Mr. RAKER. I am not talking about labor. You say it should be decided upon a scientific basis that would reach the needs at a specific time. Mr. PANUNZIO. Yes, sir. Mr. RAKER. What do you mean by that? Mr. PANUNZIO. Just what I said; the need for labor at any particular time. What is the use, for instance, of admitting to this country, as we did during the fiscal year 1919-1920, large numbers of people when we had approximately four and one-half million or five millions of people out of employment at that time? What reason was there for admitting even one? And you will recall, Mr. Chairman, when I had the privilege of appearing before this committee on a previous occasion that I cited to you some of my findings in Europe, where certain interests in this country were actually depopulating village after village at that time. Mr. Box. Was that carried into the hearings? Mr PANUNZIO. The chairman asked for certain names and it was thought best that part of the testimony be left out. Mr. Box. It is not in here? Mr. PANUNZIO. No, sir. Mr. Box. I did not recall it. I would like to have that information, though, if it is available. Mr. PANUNZIO. I think that information could be gathered. I do not know whether the consular reports would show it, but I got a good deal of it from the consuls in Italy. Mr. RAKER. Do you not go any further on the subject than the question of the needs of labor at a particuler time? Mr. PANUNZIO. I have already spoken of social assimilability. My chief objection to immigration legislation is that it has devoted its attention almost exclusively to the rejected 3 per cent and it has paid no attention whatsoever to the 97 per cent of those who knock at the doors of the United States and who are admitted, so that many of the problems, some of which have been brought to your attention, I believe, are primarily due to the fact that we have followed a lassez faire policy with respect to the immigrant after he has been admitted to the country. I repeat, the entire body of immigration legislation deals with the question of rejecting the 3 per cent of all those who knock at the gates of the United States and pays no attention whatsoever to the much larger and more important problem of properly caring for the immigrant after he has been admitted to the country. Over and above any restriction, be it 1 per cent, be it 2 per cent, be it any percentage, or whatever be the basis upon which the restriction is placed, it seems to me that there is nothing that is more greatly needed in this country than a body of legislation which will make it possible for the immigrant to find himself, to discover his capacity, to discover where he is needed, to discover how he can become an American citizen, how he can fit in American society. And if you will permit me, gentlemen, to refer to a little book of mine. The Soul of an Immigrant, it will tell you the story of how it took me 18 years of continuous hunting and searching before I became a citizen of the United States, even though I was educated, in part, in Italy, even though I was yearning and seeking for the privilege of becoming a citizen of the United States. Such was the lack of actual interest on the part of authorities and on the part of those who could have guided me that it took me all those years before I could actually become a citizen of the United States. Mr. CABLE. Did you apply right away for first papers ? Mr. PANUNZIO. I applied two years after I came to this country. Mr. CABLE. Then why did you not on your five years' residence become a citizen? Mr. PANUNZIO. Because of my movements from place to place and of the obstacles placed in the way by the law. Mr. CABLE. You blame the law then? Mr. PANUNZIO. I partly blame the law, although I think it has since been corrected in part. I refer to the naturalization law, and not the immigration law. Mr. CABLE. This is a hearing affecting the immigration bill and not our naturalization law. Mr. PANUNZIO. No, sir; this affects the entire question of immigration. I say that what we need is a proper system of regulation, that this regulation should be based upon an elastic principle, and this in turn upon the actual conditions of the country at a given time. And more than this, we need a proper system of distribution and a plan for directing assimilation. Mr. CABLE. Do you want some one man or some group of men to control the number of aliens who should come here year by year? Mr. PANUNZIO. May I say that I am free from any political or economic interests. If anything, I would be on the other side of the fence from where Mr. Emory was, or the interests that Mr. Emory represents. But after studying the plans followed by the various countries, I have reached almost exactly the conclusion which