The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1893-05-17

Washington News
WAsHINGToN, May l5.-The supreme
court OF the United States today affirmed
the constilutionalitv OF the Geary Chinese
exclusion and registration act. The
opinion was announced by Justice Gray,
others dissenting. The announcement
that decision in the case was expected
attracted large attendance. and the fact
that il was the last day of the term &C
counted for the presence of an unusually
arge array of attorneys within the bar, in
clud1ng Attorney-General Olney, Solicitor
General Aldrich. Senators PuRh, Dolph
and Cockrell Ex-Justice Strong and
several members of the diplomatic corps
were interested spectators.
Justice Gray announcing the judgment
Of the court said that the power of this ma
lion to restrict or prohibit the immigra-
lion OF any aliens into the country or to
require such aliens already in the country
20 remove therefrom was a well-settled
principle of international law and was
confirmed by On unbroken line Of de-
,isions in this court. The legislative
power of the government had not
ranscended any of It's constitutional linn
tations in the act under consideration. It
vas within its power to determine the
regulations under which these aliens
Ihould be permitted to remain in the
United States, or failing to observe the
ECU ati0ns they should be required TO
cave the country.
The provisions ofsec. 6 of the act. which
,rc the part of the law particularly at
ssue, were not inconsistent with the
Citations and duties of the legislative and
judicial departments of the government.
The mode of procedure set forth in the
IectlOn Is similar to that in other we'll
established proceedings, such as the
nabeas corpus and naturalization, fixing
the requirements of citizenship D and the
Ike, in which the judicial branch
q the government accepted the
determination of the executive up
on the questions involved. As to the
requirements that the Chinese entitled 10
remain in this country should establish
that right bv the evidence OF one credita-
BILE white witness. Justice Gray said il
was within the power of the legislature to
determiee the character of evidence that
might be received in a case at law and
W at force should be given to the testi-
mony SO offered. Not discussing the wis
dom nor the Justice of the act in question,
which was beyond the province of the Judi
ciel branch OF the government, itremained
only to say that the judgment of the cir
cult court for the southern district of
New York in refusing to grant writs of
habeas corpus 20 the several petition
ers was affirmed. Justice GRAY
stated that it had been impossible in the
brief time elapsing since the hearing of
the argument upon the petitions to pre-
pare in writing the opinion OF the court,
but it would be filed as soon as possible.
Justice Brewer Dissents.
At the conclusion OF Justice Gray's
opinion, Justice Brewer announced that
be felt compelled to dissent from the view
of the majority of the court. He read his
views at some length, declaring, in sub
gtance, that the act OF 1892 was unconsti-
tutional, and that If it was upheld there
was no guarantee that similar treatment
might not be accorded to other classes of
our population than the Chinese.
Justice Field. who delivered the opinion
Of the supreme court of the United States
in the first case under the exclusion act
also read a dissenting opinion. He held
that there was a wide difference between
exclusion of immigrants and the depOrta-
tion OF alien residents. and he character
IZed the act In the strongest language as
jnhuman and brutal, and as violating the
institution in every section. He regretted
say that the decision of the court was
D his mind fraught with the eravest dan
srs TO the priceless constitutional lber-
,ies of the people
Chief Justice FuIIer's Opinion.
Chief Justice Fuller also dissented from
the opinion of the court. In his dissent
ing opinion the chief justice 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. Ii was in his view judicial
question, and however reluctant courts
may be to pass upon the constitutionality
OF legislative acts it was the very essence OF
iudicisl duty to do so when the discha arge
of that duty was properly imposed
upon il.
He entertained no doubt that the pro-
visions of the fifth and fifteenth amend
ments were universal In their application,
and that while the general government
was invested, so far as foreign countries
were concerned. with all the powers neces-
sarY TO the maintenance OF its absolute
independence and security it could not, in
virtue Of a supposed inherent sovereignty,
absolutely deal with persons lawfully
and peacefully within its domain. The
act before the court was not an act TO ABB
Togate or repeal treaty, nor to expel
Cinnamon lawfully here, and no such in
tent could be imputed to congress. Its
object was to prescribe a method of regis
tration, and the deportation denounced
by way of punishment was, in his view.
an unusual punishment not authorized
by the constitution.
A Kehearing Moves.
After the court had concluded an
nouncement of opinions Mr.. j. Hubley
IL. n 81 l.. IL \