Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1885-03-27


in this matter, by directing the attention
Of the next Legislature to its constitutions
duty upon this important question, and
not the mere negative kind by offering nc
opposition.
In regard to the constitutional cues ion
to which our contemporary refers it may
not be supertluous for US again TO remind
it that it is not practicable for any ques-
ton to become res aijuaicatI by a mere
provision ofthe constitution The consti
tuition merely states the principles of the
social compact. 1t remains for the couris
and the legislature to determine the appli
cation Of those principles. Until this be
done, no question can he sid to be res
0!judicata by the constitu ion, but Is sub
ject to the private Interpretation and di
verse views of individual citizens. Aswe
have heretofore stated, abe constitutional
lawyers of the present day entertain the
opinion that section Of the 14th amend
ment can have 10 application to the loyal
allegiance; and this was undoubtedly the
opinion of the many eminent lawyers who
framed the constitution of 1867, which
spoke subsequent to the adoption Of the
14th amendment. The only way in which
this question can become res adju3icatr is
by bringing The mater TO the attention Of
the Federal Government, as required 10y
the cons tuition. and obtaining the sdju
dication of the Supreme Court upon it
/ That this adjudication would be favorable
to the State OF Mary and We believe th.re
is little doubt
With regard to the views of the Bel Air
/ Times, it is due to it to state that it has
not been long on our exchange list and
is not, therefore, cogni1sn. Of al the TINES
has said upon this question. We believe
We have fully met ali OF its objections in
former articles. As that journal seems TO
be very intelligently conducted, we shall
I hope to convince it Of the erroneonsness
! eff its impressions AID in time to have it's
support Of the measure 1t is 4 Republi
can journal and for that reason we would
especially ike 10 have it form correct
judgment in regard 70 'he stasls Of the
matter.
With regard TO the three propositions
which it deduces from the the TIMF>s last
article and which it deems 'extraordi-
nary" we will say word. It's first and
third propositions, invo've a distinction
without a difference and We shall treat
them both as one. That this property
trds taken by the policy and authority Of
the United States" and consequent that
"a wrong WAS committed upon our people
by the Federal authority in this matter"
We think is we'll established by recent his
tory as vel as by he dec arations Of tie
constitution Of the State.
That the 50 cal ell constitution Of 1864,
whereby this class of properly was per
emp ori'y taken away, was dec arei to bs
law upon the votes of decided minority
of the people of the 81 e, only 81 ci j.
zens voting in its favor; and that this re-
suit was rendered practicable by the ex
clusion of many Of the best and most loyal
citizens OF the State from the right to vote
through the illegal imposition of unwar-
ranted and most extravagant test oaths
and that the carrying on. of this bold and
lawless scheme, whereby the forms of law
were so grievousiy perverted in his State,
was only rendered practicable by the pre-
sence and intinida'ing influence Of the
Federal troops at the polls in this State.
are, We apprehend, well established his
torical facts. 1t is also well established
that the Federal Congress did, in the month
of April, 1862, upon the recommendation
of President Lincoln, pass q resolution that
'the United States ought to cooperate
with any State which may ADOPT gradual
abolishmsnt of slavery, gicing t. suh Suite
pecuniary all to be used by such State in
its discretion. to compensate for the in
conveniences public and private, produc-
ed by such change Of system - and that
this resolution remained unrescinded at
the time the Federal government through
it's military forces wrongfully perverted
the forms of law in this loyal Safe and
forcibly declared slavery in Maryland i'm
nediately abolished.
Upon the ques ion of the interference
of the Federal mi 'itary at the elections in
this State at the time of the preparation
Of that reyo utionary measure by which
slave property was taken away, which we
think viii prove to be an essential ques
lion in This matter, we suppose we cannot
adduce any more satisfac DRY testimony
than that of ex-Gov. Bradford, who sub
sequently became the co-operator of the
Infamous Lew Wallace in Carrying this
revolutionary measure to a successful &C
comp ishment. In his message to the le-
gislature of 1864, Governor Bradford thus
refers to the unlawful Federal interference
at the elections in this State at the time
when the Legislature which first concoct-
ed this revolutionary scheme was chosen.
After referring to the numerous specific
cases of outrages upon popular suffrage
which had been committed by the FEEDER
al soldiery upon our citizens he conclud-
ed as follows:
"But will not detan you with recapitula-
ton of all the abuses that these statements dis
close. | have caused copies of them to be trans
mitted to you and they cannot fail to arrest