Mr. EDSELL. Well, there would be a number of things happen. First, if the Chinese who are now in the United States were kept constantly moving, the value of their residence would drop. A man could not keep his employment. He must be undisturbed to keep his work going, and unless he can keep his work going he can't pay for his smuggling, and if he can't pay for his smuggling, down goes the price of smuggling. You let an arrest crew visit Chinese communities unexpectedly, not periodically but unexpectedly, let them jump from one district to another, let it not be known where they are going next. Commissioner GARRETSON. Outrun the methods of transmission that maintain among the natives. Mr. EDSELL. Yes, in some way; and let them quietly go around and check up Chinese. They don't have to go through it completely, because the very fact that they were doing it at all would render the residence of all who were there unsafe and uncertain. Commissioner GARRETSON. Yes. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. You mean so far as the contrabands are concerned it would create a reign of terror? Mr. EDSELL. Yes, exactly. They would move. That is their way of doing. They get out bag and baggage. They don't merely go into hiding some place, they get out, get clear out. Well, that course of procedure would render their employment unsteady, would render their incomes unsteady, and would ultimately do away with the incentive to Chinese smuggling. Commissioner GARRETSON. Take the profit out of the business. Mr. EDSELL. That to-day is the profit that there is in it. You can have an army on the border, but you can't keep them out. Commissioner GARRETSON. What is the status of the penny merchant to-day, the Chinaman in the country, does that affect him in any way, is he as a merchant any more free to remain than a laborer? Mr. EDSELL. Oh, absolutely, absolutely safe. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Now, this thought comes to me, Mr. Edsell. Isn't it a fact that the instances are very rare where a Chinaman of his own volition would attempt to smuggle himself into the country, that as a rule it is handled as a business by professional smugglers to make a profit out of it? Mr. EDSELL. Always. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Very well. Mr. EDSELL. There are rare exceptions. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. The science lies in taking away the profit; that if the profit could be taken out of the game the smuggling would die. Now, with that end in view, this further suggestion was made by an attorney who had had a good deal of experience in Chinese matters in Boston, that the contraband Chinaman when caught should be penalized. He pointed out that now all that happens to him is that he is deported, and if in addition-but if before deportation he was subjected to imprisonment, that that would have a further important deterring and restraining influence. If the Chinamen understood, as they would very quickly, that an attempt at smuggling themselves into the country meant all of these things-first the physical hardship and privation; second, the expense: third, the uncertainty of being permitted to remain here; fourth, the certainty that if they are caught they will not only be deported, but also imprisoned in advance of their deportation; that that combination of penalties would tend to in time wipe out the whole industry? Mr. EDSELL. Yes; perhaps imprisonment would have an additional fear for them. Commissioner O'CONNELL. Now, Mr. Edsell, will you take the proposition as we have it there and give it close analysis and criticism and write us your opinion upon it based upon your experience, and in addition give us your opinion of the present laws and what remedies might be made of the present laws-regardless of this idea-the present immigration law? Mr. EDSELL. Yes; you mean Chinese law? Commissioner O'CONNELL. Chinese; oh, yes; exclusively Chinese. So that we would have both your opinion on that and your opinion or the other. We have had some suggestions as to the present law outside of this, as to what might be done to straighten the present method of conducting the business. If you will do it at your leisure and send it to headquarters in a brief time, I think the commission will be grateful. Mr. EDSELL. Very glad to. Commissioner O'CONNELL. I want to get into the record Mr. Gardner's nationality. Mr. BUSIEK. We have that in the form of a report. Commissioner O'CONNELL. Well, I want it in the record. What is his nation ality? Mr. EDSELL. Dr. Gardner is the fruit of a marriage between a half-breed Chinese woman and a white father. Commissioner GARRETSON. Do you know what race the father was? Mr. BUSIEK. He was an American. Commissioner GARRETSON. American? Mr. BUSIEK. Yes. Mr. EDSELL. He was an American allegedly descended from an old family of Salem, Mass. Commissioner GARRETSON. The marriage took place in China? Mr. EDSELL. Yes, sir. Commissioner GABRETSON. The woman was what was known in that country. in the East as an Eurasian. Mr. EDSELL. Yes. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Half-breed. Commissioner GARRETSON, Half blood; that is, child of a white father and a native woman. Mr. EDSELL. Yes; that is right. She was the fruit of a marriage between a German and a Chinese. And she is living here in San Francisco to-day. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Does she live as a Chinese woman-follow the habits and customs of the Chinese? Mr. EDSELL. No; not now. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. She dresses European fashion? Mr. EDSELL. Yes, sir. I never saw her until on the occasion of Dr. Gardner's daughter's wedding about-well, in June. Commissioner O'CONNELL. I want to get in the record for purposes of prece dent Commissioner GARRETSON. You might as well make it complete. Is he wedded to a white woman? Mr. EDSELL. Yes, sir. He married a British Columbia lady. Commissioner GARRETSON. Is there any other matter? Have you any further requirements from Mr. Edsell? Mr. BUSIEK. No. Commissioner GARRETSON. You will be excused from further attendance. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Nine a. m? Commissioner GARRETSON. Yes, Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Sharp? Commissioner GARRETSON. Yes. (Whereupon, at 4.30 o'clock p. m., an adjournment was taken until the following day, Saturday, September 5, 1914. at 9 o'clock a. m.) SAN FRANCISCO, CAL., Saturday, September 5, 1914-10.15 a. m. Executive session continued per adjournment. Present, as before. TESTIMONY OF MR. FRANK H. AINSWORTH Chairman WALSH. You may proceed, Mr. Weinstock. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Have you received a copy, Captain, of the pro posed Chairman WALSH. Have the captain state who he is. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. I think the reporter has got that. Mr. AINSWORTH. Frank H. Ainsworth, inspector in charge, Immigration Service, San Francisco. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Have you seen a copy, Captain, of the proposed changes in the Chinese immigration law that has been submitted to this commission? Mr. AINSWORTH. Why, I saw a draft which was somewhat of an elaboration upon a draft that I made and which was introduced by Mr. Raker, known as House bill 2133, and the draft which I have seen embraced a part of that bill and also a number of changes. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Well, the two important changes in the proposed amendments are these, first, that all the Chinese in this country be called upon to reregister. Mr. AINSWORTH. Yes. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Allowing them, say, six months' time to so reregister, this reregistration to be compulsory on the part of Chinese laborers and optional on the part of the exempted and privileged Chinese. It further provides that at the end of six months there shall be inspection crews appointed by the Secretary, each crew to consist of an inspector, interpreter, and stenographer; that those crews are to specialize on checking up Chinese all over the country; under the direction of the Secretary, they are to drop into communities at unexpected times, and to follow up every case of a Chinese laborer who is unable to show his certificate. It has been pointed out that the weak spot in that proposition lies in the fact that it is made optional with the privileged classes to register, and since, under the law, it is not possible to make it compulsory that that might leave a wide-open door. The answer to that criticism has been that the compensation, the inducement for the privileged members to register are such that there is very little likelihood that they will, as a rule, not register, because the possession of the certificate will make it possible for them to leave this country and to return without delay, without inconvenience, without expense, without the annoying and vexatious conditions that now surround their going and coming. Those are the two prime proposed changes, having in view the minimizing of smuggling; with the further suggested amendment that in addition to deporting the contraband when caught, they should be imprisoned as well, so as to make the conditions so that there would be still greater restriction imposed on the part of the contraband to attempt to enter the country. Now, the commission will be very glad to get your criticism of those proposed changes and to get such other suggestions as you may have that would still further minimize the possibility of smuggling. Mr. AINSWORTH. The matter of dealing with smuggled aliens is of course an administrative matter, and inasmuch as the law prohibits the admission of certain classes of aliens, I may say, parenthetically, that it is evidence pointing to the integrity and effective administration of the Immigration Bureau that this law is so well administered that they have had to have recourse to smuggling-that is, surreptitious entry. Smuggling is a lucrative employment by reason of the amount of money that, especially Chinese, are willing to pay to be landed into the United States, and the ease, owing to natural conditions, with which it may be accomplished. There is no great physical difficulty in bringing a group of men from Mexico, where it is legal for Chinese to be, to the United States by water. I know of a man who went in a rowboat from Ensenano to San Diego. The water was comparatively smooth and he had no trouble with