Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1807-02-27

ueris term and Iacludes every specs "
isas writ. To this il may DE added that
when used singly--when we say the 1crst
sof ha6sas carbgs, Without addhion-we
most generally .neansthas grea. writ which
is now applied for and 10 mat sense II IS
used in the CONSTITUTIONS.
The section proceeds TO say that Ell.
thes of The justices of the supreme court,
as well as Judges OF the district courts,
shall have power to grant wriss OF habeas
corpus for the purpose Of an enquiry anto
ri,e cause of coamitment."
II mas been argued that congress could
never ia,end 70 give power OF this kind,
90 one 81 the judges@of his court which
is r~eiased to all sot them waen assem-
bled.
TEereis-cestainly much force in this ar
guauen,, aud il receives additional streagth
from ihs consideration that if the power De
asoied TO this grearcours, il IS denied to
every osaer conrs ofssshe u. 5. tae ri6htto
gran, shls important wfitis given, IN this
sseassnce, to every judge OF The circuit, or
sdislrics court, but can neither DC exercised
BY the circuit nor district court 1t would
be strange if the Judge, sitting ca rae
bench, should be able TO hear a oiiont tor
this writ where it might be openly nsdes
and openly discussed. and might YET retire
10 his chamber and in privsse receive and
decide upon the melton. This is notcon-
eissen, with the genius Of our legislation,
nor with the course Of our Judicial proceed
Jugs. II would be mach more consonans
with both, that the power ct the Judge at
his chambers should &c suspended during
his term, than shas il should be exetclses
only 10 secret.
Whatever. motives might induce the se-
g;sla,ure TO withhold from the supreme
courl the power 10 award the great writer
habess corpus, there gould be none. which
would induce them TO withhold it from e
very court 10 the Us. and asitIs granted
TO, all 10 the same sentence aud by me some
4vords, the soand construction would seem
20 be, thai the first sentence vests this pow
/, er in all the courts Of the Z, S but as those
courts are not always IN session. the Sc
cons sentence vests it In every justice or
Judge of the US.
The doabt which has been raised onsthls
subject may be further ezplalnedo y sxa'
mining the character of the various wrl;s
Of habeas corpus, and selectisgs those 30
which this general grant OF power mussbe
ressrictea. If taken in the limited sense OF
being merely used TO enable the court TO ex.
ercisesi its urisdiction in causes which ~ Is.
enabled Ia decide finally.
The various wrlts Of habeas corpus as
s,a,ed aud ae<uratsly dehned by Iudge.
Blackstone (s 81. Com 129) are 1st, The
witt of habeas corpus I'D respoadendum
uwhep a man hath a cause OF action against
.one WHO'S confined by the process OF some
inferior court ; in order 10 remove the Pft-
soner and charge him with this new action
In tie court above"
This case may occur when a<pafty nav
ing a right Co sue In this court las a state
at the time of the passage OF this ACT, orsa
foreign naiuisser1 wishes TO institute a SUIT
against a person who is already eonhosdby
,bep .ocess fan inferior court. las COO.
6nemens nav be either by the process CT a
court of the US, or of a state court. n
:, be IN q court of the US. this. writ would
be ~inapplicable, because perfectly useless,
aud consequently could De contemp'as-
ed BY the legislature. 1t would not be re.
ouired. in such case, TO bring the body OF
the defendant actually into court, and he
would already be in the charge OF the per.
SON who, under an original writ fross this.
cow, would be directed TO, take him into.
custody, ADD would already be coahnedin
the same all in whichh he would DC mime
ander the processof this SQUIRT il ne should
be unable to.givs bail.
1.-THE patty should be confined by process
from a state court, there are MANY additions
al reasons against the ase OF this writ 10
such a case
The state courts are not, In any sense