GENERAL CONCLUSION
In dealing with the Japanese problem in California, we started with a
general account of Japanese traits and ideas. We did so because we
believed that a knowledge of the Japanese disposition is essential to a
comprehensive understanding of the problem. No attempt was made to
determine whether the traits of the Japanese--their emotional nature,
their well-developed aesthetic temperament and strong group consciousness,
and the unique feature of chivalry and virility prevailing among the lower
classes--are inherent in the race or acquired; but we concluded that the
question may best be answered by observing those of Japanese descent born
and reared in different countries. Later, when we examined the
characteristics of the American-born Japanese and discovered that they
appear to have lost most of the Japanese traits, and, in turn, have
acquired mental attitudes that are peculiar to the American, it was
suggested that none of the racial characteristics is necessarily fixed,
and that, similarly, the Japanese traits must have been largely acquired
through peculiar natural surroundings and social systems.
Next we reviewed in a brief way Japan's Asiatic policy in order to
envisage the international situation in which she finds herself and to see
how she proposes to meet her difficulties at home and abroad. We commented
on the manifest shortcomings of that policy. In view of the fact that
Japan's industry--her only hope in the future--has to depend largely on
the supply of raw material from her Asiatic neighbors, the assurance of
good-will and friendly cooeperation with them is essential for her welfare.
It is in the failure to obtain this assurance that the defect of Japan's
past Asiatic policy becomes apparent. We expressed our conviction that
under the circumstances the best that Japan can do is to so reconstruct
the principle of the policy as to convince her neighbors of her genuine
sincerity.
In the chapter on the background of Japanese emigration, an attempt has
been made to discover its causes. The principal causes found are the small
amount of land, the dense population, and the limited prospect of
industrial development due to the scarcity of raw material. Moreover, the
peculiar social and political conditions in Japan are such as to obstruct,
by numerous fetters and restraints, the free development of ambitious
youths. The exaggerated stories of great opportunities in the new worlds
kindle the desire of the young people to go abroad.
Tentative attempts were made some thirty years ago in emigration to
Australia, Canada, and the United States. Nearly a quarter of a century's
effort at emigration into the new worlds, with the exception of partial
success in Brazil, had proved a complete failure, and thus attempts at
migration towards the North came into vogue.
In our discussion of the causes of anti-Japanese agitation in California,
it was made clear that the explanation of much of the trouble lies in the
conditions of the Japanese themselves, such as congestion in particular
localities and different manners and customs. The nationalistic policy of
Japan was also pointed out as a factor making for resentment. What renders
the situation unnecessarily complicated, leading to a general
misunderstanding, is the employment of the issue in local
politics--exploitation of the subject for private ends by agitators and
propagandists.
Then our study entered the heart of the California problem, the fact of
the existing Japanese population. It was discovered that the rate of
increase of Japanese population in California has been rapid, but that it
shows a tendency to slow down, while the rate of increase of the entire
population of the State shows a tendency to steady increase. We found
that in comparison with the total number of Japanese in the United States
the percentage of Japanese in California is remarkably high, nearly 60 per
cent. of them being domiciled in that one State. Then we examined the
factors--immigration, smuggling, and births--which contributed to the
increase of the Japanese population in California. Under the subject of
immigration it was made clear that the net gain from immigration has
become small since the restrictive agreement was concluded, but that the
number of those entering the country increased because the number of those
who are passing through or temporarily visiting America has increased. We
expressed our opinion that in order to quiet the excitement of the people
of the Pacific Coast it is entirely desirable to stop sending Japanese
immigrants to America.
We have somewhat fully treated the subject of birth because it is a vital
part of the question. It was discovered in the discussion that the birth
rate of the Japanese in California is exceptionally high, due to the fact
that a high percentage of the immigrants are in the prime of life and that
the percentage of married people is remarkably high. In forecasting the
future of the birth rate we stated that if immigration is stopped the
present generation will in time pass out without being re-enforced,
leaving behind American-born children, who, with higher culture and more
even distribution with regard to age and marriage, will not multiply at
nearly so high a rate as their parents. We concluded, therefore, that the
present is a transitional period and that apprehension over the high birth
rate is entirely unwarranted.
The chapter on Japanese agriculture in California gives report of a degree
of progress that has been remarkable. As to the causes of this progress
the peculiar adaptation of the Japanese farmers to the agricultural
conditions of California was presented as the principal one. Then we
considered separately the Japanese farm labor and the farmers. What we
found in treating the subject of Japanese farm laborers was that they are
indispensable to California's agriculture, inasmuch as they have several
important peculiarities which are useful. Their ability to farm and their
aptitude for bodily and manual dexterity, as well as their highly
transitory character under the system of contract labor, are useful assets
to the farmers of California. Under the topic of the Japanese farmer, we
examined the reasons given for the discrimination against Japanese in
agricultural pursuits. The first reason--that they are "crushing
competitors of California farmers"--was criticized on the ground that
there is not much competition between white and Japanese farmers, since
there is a pretty clear line of demarkation between them, the former being
engaged in farming on a large scale and the latter engaged in small
intensive agriculture. The second apprehension--that the Japanese farmer,
if left unchecked, will soon control the greater part of California
agriculture--was characterized as an entirely exaggerated fear, since the
portion of land which the Japanese till is quite negligible and there are
vast tracts of land yet uncultivated. The third objection--which finds
reason for opposition in the unassimilability of the Japanese--we held as
the weightiest count, and withheld criticism until we had fully treated
the subject of assimilation in the succeeding chapter. What we insisted on
was that it is unwise to maltreat the Japanese on the surmise that they
are unassimilable. Whether they are assimilable or not--and this is not
the question, for they are not allowed to become American citizens--their
children, who are Americans by virtue of birth, will suffer much from a
hostile policy towards their parents.
The anti-alien land laws were considered briefly, and the views of their
critics were introduced. As an effective measure to cope with the
legislation, we suggested that neither legal nor diplomatic disputes will
bring about a satisfactory result, but that only through obtaining the
good-will and friendship of the people of California can there be a true
solution.
The topic of assimilation discussed in the preceding chapter needs no
recapitulation.
The foregoing study, which we have undertaken from the outset with an open
mind and fair attitude, has, it is to be hoped, disclosed that the
underlying cause of the entire difficulty is a conflict or maladjustment
of interest. There are four parties whose peculiar interests and rights
are seriously involved in the situation. First and foremost, we have to
consider the rights and interests of California. Then we have the United
States, which is no less directly concerned with the problem. For the
Japanese living in California, the issue is a matter of life and death;
their entire interests and welfare are at stake. Japan also is as much
concerned with the fate of her subjects in America as the United States
would be with the welfare of her people living abroad--say in Mexico. The
Japanese problem in California is the concrete expression of the
maladjustment of the interests and rights of these four parties concerned.
Various measures, wise and unwise, have been proposed for the solution of
the problem, but none of them has so far been put into effect, since each
has failed to adjust the interests and rights of all parties concerned in
an harmonious way, and hence has met with violent protest at the outset.
Take, for instance, the proposal that the Japanese should be granted the
right of naturalization. The promoters of the project insist that the
denial to the Japanese of the right to become citizens of the United
States is the cause of the anti-Japanese exclusion movement, and,
accordingly, that the granting of the privilege will annul all
discriminatory efforts. Undoubtedly the proposal was well meant, but it
has perhaps done more harm than good. In the first place, it confuses the
cause and method of discrimination against the Japanese. The Japanese
ineligibility to citizenship has certainly been seized on as a weapon for
discrimination, but it is by no means the cause. The cause is elsewhere.
In the second place, the advocates of the proposal argue that, if adopted,
it will defeat the entire discriminatory efforts of the Californians. It
is, however, decidedly unwise to attempt to defeat the effort without
removing the cause of the difficulty. No wonder the proposal has provoked
the wild criticism of California leaders. The granting of citizenship to
refined and Americanized Japanese is in itself a proper and desirable
step, but to use it as a weapon to defeat the exclusion movement is
clearly unwise.
The solution of the Japanese problem in California, if it be equitable at
all and satisfactory to the four parties involved, must rest on the
following basic principles:
_1. That it should be in consonance with justice and international
courtesy; it must redress Japan's grievances and meet America's wishes._
_2. That it should be fair to Californians; that is to say, operate to
allay the fear they entertain of the alarming increase of Japanese in
numbers and economic importance._
_3. That it should be fair to the Japanese residents, both aliens and
American-born, so that they may enjoy in peace, without molestation or
persecution, the blessings of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness," and participate, as all American-born are entitled and in duty
bound to do, in the promotion of the State's well-being._
The new treaty, which is reported to have been laid for final decision
before the Washington and Tokyo Governments by the two negotiators,
Ambassador Morris and Ambassador Shidehara, has not been made public at
this writing. We have, therefore, no means of knowing the contents or
nature of its provisions. It may, however, be presumed that it will go a
long way toward redressing Japan's grievances and meeting America's
wishes. The latter will probably be met by Japan's adoption of drastic
measures to check completely the influx of her immigrants. Knowing that
Japan has always been sincere and ready to yield to the wishes of the
United States, we hold it only just that she be saved the embarrassment
arising from discrimination against her subjects in America. Proud and
sensitive, Japan takes to heart the abuses or indignities which she deems
seriously detrimental to her national honor.
The conclusion of the Treaty and its ratification by the Senate, however,
may not prove the panacea for all evils, for governmental action is
naturally circumscribed in its sphere. To solve the perplexing question
once for all, the Treaty must be supplemented by the patriotic efforts of
public-spirited citizens of both countries to heal and adjust the
irritated parts in the scheme of American-Japanese relations which are
beyond the reach of governmental action. Viscount Shibusawa and some of
his compatriots have, during the last year, held many conferences with
some prominent Americans--those representing the Chamber of Commerce of
San Francisco and the party headed by Mr. Frank Vanderlip. A better
understanding of the situation must have resulted as a consequence of the
conferences. The earnestness of the Viscount and his friends to do what
they could for the good of both countries is beyond praise. But we fear
they have been measuring America by Japan's standard and trying to cure
the trouble without remedying the cause. In Japan the counsel of a few
influential men often proves effective even in local affairs, but in
America, where local autonomy is strongly entrenched, a man, however
prominent a figure he may have cut in national affairs, will think twice
before he pronounces judgment on matters of local concern, lest it be
construed as an intrusion, and thus defeat the good intention. The
California question can only be settled by or in cooeperation with the
Californians, and right on the spot, not elsewhere.
