
    CHIN MAN CAN v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    May 3, 1909.)
    No. 1,645.
    Appeal and Erbok (§ 1008) — Review—Questions op Fact.
    In a Chinese deportation proceeding it was assigned as error that the court did not find that defendant was a citizen and entitled to remain in the United States, in sustaining the judgment and order' of the commissioner, and in remanding defendant to the custody of the marshal, and adjudging he was unlawfully in the United States. Held, that the issues presented by such assignments were issues of fact, and could not, therefore, be reviewed on a writ of error.
    |TCd. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. I)ig. §§ 8935-8989; Dec. Dig. § 1008.)
    In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Southern District of California.
    George L. McKeeby and A. C. Hurt, for plaintiff in error.
    Oscar Lawler, U. S. Atty.
    Before GILBERT, ROSS, and MORROW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       For other cases see same topic & § numbmii in Dec. & Am. Digs. !i)07 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   MORROW, Circuit Judge.

This is a writ of error to review the decision of the District Court for the Southern District of California ordering the deportation of Chin Man Can from the port of San Francisco on the ground that Chin Man Can is a Chinese person and a laborer by occupation, and that lie has failed to establish by affirmative proof to the satisfaction of the court, or the judge thereof, his lawful right to be and remain in the United Slates, and has not made it appear to said court, or the judge thereof, that he is a subject or citizen of any other country than China.

It is assigned as error that the court below did not find that the plaintiff in error was a citizen of the United States, and entitled to be and remain in the United States, that the court erred in sustaining the judgment and order of the commissioner, and that the court erred in remanding the defendant to the custody of the marshal and adjudging that he was unlawfully in the United States. The only questions and issues presented by the record before the court are questions and issues of fact, and not of law. These questions cannot be reviewed upon writ of error. Leo Lung On v. United States, 159 Fed. 125, 86 C. C. A. 513, and cases there cited.

The writ of error is therefore dismissed.  