AMERICA AND JAPAN.

Hokitika Guardian, 20 June 1924, Page 1

AMERICA AND JAPAN.

THE EXCLUSION LAWS. NOT PROVOCATIVE OF AVAR. (L»y ttctliin Times.) AYhilo chatting to AD - T. M. AYilford, A1.1’.. who during tile World AA ar made a close study of world affairs, and who has recently returned from tho East, a reporter asked him if lie thought that war would occur between the United States and Japan, as the result of the American exclusion laws against the Japanese. “For that reason, certainly not.” said Air AA’ilford. “Japan lias no reason to complain of the American exclusion laws and does not complain except for propaganda purposes.” He added that this question was being debated from a publicity point of view when tie "as in Japan last October. During that month, tho “Jiji Shimp’o,’’ a prominent Japanese paper, realising the farce of the process Japan was making through its cables, used these words: “Now that Japan has advocated tho removal of all discrimination in tho matter of her emigrants. it is essential that site should conceal the disabilities under which foreigners labour in Japan.” “That is fairly direct for n. Japanese newspaper.” said Afr AA’ilford.

“AA'liat arc* tile disabilities you referred to?” was the next qucction put to :>lr AYilford.

“Here.” he replied, “is a list of Japanese laws against which among others, includes Americans and New Zealanders. No foreigner can, in Japan, acquire landed property, nor can lie engage in agriculture. Foreigners cannot own ships flying the Japanese Hag; their interests must Ik* subordinated in shipping firms to Japanese control. They cannot hold shares iu national, agricultural. or industrial hunks, while the articles of many large companies exclude foreigners from membership. They cannot, as individuals, engage in mining operations, and are barred from becoming shareholders or brokers of the various exchanges, or even becoming members of the chambers oT commerce.

“They cannot hold public office of any kind,” continued Mr AA’ilford, “or enjoy the frtmclii.se. A foreign insurance company cannot writo insurance in Japan unless a large percentage of the money collected is left in the country. Doctors and surgeons cannot practise unless they pass examinations in the Japanese language, written and oral, before a hoard of control of Japanese doctors.” Air AA'ilfonl added that tinder tho national laws, rebates may lie granted hy Japanese steamship companies on all goods exported. This system is widely exploited to help to undersell foreign merchants. “The laws mid administration of justice discriminate against foreigners to a marked degree.” continued the speaker, “while Korean labourers (Korea now being a part of Japan) are not allowed to enter Japan from Korea unless it can lie proved that their presence there would not conlliot with the interests of Japanese working people. In short, japan adopts the same policy towards China and Korea in this last respect as the United States adopts towards Japan, and for the same reasons.” “AA'liat. then, would cause war between America, ami Japan?” tho reporter asked. “If." said Air AVill'oVd. “war breaks out between Japan and America, it will not he because of the American exclusion laws, but because of America’s attitude towards Japan in Chinn alter Japan presented its twenty-one points to China, which if Japan had had its own way. would have made that .country a vassal slate, with its harbours, railroads and army under Japanese dominance. The hatred hy Japan of America for America defeating Japan's designs in these directions mny lie the cause of war. hut not any exclusion proposals-carried out by American laws.”

r.S.A. REPLY TO JAPAN. WASHINGTON', .him* IS. Tin* Slate Department lias published Secretary Hughes’ reply to tin* Japanese protest against the Japanese exclusion. The reply declares that the American legislation affects neither the letter nor the spirit of the Treaty ol' 11)11, nor does it violate the “Gont lemon's Agreement.” saying: “The I'nited States Government fully and gratefully appreciates Japan’s voluntary assistance in executing a long established police evilieh evidences no lack of esteem for the Japanese character and. achievements." Tie adds: “An important change is the Congress determination to exercise the prerogative of legislating on immigration.” Air Hughes points out that the Government does not feel itself limited hv a prior international arrangement, i’urlliermore, the existing negotiations and the past negotiations do not impair the full liberty of action of either party. Mr Hughes, in reviewing the Treaties. points out that the Cniled States has been careful to negative any intention that the Treaty of 1911 should derogate from the full right ol discretionary control ol immigration, which right Japan has unhesitatingly asserted domestically. Mr Hughes expresses regret that the Congression.nl action allows no latitude to exercise Executive discretion, and he acquiesces in Japan s view that Japan is released trout any further oligation.

In conclusion hi* expresses the conviction that the recognition of the right of each Government to legislate on the control of immigration should not derogate from the mutual goodwill and cordial friendship which has always characterised their relations. HAXIHAEA’S SPEECH. NMW YORK. June IS. The Japanese Ambassador. Mr Ilaniliartt. continuing said: This debt of gratitude Japan has not lailed, and will never fail to repay as opportunity offers. Japan has for years been Anierigreatest Paeitie customer, ami tlio I'nited States lias been tile greatest market lor Japanese products. Evil forces began, after the Russian War to mar these happy and mutually beneficial relations. At last the Washington Conference entirely removed anv discord, and restored the old happy, glorious friendship.