and began to persecute the Christians, of whom there were many hundreds of thousands; she supposed the entire Christian population of Japan had been exterminated. She destroyed her three-masted ships that could sail the ocean even to India; some of them came, it is thought, to the continent of America. She would not allow other big ships to be built. Why? Because she did not wish to have anything to do with the foreign nations; she did not wish to have any entangling alliances; she felt she could carry on her life absolutely regardless of the life of the rest of the world. China has had that same idea, and although the other nations encroached upon her and the commercial enterprise of the sailors of the western lands enabled them to find their way into China occasionally, the great mass of the people felt this way about it, "We have the oldest civilization; we do not need to have anything to do with these barbarians."

But that idea changed. The Japanese were the first to change it when they discovered in 1853 that it was absolutely impossible for them to keep themselves out of the great world's civilization that was swamping them, and that the only thing they could do to save themselves from being literally swamped and destroyed by western civilization was to find out what western civilization was and make use of its machinery and its knowledge and take part in it.

That new principle of Japanese policy and of the Japanese movement was given expression to in 1868. For 14 years before that there had been turmoil over the question as to what they were going to do with the white man. The great mass of the people said, "Drive him out." That was one of the reasons for the revolution of 1867. When the dual system of government was overthrown and the new Emperor Mutsuhito came to the throne he, with the young men who had gathered around him, discovered, or already knew, it would be impossible to carry out that old policy of exclusion. So that when the new Emperor announced to the nation the policy of his reign it was done in an edict of five articles, the gist of which was that they were to do away with ancient superstition, to prepare for representative government, so that popular opinion may rule, and to go out into the world and learn everything there was in the world, and to bring it back in order to build up Japan. That is the policy which has guided the Japanese since 1868. It is because Japan has accomplished that so successfully that she has obtained her position of world influence. She does not profess that she has completely attained or that she is now leading the civilized nations of the world. Japanese laugh at propositions of that kind.

Because Japan has so successfully taken on so much of the western civilization and the ambitions of the western nations for expansion of industrial life she has discovered that she can not live upon the territory she has, she must go out in commerce and trade, she must find markets for buying food and raw material; and because she did all this so successfully she was able to resist the encroachments from Russia. I ought to say that the initial causes of the Russo-Japanese War were first, German aggression in Shantung and the seizure of Kiauchau in 1897. Then Russia took Port Arthur in her process of absorbing Manchuria. England and France took other territory. That was the beginning of the partition of China.

That frightened the Chinese and led in 1900 to that amazing, foolish uprising, which we call the Boxer uprising.

The six nations sent their armies to Peking, saved the legations, and put down the uprising. In the treaty then made they agreed to withdraw all their forces to their respe tive lands and to maintain the sovereignty of China. Most of them honestly carried out that program, But Russia was not honest. She withdrew her troops from Peking, but not from Manchuria. She rather added to her forces there and was making arrangements for the absorption of Korea. Plans were well under way for the purchase of the two great seaports of that country.

When Japan tried by diplomatic negotiations to have Russia carry out the arrangements made at Peking, Russia simply ignored Japan. Japan then saw that her own life was at stake; that if Russia had possession of those two ports, in addition to Port Arthur and Vladivostck, and Germany had Kiauchau, her own existence was involved. That is what led to the Russo-Japanese War (1904).

One month after the signing of the treaty of peace between Japan and Russia (1905) we began to get evidence of the awakening of China. The Empress Dowager ordered the schools of China to abandon the old classical system of education and instead to give instruction. in occidental learning. What did that mean? It meant that after so many decades of humiliation and cruel submission to the occidental nations China had discovered that she must do what Japan had done; she must follow along the lines of the learning of the world. And how rapidly China has gone ahead in these past years you know. During the past four or five years Japan has been fastening her talons in the side of China. We do not yet know what the final results will be, but we do know of a very serious situation that is developing over there.

Just as the Orient has discovered that they can not carry on their life independent of the Occident and regardless of the Occident, so the Occident now needs to discover that we can not carry on our life regardless of them.

They are a mighty people, and although at present there is no possibility of their meeting us on the battlefield, or even upon the ocean, we do not know what may happen 50 or 100 years hence, and it is highly desirable that we remove from our mutual relations those elements of irritation which are there.

