Weedin

(after stating the facts as above). The appeal presents the question of law whether upon the admitted facts Wong Chai Chong is a merchant. The rulings of immigration officials upon the question whether a restaurant keeper is a merchant have, at different periods, been subject to change. Until 1893 he was held to be a laborer. Thereafter, owing to the opinion of' the Attorney General (20 Op. Attys. Gen. 602), the reverse was held. In consequence of the decisions in Ah Yow (D. C.) 59 F. 561 , and United States v. Chung Ki Foon (D. C.) 83 F. 143 , it was again ruled that a restaurant keeper was not a merchant, but in December, 1915, the rule was adopted that the owner of a restaurant, whose duties were solely those of a manager, is a merchant.

In the present case that ruling was departed from; the decision of the immigration officials being influenced by the decision by Judge McCoy of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, sitting in the District Court in April, 1924, in United States ex rel. Mak Fou Cho v. James J. Davis, Secretary of Labor, 52 Wash. Law Rep. p. 306. In that ease the iijquiry concerned the status of one who was the bookkeeper and cashier of a Chinese…