The Washington times., 1902-04-06
Continued from Second Page1

States, and to any Territory under its
jurisdiction. while allowing the admis-
| sion of Chinese officials. teachers, stu
dents, merchants. and travellers for pleas
ure.
| 1t could not be doubted, the Senator
! claimed. that we have the right to enact
such laws as will safeguard our citizen
ship against communicating influence from
any quarter of the globe. The duty to
preserve the standard of our citizenship
is plain and imperative. AS proving that
our national policy had been a broad and
generous one, he cited the fact that 49,
9lS immigrants were added to our popula-
| tion during the year 1901, or enough to
found city nearly two and half times
| larger than the city of Indianapolis
Enough are annually coming to our shores
to make a city larger than Cincinnati,
and nearly as large as the combined cities
of San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle
| AT the rate of our immigration for last
year there will be added to our population
in six years enough to found State as
| large and popuious as the State OF In
diana. This does not include any appre-
ciable number of Chinese, and the query
naturally arises, what would be the total
| annual immigration with no restrictive
| law safeguarding the Pacific Coast against
the admission of the Chinese
History of the Policy.
Mr.. Fairbanks then proceeded to give
the history of the Chinese exclusion pol
icy. and declared that the pending meas
ure is in effect a codification of existing
laws and the rules and regulations pro-
mulgated by the Treasury Department to
carry such laws into effect 1t was not a
departure from the well settled policy of
the Government, and although some of the
provisions of tie bill might seem to be
unduly drastic, they were only such as ex-
perience has suggested. 1t was a matter
of pride that our labor was better paid
than any other. and he argued at length
against the undesirability of compelling
American labor to enter into competition
with Chinese, who subsist upon what an
American would throw away who never
rise above their present level, and who
are but human machines of the lowest Or
der
He insisted that the exclusion policy
was not dictated by any iil-will toward
the Chinese Empire. The events of the
last few years had demonstrated our
friendship for that great and venerable
Empire. But our first duty was toward
our own country. high order of citizen
ship was the chief end and aim OF this
Republic, and while we were liberal to
those of foreign birth, we had a rightful
concern as to who should be admitted
Contract laborers were excluded from
every country, and the exclusion of Chi
nese laborers. whether under contract or
not, was dictated solely by the same
measures and in the interest of American
labor and American civilization.
He urged that the bill should be passed
soon. saying it would avoid inevitable
friction and discomfort and the disturb
ance of friendly relations
Might Violate Treaty.
An interesting colloquy arose at the
conclusion of Mr. Fairbanks remarks Mr.
Gallinger IN. HI thought some provis-
ions of the pending measures would vio-
(Mass.) and Mr. Mitchell (Ore.) denied
the charge.
Mr. GaIlinger took Hon. John W. Foster
as his authority. Mr.. Penrose -Pa)
charged that Mr.. Foster was the accred-
tied agent or attorney of the Chinese
Government. Mr.. Gallinger expressed
surprise. He declared that if an exist
ing treaty was Violated he could not sup
port the bill, even if his State SO de-
nanded
Mr.. Lodge made a speech in favor of
the bill He announced that he had
changed his mind On some features of
the bill since the committees investiga-
tior. One of ifese questions was that
OF coolie labor.
Mr.. Lodge argued that there was no
violation of the stipulations OF the treaty
Of 1894. That the treaty had been en-
tered into with entire knowledge. not
only of the policy OF the United States.
but of the means adopted to carry that
policy into effect
II in any clause of the bill IL could be
shown that treaty rights would be vio-
lated, The bill ought to he modified, and,
he had no doubt would be modified. But
he did doubt very much. indeed, whether
II could be shown ttat the treaty of 1894
was violated in any single particular.
Mr.. Fairbanks read from the testimony
taken before the Committee on Immigra
tion statements OF a Mr.. Dunn, showing
how the rules were evaded, and how large
numbers of Chinese persons were fraudu-
lcntly introduced into this country.
Chinese Numbers Decreasing.
Mr. Gallinger. in refu.ation of this
statement. pointed out the fact that the
Chinese population of California had fal-