Senator ANDREWS. I do not quite understand paragraph (c) on page 4. It provides: Any alien not ineligible to citizenship as to whom there is no record of admission for permanent residence who has been permitted to remain in the United States in accordance with subdivision (a) of this section shall be recorded as admitted to the United States for permanent residence as of the date of the order permitting him to remain upon the payment of a fee of $18. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. The $18 represents the $10 visa fee and $8 head tax that he would have had to pay had he entered in the regular manner. This refers to persons of good character who should be permitted to remain. We certainly do not want these persons to remain unless they can look forward to citizenship, and without having that record they could never proceed to citizenship. Senator ANDREWS. I see where that would relieve the objection I thought of. In Florida we have a situation quite different from most of the United States. Aliens are smuggled in from the islands, come in by way of a rowboat into the bayous where they are unloaded and spread all over the country. That would not come under this. Senator REYNOLDS. Yes; it would. It does not make any difference how the alien got into the country. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. If the alien had lived here for 10 years and could meet the conditions of subdivision 2 on page 3, line 16, or if he had lived here 1 year and had a family or close relatives abroad, he would come under that. Senator ANDREWS. We have had a lot of trouble of that kind. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Yes. We have seized a large number of aliens down there. We sent a number of smugglers to Atlanta. Senator ANDREWS. They are very undesirable as citizens. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Most of the type you have in mind are immediately deportable. Senator REYNOLDS. Any alien who had been here for the past 10 years, regardless of how he came in, would be admissible and eligible to citizenship under this section, would he not? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. That is correct. We put him in a position where he can proceed to citizenship. Senator REYNOLDS. Regardless of how he got into the country? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. That is correct. Senator REYNOLDS. And he would be entitled to citizenship. These people the Senator mentioned coming into the State of Florida would be entitled to citizenship. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. If he was permitted to stay under that section. Senator ANDREWS. What does "permitted" mean? Senator REYNOLDS. May I add something to what you were about to say? Senator ANDREWS. Yes. Senator REYNOLDS. He could not have been permitted to remain, because we did not know he was here. A permission to remain here continuously could not have been made. Senator ANDREWS. That is the definition I wanted to get. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. The permission in that sense cannot exist until we have apprehended the man. Senator REYNOLDS. The fact that he had not been found and identified within 10 years would indicate he was staying here on permission. Mr. SHUAGHNESSY. No; we had not been able to pick him up. Senator REYNOLDS. That would not be permission? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. No; there is no permission until he has met the conditions of section 2. Senator COPELAND. Mr. Chairman, it is very evident that we are not going to have time to do all we want to do. I would like to suggest that the clerk of the committee, with the aid of Mr. Shaughnessy, give us a committee print of this bill we have been discussing, together with the amendments in italics, which the Department would regard as desirable. Then we would have it before us in one form. Senator SCHWELLENBACH. I think perhaps we should wait until we get through with the hearings. People on the other side may object to all of these provisions. Senator COPELAND. Yes; that is true. Perhaps that should be deferred until a later time. May I say that fixing the date of July 1, 1924, has been in a bill of mine at least 6 or 7 years, and we have repeatedly passed it in the Senate. The Senate has repeatedly fixed that date as July 1, 1924. We never were able to get the House to do it. Is not that right? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. It is in this bill. Senator COPELAND. I remember a conference presided over by Senator Reed, of Pennsylvania, who was then chairman of the conference committee. We argued it for hours. Here we have people who cannot become citizens. Many of them come from Canada, yet they cannot have citizenship. I know a very fine woman who was a bookkeeper in a hotel where I lived in New York. Mrs. Copeland and I were very fond of her. She was a Canadian. She had got in here a little too late. I am very eager for this feature of the bill, and I did not know there was any dispute about it. Are there any other features of my amendment to which you wish to call attention? