The campaign. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1866, 1866-10-05
Letter from Sheriff Snyder.
SHERTFF'S OFFICE.
BLoOMsBURG, september p, 1855.

Letter from Sheriff Snyder.
SHERtFFs OFFICE,
BLoOMsBURG, september 2i, 1855.
Doctor p. John, Editor Of tie CoiaDi6id
County Republican:
SIR,-ln your issue Of the twentieth
instant / find the following inquiry:
"Why is it that in publishing his clec-
tion proclamation Sheriff Snyder has
omitted that portion relating to desert
ers ?''
For the information of yourself and
your readers, | beg to say that ! cannot
amend my proclamation for the reasons
which follow: Since the passage of the
Act of Assembly of the eleventh Of
June last, intended to carry into effect
the act of Congress Of the third Of
March, 1865, depriving certain persons,
called deserters, of right to vote, the
Supreme Court of this State has pro-
nounced the Act of Congress of no val
idity. As the opinion of the court has
not yet been published in your paper,
and may not have come under your no.
tice, ] refer you to Il portion of it in an
swer to your inquiry, and in cXplana-
ton of m proclamation. Judge Strong,
who d, livcred the opinion OF the Court,
says:
1t reft rrin, to the Act Of Congress
means tLat the forfeiture which ii
prescribes, like all other penalties for
desertion, must be adjudgcd to the con-
vict' person after trial by a court-mar-
tiai an | sentence approved. For the
conN ct on and sentence of such a court
there ca / be no substitute. They alone
estab isl the guilt of the accused, and
fusten u ION him the legal consequences.
Such we think is the true meaning of
the act, a construction that cannot be
denied to it without losing sight of all
the previous legislation respecting the
same subject matter, no part OF which
does this act profess to alter.
| 1t may be added that this construc-
tion is not only required by the univcr-
sally admitted rules Of statutory inter-
probation, but it is in harmony with
the personable rights secured by the
Constitution, and which Congress must
be presumed to have kept in view. 1t
gives to the accused a trial before sworn
Judges, IL right TO challenge, an oppor-
tunity of defence, the privilege of hear
ing the witnesses against him, and OF
calling witnesses in his behalf. 1t pre-
serves to him the common law presump-
tion of innocence, until he has been adj
Judged guilty according 10 the forms Of
law.
1t gives iinality to single trial. If
tried by Il court-niartial and acquitted,
his innocence can never again be called
in question, and he can be made TO suf-
fer no part Of the penalties prescribed
for guilt. On the other hand, If Il re-
cord of conviction by a lawful court be
nOt II prerequisite to suffering the pen
atty of tine law, the act of Congress may
work intolerable hurd.hips. Yhc ac-
cused will thus be obliged to prove his
innocence whenever the registry of the
Provost Marshal is adduCcd against
him. No decision of board Ul clec-
ton officers will protect him against
the necessity Of renewing his defence at
every subsequent election, and ut each
time with Increased difficulty arising
from the possible death or absence OF
witnesses: In many cases this may
prove a gross wrong. 1t cannot be
doubted that in some instances there
were causes that prevented Il return TO
service or report, by persons registered
I as deSerters by Provost Mulshals, that
+ would have been held juStiiying rca-
sons by cOurt-martial, or at least
would have prevented an approval OF
the courts sentence. 1t is well known
also that some who We're registered de-
serters, were at the time actually in the
military service as volunteers, and hon
Orably dischargng their duties t. the
Government. TO hold that the act OF
Congress imposes upon such the noces,i-
ty of proving their innocence without
any conviction of guilt, would be an
unreasonable construction of the act,
and would be attributing 10 the Nation
al Legislature an intention not warrant
ed by the language and connection OF
the enactment.
1t follows that the Judgment OF the
court below upon the case stated was
right. The plaintiff not having been
convicted of desertion aud failure to rG-
turn to the service or to report to Il Pro-
vost- Marshal, and not having been SEN
fenced to the penalties and fortci,urcs
} of the law, was entitled to vote.
You will observe that the Supreme
Court of our State, the tribunal author
lied to pronounce the final decision up
Oh the cOnstitutionMity of our laws, de-
clares in express terms that an election
board is not competent to try and de-
eide upon the question of de3ertion; in
other words, they declare that the per-
s)nal rights secured by the Constitution
gives to the accused Il trial before sworn
Judges, right to challenge, an oppor-
tunity of defence, the privilege Of hear
ing the witness against him, and o,
calling witnesses on his behalf.
1t cannot be denied that the reason
ing of the Court applies with The same
force to the act of our Legislature that
it does to the act of Congress which the
Court had Immediately before them.
| You will, therefore, l hope, readily
percelYe why l have declined in the
eli, etion proclamation to impose upon
the Btard of Election the duty Of try
ing alleged, cases Of deseriion. The Su-
preme Court says the Election Boar!
has no such powcl or authority. And
runtil the Court revei 9s the decision /
} will respect it, l have 20 disposition
to do anything by which elac'ion ON
GERS may become involved in prosecu-
lions. Very respectfully,
SAMUEL SNl DER, Sheriff