The debate in both the House of Representatives and the Senate over the first "Quota Law" restricting immigration into the United States, became an occasion for the legislators to define the meaning of America. Those in favor of restricting immigration, as well as those who wanted to continue the older and freer policies, agreed that American values were at stake in the debate. The opponents of free immigration argued that a continued influx of aliens would dilute what they called the American way of life, while the defenders of free immigration insisted that the very meaning of America depended, as it always had, upon free immigration. Radicalism, pauperism, and cheap labor were additional ingredients in the conflict. Underlying this debate was the growing tension between cosmopolitan and provincial America. The outcome was the passage of new legislation restricting immigration to 3 percent of the nationalities represented in the census of 1910, but soon, in 1924, even more restrictive legislation was passed, cutting approximately in half the figures of 1920 and 1921. These debates disclosed the growing divergences in the United States and showed too, that there was little hope for an immediate political or social armistice.
April 20, 1921
House of Representatives
Mr. [Lucian Walton] Parrish [D-Tex.]. We should stop immigration entirely until such a time as we can amend are immigration laws and so write them that hereafter no one shall be admitted except he be in full sympathy with our Constitution and laws, willing to declare himself obedient to our flag, and willing to release himself form any obligations he may owe to the flag of the country from which he came.
It is time that we act now, because within a few short years the damage will have been done. The endless tide of immigration will have filled our country with a foreign and unsympathetic element. Those who are out of sympathy with our Constitution and the spirit of our Government will be here in large numbers, and the true spirit of Americanism left us by our fathers will gradually become poisoned by this uncertain element.
The time once was when we welcomed to our shores the oppressed and downtrodden people from all the world, but they came to us because of oppression at home and with the sincere purpose of making true and loyal American citizens, and in truth and in fact they did adapt themselves to our ways of thinking and contributed in a substantial sense to the progress and development that our civilization has made. But that time has passed now; new and strange conditions have arisen in the countries over there; new and strange doctrines are being taught. The Governments of the orient are being overturned and destroyed, and anarchy and bolshevism are threatening the very foundation of many of them and no one can foretell what the future will bring to many of those countries of the Old World now struggling with these problems.
Our country is a self-sustaining country. It has taught the principles of real democracy to all the nations of the earth; its flag has been the synonym of progress, prosperity, and the preservation of the rights of the individual, and there can be nothing so dangerous as for us to allow the undesirable foreign element to poison out civilization and thereby threaten the safety of the institutions that our for fathers have established for us.
Now is the time to throw out this country the most stringent immigration laws and keep from our shores forever those who are not in sympathy with the American ideas. It is the time now for us to act and act quickly, because every months delay increases the difficulty in which we find ourselves and renders the problems of government more difficult of solution. We must protect ourselves from the poisonous influences that are threatening the very foundation of the Governments of Europe; we must see to it that those who come here are loyal and true to our Nation and impress upon them that it means something to have the privileges of American citizenship. We must hold this country true to the American thought and the American ideals.
Mr. [Albert B.] Rossdale [R-N.Y.]. Will the gentleman yield to me one minute of his time to allow me to correct a statement in his speech of the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Parrish]?
Mr. Raker. I yield to the gentleman one minute.
Mr. Rossdale. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Parrish] has stated that the indications are that 2,000,000 or possibly more people will enter the United States in the coming year. The estimated steamship facilities for bringing people form all over the world for a year are 809,000. Now why this hysteria? The gentleman also assumes that all of these people over there are antagonistic to American ideals and interests. Has the gentleman ever come in contact with a lot of these immigrants and does he really know that they are of that type? I come from the Bronx, where there are a great deal of these so-called foreigners, and I have an intimate knowledge of their political opinions and ideals, and I can say to the gentleman from Texas that if he had even a speaking acquaintance with them he would quickly learn that they breathe purer and higher ideals than he had any previous knowledge of. I invite the gentleman from Texas to come to the Bronx and find out for himself what splendid American citizens they make. [Applause]
Mr. [Meyer] London [Socialist-N.Y.]. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I have no hope of even presenting an outline of this subject. The world is still crazy. The war is not over. After preaching for thousands of years the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, and then engaging for five years in the slaughter, it is but natural that we be in an abnormal state. While the killing of mens bodies has stopped, the poisoning of minds has just begun. This bill is a continuation of the war upon humanity. It is an assertion of that exaggerated nationalism which never appeals to reason and which has for its main source the self-conceit of accumulated prejudice.
