The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1864-08-23
LOCAL METHODIST MINISTERS.
HABEAS CORPUS.

! the following case:
| The petitioner is, and has been for five or six
years, local preacher of the Methodist Episcopal
church, South, duly licensed as such, according to
the rules of his churchill is part of the discip-
line of this church that the license of local preach
er must be given by the Quarterly Conference, and
| signed by the President of the Conference; and
must be renewed every ecclesiastical year. Alocal
preacher is minister of his church, and his duty
is to preach and perform such other duties as may
be assigned by his presiding Elder or preacher in
charge; But until he is ordained as deacon, he
cannot administer the sacraments of his church.
He is not entitled to any salary pay for preach
ing or for the performance of his other ministerial
duties. The petitioner was, prior to the 18th day
of February last, and has been ever since that
time, located at the city of Raleigh, and has been
constantly anG regularly engaged in preaching
every Sunday alternately, to two congregations in
the country the city, and at the hospitals, and
also performing other ministerial duties, by attend
ing class meetings. &c, all under the superinten-
dence of Dr. Craven, his preacher in charge. He
! has received no salary or pay from his church or
his congregations, but has supported himself from
| the income of hotel in the city of Raleigh, of
which he is the owner and manager.
{ Having been enrolled as eonscript and carried
to Camp Holmes, the petitioner claims to be dis
charged under an act of the Confederate Congress-
ratified on the 18th day of February, 1864, which
grants all exemption from military service III the
army of the Confederate States, to "every minister
of religion authorized to preach according to the
rules of his church. and who at the passage Of this
act, shall be regularly employed in the discharge
of his ministerial duties" The comnandant of
conscripts for this State denies his right and in
sists upon retaining him in custody conscript
under a regulation adopted by the Bureau of Con
scription, to the following effect: off the party is
regular licensed minister authorized to preach
cordng to the rules Of his Sect and that is his only
business, he is entitled to exemption. If, how
ever, he depends for support on any other bust
ness, even if he should preach regularly, he is not
entitled to exemption"
That the case of the petitioner is obviously with
in the letter of the act of Congress, cannot be de-
MED. He is according to the polity of his church,
a minister Of religion duly authorized to preach
and he at the time of the passage of the act of
Congress regularly employed in the discharge of
his ministerial duties.-He is, therefore. entitled
to be exempted from performance of military SER
vice, unless the Bureau Of Conscri ption is author
lied, by law, to make a regulation other than that
prescribed in the act of Congress, by which he
shall be held as conscript; in constituting the
words Of the act the Bureau has adopted con-
struction which is in accordance with its spirit
though not within its strict letter. I cannot find
in the act any authority conferred upon the Bureau
of Consumption to frame regulations upon this sub
ject; and I cannot suppose that it sets up claim
to an Independent power of legislation. In making
provision for carrying the act into effect, the Blu
reau must ascertain its meaning, and in doing so,
must necessarily put construction upon it's Lam
guage. That construction, though, is not concu
sively binding upon the persons upon whom the
act is to operate for they have unGoubted right
to appeal to the courts of law for redress and it is
the decisions of such courts alone which can final
y settle the disputed point. The true and only
enquiry before me, then is, whether the Bureau of
CONSUMPTION has adopted the proper construction
of the act in question, according to the intention
of those who framed it-that is, according to the
reason and spirit Of it?
[ have already remarked that the case of the
petitioner is obviously within the letter of the act
of Congress. This being so, it is incumbent upon
the government to show that it is not also within
its spirit, for it is the first among the fun
damental rules for the Interpretation of laws, to
construe words in their usual and most known sig
MITIGATION. If the words be dubious, then we may
resort to other for ascertaining the will of
the Legislature; among which is that of consider
ing the reason and spirit of the law, the cause
which moved the Legislators to enact it.-See [
Blac. Com. SO and 81. Surprising, then, that
there is some dubiousness in the meaning of the
act under consideration, let us enquire what was
the motive which Induced the members of Con-
gress to pass it? About that there cannot be the
slightest doubt. Most manfestly, it was to afford
to all who should not be called into the field to the
men, women and children who should remain at
home, the services of all the ministers Of religion
Of every grade in every denomination, who were
duly authorised to preach, and who, when the act
was passed. were regularly employed in the dis
charge Of their ministerial duties Can any good
reason be given why these ministrations may not
be useful and productive of much good though
rendered by unpaid ministers? In the ecclesiasfi-
cal polity of the Methodist Episcopal Church,
South, the local preachers form, as | learn, the
most numerous class of their ministers. They &C.
cupy an important, though it may be an humble
field of labor, and are deemed essential in the
scheme of that church, as furnishing the means
whereby tthe poor have the gospel preached to
them" The fact that they take nothing from the
Golfers Of their church for their support, renders
that body much more able to sustain those who are
laboriDg in the higher grounds Of the ministry.
These unpaid ministers :hus enabled to effect
much good both by what they do and by what they
abstain from doing In working for nothing of an
earthly nature and supporting themselves, they
give [as well said by Messrs. Winston and Lewis
the counsel for the petitioner an iustrious exam
pie in ST. Paul, the greatest preacher whom the
world has ever known, who worked with his own
hands at his occupation of tent maker, that his
support mi Sht not be burden to the churches at
Corinth and Ephesus.-See Paley's Horae PAUL.
nalea, ch. 3. No. 6. Has this great apostle ever
been considered as having forfeited any of his
rights preacher by reason of sucn forbearance
and sef-deniaH On the contrary, has be- net fur
nished to all succeeding ages an additional proof
- yuypI fu loC H.