Power, J. L. (fl. 1861) The Merryman habeas corpus case, Baltimore. The proceedings in full and opinion of Chief Justice Taney. The United States Government a military despotism.
High-resolution images are available to schools and libraries via subscription to American History, 1493-1943. Check to see if your school or library already has a subscription. Or click here for more information. You may also order a pdf of the image from us here.
A high-resolution version of this object is available for registered users. LOG IN
Gilder Lehrman Collection #: GLC00833 Author/Creator: Power, J. L. (fl. 1861) Place Written: Jackson, Mississippi Type: Pamphlet Date: 1861 Pagination: 16 p. ; 22 x 14 cm. Order a Copy
Prints the proceedings of the Merryman case and Chief Justice Roger B. Taney's decision that Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional.
After the fall of Fort Sumter in 1861, President Lincoln suspended the right of due process and implemented martial law, arresting some 18,000 civilians as secessionists. John Merryman, an avowed secessionist, was arrested and detained. Taney found that Merryman was being held unlawfully and issued a writ of habeas corpus. The jail official refused to comply, citing that he was complying with an order from President Lincoln. Taney held that only Congress had the power to suspend habeas corpus, not the president.
Citation Guidelines for Online Resources
The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.