naturalization examiners, both excellent investigators, were sent to this county to conduct the preliminary investigations of these petitions, with instructions to obtain all facts regarding the filing of so large a number of petitions within such a short space of time, and to ascertain facts regarding the activities of these attorneys and politicians, and to report upon the credibility and competency of the verifying witnesses to the petitions for naturalization so filed. It developed at this investigation that three young attorneys for political and financial reasons had induced a majority of those aliens to file their petitions for naturalization, one of them having obtained from the office of the clerk of the court the names of persons who had filed their declarations of intention more than two years ago and who were eligible to file petitions for naturalization. To each of these declarants he addressed a communication advising that he would complete his naturalization and furnish the necessary witnesses for a fee of $10. A large number of these declarants appeared before him, paid the fee, and were advised by the attorney to meet him at the county seat, Sunbury, Pa., to file their petitions, at which time the witnesses so obtained by the attorney would be present. On 34 of these petitions for naturalization this attorney furnished his aged father for a witness, the old gentleman being one of the county commissioners. The investigat on developed that this old gentleman did not know any of the petitioners for whom he had vouched; that he could not name them nor indicate where they resided, and he completely failed to establish his competency in any manner. He admitted that he had acted as a witness upon these petitions at the instigation of his son, the attorney for these aliens. It was also developed that at least 25 of these petitions for natural zation filed by the clerk at Sunbury were signed in the handwriting of attorneys and an attache of the clerk's office, and that absolutely no regard for the legal requirements had been given by the clerk, who, himself, was greatly interested in the political situation in Northumberland County. Prior to the hearing on these petitions at Sunbury on September 30, 1921, I went there and acquainted both of the judges, they being of opposite political faith, with the condition of naturalization matters in the county, advising them of the attempted pollution of citizenship, at which time I suggested to them that these petitions should be heard en banc rather than each judge sitting separately. They agreed to see each other and to arrange to have the hearing en banc, and to notify me regarding the result of their conference. They did not communicate with me on the subject. On September 30 I attended the hearing on these petitions, having with me Examiner Willson of my force, and before the judges had an opportunity to separate after hearing arguments I stated the facts in open court and informed them that for obvious reasons I believed that they should not separate and that the naturalization hearing should be had before both of them rather than separately. To this they agreed, and the hearing was so conducted. All of the petitions upon which the attorney's father, the county commissioner, appeared were dismissed by the court due to the fact that he was held to be an incompetent witness upon his statement that he could not name any of the petitioners whose petitions he had verified; that he did not know' where they lived and had no knowledge of their reputation and other legal requirements necessary to establish the aliens' right to citizenship. All of the petitions which had been signed by attorneys and others for the petitioners who could not write their names thereto, as required by law, were also dismissed, there being a total of 56 petitions denied by the court for cause. The CHAIRMAN. How many citizens were made out of the total number? Mr. RAKER. When was that? Mr. GORDON. On the 30th of September. Mr. RAKER. Who are the judges? Mr. GORDON. Judge Cummings and Judge Moser. That was at Sunbury, in Northumberland County. Mr. CABLE. Were any criminal proceedings instituted as a result of that investigation? Mr. GORDON. This attorney was disbarred at one time, and the court directed that all facts be presented to it later. Mr. RAKER. What became of the county commissioner or the attorney's father? Mr. GORDON. That poor old gentleman was very decrepit and I do not believe any conviction could be secured. Mr. RAKER. He had to commit several acts of perjury? Mr. GORDON. Yes, sir. The action taken at this hearing has and will curtail the activities of these attorneys. What I am trying to get at with you gentlemen, is whether you do not believe that something could be included in this law prohibiting the appearance of attorneys in matters pertaining to naturalization, similar to the provision that is carried in some pension laws. Of course, I know that the administration of the pension laws is ministerial and not judicial, but could not sonrething be done that would prohibit attorneys from commercializing citizenship? The CHAIRMAN. It affects the alien as well as the Government? Mr. GORDON. Yes, sir. The Naturalization Service is the best friend the alien has, and they look upon us in Philadelphia as the'r best friends and advisers. In the counties outside