Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1863-11-25

Tue kDe antncrltN to raise SuCD Il
force was to be taken from the States partial
iy, and delegated TO the new government a
bout to be formed. No State was to be allow
ed TO keep troops il time of peace. The
whole power of raising and supporting armies,
except in time of war, to be conferred up
on Congress. Necessarily with it was given
the means OF carrying it into full effect.
l agree that Congress is not at liberty to
employ means for the execution OF any powers
delegated to it, that prohibited by the
spirit of the Constitution, that are inconsis-
tent with the reserved rights of the States,
the inalicnable rights of a citizen. The
means used must be lawful means. But
have not been shown, and am unable 10 per-
ceiVe that compelling military service in the
armies of the United States, not by arbtra-
ry conscription, but as this act of Congress
directs, by enrolment of all the able bodied
male citizens of the United States, and per-
sons of foreign birth who have declared their
intention to become citizens, between the ages
of twenty and forty-five, with some few ex-
ceptions,) and by draft by lot from those en-
rolled, infringes upon any reserved rights of
the States, or interferes with any constitu
tional rights of private citizen. If personal
service may be compelled it is common
duty, this is cerainy the tairest and most e.
quail mode of distributing the public burden.
1t was uged in the argument that coercion of
personal service in the armies is an invasion
VI tho IISHt VI CIVIL ne
was urged in strange forgetfulness of hat civil
liberty is. In every free government the cit
lzen, or subject, surrenders portion of his
absolute rights in order that the remairder
may be protected and preserved. There can
be no government at all, where the subject re-
tains unrestrained liberty to act as he pleases,
and is under no obligation TO the State. That
is undoubte edIy the best government, which
imposes the fewest retraints, while it secures
ample protection to all under 1t. But no gov
ernment has ever existed, none can exist with
out right to the personal military services
of all its able bodied men. The right to civil
liberty in this country never included right
to exemption from such service. Before the
Federal Constitution was formed, the citizens
of the different States owed it to the govern
ment under which they lived, and it was exact
ed. The militia systems OF the States then as
serted 1t, and they have continued to assert 1t
ever since. They assert it now. No one
doubts the power of State to compel its mi
litis into personal service, and no one has ever
contended that such compuision invades any
right of civil liberty. On the contrary, it is
conceded that the right to civil liberty is sub-
ject 10 such power in the State governments,
and the history of the period Immediately
antecedent to the adoption of the Federal
Constitution shows that il was then admitted
Is civil liberty different thing from
what it was when the Constitution was formedi
III Is DtLItr projected Oy me provisions OF
the Constitution, hut the obligations of a
citizens to the government any less now than
they were then? This cannot be maintained.
If the, coercion into military service was no
invasion of the rights of civil liberty enjoyed
Ivy the people of the States, before the Federal
Constitution had any existence, it cannot be
now.
Again, it is insisted that If the power given
TO Congress to raise and support armies be
construed Mt hp mn sion of cifI-
ZenS into military service, it must with equal
reason be held to authorize arbitrary seizures
of property for the support of the army. The
force of the objection is not apparent. Con-
fessedly the army must be raised by legal
means. By such means it must also he-sup-
ported. 1t has already been shown that en-
roIlment and draft are not illegal; that to
make them illegal prohibition must be found
ia the letter or in the spirit of the CoDStitu
ton. Arbitrary seizures of private property
for the support of the army Illegal and
prohibited. Not only does the Constitution
point out the mode in which provision shall
be made for the support of the army, but in
numerous provisions, it protects the people
against deprivation OF property without com
pensation and due course of law. Exemption
from such seizures was always an asserted and
generally an admitted right wh lie exemption
from liability to being compelled TO the per
formance of military service was, has been
StGll,HGNct CIdlHltu IHSEe are, therefore.
limitations upon the means which may be used
for the support OF the army, while none are
imposed upon the means OF raising 1t.
Again, 1t is said this act of Congress IS a
of the Constitution, because it makes
a drafted man punishable a deserter before
he is mustered into the service. The contrary
was declared by Chief Justice Marshall, when
delivering the judgment OF the Supreme Court
of the United States in Houston VS.. Moore, 5
Wheaton. Under the act OF 1895, the drafted
men not declared to be subject to mill
tary law until mustered into service. This is
the act of which Judge Story speaks in his
But in the opinion of Judge
Congress might have declared them
in service from the time of the draft, precise
ly what this act of Congress does. Judge
MarshaiPs opinion, Of course, explodes this
objection.
The argument most pressed, in support of
the alleged uncoustitutionality of the act of |
Congress is that it iDterferes with the reserved
rights of the States over their own malItia. 1t !
is said the draft takes portion OF those who
owe MALTA service to the States, and thus |
diminishes the power of the States to protect
themselves. The States, it is claimed, retain
the principal power over the MALTA, and there
fore the power given to Congress to raise ar
mics must be construed, not to destroy or
impair that power of the States. If, say the
Congress may draft into their
armies, and compel the service of portion of
the State MALTA, they may take the whole,
and thus the entire power of the States over
them may be annulled, fo- want of any subject
upon which it can act. l have stated the ar
gument quite as strongly il was presented.
It is more plausible than sound. 1t assumes
the very matter which is the question in de-
bate. 1t ignores the fact that Congress has
liso power over those who constitute tho ma
tia. The MALTA of the States is also that of
The general government. 1t is the whole able
bodied populate Jon capable of bearing arms,
whether organized or not. Over it certain