416 



HABEAS CORPUS. 



charging the crime or offence, nor warrant pursuant 

 to it, to authorize the arrest, the warrant in this case, 

 therefore, is unauthorized, and the relator is entitled 

 to be discharged. 



This decision is not one that conflicts as between 

 the civil and military authorities of the country. It 

 is an important clause of our Constitution and right, 

 that the military shall in all cases and at all times be 

 in strict subservience to the civil pfbwer, and it will, 

 doubtless, be as agreeable to the military authorities 

 that there should be a return to the normal condition 

 in this respect, as peace happily reigns, as to the 

 civil authorities themselves. On this simple fact, 

 considering the return, and no more, I discharge 

 this claimant. I do not go into the question whether 

 Congress has the right to put into the army contract- 

 ors or others. It is not necessary to this decision. 

 I must discard all considerations that have been sug- 

 gested arising out of the fact that Mr. Cozzens has 

 been tried by a military tribunal. It would have 

 presented a different question had' it been returned 

 here that he was in execution under the finding of 

 that court. I hope, however, most earnestly hope, 

 now at the end of the long terrible war we have just 

 passed through, that the President of the United 

 btates will do speedily what I think he ought to do, 

 refuse his sanction to all trials of offences that are 

 not purely military, and let the citizen be again re- 

 turned to the tribunals to which he is accustomed to 

 answer, and there to receive the punishment of which 

 he shall be found to be guilty. I make no decision on 

 this question, for the question of trial is not returned 

 as the reason for the arrest, nor will it, therefore, be 

 proper for me to notice it. The return is based sim- 

 ply on the power of the President to order the arrest 

 under the authority of the suspension of the writ of 

 habeas corpus. Therefore, the decision in one great 

 question, must, in my judgment, decide all questions 

 of this kind. That is to say, the time allowed the 

 President to exercise this power is at an end. The 

 bow of peace spans the whole country, and that was 

 to be the sign that all should be secured in their 

 rights hereafter. I have, I believe, nothing further 

 that it is necessary to add. I have thought with a 

 great deal of care on this subject. I have approved 

 the calm and dispassionate manner of the discus- 

 sious, that was becoming the gentlemen engaged on 

 both sides. I am obliged, therefore, to order the re- 

 lease of the relator. 



Cozzens was accordingly discharged, and the case 

 thus ended. 



No case has arisen concerning the suspension 

 of the writ of habeas corpus, which gave rise 

 to more comment and created greater interest 

 than that in reference to Thomas 0. A. Dexter in 

 the U. S. Court of Alabama, before Judge Eich- 

 ard Busteed. The facts of the case are stated as 

 follows : R. F. Andrews, Esq., counsel for Mr. 

 Dexter, presented a petition setting forth the 

 grounds on which action was requested, and 

 praying that the writ might issue to Gen. Woods 

 and to Col. Brooks, provost marshal, in whose 

 custody it was alleged Mr. Dexter was held. 

 The writ was allowed, returnable November 

 22d. On that day proof of the service of this 

 writ on Gen. C. R. "Woods, and on Hunter 

 Brooks, the provost marshal, was made, and . 

 Judge Busteed asked if either of the respond- 

 ents was present. Neither of them appearing, 

 the Judge caused proclamation for them to bo 

 made, and the crier called out the name of each 

 three times.. Mr. Andrews 'stated that Gen. 

 Woods and Col. Brooks had each made a return 

 to the writ, and read to the Court the return 

 of Col. Brooks, as follows : 



HEADQITABTEP.S DEPARTMENT or ALABAMA, ) 

 OFFICE PBOVOST MARSHAL GENERAL, Nov. 21, 1866. f 

 Respectfully returned. I am acting under military 

 orders from Maj.-Gen. C. K. Woods, commanding 

 this department. 



I do not recognize the authority of Judge Busteed, 

 and therefore decline to respond furthjer to the writ 

 HUNTER BROOKS " 

 Brevet Lieut.-Col. and Provost Marshal Genera). 



The following return was made by Maj.-Gon. 

 Charles R. Woods: 



HEADQUAKTEBS DEPARTMENT or ALABAMA, I 

 MOBILE, ALA., Nov. 22, 1865. ) 



By way of return to the within writ, I, Brevet Maj.- 

 Gen. Charles R. Woods, of the United States volun- 

 teers, commanding the Department of Alabama, re- 

 spectfully show that the said Thomas C. A. Dexter, 

 in said writ named, is imprisoned and detained by 

 me, by authority of the President of the United States, 

 and of Maj.-Gen. George H. Thomas, commanding 

 the Military Division of Tennessee. That by the 

 order and proclamation of the President of the United 

 States, the writ of habeas corpus is suspended in the 

 State of Alabama, and that consistentlv with the 

 orders of my military superiors, the President of the 

 United States, and Mai. -Gen. Thomas, I cannot pro- 

 duce the body of said Thomas C. A. Dexter before any 

 civil tribunal, and protesting due respect for the Hon- 

 orable the Court or the United States for the District 

 of Alabama, I decline to obey the writ, or to make 

 any other or further return. 



CHARLES R. WOODS, Brevet Maj.-Gen., 

 Commanding Department of Alabama. 



Judge Busteed then asked the counsel if he 

 had any motion to make, whereupon Mr. An- 

 drews argued that both the returns were wholly 

 defective and insufficient, and moved in conclu- 

 sion for an order directing Gen. Woods and 

 Col. Brooks to make a further and full return to 

 the writ. 



The Judge said in answer: "I agree with 

 what counsel has said touching the insufficiency 

 of these neturns. That of the provost marshal 

 is not insufficient only, it is disrespectful to the 

 Court. It is not proper in making an answer 

 to a writ of habeas corpus to deny the authority 

 of the officer issuing the writ. This is no part 

 of a return. I can but hope that an officer in 

 the military service of the United States of the 

 rank of the respondent Brooks, is not guilty 

 of intentional disrespect to the courts of the 

 United States, and that the language in which 

 he couches his return is the result of his igno- 

 rance of what was proper in the premises. If 

 I supposed that the matter complained of pro- 

 ceeded from viciousness, it would be my duty 

 to order that he show cause to-morrow morning 

 why he should not be proceeded against as for 

 contempt. I choose the charitable construction, 

 and pass it over with these observations. The 

 motion that he make a further return will not 

 be granted. It is unnecessary, because in what 

 he calls his return he says he is acting under 

 orders from Gen. Woods, his department com- 

 mander, and because in the return made by 

 Gen. Woods he assumes the responsibility of the 

 imprisonment of the petitioner. 



" The motion will be granted as it respects 

 the return made by Gen. Woods. This return 

 is altogether insufficient. It does not comply 

 in any essential with the requirements of the 



