The Sun.
London, England, 1870-08-05 00:00:00

ROAST BEEF V. ROAST RAT.

One of the sharpest points made by his Honour A. Oakey
Hall, borrowing from Mr. John Swinton, in opposing
Chinese Immigration, is his averment that the question is
one of "Roast Rat versus Roast Beef." It is not asserted
that the Chinese people are of such perverse taste that
they eschew Roast Beef, and insist on gorging themselves
instead with Roast Rat. On the contrary, all that can
be truly cast up against them in the premises amounts to
this—that in deplored absence of Roast Beef, and when
utterly-unable to achieve that wholesome and nourishing
viand, they have been known to extract such questionable
nourishment as they might from Roast Rat. Would not
a crew of Yankee or British sailors, wrecked and cast
ashore on Sable Island, or any such forlorn locality, do
exactly the same ? The assumption that John Chinaman
clings to roast rat, when he might do a good deal better,
is refuted by a thousand facts. Any unprejudiced
Cali-
fornian will satisfy you that John is an immense
con-
sumer of rice, and stickles habitually for the very best
quality of that delicate and nourishing grain ; while
as to chickens he eats all that he can honestly
procure, to say the very least. In short, John,
like his betters, goes in for the best he can
get, and a liberal allowance of that same.
True, he sometimes works for low wages—works faithfully
and well—but only when he can get no higher. Show him
that he can honestly and decently double his earnings, by
joining the Crispins or another Society, and we warrant
him to go in. In fact, John is human—moved by human
impulses, subject to human passions, and governed by the
very human determination to take the best possible care
of " number one." Those who ignore this fact are not
well qualified to discuss the Chinese question. If any one
doubts this, if he really imagines that John would insist on
regaling himself with roast rat in preference to roast beef,
let him supply as much good beef as the Chinaman will
eat at five cents per pound, on condition that he be paid
$1 for all the roast rat they persist in eating in preference
to the beef. We warrant him that his offer, if responsibly
indorsed, shall not go begging for takers. But it is urged
that John often, if not usually, sells a specified portion of
his future labour and service, in order to defray thereby
the cost of his transportation across the vast Pacific. Let
us• look into this. Suppose a Yankee skipper to have
visited Antwerp, Rotterdam, or Hamburg with a load of
petroleum or cotton, and to be just on the point of setting
forth nearly empty on his homeward j ourney. A short, ruddy_
Dutchman accosts him thus, "Captain,take me to America."
" Certainly," responds the captain. " $25, with pork and
potatoes ; $3O if you have tea, coffee, and other extras."
But, captain, I am not worth $5 beside the clothes I
stand in, and I couldn't raise $2O to save my life."
" Very well ; stay here and earn it." " But, captain, how
can I earn it ? My wages as a farm labourer range from
20 to 30 cents a day, out of which I must buy food, lodg-
ing, and clothing, and I can't find work more than ten
months in the year. If I would work here till gray as a
badger I couldn't save $25." " Well, so be it ; but ships
cost money to run and build them, while emigrant pas-
sengers eat like oil of vitriol, How am Ito be paid for
carrying you ?" " I will tell you," responds Hans.
" When you shall have fastened your vessel at the Phila-
delphia dock just take me ashore and sell my service for
six months, or the shortest time that will pay you fully to
any kind, honest fanner who will keep me, clothe me, and
teach me the Yankee way of working a farm. I shall then
have a sure home from the start, and, if I behave and
make myself useful, there must be half a dozen ready
to hire me at fair wages when my time is out."
Can you suggest any other way in which
this poor labourer could get across the Atlantic more
cheaply and comfortably ? and if not, can there be a good
reason,for refusing to let him come this way? And if this
be right and expedient for Hans, why not for John?
Doubtless the business requires strict legal regulation to
secure both Hans and John from being overreached and
oppressed ; but the wrong is not in the thing itself, but in
its abuses. An act of Congress providing that no immi-
grant from Europe shall give more than six months'
faithful work for his passage, and none from Asia more
than twelve months, and that all contrary agreements or
understandings which involve a longer term of service
shall be absolutely void, except that they shall subject the
capitalist-contractor to fine and imprisonment, is all that • •
can be needed. Have this act read in translation to every
immigrant as he step.l on our shores, and it is morally
certain that none will work longer for his passage than
the law allows. The suggestion that John is an idolater
and a pagan is so directly at war with the Federal Consti-
tution, that we cannot Joelieve it serious. Assuredly, if
Congress were to attempt the exclusion of any class of
immigrants from our, soil because of their religious faith,
or want of it, the courts would be compelled to pro-
nounce the act not worth thepaper on which it isprinted. If
anything in the Federal Constitution is sacred and funda-

mental:it is that most righteous and salutary j-;;Vol
which forbids any interference by Congress with the ab-
solute freedom of religious belief.—New York Tribune.