The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-06-15
MILLER EXPLAINS PRESENT ATTITUDE Always Opposed Greater City Without Referendum PLEDGE BEFORE ELECTION Says Legislators Should Be Bound by Some Agreement Made Prior
 to Their Election
 to Office.
PLEDGE BEFORE ELECTION

To the Editor of The Age-Herad:
 In your issue of June 1S inst, you pub lished communication signed Messrs. Jere c. King, J. E. Shelby and Sidney J. Bowie, regarding the proposed arbitrary extension of the corporate limits of Bir- mingham
 That communication contains statements calculated to produce impressions not in accord with the real facts They say; This desirable object (the enlargement or the corporate limits of Birmingham) has been defeated at every session ot the legislature for the past 15 or 20 years through a policy of officers and other interested parties in the smaller munich palities around Birmingham obtaining, in most instances secretly, private pledges from representatives not to pass such bill without giving veto power to each separate locality concerned. It Is not right that small munic- ipality in the suburbs should have in its own hands a power to veto and to make 1t possible great city in this val ley. It is not patriotic for any true citizen to consent to it.
 It Is well known that I. as the sem ator from the Thirteenth senatorial dis trict. composed of this, Jefferson, coun- ty, has opposed and am continuing to oppose the arbitrary extension Of Bir- mingham's corporate limits. The inuendo contained in the foregoing excerpt is that am constrained to do so by secret prom 1 ises made to officers or others of ad1oin- ing municipalities. That Is not true l made no secret promise to any one upon that or any other subject coming up for legislative action. My promise was made openly, in response to request from many people, Including the Greater Birmingham committee, as will herein after more fully appear. True these gen. tlemen have inserted the clause, "in most instances secretly" As private pledges are in most instances secretly made I fail to gather the force of that clause. Possibly they meant it for some kind of a qualification If so 1t does not dispel the misleading effect of their dec laration.
 My friend. MT. Bowie, I have known intimately for many years. He Is, how ever, a newcomer to Birmingham and having arrived just prior to the cam paign and primary in which the present members of the legislature were chosen, doubtless failed to fully appreciate the issues in that campaign and how they were adjusted. l am sure he would not purposely make inaccurate statements. Mir. Shelby has not himself been here for the entire 15 or 20 years during which he declares the extension movement has met defeat. He probably has done what I find a great many others have done, that is, failed to bear in remembrance to the Greater Birmingham movement in the campaign above referred to and par ticuarly his own part therein.
 As to MT. King, he has since his cleo ton stated to me that he had more than once declared himself while candidate for nomination, in favor of a referendum to the particular town or section of un- incorporated territory sought to be taken in.
  cial Club rooms for the consideration of the Smyer bills by Birmingham and sur rounding territory Mir. King indorsed the referendum feature of those bills. And the reason he has assigned to me for his change of front is that he can't get what he wants by the route he agreed to, viz: the referendum route.
 I have been often assaied for oppos- ing an arbitrary extension, more frequent ly in the Commercial Cub, now the Cham Der of Commerce, than elsewhere. It is the last place from which adverse crit icism can justly come. little history will confirm this statement.
 Now for the facts: There had been a controversy between Birmingham, on the one part, and nearby towns and sections of unincorporated territory on the other part. In 1906, before tho campaign for the democratic nomina- ton of candidates for the present legis- la ature was over friends of Greater Birmingham took affirmative action i looking to the enlargement of its linn its. A committee known as the Great CT Birmingham committee was created consisting of five members appointed by the Board of Trade, of which MT. J. E. Shelby was one, three appointed by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of Birmingham, il from the Comuer- cial club, one from the Board Of Rev enue of Jefferson county, one from the Jefferson County Medical society, and one from the Board of Education of Birmingham. subcommittee was ap- pointed from this committee to draft bill, or bills. for the accomplish ment of the purposes of the committee. This sub committees work resulted in two bills, which came to be known as the 'Smyer bills.' The subcommittee re- ported these bills back to the commit tee. The committee approved them and they were then reported to the Com merciai club and Board of Trade and these organizations approved them. These two "6mysr bills" were publish ed ct length in the Birmingham Ledger and generally discussed,