New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-02-13


,ii,ution were imposed upon the States, and al
poxer 10 relation thereto, reerved .o.the States and
re reople am compelled TO hold that the get is un'
constitutions sId vo1 and confer no slthosi'y
uror the Federal Courts
This doctrine goes 10 the jurisdiction Of the Court
whi,h attempted 20 try aud sentence this petitioner,
which ursd ction il always subject TO inquiry an de-
csion in any other Court in which its proceelInss
NAV come 10 question collaterally otherwise TINS
IL tue of Courts of general original jurisdiction, and
much more IL il true in regard 10 the jurisdiction OF
Courts Of inferior special and limited jurisdiction.
The I'd clause OF the 9th section OF the lst arucie
Of The Cor struton of the United States provides:
1.-The pivile &c Of the writ Of hsbe,s corpus SHAH no,
"be suspended uhl.se when In case of rebellion or 10.
"va,ion the public safety may require It. Inc M
seron Of this clause in the Constitution clearly ind-
cate. the extreme caution which ives exercised by the
members OF the Nsiiopal Convention and also the ap-
pr, hension wbch they f.t lest the power of the States
might prove much for that OF the Federal Govern
mebt While, on the one hsnd, they obviously To-
tended 70 leave 10 the State Governments the juris
dic,on end control Of this high prerogave writ, in
ali crdnsry circumstances, and on al ordinary occs-
sons Cd the other they granted TO Congress the
tover 70 suspend IFS privileges whenever they should
MAJ les an open rebellion against the Federal
thority or an invasion Of the national or Stste terri
tory. The suspension Of the privileges OF the wrl,
here referred TO- could not be held as sppyisg only
20 the power Of the United States Courts TO issue H.
because such power could be made TO extend TO but
few cases and more palpsby, because il could hardly
be conceived that the national Judiciary would ever
be found disposed 10 the writ in aid OF the sub
version Of the very authority upon the existence Of
which their own functions depended Hence il is ap
parent that the inhibition and the exceptions there
from have reference 10 the State functonaries and
the cnuse must be regarded az restrictive upon the
power of Congress interfere with the authorty OF thu
STATE Judges 10 ISSUE hear and determine the writ.
This clause then, may be regarded in two aspects,
the express reservation 20 the Sstes of the
power ard jurisdiction the writ OF hsbess corpus
In all cases whatsoever, except in cases of rebellion or
invasion when the public safety nigh. require its
suspension and in such cases, "a an absolute grant OF
power TO the Congress TO suspend its privileges Bat
these must be declared by Congress before any
suspension be ordered. All this goes 70 show
that the trainers Of the Constitution not only recog-
bzed in the States the general absolute control OF the
writ but by the provisions cited, absolutely required
obedience TO it, all occasions and by all persons
and functionsries, whether State or Federal unless
Congress should declare the existence OF the emsr-
gencies wherein il might and should suspend its priv
ileges.
In view of this remarkable provision Of the Con-
sti,u,ion is little surprising that claim is
lately set up in behalf of Federal Officers, even OF
the lowest grade of entire immunity from any obi
CATION TO regard the writ when emanatlDg from State
authority, and that jurisdiction of this writ - perty
gu. stioLed by inferi ministerial officers, even when
issued from the highest judicial tribunal OF SOW
ereign State. However regardless people may be
Of encroachments upon the power to which alone
they have confded their liberties it would seem that
such prete nsioDs from such sources, could hardly
fail TO invite inquiry in regard no. only TO the rights OF
sovereignty originally reserved, but IN regard 10
what yet remain, not yet FILTERED sway by Thought
less acquie cence on the one hand or voluntary sur
render on the other.
But il seems TO me unnecessary to pursue this sub
ect further. The whole tenor and scope OF the ted-
eral Constitution indicate most clearly that the state
Judges and indeed all State officers, essential TO
its maintenance and support, and accordingly tue
very last clause in the instrument requires such ON
ces TO be bound by oath affirmation 10 support IL
Yet the course of reasoning sometimes resor.ed TO- IN
order 10 Gust the State Judiciary Of jurisdiction OF
constitutional question is based upon the assumption
that State judges must necessarily be reckless OF such
obljp alton and that fidelity 10 official duty only 70
he Injected tom Federal officers. But this lassu mo-
ton goes too far. Ii is weapon with douoie edge.
The hypothesis presupposes ina. ederai JUDGES
are utterly unnindful OF the restrictions when ,he
CONSTITUTION imposes upon Federal power, and that
they are willing for the sake OF "uHyornHy 10
administer all power, both State and National;
Neither assumption is true. The earnest desire OF al
is TO ascertain the true line of duty, and 10 act ac
cordiDgly o, ,o,, .dss mus, nacass.,;lv ba
committed is only admitting that the agencies by
which each Government is administered are human.
But those who suppose that upon the one side or
the other must necessarily lead 10 insurrecton, revo
lutop ard anarchy have studied Tie temper oil our
people and officers TO little purpose. lime reason
reflection discuss ion, forbearance, patriotism, will
now az thew have done heretofore, prove that the
wisdom and Intelligence of the parties Interested ana
especially Of the ultimate authority, Will De FOUND
competent TO the emergencies which call for their ex
to the test.
sgree fully with the course Of reasoning OF my
brother Crawford, upon the second branch OF TINS
Gaze viz that the record Of conviction here returned
does not show an ofense within The jurisdiction of the
FEDERAL Court, admitting the Act OF 1850 to be
constitutional; and even on that ground alone 1
should agree to discharge the prisoner. am permit,
ted and desire TO adopt his Of reasoning in
that respect, which is so clear and conclusive that
further suggestions would be entirely superfiuous.
! will only say that whatever the Congress may have
de.pned by the eth section of the Act Of 1880 such
design can only be discovered from the words Of the
statute II they failed TO des ate the oense ~ they
intended 10 do their defect cannot be supplied by any
legislation of Judicial tribunal. BY their own Ian
cuaee must their acmen be construed, an if their
Intentions may be hwsrted in consequer Of fail
ure accurately 10 express them, Congress has the
same power to amend that il had originally to enact
| the statute.
! have deemed il my duty on this occasion to
pres my views upon question which ! deem vital to
! the system on which our Government is based. The
foundation Of my action is broader ard deeper than
the purport of the indictment, though that alone
would be sufficient for the present emergencies.
! But the question suggests, and indeed upon the
Argument have been raised questions involving the
powers of the Federal and State Governments;
questions not confined to the particular subject mat
ter Of the Act Of $780, but questions pervading the
entire scope Of the two Governments, in all Of their
| departments, upen other subjects which may, from
| time TO time arise. And firmly believing that the
beLefeent designs of the Union only be realized
and the Union itself only preserved by maintaining
the Independence and sovereignty of the States in
tact, in all respects except where they have clearly
delegated power, and by contning the Federal Gov
Ell ment 10 powers clearly conferred / have felt
called upon to place my views upon our records in
order that may discharge my full duty, and that my
reasons for the decision TO which have been i'm.
PEELED, may be fully known, and not misapprehended
OPINION OF JUSTICE CRAWFORD.