We believe that the time has come, therefore, when those public-spirited
citizens of both countries should replace academic discussion by action.
As a means of alleviating the situation we venture to offer the following
modest suggestion:
1. That a Committee of a dozen or so members, consisting of
public-spirited men of broad vision of both countries, and particularly of
California, be formed with the object of formulating and putting into
effect the project of relieving the congestion of Japanese in California.
Such a Committee would doubtless be able to secure the hearty cooeperation
of The Japan Society of New York and other cities, as well as of the
Japanese Association of America and similar organizations, all of which
exist with a view to promoting friendly relations between America and
Japan.
2. That the said Committee appoint an administrator of proved executive
ability and a staff for the prosecution of the project.
3. That to finance the project an initial fund of half a million dollars
be raised by contribution from the 120,000 Japanese living in this
country.
The Japanese domiciled in this country have the keenest interest in the
subject; they are directly or indirectly affected by the anti-Japanese
agitation in California; they would not grudge a contribution of a small
sum for the purpose of uprooting the cause of that annoyance. The Japanese
in California who have interests at stake would surely be more than
willing to contribute their quota to the fund. The native Californians,
too, we strongly feel, in their calm and considerate mood, would obey the
dictates of wisdom to adopt a more liberal and logical method of relieving
the local tension than to resort, as at present, to measures of repression
and persecution.
We are of the opinion that there would be a fair demand in other States of
the Union for such skilled farm hands as we have found in the Japanese in
California if the facts were well advertised. If proper precaution be
taken so as to avoid the repetition of the same story of congestion as
that in California, the plan of dispersal above outlined might prove a
boon to all concerned. If the initial stage of the plan be earnestly
carried out before the eyes of the Californians, a totally different
atmosphere might be created among them so as to win their good will and
enlist their cooeperation. When such a happy outcome is obtained, a
solution of the Japanese-California problem is assured.
There is certainly a great deal which the Japanese in California can and
must do. In the first place, they must thoroughly grasp the psychology of
the Californians. They must indicate, if they are to remain in this
country, their willingness to become Americans regardless of barriers or
opposition. They must show this willingness not only in intention but also
in practice. They must improve their command of English, alter many of
their customs and manners. They must endeavor to elevate their standard of
living and culture. They must give up beliefs and ideals which are
Japanese and which run counter to the American. It would be well for them
to refrain from building in California Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples
and from maintaining language schools. They must above all learn to take
an interest in the national life of the United States.
There is also much that the Japanese Government can do. Its policy of
paternalism, extending too much care to Japanese domiciled abroad, and
even to Japanese born abroad, must, in our opinion, be altered. The claim
of allegiance to the home country by the children born in another country,
whatever may be their status in the land of birth, is an international
practice still adhered to by most European nations--France, Italy,
Germany, Switzerland, Greece. From this results what is called a "dual
nationality" of a subject. In a country like the United States, where its
Constitution endows children born therein with citizenship, the so-called
"dual nationality" gives rise to an awkward situation in case its mother
country adopts the military conscription system. To avoid this awkward
situation, Japan enacted in the year 1916 a law which provides that a
Japanese boy who has acquired a foreign nationality by reason of his birth
in a foreign country may divest himself of Japanese nationality if his
father, or other parental authority, takes the necessary steps to that end
before he is fifteen years of age, or, if he has attained the age of
fifteen, he may himself take the same steps, with the consent of his
father or guardian, before he reaches the age of seventeen.[57] This law
is objectionable because it fixes the age limit of expatriation at
seventeen, when the subject is yet a minor and is not competent to
exercise his own choice. Fixing the age limit at seventeen is a provision
in consonance with the Japanese military law, which imposes on all male
Japanese subjects above that age the duty of military service.
Consequently, all American-born Japanese males who have failed to
expatriate before they have reached the age of seventeen are claimed as
Japanese subjects and are subject to conscription, while at the same time
they are American citizens. The existence of such a discordance in the
laws and Constitution of the two countries has the possibility of giving
rise to a serious international complication, and it seems advisable that
some sort of settlement be made on this point between the American and
Japanese Governments. The difficulty could, of course, be overcome if the
Japanese parents who are determined to stay permanently in this country
would take the necessary steps to expatriate their children as soon as
they are born, or at the proper time. The hesitation they have heretofore
manifested was greatly due to the uncertainty in which their future and
that of their children was shrouded.
We cannot omit to emphasize in this connection the part which America can
and has to perform. Of the numerous things America can do with profit we
believe the task of Americanizing the Japanese to be the foremost. We
wish to make it clear that, whether Japanese aliens are worthy or not,
their children born in America are in any case Americans, and it is
America's duty to make them worthy members of the nation. They are not
foreigners or aliens, and, accordingly, it is clearly wrong, as well as
unwise, to deal with them as if they were. Upon what we can do to guide
the rising generation depends the future of the Japanese problem in
America. This in turn must depend upon how America treats their parents.
Disappearing gradually as they are, they are bequeathing their impressions
and accomplishments to their children. Any generosity and kindness
extended to them are acts not so much of altruism as of vital interest in
the welfare of America herself, for they are the guardians of the
Republic's sons and daughters of Japanese blood.
It is certainly not fair to slander and maltreat those people, who were
originally brought in to fill the need of man-power and who have
contributed much towards making the Pacific Coast what it is to-day. To
prevent the influx of Japanese immigrants, to avoid the possible future
development of difficult problems with Japan, there certainly ought to be
some better means than gradually strangling the innocent people who
individually are in no way to be blamed for the present strained
relations on the Pacific Coast.
All these considerations lead us to a belief that the time is now ripe for
the American people, and especially for the people of California, to
reconstruct their attitude and policy towards the Japanese domiciled in
this country. Every indication seems to suggest that if, in place of the
discriminatory policy so far resorted to with no better effect than
general irritation, a new policy be initiated, a policy of constructive
Americanization based upon generosity, sympathy, and understanding, the
result will surely be far-reaching. It is a common fact of human
experience that one's attitude is directly responded to by other people
with whom we deal. It was Thackeray, we believe, who said that "the world
is like a looking-glass; if we smile, others also smile." What cannot be
achieved by a hostile policy is often easily and satisfactorily
accomplished by sympathetic attitude and friendly dealing. Give the
Japanese the opportunity and see what good use they will make of it.
We hardly need to reiterate that the Japanese-California question--the
main theme of this book--is only a part of the vast problem which
confronts America and Japan. The present world tendency is to bind
increasingly all parts of the world into one. The process of civilization,
like a revolving body, exerts centrifugal and centripetal force and
gradually unifies all civilizations into a cohesive system. At present
there are two centers of such forces, one in the East and another in the
West, each trying to influence the other. By virtue of being the youngest
and the most vigorous representatives of the two spheres, Japan and
America, respectively, are naturally destined to shoulder together the
great task of harmonizing and unifying these two great currents of human
achievement. The task involves, from its gigantic nature, a great many
difficulties and risks of which the present California issue is certainly
one. All these difficulties must be squarely met and surmounted with
courage and wisdom, since to shrink from the job is to commit the future
relationship of the East and West to the cruel law of natural selection.
It is, however, generally true that the perfect understanding of the
common aim settles the incidental difficulties arising in the process.
This is particularly true in the case of the California-Japanese question,
which is a partial issue of the great undertaking between America and
Japan. The core of the California problem, our study has shown, is the
question of assimilability of the Japanese. But what is the assimilation
but the approach to the common standard of culture and ideals? The
approach to the common standard of culture and ideals between the peoples
of Asia and Europe and America is precisely the task in which Japan and
the United States are engaged in unison. Herein is the explanation of our
earlier assertion that the California problem is a miniature form of the
problem of the East and West. Herein also is the support of our contention
that to accelerate the cooeperative effort of America and Japan for mutual
understanding is the only and the best method of bringing about the
solution of the Japanese problem in California or elsewhere in the United
States. We wish, therefore, to emphasize once more that the wisest policy
to follow in the future for America and Japan is not foolishly to sharpen
the edge of swords for imaginary race wars, which are absurd, but to
devote themselves wisely to learning and appreciating each other's
accomplishments and greatness, from which alone true friendship can
arise.
APPENDIX A
[Illustration: _COMPARATIVE HEIGHT OF AMERICAN, JAPANESE-AMERICAN &
JAPANESE CHILDREN_]
[Illustration: _COMPARATIVE WEIGHT OF AMERICAN, JAPANESE-AMERICAN &
JAPANESE CHILDREN_]
APPENDIX B
EXTRACTS FROM THE TREATY OF COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION AND PROTOCOL BETWEEN
JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, OF FEBRUARY 21, 1911.
His Majesty, the Emperor of Japan, and the President of the United States
of America, being desirous to strengthen the relations of amity and good
understanding which happily exist between the two nations, and believing
that the fixation in a manner clear and positive of the rules which are
hereafter to govern the commercial intercourse between their respective
countries will contribute to this most desirable result, have resolved to
conclude a treaty of commerce and navigation.
=Article I.=--The subjects or citizens of each of the high contracting
parties shall have liberty to enter, travel, and reside in the territories
of the other, to carry on trade, wholesale and retail, to own or lease and
occupy houses, manufactories, warehouses, and shops, to employ agents of
their choice, to lease land for residential and commercial purposes, and
generally to do anything incident to or necessary for trade, upon the same
terms as native subjects or citizens, submitting themselves to the laws
and regulations there established.
They shall not be compelled, under any pretext whatever, to pay any
charges or taxes other or higher than those that are or may be paid by
native subjects or citizens.
The subjects or citizens of each of the high contracting parties shall
receive, in the territories of the other, the most constant protection and
security for their persons and property and shall enjoy in this respect
the same rights and privileges as are or may be granted to native subjects
or citizens, on their submitting themselves to the conditions imposed upon
the native subjects and citizens.
=Article IV.=--There shall be between the territories of the two high
contracting parties reciprocal freedom of commerce and navigation. The
subjects or citizens of each of the contracting parties, equally with the
subjects or citizens of the most favored nation shall have liberty freely
to come with their ships and cargoes to all places, ports, and rivers in
the territories of the other which are or may be opened to foreign
commerce, subject always to the laws of the country to which they thus
come.
