"Unless above himself he canExalt himself, how mean a thing is man!"How are these longings to be gratified?—how are they to be even partially realized, while this unchecked flood of destitution and degradation pours in upon us from abroad?We hear much in these days of schemes for elevating and evangelizing the masses of the poor in our great cities. All honour to such schemes, whether they succeed or whether they fail, for the motive which animates them is good. But it cannot be too often insisted upon, that spiritual and intellectual necessities do not arise until some decency of physical conditions has been first attained. Among the "submerged tenth," as they have been called, decency ofphysical conditions will never come to pass until steps have first been taken to forbid the entrance of the unclean and unhealthy of other lands. So long as the bare struggle for existence absorbs all the energies of our very poor, they cannot be civilized.I do not underrate the greater worth of the moral life as compared with the purely physical life; but we must begin at the lowest rung of the ladder before we can ascend to the highest. As things are, the dregs of our slum population have neither the time, the energy, or the desire to be clean, thrifty, intelligent, or moral. In our haste we must not blame them. What they want first of all is better food, and more of it, warmer clothes, better shelter, higher wages, and more permanent employment. Unless we can first assist them to obtain these material desires, all our efforts to awaken the higher part of their natures will be in vain. Some perhaps will object that many of these poor creatures are so brutalized, so criminal, so degraded, that they have no higher nature left to awaken. I do not believe it—I will never believe it. However degraded a human being may be, however handicapped from his birth by the circumstances of his life, and even handicapped before his birth by the transmitted vices of his progenitors, there still is implanted in him, dormant and infinitesimal though it may be, that spark of the divine nature which alone separates man from the beast.In writing on the social aspect of this evil, it is well to make one's meaning quite plain. I do not of course mean to say—no one can say—that to restrict the immigration of the destitute, the criminal, or the worthless, would be a panacea for all our social ills. Far from it; but it would atleast remove from their way, one of the most potent causes of degradation in the material and social condition of the poor in our large cities. Until something has first been done to check this evil, charitable agencies, religious movements, colonization and emigration schemes will be beside the mark. However much good they may do here and there—and I freely admit the amount of good that such movements have done, and are doing every day—they will fail to go to the root of the evil, since they deal with effects and not with causes; they treat the symptoms, but not the disease.Emigration is worthless while this continuous influx is allowed to go on. At the best, emigration is a drastic remedy only to be applied in the last resource. If, like the Great Plague, or Fire of London, emigration carried off the diseased, or swept away foul and unhealthy tenements, it might possibly be regarded with more complacency. But under existing circumstances this is just what emigration does not do. We must bear in mind that we can no longer draft off our social failures to other countries. Even our colonies now refuse to take the "wreckage" of the mother country. The people we emigrate now, are just those we can least afford to lose. And there is another consideration. Of the thousands we emigrate yearly, most are men, young, healthy, and vigorous. Of the women, all—or nearly all—are virtuous and industrious. In either sex the residuum, both men and women, and more especially women, remain behind. "Bad men die, but bad women multiply," once said a lady whose name is a synonym for all that is charitable and good, when urging the advisability of giving the fallen sisterhood of our great cities a chance of beginning life over again in some new land beyond the seas. Theseare pregnant words, but under our present system little or no provision is made for carrying them into effect. Things have come to such a pass, that while we emigrate the flower of our population, the industrious, the vigorous, and the courageous; the feeble, the idle, and the worthless remain with us; and this undesirable increment is ever being augmented by the refuse population of other countries.Look at it from whatever point we will, it cannot be right that these things should be.CHAPTER IX.LAWS AND CUSTOMS OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES.The laws and customs of Europe with regard to the treatment of destitute and undesirable immigration vary considerably. For the purpose of convenience in dealing with this aspect, the European countries may be roughly divided into three classes, (a) Those which have decrees and restrictions both for prohibiting the admission of destitute aliens, and for expelling such as have resided in their territory, when for divers reasons they should appear to be unwelcome or undesirable acquisitions. (b) Those which have laws and local regulations for the expulsion of aliens, but none prohibiting their admission into the country in the first instance. (c) Those which take no steps in the matter at all. To the first of these three classes belong Austria, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, Roumania, Saxony, and Bavaria. To the second class, Spain, Sweden and Norway, Greece, Germany (all States except the two previously specified), Italy, Hungary, Servia, Montenegro, and in a lesser degree, France. To the last belong Portugal, and until the other day, Turkey. The remaining country is Russia; but having been unable to obtain any very definite information concerning it, I have hesitated to classify it with any of the above.It will be best to take these classes and countriesseriatim.In Austria the regulations vary slightly with regard to particular provinces; but, speaking generally, special instructions have been issued to the frontier police, with the result that all vagrant aliens, deserters, suspicious-looking foreigners who are not able to give a proper account of themselves or as to the sufficiency of their means, foreign pedlars, workmen and artisans who on entrance into the country are uncertain of obtaining immediate employment, or whose papers are unsatisfactory, or whose means for travelling are insufficient—all these are at once to be refused admission, and to be turned back at the frontier. The only exception to this rule is the case of foreign day-labourers and artisans, who are entitled by reason of reciprocity to the same treatment as Austrian subjects of the same class receive in the States to which these belong, whose appearance gives rise to no suspicion, and who having regular passports are obliged, in order to return to their homes by the most direct route, to pass through Austrian territory. By the Ordinance of 1867, foreign beggars, mountebanks, singers, musicians, jugglers, rope-dancers, gipsies, and other vagrant people, proprietors of wax-works, owners of menageries and similar exhibitions, unless they have first obtained a licence to exhibit the same in the Empire, are also refused admittance and turned back at the frontier. As to continued residence, by the General Communal Laws a Commune can refuse to allow foreigners to reside in its district, if they, together with their belongings, do not lead a blameless life, or if they become a burden upon public charity. By the Banishment Law of 1871, the Communal Police are also empowered to forcibly expel from the territory all idle or vagrant foreigners, discharged convicts, and foreign prostitutes,especially if these pursue their immoral trade without strictly observing the police regulations, if they are suffering from venereal disease, if they cause a public scandal by their behaviour, or if they seduce young people. Such, in brief, are the laws which regulate and restrict alien immigration in the Austrian Empire, as distinct from the kingdom of Hungary.Through the courtesy of M. de Bille, the Danish Minister at the Court of St. James's, who kindly procured for me from Copenhagen a copy of the Decree of 1875, and other law-records, I have been enabled to make a detailed study of the laws of Denmark which bear upon this question.[28]The law of 1875, containing the regulation in force in regard to foreigners and travellers in Denmark, is a very drastic one. Briefly summarized, it amounts to this. Thestatusand liberties of the foreign workman or servant, employed or seeking employment in Denmark, are defined with very great attention to detail; the most uncompromising regulations are laid down for the prevention of the entry of all foreigners who may be found destitute of sufficient means for their support; and even of those who are in search of work under any circumstances, except under strict conditions. The first Article contains a positive prohibition against the admission into the country of foreign gipsies, itinerant musicians, leaders and exhibitors of animals, acrobats and jugglers, who seek to gain a livelihood by vagrant performances. Foreigners in search of work are not admitted, except on the condition that they are provided with a document of identity from a public functionary. From the succeeding Articles of the same law it appears that foreigners who are not possessed of any claim for maintenance in Denmark, and are destitute of the means ofsubsistence, are to be expelled by the police, and the method of expulsion is very carefully detailed. Even those who find employment are constantly under the supervision of the police, and have pass-books, which, at every change of domicile or of employment, must beviséby the police as well as by the employers. There can be no doubt that the severity of the law is very effectual in exterminating the evil against which it is aimed. On the other hand, it in no way deters considerable numbers of foreign skilled artisans from seeking and obtaining employment in Denmark, as any one with any knowledge of the country would speedily discover. The majority of such foreigners appear to be Germans.In Belgium the measures which the Government is authorized to take with the view of protecting the country against the dangers which the presence of destitute foreigners involve, are based upon several laws and decrees which have been passed from time to time as need required. They are interesting having regard to the strikes and labour-troubles which have taken place in Belgium during recent years. By a decree of the Provisional Government of 1830, all foreigners unprovided with a Government authorization, are bound to show that they possess means of livelihood; if not, they are at once to be sent back to their own country. They are even liable to be brought before the Juge de Paix, who may condemn them to a short imprisonment, or send them to the agricultural colony of Hoogstraeten, where native vagabonds are confined while at the disposal of the Government. Since 1850, however, foreigners are not as a rule brought before the Juge de Paix, instructions having been given to the police authorities directing them to reconduct to the frontier at once, and of their ownaccord, any foreigner arriving in Belgium and being evidently destitute, or a vagabond. A report of the arrest and a certificate of expulsion are, in this case, addressed to the Administrator of the Public Safety, at the time when the foreigner is sent out of the country. This summary procedure is followed both in the interest of the Treasury as saving expense, and in that of the foreigners themselves, who thus escape a prolonged detention. When at a seaport, and especially at Antwerp, foreign sailors are without means of existence, the Maritime Commissaries endeavour to find them an engagement on a ship about to sail; they are only conducted to the land frontier if these efforts fail. Formerly aliens, who were arrested for not having sufficient means of subsistence, were allowed to choose the frontier by which they might leave the kingdom. Of late years, however, this right of choice has been considerably curtailed on account of the attitude assumed by neighbouring countries. These countries have not unnaturally showed a marked disinclination to becoming a sort of rubbish-heap for Belgium. Even little Luxemburg revolted at this state of affairs, and a Convention was concluded with the Grand-Duchy by which it was agreed that only natives of the country, Italian subjects or Swiss citizens (these beingen route), should in future be forwarded across the Luxemburg frontier. The German frontier is now absolutely closed to destitute persons expelled from Belgian territory who are not of German nationality. Holland has also followed suit, and the Dutch authorities reconduct into Belgium byvisé, a great number of aliens, transferred by prison vans to Lanaken.The law regulating the admission and expulsion of foreigners from the Netherlands dates from 1849. Article I.of this law lays down as the first and indispensable condition on which foreigners can be admitted into the Netherlands, the possession by them of "sufficient means of subsistence, or the faculty of acquiring such means by work"; and upon the strength of this condition, and under the provisions of Article IX. of the law, foreigners found on Netherlands territory in a destitute condition and without any ostensible means of earning a living, may be expelled from the country; and, in fact, numbers of persons so situated are expelled every year. All foreigners "dangerous to the public peace" are also subject to immediate expulsion.The law and custom in force in the petty European States of Bulgaria and Roumania is as follows. In Bulgaria the constantly increasing number of vagrants in the capital of Sophia, as well as in the coast of the Black Sea, and on the Danube, has compelled the Government of the Prince to increase the staff of police, in order, by a more extensive supervision, to put an end to the difficult position in which the Bulgarian population is admittedly placed by alien vagrancy and destitution. The police authorities are therefore bound to keep a strict watch on the strangers arriving in the country, or residing there without occupation, and to have recourse to the immediate expulsion across the frontier of the Principality of all those who are unable to afford surety of their intention to remain, or who attract notice by their destitution, suspicious character, or culpable actions. In Roumania, though there are no general Regulations existing on the subject, the invariable custom is, that persons who are evidently in a state of indigence are not admitted to the country, unless they could prove that they possessed the means of subsistence.In the German Kingdom of Saxony, though there are no laws on the subject, it is competent for the authorities to prohibit the admission or residence of destitute aliens. In Bavaria also the competent police authorities are allowed to expel a foreigner from the kingdom if this course should appear to be of public expediency; and besides this, the Minister of the Interior is empowered to refuse entrance into the kingdom to foreigners who may be liable to become either a public nuisance or a public burden.We now come to the second class, namely, those countries which have laws and local regulations for the expulsion of aliens, but have neither law nor custom for prohibiting their admission into the country in the first instance.Of these we will first take Germany, including all the States with the exception of the kingdoms of Bavaria and Saxony. It is held by international law, that each State has the power of expelling from its territory aliens who may have rendered themselves obnoxious or dangerous to it. Destitute persons convicted of vagabondage or begging, or who, after becoming destitute, have been unable to procure a subsistence for themselves within a period of time laid down by the police, can be placed under arrest, and be handed over to the Government police ("Landespolizei"), who in aggravated cases can consign them to the workhouse; but destitute aliens thus handed over to the police authorities, instead of being consigned to the workhouse, are as a rule expelled at once from the territory of the Empire. In the little kingdom of Würtemburg, the Royal "Oberamts" (provincial administrative authorities) have an uncontested right to expel aliens from the kingdom. This right is generally exercised when it is proved or even suspected that the alien is unable to maintain himself; nor are such aliensentitled to any relief from the communal or charitable institutions of the country.In Sweden, by a Circular published in 1886, addressed to the Governors of the Provinces, foreigners found without resources in this country, and in a state of vagrancy, are directed to be sent back by the authorities to their own country at the expense of the Swedish Government; in case the country to which the person belongs be so situated that he cannot be forwarded there without having to wait on the road within the boundaries of any other country, due notice is given to the authorities at the place to which the person is sent. As regards the treatment of destitute aliens in Norway, should there be any found in that country, they are taken care of by the police, and forwarded to their own country, the expense being charged in the police accounts. Thus it will be seen the custom in Sweden and Norway is perfectly identical; only there is this difference in the latter country, there are no laws, Royal or municipal, which