Payment of dividends by trading corporations and companies is generally made by means of dividend warrants. Mercantile warrants are instruments giving a right to the delivery of goods, generally those deposited at a dock or warehouse, and by mercan tile custom regarded as documents of title to goods.
Judicial warrants can be divided into the two classes of war rants of arrest and warrants of search and seizure. The use of general or John Doe warrants, which did not specify the name of the person to be arrested nor the place to be searched nor the character of the goods to be seized, and the use of writs of assis tance having a like effect, a practice condemned in 1763 by Lord Camden in Entick v. Carrington (19 How. St. Tr. 1030) and one of the abuses complained of by the colonists in the Revolutionary War, led to the prohibition of the issuance of such warrants by constitutional provisions. The 4th amendment to the U.S. Consti tution thus provides against unreasonable searches and seizures and prohibits the issuance of any warrant "but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describ ing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized." Though this amendment is only a limitation upon the powers of the Federal Government, similar restrictions upon the States are to be found in the State Constitutions.
Warrants of arrest, which are necessary where under the com mon law or under statutory provision no power to arrest without warrant may be exercised, may be issued by those officers desig nated by the State or Federal statutes. These ordinarily include judges, U.S. commissioners, justices of the peace and judicial or quasi-judicial officers of municipal corporations. A similar power is conferred upon certain administrative officers in the exercise of their functions, the commonest example being that of warrants issued by the Department of Labor in the deportation of aliens. Under the traditional laws of parliamentary privilege a power to issue warrants of arrest for breach of privilege resides in the speaker of a legislative assembly or the president of a senate. The warrant issues at the behest of the complainant upon a com plaint setting forth the facts or information upon which the guilt of the offender is based. Probable cause must be shown in the
sense that the complainant must make out a prima facie case for concluding that the person accused was guilty of the crime. The complaint must be accompanied by the affidavit of the com plainant. The forms and requisites governing the issuance of the warrant must be strictly complied with. The legality of the war rant and the arrest thereunder can be contested by a habeas corpus proceeding (q.v.) or by an action for false imprisonment. Analogous to the ordinary warrant of arrest is the bench warrant which is issued by the court itself for arrest for contempt or after indictment found or against a recalcitrant witness.
The issuance of search warrants is governed generally by the same limitations surrounding warrants of arrest. The description of the property to be seized must be so particular that the officer charged with the execution of the warrant will be left with no dis cretion respecting the property to be taken. It may issue for the recovery of stolen property, for the seizure of property used for the commission of a crime or in the possession of a person intend ing to use it for such a purpose. The warrant should be executed only during the day-time but the officers when resisted may forcibly enter the premises. In its execution its limitations must be strictly observed, and the search confined to the character of goods enumerated in the warrant. Resistance to its execution is punishable. The legality of its issuance is in some instances re viewable by writ of certiorari to a superior tribunal. In all cases the legality of its issuance and execution can be contested by an action of trespass against the officer. In order to make more effective the constitutional prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures the Federal courts refuse to admit any evi dence obtained as a result of a search without a warrant or under an illegal warrant. The majority of the State courts, however, admit such evidence and leave the complainant to his civil action against the offending officer. The enforcement of the constitu tional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures has become a matter of intense moment in the prosecution of offenses against the i 8th amendment and legislation under it seeking to make effective the constitutional prohibition against the sale, manufacture and transportation of intoxicating liquor. The asser tion of these new and penetrating powers of government has, in communities where their assertion is regarded as an infringement upon the liberty of the citizens, precipitated issues akin to those that agitated the citizenry during the controversy over general warrants and writs of assistance.