=Article V.=--Neither contracting party shall impose any other or higher
duties or charges on the exportation of any article to the territories of
the other than are or may be payable on the exportation of the like
article to any other foreign country.
Nor shall any prohibition be imposed by either country on the importation
or exportation of any article from or to the territories of the other
which shall not equally extend to the like article imported from or
exported to any other country.
=Article XIV.=--Except as otherwise expressly provided in this treaty, the
high contracting parties agree that in all that concerns commerce and
navigation, any privilege, favor, or immunity which either contracting
party has actually granted or may hereafter grant, to the subjects or
citizens of any other State shall be extended to the subjects or citizens
of the other contracting party ... on the same or equivalent
conditions....
Declaration
In proceeding this day to the signature of the treaty of commerce and
navigation ... the undersigned has the honor to declare that the Imperial
Japanese Government are fully prepared to maintain with equal
effectiveness the limitation and control which they have for the past
three years exercised in regulation of the immigration of laborers to the
United States.
(Signed) Y. UCHIDA.
February 21, 1911.
APPENDIX C
CALIFORNIA'S ALIEN LAND LAW
(Approved May 19, 1913)
_The people of the State of California do enact as follows_:
=Section 1.=--All aliens eligible to citizenship under the laws of the
United States may acquire, possess, enjoy, transmit, and inherit real
property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the same manner and
to the same extent as citizens of the United States, except as otherwise
provided by the laws of this State.
=Section 2.=--All aliens other than those mentioned in section one of this
act may acquire, possess, enjoy, and transfer real property, or any
interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for
the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government
of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a
citizen or subject and not otherwise, and may in addition thereto lease
lands in this State for agricultural purposes for a term not exceeding
three years.
=Section 3.=--Any company, association, or corporation organized under the
laws of this or any other State or nation, of which a majority of the
members are aliens other than those specified in section one of this act,
or in which a majority of the issued capital stock is owned by such
aliens, may acquire, possess, enjoy, and convey real property, or any
interest therein in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for
the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government
of the United States and the nation or country of which such members or
stockholders are citizens or subjects, and not otherwise, and may in
addition thereto lease lands in this State for agricultural purposes for a
term not exceeding three years.
=Section 4.=--Whenever it appears to the court in any probate proceeding
that by reason of the provisions of this act any heir or devisee cannot
take real property in this State which, but for said provisions, said heir
or devisee would take as such, the court, instead of ordering a
distribution of such real property to such heir or devisee, shall order a
sale of said real property to be made in the manner provided by law for
probate sales of real property, and the proceeds of such sale shall be
distributed to such heirs or devisee in lieu of such real property.
=Section 5.=--Any real property hereafter acquired in fee in violation of
the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this
act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section
three of this act, shall escheat to, and become and remain the property of
the State of California. The attorney general shall institute proceedings
to have the escheat of such real property adjudged and enforced in the
manner provided by section 474 of the Political Code and title eight, part
three of the Code of Civil Procedure. Upon the entry of final judgment in
such proceedings, the title to such real property shall pass to the State
of California. The provisions of this section and of sections two and
three of this act shall not apply to any real property hereafter acquired
in the enforcement or in satisfaction of any lien now existing upon, or
interest in such property, so long as such real property so acquired shall
remain the property of the alien, company, association or corporation
acquiring the same in such manner.
=Section 6.=--Any leasehold or other interest in real property less than
the fee, hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of this act by
any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company,
association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall
escheat to the State of California. The attorney general shall institute
proceedings to have such escheat adjudged and enforced as provided in
section five of this act. In such proceedings the court shall determine
and adjudge the value of such leasehold, or other interest in such real
property, and enter judgment for the State for the amount thereof together
with costs. Thereupon the court shall order a sale of the real property
covered by such leasehold, or other interest, in the manner provided by
section 1271 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Out of the proceeds arising
from such sale, the amount of the judgment rendered for the State shall be
paid into the State Treasury and the balance shall be deposited with and
distributed by the court in accordance with the interest of the parties
therein.
=Section 7.=--Nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation upon
the power of the State to enact laws with respect to the acquisition,
holding or disposal by aliens of real property in this State.
=Section 8.=--All acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with
the provisions of this act, are hereby repealed.
APPENDIX D
ALIEN LAND LAW
(Adopted November 2, 1920)
PROPERTY RIGHTS AND DISABILITIES OF ALIENS IN CALIFORNIA
=Alien Land Law.= Initiative Act. Permits Acquisition and Transfer of
Real Property by Aliens Eligible to Citizenship, to Same Extent as
Citizens Except as Otherwise Provided by Law; Permits Other Aliens,
and Companies, Associations, and Corporations in Which they Hold
Majority Interest, to Acquire and Transfer Real Property Only as
Prescribed by Treaty, but Prohibiting Appointment Thereof as Guardians
of Estates of Minors Consisting Wholly or Partially of Real Property
or Shares in Such Corporations; Provides for Escheats in Certain
Cases; Requires Reports of Property Holdings to Facilitate Enforcement
of Act; Prescribes Penalties and Repeals Conflicting Acts.
_An act relating to the rights, powers, and disabilities of aliens and
of certain companies, associations, and corporations with respect to
property in this State, providing for escheats in certain cases,
prescribing the procedure therein, requiring reports of certain
property holdings to facilitate the enforcement of this act,
prescribing penalties for violation of the provisions hereof, and
repealing all acts or parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict
herewith._
_The people of the State of California do enact as follows_:
=Section 1.=--All aliens eligible to citizenship under the laws of the
United States may acquire, possess, enjoy, transmit, and inherit real
property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the same manner and
to the same extent as citizens of the United States, except as otherwise
provided by the laws of this State.
=Section 2.=--All aliens other than those mentioned in section one of this
act may acquire, possess, enjoy, and transfer real property, or any
interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for
the purpose prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government
of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a
citizen or subject, and not otherwise.
=Section 3.=--Any company, association or corporation organized under the
laws of this or any other State or nation, of which a majority of the
members are aliens other than those specified in section one of this act,
or in which a majority of the issued capital stock is owned by such
aliens, may acquire, possess, enjoy, and convey real property, or any
interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for
the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government
of the United States and the nation or country of which such members or
stockholders are citizens or subjects, and not otherwise. Hereafter all
aliens other than those specified in section one hereof may become members
of or acquire shares of stock in any company, association or corporation
that is or may be authorized to acquire, possess, enjoy or convey
agricultural land, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes
prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United
States and the nation or country of which such alien is a citizen or
subject, and not otherwise.
=Section 4.=--Hereafter no alien mentioned in section two hereof and no
company, association or corporation mentioned in section three hereof, may
be appointed guardian of that portion of the estate of a minor which
consists of property which such alien or such company, association or
corporation is inhibited from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or
transferring by reason of the provisions of this act. The public
administrator of the proper county, or any other competent person or
corporation, may be appointed guardian of the estate of a minor citizen
whose parents are ineligible to appointment under the provisions of this
section.
On such notice to the guardian as the court may require, the superior
court may remove the guardian of such an estate whenever it appears to the
satisfaction of the court:
(_a_) That the guardian has failed to file the report required by the
provisions of section five hereof; or
(_b_) That the property of the ward has not been or is not being
administered with due regard to the primary interest of the ward; or
(_c_) That facts exist which would make the guardian ineligible to
appointment in the first instance; or
(_d_) That facts establishing any other legal ground for removal exist.
=Section 5.=--(_a_) The term "trustee" as used in this section means any
person, company, association or corporation that as guardian, trustee,
attorney-in-fact or agent, or in any other capacity has the title,
custody or control of property, or some interest therein, belonging to an
alien mentioned in section two hereof, or to the minor child of such an
alien, if the property is of such a character that such alien is inhibited
from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or transferring it.
(_b_) Annually on or before the thirty-first day of January every such
trustee must file in the office of the Secretary of State of California
and in the office of the county clerk of each county in which any of the
property is situated, a verified written report showing:
(1) The property, real or personal, held by him for or on behalf of such
an alien or minor;
(2) A statement showing the date when each item of such property came into
his possession or control;
(3) An itemized account of all expenditures, investments, rents, issues,
and profits in respect to the administration and control of such property
with particular reference to holdings of corporate stock and leases,
cropping contracts, and other agreements in respect to land and the
handling or sale of products thereof.
(_c_) Any person, company, association or corporation that violates any
provision of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished
by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the
county jail not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
(_d_) The provisions of this section are cumulative and are not intended
to change the jurisdiction or the rules of practice of courts of justice.
=Section 6.=--Whenever it appears to the court in any probate proceeding
that by reason of the provisions of this act any heir or devisee cannot
take real property in this State or membership or shares of stock in a
company, association or corporation which, but for said provisions, said
heir or devisee would take as such, the court, instead of ordering a
distribution of such property to such heir or devisee, shall order a sale
of said property to be made in the manner provided by law for probate
sales of property and the proceeds of such sale shall be distributed to
such heir or devisee in lieu of such property.
=Section 7.=--Any real property hereafter acquired in fee in violation of
the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this
act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section
three of this act, shall escheat to, and become and remain the property of
the State of California. The attorney general or district attorney of the
proper county shall institute proceedings to have the escheat of such real
property adjudged and enforced in the manner provided by section four
hundred seventy-four of the Political Code and title eight, part three of
the Code of Civil Procedure. Upon the entry of final judgment in such
proceedings, the title to such real property shall pass to the State of
California. The provisions of this section and of sections two and three
of this act shall not apply to any real property hereafter acquired in the
enforcement or in satisfaction of any lien now existing upon, or interest
in such property, so long as such real property so acquired shall remain
the property of the alien, company, association or corporation acquiring
the same in such manner. No alien, company, association or corporation
mentioned in section two or section three hereof shall hold for a longer
period than two years the possession of any agricultural land acquired in
the enforcement of or in satisfaction of a mortgage or other lien
hereafter made or acquired in good faith to secure a debt.
