mittee based its favorable report go beyond these specified limits. The phrase in section 302: "Any alien who shall act in the United States in behalf of any foreign government or foreign political party or group" is capable of the broadest interpretation. Under this section, it would only be necessary to allege that an alien had acted "in behalf of any foreign government or foreign political party or group" to accomplish his deportation.

Statements of Representative Hobbs show that this bill will not require proof of actual membership in the organizations named. Representative Hobbs said, in response to a question

that the second phase of the title is exactly for that purpose, to get away from the necessity of making any proof of the party or affiliation or anything else, whether they can prove it was in behalf of a foreign government or not.

Thus it is clear that this bill is designed to act as a dragnet for any alien who may be a member of an organization having international affiliations, even though it cannot be proved that the alien was

acting in behalf of any foreign government or foreign political party or group.

Many thousands of American citizens are members of groups, organizations, committees, and the like with foreign connections. Many of these are commended by the press and leading public figures, which reserve their fire for labor organizations.

The organized-labor movement recognizes that an attack on the civil rights of aliens is invariably accompanied by an attack on the rights of United States citizens. H. R. 3 provides concentration camps for noncitizens. It is a quick and simple step to concentration camps for native-born who violate any of the tory canons set up by those who are opposed to the efforts of American workers to better their living standards through organization in trade-unions.

Workers have long known that an attack on liberty directed at any minority group is an attack on the liberty of all the people of America. The labor movement recognizes this basic truth; as we defend our racial and national minorities, so do we defend ourselves. The cause of freedom is indivisible. Abraham Lincoln said a long time ago that a nation cannot live while a part of it remains in slavery. We cannot live as a free people while we permit the oppression of any group, whether a fraction or a section of our population. That is why the labor movement defends the rights of all men and women, why it advances the cause of all mankind-whatever the race or national origin.

And that is why the affiliated organizations of the C. I. O. maritime committee are opposed to passage of H. R. 3.

Mr. WEAVER. Any questions?

(No response.)

Mr. WEAVER. Does that conclude your statement, Miss Kahn?
Miss KAHN. Yes, thank you.

Mr. WEAVER. The committee will adjourn. We will have another meeting on Wednesday. There are three more witnesses who desire to be heard.

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., the subcommittee adjourned until 10 a. m., Wednesday, April 30, 1941.)

SUPERVISION AND DETENTION OF CERTAIN ALIENS

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1941

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE No. 2 OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,

Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10:30 a. m., Hon. Zebulon Weaver presiding.

Mr. WEAVER. Let the subcommittee come to order.

Mr. HOBBS. Mr. Chairman, the distinguished majority leader of Congress has an amendment to this bill which he desires to propose, and I suggest we hear him first, recognizing that his duties are multifarious and important.

Mr. WEAVER. I am sure the committee will be happy to hear our majority leader, and certainly, because of the many duties he has to perform, we will not detain him.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN W. McCORMACK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. McCORMACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, several weeks ago the secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, who is a very fine public official, called in to see me with the distinguished minority leader, Mr. Martin, he being a personal friend of both of us, and one whom we respect very profoundly.

He was very much concerned over a situation that had been called to his attention, and he conferred with the distinguished minority leader and they did me the honor to call and see me, and while I am appearing here personally, in my individual capacity, I think I speak the views, in his individual capacity, of my friend from Massachusetts, Mr. Martin.

Early in January, a man living in Massachusetts, whose name is unnecessary for the record, although I have the data here, went to the naturalization office in Boston to be a witness for some person seeking citizenship, and it seems that he was born in Canada and he came to the country as a child. His father was naturalized during his minority, and, of course, he assumed that he was a citizen.

Mr. WEAVER. He came to the United States?

