Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-01-25
DEFERRED DEBATES.
IcoNrIsuEp rRoM rIRsr PAGE

ICONIlhGEJ FROM FIRST Ell
zens until the naturalization laws are amended so as
TO include them.
Mr.. Enos-I would like to ask another question.
Have not cur Courts decided and Interpretation
be given as TO what constitutes white people, and
that they have even included the NsXclns and
Spanarls and the 0ctoroons: and is it not now u
mooted question why the Chinese shall no, come
under that definition?
MIR. Sears-No; there is no mooted question about
it. will come to that question shortly. Now
lay this done broad, settled principle, which has
been decided by the highest Courts that naturalza-
ton is not and cannot be conferred by treaty You
cannot confer naturalization by treaty; 1t IS not
treaty right. The policy OF all nations has been 10
prevent IL because nations desire TO retain their
subjects.
Mr.. Enos-Did not our treaty with Mexico make
citizens by that treaty, OF all residents and citizens
Of this Slater
Mr. sea-s-I will answer that question. 1t might
as well be answered here, because the gentleman
don't seem TO understand the difference between
thai case and this In our treaty With Mexico
wheieby we acquired Mexican territory, we make
Inhabitants Of that territory citizens. There is a
vast diff renee in comforting citizenship upon people
residing in the territory which we acquire, and con-
fcrrinQ naturalization upon fOreigners-there Is a
vast difference. When we acquired territory as we
did California from Mexico, we said IN that treaty
that the residents Of that acquired territory should
nav lie ght to their lands md property in that
TERRITORY and should within year from that
time decide whether they preferred to remain citi
of Mexico. lItat Is uDGtG power vi
the Constitution, and IS no appurtenance TO the
aueson OF treaties with foreign na IONS or with the
naturalization Of foreigners. That Is done through
national sovereignty The proposition is reversed
Our nation went to theu-they did not come 10 us
MIR. Enos-It does not satisfy me. But ! would
like to ask you this question Could not Congress
confer Immediately, by treaty. upon Cinnamon that
have been living here i've years, the right 10 become
citizens and to vote
Mr. Sears-Colgress can, by amending the L;.tu-
raltzation laws IL never did and never can In any
other way There is way in the world IN which
the gentleman can twist and squrm around it, so as
10 find single authority whereby the Cinnamon in
this country can be naturazed under the existing
laws and they never can be naturalized under any
treaty.
MI Fuos-PArt of them already kave become nat
rralizcd by the different Courts Will the gentle
man answer this question: Have not Cinnamon
been naturalizsd in the different Courts OF the
United States, who now voter
Mr. Sears-I will answer the gentleman. Yet l
look upon the interruptions made more to break
the thread Of my argument than anything eise But
will answer all OF his questions that he Is pre- area
% ask I believe il is = fact that chinese III some
Of the Eastern state Courts have been naturaized.
That is matter which rests discretionary with the
Judges Of those Courts; but II the matter OF their
citizenship was taken to the supreme Court, there
is no question. in my opinion, but what the aetion
of those Courts would be set aside. We are not re-
snpnsible Tor what inferior Courts do
Mr.. Davis (interruptng)-Am 70 Understand,
that the nSIS W
inpeach the acuOu OF those ourts that have granted
naturalization TO Chinese subjects
MI Sears-I say most empAatically that any Court
that has naturaized Chinaman born in China
any Court that has naturaiized ChInaman, has
done so without authority OF law; and l defy the
.entlen IN or any other gentleman, to show TO the
contrary challenge him to show one single treaty,
sndor any decision Of the CDlted States Courts, or
the Supreme Court OF any state IN this Union,
whereby a man has been natura7ed by treaty OF
through a treaty which has been made with for
mir Dayis-Can you find any decision from the
highest judicial tribunal of the country which says
that Chinese are rot entitled 70 the rlgntol natural
Mr.. Saars-Yes, will give the gentleman de
cison shortly that point, which ought to satisfy
him. Mr. President, naturalization s simply a
boon Il is gift. II is q privilege which our ma
ton confers upon foreigners upon aliens from other
nations and our nation, under the Constitution, has
paced IN Congress the power to say who shall be-
come citizens Of this Government | have stated
that two or three times, but that statement, per
haps will cover thequesticn more fully. Mr. Presi-
dent | have quoted from the United States ConStl-
tution this article, whereby Congress derives its
,,ov,ar IN natlralze foreigners Now hold here in
my hand a cision by the United States Circuit
Court OF California.
Mr. Davis Gnterrupting)-Y do not hold that
Is the highest tribunal in the United states?
Mr. Sears-This is 4 decision by the United States
Circuit Court. 1t goes over the ground thoroughly
and presents all of the authorities 1t is an action
by Chnaman by the name oil An lup TO compel
that Court to naturalze him, and tine whole ques-
tion OF naturalization raised and determined.
