Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-05-28
GEARY EXCLUSION ACT.
Federal supreme Court PronOunces
IL Constitutional.


IL Constitutional.
WASHINGTON. May 27.-The Supreme
Court of the United States to-day decided
the Geary Chinese exclusion act to be con-
stitutlonal, and incidentally affirmed the
general right of the United States to
exclude aliens Of all kinds. The question
came before the court in the case Of
Lem Moon Sing. appellant. VS. the United
States.
The appellant transacted business in
San Francisco for a number of years
and in January, 1894. went on a temporary
visit to China, with the intention Of re-
turning and continuing his residence in
the United States. During his absence
the Geary law of 1894 was passed
Justice Harlan delivered the opinion OF
the court, the important parts being as
follows:
1.-THE contention is that while. generally
speaking immigration officers have iuris
diction under the statute to exclude an
alien who is entitled, under treaty. to
come into the United States; yet II the
alien is entitled by law or treaty to enter
this country, but is nevertheless excluded
by such officers. the latter exceed their
jurisdiction, and their legal action, If II
results in restraining the alien OF his
liberty, presents a judicial question for
the decision of which the courts may in
tervene upon a writ OF habeas corpus.
"That view, If sustained would bring
into the courts every case OF an alien
who claimed the right TO come into, the
United States under some law or treaty.
but was prevented from doing 30 by the
executive branch of the government.
| This would defeat the manifest purpose
~ In committing orfhOrni-
nate immigration Of officers under the
| Secretary OF the Treasury the exclusive
right to decide whether an alien seeking
| admission TO this country belongs 10 the
| class entitled by law or treaty 10 come
| into the country. Under that interpre-
| tation Of the act OF 1894 the decision OF
| immigration or custom officers, which,
| under the law. should be final. unless re-
versed on appeal by the Secretary OF the
| Treasury. would be Of no practical value.
| The power Of Congress TO exclude aliens
| altogether from the United States or 10
prescribe the terms and conditions upon
which they may come to this country
and TO have its declared policy IN that
regard enforced exclusively through exc
| cutive officers without judicial interven-
| ton, has been settled by previous adjudi-
| cation. The remedy OF the appellant was
| by appeal TO the Secretary OF the Trea-
sury from the decision of his subordinate
| and not TO the courts.
There is no room in the language OF
| the act Of 1894 to doubt that Congress
| intended that il should be interpreted
| as we have interpreted 1t in this case
| To avoid Misrepresentation, II IL proper
| 10 say that the court does not now sS-
press any opinion upon the question
] whether, under the facts stated in the
I H.. 81. .Fftf 81 lalea 4fH1
Lem Moon Sing was entitled of right
under some law or treaty TO ever enter
the United States. We mean only e
| decide that that question has been con
stitutionally committed by Congress fol
| final determination to named officers OF
! the Executive Department OF the govern
| ment
"The judgment Of the court below de-
nying the application for the writ Of
! habeas corpus is affirmed"
Justice Brewer dissented from this onin
| ION.