sanction the practice; it rests entirely upon custom.The law in Spain amounts to this, that if a foreigner after due inquiry is proved to be a vagrant, he is forced to leave the country. The definition of a vagrant, according to the law of Spain is, it should be noted, as follows:—"A person who has no property or income, no habitual profession or trade, nor any known or legitimate manner of living."In Italy no special law exists, the residence of aliens in that country being regulated by the common law; but should such persons in the same manner as indigent natives take to begging, or if they engage in no fixed or useful labour, they can be arrested as idle persons, and dealt with by the judicial authorities, who can inflict a punishment upon them, and expel them from the King's dominions.Forcible expulsion is, however, only recurred to as an extreme measure. Usually, aliens are sent back to their own country with afoglio di via, or pass.In Switzerland the matter is met by the local enactments of the different Cantons. Minute rules are laid down as to the permit of residence to foreigners. Destitute aliens, bad characters, tramps, and suspects are liable to an imprisonment on bread and water, from four to eight days' duration. They are then conducted to the frontier and expelled.The custom observed in Servia, Hungary, Greece, and Montenegro is all much the same. Either by penal codes, or by the unwritten, but equally stringent, law of custom, the foreigner who is found in any of these countries without visible means of subsistence, and who has no occupation, is requested to leave the country by the authorities, and should he fail to comply, he is forcibly conducted to the frontier and expelled.The case of France, however, calls for more than passing remark in that it differs considerably from the custom in vogue in most European countries. There is no positive or direct legislation properly so called for the purpose of prohibiting aliens destitute or otherwise from entering French territory. The question of expulsion is governed by the law of 1849, which is applicable to the whole of France. By Article VII. of this law, "Le Ministre de l'Intérieur pourra, par mesure de police, enjoindre à tout étranger voyageant ou résidant en France de sortir immédiatement du territoire Français et le faire conduire à la frontière." This law, however, it should be noted, emanated from an idea of social and political protection; it had no economical design, and it does not touch the question of destination. There is a Bill at present lying before the Chamber of Deputies forthe purpose of amending the law of 1849; it has been lying there five or six years, and has not yet been proceeded with. On immigration, properly so called, France has only at present legislated for her colonies on purely special points. The silence of the Statute Law on this subject is to be accounted for on various grounds. France recruits her population in other ways than by the normal growth of the inhabitants within her territory. Statistics show that of late years the number of births in France has remained stationary, but that notwithstanding this, her population has not ceased to increase; this fact being due to the influx of immigrant aliens, which is growing larger from year to year. The fact that France has become a country of immigration like America and Australia is a surprising phenomenon. "It may not be impossible," writes M. Edouard Clouet, the advocate at the Court of Paris, "that these new economical conditions will have some influence on future legislation, and call for specific measures." Such measures, however, are still in the future, and the astounding fact remains that the immigration of aliens into France is estimated at an average of about 100,000 souls per annum, while the native population is stationary, if not decreasing.The only European country which has no law or recognized custom in dealing with destitute aliens is Portugal. Until quite recently I should have included in this category Turkey as well; but in October last (1891) the long-suffering Ottoman Government, in order to prevent the danger which would result to the public health from the influx of Jewish immigrants from Russia, resolved in future to forbid their entry into Ottoman territory. The Porte also requested the British Ambassador at Constantinople to cause a warning to be conveyed to British shipownersto refuse passages to Jewish immigrants, who will not be allowed by the maritime authorities to land. This prohibition applies not only to immigrants from Russia, but from any quarter whatsoever, whether in Western or Eastern Europe. Individuals will be allowed to pass, but not families.On the subject of alien immigration into Russia, or the continued residence of destitute aliens therein, I have been unable to obtain any definite information. The protective policy of Russia in purging the Empire of all alien influences, whether good or bad, is well known, and needs no comment here. The expulsion of resident Germans from Russian territory unless they consent to become naturalized, and the recent edicts promulgated against the Jews, are however illustrations of my meaning. In this Russia differs from all other European countries. They are all willing to admit the desirable alien, the skilled artisan, the foreigner who is decent and law-abiding in his habits and mode of life. It is only the destitute, the vagrant, the convict, the suspect, the evil-liver that they object to. But Russia, it would seem, has a dislike to all alien influence, whether for good or for evil.To sum up, therefore, it appears that in all European nations—with one insignificant exception—some measures, more or less drastic, are taken either for prohibiting the admission, or for the expulsion of destitute and undesirable aliens. This policy is the deliberate outcome of years of thought and legislation. It is framed in the interests of the native population in each country, and is in all cases fully in accordance with the popular will. It is generally recognized throughout Europe that it is the duty of every State to deal with its own paupers and undesirable citizens, and it is recognized also that the only way to bring about thatdesirable end, is by other countries politely but firmly refusing to admit them. Thus it may be safely said that in the continent of Europe all countries liable to suffer from undesirable immigration have taken steps to guard themselves against it—with one single exception.That exception is Great Britain.CHAPTER X.THE EXAMPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.Twenty years ago it was a common calculation in the United States that every new immigrant was worth a thousand dollars to the particular State in which he settled. A farm might be had for practically nothing by anybody who chose to apply for it. In those comparatively early days, what are now flourishing States west of the Mississippi, were then, in parts, wild unpeopled wildernesses, and the country could not afford to be very discriminative as to either the character or the means of particular immigrants. Thus for many years America was the camping-ground of the social refuse of Europe. Irish paupers driven forth by famine and political misrule went West in tens of thousands, to become, many of them, prosperous farmers and worthy citizens of their adopted country. But there came also, in almost countless hordes, immigrants of a far less desirable, and, as the sequel has proved, dangerous kind: Fenians and apostles of dynamite from Ireland; secret societies from Italy, whose gospel was murder and brigandage; Nihilists from Russia, and Socialists from Germany, driven forth almost at the point of the bayonet by their own Governments; Russian and Polish Jews, fleeing in terror before thefanatical persecution of the Czar. All this heterogeneous mass of inflammable human material has at length become a standing menace to the United States, endangering her friendly relations with foreign countries, as well as the freedom her own people enjoy under their present form of government. Of course there were compensating advantages, but the evil of unrestricted immigration has of late years reached such an extent that the old sturdy race, the descendants of the English Puritans, who made the great Republic of the West, have been in danger of being gradually swallowed up by foreign-born populations.In a certain sense it may be said that the history of immigration into the United States has been synonymous with the history of the nation itself; but it is evident to all unprejudiced minds, that the motives which induced those early immigrants, the Pilgrim Fathers, to leave their native land and settle in the New World, were very different from the motives which actuate the greater numbers of those who are pouring into the United States at the present day. In fact, the time from the landing of the Pilgrim Fathers down to the year which witnessed the inauguration of the first President of the United States, may not unfitly be regarded not as the period of immigration, but of colonization. Since then the rapid growth of the population—though of course largely due to natural causes—has been greatly accelerated by immigration.Immigration into the United States appears to come in tidal waves. It has its flood and its ebb; but each decade, with the exception of the war period, shows that the new flood is higher than its predecessor. The magnitude of this influx of alien immigrants is best shown by the Annual Reports which have been issued by the late Board of Commissionersof Emigration of the State of New York. Without troubling my readers with unnecessary statistics, I may say briefly from calculations which have been made, the total number of immigrant aliens who arrived at the port of New York from the 5th May, 1847, until the 31st December, 1890 inclusive, was 10,050,936. It should be noted that at least two-thirds of the whole number of alien immigrants who come to the United States from other countries, arrive at the port of New York.This large influx has arisen from a variety of causes. One of the most potent undoubtedly has been steamship solicitation. A regular "brokerage" business has gradually been established. Some of the steamship companies have as many as two thousand agents in Europe, and their sub-agents and solicitors are to be found in every district on the Continent. These sub-agents receive liberal commissions, varying from fifty cents to two dollars for each immigrant passenger obtained. This naturally leads, not only to their selling the tickets which are required, but also to their endeavouring to create a fresh demand by solicitation and inducement. These agents picture in the most glowing terms to the poor peasants of Europe the future which awaits them in the New World. On the strength of the false representations made to them, the peasants are often induced to sell out their little homes, and to spend a life's savings in the purchase of a through passage to America. Oftentimes they will even borrow money for the passage at a ruinous rate, and the agents will advance the tickets, taking a mortgage of whatever property is of value for payment. In some cases the money is refunded, but in most cases the agent becomes the owner of the property by foreclosure; and the poor peasants in a few months findthemselves and their families in a strange land, without money, friends, or employment. Upon arrival, they are taken in charge by a "labour boss," who herds them together in a tenement house, and hires them out at wages he dictates, and which he shares with his victims. Abundant evidence was given before the Select Committee of the House of Representatives, recently appointed to inquire into immigration, as to the truth of these statements. For instance, it appeared that one combination in Galicia induced 12,406 emigrants to emigrate to the United States within the period of fourteen months.Another and more indirect cause is the fierce competition which rages among the steamship lines and the different railroads. In 1888 a war of rates broke out among them, so that in that year an emigrant could travel from Liverpool to Chicago for ten dollars, or about two guineas in English money. This low rate offered exceptional facilities to foreign governments, poor-law guardians, and charitable institutions, to rid themselves of the burden of persons unable to support themselves and their families, by simply purchasing for them tickets, and shipping them off to America. The chief offender in this respect appears to have been the British Government; and the Poor Law Guardians in Ireland, who by the Land Act of 1881 were advanced money to assist emigration, especially from the poorer and more thickly populated districts of Ireland. Various charitable societies in Europe and the United Kingdom were no less active. The so-called "Tuke Committee" assisted over 8000 persons to emigrate from Ireland in three years, 1882-85. The Prisoners' Aid Society also assisted convicts to emigrate, while the Central Emigration Society and the Jewish Board of Guardiansestablished in London, have both been active in sending their paupers, and the least desirable portion of the population, to America. Switzerland, Sweden, Italy, and Germany also help to swell this alien invasion—Germany more especially with regard to that most undesirable class of emigrants, liberated criminals and discharged convicts. There exists, for instance, in Munich, a society with several branches, especially formed for the purpose of enabling discharged convicts to begin life over again in some far-off land, and the land almost invariably selected is the United States.Another method of evading the Contract Labour Law, and of drawing large numbers of immigrants to the United States, is the systematic advertising for labourers by employment agencies through the British and European newspapers. From evidence which came before the Select Committee investigating at Boston, it appeared that the Freestone Cutters' Association of New England had advertised in the English and Scotch papers for journeymen, agreeing to pay fifty cents per hour for work. The applicants were directed to call upon the agents signing the advertisement in London. These agents made no contract with the men, and so evaded the letter of the Contract Labour Law; but they came to New England on the representation that employment should be found. As the freestone cutters in England only get tenpence an hour, or about twenty cents in American money, the prospect of largely increased wages naturally induced many of them to go over to America. This is only one instance out of many; and to quote the Immigration Committee's Report, "Where good wages are paid, advertisement abroad has become of common occurrence; the workmen here are thereby brought to terms, orthe market becomes overflooded with labourers, and wages are reduced." In connection with this must also be considered the immigration coming into the United States over the Canadian border. During the last six months of 1890, it is estimated that over 50,000 European immigrants landed in Canada, and reached the United States, coming by this circuitous route to avoid inspection. There is also another point to be noted, viz. that large numbers of Canadians come into the United States for work, wages being 40 per cent. higher in the United States than in the Canadian provinces. Several hundreds of these people cross over the border from Windsor to Detroit every morning, and find employment in the stores, seed-houses, and so forth, and return to their homes every evening.So much for the causes which have led to this wholesale invasion. We will now consider its undesirable results. The effect of immigration upon American labour is especially marked. As was shown by the Report of the Ford investigation of 1888, the pauper and lower classes of Europe have crowded into the American factories to such an extent, that in many of the large industries, notably the cigar trade, tailoring trade, and the shirt manufacturing trade, what was fifteen years ago 90 per cent. American and 10 foreign, is now 90 per cent. foreign and 10 per cent. American. Frequently upon differences arising between employers and employed as to the price of wages, foreigners were imported to take the place of American workmen, and the wages were consequently reduced. In fact, the tendency of foreign immigration is constantly to lower the standard of wages which the American labourer has hitherto enjoyed. The only persons opposed to restricting it are the great manufacturers and contractors, whoseinterest is obviously to keep the price of labour at its lowest level.Another danger of indiscriminate immigration is plainly shown in the riots which have taken place in New York and other places during the last twenty-five years. In 1863, in the city of New York, when the famous draft riots took place, no American dared to display the flag of his country without running the risk of having his house burned and destroyed. Recent outbreaks of Nihilists, Anarchists, and Socialists, in the city of Chicago, and the still more recent lynchings at New Orleans, are further illustrations of my meaning. This political danger is deepened by the short period of time in which immigrants may become eligible for citizenship, and thus invested with political power. In several States the immigrant is admitted to citizenship after only one year's residence, and while he is still to a great extent ignorant of the laws, language, and customs. The right of citizenship thus conferred is very liable to be abused. American politicians, like other politicians, are very prone to yield to their prejudices without sufficiently regarding the interests of the people at large. The German vote in many localities controls the action of political leaders on the liquor question. The Irish vote favours, and largely influences, the policy of antagonism to Great Britain.The social effects of this increasing immigration are also very strongly marked. There is an abnormal representation of the foreign poor in the workhouses and penitentiaries of the United States; and there can be little doubt that the effect of deporting to America the destitute, the worthless, and the criminal, has largely added to the burden there of pauperism, vice, and crime.How keenly alive American statesmen are to the evils which result from unrestricted immigration, is shown by a perusal of the Acts which have been passed upon the subject. The Acts, other than those regulating the immigration of Chinese labourers, are three in number, viz.:—The Act to regulate immigration approved by Congress in 1882, the Contract Labour Law of 1885, and the recent Act to amend all previous laws, which was approved by Congress on the 3rd of March of this year, and which came into force on the 1st of April last.