|
1
|
- HABEAS CORPUS
- POWER TO SUSPEND IN TIME OF WAR;
- PRESIDENT; MILITARY AUTHORITY;
- SUSPENSION BY CONGRESS.
|
|
2
|
- The petition presents the following case: The petitioner resides in
Maryland, in Baltimore county; while peaceably in his own house, with
his family, it was at two o'clock on the morning of the 25th of May
1861, entered by an armed force, professing to act under military
orders;
- he was then compelled to rise from his bed, taken into custody, and
conveyed to Fort McHenry, where he is imprisoned by the commanding
officer, without warrant from any lawful authority.
|
|
3
|
- [The arrest warrant does not allege] that any specific act, constituting
any offence against the laws of the United States, has been charged
against him upon oath,
- but he appears to have been arrested upon general charges of treason and
rebellion, without proof, and without giving the names of the witnesses,
or specifying the acts which, in the judgment of the military officer,
constituted these crimes.
- Having the prisoner thus in
custody upon these vague and unsupported accusations, he refuses to obey
the writ of habeas corpus, upon the ground that he is duly authorized by
the president to suspend it.
|
|
4
|
- The case, then, is simply this: a military officer, residing in
Pennsylvania, issues an order to arrest a citizen of Maryland, upon
vague and indefinite charges, without any proof, so far as appears;
under this order, his house is entered in the night, he is seized as a
prisoner, and conveyed to Fort McHenry, and there kept in close
confinement;
|
|
5
|
- and when a habeas corpus is served on the commanding officer, requiring
him to produce the prisoner before a justice of the supreme court, in
order that he may examine into the legality of the imprisonment,
- the answer of the officer, is that he is authorized by the president to
suspend the writ of habeas corpus at his discretion, and in the exercise
of that discretion, suspends it in this case, and on that ground refuses
obedience to the writ.
|
|
6
|
- As the case comes before me, therefore, I understand that the president
not only claims the right to suspend the writ of habeas corpus himself,
at his discretion, but to delegate that discretionary power to a
military officer, and to leave it to him to determine whether he will or
will not obey judicial process that may be served upon him.
|
|
7
|
- No official notice has been given to the courts of justice, or to the
public, by proclamation or otherwise, that the president claimed this
power, and had exercised it in the manner stated in the return.
- And I certainly listened to it with some surprise, for I had supposed it
to be one of those points of constitutional law upon which there was no
difference of opinion, and that it was admitted on all hands, that the
privilege of the writ could not be suspended, except by act of congress.
|
|
8
|
- When the conspiracy of which Aaron Burr was the head, became so
formidable, and was so extensively ramified, as to justify, in Mr.
Jefferson's opinion, the suspension of the writ,
- He claimed, on his part, no power to suspend it, but communicated his
opinion to congress, with all the proofs in his possession, in order
that congress might exercise its discretion upon the subject, and
determine whether the public safety required it.
- And in the debate which took place upon the subject, no one suggested
that Mr. Jefferson might exercise the power himself, if, in his opinion,
the public safety demanded it.
|
|
9
|
- Blackstone says: 'To assert an absolute exemption from imprisonment in
all cases is inconsistent with every idea of law and political society,
and in the end would destroy all civil liberty by rendering its
protection impossible.
- But the glory of the English law consists in clearly defining the times,
the causes and the extent, when, wherefore and to what degree, the
imprisonment of the subject may be lawful.
- This it is which induces the absolute necessity of expressing upon every
commitment the reason for which it is made, that the court, upon a
habeas corpus, may examine into its validity, and according to the
circumstances of the case, may discharge, admit to bail or remand the
prisoner.
|
|
10
|
- 'It is obvious that cases of a peculiar emergency may arise, which may
justify, nay, even require, the temporary suspension of any right to the
writ.
- But as it has frequently happened in foreign countries, and even in
England, that the writ has, upon various pretexts and occasions, been
suspended, whereby persons apprehended upon suspicion have suffered a
long imprisonment, sometimes from design, and sometimes because they
were forgotten, the right to suspend it is expressly confined to cases
of rebellion or invasion, where the public safety may require it
|
|
11
|
- The constitution provides, as I have before said, that 'no person shall
be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.'
- It declares that 'the right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated;
- and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath
or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched,
and the persons or things to be seized.'
- It provides that the party accused shall be entitled to a speedy trial
in a court of justice.
|
|
12
|
- These great and fundamental laws, which congress itself could not
suspend, have been disregarded and suspended, like the writ of habeas
corpus, by a military order, supported by force of arms.
- Such is the case now before me, and I can only say that if the authority
which the constitution has confided to the judiciary department and
judicial officers, may thus, upon any pretext or under any
circumstances, be usurped by the military power, at its discretion, the
people of the United States are no longer living under a government of
laws, but every citizen holds life, liberty and property at the will and
pleasure of the army officer in whose military district he may happen to
be found.
|
|
13
|
- In such a case, my duty was too plain to be mistaken. I have exercised
all the power which the constitution and laws confer upon me, but that
power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome. It is
possible that the officer who has incurred this grave responsibility may
have misunderstood his instructions, and exceeded the authority intended
to be given him;
|
|
14
|
- I shall, therefore, order all the proceedings in this case, with my
opinion, to be filed and recorded in the circuit court of the United
States for the district of Maryland, and direct the clerk to transmit a
copy, under seal, to the president of the United States. It will then
remain for that high officer, in fulfillment of his constitutional
obligation to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed,' to
determine what measures he will take to cause the civil process of the
United States to be respected and enforced.
|