67

In Green's Reports, second volume, page 312, it is record-
ed that if a judge at chambers can inquire into and decide
the right of a plaintiff to arrest the defendant, there shall he
terminate his inquiries. Not a single case sustains the con-
trary doctrine. The writ is a legal and proper one. The
court has competent jurisdiction. I refer to fourth McCord ;
reports to 1 Watts, 66; to 2 Casey, 9; to Hurd on Habeas
Corpus, p. 332, 335.

Unless aided by the Assembly of Maryland in this case,
you are limited to the inquiry . Was there a proper legal
mittimus under which these parties are held ? The Code
provides that the party may controvert the truth of the re-
turn, or plead to the matters alleged therein. The act of
1813, chapter 135, contains the law up to that: time. Under
that act, the recognized law of Maryland, until the adoption
of the Code, the verity of the return alone could be im-
peached. The truth of the return may be controverted, or
plead matters repugnant, or avoid it by showing that there
was not sufficient legal cause for the detention. The return
alone is drawn in question. In the act of 1809, it is said the
truth of the return may be controverted. Chancellor Kelly
understood the law as I have read it. The law goes no fur-
ther than to say the return may be controverted.

The Code was designed to simply embody the scattered en-
actments of the State. It does not give appellate power to
every judge of Maryland over every other judge. The case
13, Md., 636, does not conflict with the statement of the law.
Where the law is clear, the argument from inconvenience can-
not avail. A defendant cannot be discharged from the com-
mitment by reason of any error in the original proceedings.
A writ of habeas corpus is not a writ of error. At common
law the return imputed absolute verity. It could not be tra-
versed or its truth inquired out. The act of 1813 authorizes
all these things. If a party is convicted by legal process, he
is denied the benefit of the writ. If the judgment is by a
competent court, that judgment cannot be inquired into be-
cause of error. The law is not affected by the statute of
Maryland, or by any decision in this State. The jurisdiction
of the Criminal Court is not fixed by the acts of Assembly.—
The twenty-ninth article of the Code determines its jurisdic-
tion. It has jurisdiction of all crimes and felonies in Balti-
more. It has exclusive jurisdiction, and its decision con-
cludes the whole until they are reversed upona writ of error.
The judge of the court is at all times a conservator of the
peace. It has the power to commit to jail in default of bail,
and to require bail when a prima facia is made out. There
can be no controversy with reference to the power of that
court in this matter.

The return in this case sets forth two different commitments
one to answer for a crime, the other in default of bail to keep