Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-05-03
CHINESE YOUTH WINS
LONG FIGHT IN COURT
Won zee Teung May Now Stay in
America rs Long as He
Wants.
APPELLATE COURT DIVIDED
Minority Opinion Doubts Right Of
Court to Review and Reverse Acts
OF Executive Branch of Govern
ment-Judgc Rose Is Reversed.


twenty summers. who nrst saw the
glories of the Western world when he
stepped ashore some three years ago
from the good ship Korea" at San
Francisco. has been guaranteed. after
unsuccessful encounters with the inn
migration authorities. the Department
OF Labor and the United States District
Cour, ut Baltimore, the privilege OF re-
naming unmolested In the country of
his adoption.
The guarantee came yesterday from
the United States Circuit Court OF APP
peals. which in an opinion handed
down by District Judge BOYD and con-
Cured in by Circuit Judge Pritchard.
averred that the government has not
proven the charge that Won gained Il
foothold In the city OF the Golden Gate
by fraudulently representing himself
AS the infant son Of Chinese mercha mt
who had journeyed here some years be-
fore.
In rendering it's decision. from which
Judge Woods dissented, lhe appellate
Court reversed Judge Rose, of the Dis
trict Court at Baltimore who. after
reviewing the case as presented by i'm
micratiou authorities and the Depart
ment OF Labor. ordered Won deported
to tho land whence he came. 1ncon-
slstenccs in the testimony of the al
legged father, Wong Que Teung, aud the
two brothers. who chung to Won as
a member Of their family. led the court
to believe that the Chinese youth was
an mposter.
WIDELY DIVERGENT
OPINIONS OF COURT
incidentally, the case of Won ELECTED
two widely divergent opinions from
members Of the appellate court as TO
=, ~,-,k ne he. r.
spect TO interference with the judg-
ment OF the immigration authorities
in cases raising similar questions
Judge Boyd. supported by Judge
Pritchard, says:
when q Chinannn OF an exempt
class enters this country intending TO
remain, he is not INDUCING mere
privilege accorded him by us. but he
is exercising right which is guar
anteed to him by international treaty
and the laws of the United States He
cannot be Invested Of this right upon
charge OF fraud unsustained by
competent and relative evidence. We
reiterate that we do not find evidence
OF that character in this record
Over against this opinion, Judge
Woods has this to say:
THE weight TO be given to the fact
OF admission and all other evidence
is for the executive department con
cerned. and not for the courts. The
Immigrant may. however invoke Judi
cial interference il his behalf on the
questions whether de has had fair
hearing. and whether the findings OF
the Immigration officers against mis-
right to remain in this country nrc
supported by any substantial evidence.
II is not denied In the case before us
that the hearing was fairly conducted.
IMMIGRANT HAS GREAT
OVE.If
1.-THE evidence should be weighed by
the court in view OF the difficulty con-
fronting immigration officers In the en-
forccment OF the exclusion laws. Evil
IDENTIFY the immigrant. especially the
Chinaman. has great advantage over
the government with respect to direct
evidence. If he wishes TO come in
under false claims. his oath and that
of his relatives or friends can rarely,
If ever. he met by direct contradic-
ton. The presumption is that immi-
grafton officers will not be arbitrary
and unfair. and that they arc selected
for their Intelligence and acquaintance
with the manners and customs Of tho
races with whose members they havc
10 deal
'Thcsc considerations are suggestive
Of the greatest caution on the part Of
'hc courts in deciding that an immi-
grant Is entitled to remain i'm this
country to tho findings OF facts by
the immigration officers making the
examination. IT is not for tho court
tn say that tho findings OF the execu-
tive officers on the evidence should
have hccn different"
Briefly, tho case of Won was this:
Landing in California in tho fall OF
1913. he was refused admission to the
United states by an inspector for the
Department; OF Labor. Later, however,
the law section of the department took
the matter In hand and issued Won
Il certificate on the ground that he was
n minor son of Wong Que Teung, a
Chinese merchant who had settled at
oakland twelve years before
WON CAME TO BALTIMORE
AFTER TWO MONTHS, STAY
After residence of two months with
the alleged father. the youth, who was
unhealthy and subject TO chilis, went
across the continent to Baltimore, and
fell In with Wong Jim Lee. a laundry
man hailing also from the Orient. Ills
father said he sent him with two
fold purpose: to take advantage OF bet
ter climatic conditions and to go to
school where the prejudice against
Cinnamon was not SO pronounced. There
ne was arrested oil a warrant issued
by the Assistant Secretary Of Labor
tried before Judge Rose, and ordered
deported
The prosecution pointed to the fact
that the alleged father sent Won, a
mere lad, unacquainted with the coun-
try. clear across the continent after he
had seen him only few weeks; that
he had not attended school since he
had been In Baltimore. though Teung
said no had sent him there for that
purpose; that the father had not writ
ten TO him since he left, and had sent
him only $50 for Il years subsistence
and that the evidence given by the
family was so conflicting as to pon,
convincingly to fraud
Won, OH the other hand. said that
ne didn't go to school because he had
been too sick, and stuck to the as
sertion that he was Teung's son. And
Won won
Will VISIT DEpRRTMENTc