# data[].attributes.headline
Should the Chinese Be Excluded? | Part 1

# data[].attributes.subject
Should the Chinese Be Excluded? | Part 1

# data[].attributes.body
"Should the Chinese Be Excluded?," 1893. Digital History, accessed May 9, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4049

Colonel Ingersoll's stance is that the bill is violating the Chinese's rights. He implies that racism is the reason why the bill went into affect, citing that man feels "inferior" when confronted with "difference"¹. Further more, he argues that both China and the U.S. have agreed that their respective citizens should be able to freely travel to and from each others nations without violation of rights.² The Geary law bans the Chinese if they are not lawfully in the country. The law is cruel since it does not provide the immigrants with habeas corpus, and they have 1 year to obtain a certificate lest they be thrown into prison, facing deportation. Once more, he states that the Chinese are peaceful, friendly people who have never sought war against the U.S. so why be so hostile towards them?

------------------------------------------------------

1. "Should the Chinese Be Excluded?," 1893. Digital History, accessed May 9, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4049

2. Digital History, "Should the Chinese," 1.

3. Digital History, "Should the Chinese," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should the Chinese Be Excluded? Digital History ID 4049

# data[].attributes.headline
The Chinese Exclusion Treaty of 1880 and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882

# data[].attributes.subject
The Chinese Exclusion Treaty of 1880 and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882

# data[].attributes.body
"The Chinese Exclusion Treaty of 1880 and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882." 1880. Digital History, accessed May 4, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=1099.

The two documents contain various travel rules involving Chinese immigrants and their entry into the United States. The Chinese government is presented both as a figure to fear and commanding presense¹. Chinese people became the subject of fearmongering and would not be allowed to apply for citizenship. They would have to comply for stricter rules for documentation upon their travels, as seen in the second document which has rules like needing an official government issued certificate to enter "... without producing to the proper office of customs the certificate..."₂, and that Chinese laborers must have been in the country before 90 days have expired or they will be removed³.

-------------------------------------------------------

1. "The Chinese Exclusion Treaty of 1880 and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882," 1880. Digital History, accessed May 4, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=1099.

2. Digital History, "The Chinese Exclusion," 1.

3. Digital History, "The Chinese Exclusion," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Chinese Exclusion Treaty of 1880 and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 Digital History ID 1099

# data[].attributes.body
"The Exclusion of the Chinese." 1884. Digital History, accessed May 5, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4053

Dealing with Chinese laborers is the main focus here; themes of displacement of the white middle class are common as well as the diminishing of wealth via cheap employment. The Chinese laborers will work for quite cheap, so cheap that they will lower their demands just to obtain work, because of this, white laborers will be forced into either choosing a small wage or poverty, and they will undoubtedly choose the former¹. In order to preserve the white middle class, the Chinese Exclusion bill is a must, even despite the fact that America was built on welcoming refugees of all races and nations, but it is a necessity as it "... threatens the destruction of our democratic society and the dissolution of our republican institutions."₂.

------------------------------------------------------

1. "The Exclusion of the Chinese." 1884. Digital History, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4053

2. Digital History, "The Exclusion of the Chinese," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Printable Version

The Exclusion of the Chinese
Digital History ID 4053

Annotation: Article on Chinese exclusion in the North American Review.

From 1882 until 1943, most Chinese immigrants were barred from entering the United States. The Chinese Exclusion Act was the nation's first law to ban immigration by race or nationality. All Chinese people--except travelers, merchants, teachers, students, and those born in the United States--were barred from entering the country. Federal law prohibited Chinese residents, no matter how long they had legally worked in the United States, from becoming naturalized citizens.

Document: The Exclusion of the Chinese

The Chinese bill established as the policy of the United States for a period of ten years the exclusion of Chinese laborers from our territory. But that bill was only a provisional disposition of the question. The permanent policy of the United States is yet to be determined. The present bill was undoubtedly a concession to the clamorous demands of California. Its enactment was secured through party and sectional combination, with a view to party and personal advantage, rather than through conviction. The wisdom and justice of exclusion, and its consistency with the object and spirit of our institutions, are still open questions.

The policy of the Chinese bill seemed illiberal to Eastern statesmen. It appeared to be contradictory of the principles of the Revolution and antagonistic to the spirit and subversive of the ends of our institutions whereas, it is fully in conformity with them. The people of the Pacific coast perceive a national danger which has escaped the perception of the political philosophers of New England, and they now supplicate the assistance of the sentiment which antagonized slavery when it was sapping the manhood of the masses of America. They object to the influx of Chinese laborers because it is calculated to sweep from existence our great middle class, and to reduce the mass of our population to the condition of laborers destitute of property and excluded from the comforts, the refinements, and the means of intellectual and physical culture and of progress which our civilization affords, and because it threatens to overthrow our domestic institutions and the democratic condition of our society. The people of the Pacific coast do not intend a real departure from the policy of the founders of our Government. The fathers embraced the whole human race in their philanthropic sympathy. They adopted the policy that this country should he the "refuge of the oppressed" of all nations, because in its ordinary operation that policy conduces to the welfare of the race, and because at the time it seemed the most direct and unequivocal means of benefiting our people and the race. But the reason for the policy ceases when its operation threatens the destruction of our democratic society and the dissolution of our republican institutions. It does this when it threatens the existence of our domestic institution, and the continuance of the normal industrial and economical condition of our society.

This Chinese labor element is calculated to produce, and has actually set on foot, a destructive social change. It is a change similar to that wrought by slavery. Slavery undoubtedly produced immense wealth both in the North and the South, but it was effecting a fatal change in the structure of society. It was working a division of society into three strongly marked classes: First, a class of white aristocrats, composed of the white land-owners and of the men of the professions and of literature; second, a class of black slaves and, third, a class of miserable whites, who fell from the first class to sink to a level socially little above that of slavery. The aristocratic class was becoming narrower by the dropping out of bankrupt land-owners and by the consolidation of estates. The whites of modest property were becoming steadily impoverished by competition with their slave-owning neighbors. The white laborers were becoming more degraded, their condition more hopeless, and their numbers greater in proportion to the whole white population. They could get employment on such terms only as would make them as profitable to the planters as slaves. The tendency necessarily was toward a compensation which would enable them to maintain the same domestic establishments with the plantation hands, and enjoy the same scale of comforts. It was impossible for them, by labor and frugality, to accumulate wealth to become thus independent, and to furnish their children with refining surroundings and with an education. In such a social state, poverty and ignorance were the lot of the major portion of the white population, or would soon be.

