The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-06-16
THE DEMURRER SUSTAINED.
The Indictment Against Lawyer Trum
bull Found Defective.

Judge Hanford, of the United States district
court, rendered an important decision yester
day In sustaining demurrer TO an indictment
charging John Trumbull with aiding and abet-
ting the landing in Port Townsend OF Cinnamon
not legally entitled to enter the United States.
Trumbull, who is well-known lawyer of Port
Townsend, Ii said TO have issued false certifi-
Gates, In bis capacity as notary public, to the
effect that Cinnamon were legal residents.
The demurrer was argued by p. C. Sullivan,
assistant district attorney, for the plaintiff, and
by A. r. Coleman for the defendant Judge
Hanfords opinion was as follows:
This indictment is founded upon the acts OF
congress, by which the coming into the country
OF Chinese taborers was intended to be restricted
and prohibited. and particularly the eleventh
utes. page 81, which reads i as follows: .sec
ton IL; That any. person who shall
knowingly bring into ,ss or n,,. cause to
b .nd OF who shall knowingly aid or abes the
same, or aid or abet the landing in the United
States from any vessel OF any Chinese person
shall be guilty OF misdemeanor, and shall, on
conviction thereof, be fined in sum not ex-
ceeding u 900. and imprisoned for term not
Manifestly the intention of the grand jury
was to charge the defendant by this Indictment
with the commission OF criminal ohenses COM
mitted by aiding and abetting the landing in the
United States OF Chinese persons who had been
unlawfully brought into the country by vessels,
but the pleading is fatally defective because il
were brought into the United States in
the vessels named, or that they ever
were unlawfully brought into the nited States.
Chinese as persons not lawfully entitled TO enter
the United States. That is, IL they were now out
OF the United States they would not be lawfully
entitled to enter, and IL may be assumed that IL
they were not In the country prior to the enact
ment of the exclusion acts they must have en-
tered unlawfully. But the allegations OF this
T. al
20 show the court, after INDUCING
their entry was unlawful. All that is alleged
Is not inconsistent with q state of facts which
would render the landing of the persons named
at the time and place mentioned, from the ves-
sci named, lawful and proper. For example, II
country prior to May 9, 1882, and who had re-
mained within II continually from that time
and who landed from the vessel mentioned at
from some other point Within the United States
20 the place of landing without having during
the journey been outside OF the United states.
1o. ,asa Of case law 'hers By e0a aiding .nS
sbetting such landing. The law must
be 30 interpreted, by reference TO all It's parts
TO give effect TO the manifest intention of con-
gress In enecting It, / think the intention is
quite clear 10 make the aiding and abetting OF
the landing of Chinese persons criminal only in
those cases in which the bringing of such per
sons in the same vessel and ON the voyage ter
inmates at the time OF the landing; and IL il
therefore necessary IN good indictment TO al
lsge facts sufficient TO make IL appear that the
landing was itself unlawful by reason of being
an unlawful entry into the country of persons
prohibited from coming.
In prosecutions for odenses against the laws
Of the United States an Indictment, in which
the charging part follows the language of the
statute upon which IL IL founded. Is not suffi-
cient unless such words indicate the acts consti-
stuting the offense. Every defendant In GRIM
inal case has constitutional right TO be In
formed by the indictment of the nature and
cause OF the accusation against him and the
cause must be stated with such particularly
as 10 indicate clearly the facts TO be proven on
the trial Article vi, amendments to United
States constitution. United States vs. Cruik-
shank ct al, 92d U. 8, SD
This Indictment does not state the facts with
enough Of the details 90 show how the defend
ant aided or abetted the landing of any Chinese
person and, therefore, does not either show how
he has violated the law or that there has been
any violation
Tho demurrer interposed viii therefore be
sustained; but will hold the defendant until
the matter can be passed upon by another grand
Jury and viii order the case 70 be resubmitted to
the next grand jury to be convened at this
nlsce