The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1888-09-07
The aeluOrrat.
HARRlsoN,s CHINESE RECORD.

by Harrison to some of hts callers,in which
that paper says Is to be found a complete
"answer to the campaign slanders which
have been SO industriously circulated TO
the effect that he favored Chinese and
other forms of cheap labor" Let us now
look into this subject and see what an utter
disregard for facts the Heyald manifests.
What are these campaign slanders"which
democrats have so industriously circulated
about Mr.. Harrison's record on Chinese
immigration Democrats have simply
charged against Mr.. Harrison that while In
the United States Senate,in ISS2,while the
two bills to restrict Chinese immigration
were pending, he uniformly voted against
every restrictive feature of both bills and
finally against the bills themselves. That
every vote cast by him was against Chinese
restriction. That not a single vote cast by
him during the pending of these two bills
was in favor of any kind of restriction, These
are the charges made against Mr.. Harrison
by democrats, and they refer TO the page of
the Congressional Record where these
votes are to be found as proof to sustain
these charges. These are the charges
which the Heyald,with aperverse and will
full disregard of facts and fair-dealing, calls
campaign ISLANDERS" Is It a slander against
man to quote the record that he deliber.
ately made for himself Does the HcraId
cherish the hope that Il will be able to dc
ceive and hoodwink the people in regard
to Harrison's record on this question II It
does It might as well be undeceived. The
people are not all fools. Farmers and Ia.
boring men, though they may not be so well
advised in politics and mems records as
those whose opportunities enable them to
read more, yet they are notl like dumb, driven
cattle. That those who read this article
may know of truth that IIarrison's whole
record on the Chinese restriction bills be-
fore referred to was uniformly and persist
emily against all restriction of Chinese i'm
migration, we append hereto a reference to
the book and page of the Congressional
Record where his votes may be found;
In Part :, volume I3, page I7I6, 47th
Congress, we find Harrison voting for an
amendment to the bill TO the effect that it
should not apply to Chinese skilled labor
ers.
In Part :, volume - page I7I6, 47th
Congress, we find him voting for Hoar's
amendment providing that the bill should
not apply to any Chinese artisan.
In Part a,volume I3, page I7s2,47th Con
gress, we find him paired with Maxey on
ingalls, amendment to make the time of ex-
clusion ten years instead of fsscaty. Sena-
tor Maxey stated, when his name was called,
that he was paired with Harrison of Indi-
ana, (who was absent) If Harrison were
presenthe would vote "yea" and he, ,Maxey,
would vote may"
On page 1853, same book, we find that
when the bill came Up on its final passage
Senator Maxey announced that he and Sen.
ator Harrison were paired on the bill. II
Harrison were present ne would vote"nayr
and he, Maxcy, would vote "yea"
The bill passed Notwithstanding Harri-
sons opposition to it, but President Arthur
vetoed it. The question then came up in
the Senate whether the bill should pass, the
veto of the president notwithstanding.
Harrison voted may" that is that the bill
should not pass. (See Part 3, volume r5,
page 26I7, 47th Congress.)
In Part 4,volume I3,page 3z6i47th Con-
gress, we find him voting against this sec
ton of the bill Sec. I4- That heyrgffer no
state oOHyt or oOHyt Of the United States siall
admit Chinese 10 cilizeHshib, and all Iasgs o.,
parts Of Lazvs IN oOst7ief ssifh hliS act are re-
Pealed."
In the same book, page 326s, when the
Ten Year Exclusion bill was pending, we
find Senator Harrison voting to strike out
this section "Sec. s. That the word Chi
nese laborers,' wherever used in this act,
shall be construed to mean both skilled and
nHSk;lled EaGOyers and Chinese employed in
mining"
In same book, page 34II, we find him
voting to strike out this same section again.
In same book, page 4II, he voted prac-
tically for Chinese citizenship again.
In same book, page 34r2, we find him
voting against the final passage of this last
bill.
General Harrison was appointed to the
Committee on Foreign Relations in 1886,
to fill the vacancy caused by the death Of
General Miller of California. This com
mittee, through its Chairman, Senator Sher-
man, reported amendments to the Chinese
Immiorafion Amending hill introduced hy
Senator Fair (D) of Nevada, which de-
stroyed it as preventive measure. Senator
Sherman said the committee were unani-
moLs in their report, therefore General
Harrison must be presumed, and is admit
ted, to have concurred inthe amendments
This bill, as amended by the committee on
Foreign Relations, passed the Senate, but
failed to pass the House.
We have thus given a brief reference to
the recorded votes of Mr.. Harrison against
restricting Chinese immigration, and We
challenge the Heyald to deny or dispute
the record. And we here assert again
what we have said before, that the record
does not show that Harrison ever cast
single vote against restriction of Chinese
immigration, but that it does show that
every vote cast by him in the Senate on
that subject was against such restriction.
We haye them in our Office and any one
may examine it who chooses.
s-~
$4,000
~,