Speech #520047698

What I am arguing is that. after the lapse of twelve years from the enactment of the treaty. there can be but a very few Chinamen who were domiciled here then who can be affected by the law which we may pass. I was alout to refer to the bill reported by the Committee on Foreign Relations. It does nat extend prohibition of immigration or suspension of immigration beyond the provision of the law of 1888. but it docs this. which it seems tome that everyone opposed to Chinese immigration should be satisfied with: Under its provisions a Chinese laborer here. against whom we would guard the country and our civilization. is presumptively here in vi lation of law. ce.tificates that such persons were here in 1880 Ia.:e been abrogated. a Chinese laborer has no right here. and ih burden of proof. at least. is thrown upon him. I sad he had no right here. the burden of procf is thrown upon him to establis h his right to he here. and if he fails to establish it alffirmativoly he is exported from the country. The passage of this measure must. in my judgment. of necessity r salt in a practical b nishment from the Pacific States of the Chinese laborers. that is. if the people of California. of Oregon. and the ether Chinese States see fit. or if there is anyone momber ef any of those States who sees fit to prosecute the Chinaman under the provisions of this act. he can drive the whole race. or all the members of the race who are here. if they are laborers. from our shores.