美国排华法案:修订间差异

删除的内容 添加的内容
无编辑摘要
InternetArchiveBot留言 | 贡献
补救21个来源,并将0个来源标记为失效。) #IABot (v2.0.8.8
第65行:
这項法案將所有华人劳工拒于美国之外長達十年。其1884年修正案更限缩了先前入境的移民离开和进入美国的规定,同时阐明,无论這些華人的国籍为何,该法皆适用。1892年,该法案由《{{tsl|en|Geary Act|吉尔里法案}}》(或称《{{tsl|en|Geary Act|基瑞法案}}》)延长十年,到1902年便取消了时限。法案被1943年通过的《[[马格努森法案]]》废除,后者允许每年105名华人的入境移民限额,然而大规模的华人移民并没有随之到来,直至《{{tsl|en|Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965|1965年入境移民与国籍服务法案}}》的通过。{{Citation needed|该法案是对大量华人因中国的内部动荡和有机会得到铁路建设工作而迁入美国西部所作出的反应。它是在美国通过的第一部针对特定族群的移民法。|time=2022-02-17T04:39:24+00:00}}
 
虽然该法案很久之前就被废止,但是长期以来它却一直是《[[美国法典]]》的一部分。即便是今天,虽然它所有的內容都早已被废除,但是《美国法典》第8篇第7章题名为“排除华人”(Exclusion of Chinese)。它是第8篇(外国人和国籍)的15章裡唯一一个完全针对一个特定国籍或族群的章节。<ref>{{cite web |url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/8/chapters/7/toc.html |title=US CODE-TITLE 8-ALIENS AND NATIONALITY |publisher=[[FindLaw]] |date= |accessdate=2014-05-05 |archive-date=2009-04-25 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090425074524/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/8/chapters/7/toc.html }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.163.com/11/1008/15/7FRPQMK600014AED.html |title="美参议院通过议案为百年前排华法案道歉" |publisher=网易新闻/中国新闻网 |date=2011-10-07 |accessdate=2011-10-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111010190212/http://news.163.com/11/1008/15/7FRPQMK600014AED.html |archive-date=2011-10-10 |dead-url=yes }}</ref>
 
==背景==
[[File:Chinese railroad workers in snow.jpg|thumb|250px|right|正在修建[[第一條橫貫大陸鐵路|越州铁路]]的华人移民劳工]]
第一个重要的中国移民北美潮始于1848-1855年的[[加利福尼亞淘金潮|加利福尼亚淘金潮]],接着又以大型劳工项目带来大批华人,包括建设[[第一條橫貫大陸鐵路|第一条横贯大陆]]的铁路。在淘金热的早期阶段,当表层黄金充足时,[[中國人|中国人]]即使不受欢迎,也能够被白人容忍。<ref>{{Cite web|title=Gold Rush and Anti-Chinese Race Hatred - 1849|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080509090327/http://www.sfmuseum.net/hist6/chinhate.html|accessdate=2020-04-11|date=2008-05-09|work=web.archive.org}}</ref>然而,随着黄金越来越难找到,竞争越来越激烈,对中国人和其他外国人的敌意也在增加。在被州立法者和其他矿工(外国矿工税)一起强行赶出采矿业后,移民中国人开始在城市(主要是[[旧金山]])的飞地定居,从事低报酬的劳动,如餐馆和洗衣店的工作。<ref>{{Cite web|title=China's menace to the world : from the forum : to the public|url=https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/murray:@field(DOCID+@lit(lcrbmrpt2412div1))|accessdate=|author=|date=|format=|publisher=|language=|archive-date=2020-04-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200404230234/https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem%2Fmurray%3A%40field%28DOCID+%40lit%28lcrbmrpt2412div1%29%29}}</ref>随着19世纪70年代[[南北战争|美国内战]]后经济的衰退,劳工领袖丹尼斯·卡尼(Denis Kearney)和他的工人党<ref>{{Cite web|title="Our Misery and Despair": Kearney Blasts Chinese Immigration|url=http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5046/%7C|accessdate=2020-04-11|work=historymatters.gmu.edu|archive-date=2011-07-19|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110719203246/http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5046/%7C}}</ref>团体以及加州州长[[约翰·比格勒]](John Bigler)将反华仇恨政治化,他们都指责中国的“[[苦力]]”导致工资水平低下。加州的舆论和法律开始以多种角色妖魔化中国工人和移民,19世纪后半叶,针对中国劳工、行为甚至生活条件制定了一系列越来越严格的法律。尽管许多立法尝试很快被州[[最高法院]]推翻,<ref>{{Cite web|title=1855 Cal. Stat. 194 Capitation Tax|url=http://libraryweb.uchastings.edu/library/research/special-collections/wong-kim-ark/1855%20Cal.%20Stat.%20194.pdf|accessdate=|author=|date=|format=|publisher=|language=|archive-date=2021-03-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210307234602/http://libraryweb.uchastings.edu/library/research/special-collections/wong-kim-ark/1855%20Cal.%20Stat.%20194.pdf}}</ref>但加州和全国仍在通过更多的反华律法。
 