At whom are you striking in this bill? Why, at the very people whom a short while ago you announced you were going to emancipate. We sent 2,000,000 abroad to make the world "safe" for democracy," to liberate these very people. Now you shut the door to them. Yes. So far we have made the world safe for hypocrisy and the United States incidentally unsafe for the Democratic Party, temporarily at least. [Laughter.] The supporters of the bill claim that the law will keep out radicals. The idea that by restricting immigration you will prevent the influx of radical thoughts is altogether untenable. You can not confine an idea behind prison bars. You can not exclude it by the most drastic legislation. The field of thought recognizes no barriers. The fact that there was almost no immigration during the war did not prevent us from importing every abominable idea from Europe. We brought over the idea of deportation of radicals from France, not from the France of Rousseau, Jaures, and Victor Hugo but from the France of Bourbons. We imported the idea of censorship of the press and the passport system from Russia of Nicholas II. We have imported the idea of universal military service from Germany, not from the Germany of Heine, Boerne, and Freiligrath but from the Germany of the Kaiser...
Ideas can neither be shut in nor shut out. There is only one way of contending with an idea, and that is the old and safe American rule of free and untrammeled discussion. Every attempt to use any other method has always proven disastrous.
While purporting to be a temporary measure, just for a year or so, this bill is really intended to pave the way to permanent exclusion.
To prevent immigration means to cripple the United States. Our most developed industrial States are those which have the largest immigration. Our most backward States industrially and in the point of literacy are those which have no immigration to speak of..
The extraordinary and unprecedented growth of the United States is as much a cause as the effect of immigration.
Defenders of this bill thoughtlessly repeat the exploded theory that there have been two periods of immigration, the good period, which the chairman of the committee fixes up to the year 1900, and the bad period since. The strange thing about it is that at no time in history has any country made such rapid progress in industry, in science, and in the sphere of local legislation as this country has shown since 1900.
The new immigration is neither different nor worse, and besides that, identically the same arguments were used against the old immigration.
By this bill we, who have escaped the horrors of the war, will refuse a place of refuge to the victims of the war.
I repeat, this is an attempt at civilization. Progress is by no means a continuous or uninterrupted process. Many a civilization has been destroyed in the tortuous course of history and has been followed by hundreds or thousands of years of darkness. It is possible that unless strong men who love liberty will everywhere assert themselves, the world will revert to a state of savagery. Just now we hear nothing but hatred, nothing but the ravings of the exaggerated. I- "I am of the best stock, I do not want to be contaminated; I have produced the greatest literature; my intellect is the biggest; my heart is the noblest"--and this is repeated in every parliament, in every country, by every fool all over the world. [Applause.]
May 2, 1921
Senate
Mr. [James Thomas] Heflin [D-Ala.]. Mr. President, I understand that as the pending bill is now written it will permit about 300,000 immigrants annually to come into the United States. I think the provision which is made in the bill as reported by the Senator from Vermont [Mr. Dillingham] is a considerable improvement over the bill as it came from the House. The provision of the House bill relative ti permitting those who are fleeing from foreign countries because of religious persecution would permit thousands and hundreds of thousands of undesirable foreigners to come into our country.
We have tried for a long time to pass an immigration law that would really restrict immigration and that would guard out shores against the undesirable populations of foreign countries, but we have invariably discovered, after the law had been enacted, that there were loopholes through which such people could come. Undesirables have been coming and they are now coming to this country. I submit, Mr. President, to the Senate and to the country that if this government ever intends to protect its life against the dangers that threaten it from this very source that time is now. The daily newspapers have been filled with headlines relative to the movements of red anarchists and bolsheviki in the United States. I hold here in my hand the notice of a circular which has been issued by them. This is from Ansonia, Conn., and is dated April 29. It appeared in the Washington Post of last Saturday, I believe. The article reads:
Anarchist Circulars Urge Refusal to Obey Laws
Ansonia, Conn., April 29
Radical literature again was distributed in this city during the night. Circulars bearing the caption, "The First Day of May the day of reckoning and liberation," and purporting to be issued by anarchist groups of the United States and Canada, were found this morning.
In them workers are advised to refuse to pay taxes and rents, refuse to obey laws, take possession of the land, factories, mills, and mines and go armed to mass meetings or parades.
Mr. President, is this Government called upon to open the doors of this country to people who openly and notoriously advise the violation of our laws, the tearing down of our institutions and the taking over of private property? It seems to me that it is high time that Congress should pass a law that will keep out all people who are unfriendly to the American form of government. Several months ago one of these men who oppose our form of government, and while enjoying its hospitality, unfurled and burned he United States flag before an audience of his kind in the city of New York. I think some small fine was imposed upon him, but he is now again a free man. Is this Government called upon to open the doors of our country to such as he? Is this Government alled upon to permit such as he to remain?
