The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-02-07
OUR BUNGLING NATURALIZATION
LAW.


garding the status of the Japanese now in
the United States or who may come in here
after. The confusion is a result of an at
tempt at race discrimination and proscrip-
ton in our naturalization law, The truth
is the law on that subject never has con-
formed to the spirit of the Constitution of
the United States. Section of Article
of that instrument empowers Congress ito
establish a uniform rule of naturalization"
The use Of the word uniform seems TO
imply trat any law on the subject should
be uniform in every respect, in application
we'll as in operation. This has never
been the case. The first Congress that met
after the adoption of the Constitution
passed an act in 1890 providing under GER
tain conditions for the naturalization and
admission to citizenship of free white
Aliens This was a departure from the
spirit of the Constitution i'm that it pro-
hibited the naturalization of any but white
aliens. Although the law was amended in
some other respects two or three different
times it remained unchanged in this re-
spect until 1870, when Senator Charles Sum-
ner moved to strike out the word white,
$50 as to bring our system in harmony with
the Declaration of independence" as he
said. The effect of the adoption of this
amendment would have been to admit TO
naturalization persons of any nationality or
color, but it was defeated in the Senate by
one vote. The opposition came from those
senators who, while they We're willing to
admit the negro, were not willing to admit
the Chinese. So the law was amended.
making it's provisions applicable ito aliens,
being free white persons, and to aliens of
African nativity and to persons of African
descent" This admits whites and negroes,
but excludes others. Thus, while the law
from 1890 to 1870 drew the color line against
negroes, the present law draws it against
the yellow races, and that not on account
of nationality heathenism or ignorance, but
on the ground of color only. This is an
illiberal and un-American discrimination.
The present confusion grows out of an
attempt to admit japanese to naturaliza-
ton and citizenship while still excluding
Chinese. This is not because it is supposed
the former would make any better Amer-
can citizens than the latter, but because
just now we are trying to cultivate friendly
relations with the Japanese. From a COM
mercial point of view we would much bet
ter make friends with the Chinese, but COM
merce and common sense must give way to
race prejudice. So, in order to make a point
for the Japanese it is claimed, first, that
the exclusion clause in the naturalization
law applies only to the Monaptian races. and
that the Japanese do not Belong to that
class. Most of the Japanese are Mongolians,
but without discussing whether they be-
long to that class or not, it is enough to
say that. the law does not mention Mon
golians. 1t excludes from naturalization all
aliens. The Japanese are neither whites
nor Africans, and no more entitled to
naturalization on the ground of color than
the Chinese are. Again, it is claimed that
the Japanese will be entitled TO naturaliza-
ton under the new treaty between the
United States and Japan which will go into
effect July 1, 1899. The treaty is a CONNER
cial one and does not contain word re-
garding naturalization or citizenship. The
most favored nation clause" which has
been referred to is follows:
The high contracting parties agree that
i'm all that concerns commerce and naviga-
ton any privilege, favor or immunity which
either high contracting party has actually
granted or may hereafter grant to the gov
eminent, ships citizens or subjects OF any
other state shall be extended to the govern
ment ships, citizens or subjects of the other
high contracting party gratuitously ii con-
cessions in favor of that other state shall be
gratuitouS, or on the same or equivalent
conditions If the concessions shall have been
conditional; 1t being their intention that the
trade and navigation of each country shall
be placed in all respects by the other on
the footing of the most favored nation.
This is en- important provision so far as
trade is concerned, but its terms limit its
application strictly to matters of commerce
and navigation. Yet Washington dispatches
say that the State Department holds that
it would admit Japanese to naturalization
Finally, the decisions of the courts are
conflicting, at least one or two United States
judges having held that japanese are en-
titled to naturalization under the present
law and others having held the contrary.
Undoubtedly the intention of the present
law, as amended in 1870, was to exclude
Chinese only, but it's language does not ex-
press that intention clearly. To admit
Japanese to naturalization under the pres
ent law they must be held to belong TO the
white or Aryan race, and that is not the
case.
All this trouble and confusion grows out
of two wrong steps-frst, in 1890, the ex-
clusion of negroes from becoming natural
lied citizens. and second in 1870, the ex-
elusion OF Chinese. No more unworthy test
of citizenship could possibly be made than
that of color. II the Japanese are admitted
China will make loud protest against the
discrimination against Chinese, and the
United States will be placed in a more en-
barrassing position than ever.
TOO MUCH PARTIsANsHIP.
When Mr.. sayers. of Texas, told the