Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN,

ELIZABETHTOWN, IND., April 26, 1930.

House Office Bldg., Washington, D. C.

Hon. ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN: As clerk of Sand Creek Quarterly Meeting of the Friends' Church, I have been directed by the meeting in session April 19, 1930, to write you indorsing the actions taken by you, concerning the naturalization and immigration bill you are sponsoring.

I have been directed also to write to the House Committee concerning it; this I have done, assuring them of our hearty approval of such a bill, Wishing you the greatest success in your proceedings, I am,

Sincerely,

LIZZIE M. Cox, Clerk.

WESTERN YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS CHURCH,

Hon. ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN:

May 1, 1930.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. GRIFFIN: This is to again express to you my appreciation for the Griffin bill to amend the naturalization laws. Also to inform you that I am again addressing the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization in care of the Griffin bill committee, New York City, and that church groups are doing likewise.

Your effort in behalf of your bill as well as the bill itself is very much appreciated by Friends.

With best wishes.

Very sincerely yours,

R. R. NEWBY, General Superintendent.

Hon. ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN:

WEST MILTON OHIO, March 18, 1930.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: Believing in the ideals of civil and religious liberty upon which our nation was founded, we support the principle that the refusal of the promise to bear arms because of a supreme loyalty to God shall not be a bar to citizenship in the United States.

We therefore desire the passage of the bill introduced by you in the House of Representatives.

Signed in behalf of West Milton Monthly Meeting of Friends held March 12, 1930.

E. J. PEARSON, Presiding Clerk.

MRS. MINNIE SCHATZLEY, Recording Clerk.

ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN,

CHRISTIAN ENDEAVOR UNION,
Cherokee, Okla., March 14, 1930.

Congressman, Washington, D. O.

HONORED SIR: The Christian Endeavorers of the Cherokee quarterly meeting of the Society of Friends, assembled in meeting at Alva, Okla., Sunday, March 2, draft the following resolution;

We take this opportunity to express to you our most hearty indorsement of the House bill introduced by you before the House of Representatives, the purpose of which is to allow a man or a woman to become a citizen regardless of his or her religious views or opinions with respect to the lawfulness of war. May you be assured that in the presentation of this bill you are supported by this group unanimously.

Trusting for the passage of this highly important measure, we are,

Respectfully yours,

L. HERBERT REYNOLDS,

Superintendent Department of Peace.

BOARD OF RELIGIOUS EDUCATION, CHURCH OF THE BRETHREN,
Elgin, Ill., April 17, 1930.

GRIFFIN BILL COMMITTEE,

New York City, N. Y.

DEAR SIRS: The peace department of the Church of the Brethren, representing the peace sentiments of over 133,000 peace-loving people, heartily endorses the Griffin bill to amend our naturalization laws. We believe that no person who is mentally and morally qualified for citizenship should be denied it on account of religious convictions. You may use my name, and we assure you of our whole-hearted support.

Sincerely yours,

RUFUS D. BOWMAN,
General Secretary.

BOARD OF RELIGIOUS EDUCATION, CHURCH OF THE BRETHREN,
Elgin, Ill., May 1, 1930.

GRIFFIN BILL COMMITTEE,

New York City, N. Y.

GENTLEMEN: The Board of Religious Education of the Church of the Brethren, which includes the peace department of said church and represents the sentiments of 133,000 peace-loving people, heartily indorses the Griffin bill which purposes to admit to citizenship those who are morally and spiritually qualified regardless of conscientious objections to war.

This bill is right and has the indorsement of our people. We urge the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization to give it a favorable recommendation. Its passage by Congress will be in the interests of the highest welfare of our country.

Yours very truly,

RUFUS D. BOWMAN,

General Secretary.

ASSOCIATIONS INDORSING H. R. 297 AND H. R. 298

RELIGIOUS

The Covenant Club of the First Unitarian Church, Woburn, Mass. American Unitarian Association, 25 Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. resolution October 22, 1931.)

HUMANITARIAN

(Passed

The Centenarian Club, Judge Henry Neil, founder, East Aurora, N. Y. Fellowship of Reconciliation, J. Nevin Sayre, Bible House, Astor Place, New York City.

Immigrants Protective League, Mrs. Keneth F. Rich, 824 South Halsted Street, Chicago, Ill.

American Civil Liberties Union, Roger N. Baldwin, director, 100 Fifth Avenue, New York City.

League for American Citizenship, Harold Field, executive director, 122 East Forty-second Street, New York City.

PEACE

National Council for Prevention of War, Frederick J. Libby, executive secretary, 532 Seventeenth Street NW., Washington, D. C.

WOMEN'S

International League for Peace and Freedom, Mrs. Mildred Scott Olmsted, executive secretary, 1525 Locust Street, Philadelphia, Pa.

Women's Peace Society, Annie E. Gray, executive secretary, 20 Vesey Street, New York City.

International League for Peace and Freedom, Laura King, executive secretary, 150 Fifth Avenue, New York City.

Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, Emily G. Balch, superintendent, 130 Prince Street, Jamaica Plain, Mass.

Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, Dorothy Detzer, executive secretary, 8 Jackson Place NW., Washington, D. C.

League of Women Voters, Sally Peters, 50 West Sixty-seventh Street, New

York City.

Griffin Bill Committee, 1122 Nineteenth Street, New York City.

Women's Peace Union, Caroline Lexow Babcock (for the working committee), 39 Pearl Street, New York City.

Young Women's Christian Association, New York City.
Young Women's Christian Association, Washington, D. C.

NEWSPAPERS FAVORING H. R. 297

The Day, Marion Weinstein, editor English section (national Jewish daily), 183 Broadway, New York City; New Republic, Bruce Bliven, 422 West Twentysecond Street, New York City; the Survey, Paul U. Kellogg, 112 East Nineteenth Street, New York City; Labor, Washington, D. C.; Christian Science Monitor, Boston, Mass.; Washington Star, Washington, D. C.; Christian Century, Chicago, Ill.; Washington News, Washington, D. C.; Nation, Oswald Garrison Villard, New York City; Baltimore Sun, Baltimore, Md. (two editorials); New York American, New York City; Hearst chain of papers; New York World, New York City; New York Telegram, New York City; Brooklyn Times, Brooklyn, N. Y.; Milwaukee Leader, Milwaukee, Wis.; Milwaukee Journal, Milwaukee, Wis.; Philadelphia Record, Philadelphia, Pa.; Portland News, Portland, Me.; Worcester Gazette, Worcester, Mass.; Waterbury Republican, Waterbury, Conn.; the Arbitrator, 114 East Thirty-first Street, New York City.

TELELRGAMS, LETTERS, AND STATEMENTS INDORSING H. R. 297

The CHAIRMAN. When you get them just submit them. I think there will be no trouble at all.

Telegrams and letters submitted indorsing H. R. 297 to be included in hearings selected out of many hundreds.

TELEGRAMS

1. William Walker Rockwell, chairman of Commission on International Relations. Appointed by National Council of Congregational Churches at meeting held in Detroit, June, 1929, to record indorsement of H. R. 297 by said meeting.

LETTERS

1. James T. Shotwell, director Endowment for International Peace, 405 West One hundred and seventeenth Street, New York City.

2 and 3. Henry S. Coffin, president Union Theological Seminary, Broadway and One hundred and twentieth Street, New York City.

4. Dr. Harry Emerson Fosdick, Riverside Church, Riverside Drive, One hundred and twenty-second Street, New York City.

5. Guy Franklin Hershberger, professor of history, Goshen College, representing the Mennonites.

6. Right Rev. G. Ashton Oldham, chairman the Churches and World Peace, 105 East Twenty-second Street, New York City.

7. H. O. Miles, Earlham College, Richmond, Ind.

8. William Dennis, president Earlham College, Richmond, Ind.; also copy of letter to Chairman Johnson.

9. Rev. Charles S. Macfarland, general secretary Federal Council, Churches of Christ in America, 105 East Twenty-second Street, New York City.

10. Ferdinanda W. Reed, 520 West One hundred and fourteenth Street, New York City.

11. G. W. Knobleuch, 27 West Forty-fourth Street, New York City.

12. Anna E. Gray, executive secretary Women's Peace Society, 20 Vesey Street, New York City.

13. Frank H. Stierghtoff, Plainfield Quarterly Meeting Friends, 733 East Thirty-third Street, Indianapolis, Ind.; also copy let to committee.

14. Mr. Harold Fields, League for American Citizenship (Inc.), One hundred and twenty-second East Forty-second Street, New York City.

15. Mr. Harry F. Ward, chairman American Civil Liberties Union, 100 Fifth Avenue, New York City.

[Telegram]

Hon. ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN, M. C.,

NEW YORK, N. Y., May 8, 1930.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

As chairman of the commission on international relations appointed by the national council of the Congregational Churches at its biennial meeting held in Detroit last June, please record me at to-day's hearing as heartily in favor of the passage of the bill, H. R. 3547, to amend the naturalization law. In view of the Kellogg pact which outlaws war, and as a treaty is part of the supreme law of this land, it is illogical to deny naturalization to persons otherwise qualified who deny the lawfulness of war as a means of settling international disputes.

The case of Prof. Douglas Slyde Macintosh, of Yale, particularly interests members of our commission. I take pleasure in quoting the following sentence from a letter concerning the Macintosh case written to me by Rev. William E. Gilroy, D. D., editor of our denominational organ, the Congregationalist:

"To refuse citizenship to such a man seems to many citizens to put a premium upon brute force and a compliant compromising spirit rather than upon the moral and spiritual qualities that ultimately determine the only allegiance that is vital and worth while. If the bearing of arms is to be the only or chief ultimate qualification for citizenship, it would seem to be that the country adopting that principle would be a militarist state rather than a democracy. In a very prominent place in its issue of September 26 the Congregationalist took an unambiguous position in this matter by printing a long article by Edwin D. Mead, entitled "Is Fighting the Test of Patriotism," which I respectfully suggest you will read by title into the proceedings of to-day's hearing. A copy of the text will follow by letter.

