Evening star., 1924-04-13
JAPANESE BANNED
AS HOUSE PASSES
ALIEN BILL, 322-71
Brief Discussion PreCipitat-
ed, Only Difference Arising
Over Quota Basis Year.
TWO PER CENT OF 1890
CENSUS is ENTRY LIMIT
Republican Leaders to Seek Agree
ment Tomorrow on Issues
in Dispute.

Carrying japanese exclusion
provision against which the Japanese
government has protested vigorously,
The Johnson immigration bill was
passed yesterday by the House, s22
to IL
No effort was made to eliminate
she Japanese section. which provoked
only brief and perfunctory discus
sion. There was nothing to indicate
that any of the opposition votes were
directed at the Asiatic policy con-
tanned in the bill, but rather against
the provision fixing the 1890 census
as the basis of the 2 per cent quota,
which was adopted.
Seek Agreement Tomorrow.
While the Senate was getting back
10 its consideration of the immigra-
publican leaders issued a call for a
party conference tomorrow at which
an effort will be made to agree upon
O policy both as to japanese exeiu-
sion and the census quota basis,
The existing law, which expires on
next June so, fixed the quota at 8
per cent, on the 1910 census, and had
no provision relating to Japanese i'm
migration which for years has been
regulated by the "gentlemen's agree
ment'' with Japan. Secretary Hughes
has urged that the American govern
Inent continue to recognize this
agreement, and that the Japanese be
placed on the same quota basis as the
nationals of other countries.
Representative Johnson of Wash
ington, chairman of the House i'm
migration committee, announced yes
serday that when the time comes for
the House and Senate to reconcile
their differences on immigration leg
islation, the managers on the part of
the House will insist to the end on
the retention of the Japanese exclu-
sion provision.
Protest Not Mentioned.
Ambassador Hanihara's letter to
Secretary Hughes, which was trans
mitted Friday to Congress, protest.
ing against any exclusion feature,
was not mentioned in House debate
on the bill. When this proposal is
reached in the Senate, however, SEN
ator Johnson, republican, California,
and other senators from the Pacific
coast plan to take formal cognizance
of the letter and redouble their ef-
forts to have an exclusion feature
written into law.
There was no formal vote in the House
the exclusion feature, the failure
Of any member to offer an amendment
Jcsulted in automatic approval, while the
bill was being read for amendment Only
one address regarding this feature was
delivered, that being by Representative
burton of Ohio. a republican member of
the foreign affairs committee He dis
cussed the provision for five minutes,
emphasizing what he regarded as the
inadvisability of superceding the gentle
mems agreement by legislative enact
snent
Fight Fails to Develop.
Chairman johnson. who had planned
TO deliver an address to the House urg-
ing the necessity for such enactment,
abandoned this program when it became
apparent that no serious opposition
would develop.
discussing the effect of the opera
tion of the proposed immigration
legislation, Mr.. Johnson said in
formally that should American con-
sIlar officers abroad be unprepared
on July 1 to carry out their exami-
nation of prospective immigrants in
1he country of origin, the new law
would automatically suspend all i'm
emigration from Europe until the ma
cllinery for the overseas examination
could begin to function
While the Senate measure differs
from the House bill in several par
ficulars, it also has the provision
yor overseas examination and there
appears little prospect that the two
houses will be in disagreement on
this feature of the legislation. The
chief difference between the House
and the Senate bills is in the census
basis for the quotas, the Senate meas
ure proposing the 1910 census There
have been moves to substitute the
date in the House bill and also the
1920 census with the quotas based on
sorigin of nauonalities."