People's Pilot, Volume 3, Number 18, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 20 October 1893 — THE CHINESE BILL. [ARTICLE]

THE CHINESE BILL.

Synopsis of the Debate In the National House of Representatives. On thellth Mr. McCreary (dem., Ky.), author of the proposed amendment to the Geary Chinese exclusion bill, explained that the pending measure provided that the act of May 5,1802, be so amended as to extend the lime six months in which Chinese persons may register and obtain certificates of residence, and also amended said act so as to require “one credible witness other than Chinese” that an applicant tor a certificate was a resident of the United States on the sth of May, 1892, instead of “one credible white witness." The bill also amended the act by providing that the word “laborer” or “laborers" shall be construed to mean both skilled and unskilled manual laborers, including Chinese employed in mining, fishing, huckstering, peddling, laundrvmen or those engaged in taking, drying or otherwise preserving shell or other fish for home consumption or exportation. It seemed just and fair that the Chinese should have additional time in which to register and obtain certificates of residence. If all the Chinese persons who were not now registered should be transported to China the cost to the government would be about 57,000.000. Mr. Geary (dem, CoL), in opposing the bill, said if he believea that through the operation of this bill if enacted into law the Chinese would comply with the law he would vote for the measure. But he did not so believe. He wanted to act in accordance with civilization, Christianity and morality. He wanted to exclude Chinese from coming here, but no additional burdens should be imposed upon those already here. He denied that the bill which bore his name was any violation of treaty stipulations Within .the last thirty years 1)500,000,000 had been taken from the Pacific coast to foreign lands. Gentlemen from tho east expressed their wonder that the people of California did not like the Chinese. How would they like a foreign colony located in their region? He then went on to denounce the competion of the cheap Chinese labor with free American labor. He ridiculed the statement that it would take 17,000,000 to deport the unregistered Chinese. It would not, he declared, involve an expenditure of >1,000,000, and he criticised the action of the administration in not enforcing the laws. He was a democrat and loved the democratic party, but if that party permitted the men of its selection to violate the laws it had no right to ask for a continuance of public confidence.

On the 12th Mr. Hitt (rep., Ill.), spoke In favor of the bill. He denounced the Geary law. It was a violation of the public faith, but it was a law, and it was the duty of congress to make it as light upon the victims as possible. If carried out it would be strange II it did not cause a rupture with China. Mt. Hitt admitted that Chinese coolie labor was a great evil, but the way to stop it was by international agreement Mr. Loud (rep., Cal.) described the evils of the Chinese invasion of the Pacific coast He criticised the administration for not enforcing the law. He claimed that the executive power was trying to overawe the legislative power. Mr. Hooker (dem., Miss) spoke in favor of the bill

Mr. Bartlett (dem., N. Y.) opposed the bill He said there would follow the enactment of this law as many cases to test the McCreary amendment as there were cases to contest the constitutionality of the Geary law. The underlying object of this legislation was to allow the Six Companies to try the case again and have a majority of the supreme court turned into a minority. He closed with a criticism of the Six Companies for preventing Chinamen from registering.

On the 13th Mr. Rayner (dem., Md.) said the passage of the pending McCreary bill was an • act of self evident justice, one that should com- ' mend itself to every member of the bouse. “If I we are going to exercise natural justice in this ‘ country,” he said, “if we are going to maintain human rights we must pass this bill ” In reply to questions by Mr. Ray (rep.N. Y.) he said the administration had rightfully done nothing to enforce the present law, because of want of the necessary funds, and be cause, after the law had been pronounced constitutional by the supreme court, there was a likelihood of its being amended by the present congress In reply to a further interruption criticising the president for failure to enforce the existing taw Mr. Rayner said: “The president has done his duty in accordance With the dictates of his own conscience. He is no weak, uncertain thing, yield-

ing to every wind of public opinion. He does not believe in bartering away any of the principles upon which he was swept into office by an overwhelming verdict" Mr. Sickles (dem., N Y.) made a brief speech in favor of the pending biil. Mr. Bowers (rsp. Cal) warned the democrats and republican*, that if this McCreary bill was passed there would not be enough of either party left in California to make a grease spot that could be seen with the naked eye. Asked to explain what would become of them he said the populists would receive an astonishing increase in the state. Messrs. Draper and Morse (reps.. Mass.) favored the pending bill Mr. Maguire (dem , Cal) opposed the bill He defended the Geary law as a reasonable, easy and convenient requirement wholly within the bounds of the constitution.