In 1880, an analogous condition of things seemed imminent in the West, owing to the presence of a considerable Chinese laboring population. The Chinese laborers in California number seventy thousand or over. They easily adapt themselves to work requiring no great capacity, and they flock to any manual employment for which they are fitted, making the competition therein extreme. They are submissive laborers, but they are incompetent for positions where managing ability, good judgment, and energy are required. They come from the lowest stratum of Chinese society, and accept as the regular order of nature, poverty, submission to superiors, resignation to stint, and a mechanical pursuit of the vocations of their fathers. They are the only class of Chinese who are disposed, and who need, to come to America. The pressure of the dense population of China concentrating upon the class to which they belong, entailing stint and starvation, overcomes the conservatism of their race, the social disapproval of their society, their superstition, and their attachment to their country. Merchants who find enormous profits in supplying and guiding the labor of the immense body of laborers, and in ministering to their peculiar wants and passions, are the only representatives of the higher classes among them. They are almost exclusively employed in woolen mills, fish canneries, and sugar manufactories; they form a majority of the employees in sack and boot factories, and in fruit-canning establishments. With each year they acquire facility in some operation of industry peculiar to our society. That their serviceableness is due to imitativeness is evidenced by the wages in the woolen mills of California. In New England there are ten or more classes of operatives. Wages vary with each class, and range from $5.34 to $11.00 per week. In California, the Chinese operatives, constituting ninety percent of the workmen in such mills, receive a uniform compensation of $5.25 per week.

These male laborers bring no families with them. However long their stay, no individual of these thousands of laborers shows an inclination to acquire a wife and family. As general is the absence of any intention to acquire property, or of the faintest desire to become more than mere laborers upon this continent. The laborer intends to save a little fortune and then return to China; but the majority spend their earnings in opium and gambling, and die in America. These laborers congregate in Chinatown in the towns, and in the Chinese quarters on the plantations. Except in the cities, where they occupy sections abandoned by the whites, they house themselves in rough huts of five and six rooms. Such huts no respectable white family could occupy without a feeling of social degradation. They sleep in bunks or in lofts, from six to twenty in a house, and cook over a furnace or broken stove. The cellars beneath are either opium dens or the quarters of the only women in Chinatown, the prostitutes who minister to the apathetic passions of this laboring population. In the city of San Francisco, the Chinese population of twenty thousand, with the exception of a few washermen, is crowded into less than twelve blocks. In these habitations they live; from these they go out to work. As a consequence, the cost of lodging is reduced to the utmost minimum for the average Chinese laborer in California, not over half a dollar, certainly not over one dollar, a month. The dietetic habits of the Chinese are upon as low a plane. Mr. Seward, in an article in this REVIEW for June 1882, states that they eat as "good" food as the whites. This may be true in our country in case the word "good" is used in the sense of wholesome; but it is absolutely erroneous if it is meant that their food, either in abundance or variety, is equal to that of white families. The ordinary diet of the vast body of Chinese laborers consists of tea and rice, and a few varieties of vegetables. In California, they consume very generally brandy and pork as ordinary food. With this diet they live luxuriously compared with the style of living enjoyed by the corresponding class in China. The common foods of America, bread, butter, milk, sugar, and coffee, without which the table of the meanest American laborer would be stinted; the dried fruit, the various meats and delicacies which add so much to the well-being and content of our laboring classes, never appear upon the tables in the Chinese quarters. The absence of these ordinary foods is no deprivation which moves the Chinese laborers to discontent; it does not prompt them to exercise self-denying thrift, or to seek to better their condition. Their diet and their mode of life are their deliberate preference. Their dress is scantier than that of the humblest white workman. The Chinese laborer endures such discomforts from the weather as would be intolerable to a white man; but centuries of penury have bred it into his nature to bear such discomfort without thought and without rebellion. It is safe to say that the average cost of food and shelter to the Chinese laborer in California is not more than $5.00 per month, and that this sum enables him to live in a satisfactory manner. The result of this standard of living has been that throughout the State, in all employments in which no other qualities than those of strength, laboriousness, patience, docility, steadiness, and imitativeness are required, the Chinese have underbid white laborers, and have wholly or partially supplanted them. In those employments wages were uniformly lowered in 1880. It is true that wages are higher in most callings in California than in other States, but not much higher in proportion to the cost of living. Chinamen were readily obtained for $20.00 per month the year around, they to board themselves. It is rare that a white man is paid less than $20.00 a month, with board. Reasonable wages are $1.00 a day and board. As a consequence of the cheapness of the services of the Chinese, many of the river-bottom farms had, in 1880, and in many cases still have, their Chinese quarters of from two to half a dozen huts. In these dwelt a small community of Chinese, who did the ordinary work of the farm during all seasons of the year, and who bore the same relation to the industries of the farm which, before the Civil War, was borne by the inhabitants of the negro quarters to the industries of the plantations of the South.

The question arises, what is the significance of this substitution with regard to our industrial, social, and political future what did this substitution mean? Had it continued, would it merely have caused certain fields of labor to be occupied by Chinese and others by whites, without working any effect upon the condition of the white laborer and upon his home life, and upon the distribution of wealth, comfort, and intelligence in our society? Here is a mass of male laborers. The individual intends an indefinite stay in California, limited only by the intention of returning home when he has accumulated a certain amount of money. Those who return are replaced immediately by others from the same class and bent upon the same errand. One-half of them, however, succumb to the fascination of gambling and opium. The superstition of the Chinaman requires that he shall not make a permanent home in California. That alone would have restrained the laborer from binding himself to the soil of this continent by a family; and that alone would have operated as an effectual barrier for a century to come to the introduction of the institution of the family into this population of 70,000 laborers. From 1870 to 1880, these laborers were entering San Francisco at the rate of from 1,000 to 2,000 per month. The price of unskilled labor in the provinces of China is from $3.00 to $4.00 per month, or at the rate of from ten to thirteen cents per day. It is safe to say that in less than ten years Chinese laborers would have to come to America readily for the prospect of getting constant employment at even $10.00 per month, without board, double or triple the wages obtainable in their own laud. Especially would this have been the case when the cost of passage amounted only to the possible savings of a few months. Within that time China could and would have furnished us with from one to three hundred thousand male laborers annually.

