57TH CONGRESS, 1st Session. 41.9. SENATE. (DOCUMENT 18 Sovate). Committee N Congress ང foreign affais EXCLUSION OF CHINESE LABORERS. LETTER OF MR. JOHN HAY, DATED DECEMBER 18, 1901, AND FEBRUARY 3, 1902.-Ordered to be printed as a document. 99 DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith for the consideration of your committee copy of a note, with inclosures, from the Chinese minister, reviewing at length the treaties and laws regulating Chinese immigration and requesting that before opening the question of new legislation Congress will provide for a commission to visit the localities in the United States and in the Philippine and Hawaiian islands where the Chinese most largely congregate, and by a personal investigation ascertain how the present laws and regulations affect the Chinese, and how the exclusion of Chinese affects the localities in question. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. ROBERT R. HITT, JOHN HAY. House of Representatives. Chairman Committee on Foreign Affairs, CHINESE LEGATION, SIR: In view of the fact that the law of the Congress of the United States which went into force May 6, 1882, based upon the treaty of 1880 between China and the United States, regulating Chinese immigration, and which was reenacted May 5, 1892, for ten years, is about to expire by limitation, and as the treaty now in force relating to Chinese immigration will terminate in 1904, I have been instructed by the Imperial Chinese Government to bring the subject of this law and the treaties to the attention of the United States and to urge an adjustment of the questions involved more in harmony with the friendly relations of the two Governments and with the interests of their respective peoples. * * * The treaty of 1880 (Article IV) provides that "if the laws of the Congress of the United States to carry out the treaty are found to work hardship upon the subjects of China, the Chinese minister at Washington may bring the matter to the notice of the Secretary of State of the United States, who will consider the subject with him to the end that mutual and unqualified benefit may result." The matter which now presses itself upon our consideration is whether the laws now in force "are found to work hardship upon the subjects of China" and whether they ought to be renewed or modified by Congress. As the subject is one of the most important to my Government and my people, I must entreat your patience while I attempt to review it at some length and in detail. In doing so it will be necessary to repeat some of the facts and arguments which have already been submitted to you, in order that a full and connected presentation of the subject may be made for the consideration of the legislative branch of your Government, and I respectfully request that a copy of this note be transmitted to the honorable Congress. In seeking to discharge this duty I shall ask your attention, first, to the diplomatic history of the treaties upon which the laws of the Congress are based; second, to an inquiry, somewhat in detail, whether these laws have worked hardships to the subjects of China; third, whether they have proved to be for the best interests of the United States in an economic aspect and in its commercial relations with China, and fourth, whether, in view of their early expiration, they should be reenacted, and if so, to what extent of territory they should be applied and what modifications are called for by experience in their enforcement. I. DIPLOMATIC HISTORY OF THE CHINESE IMMIGRATION TREATIES. In 1868 the Governments of China and the United States celebrated a treaty which guaranteed to the Chinese subjects visiting or residing in the United States the same privileges, immunities, and exemptions as were enjoyed by the citizens of the most-favored nation. It was a treaty negotiated by the great American statesman, Secretary Seward. It was announced by the President of the United States to Congress to be a "liberal and auspicious treaty" (Dip. Cor. U. S., 1868, p. 16), and it was welcomed by the people of the United States as a great advance in their international relations. It also has the double significance of having been negotiated by a Chinese special embassy, of which a distinguished American diplomat, Hon. Anson Burlingame, was the head, and who was familiar with the wishes and interests of the American people. Some delay was occasioned in its ratification by the Chinese Government, and upon the advent of a new President-General Granthis Secretary of State, Mr. Fish, manifested a marked zeal and anxiety to secure its ratification, with a full knowledge on the part of the Government that it was to secure the free entrance of Chinese laborers into the United States, whose coming by "thousands" he welcomed. In urging the minister of the United States to hasten final and favorable action, he wrote: Already they, the Chinese immigrants, have crossed the great mountains, and are beginning to be found in the interior of the continent. By their assiduity, patience, and fidelity, and by their intelligence they earn the good will and confidence of those that employ them. We have good reason to think that this thing will continue and increase. (Wharton's International Digest, I, p. 457.) Under such circumstances the Imperial Chinese Government was pleased to meet the wishes of the Government of the United States, and it put the treaty into full force and operation with the expectation that it would be the means of unrestricted commercial and industrial intercourse, and a bond of union and friendship between the two great peoples for many generations to come. But within a few years the labor unions on the Pacific coast began to object to the coming of Chinese laborers to that region to compete with them. Soon afterwards 3/2/40 D. Rauffinan |