The record-union., 1894-03-26
THE NEW TREATY.

Now that the new Chinese treaty has
been made public it is found to be far
less Objectionable than was feared. Its
reading emphasizes, however, the protest
that the fact of such treaty being in ne
gotiation was unwisely kept secret. Had
that simple fact been made known the
incident Of the treaty would have occa-
stoned neither surprise nor irritation.
The important feature of the treaty is
that it squarely and beyond any possi-
bility of retreat commits the Chinese
Government to the American restrictive
policy and to recognition of our legisla-
tion in that direction.
The weak features in it are the 81, 900 debt
clause and the article concerning travel
elers for curiosity or pleasure. Under
this latter clause Chinese Iaborers of the
restricted class may enter upon the cer-
tifcate of their Government or of the
Government where they last resided.
Under this system a country that does
not restrict Chinese immigration may
easily become the open door for unlim-
tied passage of Chinese Iaborers into this
country, and once inside it would be diff
ficult to eject them if they chose to be-
come residents.
1t may be said, however. that the pro-
vision requiring such certificates to be
vised by diplomatic or consular rep
resentative of the United States before
they can be effective gives US power to
30 instruct our agents as to prevent i'm
position. But we confess that we cannot
understand how such agents are to estab-
lish negatives and disprove the claim of
the traveller" We can see, also, how
the certificate business can become
matter of traffic and corruption.
The 81, 900 debt clause will awaken much
opposition. But if it is conceded that it
United States to return to China and to
come back to the United States, it does
not open the door to entry by new immi-
grants except by fraudulent personation.
It will be seen, therefore, that what OBJ
lection there is to this clause is limited
and must gradually decrease as the
Chinese now here advance in years and
die off; so that while it is not without OBJ
lection, we do not consider it so serious as
some assume it TO be.
The right to return where Chinaman
leaves a wife, child or parent is not un-
reasonable. OF course it opens door for
perjury and fraud, but if there is to be
given any right to return whatever. we
cannot see how provision can be made
to that end that will wholly prevent
fraud. It must be our Office to be watch
full and to defeat imposition.
1t is provided that the United States
guarantees to Chinese residents protection
such as is afforded by the laws to our own
citizens proper provision. of course.
But why it was not similarly provided
that American citizens residing or travel
ing IN China shall be protected in that
country as are Chinese subjects, is in
explicable.
1t is certainly true that the treaty
strengthens the exclusion and registry
laws; that it absolutely shuts out Chinese
opposition to them, and that it settles
once and for all the questions those laws
gave rise to, that went to the test of their
vitality. Aside from this important con-
sideration, it does not appear that the
treaty will greatly affect the matter of re-
striction of Chinese immigration; nor
will it very greatly enlarge the oppor-
tunities for fraud. Its chief objectiona-
BILE clause is that already referred to, ad-
mission of travellers for pleasure or
curiosity on certificates of other Govern
ments. Yet we can understand how
difficult it would have been for the Secre-
tary of State to have refused consent to
this provision and have secured the
others.
We believe in the wisdom of restriction
of Chinese immigration; the RECORD
UNION has uniformly maintained that the
Chinese, being REPRESENTATIVE race,
could not be introduced into our civiliza-
ton without harm to our own labor in