acter. Finally, in machine shops, foundries, and similar places, they have seldom been given employment, for these trades are well organized and there has been strong opposition by union men to the employment of Asiatics as helpers or as common laborers.

In 1909 it is probable that not far from 30,000 Japanese were engaged in agricultural pursuits in California during the summer months. As laborers they occupy a dominant position in most of the intensive, specialized agriculture which has come to prevail, and especially in that which involves much hand work and is seasonal in character. They occupy substantially the position held by the Chinese twenty years ago in the same and similar industries.

Among other things shown by the investigation of Japanese farming were the following:

(1) That because of the convenience of the tenant system and the difficulty farmers have experienced at times in securing laborers, there has been a strong inducement to lease land to a member of the race most prominent in the labor supply;

(2) That a further inducement has been found in the fact that both Chinese and Japanese, and the latter particularly, in their anxiety to establish themselves as farmers, had offered such high rents that leasing his land gave the owner the best returns, allowance being made for the diminished risk;

(3) That with the exception of one or two localities, the Japanese have been the most effective bidders for land and have overbid the Chinese, the Italians, and native white men, and, moreover, have sometimes been effective bidders because they would reduce land to cultivation which white men would not lease on such terms;

(4) That much of the leasing is closely related to a labor contract in which the tenant does certain stipulated kinds of work in return for a share of the crop, but that there has been a strong tendency for the Japanese to work for a greater degree of independence until they became cash tenants or landowners;

(5) That little capital has been required for a Japanese to become a tenant farmer, because (1) of the formation of partnerships among them, (2) of the provision of necessary equipment by the land-owner for the use of share tenants, and (3) of the advancing of money by shippers and others in competing for the control of the crop, the result being that many of the Japanese farmers have required little or no capital to begin with;

(6) That the leasing of land to Japanese, as to Chinese and Italians, has resulted in a displacement of laborers of other. races because, on account of the disinclination of white persons to work for them or their own favoritism, they employ persons of their own race almost exclusively;

(7) That the Japanese farmers usually pay their Japanese laborers more than the local rate, but these wages are for a longer work day and for the better men they are usually in a position to select from those available;

(8) That in growing strawberries, asparagus, and certain vegetables the Japanese farmers have increased the acreage in some instances until the industry has become unprofitable for them as well as others;

(9) That because of the strong desire to remain independent of the wage relation and the limitations placed upon the occupations in which they may engage, the Japanese farmers in some instances appear not to have been discouraged in gaining control of land as long as there was a prospect of a small profit to be realized.

Re

Though in many localities the Japanese laborers were at first received with great favor, widespread dissatisfaction with them is now found and they are almost always disparagingly compared with the Chinese, who, because they are careful workmen, faithful to the employer, uncomplaining, easily satisfied with regard to living quarters, and not ambitious to learn new processes and to. establish themselves as independent farmers, are used in the older agricultural district as the standard by which others are measured Indeed, while the largest number of Japanese were arriving and there was no great question of an insufficiency of numbers, there was a demand for a limited immigration of Chinese. Though many ranchers think that for social reasons it would be a mistaken policy to readmit the Chinese, they generally regard Asiatic laborers as indispensible to the prosperity and expansion of the agricultural industries which have become predominant in the state, and their almost unanimous preference is for Chinese rather than any other Asiatic race.

ured/

Perhaps between 12,000 and 15,000 Japanese are employed in the eleven states and territories comprising the western division, as domestic servants in private families, and as help in restaurants, hotels, barrooms, clubs, offices, and stores conducted by members of the white races, while some 10,000 or 11,000 more are engaged

in business for themselves or are employed by those who are thus occupied, or are professional men and craftsmen working on their own account.

In certain respects the Japanese have shown a great capacity for assimilation, and very much more than the Chinese and the Mexicans of the peon class. In fact, they are extremely anxious to learn western ways and methods and conform at least to the externals of the civilization into which they have come. They have organized more schools for the acquirement of knowledge of English than any other race, and in spite of their general colony life and slight association with other races they have made more rapid progress in learning our language than the majority of the south and east Europeans, and much more than the Mexicans and Chinese, who have shown little interest in such matters. In dress and all superficial matters they conform to American ways, and though the majority adhere to the Buddhist faith, a large number, especially of the younger student class, are professed Christians and the missions are usually well supported. Yet there are race characteristics which may be firmly rootedhow firmly only time and longer association with other races will tell.

