デジタル版『渋沢栄一伝記資料』

大正13年12月11日（1924年）

是日、当委員会小委員会、飛鳥山邸ノ栄一ノ病室ニ開カレ、アメリカ合衆国排日移民法対策ヲ議ス。

十四日、再ビ同所ニ小委員会ヲ開キ、合衆国ノ知友ニ書ヲ送リ、同国人側ヨリ排日法ノ改正ニ着手セシメンコトヲ協議ス。

日米関係委員会集会記事摘要　（渋沢子爵家所蔵）
　大正十三年十二月十一日午前十時、於飛鳥山邸、日米関係小委員会開催
　　出席者
　　　（委員）　渋沢子爵・阪谷男爵・井上（準）之助氏・添田寿一氏
　　　（幹事）　増田氏・小畑氏
渋沢子爵　大統領の選挙も終了してクーリツヂ氏当選せられ、新任大使エドガー・エー・バンクロフト来任せられ、前大使サイラス・デー・ウツヅ氏も米国に於て活動を始められたり、而して一方に於ては両国間の阻却を促すが如き新聞記事なども見える折柄、日米関係委員会に於て相当の方法を講すべき時期には非らずやとの念切なるを以て、病中にも拘らず皆様の尊来を忝ふせし次第なり、尤も個人として幣原外務大臣とも本問題に就て懇談せしことありたり、尚ほモー一ツ皆様に御計り申上け度いことは、今回在米日本人会書記長滝本為三氏の齎らせる中加日本農民救済の件であります
井上氏　子爵は已にバンクロフト大使の意見を御聞きゝになりしや
子爵　去る十一月十九日同大使と会見せし際、日米関係委員会の沿革を話して別れしのみにて、大使とは未だ此問題に関して懇談するの機会を得ませぬ
 - 第34巻 p.400 -ページ画像 
阪谷男爵　米国も英国も日本が之れ以上強くなることを恐れて居る様に見えます、故に一方に於ては太平洋艦隊の大演習とかシンガポールに於ける海軍根拠地設立等の事あると同時に、米国は移民法の取扱に関しては非常に寛大である由なり
井上氏　自分が米国を通過せし時に感じたる様子は、先づ時を待つて此問題を解決するより外に道がない、といふ訳けは議会の空気が一変せざる内は手の附け様が無いからであると聞きました
添田氏　子爵の仰せらるゝ様に、自働車を馳せるが儘に任せて置かば終に墜落する恐ありといふ具合に、此問題も此儘に捨置くことは危険であると思ひまするから、何等かの矯正法を採用する必要があると考へます、而して其方法は米国に於ける友人等を通じて輿論を喚起せしむることが一つ、次に大使を速に派遣することであると思ひます、叶ふべくんば井上君の如き人を此任に挙げらるゝことを希望するのであります
阪谷男爵　移民法通過は日本に対する一種の侮辱である、尤も外務省に於ては侮辱と考へられざるが如し、然し米国人中にも侮辱と考ふるもの少しとせず、従つて此侮辱を解決することが大問題であつて何人が大使になるとしても此問題を解決するの覚悟なかるべからず然し斯る覚悟を以て立つ人は今日の処中々見当らざるなり

（阪谷芳郎）日米関係委員会日記　大正一三年
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　（阪谷子爵家所蔵）
一三、十二、十一　王子、渋沢邸、添田・井上（準之助）・余、子爵ヨリ招キニヨリ集ル、子爵ヨリ排日ノ空気ヲ去ル方針談アリ、添田、駐米大使ノ人物ニ付話アリ

（増田明六）　日誌　大正一三年　（増田正純氏所蔵）
十二月十一日　木　晴
前十時飛鳥山邸子爵御病床ニ阪谷男爵・井上準之助・添田寿一の三氏を招かれ、米国ニ於ける移民問題ニ関する将来の方針ニ就きて親敷協議せられたり、小生及小畑久五郎氏参席す

日米関係委員会集会記事摘要　（渋沢子爵家所蔵）
　大正十三年十二月十四日（日）午前十時、於飛鳥山邸、日米関係小委員会開催
　　出席者
　　　（委員）　渋沢子爵・添田寿一氏・山田三良氏・頭本元貞氏
　　　（幹事）　増田氏・小畑氏
渋沢子爵　去る十一日における小会合の摸様を報告せられ、米国の諸友人等へ書面を発送するに付其体裁を如何にすべきか、之を個人的通信とすべきか、或は七月の移民法に関して直接陳述的のものにすへきか等に関し質問せらる
頭本氏　子爵の御友人等に対して書面を発せらるゝことは甚だ結構ならん、唯今御話を伺つて真に欣喜に堪へざる次第なり、就ては其内
 - 第34巻 p.401 -ページ画像 
容として、（一）七月施行の移民法に関して大に遺憾の情を厚うすること、（二）然し決して失望し居らざること、（三）本問題が米国政府の最高機関たる当局の決定によりて確定せられたる以上は、外国人たる吾吾が此法律に関して容喙すべきものにあらずと思ふ、之は全く友人等の尽力に任かする外に良策なしとの意を示すを能しとすべし、右は一般的書面にして、ギユーリツク博士には尚ほ委はしい書面を送り、之には最近ギ博士がマクラツチー氏の書面に答へたる回答書の写を基礎として通信するを至極好都合と考へらると語られ、爰にギユーリツク博士より送られたる対マクラツチー氏弁駁書を披露せらる
添田氏　此問題は米国人によつて解決せられざるべからず、故に此意味を先方に知らしめ、同時に先方の友人等が吾々日本人に対して斯くして貰ひ度いといふことあらば、遠慮なく申越さるべしとの保証を与ふるを能しとすべし
山田氏　添田博士と同意見なりと語らる
渋沢子爵　書面中コータ率を力説するか、又帰化権を日本人に与へよといふが如きことを書き加ふべきかなと思ひしが、頭本君の一般的意見は此際至極穏当なりと思ふと述べらる
　　　○コータ率トハアメリカ合衆国ニ於ケル一八九〇年ノ国勢調査ニ基キ外国移民ノ一年間ニ於ケル入国許可願ヲ各其二分ニ定メタルヲ云フ。

（シドニー・エル・ギューリック）書翰　各位宛一九二四年一一月一七日
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　（渋沢子爵家所蔵）
　　　　　　　FEDERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHRES
　　　　　　　　　　OF CHRIST IN AMERICA
　　　　NATIONAL OFFICES, 612 UNITED CHARITIES BUILDING
　　　　　　　105 EAST 22nd STREET, NEW YOURK
　　　　　　　　　　　CONFIDENTIAL
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　November 17, 1924
Dear Brothers :
　　On September 18 we sent you a copy of a letter from Mr. McClatchy to Mr. Abiko, on which Mr. McClatchy asked my views. You will be interested, I am sure, in the letter which I have at last found time to prepare.
