The Case Of Dorr

Tho Süpreme Court dënied ihe rhófion for a writ oC habeas" corpus to bring Dorr before them, because they had no" juriscliction in the premises. The Court laiddown the law in the following broad' andcompreliensive terms: ""Neithér fhis nor any öther court of the United States, or judgë thereóf, canissue a habeas corpus to bring up a pris-" otier who 'is in' ccrstódy irader a sentënce or execution cf a State court, for any other purpose than to be üsed as" á wit-' ness. And it is immateria} tfhether tho' imprisonment be under civil óf criminal process. As the few now stands,' an indi-" vidual who may be indicted in a Circuit; court for treason tíie United" States, is bevond the power" óf the feder-" al courts andjudges, if hé" bé iri custodjK under the authority of a State." It will be seen that the cbnsequencès of the decisión are important and exteüsitfë.Says' the Boston Chronicle, if an individ-" ual becomes obnoxious to'the vengéanco' of a State or its authorities, nó mattölr" whether for pohtical offéhcës, abolition1 doctrines, or personal malicé, he may bé" imprisoned, with violations Of right áüd of law ever so gross or cruclty ever so'rë-" volting, under State duthorityy éitliér beii:g a citizen of that' or any othër' Stiate,and HE HAS NO REMEDY. Á i$Wfing State cari in this way crusn áll the friends of the Union, and' defy the Federal courts, with absolute impuniiy,' aiid, TH ER E IS NU REMEDY. hï this ifüft Whatmean the 4!ñy 6th' and Öth articlos of amendmenf óf the Constitutión? What means tne constitutiohal' güaranty of the old commoa luw writ of habeas corpus? This" must be looked to.'