Golden Gate; and I think that I am not stating the facts too strongly when I say that the people of California regard these Japanese coolies with greater abhorrence, aye, with greater fear, than they did the coolies from China. We feel that the former have all the vices of the Chinese, with few or none of their virtues. In business they are absolutely devoid of the stern sense of honor of the Chinaman. The latter invariably lives up to the letter of his obligation, while the Japanese never hesitates to break that obligation if it suits his purpose so to do. Why, even in Japan all the principal banks and commercial houses employ Chinese in the two important positions of compradore and shroff. The compradore is the purchasing and selling agent who acts as the go-between between his employer and the firms with which he does business. The shroff is the exchange expert, a necessary adjunct to all large business houses in a land where the value of silver, which is the common medium of exchange, fluctuates from hour to hour. As a rule foreign firms doing business in Japan place full reliance on the word of the Chinese compradore, even tho they have little faith in the integrity of the Japanese proprietor. And if the bankers and business men are not to be relied on, what reliance is to be placed on the lower classes of Japanese society? But the people of California have never made objection to merchants, bankers and professional men from Japan. It is the coolie against whom they protest. And just one word in this connection. It has long been the policy of our government to protect the products of our farms, our factories and our workshops from the products of the pauper labor of Japan and all other countries. Then why not protect the workman himself—the man who creates those products of our farms, our factories and our workshops, from that very pauper laborer?

Much has been said in recent discussions to the effect that the Japanese have been denied their treaty rights in California. The people of that state deny this assertion most emphatically. But in speaking of treaty rights, Californians freely express the belief that the existing treaty, under which Japanese coolies come to our shores at the present rate of 1000 per month, is not an altogether equitable instrument. They contend, on the contrary, that the treaty is altogether one-sided. True, it guarantees to the citizens of either country full right of entrance into and residence in the territory of the other. But who ever heard of American laborers, or American mechanics, going to Japan in large numbers? Why,

industrial conditions in the "Land of the Rising Sun" are absolutely prohibitive, so far as the emigration of the American workman to that country is concerned. The latter receives from $2.50 to $7.00 a day in his own land. It would be an insult to his intelligence to assume that he would want to sail to far-off Nippon for the privilege of working there at the prevailing rate of wages paid to mechanics, to wit, 30, 40, 50 or 60 cents a day. It is the high wage that prevails here that is attracting thousands of the little brown men to our shores. Unless prohibited by legislation they will come in still greater number, while the number of Americans who expatriate themselves in Japan, by reason of the conditions that prevail there, must, necessarily, always remain limited. And for these reasons Californians feel that the treaty with Japan is entirely one-sided.

Congressional Record.

42:3494-8. March 17, 1908

Shall the United States Exclude the Immigration of Japanese and Korean Laborers? Burton L. French

Nations are organized and perpetuated for the benefit of the people who make up the nation, and as people individually have problems to solve that have to do with their course of life, so nations have problems to solve which bear upon their perpetual well-being, and we must proudly assume that our nation's life is perpetual. Many acts of a nation are merely transitory and have but a passing effect upon the current events and development of the nation; other policies of the nation go to the very basic principles upon which the nation rests.

A tariff law operates indifferently and may be repealed or continued with slight effect upon the ultimate character of the nation; a financial policy may be changed by each succeeding administration; great government improvements have to do with the facility with which business is handled, but not one of these questions strikes vitally at the highest good of any country. The question involved with respect to the immigration of people to our shores has to do with the character of our population, of our institutions, of our religious, ethical, social, and political life. Our country is going through a great formative period, and it is the duty of our nation to have a guard for not only our commercial and industrial well-being, but our people as well. More

important than the construction of railways, the building of cities, or the reclamation of arid lands is the safeguarding of our population, and in safeguarding our population one of the primal things to which our minds must be directed is the blood that flows in our people's veins. Peoples of different color and widely separated racial tendencies do not live side by side under the same flag in peace and harmony.

It matters not the relative development of the races; it matters not that they are equal in all that makes for highest manhood and for purest womanhood; it matters only that their social characteristics are separated by a chasm so deep that it cannot be bridged at the marriage altar, and their folklore stories mingled by a common fireside. Such is the chasm that separates the American people today from the people of the Orient. It is upon this ground that I believe they should be excluded from our shores in such a manner as will prevent any considerable number from ever claiming this their home. This can be done, I believe, by the exclusion of the laboring classes of the Oriental countries. On the other hand, realizing the vigor, attainments, and traditions of these ancient people, realizing that they have broken the spell that has bound them as recluse nations during the centuries gone by, we may well afford to admit their scholars that we may learn from them, their students that they may learn from us, their merchants, if this can be done without abuse, that we may buy from them the product of their genius, and through whom we may in turn exploit the fruits of our own industrial thrift.

