Daily National Intelligencer

WASHINGTON

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1815.

Commodore Decatur, and Governor Holmes of the Mississippi territory, are among the distinguished visitors at present at the seat of government.

Messrs. Gales & Seaton,

A decision of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania was published some time since, in which it was stated, if I mistake not, that the fines which were inflicted upon the delinquent militia of that state, by the courts martial instituted by Gov. Snyder, could not be collected, because the Governor had no authority to organize such courts; that the militia being called out by the general government, the delinquents were only answerable to that government, and could only be legally tried by courts martial which should be instituted by the President of the United States. This is the impression which that publication has left on my mind; I may, in some degree, have misconceived it—but this I know, that the militia of Pennsylvania have generally understood from it, that those who refused to march when called upon to assist in defending our shores, and who ridiculed and scoffed at those who did march, are likely to come clear of all punishment for their delinquency. Those who left their homes, under every disadvantage, to aid in the protection of our country, have been led to believe, by that decision, that no penalty will be inflicted on such as stood aloof in the day of trial, and laughed at the sacrifices which were made by the patriotic. There is something in this business which requires looking after. If the laws are such that Governor Snyder could not legally institute courts martial on the occasion, it rests, I presume, with the President of the U. States: and this I will say, that it is due to the patriotic militia of Pennsylvania who were in service, that measures should be adopted to call those to account who refused to obey the call of their country. If they can escape with impunity now, does any one suppose the same impunity will not be looked for hereafter? Will men turn out to protect their property, and subject themselves to their scoffs, when there is no penalty for disobedience? If such an opinion be entertained, I apprehend it is a great mistake. If the general government expect men to march again at their call, they must let it be known, that those who refuse will be punished. If they do not—if they suffer delinquents to escape, as it is generally believed in Pennsylvania they are now about to escape, in consequence of the decision above-mentioned, they may call for the militia when danger approaches—but I suspect it will be like calling "spirits from the vasty deep;" it will be very questionable whether they will come when they do call them.

In offering these remarks, I am prompted by a desire to invite the attention of the proper authority to the subject. I may be under a misapprehension of the business—but it is a fact, that much sensation was produced in some parts of Pennsylvania by the publication of that decision of the Supreme Court; and much disgust and indignation felt by those who had marched, and left behind them a number who disregarded the call, ridiculed such as obeyed, vilified the government, and discovered as much hatred to its service then, as they do contempt for its powers now.

A PENNSYLVANIAN.