American ones cannot, and are not so operating in the portions of our country where the caste system prevails, they now operate in that portion of the country simply by one race operating them and the other one submitting. That can be done with that race. That not only should not but could not be done with any other race. There is another calamity that might come from this caste system if it developed, the absence of which in this Institution is I think significant. Between the Oriental peoples and the Occidental peoples the contacts, the social personal contacts, such as we have had here between the cultivated classes of the two countries, are even more important than they are between the Occidental peoples of America and Europe. The streams of our culture and of our thought go back to Europe. If a Chinese wall were erected between Europe and America so that nothing could pass, it would take generations for the physical wall to break down the cultural wall. However, in the case between America and the Orient, the very differentiation of the channels of our traditions, makes actually necessary for the progress of mankind, and to have our cooperation for the future of humanity, the social contacts such as have been the delight of this Institution. So long as the mass race question in America remains small, then social contacts will be as profuse as they are now, and these social contacts are not merely a pleasure which we wish to preserve but they are à human institution which it is vital that we preserve. The experience of India and the still more serious consequences in America, is that those social contacts do not exist, even among those who are called the intellectuals of any race where there is a caste line drawn against the others. These consultations and these social contacts and personal friendships, which are so easy now, with the leaders of the Oriental peoples, because there is no caste line, we would find difficult or impossible in our own country, with a similarity even to the representatives of the Negro race, in cases where there is no personal objection whatever but because there is a traditional caste line and matter of race, and that caste line obstructs the contacts of the leaders of that race, and that obstructs the progress of the solution of one of the most difficult problems in America, and is an evil handed down to us which we do not yet know what to do with.

I think that for the great problem of the future cooperation of the nations and the races, we must not complicate that problem with the possibility of the development of a caste system in America. That caste system has a small beginning now. These beginnings are growing less; these beginnings are harmless so long as the Oriental population remains small, but these beginnings might be dangerous if that population were large, and if these caste lines were drawn between the masses of our people and the masses of a great Oriental immigration, they would obstruct all the other things we are trying to do. They have obstructed it in India for two thousand years, between the various racial groups of that great empire. They do obstruct it in America between the only two racial groups that they have, and the progress of mankind demands they not be permitted to obstruct it between the racial groups here represented.

I think that that raises the question of physical race to the racial plane and makes it a problem which we must consider seriously. I think as a matter of fact both races have accepted that, however, because it is an accepted fact on both sides of the Pacific, there shall be no mass emigration on the part of the two races such as might easily happen, and as has happened between Europe and America. While the reason for that is partly cultural, that is temporary, but the permanent aspect of it is that given in the curse of India and partly in the curse of America, the development of racial castes.

MR. KOMATSU: It is necessary for us to recognize the fact that the racial difference is a thing which is most difficult to overcome. The differences in the American status of culture, customs and so forth are of a temporary nature, as Mr. Rowell has said, but we should recognize the fact that there is this racial differ

ence, which seems to bother us all the time. Now if this racial difference is emphasized constantly, by saying you and I are so different we can never get together; by raising laws and by holding all sorts of prejudices on both sides, there is danger of a creation of a caste system. But we should work towards the other goal; toward the prevention of such creation, and I think the prospect is not so dark as some may think. As has already been said, the problem between the Oriental and Occidental is much less than the problem between the Negro and the white races. It is important to consider the remark made by Mr. Rowell that the fault is on the part of one race, which insists on castes and that the situation cannot be remedied by the other race.

If the white race insists on creating that caste system, and it cannot be prevented by the efforts of other races, there is great danger, unless some other attitude takes place in the conduct of our lives. If the white race or any race insists on such a barrier, such a concept or such an attitude, I am afraid that it will be very difficult to prevent the creation of a caste system. It would be necessary for any race, I don't say the white race or any particular race, which is economically, socially, or otherwise in a position to advance, to grow away from that attitude of mind, and try to see that other races have something really in common. Now, it seems to me the question of assimilability has but one answer, and I cannot understand why the difficulties of assimilation should be pointed out so much in the different discussions. We see the process of assimilation going on constantly, in not only our own people who live side by side but among all races who are living in different countries. We have been told of the process going on in the Oriental countries, and I am sure if you stop to examine the process going on in America you will see many things showing that some of the things of the Orient are being assimilated in America. When we think of people whom we come into contact with in daily life we see that very markedly. I can remember the time in San Francisco when if I walked on the street I would be called names by groups of little children, and would be a conspicuous character. Nowadays no Japanese or any Oriental would create any such excitement, or curiosity. When the first embassy from Japan came to America, in 1860, I understand that some of the papers mentioned remarks made about them, such as "What are you going to do with this bunch of monkeys?" I don't think any crowd in any part of the world would make such a remark at the present time. And that is due to the fact that the races are growing closer together, and that we are forgetting the color line. In my mind I am very frank to say that the shades are disappearing very rapidly.

