Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-01-20
THE CHINESE TREATIES.
Commissioner John F. Swift
Interviewed.
HISTORY OF THE NEGOTIATIONS.
Items Made Public for the First
Time on the Pacific Coast.
isrsclAL BY TELEGRAPH TO THE RroonD-ua1os.l

tsPEcIAL BY TELEGRAPH TO THE RECoRp-USIos.l
SAN Francisco, January 19th.-The in
PRODUCTION in the Senate of the concurrent
resolutions of Glascock and Davis, the efforts
made to rush them to a vote without refer
ence to a committee, and the statement that
the committee have decided to report in favor
OF their adoption, have
CREATED MUCH UNEAsINEss
Here among large moderate and conserva-
tive class who believe that the Chinese immi-
grafton treaty as satisfactory solution of the
much vexed question as could be reasonably
expected, and that to oppose its ratification
would be to reopen the whole question, risk all
| that has been gained and stulsify California
| in the eyes of the nation. 1t is more than
suspected, indeed belief seems widely diff
fused, that the opposition that has shown
itself in the Legislature springs from two
| seurces-the interest of the steamship COM
panies, who see in the stoppage of Chinese
inning grafton material reduction of their in.
come, and the Democratic policy Of obstruc-
! ton, that would rather see the country
damned than saved under Republican
auspices. There seems disposition TO bring
| up in objection to the treaty features that do
not exist therein, or that are either ignorantiy
| or willfully misconstrued. Glascock's reso-
luton objects that the treaty provides no
means Of determining the real status of the
! Chinese coming to this country, and Davis,
in his preamble, claims that the treaty con-
fers upon the Chinese rights of natural
ization and citizenship, and provides
| that it shall not be competent for the
| Government of the United States
classes of China. To throw some additional
| light on these and other points in the treaty.
and to show the difficulties under which tie
| Commissioners labored in obtaining the con-
cessions contained in it, have conversed at
length on the subject with
| JOHN F. SWIFT,
One of the Commissioners who on our part
negotiated the treaty, and send you the SUBJ
stance of the interview for publication At
the first business meeting of the United
| States and Chinese Plenipotentiaries an ex-
change of views took place as to what was
wanted by both parties. Basing their action
on that interview, the Chinese Commissioners
presented articles setting forth their position
in the premises. Through the courtesy Of
Mr.. Swift am enabled to lay before you
these articles, which have not yet been made
public on the Pacific coast. After the usual
l.. Al Al.
treaty as adopted. Article reads as follows :.
ARTICLE I.
The United States, in regulating the immi-
grafton of Chinese laborer5 to California,
will limit the number who may enter the
ports of the State, but will not prohibit such
| immigration. Only such Chinese will be in
cluded in this limitation as are found, after
careful examination at the time of their en-
try into ports of California under rules to be
established by the United States, to be actual
laborers. Any regulations for limiting such
Immigration shall only be such as to hinder
the entry of immigrants of class specified
to the ports named, and shall not impose dis
abilities of any kind or class upon such i'm
migrants.
THE WORD "PRoHIBIT.n
This, 1t will be seen, differs from the article
in the treaty as concluded, in applying a re-
striction only to California ports. The Com
missioners rectided that, but the Chinese in
sisted that the word "prohibt should not
be used. In the discussion of that point it
was clearly developed that the power of reg
ulation, limitation Or suspension, SIS given in
! the treaty as concluded, meant ii desired
total prohibition except in the matter of
time. It meant that the United States
should at any time have the right to stop the
immigration of laborers entirely, for
a month, q year or twenty years
but the Chinese Commissioners would
not place themselves in the posi-
ton of binding their Government and
their infant Emperor to perpetual prohibit
ton of the right Of emigration to America.
This does away with Mr.. Davis objection,
that the, treaty does not make it competent
for our Government to prohibit Chinese i'm
migration. The concession was the greatest
the Chinese would entertain on that point.
THE SECOND ARTICLE
Of the Chinese draft also covers the same
ground as in the accepted treaty:
| Article II. Chinese who may be desiroas of
| proceeding to any other part of the United
/ States for purposes OF labor excepting only
the State of California, shall be allowed to
| go of their own free will and accord. Per-
sons of all other classes, with the exception
of actual Chinese laborers, whose immigra-
| ton into California will be temporarily regu-
lated and limited by tine United States,
! whether proceeding to California as teachers,
students, travellers, traders or artisans, as
| well as Chinese laborers now in that State,
will be allowed to go and come with entire
/ freedom, and will not be included in the
| limiting regulations.
| THE WORD "LABoRERs"
This differs widely, it will be seen, from
the second article as accepted. Our Com
missioners made an especial contest over The
exemption of artisans, demanding that all ar.
tisans and handicraftsmen be included in the
term laborers, which was finally conceded
and clearly understood. This disposes of the
point as to the construction to be put on the
words "laborers now in this country to come
and go at their pleasure, as expressed in the
| treaty as concluded. Mr.. Swift explains that
it is the province of Congress to make such
regulations as will prevent the Importation of
fresh Chinese in the nominal place of any
returning from here to their own country.
This may be effected by requiring the
production of certificate, or in some such
manner. In any event the only evil that
could possibly result from this clause would
be.of an unimportant character.
NATURALIZATION.
Article III. is the same as in the accepted
treaty and is the one which seems to have
mainly inspired the resolutions of Messrs.
Glascock and Davis, inasmuch as it guar
antees to Chinese subjects in this
country all the rights, privileges, immu-
mites and exemptions which are accorded to
citizens and subjects of the most favored ma
tions, and is in these resolutions construed to
confer the right of citizenship. On this point
MIR. Swift dilated at some length. He held
that nothing is more clearly and completely
established than that the question of natural
ization is wholly in the hands of Congress, and
is the subject of statutory provisions tina. no
subject or citizen of any foreign country,
black, white or red, has any right, natural or
acquired, by treaty to naturalization, and
that in comforting upon the Chinese the rights |