What are they? First is with reference to China. She has become a republic; we are beginning to find out also that the Chinese, individually, is quite a different man from what we had supposed. The whole trend of China, moreover, has been transformed in the past 20 years; China turned around; instead of looking ba kward she is looking forward; she is adjusting her life to the life of the western world; she is taking our education, our system of government, our diplomacy, our science; she is following in the footsteps of Japan.

I see that my hour has expired, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. RAKER. I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the time of the witness be extended until 12 o'clock, and we can go on to-morrow in our examination of the witness with much better information than if he stopped now.

Mr. SABATH. I move that Dr. Gulick be allowed to proceed until he finishes his remarks.

(The motion was carried.)

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Dr. Gulick.

Dr. GULICK. I was speaking of the causes of irritation. China has moved forward; she is looking to the western world; she is adjusting her life, and the Chinese are entering into Occidental methods of education.

Shortly after the Russian war many thousands of Chinese flocked to Japan. At one period, about 1910 or 1912, there were 16,000 Chinese students in the Government institutions in theity of Tokyo, trying to get a short cut into Occidental life. Those, however, who went to Tokyo were not fully satisfied. Now they are coming to this country in large numbers.

We did a rather generous thing some years ago in returning to China our part of the Boxer indemnity, over and above our expenses; there are hundreds of Chinese students coming to this country whose expenses are being paid out of that Boxer indemnity. I believe the number is now over 400. But in addition to those, there are more than a thousand who are coming on funds provided by their own institutions and by the local governments in China, and also by private individuals. Why are the Chinese coming here? They are studying our ways of living; they are learning what we are doing; they are learning what our spirit is toward the oriental.

Somewhat more than a year ago I was speaking in Kansas City, urging the importance of changing our immigration laws so that we may deal on a basis absolutely of justice and friendliness. After I got through, a Chinaman in the audience came up and spoke to me and said, "You are the first American I have ever heard pleading for justice for China."

Most of us do not know that at present our laws dealing with Chinese and their administration are deeply resented by intelligent Chinese. What are they?

Of course, one of the items deeply resented has been the administration of the laws in San Francisco dealing with immigrants arriving there. There has been at times a good deal of callousness, to say the least. Chinese have been herded in pens, and so on.

Mr. RAKER. Have you anything to present in reference to the herding in pens? Will you explain that?

Dr. GULICK. I would like to make a rounded statement first.
Mr. RAKER. Very well.

Dr. GULICK. In 1887 and 1888 the anti-Chinese feeling in this country became very strong and some interests found it to their personal and party advantage to promote further anti-Chinese legislation. The legislation then became so drastic that the Chinese contended it was in conflict with the treaty, and the matter was taken to the courts and finally went to the Supreme Court. It was admitted by the Supreme Court that it was in conflict with the treaty. I have here a pamphlet which I would like to give to you. I would like to read from the judgment of Judge Field, who handled that case in the Supreme Court. He said:

It must be conceded that the act of 1888 is in contravention of the treaty of 1868 and of the supplementary treaty of 1880, but it is not on that account invalid. It (a treaty) can be deemed only the equivalent of a legislative act, to be repealed or modified at the pleasure of Congress. It is the last expression of sovereign will and must control. The question whether our Government was justified in disregarding its engagements with another nation is not one for the determination of the courts. This court is not a censor of the morals of the other departments of the Government.

So the matter stands. I have no doubt that was good law. We have to obey the laws, but after all, laws should be brought under the continuous judgment of moral ideals. We have fallen down since 1888 and onward to this present time. Those laws which Judge Field said were in contravention of our treaty with China still stand, and the treaty still stands, and they are published in the records of our Bureau of Immigration dealing with the Chinese.

Intelligent Chinese are finding this out. They are finding out that although citizenship is being given in America to all classes of people, they are the only people in all the world who are singled out by the law and told they may not be citizens of the United States. They resent that. They recognize that in many respects we have been friendly, but they also see in our treatment certain facts that are not friendly. You will probably ask what are some of the facts contrary to the law. The treaty specially provides for "most favored nation treatment." I would like to read one or two of the clauses. The first article provides that

The Government of the United States may regulate, limit, or suspend such coming or residence of Chinese (laborers), but may not absolutely prohibit it.

