New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-03-25
TwEED's APPEAL.

SHOULD BE TREATED AS NuI1IrIEs - ORIGIN
NAroRB. IND USE OF THE HABEAs CORPUS.
AlAASsg, n, Y, March 24.-In the Court OF
AypealsaR the Tweed to-day DStrictAuorn.'
Yavibs oza Wheeler H. Peekham closed Tor the people
sad Jgdge George f. ComstocK commehSea 'u'
xiossng argument for the relator, VIM NJ A"eoN'
Judge Comstock addressed the Court as sofio"si
NV IL please the Court in performing the n very 5e
hpcasible which now undertal TO assert Teed tbe
flStor in respect TO serous crime Of which re
~ 10 Is Quite material for say that
An tbs the prosecution now under review ne ns
for anV srch o8ense The accusation against , nt,ns
which Is spread over yolume o. L w pmisde,neanor
20 be found in all criminal Jaw a. ,na Ie outy In
foeela duty or the bad or impuatton
81 anv Dersonal corruption connected with TINS Qnense
o. on any aud tho terrible injustice OF the SEN
Sence or consecutive sentences prgnonDeee upon E
avery TshIninded person The accumulated penalties
punishmens amount ~ tnT be NV would inlet
n be had been guilty OF the larceny OF s2oooVCO VI
Vii = profound conviction that both justice and law
been violated, ana my tongue VIII DC pas Zee IN,
Te gTest proposition upon what call the merits Of
this controversy that the whole Law of punishment
pcn his indictment and upon the verdict tOund ny he
fury was exhausted by single sentence reaching tue
aximum or punishment ADD all the consecutive seh-
imposing upon the relator imprisonment ana 9
arc outside OF the indictment, verdict aud law ana
are therefore void This is the main
question the relations Of the REALTORS
by the other side that no
question TO be reached in this case because they
gay that the accumulated sentences are WthOnt
irregular and avOidabe and will Justify the detention
other form and mode he release himself aud they
tell further that even the acS
fences was without jurisdiction and void the rem
edy by habeas corpus, which in this state Is SO mar
inadequate for the prisoner They tell us that this great
writ which for generations has been the guar
Reenng watch
pie cannot penetrate the reeesses OF the DUNGEON %
of court OF Justice although tnat court in PToDoune
ing sentence, has trauscen5ed It's authority. 70 these
preliminary questions shall hTst address myself
THE JUDGMENT A NULLTTY.
First then assuming that law authorized the
accumulated sentences they ought to be treated as
nunues. To affirm the contrary is to say that il the
Judge criminal has jurisdiction TO receive an
Indictment and 70 try issue, and having got
the jurisdiction he cannot Rerward make any invalid
decision, or order pronounce invalid Judgment.
He may deny the right Of trial by jury He may decide
tWeiye. He nav override the challenge He MAJ
direct the clerk verdict when the jury refus
the law SAYS they should be tried by feIow-uryme
aud after the verdict or perhaps without sny verdict at
all, be may pronounce any sentence he pleases He Is
emily to say that what be - doing is according to law
and there the end 10 It, His acts are valt on TINS
theory until reversed by appeal or writ OF error tat 49,
she pOry stocks aud bastlnado NAV be inflicted for the
ment for the ofeuse OF champefty. He may sentence
20 death for the crime Of grand larceny He may lm-
prison for life for ~ when tine law prescribes
IN this case the punishment OF one year only. No
lions. We have been told without authority for
IT, that IL the judge makes up the jury III his own way
Ia opposition 10 positive law, 1t is nevertheless lawful
Jury, because the Judge so decides We have
been told that although the judge pronounced iuds-
ment for which law be cited, yet II ia valid
judgment because he must have SO decided In the very
got possession OF the jurisdiction in any stage
at tue close of It, was possible against these despOto
which, IN its lofty declaration that man shall be de-
prved Of ife liberty or property except by the iudg
nf ms ar Avs IN iaD
Foundation OF liberty for nearly thousand years, aud
tie same period Of time, has been the attendant OF
chata, and the power OF which has given force
and authenticity to the principles therein cOnsecrdted
ORIGIN, NATURE AND USE OF THE HABEAs CORPUS
Before proceeding to the citation and analysis of a
few the bearing upon these great questions, 1
submit few general observations upon the origin,
the Of the habeas corpus. This writ is not
the creation OF statute, of any statute 1t is
ancient English writ, the origin of which lost in
mote ages The Great Charter declares, the words
already quoted, that person shall be imprisoned
rept by the lawful judgment OF lis peers or the law Of
the laud. This great principle is eOthroned in all
American institutions and in the exquisite declaration
that nobody shall be deprived OF life or properly with
put due iprocess of law The history OF this writ IN:
not before yet Immediately after Magma Cnarta Has
1he remedial process any right 70 violate the right
Itself was nothing without the OF the pra tcal
assertion of the principles which It ordained. There
corpus. The celebrated act Of Charles H.,
commonly known as the Hd0eas Corpus Act"
was enacted only TO prevent invention and make the
writ more eBcacious. Such also the leading pur-
pose Of statute. 1t regulates but does not originate
the writ IL seemed writ OF absolute right day
On the year and every hour in the day. Tlere dun
geOn which it cannot penetrate unlawful mprison-
nient which it cannot release Thus the English race
have understood for several hundred years. We
tOld that imprisonment is lawful If under nal judg
ment Of the court OF competent jurisdiction SO says
our statute But In this there Is nothing new Such
always was the law. Such was the common law.
What is the Judgment Of court Of competent
Jurisdiction, and void Judgment Is no dgIneut ia any
court which competent anything beyond its
jurisdiction. The proposition lie selfeUdently
courts may have general competency even In par
tcniar case aud yet that they can and sometimes
Juridictonal questions, and that such
Is fatal IN all modes OF inquTng into It, The highest
death where the aw prescribes imprisonment or. hne
tenee not void The error here asserted is one of re-
markaOie simplicity, although II is wonderfully miscOn
eeiVed, and is Incapable OF logical thought
ALL JUDICIAL ACTS SUBJECT TO REVIEW.
There judicial act, aud in the nature of the law
there be which not open collateral in
curry To assert that court render a Judgment
not open such inquiry Is asserting simply universal
despotsm residing in the who possesses that
pFeWe power. The inquiry, therefore, is always open
We suppose action pending in the lowest court
OF this state in which the title TO a personal chattel
bears on the validity OF the Judgment OF this Court
Of Appeals Such case Is not incOnceivdbe although
unlikely 70 II the decision OF the magistrate
should BE- against the Judgment Of this Coufr in such
case, and the should here for review, what
this Court would whether the point had been prop
eIlY dee6ed in the Court below II you so find the
would hOlc your own judgment TO have been void
81 you f0and Il So II otherwise, you would
erred in deciding as he did but because he enter
taiDed the opsson And 1t is in respect TO all egs
Court sitting ~ any OF the four corners OF this state may
hold legislative act TO be void in which actually
involves the question. This the logical result OF the
very simple elementary propositions Of all judicial
tribunals who Sqst decree according TO the law Of the
20 all counts Of law and therefore DO
"a IA n wit To afuGa