The San Francisco call., 1910-06-11
VICTIM OF Chinese.
SAYS HART North
Blames OrientaIs for Charges
Made Against Him at
Washington
Defends His Hindu Policy and
Declares That lie viii
Land on Top
Continued From Page 1

dock at San Francisco Most Of them
have some money. and the assertion
that they are likely to become public
charges is not easy to prove. dare
say that the Hindus are not desirable
as citizens. and the remedy is gen
eral Asiatic exclusion law. There is
no reason for any discrimination be-
tween the different Asiatie peoples in
so far as this country is concerned.
YOELL TAKES ISSUE
YoeH, after reading NOrth's declara-
tiOn. issued the following statement:
How does the commissioner of i'm
migration account for the fact that
some fifty Hindus whom he recon-
mended for admission. and in which
case an appeal was made to the de-
partment of commerce and labor BY
Inspector Ainsworth were deported by
order of the department. in spite OF
his recommendation that they be ad-
mitted?
why was the inspector who ap-
pealed against the admission of Hins>
dus, and whom the department sus-l
tanned, taken off the board of special
inquiry and also the work of primary
inspection? The immigration laws are
the same for all ports OF the United
States Why are Hindus not admitted
this port?
TAXED BY CANADA
Another feature: Our neighbor.
Canada, imposes a tax of $500 on all
Hindus, although subjects of the
British empire. Are we not doing an
unfriendly act to allow Hindus to be
admitted here so that they can be
easily Smuggled across the border to
a friendly neighbor. while that neigh
l1- oR q -
discourage their admission and subse-
quent smuggling into the United
States?
The commissioner states that con-
siderable numbers of Hindus have been
excluded from here for legal reasons.
How many have been excluded who
have not been found physically deficient
since Inspector AinswOrth has been
taken off that work? Were the so
Hindus depOrted by the department of
commerce and labor for legal reasons
or not? If these so were excluded for
legal reasons are not the same reasons
applicable in the cases of other Hin
dus?
The commissioner states that there
is no reason for any discrimination be-
tween the different Asiatic peoples in
so far as this country is concerned
Is il not a discrimination against jap
aneSe that all Japanese arriving at this
tion, while the distinctly inferior Hindu
! is admitted with the same facility
the high class British. Scandinavian and
other European imm grants receive?
rs IL not a fact that the social. in
dustrial and moral characteristics of
the Hindus is a sufficient reason to dis
criminate against them? Why does
Canada, Australia. New Zealand and
South Africa-all the white mans coun-
tries-bar these aliens If there is no
reason for it? What would California
be for a white man populated by two
or three million Hindus of the class we
are now becoming too familiar with?
Despite the commissioner of immigra-
tions assertion that there is no reason
to discriminate, the people OF California
are in too many instances justified in
their assertions that there are good
and sufficient reasons why these people
are not wanted. and win probably in
dicate them in more pronounced man
ner unless this Immigration be stopped
The assertion of the commissioner
that an Asiatic exclusion law is neces-
sary is not borne out by the facts. and
is probably made by him to bolster up
his action in admitting Hindus"