Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-07-31
Secretary Carlisle Takes a Hand in
the Affair,
REBUKING CUSTOMS OFFICIALS.
A Letter Sent to the Collector of
New York.
THE LAW TO BE ENFORCED.

poSSeU Oh inc SUBJECT, anu secretary Car
Isle brings the matter to a close in the fol-
Collector Hendricks:
Il have to acknowledge the receipt Of
your letter Of the 26th instant in reply to
instructions Of the 18th instant, in which
you were directed to discontinue the prac-
tice OF authenticating by your signature or
that OF your deputies under the official
seal Of the custom house. certificates of the
Chinese consul at New York issued to Chi
nese other than laborers about to leave the
country and intending to return thereto
Your letter Is an argument In support of
the opinion you express thai the depart-
ment should reconsider its instructions Of
the 18th instant and permit your officers TO
authenticate such certificates as heretofore
You cite the decisions Of department sy-
nopsis 6e74. dated September Is, 1854. in
which the collector Of customs at Port
Townsend was instructed that in the ab-
sence Of any provision Of law as to evidence
to be required on the re-enery Of Chinese
merchants no objection was perceived TO
parties interested and for his own nrotac-
ton. merchants certificates similar to the
Geruncates prescribed under the act Of
July 5. 1884. as evidence Of the right to re-
entry of Chinese laborers You cite also
decision 6722 dated January 14lSS5 in which
II Is stated that persons other than labor
Of their own free will ami accord and when
they leave the United States are entitled
70 re-enter on any evidence satisfactory 70
laborers.
Quoting Obsolete Instructions.
These instructions were issued during
the early administration of the acts of 1852
and 1884. before the present methods of
evading the law became SO prevalent. These
acts authorized the return to the United
States Of laborers who had been here and
who had gone to visit China, and provided
Tor the issue Of certificates by the customs
officers to identify such returning Chinese.
The Issuance Of similar certificates to Chi
nese merchants. although not expressly pro-
vided Tor by law. was permitted as coming
within the spirit OF these acts But the
cases Of the fraudulent entry Of Chinese
Iaborers under cover Of this practice be-
came so numerous that Congress passed the
act Of October 1. 1885, forbidding the re-
void ali csFti9cstes Of Identity W heretofore reta
similar fos msrchant. a@ mhs use se5f of
tinued ~
After quoting these obsolete instructions
you then say that Notwithstanding these
on August 1. 1891 III 600. declared that ali
Chinese. not laborers. now resident in the
United States who may desire to visit China
States win be required to present e, mt at nthe the
port OF nrst arrival In the United States.
as, as condition precedent to landing, the cey-
tifcete provided for by section 8 Of the act
OF July 5, 1884, but you omit to state that
the circular Of August. 1891, to which you
refer. was based upon decision Of the su-
preme Court of the United States. which
was printed In full as a part Of the said
circular. and in which the court used the
following LANGUAGE; The result of the leg
to be this, that no laborers Of that race
shall hereafter be permitted to enter the
United States: OF even to return after hav-
may have previously resided therein and
have left with a view Of returning; and that
connected with the diplomatic service. must
produce certificate from the authorities
OF the Chinese government. or of such other
time be subjects of. showing that they are
not laborers and have the permission of
that government to enter the United States.
sentative Of the government Of the United
States
The Lau Ow Bew Decision.
You also refer to a later decision Of the
supreme court in the case of Lau Ow Bew,
wherein 1t was decided that Chinese mer-
and are entitled to exercise, the right Of
free ingress and egress. and all other
rights. privileges and immunities enjoyed
in this country by the citizens and sub
decision you state has never been promui-
to say that with this in view. it would
whom alone under the law and decisions
Of the Department and the courts respons-
ibility in this matter rests. to facilitate
in every proper way. for outgoing Chinese,
other than laborers the procuring of evil
dence establishing their right of re-entry
In to the United States
Your statement that the decision of the
supreme court last mentioned has not been
promulgated by the Department is errone-
Department (copy inciosed) dated October
49, 1892. in paragraph q: Of which the sub
stance Of said decision is expressly recited.
V~1x WS~t hA tevx -
the practice Of the Department since the
PRONUNCIATION of that decision has been in
accordance Herewith.
for the execution Of the laws relating to the
exclusion of Chinese rests alone upon the
collector e; s is 1hhwaarrantsd. INV Upon that officer
Gliding upon the testimony presented by
Chinese persons claiming the right to enter
1t Is his duty. as 1t is the usual practice Of
collectors of customs. to submit the case to
the Secretary Of the Treasury for his de-
cision with whom lies the ultimate re-
sponsibility for the enforcement of these
laws and whose lawful instructions in the
premises should be obeyed BY collectors
Evadinx the Law.
''The department cannot concur in your
view that the unauthorized practice, dis
continued by its order Of the 18th instant,
Of authenticating the certificates Of the Chi
nese consul at New York by the signature
and seal Of the collector, should be re-
sumed. Evidence Is before the department
in one case where a Chinese person repre-
sented himself to be a member OF a firm OF
Chinese merchants in New York, and was
so certified by the Chinese consul at New
York. which certificate was duly authenti-
Gated by the seal Of the custom house and
in point of fact. the Chinese person who
presented himself at the custom house was
another and entirely different person from
the one named In the certificate. This man
applied for admission at one of the frontier
custom houses upon the certificate men,
toned, which, according to your theory,
would be conclusive evidence of his right
to enter, inasmuch as the photograph was
that Of the person who presented himself
but it was not that Of the person named in
the certificate. who was a real parsonage,
formerly residing in New York, and who
was still in China. That many cases Of
this kind have occurred is beyond question
and the department sees no good reason for
which. in Instances like that mentioned
only serves an aid to those engaged in
violating the law.
"It is an ascertained fact that many
hundreds Of Chinese laborers have come
into the country within the past year under
the guise of merchants, students, actors or
other persons of the exempt class aided in
most cases by customs officers. who were
either corrupt or Indifferent to their duty
in the premises.
1T Is my duty. as 1t is my purpose, to
employ all the means under my control to
enforce the law in good faith. and to that
end 1 shall expect the cordial cooperation
Of all officers OF the customS"