Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-03-13
WHOLE NO. 1O,887.

decided by the Supreme Court of the tinted
9.ai,s ~ TIE case of Chew Hong against the
| United States -'S
1t is clsimed that the Chinese laporrrs who,
were never in the United States seek. by false
testimony, TO prove that they were here at the
cate OF the treaty and therefore have n right IN
return, ana IN that way effect an entry into the
country without the right to do so under the
treaty contrary to the provisions of the restrict
I've I've Aet. No evidence has been shown OF any
eoiislaeraDle evasion of the law in this wav
anu, certainty, under the circumstances it is
very diihcult 10 believe that any considerab BILE
iuulher OF such evaslons could have been at
", a,S,ihpted, or II attempted. could have succeeded
I ne evidence of toe great diminution in num-
per OF Chlrese laborers in the country since the
passage OF The restrictive Act proves III at there
mas oeen II considerable or dangerous evasion
OF the provision of these Acts In this belief
thc undersigned respectfully represents that no
sarv. - ~
The Act recommended by the majority of the
SUB committee. as has been stated in their re-
port contained four leading points First-The
" Taii pToVlaes TO tnat any Chinaman going abroad
ms night TO return to the United States by an ab-
senee OF TWO years This provision in the bill
is IN dlrec. eonnict with all the treaties between
the tnlted states and China. The Burlingame
treaty conferred upon Chinese subjects the
same rights Of immigration to the United States
70 travel and reside here, as were enjoyed by
citizens AID subjects OF the most favored ma
tions When the immigration of Chinese la
borers had reached the point that the great mi
nority OF our citizens on the Pacific coast be-
lleyed 1t to be detrimental to the institutions
and the character and the Interests of cur peo-
pie, and sought to alleviate this condition of
things by legislation, the Burlingame treaty pre-
vented the desired legislation and the Act
posed by Congress was vetoed by the President
as in violation of our treaty obligations. and
ialled to become law. Our Government then
adopted the proper course under the cirrrn,
stances. 1t negotiated new treaty with China
in which, without abrogating the Ruriingalne
treaty. 1t was agreed TO modify it so far that the
Government OF the United States might regtl-
laie the limit or suspend the coming of the
Chinese laborers TO the United States or their
residence therein, but that it should not
absolutely prohibit them. and that the limita-
ton or suspension should be reasonable. Ii also
provided that Chinese laborers in the United
states at that time to wit November H. 1890
should be allowed to go and come of their own
Tree VIII and accord, and be accorded all the
rights privileges, iInmunities and exemptions
which are accorded to citizens and subjects of
the most favored nations. The system OF GER
thcates required by the restrictive Acts is some
thing that is required of citizens of no othern ma
ton: but it may perhaps be argued that these
certificates are necessary for identification of
the persons using them, and do not deprive
them OF any rights TO go and come, such as is
enjoyed by citizeHs of most favored natious
But certainly this cannot be argued in defense
OF the provisions of this bill, that "every Chi
nese luborer who having been in the United
states and had departed theretrom and re-
manned absent for q period of two Years shall
be deemed to have remained away permanently
and abandoned his right 10 return His right
TO return under the treaties, both original and
supplemental, is absolute and unlimited, and it
is impossible TO argue that limitation as to thai
right. as proposed in this bill as anything less
than an infringement aud violation OF that alb
solute and unlimited right
The second provision, accomplished by the
bill as stated by the majority, is the extension
of the restrictive Acts for twenty years from the
date of the amendatcry Act The restrictive
Act, as has already been stated, will continue in
Aot he ton
force until 1856. One OF the principal reasons
stated by President Arthur in his veto message
of this restrictive act passed under the Supple
mental Treaty, which message mhy be found in
the Congressional Record of the Forty-seventh
Congress, first session. April 4 1882, was that it
provided for suspension of the coming of the
Chinese laborers into the United States for
twenty years from the passage of the Act In
that message the President reviewed the history
of the supplemental treaty and the negotiations
by which il was cOnsummated and concluded
by the following statement THE exanina-
tions which / have made of the treaty and
of the declarations which the negotiators
have left on record Of the meaning Of the
language, leaves no doubt in my mind
that neither contracting party i'll conclId-
ing the treaty of 1870 contemplated the
passage of an Act prohibiting immigration for
twenty years. which is nearly a generation or
thought that such a period would be a reason
able suspension or limitation. or intended to
change the provisions of the Burlingame Treaty
to that extent ] regard this provision of the
Act u breach Of our national faith, and being
unable to bring myself in harmony with the
views ofC ngTess on this vital point the honor
of the country constrains me to return the Act
with this objection to its passage" In this
view Congress concurred, and it was only by re-
dueing the term of the operation TO ten wears
instead 81 twenty, and thus avoiding the Presi-
dents objection to that extent. that the Act was
passed. The objections so well stated By Presi-
dent Arthur and accepted by Congress at that
time surely operate with greater force against
the proposed bill. which would sdd the full
term of twenty years objected to by the Presi-
dent 10 the four years during which the re-
strctive Acts have already been in force.
