Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1864-04-20

Ihevsger, know of no reasons that reqaire t and
have heard of neDeC But in she exercise OF an aa-
disputed power, they have attempted too do just
what cannot be done ITO Authorize illegal and un'
constitutional arrests. There Gamble co SUSPENSION
of the writ under four: system fofc goTernnenh
against unconstitutional arrests--theTe can De no
suspension aleYiRg nor with n view topermu aao
aCth0Eiz The, seizure of persons without warrant
issued 10y judicial officer sponPrOba BILE cause sup
ported by oath affirmation; 1.-The whole OonstTtu-
IIon must be read together and so read and con-
strued as thai every part and eaueesha stand and
have its proper effect under the restrictions other
clauses 52uar.'' ,rs0Eg uJr;rE.'us7 ~ = go. b. J.
II any, conflict arises between clauses In the.
original and the amendments subsequently, made
theorigipal must yield to thesamendments, as Wall
previously made always yields to the notifications
of eodiciL Such of course, WAS the condition or
the old Consultation with its amendments when the
States Of this Confedera y adopted it-and IL vas
adoptsd by these States with the meaning, force
aud effect it, then had IsIn constituting, therefore,
those parts of the old Constitution which We adopt
ed we stand lust where we should have stood under
like circumstances under it - With these views Il
will clearly appear that under our Constitution
Courts ea1not be deprived Of their right or be re-
levsd of their duty to- enquire into the legality Of
all arrests except in cases arising in the land and
naval forces orcp the militia when IN actual SER
vice-foI the government of which different pro-
vision is made in the Constitution. Under Con-
sttutional suspension of the privilege OF the writ
all the Courts could do would be- to see that the
party was legally arrested and held, upon proper
warrant, upon probable cause, supported by oath
or affirmation setting forth crime or some violation
of law Literally and truly, then, the only effect Of
a Constitutional exercise Of this power over the
writ of hd6eas corpus by Congress, is to deprive
person, after being legally confined Of the privilege
of discharge before trial. by giving bail, on ac
count Of insufieency of proof to probable cause,
or other like grounds! This privilege only can be
suspended, and not the writ ITSELF The words OF
the Constitution are aptly chosen to express the
purpose and extent to which suspension can go in
this country With this view the power is wise
one. 1t can work no serious injury to the citizen,
and it sufficiently guards the public safety. The
party against whom grave accusation Is brought
supported by oath or affirmation, founded upon
probable cause, must be held for trial. and if found
to be guilty is to be punished according to the ma
ture Of his offence. The monstrous consequences
Of any other view of the subject are apparent The
exercise Of the power by Congress may be either
general or limited to special cases as in this in
stance.s If il had been general under any other
view, what would have been the condition Of every
citizen in the landH The weaker would have been
completely in the power of the stronger without
remedy or redress. Any one in the community
might seize for any motive or for any purpose, any
other, and confne him most wrongfuly and shame
fully Combinations of several against few might
be formed for like purpose and there would be
laWleSsness The Courts would be cosed-all per
sonal security and personal safety would be swept
away lnStead0 q land of laws, the whole country
would be no better than White friars domain-a
perfect Asatia. This would be the inevitable effect
of the exercise Of the power, by general suspen-
sion, with any other view of the subject than this
presented. The same effects as to outrages upon
personal rights must issue under limited suspen-
sion confined to any specified cases under any other
view. No such huge and enormous wrongs can
ever spring from Constitution If it be rightly
administered So that the conclusion Of the whole
matter Is well stated by the Governor in his late
message, in the brief comprehensive, but exact
terms The only suspension of the privilege of
the writ Of hG6edS corpus known to our Constitu-
ton and compatible with the provisions already
quoted goes to the simple extent of preventing the
release, under it, Of persons whose arrests have
been ordered, under constitutional warrants from
! judicial authority" .. 8. .g.. ..a
On this subject much light is to be derived from
! English history. Our whole system of constitu-
honal liberty rests upon principles established by
| our Anglo Saxon ancestors. But between their
system and OURS there are several differences that
| should be noted and marked-and none more strik-
| ing and fundamental than the difference between
| the two upon this subject With them the right of
personal security against illegal arrests, was wrest
ed from the Crown by the Parliament, and estab-
lshed by Magma Charta, the bill Of rights, the alb
| clifton of the star chamber and the grant Of the
I
dress against violations of law, and other wrongs
! against rights secured and acknowledged. In the
abolition of the court of star chamber, the power
| vas taken from the King, his heirs and successors
forever, and every member of his priVy council to
make any arrest of any person for any ohense or
| alleged crime, exceit by due process Of law. By
this act, the power of the King to issue warrants
or ORDERS of arrest unsupported by oath afirma-
tion setting forth probable cause which before had
been claimed as royal prerogative, was taken away
| from him and his SUCCESSORS forever The ruling
monarch Charles l. gave his consent to the act and
yielded the power He afterwards broke his pledge.
Civil connections ensued from this and other causes
He lost his head upon the block The subsequent his
tory of that strife between the people and the Crown
| OF England Oh this and other matters is not now
pertinent to the object before Suffice it to say
that it ended in the settlement it is termed be-
tween the Parliament and their new soyereigns,
| William and Mary-in l6SS-89 In this settle
ment all the ancient ghts and liberties of the
English people, including the right of the writ of
hd6eas corpus, were re-affirmed and secured. Such
were the liberties inherited as q birth-rght that
| our British ancestors brought with them to this
continent. The principles established in England,
after centuries of struggle and blood formed the
basis upon which the great structure Of American
stltutional liberty was erected. But the striking
difference between their system and ours to which
have alluded and which should be lost sight
Of IS that with them all power originally belonged
to the Grown. Allrights and liberties were grants
from the Crown to the Parliament and through
them to the people, while with US all power origi-
nally belonged to the peope-and essentially still
resides with them. They have appointed agents to
perform the functions of government in the differ
ent departments, executive judicial and legislative,
under the form Of government set forth IN the Con-
stituton, clothed with the exercise Of certain dele
gated specific and limited powers In Eng
land it Is competent for the Parliament ct any time
to return to the Grown all the powers heretofore ex-
hair H.,
Magma Cbarta, the hG6eds corpus act, and the whole
bill Of rghts and render the rnlino monarch as ali.