Case Name: United States v. Lipscomb
Court: Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jurisdiction: Virginia
Decision Date: 1847-04
Citations: 4 Gratt. 41
Docket Number: 
Parties: United States v. Lipscomb.
Judges: 
Reporter: Virginia Reports
Volume: 45
Pages: 41–42

Head Matter:
Richmond.
United States v. Lipscomb.
1847. April Term.
1. By the common law, an infant may make a contract to perform military service, which will be valid against him.
2. An infant who, without the knowledge or consent of his parent, enlists as a volunteer under the act of May 13th, 1846, providing for carrying on the war with Mexico, is bound by his contract. and will not be discharged either on the application of himself or his father.
This was an application to a Judge of the General Court by John B. Lipscomb of the county of King William, for a writ of habeas corpus, for the purpose of procuring the discharge of his son George B. Lipscomb, who had enlisted as a volunteer in the service of the United States during the existing war with Mexico, under the act of the 13th of May 1846, entitled “ an act providing for the prosecution of the existing war between the United States and Mexico.” The ground of the application was, that the volunteer was an infant under the age of twenty-one years; and had enlisted without the knowledge or consent of his father.
On the return of the Writ, it appeared: That some two or ^ree years previous, John B. Lipscomb, who lived in the county of King William, had placed his son with the boy’s uncle, in the town of Petersburg, to learn the trade of a carpenter. That he remained with his uncle until about the first of the year 1846, when having stopped his own business, the uncle allowed the minor to go and get employment for himself. That the minor then engaged with another carpenter in Peters-burg, and continued to work with him until he joined the Petersburg company of Mexican volunteers. At that time, he was between twenty and twenty-one years old. That he joined the volunteer company without the knowledge or consent of either the father or uncle: but he joined it by his own free choice; and by like choice had been mustered into the service of the United States. That the father on hearing of his son’s enlistment, immediately proceeded to Petersburg, and took steps to obtain his discharge; and that at the hearing, the volunteer concurred in the application.
Upon the facts as above stated, the Judge being of opinion that it was illegal to detain the minor in the military service of the United States against the consent of both himself and his father, ordered that he should be discharged. From this order the United States applied to this Court for a writ of error, which was allowed.
Nicholas, for the United States, and Brooke, for the volunteer, submitted the case.

Opinion:
By the Court.
Judgment reversed, and volunteer remanded.
Cabell, P. and Allen, J. dissented.