Japan and the California Problem Part 8

On April 13, 1910, the j.a.panese Diet pa.s.sed a land law which embodied, among others, the following provisions:

Article I. Foreigners domiciled or resident in j.a.pan and foreign juridical persons registered therein shall enjoy the right of owners.h.i.+p in land, provided always that in the countries to which they belong such right is extended to j.a.panese subjects, and j.a.panese juridical persons....

Article II. Foreigners and foreign juridical persons shall not be capable of enjoying the right of owners.h.i.+p in land in the following districts: First, Hokkaido; second, Formosa; third, Karafuto; fourth, districts necessary for national defense.

Article III. In case a foreigner or a foreign juridical person owning land ceases to be capable of enjoying the right of owners.h.i.+p in land, the owners.h.i.+p of such land shall accrue to the fiscus [the Imperial Treasury], unless he disposes of it within a period of one year.

Article IV. The date for putting the present law into force shall be determined by Imperial ordinance.

This law was severely criticized by both liberals and foreigners on account of its too conservative provisions, and as a consequence it was not promulgated by the Emperor for the time being. In the legislative session of 1919, the Government introduced to the Diet a revised bill embodying more liberal principles and omitting all features in the law of 1910 considered objectionable by foreigners. Unfortunately the Lower House was suddenly dissolved by the deadlock encountered on the issue of universal suffrage before the proposed law was voted on. The j.a.panese Government, it is reported, has drafted a new law with the intention of introducing it to the session of the Diet now sitting (January, 1921), the notable feature of which is the inclusion of Korea and other territories among the available lands for owners.h.i.+p by foreigners.

Effect of the Initiative Bill.

Already there are indications that the action of California has had its effect on the neighboring States. Similar legislation is mooted in Texas, Was.h.i.+ngton, Oregon, and Nebraska. When we consider that in those States the number of j.a.panese is very small and the amount of land-holding is simply negligible, the only explanation for the proposal is the influence of California, which has been deliberately strengthened by the direct appeal of Governor Stephens to other States for cooperation. In this way California is rather making the local situation worse, for by limiting the scope of discriminatory activity within her doors, she might have found a remedy for relieving the tension found therein through the dispersal of j.a.panese into other States.

It is not the purpose of this book to enter into a detailed examination of the legal aspects and technicalities of the new land law voted on by the California electorate. It may be found in contravention to the American Const.i.tution by depriving certain residents legally admitted into this country of the "equal protection of the law" as guaranteed by that instrument. The j.a.panese Government may lay before the Federal Government a formal protest against the land law on the theory that it infringes on the j.a.panese-American Treaty of 1911, by running counter to the spirit of fairness pervading the doc.u.ment in withholding from j.a.panese aliens the rights and privileges enjoyed by aliens of other nationalities. Or it may be the intention of the Was.h.i.+ngton and Tokyo Governments to reach a mutual agreement by concluding a new treaty which will specifically state the rights to be conferred upon each other's subjects, so that subterfuge will no longer be possible, and, on the other hand, will completely prevent the entrance of j.a.panese immigrants. We are not in a position to gauge the intent and nature of the proposed treaty, which is understood to be under way between the j.a.panese Emba.s.sy and the State Department, while it is in the stage of negotiation or discussion. Whatever may be the nature of the _pourparler_, it must be based on the conviction that neither legal contention nor diplomatic dispute will ever settle the vexed question.

America is the country of the people, and the Government is powerless unless it is supported by the people. The key to the solution, accordingly, must be found in the att.i.tude of the people and not exclusively in legal or diplomatic arrangements. We are of the opinion, therefore, that the surest way of removing the difficulty is to study the causes that const.i.tute the present California unrest and endeavor to eliminate them so far as it is within our power to do so. Only by regaining the genuine friends.h.i.+p of the people of California in this way can the j.a.panese in that State expect to free themselves from the unfortunate unfriendly pressure.

CHAPTER IX

a.s.sIMILATION

Nationalism and a.s.similation.

In the question of a.s.similation we find the heart of the j.a.panese problem in California. The reader will probably recall that, in discussing California's effort to counteract the progress of the j.a.panese in agriculture, we stated that there would be no ground for justification of the recent rigorous measure except on the a.s.sumption that the j.a.panese are una.s.similable, and that they should not, therefore, be allowed to flourish in that State. He will also remember that we stated, in discussing the j.a.panese population in California, that, were it not for the apprehension of the probable impossibility of a.s.similating the j.a.panese, their increase in number either in California or in the United States was not an occasion for anxiety. These arguments implied our belief that the entire problem of the j.a.panese-California situation would finally resolve itself to one crucial point; namely, the question of a.s.similation. It is our profound conviction that if it be established that the j.a.panese are una.s.similable, then decisive steps--much more decisive than any so far adopted--should be taken by both America and j.a.pan in order to forestall a possible tragedy in the future.

