First State Law in 1824
While statesmen were theorizing and differing, conditions made the need of some actual regulations and restrictions felt as early as 1824, although the total immigration of that year was only 7,912, or less than that of a single day at present. The first law resulted from abuse of free admission. It was found that some foreign governments were shipping their paupers, diseased persons, and criminals to America as the easiest and most economical way to get rid of them. This it undoubtedly was for them; but the people of New York did not see where the ease and economy came in on their side of the ledger, and in self-defense, therefore, the state passed the first law, with intent to shut out undesirables.[21] This state legislation was the genesis of national enactment. The history of federal laws concerning aliens is covered compactly by Mr. Hall, and those interested in the details of this important phase of the subject are referred to his book.[22] A comprehensive table, by means of which all the significant legislation can be seen at a glance, will be found in Appendix B.
Government Control
In 1882 there came a tremendous wave of immigration, with effects upon the labor market that largely induced the passage in that year of the first general immigration law. The Federal Government now assumed entire control of the ports of entry, as it was manifestly essential to have a national policy and supervision. Since 1862, when the Chinese coolies were excluded, under popular pressure, Congress has passed eight Acts of more or less importance, culminating in the Act of 1903,[23] which is said by Mr. Whelpley, who has collected all the immigration laws of all countries, and is therefore competent to judge, to be "up to the present time the most far-reaching measure of its kind in force in any country; and the principles underlying it must serve as the foundation for all immigration restriction." Under this law we have practically unrestricted immigration, with the important exceptions that the Chinese laborers are not admitted, and that persons suffering from obvious contagious diseases, insane persons, known anarchists and criminals, and a certain small percentage likely to become public charges are debarred. The law does not fix a property, income, or educational qualification, does not insist upon a knowledge of a trade, nor impose a tax. In other words, we have at present a more or less effective police regulation of immigration, but we are not pursuing a policy of restriction or limitation.
Un-American Discrimination
As to the Chinese, we have made an exception, and one that fails to commend itself to many. Grant that there is much to be said in favor of the proper restriction of Chinese immigration, especially on the ground that the immigrants would come only to earn money and return home, not to become Americans; that there can be no race assimilation between Chinese and Americans; and that such bird-of-passage cheap male labor is a detriment to the best interests of the country. All the force in these arguments applies equally to a large proportion of the immigration from southeastern Europe which is admitted. The laws should be uniform. The right to shut out the Chinese coolies is not questioned; but if these be debarred, why not debar the illiterate and unskilled laboring class that comes from Ireland, Italy, and Austria-Hungary? The Chinese certainly can fill a place in our industries which the other races do not fill equally well. Their presence in the kitchen would tend to alleviate domestic conditions that are responsible in large measure for the breaking up of American home life. It is a ludicrous error to suppose that all the Chinese who come to America are laundrymen at home. Let Mrs. S. L. Baldwin, a returned missionary who labored in China for eighteen years and knows the people she pleads for, bear her witness:
A Missionary's Plea for the Chinese
"The Chinese are exactly the same class as the immigrants from other lands. The needy poor, with few exceptions, must ever be the immigrant class. Those who come to us across the Pacific are largely from the respectable farming class, who fall into laundry work, shoemaking, etc., because these branches of industry are chiefly open to them. I have no fear of the Chinese immigrants suffering in comparison with those who come across the Atlantic. It is not the Chinaman who is too lazy to work, and goes to the almshouse or jail. It is not he who reels through our streets, defies our Sabbath laws, deluges our country with beer, and opposes all work for temperance and the salvation of our sons from the liquor curse. It is not the man from across the Pacific who commits the fearful crimes, and who is longing to put his hand to our political wheel and rule the United States. There are no healthier immigrants coming to this country. It is with difficulty, and only under pressure of necessity they are induced to leave China, so that the bugbear of millions of coolies overrunning America is absurd."
Call for Fair Play
Workers in the Chinese missions and Sunday-schools in this country will assent to Mrs. Baldwin's words. And Americans will appreciate her sense of the ludicrous when an Irish washerwoman in San Francisco, indignant that a Chinese servant had been brought to America by the missionary, said to her, "We have a right here and they haven't." As for the Chinese, the time will come when the injustice of discriminating against a single nation will be recognized and the wrong be righted. There are no more stable converts to Christianity, no more generous givers and zealous missionaries, than the Chinese converts. Let us have American fair play, about which President Roosevelt says so much, in our treatment of them. Recent developments prove that the United States is unwilling to imperil the relations of friendship which have existed with China.