Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1921-01-22
MORRIS EXPLAINS
JAPAN'S PROTEST
Declares Toxic Fears California
Will Extend Discrimination"
to Personal Rights
IS POLICY WISE? HE ASKS
By the Associated Press


New York. Jan. 90. Discussing whot t
hc termed "thc California issue" in an
address today before the University
IluO' Roland s. Morris. American am .
bassador TO Japan, declared that the
japanese wcrC fearful! that California.
| having devised the plun Of CLASSIFYING
Huens on the basis If eligibility 10 citi =
leushlp, might use this method not only
III propcr,y rights, but also in personal
! rights. ''''"'
Ambassador Morris. who has been
! conducting tho negotiations with Baron
! Hhlachnra, tho japanese ambassador.
| WIN 'jcw to lnying the bases of n
! treaty between tn" United States and
japan further declared that the Jap.
ahese protest against the California
! ahtl-aiicn land law presented 10 the
American people the definite question Of
Whcther in the larger view of Amer
! i'a relations with the Orient it Is
| W'Hc To- classify HIiens on the basis of
thrIr CtlglhiItT TO citizenship.
iTeS"nting the ISSUE involved in tho
! present negotiations. Mr. Morris ask
! thai u b" borne in mind that tho Jan.
! dn'SH Merc not complaining because its
nationals resident in thr United States
ar" ineligible to citizcnShir. not asking
any greater rights for its nationals than
( those conceded 10 other aliens, not uups
| tionirS the right of tho United States
! Government to pass, subject to trenty
ohligations, legislation covering admIs.
siou or residence Of foreigners. nor seek
! ing removal of present restrictions on
japanese immigration.
Japan Opposes Discrimination
The japanese Government. he added
| does contend that Il is unjust and
unfair to pick out particular group of
aliens who 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 ne was not dis
| CusSing the merits of the issue but its
! definition, are not eligible to citizen
| Ship, our naturalization laws having
bpeu interpreted as applying only TO
whitc persons or persons of African de-
scent. This is in sense a diSCrimina &.
tion, or perhaps better, a selection of
thOs" whom for ono reason or another
wc arc willing to admit to the privilege
| of American citizenship
But it is clearly not a discrmina q.
ton Of u character which could properly
J BE- the subject Of complaint by a gov.
rrnmcnt whose nationals might be OK
! cluded. No government would consider
il proper or CxpCdicnt to protest be-
cause it's citizens wcrc not permitted to
cxpatriatc themselves.
May I ask YOU. therefore. tn note
carefully this point. Tho japanese
Government is not complaining because
Japanese aliens resident in the United
Statcs are ineligible to American citi-
zcuship.
Toxic Asks for No Favoritism
"Nor is the government Of Japan ask
ing for its citizens resident among ue
any greater rights than those conceded
to Other aliens. 1t accepts, and in It's
own domestic legislation has Often art"!
upon. tho principle that any state mas
tho right to impose reasonable rcstric'
tons upou the property rights of for
cigncrs who choose TO live or pursue
their occupations within its borders.
May I ask you therefore to not'
in the second piece that the govern
mcnt of Japan "is not IN any way
questioning the right of our govern
mout TO pass. subject only 20 ~
treaty obligations. any legislation i
may SOC ht covering the admission o,
residence OF foreigners among us.
In the third place, therefore, may
ask you TO note that the JapancS'
government aud people arc not amor
ing for the removal of any OF th'
present restrictions ou japanese I'M
migration.
What then is this much talked o
California ISSUE. OF what does JapaT
complain? Let me try TO answer thos'
uuestiOnS. As | hav" already stated
Japanesc aliens arc iueiigihlc L
citizenship under the adminIstrattv
Interpretation OF our naturalization
laws. But personal property right
they have shared equally with othc
aliens. In 1919, however, California
devised tho plan Of Classifying aItcu
on the basis of their eligibility 60 cit
zenship and then proceeded to deprlv
those who were ineligible Of certain
, property rights previously enjoyed b.
.. all aliens.
In 1920 this legislation was ampIi
fed by an initiative and referendum
act Other states arc now srriOusI
considering similar legislation and tn
people Of Japan are fearful lost thi
method may b. used not only IN prop
crty rights, but also IN personal rights
1t is against this method that ia
government and people "f Japan NJ
most vigorously and earnestly protest
Ing. They contend trat it j. Unius
aud unfair to pick out n partirulH
group Of HllruN vino are under Ccrt0i
poutical dIsa'iitj"s and deprive ther
, nj rights W..Ch AL other aliens ar
permitted ~ enjoy. And tho Japan
}, csc rrnt'st p,rs"ut, 70 al our peuV5
th,s very definite question IL III
. larger VIE" VI oVr relations with ID
s Ornut - - wI~c t'.Is to classify alien
81 & tlt,fr iDiI l.,