Mr. Emory presented to this committee yesterday. So it will not be necessary for me to go into it in detail. Mr. FREE. I was not here at that time. What was it? What was it, in brief? Mr. PaNUNZIo. A system based on an elastic principle, the application of which should be left in the hands of an administrative board composed of the Secretaries of Labor, Agriculture, and Commerce. This board should from time to time forecast the need of labor and if at a given period there was no need of labor, to have no labor whatsoever come into the country through immigration, and if at other times there was a greater need for labor there would be a greater number admitted within specified or upper limit. Of course, I am perfectly conscious of the fact that there would be a great deal of conflict; there would be a great many interests represented; but still I can not help but feel but that you could trust three of your administrative officers to carry out a definite elastic policy, more or less similar to the Canadian system. Now, Canada does a great deal of that, and South America, Argentina especially, and Brazil; France does the same thing. France goes down to Italy and imports a certain number of laborers in accordance with its present needs. Mr. FREE. Professor, have you gathered anywhere the different systems used by the different countries? Have you compiled it in any way so that we could get it? Mr. PANUNZIO. I am just now working on that very thing. I am working on a book dealing with the subject. I came to Washington to complete my researches. Mr. McREYNOLDS. How many countries have restrictive immigration? Mr. PANUNZIO. You mean selective? Mr. McREYNOLDS. Restrictive and selective, either or both. Mr. PANUNZIO. I think all the great immigration countries have selective and to an extent restrictive immigration. Mr. FREE. What do you mean by great immigration countries? Mr. PANUNZIO. All the countries that do receive-I might put it that way-have restrictive and selective provisions. Mr. FREE. That is what I want to get at. There are countries that will not receive immigrants at all? Do you know what they are? Mr. PANUNZIO. No; I did not make that statement. I said all the countries that are immigration countries have restrictive and selective provisions. Mr. CABLE. The fact is the United States is about the only nation that has a large influx of aliens! Mr. PANUNZIO. That is, that had large numbers previous to the present war. Mr. CABLE. And still has under the present law? Mr. PANUNZIO. Oh, no. The South American Republics receive large numbers of immigrants. Mr. CABLE. Large numbers from Italy? Mr. PANUNZIO. Yes; large numbers from Italy. And I have had a conversation with a man who has just returned from South America, and he tells me that the Germans are going into those countries in large numbers and are colonizing whole sections of South America. Mr. CABLE. And Canada has so much land up there that they encourage immigration in every way they can, do they not? Mr. PANUNZIO. But the Canadian system, I think, is very excellent. Of course, Canada can do what we can not do. Canada selects occupationally and primarily from within the British Empire. Mr. CABLE. Then they can not keep them when they get them, can they? Mr. PANUNZIO. They can. The net result is better than is produced by our system. You must always compare final results. Mr. McREYNOLDS. What about Australia? Mr. PANUNZIO. Australia receives on the restrictive basis, and encourages primarily subjects of Great Britain, as does Canada. Mr. RAKER. Is it not so primary that there are practically no other races there in Australia? Mr. PANUNZIO. Practically, yes. Mr. RAKER. And they have a law by which they can do it? Mr. FREE. The immigration official can keep out anyone he wants to keep out, because he can take a Hindoo and ask him to read Greek, and he can take a Greek and ask him to read a German book. Mr. PANUNZIO. I am not attacking this immigration question from the subjective or racial point of view simply because we have no data on which to base final conclusions as to superiority or inferiority of races; but I am maintaining that an elastic system that will place in the hands of an administrative board the authority to admit one immigrant or no immigrant at all is far superior to our present system. Mr. CABLE. Do you base that entirely on the need or lack of need of labor? Mr. PANUNZIO. Not on that alone. Mr. CABLE. On what else do you base it? Mr. PANUNZIO. You already have provisions in the law and I am not asking for the abrogation of those provisions. Mr. CABLE. You want an elastic board that can, if we need one man, let one man in? Mr. PANUNZIO. Yes. Mr. CABLE. That is, if they need one man for labor? Mr. PANUNZIO. Yes. Mr. CABLE. Is