of the United States. The patient, loyal and scrupulous observ ance by Japan for more than sixteen years of these self-denying regulations, in the interest of good relations between the two countries, now seems to have been wasted.

"It is not denied that, fundamentally speaking, it lies within the inherent sovereign power of each State to limit and control immigration to its own domains, but when, in the exercise of such right, an evident injustice is done to a foreign nation in disregard of its proper self-respect, of international understandings or of ordinary rules of comity, the question necessarily assumes an aspect which justifies diplomatic discussion and adjustment.

“Accordingly, the Japanese Government consider it their duty to maintain and to place on record their solemn protest against the discriminatory clause in section 13 (c) of the Immigration Act of 1924 and to request the American Government to take all possible and suitable measures for the removal of such discrimination."

I am instructed further to express the confidence that this communication will be received by the American Government in the same spirit of friendliness and candor in which it is made. Accept, sir, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration.

(Signed) M. HANIHARA

PART II

TEXT OF THE REPLY OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

Department of State
Washington, June 16, 1924

His Excellency.

Mr. Masanao Hanihara,

Japanese Ambassador,

Excellency:

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note under date of May 31st containing a memorandum stating the position of the Japanese Government with respect to the provision of section 13 (c) of the Immigration Act of 1924. I take pleasure in noting your reference to the friendliness and candor in which your communication has been made and you may be assured of the readiness of this Government to consider in the same spirit the views you have set forth.

At the time of the signing of the Immigration Bill the President issued a statement, a copy of which I had the privilege of handing to you, gladly recognizing the fact that the enactment of this provision "does not imply any change in our sentiment of admiration and cordial friendship for the Japanese people, a sentiment which has had and will continue to have abundant manifestation." Permit me to state briefly the substance of the provision. Section 13 (c) related to all aliens ineligible to citizenship. It establishes certain exceptions, and to these classes the exclusion provision does not apply, to wit:

"Those who are not immigrants as defined in section 3 of the act, that is (1) a Government official, his family, attendants, servants, and employes, (2) an alien visiting the United States temporarily as a tourist or temporarily for business or pleasure, (3) an alien in continuous transit through the United States, (4) an alien lawfully admitted to the United States who later goes in transit from one part of the United States to another through foreign contiguous territory, (5) a bona fide alien seaman serving as such on a vessel arriving at a port of the United States and seeking to enter temporarily the United States solely in the pursuit of his calling as a seaman, and (6) an alien entitled to enter the United States solely to carry on trade under and in pursuance of the provisions of a present existing treaty of commerce and navigation."

Those who are admissible as no-quota immigrants under the provisions of subdivisions (b), (d) or (e) of section four, that is “(b) an immigrant previously lawfully admitted to the United States, who is returning from a temporary visit abroad; (d) an immigrant who continuously for at least two years immediately preceding the time of his application for admission to the United States has been and who seeks to enter the United States solely for the purpose of carrying on the vocation of minister of any religious denomination, or professor of a college, academy, seminary or university, and his wife and his unmarried children under 18 years of age, if accompanying or following to join him; or (e) an immigrant who is a bona fide student at least 15 years of age and who seeks to enter the United States solely for the purpose of study at an accredited school, college, academy, seminary or university, particularly designated by him and approved by the Secretary of Labor, which shall have agreed to report to the Secretary of Labor the termination of attendance of each im

migrant student, and if any such institution of learning fails to make such reports promptly the approval shall be withdrawn." Also the wives or unmarried children under 18 years of age of immigrants admissible under subdivision (d) of section four, above quoted.

It will be thus observed that, taking these exceptions into account, the provision in question does not differ greatly in its practical operation, or in the policy which it reflects, from the understanding embodied in the Gentlemen's Agreement under which the Japanese Government has cooperated with the Government of the United States in preventing the emigration of Japanese laborers to this country. We fully and gratefully appreciate the assistance which has thus been rendered by the Japanese Government in the carrying out of this long-established policy, and it is not deemed to be necessary to refer to the economic considerations which have inspired it. Indeed, the appropriateness of that policy which has not evidenced any lack of esteem for the Japanese people, their character and achievements, has been confirmed rather than questioned by the voluntary action of your Government in aiding its execution.

