The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-02-01
Ex-AIderman SturtevaDt demanded 70 jail
for the Contempt or Court.
SUPREME CDURr-IN CHAnRvpa

JAN sI.-h the mater Of TIE Hab.os Corpus 10 inquire
iato he prisonnen Of Oscar W. Stureuas The Cham.
bers pretty wei nsd this morning BY persons anx
ous 10 hear the resi- Of the motion argued before the
Judge on Monday Alder SturtevAn accompanied by
his opuniel and the Deputy Sheriff, was present.
Judge Clerks then proc. eded to deliver the following
decen: On the 10th inst Oscar W. sturtsvAnt applied
70 me- ON writ OF habca corpus TO inquire into the
Of his imprisonment which he alleged in petition Vas
paper pu' porting to be warrant order Of the Superior
Court Of the city OF New York against him for alleged
contempt; further stating his imprisonment to be Illegal
because among oihsr on the said warrant order
was issued In violation Of order staying proceedings
the matter until certain time not then elapsed and
Issued without lawful authority, and defective and
invalid en- its fAse The petition set forth that the ale.
cations required the statute that he Was not tted
oretsned BY virtue Of process issued by any Court
was Of Committed By virtue Of ,Ss 1 or
cree OF any competent tribunal Of civil criminal uris
dicon or by virtue OF execution Issued upon such
judgment decree The statute relating to wrlts OF
babeas corpus ga Rev Stst- 66i-mlrgnAl-Ssc SO,
Sab expressly declare, that ordsr OF commitment
dies OF any party shall be deemed judgment or dc cree
within the meaning Of the section req airing the alegs
tonto which HAYS referred, nor that any attachment.
other procss issued upon such order shall be deemed
execution within the meaning Of that section. IN
obedience to law securing the benefit OF his great prero
gstve unto the bum sl.st ctizsn-ths only practical
guarantee OF civil liberty mating it inn eratvs on ms
under forfeiture Of thousand dollars In case OF re-
ss she sss ms .ss hi. ~s
ave in the afternoon Of the day, Ia c,BplAaee
With The wit, masking, hoseys no return, vhch con
tat the.a were parties interested to Who the statute
expressly directs that the lie notice shall be given tbs
rsurnahle as Is required TO bs giv5n OF special otioss
IN the Supreme Court OF this Safe q Rev Stat $50
MAJ gil ~ md in the next section sufficient rotiss IS
Erected TO be to the District Attorney where
pesTe that the party Is aimed crmiuk! scussi
Ptoosed ga similar to those undsr sbcn Sturtsvsa
dtsind have been generally considered p,rtskiog of
criminal description, ~ lpss. oeog quasi cimioa
therefore found II necessary az ,urn tai, matter
vi the Both pst giving the pis1nsr that aite and
the next day to thos notices. which would give full
eight days Tor the service OF the notice to the interested
pArtisf excluding the last which Sunday Ca that
dsy pursuant 10 ao urpment the prisoner brought
before me b. Mr. Vuee thcsputy shsr TO whoss custody
committed him. on which cssion ! attended by
Mr. Bronson ~ counsel for the partie, interested the
District Attorney and by Messts. Field and Coxles,
counsel for StuevAnt The Sheriff made his return and
alleged that he detained the prisoner b. virtue of war
OF mi ut issuel by the 3upsor Court which
commitment hnd 70 be- auths ncaed by the seal said
court and by the signature Of its cerkthus proving it.
