Evening star., 1924-04-11

these terms is published in the annual
! report of the United States commits
sioner general of immigr alton for
1908, 1909 'snd 1910, respectively.
| Faithfully Keep Pact. ,'-'-
"As l. stated above, the Japanese
government have been most faithful.
ly conserving the gentlemen's agree
ment in every. detail OF its terms,
i which fact is, believe, we'll known
TO the uniged States government.
may be permitted. in this conn ection,
TO call your attention to the official
! figures published in the annual re-
ports of, the United States commits
sloner general of immigration, show
: ing the increase or decrease of Jap
| anese population in the continental
| United States by immigration and
! emigration.
According to these reports. in the
years 190S-19c3 the total mum bers OF
Japanese admitted TO and departed
| from the continental United States
! were. respectively. l20,3l7 and 111.6S6.
4 In other words, the excess of those
| admitted over those departed was in
niteen years only S,6S1 that is TO say,
the annual average of SIS. 1t Is inn
portant to note that in these S,6Sl
are included not only those VINO are
! covered by the terms of the gentle
I men s agreement, but all other classes
( or Japanese, such as merchants. stu
! dents, tourists, government officials,
/ etc.
! These figures collected by the
! United States immigration authori-
| ties seem to me to show conciusively
| the successful ope Grafton of the gem
| tlemen's agreement, Resides this
there is, of course. the increase
! through birth of the Japanese popu-
! lation in the United States. This has
| nothing to do with either the gentle
mems agreement or the immigration
| laws
Il may add in this connection that if
the proposition were whether it would
not be desirable to amend or modify
some of the terms of the agreement. the
question would be different, and L per-
| sonally believe that my government
would not be unwilling to discuss the
matter with your government, II such
were its wishes. -. !;
CO-operatcd From Start
Further. if ] may speak frankly. at
the risk of repeating what. under in
structions from my government, have
! represented TO you on former occa-
sions, the mere fact that a certain
iclause. obviously aimed at Japan as a
nation, is introduced in the proposed
immigration bill, in apparent disregard
of the most sincere and friendly en-
deavors on the part of the Japanese
| government TO meet the needs and
I wishes of the American government
and people, is mortifyins enough 10
the government and people of Japan.
''They are, however, exercising the
4 utmost forbearance at this moment,
| and in SO doing they confidently rely
I upon the high sense of justice and
! fair play Of the American govern
/ ment and people, which, when prop
| erly approached, will readily under
stand why no such discriminatory
| provision as above referred to should
\ be allowed to become part of the
| law of the land.
1T is needless to add that it is not
4 the intention of the Japanese gov
| ernment TO question the sovereign
| right of any country to regulate i'm
| migration to it's own territories.
! Nor is it their desire to send their
| nationals to the countries where they
! are not wanted. On the contrary, the
| Japanese government showed from
| the very beginning OF this problem
| their perfect willingness to cooper
ate with the United States govern
honorable means the entrance into
! the United States of such Japanese
nationals a S are not desired by the
! United States, and have given ample
/
| are well known to your government
ITO Japan the question is not one
| OF eXpediency, but of principle. To
| her the mere fact that a few hun
| dreds or thousands OF her nationals
! will or will not be admitted into the
domains of other countries is inn
! material. so long as no question of
| national susceptibilities is involved.
The important question is whether
japan as nation is or is not en-
titled to the proper respect and con-
| sideration of other nations In other
words. the japanese government asks
/ OF the United States government
1 simply that proper consfd Iteration or
dlnari%y given by one nation to the
SeiE-resPece OF another, Which after
all forms the basis of amicable in
| ternational intercourse throughout
the civilized world. 80
Exclusion Clause Unneeded.
TT is indeed impossible for my gov
eminent and people, and / believe II
would be impossible also for your
government and for those of your
people who had made a careful study
of the subject. te. understand why it
should be necessary for your country
to enact as the law of the land such
clause as section II (BD, of the
House immigration bill.
"As is justly pointed out in YOUR
letter of February s, 1924, to the
chairman of the House committee on
imm migration, it Is idle to insist that
the provision is not aimed at the
japanese, for the proposed measure
(section 25) continues in force your
existing Legislation regulating Chi
nese immigration and the barred
zone provisions of your immigration
laws which prohibit immigration
from certain other portions of Asia
to say nothing about the public state
ments OF the sponsors and supporters
-of that particular provision as to its
aim. In other words, the manifest
object OF the said section II is to SIN
gle out Japanese as a nation, Stig-
matizing them as unworthy and un-
desirable in the eyes of the American
people. =
And yet the actual result of that
particular provision, If the proposed
bill becomes a law as intended, would
be to exclude only 146 japanese per
year. On the other hand, the gen.
tlemen's agreement is, in fact, accom-
plishing all that can be accomplished
by the proposed Japanese exclusion
clause, except for those 1A6.
'It is indeed difficult to believe that