The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-02-09
CITIZEN S
HERE.
Rights Of Hawaiian
! Chinese Fully
Defined.
(Staff correspondence

he citizenship of Chinese who were ,
itizens of Hawaii prior to the passage
f the annexation resolution, and who
ave not since that time taken any
teps to abandon that citizenship. The
REF mention of the fact that this was
he decision of the Department of JUS
ice does not give the fullest view OF
he reasoning by which the Attorney /,
General arrives at that conclusion, and
or that reason the decision is app
,ended.
While the opinion of the Attorney
General is based upon that of the So
icitor of the Treasury, it goes into the
subject fully and as we'll will be found i
alter to have bearing upon other ques-
ions which will be argued as coming
,nder the general laws of the United I
States and which it may be held should
apply as the Constitution goes with the
flag despite the action of Congress. |
rhe decisions in these cases which were I
rendered by the Solicitor have not been
made public, the publication in the Ad-
yertiser being the only publicity given |
TO them so far. Reference to that
opinion will show how completely the
Attorney General has gone in his opin-
ion that the enactment by Congress
has become the paramount law of the
land. The decision of the department,
in line with the opinion herewith given,
goes forward now to the Collector of
Customs and will be followed by him in
his subsequent rulings in such cases.
This ruling in full is as follows:
Department of Justice,
Washington, D. c., Jan. Is, 1901.
The Secretary of the Treasury
Sir: Your letters of December 6 and
December 10 request my opinion upon
the following questions of law relating
to actual cases arising in the admlnlstra-
ton of your Department.:
One-Whether a person bornin the Ha-
waiian Islands in 1885 of Chinese parents
who are laborers, and taken to China
with his mother in 1890, is entitled to re-
enter the Territory of Hawaii, where his
father still resides?
Two-Whether the wife and children or
a Chinese person, who was naturalized
in 1887 in Hawaii and still resides there,
are entitled to enter that Territory by
virtue of the citizenship of the husband
and father?
In the first case the Chinese person
claims the right to enter the Territory
| of Hawaii because he is a citizen of the
| United States and of the territory OF
Hawaii by reason of his birth in that
! Territory; and in the second case the
Chinese persons claim the same right be-
! cause the husband and father is a citi-
zen of the United States and Of the Ter
/ ritory of Hawaii by force of his naturali-
| cation under Hawaiian laws. The eX-
| act question, Nthen, upon which 1 have
the honor to deliver to you my opinion
| is whether a Chinese person, born or
lnaturalized in the Hawaiian Islands
prior to the annexation Of that Terri
tory is citizen of the United states
for conceive that there can be no doup'
under existing law of the right of citi-
zen of the United States and of his Wlfe
and children to enter freely the Terri
tory of Hawaii.
The Joint Resolution of July z, 1898 (3t
Stat, 75O, providing for the annexation
of the Hawaiian Islands, contains the
following paragraph:
There shall be no further Immigration
of Chinese into the Hawaiian Islands ex
cept under such conditions as are now
or may hereafter be allowed by the law:
of the United States; and no Chinese, by
reason of anything herein contained
shall be allowed to enter the limited
States from the Hawaiian Islands
The Constitution of the Republic O
Hawaii (sec. 1, art. I'D provided that al
persons born or naturaliZed in the Ha
waiian Islands and subject to the juris
diction of the Republic, are citizens
thereof" The Act of April 80, 1900 6
Stat, 14D, providing a government TO
the Territory of Hawaii, declared (sec
a that ''all persons who were citizens
of the Republic of Hawaii on August L
1898, are hereby declared to be citizen
of the United States and citizens of tn
Territory of Hawaii" This discussion
grants, as I understand it, that the tw
Chinese persons whose personal or fam
lily rights are in question, We're citizen
( of the Republic of Hawaii on the crucia
date and does not require me further t
scrutinize and to determine their statu
under the constitution and laws of tina
republic.
l lay aside important questions sug
gested by the inquiry, which may here
after arise, but are not now materla
affecting the status and rights of variou
classes of Chinese persons now born Q
naturalized in the Hawaiian Island
prior to August Il, 1888, who may see
to enter Hawaii or desire to renal
there, or who may seek to enter tn
United States from that Territory. Sue
questions, when they arise, will invok
inter ALA the Joint Resolution frol
which | have quoted, the laws forbie
ding the naturalization of Chinese (se
IA, Act of May 6, 1882, % Stat, IS; art. 1
of the Treaty with China of 1894,
Stat, 1910 secs 5, Z, 100 of the Act
April 80, 1900 supra), and the permissiN
and restrictive provisions of sec. 101 {
the Act last cited relative to "certif
Gates of residence for Chinese in tt
Hawaiian Islands. AS to these matte
express opinion, because we al
concerned only with the definite ella:
of Chinese persons who were born
natura1ized in the Hawaiian Islands prit
to August II, 1898.
The inquiry involves both the powt
and intention of Congress in dealir
with the subject. AS to the power
Wong Kim Ark VS.. United States 1
U. s., 649 decided several months befol
the adoption of the resolution for II
annexation of Hawaii, which deliberat
ly determined that a child, born in Il
United States of Chinese parents WI
have a permanent domicile in this cou1
try, becomes at birth a citizen of Il
United States, the court re-stated the L
J herent right of the United States, actir
through Congress, to exclude or exp
aliens; and, in a review of the exerci
by Congress of the constitutional pow
ito establish uniform rule of natura
zation," again recognized as constftutio
al the denial of naturalization to Chine
: persons, and on the other hand, show
- that through treaty or by authority
Congress certain classes of persons m;
be declared to be citizens.
1T is true that Chinese persons DO
in China cannot be naturalized like OF
er aliens by proceedings under the ma
:. uralization laws; but this is for wa
. of any statute or treaty authorizing