The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-02-01
Ex-AIderman sturtevant demanded 70 jail
for the Contempt OF Court.
SUPREME ooURr-Is CHAMBERS.
Dacialop nv Hon JuaOs ClarAs


JAN sl.--In the mater Of tie Hab.as Corpus TO inquire
into he iprisonmer Of Oscar W. Siurtepa The Cham
bsrs pretty wen Hsd this morning BY persons spx
ous 10 hear the Of the motion argued before the
Judge on Monday. Alder sturevAn panied BY
his cpunfei and the Deputy Sheriff, WAS present.
Judge Clsrks then proc. eded to deliver the following
decison On the 10th inst Oscar SturtsvAnt applied
to me- on writ Of hacas corpus inquire into the cause
Of his imprisonment which he alleged in petition VAS
paper pui porting to be order of the Superior
Court OF the city OF New York against him for alleged
contempt further 81 sns his i'm prisonment to be Illegal
because among o,hsr the said warrant order
was issued in violation Ct order staying proceedings 10
the matter until certain time not then elapsed and was
Issued without lawful authority and defective and
invalid It's fA~ The petition set forth thu. the ale
cations required by the statute that WAS not ited
oetsned by virtue Of any process issued by any Court
the United Slater or by Judge thereof and that he
was rot committed by yrue Of the anal alignment de-
cree OF any competent tribunal Of civil criminal juris
dicon or by virtue OF execution Issued upon ouch
judgment or decree The statute relating to wrts OF
hAbeas corpus ga Rev Stat, 66i-marginAl-Sso So,
Sab. expressly declares that ordsr OF commitment
for alleged contempt 10 enforce the rights or RENE
dies OF any parry shall be deemed judxmsnt decree
within the meAnrg OF the section req airing the Alsgs
ton to which, have referred, that any attachment
other prooss issued upon such erder shall be dssm
beense law securing the benefit of This great prsro
gsve unto the bum slest oitizsn-ths only practical
under forfeiture of thousand dollars case Of re.
fusAi-I allowed the writ, feturnabls forth With.
TAs sheriff appeared before ms With his prisoner
with The writ, Masking, hosevs, 10 return wh'ch
sdered rpinportsn from the petition itself inferred
tst there pArtss interested to whom the statute
expressly directs that the ls notice shall be given ths
tine INC nlsce which sush writ shall been Ma
re'nrnsnle as required to De svan Of special otoas
MAJ gin md in the next secHcn sufficient rotiss is
Iectea 10 he gwen to the District Attorney where 1t
has 49,
Proceed ga similar to those uadsr .heh stursvant was
dtsinst have been generally considered psrtskog OF
therefore found II necessary djourn this matter
I'll the Both ipst giving the pis)nsr that afternoon and
the next day to those notices which would give full
eight osf Tor the SERVES OF the notice to the interested
pkrss, excluding the last which Sunday Ga that
dsy pursuant 10 ae aurpment the prisoner brought
before Mr. vues sheriff TO whoss custody
committed him; which OF c.sion was attended by
Mr. Rronfon courae for the parte, interested By the
District Attorney and by Messrs Field and Cowles,
counsel for StutevAu The Sheriff made his return and
alleged that he detained the prisoner b. vtus of
rant OF oomu ment issuel by the 3upsor Court whca
commitment find % be authe nchted by the seal of said
court and the signature OF its csrs-thus proving It.
self The counsel OF Sturtsvaat iater posed reply to
ibis rsturD alleging that when the said Is
sued tho sam, vas not authorized by Auy lesa judg
ment orr er OF the Superior Court This in the
nature Of demurrer to the return and raised the quss
uon for my consider alton whether there legal
judgment order in the Superior Court to Auhoizs the
issuing Of th, warrant 1t appeared to that this lsa
gusse forty division three second Revised
567 too clear and peremptory to admit Of
any he6it ,tion on this point could mt look bshind
the commitment Toe effcscious enforo' ant OF this
decisons Of ,ourts OF us, tbs uteuaucs OF their
dgsi'y the preservation OF thsir independence the
avoidance of unseenly and disosganlzins collisions be-
tween the several tribunals require rtros construction
OF this section; and 10 repeat the lang OF the sub
division OF the section which applies When
any contempt is specially and plainly chsrg In tins
mi'ment by court having auth 1rty to commit the
contempt charged he prisoner must be rensndsd But
slthosgt the Jnfgs court bsfore whom hsbeas ,r
pus IL fsurnxbs has no right to go bshind this commt
invan al Hing
ste ccer yet he MAJ Iqurs whether the process OF
comnita ens Is valid on It's face and alo whether sny
end 80 the impris 'nment rhs People Casssls, Hill
lea And for the same reason CANNOT look into ths
Council alleges to have eee1 b, Jutics sworth,
on the 1Stk day of Jaausry, staying proceedings ia
tn. matter until tie 2ist o. the same month.
