Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1888-07-12
GENERAL HARRISON AND THE CHINESE
4 Clear and Cons. .stent Record. IN Perfect Ac
coro with the Senators and Representa-
tyes from the Pacific Coast States.

i
uous opponent of Chinese immigration,
and the author of the Morrow bill, the
Representative of the Fourth California
District is particularly qualified to say
how the Republican candidate stands on
this subject, and how his votes and Opin-
ions are regarded on the Pacific Coast
Mr. Morrow said:
| notice that the Tribune has several
times said that Senator Harrison voted
/ for the Page bill This is a mistake, as
you will readily see on examining the Re
cord. The Page bill was considered in the
! Senate in the early part of 1882, and Sen
| atOr Harrison voted against it. The bill,
| however, failed as law TO keep out Chi
nese Immigration and was amended in
/ 1884. There is no record as to Senator
HarriSOn's position on the amended bill,
! but if is known that he favored the addi-
/ tional legislation; but even the law as
amended proved Intellectual, and in the
! XLIXth Congress | introduced a bill
which became known as the Morrow bill.
| 1t was drawn with considerable care, as
| was familiar with the subject, having
/ been Assistant United States Attorney at
| San Francisco and familiar with the Fed
eral jurisdiction. The bill was approved
/ by the Collector of the Port, the United
/ States Judges, and the United States At
! tOrney, and it was supposed that it wOuh
accomplish everything that legislation
could do under the treaty. The bill was
! introduced in the Senate by Senator Fair,
| the Democratic Senator from Nevada.
and referred to the Committee on Foreign
| Relations, of which Senator Harrison was
! then member. had occasion to meet
with members of that committee several
/ times while the bill was pending before
/ the committee, and among others with
! Senator Harrison, and know that he was
| in favor of excluding Chinese immigra-
| ton, either by suitable legislation under
the treaty, or anew treaty that could make
| exclusion absolute. ] remember that he
and were members of a small party that
went to Philadelphia in the early part of
! 1886 to attend dinner given by the Clover
! Club. During the trip had quite a talk
with Senator Harrison on the subject of
| Chinese immigration. and was gratified
| to find that he was not only in favor of
| further legislation in restraint of such i'm
migration, but he was in favor of a new
! treaty that would provide for absolute eX-
| cluSiOn.
The bill introduced by Senator Fair was
considered by the Committee on Foreign
| Relations of the Senate, and passed the
committee unanimously. 1t was report
ed to the Senate by Senator Sherman, who
said: The bill has been carefully exam
"ined in the Committee on Foreign Rela-
'tiOnS, and as far as / know every provi-
"sion was aSSented to with entire unan-
Unity" This statement will be found
on page 4, ,95S of the Congressional Record
N ia nf 10
gresS. 1t is well known that Senator
Mitchell, of Oregon, is extremely radical
against Chinese immigration. In discuss
ing this bill (Which Harrison voted for in
the committee, as | have just stated. he
said: "This bill is a great improvement,
permit me to say, in my judgment, upon
"any bill that has ever heretofore at
"any time been reported by any commit
''tee of either branch of Congress upon
this question" The Senator's speech
will be found on page 5,109 of the Con-
greSSiOnal Record of the first session of
the XLIXth Congress. The bill passed
the Senate unanimously, but was Smoth-
cred in the House Committee on Foreign
Affairs, of which Mr. Perry Belmont was
Chairman and the only action the Demo
Ocratic House took in furtherance of the
action of the Senate on the Chinese ques-
ton was to pass the Chinese indemnity
bill, providing for the payment of S147,-
600 to the Chinese for the Rock Springs
outrage.
But it is said that Senator Harrison. in
1882, opposed legislation against Chinese
immigration, and that he voted against
an amendment to the bill then pending.
offered by Senator Farley, providing that
hereafter no State Court or Court of the
70 aif
iZenShip; and repeating all laws in conflict
with the act. Senator EdmundS opposed
this form of amendment, saying that the
naturalization laws did not authorize the
naturalization of Chinese. The Senator
was correct. -Four years before, in 1878,
Judge Sawyer, the L. S. Circuit Judge for
California, Oregon, and Nevada, had de-
cided on the application of All Yup that
native of China of the MongOlian race
was not entitled to become a citizen of
the United States. On the authority of
this decision, Senator EdmundS proposed
an amendment in these words: " Nothing
in the act shall be construed to change
"the existing naturalization laws so as to |
admit Chinese persons to citizenship"
Senator Harrison voted for this amend |
ment in preference to the one proposed |
by Senator Farley. This is all there is in |
this vote.
Senator Harrison was undoubtedly op- |
posed to the abrOgatiOn of treaty by in |
direct legislation. He was in favor of a |
clear-cut proposition for abrOgating the |
existing treaty, with its annoying iimita- |
tions, and excluding the Chinaman abso- |
lutely, and it is an interesting fact that |
this is precisely the position occupied by |
the Senators and Representative from |
the Pacific Coast. We have favored the !
abrOgatiOn of the present treaty, because
of its limitations of the power of Congress
to legiSlate in defense of the country
Senator Harrison has occupied precisely |
this position, and his votes on the amend
ment to the Page bill prove this fact be-
yOnd doubt. Furthermore Senator Har-
risOn'S position has been justified by the
fact that new treaty has been negOtia-
ted, with the approval of both parties un-
der which Chinese immigration will be
stopped. The bill introduced by Senator
Fair in the Senate is the bill which Sena-
tor Harrison voted for in committee, and
it is worthy of note that this bill is the
framework of the new treaty just negoti-
ated with China.
Senator Harrison is all right He will
enforce the treaty and whatever legisla-
ton may be had under it. The great
QutSIlOl 10 pIOueCllOil W AlltTiCttll lIluuS-
tries, in which the Chinese question is
only part. If, under a Democratic pol
icy, the tariff is to be reduced so as to de-
stroy protection to our home labor, of
what consequence is it that the Chinaman
is excluded? The policy of excluding
cheap labor of the Chinaman is based on
the principle of protection, but if that
principle fails, the exclusion viii cease to
be of any value.
THE REPUBLICAN SYMBOL.
Chicago Mail
1t is to the credit of the Republican
nartv that itS diStinct;va cvn,hol in +biS |