Mr. President, some months ago the boys who had returned from France with our flag, covered all over with the glory of their valor, while marching in a parade out in Centralia, Wash., celebrating Armistice Day, were fired upon from ambush and two of them killed. Is this Government called upon to permit any more of that kind from the criminal classes of Europe to land upon our shores?
Mr. President, it is high time for this Government to take stock; it is high time that we were finding out here at home just "who is who" in America.
There was another story in the newspapers Saturday about one of these red anarchists who has been in this country for 17 years and yet he had never been naturalized. Think of it. He has been protected by our laws; he has enjoyed the blessings and benefit of the Government, which he is daily seeking to overthrow. Is there any good reason why we should pass a law that will permit such as he to come over here?
Mr. President, if I had my way about it, I would shut our immigration doors tightly for one year at least, and I would very rigidly restrict it for all time to come.
I am in favor of putting a commission of loyal Americans on the other side of the ocean to pass on prospective immi-. grants before they ever set foot upon the ship sailing for our shores. I am in favor, then, of having another such commission on this site to examine them and their credentials before they are permitted to set fo ot upon American soil.
Mr. President, it is no small thing to be a citizen of the United States. Time was when Rome had reached the zenith of her power that the proudest title a Roman could wear was that of a Roman soldier. To-day the proudest boast that mortal man can make is "I am an American citizen." And yet we have people in the United States, not long in the country, who threaten Members in the other branch of Congress and threaten Senators in this branch with punishment at the polls if they do not throw the do ors open to all kinds of people coming from foreign countries. Political threats are used and local political power employed to secure the enactment of laws that will permit this stream of undeserved and undesirable people to continue to come into this country
Thomas Jefferson warned us of this danger; Abraham Lincoln warned us of this danger; Gen. Grant warned us of this danger; a long line of illustrious leaders that I could mention have told us "Your danger is from within more than from without." Danger from within--HOW? You ask me. By people coming here who despise our form of government, who hate our institutions, and who spread the poison of their dangerous propaganda.
Senators, I repeat it is high time that we were taking stock; it is high time that we were passing a real immigration law that will keep such people out.
Not long ago I heard a Senator make a plea in behalf of liberal, easy immigration laws and he told us how in the old days we threw our doors open and how great and good people came to our shores. That is true; all of our ancestors came from across the se a; but the difference between the immigrants of that time and this, Mr. President, is that then the individual wanted to come here because he liked our form of Government; because he wanted to become a member of it; because he desired to enjoy its blessin gs and benefits; because he intended to support its institutions; to fight for it, if need be, and to die for it, if necessary. That is the difference between the old type that came then and some of the miserable horde that is coming now.
Mr. [Le Baron Bradford] COLT [R.-R.I.]. Mr. President--
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Alabama yield to the Senator from Rhode Island?
Mr. HEFLIN I am glad to yield to the Senator.
Mr. COLT. Does the - Senator recall that 411,000 aliens waived exemption under the draft and enlisted in the late war under the banner of our country?
Mr. HEFLIN If there were 400,000 of them who did waive exemption and were willing to fight, I dare say there were 5,000,000 of them who were shirking their responsibilities, dodging the draft law, and refusing to fight for the flag. We convicted a number of them who were openly and notoriously advising people to resist the draft law, who were telling them to paralyze the military arm of the Government in every way they could, and they were doing all in their power to defeat the purpose and the program of the Government.
Mr. COLT. Mr. President--
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Alabama yield further to the Senator from Rhode Island?
Mr. HEFLIN I yield to the Senator.
Mr. COLT May I say further to the Senator that, of those who strove to avoid the draft, the percentage among the aliens was comparatively low? Indeed, I have seen it stated that it was less than among the native born. I merely make these statements in ju stice to the aliens. It does not seem to me that exaggerated statements should be made which the facts do not seem to warrant.
Mr. HEFLIN Mr. President, I have to challenge that statement of the Senator. I do not agree with his statement that a larger percentage of native stock were disloyal and were guilty of slackerism than there were among the aliens in this country. I do not know where the distinguished Senator got his information, but evidently it came from some source not entirely friendly to the Government. I think it is a reflection upon the great body of American boys born here, native to the soil, to say that there wer e more of them who were guilty of trying to dodge their' responsibility in time of war, refusing to follow their flag, than there were of aliens in America....
Mr. President, in the old days, when the immigrant came, he came of his own accord, he worked and laid aside a little money in order to enjoy the great privilege of coming to the United States, of becoming citizens of this, the greatest Government on the globe, the freest and best Government in all the world. They were glad to come. They worked and stinted in order to get money to come. HOW is it now? Why, they have immigration agents now hired to go through foreign countries getting up people to come an d fill up the ships that sail for America. These agents are paid money to do what? To get shiploads of people to go over to the United States. What kind of people? Any kind, just so they occupy space on a ship and pay money into the purses of the steamship companies of the United States and those of foreign countries, too.
