Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1861-06-13
THE MERRYMAN CASE.

Il llA AL IL IL IL Ill IlIN OXlOlIS
OPINION OF CHEF JUSTICE TANEY.
The following is the opinion in the habcas
corpus case of John Merryman, filed by
Chief Justice Taney, of the Supreme Court
of the United States, in ''thc Circuit Court
of the United States for the fourth circuit in
and for Maryland district"
T.. .,o,to Before the Chief Justice OF
Joa" Me'7y"a" w. u 81 S"ns1E at GIao5eys' aU1ra nc
The application in this case for writ of
hobeas corpus is made to me under the 14th
section Of the judiciary act of 1889. which
renders effectual for the citizen the constitu-
tional privilege of the ha6eas corpus. That
act gives to the courts of the United States,
rs we'll as to each Justice of the Supreme
Court, and to every District Judge, power
to grant writs of habeas corpus for the pur-
pose of an inquiry into the cause of commit
ment. The petition was presented to me
at Washington, under the impression that
would order the prisoner to be brought
before me there, but as he was confined in
Fort McHenry, at the city Of Baltimore,
which is in my circuit, resolved to hear it
in the latter city; as obedience to the writ,
under such circumstances, would not with
draw Gen. Cadwallader, who had him in
charge, from the limits of his military COM
mand.
The petition presents the following case ::
The petitioner resides in Maryland, in Bal
timnre ecannty-W While naaeaahlv in his own
house, with his family, it was, at two O o'clock
on the morning of the 25th of May, 1861,
entered by an armed force, protesting to act
under military orders. He was then COM
pelled to rise from his bed, taken into GUS
tody and conveyed to Fort McHenry, where
he is imprisoned by the commanding officer,
without warrant from any lawful authority
The commander of the fort, Gen. George
Cadwalladcr, by whom he is detained in
confinement, in his return to the writ, does
not deny any of the facts alleged in the pc
tition. He states that the prisoner was ar
rested by order of Gen. Keim, of Pennsyl-
vania, and conducted as prisoner to Fort
McHenry by his order, and placed in his
(Gen Cadwallader's) custody to be there
detained by him as prisoner
A copy Of the warrant, or order, under
which the prisoner was arrested, was de-
manded by the counsel, and refused. And
it is not alleged in the return that any spe-
cifc act, constituting an offense against the
laws of the United States, has been charged
against him upon oath; but he appears to
have been arrested upon general charges of
treason and rebellion, WITHOUT proof, and
without giving the names of the witnesses,
or specifying the acts, which in the judg-
ment of the military officer, constitute these
crimes. And having the prisoner thus in
custody upon these vague and unsupported
accusations, he refuses to obey the writ of
habeas corpus, upon the ground that he is
duly authorized by the President to sus-
pend it,
The case, then, is simply this A mill
tary officer, residing in Pennsylvania, issues
an order to arrest a citizen of Maryland
upon vague and indefinite charges, without
any proof, SO far as appears. Under this
order his house is entered in the night; he
is seized as a prisoner, and conveyed to Fort
McHenry, and there kept in close confne
ment. And when haJeas corpus is served
on the commanding officer, requiring him
to produce the prisoner before Justice Of
lue DupFCme COuTG, Ill Ofuef CnaG he may
examine into the legality of the imprison-
inent. the answer of the officer is, that he
is authorized by the President to suspend
the writ of habeas corpus at his discretion,
and, in the exercise of that discretion, sus-
pends it in this case, and on that ground
refuses obedience to the writ
AS the case comes before me, therefore,
I understand that the President not only
claims the right to suspend the writ of ha-
beas corpus himself, at his discretion, but
to delegate that discretionary power to a
military officer, and to leave it to him to de-
tcrmine whether he will or will not obey
judicial process that may be served upon
him.
No official notice has been given to the
Courts of Justice, or to the public. by pro-
clamation, or otherwise, that the President
claimed this power, and had exercised it in
the manner stated in return. And [ GER
tainly listened to it with some surprise for
had supposed it to be one of those points
of constitutional law upon which there was
no difference of opinion, and that it was ad-
mitted on all hands that the privilege of the
writ could not be suspended, except by act
of Congress.
When the conspiracy of Which Aaron
Burr was the head became SO Formidable.
and was 50 extensively ranlifed, as 10 justi-