The reason why this preamble was not inserted in the present treaties Is probably because there is absolutely no danger of the questions of independence and territorial Integrity ever being raised as between the United States on the one hand and Great Britain and France on the other. And as to sovereignty in home affairs. that Is already a wellrecognized principle of international law. In other words. in accordance with wellestablished international rule. no nation can interfere with another in questions of Internal policy. hence the United States has a perfect right to regulate the immigration question to suit ourselves. In accordance with this right we exclude the Chinese without a treaty and Japanese laborers in pursuance of one. And the special treaty we have with Japan on this subject would. of course. not be superseded by any arbitration treaty into which the United States and Japan might enter hereafter. The question of the interpretation of a treaty might. of course. become the subject of arbitration. and let me suggest In this connection that no government. however reluctant in its recognition of the principle of arbitration. has ever objected to its application in the nmatter of the interpretation of treaties. To sum up the case. no nation can. under the authority of international law. make another nation change its internal policy with regard to any subject. and if it Is a matter affecting the interests of the other nation. such as immigration. changes can be brought about only by friendly negotiation and voluntary concession. but can not be demanded as a matter of right. So neither our friends of the Pacific coast nor American labor need have any fear on that score. No international tribunal or commission would ever deny to any nation the right to regulate ad libitum its own domestic affairs. or include within its dicta any decision bearing on a settled and internationally well recognized policy. such. for instance. as the Monroe doctrine.
Keywords matched
immigration