[29]I do not propose to dwell upon the provisions of those Acts in detail; they are given in full elsewhere;[30]but section 1 of the new Act, which specifies the class of aliens henceforth to be excluded from the United States, deserves to be quoted in full:—"All idiots, insane persons; paupers, or persons likely to become a public charge; persons suffering from a loathsome or a dangerous contagious disease; persons who have been convicted of felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanour involving moral turpitude, polygamists, and also any persons whose ticket or passage is paid for with the money of another, or who is assisted by others to come." The right of asylum to political and religious refugees is maintained intact by the insertion of a special proviso. The working of the Act is very simple. The immigrants are stopped at the port of arrival and inspected, and the steamship companies are compelled to take back at their own expense all those who are refused admission; and heavy penalties of fine and imprisonment are dealt out to those who attempt to break or to evade the law. This course of action, though it may seem to press hardly in individual cases, has been found to have an excellent deterrent effect,for as soon as steamship companies know that they bring over such passengers at their own risk, they refuse to bring them at all, and the evil to a great extent is nipped in the bud.Now, if such measures of self-defence have become thus early in her history imperative with a young country like America, with a habitable area ofmore than 3,000,000 square miles, and a population of not more than 65,000,000, what are we to think of an old country like England, with an area ofa little over 32,000,000 acres, and a population, according to the census of 1881, of near 25,000,000 souls—and probably of over 30,000,000 now—compelled to spend annually some £7,000,000 on the relief or support of her own three-quarters of a million of paupers—leaving her ports, more especially the port of London, free for the entrance of a huge foreign and degraded population, from every country in Europe, which statistics demonstrate to be largely on the increase?It is impossible for Englishmen not to feel a certain amount of envy at the energy and firmness which the American Government has displayed in excluding undesirable aliens. If such action be good, where the vast territories of the United States are in question, what must be thought of thelaissez-fairepolicy which allows our little British Islands to be overrun by the class of foreigner which America so rigorously excludes?CHAPTER XI.THE COLONIAL ASPECT.In this chapter I propose not only to deal with the general laws for restricting destitute and undesirable immigration into some of the principal colonies, but also the particular laws for prohibiting the immigration of Chinese. Sir Charles Dilke, in a general summary of colonial policy on this matter, writes:—"Colonial labour seeks protection by legislative means, not only against the cheap labour of the dark-skinned or of the yellow man, but also against white paupers, and against the artificial supply of labour by State-aided white immigration. Most of the countries of the world, indeed, have laws against the admission of destitute aliens, and the United Kingdom is in practice almost the only exception."[31]The main object of all the general laws passed upon the subject appears to be the same, namely, to prevent the colonies from becoming the "dumping-ground" of the destitute, lunatic, vicious, and criminal population of older countries, including in several instances the mother country as well. With regard to Chinese immigration, two objects are apparent: first, to protect the native population fromforeign competition in the different branches of industry, the effect of which is materially to lower wages, and reduce the standard of comfort of the colonial artisan or labourer; and secondly, to guard against the political dangers which the presence of a numerous alien race occupying an inferior position could not fail to bring about.To take the general laws first. The principal colonies which have passed statutes on the subject are Canada, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand. In New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia, the Cape Colony, and Natal, there are no similar statutes; but these colonies have the power, in the case of a threatened influx of undesirable immigrants, of passing restraining Acts, which effectually meet the purpose for which they are required. I now give a summary of the principal general statutes actually passed, other than those which exist for the immigration of Chinese. They are given in more detail elsewhere.[32]In Canada, the Immigration Act of 1886 enacts that the Governor-General may by proclamation prohibit the landing of destitute, pauper, or diseased immigrants; also of the criminal and vicious; and arrangements are made for the immediate return of the vessel and the prohibited immigrants to the port of Europe whence they came.In Victoria, the owner of the ship is compelled to give a bond of £100 to the immigration officer for every passenger he may bring, being "either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, or likely in his opinion to become a charge upon the public, or upon any public or charitable institution." Penalties are enacted for refusing to execute the bond, which, it should be noted, is applicable to the master of anyBritishor foreign navigable vessel; the only exemption being in favour of crews that are shipwrecked, or her Majesty's land and sea forces.By the Immigration Act of South Australia, passed in 1872, paupers are practically forbidden to land. In Tasmania, the Passengers Act, 1885, enacts in the same way as Victoria, that a bond of £100 shall be given to the collector at the port of arrival, by the master of any ship (except one plying from one port in the colony to any other), who attempts to land any passenger in Tasmania, being "either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, or from any cause unable to support himself, or likely to become a charge upon the public." As in Victoria, the bond is applied to the maintenance of the said passenger, and penalties are enforced in the case of the refusal to execute it. Provisions are also made with regard to ships undergoing quarantine. In New Zealand, the "Imbecile Passengers Act" of 1882 is practically identical with that of Tasmania.Such are the principal general Colonial Acts.We now come to the vexed question of Chinese Immigration. It would be well to mention in passing that a particularly drastic Act was passed in British Columbia in 1884, which spoke of the "pestilential habits" of the Chinese, and stated that they "habitually desecrate graveyards by the removal of bodies therefrom." These expressions were termed "peculiarly offensive" by the Chinese Ambassador in London; but apparently his protest was of no avail, for in 1885 another and still more drastic Act was passed, which effectually prohibited all further Chinese immigration to British Columbia. It is, however, with Chinese immigration into Australasia that we are more immediately concerned.For many years the immigration of Chinese into Australia was very large, causing great irritation throughout the colonies, more especially among the working-classes, who thus found the price of their labour undersold. Many attempts, more or less successful, were made for the purpose of restricting the undesirable influx. In 1887 Commissioners were dispatched by the Emperor of China to the Australasian colonies, for the purpose of inquiring into the condition of the Chinese residing therein. These Commissioners found that in each of the colonies they visited, a poll-tax of £10 was imposed upon Chinese subjects, from which the subjects of other powers were exempted, and also that various laws had been enacted by some of the Colonial Legislatures against the Chinese. Upon receiving this report, a complaint was forthwith lodged at the Foreign Office by the Chinese Minister accredited to the Court of St. James's, pointing out that these restrictions and laws were at variance with treaty obligations and international usage. Upon receipt of this protest, Lord Salisbury communicated with Lord Knutsford, with the result that a circular letter was dispatched from the Colonial Office to the Governors of all the Australasian colonies, enclosing a copy of the letter from the Chinese Minister, and requesting to be furnished with full information on the subject.The receipt of this circular created quite afurorein Australia, where public opinion was already greatly excited on the subject. The replies received in answer to it were numerous and varied; but one dominant note sounded through all of them, namely, that at all hazards the Chinese must be restricted from emigrating to any part of Australasia.The Despatch prepared by the Ministers of New South Wales, and telegraphed to the Colonial Office by LordCarrington, who was then Governor, is of especial interest. It deserves to be quotedin extenso, since it sums up the whole case in favour of the colonies."Australian feeling is much exercised in reference to Chinese immigration and the inquiry made by the Marquis of Salisbury,"—so runs the Despatch.—"Your Excellency's advisers beg chiefly to explain that the law of the colony for some years past has imposed the restrictions of a poll-tax of £10 on each immigrant, and a limitation of one immigrant to every hundred tons of the ship's burden; but owing to recent occurrences, severer measures are now demanded throughout all the colonies. This state of things has given rise to new reflections in dealing with a difficulty which threatens to become a calamity. As these colonies form an important part of the Empire, it is submitted that our cause of contention is of sufficient national concern to be taken up by the Empire; if we have no voice in the making of treaties, it seems only just that our interests should be considered and exercised by those who exercise that power. We learn by public report that the United States Government have entered into a treaty with the Government of China, by which Chinese immigration into America is no longer permitted. We fail to see why Australia may not be similarly protected. On behalf of this colony we desire, through your Excellency, to impress upon her Majesty's Imperial advisers the more prominent phases of the Chinese question, as it specially and almost exclusively affects the Australian section of the British people. Firstly, the Australian ports are within easy sail of the ports of China; secondly, the climate, as well as certain branches of trade and industry in Australia, such as the cultivation of the soil for domestic purposes, and tin and gold mining, are peculiarly attractiveto the Chinese; thirdly, the working-classes of the British people, in all the affinities of race, are directly opposed to their Chinese competitors; fourthly, there can be no sympathy, and in the future it is to be apprehended that there will be no peace, between the two races; fifthly, the enormous number of the Chinese population intensifies every consideration of this class of immigration in comparison with the immigration of any other nation; sixthly, the most prevailing determination in all the Australian communities is to preserve the British type in the population; seventhly, there can be no interchange of ideas of religion or citizenship, nor can there be any intermarriage or social communion, between the British and the Chinese. It is respectfully admitted that the examination of these principal phases of the question can only lead to one conclusion, namely, that the Chinese must be restricted from emigrating to any part of Australasia. It will be seen that while the question scarcely touches the people of the United Kingdom, it vitally concerns these great colonies, whose importance in their political and commercial relations entitles them to be protected by the diplomatic influence and the powers of treaty which belong to the Empire. With renewed expressions of our loyal attachment to her Majesty, we urge that immediate steps be taken to open such negotiations with the Emperor of China as will result in affording permanent security to the Australian colonies from the disturbance of Chinese immigration in any form; the matter is too grave and urgent to admit of long delay. However desirable it may be to avoid the irritation and conflict of interests which may arise from local legislation of a drastic character, if protection cannot be afforded as now sought, the Australian Parliaments must act from theforce of public opinion in devising measures to defend the colonies from consequences which they cannot relax in their efforts to avert."This representation on the part of New South Wales was followed by similar ones from all the Colonial Governments to whom the circular had been addressed. From Victoria came an intimation stating the statutes already in force, and the intention of the Victorian Government to carry out the law to its utmost letter.From Queensland, the Government wrote to say that they were determined to restrict the influx of Chinese, because it had been proved by experience that they had become formidable competitors with European labour in almost every branch of industry; some branches, such as cabinet-making, having been practically monopolized by them in several of the Australian cities. And, as owing to their habits of life, the cost of subsistence was to the Chinese very much less than to Europeans living in accordance with European habits; and the effect of their unrestricted competition was undoubtedly to materially lower wages, and to reduce the standard of comfort to European artisans and labourers. There was also the insuperable objection that the Chinese could not be admitted to an equal share in the political and social institutions of the colony; and under the present colonial system every citizen is allowed to have a voice in the government of his country; and the presence, in considerable numbers, of an alien race occupying an inferior position could not fail before long to bring about very serious troubles, which would probably necessitate a radical change in political institutions, and entirely alter the future history and development of Australia.Despatches were also received from New Zealand, Tasmania,Western Australia, and in fact all the Australasian colonies, stating that the greatest excitement prevailed upon this question, and that there was a general determination to prevent the continued immigration of Chinese.The upshot of all this was that in June of the same year a conference of representatives of the Australian Governments of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania, and Western Australia, was held at Sydney, with the result that the poll-tax which had given so much offence to the Chinese Government was remitted, but a number of resolutions were passed which have since been embodied in the different Chinese Immigrant Acts and statutes, which amended all the previous Acts which had been passed on the subject. It is unnecessary to quote these Acts in detail, but their provisions may be briefly summarized, as limiting the number of Chinese to be brought to the colonies by vessel; increasing the penalties for violation of the law; and prohibiting alien Chinese from voting at elections of the local authority of the colony. Certain exceptions are made in the case of Chinese immigrants who are British subjects, of certain Chinese officials, and of the crews of vessels who do not land in the colony.These Acts, which are now in force, have been found very effectual for the purpose for which they were required. The action of the Colonies in this matter did not meet with the approval of the Colonial Office; but since it was evident that the Colonies were determined to prevent Chinese immigration at all hazards, no further word of remonstrance was heard from Downing Street.There is no doubt that the point affecting labour upon which colonial workmen felt most strongly, and upon which they are thoroughly agreed, is the desire to discourageemigration. Colonial labour seeks protection by legislative means, not only against Chinese, but also, as we have seen, against the artificial supply of labour by State-aided immigration, and other means. The colonial workmen are opposed not only to the reception of the destitute from abroad, but even to the assisted emigration of persons able to work. They argue that if assisted English emigration is encouraged, inferior workmen will come out to the colonies, and bring down