Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1879-07-10
oaISEsE cUsrAILING ILLEGAL.

CaINEsE CURTAlLiNa ILLEGAL
In the United States Circuit Court at
San Francisco. last Monday. Justice
stephen ]. Field Of the United States
Supreme Court. with the concurrence Of
Judge Lorenzo Sawyer OF the Circuit
Court, delivered an important opinion
involving the constitutional validity OF
the so-called "Cus Ordinance"
psassd by the San Francisco Super
vison. which provides for cutting on
the Cues Of Chinamen when sent to
the County Jail. The Court decided
that the ordinance aforesaid was special
issislation. prohibited by the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution Of the
United States. and consequently invalid.
The suit VA brought a year ago By .
Cinnamon named Ho All How against
Matthew Nunan. Sheriff Of the city aud
county OF San Francisco. We copy
frou the Published report Of the decision
o. judicial opinion. As follows:
II appears that In April. 1876. the Legis-
iaturs Of California passed an act con-
oeninR lodging houses and sleeping apart
msnts within the limits OF incorporated
oitss," declaring. among other things,
that \ person found sleeping or lodging
IN 4 room or an apartment containing less
than 500 cubic feet Of space in the clear Tor
each psrson occupying II shall DO deemed
Tuilty Of misdemeanor. and on conviction
thsrsof b punished by = hne Of not less
than $40 or more than $50. or imprison-
msnt In the county Jail. or BY botn suen
ane and imprisonment. Under this ACT
IL plsintid. in April. 1878. was convicted.
and sentenced to pay . dine oil ten dollars
or IN default Of such payment to DO i'm
prisonsd Ave days in the county Jail. ran
Ing to pay the lne he Was imprisonea;
Tha defendant, a. sheriff OF the city AND
county. had charge Of the jail. and during
ths imprisonment Of the .plAintiu cut ON
his cue. - alleged.
The complaint AYERS that 1t IL the Gus
tom Of Chinamen ~ shave the hair from
the front Of the head and TO wear the re-
maindsr Of 10 braided into . cue; that the
deprivation Of the cue 10 regarded by them
q Q mark Of disgrace. and Is attended,
according 10 their religious faith, with
misfortune and suffering after death; that
TIE defendant knew Of this custom and re-
ligious faith OF the Chinese, and knew
also that the plaintiff venerated tho Gus.
tom and held the faith yet, In disregard
Of his right. inflicted tho injury COM
plainsd Of; and that the plaintiff has. in
consequence Of 10. suffered great mental
anguish. been disgrsced In the eyes OF his
friends and relatives and ostracised from
associaton with his countrymen ; and that
hsnos be has been damaged to tho amount
Of $4,000.
Tia ordinance referred to was passed on
ths 18th Of June. 1876. and 1t declares that
every male person imprisoned in the Coun-
" Jail. under the Judgment Of any court
having Jurisdiction In criminal cases In
The city and county. shall Immediately
upon his arrival ut the Jail have the hair
Of his head ''cut or clipped to an uniform
length Of one inch from tho scalp thereof
and II 10 made the duty Of the Sheriff TO
have this provision enforced. Under this
ordinance the defendant cut Oh the cue OF
the plaintiff.
The validity OF this ordinance is denied
by the plaintiff on two grounds: First.
that 10 exceeds the authority Of the Board
of Supervisors. the body IN which the
legislative power Of the city and county Is
vsstsd; and second. that IL Is special legis.
lation. imposing . degrading and cruel
puniahment upon Q class of persons who
are entitled, alike with all othor persons
within the Jurisdiction Of the United
States. 10 the equal protection OF the laws.
We are Of opinion that both these positions
Are we'll taken.
The Court took the ground that the
ordinance was evidently directed ssps-
daily Ct the Chinese. and constituted n
''sEusl and unusual punishment" which
the Board Of Supervisors had no con-
sttutional power or right to infict. The
reason advanced for its adoption. and
nov urged for Its continuance. IL that
only the dread Of the loss Of his q
win induce . Chinaman to pay his Ans.
In support Of this view the Court holds
that In the case Of Jews confined in the
County Jail. we're they also to be obliged
to feed on an exclusive diet Of pork.
that also would DO ''crusl and unusual"
- we'll - special %punishment. which
the Supervisors had nc legal, constitu-
tioaal nor moral right to infict.
Notwithstanding the well-vrittsn and
considered opinion Of the Court. the
great mass Of the American people will
hardly agree with tho decision. All
treaties are based upon reciprocity. and
our treaty with China does not specify
- 70 the style or extent Of punishment
Of criminals violating the law In either
country. Hsir.drsssing or peculiar re-
hGon does not enter into the question
ct al. Americans in China arc not
any more OF favored people
than are Chinese in San Francisco.
and In punshing an American violator
Of their laws they never think to inquire
whether no prefers to wear his hair
long or short. or IL il troubles
his religion any to have his
hair ell cut on. and his head with IL, as
to that matter. The Honorable Court
certainly Was . little over.nice In this
decision. Exemption from provided
punishment for violation Of law must
nos b claimed or allowed on the score
Of religious belief. In the eyes OF hon.
cot Justice one criminal is no better than
another. II Cinnamon. Americans or
Jews do not wish their peculiar styles Of
h~airdrsssing or eating and drinking
intsrfsrsd with. they must respect the
Law and keep out Of Jail.
TEE Poetic Life. which is the gentle
ms.'s sporting paper Of the Pacific
---.