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. The rest of the amendments are contained in sections 10, 11, and 12, extending exemption in naturalization cases to different classes of veterans. I refer to the printed amendment submitted by Senator Copeland. We feel they ought to be the subject of separate legislation. Senator COPELAND. All right. Let us not argue it. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Section 13 is all right in principle, but might be controversial, and perhaps should be in a separate bill. Senator COPELAND. All right. My disposition is to follow the Department. Mr. SHAUGNESSY. I am about to conclude. Section 8 merely provides for charging the quotas. Senator REYNOLDS. Section 8 of the bill? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Yes. Under this bill we can charge them to the quotas, whereas under existing law we cannot do that. Section 9 needs a little explanation. It was put in at the request of the author of the bill in the House. It takes care of a number of nuns, 69 in number, who came in temporarily, and would not come within section 2. There is a big charitable hospital in Texas where these people are. They can never come under section 2. They would not be here over 10 years. The State of Texas is interested in permitting these 69 nuns to remain here. That is the real purpose of section 9. This charitable institution might have to close if they could not have their services. Their services are free except their board and room. That is the purpose of putting that section in. There has been no objection to it. It is limited to 100. Senator COPELAND. Would you have any objection to that? Senator REYNOLDS. Does that mean they can remain here permanently? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Yes. Senator REYNOLDS. One hundred a year? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. No; just for 1 year, and not over 100 can remain permanently. Senator REYNOLDS. It does not mean 100 each subsequent year? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Oh, no. Senator REYNOLDS. They have been here for some time? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. They have been here from 1 to 3 years. I think I have concluded, Mr. Chairman. Senator SCHWELLENBACH. Are there any other questions? Senator COPELAND. Let me ask one more question about this bill, in relation to this point about July 1, 1924. That is more restrictive, is it not? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Yes. I may say that many features of this bill were endorsed in resolutions of the American Legion at their last convention. I should like to submit a letter from William Green, president of the American Federation of Labor, and John L. Lewis, president of the United Mine Workers of America, both endorsing this bill. Senator SCHWELLENBACH. They may be incorporated in the record. (The letters referred to, respectively, are here set forth in full, as follows:) Mr. EDWARD J. SHAUGHNESSY, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, Acting Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, The DEAR MR. SHAUGHNESSY: I herewith reply to your letter dated April 21. revised immigration legislation to which you call my attention has been given my careful consideration and attention. In addition, Vice President Woll analyzed the measure in the most thorough way and, as you know, conferred and worked with you in bringing about revision of some of the objectionable features of the act. As a result of this and of our study of the act it now seems quite clear that we can give to the measure the support of the American Federation of Labor. I noted carefully the special provisions of the bill to which you call my attention, particularly your reference to section 6 and section 9. The legislative representatives of the American Federation of Labor are authorized to advise the committee to which this immigration bill you call my attention to was referred that it has been accorded the support and endorsement of the American Federation of Labor. Sincerely yours, Mr. EDWARD J. SHAUGHNESSY, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, Acting Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, DEAR MR. SHAUGHNESSY: House Resolution 6391, authorizing the deportation of criminals and certain other aliens, has been given my careful consideration. I am of the opinion that the bill, as it now stands, should be enacted by Congress. It provides for a wider discretion in the Secretary with respect to the more humane treatment of aliens on limited stay in this country, and, at the same time, enlarges the statutory grounds for deporting objectionable aliens. As the bill provides that quotas under existing laws shall not be disturbed, we think that the objectives of this bill are praiseworthy and I am glad to give it our endorsement. Very truly yours, JOHN L. LEWIS. (There was discussion off the record relative to S. 2845, introduced by Senator Copeland, after which the following occurred.) Senator COPELAND. Will you permit me to ask Mr. McVay to say a word about this? Senator SCHWELLENBACH. Yes. STATEMENT OF J. H. McVAY, WASHINGTON, D. C. Mr. MCVAY. My name is J. H. McVay, residence at the Lindbergh Apartments, Washington, D. C. Mr. Chairman, I have listened to the argument on this