Mr. President, are we to permit citizenship in this country to become in this fashion a mere matter of barter for the benefit of immigration agents and steamship companies? The cattlemen used to send their agents out into the country to buy and drive to the railroad station a carload of yearlings. They would then lo ad them on the train and ship them to market. That is what the financiers of the immigration business are doing now with people whom they bring here and turn loose upon the people of the United States. They have agents going through Europe who display pic tures of our savings banks, with the boys and girls from our factories rushing over with hands filled with greenbacks to deposit in the bank. They say to the foreigners: "America is the place. Get your tickets. The ship will sail soon. Don't fail to get your tickets." They fill these ships with people who make the business of the immigration agent profitable and pour money into the pockets of the steamship companies.
The steamship companies haul them over to America, and as soon as they step off the decks of their ships the problem of the steamship companies is settled, but our problem has but begun--bolshevism, red anarchy, black- handers, and kidnapers, challenging the authority and the integrity of our flag, and still we find people who want us to have loopholes in the law so that such may continue to come in.
I do not intend to vote for any such proposition. I would like to shut for a time the immigration door. Thousands come here who never take the oath to support our Constitution and to become citizens of the United States. They pay allegiance to some other country while they live upon the substance of our own. They fill places that belong to the loyal wage-earning citizens of America. They preach a doctrine that is dangerous and deadly to our institutions. They are no of service whatever to our people. The y constitute a menace and danger to us every day, and I can not understand the seeming indifference that some national lawmakers exhibit upon this serious subject. This very question of immigration is the most vital question that affects us to-day.
Senators, if we permit this thing to go on the day is coming when you can draw a line through the United States and ask the native stock to get on one side and the foreign born on the other and they will outnumber us. They will be in the majority.
Mr. [John Sharp] WILLIAMS [D.-Miss.]. Mr. President--
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Alabama yield to the Senator from Mississippi?
Mr. HEFLIN.. I do.
Mr. WILLIAMS. The Senator speaks about the day coming when they will outnumber us. The day has already come, has it not, when they hold the balance of power and can decide a national election?
Mr. HEFLIN That is true, absolutely true. They can get us divided on any great issue and get their forces in compact, concrete form and hold the balance of power and decide issues that affect the conduct and the life of the United States Government.
Mr. COLT. Mr. President--
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Alabama yield to the Senator from Rhode Island?
Mr. HEFLIN. I yield.
Mr. COLT. May I ask the Senator if he has seen the recent statistics of the Census Bureau which show that for the 10 years from 1910 to 1920 the increase in the alien-born population of the United States was only 358,422?
Mr. WILLIAMS. But they were not the voters.
Mr. HEFLIN. NO.
Mr. COLT. With a population, I might say, of 105,000,000 to 110,000,000, does the Senator think that an increase in alien population in 10 years of a little over 358,000 presents any great danger to American institutions?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, if the Senator will permit me--
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Alabama yield to the Senator from Mississippi?
Mr. HEFLIN.. I do.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I hope the Senator will call attention to the fact that while that increase of 350,000 took place in one 10-year period, while we were isolated from Europe for the most part, there were 13,000,000 of foreign-born voters in the United States at the last election.
Mr. HEFLIN. Think of that, Mr. President; if 13,000,000 of foreign-born voters participated in the last election that is as many, if not more, votes than Presidents Wilson and Taft and Roosevelt all polled in the presidential election of 1912.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I beg the Senator's pardon. I meant 13,000,000 of foreign-born population, with their due proportion of voters. Their due proportion is about SO per cent in the case of foreigners.
Mr. HEFLIN. Yes; about that.
Now, Mr. President, a great many of these foreigners went out of our country during the World War to fight against us. They were occupying places in this country, making money in our industrial establishments that some real, loyal Americans should have h ad, and when the war came on and our liberties were imperiled they went back to fight against the flag that had sheltered them and blessed and profited them while they were here. Every year foreigners in America send out of this country millions and milli ons of money. They send it back to the Governments over there; and these men that I am talking to you about are not citizens of the United States. They have never taken the oath to support that flag. There are thousands and hundreds of thousands of men in this country enjoying all the blessings and benefits that those who support our institutions enjoy, and yet when war comes they get out of the country and take up arms against the flag and the Government.