=Section 8.=--Any leasehold or other interest in real property less than
the fee, hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of this act by
any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company,
association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall
escheat to the State of California. The attorney general or district
attorney of the proper county shall institute proceedings to have such
escheat adjudged and enforced as provided in section seven of this act. In
such proceedings the court shall determine and adjudge the value of such
leasehold or other interest in such real property, and enter judgment for
the State for the amount thereof together with costs. Thereupon the court
shall order a sale of the real property covered by such leasehold, or
other interest, in the manner provided by section twelve hundred
seventy-one of the Code of Civil Procedure. Out of the proceeds arising
from such sale, the amount of the judgment rendered for the State shall be
paid into the state treasury and the balance shall be deposited with and
distributed by the court in accordance with the interest of the parties
therein. Any share of stock or the interest of any member in a company,
association or corporation hereafter acquired in violation of the
provisions of section three of this act shall escheat to the State of
California. Such escheat shall be adjudged and enforced in the same manner
as provided in this section for the escheat of a leasehold or other
interest in real property less than the fee.
=Section 9.=--Every transfer of real property, or of an interest therein,
though colorable in form, shall be void as to the state and the interest
thereby conveyed or sought to be conveyed shall escheat to the State if
the property interest involved is of such a character that an alien
mentioned in section two hereof is inhibited from acquiring, possessing,
enjoying or transferring it, and if the conveyance is made with intent to
prevent, evade or avoid escheat as provided for herein.
A _prima facie_ presumption that the conveyance is made with such intent
shall arise upon proof of any of the following groups of facts:
(_a_) The taking of the property in the name of a person other than the
persons mentioned in section two hereof if the consideration is paid or
agreed or understood to be paid by an alien mentioned in section two
hereof;
(_b_) The taking of the property in the name of a company, association or
corporation, if the membership or shares of stock therein held by aliens
mentioned in section two hereof, together with the memberships or shares
of stock held by others but paid for or agreed or understood to be paid
for by such aliens, would amount to a majority of the membership or the
issued capital stock of such company, association or corporation;
(_c_) The execution of a mortgage in favor of an alien mentioned in
section two hereof if said mortgagee is given possession, control or
management of the property.
The enumeration in this section of certain presumptions shall not be so
construed as to preclude other presumptions or inferences that reasonably
may be made as to the existence of intent to prevent, evade or avoid
escheat as provided for herein.
=Section 10.=--If two or more persons conspire to effect a transfer of real
property, or of an interest therein, in violation of the provisions
hereof, they are punishable by imprisonment in the county jail or State
penitentiary not exceeding two years, or by a fine not exceeding five
thousand dollars, or both.
=Section 11.=--Nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation upon
the power of the State to enact laws with respect to the acquisition,
holding or disposal by aliens of real property in this State.
=Section 12.=--All acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with
the provisions hereof are hereby repealed; _provided_, that--
(_a_) This act shall not affect pending actions or proceedings, but the
same may be prosecuted and defended with the same effect as if this act
had not been adopted;
(_b_) No cause of action arising under any law of this State shall be
affected by reason of the adoption of this act whether an action or
proceeding has been instituted thereon at the time of the taking effect of
this act or not and actions may be brought upon such causes in the same
manner, under the same terms and conditions, and with the same effect as
if this act had not been adopted.
(_c_) This act in so far as it does not add to, take from or alter an
existing law, shall be construed as a continuation thereof.
=Section 13.=--The legislature may amend this act in furtherance of its
purpose and to facilitate its operation.
=Section 14.=--If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of
this act is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this act. The
people hereby declare that they would have passed this act, and each
section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of
the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.
APPENDIX E
CROPS RAISED BY JAPANESE AND THEIR ACREAGE.
===============================================================
| Total |Acreage by|Percentage of Japanese
Product. | Acreage of | Japanese.| Cultivation Against
|Cultivation.| | Total Cultivation.
----------------|------------|----------|----------------------
Berries | 6,500 | 5,968 | 91.8
Celery | 4,000 | 3,568 | 89.2
Asparagus | 12,000 | 9,927 | 82.7
Seeds | 20,000 | 15,847 | 79.2
Onions | 12,112 | 9,251 | 76.3
Tomatoes | 16,000 | 10,616 | 66.3
Cantaloupes | 15,000 | 9,581 | 63.8
Sugar Beets | 102,949 | 51,604 | 50.1
Green Vegetables| 75,000 | 17,852 | 23.8
Potatoes | 90,175 | 18,830 | 20.8
Hops | 8,000 | 1,260 | 15.7
Grapes | 360,000 | 47,439 | 13.1
Beans | 592,000 | 77,107 | 13.0
Rice | 106,220 | 16,640 | 10.0
Cotton | 179,860 | 18,000 | 10.0
Corn | 85,000 | 7,845 | 9.2
Fruits, Nuts | 715,000 | 29,210 | 4.0
Hay, Grain | 2,200,000 | 15,753 | 0.0
===============================================================
Reported by the Japanese Agricultural Association of California, 1919.
APPENDIX F
JAPANESE IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES.
=====================
Year.|No. of Japanese
| Immigrants.
-----|---------------
1869 | 63
1870 | 48
1871 | 78
1872 | 17
1873 | 9
1874 | 21
1875 | 3
1876 | 4
1877 | 7
1878 | 2
1879 | 4
1880 | 4
1881 | 11
1882 | 5
1883 | 27
1884 | 20
1885 | 49
1886 | 194
1887 | 229
1888 | 404
1889 | 640
1890 | 691
1891 | 1,136
1892 | 1,498
1893 | 1,648
1894 | 1,739
1895 | 480
1896 | 1,110
1897 | 1,526
1898 | 2,230
1899 | 2,844
1900 | 6,618
1901 | 4,908
1902 | 5,325
1903 | 6,990
1904 | 7,771
1905 | 4,319
1906 | 5,178
1907 | 9,948
1908 | 7,250
----------------------
-----------------------------------
Year.| Admitted.|Departed.|Balance.
-----|----------|---------|--------
1909 | 1,593 | 5,004 | -3,411
1910 | 1,552 | 5,024 | -3,472
1911 | 4,282 | 5,869 | -1,587
1912 | 5,358 | 5,437 | - 79
1913 | 6,771 | 5,647 | +1,124
1914 | 8,462 | 6,300 | +2,162
1915 | 9,029 | 5,967 | +3,062
1916 | 9,100 | 6,922 | +2,178
1917 | 9,159 | 6,581 | +2,578
1918 | 11,143 | 7,691 | +3,452
1919 | 11,404 | 8,328 | +3,076
1920 | 12,868 | 11,662 | +1,206
-----------------------------------
The above is taken from the Annual Report of the Commissioner General of
Immigration.
APPENDIX G
JAPANESE ADMITTED INTO CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES: ARRIVALS AND DEPARTURES.
===============================================
| Number of | |Total Gains
Year. | Arrivals. | Departed. |Up to Date.
-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------
1861-1870 | 218 } | |
1871-1880 | 149 } | |
1881-1890 | 2,270 } | 25,000 |
1891-1900 | 20,829 } |(estimated)|
1901-1910 | 54,838 } | |
1911-1920 | 87,576 | 70,404 |
-----------|-----------| |
Total | 165,880 | |
| | |
No. of | | |
transient | | |
immigrants | | |
from Hawaii| 15,000 | |
|(estimated)| |
|-----------|-----------|-----------
Total | 180,880 | 95,404 | 87,476
===============================================
APPENDIX H
IMMIGRANTS AND NON-IMMIGRANTS.
========================================================
| Total | | | Percentage of
| Number | | Non- | Non-Immigrants
Year.|Admitted.|Immigrants.|Immigrants.| Against Total
| | | |Number Admitted.
-----|---------|-----------|-----------|----------------
1909 | 1,593 | 255 | 1,338 | 84.0
1910 | 1,552 | 116 | 1,436 | 92.5
1911 | 4,282 | 736 | 3,546 | 83.0
1912 | 5,358 | 894 | 4,464 | 83.3
1913 | 6,771 | 1,371 | 5,400 | 79.7
1914 | 8,462 | 1,762 | 6,700 | 79.1
1915 | 9,029 | 2,214 | 6,815 | 75.5
1916 | 9,100 | 2,958 | 6,142 | 67.5
1917 | 9,159 | 2,838 | 6,321 | 69.0
1918 | 11,143 | 2,604 | 8,539 | 76.6
========================================================
Taken from Kawakami, _Japan Review_, vol. iv., p. 76.
APPENDIX I
DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE AND CHINESE POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES.
DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE POPULATION.
======================================================
Census. | 1880 | 1890 | 1900 | 1910
-------------------|--------|--------|--------|-------
Total United States| 148 | 2039 | 24,326 | 72,157
-------------------|--------|--------|--------|-------
New England | 14 | 45 | 89 | 272
Middle Atlantic | 27 | 202 | 446 | 1,643
East North Central | 7 | 101 | 126 | 482
West North Central | 1 | 16 | 223 | 1,000
South Atlantic | 5 | 55 | 29 | 156
East South Central | ... | 19 | 7 | 26
West South Central | ... | 42 | 30 | 428
Mountain | 5 | 27 | 5,107 | 10,447
Pacific | 89 | 1,532 | 18,296 | 57,703
======================================================
DISTRIBUTION OF CHINESE POPULATION.
========================================================
Census. | 1880 | 1890 | 1900 | 1910
-------------------|---------|---------|--------|-------
United States | 105,465 | 107,488 | 89,863 | 71,531
-------------------|---------|---------|--------|-------
New England | 401 | 1,488 | 4,203 | 3,499
Middle Atlantic | 1,277 | 4,689 | 10,490 | 8,189
East North Central | 390 | 1,254 | 2,533 | 3,451
West North Central | 423 | 1,097 | 1,135 | 1,195
South Atlantic | 74 | 669 | 1,791 | 1,582
East South Central | 90 | 274 | 427 | 414
West South Central | 758 | 1,173 | 1,555 | 1,303
Mountain | 14,274 | 11,572 | 7,950 | 5,614
Pacific | 87,828 | 85,272 | 59,779 | 46,320
========================================================
Taken from Gulick, _American Democracy and Asiatic Citizenship_, pp. 152,
177.
APPENDIX J
DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE IN UNITED STATES.
(_According to Consular Division as Reported by Foreign Department,
Japan._)
==================================================
Districts. | Male. | Female. | Total for 1919.
