EXCLUDING THE JAP.

Auckland Star, Volume 55, Issue 94, 21 April 1924, Page 5

EXCLUDING THE JAP.

BILL THROUGH SENATE. QUESTION OF THE VETO. WOULD VITIATE WHOLE BILL. (By Cable.—Press Association.— Copyright.) WASHINGTON, April 20. The U.S. Senate finally passed the Immigration Bill by 62 votes to 6. The Senate refused to extend the quota restrictions of the North to South American countries as was proposed by Senator Willis, of Ohio. Democratic and Republican leaders opposed this move, as tending to destroy pan-Ameri-can harmony. AVhile there is no evidence that cither side at the Capitol will recede from the position taken up regarding the total exclusion of the Japanese, observers call attention to the possibilities offered for a modification of the clause in the conference, which must take place between the Senate and the House of Representatives. It is remarked that the exclusion of Japanese puts the President in a serious predicament. There is a very slight hope that when the House and Senate confer on the question of equalising slight dissimilarities in the measure, they will decide to reject the exclusion clause. The President will therefore be faced with' the question of applying his veto. This, however, would mean the negation of the complete Immigration Bill, which has taken months to formulate. At the same time it might mean a loss of the support of the Pacific Coast States in the coming election. It is known that Mr. Coolidpe is very much opposed to the exclusion /■lauso. which Mr. C. K. Hughes. Secretary of State, has officially repudiated. The President's political counsellors are urging him to take no action when the measure arrives for his signature. It would thns become law within ten days without signature. Mr. Hughes has published a letter in which the Japanese Ambassador. Baron Hanihara. disclaims any intention of employing an offensive" threat in his prior communication, in which he referred to the grave consequences which might follow the adoption of the exclusion provision in the bill. The letter states: In my supreme duty of maintaining and drawing closer the bond of friendship so happily existing between our peoples, I honestly believe that ill-feeling and misgiving would reasonably follow such an enactment. These I described as "grave consequences." I had no thought of being disagreeable nor discourteous, etill less did T intend to convey a so-called "veiled threat." On the' contrary it was in a spirit of the most sincere respect, confidence, and candour that I used the words. This epirit I hope I have manifested throughout this letter. Mr. Hughee. in a letter of reassurance, says:—l have no doubt your words will be taken in the sense you have stated. lam quite sure that it was far from your thought to express or imply a threat.—(Reuter.) ' ' CLARIFYING THE ATTITUDE. ANOTHER NOTE SENT. ■■ ■ (Hcceived 2 p.m.) TOKYO, April 20. M. Hanihari, Japanese ambassador at Washington, has sent another Xote to Mr. Hughes, United States Secretary of State, with a view to clarifying Japan's attitude as regards immigration. Mr. Woods, United States ambassador, here, had a lengthy conference with Baron Mitsui. Foreign Minister, resterday—(A. and X.Z. Cable.)