within the United States without the stamps required by this Act, shall be forfeited and destroyed.

The Circuit Court of Appeals in Shelly vs. U. S., 198 Federal, 88, had held that the mere mixing of smoking opium with the residue of opium that has been smoked, and heating the same, was not a manufacture of opium for smoking purposes, within the meaning of the internal revenue Act. of 1890 which imposed a tax on smoking opium and regulated the business of its manufacture. It would appear that Congress answered this decision by providing the Act just above quoted wherein it is said that the preparation of opium suitable for smoking purposes from crude gum opium or from any preparation thereof, or from the residue of smoked or partially smoked opium, etc., shall be regarded as a manufacture within the meaning of the Act.

In Marks vs. U. S., 196 Federal, 476, it was held under the old statute that any process by which crude opium is converted into a product fit for smoking constitutes a manufacture of smoking opium, but the limiting of the Marks decision by the Shelly decision made the new opium Act most understandable and any mixture whatsoever of opium which may be smoked will now be considered a manufacture thereof.

Under the old law the offense of illegal importation was committed whenever the smoking opium was fraudulently and knowingly brought within the territorial limits of the United States, although the opium may not have been landed from the ship or carried across the custom lines, U. S. vs. Caminata, 194 Federal, 903.

387b.

These Statutes Constitutional.-The Act of 1909, and the Act of January 17, 1914, which declare certain presumptions against the defendant, are held to be constitutional in the case of U. S. vs. Yee Fing, 222 Federal, 154, and that they do not deny due process of law, provided in the case there is a rational connection between the facts proved and the facts therefrom inferred, and provided the party affected is free to oppose them.

CHAPTER XXI.

PANDERING AND PROHIBITING IMMORAL USE OF WOMEN AND GIRLS.

§ 388. The Act of February 20, 1907, Prohibiting Importation for Prostitution.

389. Decisions.

389a. Additional Decisions.

390. Importing Contract Labor.

391. Pandering.

392. White Slave Act.

392a. Decisions Under White Slave and Pandering Act. 392b. Harboring Prostitutes and Making Reports Thereof.

§ 388. The Act of February 20, 1907, 34 Stat. L., 898, contains forty-four sections, relating to immigration. It prohibits the importing of women for prostitution, the importing of contract labor, the advertising for labor abroad, the soliciting by vessel owners, and the illegal landing of aliens. Sections 3 and 4 of the Act are the ones most frequently made use of to cleanse, as far as possible, the stream of immigration. Section 3 reads as follows:

"Sec. 3. That the importation into the United States of any alien woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution, or for any other immoral purpose, is hereby forbidden; and whoever shall, directly or indirectly, import, or attempt to import, into the United States, any alien woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution, or for any other immoral purpose, or whoever shall hold or attempt to hold any such woman or girl for any such purpose in pursuance of such illegal importation, or whoever shall keep, maintain, control, support, or harbor in any house or other place, for the purpose of prostitution, or for any other immoral purpose, any alien woman or girl, within three years after she shall have entered the United States, shall, in every such case, be deemed guilty of a felony, and on conviction thereof be imprisoned not more than five years and pay a fine of not more than five thousand dollars; and any alien woman or girl who shall be found an inmate of a house of prostitution or practicing prostitution, at any time within three years after she shall have entered the United States, shall be deemed to be unlawfully within the United

States, and shall be deported as provided by sections twenty and twenty-one of this Act."

§ 389. Decisions.-Judge Hough, in United States vs. Bitty, 155 Federal, 938, held that the words "any other immoral purpose," as used in the above section must be construed with reference to the preceding word "prostitution," and to relate only to a like immoral purpose, and, so construed, cannot be held to include concubinage; and he, therefore, sustained a demurrer to the indictment. The Government had gone, by writ of error, direct to the Supreme Court of the United States, by virtue of the Act of March 2, 1907, 34 Stat. L., 1246, authorizing writs of error by the United States, and the Supreme Court held, in United States vs. Bitty, 208 U. S., 393, 52 Law Ed., 544, that the importation of an alien woman into the United States, in order that she may live with the person importing her, as his concubine, is for an immoral purpose, within the meaning of the above section, making it a crime against the United States to import alien women for the purpose of prostitution, or for any other immoral purpose.

