832 ARTICLE 4.
for the purposes of such trust all moneys and assets which may have been
or shall be bestowed upon it by will, deed or any other form of gift or
conveyance in trust for any general corporate purpose, or in aid of the
indigent poor, or for the general purposes of education or for charitable
purposes of any description within the said city, and the said 'corporation
may dispose of, in the manner and upon the terms in this Charter pro-
vided, any property belonging to it.
EXRS. of McDonough v. Murdoch, 15 Howard, 413. Darlington v. Mayor & C. C.
of Balto., 51 Md. 1. Gregg v. Mayor & C. C. of Balto., 56 Md. 256. Barnum v.
Mayor & C. C. of Balto., 62 Md. 275. Davidson v. Balto. City, 96 Md. 511. Cf.,
Johnson v. Frisbie, 29 Md. 76. Kilpatrick v. Mayor, 81 Md. 179.
The legislature possesses wide powers of control and legislation over the City
of Baltimore, but its power is not absolute and unlimited.
Thrift v. Laird, 125 Md. 55.
P. L. L. (1888), Art. 4, sec. 4, 1888, ch. 98.
3. All the provisions of the Constitution of the State and of this Char-
ter shall be applicable to the portions of Baltimore County, which, under
the terms and provisions of the Act of 1888, Chapter 98, have been
annexed to the City of Baltimore. All streets, avenues or alleys lying in
any portion of Baltimore County, which, under the provisions of said
Act of 1888, Chapter 98, became a part of Baltimore City, and which
shall have been legally condemned as streets under the provisions of the
Acts of Assembly of Maryland relating to streets in Baltimore County,
shall be held to be validly constituted streets of Baltimore City in all
respects as if the same had been legally condemned as such by the Mayor
and City Council of Baltimore; and all proceedings for the laying off,
opening, grading and construction of streets, avenues or alleys, which
shall have been begun under Article 3, of the Public Local Laws, title
"Baltimore County," sub-title "Streets," shall be proceeded with and
completed under said Article and sub-title.
Daly v. Morgan, 69 Md. 460. Chilton v. Brooks, 71 Md. 452. Murgiondo v.
Hoover, 72 Md. 12.
Aa to effect of Annexation Act on rights of turnpike companies in bed of streets
in annexed territory and powers of the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore in
relation to streets occupied by such companies, see,
Baltimore & Jerusalem Turnpike Co. v. Mayor & C. C. of Balto., Daily Record,
April 24, 1890. Roberts v. Loyola Perm. Bldg. Assn., 74 Md. 1. Murphy v. McBney,
77 Md. 80. Mayor & C. C. of Balto, v. Turnpike Co., 80 Md. 541. Ulman v. Charles
St. Ave. Co., 83 Md. 138. Park Tax Case. 84 Md. 1. Baltimore City v. Broumel, 86
Md. 155. U. Rys. Co. v. Hayes, 92 Md. 490. Upshur v. Baltimore, 94 Md. 754.
Balto. City v. Balto. Co. Water & Elec. Co., 93 Md. 241.
P. L. L. (1888), Art. 4, sec. 5. 1888, ch. 98 1908, ch. 286. 1920, ch. 721.
1927, ch. 331.
4. All personal property situated or held in the territory annexed to
Baltimore City by the Act of 1888, Chapter 98, shall be subject to levy,
taxation and assessment in the same manner and form, and at the same
rate of taxation as property of similar character or description within
the old limits of said city may be subject. It shall be the duty of the
Appeal Tax Court of said city to divide all the real and leasehold property
in said territory into three separate classes, to be known as urban, sub-