W

day, if there are not thousands who would flock to the scene of dis-believe you gentlemen will see that we will get some r covery in the hope of bettering their condition? And at this particular quarter that will be of great use to us. If we cannot get time China is stricken with famine. There are millions dying of we have no remedy. These resolutions will fall to the g starvation. Is it not human nature for these men to go away from that ing. We must not put ourselves in a hostile attitude to country, when they are dying off every day of starvation, into a country ernment, for if we do attempt to enforce these provisions where they can better their condition? Are these poor creatures to be the country into a war with China. It could not be other blamed for it? I think not. I don't think there ought to be any a treaty with that country, and if our government is goin feelings of hostility against these Chinamen. And I, as an individual, individual State to set aside that treaty it is a cause for while I greatly regret that they are here in the numbers they are, have no will be most apt to follow such an action on our part. antipathy to them. I do sometimes feel a little bit hostile toward the pared, and the General Government is not going to permi party that has prevented us from modifying the provisions of the treaty a treaty in that way. The only way is to adopt the clause which exists between this country and China, so that we might stop suggested. I believe now, as we have, for the first time this influx of Chinamen. It is toward those men I cherish feelings of houses of Congress Democratic, I believe we can expect hostility, if I have any at all, and not against the Chinese who come to that source. I want to get rid of these Chinese as bad as this country, as I would go to China, to better their condition. man, or any other man. I see the evil effects. It corrup Gentlemen must not forget the fact that this country has been several degrades labor, and injures the business of the State; for, years filling up with Chinamen. It has taken a great many ships to said, any man, I don't care who he is, may go to work an bring them here. They have been coming and coming for the past men because he gets them for less money, but he loses twenty years. We cannot expect to relieve ourselves of them in a day, operation. Every dollar paid to them is gone from us. nor in a week. It took several ships to bring them, and it will take a any of it back, as we do when we pay it to white men. great many ships to take them back again. We cannot relieve ourselves a white man and pay him money he will settle down in of an evil of twenty years growth in a day. It will take some time. hood; if he is a single man he marries as soon as he gets As far as I am concerned, I hope we can find some partial remedy at piece of land, settles down, and becomes a valuable additi least. But I don't think we can do it unless we act rationally; unless ulation. It is not so with these Chinamen. Every dol we go at this thing in a legal way. We cannot do it by any such reso- them is gone from us. I have always advocated that it w lutions as it is proposed to insert here. They would be declared uncon- cial interest of the country to get rid of them, but I want stitutional the first time they come before the higher Courts. Gentlemen legal way. I shall vote on these various propositions as have inserted in this report a clause that they shall not be employed by dictates. I have taken an oath in this hall to obey the corporations; that they shall not do thus and so; that they shall not the United States, and I do not propose to violate that oat engage in business without a license, and then provide further that they shall not have a license. Now, suppose you do this; suppose you incorporate this provision in the Constitution, and suppose the Constitution is adopted by the people, and becomes the law of the land. What are you going to do with these sixty thousand Chinamen, if they are all going to be excluded from work, until such time as they can get away? Are the people going to keep them? Are the people going to feed them, or are you going to run them into the sea? What do you propose to do

with them?

MR KLEINE. Let these Chinese companies that brought them here send them back.

MR. OVERTON. Yes, they will send them all back in a week-sixty thousand of them. You can't get rid of them in a day.

MR. KLEINE. There are one hundred and sixty thousand of them. MR. OVERTON. That makes my argument all the stronger. You can't get rid of them in a month. Again, as some gentlemen have said, I have a right to my opinion, and I propose to vote as my judgment tells me is right, and I do not care what the people of the State may think. I am not a candidate for any office; I don't know that I shall ever hold an office again. If I could insert a clause prohibiting Chinese immigration, I would do it, but I know it cannot be done. I am going to vote as my reason dictates. I am not going to fall down to popular clamor for the sake of support. I am not going to do that, sir. I am going to act for myself, and I shall be responsible for my vote, and I want my constituents to see how I vote.

I

Now, sir, as I was going to say, I have an opinion on this section. do not believe, notwithstanding other gentlemen differ with me, I do not believe that a clause in which we say the corporations shall not hire them is worth the paper it is written on. I don't believe it is worth the price of the ink used in writing it. I believe that Governor Stanford, or any other man controlling a corporation, will go on hiring them, and the Courts will sustain them. The Courts will say that you had no right to put such a prohibition in the Constitution, and your work will be set aside.

