escape the natural flow of a stationary population, and by his arts maintain an indefinite future slowly increasing numbers. But it is certain that he can not long continue to increase at the present rate, and if he is not to suffer a decline in civilization he must see to it that the rate of increase is always kept definitely behind the advance in arts of life. Some drastic check must come very soon, and the vital problem is what the nature of the check is to be. Every advance in hygiene, sanitation, and public health which tends to extend the average span of life adds to the gravity of this problem. Lothrop Stoddard has pointed out how the improvement of these fields introduced by white men into the lands of the colored races have already occasioned an unprecedented rate of increase among those peoples. No one can predict what the solution will be. But one thing is certain-the time has passed when any form of land aggression, hostile or peaceful, can be recognized as a part of that solution. It is intolerable that a nation which working out a scientific, humane system of population control should have its efforts thwarted by an uncontrollable torrent of outsiders. The book of race migrations must be closed forever. It is an informed and sensible public opinion to put a stop to permitted invasion. The peace of the world can not be assured until some effective check is placed upon war for land and for the products of land; the prosperity of the world can not be assured until there is a general denial of the right of any nation with an excessive increase of population to seek relief by sending its surplus nationals abroad. We have lately heard a good deal about the right of self-determination of peoples. It is time to assert the duty of self-determination. Each nation should be compelled to work out its own population problems without threatening the well-being of other nations that are more intelligent or more selfcontrolled. If the objection is raised that such a step should be postponed until a more nearly equal division of advantages has been established among the nations of the world, the answer is furnished by Secretary Hughes' attitude on disarmament. Every world-wide reform must start at some time, and the best time is now. This is particularly true in population questions. Moreover, for the United States, the suggested equalization would inevitably mean a leveling downward. The more the nations of the West are brought to the present situation as such countries as China and India, the gloomier becomes the outlook for the future, and the less possible becomes any satisfactory and permanent solution. The CHAIRMAN. I desire to place in the record some matters which I think should be before the committee, because I want both sides represented in this hearing. All of these matters are placed in the record so that they may be studied by members of the committee. The first is a letter from the National Liberal Immigration League, whose motto is, 'Selection, distribution, and Americanization rather than restriction." with headquarters at New York. In the letter they call attention to quotations from the Literary Digest; from an address by Senator-elect Copeland, of New York, entitled "A silly law"; also an editorial in the New York Herald of November 24, 1922, entitled, "No labor for the farm," and a quotation from an address by Frank A. Munsey entitled, "One result-$25 a day wages." (The letter and quotations referred to follow :) Hon. ALBERT JOHNSON, NATIONAL LIBERAL IMMIGRATION LEAGUE, Chairman Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, DEAR SIR: The drastic laws against immigration which have been enacted since 1917, particularly the 3 per cent law, have had regrettable results. They have brought about an acute shortage of unskilled labor "without which." asserts the New York Board of Trade, " the heartbeat of our country's activities will stop." Take, for instance, our best laborers, the Italians, who used to come by the hundred thousand. In the last fiscal year their allowable quota was 42,000, and in the same period 53,000 left our shores. Congress has always endeavored to echo the will of the Nation. But in framing its immigration policy Congress of late seems to have taken the noisy voice of the restrictionists for the will of the people. But the Nation is adverse to this policy; the Nation needs and wants a liberalized immigration policy. Your attention is respectfully invited to the inclosed quotations selected by the Literary Digest, to which we have added quotations from Senator-elect Copeland, Frank A. Munsey, and the New York Herald. In addition we may mention an article in the January Nation's Business by the Commissioner General of Immigration, Hon. W. W. Husband, from which we learn authoritatively: (a) That the present quota law has brought about a shortage of labor, and (b) That the need is felt to modify this law. It is earnestly hoped that Congress will empower the Secretary of Labor to lift the bars whenever there is an honest demand for certain kinds of labor. so as to supply the need felt keenly throughout the country. In this connection it is