The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1866-10-05
The Law of the Land.
DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT,
ONTHE RIGHT OF SO-CALLED
DESERTERS TO VOTEI
Election Officers, Read !

The following is the opinion of the
Supreme Court in regard to the right of
so-called "desertersn to vote. 1t de-
clares the Act Of Congress void and of
course the act of the Legislature based |
upon the void Act of Congress is also
void. a MAN MUST FIRST BE
TRIED, CONVICTED AND SEN
TENCED as adeserter before he can be |
deprived of hisright to vote. So say the
Supreme Court. Read for yourselves:
The act Of 1906 provided for general
courts martial, and made minute and
careful regulations for their Organiza-
ton, for the conduct Of their proceed
ings, and for the approval or disappro-
val Of their sentences. Subsequent acts
made some changes, but they have not
restrained the jurisdiction or diminish
ed the powers of such courts. 1T IS to
such a code of laws, forming a system
devised for the punishment ofdesertlOn,
that the twenty-frSt section OF the act
of March 3, 1863, was added. 1t refers
plainly to pre-existing laws. 1t has the
Single object OfinCreasing the penalties,
but it does not undertake to change or
dispense with the machinery provided
| for Furnishing the crime. The common
rules of construction demand that it be
read as if it had been Incorporated into
former acts. And if it had been, if the
act of 1906 and its supplements had pre-
scribed that the penalty for dcsertion or
failure to report within a designated
time after notice ordraft (which the act
of 1865 declares desertion) should be
punished, on conviction of the same,
| with forfeiture of relationship and death,
/ or in lieu of the latter, such other pun
/ ishment as by the sentence of a court
martial may beinficted, would any one
contend that any portion Of this pun
! ishment could be inflicted without con-
yictiOn and sentence? AsSuredly not.
! AndifnOt, so must the act OF 1860 be con-
strued now. 1T means that the forfeit
ureWhich it preScribes, likeall 0therpen
alties for desertiOn, must be Hdjudgedto
/ the convict, d person after trial by a
/ court martial and sentence approved.
/ For the conviction and sentence OF SucA=
1 a court there can beno substitute. 1hey
alone establish the guilt Of the accused
/ and fasten upon him the legal conse-
/ quences. 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 re-
specting the same ubjectmatter, no part
/ of which does this act profess to alter.
ItmaS be added that this cOnstruc-
! ton is not only required by the unINer-
sally admitted rules of statutory inter
pretation, but it is in harmony with the
personal rights secured by the Consti-
/ tuition. and which Congress mustbepre-
sumed to have kept in view. 1t gives TO
! the accused a trial befOresWOrn judges,
q right to challenge, an opportunity Of
defense, the privilege of hearing the
/ witnesses against him, and Of calling
witnesses in his behalf. 1t preserves to
/ him the cOmmOn-laW presumption OF
! innocence until he has been adjudged
| guilty, according to the forms Of law.
/ 1t gives finality to a single trial. lftr1ed
/ by a court martial and acquitted, his in
nOcence can never again be called in
question, and he can be made to suffer
no part Of the penalties prescribed for
| ruilt. On the other hand, if record Of
I conviction bya lawful court be nOta pre-
requisite to suffering the penalty OF the
/ law, the act Of Congress may work lntOl-
erable hardships. The accused will then
be obliged to prove his innocence when
ever the registry oftheprOvOst marshal
sadduced against him. No decision of
q board of election office will protect
him against theneceSsity of renewing
his defense at every subsequ uentelectl0n,
and each time with increased difficulty
arising from the possible death or alb
sence of witnesses. In many cases this
may prove a gross wrong. 1t cannot
be doubted that in some instances there
were causes that prevented return to
/ service, ora report by persons register
ed as deSerters by provost marShalS,
that would have been beld justifying
reasons by a court martial, or at least
would have prevented an approval Of
the courts sentence. Its well known,
also, that some who We're registered deS-
erters were. at the time, actually in the
military service as volunteers, and hon
Orably discharging their duties to the
government. To hold that the act of
Congress imposes upon such the neCesSi-
ty Of proving their innocence, without
any conviction of guilt, would be an
unreasonable construction Of the act,
and would be attributing to the Nation
al Legislature2an intention not waran-
ted by the language and connection of
the enactment.
1t follows that the Judgment of the
Court below, upon the'case stated, was
right. The pl0intifR0t hard2g bre13 con
Uicted Of dcsertiOn and fGjilne t0rettgWtO
: the serrice, or 10 report TO q pror0st mar
shat, and not h0rjng been SemencedtO the
penalties a34dJogeitt~e Of the lac, lcas
| allfifIni flt t.ll{n