　　　　　　　　　　　　Cordially yours,
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　SIDNEY L. GULICK
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Secretary

My dear Mr. McClatchy :
　　Your letter of August 24, 1924, enclosing a copy of your letter to Mr. Abiko of July 23, has already been acknowledged.
　　I have waited for a time when I could read this letter with some care, and gladly respond to your courteous request for my "views thereon". You will, I am sure, wish to have me write with complete frankness.
 - 第34巻 p.402 -ページ画像 
　　1. You say that "Japan ― has been induced ― to place herself in a false and embarrassing position by listening to the unwise counsel of those in this country whom she regards as her friends." This thought recurs in various places and with varying expressions. In my judgment it completely misrepresents the situation. The positions taken by Japan on the "exclusion question" were not suggested to her by "unwise friends." They were positions she naturally ― nay inevitably ― took for herself. Indeed they were strongly taken by her as far back as 1907, and led to the Gentlemen's Agreement. She undertook at that time to stop all Japanese immigration to Continental America, in order that there might be no occasion for Congressional legislation involving tratment different from that given to other first class nations. Japan's judgments and desires in this matter and her recent insistence upon them were in no sense whatever due to the "unwise counsel" of "indiscreet," "ignorant," or "blind" friends who persuaded her to think that she could secure her ends if only she insisted strongly enough. You credit the friends of Japan with altogether too much influense in determining her policies and still more in instigating them.
　　2. You say : "She is now being encouraged by the same parties to persist in this course with the assurance that the action taken by Congress is not endorsed by public sentiment and that therefore repeal of modification of the exclusion act can be readily secured." You are mistaken. No one of whom I have heard believe that "repeal of modification of the exclusion measure can be readily secured." On the coutrary, all those who are friends of Japan ― because they are friends of fair play and of courteous international relations ― recognize full well the difficulty of the situation. The present Congress is not thought by anyone to be likely to recede from its position. I very much doubt it anyone is "encouraging" Japan to believe that the "repeal or modification of the exclusion measure can be readily secured." If you know of such persons I should be glad to know who they are.
　　3. You assert that "Congress had no alternative than to follow the course adopted." This is, of course, an expression of your personal opinion. It was not, however, the opinion of President Coolidge, of Secretary Hughes, or of a vast host of loyal and patriotic American citizens, expressed in the most emphatic manner. Your argument on this point appears to me to be plausible only to those not well informed on the situation.
 - 第34巻 p.403 -ページ画像 
　　4. Your assertion that the long established policy of the nation has been "the preservation of this country for the white race" raises a fundamental issue. First, I wish to ask just what you mean by the phrase. Do you mean that the American national poilcy has been to give the white race exclusive right to come and live here ? If so, how has it happened that we have over ten million Negroes ? And how does it happen that under the new immigration law Negroes are still admitted ?
　　Or do you mean that the national policy is to give the white race exclusive right to participate in the goverment and to have fair and equal opportunity and treatment ? If so, how does it happen that Negroes and Asiatics, and men of every race without restriction of any kind, born in this country are given the privileges, right and duties of citizens ?
　　In either case your contention is not substantiated by history or by an impartial study of our laws in their full historical meaning and intent.
　　The first naturalization law of 1790 was carefully worded so as to deny citizenship to slaves ; hence the phrase "free white persons." Its primary aim was the maintananse of liberty and democracy. It was expected at that time that slavery would naturally pass away. It was even proposed to deny citizenship to slave owners, because their position was not in harmony with the regnant purpose to establish a genuine democracy.
　　Expectations were not realized; slavery continued and expanded; during many decades hundreds of thousands of new slaves were imported. Finally a great war was fought which involved as the main issue the question whether or not this was to be a nation wholly of free men.
　　The policy you now assert and advocate was that of the slave-holding states. Those states, however, were defeated and that policy was rejected. The national policy for a nation of free men, whatever might be their race or color, was triumphant, first in a military sense and then legally. In order to make that clear, the Constitution was amended and also the law of naturalization. The right of citizenship was conferred on all Negroes in the United States, and the right of naturalization was "extended" to persons of "African birth or descent."
　　The foregoing statements and arguments are not invalidated by the fact that in some of our Southern and Western states the natoinal policy of equality, liberty and opportunity for all, regardless of race, color or religion, is more or less nullified by local laws and customs. All such laws and customs are vio
 - 第34巻 p.404 -ページ画像 
lations, not exemplifications, of our national policy. Moreover, they are being gradually rectified by the wise leadership in the South of men of both races and by the remarkable achievements of the colored race in rising out of the terrible economic, educational and moral conditions due to slavery.
　　It is absurd now to call the United States a "white man's country," in the sense in which you evidently mean it, when one-tenth of our population is Negro and when there are considerable numbers of American Indians, Mexicans, Chinese and Japanese, and especially when all born here are endowed by our Constitution and our laws with the rights of citizenship ragardless of race of color.
　　Moreover, to this day, immigration of Negroes is permitted. Immigration from Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, Santo Domingo and all South America, is still unrestricted, not even being limited by the quota provisions of the new law.
　　Your contention expresses, indeed, the desires and purposes of a group in the United States, but it is not the policy of our nations. It is in direct conflict with the principles and ideals of the Declaration of Independence, with the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution and with the Naturalization Law as amended in 1870, which law is still in force.
　　Until 1906 that law was understood to grant privileges of naturalization to all the races, from the extreme white to the extreme black, except that in 1882 and onward the Chinese were denied naturalization.
　　In that year (1906) without a law or act of Congress, a rigid interpretation was adopted by the Naturalization Bureau in order to exclude Japanese. But Hindus and others, including Mexicans, were still regarded (until 1923) as eligible for naturalization.
　　I do not deny that the view you take is held by many But, in principle, it is not democratic nor truly American. Its official adoption by the United States as the "national policy" would destroy the fundamental characteristics of our nation and lose the most destinctive glory of our people.
　　If by the phrase "white man's land" you merely mean that we cherish and intend to preserve our Christian civilization with its characteristic and essential principles of liberty, equality, humanity and brotherhood, several things should be said.
　　　First: The phraseology utterly fails to convey the meaning.
　　　Second: These principles of our civilization are not
 - 第34巻 p.405 -ページ画像 
 spontaneously believed and practiced by a man merely because he is white; nor are they ignored and violated by another man merely because he is yellow or black. The belief and practice of these principles is not a matter of race or color. It is entirely and absolutely a matter of education, of training, of personal character.
　　　Third: The Christian and democratic civilization characteristic of our country is not in the least endangered by the presence of a few score thousand Japanese in the midst of our entire population of over one hundred million or even of the white population of California exceeding three and one-half millions. Neither would the continued coming of Japanese under the quota as proposed by Secretary Hughes (146 annually) in the slightest degree constitute a menace to the United States or to California.
