Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1867-10-07
The Philadelphia Habeas Corpus Case.

ne efhiIadeiphla habeas Corpus Case.
ILLEGAL kNLIsTM OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL.
The Attorney Gederal OF the United States
has given an opinion in the matter of the ha-
beas corpus pending in the Court of Quarter
Sessions of Philadelphia.
The opinion first recles the facts Of the case,
from which 1t appears that the 23d OF Sep
tember a writ OF habeas corpus was issued by
lndge OF the Court Of Quarter Sessions OF
Philadelphia 10 Commodore Selfridge, COM
mandant OF the navy yard at that city, for the
production Of the body Of Charles Gormley q
person alleged to have been illegr lily Unlisted
Navy Department, Commodore SelfridRe re-.
fused to prodUce the body OF GormleY. and
made return to the writ that Gormley was "a
regularly enlisted person, and held to service
IN The navy Of the United States, according to
the rules and regulations Of the recruiting ser.
vice tor enltsting recr uts, by his signing the
shipping articles and the proper statement or
declaration required for recruits to take; that
the oath was regularly administered by an Of
hcer authorised TO administer oathe, and that
the recruit was regularly examined by the sur
Eeon appointed for that purpose; that under
the decision of the honorable Secretary of the
Navy 1t was not my duty to produce the body
OF eaid Gormley in court; that said deciination
and denial OF the jur isd,ction of your honor 10
matter of Official duty, and not from any
court"
court on the oath OF September 1867, that a rule
be entered upon Commodore Selfrdge to shsw
cause why an attachment should not be issued
against him for contempt OF court in refusing
TO obey the writ Of habeas corpus commanding
him to produce before the court the body OF the
said Gormley. Thisrule was made returnable
Sept. 2Sth, but has since been extended to Sat-
urday, the 5th of October.
The question submitted to the Attorney Gen
eral is stated to be whether the commodore
should be instructed to produce the body Of
Unnecessary, any further wrlts or process from
the Court OF Quarter Sessions to enforce obe-
dience to the command of the writ OF habeas
corpus, or any process OF attachment against
After thus stating the facts involved in the
case, Mr.. Stanbery, the Attorney General, pro.
ceeds to set forth the law at much length, and
concludes as follows:
There is, then, no act OF Congress- and
no decision OF the Supreme Court of the United
States which, in the matter Of habeas corpus,
own proper jurisdiction to entertain the case,
and to require aproper return and the produc-
ton OF the body of person detained by an Of
hcer of the navy as an enlisted persen.
court In this case had authority to issue the
writ and to compel a return and production Of
the body, and that instructions should be sent
to Commodore Selfridge to answer the rule for
an attachment and to produce the body Of
Gormley before the court; and that the in
structions heretofore sent him to make resis-
tance by force should be revoked.
81 do not deem it proper at this time, and
upon the question referred TO nae, to 60 into
any further q uestions which may arise before
the State court after the production of the
body. But do not doubt that after the luris-
diction of the court has been vindcated by
obedience to its writ, a proper decision will be
had upon the question Of discharge. II it
should happen that the court order a dis.
charge, and upon examination it should be
deemed expeoent to carry the question
to the Supreme Court Of the United
States for final decision, it will then be
proper to inquire by what mode Of proceed
ing that purpose can be accomplished %
In conformity with the foregoing opinion,
the Secretary OF the Navy revoked h,s former
order. and Instructed Commodore Seliridge to
produce Gormley before the court.