The New York herald., 1870-02-10
THE EABEhS CORPUS WAR.
The Case in the Court of Oyer and Tcrmincr-
Discharge Of John Stacom, Keeper of the
City Prison-Tbe Proceedings Held to be
Not Within Jurisdiction.

The Case in the Court Of Oyer and Tcrmincr-
Discharge Of John Stacom, Keeper Of the
City Pris0n-Tbe Proceedings Held to be
Not Within Jurisdiction.
A larUe crowd assembled yesterday morning in the
Court of Oyer and Terminer, Judge Ingraham pre-
siding, to hear what disposition should be made Of
the case Of Mr.. John Stacom. Warden OF the City
Prison, who was himself committed for an alleged
disobedience OF an order issued by Judge McCunn
AS FULLY set forth IN yesterdays paper, man
named John Hcfferman was convicted in the Special
Sessions Court, on Saturday, for assault and bat
terry committed Gu Jennie Collins and was accord.
ngly sentenced to be imprisoned for ten days In
lars. Application was subsequently made 10
Judge McCunn, in the Superior Court for
and served npon tne ccer Of the pason
Mr. Stacom, acting under Instructions owing to
certain abuses which had previously existed In
swer TO the writ returned that the prisoner was IN
the custody OF the Commissioners or Public Chari-
ties and Corrections and was under final commit
ment Of sentence and declined to produce the body
without the advice OF the Board. Not relishing the
refusal, Judge McCunn ordered an attachment for
contempt TO Issue AGAINST Mr.; stacom, giving HIM
until Tuesday morning to produce the prisoner. Mr.
Stacom however acting under his instructions from
the Commissioners, was unable to bring forward the
prisoner whereupOn Judge McCunn ordered the ar
rest OF Mr.. Stacom, who was conveyed to Ludlow
street jall. Subsequently writ OF habeas corpus
body or John Stacom be produced before Judge In
graham yesterday morning, IN the Court OF Oyer and
Terminer
Shortly after eleven O'Clock District Attorney Gar.
vln, after calling attention to the case, proceeded
TO read number OF afldavits setting forth facts IN
the case ALREADY developed, and, having concluded
Judge Ingraham inquired whether the preliminary
proceedings had been before court or before JUS
tice out or court, to which the District Attorney
replied that they had taken place before justice
out OF court and added that the only question before
the court was whether the facts contained in the
traverse were true. MIR Bookstaver, on the part or
the Sheriff. stated that the facts the traverse or
return were not cOntradcted. The District Attor-
ney then observed taat If such were the case Mr..
Stacom was entitled TO his discharge.
Judge Ingraham asked the counsel for the Sheriff
whether he had any objection to the prisoner being
discharged and in reply the counsel stated that the
whole matter was submitted to the Court for deter
mination. II Mr.. Stacom we're legally under ar
rest 1t was not advisable that he should be dis
charged; but II Illegally there was objection to
his release The whole matter, however was now
submitted to the Court for determination. Judge
lngraham then remarked that during the sitting OF
oyer and ferminer no officer had right to inquire
into the detention OF prisoners, and the proceed
ing was not within jurisdiction the prisoner was en-
titled 10 his discharge Mr.. Stacom, surrounded
by many friends. then left the court.