Therefore, alien stowaways shall not, as a rule, be examined or permitted to land at ports of the United States, nor shall head tax be certified on their account. The masters of vessels immediately upon arrival shall report to the immigration officer in charge the names of any alien stowaways on board, and shall take every precaution to prevent their landing, subject to the penalty prescribed by section 18, holding them on board the vessel until it departs from the United States. While these regulations cover all ordinary cases of stowaways and will in practice be found to be of almost universal application, yet cases may rarely arise in which the alien, though a stowaway, may nevertheless be entitled to inspection and to admission if found to belong to none of the excluded classes. For example, the alien, though originally a stowaway, may have been, because of the particular facts of his case, accepted by the vessel as a passenger and manifested in such a way as to substantially comply with the law, or may have been employed as a member of the crew, or the causes which led the alien to stowaway may have been such as to bring his case within the first proviso to section 2 of the immigration act, and entitle him to special consideration, ceptional cases of this character should be promptly brought to the attention of the department, with a full statement of facts and a request for instructions. The Commissioner-General of Immigration, in his reports for the years 1908 and 1909, has the following to say with regard to the operation of this rule concerning stowaways: [Report of the Commissioner-General of Immigration for 1908, p. 11.] Ex Table XVIB is new, but is extremely interesting as an illustration of the anxiety of the poorer classes to reach this country, too much advertised as the place where living is easy. It shows that during the year 633 alien stowaways were found on board arriving vessels. Nearly all of these were refused examination under the immigration laws, not being regarded as bona fide applicants for admission to the United States, and were retained on board of the vessels on which found and carried back to the port where they stowed away. A few were accorded examination and admitted to the United States as exceptional cases within the meaning of rule 23 of the immigration regulations. Attention is directed to said rule, which it becomes necessary to adopt to overcome the abuses arising from the practice of stealing passage to this country. [Report of the Commissioner-General of Immigration for 1909, p. 13.] Table XXI corresponds with Table XVIB of the report for 1908, but shows 76 less stowaways brought to our ports during the past year than during that year. This reduction has been due, in part at least, to the enforcement of rule 23 of the immigration regulations, under which aliens coming as stowaways are not regarded as applicants for admission, and are not ordinarily examined, but required to remain on board and depart with the ship. It is no longer possible to enforce said rule at New York, however, the district court there having held that examination must be accorded." @ In re D'Amato (U. S. District Court, Southern District of New York, Hand. J., July 12, 1909). This was the case of an alleged stowaway who was denied a hearing before a board of special inquiry, the immigration authorities contending that the omission of his name from the ship's manifest conclusively proved that he was a stowaway. The court refused to accept this contention, and held that he was entitled to a judicial hearing to show that he was not a stowaway. The court said: "I think it is quite clear that in Rule 23 the word 'stowaway' is used to indicate one who steals his passage, and I do not mean to decide whether that rule is valid or not, for I do not think it is necessary here. Possibly one who steals his passage and who concedes that he steals his passage may be deprived of a hearing before a board of special inquiry. I am not prepared to say that that board is necessary where there is nothing for them to decide. If the alien concedes such facts, perhaps any hearing is unnecessary. This man does not concede that he is a stowaway within the meaning of the rule. He has been denied any hearing before the board of special inquiry and at least he was entitled to a determination upon that issue. As that hearing has been denied him, he has been denied rights due to him under the statute, and I think the writ must go." * * * CONCLUSIONS. In the opinion of the immigration authorities the enactment of specific legislation is necessary to a satisfactory solution of the problem of alien seamen. In the draft of a proposed new immigration act which is contained in the report of the Commissioner-General of Immigration for 1909 two sections (secs. 16 and 17) are devoted to this subject. These sections, with the explanatory comments thereon, are submitted herewith: DRAFT OF PROPOSED NEW IMMIGRATION ACT. SEC. 16. That the Commissioner-General of Immigration shall prescribe such rules and regulations with respect to the recording and inspection of aliens of nationalities and races other than Chinese employed on vessels entering ports of the United States, and the assessment of head tax on account of such as seek to land in the United States for purposes other than those of their employment, or whose departure in the pursuit of such employment is not shown. as may be necessary, on the one hand, to prevent violation or evasion of the terms of this act by aliens who, arriving as employees of vessels, or in the guise of such employees, determine to enter and remain in the United States, and, on the other hand, to avoid in the enforcement of this act any undue interference with navigation and commerce. Full information shall be furnished immigration officials by the master, owner, officer, or agent of any vessel employing aliens with respect to every alien employed thereon who shall desert the vessel in a port of the United States, and also all such alien employees as may be pronounced under said regulations inadmissible to the United States shall be held on board and carried to the foreign port of shipment, subject to the penalties prescribed in sections thirty-four and thirty-five hereof. Comment.