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

they are adopted that that provision of tho pr,;,,
game treaty becomes stricken out and is no onga
any parl OF the treaty; and that the very cIa,3s[
which was intended should take away anv c1, ~
naturazaticIl-that very clause is abropated by ~
ratification of this treaty. ~ '''e
Now, then, it seems to me, Mr.. President and
that is the position take-that the Chinese nndar
this treaty have right to come to this country tha
same as the people from any other foreign conntrv
and that they have just the rights to citizen
ship that the Engishman, who comes from Victoria
! or Australia or England, has; the Frenchrnan
| who comes from France or the Mexican who comes
from Mexico; that they come here on just the same
footing exactly. Now, it is said on the other side
that Congress regulates this question that Com
gress by its naturalization laws says who shall he
naturalized and who shall not be- 1t is VERY true
the law does state that. But you have 80 90 still
turther, and say that the United States shall not
discriminate among the classes of people who come
mere, all OF whom are accorded all the rights and
privileges that belong to the ctizena of the most
| favored nations. Now, would like to have some
senator point out to me people from any country
with which the United States Government has re-
lations, with whom it has 'reates-I would like to
nave you point out to me any people from any coun-
try that would not be entitled 10 citizenship rnder
the naturalization laws. My proposition is that rn-
der the provisions of the Burlingame treaty and
TINS supplemental treaty, the Government has no
ilsht-t has the power-it has right to prohibit
the naturalization of Cinnamon.
Mr.. Enos-Has not the General Government the
power and the right, if there was no treaty in ex
iatencs to prohibit by Congressional legislation the
MIR Davis Undoubtedly so, sir. But we have a
treaty OF comfy and amity with the various ma
tions, England, France, Germany and Mexico. and
with all the powers of Europe, even going to the
Sandwich Islands. Now, the people II these ma.
tons have the right to come here forswear their
allegiance to their native country and become citi-
'zens Of the United States every one of them How
then will any say that the citizens Of the EN-
pire of China, who come here under these treaties
the same as other people come have not the same
right? say they have, and that Congress has no
right to deny it to them
Mr. ChaSe-A question -
Mr Davis-l would Ike for Senators TO wait till 7
get through. don't mind being interrupted every
two minutes, but when it comes TO a question every
minute must object. Now, say the Government
of the United States has right to deny them this
pTivilegei and why? just for the same reason
tnat it -
HAS NO RIGHT TO PROHIBIT THE EEGLISHMAN,
Who comes here from England from becoming
citizen say the United States can do it, provided
prohibit every people from every nation, because
then the Act is uniform. 1t would be treat
ing the people OF every nationality alike with re-
spect TO this matter. But this treaty says the peo-
pie of Ch ma shall be accorded all the rights and all
the privileges and all the umunities that are ac-
corded to the people of England, or France or any
ether nation. Doe.nt it say so? Isn't it
one Of the rights accorded to the people Of
England, and to all the other foreign ma
tions who leave their native country, foreswear
allegiance to it, and became citizens of the United
States. Is not this right accorded to thanl Then
if that be SO, that these people are entitled all
the rights which the people Of other foreign nations
entitled to, then, say, the United States Gov
ernment has right to discriminate as against the
Chinese. That they have just the same right TO
come here and become naturalized citizens as the
people from any other country on the face OF the
globe. Ii the United States Government should I'm
dertake to pass laws prohibiting the naturalization
OF the Chinese, | say it would be passing law in
direct violation of the treaty provisions between
this country ami the Empire of China. That is the
position which take on this question. 1t is poss-
BILE may be wrong but cannot see it in any ther
light. Ii l am wrong in this view, then my reso-
lutons are wrong | will admit that. But TO my
mind think the practical working of cur naturaii-
zaton laws bears me out that under treaty with
the Chinese Empire that naturalization has been
conferred uron some of these people and think
il will be still easier under this sup emenal tr ty
which We have Lefure u.s. FOR this reason am
OPPOSED TO THE RATIFICATION OF THE TREATY.
| am further opposed to it because it takes away
from the Government the power to say to these peo
pie, You shall not come. know it may seem an
extreme view to say that law should be passed
prohibiting any one from coming here. But in re-
speet to this am free to say that in my opinion
such provision should be had. We know bv ex-
perience here that the Chinese are bad element
that they do no good in any way, unless it may be
to some OF the capitalists who make use of nem
but that is nothing. | say they undtsrzb BILE
element in this country, and that their comuL mere
should not be encouraged should not be tolerated,
because it will lead to grave consequences by
and by.
Now read an editorial article in one Of the morn
ing papers this morning, speaking Of the resolu-
tions under consideration, and saying that they
ought not to pass 1t took up what | claim to be
the only argument that has been advanced by the
people of the Pacific coast, which is entitled to the
consideration OF the people of the East or that has
received the consideration of the people of the
East and that was that the Chinese are an unde-
sirab.e element, for the reason that
THRY ARE NOT AssDIILAT1vE.
That they do not adopt the habits and customs OF
American life that they do not come here as other
foreigners come, for the purpose of mIngiine with
u.s. but that they element that will not sssin-
ilate. Now, this editorial goes to say that
going back on our own theory. That while We have
heretofore said we did not want them here because
they would not asspi ate we turn round
and say We do not want them here because they
may assimilate. Now, Mr.. President. do not care
what view is taken of this thing. IL is enough for
me to know that in instance, in my opinion,
would they be desirable element in this country.
My opinion is, we have too much assimilation now.
there is anything that this people is cursed wiyh
it is with too much assimilation. believe that
every people, from every country, who can come
hare with American thought, and American feel
ceucy, ought TO be encouraged to come here
and become portion Of But any people
who cannot do these thin gs, vhp cannot feel
and in4hibe the spirit OF our institutions,
an undesirable element that We ought not to en-
courage in coming and should not be granted the
rights of American citizenship.