MR. TULLY. What principle of law does it violate, prohibiting corporations from employing Chinamen? MR. OVERTON. Simply this: that the treaty says they shall come to this country to reside and travel, and be treated like the people of the most favored nations. Now, sir, the most favored nations, Englishmen, Irishmen, and Germans, can come to this country and hire out to whom they please. There is a discrimination in that regard between these people and the Chinese.

• SPEECH OF MR. HOWARD.

MR. HOWARD, of Los Angeles. Mr. Chairman: I ha tant to participate in this debate, and if I had not been by a sense of duty I should certainly have continued sil subject. I concede that the object and effect of this article Chinese immigration from California. It is admitted by bers of this Convention who have spoken on the subject immigration is a great and menacing evil to the moral prosperity of the State. Several gentlemen who have question maintain, however, that the State is, under the F tution, powerless to resist, and they oppose all action. Th of the fellow down East who was in favor of the Maine li against its execution. The opponents of State action main power to exclude the Chinese, or any other immigration ti the safety of the State, is exclusively in the Congress o States. I deny the premises and the conclusion, both u and reason. I shall be unfortunate if I do not demonst authorities are the reverse of such a proposition. Nor is position with me. As long ago as eighteen hundred and when Mr. Gorham was canvassing the State as the Repu date for Governor on the "fatherhood of God and the b man" proposition, I discussed this subject in an address wi published in the Examiner, republished, as to that port Workingmen's paper then printed in San Francisco. The has always been a Chinese immigration party in the State present few of its advocates have the courage of my friend Mr. Stuart, to avow it. All those interested in the large porations, like the railways, or who cultivate land by the acres, desire cheap Chinese labor, and a continuance of its In this Convention that is the inner secret of the oppo report, and of the assertion that the jurisdiction is exclusi Federal Congress, where they are aware there is no reliet pated. It is well known that for a long series of years the the Western States has excluded not only slaves, but free p and it has gone unchallenged either by Congress or by judiciary. This course of legislation settles the question so action is concerned. Article fourteen of the Constitution eighteen hundred and forty-eight, provides: "The Gene shall, at its first session under the amended Constitution, p as will effectually prohibit free persons of color from in and settling in this State; and to effectually prevent the ow from bringing them into this State for the purpose of settin It is a matter of history that that policy was sustained and the State of Illinois with entire success, and without opposi Federal Government.

The thirteenth article of the Constitution of Indiana eighteen hundred and fifty-one, declares:

No negro or mulatto shall come into, or settle in this S adoption of this Constitution. All contracts made with mulatto coming into this State, contrary to the provision of section, shall be void, and any person who shall employs mulatto, or otherwise encourage him to remain in the S fined in any sum not less than ten dollars nor more than dollars."

Now, I did not expect to make a speech. I wanted to make these few remarks so as to show how I stand. My vote shall be in keeping with my judgment, and I am perfectly willing for the people to see how I stand. I am not afraid to let them know. Now, sir, I agree with you as to the evils of Chinese immigration. I had taken that position long before I was called on to run for this office. I am not an office seeker. I have always opposed Chinese immigration, and I am as strongly opposed to it to-day as ever; but I want to get rid of these people in a legal way. I am not willing to go to such extremes as to make this State the laughing stock of the country. I pledged myself to adopt all lawful methods, and I am ready to do so. I stated then that I believed the only real, effective remedy would be to secure a modification of the treaty. One reason that this has not been done, is that for the last ten years the Republican party have had control of the two branches of These provisions go quite as far as any contained in thi Congress. I have never expected a great deal of aid from that party. are as open to objection on the ground of code legislation Not that the Republicans in this State are not just as much in sympathy tained in the report of the Committee on Chinese Immi with us on this question, and just as deeply interested, but the great body aside from the treaty with China, are quite as obnoxious to of the party back East has not sympathized with us, and does not to-day. objections. I maintain that the decisions of the Supren The great body of that party believe in the fatherhood of God and altogether clear and uniform as to the power of the State t brotherhood of man theory, and they are in favor of the Chinese coming immigration which endangers the morals and safety of th here, and will not give us the relief we need. I stated then, and I│that the power exists alongside of and independent of the p