It remains to be considered what would be the consequence of the influx of a population of laborers, content to remain mere laborers, unencumbered by families, satisfied with the mode of life described, and willing to work for wages lower than any known to our civilization, at least in England and America. Would it tend to elevate humanity, sustain our civilization, and strengthen the foundations of our institutions? In the solution of these questions is to be found the fundamental and decisive objection to the influx of this laboring class.

This influx would certainly tend to a great and rapid massing of wealth on the Pacific sea-board for a generation or century, at least. Transportation made extremely speedy and cheap, obstructive legislation avoided, demonstrations of popular dislike among the working people prevented, the influx would increase indefinitely to meet any possible industrial development. California would take front rank among manufacturing countries. Chinese laborers now form ninety percent, at least, of the laborers in the few woolen mills she possesses. That fact alone demonstrates the especial fitness and serviceableness of Chinese as the ordinary operatives in manufactories. Manufactures would multiply. Labor abundant, wages approximating near to $10.00 per month, and operatives submissive, never, given to strikes, with few personal aims and ambitions to distract them and to make them independent, the manufacturing establishments of California would underbid the world.

This would be the first and the conspicuous result of the unlimited influx of the Chinese. But, correlatively with this material development, social change would be in progress; a change roughly stated as consisting in the gradual differentiation of classes, attended by the exaltation of one part of society and the hopeless degradation of the other and the greater part. It would consist of the division of society into a class of wealthy owners of land and manufactories with the professional classes they would sustain, on the one hand; and on the other, side by side with the class of Chinese laborers, a class of wretched whites doomed to labor for a pittance sufficient to sustain them and their families in the style of their competitors only, or, in other words, in helpless and gaffing destitution. The process of this change, if allowed to continue, would necessarily be complex. It would appear, however, in two well-defined successive stages. The first stage would be fourfold in its processes. It would consist, first, in the substitution of this laboring class for our own white labor, in existing fields of industry, in whatever employments required only physical exertion and a low grade of skill; second, in the occupation by these laborers of new labor fields opened by the white business classes of California, to the exclusion of the Eastern and European immigrant; third, in dragging down the white laborers who remained in California and also remained manual laborers, to a level, in their standard of living, with the standard of living uniformly adopted by this class-and, fourth, in pushing up the multitude of whites who retained property to the position of a class elevated immeasurably above the class of laborers.

This first stage, with its fourfold processes, had fairly commenced in 1880. In California, the wages of Chinese workmen were less by from ten to forty percent than the wages of whites engaged in the same grade of labor. Where they proved serviceable they were employed, and when once employed they were uniformly retained. Were it a cigar manufactory into which they were introduced, they were never replaced by whites, because in case hard times made it possible to obtain whites at then existing Chinese rates, or on terms that warranted the change, Chinese laborers could always be got at lower rates.

Furthermore, as industries were developed, the new labor fields were being filled more and more generally by Chinese laborers. The white laborers supplanted in the fields of labor successively occupied by the Chinese, were either leaving the State, or were ascending to the ranks of small land and property holders, there to enjoy the advantage of the cheap labor in developing their lands and modest manufactures; or they found other occupations. These classes left their places to be filled, not by the immigrants of their own race, nor yet by their children, but by this Chinese population of male laborers. Of this fact the census of 1870 furnishes evidence. The following table gives the percentage of Chinese in the principal fields of manual labor in that year in California: *

Employees in Cotton and woolen mills.....52 5/10%
Fishermen.......................................27 8/10%

Miners.......................................... .25 %

Agricultural laborers...........................10 %

Nursery-men, gardeners, etc..................25 %

Domestic servants..............................28 %

Laborers..........................................20 7/10%

Laundrymen.....................................71 7/10%

Traders, dealers.................................7 5/10%

Hucksters.........................................17 1/10%

Railroad employees..............................22 8/10%

Employees in boot and shoe manufactories..15 6/10%

Employees in cigar and tobacco factories....89 6/10%

From 1870 to 1880, the number of Chinese in various callings increased, but of the extent the census of 1880 furnishes us no information. That census, as far as published, gives the numbers of those in the various callings born in Great Britain, Ireland, Germany, Scandinavia, and British America, but classes persons of all other nationalities together. As persons of other nationalities constitute nearly one-third of the persons of this class, the figures are of little service for this inquiry. However, the census shows that in the manufactories of boots and shoes, forty-seven and nine-tenths of the employees come under the last class. Those are known to be mainly Chinese. In the comparatively undeveloped stage of the industries of California in the year 1870, or not more than ten years after the establishment of extensive manufacturing and agricultural industries upon the Pacific coast, it could not be expected that many fields should be exclusively occupied by Chinese laborers. While the industries were still in process of development,

The figures of the census include in the case of manufactures all engaged in them, whether in the capacity of employers, overseers, clerical employees, or employees in the engine-room and yards, as well as the mere manual operatives. As Chinese are employed in the capacity of manual operatives only, it is clear, therefore, that they made in 1870 a far larger proportion of such operatives than appears on the face of the census. Hence my statements in parts of this article that Chinese form a majority of employees in certain employments is not inconsistent with the census of 1870. It is based on personal observation services were required which could be rendered by white laborers only; but the fact that already in cigar-making and in woolen manufactories the operatives (manual laborers) were almost exclusively Chinese, indicates the tendency in these industries of California at that time, while they were still in their inchoatic stage.