of Philadelphia we can not have the same close relation with the alien. The CHAIRMAN. One purpose of the bill is to bring the whole service under a Director of the Citizenship Service and dignify it in that way. Secretary Davis is anxious to do something for the service. Was the father of this attorney you have referred to born in this country? Mr. GORDON. No, sir; I think the attorney was, but his father was a Welsh man. Mr. RAKER. Is it not your view, from your experience, that this method you have described of bringing men in and naturalizing them is a detriment to our country? Mr. GORDON. Personally I have always held that citizenship is a privilege and not a right; that it should be placed upon a pedestal for aliens to seek rather than to have it presented to them without effort on their part. Of course, the war cond tions changed the whole matter of naturalization. The employer, when he found that he had a large number of alien employees, thought that it was a protection to have them naturalized, and he demanded that the men who had not made the declaration of intention shouuld make it, or he told those who had made the declaration to complete their citizenship. I should not wonder if persons, through the attitude of employers, have been induced to complete their citizenship when they might have waited and taken it upon their own initiative later. The CHAIRMAN. We have had all sorts of propositions before the committee, one being to put the Naturalization Service on wheels and move it around among the factories. Mr. GORDON. I would be absolutely opposed to that. However, that is no worse than commercializing it by attorneys and its exploitation by runners. Anything obtained without effort is not appreciated, and to change the present procedure required to obtain cit zenship and to lessen the requirements on the part of the aliens will tend to cheapen citizenship in their estimation, and they will have less regard for it when acquired. Mr. RAKER. What I am trying to obtain from you gentlemen, with your experience and observation, is whether it is not more of a detriment to our country to try and force men into becoming naturalized and receiving this wonderful gift through the method that has been followed than it would be to let them remain foreigners. Mr. GORDON. I think so. I agreed with you in your statement yesterday that the method in the smaller courts is the real method of naturalization, but until something is done to relieve the courts I do not see how you are going to keep pace in districts having an alien population as large as in those under the supervision of Mr. Sturges, Mr. Schlotfeldt, Mr. Farrell, and myself. In the eastern district of Pennsylvania the United States Federal court has but two judges and they are absolutely, I know, worked to death, and until some relief is given them, either by additional judges or by changing the system, they will not be able to keep up with the naturalization filings. Mr. RAKER. Referring particularly to Philadelphia, you have there two courts that can naturalize? Mr. GORDON. Yes; but the county court is not at this time doing very much in naturalization. Mr. Box. Why? Mr. GORDON. Due to the fact that the office of the clerk is politically dominated. Under the system in Philadelphia, which is about the worst politically that anybody could conceive of, they have a class of clerks who are ward and division leaders in the political system, and they will not receive from my office any application for a declaration of intention or file a petition for naturaliza tion after 11 o'clock in the morning, and at 12 o'clock they are closed for business, at which time they go out and look after their "fences." The CHAIRMAN. These are the clerks who get this Federal money? Mr. RAKER. It will make a great deal of difference if they close their offices at 4 or 5 o'clock instead of 12 o'clock? Mr. GORDON. Yes; because then they could take care of more business. Under the system we have, by taking the work over in our office for the United States district court, we give the alien every minute of the working day. Mr. RAKER. Outside of the county court in Philadelphia, what other State courts have you for naturalization? Mr. GORDON. No other; we have but two courts in Philadelphia, and the quarter sessions court, I think, was given jurisdiction by a very large stretch of the imagination. The law says a court having jurisdiction in actions at law or equity, or law and equity in which the amount in controversy is unlimited, may assume jurisdiction in naturalization matters. It was held that the quarter sessions court, being a criminal court, had unlimited jurisdiction in bail bonds, and for that reason it was given jurisdiction. The then Assistant Secretary of Labor came to Philadelphia and went over that matter on a special investigation, and as the common pleas judges would not assume jurisdiction they stretched their imagination and held that the quarter sessions court having unlimited jurisdiction in bail bonds was brought within the purview of the statute. Mr. FREE. Are the clerks you mention the regular clerks of the court? Mr. FREE. No; these clerks who go out at 12 o'clock? Mr. GORDON. They are appointed politically by the candidate who is successful in being elected clerk of the quarter sessions court. Mr. FREE. By the judge? Mr. GORDON. No, sir; by