August 8, 2026 2nd draft
部分资料由台湾原住民提供。
1876年美国人在国会演说时形容华工：
- FRANK M PIXLEY是旧金山市议员，说：中国人并不比非洲种族优秀，他们比上帝所创造的任何种族都要低劣。
- Frank M. Pixley, a San Francisco city council member said: The Chinese are no better than African races; they are inferior to any race God created.
Frank M. Pixley, a San Francisco city council member
旧金山市议员弗兰克·M·皮克斯利 Frank M. Pixley
- Dr. Arthur B Stout 是一位医生，说：每有一个中国佬在我们的土地上永久定居下来，都会使我们的血统降低。
- Dr. Arthur B. Stout was a 19th-century San Francisco physician and member of the California Board of Health who said: Every time a Chinaman settles permanently on our land, it lowers our bloodline.
Arthur B. Stout was a 19th-century San Francisco physician and member of the California Board of Health.
- JAMES P DAMERON 是一名律师，说: 中国人脑容量太小，是无法建立文明的自由政体的劣等民族。
- James Palatine Dameron was a 19th-century California lawyer and political figure, he said that the Chinese have too small a brain capacity and are an inferior race incapable of establishing a civilized and free political system.
JAMES P DAMERON 是一名律师
James Palatine Dameron was a 19th-century California lawyer
华工史卖猪仔：
- 黑奴1000，
- 黄奴400，
- 买两个唐山公还省200。
百年前，中国客家人和广东人福建人，在西方奴隶市场上被拍卖，价格不到黑人奴隶的一半！
美国人通过民主程序，在 1882 年颁布法律禁止华人移民，但商人学生官员不受影响。
旧金山市长詹姆斯·杜瓦尔·费兰: 《为何应排斥华人》James D. Phelan, mayor of San Francisco: “Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded” (1901)
- James D. Phelan 詹姆斯·杜瓦尔·费兰（James Duval Phelan，1861年4月20日－1930年8月7日）是一位美国政治家、社会领袖和银行家，曾于1897年至1902年担任旧金山市长，并于1915年至1921年担任加利福尼亚州联邦参议员。担任市长期间，他倡导市政公用事业，并努力保护选民免受托拉斯垄断行为的侵害。在参议院，费兰是伍德罗·威尔逊政策的进步支持者，也是限制日本人和中国人移民美国的运动的领导者之一。
- James Duval Phelan (April 20, 1861 – August 7, 1930) was an American politician, civic leader, and banker who served as the mayor of San Francisco from 1897 to 1902 and as a U.S. senator from California from 1915 to 1921.
Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded
詹姆斯·D·费兰，《为什么应该将中国人排除在外》（1901 年）
詹姆斯·D·费兰，旧金山市长撰写了以下文章以鼓舞士气支持延长禁止中国人移民的法律。
《排华法案》分别于1882年和1892年通过。当时通过的排华法案有效期均为十年。最新法案将于明年五月到期，届时国会将被要求续签，因为迄今为止，在外交界和其他领域，排斥华人一直被视为该国的既定政策。。 罪恶的本质或者人们的观念是否有所改变？当然，在太平洋沿岸地区情况并非如此，随着时间的推移，中国人难以融入当地社会以及他们不适宜成为公民的特质更加显而易见。。
T《排华法案》总体上取得了一定的成效，尽管中国人或多或少地运用了他们众所周知的狡猾手段。通过偷偷摸摸、欺诈手段进入美国来规避其规定。然而，法律反对对大量移民设置障碍。在1880年之前的许多年里，这种威胁一直困扰着这个国家……
由于涌入人数得到控制，加州面临的危险得以解除，因此，过去十年来的工业状况显示出相对繁荣。而它是众所周知那在……之前加利福尼亚州的排除法深受劳工问题困扰以及商业混乱。 失业男子因找不到工作而饥肠辘辘，他们走上城市街头游行，并成立了各种政党。骚乱扰乱了社区的和平，有时甚至威胁到法律和秩序的基础；这些事实为詹姆斯·布莱斯在其杰出的著作《美国联邦》中对民主进行了富有成果的思考。“他用了两章的篇幅来描述反华运动。 加州问题被视为种族、劳工和政治问题，如果不加以解决，迟早会威胁到美国的制度。。当时有人指责（何耀也重申了这一点），反对华人的势力完全来自煽动家。为了表明人民的一致意见，我可以指出，立法机关已将华人移民问题提交全民公投。为了支持中国移民的投票数为 883 票，反对中国移民的投票数为 154,638 票。旧金山市代表着该州的财富和智慧，并汇集了该州的熟练劳工组织，只有 224 票赞成移民，41258 票反对移民。 这一结果清楚地表明，加利福尼亚州的居民从自保的角度出发，拒绝让中国苦力剥夺他们的祖产。这就是判决的意义所在。
国会一个特别委员会在调查该问题并在加利福尼亚州听取证词后，提交了支持排华政策的报告。此后，该政策一直被视为一种和平的预防措施，可以防止严重扰乱政治秩序的局面，否则这些局面将不可避免地发生。国民立法机构未能保护该国的白人人口。……
…
中国人通过让远逊于我们的文明与我们自己的文明竞争，往往会摧毁人口。自由政府的永续存续就取决于他们。无家可归，没有家人；既不去学校，也不去图书馆、教堂或剧院；违法乱纪，沉迷于不良嗜好；漠视卫生条例，滋生疾病；不休假，不尊重传统纪念日。但孜孜不倦地工作他们几乎没有任何食物和衣物可以维持生计，这种状况他们已经习惯了几个世纪。他们与那些从小接受我们文明教育、重视家庭生活和公民责任的男性一起被列入名单。 我们的文明曾被人类的爱国者、烈士和恩人从野蛮状态中拯救出来，那么现在的问题是：它会受到威胁吗？中国移民难道不是一种危害吗？
…
如果接纳中国人，那么自由民的队伍从何而来？谁来保卫我们的文明？谁来为我们而战？ 中国人或许是优秀的劳动力，但他们不是优秀的公民。少量的个体雇主或许能从中受益，但他们却滋生了一种全国性的疾病，这种疾病会随着他们的扩散而蔓延，随着他们的壮大而加剧。
[资料来源：詹姆斯·D·费兰，《为何应将华人排除在外》，《北美评论》 173（1901年11月）。]
James D. Phelan, “Why the Chinese Should Be Excluded” (1901)
James D. Phelan, the mayor of San Francisco, penned the following article to drum up support for the extension of laws prohibiting Chinese immigration.
[The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1882, and again in 1892.] The Exclusion Acts then passed were limited to ten years’ duration. In May next the latest act will expire by limitation, and Congress will be asked to renew it, because, until now, Chinese exclusion has been regarded in diplomatic circles and elsewhere as the settled policy of the country. Has there been any change in the nature of the evil, or in the sentiments of the people? Certainly not on the Pacific Coast, where the lapse of time has made still more evident the non-assimilative character of the Chinese and their undesirability as citizens.