We hold this view because the present state of world affairs allows us to entertain no other opinion. As long as our world order is such that its const.i.tuent units are highly organized, composite nations with independent rights and marked individualities, it is only natural that each nation should demand that foreigners entering for the purpose of permanent settlement conform in a large measure to the social order and ideals of the country. In case this is deemed impossible, the nation opposes any large influx of foreign races because of the necessity of maintaining its national unity and harmony.

Naturally, this tendency of conserving strict national integrity is strongest among the oldest and most highly organized States, and weakest among the new and loosely integrated countries. Countries like j.a.pan and England, which have long, proud histories and traditions, and which are highly organized, are more strict about the way they take foreigners into their households. On the other hand, new countries like Australia and the South American republics, which have short histories and few traditions, are more or less liberal in admitting foreigners. This truth has been exemplified by the history of the United States. She has shown a marked laxity in this regard during the colonial and growing periods; but as soon as she achieved a more perfect national unity and consciousness, she began to manifest a strong tendency toward integration, exerting her energy on the one hand upon consolidation of her population and on the other upon excluding "squatters" who would not readily a.s.similate.

Whether or not such a nationalistic policy may be considered just, and whatever change the future may witness in this regard, the fact remains that not a single nation in the world at present discards or rejects the policy in practice. In the face of such a situation the only alternative for the j.a.panese in the United States, when they obstinately cling to their own ways of living and thinking, would be to go elsewhere.

This conviction of ours should not be confused with the hasty, groundless conjecture that the j.a.panese are a race utterly impossible of a.s.similation to American ways by nature and const.i.tution. Most of the careless agitators who put forth statements to this effect start from the wrong end in their reasoning. They a.s.sume what ought to be proven, and forthwith proceed to formulate a policy on this a.s.sumption. They a.s.sume that the j.a.panese are una.s.similable and conclude that, therefore, they should not be given an opportunity to progress. This is a.n.a.logous to saying that because a child is ignorant he should not be sent to school, forgetting that the very ignorance of the child is due to the fact that he has been denied an education. They fail to see that their conclusion is the very cause of their premises. What we maintain is that when the j.a.panese shall have proved una.s.similable, _after all means for their a.s.similation have been exhausted_, they should then be persuaded to give up the idea of establis.h.i.+ng themselves in America.

Meaning of "a.s.similation."

A great deal of confusion arises from the ambiguity of the term "a.s.similation." Its interpretations vary from the idea of a most superficial imitation of dress and manners to that of an uncontrollable process of biological resemblance or ident.i.ty. Those using the term in the former sense, in face of the fact that the j.a.panese in their midst dress, talk, and live like Americans, consider it indisputable that they are a.s.similable. Those who use the word in a narrow sense of ethnological similarity, on the contrary, insist with equal conviction that the a.s.similation of the j.a.panese is absolutely impossible. Neither is wrong in reasoning, for a.s.similation, according to the accepted diction, means the process of bringing to a resemblance, conformity or ident.i.ty--it is a relative term. Hence, in order to determine whether it is possible for the j.a.panese to become Americanized, it is necessary to find a standard by which the process can safely be gauged. Without this it is wholly absurd to say either that they are or are not a.s.similable. If the standard be fixed at physical ident.i.ty with Americans, the Americanization of the j.a.panese is hopeless--at least for a few generations; but if it be fixed at conformity with American customs and social order, the j.a.panese have to a certain degree already been a.s.similated.

How is the criterion to be determined? Perhaps it may be found, like the standard of our morality, in practical usage; that is, in the accepted usages and customs of the United States. Here we can do no better than point out the traditional spirit of cosmopolitanism, or firm adherence to the policy of racial non-discrimination, which was sustained even at the costliest of sacrifices and which is inscribed in the immortal fourteenth amendment of the Const.i.tution, which states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

If the supreme law as well as the traditions and customs of the land do not deny, on account of color or race, any person born in America the right of citizens.h.i.+p, it is apparently un-American to make racial similarity or conformity the standard of a.s.similability.