Mr. President, I want to suggest to the Senator from Rhode Island and to others on the other side that I hear a great deal said about protecting American labor against the cheap labor of Europe; that the standard of living is so much higher here,
American labor can not compete with cheap labor of Europe. I could never understand why you would build a tariff wall between the products of the cheap labor of Europe and the United States and then throw the doors to America open to thousands of cheap E uropean laborers to come here and compete with American labor. Yes, come here and compete with the loyal American citizen who has a wife and children to support. If you want to protect these men, protect them by keeping out those who work for starvation w ages and spread their dangerous doctrines around the industrial establishments of our country, and take the places of our men, and get money that ought to be going into the pockets of the loyal wage earners of America.
You are permitting people to come over here who never become citizens of this country. They go into our industrial establishments and take the places that should be filled by American workingmen. They get the places and American workingmen are walking th e streets idle and hungry. Senators, the time has come to stop this thing. We are seeking to keep these people out.
Some Members of the Congress, it seems, are opposed to this character of restriction. Some have constituents back home who say to them, "If you do not vote to permit these people to continue to come, we will beat you at the next election." I wa nt to remind the American people, as I did on a former occasion in this Chamber, that it is high time that we were voting in Congress for the good of the Government of the United States.
Mr. President, in the Saturday Evening Post not long ago there was an article written by Kenneth L. Roberts in which he said that an American consul general in a European city said to him:
Every foreign Government understands that never in the history of the world was there such a movement of peoples as there is to America to-day. All the Governments understand that we have every right to go into the case of every immigrant with extreme thoroughness, because it is becoming a matter of life and death for our people.
Why? Because our very existence is threatened. American institutions are threatened by this influx of the refuse and criminal hordes of foreign countries.
Some time ago the chairman of the Committee on Immigration in the House, Congressman Burnett, of my State, said that while in Italy he made inquiry about a dangerous band of outlaws and cutthroats that he had heard of in Italy. The man to whom he was spe aking said: "They have all gone to America." The hearings in the House at that time disclosed that the King of Denmark pardoned 700 criminals with the distinct understanding~ that they would go to America. In other instances we are told that for eign countries make up purses to send out of their countries undesirables, and they send them to America. God help us to protect the great household of America from the dangers that threaten it.
What care we for wrongs and crimes, It's dimes and dollars, dollars
and dimes.
But they tell us that the immigration agents and steamship companies make money out of it. Away with the interests of America! "What care we for wrongs and crimes; it is dimes and dollars, dollars and dimes." The steamship companies make money out of it. Certain organizations, political and religious, profit by it. On with the dizzy and dangerous dance they tell us.
I protest against it, Mr. President. I wish I had it in my power to shut these doors tight for at least 12 months' time. We know how upset and distracted the world is. We know how much unrest and distress there is in the Old World, rent and torn by war. People want to get away from conditions over there. They want to leave behind them the big war debts. And what is the suggestion made to them? Go to America. Who is there to encourage them? The hired immigration agents. Who is there to greet and receive them? The steamship companies, ready and anxious to bring them over and dump them down upon the shores of America.
In the name of the boys who fought and died in France, I protest against such a course. I plead for the preservation of the institutions of my country. I plead for the great army of wage earners of America, to protect and defend them against this horde o f unfit foreigners who want to come here to take their places in our industrial establishments. I plead for the honor and glory of my `flag and for the preservation and perpetuity of American institutions.
December 10, 1920
HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. [John E.] RAKER [D.-Cal.]. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the House, I consider this bill as one of the necessary reconstruction bills following the World War. It is not a question of just what should be the amount or kind or character of immigration to this country. We need and always have required a reasonable amount of immigration. But it is apparent from the investigation of the committee that beyond all question there are now in the United States something like 15,000,000 people who are not American citizens. There are coming to the shores of America now all the way from 65,000 to 150,000 people a month. In other words, immigration at the present rate will amount to over a million and half a year. Our country is not determined as to just what it wants to do, and the people of the world are in the same condition, even more so than in this country. Hundreds and thousands of them are trying to get out from under the burden that has been placed on them by virtue of the war. They are not seeking necessarily the benefits of this country because they want to become citizens and be a part and parcel of America and to carry out the principles upon which this Government is founded. The great majority of those who have come already since the armistice and of those who are see king admission now are dependents. They are not farmers or laborers, but are coming to live upon their relatives and friends and on the bounty of this country. The evidence shows that beyond all question. With the large number of contagious diseases that are prevalent in the Old World, many hundreds of persons afflicted with those diseases are bound to land on our shores, notwithstanding the inspection here, because the inspection as to physical and mental condition is exceptionally poor, on account of the fact that there are not enough inspectors or agents. Many of the immigrants who arrive here just practically walk off of the vessel on the landing planks and scatter promiscuously among the people of this country. So under the conditions which exist to-day it is better to let immigration be suspended, and to let us assimilate those who are here now, than to continue this overflow of the many, many undesirables who are coming at the present time. That is the purpose of the committee in reporting this bill. It excludes all. There is no discrimination against any country or race. All are excluded with the exception of Government officials and certain relatives of those who are now living in this country. We allow a man 24 years old to go abroad and be married if he desires and to bring his wife to this country. Notwithstanding these exceptions, the Secretary of Labor has the power to make investigations, and it is his duty, if there is any possible reason, notwithstanding the relationship of these people, why they should not be admitted to this country, to see that they are excluded, and that is one of the purposes of the bill.