19世纪50年代初,由于中国移民工人提供了必要的税收,填补了加利福尼亚州的填补了政府赤字,因此加利福尼亚州政府并不支持排斥华人劳工移民。<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|title=Immigration, Exclusion, and Taxation: Anti-Chinese Legislation in Gold Rush California|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-economic-history/article/immigration-exclusion-and-taxation-antichinese-legislation-in-gold-rush-california/63FAD41EDA87D01318FA250853F248C5|last=Kanazawa|first=Mark|date=2005/09|journal=The Journal of Economic History|issue=3|doi=10.1017/S0022050705000288|volume=65|pages=779–805|language=en|issn=1471-6372|access-date=2020-04-11|archive-date=2020-06-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200617050228/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-economic-history/article/immigration-exclusion-and-taxation-antichinese-legislation-in-gold-rush-california/63FAD41EDA87D01318FA250853F248C5}}</ref>[[咸豐帝|當時的清朝皇帝]]对排华持支持态度,他担心中国移民到美国会导致中国失去劳动力。<ref>{{Cite book|title=THE EVENTS LEADING TO THE CHINESE EXCLUSION ACTS|last=Wellborn, Mildred|first=|publisher=|year=|isbn=|location=|pages=56}}</ref>但到了50年代末,经济状况有所改善,随后,在州一级立法排华的尝试获得成功。<ref name=":0" />1858年,加利福尼亚州立法机关通过了一项法案,规定所有“中国或蒙古”人进入该州都是非法的;但是,1862年该州最高法院推翻了这条法案,未发表解释意见。<ref>{{Cite web|title=Wayback Machine|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140505105756/http://librarysource.uchastings.edu/library/research/special-collections/wong-kim-ark/1858%20Cal.%20Stat.%20295.pdf|accessdate=2020-04-11|date=2014-05-05|work=web.archive.org}}</ref>
 
到1860年,华人已经是加利福尼亚州最大的移民团体了。中国移民工人提供廉价劳动力,不占用任何政府基础设施(学校、医院等),因为中国移民人口中,健康的成年人男性占据了绝大多数。<ref name=":0" />随着时间的推移,越来越多的中国移民来到加利福尼亚州,在洛杉矶等地开始多发暴力事件。[[宾夕法尼亚州议会]]和[[美国国会|国会]]提到,宾夕法尼亚州海狸瀑布餐具公司(Beaver Falls Cuttery Company)因为所有工作被200多名中国男性取代而爆发了罢工。“在某种程度上,它促成了《排华法案》的最终通过。”<ref>{{Cite journal|title="White Labor" vs. "Coolie Labor": The "Chinese Question" in Pennsylvania in the 1870s|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/27502811|last=Rhoads|first=Edward J. M.|date=2002|journal=Journal of American Ethnic History|issue=2|volume=21|pages=3–32|issn=0278-5927|access-date=2020-04-11|archive-date=2021-02-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204213607/https://www.jstor.org/stable/27502811}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|title=Asian Pioneers in the Eastern United States: Chinese Cutlery Workers in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, in the 1870s|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/14556|last=Rhoads|first=Edward J. M.|date=1999-06-01|journal=Journal of Asian American Studies|issue=2|doi=10.1353/jaas.1999.0019|volume=2|pages=119–155|language=en|issn=1096-8598|access-date=2020-04-11|archive-date=2021-03-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308061801/https://muse.jhu.edu/article/14556}}</ref>曾经,在加州,中国男性占所有挣工资工人人口的近四分之一,<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Book sources|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0807845301|journal=Wikipedia|language=en}}</ref>到1878年,国会感到有必要在立法中禁止来自中国的移民,而这项法案后来被[[拉瑟福德·伯查德·海斯]](Rutherford B. Hayes)总统否决。1873年8月27日《[[旧金山纪事报]]》文章的标题是“中国入侵!他们来了,90万人,强大的种族”,这篇文章被《[[大西洋 (雜誌)|大西洋]]》追溯为2019年反移民“入侵”言论的根源之一。<ref>{{Cite web|title=Where Does Trump’s ‘Invasion’ Rhetoric Come From?|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/08/trump-immigrant-invasion-language-origins/595579/|accessdate=2020-04-11|date=2019-08-06|last=Zimmer|first=Ben|work=The Atlantic|language=en-US|archive-date=2021-05-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210505160529/https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/08/trump-immigrant-invasion-language-origins/595579/}}</ref>
 
