The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1892-05-21
Chinese Exclusion


GENTLY passed by Congress has
raised a howl of protest and criti-
cism in the Republican press. Now,
some animals are supposed to howl
because they are made that way,
and so 1t would seem to be with
the critics of the Chinese bill. The
noise made must be explained away
in some manner, for it certainly
cannot be due to the defects of the
measure.
The bill excluding Chinese from
this country is II measure that sub
serves in full the best interests of
the American people. That We
want, once and forever, to he rid of
i"the heather Chinee" is II PROPOSE
tion that needs no comment. That
the interests Of our people demand
such a consummation is u fact not
less thoroughly established. Who
ever saw a Chinaman that he could
make q friend and reighbor Of?
Who ever knew one to become
sufficiently Americanized to make
a good citizen? Finally who will
deny that, save for comparatively
few exceptions, the representatives
of the Flowery Kingdom that have
landed on our shores are filthy, dis
gusting, eXecrable? They come
here not to become citizens and
live for what there is in American
life, but to play the miser, living
in suualor in unsummed easements,
only to hoard our gold to suf-
ficient sum and then to go back to
some footless and faithless fair in
the Mongalian realm.
True, we once told China we
would receive her citizens as we
would those of other nations. But
see the result: She proceeded to
flood us with very tidal wave of
yellow-skinned blood-suckers.
From the class of beings she has
sent us we have gained no citizens
and no possible profit of any kind,
while they have merely punched
our gold and hustled home. We
have had from them filth, disease,
crime, but nothing good.
Meanwhile other nations, notably
Germany, have sent us class of
immigrants that have come to
stay4sEleanly, intelligent indust-
rious, they become loyal citizens,
and, building homes and prosper
ing, they rear families ofintelli-
gence and virtue. Now why should
the gates be left open to the influx
of such social bilge water as China
sends us, simply on the ground that
our doors are open to Germany and
and other nations? And as for that
matter we have of late taken steps
to debar from landing at our ports
theHignorant and base from even
the European nations. Not even
here, then, can the friends of China
and the critics of the exclusion
bill base a claim.
Any class Of immigrants that
would prove as odious as the
Chinese that visit us would be
speedily ruled out, come they from
what point they might.
And this is certainly our right.
Who shall gainsay it? Have we,
as nation, no right to choose adj
ditions to our people? Have we
no right to say-such and such we
welcome to our shores, such others
we debar? TO go further, for the
moralist is abroad in the land, is it
not duty we owe ourselves as Il
people to conserve the highest poss-
ible standard of social and moral
development?
And how accomplished this if we
fling wide the flood-gates for indis-
crininate immigration and become
not an asylum for the oppressed,
but dumping ground for the
nations of the earth?
There can be no doubt of the wis.
dom of excluding the Chinaman,
and all argument against it is but
lame. There are some, too, who
admit as much, but attack the re-
cent bill on account of its extreme
stringency, as though that were 4
vulnerable point.
Why, there lies its chiefest merit
for law that is not strict and
stringent comes at length to be
ignored and trodden under foot.
They point out that the clause re
quiring man who has been ovel
for some time to prove that fact or
leave the country, is too severe
No. 1t is we'll done. If the M0ngo
lian cannot show his proof let hin
go. He will leave anyhow as soor
rs he gets "a little more good Amer