Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1886-04-10
THREATENED ARRESTS AT
CARSON.

The Silver State has the follow
ing:
THE APPEAL states that papers
for the arrest Of several prominent
citizens Of Carson, who are identi
fed with the anti Chinese agitation
IN that city, have been made out
and forwarded to Washington by
United States District Attorney
Coffin. This might be taken as a
joke. we're it not for the fact Amer
lean citizens have heretofore been
indicted by the United States
Grand Jury at Carson for alleged
violation of the Burlingame treaty.
In 1869 the Chinese were boycotted
at Unionyille. in humboldt county,
by miners and others, and eighteen
Of the leaders Of the movement
were indicted by the . S. Grand
Jury. The U. S. Marshal went to
Unionyiile with warrants for their
arrest, and his first prisoner, who is
Yet a resident Of Humboldt county.
sued out writ Of habeas corpus
. and was released by Judge Berry,
the Judge Of the District Court in
Winnemucca. who held that the
petitioner was unlawfully restrain
ed of his liberty by toe United
States Marshal. The Marshal re-
turned to Carson without prisoner.
and the Virginia Enterprise, then
edited by r. NJ. Daggett, who was
also Clerk of the United States
District Court, and strange as 1t
may now seem, the Carson APPEAL
too, denounced the act OF the Dem
ocratic Judge of Humboldt, and |
suggested that company of United
States troops be sent to rebellious
Humboldt to assist the Marshal in
arresting and taking to Carson the
eighteen men indicted for violating
the Burlingame treaty. Wiser
counsel than that rendered by the
and APPEAL prevailed,
and Marshal Dey returned to Hum
boldt and took one of the eighteen
q prisoner to Carson, where he was
held for several months and dis
charged without trial.
The facts show that Z. S. Dis
trict Attorney Coffin, if he has
preferred charges against the lead
ers in the anti-Chlness movement
1t Carson, is simply following the
example of one Of his predecessors
n office, and has the sanction of
he APPEAL and Enterprise for do
ng SO.
What seems most inconsistent
IN the part Of Federal Judges and
Marshals is, that if white subjects
If foreign nations residing in the
United States are boyc0tted or
lriven from a mining district, as
las been done with Hungarians in
Pennsylvania, they must seek re-
lress in the State Courts, while the
federal Courts and authorities in
erpose In behalf Of the Chinese,
nd afford them protection it does
os accord to subjects Of other ma
ions"
The stand taken by these papers
t the time was before the question
f law had been settled in the Su-
rene Court of the United States.
was always supposed that the
Tnited States authorities had juris-
lotion in such matters, but the
latter was in doubt, and in order
, reach the Ku Klux troubles
W was passed giving the United n
tates authorities power to inter y
re in such cases.
The first case of the kind was
ppealed to the Supreme Court of
he United States and the decision {
as unanimous that the jurisdic- A
on in such cases alone belonged :.
the State IN which the trouble
'ok place. In spite of the de-
sion by the Supreme Court, Judge
awyer renders a decision in the
alifornia cases which he ought to
now has already been decided ad-
,rsely to him.
The threatened outbreak of the