The Lansing state Republican. [volume] (Lansing, Mich.) 1855-1874, 1863-07-29

| few years ago a man BY the name of Booth
was arrested and imprisoned in Wisconsin, for
the violation of law OF Congress. The Su
preme Court of that State issued a writ OF haJe-
as corpus to inquire into the cause of his res
traint, and after examination discharged him, OH
the ground that the law was unconstitutional
and the Imprisonment therefore illegal. A writ
of error was brought upon this decision, and the
Supreme Court of the United States reversed it,
holding that where a person was restrained OF
MS liberty under the National authority, no State
Judge or Court had right to inquire into the
legality of the restraint, and he could have re.
lief only in the National Courts. We have
distinct recollection that this decision was hailed
with rapture by the Democratic press who did
not fail to express their satisfaction that State
courts had been properly rebuked in their at
tempt to override the National authority, nor
to improve the opportunity to remind their op-
pOnents that duty required of them to obey
without hesitation the decisions of the courts.
The opinion in Booths case, was delivered BY
Chief Justice fancy, aud it was regarded as set
ting disputed point and has been recognized
as authority by the courts ever since The Su-
preme court of this State, not long since, had
the same question before them and recognized
this case as conclusive upon the question
But there are in the city of New York and
elsewhere, number of State Judges who, for
the past two years have made it principal part
OF their business, in open defiance of this decis
ion and OF the authority of that Supreme Court
over which the undying fancy still presides, to
issue wrts of habeds corpus for the relief from
imprisonment OF persons held under National
authority. Men held as soldiers have been thus
released deserters from the National army have
been discharged when captured by their officers,
aud in one instance, at least a spy was taken
from the hands OF National officer and dschsr-
ged by State Judge on the ground of ilegality
in his arrest. Aud within week the telegraph
has informed US that when leader in the New
York mob, seized by the authority for treason,
murder and arson, was being taken to place Of
confinement, Judge McCunn Of that city prompt.
" issued a writ of habeas corpus for his release
We have carefully looked into the Democratic
press for some condemnation of these glaringly
legal acts, so utterly destructive Of all law and
order. and defiant and high handed in their
character as to be no more nor less than a spe-
cies OF mob law, by means of which Judges dis
posed to shield crime, are enabled to snatch
criminals from the hands of lawful authority, and
turn them loose to repeat their offences.
But to our utter establishment our search is in
vain. The old homilies on law and order" have
ceased to be repeated for the benefit of refrsc-
tory State courts. Nay, in the opinion of our
Democratic contemporaries to set the laws of
Congress and the decisions of the courts at de-
nance has ceased TO be an offense, and the mill
tary officer who refuses to discharge men caught
IN the act of murder, pilsgs ard treason at the
command Of State Judge, who has no more
Jurisdiction of the case than the Emperor OF
China, is denounced as tyrant, and the whole
brood of ccpperhead blood bounds are set to
baying at him as a minion of Lincoln's despo
tism.
These facts are so apparent that every man
and every child can see and appreciate them
Why is it that Judges are thus encouraged to
set the laws at defiance, and that military off, !
GERS in the discharge OF their plain duty are
abused and denounced for not surrendering their
prisoners at the illegal and moderate demand |
OF an official who seeks to use bis judicial posi-.
ton to thvart the purposes of Justice, WHY
are the State Judges of New York city applaud. |
ed for doing the same thing now when it is set
tied to be illegal, that the State Judges of Wis
consin were denounced for before it was so set. |
tied, and while it might fairly be considered a.
open question:
We have said that every child could see ard
appreciate these facts; and every person wio
has given the events of the last few wears snv
attention understands perfectly the reason. II
is because Booths offense was committed against
the institution Of Slavery, while the offences
now being committed are IN the interests OF
Slavery. The former was an objectionable sin
but offences in the interest of slavery are no;
only pardonable, but it is even doubted if one
can be eOHstitttiOFadly punished or restrained of
bis liberty Who kills his neighbOr, burns church