The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1865-03-25

with an object. That object was not the render
ing Of aid and assistance to the troops or lawful
authorities of the United States. No act, word
or slightest demonstration of that company or
any member of that company, has been given us
ia evidence showing any sympathy with the Gov
eminent of the United States, or readiness or de-
sire to aid or cooperate with any friend of that
Government. They did not, nor did any
member ofthem, hold any friendly intercourse
with Col. Wynkoop's corps at Cockeysville. On
the contrary, their position was position Of hos
tilty to that corps while it remained and their
action in following its retirement by the destruc-
ton Of the bridges which might prevent its re-
turn was palpable unmistakable hostility to the
United States Government and its lawful author
tiles. Nor does it relieve it of the difficulty to
say that it was by command of State authority,
or General Steuart. Whoever commanded, the
"Horse Guards performed. And the history of
the last four years furnished but too much proof
that State authority may be in hostility to the
United States, and its lawful authorities. The
Constitution of our State settles the question
that no State action can dbsolve any citizen from
the allegiance which he owes to the United States.
At that time the great questions at issue and ar
rayed in hostility to each other, were national
power or right on the one hand and State SOW
ereignty or right on the other The former had
as its emblem the flag of the nation, the latter
the banner of the State. And thesingle fact that
this company, engaged as it was and at such
time, appeared nowhere with the nations flag,
did not protect or uphold the one which for
months had foated at Towsontown, but instead
bore part--as Mr.. Grason is clearly proven to
have done-in its suppression; that it moved
with State badges displayed upon its members,
and with the State banner raised by it and float
ing above its headquarters, proves that the COM
pany was not acting with but in hostility to the
United States and its lawful authorities.
1t is not, of course, supposed that Mr.. Grason
did all that was done by the company, but the
evidence does show that no one was more active
or had more influence in shaping the course of
the company than he. He was an officer, could
have retired at any moment the proceedings were
distasteful to him. He chose TO remain in the
company in arms to take a leaders, part in its
marchings, picketngs, and other services, and
nothing could be more absurd than to say that
he was acting as a friend or ally of the United
States, while his subordinates were acting in
EARNED hostility to the United States or its law
full authorities ~ Your committee,
therefore without going into the proof upon any
other point are forced to the conclusion that un-
der this clause of the Constitution Richard Ora
son is disqualified for holding the office of Judge
of the Circuit Court of the Eighth Judicial Cir
cult of the State, the same being an "office of
honor, profit trust under the laws of this State ~
The question of the qualifications of Mr.. Ridge
ly, the contestant under the Constitution, was
not fully investigated by the committee, but the
evidence of Mr.. James NJ. Lester, which was
heard, raised strong doubts whether Mr.. Ridgely
had that residence in the county which qualified
him to hold the Office. In this position Of affairs
they can come to no other conclusion than that
the election of November 9Th 1864, for Judge of
the Circuit Court Of the Eight Judicial Circuit
was nullity. They therefore recommend the
adOOtiOn of the fOllOwinD resolution
Resolved, That Richard Grason was not duly
elected Judge of the Circuit Court for the Eighth
Judicial Circuit of the State, he being consttu-
tionally disqualified for holding that position,
and that the election of that date for Judge OF
that Circuit was nullitY