Japan and perform his military duty, and he failed to do so. He had certain relatives over there, and those relatives were punished because Mr. Fukuda, an American citizen, declined to go back to Japan and perform his conscription duties. He has a receipt showing that H. Nakahara, who was his relative, had paid $5 to the district attorney of the Iwakuni district for alleged violation of the military conscription law by H. Fukuda.

Senator KING They insist upon dual citizenship, the same as Germany did for a while?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. They do, Senator, but they carry it to a very much greater extent. Germany does not in this country maintain associations under which every American citizen of German parentage is influenced and controlled; those associations subject to major associations, and those in turn subject to the control and direction of the local German consul. That is the fact with regard to Japan and the Japanese, and here I have in my exhibits the proof of it. For instance, from Yoshi Kuno, a professor of the University of California, a Japanese, a son of one of the great generals of Japan, in this country many years, but not a citizen of the United Stateshe has published a statement, in the interest of permanent friendship between the United States and Japan, showing the way in which Japan has been determinedly and persistently doing these things,. and warning that a continuance of that policy must inevitably result in the breach of those friendly relations between this country and his own country of Japan. I will leave that with you, Senator, and be very glad to call your attention to any specific point in it.

There have been in the neighborhood of 90,000 Japanese born under the American flag in continental United States and in Hawaii. Three years ago I had an official report from, I think it was, the department of justice in Tokyo, and there were exactly 64 of that entire number who had been permitted to expatriate under the laws of Japan. They were claiming and exercising the rights of American citizenship, and all but 64 of those 90,000 were tied up to Japan and compelled to do her will in peace and in war.

Senator KING. Have you evidence that they assented to this claim of Japan and recognized their allegiance to the Japanese Government? Or was it a mere assertion of a claim by Japan which the American citizens resisted?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. For instance, every Japanese born in this coun-" try has to register with the Japanese consul, and he does register, as a citizen of Japan. He is subject to the control and direction of his local Japanese association. He can get none of the necessary privileges or rights in the way of communication with Japan, passports, and so on, unless he has fulfilled the duties required of him.

Why, over in Honolulu during the time when we were at war and under arms a number of Japanese had enlisted with the colors. Many of them, I suppose really all of them, were American-born citizens, and claiming rights as such. One of those American-born citizens, in American khaki, coming in from the camp came to the Japanese consul in Honolulu, and, under his right as a Japanese citizen, got credentials from that consul recognizing him as such so that he could bring over from Japan a picture bride.

Senator KING. You will recall that the War of 1812 was largely the result of the assertion by Great Britain of her right over English

men who had expatriated themselves and taken out American citizenship papers and had gone upon our ships, and they were seized upon the high seas.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Senator, that was a hundred years ago.

Senator KING. I know. I am merely stating it as a fact. And yet England, perhaps improperly, certainly from our concepts of international law, asserted jurisdiction over those persons. Nevertheless, they did not assent to that. I am not expressing any opinion. Mr. MCCLATCHY. Do not misunderstand me. I am not denying the right of Japan to do these things. I am calling attention to the fact and suggesting that the fact is one of the strong indications that it would be absurd, criminal, and suicidal on the part of this country to admit as permanent residents people of a proud race who will be obliged to do these things.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. Senator, before we depart from that, with the permission of the chairman, I undertake to maintain that practically 100 per cent of the native-born Japanese in the United States and 100 per cent of those who have come here from Japan do submit and do yield obedience to the demands of Japan.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. I might supplement that, if I am not taking too much time, by referring the committee to the testimony of the Hawaiian commission before the House committee in either 1921 or 1922.

