CHAPTER X

GENERAL CONCLUSION

In dealing with the Japanese problem in California, we started with a general account of Japanese traits and ideas. We did so because we believed that a knowledge of the Japanese disposition is essential to a comprehensive understanding of the problem. No attempt was made to determine whether the traits of the Japanese--their emotional nature, their well-developed aesthetic temperament and strong group consciousness, and the unique feature of chivalry and virility prevailing among the lower classes--are inherent in the race or acquired; but we concluded that the question may best be answered by observing those of Japanese descent born and reared in different countries. Later, when we examined the characteristics of the American-born Japanese and discovered that they appear to have lost most of the Japanese traits, and, in turn, have acquired mental attitudes that are peculiar to the American, it was suggested that none of the racial characteristics is necessarily fixed, and that, similarly, the Japanese traits must have been largely acquired through peculiar natural surroundings and social systems.

Next we reviewed in a brief way Japan's Asiatic policy in order to envisage the international situation in which she finds herself and to see how she proposes to meet her difficulties at home and abroad. We commented on the manifest shortcomings of that policy. In view of the fact that Japan's industry--her only hope in the future--has to depend largely on the supply of raw material from her Asiatic neighbors, the assurance of good-will and friendly cooeperation with them is essential for her welfare. It is in the failure to obtain this assurance that the defect of Japan's past Asiatic policy becomes apparent. We expressed our conviction that under the circumstances the best that Japan can do is to so reconstruct the principle of the policy as to convince her neighbors of her genuine sincerity.

In the chapter on the background of Japanese emigration, an attempt has been made to discover its causes. The principal causes found are the small amount of land, the dense population, and the limited prospect of industrial development due to the scarcity of raw material. Moreover, the peculiar social and political conditions in Japan are such as to obstruct, by numerous fetters and restraints, the free development of ambitious youths. The exaggerated stories of great opportunities in the new worlds kindle the desire of the young people to go abroad.

Tentative attempts were made some thirty years ago in emigration to Australia, Canada, and the United States. Nearly a quarter of a century's effort at emigration into the new worlds, with the exception of partial success in Brazil, had proved a complete failure, and thus attempts at migration towards the North came into vogue.

In our discussion of the causes of anti-Japanese agitation in California, it was made clear that the explanation of much of the trouble lies in the conditions of the Japanese themselves, such as congestion in particular localities and different manners and customs. The nationalistic policy of Japan was also pointed out as a factor making for resentment. What renders the situation unnecessarily complicated, leading to a general misunderstanding, is the employment of the issue in local politics--exploitation of the subject for private ends by agitators and propagandists.

Then our study entered the heart of the California problem, the fact of the existing Japanese population. It was discovered that the rate of increase of Japanese population in California has been rapid, but that it shows a tendency to slow down, while the rate of increase of the entire population of the State shows a tendency to steady increase. We found that in comparison with the total number of Japanese in the United States the percentage of Japanese in California is remarkably high, nearly 60 per cent. of them being domiciled in that one State. Then we examined the factors--immigration, smuggling, and births--which contributed to the increase of the Japanese population in California. Under the subject of immigration it was made clear that the net gain from immigration has become small since the restrictive agreement was concluded, but that the number of those entering the country increased because the number of those who are passing through or temporarily visiting America has increased. We expressed our opinion that in order to quiet the excitement of the people of the Pacific Coast it is entirely desirable to stop sending Japanese immigrants to America.

We have somewhat fully treated the subject of birth because it is a vital part of the question. It was discovered in the discussion that the birth rate of the Japanese in California is exceptionally high, due to the fact that a high percentage of the immigrants are in the prime of life and that the percentage of married people is remarkably high. In forecasting the future of the birth rate we stated that if immigration is stopped the present generation will in time pass out without being re-enforced, leaving behind American-born children, who, with higher culture and more even distribution with regard to age and marriage, will not multiply at nearly so high a rate as their parents. We concluded, therefore, that the present is a transitional period and that apprehension over the high birth rate is entirely unwarranted.

The chapter on Japanese agriculture in California gives report of a degree of progress that has been remarkable. As to the causes of this progress the peculiar adaptation of the Japanese farmers to the agricultural conditions of California was presented as the principal one. Then we considered separately the Japanese farm labor and the farmers. What we found in treating the subject of Japanese farm laborers was that they are indispensable to California's agriculture, inasmuch as they have several important peculiarities which are useful. Their ability to farm and their aptitude for bodily and manual dexterity, as well as their highly transitory character under the system of contract labor, are useful assets to the farmers of California. Under the topic of the Japanese farmer, we examined the reasons given for the discrimination against Japanese in agricultural pursuits. The first reason--that they are "crushing competitors of California farmers"--was criticized on the ground that there is not much competition between white and Japanese farmers, since there is a pretty clear line of demarkation between them, the former being engaged in farming on a large scale and the latter engaged in small intensive agriculture. The second apprehension--that the Japanese farmer, if left unchecked, will soon control the greater part of California agriculture--was characterized as an entirely exaggerated fear, since the portion of land which the Japanese till is quite negligible and there are vast tracts of land yet uncultivated. The third objection--which finds reason for opposition in the unassimilability of the Japanese--we held as the weightiest count, and withheld criticism until we had fully treated the subject of assimilation in the succeeding chapter. What we insisted on was that it is unwise to maltreat the Japanese on the surmise that they are unassimilable. Whether they are assimilable or not--and this is not the question, for they are not allowed to become American citizens--their children, who are Americans by virtue of birth, will suffer much from a hostile policy towards their parents.

The anti-alien land laws were considered briefly, and the views of their critics were introduced. As an effective measure to cope with the legislation, we suggested that neither legal nor diplomatic disputes will bring about a satisfactory result, but that only through obtaining the good-will and friendship of the people of California can there be a true solution.

The topic of assimilation discussed in the preceding chapter needs no recapitulation.

The foregoing study, which we have undertaken from the outset with an open mind and fair attitude, has, it is to be hoped, disclosed that the underlying cause of the entire difficulty is a conflict or maladjustment of interest. There are four parties whose peculiar interests and rights are seriously involved in the situation. First and foremost, we have to consider the rights and interests of California. Then we have the United States, which is no less directly concerned with the problem. For the Japanese living in California, the issue is a matter of life and death; their entire interests and welfare are at stake. Japan also is as much concerned with the fate of her subjects in America as the United States would be with the welfare of her people living abroad--say in Mexico. The Japanese problem in California is the concrete expression of the maladjustment of the interests and rights of these four parties concerned.

Various measures, wise and unwise, have been proposed for the solution of the problem, but none of them has so far been put into effect, since each has failed to adjust the interests and rights of all parties concerned in an harmonious way, and hence has met with violent protest at the outset.

Take, for instance, the proposal that the Japanese should be granted the right of naturalization. The promoters of the project insist that the denial to the Japanese of the right to become citizens of the United States is the cause of the anti-Japanese exclusion movement, and, accordingly, that the granting of the privilege will annul all discriminatory efforts. Undoubtedly the proposal was well meant, but it has perhaps done more harm than good. In the first place, it confuses the cause and method of discrimination against the Japanese. The Japanese ineligibility to citizenship has certainly been seized on as a weapon for discrimination, but it is by no means the cause. The cause is elsewhere. In the second place, the advocates of the proposal argue that, if adopted, it will defeat the entire discriminatory efforts of the Californians. It is, however, decidedly unwise to attempt to defeat the effort without removing the cause of the difficulty. No wonder the proposal has provoked the wild criticism of California leaders. The granting of citizenship to refined and Americanized Japanese is in itself a proper and desirable step, but to use it as a weapon to defeat the exclusion movement is clearly unwise.

The solution of the Japanese problem in California, if it be equitable at all and satisfactory to the four parties involved, must rest on the following basic principles:

_1. That it should be in consonance with justice and international courtesy; it must redress Japan's grievances and meet America's wishes._

_2. That it should be fair to Californians; that is to say, operate to allay the fear they entertain of the alarming increase of Japanese in numbers and economic importance._

_3. That it should be fair to the Japanese residents, both aliens and American-born, so that they may enjoy in peace, without molestation or persecution, the blessings of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," and participate, as all American-born are entitled and in duty bound to do, in the promotion of the State's well-being._

The new treaty, which is reported to have been laid for final decision before the Washington and Tokyo Governments by the two negotiators, Ambassador Morris and Ambassador Shidehara, has not been made public at this writing. We have, therefore, no means of knowing the contents or nature of its provisions. It may, however, be presumed that it will go a long way toward redressing Japan's grievances and meeting America's wishes. The latter will probably be met by Japan's adoption of drastic measures to check completely the influx of her immigrants. Knowing that Japan has always been sincere and ready to yield to the wishes of the United States, we hold it only just that she be saved the embarrassment arising from discrimination against her subjects in America. Proud and sensitive, Japan takes to heart the abuses or indignities which she deems seriously detrimental to her national honor.

The conclusion of the Treaty and its ratification by the Senate, however, may not prove the panacea for all evils, for governmental action is naturally circumscribed in its sphere. To solve the perplexing question once for all, the Treaty must be supplemented by the patriotic efforts of public-spirited citizens of both countries to heal and adjust the irritated parts in the scheme of American-Japanese relations which are beyond the reach of governmental action. Viscount Shibusawa and some of his compatriots have, during the last year, held many conferences with some prominent Americans--those representing the Chamber of Commerce of San Francisco and the party headed by Mr. Frank Vanderlip. A better understanding of the situation must have resulted as a consequence of the conferences. The earnestness of the Viscount and his friends to do what they could for the good of both countries is beyond praise. But we fear they have been measuring America by Japan's standard and trying to cure the trouble without remedying the cause. In Japan the counsel of a few influential men often proves effective even in local affairs, but in America, where local autonomy is strongly entrenched, a man, however prominent a figure he may have cut in national affairs, will think twice before he pronounces judgment on matters of local concern, lest it be construed as an intrusion, and thus defeat the good intention. The California question can only be settled by or in cooeperation with the Californians, and right on the spot, not elsewhere.

