The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-08-14
Orders Keely to Be Remanded and
day to Decide on Action.
CITATION BY JUDGE WALLACE
ORDERING OFFICERS TO APPEAR
BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT.
Habeas Corpus Proceedings to Be
Heard in Washington on Sept. T.
Investigation at Havana.

NEW IOINhy AUS. 4o.-cuuSO i<aNSAc~'
of the United States Circuit Court, to-day
refused to sign the writ of extradition for
Charles F. W. Neely on account of the ac-
tion of Judge Wallace in granting an ap-
peal to the Supreme Court in the habeas
corpus proceedings, but indicated that he
did not think Judge Wallace understood
the real situation of the case, and he be-
lieved if it went to the Supreme Court in
its present shape the application for writ
of habeas corpus would be denied.
A citation in the case, signed by Judge
William j. Wallace. was fled in the clerks
office of the United States Circuit Court
to-day. The citation calls on Henry Il.
Burnet, United States district attorney,
and William A. Henkel, United States mar
shall, to appear before the Supreme Court
of the United States I'm Washington on
Sept next, pursuant to citation or ap-
peal wherein Charles F. w. Neely is the
appellant and Marshal Henkel the appellee.
to show cause why, under the final order of
the Circuit Court, the said petition OF ap-
peal should not be corrected and speedy
justice should be rendered.
In refusing to sign the extradition writ
Judge Lacombe said in part: Il came here
Neely in custody under an act passed by
| Congress June 6 last. provided the govern
ment made o disposition of the two suits
| under which orders of arrest still stand
against him. find, however, that the ex-
| ceptional zeal of the prisoners counsel has
produced most peculiar situation, a COM
| plicaton that so far as know, has never
| before existed in connection with extradi-
| ton cases. Judge Wallace, Of this court,
/ has been applied to for writ of habeas
| corpus on the ground, among others. that
/ the act of June 6 is unconstitutional. The
| writ Of habeas corpus was asked In order
/ to test the constitutionality of the act and
| to restore to liberty a prisoner alleged to
| be held under it. But the act OF June
| does not apply here. No one is restrained
| of his liberty under that act. never is
| sued an order authorizing his holding un-
| der the act of June 6. Now, the proceed
ings asking writ of habeas corpus have
been refused. an appeal taken. and an or
der issued by Judge Wallace remanding
| the prisoner. I do not know on what in
formation Judge Wallace acted. Nor can
see what else can happen to the appeal
| when it reaches the United States Supreme
Court except that they will dismiss ii as
being brought upon insufficient grounds.
| Habeas corpus cannot be availed of under
| the act until some proceedings are held un-
| der the act. And / have been careful all
along to allow the order of arrest in the
| civil suit to stand, and not to attempt to
| put him under the provisions of the new
| act'
Judge Lacombe said he did not want to
| sign papers dismissing the old charges and
| leaving the prisoner held only on the re-
| naming order of Judge Wallace, and ask
| ing Mr.. Lindsay if Judge Wallace knew
that the man was not held under the act
| of June s. Mr.. Lindsay did not answer
| directly, but said he knew the prisoner
| was arrested on an order issued by Judge
Lacombe.
General Burnet, by a request of Judge
Lacomhe. stated his position in the case,
| saying he did not think Judge Wallace was
fully informed of the prisoners proceed
ings. Mr.. Lindsay said all he wanted was
an opportunity to submit this case to the
Supreme Court. In conclusion Judge La
combe said: 'I certainly shall not take
any action which will turn over to a for
eign country or another State. it matters
| not Wnlcli, Il prlsOHeT WHO Is 0elu mere un-
der an order of arrest in a civil or GRIM
ina; action until such actions shall have
beer discontinued This position I have
taken from the beginning shall not al
low the prisoner to be remanded until we
have got through with him. 1 shall as
sent to proposition that will take pris-
oners out of the jurisdiction of this court
at the call of any tribunal on earth.'
Judge Lacombe then advised Marshal
Henkel to keep the prisoner in custody un-
der the civil order or under Judge WAL
laces order, as he chose, and to advise
witt the district attorney about that. The
government was given until next Monday
TO decide what further action will be taken
in the matter.