--------------|--------|---------|----------------
Seattle | 14,568 | 4,397 | 18,965
Portland | 5,829 | 1,637 | 7,466
San Francisco | 37,375 | 16,578 | 53,953
Los Angeles | 22,644 | 9,861 | 32,505
Chicago | 2,336 | 378 | 2,714
New York | 3,320 | 284 | 3,604
|--------|---------|----------------
| 86,072 | 33,135 | 119,207
==================================================
APPENDIX K
AN ABSTRACT OF EXPATRIATION LAW OF JAPAN
=Article XVIII.=--When a Japanese, by becoming the wife of a foreigner, has
acquired the husband's nationality, then such Japanese loses her Japanese
nationality.
=Article XX.=--A person who voluntarily acquires a foreign nationality
loses Japanese nationality. In case a Japanese subject, who has acquired
foreign nationality by reason of his or her birth in a foreign country has
domiciled in that country, he or she may be expatriated with the
permission of the Minister of State for Home Affairs. The application for
the permission referred to in the preceding paragraph shall be made by the
legal representative in case the person to be expatriated is younger than
fifteen years of age. If the person in question is a minor above fifteen
years of age, or a person adjudged incompetent, the application can be
made with the consent of his or her legal representative or guardian. A
stepfather, a stepmother, a legal mother, or a guardian may not make the
application or give the consent prescribed in the preceding paragraph
without the consent of the family council. A person who has been
expatriated loses Japanese nationality.
=Article XXIV.=--Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding six
articles a male of full seventeen years or upwards does not lose Japanese
nationality, unless he has completed active service in the army or navy,
or he is under no obligation to enter into it. A person who actually
occupies an official post--civil or military--does not lose Japanese
nationality notwithstanding the provisions of the foregoing seven
articles.
=Article XXVI.=--A person who has lost Japanese nationality in accordance
with Article XX may recover Japanese nationality provided that he or she
possesses a domicile in Japan, but this does not apply when the person
mentioned in Article XVI has lost Japanese nationality. In case the person
who has lost Japanese nationality in accordance with the provision of
Article XX is younger than fifteen years of age, the application for the
permission prescribed in the preceding paragraph shall be made by the
father who is the member of the family to which such person belonged at
the time of his expatriation; should the father be unable to do so, the
application shall be made by the mother; if the mother is unable to do so,
by the grandfather; and if the grandfather is unable to do so, then by the
grandmother.
APPENDIX L
A MINUTE OF HEARING AT SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, BEFORE THE HOUSE SUB-COMMITTEE
ON IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION
DIRECT EXAMINATION
July 27, 1920.
Evening Session
SEATTLE
JAMES SAKAMOTO, produced as a witness, having
been first duly sworn, testified
as follows:
QUESTIONS BY MR. BOX:
_Q._ What is your name?
_A._ James Sakamoto.
_Q._ Where do you live?
_A._ 1609 Yesler Way.
_Q._ You were born in the United States?
_A._ Yes, sir.
_Q._ Where were you born?
_A._ In Seattle, Washington.
_Q._ Right here?
_A._ Yes.
_Q._ Are you full of Seattle spirits?
_A._ You bet.
_Q._ You only refer to one kind. How old are you?
_A._ Seventeen. I was born in 1903; March 22d.
_Q._ You go to school here?
_A._ Oh, yes.
_Q._ In the high school?
_A._ The Franklin High.
_Q._ About how many boys are there here in and about Seattle that were
born here, along about your age, from three or four years younger to two
or three years older?
_A._ Well, I only know of the fellows that I associate with. I can't tell
you the fellows that I don't know about.
_Q._ Do you know a number?
_A._ I don't know many of them.
_Q._ A half a dozen?
_Q._ How many in your high school are Japanese boys?
_A._ I think I am the only one.
_Q._ Are there many young ladies? Do you know this young lady that just
testified?
_A._ Yes, sir.
_Q._ Are there many such nice looking girls as she is in Seattle?
_A._ You better ask them.
_Q._ You get along all right in school?
_A._ Oh, yes, sir.
_Q._ You don't have any trouble with your classes, and boys?
_A._ I have lots of fun.
_Q._ You have a good time?
_A._ Yes, sir.
_Q._ Did you attend the Japanese Language School?
_A._ Yes, sir; eight years.
_Q._ What did they teach you there?
_A._ Taught me Japanese.
_Q._ The Japanese language?
_A._ Yes, sir.
_Q._ Did they teach you Japanese history?
_A._ I wasn't able to learn very quick.
_Q._ You were not very quick to learn, but they did that, teach the
history of Japan?
_A._ They tried to.
_Q._ Didn't they succeed with a boy as bright as you are, going to high
school?
_A._ They were successful, but I did not succeed. See?
_Q._ You read the Japanese language now?
_A._ I can't read it; it is too hard.
_Q._ You really can't read any?
_A._ There are three different kinds of words and letters. I can read the
easiest.
_Q._ In other words, you have adopted the road of least resistance with
the Japanese language?
_A._ Sure.
_Q._ You talk Japanese with your parents?
_A._ In a simple, broken language.
_Q._ Do they talk English?
_A._ They can't talk English. They have been here quite long, but they
have never had a chance to talk English.
_Q._ Let me ask you this; do you get along very well with them?
_A._ In my home?
_Q._ Yes.
_A._ Sure. They are my father and mother.
_Q._ (Mr. Siegel.) And you say that you don't understand the Japanese
language sufficiently well to carry on a conversation with them?
_A._ I understand them, but that is about all.
_Q._ How do they arrange to get along with you, if you can't speak the
language orally?
_A._ They just about guess what I am trying to tell them.
_Q._ In other words, you are always asking for money. Is that the
principal idea?
_A._ May be, not any more, but I used to.
_Q._ When they talk to you, you understand them all right?
_A._ Oh, yes; I understand them.
_Q._ (Mr. Raker.) Would you tell us why, you haven't, or didn't, and
haven't given more attention and worked harder to become familiar with the
Japanese language and history?
_A._ That is a hard question to ask me just now.
_Q._ I know it is, but I think you know, my boy; tell us in your own
language, in your own way?
_A._ Well, suppose we go to school five hours a day, the American school.
We attend Japanese school for two hours; that is overwork two hours, you
see, and we don't get paid for over time.
_Q._ I guess you are about pretty near right, didn't I? You are the kind
of a fellow that is going to be thinking a little about money as you grow
up, and you are going to make it in Seattle.
_A._ I haven't got a business.
_Q._ (Mr. Raker.) What I was asking that question for, I am going to put
it direct. I want you to give me your good frank answer, which I know you
will. Is it your determination when you get a little older, and begin to
think over the situation, that you want to become familiar with the
English language and understand the American ways rather than to devote
your time to Japanese ways and language?
_A._ Well, I want to be an American more than a Japanese. I was born here.
_Q._ That is one of the reasons you haven't devoted your time to the
Japanese language. How old were you when you started?
_A._ I started the same year when I went to Grammar School.
_Q._ That was when?
_A._ Five years old. Five years old I started to kindergarten, and at six
I started to Grammar School.
_Q._ So when you started to kindergarten did you start in the Japanese
School?
_A._ No, when I was six.
_Q._ And you did that from the time you were six until you were fourteen?
_A._ I think that is right, fourteen.
_Q._ How old are you now?
_A._ Seventeen.
_Q._ You have to renounce the Japanese Emperor before you are seventeen?
_A._ I don't know a thing about it.
_Q._ You know, don't you, that you are claimed as a citizen by Japan, and
also by the United States.
_A._ I don't care. I was born here.
_Q._ Is it your intention to remain an American citizen or be a Japanese
citizen?
_A._ Why shouldn't I remain an American? I was born here. Why should I go
back there? This is my home here.
_Q._ You intend to remain an American citizen?
_A._ Nobody is going to stop me.
_Q._ That's what I want to get at. Do you remember when you were first
told that you were a native-born American citizen; do you remember when
that was first told you?
_A._ I don't know.
_Q._ How long have you felt the pride that you are a young American
citizen? How long have you held that feeling of pride?
_A._ Since I went to Grammar School.
_Q._ Has every young Japanese boy here expressed that feeling as you do to
us; have you heard them talk about it?
_A._ They don't talk about it much. It is mostly their home training. My
father and mother don't care whether I am an American. They would rather
have me an American.
_Q._ And they have encouraged you to be an American?
_A._ Sure.
_Q._ And your teachers have?
_A._ Oh, yes, naturally.
_Q._ And you like the idea?
_A._ Sure.
_Q._ Your father and mother intend to remain here all their lives, do
they, as far as you know?
_A._ Well, I would like to have them go back and see their home once
again, but that is about all. I don't know what I can do.
_Q._ (Mr. Vaile.) As far as you know, their own intention is to live here,
except for a visit home, perhaps, the rest of their lives?
_A._ Yes, sir.
_Q._ Suppose you visit Japan. You know, don't you, that the Japanese
Emperor still claims you as his subject? Suppose you are required to
render military service to Japan, what would be your position on that
subject?
_A._ It would be a pretty difficult one, but I will get out of it.
_Q._ Following that, suppose you were required to render military service
to the United States, what will be your position?
_A._ I will get in.
_Q._ Exactly. We are glad to meet you. Good luck to you.
(_Witness Excused._)
APPENDIX M
COMPARATIVE STANDING OF INTELLIGENCE AND BEHAVIOR OF AMERICAN-BORN
JAPANESE CHILDREN AND AMERICAN CHILDREN DISCUSSED BY SEVERAL PRINCIPALS OF
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.
_Request Sent to the Board of Education of Los Angeles, California._
December 24, 1920.
President of the
Board of Education,
Los Angeles, California.
MY DEAR SIR:
I am collecting data on the intellectual and moral status of American-born
Japanese children. Among the data the most important, I need hardly say,
are their school records.
I shall highly appreciate your courtesy if you will be pleased to provide
me with the valuable information you have at your command bearing on the
subject. What I am particularly interested in is the average record of
American-born Japanese children and its comparison with the record of
American children.
Yours very respectfully,
(Signed) T. IYENAGA.
_Method of Gathering Material_
December 31, 1920.
