Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/479

 09 U.& 8yUva applies to the Sault Ste. Marie, whatever it be called. The fact- that it is a boundary has not been held to make a difference. The riparian proprietors upon it own to the center. Ryan v. Bwa, 18 Michigan, 196; $cwaam v. W/u/, 113 Michigan., 565, 567; Kmp v. $], 134 Michigan, 676. See. also $cra to v. W/er, 57 Fed. Rep. 803, 812; $. C., 179 U.S. 141, 163; Irman v. Bron, 8 Michigan, 18; Wa2r Comm'sio'8 v. D, 117 Miehi?n 458, 462. We see no plausible ground for the laim of the United States. LIU HOP FONG . UNITED STATE. ERROR TO  DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE � DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. No. 181. Argu March 18. l.--Delcld Arll0. 190 Under the pmvkions of i 13 of the act of September 13, 1888, e. 1015, 25 8tat. 476 and i 3 of the act of May 15, 1890, c. 60, 27 Stat. 25, the appeal ivca to a ChlnmJ from an order of deportation made by a commissioner s a trial d mo before the district judge to which he is entitled before he eau be ordered to he deported, and the order cannot he made on a tnmserlpt of pm before the eomn'oner. After a commioner has made and filed a certified transcript in the cae of a Ch;Aro orl,md by him to be deported h authority over the matter -ck. Them is no statutory right to - up and file additional find- While a certificate issued as pmvlded by ! 3 of the Treaty of Decemher, 1894 between the United States nd China to entitle Chinese subjects to cater the Uted tatessmay be overeome by proper evidence, and may not have the effect of a judicial determination, Whca a Chimn has been admitted to the United States on a certificate made in con- ' formity with the' treaty, he cannot be deported for having fraudulcatly rotered the United States unle them is competent evidce to overcoma

