Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-04-24

The COMMITTEES on Arbitrary Arrests. author
lied by the resolution of the House Of Represen-
tatiyes OF this State in their report thus refer to
the facts connected with the arrest of Judge Coz
STABLE OF Illinois. The comments OF the com
mittee this arrest, are eminently worthy of
consideration at the present time lffurther evil
dence be needed that the party in power is at
tempting TO undermine and overthrow the liber-
ties of the people-their constitutional rights
the arrest of judge CONSTABLE most forcibly IL
Illustrates il:
But leaving these questions. propose to
look more an detail at the classes of cases pre-
sented but, before doing so, we desire to call
special attention to the case of Judge Constable
He isnot a resident of Indiana but he was brought
into the State and imprisoned here. We do this
for the that the principle involved in his
case i closely connected with civil Liberty itself
What is il that distinguishes civilization from
barbaEismf The one IS established upon condi-
tOnal rules-wise, humane, determnate laws;
the other is the sudden growth of prejudice, sell
hShness and passion, afforiing shelter 10 day and
bringing swift destruction to morrow. Upon the
just administration of the conventional rules and
and prescribed laws upon which civilization is
built, depends its highest degree OF perfection
All NflttF, HEftc mt W tH-uf ltt- tlut iHtGlc-
trates OF he law should be learned, independent,
unbiased and honest; aud thus qualified -zthey
must be left 10 act freely. No man could thus
act IT, for at honest error of udgment he should
be subjected To penalties. Every beginner in the
study of law knows this And why is it 7 Be
cause of the nfaIliblli:y of the human mind No
man is infa1lible. A judge must decide one way
or another upon questions presented 10 him. lie
has no choice AS to that He may decide wrong
ii he does The Imprisonment. or even Nors,
punishment of the j udge, would not reverse thai
judgment. For these, among other reasons, it Is
settled aud known principle OF legal urispru
dence. that Magistrate or Judge can not b,
made to respond, either erminally or in 4 images
in civil suit. because OF any official decision h,
may honestly make. This i to support his di z
nifty and authority, and To draw veueration to hi
person, aud submission to his judgment In sup
port of this theory. the Committee would refer t,
the following standard English and American
authorities: Co Lit 294: Just. 122; Dali
r. 100; Yeates' X. 443; n & Nice l6s.
Day r 3l5: Root K oil; 3 Gaines r no.
John. z 2o2; 9 John r. $685. | John r. $50
Marsh. X. 76. South Il. "A; l n III. Rep
374 2 Bay 1863: 8 Wend 46S; 3 Marsh. r. IS
If it were otherwise judges would be the mer,
tools Of those in authority, there would he no in
dependence OF thought or action. No either
: could safely trust bis interests in the keeping o.
to the determination of judiciary thus trammel
ell Communities would be driven back toward
a state of barbarism. Every man would be com
pelled 10 take into his own hands the adudica
ton of his own controversies The strong woul,
govern the weak. Men would combine togethe
an clxss and factonst TO protect each other. Thi.
condition of. things would be anarchy
In the above suggestions we have assumed tina
Judge Constable committed an error in the judi
cial decision upon which he was arrested-but IL
fact he did not, could be amply shown ifitwa
at all necessary to enter into an argument on thu
subject But il is not necessary, for, conceding
for the sake of the argument that he was in erro
i'm his decision, il is not pretended that he decide,
corruptly. and therefore, all the reasons we have
stated, fully apply in favor OF the freedom ant
independence of the judiciary in his case. Again
admitting he wrong in England even. from
whose expressions separated by a long war,
is held by the king that The looks upon the in
depence and uprightne>s of the judges Is essentia
to the impartial administration of iuStice-as on,
of the best securities of the rights and libertie
OF his subjects. and rs most conducive to the hon
or or the crown" Ii Raym, III, Blkst Com.
Jacobs L. Dict 3. 547
\ Judge is not answerable then. even to TN
king, for error of Judgment in a matter O
which he has jurisdiction. | Salk. 391 , Hawk
c. ] see IL
But here, the President rs Commander i'm
Chief, though his subordlnates usurps create
powers than the king IN England dare exercise
for through them he undertakes to determin
when judge has decided right or wrong. and !!
punish him for that decision-not by any regula
course OF judicial proceeding, either civil o
criminal. not vet by the mode pointed ont by III
Constitution for corrupt acts, which Is by i'm
parchment but by an arbitrary Turkish process Q
military deSpOti-m merely because as in tn
case OF Mr. Green. these gentlemen may beiev
they are backed by six hundred thousan
bayonets."
1t is time that the people should arouse to
just sense of the great danger to their lberite:
when tie men and the monev they have placed /.
the disposal OF the Government thus boast
ingly diverted from the purpose for which the
were furnished.