The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-02-29
Ia W LNI,ELLIGENCE

Ia " LNT,ELLIGENCE.
SUPERIOR CoURT.-Hon. r. N. Martin judge
The State of Maryland, on the relation of Charles
Howard and others, ''The Board of Police of the
city of Baltimore" vs. The Mayor and City Coun-
Gil of Baltimore. Application for mandamus
Reverdy johnson, j. Mason Campbell, William H.
Norris and S. Teackle Wallis Esqrs for the Police
Board; Jonathan Meredith, VIM. Price, William
Schley and Thomas S. Alexander, Esqrs., tor the
city.
The courtroom Yesterday was crowded with lis
teners 10 the proceedings. On the opening of the
Court, Mr.. Norris arose and continued his argu-
ment on the part of the Police Commissioners.
Mr. Norris recapitulated some of the points argued
by him on Monday and contended that the Mayor and
City Council had not the exclusive right to organ
ize and control police force, such is exist
ing IN this city, and such as is provided for in the
Poce Bill passed the present session of the Leg
sature. He referred to the latter part of 10th sec
tion of the 4th article of the Constitution which
says that the Mayor and City Council may provide
by ordinance, from time to time for the creation
and government of such temporary additional police
as they may deem necessary to preserve the public
peace. He argued that this temporary police or
special constahulary force was nothing more, and
was so intended to be, by the trainers of the Con-
stltuton, than an Improvement upon the old En-
glish style of summoning posse comitatus; they
were only to preserve the public peace. They
were to be appointed from time to time, when an
emergency called for it.
tion of Justices of the Peace and Constables for
each ward for the term of two years, and they can
only be removed by Indictment and conviction
as the Judge of the Criminal Court, down stairs
could be removed they are Constables having
power to preserve the peaceand civil process
the Constables, provided for in the latter section
have other powers, and they only exist as long as
the emergency endures for which they were called
out Mr. Norris said that, at the time of the adop-
tion of the new Constitution there three class
es OF Constables known to the law. The first were
Constabes, who waited upon the courts and served
civil process the second were Constabes appointed
lot special emergency, or temporary additional
police, to preserve the peace, and the third were
those who had both the power to preserve the
peace and enforce the city ordinances-to abate nu-
sances, prevent swine from running at large, &c.
Mr.. Norris then argued that as the Legislature
had the right to delegate certain powers to the
Mayor and City Council appoint a Temporary
pohce 1t had the reserved right itself to appoint
permanent police. He contended that the re-
served rights of the people, vested in the Legisa-
ture, could not be changed except by express con-
stitutional act. The employment of the words
temporary additional police in the Constitutions
Implies that the right to appoint permanently is
reserved to the State. The power to appoint tenn
porary police was given to the city, as the agent
OF the State; and the argument on the other side
ls that the giving of that right to the agent is the
REIMBURSEMENT of all right to appoint by the prin-
cipal. This not statutory law, and the coun-
sci argued against it, and cited many authorities in
support of his argument.
This present city government, said Mr. Norris
think that they have absolute poWers-that tbev
cannot be disturbed or abridged by the soye-
reign power; they think that they are supreme: it
ought to be called the State of Swami The Legis-
lature has said that the Mayor and City Council
shall have power to pass ordinances to carry ont
the powers delegated to the city merey-there was
no intention to prefer the city government of the
State power; the mere giving of the right TO the
city to appoint temporary police does not ex-
clude the State from appointing permanent one
there is nothing in the Constitution to indicate
that it intended to prefer the CITY goyerement
over the State; but, on the contrary that the rights
of the State were reserved.
Mr.. Norris then referred to the ordinances of the
city, passed since 1858, in accordance with the act
OF Legislature OF that year, to establish, orga-
nize, and arm police force for the city of Balti-
more, and contendec that such police force was Or
ganized as temporary police, under section 10 of
the Constitution and that the State had this power
reserved to itself OF establishing a permanent po-
lice, as by the Bill passed at the present session.
