If the native paper is quicker, have one made out, but be sure to do whatever is safe. Mr. Mo Shuk, grandfather's cousin, said he has another way, so he can fix me to go on a rapid steamer, and he knows the lawyer can fix it that way. That ship sails on the 15th day, American date. If you can fix up the native paper I will come in through a proper port of entry, but if you can not I will come on the rapid steamer later. I am in good health, so there is no need to worry.

S. T., 2d year, 1st month, 13th day.

[Stamped:] Fong Cho Goon.

TO HONORABLE FATHER:

FoNG CHO Goon.

I am here in good health. Mr. Mo Shuk has often heard that I want to go to China, but he does not think that I want to go back to China; he thinks I want to go to Canada, and he has been "pumping" me about it, and he said that if I want to go to Canada he will ask you to send some money, so that I could go to Canada and stay there for several years, and then go to China and return, but I do not know if what he said is true or not. He is going to Canada in the 4th month, which is still a few months away, and if you can't fix it for me to come to the United States I would like to go to Canada with him in the 4th month. So I will wait until the 4th month, and if you can't get me into the United States please send me some money to go to Canada, but if you don't want me to go to Canada please send some money so I can go to China. What is your opinion? Please write to me about it.

S. T., 3d year, 1st month, 20th day.

Sent by son:

FEBRUARY 17, 1911.

CHO GOON.

The boy eventually reached the port of New York, but, of course, was rejected, on the above-mentioned evidence, which fortunately, in this instance, came into the possession of the officials. It is interesting to note, from the above letters, that the feasibility of various schemes was discussed, including a claim of nativity, smuggling by stowing away on a "rapid steamer," and entry through Canada at an additional expense of $500 for head tax. Finally it was decided to have the father qualify as a "merchant."

A class covered by Table 2 to which particular attention should be called is "wives of United States citizens." Such women are admitted upon the theory, not that they are citizens (for not being of a race members of which may be naturalized they can not acquire citizenship by the indirect means of marriage), but that their husbands, being citizens, are entitled to the care and companionship of their foreign wives. Of these "wives," 89 applications were considered, 80 being admitted and 5 deported. The claim is a favorite one under which to import Chinese slave women and girls, who bring an exceedingly high price in this country for use in houses of ill famefrom $2,500 to $4,000 each. But this is not the only method adopted in this nefarious but exceedingly profitable business. For instance, in December last a party of stowaways was captured after being surreptitiously landed at San Francisco from the steamship Manchuria, such party consisting of 8 males and 7 females. The men were coolies of the lowest and most ignorant type, and the women were being brought in for sale as slaves. These 7 females ranged in age from 14 to 21, and it appeared from their testimony that they had been coaxed or forced aboard the vessel, some at Hongkong and others at Yokohama. The entire party was stowed away in the hold of the vessel, and was kept supplied with food and water by some person or persons on board. The 15 aliens were deported, and proceedings have been instituted looking to the prosecution of the parties implicated in the smuggling.

The class "United States citizens" needs further segregation and explanation. This may be found in Table 3. Under the Constitution and naturalization laws alien free white persons and persons of African nativity or descent are entitled to become United States citizens by naturalization. Mongolians are not allowed this privilege. Yet we have a large and constantly increasing body of citizens of the Chinese race. The Supreme Court, in the Wong Kim Ark case (169 U. S., 649), held that "a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States,' and it has been considered under a very (perhaps unnecessarily) broad application of this construction that any Chinese person who can prove birth here must be regarded as a citizen. And section 1993 of the Revised Statutes is to the effect that "all children heretofore born or hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were or may be at the time of their birth citizens thereof, are declared to be citizens of the United States." The "citizens" enumerated in Table 3, therefore, fall into two general classes (1) those of native birth; (2) those born abroad of nativeborn parents. Of the 1,585 admitted (amounting to nearly 31 per cent of the total admissions for the year), 1,412 were of the first and 173 of the second division. In 1910 the figures were 1,328 and 781, respectively. The 1,412 belonging to the first division are segregated further into 12 of whose claimed departure from this country there was no record (technically known as "raw natives"), and 1,400 of whose departure there was a record (technically "returning natives"). Of the latter, status had been determined previously in 1,051 and was determined for the first time in 349 cases. The number of Chinese adjudicated natives for the first time, i. e., actually turned into citizens, was 534, compared with 1,295 for the previous year and 1,617 for the year 1909. Table 2 shows that 80 alleged wives of natives were admitted, compared with 109 in 1910 and 98 in 1909. To complete this matter of simultaneously admitting to residence and to citizenship, on the claim of birth, persons who can not acquire citizenship by naturalization, it is necessary to consider here the discharge by United States court commissioners and courts of Chinese arrested within the country on the charge of unlawful residence, data concerning whom is shown by Table 6. During the past year 156 Chinese so arrested were discharged, practically all on the claim of birth in the United States. The corresponding figures for 1910 and 1909 are 190 and 189, respectively.

