Idaho Springs siftings., 1904-08-20
HABEAs CORPUS AND MARTIAL
LAW.

Every possible attempt is being
made by Democratic and Socialist fus-
ion speakers. and the Democratic
press throughout the state. to create
the impression that In the recent la.
Dor troubles the governor suspended
the privilege Of the writ OF habeas cor
pus and declared martial law. and that
In SO doing he exceeded the limits OF
his authority. A. prominent Demo
cratic lawyer has made the following
statement upon this question:
'-fhe governor did not suspend the
privileges OF the writ. nor did he de-
clare martial law.
In the Meyer case, so far from de-
nying the privilege Of the writ, the
body Of AoYer was actually produced
in court, and that IS the case on which
most OF these allegations are based.
AS to martial law. there has not been
a single trial by court martial for an
offense alleged to have been commit
ted by any person not member OF
the National Guard. Under martial
law the civil courts are suspended and.
all trials are held by courts martial.
That the courts were not thus super.
seded. and that there were no courts
martial called. is sufficient evidence of
ist.
The Supreme Court declared the
state of the case very clearly in its
having been produced In court, It was
incumbent upon the governor to show
why Meyer had been restrained Of bis
liberty. This he did By showing that
In his opinion. based upon the repre-
sentations OF the civil authorities. a
state OF insurrection and rebellion ex-
listed In the Telluride and Cripple
Creek districts. that In the exercise OF
his executive duty. deyolYed upon him
by the constitution. he was compelled
TO decide whether such a state exist
ed or not. and that by the constitu-
tion he is the sole Judge In that mat
ter. A state of tnsurrection having
been declared to exist. such insurrec-
tion was put down by the military. act
Ing under the orders OF the governor
as chief civil officer OF the state: and
IL was put down by the means which
the military are empowered to employ
and which they usually do employ In
such cases. In the exercise OF his best
judgment. the commander In the Tel
luride district found that the presence
OF Moyer was a hindrance TO the sup
preston OF the insurrcction. and he
took Meyer into custody. When or
dered by Judge Stevens to release
Meyer, the order was disregnrded. and
the matter was passed up to the Su-
preme Court. That court having is
sued writ of habeas corpus com
manding that Meyer shohld be pro-
duced before 81. he was produced. and
argument was had as TO the right OF
the governor to deprive Meyer OF lib
erty temporarily. and while In his
Judgment the release OF the federation
president would be dangerous to the
peace OF the community. The court
decided that the constitution vested IN
the governor. and in him alone. the
authority to decide when case Of In
surrection and rebellion existed. and TO
put down such insurrection and rebel
lion by any means necessary. and that
wniie he is acting in that capacity and
for that end, the court has no turis-
dictlon to interfere with him in the
performance OF his duty.
This decision was In line with all
other decisions. on the same general
subject which have been made in 9TH
er states. Nothing is of more import
ance in our form of government than
that each department. legislative. ex-
ecutive and judicial. should be su-
preme In its own Jurisdiction. and
should not interfere with either OF the
other departments in matters that are
confined by the constitution 10 those
departments. and to them alone.