Imagini ale paginilor

female Chinese population of 7,748, the 1920 census shows 3,047 married and 4,302 single, 371 widowed, 15 divorced, and 13 whose marital condition is not reported. Of the 4,302 Chinese females classed as single, 3,340 were under 15 years of age at the time of the census and 962 were 15 years or over.

Adding to the 4,302 single females, the widowed (371), the divorced (15), and those whose marital condition is not reported (13), we have a total of 4,701 Chinese females without husbands. Of this number a large proportion are children not of marriageable age and some are women practically beyond marriageable age, so that the number of Chinese women available for marriage in this country is very small and out of all proportion to the single Chinese male population, which according to the 1920 census is 27,167. The number of widowed Chinese males is given as 1,355, of divorced 66, and those unreported as to marital condition as 519. The great disparity between the male and female Chinese population is due to the fact that in the early days of Chinese immigration very few Chinese females came here.

When the above figures are considered, it is apparent why the Chinese American citizen must, in most cases, seek his wife in China. As time goes on, the situation will naturally gradually change, and the ratio between the sexes gradually equalize itself, due to the birth here of Chinese children, but until it has so equalized itself, most of our male Chinese American citizens must either seek a wife in China or remain unmarried. This statement is made having in mind the accepted principle that it is inadvisable for a Chinese to marry outside of his own

The proposed amendment would, of course, also apply to American citizens of the Japanese race, but practically its field of operation among the Japanese would be very small, almost negligible, for most of the Japanese unmarried males in the United States are alien Japanese, whose wives when such Japanese marry would not be admissible under the proposed amendment. The total Japanese population of the country is given in the 1920 census as 111,010, made up of 72,707 males and 38,303 females. Of the total Japanese population, 29,672 are classed as native born, 15,494 being males and 14,178 being females, and only 658 nativeborn Japanese were 21 years or over at the time of the census. It will be seen, therefore, that the native-born Japanese in the country—and the proposed amendment could apply to no others—are largely children, and the sexes being almost equally divided this class will practically take care of itself in the matter of marriage.



Letters sent to representative Americans, prominent in the educational and the religious life of the nation, detailing the situation of hardship in which the American citizen of the Chinese race found himself as a result of the immigration act of 1924, as set forth in the foregoing “Plea for relief,” and asking for their views thereon, have brought forth many responses. The following extracts from some of the letters received are submitted to show the general sentiment throughout the country upon the proposed change in the law, which would restore to the alien Chinese wives of American citizens the right of admission which they enjoyed prior to the passage of the 1924 immigration act.

Your proposition seems reasonable and fair to me.—(Ray Lyman Wilbur, president Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.)

As a native son of California and one who favors the principle back of the Oriental exclusion legislation of Congress, I have read with much interest your letter of December 7 and what you say of the injustice of preventing alien wives of Chinese citizens of America from joining their husbands. I think your case is just beyond argument.—(Sidney Edward Mezes, president the College of the City of New York, St. Nicholas Terrace and One hundred and thirty-ninth Street, New York City.)

I have no question as to the righteousness of the proposal made in your letter of December 7. Cases have come to my own notice where the existing legislation brings not only hardship but downright cruelty to families.—(Nicholas Murray Butler, president Columbia University, New York.)

From my study of the situation, and from such information as I am able to obtain, I have come to the conclusion that our Government is in the unen viable position of clearly discriminating against one class of American citizens, viz, denying to native-born American citizens rights and privileges which we extend to aliens of the same races and peoples.

You have a very good case, and it ought to receive sympathetic consideration from Congress. I do not see how the discrimination can be justified. Aliens who happen to be ministers of a religious denomination and college professors are admitted to follow their profession, and their wives and children enjoy the same privileges as do the wives and children of aliens who come here to carry on trade under treaties with China and Japan. Our position is not justifiable and is indefensible with respect to you native-born American citizens.—(Charles A. Plumley, president Norwich University, Northfield, Vt.)

I am in hearty accord with your aspirations and feel sure that the American people when they have occasion to consider the matter will be of the same mind. It is certainly a hardship which I believe that Congress did not take into consideration in the passage of the law cited.—(J. L. Brasher, president John Fletcher College, University Park, Iowa.)

I favor the principle of American citizens of Chinese race being permitted to have for their wives women of their own race. It would therefore seem to me to be wise for the immigration act of 1924 to be so amended as to make it possible for this principle to be recognized by the United States Government.—(A. W. Leonard, resident bishop, Methodist Episcopal Church, Buffalo, N. Y.)

