The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1917-10-25
EXTENSION ON FAIR TERMS--NOT
POSSIBLE With REFERENDUM

must come, and that not far
distant, when the extension of
the limits of a great city like
Baltimore would be absolutely
! necessary to its proper growth
/ and development"
Seven years after the Constitu-
tional Convention, the Legislature
passed an Act extending the limits
of Baltimore City, Act of 1874,
Chapter 224, but made the mistake
of inserting a referendum to the
voters in the territory to be an
neXed, and they voted against the
extension; thus the extension
which the Court of Appeals said
was absolutely necessary for
the growth and development of
the city was set back for fourteen
years.
In 1888, the Legislature made
another effort to extend the city
limits. In the effort to get some
extension, they provided for a ref
erendum in three sections; the
eastern section, which was the
most densely populated and which
most needed the protection of the
city police and health department,
fire department, etc, voted to
stay out, hence the extension OBJ
tanned was not symmetrical. More
over, in order to get even a part
of the surrounding territory to
vote to come in, terms were put in
the Bill which were unfair to the
people in the old city limits.
The Baltimore County Com
mittee, which is fighting city ex-
tension, in a three-column adver-
tiscment inserted in all the daily
papers Of Baltimore, at a cost Of
more than a thousand dollars,
stated:
The Annex of 1883 has been a
heavy burden on the old city *
And, in a headline, referred to
the city taxpayers still groaning
under the burden of supporting
the annex Of 1883, which has cost
the city S15,Oo0,o00 more than it
has paid in
This statement is rather wild,
like other statements emanating
from that Committee, but it is a
fact that the terms Of the Act Of
1888 were unfair to the city, and
the city has had to spend more
money in the Annex than it has
collected in taxes from the Annex.
The fair thing is for the new
territory to pay for benefits re
ceived. The city ought not to
make any profit from taxing the
new territory, and the new ter
ritory ought not to get conycn-
fences and benefits at a loss or ex-
pense to the old city.
The experience Of every city in
the State proves that you cannot
have city conveniences for county
taxes, THAT you must pay some
additional taxes for city benefits;
and the experience with the Acts
of 1874 and 1888 proves that you
cannot have annexation on fair
terms if YOU make it conditional
upon a referendum to the people
in the territory to be annexed.
You cannot expect a fair decision
of any question if you give to one
of the parties interested the power
to decide it. The only way to get
fair annexation is to let the Legis-
lature decide the terms. This is
what the State has done for every
other city in the State; why should
it not do the same thing for Balti-
more?
HAS BEEN DONE FOR BALTIMORE.
In the history of Baltimore. the
Legislature has ten times extend
ed its limits without a referendum,
the last being by Act of 1916,
Chapter POO. Referring to this
Act, the sun Almanac of 1900
says:
Sixteen thousand or seven
teenthousand inhabitants were
added to the poulation by Act
of the Legislature and against
the protest of a large majority