For this glorious and inestimable safeguard of the liberty of the subject, we are indebted to the ancient common law of England, strengthened from time to time by the legislature, and now made secure against the insidious encroachments of tyranny. The chief statute passed with this view is known as The Habeas Corpus Act (31 Car. II. c. 2), and "has been incorporated into the jurisprudence of every state in the Union" in America.—Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the U. S., vol. iii. p. 208.
"It is a very common mistake," says Mr. Hallam, and the Lord Chief-Justice of the Queen's Bench had occasion, during Michaelmas Term 1844, publicly to make a similar observation, "not only among foreigners, but many from whom some knowledge of our constitutional laws might be expected, that the statute of Charles II. enlarged in a great degree our liberties, and forms a sort of epoch in their history; but though a very beneficial enactment, it introduced no new principle, nor conferred any right upon the subject.... It was not to bestow an immunity from arbitrary imprisonment, which is abundantly provided in Magna Charta (if, indeed, not much more ancient,) that the statute of Charles II. was enacted; but to cut off the abuses by which the government's lust of power, and the servile subtlety of crown lawyers, had impaired so fundamental a privilege."—3 Hall. Const. Hist., pp. 16, 17.