We believe that the time has come, therefore, when those public-spirited citizens of both countries should replace academic discussion by action. As a means of alleviating the situation we venture to offer the following modest suggestion:

1. That a Committee of a dozen or so members, consisting of public-spirited men of broad vision of both countries, and particularly of California, be formed with the object of formulating and putting into effect the project of relieving the congestion of Japanese in California.

Such a Committee would doubtless be able to secure the hearty cooeperation of The Japan Society of New York and other cities, as well as of the Japanese Association of America and similar organizations, all of which exist with a view to promoting friendly relations between America and Japan.

2. That the said Committee appoint an administrator of proved executive ability and a staff for the prosecution of the project.

3. That to finance the project an initial fund of half a million dollars be raised by contribution from the 120,000 Japanese living in this country.

The Japanese domiciled in this country have the keenest interest in the subject; they are directly or indirectly affected by the anti-Japanese agitation in California; they would not grudge a contribution of a small sum for the purpose of uprooting the cause of that annoyance. The Japanese in California who have interests at stake would surely be more than willing to contribute their quota to the fund. The native Californians, too, we strongly feel, in their calm and considerate mood, would obey the dictates of wisdom to adopt a more liberal and logical method of relieving the local tension than to resort, as at present, to measures of repression and persecution.

We are of the opinion that there would be a fair demand in other States of the Union for such skilled farm hands as we have found in the Japanese in California if the facts were well advertised. If proper precaution be taken so as to avoid the repetition of the same story of congestion as that in California, the plan of dispersal above outlined might prove a boon to all concerned. If the initial stage of the plan be earnestly carried out before the eyes of the Californians, a totally different atmosphere might be created among them so as to win their good will and enlist their cooeperation. When such a happy outcome is obtained, a solution of the Japanese-California problem is assured.

There is certainly a great deal which the Japanese in California can and must do. In the first place, they must thoroughly grasp the psychology of the Californians. They must indicate, if they are to remain in this country, their willingness to become Americans regardless of barriers or opposition. They must show this willingness not only in intention but also in practice. They must improve their command of English, alter many of their customs and manners. They must endeavor to elevate their standard of living and culture. They must give up beliefs and ideals which are Japanese and which run counter to the American. It would be well for them to refrain from building in California Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples and from maintaining language schools. They must above all learn to take an interest in the national life of the United States.

There is also much that the Japanese Government can do. Its policy of paternalism, extending too much care to Japanese domiciled abroad, and even to Japanese born abroad, must, in our opinion, be altered. The claim of allegiance to the home country by the children born in another country, whatever may be their status in the land of birth, is an international practice still adhered to by most European nations--France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Greece. From this results what is called a "dual nationality" of a subject. In a country like the United States, where its Constitution endows children born therein with citizenship, the so-called "dual nationality" gives rise to an awkward situation in case its mother country adopts the military conscription system. To avoid this awkward situation, Japan enacted in the year 1916 a law which provides that a Japanese boy who has acquired a foreign nationality by reason of his birth in a foreign country may divest himself of Japanese nationality if his father, or other parental authority, takes the necessary steps to that end before he is fifteen years of age, or, if he has attained the age of fifteen, he may himself take the same steps, with the consent of his father or guardian, before he reaches the age of seventeen.[57] This law is objectionable because it fixes the age limit of expatriation at seventeen, when the subject is yet a minor and is not competent to exercise his own choice. Fixing the age limit at seventeen is a provision in consonance with the Japanese military law, which imposes on all male Japanese subjects above that age the duty of military service. Consequently, all American-born Japanese males who have failed to expatriate before they have reached the age of seventeen are claimed as Japanese subjects and are subject to conscription, while at the same time they are American citizens. The existence of such a discordance in the laws and Constitution of the two countries has the possibility of giving rise to a serious international complication, and it seems advisable that some sort of settlement be made on this point between the American and Japanese Governments. The difficulty could, of course, be overcome if the Japanese parents who are determined to stay permanently in this country would take the necessary steps to expatriate their children as soon as they are born, or at the proper time. The hesitation they have heretofore manifested was greatly due to the uncertainty in which their future and that of their children was shrouded.

We cannot omit to emphasize in this connection the part which America can and has to perform. Of the numerous things America can do with profit we believe the task of Americanizing the Japanese to be the foremost. We wish to make it clear that, whether Japanese aliens are worthy or not, their children born in America are in any case Americans, and it is America's duty to make them worthy members of the nation. They are not foreigners or aliens, and, accordingly, it is clearly wrong, as well as unwise, to deal with them as if they were. Upon what we can do to guide the rising generation depends the future of the Japanese problem in America. This in turn must depend upon how America treats their parents. Disappearing gradually as they are, they are bequeathing their impressions and accomplishments to their children. Any generosity and kindness extended to them are acts not so much of altruism as of vital interest in the welfare of America herself, for they are the guardians of the Republic's sons and daughters of Japanese blood.

It is certainly not fair to slander and maltreat those people, who were originally brought in to fill the need of man-power and who have contributed much towards making the Pacific Coast what it is to-day. To prevent the influx of Japanese immigrants, to avoid the possible future development of difficult problems with Japan, there certainly ought to be some better means than gradually strangling the innocent people who individually are in no way to be blamed for the present strained relations on the Pacific Coast.

All these considerations lead us to a belief that the time is now ripe for the American people, and especially for the people of California, to reconstruct their attitude and policy towards the Japanese domiciled in this country. Every indication seems to suggest that if, in place of the discriminatory policy so far resorted to with no better effect than general irritation, a new policy be initiated, a policy of constructive Americanization based upon generosity, sympathy, and understanding, the result will surely be far-reaching. It is a common fact of human experience that one's attitude is directly responded to by other people with whom we deal. It was Thackeray, we believe, who said that "the world is like a looking-glass; if we smile, others also smile." What cannot be achieved by a hostile policy is often easily and satisfactorily accomplished by sympathetic attitude and friendly dealing. Give the Japanese the opportunity and see what good use they will make of it.

We hardly need to reiterate that the Japanese-California question--the main theme of this book--is only a part of the vast problem which confronts America and Japan. The present world tendency is to bind increasingly all parts of the world into one. The process of civilization, like a revolving body, exerts centrifugal and centripetal force and gradually unifies all civilizations into a cohesive system. At present there are two centers of such forces, one in the East and another in the West, each trying to influence the other. By virtue of being the youngest and the most vigorous representatives of the two spheres, Japan and America, respectively, are naturally destined to shoulder together the great task of harmonizing and unifying these two great currents of human achievement. The task involves, from its gigantic nature, a great many difficulties and risks of which the present California issue is certainly one. All these difficulties must be squarely met and surmounted with courage and wisdom, since to shrink from the job is to commit the future relationship of the East and West to the cruel law of natural selection.

It is, however, generally true that the perfect understanding of the common aim settles the incidental difficulties arising in the process. This is particularly true in the case of the California-Japanese question, which is a partial issue of the great undertaking between America and Japan. The core of the California problem, our study has shown, is the question of assimilability of the Japanese. But what is the assimilation but the approach to the common standard of culture and ideals? The approach to the common standard of culture and ideals between the peoples of Asia and Europe and America is precisely the task in which Japan and the United States are engaged in unison. Herein is the explanation of our earlier assertion that the California problem is a miniature form of the problem of the East and West. Herein also is the support of our contention that to accelerate the cooeperative effort of America and Japan for mutual understanding is the only and the best method of bringing about the solution of the Japanese problem in California or elsewhere in the United States. We wish, therefore, to emphasize once more that the wisest policy to follow in the future for America and Japan is not foolishly to sharpen the edge of swords for imaginary race wars, which are absurd, but to devote themselves wisely to learning and appreciating each other's accomplishments and greatness, from which alone true friendship can arise.

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

EXTRACTS FROM THE TREATY OF COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION AND PROTOCOL BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, OF FEBRUARY 21, 1911.

His Majesty, the Emperor of Japan, and the President of the United States of America, being desirous to strengthen the relations of amity and good understanding which happily exist between the two nations, and believing that the fixation in a manner clear and positive of the rules which are hereafter to govern the commercial intercourse between their respective countries will contribute to this most desirable result, have resolved to conclude a treaty of commerce and navigation.

=Article I.=--The subjects or citizens of each of the high contracting parties shall have liberty to enter, travel, and reside in the territories of the other, to carry on trade, wholesale and retail, to own or lease and occupy houses, manufactories, warehouses, and shops, to employ agents of their choice, to lease land for residential and commercial purposes, and generally to do anything incident to or necessary for trade, upon the same terms as native subjects or citizens, submitting themselves to the laws and regulations there established.

They shall not be compelled, under any pretext whatever, to pay any charges or taxes other or higher than those that are or may be paid by native subjects or citizens.

The subjects or citizens of each of the high contracting parties shall receive, in the territories of the other, the most constant protection and security for their persons and property and shall enjoy in this respect the same rights and privileges as are or may be granted to native subjects or citizens, on their submitting themselves to the conditions imposed upon the native subjects and citizens.

=Article IV.=--There shall be between the territories of the two high contracting parties reciprocal freedom of commerce and navigation. The subjects or citizens of each of the contracting parties, equally with the subjects or citizens of the most favored nation shall have liberty freely to come with their ships and cargoes to all places, ports, and rivers in the territories of the other which are or may be opened to foreign commerce, subject always to the laws of the country to which they thus come.

=Article V.=--Neither contracting party shall impose any other or higher duties or charges on the exportation of any article to the territories of the other than are or may be payable on the exportation of the like article to any other foreign country.

