THE CHINAMAN IN AMERICA
The average Irishman whom one meets in America, and he is legion, is a
very different person from the polished gentleman I have met in Belfast,
Dublin, and other cities in Ireland; but I never heard that the American
Irishman, the product of an ignorant peasantry crowded out of Ireland,
had been accepted as a type of the race. Peculiar discrimination is made
in America against the Chinese. Our lower classes, "coolies" from the
Cantonese districts, have flocked to America. Americans "lump" all
Chinese under this head, and can not conceive that in China there are
cultivated men, just as there are cultivated men in Ireland, the
antipodes of the grotesque Irish types seen in America.
I believe there are seventy-five or eighty thousand Chinamen in America.
They do not assimilate with the Americans. Many are common laborers,
laundrymen, and small merchants. In New York, Chicago, San Francisco,
and other cities there are large settlements of them. In San Francisco
many have acquired wealth. The Chinese quarter is to all intents and
purposes a Chinese city. None of these people, or very few, are
Americanized in the sense of taking an active part in the government;
Americans do not permit it. I was told that the Chinese were among the
best citizens, the percentage of criminals being very small. They are
honest, frugal, and industrious--too industrious, in fact, and for this
very reason the ban has been placed upon them. Red-handed members of the
Italian Mafia--a society of murderers--the most ignorant class in
Ireland, Wales, and England, the scum of Russia, and the human dregs of
Europe generally are welcome, but the clean, hard-working Chinaman is
excluded.
Millions are spent yearly in keeping him out after he had been invited
to come. He built many American railroads; he opened the door between
the Atlantic and the Pacific; he worked in the mines; he did work that
no one else would or could do, and when it was completed the American
laborer, the product of this scum of all nations, demanded that the
Chinaman be "thrown out" and kept out. America listened to the blatant
demagogues, the "sand-lot orators," and excluded the Chinese. To-day it
is almost impossible for a Chinese gentleman to send his son to America
to travel or study. He will not be distinguished from laundryman
"John," and is thrown back in the teeth of his countrymen; meanwhile
China continues to be raided by American missionaries. The insult is
rarely resented. In the treaty ratified by the United States Senate in
1868 we read:
"The United States of America and the Empire of China cordially
recognize the inherent right of man to change his home and allegiance,
and also the mutual advantage of the free immigration and emigration of
their citizens and subjects respectively from the one country to the
other for purposes of curiosity, of trade or as permanent residents."
Again we read, in the treaty ratified under the Hayes administration,
that the Government of the United States, "if its labor interests are
threatened by the incoming Chinese, may regulate or limit such coming,
but may not _absolutely prohibit_ it." The United States Government has
disregarded its solemn treaty obligations. Not only this, our people,
previous to the Exclusion Act, were killed, stoned, and attacked time
and again by "hoodlums." The life of a Chinaman was not safe. The labor
class in America, the lowest and almost always a foreign class, wished
to get rid of the Chinaman so that they could raise the price of labor
and secure all the work. China had reason to go to war with America for
her treatment of her people and for failure to observe a treaty. The
Scott Exclusion Act was a gratuitous insult. I hope our people will
continue to retaliate by refusing to buy anything from the Americans or
sell anything to them. Let us deal with our friends.
Then came the Geary Bill, which was an outrage, our people being thrown
into jail for a year and then sent back. I might quote some of the
charges made against our people. Mr. Geary, I understand, is an Irish
ex-congressman from the State of California, who, while in Congress, was
the mouthpiece of the worst anti-Chinese faction ever organized in
America. He was ultimately defeated, much to the delight of New England
and many other people in the East. Mr. Geary's chief complaint against
the Chinese was that they work too cheaply, are too industrious, and do
not eat as much as an American. He obtained his information from Consul
Bedloe, of Amoy. He says the average earnings of the Chinese adult
employed as mechanic or laborer (in China) is five dollars per month,
and states that this is ten per cent above the average wages prevailing
throughout China.
