For The cecil Mir.
PRATT AND REFORM.
{"character_count": 1757, "word_count": 299, "ccnet_language_score": [0.968999981880188], "ccnet_perplexity": [1763.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
DenunclatIon seems To be the engine
which is TO he used by our opponents a
gansl our candidate Thomas G. Pratt
But let them beware lest the blows lhe>
strike al him, should rebound with force
against themselves. We have heard ofmen
holding him up to the execralion Of the
public, because, in 1886, period which
most MarylanGers recollect, he was found
in position hostile to the 10 recusanl
Senatorial Electors whose destructive aud
revolutionary course we do sincerely be-
lIeve they have ere this themselves fully
appreciated. This must be the meaning
of the charge that he was opposed 10 re-
form in the Constitution. We uncquivocal-
ly deny that either Mr.. Pratt or tho wing
party were opposed to Reform properly
effected, bnt we take a pride in avowing
the open. uncompromising hostility OF
both to this band, who lalher than be de.
feaied in accomplishing party purpose
would have thrown tie Government o
Maryland into a state Of confusion which
might have ended in Revolution and civil
War. We are proud to find him among
the faithful 81, whom nothing could drive
from the faithful discharge of their duty
TO their constituents.


The simple facts briefly told are these
The Constitution of Maryland, previous
TO its reform-that constitution bought and
consecrated by the blood OF our sres, re,
quired for the formation of Senate, tha
forty Electors should be chosen by the
people OF Maryland every five years, Whose
duty 1t should be to assemble in Electoral
college on the third Monday of September
and select by ballot, fifteen persons from
among the citizens of the State, who shoult
constitute the Senate of Maryland for the
following five years. In pursuance of thi.
provision an election was held in the
Summer of 1886 for Senatorial Electors