In my own life in San Francisco there is no social caste. If I invite to my house Mr. Rowell or anybody in San Francisco they accept my invitation. If my wife gives a dinner or luncheon to the elite of San Francisco's society, apparently they are very glad to be invited. It is difficult for a laboring man to come into contact socially or otherwise with a refined group of his own race or of any other race. A laboring man of the white race can hardly enjoy the social life of other groups of his own race. That is not peculiar, and is not a matter of difference of race. The thing that we should emphasize, I am sure, is the fact that the race which is likely to be responsible for the creation of the caste system, should adopt a different attitude of mind, and that the other races should see that such a system will not be brought about because of any fault on their part. On the other hand, the other races which might be subjected to the evils and disadvantages of the caste system should try to increase their virtues, and if it is possible at all, to convince the other group that they should change their attitude of mind. I cannot help but think that not only in social work but in commercial and industrial life, we have to grow away from this old attitude, this sense of inferiority in various races, and that organizations like this Institute should do all they can to make such a situation possible by education and contact of peoples.

MR. PARK: Now I wish to say at the outset that I am not a biologist, I am a sociologist, and it is well understood that the long standing quarrel between the sociologists and the biologists as to questions of racial differences is still going on. However, as I have had occasion to read the literature of the biologists I perhaps can make a rather fair statement of what seems to be the present attitude of the scientific men on the subject. The question of race difference is one with which biologists and eugenists are mainly concerned. That there are racial differences— physical differences-there can be no doubt and the assumption that there are mental differences seems to be a fair one. What the eugenists have been mostly concerned about is the value of these differences, and the question of racial equality and racial inferiority. Attempts to study the mentality and intellectual qualities of different racial groups in order to determine whether they were inferior or superior, have been made. There are statistics in the case of the Negro, the race that has been studied most thoroughly in the United States, that tend to show that a Negro is inferior to a white man. These are not always conclusive, because the difficulty is to get a kind of measurement that will measure purely racial qualities. The eugenists seem to speak as if the culture of the people was somehow or other transmitted through the blood. Of course that is not true, otherwise we would not need so long a period of education, and it is quite clear that members of another race, reared in our environment, inevitably, in spite of all obstacles, do acquire most of our attitudes very quickly. In fact that constitutes one of the problems; that is to say the difference between the second generation and the first generation. These differences are so great, that the effort of the older generation to impose its cultural value upon the younger native-born often fails, and this failure really constitutes a great problem, a problem of family discipline. So it seems to me, it is not the difficulty of assimilation we are facing, but that of assimilation too quickly. The consequence is disorganization in the family and delinquency in the children, and general disorganization in the community. Sociologists are quite certain that this has been the effect of the breaking up of family discipline as the result of education in our public schools of the children of foreign-born. The difficulty so far as the measurement of racial differences is concerned is to separate the qualities that are transmitted through the blood and those that are acquired. Naturally the sociologist insists that there is a great deal more that is acquired than is transmitted through the blood. The question, therefore, of what these racial differences are, is not fully settled, neither do we know how to measure them. There is, however, a general disposition among American scientific men to assume that the differences of race as compared with the differences of individuals of the same race, is very slight. That is, if you average up the individuals in the race, and compare these differences with those of another racial group, the differences will be slight. Just how great I am not sure. On the other hand the differences between individuals in any race are very great, and all the effects of culture tends to intensify those differences.

Then there is the further question of the effect of inter-breeding. As Herbert Spencer wrote in a letter to a Japanese statesman a long time ago, 'where peoples of a widely different race and divergent features, interbreed, the general supposition among eugenists is that you have bad effects. Where, however, the races are closely related, you have good effects.' That hypothesis is generally accepted, but it remains an hypothesis. According to Professor Holmes, who has read all the literature on the matter more thoroughly and more dispassionately than anyone I know, the divergencies in racial qualities that can possibly be measured by such devices as we now possess is slight. Psychologists are now seeking to refine their measurements in such a way that these differences can be cleared up. Undoubtedly differences do exist, but when you are measuring racial intelligence you are measuring a great many different things. A great many different combinations of traits are possible so that

you are measuring an average. It is so uncertain just what mental measurements measure that when one of our noted psychiatrists, who has been studying the different racial and cultural groups, was asked what he meant by intelligence, he made the remark, the very wise remark, "I mean by intelligence just what these measurements measure," and that is as far as you can go.

