New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-09-10

N ~ J.
fvs .ss,s ne fsdsr.l u'isnss ~ nis ~ ~n' ~ hSNs'
,ofIrs uton them 81 the lin. TIE pni" lg.s ~ 5'sir
Ts ssls,y would b. bef pbI,o'leti, sod nna,
soforon IRON. ChsnJ iin and nJyn-nsg. al ai'sg1
g.d H., wfhs would b'ng thsn al btt SCALA.
.feno ray e0nh.sent would be ssntrnos hat the
a., ,bd tfsvsi Gr linitsd sn9 down ths 5sfe.
A. reuusn, 9TH he officer who ,ht ha'e I'm N onarg'
by the ous .. Of tse spare sya, "isa,
teuuoafly oulaissd much a. thstr o~n dstnenti ant
eVer iirr n tn service 81 the eun'r7 could
comIe hs eorauandsrio onns him befo'7 ITO e''' m m
bab seo,pus act has neyer received sreh e;nstruc
,s - 6,ei. case nil,ng Rim - be a-d bieJ.
Bu be h,s Ihf 10 demand who adni, As ny Iessl
DIV Tor ~ on nse rashe and he does IKE what !.
.ivsI.n 10 ,uob su admission when his spp and
M. ron iruent referee IN t show that ne u a"iy
DETAINED complaint mus, be made and the crass OF
su Judge beiory the Wit can Co. me very o,e
,ud purpose Of this 70 20 prevent from being TRIED ~ih o
those who usniissly have no 'isni " oe .et az
In. wit a error criminal which the court or jncsr
l. bound 10 sov il there suppose tnst an error hl
fen committed equally bound 20 ef1ss II Dc Gear
let he fd.rnent must Be Stunned
ihs, any application TO ms .S,, -, rs
Judss time Of the a. owance wer s.ished t1at ne
rep1ted case II which was refused Is sinn $3.50
rnr n ursed IN the Argument reason iJr snppo'hs ma.
IN al other esses The writ sisued without ont
such inference can fairly be drawn rom me s. o. d s
cal decisions upon pon Ike this We do n,t expect 70 ana
bc fhs uoeu learn. from elementary books and which
sre constantly sstsd On without being cisru'ed.,
in e. and from time lmmenOra Just as It i now The
s.. ute 81 Char II. u-ie no sltsson IN the prsees
rh re Rer. mT Il merely provided that Judges
cation h'.d have ns I1Tec5 sS Ger Ps sn& ~
sted pepaes upon those who sh 'ud defeat its on
re eolopss and most no, all have since
seied Laws resembling The EnglIh statute o. Charlie:
n. irpi,ed States d,clsre. that the privilege Of
wit Of hSb. a. cor pu be unless when
CONES. bas upon the federal judges the power
such wri,s e'ordps to he PiaeIIs, "a mes
Of On n ,utec prevail in treliud AID Arlore
and .t.i sl'o zoe hIGohJ y sdc5, =. vel IS Of
The AIaertsg couIis both s-,e a. Fee e re onnsd %
fullest resrec' as setting ana dehui's our powers anu
BI'ek.Op. o Com 49, ys The rir Of habea should he a.