The relations between the United States and the nations of the Orient should be such that the utmost good will may prevail. We should ask nothing from them that we would not as cheerfully concede. As the years go by we will become more and more interdependent. Notwithstanding this, our growth should be side by side and not by mingling the population of America on the continent of Asia and the population of Asia upon the continent of America. It may be laid down as a cardinal principle that the greatest internal peace belongs to that nation whose people are homogeneous, while, on the other hand, distrust, unrest, and internal strife are the undoubted portion of the nation whose people do not blend.

Every year that passes will bring additionally embarrassing political questions to the states which have Oriental voters. It

is not to be supposed that these voters could get the point of view that the American would have. It is not to be supposed that they would fail to use their ballot to produce practical results for themselves. Every year that passes will bring increased difficulties because of the public school situation. Every year will heighten the difference between the Oriental laborer and the white laborer, and the white laborer cannot be blamed for standing for the welfare of his own fireside. Last of all, every year that goes by without positive legislation looking to the checking of Oriental immigration means the introduction into our midst of a people of a strange blood who throughout the centuries to come will retain their individuality and serve as the slumbering embers that will in the sometime burst into flames of international wars involving our own country and the nations of the Orient.

We may talk of friendly understanding and the willingness of the Oriental nations to prevent the immigration of their people to our shores. I respect the sincerity of those who urge this course, but I have no confidence in the merits of such a policy. We cannot leave this question to Japan and to Korea any more than thirty years ago we could have left the question of Chinese immigration to the Chinese government. The present ministry may favor the policy, the succeeding one may oppose it, or if it favors it, the ministry may not prove itself efficient. During the last few days the people of Japan, by their votes, have asked for a new ministry. Who can tell the policy of the political leaders who will now assume control? Aye, if they have declared their policy, who can tell how faithfully that policy will be executed or what will be the policy in ten years from now?

Collier's. 51:12. May 31, 1913

World's Most Menacing Problem

The question involved in the California anti-alien land law is not for today alone. It is for generations to come. It is not a Japanese question alone. It is a Chinese question, a Hindu question, a Korean question, a Syrian and Armenian question. It is not a matter of the United States alone. It is a Canadian question, an Australian question, a South American question, a Mexican question, a South African question, a New Zealand question.

It is a world question. It is a problem for all time.

It is the local outcropping of the greatest of world problems -the riddle of the intermingling of races.

It cannot be settled on the narrow basis of any treaty with Japan, nor on the local basis of opinion in California, nor the feelings of the people of all the states on the Pacific coast.

It ought not to be adjusted by the people of the United States in ignorance, nor prejudice, nor with reference to political platforms, nor the demand for cheap labor.

It cannot be lightly slighted off. It is an irrepressible struggle. It will persist for ages. Its complexities and its menace are bound to become nearer and more menacing as every invention in transportation and every advance in commerce brings white men and brown men and yellow men into closer and closer contact with each other.

1-The Wrong Way to Approach the Question

Let us consider the attitude of Japan in the premises. The Japanese are a fine and strong people. They are very proud, just as we are very proud. They have just as much reason to be proud as we have. They have a very ancient and splendid civilization. They are poets and artists and scientists. They have a fine system of ethics, and some virtues which they can teach us. In patriotism, in enterprise, in efficiency, all along the line of modern life, they compare favorably with all other peoples. They are not inferior to us-let that be admitted at the outset. So long as we act with reference to them on the theory that they are inferior, we shall be in the wrong. They think themselves superior to us. We think ourselves superior to them. That is the natural attitude of the mass of the people of every land. But in the last analysis the Japanese will be entitled to the verdict that they are just as able, just as efficient, and just as good as we are.

2-The Necessity for Homogeneity in a Democracy

What reason can we find, then, for making laws which will tend to keep the Japanese out? Let us see what our destiny is and how it must be worked out, determine what our problems are, and see what effect the incoming of the Orientals would have on our affairs:

We of the great Caucasian nations, especially the Englishspeaking nations, have unreservedly committed ourselves to the