The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-04-28
Supreme Court-General Term.

Hon Judges Edwards, Mitchell and Roosevelt, residing
April 27-1ne People John J. Hicks This came
up en- cora,f from the decision made by Judge Morris
The following the points submitted by the District
Attorney
The return Of the Sheriff sets forth valid legal commit
ment sufficient its face to protect the officer The
validity Of the process in form and substance far as
apparent it's face 1t is presumed will not be ques
toned The return by officer Of process valid upon
its face sufficient TO protect the officer from action OF
false imprisonment cannot be impeached upon habeas
corpus The true remedy direct proceeding by certo
process upon its face being established the officer cannot
inquire further habeas corpus 10 the facts set forth
return sufficient upon its face conclusive and none
of the facts contained in il could be cOntroverted rs HILL
Appendix p 65s, note 80 and there cited The
statute has far altered the common law as to
permit by As, R. s. p. 500, the party to deny any
OF tie material facts set forth in the retorn, al
ege any fact, &c. Now, the material facts here
the process set forth in the return-not the existence
Of the facts contained in the process eope vs. Cassel
Hill supra II intended by this section 70
author ze inquiry into the validity OF wrts and other
contrary rule would lead to endless psrplexity and
fusion. Thus if the Sheriff shouc return that he held
the party by civil process regular upon its face and is
sued out Of court or by officer having general uris
die lion of the subject matter another officer habeas
corpus under this construction colateraly review
the jurisdiction OF such or magistrate Such is
rot the law either in England or here lease Of sheriff Of
Eiddlesex IL Ads. Fl. 273 People vs.. Neyins, Hill,
lb4 Such, too is the construction of the statute, and
contradictory ard inconsistent with each other while
by this construction harmony and consistency pre-
served throughout The jurisdiction of the officer issu
ing the process where such officer bas general uri,dc
ton OF the subject matter if it can be mpeached at all,
except upon direct proceeding for that purpose can
only 'e h a. 70 .ne ~ oiha s
court officer has jurisdiction, by stature or at
law, Of the subject matter embraced
you not at liberty to 60 behind the process
to inquire into the existence existence Of any
suit proceeding upon which said alleged based
The remedy judicial abuse in this respect by ndct
ment &c. The consists in confoundng special and
limited Jurisdictions, created for special and limited pur
poses and whose powers and duties specially pointed
out in the statute creating them with courts and officers
Of general and law jurisdiction. In the former,
the absence of urisdcona facts the whole pro-
ceedng co,an non JUDGE In the latter the proceeding
is not void per but may be reversed for irregu
arty. Of this former description is the class Of
language III the justice had authority to inquire &C.
In fact in that jurisdiction Of subject matter, and
Of the person not set forth in the commitment and
the facts proved aede distinctly showed he had her
But assuming that the Judge had the right, habeas
corpus 70 compel the production Of the complaint the
facts recited in the complaint produced sufficient to
confer jurisdiction. At common law and by the statute
magistrate may investigate preminarly upoa any
able suspicion to whether crime has been committed
and if by whom. Such investigation necessarily
be- and in most must be, private in its character
A. an incident to this power the magistrate has the
right send for witnesses and 10 compel their attend
He has also, necessary incident, the power
to punh for refusing to be The sufciency Of
Ine amddVt az Dasls io ihVesugation OF as ground
tor warrant is different thing and while in the htsr
case, upon application of the party arrested it might be
held insufficient, the former It snnot be questioned
by mere witness. Proof OF the corpus deiict is
cessary to authorize warrant Suspicion OF crime
committed us6es investigation, and carries with il the
incidents necessary to make such investigation indie
pendent Of the mmon law, power to enforce obedience
to his lawful orders express power to publish for toe con
temptis conferred by statute-2R s p 74s, a.
r. s. 274, 279 &C. The decision Of Justice Morris
erroneous and should be reversed
The argued by Mr.. Blunt, District Attorney
and Mr.. Ogden Hoffman the part of the people, and
the decision is reversed.