Ex parte Tom Tong, Petitioner

Citation2 S.Ct. 871,108 U.S. 556,27 L.Ed. 826
PartiesEx parte TOM TONG, Petitioner
Decision Date07 May 1883
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

[Syllabus from page 556 intentionally omitted]

[Statement of Case from pages 556-557 intentionally omitted] S. F. Phillips, Thos. Simons, andHall McAllister, for petitioner.

[Argument of Counsel from page 557 intentionally omitted] L. D. Latimer, in opposition.

WAITE, C. J.

This is a writ of habeas c

orpus

sued out of the circuit court of the United States for the district of California by the petitioner, Tom Tong, a subject of the emperor of China, for the purpose of an inquiry into the legality of his detention by the chief of police of the city and county of San Francisco for an alleged violation of an order or ordinance of the board of supervisors of such city and county regulating the licensing, etc., of public laundries, and the case comes here, before judgment below, on a certificate of division of opinion between the judges holding the court as to certain questions which arose at the hearing. The allegation in the petition is that the order, for the violation of which the petitioner is held, is in contravention of the constitution of the United States and of a treaty between the United States and the emperor of China.

A question which meets us at the outset is whether we have jurisdiction, and that depends on whether the proceeding is to be treated as civil or criminal. Section 650 of the Revised Statutes provides that whenever, in any civil suit or proceeding in a circuit court, there occurs a difference of opinion between the judges holding the court as to any matter to be decided, ruled, or ordered, the opinion of the presiding judge shall prevail and be considered the opinion of the court for the time being; and section 652, that when final judgment or decree is rendered, the points of disagreement shall be certified and entered of record under the direction of the judges. That being done, the judgment or decree may, under the provisions of section 693, be brought here for review by writ of error or appeal, as the case may be. By section 951 it is provided that whenever any question occurs on the trial or hearing of any criminal proceeding before a circuit court and the judges are divided in opinion, the point on which they disagree shall, during the same term, upon the request of either party, or of their counsel, be stated under the direction of the judges, and certified under the seal of the court to this court at its next session. It follows, from these provisions of the statutes, that, if this is a civil suit or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
154 cases
  • Browder v. Director, Department of Corrections of Illinois
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • January 10, 1978
    ... 434 U.S. 257 . 98 S.Ct. 556 . 54 L.Ed.2d 521 . Ben Earl BROWDER, Petitioner, . v. . DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OF ILLINOIS. . No. 76-5325. . Argued Oct. 31, 1977. ... Fisher v. Baker, 203 U.S. 174, 181, 27 S.Ct. 135, 136, 51 L.Ed. 142 (1906); Ex parte Tom Tong, 108 U.S. 556, 2 S.Ct. 871, 27 L.Ed. 826 (1883); see Heflin v. United States, 358 U.S ......
  • Commonwealth ex rel. Master v. Baldi
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • March 20, 1950
    ...... Commonwealth's right to appeal is not applicable. Ex. parte Tom Tong , 108 U.S. 556, 2 S.Ct. 871, 27 L.Ed. 826;. People ex rel. Ross v. Ragen , 391 Ill. 419, ......
  • Boudin v. Thomas, s. 467
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • April 17, 1984
    ...a "criminal" action, which is intended to punish and requires various constitutional guarantees. See, e.g., Ex parte Tong, 108 U.S. 556, 559, 2 S.Ct. 871, 872, 27 L.Ed. 826 (1883) (habeas is a civil proceeding because "[p]roceedings to enforce civil rights are civil proceedings, and proceed......
  • United State v. Morgan
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • January 4, 1954
    ...... . . Page 503 .           Miss Beatrice Rosenberg, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. .           Mr. Jacob Abrams, Brooklyn N.Y., pro hac vice for respondent by special ...Cf. Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, 85 U.S. 163, 21 L.Ed. 872; United States v. Plumer, 27 Fed.Cas. No. 16,056, ...See also cases collected in 24 C.J.S., Criminal Law § 1606(a). 8. Ex parte Tom Tong, 108 U.S. 556, 2 S.Ct. 871, 27 L.Ed. 826. 9. 'Mistakes; Inadvertence; Excusable Neglect; Newly ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 provisions
  • 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Federal Custody; Remedies On Motion Attacking Sentence
    • United States
    • US Code 2019 Edition Title 28. Judiciary and Judicial Procedure Part VI. Particular Proceedings Chapter 153. Habeas Corpus
    • January 1, 2019
    ...habeas corpus is a separate civil action and not a further step in the criminal case in which petitioner is sentenced (Ex parte Tom Tong, 108 U.S. 556, 559 (1883)). It is not a determination of guilt or innocence of the charge upon which petitioner was sentenced. Where a prisoner sustains h......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT