SEARS, Collector to F. A. Bee , His Imperial Chinese Majesty’s, June 7, 1884

Collector Sears to Consul Bee.

Sir: Your communication of yesterday, calling my attention to the circulars of the Secretary of the Treasury dated January 23, 1883, relating to Chinese laborers in transit through the United States, is received, and after a careful examination of said order, and the opinion of the Attorney-General embodied therein, I am of opinion—

First. Subdivision 1 requires that when any Chinese laborer in transit through the territory of the United States enters at a port where there is a Chinese consul, said consul may furnish him with a descriptive transit certificate showing the place and date of his arrival, also the place from whence he intends to depart from the United States, and that his journey is to be continuous and direct, &c. Said certificates shall be accepted as prima facie evidence.

This first subdivision evidently refers to a Chinese entering one port of the United States and traveling across our territory to some other port in the United States, and thence departing for some foreign port. When the said Chinese reaches the port of departure in the United States, then his said transit certificate shall be received by the customs authorities there as prima facie evidence that he had the right only to cross the country, but not to remain in it.

Subdivision 2 requires that in the absence of such certificate other evidence may be received of the fact of a bona fide transit across the territory of the United States intended to be traversed. This subdivision also contemplates that the person is to traverse the territory of the United States to some other port for departure.

Subdivision 3 relates to a number of Chinese under charge of an agent, who may make affidavit that he will transport them without delay across the territory of the United States and deliver them on board ship. The purport of this subdivision is that the agent will take his body of Chinese from the port of entry to the port of exit, without unnecessary delay, across the territory of the United States, and place them on board some ship leaving for a foreign port. Again, this subdivision requires descriptive lists of all such Chinese to be made, showing the place of arrival and place of intended departure, the route to be traveled, and that a copy of the same shall be forwarded to the collector of customs at the port of exit, who will see that they all duly leave the United States.

It is clear Jo my mind that the whole tenor and purport of the order was intended to and does relate to Chinese crossing the territory of the United States.

I am further of the opinion that Chinese laborers arriving at a port in the United States and departing from the same port are not in transit across the territory of the United States, and therefore not entitled to laud, but should be kept on board ship and transferred to another vessel departing for a foreign port, to which their tickets entitle them to go.

In regard to the system of “bonded security” established by you as a guarantee for the return of a Chinese lauded who is in transit from one foreign port to another via this, arriving at and departing from this port, I beg to state that the bond does not run to the United States, and, if it did, I have been unable to find any authority of law for such bond.

A bond given to permit the performance of au unlawful act is void; therefore I must respectfully decline to grant permission for the said Chinese to land.

I am, &c.,