The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1871-11-09
The Habeas Corpus Case, now
Pending Before the Federal
Court ia IIaIS City,


Seems to be attracting the public
attention TO a very great degree. This
circumstance seems to make it proper |
that the DEMOCRATIC STATESMAN should |
add its mite towards enabling the true
principles involved in the case to be
understood by lis readers. In free
country, whose theory is that the
people-the legal voters-are the Sow
ereigns, and are to make and control
the government, it must not only be
proper, but absolutely Indispensable
that they become acquainted with their
constitution If government, and more
or less familiar with its essential prin-
ciples and practical working. There
should be no mystery or law craft about
the subject, but all should read, study,
qualify themselves for the dignifed
exercise of the great sovereign power
which they claim and are often called
upon to exercise. With this view, and
under this impression we offer to our
readers, in advance of its trial, a brief
synopsis of the pending case as we
understand its facts and principles,
The applicant for the writ of habeas
corpus in this case complains of being
illegally imprisoned contrary to the
Constitution and laws of the United
States, and asks the interposition Of
the Federal Courts, under the pro-
visions of the Act of Congress of Feb.
5, 1861, which provides, among other
things, that the U. S. District and
Circuit Judges, Gin addition to the
authority already conferred by law,
shall have power to grant writs OF
habeas corpus, in all cases where any
persons may be restrained of their
liberty in violation of the Constitution,
or any treaty of the United States" etc.
This Act of Congress gives the
Federal Court Jurisdiction "in addition"
to what it previously possessed. Be
fore the passage of the act of 1867,
"None of the courts of the United
States have authority to grant the writ
for the purpose of inquiring into the
cause of a commitment where the per
son is imprisoned under process issued
from the State courts" (Hurd on
Habeas Corpus, 154, citing ex-parte
Dorr, Howard, 1O3, and the four i'm
mediate subsequent cases.
The Act of Congress of March 2,
1888, although it greatly enlarged the
powers of the Federal Courts in cases
of habeas corpus, yet limited the juris,
diction to "power to grant writs of
habeas corpus to all cases of a prisoner
OF prisoners in Jail or confinement,
where he or they shall be committed or
confined, on or by authority of law,
for any act done or to be done, in pur.
suance of law of the United States,
or any order, process or decree of any
Judge or court thereof" (See 4 Stat
utes at Large, 634, sec. ~ So that
it is plain that the act of 1867 gives
the Federal tribunals general authority
to esquire, by habeas corpus, into all
imprisonments not warranted by the
Constitution of the United States.
Under these circumstances, the plain
and simple question is presented.
wiIutl,os tho act of the Legislature Of
tie State of Texas purporting to en-
power the Governor to declare martial
law in any part of the State at his
pleasure, for the causes set forth in the
act, to arrest, imprison and try by
courts martial all such citizens as he
may see fit, and by suspending the
writ of habeas corpus, deny them all
privilege of having the legality oil
their arrest and Imprisonment inquired
into. The Governor claims to have
acted under this act of the Legislature.
The essential principles of civil liberty
for which the colonists waged the war
of Independence, are declared in the
Constitution of the United States, and
efectually secured by that instrument
to the people. These provisions, re-
lating more particularly to the right Of
personal liberty, are contained in
the 4th, 5th, 9th and Sth articles of the
amendments, and the second clause Of
the 9th section of the LIST Article Of
the Constitution. (Hurd on Habeas
Corpus, 100, 121 and 122.
1t is only necessary to read these
amendments and clauses, to see that
the Act of the Legislature of Texas is
directly in conflict with each one OF
them. Every thing authorized by the
act to be done by the Governor is ex-
pressly forbidden. Read them.
Art. ". The right of the people to be Sc
cure in their persons, houses, papers and eff
fects, against unreasonable searches and sci
cures, shall not be violated, and no warrants
shall issue, but upon probable cause, sup
ported by oath or affirmation, and particular.
ly dercribing the place to be searched, and
the persons or things to be seized.
Art. V. No person shall be held to answer
for capital or otherwise infamous crime
unless on a presentment or indictment of 6
grand jury, except in cases arising in the land
or naval forces, or in the militia, when IL
actual service in time of war or public dan.
ger; nor shall any person be subject for the
same offence to be twice put in jeopardy o.
life or limb; nor shall he be compelled il
any criminal case to be witness against him.
self, nor be deprived of life, liberty or pro-
perty without due process of law; nor shall
: private property be taken for public use with
out just compensation.
Art. VI. In all criminal prosecutions, the
accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy ant