Meanwhile, those of the laboring population who could not emigrate in consequence of insufficient means, or who did not emigrate in consequence of inertia, and who remained common laborers, found themselves in competition with a class of laborers outnumbering them, and a class who could and who did inevitably underbid them. They found the average rate of wages diminishing steadily, and for California, compared to the cost of living, abnormally. The major part of the increase of the whites found new fields for their activity in developing new industries and new mining regions; or in employments where the new country demanded a more active, hardy, and energetic class of laborers than the Chinese. But into these new fie1d the Chinese constantly followed the whites. When these fields were conquered, competition by the Chinese commenced, and the whites were compelled to ascend to the higher ranks, to move away, or, as yet in the minority of cases, to sink to the level of the Chinese in the wages received and in the standard of domestic establishments maintained. Had the immigration of Chinese continued, as the expansion of industries became less rapid and the population more dense, the competition of the laboring classes for work would have forced wages down with reference, not to the cost of living to the white man with his family, but to the cost of living to the Chinaman unencumbered with a family. It is a law of political economy that wages will fall until the demand for labor equals the supply. In case the supply of labor in California should have increased beyond the needs of the existing industry, wages would have declined through competition. But the Chinese would have inevitably obtained employment. They would have diminished their demands until work was given them, and the superior cheapness of their services would have inevitably secured them whatever employment the industries of the State could have afforded. The white laborer, if he still clung to his family, would have been compelled to sink to brutal destitution and to the misery and degradation of ignominious and irredeemable poverty.

The first stage in the social metamorphosis would have been accomplished. An impassable barrier would have been introduced between the manual laborers among the whites and that portion of the white population still in possession of property. On the one side would be the various grades of the property-owning whites, from the man with his modest homestead to the manufacturer with his millions; on the other, the white laborers reduced to the lowest stage of destitution. Side by side with the white laborers would be the swarming multitude of Chinese, keeping wages down to the level they had reached.

Now, however, the second stage in the process would set in. This stage would be characterized, by the relegation of property-holding whites gradually, but inexorably, to the class of propertyless laborers, a corresponding narrowing of the property-holding and affluent classes, and the correlative augmentation of the magnitude of the fortunes of those individuals and families who retained their foothold in those higher classes. The vicissitudes of fortune would steadily lessen the numbers of the property-holding classes. Those who lost their wealth through misfortune, mismanagement, or extravagance, would sink to the class of laborers. If they managed to maintain a precarious foothold upon the higher social level by force of the old connections, sympathies, and habits, their children would inevitably fall to the lower level, there to remain in hopeless and miserable poverty. Coincident with this cause, another would be in operation to the same end. As generation after generation passed, the smaller property-owners would succumb to the competition of those who wielded larger wealth. Small capital cannot compete in any field of industry with large. With this precipitation of individuals and families to indigence, the fortunes of the narrowing class of the wealthy would increase in absolute magnitude. Possessing exclusively the land and the materials to which labor is applied in the creation of wealth, and enjoying unlimited efficient labor of the cheapest character, their wealth would steadily augment. Wages leaving no margin for accumulation, the avenues to property through industry and thrift that now steadily renew the fortunes of the multitudes of citizens who meet with reverses, would be closed. Thus the class of property-holders could not receive recruits from the propertyless laboring classes. Even were small sums accumulated by almost incredible self-denial, there would be little, if any, opportunity for investment. As for real estate, the first field of investment, land would be owned in large tracts by wealthy classes, who, enjoying the fruits of an extremely cheap labor, would feel no such pressure as would cause them to sell their lands, least of all in small parcels, and to plebeian purchasers. Industries, the second field of investment, would be conducted on such a gigantic scale, that the little capitalist could not successfully enter the field of competition. The third field of investment, consisting of the various little trades and callings to which small capital alone is applicable, trades and callings that are requisite to supply the manifold wants of a prosperous laboring and middle class, would be unavailable in consequence of the destruction of the middle classes and the impoverishment of the laboring classes. The middle classes would not exist, while the masses would supply their simplest physical wants only. They would not have the means or the incomes to pay for those satisfactions and to indulge those desires to which the multitude of these little business enterprises peculiar to our industrial society minister. The fall from the property-holding to the propertyless class would be terribly precipitate. Mistakes or misfortunes would be irreparable. The millions of our citizens of little property, citizens possessing homesteads or little fortunes, men who had commenced with their hands alone for capital, would cease to exist as such. They would either pass up by increased prosperity to the higher classes, or sink down, through mistakes, misfortune, or competition, to the propertyless and hence the laboring classes. But of this latter class none would rise to replenish the middle class. Thus, the present great middle class would disappear. Society would consist of a single unbroken rank of aristocratic wealth with the professions, and a common unbroken level of laborers, toilers, and bondsmen in reality. The former class would become smaller in proportion to the whole population, but yet it would become richer and more powerful in its hold upon the regular means of political influence. The latter class would form a majority, and a constantly increasing majority.

This social change, which can now be foreseen as possible upon the Pacific coast, is the natural result of the operation of certain social and economical causes. Were such change to result from the unrestricted immigration of these male laborers to our coast, is it not true that our race would have been dragged down, while the Chinese would not have been elevated? The happy condition of our middle class would have been destroyed. The multitude of small property-holders, who are conservative in consequence of their property, and who preponderate in our society, would have been deprived of their possessions. The mass of our population would have been depressed to destitution. Hard and incessant labor, securing but a bare subsistence, would be their ignominious lot. Even were the only result the reduction of our population of mere manual laborers, consisting of the operatives in the various manufactories and the hands in the harvest fields, to such a level of wages and to such a grade of living, the result would be calamitous. These manual laborers, as society grows denser, must form an immense class in our society. They must in time number one-quarter or more of our population. If the males are to receive for their labor wages approximating to those acceptable to Chinese males, namely, $10.00 or $15.00 a month without board, the condition of the laboring classes of America must become, at least, one of comparative degradation.

It might be that the obverse side of our civilization would be exceedingly brilliant. The class of enormous affluence, possessing ample leisure and enjoying an unstinted use of the multitudinous instruments and sources of culture with which our civilization is equipped, might develop a most exquisite and powerful literature and art. When Roman literature began to produce its masterpieces, its master-workmen were exclusively from among the aristocracy. Their means furnished the leisure and opportunities for the pursuit of literature. The wealth of the republic had long centered in the aristocratic land-holders mainly by force of competition of cheap labor in the form of slave labor. Its artistic and literary career was brilliant, and the fond memories of mankind center around that brilliant passage in human history. Yet on the reverse side of the civilization of the Roman Republic and Empire, the degradation and failure of humanity was found more disheartening by reason of the contrast. In the Augustan age, one-half of the population of the Roman world, according to Gibbon, were slaves. Of the free population, the multitude forming the rabble of the imperial city and the peasantry of the provinces were propertyless. They were in a state of hopeless poverty and of irredeemable ignorance. They formed a majority of the freemen or non-slaves of the republic and afterward of the empire, but of their number we have no definite record. Latin civilization doomed them to poverty arid to degradation, and was itself doomed to inevitable decay. When the members of the aristocratic class became corrupt and enervated through indulgence, no new element took their places. Neither the slave population nor the degraded, propertyless rabble could furnish vigorous recruits.