DEAR MR. SHAFER:
May I trouble you to select two of your schools in which you have the
largest Japanese attendance and secure for me at your earliest possible
convenience data as to the number of Japanese children in those schools
and the points about them that are touched upon in the accompanying
letter?
My thought is this--that if we secure records from two or three schools
where we have the largest Japanese attendance, this will suffice as a
basis for decision as to the other such schools.
MRS. DORSEY.
January 7, 1921.
Mrs. Adda Wilson Hunter, _Principal_, Moneta School,
Miss Mary A. Colestock, _Principal_, Hewitt St. School,
Miss Mary A. Henderson, _Principal_, Amelia St. School,
Miss Lizzie A. McKenzie, _Principal_, Hobart Blvd. School.
A communication has been received from Dr. T. Iyenaga stating that he is
collecting data on the intellectual and moral status of American-born
Japanese children. He is anxious to know the average record of
American-born Japanese children in the schools and how it compares with
the record of American children.
Will you kindly send me statement concerning the results in your schools?
Very truly yours,
_Assistant Superintendent_.
_Replies_
(1)
_Office of the Principal of Hewitt St. School, District No. 151_
Report of American-born Japanese Children.
January 17, 1921.
MY DEAR MR. SHAFER:
The American-born Japanese children, who are enrolled in this school,
compare most favorably with the American children both intellectually and
morally. They are like all groups of children. We find some very bright
children and some very dull ones. As a whole, they are more persevering
and more dependable than the class of white children found in this school.
Miss Oliver, who has been working with the Japanese for the past four
years, said, "When with them I feel that I am in the company of well-bred
Americans."
Truly yours,
MARY A. COLESTOCK,
_Prin._
(2)
_Amelia St. School, City_
January 19, 1921.
MR. HARRY M. SHAFER,
_Assistant Superintendent_,
Los Angeles City Public Schools,
Los Angeles, California.
DEAR MR. SHAFER:
My general observation has been that given anything of an equal chance,
children are children, human nature is human nature, and brains are
brains--whatever the mother tongue may be. Compared with our other foreign
children, or with other children born in America of foreign parentage not
Japanese, keeping in mind the differences in social position that exist in
all classes, whatever the nationality may be, I cannot see much difference
along any line between our Japanese children and our Mexicans, our French
and our Italians; nor do I think any of them differ radically from what we
are apt to term "American" children. Few families are many generations
away from some foreign ancestors....
Our Japanese children are called brighter and more studious, sometimes,
than the others. I think this is due to the fact that they have, in many
cases, ambitious, educated parents who follow school work up very closely
in the home. Where home restrictions are lifted, such conditions do not
always prevail, any more than in cases of other neglected children. _They
must_ be studious. Discipline of American-born Japanese children is not so
close in the home as it seems to be with children born in Japan and reared
along Japanese lines, yet such children show much more initiative in all
of their work at school. They catch the American spirit.
As summary, I would say that physically, mentally, morally, given the same
chance, there does not seem to me to be a great difference among children
of the different nationalities, but this difference is most readily
noticed. The other nationalities do assimilate quickly, and lose, to a
great extent, their parents' national traits in short time; but it is
exceedingly hard to get the same results with our Japanese children. They
cling to one another, to their own ways, and to their own language, even
after many years of work in public schools, where most social barriers are
broken down. My personal feeling in the matter is that this condition is
the result of lack of American education in the Japanese homes and lack of
American touch with the Japanese mothers.
Our Home teachers are doing much to help along this line, but it is slow
work, and work that takes much time, and requires great tact on part of
the workers.
Most important to me is the work our public schools are doing with the
Japanese girls, the mothers of tomorrow.
Yours respectfully,
MARY A. HENDERSON.
(3)
_Report of Intellectual and Moral Status of American-born Japanese
Children_
MONETA SCHOOL, LOS ANGELES SCHOOL DIST.
As a rule American-born Japanese children know no English when entering
school. Their progress at first, therefore, is more slow than that of
English speaking children. Japanese children require one year to complete
one half year's work through the first, second, and third grades. After
the third grade they complete the work in the time assigned.
They are especially good in handwork. Their chief difficulty is with
English. In application they rank high.
As to their moral status they are neither better nor worse than other
children.
MRS. ADDA WILSON HUNTER,
_Principal Moneta School_.
January 14, 1921.
_Report of Intellectual and Moral Status of American-Born Japanese
Children_
=========================================================================
Grade| Amer.- |Time to |Standard|Average | Rank |Appli- |1. In What Do
| Born |Complete| Age of | Age of | in |cation.| They Excel?
|Japanese |Work of | Grade. |Am.-Born|Class.| |2. What is
|Enrolled.| 1/2 | |Jap'se. | | | Greatest
| | Year. | | | | | Drawback?
-----|---------|--------|--------|--------|------|-------|---------------
| | | | | | |
Kgn. | 13 | 1 yr. |4-1/2-6 | 5 | | Good |1. Handwork.
| | | | | | |2. Do not speak
| | | | | | | English.
| | | | | | |
B-1 | 21 | 1 yr. | 6-7 | | | Good |1. Drawing,
| | | | | | | writing,
| | | | | | | handwork.
| | | | | | |2. Do not speak
| | | | | | | English.
| | | | | | |
A-1 | 4 | 1 yr. | 6-7 | 9 | | Good |1. Handwork.
| | | | | | |2. Do not speak
| | | | | | | English.
| | | | | | |
B-2 | 2 | 1 yr. | 7-8 | 9 | | Good |1. Handwork.
| | | | | | |2. Do not speak
| | | | | | | English.
| | | | | | |
A-2 | 3 | 1 yr. | 7-8 | 10 | | Good |1. Handwork.
| | | | | | |2. Do not speak
| | | | | | | English.
| | | | | | |
B-3 | 2 | 5 mos. | 8-9 | 10 |Excel.| Poor |1. Spelling,
| | | | | | | arithmetic.
| | | | | | |2. English.
| | | | | | |
A-3 | 3 | 1 yr. | 8-9 | 10 | Fair | Good |1. Spelling,
| | | | | | | arithmetic.
| | | | | | |2. English.
| | | | | | |
B-4 | 1 | 5 mos. | 9-10 | 9 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic.
| | | | | | |2. English.
| | | | | | |
A-4 | 1 | 5 mos. | 9-10 | 11 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic,
| | | | | | | spelling.
| | | | | | |2. English.
| | | | | | |
B-5 | 2 | 5 mos. | 10-11 | 11 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic,
| | | | | | | spelling.
| | | | | | |2. English.
| | | | | | |
B-6 | 2 | 5 mos. | 11-12 | 10 | Good | Excel.|1. History,
| | | | | | | geography.
| | | | | | |2. Arithmetic.
| | | | | | |
A-6 | 1 | 5 mos. | 11-12 | 12-1/2 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic,
| | | | | | | history.
| | | | | | |2. Geography.
| | | | | | |
=========================================================================
(4)
HOBART BLVD. SCHOOL,
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA,
January 13, 1921.
MR. HARRY M. SHAFER,
_Assistant Supt. City Schools_.
MY DEAR MR. SHAFER:
In reply to your inquiry relative to the American-born Japanese pupils of
our school, I enclose statement as to results noted in the various
classes.
Trusting that this may serve the purpose desired, and appreciating your
very kindly interest,
Sincerely,
LIZZIE A. MCKENZIE,
_Principal_.
Hobart Blvd. School. January 13, 1921.
_Report on Japanese Pupils_
(American-born)
Many of the Japanese fail in First Grade on account of inability to
understand the English language. In succeeding grades, progress is
satisfactory as shown by the following tabulation of current date:
====================
| To Be
Enrolled.|Promoted.
---------|----------
B-1 16 | 10
A-1 7 | 6
B-2 5 | 5
A-2 4 | 4
B-3 1 | 1
A-3 1 | 1
B-4 2 | 2
A-4 0 |
B-5 2 | 1
A-5 1 | 1
B-6 1 | 1
A-6 0 |
Total enrolled, 40.
Total promoted, 32.
====================
We find these children as a rule clever in use of pen and crayon,
possessing light touch, having correct ideas of form, and excellent taste
in selection of color.
As pupils they follow direction well, and are usually free from faults of
rudeness or improper language. Of the forty above Kindergarten, three are
troublesome and are persistent cases. In general, it may be said that
these children as a class compare favorably with others in matters of
progress and of conduct as well.
LIZZIE A. MCKENZIE,
_Principal_.
LITERATURE ON THE SUBJECT
BOOKS
ANNALS OF AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, January, 1921.
_Present Day Immigration with Special Reference to the Japanese._
ANNALS OF AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, September,
1909. _Chinese and Japanese in America._
GULICK, SYDNEY L. _American Democracy and Asiatic Citizenship._ Scribners,
New York, 1918. _The American-Japanese Problem._ Scribners, New York,
1914.
ICHIHASHI, Y. _Japanese Immigration._ Marshall Press, San Francisco, 1915.
KAWAKAMI, K. K. _American-Japanese Relations._ Revell, New York, 1912.
_Asia at the Door._ Revell, New York, 1914. _Japan in the World Politics._
Revell, New York, 1917.
MASAOKA, N. (Editor). _Japan to America._ G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York,
1915.
MILLIS, H. A. _The Japanese Problem in the United States._ McMillan, New
York, 1915.
PITKIN, WALTER B. _Must We Fight Japan?_ The Century Co., New York, 1921.
RUSSELL, LINDSAY (Editor). _America to Japan._ G. P. Putnam's Sons, New
York, 1915.
SCHERER, J. A. A. _The Japanese Crisis._ Stokes, 1915.
THE JAPANESE-AMERICAN NEWS. _The Japanese-American Year Book_, 1910 and
1918. San Francisco.
OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS
Annual Reports of the United States Commissioner-General of Immigration.
Bureau of Labor (California). Biennial Reports, and especially, "Report on
the Japanese in California."
California and the Oriental. Report of California State Board of Control,
with Governor Wm. D. Stephens's letter addressed to Secretary of State
Bainbridge Colby. California State Printing Office, Sacramento, 1920.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. Chinese and Japanese in the
United States, 1910. Bulletin 127, Washington Printing Office, 1914.
Immigration Commission. Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of
Immigrant. Senate Document, No. 208, 61st Congress, 2nd Session.
