Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1864-03-23

power upon State. their legislatures or courts
I Kent, Lecture 10: Ind Rep SIS. The sus
pension 81 the writ IRON our State Courts must
come from the State Legislature The statute
law IF our State requires the Courts "a issue the
writ und the Constitution ordaius Arr. J..
Sec % thar: The operation OF the laws
shall never be suspended except by the
AUTHORITY Of the General Assembly" Nor can
che Circuit Courts OF the United States interfere
with the jurisdiction Of the Courts of State .
| Kent. . sI2 Nor can State Courts interfere
xith the jurisdiction Of the United States, or her
courts: and hence, while the State courts have
the undoubted right 20 issue wrIts OF habess
corpus IN all cases. till a suspension OF the right
by the State legislature. thsy have not right 10
deliver persons held in custody By legal authority
OF the United States.
But TO prevent such delivery OF persons on ha-
beas corpus, by a State Court. il must be made
to appear 20 that Court that tie persons are held
by authority of the United States. For example
a soldier i held under sD enlistment by M off,
Ger of the United States l. be thus held by
authority OF the United SsatesZ 1t he IS eighteen
wears old, or upwards. he is, because the law OF
Congress authorizes United States officers To en-
list and hold such persons Ii he il under eigh-
teen. he j. not held BY the officer under authOrl-
u Of the United States. according to the best
Judgment we can form, because no law of the
United States authorizes him to enlist and hold
such minor Now. if the petition ia such case
presented to a State Judge for 4 writ Of habeas
corpus shows that the soldier j. over eighteen.
the Judge should refuse the writ. not because he
has not a right To issue writs OF habcds
corpus but because the petition SHOVE.
in the given case, that he has not jurisdlc
ton, the person being held under authority OF the
United States. But if the petition shows that
the soldier is under eighteen. the State Judge
would have jurisdiction. because no authority
has been conferred by the United States to hold
such persons in custody as soldiers; but the fact
that the soldier was eighteen upwards might
be shown TO the court by the officer OH the re-
turn of the wri. and in that event the jurisdiction
OF the State Court might cease: and il might
become its duty to remand the petitioner. The
mode OF proceeding in these cases is pointed out
in Ableman Vs. Booth 81 How u. 3 Rep 500
See. also. 20 Ind. 1879
Congress can neither force jurisdiction upon
State Courts nor take II from them The Courts
OF Indiana do not derive their power To issue
writs of haJeas corpus from the General Govern
ment, nor can that Government take il from them
But the State Courts cannot extend their writs
when issued. into the domain of the General
Government Prisoners in custody. by authority
OF the General Government must 20 Ia the
Courts of that Government for relief and il
that relief j. suspended. they are without relic
from the State Courts for want OF jurisdiction
The Federal and State Governments are distinct
and sovereign within their respective spheres ant
neither should be permitted TO encroach upon th,
rights of the other