But whatever their capacities for assimilation, the general conditions have been, and are, unfavorable to Japanese laborers because of race feeling growing out of difference in color, characteristics, and ideals, because of the economic conflict which has taken place, especially in California, and (this being not least in importance) because these laborers came from the same quarter of the world as the Chinese and fell heir to their industrial position and general mode of life. The Japanese, along with the Chinese, are regarded as differing greatly from the white races they have lived among, and a strong public sentiment has segregated them, if not in their work in other details of their living. This practically forbids, when not expressed in law, marriage between them and persons of the white races, and where a considerable number of Japanese have appeared in a community race. conflicts have frequently resulted. With the exception of those who belong to the business classes, the Chinese native-born have found limitations placed upon them so that, regardless of any capacity they may have for Americanization, they do not differ materially from and are treated as if foreign-born. It is not unlikely that, with large numbers of laborers, similar limitations

-with similar results—would be placed upon the native-born Japanese, none of whom has yet arrived at mature age.

Regulation by Treaty and Legislation*

The Chinese began to come to California in the early 50's. At first they were welcomed, but when their competition began to be felt restrictive legislation was demanded. Various state laws were passed. In 1853 a law was passed taxing all foreign miners which in practice was applied only to the Chinese. In 1855 a tax of $55 was imposed on every Chinese immigrant. In 1858 a state law prohibited all Chinese or Mongolians from entering the state. This continued until 1876 when a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States rendered all state legislation unconstitutional and made the regulation of immigration a national function.

National Legislation

1862. Congress passed a law prohibiting the coolie trade. 1868. The Burlingame treaty between the United States and China declared that

Chinese subjects visiting or residing in the United States shall enjoy the same privileges, immunities, and exemptions in respect to travel or residence as may there be enjoyed by the citizens or subjects of the most favored nations.

By the terms of this treaty the rights of naturalization were denied the Chinese.

1875. The general immigration law of 1875 prohibited the importation of Chinese women for purposes of prostitution and the immigration of convicts. The importation of Chinese or Japanese without free and voluntary consent for the purpose of holding them to a term of service was made punishable by imprisonment or a heavy fine. The importation of coolie labor was made a felony.

1877. The report of a joint special committee sent to California to study the question was made to Congress. The report consisted of a denunciation of the Chinese.

1879. President Hayes vetoed a bill limiting the number of Chinese to be brought in by any one vessel on the ground that it was an abrogation of the Burlingame treaty.

*A summary based on the Report of the Immigration Commission. M. K. R.

1880. The failure of the above bill led to a new treaty, containing the following:

Whenever in the opinion of the Government of the United States the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States or their residence therein, affects or threatens to affect the interests of that country, or to endanger the good order of the said country, or of any locality within the territory thereof, the Government of China agrees that the Government of the United States may regulate, limit, or suspend such coming or residence, but may not absolutely prohibit it. The limitation or suspension shall be reasonable, and shall apply only to Chinese who may go to the United States as laborers, other classes not being included in the limitations. Legislation taken in regard to Chinese laborers will be of such a character only as is necessary to enforce the regulation, limitation, or suspension of immigration, and immigrants shall not be subject to personal maltreatment or abuse.

1882. A Chinese exclusion law was passed providing that immigration of Chinese laborers should be suspended for twenty years. It was vetoed by President Arthur, but in an amended form, making the period of exclusion ten years, it was approved and became a law.

1884. Amendments were made tightening the above exclusion provisions for the purpose of making evasions less possible.

1888. China took the initiative in proposing a new treaty prohibiting the emigration of Chinese laborers to the United States. Such a treaty was drawn up but was not ratified. When the treaty failed Congress passed a bill providing for exclusion. President Cleveland recommended that it should not be made to apply to Chinese then on the way, but this recommendation was not heeded.

1892. A law was passed continuing the law of 1882 for another ten years. It declared also that all Chinese in the United States must take out certificates so that authorities could know their whereabouts. They were made liable to deportation if found without such certificates within a year.

1894. A new treaty was agreed to at the request of China. It provided for exclusion of all Chinese laborers for a term of ten years. Those going back were allowed to return here provided they had a wife, child, or parent, or property worth $1000 in the United States. Registration was still required. This treaty covered practically the same ground as existing legislation.

1902. A law was passed providing that all existing laws be reenacted, to continue in force until a new treaty should be negotiated.