wages to the European level.The agitation against the Chinese in particular, however, is no new thing. So far back as 1854 the second Governor of Victoria reported to the Home Government that he thought the introduction of the Chinese into Australia undesirable. "Australia for the Australian" has for a long time been the prevailing cry; and to that may be added, "Canada for the Canadian." Colonial labour, whether in Canada or Australasia, desires to limit competition. The Chinaman is a most dangerous competitor. He is an excellent workman, but at a very low standard of comfort. The colonial artisan, on the other hand, has a much higher standard of comfort than the ordinary European labourer. His pay is high, and his hours are short. He is educated, and he is independent. He has plenty of leisure for amusement, and he regards all his privileges as rights, and he fully intends to keep them. We cannot blame him either; and it cannot be said that he takes a purely selfish view of the case, since in the Dockers' Strike the Australian workmen sent large sums to England where no return was possible.After all, the Chinese are only a small population in our white colonies; but this is because of the difficulties which have been thrown in the way of their coming in. Were itnot for this, they would be numerous indeed. The Blue-book of July 1888, as we have seen, shows how determined the Colonies are to forbid Chinese immigration at all hazards. Their action in this matter has been in many respects contrary to the letter of the law; but as Sir Henry Parkes, the Premier of New South Wales, said, when charged by the Assembly for having broken the law, "I care nothing about your cobweb of technical law; I am obeying a law far superior to any law which issued these permits, namely, the law for the preservation of society in New South Wales."The Australian Intercolonial Conference had declared the Chinese to be "an alien race, incapable of assimilation in the body politic"; and acting upon these conclusions, Sir Henry Parkes declared—"Neither for her Majesty's ships of war, nor for her Majesty's representative on the spot, nor for her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, do we intend to turn aside from our purpose." Lord Knutsford telegraphed to know by what law New South Wales shut out the Chinese; and the reply which he received, in effect was, that both laws and treaties must give way to the strength of colonial feeling. After that, the Imperial Government did well to be silent, for to have enforced the law, or to have enforced the treaties, would have been to have risked an open rupture between the Colonies and the mother country. This anti-Chinese feeling is often spoken of as another phase of protection; but it is worthy of note that Sir Henry Parkes, whose vigorous utterances I have quoted above, is a free-trader.Such in brief are the principal colonial laws on this subject, both in a general sense, and more particularly with regard to Chinese immigration. These laws are the legislative outcome of the almost passionate demands of thecolonists. The significant fact is, that unlike the mother country, the Colonies cannot bring forward the plea of overpopulation, since in all of them there are vast tracts of territory still uninhabited, and in Australia only the fringe of the vast continent is at present populated. Yet in their own interests the Colonies have found it necessary to pass such stringent laws as those described. The moral is obvious. If young countries like our Colonies, which require a large working population, find it necessary to shut out the destitute, the unfit, and the undesirable—and are able to do so with the greatest possible success—surely the mother country, where there are already too many mouths to fill, may be expected to follow their example.CHAPTER XII.THE REMEDIES.In this chapter let us very briefly consider the best way in which this wrong may be set right. Several suggestions have been made for dealing with this question apart from legislation; some of them have been acted upon, but none seem to go to the root of the evil. Among these well-meaning but unsuccessful efforts, may be classed the recent action of the Government in causing notices to be posted up at some of the principal European ports, warning intended immigrants of the state of the labour market here, and of the hardships that await them. This sounds very well in theory, but in practice it may be doubted if it has had the effect of stopping one single immigrant from proceeding on his journey. For in nine cases out of ten, that journey is already nearly accomplished before the notice catches his eye. A Russian Jew, for instance, who had travelled all the way from the heart of Russia to Hamburg, would hardly be likely to turn back at the eleventh hour. What is there for him to do but to go forward all the same? He has made all his preparations, broken up his home, sold his little stock, and perhaps expended a life's savings in the purchase of athrough ticket to that new land where he has been told all good things are; and by the time he reaches the port it is too late for him to turn back even if he could. But would he if he could? I very much doubt it. "Whatever happens," he may argue, "things cannot be much worse with me than they have been." Besides, he may have the direct, or indirect, promise of employment through some sweater's agent, or he may have heard—such news travels fast—of the "shelters," of the relief-funds, of the soup-kitchens, of the loan and industrial departments of the Jewish Board of Guardians, and of the numerous foreign "Benevolent Societies," or of other similar charitable organizations for foreigners in distress, which abound in London. The Chief Commissioner of the Police writes in his Report[33]:—"It cannot be ascertained that any societies are in existence in London to offer direct inducements to immigrants;but, undoubtedly the prospect of shelter and assistance till work is obtained, which some hold out, acts as an indirect inducement to many."[34]"Whatever happens," the immigrant argues to himself, "I shall not actually starve." He proceeds on his journey, notices and warnings notwithstanding, and in due time arrives here, one more unit to intensify the awful struggle for existence which is daily and hourly going on among thousands in London and our large provincial cities.What, then, is the remedy?The answer is simple. In the words of the Select Committee upon Immigration—"It is clear that the only way effectually to check the immigration of foreign paupers is to stop them at the port of arrival." This is the course adopted in the United States and in Germany. The police regulations at Hamburg are to the effect that no personwithout means is allowed to land at that port; and if found to have been taken there and landed, the captain of the vessel in which the person sailed, is liable to a penalty of 300 marks, and moreover is compelled at his own expense to take the destitute person away from Hamburg. As we have already seen, in the United States and our principal colonies, similar laws exist to forbid the landing of destitute and undesirable aliens, while other European countries have also taken steps to guard themselves against them. Though the details may vary in particular instances, the principle in all cases remains the same. England could not do better than adopt some similar plan, and compel the steamship companies to take back to the place where they first took them on board, all persons whom they attempted to land at our ports, who were unprovided with the means of subsistence, mentally or bodily afflicted, or likely in any way to become a public nuisance or a public burden. But it will require a special Act of Parliament to compel the steamship companies to do this, and every effort should be made to get such an Act placed upon the statute-book. The mere knowledge that such a law existed would exercise an excellent deterrent effect, and serve to keep away thousands and thousands from our shores; for directly the steamship companies knew that they brought such passengers at their own risk, they would speedily cease bringing them at all, and would exercise that same circumspection in bringing people here, which they now have to exercise in the case of other countries.Such, I submit, would be an effectual remedy. It has much to recommend it from a practical point of view. It is no visionary scheme; it has been tested by experience in other countries, and has been found to work admirably.Why should it not work equally well here? But at the same time it is idle to deny, having regard to the present state of public business, and to the fact that the life of the present Parliament is ebbing fast, that any legislation on this subject must of necessity be tardy. In the meantime there is much to be done. That the working-classes of this country are already alive to the danger may be seen in a moment by glancing at the long list of Trades Unions and labour organizations which have already condemned it.[35]But that the other classes which make up the electorate are equally convinced of its urgency may be doubted, and the reason is obvious—it does not touch them so nearly. Therefore, no opportunity should be lost of bringing the real facts of the case before the public. With this object the present little book has been written, and if it should have the effect of causing any to pause and consider the importance of this question, the reason for its existence will have been more than justified."There is a general agreement that pauper immigration is an evil, and should be checked." This much was admitted by the House of Commons' Committee in their Report, and they went on to say that "the objections to such a proposal are not based on grounds of policy in any instance, but upon the difficulty of carrying such a measure into effect." Furthermore, they admitted that though they were not prepared to recommend legislative interference just at present, because of the "great difficulties" in the way, yet "they contemplated the possibility of such legislation becoming necessary in the future, in view of the crowded condition of our great towns, the extreme pressure for existence among the poorer part of the population, and thetendency of destitute foreigners to reduce still lower the social and material condition of our own poor."This Report was issued in 1889. Little more than two years have elapsed since its publication, and already it must be admitted the danger has greatly increased. It may be asked—Are the difficulties which surround this question likely to become less by waiting for the future? Are they not rather liable to become greater as time goes on, and the evils lamented by the Committee assume more formidable aspects? To admit the existence of an evil, to deplore its effects, and yet to shrink from proposing any remedy because there are difficulties in the way, is a very lame and impotent conclusion. Such a proceeding may or may not agree with the political exigencies of the moment, may or may not be desirable from a party point of view; but it shows a deplorable lack of the courage of conviction, and of the higher order of statesmanship. A problem which other nations under similar circumstances have successfully solved, is surely not one from which English statesmen should shrink, because of the difficulties besetting its solution.Let us analyse these difficulties. One, we are frequently told, is the short sea passage between the Continent and England, which would render it practically impossible for us to adopt a similar plan to that already existing in other countries. But if at Hamburg they can effectually prevent the landing of destitute persons from England, surely in England we can prevent the landing of destitute persons from Hamburg—the port from which the great bulk of these objectionable aliens generally come? The difficulty in the one case is no greater than the difficulty in the other. That objection is easily disposed of. But the other impediment—thelack of trustworthy statistics—is more serious, since without statistics there can be no legislation. I have already alluded to the Board of Trade Returns, and have endeavoured to show how utterly worthless they are for all practical purposes. The same dearth of information was the great stumbling-block in the way of the House of Commons' Committee. To that, its chairman, Sir William Marriot, has testified.[36]"The difficulty was," he said, "that there was no means of getting correct information; and it was a most extraordinary thing, that, though we had some witnesses from the Board of Trade, they were utterly unaware of certain Acts of Parliament which ought to be carried out by them, namely, the Act of William IV.; and we discovered that, although the people were calling for fresh legislation, there was a law existing by which we could get information at every port in England." Such was the state of affairs then. It is not much better now. Returns are not taken from every port in England; important ones—Southampton for instance—being still omitted; those from three of the most important ports are only partial; and from all they are loosely prepared, only checked "now and then," and the penalties for violation of the Act are never enforced. How can such returns be considered satisfactory? If they really want us to know the exact dimensions of the extent of alien immigration, there can be no difficulty in the way. The Act exists; it is only for the Government to put it into force; it is only a question of method, of means, and of men. But if they do not want us to know, that is another matter, and pressure should be brought to bear until the required information is forthcoming.Such then is the remedy, such are the difficulties in the way of its being applied. They are easily surmounted. The realcruxof the question is this. Is such a remedy justified by the circumstances of the disease? I submit, for reasons already given, that it is. State intervention is an extreme measure; as a rule it is better to let natural laws take their course, to see what can be done by individual effort, mutual help, organization, and combination. Men of the school of thought of Mr. Herbert Spencer and Mr. Auberon Herbert would probably denounce such a measure as "socialistic," in that it would limit the freedom of the individual, and limit the utility of his individual capital by forbidding him to employ it in certain ways. I admit the plausibility of their strictures in many instances, but not in this one. The key-note of such a measure as that which I have indicated, would be to help the weak, and to protect those who are not able to help themselves. Speaking generally, I am not a believer in what is termed "grandmotherly legislation." You cannot make men sober, religious, industrious, or moral by Acts of Parliament. The experiment has been tried, and failed. But you can at least remove all the stumbling-blocks in the way of their becoming so. In this particular instance, individual effort has been tried and failed. It has been found to be useless in stemming the tide of pauperism and degradation which pours in upon us from abroad. Therefore, in the last extremity, we resort to the State as the natural protector of our people.It has been urged as an objection to such a measure that it would violate the principles of Free Trade. The fact that this movement is supported by many whose fidelity to Free Trade principles is above suspicion, is a sufficient answer tothat objection.[37]But even were it otherwise—what then? Free Trade is not a fetish. It was made for man, and not man for it. There is no such thing as Free Trade in human bodies. You cannot argue that the economic laws which are applicable to goods should govern man. You cannot confuse humanity with commodities. You may exclude commodities by a tariff if you please—that is not an immoral principle. You may let in commodities freely if you choose; but to let in human bodies to compete with those who are natives of the soil, who are your flesh and blood, and who already have the greatest difficulty in supporting life—to allow this, because to shut them out would be violating the principle of Free Trade, is to sacrifice a principle to a name.Lastly, it has been said that to prohibit the destitute and unfit of other countries would be a dangerous and a mischievous innovation. Prohibition in itself is no innovation. We already prohibit many things which tend to our national hurt—false coins, disease in animals, in special shapes in human beings, products dangerous to life and limb, besides various things touching our revenue. Prohibition, therefore, in this instance, would only be extended in a fresh direction. Nor can it be declared contrary to the laws of the land or the principles of the Constitution. Such an objection is founded upon ignorance, and not on fact. The Alien Acts of the Plantagenets and early Tudors; the Proclamation of Mary against the French, of Elizabeth against the Scots; the Peace Alien Acts, and the War Alien Acts of the Georgian era; and, in a lesser degree, the Chartist Act of the present reign—a perusal of these will tend to convinceany dispassionate student of our history, that while this country has always been desirous of welcoming the persecuted and oppressed of other lands, national interests have ever been deemed to have the prior claim. I do not wish to go over again the arguments already adduced in favour of some judicious restrictive measure. To do so would be to weary and not to edify. It will suffice, in conclusion, to say that they may all be summed up in the memorable words of Sir George Grey, when introducing the Chartist Act of 1848:—
"Unless above himself he canExalt himself, how mean a thing is man!"
