Chy Lung v. Freeman Et Al

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtMILLER
Citation23 L.Ed. 550,92 U.S. 275
Decision Date01 October 1875
PartiesCHY LUNG v. FREEMAN ET AL

92 U.S. 275
23 L.Ed. 550
CHY LUNG
v.
FREEMAN ET AL.
October Term, 1875

Page 276

ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of California.

Mr. Attorney-General Pierrepont for the plaintiff in error.

No opposing counsel.

MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the court.

While this case presents for out consideration the same class of State statutes considered in Henderson et al. v. Mayor of the City of New York et al., and Commissioners of Immigration v. North German Lloyd, supra, p. 259, it differs from them in two very important points.

These are, First, The plaintiff in error was a passenger on a vessel from China, being a subject of the Emperor of China, and is held a prisoner because the owner or master of the vessel who brought her over refused to give a bond in the sum of $500 in gold, conditioned to indemnify all the counties, towns, and cities of California against liability for her support or maintenance for two years.

Secondly, The statute of California, unlike those of New York and Louisiana, does not require a bond for all passengers landing from a foreign country, but only for classes of passengers specifically described, among which are 'lewd and debauched women;' to which class it is alleged plaintiff belongs.

The plaintiff, with some twenty other women, on the arrival of the steamer 'Japan' from China, was singled out by the Commissioner of Immigration, an officer of the State of California, as belonging to that class, and the master of the vessel required to give the bond prescribed by law before he permitted them to land. This he refused to do, and detained them on board. They sued out a writ of habeas corpus, which by regular proceedings resulted in their committal, by order of the Supreme Court of the State, to the custody of the sheriff of the county and city of San Francisco, to await the return of the 'Japan,' which had left the port pending the progress of

Page 277

the case; the order being to remand them to that vessel on her return, to be removed from the State.

All of plaintiff's companions were released from the custody of the sheriff on a writ of habeas corpus issued by Mr. Justice Field of this court. But plaintiff by a writ of error brings the judgment of the Supreme Court of California to this court, for the purpose, as we suppose, of testing the constitutionality of the act under which she is held a prisoner. We regret very much, that, while the Attorney-General of the United States has deemed the matter of such importance as to argue it in person, there has been no argument in behalf of the State of California, the Commissioner of Immigration, or the Sheriff of San Francisco, in support of the authority by which plaintiff is held a prisoner; nor have we been furnished even with a brief in support of the statute of that State.

It is a most extraordinary statute. It provides that the Commissioner of Immigration is 'to satisfy himself whether or not any passenger who shall arrive in the State by vessels from any foreign port or place (who is not a citizen of the United States) is lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, crippled, or infirm, and is not accompanied by relatives who are able and willing to support him, or is likely to become a public charge, or has been a pauper in any other country, or is from sickness or disease (existing either at the time of sailing from the port of departure or at the time of his arrival in the State) a public charge, or likely soon to become so, or is a convicted criminal, or a lewd or debauched woman;' and no such person shall be permitted to land from the vessel, unless the master or owner or consignee shall give a separate bond in each case, conditioned to save harmless every county, city, and town of the State against any expense incurred for the relief, support, or care of such person for two years thereafter.