然而,到了1879年,加利福尼亚州通过了一部新[[加利福尼亞州憲法|宪法法案]],明确授权州政府决定哪些人可以在该州居住,并禁止中国人受雇于公司和州、县或市政府。<ref>{{Cite web|title=Wayback Machine|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130516131106/http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/collections/1879/archive/1879-constitution.pdf|accessdate=2020-04-11|date=2013-05-16|work=web.archive.org}}</ref>尽管关于加州的反华情绪是否推动了联邦政府(加州论)作出决定,或者对华歧视主义是否仅仅是该国固有的问题存在争议,但到1882年,联邦政府还是被说服通过了《排华法案》,在10年内禁止从中国移民。当《排华法案》最终在1882年被通过时,加州也通过了各项法律,更加深入地进行了对华人的差别待遇——但这些法律随后被宣告为违宪。<ref>Cole, L. Cheryl."Chinese Exclusion: The Capitalist Perspective of the Sacramento Union, 1850-1882".California History, Vol. 57, No. 1, The Chinese in California (Spring, 1978), pp. 8-31. Published by: California Historical Society</ref>
 
该法案通过后,大多数中国工人面临一个两难的境地:是该独自留在美国,还是返回中国与家人团聚。<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Hidden in Plain Sight: Global Labor Force Exchange in the Chinese American Population, 1880–1940|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2004.00003.x|last=Chew|first=Kenneth S. Y.|last2=Liu|first2=John M.|date=2004|journal=Population and Development Review|issue=1|doi=10.1111/j.1728-4457.2004.00003.x|volume=30|pages=57–78|language=en|issn=1728-4457|access-date=2020-04-11|archive-date=2021-03-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308191549/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2004.00003.x}}</ref>全国的(尤其是加州本地的)报纸开始从各方面质疑和谴责华人,比如白人失业问题。警察也尽可能寻找一切微小的机会来逮捕华人,从而对他们进行区别对待。尽管法律通过后,人们对中国人的普遍厌恶依然存在,但值得注意的是,一些资本家和企业家基于经济因素而反对排华,因为他们想要继续享受较低工资支出。<ref>{{Cite journal|title=The Chinese and the Exclusion Act|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/25105257|last=Miller|first=Joaquin|date=1901|journal=The North American Review|issue=541|volume=173|pages=782–789|issn=0029-2397|access-date=2020-04-11|archive-date=2021-03-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308210943/https://www.jstor.org/stable/25105257}}</ref>
 
==法案==
《排华法案》是在美国历史上针对自由移民所作出的最重大的限制之一。该法案通过监禁和驱逐的惩戒方式禁止“被矿井雇佣的有技能或无技能的华人劳工们”在10年之内进入美国。仅仅因为种族,许多华人被残酷地控制住了。<ref name="mem">{{cite web|url=http://memory.loc.gov/learn//features/immig/chinese6.html|title=Exclusion|publisher=[[Library of Congress]]|date=2003-09-01|accessdate=2010-01-25|archive-date=2009-08-10|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090810043800/http://memory.loc.gov/learn//features/immig/chinese6.html}}</ref><ref name="usn">{{Cite web |url=http://www.usnews.com/usnews/documents/docpages/document_page47.htm |title=usnews.com: The People's Vote: Chinese Exclusion Act (1882)<!-- Bot generated title --> |access-date=2012-06-30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070328223654/http://www.usnews.com/usnews/documents/docpages/document_page47.htm |archive-date=2007-03-28 |dead-url=yes }}</ref>少数想要移民的非劳工华人不得不从中国政府那里获得保证以证明他们有资格移民,但证明这一点显然太过困难。<ref name="usn"/>
 
