The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1893-05-16
CHINESE EXCLUSION ACT.
The Supreme Court Decides 1t to
Be Constitutional.
THREE JUDGES DISSENT.
They Are Chief Justice Fuller and
Justices Brewer and Field.
A Rehearing and Argument Before the
Full Bench at the Next Term Is Moved
by Counsel for the Cbinese-Which
Is Taken Under Amusement

WASHINGTON, May 15.-The Supreme
Court today, through Justice Gray, sus-
tanned the decision of the New York
courts in favor of the constitutionality of
the Geary Chinese exclusion act. Justice
Brewer dissented. The announcement of
the decision in the case attracted a large
attendance of spectators and attorneys,
including Attorney General Olney,
Solicitor General Aldrich, Senators
Pugh, Dolph and Cochrane.
Justice Gray, in announcing the judg-
ment OF the court, said the power OF the
nation to restrict or prohibit the immi-
grafton of aliens into this country or
require such aliens already in the country
to remove therefrom is we'll settled
principle of international law, confirmed
by an unbrokep line OF decisions in this
court. The question presented was the
constitutionality and effect of the sixth
section of the act entitled San act to pro-
hibit the coming of Chinese persons into
the United States.'
The provisions of section vi of the act
are not inconsistent with the relations
and duties of the legislative and judicial
departments of the government. The
mode of procedure under the section is
similar to other well established proceed
ings, such as habeas corpus and natural
iZation, fixing the requirement for citi-
zenship and the like, and which the ju-
dicial branch OF the government has ac-
cepted in the determination OF the ex-
ecutive upon the questions involved.
The justice then sketched the provi-
sions of law rapidly and then proceeded
to say that it was perfectly well settled in
one of the fundamental principles of the
law of nations that every Independent
nation had an inherent right to keep
aliens out of its territory and to order
them to get out of It's territory; that
power public welfare demanded, that
power exists in time of war and equally
SO in time of peace, and has always been
recognized as belonging to Independent
nations. The United States. as all of the
great powers, has power to make war, to
make peace, to pass acts of naturaliZa-
ton, to pass all necessary and proper
laws to carry out the powers reposed in
Congress.
On the political department of the gov
eminent devolved the care of international
relations. 1t had been settled in two
cases that power OF exclusion may be
vested in executive officers and the aid OF
the judiciary might be invoked. 1t was
no new thing in public law for matters to
be executive and political in the first in
stance and then take judicial force as the
political department might direct. Courts
have no authority to revise decisions or
action and effect in these cases except so
far as provision have been made by law.
Treaties with China provided originally
for very free intercourse. That was in
1853. Then it was found it was necessary
IN have IN 10 mo ant
regulation of this matter and subsequent
treaties more distinctly recognized as con-
templated by the contracting parties,
power to regulate entrance of Chinese
into this country. If Congress makes a
law inconsistent with a treaty, it may
give a foreign nation the right to COM
plain and to take such as it may deem
best for its own best interests, but the
duty of the courts of the United States is
clear, and they must recognize its force.
Justice Gray here dwelt at length upon
the objection that had been made to the
arbitrary power conferred upon the exec
utive officers in making deportations, and
said so far as the investigation is made it
will be a judicial investigation. The law
provided that Cinnamon shall be deported
unless they shall clearly establish certain
facts to the satisfaction of Judge. The
legislature had right to prescribe what
judicial tribunals. 1t was within its
power to provide that those aliens who
have been year within the United States
without getting out q certificate should
be deported. 1t had the right to define
what witnesses should be heard The
right to protect the courts against testi-
mony from persons who had no regard
for the sanctity of an oath
He would not touch upon the wisdom,
= Il he 0f
Those questions were for the political
Legislative and executive departments OF
the government, and if this act were
within their constitutional powers it
would be out of place for the court to in
terfere. What Congress had done had not
been to provide for any definition of crime
in this act, nor to provide any punish
ment. 1t provided that the persons in
question should be sent out of the coun-
try to the place from whence they came.
| 1t provided, not for adjudication of crime
but simply for the removal of persons
whose presence Congress considers incon-
sistent with the public welfare. 1t must
| be remembered that Chinese cannot be
naturalized. Doubtless they are entitled
| to the security and safeguard guaranteed
| by the constitution and laws in such
measure as they provide, but there was
nothing in the constitution or laws which
impugned the power of Congress to com
pei them to leave the country.
Not discussing the wisdom nor the jus.
| tice of the act in question, which was be.
yond the province of the judicial branch
of the government, it remains only to say
| that the Judgment of the circuit court O
the southern district of New York in re
| fusing to grant Writs of habeas corpus tt
the petitioners is affirmed.
The Judge said the opinion in writing
would be filed as soon as possible. a
the conclusion of Justice Gray's opinion
Justice Brewer announced that he wa.
compelled to dissent from the view of tn,
majority of the court, and read his view
at some length, declaring in substance thu
act of 1892 unconstitutional; that if up
held there is no guarantee that similar
treatment might not be accorded othe
classes of our population.
Judge Field, who delivered the opinion
of the supreme court in the first case IN.
der the exclusion act, also read a dissent
ing opinion. He held wide difference
between the exclusion of immigrants an,
deportation of alien residents, and char
acterized the act in the strongest Ian
guage as inhuman and brutal and a vic
Iation of the constitution in every sec
ton. He regretted to say that the de
cIsion of the court to his mind wa
fraught with the gravest dangers to con
stitutional liberty.
Justice Field delivered the principa
dissenting opinion, he said: Th
power of the government to exclude for
leigners from this country, that is to pre-
vent them from entering it wheneve
public interests in its Judgment re
quire such exclusion, has been repeatedl
asserted by the legislative department
but the deportation from this country G
/ persons lawfully domiciled therein b.
] permission of the government engaged i
ordinary pursuits of life has never bee
lasserted by the government since it