Year: 1879

views the decision of Judge Deadly OF
the Chinese case, saying that the news
papers afflicted with the Chinese prob
lem are unhappily inclined to assert
| with superfiuous passion that nobody
but q dweller In some one Of the Pacific
states Is. or can be, qualified to express
an intelligent opinion on the abstract
of the Chinese question. In Califor-
mia we understand that 1t is necessary
that one should establish his claim to
be q pioneer, that Is, one who arrived
on the coast prior to Jan. 1st, 40, be-
fore he gains the right to entertain an
opinion on this intricate and obstruse
subject.


As for Judge Deady's dictum that the
right to live In the country carries with
it right to work for living, anti
Chinese papers are inclined to believe
that this Is not good law. At least one
of them says that this sis an assump-
tion which may be determined by law;''
and though 1t may be admitted that
the right to earn living may be i'm
piled from the terms Of the Burlingame
treaty. which comedies the right to live,
this Implication may not hold good
against the express prohibition. That
is to say, the right to earn a living is
only implied In the treaty. While pro-
hibition exists Enthusiastically on the
statute books of sovereign states, and
it is broadly asserted that the treaty
gives the Chinese right to live in this
country, but 1t don't give them the
right to work. This is refinement of
prescription which we confess we were
not prepared to expect. And when we
were told that there is a vast difference
between conference upon the Chinese
the right spend their money in this
country, and comforting upon them the
right to come here and make money,
we must acknowledge feelings Of admi-
ration for SO subtle and ingenious a
plea.


A liberal construction of the mean
ing of the word ''trade" employed in
the treaty to define one of the privileges
which it is agreed are conferred upon
the Chinese would certainly include the
right to be employed. Trade is usually
understood to mean barter or sale.
But it may very fairly include hiring
of manual labor. The mechanical pur-
suits which make the Chinese SO OBJ
jectionable to their Caucasian neigh
bors In the Pacific states are known as
trades. Those these may not be classed
as among the purposes Of trade" as
recognized by the treaty. Unless We
resort to the same species OF quibbling
as that employed to separate the right
to live and the right to earn living.
None but the most bigoted would set
up such monstrous pretense that the
privilege Of trade as expressly conferred
on the citizens of both nations by the
Burlingame treaty don't confer on the
Chinese the right to come here and
make money, as is denied the Chinese
by the newspaper from which we have
just quoted.


Such a doctrine would not only des.
troy the implied right to earn living,
but also expressed right to trade, that
is to say, to barter and sell goods. Or
is it set up that the Chinese trader in
the United States may buy and sell
provided he does 1t, at a loss. With
admirable ingenuity 1t is urged that
the government is no more under OBJ
legations to concern itself about the
means by which the Chinese shall live
in this country than 1t is to concern
itself about the passage money of
an American citizen Who might want
to visit China.


As this Is the sort Of argument, or
what passed for an argument, employ
ed in California, it is at least worth
quoting. This is cool assumption Of
the newspapers which profess to teach
the people Of California their rights
and duties TO an inferior and alien race
As we have before said, there is not in
this much discussed decision any exam
ination OF the question Of desirability
Of Chinese immigration; that matter
has long since been relegated to the
people, who have repeatedly and pas
sionately decided that they don't want
Chinese among them. But this news
paper outburst Is an attempt to throw
discredit on the courts Of the country,
although It is admitted that the judge
who made the decision in the Oregon
case is in sympathy with the majority
Of his fellow citizens so far as the main
question is concerned. 1t should be
understood that the anxiety of the Cal
ifornia people in this matter arises from
the fact that their new constitution
contains the same prohibition of the
employment of the Chinese by contrac
tors, as that which has just been passed
under review by the United States
court in Oregon. This is the first offic
ial warning that the prescription legis
lation embodied in that singular in
strument will not stand severe
judicial scrutiny.


MARKETS BY TELEGRAPH