Democrat and sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1853-1866, 1861-07-24
EBENSBIRG. Pa WEDNESDAY, JULY 24 1861
THE HABEAs CORPUS CASE.
OPINlON OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF
THE UNITED STATES.
Er Pdrte

Ez Pdrte before the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court of the
john MERRYMAN. U. S., at Chambers
The application in this case for writ of kaGe-
as corpus Is made to under the 14th section
of the Judiciary Act of 1889, which renders effec
tual for the citizen the constitutional privilege of
ha6eds corpus That act gives TO the courts of
the United States, as well as to each Justice of
the Supreme Court, and TO every District Judge
power to grant writs of hGbeds corpus, for the
purpose OF an inquiry into the cause of commit
meGt- The petition was presented to me at
Washington, under the impression that L would
order the prisoner to be brought before me there,
butFs he was, confined in Fort McIIenry, at the
city 81 hal tinfJTe.- which is in my circuit, |
solved TO hear it in the latter city, obedience
to the writ, under the circumstances, would not
withdraw Gen. Cadwallader, who had him IN
charge, from the limits of his military command.
The petition presents the following case The
petitioner resides in Maryland, in Baltimore coun-
ty. While peaceably in his own house with his
family, at Z O'Clock, on the morning of the 25th
of May, 1851, it was entered by armed force,
protesting to act under military orders. He was
then compelled to rise from his bed. taken into
custody, and conveyed to Fort McHenry, where
he was imprisoned hy the commanding officer.
without any lawful authority.
The commander of the fort. Gen. George Cad
wallader, by whom he is detained in confinement
in his return to the writ, does not deny any of
the facts alleged in the petition. He states that
the prisoner was arrested by order Of Gen. Keim
of Pennsylvania, and conducted as a prisoner to
Fort AcHenry by his order. and placed in his
(Gen. Cadwallader's) custody to be there detain-
ed by him prisoner.
A copy of the warrant. or order, under which
the prisoner was arrested. was demanded by his
counsel, and refused. And il is not alleged in
the return that any special act, constituting
offence against the laws of the United States has
been charged against him on oath. but he appears
to have been arrested on general charges of trea-
son and rebellion, without proof, and without
giving the names of witnesses, specifying the
acts, which. in the judgment of the military Off
GERS constituted these crimes. And having TIE
prisoner thus in custody, under these vague and
unsupported accusations, he refuses To obey the
writ of hdbeGs cOIpuS, upon the ground that he
is duly authorized by the President to suspend it.
The case, then, Is simply this. A milit ry
officer residing IL Pennsylvania. issues an order
to arrest a citizen Of Maryland, upon vague and
indefinite charges. without any proof, so far it
appears. Under this order, his house is entered
in the night he is seized prisoner. and con
veyed to Fort McHenry. and there kept in close
confinement. And when a h0beds corptS is serv
ed on the commanding officer, requiring him to
produce the prisoner before Justice Of the Su-
preme Court, in order that he may examine into
the legality of the Imprisonment. the answer of
IS
dent to suspend the writ of hdbeds corpus at his
discretion and. IL the exercise of that discretion,
suspends it in this case, and on that ground refu
ses obedience to the writ.
As the case comes before me, therefore, | url-
deIstand that the President not only claims the
right to suspend the writ of hdbeds corpus him.
SELF at his discretion but to delegate that dscre
tionary power to a miIitary officer, and to leave
it to him to determine whether he will or will or
not obey judicial process that may be served up
on him.
No official notice has been given to the Courts
of Justice, or to the public 10y proclamation, or
otherwise, that the President claimed this power,
and had usei il in the manner stated in the re
turn. And certainly listened to it with some
surprise, for / had considered it one of those
points of constitutional law upon which there
no difference of opinion, and that it was admitted
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 so ex-
tensively ramied rs to Justify, in Mr.. Jeffersons
opinion, the suspension of the writ, he claimed,
on his part, power to suspend it-but com
muniCated his opinion TO Congress, with all the
proofs in his possession, in order that Congress
might exercise its discretion upon the subject and
determine whether the pubic safety required it.
And in the debate which took place upon this
subject, no one suggested that Mr. Jefferson might
exercise the power himself, if In his opinion, the
pubic safety demanded it.
Having, therefore, regarded the question as too
plain and too well settled 70 be open to dispute
if the commanding officer had stated that upon
his responsibility, and in the exercise of his
own discretion he refused obedience to the writ,
[ should have contented myself with referring to
the clause of the Constitution and the construc-
ton it received from every Iurist and statesman
OF that day. when the of Burr was before
them. But being thus officially notified that the
privilege Of the writ had been suspended under
the orders. and by the authority of the President
and. believing. as do, that the President has
exercised power which he does not possess un-
der the Constitution. proper respect for the
high Office he fills requires me to state plainly
and fully, the grounds of my opinion to show
that | have not ventured to question the legality
of his act without a careful and deliberate exami
nation of the whole subject.
The clause of the Constitution which authorizes
the suspension of the privilege of the writ of
ha6eas corpus, is in the ninth section of the fist
article.
This article is devoted to the legislative depart.
ment of the U. s., and has not the slightest ref
erenee TO the Executive Department. 1t begins
by providing that all legislative powers therein
granted shall be vested in Congress of the u. S..
which shall consist of a Senate and House of Rep
resentatives." And after prescribing the manner
in which these two branches of the legislative de
partment shall be chosen, it proposes to enuIner-
ate specially the Legislative powers which it
thereby grants, and legislative powers it expressly
prohibits, and at the conclusion of its specifca-
tions a clause is inserted, giving Congress ." the
power to make all laws which may be necessary
and proper for carrying into execution the fore
going powers, and all other powers vested by the
Constitution in the government of the Z. s. or
in any department or Office thereof"
The power of legislation granted by this clause
is by its words carefully confined to the specific
objects before enumerated But as this limitation
was unavoidably somewhat indefinite, it was
deemed necessary to guard more effectually GER
tain great cardinal principles essential to the lib
10 ric- and