沃普认为《排华法案》被认为是美国排斥华人法律的起始点,原因在于用词不当。她建议开展有关种族、性别和美国国籍的交流从而令双方了解对于这样一种历史性倾向(包括1875年的Page法案)的控制并促使女性华人的移民。<ref>Leti Volpp "Divesting Citizenship: On Asian American History and the Loss of Citizenship Through Marriage" The Regents of the University of California. UCLA Law Review (2005).</ref>
第92行:
一个叫做乔治·福瑞斯比·霍尔的反蓄奴主义者、反帝国主义者和共和党参议员对《排华法案》持批评态度。他将该法案描述成“简直就是人种歧视的合法化”。<ref>Roger Daniels, Coming to America, p271.</ref>
 
对于种族的忧虑催生了此类法案。但在此期间,其他种族的移民都没有受到限制。<ref>[{{Cite web |url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1121119 |title=Chin, Gabriel J., (1998) '''[[&#91;&#91;University of California, Los Angeles|{{!}}UCLA]]&#93;&#93;''' Law Review vol. 46, at 1 "Segregation's Last Stronghold: Race Discrimination and the Constitutional Law of Immigration"] |access-date=2012-06-30 |archive-date=2020-04-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200408183828/http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1121119 }}</ref>另一方面,许多人强烈支持《排华法案》,包括一个叫做“劳动骑士”(Knights of Labor)的商业/劳工联盟。这个联盟认为企业家们会利用华人劳工继续维持低廉的薪金。<ref>Kennedy, David M. Cohen, Lizabeth, Bailey, Thomas A. ''The American Pageant''. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002</ref>在工会和左翼团体当中,“世界工人”组织是仅有的一个例外。世界工人在《排华法案》通过之初至1905年都公开对此表示反对。<ref>Choi, Jennifer Jung Hee. ''The Rhetoric of Inclusion: The I.W.W. and Asian Workers''</ref>
 
==影响与结果==
第105行:
1885年在[[懷俄明州]]的[[石泉]]煤礦,150名白人礦工公然闖入[[唐人街]]開槍,殺害28名華人,震驚全國,警方隨即逮捕16名嫌疑犯。當地工團[[勞工騎士團]]揚言要驅逐華人,在1886年押解華人到達碼頭後,西雅圖警方趕赴現場制止,法院發出人身保護令並派民團隨身保護。隔日,當民團護送華人到唐人街時被一群暴徒攻擊,民團開槍打死兩人,西雅圖的[[華盛頓州]]政府宣布[[戒嚴]],將華人全數運走。因此,即便在整個排華歷史中,美國政府經常動用警察、軍隊保護華人免受暴力攻擊<ref>{{cite web |title=美國1882年排華法案出臺始末 |url=http://finance.jrj.com.cn/book/2012/06/19092913522763-3.shtml |publisher=淇河晨報 |website=金融網 |date=2012-06-19 |accessdate=2019-03-16 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160412002633/http://book.jrj.com.cn/book/2012/06/19092913522763-3.shtml |archivedate=2016-04-12}}</ref>。
 
纪录片《排华法案》描绘了其后可怕的暴力浪潮(包括大规模私刑),乃至1882年后在美国西部约300个城镇发生的种族清洗。<ref>{{cite news |author1=MIKE HALE |title=《排华法案》:一段美国华裔移民苦难史 |url=https://cn.nytimes.com/film-tv/20180531/pbs-chinese-exclusion-act/ |accessdate=2021-02-01 |agency=纽约时报 |date=2018-05-31 |archive-date=2021-04-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210427003623/https://cn.nytimes.com/film-tv/20180531/pbs-chinese-exclusion-act/ }}</ref>
 
==清政府反应==
第117行:
 