Now, no one can object to a clearing up of this business. No one can object to putting our own house in order. No one, no matter how anxious he is for immigration, can object to our taking time to assimilate those who are here, to see that they are citizens; that they take unto themselves the principles of this country and study its institutions, in order that we may further extend our work of Americanization, so that those who have come to this country within the last 10 years may become citizens; that they may love, honor, respect, and assist in maintaining our Government; and that they may imbue their children with the same ideas. Instead of that we find communities in this country that are as foreign as to language and thought as any city in any foreign land to- day. That must be avoided, and now is the time to stop.
Mr. [Frederick W.] ROWE [R.-N.Y.]. Mr. Chairman, I am not so much afriad of the immigrant as some Members of this House appear to be. I have lived in the city of New York a great many years and have met and had business relations with a great many who came over as immigrants. Up to 1914 we received into this country a net of about a million a year. This year we will probably receive into this country 700,000 or 800,000. Of every two who come to this country one is going back. There is no great reason why we should take this up at this time. The people who come here are not of a poorer class than those who have come here during the last 20 years. I know considerable about the conditions. I was present at Ellis Island, went down on the ship that sent the 249 undesirables back to Europe, where they should have been sent long ago. I have been twice during the month of November to Ellis Island to see what the conditions were at that place. The last time I was over to Ellis Island I took with me a prominent citizen of the State of Iowa, because in the papers of Iowa he had read very often that undesirables were coming to this country, and wanted to see for himself the conditions at the island. That was about three weeks ago. The island was full of people and we had a splendid opportunity to examine the situation. We spent more than three hours there. When he came back on the boat and met several people at dinner that night I remember that the very first remark he made was to the effect that the immigrants whom he saw coming in at Ellis Island were of a much better class than one would believe from reading the newspapers of his own State or the papers of Chicago.
The fact is that in this country we need laboring men and women of certain-classes. We are paying now in the city of New York for ordinary shovelers to dig trenches in which to lay a sewer or a water pipe from $4.50 to $6 a day. We are paying from $6 to $9 a-day for hod carriers. It is not because we have not plenty of men in this country. The fact is that our people of the second generation in this country will not carry a hod or dig a trench. We need the men on the farms. We have a great need in this country of competent women to do housework, and there are in Europe men who are willing to do this hard work in America and women who are capable and willing to do the housework. I believe in restrictions. I would have a very careful examination. I would not have it made under labor- union organizations. They represent only about one-ninth of the laboring men in this country. They should not have the power of saying who shall come and how the laws of this country shall be administered in respect to who is to be permitted to come into the Nation. I want to have restrictions. I think that for a limited time we might stop immigration in this country long enough so that Ellis Island may be made a proper place in which to receive all of the immigrants who desire to come into the country.
Mr. [James V.] MCCLINTIC [D.-Okla.]. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I feel that the Immigration Committee is entitled to the thanks of this body for bringing in a bill of this kind during the early part of this session. There is an old sayi ng, "A stitch in times save nine," and this saying, in my opinion, is apropos of the condition that exists in the United States at the present moment with relation to the need of a law which will protect the citizens of this country from the foreign immigrants who are fleeing to our shores to escape the heavy taxation in the war-devastated regions of Europe.
Some time ago it was my privilege to visit Ellis Island, not as a member of the committee but as a private citizen interested in obtaining information relative to the situation which exists at that place. I stood at the end of a hall with three physician s, and I saw them examine each immigrant as they came down the line, rolling back the upper eyelid in order to gain some information as to the individual's physical condition. I saw them place the chalk marks on their clothing which indicated that they were in a diseased condition, so that they could be separated when they reached the place where they were to undergo certain examinations. Afterwards I went to a large assembly hall where immigrants came before the examiners to take the literacy test, and the one fact that impressed me more than anything else was that practically every single immigrant examined that day had less than $50 to his credit....
Practically all of them were weak, small of stature, poorly clad, emaciated, and in a condition which showed that the environment surrounding them in their European homes were indeed very bad.
