The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-06-26
STATES
and JAPAN

Continued From Page One.
Toxic. 1t will be published on a date
TO be agreed upo later. 1t is agreed
that Secretary Bryan replied directly
10 the Japanese governments desire to
rake up the negotiations anew where
they were suspended. and reaff1rmed
the position of the United States, leav-
ing the subject open for further diplo-
matte exchanges.
so there the controversy stands, an
parently at a. deadlock. There are
lntimations in diplomatic circles that
II Delng worked around to a stage for
arbitration at The Hague. A standard
arbitration treaty with Japan now is
IN force, having only recently been re-
neWed. The proposed treaty which
was halted by Japan's latest attitude.
IL Is understood, proposed to touch
upon the naturalization of those Jap
auese already owning land.
Inc correspondence in full makes
about 10000 words. A prepared alb
stract sets out the main features in
this manner:
"On May. 9, 1913. after the Califor-
MIA anti-alien land law had been pass
ed' but before it was. signed by Gov
ernor Johnson, the Japanese ambassa-
dor presented the first urgent and ex-
plicit protest of his government. He
said that in the opinion of Japan the
act was unfair and discriminatory,
was directed against his countrymen,
was inconsistent with the provisions
of the treaty in force, and that it was
opposed to the spirit and fundamen-
tai principles of am.ty and good I'M
Outstanding,
The ambassador emphasized the
contention that the proposed law was
in violation of the treaty and discussed
at length it's effect on the rights of
Japanese in the law of descent, and it's
effect upon corporations of which jap
anese were members, It violated, he
commended, the treaty guarantee grant
ing Japanese the most constant pro
lection" for their property and the
clause granting the right to own
houses, factories, warehouses and
shops. He intimated that it was con-
trary to the favored nation clause also.
Any possible remedy by resort to
ordinary process of law, the ambassa-
dor pointed out, would be unnecessary
for aliens eligible to citizenship. This
marked, he said, a further discrimina-
ton. In closing, the ambassador stat
ed that his government desired to
have 1t entirely clear that they attach
the utmost Importance to the discrim-
inatory phase Of the legislation"
On May 10, the United States, set
ting forth the steps taken by the fed
eral government to avoid the legisla-
ton in California and explaining that
under the constitutional arrange
ments of the United States we could
do no more than that" pointed out
that the object of the objection was
not political, that it was the act of
but n state and that the only object
was wholly economic, based upon the
particular conditions existing in Cali
fnNnIn Nh IN~N 49, NI@A
all existing treaty rights are expressly
preserved by the act and that they
may be enforced in the federal courts,
a privilege not enjoyed by American
citizens in all cases.
On June 4, Japan replied that the
latest American note did not have the
effect of lessening the sense of dis
appointment and grave concern of his
government in consequence Of the
alien land law; that his government
expected cooperation instead of a
reference to the courts of the United
States; AND that, as Japanese are not
eligible to citizenship, and as they
have not under the new act the right
to acquire land in California. the
Japanese government is convinced that
the measure is internationally
racially discriminatory" and is con-
trary to the letter and spirit of the
treaty of 1911, as we'll as at variance
with the accepted principles of just
and equal treatment upon which good
relations between friendly nations so
largely depend.
The ambassador contended that the
wrong complained of was directed
against his countrymen as a nation;
that though it was committed by the
authorities of a single state, it never
theless was to the federal government
that Japan must look. He called at
tention to the small number OF
Japanese in California and the small
amount of property improved, to the
enforcement by his government Of the
existing understanding on the restric-
ton of immigration from Japan, and
concluded that "if the object of the
legislation in question was wholly
economic then the conclusion is ma
tural, that the apprehensions upon
which the enactment was based are
unjusti1able and without sanction of
good reason"
The ambassador then called attention
to the American laws under which