War of the Rebellion: Serial 126 Page 0628 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC.

Search Civil War Official Records

If a person was in the service on the 3rd of March, 863, or has served out the period of the first draft, he still belongs to the "national forces," and is liable to any future draft.

As the draft, notice, and service thereof add to the enrolled man no new liability, except that of "reporting for duty" and of being treated as a deserter in case of "failure to appear and report," it follows that release from "further liability to be punished for failure to appear and report after due service of notice. The thirteenth section provides two modes of obtaining discharge from that liability, viz: First, by tendering an acceptable substitute on or before the day fixed for the appearance of the drafted man to take his place in the draft; or, second, the payment of a sum, to be fixed by the Secretary of War, for the procuration of such substitute, and thereupon such person so furnishing a substitute or paying the money shall be discharged from any further "liability under that draft;" and any person "failing to report" after due service of notice as herein described, without furnishing a substitute or paying the required sum therefor, shall be deemed a deserter, &c.

This language also strengthens the conclusion that the liability under that draft means liability to "report for duty," a failure to perform that duty subjecting the offender to be treated as a deserter.

If the statute had made no other provision than that found in section 13, there might have been some force in the suggestion that persons who pay the money were placed upon the same footing as those who furnish the substitute, and there would be some plausibility in hat as the money paid for commutation is "for the procuration of a substitute," the party paying it should be placed on an equality of exemption with him who has actually furnished such substitute. But if this suggestion were correct it would be immaterial, because the exemption provided in the thirteenth section for those who pay money or furnish substitutes is lto liability under that draft, and not extended to exemption from any succeeding draft, nor to exemption from "military duty."

All question as to the extent of exemption is removed by reference to the seventeenth section, which provided that "any person enrolled and drafted according to the provisions of this act, who shall furnish an acceptable substitute, shall thereupon receive from the Board of Enrollment a certificate of discharge from such draft," which (certificate) shall exempt him from military duty during the time for which he was drafted, &c.

This section provides not that the person who furnishes a substitute shall be free from further liability under that draft, but that he shall be free from all military duty for a given time, and therefore by law free from all subsequent drafts for the period for which he was originally drafted. This exemption is wholly different from that provided in section 13, and is in addition thereto. An exemption from all liability to do military duty for a limited period is quite different from an exemption from a requisition "to appear and report" at a given time and place.

Statutes must be so constructed that all clauses thereof should be operative, and all parts of the law should be taken into consideration in determining the meaning of any particular provisions thereof.

The object of the law was to raise men and not to collect money. It was obviously to give those who procured substitutes a decided advantage over those who should pay the money, because the money is not what was wanted, and it might not be sufficient to enable Government to obtain substitutes. If it were sufficient, the burdestitutes is placed upon the Government. Congress may well have though it just to give less advantages to those who avoided their duty of serving the country in time of war by paying a small sum of money than to those who performed it by taking the field in person or by substitutes.

The construction of this statute is made still more plain by consiiar language of the seventeenth section. This section provides that the board of Enrollment shall give "a certificate of discharge from the draft" to him who furnishes an acceptable substitute, and that "that certificate" shall exempt him from military duty during the time for which he was drafted. It is not the payment of money nor the furnishing a substitute that exempts the drafted man from "military service;" it is "the certificate of the Board of Enrollment" which has that effect. That certificate cannot lawfully be given to the man who pays money; it must be given to him whose substitute is accepted.

To say that one who has only paid money is entitled to a "certificate" is to insert a new provision in the act. To say that he is entitled to the same exemption as one who has the "certificate" is to deprive section 17 of that act of its force and effect. The provision for exemption in section 17 is important only