Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-04-06
THE VETO SUSTAINED.
SHARP CRITICISM OF THE PREsI-
DENTS MESSAGE.

SHARP CKlTlCISM OF THE PREsI-
DENTS MESSAGE.
Senator Bayard's Speech In Defence OF the
Ant-Chinese Bill Passed by Congress.
The presidents Veto came up before the
pass the anti-Chinese bill failed to receive
the necessary two-thirds. The vote was
| 20 to 25-except that Messrs. Cameron of
Wisconsin, Jones of Nevada and Miller of
California voted yea with the Democrats.
Mr. Davis. of Illinois, and MIR. Malone
voted nay with the Republicans.
Mr. Sherman moved to refer the bill
and m essage to the committee on foreign
relations, and supported and elaborated
the objections Of the president, and par
ticularly Of the Chinese minister, and
| urged that as there was no occasion for
haste, the measure should be carefully per-
| fected in committee with view of Obvi-
ating these objections.
Mr.. Garland expressed tho opinion that
| i'll view OF the prOtracted discussions OF
| the measure in the Senate and House it
was improbable that any new light could
| be thrown upon it; that as intelligent
action could be had at this time as we'll as
at any other the only purpose Of the pro-
posed reference was to bury the bill.
Mr.. Bayard said it was useless for the
friends Of the bill to expect, by referring. it,
to change its features in accordance with
the presidents objection. He proposed to
answer the sole objection upon which the
president had seen fit to return the bill,
and to show that it had no justification in
fact, no justification in comfy, and no
justification upon aGy pretence to dig
nified and respectful consideration by ono
branch of the government for another. AS
! to the presidents announcement that ga
nation is justified in repudiatipg its treaty
obligations only when they are in con-
tlict with great paramount interests"
Mr.. Bayard said he had always
understood reputation to be dis
claimcr of obligations, and therefore he re-
garded it unsound in equity to announce
that there could be any reputation in
treaty obligations. Furthermore, nothing
could he found in the action of Congress
to justify this further objection upon
which the veto was based. Characterizing
the statements of the veto on the point as
having been given in very strong and
what seemed to some persons, and to him
self, as very coarse language, he said the
phraseOlOgy did not seem to be that which
ought properly to characterize communi-
| =
this government. The language, coming
from the executive in regard to an act of
Congress deliberately discussed and passed
by both Houses and unanimously recon
mended by a committee of the Senate,
was an impugnment of the act of Congress
and Of the votes of those who passed it.
That comfy which though unwritten was
as essential for the good government of
this country as the unwritten law had
been lost sight of.
| In respect to the president s understand
ing of the agreement between the COM
missioners who negotiated the treaty as to
| the period of the suspension of the coming
of Chinese laborers, Mr.. Bayard asserted
that the whole canon of Interpretation as
presented by the veto was unwarranted.
| Aside from the fact that we cannot look
at what preceded this diplomacy except
upon the ground that there is Obscur;ty or
| ambiguity in the text Of the treaty which
cannot otherwise be elucidated-a rule re-
peatedly reiterated by the courts and re-
Gently laid down by the supreme court of
the United States-the facts did not justify
the presidents assumption.
| Promising that he would adopt the same
facts and the same source of facts which
the executive had resorted to, Mr.. Bayard
took up and read at length from the
memoranda of the conversations between
the commissioners pending the negotia-
tions to show that the Chinese government
and it's commissioners voluntarily conced
ed that the power to regulate, limit or
suspend the coming of Chinese laborers
into this country was by the treaty vested
solely in the discretion of the government
of the United States. This fact was ad-
| H. fof nc
clear and positive This power was spoken
of in the veto as "uniIateral," and it
might be so termed but it was conceded
not by a unilateral vote, but by the cOn-
sent Of both nations. He asked special
attention to the definition given by the
Chinese representatives as to what they
| considered to DO 4 reasonable re-
striction as to numbers. This was that
the government of the United States
| would prevent a greater number coming
in any one year than the minimum or
maximum of departures in the preceding
year, and further, that tho total of those
already here should never be exceeded.
Was that or not q less reasonable limita-
ton upon the immigration than twenty
years suspension? lie submitted tie
question to the practical sense OF man.
kind. When it was recognized that the
great body of Chinese laborers in Califor-
mia arc young men !; that their natural
existence will be prolonged by their
bettered condition that as there are
females among them the average. of
loss by death will be compensated
| by natural increase, it would
he seen that their total number in tho
country will be substantially the same at
| the end of twenty years that it is now.
| The logical result of the voluntary conces-
| sion of the Chinese authorities amounted
not only to a prohibition for twenty years,
but to perpetual prohibition of the CON-
ing of any more of that class, because the
number in this country was never to ex-
ceed the total of those here at the time tho
treaty was made. Therefore, it followed
| that the congressional Interpretation of
| the treaty fixing twenty years as reasona-
bic limitation was urassailable, and stood
| long way inside of the proposition of the
Chinese themselves-that under no cir
cumstances should the number of their
people in this country ever he increased.
Further, Congress has adopted precisely
| that meaning of the word "laborers {"
which was accepted by tho commissioners
| themselves that is to say the artisans,
meaning skilled laborers, should not be
allowed to come in and return.
Mr.. Sherman suggested that the use of
the term "skilled," as applied to laborers,
instead of the word "labOrers" alone, as
prescribed by the treaty. was one of the
objections to the bill made by the Chinese
minister and which the nreSident had re-