Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1869-08-26

Gated by telegraph, that the prisoner is
charged in Tennessee with the commits
sion of on offanse against the laws Of
that Commonwealth. This paper, which,
from being nothing more than the repe-
tition Of rumor, 10 fatally defective
otherwise, in not Incorporating an au-
thensioated copy of the charge or indict-
ment against the prisoner in the State OF
Tennessee. Matter of Hayward; |
Sandford, s. G. X 202 en- pGrte Smith,
3 Mclean; er parte Thornton, 3 Texas;
People vs.. Wright, Gaines. 2l3; Clark's
case, 3 Wendell, 2l9) Thus, as it APP
pears on the face Of the return, the
prisoner ia held without any warrant.
process or other authority of law; but, on
the contrary, is detained BY mere physi-
cal force, and in violation of all the
sacred safeguards of the liberty Of the
citizen. In this circumstance, what is
ny duty? The law of New York plainly
prescribes it By the habeas corpus act
it is imposed on the officer before whom
a writ Of habeas corpus is returned TO
examine into the case OF the prisoners
detention, and if it appears he is legally
confined, forthwith to discharge him;
not to remand him nor to bail him, but
forthwith to discharge him. By the
Constitution of the United States, as we'll
as of the State of New York, mo person
shall be deprived Of life, liberty or prop
erty without due process OF law" Now,
here the party is held without any pro-
cess; his detention is illegal, and have
no discretion but to discharge him. But
the District Attorney, conceding that the
prisoner is held without warrant OF
law, asks that l detain him until
mandate arrives from the Governor
of New York. Anxious as l am to
facilitate the administration Of justice in
a sister State, / cannot act in violation OF
my official obligations. The statutes OF
New York make it my imperative duty
forthwith to discharge the prisoner; and,
if should detain him single moment,
would not only contemptuously defy the
Constitution OF the United States and of
the State Of New York, but would disre-
gard my Official duty, and set an example
of lawless invasion of personal liberties,
which would justly expose me to public
animadversion and primitive chastise-
ment. Happily the people of New York
do not live under the arbitrary system OF
overnment prevalent in other countries,
but in land Of law, where the rights of
the citizen, and, above all, the right OF
personal liberty, 10 protected from inva-
sion by stringent securities and the most
formidable sanctions. No matter how
humble or how reprobate the man may
be, he is exempt from arrest, except by
due process Of law" Indeed, ] am
conscious Of having dealt already too
hardly with the prisoner. He was brought
before me Tuesday, aud, at the instance
of the District Attorney, ! remanded him
until Thursday, that the District Attor-
ney might have an opportunity Of pre-
pairing return to the writ, PROBABLY it
was then the right Of the prisoner to be
discharged, nothing heing shown to JUS
liz his detention. Thursday the pris-
oner was again before me, and with him
came a return to the writ. The return
was coniessedly insufficient to authorize
his imprisonment; but selicitous may be
unduly solicitous to prevent the escape of
q possible criminal. / again accorded
the District Attorney twenty-four hours
within which TO tile an amended return.
| can hardly doubt but my duty was then
to discharge the prisoner Considering
these things, and that he has already been
imprisoned week without the least fea-
ture Of justification, cannot consent to
detain him another moment in Illegal
custody. The District Attorney suggests
. warrant from the Executive will arrive
for the arrest and surrender of the pris.
oner. Very well, under that let him be
taken and detained. and, il there be APP
prehenaion OF his escape meanwhile,
upon proper affidavit, process for his
arrest may be procured, and he may be
held for extradition to Tennessee. For
myself, / cannot longer be a party to bis
illegal imprisonment, Let the priaoner
he discharged, :