On this day in 1882, the US adopted a law including these provisions:
Whereas, in the opinion of the Government of the United States the coming of Chinese laborers to this country endangers the good order of certain localities within the territory thereof [we’re looking at you, California]: Therefore … until the expiration of ten years next after the passage of this act, the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States be, and the same is hereby, suspended…. That hereafter no State court or court of the United States shall admit Chinese to citizenship[.]
Actually, it’s much longer, going on for almost three pages in the Statutes at Large, beginning at 22 Stat. 58, including all kinds of provisions for controlling immigration. It was America’s first legal definition of an entire nationality as unassimilable.
There are several ways to think about this law. One is, it was part of a global movement among white settler colonies to exclude Chinese: what did Canada, Australia, and the US have in common? Aside from British-inflected culture and government. No, aside from frontiers. No, aside from gold strikes and boom-and-bust frontiers. No, aside from frontier war against the aboriginal inhabitants. No, aside from relying on immigrant labor. YES, bigotry against immigrant laborers! If you want to find your trans-oceanic community of policy-making, look at the immigrant-haters. Victoria, in Australia, had a Chinese exclusion law in 1855; other Australian governments followed suit, so that by 1887 there were such laws all over Oz. The US passed its law in 1882; the Canadians did not outright exclude Chinese until 1923 but in the meantime had a variety of measures, including a head tax and a highly discretionary system of immigrant admission, that kept down Chinese immigration. The pattern of Japanese immigration restriction is similar; Queensland made a “gentleman’s agreement” with Japan to keep down immigration in 1897, while the US did its deal with Japan in 1907 and Canada did its in 1908. (Why were the Chinese excluded by law while the Japanese were excluded by bilateral negotiation? The Chinese were quasi-colonized, while the Japanese had a navy modeled on Britain’s.)
Another way of looking at the law is to see it functioning within the history of American immigration restriction. Chinese exclusion invented something like the concept and business of modern illegal immigration. As a journalist wrote in 1891,
There is no part [of the Canadian border] over which a Chinaman may not pass into our country without fear of hinderance; there are scarcely any parts of it where he may not boldly walk across it at high noon.
The law and its successor of 1892 also made necessary for the first time the modern machinery of immigration and residency control and documentation. And what was made for the Chinese eventually extended to other immigrants as well—not just the Japanese, but eventually all “Asiatics,” excluded by the 1917 law. And also Europeans: in the decades around 1900, Americans found lots of ways to define various nationalities of immigrants as undesirable owing to “health” problems. Somehow, the taxonomy of health problems mapped onto certain ethnicities and national origins, as Howard Markel and Alexandra Minna Stern find; Jews were “neurasthenic,” Italians “criminally minded.”2 Medical opinion underwrote racism, allowing the redefinition of people previously considered “white” and thus A-OK, as excludable along with the “Asiatics.” What starts as the “Yellow Peril” can become the merely sallow peril. Say, you’re looking a little peaky there, yourself….
1Cited in Erika Lee, “Enforcing the Borders: Chinese Exclusion along the U.S. Borders with Canada and Mexico, 1882-1924,” Journal of American History 89, no. 1 (June 2002): 54-86. The discussion here also relies on Mae Ngai, “The Architecture of Race in American Immigration Law: A Reexamination of the Immigration Act of 1924,” Journal of American History 86, no. 1 (June 1999): 67-92, and the various works of Roger Daniels, including his good survey of immigration law, Guarding the Golden Door.
2Howard Markel and Alexandra Minna Stern, “Which Face? Whose Nation? The Construction of Disease at America’s Ports and Borders, 1891-1928,” American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 9 (June/July 1999): 1314-1331.
30 comments
May 6, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Witt
Your post title reminds me that one of the great challenges in discussing immigration with the general public is that it usually starts from the presumption that “My grandparents followed the rules,” with little or no comprehension of the fact that for long periods in American history there were no rules.
May 6, 2008 at 3:47 pm
DinTN
CHUCK BALDWIN NOMINATED PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE OF THE CONSTITUTION PARTY 2008!
