230 F. 974 | 2d Cir. | 1916
First. The relators are Chinese persons not permitted by law to remain in this country.
Second. The country from whence they came is Canada.
Third. There is no evidence that they came from China; the contention that they did do so is based solely upon conjecture and presumption.
We therefore directed that the aliens be returned to Canada. No difference of importance is suggested upon the facts and we see no reason for departing from our former decision.
We are referred to the recent case of Lewis v. Frick, 233 U. S. 291, 34 Sup. Ct. 488, 58 L. Ed. 967. In that case the petitioner was a Russian who came to this country in September, 1904, entering at the port of New York and lived in or near that city till 1910, when he removed to Detroit and made his home in that city. On November 17, 1910, he crossed the Detroit river to Windsor, Canada, and brought back with him a woman who, as was subsequently found by the Secretary of Commerce and Uabor, was brought to Detroit for an immoral purpose. Subsequently, after indictment and trial he was found guilty and deported to Russia, the court observing:
“Upon the whole, it seems to us that the act reasonably admits of his being returned tO’the land of his nativity, that being in fact “the country whence he came’ when he first entered the United States.”
The difficulty with this case is its want of resemblance. If it had been shown that this appellant was born in China and came here from
The order of deportation is amended by providing that the appellant be deported to Canada, and, as so amended, is affirmed.