M'arthur Democrat. (McArthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1853-1865, 1861-06-27


even in England, that the writ has,
upon various pretexts and occasions,
been suspended, whereby persons az.
pretended upon suspicion have spt-
cred a long imprisonment. sometimes
from design, and sometimes because
they were forgotten, the right to Sus.
pend 1t Is expressly confined to cases
of rebellion or invasion, where the
public safety may require it. A very
Just and wholesome restraint, which
cuts down at a blow a fruitful means
Of oppression, capable Of being abused
in bad times to the worsl Of purposes.
Hitherto no Suspension Of the writ
have ever been authorized by Con.
gress since the establishment Of the
Constitution. 1t would seem, as the
power is given to Congress to sus-
pend the writ of habeas corpus in cases
OF rebellion or invasion, that the right
to Judge whether the exigency had
arisen, must exclusively belong to
that bo1y." 3 Story's Com. on the
Constitution, section /, 336. .a 5aas
And Chief Justice Marshall, in de.
livering the opinion Of the Supreme
Court in the case OF ex parte Bollnan
and Swartout, uses this decisive Ian,
guage in 4 branch, 95; ut may be
worthy Of remark that this act (speaki
ing of the one under which am pro,
cecding) was passed by the first Con.
gress of tie United States, sitting
under q Constitution which had de.
clared "that the privilege Of the writ
Of habeae corpus should not be sus.
pended, unless, when, in case OF rebel.
lion or invasion, the public safety
might require it." Acting under the
immediate influence Of this injunction,
they, must have felt, with peculiar
force, the obligation Of providing ef
ficient means by which this great
Constitutional privilege should receive
life and activity; for if the means be
not in existence, the privilege itself
would be lost, although no law for it's
suspension should be enacted. Under
the impression OF this obligation they
give to all the Courts in power Of
awarding writs Of habeas corpus" p q
And again, in page 101:
"lfany time the -pnblic safety should
require the suspension Of the powers
vested by this act In the Courts of the
I United States, it is for the Legislature
to say 90. That question depends on
political considerations. on which the
Legislature is to decide. Until the
Legislative will be expressed, the Court
can only see it's duty, and duty must
obey the law" .rsr1,, W. sr, M
] can add nothing to these clear and
emphatic words of my great predeces-
sor. aua-H 'ag'"o ''.'.'' a'N
But the documents before me show
that the military authority in this
cause has gone far beyond the mere
suspension of the privilege of the writ
ofhabeas corpus. 1t has, by force Of
arms, thrust aside the judicial au-
thorities and officers to whom the
Constitution has confined the power
and duty of interpreting and admin.
istering the laws, and substituted a
| military government In its place, to
be administered and executed by mill
tary officers; for at the time these pro-
ceedings were had against John Mer-
ryman, the District Judge of Mary
| land-the 9 Commissioner appointed
under the act Of Congress-the Dis
tricI Attorney and the Marsball-all
reside in this city Of Baltimore, few
miles only from the home Of the priD'
oner. ..,. ..g
l. Up to that time there had never
been the. slightest resistance or OBJ
strnction to the process Of any court Of
judicial officer Of the United States il
| Maryland, except by the military au
thority. And If military officer o.
any other person had reason to believe
that the prisoner had committed any
offense against the laws Of the United
States, it was his duty to give infor
nation Of the fact, and the evidenct
to support it, 10 the District Attorney
ard it w,uld then have become the
duty Of that officer to bring the matter
before the District Judge Of Commits
sioner, and ifthere was sufficient legs
evidence to justify his arrest the Judg'
or Commissary would have issued
warrant to the Marshal to arrest him
and upon the hearing Of the part,
would have Leld him to bail or com
} mitted him for trial, according to th
character of the ofense as it appeare,
, iu the testimony, or wonld have dis
> charged him Immediately if there va
, not sufficient evidence to support, th
accusation. pld'af
{ There was no danger of any obstrut
! ton or resistance to the action Of th
: civi! authorities, and therefore D
. reason whatever. for the interpcsitio
of the military, And yet, under thes