Randall in their favor. Governor Bradford gave his decision on the numerous questions raised as to their legality, in a lengthy opinion, dated October 28, 1864, and published simultaneously with his proclamation declaring the final result of the total vote on the Constitution. The objections raised by Mr. Schley were mainly on the ground of technicalities, as to requiring the oath of the soldiers who voted, as to the paper on which the ballots were printed, as to counting the votes of certain companies not attached to any regiment, etc. Out of the total of 3186 votes cast by the soldiers, 285 votes "for," and 5 "against" the Constitution were rejected, and 2633 votes "for" and 263 "against " it were accepted. Adding these latter numbers to the vote of the state, it made a total of 30,174 for the Constitution, and 29,799 against it, leaving the small majority of 375 in its favor, an exceedingly close result in a total vote of nearly 60,000. On October 29, 1864, Governor Bradford issued his proclamation declaring the new Constitution adopted, and causing it to go into effect on November 1, 1864. It should be observed that the overwhelming preponderance of the favorable vote on the part of the soldiers does not necessarily presuppose fraud or unfairness on the part of either the civil or military authorities. Men thrown together in the camp, or standing side by side on the field of battle would naturally be largely of one mind on political matters. This was seen in the case of the votes of the soldiers of various other states at this period. Also, men who were offering their lives in defense of their principles would not be apt, from motives of legal expediency, to hesitate in regard to measures considered as calculated to advance their cause." We thus come to the end of the movement which 12 The War Department issued at Washington on Oct. 1, 1864, "General Order, No. 263," intended to insure, as far as possible, freedom and fairness in the vote of the soldiers of the various states. occupied the thought of the people of the state during nearly two years preceding the close of the war. It was largely the result of a long-existent feeling of the need of reform in the social and political life of Maryland, and although precipitated and somewhat changed in character by the influence of the Civil War, would undoubtedly have been successful at some later day. In this latter case it would likely have been less extreme, yet perhaps more thorough, in its results, and hardly would have suffered the effects of the inevitable reaction which in the year 1867 not only abrogated the objectionable features of the Constitution of 1864, but rejected some of its greatest merits as well. But the fact that these merits and defects once existed in the organic law and government of the state, will not be forgotten by the more thoughtful people of Maryland, but will serve as a valuable experience to guide them in many hitherto untried paths of reform. Furthermore, if the justification of a higher national necessity is denied the Union men of 1863-4, their courage shown in the abolition of slavery in the state of Maryland deserves the thanks and appreciation of their posterity. |