The big sugar strike in Honolulu developed this astounding fact: Hawaii had been priding herself on Americanizing the American born-the Hawaiian-born Japanese. The legion was particularly proud of the fact that it was educating those American citizens of Japanese ancestry. And yet they found in the course of that strike that with a few individual exceptions, there was not a single Japanese in the Territory of Hawaii, immigrant or Hawaiian born, who was not, under duress or voluntarily, conforming to the orders of the Japanese family leaders in Japan, and, directly or indirectly, actively or in other ways, upholding the strike as a racial matter.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. And guided by the consul.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. I do not know whether the question has been brought up, but I see by the report of the Commissioner General of Immigration that in the last fiscal year there were admitted a total of 11,571 Japanese and there departed 11,172 Japanese, so that the net gain by immigration in the last fiscal year was 399 persons. Do you regard that as a menace?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Senator, permit me to say-I will go into that now if you desire, but I am dealing with the matter of the actual result of the agreement later.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. Very well.

Senator KING. As I understand it, under the bill which we are discussing now, if it should be enacted into law, the number which would be admitted would not greatly exceed 300.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Oh, I beg your pardon, Senator. You are taking the 1910 census, as I understand it-you have already agreed to do that. The 1910 census would admit 3,000 Japanese a year.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. That would mean that there were 150,000 Japanese-born residents in the country in 1910?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. In 1910.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. Is that in the continental United States?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. No; continental United States and Hawaii. Senator REED of Pennsylvania. The bill we are considering refers only to the number in the continental United States.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Then it would be about 72,000-1,400 persons a year.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. I have this thought, that under the gentleman's agreement there is a distinct restriction on Japanese immigration. This quota system which we will now add to that supplies an additional restriction. It does not in any sense liberalize the present law; it supplies an additional bar. I understand that that is not satisfactory, that you want absolute exclusion?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Yes, Senator; and if you will permit me, I will go into that now if you prefer.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. No; I did not want to disturb the order of your remarks at all, just so long as you do not pass over the subject entirely.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McClatchy, I would be very glad to have you, when you come to it, discuss the effect of including the Japanese in the quota law.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. I am prepared to do that, Mr. Chairman. That is one of my topics.

I was speaking of the Japanese children born here and the difficulty of making American citizens of them. They are educated in separate Japanese schools in California and Hawaii, where they are taught to be loyal and ideal Japanese citizens. Again, I only refer to that as a fact and as indicating that that class of people is dangerous for us. It is perfectly proper for Japan to educate her citizens in Japanese loyalty. A great many of those children' are sent back to Japan between the ages of 6 and 8 years, and they remain there until they are 17 or 19, and when they come back they are not American citizens, they are Japanese citizens, loyal, and they never become American citizens in intent or ideal after that.

Why, two years ago-and I suppose the conditions are about the same now-there were, according to the admission of the Japanese, 15,000, and according to the estimate of the health board in the territory, 20,000 Hawaiian-born Japanese children in Japan, receiving their education in Japanese schools and destined to come back when they were 17 or 19 years of age as full fledged loyal Japanese citizens entitled to all the rights and privileges of American citizens but drilled to do the will of Japan in peace and in war. From California it is estimated that there are 15,000 California-born Japanese children in Japan receiving a Japanese education. I can not quote the exact figures, but there were 6,600 of those children sent out from the port of San Francisco in three years, to receive that Japanese education and come back.

Senator HARRISON. What is your estimate of the Japanese in Mexico?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. I do not like to talk about things on which I am not informed, Senator, and I do not know. I may say this enly, that so far as I know and believe, Mexico is used largely as a

temporary abiding place for those who intend ultimately to get into the United States. The same is true of South American ports.

Now, the Japanese maintain in this country a government within a government. That is to say, as I have indicated they are subject individually, whether born here or immigrants, to the orders of the local associations, which in turn are subject to the central associations in the five consular ports of the Pacific coast, and those in turn are under the direct orders of the local Japanese consuls. That is not my statement; that is the statement of a Japanese, Professor Yoshi Kuno, and I have it here in one of my exhibits.

