The Middlebury people's press. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1841-1843, 1842-10-25
COM MUNICATION.
To the Editor of the Peoples Press.

Sir - have said that the language Of
the cons tutor was misunderstood when al
their last session the Legislature repealed
csrtain sections of tho militia act on the
ground that they were unconstitutional.
now proceed 10 verify this as briefly rs pos
sIble, for | can say nothing that will be ri.
Their new or Interesting TO most readers who
will feel an interest in the subject. 1t was
decided by the Legislature that those Sec
ions of the militia act we're passed in VIC.
laiion OF The l7ih section Of the bill Of
rights, which is in these words mo per
son in this Stale can in any case be subject
10 law martial. or 10 any penalties and pains
by virtue Of that law, except those employed
III the army. or in the militia in actual ser
vice. And they arrived at the conclusion
that said sections of he militia act were un-
cons,itutionalin tie following manne--(sce
journals Of page l4.) The courts
as now est ,bliShed for governing the milirin
not IN actual service are d~enominated courts
maftial-the laws by which they are gov
erned are peculiac TO these courts, and con.
SequenHy are laws MARTIAL" Now here is
clearly u singular non-sequitur-for bv the
same reasoning If these courts had been
denominafed militia courts, as hey might
have been with great propriciy, those Jaws
being peculiar 10 those courts, woulI conSe-
qHenuy have been militia laws, and so no
violation OF the constitution. Surely the ia
ture Of laws cannot be determined by the
style Of the court by which they are admin.
Is'ered, nor is their meaElug changed
by changing the style Of The court. Instead
therefore Of pursuing this novel method OF
d%efiOlng laws, we will resort 10 The English
law 10 ascertain what law martial ia. where
Ne find the following definition Of it.
"Nartial law is the law of war, depending
on the power and pleasure of the king and
his Lieuienanis +; oelng a pure military des-
Potsm restrained by no law" Hence sir
Mathew Hale justly remarks that martial
law is in reality no law. but something in.
dulged rather than allowed as law Now
the militia of this state have always been
governed by law. When the government
was first organized under The constitution
the Legislature passed an act for organizing
and governing the militia. infinitely pre-
scrIbIng the duties 10 be performed BY off,
Gers and soldiers, and specifying the sum
10 be paid for such neglect Of duty-leaving
nothing 10 the discretion of the officers as
to the nature or degree of punishment, nor
they in any case go beyond a %pecuni.
airy mulct' Is this the law martial against
Inc penalties and pains of which the trainers
OF The constitution so carefully protected the
will waste no more time ON This
branch of The subject. But it was adildged
Ina; those sections Of the militia act which
were rePealed-we re passed in violation of
he 10Th article of the brl! of rights, which
declares that in all prosecutions for criminal
1tiences a person shall have a right to a
rial by jury. Now The question is wha,
I'D The trainers Of the constitution intend by
for criminal offences, did thew
consider that The proceedings in the Impo.
ilion OF militia fines, were prosecutions for
olfences1 That ihey did no, Is 3
lear ffem the fact, that at the first session
The Legislature under the constitution, a
l,ii'ia act-was passed authorizing militia
nicefs 10 assess and collect militia fines.
No one ever considered that this made any
Of The criminal code. nor were the pro- {
eedlngs ever termed prosecutions for GRIM |
nal offences by any one. But it was al
rays considered that the &C. for the govern. S
nent of the militia was a distinct branch of
ne municipal law, passed in obedience to l
10 - section OF the frame Of governmenl,