very determined and that they are bitter toward the defenders of the National Policy. More will appear under the chapters treating of the "Real Issues" and of the "Relation of Organized Labor to the Broader Question of Immigration."

Loss of Memory or Lack of Sensitiveness.

"Since it is formally announced that the President is endeavoring to satisfactorily adjust our relations with Japan," says The San Francisco Chronicle of February 1, 1907, editorially, "no patriotic American —and no Americans are more patriotic than those of California—will by word or deed knowingly make the situation more difficult. It must be remembered that, so far as the expressions of press or organized bodies in California are concerned, there has never been one word that we now recall of which the most sensitive people could complain."

The reader can draw his own conclusions, after completing this chapter, whether there has been a loss of memory or a lack of sensitiveness. For the edification of those who have not been permitted to see the daily papers of the Coast, during these months of excitement, we will give some brief quotations from The Chronicle and from other papers.

EXTRAVAGANCE OF

THE CHRONICLE

What shall be said of the tolerance or temperance of a paper that asserts that the President is evidently insincere, and that he is detested by both The Chronicle and by Congress? The quotations follow: The President Insincere and Detested.

"We care nothing whatever for Mr. Roosevelt, but we do desireat all times to speak with respect of the President of the United States. It is necessary, however, to say that the President has degraded his position by assertions which are untrue, assumptions which have no basis in fact, recommendations which can only excite ridicule, implied threats which he has no power to execute, all presented in a tone calculated to arouse national and international passion, and the worst of all is that he is evidently insincere."-Chronicle, Editorial, December 5, 1906.

“We have not the slightest ill-will to Congress, for we know that it detests the President as heartily as we do, and is as ready to snúb him if he steps outside his authority on the Japanese question as it was in respect to his attempt to dictate the Government's official spelling." The Chronicle, Editorial, January 17, 1907.

The Chronicle and Justice.

"If the case goes up, it will be interesting to see what view the Supreme Court takes. There is no Judge, however exalted, whose views of the law are not affected by his views of public policy, which in turn are affected by the prevailing sentiments of the day. The discussion inspired by the Federal assault on State control of its own schools is setting men to thinking. . . . We in California cannot pretend to have either a good or a strong government. It can do nothing with our great corporations, and we permit notorious criminals to

badger our courts of justice."-Chronicle, Editorial, January 2, 1907. "It is hard to conceive of the folly of those who stirred up this question in the first place. It is still harder to understand how any sane person could be so destitute of reason as to persist in pressing it. Even if a legal victory could be won, it would be a barren victory. No sensible Japanese parent would permit his child to enter one of our schools upon a court order. The only result of the unspeakable stupidity of our Federal authorities in this matter will be to stir up international hatred and make it difficult, if not impossible to, settle the matter in a reasonable way."-Chronicle, Editorial, December 1, 1906.

This Paper Is the Leader in the

Campaign Against the Japanese.

This is the paper that has been leading in the opposition to the Japanese upon the Coast. This extravagance has been recognized since The Chronicle began its campaign in the spring of 1905, with such glaring headlines as the following: Crime and Poverty go Hand in Hand with Asiatic Labor; Brown Men Are an Evil in the Public Schools; Japanese a Menace to American Women; Brown Asiatics Steal Brains of Whites; Big Immigration may be Japanese Policy, etc.

It is no wonder that so strong a paper as The Argonaut, in criticising this method, should then say editorially: "The Chronicle will ! effect nothing for its cause by talking, when referring to the Japanese, of the 'manners and customs of the slave pen.' Such exaggeration hurts rather than helps, for we all know that the ordinary Jap is a neat, clean, personally pleasing little fellow."

The Contention of The Chronicle.

