Speech #580059955

In the substitute that he offered and that passed this body there was this language: So far as the same Is not inconsistent with treaty obligations now existing. "Now existing" was eliminated from thts law in conference. So it reads: So far as they are not in conflict with treaty obligations. Then. again. the Senator from Connecticut evidently thought In 1902 that the denunciation of the treaty of 1894 would imperil every exclusion act that was upon the statute book. for he incorporated in his substitute the provision: That In case tho said treaty be terminated. as provided in article 6 thereof. this act and the acts hereby extended and continued shall remain in force until there shall be concluded between the United States and China a new treaty respecting the coming of Chinese persons into the United States. etc. Every provision in the Senators substitute that limited the test of the law to the treaties then existing was stricken out. The provision that continued the laws in force. should the treaty of 1894 be denounced. was stricken out. and the only provision we now find is that these laws are to be continued in force so far as they are not inconsistent with treaty obligations.