Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1863-12-10
THE ENROLMENT ACT.

We observe that many of our contemporaries are
discussing the propriety of modifying the provi-
sions of the enrolment act under several of its
heads, and especially that feature of it which au-
thorizes communication for actual service by the
payment Of three hundred dollars. 1t is well
known that his clause has been made the occasion
for casting much obloquy on the whole law and on
the Administration, which was held responsible for
it's passage Yet the friends of the law and of the
Administration have not hesitated to vindcate the
measure from these representations, and have de-
Tended as benefcent and just the very clause
against which it was sought to excite popular
odium and prejudice.
1t is known that we have uniformly felt it our
duty to express the opinion that the law was not
fairly open to the objections brought against it on
this ground, and that the Communication clause"
which appears to have excited the most opposi
ton, was in reality provision which wrought no
comparative harm to the 'poor man" simply be-
cause it gave to the man of moderate means an op-
portunity Of making the Government his agent for
the procuration of a substitute. 1t is not to be
forgotten that this latter and this alone, the
object Of the Communication clause" and it is
truly said by the New York Evening Post that
"to abolish the communication clause, as it now
stands, will have other effect than to raise the
price of substitutes. And this will be hardship
not upon the wealthy, but upon members of the
most numerous-the middle class. The wealthy
will not suffer; they can afford to pay higher
rate; it is the artisan, the farmer, the mechanic
that the heavier burden will Cypress"
The Secretary of War, in his forthcoming re-
port, will doubtless state the number of soldiers
whom he has "procured" substitutes for the
drafted men who paid the three hundred dollars
for this purpose, and with these data before it
Congress can better judge to the necessity of
entirely repeating the clause-,hus justifying the
objections brought against it-or of raising the
sum fixed as the price of Communication.
The motive and the effect of the clause, as origi.
nally framed and adopted, are, we doubt not, cor
recty stated in the following letter of the distin.
guished gentleman who was the recognised lead
er" of the last Congress
LANCASTER, AUGUST 81, 1868.
DEAR SIR: 10 answer to your inquiry, my opinion is,
that the payment T the three hundred Communication and
the furnishing substitute have precisely the effect
Either Of them frees the drafted from further draft
for three years He is in effect in service, either by him
self another The payment Of the three hundred dol
lars makes the Government his agent to procure subs
tute The Government has consented to act as such
agent The law says he may or before the day fixed
for bis appearance, furnish acceptable substitute, or
pay such sum- not exceeding three hundred dollars for the
procuraen Of SUCH subsiinei and thereupon the per-
furnishing such substitute, paying the money shall
be discharg ed from further liability under that draft
No one doubts that furnishing substitute for
three years To give different effect to the payment OF
the Communication money seems to me little less than an
absurdity. 1t is very mischevous misconstructcn
which il need be- have doubt Congress will correct
| Ed. REILLY, Eco. 1HADDEUs STEVENS