The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-06-08

highly .intelgent merchant OF San Francisco,
enclosing commercial circular, issued by King
a. CO., dated "Canton, (China,) January 81,
1862" from which the following extract is
made;
"'fhe most remarkable feature in connection
with shipping which we have TO note is the
employment of tonnage caused by Chinese emil
grafton to California This has been increasing
for some months past, and the following vessels
are now under engagements to take Chinese
passengers at from $35 to 800 per head, viz:
American packet, 300 tons Benheim, $50 !;
Constant, 583; Emperor, 497 Glenyon 1884 /;
llenbury 476 Land o. Cakes, SGT; North
Carolina, $40; Brahmin, 6l4; Eden, 5l3
Grace McVed 845 Osceola, 1853; Rajasthan,
500, Robert Small, Clio; Convoy, 238; Ire.
nelga, Bias George Washington, 400 After
the New Year holidays, it is expected that a
number Of other vessels will find similar en-
ployment"
The letter enclosing the circular from which
the above extract is taken, is dated "San Fran
cisco, April %, 1882" The writer says;
"The Challenge, from Hong Kong, is in this
morning, With a full list of Chinese---from
seven to eight hundred She reports an extend
ed emigration to this State, with prospect Of
still greater increase---mary large ships being
on the way, crowded with ceestials."
| have mentioned, in the preceding portion
of this communication, that numb rs of Asialics
have been, and are being sent here, under con-
tracts to labor for term OF years in our mines at
| merely nominal wages, and that their families
have been retained as hostages for the faithful
performances OF the contracts. If this inteIli.
gence is correct, it may well be doubted wheth.
er such contracts should be recognized or en-
forced within the limits of this State. Mr.
Justice Story, in his commentaries upon Soon.
tends, with great force and clearness, that
''there is exception to the rule as to the
universal validity of contrac which is, that no
nation is bound to recognize or enforce any
contracts which injurious to its own inter-
ess, or to those Gifts own subjects" Mr.. JUS
tice Martin has expressed it in the following
| terms: "I'he exception applies to in which
! the contract is immoral unjust, or in which
the enforcing it in State would be injurious to
the rights, the interest or the convenience of
such State or its citizens"
"This exception results from the considera
ton that the authority Of the acts and contracts
done in other States, as well the laws by
which they are regulated, are not of any efiica-
cy beyond the limits of that State and what
ever is attributed to them elsewhere, is from
comify, and not of strict right; and every indie
pendent community will, and ought to Judge for
itself, how far that comfy ought to extend.
The reasonable limitation is that it shall not suf
fer prejudice by its comfy"
On a recent occasion, it was affirmed by the
Supreme Court of Louisiana, that the rule in
regard TO the universal validity Of contacts sis
subject only to the exception that the contract
to which aid is required, should not, either in
itself, Il in the means used to give it effect,
work aniuury to the inhabitants of the country
where it is attempted to DO enforced"
The cases which form all exception to the
rule as to the universal validity of contrgct-,
have been classified by eminent legal authorities
i Among those enumerated, are contracts to cor
rupt or evade the due administration Of Justice;
contracts to cheat public agents, or to defeat
the public rights contracts which are opposed
to the national policy and Institutions; and, in
short, all contracts which, in their own nature.
are founded in moral turptude, and are incon.
sistent with the good order and solid interests
of society All such contracts, even though
thew might be held valid in the country where
they are made, would be held void elsewhere or
at least on lht TO be, il the dictates of christian
morality, or even of natural Justice are allowed
to have their due force and influence in the nd.
. ministration Of international Jurisprudence.
There cannot be reasonable doubt that con
tracts made in China, with the subjects of that
empire, by their own countrymen, or by resident
Il foreigners, for the performance of work and
labor within the State of California, come within
the class of contracts here enumerated, as ex
ceptions to the rule in respect to the universal
validity of contracts. This question will form
an appropriate subject for the consideration of
courts of laws; but cannot lorbear to express
the opinion that such contracts ought not to be
recognized or enforced within the limits of this
Il State, either upon the score OF international
comfy or law.
If it be admitted that the introduction of one
hundred thousand or ola less number of coolies,
in this State, under such contracts with non
| residents, may erdanger the public tranquility
and injuriously affect the interests Of our people,
then we are bound to adopt measures to avert
such evils. therefore, respectfully submit for
your consideration two distinct propositions;
LIST. Such an exercise of the taxing power by
the State, as will check the present system of
indiscrmnate and unlimited Asiatic emigration
Cd demand by the State of California for
the prompt interposition Of Congress-, by the
passage Of an act prohibiting !" coolies" shipped
to California under contracts. from laboring in
the mines of this State. With the consent of
the State, Congress would have the clear right
to interpose such safeguards as in their wisdom
might be deemed necessary. The power to tax
as well as to entirely exclude this class of Asatc
immiqr Ints it is believed, can be consttutionally
/ exercised by the State. AS the subject is one
of great magnitude, | have deemed it my duty
to examine che opinions of the judges Of the
| Supreme Court of the United States.
1t might be urged as an objection to the i'm
position of tax, that such statute would be
a regulation of commerce, and that the power
| to regulate commerce is exclusively reposed in
| Congress. | am aware that majority of the
Judges composing the Supreme Court of the
United States, have decided that statutes passed
by the legislatures of New York and Nassachu
setts imposing tax on passengers OF 8 ship
from a foreign port, were regulations of foreign
commerce and that the power to regulate COM
MERGE being exclusively reposed in Congress- the
statutes were void But the whole court were
. understood to concede the right of the State to
tag immigrants after they were shore. The
power Of States to exclude immigrants is also
aho, L,t tho hnst yriinrs o. al lar