New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-03-08
THE CASE OF MIR. VAN NORDEN

The course pursued by the Judge of the
| Sixth District Court In resisting the au-
| thority of the Governors pardoning power
has resulted in bringing the matter before
the Supreme Court Of this State On
Wednesday evening last Mr. Van Norden,
| through counsel, made application to Chief
Justice Ludeling for writ of habeas corpus.
and the writ issued the same evening. and
was made returnable on yesterday morning
at eleven o'clock. At the appointed time
Chief Justice Ludeling and Associate JUS
tIce TalliaterrO were present upon the
bench when Sheriff Sauvinet appeared
with Mr.. Van Norden, as ordered by the
court. Counselors Rice and Lacy ap-
peared for Mr.. Van Norden. Mr.. Fileul as
counsel FOR the Sheriff, and Mr.. c. T.
Beniis as the friend of the Sixth District
Court.
The Chief Justice having signiied that
the court was ready to proceed with the
case. the return of the Sheriff to the writ of
habeas corpus and Judge Cocleys order of
commitment was read by Mr.. Filleul. The
petition for the writ of habeas corpus was
then read by Mr.. Rice. lie also produced
as evidence in the case copy of the record
in the case of Lewis VS.. Van Norden. the
pardon of Governor Warmoth, the written
reply thereto by the Sheriff. and copy of
the writ issued by the Supreme Court.
NJ. Rice then entered upon most ex-
haustlve and lucid argument sustaining the
Governors right to pardon person con-
victed and sentenced is in the case of Mr..
Van Norden. The learned counsel also
contended that there could be no doubt of
the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in
cases Of this kind. He produced authority
in support of these views, and concluded
by asking that his client be delivered from
his unlawful imprisonment.
Mr. Bemis then arose, as a friend of
Judge Cooley. and questioned the legality
of the present proceedings, inasmuch as
there We're only two judges of the Supreme
Court trying the matter at issue, when in
fact he thorght that not less than ma
jorty was competent to determine the
matter. Chief Justice Ludeling thought
differently, and Mr.. Bemis then asked that
the further hearing of the case be post
poned until this friday morning, in order
that lie might be enabled to hunt up au
thority sustaining the course taken by Judge
Cooley. Opposite counsel objected to this,
and it was finally agreed that Mr.. Belnis
should have until five O'Clock last night to
furnish his authority.
Mr.. Filleul then addressed the court in
support of his course in the case, which
was simply to advise the Sheriff that, as
ministerial officer, he had no judicial power,
and that all he could do was to submit the
pardon OF Governor WarmOth to the judg-
ment OF Judge Cooley.
Mr.. George S. Lacey concluded the argu-
ment in behalf of Mr. Van Norden. He in
dorsed all that had been said by Mr.. Rice,
the gentleman associated with him in de-
tending the liberty of his client. Mr.. Lacey
thought Judge Cooley exceeded his author
ity when he detied the pardon granted
Mr. Van Norden by Governor War
moth. He believed that after a Judge
has convicted and sentenced a pris-
oner, and the prisoner has been
handed over TO other officers OF the law
that the power Of the judge over the pri-
soner ends there. Mr. Lacey also believes
that the Governor of this State is invested
by the State constitution with pardoning
power similar to that given to the Presi-
dent by the federal constitution. He evil
IDENTITY holds that the similarity Of our
State governments to the national form Of
government warrants this Interpretation,
and he produced various authorities and
opinions Of chief law officers Of the general
government giving the President power to
pardon individuals convicted and sentenced
for contempts Of court.
Judge Ludeling is to deliver his decision
in this case to-day at eleven o'clock.