Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-01-25

the past, which legal lunnary ought we 70 ~
our researches after the proper constitutional sense
of bill or law or treaty! say we had better Ioi-
| low the Senator from Yubl, because the supreme
Court of this State has said that upon the one prep
osion presented by them he was super II IN h,s re-
search 20 his learned and able antagonist the Sem
ator from Marin.
The next proposition advanced, as understand
him was ole so strange to me so opposed TO every
decision of every Court in every ciVllze1 or uIciv
ilized nation in the world opposed TO every line
of history whether 1t be in the old or IN the new
world so opposed to everything that IS found In the
books that wondered at hearing the argument re-
iterated even in the smooth and oratorical manner
in which it was by the Senator from harlt de says
thar the proposition laid down in the Buriingame
treaty. which recognizes the right of a citizen OF
China or OF America, to orswear his allegiance, is
AN INALUESABLE RIGHT OF EVERY MAN
Recognized by all natons. l deny the proposition
as being opposed to the current Of decisions
and the lessons OF history hat is propo-
sition, Mr.. President, for which this country,
and this country alone, has fought for years. The
of 1872 against Great Britain fought by the
United States to establish the doctrine that an
Euglishman, or an Irishman, or a Scotchman or a
weshman had right to forswear allegiance to the
British Crown and become subject Of the United
States. And it needed blood, and treasure, and
time and toll to settle that question; and Oday,
Mr.. President, there is not man who owes ale
glance to Queen Victoria who becomes naturaliZed
by virtue Of any inaenable right recognized by
that sovereign or by the law Of nations, but simply
and solely because OF tie naturalization laws OF
America, which recognized as binding by treat.
les between the two countries, and because
the United States fought for and conquered the
principle from Great Britain. Why, Mr.. President,
other nations DO not recognize this principle, for at
this very moment men born in Germany and natur-
allied in the United States undergoing impFison-
ment in Germany, and serving in the armies Of Ger
many, notwithstanding their naturalization, and
utterly regardless of the socalled nalieDable right
Of man to forswear his allegiance. Mr.. President,
| ia hrrta raxxy auO hat q m
mento city whom | well knew, named Gabriel -,
an italian who had come to this country, who had
reared for himself q home, who had acquired prop
erty, who had become a naIurazed citizen, who had
voted for years in Sacramento county went back to
Italy, and there presented his naturalization papers
as being citizen Of America. He was met by the
response from the Italian authorities
ONCE AN ITALIAN, ALWAYS AN ITALIAN,
And compelled to and did serve three years in the
Italian army. This was brought to the atteh-
ton Of the United States authorities, and they
found themselves powerless to act lallude to tins
Mr.. President Gs being case within my own knowl-
eige, 1 having assisted in preparing some of the
papers, and having signed all that were brought to
me- order to bring the case to the attention OF the
authorities. a gentleman sitting here on my LETT
knows the man. who is member OF the Society
that he belongs to. The Senator from Yuba also
remembers the case. | allude to this particular
case and call attention to the general action OF for
egn countries to show that the Senator Is incorrect
in his proposition that the right to forswear alegi-
ance is an ina ienable right Of man. recognized by
the law of nations and the practice of mankind. 1t
is not, sir. 1t is merely recognized in the United
States, because il is the basis of our Government
it is one Of the foundation stones upon which this
republic is built but We only are permitted by for
egu nations to naturaiZe their citizens because OF
comfy and treaties OF peace made with them, or
because We have conquered the right upon the field
of battle.
The next proposition that the Senator from Marin
makes is also opposed, in my Judgment, to law
also opposed to the Constitution OF the United
States (Which he says he recognizes supreme( 1t
is that naturalization law passed by Congress is
superior to everything, treaties, laws or Constitu
ton of the United States. Sir deny the PROPOSE
ton maintain that under the provisions of the
Constitution OF the United States relied upon by the
Senate,
TREATY IS THE SUPREME LAW OF THE
LAND,
Because the Constitution of the United States says
So Article vi. of the Constitution says that all
treaties made, or which shall he made under the
authority of the United States shall be the supreme
law of the land Why, Mr.. President, l heard
that sent into our ears many times last session
by the Senator from the Thrteehth, Mr. Hittell,
ami by the Senator from the Tenth, Mr.. Dickinson,
that il to me as though evtn the Senator from
Marin should have RENE nlbered it ; because he was
found voting side by side with myself upon all the
Chinese measures OF the last session. notwithstand
ing the arguments made by those Senators have
named, that our l.ws were in conflict with the
Burllngame treaty, by reason OF the provision OF
the Constitution have just read.