It is well established that these people are often made the subjects of the grossest frauds, and sometimes leap overboard before the ship leaves port, and are drowned in their effort to escape their fate. On the voyage they have been known to suffer all the horrors of the middle passage. It is our duty to put an end to this horrible traffic which can only be effected by a total inhibition of the immigration. We are informed by the reports of Americans, who have visited China, that their prisons are often resorted to for the purpose of filling contracts for labor made by the Six Companies. It is the statement of all intelligent Chinamen that the laborers introduced into California of late years are generally drawn from the lowest dregs of the Chinese people. This coast has become, to a large extent, a penal colony for the Emperor of China. Every citizen of California is fully aware that the Chinese companies have a system of government and laws for the Chinese entirely independent of our own government, which they sometimes enforce, even to the taking of life. One or two cases have fallen under my own observation. Yet such is their system of terrorism, that it can never be proved in a Court of justice. They are, therefore, in open rebellion against the State Government. It was charged to juries by the United States Supreme Court Judges on the circuit, that combinations to resist the execution of the fugitive slave law were treason. Such are the combinations of these people for a Chinese Government in California. It has been said by some jurists that treason against a State was also treason against the United States. If this be so, the Chinese are in open revolt against both the State and Federal Government. The Chinese are now well armed with the improved weapons, and with their own passion and those of our people excited as they are at present, civil war may be anticipated at any time. Many riots have already occurred. It must be apparent to all men of reflection that China, with her four or five hundred millions in a state of starvation, may pour such a flood of immigrants upon our shores that, in process of time, they will subvert our institutions and government. It has been well said by the Chairman, in his able and candid speech on the presentation of the report, that with these people it is a question of food and existence, which they can only solve by immigration. Our own security requires that we should turn this tide away from California. If they continue to come in the numbers in which they have been arriving, they will in time, and at no distant day, drive out the free white laborers by their merciless system of competition, which must inevitably result in their getting the possession and control of the country. In other words, they will Mongolianize the Pacific Coast, for in the absence of the Caucasian laborer they will be irresistible in numbers, force, and power. The Chinaman earns only eight or ten cents per day in his own country. He is therefore benefited by any change of residence. In this country, with his nomadic habits, he lives in tents, or tenements of the meanest character. He clothes himself with Chinese raiment, and subsists on rice and the cheapest food. It is impossible for the white laborer to compete with him, and as a consequence he drives off the white man and monopolizes the labor market.

The first case was decided in eighteen hundred and thirty-seven, and the last bearing upon the subject in eighteen hundred and seventysix, and they are entirely consistent. The Passenger cases go to the extent of asserting that the States have the exclusive right to determine whether the immigration is dangerous or not, and of applying the necessary remedy. In the City of New York vs. Miln, 11 Peters, decided in eighteen hundred and thirty-seven, Mr. Justice Barbour, rendering the opinion of the Court, quotes from Vattel, as the law of the case: "The sovereign may forbid the entrance of his territory either to foreigners in general or in particular cases, or to certain persons, or for certain particular purposes, according as he may think advantageous to the State." 串 "Since the lord of territory may, whenever he thinks proper, forbid its being entered, he has no doubt a power to annex what conditions he pleases to the permission to enter." The Court then proceeds to prove that the State possessed this power before the formation of the Federal Constitution had not surrendered it to the General Government, and still retained it. It has been asserted that the decision in the Passenger cases overruled the decision in the City of New York vs. Miln. It is an assumption without the slightest foundation in fact. In the Passenger cases, Judge McLean says: "In giving the commercial power to Congress, the States did not part with that power of self-preservation which must be inherent in every organized community. They may guard against the introduction of anything which may corrupt the morals or endanger the health or lives of their citizens." To the same effect is the opinion of Judge Grier, and seven of the nine Judges who composed the Court. Seven of the Judges, including the majority and minority, delivered concurrent opinions on this question, and eight of them concurred in the position thus expressed by Judge McLean, as I shall demonstrate before I conclude. I shall show that all the other decisions of the Court either substantially maintain the same rule, or expressly reserve any opinion on the subject. Then do the Chinese immigrants, in the language of Judge McLean, tend to corrupt the morals of our people, or endanger the safety of the State? Let us begin with the foundation of society, the marriage relation. We know, from history and the statements of travelers, that a system of polygamy exists in China, quite as execrable as that which prevails among the Mormons of Salt Lake. That the position of woman in China is practically that of a slave and an article of commerce. I need not dwell on the fact, that there can be no desirable civilization or sound state of morals where polygamy is the position of woman. In the nineteenth century that is an admitted axiom among all people of any liberal cultivation. To illustrate the Chinese idea of the rights and position of woman, I give the following contract from the Senate Committee report on the subject of Chinese immigration at a late session of Congress: "An agreement to assist the woman Ah Ho, because coming from China to San Francisco, she became indebted to her mistress for passage. Ah Ho herself asks Mr. Yu Kwan to advance her sixty dollars, for which Ah Ho distinctly agrees to give her body to Mr. Yee for services as a prostitute for a term of four years." And yet the passage did not cost Yee exceed-railroads to import and steamers to transport these coolies by the thouing forty dollars, and Ah Ho for this service was required to prostitute herself for four years. And this is the foreign commerce which gentlemen, in effect, argue is protected by the Constitution of the United States. It appears from the testimony of Governor Low, in the same report, that by an arrangement between the Chinese Companies and the steamship company no Chinaman will be allowed to return to China on the steamer until all his debts are paid; and, therefore, there was no way for this woman to escape her odious contract until the expiration of the four years. Yet, such are the Six Chinese Companies tolerated in San Francisco, and such is the steamship company subsidized by the United States Government in the cause of civilization and commerce.

