Mr. STURGES. I believe he would if the fee was not made burdensome. He would be as much interested in registering as we citizens are in registering to vote.

The CHAIRMAN. And if it were generally understood, through advertising and the work of these societies, that the registration would take place on the day of a general election he would soon come to know that the day other people were voting was his day to register?

Mr. STURGES. Yes. And I have no doubt that a great many persons who are interested in bringing out voters on election day would also encourage aliens to register on election day, so that their votes might eventually be recorded.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think, following a plan of that kind, that final citizenship should only be granted on a pretty fair understanding of the English language?

Mr. STURGES. I believe that a person acquiring American citizenship should be able to speak enough English to make himself understood and to understand others, and that he should be able to read the English language.

The CHAIRMAN. If that were a positive requirement, and not just enough to read and write his name and barely get by, an alien would know, from the day he started to seek naturalization, that that was the big thing he had to do, in addition to good conduct.

Mr. STURGES. There is no doubt about that.

The CHAIRMAN. And if the aliens understood that it would be a real incentive toward having them understand the English language.

Mr. STURGES. I have believed for a long time that there should be some specified test, some test specified by statute, so that when a man is seeking naturalization he knows what he must prepare for, the same as a person who wants to be a doctor knows what he must do in order to acquire the privilege of practicing medicine, what he must do to become a lawyer or to enter any other profession requiring training.

The CHAIRMAN. I presume you have come to that belief for the reason that no court and no examiner can search a man's soul and know what form of Americanism, internationalism, or other notion is in his heart.

Mr. STURGES. I believe it would make a better citizen for himself and for the country. He can enjoy the privileges of citizenship much better if he knows how to read and understand our language than if he lives in some community where he only hears the language of his own people and reads their papers if he reads at all. He does not enjoy the whole country, but only enjoys this little section where he lives unless he is able to speak and understand our language.

The CHAIRMAN. Granting all that to be correct, if it is desirable that an alien under the present law should have a reading and understanding knowledge of the English language is it not also desirable that the wife of that alien should have the same knowledge before securing citizenship?

Mr. STURGES. I think so. I am in sympathy with the provision that a wife should be naturalized in her own right, and therefore the same requirements should apply to her. However, I would except from this requirement persons who have reached a certain age and who have resided here for a certain length of time. There are persons residing in large cities in this country, and perhaps elsewhere, who have gotten by the time when they can learn much English. The CHAIRMAN. That is quite so; but inasmuch as both men and women, if naturalized, may vote in all elections, is there any harm in denying citizenship to those unable to read and write for the rest of their lives?

Mr. STURGES. It would not take anything away from them. We are only withholding a privilege they may acquire upon meeting certain conditions.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe the denial of the right of citizenship to those who can not read and write the English language would make any great hue and cry among the alien population?

Mr. STURGES. Not if it was thoroughly understood and thoroughly set forth in the press of the country-fairly set forth, I mean. But, as I say. I would except certain persons who have lived here many years. Of course we hear the statement made sometimes that persons who have reached the age of 75 or 80 and who have had no chance to secure an education can go to school and learn something. That may be true in particular cases, but it is not true generally. So I believe that certain persons who have reached a certain age, who have lived here for many years, have acquired property, and have a business should perhaps be excepted from any such provision.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you not think an exception of that kind would be apt to breed discontent among alien peoples more than a clean-cut refusal to admit any of them?

Mr. STURGES. I do not know that it would. I am speaking now more from the suggestion you made as to whether or not certain persons who are in sympathy with the foreign-born element might object. A cry would go up imme diately, I believe, if you included all of those we have among us who can not read and write English, because there are certain people who have been here for many years and who will stay here all of their days and will never learn to read and write English. I know many who have been in this country, perhaps 20 or 25 years, and through our own negligence, perhaps, are not able to speak English to-day.

Mr. SABATH. And they do not all live in the large cities, do they?

Mr. STURGES. No.

Mr. SABATH. Many of them live in the rural districts?

Mr. STURGES. That is true.

Mr. SABATH. They went out into Wisconsin and other sections and developed the country; they cultivated our lands and had no chance to get any schooling, and consequently did not acquire a knowledge of the English language, but still they have made good; is not that true?

Mr. STURGES. That is perfectly true.