Nor shall any prohibition be imposed by either country on the importation or exportation of any article from or to the territories of the other which shall not equally extend to the like article imported from or exported to any other country.

=Article XIV.=--Except as otherwise expressly provided in this treaty, the high contracting parties agree that in all that concerns commerce and navigation, any privilege, favor, or immunity which either contracting party has actually granted or may hereafter grant, to the subjects or citizens of any other State shall be extended to the subjects or citizens of the other contracting party ... on the same or equivalent conditions....

Declaration

In proceeding this day to the signature of the treaty of commerce and navigation ... the undersigned has the honor to declare that the Imperial Japanese Government are fully prepared to maintain with equal effectiveness the limitation and control which they have for the past three years exercised in regulation of the immigration of laborers to the United States.

(Signed) Y. UCHIDA.

February 21, 1911.

APPENDIX C

CALIFORNIA'S ALIEN LAND LAW

(Approved May 19, 1913)

_The people of the State of California do enact as follows_:

=Section 1.=--All aliens eligible to citizenship under the laws of the United States may acquire, possess, enjoy, transmit, and inherit real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the same manner and to the same extent as citizens of the United States, except as otherwise provided by the laws of this State.

=Section 2.=--All aliens other than those mentioned in section one of this act may acquire, possess, enjoy, and transfer real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a citizen or subject and not otherwise, and may in addition thereto lease lands in this State for agricultural purposes for a term not exceeding three years.

=Section 3.=--Any company, association, or corporation organized under the laws of this or any other State or nation, of which a majority of the members are aliens other than those specified in section one of this act, or in which a majority of the issued capital stock is owned by such aliens, may acquire, possess, enjoy, and convey real property, or any interest therein in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such members or stockholders are citizens or subjects, and not otherwise, and may in addition thereto lease lands in this State for agricultural purposes for a term not exceeding three years.

=Section 4.=--Whenever it appears to the court in any probate proceeding that by reason of the provisions of this act any heir or devisee cannot take real property in this State which, but for said provisions, said heir or devisee would take as such, the court, instead of ordering a distribution of such real property to such heir or devisee, shall order a sale of said real property to be made in the manner provided by law for probate sales of real property, and the proceeds of such sale shall be distributed to such heirs or devisee in lieu of such real property.

=Section 5.=--Any real property hereafter acquired in fee in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to, and become and remain the property of the State of California. The attorney general shall institute proceedings to have the escheat of such real property adjudged and enforced in the manner provided by section 474 of the Political Code and title eight, part three of the Code of Civil Procedure. Upon the entry of final judgment in such proceedings, the title to such real property shall pass to the State of California. The provisions of this section and of sections two and three of this act shall not apply to any real property hereafter acquired in the enforcement or in satisfaction of any lien now existing upon, or interest in such property, so long as such real property so acquired shall remain the property of the alien, company, association or corporation acquiring the same in such manner.

=Section 6.=--Any leasehold or other interest in real property less than the fee, hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to the State of California. The attorney general shall institute proceedings to have such escheat adjudged and enforced as provided in section five of this act. In such proceedings the court shall determine and adjudge the value of such leasehold, or other interest in such real property, and enter judgment for the State for the amount thereof together with costs. Thereupon the court shall order a sale of the real property covered by such leasehold, or other interest, in the manner provided by section 1271 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Out of the proceeds arising from such sale, the amount of the judgment rendered for the State shall be paid into the State Treasury and the balance shall be deposited with and distributed by the court in accordance with the interest of the parties therein.

=Section 7.=--Nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation upon the power of the State to enact laws with respect to the acquisition, holding or disposal by aliens of real property in this State.

=Section 8.=--All acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this act, are hereby repealed.

APPENDIX D

ALIEN LAND LAW

(Adopted November 2, 1920)

PROPERTY RIGHTS AND DISABILITIES OF ALIENS IN CALIFORNIA

=Alien Land Law.= Initiative Act. Permits Acquisition and Transfer of Real Property by Aliens Eligible to Citizenship, to Same Extent as Citizens Except as Otherwise Provided by Law; Permits Other Aliens, and Companies, Associations, and Corporations in Which they Hold Majority Interest, to Acquire and Transfer Real Property Only as Prescribed by Treaty, but Prohibiting Appointment Thereof as Guardians of Estates of Minors Consisting Wholly or Partially of Real Property or Shares in Such Corporations; Provides for Escheats in Certain Cases; Requires Reports of Property Holdings to Facilitate Enforcement of Act; Prescribes Penalties and Repeals Conflicting Acts.

_An act relating to the rights, powers, and disabilities of aliens and of certain companies, associations, and corporations with respect to property in this State, providing for escheats in certain cases, prescribing the procedure therein, requiring reports of certain property holdings to facilitate the enforcement of this act, prescribing penalties for violation of the provisions hereof, and repealing all acts or parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict herewith._

_The people of the State of California do enact as follows_:

=Section 1.=--All aliens eligible to citizenship under the laws of the United States may acquire, possess, enjoy, transmit, and inherit real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the same manner and to the same extent as citizens of the United States, except as otherwise provided by the laws of this State.

=Section 2.=--All aliens other than those mentioned in section one of this act may acquire, possess, enjoy, and transfer real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purpose prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a citizen or subject, and not otherwise.

=Section 3.=--Any company, association or corporation organized under the laws of this or any other State or nation, of which a majority of the members are aliens other than those specified in section one of this act, or in which a majority of the issued capital stock is owned by such aliens, may acquire, possess, enjoy, and convey real property, or any interest therein, in this State, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such members or stockholders are citizens or subjects, and not otherwise. Hereafter all aliens other than those specified in section one hereof may become members of or acquire shares of stock in any company, association or corporation that is or may be authorized to acquire, possess, enjoy or convey agricultural land, in the manner and to the extent and for the purposes prescribed by any treaty now existing between the Government of the United States and the nation or country of which such alien is a citizen or subject, and not otherwise.

=Section 4.=--Hereafter no alien mentioned in section two hereof and no company, association or corporation mentioned in section three hereof, may be appointed guardian of that portion of the estate of a minor which consists of property which such alien or such company, association or corporation is inhibited from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or transferring by reason of the provisions of this act. The public administrator of the proper county, or any other competent person or corporation, may be appointed guardian of the estate of a minor citizen whose parents are ineligible to appointment under the provisions of this section.

On such notice to the guardian as the court may require, the superior court may remove the guardian of such an estate whenever it appears to the satisfaction of the court:

(_a_) That the guardian has failed to file the report required by the provisions of section five hereof; or

(_b_) That the property of the ward has not been or is not being administered with due regard to the primary interest of the ward; or

(_c_) That facts exist which would make the guardian ineligible to appointment in the first instance; or

(_d_) That facts establishing any other legal ground for removal exist.

=Section 5.=--(_a_) The term "trustee" as used in this section means any person, company, association or corporation that as guardian, trustee, attorney-in-fact or agent, or in any other capacity has the title, custody or control of property, or some interest therein, belonging to an alien mentioned in section two hereof, or to the minor child of such an alien, if the property is of such a character that such alien is inhibited from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or transferring it.

(_b_) Annually on or before the thirty-first day of January every such trustee must file in the office of the Secretary of State of California and in the office of the county clerk of each county in which any of the property is situated, a verified written report showing:

(1) The property, real or personal, held by him for or on behalf of such an alien or minor;

(2) A statement showing the date when each item of such property came into his possession or control;

(3) An itemized account of all expenditures, investments, rents, issues, and profits in respect to the administration and control of such property with particular reference to holdings of corporate stock and leases, cropping contracts, and other agreements in respect to land and the handling or sale of products thereof.

(_c_) Any person, company, association or corporation that violates any provision of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

(_d_) The provisions of this section are cumulative and are not intended to change the jurisdiction or the rules of practice of courts of justice.

=Section 6.=--Whenever it appears to the court in any probate proceeding that by reason of the provisions of this act any heir or devisee cannot take real property in this State or membership or shares of stock in a company, association or corporation which, but for said provisions, said heir or devisee would take as such, the court, instead of ordering a distribution of such property to such heir or devisee, shall order a sale of said property to be made in the manner provided by law for probate sales of property and the proceeds of such sale shall be distributed to such heir or devisee in lieu of such property.

=Section 7.=--Any real property hereafter acquired in fee in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to, and become and remain the property of the State of California. The attorney general or district attorney of the proper county shall institute proceedings to have the escheat of such real property adjudged and enforced in the manner provided by section four hundred seventy-four of the Political Code and title eight, part three of the Code of Civil Procedure. Upon the entry of final judgment in such proceedings, the title to such real property shall pass to the State of California. The provisions of this section and of sections two and three of this act shall not apply to any real property hereafter acquired in the enforcement or in satisfaction of any lien now existing upon, or interest in such property, so long as such real property so acquired shall remain the property of the alien, company, association or corporation acquiring the same in such manner. No alien, company, association or corporation mentioned in section two or section three hereof shall hold for a longer period than two years the possession of any agricultural land acquired in the enforcement of or in satisfaction of a mortgage or other lien hereafter made or acquired in good faith to secure a debt.

=Section 8.=--Any leasehold or other interest in real property less than the fee, hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of this act by any alien mentioned in section two of this act, or by any company, association or corporation mentioned in section three of this act, shall escheat to the State of California. The attorney general or district attorney of the proper county shall institute proceedings to have such escheat adjudged and enforced as provided in section seven of this act. In such proceedings the court shall determine and adjudge the value of such leasehold or other interest in such real property, and enter judgment for the State for the amount thereof together with costs. Thereupon the court shall order a sale of the real property covered by such leasehold, or other interest, in the manner provided by section twelve hundred seventy-one of the Code of Civil Procedure. Out of the proceeds arising from such sale, the amount of the judgment rendered for the State shall be paid into the state treasury and the balance shall be deposited with and distributed by the court in accordance with the interest of the parties therein. Any share of stock or the interest of any member in a company, association or corporation hereafter acquired in violation of the provisions of section three of this act shall escheat to the State of California. Such escheat shall be adjudged and enforced in the same manner as provided in this section for the escheat of a leasehold or other interest in real property less than the fee.