And yet in 1904 it was absolutely prohibited. The article continues:

The limitation of suspension shall be reasonable and shall apply only to laborers. Then, in article 2 there are these words:

Chinese laborers who are now in the United States shall be allowed to go and come of their own free will and accord, and shall be accorded all the rights, privileges, immunities, and exemptions which are accorded to citizens and subjects of the most favored nations.

The next article provides that in case of ill treatment the—

Government of the United States will exert all its power to devise measures for their protection and to secure to them the same rights, privileges, immunities, and exemptions as may be enjoyed by citizens or subjects of the most favored nations, and to which they are entitled by treaty.

That most favored nations clause comes in in several places, and yet we have absolutely ignored it. We have enacted many laws that deal only with the Chinese. These laws subject them to differential treatment which is in some respects very humiliating. These are some of the principal grounds why the Chinese are beginning to find that although there are friendships between America and China, yet there are things contrary to that friendship.

What complaint have the Japanese? Have they not recognized that the coming of large numbers of immigrants to the Uuited States. is undesirable? and have they not of their own accord made a Gentleman's Agreement?—and have they not been keeping it? Yes. Why, then, do they complain?

It is a very astonishing fact that our people, as a whole, have not had the information which enables them to understand what the Japanese viewpoint is, and why it is that Japan feels irritation. I think I can tell you briefly.

Japan, out of loyalty to the friendship and welfare of the United States, stopped her labor immigration to this country at the beginning of 1908. Remember that date. Shortly after that plans were developed for the Panama-Pacific Exposition at San Francisco, and Japan was approached and Japan said, "That will be a fine oppor

tunity for promoting friendship," and she made an appropriation of about $125,000 for that purpose. But, in spite of that fact, and in spite of the fact that Japan cut down her immigration from 30,000 in 1907 to 3,000 in 1909, the anti-Japanese agitation in this country continued. Our people were not informed as to the results of the Gentleman's Agreement, and the great falling off. On the contrary we were constantly being told that Japan was demanding unlimited immigration; that she is getting ready to attack us that there is only one thing we must do, and that is be prepared to fight Japan at any moment. When the antialien land law was passed in California in 1913, there was so much indignation and so large a belief that Japan was going to attack us that many really thought that war was on.

I do not know just what all the conditions at that time were, but I know a very important cablegram was sent from Washington to the Philippine Islands to Governor Forbes ordering the mobilization of the entire military forces in the Philippines in Manila and Corregidor, expecting a momentary attack from Japan, and they were ready for weeks awaiting that attack. But it did not come off. That was in May and June, 1913.

I was in Japan, and I took part in what were called some of the indignation meetings in Japan. At the request of Japanese to an audience composed entirely of Japanese, I set forth California's viewpoint of the so-called Japanese question, and in that address I received repeated applause.

At that very time, Okuma gathered together a group of editors and educators and some Christian pastors to talk over the question, how is the Japanese-American question going to be solved. The Japanese said: "We have proposed a Gentleman's Agreement, and have put it into operation; it has been going on now very effectively for a number of years, and still the agitation goes on, still the differential laws are being passed, which we asked might not be passed." They discussed that matter and the conclusion reached then was voiced by Count Okuma in two or three very important statements. He said: "This is a question that can not be solved by diplomacy; it is a question that can not be solved by retaliatory legislation." What did he refer to? Already at that time the Japanese Government had made an appropriation of $125,000, and the proposition was being made that if California is going to treat us that way, we will have nothing to do with the exposition. But Count Okuma said: "No; that is not the way. We can not win California by getting peeved and passing retaliatory legislation."

A little later, when the great war broke out and the proposition came to Japan afresh, not to participate in the Panama-Pacific Exposition, there was a certain strong demand among a certain part of the Japanese that that should be done, but the Government said: "No; this is an opportunity to show America that we are not taking offense at a little thing." Instead of cutting down the sum they actually doubled their appropriation and spent $250,000 on the Panama-Pacific Exposition. I cite these things to show the desire of the responsible leaders to get on in a friendly way. Yet those facts are not known to us. Our papers have been telling about the Japanese intention to attack us; they have been saying that the Japanese demand free immigration which the Government and the responsible people have not been making.