Skip to main content
« Back to Explore

Cases

Habeas petitions described a broad range of carceral, institutional, and interpersonal confinement over the long nineteenth century, including those used to demand due process, resist enslavement, challenge child removal and reservation confinement, avoid deportation, present child custody claims and protest child marriage, and to challenge institutionalization and detention in private and state institutions. As a legal mechanism borrowed from British common law and guaranteed as a civil right in US federal and state constitutions, habeas provides a lens on a diverse community of legal actors.

Our encoding practice allows us to identify petitions in these three categories and to indicate where those categories overlap. In addition to these three general categories, our team has identified the specific carceral charge being challenged as well as the particular forms of institutional and interpersonal confinements being questioned.

You may also browse or search petitions by location and/or jurisdiction to learn more about the myriad complaints petitioners brought before judges in Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oregon, and Washington between 1812 and 1924. Each case entry includes a full citation, a summary, links to people with a role in the case, a list of other people named, and any sites of significance. Visitors wanting access to full case files can contact the cited repository for information about obtaining copies. Those without institutional affiliations may request image scans from Dr. Jagodinsky directly. The Glossary defines the attributes used to structure data from the habeas petitions. The Code Book explains the relational structure of the data and functionality of the database website.

Filter by:

Date

Drag slider to explore cases

Dates: -

Petition Type

Petition Subtype

Petition Outcome

Fate of Bound Party

Sex of Bound Party

Age of Bound Party

Race of Bound Party

Type of Source

Length of Case File

People

See more
Latest Record Year : 1886

24 results

Download JSON Download CSV

In the matter of the application of C. W. Hutchinson for writ of Habeas Corpus.

  • Earliest record date: October 31, 1885
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: embezzlement
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the Matter of the Application of Charles Barnes for a writ of Habeas Corpus.

  • Earliest record date: January 4, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: breaking and entering | Carceral: refusal or inability to pay fine
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

Foong V. William Murphy. Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: January 1, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: refusal or inability to pay fine | Carceral: peddling without a license
  • Petition outcome: Petition denied
  • Fate of bound party: Remained in custody

In the Matter of the restraint of Gee Lee and other Chinamen

  • Earliest record date: February 7, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: immigration
  • Petition outcome: Unknown
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

In the Matter of the Application of L. T. Savacool for Writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: April 18, 1884
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: forgery
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the matter of the application of Can- ah- couqua for a writ of habeas corpus

  • Earliest record date: March 20, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Institutional: child custody | Institutional: Indian agent/superintendent
  • Petition outcome: Writ denied
  • Fate of bound party: Remained in custody

In the matter of the application of Yu Gum and Yu Hung for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: May 7, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: immigration
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

In the matter of the application of Mary Marshall mother of Wm. Marshall an infant for a petition of habeas corpus

  • Earliest record date: June 8, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Interpersonal: child custody
  • Petition outcome: Writ denied
  • Fate of bound party: Remained in custody

In the matter of the application of Robert Ashburn for writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: July 3, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Interpersonal: child custody
  • Petition outcome: Writ denied
  • Fate of bound party: New custody arrangement reached

In the Matter of the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for Peter Goshaun

  • Earliest record date: July 12, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: cause unspecified
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the matter of the application of Bertha Dogge for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: July 16, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: contempt of court
  • Petition outcome: Writ denied
  • Fate of bound party: Remained in custody

In the matter of the application of W. H. Beers and E. R. Bissett for writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: July 24, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Unknown
  • Petition outcome: Writ denied
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

In the matter of the application of Micheal Richie for a writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: August 12, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: cause unspecified
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

In the Matter of the Application of Jacob Schuman for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: June 27, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: selling liquor without a license
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the matter of the application for a writ of Habeas Corpus on behalf of Delia Batten

  • Earliest record date: September 27, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Unknown
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

In the Matter of Application of Henry Huckfeldt for a writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: September 30, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: cause unspecified
  • Petition outcome: Writ denied
  • Fate of bound party: Remained in custody

Ex Parte Wilhalm Spiertiz, Application for writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: October 5, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: cause unspecified
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the Matter of the Application of C. A. Clayton, Geo Rosenthal, Wm Lewis, John McDonald, Chas Olsen, Chao Kales, Fredericke Linde, C. Roschman For a Writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: October 9, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Institutional: detaining sailors aboard ship
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the matter of the Application of John Duffy for a writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: October 16, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Institutional
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

In the matter of the application of W. H. Watson for writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: June 26, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: cause unspecified
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the matter of the application of Frank Baldwin for writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: May 28, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Carceral: cause unspecified
  • Petition outcome: Writ allowed
  • Fate of bound party: Released from custody

In the matter of the application of Hew G. Durham for a writ of Habeas Corpus on behalf of Sylvia May Durham

  • Earliest record date: December 17, 1885
  • Petition type(s): Interpersonal: child custody
  • Petition outcome: Petition withdrawn
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown

In the matter of the Application of William Sigman for a writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: August 20, 1885
  • Petition type(s): Interpersonal: child custody
  • Petition outcome: Petition withdrawn
  • Fate of bound party: Remained in custody

In the Re-Application of Minnie Smith for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

  • Earliest record date: August 3, 1886
  • Petition type(s): Unknown
  • Petition outcome: Unknown
  • Fate of bound party: Unknown
Back to top