Speech #630135119

Mr. Chairman. it is very unfortunate at this time that partisanship has been injected into this discussion. It is unfortunate that it has been injected in here by one of the Representatives of California. a man who is the author of a bill looking toward Asiatic exclusion. It is unfortlnate that it is offered at this time and the charge made against an-. other Representative from California. who hais had a bill in Congress for a number of years for Asiatic exclusion. A great deal of stress has been laid by the chairman of the committee and the distinguished gentleman from California as to how the committee has proceeded. Now. let us see what the facts are. The Committee on Immigration. at the solicitation of the gentleman from California and many other people interested in Asiatic exclusion. set. I believe. the 22d of January for a public hearing on the bill H. R. 102 and on the bill introduced by my colleague from California . I want to call the attention of the committee particularly to this fact: In California in 1907. 1909. and 1911. at the time when antiAsiatic measures were pending before our legislature. the Japanese Government. through its representatives in this country. followed out a very wise course in the matter of publicity. About the time that some measure would appear before the California Legislature and become a live issue the papers would be full of the fact that somebody in Japan. the minister of foreign affairs through the Japanese ambassador. was corresponding with the United States Government and calling attention to the fact that their treaty rights were liable to be violated. They succeeded in 1907. 1909. and 1911. through pressure from Washington. in stopping the California Legislature from enacting antialien laud laws or other legislation affecting Asiatics by a carefully planned campaign. What has been our experience here? On the morning of January 22 there appeared in all of the Washington papers and in every other paper throughout this country. given to the press by the Japanese ambassador. a speech made in the Japanese Parliament by the minister of foreign affairs. This speech was in relation to the controversy brought about by the protest of Japan against the passage of the alienland law by the California Legislature. and was a plain statement that the Japanese Government was not satisfied with the way that the State Department and the administration at Washington had proceeded in this matter. and served notice that the Japanese Government was not through. and that in the future in matters of this kind they would try some other way. Reading between the lines. and taking past performances by the Japanese nation. especially in the controversies with China and Russia. into consideration. we are free to draw our own conclusions as to what was meant by "another way." It is a remarkable coincidence that the Japanese Government could allow months to elapse befoe making public in a spectacular way their position in regard to the California legislation. This legislation was enacted in the early part of 1913. and it remained for the representatives of the Japanese Government to wait until the morning of time day upon which a hearing was to be held on two bills providing for the exclusion of all Asiatics to publish. through the speech of thd minister of foreign affairs. their answer to the State Department. Giving this matter the serious consideration which it deserves. one conclusion only can be arrived at. and that is that this move. coming at -the time when the Committee on Immigration of the House of Representatives was about to take up these two measure.. was made for a certain definite purpose. and that it was published with the object in view of having those in charge of diplomatic affairs. call a halt as far as any particular activity by the committee in furtherance of this legislation. What was the reason for that? Their object was to influence this case. and it did influence it to this effect. that when those of us who wanted to be heard on the bill H. I. 102 and on the bill Introduced by Representative HAYES. which is before the Committee on Immigration. we found that committee behind closed doors. and they have been conducting their consideration of Asiaticexclusion legislation behind closed doors since that time and have not conducted any public hearings to date. Now. I believe with my colleague f~om California.