The following quotation from an editorial of The Chronicle of November 30, 1906, is laughable in view of the violent language which it has so frequently used during the two years' discussion of this whole question. Think of the editor sitting down and talking over, in a friendly way with representative Japanese, these matters with any hope of a satisfactory adjustment! The quotation reads:

"The objection of our people is simply to the establishment of Oriental forms of civilization in the United States. We particularly object to a Japanese invasion, because, as the Japanese are the most virile of Oriental peoples, their lodgment on our shores is by so much the more dangerous. We recognize that Asiatic peoples are entitled to maintain such forms of civilization and such a standard of life as they prefer in their own country, and to exclude, if they so desire, and as they certainly did once desire, the people of Western countries. So far as we are concerned they are quite welcome, as they have the right, under existing treaties to exclude all American manual workers from Japan. We claim the same right, and demand that it be exercised.

"We have more hopes of convincing the Japanese statesmen of the wisdom of keeping the races apart than of convincing Eastern manufacturers and fool sentimentalists. We should be delighted to sit down and talk it over in a friendly way with representative Japanese not concerned with ocean transportation nor with contracts for coolies."

The question as to the establishment of Oriental forms of civilization in the United States will be considered in the next chapter, under the heading of Assimilation.

OTHER SAN FRANCISCO

PAPERS.

Brief extracts from The Argonaut, The Bulletin, and The Cail will be given, and in the following section it will be shown that the Pacific Coast is not solid, the papers in the Northwest and in Los Angeles refusing to join in the outcry against the Japanese, and the Christian press being decidedly opposed to the movement.

The Argonaut: Passive Resistance.

It must not be inferred from the above quotation from The Argonaut that it is in sympathy with the Japanese. It has been equally zealous in its opposition, but for the most part more sober. It has taken a strong position on the question of State Rights, but recognizes the strength of the East in the matter of restricting immigration. In an editorial, December 1, 1906, on California and the Japanese, this paper said:

"California has a law which makes it obligatory on her school board to provide separate schoolhouses for children of Indian, Chinese or Mongolian blood. That law still stands on the statute books. It is a duty of the school board to enforce it. They are enforcing it. They will continue to do so. That law, we beg to assure our Eastern friends, will be enforced until it has been set aside by the Supreme Court of the United States. . . Some of the Eastern journals consider it odd that California and Californians should seem at this juncture so extremely placid. The reason that we in California are calm in the presence of this crisis is: First, because we know we are right; second, because we hope to convince our countrymen that we are right; third, that if we fail to so convince them, we will, whatever they do or say, do what we know to be right."

In a subsequent editorial, entitled "Passive Resistance," in reply to a criticism of The Commercial Advertiser, The Argonaut says:

"The statement means simply that in this public school question we in California will do what we know to be right. By that we mean that we will educate our own children in our own way. We will not permit adult males-whether white, yellow, black or brown-to be intimately associated with white girls of tender age in the schoolroom. We will not permit the Federal Government, the Japanese Government, Theodore Roosevelt, the Mikado, or anybody else to dictate to us in this regard."

It will be noted in the above that The Argonaut assumes that the State law is mandatory, that the only question is concerning adults, and that the segregation of Japanese students of all ages is the only solution. These questions will be taken up later.

The Bulletin: Adults in the Schools.

In the following quotation from The Bulletin, emphasis is placed. upon the objection to adults in the schools, and the editor suggests

that the reference of the whole question to the courts would be welcomed. We read:

"Whatever may be the report of Secretary Metcalf, the stubborn fact remains that the citizens of San Francisco object to having Japanese men taught in the same classes with American children. They do not object to giving the Japanese all the educational advantages enjoyed by the San Francisco children, but as to the conditions under which this instruction is to be given, the California people claim the right to decide a local matter, even if it involves international issues. The President's desire to submit the matter to the Supreme Court for decision will not be obnoxious to the people of California, who feel that this whole affair is overemphasized. There may be some difficulty in enforcing the mandate of the Supreme Court.”—Editorial, December 3, 1906.

The Call and the President.

