Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1870-03-17

Il Usited States thai the charge il makes "a
| 10 passengers uf the Washington Branch
Il ~ unconstitutional and wrong; that had
J! taith procseds from al Obedience 10 the
lavss annaaeiasea BY the highest tribu.
i est = thseoustry. Tae opponcnts Of the
reed en- re no bad faith 10 that &C. when
i - resiev the proccediuxs in this body
- The one in the opposite hail.: when ia
- pssk The Ssste readily accepted from
tAe 6,ldzfsre Ind Ohio Rsilroad currency
- tie dividend o. interest due the State
to4 ths Compaay has nov. BY rssolu-
s befoes this boiy. evidenced . de-
cse = sesheu currency and demand gold
Aa4 uhyf Because Che same high sri-
eoonl bas. ID Tie last lev ueeks. deci-
dsd tAas nethisa bat gold i legal
pr. WIN esstleusn Of the opposi-
- ~ = b be3 nth - demsnd ehedi-
enee to the Judgment of the Saprsme
Ooart when against them and willis.
10 the act Of declaring bad faith on
account Of said obsdieuos. they assume
the position contrary 10 she past.
and consiier no violation Of contract. Do
bad faith. in acting seeordins TO the de-
cision o: that very court. the Judgment of
which il was bad faith for the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad Company to obey?
II the Company believed. as is real Y
the fac'. that they had right to resis,
the payment OF that one-6th of the re-
ceipts on passengers for the last eighteen
mon1hs. and tha. that belief vas induced
By The advice Of eminent counsel-is it
reasonable and just to hold the Company
guilty Of that malicious intent which
characterixss every criminal and arb,tr.-
~ procsedings II was . matter Of dif.
ference Of opinion between contendins
parties. The Company did not merely
state that her counsel advised her, with.
out giving the name Of said counsel. bu.
published 10 the world. on the signature
OF ono OF the most eminent jurists Of the
country. that opinion which directed and
determined its action. am fully aware
OF the insinuations cast upoo the legal
character of that eminent lawyer aud
statesmeu-'hs Hon. R.vsrdy johnson.
But the high reputation. both nationa,
and State. which he erjoys; his known
ability. admitted BY his enemies in the
National Council as the best expound.r
OF Constitutional law in this country, suf-
h:es for me to affirm aud proclaim his ie-
gal ability far. very far. above those who,
for their own special purpose. dare de-
grade themselves by casting reproach
cpsn his legal and pruie ssional integri-
! ty.
With such an adviser. with all the
facts presented to the community, il it
reasonable to conclude that the Baltimore
aud OHIO Railroad Company have acted
msliciousl Yin defiance oflaw-and have
attempted to drag down. from its high po-
sl'ioU. the sovereignty &c CHS good S.atci
Tbe srraker pext alluded To The charge
vt the refusal Of the CosBPsuyW pay lie
Fone-ffth passenger receipts. THIS may
be. technically speaking. the truth. but
/ not fact in accordance with the spirit on
which the refusal was based. The Pres
ident of the Company had never refused
to account for every cent collected up to
the present time. though he has strongly
and righ,fully intimatcd tha. in future
there will be no further obligation upon
him to charge or pay over the one-fifth,
because Of the uncons,ituiional;ty Of the
act. He next argued that the State be-
ing copartncr, had no right BY seire fa-
eias
Mr.. Maddox then continued
Now, MIR. President. before proceed
ing to the argument Of this question Of
the capitation tax, I will say one word to
the Senator from the Fret Legislative
district in regard to the proposition which
he made as respects his position to this
question. The S nator presented his
waybiIl. and he asks the friends Of the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad now to de-
fend that Company from the charges which
arc made under his calculation of that
bill. | will state, sir. tha. so far a. John
W. Garrett is concerned, l had no con.
versation with him or any of his agents
upon the subj &c: be is abuniantly able
to take care of himself upon this or any
other question. This proceeding il IN
usual in morals. in Law oni in equity, to
expect al individual to b, charged, with
out proof, with a crime. and then oe c,l-
led upon TO defend aad prove . negative.
We have no right to prove negative
As far as :he Baltimore aud O,io R,id
is concerned. in regard to this gre.. qu.s
,ion of the way bill. when the facts are
presented. that great wrong has been
Inflicted BY this great corporation, then
We shall iud Mr. Garrett able to defend
himself or sink in the good opinion of the
people of this State.
The objects of the resolutions. which
had received an unfavorable repor. from
the Committee of Finance, and the PRO-
ccdure suggested by them, were entirely
unnecessary as we'll as Unconstitutional.
There was no law in The State of Mary
land that justified tie issue Of q writ of
scire fdcias in such case. / care not
what might be the actisn of the cou.mi,.
tee; l care not what they might proclai n
to be right, nor what nigh, b the pro-
grammc that they laid down for the State
of Maryland; there was no law to war
rant the Issue Of writ Of scire Eacias to
annul the charter of the Baltimore aud
Oaio Road. There were four importan.
points connected with this case. II We
can establish tha. this is capita,ion tax.
your scire taeias cannot issue. II We can
establish to the Senate that . co-partuer-
ship existed. your scire Jscias canno, is
sue. II Ne establish the fact sf ses-of,