« ÎnapoiContinuați »
as it seems to me it would be a very unfortunate reversal of American policy, and would be a very unjust and inhumane position for this Government to take.
Senator SCHWELLENBACH. Thank you very much for your contribution.
STATEMENT OF EDWARD J. SHAUGHNESSY, ACTING COMMIS
SIONER OF IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.
Senator SCHWELLENBACH. You may proceed, Mr. Shaughnessy.
Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. My name is Edward J. Shaughnessy, Acting Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization.
Mr. Chairman, I had intended to analyze these bills from beginning to end, but I find that the witnesses have so excellently covered every phase of the four bills that I think I can save the time of the committee by merely placing in the record our written analyses of these bills. So if I have the permission of the Chair to place our written analyses of these bills in the record, I will waive the privilege of making an oral discussion of the bills. However, I will be very glad to answer any questions which the committee might have in mind.
Senator SCHWELLENBACH. In the first bill, Mr. Shaughnessy, S. 1363, has the Department made any investigation as to the cost of the operation of section 2?
Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. We have not, for the reason that our Department has no authentic statistics on the number of aliens that have received the relief required to make them deportable under section 2 of the bill.
Senator SCHWELLENBACH. Did we not include in the appropriation bill last year some requirement of Mr. Hopkins to find out how many aliens are receiving assistance?
Mr. ShaughNESSY. There was an amendment in the House which was attached to one of the relief appropriation bills that provided that no part of the appropriation should be expended for the employment of any alien who is illegally in the United States. That was a function of the W. P. A., I believe they determined. I know that the W. P. A. does have some statistics which I feel sure you could get from them. I do not have any at the present time.
Senator SCHWELLENBACH. S. 1364 relates to registration. Are you able to give the committee any estimate of the cost of operation under that bill?
Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. We have roughly estimated that something like 2 years would be required to register all aliens in the country, and that the cost would be at least $6,000,000 the first year, $4,000,000 the second year, and $2,000,000 for 3 years thereafter, to care for that registration and care for the records. It has been estimated that a personnel to the number of 3,000 would be required for the first year, 2,000 for the second, and 1,000 for the third.
Senator SCHWELLENBACH. Has this bill been submitted to the Director of the Budget?
Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. The bill has been submitted to the Director of the Budget, and he has forwarded it, with comments dated February 16, to the chairman of the Senate Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, endorsing the position that we have taken on the bill, which is an adverse position.
May I say in behalf of Mr. John Farr Simmons, Chief of the Visa Section of the Department of State, that insofar as S. 1366 is concerned, he had intended to be here this morning and put into the record a letter addressed to the Director of the Budget by the Secretary of State, in which that Department takes the solid position against reduction of quotas and the extension of the quota system to countries in the Western Hemisphere. I am submitting a copy of that letter for the record. In that letter the Secretary of State endorses the position taken by the Department of Labor on the other sections of the bill, S. 1366.
Senator SCHWELLENBACH. That may be incorporated in the record. (The letter referred to is here set forth in full, as follows:)
APRIL 8, 1937. Hon. DANIEL W. BELL,
Acting Director, Bureau of the Budget. MY DEAR MR. BELL: With reference to Mr. Fullaway's letter of March 16, 1937, with its enclosed adverse report from the Secretary of Labor concerning S. 1366, the following comment is offered:
With regard to section 1 of the proposed bill, it has been noted that the Secretary of Labor has submitted in detail her reasons for objection to the various provisions of the section in question. As regard the proposals of this section (1) to reduce immigration quotas to 10 percent of those established by existing law, (2) to grant preference to certain near relatives of citizens or lawfully admitted aliens, and (3) to reduce the quota for nonpreference aliens to 20 percent of the new quotas, the Department of State does not wish to add at the present time any comment to the views already expressed by the Department of Labor in regard to these questions.
As to that part of section 1 which would impose immigration quotas on natives of independent countries of the Western Hemisphere, it is desired to emphasize that such action would have the effect of revoking a privilege granted for good reason to Western Hemisphere countries under the 1924 Immigration Act and would undoubtedly lead to much misunderstanding and resentment on their part at a time when the administration is taking active steps to foster the good-neighbor policy. Furthermore, there is no problem whatever in regard to Western Hemisphere immigration at the present time. Immigration of Canadians has never been regarded as a serious problem, and has been more or less matched, for a number of years, by emigration from this country to Canada. Immigration from Mexico, though admittedly a serious problem prior to 1929, has been effectively reduced by administrative action to a point where it has averaged less than 1,400 per annum for the past 3 years. Existing immigration law, particularly those sections of the 1917 Immigration Act dealing with public charges, illiterates, and contract laborers, would seem, as administered for a number of years past, to form an effective and permanent barrier against any undue immigration of Mexican labor. These measures have already accomplished, without international disturbance, what those desiring a quota on Mexico seek to accomplish in another way.
Ås regards the paragraph of section 1 authorizing the Secretary of State to permit immigration from Western Hemisphere countries on a reciprocal basis, by virtue of individual agreements with those countries, there would seem to be objection to this type of legislation (1) as being unnecessary for the reasons above indicated in regard to Western Hemisphere quota proposals and (2) as instituting a radical departure from our present policy of regulating immigration according to our own national needs and requirements rather than upon some other basis, such as a computation based on the admission of American citizens into foreign countries.
The Secretary of Labor's views on sections 2 to 10, inclusive, as expressed in her report under reference, are approved. Sincerely yours,
UNITED STATES SENATE,
May 4, 1937. Hon. LEWIS B. SCHWELLENBACH,
United States Senator, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR LOUIE: Recalling that you suggested at the hearings last Tuesday that section 3 of my bill, S. 1366, relating to intelligence tests, be redrafted and made more specific, I therefore submit for your consideration the following redraft of the aforementioned section 3, subsection a:
“From and after July 1, 1937, no immigration visa shall be issued to any applicant over sixteen years of age unless examined by an American psychologist and found to have a mental age of fourteen years or more by the Stanford-Binet test translated into the native tongue of the applicant and supplemented by an Army individual performance test showing a mental age of twelve years or more. Children from ten to sixteen years of age to be eligible for entry shall be tested and found to have a mental age of not more than one year below their chronological age by the Stanford-Binet test and a mental age by the Army performance test of not more than two years below their chronological age. Children under ten years and over three years of age to be eligible for entry shall be tested and found to have a mental age of not more than half a year below their chronological age by the Stanford-Binet test. Children below three years of age to be eligible for entry shall be tested and found to have a mental age at least equivalent to their chronological age on the Kuhlmann or Gesell scales.”
You will observe that I have been extremely conservative in this redraft as to requirements and mental age, and in the scientific aspects I have been guided very largely by Dr. C. P. Armstrong, psychologist attached to the court of domestic relations of New York City, and others. With assurances of my esteem, I am, Most sincerely yours,
ROBERT R. REYNOLDS. Senator SCHWELLENBACH. There appearing to be no further witnesses on either side, the hearings are closed.
(Whereupon, at 11:20 a. m., on Friday, Apr. 30, 1937, the hearings in the above entitled matter were closed.)