« ÎnapoiContinuă »
could easily sense the earnest desire that the United States should participate in the affairs of the bureau.
Mr. Box. What is the function and the attitude of the division of migration, especially in relation to the United States?
Doctor LAUGHLIN. The division of migration, so far as the gathering and distribution of international migration statistics are concerned, plays very much the same part in international affairs as our Bureau of Immigration does in national affairs, except, of course, that the international division has no laws to enforce in actually handling human migrants. In the international office, the same as in American administration, the matter of migration is made a subdivision of the labor department. For the first time in the history of the world there is a central bureau which makes it its business to keep informed concerning the international movements of peoples. It issues a series of publications, one of which is called the Monthly Record of Migration. This is a bulletin which contains a survey of the current movements of international migrants, statistically reported, and also gives much other international migration news, such as records of laws, bills, treaties, agreements, and notes on supply and demand of labor; also news notes on attitudes and situations. Then, in other papers, there have been compiled the existing laws and treaties covering the subject of migration. This service is indeed a very valuable one.
There are so many functions of government and specific types of international relationship that it is interesting to trace the history of the International Labor Bureau, and to find out why the League of Nations established a labor bureau before bureaus for the considera
a tion of other types of international governmental functions. During the war labor suffered terribly and had to be promised a better day when
peace came. To the European wage earner in overpopulated and unindustrialized regions, emigration means a better wage, more permanent employment, and, consequently, better opportunities for social advancement. Thus in establishing an international labor bureau which would study the supply and demand of labor in different regions of the world, labor, as an international commodity, would be benefited. This holds particularly true in those regions which are exporting labor, because they have a surplus of it. From the viewpoint of international movement of labor, there are two interests to be considered—the welfare of the exporting nation and also the welfare of the importing nation. Consequently in the control of the policy of an international division of migration, if the matter is entirely impartial and international, the full interests of both the emigrant-exporting and the immigrant-importing nations should be considered.
As the matter stands to-day, most of the authority in the division of migration at Geneva is exercised or derived from those nations which have a surplus of labor. It would be very difficult for this bureau to exercise an impartial attitude toward the welfare of importer and exporter unless more of the immigrant-importing nations were represented. Most of Europe and part of the East are overpopulated, and are, therefore, naturally emigrant-exporting nations, while all of the countries of Pan America, together with the British Dominions, are still immigrant-receiving or importing nations. Consequently, no matter how the different nations may align them
selves in international conference on other subjects in human migration', we would expect representation and alignment, in accordance with the geographical limitations which I have just named.
At present the League of Nations, in its ability to control the policy of human migration, must be looked upon more as a sort of European Monroe Doctrine than an impartial international body, It is, of course, proper that the exporting nations should be well represented, but predominant continental interests can not be substituted for impartial international control. The Pan American Union as one unit, or the English-speaking nations and dominions (with the exception of the British Isles) as a unit, have in common a considerable international interest to balance the present interests of the several emigrant-exporting nations.
Mr. Box. Of course, the League of Nations consists now mainly of European countries. In order that I may not be misunderstood and to show the purpose that I have in mind, I have thought that their whole policy tended to international control of the subject, and that international control would be now largely from the European viewpoint. I should like to have any additional information that the committee can get on that subject.
Doctor LAUGHLIN. I can give the results of my own observations. At the forthcoming International Conference on Emigration, which will be held in Rome in May, 1924," there will, doubtless, be made an effort to agree upon the "definition of a migrant." The tendency at the international bureau seemed to be to desire to define an emigrant
an individual who leaves his home country for a greater or less period of time for the purpose of earning a living in a foreign country.” Now, such a person, of course, is not an immigrant proper, such as I have defined under another heading (p. 1285), but is rather a "migrant laborer.” But if the interests of the receiving nations, like all of the American Republics and the Dominions of the British Empire, as well as the welfare of Europe, were equitably weighted, the international rule, more probably, would define the immigrant as person who leaves his or her homeland to go to a new country and who intends to plant himself or herself there and place his or her loyalty with the new country, cutting off all political connections with the old country.” In fact, American naturalization laws, but not our immigration statutes, call for a renunciation of loyalty to the country which the emigrant leaves.
In studying the matter of human migration we must bear in mind that, in fact, in times of peace there are four different major groups or types of persons who move from nation to nation. There are three bases in this grouping: First, the purpose or motive of the individual in moving from the territories of his home sovereign nation into another; second, the length of time which he intends or actually does remain in the host country; and, third, the completeness of destruction of allegiance to the country, which he left. For international statistics, this classification should be used now, and for international and national law it should be made use of as rapidly as possible. It is only a recognition of facts in the case.
A“bird of passage” is one type and a “true immigrant” is another, and there are still others. These actual differences should be recog
See Series IV, Appendix E, the Rome conference, full report of proceedings (p. 1367).
429-247-SER 5A- 5
nized in international law and statistics. Each different type o person who moves between nations exists, and each should be giver its own definition (p. 1285).
Administrators in charge of the international division of migration, with whom I discussed another specific matter, showed a very broad viewpoint. I refer again to the matter of deportation of defectives and the return of persons who enter a country contrary to law Whenever the matter was put up squarely, the officers agreed, in principle, that each nation should be required to care for the defec tives which it produces. This, too, is one of the principles which I stated (p. 1285) a little while previously in listing the fundamental rules which might well control the international aspect of human migrations.
In the compilation of international migration statistics, laws, treaties, and other information the division of migration of the League of Nations is serving a very valuable purpose. If this division is to function impartially with world-wide benefit, immigrant-receiving countries must have equitable voice with the emigrant-exporting countries. The United States and all individual investigators are, of course, anxious to see the international division of migration thrive and increase in world-wide service. And particularly all Americans, as representatives of an immigrant-receiving nation, must desire that the welfare not only of the exporting nation and of the individual migrant, but also of the immigrant-receiving nation, be. duly considered.
The League of Nations seems still to take largely the economic view of human migration, whereas most modern nations, while weighing both the asylum and the economic factors, are giving to the eugenical or biological factors the dominating influence. When the international bureau can attack both the biological and the economic problems of human migration, from the standpoints of both the sending and the receiving nations, it will have functioned well in international service. At present, as a compiler of statistics and of legal and social information, as an agency for advancing the welfare of the individual migrant and of the emigrant nation, and in checking credits and balances on the economic basis, the institution must be praised. But to make it truly a representative body, the interests of the receiving nations must be given greater weight.
COMPARATIVE QUOTA FORMULAS
Doctor LAUGHLIN. The accompanying chart (Table No. 5, opposite p. 1290), shows 25 different immigration formulas worked out in detail. The United States has adopted the policy of limiting immigration, first, by total numbers, and second, by the distribution of this total among the several nations, according to an impersonal formula. The principle of using a formula for this purpose has, by practice, proven its acceptability in international law as entirely within the sovereign right of an immigrant-receiving nation. It has demonstrated also that such an impersonal formula does not, in any manner, run contrary to the "most favored nation" clause which most of our treaties with foreign nations provide in general relations.
In our naturalization laws we have used the principle of race as a basis for qualifying. Our laws have several different bases for limit
98 24, 724
100 was given to 22 coun
ble only to persons eligib