Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 15.pdf/282

 Lodon Legal Letter. immigration into England has latterly re ceived a fresh impetus from the trial of Severino Klosovvski (otherwise George Chap man), which has just been concluded at the Old Bailey, and to which allusion has been made above. Chapman's case was one of pe culiar cruelty. According to the opening statement for the prosecution he is, although claiming to be an American, in fact, a Rus sian Pole, who formerly carried on a busi ness which is now happily extinct in this country—that of a barber-surgeon. Later he became the landlord of the "Crown" public house in the Borough High street, south of the river. In the last few years Chapman is alleged to have made away with three women by administering to them tartar emetic, a poison with the effect of which he was pe culiarly familiar from his old profession of barber surgeon. He was, however, only in dicted for the murder of one of these unfor tunate persons, a young woman named Maud Marsh, who passed as his wife and acted as his barmaid. The facts of the case as outlined by the attorney-general pointed to an extraordinarily callous course of conduct on Chapman's part, each victim appearing to have been made away with simply as a mat ter of passing convenience. The alien question has at last become a serious one in England. The immigrant alien who finds his way into London from southeast Europe, is capable of supporting himself at a much lower wage than the na tive workman, so that in the case of a num ber of trades in the East End, as for exam ple, tailoring, furmaking, and the like, the English workman has been ousted, simply through his inability to live upon the sum which the average alien accepts with a con tented spirit. The important case of the Bank of England note forgeries last Decem ber, in which every one of the eight forgers was an alien, and the present case of triple murder, for which Chapman has now been convicted, have awakened alarm at the preva

245

lence of crimes committed by aliens in this country. The present feeling in favor of strict legis lation to impose some restriction upon their entrance to our gates, is no new one. In 1894 Lord Salisbury introduced an alien's bill; in 1895 Mr. Ritchie promised legislation on the subject; in 1896 it was one of the prin cipal measures promised in the late Queen's speech; in 1897 Mr. Ritchie, again president of the Board of Trade, said in the Commons, "The government are pledged to legislation and do not wish to depart one iota from their pledges. I hope at no distant time to propose in Parliament legislation on the subject." In 1898, Lord Hardwicke carried a bill through the Lords, and yet the Royal Commission appointed by the government last year to enquire into the question did not sit at all from July to December, and is still engaged in taking evidence. It is small wonder then, in view of such procrastination that press and public have joined in a severe criticism of the govern ment. Even the colonies have found it nec essary to legislate upon the subject, Cape Colony most recently. And yet the mother country, overcrowded as she is with her own large proportional population, has hitherto been content to act as the "midden heap and dustbin for all the refuse of the world." Such a course may be pleasing to a certain section of the population who considers it evidence tending to prove Great Britain's claim to be the freest country in the world, but there is now an enormous majority in favor of some kind of legislation in the direction of prohib ition of immigration. It must be difficult for an American to realize that in a country where naturalization is hedged about with many conditions, the necessity for it should be almost dispensed with by what is, practically speaking, the welcome afforded to for eigners. An alien has only to cross the chan nel and settle down in London to receive, practically speaking, every advantage from