In re Boyle
Decision Date | 16 June 1899 |
Citation | 6 Idaho 609,57 P. 706 |
Parties | IN RE WILLIAM BOYLE |
Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
HABEAS CORPUS-INSURRECTION.-In case of insurrection or rebellion the governor, or military officer in command, for the purpose of suppressing the same, may suspend the writ of habeas corpus, or disregard such writ, if issued.
SAME-PROCLAMATION OF GOVERNOR.-The truth of recitals of alleged facts in a proclamation issued by the governor proclaiming a certain county of the state to be in a state of insurrection and rebellion will not be inquired into or reviewed on application for a writ of habeas corpus.
SUSPENSION OF WRIT-MARTIAL LAW-MILITARY FORCES.-The proclamation of the governor declaring Shoshone county to be in a state of rebellion, and his action in calling to his aid the military forces of the United States for the purpose of restoring good order and the supremacy of the law, had the effect to put into force, to a limited extent, martial law in said county and such action is not in violation of the constitution, but in harmony with it, being necessary for the preservation of the government and its necessary self-defense.
(Syllabus by the court.)
Original proceeding upon application for writ of habeas corpus.
Demurrer sustained, and writ denied.
T. C Robertson, Patrick Reddy and Plat B. Elderkin, for Petitioner, file no brief.
Samuel H. Hays, Attorney General, files no brief.
This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus. To the petition a general demurrer is filed. The only question presented for our determination is, Does the petition state facts entitling the petitioner to the writ? The petition alleges the illegal detention of the petitioner, and sets forth the alleged cause of, and authority for, such detention; and it is upon the alleged illegality or want of authority therefor that petitioner bases his right to the writ. As to the facts set up in the petition, so far as not contradictory or conflicting, for the purposes of this decision, in so far as they are assumed to be true, do they constitute sufficient ground for the issuance of the writ? It appears from the petition that on the fourth day of May, 1899, the governor of the state of Idaho issued the following proclamation:
That thereafter, upon the call of the governor, a military force was sent into said Shoshone county by the President of the United States, which proceeded at once to secure the arrest of ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Idaho State AFL-CIO v. Leroy
...upon which the Governor declared to have prompted his action. The Gallet Court might have drawn a better comparison to In re Boyle, 6 Idaho 609, 57 P. 706 (1899). Article 3, § 15, as here pertinent, reads in part that the legislature may "in case of urgency," by a two-thirds vote of either ......
-
Russell Petroleum Co. v. Walker
...the state court. See: State v. Holden, 64 N.C. 829; Appeal of Hartranft, 85 Pa. 433; Kendall v. United States, 12 Peters 610; In re Boyle, 6 Idaho 609, 57 P. 706; In re Moyer, 35 Colo. 159, 85 P. 190; State v. Brown, 71 W. Va. 519, 77 S.E. 243; Hatfield v. Graham, 73 W. Va. 759, 81 S.E. 533......
-
State v. Corcoran
...his inability or disqualification it became the duty of the court to appoint an elisor. (Idaho Rev. Stats., secs., 1887, 2085; In re Boyle, 6 Idaho 609, 57 P. 706.) Even if appointment of the acting sheriff was void, yet his acts as a de facto officer were good. (People v. Roberts, 6 Cal. 2......