(a) The taking of the property in the name of a person other than the persons mentioned in section two hereof if the consideration is paid or agreed or understood to be paid by an alien mentioned in section two hereof;

(b) The taking of the property in the name of a company, association or corporation, if the memberships or shares of stock therein held by aliens mentioned in section two hereof, together with the memberships or shares of stock held by others but paid for or agreed or understood to be paid for by such aliens, would amount to a majority of the membership or the issued capital stock of such company, association or corporation;

(c) The execution of a mortgage in favor of an alien mentioned in section two hereof if said mortgagee is given possession, control or management of the property.

The enumeration in this section of certain presumptions shall not be so construed as to preclude other presumptions or inferences that reasonably may be made as to the existence of intent to prevent, evade or avoid escheat as provided for herein.

SECTION 10. If two or more persons conspire to effect a transfer of real property, or of an interest therein, in violation of the provisions hereof, they are punishable by imprisonment in the county jail or state penitentiary not exceeding two years, or by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or both.

SECTION 11. Nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation upon the power of the state to enact laws with respect to the

acquisition, holding or disposal by aliens of real property in this state.

SECTION 12. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions hereof are hereby repealed; provided, that

(a) This act shall not affect pending actions or proceedings, but the same may be prosecuted and defended with the same effect as if this act had not been adopted;

(b) No cause of action arising under any law of this state shall be affected by reason of the adoption of this act whether an action or proceeding has been instituted thereon at the time of the taking effect of this act or not and actions may be brought upon such causes in the same manner, under the same terms and conditions, and with the same effect as if this act had not been adopted.

(c) This act in so far as it does not add to, take from or alter an existing law, shall be construed as a continuation thereof.

SECTION 13. The legislature may amend this act in furtherance of its purpose and to facilitate its operation.

SECTION 14. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this act is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this act. The people hereby declare that they would have passed this act, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact than any one or more other sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.

acquiring large tracts of agricultural land. The state law forbade ownership by aliens ineligible to citizenship, but the Japanese took deeds in the name of their children born on the soil or in the name of the corporations and so circumvented the intent of the law. The initiative law adopted at the recent November elections will, it is hoped, prevent this circumvention, thus making further land acquisition impossi ble. The Japanese also lease lands and work for a share of the crop, and when thus working for themselves are impossible competitors, and drive the white settlers, whose standards of living are different, from their farms. The white farmer is not free from cupidity when tempted by Japanese to sell out at high prices, and they do sell out and disappear., The state, therefore, is obliged as a simple matter of self-preservation to prevent the Japanese from absorbing the soil, because the future of the white race, American institutions, and western civilization are put in peril. The Japanese do not assimilate with our people and make a homogeneous population, and hence they can not be naturalized and admitted to citizenship. Therefore, the question is principally economic and partly racial. Japan herself excluded Chinese in order to preserve her own people, and that is what California, Australia and Canada are doing. Japanese statesmen must surely, for these reasons, acquit Americans of race prejudice. We are willing to receive diplomats, scholars and travelers from Japan on terms of equality, but we do not want her laborers. We admire their industry and cleverness, but for that very reason, being a masterful people, they are more dangerous. They are not content to work for wages, as do the Chinese, who are excluded,

but are always seeking control of the farm and of the crop.

Immigration and naturalization are domestic questions, and no people can come to the United States except upon our own terms. We must preserve the soil for the Caucasian race. The Japanese, by crowding out our population, produce disorder and Bolshevism among our vism among our own people, who properly look to our Government to protect them against this destructive competition. California, by acting in time, before the evil becomes even greater, expects to prevent conflict and to maintain good relations with the Japanese Government.