providential that the Italian premier has offered to pick up for us the kind of laborers we want. But in order to obtain the full benefit of this project, we must repeal the literacy test and put aside the thought of imposing any other artificial tests aimed at raising the required standard of intellectual performance as if we could ever erect a sieve through which only the equivalent of an educated and enlightened native could pass. The crying need is not for voters but for workers. Immigrant laborers always have been and always will be raw material. The most logical test, indeed, if a test we must have, in addition to the selective provisions of the law of 1907, would be one to ascertain the callousness of the hands of adult males, because, other things being equal, the more callous the hand of an adult male immigrant the more desirable he is. What if he is less alert mentally than the average citizen? In all countries the rough work is done by rough men, of the class which certain writers about immigration generically classify as "morons." Is it fair to insist that humble toilers should be expected at the moment of arrival to pass difficult tests which have no bearing upon their desirability as workers? It must not be forgotten that all insane, idiots, imbeciles, feeble-minded, etc., are already debarred under older laws still in force. Moreover, a number of the originally illiterate aliens who came before the passage of the literacy test law have risen in the social scale until some of them have been able-largely through their own efforts born of love of this country to pass the never-too-severe tests at the gate of citizenship. It all is mainly a question of education; efficient night-school teachers, easily available when salaries are adequate, can turn alien "morons" into patriotic and useful citizens. And in this connection, the inevitable accompanying change is that the uskilled laborer becomes a semiskilled worked, a skilled artisan or a business man, and must therefore be replaced by a fresh immigrant. The adequacy of the law of 1907 to give us only the right kind of human raw material is strikingly demonstrated by the fact that the brightest school children are the native boys and girls of illiterate, foreign-born parents. Of the native population of all ages, the natives of illiterate foreign parentage show the smallest proportion of illiterates. So is it with regard to another important characteristic-respect for self and for American institutions. Criminality statistics show that natives of humble foreign-born parentage do not furnish a greater proportion of lawbreakers than do natives whose parents were native-born American citizens. It is certain that at the moment of landing Nordic immigrants are vastly superior to those from southeastern Europe. But facts are facts, and we must not allow ourselves to be swayed by personal likes and dislikes when considering the good of our country. We want laborers-healthy, clean, sane, and honest laborers, whose children will be useful citizens. As to "birds of passage," they are on the whole an advantage, contributing to the general fluidity of labor which is an economic necessity in a country so full of seasonal industries as ours. If a few or many of the unskilled alien laborers return to their native lands with a part of their earnings, let us wish them Godspeed, since they can not take away the houses and roads they have built, the subways and ditches they have dug, the coal and ores they have mined, and the fields and orchards on which they have toiled. Our body politic can not be injured and in the long run can be greatly bettered by the constant influx of large numbers of unskilled laborers, who take hold of picks and shovels as soon as they settle anywhere. But when it comes to granting American citizenship, as this league has declared for the past 16 years, rigorous tests may and should be applied. For this high privilege, educational, economic, mental, and character requirements can hardly be made too severe. We must not allow our Nation to deteriorate. Immigrants should be admitted liberally but always conditionally-with the provision for a probationary period of five years, during which those who make themselves undesirable should be liable to summary deportation. Under the present law, many undersirables have already been deported, and others can be deported without the proposed registration of alien residents. This idea of registration is naturally distasteful to freedom-loving Americans, who can not but view it as an unnecessary humiliation of all aliens, the desirable as well as the undesirable. Self-respect is an American trait, and it implies consideration, the Golden Rule. Equally repugnant to Americans is the practice-inevitable and of common occurrence under the "excess monthly quota" enforcement of the 3 per cent law of turning back arrivals bearing our official permission to enter, that is to say a passport which has been viséed by an American consul. This is simply unethical, no matter how we look at it, and it ill-becomes a great civilized nation. The National Liberal Immigration League respectfully