of the class thought proper to volunteer his services, a reoruit was to be enlisted at their joint expense.

*

Against this noble system of defence, so equitable, so just, so unexceptionable-so adequate to its end-so easy and free from burthen to our citizens-so likely to bring the war to a close, by convincing the enemy of the impossibility of making any impression on us-there was a most hideous outcry raised in and out of congress-an outcry highly disgraceful and factious. It was branded with the odious name of " Conscription,” and identified with the horrible system of Bonaparte, whereby the whole male population of France was subject to his despotic will and pleasure.

The attempt was of course defeated. To the passions of the people the most inflammatory appeals were made. A most lamentable delusion prevailed on the subject. Many of our citizens were, by unceasing efforts, led to believe, that the plan was wholly unprecedented in this country; that it was utterly unconstitutional and pernicious; and that it was intended as the basis of a military despotism. And to such an awful extent was the frenzy carried, that open resistance was not obscurely threatened. Sexagenarian veterans, shaking their hoary locks, and burnishing their rusty, revolutionary arms, were disposed to punish, at the point of the bayonet, those whom they were taught to regard as violators of the constitution.

It is hardly possible to conceive of a more awful delusion.Never were the public cullibility and credulity more miserably played upor. For, as I have already stated, it is hardly possible to contrive a plan of public defence more just, more rational, more unexceptionable, or more efficient.

Of

Let us examine the matter. Recruits for a year, could have been readily procured at any time for two hundred dollars. course the tax on each individual. of twenty-five persons bound to furnish a recruit, would be only eight dollars, for which he would be exempt from all the dangers, and hardships, and privations of a military life!

The British government would probably have made immense sacrifices to prevent the establishment of such a system. It was

*These were the grand important features of various plans submitted to congress, and to the legislature of Pennsylvania, which were absurdly and discracefully rejected. There were some unessential differences between them, not worth attention in this dis cussion. To the honour of the enlightened and patriotic legislature of New York, they were rot deterred by the wretched, stupid and fac tious clamour that prevailed on this subject. They passed an act to raise 10,000 men on the classification plan.

It is not extravagant to say, that policy would dictate to England the sacrifice of millions of pounds sterling to prevent the adoption of this system,

the measure most really formidable and efficient against her veteran armies, that had been devised. But surely this ought to have been no reason why American legislators should oppose it-or why the factious and tumultuous meetings, held to denounce the system, should be eulogized as displays of "the spirit of seventysix."* Had such a wretched spirit prevailed in '76, this glorious country would never have emerged from its colonial and dependent state.

From the extreme abhorrence of wars, and battles, and bloodshed, and wounds, and scars, manifested by some of the members of congress-from their wailings, and lamentations, and strong sensibilities, at the possible loss of a single life, a stran ger might suppose they were quakers or menonists, who were not merely conscientiously scrupulous against carrying arms themselves, bu tprincipled against warfare altogether. And from the delicacy of their constitutional exceptions and objections, it might be reasonably presumed, if the constitution were not at war with such a presumption, that there was no power given, or intended to be conveyed to the general government, to command or coerce the military service of any individual citizen, It would appear, that the citizens of the United States had obtained letters patent from Heaven for enjoying all the benefits of society and of self-government, without risking either life or limb or shedding a drop of blood in their defence.

While the public delusion on this topic lasted, argument was useless. Prejudice, and passion, and irrationality, almost uni-. versally predominated. But every species of folly and madness has its day. After its spell is dissolved, it becomes harmless and inoffensive. It is then a fair subject of inquiry and investigation. The understanding of the public may be addressed with a tolerable chance of success.

I therefore venture to discuss the subject, and solicit the calm attention of the reader. In case of future wars, from which we cannot hope to be exempt, it may be of considerable importance to establish correct opinions on a subject inferior to none in importance-I mean the most eligible mode of pub lic defence.

I therefore undertake to prove these seven propositions : 1. That there is no principle more clearly recognized and established in the constitutions and laws of the several states, than THE RIGHT OF SOCIETY TO REQUIRE AND COERCE, AS

* In several parts of the union, factious and seditious meetings were held to denounce this plan, whose proceedings were detailed in many of our papers, headed in large letters with the words," SPIRIT OF '76."

WELL AS THE DUTY

OF THE CITIZEN TO AFFORD, MILITA

RY SERVICE FOR THE GENERAL DEFENCE.

2. That the power of congress to call forth, and order the employment of, the militia, in cases of invasion, rebellion, or insurrection, is as clearly established as any other power vested in that body.

3. That the mode of drafting prescribed by the militia laws of the several states, is oppressive, unequal, and unjust.

4. That the force so drafted is generally inefficient, and enormously expensive.

5. That the system of classification is the most impartialthe most efficacious-and the least oppressive mode of calling into operation the militia, of any of the plans that have ever

been devised.

6. That the proposed system of classification prevailed during the revolution-and of course, instead of having been borrowed from Bonaparte by our present rulers, was, if borrowed at all, borrowed by France from this country.