-Section 16 is designed to close a wide and continually widening breach in the immigration law. It has never been easy to prevent violations of the law by aliens employed on vessels, and since the decision of the Supreme Court in the Taylor case (207 U. S., 120) it has been practically impossible to do so. The handling of alien seamen generally must be accomplished in such a way as to avoid undue interference with navigation and commerce. The details of such a plan can hardly be outlined in a statute; hence the proposal to invest the department with authority to adopt suitable regulations, which is altogether feasible and ought to be reasonably effective. SEC. 17. That no Chinese alien or alien of Chinese descent employed on board vessels entering the ports of the United States shall, unless entitled to enter the United States under the various provisions of this act, be permitted to land in the United States, unless satisfactory bond is furnished in form and amount to be prescribed by the Commissioner-General of Immigration, conditioned for the departure of such alien from the United States with the vessel on which employed, in accordance with proper regulations requiring names, description, and photograph, to be issued by the Commissioner-General of Immigration, to insure the identity of such departing Chinese alien. Comment.-Section 17 is intended to effect a purpose similar to that of section 16, and prevent serious violations of the Chinese-exclusion laws. Recently the district court at Philadelphia has ruled in a criminal case that the exclusion laws do not apply to Chinese laborers employed as seamen. If this ruling obtains, the exclusion laws will to a considerable extent become inoperative. The requirement of bond in the cases of Chinese seamen has had the sanction of the courts (101 Fed., 989), but has never been made absolute by statute, nor has there been any thorough method of identifying those bonded to prevent substitutions, which are constantly occurring. This situation is met, it is believed, by the proposed section. United States v. Rout (170 Fed., 201). This was dicta. What the court said was: "It may be added that, although the point is not now made, it might deserve consideration in a proper case, whether the prohibition of bringing and landing any Chinese laborer or other Chinese person was intended to apply to a member of a crew who was a bona fide employee and manifested as such." (Taylor v. United States, 207 U. S., 120; 28 Sup. Ct., 53, 52 L. Ed., 130; re Ah Kee (D. C.), 22 Fed., 519; re Jam (D. C.), 101 Fed., 989). I have noted the copy of the United States statute which appears on the reverse side of this notice, and report that the following alien members of her crew have deserted: [Extract from the act of Congress approved Mar. 3, 1903.] SEC. 18. That it shall be the duty of the owners, officers, and agents of any vessel bringing an alien to the United States to adopt due precautions to prevent the landing of any such alien from such vessel at any time or place other than that designated by the immigration officers; and any such owner, officer. agent, or person in charge of such vessel who shall land or permit to land any alien at any time or place other than that designated by the immigration officers shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall on conviction be punished by a fine for each alien so permitted to land of not less than one hundred nor more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and every such alien so landed shall be deemed to be unlawfully in the United States and shall be deported, as provided by law. APPENDIX II. LETTERS FROM STEAMSHIP COMPANIES. JUNE 7, 1907. Hon. LOUIS T. WEIS, Commissioner of Immigration, Port of Baltimore City. DEAR SIR: At your request we have heretofore reported to your office deserters from the crews of steamers of the North German Lloyd while in this port, and have been paying head tax thereon. 368 We are informed that two test cases will be tried promptly in New York, wherein the Government will attempt to secure judicial interpretation of section 18, immigration act March 3, 1903, in favor of your contention that all such deserters come within the provisions of said immigration act. We beg leave to inform you that, pending the settlement of these disputed points and until your interpretation of said section 18 of the act of March 3, 1903, has been established in court in one or both of said test cases now pending in New York, we shall discontinue to report to you deserters from our steamships and to pay head tax thereon. Yours, very truly, Hon. ROBERT WATCHORN, United States Commissioner of Immigration, A. SCHUMACHER & Co. HOLLAND-AMERICA LINE, Ellis Island, New York Harbor. DEAR SIR: Replying to your esteemed favor of April 9, we regret that through a misunderstanding our letter of January 24 was sent to you conveying the information that we would promptly send you notice of all desertions from the crews of our steamers while here in port. We are advised that the United States immigration laws do not apply to members of the crew, and as this matter has not finally been decided in the courts we would suggest to leave the same in abeyance until said final decision has been made. Respectfully, HOLLAND-AMERICA LINE, |