The Washington herald., 1907-02-06

Ex-Secretary Of state Richard Clney. Of
Boston, holds that San Francisco is act
ing within her rights in excluding Japa-
ncse pupils from the public schools lie
/ iHterprets the treaty with Japan as inn
posing no obligations TO educate the
/ aliens. and as authorizing 80 infringement
upon the usual powers OF the California
/ State government
/ HIS views are cited i'm a letter written
I TO Representative Mccall, OF Massachu-
setts il was occasioned by q published
| interview on the japanese question which
/ Mr. Mccall gave some time ago. not long
after the Presidents message 10 Con
/ gress. Dir. Olney cited the provisions "
the treaty and showed that the second
/ article specifically provided that il should
in 10 wise affect local laws. ordinances.
and regulations affecting police and pub
/ lie security"
ar. Mccall, with the assent or Mr..
olney, gave out the text Of the letter,
which reads in part as follows.
In every discussion 7 have seen Of The
japanese claim whether official or other
wise. il has been assumed that the issue
is between the laws of the State of cali
fornid and the rights pBrportiug 40 be
granted TO Japan by treaty. that there IS
an irrec0ncildble conflict between the
two; and that either the treaty overrides
the State laws or that the State laws
override the treaty.
Treaty Excludes Issue.
But what I wish 10 sail your 3articu-
lar attention to is that in point of fact
no such issue really arises as that uni
versaIly discussed. to Wit. whether the
treaty rights of Japan are TO prevail over
the laws OF California, or vice versa.
The expressed terms of the treaty itself
exclude such an issue They contain an
explicit reservation ia favor of California.
and every other State Of the Union Of
such rights as California has exercised In
the organization of its san Francisco pub
lic schools.
"The treaty between the United States
and Japan OF November, 1924. supersedes
all previous treaties, and is stiH I'm force
Article 1 of tilat treaty upon which the
japanese clain As 10 The san Frarleiseo-
public schools g founded. declares in sub
stance,
That the citizens or subjects of each
country shall have fun liberty to travel
or reside in the other and shall have fun
protection for persons and property;
That they shall have free access 10
courts of justice in pursuit and defense
of their rights, shall have the same lib
crty as native citizens or subjects 10
employ lawyers &c. and in connection
with the administration of justice shall
have al rights and privileges OF native
citizens or subjects,
Rights OF Residence.
That. as respects rights Of residence
and travel. the possession Of goods and
effects Of any kind, the succession TO per
sonaI property, and the disposal of prop
erty of any sort. the citizens or subjects of
each country shall enjoy in the other the
same privileges. liberties. and rights. and
be subject TO TO higher imposts or charges
than native subjects or citizens Of the
most favored nation:
That the citizens or subjects of each
country shall enjoy in the other entire
liberty Of conscience. and. subject 10 the
laws, ordinances. and regulations the
right OF private or public worship and
of burial according to their religious Gus
tom. in suitable places established for
the purpose
That they shall not he compelled 10
pay charges or taxes other or higher
than those paid by native citizens or sub
jects, or those of the most favored na-
tiion.
" The citizens of each residing in the
other shall bc exempt from compui-
sorry military service from contributions
imposed in lieu thereof, and from all
forced taxes or military exaCtion.'
Now. if the provisions of this abstract
constituted the entire treaty with Jspan.
or were unqualified by any other pro-
visions in the treaty dealing with the
same subject matter. IL might be po5si-
bic to argue. though I think without
success. that a case is presented I'm which
japanese treaty rights and the rights or
dinaTily conceded 10 and exercised by the
State Of California are in conflict. and
that either the treaty must prevail over
the law OF that state or the State law
prevail over the treaty
Not the Only Provisions.
But Article I is not the whole of the
treaty. nor are its provisions the only
provisions on the same subject The
last paragraph Of the very next article
Article His as follows;
1t is, however understood that the
contained in this and the pre-
reeding article do not in any way affect
the laws. ordinances, and regulations I'm
-
.rs police and public security. either i'm
force OF which may hereafter be enacted
IN either of the two countries.
II am unable 20 see how the meaning
and effect Of the paragraph Just quoted
,dn bc misunderstood. 1t cmbodieS AN
expressed declaration that the stipulations
)f Article I are in no way TO affect the
avs. ordinances. and regulations with
regard to police and public security
which are IN force or which may here
after be enacted in either Of the Two
IN other words the COugcrics of i'm
1ortant powers, known as the police
power. is untouched and unimpaired by
his treaty How much Of The police
power is vested ia the several States and
now much in the United States il is uu-
necessary for present purposes 10 con
;ider That the great mass Of the power
remains i'm the States will hardly be de-
lied. But. however it be divided as the
'esut Of our dual form Of government.
he whole power IS excepted from tile
,peTaticn Of this treaty, so that there
'enains 20 each State. as well as 10 the
rnitcd States. All the police power either
lad, before the treaty was concluded
1T follows that as IL has never been
doubted, and viii not now be- thar the
cguation of its public schools is an ex-
rcise OF the police power belonging 10
~ - -r-Ta faNa srrrr rrsr,