The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1866-07-20

he draft" All these acts of Congress
m .nif-stly contemplate trial for deser-
ton by court martial and the infiictlon
0 no punishment or forfeiture, exeetU
up IN conviction and sentenceincourts.
rae act of 1896 provided for general
.oarts martial, and made minute ara
areful regulations for their organiza-
ion, for the conduct of their proceed
ngs, and for theapproval or dioappro-
yaIof theirsentences. Subsequent acts
made some changes, but they have not
estrained the jurisdiction Or diminish
d the powers Of such courts.
1t is to such a code Of laws, forming
system devised for the punishment
fdesertion, that the 2lst section of the
ct of March 2d, 1865, was added. 1T
efers plainly to pre- existing laws. 1t
a the single OBJECT of increasing the
enaltics, but it does not undertake TO
hange or dispense with the machinery
rovided for publishing the crime. The
8nll1on rules Of construction demand
nat it be read is lit had been icor-
orate} into the former acts. And if
had been, il the act Of 1866, and its
Implements had prescribed that PEN
tty for DESERT II or failure 10 report
ithin designated time after notice
draI; which theacg o. 1865 declares
escrGon} shoaid be punished on con-
sction Of the slmc with loIleitUie OF
tizcHsiiip aud death, or in Iieu Of Tie
.tJcr such other Punishment as by the
enleacc Ufa coUrs-martial nay be in
.ictetl, would ANY Gue contend tllat any
,ortion OF this punishment oou!d Lcin-
iicted dw.tAoutcuuyiUtion and sentence?
Assuredly not. And if not, 50 must
he act OF 1865 he construed now. 1t
means that the for1eiture which il pre-
,eribes, like all other penalties for
assertion, must be adjudged to
tie convicted person after trial by
.0urt martial and sentence approved.
Eor theconviction and sentence of such
/ court there can be no substitute. They
l.one establish the guilt of the accused,
md fasten upon him the legal conse-
,uences. Such we think is the true
meaning of the act. a construction that
annot be denied to it without losing
sight of ala the previous legislation re-
specting the same subject matter, no
i ~ ,sy,+
alter.
Itmay beaded that thisconstruction
is not only required by the universal
IN admitted rules of statutory interpre-
.ation, butitis in harmony with the per-
.onaI rights secured py the constitution,
and which Congress must be presumed
10 have kept in view. 1t gives to the
accused a trial before sworn Judges,
right to challenge, an opportunity Of
defence. the privilege of hearing the
witnesses against him, and of calling
witnesses in his behalf. It preserves
TO him the common awpresumption Of
innocence, until he has been adjudged
guilty according to the forms of law.
1t gives tinality to single trial.
If tried by acourtmartialandacquitted,
his innocence can never again becalIed
in question, and ne can be made to suf-
fer no part Of the penalties prescribed
for guilt.
On the other hand, if a record Of con
viction by lawful court be nota pre-
requisite tosufiering thepenality of the
law, the act Of Congress may work in
tolerable hardships. The accused will
will thus be obliged to prove his fnno-
cence whenever the registry of the pro-
vost marshal is adduced against him.
No decision OF a board of election Off
! GERS will protect him against the neces-
| sity of renewing his defence at every
/ subsequent election, and each time with
increased difficulty arising from the
possible death or absence of witnesses.
In many eases this may prove a gross
wrong. Itcannot be doubted that in
some instances there were causes that
prevented a return tG service or a re-
port, by persons req stered as deserters
/ by Provost Marshala, that would have
been held iustifying reasons by Z court
martial, or at least would have prevent
ed anapprovaIof Of the cOurt's sentence. 1t
is well known also that some whowere
registered descrters, We're at the time
actually in the military service as vo.-
unteers. and honorably dischargingthe r
duties tothegovernment. Toho!d that
The act of Congress imposes upon such
| the necessity ofpr0ving theirinnOcence
/ without any conviction of guilt, would
( beuureas0nablec construction Of theact,
and would be attributing to thenation-
ailegislatureav intention not warranted
by the language and connection of the
enactment.
1t follows that the judgment Of the
court below upon the ease was right.
The plaintiHnot having been convIctt d
OF desertion and failure to return 20 the
service or toreporttoa Provost Marshal,
and not having been sentenced 10 the
penalties and forfeitures OF the law,
was entitled to vote.
And now, TO wit, June 20, 1866, the
Judgment OF the Court OF Common
Pleas OF Franklin ceun-y is affirmed.
: w ANnnT,ST