==法案的废止与当前状况==
1943年,《排华法案》被《[[麦诺森法案|马格努森法案]]》废止。后者允许已经居住在美国的华人归化美籍,并令他们停止因为被驱逐出境的威胁而躲藏。该法案也给出了每年105名华人移民的限额。大量的华人移民并未涌现,直到1965年的《移民和国籍法案》被通过。尽管《排华法案》已经于1943年被废止,但1948年之前,加利福尼亚州禁止华人与白人通婚的法律仍未废除。<ref>[{{Cite web |url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=283998 |title=Chin, Gabriel; Karthikeyan, Hrishi (2002). Asian Law Journal vol. 9 "Preserving Racial Identity: Population Patterns and the Application of Anti-Miscegenation Statutes to Asian Americans, 1910-1950"] |access-date=2012-06-30 |archive-date=2020-04-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200408183827/http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=283998 }}</ref><ref>See ''[[Perez v. Sharp]]'', [http://online.ceb.com/CalCases/C2/32C2d711.htm 32 Cal. 2d 711] {{Wayback|url=http://online.ceb.com/CalCases/C2/32C2d711.htm |date=20210323012125 }} (1948).</ref>在1967年以前,其它的州也有类似法律,直到最高法院在洛枫诉弗吉尼亚州(Loving v. Virginia)的诉讼期间一致同意地作出判决:反对种族通婚的法律是违反宪法的。<ref>{{link-en|Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States|Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States}}</ref>而1879年加州宪法禁止政府與公司雇用华人的条款,<ref name="California1922">{{cite book |author=California | title=Constitution of the State of California, Constitution of the United States and Act for Admission of California Into Union, Declaration of Rights, Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation ...| |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=azA2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA224 |year=1922 |publisher=State Printing Office |pages=224–225 |access-date=2013-11-23 |archive-date=2014-01-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140103075603/http://books.google.com/books?id=azA2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA224 }}{{en}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.oac.cdlib.org/view?docId=hb3z09p0h2&brand=oac4&doc.view=entire_text | title=Statement of Augustus F. Hawkins (California State Assemblyman) at California hearings of the United States Commission on Civil Rights | publisher=Online Archives of California | date=1960-01-25 | access-date=2013-11-23 | archive-date=2017-10-13 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171013120141/http://www.oac.cdlib.org/view?docId=hb3z09p0h2&brand=oac4&doc.view=entire_text }}{{en}}</ref>到1952年才被废除。<ref name="acr42">{{cite web | url=http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/acr_42_cfa_20090622_125920_asm_comm.html | title=Official California Legislative Information: Assembly Committee on Judiciary ACR 42 (Fong) | date=2009-06-23 | publisher=Legislative Counsel of California | quote=6)States that in 1879, California adopted Article XIX of the state Constitution, which unfairly targeted and discriminated against Chinese living in California and remained in effect until its repeal in 1952. | access-date=2013-11-23 | archive-date=2013-12-02 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202221807/http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/acr_42_cfa_20090622_125920_asm_comm.html }}{{en}}</ref>
 
甚至在今天,尽管《排华法案》的重要部分早已经被废止,但《美国法典》第8号的第7章仍旧以“排华”字样开头。<ref>[{{Cite web |url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/8/chapters/7/toc.html |title=US CODE-TITLE 8-ALIENS AND NATIONALITY] |access-date=2012-06-30 |archive-date=2009-04-25 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090425074524/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/8/chapters/7/toc.html }}</ref>在法典第8号的15个章节中,第7章是惟一一个完全聚焦于某个特定国籍或种族团体的章节。
 
2009年6月23日,加州眾議院通过正式决议,为曾经通過针对华人的歧视性法律道歉。<ref name="acr42"/>
第144行:
== 外部链接 ==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20041204092238/http://www.paperson.com/history.htm Exclusion Act Case Files of Yee Wee Thing and Yee Bing Quai, two "Paper Sons"]
* [http://www.worldandi.com/subscribers/americanwavesdetail.asp?num=12325 《在美国的华人》(请阅“Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882”一节)Chinese in America (see section on Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882)] {{Wayback|url=http://www.worldandi.com/subscribers/americanwavesdetail.asp?num=12325 |date=20210228214007 }}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070314160947/http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist6/chinhate.html 《1849年的淘金热和反华种族仇恨》 Gold Rush and Anti-Chinese Race Hatred 1849]
* [http://www.justia.us/us/130/581/ Chae Chan Ping v. United States, 130 U.S. 581 (1889)] {{Webarchive|url=https://archive.is/20120802213826/http://www.justia.us/us/130/581/ |date=2012-08-02 }}
* [http://www.justia.us/us/163/228/case.html Wong Wing v. United States , 163 US 228 (1896)]