　　　Fourth: On the contrary, the preservation of our Christian civilization depends on the practice by American citizens of these Christian ideals and democratic principles in our relation with all races, including Asiatics, In proportion as these ideals and principles are ignored or violated by any group or any section of our country is our Christian civilization betrayed and injured.
　　　Fifth: We who are friends of friendship with Japan and advocates of fair and equal treatment for all Japanese in the United States yield to none in our loyalty to our country or in our desire for its preservation as a country in which these principles are to be both preached and practiced. We believe in a Christian civilization and therefore adovocate its actual practice. This is a "white man's land," in this sense, only in so far as we practice the white man's faith.
　　The fundamental postulate of your entire "white man's land" argument is, in my judgment, unhistorical, un-American and unethical, and, in this modern world of the twentieth century, it is in reality impracticable. In proportion as it is proclaimed and embodied in law as our "national policy," will our national stability be threatened, and our international regulations become difficult and dangerous.
　　5. I am glad to see that you no longer question the good faith of the Japanese Government and its administration of the Gentlemen's Agreement, and that you state that the Agreement has merely not "produced the desired result ― exclusion." If the matter had been taken up in this spirit by California and by the Department of State years ago, it could
 - 第34巻 p.406 -ページ画像 
 easily have been adjusted. Indeed, so soon as it became clear to Japan that strong feeling against the Agreement had developed in America, she voluntarily stopped (1920) the further coming to Continental America of so-called "picture brides" and later offered to modify the Agreement still further, in harmony with America's wishes. The complete ignoring of that offer was one of the factors which deeply wounded the feelings of the Japanese people. It was a case of flagrant international discourtesy. It is a common rule of life that, when exceptional methods have been in use, the manner in which they are changed should be most carefully considered.
　　6. Your presentation of figures regarding Japanese in the United States does not indeed profess to be complete; but in fairness to the situation it should also be stated that under the working of the Gentlemen's Agreement (1909-1923) 22,737 more Japanese males left the United States (including Hawaii) than entered, and that the total increase of foreign-born Japanese was 8681 in Continental America and 7415 in Hawaii during a period of sixteen years.
　　7. You claim that "Japan should not regard this action as discriminatory against her people," because the law also includes all Asiatics. Yet you show elsewhere in your letter that all Asiatics other than Japanese had already been excluded by the Chinese exculsion and "barred zone" acts of 1882 and 1917 respectively. It was notorious when the action was taken that the only purpose of the section dealing with "aliens ineligible to citizenship" was to deal with Japanese immigration and annul the Gentlemen's Agreement. Secretary Hughes called pointed attention to this purpose in his letter (February 8) to the Honorable Albert Johnson, declaring that "it would be idle to insist that the provision is not aimed at the Japanese" since the other exclusion laws are continued in force.
　　8. You state that "the Gentlemen's Agreement not only constituted an invasion of Congressional prerogative by the Executive but also surrendered the national sovereignty." Strange ― is it not ― that President Roosevelt, Elihu Root and all other advisers in making the Agreement did not discover these fatal objections ?
　　Stranger, too, that the Senate in ratifying the treaty with Japan in 1911 did not discover them, for the treaty recognizes the Gentlemen's Agreement as a satisfactory method of dealing courteously and also effectively with a confessedly difficult matter in international relations ?
　　And strangest of all ― is it not ― that President Coolidge
 - 第34巻 p.407 -ページ画像 
 and Secretary Hughes, who are made by the Constitution peculiarly responsible for dealing with foreign nations, after hearing all that the Immigration Committees of the House and Senate had to say on the matter of "prerogatives" and "sovereignty," still felt to the very end that the best way to deal with the question was the way which you describe as an "invasion of Congressional prerogative and a "surrender of national sovereignty?" It is clear to many of us that Congress, exercising its prerogative and maintaining the national sovereignty, could perfectly properly ― and should ― have cooperated with the Department of State and the President in solving this issue in a manner that would have secured the practical results of the demand for exclusion and also have preserved the moral and courteous requirements for amicable international intercourse.
　　9. You say that "it ill comports with Japan's dignity to further press upon Congress or this nation requests or demands which cannot be conceded in the face of exisiting conditions." I hold no brief for Japan and have no information regarding her plans, but let me assure you that your anxiety is entirely needless. Japan had conducted herself with extraordinary dignity and self-control in a very difficult situation. There is not the slightest danger that she will take any steps inconsistent with her dignity and honor. Few nations, if any, are more sensitive to matters of national dignity than Japan. Having been so discourteously treated by Congress, she will plan her course and her protests with care.
　　10. But this remark of yours brings to light what appears to be the complete and persistent failure to understand the point of Japan's earnest contention and anxious desire.
　　You imply all through your letter ― it is one of your fundamental postulates ― that she is seeking opportunity for immigration. Your assumption is absolutely wrong. She has repeatedly declared that she is not. The Gentlemen's Agreement and its actual working show that an open door for her emigrants is not what she is seeking. Her official offer to make that Agreement still more drastic is still further evidence.
　　These was not the slightest need for the exclusion section of the new immigration bill. For four years, more Japanese have been leaving than have been entering the United States. The Agreement could easily have been modified to stop the coming of wives for Japanese laborers in the United States. The Japanese Government was ready to do it.
　　What Japan asks and earnestly asks, is that she shall be
 - 第34巻 p.408 -ページ画像 
 recognized as one of the equal and friendly nations of the world, to be treated with consideration and respect, and that her nationals who are or who may be here shall receive the same economic opportunities and the same courtesies as are extended to nationals of every other great nation.
　　Japan, therefore, is not asking for the things you state we cannot give. She asks only what any self-respecting, wellordered nation must ask. And the day will come, sooner or later, when both China and India will make the same insistent demand for courteous and respectful treatment.
　　The way in which you and those for whom you speak have presistently destorted and misrepresented the issue is one of the very serious aspects of this most unfortunate situation.
　　11. I wish to refer briefly to two important factors to which you make no referense ―
　　　(1) The vast volume of misinformation regarding Japan and the Japanese which has issued from the anti-Japanese agitators of the Pacifiic Coast.
　　　It has been almost impossible for our people to know the facts. This it is that has prepared Congress to do the needless and even the humiliating thing which it did. The people have been led to believe that California was being flooded with Japanese immigrants; that the Gentlemen's Agreement was being flagrantly violated; that Japan had vast plans of military aggresstion for the capture and annexation of California to her empire; that Japanese laborers were in fact soldiers; that the coming of picture brides was a part of this military scheme; that Japan controlled and directed all Japanese in America by an imperium in imperio in harmony with these alleged grandiose ambitions, etc. etc. Americans have been deliberately taught to suspect, fear and hate Japan and Japanese. A vast and vicious propaganda of hate has carried these ideas all over America. It was surprising and highly gratifying to discover in April that in spite of that propaganda most of the responsible press of the United States practically unanimously condemned the action of the Senate in suddenly adopting the "exclusion clause" of the House Bill.
