Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1919-09-04
Progressive" Candidates Pledged
"Sights-unseen" To Laws Not
Even Framed-Special Threat
To Annapolis Suburbs.


Even Framed-Special Threat
To Annapolis Suburbs.
The committee OF "Progressiyes."
which undertook to name the eandi-
dates for whom the Democrats of
Anne Arundel should vote. also adopt
ca a set ~ resolutions which are only
expressions on public matters they
have made public. There are some
good things IN these resolutions, but
most OF them are demands for the
things IN which everybody believes
and which no one opposes openly.
The resolutions. however. in some
particulars indicate that they are
made fore mere vote-catching. and in
one instance, AT least, show a condi-
tion full OF danger to the whole Coun
~, and particularly to the populous
suburban sections around Annapolis.
These resolutions demand of the
nominees for Senate and House of
Delegates to pledge to support such
legislation as may be recommended
by commission 10 be appointed by
the Mayor of the City of Annapolis in
reference to a new charter or amend
ments to III epresent charter of the
City of Annapolis
The Progressive" candidates for
the Senate and House are therefore
pledged sights unseen" to support
anything in reference to the charter
OF Annapolis. which a commission not
yet named shall recommend. The
argument might end right here and
the only conclusion which could be
reached would be that men who would
allow themselves to be placed in such
a position are not competent TO rep
resent their people in the Legislature
and would be easy victims of the wiles
of designing people II they were in
that body. | know of no instance
where candidates have placed them
selves I'm such a weak and dangerous
position. Pledged, not only TO support
something not yet framed, but whose
trainers have not even been named.
II Is necessary, however to show
that this item was placed in the
resolutions and the candidates pledg-
ed TO Il for a purpose. "A Greater
Annapolis" is the right and proper
ideal OF a great many citizens.
hope and believe that II may be real
lied through legislation passed this
winter. but l oppose any scheme of
forcible annexation 10 Annapolis with
out the consent Of the annexed This
Ia the principle for which We stood
out IN our own case
Enlargement OF the City boundaries
includes adjustments Of many serious
questions. Annapolis has a great
bonded debt and Il maintains a higher
! degree OF civic Improvements than It's
Saburbs Any scheme Of enlargement
must deal fairly with the citizens OF
our suburbs and not saddle on them
expenses which Annapolis should
carry No fair-mnded citizen OF An
napolis would want anything OF the
sort. and the residents OF the suburbs
would have a right TO feel that they
had been very badly treated. They
are in no condition TO bear any bur
aens for others.
The extension Of the boundaries of
Annapolis is a matter of amendment
To the City Charter Outside OF the
dissolution of the Annapolis Water
Company. 10 which | was definitely
pledged before any other candidate.
the enlargement of Annapolis is the
only change In the Charter that have
heard discussed. The promoters of
the New Charter" idea have almost
nothing TO propose in definite way.
1t is therefore, fair TO conclude that
this provision was placed in the reso-
buttons for definite purpose and that
some interests planned to secure a
pledge to any scheme of annexation
that a hand-picked commission, the
appointment of which is being pur-
posely delayed, might arrange.
refuse the demand of these slate
makers to pledge that / will support
something that / have not seen, and
state now that am deeply interested
in a Greater Annapolis" and believe
that it can be brought about, but it
must be on conditions that are fair
and satisfactory to those who are
brought into the City.
(adv.) HUGH r. RILEY.
1t certainly would be a fastidious
fruit dealer who would refuse to have