Speech #680116616

Not "-rising to the dignity of" treaties. these "-agreements" would not have to -be submitted to the Senate. The " gentlemens agreement" was not. Such agreements. if made and accepted as valid regulations of immigration and ther successfully held up as bars to congressional action. would oust Congress of dll control over our domestic. policy concerning a problem of greatest importance. If such ".greeeits." not subject to the approval of the Senate. are to.be permitted to control our immi-. gration policies. President Hayes. who made the Burlingame treaty. which guaranteed the Chinese " the inalienable right" . 8658 to migrate to America. could have merely made an agreement "not rising to the dignity of" a treaty and accomplished what he then contended for. President Arthur could have likewise worked his will in avoiding a later act in restraint of Chinese immigration to America by such an agreement much better than by a veto. as he undertook to do. Presidents Cleveland. Taft. and Wilson needed only to have made such agreements and to have Congress and the American people accept them as inviolable international obligations too sacred to be touched by congressional action. Mr. Wickershams suggestion as to ".agreements not rising to the dignity of" treaties regulating immigration to the United States is very unfortunate. unless it proves fortunate as a reminder that the handling of immigration by agreement not submitted to the Senate might be resorted to again and again until it became an established policy. and Congress thereby ousted from control over the question. leaving it wholly to those who have almost. though not quite. uniformly tried to restrain the Congress elected by the people from doing the will of the Nation in protecting it. even so far as it has been protected. Control of immigration by treaties would be dangerous. Control of it by agreements between the Executive and foreign countries "not rising to the dignity of" treaties would be even more dangerous. In the deliberate judgment of the writer. formed after full consideration of all the objections which the opponents of this legislation have urged. an opportune time has arrived for the American Congress to say with emphasis that it proposes to retain and exercise. in the protection of American interests and in obedience to the Constitution. full control over this vitally important question without consulting any foreign potentate or power. Neither Italy. Japan. nor any other nation has any right to ask. much less to insist. that we change our method of handling this fundamentally domestic question in our own way and place ourselves where we would have to procure their consent to our regulatory. restrictive. or prohibitory immigration measures. There has been an apparent effort to impress the country with the. idea that the only question between Congress and the Executive concerning the Japanese exclusion provisions of the recent immigration act was whether the act should go into effect July 1. 1924. March 1. 1925. or at some subsequent date. Many people who thought the). were keeping informed on this issue were lead to believe that the whole controversy was over this question. That was not the question at all. The controversy was over the question whether the Congress of the United States should control immigration as required by the Constitution of the United States. or would shirk its responsibility fixed by the Constitution and let another department usurp it in violation of the purpose of the Constitution in violence to important present public interests and the equally important interests of the future. I have explained in the foregoing remarks what was involved in the proposed continuance of the present unratified and only partially published and partially known Executive agreement with Japan. called the "gentlemens agreement." never submitted to the Senate for approval. In order that those who wish to know may understand how this matter assumed its final status I call attention to the fact that while the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization was shaping this legislation in committee the executive department sent to the House committee an amendment to be inserted in the bill in the following language as an exception to section 3. "an alien entitled to enter tie United States under the provisions of a treaty." In such connection as would have exempted from the excluding provision of the entire law the nationals of every country with which the United States should have a treaty regulating immigration made before or after the passage of the law. By inserting such a provision in the bill as the Executive. through its State Department. sought to have inserted. Congress would have placed itself in the attitude of seeking to renounce its constitutional duty to regulate immigration from any country except such as the President might leave within the operation of the law by his failure to control it by treaty. Of course. Congress can not legally. or without gross dereliction. throw down responsibilities which the Constitution places upon it. and the executive department can not. without blameworthiness. seek to take upon itself the performance of functions which the Constitution places upon Congress. Both of these vices were involved in the suggestion made to the committee by the Executive. through the State Department. Moreover. in view of the history of the countrys dealing with this vitally important question the suggestion was fraught with grave danger in addition to the violence it offered to the Constitution. When this first suggestion. that virtually all regulation of immigration be passed to the treatymaking power. was unani. mously rejected by the committee and not tolerated by the House. another amendment was sent to the conferees in the following language. to be inserted in section 12 (c) of the present bill: * * * after the letter (b) and before the word " no" insert " on and after March 1. 1926." On same page at the end of the paragraph strike out the period. Insert a colon and inscrt "Provided. however. That the provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to the nationals of those countries with which the United States. after the enactment of this act. shall have entered into treaties. by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. for the restriction of Immigration." By this the Executive showed that. not being permitted to control immigration with all countries by treaty. it sought to control our immigration from Asiatic and Malayan countries by treaties. This was not quite as vicious as the usurpation involved in undertaking to control it by unratified and partly secret Executive agreements. but it was nevertheless vicious and dangerous in that it involved the same principle embodied in the amendment first suggested by the executive department. except that it was limited to the clause excluding immigrants from Asiatic countries. One would be stupid indeed who could not see that after that principle and precedent were established and made to control immigration from Asiatic countries it would probably be extended to all countries. The House and Senate conferees. though evidently anxious to oblige the President. were unable to bring themselves to the acceptance of that principle. But the Executive did not stop there.