Mr.. Norris then proceeded to discuss the third
point set down in the Realtors brief; that the
Sherf's duties and powers, and those of other
peace conservators, are not unconsttutionally af-
tected by the Police law of this General Assembly
10 the position taken by the respondents that the
powers of the Sheriff were of so high character
that they could not be subordlnated to other Off
GERS, he took exceptions and argued that as duties
OF the sheriff were defined by the law and we're
creatures OF the law, the law-making power could
increase or diminish them. Several authorities
were cited to sustain this argument.
The fourth point in the REALTORS brief was then
taken up, viz That the police law does not inter
fere with the military powers of the Governor
Mr. Norris contended that the power of calling out
the military was not confded by the Constitution
to the Governor alone, and that under strict limi-
tations; but that by several laws passed by the
Legislature, from 1913 to 1885, that power had
been conferred upon other persons; it had been
conferred upon the Judges of the Superior Court
and Criminal Court; and two Justices of the Peace
could make call in writing upon a militia officer.
The fifth point, viz: that the Legislature has de-
VOWED no judicial powers on the Board of Police by
enabling them to examine witnesses, and to affect,
as contemplated in the law, police officers for mis-
behaviour in office, referred to.
The counsel argued that the power of examining
witnesses conferred upon the Board, was not iu-
dlclal power. The mere fact of putting parties
upon their oath, to be examined, was not judicial
power. Tax assessors have the power to examine
parties under OATH but no one ever considered that
they were exercising judicial powers. If that were
the case, an immense amount of judicial power was
exercised every day at the Custom-House; There
they were simply police powers
Mr.. Norris spoke until 215 o'clock, when the
Court adjourned; he will continue his argument
this morning.
Court OF COMMON PLEAs.-Hon Wm l.. Mar.
shall, Judge
Yesterday occupied with taking induisitons
and entering judgments.
Assignment to 100 on postponed docket.
CIRcUIT Court FOR BALTIMORE CITY.-Hon. VIM.
George krebs, Judge.
The following occupied yesterday:
Porter and others The Mayor and CITY Coun-
Gil of Baltimore. Motion to dissolve an in junction
heretofore granted in the matter of the assessments
for grading the North avenue. Before reported
Argued by Frick for complainants. Not concluded
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT CoURr.-Hon. VIM. Fell
Giles, Judge.
The testimony in the contested election case of
Harrison and Davis still going on.
CIRCUIT CoURrsFoR hartford CoUNrY.-Before
Hon. John H. Pricee, Judge
BELAIR, Md, Feb. %, 1860
VIM. "a. Dallam, Esq, Attorney for the State,
prosecuting.
The quarterly term of this Court was called yes
terday morning, and the following business transac-
ted
At the opening of the Court it appeared that the
old jury, summoned under the act of 1853 who SER
we'd at the last term term were present. and also
the new jury who were summoned by the presen.
Sheriff, Mr. Bateman, under the operation of the
new Code.
The question arose which of the two iuries were
the legal parties to try causes pending, when
Henry w. Archer, Esq, read from the first page
OF the Code section I'd, which sets forth that s'if
any crime or misdemeanor, or any other violation
of the law hath been committed before this Code
is adopted, and prosecution or other proceeding
hath been commenced against the offender before
the adoption of this Code, then said offender NAV
be proceeded against by indictment or otherwise
and punished, in the same manner as if this Code
had not been adopted" Mr.. Archer, from the
above authority plead in behalf of the old Jurors.
and asked the Court to discharge the new jury
summoned by Sheriff Bateman, but the Court
ruled otherwise and retained the new jurors the
same as he did in Baltimore county, by discharg-
ing the jurors who served at the December
term.
The appearance docket then called, after
which the removed cases from Baltimore county,
known as the Towsont0wn riot cases; and the case
of Jacob Shock, indicted for shooting William
Cahoon, were continued to the next term
The removed of Frederick Keiner, from
Baltimore county, charged with the larceny of
lot OF corn, the property of DR.. Grafton NJ. Bos-
ley, OF Towsontown, was assigned for trial ON
Thursday next.