The total of the above statistics relating to "native born," "foreignborn children of natives," and "wives of natives" allowed entry to or a continuance of residence in the country is 4,268, or an average of 1,422 per year. The past three years have been fairly normal. There is little reason to believe that, unless some new law should be passed, there will be any material change in the near future except in the direction of a natural increase, in an ever multiplying ratio, by birth or alleged birth in China of "sons" of these citizens. Therefore, it is not difficult to conclude that, in the natural course of events, there will be

an addition to our Chinese population, from this source alone, during the next decade of 14,220. If we allow an average of three sons (a very moderate estimate in the light of experience) for each native who thus enters, we must increase said amount by 42,660. It ought to be remembered particularly in this connection that the "minor-son" evil is of almost equal extent for the present, although it is not, perhaps, susceptible to so rapid a natural ratio of increase, and does not involve the serious element of citizenship. It is not necessary to attempt a prognostication looking further to the future; nor would it be a very safe or certain field for speculation, for, while most of these Chinese are young men, allowance would have to be made for deaths and departures, and, as the calculation moved into future generations, the ratio of increase, ever multiplying, would become exceedingly intricate and correspondingly of an approximate nature.

Table 4 should be compared with the tables of the same number in the reports for 1909 and 1910. In 1909 the Department considered 409 appeals in Chinese cases, sustaining 51 and dismissing 245, while 83 were withdrawn or disposed of otherwise than by departmental decision and 30 remained pending at the close of the fiscal year. The corresponding figures for 1910 are 674, 58, 368, 210, and 38, respectively, and for the past year 613, 111, 314, 134, and 54. Therefore, in 1909 the decisions of the officers at the ports were confirmed by the Department in all but about 12.5 per cent of the cases actually appealed, in 1910 the corresponding ratio was 8.5 per cent, and in 1911 it was 18.1 per cent.

Table 5, as heretofore presented, covered only the departure and return of registered Chinese laborers. As the number of laborers reentering the country is given in Table 2, and as it becomes necessary, in view of the adoption about a year ago of regulations (rules 13, 15, and 16) to permit of the preinvestigation of not only laborers but exempts and natives, to furnish data regarding such preinvestigations, this table is adapted to furnishing statistics covering the operation of the said new regulations. No plan ever inaugurated in the enforcement of the exclusion laws has given more general satisfaction than this one. It will be observed that 3,439 applications were submitted, divided into 956 natives, 1,236 exempts, and 1,247 laborers; of which the officers at the ports of proposed departure granted 2,894 and denied 290; that of those denied 94 appealed, 20 of the appeals being sustained and 74 dismissed by the Bureau; so that during the year return certificates were refused in 269 cases (divided into 95 natives, 129 exempts, and 45 laborers), and granted in 2,913 cases (divided into 749 natives, 1,011 exempts, and 1,153 laborers); appeals withdrawn or otherwise disposed of, 97, and remaining pending, 160.

Tables 6 and 7, compiled from statements furnished by United States marshals concerning Chinese arrested on judicial warrants, require the following comment in addition to what has been said in discussing Table 3: During the year 669 Chinese were so arrested, compared with 977 for the previous year. There remained pending from the previous year 321 cases, so that the total number of cases under consideration during the past year was 990. Of these, 23 died or escaped, 156 were discharged, 522 were deported, and 289 cases remain pending. Table 7 shows the districts in which the 669 arrests were made and compares the figures with those for the preceding three

years. The majority of the arrests, as was the case for several preceding years, occurred in districts on or immediately adjoining the land boundaries, and therefore were of Chinese who had recently entered surreptitiously. As in 1908, 1909, and 1910, about 89 per cent of the arrests were of this kind of Chinese. The comparative success attained in securing orders of deportation (covering about 52 per cent of those arrested) is due to the fact just mentioned. Experience has demonstrated that usually little good and a great deal of harm results from arresting Chinese found in the interior of the country with no tangible documentary evidence of their right to be here. As a rule the courts will not bother with such cases otherwise than on appeal, the law making it discretionary whether the warrant of arrest shall be obtained from a court or a United States commissioner. Therefore, with rare exceptions, the cases must be tried primarily before a commissioner. If such official decides adversely to the defendant, the latter has the statutory right of appeal to a district court; but, for some inexplicable reason, the law does not give the Government such an appeal in the event the decision is favorable to the defendant.

