Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-11-20
JAPANESE MAY
Be RESIDENTS
Of us. IN WEST
Supreme Court Decision
Fails to Limit Those
Born on American Soil
Ownership and Control
of 900 Acres, Will
Remain With Aliens.
By l.. c. Ryan.
Especial Correspondent Of The Tfihunei
lrop4--ggb+ 1000 Ry Great Falls TribUne

(Specfai Correspondent or Inc Ifinuhef
Copyright. 1922, BY Great Falls Tribune
San Francisco. Calf. Nov. 10
There are more than 10000 American
born Japanese in California alone, who
| desDite the recent decision Of the su-
preme court are bonafide citizens of the
| United States. Under the laws of this
! country they also will be legally quail
| fled to own California land now in dis
pute regardless of any act or provision
! Of an anti-alien law. This figure is
, official. These japanese have been
born il this state since 1908 and while
it is suggested that there may be some
/ 10000 who were born here there is
no statistics available on which to base
a guess. There are at the present time
a total of 100000 Japanese in the
state.
I It is pointed out by many who de
cline to wax enthusiastic that the recent
decision of the supreme court. which
upheld public opinion generally, that
so soon PC these 10000 japanese be-
| come Of i al age they also legally can
| step in as owners of 100000 acres of
the finest agricultural land in the state.
land in which their parents. relatives
! and japanese corporations with Amerl-
can. now hold under various lease ar
/ engagements which seem just as effec-
tive as real ownership.
Little Reaction
This is why the supreme court
naturalization decision produced less
| reaction here, the fountain head of anti
japanese legislation in the west. thar
in the various states where the Japan
csc are not a problem, and the effect
Of the decision upon internal relations
was more of a topic of discussion. The
Ill 80
the test cases brought to them.
On the 9th of this month the
supreme court will hear arguments on
the test case brought to determine the
constitutionality Of the California law,
states, and directed against alien own
ership of land. This comes in three
cases. the first unfolding that section
of the law leasing Of land to the
Japanese for agricultural purposes and
the second that prohibiting leasing Of
land to corporations which in reality
are owned and controlled by Nip
ponese. Both these actions were won
by the state in the lower courts. The
third. lost therein, involves the legal
right of a japanese to till the land
on crop shares. Naturally it is con
coded that the recent decision, holding
that the Japanese were mot white
persons. and consequently were in
eligible to naturalization. was Of i'm
p~ortance to California. but only be-
cause if it had been to the contrary
it automatically would have knocked
out the other cases awaiting argu-
ments.
Demands Made
One result of the suit decision was
a concerted demand on the congress
sional representatives of the nine
western states, in which the Japanese
question is a vital problem, for a law
doing away with the so-called gentle
mans agreement, whereby japanese
immigration is restricted by an under
standing between the two governments. |
Naturally there is a division in senti-
ment on whether this supreme court