It may be objected that the mischief produced by this abnormal immigration could not be coextensive with our national territory; that, at most, it must be confined to a single State or section. But, west of the Rocky Mountains, the process could be completed with ease and celerity. Let the change, with its gigantic industries and with all the enterprise and aggressiveness of such wealth, be established in that great territory, equal in area to Western Europe, and the course of social change would soon pass the natural barriers established by those ribs of our continent, the Rocky Mountains. In the South, Chinese laborers would be introduced gradually through the great southern transcontinental railroad lines. It is safe to say that Chinese laborers, who have proved so efficient in the climate of California, would, in the cotton fields pf the South, prove three times as efficient as the unstable and comparatively unindustrious negro. They would, without doubt, stand the climate with equal ease, and would prove swift and steady workers. They would be constant in their work, and submissive to their overseers and employers. The old negro quarters would be reproduced upon the plantations of the South in all their essential features. Quarters would again be established upon those plantations as the habitations of a class of laborers incapable of becoming property-owners in this case in consequence of their apathy, indifference, and want of energy. With abundance of such labor, what fortunes might not be made upon the cotton and sugar plantations of Mississippi and Alabama.

The same process of the abandonment of labor to a swarming class, which attended slavery in the South, would take place in the new South. Wealth would augment immensely, but it would remain in the hands o

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/ncps:@field(DOCID+@lit(ABQ7578-0139-24))::

Additional information: [The North American review. / Volume 139, Issue 334, Sept 1884]

Copyright 2021 Digital History

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Printable Version The Exclusion of the Chinese Digital History ID 4053 Annotation: Article on Chinese exclusion in the North American Review. From 1882 until 1943, most Chinese immigrants were barred from entering the United States. The Chinese Exclusion Act was the nation's first law to ban immigration by race or nationality.

# data[].attributes.body
"Chinese Exclusion Bill." 1892. Digital History, accessed May 5, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4047

In the document "The Chinese Exclusion Bill", the United States government argues against protestors that it is making fair judgement in its excluding of the Chinese. The barring of entry is based on "... discrimination against character...," not on race nor nations¹. Interestly enough, the mention of trade with other countries is mentioned, suggesting that there is monetary gain to this as well².

-------------------------------------------------------

1. "Chinese Exclusion Bill." 1892. Digital History, accessed May 5, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4047

2. Digital History, "Chinese Exclusion Bill" 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Printable Version

Chinese Exclusion Bill
Digital History ID 4047

Annotation: Article on Chinese Exclusion Bill in the American Missionary.

Document: The Chinese Exclusion Bill, 1892

Undoubtedly this nation must throw some limitations on immigration to its shores. We cannot safely make this land the dumping-ground for the pauper and criminal classes of the old continents. But, in making such limitations, we must be guided by fairness and justice to all concerned. We must discriminate against character and not against races or nations. And especially we must not violate treaty obligations, nor cripple trade with the great nations of the old world, nor raise up such a sense of indignation as will exclude missionaries from heathen lands. We fear that all these objections lie against the bill recently passed in the House of Representatives excluding Chinese from our shores.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/ncps:@field(DOCID+@lit(ABK5794-0046-89))::

Additional information: [The American missionary. / Volume 46, Issue 5, May 1892]

Copyright 2021 Digital History

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chinese Exclusion Bill Digital History ID 4047

# data[].attributes.body
"Chinese Exclusion," 1893. Digital History, accessed 7 May, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4048

The magazine American Missionary proclaims undesirables have entered the nation.¹ Their proposal adds that instead of being excluding them based on race is wrong, especially since it goes against the values of the treaty. They criticize that the bill "... has all these obnoxious feature."².

-------------------------------------------------------

1. "Chinese Exclusion," 1893. Digital History, accessed May 7, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4048

2. Digital History, "Chinese Exclusion," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Printable Version

Chinese Exclusion
Digital History ID 4048

Annotation: Article on Chinese exclusion in the American Missionary.

Document: Chinese Exclusion 1893

America's open door to people of all nations has become the passage-way for many undesirable additions to our population. Undoubtedly some restrictions must be placed on this influx. But it should be on the score of character and fitness, rather than of race; and especially it should not be made in violation of justice, humanity and the sanctity of treaty obligations. The Chinese Exclusion Bill has all these obnoxious features. Our readers will find on other pages of the magazine a very full and interesting sketch of the odious features of this legislation.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/ncps:@field(DOCID+@lit(ABK5794-0047-49))::

Additional information: [The American missionary. / Volume 47, Issue 3, Mar 1893]

Copyright 2021 Digital History

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chinese Exclusion Digital History ID 4048

# data[].attributes.headline
Should the Chinese Be Excluded? | Part 2

# data[].attributes.subject
Should the Chinese Be Excluded? | Part 2

# data[].attributes.body
"Should the Chinese Be Excluded?," 1893. Digital History, accessed May 9, 2025 https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4049

Hon. Thomas J. Geary's stance is anti-Chinese; he believes the Chinese unlawfully entered the nation, therefore must face the appropriate punishment as declared by the bill which is exclusion. The bill was created to curb the entry of Chinese laborers and those illegally within the country who could not present a real certificate, thus it actually protects the rights of legal Chinese residents¹. Registration is necessary since it proves who is a legitimate, and should anyone complain, think of American citizens who are also subjected to registrations; when it comes to voting, or even in some states who deman a physical description of the person. Should the Chinese be exempt for what is "... requiring him to do that which nearly all States demand of the American citizen?"². Geary argues once more how considerate the government is being in it's treatment with the Chinese since, when compared to previous bills or laws, there was no kindness exhibited towards the Chinese should they be arrested. For example, should identification made easy, a written testimony present if in the presense of law enforcement, etc. Specifically, he states "This language is not found in any other treaty... and illustrates the superiority diplomacy in negotiating treaties."³, with the last part in reference to how the Chinese secured themselves a great outcome in regard to their outcome in the bill.