It is for this reason that I say the class of immigrants coming to the shores of the United States at this time are not the kind of people we want as citizens in this country. It is a well-known fact that the majority of immigrants coming to this country at the present time are going into the large industrial centers instead of the agricultural centers of the United States, and when it is taken into consideration that the large centers are already crowded to the extent that there is hardly sufficient living quarters to take care of the people it can be readily seen that this class of people, instead of becoming of service to the communities where they go, they will become charges to be taken care of by charitable institutions. The week I visited Ellis Island I was told that 25,000 immigrants had been unloaded at that port. From their personal appearance they seemed to be the off casts of the countries from which they came....
Mr. [William E.] MASON [R.-III.]. Mr. Chairman, I am not in condition to do this subject justice, but I can not be silent--I think from a sense of duty_while this bill is so hurriedly passed through the House of Representatives. I want to say for my fellow immigrants [laughter] in the House_you are all immigrants; what have you got big heads about, every one of you. If this bill had been passed 50 or 100 years ago hardly any of the House would have been here. It would have kept the Pilgrim Fathers out. They had no passports. The meanest thing about this bill--and I say that with all respect to my good friends who framed it_is that the whole theory that this was to be the land of the free and the home of the brave and an asylum for the oppressed is destroyed by it. You must have a passport if you want to escape the rule of Lenin and Trotski.
You can not escape unless you get a passport from them, and this Government does not recognize the Soviet Government. It would have kept Kossuth out when he came to speak here for the liberty of Hungary. It would have kept Thomas Estrada Palma out, who came to speak for the liberty of Cuba. He could not get a passport from Spain, and to-day this little island of Cuba is blossoming, a beautiful, strong, young Republic. You propose to-day by this bill to say that no man, however good or strong of arm, that no man, however much in love with the principles of our Government, can come from India or Ireland or South Africa without a vise of the king; By article 10 we guaranteed the territory of all nations. The people knocked that out. You now propose to enact into law that provision by guaranteeing that the kings of the earth shall not be deprived of their right to govern the brain, blood, and bone of tall their subjects. An honest, brave man fleeing from the power of the king you propose to deport and send him back to prison or the gallows if he lands on our soil without the consent of his master, the king.
To my colleagues on the Republican side, let me say to you, gentlemen, you are making a mistake personally and politically. But, bigger than that, you are making a mistake for your country. All of the treaties that we have will be amended or abrogated by this law, except possibly where there is a special treaty like that with Japan. We want peace and good fellowship. By this bill you turn the people of the world against us. You put into the mind of every man, woman, and child all over the world that this great country has suddenly drawn the cloak of seclusion about herself. You say by this bill, "Young man, have you got money?" "Yes." "Royal blood?" "Yes." "Do you want to go to school?" "Yes." "Come in." But if the Norwegian stands here with a strong hand and warm heart, in love with the doctrines of your country, you say to him, "Stay out unless you can go to school."
The trouble about this, my brother immigrants, is that the fault has been in the execution of the law we have. No man can come here who does not subscribe to our doctrines. The description given by my friend the gentleman from California as to granting of citizens' papers in our courts was not fair. I have seen them go through the United States courts. They are all examined. I saw them stand there. They did go fast before Judge Landis the other day, I noticed, but every one of them had been examined; their papers had been examined; the living witnesses were there as to their character and reputation.
The trouble in the immigration subject is where it has been all the while for eight years--inefficiency and incompetency in the execution of the laws: We do not need this law to shut out these people who want to come here. We do need--and the people have spoken--to give a new administration to this Government. And I hope and pray that the law we have will be enforced and that there be no more talk about the danger of the immigrants coming into this country and the danger and hysteria about the bolshevik. This country can take care of itself. All the Bolsheviki in the world can not hurt us. They may disturb us for a while, but the Bolsheviki can not come in here under the present law. The people have given you a new administration; we will have a new Attorney General; we will have a new administration of the department. Let us see what they can do. Let us see whether they can not protect the American people from the things you are talking about. But to me the most unsentimental, the most selfish, un- American, un patriotic thing is the ungodly desire to crowd every man off the earth because we do not want to compete with him. We get a prejudice; and you know that largely the basis of this is the prejudice against the Jews. Tell the truth about it. We are not afraid to speak the truth, are we? There is a prejudice against the Poles; there is a prejudice against the Germans; there is a prejudice against the Irish.
It is a prejudice also against any nation in the world that is seeking to adopt the doctrine of self-government, that has the cruel hand of Great Britain -at her throat. South Africa wants to be heard. By unanimous vote of her Congress she declared for s elf-determination. Within the memory of us here now, we saw Great Britain kill that young republic. They want a chance to come here. Her people want that chance. But they have got to get a vise from the king, George.
