by a letter addressed to Mr. A. A. Low, a member of the Chamber, by Mr. C. P. Huntington, also a member, and by Mr. Low referred to the Chamber. As this letter is the basis of our inquiry and embodies the views of many of the people of the United States, it is proper that it should be given in full. It is as follows:
New York, November 24th, 1888.
A. A. Low, Esq.,
Burling Slip, New York City.
Dear Sir: I do not carry in my mind whether you have altogether retired from the China trade; but I know you still have a keen interest in the national prosperity and in the dignity and honor of this Government. I suppose you felt as most other people did, last summer, when Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, that it was an unworthy proceeding which nothing but the necessities of a partisan struggle could have brought about It may have been foreseen, and perhaps was pointed out at the time, that the Government of China had it in its power to inflict far more serious harm upon our country than we could upon China, even supposing that the coming of the Chinese was the injury to our laboring people which was charged. It seems that without uttering a word or lifting a finger the Chinese are enabled to retaliate effectively against our commerce; so that we have not only offered them a wanton affront, but also injured ourselves la a twofold way, by excluding a tractable and cheap labor which we very much need to build up our desolate places; and by the loss of a valuable trade which we might have kept to the exclusion of our rivals. A gentleman direct from Chinese and Japanese ports tells me that since the news of the passage of the Exclusion Act reached China American agents there have been unable to sell any of the coarser cotton textile fabrics, of which they had been taking large quantities. Their wants are supplied from other sources; England, I suppose. They offer no explanation for this change of policy, but simply say they are not baying. Just as soon as they can supply themselves with petroleum from Asiatic oil wells we may expect that trade to follow. Clocks and machinery can be supplied by the English and Germans who would be glad to relieve us of the trade. The tea, mattings, raw silks and other commodities which we need and can buy nowhere else, Americans will have to pay for in coin, or exchange on London, when we might have paid for them with our own products.
Is not this, a heavy price to pay for the luxury of the hoodlum vote of California. It is to be hoped that the expiring Congress will find time to undo this pernicious piece of spiteful legislation; or, if not, that the incoming administration will so interpret the law and instruct its ministers so as to restore the lost amity. Just how this is to be brought about, you know as much as I do.
It occurs to me that the New York Chamber of Commerce might properly speak on this subject, and I know of no one so well fitted as yourself to move in this matter. If you will undertake it, please do so; and if I can be of any assistance to you in the matter, I shall cheerfully render it. It seems to me this is a clear case where patriotic duty calls for prompt action.
Very respectfully yours,
C. P. HUNTINGTON
That the sentiments of this letter are not peculiar to its author, but are shared by many others in all parts of the United States, is manifest from the following expressions taken from prominent public journals.
The Commercial, of Louisville, says:
"The Chinese question is receiving a larger share of public attention as it becomes apparent that the ill effects of the Exclusion Act are manifold and certain, while it is exceedingly doubtful whether 'exclusion' can really be accomplished."