"Unless above himself he can
Exalt himself, how mean a thing is man!"
How are these longings to be gratified?—how are they to be even partially realized, while this unchecked flood of destitution and degradation pours in upon us from abroad?
We hear much in these days of schemes for elevating and evangelizing the masses of the poor in our great cities. All honour to such schemes, whether they succeed or whether they fail, for the motive which animates them is good. But it cannot be too often insisted upon, that spiritual and intellectual necessities do not arise until some decency of physical conditions has been first attained. Among the "submerged tenth," as they have been called, decency ofphysical conditions will never come to pass until steps have first been taken to forbid the entrance of the unclean and unhealthy of other lands. So long as the bare struggle for existence absorbs all the energies of our very poor, they cannot be civilized.
I do not underrate the greater worth of the moral life as compared with the purely physical life; but we must begin at the lowest rung of the ladder before we can ascend to the highest. As things are, the dregs of our slum population have neither the time, the energy, or the desire to be clean, thrifty, intelligent, or moral. In our haste we must not blame them. What they want first of all is better food, and more of it, warmer clothes, better shelter, higher wages, and more permanent employment. Unless we can first assist them to obtain these material desires, all our efforts to awaken the higher part of their natures will be in vain. Some perhaps will object that many of these poor creatures are so brutalized, so criminal, so degraded, that they have no higher nature left to awaken. I do not believe it—I will never believe it. However degraded a human being may be, however handicapped from his birth by the circumstances of his life, and even handicapped before his birth by the transmitted vices of his progenitors, there still is implanted in him, dormant and infinitesimal though it may be, that spark of the divine nature which alone separates man from the beast.
In writing on the social aspect of this evil, it is well to make one's meaning quite plain. I do not of course mean to say—no one can say—that to restrict the immigration of the destitute, the criminal, or the worthless, would be a panacea for all our social ills. Far from it; but it would atleast remove from their way, one of the most potent causes of degradation in the material and social condition of the poor in our large cities. Until something has first been done to check this evil, charitable agencies, religious movements, colonization and emigration schemes will be beside the mark. However much good they may do here and there—and I freely admit the amount of good that such movements have done, and are doing every day—they will fail to go to the root of the evil, since they deal with effects and not with causes; they treat the symptoms, but not the disease.
Emigration is worthless while this continuous influx is allowed to go on. At the best, emigration is a drastic remedy only to be applied in the last resource. If, like the Great Plague, or Fire of London, emigration carried off the diseased, or swept away foul and unhealthy tenements, it might possibly be regarded with more complacency. But under existing circumstances this is just what emigration does not do. We must bear in mind that we can no longer draft off our social failures to other countries. Even our colonies now refuse to take the "wreckage" of the mother country. The people we emigrate now, are just those we can least afford to lose. And there is another consideration. Of the thousands we emigrate yearly, most are men, young, healthy, and vigorous. Of the women, all—or nearly all—are virtuous and industrious. In either sex the residuum, both men and women, and more especially women, remain behind. "Bad men die, but bad women multiply," once said a lady whose name is a synonym for all that is charitable and good, when urging the advisability of giving the fallen sisterhood of our great cities a chance of beginning life over again in some new land beyond the seas. Theseare pregnant words, but under our present system little or no provision is made for carrying them into effect. Things have come to such a pass, that while we emigrate the flower of our population, the industrious, the vigorous, and the courageous; the feeble, the idle, and the worthless remain with us; and this undesirable increment is ever being augmented by the refuse population of other countries.
Look at it from whatever point we will, it cannot be right that these things should be.
The laws and customs of Europe with regard to the treatment of destitute and undesirable immigration vary considerably. For the purpose of convenience in dealing with this aspect, the European countries may be roughly divided into three classes, (a) Those which have decrees and restrictions both for prohibiting the admission of destitute aliens, and for expelling such as have resided in their territory, when for divers reasons they should appear to be unwelcome or undesirable acquisitions. (b) Those which have laws and local regulations for the expulsion of aliens, but none prohibiting their admission into the country in the first instance. (c) Those which take no steps in the matter at all. To the first of these three classes belong Austria, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, Roumania, Saxony, and Bavaria. To the second class, Spain, Sweden and Norway, Greece, Germany (all States except the two previously specified), Italy, Hungary, Servia, Montenegro, and in a lesser degree, France. To the last belong Portugal, and until the other day, Turkey. The remaining country is Russia; but having been unable to obtain any very definite information concerning it, I have hesitated to classify it with any of the above.
It will be best to take these classes and countriesseriatim.
In Austria the regulations vary slightly with regard to particular provinces; but, speaking generally, special instructions have been issued to the frontier police, with the result that all vagrant aliens, deserters, suspicious-looking foreigners who are not able to give a proper account of themselves or as to the sufficiency of their means, foreign pedlars, workmen and artisans who on entrance into the country are uncertain of obtaining immediate employment, or whose papers are unsatisfactory, or whose means for travelling are insufficient—all these are at once to be refused admission, and to be turned back at the frontier. The only exception to this rule is the case of foreign day-labourers and artisans, who are entitled by reason of reciprocity to the same treatment as Austrian subjects of the same class receive in the States to which these belong, whose appearance gives rise to no suspicion, and who having regular passports are obliged, in order to return to their homes by the most direct route, to pass through Austrian territory. By the Ordinance of 1867, foreign beggars, mountebanks, singers, musicians, jugglers, rope-dancers, gipsies, and other vagrant people, proprietors of wax-works, owners of menageries and similar exhibitions, unless they have first obtained a licence to exhibit the same in the Empire, are also refused admittance and turned back at the frontier. As to continued residence, by the General Communal Laws a Commune can refuse to allow foreigners to reside in its district, if they, together with their belongings, do not lead a blameless life, or if they become a burden upon public charity. By the Banishment Law of 1871, the Communal Police are also empowered to forcibly expel from the territory all idle or vagrant foreigners, discharged convicts, and foreign prostitutes,especially if these pursue their immoral trade without strictly observing the police regulations, if they are suffering from venereal disease, if they cause a public scandal by their behaviour, or if they seduce young people. Such, in brief, are the laws which regulate and restrict alien immigration in the Austrian Empire, as distinct from the kingdom of Hungary.
Through the courtesy of M. de Bille, the Danish Minister at the Court of St. James's, who kindly procured for me from Copenhagen a copy of the Decree of 1875, and other law-records, I have been enabled to make a detailed study of the laws of Denmark which bear upon this question.[28]The law of 1875, containing the regulation in force in regard to foreigners and travellers in Denmark, is a very drastic one. Briefly summarized, it amounts to this. Thestatusand liberties of the foreign workman or servant, employed or seeking employment in Denmark, are defined with very great attention to detail; the most uncompromising regulations are laid down for the prevention of the entry of all foreigners who may be found destitute of sufficient means for their support; and even of those who are in search of work under any circumstances, except under strict conditions. The first Article contains a positive prohibition against the admission into the country of foreign gipsies, itinerant musicians, leaders and exhibitors of animals, acrobats and jugglers, who seek to gain a livelihood by vagrant performances. Foreigners in search of work are not admitted, except on the condition that they are provided with a document of identity from a public functionary. From the succeeding Articles of the same law it appears that foreigners who are not possessed of any claim for maintenance in Denmark, and are destitute of the means ofsubsistence, are to be expelled by the police, and the method of expulsion is very carefully detailed. Even those who find employment are constantly under the supervision of the police, and have pass-books, which, at every change of domicile or of employment, must beviséby the police as well as by the employers. There can be no doubt that the severity of the law is very effectual in exterminating the evil against which it is aimed. On the other hand, it in no way deters considerable numbers of foreign skilled artisans from seeking and obtaining employment in Denmark, as any one with any knowledge of the country would speedily discover. The majority of such foreigners appear to be Germans.
In Belgium the measures which the Government is authorized to take with the view of protecting the country against the dangers which the presence of destitute foreigners involve, are based upon several laws and decrees which have been passed from time to time as need required. They are interesting having regard to the strikes and labour-troubles which have taken place in Belgium during recent years. By a decree of the Provisional Government of 1830, all foreigners unprovided with a Government authorization, are bound to show that they possess means of livelihood; if not, they are at once to be sent back to their own country. They are even liable to be brought before the Juge de Paix, who may condemn them to a short imprisonment, or send them to the agricultural colony of Hoogstraeten, where native vagabonds are confined while at the disposal of the Government. Since 1850, however, foreigners are not as a rule brought before the Juge de Paix, instructions having been given to the police authorities directing them to reconduct to the frontier at once, and of their ownaccord, any foreigner arriving in Belgium and being evidently destitute, or a vagabond. A report of the arrest and a certificate of expulsion are, in this case, addressed to the Administrator of the Public Safety, at the time when the foreigner is sent out of the country. This summary procedure is followed both in the interest of the Treasury as saving expense, and in that of the foreigners themselves, who thus escape a prolonged detention. When at a seaport, and especially at Antwerp, foreign sailors are without means of existence, the Maritime Commissaries endeavour to find them an engagement on a ship about to sail; they are only conducted to the land frontier if these efforts fail. Formerly aliens, who were arrested for not having sufficient means of subsistence, were allowed to choose the frontier by which they might leave the kingdom. Of late years, however, this right of choice has been considerably curtailed on account of the attitude assumed by neighbouring countries. These countries have not unnaturally showed a marked disinclination to becoming a sort of rubbish-heap for Belgium. Even little Luxemburg revolted at this state of affairs, and a Convention was concluded with the Grand-Duchy by which it was agreed that only natives of the country, Italian subjects or Swiss citizens (these beingen route), should in future be forwarded across the Luxemburg frontier. The German frontier is now absolutely closed to destitute persons expelled from Belgian territory who are not of German nationality. Holland has also followed suit, and the Dutch authorities reconduct into Belgium byvisé, a great number of aliens, transferred by prison vans to Lanaken.
The law regulating the admission and expulsion of foreigners from the Netherlands dates from 1849. Article I.of this law lays down as the first and indispensable condition on which foreigners can be admitted into the Netherlands, the possession by them of "sufficient means of subsistence, or the faculty of acquiring such means by work"; and upon the strength of this condition, and under the provisions of Article IX. of the law, foreigners found on Netherlands territory in a destitute condition and without any ostensible means of earning a living, may be expelled from the country; and, in fact, numbers of persons so situated are expelled every year. All foreigners "dangerous to the public peace" are also subject to immediate expulsion.
The law and custom in force in the petty European States of Bulgaria and Roumania is as follows. In Bulgaria the constantly increasing number of vagrants in the capital of Sophia, as well as in the coast of the Black Sea, and on the Danube, has compelled the Government of the Prince to increase the staff of police, in order, by a more extensive supervision, to put an end to the difficult position in which the Bulgarian population is admittedly placed by alien vagrancy and destitution. The police authorities are therefore bound to keep a strict watch on the strangers arriving in the country, or residing there without occupation, and to have recourse to the immediate expulsion across the frontier of the Principality of all those who are unable to afford surety of their intention to remain, or who attract notice by their destitution, suspicious character, or culpable actions. In Roumania, though there are no general Regulations existing on the subject, the invariable custom is, that persons who are evidently in a state of indigence are not admitted to the country, unless they could prove that they possessed the means of subsistence.
In the German Kingdom of Saxony, though there are no laws on the subject, it is competent for the authorities to prohibit the admission or residence of destitute aliens. In Bavaria also the competent police authorities are allowed to expel a foreigner from the kingdom if this course should appear to be of public expediency; and besides this, the Minister of the Interior is empowered to refuse entrance into the kingdom to foreigners who may be liable to become either a public nuisance or a public burden.
We now come to the second class, namely, those countries which have laws and local regulations for the expulsion of aliens, but have neither law nor custom for prohibiting their admission into the country in the first instance.
Of these we will first take Germany, including all the States with the exception of the kingdoms of Bavaria and Saxony. It is held by international law, that each State has the power of expelling from its territory aliens who may have rendered themselves obnoxious or dangerous to it. Destitute persons convicted of vagabondage or begging, or who, after becoming destitute, have been unable to procure a subsistence for themselves within a period of time laid down by the police, can be placed under arrest, and be handed over to the Government police ("Landespolizei"), who in aggravated cases can consign them to the workhouse; but destitute aliens thus handed over to the police authorities, instead of being consigned to the workhouse, are as a rule expelled at once from the territory of the Empire. In the little kingdom of Würtemburg, the Royal "Oberamts" (provincial administrative authorities) have an uncontested right to expel aliens from the kingdom. This right is generally exercised when it is proved or even suspected that the alien is unable to maintain himself; nor are such aliensentitled to any relief from the communal or charitable institutions of the country.
In Sweden, by a Circular published in 1886, addressed to the Governors of the Provinces, foreigners found without resources in this country, and in a state of vagrancy, are directed to be sent back by the authorities to their own country at the expense of the Swedish Government; in case the country to which the person belongs be so situated that he cannot be forwarded there without having to wait on the road within the boundaries of any other country, due notice is given to the authorities at the place to which the person is sent. As regards the treatment of destitute aliens in Norway, should there be any found in that country, they are taken care of by the police, and forwarded to their own country, the expense being charged in the police accounts. Thus it will be seen the custom in Sweden and Norway is perfectly identical; only there is this difference in the latter country, there are no laws, Royal or municipal, which sanction the practice; it rests entirely upon custom.
