St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-01-22
A CHINESE DECISION.
Judge Edgerton Did Not Pass
Upon the Constitution
atty Point,
But Held the Commissioner
Had Exceeded All His
Powers
In Sentencing All Yuk to a
Thirty-Day Term in the
Jail.
The Celestial Released, and
Ordered to Depart to His
Own Soil.

Judge Alonzo j. Edgerton, Of the
United States district court, filed a
written opinion yesterday in the noted
case OF All Yuk, Chinaman laundry
artist of Duluth, who was ordered i'm
prisoned for thirty days by United
States Commissioner Carey and then to
be deported under the Chinese exclusion
act Of congress. The court holds that
the Imprisonment was illegal, but that
the right to deport IS created by the law.
The decision is as follows:
The petitioner An Yuk, was arrested
on Dec. 10. 1892, and brought before }.
Il. Carey, commissioner of the circuit
court for the district, charged with hav-
ing unlawfully entered the United
States, and being on that date unlaW-
fully therein, in violation Of the act OF
congress entitled, ian act to execute
certain treaty stipulations relating to
Chinese, approved May b, 1882" and the
acts amendatory thereof and supple.
mentary thereto; that afterwards on
the said 10Th day of December, 1892, the
said All Yak was taken before the said
commissioner, by virtue of the said COM
plant and warrant, who, after hear
ing thereon, found and adjudged that the
said All Yuk was Chinese laborer and
a subject to the Chinese empire; that he
came unlawfully to the United States,
and was then in the United States con-
trary to law and in violation OF the acts
aforesaid, and it was then and there
ordered and adjudged by the said COM
missioner that the said All Yuk be i'm
prisoned at hard labor in the Jail OF st.
Louis county, in said district of Mime
sofa, for thirty days and then be re-
HnnnTtn6
United States of America to China"
The petitioner caused to be issued a
writ of habeas corpus, and the return of
said writ admits the said allegations.
The sole and only question presented
to the court is whether the circuit court
commissioner exceeded his authority
under the law when he sentenced the
petitioner to be confined at hard labor
fol- thirty days.
The petitioner could be arrested, and
upon a summary examination before
the circuit court commissioner could
upon the finding and sentence of that
officer be depOrted, but this does not
necessarily determine that the circuit
court commissioner could thus summa-
rilv sentence the petitioner to hard
labor.
In the case of The United States vs.
w iIlS lCpOlICo III pliO II W SC
Federal Reporter on page 70, the learned
judge says: TO give proper effect to
all the provisions Of this act it is neceS-
Sary to give it an Interpretation author
izing indictments and criminal prose-
cutions in those cases in which
the government may be able to
secure and produce sufficient evil
dence to justify the same, and
at the same time preserving the remedy
of summary proceedings in all cases in
which criminal prosecutions may be for
any reason impracticable, and requir-
| ing that Chinese persons unable to
| prove their right to remain in the coun.
| try, but who cannot be convicted upon
criminal charge, shall be sent to their
own country in accordance with the
procedure and practice adopted i'll en-
forcing the existing laws. Such pro-
cedure and practice permits an informa-
| ton to be filed by the United States at
torney, upon which the accused may be
brought to trial, and if on such trial
the Judge finds the necessary facts, he
| may issue process for the removal Of
| the accused to his own country"
If the commissioner had sentenced
the petitioner to be depOrted only, his
sentence would not be disturbed; but |
| think he exceeded his authority under
| the law when he sentenced him to hard
labor, and as that is the charge upon
which the writ issued, the prisoner
must be discharged from custody.