Year: 1878

The report of the House Committee on
Education and Labor upon the chinese
question is decidedly the most thoughtful
and well considered review at the subject
which has been presented before Congress,
aud it is calculated to form public opinion
at the East. and to promote useful leglSla-
tion. The committee has undoubtedly en-
dravorrd to iudge the iSSuc dispassiOnateIy
and while avoiding the too common mis-
take of denying the Chinese any good at
tribntrS they have been keen enough to
discover aud emphasize the only Just
ground of opposition TO that Kind OF i'm
migration. When the mretlecting Oppo-
urits OF the Chinese have undertaken to
rcpresent them "a set of monsters, dcsti-
mite OF all human excelen2ies, and have
further attempted to make 1t appear that
their labor has been altogether unproduc-
tive OF benefit to the Pacific Coast, they
have merely given handle to those who
take the other side, and have justified
comparisons which have by no means al
wsys nut white labor in the best and most
favorable attitude. Whenever this ques-
,ion is candidly discussed it must be ad.
mtted freely that the Chinaman is an ex-
cellent labor machine; that he is frugal,
temperate, industries, docile, and in many
respects trustworthy. Take him on any
of these points, without reference to
broader considerations; and will compare
tavombly with any class OF labor in the
world. But the fatal objection to him is,
as we have constantly pointed out, that he
does not assimilate. He begins as a
Ihinaman. and AS Chinaman he ends.
So far as the experience of quarter of a
century enables us to judge, he has not the
making of American citizenship about
him. He belongs to an alien race, and
this is a very different thing from an alien
nationality, while its difference is empha-
sized by the fact that the race to which he
belongs. or by far the largest portion of it,
has been nodded for thousands OF years in
the habits and customs and ideas of civili-
zation and government altogether at vari-
ance with those OF the European people
from whom we derive our own, 1t is
this consideration. and this alone, which
justities the attitude Of the Pacific Coast
upon the Chinese question. The Opposi-
tiOn TO the Chinese on the mere ground
that they work for small wages could
never be seriously maintained, and the
truth Of this will be at once perceived If
we suppose the case of an immigration Of
foreigners as willing as the Cinnamon TO
work for small wages, but. unlike him
capable Of assimilation. In such a case
there would be no rational ground for op-
position. for the new cDnIers would at
once become u.2tuFalIxgli, adopt American
cRstOmi and INSTITUTIONS, and be absorbed
into the ulEh0a. there to act upon, or to
be ra-zcreii uPaa- by che majority. But
the case supposeaG wUHld probably end In
the abandonment OF the low wage factor,
since the desires Of the new element would
grow with their experience, and since they
would no longer rest content with the pit
lance win which they had at first been
satisfied. The Chinaman, however does
not change his mode OF life. He retains
his S0itlid habits to the last. He evinces
no disposition to indulge In unaccustomed
luxuries. He is constantly boarding his
earnings in Oider that he may return to
his native land capitalist. He is in
short stranger and a sojourner in our
midst, and possesses nothing IN common
with US. This is not justification for
abusing him, but it is u reason why we
should refrain from encouraging the i'm
migration of such an element, no matter
how plausible case may be made out for
it when ltd utility as an aid to production
Is considered alone. Every nation has
the right to protect itself against agencies
which menace the well-being of Its compo-
nent parts, and no Government Is bound
to play the phiIanthropist at the expense
OF progress and civilization. We are here
supposed to engage in building up civili-
zation after the models followed by our
European ancestors, nothing calls upon
us to deviate from that policy for the bene-
tit OF an alien race. No doubt 1t can be
made to appear that with the aid of un-
limited Chinese labor the creation OF
wealth would proceed very rapidly, and
that an extremely prosperous condition
Of things would result. Precisely the
same kind Of argument, however, has re-
peatedly been employed in defense of
Slavery, and between Slavery and Chinese
labor there Is no essential difference be-
sides those OF compulsion and ownership.
The Chinaman Is not chattel, 1t is true,
bur he answers all the purposes OF chat
tel, and the social growth and develop
lment which is produced through his
agency is in no respect different from that
which Slavery fostered. In most cases
the tendency must be 10 destroy the ele


ment Of white American labor; to con-
centrate power, wealth and political in
flneIite, in the hands of small minority;
and to weaken the democratic spirit. This
is what slavery did for the South, and it Is
what Chinese labor would do tor any state
that tried 1t long enough without res
traint. The House Committee on EduCa-
ton and Labor has perceived this tendency
and has pointel 1t out; and the presenta-
tion so made will We think be very apt
to bear fruit Sacramento Union"