Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1888-04-23

or even mdlut31u nci OWht Az e.s.D~ -
State to maintain itself and carry on the
functions Of government it Is necessary
that Governor Wilson should have his citi-
zens secure in their citizenship, quieted In
their domiciles and confident in the saneti-
ty of the laws of their State and OF the
| United States. Iftheee things are to be
allowed DO man, woman or child In any
State can know at what moment ne or sne
may be captured and carried from home TO
to foreign jurisdiction.
The State has surrendered her power to
recapture these men to the General Gov
eminent, and therefore respectfully sub
NIT that il becomes the duty OF that Gov
eminent to do through its courts In this
case what the State would otherwise DO
through its armies, and upon this point
cite your honors to Sd Mclean, ~
Smiths case.
That the Governor of State has the
right TO make this application / refer to
the well-kuovn rule of the common law.
That in the cases OF orphans and those
of general interest affecting the public 1t is
the duty of the Crown as '.pater pdtria' to
sue ont writs Of kdbeas corpus and its solic-
itor TO prosecute them. (Dow's Case, 18th
Penn :,
That il was intended that the Federal
Courts should have the power, in protect.
ing the liberty and lives OF the citizens OF
tbs different States, TO supervise and set
aside the DEGREES of State Courts and hber-
ate men held under them as well as to dis
regard acts of State Legislatures, refer to
Articles v, vi, viii.
REGRETS OF CITIZENSHIP.
The rslator, Plyant Mahon, claims that
under Article iv, Section ., he was guaran.
teed all the privileges and immunities OF
citizans of the several States, and he as
serts that the dearest of all those "privil-
leges and immunities' was the right to
enjoy his domicile unmolested and TO ap-
peal TO the Courts and laws OF. his State
and judgment of his peers for protection.
These have been denied him.
he again asserts that the second clause
of that same section, after making that
guarantee, provided the only means by
which he could be deprived Of these
benefits, and that that is the only due
process of law" by which he could be so
deprived. -
He asserts that article guarantees that
he shall not "be deprived Of life, liberty
or property without due process Of law"
and he claims that his confinement Is
such.
Again, be asserts that the state Of Ken
lucky, in enforcing what she claims to be
one Of her laws, in his case is violating
the Fourteenth Amendment TO the con-
stitusion, which declares that mo state
shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities Of
citizens of the United States" and he
claims that this action on the part Of the
said state of Kentucky does 'abridge his
privileges and immuuities."
Being thus captured contrary to the pro
visions of the Constitution and having
rights hereunder, he submits that the
Federal courts have jurisdiction Of his
case and should right his wrong. In that
refer to Rsuscher's case, 407, and Keer's
case, 436, 119 United States Reports.
KENTUCKY's CLAIM.
But the State Of Kentucky, admitting
the wrongful capture and violation Of the
REALTORS, Piyant Mahone's constitutional
rights, claims that she was no party there
to, and not responsible therefor. This po-
sition is untenable. The taking and
holding was one continuous act by the
same officers of the State of Kentucky,
and was her act for the purposes
of this case. The act of Phillips in cap
turing and of Kline in locking him up in
Jail without warrant or mittimus, were
both the wrongful acts of the State OF Ken
lucky (see Cooley's Constitutional Limita-
tions, page y; and being thus carried out
of their own jurisdiction into the jurisdic-
ton of the State of Kentucky by fraud and
force ofarms, and held under arrest, while
80 held no process could be legally served
upon him or become 'due process Of law"
nor could the State Of Kentucky or the
Courts thereof acquire any rights or get
any jurisdiction by this wrong.
Upon this point refer to 1S Penn. 81;
12 Pickering go, and cases therein cited,
and to 16ih America, Decisions 723, and
note.
In view of all of which respectfully
submit that the relator has been captured
and is now detained, in violation OF his
constitutional rights as citizen of the
State of West Virginia and Of the United
States, and that the State of West Virginia
has been invaded and deprived of the use,
services, and enjoyment of her subjects in
violation of the Constitution of the United
States of America.
EUsTACE GIBSON,
OF Counsel for Appetldnt.