OCR Text |
Show CHINESE EXCLUSION LAW. The Decision ot tbe Supreme Court Rendered Today. Dlssrnltoe; Opinions. Proceedings fuller Hie Jnilxliirnl 1-ostpoued. Anollier llearlna;. Wasiiinoto.v, May 15. The Supreme Su-preme court today, through Justlco Uray, sustained the decision if the New Vorkcouiti In favor uf thu constitutionality con-stitutionality of tho Geary Chlnise exclusion act. Justlco IJrencr ills-lenled. ills-lenled. l.ATHl INTILI.UirNCi:. Tbe annouocemant of the decision In the case attracted a largo attendance attend-ance of spectators and attorneys, Including In-cluding Attorney General Olnoy, Hollcltor General Aldrlch, tienators, Pugh, Oolpb and Cochrane, Justice Uray, In announcing tbu ludgmeut of the court, said the power of the nation to restrict or prohibit the Immigration of aliens Into tbltcoun. try, ur require such aliens already In the country to remove therefrom Is a well settled principle of International Interna-tional law, confirmed by an unbroken line of decisions In this court. The legislative power of the government has not transoended any of lis constitutional con-stitutional limitations in the act uuder consideration. It was within Us tower to determine tbe regulations under which thisualleci cau remain In the United States, or, lalllugti observe ob-serve those regulations, lie required to leavu thecounlry. The provisions of section VI of tho act, which are part of tbe law aud particularly at limit, are not Inconslal-unt Inconslal-unt Willi tho relations and dutltsof tbe legislative and judicial departments ol Ilia government. The modu of pro-Veduru pro-Veduru under tbu section Is similar to other well established proceedings, such as habeas corpus and naturallia-tlon,flxlnK naturallia-tlon,flxlnK Hie requirement for cltlceu-sblp cltlceu-sblp and the like, and which tbo Judicial branch of the government has accepted in tha determination of the executive upon thu qucsllona Involved. Aa to thu requirements that tho Cblnesu entitled to remain la this couutry, should establish thu right by tho evidence ot ono credible whlto wltnesf, Justice Uray said It was within the power of tha legislature to determine the. character of the ovl dencu that might bo received In a case at law, and what forco should bo given to the testimony so ottered. Notdhcusslog tbe wisdom nor the Justice of the act In question, which was beyond the provluco of Ibe Judl clal branch of the governmene. It remains only to say that the Judgment Judg-ment of tbe circuit court of the south-ern south-ern district of New York In refusing to grant writs of habeas corpus to tho petitioners Is afllrmed. The Judge said the opinion In writing writ-ing would be tiled aa soon aa possible. At tho conclusion of Justice (J ay's opinion, Justice llruwer annouueed that ho was compelled to dissent from tbe view of thu roalorlty of thu court, and read his views at some length, dtclailng In lubstancu tho act ot lot).! unconstitutional; that If upheld there la no guarantee that similar treatment might not bu accorded other classes of our populsllon. Justice Field, who delivered the ojlnlon of lueHupremo Court In ihu first caso under thu exoluslon act, alto read a dissenting opinion, lie held a wide dlllerence between tbe ex elusion cf Immigrants and d. porta, tlon of alien resident, and characterized char-acterized the act In tbu strongest language! as Inhuman aud brutal andn violation of the Constitution Id every section. lie regretted tossy that tho decision of thu court lo his mind was fraught with the gravtsl dangera to constitutional llbsrly. Chief Justlco Fuller also dlisontod from tho opinion of the court. After the court concluded the announcement an-nouncement of tho opinion Ashton. of counsellor tbo Chinese, moved u rehearing and argument beforu the full tench at the next term. At I riseut the court stands live to thrco In support of thu law. Justlco llarlun being abient tho court took tho motion under advliement, tho illect ol which Is to postpone tho proceedings under the Judgment announced today. |