Speech #520048736

I have listened with undivided attention and with considerable astonishment. I confess. to the very able and interesting speeches made by several of the members of the Committee on Foreign Relations. including the distinguished chairman of that committee . Those speeches. in my humble judgment. while able and interesting from their standpoint. were not the character of speeches. as I think. which the great masses of the people of the Pacific States and Territories. who have felt keenly the touch of the evils of Chinese immigration. would have desired to hear from members of that committee. Those speeches were such as we. fight have expected to hear from Senators who. by conviction. had arived at the conclusion that it is entirely wrong to impose any restriction whatever on the coming of Chinese to this country. They were speeches which would have sounded well and which would have been influential. it seems to me. in the highest degree had they been made in opposition to the first proposition ever presented to the Senate of the United States in favor of inhibiting. even to a limited extent. the coming of Chinese to this country. Those speeches. and especially the speech of the honorable chairman of the committee and that of my distinguished friend from Minnesota . while able and interesting. presented arguments which. in my humble judgment. in view of the character of the amendment presented and advocated by that committee. and in view of the character of the legislation proposed by the House of Representatives. and which is antagonized by that committee. were fallacious and illogical. Had the Committee on Foreign Relations desired. or did they desire now. to give expression by their acts to the full meaning of the sentiments expressed by them in those speeches. then it seems to me that there is but one way. and only one. to do that thing. and that is by a motion to recommit this bill to the committee with instructions to- report a. measure repealing all laws and treaties on the subjectof restricting. Chinese immigration. and reCnacting in terms all the provisions of our original treaty with China of 185& as modified by the Burlingame treaty of 1868. But if in this statement. � am a. little too harsh on the committee. or if my criticism is hypercritical. I certainly am justified in saying that. if the instructions. to which I refer should be modified so as to requireabili repealing the Scott exclusion act. then APRuL 25. "I am sure I should ot be chargeable with any unjust or unreaonable criticism of the action of the committee. Why do I say that the arguments of the committee. in view of the proposition they support and in view of the proposition they antagonize. are illogical and fallacious? The main argument which has been made by these Senators in antagonism to the House bill is because it transgresses our treaty with China.