the clerk. You see, they have probably 8 or 10 judges sitting in criminal court, which is the quarter sessions court, and they have one clerk who is elected, and when he is elected and takes office he appoints his henchmen to positions in his office as deputies. The CHAIRMAN. You could find it convenient to get over here on a few days' notice? Mr. GORDON. Absolutely; on three hours' notice. The CHAIRMAN. But you would like to have notice of a day or two? Mr. CABLE. How many women are naturalized in your office during the year? Mr. GORDON. That would be hard to say up to this present time. I should suppose, in my whole district, up to the passage of the nineteenth amendment, that 25 a year would have been a large average, but I should say that we have naturalized in the last year from two to three hundred. Mr. CABLE. And if this proposed bill becomes a law what percentage of those naturalized would you estimate would be women? Mr. GORDON. Well, I have given that some thought, but the relationship of husband and wife will doubtless be a deterrent factor from having a divided allegiance in the family. I suppose the number will materially increase, but I could not, without a little time and some practical demonstration on the part of the women applying, give you any idea. Mr. CABLE. You might have one family where the husband would swear allegiance to this Government and the wife owe allegiance to their home Government. Mr. GORDON. Yes. I want to say that I can administer any law when it is given to me, but my personal view has always been against a divided allegiance in the family. I know we may have to come to it, and the time may come when you will find the woman leading the husband, if it is necessary, or the husband leading the wife. Mr. CABLE. And it will increase your work considerably? Mr. GORDON. Yes; it will increase the work. I ought to have to-day not less than 10 examiners. I have 3 or 4 men in the field all of the time over my 70 courts making preliminary examinations. The CHAIRMAN. What is the area of your district? Mr. GORDON. I have what is known as the eastern and middle districts of Pennsylvania-that is, two Federal districts-but there are three Federal districts in Pennsylvania. I go to the south about 100 miles west of Harrisburg and on the north about 100 miles west of Williamsport. Emporium and Huntingdon, with a line drawn through, would just divide me from Mr. Rags dale, who has the western district, and I have all of New Jersey except Hudson County, which Mr. Sturges has, and all of the State of Delaware. I have 70 courts. The CHAIRMAN. You have given us a very interesting statement, and we will let you amplify it in the record. Mr. SABATH. In connection with the naturalization of women, what is your opinion as to the effect it will have? The wives of foreigners as a rule have large families. Mr. GORDON. Yes. Mr. SABATH. And they are rather occupied in bringing up their children. Will not that really prevent them, these mothers of big families, from becoming American citizens? Mr. GORDON. Yes; and it will prevent them from being able to meet the educational requirements. Mr. SABATH. And also prevent them from securing the educational requirements we prescribe for them? Mr. GORDON. Yes. Mr. SABATH. Will not that deny citizenship to most of the mothers of American-born children as against those who are unmarried and those who are different stations? Mr. GORDON. Yes; and I think that is a very good point. That will be true where there is a segregation, where they live like they did in the "old country,” and where they raise families of from 6 to 15. The woman who lives under those conditions has no knowledge of English and never will have. Mr. VAILE. Do you think she should be entitled to vote? Mr. GORDON. I do not. I have always argued that practically the only desire of a person to become a citizen was to exercise the right of suffrage, and that he should not have it unless he was able to vote upon his own initiative. We have a very pernicious law in the State of Pennsylvania, a law which allows illiterate voters to receive assistance in the voting booths. The man who does the assisting gets two votes and the illiterate voter is a negative factor at elections. Mr. SABATH. Not only two, but he gets a good many more, because he assists many voters. Mr. GORDON. Yes; he assists many. The CHAIRMAN. I do not think we need to go into that phase of the matter. Mr. GORDON. I realize that, and I was only expressing my personal views. Mr. RAKER. But because of the conditions you have described in your district, which apply in other congested districts where there are many foreigners, and where the wife is not given an opportunity to get out, but is devoting all of her time to the family and to other hard work, it would be a godsend to her and to this country if she were required, before she exercises citizenship, to appear in court and pass the necessary examination and learn to read and write so that she mght assist her children and others surrounding her. Mr. GORDON. It might stimulate a desire and ambition to acquire what we require. Mr. CABLE. When would she have time? Mr. RAKER. If it is a question of time, we ought to devote a little more time and a little more money to the proposition of giving her an opportunity to get out and learn enough to enable her to become a citizen. so