The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-03-28
VALIDITY OF THE scorr ACT.
The Case OF Chae Chan Ping In the
Supreme Court.

WASHINGTON. March z1.--There being no
quorum present when the supreme court
met today an adjournment was taken until
tomorrow. Shorsd s quorum be Ia AT
tendance then the court viii immediately
proceed to the hearing Of argument in the
ease Of Chae Chan Ping. appellant, VS.. the
Z n1tec states. This csSe involves the con
stitnt.oaality Of the scott exclusion acr.
approved By the president October /. ISIS
The facts IN the case ss ses forth in the
statement OF counsel FOR appellant upoa
20 sdyanee the csc for argument are Is
follows. Appellant is q Chinese iahorSr
and subject of Chins, and departed from
the United States for China on june ., Isss.
Before doing so be applied 10 and ohtsinesi
from the collector OF fae port of San rrsa-
cisco the return certificate required by Sec
tiots OF the Chinese restriction act of May
q, lss2. IS amended July 5, l,ss. He ~
turned TO the United states October :, IsSs.
aud presented the certificate TO the col
lector. and claimed the right To Land there
under, but permission was refused by the
collector on the sole ground that under
the proFisisns of the aet commonly known n
as the Scott exclusion act Of October j.
lsss, the certificate pEesented ay appellant
had been declared Tcld aad Of ne effect
he sued out writ of ilsbeas corpus in the
United states circuit cOurt, aud after q
hearing THE court ordered appellant re-
manded 10 the custody from which be had
been taken. This custody was the captain
OF the ship which had brought him back
10 the Unised states. From thai Judgment
OF remand he has appealed Ia this court
Counsel for appellant contend that the
question involved In this case il wht fher
that portion of the aet OF October 1. lsSS
declaring laborerS' certificates void aass al
no effect. is valid and constitutional. As
viii be perceived, they say. this pE5;,ass-
rnfx-G.r -
and international Importance. Counsel
further contend that the laborefs who de-
parted from the United Sfates with these
return certificates we're guaranteed BY the
treaty between the United States and
China of November Il, 1850. and the act Of
May 8, iss1. the right 10 10 aud come, and
without warning or notice this treaty Is
abrognted and the vested rights required
fhereuuder are entirely swept away The
faith and honor of the government. they
say, Is also involved in the case now before
the Court. Those certificates contain upon
their face Promise oa the part OF the gov
ernment that the holders thereof shall
upon presentation of certificates be entitled
10 return 20 aud re~enter the United states
II the act IS unconstitutional, counsel say,
IL Is necessary that speedy determination
OF this case should be had. so that the la
borers may return and avail themselves OF
the rights and privileges granted to them
by treaty aud the act of 1852. and II the act
is valid il is inst as necessary that il should
be so determined Immediately, so that
those who have acquired property inter
ests here may take some means OF protect
ing these interests.
Ex.Goy. Hoedly of Ohio and James c.
Carter of New York win represent the case
for appellant before the court, and So
licitor-General jerks viii appear for the
government ]. r. Swift, recently confirm
ed as minister TO Japan, AttDrney-teneral
Johnson OF California, aud 3. NJ. White OF
California will also be present 10 look after
the interests of the state of California in
The case