that the only basis? Mr. PANUNZIO. Not at all. Mr. CABLE. What other basis, concretely? Mr. PANUNZIO. First of all, you have the various excluded classes in the law, have you not, which eliminate certain so-called undesirables? And if you trace the history of immigration legislation you will find that you began with certain classes and gradually increased until you have reached now something like fifteen or so classes, if I remember correctly, which are definitely specified and are kept out. Now those are primarily the groups which are kept out because of lack of ability to fit into the social fabric of the United States. Mr. CABLE. Suppose we did not need an additional man for labor for 10 years, would you admit him for any other reason? Mr. PANUNZIO. I would not, not for the time being. Mr. CABLE. Then your idea is that the need of labor is the sole basis for immigration in this country? Mr. PANUNZIO. I also advocate the assimilability basis for admission. Mr. WILSON. When you admitted immigrants on the ground of labor requirements would you have any excluded classes? Mr. PANUNZIO. Not on the basis of countries. I would have them on the basis of occupations of need and of assimilability. Mr. WILSON. Would you exclude absolutely Japanese and Chinese? Mr. PANUNZIO. That brings up another question. That is the larger question of the amalgamation of parent races. Mr. WILSON. If you had charge of this legislation would you have a discriminative provision absolutely excluding the Chinese and the Japanese? Mr. PANUNZIO. I would have a tendency to do it. Mr. WILSON. Well, would you do it? Mr. PANUNZIO. I would do it as in the present laws or treaties, with possible minor changes. Mr. McREYNOLDS. You base your system on the social and economic conditions? Mr. PANUNZIO. Yes. Mr. McREYNOLDS. Can they always be the same, the social and economic conditions? Mr. PANUNZIO. You can not always separate the social, economic, and political conditions of the country. Mr. McREYNOLDS. An immigrant might be ically and not a proper man socially? Mr. PANUNZIO. Yes. proper man econom Mr. McREYNOLDS. How would you play them together, and if you can not play them together, which would you put first? Mr. PANUNZIO. The two can be played together. I believe that it is best not alone for the United States, but also best for the world to have a more or less restrictive immigration policy. I am not standing for a liberal policy at all. I am standing for a restricted policy based upon the social and economic needs of the country at a given time. That social and economic need should be determined not by "heat" but by thoroughly scientific study. Mr. McREYNOLDS. Not by what? Mr. PANUNZIO. Not by heat, but by some light, if you please. Mr. WATKINS. Let me ask you this question concerning your own State: Suppose the Merchant Tailors' Association of Portland, Oregon, wanted to bring in some Finnish tailors and suppose it was your view that the city of Portland did not absorb Finns, what would you do? Mr. PANUNZIO. I would take both things into consideration, and I would not admit them. Pardon me, if I might continue just a word on that. Mr. WATKINS. Yes. Mr. PANUNZIO. Immigrant communities are often misrepresented, I investigated, for instance, the Finnish colony at Astoria, to which you refer, I believe I was down there just recently. You must remember, gentlemen, that many of these newspaper clippings that are presented are not based on actual facts. You know that for youselves you have been before the public long enough to know that many a time you are misrepresented and your words are not even quoted correctly. So it is with many a situation in an immigrant colony. I have lived in immigrant colonies as a student, I have gone steerage for the purpose of discovering the soul of the immigrant, I have tried as objectively as I knew how to get at the actual situation regardless of these high controversial matters of racial capacity, etc., and I have come to the conclusion that many a situation reported by the press is a beautiful thing that is not so, that does not exist. And the Chairman himself has been quoted to me as having said that of all the people who were arrested, for instance, in Seattle, evidence could be produced against only ten per cent of them. The CHAIRMAN. That was for certain offenses supposed to be against the Government. Mr. PANUNZIO. Yes, sir. Now I say, as to many of these reported situations we do not have at our disposal a body of social data upon which we can definitely determine what the actual conditions are but are guided by mere hearsay. Mr. FREE. Professor, I agree with you that it would be a most ideal situation if we could have selective immigration, but have you 78952-24-SEB 1A- -38 |