A nation, however, cannot maintain its own rights and honor among the family of nations without upholding its individuality. But America's individuality does not consist in ethnological unity alone. It consists more in cultural and spiritual solidarity. America upholds her dignity and national rights with the strength of that patriotism of her people which is born of their active sharing in her culture and ideals, as well as of their common experiences of American life. Clearly, then, one criterion of Americanization is unmixed devotion and allegiance to the cause and welfare of the United States--devotion and allegiance not blindly compelled by force of imposition, but born of voluntary and unrestricted partic.i.p.ation in American culture and ideals, religion, and industry; in short, in the entire American life. More concisely expressed, the required standard of a.s.similation in America is an active share in American life as a whole to such an extent that unmixed love and the will to devote self to the United States are no longer resistible.

The essence of Americanization was elucidated in simple and beautiful words by President Wilson in his memorable speech delivered at Philadelphia in 1915 before an audience of naturalized citizens of that city. He said in part:

... This is the only country in the world which experiences this constant and repeated rebirth. Other countries depend upon the multiplication of their own native people. This country is constantly drinking strength out of new sources by the voluntary a.s.sociation with it of great bodies of strong men and forward-looking women out of other lands. And so by the gift of the free will of independent people it is being constantly renewed from generation to generation by the same process by which it was originally created.

You have just taken an oath of allegiance to the United States. Of allegiance to whom?... to a great ideal, to a great body of principles, to a great hope of the human race.... You cannot dedicate yourself to America unless you become in every respect and with every purpose of your will thorough Americans. You cannot become Americans if you think of yourselves in groups. America does not consist of groups. A man who thinks of himself as belonging to a particular national group in America has not yet become an American....

My urgent advice to you would be, not only always to think first of America, but always, also, to think first of humanity. You do not love humanity if you seek to divide humanity into jealous camps. Humanity can be welded together only by love, by sympathy, by justice, not by jealousy and hatred.

Biological a.s.similation.

With this clarified meaning of a.s.similation or Americanization, let us examine the a.s.similability of the j.a.panese. First of all, we shall take up the matter of racial amalgamation. Immediately the questions arise, "Is it possible to amalgamate the j.a.panese? Is it desirable to do so? Is it necessary to do so?"

To the first question, paradoxical as it may seem, careful observations compel us to reply that it is, and that it is not, possible to amalgamate the j.a.panese blood with the American. Just as there is no national boundary in science, so there is no human barrier in marriage. Truth and love appear to transcend all natural and artificial obstacles. That love defies racial difference has been amply proven in the United States, where all races are in the process of being fused together. It has no less conclusively been proven by the number of happy marriages that have taken place between Americans and j.a.panese in this country and in j.a.pan. On the other hand, it is unthinkable that the j.a.panese should begin wholesale intermarriages with Americans in the near future, to the extent of losing their racial distinction. This is unthinkable because of the social stigma--and Americans as well as j.a.panese are extremely sensitive on the question of social environment--and the legal and economic handicaps which cause thoughtful persons of both nationalities, who take into consideration the welfare of themselves as well as of their descendants, to refrain from indulging in uncustomary marriages. It is more likely, therefore, that while here and there sporadic cases of intermarriage will continue to take place, and that such cases will gradually increase as the j.a.panese raise the degree of Americanization, it is wholly out of the question that under the present conditions of social, economic, and political enc.u.mbrances, the practice will prevail to any large extent.

This being the case, our second query--"Is intermarriage desirable?"--appears superfluous. Indeed, had it not been for the dangerous dogmatism inculcated by some willful propagandists that the result of intermarriage between Americans and j.a.panese is "the germ of the mightiest problem that ever faced this State; a problem that will make the black problem in the South look white,"[43] the subject would be purely an academic one. To allow this sort of baseless a.s.sertion to go unchallenged is extremely dangerous, because it exaggerates an unimportant point to misrepresent maliciously the whole question of the j.a.panese in the United States.

The conclusions of able observers, such as Dr. Gulick and Professor Millis, invariably confirm the fact that, as far as the ordinary means of observation go, the offspring of a j.a.panese and American couple is in no respect inferior to those of either American or j.a.panese unmixed descent.

Professor Millis states:

So far as experience shows, there is nothing inherently bad in race mixture, if it takes place under normal conditions, and neither race is generally regarded as inferior and the offspring therefore given inferior rank, as in the case of the negro.[44]

From his extensive a.s.sociation with j.a.panese, Dr. Gulick has been able to make some valuable observations on this topic. He states in his important book, _The American j.a.panese Problem_:

The offspring of mixed marriages are oftentimes practically indistinguishable from Caucasians. The color distinction is the first to break down. The j.a.panese hair and eye exert a stronger influence.

