New-York daily tribune., 1863-08-31
u.uYS. COppUs- STATE
lOlRT DGtGsiON.

The ncrt.neucc of the decision OF the Suprcm,
Court Of the United Sialcs in AHuasH r. Booth
To cases arising under the ConscnptiOn law, has
again been affirmed by the Supreme Court OF
ihis State. We stated fcw days since the sub
stance Of the opinion Of JudgcE. Darwln Smith,
delivered az Rochester. We now are able Ia
confirm and enforce that decision by the very
elaborate aud able opinion Of Judge Bacon, oi
Utica. on the bcnchoi the Supreme Court ior
tie Fiiih Judicial District. The facts alleged
IN the petition on which the habeas corpus was
originally isucd are not materially different
from the former. one Charles l.. lIopson was
held "a. a dcsorier, under the provisions of the
Conssripiion act 10y rroyos,-Marshal Richard
son. 4 petition, omitting that fact, was pre-
seuted to Judge Bacon and he writ issued. The
Proyosi-Mar-hal made a general return, setting
forth the authority under which be held the
prisoner. and declining to produce him.. An AZ
tachmcnt was moved Tor. and upon mc ton to
vacatc that attachment the case was argued and
the decision given.
Judge Bacon's opinion has special value,
aside from that which il derives from his high
reputation, because it was finally arrived at III
opposition 10 bis first impressions, upon argu-
ment aud examination; and it covers every pos
sibc point that could be raised in similar cases.
Ills language il without qualification:
we sio now prepared 10 d.cus tie question wh h cia'
brrcr. !, OF i. ani upo' which .is decision
who'll, hnse, to vii wi The state Courts entertain OF con
thu. uil,lcton Of case where person l. f'do be n1
under tie authority Of United States and wherc hr ~as 10
Led 1t the time Of the suins Of Tie process Of Tie Slate
Count siae - ia Ia. he H0nsc.f Jo'm N a. n m i
BE- easnerid utihoss 5efossos 10 ne particular bsHef W
e tos. ssoh The authority snboded, OF me O." 30 r %
ne 5roce v any ~ rh,eh ns caption has tee" "aee
Cavilers who have sought to rest the decision
in dbi,m man r. Booth on the existence Of Com
mssoncr's warrant in that case Will 10 well 10
note the foregoing statement Of the question,
and the conclusion reached BY Judge Bacon.
Recting at length the facts in tie case, and
the language of Mr.. Chiel-Jus,cc Tancy, judge
Bacon then says;
The doctrines thu. laid down a. the Law Of The caeby Chief
Jua.co Tancy TO enfi'dy docre. II there " any
dgsresee IN princp> unable T. ' IT, VIII 1t be said
thu, n that Gaze the prisoner held by Judicial process s
n.d b an officer Of the law eud clothed with Judicial unc
tousl dey the (ommorer wai IN any 'en'eG Jad'
eai qcoer he that ~ TaTanf Ia,oos IN any re-
,pect qf judicial proc' lilo had passed no u'
dcial Judgment he had cl'rd judicial unc,ions The
,a,ranf su,d by hin n<gy The Jo,md! authority ~
aiea another qcer directed 70 ce s G'ye'i and 10 de-
r or the ,i.one, 10 BE- ae,eae' dealt ein according 70
hw ,psi mHi,fodi not judicial act II wllnot ap'
tchend be- clalmed TINT clothed with any superior sol
eny or any higher character than tho writ of haheas corpus
which thi. very case issued to bring before the Pro
vo Marshal to why he had deprived Of Liberty cti
fcn Of this land Aud yet Ia entertaining the sppcation and
directing the wit to Issue. was executing Judicial function
whatever but dscharing merely ministerial Office"
And we may be permitted to remark with
satisfaction that the ground thus taken by
Judge Bacon, is precisely the ground on which
the identity of the two cases was early asserted
in these columns, and which no one has yet ven
tured to dispute; yet, being admitted, it is
conclusive of every question raised on the other
side. And ever more strongly Judge Bacon de.
clarcs:
The in principle would have been precisely the sam,
fe Marshal had arrested Booth without any warrant as will
IT, The warrant the machinery by which he
to the action Of tribunal charged with executing
s Ian. eg gathsg puphiDx I0r M violation. tha VI Lge