Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-04-12

Representative Morrow Explains the De-
fects of the Chinese Treaty.
Copyright, 1855, by The California Assoaated Press
WASHINGTON, April 11th-At the request
OF Senator Sherman, Chairman of the SEN
ate Foreign Relations Committee, Repre-
sentative Morrow has addressed him let.
ter with reference 10 the treaty recently
concluded between China and the United
States. Morrow says the treaty is fatally
detective, in not providing in positive terms
against the return of a class of Chinese
former residents who are not now in the
United States but who will certainly con-
unue, either In person or by proxy, to
assert their claims of right to return, if
such claim can be made available under the
new treaty.
After pointing out the difficulties en-.
countered in enforcing the provisions of
exclusion in the treaty of 1880 and the Re-
strlction Act OF 1882 enacted in accordance
Herewith, Mr.. Morrow shows how the law
has been evaded. He gives the statistics
OF the number of Chinese who have come
TO this country from December 81. 1882. to
december 81 1887, which have been re-
peatedly published from figures collected
by the Treasury Department, and SAYS that
II the treaty only contained the provision
in Secretary Bayard's letter-which saws
that the treaty precludes the return of Chi
nese laborers who are not now in this
country, and forbids the coming here of
Chinese laborers from any quarter what
soever-that it would have been entirely
satisfactory.
Mr.. Morrow says that the most serious
complaint made against the present treaty
Is the clause providing that Chinese labor
ers who were here at the date of the treaty
mi hn tod - ]
pleasure. AS before explained, with this
door open we find ourselves, at the end of
nearly eight years, without any practical re-
lief from this troublesome question, and
the new treaty absolutely ignores this i'm
portant point, about which so much con-
troyersy has been had in the Courts and
before Congress in appeals for further lecis-
lation.
The new treaty attempts to limit the
number of Chinese laborers who shall be
entitled to return by providing certain
qualifications for those who may seek to
return, but the difficulty is that the Courts
may hold that this restriction only applies
to those who shall be entitled to return.
There still remains necessity for provid-
ing against the return of those now absent,
which is for the purpose of preventing the
immigration of Chinese laborers who were
never in this country.
To accomplish this object, which is the
real point at ISSUE would suggest the fol-
lowing amendment to the new treaty
Also this prohibition shall extend to the
return of Chinese laborers who are not
now in the United States, whether holding
return certificates under the existing laws,
or not
The article, thus amended, would
terminate the life of several thousand re-
turn certificates. But in view of their
fraudulent use, their destruction is not
only proper, but necessary to secure the
enforcement of the terms of exclusive pro-
hibition in the new treaty. 1t would also
put an end to the claim of prior residence,
or residence here at the date of the treaty
of 1880, which would give to the new treaty
lis chief value as measure of exclusion.
Furthermore the article, if so amended,
would then, in measure, provide for
terms of exclusion as mentioned in the
letter of the Secretary of State. The next
difficulty will occur in the identification of
the privileged class of laborers who will be
entitled to return under the new treaty.
That is to say. the identification of a
Chinese laborer who has lawful wife,
child or parent in the United States, or
property therein of the value of ST. 900, or
debts of like amount due him and pend
ing settlement"
do not think much of the restriction
contained in this qualification, for it will
probably be developed that all who want
TO return will be thus qualified bv the aid
OF the company to which the Chinaman
belongs, but there will be decided advan-
tage in even restricting immigration to
such persons as may hereafter depart from
the United States. To make such restric-
ton effective. would suggest that it would
be well to make it perfectly plain that
Chinese laborers not provided with the re-
turn certificates authorized by Article 2
shall not be entitled to return. To do this,
an amendment in harmony with the re-
cent decision of the Supreme Court in the
case of Jung All Lung would be required.
The next point to which invite atten-
ton is the failure to provide protection
against the abuse of the privilege accorded
to certain persons in Article 8. What, for
instance, is to prevent any Chinese person
from procuring the necessary certificate
and coming into the United States under
the claim of being either an official, teacher,
student, merchant or traveller? If the doors
are closed elsewhere, l am afraid this one
will be forced open. To provide as far as
possible against such proceedings, the
treaty should be amended
With these amendments incorporated
INTO the treaty, and proper legislation by
Congress carry its provisions into effect, I
think we may reasonably hope for much
better condition of affairs on the Pacific
coast in dealing with this difficult and
troublesome question, but l must say, in
justice to myself, that have not changed
the views heretofore expressed in urging
legislation terminating all treaty stipula-
tons and absolutely prohibiting all Chi
nese immigration. This, in my judgment,
is a still better course, and everything |
have written is secondary and subordinate
to such Judgment