Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-04-24
A BIG CHINESE WALL
That Some Senators Are Trying to
Prevent Others Building.
CHINA'S COMMERCE AT STAKE
On the Passage or Failure of the Geary
Exclusion Bill.
DEAD CALM FOR A DAY IN TIE HOUSE

the securing of an international conference
TO consider the question of the free coinage
OF silver at the mints of the nations partici-
pating in such conference, or as to the
enlarged use of silver in the currency of
such countries; also, to transmit copies of
all correspondence between the United
States Government and the governments eS-
pected to participate in the proceedings of
such international conference.
Mr.. Sherman suggested the insertion of
the words: "If not incompatible with the
public interests" and Mr.. Teller agreed to
the suggestion, although he did not see, he
said, how such publication could hurt the
public interests. The resolution, as so
modified, was agreed to.
Mr.. Call offered a resolution, which went
over without action, for the appointment of
a committee OF nine Senators to inquire into
the present value per mile of the
railways of the United States; their present
capitalization and the difference between
such capitalization and the actual cost of
construction and equipment; their gross and
net receipts: the number and compensation
of their employees; the amount of indebted
ness and capital stock, and the amount of
bonds and stock held by the stockholders
and bondholders, Distinguishing between
home and foreign holders.
Building Another Chinese Wall
The Chinese exclusion bill was then taken
up, and Mr. Teller addressed the Senate
There could not be, he said, any dispute
touching the rejection of the United States
Minister to China. II was an elementary
principle of international law that Minis
ter must serve as such with the consent of
both nations. Both nations had to consent |
before he could be Minister In other |
words, he must be received as well sent. |
He, therefore, had no fault TO find with the |
Chinese Government because it had re- |
iected Mr.. Blair. 1t had right to reject |
him, even on absolutely false premises or
without any premises whatever
Coming 10 the question of the abrogation
of treaties, Mr. Teller held that every nation
which agreed with another nation did so
with the understanding that it might retire
from it any time it saw fit, and it might do
so notwithstanding the fact that there was a
provision in the treaty that it should con-
tinue for limited period of time. Legis-
lation by the National Legislature would
set aside any treaty inconsistent with it.
Mr. Morrill,, while inclined to believe
that Congress had power to pass a law
superseding a treaty, asked Mr.. Teller
whether he thought that other nations had
the same power. Mr. Teller thought he
had stated explicitly that all nations had
that power, and said he had very poor
opinion of nation which would surrender
that right.
Not Always Easy to Break Treaties.
Nh. Morrill, remarked that Japan had for
years endeavored to get a release from a
treaty with Great Britain, and had not sue
ceeded.
Mr.. Teller said that reason for that
might be that japan was not willing to
create friction with Great Britain The
United States had been trying for great
many years to get rid of a treaty with Great
Rritain, and had got rid of it bv the action of
Great Britain in vioiatingit Hereferred to
the CIayton-Bulwer treaty, and said that |
there had never been such condition of
affairs that either nation wanted to propose
its absolute repeal or violation; and vet
neither Great Britain nor the United States |
had respected its terms But it was very
evident that the people ofthe United States
would insist on the abrogation of that
treaty whenever it should appear that it
was inimical to the interests of the great
mass of the people of the country.
Reverting to the peculiaritles of Chinese
immigration, Mr.. Teller remarked that the |
American would never assimilate with the
Chinaman, because, if the American would,
the Chinaman would not. In the whole
catalogue of nations there was not one ma
tion so thoroughly satisfied with itself as
the Chinese. Their civilization was to
Of Europe and America. The Chinaman |
would, in contact with the civilization of
Europe and America, remain Chinaman. |
And therefore reason existed for keeping |
them out OF the country which did not exist
for keeping other people out Cinnamon
came to the United States
Simply to Take Money Out
of the country and to return to their homes.
They took no part in building up the
society in which they lived. The lowest
immigrant that came from Europe (whether
convict, pauper or otherwise) contributed
something to civil society. His children
went to the public schools, and the great
mass of them contributed materially to the
prosperity of the country. But the China
man contributed simply his cheap labor, and J
in that he came in competition with the
American laborer and deprived him of his
opportunities. .
Mr.. Teller was in favor of restricted
immigration of all classes of people
although he confessed that If it were lett to
him to determine how it should be done he
would be unable to arrive at any plan that
would be acceptable to himself Still, in
relation to the Chinese, Congress could af-
ford to pass harsh and unreasonable laws.
Those Cinnamon who were in the country
with the consent of the United States
Government were entitled to domicile; and
lUSIS was HO way nC hHcN vi, Wlll- | y
out an infraction Gf not of the law) of
the decencies that should be shown by
one nation to another, to compel the China :
men now here to retire; but the United
States Government had perfect right to
say that no more should come. AS to the
great trade with China that had been
spoken of, Mr. Teller denied its existence,
and said that American exports to China
last year were not one-half of what they
were five years ago
Diplomacy Should First Fail.
Mr. Biscock was not in favor of the vio-
lation of the treaty obligations with China
or any other nation until diplomacy had ex-
hausted itself in efforts for the amendment
Of the treaty.
MIR. Morgan spoke in favor of the Senate
substitute.
Mr.. Frye said the Committee on Com
merce had been considering the appropria-
lions in the river and harbor bill, and that
The Senators from the Pacific coast had been,
,s usual, very careful in the interest OF their
people, and had been soliciting very large
Their main ground for ask
ng these appropriations had been that the
Pacific commerce was to be really the COM
nerce of the United States; that Puget Il
sound for instance, was to be the scene of q =,
IN enormous Oriental commerce. Now, a
aid Mr.. FRYE, if the people of the Pacific +,
.oast build Chinese wall by insulting the a
,eople and Government of China so that q
hey will not send any of their on'merce v
lere or permit us to send any of ours there,
What becomes of the necessity of any fur
her improvement of rivers and harbors on
he Pacific coast? M
A Pert Question and Answer. "
Mr.. Mitchell-In view of the fact that we u
ave paid, in gold and silver, to China over p
2Oo. 600, 900 in the last 20 years to pay the "
alances of trade, ask the Senator from z