New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-11-02
THE MARYLAND TROUBLE.

swAKS VISITING THB PRESIDENT.
M xsnssnun THE. TRIBUNE
BALTIMORE Thursday, Nov l, 1866
Nv Suapn ha1 removed the Police Commissioners
Gov swanns decision excites surprise among Unicn
sp who from the first believed it his intention to
remove the Commissioner predicted this decision one
week ago. Swami originated the prosecution, and, it is
believed directed all the machinery by which 1t
STonghtup.
HE manner and questions throughout the examination
betrayed the prosecutor and not the judge. There is
ground for belief that the decision written before the
examination closed.
In the capital to-day when the decision was made there
number Of returned Rebels and parties who particle
Paed in the recent Camp Meeting Riot at shipleys Wood
who testified their appreciation of Swanns decision by
loud applause. The following is the decision:
STATE OF MARYLAND, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
. ..... ANsAPoLls Nov. l. 1866.
daily considered the charges which have been preferred
by certain citizens Of Baltimore denied the right to
vote at he late municipal election r Mayor and members Of
che City Council against the Police Commissioners in eonnec
with testimony submitted for my guidance in the case
and have arrived the conclusions which shall proceed
briefly The refusal Of the Police Commissioners at
the opening of this investigation to appear before the Gov
upon charges Of misconduct in
Office l look upon as ofense for which they might
have been held responsible without further inquiry as to
the evidence Of official misconduct in the late election 1t is
true thet the Commissioners through their counsel have to
some extent retraced their steps their willing
appear and any questions the Governor might
have to PROFOUND understand that they have
yielded the point Of jurisdiction to which they still adhere
Their declining respond TO the OF the
places them in the attitude Of State officers made by
law subject 10 his direct supervision treating with contempt
me power specifically delegated him by the Legislature and
the sl higher power conferred by the 18th section Of
the Goth article of the Constitution to take care that the
laws be faithfully executed How is the Governor it be
asked representing The sovereignty Of the State 10 discharge
imperative duty imposed upon him by the organic law in
conflict with Iebeous officers setting authority at defiance
ard denying his right to hold them accountable for official
sins conduct pepable violation neglect OF their duties
The Police law these Commissioners with almost ALSO
Iue power placing its scope in the hands Of the designing
without a check somewhere to protect the pubiie
interest The Legislature intended any such thing The
State Of Maryland at this very moment threatened with in
vasion by armed hOrdcs from States. Military organiza
tOns have been formed in the City Of Baltimore for the open
and purpose resisting the authority OF the laws No
single step SO informed up this time has been
taken by the Police Board sppess this tendency 10 anarchy
and rebellion, threatening, and TO excite riot
ard hoodsbed among people. IL is wen known
that far the action Of the Governor is concerned no
furnished for these revolutionary proceedings Is
the Governor whom these officers made
she by the law 10 assist guilt and see the laws OF me State
Ssoee da S the State invaded BY armed cTontoUs in
completely with those whom the Police Board encouraging
Sae Sson insult and cutrsee Bu the Legislature did
not Implication this power Of the Police
law expressly provides in reference to these particular officers
that oT oea misconduct OF the said Commissioners may
be removed by Of the two houses Of the Gen
era Assembly by the Governor in the recess thereof II Is
been defined that upon complaint made against any civil or
military officer who can be removed or oy s''pcs S@
before him any witness to testify for or against |
such complaint and may allow such witnesses day for their
attendance and neant charges and may enforce the attend
Of such witnesses IN the same manner as e courts may
been occasion in the past history Of this State when the In
tpOoh Of the Executive was more necessary then at present
in the face Of The clear letter Of the law above referred 70 The
treated with contempt and they go on 10 WELD power
sded to them in utter disregard q checks yek IN
The return Of peace has brought with the
fierce animosties which during period Of eyh strife had
happily, y are Attempted to Be- iOstesd and kept alive
the great asment Of cur ss; interest r By iG1s
longer any issue between Union and dsion loyalty and
% sGS rs s an issue uS IN @ s RVs 10
20 resist the national authority they so wlled i They arc
AID s 4TnS Iey accept r.; results Of the war and
70 % rsSd IN ri. case Is altogether rSitous and unauiSOr
hed There is no purpose on The part o. any one 70
Tho have been dissnchsd By the Constitution This
Only be done by Of the people aud repeal Of the
real question before me now s whether Il 900 citizens Of Bal
nOeUniOn and supporters q the Government With
TesstSfsd as Voters under he Act Of MsrR ~ 1856
excluded from the polls o. the pleasure o. surely
he sbts q insult through the nsiTnnsnay regis
Of the first article Of the CONSTIPATION which says
General Assembly shall provide y law iOr Uniform regsts-
Sa Be evidence Of the qualification Of said voters 10 vote
any eeci thereafter hd bat no person shsl be excluded
registered sat General Assembly sh have passed an
Of registration and the ehal have been carried into
on the register Suppose has been claimed that few
more combsants In sympathy with the Soah during the war
have been admitted registration the law gives no authority
judges Of Eectiea 70 correct IL On tte contrary Il
registers themselves who hsve violated the law The second
sSn q Ds h and udusn
violation Of The pToyon Of article Of the Constitution OF Of
tesd ca the ist OF register Of ensssd voter sxcade there
from the Of qualified voter be shs upon conviction
be disqualified nom holding oes Of honor profit trust and
from exercising the elective Franchise In this state
their plociTliiss with one Or exceptions produced
most alfayorab impression upon my %ad ss 70 then con-
oerous view Chat Loyalty resided only with thoe who support
their policy tits net reasonable inference that they would
msones who refuse Interfere to challenge the votes o. all
do TO their standard n they refused the obi
sonsd s. he law Surely would Be no greater sisc
th0rty 70 SO behind the registry ana recognize whom
voters under tie ACT Of 1885 was intended By Legss
tuTs 70 ee iTessa ss nudity q the Tages o. ELECTION sP
rgty when fuzzy complete was not 70 Be recognized as
guide in establishing the right Of voter Could the
judges Of election expect to 81 as court q review On the day
soa esegelheE inSssanass % ne asesge q such
% Si ~ Sc Of invrsccabits Bnt the Court Of Ap
pea had happily 70 aid and removed all doubt npon
this point Upon the Of Thomas Anderson agt John
eoBsued the Rsies BY the sei Of Assembly
e mao sassaSa .s provisions q ss pS
70 tbs Judges Of Election In the dire eseccten * wieh
ns sS .n as ssss" az & s .; s
q as sS.srs 2 me PS, SEss ,ss Gs ne ss
Sy q Ssuss.. they ~aly sOr1Pty or maei0ay exclude