
    TRIBOU, Plaintiff in Error, v. REYNOLDS.
    Excuses for non-appearance at a military inspection must be offered to the commanding officer of the company within eight days after the inspection, unless the party be prevented from offering such excuse by severe sickness.
    Upon a writ of error to reverse the judgment of a Justice of the peace, rendered in an action of debt, brought by the plaintiff in error, who was clerk of a company of militia, against the defendant who was a soldier therein, to recover a fine for his neglect to appear at the annual inspection of arms, the case was thus:—
    The defendant was unfit to do military duty by reason of extreme deafness, and therefore did not attend at the inspection 5 nor did he offer any excuse for this neglect within eight days, to the captain, agreeably to the “ Rules and Articles for governing the militia when not in actual service,” Art. 32. [Revised Stat. ch, 164. sec, 44.] part of which is in these words ;—“ And “ any such.non-commissioned officer or private, who shall ne- “ gleet to give or cause to be given to his commanding officer, “ such satisfactory evidence of his inability to appear (provided “ he is not prevented therefrom by severe sickness) within the said “ eight days, shall forfeit and pay the penalty by law provided “ for such non-appearance.” And it appeared that the defendant was not prevented, by any bodily indisposition, from offering his excuse within the eight days. Upon the trial before the Justice the defendant offered to shew his said inability in evidence; to which the plaintiff objected, on the ground that no proof ought to be received of inábilíty to do duty, unless it either had been communicated to the commanding officer within the eight days, or was a case of severe sickness, not only dis-: abling the party from doing duty, but also disabling him from offering his excuse within the limited time. The Justice, however, overruled the objection, and admitted the evidence, and thereupon rendered judgment for the defendant; to reverse which this writ was sued out_
   And the Court were of opinion that by the “ severe, sickness” mentioned in the proviso, was intended such sickness as prevented the party from giving to his commanding officer, within the eight days, satisfactory evidence of his inability to appear; —and that such not appearing to have been the case here, the. Justice erred in admitting the evidence, and therefore the judgment ought to be reversed.

There being some material defects in the original declaration, the judgment of the Court extended no farther than the reversal, the parties immediately adjusting the suit by compromise.  