From and after the expiration of sixty days next after the passage
of this act, and until the expiration of twenty years next after the
passage of this act, the coming of Chinese laborers be, and the same
is hereby, suspended; and during such suspension it shall not be
lawful for any Chinese laborer to come, or, having so come after the
expiration of said sixty days, to remain within the United States.
The examination which I have made of the treaty and of the declarations
which its negotiators have left on record of the meaning of its language
leaves no doubt in my mind that neither contracting party in concluding
the treaty of 1880 contemplated the passage of an act prohibiting
immigration for twenty years, which is nearly a generation, or thought
that such a period would be a reasonable suspension or limitation, or
intended to change the provisions of the Burlingame treaty to that
extent. I regard this provision of the act as a breach of our national
faith, and being unable to bring myself in harmony with the views of
Congress on this vital point the honor of the country constrains me to
return the act with this objection to its passage.
Deeply convinced of the necessity of some legislation on this subject,
and concurring fully with Congress in many of the objects which are
sought to be accomplished, I avail myself of the opportunity to point
out some other features of the present act which, in my opinion, can be
modified to advantage.
The classes of Chinese who still enjoy the protection of the Burlingame
treaty are entitled to the privileges, immunities, and exemptions
accorded to citizens and subjects of the most favored nation. We have
treaties with many powers which permit their citizens and subjects to
reside within the United States and carry on business under the same
laws and regulations which are enforced against citizens of the United
States. I think it may be doubted whether provisions requiring personal
registration and the taking out of passports which are not imposed upon
natives can be required of Chinese. Without expressing an opinion on
that point, I may invite the attention of Congress to the fact that
the system of personal registration and passports is undemocratic and
hostile to the spirit of our institutions. I doubt the wisdom of
putting an entering wedge of this kind into our laws. A nation like
the United States, jealous of the liberties of its citizens, may well
hesitate before it incorporates into its polity a system which is fast
disappearing in Europe before the progress of liberal institutions.
A wide experience has shown how futile such precautions are, and how
easily passports may be borrowed, exchanged, or even forged by persons
interested to do so.
If it is, nevertheless, thought that a passport is the most convenient
way for identifying the Chinese entitled to the protection of the
Burlingame treaty, it may still be doubted whether they ought to be
required to register. It is certainly our duty under the Burlingame
treaty to make their stay in the United States, in the operation of
general laws upon them, as nearly like that of our own citizens as we
can consistently with our right to shut out the laborers. No good
purpose is served in requiring them to register.
My attention has been called by the Chinese minister to the fact that
the bill as it stands makes no provision for the transit across the
United States of Chinese subjects now residing in foreign countries.
I think that this point may well claim the attention of Congress in
legislating on this subject.
I have said that good faith requires us to suspend the immigration of
Chinese laborers for a less period than twenty years; I now add that
good policy points in the same direction.
Our intercourse with China is of recent date. Our first treaty with
that power is not yet forty years old. It is only since we acquired
California and established a great seat of commerce on the Pacific that
we may be said to have broken down the barriers which fenced in that
ancient Monarchy. The Burlingame treaty naturally followed. Under the
spirit which inspired it many thousand Chinese laborers came to the
United States. No one can say that the country has not profited by their
work. They were largely instrumental in constructing the railways which
connect the Atlantic with the Pacific. The States of the Pacific Slope
are full of evidences of their industry. Enterprises profitable alike to
the capitalist and to the laborer of Caucasian origin would have lain
dormant but for them. A time has now come when it is supposed that they
are not needed, and when it is thought by Congress and by those most
acquainted with the subject that it is best to try to get along without
them. There may, however, be other sections of the country where this
species of labor may be advantageously employed without interfering with
the laborers of our own race. In making the proposed experiment it may
be the part of wisdom as well as of good faith to fix the length of the
experimental period with reference to this fact.
Experience has shown that the trade of the East is the key to national
wealth and influence. The opening of China to the commerce of the whole
world has benefited no section of it more than the States of our own
Pacific Slope. The State of California, and its great maritime port
especially, have reaped enormous advantages from this source. Blessed
with an exceptional climate, enjoying an unrivaled harbor, with the
riches of a great agricultural and mining State in its rear and the
wealth of the whole Union pouring into it over its lines of railway,
San Francisco has before it an incalculable future if our friendly and
amicable relations with Asia remain undisturbed. It needs no argument to
show that the policy which we now propose to adopt must have a direct
tendency to repel Oriental nations from us and to drive their trade
and commerce into more friendly lands. It may be that the great and
paramount interest of protecting our labor from Asiatic competition may
justify us in a permanent adoption of this policy; but it is wiser in
the first place to make a shorter experiment, with a view hereafter of
maintaining permanently only such features as time and experience may
commend.
I transmit herewith copies of the papers relating to the recent treaty
with China, which accompanied the confidential message of President
Hayes to the Senate of the 10th January, 1881, and also a copy of a
memorandum respecting the act herewith returned, which was handed to
the Secretary of State by the Chinese minister in Washington.