In Keller vs. United States, 213 U. S., 138, the Supreme Court held that that portion of the above section which makes it a felony to harbor alien prostitutes was unconstitutional, as to one harboring such a prostitute without knowledge of her alienage, or in connection with her coming into the United States, as a regulation of a matter within the police power reserved to the State, and not without any power delegated to Congress by the Constitution. The portion, therefore, of the section held to be unconstitutional on this state of facts, begins at the words "whoever shall keep, and ends with the words "not more than five thousand dollars."

In line with this decision was the case of ex parte Lair, 177 Federal, 789, which held that in so far as the section provides for the criminal punishment of the mere keeping, maintaining, supporting, or harboring an alien woman within three years after entry for the purposes of prostitution, it is unconstitutional, such offense being within the police power of the State, and not subject to Congressional regulation. That case also held that the Act of March 3, 1903, 32 Stat. L., 1214, in so far as it places no limitation on the length of

the holding of a female alien for prostitution, for which the holder might be prosecuted, was repealed by the Act under discussion. That case also held that the venue for the importing of a female for immoral purposes was within the district of the seaport where the alien first landed and entered the United States. In the case of United States vs. Sibray, 178 Federal, 144, the Court held, upon a writ of habeas corpus, that a warrant by an immigration inspector under the Act, which authorizes the inspectors to proceed without going before any other United States Courts or United States Commissioner, while not required to have the formality and particularity of an indictment, it must, in charging that the relator was an alien who was a member of the excluded class, in that he imported a woman for immoral purposes, and that he had been convicted of, or had admitted, having committed a felony or other crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude, prior to his entry into the United States, was fatally defective for failure to specify the specific act or acts which it was claimed brought the relator within the excluded classes. In other words, the decision throughout demands that such warrants must state facts, and not mere conclusions. The Court also held that proof that an alien, prior to his emigration, committed a single act of adultery or fornication in the country from which he came, was insufficient to justify his deportation as an alien having been convicted of, or having admitted, committing a felony or other crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; also that an alien living in adultery within the United States is not ground for deportation; such conduct being solely within the police power of the statute. See also United States vs. Sibray, 178 Federal, 150, where it was held that a warrant for a woman stating generally that she entered the United States for an immoral purpose, was not sufficiently specific.

§ 389a. Additional Decisions Under Act of February 20, 1907. All that portion of Section 3 of the Act of February 20, 1907, reading as follows: "Whoever shall keep, maintain, control, support, or harbor in any house or other place for the purpose of prostitution, or for any other immoral purpose, any alien woman or girl, within three years after she shall have entered the United States, shall in every such case be deemed guilty of a felony, and on conviction

thereof be imprisoned not more than five years and pay a fine of not more than $5,000," is declared to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States, in Jeller vs. U. S., 213 U. S., 138, for the reason that while Congress has power to exclude aliens from and to prescribe the terms and conditions on which aliens may come into the United States, that power does not extend to controlling dealings with aliens after their arrival, merely on account of their alienage. That portion of the Act of February 20th, quoted above, is unconstitutional because it is the attempt to regulate a matter within the police power reserved to the State, and not within any power delegated to Congress by the Constitution.

The Act of March 26, 1910, 36th Statute 264, reads as follows: "Any alien who shall be found an inmate of or connected with the management of a house of prostitution, or practicing prostitution, after such alien shall have entered the United States......shall be deemed to be unlawfully within the United States, and shall be deported in the manner provided by Sections 20 and 21 of this Act," thereby doing away with the three year limitation of time provided for in the last paragraph of the original Section 3. In other words, when an alien is found engaged in the inhibited practices, irrespective of the length of time in the United States, deportation may be had. U. S. vs. Prentis, 182 Federal, 894; U. S. vs. Weis, 181 Federal, 860.

Under the authority of United States vs. Lavoie, 182 Federal, 943, which was a prosecution under the first part of Section 3 for importing for the purpose of prostitution an alien woman, a space of time elapsing after importation of as much as two years, and then the resumption of illegal relations, such illegal relations will not be held to be pursuant to the illegal importation. Prosecution for illegal importation under this section should be had in the district of the port where the alien was landed. U. S. vs. Krsteff, 185 Federal, 201; U. S. vs. Lavoie, 182 Federal, 943.

§ 390. Importing Contract Labor.-Section 4 of the Act reads as follows:

"That it shall be a misdemeanor for any person, company, partnership, or corporation, in any manner whatsoever, to prepay the transportation or in any way to assist or encour