Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1864-02-24

ern States in time to get the votes of those States
tor him in the next Presidential eection-this farce
to be enacted by means of his one tenth Of popuia-
tlon in each Stated These are the means it seems,
TO oe relied to perpetuate the abolition power by
Debating the national candidate for the Presidency
Of inc United States Such 4 course, if adopted,
would most probably lead to . revolution by the
nat'onai men at the North. The idea of casting the
vote Of North Carolina for Abraham Incolnl What
an insult to our people, and what gross perverson
OF every recognized principle of self govern~entl
For the Standard.
The conscript act of April, 1862, section o. pro-
vides " that persons not Liable to military duty
may DO received as substitutes for those who are,
under such rules and regulations as may be pre-.
scribed BY the Secretary of War" The time of
service is three years. unless the war shall sooner
end. The Secretary Of War published: an order
that person thus liable to military duty, might
put an able bodied man, not liable to military duty
under the act in his place. and thereby become en-
titled to his discharge from the service exactea of
him. Accordingly, such . substitute was put in,
and the principal was discharged by the govern
ment absolutely and without condition; for the law
did not make the substitution or discharge condi-
tional to any purpose whatever.
Now, is this q contract between the government
and the principal! And, if So can tho government
.soA"se ~ oPOu uoSooeaIys ovSiis "ISuOuS
ton! fit is contract, it is an ezseuted one
" A contract is . compact between two or more
parties to do, or not to do, particular thing
Ogden o. Saunders, II Wheat 256; l Parsons
const, B, Smith on contracts, Law lib, Story
cons, 1876 Whether any contract exists, and,
if So what Is its proper Interpretation is determ
Unable upon the principles Of the common law. 2
Story, cons 1880.
These principles require to every contract . con-
sideration. They do not however, look to the
question, which party has obtained the advantage
in the bargain Indeed, the contract is as oblira
tory without any advantage to the promiser as
with it. The main rule in regard to the sufi.
cheney Of the consideration, is that it may arise,
either first by reason of benefit resulting to ihe
party promising, or at his request to third per.
son by the act Of the promiser; secondly, on occa.
sion Of the latter sustaining any loss, or nconve-
nience, or subjecting himself to any charge or ob
ligation at the instance of the person making the
promise, although such person obtain no advan
tsge therefrom. Chit on contr., 80; Parsons
contr, 1856 Smith on contr, and cases cited.
The entire case may be briefly stated, thus: By
force of the conscript act Of April, 1862 citizen
between 18 and 35 years of aye, became liable and
owed to the government military service for three
years; and another citizen, Beyond the age of IS
years, did not become thus liable. The govern.
ment in order to make the debt more acceptable to
the military debtor, said to him, at the very mo-
ment of demanding The military service, "you may
be discharged Of the duty exscted Of you, if you
will choose to do SO, by putting in your place some
ft citizen Of whom this military service is not re.
quired. This proposal, however is made of mere
favor, and without any purpose or expectation Of
seeking any benefit therefrom Such is fair
construction Of the undertaking by the government
in section 8.
Well, in pursuance Of this declaration or propo
sal, or promise, the military debtor proceeded to
subject himself to tho inconuenience aud charge of
procuring person who was not liable-not mil
ita1y debtor-bo,h abe and fit, and offered him in
his place and he was accepted and the government
forthwith discharged the military debtor from the
service demanded Of. three years.
Now, if this had been = stipulation between two
citizens about matter of money, property, or ser.
vice. there would never have arisen any doubt that
a contract existed and that the debtor was fully
acquitted of the whsle matter demanded of him in
the outset Let us see if familiar cases Of iustra-
ton in the law do not fully support this conclusion.
IS bound to convey to the tract of land called
"Black Acre" He is reluctant to do so, and there
fore B, of mere grace, says that he will accept in
lieu another tract, which is forthwith conveyed to
B, who thereupon discharges Of his obligation.
Again: A owes B debt and A proposes to
pay him with the bond of G of the same amount,
which proposal of mere graes, is accepted, and
is discharged.
Again !: A is oound to serve B for one year in a
specified calling gioss him leave. Of mare graes,
to put in his place another not bound to serve
auAll at the time This other man is accepted
and A is discharged.
In all these cases, the substituted obligation and
service are allowed as privilege and of mere grace
and favor; yet the discharge is binding in every
Court in the land. Take one more illustration =
Suppose that by tax law A is taxed during three
years in future, nine tenths of his income; and
the Confederate government proposes to him, OF
mere gracs, that if he will pay down thrice seven
tenths of his annual income estimated according to
rules prescribed by theSccretary of the Treasury, hs
shall be discharged from all other and further tax
on his estate, and A does so. Can the government
after getting the cash, rghtfully claim to tax his
income too without restoring the cashl
Now, in the first three illustrations none will dis
pute the law as it is stated. In'the fourth, I am
sure that any government even with the power to
retain the money, would be ashamed to do so; and
that any Independent judiciary would decide that
it could not Yet in the cases between individ-
uas, there was no benefit or advantage to the prom.
iser The substitution Of one duty for another was
allowed of mere favor, as was the substitution Of
another to the particular duty required. Ut this
character often are the promises made by tbs VIC
tors to the vanquished on laying down their arms
Ine surrender was tue coas'ueta''o'' ~"" " ~. "so"
has been deemed of the same force and virtus,
whether the promise was made Of necessity, OF ex-
pediency, Of grace, which, it must be adn''stsd
has been generally better kept when it came OF
grace. because that impulse is from generous and
noble, As we'll as . just heart
Its easy If the above examples are notsuicient to
enforce conviction, to present cases Of ustrstonst
more opposite. As, for instance, suppose section
had declared that persons not liable to military duty
may be received as substitutes and provided, that
not less than tv9 shall be received for oae thus lia
BILE; or that the sum Of 81 900 may be received in
substitution of the three years service ex.cted by
the act Now, these offers would have been Al
purely of mere grace and favor, if not SO liberal
that which is actually offered II, under such en-
.ctment one person had put in two substitutes AM
smother had paid 81, 900, would any one deny tba
the faith Of the nation would be pledged to them
and that nontrast would arise instantly ON aceani