　　　(2) The mischievous politics that have made use of the Asiatic problem for more than fifty years.
　　　Because of personal and party ambitions, in the years of Presidential elections, it has apparently been possible to deal with this difficult question in a carefull, scientific and rational way. Congress has been repeatedly stampeded.
 - 第34巻 p.409 -ページ画像 
　But I need not explain. All well-informed men and women knew and lament the sinister influence of mischievous politics. The politicians, I suppose, congratulate themselves on the legislation they have secured for the differential treatment of Asiatics, ignoring the fact that not a little of that legislation is in violation of treaties, of agreements, and of the principles of international courtesy and amity.
　　12. You are correct, I believe, in stating that it is useless to ask the present Congress to go back on its action. If anything is to be done it must be directed to changing public opinion with regard to the adequacy of our present naturalization law. You seem to imply that if the disability of ineligibility to citizenship were removed, so that the Japanese might become citizens, they would not remain "hopelessly inassimilable." You surprise me, for I have understood your position to be that under no circumstances can a person born a Japanese be fit for American citizenship. If I have misunderstood you, or if you have changed your view, I shall be glad to be informed.
　　What you suggest concerning naturalization is, I believe, the correct course for friends of Japan and friends of America, too, to take. The naturalization law, especially as now literally interpreted by the Supreme Court, is obsolete. Fitness for citizenship and for naturalization is not a matter of color but of personal qualities. We need to amend this law so that our great Republic shall base its definition of fitness for citizenship on a correct principle. Our antiquated law ― adopted in stages many decades ago when we lived in a world of peoples and races far apart ― is an affront now to more than half the world.
　　But I do not intend to argue this matter here. The point I wish to make is that amendment of this law should be urged by Americans, not by Japanese or by any other nationality. And Americans should urge it, not to please Japan, but to express more adequately the real meaning and significance of the fundamental principles of our democracy, ― liberty and fraternity. These are the only principles on which our national life can be wholesomely built up and international relations of amity and peace be permanently maintained between the great races.
