M'arthur Democrat. (McArthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1853-1865, 1863-05-14

JuuICIaIy Act conlerIeu powers upon
the Supreme Court of the United
States t. issue the writ, makes the
following remark: "Acting uudel
the immediate influence of this in
Junction, Congress must have felt
with peculiar torce, the obligation o
providing efficient means by which
this great constitutional privile G {
should receive life and activity; for il
the means be not in existence, the
privilege itself would be lost, altho
no law for its suspension should be
enacted. ~ Cranche's Rep. 75' II
is very clear that this great iurist was
looking to the Legislative department
for power to suspend the writ; else
why speak ofa law TO be enacted, by
which its suspension might be accom-,
Iplished 2 Such terms would be alto
getI.er inapt and ouL Of the place in
their application to an executive ex-
ercise Of the power Of suspension. -
The very latest work on Constitution
al Law, published in 1857, thus speaks
Of tine question: The writ of IiabeSs
Corpus VAS fret secured to English
liberty by the famous statute Of 81
Charles II ; but in England, like all
other guarantees, ofprivate right, it
is subject to the pleasure OF Paria
ment. Here, we have fixed it in the
constitution, and declare that it can
only be forfeited during periodic Of
warfare or rebellion. Practically, as
yet, Congress has never authorized
the suspension Of the writ. 1t is un-
dcrotood that as tho Ultimate power is
vested in Congress, the right to judge
OF the expediency Of its exercise IS
ALSO ABSOLUTE IN THAT BODY" Sedg.
aoio%s COnst. LG,0, 568. Another
late law writer thus lays down the
doctrine; The llabeas CorpuO can
be suspended only by authority of the
legislature. + IL Whether
-
this writ ought tO be suspended de-
peudo on political considerations, OF
WHICH THE LEGIsLATURE IS 70 DECIDE. "
i Bouyier's Institutes, 91.
In addition to these very plain and
decided views Of distinguished judges
and lawyers. we have the express do,
cision OF Chief Justice TANEY, of the
Supreme Court OF the United States,
OF the Supreme Court Of Wisconsin,
aud of the DiStrict Court Of the Uni.
ted States for the Western District of
New York. Judge TANEY, in deci-
dingthe Msrrimau case, laid down
the following propositions: list. The
President, undcr the constitution aud
the laws Of the United States, can not
suspend the privilege Of the writ Of
Habeas Corpus, nor authorize any
military officer to do 50. 2d. A mil
itarv officer has no right to arrest
and detain any person net subject to
the rules and articles Of war, for a.
offense against the laws OF the United
States, except in aid of the judicial
authority, and subject to its control f;
and if the party is arrested by the
military, it is the duty Of the officer to
deliver him over immediately to the
civil authority, 20 be dealt with accor,
ding to law" Judge HALL, in the
Benedict case, said "Tne deliberate
opinion of Marshall, Story, and Mar
tin, and Of the other Justices Of the
Supreme Court, who concurred in
the opinion of the Chief, in the case
of Bolman and Svartwout(4 Cranch,
75) supported, as they are in my opin.
ion, by unauswerable arguments, are
decisive of the question, and conStrain
me to decideithat the President, with
out the authority of Congress has no
constitutional power to suspend the
writ Of Habeas Corpus in the United
States" The Supreme Court of Wis,
consin, only a few weeks ago, upon
an application Tor writ Of habeas
corpus, against the operation and va
lidity of martial law, as declared by
the President of the United States,
and the orders from the War Depart
ment, decided that tue writ was not
suspended. This authority is the
more pointed, for the reason that the
Court was manitestly anxious to sus.
tain the action OF the government, as
is evident from the tone Of the whole
opinion, if they could tbaVe conscien,
tiously done 80. Chief Justice DIX
ON, in announcing the opinion of the
Court, allowing the writ, says: And
first, | think the President has no
power, in the sense of the 9th section
Of the First Article Of the Oonstitu-
tion OF the United States, to suspend
the privilege Of tue writ of habeas
corpus. tbs, in my Judgment, a
legislative and not an executive act,
aud the power is vested in Congress-
Upon this question, it seems to me,
that the reasoning Of Chief Justice
TANEY, in erparte Msrriman, is IN.
IL