7. That the classification or conscription system, most elaborately matured by General Knox, and stamped with the seal of General Washington's approbation, was more strict and extensive in its provision, than any of the recent plans.

CHAPTER LXVI.

Right of Society to coeree, and duty of Citizens to afford, military service, recognized by the Constitutions and Laws of the several

states.

To establish my first point, that "there is no principle more clearly recognized and established, in the constitutions and laws of several states, than the right of society to require and coerce, as well as the duty of the citizen to afford, military service for the general defence," I submit to the reader, the most satisfactory extracts from the constitutions of New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, New-York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Kentucky; and from the militia laws of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode-Island, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Georgia, and Kentucky.-. These are all the states whose statute books I have been able to procure.

The declaration of rights of the state of New-Hampshire, expressly provides that

"Every member of the community has a right to be protected by it, in the enjoyment of his life, liberty, and property he is therefore bound to contribute his share to the expense of such protection; and TO YIELD HIS PERSONAL SERVICE WHEN NECESSARY, OR AN EQUIVALENT."

It gives the governor for the time being, complete and plenary power," by himself or any chief commander or officers,

"To train instruct, exercise, and govern the militia and navy; and for the special defence and safety of the state, to assemble in martial array, and put in warlike posture the inhabitants thereof; and to lead and conduct them; and with them encounter, repulse, repel, resist and pursue, by force of arms, as well by sea as by land, within and without the limits of the state, every such person or persons as shall at any future time attempt the destruction, invasion, detriment, or annoyance of the state."

It further invests the governor with the mighty, the tremendous power,

"To use and exercise over the army and navy, and over the militia in actual service, THE LAW MARTIAL IN TIME OF WAR, INVASION, AND ALSO IN REBELLION, declared by the legislature to exist, as occasion shall necessarily require."

Nothing can be more clear and explicit than these provisions. They level in the dust the volumes of rant and declamation, which have been uttered in congress, and with which the press has teemed on this important topic.

The constitution of the state of Massachusetts contains the same provisions, couched in the very same words, as thai of New Hampshire. One has been obviously copied from the other. It is therefore unnecessary to make any extract from that of the former state. I refer the reader to the volume of the constitutions of the United States.

The constitution of New-York expressly declares that

"Whereas it is of the utmost importance to the safety of every state, that it should always be in a condition of defence, and IT IS THE DUTY OF EVERY MAN WHO ENJOYS THE PROTECTION OF SOCIETY, TO BE PREPARED AND WILLING TO DEFEND IT. Therefore this convention, in the name and by the authority of the good people of this state, doth ordain, determine and declare, that the militia of this state, at all times hereafter, as well in peace as in war, shall be armed and disciplined, and IN READINESS FOR SERVICE."

The declaration of rights of the constitution of Vermont, states that

Every member of society hath a right to be protected in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property; and therefore is bound to contribute his proportion

towards the expenses of that protection, and YIELD HIS PERSONAL SERVICE. when necessary, or an equivalent thereto ****Nor can any man who is conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms, be justly compelled thereto, IF HE WILL PAY SUCH EQUIVALENT."

The old constitution of Pennsylvania is in unison with those already quoted-viz.

"Every member of society hath a right to be protected in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property; and therefore is bound to contribute his proportion towards the expense of that protection, or an equivalent thereto; but no part of a mar's property can be justly taken from him and applied to public uses, without his consent, or that of his legal representatives: nor can any man who is conscienuously scrupulous of bearing arms, be justly compelled thereto, if he will pay such equivalent."

The existing constitution of Pennsylvania is equally clear:

"The freemen of this commonwealth shall be armed and disciplined for its deThose who conscientiously scruple to bear arms, shall not be compelled to do so; but shall pay an equivalent for personal service."

Kentucky holds the same language

"The freemen of this commonwealth (negroes, mulatoes, and Indians excepted) shall be armed and disciplined for its defence. Those who conscientiously scruple to bear arms, shall not be compelled to do so; but shall pay an equivadent for personal service."

The old constitution of Delaware had a clause nearly verbatim with some of the preceding

"Every member of society hath a right to be protected in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property; and is therefore bound to contribute his proportion towards the expense of that protection, and YIELD HIS PERSONAL SERVICE, when necessary, or an equivalent thereto."

I presume I might here dismiss the subject. It is impossible to resist the conviction the foregoing clauses flash on the mind. They strike dead cavilling and casuistry, declamation and sophistry, as with the forked lightning. The wisest and best men of seven states, engaged in the all-important duty of framing forms of goverument for their fellow-citizens, solemnly recognize the paramount right of society to coerce, and the imperious duty of the citizen to afford personal service, or an equivalent, for the general defence. And the intelligent and respectable men who framed the constitutions of New-Hampshire and Massachusetts, invested the governors with the power to lead the militia in pursuit of an enemy, "within and without the state," and to exercise MARTIAL LAW on the militia, as well as on the regular army.

I now proceed to detail the legal provisions on this point.