　　13. I wish, now, to state with utmost possible emphasis that the proposal to give privileges of naturalization to all who qualify personally, regardless of race or color, is not a proposal to open the doors to promiscuous or free immigration. Not at all. It is the opposite. Naturalization and immigration are
 - 第34巻 p.410 -ページ画像 
 two distinct things. Much of the difficulty in the recent discussions has developed because these two ideas have been so commonly confused. The restriction of all immigration ― even its rigid restriction ― on the Reed plan embodied in the new law is in principle what I have advocated for many years. But if we allow any immigration by quotas, it seems to me we should include all people. The numbers which would be admitted from China and India would, on the quota plan, be absolutely negligible.
　　14. I am glad to know that you desire to preserve goodwill and friendly relations between Japan and United States. But let me assure you that you are mistaken if you think this desire can be realized by insisting that the question is "closed" and that nothing is to be done by America to heal the wound inflicted by the ungentlemanly action of Congress. My information shows that the injury is far deeper than you seem to realize and that the course you propose will only aggravate it. We cannot afford to have our country appear before the world as indifferent to matters of international courtesy, honor and justice. When an error has been made or a wrong inflicted, even unintentionally, an honorable nation will surely desire to reconsider the question and will seek to set matters right. These is some way to do it. Let us earnestly search for it.
　　15. Your statement that "on this side of the Pacifiic every effort has been made to prevent growth of misunderstanding or illwill" amazes me,. Some of us, I know, have been doing our utmost along these lines; but if my information is correct, this cannot be said of the group for which you speak. The sad facts appear to be quite the contrary. If I am wrong you can set me right by citing a number of typical concrete instances. There would, however, still be a large amount of experience of an apparently opposite nature to be explained.
　　I am sorry this reply is so long and has been so long delayed. I can only say that I have been as prompt and as brief as possible. Even so I have dealt with only some of the points of your letter. To deal with them all would require a document for too long.
　　Hoping that this response to your request for my "views" on your letter to Mr. Abiko may help you to understand the attitude of those who cannot take your viewpoint, I am,
　　　　　　　　　　　　　Sincerely yours,
　　　　　　　　　(Signed) SIDNEY L. GULICK
Mr. V. S. McClatchy,
 - 第34巻 p.411 -ページ画像 
　　910 Humbolt Buildding,
　　San Francisco, California.
（右訳文）
　　　　　　　　　　（栄一墨書）
　　　　　　　　　　一月十六日湯河原客舎ニ於て一覧、立論正確にして能く謬見誤解を駁撃す、所謂快刀乱麻を断ち、摩姑之手痒を掻くの概あり
　　　　（別筆）
　　　　ギユーリツク博士ヨリノ書翰
