The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1813-06-01

t"hA net Opey your eau, dCCorG1NS So ou'
own views of the Cast" because the exercise
al ANY discretion may da,sat ,he very p4.
poses tor which the authority was-yestea.
| Bu1 Tie az Snts are bJeEd to oOc,. ano for
any dis"beuieuCc of orders, they are sAojeCl
To sech penalties as the Congress OF the y.
States may lay down within inc pale vi the
lConstitutioa.
The ao,hority ofthe u. States in this res
peCt seems 10 nc complete. To the States
4, reserved. iS,. the power of dEhoIVfiag such
cytrcrS a. Congress may deem requisite tor
torganizIng aud dlsciplming the militia, and
"a. t''e power Of TRAINING the militia accord =
mg ,o the discipline prescribed by Cum
gress But the States have no. right to so
idriaer aid assume to themselves tire pow
&c ~ Judging az the propriety of the cali, *
taxing s,pg,c measure To defeat IL. he
Ssites have 40 RI ,iit 10 say To the Adjutant-
ItIeherai, f@ instance "foa shall not max c
return or oar m!hua To the President of
the u. States" nor ia the Br.gadier General
~ GA shall, not march your i,rig Ade agree
ably to the Call OF the Union - nor to "a CO.
lionel, Narcn not YOUR regiment, until YOU
have consulted the e. vernon or until you
are satisfied that you bs,s been called upon
agreeabiH to the provisions of the constitu
ton aud that there is some invasion to re
pei, some insurrection to suppress. or some
competent to enforce"
The words of the Constitutions, therefore,
seem to carry this meaning uhon their {eee,
that the u. States may cali the Militia into
service that they may enforce this call (;
that the agents TO whom they address their
CAL In this matter, are directly responsible
TO them and that Congress are under no ne
cessity OF asking the consent OF the STATE
authorities for. the militia to IT. rCtI in obedi
ence to the Call OF their legitimate Agents.
The very circumstances under which
the Constitution was formed. seen strongly,
to support this construction. It was urged.
that the old confederation was not strong
enough, because il was dependent upon the
States Tor all its most material powers
thar 1t was obliged Co resort 10 acquisitions
upon tha States for supplies of money ana
Quotas OF troops that the states were in
different TO these acquisitions, because you
could not enforce them; You eenld not throw
state into prison. nor subject her to corpo-
ralpusishment for her dSobedience and
that the only way to remedy these defects,
was To establish a firm of government,
which would have the power within itself of
operating directly upon individual citizens,
without having recourse to the consent or
intermediate authority of the states. The
argument was irresistible, because the exis-
ting situation of the country proved tito be
correct. 1t rs fair. therefore, To presume,
that, in framing the constitution to get quit
of these evils, its founders would take dne
care to throw the government of the Union
as little as possible upon the States for the
means OF enforcing the powers which were
transferred to it. And it is fair, then, to
presume that III no case is this consent or
cooperation of the States uecessary, but
where the Constitution has expressly made
it so. But in the case Of the militia thereis
no such Consent reserved to the States.
after the officers are appointed-and the
authority OF Congress to have agents res
ponsible to them, seems then in this respect
to flow from the history "a well as the
words of the Constitution.
Agdin. We can be at TO loss for the
meaning of this part of The. Constitution. If
we resort to the sense in which ii was taken
at the time by its framers But the co-tem-
poreous exposition completely support. the
construction which We have given.
The FederGHst maintains this doctrine in
more general way--1He Be6ates of the
Virginia ConUention, the other textbook
on this subject. in more pointed manner.
, In the Esd number of the Federaliss, in
which an attempt is made to show {" The
necessity OF Government at least equally
energetic with the one proposed" the wri-
ter presents the following reflections.
Is there not manifest inconsistency. in dsYcly
ing upon the federal government the care of the
seaeral defence, leaving in the state governments
the eIecfiTe pewcrs, by which il is to he provided
Tor Is MT want OF co operation the inislDle con
sequence CT such a system! And will not weak
ness disorder, undue distribution oil the burthens
and eSlamites OF war, unnecessary and intoera.
bio increase OF expence be its natural and Inc yitabi
c0neomtants Have we not had unequvocaI expe-
Iience OF its effects in the course Of the revolutions
which we have just atchievedw
In the 2Sth No. The Federalist say
Concerning the Militia
The power of Regulating the militia and of com
manding IT'S services IN times of and in
vasion, are natural incidents to The duties of super
intending the common defence, and Of watching g
Yer the Internal peace of the eonfederacy.'
" 1t well regulated militia be the most natural
defense OF free country, il ought certainly to be
hder the regulation and 1t the disposal of that body
which Is constituted the guardian OF the national ST..
surity standing srines dangerous to liberty,
an efticacous power the militia, in the same
body, ought as far possible, to take away the in
ducemesnt and the pretexts TO such unireudIy in.
suluhops. u the federal government corr In and
| the and OF the mits in these emercencies which
call tor the uatitsry arm in support OF the civil
magistrate, Vt esn the bstter dispense with the crn.
ployment Of different kind Of force. IT il cannot
avail itself OF the former, it will be Obliged 10 recur
20 the latter. 10 render ariay unnecessary will
be more certain method Of preventing its egstesee
| thsna thopsand prohibitions upon paper"
Let us now iOak To the Debates Of the
Virginia Convention tive sec at once
what interest vas EXCITED by the PROPOSE
ton to transfer TO Congress the power over
the militia, aud what feid OF debate il
lopened to theH but it was neither denied
Ill., = H. - a.. a