It is an admitted fact, to which every practicing lawyer can testify, that as a race the Chinese have no sense of the obligations of an oath, either when the litigation is among themselves or between Chinese and others, whether the oath is administered according to our laws or their own customs. If among themselves, they generally produce about an equal number of witnesses on each side, who testify directly in opposition to each other. I recollect the history of a case, when I first came to the State, when a Justice of the Peace, as a matter of curiosity, had witnesses in a suit until fifty had testified in contradiction of each other. A race that has no sense of the obligations of a jural oath is dangerous in any country, and especially where jury trials prevail according to the English or American rules.

It is well established that smallpox and leprosy prevail among the Chinese to an alarming extent, and that they have introduced both into this country. It is also an established fact that leprosy is an incurable disease, and that several deaths from that cause have occurred in San Francisco.

It is well known that their women fearfully corrupt the youths in our cities, both in morals and health. I have been credibly informed that they have introduced among our young people the practice of smoking opium, which, in some instances, has been indulged by young females. It cannot be denied, that in opposition to law and the Acts of Congress, Chinese are introduced into this country as coolies bound by contracts to labor-practically slaves-and that the Six Companies rigidly enforce these contracts. Nor is it possible to detect this violation of law, or repress this system of slavery so long as Chinese are permitted to be introduced as immigrants. It appears from the testimony before the United States Senate Committee that these people are generally too poor to pay their own passage. It is, therefore, the practice of the importer to advance the passage money under a contract to labor, and the coolie goes before the American Consul, and proves-or some one else does it for him-that he is a voluntary immigrant; and thus he sells himself into slavery for a term of time, and becomes a person "held to service or labor," as our system of slavery used to be described.

Instead of checking this evil the Federal Government has subsidized sand to the Pacific Coast. Governor Low, in his testimony before the Senate Committee, which will be found on page seventy-six, testified: "The impulse of eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, eighteen hundred and sixty-eight, and eighteen hundred and sixty-nine, I have always conceived to have been given by the building of the Pacific Railroad, the company being very anxious for laborers. A great many were brought here directly and indirectly by the efforts of the railroad people to get laborers. 華 I should think on the Central Pacific, from

my knowledge of it, four fifths of the labor for grading perhaps was performed by Chinese. That is, from here to Ogden."

The laborer can hardly regard a government as paternal which inaugurates measures to introduce a horde of Asiatics who compete with him in all the industries of the country, and by competition deprive them and their families of bread. National, like domestic charity, begins at home. The policy of the Federal Government for these last fifteen years cannot be accounted for on any rational or humanitarian principle. Under the cry against pauper labor it has established a so-called protective tariff, which has led to an importation of operatives, because it has rendered impossible an exchange of our agricultural products for the proceeds of that labor, filled the country with foreign paupers and tramps, broken up our foreign commerce, and overstocked the country with manufactures forced in this hotbed of legislation. Asiatic immigration is opposed to all the great interests of the country. It represses that of our own and kindred races. I prefer that the future inhabitants of the Pacific should be descended from the fair daughters of Germany, Ireland, England, and France, instead of the copper-colored courtesans of China. Mixing with a lower race, without elevating them, debases our own.