親展
拝啓
九月十八日附ヲ以テ安孫子氏宛「マクラツチー」氏書翰写御送附申上置候処「マ」氏ハ同書翰ニ対シテ小生ノ卑見ヲ求メラレ候ニ付、漸ク左ノ通リ回答致候間御参考迄供高覧候　敬具
　　一九二四年十一月十七日
　　　　　　　　　　　　書記　シドニー・エル・ギユーリツク
　　　　各位
　　カリフオルニア州桑港
　　　　ヴエー・エス・マクラツチー殿
拝啓
一九二四年八月二十四日附貴書中ニ御封入ノ、七月二十三日附安孫子氏宛貴翰写ニ対シテハ、已ニ御請書差上申候
小生ハ機ヲ得テ右写ヲ熟読致度ト存候処、漸ク玆ニ聊カ愚見ヲ提シ得ルニ至リシヲ喜ビ、全ク腹蔵ナク記述致候間左様御諒承被成下度候
一、「日本ハ日本ノ友人ト思ヒタル米国人ノ賢カラザル忠言ニ傾聴セルガ為メニ裏切ラレ、今日ノ窮境ニ陥ルニ至リ」シトノ御意見拝誦仕候、此思想ハ各所ニ種々ノ形式ニ於テ論述セラレ候モ、此ノ如キハ事件ノ真相ヲ誤解セルモノト愚考仕候、日本ガ排日問題ニ対シテ採リタル態度ハ決シテ「賢カラザル友人」ノ忠言ニ依ルモノニハアラズシテ、日本ガ自然否必然止ムヲ得ズシテ自ラ採ルニ至リタルモノニ有之候、日本ハ寧ロ一九〇七年ニ於テ強硬ニ此態度ヲ採リ、次デ紳士協約締結ト相成リ、之レニヨリテ日本ハ自国民ノ米大陸移住ヲ防止シ、後日米国議会ガ日本ニ対シテ他ノ一等国ニ与フルト異ナル待遇ヲ与フル法令ヲ制定スルコトナキヲ期待セルモノニ有之候、日本ガ該問題ニ対シテ懐ケル希望ト判断トヲ固守セントセルハ、決シテ「無分別」「無智」又ハ「盲目的」友人アリテ「賢カラザル」忠言ヲ日本ニ与ヘ、又ハ日本ニシテ堅ク其ノ主張ヲ固守セバ目的ヲ達成シ得ベシト説キタルニ基因セルモノニハ御座ナク候、故ニ日本ガ其ノ政策確定ニ際シテ、日本ノ友人等ノ忠告又ハ其ノ慫慂ニヨルモノナリトスルハ、斯ル友人ノ日本ニ及ボセル感化ヲ重大視シ過ギルモノト相考エ候
二、御意見ニヨレバ「日本ノ友人等ハ輿論ガ議会ノ行動ヲ裏書セザルカ故ニ、排日法ハ容易ニ廃棄又ハ修正セラルベキ事ヲ公言シ、日本ニ慫慂シテ其ノ採レル態度ヲ墨守セシメタリ」トセラルル様ニ候モ之ハ明カナル誤謬ニ御座候、小生ガ直接調査致候範囲ニ於テハ排日
 - 第34巻 p.412 -ページ画像 
法案ガ容易ニ廃棄又ハ修正セラルベシト信ズル人ハ一人モ無之候、日本ノ友人ニシテ公正ヲ尊ビ国際的友誼ヲ重ズル士ハ、凡テ其ノ困難ヲ認メ居候、而シテ現議会ガ其ノ態度ヲ撤回センコトハ何人モ思考セザル所ニシテ、小生ハ果シテ排日法案ヲ容易ニ廃棄又ハ修正シ得ベシト信ズル人アルヤヲ疑フ者ニ候、若シ斯ル人ヲ御承知ニ候ハバ、小生迄其ノ氏名ヲ御洩ラシ被下度候
三、貴下ハ議会ガ其ノ採用セル方針ヲ辿リ行クヨリ他ニ途ナカリシト断言ナサレ候得共、之レ元ヨリ貴下ノ私見ニシテ、大統領クーリツヂ氏、国務卿ヒユーズ氏及ビ其他誠実ニ国事ヲ憂ウル米国市民多数ノ力説セルモノニアラズ候、貴説ハ只事件ノ真相ニ疎キ人ノミノ首肯スル一説ニ過ギズト愚考仕候
四、「此国ヲ白人種ノ為メニ保存スル」ハ多年確立セル国民的政策ナリトノ御主張ハ真ニ由々シキ問題ニ御座候、第一「此国ヲ白人種ノ為メニ保存スル」テフ言葉ノ意義ヲ承リ度候、米国ノ国民的政策ハ絶対的ニ白人種ノミノ来住スルヲ許スベシトノ謂ニ候ヤ、然ラバ千万人ノ黒人ノ生存ハ如何ニ之ヲ御説明ナサレ候ヤ、又ハ新移民法ニ於テ黒人ノ入国ヲ認容スルハ如何ニ候ヤ、伺ヒ度候
　又ハ政治ニ関与シ且ツ公正ニシテ均等ナル機会ト待遇トヲ享クルノ絶対権ヲ白人ノミニ賦与スルヲ以テ、国民的政策ナリトスルノ謂ニ御座候ヤ、然ラバ黒人モ亜細亜人モ亦其他人種的制限ナク、凡テ此国ニ生レタル男子ハ市民トシテノ特典・権利及ビ義務ヲ賦与セラルルハ如何ナル理由ニ候ヤ、承リ度候
　以上二ツノ場合ニ於テハ歴史的ニ貴説ヲ裏書スルモノ無之候、又米国法ヲ研究スルモ、其ノ歴史的意味及意向ニ於テ貴説ヲ承認スルモノアルヲ見申サズ候
　一七九〇年第一帰化法制定ニ際シ奴隷ノ市民権ヲ否認シ、特ニ「自由ナル白人」ナル語句ヲ使用致居候其ノ第一目的ハ、自由ト民権トヲ維持セントセルモノニシテ、当時已ニ奴隷制度ハ自然ニ消滅スベキモノト信ゼラレ、又奴隷所有主ニ対シテモ市民権ヲ拒否スベシトノ議行ハレシ程ニ有之候、而シテ其理由トスル所ハ、真ノ民主主義確立ノ大目的ト調和セザル為ニ候
　然レドモ予期ニ反シ奴隷制度ハ継続シ、更ニ拡大シ、幾十年間幾十万ノ奴隷ヲ新ニ輸入シ、遂ニ米国民ハ果シテ全然自由民タルベキヤ否ヤノ一大疑問ヲ決定センガ為メ遂ニ一大戦争ヲ現出致候
　貴下ノ主張シ且ツ力説スル所ハ、往時奴隷使役諸州ガ採レル政策ニ御座候ヘ共、此等ノ州ハ戦争ニ敗レ其ノ政策ハ已ニ廃棄セラレ候、之ニ反シテ人種又ハ色ヲ論ゼズ自由ヲ尊重スル国民ノ国民的政策ハ軍事上又法律上捷利ヲ博シ、遂ニ憲法ヲ修正シ帰化法ヲ改正シテ此ノ捷利ヲ確立致候、斯クシテ米国在住黒人ハ凡テ市民権ヲ賦与セラレ、帰化権ハ其ノ適用ヲ「亜弗利加生レノ人及ビ其ノ子孫」ニ拡張セラレ候
　人種・色及ビ宗教ヲ論ゼズ、万人ノ平等・自由及ビ機会均等ヲ唱フル此ノ政策ハ、南部及ビ西部ノ或州ニアリテハ地方的法律及ビ習慣ニヨリテ幾分無効トナリタルノ観ナキニアラザルモ、之ヲ以テ前記
 - 第34巻 p.413 -ページ画像 
陳述及ビ論議ハ破毀サレタリト云ヒ得ベカラズ候、期ル法律及ビ習慣ハ国民的政策ノ例証ニアラズ、寧ロ其ノ違犯ニ御座候、加之南部ニハ白黒両人種ニ属スル有識者ノ賢明ナル指導アリ、加フルニ黒色人種モ亦経済上・教育上及道徳上、奴隷制度ノ恐ルベキ悪影響ヨリ脱出シツツアルヲ以テ、右地方的法律及ビ習慣ハ漸次矯正セラレ居ル次第ニ有之候
　貴下ノ御諒解ナサルル意味ニ於テ合衆国ヲ「白人ノ国」ト呼ブハ妥当ニ御座ナク候、今ヤ我人口ノ十分ノ一ハ黒人ニシテ他ニ多数ノ亜米利加土人アリ、墨西哥人アリ、支那人アリ、又日本人アリ、特ニ米国ニ生レタル者ハ人種又ハ色ヲ論ゼズ憲法及米国法ニヨリテ市民権ヲ賦与セラレ居ルガ故ニ御座候
　殊ニ今日ニ至ル迄黒人ノ入国ハ認容セラレ、墨西哥、キユバ、ハイチ、サンドミンゴ及ビ南米各国民ノ入国ニハ制限ナク、又新移民法中ニハ此等ノ国民ニ対シテ比率ヲ応用セザル程ニ候
　貴下ノ議論ハ、合衆国民一部ノ希望ト目的トヲ代表スルモ、独立宣言書ノ主張及理想ニ反スルコト明瞭ニシテ、憲法第十四修正ニ抵触シ、又現行帰化法（一八七〇年修正）ニ違犯スル等、我国民ノ政策ニハ全然御座ナク候
　一九〇六年迄ハ該帰化法ハ極端ナル白色人種ヲモ極端ナル黒色人種ヲモ含ミテ、各人種ニ帰化権ヲ賦与スルモノト解サレ候、但シ支那人ニ対シテハ一八八二年以降引続キ帰化権ヲ拒否シ居ル次第ニ候
