OCTOBER TERM, 1907. Olinion of the Court. 209 U.?. seems merely to require a fair, though snmmary hesa?. Chin Yow v. United $ta?, 208 U.S. 8. The court was justi- fied in atg. rming the decision solely upon the commi?sioner's report of the evidence. Y?h How v. Un/ted $tate?, 193 U.S. 78. A student's certificate is only pr/ma ?ac/e evidence of the right of the Ch?aman to remain in the United States, and its effect may be overcome by other evidence in the case. Such evidence was furnished by the Government officers in this case, and the order of deportation was rightfully entered. Un/- ted $tatez v. Yonq Yew, 83 Fed. Rep. 832; Un/ted ?qtat? v. N'g Park Tan, 86 Fed. Rep. 605. MR. Jus?c? D?Y delivered the opinion of the court. The plsJntiff in error, Liu Hop Fong, on November 23, 1904, was arrested upon the sworn complaint of the United States district attorney and brought before a United States com- missioner at Omaha, Nebraska, charged with b?ing ?mlaw- fully within the United States of America, living and residing at Omaha, Nebraska, and there pursuing the occupation of a common laborer, contrary to the laws of the United States. The complaint prayed that he might be arrested and' dealt with according to law. Upon a plea of not guilty, on De- cember 29, 1904, a hearing was had before the commissioner. The bill of exceptions shows that the commissioner on Decem- bet 29, 1904, made an order finding the defendant guilty, and ordered his deportation from the United States to the Empire of China; that an appeal was taken to the District Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska; that the case was heard upon the thirteenth day of April, 1905, being one of the days of the November term of the District Court; that the case was tried and submitted to the judge without any new evidence upon the complaint, upon the transcript of the proceedings made by the United States commissioner from whose order the case was appealed, and the additional sep-
�
