, 1888-09-04
THE CHINESE TREATY.
Proceedings in the Senate and
House.
The Bill For Excluding Chi
nese Discussed,
And After Long Arguments
No Decision Reached.
In the Senate.

Depl. O.-lue mousse OIL
excluding Chinese immigration absolutely
having come over from the house was
taken up for action. At first George
moved its reference to the committee on
foreign relations, but that course was re-
sisted by Senators Stewart, Mitchell and
Dolph, and Vest declared himself pre-
pared to vote for the bill Immediately.
Under these circumstances George with
drew his motion to refer.
Sherman gave a detailed statement of
the course of the committee on foreign re-
iations In regard to the treaty recently rat
flied by the senate with amendments, in
Guiding an interview with the secretary of
state. No one doubted the power of the
United States government to make the
exclusion of Chinese absolute, ever with
out negotiating the new treaty and ever in
violation of the existing treaty. Every
nation has the right to provide by law for
its own safety. But it had been the gen.
eral desire of the committee on foreign re-
lations to have the Chinese government
assent by treaty to absolute exclusion.
If the object could be accomplished in
hat way, and without the direct action
of congress (not in harmony with the
treaty. the committee preferred to have
is done in that way. The subcommittee
of three had talked the matter over in the
most friendly manner with Secretary Bay
ard, and the secretary had entered into
negotiations with the Chinese govern
ment in view of the proposed modifca-
tons of the treaty. The new treaty had
been negotiated and had been ratified by
the senate, with amendments to make it
clear, and which amendments it was sup
posed the Chinese minister would have
agreed to. 1t was supposed from what
the newspapers said that the rejection of
the treaty by the Chinese government
was connected with the Australian com
plications and with the idea that the
Chinese government would have to con-
cede to Great Britain in reference TO its
Australian colonies the same terms which
it comedies to the United States. He,
therefore, would not make any objection
to the passage of the bill, and he hoped
it would pass. But this was with the dis.
tinct understanding that the house had
passed it with the knowledge that the
new treaty had been rejected by the
Chinese government, If that should
prove otherwise, the fault would not be
that of the senate.
Butler-If this bill should become a
law would it not be IN direct c%ontraven-
ton of the treaty between the United
States and China?
Sherman-I think the bill is ~inconsis-
tent with the treaty. But as the Chinese
government declines to make the proposed
changes. we have the unquestioned right
to pass this bill.
Butler-So there is a treaty now exist
ing between the United States and China
with which this bill comes in conflict d?
Sherman-Undoubtedly; because under
it it is provided that for a certain time and
under certain circumstances, Chinese la
borers who have been here have the right
to come back, and it is only because Its
provisions have been violated by fraud
and perjury that such a law as this is
justifiable.
Butler-Then you admit that this bill
is a violation Of the treaty. and therefore
a violation OF the constitution of the
United States?
Sherman deny the ergo.
Butler-I will take back the ergo, be-
cause it is not a violation of the constitu.
ton; but you admit that it is a violation
of the existing treaty.
Teller-The term collation. is not a
proper term where there is legislative dis
plcement of a treaty. Abrogation is the
term.
Butler-Now l understand the senator
from Ohio to state that this act will be a
" violation of an existing treaty?
Sherman did not use the word ''vio-
lation.
Butler-What Is the word?
Sherman-lt Is abrOgation of the
treaty. just as . law may be ~abrogated.
A treaty is a law.
Butler-This is an abrogation, then, OF
The treaty between the United States and
China?
S~hermau-lt is a substantial change.
Butler-Is this the form in which it is
provided, that the treaty may be abro,
gatedY
Sherman-lt is not. But there is nc
doubt of the power of congress to repeal
the treaty if it chooses to exercise that
power. Every nation has that right.
Butler-I understand that very well,
but it seems to me that this whole Chr
nese business has bsen q matter of politi-
cal advantage and that we have not been
governed by that deliberatIon which the
gravity of the question requires. There
is a very important presidential ~election
pending. One house of congress passes a
bill to drive these poor devils of China
men into the Pacific ocean and the other
house comes rp and says: Yes. we viii
drive them still further into the Pacific
ocean, Notwithstanding the treaty be
tween the two governments | shall
vote for the bill, but AN sorry to be in
formed by the senator from Ohio that il
is a violation of treaty.
Teller-Not violation of it.
Butler-well, an abrogation of the
treaty. .
Mitchell-Is the senator from South