[4CJ]

I had not heard of this case before. Do you have a link to the whole decision? Also, you quote Chase, but say the Bollman decision was authored by Marshall with Chase absent. Is your quote from that decision, or from Chase speaking elsewhere?

My bad - the decision was written by John Marshall. The case is cited by Taney in ex parte Merryman.

You can read the entire decision at Findlaw

[Non-Sequitur]

If at any time the public safety should require the suspension of the powers vested by this act in the courts of the United States, it is for the legislature to say so.

The case before the court in Ex Parte Bollman & Swartwout involved not who could suspend habeas corpus, but whether the court could issue a writ of habeas corpus or not. Since habeas corpus had not been suspended at the time, the court could not rule on the legality of the suspension so the Chief Justices comments on this matter constitute an obiter dictum; that which is said by the way or in passing. In law, an obiter dictum is an opinion expressed by a judge on a point of law not necessarily connected with the issue before the court. Obiter dicta have no binding authority. The comments Chief Justice Marshall made in Bollman & Swartwout concerning the suspension of habeas corpus were not part of the matter before the court. His comments on this unrelated matter have no standing in law other than an indication of how Marshall felt on that particular subject. When President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus on his own authority he violated no Suprem Court decision.