Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-11-22

question the power of that court 10 make
such orders ~ it might deem proper IN
the premises 10 The discharge Of its duty.
IL was his duty To ooey - orders. ana 10
deliver the prisoners 10 the Sheriff OF
the county ~ directed. If the prisoners
themselves questioned the power of the
County Court To- make the order that was
made. and wished 60 prevent its eXccu-
ton. they had the right to have that
question determined by the courts by
rcsorting 10 the appropriate proceeding
I'm such cases.
JUDGE WELLFORD IN ERROR.
Another ground upon which the re-
spondcn, bases his refusal to obey the
order of The County Court is that. after
Tho Governor had ordered hinr not to de-
liver the prisoners 10 the sheriff Of Lii
ncnburg county. no was required by the
Judge of the Circuit Court OF the city
OF Richmond TO produce the bodies Of
The prisoners before him. and that he
now holds them subject 10 his order. and
files with his answer copy Of the pro-
ccedinGs before the Judge of that court
Ia the habeas-cOrpus case
The petition Of tho prisoners IN ttat
case, upon which the writ Of habeas cor
pus was issued. does not allegc facts
which show that they were detained
without lawful authority; nor does IT al
lcEc that they are so detained. On the
contrary. they ailcge in their petition
that they were at that time In She law
ful custody al the keeper Of the Jail OF
the city OF Richmond; but express grave
apprehension that the keeper OF the Jail
would deliver them 70 the Sheriff Of Lu-
nenburg county. IN obedience 10 The order
Of the County Court. The fear that
their custodian might deliver them 20 the
Sheriff of LuncnbuIT county. and thus.
iu their view place them ina Illegal Gus
tody furnished no sufficient ground for
awarding tho writ
The writ Of habcas corpus does not
issue as ~ course TO every one impris-
oned or detained who imagines himself
or another entitled 10 its benefits.
Though the writ is q writ Of right IL
should not be granted, except upon pro-
bablr cause shown. and the party ask
ing for it must make out prima facie
ease. Spillng on Extraordinary Re
lief section 1l94: Sims Case. Cush. 2Aj,
29i: Church on Habcas Corpus. section
%: Hurd on Habeas Corpus, pages 222
TO 81.
The facts in this case not showing
probable cause. it is insisted that the
action Of the Judge Of the Circuit Court
was without jurisdiction and. therefore
void. and shows no cause why the man
THE MANDAMrS REFUSED.
Whilst the allegations Of the petition
did not warrant the Judge of the Circuit
Court in granting the writ of habeas cor
pus. yet having done so. his act was
not void
When a court has general jurisdiction
over cases of that class. 10 which the
one I'm controversy belongs although the
facts in the case may not have been
sufficient TO authorize the court To take
jurisdiction. yet. If it did go. the question
OF jurisdiction having been decided by
lts Judgment. cannot be raised again. oN-
ccpt by a proceeding In error. Fisher
vs.. Eassctt Leigh. ll9, l3l. Cox ".
Thomas Graft. 323. S2S. Gibson ". Bek-
han. l6 Graft. 81 and 326.
And Il appearing from the respondents
answer and the order Of the Judge of the
Circuit Court that the prisoners are now
held under that order. good cause is
shown why the mandamus prayed for
should not hc awarded.
n is hardly necessary 10 say that We
have no doubt that the Governor and
All the other officials connected with or
involved In this most unfortunate and
nnseemly controversy have been governed
by the utmost good faith IN the perform
ancc Of their duties. and in the assertion
Of their rights as they understood them.
An order viii be entered refusing the
mandamus. and dismissing the petition.
JUDGE KEITHS OPINION.
Judge Keith. president of the court
Med the following independent opinion.
| concur i'm the opinion just delivered
hy Judge Buchanan, except that IT. is by
no means clear TO me that the Judge Of
Luncnburc or the County Court Of that
county had any jurisdiction in this mat
ter after final Judgment was pronounced
upOn the prisoners except special Ju-
rfsdiction under the statute for the
safe-kceping of the prisoners. II this
be- so The facts upon which the special
Jurisdiction was exercised should have
appeared upon the face of the order. s.
coudly. ihe opinion OF the court con-
cedcs the jurisdiction of Judge Wexford
over the prisoners under the habeas cor
nus proceedings. That being true. the
propriev Of its exercise can only be re-
viewed or property animadVerted upon
here ON appeal or writ of error.
I'm The Judgment rendered fully con-
cur.