As to the moral qualities, there has been no success at all in defining what they are or how they could be measured.

With regard to the mixed races we are in doubt. We have sought to estimate their values but we have no definite standards of value. The standards of values as between races have usually been applied by those who employ them or manage them. In estimating the values of races, we have employed the same standards to races that we do in estimating the conduct of children. We think the best children are the children who sit quietly and do not bother us. But children who sit still and are not noisy and are docile do not always make the best men and women. We have no objective standards of value in this field. It is probably true that we cannot settle the question of the value of mixed bloods in general in advance of actual experience. We must try all these mixtures and see what comes out, before the question will be finally settled.

3. IMMIGRATION: CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS ASPECTS

ROUND TABLE (THREE MEETINGS): CHAIRMAN, MR. LEE

Mr. Saito remarked that the cultural and religious aspects of immigration are involved in the question of "assimilation": How many years does it require? Would Japanese be assimilable if given a chance? Segregation and exclusion from social intercourse prevents assimilation and "cheap labor" has no capacity to absorb a new culture. American-born Japanese have a Western psychology quite unlike their parents. In Japan the new liberal movement stresses cultural features similar to those of Europe and America and the standard of living is just as high and as bad as in the United States. Figures given by Mr. McClatchy ("America and Japan," page 8) are misleading. During the life of the Gentlemen's Agreement 20,000 more Japanese left the United States, including Hawaii, than came in. Mr. Dean spoke on Race Assimiliation in Hawaii (See page

).

The second meeting of the Round Table was given to a discussion of the questions: What evils result from the presence of unassimilated groups and what are the objectionable traits of character which make the Japanese immigrant to the United States and Canada an undesirable citizen?

At the third meeting of the Round Table the race relations in Hawaii were further discussed and comparisons made with conditions on the United States mainland, in Australia and in China.

Among the points brought out in the discussion are:

I.

Westerners should cease to think that their culture is superior.

2. The Japanese consider Western people culturally superior to a great extent and desire to learn from them.

3. The superior culture of the West is not inherent; it is largely a matter of time.

4. The solutions of international and inter-racial troubles is to bring all peoples to the same standards of living in mental and spiritual life. The following questions were raised:

I. Is the denationalization of Chinese students through study in foreign. lands advantageous?

2. Would the Chinese like to have Western missionaries leave the country?

3. Is assimilation possible where immigrants remain in isolated groups in cities?

4. IMMIGRATION: LEGAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS

ROUND TABLE (FOUR MEETINGS): CHAIRMAN, MR. HALL

Discussion was based on the following topics:

1. Analyses of immigration acts and regulations of Pacific countries; purpose and fundamental principles; legislative and administrative provisions for control; to what extent discriminatory on a racial basis (see page 144 and Nos. R 8, R9, R 11, R 14, R 25, R 26 in list of papers distributed to Members).

2. Effect of present immigration laws on the feelings and interests of Japan (see No. 39 of papers distributed to Members, p. 206).

3. Actual methods of enforcement; administrative difficulties and shortcomings; irritating delays and "red tape"; inconsistent interpretations regarding students, members of families and exempt classes.

4. Suggestions regarding general immigration policy (see paper by Mr. Takayanagi, page 110).

5. The "right to emigrate" and the "right to control" composition of population; legal right and moral right; assertion of state sovereignty.

MR. HALL: The uncompromising assertion of state sovereignty in the matter of control of immigration does not end the question. The discussions which have taken place in the League of Nations show that States are beginning to ask whether the development of international society does not necessitate the formulation of some recognized rules of international morality which should guide a State in the exercise of its sovereign rights where such exercise may directly or indirectly affect the interests of citizens of other States. Some light has been thrown upon this prob lem of adjusting domestic and international jurisdictions by the recent experience of the British Commonwealth. In the last five Imperial Conferences (1917-1923) a series of resolutions have been carried by the governments represented (i.e. Great Britain, India and the Dominions) for the purpose of adjusting difficulties which have arisen through the immigration of Indians to the Dominions. The Dominions have asserted their sovereignty, but have agreed that it ought to be exercised in