Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1855-09-08
From the Pittsburgh Journal.
HABEAS CORPUS.

As this writ, hitherto in its application passably
well understood as was Supposed has found a new
use and application in Philadelphia, we have
thought it might be interesting to give the opinions
of one or two of those who are supposed to be au-
thority respecting its intent and object.
The object of the writ is to bring the body of
the person who has been restrained of liberty into
court, who shall determine whether the cause of
his commitment be just, and thereupon do as just
ice shall appertain."-l6 Charles l c. 10; Black
stones Com. B. l. l35.
at is directed to the person OBTAINING another,
and commanding him to produce the body of the
prisoner, with the day and cause of his capture
and detention blackstone III, 49,
An additional security of the subjects person
from Imprisonment was obtained by the great bull
wark Of the Constitution, the Habeas Corpus act
These two statutes Bill of Rights" and Habcas
Corpus. with regard to our property and persons,
of Runnymede." "Magna Charta only in general
terms declared that no man should be imprisoned
contrary to law. The lIabeas Corpus act points
out the efectual means, as we'll to release himself
though committed even by the King in Council, as
to punish all those who shall thus unconstituton.
ally misuse him. Blackstone b. ", 43S, 439.
When one considers the object of the writ as
above defined, and the words of the Act of Con.
gress of March 2, 1888, to wit:
IF any person or persons to whom such writ OF
IIabeas Corpus may be directed shall refuse to
obey the same, or shall neglect or refuse to make
return, or shall make false return thereto, in ad-
dition to the remedies hitherto given by law he
shall be deemed and taken to be guilty of misde.
meanor."
And the words of the Act of Congress of March
2, 1881:
That the power of the several Courts of the
Unitsd States to issue attachments and infct sum
mary punishments for contempt of Court shall not
be construed to extend to any except the mis-
behavior of any person or persons in presence OF
the Court"
We say, when one considers al! these in addition
to the fact to be considered in this connection, that
the act of l847 of this State in express terms de-
clares that no man shall hold slave on the terri
tory of this Commonwealth for any time tchatso
eyer. it is with astonishment we read of the late
procee iings in Philadelphia. Williamson is com
mitted for contempt of Court. Does any one say
or pretend to say, that "misbehaved in presence
of the Court" Ii is answered that the contempt
consisted in making such return as he did to the
writ. Granting for the moment that any one had
n right on this soil to command another to bring
the North Carolina or Virginia chattels of Mr.
Wheeler into Court if under oath he made false
return, why is he not proceeded against for per
Jury? His return was not, except under the lea
necessitdtis, misbehavior, but for The emergency
it was distorted into contempt, for by that means
the Judge got into his own hands the whole mat
ter; whereas if perjury had been the charge,
jury would have inerfered, and in all such cases
luries arc dangerous.