The Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, Ohio) 1853-1861, 1854-07-15
From the Urbana Citizen of June 7.
Temperance Law Decision.

Since the date of our last publication, we
have had several new cases under the liquor
law, and some strange proceedings on the
subject Chief Justice Corwin, Of the Su-
preme Court, being in town on Saturday
last, two persons confined in Jail for selling
liouor contrary to law, were brought before
His Honor on habeas corpus, and discharged
from custody. The decision of the Chief
Justice, on this occasion, was probably one
of the most remarkable and extraordinary
ever delivered by any Judge, high or low, in
this or any other country. In giving his
decision, he lost sight of the dignity Of his
station and descended to the low and vulgar
gasconade of a bar-room politician.
We were not in attendance a this inter
esting session of the Supreme Court, but all
we have heard speak of it agree in the opin-
ION that the conduct of the Judge was any
thing but manly or dignfied, and that he
certainly must have been good deal how
come -you-so.' A gentleman who was pres
ent and took notes of the savings and dongs
of His Honor, has furnished us with the fol
lowing statement, which is fully corrobo
rated by others, and may be relied upon as
being substantially correct:
Having heard, on Saturday last, that
Chief Justice Corwin was hearing case
brought before him by a writ Of habeas
corpus, entered the court room, and behold
there was His Honor in the Judicial seat
His face shone with unusual brilliancy, look.
ing like the setting sun, when the western
sky is red and lowering. He evnced a great
deal of restlessness, while the younger Mr.
Corwin was arguing the case for the State
interrGptng him frequently and serving the
l,|N thn oI,It, Ol
pitnc6s, and at other times in the capacity
of advocate. must say. however, that his
brother fairly beat him in the argument, and
showed that the signatures of the Speak kers
Of the two Houses in the Ohio Legislature
the certificate of the Secretary of State, and
the publication of the law by authority Of
State, afforded better evidence of the regular
passage of the law, than could be brought
against it. The court testified that he haC
examined the Journals of the Legislature, anc
sncp tAat the law was not passed in the
manner prescribed by the Constitution; anC
this was the ground on which he discharged
the prisoners. In giving the decision he
stated that he wished to be reported cor
rectly
The court hated all such legislation in his
heart. 1t was demoralzing in its tendency
The legislature had as much right to enact
laws regulating the use of beef-steak and
onions as they had to legslate about the USE
of whiskey. The court held that no judi
oial officer should withhold the right of ha
beas corpus; that this was the buwark o.
our liberty, and should never be denied to 6
suffering party; that he had never read the
law, and that he never would read it. He
despised the law, and he despised the mer
who had passed it; that they never intended
that il should be law that at the seat o
government and the large cities no attention
was paid to it; that it was only in Smal
places, where mean men lived, who could
not bear TO see their neighbors enjoy them
selves, and who would get up excitement or
such questions, which should be put down
and he would be unworthy of his place, i
he did not meet and decide the case.
The court held that the Legislature har
authority to pass law to prevent the evil
arising from the sale of intoxicating drinks
that the law in question was just such G
law. 1t was not prohibitory law, and if i
had been passed in accordance with the pro
visions of the Constitution, it should be en-
forced. But it had not been passed accord
ing to those provisions, and was therefore
no law. He would therefore discharge th'
prisoners, who had been Improperly senten
ced under it,
Not wishing to do Judge Corwin injustice
~, he f,ll bano nc