　同年（一九〇六年）帰化局ハ国会ノ議決ヲ経ズ、又法律ノ権能ヲ待タズシテ、峻厳ナル見解ヲ下シテ日本人ヲ排斥セント致候、然レドモ（一九二三年迄）印度人其他（墨西哥人ヲ含ム）ハ帰化権アルモノト認メラレ候
　貴下ト説ヲ同ジフスル人多キ事ハ小生モ敢テ否認不仕候得共、貴説ハ主義ニ於テ民主的ナラズ、又真実亜米利加的ニモ御座ナク候、然ルニ合衆国ガ之ヲ「国民的政策」トシテ公認セルハ我国民ノ根本的品位ヲ毀損シ、更ニ我国民ヲシテ其ノ最モ勝レタル栄誉ヲ失ハシメルモノニ御座候
　貴下ノ所謂「白人ノ土地」ナルモノガ、基督教的文明ト其ノ特徴タル自由・平等・人道及ビ四海同胞主義等ヲ維持セントスル吾人ノ宿望及ビ意向ヲ意味スルモノトセバ、小生ハ之ニ関シテ聊カ申上度義有之候
　第一　此語句ハ全然斯ル意味ヲ表現スルニ足ラズ候
　第二　我文明ノ根本主義ハ白人ナルガ故ニ之ヲ受理実行シ、黄人又ハ黒人ナルガ故ニ之ヲ排斥無視スベキモノニ無之候、此主義ノ受理実行ハ人種又ハ色ノ問題ニアラズシテ、徹頭徹尾、教育・訓練及ビ人格ニヨルモノニ御座候
　第三　我邦特有ノ国風タル基督教的及ビ民主的文明ハ、全人口一億余万中又ハ加州白人三百余万中ニ於ケル僅々数万ノ日本人ニヨリテ毀害サルルノ憂無之候、更ニ国務卿「ヒューズ」氏ノ提言セル「クオータ」（年一百四十六人）ノ日本人ニ入国ヲ許可スルモ、之ガ為ニ合衆国又ハ加州ガ脅威セラルルガ如キ懼毫モ無之候
 - 第34巻 p.414 -ページ画像 
　第四　之ニ反シテ我基督教的文明ノ維持ハ、一ニ米国市民ガ世界人類（亜細亜人ヲ含ム）ニ対シテ如何ニ基督教的理想ト民主的主義トヲ実行スルカニ懸リ申候、別言スレバ我国内ニ此理想ト主義トヲ無視又ハ排斥スルモノアラバ、之ニ準ジテ我基督教的文明ハ裏切ラレ、又毀傷セラルベク候
　第五　吾人ハ在米日本人ヲ公正且平等ニ待遇セン事ヲ高唱シ、日本ニ対シテ友誼ニ富メル友タル事ヲ公言シテ憚ラザルモノニ御座候得共、自国ヲ念フ至誠ニ於テハ毫モ人後ニ落チザルベク、及我合衆国ヲシテ此主義ヲ鼓吹シ且ツ之ヲ実行セシメントスル希望ニ於テモ、何人ニモ劣ラザル所存ニ御座候、吾人ハ基督教的文明ヲ信スルガ故ニ其実行ヲ力説シ、白人ガ其ノ信仰ヲ実行スル時ニ初メテ此国ハ真ニ「白人ノ土地」ト可相成候
　貴下ノ「白人ノ土地」論ハ其ノ根本的臆説ニ於テ全ク非歴史的、非亜米利加的又非倫理的ニシテ、二十世紀ノ世界ニアリテハ実行不可能ト愚考仕候、之ヲ国民的政策トシテ公言シ、且法律化シタルハ寧ロ我国民的安定ヲ脅威スルモノニシテ、我外交関係モ之ニヨリテ困難ト危険トヲ招致スルモノト可相成候
五、貴下ガ最早日本政府ノ誠実及ビ紳士協約履行ニ対シテ疑念ヲ懐カズ、該協約ハ「希望セル結果即チ排日」ヲ見ル能ハサリシノミナリト仰セラレ候ハ、小生ノ大ニ喜ブ所ニ御座候、加州及ビ国務省ガ数年前此精神ヲ以テ日本人ニ臨ミタリシナラバ、問題ハ大ニ緩和セラレシナラント愚考仕候、反紳士協約ノ感情米国ニ於テ稍々濃厚ニナリ来ルヲ見ルヤ、日本ハ自発的ニ（一九二〇年）所謂「写真花嫁」ノ渡米ヲ禁ジ、更ニ紳士協約ヲ修正シテ米人ノ意ヲ迎ヘントシタルニ拘ハズ、米国ガ其ノ提言ヲ拒絶シテ大ニ日本ノ感情ヲ害シタルハ明カニ外交的暴戻ニ御座候、外交上特例ノ開カレシ場合ニハ、之ガ改廃ニ関シテ慎重ノ考慮ヲ与フルハ社交的礼譲ニ候ハズヤ
六、貴下ノ提示セル在米日本人統計表ハ不完全ニシテ真相ヲ示シ居ラズ候、若シ之ヲ示サントセハ紳士協約履行中（一九〇九年―一九二三年）合衆国（布哇ヲ含ム）ヲ去リシ日本人ハ入国者数ヨリ男二二七三七人多ク、又十六年間海外出生日本人ハ米大陸八六八一人、布哇七四一五人ノ増加ヲ見タルノミナルコトヲ附記スベキ筈ニ有之候
七、貴下ハ新移民法ガ全亜細亜人ヲ含ム故ヲ以テ「日本ハ之ヲ視テ日本ノミノ差別待遇ト見做スベカラズ」ト仰セラレ候得共、日本以外ノ亜細亜人ハ一八八二年ノ支那人排斥及ビ一九一七年ノ「禁止帯」（Barred zone）法案ニヨリテ排斥サレアル事ハ、貴翰ニ御記述セラルル処ニ候、「市民権ナキ外人」ニ関スル条項ハ専ラ日本人ノ入国禁止並ニ紳士協約ノ破棄ヲ目的トセルモノナルハ、公然ノ事実ニシテ、国務卿「ヒューズ」氏ガ「アルバード・ジヨンソン」氏ニ送ラレタル書信（二月八日附）中ニ、日本人以外ノ亜細亜人ハ已ニ排斥サレアルガ故ニ、這般ノ条項ハ日本人ヲ目的トスルモノニアラズト論ズルハ曲論ナルヲ指摘シテ、特ニ「ジヨンソン」氏ノ注意ヲ喚起セル次第ニ候
八、「紳士協約ハ行政上国会ノ特権ヲ侵害スルノミナラズ国民ノ主権
 - 第34巻 p.415 -ページ画像 
ヲ犯スモノナリ」トノ貴説拝誦仕候得共、大統領「ルーズベルト」氏ヲ始メ「エリユー・ルート」氏及ビ其他該協約締結ニ関与セル人人ガ、斯ル致命的反対ニ気付カザリシハ実ニ奇怪千万ニ御座候
　更ニ奇怪トスベキハ、一九一一年上院ガ条約ヲ批准セル時ニ右反対点ヲ発見セズ、却テ紳士協約ハ国際関係上難問題視セラルルモノヲ好意的又有効的ニ解決スベキ恰当ノ方法ナリト認メタル一事ニ有之候
　更ニ最モ奇怪トスベキハ、外交上ノ折衝ニ関シテ憲法上特ニ重大ナル責任ヲ負ハセラルル大統領「クーリツヂ」氏及ビ国務卿「ヒューズ」氏ガ「特権」及ビ「主権」ニ就テノ上下両院移民委員ノ説明ヲ聴キタル後モ、尚ホ貴説ノ所謂「国会ノ特権侵害」及ビ「国民ノ主権ヲ犯ス」モノヲ以テ問題解決ノ最良方法ナリト認メタルコトニ御座候、国会ハ其特権ヲ遂行シ且ツ国民ノ主権ヲ維持シツツ大統領及ビ国務省ト協力シテ当該問題ノ解決ニ力ムベキハ当然ノ義務ニシテ、斯クナシタランニハ排日ノ実績ヲ挙グルト同時ニ、国際関係上道徳的及ビ友誼的要求ヲ充タシ得タリシヤ疑ナカリシナラント信スル次第ニ御座候
九、国会又ハ国民ガ現状ニ鑑ミテ到底許諾シ難キ請願又ハ要求ヲ提ケテ米国ニ迫ルハ、日本ノ威信ヲ失墜セシムルニハアラズヤトハ貴下ノ御意見ニ候、小生ハ決シテ日本通ヲ以テ任ズル者ニモ無之、従ツテ日本ガ果シテ何事ヲ企画シ居ルヤヲ知ルコト能ハザレドモ、貴下ノ御所見ハ全ク杞憂ニ過ギザルコトヲ断言シテ憚ラザル者ニ候、日本ハ此難局ニ際シテ非常ナル威信ト自制トヲ示居リ候ヘバ、此等ノ美徳ヲ損ズルガ如キ手段ヲ講ズル事ハ断ジテ可無之候、由来日本人程国威ヲ尊重スル国民ハ世ニ多ク見サル所ニシテ、現ニ国会ニ冷遇サレナガラ隠忍シテ其ノ採ルベキ方針ヲ考慮シ、且ツ慎重ニ抗議ヲ画策シ居ル次第ニ有之候
一〇、然ルニ貴説ヲ拝誦スレバ、日本ガ真剣ニ論議シ又切望シテ止マサル要点ハ、全然貴下ノ理解セラレザル所ニ有之候
　日本ハ移住ノ好機ヲ窺フ者ナリトハ貴翰中諸所ニ仄カサルル頑強ナル臆説ニ御座候得共、斯ル仮定ハ全ク誤謬ニシテ、日本自ラ反覆之ヲ否認シ居ル事実ニ照シ明瞭ニ候、尚又紳士協約及ビ其ノ実行ヲ見レバ、日本ガ移民ノ捌口ヲ米国ニ求ムルニアラザルコトハ明白ニシテ、殊ニ該協約ヲ改正シテ更ニ「峻酷」ナラシムルモ敢テ辞セスト自ラ正式ニ提議シタル如キハ、日本ノ誠意ヲ示ス良好ノ証拠ト申シ得ベク候