The wages paid, according to his report, per month, to blacksmiths are
$7.25; carpenters, $8.50; cabinet-makers, $9; glass-blowers, $9;
plasterers, $6.25; plumbers, $6.25; machinists, $6; while other classes
of skilled labor are paid from $7.25 to $9 per month, and common
laborers receive $4 per month. In European houses the average wages paid
to servants are from $5 to $6 a month, without board. Clothing costs per
year from 75 cents to $1.50. Out of these incomes large families are
maintained. He says: "The daily fare of an Amoy working man and its cost
are about as follows: 11/2 pounds of rice, 3 cents; 1 ounce of meat, 1
ounce of fish, 2 ounces of shell-fish, 1 cent; 1 pound of cabbage or
other vegetable, 1 cent; fuel, salt, and oil, 1 cent; total, 6 cents.
"Here," said Mr. Geary, "is a condition deserving of attention by all
friends of this country, and by all who believe in the protection of the
working classes. Is it fair to subject our laborer to a competitor who
can measure his wants by an expenditure of six cents a day, and who can
live on an income not exceeding five dollars a month? What will become
of the boasted civilization of our country if our toilers are compelled
to compete with this class of labor, with more competitors available
than twice the entire population of France, Germany, Austria, Belgium,
Denmark, Switzerland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain?
"The Chinese laborer brings neither wife nor children, and his wants are
limited to the immediate necessities of the individual, while the
American is compelled to earn income sufficient to maintain the wife and
babies. There can be but one end to this. If this immigration is
permitted to continue, American labor must surely be reduced to the
level of the Chinese competitor--the American's wants measured by his
wants, the American's comforts be made no greater than the comforts of
the Chinaman, and the American laborer, not having been educated to
maintain himself according to this standard, must either meet his
Chinese competitor on his own level, or else take up his pack and leave
his native land. The entire trade of China, if we had it all, is not
worth such a sacrifice."
Mr. Geary forgets that when Chinamen go to America they adapt themselves
to prevailing conditions. Chinese cooks in the States to-day receive
from $30 to $50 per month and board; Chinese laborers from $20 to $30,
and some of them $2 per day. In China, where there is an enormous
population, prices are lower, people are not wasteful, and the
necessities of life do not cost so much. The Chinaman goes to America to
obtain the benefit of _high_ wages, not to _reduce_ wages. I have never
seen such poverty and wretchedness in China as I have seen in London,
or such vice and poverty as can be seen in any large American city. Mr.
Geary scorns the treaties between his country and China, and laughs at
our commercial relations. He says, "There is nothing in the Chinese
trade, or rather the loss of it, to alarm any American. We would be
better off without any part or portion of it."
In answer to this I would suggest that China take him at his word, and I
assure you that if every Chinaman could be recalled, if in six months or
less we could take the eighty or one hundred thousand Chinamen out of
the country, the region where they now live would be demoralized. The
Chinese control the vegetable-garden business on the Pacific Coast; they
virtually control the laundry business; and that the Americans want
them, and want cheaper labor than they are getting from the Irish and
Italians, is shown by the fact that they continue to patronize our
people, and that in various lines Chinamen have the monopoly. Even when
the "hoodlums" of San Francisco were fighting the Chinese, the American
women did not withdraw their patronage, and while the men were off
speaking on the sand-lots against employing our people their wives were
buying vegetables from them.
Why? Because their hypocritical husbands and brothers refused to pay
higher prices. America is suffering not for want of the cheapest labor,
but for a laborer like the Chinese, and until they have him industries
will languish. With American labor and American "union" prices it is
impossible for the American farmer or rancher to make money. The
vineyardist, the orange, lemon, olive, and other fruit raisers can not
compete with Europe. Labor is kept up to such a high rate that the
country is obliged to put on a high tariff to keep out foreign
competition, and in so doing they "cut off the nose to spite the face."
The common people are taxed by the rich. The salvation of industrial
America is a cheap, but not degraded, labor. America desires
house-servants at from $10 to $12 per month; this is all a mere servant
is worth. She wants good cooks at $12 or $15 per month. She wants
fruit-pickers at $10 to $12 per month and board. She wants vineyard men,
hop-pickers, cherry, peach, apricot and berry pickers, and people to
work in canneries at these prices. She wants gardeners, drivers,
railroad laborers at lower rates, and, to quote an American, "wants them
'bad.'"
