The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-03-06
La W INTELLIGENCE.

Inc state OF Maryland, on the relation of Charles
Howard and others, "The Board of Police of the
city of Baltimore" Us. The Mayor and CITY Coun-
Gil of Baltimore. Application for ,nandamus
Reverdy johnson, j. Mason Campbell, William II.
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 densely crowded,
owing to the fact that the Hon. Reverdy johnson
was to make the concluding argument in the case.
on the part of the Realtors.
At 1O13 o'clock, Mr.. johnson proceeded to ad-
dress the Court as follows:
Nay it please your Honor:
The concourse of citizens which fills the chamber
shows what deep interest is felt in the present proceed
ngs.
1t is evident that there is in the enlightened and
servative mind of the city, conviction that veal or
woe is involved in this contest
Fully participating in this impression rise to dis
charge the duty have assumed with the embarrass-
ment it is well calculated to produce
My task however, is measurably .essened by the fact
the learning belonging to the inquiry. 1t will only be
my easier labor to apply it to the support PROPOSE
tons which shall endeavor to maintain.
The case itself presents but two questions:
Is the act OF the Legislature providing permanent
police for the city of Baltimore tao?
H. If is does give the relaors rightto the use of
the station-houses for the purposes of their ofce2
Both the questions are purely legal ones There is
nothing in either which, in Court of Justice should be
permitted to excite feeling They both appeal exclusive
that that Judgment should be calmly and spassonatey
exercised Thus both address themselves to the mind Of
the Court The Judge in such enquiry violates his
duty he consuts any other faculty he possesses
his resorts to any of information
than the Constitution and the law may afford But for
the course pursued by the opposi g counsel I shonld
therefore, confne myself in the argument rise to submit
to topics properly appropriate to the discussion But that
will be my and furnish nv excuse for
vations which should otherwise avoid The
Legislature in passing the act have harshly CEN
sured The act itself is said breathe its every line
spirit of hatred-o embitered hatred-to the city and
her inhabitants 1t is charged be vioative of the fun
damenta principles of the social compact 1t is de.
aHaS, 40 N1,- Aast~
pabe usurpaton and gross and this country upheard
of tyranny 1t is arragned reducing the city its
people from state of reedom-tner inherent birth
to a state of political bondage and slavery If these
charges well founded, the mode of resistance now
submitted to should if itfas, not satisfy control the
shacked citizen. The standard of freedom should be un
furled and under that holy emblem her sacred rights be
maintained by force. If the city government by in
heren right or by constitutional guarantee the argu
assumes and very existence is threatened She
it to herself to proclaim her independence Her
citizens should assemble in their own Congress-
in the City Hall, and then, appealing to the Su
preme Judge Of the world for the rectude of their
intentions in the name and by the authority the good
people thereof, solemnly publish and declare, that
the city of Baltimore is and of right ought to be free
and independent State, absolved from all obligation to
the State OF Mary land, and free and independent
State having the right to do every and thing that in
dependent States may of right do And for the support
thereof, with firm reliance Divine Providence thew
should mutually pledge to each other their lives their
fortunes and their sacred honors The occasion would be
to make themselves the Hancocks Adamses and JeTer
sons of so glorious an instrument.