Senator KING. Mr. McClatchy, when I was in California and when I was in Hawaii I talked with a good many Japanese; some of them voluntarily sought me and in other cases I sought them for the purpose of getting information, with a purely open mind. I discussed with them very frankly some of the matters to which you are referring, and some of the young men who were contemplating going to Japan to complete their education stated to me that they did it with a great deal of reluctance. They said that there was a sort of bar sinister placed upon them by the Americans; that there in Hawaii the Americans, the Anglo-Saxon race, always looked upon them as Japanese, and American newspapers were always denouncing them and denouncing the country of the birth of their fathers, holding it up as the awful example, that it was the yellow peril, that it was the menace of Anglo-Saxon institutions, and of our country. And they conceded that the attitude of the American mind was that they were to be outcasts even if they were American citizens under the American flag; that we erected social barriers against them and political barriers agains them, and that there were economic barriers against them; and that whereas they might be born here and be American citizens by reason of birth, our attitude forbade any possible amalgamation, assimilation or association, political, or otherwise.

It seems to me there is a good deal in that. Have we dealt properly and fairly with the young Japanese boy and girl born in America? Have we dealt fairly with the Jew, with the Italian, with the Greek, with the Hungarian, with the Pole, with these young boys, and girls who were born here and with those who have come here? Have we held out a welcoming hand with a view to assimilating them, or haven't we too often pushed them out, ostracized them, put them into the ghetto and forced them to assume a feeling of affection and loyalty to their fatherland that they did not want to assume?

That is worthy of consideration, though I express no opinion. Mr. MCCLATCHY. Senator, that suggestion is an entirely fair one, and what you say is well grounded. That is quite true. But remember just this distinction. You in the East here, who come in contact with the cultured and desirable Japanese, have no idea, no conception, of the class of immigration which comes into California. I have, I am proud to say, among the Japanese many friends. I have been able to discuss these questions with them in perfect frankness and amity, with Vicount Shibusawa, the most prominent private citizen of Japan now, and others. And there has always been that trouble, that even where they have individually the desire to become thorough Americans there is, as you say, this bar.

But that is hopeless, Senator. That is the result of the absolute unassimilability of the two races. Whether it is our fault or theirs,

it exists. It is mutual. And since it is so, it is our duty, as I see it, to protect our race and our people and our Nation, with all its faults, rather than to sacrifice it by letting in an unassimilable alien people at their request or demand.

We do not differ very much, Senator, when all the facts are before us, on that point at least.

Senator KING. I did not express an opinion. I was just citing some of the suggestions which have been made to me.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. I agree with you, Senator, on that point, but I say that these are conditions which we face.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McClatchy, when you come to the end of your statement of facts I want to ask you to discuss the numbers that come in under the gentleman's agreement.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Yes, Mr. Chairman; I have that. Do you want me to take it up now?

The CHAIRMAN. No; I do not wish to interrupt the order of your argument.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Now, I want to show you why, in the judgment of California, aliens ineligible to citizenship are so hopelessly unassimilable, and why, in our judgment, of all those races the Japanese, notwithstanding our friendly feeling toward them, are the most unassimilable and the most dangerous.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me say that the reason why I asked that question is this: Suppose there were only 100 coming in, a very minimum number, then you would come to the international question of disturbing our international relations with Japan? I want to know whether, in point of numbers, it is reduced to a minimum so that it is a negligible quantity, or whether in practical operations, under present conditions, it is a menace.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. I will come to that, Mr. Chairman. But I will say briefly that California will not be satisfied with any quota, no matter how small, for reasons which I think will commend themselves when I present them to your judgment.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Mr. McClatchy, in that aspect of it, how many come in now under the present law, and, secondly, how many would come in under the quota?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Under your quota?

The CHAIRMAN. Under the 2 per cent quota. You need not answer it now, but when you come to discuss the numbers, I wish you would. Senator REED of Pennsylvania. I can put the figures in the record, Mr. Chairman. About 1,400 would come in if the quota were 2 per cent, based on the census of 1910. If the quota were based on my amendment, it would be about 300 persons per year.

(At this point the hearing was suspended for about 10 minutes to permit members of the committee to attend upon a vote in the Senate.)

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. Continue your statement, please, Mr. McClatchy.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. I have shown the reasons why California believes that it is impossible to assimilate the Japanese into American citi-" zenship, not because of their fault-it is ours, if you like but the two races are unassimilable, and, therefore, it is a danger to the peace and friendliness and good will of the two nations to have that condition continue in this country.