There is war in Ireland. Ninety per cent of the people have spoken for self-determination. They have established a de facto government. We are not neutral. We refuse to recognize one but do recognize the other. Some of them want to come here. I remember my great leader, sir, in politics, was John A. Logan. I remember that he saved the day at that critical hour in the war, and I remember that he was the son of an Irish immigrant. They want to come here. Here is this poor, brave woman, Mrs. McSwiney;; she could not be here 24 hours if we passed this bill, without a vise from the king. He is not her king. The people of that country have spoken. A larger percentage of Ireland are back of De Velera to-day for president of Ireland than there was back of George Washington when he established our Republic. A larger percentage are for that freedom to- day in Ireland than was back of Abraham Lincoln when he maintained the Union--a larger percentage of the people....
Just one illustration of this selfishness of us immigrants, the Masons through Scotland and the Campbells from the same country. A lot of you came along from Ireland and some from Germany. You are here now and have gotten on your feet, and do not want anybody else to have a chance.
I read a legend once of an old stingy grouch who was in hell, and who appealed to an angel to help him. The angel said, "Name one good thing you ever did and I will try to help you." He said "I gave a carrot once to' a poor boy." Imme diately a carrot appeared before this grouch in hell. They got hold of him and began lifting him out of the pit, and just as they were going to deposit him out of hell-fire and damnation, he saw some other fellows clinging with him to the carrot. He said, "Get out of here. This is my carrot." And the angel very properly dropped them all back to hell, where they belonged. [Laughter.]
Gentlemen, this is not our carrot alone; it is not your world, your country alone; it is not my country. The people who have developed this country have come from all over the world. England is not the mother, but all of Europe. We have made this country . You have good laws; let us enforce them. Let us have a President in evidence on the 4th of March who will appoint men to see that those who come in here are sound of limb and of mind and can become good American citizens. It is a part of the world. It i s not your country or mine alone; it is God's country. [Applause.]
Mr. [Lucian Walton] PARRISH [D.-Tex.].... Not only are a large majority of the immigrants nonsupporting, but from past experience we know that a large per cent of them, at least, are not in sympathy with America and American institutions, and a good majo rity make up the criminal class that is causing so much concern throughout the entire United States. Mr. William Shadduck, foreman of Kings County grand jury, New York, recently reported the conditions actually existing in his county, and in this connecti on made use of these significant paragraphs:
A study of the record of our proceedings shows that all of
the homicides and most of the graver, more desperate, and heinous
crimes were committed by foreigners, who palpably have no understanding
of the genesis or genius of American institutions. They not only
have not been assimilated, but seemingly are unlikely under present
conditions ever to be assimilable.
The facts as to many of these crimes show the presence in this city of foreign colonies whose existence is a perpetual menace to the lives and property of our law-abiding and law-loving citizens. From the testimony of witnesses, some of whom were partici pants in these heinous crimes, it has been clearly revealed that interracial hatred, with their attendant feuds and vendettas, have been transplanted to this country. These feuds have been aggravated and perpetuated by the increase and extension of these foreign colonies.
If the grand juries of the other sections of the United States where foreign elements predominate were to make reports, I have not the slightest doubt but that we would find great unanimity in their reports corroborating the report of the grand jury of New York. As a matter of fact every President who has fallen at the hand of the assassin has gone down by the murderous blow of a man of foreign extraction....
The time once was in the history of this country when America was looked upon as the home of the downtrodden people of all the nations of the earth, but we have arrived at a new and different era in our history; new conditions have arisen among the peopl e of the world. Beyond the seas there are being taught new and strange doctrines. Socialism, bolshevism, and anarchy are playing unusual parts in the history and welfare of those nations, and are threatening the very foundation of their governments. Bolsh evism and anarchy may draw their slimy trail across the map of Europe and write their destructive doctrines into the history of the nations over there, but never with my vote or influence will they make their unholy imprint upon America or American instit utions....
Mr. [Adolph J.] SABATH [D.-Ill.]. The gentlemen from Minnesota, Kentucky, and Texas charge that the present immigration is undesirable and that the sections of this country to which this immigration goes are suffering from unemployment and lack of housin g facilities.
Mr. Chairman, the charges that are being made against the present-day
immigration are by gentlemen who come from sections who receive
no immigration and who are not in position to know as much about
that question as those who come from and live in the c ities and
in the States that absorb most of the present-day immigration.
Is it not singular that up to this moment not a single gentleman
coming from our great cities or our great States who, I am sure,
are better acquainted with the immigration question than those
from the rural districts, has said a word in behalf of this legislation;
but, on the contrary, like myself, feel it is hasty, uncalled
for, unnecessary, and unjustified.