The Daily Dispatch: March 24, 1862., [Electronic resource]

---

---

[for the Richmond Dispatch]
substitutes.

Can able-bodied men have substitutes?--Legally they can; but on the grounds of patriotism and morality, as judged by obvious common sense, there can be no substitutes for the class of individuals mentioned. In the present war every interest is at stake; property of all kinds, and freedom of the person, as well as State sovereignty, are being seized upon, and human rights become null and void under the despotism of the Federal Government. Under such imminent impending danger, is it the duty of only some few persons to enter the battle field? And, on the other hand, is it the prerogative of some select few individuals to remain in luxurious case at home? While theoretically these points are rejected, yet practically they have been, and are still being, carried out by multitudes in our midst. The true ground on which every one should stand is, that he must fight for himself if a poor man, and if possessing property his personal responsibility increases. It is said that Gov. Letcher refused to exempt a rich man because he had more to fight for than others and therefore he could not engage another person like himself — and bound to fight for himself — to be his substitute. Twelve months of warfare have nearly passed, and many of the first volunteers desire to return home. This desire is only prevented, by the necessity of their remaining in front of the enemy; and yet there are thousands at home who still insist that trained soldiers should continue in service, and, if necessary, a draft upon the balance to fill up the required number. If drafted, these men get substitutes for money, and thus pretend to consider their obligations to their country ended. They know better than to make this false plea; but as the law allows it, their patriotism extends no farther The law ought to be altered, and no substitute allowed to any one owning property to a certain amount, say $5,000. Were men of property to enlist, there would be no hesitation or drawing back of the poor, and no occasion for a draft to force men to fight for their country. The principle of substitutes is a had one, and the sooner it is abolished the better. and in its place pass a law that no man subject to military duty can pay another for defending his person and property, while the proposed substitute is in duty bound, if able, to fight for himself, although legally absolved from so doing.

As the danger increases, so the principle of substitution increases, instead of lessening. Had love of country as great a hold upon our people as love of self, the Yankees would not now touch Southern soil, and if the late reverses of the South don't call out all of its defenders, the time will soon come when substitutes will protect neither person nor property, nor your family, from violence, nor your country from dishonor and defeat. It substitution were a sacrifice by which salvation of self and country could be obtained, it might be allowable, but nothing on moral grounds can release a healthy man from entering the service of his country, and have the honor of saying us drove the enemy from our soil and participated in establishing a glorious independence. C. R. C.