When in San Francisco I made a thorough investigation of the
"house-servant" question, and learned that our people as cooks in
private houses were receiving from $30 to $50 per month and board. A
friend tells me there is continued protest against this. Housekeepers on
the Pacific coast are complaining of the lack of "Chinese boys," and
want more to come over so that prices shall go down. The American wants
the Chinaman, but the American _foreign laborer_, the Irishman, the
Italian, the Mexican, and others who dominate American politics, do not
want him and will not have him. As a result of this bending to the alien
vote the Americans find themselves in a most serious and laughable
position in their relations to domestic labor.
I am not overstating the fact when I say that the "servant-girl"
question is going to be a political issue in the future. The man may
howl against the Chinese, but his wife will demand that "John" be
admitted to relieve a situation that is becoming unbearable. As the
Americans are all equal, there are no servants among them. The poor are
as good as the "boss," and won't be called servants. You read in the
papers, "A lady desires a position as cook in a small family, no
children; wages, $35." "A young lady wishes a position to take care of
children; salary, $30." "A saleslady wants position." "A lady (good
scrubber) will go out by the day; $2." When you meet these "ladies," in
nine cases out of ten they are Irish from the peasant class--untidy,
insolent, often dissipated in the sense of drink. When they apply for a
position they put the employer through a course of questions. Some want
references from the last girl, I am told. Some want one thing, some
another, and all must have time for pleasure. Few have the air of
servants or inferiors, but are often offensive in appearance and
manners. I have never been called "John" by the girls who came to the
door where I called to pay a visit, but I could see that they all wished
so to address me. In England, where classes are acknowledged and a
servant is hired as a servant, and is one, an entirely different state
of affairs holds. They are respectful, having been educated to be
servants, know that they are servants, and as a result are cared for and
treated as old retainers and pensioners of the family.
The whole story of exclusion is a blot upon the American national honor,
and the most mystifying part of it is that intelligent people, the best
people, are not a party to it. The railroads want the Chinese laborer.
The great ranches of the West need him; people want cooks at $15 and $20
a month instead of $30 or $50. In a word, America is suffering for what
she must have some time--cheap labor; yet the low elements force the
issue. Congressmen are dominated by labor organizations on the Pacific
slope, and there are hundreds of Dennis Kearneys to-day where there was
one a few years ago. To make the case more exasperating, the Americans,
in their dire necessity, have imported swarms of low Mexicans to take
the place of the Chinese on the railroads, against whom there seems to
be no Irish hand raised. The Irish and Mexicans are of a piece. I know
from inquiry everywhere that the country at large would welcome
thousands of servants and field-workers in vineyards and orchards which
can not be made to pay if worked by expensive labor.
The Americans try to keep us out, but they also try to convert those who
get in. They have what they call Chinese missions, to which Chinamen go.
To be converted? No. To learn the language? Yes. I am told by an
American friend that here and in China over fifty thousand Chinese have
embraced Christianity. On the Atlantic coast I am assured that eight
hundred Chinamen are Christians, and on the Pacific slope two thousand
have embraced the faith of the Christians. There is a Christian Chinese
evangelist working among our people in the West, Lum Foon, and I have
met the pastor of a Pacific coast church who told me that nearly a third
of his congregation were Chinamen, and he esteemed them highly. But the
most conclusive evidence that the Americans are succeeding in their
proselyting is that in one year a single denomination received as a
donation from Chinamen $6,000. The Americans have a saying, "Money
talks," which is much like one of our own.
On the other hand, a clergyman told me that it was discouraging work to
some, so few Chinamen were "converted" compared to the great mass of
them. The Chinese of California have sent $1,000 to Canton to build a
Christian church, and the Chinese members of the Presbyterian Church of
California sent $3,000 in one year for the same purpose. I am told that
the Chinese Methodists of one church in California give yearly from
$1,000 to $1,800 for the various purposes of the church. The Christians
have captured some brilliant men, such as Sia Sek Ong, who is a
Methodist; Chan Hon Fan, who ought to be in our army from what I hear;
Rev. Tong Keet Hing, the Baptist, a noted Biblical scholar; Rev. Wong,
of the Presbyterians; Rev. Ng Poon Chiv, famous as a Greek and Hebrew
reader; Gee Gam and Rev. Le Tong Hay, Methodists; and there are many
more, suggestive that our people are interested in Christianity,
against the _moral_ teachings of which no one could seriously object.