There is another aspect of this question which requires our deliberate consideration. If this Chinese population is permitted to become permanent among us to the extent threatened, they will ultimately attain the right of suffrage. It is not possible to continue to carry them in our bosom as a quasi-alien enemy. If among us in the numbers we anticipate, paying taxes, it will be impossible to resist their claim to citizenship. They are already being naturalized in other States, and all legal objection to their naturalization rests upon the word "white" in the Act of Congress. How soon that will be construed away by the Courts, no one can divine.

If the Chinese now in the country had the ballot, in all party contests they would hold the balance of power and the Six Companies would control our politics and government. They would become the mere subjects of commerce, to be transferred to the party paying the highest price. It is urged that the exclusion of Chinese immigration from California is in opposition to the treaty with China. I have shown that according to the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United

that the necessity indicated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Miller has already arisen in California in relation to Chinese immigration, and that the only proper, appropriate, and efficient remedy is a total exclusion of the Chinese from landing on our shores.

That the case of Chy Lung vs. Freeman does not overrule the former decisions, that the State is the exclusive judge of the necessity of the case in a question of self-defense, and that according to the opinion of Justice Miller the State must judge at least in the first instance and present a case for adjudication.

It is simply nonsense to say that if we present a case of exclusion under this report and a revised Constitution, it will lead to a conflict with the General Government. If the case should be decided against us, which I do not anticipate, we have only to submit to the judgment of the Court, and there can be no possible contest between State and Federal authority. Besides, each section, under the decisions of the Courts, will be a distinct and separate enactment, and some of them, at worst, will be held valid, while others may possibly be declared in conflict with the Constitution of the United States. The interests and honor of the State require that the experiment of invoking a decision should be made as suggested by the Supreme Court of the United States.

result will show that the wish is father to the thought, and that they who cry defeat are false prophets of evil omen. I say to you, in the language of the great bard:

"To thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.'

MR. GREGG. Mr. Chairman: If a motion is in order, I would like to move to strike out sections two, five, six, seven, eight, and nine of the report. THE CHAIRMAN. It is not in order.

SPEECH OF MR. HERRINGTON.

It is pertinent to remark that since the decision of the case of Chy Lung vs. Freeman, the subject of the police powers of the States was again before the Supreme Court of the United States, after a heated political contest over the subject in California, and Mr. Justice Field, in the opinion of the Court, took occasion to modify the language of the former opinion. That such was the intention can admit of no doubt, as Mr. Justice Field, in the opinion of the circuit, declared that a State had a right to protect itself against Chinese immigration as a matter of self-ered that this was asserted by the thirteen sovereign States, it defense.

In this case of Sherlock vs. Alling, decided at the October Term, eighteen hundred and seventy-six, the Court, in the opinion by Justice Field, say: "In conferring upon Congress the regulation of commerce, it was never intended to cut the States off from legislating on all subjects relating to the health, life, and safety of their citizens, though the legislation might indirectly affect the commerce of the country." (95 Otto, p. 100.) In this case the whole principle is clearly enunciated. And now, sir, in conclusion, I take occasion to say there is not the least hope for relief by the action of Congress. I am utterly opposed to any action of that body in the premises, but the abrogation of the Burlingame treaty. Now, sir, in the classic language of some of my friends on the other side, I say, "the Chinese must go." But I propose to make them go in a legal way, by the regular action of the government. Violence has been suggested. Mobs have been alluded to. Now, sir, so far as any-sume that it embraces also transient foreigners passing through the thing but regular governmental action is concerned, I set my face against it. If our system of government is not sufficient to correct all the evils of society, then is that government a failure and a fraud. I have no taste for mobs, whether they be in the nature of an honest uprising for the correction of abuses, or whether they are the lowest, and vilest, and most criminal of all mobs under the name of a Vigilance Committee. And, sir, if any violence is resorted to in relation to this Chinese question, if we have an Executive of honor and courage, it will be put down in sharp and vigorous action, cost what it may in blood or treasure. Let us take care what we do. We may as well talk sense as nonsense; it don't cost any more.

