National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1882-03-02

MNopNl' lLMrir-l uion veteran Corps Fair
The Chinese Question.
1t is not in the Constitution of the
United States that this country is declared
10 be the "asylum" for even " the OPP
pressed of all nations" much less for
their overflow and slops. But it is none
the less true that in this great Republic
Sn asylum may he found by all worthy
men who seek TO enjoy and uphold lib
erty Of opinion, speech, and action.
To what extent, then, has the United
States invited immigration from all lands,
and to what extent is there an obligation
io receive all comcrs, whether thus in
Vitcd or not? Nations are in duty bound
10 care first and most for their own peo-
pie. Rulers are trustees for not only the
present generation but for those to come.
sentimentality and philanthropy, which
may be practiced by individuals are
denied TO those in charge of the dcstinies
Of great people. Selr-intcrest is the
guiding principle of every nation, and
those Entrusted with its power are for
bidden, by the law Of agency or trust
under which they act to indulge in the
qualification of their emotions and senti-
ments at the expense of the common
wealth, or at any risk of its future well
fre.
The trainers of the Constitution granted
TO Congress the power to enact uniform
naturalization laws. Congress has never
construed this as imposing upon it the
duty of providing for the naturalization
of all who might choose to come. There
is no invitation, expressed or implied, in
any clause of the Constitution, or in any
section Of the statutes, for MI who choose
10 make this land their home. The nat
lr9lization laws contain the only ex-
prcssions to be found on the subject, and
from their operation all are excluded who
have not become devoted TO a republican
and constitutional government. The
language is explicit, 1t is us follows:
II shall be made TO appear To the sa'i,iuc'ion of
a.. court admitting such alien that he has resided
within the United States five years at least aud
within the State or Territory where such court is
n the time held one ycar at least, and that
during that time he has behaved rs a man of good
moral character attached 10 the prhlcipes 0fHc Con-
uhdioH " the Cni'cd state, aud well disposed to
tHp kpyNl uluNl anu HhpllutHh OF INC hhUe.--Kc-
ttsci Sdt1ttc3 Sc. 2l6j SUbd. 3.
If anyjudge hasat any time admitted to
citizenship an alien who did not first prove
10 his satisfaction that he had sufficient
knowledge of " the principles of the Con-
btitution" to enable him to be at
tached' thereto, then that judge is for
sworn. The same is true of any Judge
who may have admitted to citizenship
any alien who, knowing the principles of
our Constitution, was not attached to
them.
Ours is a republican government, and
under its laws faithfully administered no
man from abroad can enter the body
polite who does not prefer our system
above all others. Thus our land may be
said to offer au asylum TO those only of
the oppressed Of all nations who come
within the requirements of our natural
ization laws They must believe in our
governmental doctrine, and be otherwise
worthy of our association.
What expressed obligation is there
then for the admission of the masses of
the Chinese people? What unfriendli-
LGan Nphuiu lllt NlllIltSt RbNtIHlltub
can be alleged against us if we say by
statute, as we have already agreed with
them by recent treaty Your people
and ours do not get along well together,
and We had better keep them separated
in order to avoid irritations which may
in time involve the two countries. Let
MS trade with each other and be friends,
but do not let us allow our people to come
In contact, which, ms time has shown,
means only collision and disorder?'
"The right Of eXpatriation," for which
We have successfully Contended as against
the doctrine of perpetual allegiance"
does not throw open our gates to any
who are not to become citizens We as
serted that right in behalf Of our citizens
and those who might become so, and not
as an invitation for an Asiatic or other
exodus TO this country. The treaty with
China Of 1868 did contain an assertion of
that right, but it was entirely out Of
place there, because in the same treaty
we declined to accept the allegiance of
the very people whose right of expatria-
tion was thus asserted, This improvi-
dent and illogical declaration has been
virtually rescinded by the recent treaty
with China.
The undesirability Of Chinese immi-
grafton has been stated and restated
with every degree of moderation and
vehemence. Upon that branch of the
subject we will not enter, 1t is certain
that the Chinese have no vocabulary in
which TO be even made acquainted with
free institutions, They do not claim to
be oppressed" by the imperial system
which has ruled in China for fifty CEN
turies, and they are not seeking political
or religious liberty in this country. For
these reasons il would be unlawful to ad-
init them to citizenship Whatever