The Washington herald., 1906-12-06
California and the Japanese.

We think our California friends are
viewing with quite too much alarm the
apparently minatOry phrase in the Pres
idents message asserting the executive
purpose. il it may be lawfully carried
out TO employ the entire military and
civil forces of the Federal government
10 maintain the treaty rights of the
japanese. The language used by the
President is strenuous and superlative.
but it hardly justiies visions Of military
operations against San Francisco or a
naval blockade Of that port As an ulti-
mate resort, the army and navy are be-
hind all enforcement of Federal law, and
the President evidently intended nothing
more than to express as vigorously as
possible his resolute purpose TO enforce
the law. Federal troops have been used
to uphold Federal statutes, notably in the
South during Grants administration. We
do not Imagine President Roosevelt has
the remOtest thought Of reproducing any
feature of that unhappy regime
The truth is that the Presidents
treatise on international morality, which
has set the Californians by the ears, does
not wholly disclose the administration
policy with respect to the Japanese ques-
tion. We must confess to sharing the
perplexity of our California friends. on
reading the message, as TO Just what it is
that the President purposes to enforce
with all the military and civil forces at
his command The treaty rights of the
japanese? But what are they? Exclu-
sion Of japanese children from the com
mon schools the President regards as a
wicked absurdity;" nowhere does he say
that it is in violation of the treaty with
Japan. He has avoided prejudging that
question. the really vital point in the con
trOversy and has not made known
through his message the precise method
by which the administration hopes to
achieve a settlement Of the matter in
dispute
From other sources, however. it may be
gathered that the administration adheres
to the view that discrimination against
japanese children in the public schools Of
the States violates the rights of residence
guaranteed to the japanese by treaty.
The right of education, We are told. goes
with the right of residence. Serious diff
ferences Of opinion are likely to arise as
sitions. They are properly questions for
judicial determination. and the plan of
the Department of Justice to bring them
before the courts is strongly TO be COM
mended. Executive enforcement OF law
follows. it does not usually precede. Judi
cial process; SO the people of California
need have no fear that the clank of
arms will Immediately disturb their slum-
beTs
Pending legal decision as TO the merits
Of the Japanese case. upon which alone
further executive action may be founded.
resolutions expressive of opinion on the
Interpretation of a treaty are inexpedient
at best They may tend 70 embar-
rass the President, but they may have
the effect also of fOmenting unpleasant
agitation and embittering our relations
with country where the harmlessness
of Congressional resolutions may not be
as well understood as it is among las.
The eagerness with which Mr. Roose-
welt invites a call of his hand on the
question Of the discharged negro troops
indicates that he is a pretty confident
stand-patter in that respect, at ali events.