From a writer long resident in Japan, and fully conversant with its language, its religion and its people, is quoted the following statement on this matter: "Mikadoism, or Emperor worship, is the sheet anchor of patriotic fervor in Japan-the soul of the body politic. The vast majority of the people have no other religion. It is not a relic of bygone days, but the very heart of present-day Japan."

The plea of Sidney Gulick and a number of his Christian friends that we make citizens of the Japanese and then trust to making good citizens of them by Christianizing them, advocates an experiment dangerous in the extreme, doubtful even as to a superficial change in religion, and certain to end in disaster.

The inherent incapacity of the Japanese for assimilation, their religious belief and ideals, bred in them for generations and taught to them the world over, which foreign birth and foreign residence do not modify, create a permanent and insurmountable barrier between them and that real American citizenship which would be of value, and not a grave menace, to this nation. They can not be transmuted into good American citizens. JAPAN OPPOSES EXPATRIATION OF HER CITIZENS

The second point made by me against the possibility of making American citizens out of Japanese is based upon my statement that Japan does not permit it. We come now to the curious and inconsistent policy of our Government as to dual citizenship, the full viciousness of which is most apparent in the case of the Japanese. We recognize as an American citizen and extend all rights and privileges as such. to any one born under the American flag, including, of course, the Japanese. Japan, on the other hand, rigidly in

sists that every Japanese, no matter where his parents were born, and no matter what nation may have conferred citizenship on him, with or without his request, is a Japanese citizen, and must perform all the obligations as such.

Every Japanese born here, even if his forbears for generations were born here, but had not been permitted to expatriate, is subject to orders from Japan; is kept track of through the Japanese Consulate and other organizations, and is subject to call for military duty. Authorities on international law agree that, since the United States confers its citizenship on the Japanese born here, unasked and with full knowledge of Japan's claims, we must, in the event of war, recognize those Japanese as the citizens of Japan.

We are thus conferring upon the Japanese born here all the rights and privileges of citizenship, without any of the obligations; and we are certainly breeding in our midst a class of American citizens whose hand, we know in advance, must be against us in possible case of war.

Japan not only claims as her citizens all Japanese born on American soil, but she also takes great care that they grow up really as Japanese citizens, with all the ideals and loyalty of the race, untouched by the notions prevalent in this country, which would weaken that loyalty.

The Japanese children born under the American flag are compelled to attend Japanese schools, usually after the public school hours, where they are taught the language, the ideals and the religion-of-Japan, with its basis of Mikado worship. Here they are taught by Japanese teachers, usually Buddhist priests, who frequently speak no English, and who almost invariably know nothing of American citizenship. The text-books used are the Mombusho

series, issued under the authority of the Department of Education at Tokio. These schools are located wherever there are Japanese communities, and teachers in the American public schools testify that the Japanese children frequently are studying their Japanese lessons in their public school hours.

In Hawaii, this system of Japanese schools and its effect in preventing any chance of inculcating the principles of American citizenship in the Japanese upon whom we confer such citizenship, caused such wide-spread comment that the Hawaiian Legislature in 1919 attempted to pass a law providing that teachers in foreign language schools must know sufficient English and enough American history and civics to ground the pupils in the principles of American citizenship. That bill was defeated on the demand and through the influence of the Japanese who said its effect would be to destroy their schools.

Now, the survey commission appointed by the Commissioner of Education of the United States, reports in Bulletin No. 16 of 1920, that these Hawaiian-Japanese schools, if not antiAmerican, are at least not pro-American, and recommends that all foreign language schools in the Hawaiian Islands should be abolished, except for foreign children who can never become American citizens.

NOT DISPOSED TO BECOME REAL
AMERICANS

It has been shown already why the Japanese can not make good citizens, because of their religion and heredity and non-assimilability; it has been shown also why they may not make good citizens, because the laws of Japan, efficiently and rigorously administered in the United States, as well as in Japan, do not permit them; it is equally true that they will not make

good citizens, and that the evidence of the acts of those who have resided under the American Flag for many years is conclusive on this point.

In Hawaii, where their numbers make them independent, and where they are now in a position to practically control the Territory, the Japanese form a separate, alien community, observing the laws, customs and the ideals of Japan; using the Japanese language, both in their business and in their schools, and bringing up their children to be not American but Japanese citizens, with all that loyalty to the Mikado which is a part of the Japanese religion.

The statement made as to Japanese policy in Hawaii is equally true of the Japanese in California, though, because of differences in conditions, the evidence has not forced itself as yet so strongly on public attention. The Japanese schools are found in every Japanese community in California where there are enough children to support them.

The Japanese, however, are not content to depend upon education of their American-born children in this country in order to make them loyal subjects of the Mikado. In the report of the Japanese Association of America, concerning its California census, as quoted by the State Board of Control, appears the statement that there are in Japan at this time about 5,000 California-born Japanese. That statement carries little significance to most people. It means, however, that there are at this time 5,000 of the Japanese born in California, that is to say, 20 per cent of California's Japanese minors, upon whom the United States. conferred citizenship, who are now back in Japan being thoroughly instructed in the religion and ideals of Japan; so that when they return here they may serve, not as American citi

M. Alexander of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce to discuss with leading Japanese the feasibility of a friendly understanding between the two countries.