I sympathize with you and the other American citizens of the Chinese race in the situation which you find yourselves. Sincerely, I hope this matter will be brought to the attention of Congress and that some measure will be passed by which your wives may gain the right of admission to this country.- Walter D. Scott, president Northwestern University, Evanston, Chicago, Ill.)

I am much interested in your protest against the obvious injustice of the immigration act which prevents the wives of certain American citizens from joining them here in America. I send you best wishes that your protest may be effective.—(W. H. P. Faunce, president Brown University, Providence, R. I.)

It gives me pleasure to tell you that I am in hearty sympathy with the plan to secure an amendment to the immigration act of 1924 so as to permit your members of American birth to have their wives who are alien Chinese admitted to the United States. There is no reason whatever for such refusal.—(Tully C. Knoles, president College of the Pacific, Stockton, Calif.)

I am in sympathy with the point of view of the Chinese with regard to the amendment to the immigration act that has to do with the wives of Chinese in this country.-(Mary E. Woolley, president Mount Holyoke College, South · Hadley, Mass.)

We, the undersigned, bishops of the Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Los Angeles, feel that the refusal to admit alien wives of American citizens of the Chinese race works a serious hardship and is inconsistent with the spirit of American institutions. We shall be very glad to add our voice to any appeal to have the barrier erected by the immigration act of 1924, abolished. We shall be glad to be quoted as being opposed to the restriction and as advocating its removal.-(Joseph H. Johnson, bishop of Los Angeles; W. Bertrand Stevens, bishop coadjutor of Los Angeles.)

Resolution adopted by the Home Missions Council and Council of Women for Home Missions (representing home missionary boards of 22 denominations) at its annual meeting in St. Louis, January 21 to 25, 1926:

An unusual hardship has fallen on American-born young men of Chinese descent through the interpretation of the immigration act of 1924, which denies them the right to bring into the United States a wife married in China. It is against public policy to hinder this group of American cit ens from establishing families, or to limit them in the choice of a wife to the very small number of American-born Chinese women. We would, therefore request the Commissioner of Immigration to propose to Congress such legislation as would relieve this situation.

I entirely agree that there is a manifest injustice to American citizens which must be speedily corrected.—(George W. Hinman, D. D., secretary American Missionary Association, 421 Phelan Building, San Francisco, Calif.)

It was a profound conviction with me when the immigration act of 1924 was passed, that certain provisions were far from the real spirit of the American people. The one you mention, resulting in the forced breaking up of homes of worthy citizens, certainly should be remedied.—(Rev. James Asa White, minister Thousand Oaks Baptist Church, 1751 San Lorenzo Avenue, Berkeley, Calif.)

It is an outrage that wives should be kept away from their husbands in this manner. It certainly must have been an oversight on the part of our Congress, which they will be glad to remedy when their attention is called to it.—(M. P. Boynton, D. D., pastor Woodlawn Baptist Church, University Avenue and Sixty-second Street, Chicago, Ill.)

I can not think that our Federal Government would deliberately do such a grave injustice to a group of its citizens as to separate them permanently from their wives. I believe thoroughly in the justice of your case. (Alfred Lawless, D. D., Superintendent American Missionary Association, Southern Church Work, 195 Auburn Avenue, Atlanta, Ga.)

You have my sympathy and I will do everything I can to help you.—(M. A. Matthews, pastor First Presbyterian Church, Seattle, Wash.)

I feel confident that this adjustment will be made, and that the legislation inadvertently did a great_wrong to your worthy people.—(Charles Edward Locke, bishop Methodist Episcopal Church, 1000 Portland Avenue, St. Paul, Minn.)

I am in entire sympathy_with the plea which you make and feel that it is founded on justice.—(F. T. Keeney, resident bishop Methodist Episcopal Church, Suite 330 Aquila Court, Omaha, Nebr.)

I wish to say that I am thoroughly in accord with your position in the matter. It is wrong for us to have laws on our statute books that separate husband and wife.—(Alcuin Deutsch, president St. John's University, Collegeville, Minn.)

It appears to me that your object is a reasonable one.—(William John Clark, president Virginia Union University, Richmond, Va.)

I have just read your communication regarding your desire to bring your wives to America and unite your families in keeping with the custom of all well regulated families and countries. May I state that I am in full accord with your idea and plan.—(U. S. Smith, president Iowa Wesleyan College, Mount Pleasant, Iowa.)

