The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1893-04-28
FRIDAY, APRIL %, 1898.
THE LABOR QUESTION.

namely
(I) Whether we can have Chinese
labor.
(II) Whether we can have the
present labor law providing for penal
enforcement of the contract labor.
(IIID Whether we can have labor
introduced from abroad, other than
Chinese, with the intention Of engag.
ing them in labor contracts here.
(IN) Whether we can make labor
contracts providing for Withholding a
percentage Of wages until satisfactory
performance of the contracts.
As to the first question, we presume
there can be no doubt that there will
be no legislation by Congress giving to
Hawaii any privileges which residents
of any other portions of the United
States could not enjoy The Chinese
Exclusion Acts we understand would
apply, therefore, to this territory.
We understand that the present
labor law would undoubtedly be regard
ed as unconstitutional by the United
States courts; but in regard to existing
contracts a test case might be carried
up to the Supreme Court of the United
States, to obtain an adjudication upon
the question whether existing contracts
could be Constitutionally affected by a
change in the fundamental law. To
reach final result on that question in
the Supreme Court of the United States
would probably require about three
years. 1t would, therefore, be only new
contracts which practically would be
prohibited.
The United States laws provide as
follows on the subject of introducing
contract labor from abroad.
1t shall be unlawful for any person, com
pany, partnership, or corporation in any maj
ter whatsoever, to prepay the transportation
or in any way assist or encourage the impor
tation or migration of any alien or aliens any
foreigner or foreigners, into the United States
its Territories, or the District of Columbia
under contract Of agreement, parol or special
express or implied, made previous to the i'm
portation or migration Of such alien or aliens
foreigner or foreigners, to perform labor Of
service of any kind in the United States it,
Territories, or the District Of Columbia.
Section ,. That all contracts or ageements
express or implied, paro or special, which
may hereafter be made by and between any
person, company, partnership, or corporation
and any foreigner or foreigners, alien or aliens
to perform labor or service or having reference
TO the performance of labor or service by an,
person in the United States, its Territories
or the District of Columbia previous to tn,
migration importation of the person Of
persons whose labor or service is contracted
for into the United States, shall be utterl
void and Of no effect.
But the following important provisc
is in that law, namely:
Pyovided That nothing in this Act shal
be construed in prohibiting any individual from
assisting any member of his family or an
relative or personal friend, to migrate iron
any foreign country to the United States, 70
the purpose Of settlement here.
There is also the following provision
in Chapter ssh of the United State
Acts of 1891, being the Act intende
to prevent pauper and criminal imm
grafton, viz
That it shall be deemed violation Of sal
Act of February twenty sixth, eighteen hur
bred and eighty-hve, to assist or encourage tn
importation or migration of any alien by prom
Use of employment through advertisement
printed and published in any foreign country
and any alien coming to this country in cons,
quence of such an advertisement shall l.
treated as coming under a contract as col
tempated by such act; and the penalties |
said act imposed shall be applicable in sue
case:
Pyovided, that this section shall not appl
to States and immigration Bureaus Of State
advertising the inducements they offer for in
migration to such States.
The result of this legislation appear
to be that while no laborers for thi
country can be engaged abroad direct
or indirectly, there is nothing to pre-
vent relatives or personal friends fror
assisting persons to come here, an
once here such persons are free to cor
tract as they like, and there is nothin
to prevent the Immigration Burea
from holding out inducements for in
migration.
Nor is there anything in any Unite
States law which hinders one fror
making a contract by which all or an
part of his wages shall be withheld III
til he has performed his contract. Tn
foregoing views express the position a
we understand it, with reference to tn
questions above suggested: but ther
is a larger and broader view, undt
which the Hawaiian planter can re-
assured that his interests will not b
interfered with in case Of annexatio
to the United States. There is n
reason to think that steady govern
ment will exist here for any grea