33 F.2d 290 (1st Cir. 1928), 2280, Tillinghast v. Wong Wing

Docket Nº:2280.
Citation:33 F.2d 290
Party Name:TILLINGHAST, Commissioner of Immigration, v. WONG WING.
Case Date:October 30, 1928
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Page 290

33 F.2d 290 (1st Cir. 1928)

TILLINGHAST, Commissioner of Immigration,



No. 2280.

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

October 30, 1928

The opinion of Brewster, District Judge, in the lower court, is as follows:

'This is a petition for writ of habeas corpus to secure the admission into the United States of a Chinese, applying for admission as a minor son of a citizen of the United States.

'The citizenship of the father is conceded, but the immigration authorities were not satisfied as to the relationship of the applicant to the alleged father.

'The only question presented is the familiar one as to the sufficiency of the evidence upon which the excluding decision is based. The case is before me upon the files of the immigration authorities.

'I have carefully considered the grounds upon which the board of special inquiry and the board of review have based their decision, and I am forced to the conclusion that they are wholly without substance. The discrepancies are too trivial and unimportant to justify a reasonable mind in arriving at the conclusion that the applicant is not the son of Wong Yuk. Although the father had consistently claimed the applicant as his son for several years, some doubt was entertained by the board of special inquiry as to whether it would have been possible for Wong Yuk to have been the father of the applicant. The most that can be said for this suggestion is that the circumstances shown might be sufficient to excite a suspicion, but they are too unsubstantial to afford any support for a conclusion of fact.

'This case, in my opinion, falls within that class of cases well illustrated by Johnson v. Damon ex rel. Leung Fook Yung (C.C.A.) 16 F.2d 65, and Go Lun v. Nagle (C.C.A.) 22 F.2d 246.

'Writ may issue, and the relator...

To continue reading