--------------------------------------------------------

1. "Should the Chinese Be Excluded?," 1893. Digital History, accessed May 9, 2025 https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4049

2. Digital History, "Should the Chinese," 1.

3. Digital History, "Should the Chinese," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should the Chinese Be Excluded? Digital History ID 4049

# data[].attributes.headline
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws | Part 1

# data[].attributes.subject
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws | Part 1

# data[].attributes.body
"The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws." 1898 Digital History, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4055

The United States is no stranger to the Chinese for back in 1786 the nation traveled to China, bringing back Chinese voyagers on its ships¹. The massive influx of immigrants, at the times, was due to the massive findings of gold in California. This gold rush sent a mad frenzy around the world, and while there were certainly other races immigrating to the U.S., it was Asians which struck fear in the hearts of America. The Chinese were the main hate target since the US and China signed the Burlingame treaty to negotiate peace, with one of the sections made mention to support travel for each's citizens where they in the other's nation.

Originally, the Chinese immigrants were viewed favorably by the general public, with even then Governor John McDougall referring to the group as "... most desirable of our adopted citizens."². Essentially, they were important to the economy, but this sentiment of excitement for the Chinese would change as the years came. By 1854, 40,000 Chinese immigrants were in America³. To cope with the onslaught, a head tax was placed on those that mined. It failed to stop the migration since many more Chinese would come over.

-----------------------------------------------------------

1. "The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws." 1898. Digital History, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4055

2. Digital History, "The Farce," 1.

3. Digital History, "The Farce," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws Digital History ID 4055

# data[].attributes.headline
James D. Phelan, “Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded” (1901) | American YAWP

# data[].attributes.subject
James D. Phelan, “Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded” (1901) | American YAWP

# data[].attributes.body
James D. Phelan, “Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded” (1901). American Yawp Reader. https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/19-american-empire/james-d-phelan-why-the-chinese-should-be-excluded-1901/

James D. Phelan argues for the exclusion of the Chinese citing multiples reasons as to why it's a good idea, such as disruption of the peace via jobless men, the pacific coast vote, and the Chinese being destructive because they go against the natural order of society. Phelan opens with that the Chinese have not changed their ways, evident in the way that poor "unemployeed men, hungry from want of work, marched the streets of the cities, inaugurated political parties, disturbed the peace of communities by riotous outbreaks which threatened at times the foundations of law and order."1 The Chinese are at fault for causing the men to turn to riots, effectively harming the peace.

Phelan as well states that in response to the accusations of unfairness against the Chinese, that the Legislature held a vote with outcomes showing favorability for exclusion; 883 for Chinese immigration , and 154,638 votes against it.2

Oncemore to reenforce the negativity that a Chinese population would have, he ends the article by stating that the Chinese disturb society because of the way they only crave to work; they have no interest to settle down, to eat, to take holiday time off, etc., and that "but they breed the germs of a national disease, which spreads as they spread, and grows as they grow."³

-----------------------------------------------------

1. James D. Phelan, “Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded” (1901). American Yawp Reader. https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/19-american-empire/james-d-phelan-why-the-chinese-should-be-excluded-1901/ 1.

2. Phelan, "Why the Chinese," 1.

3. Phelan, "Why the Chinese," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
James D. Phelan, "Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded" (1901)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
James D. Phelan, the mayor of San Francisco, penned the following article to drum up support for the extension of laws prohibiting Chinese immigration. [The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1882, and again in 1892.] The Exclusion Acts then passed were limited to ten years' duration.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chinese Immigrants Confront Anti-Chinese Prejudice (1885, 1903) | American YAWP

# data[].attributes.subject
Chinese Immigrants Confront Anti-Chinese Prejudice (1885, 1903) | American YAWP

# data[].attributes.body
Chinese Immigrants Confront Anti-Chinese Prejudice (1885, 1903). American Yawp Reader. https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/19-american-empire/chinese-immigrants-confront-anti-chinese-prejudice-1885-1903/

Mary Tape was a Chinese immigrant and mother. In the Court case Tape v. Hurley (1885), the court sided with Mary Tape and her daughter Mamie Tape, but despite this the San Francisco Board of Education built a segregated Chinese school, forcing Mamie to attend.¹ In this letter, Tape argues for her daughters right to attend public school.

Tape questions why must her daughter be kept out of public schools, and what is the difference between Mamie and the other children.² She ponders if it must be because Mamie is Chinese, then remarks that there is no reason that being Chinese should exclude her daughter. Again, she reiterates that Mamie is just like the white, Caucasian children since she does not dress Chinese, that she stands out among them even.³ Tape wonders why they hold a grudge "against this Eight-year-old Mamie Tape." She ends her letter by saying that Mamie is more American than any of them, and nothing will stop her education.⁴

--------------------------------------------------------

1. Chinese Immigrants Confront Anti-Chinese Prejudice (1885, 1903). American Yawp Reader. https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/19-american-empire/chinese-immigrants-confront-anti-chinese-prejudice-1885-1903/

2. American Yawp Reader, "Chinese Immigrants," 1.

3. American Yawp Reader, "Chinese Immigrants," 1.

4. American Yawp Reader, "Chinese Immigrants," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Mary Tape, a Chinese immigrant mother, fought for her daughter, Mamie Tape, to integrate public schools in California. The case, Tape v. Hurley (1885), reached the California Supreme Court in 1885 and, despite a favorable ruling for Tape, the San Francisco Board of Education built a segregated Chinese school which Mamie Tape was forced to attend. In the following letter, Mary Tape protested the denial of her daughter's entry to Spring Valley School
To the Board of Education-Dear Sirs:

I see that you are going to make all sorts of excuses to keep my child out of the Public schools. Dear sirs, Will you please to tell me! Is it a disgrace to be Born a Chinese? Didn't God make us all!!! What right have you to bar my children out of the school because she is a chinese Decend. They is no other worldly reason that you could keep her out, except that. I suppose, you all goes to churches on Sundays! Do you call that a Christian act to compell my little children to go so far to a school that is made in purpose for them. My children don't dress like the other Chinese. They look just as phunny amongst them as the Chinese dress in Chinese look amongst you Caucasians. Besides, if I had any wish to send them to a chinese school I could have sent them two years ago without going to all this trouble. You have expended a lot of the Public money foolishly, all because of a one poor little Child. Her playmates is all Caucasians ever since she could toddle around. If she is good enough to play with them! Then is she not good enough to be in the same room and studie with them? You had better come and see for yourselves. See if the Tape's is not same as other Caucasians, except in features. It seems no matter how a Chinese may live and dress so long as you know they Chinese. Then they are hated as one. There is not any right or justice for them.