=Section 9.=--Every transfer of real property, or of an interest therein, though colorable in form, shall be void as to the state and the interest thereby conveyed or sought to be conveyed shall escheat to the State if the property interest involved is of such a character that an alien mentioned in section two hereof is inhibited from acquiring, possessing, enjoying or transferring it, and if the conveyance is made with intent to prevent, evade or avoid escheat as provided for herein.

A _prima facie_ presumption that the conveyance is made with such intent shall arise upon proof of any of the following groups of facts:

(_a_) The taking of the property in the name of a person other than the persons mentioned in section two hereof if the consideration is paid or agreed or understood to be paid by an alien mentioned in section two hereof;

(_b_) The taking of the property in the name of a company, association or corporation, if the membership or shares of stock therein held by aliens mentioned in section two hereof, together with the memberships or shares of stock held by others but paid for or agreed or understood to be paid for by such aliens, would amount to a majority of the membership or the issued capital stock of such company, association or corporation;

(_c_) The execution of a mortgage in favor of an alien mentioned in section two hereof if said mortgagee is given possession, control or management of the property.

The enumeration in this section of certain presumptions shall not be so construed as to preclude other presumptions or inferences that reasonably may be made as to the existence of intent to prevent, evade or avoid escheat as provided for herein.

=Section 10.=--If two or more persons conspire to effect a transfer of real property, or of an interest therein, in violation of the provisions hereof, they are punishable by imprisonment in the county jail or State penitentiary not exceeding two years, or by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or both.

=Section 11.=--Nothing in this act shall be construed as a limitation upon the power of the State to enact laws with respect to the acquisition, holding or disposal by aliens of real property in this State.

=Section 12.=--All acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions hereof are hereby repealed; _provided_, that--

(_a_) This act shall not affect pending actions or proceedings, but the same may be prosecuted and defended with the same effect as if this act had not been adopted;

(_b_) No cause of action arising under any law of this State shall be affected by reason of the adoption of this act whether an action or proceeding has been instituted thereon at the time of the taking effect of this act or not and actions may be brought upon such causes in the same manner, under the same terms and conditions, and with the same effect as if this act had not been adopted.

(_c_) This act in so far as it does not add to, take from or alter an existing law, shall be construed as a continuation thereof.

=Section 13.=--The legislature may amend this act in furtherance of its purpose and to facilitate its operation.

=Section 14.=--If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this act is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this act. The people hereby declare that they would have passed this act, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.

APPENDIX E

CROPS RAISED BY JAPANESE AND THEIR ACREAGE.

=============================================================== | Total |Acreage by|Percentage of Japanese Product. | Acreage of | Japanese.| Cultivation Against |Cultivation.| | Total Cultivation. ----------------|------------|----------|---------------------- Berries | 6,500 | 5,968 | 91.8 Celery | 4,000 | 3,568 | 89.2 Asparagus | 12,000 | 9,927 | 82.7 Seeds | 20,000 | 15,847 | 79.2 Onions | 12,112 | 9,251 | 76.3 Tomatoes | 16,000 | 10,616 | 66.3 Cantaloupes | 15,000 | 9,581 | 63.8 Sugar Beets | 102,949 | 51,604 | 50.1 Green Vegetables| 75,000 | 17,852 | 23.8 Potatoes | 90,175 | 18,830 | 20.8 Hops | 8,000 | 1,260 | 15.7 Grapes | 360,000 | 47,439 | 13.1 Beans | 592,000 | 77,107 | 13.0 Rice | 106,220 | 16,640 | 10.0 Cotton | 179,860 | 18,000 | 10.0 Corn | 85,000 | 7,845 | 9.2 Fruits, Nuts | 715,000 | 29,210 | 4.0 Hay, Grain | 2,200,000 | 15,753 | 0.0 ===============================================================

Reported by the Japanese Agricultural Association of California, 1919.

APPENDIX F

JAPANESE IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES.

===================== Year.|No. of Japanese | Immigrants. -----|--------------- 1869 | 63 1870 | 48 1871 | 78 1872 | 17 1873 | 9 1874 | 21 1875 | 3 1876 | 4 1877 | 7 1878 | 2 1879 | 4 1880 | 4 1881 | 11 1882 | 5 1883 | 27 1884 | 20 1885 | 49 1886 | 194 1887 | 229 1888 | 404 1889 | 640 1890 | 691 1891 | 1,136 1892 | 1,498 1893 | 1,648 1894 | 1,739 1895 | 480 1896 | 1,110 1897 | 1,526 1898 | 2,230 1899 | 2,844 1900 | 6,618 1901 | 4,908 1902 | 5,325 1903 | 6,990 1904 | 7,771 1905 | 4,319 1906 | 5,178 1907 | 9,948 1908 | 7,250 ----------------------

----------------------------------- Year.| Admitted.|Departed.|Balance. -----|----------|---------|-------- 1909 | 1,593 | 5,004 | -3,411 1910 | 1,552 | 5,024 | -3,472 1911 | 4,282 | 5,869 | -1,587 1912 | 5,358 | 5,437 | - 79 1913 | 6,771 | 5,647 | +1,124 1914 | 8,462 | 6,300 | +2,162 1915 | 9,029 | 5,967 | +3,062 1916 | 9,100 | 6,922 | +2,178 1917 | 9,159 | 6,581 | +2,578 1918 | 11,143 | 7,691 | +3,452 1919 | 11,404 | 8,328 | +3,076 1920 | 12,868 | 11,662 | +1,206 -----------------------------------

The above is taken from the Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration.

APPENDIX G

JAPANESE ADMITTED INTO CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES: ARRIVALS AND DEPARTURES.

=============================================== | Number of | |Total Gains Year. | Arrivals. | Departed. |Up to Date. -----------|-----------|-----------|----------- 1861-1870 | 218 } | | 1871-1880 | 149 } | | 1881-1890 | 2,270 } | 25,000 | 1891-1900 | 20,829 } |(estimated)| 1901-1910 | 54,838 } | | 1911-1920 | 87,576 | 70,404 | -----------|-----------| | Total | 165,880 | | | | | No. of | | | transient | | | immigrants | | | from Hawaii| 15,000 | | |(estimated)| | |-----------|-----------|----------- Total | 180,880 | 95,404 | 87,476 ===============================================

APPENDIX H

IMMIGRANTS AND NON-IMMIGRANTS.

======================================================== | Total | | | Percentage of | Number | | Non- | Non-Immigrants Year.|Admitted.|Immigrants.|Immigrants.| Against Total | | | |Number Admitted. -----|---------|-----------|-----------|---------------- 1909 | 1,593 | 255 | 1,338 | 84.0 1910 | 1,552 | 116 | 1,436 | 92.5 1911 | 4,282 | 736 | 3,546 | 83.0 1912 | 5,358 | 894 | 4,464 | 83.3 1913 | 6,771 | 1,371 | 5,400 | 79.7 1914 | 8,462 | 1,762 | 6,700 | 79.1 1915 | 9,029 | 2,214 | 6,815 | 75.5 1916 | 9,100 | 2,958 | 6,142 | 67.5 1917 | 9,159 | 2,838 | 6,321 | 69.0 1918 | 11,143 | 2,604 | 8,539 | 76.6 ========================================================

Taken from Kawakami, _Japan Review_, vol. iv., p. 76.

APPENDIX I

DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE AND CHINESE POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES.

DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE POPULATION.

====================================================== Census. | 1880 | 1890 | 1900 | 1910 -------------------|--------|--------|--------|------- Total United States| 148 | 2039 | 24,326 | 72,157 -------------------|--------|--------|--------|------- New England | 14 | 45 | 89 | 272 Middle Atlantic | 27 | 202 | 446 | 1,643 East North Central | 7 | 101 | 126 | 482 West North Central | 1 | 16 | 223 | 1,000 South Atlantic | 5 | 55 | 29 | 156 East South Central | ... | 19 | 7 | 26 West South Central | ... | 42 | 30 | 428 Mountain | 5 | 27 | 5,107 | 10,447 Pacific | 89 | 1,532 | 18,296 | 57,703 ======================================================

DISTRIBUTION OF CHINESE POPULATION.

======================================================== Census. | 1880 | 1890 | 1900 | 1910 -------------------|---------|---------|--------|------- United States | 105,465 | 107,488 | 89,863 | 71,531 -------------------|---------|---------|--------|------- New England | 401 | 1,488 | 4,203 | 3,499 Middle Atlantic | 1,277 | 4,689 | 10,490 | 8,189 East North Central | 390 | 1,254 | 2,533 | 3,451 West North Central | 423 | 1,097 | 1,135 | 1,195 South Atlantic | 74 | 669 | 1,791 | 1,582 East South Central | 90 | 274 | 427 | 414 West South Central | 758 | 1,173 | 1,555 | 1,303 Mountain | 14,274 | 11,572 | 7,950 | 5,614 Pacific | 87,828 | 85,272 | 59,779 | 46,320 ========================================================

Taken from Gulick, _American Democracy and Asiatic Citizenship_, pp. 152, 177.

APPENDIX J

DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE IN UNITED STATES.

