The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-11-16
ARGUMENT FOR MANDAMUS.
Continued from First Pase)

mis- RICH, ~ transfer the prisoners were
FOR all legal purposes common III .,, LII ,h'
In the jail of Lunenburg county, a. 49,
court had the right at any time 10 hasc
them brought hack to Lunenburg. BY
this refusal Of turning over the prisoi 'ns'
TO the Sheriff OF Lunenburg county on a,ae
ground that their lives would ne encan-
gered. officers Of the Commonwealth are
accused OF completely or murder. inns
charge is hurled py the Executive asai,n1
the Judge and Sheriff OF Lghs 3, a5,, I'm On
~, and this is the ground, II seeni'' VA
which he bases his jurisdiction. 49,,
There has no fact been stated 10 pear
any such construction or perVersio III,
spoke up the Attorney d. ,rho
Juncture. addressing the court; 49,.
Court sided with Major Scott ana MAJOR
Mann apologized for the interpretation
which he had given the action on tae
9 ,hne SIDE. and eNps So ms
In speaking on the position taken ~
the Circuit Court Of the city OF Rlchinohu,
Judge Marm continued: II the o.,,,u,'
Court has Jurisdiction in TINS hhdtte,'
then we cannot correct an error commit
ted by the same by a mandamus' put o.t,s
by an appeal But we contehn ma nd
Circuit Court is without Juris1lctlVi: a'e
that, therefore, we are ehutitu W "
writ OF rnangarnus The petition pre-
scented TO Judge Wexford FOR a VIII ..
habeas corpu. does not possess the "-s'
requisite demande by the statute. i, ~
pressly states that the prisoners are ld"
fully detained and the only ground upvh
which the writ is asked for is because tne
lives Of the prisoners are CONSIDERED 10 De
In danger II they are taken Dach ~ H'
nenburg.
THE QUESTION NOT DEBArABLf.
Iudga Mann then touched on the ques-'
ton as to whether the records OF ne
County Court cotild be changed after the
case had been taken 10 the SupIeinc
Court Of Appeals put Judsg h1 ~ a @.ro
presided, after cOnferring with MS dsso-
ciates. decided That this question as 10 the
power OF changing the records ulu hoe
arise for discussion AT this time. IL was
true that il could be taken up, out II thls
was done counsel FOR the prisoners csi-
tainly would have 10 be heard on th's
question.
Judge Mann then continued, There can
be no question as 10 the right OF the
County Court Of Lunenburg TO revoke us
order as To where the prisoners snail ne
kept I'm custody. The law preScripes that
"a Judge can make such transfer 10 an
otner jail. If he deems the JAN cohnecteu
with his court unsafe. and he surely mas
alone Jurisdiction over his prisoners II ne
issues such order The order OF tne
Judge of the Circuit Court Is W.,noue
Jurisdiction. because II Is nor baseu upon
any petition authorized by the statute OF
Virginia. Bot suPpOslng, ioI liic sam ~, ~
argument. that the Circuit court Hlu
have jurisdiction. IT failed 70 snow MA
the prisoners were unlawiully uetalh,u,
and By his order the judge so exceeded
that jurisdiction as 10 destroy us Naliuity:
The statute provides thai a VIII OF
habeas corpus must be disposed OF ar
once. but I'm this instance the order was 10
continue the writ, and the power or Keep
ing the prisoners in custody was trans
f-rred from the County Cour1 or Lnheh-
burg to the Circuit Court OF the CITY OF
Richmond for the judge of the latter
notified the sheriff OF the CITY or ficn-
mond TO keep the prisoners In his CUSTODY
subject TO the orders OF the Circuit court
OF the city OF Richmond.
Judge Mann also referred 10 the fact
that he had omitted TO refer In MS petl-
ton 10 the writ OF haoeas coipu. Wn-ch
had been served on the superintendent
Of the Denitentiary TO produce the BODY
of Mary Barnes an inmate OF that insti-
tuition, in the County Court OF Lunen-
burg.
The Attorney-General stated that he
could not rec any necessity for discussing
that matter because he had written a
letter " Judge organ explaining That
this order would not be obeyed. II tne
Judge desired to test that question all ne
would have to do would be to take an
appeal 10 this court.
INTERESTING CASE CITED.
Judge Mann cited many authorities to
show that the city Circuit Court had eN-
cecded iss jurisdiction, and that, there
fore. its order was nulhty, ana DISCUSS
ed with great force the vital Importance
OF keeping inviOlate the cardinal doctrines
OF our Constitution and Bill OF Rights.
II would bring riot and obstruction at
once. either TO have the courts Of the
Commonwealth warning with each other
or one OF the coordinate departments or
the government assuming control of amy
other In conclusion. he referred 10 the
ejectment suit of General Gusts Lee
against the United States TO recover pos
session of Arlington. which had been con-
fiscated by the Government and converted
into a National Cemetery. Appeals were
made to the Supreme Court judges, all
OF whom were Union men, 10 preserve the
sanctity of the soldiers graves and not
permit the title Of Arlington TO vest in
''rebel." One Of the justices asked Jere
Black. OF counsel for General Lee. wheth-
or he thought an action OF electment
would lie to recover title to land on
which the Government had inadevertent-
" built "A lighthouse. Better re-
sponded Judge Black. that every light
house on our coasts be eclipsed than the
light Of law and right be extinguished.'
DECISION PROBABLY MONDAY.
The court took the papers in the case.
but made no sign when il would render
a decision As there Is no session to-day,
IL cannot be looked for before Monday.