The Exclusion Act has been reasonably effective, although the Chinese, with more or less success, have employed their well-known cunning in evading its provisions by surreptitiously and fraudulently entering the United States. The law, however, has opposed a barrier to the great volume of immigration which threatened this country for many years prior to 1880….
The influx having been checked, the danger to California has been averted, and, consequently, during the last decade industrial conditions indicate comparative prosperity; whereas it is well known that prior to the Exclusion Laws the State of California suffered acutely from labor troubles and business derangement. Unemployed men, hungry from want of work, marched the streets of the cities, inaugurated political parties, disturbed the peace of communities by riotous outbreaks which threatened at times the foundations of law and order; and these facts gave to James Bryce a fruitful theme for speculation on democracy in his excellent work, “The American Commonwealth.” He devoted two chapters to the anti-Chinese crusade in. California and looked upon it as a race, labor and political question, which sooner or later, unless solved, would menace American institutions. Accusations were made at that time, which Ho Yow repeats, that the opposition to the Chinese came from demagogues alone. To show the unanimity of the people, I may point out that the Legislature submitted by referendum the question of Chinese immigration to a popular vote. For Chinese immigration 883 votes were polled, and against Chinese immigration 154,638 votes. In the City of San Francisco, representing the wealth and intelligence and containing the skilled-labor organizations of the State, only 224 votes were cast in favor of the immigration and 41,258 votes against it. This result demonstrated clearly that the resident population of California, taking the broad ground of self-preservation, refused to suffer themselves to be dispossessed of their inheritance by Chinese coolies. That is what the verdict meant.
A select committee of Congress, after investigating the question and taking testimony in California, reported in favor of Chinese exclusion, and that policy has been regarded ever since as a peaceful preventive of serious disorders affecting the body politic which would have inevitably ensued had the National Legislature failed to protect the white population of the country. …
…
The Chinese, by putting a vastly inferior civilization in competition with our own, tend to destroy the population, on whom the perpetuity of free government depends. Without homes and families; patronizing neither school, library, church nor theatre; lawbreakers, addicted to vicious habits; indifferent to sanitary regulations and breeding disease; taking no holidays, respecting no traditional anniversaries, but laboring incessantly, and subsisting on practically nothing for food and clothes, a condition to which they have been inured for centuries, they enter the lists against men who have been brought up by our civilization to family life and civic duty. Our civilization having been itself rescued from barbarism by the patriots, martyrs and benefactors of mankind, the question now is: Shall it be imperilled? Is not Chinese immigration a harm?
…
If the Chinese are admitted, whence are the ranks of the free population to be recruited? Who shall preserve our civilization and who shall fight our battles? The Chinese may be good laborers, but they are not good citizens. They may in small numbers benefit individual employers, but they breed the germs of a national disease, which spreads as they spread, and grows as they grow.
[Source: James D. Phelan, “Why The Chinese Should Be Excluded,” The North American Review 173 (November, 1901).]
No comments:
Post a Comment