The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-07-30
CHOP TIN SHUT OUT
ON HIS OWN EVIDENCE
Judge Dole Takes Jurisdiction on Account of
Apparent Injustice but Finds the Case Was
Too Weak to Help the Man.

the laws of the land" for carrying out
the provisions of such Act and other
Chinese Exclusion Acts and the Chinese
treaty, and, with the approval of the
President, to appoint such agents as he
might deem necessary for the execution
thereof. This authority was transferred
to the Secretary of Commerce and La
Dor and to such officers under the con-
troll of the Commissioner-Gen of
immigration as the Secretary might
designate. by Section of the Act to
establish the Department of Commerce
and Labor of February 14th, 1903 go
Stat L. 1st part, $3.50. Under the APP
preparation Act of August 18TH 1894
| (2S Stat. L., $500, every decision of the
| Inappropriate immigra ton or customs Of
| ficer excluding any alien from admis-
| sion to the United States is final unless
| reversed on appeal to the Secretary of
| the Treasury.
WHERE JURISDICTION EXISTS.
| 1t is not disputed that the courts have
no authority to review the decisions of
immigration officers made under the
authority of the statute affecting the
right of aliens to enter the country. If,
however, the facts should show in
| case like the one before the court,
| where a Chinaman applies for admis-
sion on the ground that he formerly did
business as a merchant in this coun-
ltrv. that he was not allowed a reason
able opportunity Of producing the two
Inon-Chinese witnesses required by the
statute in proof of such fact, the courts
lwould have jurisdiction to interfere
I upon a proper showing. Rex VS.. Young
and Pitt, 1 Burr, $50. 561-2; Bradley VS..
/ Thurston, Haw, $50.
| Rule Z which provides that the exam
| ination of the applicant for admission
| shall be separate and apart from the
public, in the presence of government
officials and such witness or witnesses
only as the examining officer shall des-
| ignate" confers no authority upon such
! officer to exclude such two non-Ch1-
inese witnesses as the applicant for adj
| mission may desire to produce, or either
of them, or to deprive him of a reason
able opportunity of procuring them.
| contrary construction of the rule would
| be inconsistent with the statute re-
ferred to, requiring the applicant to
establish by such witnesses the fact
| that he conducted the business OF
| merchant for one year before his de-
parture from this country and that
| during such time he did no manual Ia
bor except what was necessary to the
said business (28 Stat. L., Sec. p; but II
/ such latter construction is required by
/ the words of the rule, then it would
| follow that the rule is invalid, as being
inconsistent with the laws of the land.
TREASURY RULES.
The rules and regulations provide in
the sixth, seventh, ninth and tenth
rutes, among other things, that upon
| the arrival of Chinese persons, 1t shall.
BE- the duty of the proper officer to Sc
gregate them from other persons than
I officials and to have them promptly
examined las by law provided" touch
ing their right to admission; that such
examination shall be in the presence
OF officials only and such witnesses as
! the examining officer shall designate,
and, presumably, counsel for the APP
plicants if they have any, and if the
decision shall be unfavorable, the APP
plicants shall be advised of their right
| of appeal, and their counsel permitted,
| after filing notice of appeal to exam
| inc but not copy the evidence upon
| which the decision is based. The no
/ tice of appeal acts az a stay of the
| deportation of the appellant until a
| final decision is made. Within three
days after such notice the record of the
| case. with such briefs. affidavits and
| statements as are to be considered in
| connection Herewith. are TO be for
warded to the Commissioner-Ge General
| of immigration, with the written views
OF the officer in charge, unless further
delay shall be allowed only in those
| instances" in which the above limit of
| three days would occasion injustice to
| the appellant or the risk of defeat of
| the purposes of the Act
HARD CONDITIONS.
| In this case, so far as the allegations
OF the petition go, the prompt exam
ination of the said Chop Tin took place
| upon his arrival on the 1st day of June,
| without opportunity on his part to pro-
cure or produce witnesses or to make
any showing other than his statement
| through an interpreter and apparent
ly without counsel Upon this examin-
alton a decision was rendered refusing
Chop Tin the right to land Notice of
appeal was given and perfected on the
Sr1 of June. At this stage, through the
| off of