The two civilizations can not mingle, and the leaders in Japan agree that it is not well

to attempt to amalgamate them. They can not and will not understand our civilization, and no matter in what part of the world he is, a Japanese always feels himself a subject of the Emperor, with the Imperial Government backing him, much as a feudal retainer had the support of his overlord in exchange for an undivided loyalty.

THE

HE Oriental immigration problem has always been distinctively a California problem. For seventy years the working people of California have striven for legislation prohibiting the further immigration of Oriental laborers. Certain internationalists and intellectuals of various shades have expressed doubts about the wisdom of adopting an exclusion policy. Men and women whose occupations have brought them into direct contact with the Chinese or Japanese have never had but one opinion as to the significance of their admission. Whether in the mining camps of the early fifties, in the factories and workshops of the later periods of industrial development, or as tillers of the soil, we find the same bitter complaints of the evils of such competition.

If Californians had been able to legislate on the subject, the question would have been settled long before the Chinese had arrived in sufficient numbers to constitute a serious problem. However, under our system of government Congress claims exclusive right to regulate immigration, hence it was necessary to convince the nation before the desired relief could be obtained. This was not an easy task. The small minority within the state whose interests were opposed to re

strictive legislation were greatly reinforced by the merchants of older states, who feared to jeopardize the rich trade of the Orient, and by idealists who were loth to recognize the world-old significance of race in the application of their theories of political and social equality. Only by the persistent and sustained effort of the working people of California first the state and then the nation have been converted to the policy of Chinese exclusion.

No sooner had the Chinese immigration problem been disposed of to the general satisfaction of Californians when the menace of unrestricted Japanese immigration came to the front with startling rapidity.

For two hundred and fifty years prior to the arrival of Commodore Perry, Japan had excluded all foreigners (barbarians) except a small number of Dutch traders who were, however, restricted to a small island. Commodore Perry anchored off Uraga on July 7, 1853. Five years later the first official treaty between the United States and Japan was signed to take effect on July 4, 1859.

Only thirty-three years later, in 1892, the American Federation of Labor Convention adopted resolutions demanding extension of the Chinese Exclusion Act so as to include Japanese. And

fifteen years after this demand was made, i.e., in 1907, a so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement" was arrived at through diplomatic negotiations whereby the Japanese Government agreed to keep laborers from America.

But the "Gentlemen's Agreement" has not been a solution of the problem. In California the demand for the exclusion of Japanese is more general and more pronounced today than ever before. Of course, the organized working people have been in the vanguard of this movement just as they led in the struggle for Chinese exclusion. Leadership in this respect does not mean hurling the most bricks. To the contrary, labor in California has severely frowned upon violent anti-Japanese manifestations. Although this is not generally known, it is a fact, nevertheless, that California tradeunionists have at all times made earnest efforts to eliminate the harsh, unpleasant features incident to such a campaign of propaganda.

There are many concrete examples to bear out this contention. But just one will suffice to illustrate the point. Two Japanese presented credentials as fraternal delegates to the annual convention of the California State Federation of Labor which met at Santa Rosa in 1915. The report of the Committee on Credentials made to said convention clearly sets forth California labor's attitude toward the workers in Japan and is quoted herewith:

There have been submitted to the Committee on Credentials two credentials for fraternal delegates from the Laborers' Friendly Society of Tokio, Japan, namely, B. Suzuki and S. Yoshimatsu.

Your Committee has given careful consideration to the question of seating these

men.

It has been said that the Laborers' Friendly Society is not a bona fide tradeunion. It has also been alleged that these two men are not representing the working people of Japan, but are rather agents of the

Japanese Government in a well planned campaign to weaken our immigration laws,

etc.

Your Committee, however, has not been furnished with any evidence to substantiate the allegations referred to. We therefore recommend that both be seated without vote.

We have arrived at this conclusion (1) because the seating of these delegates in no way affects our attitude or modifies our demand for the exclusion of all Asiatic laborers from our shores; (2) because we believe it is in accordance with the spirit of International Unionism and to our own advantage to aid and encourage the working people in Japan to organize and better their conditions.

The Committee's report was adopted and the delegates seated. During the second day's session Delegate Suzuki read to the convention a carefully prepared paper. His address was made a part of the printed proceedings.

The same convention which extended every courtesy to the Japanese delegates did not fail, however, to reiterate the old demand for an extension of the Chinese Exclusion Act so as to bar all Asiatics. United States Senator Phelan took occasion shortly after the adjournment of said convention to write to the California State Federation of Labor intimating "that the Federation had been trapped into a false position."

This was denied in a circular letter sent out by the Executive Council of the Federation, reading in part as follows:

No, Senator, we have not modified our views upon the Japanese menace. We fully realize the danger of the so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement" and we are anxious to have enacted an exclusion law which will effectively and permanently bar these little brown men from our shores.

Our objection to the Japanese in California is not, as you so well know, based upon trivial or sentimental reasons. We object to them for economic reasons, we