The CHAIRMAN. But they have gone all these years without the voting privilege, have they not?

Mr. SABATH. Yes; in some States.

The CHAIRMAN. In my own town, a town of 10,000 people, a husband and wife recently celebrated their golden wedding anniversary. They have lived in the United States for 40 years, but can not speak a word of English although their children are prominent English-speaking citizens. This was out in a new country where everybody had to speak English or Siwash in order to get along.

Mr. SABATH. That is an exception, of course.

Mr. Box. Mr. Sturges, if you naturalize women by much the same procedure you follow in naturalizing men, to what extent will that create a necessity for increasing the force? I do not say that by way of opposition, but I just want to know.

Mr. STURGES. Well, that would be rather a guess on my part.

Mr. Box. Will it increase it?

Mr. STURGES. No doubt it would increase the number of persons seeking citizenship, and therefore it would increase the necessity for more help to handle the work; but to what extent it might increase it I am unable to say, because we do not know as much about how many women speak English as we do about men.

The CHAIRMAN. Have conditions improved in the naturalization offices in New York in the last year?

Mr. STURGES. In what sense?

The CHAIRMAN. Well, on the occasion of my last visit there was great congestion not only in the rooms and at the desks, but out in the halls.

Mr. STURGES. Well, I will say this: Our work is governed largely by the obtaining of certificates of arrival, which the present law requires. There are times when practically no work is being done at some ports of entry in taking care of these applications for certificates of arrival. That means that our work will in a very brief period drop down to the level maintained by the number of certificates of arrival furnished. At the present time there are probably 25,000 applications for certificates of arrival awaiting action at the port of entry, New York. That means that an additional force must be put on for a temporary period, at least, in order to bring those papers up to date. The CHAIRMAN. That is to say, those applications for certificates of arrival have come into New York City from other parts of the country?

Mr. STURGES. They are coming in from the entire country; yes.

Of course, a large percentage of them are from New York City, because about one-third of the naturalization in the whole country is done in the metropolitan district of New York. At one time the Immigration Service put on 20 people for furnishing certificates of arrival at a rapid pace in order to catch up; and that meant that with our force, which is stationary, we must try to do in a period of perhaps a month or six weeks what we would under normal conditions do in the matter of six months, because here is an accumulation of six months' applications for certificates of arrival. These certificates of arrival, then,

should either be eliminated altogether or some provision made whereby prompt action could be taken upon those cases and the applicants go through without this long delay. When you were up in New York about a year ago, I believe, or a little more, perhaps, there was quite a congestion in the courts in hearing cases because of the delay in disposing of alien-enemy petitions. Now we have practically brought those cases up to date, so that the court hearings now are not as congested as they were at that time, but the number of persons notified to appear on final hearing is substantially as before, because they have a less number of days; in other words, they work the number of days according to the number of applications that may be pending. The number of cases heard depends largely upon the attitude of the judge who may be presiding at that particular hearing; in other words, the calendar is arranged according to the dispatch with which the judge believes he should proceed. Some judges want to go into the matter quite fully; they want to examine the applicants and the witnesses quite extensively, and therefore they limit the number to perhaps 75 per day. Another judge who is going to sit in the same court says he will dispose of 250 or 300 or sometimes more, and he puts them through. Mr. Box. How long does it take him to put through 400?

Mr. STURGES. Well, of course, if there are 400 on the calendar, that does not mean that 400 appear; probably 275 out of 400 may appear with their witnesses. There may be 150 or so heard in the morning and as many more in the afternoon.

Mr. Box. In how many hours?

Mr. STURGES. This is not definite, because one judge goes faster than another. But one judge may take 150 between 10 o'clock and 12.

Mr. Box. Were you in court the morning Judge Wilson and I sat there? Mr. STURGES. I think I was there a few moments; yes. I am not at all in sympathy with the method of conducting final hearings in naturalization in large centers; I think it is a farce and is ridiculous.

The CHAIRMAN. As a matter of fact, is it your opinion that when a judge hears, say, 250 applications for citizenship, and in the court room are those 250 applicants and 500 witnesses, that while the whole procedure is conducive to disrespect on the part of the witnesses, the new citizens, and their alien friends? Mr. STURGES. It is entirely without dignity and, as I say, it is a farce pure and simple.