The point of substantial difference between the existing arrangement and the provision of the Immigration Act is that the latter has expressed, as the President has stated, "the determination of the Congress to exercise its prerogative in defining by legislation the control of immigration instead of leaving it to international arrangements." It is not understood that this prerogative is called in question, but, rather, your Government expressly recognizes that "it lies within the inherent sovereign power of each State to limit and to control immigration in its own domains," an authority which it is believed the Japanese Government has not failed to exercise in its own discretion with respect to the admission of aliens and the conditions and location of their settlement within its borders. While the President would have preferred to continue the existing arrangement with the Japanese Government, and to have entered into negotiations for such modifications as might seem to be desirable, this Government does not feel that it is limited to such an international arrangement or that by virtue of the existing understanding or of the negotiations which it has conducted in the past with the Japanese Government, it has in any sense lost or impaired the full liberty of action which it would otherwise have

in this matter. On the contrary, that freedom with respect to the control of immigration, which is an essential element of sovereignty and entirely compatible with the friendly sentiments which animate our international relations, this Government in the course of these negotiations always fully reserved.

Thus in the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation concluded with Japan in 1894 it was expressly stipulated in Article II:

"It is, however, understood that the stipulations contained in this and the preceding article do not in any way affect the laws, ordinances or regulations with regard to trade, the immigration of laborers, police and public security which are in force or which may hereafter be enacted in either of the two countries.”

It is true that at the time of the negotiation of the Treaty of 1911 the Japanese Government desired that the provision above quoted should be eliminated and that this Government acquiesced in that proposal in view of the fact that the Japanese Government had, in 1907-8, by means of the Gentlemen's Agreement, undertaken such measures of restriction as it was anticipated would prove adequate to prevent any substantial increase in the number of Japanese laborers in the United States. In connection with the treaty revision of 1911 the Japanese Government renewed this undertaking in the form of a declaration attached to the treaty. In acquiescing in this procedure, however, this Government was careful to negative any intention to derogate from the full right to exercise in its discretion control over immigration. In view of the statements contained in your communication with respect to these negotiations I feel that I should refer to the exchange of views then had. You will recall that, in a memorandum of October 19, 1910, suggesting a basis for the treaty revisions then in contemplation, the Japanese Embassy stated:

"*** The measures which the Imperial Government have enforced for the past two and a half years in regulation of the question of emigration of laborers to the United States have, it is believed, proved entirely satisfactory and far more effective than any prohibition of immigration would have been. Those measures of restraint were undertaken voluntarily, in order to prevent any dispute or issue between the two countries on the subject of labor immigration, and will be continued, it may be added, so long as the condition of things calls for such continuation.

"Accordingly, having in view the actual situation, the Imperial Government are convinced that the reservation in question is not only not necessary, but that it is an engagement which, if continued, is more liable to give rise to misunderstandings than to remove difficulties. In any case, it is a stipulation which not unnaturally is distasteful to national sensibilities. In these circumstances the Imperial Government desire in the new treaty to suppress entirely the reservation above mentioned, and to leave, in word as well as in fact, the question to which it relates for friendly adjustment between the two Governments independently of any conventional stipulations on the subject. In expressing that desire they are not unmindful of the difficulties under which the United States labor in the matter of immigration, and they will accordingly, if so desired, be willing to make the proposed treaty terminable at any time upon six months' notice.

"The Japanese Embassy is satisfied that in the presence of such a termination clause the Contracting States would actually enjoy greater liberty of action, so far as immigration is concerned, than under the existing reservation on the subject, however liberally construed."

Replying to these suggestions, the Department of State declared in its memorandum sent to the Japanese Ambassador on January 23, 1911, thatit was prepared to enter into negotiations for a new treaty of commerce and navigation on the following bases:

"The Department of State understands, and proceeds upon the understanding, that the proposal of the Japanese Government made in the above-mentioned memorandum is that the clause relating to immigration in the existing treaty be omitted for the reason that the limitation and control which the Imperial Japanese Government has enforced for the past two and a half years in regulation of emigration of laborers to the United States, and which the two Governments have recognized as a proper measure of adjustment under all the circumstances, are to be continued with equal effectiveness during the life of the new treaty, the two Governments, when necessary, cooperating to this end; the treaty to be made terminable upon six months' notice.

"It is further understood that the Japanese Government will at the time of signature of the treaty make a formal declaration to the above effect, which may, in the discretion of the Government of the United States, be made public.