MR. HERRINGTON. Mr. Chairman: From the way we are going, this Convention will be in session till the Legislature meets. It is about time we were adopting some fixed, settled line of policy. Now, I can hardly hope to add any argument to that which has been made by the gentleman from Los Angeles, Mr. Howard. The doctrines which he advanced are eminently sound, and his logic invincible. There are very few, if any, additional authorities besides those which have already been presented. It may not be improper, however, to state what I consider the object and purpose for which the Government of the United States was established under the Constitution and forms of law. It is said that the chief purpose of the Constitution of the United States, as decided by its founders, to be to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. And when it is considwill be understood that nothing more was conceded than what was agreed to by these general terms. And when you have referred to the specific provision that the same instrument contains, by which the power is conferred upon Congress to put in force this instrument, so as to enable the Government of the United States to carry out these several general powers, we have arrived at the whole plans and powers of the Govern ment of the United States as contradistinguished from the powers still remaining in the States of this Union. And it is with these powers, regulating commerce with foreign nations and between the States, borrowing money, etc., that you parted. Upon this subject of regulating commerce, I presume you have been sufficiently enlightened by the gentleman last upon the floor, and by the gentleman from San Francisco, Mr. Barbour. So far as that power is concerned, it extends only to the regulation of commerce between the States, and between the United States and foreign nations. It has been held, and rightly so, and I precountry-as far as the Burlingame treaty is concerned-that those who are here may reside here. The doctrine of the powers of the State bas been expounded very clearly, and it is hardly worth while for me to go into that subject. I shall, therefore, refer simply to the action taken in establishing the treaty. I do not say it was the purpose of the President of the United States, or of the Congress of the United States, but I say it was an oversight, the result of eagerness to secure the commercial interests of the United States, and in their eagerness to secure this result important guards and restrictions were omitted. I apprehend, however, that if ever the construction of that treaty was called in question before the Courts, and a fair construction given to it, it would be held, as the Mr. Chairman, mob means the torch; a mob means the destruction of Fourteenth Amendment has been held in certain cases, to which I will property. It never can succeed in this country; there are too many call your attention, to apply solely to the regulation which the governproperty holders here. There are too many men who own little farms-ment is authorized to exercise. I refer to the Slaughterhouse cases. (16 little homes here. They will revolt against all mobs, and whenever Wallace, p. 37.) violence is resorted to, I am for stifling it at once, be the cost what it may. In relation to the mobs of eighteen hundred and seventy-seven against Eastern railroads, although it may have been provoked by the reduction of wages at a time when they were declaring dividends of seven per cent., it was properly suppressed by the State and Federal Governments, and if President Hayes never does another act which will commend him to the grateful remembrance of posterity, the suppression of those riots will. No, sir, give us law and the regular methods of redress of grievances through the ballot box, and I trust we will redress a great many in that way.

able and useless matter.

I express myself in this manner, sir, because I know with what we have to deal here. I would not load the Constitution with objectionI have no fear about the Constitution when it comes before the people. It will be ratified. I know, sir, that there is a disposition in certain quarters to malign this Convention. I know there has been a disposition to belittle our work and traduce it. And whatever we do or say, we are met with the threat that the Constitution will be rejected. But gentlemen are counting without their host. I know, sir, that certain papers in this State, notoriously in the interest of monopolies, are battling in that direction; that they endeavor to suppress all the reasons from the public for the action of the majority here. It is true, the Record-Union did print speeches for some of us, which we paid for, until we got to be too hard on the corporations, and then they shut down on us, and now you can't get a solitary line published which is against their views. The accounts which go to the city papers are so meager that the public can glean nothing of the reasons for what we do here. All this works against us, especially when everything said against the reforms proposed here is carefully published. But if we make a good instrument, and give to the public such reasons as we can, and take care to keep all tomfoolery out, I have no fear of the result; and I do not fear the opposition of this class of papers; it will fall harmless at our feet. We have no hope of any relief from this monstrous evil but in union among ourselves and the action of the State. I have no fear that such provisions as this will result in the rejection of the Constitution. If it should be rejected by the people, it will more probably be for what it omits than for what it contains. The cry of its defeat is an idle bugbear, which will not disturb even venerable maidens. The

There was a cry for cheap labor. Capital wanted cheap labor; corporations wanted cheap labor; and now cheap labor is fastened upon us, and threatening our ruin, threatening starvation to our poorer classes, and we are told that we are powerless. I say, no wonder the poor man is tempted to lift his voice against the powers that be. He who has ever been ready to take up arms in defense of his country, and of its institutions, finds himself driven to the wall by serfs, with no power of redress. What wonder that he lifts his voice in lamentation. It is not drunkenness that has caused this trouble. It is the lack of employment which makes men lift their voices against this unnatural condition of things. Cheap labor has redounded to the benefit of a few capitalists, but not to the prosperity of the country, or any part of the country. The cry of cheap labor had no foundation in fact, but was used as an excuse for an enormous subsidy to a line of steamers. We have all seen the evils of cheap labor, and the State has the power now to remedy these evils.