The American Government rests/ upon the free choice of the people, and a large majority of the people are engaged in farming pursuits. They form the backbone of every country-the repository of morals, patriotism and thrift, and in time of their country's danger spring to its defense. They represent its prosperity in peace and its security in war. The soil can not be taken from them. Their standards of living can not suffer from deterioration. Their presence is essential to the life of the state. I therefore urge the Japanese Government and people to put themselves in our place and to acquit us of any other purpose in the exclusion of oriental immigration than the preservation of our national life. and the happiness and prosperity of men and women who founded the

Republic, who have developed its resources, and who occupy the land. It is theirs in trust for their posterity

The people of Asia have a destiny of their own. We shall aid them by instruction and example, but we can not suffer them to overwhelm the civilization which has been established by pioneers and patriots and which we are dutifully bound to preserve.

which, more than anything else,

has held our United States together has been the parity of states regardless of size, wealth or geographical position. This principle has been kept before the eyes of our people at all times by means of the starry field in our national flag, and as we gaze thereon we do not realize that star No. 1 stands for Delaware, the smallest state, and star No. 48 for Arizona, the youngest state.

California was made a white man's state by the Constitution of 1849. Article 2, section 1, dealing with citizenship, begins with these words: "Every white male citizen," and the Constitution of 1879 reiterated this, strengthening it by specially mentioning Mongolians as ineligible to citizenship.

The question of the mixture of Orientals, particularly Japanese, with whites, while it has its economic side, is nevertheless a race problem in the last analysis. Not of an inferior race seeking to mix with a superior race, for at no time have we cast reflection on the Chinese as to their dependability, honesty and shrewdness in business nor on the Japanese as to their thrift, industry and finesse in diplomacy. We respect both of these members of the Mongolian race but the fact can not be dodged that they either must not come or if permitted to come must, not be allowed to gain a foothold that will eventually enable them to control a single state of the nation as they virtually control Hawaii today.

At an early date, Chinese coolies were brought into California for work in mines and on railroad construction.

complaint of this practice, but when in the hard times of the late seventies white men, walking the streets facing starvation for themselves and their families, saw Chinese at work, even though at small wages, they naturally rebelled and a period of rioting followed. Many Chinese voluntarily returned to China. Some were forced to go and the Geary exclusion act passed by Congress in 1882 was the conclusion of this California's first race problem. She had to settle it and she did so in her own way.

During the period of prosperity through which we have just been passing, the presence of Orientals has not been a serious menace economically; and if the occupancy of land, the production of crops and the increase of population were the whole duty of California, doubtless a race question would not rise at this time. But the duty of California is to keep her population on a par with the peoples of other states and not to mix with our citizens races of ineligibles. If a period of depression comes and the white people of this state find an element in their midst of another race, of different home standards, alien under the law and openly loyal to another country, if not disloyal to ours, a people sapping our vital strength and draining our finances when our people have need, is it to be expected that California shall again take the settlement of the question in her own hands as she did in the seventies? Will it be right for California to conclude, if the Federal Government does not look after her interests now, that it is to be expected that we proceed to the settlement of

any new race problem just as we settled the one in the seventies?

Our laws separate the Mongolians from the whites, not simply in the constitution as above quoted, but by statutes which for many years have forbidden the intermarriage of Mongolians and whites. One prominent Japanese has recently argued for intermarriage between whites and Japanese on the same grounds that he would import potato seed from other localities to strengthen local stock, placing the question of race assimilation on no higher ground than that of plant breeding. There seems to be an underground inclination on the part of some of the advocates of freer re

lationship with the Japanese in this country to allow intermarriage. In the November number of The World Tomorrow, Mr. Sidney Gulick, an eminent authority on the Japanese question and supporter of the Japanese viewpoint, expresses himself as follows about biological assimilation:

Unfortunately, most mixed marriages of Americans and Asiatics are under such social, economic, and ethical conditions as to account for low standards of family life. Where the marriages have been on a high plane, the results in terms of family life have on the whole been satisfactory.

It is difficult to analyze Mr. Gulick's language and apply his conclusion to anything but a belief that any Japa nese coming under such influences as exist in America will rise to a standard he characterizes as "on a high plane," for elsewhere in the same interview he uses this language of what he calls psychological assimilation:

Not only their clothing and housing and living standards will be American, but so also will be their conceptions of God and man, of parents and children, of morals and religion, of the state and the citizen. From my residence in Japan and from my experience with immigrant peoples, I should say

the Japanese children of the second generation (who present the real test) were fully as assimilable as the children of most of the

European races.

from these statements and that is that Japanese children after a time, under the influence of America, will rise to the "high plane" and passing through the period of psychological assimilation they come to a condition fit for biological assimilation where, "When the marriages have been on a high plane, the result in terms of family life have on the whole been satisfactory." We can not think in such terms for future America.

