Speech #510158943

Mr. President. I have called attention to the last two lines of this section. which must be considered in relerence to the penal arrangements of the section. those last two lines providing that the mere act of bringing such a proscribed immigrant hither and anding him shall be deemed prime facie evidence of the master having known it. We have now something of this kind of legislation. that while a criminal shall be protected under our general system. yet for certain purposes when the ingredient ol guilt is intent and knowledge. yet it a certain fact occurs. that shall be considered as evidence to convict. Now. without enlarging generally upon these propositions. look at the attitude of the master of one of the great ships which ply between Europe and New York. He takes on board at Liverpool or at Bremen 1.200 passengers. What is there for him to ascertain whether any proscribed immigrant is among them? What possible evidence is there? But the fact that he has brought one that afterwards is fbund over here under proof to have been one of that kind. he is to be punished. Mr. President. there is no criminality in bringing immigrants hither. and we have not proscribed immigrants. We have undertaken to say that persorts who by contracts are to come here and work after they have got here are to be sent back. and those who intermeddle in the transaction knowingly and improperly areto be punished. Now. where is this question of knowledge to be placed? After a master has taken one of these proscribed immigrants on board he must bring him here. although afterward he may find out that he is within proscription. and he is punishable. although he has found it out for the first time after the immigrant is on board and the ship has sailed. and then knowledge is to be imputed to him unless he can prove innocence. Thereore we are entitled to every proper protection under these very stringent penalties. and hence I have thought that it was not undueto the proper protection of navigation and of the transportation of immigrants who arc lawfully brought here that this word "knowingly." which may be considered as ambiguous as to any ingredient of willful purpose as I pointed out. shall he substituted by the word "willfully." which will show that when he sails from a port he has with purpose brought one of the proscribed immigrants. The proscription is of laborers. mechanics. artisans. I think those are the only ones that are subjected to the treatment of this section. How can a master know whether a person is a mechanic. an artisan. or a laborer? And if the proscription is limited to those classes. immigrants who wish to evade it will always report themselves as being of some other pursuit. I do not think. unless we are willing to stop immigration and are to treat transportation according to the necessary rules of transportation of great multitudes of people themselves as a dangerous thing. it is too much to say in the third section that the word "willfully" shall be substituted for "knowingly."