You have seen my husband and child. You told him it wasn't Mamie Tape you object to. If it were not Mamie Tape you object to, then why didn't you let her attend the school nearest her home! Instead of first making one pretense Then another pretense of some kind to keep her out? It seems to me Mr. Moulder has a grudge against this Eight-year-old Mamie Tape. I know they is no other child I mean Chinese child! care to go to your public Chinese school. May you Mr. Moulder, never be persecuted like the way you have persecuted little Mamie Tape. Mamie Tape will never attend any of the Chinese schools of your making! Never!!! I will let the world see sir What justice there is When it is govern by the Race prejudice men! Just because she is of the Chinese decend, not because she don't dress like you because she does. Just because she is decended of Chinese parents I guess she is more of a American then a good many of you that is going to prevent her being Educated.

Mrs. M. Tape.

Source: "Chinese Mother's Letter," Daily Alta California, April 16, 1885, 1. Available online via California Digital Newspaper Collection (https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DAC18850416.2.3).

Lee Chew, "The Biography of a Chinaman" (1903) Lee Chew immigrated from China at the age of 16. He worked as a domestic servant for an American family in San Francisco, started a laundry business, and later ran an importing business in New York City. In the following passage, he attacked anti-Chinese prejudice in the United States.
I heard about the American foreign devils, that they were false, having made a treaty by which it was agreed that they could freely come to China, and the Chinese as freely go to their country. After this treaty was made China opened its doors to them and then they broke the treaty that they had asked for by shutting the Chinese out of their country.

...When I first opened a laundry it was in company with a partner, who had been in the business for some years. ... We had to put up with many insults and some frauds, as men would come in and claim parcels that did not belong to them, saying they had lost their tickets, and would fight if they did not get what they asked for. Sometimes we were taken before Magistrates and fined for losing shirts that we had never seen. On the other hand, we were making money, and even after sending home $3 a week I was able to save about $15. When the railroad construction gang moved on we went with them. The men were rough and prejudiced against us, but not more so than in the big Eastern cities. It is only lately in New York that the Chinese have been able to discontinue putting wire screens in front of their windows, and at the present time the street boys are still breaking the windows of Chinese laundries all over the city, while the police seem to think it a joke.

...During his holidays the Chinaman gets a good deal of fun out of life. There's a good deal of gambling and some opium smoking, but not so much as Americans imagine. Only a few of New York's Chinamen smoke opium. The habit is very general among rich men and officials in China, but not so much among poor men. I don't think it does as much harm as the liquor that the Americans drink. There's nothing so bad as a drunken man. Opium doesn't make people crazy.

... Some fault is found with us for sticking to our old customs here, especially in the matter of clothes, but the reason is that we find American clothes much inferior, so far as comfort and warmth go. The Chinaman's coat for the winter is very durable, very light and very warm. It is easy and not in the way. If he wants to work he slips out of it in a moment and can put it on again as quickly. Our shoes and hats also are better, we think, for our purposes, than the American clothes. Most of us have tried the American clothes, and they make us feel as if we were in the stocks.

. . . Americans are not all bad, nor are they wicked wizards. Still, they have their faults, and their treatment of us is outrageous.

The reason why so many Chinese go into the laundry business in this country is because it requires little capital and is one of the few opportunities that are open. Men of other nationalities who are jealous of the Chinese, because he is a more faithful worker than one of their people, have raised such a great outcry about Chinese cheap labor that they have shut him out of working on farms or in factories or building railroads or making streets or digging sewers. He cannot practice any trade, and his opportunities to do business are limited to his own countrymen. So he opens a laundry when he quits domestic service.

The treatment of the Chinese in this country is all wrong and mean. It is persisted in merely because China is not a fighting nation. The Americans would not dare to treat Germans, English, Italians or even Japanese as they treat the Chinese, because if they did there would be a war.

There is no reason for the prejudice against the Chinese. The cheap labor cry was always a falsehood. Their labor was never cheap, and is not cheap now. It has always commanded the highest market price. But the trouble is that the Chinese are such excellent and faithful workers that bosses will have no others when they can get them.

...It was the jealousy of laboring men of other nationalities - especially the Irish-that raised all the outcry against the Chinese. No one would hire an Irishman, German, Englishman or Italian when he could get a Chinese, because our countrymen are so much more honest, industrious, steady, sober and painstaking. Chinese were persecuted, not for their vices, but for their virtues. There never was any honesty in the pretended fear of leprosy or in the cheap labor scare, and the persecution continues still, because Americans make a mere practice of loving justice. They are all for money making, and they want to be on the strongest side always. They treat you as a friend while you are prosperous, but if you have a misfortune they don't know you. There is nothing substantial in their friendship.

...More than half the Chinese in this country would become citizens if allowed to do so, and would be patriotic Americans. But how can they make this country their home as matters now are! They are not allowed to bring wives here from China, and if they marry American women there is a great outcry.

All Congressmen acknowledge the injustice of the treatment of my people, yet they continue it. They have no backbone.

Under the circumstances, how can I call this my home, and how can any one blame me if I take my money and go back to my village in China?