This decision says that the law passed by Congress
relating 10 the naturalization OF aliens on April
Il 1902 had been changed by the revised statutes.
The language had been that any alien, being " free
white person." might be admitted to become citi-
zen That il the language put In the naturaliz atom
laws in 1902, and it remqined unc anged until 1870.
Every white perso before the adoption of the last
amendment to the naturalization laws, alone could
be naturalized and neg oes could not become cit
liens Of the United States-nohe except " white
persons In 1870 an amendment was made 70 the
naturalization laws which reads as follows: That
the naturaz ton laws are hereby extended to aliens
OF african nativity, and TO persons OF African de-
scent" You viii find in the Sixteenth United
States Statutes, page 256 Section Z, we have no"
naturalization law including every white person
aliens Of African nativity and persons OF African
descent All others are excluded. There was an
omission in the amendment OF naturalization law
which. lett out the woTGS white persons by MIS-
take And az soon as Congress Uncovered the mis-
take the words were rejl1Cet in the revised statute
Mr. President have examined authorities which
define the color of the ska, and the oomple Xon OF
races I have examined Webster ard worcester
and the new American Encyclopedia, and other
authorities and taking them all together, they class
the races as four. The first IS the European or
white race This is the class that was included IN
the naturalization laws OF 1902 Secondi the Mon
eeolian or yellow race | never knew or saw a Chi
ra1nan tina. was white. They all OF that yellow
fatuv color and their characteristics are different
from the white or Dlack races. Inc tlllFu IS the
Ethiopian, the negro race-the black race The
fourth is the American cOppery or red race, known as
the Indian. These four classes these authorities
agree upon. Some of the authorities add one or
two more classes to them Under that classification,
and under this decision, Judge Sawyer refused to
naturalize the Chinaman, because he believed the
yellow or tayny race were neither white nor black.
So much for that branch of this subject. This
opiniou is very elaborate it goes into the question
very thor ughY, and cites debates in Congress and
in the United States Senate When this amend
rnent TO the naturalization laws under discus
sion for there was an eff TT made in order to in
clude Chinese there was an effort made in the
United States Senate TO strike out the word
&c hite in the naturalization laws but 1t was voted
down. because il would include Chinese. Therefore
il stood az | have read 1t, only including the Tree
white and the African. and on that ground
this decision is particularly based. Mr.. President
passing that we VIII come TO the treaty. In
answering the questions which have been asked me,
have somewhat gone over this question OF treaty.
In 1855 a treaty was made with China, known as
the Buchanan or Reed treaty. and the Burlngame
treaty was simply an amendment to that treaty.
In the Burlinglpe treaty was placed the words
which have been quoted by Senator Davis, in which
the same privileges and immunities and exemptions
in respect TO travel residence were conferred as
might be enjoyed by the citizens and subjects OF
the most favored nation. These amendments add
one word to the treaty. They have included the
word rights" That is about the only change,
and that word added to the treaty
does not pretend to confer naturaiiz alton
there was clause placed in the Burlingame treat y,
which Senator Davis has read, which is in these
words But nothing herein contained shall be held
to confer naturalization upon the citizens OF the
United States in China nor upon subjects OF emma
IN the United States" claim that that provision
does not confer naturalization or prevent natural
izaton 1t was pus in there to satisfy the Chine q
nation They had some doubts upon the subject.
Il is very tender question with them of allowing
one of their subjects TO become Daturalized or
swear allegiance 10 another ration. | have in o
scrap. book, which clipped out some years ago, a
quotation from he awSof hina which the gentleman
will see Nhen it is read is the reason why the Chi
nese insisted on putting that clause into the treaty
1t was for their benefit and not for This
ton from their law was furnished our Government
nv the Consul General residing at Hongkong-the
American Consul Genera Ii is Section 204, and il
Senator Davis will look over the laws Of China he
will there find it. II reads IS follows "Au persons
renouncng their country and allegiance, desiring
the means thereof, shall be beheaded, and in the
punishment of this offense no distinction shall be
made between principals and accessories. The
property of all such criminals shall be confscated,
and their wives and children distributed slaves to
the great officers Of State" That is the law of China
Il makes il a criminal ofen7e, for which shall
be beheaded, and his wives aud children taken and
given away into slavery.
Mr. Davis-Then these fellows that have been
naturalzed had peter not 90 back there
Mr. Sears-Not il they desire to keep their own
heads: for they will surely lose them as soon as
they return That is the reason Why that clause
was placed in the Burlingame treaty. Mr. Presi-
dent | shall refer the gentlemen TO some other au-
ihorities en- this question In the first place we
Will take our own reports | read from Fifth Cali
fornia. page 800, eX parte Knowles. This de-
ision rend red by Judge Hsydenfe'dt. II discusses
Ills oues.iO under the Constitution Of naturalist
ton 1.-The power to naturalize by authority Of