o ';t 10y, oy %G esss 10 l. a M gives cOscni
why Il ,hor Ia TO: be n Any " er Gaze a. cues Ga
md Juee Vaughan h cl.es nero Ihey hs1 reusea II
Clit'y y the rule Cr L.w oli General rr4e osS
Vas nsed in Rex w. schc.1er ii Burr 1853 and 10 the
Of tn TREE spsD,b saols 2 Blae r. 1924 10 Hobh uses
Ceut a. tie true construction Of tho statue, tina;
be commitment il be ma itest that the prisoner b,
nsndd In New York. when the statute 10 force there
VS.. decided BY the supreme Court % Johns ~ that the
aDowar of the wit matter within the discretion o. he
q, p. uns on grounds laid ia the applcatop IL was
refused ~ HueI. Il C. 1856 and in EsPnte Ferguson
M II S Waiu sa e ~s g Peters sSs hss
the wit ought not he awarded If the court Is aIisaed
fused by The Of the United States In that case
as il bad been Before in KeaIney's case: A.. -
m 10
oues US 10 view examine the OF detane now aud
c make an business at once If appear that we have
mis- prisoner already sa confined on sentence OF the
District Court Of tho United states tor contempt nso,ss
fore US in such that we can exercise any Nni
Of appellate jurisdiction IN Il On STATE ea, ennnc BE-
di.regsrded reversed or set aside, however clear
we ay perceive be erroneous and however plain 1t may
he .b, We ought to revere it before appeal or
writ Of error only look al the record to see wh ther
, ard have no power say whether night or
In ia ufiy
brought revision we decided TINS to,ee yesrs ap
hin Blu, the familiar so universally assnoweSseI
and reasonable in itself that 1t requires only 70 Dc ~
~ he decisions OF the federal Over them we have no
control Al AL THOSE tribunals belong different judi
esl ,y-sm from They administer dherent CODE OF
% curt Of the United States independent OF as as we are
ofss the Supreme Court OF tae Uned states
l. Of ei,bs What the the Con suon have fJrbdden
directly writ OF error we OF course cannot 20 na
rectly by hAbess corpus a.. .,
ths the against him in the District Court was
Vde mil ana void n certainly rue and ev vo1
udsmen, which clearly OF It's own face TO have
n H. sniiec raj en- For instance, Federal should
convict al citizen of libel or If State court having
10 in except civil pleas. hoald try an indc m mt
y crime srd Wet paryin these Gasp tine Judgments
wooo be wholly 1.-THE petitioner can bring himself YIN
ia h, principle then there is judgns against him he Is
Ionsay Imprisoned, and we must order hun TO DC oous'
iefsp,d for? The easy and simple The
con ment elbows that be Ired found guilty and SON.
ter ..d
neo otdt sentence and for no other cause Ihs
was sub.tsn'ive ofense against he authority
JUN tie District Count punish Contempt Certain
not ~ Courts ba'e this power and must necessarily have
liz otherwise trey could protect themselves from ms M or
cree obedience their process Without they wo1iu %
s'tery lhe ,sy 20 ~. Court in which tSs OIL nss
committed ald other Court not even the highest can a'
ner0 %mh o5 tsSeSs copas If the power be
abused thtro is remedy bat Impeachment.
The aw held by this Court in MLanghns Case -
II A : and v
kesne,s Case a Wharton, 9s) II solemny settled as
part Ct the common law N Drs Of ss 2.most ar, that
T Law sp5 we must administer il As WI find it. The only
s,,eIapt ever made to disregard by New York Judge
john r 34s who not sQpcfted by Dis oretlteo ins
9p sn S' .sS % TO Be @
qverees VII ever vi ua;e hut singular controversy 70 u.
Supreme Court ouse ouvoed IL the Senate were nsYer
he senate itself Welded to the truths which the
Supreme had laid doa cissy and the Judgment Of
the Court Of Errors in Yates case % Jo' rs @ was oyeae
~ Johns 4J which out OF the same TRANSACTION,
ard DE- p ned the prime PIES st further reflection
later period induced the senate Join the paaE branch
OF the Legislature In ps'sng statute which prevents
on o Interfering habes' corpus with the Judgment
These principles being .eed Il follows ires. by that the
decide what contempt sgsu't III TO detsnns
wbeber the petitioner had b. en- Su ~ q ;ohtenp ana % i
.ua,r IL we fy believed petiton.t be nuocent-f
that the count which eon'e cd nun
the applied the wsii eond not ekatnine e
evidence the justice Of the without <s di'fe
sardns Whist no~ 90 be the law of tho land The Judge d
tee puct decided tho question on lis own eon'tu
rf.pabiy Even he could be shown 70 have acted ,yIAa
nc cortuptI 10 could be called 10 aasses Tor ouy IL
the Set 81 Tho Ibi cd Sisters
10, he counsel lot tito petitioner eehnd the proceeding
which no convicted aud that tho ssnsenee @ Goa
mpt void tho Court bad jurisdiction OF cor
other matter which ssesssasius CO asmptas
nv rsnsats when tho con enp e4Annssed w . esa
smsn saso, sll No eapsns sboa' az
ether 10 which there Is pdsnsua Ito sSaer'es q" ~
oaab.s against unsd ssie aad 10 no Ia taIesn' ~
suy wtas parts alA Individual Ito s"as s,',e stadssd
.u, II oenuYt aud he tolls hai tho Iou hsa ~ ia'
at.r. Go fp.trte Nj. Mhoo'ets