The Lansing state Republican. [volume] (Lansing, Mich.) 1855-1874, 1863-08-05

scy is conferred by the Constitution; that the
men who framed that instrument clearly saw that
il was necessary that many of the rights Of
sovereignty which the States originally posses
sed, must be ceded to the General Government /;
and that in the sphere of action asst igned 10 t,
- il should be supreme and strong enough 70 ex-
Il" ecute its own laws by It's own tribunals, with
." cut interruption from State or fros State au-
thorities." See q HoEsrd's Supreme Court
Reports, PIP. 5l4-524) Judge Taney says -
Eve DO not question the authority OF state Court or
Judge who authorized by the laws Of the state 10
the wit VI hADeas corpus, . Issue Il II ANY case
where the party IS imprisoned within It's territorial lin
its provided Il does not appear when tue Application d
made that the DersOn imprisoned j. IN custody under
the authority " the United states The court Judge
has right 70 inquire 10 tnis mode Of proces1lg- Tor
and BY what authority the prisoner II con
fined within the territorial limits Of the state sovereign
y and 10 y the duty Of the Marshal Or other person
having custody Of the prisoner, make known to
the Judge Court by proper returl the authority by
which be holds him custody. This right 10 inquire
by process Of ha0eas corpus an1 the duty q the oce
10 make return, grow necessarily Out Of the complex
character Of Government and the existence OF Two
distinct and seperate .0veregu,es within the ter
riioria space, each o them restricted II us powers and
each within sphere of action prescribed by tie Con
u the United States independent Of the other
Bot after the return IS made aud the state Judge Court
udicay apprised that the party is il custody under
the authority Of the United states they proceed
further. They then know that the prisoner IS within
and that neither the VIII Of habeas corpus any 9th
process issued under state authority pass over
the line of division between the two s0veregnties He
l. then within the dominion and exclusive jurisdiction
Of the United States. II be has committed any oteuce
against their their tribunals can punish him
II be IS wrongfuly imprisoned then judicial tribunals
release him and afford him redress Aud although,
have said II is the duty OF the Marshal or other
person holding him TO make known BY proper return
the authority under which be detans him, il Is al the
same time mperavely his duty obey the process Of
the United states u hold the prisoner custody under
and refuse obedience 20 the mandate process n
any other Government And nsequenty, Il II hts duly
not the prisoner suffer him 10 be taken, be
fore State Judge Court upon habeas corpus issued
under that authority No state Judge Court, after
they jldiciay informed that the party imprI-nn
ed under the authority Of the United states, has any
right interfere with him, - require him = Be
brought before them. And the authority Of state,
the form Of judicial process or otherwise, should at
tempt control the Marshal other authorized ocer
agent Of the United any respect the Gus
Ody Of his prisoner II would DO his duty 10 resist Il,
call TO his AID any force that might be necessary
10 maintain the authority Of law against Illegal interfe-
No judicial process, whatever form II may as
sumo have any lawful authority outside OF the lin
its Of the jurisdiction Of the Court Judge by which ii
is issued and attempt 10 enforce Il beyond these
boundaries is nothing less than awess violence"
We can add nothing to the force of the ar
gument It covers every point in the issue pro-
posed 10 be raised between the opponents Of
cOnscriptiOn and the Government. The cases
are entirely analogous The cOnscript is virtu-
ally, if not literally, in the custody Of the Pro-
vost Marshal from the moment bis name is
drawn. He il within the Jurisdiction of the Fed
cra authority, and smenable to the Federal laws
In the expressive words Of Judge Taney. he is
within the exclusive dominion of the United
States" He is the subject Of "snoher sOve-
reignty," and no writ of habeas corpus, or any
other process issued under State authority" can
reach him
Nor is this all. According to Judge Taney it
becomes the imperative duty" of the Marshal
to hold bin in custody, aud refuse obeliencs to
the mandate or process of any other GouerR
ment" He cannot bow even to the suthOrita
tive fat of Judge McCunnl He cannot suffer
him 4" to be taken before a State Judge or Court
upon a habeas corpus issued under State author
ity." In case it is attempted, as s urged by the
World, to assert State jurisdiction over him, the
representative of the National Government must
according to Judge Tsney, call to his aid any
force that might be necessary TO maintain the
authority OF (Federal) law against illegal inter
ence."
Rscollect ICE are not urging these arbitrary"
measures on the part of the Federal Govern
nent; we are only giving what Judge Taney-
the father OF latter-day judicial Democracy
saws should be done. He may be heretical; he
may be even Black Republican" in disguise
but there are his words confronting and rebuk-
ing the revolutionary counsels OF " Conserva-
tive" organs. Read and "inwardly digest
them Albany Evening Journal.