Evening star., 1921-01-22
JAPAN FEARFUL,
DECLARES MORRIS
Questions Wisdom of CIassi-
fication on Basis of Citi.
zen Eligibility.
BY the Associated Press.


NEW YORK. January 22.-Discuss-
ing what he termed 'the California
issue" in an address today before the
American ambassador to Japan,
declared that the Japanese were
fearful that California, having
devised the plan of classifying
aliens on the basis of their eligibility
to citizenship, might use this method
not only in property rights, but also
in personal rights.
Ambassador Morris. who has been
conducting the negotiations with
Baron Shidehara, the Japanese am
bassador, with a view to laying the
basis of a treaty between the United
States and Japan. further declared
that the Japanese protest against the
California anti-alien land law pre-
sented to the American people the
definite question of whether, in the
larger view of Americas relations
with the orient, it is wise to classify
aliens on the basis of their eligible
ity to citizenship.
U. 8. Right Unquestioned.
Presenting the issue involved in the
present negotiations. Mr.. Morris asked
that it be borne in mind that the
Japanese were not complaining be-
cause its nationals resident in the
United States are ineligible to citizen
ship; not asking any greater rights
for it's nationals than those conceded
to other aliens: not questioning the
right of the United States government
to pass, subject to treaty obligations.
legislation covering admission or
residence of foreigners. nor seeking
removal of present restrictions on
Japanese immigration. The Japanese
government. he added does contend
that it is unjust and unfair to pick
are under certain political disabilities
and deprive them of rights which all
other aliens are permitted to enjoy"
Japanese aliens resident in the
United States" said Ambassador Nor
ris, after asserting that he was not
its definitions. "are not eligible to
citizenship. our naturalization laws
having been interpreted as applying
only to white persons or persons of
African descent. This is. in a sense.
a discrimination or, perhaps better. a
son or another we are willing to ad-
init to the privilege Of American citi-
zenship. But It is clearly not dis
elimination of character which
could properly be the subject Of COM
plant by government whose ma
tionals might be excluded.
On Sovereign Rights.
mo government would consider it
proper or expedient to protest because
its citizens were not permitted to ex-
patriate themselves. A friendly state
might regret and deplore such a poll
icy and even hope that some day it
would be changed. but 1t would un-
doubtedly claim for itself and con-
cede to other states the inherent right
of a sovereign state to determine the
conditions and limits Of naturaliza-
tion.
May I ask you. therefore, to note
carefully this point: The Japanese
cause japanese aliens resident in the
United States are ineligible to Amer
ican citizenship.
'rNor is the government Of Japan
asking for it's citizens resident among
US any greater rights than those con-
in it's own domestic legislation has
often acted upon the principle that
any state has the right to impose rea-
sonable restrictions upon the property
rights of foreigners who chose to live
or pursue their occupations within its
borders.
MAY ask you. therefore. to note in
the second place that the government
of Japan Is not in any way question
ing the right of our government to
pass. subject only to it's treaty OBJ
legations. any legislation it may see
fit covering the admission or resi-
dence of foreigners among US. 1t is
true that by the treaty Of 1911
japanese were granted full rights OF
admission to and residence in our
country. But this right was granted
only upon the express understanding
that the Japanese government would
continue voluntarily to limit immigra-
tion as provided in the so-called gen
tlemen's agreement Of 1908.
willing to Correct Defects.
I'm the third place. therefore, may I
ask you to note that the Japanese
government and people are not clam
oring for the removal of any Of the
present restrictions on Japanese i'm
migration. On the contrary, the gov-
ernment has shown a willingness to
examine and correct any Of the de-
fects and abuses of the existing ar
rangement.
What. then. is this much talked of
California issue? OF what does Japan
complain? Let me try to answer these
questions. AS I have already stated.
Japanese aliens are ineligible to citi-
zenship under the administrative in
terpretation of our naturalization
laws. But personal and property
rights they have shared equally with
other aliens.
I'm 1913. however. California devised
the plan of classifying aliens on the
basis of their eligibility to citizen
ship and then proceeded to deprive
those who were ineligible of certain
property rights previously enjoyed
by all aliens. In 1920 this legislation
was amplifed by an initiative and
referendum act. Other states are now
seriously considering similar legisla-
tion and the people Of Japan are fear
full lest this method may be used not
only in property rights. but also in
personal rights.
'It is against this method that the
government and people of Japan are
most vigorously and earnestly pro-
testing. They contend that it is un-
Just and unfair to pick out q par
ticular group of aliens who are under
certain political disabilities and de-
prive them Of rights which all other
| aliens are permitted to enjoy. And
the Japanese protest presents to all
our people this very definite ques-
ton: In the larger view OF our rela :
tions with the orient is it wise thus
| to classify aliens on the basis of their
eligibility to citizenship?
ut is not for me to answer this
| question. The answer must be made
! by the American people speaking
through the recognized organs OF
| their government. But IL is important
/ that we should keep clearly before
, US just what the issue is SO tina,
! we may more intelligently determine
| il in the light of the facts and argu-
| ments which are being submitted to
u.s."
REGIONAL DIRECTOR TO SAIL