the elements, so that we have that incentive. I think that the Chinese themselves in China contract to pay as much as $1,000 for safe delivery in the United States, and I believe that the commercial attractiveness of it, as far as the smuggling into the United States is concerned, is very high. I remember on one occasion we captured a boat at Half Moon Bay, a boat about 50 feet long, that had on board 40 Chinese. We have at this harbor two steamers, the Yale and the Harvard, and I venture to say that the trip of this boat was more profitable to the owner than any trip of the Yale or the Harvard, because I understand that they received about $300 apiece; that would be $12,000 for that one transaction. It is true we captured the owner and master and engineer, and they received imprisonment of about a year each, and they lost the boat. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. What was the value of the boat? Mr. AINSWORTH. I was going to say, taking the value of the boat at $2,500 and taking a year's imprisonment in the Alameda County Jail, at the end of the year-I don't think they greatly suffered by the year's imprisonment; they were hardy seafaring men that did not have the standing in the community that the imprisonment bothered them much-at the end of the year they were ahead eight or nine thousand dollars on that transaction. That makes it an attractive feature, and as long as that attraction exists it seems to me there will be a constant effort on the part of those who are waiting to make a little easy money, if I may use the term, to resort to Chinese smuggling. This bill I referred to provides for the registration of all Asiatics in the United States, laborers and nonlaborers. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. This printed bill you have before you? Mr. AINSWORTH. This is the bill that is already before the House. Mr. AINSWORTH. It has been submitted. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. When was it submitted to the House? Mr. AINSWORTH. Introduced in the House April 10, 1913. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. That is a year and a half ago. Mr. AINSWORTH. Yes, sir; I would be glad to furnish a copy. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Can you conveniently locate the paragraph in regard to registration? Mr. AINSWORTH. Yes, sir. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Will you read it? Mr. AINSWORTH. Section 18, page 32, line 9. House bill 2133, Sixty-third Congress, first session. I read: "That upon the passage of this act the Secretary of Labor shall direct the Commissioner General of Immigration to cause a registration of all Asiatic laborers now residing in the United States and issue to them a certificate of residence irrespective of the time or manner of their entry into the United States." That gives them a blanket--all these people are blanketed. "He shall further cause a registration of all Asiatic persons now in the United States other than laborers and issue to such other persons a certificate of residence irrespective of the time and method of their entry into the United States. Asiatic residents of the United States who are not eligible to citizen`ship thereof may return to their native country for purposes of business or pleasure without being compelled to show property interests "-I will say that that relieves a condition which we-a hardship-which we now believe exists in that a laborer must shown a thousand dollars' worth of property, which frequently he does not do and it is rather an incentive to perjury—“ and under such regulations as the Commissioner General may from time to time promulgate for the purpose of their proper identification. All Asiatics found within the United States and to whom certificates of residence shall be issued under the provisions of this act may be joined by their wives and minor children 16 years of age." That is the registration provision. That is followed by a provision of deportation which is an elaboration of and supplemental to the present deportation provision. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. By whom has that been introduced? Mr. AINSWORTH. By Congressman Raker. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. What are the Congressman's tendencies; are they pro or anti Asiatic? Mr. AINSWORTH. Congressman Raker? Mr. AINSWORTH. I think Congressman Raker is anti-Asiatic. Mr. AINSWORTH. Anti-Asiatic. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Well, now, digressing for a moment, how could he under that proposed provision compel the native-born American Chinese or the privileged classes to register? Mr. AINSWORTH. I don't think it contemplates native-born. They are citizens of the United States, and this refers to Asiatics. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Well, how can he, under the treaty, compel the privileged classes to register? Mr. AINSWORTH. I doubt very much if they can be compelled. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. They have certain treaty rights that must be re spected. Mr. AINSWORTH. I will say this: I have heard that the exempts object to registration. As a matter of practical experience, they register all the time. I will say that substantially all the exempts that we have to deal with in San Francisco, merchants, scholars, teachers-all come to us for a certificate of residence, or certificate of identity, which is registration. