This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

HIndsight: 149 Years Ago

By Kari Machado | Apr. 2, 2011
News

Law Office Management

Apr. 2, 2011

HIndsight: 149 Years Ago


On April 26, 1862, as the Civil War raged on, the California Legislature approved the Anti-Coolie Act. Lawmakers used the derogatory term for unskilled Asian workers in the title of the law, which also spelled out the intent of the statute: "An Act to Protect Free White Labor Against Competition With Chinese Coolie Labor And To Discourage the Immigration of the Chinese Into the State of California."

To encourage employers to hire white workers, the law placed a monthly tax of $2.50 on all adult workers "of the Mongolian Race," except in the least desirable industries. Earlier in the year, Congress had passed similar federal legislation--the first of this nation's long, unfortunate history of anti-Chinese laws.

The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act would follow, banning Chinese immigration and naturalization. Said to be the only law in U.S. history to single out a particular ethnic group, it contained even more onerous restrictions on Chinese laborers than California's Anti-Coolie Act. The Immigration Act of 1924 further limited the rights of Asians in America.

The Exclusion Act was not repealed until 1943, and even then Congress still forbade Chinese from immigrating to Hawaii. The tide continued its turn in 1948 when the California Supreme Court held that antimiscegenation laws were unconstitutional, making it legal for people of all races and ethnic backgrounds--including Chinese Americans--to intermarry (Perez v. Sharp, 32 Cal. 2d 711 (1948)).

Though circumstances have improved, this awkward legal history reflects the complicated and contradictory views on race that have permeated the state and the nation: Even as California passed the Anti-Coolie Act, it was simultaneously fighting in a civil war to expand the rights of African Americans.

#281692

Kari Machado

Daily Journal Staff Writer

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com