Negro William Richardson's Case

Decided November 15, 1837

UpoN the return of a writ of habeas corpus, issued by order of the Court, it appeared that the prisoner, William Richardson, a colored man, was committed, by a warrant, issued by a j ustice of the peace, directed to the marshal, stating that whereas, F. B., a constable, had apprehended and brought before him, Negro William Richardson, “ charged with being a runaway; and whereas no proof has been adduced before me that the said William Richardson is not a runaway; you are…

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2020

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1837-11-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Cranch, C. J.,

¶1was also of opinion that the commitment was not sufficient, as it did not state any conviction by the justice, or even an opinion that the prisoner was a runaway; but a mere assertion that he was charged as a runaway; and said that the magistrate is bound to examine the case, and be satisfied by competent evidence on oath that the person is a runaway.

¶2He gave no opinion upon the question whether the Maryland laws upon this subject were applicable to this county.

¶3The CouRT (Thruston, J., absent,) ordered the prisoner to be discharged, because the warrant of commitment was insufficient, and because they were satisfied that he was not a runaway.