New-York daily tribune., 1854-07-12

nprxfnv HON. II ~
...--( "a, s.,v<s< fosrt Q s< sa1 81 oNo'S'-
:, ,ss r. f. rsi''ss g 6 ''
vAsuxGrox, jane q, lS54--ll A.AL
-. az<a xlt. syplication was made TO me ~
.,,... m Booth, the petitioner, for writ Of hstess
s-s..s. 70 be directed to stephen V. r. Ableman.
"a. II was alleged restrained the petitioner Of his
lnerty. Accompanying the petition wa q cory Of
- process, by virtue Of which, it was alleged, the
,pukitioner was held in custody.
This writ purported to be what is commonly called
. m;ttimss, issued by Winfield Smith, Esq:
..s pssy srsa By The Ds co1r I .1;bs Uni
s q cath .s h.vns On the .s dsy Of s.,sh iss
sss .,.ss and ,ssIsd n.Hss Jo.hss Glover h,d
siBs the properly Garland having escaped
eereireu ato the STATE Of Wisconsin from the swfal
he ps h. ihs Z, C. cos Sssss
lesss Glover b virtue issued y the judge
vcsd States for The .. De pursuant 70 the proyess Of the
1Sa'''' thai case made And provided approved Sept '
The writ goes to rectc en- examination before the
Commissioner its result in holding the petitioner to BAIL
he giving of the required BAIL his subsequent arrest and
ps.reDder by his ball. the order Of the Commissioner to
'r recognizance again, his neglect and refusal SO
70 hence the irsuipg Of the writ; and closes With
.s. .s.sowing command:
,a,swh convey deliver into t custody q The keep o
Jail The body o the aid sierGsn a. sooa apo you
required receive the said sherman Booth n.o your cas,c
jail bm there sly keep ant he shall be discharged
In he application petition, the petitioner alleged the
III. gay of bis imprisonment TO consist in the following
viz That the Of Congress- referred - IN the sad
warrant unconstitutional and void also that Congress
hos no constitutional Awcr or authority % pun,sh me
epse with which said Booth charged and for which he
IA that the act Of Congress Of 1870 is IN Yoa-
ton Of the provisions Of compact unaerabe except by
,omou consent contained in the Ordinance OF l7s7 for
The Of the Territory north west of the Ohio
River that therefore said act is not in force IN said
State
,lsn on which The founded OF which appears by said
hs hs sd Joshua Glover a was nc p0ps,y Of the % sss
d made prphs the sn s IN the 9J e,cls na Ss
.ps in The escape Of PROPERTY for which reason said Afan'
Upon this Application could hesitate to issue the
writ according to the prayer Of the petitioner had
hoped indeed that nasnuch as at two opportunities
had been presented the petitioner since his original ar
rest 10 apply TO the Supreme Court IN term time or hs
writ that lie would have done go had he beon dSposeu 10
avail himself of its insirumentay Inc Cour. wa u. @
son at the time Of his arrest and an aourned session was
held commencing the 18th day OF May at either OF wnich
fines the petitioner might have presented his aPphcaon
and obtained the opinion ana Judgment Oh .ne wnoe ;
Court; and am at loss TO conceive the motive winch
may have induced him his advisers 10 iorego such cp
portunes But have right to complain that any clt-
zen calls upon for the discharge Of any duty pertaining
to my Office. do not complain fet cannot out zee,
the immense responsibility thrown upon me alone, and
may be pardoned for expressing my regret mat am de
pryed OF the aid and counsel of my associaes, so much
better able cope with the grave and intricate questions
involved than am myself Whether by design or ron
necessity this application has been made to me meet the
emergency with al the anxiety and which 1t can
not fail to excite and hope with some share OF the hr-
pes which the occasion and the nature Of the questions In
volved imperatvely demand
There was no question pertaining to the subject ma!ter
Of the application connected with the parties which
the slightest degree to conflict Of jurisdc-
ton between the State and Federal Courts the Judges
sheran he
was held not issued by Federal Judge or Court ou,
by Commissioner Of the District Court OF the United
States No exclusive ultimate sdction can be claimed
for on officer Of this kind As of the justices of the
highest judicial tribunals of this State which tribunal reP
rfsenis that behalf the sovereignty OF the state cond
not deny any citizen person entitled to the potec'on
of the State the proper process by which the validity OF
warrant issued by such authority could be examined Nor
eap admit that Court Commissioner, holding ms ap-
oipm. Mt at the will of the Court responsible only to such
Court in fact irresponsible and unlmpeacha6le has the
right or pow have the right the power to issue
any process by which citizen OF The state may ee nPrs
oneo that may be examined and its validity tested by
the proper Judicial authority Of the State Indeed, we
may 90 further, and say that every citizen has right
;udicsi power is that only to which application be
made by the citizen, il is the duty Of the judicial oncer
when applied to see that no citlzens imprisoned w'
the limits of the State taken beyond its limits except
by proper legal and constitutional authority IL not IN
the power of anybody to dvest the State Judiciary OF such
nSI S%n S Se the
Of their duty in this behalf
Il not necessary here to inquire what would be the
force and effect of like the present one, it
iesued by a judicial officer Of the United States con
rs however that have never been able to appreciate
the liability to- danger Of Sccessy for collision be-
tween the judicial and Ministerial authority oi the states
and the United States.
The line of demarcation is not very dim and proper
regard the peculiar functions Of each class OF officers
will render all apprehension on that score work OF super
erogation. But the States will submit to the
SUMPTION that United States Court Commissioners have
the power to hear and determine upon the rights and ber
ties Of their citizens and issue process TO enforce their at
Indications which is beyond the examination or review OF
ihe State Judiciary They will cheerfuy submit to the
exercise of all power and authority by the Federal udc
sry which is delegated to that department by the Federal
insist that the State Judiciary shall he and remain supreme
IN all elfe and that the functions Of the Federal Judiciary
within the territory Of the States shall be exercised by the
officers designated provided for by the Constitution OF
and irresponsible fmctonares holding their office at the
will Of the Federal Courts doing their duty and obeying
their mandaos for which neither the one nor the other is
responsible
Every lot and title of power delegated 10 the Federal
overnsent will be acquesced in but every ot and title
of power reserved to the States will be rgdly asserted
and rigidly sustained
II is only by exacting of the Federal Government rigid
conformity to the prescribed limitation Of its powers and
by the assertion aud exercise the part of the states of
ali the powers TO hem and due regard by both
to their Just and legitimate sphere that obedience be
rehtfuy exacted Of the citizen TO the authority of either
Entertaining the opinion that the commissioner of a
United States Court had rghal authority to mprson
citizen of this State, any other person entitled TO the
protection Of its laws by any process which precluded the
State authority from nqurng into the proceedings Of such
Commissioner and inspection Of the writ copy of
which presented with the petition could not deny
the writ Of habeas corpus prayed for.
The Marshal to whom the writ directed, in conform
ty with the double allegiance which all to the
State and to the United States, promptly made return,
bringing the body OF the petitioner before me- and show
ING the Of his caption and detention copy the
mi,timus hereinbefore mentioned