Weekly Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1853-1861, 1855-09-20
For the State Sentinel.
Late Important Decision in Pennsyl-
Williamson

litical excitement OF the public mind evolves
matters Of minor note to the surface, where
their c-onspicuousneSs gives them an import
ance and notoriety not their ordinary due.
The slavery issue which now agitates the
country, infuses its characteristics into the
most everyday affairs Of life. 1t Is q touch
stone by which IS tiled each action OF incl
dent which bears the least affinity.
Thus. the usual routine of the law IN Penn
svlvania was startled into unprofesslonai IN
tersst \ few weeks. since by the Wheeler
slave case. 1t is one which, by mlsrePresen-
tation. has been used to defame an honorable
and learned Judge, and to stir up into more
frenzied activity the ill-humors that veer the
BODY polite, entering upon an exciting cam
The principal facts in the case are these f:
The Hon. John II. Wheeler passed through
Pennsylvania with three of his slaves. Pass
more Williamson, and others, ofhciously In
terfered between the master and his servants
by counselling and aiding the escape of the
latter. Now, bv the law of the State, the
negroes were free the moment they touched
its soil. if they chose to claim their rights.
But Mr.. Wheeler thinking, perhaps, that be-
ing excited, they were unable l~udiciously to
| decide; and knowing better than they, how
preferable to a laborious freedom was their
easy servitude, and that they would find this
sadly true when their new found friends be-
came tired of their hobbies, applied to Judge
| Kane. of the u. S. District Court, for a writ
| of haJeos corpus, issuing to Passmore William
| son; who refusing to amend his return and
| submit himself to the Court, was OF course
committed for contempt. Thereupon his
friends applied to the Supreme Court OF
PENNSYLVANIA for an ha5eas corpus, to inquire
into the legality of his Imprisonment. In
other words, called upon the State to protect
him from the Federal authorities, to ward OF
ell-deseryed punishment for his defiance Of
and disobedience to, the U. ). District Court
The counsel concerned were such as would
prepare the case so as to secure the tulles
consideration of the points it presented. An6
the bench, still numbering in its member
two associates Of the bench Of which thu
venerable Gibson was chief, is one which 70
ability and authority stands high in tn
Union. and to which the establishment o
precedent might be entrusted with safety
After full argument the Court refused tn
writ. Justice Knox dissenting. Oh. Justic
, Black delivered the opinion.
The application complained that William
son was held in custody under a commitmen
! of the u. S. District Court for n contempt
! that Court in refusing TO obey its process
Judge Black argues that the ha5eas corpus
+ a writ of right and cannot lie refused to an
one showing a prIma Jacie case emitting hir
to discharge or bail; but that the prisone
here acknowledges himself TO be in Leg
t custody for an offence not bailable. Sue
; probable cause must appear, or a refusal is IN
evitable.
Again, the writ of habeas corpus is not
writ of error; it cannot bring a case befor
> the Court so as to exercise any appellat
: jurisdiction over it, no matter how erroneou
5 the decision of the subordinate Court ma
n be. And that applies more strongly to tn
Federal Courts over which the State Court
q have no control at all, they being separat
and distinct judicial systems emanating fror
: distinct soyereignties. 1t was contended tina
the whole proceeding was corans non JDdec
and therefore void. This is certainly tn
case where the judgment appears upon il
face to have been pronounced by a CouI
. having no jurisdiction; but here the recon
shows that he was tried, found guilty all
sentenced for contempt of Court, and nothin
$ else. The District Court had certainly juris
diction of the offence: no Court can interior
with it in the exercise of its powers, and for il
abuse there is no remedy excep. by impeacl
ment. And this power is essential to tn
q very existence of the tribunal. The Coul
cannot go behind the proceeding in whic
the petitioner was convicted, to examine tn
jurisdiction Of hat Court over a certain otht
matter which it was attempting to investigai
n when the contempt was committed. Th
. record of conviction for contempt is as dis
tinct from the matter under investigation, q
=" an Indictment for perjury is from the cause
which the false oath was taken.
Every judgment must be conclusive unit
reversed and it is more especially necess;
~ that convictions for contempt should
final, conclusive and free from re-exanlin.
tons by other Courts on hab. cor. Otherwis
&c a party not wishing to be tried by one Cou
o has only to defy IFS authority, and, upo
commitment, take out a writ of hat. cor. bs
e fore a Judge of his " choosing, and if thu
Judge is Of opinion that the former Court ha
no authority, there is an end of the cas-,
: Such a doctrine is too monstrous to find suI
port. And in this case, says the learne
judge, 'the want of jurisdiction would nc
e even have been a defence on the trial. TIL
proposition that a Court is powerless to pu
nish for disorderly conduct or disobedienc
7 of its process in a case which it ought ulti
D mately to dismiss for want of jurisdiction,
not only not supported by judicial authority
; but we think it even new as an argument a
: the bar"
Such were the principal grounds upoI
which the writ was refused, and Passmor
l Williamson left to such reflections in hi
prison as, it is to be hoped, for his own com
fort and the character of his party for hon
esty and patriotism, will lead him to submit
himself to the Court which he has insulted
Judge Kane delivered dissenting opinion
which is marked with much that appeals t
the feelings, but lacks the legal and logica
accuracy which distinguishes that of his eide
brethren. As for instance, he seems to los
sight of the fact that the Supreme Court o
Pennsylvania, supreme as it is over all tribu
nails deriving authority from the State, We
has no appellate jurisdiction over the fedora
Courts: and again, that the writ of huJea
corpus is not a writ of error: and that tn
Court cannot go beyond the record.
These false premises lead him to an entirely
different conclusion from all the rest of tn,
Court. Judge Knox is the youngest man o
the bench.) / think there is no one VIII,
doubts that Judge Kane could have discov
cred that he had no jurisdiction over the cas-,
had not Mr.. Williamson stopped the investi
\ CATION IN hn'ine by his refusal to stay the pro
o cess OF the Court. He would have foun,
f upon the examination, that the slaves ha,
: been voluntarily brought by their master in
20 the tree State of Pennsylvania-that the,
became iPso Jacto free and their freedom
{ would have received an additional guarant,
: : in the decision Of his Court, all of which wa
I prevented by Mr.. Williamson's intempcrat
and u~ndignified ambition in the pursuit 9
! martyrdom under difficulties.
In this stand taken by the Supreme Cuul
of Pennsylvania, is seen the efficacy and i'm
c partialty of the Courts acting as a check M
= on the reasonless fury of craftsmanship. /
= = this decision they hesitate not to define clear
! ly and dispassionately the respective juris
dictions of the State and Federal Court.