Sacramento daily record-union., 1883-10-31
THE EVASION OF THE CHINESE RE.
sTRICTIoy ACT.

validity of certificates issued to Chinese at
Canton authorizing the landing in the
United States of persons claiming to be
merchants" were before the United
States District Court in San Francisco on
the 29sh instant on writs of habeas corpus
The first case was of Chinese boy with
Canton certificate. Testimony was given
by Chinese official as to the genuinepess
of the certificate made at Canton. The
matter of admitting proof of the official
character of the certificate was discussed
at length. Finally Judge Hoffman admit.
ted it for what it was worth, saying he
could not subpoena the Emperor of China to
prove its validity.
The attorney for petitioner claimed that
a merchant is any one who buys and sells
goods for profit
Judge Hoffman said that would admit
every peanut peddler.
The petitioner testified that he is Il
years old. Came from Canton. Was in a
commission house there. Is going to Port
land to a cigar. manufacturing firm com
posed of his father and uncle. Mother is in
China, father In Portland. Is to have his
fathers share in the business. Is to go to
school, learn trade and boss the business
at Portland. Going there to do business,
not for manual labor.
Lo Chin testified that the boy is his
nephew. Knew him six years ago in Can
ton. The boys fathers firm buys and sells
and makes cigars in Portland.
Judge Hoffman said: "It is very hard
case, and l would help the boy if 1 could.
If was to open the door that any China
man could come here to learn a trade to
become a merchant, hereafter any China
man could come here under the same cir
cumstances. You invoke the general ar
gument that Congress did not intend to
break up families. If that obtains, where
am l TO draw the lines of relationship
Obviously the boy comes here to go into
his fathers business and learn the trade. l
don't think the law should be vigorously
enforced IN such cases, but l cannot help
it in this case. Congress uses the word
merchant, not manufacturer. II every
body who buys and sells few goods is TO
be classed as a merchant, there will be no
end Of Chinese merchants applying to the
Court TO land. a person who peddles
matches about the streets is net to be
classed as a merchant. Congress intended
the word merchant to be construed COM
merclally and popularity. All that was to
be done to open the door OF immigration
would be to give small share in business
on the cooperation principle. cannot
release this man unless l establish prin-
ciple which breaks down the bars to
Chineseimmigration. The petitioner is re-
manded."
no Of UnO
comes to San Francisco to manage mer.
camille business for an existing firm. Chun
Tie Zen testified that petitioner was his
nephew. Knew him in Canton. Witness
sent for the youth. Wants him to go to
school and then to take charge of books.
Witness has 81, 900 interest in a clothing
and cigar factory in Sacramento street.
The boy has no interest now, but witness
interest is to go to the boy. The boy has
never been in business. He is to take
charge of the business.
Judge Hoffman said "These cases are
exceedingly embarrassing, and l am not
quite certain that l have been right in dis
posing of the first case the way l did. Are
these men laborers or merchants l don't
know if boy of II can be said to be any
thing. II he is anything he is probably q
merchant. He is certainly not laborer
in the general sense, but so far as appears
he is to go into an old established mercan-
tile firm Of course, the statement that he
is to take charge is absurd but he is to 90
in there and do some duty connected with
the business. | suppose that shows him to
be as much merchant as he is anything
1t don't show him to be laborer. In point
of fact he is neither one nor the other,
but | would recommend you to bring
the case before the Circuit Court. In a
case where person, say when 10, l6 or y
years of age, is sent for by his father,
where he cannot be laborer or a merchant
either, there is no provision for him in the
Act, and perhaps your suggestions may
have some force where he appears to be a
member of resident family that he ought
to be allowed to come, because he is not
laborer as yet, though he may not be a
merchant either. The very exhibition OF
the petitioner on the stand would show that
he could not be skilled laborer, and that
he is too young to do anything. Certainly
it is not to be supposed that he is going to
take charge of a firm and direct it. 1t
struck me in the other case that where the
business was carried on, or to be carried
on at Portland for the manufacturing of
cigars, that it was another mode of import
ing person here to make cigars, and that is
the reason l decided that case adversely,
but still it is open to the objection that
boy of II can hardly be pronounced to
be laborer or a merchant. The Act has
not provided what shall be done with
the wives of persons resident here, or their
families. II l admit the same may l not
be called up to admit the nephews, and if
the nephews, the cousins. | will consider
this case, and decide in few days. My
impression is, that SO far as we can fix any
status upon this boy, it is as merchant,
because he is going into a mercantile firm.
OF course he will have to labor and do some
work in the firm, because the Chinese are a
laborious people. About this relationship,
if it exists, the parents or relatives of the
boy desire to introduce him, or bring him
up to their own business. The objection
to it is, that anybody may be proved to be
a son or nephew of anybody else, and the
Government has no mode OF defense against
them. Perhaps the Circuit Judge may
think, and 1 may agree with him, that the
Act don't apply to persons of immature
age. In the first case, l think that the
father intended to get another workman in
his factory, and that the law does not per-
nit Certainly, cannot say that cigar
manufacturer is a merchant any more than
a matchmaker"