Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-05-16
THEY MUST GO.
The Court Is Not Unanimous
|. Blu, stin Go They Must.
JOHN cHIHAMAN HEARS IT
Bul Won't Believe It Until the sa-cOnpauIe,
Tells Him I, Is So,
An Interesting Event in Ihe Cleveland Family.
HOke Smith Gels Word Of an laelau
FishI--carlIsle's Action.
whai Quay
Says.
JOHN cHINAMAN HEARS IT

hsA, ashinrtcn. May lo.-lThe United
: TX abce 9preiae court today affirmed The
TSko lOnality Of Chinese exclusion
0'p fstration. Justice Gray read the
dee. Il Justice Brewer dissenting
NJ the courtroom were Attorncy-Gen-
ernl Olney. Solicitor-iencral Aldrich.
Senators Pugh, Dolph and Cockrell, eX-
Justice Strong aud several members of
the diplomatic corps. who. We're inter
estcd spectators Justice Gray said the
power OF this nation 10 restrict or pro-
hihit Immigration OF any aliens into the
country or 10 require those in the cuun-
try to remove therefrom was settled
principle of the International law. The
legislative power OF the government bad
not transcribed any Of It's constitutional
limitations in the net under conAdera-
ton. 1t was within It's power to de-
terInine the regulations under which
these aliens be permitted to remain IN
the United States or failing to observe
these regulations they should be required
to leave thc. country. The. provisions OF
section u Of the act which Is the part
of the law particularly al issue are not
inconsistent with the relations OF the
duties of lie legislative and judicial de
partments of The government The mode
of procedure SCI forth In the section was
similar 10 that In other well established
proceedings. such rs haheas corpus and
naturalization requirements of citizen
ship and the like In which the judicial
branch of the government accepted the
determination of the executive on the
questions Involved. As to the require
menls that entitled Chinese to remain
In this country. and who should rstnb-
lsh that right. Justice Gray said 1t was
In the power Of the legislature to deter
mine the character Of the evidence re-
ceiyed in case AT law and what force
should be given IT, Not discussing the
wisdom nor the justice of the act in
IL. Il. a.
! of the judicial branch of the government,
! II remained only to say that the judg-
ment of the circuit court of the southern
district OF New York In refusing to grant
writs Of habeas corpus TO the several
petitioners was affirmed, Justice Gray
stated II had been impossible In the brief
tlmo since the hearing of argument On
the petitions TO prepare In writing an
| opinion OF the court. IL would be filed
as soon as possible
At the conclusion Of Justice Gray's
opinion, lusticQ Brewer said he felt com-
4 npluh 10 diSsrut from the view Of the
majority Of che court. He read his views
AZ some length. declaring the act of 1892
unconstitutional and If 1t was upheld
there was no guarantee that similar
treatment would not be accorded TO other
classes of population than Chinese.
Justice Field. who delivered the opln-
\ ion of the supreme court OF the United
: ttfAlfh ~ AHf nlFh fANt NAlNtI Auf ~
| cusion act also read dissenting opin-
ion, He held there was wide differ
| ence between exclusion OF immigrants
1 and deportation Of allen residents, and
/ be characterized the act in The strongest
| language as brutal and unconstitutional
| The case was, to his mind, frnught with
| the grayest dangers 10 the priceless cOn-
stitutional liberties Of people.
In his dissenting opinion the chief jus
| tice denies the soundness of the PROPOSE
| ton that the cases before the court
were such MS the judicial department Of
the government alone could deal with
| II WAS In his view, Judicial question.
and however reluctant the courts may be
! TO pass upon the constiMtionnlity Of
legislative acts, u was the very essence
OF judicial duty 10 do so when the dis.
charge of that duty was properly imposed
upon II. He entertained no doubt the
provisions Of the Fifth and Fourteenth
amendments We're universal in APP
I plication and that while the general
government invested so far as foreign
countries were concerned with all the
powers necessary TO maintain It's abso-
lutte Independence and security, II could
not by virtue of supposed Inherited SOW
ereignty absolutely deal with persons
lawfully and peaeenbly within It's domain.
The act before the court was not an
act TO ahrocate or repeal the treaty nor
TO expel Chinamen lawfully here and no
such intent could be imputed to con
gress. lis object was 10 prescribe a
method Of registration and deportation
10y way Of punishment. and this was in
his view an unusual punishment not au-
lboriEed by the constitution
After the court had concluded its an
nounceinent Of opinions, J. II. Ashton
Of counsel for the Chinese. moved for a
rehearing Of Tie case and argument be-
fore n full bench at The next term.
The ~~te was . TO 3 IN support Of the
law. .lrHicc Harlan being absent
The motion was taken under advise
fnanI