The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1893-05-31
CHINESE EXCLUSION Law,
THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT
IS CONSTITUTIONAL.

senting Oplnions-Justice Field
Denounces the Law as Brutal-It
VIII Cost $6,OOO,OOO to Deport
the Unregistered Mongolians.
The Supreme Court Of the United States al
Washington has affirmed the constitutionality
of the Geary Chinese Exclusion and Regis
tration act. The opinion was announced by
Justice Gray, Chief Justice Fuller and JUS
tices Field and Brewer dissenting. The an
nouncement that decision in the case was
expected attracted large attendance of spec
tators, and the fact that it was the last day OF
the term accounted for the presence o; an
unusually large array Of attorneys within the
bar, including Attorney-Ge Olney, Solici-
tor-General -Aldrich, and Senators Pugh,
Dolph, and Cockren, Ex-Justice 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 any aliens into the country, or to require
such aliens already in the country to re-
move therefron, was q we'll settled
principle of international law, and
was confirmed by an unbroken line
of decisions in this court. The
transcended any OF its constitutional limita-
tions in the act under consideration. 1t was
within its power to determine the regulations
under which these aliens should be per-
mitted to remain in the United States, or,
failing to observe these regulations, they
should be required to leave the
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 departments Of
the Government. The mode OF procedure
set forth in tine section is similar to that in
other well-established proceedings, such as
the habeas corpus and naturalization, fixing
the requirements of citizenship and the like,
In which the judicial branch Of the Govern
ment accepted the determination Of the Ex-
ecutive upon the questions involved.
As to the requirements that the Chinese en-
titled to remain In this country should eStab-
lish that right by the evidence OF one crediI
table white witness. Justice Gray said that
1t was within the power OF the Legislature to
determine the character OF evidence that
might be received in case at law and what
force should be given to the testimony 80 Of
fered. Not discussing the wisdom nor the
Justice Of the act In question, which was be-
yond the province OF the judicial branch Of
the Government. it remained only
to cay that the Judgment Of the
Circuit Court for the Southern District OF
New York In refusing to grant writs ofhabeas
corpus to the several petitioners was af-
frmed. Mr.. Justice Gray said that 1t had
been impossible, in the brief time elapsing
since the hearing Of the argument upon the
petitions, to prepare In writing the opinion
of the court. 1t would be filed as soon as 1t
was possible.
Justice Brewer said that he felt compelled
to dissent from the view OF the majority OF
the court. He read his views at some
length, declaring 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 population that the Chinese.
Justice Field, who delivered the opinion OF
the court in the first case under the Exclusion
act, also read dissenting opinion. He held
that there was wide difference between ex-
clusion OF immigrants and the deportation OF
alien residents. and he characterized the act
In the strongest language as inhuman and
brutal, and as violative Of the Constitution In
every section. He regretted to say that the
decision Of the court was to mis- mind fraught
with the gravest dangers to the priceless con-
stitutional liberties OF the people.
Chief Justice Fuller also dissented from
the opinion of the court. He denied the
soundness OF the proposition that the cases
before the court were such as the political
department Of the Government alone could
deal with. It was, in his view, judicial
question, and, however reluctant courts
may be to pass upon the constitution
atty Of legislative acts, it was the very
essence of judicial duty to do 80 when
the discharge Of that duty was properly Inn
posed upon it. He entertained no doubt that
the provisions of the fifth and fourteenth
amendments were universal in their apphca-
ton, and that while the general Government
was invested. 80 far as foreign coun-
tries were concerned, with all the pow
ers necessary to the maintenance Of its
absolute independence and security, it
could not, in virtue Of O supposed inherent
sovereignty, absolutely deal with persons
lawfully and peacefully within its domain.
The act before the court was not an act to
abrogate or repeal treaty, nor to eXpel
Cinnamon lawfully here, and no such intent
could be imputed to Congress. Its object
was to prescribe method of registration, and
the deportation denounced by way OF punish
ment was, in his view, an unusual punish
ment not authorized by the Constitution.
J. .Hubley Ashton of counsel for the Chinese
moved for a rehearing Of the case and an
argument before full bench OF the next
term. At present the court stands five to
three in support of the law, Justice Harlan
being absent The court took short -ec"ss
to consider tho motion and afterwari denied
it. so the opinion stands as announced.
Secretary Carlisle, soon after he heard OF
the decision Of the Supreme Court, went to
the Executive Mansion and had conference
with the President on the subject. He re-
mained for an hour or more. Attorney
General Olney said that until the line of
action to be pursued by our Government was
mapped out, he could say nothing on the
subject, except that the Department of JUS
tice had no money for deporting Chinese.
Conservative estimate places the amount
necessary to deport the unregistered Chinese
at $4,000. 900.
It is estimated that there are ITO 900 Chi
nese in the United States. Reports from
thirty-four districts show that 300 have
registered. The twenty-nine districts not yet
heard from, it is estimated, will increase the
number to 5000, which is regarded to be
the maximum registration. During the
present fiscal year $50 Chinese subjects
have been deported. The coat OF de-
portation from San Francisco is 1856 per
head. Only SIG, ,s06.03 OF the appropriation
fos the enforcement OF the Chinese law re-
mains unexpended. This amount will go
but small way toward paying the expenses
OF deporting the 104, 900 Chinese who have
not registered. 1t is not known at the Treas
ury Department that any other tund can be
drawn upon to provide for the expense OF
carrying out the requirements of the law.
Intimations were heard that Congress might
convene to consider the matter.
TOD CHMnhv ThTp