The Tombstone epitaph., 1882-04-17
WHAT SWIFT DID SAH
On the Subject of the Chinese Treat,

missioner John F. Swift appeared in the Sacramento Record Union of Friday last, and gives clean expo sition of his understanding of the treaty and what took place during its 
 EDITORS RECORD -UNIoN-The ar- ticle in the Record Union of yester- day, based upon an alleged inter- view between myself and reporter of the San Francisco Morning Call upon the China treaty, seems to re quire an explanation from me. The San Francisco Evening Post, writing upon the same supposed utterances, takes similar grounds as your jour- nal. An unexpected call to this city to attend funeral of a dead friend renders it impossible to make the proper correction Tn San Francisco in time. The gentleman who re ported the interview in the Call, while giving accurately enough much that did say, has misunderstood, and, therefore, misrepresented me as stating for discussed and agreed facts between the commissioners what l only gave him as my opinions upon what the Chinese government thought and desired. For what 1 did actually say upon the subject, l respectfully call attention to an in terview with a Chronicle reporter, published the same day. 1 said to both the Chronicle and Call reporters in substance that l had no doubt that the Chinese government fully expected that tine United States government would take all necessary time to correct any evil growing out of the immigration of Chinese labor CTS, and that it was distinctly agreed that what might be necessary time, whether ten years or fifty years, the United States was to be the sole and only judge. l did not say that it was agreed that thirty years, or any named time, would be necessary or adopted. 1 said that the Chinese government, as 1 understood them, relied upon the good faith of the American government not to take more time than was necessary to accomplish the desired result And thinking as l do that an entire generation, under the pc uliar cir cumstances of the case, was as little time as would operate to place this coast in the normal condition of a homogeneous community of people like that of the Atlantic States or Europe. 1 had no doubt, and have no doubt that thirty = three years would have been perfectly satisfac' tory to the authorities at Picking I said to the reporter that the Chi nese Government, in my opinion was not deslrous of having their peo pie emigrate, and that they would probably make no complaint if tn, prohibition was to be perpetual
 From what I saw in China 1t is my opinion that had the Fifteen-pa sen ger Act passed into law, although i
 was in the very teeth of the Burlln
 game treaty, no objection would have been made by the Chinese Gov
 ernment. 1 believe that so far a China is concerned no new treaty
 was necessary before prohibiting th' immigration of Chinese laporers. Tn, treaty was only necessary Tn orde
 to remove the objections of our owl government to legislation agains
 the provisions of the BurlIngam
 treaty. The Chinese would not,
 think, have found fault had we don' so. The real opposition to the re
 striction of Chinese immigration comes, not from China, but from th' citizens of the United States, who
 expect to make money out of cheaE lahor, regardless of every other econ
 omic, social or political consider
 ation. 1 have never known all,
 American or European resident O
 China who thinks the Chinese Gov
 ernment want their people to migrat
 or that they would claim it as valu
 able right that their people shoul'
 come to this or any other country
 The force that sets the Chinese tc
 moving in this direction, and oppose
 restrictions being placed upon tn
 movement, has its base and standin!
 ground in this country alone. ] has no stauding in China. And il
 my humble opinion the most of tn
 supersensibility over the irviolahl
 obligation of treaties about whic
 we have heard so much in this con
 nection comes not so much iron
 exaggerated respect for internationa obligation as from desire to con
 tinue the importation of Chimes
 coolies as cheap laborers. The ne' treaty was understood by all parties to allow the United States to "regu-
 late," "limit" and "suspend" th' , coming of Chinese laborers to th
 country as long as It was, in the opln ion of the United States, in any man
 ner detrimental to their interests } Every hint or suggestion of the Chi
 nese Commissioners looking to Chin
 having any voice in determin ing the circumstances or extent o any action to be taken by this gov ernment was sternly repudiated a even the oasis of discussion by tn Amarican Commissioners as the pro