Website coming soon: http://www.baldwin2008.com/
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5808710975074355086&hl=en
“We will close our borders and ports. Illegal immigration STOPS the day we take the White House!
We will not provide amnesty to anyone. There will be no welfare for illegal immigrants! We will end birthright citizenship! There will be no more anchor babies!”
“It is absolutely ludicrous to say we are fighting a war on terror half way around the world when we refuse to secure our borders and ports. If I were President, I would immediately seal our borders. I would also see to it that employers in America who knowingly hire illegal aliens are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. In plain language: any employer who consciously hires illegal aliens would go to jail. They would not pass Go; they would not collect $200; they would go straight to jail.
By sealing the borders and by cutting off the money supply to illegal aliens, the problem of illegal immigration would dry up. As it is, we have no idea how many potential terrorists–not to mention violent gang members such as MS-13–have snuck (and are sneaking) through our borders.
And speaking of illegal immigration, as President, I would enforce our visa rules. This means anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law is immediately deported. There would be no “path to citizenship” given to any illegal alien. That means no amnesty. Not in any shape, manner, or form. I would not allow tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens’ education, social services, or medical care. As President, I would end birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. There would be no “anchor babies” during my administration.”
May 6, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Vance Maverick
Those who do not remember the past, or who note it only when it turns up in an automated web search, are doomed to freshly illustrate its relevance.
May 6, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Adam
Thanks for another great post. I am a long-time lurker and a second time commenter.
I have an unrelated question. I teach high school history. I am currently having my students research the effects of imperialism on a country of their choice during the late 1800s early 1900s.
Here is my problem, we don’t really have a library. I went to our city library and checked out a dozen books for them to use, but it isn’t the same. We have a school subscription to EBSCO and ProQuest as well. My students (and I) are struggling finding relevant articles. Most of the articles are on recent events and most on African nations are about HIV or something unrelated to how the English treated those living in what is today Ghana or Nigeria, etc.
Is there a ‘History’ database we could subscribe to? Any ideas? Thanks. Feel free to comment or email me if you can from the list.
Adam
May 7, 2008 at 6:19 am
EconTech » Yesterday, Illegal Immigration was Invented
[…] Inventing illegal immigration. […]
May 7, 2008 at 7:46 am
eric
Adam,
First, does your ProQuest subscription include historical databases? I know they offer the NYT, the LAT, the WSJ, and other historical newspapers.
Second, you can get the New York Times historical archive free online at the New York Times, at least for the period of articles that are in the public domain. Go to their homepage, use the search bar, and choose from the menu archives 1851-19xx. Once you’ve done a search, you can get an advanced search page that will help you narrow things down.
Third, beyond that, there’s American Memory.
And of course there are lots of others…
May 7, 2008 at 7:46 am
zunguzungu
This post is great, but I suspect that large portions of it were plagiarized from the guy who wrote “Blessed Among Nations.” You better hope that guy doesn’t find this posting.
Actually, it’s fascinating to read such similar material in a different register, and with a subtly but substantially different twist.
May 7, 2008 at 7:54 am
eric
I suspect that large portions of it were plagiarized from the guy who wrote “Blessed Among Nations.” You better hope that guy doesn’t find this posting.
Shh, zz. Nobody else read that book. If you don’t tell them, they’ll never know.
Yes, it’s different—but only because I didn’t have the book on me and was too lazy to go pick up a copy….
May 7, 2008 at 8:06 am
andrew
I’ve only used their academic databases, but ABC-CLIO has databases aimed at schools that might by worth a look.
May 7, 2008 at 9:29 am
Zippy
Ah yes, the US is an evil, racist country. Tired.
May 7, 2008 at 9:29 am
eric
Ah yes, that’s exactly what the post says. Well done.
May 7, 2008 at 9:57 am
zunguzungu
I thought the post was exalting the nation’s entrepreneurial spirit? Though, to be fair, other nations were also innovators in this field; we were just standing on the shoulders of giants.
