The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1865-08-09
THE CHESHIRE HABEAs CORPUS CASE.

The Prisoner taken Ia Boston by the
Provost Marsaas Q. $3.50. 80. "a. ~
nation said 60 be the Dr. ,,n-.-.-
Remarks OF Judge Lot. n.-s-s--
20 "e Rendered In s. .s,s.. h.r
In the matter Of the ,ss e"aDer'
Lott, in behalf OF 81 ~asss corpus issued by Judge
Tb,rtecpth W.. -sefvisof Charles w. Cheshire Of the
Penitep. - who was imprisoned in the Albany
nv sssg ON beng sound guilty by military tribunal
- sentenced to lp fine of 81 900 and Imprisonment
sor SIX months. ms counsel appeared court at eleven
O'Clock Yesterday and made motion for an attachment
against Acs Pishury, the keeper Of the Penteutiary
for ccnfenpt in producing the body OF Mr. Cheshire
az corAwinded in the writ
The United States District Attorney opposed the mo-
tion and presented the following special return 10 the
Co1rt:-
To THE Hon, TIE SUPREME CouRT or rus STATE on New
l. tho subscriber, Amos Pllsbufy, superintendent Il
the friitentary at Albany in The county Albany in
the State OF New York, for return OF tho writ OF IN.
beas corpus served ON me in the above entitled matter
say and certify
FiTtTha the said Charles w. Cheshire is not in nv
custody OF under my power restraint.
Sscoadi further state aud show that said Charles W.
Cheshire was in my custody such superintendent az
aforesaid at tue date of such writ OF ha5es corpus but
that such wrt has been TRANSFORMED Colorcl Frederick
Townsend, an olccrc or the unsed States Army; that
such ,rlsfor made the 9TH 9Th cay Of August
1885, that The Of such transfer was an order from
by tho Presdsnto OF the rntc Staes dmcct,na such
transfer was The authority under which such trans
fer fnade which statements thar sad Cheshire is not
IN my Custody power or restraint md said order
and transfer made Information belief derived
iroma communication made TO ssnd received BY me
from Albany by telegraph annousrng that such
made pursuance thereof in ing from Albany
and have and had knowledge information respect
ing such order or transfer Till 80 received norna
tion thereof by telegraph
2"Id--That said Charles W. Cheshire was committed
20 said 1enentiary, which had been duly designated us
misry prison by the President of the United States
that srch commitment was in pursuance "A Judgment
nds and sentence Of the general martial the
President OF the United States through the Secretary
War, as contained in the exhibit A. hereunto annexed
thai such commitment was about the Sd day Of
| gust, 1865
FourihAnd upon further separate return 10 the
said writ OF habeas corpus hereby show state that
pursuant 10 the provisions in that respect contained m the
first section OF the OF CONGRESS- passed Mar 3 1858
entitled All act relating to abeas corpus and regulating
judicial proceedings in cases the privilege OF the
writ OF abcas corpus by the President of the United
States duly suspended throughout the United Sates and
Ss es sae i" a 1
act continues, and in conformity the provision in said
,ton in that respect contained certify that
Charles W. Cheshire detained by me, up the time
OF so transfer as prisoner under the authority Of the
said Charles W. Cheshire ut the time OF prior to the
service on OF such writ OF habcas corpus was In my
custody pursuant and in conformity to the Judgment and
scntencc OF a court martial of the United States duly
organized and held which Judgment and sentence were
duy rendered and were duly approved by the President
Of The United States that said court martial had jursd
ton OF the person Of said Charles W. Cheshire and Of the
offence OF which he was convicted and competent
ana authorized to pronounce such judgment and
sentence and 10 order and adudge the imprisonment of
said Cheshire in the enorc ement Of which Judgment
was so aforesaid "a my custody and that the said
Charles W. Cheshire so in my custody and detained
by me as prisoner under authority Of the President Of
transfer S'' AMOS p Ins 1R. e %e Of such
Mr. silliinan commended that the act of Congress
authorizing the suspension of the writ Of habeas corpus
aDs0ved MI Pilsbury from contempt that was i'm.
poss bic for the respondent produce The prisoner ia
court as ne had been taken ont OF his custody by order &
the President ~ the United States.