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Exactly. Now, you don't apprehend, then, any difficulty in getting the privileged classes under the proposed amendment that had been suggested to this commission, you don't apprehend any difficulty in having them register? Mr. AINSWORTH. I think they in a very short space of time, on their own motion, would be glad to be registered. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. And that the legality of their registering when it is left optional with them would be even greater than if it is made compulsory? Mr. AINSWORTH. I think that is very true. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Then does the idea of registration meet with your approval? Mr. AINSWORTH. Unqualifiedly; without qualification. Mr. AINSWORTH. Yes, sir. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Now, are you in favor of the idea of these inspec tion crews? Mr. AINSWORTH. As you have outlined it, for administrative reasons, with certain limitations. For instance, here is a jurisdiction under the commissioner of immigration at the port of San Francisco which takes the State of Nevada and a portion of the State of California north of what they call the Tehachapi, I believe that any activity in immigration matters should be properly under the commissioner of immigration at this port, for the reason that in the crew that you have outlined there is one very important element lacking, and that is taking care of the case after he has been arrested and the writ issues. We find in San Francisco that in almost every immigration case, and especially Chinese cases, there is an application for a writ of habeas corpus when the Secretary has ordered deportation. Of course, the Supreme Court has held that when the Secretary has passed upon those cases, they are closed to the court except it can be shown that there has been an unfair hearing or there has been an abuse of discretion. Well, that is so wide that very frequently judges feel, they feel at least that they must enter the application for the writ. And even if they don't, I have now in my desk 75 cases where deportation has been ordered, and application has been made for writ of habeas corpus, the district court has denied the application, and appeal has been taken to the United States Supreme Court or the circuit court of appeals, and those things go on for two or three years. So that in the crew that you refer to, unless that crew was a component part of the administrative entity of this particular jurisdiction, there would be apt to be confusion and some lost motion, I think, in their work. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Well, now, the details under this proposed amendment are left to the Secretary. This amendment simply outlines a general scheme, and the rest is left to the Secretary to carry it out in accordance with his best judgment and with his experience, so that it would be a matter for the department to determine, you see. It was not deemed wise and expedient to have the bill cover every possible contingency and every possible detail. We had sufficient confidence in the department to believe that they could work that out better than we could for them. Mr. AINSWORTH. That would have this effect: It would have the effect of rendering unsafe any man who in China had contracted to pay $1,000, or whatever the sum might be, for his delivery in the United States after that delivery could have been accomplished, and these arresting crews would render his tenure unsafe, and that would go a long ways toward preventing smuggling. But this situation has been growing for years, and I have thought in order to deal effectively with it, that is only one character of work that is necessary to stop it. I think that there are three elements involved: First, the safety of the man when he gets here; second, a reasonable supervision of the method by which he comes, and I think that that probably is not altogether a function of a peace branch of the Government. We have an institution called the Revenue-Cutter Service, and when the collector of the port calls upon-finds any violation of navigation laws he calls upon the RevenueCutter Service to assist him in correcting it. I think that the Revenue-Cutter Service has the same relation to the other branch of the Government. If a vessel should come from China, Australia, or any place, any large steamer, the immigration people would not be expected to take the matter up; because, first, there is the quarantine laws, the health laws, all under the administration of the collector. And as a matter of technical fact the Chinese who may come on a steamer do not come in violation of law until they are attempted to be landed. So that I think some supervision of the means by which they come in would be also necessary to work in hand with these arresting crews after they get here. Commissioner WEINSTOCK. Now, will you formulate that in the nature of written suggestions, Captain, and let us have it? Mr. AINSWORTH. I should be glad to do so; yes, sir. |