I dined some time ago with a merchants' club, and was much pleased at
the eulogy I heard on the Chinese. A merchant said, "My firm deals
largely with the Chinese and Japanese. When I make a trade with the
Japanese I tie them up with a written contract, but I have always found
that the word of a Chinese merchant was sufficient." This I found to be
the universal feeling, and yet Americans exclude us at the bidding of
"hoodlums," a term applied to the lowest class of young men on the
Pacific coast. In the East he is a "tough" or "rough" or "rowdy." "Tough
nut" and "hard nut" are also applied to such people, the Americans
having numbers of terms like these, which may be called "nicknames," or
false names. Thus a man who is noted for his dress is a "swell," a
"dude," or a "sport."
The United States Government does not allow the Chinese to vote, yet
tens of thousands of poor Americans, "white trash" in the South,
ignorant negroes, low Irish and Italians who can not speak the tongue,
are welcome and courted by both parties. It is difficult for me to
overlook this insult on the part of America. There is a large settlement
of Chinese in New York, but they are as isolated as if they were in
China. In San Francisco there is the largest settlement, and many fine
merchants live there, and also in Los Angeles.
In the latter city ---- told me that the best of feeling existed between
the Chinese and Americans; and at the American Festival of the Rose the
Chinese joined in the procession. The dragon was brought out, and all
the Chinese merchants appeared; but these gentlemen are never consulted
by the Americans, never allowed to vote or take any interest in the
growth of the city, and ---- informed me that none of them had ever been
asked to join a board of trade. It is the same everywhere; the only
advances the Americans make is to try and "convert" us to their various
religious denominations. While the Chinese are not allowed to vote or to
have any part in the affairs of government, they are taxed. "Taxation
without representation" was the cause of the war of the American
Revolution, but that is another matter.
Yet our people have ways of influencing the whites with the "dollar,"
for which some officials will do anything, and, I regret to say, all
Chinamen are not above bribing Americans. I have heard that the Chinese
of San Francisco for years were blackmailed by Americans, and obliged
to raise money to fight bills in the Legislature. In 1892 the Six
Companies raised $200,000 to defeat the "Geary Bill." The Chinese
merchants have some influence. Out of the 110,000 Chinamen in America
hardly ten per cent obeyed the iniquitous law and registered. The
Chinese societies contracted to defend all who refused to register.
Our people have a strong and influential membership in the Sam Yup, Hop
Wo, Yan Wo, Kong Chow, Ning Yeong, and Yeong Wo companies. These
societies practically control everything in America relating to the
Chinese, and they retain American lawyers to fight their battles. I have
met many of the officers of these companies, and China has produced no
more brilliant minds than some, and, _sub rosa_, they have been pitted
against the Americans on more than one occasion and have outwitted them.
Among these men are Yee Ha Chung, Chang Wah Kwan, Chun Ti Chu, Chu Shee
Sum, Lee Cheang Chun, and others. Many of these men have been presidents
of the Six Companies in San Francisco, and rank in intelligence with the
most brilliant American statesmen. I regret to see them in America.
Chun Ti Chu especially, at one time president of the Sam Yuz, should be
in China. I met this brilliant man some years ago in San Francisco.
After dinner he took me to a place and showed me a placard which was a
reward of $300 for his head. He had obtained the enmity of criminal
Chinamen on the Pacific coast, but when I last heard of him he was still
alive. There are many criminals here who do not dare to return to China,
who left their country for their country's good. These are the cause of
much trouble here, and bring discredit upon the better class of our
people. Our people in America are loyal to the Government. It was
interesting to see at one time a proclamation from the Emperor brought
over by Chew Shu Sum and posted in the streets of an American city: "By
order of his Imperial Majesty, the Emperor of China." The President, the
mayor of San Francisco, was not thought of; China was revered, and is
to-day holding her government over the Chinese in every American city
where they have a stronghold. So much for the loyalty of our people.