The Springdale news., 1889-11-22


 heard of. There are several other instances of the same kind but this we believe is enouga to show where. ever the Republicans ha3 the pow or they effectualy sat down on all et. forts toward the crus hing out of one of the worst things that ever mcn- aced tho American working man. But we are not through with you yet, Doctor; not by any means. We havc full hand Tn this game, the cards are all trumps and We in- tend to eucher you.
 A bill to restrict Chinese immigra tion by limiting tue number of i'm migrants to be transported by ves- sells to the United States to fifteen on each trip, passed the House on January 14, 1879. Thcv.te on this question was: Yeas-Denocrats, lo4: Republicans 5l. Nays Re. publlcans, 56; Democrats. 16. As usual majority of the Republicans noted against the bull while the Democrats voted aim ost solidly for it's passage. The vote in the Sen. ate was: Yeas Democrats, 22; Re publlcans, 10; Nays Republicans, 20; Democrats. 8. Bear Tn mind that this occurred in 1879, Doctor, "when Congress was strongly Democratic. The bill, thus passed by the votes of Democrats, was vetoed by Ruth erford B. Hayes, n Republican pres idcnt Of the United States. There IS more 10 follow, Doctor, we are just getting warmed up to our work.
 In 1880 new treaty with China vas ratified. whereby the United States acquired the power of re- stricting immigration without giv- ing reason for offense 70 China. A bill w.s then introduced III the fist session of the Senate in 1881 provid- ing for the exclusion ot tic paupers for term of twenty years.s A vote was taken on this measure Tn the House in March, 1882, and the re- suit was that II passed by the fol- lowing vote: Yeas-Democrats. 9s; Republicans, 5l. Nays-Re- publicans, 62; Democrats, f. In the Senate Tn April vote was taken which was: Yeas-Dem crats, 3l; Republicans, 5. Nays-Democrats, 0; Republicans, 27. The bill was sent to Chester A. Arthur, the then Re publican President of the United States, and instead of signing he vetoed t. In placing on it his seal of condemnation, Arthur said:
 "No one can say the country has not profited by their work. They were largely instrumental in constructing the railways which connected the Atlantic with the Pacific. The states of the Pacific slope are full of evidences of their industry"
 Thus it was that the Democrats were again foIled by the Republl- cans in their attempt to protect tho merican workingman.
 After Arthurs vetoe another bill was introd uced in the Senate re- ducing the term of restriction from twenty to ten years. This passed the house by the following vote: Yeas-Democrats, l03; Republl- cans 9l. Nays-Republicans, 34; Democrats, 5. In the Senate the vote stood: Yeas-Democrats, 31; Republicans. 9. Nays-Republi cans, "A; Democrats, none.
 Thcre are other cases. such as are cited above. but we do not attempt to give them all as it would be su- perhuous. We have already called attention to enough to show that pr. Simonds states an untruth when he says the Republican party has aiaays fav pred the exclusion of tho 
 Chinese from this coun.ry.
 After the Chinese Restriction Law was enacted the Republicans on the Pa",fie Coast resorted to al most every possible means in or. der to lot the paupers land at cur ports. The Federal Judges at San Franc,soo, who were Republicans, let a large number of them land un- der the operation of the habeas cor ruu Tha,, in o.t hois If niocad n ra