The undersigned does not care to waste time
in discussing the provisions of the BILL in the
other two points stated by the majority of the
subcommittee. They appear to him superfiuous
and frivolous. but if they would stop the small
est opening to this immigration. or crafty the
most far fetched and imaginative effort after
thor0ughness OF execution, he would not object
sections of the bill which provide for the abso-
lutte loss of right to return to this country after
an absence of two years and for the extension
of the total suspension of Chinese immigration
for further term of twenty years, he must most
unqualifiedly object as being in violation of our
treaty obligations with China. We should not
dare to violate a treaty with any nation able to
sssert its rights, and we should be ashamed to
do that against a weak nation which we would
not dare TO do against a strong one. 1t is diff
cult 10 see what can be gained by these proposed
amendments The distant immigration has
been stopped, the number of Chinese laborers in
the country has been reduced TO such an extent
that there is danger even now that the sIlnply of
laborers in California will be insufficient to har-
VI st he crops of the present year.
Ii Is claimed that the repre- sentatives from
California are unanimously in favor of the pas
sage of the bill. and the undersigned makes no
question that they represent a powerful and
perhaps, prevailing sentiment of the Pacific
coast but surely those who are remote from the
exciting causes which influence that sentiment
may consider Y neither the honor and dignity of
the milton win be affected by the passage Of
the bill. or whether any real necessities OF the
people of the Pacific coast require it, That
Copgre has right to abrogate the treaty may
not be questioned. but it should not exercise
that right except in great emergencies and for
Nle gravest reasons. 1t may surely be conf
deStly asserted, in view of all the facts proved,
or which may be believed to exist If it is neees-
sary to extend the terms of the suspension of
Chinese immigration as proposed by this bill. or
to prohibit it altogether. or 70 violate the right
of the Chinese who were In this country at the
date of the treaty of November II. 1880.
to go and return of their own free will.
then, in the judgment of the under
signed, 1t should be accomplished in the
same way as-the supplemental treaty of 1880 was
obtained, by frank aud honorable negotiations
with the Government OF China, for which there
is ample time. There is no extraordinary emer-
geucy or overruling necessity to Justify us in
the ex parte abrogation of solemn treaty pledges
sought for by ourselves, when there Is every
probability that everything necessary can be
tiations.
The yalue of our commercial intercourse with
China may be weighed in the balance by the
residents of the Pacific coast and counted as
nothing against the danger they apprehend
from the immigration of Chinese laborers, but
Congress should not forget that the commerce
oil the East has been source of wealth to the
most civilized people, and has been sought for
by Our nation with great effort and expense
Already our grain our cotton clothes and most
important of all. our silver, whose surplus pro-
Duct Is just now giving us SO much trouble are
finding market in China. Let us not hazard
the loss of that market by hasty. ungenerous
and hostile legislation.