It has been said here that the Constitution of the United States was the supreme law of the land, and the treaties and laws made in pursuance thereof were the supreme law, anything in the Constitution of the States to the contrary notwithstanding. I understood that the proposition was set up as a general proposition.

If I am not mistaken that proposition is not law, and it will be sufficient to merely state what is the law, and let it rest upon that statement. In every case where there is joint jurisdiction, and there is an absolute prohibition by the State, and the same authority is concurrent. in the United States, in such a case the laws passed by Congress, in pursuance of the Constitution, are the supreme law of the land, anything in the Constitution or laws of the State to the contrary notwithstanding, But in the absence of any law of Congress on a subject, where the authority is concurrent, the laws of the State will hold good. Of course when Congress does act, that supersedes the State law.

THE CHAIRMAN. The question is on the adoption of the substitute proposed by the gentleman from San Francisco, Mr. Beerstecher. The amendment was lost.

THE SECRETARY read section one, temporarily passed over: SECTION 1. The Legislature shall have and shall exercise the power to enact all needful laws, and prescribe necessary regulations for the

protection of the State, and the counties, cities, and towns thereof, from the burdens and evils arising from the presence of aliens, who are or who may become vagrants, paupers, mendicants, criminals, or invalids afflicted with contagious or infectious diseases, and aliens otherwise dangerous or detrimental to the well-being or peace of the State, and to impose conditions upon which such persons may reside in the State, and to provide the means and mode of their removal from the State upon failure or refusal to comply with such conditions; provided, that nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to impair or limit the power of the Legislature to pass such other police laws or regulations as it may deem necessary.

THE CHAIRMAN. The question is on the substitute of Mr. Joyce. MR. MILLER. This amendment has no relation to the subjectmatter of section one. It more properly belongs to section seven, which

reads thus:

"SEC. 7. The presence of foreigners ineligible to become citizens of the United States is declared hereby to be dangerous to the well-being of the State, and the Legislature shall discourage their immigration by all the means within its power. It shall provide for their exclusion from residence or settlement in any portion of the State it may see fit. or from the State, and provide suitable methods, by their taxation or otherwise, for the expense of such exclusion. It shall prescribe suitable penalties for the punishment of persons convicted of introducing them within forbidden limits. It shall delegate all necessary power to the incorporated cities and towns of this State for their removal without the

MR. AYERS. Mr. Chairman: I hope the amendment will not be adopted, because it raises a question upon which doctors might disagree. While Dr. O'Donnell might consider a certain disease incurable, Dr. Shurtleff might consider it curable. I think the amendment weakens rather than strengthens the section, and, unless the gentleman can produce some better reasons for it, I shall have to vote against it.

MR. MILLER. The object is simply this: there are a great many diseases that are contagious and infectious, which are mild in form, such as measles, mumps, and things of that kind. We do not want to put in a provision here to remove a man from the State simply because he may have the misfortune to have the measles or the mumps. That is why I have suggested the word incurable.

MR. JOYCE. It seems to me that the section is in the interest of protecting the Chinese. What benefits there is going to be got out of section one I can't see. If we are going to get rid of a few sick Chinamen and keep all the healthy ones, I don't see the good. I want to get rid of them all, and not merely the sick ones.

THE CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment.
Lost.

MR. O'DONNELL. I have an amendment to the section.
THE SECRETARY read:

"The right is hereby reserved to the State to protect its citizens from pestilence and plague, and as a police regulation to prohibit the entering of dangerous and criminal classes."

SPEECH OF MR. O'DONNELL.

and the report is right there in black and white. It
describes these cases. Now, according to the best medical w
world, if we allow them to remain here five years three
San Francisco will be affected with this pestilence. That
I produce that extract which you refuse to hear read. But,
of a few years, you will be sorry for it. If you don't take e
this evil now, I say you, the delegates of this Convention, a
ble for the dire results which are certain to follow, and y
be held responsible.

There are now in the pesthouse, in San Francisco, some cases. One of these cases was standing on the corner of 1 Washington streets for two years. Now, think of that. F one of these lepers was standing on the corner of Wash Dupont streets, coming every hour in contact with your wiv dren who are forced to pass through that part of the city. ing to the very best authorities in the world, they tell yo infectious. I want you to understand it is both infectious gious. The press, owned by the Chinese companies, will te it is not. A majority of the people of this State don't know ence between infectious and contagious.

