Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1893-05-18
THE oEARY LAW.

cfasion and ReGistration Law Before
tho United States Supreme Court-Tho
in Support OF the Right of the Govern
ment tn Regulate Immigration, and In
Its Judgment. to Restrict It.
WASHINGTON. May lin the Chi
nese exclusion case in the supreme
court yesterday, Mr.. Charles ii. AL
dr1ch, solicitor general, appeared on
behalf of the United States and argued
in favor of the constitutionality of the
Geary law. These cases, he commended,
could not be distinguished from the Chi
nese exclusion case ESQ United States,
5S1), in which the court had decided
most of the points at issue. The Geary
act had not for its purpose the deporta-
ton of Chinese laborers, as counsel for
the petitioners enormously assumed,
but to provide a system Of identified
ton and registration for such as were
here. This is q lawful purpose
whether applied to citizens or
aliens. The means by which the
Identification is attained, the solicitor
general contended, were also lawful
and the act is reasonable and humane
in its provisions. The refusal of the
Chinese to observe the requirements OF
the law was under the advice of certain
eminent legal gentlemen, in whose
opinion the law is unconstitutional
''an opinion Che continued) which, as
shall seek to show, is equivalent to a
denial of the sovereignty of the United
States in the exercise of enumerated
powers of the constitution, of the au-
thority of the previous decisions OF
this court and of well-settled princi-
Piles of the law of nations"
Mr.. Aldrich maintained a. the right
of congress to require aliens or citizens
to register or obtain ertificates of
Identification; (3) the power of con-
gress to restrict and even forbid such
immigration, he said, must be conceded
as question of both international and
constitutional law. OF the necessity
for such exclusion, the political de-
partments are the sole judges The jul
dietary cannot pass upon that question,
and so and for like reasons it is thought
that the methods and means by which
the political departments seek to regu-
late, limit or terminate the residence
~ such aliens as are already here are
likewise exclusively within the juris-
diction of the political departments and
beyond the confines of judicial power.
The legislation under consideration, he
contended, was authorized by the
terms of the treaty of November, 1880,
which reserves the right on the part Of
the United States to regulate, limit
or suspend such coming or residence"
Mr.. Aldrich's third point was that "a
nation has right, according to inter-
national law, to prescribe the terms
1con which the citizens or subjects of
other nations shall be admitted to it's
territory; to forbid such admission, or,
having admitted such citizens and sub
jects, to regulate and limit their resi-
dence therein, and, whenever it chooses
to do so, suspend such residence alto
gether, and require that they shall
depart its territory.
The fourth point was that the United
States was a nation possessing like
powers with other nations to exercise
the ordinary and necessary means OF
self-preseryation. From this it follows
that ':there is n police power of the
United States which extends to and
embraces all subjects confined to the
general government and against the
exercises of which Chinese alien res
ident laborer is not entitled to invoke
the guarantees of the constitution of
the United States, designed for the
protection of it's citizens and citizens of
the several states"
In conclusion, the solicitor general
said: Assuming the maxim that the
safety of the people is the supreme
law, then the police power in its rela-
tons to every subject of danger, must,
under our system, rest in the states or
the United States or the people. If
the latter, it occurs to me that the Chi
nese residents in this country have
need to repeat the old prayer that they
may be saved from their friends Tor
counseD; for if they can induce the
court to hold that the power does not
belong to the federal government, but
yet rests in the people Of the several
states, no person who has witnessed
the evils of Chinese immigration and
competition with our laborers can
doubt that the people Of the states af-
fictcd Herewith will promptly rid
themselves of the banefu1 presence by
appropriate legislation to that end. :"
Mr. j. Rubley Ashton, of Washing
ton. concluded the argument. Through
out the progress of the argument court
and spectators alike gave marked at
tention.
Mr. Choate, in the course of his re-
marks. referred to the assertion in the
| printed argument of the solicitor gen.
cral that the Chinese residents of this
country had failed to register under
the law in pursuance to advice of coun-
| sell ION the contrary said Mr..
| Choate, my advice, and that of all the
| counsel associated with me in the case,
| has been for the Chinese to register,
but they did not
| While discussing the point that the
law was faulty in attempting to vest
| judicial power not in any court, but in
United States judge upon the wing"
Mr.. Choate was interrupted by Mr.. JUS
tice Gray, who asked, what do you
| say as to the power of any United
States judge to issue writs of habeas
| corpus?" To which the attorney re-
sponded: 81 thought your honors
would ask me that question and looked
it up. The authority Is vested in the
United States courts by the first sec.
ton of the law, and IL is there declared
that amy judge may issue the writ"
comms.ss Upon tho K.lsss's rsmpelhofe,
BERLIN, May 1.-THE vossische Zuh
tung says that the address made by tbs
kaiser to the officers of the guards in
/ \ = L.