In an editorial entitled "An Extraordinary and Unpleasant Situation," The Call of February 2, 1907, in referring to the President's request for two members of the San Francisco Board of Education to proceed to Washington for conference, says:

"Officially the President has not exposed the reasons behind his urgent request that San Francisco and California back down in the matter of the segregation of Japanese and white children in the public schools of this city. In the usual left-handed manner, known as semi-official, it is made to appear, however, that if the present request be not heeded Japan will be angered to the point of a resort to arms. . . It is an extraordinary request, an extraordinary and unpleasant situation. The President's reasons for his urgency need to be strong reasons. President Roosevelt asks us to take a great deal on trust, and apparently he still misconceives the attitude of Californians on this matter. California has no angry or malignant feeling in the matter. As citizens of the commonwealth, we neither like nor dislike the Japanese, but are irrevocably apposed to permitting them to come here in such numbers as to make this an Asiatic colony."

In Chapter V., under "The Broader Question of Immigration," this question will be taken up and discussed at length. As the statistics show, there is no ground for such a fear, and the reason for the agitation must be found elsewhere.

THE PACIFIC COAST

NOT SOLID.

The attitude of certain Seattle, Tacoma, and Los Angeles papers is given in a review of the Pacific Coast Press in the Literary Digest of January 12, 1907, which says:

Seattle News.

"A canvass of the Pacific Coast Press, prompted by statements of The Seattle News to the effect that the majority of the thoughtful people of California are not in sympathy with the agitation of the demagogues of the cities against the Japanese, and that 'no part of the State of Washington or Oregon, which exceed in area and populathe State of California, have any sympathy with the foolish agitation of the San Francisco people,, leaves us between the horns of a

dilemma. It seems that we must either believe that the thoughtful people of the Pacific Coast are not represented by the press of that section, or that The News is mistaken in its diagnosis of public opinion."

The Tacoma Daily News.

The Digest continues: "The Tacoma Daily News, it is true, protested that it has not shown sympathy with any demagogic agitation against the Japanese. But it adds that it is not convinced that the disturbance in California is due to demagogic agitation. The Pacific Coast, it asserts, will not close the doors to the Japanese nor drive them from the country. Nevertheless, we are assured it does and will refuse to set this people on any pedestal-a determination which no presidential order shall change."

Los Angeles Times.

Still quoting The Digest, "The Los Angeles Times also refuses to join the hue and cry against the Japanese, taking a rap instead at Mayor Schmitz. Alluding to the latter's declaration that he would, if necessary, lay down his life in battle against the Japanese, The Times remarks: 'It is a notable fact that his Honor has never laid down anything of value. His promise, however, would almost reconcile anyone to a war with Japan. His Honor has probably merely discovered some place in Japan that the extradition treaty doesn't cover, and is willing to go for that purpose.' It claims, moreover, that 'California could utilize the services of 100,000 Chinese and Japanese at the present time more easily than 10,000 twenty years ago.' adds that we need the Japanese as workers, but not as voters.

And

In justice to The Literary Digest, the following should be added: "In a canvass of fifty leading Coast papers, however, these three are the only ones we find expressing such views. Most of the Coast press display uncompromising antipathy against Japanese aggression and competition, against the President, and against Secretary Metcalf for his 'disloyal' report. The latter is admonished by one paper to 'stick by the President, who can give him a job, because he could get nothing from the people of his own State.'

The editor of the above had doubtless not seen several other Coast papers. Extracts will be given from The Los Angeles Express, which places the responsibility for the agitation upon union labor; also from the Christian press.

Los Angeles Express Fixes Responsibility.

The following quotation from the Los Angeles Express is taken from The Pacific, January 3, 1907, the organ of the Congregational Churches on the Pacific Coast:

"The Los Angeles Express declares that nothing less than the hanging of Japanese by the toes would satisfy some of the antiJapanese agitators in San Francisco. With a desire to ascertain the sentiment as to Japanese exclusion, the Secretary of the Merchants and Manufacturers' Association of Los Angeles has sent out a letter to the members of the Association. The Secretary himself says: 'We believe the gist of all this agitation is to be found in the action of the labor union leaders at San Francisco, and that they are trying to involve the entire State in their own little controversy.' And the Secretary says further: 'If the Japanese labor were cut off from Southern California many interests would suffer.' In the days of the