The next proposition to which he gave his atten-
ton was in regard to the construction OF the word
"whte." have the same views upon the meaning
of that word today thai had day before yesterday,
when offered some remarks upon this subject, to
wit that the word "vhite in the naturalization
laws means exactly what the Judge passing upon it
says it means /; that there is not to-day any
decision, to my knowledge, nor to the knowl-
edge Of the Senator from Marin, any
other Senator upon this floor, Of the highest
judicial tribunal in the United States as TO the
meaning of the word '' white in the naturalization
laws passed by Congress; that the meaning of the
word white " is Just what the Judge passing upon
the proposition may say it's 1t hath that extent,
no more. The Senator from Marin, In celebrating
his ideas up5n this subject, asks, Who ever saw
white Chinaman?" answer, have. have seen
cHINAMEN AS WHITE AS SOME MEMBERS
OF this Legislature. l saw lhinamen in the streets
of New York city when was there last season that
could not have tod from white men but for their
Introduction to as being natives Of China. And
! apprehtnd there other Senators upon this floor
who have seen Cinnamon 50 white that they could
have been told from the gent rality of white peo
pie, except by Introduction statements.
But, sir, the Senator goes to say,
in answer to question by the Senator
from Yuba in which the latter calls attention to the
factnot to the theory, not to the idea which might
be advanced oratoricaly and elOquentiy, and forci
bly-but TO the fact that Cinnamon have been natu-
rallied, and that Cinnamon do vote now III the
United States that Cinnamon did vote at the last
election for President Of the United States | my
self a Cinnamon in political procession when
East-it nota Republican procession, either,
permit me to remark. In view OF the fact
that Cinnamon do vote and naturaliZed the
Senator from Marin says-assuming to himself the
very power and prerogative which he has denied to
the Senator from Yuba, when he asked him SO elo-
quently how he dared to overrule the decisions OF
the Courts-the Senator says he overrides every
decision of every Court in the United States that
baye naturaliZed Cinnamon. and that Judges de-
Gliding should be impeached 1t seems to me that
the bald statement of the proposition ought to be
enough to consign it to the limbo for claptrap, that
the Senator from Marin says he is opposed to.
Judges as able and learned in the law as Judge
Sawyer-Judgej Belts of New Yors, his peer in
every respect-have decided that Cinnamon can be
naturalized. The Judge OF the United States Court
in Cincinnati, whose name now escapes me, has de-
cided the same thing, accompanying his decision
with an elaborate argument, and the Judges of
other Courts have done the same thing and yet
the Senator from Marin says
THOSE JUDGES COMMITTED PERJURY.
Sometimes Mr.. President, have been accused OF
using strong language when it was unnecessary.
Sometimes the report has come to me from aged men
and venerable Senators that, as young man, used
strong expressions but my remarks nave perhaps
always been warranted, at least they had some
foundation But even aged Senator ought to be
careful when he accuses Judge Of United States
Court Of having committed perjury.
The ca upon which he relies, and the only de-
cision upon which he relies. of United States
Court that rendered by the Uni'ed States Circuit
Court at San Francisco--Judge Sawyer presiding
/ believe. | simply wish, as bearing upon the
weight of his authority, to call attention 10 the fact
that Judge Sawyer is the same Judge who decided
all our Chinese legislation Of the last session to be
unconstitutional and he seemed to strive hard 20
lean that way. His decisions all that way, in
favor If extreme Capitalization OF power i'll the
national Government, aud he has always been since
drawing a Federal salary, apparently strengthening
his own power indirectly. He has decided that he
knew more then a large majority Of the people OF
unconstitutional and perhaps he does, but do
not believe it. give him credit for one thing lie
has made a rule and he sticks to it, that is all.
Inasnuch as | have great respect for his learn
ing and purify OF character, but very little,
if any, for his pro-Chnese decisions,
will not follow the bad example Of the
Senator from Marin, and say he is guilty of
perjury will simply say that III the judgm mt of
an humble citizen of this State, speaking now, per-
haps, from workingman's standpoint, as does fire.
quently our f'iend, Senator Kane, Judge Sawyer
made mistake.
upon the proposition to show how weak treaty
was as az inst law, particularly the naturalization
law and as listened to the authorities he read and
commented upon with such force and with such
zeal, was reminded Of story that heard many
years ago. of a boy whose father a minister,
and who had fallen from grace; who did
not obey the wishes or carry out the coun-
sells of his father, and who was engaged in
many bad transactions, among which was stealing
certain goods, Chickens etc, the property OF his
neghbors When called to account by his father
for his misconduct, he said: "wty, father, am
simply obeying the dictates OF that Bible which you
said must obey" "Why, my son, what do you
meanfs said the old man, horriied at the appa-
rent sacrilegious expression. Why, father. the
Bible says 'le. him that stole steal 80, my son,
e