The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1863-05-21
Vallandigham Habeas
Corpus Case.
BEFORE JUDGE LEAviTT.
THE CIRCUIT COURT DECLINES
TO fHsUE THE wafT.
Opinion oftiir j Judge i'm Full.


iffoH NE Stheihnstl 0sxstte, OF hoodsy
AT ten o'clock on Saturday morning
the Circuit Court room was crowded ID
hear the decision of Judge Leavitt on the
application OF 4. l.. Va lsndighsm for q
writ Of hoJeas corpus. The following i.
the decision of the Court:
Ex Porte G. l.. IaHamdtgAam-
Habeas Corpus.
This ease 10 before the Court on the
petition OF Clement l.. yallondiahsm. a
citizen of Ohio. alleging that he was uu.
luwiuily arrcsfed nj his l,nine 10 Ds,ion,
IN thi. s.ate. on The night of The oh Of
May, inst, BY detschm. N. Of soldiers ol
the army Of the Unit. d States. setting
under the orders of Ambfosc Z. Burn.
side. Major General in the army of the
CbIted States. and brought, sgainst his
will, to TIE city of Cincinnati, where he
hes been sui ject 10 trial before Mill
tsry Commission, and Is still retained 10
custody, and nsrrsined Of his liberty.
The PETITIONER sl.o ayers that lie 10 mol 10
the laud or navsi service OF the United
States, and has not b~en called iste active
service in the militia of any STATE and
that his arrest. detention and t.ial, n set
iofth IN his peti.ion are illegal, and in
violation OF tie Constitution Of the Upl,sd
States. The prayer 10, that . w,m Of
hoLea' corpus nay issue requiring Gen
ersl burnside to produce the body Of the
petitioner before ihis Court, with the
cause of his capture aad detention. Ae
conpan,ing the petition Is = statement OF
the charges or specifications Oh which he
alleges be was isied bef,re The Military
Con mission. For the purposes OF ,his
decision IL Is Lot necessary to notice
.Eese charges specially, but il may lie
stated in brief that they impute to the
petitioner the uttersnce OF sund,y disloJ
NJ opinions and statements, 10 y public
speech At Mount Vernon, iu tho S.sie OF
Ohio, on tho 1T Of May inst, with the
kuowkdge "thst they did aid 4od com
tort and encourage those in arms against
the Cove nment, and could but induce in
bis hssIers di.aiusi in their own Govern.
meat and = sympathy for those in arms
against IL, and disposition 10 resist the
laws Of the land" The petitioner does
not state what the judgment Of The Mill.
,sry Commission 10, nor is the Court in
formed whether he las been cnnde mned d
or acquitted on the charges exhibited
against him.
IL 10 proper 10 remark here. that on the
presentation of the petition the Court
stated to the counsel for Ar. Yallandig
ham that. according to the ussgcs If the
Court, ~ well a. Of ether Courts Of high
authority, the writ WAS not gean,abIc ci
eouFtc, aud would only be 1T sd On q
sufficient showing thai It ouIhl b. j., u...
The copr 10 entirely sat sGef,I ti.e 81
rectness of the copr.t thus Indicate
Tbs subject WIS fully examined by u,e
learned Justice sweyne. when present,
the presiding Judge Of the Court. op u
pf'ition for haJeos corpus, present d at
the last Oclober term a case TO which
further reference viii be made. l shall
now only note the authorities on thi.
point, which seem to be .ea..rp.s eapclu
ave. Peters col, Gushing, II. 285
Hard on habeus corpus. 2.2. 3. 1. 10
pursusncc of this ruling an order was
made By the Court, that notice be given
T. Gencrai Burnside. OF the pendency in
the Court of the spplisstioa Tor tho writ,
to she end that he misht appear hy conn
sci or otherwise " oppose the grsaling oi
the writ. That dislinpp shed usneyal
has acdord nkly pfes~sisd rspectfu.
communication to the Court, stating gen
orally and argumen'stiv,ly the ri sons OF
the arrest Of Mr.. V.lisudisham and hns
slso au'torisei able counsel TO reprc.e n /,
him in resistance Of the spplh.atnn for
the writ. And the c"se has been argued
at great length, and ~ith gsest ability OH
the motion Tor its allowance.
II is ptpper u remark further, that
shen thee petition vas presented, ths
Court made . distinct rsfcvsaae 70 the
decision OF this Courl in the case Of Be-
ibael Rupert. At October Term, 1863, be-
fore not ced. as an authoritative prece
dent FIR its action on this application
Tn tuii reflection. / do not zee how /, Il
possible for me. sitting s!sne in the Cir
euit Court, " ignore tie dsrision, made
upon full consideration by Justice
Swayne, with the concu rrence If mys.lf.
and which. MS referrablc TO all cases in
.sDlying The same principle, musl be 70
gsrded - the law VI this Court until re.
versed by ! higher Court The case oI
Rupert was substantially the same a. thai
of the present petitioner. lie set ont i.
his petition what he alleged to be an un
lawful arrest BY Tue order OF a military
othcer, onsa charge inputing 10 him dis.
loyalty to the Government, and sympathy J
with ,he rebellion against it, and an un.
lswiu deteu.ion aud iuprisoAmeat as the
result Of such ordor. The application
however, In abe ease Of Rupert. differed
from the ono now .hefort the Court, in
this, that ufidayits were exhibited in
tended TO disprovc the charge OF dislyyal
conduct Imputed to bi,u; and also il
this, that there was no pretense or show
ling By Rupert that there had been any ii
vestigatipD Or triai BY any Court Of the
charges made against him.
The petition IN this ease Il addressed
to the Judges Of tho Circuit Court, ana
not 10 single Judge Of that Coust. 4
occurs from the absence Of Mr. Jassie,
Swayne thss she District Judge y nos
holding the Circuit Court, u hsa aalkor