(_According to Consular Division as Reported by Foreign Department, Japan._)

================================================== Districts. | Male. | Female. | Total for 1919. --------------|--------|---------|---------------- Seattle | 14,568 | 4,397 | 18,965 Portland | 5,829 | 1,637 | 7,466 San Francisco | 37,375 | 16,578 | 53,953 Los Angeles | 22,644 | 9,861 | 32,505 Chicago | 2,336 | 378 | 2,714 New York | 3,320 | 284 | 3,604 |--------|---------|---------------- | 86,072 | 33,135 | 119,207 ==================================================

APPENDIX K

AN ABSTRACT OF EXPATRIATION LAW OF JAPAN

=Article XVIII.=--When a Japanese, by becoming the wife of a foreigner, has acquired the husband's nationality, then such Japanese loses her Japanese nationality.

=Article XX.=--A person who voluntarily acquires a foreign nationality loses Japanese nationality. In case a Japanese subject, who has acquired foreign nationality by reason of his or her birth in a foreign country has domiciled in that country, he or she may be expatriated with the permission of the Minister of State for Home Affairs. The application for the permission referred to in the preceding paragraph shall be made by the legal representative in case the person to be expatriated is younger than fifteen years of age. If the person in question is a minor above fifteen years of age, or a person adjudged incompetent, the application can be made with the consent of his or her legal representative or guardian. A stepfather, a stepmother, a legal mother, or a guardian may not make the application or give the consent prescribed in the preceding paragraph without the consent of the family council. A person who has been expatriated loses Japanese nationality.

=Article XXIV.=--Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding six articles a male of full seventeen years or upwards does not lose Japanese nationality, unless he has completed active service in the army or navy, or he is under no obligation to enter into it. A person who actually occupies an official post--civil or military--does not lose Japanese nationality notwithstanding the provisions of the foregoing seven articles.

=Article XXVI.=--A person who has lost Japanese nationality in accordance with Article XX may recover Japanese nationality provided that he or she possesses a domicile in Japan, but this does not apply when the person mentioned in Article XVI has lost Japanese nationality. In case the person who has lost Japanese nationality in accordance with the provision of Article XX is younger than fifteen years of age, the application for the permission prescribed in the preceding paragraph shall be made by the father who is the member of the family to which such person belonged at the time of his expatriation; should the father be unable to do so, the application shall be made by the mother; if the mother is unable to do so, by the grandfather; and if the grandfather is unable to do so, then by the grandmother.

APPENDIX L

A MINUTE OF HEARING AT SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, BEFORE THE HOUSE SUB-COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION

DIRECT EXAMINATION

July 27, 1920. Evening Session SEATTLE

JAMES SAKAMOTO, produced as a witness, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:

QUESTIONS BY MR. BOX:

_Q._ What is your name?

_A._ James Sakamoto.

_Q._ Where do you live?

_A._ 1609 Yesler Way.

_Q._ You were born in the United States?

_A._ Yes, sir.

_Q._ Where were you born?

_A._ In Seattle, Washington.

_Q._ Right here?

_A._ Yes.

_Q._ Are you full of Seattle spirits?

_A._ You bet.

_Q._ You only refer to one kind. How old are you?

_A._ Seventeen. I was born in 1903; March 22d.

_Q._ You go to school here?

_A._ Oh, yes.

_Q._ In the high school?

_A._ The Franklin High.

_Q._ About how many boys are there here in and about Seattle that were born here, along about your age, from three or four years younger to two or three years older?

_A._ Well, I only know of the fellows that I associate with. I can't tell you the fellows that I don't know about.

_Q._ Do you know a number?

_A._ I don't know many of them.

_Q._ A half a dozen?

_Q._ How many in your high school are Japanese boys?

_A._ I think I am the only one.

_Q._ Are there many young ladies? Do you know this young lady that just testified?

_A._ Yes, sir.

_Q._ Are there many such nice looking girls as she is in Seattle?

_A._ You better ask them.

_Q._ You get along all right in school?

_A._ Oh, yes, sir.

_Q._ You don't have any trouble with your classes, and boys?

_A._ I have lots of fun.

_Q._ You have a good time?

_A._ Yes, sir.

_Q._ Did you attend the Japanese Language School?

_A._ Yes, sir; eight years.

_Q._ What did they teach you there?

_A._ Taught me Japanese.

_Q._ The Japanese language?

_A._ Yes, sir.

_Q._ Did they teach you Japanese history?

_A._ I wasn't able to learn very quick.

_Q._ You were not very quick to learn, but they did that, teach the history of Japan?

_A._ They tried to.

_Q._ Didn't they succeed with a boy as bright as you are, going to high school?

_A._ They were successful, but I did not succeed. See?

_Q._ You read the Japanese language now?

_A._ I can't read it; it is too hard.

_Q._ You really can't read any?

_A._ There are three different kinds of words and letters. I can read the easiest.

_Q._ In other words, you have adopted the road of least resistance with the Japanese language?

_A._ Sure.

_Q._ You talk Japanese with your parents?

_A._ In a simple, broken language.

_Q._ Do they talk English?

_A._ They can't talk English. They have been here quite long, but they have never had a chance to talk English.

_Q._ Let me ask you this; do you get along very well with them?

_A._ In my home?

_Q._ Yes.

_A._ Sure. They are my father and mother.

_Q._ (Mr. Siegel.) And you say that you don't understand the Japanese language sufficiently well to carry on a conversation with them?

_A._ I understand them, but that is about all.

_Q._ How do they arrange to get along with you, if you can't speak the language orally?

_A._ They just about guess what I am trying to tell them.

_Q._ In other words, you are always asking for money. Is that the principal idea?

_A._ May be, not any more, but I used to.

_Q._ When they talk to you, you understand them all right?

_A._ Oh, yes; I understand them.

_Q._ (Mr. Raker.) Would you tell us why, you haven't, or didn't, and haven't given more attention and worked harder to become familiar with the Japanese language and history?

_A._ That is a hard question to ask me just now.

_Q._ I know it is, but I think you know, my boy; tell us in your own language, in your own way?

_A._ Well, suppose we go to school five hours a day, the American school. We attend Japanese school for two hours; that is overwork two hours, you see, and we don't get paid for over time.

_Q._ I guess you are about pretty near right, didn't I? You are the kind of a fellow that is going to be thinking a little about money as you grow up, and you are going to make it in Seattle.

_A._ I haven't got a business.

_Q._ (Mr. Raker.) What I was asking that question for, I am going to put it direct. I want you to give me your good frank answer, which I know you will. Is it your determination when you get a little older, and begin to think over the situation, that you want to become familiar with the English language and understand the American ways rather than to devote your time to Japanese ways and language?

_A._ Well, I want to be an American more than a Japanese. I was born here.

_Q._ That is one of the reasons you haven't devoted your time to the Japanese language. How old were you when you started?

_A._ I started the same year when I went to Grammar School.

_Q._ That was when?

_A._ Five years old. Five years old I started to kindergarten, and at six I started to Grammar School.

_Q._ So when you started to kindergarten did you start in the Japanese School?

_A._ No, when I was six.

_Q._ And you did that from the time you were six until you were fourteen?

_A._ I think that is right, fourteen.

_Q._ How old are you now?

_A._ Seventeen.

_Q._ You have to renounce the Japanese Emperor before you are seventeen?

_A._ I don't know a thing about it.

_Q._ You know, don't you, that you are claimed as a citizen by Japan, and also by the United States.

_A._ I don't care. I was born here.

_Q._ Is it your intention to remain an American citizen or be a Japanese citizen?

_A._ Why shouldn't I remain an American? I was born here. Why should I go back there? This is my home here.

_Q._ You intend to remain an American citizen?

_A._ Nobody is going to stop me.

_Q._ That's what I want to get at. Do you remember when you were first told that you were a native-born American citizen; do you remember when that was first told you?

_A._ I don't know.

_Q._ How long have you felt the pride that you are a young American citizen? How long have you held that feeling of pride?

_A._ Since I went to Grammar School.

_Q._ Has every young Japanese boy here expressed that feeling as you do to us; have you heard them talk about it?

_A._ They don't talk about it much. It is mostly their home training. My father and mother don't care whether I am an American. They would rather have me an American.

_Q._ And they have encouraged you to be an American?

_A._ Sure.

_Q._ And your teachers have?

_A._ Oh, yes, naturally.

_Q._ And you like the idea?

_A._ Sure.

_Q._ Your father and mother intend to remain here all their lives, do they, as far as you know?

_A._ Well, I would like to have them go back and see their home once again, but that is about all. I don't know what I can do.

_Q._ (Mr. Vaile.) As far as you know, their own intention is to live here, except for a visit home, perhaps, the rest of their lives?

_A._ Yes, sir.

_Q._ Suppose you visit Japan. You know, don't you, that the Japanese Emperor still claims you as his subject? Suppose you are required to render military service to Japan, what would be your position on that subject?

_A._ It would be a pretty difficult one, but I will get out of it.

_Q._ Following that, suppose you were required to render military service to the United States, what will be your position?

_A._ I will get in.

_Q._ Exactly. We are glad to meet you. Good luck to you.

(_Witness Excused._)

APPENDIX M

COMPARATIVE STANDING OF INTELLIGENCE AND BEHAVIOR OF AMERICAN-BORN JAPANESE CHILDREN AND AMERICAN CHILDREN DISCUSSED BY SEVERAL PRINCIPALS OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.

_Request Sent to the Board of Education of Los Angeles, California._

December 24, 1920.

President of the Board of Education, Los Angeles, California.

MY DEAR SIR:

I am collecting data on the intellectual and moral status of American-born Japanese children. Among the data the most important, I need hardly say, are their school records.

I shall highly appreciate your courtesy if you will be pleased to provide me with the valuable information you have at your command bearing on the subject. What I am particularly interested in is the average record of American-born Japanese children and its comparison with the record of American children.

Yours very respectfully, (Signed) T. IYENAGA.

_Method of Gathering Material_

December 31, 1920.

DEAR MR. SHAFER:

May I trouble you to select two of your schools in which you have the largest Japanese attendance and secure for me at your earliest possible convenience data as to the number of Japanese children in those schools and the points about them that are touched upon in the accompanying letter?