that she can instruct her boys and girls properly as to their duty toward this Government instead of letting these helpers and runners run this Government as they are doing now in many instances. Mr. CABLE. You can not prove that statement. Mr. RAKER. Yes; I can. Mr. GORDON. In Wilmington, Del., they have visitors who go into the homes of these people. They bring in groups of women and they are educated in their homes in Delaware. If we can get at the State legislatures and get them to see what this problem is and get the States to do their duty in providing schools by appropriations, as they do in Delaware, we can have social workers, under the school system, visit these women and give them instruction; give them an education, and give them so many afternoons a week in English. If we can do that, we are going to benefit our electorate. The CHAIRMAN. You have given us a valuable statement. The next witness is Mr. Moore, of Washington, D. C., but with his permission we will not hear him to-day, because he can be called separately. Right after lunch we will hear Mr. Ragsdale. (Thereupon a recess was taken until 2 o'clock p. m.) AFTER RECESS. (The hearing was resumed at 2 o'clock p. m., pursuant to the taking of recess.) The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order. Unless there is objection these hearings will be printed as having been held on H. R. 8727 and on the bills which were used in the compilation of H. R. 8727; also as if held on a bill which will be the first revision of H. R. 8727. The principal reason for this suggestion is that H. R. 8727 is a compilation of various bills, and in putting them together some errors have occurred; some paragraphs are in the wrong place, and some paragraphs refer to matters that are not in the bill. So there must be a rev sion of this bill-that is, before the committee attempts any changes and the hearings will appear as having been held on H. R. 8727 and H. R. 9238. That bill will be a revision of this bill and will be printed in the hearings. There is no need of printing this bill in the hearings, as it contains errors that have nothing to do with the contemplated changes in this bill. NOTE.-See Appendix for H. R. 9238. I believe that the examiners who are present have agreed that we shall go on with the list, and that brings us to Mr. William M. Ragsdale, of Pittsburgh, Pa., in charge of the fifth district. Now, Mr. Ragsdale, if you can proceed and add anything, for the information or enlightenment of th's committee, in addition to what we have heard in the last two days, we will be under obligations to you. STATEMENT OF MR. WILLIAM M. RAGSDALE, CHIEF EXAMINER OF THE FIFTH DISTRICT, PITTSBURGH, PA. Mr. RAGSDALE. I have been in the Naturalization Service since June, 1907. I was appointed a chief examiner and assigned to the Pittsburgh district at that time and have been in charge of that district continuously ever since. The CHAIRMAN. What does the fifth district embrace? Mr. RAGSDALE. This district as now constituted-its boundaries have been slightly changed once or twice-consists, in whole or in part, of seven States, western Pennsylvania, western New York, the State of Ohio, the State of West Virginia, four counties in western Maryland, the southern half of Indiana, and the State of Kentucky. I have under my supervision 242 active courts. There are more courts eligible to naturalize but there are not sufficient aliens in all of the counties to justify them in exercising that jurisdiction. During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1921, I had a force consisting of 10 examiners, 5 clerks, and myself, 16 persons. Mr. Box. That was the fiscal year 1921? Mr. RAGSDALE. Yes, sir. We attended the court sessions in 983 courts; disposed of 26,046 petitions—that is, petitions heard by the courts-either by their admission, rejection, or continuance for cause. There were 21,795 civilians and 2,522 honorably discharged soldiers admitted to citizenship, 2,584 were continued for cause, and 1,725 petitions dismissed or denied. There were filed during the year in that district in all courts 25,032 petitions, and there were 41,451 declarations of intention filed with the clerks of the courts. The travel and subsistence cost for the district was $8,730.20. The salaries of all employees, including the bonus, were $35,164.72. Mr. Box. Have you the total expenses? You mentioned two items of them. Mr. RAGSDALE. I have not added them together yet. The clerks of courts collected in naturalization fees $131,451. The part retained by the clerks is approximately $45,000, and the part that goes into the United States Treasury about $85,000. The total cost of the district, I find by adding, was $43,894.92. The CHAIRMAN. Showing that the Government made a little money in the naturalization game in your district? Mr. RAGSDALE. Taking out one-tenth of the remainder, about $4,000, as my pro rata for maintaining the bureau at Washington, it would leave about $37,000 clear money that was turned into the United States Treasury from the naturalization fees collected in my district. The CHAIRMAN. And how many men did you naturalize in that period? Mr. RAGSDALE. Civilians 21,795, and 2,522 honorably discharged soldiers, making a total of 24,317. No fee is collected on soldier petitions. The CHAIRMAN. So the Government made more than $1 per citizen? |