Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D was charged in a federal court with aiding and abetting the escape of a fugitive slave from the deputy marshal, who had him in custody under a warrant issued by the district judge of the United States for that district, under the Act of Congress of September 18, 1850 (The Fugitive Slave Act.). Upon examination before the commissioner, D was held to bail to appear and answer before the District Court of the United States. D made application on the next day, to one of the justices of the Supreme Court of the State of Wisconsin, for a writ of habeas corpus, stating that he was restrained of his liberty by D under the warrant of commitment hereinbefore mentioned; and alleging that his imprisonment was illegal, because the act of Congress of September 18, 1850, was unconstitutional and void; and also that the warrant was defective, and did not describe the offence created by that act, even if the act were valid. The justice issued the writ of habeas corpus. The justice decided that his detention was illegal, and ordered the marshal to discharge him and set him at liberty, which was accordingly done. The marshal applied to the Supreme Court of the State for certiorari, setting forth in his application the proceedings hereinbefore mentioned, and charging that the release of D by the justice was erroneous and unlawful, and praying that these proceedings might be brought before the Supreme Court of the State for revision. The writ was granted and the Supreme Court of the State affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. A grand jury found a bill of indictment against D for the offence. A jury eventually found D guilty. D again filed habeas corpus to the State Supreme Court. It again granted the writ. The Attorney General of the United States presented a petition to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co