The CHAIRMAN. It is not only a farce but a shameful procedure.

Mr. STURGES. It is a shameful procedure. The man goes away disappointed and his witnesses are disappointed. I have known a great many cases where a man will go up thoroughly prepared to answer a great many questions concerning the fundamental principles of the Government of the United States; he has gone to school, perhaps, a year or two; gone to night school right along, and he is proud of what he has learned in order that he may become an American citizen. He comes up before a judge who does not conduct any examination and he is crowded together with a lot of others who pass before the judge's bench like a group of soldiers. He is asked his name and he says "Tony" something. He is asked whether he has been in this country five years and he says yes, and that is about all he is asked. Then Tony is disappointed, because he wanted to tell what he had learned in school. Now, that is the way it is done before some judges, whereas other judges believe the examination should be more extensive. The next day, in the same court, we may have a judge who says: "I am not satisfied that a man should be a citizen unless he can read the English language." The law does not require that, but it says he shall be satisfied. He says: Tony, can you read?" and he answers a little bit"; "Well, how much can you read? Here is the Bible; turn to Genesis and read a few verses to me."

66

Of course, he does not know anything about reading the Bible or anything else; he can not read and his case is denied, or, perhaps, continued, because he has appeared before a different sort of a judge, and that sort of a judge will put a man through a course of sprouts which he may not be expecting at all, while another judge does not require anything of him. That is the lack of uniformity we have in the large cities and which, in my judgment, should be overcome in some manner.

The CHAIRMAN. If these men who went up on different days and met with a different procedure are from the same neighborhood, or live in the same settlement, they are apt to say that one got through in such a way and another in another way.

Mr. STURGES. They do say that, and there are certain individuals, unscrupulous persons, who watch the calendar to find out what judge is going to preside on a certain day; if they have an applicant under their tutelage whom they believe can not pass the test of the particular judge who happens to be assigned for that day, he says: Tony, go up with only one witness and tell the judge the other witness is sick and you can not have a hearing to-day," and the case will be continued until the "easy" judge presides.

64

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any establishments in New York City that make it their business to sell questions and answers to candidates for citizenship?

Mr. STURGES. Well, I do not know that we have it in that particular form, but I see once in a while-well, every day you can see a man standing outside of the county's clerk's office or outside of the Hall of Records in the street, probably with a peddler's license, selling a book on how to become a citizen, and you can not stop him. I am not in sympathy with that at all, because to study that book does not make a man a better citizen. A man may learn the answers to the questions in that book from one end to the other, but he does not know what they mean at all, and if you jump around a little bit he will give you an answer to one question when you have asked him another. So it does not make any better citizen of him, but there is no way by which it can be stopped.

The CHAIRMAN. It does not facilitate the examination before the examiners. Mr. STURGES. Not at all, but it might before a judge if the judge conducts an examination.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, then, getting back to the certificates of arrival, H. R. No. 9 eliminated those, I believe?

Mr. STURGES. That provision is also in this bill, is it not?

The CHAIRMAN. It was not in H. R. No. 9, but the one we put on the calendar a year or so ago had the certificates of arrival eliminated. Hearings held by the committee after that led us to believe that we should have them or their equivalent.

Mr. STURGES. There was a time when I believed certificates of arrival should be abandoned or abolished, but I now believe that the certificate of arrival should be the starting point for the petition unless you have this registration.

The CHAIRMAN. If we plan a new system, either this bill or the immigration act should provide for the original registration on the day of arrival, should they not?

Mr. STURGES. Well, you have that any way at the port of entry.

The CHAIRMAN. If a certificate of arrival becomes a matter of dispute or is lost, another is made up by the court nunc pro tunc, I believe they call it. Mr. STURGES. Yes, sir; that is another farce.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, after you have gone to all the labor and expense of trying to find a certificate of arrival and do not find it, they have some system of making up one any way.

Mr. STURGES. They make one up, but there is not much system about it.

The CHAIRMAN. To get your view, you believe that if we develop any naturalization bill it should carry a provision for a certificate of arrival, and carry a requirement that without a certificate of arrival there should be no citizenship?

