New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-05-09
BORT h1aroen's Notife.
LAW INTELLIGENCE.

,c,-nr - x.
ILL., psa Ixna.uv and s,,1axp, .Sn
Suuses pAaNAhp, isohAhAA anu o. 1850, .
RIGHT OF TIE CITY JUDGE TO ISSUE wkiIS W aAtkA
CORPUS.
Tho People ex rel Michael Ryan, agt Abram D. Russell
''' City Judge.
The CITY Judge of the City Of New-York, by the
vested nv law In the Recorder of the cty Chsp eos
Laws Of s Sec 81 and was directed BY The :ss'n q
PefioIn ahu "a bs r. PaoalJr "a ~ s,s,nts
vested with the power Of Supreme COu. Commission, g
s. 2o sec 5oy a. sacn ne Las power 70 s ,I h ~
habeas corpus returnape 1e'ore 1'mse aha h%
ceedngs upon return 70 Ine VIII 90 Jne % ~ ~
statute governing the 10 sasa 70
dsisrmips z 3 8, 2s9 See ~
The question presented ~ ,ae appeal papers wneoer We
claimed under the authority Of Yees ys Lansing g 9s
& the n act ufS svea bv ha ana Mn
vs. Nash llo Aoootts hep ze tnas tneieots .ne S
mai no Of the Reeerde OH"
The ease o. Yates vs. lansing dd mot arse under the pres
il the chancellor Of the Supreme Court the vsos
ton should deny to allow any writ o. habeas corpus
said he shall forfeit to the party grieyed thousand
hundred and fifty dollars q K Laws lei3 p - sec -
Of the set for rempsoning person discharged BY the
supreme Court which imposed an e9ua penalty of su,n
That the for which the action broaugb was jod-
cia and action would hc for Judicial error 10 odg
meat In giving the opinion OF the Court tee Chiei
ton not jade; ae os the question q: 70 the ea a
WHEN ouuso oio"oN ~ - -.
~ ono.,,n Itch wa nresented Inv that ease thnk
under the present statute ii may well be questioned the al
lowance Of writ OF habeas corpus ministerial act Ihe
contents Of the petition are prescribed and the exceptions
of those classes of persons given By statute who
of the paper under which restraints
is made annexed unless made fo- its om
sion The officer NAV question whether he viii
allow the writ or not he made responsible TO the
party applying for decision is true SO ts the
Supreme Court Judge either at Cham 0eIs or
but fact Of responsibility for doee
determine the character OF the act DONE IL Is udccs
he nav or NAV not exercise as he shall determine tie action
IA be LEGAL or NOT
IL will thus be seen that Il IA OF serious question II the
OF Yates agt Lansing authority for the Of MatD AFT
writ OF habeas corpus ministerial act under the statute a.
It now stands but think the City Judge mas o
ALLOW these Wits whether tne allowance ., ;nsm
RrSa sssr ,ha VIII q sye ar the i'm nrisonsd psr
son is brought before the officer is to discharge bail
remand him he shah be advised and action penalty
gvcn for what be shall then door refuse 90 ses as
matter Is udcs The Recorder has this power II the ey
ercs, judicial power given by law " the City Judge
qes she doing Of ministerial act to initiate such
proceedings he DO such act The City Judge has there
fore power allow the writ; bat be may refuse 10
discretionary with him whether he allows or not the rem
edy Is nor 0y mahdsmns
The writ Of mandamus when addressed to Judicial officer
or 10 court can Only orcer te oeel or court deeae ,o.
-. ,i mr., -. snrai, Ia ,b s',a,y 81 80 .an-x
not direct him TO alter his decsiou
crprpyop corRr- Ar TrpxN.ya : Refor. Jp,ties.
o'' HNAOH WV ~. IN" .~' - N'''' N>~