Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-04-23
THE CHINESE QUESTION.
VIEWS OF JUDGE FIELD, OF THE U. s.
SUPREME COURT.
A Response to Recently Published Arti-
Gle on the Absorbing Topic-The Evils
of Chinese Immigration.
[San Francisco CALI

article from the pen of General John f.
Miller on Certain Phases of the Chinese
Question" 1t was sent to Judge Field, of
the Supreme Court of the United States. by
General Miller, who has received in reply
the letter which we publish below. Some
of our citizens, learning from General
Miller the purport of the letter, tele.
graphed Judge Field for permission to pub
fish it, and obtaining his consent, we are
now enabled to give it to the public
WASHINGTON, March 5, 1880.
Hon. John F. Miller-Dear Sir l have
much pleasure in acknowledging the re-
ceipt of the Californian for March, which
you were kind enough to send me, contain
ing your article on ''Certain Phases of the
Chinese Question" l am glad, as Cali
fornian, to see that another effort is being
made to resuscitate the publication of a
monthly periodical in our State. The first
one was commenced, | believe, by Mr..
Ever, now an Episcopal clergyman of dis
tinction in New York. The second one
was edited, / think, for some tine by Bret
Harte, whose contributions to it first
brought him into prominent notice This
new publication contains several interest
ing and instructive papers, and WILL doubt
less, soon win its way to popular favor
Your article on the Chinese / have read
with great pleasure, and l heartily concur
with you in most of the views you express
in it. have always regarded
THE IMMIGRATION OF THE CHINESE
In large numbers into our State as a serious
evil, and likely to cause great injury to
the morals of our people, as well as to
their industrial interests. No one who
visits the Pacific Coast can fail to perceive
its injurious results. Your article, ven
ture to say, will be productive of much
good, as it is temporarily and dispassion
ately written, truthful in its statements,
forcible in its argument, and statesmanlike
in its suggestions and coming from one
who holds high position with the party
in power, it cannot fail to have great
weight with its members who desire to
reach a correct solution of the Chinese
question. l think that you have handled
the subject so ably and pointedly, and in
such a way, too, that you can hardly fail
to obtain the approval of the more thought
full and enlightened on this side of the
Continent l agree with you that it is our
duty 'to preserve this land for our people
and their posterity forever; to protect and
defend American institutions and republi-
can government from the Oriental gan
creme. And this is the duty of every
American citizen" These opinions / have
long entertained indeed, ever since the
evil began to loom up in its present proper
tions, though have had no sympathy with
the violent, illegal and
MISDIRECTED EFFORTS
So often made to get rid of it. You will
find them stated in an interview with the
editor of the Argonaut and reported with
substantial correctness in it's issue of
August 9, 1879, an extract from which
beg to subjoin for your perusal. | then
said that no good can come from resort
to small vexations against the Chinese. To
deny to them the privilege of sending to
China their dead, to cut off their cues, to
subject them to inconvenience and petty
annoyances is unworthy generous geople,
and will result in no practical benefit
recognize the Chinese question as one of
prominent Importance national question
demanding the con sideration of iurists and
statesmen, and not to be solved by resort
to sanitary laws, nor by local and munich
pal police regulations. 1t is broad ques-
ton, to be discussed by broad-minded men,
govern nations in their intercourse with
solved by San Francisco nor California,
nor is it local one, nor are its conse-
uuences to be confined to this side of the
continent. l am aware
that commercial intercourse with China is
a one-sded affair, and that the English,
German and American merchants are being
driven out of the Chinese trade, and that
the Chinese merchants have monopolized
not only their foreign commerce, but the
navigation of their own coast and the in
terror waters.
NOW WHAT Is THE REMEDY ?
To me it seems plain. We have treaty
with the Government of China. We find
that treaty, in its practical workings, one
sided. 1t is not equal. The Chinese
have denied to our people the privilege of
trading with the interior of China. They
open certain ports, known as treaty ports,
and practically deny to our merchants the
right to enter any other. Americans are
not allowed to dig in their mines, work ON
their farms, build railroads, navigate
streams, obtain franchises, and are re-
stricted in the enjoyment of any but the
most limited privileges. They are not
allowed the freedom of the country. We
may not peremptorily abrogate this treaty,
because to do so would be declaration of
war, but we may say to the Chinese au-
thorities, that because we find this treaty
works unequally, and to the disadvantage
of our people, we desire to modify it we
may give the required notice of six months
or one year we may then make another
treaty and give to the Chinese the privi-
leges theJ practically accord to us. We
may say to them, your people shall only
come to the United States and shall only
remain here for the purpose of general
tain ports and to none other; you shall
engage only in foreign trade; you shall be
EXCLUDED FROM ALL EMPLoYMENTs
Not connected with or incidental to for
eign commerce you shall be allowed the
privilege of crossing our continent in pur-
suit of business; you may be welcome to
visit any port of our land you may edu-
cate your youth in our colleges. But you
shall not send to us an immigration to en-
gage in the general industries of our coun-
try; you shall not send a population to be-
come permanent residents in our country
yon shall not come into competition with
our laborers you shall not engage in me-
chanical and manufacturing employments
you shall not own or till our agricultural
lands nor shall you fill mental employ
ments. Thus, the question
may be solved, nationally, speedily and
peacefully"
The want of reciprocity in the benefits
of the treaty is fully stated in the follow
ing extract from communication made by
our Minister in China toathe State Depart
ment, dated May l6, 1878:
"a very few words are needed to indi-
cate the lack OF reciprocity between us. /
think that there are no opportunities of
residence, or of enterprise, from which the
Chinese among us are debarred They can
90 where they will and do what they will
in all our broad domain. But it is not so
here. Our countrymen may reside in a
few cities only, and they may engage in no
enterprise outside of the ordinary inter-
change of commodities and their Transport
tation between defined points.
OPPORTUNITY EXISTS TO DEVELOP MINES,
To establish furnaces and factories, to con-
struct roads, canals, railroads and tele-
graphs, to operate these, and steam or