188 



CONGRESS. (CHINESE EXCLUSION.) 



that the race question of the South is entirely a 

 domestic question, while the race question on the 

 Pacific is complicated with international ques- 

 tions. I believe, moreover, that the white people 

 of the South are the most capable of dealing 

 with their race question, just as the white people 

 of the Pacific coast are most competent to deal 

 with their Chinese race question. 



" Upon these race questions I unhesitatingly 

 take my position with the white people of the 

 South and the white people of the Pacific 

 coast. 



"The substitute reported by the Democratic 

 minority is substantially the bill desired by our 

 Pacific coast citizens and by the laborers of the 

 whole country, which is a very persuasive reason 

 why it should be adopted by the House." 



The House passed the bill without a division 

 April 7, after adopting certain amendments, 

 which, it was claimed by Mr. Clark, embodied 

 everything for which the minority contended, and 

 which, according to Mr. Hitt, of Illinois, made 

 the measure identical with that reported by a 

 Senate committee as a modification of the origi- 

 nal or Kahn bill. 



In the course of the debate in both houses 

 it was commonly conceded that the policy of ex- 

 clusion was to be continued; and that the only 

 matter open to discussion was the method of ex- 

 clusion. A more generous course was advocated 

 at times. Mr. Gallinger, of New Hampshire, said 

 in the Senate: 



" Mr. President, to my mind this bill is uncalled 

 for, unnecessary, unwise, and un-American. It 

 is harsh in its provisions, unjust in its definitions, 

 and clearly violative of solemn treaty stipula- 

 tions. It is the kind of legislation that prejudice 

 engenders and unthinking agitation produces. It 

 is a measure aimed at a weak people, and which 

 would never be dreamed of in connection with 

 any nation able to defend itself. It is narrow, 

 bigoted, intolerant, and indefensible legislation. 

 It assumes conditions that do not exist, and aims 

 to correct evils that are purely imaginary. It 

 M i^ests the want of laws to prevent undesirable 

 Chinese immigration into this country, when the 

 fact is that existing laws are entirely adequate 

 to accomplish that purpose." 



He quoted at length the letter of protest ad- 

 dressed by the Chinese minister to the Secretary 

 of State, which set forth various objections to 

 the measure as follows : 



" I do not wish to go into the different provi- 

 sions of the bill in detail, but I should like to 

 call your attention in a general way to its ef- 

 fects. It restricts the privileged Chinese persons, 

 other than laborers, to come to the United States 

 to only five classes, viz., officials, teachers, stu- 

 dents, merchants, and travelers, in direct contra- 

 vention to the treaty of 1880, in Article I, where 

 it states that the limitation or suspension of 

 immigration shall apply only to laborers, ' other 

 classes not being included in the limitation.' So 

 also the history of the negotiation shows that it 

 was the intention of the two governments that 

 laborers alone were to be excluded. Under the 

 bill there would be excluded bankers, capitalists, 

 commercial agents or brokers, and even mer- 

 chants who come only to make purchases; also 

 scholars and professors, of which there are many 

 in China of nigh attainments; also physicians, 

 clergymen, and many other classes which do not 

 fall under the five classes exempt by the bill. 

 The provisions of the bill as to the five exempt 

 classes are so restrictive as to practically nullify 

 the treaty in regard to them. The definitions as 

 to teac-hers, students, and merchants are so con- 



trary to the spirit of the treaty as to make them 

 almost impossible of observance. 



" A woman married according to the Chinese 

 custom to a person of the exempt classes would 

 be prohibited from entering the country, because 

 according to the provision of the bill it is neces- 

 sary that the marriage shall be legal and binding 

 by the la\ys of the United States. 



" The bill requires that all Chinese laborers 

 now in the United States shall undergo a new 

 registration. It will be remembered that my 

 Government remonstrated against the first regis- 

 tration that was proposed under the Geary law, 

 and only consented to it at the earnest request 

 of the Secretary of State at the time. All the 

 Chinese laborers submitted to that requirement 

 and were registered, and now it is proposed to 

 nullify all that and subject them to the annoy- 

 ance and trouble of a new registration. It is an 

 unnecessary hardship and should not be re- 

 quired. 



" The bill also contemplates the registration of 

 all merchants and of others of the exempt class. 

 This can not be required under the treaty, but 

 the bill attempts to obviate that obstacle by 

 making the failure to register a serious prejudice 

 of their rights. 



" I have heretofore complained to you of the 

 great hardships to which laborers, merchants, 

 ajid others are subjected after they have been 

 admitted to the United States and are lawfully 

 domiciled in this country. Past experience shows 

 that Chinese have been arrested by the wholesale, 

 placed in jeopardy, and subjected to molestation 

 and insult. When found innocent, no redress 

 is obtained for such illegal arrest. Persons 

 charged with being unlawfully in the country 

 and taken before a court are denied the privilege 

 of bail, but must remain in jail until their case 

 is decided. The bill, in place of providing some 

 relief for these hardships, rather adds restrictions 

 thereto. 



" The provisions with regard to transit across 

 the United States imposed by this bill are almost 

 impossible to be complied with, because people who 

 are passing through the United States en route 

 to other countries do not know the laws of the 

 country, and they can not understand the intri- 

 cate rules and regulations made by the Commis- 

 sioner-General of Immigration. 



" The report of the committee says that ' the 

 greatest degree of fairness and justice to the ex- 

 empt classes will be insured by the provisions of 

 the bill, which provides better means for the 

 investigation and disposition of their claims.' 

 And again it says : ' The features of the bill . . . 

 will tend to protect the worthy immigrant in his 

 treaty rights and privileges.' 



" I have referred to the fact that the provisions 

 as to the admission of the exempt classes are in 

 direct violation of the treaty; and in addition to 

 this the bill provides that the exempt classes 

 must submit their right to admission to the 

 adjudication of the Immigration Bureau, which, 

 as I showed in my note to you of Dec. 10, la-t. 

 was a purely ex "parte investigation, where lilt- 

 claimant was not permitted to confront the wit- 

 nesses, was deprived of the privilege of counsel, 

 and was excluded from an appeal to the courts. 

 I can not understand how the committee can 

 style this ' the greatest degree of fairness and 

 justice,' or how the ' worthy immigrant is pro- 

 tected in his treaty rights and privileges.' It 

 seems to me, on the contrary, that his treaty 

 rights are taken away from him. 



" The provisions of the bill above referred to, 

 and others which might be cited, place so many 



