The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-06-08
PRESS ON JAPAN's PROTEST

PRESS ON JAPAN'S PROTEST
 After a dignified interval Japan filed with our state department her solemn pros test against the prosision in the immi- grafton measure excluding Japanese from settlement in this country A fever of chagr'n and disappointment ran the gauntlet of the Japanese press, and the people thus taught, responded with the desired sentiments of resentment. Part of the feeling was genuine and part of it was deliberately contrived for political purposes. The jingoes, the mil ita.ists, the outs in Japanese political affairs, tried to make what capital they could out of the circumstance. But the / deed is done; the bill is signed; and we still regulate our domestic concerns to suit our policies and our ideals of cit izenship.
 The American press appears to be in sympathy with the Japanese official po- sition that the provision was needless affront to the Japanese people. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch and the New York World set forth the view that pub lie opinion in this country, while slow in manifesting itself, condemns the ex- clusion act and will eventually cause it's repeal. As the World remarks: "More 0AS0ACAJ OA tAuO PObuk ID pIOIu1ScUs OUL the fact will remain then, as now, that we have deeply and needlessly offended the Japanese people and must leave to the slow workings of American public opinion whatever is done to avert mis- chievOus consequences"
 That the president is in a measure responsible is the view of the Richmond Times-Dispatch: 'Tt is possible that the president, had he been the size of Lin coin or of Wilson, might have halted this dangerous Legislation, but it is not probable. In the first place, Mir. Cool idge and congress are hopelessly out of tune. They cannot play together in the governmental orchestra. In the second place, congress was so intent upon Jap anese exclusion that it was almost cer- tain to have pursued its course, no mat ter what pressure may have been brought to bear upon it. It was peeved, childiShly peeved, at an unfortunate use of words in Ambassador Hanihara,s note, and it was bent upon showing that it was peeved. Congress would not have feared the emigration here of something more than two hundred Japanese a year. It was just angry, unwisely angry, and now the country reaps the fruit of that unwisdom.
 Our right to enact the statute is not questioned, but, says the New York Times: "When we pass to the sphere of cOmity and courtesy in international re- lat1ons, the real strength of the Japa- nese protest becomes plain. It is not so much what was done as the way in which it was done that gave the Japa- nese a grievance. On this point they are able to condemn us out of our own mouth They need only to quote the public statements of the American sec retary of state and the American pres ident in order to prove that congress displayed a rude disregard not only of the feelings but of the conciliatory of- fers of the Japanese government. What congress sought to obtain could have been secured with the good will and cooperation of Japan, and without any thing that could be considered an af- front by country, which, whatever may be said of it, is entitled to rank as one of the great powers of the world"
 After noting that the government will make a technical reply to the Japanese protest, the Chattanooga Times re- marks: From this we may expect to read shortly a series of special plead ings, hairsplitting definitions, mystifying interpretations and oily diplomatic ra- fluctuations, emanating from Washing ton, all of which will be intended to ob- scure the obvious fact that because the Pacific states, at a critical political Juncture, demanded the exclusion of Japanese immigrants, the politicians of congress were willing to jeopardize the peace and tranquility of their country. Whatever the language of diplomacy may say of it, it was direct, intended and ingl6rious insult to a friendly na- tion." Doubtless even the Japanese newspapers would be satisfied with that dictum.
 Perhaps it is we'll to ponder the philos- Ophy of the Memphis Commercial-Ap- peal: ''So far as the present is con- cerned the issue is closed. It must re- main for the future to tell whether or not the difference between enforced ex- clusion and voluntary exclusion of Jap anese is worth the certain hatreds and possible war that will be provoked by the change. In this connection the pro test filed by Japan is document for the future as are all the preparations re- ported being made in Japan. Although the lingo press and the chauvinistic ' leaders are demanding immediate re- sistance to exclusion, the financial con- dition of Japan right now forbids any such culmination."
 Nor, according to the Springfield Re publican, "can a controversy of this kind be settled by argument, no matter how ingenious and finespun. Questions of absolute right and wrong hardly enter into the issue, which is all the more diff ficult and delicate because it springs spontaneously from the clash of two Gxong and proud nations. Notes and bourparlers may serve to distract atten- ton and to give emotion harmless out let, but the essential thing is a broad and statesmanlike spirit on both sides, a spirit of avoiding offense and of refrain ing from raising issues which diplomacy cannot dispose of"
 None of the papers examined bring out the point that there is a division of sentiment between our state department and our congress, and that it is with the annasHnraAA nkaha hnnnrtrnnrk father thar,