Joseph Story

“ A court pronounces the law-it declares, not who shall be imprisoned and who released, in civil causes, according to its own will and pleasure, but who is pronounced by the law to be a prisoner, or to be liable to imprisonment-enforces the law in its operation upon an individual, not its own arbitrary pleasure. ”

“ Rules of court can never vary the mode of proceeding prescribed by statute, or give a right of discharge in any other mode, or upon any other terms than those contained in it. They are the only mode adopted by the court in administering the laws of the land-they can never add to, diminish, or vary the provisions of a statute. A recognizance of bail is a contract, the form of which may be prescribed by the court: the nature, effect and obligation are regulated by fixed laws. ”

“ Nothing less, than that the court, by some high power, exercised in the shape of a rule, can provide a mode, before unknown, by which this bail should be discharged from liability-this contract vacated-these vested rights wrested from the present plaintiffs: we cannot argue against such an assumption, because the simple statement of it carries, to our mind, a stronger refutation than any argument. ”

“ The tenth rule of the circuit court, for the district of Ohio, relied on by the defendant in this case, is in these words: 'But under neither mesne nor final process, shall any individual be kept imprisoned, who, under the insolvent law of the state, has, for such demand, been released from imprisonment.'
One in prison only can be released from imprisonment. One who has never been imprisoned on a debt, never can have been released from imprisonment for that debt, though he may have been absolved or released from liability to imprisonment on account of it. ”

“ The obligation of the contract can only be discharged by law, never by the mere virtue of a rule of practice established by court-certainly, not by a rule, made after the execution of the bond, or recognizance. ”

“ The matter, therefore, is not governed by that part of the law which requires 'the proceedings to be the same,' but by that part which requires 'writs of execution to be the same as used in the state courts.' To our mind, it is clearly sufficient, that a capias ad satisfaciendum is a writ used in the state courts, and if it be such a writ, the adjudication of a state tribunal cannot restrain the use of it by the federal court against a particular person-no such efficacy is given by the act of congress of 1828, to an adjudication by a state court. ”

“ We hold, upon general principles, that an insolvent law of a state, providing a mode for the discharge of the persons of debtors from imprisonment, has no force except in the courts of the state-is only a law affecting the remedy-the mere lex fori. ”

“ The form of the process, whether mesne or final, is of no benefit to the plaintiffs, unless a mode is pointed out, by law or rule of court, of making that form available. To make a demand available against a debtor, a writ must be devised, and a mode of executing that writ adopted, or the debtor cannot be brought into court. ”

“ Now, by the rules of the circuit court of Ohio, adopted as early as January term 1808, the liability of special bail was provided for and limited; and it was declared, that special bail may surrender their principal at any time before or after judgment against the principal; provided such surrender shall be before a return of a scire facias executed, or a second scire facias nihil, against the bail. And this in fact constituted a part of the law of Ohio at the time when the present recognizance was given ”

“ And it is further provided, that the final certificate of the court of common pleas, duly obtained, shall protect the insolvent for ever after from imprisonment for any suit or cause of action, debt or demand mentioned in the schedule given in under the insolvent proceedings; and a penalty is also inflicted upon any sheriff or other officer, who should knowingly or wilfully arrest any person contrary to this provision. ”

“ In the first place, there is no doubt, that the legislature of Ohio possessed full constitutional authority to pass laws whereby insolvent debtors should be released, or protected from arrest or imprisonment of their persons on any action for any debt or demand due by them. The right to imprison constitutes no part of the contract; and a discharge of the person of the party from imprisonment, does not impair the obligation of the contract, but leaves it in full force against his property and effects. This was clearly settled by this court in the cases of Sturges v. ”

“ We think we have also shown in the course of our argument, and that it is manifest, that the present plaintiffs, being residents of another state, their contract with the Harris's having been made in another state-judgment having been recovered against them in the circuit court upon that contract-the present defendant having been special bail in the case-the state courts could not so interfere with the persons of any of the parties-with their contracts or any matter relating thereto, as directly or indirectly to affect any of their rights or liabilities in the circuit court. ”

“ This discharge, however, can only be given upon his making oath that he has no other property than that contained in his schedule, &c. He may be examined under oath touching his property by the commissioner or any creditor. These proceedings are to be certified into the court of common pleas of the county, where the discharge is either consummated or the application dismissed. A person not under arrest, who has resided for a certain period in the state and county, may, by a like proceeding, exempt his person from arrest. ”

“ So that there can be no doubt, that the present plea is a good bar to the suit, notwithstanding there has been no surrender; if by law the principal could not, upon such surrender, have been imprisoned at all. ”

“ Rep. 213; and by Mr Chief Justice Marshall in delivering the opinion of the court in Wayman v. Southard, 10 Wheat. Rep. 1; and by Mr Justice Thompson in delivering the like opinion in the Bank of the United States v. Halstead, 10 Wheat. Rep. 51.
State laws cannot control the exercise of the powers of the national government, or in any manner limit or affect the operation of the process or proceedings in the national courts. The whole efficacy of such laws in the courts of the United States, depends upon the enactments of congress. So far as they are adopted by congress they are obligatory. ”