HABEAS-CORPUS ACT AMENDED.

The occasion that produced the next bill which miscarried we shall explain, as an incident equally extraordinary and interesting. By an act passed in the preceding session, for recruiting his majesty’s land-forces and marines, we have already observed, that the commissioners thereby appointed were vested with a power of judging ultimately, whether the persons brought before them were such as ought, by the rules prescribed in the act, to be impressed into the service; for it was expressly provided, that no person, so impressed by those commissioners, should be taken out of his majesty’s service by any process, other than for some criminal accusation. During the recess of parliament, a gentleman having been impressed before the commissioners, and confined in the Savoy, his friends made application for a habeas-corpus, which produced some hesitation, and indeed an insurmountable difficulty; for, according to the writ of habeas-corpus, passed in the reign of Charles the Second, this privilege relates only to persons committed for criminal or supposed criminal matters, and the gentleman did not stand in that predicament. Before the question could be determined he was discharged, in consequence of an application to the secretary at war; but the nature of the case plainly pointed out a defect in the act, seemingly of the most dangerous consequence to the liberty of the subject. In order to remedy this defect, a bill for giving a more speedy relief to the subject, upon the writ of habeas-corpus, was prepared, and presented to the house of commons, which formed itself into a committee, and made several amendments. It imported, that the several provisions made in the aforesaid act, passed in the reign of Charles II. for the awarding of writs of habeas- corpus, in cases of commitment or detainer for any criminal or supposed criminal matter, should, in like manner, extend to all cases where any person, not being committed or detained for any criminal or supposed criminal matter, should-be confined, or restrained of his or her liberty, under any colour or pretence whatsoever; that, upon oath made by such person so confined or arrested, or by any other on his or her behalf, of any actual confinement or restraint, and that such confinement or restraint, to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person so applying, was not by virtue of any commitment or detainer for any criminal or supposed criminal matter, an habeas-corpus, directed to the person or persons so confining or restraining the party, as aforesaid, should be awarded and granted, in the same manner as is directed, and under the same penalties as are provided by the said act, in the case of persons committed and detained for any criminal or supposed criminal matter; that the person or persons before whom the party so confined or restrained should be brought, by virtue of any habeas-corpus granted in the vacation time, under the authority of this act, might and should, within three days after the return made, proceed to examine into the facts contained in such return, and into the cause of such confinement and restraint; and thereupon either discharge, or bail, or remand the parties so brought, as the case should require, and as to justice should appertain. The rest of the bill related to the return of the writ in three days, and the penalties incurred by those who should neglect or refuse to make the due return, or to comply with any other clause of this regulation. The commons seemed hearty in rearing up this additional buttress to the liberty of their fellow-subjects, and passed the bill with the most laudable alacrity; but in the house of lords such a great number of objections were started, that it sunk at the second reading, and the judges were ordered to prepare a bill for the same purpose, to be laid before that house in the next session.