Seriously, though, I wonder about the word “invention.” Without taking away from the 1882 moment as an important milestone in the development of illegal immigration as a mode of political discourse, it seems like the American experience of “illegal immigrants” runs straight through the slave trade, which can look a lot like illegal immigration, if you squint at it in the right way (a work force valued precisely because they have no rights the law need respect, criminalized by their birth, etc). There’s a banal polemic to be made there (INS = Fugitive Slave Act, or something) but I think there’s also a more interesting question about where this kind of political discourse comes from; as the aforementioned author of “Blessed Among Nations” mentions, the literacy test was actually a Jim Crow innovation, and only afterwards did it become a way of justifying the government’s control over whether or not yearning and huddled masses would be allowed to breathe free and work in sweat shops and stuff. What do you make of the reconstruction backdrop for this kind of legislation? Do the dots connect? The post only mentions ethnicities coded as “immigrants” but, after all, there was certainly a much longer history of African-American racial status being pathologized and treated as a kind of social disease.
May 7, 2008 at 10:06 am
eric
I’m not sure if I’m picking up on exactly the point you’re raising, zz, but is the argument something like, the “free labor” discourse—which undergirds the original Republican party, and says we shouldn’t have (black) slave labor because it degrades (white) free labor, and so forth—is it that this set of arguments connects naturally to the set of arguments against “coolie labor” and similar?
May 7, 2008 at 10:10 am
obbop
The elites of every country tend to do well unless they are deposed or lose a war with another group of elites but even then the losing elite(s) will often continue living an opulent life style.
Hey!!!! The elite class of every country/religion/cult/any type of social organization lives well and works less by skimming from the labors of the common classes.
That is what Marx and Engels tried to tell us!!!!
Those two should have stopped there rather than trying to concoct a cure for those burdensome elites.
Maybe elite classes are inevitable.
It’s just a shame elites are so ready to brainwash, then up to murdering masses of common folks so as to enable them to maintain the status quo that is so beneficial to the elites.
I admit that some groups of elites are kinder than others.
Sure can’t compare American elites with the acts of Idi Amin, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc. etc. etc.
But, the USA’s elite class HAS murdered common Americans to maintain the status quo. Just look in the history books. Even women and children have died at the hands of jack-booted thugs, representatives of the elite class, to ensure that wealth and power remained in the hands of the elites.
Please, my fellow citizens. All I wish is that you attempt to cast off the years of indoctrination, the brainwashing all of us undergo to convince us that the way things are is correct, proper… as it should be.
From schooling to the mass media to general culture…we are constantly bombarded that the present status quo is the only RIGHT way to handle things.
Educate yourselves!!! Don’t let the self-centered greedy elite class do your thinking for you.
Don’t let the Rush Limbaugh’s of the world implant their propaganda. Those folks are merely shills for the elite class!!!
I remain convinced that the greatest threat to our freedoms is our own elite class; more of a threat than all foreign terrorists combined.
May 7, 2008 at 10:10 am
obbop
The elite’s government FEARS you!!!!!!
Their fear is manifested in the laws they pass. Here is a law banning what MANY of the Founders wrote is a RIGHT of citizens when a government no longer represents them:
Section 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or
teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of
overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or
the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession
thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by
force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any
such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any
such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates,
sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed
matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity,
desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any
government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts
to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society,
group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the
overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or
violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any
such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes
thereof –
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by
the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five
years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in
this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned
not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for
employment by the United States or any department or agency
thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms ”organizes” and
”organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of
persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new
units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes,
and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
The federal government is allowing MILLIONS of illegals to invade our country who are causing immense economic harm to America’s working poor. Corporate America is becoming increasingly more powerful and influential. Yet, according to the government of for and by the elites YOU, a citizen, have to accept whatever the government does with NO recourse other than voting…… and there is sufficient proof that shows to me voting is worthless since the entrenched power structure ensures that the emplaced elite class can not be removed.
Several Founders specifically wrote of the people’s right to abolish a government when it no longer represents them.
