Case ID: f_101/html/0989-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BROWN, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re JAM.
    (District Court, S. D. New York.
    May 25, 1900.)
    
      t. Chinese Exclusion Act — Right op Seamen to Land — Treaty op 1894— Habeas Corpus.
    The treaty oí 1894 with the empire oí China and acts of congress of 1888, 1894, excluding “Chinese laborers” from coming into the United States, are not applicable to a Chinese seaman, who ships as steward aboard a vessel bound for a port in tbe United States, and who lands with the intention and desire to reship as soon as possible.
    2. Same — Bond to Reship.
    A Chinese seaman who lands at a port of the United States for the purpose of reshipping as soon as shipment can be obtained, must give bond to the collector of the port to ship within 30 days, and to produce to the collector a certificate of the shipping commissioner to that effect.
    Jam, a Chinese seaman, native of China, shipped as steward aboard the American ship Josephus at Hong Kong, in October, 1899, and arrived at Bayonne, N. J., February 17, 1900.
    He was immediately put under surveillance of two customs agents by the collector of the port of New York, who prevented his landing until May 8, 1900, when the ship was destroyed by fire and Jam escaped and came unmolested to New York where he sought employment as seaman. On May 15, 1900, he was again taken in custody by the customs agents and put aboard the ship State of Maine lying at Newtown creek. May 17, 1900, upon petition showing that he has no intention to stay here but desires to ship as soon as possible, a writ of habeas corpus was issued.
    Thomas O. Jenks, for petitioner.
    Clarence S. Houghton, Asst. U. S. Atty.
   BROWN, District Judge.

Under the treaty of 1894, and the Acts of 1888 and 1894, the exclusion is of “Chinese laborers”; the class covered by the prior law is not enlarged, and the case of In re Ah Kee (D. C.) 22 Fed. 519, remains therefore applicable as before. The petitioner , being a seaman is not within the purview of the acts so long as he merely touches here for no other purpose than to reship so soon as shipment can be obtained, and he is therefore discharged. But to guard against abuses, such persons should be required to give bond with surety in the sum of $500 to the collector to ship within 30 days and to produce to the collector a certificate of the shipping commissioner to that effect. On receipt of such bond the prisoner will be discharged.