The U.S. Supreme Court -
"1. Is a high caste Hindu of full Indian blood, born at AmritSar, Punjab, India, a white person within the meaning of section 2169, Revised Statutes?"
"2. Does the act of February 5,
1917 (39 Stat. L. 875, section 3)
disqualify from naturalization as
citizens those Hindus, now barred by
that act, who had lawfully entered the
United States prior to the passage of
said act?"
Section 2169, Revised Statutes,
provides that the provisions of the
Naturalization Act "shall apply
to aliens, being free white persons,
and to aliens of African nativity and
to persons of African descent."
If the applicant is a white person
within the meaning of this section he
is entitled to naturalization;
otherwise not.
The conclusion that the phrase
"white persons" and the word
"Caucasian" are synonymous
does not end the matter. Mere ability
on the part of an applicant for
naturalization to establish a line of
descent from a Caucasian ancestor will
not ipso facto and necessarily
conclude the inquiry.
"Caucasian" is a
conventional word of much flexibility,
as a study of the literature dealing
with racial questions will disclose,
and while it and the words "white
persons" are treated as
synonymous for the purposes of that
case, they are not of identical
meaning idem per idem.
In the endeavor to ascertain the
meaning of the statute we must not
fail to keep in mind that it does not
employ the word "Caucasian"
but the words "white
persons," and these are words of
common speech and not of scientific
origin. The word "Caucasian"
not only was not employed in the law
but was probably wholly unfamiliar to
the original framers of the statute in
1790.
But in this country, during the last
half century especially, the word by
common usage has acquired a popular
meaning, not clearly defined to be
sure, but sufficiently so to enable us
to say that its popular as
distinguished from its scientific
application is of appreciably narrower
scope. It is in the popular sense of
the word, therefore, that we employ it
as an aid to the construction of the
statute....
They imply, as we have said, a racial
test; but the term "race" is
one which, for the practical purposes
of the statute, must be applied to a
group of living persons now possessing
in common the requisite
characteristics, not to groups of
persons who are supposed to be or
really are descended from some remote,
common ancestor, but who, whether they
both resemble him to a greater or less
extent, have, at any rate, ceased
altogether to resemble one another. It
may be true that the blond
Scandinavian and the brown Hindu have
a common ancestor in the dim reaches
of antiquity, but the average man
knows perfectly well that there are
unmistakable and profound differences
between them today; . . .
The term "Aryan" has to do
with linguistic and not at all with
physical characteristics, and it would
seem reasonably clear that mere
resemblance in language, indicating a
common linguistic root buried in
remotely ancient soil, is altogether
inadequate to prove common racial
origin. There is, and can be, no
assurance that the so-called Aryan
language was not spoken by a variety
of races living in proximity to one
another. Our own history has witnessed
the adoption of the English tongue by
millions of Negroes, whose descendants
can never be classified racially with
the descendants of white persons
notwithstanding both may speak a
common root language.
What we now hold is that the words
"free white persons" are
words of common speech, to be
interpreted in accordance with the
understanding of the common man,
synonymous with the word
"Caucasian" only as that
word is popularly understood. As so
understood and used, whatever may be
the speculations of the ethnologist,
it does not include the body of people
to whom the appellee belongs. It is a
matter of familiar observation and
knowledge that the physical group
characteristics of the Hindus render
them readily distinguishable from the
various groups of persons in this
country commonly recognized as white.
The children of English, French,
German, Italian, Scandinavian, and
other European parentage, quickly
merge into the mass of our population
and lose the distinctive hallmarks of
their European origin. On the other
hand, it cannot be doubted that the
children born in this country of Hindu
parents would retain indefinitely the
clear evidence of their ancestry. It
is very far from our thought to
suggest the slightest question of
racial superiority or inferiority.
What we suggest is merely racial
difference, and it is of such
character and extent that the great
body of our people instinctively
recognize it and reject the thought of
assimilation.
It is not without significance in this
connection that Congress, by the Act
of February 5, 1917, c. 29, ?3, 39
Stat. 874, has now excluded from
admission into this country all
natives of Asia within designated
limits of latitude and longitude,
including the whole of India. This not
only constitutes conclusive evidence
of the congressional attitude of
opposition to Asiatic immigration
generally, but is persuasive of a
similar attitude toward Asiatic
naturalization as well, since it is
not likely that Congress would be
willing to accept as citizens a class
of persons whom it rejects as
immigrants.
LINKS
Roots in the Sand,
PBS
http://www.pbs.org/rootsinthesand/i_bhagat1.html
Sikh Pioneers of North America
http://www.sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion.
nsf/0/e3034536854a9ca687256c5b007f6893?OpenDocument
Echoes of Freedom: South Asian Pioneers in California
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/SSEAL/
echoes/chapter10/chapter10.html
|
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
All rights, including copyright, in the content of these Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind web pages are owned or controlled for these purposes by
David Thind.
In accessing the Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind's web pages, you agree that you may only download the content for your own personal non-commercial use.
You are not permitted to copy, broadcast, download, store (in any medium), transmit, show or play in public, adapt or change in any way the content of these Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind web pages for any other purpose whatsoever without the prior written permission of David Thind. |
|
|
|
TO TOP
|
|
|
|
