State v. Dimick
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Habeas corpus, on the petition of Nathan Murray, setting forth that he is a citizen of Gardiner, in Maine — that on the 28th of May, 1839, being then under twenty years of age, he was enlisted as a private soldier in the army of the United States, by Justin Dimick, a captain, without the consent of either of his parents, who are still living, and that he has ever since been attached to the company under command of said Dimick, now stationed at Fort Constitution, near…
Read the full summary
Habeas corpus, on the petition of Nathan Murray, setting forth that he is a citizen of Gardiner, in Maine — that on the 28th of May, 1839, being then under twenty years of age, he was enlisted as a private soldier in the army of the United States, by Justin Dimick, a captain, without the consent of either of his parents, who are still living, and that he has ever since been attached to the company under command of said Dimick, now stationed at Fort Constitution, near Portsmouth — that he arrived at the age of twenty-one on the 24th of August, 1840 — and is restrained of his liberty, by said…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The objection, that this court has no jurisdiction to send process into that portion of territory, lying within the limits of this state, ceded by the state to the United States, and occupied for a fort and light-house, cannot be supported. The act, by which the United States hold it, vests in that government the land, with the fort and lighthouse thereon, with all the jurisdiction thereof which is not reserved by the act. One proviso in the act of cession is, *197“ that all writs, warrants, executions, and all other processes of every kind, both civil and criminal, issuing under the authority of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HarrisonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Roby v. WestSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1828
- Pray v. BurbankSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1839
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ohio & Mississippi Railroad v. FitchIndiana Supreme Court · 1863