Source: Lee Chew, "The Biography of a Chinaman," The Independent, 15 (19 February 1903), 417-423

Link to original source: https://books.google.com/books?id=GMVZAAAAYAASource: Lee Chew, "The Biography of a Chinaman," The Independent, 15 (19 February 1903), 417-423. Available online via Google Books ( https://books.google.com/books?id=GMVZAAAAYAAJ).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Chinese Immigrants Confront Anti-Chinese Prejudice (1885, 1903)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Mary Tape, a Chinese immigrant mother, fought for her daughter, Mamie Tape, to integrate public schools in California. The case, Tape v. Hurley (1885), reached the California Supreme Court in 1885 and, despite a favorable ruling for Tape, the San Francisco Board of Education built a segregated Chinese school which Mamie Tape was forced to attend.

# data[].attributes.headline
At America's Gates: Chinese Immigration During the Exclusion Era | Erika Lee

# data[].attributes.subject
At America's Gates: Chinese Immigration During the Exclusion Era | Erika Lee

# data[].attributes.body
Lee, Erika, and Emily Woo Zeller. At America’s gates. Chinese immigration during the Exclusion Era, 1882-1943. United States: Tantor Media, Inc, 2018.

Author Erika Lee's deep understanding of the exclusion era and the intense racism experienced by the Chinese population is well documented in her book "At America's Gates". Topics like immigration, racism, Mexicans and other races, even 9/11 are addressed well. With multiple quotes, names of important officials mentioned, this book is one that highlights the roughness of such a time that, while may seem forever ago, has lasting consequences which can be seen out modern day immigration policies.

Lee goes over several points which show off the common attitudes held during the Exclusion era. Harmful sentiments where the norm at the time, with no mercy cast on the Chinese nor Asians in general. The original mindset was that the Chinese were good for labor due to their numbers being short, but as numbers skyrocketed, the hatred grew. California is an example of this, where it was reported to be known as the toughest in terms of entry, with "members of the latter group (Chinese residents) were required to deposit their statements and register their certificates forty-eight hours prior to their departure from the United States, for example."¹ This noted to only be required of the San Francisco port; no other port did such. This was the result of racism, of course, since it was obvious the fear of the Chinese made San Francisco become tougher in immigration office.

Furthermore, official documents reveal the casual racism in which government officials would refer to the Chinese by racial slurs, On various forms and in correspondence

and internal memoranda, immigration officials often referred to Chinese in derogatory terms such as ‘‘Chinaman,’’ ‘‘c**lie,’’ or ‘‘Ch*nk.’’ The attitudes behind the use of these terms often translated into the physical mistreatment of Chinese immigrants.. 2

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Lee, Erika, and Emily Woo Zeller. At America’s gates. Chinese immigration during the Exclusion Era, 1882-1943. United States: Tantor Media, Inc, 2018.

2. Lee, Erika "At America's Gates," 57.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion | Part 2

# data[].attributes.subject
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion | Part 2

# data[].attributes.body
"The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws." 1898. Digital History, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4055

The first expressed opinion about Chinese exclusion was by Governor Leland Stanford in 1862, who earnestly said "It will afford me great pleasure to concur with the Legislature in any constitutional action having for its object the repression of the immigration of the Asiatic races."¹. Stanford's main issue with the Chinese was the fear that they will ruin profits for the United States. This particular idea that the Chinese would either steal or would plummet America's economy is mentioned many times in the document.

The fear of the Chinese immigrant grew to extraordinary heights, societies that once loved turned to height, and this extended into the governments laws. " the queue ordinance, the capitation tax, the basket-ordinance, the landing tax, the cubic air law, all of which were aimed at the Chinese,"2 were some that were aimed to limit Asian immigration. Numerous other attempts were made but were considered to be in poor taste; Chy Lung vs Commissioner of Immigration of California was a court case that ended with the Supreme court deciding it was unconstitutional for California to make decisions removing any immigrant, especially regardless if they were a criminal or vagrant³.

----------------------------------------------------------

1. "The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws." 1898. Digital History, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4055

2. Digital History, "The Farce," 1.

3. Digital History, "The Farce," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws Digital History ID 4055

# data[].attributes.headline
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion | Part 3

# data[].attributes.subject
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion | Part 3

# data[].attributes.body
"The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws." 1898. Digital History, accessed May 12, 2025. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4055

Finally, The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed. It prohibited the entry of Chinese laborers for 10 years, then 20 years¹. The law was a failure, though, since it did not completely halt the passage of Chinese arriving into the country. Many ways did the Chinese arrive into the country. Arriving into the country via ships was one way, and so was claiming to be a relative, in this case a son, of another existing Chinese man in order to enter "Another mode of securing admission is for “sons” to claim birth in San Francisco, and prove it by the testimony of alleged “fathers” who perjure themselves for a consideration."².

Referring back to earlier, the act was a failure since it could not stop the immigration. Notable figures like Judge Hagar referred to the act as "... a complete failure...,"³, as well as U.S. attorney Win. A. Poucher, who remarked on April 30, 1897 "“attended examinations at Malone and at Plattsburg, . . . and has reported that it was absolutely useless..." on spending more money to investigate the Chinese⁴.

---------------------------------------------------------

1. "The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws." 1898. Digital History, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4055

2. Digital History, "The Farce," 1.

3. Digital History, "The Farce," 1.

4. Digital History, "The Farce," 1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Farce of the Chinese Exclusion Laws Digital History ID 4055

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Uncle Sam kicking out Chinese Immigrants

# data[].attributes.body
Anyone can be an immigrant, so how come certain immigrants are seen as immortal? Why is their mere presence seen as a threat to our society? This is what will be explored as a deep dive is taken into understanding the Chinese Exclusion, an act that declared all Chinese a menace to American society, and why the United States believed it necessary to issue a 10-year ban for Chinese immigrants.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Chinese immigrants in detainment center | California Historical Society

# data[].attributes.body
The exclusion era was a bright stain in American history, it's goal was the deportation of Chinese immigrants soley because they were Chinese. While the targets of these hate crimes were Chinese descendant, other Asian groups were at risk as well. While it would be easy to say this was the last time the United States conducted such large scale deportations that would simply be a lie; through history and even modern times the tales of illegal immigrants ring everywhere. The belief that another race could destroy another and thus we must rid of them is propaganda meant to create fear and distract from the real problems at life. Peace must be achieved in order for proper change to actually amount to anything in this world.