requests that the literacy test be repealed, that the 3 per cent law be modified, that provision be made for the prompt and uncomplicated deportation of criminal aliens, and that the requirements for citizenship be made stricter. Sincerely yours, NATIONAL LIBERAL IMMIGRATION LEAGUE, Per N. BEHAB, Managing Director. THE CRY FOR MORE IMMIGRATION. [From The Literary Digest, November 18, 1922.] The new Congress will face as one of its most vital and pressing problems the question of revising our present immigration law, if newspaper comment may be accepted as a criterion. Already, say manufacturers in many States, the growing shortage of labor is interfering with necessary production. These interests, therefore, call for a constructive national immigration policy" to replace the present law under which the quota of immigrants from any foreign country is fixed at 3 per cent of the total number of the particular nationality in each case resident in the United States as shown by the 1910 census. For example, 42,000 are permitted to enter annually from Italy, as compared with 220,000 who entered in 1921 and 274,000 in 1913. Secretary of Labor Davis is on record in favor of a liberal revision of the new law, for the country and its industries, he maintains, needs more skilled and unskilled laborers than the present law yields. On the other hand, Representative Johnson (Republican, Washington), chairman of the House Committee on Immigration, declares that the present quota of 3 per cent is too liberal, and that it should be cut to 2 per cent. The American Federation of Labor, incidentally, is even more anxious than the Congressman from Washington to keep out the laborer from overseas. A great deal of talk is current to the effect that a wave of prosperity " is just around the corner. If this is the case, writes the Washington correspondent of the New York Tribune, the large employers of labor are wondering where they are going to get their supply of what is ordinarily termed " common labor." "America has depended on the Old World for unskilled labor ever since negro slaves were first shipped here from the shores of Africa," points out the Springfield Republican. But during the past year, we are reminded by the Louisville Post, "only 32,728 able-bodied laborers were admitted, while the figures show that 100,058 laborers left our shores. The actual loss in labor during the year, therefore, was 67,330." A definite shortage of competent mining labor in Alabaina, Minnesota, Arizona, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, and California is reported by a writer in The Mining Journal. Furthermore, writes Virgil Jordan in the New York Journal of Commerce: "In its increasing difficulty of securing an adequate supply of unskilled labor and an adequately trained force of skilled labor to meet the demands of its rapid expansion American industry is confronted with a real problem. It is a or the son of an old line American, the result is the same. ing to do with labor. He will have noth And what is true of the American boy is true of the American girl, in respect of service. This spirit is fine, admirable. It is the spirit that has made American what she is the richest and strongest nation in the world. But it leaves us without labor of our own and almost wholly dependent on foreign labor to do the plain, simple work that only human hands can do. Also a letter from the Associated General Contractors of America, dated January 16, 1923. (Said letter follows:) ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA (INC.)., Washington, D. C., January 16, 1923. Hon. ALBERT JOHNSON, Chairman Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. JOHNSON: I appreciate that the remaining weeks of the Sixtyseventh Congress will be crowded with pending legislation, and that little or no time can be given to the consideration of immigration legislation, and therefore request that you do not arrange for a hearing for the Associated General Contractors at this time. Later we will take advantage of your kind offer and ask you to arrange a hearing for us. Very truly yours, EUGENE YOUNG, Also a telegram from William Butterworth, of New York, calling attention to certain charts and constructive suggestions that were presented before a meeting of the National Industrial Conference Board. (Said telegram follows:) ALBERT JOHNSON, NEW YORK, N. Y., January 5, 1923. House of Representatives, Washington D. C.: Have set to-day in meeting of National Industrial Conference Board where very interesting facts about immigration were presented by charts and otherwise. Constructive suggestions regarding present immigration situation were also proposed which appeal to me strongly. Suggest you invite National Industrial Conference Board, 10 East Thirty-ninth Street, New York City, to appear before your committee. WILLIAM BUTTERWORTH, President Deere & Co., Moline, Ill. Also a letter from the National Crushed Stone Association, of Columbus, Ohio, dated January 20, 1923, saying that their committee will call on this committee Wednesday, January 24, and present a resolution calling attention to the natural shrinkage in the amount