Arizona republican., 1904-04-09
Patterson Sees the Bars
 About To Be Let Down
ON DECEMBER / NEXT
The Only Remedy, He Contends, Lies in Legislative Enactment to Suc- ceed the Treaty of 1894, Which Will Expire on That Date.

Washington, April S.-Contracts for the cancelling machines used by the postoffice department were debated at length in the senate today in connec- ton with the postoffice appropriation bill. MT. Culberson introduced an amendment reducing the rental of ma chimes and the democratic senators charged that the rental now paid was the same paid under contracts made by Geo. w. Beavers, when he was in the salary and allowance division of the postoffice and that they were excessive. Mir. Lodge denied the charge, saying that there was no proof of it's truth.
 Mr.Patterson then addressed the sen ate on the denunciation of the Chinese exclusion treaty of 1894 by the Chinese government. He announced his con- viction that unless additional legisla- tion is had before congress adjourns, every barrier against the Chinese i'm migration that has been built will be removed on the seventh day of De- cember next, and the ports of the country will be thrown open to the un- restricted coming of-Chinese hordes, whose invasion of the United States was arrested twenty-two years ago"
 This opinicn was based upon China s denunciatioI of the treaty of 1894 mak- ing it of no effect from December 7th, next. He traced the prospective trou- ble to the failure of congress in it's vote of 1902 to duplicate the act Of 1892, continuing in force fo- ten years the exclusion act of 1882.
 Had China not denounced the treaty" he said, there would be no trouble now with the exclusion laws, for the act of 1902 would have kept them all in force; but with the 1S9i treaty out of the way, under the act If 1902 our exclusion laws will all fall to the ground on the coming of the seventh of December.
 The cause of this is the wording of the 1902 act. For the first time in this Chinese legislation the validity of the exclusion laws was made to depend upon the terms of treaties with China.
 He said the treaty of 1894 was the only treaty that absolutely prohibited the coming of Chinese to this country. He admitted that the treaty of 1890 proyided for. Chinese xelIlsiaa--hut he called attention to the fact that under that agreement the United States could only suspend, regulate and linn it' Chinese immigration. Quoting fur ther from the language of that treaty he said: Ut is by this treaty that all existing legislation must be measured and whenever its provisions are found to be inconsistent with the treaty s provisions that legislation is a nullity.''
 In conclusion, MT. Patterson said.
 Legislation that must be compared with this treaty Of 1880 is the act Of 1902. The acts of 1881 ana 1892 each suspended immigration for ten years but the act of 1902 absolutely prohibits 1t. and is therefore not in conformity with the treaty of 1880 and necessarily falls to the ground"
 In the course of Mir Patterson S speech, Messrs. Mitchell, Cullom and Spooner questioned him as to whether the treaty of 1894 had not had the effect of entirely superseding and re- pealing the treaty of 1880, but MT. Patterson contended that such was not the case. MT. SpoCner made the point That if the treaty of 1894 had the effect of repeating the treaty of 1880, the lat ter treaty must have had the effect of superseding the treaty of 1868. MT Fatterson, however did not yield the point Mir. Spooner suggested that the treaty between the United States and China would have he effect of holding in force the other treaties existing at that time including the treaty of 1894, but Patterson did not accept this con- struction. He conended that the only safe mehod was to make explicit de- claration in the form of legal enactment as he predicted that unless this course was pursued serious agitation would ensue.
 The postofflce appropriation bill was taken ID at the close of MT. Patter- sons speech and it was still under con- slderation when the senate adjourned.