The fair treatment of all people is indispensable to the life of a great nation.Stephen B. L. Penrose, president Whitman College, Walla Walla, Wash.)

It is very obvious that your cause is just.-(Walter D. Agnew, president Woman's College of Alabama, Montgomery, Ala.)

I wish to assure you that I am in sympathy with the concession that is being asked of our Congress by your organization.—(John Paul, president Taylor University, Upland, Ind.)

I believe with you that provision ought to be made by Congress for the admission to the United States of bona-fide wives of Chinese citizens. The home life should not be broken by the enactment of some law that would keep apart those who have been lawfully bound together in the holy bonds of marriage.—(I. N. McCash, president Phillips University, Enid, Okla.)

I am in thorough sympathy with the amendment to the immigration act of 1924, by which the alien wives of American citizens of the Chinese race may be admitted to the United States.-(W. A. Harper, president Elon College, Elon, N. C.)

I quite sympathize with the predicament of men who are separated from their wives, and hope that the Congress of the United States will find it practicable to make it possible for any Chinese citizen of the United States to enjoy the companionship of his wife.—(John Hope, president Morehouse College, Atlanta, Ga.)

I am interested in your work and believe that it would only be right and proper that the alien wives of the American citizens of the Chinese race should be admitted to the United States.-(W. E. Nelson, president Pacific Union College, St. Helena, Calif.)

Undoubtedly the principle which you state of the right of a husband to the society of his wife is a correct principle and our Congress should make provision for the wives of Chinese.—(W. W. Boyd, president Western College for Women, Oxford, Ohio.)

I am in thorough sympathy with the changing of our constitutional provision relative to the admission of the wives of our native-born Chinese.—(Rev. Lucius 0. Baird, D. D., superintendent Washington Congregational Conference, southwest corner Sixth and University Streets, Seattle, Wash.)

It seems to me to be a gross injustice that you should be separated from your wives by this act of Congress. I certainly hope this may be speedily remedied by Congress.—(Rev. John Timothy Stone, minister Fourth Presbyterian Church, 126 East Chestnut Street, Chicago, Ill.)


I am sure you are pursuing the proper course in endeavoring to have the 1924 immigration act amended. It does not seem that such a restriction could have been included in the law intentionally.—(E. J. Steinberg, president Wisconsin Baptist State Convention, 173 Belair Place, Milwaukee, Wis.)



Your cause certainly will appeal to every fair thinking American. The home is the unit of Christian civilization. This is true of any race or group. The act of which you complain threatens the very foundation of the Nation.(Rev. C. S. Ledbetter, pastor Plymouth Congregational Church, 32 Bull Street, Charleston, S. C.)

I believe that your point is well taken that the Chinese wives of American Chinese citizens should be permitted to join them in this country. It seems to me that justice demands that our Congress and Supreme Court so modify their recent action and decide that this might be done.—(Bert Wilson, president Eureka College, Eureka, Ill.)

I am in hearty sympathy with such change in our immigration laws as will admit alien wives of American citizens of the Chinese race. The law should apply to American citizens of all races alike.—(Wallace B. Fleming, president Baker University, Baldwin, Kans.)

In connection with the appeal of Chinese citizens of the United States for modification of the immigration act of 1924, I beg to say that it appears to me that they have good ground for such modification as will permit them to bring their wives into the United States.—(W. A. Millis, president Hanover College, Hanover, Ind.)

I have considered the immigration act of 1924, both un-American and unjust, but I did not know that it was quite as bad as to exclude the alien wives of American citizens.—(Rev. H. C. Gleiss, D. D., Detroit Baptist Union, 809 Ford Building, Detroit, Mich.)

I confess that I am in hearty sympathy with you in the matter and I want to do all I can to help you unite your broken families.—(John L. Hillman, president Simpson College, Indianola, Iowa.)

I think your cause has unqualified merit and I can not understand what kind of a Congress it would be that would deny your appeal.—(George L. Omwake, president Ursinus College, Collegeville, Pa.)





(c) No alien ineligible to citizenship shall be admitted to the United States unless such alien (1) is admissible as a nonquota immigrant under the provisions of subdivisions (b), (d), or (e) of section 4, or (2) is the wife, or the unmarried child under 18 years of age, of an immigrant admissible under such subdivision (d), and is accompanying or following to join him, or (3) is not an immigrant as defined in section 3.

86686-28 -2

[ocr errors]
« ÎnapoiContinuați »