Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-06-16
QUESTION FOR COURTS
Views of Japanese Lawyer on
San Francisco Riots.
NOT A DIPLOMATIC ISSUE
DR.. Miyakawa Discusses All Phases of
the Situation.
UNITED STATES RESPONSIBLE
Single State Eliminated Under Treaty
of 1894, But individuals Ag-
grieved Have Remedy.

DR.. Masuli Miyakawa of San Francisco,
the japanese lawyer who filed the in
junction suit against the San Francisco
school board in the now famous school
case, in discussing. last night at the
Arlington Hotel the recent riots in San
Francisco expressed the opinion that If
the treaty rights of the Japanese have
been violated they haye ample resort in
the courts, and that the question does not
call for settlement through diplomatic
channels.
DR.. Miyakawa is the only Japanese
lawyer ever admitted to the American
bar, and he is now a lecturer in the law
school Of the University of Indiana. In
discussing the Japanese question he said:
From the various reports 1 have re-
ceived from my friends in Japan and
San Francisco, and from reading the
American and Japanese newspapers 1 am
convinced that there has been more or
less, looting done upon properties of
Japanese residents in San Francisco. This
unfortunate question comes. from inter
national viewpoint. under the treaty of
1S94-the treaty being a compact made
with Japan so that the properties and
the persons of the Japanese in the terri
tories of the United States are protected.
The government of the United States is
responsible, and not the state of Cali
fornia.
But we must not lose sight OF the fact
that the treaty of 1894 provides that the
Japanese residents. if their treaty rights
should be violated as in the present cases.
resort may be had to the courts of JUS
tice Therefore, the Japanese may have
ample remedy in the splendid American
courts, and for that matter, the Ameri-
can Constitution, directs that the treaty
is the law of the land, and the United
States Supreme Court commands that the
n tnr n n al q &c nff hA
can law.
Rank of the United States.
Japan has known ever since her first
treaty made with the western DOW
ers that the United States is a first-class
civilized power. Japan also must know
that the American progress is written
upon the racial and industrial struggle
race against race, commonwealth against
commonwealth All the races of mankind
have, come and are coming from every
corner of the globe to struggle and TO
win in the struggle. The japanese are a
frst-class civilized people, but they did
not and do not come to this country with
extraterrtorial rights; they have not any
more prerogatives than the Germans or
Englishmen.
The success of Teutonic races in
America is the illustrative example of
the survival of the fittest. They had
struggled as victims of racial differences
but never for single instant asked in
| reference of their home government
Latin colonies had sometimes depended
! upon the treaty rights, for instance the
| famous New Orleans case They are.
| therefore, to that extent, less successful
| than were the Teutonic elements The
United States has no use for and is not
| a good country for, any race which is but
| relying and dependent"
Debarment of Aliens.
Dr
to whether the Japanese claim that the i'm
| migration limitation law passed durin the
last session of Congress conflicts with the
treaty between Japan and the United
States, he said
"Those japanese laborers whose rights of
| landing are limited are aliens. That the gov
eminent of the United States, through the
action of the legislative department can ex-
clude or limit the landing Of the aliens is
an incident of every independent nation
whether there is any treaty or not. If it
| could not exclude or limit aliens it would
be to that extent subject to the control of
another power.
'If, however. the japanese bring a test
case on the ground that the limitation is
unconstitutional because of the treaty of
1894. under the most favored nation clause
could the Supreme Court invalidate the lin
itation law" was asked.
To this DIR. Miyakawa said: II am not
sure to that. 1t is not 4 question Of
| could, but would The United States SUI
preme Court has always been and is re
friend of aliens the weak. The Presi-
dent not only. dispenses the honors but
holds the sword of the community; the
Congress not only commands the purse,
but 1t pTescribes the rule by which the du-
ties and rights Of every citizen are to be
| regulated the court may truly be said to
have neither force nor WILL but merely
| judgment. Such being the case. the court
seems to sympathize with the weak almost
every time.
at is the Supreme Court that as early
as 1904 instructed all the world that an act
| of Congress ought never to be construed to
violate the law of nations
Force Of International Law.
"As late as 1899 the same court said: In
ternational law Is part Of our law. and must
be ascertained and administered by the
| courts of justice Of appropriate jurisdic-
ton as often as questions Of right depend
| ing upon it are duly presented for their de-
| termination
When asked as to whether the Japanese
newspapers are urging a bomba rdment of
San Francisco. as It was in the case of
Satsu-Cho in 1860 the Japanese lawyer
| said:
YES that is true"
! "Will they do it," was asked again.
THAT I could not answer for 1t is the
| answer properly belonging to politicians
diplomats l am a lawyer. If they ever do
! then the kilograms are responsible In the
| case of the Japan San Francisco trouble
| kilograms, the instruments for the preser-
walton of peace appear to be fast becom-
| ing the instruments for disturbing the
peace.