The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1891-07-11
SHOULD BE SENT TO CHINA
0rientals Coming Here by Way of Can.
ada Should Not Be Returned There.
Decision BY Attorney-General Miller IN the De-
troit Csses-COnditiOn of Crops as Report
ed to the Agricultural Department.
NOT BACK TO n
Chinamen Entering Here by Way of the Do
minion Should BE Returned to China.

Chinamen Entering Here by Way of the Do
minion Should Be Returned to China.
Special TO the indianapolis Journal
WASHINGTON, June 10.-Assistant Secre-
tary Spaulding has written a letter to tho
collector of customs at Detroit. Mich.
based upon an opinion of Attorney-general
Miller. in which he says: The department.
is in receipt of your letter Of the 9th
ultimo. in which you report that three
Chinese laborers found TO be unlawfully
in the United States. and whom the depart
ment had instructed you to send to San
Francisco for deportation to China, have
been returned to Canada by order of a
United States commissions at Detroit. 1t
appears that these persons crossed the
river from Canada to Detroit in q row
boat, and on landing were arrested by
your officers. IL Is undisputed that they
were unlawfully in the United States, but
in view of the fact that they were possessed
OF certain certificates issued By Canadian
authorities, permitting them to return to
Canada. the commissioned held that the
law required him to return them to Can
ada, and such action was taken with the
acquiescence of the United States attorney.
As this decision was contrary to the views
of the department. and to the decision of
other courts In like cases, the opinion of
the Attorney general was asked upOn the
state of facts presented by your letter and
previous kilograms. A copy of il is herewith
Enclosed for your information and guild
ance.
1T will be seen that the Encouragement
fully sustains the action of this depart
ment. In all cases Chinese labOrers found
TO be wfully In the United States
should be returned to China. even though
they enter the United States from foreign
contiguous countries. Unless IL Is made to
appear ~atfirmatively that they are the sub
certificate of this character does not tend
to establish such fact. Ii Is understood to
be issued by the Canadian government as
evidence that the holder has paid the head
tax of $50 exacted of all Chinese on their
first arrival in Canals. and it's possession
entities the holder to leave and return at
pleasure. so far as the Canadian authorities
are concerned, but 1t is IN no sense any evil
deDee of citizenship in Canada.
The several acts of Congress on the sub
ject provide for the return of these prOhib-
tied persons to China. and an appropriation
of money has been made for the purpose.
1t 10 presumed the opinion of the Attorney
general will remove all doubts at to the
proper construction to be given to the sew
eral acts of Congress upon the subject, and
that no other instructions will De needed
to give the law practical effect as intended
by Congress. The necessity of a strict en-
fOrcement of the law is made apparent by
the statement in your letter that within
twenty-fOur hours from the time these men
were returned from Canada they were
making every effort to induce some one to
carry them across the river in a row-boat
in the nighttime We may safely assume
that those men are now In the United States.
The opinion of the Attorney general in
the matter is very elaborate and very ex-
haustive. He says, in conclusions: In my
opinion. under our laws, Chinese persons. if
found TO be unla wfully in this country. NAV
be removed directly to China. unless they
shall show that they are not the subjects of
China, and that they are subjects of some
foreign power. Whether under the Ian
guage of the acts of Congress of 1890 and
1891 natives of China naturalized in a for
eign country would be subject to q different
rule, 10 not decided"