In re Carlton

a habeas the^Emthority” oi this state, runs at West Point. away the jurS diotion of the state courts, on habeas corpus, territoiy "ceded to the United States, such jurisdich5n must be expressly surrendered by The enlistment of a minor without consent of his parent or guardian, into the army of the United States, is void; and he maybe discharged by state authority. Any person illegally detained, has a right to be discharged on habeas corpus.

On habeas corpus, directed to Col. S. Thayer, superintend* ant of the corps of engineers at West Point; issued by, and returned to the recorder of the city of New York, . Carlton enlisted into the service of the United States; and is claimed to be detained by Col. Thayer, as a regularly enlisted soldier. He is, in fact, now within 21 years J ' of age, and has a guardian, who never consented to his enIktment. At the time of his enlistment, however, he represented himself to be over 21; and that he had neither ,. parent nor guardian. moved that the writ be quashed; and that Carlton be remanded, on the ground that the recorder had not jurisdiction; and that process, issuing under the authority of this state, did not run within ° . J the limits of the property of the United States at West Point. submitted these questions to this court for direction. He referred to the reservation as to the execution of state process, in the act of the 2d of March, 1826, (sess. 49, ch. 64, p. 46,) ceding West Point to the United States ; to Ferguson's case, (9 John. 239;) Commonwealth v. Cushing, (11 Mass. Rep. 67;) and The Same v. Harrison, (id. 63,) and expressed his own opinion that he had jurisdiction.