Bullitt, John C. (John Christian) (1824-1902) A review of Mr. Binney's pamphlet on "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus under the Constitution."
High-resolution images are available to schools and libraries via subscription to American History, 1493-1943. Check to see if your school or library already has a subscription. Or click here for more information. You may also order a pdf of the image from us here.
Gilder Lehrman Collection #: GLC08599.02 Author/Creator: Bullitt, John C. (John Christian) (1824-1902) Place Written: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Type: Pamphlet Date: 1862 Pagination: 1 v. : 56 p. ; 20.8 x 13.8 cm. Order a Copy
Published by John Campbell. Bullitt seeks to examine the legal aspects of Horace Binney's argument, based on his opinion that Binney's "premises were not well taken, and that his inferences or conclusions were erroneous." Expresses hope to "present the great constitutional question involved in its true light." Cover is missing.
Horace Binney, an influential American legal figure, served as a United States Representative from Pennsylvania 1833-1835. In 1861, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus for all military related cases. Suspension of this writ, which is guaranteed by Article I of the United States Constitution, provoked much controversy. Binney's pamphlet, which supported Lincoln's decision, also ignited fierce debate. Bullitt worked as a lawyer in Kentucky and Pennsylvania.
Citation Guidelines for Online Resources
The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.