of common labor and "Whereas it is admitted that the only possible remedy for this condition is immigration of labor from Europe; and 'Whereas mindful of the serious and critical conditions of the railroads and public carriers and of the possibility of their merging into one or more great systems or being operated by the Government, and aware of the suggestions being freely made as to the curtailing of all roadbuilding and construction work in general in the hope of relieving the present freight conditions," etc. Without objection, the letter and resolution will be placed in the record. (Said letter and resolution follow:) THE CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL CRUSHED STONE ASSOCIATION, House Immigration Committee, Washington, D. C. MR. CHAIRMAN: Inclose copy of resolution adopted by National Crushed Stone Association convention held this week in Chicago by unanimous vote. Our committee will call on you next Wednesday, January 24. The American Road Builders Assocation convention also adopted inclosed resolution. Respectfully, A. P. SANDLES, Secretary. NO LABOR FOR THE FARM. [Editorial in New York Herald, November 24, 1922.] James R. Howard, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, adds his strong protest to that of manufacturers, builders, and others already raised against the drastic restrictions in the immigration act. That measure, Mr. Howard warns the country, is stripping the farm of its manual labor. This means the crops can not be raised in adequate quantity. With a general shortage of common labor the manual worker on the farm is now drawn in unusual volume to the great industrial centers by urgent wage bids for him there. For years this drift of labor from the country to the city has gone on, but hitherto a new supply for the American farm has flowed constantly from the agricultural districts of Europe. With that supply now shut out by the rigid immigration law, the American farmer has no place to get his necessary labor. He faces directly the danger of not being able to get his heavy work done. And when the American farmer can not get his work done the American people will not be able to get their food at prices that will be bearable. Congress has not listened to the manufacturer who has complained that he could get no labor to do his work. Congress has not listened to the railroad operator, to the road maker, to the general builder, who have all protested against an exclusion law which prevents the country from doing its foundational work and keeps productive machinery from running full speed. But when the American farmer serves notice on Congress that the country's food supply is threatened by an immigration policy which shuts out the labor that is needed to till the farms and raise the crops, Congress will do well to take heed of the warning. When the American public's cost of living begins to soar, because Congress will not let the farm have enough labor to do its work, the farmer and the consumer up in arms together will be a mighty serious thing for any national legislator to contend against or any political party that stands for him to contend against. ONE RESULT $25 A DAY WAGES. [From an address by Frank A. Munsey before the American Bankers' Association, New York, October 4, 1922.] The labor problem is one of our most pressing problems just now. The country hasn't enough labor to carry on its work, hasn't enough skilled mechanics, especially in the building trades, to carry on its work. With wages advancing lower living costs are not possible. In the steel mills and in the textile centers wages have had a sensational advance, and this advance was compulsory because of the shortage of labor. In both fields of activity it was a question of bidding high for labor or shutting down the plants. Labor, like commodities, is subject to the law of supply and demand. The wage of labor will never come down until the supply exceeds the demand. The law passed by Congress soon after the war restricting immigration is wholly responsible for the present labor shortage. If this law had never gone on the statute books, if our portals had remained as free to immigration since the war as they were before the war and as they have been throughout our history, our inflated wage scale would have been well liquidated before now. That wages would not deflate when there was a shortage of labor should have been clear to the Washington statesmen. It should have been clear to them because of the fact that America does not produce its own labor, and never has produced its own labor since the formation of the Government. England, France, Germany, Italy, and all the countries of the Old World produce their own labor. They do not depend upon foreign labor to do their work. Our only domestic labor, outside of the rural sections, is colored, and in the North that is wholly negligible. There isn't enough to it to make a dent in the situation. We produce no labor in America for the reason that there is no sympathy between the American public school and the pick and the ax. Put a boy through an American public school, whether he be the son of an immigrant laborer |