| OCR Text |
Show NltlUCLKD CUi.?Alii. - Decision In Teas Court lu lie-canl lie-canl lo the "(.denials " 'a3higto.",, DecvSS. Forsome time past It has been tire practice of the Treasury Department fa retain to China at government expense all laborers convicted of entering our territory iu violation of tbe exclusion exclu-sion act. This appl'cd to Chinamen smuggled over the Mexican aW Canadian borders; at well av"tho-t-coming direct front China, A. rj; cent decision of Jujgu Jlixey uf the United States district court of the western district uf Teals, however. will, if sustained, compel a materia! modification of this practice. It is in effect th2t the jovcrnnien t has no right under the law to tud, to China Chinese laborers who, enter the United States from coutTguouk countries, unless evidence iabro-dneedUiat iabro-dneedUiat they came from China, or, in other words, that tuelanguagei of the law authorizing their return "to the country whence they came" should in such cases fxconHrued to meoH the contiguous country, and not C'lina. " " In the case in .question the Chinamen who had iwen couvleted before the United Htates commissioner commis-sioner of Unlawfully ei;terisg the United StatesTrom 'Mexico were ordered lobe deported to China at tile government's expense. Their counsel applied to J udge Moxry for a writ of habeas corpus, and after hearing tho evidence he ordered their release from custody on. the ground that the commissioner )iad exceeded bis,"authorlty In ordering them sent to China. He held that they could lawfully be pent to 'Mexico 'Mexi-co ana now here else. Reports from tbe Special treasury agents ore to the effect that the xdortlonof the course suggested by the court would afford no relief whatever, as the Chinamen returned re-turned to Mexico. would remain in the vicinity and come back into our territory at the first opportunity3. Secretaryia.Vindom and Assistant Secretarjjpinldiug are consljeriug the matter. L |
