The herald., 1893-08-31
HE STANDS BY THE GEARY ACT.
Judge Ross Orders Warrants
Issued Under Its Provisions.
A Concise but Meaty Opinion Which
Covers the Case.
He Hes No Judicial Knowledge of the
Incapacity of the Department to
Pay the Cost of Deportation
of the CHINESE.

Some months ago, an application was
made to United States Commissioner
Van Dyke for q warrant for the arrest OF
a Chinese, the application being made
by members of the trades union under
the registration clause of the Gsary
law.
The United States commissioner re-
fused to grant the warrant, and the
matter was taken before Judge Ross.
Yesterday the Judge delivered an
opinion authorizing the issuance Of war
rants for the arrest OF Cinnamon under
section 6 of the Geary law, the warrants
to be granted when the complaints and
verifcation are Undue form.
The following opinion was the result
of an application for a warrant Tor the
arrest OF All Wong. w. F. Linter made
the application under section 8.
The decision is ae follows.
An application having been made to
me as Judge OF the United States dis
trict court for the Southern district OF
California, based upon a complaint to
which the applicant asks to be sworn,
for the issuance of q warrant for the
arrest of one All Wong. charged with a
violation OF the sixth section OF the act
of congress, entitled, IAN act to prevent
the coming of Chinese persons into the
United States" approved May 5, 1892,
and commonly known as the Geary act.
That section of that act was involved
in the case OF Fong Que Ting We. United
States, 159 U. s., 698, and its validity
sustained by the supreme court; and
there is also in force, as decided by the
district court for this district on the
3Oth day OF June, 1893, in the case ol
United States vs. Wong Dep Ken, aecion
13 of an act entitled IAN. act to prohibit
the coming of Chinese laborers into the
United States, approved September Is
1883 (25 U. s. Stats, p. 476), part o1
which section reads as follows:
''That any Chinese person, or person
of Chinese descent, found unlawfully ir
the United States, or its territories, may
be arrested upon warrant issued upon
a complaint, under cath. filed by any
party on behalf of the United States,
bv any justice, judge or commissioner
of any United States court. returnable
before any juetice, judge or commits
eioner of a United States court, or before
any United States court, and when con
victed upon a hearing, and found and
adjudged to be one not lawfully entitled
to be or remain in the United States.
such person ehall be removed from the
United States to the country whence he
came. But any Chinese person convicted
before commissioner of United States
court may, within 10 days from eucf
conviction appeal to the judge of the
district court for the district"
l, therefore, while much regrettinl
that the application has been made to
me, feel it my duty under my oath o.
office and in view of the obligations rest
ing upon me to administer the laws o.
the United States in all casee properly
brought before me, to award the war
rant upon a verification OF the complaint
in the absence Of any judicial knowledge
| that the department of the government
charged with the execution OF the pro
visions of the act of May 5
1892, is not provided with tho
means to carry out its provisions. Were
L 80 advised. would not hesitate to re
fuse the warrant, for II is plain that th'
executive department of the government
cannot execute the orders of the judgel
directing the deportation of Ohinamer
who failed to register pursuant to th'
provisions of section Of the act OF Ma!
s, 1892, unless congress gives it th'
money with which to send them away
Without the necessary funds the execu
tive department would be, naturally
powerless and no Judge, in my opinion
should order into custody for deportation
any Chinaman whom he judicially know
cannot be deported by the executive de
partment for want OF the necessary
means. Such course would not only
strongly tend to embarrass the admins
tration, but it is pertinent to ask what
in that event, would become of such
Cinnamon? They could not be put II
the penitentiary at hard labor, a. pro
vided by section OF the GeAry act, fol
the reasons given in the recent opinion
OF the district court Of this district II
the case OF United States vs. Wong DeE
Ken, and any unreasonable detention O
them by the officers would doubtlesI
entitle them to discharge on writ O
habeas corpus. In the case last men
toned the defendant was found and
adiudged to be unlawfully in the
United States, and was therefore ordered
deported, and was deported by the ex
ecutive department. and. nothing to th'
contrary appearing, it is to be presumed
| that the same department. is possessed
of similar means for the deportation o
any other Chinaman or Chinamer