Democratic Sentinel, Volume 10, Number 6, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 12 March 1886 — THE CHINESE QUESTION. [ARTICLE]

THE CHINESE QUESTION.

President Cleveland Sends a Message to Congress on the Recent Outrages. He Says the Power of the Government Should Be Exerted to Punish Wrong-doers. The President sent to the Senate and House of Representatives, on the 2d inst., a message on the subject of the outrages committed in the West against the persons and property of Chinese residents, and with it a note from the Secretary of State to the Chinese Minister containing an exhaustive statement of the whole Chinese question. The President’s message is as follows: To the Senate and House of Representatives : It is made the constitutional duty of the President to reoommend to the consideration of Congress from time to time such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient. In no matters can the necessity of this be more evident than when the good faith of the United States under tho solemn obligation of treaties with foreign powers is concerned. The question of tho treatment of the subjects of China sojourning within tho jurisdiction of the United States presents such a matter for the urgent and earnest consideration of the Executive aud tho Congress. In my tirst annual message, upon tho assembling of the present Congress, I adverted to this question. (The President here quot s the passage from his message upon the Chinese question.] At the time I wrote this the shocking occurrences at Rock Springs, in Wyoming Territory, were fresh in the minds of all, and had been recently presented anew to the attention of this Government by tho Chinesu Minister in a note which, while not unnaturally exhibiting some misconception of our Federal system of administratlou in tho Territories whilj they, as yet, are not in tho exercise of the full measure of that sovereign self-government pertaining to tho States of the Union, presents in truthful terms the main features of the cruel outrage there perpetrated upon inoffensive subjects of China. In tho investigation of tho Rock Springs outbreak and tho ascertainment of the facts on which the Chinese Minister's statements rest, tho Chinese representatives were aided by the ugents of tho United Statoa, and tho reports submitted, having been thus framed and'recounted facts within the knowledge of witnesses on both sides, ]M>ssess an important truthfulness -which could not fail to give them groat impressiveness. The factß, which so far ore not controverted or affected by any exculpatory or mitigating testimony, show tho murder of a numbor of Chineso subjects in September last, at Bock Springs, tho wounding of many others, and tho spoliation of tho property of ‘ all when the unhappy survivors hod been driven from their habitations. Thqro is no allegation that the victims, by any lawless or disorderly act on their part, contributed to bring about a collision. On tho contrary.it appeal's that the law-abiding disposition of tlieso people, who wero sojourners in our midst tinder the sanction of hospitality and expross treaty obligations, was made the pretext for the attack upon them. This outrage upon law aiul treaty engagements was committed by a lawless mob. None of the aggressors, happily for the national good fame, appear by the reports to have been citizens of the United States. They wero aliens, engaged in that remote district as mining laborers, who became excited against the Chinese laborers, as it would seem, because of their refusal to • join them in a strike to secure higher wages. The oppression of Chinese subjects by tneir rivals in the competition for labor does not differ in vlolonoe and illegality from that applied to other classos of native or alien labor. All are equally under the protection of law, and equally entitled to enjoy the benefits of assured public order. Was there no treaty in existence referring to tho rights of Chinese subjects, did they come hither us all other strungors who voluntarily resort to this laud of freedom, of self-government, and of laws, here peaceably to win their bread and to live their lives, there can be no question that they would be entitled still to the same measure of protection from violence and tho same free forum for the redress of their grievances as any other aliens. 8o fur as the treaties between the United States and China stipulate for the treatment of the Chinese subjects actually in the United States as the citizens or subjects of tho “most favored nation” are treated, they create no new status for them—they simply recognize and conform a general and existing rule, applicable to all aliens alike; for none ore favored above others by domestic law, and none by foreign treaties, unless it be the Chinese themselves In some respects. For, by the third article of the treaty of Nov. 17, 1880, between the United States and China, it is provided that if Chinese laborers, or Chinese of any other class, now either permanently or temporarily residing In the territory of the United States, meet with ill-treatment at the hands of any other persons, the Government of the United States will exert all its power to devise measures for their protection and to secure to them the same rights, privileges, immunities, and exemptions as may be enjoyed by the citizens or subjects of the most-favored nation, and to wfaioh they are entitled by treaty. This article may be held to constitute a speoial privilege for Chinese subjects in the United States, as compared with other aliens, not that it creates any peculiar rights which others do not share, hut because, in case of ill-treatment of the Chinese in the United States, this Government is bound to “exert all its power to devise measures for their protection,” bv securing to them the rights to which equally with any and all other foreigners they are entitled. Whether it is now incumbent upon the Uhlted States to amend its general laws or devise new measures in this regard I do not consider in the present communication, but confine myself to the particular point raised by the outrage and mas-more at Bock Springs. The note of the Chinese Minister, and the documents which aocompany it, give as its belief an unexaggerated statement of the lamentable incident, and present impressively the regretable circumstance that the proceedings, in the name of justice for the ascertainment ot the crime and fixing the responsibility therefor were a ghastly mockery of justice. So long as the Chinese Minister, under his instructions, makes this the basis of an appeal to the principles and convictions of mankind no exception can be taken. But when he goes further, and, taking as his precedent the action of the Chinese Government in past instances where the lives of American citizens and their property in China have been endangered,argues a reciprocal obligation on the pert of the United States to indemnify the Chinese subjects who suffered at Bock Springs, It becomes necessary to meet his argument and to deny most emphatically tho conclusions ho seeks to draw as to the existence of such a liability and the right of the Chinese Government to insist upon it. I draw the attention of the Congress to the latter part of the note of the Secretary of State of Feb. 18,1886, In reply to the Chinese Minister's representations, and to invite especial consideration of the congent reasons by which he reaches the conclusion tbat, while the United States Government is under no obligation, whethor by tho express terms of Its treaties with China or the principles of international law, to indomnify these Chinese subjects for losses caused by such means and under the admitted circumstances, yet tbat In view of the palpable and discreditable failure of the authorities of Wyoming Territory to bring to justice, the guily parties or to assure to the sufferers an impartial forum in which to seek and obtain compensation for tho losses which those subjects have incurred by lack of police protection; and considering further the entire absence of provocation or contribution on the part of the victims, the Executive may be induced to bring the matter ’ to the benevolent consideration of Congress in order that that body, in its high discretion, may direct the bounty of the Government in aid of innocent and poaceful strangers whose maltreatment has brought disert dit upon the country, with the distinct understanding that such action is in no wise to be held as a precedent, is wholly gratuitous, and is resorted to in a spirit of pure generosity toward those who are otherwise helpless. 1. 'The correspondence exchanged Is herewith, submitted for the information of Congress. Grover Cleveland. Executive Mansion, Washington, Maroh 1,183 -