The morning call., 1893-09-06
THE CHINESE MUST Go
Sweeping Away the Last Hope of
the Little Brown Men in
This Country.
LIMIT OF oLNEY's POWER.
No Warrant in the Constitution for
Saying That One Section of an Act
Shall Be NuIIified, and the
Rest Enforced.

Los ANGELES. Sept. 5.-Following is the
decision Of Judge Ross of the United
States District Court. ordering the depor-
tation of Chum Shang Yuen, under section
Of the Geary act:
Pursuant to the provisions of section Is
of an act of Congress, entitled An act to
prohibit the coming of Chinese laborers to
the United States approved September
Is, 1883. which section was not only not re-
pealed by the act OF May s. 1892, COM
monty known as the GeaTy ACT. but was
thereby In express terms continued in
force, and based upon a verified complaint
charging defendant with violation of the
provisions of section 6 Of the Geary act, a
warrant was issued for his arrest. made
returnable before this court. Upon call
ing ne case for hearing the District At
torney presented to the court a telegram
from the AttOrney-General, a copy of
which was placed on file, and which reads
as follows, dated Washington, D. c., Sep
tember ,:
To United States Attorney Denis, Los
angeles. Cal: l am advised by the
Secretary OF the Treasury that there are
no funds to execute the Geary law so far
as the same provides for the deportation
Of Cinnamon who have nOt procured GER
tifcates of residence. On that state of
facts the Circuit Court of the United
States for the Southern District Of New
York made the following order: "Or-
dered that -- be and he hereby is dis
charged from the custody of the Marshal
and ordered to be depOrted from the
United States whenever provision for such
deportation shall be made by the proper
authorities" Ask the court to make SIM
liar order in like cases.
"'OLNEY. Attorney General"
This communication was, no doubt, oc-
casioned by the statement made in the
opinion given at the time OF issuing the
warrant TO the effect that the warrant
was issued in the absence of judicial
krs-~ledge on my part that the depart
gI6Ht of the Government charged with the
~ " of executing the provisions of the
& = baact was not provided with the neces-
y G. lninds for the purpose. and that were
lEoo u .dvised no warrant for such offend
ink Cinnamon would be issued nor order
for de pOftaIion made. These views were
grounded in the fact tina; to do so would
not only greatly embarrass a coordinate
branch Of the Government which, without
necessary funds would be mauifes tly
p0weress to send out of the country per-
sons ordered deDorted, and in the further
: fact that such offending persons could not
: be constitutienally imprisoned at hard
. labor in the State prison, as provided by
section 4 of the Geary act, and because
any unreasonable detention of them would
.entitle them to discharge from restraint
by: the.yery court ordering deportation, or
by:any. other court having power to in-
Qnlre by writ Of nabeas corpus into the
Illegal reStrainto of any person Of his liberty
"Such course is In no respect incOnsis-
tent with he entire Independence of the
judiciary. While, under our system of
GGgernmcnt, each of the great depart
ments. executive. judcial and legislative,
is,:withfn its proper sphere, wholly indie
pepuent of the others. yet the design is
that all shall work in harmony and not al
cross-Durposes.
':1he provision of the statute In question
is not penal law. 1t was SO decided by
the Supreme Court in the case of Fong
Yue Ting VS.. the United States. It's en-
actment was the exercise of the political
power by Congress to expel certain class
OF aliens from the country, which could be
exercised, as was decided in the
case cited. entirely through executive
officers. or through them with the
aid Of the judiciary. BY neither
method could Objectionable persons be
sent away without money to defray the
necessary expenses CT deportation, and
therefore repeat what was said when
awarding the warrant, that no Judge. in
my opinion, should order into custody for
deportation any Chinaman whom he judi
cially knows cannot be deported by the
Executive Department for want of neces-
saFy means.
But the information conveyed TO the
court through the Attorney General is not
that there are no funds available for the
execution OF the Geary act, but that there
are no funds to execute the Geary law so
Tar as the same provides for the deporta-
ton of Cinnamon who have not procured
certificates of residence
THAT portion of the Geary act reouir-
ing such certificates 10 be procured is sec
ton 6. and its validity having been sus-
tanned by the Supreme Court in the case
of Pong Yue Ting VS.. United States. it ia
as much a part of the Geary law as anv
part of it. Any Chinese Iaborer violating
its provisions ana thereafter remaining in
this country is as much unlawfully here
as if he smuggled himself into the country
contrary to other provisions of the statute,
for the simple reason that in each case
the existing law makes the act unlawful.
The violator of each is subject to depOrta-
ton. and equally so. No distinction can
be legally made between the offenders,
and can see no valid ground for with
holding warrant for the arrest of any
person properly charged with the viola
ton of any provisions of the law in Ques-
tion, nor for denying an order for deporia-
tion of any such persons proved, upon a
hearing, to have violated the law, in the
absence of judicial knowledge that the
department of Government charged with
the duty of executing its provisions is not
provided with the necessary FUNDS with
which to execute such order.
THAT Information. as has been said. is
not conveyed by communication from the
Attorney-General. On the contrary, the
clear inference drawn from it is that there
are funds available for the execution OF