Mr. McCORMACK. Oh, yes; as a child. His father was naturalized during this boy's minority, and, of course, he thought he became a citizen automatically, but upon inquiry found that there was no legal record of his entry, when a child, into the United States, although there was of the father, otherwise the father could not have become a citizen. This boy assumed that he was naturalized upon his father's

papers, and not being aware of the fact that there was no record as to his entry, he like probably many thousands of others, countless thousands of others, along the Canadian border and the Mexican border-I imagine there are thousands of similar cases, so this is not an isolated case and after arriving at voting age he registered as a voter. It is fair to assume there are thousands of other similar cases. Of course, when he went to act as a witness, the duty and the responsibility of the officials of our Government was to determine whether he, in fact, was a citizen, and, of course, the important thing for them to find out was whether or not there was a record of his entry into the United States, and in his case they found there was none, so they said he was not a citizen. They are technically right under existing law. There are undoubtedly tens of thousands of similar cases.

The result of this is that every person who came into the United States while they were a minor and became naturalized upon the naturalization of their father, or one of their parents, will be fearful as to whether or not they occupy the same position. It has broad ramifications and broad effect. For example, anyone might be disturbed about appearing as a witness for someone else seeking naturalization; they may be disturbed about filing a civil-service application. It may have a serious effect on tens of thousands of such persons who came in here as minors, where there is no record of their entry, and who considered they became citizens upon the naturalization of a parent.

This is not a case of a person whose parents came in here without a legal record being made. Of course, we are aware of the fact that records for from some time before 1906, were not perfectly kept. Many honest mistakes were made. Records were incomplete in many cases. Certainly a youngster, 2, 3, or 6 years old, is not going to come into this country illegally. It is just a question, so far as the child is concerned, of there being no record made.

Prior to the passage by Congress of the act of June 29, 1906, the record of entry by aliens into the United States was not required. After its passage fairly accurate steamship records exist of the entry of aliens into this country where such entry was from the sea, and through some port of entry. Unfortunately, however, with respect to aliens entering the country from the border states, such as Canada and Mexico, such records are found quite incomplete. It is conceded, even by Federal authorities competent to judge, that it was some years after the 1906 act became law before any really effective effort was made by the Government to enforce the law in sections of this country bordering on Canada and Mexico.

As a direct result of such conditions many persons, minors at the time of entry, legally entered this country, but no record of their entry exists.

This creates a situation where it is variously estimated that there are now in the State of Massachusetts alone over 100,000 such persons; the same thing applies to New York and all the border States. There must be thousands of such persons occupying a similar position, minors at the time of their coming to this country, who cannot establish by official Federal record any legal entry into the United States, and of course we know that the record itself is the only evidence, and if you cannot show the evidence, it is assumed for the purpose of naturalization that you have not got a legal entry.

This is not a Massachusetts problem alone. I refer to the Massachusetts case because this developed in Massachusetts. I have in my hands a photostatic copy of the letter sent to the party out of which this situation developed. It applies to every State contiguous to the Canadian and Mexican borders and affects the citizenship status of tens of thousands of residents of such States. Many thousands of persons in this class upon reaching the age that entitled them to become registered voters, had every reason to believe and did believe that they were citizens through the naturalization of their parents and the required permanent residence in this country.

Prior to the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Kaplan v. Todd, Commissioner of Immigration (267 U. S. 228), it does not appear that the question of citizenship status of this class of persons was ever raised by election officials in connection with the registration of voters.

The Federal law governing cases of this class prior to the passage of the recent Nationality Act, so-called, of October 14, 1940, is here cited. (R. S. sec. 2172) United States Code, title 8, section 7.

Citizenship of children of persons naturalized under certain laws: The children of persons who have been duly naturalized under any law of the United States, or who, previous to the passing of any law on that subject, by the Government of the United States, may have become citizens of any one of the States, under the laws thereof, being under the age of 21 years at the time the naturalization of their parents, shall, if dwelling in the United States, be considered as citizens thereof; and the children of persons who now are, or have been, citizens of the United States, shall, though born out of the limits and Jurisdiction of the United States, be considered as citizens thereof.

This section made children of persons duly naturalized in the United States, who were minors at the time of the nauralization of their parents, citizens if dwelling in the United States.