The law in Spain amounts to this, that if a foreigner after due inquiry is proved to be a vagrant, he is forced to leave the country. The definition of a vagrant, according to the law of Spain is, it should be noted, as follows:—"A person who has no property or income, no habitual profession or trade, nor any known or legitimate manner of living."
In Italy no special law exists, the residence of aliens in that country being regulated by the common law; but should such persons in the same manner as indigent natives take to begging, or if they engage in no fixed or useful labour, they can be arrested as idle persons, and dealt with by the judicial authorities, who can inflict a punishment upon them, and expel them from the King's dominions.Forcible expulsion is, however, only recurred to as an extreme measure. Usually, aliens are sent back to their own country with afoglio di via, or pass.
In Switzerland the matter is met by the local enactments of the different Cantons. Minute rules are laid down as to the permit of residence to foreigners. Destitute aliens, bad characters, tramps, and suspects are liable to an imprisonment on bread and water, from four to eight days' duration. They are then conducted to the frontier and expelled.
The custom observed in Servia, Hungary, Greece, and Montenegro is all much the same. Either by penal codes, or by the unwritten, but equally stringent, law of custom, the foreigner who is found in any of these countries without visible means of subsistence, and who has no occupation, is requested to leave the country by the authorities, and should he fail to comply, he is forcibly conducted to the frontier and expelled.
The case of France, however, calls for more than passing remark in that it differs considerably from the custom in vogue in most European countries. There is no positive or direct legislation properly so called for the purpose of prohibiting aliens destitute or otherwise from entering French territory. The question of expulsion is governed by the law of 1849, which is applicable to the whole of France. By Article VII. of this law, "Le Ministre de l'Intérieur pourra, par mesure de police, enjoindre à tout étranger voyageant ou résidant en France de sortir immédiatement du territoire Français et le faire conduire à la frontière." This law, however, it should be noted, emanated from an idea of social and political protection; it had no economical design, and it does not touch the question of destination. There is a Bill at present lying before the Chamber of Deputies forthe purpose of amending the law of 1849; it has been lying there five or six years, and has not yet been proceeded with. On immigration, properly so called, France has only at present legislated for her colonies on purely special points. The silence of the Statute Law on this subject is to be accounted for on various grounds. France recruits her population in other ways than by the normal growth of the inhabitants within her territory. Statistics show that of late years the number of births in France has remained stationary, but that notwithstanding this, her population has not ceased to increase; this fact being due to the influx of immigrant aliens, which is growing larger from year to year. The fact that France has become a country of immigration like America and Australia is a surprising phenomenon. "It may not be impossible," writes M. Edouard Clouet, the advocate at the Court of Paris, "that these new economical conditions will have some influence on future legislation, and call for specific measures." Such measures, however, are still in the future, and the astounding fact remains that the immigration of aliens into France is estimated at an average of about 100,000 souls per annum, while the native population is stationary, if not decreasing.
The only European country which has no law or recognized custom in dealing with destitute aliens is Portugal. Until quite recently I should have included in this category Turkey as well; but in October last (1891) the long-suffering Ottoman Government, in order to prevent the danger which would result to the public health from the influx of Jewish immigrants from Russia, resolved in future to forbid their entry into Ottoman territory. The Porte also requested the British Ambassador at Constantinople to cause a warning to be conveyed to British shipownersto refuse passages to Jewish immigrants, who will not be allowed by the maritime authorities to land. This prohibition applies not only to immigrants from Russia, but from any quarter whatsoever, whether in Western or Eastern Europe. Individuals will be allowed to pass, but not families.
On the subject of alien immigration into Russia, or the continued residence of destitute aliens therein, I have been unable to obtain any definite information. The protective policy of Russia in purging the Empire of all alien influences, whether good or bad, is well known, and needs no comment here. The expulsion of resident Germans from Russian territory unless they consent to become naturalized, and the recent edicts promulgated against the Jews, are however illustrations of my meaning. In this Russia differs from all other European countries. They are all willing to admit the desirable alien, the skilled artisan, the foreigner who is decent and law-abiding in his habits and mode of life. It is only the destitute, the vagrant, the convict, the suspect, the evil-liver that they object to. But Russia, it would seem, has a dislike to all alien influence, whether for good or for evil.
To sum up, therefore, it appears that in all European nations—with one insignificant exception—some measures, more or less drastic, are taken either for prohibiting the admission, or for the expulsion of destitute and undesirable aliens. This policy is the deliberate outcome of years of thought and legislation. It is framed in the interests of the native population in each country, and is in all cases fully in accordance with the popular will. It is generally recognized throughout Europe that it is the duty of every State to deal with its own paupers and undesirable citizens, and it is recognized also that the only way to bring about thatdesirable end, is by other countries politely but firmly refusing to admit them. Thus it may be safely said that in the continent of Europe all countries liable to suffer from undesirable immigration have taken steps to guard themselves against it—with one single exception.
That exception is Great Britain.
Twenty years ago it was a common calculation in the United States that every new immigrant was worth a thousand dollars to the particular State in which he settled. A farm might be had for practically nothing by anybody who chose to apply for it. In those comparatively early days, what are now flourishing States west of the Mississippi, were then, in parts, wild unpeopled wildernesses, and the country could not afford to be very discriminative as to either the character or the means of particular immigrants. Thus for many years America was the camping-ground of the social refuse of Europe. Irish paupers driven forth by famine and political misrule went West in tens of thousands, to become, many of them, prosperous farmers and worthy citizens of their adopted country. But there came also, in almost countless hordes, immigrants of a far less desirable, and, as the sequel has proved, dangerous kind: Fenians and apostles of dynamite from Ireland; secret societies from Italy, whose gospel was murder and brigandage; Nihilists from Russia, and Socialists from Germany, driven forth almost at the point of the bayonet by their own Governments; Russian and Polish Jews, fleeing in terror before thefanatical persecution of the Czar. All this heterogeneous mass of inflammable human material has at length become a standing menace to the United States, endangering her friendly relations with foreign countries, as well as the freedom her own people enjoy under their present form of government. Of course there were compensating advantages, but the evil of unrestricted immigration has of late years reached such an extent that the old sturdy race, the descendants of the English Puritans, who made the great Republic of the West, have been in danger of being gradually swallowed up by foreign-born populations.
In a certain sense it may be said that the history of immigration into the United States has been synonymous with the history of the nation itself; but it is evident to all unprejudiced minds, that the motives which induced those early immigrants, the Pilgrim Fathers, to leave their native land and settle in the New World, were very different from the motives which actuate the greater numbers of those who are pouring into the United States at the present day. In fact, the time from the landing of the Pilgrim Fathers down to the year which witnessed the inauguration of the first President of the United States, may not unfitly be regarded not as the period of immigration, but of colonization. Since then the rapid growth of the population—though of course largely due to natural causes—has been greatly accelerated by immigration.
Immigration into the United States appears to come in tidal waves. It has its flood and its ebb; but each decade, with the exception of the war period, shows that the new flood is higher than its predecessor. The magnitude of this influx of alien immigrants is best shown by the Annual Reports which have been issued by the late Board of Commissionersof Emigration of the State of New York. Without troubling my readers with unnecessary statistics, I may say briefly from calculations which have been made, the total number of immigrant aliens who arrived at the port of New York from the 5th May, 1847, until the 31st December, 1890 inclusive, was 10,050,936. It should be noted that at least two-thirds of the whole number of alien immigrants who come to the United States from other countries, arrive at the port of New York.
This large influx has arisen from a variety of causes. One of the most potent undoubtedly has been steamship solicitation. A regular "brokerage" business has gradually been established. Some of the steamship companies have as many as two thousand agents in Europe, and their sub-agents and solicitors are to be found in every district on the Continent. These sub-agents receive liberal commissions, varying from fifty cents to two dollars for each immigrant passenger obtained. This naturally leads, not only to their selling the tickets which are required, but also to their endeavouring to create a fresh demand by solicitation and inducement. These agents picture in the most glowing terms to the poor peasants of Europe the future which awaits them in the New World. On the strength of the false representations made to them, the peasants are often induced to sell out their little homes, and to spend a life's savings in the purchase of a through passage to America. Oftentimes they will even borrow money for the passage at a ruinous rate, and the agents will advance the tickets, taking a mortgage of whatever property is of value for payment. In some cases the money is refunded, but in most cases the agent becomes the owner of the property by foreclosure; and the poor peasants in a few months findthemselves and their families in a strange land, without money, friends, or employment. Upon arrival, they are taken in charge by a "labour boss," who herds them together in a tenement house, and hires them out at wages he dictates, and which he shares with his victims. Abundant evidence was given before the Select Committee of the House of Representatives, recently appointed to inquire into immigration, as to the truth of these statements. For instance, it appeared that one combination in Galicia induced 12,406 emigrants to emigrate to the United States within the period of fourteen months.
Another and more indirect cause is the fierce competition which rages among the steamship lines and the different railroads. In 1888 a war of rates broke out among them, so that in that year an emigrant could travel from Liverpool to Chicago for ten dollars, or about two guineas in English money. This low rate offered exceptional facilities to foreign governments, poor-law guardians, and charitable institutions, to rid themselves of the burden of persons unable to support themselves and their families, by simply purchasing for them tickets, and shipping them off to America. The chief offender in this respect appears to have been the British Government; and the Poor Law Guardians in Ireland, who by the Land Act of 1881 were advanced money to assist emigration, especially from the poorer and more thickly populated districts of Ireland. Various charitable societies in Europe and the United Kingdom were no less active. The so-called "Tuke Committee" assisted over 8000 persons to emigrate from Ireland in three years, 1882-85. The Prisoners' Aid Society also assisted convicts to emigrate, while the Central Emigration Society and the Jewish Board of Guardiansestablished in London, have both been active in sending their paupers, and the least desirable portion of the population, to America. Switzerland, Sweden, Italy, and Germany also help to swell this alien invasion—Germany more especially with regard to that most undesirable class of emigrants, liberated criminals and discharged convicts. There exists, for instance, in Munich, a society with several branches, especially formed for the purpose of enabling discharged convicts to begin life over again in some far-off land, and the land almost invariably selected is the United States.
Another method of evading the Contract Labour Law, and of drawing large numbers of immigrants to the United States, is the systematic advertising for labourers by employment agencies through the British and European newspapers. From evidence which came before the Select Committee investigating at Boston, it appeared that the Freestone Cutters' Association of New England had advertised in the English and Scotch papers for journeymen, agreeing to pay fifty cents per hour for work. The applicants were directed to call upon the agents signing the advertisement in London. These agents made no contract with the men, and so evaded the letter of the Contract Labour Law; but they came to New England on the representation that employment should be found. As the freestone cutters in England only get tenpence an hour, or about twenty cents in American money, the prospect of largely increased wages naturally induced many of them to go over to America. This is only one instance out of many; and to quote the Immigration Committee's Report, "Where good wages are paid, advertisement abroad has become of common occurrence; the workmen here are thereby brought to terms, orthe market becomes overflooded with labourers, and wages are reduced." In connection with this must also be considered the immigration coming into the United States over the Canadian border. During the last six months of 1890, it is estimated that over 50,000 European immigrants landed in Canada, and reached the United States, coming by this circuitous route to avoid inspection. There is also another point to be noted, viz. that large numbers of Canadians come into the United States for work, wages being 40 per cent. higher in the United States than in the Canadian provinces. Several hundreds of these people cross over the border from Windsor to Detroit every morning, and find employment in the stores, seed-houses, and so forth, and return to their homes every evening.
So much for the causes which have led to this wholesale invasion. We will now consider its undesirable results. The effect of immigration upon American labour is especially marked. As was shown by the Report of the Ford investigation of 1888, the pauper and lower classes of Europe have crowded into the American factories to such an extent, that in many of the large industries, notably the cigar trade, tailoring trade, and the shirt manufacturing trade, what was fifteen years ago 90 per cent. American and 10 foreign, is now 90 per cent. foreign and 10 per cent. American. Frequently upon differences arising between employers and employed as to the price of wages, foreigners were imported to take the place of American workmen, and the wages were consequently reduced. In fact, the tendency of foreign immigration is constantly to lower the standard of wages which the American labourer has hitherto enjoyed. The only persons opposed to restricting it are the great manufacturers and contractors, whoseinterest is obviously to keep the price of labour at its lowest level.
Another danger of indiscriminate immigration is plainly shown in the riots which have taken place in New York and other places during the last twenty-five years. In 1863, in the city of New York, when the famous draft riots took place, no American dared to display the flag of his country without running the risk of having his house burned and destroyed. Recent outbreaks of Nihilists, Anarchists, and Socialists, in the city of Chicago, and the still more recent lynchings at New Orleans, are further illustrations of my meaning. This political danger is deepened by the short period of time in which immigrants may become eligible for citizenship, and thus invested with political power. In several States the immigrant is admitted to citizenship after only one year's residence, and while he is still to a great extent ignorant of the laws, language, and customs. The right of citizenship thus conferred is very liable to be abused. American politicians, like other politicians, are very prone to yield to their prejudices without sufficiently regarding the interests of the people at large. The German vote in many localities controls the action of political leaders on the liquor question. The Irish vote favours, and largely influences, the policy of antagonism to Great Britain.
