Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1847-02-02

The case OF Geo. w. Bakency, upon h9oeos
tory,s, was heard before Judge Clopion during
the last week.
He had regularly enrolled in lie company o,
Berkeley volunteers, and had been mustered inlo
the service cf the United States. The petition
was presented By himself, being minor, between
the years OF eighteen and twenty one, and by his
/ father and master 10 whom, il was alleged, he
was an indened apprentice. The proof that ne
was minor when enrolled, and al The Time OF
the hearing Of the case, was complete, but there
was no proof OF his apprenticeship.
Henry l.. Brooke, E,q, was counsel Tor Inc
petitioner. He relied upon the common law, as
ability OF infants to make a binding conlrac! oil
This character and commended that the act Of Con-
sress Of May, 1876, and The subsequent legislation
lhereupon, OF the State Of Virginia, in December
last. did not abrogate The common law principle.
The application was resisted by Mr.. Baxter,
on behalf the Sta.c, and Mr.. Nicholas, attorney
for The United States. They insisled, that when
the contract is for the benefit of an infant, neither
he nor his parent, al common law, can annul II;
and, accordingly, that, although The special act
of Congress referred L. is silent as 10 the age o.
volunteers, yet as the service contemplated IS Of
character 10 admit OF the enrolment OF infants,
The contract OF the infant in this case was fof ms
beneft-beng reputable service and Tor The pub
lie good II was moreover, urged mat oy refer
ence 10 the previous legislation Of Congress anil
10 Tie geacrat scopto The particular act IN question:
it was 10 be inferred that either i, was The policy
OF the General Government IN authorize such en-
rolmeni (as it might conslilulonally do, in ab-
rosa,ion OF The common law or that the general
militia laac Of tie Commonwealth which fixes the
age of service al eighteen, furnished the guide IN
asceriainment Of the legal age under the act
Il was replied 10 these views:
ISL That. while contract Tor the benefit OF an
infant is binding not only upon him but upon
his parents, master and guardian, the specia'
service in this case was no, for his beneh.-at
leas; that i, was Of doubtful benefit and being So
mat the contract was, certainly, il no more, road-
able.
81 Tha, the law OF Congress containing
no provision as 10 the age, would not, amp''sdIp,
annu! he common law principle; bu', on The
contrary, lndl Tie iACl W iCO~I "HSH Pi'"'D'N
the enlistmeu; q Infants in The regular service,
without the authority Of parents, &c, determines
the policy OF The Government-and Sd, Iha, there
was no ground TO contend, upon the construction
OF the Act OF MAY, 1916, thai the STATE la'rs, in
relation 10 the militia, ascertain the military age
under that act.
Many points were moo;ed under these genera
heads, in a iull and elaborate discussion Of The
subject, deemed important 10 be settled as this
was The fts, case of The character which had |
been presented In the city under this act; and he
Judge sustained The views entirely Of the counsel
OF The petitioner.
He was accordingly discharged, although an
objection abandoned however, was made 10 The
discharge, upon the ground that wri; OF error
would be applied for. We are uninlormed whe-
Their The wri, has been granted. II 50, The case
vii. be Immediately determined by the Court al
Appeals.
\ is said thai in the famous charge Of CaI-
a;n Way, oil the eighty men under his CON-
.aant seycny-six were foreigners This was