The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1861-06-14

cH'ng contests between the Crown and the peo
pie OF England from the time of Magma Chart
were IL relation to the privilege OF this writ
and they continued until the passage of III
statute of elst Charles ID, commonly known a
the grea: habeas corpus act
lhis statute put an end 10 the struggle, ant
finally and firmly secured the liberty OF the sub
Jet from the usurpatton and oppression of thu
Executive branch OF the Government. II ney
%rthel1sS conferred no new right upon the sub
81, hnt only secured right already existing
r, although the right could not De Justly de-
., there was no efectual remedy against Il.
Hla'Ion. Until the statute Of the 18th G.
William 81, the Judges held their offices at the
pleasure Of the King, and the influences which
he exercised over timid, ime-serving and par
tlian Judges often induced them, upon some pre-
text or another, 10 refuse to discharge the party
although be vas entitled to il by law, or delay
ed their decisions from time to time, so as 10
pFol0ng The Imprisonment OF persons who were
Obnoxious to the King for their political opin-
lons, or had incurred bis resentment in any 9TH
er way.
The great aad inestimable value Of the habeas
corpus act OF the 3lst Charles 2, is that II con-
ANS provisions which compel courts and Judges
sad all parties concerned, to perform their du-
ties promptly, in the manner specified IN the
statute.
passage in Blackstone Commen! lries. show
tlg the ancient state of the law upon this sub
Jact, and the abuses which were practfced thro'
the power and Influence of the Crown, and a
short extract from HalIam's Constitutional HIS
tpry, stating the circumstances which gave rise
TO the passage of this statute, explain briefly,
but fully, all that is material on this subject.
Blackstone, in in his commentaries on the
Laws of England I'D vol, 1873 l34l, SAYS:
10 assert an absolute exemption from i'm
pflsonment 10 all cases is inconsistent with ev-
cry idea ot law and political society, and in the
end would destroy all civil liberty by render
iag its protection impossible
'' But the glory OF the English law consists
Ih clearly defining the times, the causes, and the
extent, when, wherefore, and to what degree
tae imprisonment of the subject NAV be lawful.
ibls it is which induces the absolute necessity
Of expressing upon every commitment the rea-
s9n for which II is made, that the court upon
kabeds corpus may examine into is validity,
aad according 10 the circumstances of the case
sasy discharge, admit 10 bail or remand the pris-
%
"And yet early in the reign of Charles /,
The Court of Kings Bench, relying on some ar
bhfafy Precedents land those perhaps misunder-
stoodl determined that they would not, upon
habeas corpus, either bail or deliver prisoner,
though committed without any cause assigned,
30 case he was committed by the special com
mand of the King or by the Lords of the Prlvy
Council This drew on Parliamentary IN
quiry and produced the Petition of Right 8
Chas. (which recites this Illegal Judgment,
and enacts that no freeman hereafter shall BE-
or detained. But when in the fol-
lowing year Mr.. Selden and others were COM
nitted by the lords Of the Council 10 pursuance
OF his Malesty's special command, under
a general charge OF notable contemplS,
and stirring up sedition against the King
and Government" the judges delayed Tor
two terms Gncluding also the long vacation)
to deliver an opinion how far such charge
was ballable. And when at length they agreed
that II was, they, however, annexed a condition
OF finding sureties for their good behavior,
which still Protracted their Imprisonment, the
Chief Justice, Sir Nicholas Hyde, at the same
lime declaring that 'it they We're again remand
ed tor that cause perhaps the Court would not
afterwards grant habeas corpus, being already
made acquainted with the cause Of the Impris-
onment.' But this was heard with indignation
and establishment by every lawyer present, ac-
cordIng to Mr.. Selden's own account of the
matter, whose resentment was not cooled at the
distance of four and twenty years"
1t is worthy of remark that the offences charg-
I'd against the prisoner in this case, and relied
N Justification for bis arrest and impriSon-
ment, in their nature and character, and in the
loose and vague manner in which they are
stated, bear striking resemblance to those as
signed in the warrant for the arrest of Mr.. Sell
len. And yet, even at that day, the warrant
was regarded as such fragrant violation Of the
rights Of the subject that the delay of the time
serving judges to set him al liberty upon the
fa6eaS corpus issued in his behalf excited unver-
sal indignation al the bar. The extract from Hal
Iam's Constitutional History is equally impress
sive and equally in posnt Ii is in vol. 4: p.
ID.
1t is very common mistake, and not only
among foreigners, but many from whom some
of our constitutional laws might be
to suppose that this statute of Charles
Ii. enlarged in great degree our liberties, and
forms sort OF epoch in their history. But
though very beneficial enactment, and emf
nently remedial in many cases of illegal impris-
onment, it introduced no new principle, nor
conferred any right upon the subject. From
the earliest records of the English law, no free
man could be detained in prison except upon a
criminal charge or conviction, or for civil
debt. In the former case it was always in bis
power to demand of the Court of Kings Bench
a writ OF habeas corpus ad subjicisndum direct
ed to the person OBTAINING him in custody, by
which he was epjoined to bring up the boGy OF
the prisoner with the warrant OF commitment
that the Court might judge of its suficiency and
remand the party, admit him to bail, or dis
charge bIm.accordng to the nature of the charge.
This writ issued of right. and could NOT be re-