Woodville Republican. (Woodville, Miss.) 185?-current, 1869-10-30

WASHINGTON. Oct. l5.--In the Supreme
Court to day the argument in the Yeraer
case was commenced by Attorney General
Hoar. He argued at length that to bring
a case within the appellate Jurisdiction oil
this court IN the sense requisite to enable
it to award a writ OF habeas corpus under
the judiciary acts, it is necessary that com
mitment should appear to have been made
by tribunal whose decisions are subject
to revision by this court. This court has
never granted this writ where the prison
or was not ut the time he petititioned for
it in confinement nnder an order Of court
whose proceedings can be revised by the
Supreme Court
This court cannot exercise any appel.
late control by appeal, writ Of error, or any
other proceedings over the military com
mission, by virtue Of whose sentence the
prisoner il imprisoned nor has this court
power, in any form, or by any procedure
to revise the proceedings Of that CON-
mission.
In the case Of the petitioner the address.
sing Of . writ Of habras corpls 10 the mil
itary commander in Mississippi, would be
an exercise of original and not appellate
jurisdiction; the military commander holds
the petitioner not under al y order or de.
cree Of the Circuit Court but by military
authority, and could discharge the prison.
or at his pleasure. notwithstanding the nc.
ton Of the Circuit Court.
The habeas corpus issued with the GER
tiorari as an adjunct Of the appellate pow
er, is only permitted where the custody OF
the prisoner is an essential part Of the judy
mint or decree from which the appeal is
taken. The repeal by Congress Of SO
much Of the act Of February 9Th, 1867. as
granted appellate power to this court in
cases OF this nature, was intended and
should be construed as taking away not
the whole appellate power in case Of ha
teas corpus, but the appellate power in Gu.
SEES to which that act replied. Finally. the
act OF 1867, providing Tor military gov
eminent in Mississippi, necessarily suspen
ded the writ ofhabeas corpus in that State,
which it was within the clear constitution
81 authority OF Congress to do.
Mr.. j. NJ. Carlisle replied. He said
that as citizen he confessed there was
no means OF determining what Congress
might have intended to do, but II was GER
tainly difficult to tell when Congress had
come into court and seized upon cause
sub Judicial and strangled what might not
have been the intention. but as lawyer it
was easy to say what Congress really had
done, BY applying the ordinary rules Of in.
depreciation, and by such means he found
that Congress BY the act OF 1868 repealed
only the.statute Of 1867, which had given
special jurisdiction, before the existence Of
the fourteenth section Of the Judiciary act,
and was unaffected by the repeating act
OF 1868, and 1t was under the provisions
Of that section that this proceeding was
instituted, and not under the act Of 1867, !
as contended by the Attorney tieneral.
de had heard no argument which had
IN the least shown that this court was with /
out Jurisdiction under the judiciary act, |
and he would be inexcusable in long de
tanning the conrt in insisting upon juris-
diction which Il had reiterated and reaf.
6rmed time and again. a ia
NJ. Carlisle spoke briefly, without notes,
making The argument ofthe Attorney Gem
eral the basis OF bis remarks. The. excite,
ment ct first caused BY this proceeding
seemss 10 have greatly subsided, but few
spectators having sat out the argument Ia \
DAY. The venerable Thomas Ewing. o.
ONO. was present until the argument clos
60, ana appeared much interested. Upon.
: conclu,ion q the argument, the eonrt I'd,
49, Kske fNsxF ~ =