The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-02-06
STATUS OF THE JAPS
ARE ENTITLED TO NATURALIXA-
TION UNDER EXISTING LAWS.
Vague Terms--New Treaty VIII
lie Favored Nation.

| Washington, February BIN view of the
correctness of the conclusion reached b,
the officials OF the state department who
have been engaged in negotiations with
| the japanese government as TO the status
of the Japanese in Hawaii. after annexatio
| is completed, further inquiry WAS made to-
day TO ascertain the ground of this state
| nent that the japanese, unless there was
| Legislation TO the contrary this year b.
| congress, would be entitled to the priyi-
leges OF naturalization, If they so desire
and are otherwise able TO meet the Ie-
qurements of the law.
The officials are reticent TO discuss Il
public question of this KIDD, and must be
Hypothetical. IN advance of the disposition
OF the pending annexation treaty, and
moreover are disposed to be put in the
position of laying down legal principles.
But In substance their contention is that
under the laws as they exist today ia
pane sc In the United States are entitled ~
naturalization They freely admit that IN
some instances the United States courts
have taken the ground that such apalioa-
tons can not be entertained, notably ia the
Boston case decided June ~. 1884, known
as In lie Saito,' but they also assert that
the practice OF the courts has not been BY
any means uniform IN thIs matter and that
have been admitted to the rights of natur-
alizatjon without the sightost objection OIL
the part OF the court
IL is denied that the state department
has not been consistent in Its treatment
OF the question as Is made by reference To
the existing relations for the government
OF the diplomatic service In which Is 10 be
found directions 10 United States offlcsrG
abroad 10 refuse to recognize the claims or
Japanese TO be naturalized citizens rights.
However, the regulation WIS founded on
the statutes, which was couched in terms
so vague as TO give rise to the varying
constructions placed upon 1t by the courts,
and the latest view OF the dcTartment
stated that the Japanese may apply for
naturalization.
This statute seems to limit naturalization
to white persons and persons OF African
descent. II was plainly d piece OF patch
work as history reveals and an exact re-
production Of its Language would not. II Is
held, serve the real purpose OF its authors
But aside from that the broad question
would be raised that the Japanese are not
10 BIZ regarded as outside this white races,
they not being Monaghan In the true eth
ifal fense.
II Is probably sufficient for the purpose
OF this legislation In the position OF the
department 10 cite these considerations as
matter that might readily act for the
Oh tpc IfOuiAn 10 itHIH
In the construction Of this law. There has
not been up to this time, II IL added. any
expression OF opposition by the court OF
last resort, the United States supreme
court, and until such an opinion shall have
been called forth the question can not he
regarded as settled. When that opinion Is
rendered Of course the department OF state
viii be bound by II, and meanwhile II has
no desire TO pose as an usurper OF the
rights OF the Judicial branch OF The gov
frnment.
Az for the condition that will arise undtI
the new treaty With Japan that goes into
effect Ia 1890 the department holds thst
IL confers upon the Japanese the rights OF
favored nations In all matters. While the e
does not rs yet exist any naturalization
treaty between Japan and the Unitef
States this can not he regarded as bar 10
naturalization. for there are no such trea-
tics existing with number II countries,
the citizens Of which are admitted TO
Tinted states citizenship upon compliance
with the laws.