Weekly Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1853-1861, 1855-04-12
NO. AZ

Federal and State Courts the Federal Couus
nave uniformly held the suit in these Courts
10 be abated where the same cause of action
Z had been sued in the State Court.
! cannot withhold the EXPRESSION of nv s,,r
I prise at the earnest, if not Indignant manner
! IN which the counsel spoke Of the conduct Of
the commissioner IN issuing his warrallt after
the decision of the Probate Court ON the L1-
oeIs corpus; and an intlmation was thrown out
thai, II the peace of the country is to be pre-
served, more respect must be shown by the
Federal authority to the decisions Of the State
Court.
There Is not the least foundation for thi,
feeling and expression. IL arises from an en-
tire miseoneeption Of the case under consid-
Grafton The Commissioner Of the United
States issued his warrant to arrest the SUP
posed fugitive from labor, on the application
oi the master. There is no evidence that he
had any knowledge of the previous decision
OF the Probate Judge. No one, suppose.
will allege that he had legal evidence Of the
fact but suppose the record Nd been present.
ed TO him, did he show any want Of respect
to the State Court by issuing the warrant and
lnqulnng into the complaint ? This bv no
means pre|udiced the right of the fugitive As
the previous decision could be set up In bar
oi the procedurs. IL such decision were iiu.l.
{ I'D -si-sa <l<is pnirt .;3ou<yI
ten wears ago habeas corpus was issued by
the Circuit Court of the United States. for the
Eastern District Of New York, to bring before
It an individual who had been arrested as a
fugitive from justice under Cur late treaty
with England. The Circuit Court was held
by Judge Bets, the District Judge. who ON.
full examination, remanded the prisoner 10
be given upunder ths<reaty Judge Nelson.
out of Court issued another haJeas corpus and
the prisoner being brought before him. he
adjourned the case to the Supreme Court
When the matter was in discussion before the
Court, l urged that the second haJeas o0vpus
was irregular. The case was dismissed for
want of jurisdiction, but majority of the
Judges intimated the opinion that the first
decision by the Circuit Court was no bar IN
the second writ / differed with nv bretb-
rem on the question, but as the Court did not
take jurisdiction no decision was given in the
case. The writ of habeas oorpzs being return
ed to Judge Nelson, he discharged the priso-
ner.
Every one who examines the authorities in
this country and in England will find that
there have been diversity of judgements on
the point whether the decision on hsbeas
corpus is final and after the case above cited.
the sympathies Of the counsel for the indig-
nifty done to the Judge of Probate NAV well
be spared, as also all spprehensions for the
public peace being disturbed, for any want of
respect by the federal authorities TO the State
Courts.
State rights are invoked by the counsel III
these rights are construed TO mean a subver-
sion Of the federal authorities, they may be
somewhat in danger.
That the Commissioner had Jurisdiction ia
the case is clear. While duly engaged in the
investigation of the matter, the Honorable
Judge of the Common Pleas, whose motives
by no means question, by a habeas corpus
took from the custody of the Marshal. the
body of the fugitive which left the Commis-
sloner without case. II wrested from him.
without any authority of law. the subject of
his jurisdiction This. so far as | know, is
without precedent. Had any Commissioner
or Federal Judge interpose.l and by the same
means had disregarded and disturbed the ju-
rsdiction Of a State Court, should have felt
not less concern than the eloquent counsel.
A sense of duty compels me to say, that
the proceedings of the honorable Judge were
not only without the authority Of law but
against law, and that the proceedings are void,
and am bounl to treat them as a nullity.--
The Marshal is discharged from custody
The Commissioners having discharged the
fugitive, this case IS interesting only as it re-
CARDS the Federal and State jurisdiction.