The social effects of this increasing immigration are also very strongly marked. There is an abnormal representation of the foreign poor in the workhouses and penitentiaries of the United States; and there can be little doubt that the effect of deporting to America the destitute, the worthless, and the criminal, has largely added to the burden there of pauperism, vice, and crime.
How keenly alive American statesmen are to the evils which result from unrestricted immigration, is shown by a perusal of the Acts which have been passed upon the subject. The Acts, other than those regulating the immigration of Chinese labourers, are three in number, viz.:—The Act to regulate immigration approved by Congress in 1882, the Contract Labour Law of 1885, and the recent Act to amend all previous laws, which was approved by Congress on the 3rd of March of this year, and which came into force on the 1st of April last.[29]I do not propose to dwell upon the provisions of those Acts in detail; they are given in full elsewhere;[30]but section 1 of the new Act, which specifies the class of aliens henceforth to be excluded from the United States, deserves to be quoted in full:—"All idiots, insane persons; paupers, or persons likely to become a public charge; persons suffering from a loathsome or a dangerous contagious disease; persons who have been convicted of felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanour involving moral turpitude, polygamists, and also any persons whose ticket or passage is paid for with the money of another, or who is assisted by others to come." The right of asylum to political and religious refugees is maintained intact by the insertion of a special proviso. The working of the Act is very simple. The immigrants are stopped at the port of arrival and inspected, and the steamship companies are compelled to take back at their own expense all those who are refused admission; and heavy penalties of fine and imprisonment are dealt out to those who attempt to break or to evade the law. This course of action, though it may seem to press hardly in individual cases, has been found to have an excellent deterrent effect,for as soon as steamship companies know that they bring over such passengers at their own risk, they refuse to bring them at all, and the evil to a great extent is nipped in the bud.
Now, if such measures of self-defence have become thus early in her history imperative with a young country like America, with a habitable area ofmore than 3,000,000 square miles, and a population of not more than 65,000,000, what are we to think of an old country like England, with an area ofa little over 32,000,000 acres, and a population, according to the census of 1881, of near 25,000,000 souls—and probably of over 30,000,000 now—compelled to spend annually some £7,000,000 on the relief or support of her own three-quarters of a million of paupers—leaving her ports, more especially the port of London, free for the entrance of a huge foreign and degraded population, from every country in Europe, which statistics demonstrate to be largely on the increase?
It is impossible for Englishmen not to feel a certain amount of envy at the energy and firmness which the American Government has displayed in excluding undesirable aliens. If such action be good, where the vast territories of the United States are in question, what must be thought of thelaissez-fairepolicy which allows our little British Islands to be overrun by the class of foreigner which America so rigorously excludes?
In this chapter I propose not only to deal with the general laws for restricting destitute and undesirable immigration into some of the principal colonies, but also the particular laws for prohibiting the immigration of Chinese. Sir Charles Dilke, in a general summary of colonial policy on this matter, writes:—"Colonial labour seeks protection by legislative means, not only against the cheap labour of the dark-skinned or of the yellow man, but also against white paupers, and against the artificial supply of labour by State-aided white immigration. Most of the countries of the world, indeed, have laws against the admission of destitute aliens, and the United Kingdom is in practice almost the only exception."[31]
The main object of all the general laws passed upon the subject appears to be the same, namely, to prevent the colonies from becoming the "dumping-ground" of the destitute, lunatic, vicious, and criminal population of older countries, including in several instances the mother country as well. With regard to Chinese immigration, two objects are apparent: first, to protect the native population fromforeign competition in the different branches of industry, the effect of which is materially to lower wages, and reduce the standard of comfort of the colonial artisan or labourer; and secondly, to guard against the political dangers which the presence of a numerous alien race occupying an inferior position could not fail to bring about.
To take the general laws first. The principal colonies which have passed statutes on the subject are Canada, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand. In New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia, the Cape Colony, and Natal, there are no similar statutes; but these colonies have the power, in the case of a threatened influx of undesirable immigrants, of passing restraining Acts, which effectually meet the purpose for which they are required. I now give a summary of the principal general statutes actually passed, other than those which exist for the immigration of Chinese. They are given in more detail elsewhere.[32]
In Canada, the Immigration Act of 1886 enacts that the Governor-General may by proclamation prohibit the landing of destitute, pauper, or diseased immigrants; also of the criminal and vicious; and arrangements are made for the immediate return of the vessel and the prohibited immigrants to the port of Europe whence they came.
In Victoria, the owner of the ship is compelled to give a bond of £100 to the immigration officer for every passenger he may bring, being "either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, or likely in his opinion to become a charge upon the public, or upon any public or charitable institution." Penalties are enacted for refusing to execute the bond, which, it should be noted, is applicable to the master of anyBritishor foreign navigable vessel; the only exemption being in favour of crews that are shipwrecked, or her Majesty's land and sea forces.
By the Immigration Act of South Australia, passed in 1872, paupers are practically forbidden to land. In Tasmania, the Passengers Act, 1885, enacts in the same way as Victoria, that a bond of £100 shall be given to the collector at the port of arrival, by the master of any ship (except one plying from one port in the colony to any other), who attempts to land any passenger in Tasmania, being "either lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind, or infirm, or from any cause unable to support himself, or likely to become a charge upon the public." As in Victoria, the bond is applied to the maintenance of the said passenger, and penalties are enforced in the case of the refusal to execute it. Provisions are also made with regard to ships undergoing quarantine. In New Zealand, the "Imbecile Passengers Act" of 1882 is practically identical with that of Tasmania.
Such are the principal general Colonial Acts.
We now come to the vexed question of Chinese Immigration. It would be well to mention in passing that a particularly drastic Act was passed in British Columbia in 1884, which spoke of the "pestilential habits" of the Chinese, and stated that they "habitually desecrate graveyards by the removal of bodies therefrom." These expressions were termed "peculiarly offensive" by the Chinese Ambassador in London; but apparently his protest was of no avail, for in 1885 another and still more drastic Act was passed, which effectually prohibited all further Chinese immigration to British Columbia. It is, however, with Chinese immigration into Australasia that we are more immediately concerned.
For many years the immigration of Chinese into Australia was very large, causing great irritation throughout the colonies, more especially among the working-classes, who thus found the price of their labour undersold. Many attempts, more or less successful, were made for the purpose of restricting the undesirable influx. In 1887 Commissioners were dispatched by the Emperor of China to the Australasian colonies, for the purpose of inquiring into the condition of the Chinese residing therein. These Commissioners found that in each of the colonies they visited, a poll-tax of £10 was imposed upon Chinese subjects, from which the subjects of other powers were exempted, and also that various laws had been enacted by some of the Colonial Legislatures against the Chinese. Upon receiving this report, a complaint was forthwith lodged at the Foreign Office by the Chinese Minister accredited to the Court of St. James's, pointing out that these restrictions and laws were at variance with treaty obligations and international usage. Upon receipt of this protest, Lord Salisbury communicated with Lord Knutsford, with the result that a circular letter was dispatched from the Colonial Office to the Governors of all the Australasian colonies, enclosing a copy of the letter from the Chinese Minister, and requesting to be furnished with full information on the subject.
The receipt of this circular created quite afurorein Australia, where public opinion was already greatly excited on the subject. The replies received in answer to it were numerous and varied; but one dominant note sounded through all of them, namely, that at all hazards the Chinese must be restricted from emigrating to any part of Australasia.
The Despatch prepared by the Ministers of New South Wales, and telegraphed to the Colonial Office by LordCarrington, who was then Governor, is of especial interest. It deserves to be quotedin extenso, since it sums up the whole case in favour of the colonies.
"Australian feeling is much exercised in reference to Chinese immigration and the inquiry made by the Marquis of Salisbury,"—so runs the Despatch.—"Your Excellency's advisers beg chiefly to explain that the law of the colony for some years past has imposed the restrictions of a poll-tax of £10 on each immigrant, and a limitation of one immigrant to every hundred tons of the ship's burden; but owing to recent occurrences, severer measures are now demanded throughout all the colonies. This state of things has given rise to new reflections in dealing with a difficulty which threatens to become a calamity. As these colonies form an important part of the Empire, it is submitted that our cause of contention is of sufficient national concern to be taken up by the Empire; if we have no voice in the making of treaties, it seems only just that our interests should be considered and exercised by those who exercise that power. We learn by public report that the United States Government have entered into a treaty with the Government of China, by which Chinese immigration into America is no longer permitted. We fail to see why Australia may not be similarly protected. On behalf of this colony we desire, through your Excellency, to impress upon her Majesty's Imperial advisers the more prominent phases of the Chinese question, as it specially and almost exclusively affects the Australian section of the British people. Firstly, the Australian ports are within easy sail of the ports of China; secondly, the climate, as well as certain branches of trade and industry in Australia, such as the cultivation of the soil for domestic purposes, and tin and gold mining, are peculiarly attractiveto the Chinese; thirdly, the working-classes of the British people, in all the affinities of race, are directly opposed to their Chinese competitors; fourthly, there can be no sympathy, and in the future it is to be apprehended that there will be no peace, between the two races; fifthly, the enormous number of the Chinese population intensifies every consideration of this class of immigration in comparison with the immigration of any other nation; sixthly, the most prevailing determination in all the Australian communities is to preserve the British type in the population; seventhly, there can be no interchange of ideas of religion or citizenship, nor can there be any intermarriage or social communion, between the British and the Chinese. It is respectfully admitted that the examination of these principal phases of the question can only lead to one conclusion, namely, that the Chinese must be restricted from emigrating to any part of Australasia. It will be seen that while the question scarcely touches the people of the United Kingdom, it vitally concerns these great colonies, whose importance in their political and commercial relations entitles them to be protected by the diplomatic influence and the powers of treaty which belong to the Empire. With renewed expressions of our loyal attachment to her Majesty, we urge that immediate steps be taken to open such negotiations with the Emperor of China as will result in affording permanent security to the Australian colonies from the disturbance of Chinese immigration in any form; the matter is too grave and urgent to admit of long delay. However desirable it may be to avoid the irritation and conflict of interests which may arise from local legislation of a drastic character, if protection cannot be afforded as now sought, the Australian Parliaments must act from theforce of public opinion in devising measures to defend the colonies from consequences which they cannot relax in their efforts to avert."
This representation on the part of New South Wales was followed by similar ones from all the Colonial Governments to whom the circular had been addressed. From Victoria came an intimation stating the statutes already in force, and the intention of the Victorian Government to carry out the law to its utmost letter.
From Queensland, the Government wrote to say that they were determined to restrict the influx of Chinese, because it had been proved by experience that they had become formidable competitors with European labour in almost every branch of industry; some branches, such as cabinet-making, having been practically monopolized by them in several of the Australian cities. And, as owing to their habits of life, the cost of subsistence was to the Chinese very much less than to Europeans living in accordance with European habits; and the effect of their unrestricted competition was undoubtedly to materially lower wages, and to reduce the standard of comfort to European artisans and labourers. There was also the insuperable objection that the Chinese could not be admitted to an equal share in the political and social institutions of the colony; and under the present colonial system every citizen is allowed to have a voice in the government of his country; and the presence, in considerable numbers, of an alien race occupying an inferior position could not fail before long to bring about very serious troubles, which would probably necessitate a radical change in political institutions, and entirely alter the future history and development of Australia.
Despatches were also received from New Zealand, Tasmania,Western Australia, and in fact all the Australasian colonies, stating that the greatest excitement prevailed upon this question, and that there was a general determination to prevent the continued immigration of Chinese.
The upshot of all this was that in June of the same year a conference of representatives of the Australian Governments of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania, and Western Australia, was held at Sydney, with the result that the poll-tax which had given so much offence to the Chinese Government was remitted, but a number of resolutions were passed which have since been embodied in the different Chinese Immigrant Acts and statutes, which amended all the previous Acts which had been passed on the subject. It is unnecessary to quote these Acts in detail, but their provisions may be briefly summarized, as limiting the number of Chinese to be brought to the colonies by vessel; increasing the penalties for violation of the law; and prohibiting alien Chinese from voting at elections of the local authority of the colony. Certain exceptions are made in the case of Chinese immigrants who are British subjects, of certain Chinese officials, and of the crews of vessels who do not land in the colony.
These Acts, which are now in force, have been found very effectual for the purpose for which they were required. The action of the Colonies in this matter did not meet with the approval of the Colonial Office; but since it was evident that the Colonies were determined to prevent Chinese immigration at all hazards, no further word of remonstrance was heard from Downing Street.
There is no doubt that the point affecting labour upon which colonial workmen felt most strongly, and upon which they are thoroughly agreed, is the desire to discourageemigration. Colonial labour seeks protection by legislative means, not only against Chinese, but also, as we have seen, against the artificial supply of labour by State-aided immigration, and other means. The colonial workmen are opposed not only to the reception of the destitute from abroad, but even to the assisted emigration of persons able to work. They argue that if assisted English emigration is encouraged, inferior workmen will come out to the colonies, and bring down wages to the European level.