My thought is this--that if we secure records from two or three schools where we have the largest Japanese attendance, this will suffice as a basis for decision as to the other such schools.

MRS. DORSEY.

January 7, 1921.

Mrs. Adda Wilson Hunter, _Principal_, Moneta School, Miss Mary A. Colestock, _Principal_, Hewitt St. School, Miss Mary A. Henderson, _Principal_, Amelia St. School, Miss Lizzie A. McKenzie, _Principal_, Hobart Blvd. School.

A communication has been received from Dr. T. Iyenaga stating that he is collecting data on the intellectual and moral status of American-born Japanese children. He is anxious to know the average record of American-born Japanese children in the schools and how it compares with the record of American children.

Will you kindly send me statement concerning the results in your schools?

Very truly yours, _Assistant Superintendent_.

_Replies_

(1)

_Office of the Principal of Hewitt St. School, District No. 151_

Report of American-born Japanese Children.

January 17, 1921.

MY DEAR MR. SHAFER:

The American-born Japanese children, who are enrolled in this school, compare most favorably with the American children both intellectually and morally. They are like all groups of children. We find some very bright children and some very dull ones. As a whole, they are more persevering and more dependable than the class of white children found in this school.

Miss Oliver, who has been working with the Japanese for the past four years, said, "When with them I feel that I am in the company of well-bred Americans."

Truly yours, MARY A. COLESTOCK, _Prin._

(2)

_Amelia St. School, City_

January 19, 1921.

MR. HARRY M. SHAFER, _Assistant Superintendent_, Los Angeles City Public Schools, Los Angeles, California.

DEAR MR. SHAFER:

My general observation has been that given anything of an equal chance, children are children, human nature is human nature, and brains are brains--whatever the mother tongue may be. Compared with our other foreign children, or with other children born in America of foreign parentage not Japanese, keeping in mind the differences in social position that exist in all classes, whatever the nationality may be, I cannot see much difference along any line between our Japanese children and our Mexicans, our French and our Italians; nor do I think any of them differ radically from what we are apt to term "American" children. Few families are many generations away from some foreign ancestors....

Our Japanese children are called brighter and more studious, sometimes, than the others. I think this is due to the fact that they have, in many cases, ambitious, educated parents who follow school work up very closely in the home. Where home restrictions are lifted, such conditions do not always prevail, any more than in cases of other neglected children. _They must_ be studious. Discipline of American-born Japanese children is not so close in the home as it seems to be with children born in Japan and reared along Japanese lines, yet such children show much more initiative in all of their work at school. They catch the American spirit.

As summary, I would say that physically, mentally, morally, given the same chance, there does not seem to me to be a great difference among children of the different nationalities, but this difference is most readily noticed. The other nationalities do assimilate quickly, and lose, to a great extent, their parents' national traits in short time; but it is exceedingly hard to get the same results with our Japanese children. They cling to one another, to their own ways, and to their own language, even after many years of work in public schools, where most social barriers are broken down. My personal feeling in the matter is that this condition is the result of lack of American education in the Japanese homes and lack of American touch with the Japanese mothers.

Our Home teachers are doing much to help along this line, but it is slow work, and work that takes much time, and requires great tact on part of the workers.

Most important to me is the work our public schools are doing with the Japanese girls, the mothers of tomorrow.

Yours respectfully, MARY A. HENDERSON.

(3)

_Report of Intellectual and Moral Status of American-born Japanese Children_

MONETA SCHOOL, LOS ANGELES SCHOOL DIST.

As a rule American-born Japanese children know no English when entering school. Their progress at first, therefore, is more slow than that of English speaking children. Japanese children require one year to complete one half year's work through the first, second, and third grades. After the third grade they complete the work in the time assigned.

They are especially good in handwork. Their chief difficulty is with English. In application they rank high.

As to their moral status they are neither better nor worse than other children.

MRS. ADDA WILSON HUNTER, _Principal Moneta School_. January 14, 1921.

_Report of Intellectual and Moral Status of American-Born Japanese Children_

========================================================================= Grade| Amer.- |Time to |Standard|Average | Rank |Appli- |1. In What Do | Born |Complete| Age of | Age of | in |cation.| They Excel? |Japanese |Work of | Grade. |Am.-Born|Class.| |2. What is |Enrolled.| 1/2 | |Jap'se. | | | Greatest | | Year. | | | | | Drawback? -----|---------|--------|--------|--------|------|-------|--------------- | | | | | | | Kgn. | 13 | 1 yr. |4-1/2-6 | 5 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | B-1 | 21 | 1 yr. | 6-7 | | | Good |1. Drawing, | | | | | | | writing, | | | | | | | handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | A-1 | 4 | 1 yr. | 6-7 | 9 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | B-2 | 2 | 1 yr. | 7-8 | 9 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | A-2 | 3 | 1 yr. | 7-8 | 10 | | Good |1. Handwork. | | | | | | |2. Do not speak | | | | | | | English. | | | | | | | B-3 | 2 | 5 mos. | 8-9 | 10 |Excel.| Poor |1. Spelling, | | | | | | | arithmetic. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | A-3 | 3 | 1 yr. | 8-9 | 10 | Fair | Good |1. Spelling, | | | | | | | arithmetic. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | B-4 | 1 | 5 mos. | 9-10 | 9 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | A-4 | 1 | 5 mos. | 9-10 | 11 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic, | | | | | | | spelling. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | B-5 | 2 | 5 mos. | 10-11 | 11 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic, | | | | | | | spelling. | | | | | | |2. English. | | | | | | | B-6 | 2 | 5 mos. | 11-12 | 10 | Good | Excel.|1. History, | | | | | | | geography. | | | | | | |2. Arithmetic. | | | | | | | A-6 | 1 | 5 mos. | 11-12 | 12-1/2 |Excel.| Excel.|1. Arithmetic, | | | | | | | history. | | | | | | |2. Geography. | | | | | | | =========================================================================

(4)

HOBART BLVD. SCHOOL, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, January 13, 1921.

MR. HARRY M. SHAFER, _Assistant Supt. City Schools_.

MY DEAR MR. SHAFER:

In reply to your inquiry relative to the American-born Japanese pupils of our school, I enclose statement as to results noted in the various classes.

Trusting that this may serve the purpose desired, and appreciating your very kindly interest,

Sincerely, LIZZIE A. MCKENZIE, _Principal_.

Hobart Blvd. School. January 13, 1921.

_Report on Japanese Pupils_

(American-born)

Many of the Japanese fail in First Grade on account of inability to understand the English language. In succeeding grades, progress is satisfactory as shown by the following tabulation of current date:

==================== | To Be Enrolled.|Promoted. ---------|---------- B-1 16 | 10 A-1 7 | 6 B-2 5 | 5 A-2 4 | 4 B-3 1 | 1 A-3 1 | 1 B-4 2 | 2 A-4 0 | B-5 2 | 1 A-5 1 | 1 B-6 1 | 1 A-6 0 |

Total enrolled, 40. Total promoted, 32. ====================

We find these children as a rule clever in use of pen and crayon, possessing light touch, having correct ideas of form, and excellent taste in selection of color.

As pupils they follow direction well, and are usually free from faults of rudeness or improper language. Of the forty above Kindergarten, three are troublesome and are persistent cases. In general, it may be said that these children as a class compare favorably with others in matters of progress and of conduct as well.

LIZZIE A. MCKENZIE, _Principal_.

LITERATURE ON THE SUBJECT

BOOKS

ANNALS OF AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, January, 1921. _Present Day Immigration with Special Reference to the Japanese._

ANNALS OF AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, September, 1909. _Chinese and Japanese in America._

GULICK, SYDNEY L. _American Democracy and Asiatic Citizenship._ Scribners, New York, 1918. _The American-Japanese Problem._ Scribners, New York, 1914.

ICHIHASHI, Y. _Japanese Immigration._ Marshall Press, San Francisco, 1915.

KAWAKAMI, K. K. _American-Japanese Relations._ Revell, New York, 1912. _Asia at the Door._ Revell, New York, 1914. _Japan in the World Politics._ Revell, New York, 1917.

MASAOKA, N. (Editor). _Japan to America._ G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1915.

MILLIS, H. A. _The Japanese Problem in the United States._ McMillan, New York, 1915.

PITKIN, WALTER B. _Must We Fight Japan?_ The Century Co., New York, 1921.

RUSSELL, LINDSAY (Editor). _America to Japan._ G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1915.

SCHERER, J. A. A. _The Japanese Crisis._ Stokes, 1915.

THE JAPANESE-AMERICAN NEWS. _The Japanese-American Year Book_, 1910 and 1918. San Francisco.

OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS

Annual Reports of the United States Commissioner-General of Immigration.

Bureau of Labor (California). Biennial Reports, and especially, "Report on the Japanese in California."

California and the Oriental. Report of California State Board of Control, with Governor Wm. D. Stephens's letter addressed to Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby. California State Printing Office, Sacramento, 1920.

Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. Chinese and Japanese in the United States, 1910. Bulletin 127, Washington Printing Office, 1914.

Immigration Commission. Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of Immigrant. Senate Document, No. 208, 61st Congress, 2nd Session. Washington Government Printing Office, 1910.

Immigration Laws of the United States. (Revised Federal Statutes).

KAHN, CONGRESSMAN. Japanese-California Problem. Congressional Record, 60, 4: 78-82, December 9, 1920.

METCALF, SECRETARY. Report on the Japanese School Question.

Naturalization Laws of the United States. (Revised Federal Statutes.)

Reports of the Immigration Commission. Immigrants in the Industries, Vols. 23, 24, 25, Senate Document, No. 633, 61st Congress.

ROOSEVELT, THEODORE. Presidential Message to Congress, 1907. House of Representatives; Message of the President of the United States, and Accompanying Documents. Part I; pp. 492-846. Ex. Doc. No. 1.

