[Art. 13] NEW COUNTIES 141

lines; but no new county shall be organized without the consent of the
majority of the legal voters residing within the limits proposed to be formed
into said new county; and whenever a new county shall be proposed to be
formed out of portions of two or more counties, the consent of a majority
of the legal voters of such part of each of said counties, respectively, shall
be required; nor shall the lines of any county be changed without the con-
sent of a majority of the legal voters residing within the district, which,
under said proposed change, would form a part of a county different from
that to which it belonged prior to said change; and no new county shall
contain less than four hundred square miles, nor less than ten thousand
white inhabitants; nor shall any change be made in the limits of any county,
whereby the population of said county would be reduced to less than ten
thousand white inhabitants, or its territory reduced to less than four

hundred square miles.

Counties and cities are but political divisions of the state, and the legislature may
itself levy needful taxes for local purposes, or it may delegate such power to the local
authorities. The act of 1888, ch. 98, extending the limits of Baltimore city, held not
to violate this section. The legislature may extend the limits of Baltimore city by
including therein parts of Baltimore county with or without the consent of a majority
of the voters residing within the districts annexed. Daly v. Morgan, 69 Md. 464 (cf.
concurring and dissenting opinions); McGraw v. Merryman, 133 Md. 249 (upholding
the validity of the act of 1918, ch. 82, extending the limits of Baltimore city).

Garrett county was organized under the act of 1872. ch. 212, passed in pursuance
of this section. This section referred to in construing art. 3, sec. 29—see notes thereto.
State v. Fox, 51 Md. 414.

The act of 1826, ch. 192, relating to mortgages in the city and county of Baltimore,
held not to have been repealed by the adoption of the Constitution of 1851. Eichel-
berger v. Hardesty, 15 Md. 548.

This section referred to in discussing the constitutionality of the local option law
of 1874, ch. 453. Relation of the counties to the state. Fell v. State, 42 Md. 100 (dis-
senting opinion).

The acts of 1838, ch. 205, and 1845, ch. 176, extending the time of notice of the filing
of a mechanics lien claim, and the act of 1845, ch. 346, extending the first mentioned
acts to Howard district, held under this section and art. 5 of the Declaration of Rights
(as they stood in the Constitution of 1851) to have been extended to Howard county.
Pue v. Hetzell, 16 Md. 539. And see State v. Manly, 1 Md. 139.

The act 1918, ch. 122, creating a sanitary district, or a special taxing district, within
two counties, does not violate this section. Dahler v. Wash. Sub. San. Comn., 133. Md.
647.

Sec. 2. At the election to be held for the adoption or rejection of this
Constitution, in each election district, in those parts of Worcester and
Somerset Counties, comprised within the following limits, viz: Begin-
ning at the point where Mason and Dixon's line crosses the channel of
Pocomoke River, thence following said line to the channel of the Nanti-
coke River, thence with the channel of said river to Tangier Sound, or the
intersection of Nanticoke and Wicomico Rivers, thence up the channel of
the Wicomico River to the mouth of Wicomico Creek, thence with the chan-
nel of said creek and Passerdyke Creek to Dashiell's or Disharoon's Mills,
thence with the mill pond of said mills and branch following the middle
prong of said branch, to Meadow Bridge, on the road dividing the Counties
of Somerset and Worcester, near the southwestern corner of farm of Wil-
liam P. Morris, thence due east to the Pocomoke River, thence with the
channel of said river to the beginning; the Judges of Election, in each of
said districts, shall receive the ballots of each elector, voting at said election,
who has resided for six months preceding said election within said limits,
for or against a new County; and the Return Judges of said election dis-
tricts shall certify the result of such voting, in the manner now prescribed
by Law, to the Governor, who shall by proclamation make known the same,
and if a majority of the legal votes cast within that part of Worcester