When was it published?

April 21, 1842 in Martinsburg Gazette

Domestic News April 21, 1842

Martinsburg Gazette

Q: What keywords are associated?

Bankrupt Law, Debtor Arrest, Habeas Corpus, Baltimore Court, Sangston Case

Martinsburg, Berkeley County, West Virginia

View full issue View on Library of Congress PDF Page 2

What is this article about?

US District Court in Baltimore ruled that filing a bankruptcy petition does not exempt a debtor from arrest or release from custody, as in the case of Wm. R. Sangston of Caroline County, who was denied discharge via habeas corpus.

Clipping

OCR Quality

95% Excellent

Full Text

It has been decided in the District Court of the United States for Baltimore, that the filing of petition for the benefit of the Bankrupt law, does not exempt a debtor from arrest, nor release his person from confinement, if he be in custody. The question arose upon the case of Wm. R. Sangston, of Caroline County, who had been committed to jail by virtue of a ca. sa. issued upon a judgment obtained against him in the Circuit Court. He was brought before the Judge by habeas corpus, and claimed his discharge, upon the ground that he had applied for the benefit of the Bankrupt law. The Court refused to discharge him.

What sub-type of article is it?

Legal Or Court

What keywords are associated?

Bankrupt Law Debtor Arrest Habeas Corpus Baltimore Court Sangston Case

What entities or persons were involved?

Wm. R. Sangston

Where did it happen?

Baltimore

Domestic News Details

Primary Location

Baltimore

Key Persons

Wm. R. Sangston

Outcome

the court refused to discharge him.

Event Details

It has been decided in the District Court of the United States for Baltimore, that the filing of petition for the benefit of the Bankrupt law, does not exempt a debtor from arrest, nor release his person from confinement, if he be in custody. The question arose upon the case of Wm. R. Sangston, of Caroline County, who had been committed to jail by virtue of a ca. sa. issued upon a judgment obtained against him in the Circuit Court. he was brought before the Judge by habeas corpus, and claimed his discharge, upon the ground that he had applied for the benefit of the Bankrupt law.