Show nullification NONSENSE A DECISION recently given by the united states circuit court at boston has stirred up the anti chinese papers to great anger tho the act 0 congress for the prevention of the landing of chinese laborers upon the shores of this country except such as acquire that hight right through the treaty of 1868 seemed to satisfy the tho mongolian baters haters east and west but it appears to have in it that kind hind of weakness that daniel oconnell ascribed to every act of parliament through which he eald eaid he could drive iga ica a coach and four the case on which the decision was given was that of ah hong a ship carpenter who was forcibly kept in the boston harbor by the captain of a vessel he demanded liberty to land on the ground that he shipped from hong kong which is a british port and that he was a british subject and therefore not a chinese laborer within the meaning of the acts of con grebs greka the court sustained the application and thus it is ia claimed threw open the doors of the country to thousands of chinese labor laborers ensi ersi who ho may come from hong kong rong W Ce ceylon Vlon singapore java borneo bor 1160 oc ec etc claiming that they are not subjects of the celestial empire much fault is found with the court for this decision but from what we can learn ot of the controversy it appears that the blame if any does not attach to the coa court t but to the law on which the r ruling u in 9 was given and further it seems beems ins ing that if the law had been as aa gent aa bone sone people think the court should have ruled it to be it would have been in the of judge nelson neison who rendered the ruling void on account of un constitutionality it 16 will need special treaties with all the governments from whose colonies persons of chinese birth may come to the united states to make laws against their landing valid some papers in finding fault with the court claim that its ruling amounts to a nullification of the anti chinese law it Is amusing to see the nonsense indulged in byl by the use of the dreadful word nullification I 1 fi when the cormons mormons Mor mons attempt to teat in a legal maraer manner I 1 t the he validity of any special mi measure B sure bure designed or made use of to deprive them of vested or natural rights they are accused of 96 nullification 11 As aa if they had hid no business to attempt t 8 ampt to avail themselves of that protection tor for which governments are organized nor to td appeal to the courts orda ordained laed to to test 3 t the vallace validity city and MO Ining of legislative e enactments and we notice too that the very papers which seem peem astounded that the mormons cormons Mor cMor mons have the temerity to hold opinions different from those arrived at by courts and which denounce the cormons mormons Mor mons ron fon having the audacity to the ruling of a judge now do the very things fon for which they berate the mor imon mons they attack judge nelson as well as aa hla hit decusio decision n they accuse him of improper motives charge that he favored a narrow technicality hurl at him the awful name of nullifier and set him up as an object for scorn and vituperation Is he jle not a federal judge has he not ruled on an act of Con congress grebs greas according recording to authority duly vested in him does he not give reasons ton fon his hib judicial opinion Is not a certain portion or of the power of one of the departments of the national government vested tested in his hig official person how dare they then to take tako an opposite view from that which he hu hns enunciated if they Verel were only mormons cormons Mor mons they would mould be contu maclorus ma cious clous s 1 rebellious treasons trea sona sods 11 wd ble and or dr donld ha nullifiers themselves we have no doubt that the court at boston ruled according to the isy ily as it appeared to the judgment of the judge there is a higher tribu nal which can sit upon that decision the anti chinese are afraid that the supreme court of the united states will sustain the decision of the lower court and why evl evi dently because the weakness Is the law itself coupled with certain constitutional restriction restrictions sj and there fore it is wrong to blame the cow coutt and perhaps it would to be equally wrong to blame the law our oar LA dional institutions are buch sueh titi tiit enactments which would suit the ariti antl chinea fanatical 1 also the antl anti mormon farara cannot be made in harmony harmon hatmon th the supreme law of the landa land m th the fault lies after all nil not in the law not in the courts not lat int in tt constitution but in the indi vidu vily who want their extreme notia carried into effect evenly the ahl wh system of popular government in ca der which we live and have oui our liberties be entirely nullified 11 |