Mr. STURGES. I believe that when an alien arrives he should be given a certificate, and that it should contain notice to him, perhaps in his own language, that he should thereafter or will be required thereafter to register if he wants to become a citizen of the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. You are familiar with the statement that at the time certificates were handed out they were also given slips and that they threw them about the decks of the ships like snow?

Mr. STURGES. I have heard those statements; yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that is so?

Mr. STURGES. Well, I do not know; I never saw it. I believe they could be encouraged to keep those certificates if they know there is any value attached to them.

The CHAIRMAN. You are inclined to think that a man who arrives in the United States and afterwards applies for citizenship and is unable to remember what his name was when he arrived or on what ship he came, is hardly competent to be a citizen?

Mr. STURGES. Well, in most instances that would probably be true, but there are many who come in under various circumstances and they do not recall. I have had, in my experience, men represent to me that they came here on a

ticket purchased for some one else who, after it was purchased, decided, for some cause or other, not to come; that ticket was turned over to this individual and he came; he traveled under the name appearing on the steamship ticket, and after the lapse of seven or eight years he forgot the name of the fellow from whom he bought the ticket and he could not remember it under any circumstances.

The CHAIRMAN. What would you do in a case of that kind? I am asking you to help this committee. What would you do or what would you recommend? Mr. STURGES. I would recommend this, and I have suggested it already to some persons, that the certificate of arrival work should be done entirely under the supervision of the Bureau of Naturalization or bureau of citizenship, as it is called in this bill. It is really naturalization business, and if, in a case of that kind, or other similar cases, there was no record of the man's arrival, or none could be found, then have an examination made that would determine definitely whether he did come here at or about the time and in the manner he says he did. The practice now is to send him a blank form and notify him to go before a notary public, or some other officer authorized to administer oaths, and swear to the information contained in that form, which he may furnish himself, and send it back to the port of entry. From the information furnished they issue a certificate that he arrived on the day and in the manner he says he did.

The CHAIRMAN. The reason I am anxious to have that amplified a little bit is that we are informed quite a number of aliens are piling up in Mexico and Canada, as a result of this 3 per cent limitation, with a view of ultimately coming into the United States.

Mr. STURGES. That is just what changed my view relative to the retention of the certificate of arrival, because those people will be coming in here and there will be no way to establish when they came without a very careful investigation.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think there is anything to the complaint on the part of aliens that the delay in attempting to find certificates of arrival is because the United States does not want them to become citizens?

Mr. STURGES. Not at all; the delay is due to the lack of sufficient force at the port of entry, and that is especially true in New York.

The CHAIRMAN. In any event, that seems to be the impression in the alien's mind?

Mr. STURGES. I have never heard that statement, that he believes it was because the Government did not want him to be a citizen.

The CHAIRMAN. How is the alien soldier situation in New York? Is that straightening up?

Mr. STURGES. It is getting pretty well cleaned up; yes.

The CHAIRMAN. The first-paper fellows, and others who wore the uniform, are being made citizens pretty rapidly.

Mr. STURGES. Well, the soldier matter has been given as wide publicity as we could possibly give it and they are taking advantage of it. I presume that in the supreme court of New York County we are naturalizing in the neighborhood of 40 or 50 a week. The supreme court holds hearings for the naturalization of soldiers, as we term it, on Friday of each week and in Brooklyn substantially the same arrangement is made, and that takes care of those who apply.

I would like to make a few comments on the previous discussion in connection with the investigation of applicants for naturalization.

Mr. Box. May I ask you to consider in that connection the sufficiency of your force the number you handle and the sufficiency of the force to do that work? Mr. STURGES. I was going to interject some explanations there of how it is possible to examine the apparently large numbers of cases with a small force, but I do not admit that we have enough force to do it the way it should be done. In the New York district we have probably 45,000 applications a year; we have about 21 examiners or 22-it fluctuates a little bit—including myself. The preliminary examination develops the high spots. Take a case of this kind: A man may be a professor in Columbia University seeking naturalization; he has been there, perhaps, seven or eight years; he comes in with two witnesses; one of them might be Secretary of State Hughes and the other a man of just as high standing. Not much investigation is required in a case of that kind. And we have a great many cases of similar character.

In the New York district we also have a system of obtaining from the district attorneys throughout the State, or throughout the district, all reports of convictions of aliens of any offense. We keep a card index of those. We also