The commissioner is authorized to charge the sum of seventy-five cents for every examination of a passenger made by him; which sum he may collect of the master, owner, or consignee, or of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
108 practice notes
  • Larabee v. Dolley, 8,810
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas
    • December 23, 1909
    ...of interpretation has been sanctioned by this court in Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 U.S. 259 (23 L.Ed. 543), Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275 (23 L.Ed. 550), In re Virginia, 100 U.S. 339 (25 L.Ed. 676), Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370 (26 L.Ed. 567), and Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U.S. ......
  • Barclays Bank Internat. Ltd. v. Franchise Tax Bd., No. C003388
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 1992
    ...[p] Thus I conclude that WWCR as applied to Plaintiffs violates due process, both federal and state. ( [Cf.] Chy Lung v. Freeman (1876) 92 U.S. 275 [23 L.Ed. 550]; Grayned v. Rockford (1972) 408 U.S. 104 [92 S.Ct. 2294, 33 L.Ed.2d 222]; McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Franchise Tax Bd. (1968) 69......
  • United States v. South Carolina, Civil Action Nos. 2:11–cv–2958
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • December 22, 2011
    ...challenges to a state [840 F.Supp.2d 911]immigration statute in American history, the United States Supreme Court in Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275, 23 L.Ed. 550 (1875), struck, on preemption grounds, a California statute which permitted a state official to exact a bounty from recently ar......
  • Mo. Dist. Telegraph Co. v. S.W. Bell Tel. Co., No. 34562.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 18, 1936
    ...Dartmouth College Case, 4 Wheat. 581; Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356; Henderson v. Mayor, 92 U.S. 259; Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 399; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370. (b) The refusal to consider light company's parol evidence denied due process. Womach v......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
104 cases
  • Larabee v. Dolley, 8,810
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas
    • December 23, 1909
    ...of interpretation has been sanctioned by this court in Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 U.S. 259 (23 L.Ed. 543), Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275 (23 L.Ed. 550), In re Virginia, 100 U.S. 339 (25 L.Ed. 676), Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370 (26 L.Ed. 567), and Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U.S. ......
  • Barclays Bank Internat. Ltd. v. Franchise Tax Bd., No. C003388
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 1992
    ...[p] Thus I conclude that WWCR as applied to Plaintiffs violates due process, both federal and state. ( [Cf.] Chy Lung v. Freeman (1876) 92 U.S. 275 [23 L.Ed. 550]; Grayned v. Rockford (1972) 408 U.S. 104 [92 S.Ct. 2294, 33 L.Ed.2d 222]; McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Franchise Tax Bd. (1968) 69......
  • United States v. South Carolina, Civil Action Nos. 2:11–cv–2958
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • December 22, 2011
    ...challenges to a state [840 F.Supp.2d 911]immigration statute in American history, the United States Supreme Court in Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275, 23 L.Ed. 550 (1875), struck, on preemption grounds, a California statute which permitted a state official to exact a bounty from recently ar......
  • Mo. Dist. Telegraph Co. v. S.W. Bell Tel. Co., No. 34562.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 18, 1936
    ...Dartmouth College Case, 4 Wheat. 581; Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356; Henderson v. Mayor, 92 U.S. 259; Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 399; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370. (b) The refusal to consider light company's parol evidence denied due process. Womach v......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • THE IMAGINARY IMMIGRATION CLAUSE.
    • United States
    • Michigan Law Review Vol. 120 Nbr. 7, May 2022
    • May 1, 2022
    ...Smith v. Turner (The Passenger Cases), 48 U.S. (7 How.) 283, 410, 422 (1849)(Wayne, J., concurring). (298.) See Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275 (1876); Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 U.S. 259 (1876). But see Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35 (1867)(considering a state transit (2......
  • Originalism and Birthright Citizenship
    • United States
    • Georgetown Law Journal Nbr. 109-2, December 2020
    • December 1, 2020
    ...immigration began at the state level, especially in California, and f‌irst reached the Supreme Court in 1875. See Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275, 276, 281 (1875) (holding that state exclusions infringed the federal foreign relations power). Beginning in the 1880s, the federal government b......
  • How The Supreme Court Promotes Independent Presidential Power.
    • United States
    • The Cato Journal Vol. 39 Nbr. 3, September 2019
    • September 22, 2019
    ...411-12, 421, 442-43, 455, 462-64 (1849). (9) Henderson v. Mayor of N.Y., 92 U.S. 259, 271-72, 274 (1976); Chy Lung v. Freeman et al., 92 U.S. 275, 280 (1876); Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580, 591, 596 (10) McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 154 (1927). (11) Id., 160. (12) Id., 161. (13) Sin......

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