We are forced to live under an elite’s TYRANNY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 7, 2008 at 10:29 am
zunguzungu
Mine is much less of an argument than a question. I’m just struck by the fact that the ways African-Americans were racialized and the ways immigrants were being racialized were really not all that dissimilar (were even converging, in a funny way), but they tend to end up on different sides of the discussion. It’s as if the invention of the “illegal immigrant” and the invention of the “negro” were unrelated when they’re clearly not, but how does one talk about that relationship? It’s a later moment, of course, but I’m thinking of the way Jacob Riis interpellates African-Americans into the same category as inhabitants of all the other immigrant ghettos he takes pictures of (even though they’re immigrating from the united states south), or the way Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle” uses a trope identified with black Americans (and aspires to be the “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” for white laborers) but makes it about Eastern Europeans and the problem of their Americanization. There are other examples, of course; I guess my real point would be to question whether it isn’t more than simply a “white settler colony” thing, but actually has a lot to do with the particular ways that dark-skinned people are conceptualized within the particular white settler colony (so the fact that Australia and Canada have a different kind of history vis-a-vis slavery would seem to be significant).
But I like “free labor” as a way to talk about the lines of continuity, especially since the British were still using that line of talk to justify opening up the East to commerce (and all of two years later, King Leopold would make that kind of rhetoric a centerpiece of the Berlin conference and his own “Congo Free State”).
May 7, 2008 at 10:31 am
zunguzungu
Also, I’m concerned about the elite’s government, which is merely a shill for the elite class. Off to educate myself and cast off years of indoctrination!
May 7, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Jason B
How’s that 1891 passage for a train wreck of a sentence?
There is no part [of the Canadian border] over which a Chinaman may not pass into our country without fear of hinderance; there are scarcely any parts of it where he may not boldly walk across it at high noon.
Enough negatives for you? Even “hinderance” connotes negativity. My brain popped a breaker following the negations.
May 7, 2008 at 3:08 pm
ckasih
shocked: MALAYSIA MAKE NEW RULES FOR CHRISTIANS!!
EVERY CHRISTIANS MUST SAY “ALLAH” RATHER THAN “GOD” & DONT SAY “TRINITY” ANYMORE..
This is because English language not suitable anymore because the original Bible is in Arabic.
The full story is here: ckasih.blogspot.com
May 7, 2008 at 3:15 pm
ari
Why so much more spam lately? Is this what ending up on the Crooked Timber blogroll does for us?
May 7, 2008 at 3:33 pm
eric
In this case, I think it’s because I put “illegal immigration” in the post title.
May 7, 2008 at 6:31 pm
andrew
Hello, nice site! I will be visiting every day. Keep up the good work!!
May 7, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Some Interesting Things « Accismus
[…] A very brief history of illegal immigration: Chinese exclusion invented something like the concept and business of modern illegal immigration. […]
May 8, 2008 at 12:27 am
Hemlock
This post has piqued my interest in the medical mapping of Mexican-American ethnicity and race in twentieth-century immigration policy. Perhaps in the context of the expansion of California commercial agriculture.
May 8, 2008 at 6:58 am
Warm Shanghai Rain « you don’t have to read v2.0
[…] Dr. B links to an article called Inventing Illegal Immigration. Let’s all stop pretending fear of undocumented immigrants is not racism and […]
May 9, 2008 at 7:37 am
Sabrina Karim
This law is not the scariest piece of American policy. I think that Fung Yue Ting vs. U.S. (1893) deserves some discussion.
See http://forcedmigrants.blogspot.com/2008/05/kanstroom-on-his-new-book-deportation.html
May 9, 2008 at 7:42 am
eric
Ah, thanks Sabrina—excellent suggestion.
May 15, 2008 at 12:01 am
Supreme laws are promissory notes redeemable at debtor’s discretion. « The Edge of the American West
[…] this day in 1893, the Supreme Court decided Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U. S. 698, which as Sabrina Karim points out, is worth […]
July 25, 2008 at 4:40 am
Real Hartford » “For the last time, don’t share your toys with your brother!”
[…] others from coming. The Edge of the American West addresses this in Eric’s article, “Inventing Illegal Immigration.” Likewise, an overview of immigration history on the Ellis Island website shows that […]
December 23, 2008 at 10:49 pm
fartik
Добрый день
Читаем как я отдохнул в гагре
было круто еб их за ногу http://www.akrapovnitsky.narod.ru