The Jasper Weekly Courier

To the Editor of the Enquirer:

A writ of habeas corpus was issued against General Cadwallader, on Saturday last, for the purpose of obtaining the release of John Merriman, Esq. Cadwallader this morning replied that he would not deliver up Merriman, as the President had authorized him to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act whenever he thinks proper.

One of the counsel of Mr. Merriman desired to know whether Colonel Lee had produced the body of Merriman? as the writ commanded. Colonel Lee replied that he had not; that the extent of his instructions were to read the paper he had submitted to the Court. Chief Justice Taney—"General Cadwallader was, by that writ, commanded to produce the body of Mr. Merriman before me this morning, that the case might be heard, and the petitioner either remanded to his custody or be dismissed if held on insufficient grounds, but he has acted in disobedience to that high writ, and I direct that an attachment be at once issued against him returnable before me here to-morrow at twelve o'clock."

To the Editor of The Enquirer.

The habeas corpus case of John Merriman was ended to-day, as it was expected that it would be. The Marshal visited Fort McHenry to serve the writ, but was denied admittance. Chief Justice Taney delivered the following decision in the case:

"So far as my power goes, the Court feels its duty to enforce its protest against the contempt committed. The military is subject to civil jurisdiction; and I will briefly set down the course I intend to take. I ordered the attachment yesterday, because upon the face of the return, the detention of the prisoner was unlawful, upon two grounds: First, the President, under the Constitution and laws of the United States cannot suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or authorize any military officer to do so. Second, the military officer has no right to arrest and detain a person subject to the rules and articles of war, for an offense against the laws of the Union, except in and by Judicial authority or subject to its control; and if the party is arrested by the military, it is the duty of the officer to deliver him over immediately to the civil authority, to be dealt with according to law."

I forbore yesterday to state orally the provisions of the Constitution which make these principles the fundamental laws of the Union, because an oral statement might be misunderstood in some portions of it, and I shall therefore put my opinion in writing, and file it with the Clerk in the office of the Court in the course of this week.

In relation to the present return the Court said: With relation to the present return, I would state that the Marshal has the power to summon the posse comitatus, and take forcible possession of the party attached, but as the force is so large at the Fort at this time the effort would be useless. That being the case the Court has no power to direct the forcible taking of the party, but only has power under the laws of the land, when the party is brought before it, to force the liberation of the prisoner by an order of the Court, imposing fine and imprisonment upon the officer making the arrest; but if by a superior force the party manages to keep out of the reach of the Court, it can but enter its protest against it. I will reduce to writing my opinion in the case, and having done so shall report to the President in person the facts, lay before him the official documents in the case, call on him to perform his Constitutional duty, and urge upon him the absolute necessity of a proper recognition of the Constitution and laws.