Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-09-02
State Department, to await the confirm
alton of the original dispatch, before

dblOh OA Wiz OiiSiAdl dlSPdtShy OCAOAO
taking steps to meet the emergency.
Morrow said the Senate amendments
to the treaty submitted by the President
were vital, and without them, thought
the treaty would be ineffective The
amendments caused the rejection of
the treaty by the Chinese Government,
cision of the Supreme Court, and the
of that part of the decision which pointed
out the stipulation necessary to exclude
the Chinese from the United States, that
no person should enter the United States
without a certificate provided for as in the
treaty. 1t had been the pupose of Con-
gress to prevent prior residents from re-
turning to the United States, for other
wise all Cinnamon might come in under
the claim of prior residence, which it
would be impossible to disprove.
Morrow added that if the news Of the
rejection of the treaty should be con-
firmed, the California members would
ask Congress to pass bill requesting the
President to give six months notice to
the Chinese Government that thereafter
no Chinese except diplomatic, consular
and other officers of the Chinese Govern
ment would be permitted to enter the
United States. That notice would amount
to the revocation of all the asserted rights
of the Chinese to enter this country.
He did not appear to fear retaliation
by China, saying there were but 621
Americans all told resident in that
country.
GREAT BRITAIN TO BLAME.
Morrow believed that while the
Chinese Government regarded the
amended treaty as unduly stringent, the
most potent reason for the rejection of
the treaty was that it probably had been
caught in the revolving wheels of diplo-
matte negotiations between China and
Great Britain. The Chinese Govern
ment had protested strongly against the
action of the British Government in re-
turning shpload Of Cinnamon from
Australia as an unfriepdly action, and it
was probable that in discussing negotia-
tions the English Government dragged
into the discussion the policy of the
United States, and questioning the JUS
tice of protest against the exclusion OF
Cinnamon from Australia while the
Chinese Government was about TO ratify
a treaty permitting the United States to
reject such immigration.
In Morrow's judgment the rejection of
the treaty would be advantageous to
California in the end, as it would result
in such legislative action on the part of
our Government as would effectually
protect us against Chinese invasion.
Further legislation would necessarily
cover the defects of the existing treaty
and existing legislation.
MCKENNA AND vANDEvER.
McKenna said The action of the
Chinese Government simply puts us
back to where we were, and allows us
to enact whatever legislation we can
under the existing treaty. 1t will have
the effect of strengthening the feeling OF
the people on the subject.
He regarded the treaty as amended as
a decided improvement on the original.
Vandever said it appeared that the
Senate amendment has caused the rejec-
ton of the treaty. which had been
ratified before the amendment was at
tached. Undoubtedly British influence
brought about the result.
WHAT MR.. FELTON, SAID.
FELTON, said he had always regarded
the treaty as worthless without the Sen
ate amendments. Notwithstanding the
claim that the Chinese Government does
not desire its people to emigrate, the
history of their immigration for the last
300 years disproves it, and the millions
of money the immigrants yearly remitted
to China certainly has made it desirable
for the Empire. He did not regard the
rejection of the treaty as the cause OF re-
gret, as he had never believed that the
Chinese Government would ratify q
treaty that would effectually exclude the
Chinese from the Western nations.
FELTON, believed that the people would
get relief through agitation; that the ag-
itation of the question in Australia was
the real cause for the action of the Chi
nese Government, and added that if both
their expressions they might secure the
passage of bill during the present ses-
sion like that already introduced by him,
and intended to secure the exclusion Of
the Chinese.
MR.. THoMPsoN's VIEWS.
Thompson, the only Democratic Rep
resentative from California now at the
Capital, said: If it is now question
between the exclusion of the Chinese
and the abrogation of the treaty, I am
for abrogation. The Chinese must be
excluded, even if it becomes necessary
to wipe out the existing treaty. In my
opinion, the original treaty submitted to
the Senate and ratified by the Chinese
Government was amply sufficient to have
effected the exclusion of the Chinese. 1t
conceded the power of Congress to enact
whatever legislation was necessary to do
that, and the Senate amendments were
unnecessary and resulted in the rejection
of the treaty.
SENATOR MITCHELL.
Senator Mitchell said: If it is true
that the Chinese Government has re-
jected the proposed treaty, think it q
most fortunate thing for the country.
The treaty as sent to the Senate by the
President was, in my judgment, one that
never should have received the sanction
of our people, because it opened several
new doors by which the Chinese could
enter, which do not exist in the present
treaty very greatly, but even with those
amendments do not think it meets the
great evil against which it is directed.
There is but one way to deal with this
question, and that is to pass law abso-
iutely forbidding the coming of Chinese
to this country, except diplomatic repre-
sentatives, and absolutely preventing the
return of those now here. 1t is not nee
essary for this Government to obtain the
consent of any nation, ,eithers. European or
Asiatic, to the exclusion by legislation of