There can be but one conclusion

It is interesting to note that these mild suggestions are but straws indicating a direct current of ambition on the part of the Japanese to win by intermarriage if they are denied their present plan to overcome by occupancy. The following is a quotation from Shin Sekai (The New World), a San Francisco Japanese language newspaper, October, 1919:

When we of the Yamoto race rise with a mighty resolve, their opposition will be as futile as an attempt to sweep the sea with a broom.

Even if photograph marriages should be prohibited, we can not be stopped from

leaving our descendants on the American

continent. Even if not a single Japanese woman comes, it is not possible to prevent the seed of our great Yamoto race from being sown on the American continent by marriage with Americans, with French, with Indians and with Negroes; especially since there are already 100,000 Japanese here and 5,000 children are born annually.

The day will come when the real strength of the Japanese will make a clean sweep of all laws.

Referring again to the last quotation from Mr. Gulick, let us note the expression, "The Japanese children of the second generation (who present the real test) were fully as assimilable

as the children of most of the European races." Of course this is as to psychological assimilation but these children are born of alien parents ineligible to citizenship and who to the end hold their allegiance to a foreign imperial government. These parents acknowledge not simply this allegiance but they have brought their children up under the tradition of this foreign fidelty and in the consciousness that according to the laws of Japan the children of a Japanese father are Japanese and at any time subject to the laws of Japan if within her reach. It is a fact that if a young man twenty-five years of age with a Japanese father, but born and educated in the United States, a voter who has exercised his franchise, should be in Japan twenty-four hours, he could be put into the Japanese army in spite of his constitutional citizenship in America. And it is this Mongolian child of the second generation with a dual citizenship who is held out as a fit mate for an American in marriage.

Let us go into this interesting point of dual citizenship a little further. If a father is by birth a citizen of Japan so are his children and his children's children, endlessly. A Japanese born in this country married to a white woman produces a progeny not only half breed as to race but half breed as to loyalty. Though a citizen of America by our constitution yet the government of Japan, because of the blood of the father, claims a right over his child under their law which reads:

A child is a Japanese if his or her father is a Japanese at the time of his or her birth.1

This is not all. T. Miuaoka, formerly counsellor of the Japanese Embassy in the United States, expresses himself in the following language:

Under the conscription laws of the empire a boy of seventeen is already a soldier

1 Civil Code of Japan, V. 3, Art. 66.

in the Japanese army although his time of service under "colors" does not commence until he is twenty. A male Japanese from the age of seventeen is a part of the army until he completes his fortieth year.

Any pretense on the part of the Japanese that they are not receiving fair play at the hands of America should be viewed in the light of the impossibility of a Japanese born in this country ever becoming a part of the homogeneous citizenry of America.

To counteract the effect of the

American schools, the Japanese, whereever sufficiently numerous, conduct supplementary schools in the Japanese language. These are held after regular school hours and taught in the main by Buddhist priests, evidently linking up the Japanese language with their religion which includes the worship of their national ruler. What nation has ever heretofore attempted such a course with her absent people? What nation has ever presumed to request for her people the freedom of our country while holding a perpetual grasp on her absent citizens and their progeny? Under existing conditions and in the face of the experience of California with the Japanese, we feel it right for us to take our position toward these who are incapable of citizenship by our federal laws; incapable of owning land by our state laws, their children incapable by education of true loyalty to our country and incapable of losing their citizenship in their fatherland by foreign laws from which we can not free them.

The plea that Japan needs space for expansion has nothing to do with us. or our attitude toward them. However, it is openly advertised by Japanese themselves that there are over five million acres in Japanese territory available for settlement. It is said they have never been successful at colonization. They have never tried