103 F. 384 (N.D.Cal. 1900), Wong Wai v. Williamson

Citation:103 F. 384
Party Name:WONG WAI v. WILLIAMSON et al.
Case Date:July 03, 1900
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 384

103 F. 384 (N.D.Cal. 1900)

WONG WAI

v.

WILLIAMSON et al.

United States Circuit Court, N.D. California.

July 3, 1900

Reddy, Campbell & Metson, Maguire & Gallagher, Samuel M. Shortridge, John E. Bennett, and Robert Ferral, for complainant.

F. L. Coombs, U.S. Atty., for defendant J. J. Kinyoun.

Before MORROW, Circuit Judge, and DE HAVEN, District Judge.

MORROW, Circuit Judge (orally).

On the 28th day of May, 1900, this court issued a writ of injunction in this cause, enjoining and restraining the defendants, comprising the board of health of the city and county of San Francisco, and J. J. Kinyoun, federal quarantine officer at this port, from inoculating the complainant and other Chinese residents of this city against their will; from imprisoning, restraining, or confining the complainant, or any of the Chinese residents

Page 385

of this city and county, within the limits thereof; and from otherwise interfering with or restraining the complainant, or any of said Chinese residents, in the exercise of their personal liberty to freely pass from said city and county of San Francisco to other parts of the state of California. On the 16th day of June, 1900, Wong Wai, the complainant, filed an affidavit stating that the defendant J. J. Kinyoun, in disregard and defiance of said order of injunction, and in contempt of this court, 'prevented and prevents your affiant and others from passing beyond the territorial limits of said city and county of San Francisco, and restrains and confines your affiant and others within said city and county, without any right whatever, and in disobedience of said order of injunction. ' It appears that on June 16, 1900, the complainant was desirous of taking passage on the steamer Orizaba for the port of Eureka, in this state, but was denied that privilege by the agents of the steamship company. Affidavits were introduced, of four Chinese persons other than the complainant, residents of the former quarantined district of San Francisco, to the effect that on the same day they were also desirous of departing to Eureka and to other places within the state of California, but were unable to obtain transportation without a certificate from the defendant Kinyoun that the holder had in all respects complied with the United States quarantine laws and regulations, and was, in the opinion of the quarantine officer, free from the infection of plague or the danger of conveying the same; that they presented themselves before said defendant Kinyoun, and said certificate was refused by him for the sole reason that the applicants were Chinese. It is also averred that the officers and agents of the steamship company, in refusing transportation to the affiants, acted under the direct orders of said Kinyoun, and not otherwise; and that said Kinyoun had stated to said officers and agents that, if any one were taken on board said steamship without said certificate, the said steamship would be quarantined at its place of destination. Accompanying this evidence is the affidavit of Milton Bernard, a clerk in the employ of a firm of attorneys representing the complainant herein, stating that he accompanied the several Chinese persons to the office of...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP