Ex parte Toney

• Citation: 11 Mo. 661
• Parties: EX-PARTE TONEY, ALIAS WILLIAM MORTON.
• Decision Date: 31 July 1848
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

11 Mo. 661

EX-PARTE TONEY, ALIAS WILLIAM MORTON.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

July Term, 1848.

Per Curiam.

In July, 1842, Toney, a slave, escaped from the service of his master, Thomas Williams, who resided in Montgomery county, Tennessee, and came to St. Louis in this State. Whilst in that county, he committed four grand larcenies, for which he was severally indicted and tried at the July term of the Criminal Court of St. Louis county, and sentenced to eleven years imprisonment in the penitentiary. He was arraigned as a free person by the name of William Morton, and on his arraignment pleaded guilty to the several indictments. His master, who had not heard of him since his escape in 1842, being informed of his confinement in the penitentiary here, sent on an agent, Wm. H. Stuart, who identified the slave, and on his behalf, who freely consents to his proceeding, and as agent for his owner, applied to this court for a writ of habeas corpus for the discharge of the slave, as the law does not warrant his confinement in the penitentiary for the offenses of which he was convicted, he not being a free person. These facts appearing in the petition and the exhibits thereto, it was agreed by the parties, that the right of the prisoner to his discharge should be determined on the application for the writ.

In deciding on the propriety of discharging a prisoner on habeas corpus, this court exercises no appellate jurisdiction. In the exercise of this power, it is confined within the same limits which would restrain a judge of the Circuit or County Court in its exercise. It can give no other or greater relief than is afforded by these officers. If the idea of all appellate jurisdiction is discarded it will be obvious that this court nor no other court nor officer can investigate the legality of a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction by a writ of habeas corpus. If the court has jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the person, although its proceedings may be irregular or erroneous, yet, they cannot be set aside in this proceeding. The party must resort to his writ or error or other direct remedy to reverse or set aside the judgment, for in all collateral proceedings it will be held to be conclusive.

The sixth section of the third article of the act regulating proceedings on writs of habeas corpus, expressly directs, that the prisoner shall be remanded if it appears that he is confined by virtue of the final judgment or decree of any competent court of civil...