Mr. ALFRED LIEF,

New York, N. Y.

WILLIAM WALKER ROCKWELL.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, New York, January 21, 1932.

DEAR MR. LIEF: I have your letter of January 20 requesting me to express my opinion regarding H. R. 297 introduced by Hon. Anthony J. Griffin, Member of the House of Representatives from New York.

Chief Justice Hughes in his dissenting opinion in United States v. Macintosh (51 Sup. Ct. 570, 577) pointed out that there are other and most important methods of defense, even in time of war, apart from the personal bearing of arms. We have but to consider the defense given to our country in the late war, both in industry and in the field, by workers of all sorts, by engineers, nurses, doctors, and chaplains, to realize that there is opportunity even at such a time for essential service in the activities of defense which do not require the overriding of religious scruples. Many of our most honored citizens in the past have been willing to suffer imprisonment or even death rather than make a promise to obey a law believed to be in conflict with religious duty. We know in particular that a promise to engage in war by bearing arms, or thus to engage in a war believed to be unjust, would be contrary to the tenets of religious groups among our citizens who are of patriotic purpose and exemplary conduct. It has never been concluded that the general oath of office which is in substantially the same terms as the naturalization oath, is to be interpreted as disregarding the religious scruples of these citizens. Such an interpretation is repugnant to the fundamental principle of representative government.

Agreements for the renunciation of war presuppose a preponderant public sentiment against wars of aggression. The mere holding of religious or conscientious scruples against all wars should not disqualify a citizen from holding office in this country, or an applicant otherwise qualified from being admitted to citizenship. There would seem to be no reason why a reservation of religious or conscientious objection to participation in wars believed to be unjust should constitute such a disqualification.

It seems sufficient to me to express my approval of the purposes of the Griffin bill by the foregoing paraphrase written by Chief Justice Hughes.

Very truly yours,

111460-32- -14

JOHN HANNA.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW,
New York, January 24, 1932.

GRIFFIN BILL COMMITTEE.
GENTLEMEN: I am happy to indorse the Griffin bill (H. R. 297), amending
the naturalization laws so as to permit citizenship to be conferred on persons
who are opposed, for religious or philosophical reasons, to the resort to war
for the settlement of international disputes. I have never been able to under-
stand why a Nation which has renounced war as an instrument of national
policy should deny applicants to citizenship the privilege of holding similar
views. It is no more unpatriotic for an applicant for citizenship to be opposed
to the institution of war than for the Nation to enter a solemn pact renouncing
war as a method of solving international disputes. As your memorandum
points out, this bill does not remit or exempt the applicant after his admission
to citizenship of any of the duties of a native-born citizen; it merely recognizes
the liberty of conscience and freedom of thought of those living in this coun-
try, whether or not born here. Not only is there nothing in the Constitution
which is opposed to this legislation but, on the contrary, the Griffin bill is
in entire accord with the spirit of our institutions and the basic precepts of
our constitutional system. Even those who are opposing this bill for mis-
guided notions of patriotism will concede that liberty of conscience and free-
dom of thought are bulwark of our Federal Constitution. And as Justice
Holmes has pointed out, "If there is any principle of the Constitution that
more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of
free thought-not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for
the thoughts we hate." One will search the Constitution in vain for any pro-
vision justifying the denial in times of peace to applicants to citizenship the
liberty of conscience and the freedom of thought which is guaranteed native-
born citizens. Real patriotism calls for tolerance and understanding, not repres-
sion or compulsion. I do not believe that the foundations of the Republic
would have been at all shaken if citizenship had been granted Madame
Schwimmer, Doctor Macintosh, and Miss Bland, people whom Justice Holmes
called "obviously more than ordinarily desirable."

In the interest of justice and fair play, the Griffin bill should be enacted to remove the present discrimination between applicants for citizenship and native-born citizens.

Sincerely yours,

Hon. ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN,

Washington, D. C.

MILTON HANDLER, Assistant Professor of Law.

FREE SYNAGOGUE,

New York, January 23, 1932.

MY DEAR MR. GRIFFIN: I should have been very glad to have accepted your invitation to appear at the hearing on Tuesday, January 26, but I could not. I favor the bill and I would just as strongly as possible have urged the committee to give its approval to it. But the date you name makes it impossible for me to appear before the committee.

It is the privilege of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization to mend the anomalous situation in which our country finds itself at present. We aspire to be the peace leaders of the world, while we exclude such highminded, distinguished applicants for citizenship as Madame Rosika Schwimmer and Prof. Douglas Clyde Macintosh. I hope the committee will give a favorable report on the bill to the House.

With the repeated expression of regret that I can not personally testify at your hearing how strongly I believe in the necessity of passing your bill, Sincerely yours,

.

STEPHEN S. WISE.

Hon. SAMUEL DICKINSTEIN,

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., January 23, 1932.

House of Representatives Office_Building,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: We ask you and your Committee on Immigration and Naturalization to consider the Griffin bills H. R. 297, 298, for just what they are.

Your

« ÎnapoiContinuă »