1t is my purpose, before conclude, to vindicate the
Legislature and the legislation and the citizens who have
assisted in it and have solicited it, from
to expose the folly of these imaginary wrongs-to show
that they the offspring of an excited fancy-to
demonstrate that tie contains no single provision
which, in the existing state of the CITY, not demanded
for the very preservation of the cityfor her rascna
dsgracefor the protection of the dearest rights of her
citzens-fo the maintenanceof their and their good
name, and for the discharge of the paramount vital
obligation and consequent duty of the State maintain
and preserve good government within her entire lin
its But of this hereafter Discardng for the
those extraneous matters and addressing myself to the
mere legal enquiries, upon which alone the must
turn, proceed to consider first
l. Is the act tdW? l. What it does if be done at
ALL only be done by of law H. 1t can onlv
therefore be done by the law making Of the State
body exercise it, iv The power to exercise includes
power to decide when it is to be exercised -ur;sdction
over the subject Jurisdiction and exclusive jurisdiction
over the time, the cause and the eXerng it,
IL Under the State Constitution power to legisate
is in the legislative branch By the Declaration of Inde
pendence, Maryland became independent sovereign
State clothed with all powers belonging to such State
executive judicial and legislative Neither her first nor
any subsequent constitution gave the powerthev onv
organized the departments by which OF the powers
to be executed That DONE done without imita
departments by force of mere organization be-
came clothed respectively with executive judicial
and legislative power vested in the people collectively
III 1t because this is so that deciding whether
particular power exists in State Constitution, you
not search to if it granted but only if it
prohibited The rule to the.Consuon of the United
States is otherwise and logically and necessarily 9TH
erwse The United States had antecedent existence
The Union such it under the articles of confedera
lndeDendent
The powers therein provided operated upon States as
States and not directly upon the people, There was no
people constituting nation in the aggregate There was
OF course no such people vested with original and in
herent sovereignty. They first came into being as
people when the Constitution was adopted and by the
force of the Constitution AS nation the United States
Therefore are just what the Constitution makes them-no
more. There being such antecedeut nation vested
with the right Of sovereignty, the Departments the
General Government can derive power from any
source other than the Constitution When therefore
under that government existence particular pow
er is in question: you enquire is it granted? The fail
ure here to grant is equivalent to prohibition in State
Constitution 1t does not exist here because is
prohibited but because it is not delegated The grant
here by enumeration particulars The clause in
the lst article says not that sail legislative power
THEREIN granted So as to the judicial clause, &c
In State Constitution the contrary legislative
power is inherent and incidental There the legislative
department because is legislative has the right to leg
islae on each and subject fit for legislation is
general and universal in its scope, unless and only
80 FAR as it Is made particular and limited It. conrse
follows that when the subject of law passed by such
body is impeached invalid for the want of power
that want must be affrmativey established The pre-
sumption is power Those principles are
cleariystated in 322 10 Connecticut, 1885, Gill
325; 13 Munroe, %, %; 25 Barb, 1863
And for this in every such case the absence Of
the power must be clearly made to appear
In the case of the act now contested the Court be
convinced that was passed without authority How is
this to be done2 1t must be by showing that power
paramount to the Legislature has prohibited it. There
IS no such power with but the Constitution of the
United States the Constitution of the State Is the
Constitution of the United States If the restriction
5
delegated to that any its departments
but in the clauses which prohibit the further
antecedent State powers.
There were reasons for prohibiting the exercise of
antecedenty vested in the States but those
that the exercise OF the prohibited State powers
might involve the United States in difficulty place
the citizens of State in angry and hostile attitudes
against the other The 10th Section of the lst Article
of the Constitution Of the United States says that State
SHALL hereafter emit bills of credit coin money or pass
law impariug the obligation contracts Ny broth
on the other side have said that both prohibitions did
exist in this bill My brother who spoke first confined it
to the impairng of contracts.
aeard with surprise the novel argument of my brother
advanced with such confidence that because the issue
bills of credit were prohibited by this section making
OF bills Of Indebtedness, provided by this BILL are
clear violation of the prohibition. That argument
ders necessary to go into the original which
to the adoption of that section, the fayore
phraseology of my brother-its fundamentals.
Prior the adoption of the Constitution the several
pendent States, possessing of war-ex
cept the undying love of freedom the snews of
money wereeompelled to issue bills of credit which should
circulate currency for the purposes carrying on the
war; and in order to give value currency they
pledged the faith of the respective States for the reemp
ton of that money The depreciation of that currency
commenced before the closed and continued with
ruinous effects the transactions social life and the