　新移民法中ニ排日条項ヲ加フルノ必要ナキ事ハ、過去四ケ年間ニ於テ合衆国ヨリ帰国セル日本人ガ、合衆国ニ入国セル日本人ヨリモ多数ナル事実ニヨリ明カナルベク、又在米日本労働者ノ妻呼寄禁止ノ如キハ、紳士協約ニ些少ノ変更ヲ加フレバ容易ニ遂行シ得ルモノニシテ、日本政府亦変更ヲ承諾セル次第ニ有之候
　日本ノ懇望ハ世界ノ列強国ト同等ニ認メラレ、相当ノ考慮ト敬意トヲ以テ待遇セラレ、且ツ其国民ハ米国ニアリテハ各大国ノ国民ト均シク経済的機会ヲ与ヘラレ、好意ヲ以テ迎ヘラレン事ニ御座候
　故ニ日本ハ吾人ノ与フル能ハサルモノヲ求ムルニアラズシテ、自重
 - 第34巻 p.416 -ページ画像 
心ニ富ミ秩序アル国民トシテ当然受ケ得ベキモノヲ求ムルニ過ギズ候、否支那及印度モ早晩米国ニ対シテ、礼譲アル厚意的待遇ヲ強制シ来ルベキハ推測ニ難カラズ候
　貴下及ビ貴下ノ代表セラルル人々ガ執拗ニ問題ヲ曲解誤伝セルハ、事件ヲシテ益々紛糾ナラシメタルモノニシテ一大恨事ニ御座候
一一、貴翰ニ洩レタル二重要点ニ就キ簡単ニ申述ベ度候
（一）　太平洋沿岸ノ排日煽動家ヨリ出デタル日本及日本人ニ関スル夥シキ誤報
　　我国民ハ斯ル誤報ノ真偽ヲ判断スル事不可能ニシテ、国会モ之ニ欺カレテ不必要ナル屈辱的手段ヲ執ルニ至リシハ誠ニ浅間敷キ至ニ御座候、即チ米国人ハ左ノ如キ事ヲ信ゼシメラレ候
　　曰ク、日本移民加州ニ溢ルト
　　曰ク、紳士協約ハ熾ニ違犯サルト
　　曰ク、日本ハ加州ヲ占領シテ帝国ニ属セシメントスル軍事的侵略ヲ画策スト
　　曰ク、日本労働者ハ実ハ軍人ナリト
　　曰ク、写真花嫁入国ハ該軍事計画ノ一行動ナリト
　　曰ク、之等ノ大野心ヲ満足セシメントシテ、日本ハ絶対権ヲ以テ在米日本人ヲ統御又指揮スト
　　曰ク、何　曰ク、何ト
　　斯ノ如ク故意ニ米人ヲ教唆セル陰険ナル宣伝モ其ノ効ヲ奏シ、日本ニ対スル憎悪ノ念ハ全国ニ瀰蔓シ、米人ハ日本及ビ日本人ヲ猜疑・恐怖及ビ憎悪ノ眼ヲ以テ見ルニ至リ候、然レドモ今年四月上院ガ急遽下院ノ排斥法案ヲ無造作ニ可決スルヤ、意外ニモ全米ノ責任アル新聞紙ハ筆ヲ揃エテ其ノ軽挙ヲ攻撃セルハ、大ニ吾人ノ意ヲ強カラシメタル次第ニ候
（二）　五十年以上亜細亜問題ヲ濫用セル政策
　　大統領改選ノ年ハ政党モ個人モ均シク野心ニ眩惑セラルルガ故ニ亜細亜問題ニ対シテ熟慮ト研究トヲ以テ合理的解決ヲ下スハ全ク不可能ニ御座候、国会ガ群衆心理ニ駆ラルル事一再ニ限ラズ、政論家ハ亜細亜人差別待遇法ノ通過ヲ見テ私ニ会心ノ笑ヲ湛ヘタリシナランモ、之レ国際間ノ条約及ビ契約ヲ無視シ、外交ノ好意及ビ親善ヲ害スル法律ニシテ、斯ル政策ノ悪弊ハ識者ノ悉ク悲シム所ニ御座候
一二、現国会ニ決議ノ撤回ヲ求ムルハ無効ナリトノ貴説御尤ト存候、今日トナリテハ現行帰化法改正ニ関スル輿論ヲ喚起スルニ如カズト愚考仕候、貴下ノ御考ハ日本人タル者ハ決シテ亜米利加市民タルニ適セズト云フニ可有之候処、日本人ニ対シ帰化不能ノ条項除去サレ日本人ガ米国市民タルヲ得ル暁ニハ、日本人必ズシモ「済度シ難キ程同化不能」ニアラサルベシト仰セラルルヲ見テ小生ハ驚愕仕候、之レ小生ノ誤解カ、貴下ノ御変説カ承知致度候
　帰化権ニ関スル貴下ノ御注意ハ日本ノ友人モ米国ノ友人モ共ニ首肯スル良法カト存候、今日大審院ガ字句通リ解釈スル帰化法ハ、数十年前世界各国民及ビ各人種ガ個々自立セル時代ニ制定セラレタル廃
 - 第34巻 p.417 -ページ画像 
文ニシテ、今日世界半数ノ国民ニ取リテハ侮辱ニ候、斯ル法律ハ一日モ早ク改正シテ共和国市民権ノ定義ヲ正義ノ上ニ樹立セシムル必要可有之、市民権ト帰化権トノ授受ハ、皮膚ノ色ニ依ラズシテ個人的資格ニ基クベキモノト存候
　然レドモ小生ハ玆ニ此問題ニ関シテ論議セントスル者ニハ無之候、斯ル法律ノ修正ハ米国人自ラナスベキモノニシテ、日本人又ハ外国人ニ促サルベキ問題ニアラザル事ヲ申上度候、又日本人ノ意ヲ迎ヘンガ為ニ修正スルニアラズシテ、我民主権ノ根本主義――自由ト同胞主義――ノ真義ヲ明カニセンガ為ニナスベキモノニ御座候、此主義アリテ我国民的生活ガ初メテ堅実ニ建設サレ、人種間ノ外交関係モ永ク親善ニ又平和ニ維持セラルベク候
一三、人種又ハ色ノ如何ヲ問ハズ、資格アル人々ニ凡テ帰化権ヲ賦与スベシト云フ事ト、門戸ヲ開放シテ無分別ニ自由入国者ヲ許スベシト云フ事トハ全然別問題ニ候、元来帰化ト入国トハ全ク別物ニシテ此二者ノ混同コソハ議論ノ相違ヲ惹起スルモノニ候
　小生ガ多年唱道セルハ原則ニ於テハ此度法律トナレル「リード」案ノ入国制限――峻厳ナル制限――ニ御座候、若シ比率ニヨリテ入国ヲ許可セントセバ万国民ヲ含マザルベカラズ候、而シテ支那及ヒ印度ヨリノ入国者数ハ比率ニ照セバ殆ド皆無ニ有之候
一四、貴下ハ日米間ノ好意ト友誼トヲ維持センコトヲ望マルルハ小生ノ喜ブ所ニ御座候、然レドモ米国議会ノ非紳士的態度ト行動トガ日本ニ負ハセタル傷ハ之ヲ癒ス途ナシトテ同問題ヲ已ニ「結着セル」モノノ如ク主張シテ、以テ御希望ヲ果サントスルハ余リニ勝手ノ議論ニ候、小生ノ聞ク所ニ依レバ日本ノ負ヒタル傷ハ貴下ノ時像以上ニ深ク、貴下ノ提案ハ只之ヲ拡大スルノミニ御座候、吾人ハ我国ガ外交関係ニ於テ好意・体面及ビ公正ヲ欠クヲ見ルニ忍ビズ、過失又ハ侮辱ハ意識的ト無意識的トヲ問ハズ考慮シテ之レガ矯正ノ途ヲ講ズベキハ、体面ヲ重ンズル国民ノ襟度ニ御座候、特ニ今回ノ事件ノ如キハ決シテ矯正ノ余地無キモノニハ無之候
□□《（一五）》　太平洋ノ此岸ニ於テハ極力誤解又ハ悪意ノ蔓延ヲ避ケントセリトノ御意見ヲ承リテ、小生ハ喫驚仕候、小生共ニハ全力ヲ注イデ之ニ尽力セル者無キニアラザリシモ、貴下ガ代表スル方々ニハ斯ルコトアリシトハ小生ノ寡聞之ヲ耳ニ致サズ、却テ事実ハ貴説ニ反スルヲ遺憾ニ存候、然レドモ小生トテモ誤ナキヲ保シ難ク候ヘバ、代表的実例ヲ挙ゲテ小生ノ誤謬ヲ指摘被下候ハヾ幸甚ニ存候、勿論外見反対ト見ユル行動ニテモ之ヲ説明スレバ存外反対ナラザル場合ナシトハ云ヒ難ク候
御回答甚ダシク遅延仕リ、又稍々長文ニ渉リ候ヲ遺憾ニ存候得共、之ヨリ簡短ニ且ツ迅速ニ御回答申上兼候義不悪御諒承被下度候、本書トテモ貴翰中ノ数点ニ触レテ御回答申上候ノミニテ、若シ十分ニ御回答申上ゲントセバ幾層倍ノ長文ヲ要シ可申候、幸之ニヨリ貴下ガ貴下ト説ヲ異ニスル人々ノ態度ヲ御諒解被下候ハヾ幸甚ノ至ニ存候、右安孫子氏宛貴翰ニ対スル卑見申述度如此御座候　敬具
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　シドニー・エル・ギユーリツク