The daily banner. (Cambridge, Md.) 1897-2008, 1917-10-29
CITY hot IN COUNTY
BALTIMORE'S STATUS DIFFERENT
FROM OTHER TOWNS.
Made An Independent Division o.
Maryland BY Constitution OF 1851.
Referendum Adopted In 1864 For
Express Protection OF Suburbs.


Referendum Adopted In 1864 For
Express Protection OF Suburbs.
prepared by the baltimore County Non.
Partisan Citizens Protective Committed
Prior to 1851 the city of Baltimore
was merely an incorporated town with
in Baltimore county. The extensions
of the city by acts of the Legislature
In l745, 1747, 1873 and 1916 simply
enlarged the city within the county
its inhabitants remaining residents OF
Baltimore county. The Constitution
of 1851, by the votes of the people OF
the entire State, separated Baltimore
city from Baltimore county and made
1t an Independent unit OF the State
on the same footing with the counties
Failure to understand the status OF
Baltimore city before the Constitution
Of 1851 and after it became iRdepend
ent is not uncommon and prevents
some persons from seeing clearly why
annexation cannot still be made by
simple act Of the Legislature, Just az
was done in the years above mention.
ed. Men so prominent and supposedly
learned as the members of the Greater
Baltimore Extension Leagues com
mitee say they cannot see why the
limits OF Baltimore city cannot be ex,
tended. just as had been done with
Frederick City, Annapolis, Hagers.
town, Baden burg, Easton and Ellicott
City. They overlook the fact that in
all those eases the inhabitants taken
into the towns mentioned remained
residents Of their respective counties,
Republicans Adopted Referendum.
Thirteen years after the Constitu,
ton Of 1851 was adopted the Constitu'
tional Convention of 1861 was called.
The Republican party had secured full
control Of Maryland. In the struggle
to maintain the Union the Republicans
had been compelled to deny the
validity of the doctrine Of States
rights, yet the claim Of the counties to
their territorial integrity and in.
dependence, subject only to the State
government, appealed to the delegates
so strongly that they incorporated into
the Constitution OF 1854 the provision:
Nor shall the lines of any county
be changed without the consent OF
majority of the legal voters residing
within the limits Of the lines proposed
to be changed"
Made To Fit Present Case.
And the debate in connection with
this clause shows that 1t was express.
ly intended to provide for such case
as that now before the people. The
clause was offered by Mr.. James l.
Ridgely, a delegate from Baltimore
county, who said:
81 know that Baltimore city must
increase and expand, until in the pro
cess Of time it shall absorb a large
portion of the area Of Baltimore coun.
ty, and I say godspeed to it. I do not
propose to throw any obstacle what.
ever in its way. But 1 simply ask that
when they apply to the Legislature for
an extension of its boundaries there
SllG%lI 10 q l4Ll4AIuI4CA OPOA IhO RS"SA
of the Legislature to grant, which shall
require the assent Of the people resid.
Ing in the portion of the county asked
to be included within the limits OF
Baltimore city"
In 1867 the Democrats had regained
control of the State They made new
Constitution, but the essential justice
Of the provision to protect the coun'
ties from arbitrary ACKNOWLEDGMENT so
appealed TO them that they left 1t in
the present Constitution, changing the
meaning not all and the words but
little, so as to make them stronger and
palmer. This language seems perfect
Iy plain and easily understood and it
Is claimed 1t does not need a lawyer
to explain it to any sane man.
Right Way the Only Way.
AS the Constitution now stands there
is no way to extend the corporate
limits OF Baltimore city without the
consent of the people in the territory
to be annexed This seems entirely
reasonable, for it is claimed that
whenever any section become city-like
In character and the city presents a
fair bill the people will vote to be
taken in This was done in 1888. If
the proposed bill should be passed it
would result in expensive and tedious
litigation, which could only be decided
In one way-against the city.
The Annexation acts of 1874 and
1888, both provided for the Constitu
tional referendum. The Republican
State Convention of 1915 fatty re
affirmed the principle, but this year,
because Of a political deal, it is al
legged, the Republican platform de-
clares, in effect, that the people Of the
Belt shall be taken into the city with,
out being permitted to vote upon the
matter. thus reversing the party's I'M
broken record. The Democratic plat.
form declares squaTely in favor of an
annexation bill with a referendum to
the people affected as required by the
Constitution.
Tho Fa,.roarc in the mart Of Ra1tiu1nra