General 'rookc renewed his motion for attachment
on the ground thai the return deficient anJ
meet the requirements OF the law In any respect; that
IA inc nrs place the return admitted that the prisoner
WAS in the custody Of the respondent the time OF the
service Of the writ and he Counsel knew that when
stu In his custody, and that he left Colonel
Towns nd took the prisoner beyond the Jurisdiction of
the state, and that the prisoner known have been
IN Boston on Monday night He on at length 10 crj.
cisc IN severe terms the action OF Colonel Baker whom
he charged with beng thief catcher who had surped
the powers and functions only of the President but
OF the courts Of this STATE his detectives he charged
with ring pockets Of their prisoners and robns
them OF their money, as they did in the case OF Mr.
Cheshire Mr. Crooke, in support of his mot.0n for ala
attachment quoted the decision OF Judge Thompson Of
Philadelphia, in the Of Cousins he Insisted that tho
writ o habeas corpus not suspended this or any
other State that no rebellion existed that the Pre-
sdent had no power under the constitution to dele
gate The power 10 suspend the wit to any other
person. and that in times OF the President even
ma no power He was ostOnished to find men with |
saxon blood in their vcnsstandng up in OF jus.
cc to defend such outrageous conduct the part OF
me had arrived when law must assert Its power aud
protect the citizen the victory rebellion would
DC barren one IL the crushing of the rebellion carried
WIN II the liberties and rights 0f the people he con.
sdercd II questionable whether such result was not
curse instead Of a blessing He also quest oned the I
right OF Mr.. Pisbury, a State officer TO receive gov.
eminent prisoners in Stale institution he expected
to hear from the counsel the other side that Mr.
Pillsbury had been created captain in the military ser
vice Baker had recently TO the post
Of brgadcr general for his protecting soft
headed republican politicians from the exactions az no
no mt KIN btt ;lisI,n.
might have been rewarded in the same way.
Mr. silliman replied to the remarks Of the counsel for
the prisoner and stated that he would be glad when the
day would arrive that would restore the civil tribunals
their former functions; but that tmo would not come
tended that military courts had ~ well defined duties
and as much power IN such any civil court In
Coloner Baker was or was not thief catcher ques
lion had nothing to do with the matter before court
and he could not be expected TO reply his friend
Two OF Colonel Bakers detectives were in court and
one OF them Mr. Blood, was heard to say that he would
take ~, ~ wei ~ 'li, 30, on he .;r -,'ifi, of
the court.
Mr. siili,uan continued that he believed ,br enr,
should regard The absence OF HE prisoner he had
escaped from, Jail
Al the conclusion OF the arguments Judge Lott made
the following remarks:-i regret that obliged to
remark that the action the general government in
removing the prisoner from the custody Of the law an
pears TO me TO he an attempt 10 cvadc what may
decision OF the Supreme Court OF this state upon the
legality of the detention of the prisoner " adverse 10 the
iik"' W ue'ab " appeared 10 be al expression Of |
want Of confidence the Judiciary Of the State Of New
York that Is not respectful person ~ restrained of
DIS liberty writ oil habess corpus is issued, and after
service Of the writ the person In whose custody the
prisoner II, he removed from the custody Of the law
and u may render necessary decision that will alec,
he person Of an Innocent officer OF this State n the
Of the United States have no confidence m
he administration Of the laws by the Judiciary OF the
several States Of the Union then government might
~ well be at end The courts OF this State have
Always endeavOrod 10 sustain the action Of general
in eases Of questionable legality. and
ur courts aud authority certainly entitled to ord
ary respect The action OF the government In this
las relieved from the necessity OF speedy decision
ne fact appears that the prisoner has been from
be custody OF the law and any process the might
-sue would he Insufficient TO reach the prisoner He
'ould therefore, adjourn the till the first Monday
September, at which time DECISION Will he rendered
Base Bail.
GOTHAM vs. EMPIRE.
1be match between these cubs which cook place al