Another undue advantage enjoyed by the Chinese under the present arrangement is the fact that the trial before a district court, "on appeal" from a commissioner's decision, is, as a matter of fact, no appeal at all, but a complete second opportunity to establish his case. No matter, therefore, how weak or contradictory the evidence offered before the commissioner may have been, the Chinese defendant goes before the court with the privilege of introducing anything he pleases, and usually after a long delay during which the opportunities for manufacturing evidence and coaching witnesses have been almost unlimited. So appreciative are the Chinese of this boon that frequently they deliberately fail to make out any case at all before the commissioner, especially where their claims are so palpably fraudulent that a considerable opportunity must be had in order to prepare the witnesses. Usually the claim in such a case is American birth. If Chinese are arrested in the proximity of the boundaries, generally there is either evidence or a strong suspicion that they have recently been smuggled in; if they are arrested in the interior, no such evidence or suspicion exists. It is only occasionally that a Chinaman arrested in one of the large interior cities having a considerable Chinese population can be deported. The Government can do no more than show that the defendant is a Chinese laborer and has not a certificate, and must depend upon its ability to break down by cross-examination the testimony of witnesses carefully coached for the purpose of proving American birth. The difficulties are accentuated by the unwillingness, frequently encountered, of United States commissioners to follow the decisions of the courts, including the Supreme Court, to the effect that the burden rests upon a Chinese arrested under the exclusion act, whether he claims citizenship or not, to prove lawful residence. As an illustration, the following opinion expressed by a United States commissioner in deciding such a case is quoted:

In my opinion, the Government has failed to make out sufficient proof against this man to convict him.

And no amount of argument and citation of court decisions showing where the burden of proof lay could change this opinion; although in this instance the testimony offered by the Government tended strongly to prove that the defendant was unlawfully within the United States and that offered by defendant was anything but a satisfactory establishment of his claim when considered by anyone the least versed in Chinese methods of fabricating evidence. Under the above-recited circumstances it readily can be understood that arresting Chinese within the interior too frequently results in converting them into American citizens, usually by a flagrant miscarriage of justice, to make it worth while to attempt to deport the very large numbers who have in the past entered unlawfully and established themselves in the "Chinatowns" of our large cities.

In the report for 1910 mention was made of the Wong You case (176 Fed., 933), in which the district court, northern district of New York, held that Chinese who enter surreptitiously are subject to arrest and deportation under the statute dealing generally with the immigration of aliens, and to the fact that said very beneficial decision had been reversed by the circuit court of appeals (181 Fed., 313). The Supreme Court of the United States has granted a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the circuit court of appeals, and, as that writ is only rarely issued, the Bureau is encouraged to believe that the final result will be favorable to the Government's contention. The importance of securing a decision favorable to the Government is well illustrated by the statement in the report of the United States commissioner of immigration for Canada (p. 159) that 5,330 Chinese paid the head tax (of $500 each, making a total of $2,665,000) and were admitted to Canada during the past year.

The foregoing review of the situation discloses some causes for congratulation and optimism, but many more reasons for feeling that the present statutes are wholly insufficient to maintain the long and frequently avowed policy of excluding from this country laborers of the Chinese race. Recent years have witnessed a remarkable improvement in the administration affecting this matter, and possibly the methods have been brought as nearly to an ideal point as may be expected under the adverse and trying circumstances. Therefore, I believe that it can not reasonably be expected that there will be any diminution in the immigration of Chinese, but that it must be realized and conceded that, unless some change is made in the law, such immigration will constantly increase in the future.

Copies of the certificates of residence issued under the registration acts of 1892 and 1893 are on file in the Bureau in charge of an officer designated at the time the Department of Commerce and Labor was organized to perform the duties theretofore devolving upon collectors of internal revenue throughout the country with respect to the issuance of original and duplicate certificates and the verification of the certificates presented by laborers leaving the United States with the intention to return. Verification was had of the certificates presented by the 1,247 Chinese laborers shown by Table 5 to have applied for return certificates during the year, and of many others desired for use as evidence in cases pending in court or elsewhere, and it was necessary to furnish for like purposes a large number of certified copies of duplicate certificates or of applications therefor; while under