Evening star., 1922-11-14
No Reflection on Japanese
In Denial of CitizensRip
Supreme Court Merely Interpreting and
Declaring the Viii of Congress,
Says Decision.
HEADWORk

In its first construction of federal
law relating to Japanese nature>Iiza-
tion the Supreme Court of the United
States has declared that Japanese
cannot be naturalized in the United
States and cannot become citizens.
Pointing out that there is not implied
in the law or in the courts interpre-
tation of it any suggestion of racial
inferiority, the decision, which was
handed down by Mr.. Justice Suther-
land, says that the court has no other
function than to declare the will of
Congress.
The decision was rendered in the
case of Takao OZawa. who applied for
citizenship in 1914 in Hawaii The
court, with the Ozawa case as author
ity. rendered like decision in two nat
uralization cases from the state of
Washington.
that there is not implied-either in
the legislation or in our interpreta-
tion Of it-any suggestion OF 1ndl-
vidual unworthiness or racial ln1e-
riority. These considerations are IN
no manner involved" 1t also referred
to the complimentary" terms used In
describing in the papers presented to
the court "the culture and enlighten-
ment of the Japanese people:
With such an estimate, the court
said, it had mo reason to disagree.
sun matters. however, Justice Suth-
erland stated. could not enter into
the decision of the case. I'VE have no
function in the matter. he SAID:
"other than to ascertain the will OF
Congress and declare IT.
Scope of Naturalization.
The two questions decided by the
court were whether the general natural.
ization act of June 90, 1906, was limited
by the provisions of section 21o9 Oh the
Revised Statutes. authorizing the nat.
uralization of free white persons ana
those of African birth and descent, and
whether, if SO limited, Japanese were
eligible to naturalization. In an ex-
haustive analysis Of the history OF the
2l69 was in full force, and that under
it japanese could not obtain citizenship
in this country.
The court stated that Sin all Of the
naturalization acts from 1890 to 1906
the privilege of naturalization was con-
fined to white persons with the addl-
ton in 1870 of those of African nativity
and descent). although the exact word
ing of the various statutes was not al
ways the same"
IF Congress, in 1906" it added. de
sired to alter a rule so well and so long
eStdDllSlleu, IL Hliy NC dSSuHleu IhoI 10
purpose would have been definitely dis
closed and its legislation to that end
put in unmistakable terms
Declaring that it is the duty of the
court ito give effect to the intent of
Congress-" the opinion proceeded to
determine the intent "by giving the
words their natural significance" En-
phasizing the long-established policy
Of Congress to restrict naturalization
under section 2169, the court found it
'inconceivabIe that a rule in force
from the beginning Of the govern
ment, part of our history as well as
our law, welded into the structure of
our national policy by a century of
legislative and administrative acts
and judicial decisions. would have
been deprived of its force in such a
dubious and casual fashion"
Intent of the Fathers.
Having sustained section 2169. the
court then proceeded to discuss
whether Japanese are free white
persons" within the meaning of the
statute. 1t was the intention of Con-
gress, the court held, ito confer the
privilege of citizenship upon that
class of persons whom the fathers
knew as white. and to deny it to all
who could not be so classified"
say that the trainers (of the law did
not have in mind the brown or yellow
races of Asia 1t is necessary to go
farther and be able to say that had
these particular races been suggested
the language of the act would have
been so varied as to include them
within its privileges. If it be as