The Arkansas banner., 1845-01-22
E,.a,a tls GIobe

III Lle case ol tlle OCalc Ol hnode lSlanu ana
 Providence plantations, Thomas Wilson Dorr, now confined in the State's prison at Providence Rhode Island,
 as aforesaid.
 Francis c. Treadwell, of counsel in be- half of said Dorr, moves the Court that a writ Of habeas corpus issue forthwith to bring out the said DoT to Washington, aforesaid, and give him an opportunity 10 sign petition for a writ of error in his own behalf, and to prosecute the same, to the end that the whole record of the Supreme Court of the State of Rhode Island in said case may be certified in due form of law to the Su- preme Court of the United States, and the errors therein be corrected. The facts in this case, briefly stated, are:
 First. The said Thomas ". Dom was indicted for treason against the State of Rhode Island aforesaid, at Newport, at the term of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island, holden oil the fourth Monday of August, 1842, and tried in pursuance of said indictment, and verdict of guilty having been rendered by the jury III the case, was, on the 25th day of June, l614, sentenced to {" be imprisoned in the States prison, at Providence, in the county of Providence, for the term of his natural life, and there kept at hard labor in separate confinement
 SecoRd. That suspension of the sen- tence for one day was allowed by the Su- preme Court of Rhode Island, for the pur- pose of preparing bill of exceptions, ''with a view to suing out a writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States and a bill of exceptions was then prepared, and makes part of the record, at page 82.
 IHjfd That the Court refused 10 suspend the execution of the sentence, and to aWat the decision of the case by the Supreme Court of the United States upon writ of error, although notified that the imprison- ment of the defendant would disable him from prosecuting his defence. Sec Burke's report, page l047.
 Fourth. That the inspectors of the States prison utterly refuse to let said Thomas W. Dorr sign or see a petition for q writ of er- TOT, as aforesaid.
 NiH. That the Governor of the State of Rhode Island refuses, and, as he alleges, for want of power, to let said Dorr sign or see such petition.
 Sirlh. That sundry citizens of Providence aforesaid have signed a petition to this hon orable court for writ of error, or for a writ ol habeas corpus, which petition Is now presented with this motion.
 The documents, papers, and evidence here with submitted, and prayed to be considered as a part of this motion, consist
 Fu,sf. Of the petition of sundry citizens oi Rhode Island, named in the sixth specifi- cation of facts aforesaid, marked, One
 Second. or the affidavit of Samuel Fes- senden, Esq, marked Two, with the letter of Thomas NJ. Burges, Esq, mayor of Provi- dence, marked Three, annexed. The at1ida- vit of John s. Eddy, Esq, marked Four, and the affidavit of Francis C. Treadwell, marked Five, with the copy of an application of said Treadwell 10 the mayor of Providence, an- nexed, and marked 4.
 Ihtrd The record of the trial, indictment, and judgment, and judgement aforesaid, cer- tficd by William Glpin, clerk of said court
 Foanh The petition presented by Gen. Fessenden to Thomas NJ. Burgess, mayor of Providence, and returned by him with his letter, marked Six
 Fifh. The report of the select commit tee of the House of Representatives upon the affairs of Rhode Island, by Edmund Burke, Esq, chairman.
 The points relied upon for a reversal of of the sentence are three, all of which the supreme court of the State of Rhode Island oyerruled
 First That the act of the State of Rhode Island for punishing treason IS repugnant to the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that the crime of treason cannot be committed against separate State, but against the United States-.Sce Record, D. 82, Barkess Report, ?. 1,02l.
 Second. That said Dorr was Governor of the State, duly elected, under the peoples constituton--a republican constitution or form of govornment-an that he offered 10 prove these facls.- Record, D. 50, 5l, 77.
 Third. That the whole record shows that It said Door levied war at all, il was against the United States, and cannot be enqured of by any State Court
 The authorities relied upon as giving iu- risdletion of the case to this court, are
 Firsf. The third article of the consttu- ton of the United States, which vests the power in this court
 Second. The twenty-fifth section of the judiciary act of l789, which prcseribes the mode of its exercise by writ of error.
 The writ of habeas corpus in this case is, apprehend, writ of right, the privilege of which, under the constitution of the United States, cannot be suspended but in the two contingencies mentioned in the second clause of the ninth section of article first. The necessity of the writ of habeas corpus in this case arises because the supreme court of the State of Rhode Island and the inspectors of the States prison at Providence have thrown impediments in the way of the exer- else of the constitutional right of said Dorr sto have his defence examined bv that tri- bunal whose province il Is te coGstrue the constitution and laws of the Union. n-Sce opinion of tbr Supreme C0uri ia C9lens and Iirgiaia. 6fh. itheafoa and 3d Siofg's Com. oa Con, ?. 596.
 F. C. TREADWEIL.
 Ql counsel n behalf el said nasr.
 ,lffdaraqf Samari FrzSsnaen.