The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1900-09-20
4 CHINESE W[DR
not II IMMIGRANT.
All Sing Is Given Per-
mission to Land
at This Port.
LUCID OPINION DY JUDGE EsTEE.
RIGHTS OF sEAFARINa CHI
MISE OH AMERICAN SHIPS
N no WISE ABRIDGED.
In Going From One American Port
TO Another an Oriental Ship
Employe Il Always Alb
solutsly Safe

/ allow him to land, claiming that he
was barred under the Chinese exclusion
acts. Davis & Gear, attorneys for All
Sing, combatted this ruling, contend
ing that their client was not an immi-
grant. but sailor, who desired to land,
as coming from one American port to
another, and would return to the port
whence he came. New York, or some
other American port, at the first op-
portunity.
Judge Estee upheld this contention,
holding that All Sing did not come
within the provisions OF the exclusion
acts and ordered the man to be re-
leased.
The text of Judge Estees opinion is
here given in full:
In the United States District Court in
and for the Territory Of Hawaii.
In re Application of All Sing for a Writ
Of Habeas Corpus
Davis & Gear, attorneys for petitioner.
John c. Baird, u s. District Attor-
ney. for Edward p Stackable, Col
lector of the Customs for the Port
of Honolulu.
This is an application for writ of
habeas corpus made ON behalf of one
All Sing, Chinaman. claiming to be a
seafaring man Ia cook on board the
American ship Challenger, which sailed
from the port of New York. in the
United States, on the 14th day Of April,
1900, and arrived at Honolulu on Sep
TENDER list. 1900; the said petitioner
claiming to be unlawfully detained and
imprisoned by the collector OF customs
at the port Of Honolulu, he having been
refused landing at said port by the
collector OF customs. on the ground that
petitioner Is an alien and a native Of
China, and not entitled to land under
the Chinese exclusion acts.
Upon the hearing 1t was shown that
the American ship Challenger sailed
from the port of New York on the
14th day OF April, 1900. for the port OF
Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, and Gas
shown in the articles Of shipping) to
such other ports and places in any
part Of the world as the master may
direct and back to a final port Of dis
charge in the United States : ="
That All Sing. the petitioner, was
regularly shipped as cook on board the
said ship Challenger at the said port
of New York, signing the shipping ar
ticles in Chinese, the shipping commits
sioner placing opposite his Chinese sig
nature the words All Low in English;
this being explained by the fact that
the petitioner could not read English
and did not know that the commits
sioner had written his name All Low
instead of All Sing, as appears from
ship and the petitioner.
Upon the arrival Of the ship at the
port of Honolulu the master OF the YES
sci discharged her cargo and undertook
to pay OF the petitioner and discharge
him at the port Of Honolulu, in accord
ance with the shipping articles; but
the collector. OF customs refused to al
low petitioner to land.
It was shown by the evidence at the
hearing that the petitioner had been a
seafaring man on American ships SAIL
ing out OF the port OF New York for
twenty years. He produced in evidence
eight certificates OF discharge from
different American vessels on which he
had sailed. TIE master of the ship
Challenger testified that the petitioner
was a sailor: tina: the petitioner had
consulted with him. the master. abou:
returning to New York. and that he
believed the intention OF the petitioner
was to Immediately reship upon an
other vessel as cook o. steward to re-
turn to that port. and that 1t was not
the intention of the petitioner to re-
main at the port OF Honolulu
The single question is. DO THE
CHINESE EXCLUSION ACTS APPLY
TO THIS PETITIONER?
II was held in the recent case of the
United States vs.. Burke. SO Fed. Rep.
$50. that
The legislation contained in the va
rious statutes that hare been passed.
relating to immigration ID clearly di-
rected against the IMMIGRATION into
this country Of certain classes Of per-
sons who come here with the intent to
enter into and become . part Of the
mass Of its population ." And
in the same case the court further says.
after q review Of an the statntes-
THAT these statutes do not contem-
plate the crews Of vessels which lAw-
fully trade to our ports thatl
alien seamen using TIE ports Of the
country in their ships axe NOT alien
immigrants. 80
So 1t was held In the case a Chinese
Cabin Waiter" : Ssvyef. sss f13 Ed
Rep. 1861, where An Sing. Z China
man. shipped On the City Of Sydney
and vent to Australia. coaching Ct va
rious foreign portR uftAout the certih-
cato required to b obtainad b every
Chinese Iahursr ~vho sAall depirt frou
the United States" Mr.. Justice Field
held that tie petjtioaer vas no< vitAia
tie provision a. ths ~ EequlTing -
certincafe. = ~ - n H. vhile up0n
a Anerican vu. uppa vhieA he