Señor Romero to Mr. Olney.
Washington, December 5, 1895.
Mr. Secretary: I had to-day the honor to receive your note, No. 66, dated yesterday, with which you inclose to me copy of a communication from the Attorney-General of the United States, of the 2d instant, in which he states that the appeal of habeas corpus having been decided in the western district of Texas in the cases of Inez Ruiz, Jesus Guerra, and Juan Duque, on the 27th of December, 1894, the time within which an appeal can be taken has expired according to the law of March 3d, 1893, and that consequently an appeal can not possibly be directed.
The communication of the Attorney-General ends by saying that the district attorney informed him that the marshal was not invited to join in the appeal.
On this account I have the honor to state to you that by advice of Lawyers McLary and Stayton, of San Antonio, Tex., who represented before the Federal courts the Mexican consul at that city, the said consul appealed from the sentence of Judge Maxey, who granted the application for a writ of habeas corpus in the extradition cases which the consul had requested, and on their application to Lawyers Phillips and McKenney, of this city, to solicit the Supreme Court to give precedence to this matter, they thought that the appeal ought to have [Page 496] been made by Marshal Ware and not by the Mexican consul, whose appearance in the case seemed questionable to them, and in accordance with their opinion the marshal was requested in October last to make the appeal, he having refused to do so for the reasons I communicated to you in my note of the 14th of November last.
If he was not solicited to appeal when Judge Maxey pronounced his decree it was for the reasons already indicated, that the lawyers thought that the Mexican consul should bring the appeal; but when that opinion was opposed, the marshal was requested to make the appeal.
Accept, etc.,