Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1885-01-02

FN-."sasfouaiy sCHcIH III was SNOW. "
1.-THE evidence 10 that case that, il the votes
thus excluded We're counted, the constitu-
ton would have been rejected. notwith-
standing that a great many men in the
military service outside of the State. m lny
of whom were citizens Of other STATES. had
been permitted to vote on the adoption Of
the contribution in violation OF all law aud
precedent.
The mastery argument presented in be-
half Of Miles in thai case by Messrs Alex
ander and Steele, set forth as its unanswer-
able major premise, the proposition that
The New Constitu ion can have no legal
effect and operation until at er and in vir-
tue of the ratification ami adoption there
OF by tho people of the stare; and by the
people of the State are intended the con-
stituency in ,ohom resiied the electire franchise
at the momsnt Of submitting the nsu coaaitu.
ton to the popular rote" This proposition,
which is almost self-evident, was conclus-
lively established by numerous authori.ie.
cited in their brief From this proposition
it was demonstrated that any power that
may have been attempted to be conferred
upon the Governor to disfranchise citizens
already qualified under the constitution
was unconstitutional, revolutionary and
void. The court, confessedly intimidated
by the threatened revolution and blood
shed, declined to inquire into the source
whence this power was derived and render
ed decision which has ever since excited
the contempt and censure of lawyers. This
vacillating decision was the only semb-
lance of LEGALITY which the constitution re
ceived. and that was not even a sha low,
as the Court, acknowledging that it was
afraid and powerless to express an opinion
in the matter, merely declined to do so.
But the question of the adoption of the
constitution of 1864 came up again before
the high tribunal OF the people of the
State In their sovereign capacity in the
adoption o. the constitution Of 1867. 1t
was then and there clearly decided that
the constitution of 1864 had never been
adopted by the people Of the State. Art.
"a of the Declaration of Rights, then
adopted by the overwhelming vote of the
people, reads as follows:
ART. "a. That Slavery sh al not be re-..-
tablshed in this State but haping been abolish-
ed, under the policy and authority Of the United
States con,pens rtion, in consideration thereof is
due fran the United Stdtes.
What were meant here by the "policy
and authority OF the United States" as
effecting the abolition of slavery in this
State, were the facts that slavery had al
ready been abolished in all the seeding
Southern States by the Federal govera-
ment, as war measure, and that, under
cover OF the turbulent state of affairs in
this border State and the presence and
intimidation of the Federal troops in the
State, and their illegal voting outside of
it, and in anticipation Of the treaty for eman-
cipation with compensation Which must inertia
bly haze folloped betueen the Federal gopern-
ment and that of the State Of Maryland,
peaceable revolution had been forced upon
the people of this State, still true to their
allegiance to the Federal government,
whereby this element of property, guaran-
teed to them by the Federal constitution
and that of the State, had been taken
away. Nor did the people of the State,
speaking through their Constitution OF
1867, rest with this simple declaration Of