The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-06-08
HON. JOSEPH D. SAVERS
GIVES HIS REASONS FOR SUPPORTING
THE GEARY EXCLUSION ACT.
Full Discussion OF His Reasons for Be-
lieving Chinese immigration to Be I'm
desirable and Why Its Continuance
Would Endanger Our Country.
To The Statesman:

On the oath list. there appeared in
the San Antonio Express, what pur-
ported to be an interview with me re.
garding the exclusion and the Geary
laws respecting Chinese immigration
to this country. Though the inter-
view was an ofhand and hurried con.
versation between the reporter for
that paper and myself and was not
revised by me before publication, yet
it is substantially correct and stand
by it in its entirety.
Extracts, however, from it have
been published elsewhere and have
formed the basis of criticisms that
could not properly and justly apply
to the interview as whole, except on
the hypothesis that Chinese immigra-
ton is desirable and that the exc!u-
sion act of Sept. Is. 1888, is wrong.
1t is not, however, for the purpose
of answering such criticisms, but that
the people of the district, which /
have the honor to represent in the
federal congress, may not, because of
such criticism, misunderstood my
position upon this very important
matter, that ask the indulgence of
space in your columns.
AM OPPOSED TO FURTHER
Chinese immigration to the United
States, and have uniformly voted,
since in congress, upon that line OF
policy.
In doing so, l have been actuated
by the sincere belief that such char
acter of population was not desirable
from any point of view-ec0nomical,
industrial, moral, social or political;
and in this belief, entertained by the
great body of representatives in the
Fiftieth congress, without regard to
political utilization, the "act to pro-
hibit the coming of Chinese laborers
to the United Statesn was carried
through congress with great unani-
nifty, and received the approval of
the president, Mr.. Cleveland, on Sep
TENDER IS, 1888. If l remember COR
rectly, the bill was introduced in the
house by Mr.. Scott, Democrat from
Pennsylvania, and was by unanimous
consent, considered and passed on the
same day.
This act provides, in addition to the
exclusion Of further immigration, that
no Chinese living in the United
States and leaving shall be permitted
to return unless he has lawful wife,
child or parents in the United
States or property of the value
of $1,000, or debts of like
amount due him and pending settle
ment. Another provision in the act
regarding Chinese visitors and travel
ers mot laborers) is equally as
stringent, and heavy penalties are
denounced against captains and mas
shores Chinese immigrants, and all
Chinese who may come into the coun-
try in violation of the law are made
liable to arrest and deportation to the
country from whence they came.
Since the enactment of that law
congress has, at every session, made
large appropriations to be expend-
ed for it's rigid enforcement, but not
withstanding tine greatest vigilance
on the part of the executive branch of
the government, this character of i'm.
migration has continued with but
LITTLE OR No INTERRUPTION.
1t was believed that more stringent
measures should be adopted for the
enforcement of the exclusion act, and
to that end the Geary law was passed
by the rifty-second congress and was
approved by the president on May 5,
1892.
One of its provisions (section g. re.
quires that al! Chinese laborers with
in the limits of the United States at
that date should register before the
collector Of internal revenue of their
respective districts within one year
after the passage of the act, and hav-
ing done this, at the expense of the
government, they would receive the
same protection as American born Cit
liens in the enjoyment of life, liberty
and prosperity and in their right to
the pursuit of happiness.
This duty-that OF registration-was
required of them in order that the
government might be the better able
to distinguish betweenthose who
ARE HERE RIGHTFULLY
and those who are here in violation of
the act of Sept. 10, 1888. Is there any
peculiar hardship in this require
ment b? Are not many affirmative
duties imposed upon American born
and naturalized citizens, against the
nom performance of which penalties
are denounced as we'll by state as by
federal laws? Are not our citizens
required to serve on juries, to work.
the public roads and to do many
other things, for the failure to perform
which they are liable to fine and i'm
prisonment ?
A year has elapsed since
the enactment of the Geary
law and but few, very few,
Chinese have registered. AT whose in.
stance and because of whose influence
have they refused to obey this reason.
able mandate of the federal govern
ment? The answer is to be found in
the following dispatch clipped from
Northern newspaper:
THE SIX COMPANIES SEND A MES
SAGE OF HOPE AND WARNING
TO LABORERs.
NEW YORK, May 24.-The Cinnamon
working in the Columbia River can
naries have reneivad the following