MR. BEERSTECHER. What is the difference? MR. O'DONNELL. I don't suppose there is any of ther ignorant than you are. [Laughter.] Read what the hot distinguished Judge who died of leprosy on the island has it, and how he contracted this loathsome disease by coming with a leper. You all know the history of the islands. T traveling through the islands, and accidentally sat on a seat a leper had just got up, and he was removed to another is] in about seven years he discovered that he had the disease. island set apart for lepers, and who enters there never goes: He had got the disease from sitting in the chair which the occupied. He says leprosy is spread by coming in contact or being where lepers have been. There have been five hur sent here for the purpose of sowing that disease broadcast a fair land. That is a fact. We have found it in San Franci have found it in every town in the State of California. Ev Sacramento, there are over fifty cases of leprosy. I can, wit this hall, produce over twenty cases of leprosy, that horribl disease. No human power can relieve the leper from that s a lingering, living death; there is no cure for the leper. understand that most of the press of the State of California i the Six Chinese Companies. They tell me that it is not They tell you the disease is not contagious. But do they s infectious? I say it is infectious! Remember, that whereve has gone, he has spread that disease. Look at the history o wich Islands. They were the purest blooded people on the Almighty's world, those Kanakas, until these Mongolians e them. What is the case now? Why, the island, to-day, is imated from leprosy brought over there by the coolies. countries where they have gone; the same condition exists t tell you that we have got to put our feet right down, and pu the Constitution declaring that they shall not land here, or of the State of California will rise and stop their coming to t [Applause.] This section must be put in the Constitutio that the coolies must not land on these shores in no instance Now, I say my object is to get rid of them, and this sectio We have the power to prevent their coming. We have t prevent them from spreading this loathsome disease broade land, and I mean to do it if I can. When we know that power to put these things in the Constitution, why do you it, when you know the people of the State of California de your hands? My friend froin Los Angeles says we have the I know we have. Let us express it in the Constitution. want it, and they will ratify our work here if we do it.

MR. REYNOLDS. It seems to me that this is a good plac of order; the gentleman is not speaking to the question. ment which he proposes is out of order, for it assumes that t

MR. O'DONNELL. I would like to have the Secretary read some absolute power over the whole subject, which we all know is
extracts from the press which I send up.
Objected to.

THE CHAIRMAN. Objection is made and they cannot be read.
MR. O'DONNELL. Then I claim my right, and will read them
myself, if the Secretary is not allowed to read them.
Objected to.

THE CHAIRMAN. Objection is made, and the gentleman cannot read them without the consent of the committee.

MR. O'DONNELL. Then I will speak of leprosy, and talk the extracts to you [laughter] I suppose. Mr. Chairman, that very few of the members on this floor understand what leprosy is. In the first place I want them to understand that Jesus Christ had delegated to his disciples the power to raise the dead, cast out devils, and heal every class of diseases, but he never delegated to any of his disciples the power to heal a leper. It is one of the most fearful diseases known to the world. I will show you a likeness of it. [Exhibiting a portrait, lifesize, of a leper.] That is a likeness of one of these lepers now in the pesthouse in San Francisco.

MR. BLACKMER. Does the gentleman offer that as an amendment to the section? [Laughter.]

MR. ROLFE. I think I see a striking resemblance between that and the gentleman. [Laughter.]

MR. O'DONNELL. If the gentlemen don't stop interrupting me I won't get through before to-morrow night. [Laughter ] We know thera

We can only provide for the exercise of such power as is res State, therefore the amendment is out of order. The Conver authority to reserve any rights or grant away any rights. THE CHAIRMAN. The point of order is not well taken. manom San Francisco will proceed.

MR. SCHELL. I rise to a point of order. MR. O'DONNELL. State your point of order. [Laught MR. SCHELL. I wish to read Rule Forty-one, for the go this body: "Every member when about to speak, shall rise fully address the President, shall confine himself to the que debate, and avoid personality, and shall sit down when fini last part is what I base my point of order on. The gentlen sit down when he has finished. [Laughter.]

THE CHAIRMAN. The point of order is not well taken. MR. O'DONNELL. I would like to inform the gentlema going to finish my remarks if it takes until to-morrow night. I am going to take my time, you can listen or not, as you p MR. VAN VOORHIES. I move we take a recess. [La THE CHAIRMAN. The motion is out of order. The ge proceed.

MR. O'DONNELL. I would like to read some of the test before the Senate Committee, in regard to the condition called Chinatown-this plague spot situated right in the

city 66 I have lived