guilty of murder charges and sentenced to death. Hall appealed the decision to the California Supreme Court and he was acquitted because no white witnesses to the murder were available. This reasoning is supported by the California State Civil Practice Act (under Section 394) that says no black, mulatto, or Indian can give testimony against white defendants in criminal cases. The controversy over this case occurs not just because of the obvious discrimination but because Chinese are not specifically referred to in the act and it is assumed that Indians and Asians belong to the same ethnic group. Basically anyone who was not considered white was looked down upon by the American white population. "The word 'white' has a distinct signification, which ex vi termini, excludes black, yellow, and all other colors," (Beesley 123). Chief Justice Hugh C. Murray, felt that the line had to be drawn, further states, "the same rule that would admit them to testify, would admit them to all the equal rights of citizenship, and we might soon see them at the polls, in the jury box, upon the bench, and in our legislative halls," (Beesley 123). The ruling of the Hall court case led to many violent uproars among white American citizens and Chinese immigrants. Another action taken to try and get rid of the Chinese immigrants was the California Miner's Tax of 1855. Its sole purpose was to drive Chinese immigrants out of the mining business by taxing foreign miners every month. Many Chinese spoke out about these practices. "When your honorable government threw open the territory of California, the people of other lands were welcomed here to search for gold and to engage in trade. The ship-masters of your respected nation came over to our country, lauded the equality of your laws, extolled the beauty of your manners and customs, and made it known that your officers and people were extremely cordial toward the Chinese.... we trusted in your s...