Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1863-10-08

THE HABEAS CORPUS.


them, being brought before Judge SpRAGUE for
bis consideration, the respondent for the United
States nerposed the proclamation of the Presi-
dent, suspending the privilege OF the writ, as an
objection to further proceedings.
TO this OF lection three answers were made by
the counsel for petitioners. First that these writs
were issued before the proclamation of the Presi-
dent and for that reason are not subject to its ope
ration second that the proclamation does not en-
brace like the present; and third if it does,
it is not warranted by the act of Congress upon
which it is FOUNDED
We give so much of the learned Judges argu-
ment as relates to the second of these heads:
1T is in the next place contended that if such be the
true construc len Of the proclamation IL is not author
lied by the statute Of the Sd of March 1868 upon which
il i. founded Thai statute begins as follows: That
during the present beon the President Of the United
States whenever, his Judgment the public safety may
require it, is authorized to suspend the privilege of the
Of babess corpus any throughout the United
States, or any part thereof f..... ......
The President is thus authorized spend the pryi-
lege any hrou bout the United States No ca
isexceptrd Not one withheld from the operation of
this power All within it's scope and the cases nov
before clearly comprehended IN this Language.
But il urged that this comprehensive and unrestricted
language ia limited by what follows, which is IN these
words And whenever and wherever the said privilege
shall be suspended, aforesaid, military other eff
shall be compelled in answer 10 any writ OF habeas
corpus, return the body Of any persons de-
ia BY him by authority of the President but upon the
certificate, under oath, Of the officer having charge of any
detained that such person is detained by him
prisoner under authority of the PRESIDE MT, further pro-
ceedngs uGder the writ of babeas corpus shsl be su'
pended by the Judge court having issued the said writ
1t assumed III the argument for the petitioner that this
provision ends only to persons IN confinement by pe
cal authority of the President State political prs
oners and that does not emrac those held under the
ordinary usual operation If any code or system civil"
military
Without pausinp to inquire whether this assumption
be well founded will for the present at least consider il
be and that the special provision IN this cause OF the
statute only Glars Of cases What - this
special provision 1t is that when the privilege Ia 81
pended as such prisoners the officers by whom they
OBTAINED shall not be compelled TO return their bodies
10 answer To any of habeas corpus, aud that npon
making certificate upon oath that they detained rs
prisoners by authority of the President the Court shall
proceed further Here two things erjoined in this
class Of The officer is not to BE- compelled TO pro-
the body and his certificate under oath OF the cause
Of detention to be conclusive. Does the circumstance
that this special provision extends only to those
prove that other cOnt Inpated in the previous
clause of the statute and that the generality of it's Ian
gusge should De restrained and limited TO the single class
10 which the subsequent clause s applicable lie such
deduction Legitimate The writ OF habeas corpus had
long been 10 frequent in great variety OF cases One
class under the civil code when were held by
color Of legal process, iDfanr lunacs other
wise Another class consisted Of persons detained under
military authority soldiers prisoners of war or
spies, having committed some offence subjectDg
them military Restraint. The writ of habeas corpus
uuque ouaby applicable to all these and bad long
been actually and frequently used therein. This must
have been we'll known to the members Of Congress- and
when they declared IN this statute that the resident
shou be authorized to suspend the privilege IN any
throughout The United ates they we're well that
each and all these embraced in that language
Indeed Of the classrs which have lust referred to
have been especially present to their minds in
ne1on with this very matter of the suspension OF the
privilege.
Several instances had previously occurred in which
writs Of habeas corpus had commanded officers TO re
the body Of soldier and obedience thereto had been
refused Oae such case 10 particular is in my reco
lAptID N IA oil 0f
ton An officer OF the army having refused TO bring up
soldier IL obedience to writ OF hsbeas corpus which
had been granted BY Court of the United States the
Judges Of that Court severay delivered opinions insisting
emphatcsly upon the legal authority OF the Court and
one OF them snimadverted in terms OF much in
Ggustion upon the refusal of the officer These pro-
Cerdngs and opinions were published the newspapers
and of general notoriety. The refusal to obey the
writ by subordinate officer in the city Of Washing
ton, au1 uLder the eye of the President himself Con-
must have been aware that the President claimed
and disposed to the right to suspend the
privilege in the very class of before me, and yet
10 declaring what authority the President should have To
suspend the privilege, they used language clearly EN-
brscing this class.
That language to be understood and carried into
effect according to t fair import unless there BE-
thing in the subse quent portion Of the statute Inconsistent
herewith Is there any thing The terms of the first
clause, We have comprehend three classes OF
casesOne where persons held IN esta Mt under the
ordinary administration operation Of the military code
ystem another is where persons held under the
ordinary operation working OF the civil code system
the term evil beng used in cOntradstincton To military
Iu the sctcal working Of both these systems it some
times occurs either by stake design that persons
wrougfy held il confinement and seek relief by the writ
Of hab,as corpus he third class where persons
he'd through the extraordinary nterpostou Of the Pres
deut aud his special authority As to such prrons the
second clause IL the statute a6s made special provision
10 Of suspension Of the privilege relieving the off,
Ger FRI M obi cation to return the body and making bis
certificate conclusive But the existence Of this special
provision way interfere with the suspension Of
the privilege in other but they left to the ope
of the suspension just If that special provision
had never been made.
exist bring the prisoner within the class Of persons
to whom the privilege suspended and such facts must
be forth in the return Of the officer and may be con
tested and during the condensation the court will require
that the prisoner shall be within its control and brought
up for that purpose. For example, if the proclamation
had suspended the privilege in the Of persons held 81
soldiers Hnd who had bee, held for the term OF three
months then the officers return must have set forth both
those facts ind both might have been contested BY the
present proclamation only Of these tacts ia required
nane that be is held a soldier but that may be con-
trOyerted AID may imagine case in which this might
be done with 1t may be made TO appear for IN
stance that the person held in restraint by the Cce
child tender age, and that the return Of the ticer
that he is held soldier false pretence Such is the
of procedure ordinary But, IN the eX
raOrdnsy 81 persons held by the special authority
Of the President, the Legislature has declared that he
certificate OF the officer snail be conclusive, and that he
shall not be compelled to produce the prisoner In not
necessary that we should fakom the for this
cuar provision But il uay be remarked that Congress
with respect to political prisoners appear to have thought
il best that the courts should have any custody Of the
body try question upon habeas corpus but leave