Baton-Rouge gazette. [volume] (Baton-Rouge, La.) 1819-1856, 1842-10-01
FOR The Detroit DailV Advertiser

IMPORTANT JUDICIAL DECISION.
An enlistment ofnn Alien into The Army Of
me Tnited States he'll good. md II dis
chargc from service on hdbeas corPus
denied.
An application was made 10 The Hon. Ross
Wilkins, district Judge Of this district, for a
haheas corpus, to be directed TO the command
ant Of this post, to bring up the body Of Rob'.
Wilson, a soldier in the service, belonging
to 9Th regiment infantry, and show cause
why Is was detained.
On he return Of the writ, it appeared that
Wilson mad voluntarily enlisted INTO the ser
vice Of the United States. that he was Of full
are, but and been in the y, States but three
months preceding his enlistment that he was
an alien and had never been naluraIized.
His discharge WAS asked for on the ground
that the enlistment OF any person but an able
bodied citizen Of five feet Six inches in height,
between the ages Of eighteen and thir'y-hVc,'
was in violation Of The act of Congress OF 1902,
and was null and VOID, as bein. contrary 10
law.
The case was fully argued by d. T. llar-
b1ugE1, Esq for petitioner, and the district at
tnrney for the United States.
The court decided that the enlistment was
good for the following reasons
First. That the enlistment was a mere
contract for service between the soldier and
the United States, and was, on general prln-
cjplcs, binding, unless expressly prohibited by
the laws Of the United States. G.
That an alien was capable oil ente rIng int
any contract in the same manner as a CITIZEN
and that unless there could be found an OK
press prohibition against the enlistment, o.
aliens, the contracts Of course we're good.
That an alien might contract With the United
States in the same manner as with ar lndi-
vidusI, that he Was capable 10 contract, and i
he did so Voluntarily, for a good consideration,
that he mus, be bound by it.
Second. That the act OF Congress of 1902.
did not contain a prohibition against the en-
listment Of any person "crcept n MINOR r'ihoEt
The assent Of his guardian" that its object was
merely to fix the bounty that should be paid
for The enlistment Of eelaiers, and if a recruit
ting officer should enlist persons not within
the description contained in the act, The only
consequence would be that the officer would
mt be entlIld To his bounty. That the statute
"erprsssIy prohibited The gpsrdiani' and con
tanned no other prohibition whatever.
Third. That the regulations Of the service
were merely orders to the different Officers,
and except when based on the laws of the
United States, were not to be considered
and if an officer enlisted a recruit contrary
to the regulations or orders, he would only
be liable to military punishment for d!so''ed'-
cnce OF cyiess. That the enlistment, if within
the law. would still be good, although contra
nv to the regulations of The service. That npon
the whole case, he had ne doubt that the en-
! listmant of an a1ien was not prohibited bv any
law of the United States, and as a mere con-
tact, was clearly valid and binding.
On Saturday last, we learn that the same
question was brought before Hon. Henry
Chapman, Judge Of the distrit court, on anotheI
application, who sustained, in an elaborate
opinion, the same view taken by judge Wi
klns. Judge MolelI, the chief justice OF The
supreme court has gwen in writing, the same
opinion, SO that this question may be consider
ed as settled in this state.