This may be good reason TO address to thu
Superior Court for vacAting toe clmmi .msnt. II
try Of Its officers have issued In violation OF an
oroer OF Of is Judges the tubsot Ia cuvey for
their 6eterni cation II can only be decided on motion
by The tribunal where the order d sbeyed No other
tribunal can coateray interior. with the course and
prscce az that CDu-t process issued Ia disregard OF
order OF sir gle Judge is not necessarily and PR void
ard II not void per sc, Its face, am bound, undOr
the section Above referred TO- To oesm IL operative for tas
purpose for III ID 1t Issued. Not ring, Ia short,
.eItrsneous" o the com ptm.ot be Inquired Into
ms 70 co,sa,r wsessr thar. asfsot o. oai D'
zion the fsca Of the cvrm ment render it nvAhd
It is ststed by the counsel for the prisoner that
not sufficient III the commitment. merely Allegs this
contempt. bot the facts const ung tee coatsmpt
be set forth. To require this however, Woald -irt1
ally authorize me 10 20 behind TIE couuitusnt
which have already shown / cannot do Ia. only 90
eot Of feeipg the facts would BE- to make judge OF
The conclusion ceduced by the Superior Court from
facts With THE have nothing u 20 81 tais thy
exclusively the judges II the facts infinitely
cited ard cane to Tho conclusion that they sid not
consti'ut contempt still must recognise tas validity
Of the commitment Ths Court issuing tho warrant
must alone decide what Ia suit their dgai.y or
violation o. thar orders. /. is enough for that they
charge contempt pscialy ami plainly, aud taxt they
have authority to matt for the oontsp pit charged
The only point which has 'uosd aoy hesitation on my
pant in the deermiL atc OF this after Ia the want OF
recital OF r.uttur Of the from the Court Of
peals to the ussro Court Having oes take from the
latter TO the former eortt in order to restore to
the Superior court ju isdicton the mi after, it
must te lemitted there iron the appellate Court
After recitns tho order Of the superior Court
~ special urn and its ahrmancs ~ general term and
the EppG By Strrievsnt TO the Court OF Appeals the
commitment merely saes that ths said ju1gm mt was,
b the Con-, O. Appeals on the sl.t day Of
state in express tsrmsthat 1t RENTED re
posse the Superior Court Of the Tolls really
pears TO me to % the only plausible obscon started In
this diseussion FOR II may with be alleged
thai when human liberty s In question nothing shoali
be left to ntsndment that the law In it's vgiIancs
over And its solctuos for personal right requires cr
tcs eAacu3e IN every proceeding iesgasd interfere
With that liberty. Bat the other hand, every
lie unsd In favor II courts OF general jurisdiction
while in courts Of .pecil and limited jurisdiction tbs
f,ep evEs Y jarsdic,ion must be ciroum,staatiAy
alleged In this mitnent the Possession the cas-
BIZ the appellate court alleged the rentitaY ia not
alleged; fil enougr. In NY opinioa, Is set forth Z,
authorize US 10 FEesuns thai II renittod fom
the vrJ fact that ;Es original has resume ura
dc'on over by the issuing Ct prosss 10 other
the e1eici 81 jurisdiction pre- supp posesson OF
the case Aad cons quenty jurisdiction overt IT, Bssde
inqniIe At al Ito tfs ubjest OF Jurisdiction On
nect'on vi process ISSUED By court OF general ursic
ton In ths inquiry 10 NJ not rhis is not civil pro-
cess Ia the 81 section Al srd Is Sufficient for IN
in accordance with teotion 40 the commitment
spssislc sud pistnlJ charges CONTEMPT ! am bound
To kaow Officially tina. the Superior Court has in It's
Of cont of general arisdicton authority to
mint To- the contempt so charged Foi these
must remand the prisoner TO the custody OF the sheriff
Tue Ju5so tben mace the following order
Tie pri having been brought befors rue upon a.
hsosss eorpos, aud Iroceedins bsvug besn duly had
Hereunder, spi isppssng that ths said o'car W Sur
tevans was At the tune OF suiny writ dstansd 10
eutod, by the sheriff q the city And county OF New 70
fora contempt specially asd plainly oSarged 10 ths
sbt OF con- niment psoduost before b. said sh ssif
isued bJ court having authority 70 commit for tie
tempt 20 charged, and that IN, time GuDg which ssid
sturtevint cay he legally as sinad has not ,xpred
DO Therefore herehy remand sail ". 5turteyl
to The custody Of sad Sheriff of tn aud coanty Of
New York W. CLERKE
JAN 81, 1854.