Washington Government Printing Office, 1910.
Immigration Laws of the United States. (Revised Federal Statutes).
KAHN, CONGRESSMAN. Japanese-California Problem. Congressional Record, 60,
4: 78-82, December 9, 1920.
METCALF, SECRETARY. Report on the Japanese School Question.
Naturalization Laws of the United States. (Revised Federal Statutes.)
Reports of the Immigration Commission. Immigrants in the Industries, Vols.
23, 24, 25, Senate Document, No. 633, 61st Congress.
ROOSEVELT, THEODORE. Presidential Message to Congress, 1907. House of
Representatives; Message of the President of the United States, and
Accompanying Documents. Part I; pp. 492-846. Ex. Doc. No. 1.
PAMPHLETS
CALIFORNIA FARMERS' CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION. _Japanese Immigration and
the Japanese in California_, 1919.
CLEMENT, E. W. _Expatriation of Japanese Abroad._ Japanese Association of
America, San Francisco, 1916.
ELIOT, CHAS. W. _Friendship between the United States and Japan._ Japanese
Merchants' Association, Portland, Oregon.
GADSBY, JOHN. _Foreign Land-Ownership and Leasing in Japan_, 1920.
Japanese Association of America, San Francisco, 1914.
GULICK, SYDNEY L. _How Shall Immigration be Regulated?_ 1920. _Japan and
the Gentlemen's Agreement._ 1920. _The New Anti-Japanese Agitation._ 1920.
ICHIHASHI, Y. _Japanese Immigration, Its Status in California._ 1913.
IRISH, JOHN P. _Campaign of Lies, Stolen Letters of Senator Phelan._ 1920.
_Shall Japanese-Americans in Idaho be Treated with Fairness and Justice or
Not?_ 1921.
KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Senator Phelan, Dr. Gulick and I._ Bureau of Literary
Service, San Francisco, 1920.
LAMONT, THOMAS, AND OTHERS. _Japan._ 1920.
PEOPLE'S LEAGUE OF JUSTICE. _Petition by People's League of Justice_, Los
Angeles, California, 1920.
REA, GEORGE BRONSON. _Japan's Right to Exist._ _Far Eastern Review_,
Shanghai, China, 1920.
ROOSEVELT, T. _America and Japan._ Reprint from the New York _Times_.
SHIMA, GEORGE. _An Appeal To Justice._ 1920.
TAFT, HENRY W. _Our Relations with Japan._ Japan Society, New York, 1920.
THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE OF JUSTICE. _California and the Japanese._ Oakland,
California, December, 1920.
TYNDALL, PHILIP. _Proposed Initiative Measure to be Presented to the
Legislature of 1921_, Seattle, Washington.
VANDERLIP, FRANK. _Mr. Vanderlip's Message._
WALLACE, J. B. _Waving the Yellow Flag in California._ Reprinted from the
Dearborn Independent.
WILLIAMS, B. H. _The Case against the Japanese._ 1920.
ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS
"America and the Japanese Relations." WAINWRIGHT, S. H. _Outlook_, 124:
392, March, 1920.
"America's Responsibility on the Pacific." GREENBIE, S. _North American
Review_, 212: 71-79, July, 1920.
"Another Japanese Problem." MCLEOD, H. _New Republic_, 24: 184-6, October
20, 1920.
"Anti-Japanese Agitation." _Business Chronicle_, 9, 18: 137-49, September,
1920.
"Asia's American Problem." ROBINSON, GEROID. _Pacific Review_, 367-388,
December, 1920.
"California and the Japanese." KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Nation_, 112: 173-174,
February 2, 1921.
"California and the Oriental." The Letter of WM. D. STEPHENS to the
Secretary of State Colby. _The Pacific Review_, 349-361, December, 1920.
"California-Japanese Problem." _The Pacific Voice_, 5, 10: 4-10.
"California-Japanese Question." WOOLSEY, THEODORE S. _The American Journal
of International Laws_, Oxford Press, 15, 1: 24-26, January, 1921.
"Co-operation between Japan and America." KANEKO, K. _Japan Review_,
24-26, December, 1920.
"Discrimination against the Japanese." _New Republic_, 24: 135-6.
"Future of Japanese-American Relations." SHIDEHARA, K. _Japan Review_,
170-171, April, 1920.
"Hegemony of the Pacific." _Living Age_, 316: 638-40.
"Japan, a Great Economic Power." LONGFORD, J. H. _Nineteenth Century_,
523: 526-39, September, 1920.
"Japan and America." _Far Eastern Review_, 16: 335-36.
"Japan and the United States, a Suggestion." OTTO, M. C. _Japan Review_,
334-336, October, 1920.
"Japan and the Japanese-California Problem." IYENAGA, T. _Current
History_, 13, 1: 1-7, October, 1920.
"Japan as Colonizer." _Stead's Review_, 53, 7: 358-9.
"Japan Challenges Us to Control California." STODDARD, L. _World's Work_,
40: 48-85.
"Japan Our New Customer." STARRETT, W. A. _Scribner's_, 66: 517-18.
"Japan's Diplomacy of Necessity." _Living Age_, 316: 638-640.
"Japan's New Difficulties with China." _The New York Times Current
History_, 457-458, December, 1920.
"Japan's Use of Her Hegemony." FERGUSON, J. C. _North American Review_,
210: 456-459.
"Japan's Aggression." INMAN, J. M. _Forum_, 65, 1: 1-9, January, 1921.
"Japanese-American Relations." SHIDEHARA, K. _Outlook_, 125: 317-18, June
16, 1920.
"Japanese-American Relations." YOSHINO, SAKUZO. _Pacific Review_, 418-421,
December, 1920.
"Japanese and the Pacific Coast." RYDER, R. W. _North American Review_,
213, 1: 1-15, January, 1921.
"Japanese Farmers' Contribution to California." CHIBA, TOYOJI. _Japan
Review_, 212-13, May, 1920.
"Japanese Imperialism in Siberia." CHAMBERLAIN, W. H. _Nation_, 110:
798-9.
"Japanese in America." TRENT, P. J. _Review of Reviews_, 61: 76-8, June,
1920.
"Japanese in California." BRIGGS, A. H.; JOHNSON, H. B.; LOOFBOUROW, I. J.
_Japan Review_, 166-170, April, 1920.
"Japanese in California." IRISH, JOHN P. _Japan Review_, 7-72, January,
1920.
"Japanese in California." JORDAN, D. S. _The Pacific Review_, 316-65,
December, 1920.
"Japanese Issue in California." STODDARD, L. _World's Work_, 40, 5:
585-600, September, 1920.
"Japanese Language Schools." KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Japan Review_, 14-15,
January, 1921.
"Japanese Problem in California." LOCAN, C. A. _Current History_, 13:
7-11, October, 1920.
"Japanese Pupils and American Schools." FULTON, C. W. _North American
Review_, December, 1906.
"Japanese Question." _Kawakami, K. K._ _Pacific Review_, 365-78, December,
1920.
"Japanese Views of California." _Literary Digest_, 67, 1: 20-1.
"Japanthropy." WOOLSTON, H. D. _Pacific Review,_ 289-96, December, 1920.
"Legal Aspects of the Japanese Question." MCMURRAY, ORRIN K. _Pacific
Review_, 396-403, December, 1920.
"Liberalism in Japan." DEWEY, JOHN. _Dial_, 63: 283-5; 335-7; 369-71.
"Light on the Japanese Question." KINNEY, H. W. _Atlantic Monthly_, 126:
832-42, December, 1920.
"Moral Factors in Japanese Policy." BLAND, J. O. P. _Asia_, 211-217,
March, 1920.
"Oriental Immigration from the Canadian Standpoint." BAGGS, THEODORE H.
_Pacific Review,_ 408-418, December, 1920.
"Oriental in California." IRISH, JOHN P. _Overland_, 75: 332-3, April,
1920.
"Oriental Problem, as the Coast See It." HART, J. A. _World's Work_,
March, 1906.
"Oriental Question and Popular Diplomacy." PRUETT, ROBERT L. _Japan
Review_, 291-92, August, 1920.
"Possum and the Dinosaur." MASON, G. _Outlook_, 125: 319-20, June 16,
1920.
"Race Prejudice: Psychological Analysis." SATO, K. _Japan Review_,
237-238, June, 1920.
"Shall East and West Never Meet?" SATO, K. _Japan Review_, 336-37,
October, 1920.
"Some Aspects of the So-called Japanese Problem." VANDERLIP, F. A.
_Outlook_, 125: 380-4.
"What are the Japanese Doing towards Americanization?" SASAMORI, JUNZO.
_Japan Review_, 22-24, December, 1920.
"What Japan Wants." ADACHI, K. _Nation_, 181-82, February 2, 1921.
"When East is West," GULICK, SYDNEY L. _Outlook_, 102: 12-14, April 3,
1920.
