The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1868-05-06
THE COURTS.

StPRENR COURT OF tue DISTRICT or 20.
LrNDiA-Generdi Trrm.-All the judges sat in
bdHe yesterday.
ADMITTED TO THE NAN.
4 Ross Perry was admitted to practice At
committee appointed for that purpose,
TRiBUTKs OF REsPECT.
=, MI. Brown presented the resolutions OF the
the late Gov. Thomas II. Ford, and Mr.. Mat
tingly those on the death OF the late p. X.
Kendall, and they were ordered to be spread on
the minutes Of the court.
B. Q. Loyejoy, esq, was sppoitted an cs.
An ENLISTMENT CASE.
the military, and alleged to be a deserter. The
applicant claims that Hughes enlisted when
he was but !! years Of age, and that he is i'm
properly held. Merrick and Lovejoy, N. vii.
Mr.. Wilson urged that the right of the State
to the services OF . minor wss paramount to
s MT on sh ns SsssR' III se be
make a contract Of enlistment, he would be
perfectly competent to make such contract.
existence OF such Limitation should be ascer.
tained by declaring that the oath OF the en-
listed man shall be conclusive as to his age.
time Of enii.tment that he was nineteen years
Of age, and thus without the limitation upon
his right to make q contract Of enlistment.
Ss a. sS W.; q, or
and while there committed military offence,
and became subject to military custody aud
military Iunishnent therefor. In this view
military offence while subject to military law.
or this offence the courts;martial were the
not exercise their power to Dust them OF this
Jurisdiction, by discharging the applicant un-
der hdbtdt corpus.
the papers that no bounty had been paid to
the applicant, and thus the custody act, gener-
ally understood as the completion Of the en-.
1914 gave minor four days within which to
abandon his contract Of enlistment, and that
10 fact Hughes abandoned the service within
four DAY, after HI, enlistment, without bounty
This case, however, did not rest merely on
the rights of the minor. The parent had a
child and to the proceeds Of his labor he had,
so "a, speak, a property In the child. The law
which made the oath Of the child conclusive
81 si aa ss %sse Of ss S %,t
enlisting officers, and not designed to estop
the parent from enforcing his claim for the
child. labor. The child could not, by his false
oath, defraud his parent Of this right, and the
law was not designed to make him the party to
such fraud. Tho oath of the minor was not,
then, conclusive in this case.
Nor did the fact, that Hughes was charged
with the commission Of a military offence,
give the military any right to hold II he were
not legally enlisted. II he was subject to the
Jurisdiction OF the military court, It was be.
cause OF his contract Of enlistment. But that
pretended contract was void ab iHifio; was no
contract at all, and could give the military
court no Jurisdiction. 1t was not merely q
yoidAble contract, but being denounced by the
law, was absolutely void, and no rights could
rise under 1t. The allegation that Hughes de.
serted, fell when 1t was shown that he left the
service without taking bounty within the few
days during which he was, during the act of
1914, at liberty to abandon his enlistment. The
so-called desertion could be Interpreted as an
eIpfciap of his right of election nnlpr m
statute.
The Court took the papers, and holding the
case under adyisement, adjourned until this
morning.