New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-08-06
ungreurded aud illegsl-bus stil he refuses 70
interfere We quote his own words:


interfere We quote his own words
"Conccding thep, for the purpose Of the az EImeut
which we by no means intimate 70 be true in poin
OF fsct-nor does he by any means intimate the con
trnry being this point perfectly Doo-c0mmiital :
tbef the District Court Judge Kaoel committed an
error in deciding that the prsouer refused 10 answer the
viii and in giving construction 20 the actually
given-hat Il erred in making an improper of the
writ ana that il riOasd tie 1ighss Of the prlorer ~
vorloas oker p0atss L Is not in Iiy power 70 re-
yoTee lie decision on any Of these grounds
That is to say. granting that Judge Kane has
committed PsssmOre Williamson to jail on TO-
tally false pretenses, we yet cannot interfere to
set him ct liberty The reason Chief-Ju,-
tice Lewis gives why he cannot interfere is
that this is cOmmitis for contempt, and that
in such cases Courts never interfere with each
others commitments; and to sustain himself in
this doctrine he cites The Lord Mayors case g
Wilson, 18S)-reeoenized as law and acted upon
by the Supreme Court OF the United States 10
Kearney's case q wheaton,. Now accepting-for
the purpose Of the argument only-these cases
as binding authority applicable to the case 10
hand, yet they carefully restrict this iadepend-
ent aud absolute power to commit for contempts
to "courts having a competent Jurisdictions;
and one of the grounds on which the writ was
asked for in this case was that Judge Kane had
no "competept jurisdiction" to issue bis writ
Of habeas corpus and that in issuing i. and CON-
hitting PassmoIe Williamson to prison for
pretended contempt in making return to it, be
had interfered to adjudicate a question not
within his jurisdiction as Federal Judge.
In order to make the cases on which Chief
Justice Lewis relies at all applicable, it was ab
solutely necessary that Judge Kane should have
had competent jurisdiction" oftIe subject mat
ter upon which he undertook to act. But this es-
sential inquiry as to the competency Of Judge
Kane's jurisdiction Chief Justice Lewis GRADES
altogether, ard that, too, as We think, upon the
flimsiest Of all possible preteDses. He says:
ono objection Of this character was made at the
bearing before that Court" - 1t may be that IN ec
toDs Of law where the judgment Of the United States
Courts is relied upon a defence, the jurisdiction
must be shown but in the writ of habeas corpus be-
fore Juc &c who has appellate iurisdlcuo1, wher-
ever the Jurisdiction of the United States Courts de-
pends upon the existence of certain facs and no cues
ton Of Jurisdiction has been raised on ne hearing
before u, every fact necessary 10 give yurs lcuOn
ought TO be presumed
That is to say in plain English, if a citizen Of
Pennsylvania beside having the misfortune to
fall into the hands Of fanatcal, reckless, pas
sionate Judge, who, blinded By rage and impelled
by hatred, is ready to make false constructions
and to violate rights in various points, has the
additional misfortune TO have incompetent
counsel, OF counsel so utterly improyiient as to
suppose that in a slave case Judge Kane would
or could do Justice without being absolutely
forced into it with pitchfork-that ignorance
or improydence of the counsel, exhibited in
having failed TO object at the hearing to the
want Of jurisdiction in the Federal Judge,
is to prevent the State courts from ever making
any inquiry into IT, obliges them to presume,
in spite of the fact that the Judge had jurisdic-
ton, and cOmpels them to leave Passmore
Williamson, though illegally and wrongfully
committed to prison, to rot there at Judge
Kane's pleasure
On the other hand it would seem to US an i'm
peratiye duty on the part Of the Supreme
Courts of the States to be watchful and vigilant
not caring who else may have been remiss-
at all times and in all cases to preserve their
own rights and those Of their States intact, to
keep a watchful and vigilant eye over the pro-
ceedines Of the Federal Courts that they do not
10 any case assume jurisdiction in matters not
within the Limited putyiew of their consti-
tutiOnsl auth GRITTY, and in cases especially where
citizens have been committed TO jail without
hail or mainprize to presume nothing, but to re-
ouire tie foreign court undertaking to exercise
this supereIGiEent authority to show beyond all
question it's jurisdiction in rhe matter.
1t viii be IN vain for Chief Justice Lewis or
any ofhis Judicial brethren to attempt to skulk
behind the blunders of Passmore Williamson's
counsel. This is case in which that kind of
petty Jogging will not answer. This is case
which the public will try and decide on its own
merits. wholly Independent of tAe plumbers of
council or the chcanery Of Judges.