Pearl S.

Buck Advocates Repeal of

the Chinese Exclusion Act (1943)
Miss Buck. Mr. Chairman, I cannot go back quite as far as I wish
I could, though I go back increasingly far each year. I can only say
that four-fifths of my life — and I am now 50 years old — have been
spent in China, and it ia as an American who has had all those years
in China that I must speak today, particularly on a matter of the
importance of this repeal as a war measure.

I should just like to say this: Those many years in China have given
me this advantage, I know the Chinese people, I know how they live.

I have not lived in cities among the rich people; I have not lived
among the segregated missionary compounds. I have lived among
the people because my father was that kind of a man, who believed
in going among the people. In fact, he was the sort of man that
when two or three Americans came, he said, "It is getting too thick
for a Christian, and I had better move on," and so we did. And I
had my life among Chinese families and Chinese children, went to
Chinese schools, and my friends were Chinese; and I never saw the
kind of thing that you have been hearing this morning, that the
Chinese have a miserably low standard.

There are poor people, as there are poor people here.

I remember a friend said a few weeks ago — she is from a southern

family and I am, too— she said, "The pity of it is that I have seen
children in the South poorer than any children I have ever seen in
Europe."

The standards of living are high. I mean the moral standards.

Her people have high standards of ethics, of business ethics; we know
that m our country.

Now, I should like to speak for a few minutes on the repeal of the
Chinese Exclusion Act from the American point of view. I suppose
that I am qualified to speak from direct experience as an American,
on this subject. I am an American, of pre-Revolutionary War
variety— I could be a D. A. R. if I wanted to.

The Chairman. Won't they let you?

Miss Buck. I never asked them.

My family on both sides came from the South. I have spent most
of my life in China, in constant and direct experience with the
Chinese.
I could speak with some feeling, I can assure you, on the way the
Chinese feel, as our allies in this war, when they are not allowed to
enter our country on a quota, as is allowed to the peoples of Europe
and Africa.

The Japanese have not failed to taunt them with the friendliness
of our words and the unfriendliness of our deeds. The Chinese have
heard this propaganda and while they have not heeded it much, it
has nevertheless been true. As a war measure, it would simply be
the wisest thing we could do to make it impossible for Japan to use
this sort of propaganda any more, by making it untrue.

But I shall leave this aspect of the subject to others because I want
to talk about that which I am best fitted to talk about from my own
experience— what the effect of the Exclusion Act is from an American
point of view.

I do this because I know that American boys are going to have to

be in China, sooner or later, in large numbers.

China is nearer to Japan than any other country except Russia.

Russia has offered us no bases for attack upon Japan and China has
offered us everything— you will remember that Generalissimo Chiang
Kai-shek cabled to President Roosevelt after Pearl Harbor, offering,
as he said, "All we are and all we have." That offer, not yet accepted,
will one day have to be accepted if Japan is to be attacked on the scale
which we all expect. When that day comes, many Americans will be
upon Chinese soil.

They will be welcome there, for in spite of very shabby treatment

from us, the Chinese still feel friendly to us.

Our help to China has been very small indeed. I do not even
count a few millions of dollars of relief money. Millions have been
collected for other countries. Very little of our lend-lease promises
to China have been fulfilled. The reason why the Chinese accept our
little help without open complaint or even feeling is that they tradi-
tionally do not base friendship upon material gifts. They make every
allowance for us, and continue to regard us as the people with whom
they would rather be friends than anyone else.

What really hurts them is not this lack of material help which they
can excuse because of the many demands on us, so much as our con-
tinued attitude toward them expressed in total exclusion acts which
until this war broke out, made it actually harder for a Chinese to
enter this country than a Japanese.

Now, unless these unjust total exclusion acts are repealed, it is going
to be very hard for our men, when they go to China, to feel like friends
and act like friends to Chinese. The wall of this injustice is going to
rise higher and higher between our two peoples. Our men will be
continually embarrassed by the Chinese questions. "Why," the
Chinese will ask, "why are we altogether excluded from your country
if you are our friends and our allies?"
"Oh," our men will have to say, "those are old laws, obsolete now,
because conditions have altogether changed."

"Then," the Chinese questioners will ask, "if they are obsolete, if
conditions have changed, why not repeal the laws?"

What will our men answer then? Do not imagine that Chinese
don't know what the facts are. I tell you all Chinese know about the
total exclusion of Chinese from our country. All Chinese know that
they are allowed no quota. All Chinese know of the ugly and in-
excusable humiliation which Chinese suffer even when they are coming
in on a visitor's visa, or are citizens of this country coming home again.

The Chinese people know these things very well, and how do I know
they know? Because I have been an American in China. Because
I have myself suffered the sort of embarrassment I would have our
men spared. Time and again I have cringed when the Chinese put
questions to me and as an American I had no answer.

