7728 us 540,5 18841 Mar. 1, Minot Fund· Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year one thousand eight hundred and seventy-six, BY FRANK H. HURD, In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. DAVISON PRINTERS AND STEREOTYPERS, TO HENRY STANBERRY, Esq., DISTINGUISHED AMONG THE FEW WHO, AMIDST THE TEMPTATIONS TO PROFESSIONAL WITH UNWAVERING DEVOTION, TO DIGNIFY PRACTICE OF THE LAW, BY THE DISPLAY OF PROFOUND AND VARIED LEARNING AND THE GRACES OF POLISHED ELOCUTION, THIS WORK IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY THE AUTHOR. PREFACE. THE jurisdiction exercised under the writ of habeas corpus embraces many interesting and important subjects. It is invoked to remove alleged illegal restraint of personal liberty; but as all restraint is not illegal, it be comes important to a ready and just administration of the law, that there should be a clear apprehension of the nature and extent of the right of personal liberty and the limitations to which it may, legally, be subjected. Restraint may be imposed under legal process emanating from a federal court, or under color of federal authority without process. In such cases it is important to understand the nature and extent of the jurisdiction of the state courts under the writ of habeas corpus. The restraint may be imposed under legal process emanating from a federal or state court when the legality of the imprisonment may depend on the extent or rightful exercise of the jurisdiction of the court granting process, or on the sufficiency of the process itself. Process may be irregular and yet the prisoner may not be entitled to be discharged, for the writ of habeas corpus the |