PAMPHLETS

CALIFORNIA FARMERS' CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION. _Japanese Immigration and the Japanese in California_, 1919.

CLEMENT, E. W. _Expatriation of Japanese Abroad._ Japanese Association of America, San Francisco, 1916.

ELIOT, CHAS. W. _Friendship between the United States and Japan._ Japanese Merchants' Association, Portland, Oregon.

GADSBY, JOHN. _Foreign Land-Ownership and Leasing in Japan_, 1920. Japanese Association of America, San Francisco, 1914.

GULICK, SYDNEY L. _How Shall Immigration be Regulated?_ 1920. _Japan and the Gentlemen's Agreement._ 1920. _The New Anti-Japanese Agitation._ 1920.

ICHIHASHI, Y. _Japanese Immigration, Its Status in California._ 1913.

IRISH, JOHN P. _Campaign of Lies, Stolen Letters of Senator Phelan._ 1920. _Shall Japanese-Americans in Idaho be Treated with Fairness and Justice or Not?_ 1921.

KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Senator Phelan, Dr. Gulick and I._ Bureau of Literary Service, San Francisco, 1920.

LAMONT, THOMAS, AND OTHERS. _Japan._ 1920.

PEOPLE'S LEAGUE OF JUSTICE. _Petition by People's League of Justice_, Los Angeles, California, 1920.

REA, GEORGE BRONSON. _Japan's Right to Exist._ _Far Eastern Review_, Shanghai, China, 1920.

ROOSEVELT, T. _America and Japan._ Reprint from the New York _Times_.

SHIMA, GEORGE. _An Appeal To Justice._ 1920.

TAFT, HENRY W. _Our Relations with Japan._ Japan Society, New York, 1920.

THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE OF JUSTICE. _California and the Japanese._ Oakland, California, December, 1920.

TYNDALL, PHILIP. _Proposed Initiative Measure to be Presented to the Legislature of 1921_, Seattle, Washington.

VANDERLIP, FRANK. _Mr. Vanderlip's Message._

WALLACE, J. B. _Waving the Yellow Flag in California._ Reprinted from the Dearborn Independent.

WILLIAMS, B. H. _The Case against the Japanese._ 1920.

ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS

"America and the Japanese Relations." WAINWRIGHT, S. H. _Outlook_, 124: 392, March, 1920.

"America's Responsibility on the Pacific." GREENBIE, S. _North American Review_, 212: 71-79, July, 1920.

"Another Japanese Problem." MCLEOD, H. _New Republic_, 24: 184-6, October 20, 1920.

"Anti-Japanese Agitation." _Business Chronicle_, 9, 18: 137-49, September, 1920.

"Asia's American Problem." ROBINSON, GEROID. _Pacific Review_, 367-388, December, 1920.

"California and the Japanese." KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Nation_, 112: 173-174, February 2, 1921.

"California and the Oriental." The Letter of WM. D. STEPHENS to the Secretary of State Colby. _The Pacific Review_, 349-361, December, 1920.

"California-Japanese Problem." _The Pacific Voice_, 5, 10: 4-10.

"California-Japanese Question." WOOLSEY, THEODORE S. _The American Journal of International Laws_, Oxford Press, 15, 1: 24-26, January, 1921.

"Co-operation between Japan and America." KANEKO, K. _Japan Review_, 24-26, December, 1920.

"Discrimination against the Japanese." _New Republic_, 24: 135-6.

"Future of Japanese-American Relations." SHIDEHARA, K. _Japan Review_, 170-171, April, 1920.

"Hegemony of the Pacific." _Living Age_, 316: 638-40.

"Japan, a Great Economic Power." LONGFORD, J. H. _Nineteenth Century_, 523: 526-39, September, 1920.

"Japan and America." _Far Eastern Review_, 16: 335-36.

"Japan and the United States, a Suggestion." OTTO, M. C. _Japan Review_, 334-336, October, 1920.

"Japan and the Japanese-California Problem." IYENAGA, T. _Current History_, 13, 1: 1-7, October, 1920.

"Japan as Colonizer." _Stead's Review_, 53, 7: 358-9.

"Japan Challenges Us to Control California." STODDARD, L. _World's Work_, 40: 48-85.

"Japan Our New Customer." STARRETT, W. A. _Scribner's_, 66: 517-18.

"Japan's Diplomacy of Necessity." _Living Age_, 316: 638-640.

"Japan's New Difficulties with China." _The New York Times Current History_, 457-458, December, 1920.

"Japan's Use of Her Hegemony." FERGUSON, J. C. _North American Review_, 210: 456-459.

"Japan's Aggression." INMAN, J. M. _Forum_, 65, 1: 1-9, January, 1921.

"Japanese-American Relations." SHIDEHARA, K. _Outlook_, 125: 317-18, June 16, 1920.

"Japanese-American Relations." YOSHINO, SAKUZO. _Pacific Review_, 418-421, December, 1920.

"Japanese and the Pacific Coast." RYDER, R. W. _North American Review_, 213, 1: 1-15, January, 1921.

"Japanese Farmers' Contribution to California." CHIBA, TOYOJI. _Japan Review_, 212-13, May, 1920.

"Japanese Imperialism in Siberia." CHAMBERLAIN, W. H. _Nation_, 110: 798-9.

"Japanese in America." TRENT, P. J. _Review of Reviews_, 61: 76-8, June, 1920.

"Japanese in California." BRIGGS, A. H.; JOHNSON, H. B.; LOOFBOUROW, I. J. _Japan Review_, 166-170, April, 1920.

"Japanese in California." IRISH, JOHN P. _Japan Review_, 7-72, January, 1920.

"Japanese in California." JORDAN, D. S. _The Pacific Review_, 316-65, December, 1920.

"Japanese Issue in California." STODDARD, L. _World's Work_, 40, 5: 585-600, September, 1920.

"Japanese Language Schools." KAWAKAMI, K. K. _Japan Review_, 14-15, January, 1921.

"Japanese Problem in California." LOCAN, C. A. _Current History_, 13: 7-11, October, 1920.

"Japanese Pupils and American Schools." FULTON, C. W. _North American Review_, December, 1906.

"Japanese Question." _Kawakami, K. K._ _Pacific Review_, 365-78, December, 1920.

"Japanese Views of California." _Literary Digest_, 67, 1: 20-1.

"Japanthropy." WOOLSTON, H. D. _Pacific Review,_ 289-96, December, 1920.

"Legal Aspects of the Japanese Question." MCMURRAY, ORRIN K. _Pacific Review_, 396-403, December, 1920.

"Liberalism in Japan." DEWEY, JOHN. _Dial_, 63: 283-5; 335-7; 369-71.

"Light on the Japanese Question." KINNEY, H. W. _Atlantic Monthly_, 126: 832-42, December, 1920.

"Moral Factors in Japanese Policy." BLAND, J. O. P. _Asia_, 211-217, March, 1920.

"Oriental Immigration from the Canadian Standpoint." BAGGS, THEODORE H. _Pacific Review,_ 408-418, December, 1920.

"Oriental in California." IRISH, JOHN P. _Overland_, 75: 332-3, April, 1920.

"Oriental Problem, as the Coast See It." HART, J. A. _World's Work_, March, 1906.

"Oriental Question and Popular Diplomacy." PRUETT, ROBERT L. _Japan Review_, 291-92, August, 1920.

"Possum and the Dinosaur." MASON, G. _Outlook_, 125: 319-20, June 16, 1920.

"Race Prejudice: Psychological Analysis." SATO, K. _Japan Review_, 237-238, June, 1920.

"Shall East and West Never Meet?" SATO, K. _Japan Review_, 336-37, October, 1920.

"Some Aspects of the So-called Japanese Problem." VANDERLIP, F. A. _Outlook_, 125: 380-4.

"What are the Japanese Doing towards Americanization?" SASAMORI, JUNZO. _Japan Review_, 22-24, December, 1920.

"What Japan Wants." ADACHI, K. _Nation_, 181-82, February 2, 1921.

"When East is West," GULICK, SYDNEY L. _Outlook_, 102: 12-14, April 3, 1920.

INDEX

Adaptability, Japanese disposition of, 20

AEsthetic temperament of Japanese, 13

Age distribution of Japanese in California, 112

Agreement, Root-Takahira, 34

Agriculture, Japanese, in California, 120-147; causes of Japanese progress in, 123-126

Ainu, 14

American-born Japanese, 174-177

American disposition, 9

Americanization, criterion of, 151-154

Ancestors, Japanese, 16

Anti-Alien Land Laws, 138-142; effect of, 145; Appendixes C, D

Anti-Japanese Agitation, causes of, 75-89

Asiatic policy, Japan's, 33-45

Assimilation, 137; 148-177; and nationalism, 148-159; meaning of, 151-154; biological, 155-162; of Japanese immigrants, 168-174

Australia, Japanese emigration to, 64-67

Birth-rate of Japanese in California, 109-119

Boas, Professor, quoted, 163

Bolsheviki, 38

Buddhism, 25

Bushido, 15, 21

California, causes of Anti-Japanese agitation in, 75; causes of Japanese influx to, 50-63; Christianity among Japanese in, 169-170; competition in, 133-135; congestion of Japanese in, 87-89; cultural assimilation of Japanese in, 166-168; genesis of hostility towards Japanese in, 71; population of, 93; problem, 7

