Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1863-08-05
LAW FOR CONSPIRATORS.
From n. Y. Tribune

From n. u Tribune
Casting about for means wherewith to multi
fy the Conscription Law and resist the Draft.
dis!oyal men and newspapers seemed TO have
agreed with considerable unanimity on a plan
gos aEraying the State agaiust the National
Government By help of Habeas Corpus aud
the State Courts. Ii was proposed that who
ever was drafted should sue out a habeas cor
pas from some Cour. presided over by dis
loyal Judge, and that upon tire hearing on the
writ the Judge should pronounce the Conscrip-
ton Act unconstitutional, and therefore dis
'harGe the conscrip'. who was to 60 on his
wlv rejoicing. Tie recent instructions of
Provost Marshal General Fry. iu anticipation
Of this purpose, direct his subordnates not to
produce the deserfer or conscrpt before a
State Court in obedience To writ of habeas
corpus and the conspratOrs whose plot is thus
frustrated have made haste to denounce the
Instructions as an outrage upon the judiciary
md the rights of the States. They propose
that Marshal refusing obedience 10 the writ
,hali be proceeded against by attachment for
contempt; that the Sheriff serving that pro
cess shall appeal TO the State Militia To en-
'orce II, and finally that Gov. Seymour shall
Iut himself 1t the head OF his State troops in
olttle array against the National forces. By
ne time this is accomplished, it is expected
hat very material diversion in favor of the
E-eelon will have been accomplished or in
''her words that n ortbern Rebe llion shall be
organized with military force All this is
'aseG upon the supposed respect of the peo-
PIE for legal forms and Constitutional rights,
anu might be IN that view very good plot but
.oF one consideration. The Supreme Court of
te United States has already decided the :
question on which this issue is to be made,
'6d has decided it adversely to the authority
. The State Courts
Lhe case of -7bieman, agf. Booth, q How
H1as Supreme Court Reports, 500, is we'll /
AH""n, both to the legal profession and he /
country, as that in which the effort OF the Su- !
'leme Court OF Wisconsin to protect citi- t
-fe oi that State against Federal persecution /
"Ss unsily defeated. Booth was arrested on
united States Commiss toner's warrant. for
"'aihg and abetting the escape of an alleged /
'"g'tiFe who had been arrested under the Fu.
g"i'e Slave Act of 1850. He was discharged
'loh The custody of the q. S. Marshal by the t
'apFeme Court Of the State, on the ground
'Ial the Fugitive Slave Act was unconstitn-
"0Hai exactly the ground on which il is now
proposed that conscript shall be discharged,
. 'uat the two cases are in all respects den-
N'A'. Booth was legally in the custody Of
'1s u ,. Marshal, just as the conscript will /
legally in the custody of the Provost Mar
s'A'' But the United States Court decides
-'' 0hiy that he should not have been dis
~"a'eed oecsuse the law was constitutional,
goes further and declares it to be the duty 7
'us aarshal not to obey the precspt of the
;. -'' authority. He is to make known to the
'e Judge that he holds the prisoner under
'H'ed States process, but he is not to pro-
10 Tie prisoner in obedience to the writ of
as corpus from the State Court This de-
H''0n Is the unanimous opinion of the SUI
r'e"e Court of the United States, and is pro-
0-neeo sy no less person than Mr.. Chief
N'''ee faney himself. II ID 50 fol! and en-