So far as the observation of the writer goes, there is a tendency to striking beauty in Americo-j.a.panese. The mental ability, also, of the offspring of j.a.panese and white marriages is not inferior to that of children of either race.[45]

These observations are valuable in refuting the kind of vile allegations we have quoted. But because of the limited number of cases observed, and the necessarily unscientific character of the observation, the utilization of these studies must be confined to pointing out the absurdity of the opposite extreme dogmatism and not extended to the constructive argument.

Even less reliable are the opinions of speculative biologists who by the use of a.n.a.logy--that is, by examples of hybridization of plants and animals--try to throw light on the subject of racial intermarriage. In general, the a.s.sertions of these biologists agree that the intermixture of races too far apart is undesirable because it results in a breakdown of the inherent characteristics of each, but that the combination of races slightly different is more desirable than intra-racial marriage because it tends to invigorate the stock. To this extent, opinions concur; but as to the question what races may be considered similar and what races different they begin to disagree. Most of them divide the human races by the color of the skin, and state that the case of the black and white races is that of extreme intermixture, and cite that between two white races as a desirable one. When they are pressed to pa.s.s a verdict on the result of mixture between the yellow and white races, most of them give only vacillating replies, as in the following extracts:

Yellow-white amalgamation may not be fraught with the evil consequences in the wake of the yellow-black and the white-black crosses. At the same time, it should be pointed out that the Caucasians and the Mongolians are far apart in descent, and that the advantages to be gained by either in this breaking up of superior hereditary complexes developed during an extended past are not clear.[46]

Professor Castle is more precise in his a.s.sertion. He says:

Mankind consists of a single species; at least no races exist so distinct that when they are crossed sterile progeny are produced.

Offspring produced by crossing such races do not lack in vigor, size, or reproductive capacity....

Racial crosses, if so conducted as not to interfere with social inheritance, may be expected to produce on the whole intermediates as regards physical and psychic characters.[47]

Here, Professor Castle touches on the important question involved; namely, social inheritance. Indeed, human civilization is not all that is contained in germplasm. Mankind developed and acc.u.mulated an elaborate system of living conditions which operate independently of biological processes. However wonderful a brain a child has, he will have to remain a savage if he is born in a savage tribe of Africa or in a place where the level of culture is extremely low. In discussing the possible effect of intermarriage upon progeny, therefore, the cultural level of parents and their environment must first of all be taken into consideration. It is here that we find ground for opposition to intermarriage between j.a.panese and Americans at present. With some marked exceptions, the cultural standard attained by the mixed couples has on the whole been not of a very high order. This is inevitable when we consider that intermarriage between j.a.panese and Americans has not yet received full social sanction, thus obstructing free play to the process of natural selection. Aside from the purely biological consideration, this want of social approval of intermarriage, with its concomitant, an unenviable social position of the parents, results in an undesirable environment for the offspring.

The welfare of their progeny is not the only determining point of intermarriage. Is it, then, sufficiently happy for the couple? Our observations lead us to answer in the negative. To be sure, there are cases of fortunate marriages in which it seems impossible for the couple to be happier. But, on the whole, the husband and the wife often find it difficult to harmonize their sentiments and ideals on account of different antecedents. The inharmony seems to grow as the couple advance in age, rendering their lives miserable. The greatest stumbling block, however, seems to be economic. The j.a.panese in the United States who are engaged in the ordinary walks of life are offered very little opportunities save in farming on a small scale and in petty businesses. Regardless of their ambition or ability, the j.a.panese cannot get what are considered in America good positions. Hence, neither their positions nor incomes improve very rapidly--perhaps no advance is made. Most American women are not satisfied to follow a blind alley. They turn back and get a divorce.

Exceptional cases, of course, are found in the American-j.a.panese couples, whose husbands have won distinction and wealth by extraordinary personal ability or by scientific or literary attainments, or by representing great firms of j.a.pan.

Our discussion of intermarriage seems to suggest that it is not likely to occur, for some time at least, in large numbers; that as far as hereditary effect on progeny is concerned, it is wholly premature to pa.s.s any judgment at present because of our limited knowledge; but that the social as well as the economic position of the contemporary j.a.panese in America does not seem conducive to the happiness of either the children of such unions or their parents.