Canada, Japanese emigration to, 67-69

Capitalism, 29

Castle, Professor, quoted, 159

Chiba, T., quoted, 129

China, Japan's cooeperation with, 42-45

Chinese, 23, 95

Chivalry, proletarian, 21

Christianity, 28

Colonization, Japanese policy of, 18

Confucianism, 25, 27

Congressional sub-Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 176

Constitution, Japanese, 11

Democracy, industrial, 31

Democratic institutions, Japanese training in, 172

Den Do Dan, 169-170

Despotism, Japanese, 22

Dewey, Professor John, 29

Dispersal of Japanese in California, 189

Disposition, Japanese, 20

Dual nationality, 191

East and West, 4, 195-196

Economic status of Japanese in California, 171

Education, system of, 31

Emotional nature, of Japanese, 9

English, Japanese ability to command, 170

Eta, 18

Eurasiatic relationship, 6

Expatriation Law of Japan, Appendix K

Farmers, Japanese, in California, 132-138

Fishberg, Dr., quoted, 164

"Gentlemen's Agreement," 100-106

German, influence on Japan, 30; idealism, 32

_Gikyoshin_, 21

Group consciousness of Japanese, 16

Gulick, Dr. Sydney L., quoted, 157

_Hara kiri_, 12

Hearn, Lafcadio, 44

Hedonism, Japanese, 15

Hideyoshi, 10

History of Japanese, 10, 20

Humanism, 32

Immigration to Australia, 64-67 Canada, 67-69 South America, 69 United States, 69-75

Industrial democracy, 31

Intelligence of Japanese in California, 170

Intermarriage, 155-162

Japan, topographical conditions of, 13; Nature of, 14

Japan's, Asiatic Policy, 33; land area, 52; agriculture, 52-55; industry, 57-62; population, 55-57; social conditions, 62-63

Japanese, ability to speak English, 170; age distribution of, in California, 112; agriculture in California, 120-147; ancestors, 16; assimilability of, 148-177; birth rate in California, 109-119; civilization of, 14; Constitution, 11; death rate of, in California, 117; descendants in California, 164-166, 174-177; economic status of, in California, 171; farm labor, 126-131; farmers in California, 132-138; immigration to America, 97-107; Land Laws, 142-145; morality of, in California, 168-169; nationality, 85-86; number of, in California, 91; philosophy, 24; sex distribution of, in California, 112; social system, 30; susceptibility of, 12; training in civics, 172

Jesuit Fathers, 10

Jones and East, quoted, 159

_Kikotsu_, 21

Kipling, quoted, 4

Kojiki, 16

Korea, amalgamation of, 34; local self-government in, 36; situation in, 35-37

Koreans, 18

Kusama, Shiko, note, 170

Labor, 30

Land, amount held by Japanese in California, 135-137

Land Laws, Anti-Alien, 138-142; Appendixes C and D

League of Nations, 19

Lippman, Walter, note, 86

Manchuria, 37

Mankind, 6

Marriage, Japanese, 11

Millis, Professor H. A., quoted, 157

Morality of Japanese in California, 168-169

Morris, Roland, 186

Myth, 17

Nationalism, 148

Native-born Japanese, 174

Nevada, 23

Newlands, U. S. Senator, 23

Nihongi, 16

Nitobe, Dr., 22

Number of Japanese in California, 91

Oakesmith, John, quoted, 176

Occidental learning, 26

Occidentalism, ultra, 19

_Otokodate_, 21

Pacific Coast, 193-194

Passports, 103

Patriotism of Japanese, 17

Perry, Commodore, 3

Philosophy, Japanese, 24

Picture brides, 113

Political rights of Japanese, 31

Politics as a cause of agitation, 80-82

Population of Japanese in California, 90-97

Positivism, English, 28

Pragmatism, 29, 32

Pride of Japanese, 11, 19

Propaganda, 83

Race war, 7

Racial difference, 83-85

Radicals, Japanese, 20

Relationship, American Japanese, 7

Roosevelt, Theodore, 33

Root-Takahira Agreement, 34

Russo-Japanese war, 18

Sakura, Sogoro, 22

Samurai, 12, 15

San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, 187

Santayana, 29

Science, lack of, in Japan, 15

Sex distribution of Japanese in California, 113

Shantung, 39

Shibusawa, Viscount, 186

Smuggling of Japanese to United States, 107-109

Social, force, 23; _milieu_ as affecting man, 165; reorganization, 29

South America, Japanese emigration to, 69

State Board of Control of California, 96

Stephens, Governor, quoted, 5, 23, 122

Suicide in Japan, 12

Thought, Japanese, 29

Tokugawa regime, 22

Traits, Japanese, 9

Treaty, American-Japanese, 187, Appendix B

United States, the, Japanese immigration to, 69-74

Unity, national, 17

Utilitarians, 29

Vanderlip, Frank, 187

Wang Yang Ming, 26

White and yellow races, 5

Wilson, Woodrow, quoted, 154

Women, status of Japanese, 31

Yamato race, 14

"Yellow peril," 82

Young Japan, 14

FOOTNOTES:

[1] _The System of Samurai Ethics and Obligations of Honor._

[2] See "The New Chino-Japanese Treaties and Their Import," by T. Iyenaga, in _The American Review of Reviews_, September, 1915.

[3] According to the result of the census taken on October 1, 1920, the Japanese population of South Manchuria stands at 154,998 souls. Of this total, those living at Dairen number 63,745; Fushun, 12,659; Mukden, 12,268; Port Arthur, 9379; Antung, 7057, and Anshan, 6678, while those resident in the jurisdiction of Kwantung Province number 74,893.

[4] One dollar U. S. currency is approximately two yen.

[5] For a complete tabulation of Japanese immigration see appendix F.

[6] Tokyo Emigration Co., Toyo Emigration Co., were the most conspicuous.

[7] Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the methods by which Oriental laborers were induced to come to Canada in 1909.

[8] Report as cited, p. 54.

[9] Those who voted in the negative for the initiative bill were 222,086 against 668,483 in the affirmative.

[10] _Stakes of Diplomacy_, by Walter Lippman, p. 40.

[11] Report published on October 5, 1920, by the Bureau of Commercial Affairs, Foreign Office, Tokyo, Japan.

[12] _California and the Oriental, State Board of Control of California, 1920_, p. 30.

[13] _California and the Oriental_, p. 27.

[14] For detailed comparison of geographical distribution of Chinese and Japanese see Appendix I.

[15] See Appendix G.

[16] _California and the Oriental_, p. 31.

[17] Total number of Japanese born in California so far is approximately 30,000, of which about 5000 have either died or live in Japan.

[18] Annual Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration.

[19] _Immigration Laws--Rules of November 15, 1911_, published by U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Immigration, March 10, 1913.

[20] _Japan Year Book_, 1920, p. 34.

[21] _Pacific Review_, vol. i., No. 3, p. 363; "The Japanese in California," by David S. Jordan.

[22] Bulletin 127, 1914, p. 8.

[23] The following data are reported by the Bureau of Census, Washington, in preliminary publication of 1920 census:

The Japanese population by sex in 1920 is male 44,364, female 25,832; for 1910, male 35,116, female 6,240; and for 1900, male 9,598, female 553. The per cent. distribution by sex of the Japanese in 1920 is male 63.2 per cent., female 36.8 per cent.; for 1910 male 84.9 per cent., female 15.1 per cent.; and for 1900, male 94.6 per cent., female 5.4 per cent.

[24] Gulick, S. L., _Japan and the Gentlemen's Agreement_, 1920, p. 7.

[25] _World Almanac 1921_, p. 476-9.

[26] _World Almanac 1920_, p. 487.

[27] The birth rate of immigration population in Massachusetts was 49.1 in 1910.

[28] _Senate Document_, vol. lxv., 61st Congress.

[29] _Senate Document_, vol. lxv., 61st Congress.

[30] Of the forty-one answers to the questionnaires sent to the County Farm Commissioners in California by the Board of Control asking them to give pertinent facts concerning the methods used by these races (Orientals) in securing land leases, twenty-five stated: "The Japanese pay more rent in cash or shares"; ten said: "Japanese pay ordinary rent" or "use ordinary means in obtaining lease." _California and the Oriental_, pp. 56-61.

[31] _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, pp. 148-49.

[32] _California and the Oriental_, pp. 56-61.

[33] _Ibid._, p. 221.

[34] _California and the Oriental_, p. 58.

[35] _Immigration Commission Reports_, vol. xxiii., chap. iv.

[36] _Japanese-American Year Book_, 1918, p. 10.

[37] _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, p. 123.

[38] For detailed comparison of crops raised by white and Japanese farmers see Appendix E.

[39] Figures taken from _California and the Oriental_, p. 47.

[40] See Appendix B.

[41] For full texts of land laws 1913 and 1920 see Appendixes C and D.

[42] _California and the Oriental_, p. 104.

[43] Mr. Newman in the hearings held at Sacramento, California, in 1913.

[44] Millis' _The Japanese Problem in the United States_, p. 275.

[45] Gulick, S. L., _The American Japanese Problem_, p. 153.

[46] Jones and East, _Inbreeding and Outbreeding--Their Genetic and Sociological Significance_, p. 255.

[47] W. E. Castle, _Genetics and Eugenics_, pp. 233-38.

[48] _California and the Oriental_, p. 15.

[49] "Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of Immigrants." _Senate Document No. 208_, pp. 7-54.

[50] _The Jews: A Study of Race and Environment._

[51] See Appendix A.

[52] _The Forum_, January, 1921, p. 3.

[53] For this as well as other information the authors are indebted to Mr. S. Kusama, who furnished us with the materials which were carefully prepared by him from first-hand research in California.

[54] _Bureau of Census Bulletin 127_, p. 12.

[55] _Race and Nationality_, Frederick A. Stokes Co., New York, 1919.

[56] See example of testimony in Appendix L.

See also Appendix M in which the subject of comparative standing of intelligence and behaviour of native-born Japanese children and American children is discussed by several principals of elementary schools in Southern California.

[57] For text of this law see Appendix K.

Transcriber's Notes:

Passages in italics are indicated by _italics_.

Passages in bold are indicated by =bold=.

Foonote 18 appears on page 104 of the text, but there is no corresponding marker on the page.