bill. I am not speaking particularly on this bill. I am speaking for S. 2845, a bill to amend subsection (a) of the first section of the act entitled "An act to supplement the naturalization laws, and for other purposes," approved March 2, 1929, as amended. Certain aliens, who arrived in the United States prior to June 3, 1921, illegally or otherwise, under the present act of Congress may apply for a certificate of registration to legalize their residence in the United States. Senator REYNOLDS. Those who came in prior to that date? Mr. McVAY. Yes; the date of the first quota act. It was apparent there was much confusion and it did not work out. Those arriving between June 1921, and July 1, 1924, the date of the second act, many of them arriving here illegally, thought they were here legally. Many of them thought that. I used to be an immigration inspector and I have checked up on many cases and I know what I am talking about. Many of them had married American women and had American children who were going to our schools. They would like to see their fathers granted the right of citizenship, but due to a peculiar quirk in the laws of 1921 and 1924 these fathers may not acquire citizenship in the United States. I have discussed this matter with representatives of the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Military Order of the World War, and the Military Order of Foreign Wars, and Spanish War Veterans, and all the people who appeared before this committee on immigration matters, and they all agree on this particular bill. I have taken it up with Mr. Shaughnessy of the Department of Labor, sitting on my left. Everybody says it is a good law. It will take care of a deserving class of people. It will not rescind or repeal anything in the 1921 act. If we are going to talk Americanism, let us be consistent. This will deal with a special class of people, foreign-born, who are married to American women and have American children, but under our present immigration laws cannot be deported and cannot apply for a certificate of registration, because they arrived in this country between June 3, 1921, and July 1, 1924. Senator REYNOLDS. It just takes care of those who arrived between those dates? Mr. MCVAY. That is all. Senator REYNOLDS. How many do you estimate are in that class? Mr. McVAY. Nobody can tell that. Mr. Shaughnessy could not do it. It might be 2,000 or 2,800, but, just as he said, nobody knows. No survey has been made. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. I do not like to guess unless I have a basis. Under the Registration Act of March 2, 1929, under which we now operate, we can take care of those who entered prior to June 3, 1921. While that act has been in existence from 1929 to 1937, we have only registered 65,000 to 70,000 people. That includes for all time up to 1921. That will give you an idea that it would not be a tremendous number during this 3-year period. Senator COPELAND. And you cannot deport them? Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. No. Senator COPELAND. They are like a splinter in your thumb-they are just a foreign body. Many of them would be desirable citizens, like the bookkeeper I spoke of and others I have known of. Mr. McVAY. Section 7 is too broad, in this bill you were discussing awhile ago. While I might have my personal opinion on this bill standing here and testifying unofficially, representing these veterans' organizations I can only go as far as my mandate will permit me to go, and that is to favor S. 2845. Senator REYNOLDS. Does not section 7 cover that? Mr. McVAY. It goes too far. It covers thousands. I cannot go along with section 7, speaking for the veterans' organizations. Senator SCHWELLENBACH. Have you any authority to speak for those organizations on section 7? Mr. MCVAY. I have not. Senator COPELAND. Your statement does not apply to section 7, your opinion is that it is too generous? Mr. McVAY. That is my personal opinion. Senator REYNOLDS. Why do you think it is too generous? but Mr. MCVAY. Might I skip that and talk about this particular bill? Mr. MCVAY. In drafting S. 2845 I had an opportunity- Senator REYNOLDS. Has it been reported out by the committee? Mr. McVAY. No. I am hoping this committee will report it favorably. Senator COPELAND. I introduced that bill very recently. Mr. MCVAY. Copies were sent to all veterans' organizations. In principle they have endorsed it. A copy was sent to the Department of Labor. I told the man who helped me frame the bill that as it was originally framed it would repeal the 1921 act. He said "My God, we didn't intend to do that. We just wanted to cover these additional cases." I have had a suggestion to amend the title so as to read: A bill to amend subsection (a) of the first section of the act entitled "An act to supplement the naturalization laws, and for other purposes", approved March 2, 1929, as amended. The amendment is to strike out all after the enacting clause, and in lieu thereof insert what I have just read. Then add at the end thereof the new paragraph: Such registry may also be made as to any alien not ineligible to citizenship in whose case there is no record of admission for permanent residence, if such alien |