I have tried to explain that these exclusion acts were made at a

time when Chinese themselves were being exploited by ruthless
Americans who enticed them to this country in droves, combing the
streets of over-crowded Chinese cities for cheap labor in American
mines and on American railroads.

But I had to confess time and again, that these conditions existed
no more. I had to confess that there was no reason at all for the total
exclusion of Chinese from the United States. I had to confess that
the Chinese we have here are among our best citizens — they do not go
on relief; their crime record is very low; they are honest and indus-
trious and friendly,

"Then why are we excluded?" This was always the next question.
1 parried it as best I could. I tried to laugh and say, "Why do you
care? It would only be a hundred-odd who could go in. You have
a great and beautiful country of your own."

"No," they said, that was not the point. "Whether one went in or
a hundred was not the point." The Chinese wholly understood the
need for restricted immigration. They did not want or expect to
enter the United States in large numbers. Some day, in fact.China,
too, might have restricted immigration when industry there had
developed far enough to be an attraction to other peoples.

No, the point was this, that China's friendly feelings were hurt by
the total exclusion which implied that Chinese were an inferior people
to all others— to Mexicans, and to South Americans, to the peoples
of Germany and Italy, and Spain, and all Europe.

Literate Chinese, great scholars, brilliant young men and women,

famous Chinese citizens, were all held inferior to the most illiterate
peasant of Europe so long as the total exclusion of Chinese was
continued.
How could I answer this? It was true. We have excluded not
only Chinese coolies; we have excluded Chinese of the highest quality
and attainment by our total exclusion laws. It is the injustice of the
total exclusion that hurts the Chinese, the humiliation it puts upon
them as a people, and now as our ally, and this hurt> what is difficult
for the American in China to bear. He is ashamed of being unable, as
an American, to meet this accusation of injustice.

It is more than injustice. It is a denial of our democratic ideals,

u j makes tne American on Chinese soil ashamed. And being

ashamed, he is angry at having to bear upon himself and in himself
the effects of the injustice and. the lack of democracy of his nation
lhere is a wall between him and the kindly Chinese people He
knows that they are right and he is wrong, and that is hard to bear.

1 do most earnestly hope, therefore, that as a war measure, if for

nothing else, the exclusion acts against the Chinese may now be
repealed and that China may be put on a quota basis, on an equality
with other nations, in order that when our men go to China, as they
will inevitably go, that they will not have to endure the stigma and the
shame of carrying with them the burden of their country's injustice
toward our ally China.

If this burden is not removed and wrong made right before they go
the enemy Japanese will renew their strong propaganda on this very
point, and will taunt the Chinese more than ever with the fact that
they are still totally excluded from our country and so are held in a
lower position than any of our other allies.

The Chairman. Miss Buck, may I interrupt just a minute?

We just heard three bells which means a roll call. Is it possible

for you to come back at quarter of 2?

Miss Buck. Yes; certainly.

The Chairman. There may be some questions that Members

Want to we will adjourn until a quarter to 2.

(Whereupon the committee took a recess until 1:45 p. m of the

same day.)

The committee reconvened, pursuant to the taking of the recess,

Hon. Samuel Dickstein (chairman) presiding.

The Chairman. Will you start where you left off, Miss Buck. I
am sorry I had to interrupt you.

Miss Buck. That was all right, but I think I really had finished my

Erepared material, and I am ready to answer any questions, Mr.

Hckstein.
The Chairman. Well, personally I do not have any questions. I
think you made a very clear statement and we appreciate it unless
some of the members want to ask any questions — Mr. Gossett?

Mr. Gossett. Yes; after Mr. Allen.

Mr. Allen. Miss Buck, I was greatly interested in your statement

in chief this morning.

In considering a question like this, the members of this committee

and the Congress have to try to consider the thing that will grow out
from this ultimately. We have to look at it in the broadest aspect
and see what the probabilities would be in the future, and that brings
up the question of dealing with the Oriental question as a whole.

In other words, it is not quite so simple as dealing with the Chinese

alone. We all feel very kindly toward the Chinese; I do myself and
so far as bringing in a hundred Chinese, if that were the end of it
and if it never got beyond that, no one would seriously object.

We feel that we should do everything we can to help the Chinese;

they are a great people.

Now, there are two serious phases of this, to me. One is the
question of breaking down our policy which we have had in this country
for more than 60 years, and it is a very serious question.

And the other question is whether or not it is best to bring this

up and air it at this time.

Frankly, I have felt that it was a bad thing to do at this time

because it brings a reflection of opinion pro and con, and it gets into
the newspapers, it gets back to Japan, it gets back to China, and I
say to you very frankly I am afraid that no good will come of that.

I hope that you will believe that I am sincere in that.

Now, the other question is the question of policy of our country

dealing with these Orientals.

Do you feel that we should take this step with reference to the
Chinese and not with other Orientals?

