The Cheyenne daily leader. [volume] (Cheyenne, Wyo.) 1870-1884, 1880-09-09

punished both BY proceedings f0I con"
tempt, and By indictment for failure TO
discharge the duties Of his onlcs. But
such failure on the part Of the sheriff ean
never WORK the result Of diseh4TgfRg .
prisoner fnom 3 punishment 70 which
be has been sentenced by the laws q
the land and the Judgment Of his peers
By trial duly had. URder our LaLeas
ooTPas act it Is not permissible oven 70
a judge 10 question the correctness Of
the action Of the grand jury in finding .
bill Of indictment, or OF the petit jury
In the trial Of q cause, nor Of a court or
judge when acting within their legiti-
mate province and In n lawful manner.
Section 81, habeds corpus act, page $40,
Compiled laws Of Wyoming. That
leaves the question OF the lawfulness OF
the sentence 10 the penitentiary, al
though both counsel in the argument
held that the sentence was invalid and
improper, 10 be determined not by q
Judge upon q writ OF kabeds o0rpas, but
by the supreme court OF this territory,
upon n case properly made and present
ed; and this can the more readily he
done. since the fact appears by the re-
turn OF the sheriff and by the admis-
sions Of counsel in the argument, that
the term OF the district court in and for
Uintah county Is still In session and
will not be ended until the 9th Of the
present month. The foregoing results
that l have reached are sustained by
the following citations:
at lisa rule essential 70 the efficient
administration Of justice. !" says Hurd
on habeas corpus, page SIS. '.tiiAt when
a court is vested with jurisdiction over
the subject matter upon which IL as
sumes To act. and regularly obtains
jurisdiction of the person, it becomes
its right and duty to determine every
question which may arse In the cause
without interference from any other
tribunal"
Says Hurd again, page 1856: ..Habeas
corpus will be denied Ms an inappropriate
remedy when II Is discovered that IL in
terferes unnecessarily with another
competitor and acting Jurisdiction, for
II was never designed to Illustrate or in
terrupt Justice, nor To intermeddie with
other judicial proceedings while n ready
redress may be had by application to
the tribunal whose action nav be the
subject of the complaint"
Says the supreme court OF the United
States "a pdrte Siebold, 10 Otto, 375:
"A writ OF habeas corpus can not be
used as u mere writ OF error. A mere
error In the judgment or proceedings
under, and by virtue Of which a party
Is imprisoned, constitutes no ground
for the issue OF the writ. Hence, upon
a return to a habeas corpus. that the
prisoner Is detained under n conviction
and sentence by n court having juris-
diction Of the cause, the general rule Is
that he will be instantly remanded. No
inquiry will be instituted into the reg
ularlty OF the proceedings, unless, per-
haps, where the court has cognizance
by writ OF error, or appeal, TO review
the judgment"
The court Of the first judicial district
Of Wyoming has no power TO review
the proceedings by writ OF error or APP
peal OF any other court Of the terri.
tory; much less has q judge in chambers
that right. Hence hdbeds corpus Is nc
remedy In this case. II Is true, In IL
Wallace, the supreme court OF the
United States did interfere and dis
charge one LANCE from an Illegal re-
straint by virtue OF n judgment of the
court OF the southern district of New
York, but in that case II did 1t because
he was held without authority OF law.
The offense which he had committed
was punishable aiternatively. LANCE had
been punished by line, which he had
paid. The court then attempted to
modify the judgment by imposing I'M
prisonment instead Of the former en-
tence; and this It could not do, obvious
ly because the first judgment OF the
court had been executed rs u full salts
faction Of an alternative penalty OF the
law, and the power OF the court was mt
an end, and its judgment was absolutely
void. IL Is not claimed in this case
that Henry banks has absolutely and
fully satisfied the penalty imposed upon
him In any penitentiary, but only "a part
Of the Imprisonment of six years.
1t Is, therefore, ordered that the APP
plication In this case for the discharge
Of Henry banks from the custody OF
George W. Pepper, sheriff Of Uintah
county. must, and therefore, be over
ruled and denied. and the petitioner left
in the custody and keeping of the said
sheriff, who holds him under and by
virtue OF the proceedings held in the
court Of Uintah county, as shown by the
return of the sheriff OF said county,
and by the recorded evidence presented
by the petitioner.