The agitation against the Chinese in particular, however, is no new thing. So far back as 1854 the second Governor of Victoria reported to the Home Government that he thought the introduction of the Chinese into Australia undesirable. "Australia for the Australian" has for a long time been the prevailing cry; and to that may be added, "Canada for the Canadian." Colonial labour, whether in Canada or Australasia, desires to limit competition. The Chinaman is a most dangerous competitor. He is an excellent workman, but at a very low standard of comfort. The colonial artisan, on the other hand, has a much higher standard of comfort than the ordinary European labourer. His pay is high, and his hours are short. He is educated, and he is independent. He has plenty of leisure for amusement, and he regards all his privileges as rights, and he fully intends to keep them. We cannot blame him either; and it cannot be said that he takes a purely selfish view of the case, since in the Dockers' Strike the Australian workmen sent large sums to England where no return was possible.
After all, the Chinese are only a small population in our white colonies; but this is because of the difficulties which have been thrown in the way of their coming in. Were itnot for this, they would be numerous indeed. The Blue-book of July 1888, as we have seen, shows how determined the Colonies are to forbid Chinese immigration at all hazards. Their action in this matter has been in many respects contrary to the letter of the law; but as Sir Henry Parkes, the Premier of New South Wales, said, when charged by the Assembly for having broken the law, "I care nothing about your cobweb of technical law; I am obeying a law far superior to any law which issued these permits, namely, the law for the preservation of society in New South Wales."
The Australian Intercolonial Conference had declared the Chinese to be "an alien race, incapable of assimilation in the body politic"; and acting upon these conclusions, Sir Henry Parkes declared—"Neither for her Majesty's ships of war, nor for her Majesty's representative on the spot, nor for her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, do we intend to turn aside from our purpose." Lord Knutsford telegraphed to know by what law New South Wales shut out the Chinese; and the reply which he received, in effect was, that both laws and treaties must give way to the strength of colonial feeling. After that, the Imperial Government did well to be silent, for to have enforced the law, or to have enforced the treaties, would have been to have risked an open rupture between the Colonies and the mother country. This anti-Chinese feeling is often spoken of as another phase of protection; but it is worthy of note that Sir Henry Parkes, whose vigorous utterances I have quoted above, is a free-trader.
Such in brief are the principal colonial laws on this subject, both in a general sense, and more particularly with regard to Chinese immigration. These laws are the legislative outcome of the almost passionate demands of thecolonists. The significant fact is, that unlike the mother country, the Colonies cannot bring forward the plea of overpopulation, since in all of them there are vast tracts of territory still uninhabited, and in Australia only the fringe of the vast continent is at present populated. Yet in their own interests the Colonies have found it necessary to pass such stringent laws as those described. The moral is obvious. If young countries like our Colonies, which require a large working population, find it necessary to shut out the destitute, the unfit, and the undesirable—and are able to do so with the greatest possible success—surely the mother country, where there are already too many mouths to fill, may be expected to follow their example.
In this chapter let us very briefly consider the best way in which this wrong may be set right. Several suggestions have been made for dealing with this question apart from legislation; some of them have been acted upon, but none seem to go to the root of the evil. Among these well-meaning but unsuccessful efforts, may be classed the recent action of the Government in causing notices to be posted up at some of the principal European ports, warning intended immigrants of the state of the labour market here, and of the hardships that await them. This sounds very well in theory, but in practice it may be doubted if it has had the effect of stopping one single immigrant from proceeding on his journey. For in nine cases out of ten, that journey is already nearly accomplished before the notice catches his eye. A Russian Jew, for instance, who had travelled all the way from the heart of Russia to Hamburg, would hardly be likely to turn back at the eleventh hour. What is there for him to do but to go forward all the same? He has made all his preparations, broken up his home, sold his little stock, and perhaps expended a life's savings in the purchase of athrough ticket to that new land where he has been told all good things are; and by the time he reaches the port it is too late for him to turn back even if he could. But would he if he could? I very much doubt it. "Whatever happens," he may argue, "things cannot be much worse with me than they have been." Besides, he may have the direct, or indirect, promise of employment through some sweater's agent, or he may have heard—such news travels fast—of the "shelters," of the relief-funds, of the soup-kitchens, of the loan and industrial departments of the Jewish Board of Guardians, and of the numerous foreign "Benevolent Societies," or of other similar charitable organizations for foreigners in distress, which abound in London. The Chief Commissioner of the Police writes in his Report[33]:—"It cannot be ascertained that any societies are in existence in London to offer direct inducements to immigrants;but, undoubtedly the prospect of shelter and assistance till work is obtained, which some hold out, acts as an indirect inducement to many."[34]"Whatever happens," the immigrant argues to himself, "I shall not actually starve." He proceeds on his journey, notices and warnings notwithstanding, and in due time arrives here, one more unit to intensify the awful struggle for existence which is daily and hourly going on among thousands in London and our large provincial cities.
What, then, is the remedy?
The answer is simple. In the words of the Select Committee upon Immigration—"It is clear that the only way effectually to check the immigration of foreign paupers is to stop them at the port of arrival." This is the course adopted in the United States and in Germany. The police regulations at Hamburg are to the effect that no personwithout means is allowed to land at that port; and if found to have been taken there and landed, the captain of the vessel in which the person sailed, is liable to a penalty of 300 marks, and moreover is compelled at his own expense to take the destitute person away from Hamburg. As we have already seen, in the United States and our principal colonies, similar laws exist to forbid the landing of destitute and undesirable aliens, while other European countries have also taken steps to guard themselves against them. Though the details may vary in particular instances, the principle in all cases remains the same. England could not do better than adopt some similar plan, and compel the steamship companies to take back to the place where they first took them on board, all persons whom they attempted to land at our ports, who were unprovided with the means of subsistence, mentally or bodily afflicted, or likely in any way to become a public nuisance or a public burden. But it will require a special Act of Parliament to compel the steamship companies to do this, and every effort should be made to get such an Act placed upon the statute-book. The mere knowledge that such a law existed would exercise an excellent deterrent effect, and serve to keep away thousands and thousands from our shores; for directly the steamship companies knew that they brought such passengers at their own risk, they would speedily cease bringing them at all, and would exercise that same circumspection in bringing people here, which they now have to exercise in the case of other countries.
Such, I submit, would be an effectual remedy. It has much to recommend it from a practical point of view. It is no visionary scheme; it has been tested by experience in other countries, and has been found to work admirably.Why should it not work equally well here? But at the same time it is idle to deny, having regard to the present state of public business, and to the fact that the life of the present Parliament is ebbing fast, that any legislation on this subject must of necessity be tardy. In the meantime there is much to be done. That the working-classes of this country are already alive to the danger may be seen in a moment by glancing at the long list of Trades Unions and labour organizations which have already condemned it.[35]But that the other classes which make up the electorate are equally convinced of its urgency may be doubted, and the reason is obvious—it does not touch them so nearly. Therefore, no opportunity should be lost of bringing the real facts of the case before the public. With this object the present little book has been written, and if it should have the effect of causing any to pause and consider the importance of this question, the reason for its existence will have been more than justified.
"There is a general agreement that pauper immigration is an evil, and should be checked." This much was admitted by the House of Commons' Committee in their Report, and they went on to say that "the objections to such a proposal are not based on grounds of policy in any instance, but upon the difficulty of carrying such a measure into effect." Furthermore, they admitted that though they were not prepared to recommend legislative interference just at present, because of the "great difficulties" in the way, yet "they contemplated the possibility of such legislation becoming necessary in the future, in view of the crowded condition of our great towns, the extreme pressure for existence among the poorer part of the population, and thetendency of destitute foreigners to reduce still lower the social and material condition of our own poor."
This Report was issued in 1889. Little more than two years have elapsed since its publication, and already it must be admitted the danger has greatly increased. It may be asked—Are the difficulties which surround this question likely to become less by waiting for the future? Are they not rather liable to become greater as time goes on, and the evils lamented by the Committee assume more formidable aspects? To admit the existence of an evil, to deplore its effects, and yet to shrink from proposing any remedy because there are difficulties in the way, is a very lame and impotent conclusion. Such a proceeding may or may not agree with the political exigencies of the moment, may or may not be desirable from a party point of view; but it shows a deplorable lack of the courage of conviction, and of the higher order of statesmanship. A problem which other nations under similar circumstances have successfully solved, is surely not one from which English statesmen should shrink, because of the difficulties besetting its solution.
Let us analyse these difficulties. One, we are frequently told, is the short sea passage between the Continent and England, which would render it practically impossible for us to adopt a similar plan to that already existing in other countries. But if at Hamburg they can effectually prevent the landing of destitute persons from England, surely in England we can prevent the landing of destitute persons from Hamburg—the port from which the great bulk of these objectionable aliens generally come? The difficulty in the one case is no greater than the difficulty in the other. That objection is easily disposed of. But the other impediment—thelack of trustworthy statistics—is more serious, since without statistics there can be no legislation. I have already alluded to the Board of Trade Returns, and have endeavoured to show how utterly worthless they are for all practical purposes. The same dearth of information was the great stumbling-block in the way of the House of Commons' Committee. To that, its chairman, Sir William Marriot, has testified.[36]"The difficulty was," he said, "that there was no means of getting correct information; and it was a most extraordinary thing, that, though we had some witnesses from the Board of Trade, they were utterly unaware of certain Acts of Parliament which ought to be carried out by them, namely, the Act of William IV.; and we discovered that, although the people were calling for fresh legislation, there was a law existing by which we could get information at every port in England." Such was the state of affairs then. It is not much better now. Returns are not taken from every port in England; important ones—Southampton for instance—being still omitted; those from three of the most important ports are only partial; and from all they are loosely prepared, only checked "now and then," and the penalties for violation of the Act are never enforced. How can such returns be considered satisfactory? If they really want us to know the exact dimensions of the extent of alien immigration, there can be no difficulty in the way. The Act exists; it is only for the Government to put it into force; it is only a question of method, of means, and of men. But if they do not want us to know, that is another matter, and pressure should be brought to bear until the required information is forthcoming.
Such then is the remedy, such are the difficulties in the way of its being applied. They are easily surmounted. The realcruxof the question is this. Is such a remedy justified by the circumstances of the disease? I submit, for reasons already given, that it is. State intervention is an extreme measure; as a rule it is better to let natural laws take their course, to see what can be done by individual effort, mutual help, organization, and combination. Men of the school of thought of Mr. Herbert Spencer and Mr. Auberon Herbert would probably denounce such a measure as "socialistic," in that it would limit the freedom of the individual, and limit the utility of his individual capital by forbidding him to employ it in certain ways. I admit the plausibility of their strictures in many instances, but not in this one. The key-note of such a measure as that which I have indicated, would be to help the weak, and to protect those who are not able to help themselves. Speaking generally, I am not a believer in what is termed "grandmotherly legislation." You cannot make men sober, religious, industrious, or moral by Acts of Parliament. The experiment has been tried, and failed. But you can at least remove all the stumbling-blocks in the way of their becoming so. In this particular instance, individual effort has been tried and failed. It has been found to be useless in stemming the tide of pauperism and degradation which pours in upon us from abroad. Therefore, in the last extremity, we resort to the State as the natural protector of our people.
It has been urged as an objection to such a measure that it would violate the principles of Free Trade. The fact that this movement is supported by many whose fidelity to Free Trade principles is above suspicion, is a sufficient answer tothat objection.[37]But even were it otherwise—what then? Free Trade is not a fetish. It was made for man, and not man for it. There is no such thing as Free Trade in human bodies. You cannot argue that the economic laws which are applicable to goods should govern man. You cannot confuse humanity with commodities. You may exclude commodities by a tariff if you please—that is not an immoral principle. You may let in commodities freely if you choose; but to let in human bodies to compete with those who are natives of the soil, who are your flesh and blood, and who already have the greatest difficulty in supporting life—to allow this, because to shut them out would be violating the principle of Free Trade, is to sacrifice a principle to a name.
Lastly, it has been said that to prohibit the destitute and unfit of other countries would be a dangerous and a mischievous innovation. Prohibition in itself is no innovation. We already prohibit many things which tend to our national hurt—false coins, disease in animals, in special shapes in human beings, products dangerous to life and limb, besides various things touching our revenue. Prohibition, therefore, in this instance, would only be extended in a fresh direction. Nor can it be declared contrary to the laws of the land or the principles of the Constitution. Such an objection is founded upon ignorance, and not on fact. The Alien Acts of the Plantagenets and early Tudors; the Proclamation of Mary against the French, of Elizabeth against the Scots; the Peace Alien Acts, and the War Alien Acts of the Georgian era; and, in a lesser degree, the Chartist Act of the present reign—a perusal of these will tend to convinceany dispassionate student of our history, that while this country has always been desirous of welcoming the persecuted and oppressed of other lands, national interests have ever been deemed to have the prior claim. I do not wish to go over again the arguments already adduced in favour of some judicious restrictive measure. To do so would be to weary and not to edify. It will suffice, in conclusion, to say that they may all be summed up in the memorable words of Sir George Grey, when introducing the Chartist Act of 1848:—