The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 250: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, August-October, 1918. Page: 596
xv, 1025 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
250 FEDERAL REPORTER
Thomas D. Slattery, U. S. Atty., of Covington, Ky., for appellants.
Elwood G. Godman, of Chicago, Ill., for appellee.
Before WARRINGTON, KNAPPEN, and DENISON, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM. In the case of Woo Shing v. Fluckey (No.
2882) 250 Fed. 598, - C. C. A. -, Judge Clarke (now Mr. Justice
Clarke) decided, in the court below, that the Secretary of Labor had
jurisdiction to deport a Chinaman on the ground alleged against Woo
Shing. (D. C.) 226 Fed. 141. Shortly thereafter, Judge Cochran, in
a District Court of Kentucky, held, in an elaborate opinion (Woo Jan v.
United States [D. C.] 228 Fed. 927), that such jurisdiction was vested
exclusively in the courts. When the Woo Shing Case came on for
argument, it was learned that the Woo Jan Case was in the course of
appeal to this court, and, accordingly, we withheld decision in the for-
mer until the latter case should be argued. This argument has now
been presented.
The question has been involved and decided, in the same way as it
was by Judge Clarke, by the Circuit Courts of Appeals for the Eighth
Circuit (Lo Pong v. Dunn, 235 Fed. 510, 149 C. C. A. 56), and for the
Third Circuit (Sibray v. United States, 227 Fed. 1, 141 C. C. A. 555).
In both cases, certiorari was refused (242 U. S. 644, 37 Sup. Ct. 214,
61 L. Ed. 543; 241 U. S. 657, 36 Sup. Ct. 286, 60 L. Ed. 1225); but
the briefs filed in the Supreme Court show that in neither case was
this question presented to that court. On the other hand, Judge Coch-
ran's opinion has been approved and followed by the Circuit Courts
of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (United States v. Lem Him, 239
Fed. 1023, 152 C. C. A. 661), and for the Fifth Circuit (Lee Wong Hin
v. Mayo, 240 Fed. 368, 153 C. C. A. 294). The matter seems to us
proper for certification.
In the Woo Shing Case, the petition for habeas corpus was not filed
until the order of deportation had been made, while in the Woo Jan
Case the petition therefor was filed as soon as Woo Jan was taken
upon the warrant of arrest; but we do not see that this makes any
difference. In order that the expense of taking up two cases may be
avoided, we have decided to certify the Woo Jan Case and to hold the
Woo Shing Case upon our calendar. Counsel in the Woo Shing Case
will be notified, and we assume that they will be allowed to participate
in the hearing in the Supreme Court as if their case also had been cer-
tified. Accordingly, we make the following findings of fact and request
for instructions:
Woo Jan filed, in the District Court for the Eastern District of Ken-
tucky, his petition for habeas corpus. He set up therein that he was
in the custody of the immigrant inspector by virtue of a warrant issued
by the Secretary of Labor, which warrant was as follows:
"To J. A. Fluckey, Inspector in Charge, Cleveland, Ohio, or to Any Immigrant
Inspector in the Service of the United States:
"Whereas, from evidence submitted to me, it appears that the alien, Wo
Mon, alias Woo Jan, who landed at the port of San Francisco, Cal., ex SS
Nippon-Maru, on the 2d day of May, 1913, has been found in the United States
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 250: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, August-October, 1918., legislative document, 1918; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38821/m1/611/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.