self Tho COUNSEL OF sturtevant in.erposed reply to
this rsturD alleging that when the said
sued the not authorized by any legap judg
nent or orr er OF the Superior Court This in the
nature OF demurrer The return and raised the cues
ton for my consider alton whether there any legal
judgment order 10 the Superior Court to authorize the
issuing Of th, warrant tsppeArsd to ma that tbs lsa
gusse OF section forty sub division three second Revised
Statutes 561, too clear and peremptory to admit Of
any hssit on this point could mt look behind
the commitment Ths efRcsoious enforce m ant OF thu
dscisions of ,ours Of justi tbs peuaucs OF ths
dignity, the preservation OF thsir independence the
avodance of unsee nly and di,organznz collisions bs
tween the several tribunals require rrlc construction
OF this section and 10 the Apg asge Of the sub
division OF the section which applies to this case" When
any contempt Is specially and plainly chsg Ia this
minen by court having auth ,ritv to commit for the
contsmp charged the priscusr be reandsd But
pus il feurnsb hss no right to 20 bshind this oommit
men or TO review the proceedings of hitting AXs
rsts OF cosr yet he rqurs whether tho process OF
comnto ent is valid its face and al whether any
bA arisen since the cmitneAt FOR putting ga
end 20 the impris ,nment (rhs People CAssels Hill
le4) And for the same reason canno. look into the
order -hioh prisoner in his petition aud BY bis
council, alleges TO have been bs Justcs sworth
on the lssk dry of January, staying proceedings 10
This may be good reason to address to thu
Superior Court for vacstny TIE c,mmi msnt II
Any Of Its officers have issued In violation
oroer OF Of s Ju6gss the for
their 6eterui cation IL only decided on motion
by The tribunal where The order is d sbeyed No other
tribunal colateraly Interfere with the course and
practice Of that Court process issued In disregard an
order OF sir gle Judge not necessarily and p void
ard II not void per sc, its face, bound, uad0r
the section above referred TO- for tao
purpose for ~h b 1t issued. Not liDx 10 abort
s.eIrsneous" the pitm.nt ca, be Inquired into
By ne. The OF preston that remains therefore Tor
me 70 consider IL whether there any dsfact or ons
eion the fsca Of the eut render it inyAd
1t IL sseted by the counsel for the prisoner that II Ia
not sufficient III the comm nient merely Aege the
contempt but the facts cont utipg Contempt must
De set Iofth 10 require THIS however Woajc -trt1
ally authorize ne to go behind the conmitmsn.,
which have already shown cannot do. III, only oo
ject frseng the facts would be to make odg. OF
the conclusion e5uced by the Superior Court
facts. With this have nothing 10 Of tais thay we're
exclusively the judges II the facts we're nute,y
cited, End cane TO Tho conclusion that they aid not
const 'uto contempt su must recognizes tne validity
OF the commitmsns. Ths Court Issuing tho s,rsnt
must alone decide Whist is insult 10 the dga.y or
viostou OF thair orders l. Is enough for tna they
charge contempt cially and plainly and t1xt bey
have anhorit, to con NIT for the contempt chArged
The only pont which has uced any hesitation on nv
pItin the determitstlc OF this natter is the Of
recital OF rtmittur Of the from the Court Of Ap
peas TO the Superior Court Having tsk,n from the
latter to the former eorrt. in order to restore to
the Superior court ju isdction the matter, 1t
must to lemtted there IRON the spp.lGts Court.
After reciting tho order Of the superior Court,
=. special uIm and its armAnce At general term and
the EppsGl b. StrrteTant TO the Court OF Appeals the
commitment merely s.aes that ths said judgm,n was,
By the Court OF Appeals, the 3ls day OF smber
1853 in all thing All tmed with costs &cn II does NOT
state in express t,rmsthatit RENTED to 70
poss the Superior Court OF the Tos really Ao-
pears TO me TO DO the only plausible seton stsrted In
this discussion; Tor may with force be aexss
thai when human liberty is in question, nothing snoai
be left 10 'nteadmen And that the law In its viy,ncs
over and ts sccituds Tor personal right, requires
teal e1aotude II every proceeding aesisasd 10 interfere
With that liberty Bat the other hAna every thipg
ts unisd in favor sf OF general iurisdlctn
while in coult- OF special and limited jurisdiction the
f.er eivirs L jarndicon must be Enthusiastically
alleged. In this imminent the posesson OF the cas-
By the appellate court alleged sn ths renittiaY not
alleged; still, enoug,. In my opr;oa, is set forth {,
the verJ fact that tss original has resumed juris-
dcton over by the issuing cf pross 10 other words
the exefce 81 jurisdiction pre- supp poss-sion OF
the case. ASd cons quen,ly jurisdiction over Bssidee
can nqne at al tnto trs ubest OF Jurisdiction ,,r
neoton vi process ISSUED BY court OF general urisic
ton In this inquiry IL INK net ihs is civil pro-
cess Ia the senfs 81 section al srd IL is Sufficient for
II in accordance with ,eotion 40, the commitment
spsssli, snd plstnly charges contempt. an bound
Ia kaow officially thai the Superior Court has In It's
actsr Of cont OF general arsdcion authority to
G nit To- the contempt charged For these
the prisoner TO ths usaody OF the sheriff
Tns Ju6fe then mace the following ordsr:-
Tie pri oner having been brought before upon Al
bsosas corpus, aud Irocsednss bsviug besn duly had
hereunder spd sppssrins that the said Stur.
tevant was At the tue OF Issuing writ al 10
euttod by the sheriff q the city and county OF New 70
for contempt specially syd plainly cssged 10 tbs
Ispt OF CON nmen produced before By said sh sr,
isued bJ court having suoriy I, commit for tie
tempt 20 charged and that IN, time during which sAd
sluftevlnt Gay 10 legally is aimed has rot expired
DO, therefore herehy remand sait car ~ sturtevAn.
to the custody Of sad Sheriff II tn. city aud county Of
Nes York I w CIERKE
JAN 81, 1854.
The Sheriff Is directed 10 ,ntex III. rro.asa,xs re