The Lamar register., 1893-05-20
THE CHINESE MUST GO.
The Supreme Court Says the Geary Law
IL ConstitutfonAi.

u
is Constitutional.
The Supreme Court OF the United States on
the 18th affirmed the constitutionality Of the
GcNry Chimes. exclusion and registration act.
The opinion WAS announced by Justice Gray,
Justices Brewer, Field and Fuller dissenting.
The announcement that = decision In the
case was expected attracted large attend
ance of spectators. and the fact that 1t was
the last day of the term accounted for the
presence Of an unusual large array Of attor-
neys within the bar, including Attorney Gen
erai olney, Solicitor General Aldrich, sena-
tors Pugh, Dolph and Cockren. er-Justiee
Strong and several members of the diplomatic
corps were interested spectators,
Justice Gray. In announcing the Judgment
of the court, said that the power Of this ma
ton to restrict or prohibit the immigration of
aliens Into the United States, or to require
such aliens already in the country to remove
therefrom, was a well settled principle of In
,ernational law and Was confirmed by an sn-
broken line Of decisions in this court
The legislative power of the government
had not transcribed any of It's constitutional
limitations In the act under consideration #
was within its power to determine the regula-
tons under which these aliens should be per-
failing to observe these regulations, they
should be required to leave the country. The
provisions OF section six OF the act. the part
of the law particularly at issue, were not In
consistent with the relations and duties of the
Legislative aud judicial departments Of the
government The mode OF procedure set
forth in the action Is similar to that In other
well established proceedings, such a. The
kah. S,In he
requirements. of citizenship aud the like, In
which the judicial branch Of the government
accepted the determination OF the legislative
upon the questions involved
At the conclusion OF Justice Gray's opinion
Justice Brewer announced that he felt com
PEELED to dissent from the view Of the major
ity OF the court He read his views at some
length, declaring In substance that The act OF
1s92 was unconstitutional, and thai Il Ii we're
upheld there was no guarantee that similar
treatment might not be accorded TO other
classes OF our population thSa the Chinese
Justice Field, who delivered the opinion OF
the Supreme Court OF the United State. in
the first case under the exclusion act, also
read dissenting opinion He held that
there was a wide difference between exclusion
OF immigrants and the deportation OF Alieu
residents and be characterized the act In the
strongest language as inhuman and brutal
and as violstiyc to the constitution 10 every
section. He regretted to say ths; to his
mind the decision Of the eouri was fraushi
with the gravest dangers to the priceless coa-
stitutiousl liberties Of the people.
Chief Justice Fuller also dissented from
the opinion OF the court
In his dissenting opinion, the chief justice
denied the soundness Of the proposlii.n that
the cases before the court were such the
political department OF the government alone
could deal with. II was in his view judicial
question, and hos reluctant courts may be to
pass upon the constitutionAlity Of legislative
acts, Il was the very essence Of judicial duty
10 do so when The discharge of that duty
was properly imposed upon H. He entertain
ed no doubt that the provisions of the fifth
and fourteenth amendments were universal
in their application and thGi while the gen
cral government Wa invested, so far for
eiSn countries were concerned, With all the
powers necessary TO the maintenance n It's
absolute Independence and security, II could
not, IN virtue OF It's supposed inhercni sover-
eighty, absolutely deal with persons lawfully
and peacefully within its domain The act
was not an act to shrogate or repeal treaty,
nor to eIpel Cinnamon uniAwfully here, and
no such intent could be imputed to Congress
Its object was to prescribe method Of regis
tration, and the deportation by way OF punish
meut was, in bis view, an unusuA, punish
meut, not authorized by the constitution.
After the court had concluded announce
ment of opinions, Mr.. J. II. Ashton OF the
counsel for the Chinese, moved for reheAr-
ing Of the case and argument before = full
bench at the next term. At present the court
stands five to three in support o; the Law.
Justice Harlan being absent, the effect OF
which Is to postpone. un,n the motion 1.
acted upon, any proceeding under the iuds-
ment Of the court.