INDEX
Adaptability, Japanese disposition of, 20
AEsthetic temperament of Japanese, 13
Age distribution of Japanese in California, 112
Agreement, Root-Takahira, 34
Agriculture, Japanese, in California, 120-147;
causes of Japanese progress in, 123-126
Ainu, 14
American-born Japanese, 174-177
American disposition, 9
Americanization, criterion of, 151-154
Ancestors, Japanese, 16
Anti-Alien Land Laws, 138-142;
effect of, 145;
Appendixes C, D
Anti-Japanese Agitation, causes of, 75-89
Asiatic policy, Japan's, 33-45
Assimilation, 137; 148-177;
and nationalism, 148-159;
meaning of, 151-154;
biological, 155-162;
of Japanese immigrants, 168-174
Australia, Japanese emigration to, 64-67
Birth-rate of Japanese in California, 109-119
Boas, Professor, quoted, 163
Bolsheviki, 38
Buddhism, 25
Bushido, 15, 21
California, causes of Anti-Japanese agitation in, 75;
causes of Japanese influx to, 50-63;
Christianity among Japanese in, 169-170;
competition in, 133-135;
congestion of Japanese in, 87-89;
cultural assimilation of Japanese in, 166-168;
genesis of hostility towards Japanese in, 71;
population of, 93;
problem, 7
Canada, Japanese emigration to, 67-69
Capitalism, 29
Castle, Professor, quoted, 159
Chiba, T., quoted, 129
China, Japan's cooeperation with, 42-45
Chinese, 23, 95
Chivalry, proletarian, 21
Christianity, 28
Colonization, Japanese policy of, 18
Confucianism, 25, 27
Congressional sub-Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 176
Constitution, Japanese, 11
Democracy, industrial, 31
Democratic institutions, Japanese training in, 172
Den Do Dan, 169-170
Despotism, Japanese, 22
Dewey, Professor John, 29
Dispersal of Japanese in California, 189
Disposition, Japanese, 20
Dual nationality, 191
East and West, 4, 195-196
Economic status of Japanese in California, 171
Education, system of, 31
Emotional nature, of Japanese, 9
English, Japanese ability to command, 170
Eta, 18
Eurasiatic relationship, 6
Expatriation Law of Japan, Appendix K
Farmers, Japanese, in California, 132-138
Fishberg, Dr., quoted, 164
"Gentlemen's Agreement," 100-106
German, influence on Japan, 30;
idealism, 32
_Gikyoshin_, 21
Group consciousness of Japanese, 16
Gulick, Dr. Sydney L., quoted, 157
_Hara kiri_, 12
Hearn, Lafcadio, 44
Hedonism, Japanese, 15
Hideyoshi, 10
History of Japanese, 10, 20
Humanism, 32
Immigration to
Australia, 64-67
Canada, 67-69
South America, 69
United States, 69-75
Industrial democracy, 31
Intelligence of Japanese in California, 170
Intermarriage, 155-162
Japan, topographical conditions of, 13;
Nature of, 14
Japan's, Asiatic Policy, 33;
land area, 52;
agriculture, 52-55;
industry, 57-62;
population, 55-57;
social conditions, 62-63
Japanese, ability to speak English, 170;
age distribution of, in California, 112;
agriculture in California, 120-147;
ancestors, 16;
assimilability of, 148-177;
birth rate in California, 109-119;
civilization of, 14;
Constitution, 11;
death rate of, in California, 117;
descendants in California, 164-166, 174-177;
economic status of, in California, 171;
farm labor, 126-131;
farmers in California, 132-138;
immigration to America, 97-107;
Land Laws, 142-145;
morality of, in California, 168-169;
nationality, 85-86;
number of, in California, 91;
philosophy, 24;
sex distribution of, in California, 112;
social system, 30;
susceptibility of, 12;
training in civics, 172
Jesuit Fathers, 10
Jones and East, quoted, 159
_Kikotsu_, 21
Kipling, quoted, 4
Kojiki, 16
Korea, amalgamation of, 34;
local self-government in, 36;
situation in, 35-37
Koreans, 18
Kusama, Shiko, note, 170
Labor, 30
Land, amount held by Japanese in California, 135-137
Land Laws, Anti-Alien, 138-142;
Appendixes C and D
League of Nations, 19
Lippman, Walter, note, 86
Manchuria, 37
Mankind, 6
Marriage, Japanese, 11
Millis, Professor H. A., quoted, 157
Morality of Japanese in California, 168-169
Morris, Roland, 186
Myth, 17
Nationalism, 148
Native-born Japanese, 174
Nevada, 23
Newlands, U. S. Senator, 23
Nihongi, 16
Nitobe, Dr., 22
Number of Japanese in California, 91
Oakesmith, John, quoted, 176
Occidental learning, 26
Occidentalism, ultra, 19
_Otokodate_, 21
Pacific Coast, 193-194
Passports, 103
Patriotism of Japanese, 17
Perry, Commodore, 3
Philosophy, Japanese, 24
Picture brides, 113
Political rights of Japanese, 31
Politics as a cause of agitation, 80-82
Population of Japanese in California, 90-97
Positivism, English, 28
Pragmatism, 29, 32
Pride of Japanese, 11, 19
Propaganda, 83
Race war, 7
Racial difference, 83-85
Radicals, Japanese, 20
Relationship, American Japanese, 7
Roosevelt, Theodore, 33
Root-Takahira Agreement, 34
Russo-Japanese war, 18
Sakura, Sogoro, 22
Samurai, 12, 15
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, 187
Santayana, 29
Science, lack of, in Japan, 15
Sex distribution of Japanese in California, 113
Shantung, 39
Shibusawa, Viscount, 186
Smuggling of Japanese to United States, 107-109
Social, force, 23;
_milieu_ as affecting man, 165;
reorganization, 29
South America, Japanese emigration to, 69
State Board of Control of California, 96
Stephens, Governor, quoted, 5, 23, 122
Suicide in Japan, 12
Thought, Japanese, 29
Tokugawa regime, 22
Traits, Japanese, 9
Treaty, American-Japanese, 187, Appendix B
United States, the, Japanese immigration to, 69-74
Unity, national, 17
Utilitarians, 29
Vanderlip, Frank, 187
Wang Yang Ming, 26
White and yellow races, 5
Wilson, Woodrow, quoted, 154
Women, status of Japanese, 31
Yamato race, 14
"Yellow peril," 82
Young Japan, 14
FOOTNOTES:
[1] _The System of Samurai Ethics and Obligations of Honor._
[2] See "The New Chino-Japanese Treaties and Their Import," by T. Iyenaga,
in _The American Review of Reviews_, September, 1915.
[3] According to the result of the census taken on October 1, 1920, the
Japanese population of South Manchuria stands at 154,998 souls. Of this
total, those living at Dairen number 63,745; Fushun, 12,659; Mukden,
12,268; Port Arthur, 9379; Antung, 7057, and Anshan, 6678, while those
resident in the jurisdiction of Kwantung Province number 74,893.
[4] One dollar U. S. currency is approximately two yen.
[5] For a complete tabulation of Japanese immigration see appendix F.
[6] Tokyo Emigration Co., Toyo Emigration Co., were the most conspicuous.
[7] Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the methods
by which Oriental laborers were induced to come to Canada in 1909.
[8] Report as cited, p. 54.
[9] Those who voted in the negative for the initiative bill were 222,086
against 668,483 in the affirmative.
[10] _Stakes of Diplomacy_, by Walter Lippman, p. 40.
[11] Report published on October 5, 1920, by the Bureau of Commercial
Affairs, Foreign Office, Tokyo, Japan.
[12] _California and the Oriental, State Board of Control of California,
1920_, p. 30.
[13] _California and the Oriental_, p. 27.
[14] For detailed comparison of geographical distribution of Chinese and
Japanese see Appendix I.
[15] See Appendix G.
[16] _California and the Oriental_, p. 31.
[17] Total number of Japanese born in California so far is approximately
30,000, of which about 5000 have either died or live in Japan.
[18] Annual Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration.
[19] _Immigration Laws--Rules of November 15, 1911_, published by U. S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Immigration, March 10, 1913.
[20] _Japan Year Book_, 1920, p. 34.
[21] _Pacific Review_, vol. i., No. 3, p. 363; "The Japanese in
California," by David S. Jordan.
[22] Bulletin 127, 1914, p. 8.
[23] The following data are reported by the Bureau of Census, Washington,
in preliminary publication of 1920 census:
The Japanese population by sex in 1920 is male 44,364, female 25,832; for
1910, male 35,116, female 6,240; and for 1900, male 9,598, female 553. The
per cent. distribution by sex of the Japanese in 1920 is male 63.2 per
cent., female 36.8 per cent.; for 1910 male 84.9 per cent., female 15.1
per cent.; and for 1900, male 94.6 per cent., female 5.4 per cent.
[24] Gulick, S. L., _Japan and the Gentlemen's Agreement_, 1920, p. 7.
[25] _World Almanac 1921_, p. 476-9.
[26] _World Almanac 1920_, p. 487.
[27] The birth rate of immigration population in Massachusetts was 49.1 in
1910.
[28] _Senate Document_, vol. lxv., 61st Congress.
[29] _Senate Document_, vol. lxv., 61st Congress.
[30] Of the forty-one answers to the questionnaires sent to the County
Farm Commissioners in California by the Board of Control asking them to
give pertinent facts concerning the methods used by these races
(Orientals) in securing land leases, twenty-five stated: "The Japanese pay
more rent in cash or shares"; ten said: "Japanese pay ordinary rent" or
"use ordinary means in obtaining lease." _California and the Oriental_,
pp. 56-61.
[31] _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, pp. 148-49.
[32] _California and the Oriental_, pp. 56-61.
[33] _Ibid._, p. 221.
[34] _California and the Oriental_, p. 58.
[35] _Immigration Commission Reports_, vol. xxiii., chap. iv.
[36] _Japanese-American Year Book_, 1918, p. 10.
[37] _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, p. 123.
[38] For detailed comparison of crops raised by white and Japanese farmers
see Appendix E.
[39] Figures taken from _California and the Oriental_, p. 47.
[40] See Appendix B.
[41] For full texts of land laws 1913 and 1920 see Appendixes C and D.
[42] _California and the Oriental_, p. 104.
[43] Mr. Newman in the hearings held at Sacramento, California, in 1913.
[44] Millis' _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, p. 275.
[45] Gulick, S. L., _The American Japanese Problem_, p. 153.
[46] Jones and East, _Inbreeding and Outbreeding--Their Genetic and
Sociological Significance_, p. 255.
[47] W. E. Castle, _Genetics and Eugenics_, pp. 233-38.
[48] _California and the Oriental_, p. 15.
[49] "Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of Immigrants." _Senate
Document No. 208_, pp. 7-54.
[50] _The Jews: A Study of Race and Environment._
[51] See Appendix A.
[52] _The Forum_, January, 1921, p. 3.
[53] For this as well as other information the authors are indebted to Mr.
S. Kusama, who furnished us with the materials which were carefully
prepared by him from first-hand research in California.
[54] _Bureau of Census Bulletin 127_, p. 12.
[55] _Race and Nationality_, Frederick A. Stokes Co., New York, 1919.
[56] See example of testimony in Appendix L.
See also Appendix M in which the subject of comparative standing of
intelligence and behaviour of native-born Japanese children and American
children is discussed by several principals of elementary schools in
Southern California.
[57] For text of this law see Appendix K.
Transcriber's Notes:
Passages in italics are indicated by _italics_.
Passages in bold are indicated by =bold=.
Foonote 18 appears on page 104 of the text, but there is no corresponding
marker on the page.