The enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 188?-1899, 1893-05-24
GEARY ACT SUSTAINED.
United States Supreme Court De-
cides the Law Constitutional
The Nation Has Power to Restrict or Pro-
hibit Immigration Mongolians Must
Register or Go-Justice Gray An
nounces the OpInion-Three
Justices Dissent.

WASHINGTON, may lo'--lne supreme
court of the United States yesterday
affirmed the constitutionality of the
Geary Chinese exclusion and registra-
tion act The opinion was announced
by Justice Gray, Justice Brewer dis
senting: The announcement thata de-
cision in the case was expected at
tracted large attendance of specta-
tors, and the fact that 1t was the last
dav of the term accounted for the
presence of an unusually large array
of attorneys within the bar, including
ATTORNEY General 0lney, Solicitor Gen
eral Aldrich, Senators Pugh, Dolph and
Coclsrell.
Justice Gray said in announcing the
Judgment Of the court that the power
of this nation to restrict or prohibit
the immigration of any aliens into the
country, or to require such aliens al
ready in the country to remove here
from, was well settled principle of
international law and was confirmed
by an unbroken line Of decisions in this
court. The Legislative power of the
government had not transcended any
of it's constitutional limitations in the
act under consideration.
1t was within its power to determine
the relations under which these aliens
should be permitted to remain in the
United States or falling to observe
these regulations they should be re-
quired to leave the country. The pro-
visions of Section of the act which
are the part of the law particularly at
issue, were not inconsistent with the
relations and duties of the legislative
and judicial department of the govern
ment. The mode of procedure set forth
in the section are similar to that in
other well-established proceedings,
such as the habeas corpus and naturali-
zation, fixing the requirements Of citi-
zenship and the like, in which the ju-
dicial branch of the government ac-
cepted the determination Of the execu-
tive upon the questions involved.
As to the requirement that the Chi
nese entitled to remain in this country
should establish that right by the evil
dence of one credible white witness,
Justice Gray said that it was within
the power of the legislature to deter
mine the character of evidence that
might be received in case at law and
what force should be given TO the tes-
timony so offered. Not discussing the
wisdom nor the justice of the act in
question, which was beyond the prov
ince of the judicial branch of the gov
ernment, it remained only to say that
the Judgment of the circuit court for
the Southern district Of New York in
refusing to grant writs of habeas cor
pus to the several petitioners was af-
frmed. a
Justice Gray stated that it had been
impossible in the brief time olApsing
since the hearing of the argument upon
the petitions to prepare in writing the
opinion Of the court, it would be filed
as soon as 1t was possible.
At the conclusion of Justice Gray's
opinion Judge Brewer announced that
he felt compelled to dissent from the
view of the majority of the court, He
read his views at some length, declar-
ing in substance that the act of 1892
was unconstitutional and that II 1t
were upheld there was no guarantee
that similar treatment might not be
accorded TO other classes of our popu-
lation than the Chinese.
Justice Field, who delivered the
opinion of the supreme court Of the
United States in the first case under
the exclusion act, also read dissent
ing opinion. He held that there was a
wide difference between exclusion OF
immigrants and the deportation OF
alien residents, and he characterized
the act in the strongest language as in
human and brutal, and as violative OF
the constitution in every section He
regretted to say that the decision OF
the court was, TO his mind, fraught
with the gravest dangers TO the price
less constitutional liberties Of the peo-
pie.
Chief Justice Fuller also dissented
from the opinion Of the court.
After the court had concluded the an
nouncement of opinions, J.. Hubley
Ashton, of counsel for the Chinese
moved for rehearing Of the case and
an argument before full bench at the
next term.
The court took short recess to con
slider the motion. After the recess tn,
court denied the motion for rehear
ing, so the opinion stands us announced