Miss Buck. Is that the question?

Mr. Allen. That is one question.

Miss Buck. I think that if I understand what we are talking about

today, it is the repeal of those laws which discriminate against the
Chinese, not against other Oriental peoples. There are 14 laws which
mention the Chinese by name and put the Chinese in a position inferior
to other Oriental peoples, and it is those laws I think I was told we
were discussing today; so I should think it would be better to put
our Allies on equal basis with the Japanese and the Hindus and the
other Oriental people.

That was the first question.

The second question is, is it a good time now?

Unfortunately our enemies have already aired this question, Mr.

Allen. If we could have kept it quiet, if we could have sat on the
lid, you know; in fact, many Americans have wanted to bring it up
before now, and I personally have been in the position of sitting on
that lid until I found how thoroughly the lid was off the shoe, until
I found how it is being aired from the enemy point of view.

I have put the question to the Chinese, "Suppose the thing is

turned down and it is aired unfavorably, would it not be very bad?"

And they have said, "Since the thing is discussed completely

unfavorably over most of the world anyway, it is better to have it
out, and for our own sakes, we would like to know where we are with
the American people."

So it was when the Chinese said that they, themselves, would wel-
come it being brought up, though unfavorably acted upon, that I
anally consented to come here today.

Mr. Allen. Well, I appreciate your sincerity on this question; I

give you credit for that.

Now, I would like to know the frame of your mind with respect to
the broader aspect, and we members here, Miss Buck, must face that.

In other words, we cannot take this step and expect it to stop there.
Further demands will come. We are obliged to look at the broader
aspect.

tllis committee, in the past, has been confronted

with bills to grant citizenship to Hindus and Koreans, and perhaps
others, and we have consistently said no.

Now, I think I am warranted in saying that other groups are

watching this and if this passes, then before this very session is over,
we are going to be confronted with the same demand for the 400,000,000
Hindus or Indians, or whatever you please to call them, and other
groups.

Now, what would you do with these?

Miss Buck. Well, my frame of mind on that is that if this Immigra-

tion Committee wishes to pass those bills and allow those people to
come in, I would feel it was all right.

• Mr. Allen. You would feel that they should be granted the same?
Miss Buck. If you wanted to, but that is not what I am here for
today.

It is up to you.

Mr. Allen. I know, my dear lady, but you are giving an expres-
sion of your opinion, are you not? I understood that you are giving
an expression of your opinion, based upon your experience. Now I
simply want your opinion also with reference to the other things.

Miss Buck. Well, I have been in China a long time. I have

never lived in India or Korea. I think I would leave it up to this
committee, really.

Mr. Allen. You would?

Miss Buck. Yes.

Mr. Allen. That is what we would all like to do, leave it up to

the committee.

jar Miss Buck. That is what you think your Government is for,
really.

Mr. Allen. Miss Buck. Let me ask you this further question to
ascertain the frame of your mind in testifying on this great question —
and it is a great question — let me ask you if it is not a fact that you
believe in full social equality among all the races?

Miss Buck. Are you asking me that?

Mr. Allen. Yes, I am asking you that.

Miss Buck. Well, I tell you, I do not think that is very important
now, because this is wartime, and this is a war measure. I do not
think social equality has one thing to do, at this moment, with war.

I think repeal of these acts has a lot to do with war measures.

Mr. Allen. I ask you again, Miss Buck, if you would not be so
kind as to tell me what your opinion is along that line, and if it is not
a fact that you do believe in social equality among all the races.

Miss Buck. What do you mean by social equality, exactly?

Mr. Allen. Well, I think I have heard the gentlelady over the
radio, and I think I have read some of the things that she has written
with reference to the status of colored people in the United States,
and especially in the South, in which I understood her philosophy to
be that she believed that there ought to be full and complete social
equality among Negroes and whites, and all other groups.

Miss Buck. Well, I tell you, I thought the Negro immigration

question was finished.
Did we not pass a law in 1870 allowing colored people to come in
from Africa?

Mr. Allen. I am not asking you about the question of immigration;

I am asking you about social equality among races.

Miss Buck. I do not think that that has anything to do with the
meeting today.

Mr. Allen. You do not want to answer that, Miss Buck

Miss Buck. Yes. Let us talk about it afterward, shall we?

Mr. Allen. I want it in the record.

Mr. Gossett. I do not like to take up all the time debating whether
social equality is good, bad, or indifferent. I think it is immaterial
before this committee. If Mr. Allen is going to ask every witness
whether they believe in social equality, that is injecting a lot of
foreign material.

Mr. Allen. I do not think my good friend from Texas could convince
his friends down in Texas that the question of social equality
is immaterial.

Mr. Gossett. But that does not have anything to do with the bill.

https://archive.org/stream/RepealOfTheChineseExclusionActs/RepealOfTheChineseExclusio
nActs1943_djvu.txt