Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1863-05-28


JUDGE LEAvITT
The Circuit Court Declines to
Issue the Writ.
bPINIou OF THE JUDGE IN FULt.
At ten O clock on Saturday morning the
Circuit Court room was crowded TO hear the
decision Of Judge Leavitt in the application
Of U. l.. vallandigham for writ Of habeas
corpus. The following is the decision ofthe
Court:
Er parte-C. L. Vlllandighans-Ha-
beas Cdrpus. s.lcr-4 laots
This case is before the Court on the pc
tition Of Cletheut L. Vallandigham, citi-
sen Of Ohio, alleging that he was unlawfully
arrsxted at his homo in Dayton, In this
State, on the night Of the 5th Of May, inst. /,
by detachment Of soldiers Of the army Of
the United States; acting under the orders
of Ambrose Il. Burnside, a Major General
in the army Of tho United States, and
brought, against his will, I'd the city of Gin.
ciHnati, where he has been subjected 70 a
trial before Military Commission, and is
his liberty. The petitioner also AYERS that
he is not in the land or naval service OF the
United States, and has not been called into
dctive service in the militia of any State;
and that his arrest, detention and trial, ns
set forth In his petition, are illegal, and in
violation of the Constitution OF the United
States. The prayer is. that writ Of hdbeds
corpus may issue requiring General Burn
side to produce the body Of the petitioner
before this Court, with the cause OF his cap
tion and detention. Accouipauying the pc.
tjtion is a statement OF the charges or speci.
ications on which he alleges he was tried
before the Military Commission. For the
purposes Of this decision it is not necessary
to notice these charges specially, but il may
be stated IN brief that they impute to the
petitiOner the utterance Of suDdry disloya
opinions and statements, in q public speech
at the town of Mt. Vernon, in the State Of
Ohio, on the LIST of May inst, with the
knowledge that they did aid and comfor
and encourage those in arms against tht
Government, aud could but induce in hi
hearers distrust in their own Government
and sympathy for those in arms agaius
it, and disposition to resist the laws of tn
land" The petitioner does not state wha
the Judgment Ot the Military Commission is
nor is the Court informed whether he ha
been condemned or acquitted on the charge
exhibited against hiul. a'. 10 al.
1t il proper to remark here, that on tn
pre.entation of the petition the Court state
TO the counsel for Mr.. Vallandiyham thai
according To the usages of the Court, Us we
~ of other Courts Of high authority, til
writ was not grantable of course, and woul
ouly be all wed on sufficient showing thu
il ought to issue. The Court is entirel
satisfied of the correctness Of tho cours
thus indicated. The snl jsct was fully e,
, amined by the learn d Justice Swayn'
, when present, the presiding Judge OF tn
Court, on petition for hdbeas corpu
presented ut the last October Term; cas-
+, to which furll or reference will be pre-
entity made. ! stall now only note the a,
thorties on this point, which seem to
entirely conclusive. Peters SOL, Cushini
r. 285. Hnrd on hibeas corpu3 222, 3,
IN pursuance OF this ruling. an order vi
made by the Court that ITtisc lie given
f General Bdrhsids, Of the bendehcy in y
/ Court Of the application for thc writ, toll
Z end that he might appear by counsel or OF
erwise To oppose the granting OF the writ.
: That distinguished General has according
presented respectful communication to Il
r Court, stating generally aud argumcn cntativ
t " the reasons Of the arrest of Mr. Valla
n digham, and has also authorized able cou
\ sci to represent him in resistance Of the u
% plication for the writ. Aud the case h
d been argued at great length, and with gre
,, ability on the motion for its allowance.
/. II Is proper 20 remark further, that WI
iel the petition was presented, the Court ma
N distinct reference to the decision OF u
N Court in the case Of B .th,,l Rnpert, at Q
ID tobtr Term, 1862, before noticed, as an
le lucrative precedent ioI its action on Il
n application. On full reflection, l do not
IN how it is possible for me, sitting alone
10 the Cncuit Court, to ignore the, decisit
made upon full consideration. by just
Swayne, with the concurrence OF myself, q
i which, as refcrrable 10 oil cases involvi
\ the same principle, must be regarded
~ the law of this Court until reversed by
i hiRher Court, The case of Rupert was 81
". stsntialiy the. same as that Of the pres
- petitioner. He set out in his petition VI
tS lie alleged TO be ON unlawful arrest by
Ia order Of d military officer, on . charge !, !
ia putibg to him acts OF diSoyelty to the q
~, ernment, and sympathy with the REBEL
IA =. n I