El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1912-12-07
SAYS LIBERTY.
IN DANCER
IN j. s.
Attorney For Pascual oroz-
CO, ST., Questions Power
of the President.
CONSTITUTION
rs VIOLATED"

Euenues declares that liberty IS unSale
in the United states if the contention
Of the president regarding his right
TO arrest and hold persons IN the hands
OF the military is upheld by the court
Mr.. Mile returned from AuStin,
where he d the case before fed
have his Cents released on habeas
corpus. When asked for statement
relative TO the case, he said:
The United States district attorney,
IN his return 10 the writ OF habeas
corpus contended that the president
of the United States had the right IN
der section IA, OF penal code, to cause
the arrest and detention of anyone
suspected by him of having in view or
contemplating the violation OF any OF
the neutrality laws OF the United
States, and that this right to arrest
such suspected persons, carried win IL
the right to detain them in custody so
long, as in the discretion Of the presi-
dent, it is proper to 90 so and that
the courts can not interfere in such de-
tentioR unless an abuse Of such dis
erection Of the president was shown
The government, in its return on
the writ Of habeas corpus, admitted
that II was not in possession OF facts
which would justify or authorize the
government IN filing q complaint
against Col. Orozco and causing his
arrest hereunder for a violation OF any
Of the neutrality laws OF the United
States, but that it had reason to be-
tention to violate such laws and there
fore. the president had the right 70
cause his arrest and detention to pre-.
vent the possibility Of the violation OF
such laws by him.
Defendants Contentious.
@On behalf Of Col Orozcos we con-
tended that section IA, Of the penal
code, relied upon by the government 70
sustain the exercise OF such power py
the president was not susceptible or
such construction but merely author
lied the president to use the army and
navy 10 prevent threatened Nloie-
ton Of the neutrality laws by mill
tary enterprise or expedition when the
civil authorities were poWerless 10
cope with such enterprise or expedl-
ton and when thus apPrehenoed
forthwith deliver them TO the civil au-
thorities for prosecution such con
struction, we commended, was appar-
ent on the face OF the section, and the
neutrality act because
First That one of the contingent
cies provided for by section II, was:
In every case in which any process
issuing out Of any court Of the United
States is disobeyed or resisted by any
person having custody CT any Yessel
of war, etc-fOr the purpose OF taking
possession of and OBTAINING any such
vessel with her prizes, If any, Ia order |
to the execution OF the prohibitions |
and penalties Of this tide, and,
Second BY the subsequent section /
given to the collector Of customs to de-
tain any vessel manifestly built Tor
WarliSe purposes and aDour to depart
the United States the cargo OF Wnlch
principally consists of arms and nu-
nitions of war and when the number
Of men shipped on board OF otner CIR
cunstances rendered it probable that
such vessel is intended to be employed
by the owner TO cruise or commit nos. nos
tilities upon the subjects OF citizens
of any foreign prince or state, etc.
with whom the United states IS al
peace, until the decision OF the presl-
dent is had thereon, or until the owner
gives such bond and security as is re-
quiFed Of the owners Of armed vessels
by other provisions Of the act
The Presidents Power.
The portions of the law first above
ouoted indicate clearly mat military
expedition might be OF such force as
to make it impossible for the civil au-
thorities to prevent ITS departure
from the United states and the m
vasfon of q neutral power hence the |
necessity for the president to call out
the army and navy to prevent such IN
rasion, and when III eparties composing |
the same had been apprenendeos Ihef
delivery TO the civil authorities Tor |
prosecution under the act
The second section OF the law
uuoted above, under well established !
rule of statutory construction mega
tfves the intent of congress TO vest /
to detain an individual suspected OF |
intent to violate our neutrality laws /
as is conferred upon him with refer
ence TO a ship; for, If the president had /
authority, under section Il, to detain /
an individual. he would likewise have /
authority under said section, to detaln /
ship, and the enactment OF the SUD
seouent section Of the law relating to i
a ship would have been absolutely IN
Cites Authority.
Our construction is directly sup |
ported by the case Of Gelston vs. Hoyt' /
Wheat so, sunltea states So sliis
Court rendered by justice story. IN 4
about 1918, IN which chief justice Mar
snail concurred. Furthermore, such i
construction, however is the only one
Judicial history Of all English speak
ing people and TO otherwise eonstrue /
II. would do violence to certain prin- 1
cipasi of free government, held TO be /
imnutable at least until the admins
tration Of president Taft
"Our contention as to the construc-
ton Of this statute has support N /
many other decisions Of the federal /
and state courts Of this country.
I'VE furthermore, contended that /
the construction Of the statutes con-
tended for by the president violated 1
all those provisions OF the /
first ten amendments TO the constitu-
lion Of the United states designed 70 /
secure the individual liberty OF citl- /
Gems and persons in the United States, /
GCouStitutiOn violated"
such construction as contended for
by the government, clearly violates /
article :, section /, 2 and 3, Of the con-
stitution Of the United States, Testing
the judicial power in a supreme court
and such inferior courts as congress
should from time to time ordain and
establish and; provided that the ju-
dicial power should extend TO all
cases in law and equity arising under
the constitution and laws Of the
United States and treaties made there !
under: and that the trial Of all crimes,
except in cases Of impeachment, should
I'VE further claimed that such de-
tention of OEoZeo WIS in fragrant vio-
alton of article 4, Of the amendments
Of the constitution OF the United
States providing, in substance, the
rights of the people to be secure in
their persons-against unreasonable
searches and seizures should not be
violated; and no warrant shall issue,
but upon prOba bic cause supported by
path or affirmation
Personal Liberty Endangered.
a moments reflection will convince
lnv man that if the president has the
power claimed for him in this instance.
personal liberty no longer exists in che
United States because, If the president
,an. without complaint under oath