It was not until the decision in the Kaplan case, above cited, and the insistence thereafter of Federal authorities, requiring actual Federal records of entry, that the question of establishing a legal entry into this country became a vital issue in respect to certain persons claiming derivative citizenship through a parent naturalized during their minority. Even though the naturalization procedure required names, ages, and places of birth of minor children of an applicant for naturalization to appear on the application paper, the Federal authorities construed the effect of the Kaplan decision to mean that a person must establish a legal entry by producing evidence of such entry from the Federal record at the port or place of entry in this country, that the burden of proving such legal entry was upon the individual and not on the Government and that in the absence of actual record of entry the person could not prove citizenship and, therefore, was required to register his entry with the Immigration Service.

It seems, therefore, apparent from the above statement of facts that Federal legislation is necessary to remedy a great injustice and to give rights of full and complete citizenship to many thousands of honest, law-abiding people who are beyond question of doubt legal entrants into the United States, but who, through no fault of their own, were not properly recorded as such entrants by Federal officers. Such people are thereby deprived of many opportunities for employment where citizenship papers of proof of citizenship are required, and are in their own belief now exercising full rights of citizenship and holding public office in many States. For the purpose of cor

recting this manifest injustice the following draft of a proposed Federal act is suggested and your assistance in its passage is urgently solicited.

I took the matter up with the Department of Justice, and as a result of that, under date of March 28, 1941, I received the following letter from Matthew F. McGuire, Acting Attorney General, in which he says:

Hon. JOHN W. McCORMACK,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CONGRESSMAN: This refers to conferences which you have had with representatives of this Department concerning the status of certain natives of Canada now in the United States, who claim American citizenship through the naturalization of their parents.

It is believed that the following amendment to the pending bill dealing with deportable aliens (H. R. 3) will properly meet the situation, and is satisfactory to this Department.

Amend H. R. 3 by adding at the end thereof an additional section to be known as section 403, to read as follows:

"SEC. 403. The Nationality Act of 1940 is hereby amended by inserting therein a new section immediately following Section 316, to be known as Section 316 (a): "SEC. 316 (a) A person born of alien parents in a country contiguous to the land borders of continental United States, who entered the United States as a minor prior to July 1, 1924, and who on or before the effective date of this Act was a registered voter in any State and who claims citizenship through the naturalization of a parent, upon proof satisfactory to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, of the naturalization of such parent, shall be held to have been legally admitted into the United States for permanent residence.'" With kind personal regards.

Here is a letter I received from F. W. Cook, secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, under date of March 28. By the way, the memorandum I just read was one he sent me, so I do not claim originality, although I concur, from my own study, in what he said:

I am enclosing herewith a brief memorandum in support of the proposed congressional bill in respect to which I conferred with you on Wednesday last. This matter first came to my attention as the result of a registered voter in Massachusetts, whom I will hereafter entitle "Mr. A," being informed of the fact by the immigration authorities in Boston that he was not a citizen.

The facts briefly are as follows: Mr. A came to this country from Canada with his parents, at an early age, and has continuously lived in this country since his entrance. In 1912 his father applied for naturalization in this State as a citizen, and duly became one. On the application for naturalization Mr. A's age, residence in this country, and birthplace appeared. Later upon reaching his majority he naturally assumed that, due to his long residence in this country, and the naturalization of his father, he derived citizenship through that source, and apparently had no difficulty being registered as a voter in Massachusetts. A few months ago, having been a voter in Massachusetts for some years, he appeared as a witness before an examiner of the naturalization service in support of the naturalization of a mutual friend. At the hearing before the examiner he was asked his place of birth and date of entry into this country, and was there informed that they would have to search the Federal records to ascertain whether or not there was any record of his entry into this county, and that in absence of any such record he could not establish his citizenship, and therefore would be obliged to apply for naturalization. Upon examination by Federal authorities no record of his entry was found, and he was then told it would be necessary for him to apply for naturalization, and to pay the head tax, so called, and other fees totaling $18 or else to register and be fingerprinted as an alien.

This is not merely a local matter affecting a few persons, but unquestionably there are hundreds of thousands of people in States along the border line who may be affected by this ruling. It would seem unwarranted to make them pay a fee of $18 or else be fingerprinted as aliens.

I sincerely hope you will feel justified in sponsoring this bill and assisting in its passage.