Bonners Ferry herald. [volume] (Bonners Ferry, Idaho) 1904-current, 1914-08-14
CALIFORNIA FOUND THAT ONCE
THE JAPS GOT HOLD OF LAND
THEY WON OUT.
THEREFORE, ANTI-ALIEN LAW
Their Hope Is immigration of Farm
Labor From Europe via Panama
Canal-Japs Evade Law by In
cooperating Into Companies.

that, once a foothold on the land is
gained, Japanese colonization operates
to the exclusion of the whites by
forcing the whites out of employment
on the soil and by the social incom.
patibility of the two races. Califor-
MAS problem was not only an agri-
cultural problem but a race and social
problem and conditions seemed to
have reached a serious and acute
stage. Therefore, the California
farmer was the source of an unani-
nous and irresistible demand for
law prohibiting Japanese from acquir-
ing agricultural lands. To make this
protection real, there must ultimately
be law forbidding him to lease agri-
cultural land, but to give the farmer
time for adjustment to the new condi-
tions that must come, the right to
make leases for not more than three
years was provided for in the bill en-
acted-the hoped-for relief being inn
migration of farm labor from Europe
by way of the Panama canal
Until recently the Japanese were
permitted to come into this country
freely and without restriction, but
Japanese laborers have been largely
excluded since 1908 under the so
called Gentlemen's Agreement be-
tween the two governments. Later,
the treaty of 1911 expressly comedies
to Japanese the right to lease and oc-
cupy real estate for residential and
business purposes. These are the only
two governmental documents bearing
on the California case.
The state democratic platform of
1912 had declared: I'VE favor the
passage of bill that will prevent any
alien, not eligible to citizenship, from
owning land in the state of Califor-
MIA"
When the Legislature convened in
| 1913, bills to the above effect were in
troduced in the assembly by II. B.
Bradford and in the upper house by
| Senator Birdsall
With the passage of the Bradford
bill by vote of 60 to Is on April 18th,
Japan protested to the president, the
president protested to Governor John
son and the governor passed the pro-
test along to the legislature, which,
however, declined to "renig" on its ac-
ton. The Birdsall bill was also passed
and the matter was practically dis
posed of, except for the governors
signature, when President Wilson sent
Secretary of State Bryan to Sacra-
mento to protest against the states
taking action which, it was believed,
might contravene the existing treaty
with Japan.
During the reconsideration, a point
came out which revealed to Secretary
Bryan that his mission was hopeless.
This was an unchallenged statement
that the labor movement in the state
| had, since the last election campaign,
held the pledges of 90 per cent of the
legislators to vote for an anti-alien
land bill.
Undoubtedly the presidents criti-
cisms, suggestions and objections re-
suited in a more diplomatic wording
of the document which, in the form in
which it was finally enacted, was
called the Webb law The words lin
eligible to citizenship" do not appear.
This is avoided by affirming in one
section the rights of aliens eligible to
citizenship and then, in a second sec
ton, affirming that aliens not covered
by the first section may acquire, pos
sess, enjoy, transmit and transfer real
property in the manner and to the ex-
tent and for the purposes presented
by any treaty now existing"
By this phrasing, the law apparently
not only avoids contravening the
treaty of 1911 with Japan but follows
the very lines of that document which,
as before stated, secured to the Jap
anese the right to lease and occupy
land for certain residential and bust
ness purposes, but was emphatically
silent on agricultural lands. 1t is diff
ficult to see how the Japanese govern
ment can successfully oppose a law
which practically enacts a Japanese
treaty into a California statute and
bars Japanese citizens from no priv
ilege in California from which Ameri-
can citizens are not also barred in
Japan.
Nevertheless, IL was believed this
law would be as effective in operation
as was contemplated in the original
Bradford and Birdsall bills. The law
was passed and signed by the COVER
nor in May and became effective Au-
gust 10, 1913. 1t was not as drastic
as the people wanted, however, and
there we're movements, particularly by
the Asiatic Exclusion league, to defeat
the law by means Of referendum pc
tition.