The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1869-10-29
TIE yERsER CASE.

Under authority of an Act of Congress,
passed March, 1867, to provide for the more
efficient government of the rebel States, q
private citizen of Mississippi, named Edward
NJ. Yerger, who had never, as admitted by
the prosecution, been connected with the
army or navy of the United States, or even
the militia in active service in time of war
or invasion, was arrested, tried and convicted
by military commission on the charge of
murder. He applied to the Circuit Court of
the United States for the Southern district
of Mississippi, for writ of habeas corpus, to
test the legality of his detention by the mill
tary authorities, upon which the said Circuit
Court adjudged that his imprisonment was
lapft2, dismissed the writ and remandcd the
prisoner to the custody of the military officer
in whose charge he had been. He next ap-
piled to the Supreme Court of the United
States for a writ of certiOrart, to bring the
proceedings of the Circuit Court before that
tribunal for review, and for writ of habeas
corpus, under the authority of that court, to
inquire into the legality of his confinement
by the military, sc. Upon these proceedings,
and upon full hearing, Chief Justice Chase
has rendered the decision of that Court,
which, although based only upon the question
of technical jurisdiction ofthe Supreme Court
in the matter, gives good assurance that q
fair judgment upon the law, right ana justice
of the case will finally be reached.
This decision is simply preliminary, and
decides that the Suprcmc Court has Jurisdic-
ton, upon appeal, to review the action of the
court below, and that q writ of habeas corpus
may rightfully be issued from that court but
the tone of the opinion with which the Chief
Justice accompanies the decision in the pre-
misses, is an assurance that he will be guided
in the final hearing of the case, by what he
believes to be the law, irrespective ofpolitical
bias. And here is the refreshing circumstance
connected, with the affair. 1t reawakens
hope that, amid all the corruption that per-
vades the acts of the government officers and
men in high authority, we may yet look with
confidence to the highest tribunal in the ju-
dicial branch of the government, as yet un-
corrupted by partisan prejudice. The SUI
preme Court has more than once, in the his
tory Of this government, stood as breakwa-
ter against attempted usurpation Of the rights
of the citizen. That it may continue to do
so is well nigh the last hope we have left for
vindcation of those rights. This writ Of
ha6eas corpus as every schoolboy knows, is
the hoasted bulwsrk of every free govern
ment and when persistent attacks are made
upon il, we may, from that fact alone, justly
conclude that something is aimed at, incon-
sistent with law and justice. When the
highest legal tribunal in the land shall prove
recreant to this vital charter of our individ-
vidual rights,we shall then, indeed, be reduced
to the extreme condition of political degrade
lion. Should the same tribunal assert again
and again that the privileges of this writ are
not to be wrested from us by the worst form
of party legislation, although it simply does
its duty, and what all intelligent men know it
is constrained by the law to do, yet in these
days to witness the performance of a simple
duty, in certain high places, is refreshing in
sue cAucmc. F,E S.t .lrstH