Now, gentlemen, I believe this to be a fair statement of the issue. The pertinent part of the act of 1918 is found in section 137 of title 8 of the code. It will be noted that (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) of the section deal with exclusion from entry and it will be further noted that the causes for exclusion were present and not retroactive at the time of exclusion from admission.

The Smith Act last year undertook to correct that situation by providing that

any alien who, at any time, shall have been a member of any of the following classes shall be excluded from admission into the United States.

There again you have the question of exclusion. Now, paragraph (g) of the section deals with deportation and I have not noted any material difference in (g) in the Smith Act and in the act of 1918. My fears may be unfounded. I hope the Smith Act will do what we thought it would do in this regard at the time we passed it.

But I entertain a very substantial fear that Bridges will not be held deportable at this time, and I think all will admit that he would then automatically be clothed with the provision of this bill, if it becomes a law. It is unwise to take that chance, gentlemen. In other words, if he is not deportable under the law now, under this bill an order could be issued that would set the matter at rest and perhaps forestall future arrests and trials. The same thing could be done if he is freed now on the facts. Bear in mind, gentlemen, that even the author claims that this bill does not cover, but excludes, the case of Bridges.

. It is his position that Bridges would not come under this bill at all. Therefore, it cannot be contended that this bill would make possible or even facilitate his deportation. The only effect it could possibly have on Bridges and similar cases would be to freeze them here in the event they cannot be, or are not, deported under prior provisions of law. In other words, if they happen to slip through prior provisions of law, then they may safely go to sleep under the provisions of this bill, provided, of course, they can secure an order of the Attorney General. So there it is, gentlemen. That is the chance you are taking.

I come now to the quota question. If I correctly understand paragraph (2) subsection (c) of title IV-page 18 of the bill-the quota for all the future is in a sense mortgaged. There is no end to the years to which an alien could be charged. Then section 402 finishes the job of scrapping the quota system. The Attorney General becomes the czar of the entire immigration system.

Regardless of whatever else you may think of this bill, I cannot too earnestly suggest to you gentlemen that you should go cautiously in doing anything that would scrap the quota system. This was fought for by all patriotic groups in this country. Now to permit the use of unused quotas, as is done in paragraph (1), destroys the quota system. That is the very thing which certain persons here have repeatedly sought to do.

They have proposed to lump together the unused quotas amounting to over 700,000 and let them come to Alaska, where they would soon find their way south of the Canadian border. That bill was pending last year and it is pending now. If you do not believe that this bill provides for using the unused quotas read paragraph (1) on page 18, lines 9 and 10. And I am very glad that the author of the bill, a few

moments ago, admitted that the statement of my colleague, the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Starnes, was substantially correct as to title IV, because title IV, after all, is the heart of the bill; and since the author of the bill has admitted that Mr. Starnes was substantially correct, that, I think, settles it.

Then the bill goes still further, much further. It is not content with using the unused quotas of past years, but in paragraph (2) it proposes to use the quotas for the "succeeding" years. Read lines 16, 17, and 18. That mortgages the quota for 10, 50, or 100 years. If that does not fully do away with the quota system, what does it do?

I desire to call your attention further to section 402 of this title. We constantly have before the Immigration Committee, of which I am a member, stacks of private bills validating the entry of aliens and seeking to do exactly what this section does. The House frowns upon those bills, as you know. Few of them ever get out of our committee. We have them coming there where the applicants secured visas by perjury and every other conceivable means. Of course, that class would not be protected by this section, but rest assured that if this should become a law, another bill would soon follow to include all classes.

They flocked to this country in the past as students, teachers, visitors, and so forth, not for the purpose of seeking citizenship, so they say, because they could not have gotten in for that purpose, but having once gotten in, they now assiduously seek to remain here. The very object of this proposed section is to permit the Attorney General to do what Congress has repeatedly refused to do, namely, to whitewash their entry and put them in line for citizenship. I call your attention to a list of 1,000 names which Mr. Beckworth, of Texas, placed in the record on page A2213. I ask that I may be permitted here to incorporate a portion of this statement and list by Congressman Beckworth because it is illuminating in the face of this proposed section.

Mr. WEAVER. If there is no objection, it may be placed in the record.

(The statement referred to is as follows:)

The authorities of the State Department have been kind enough to make a list-available now-of the first 1,000 cases recommended by the President's Advisory Committee for Political Refugees; they have also provided an interesting summary pertaining to the first 1,000 people. It is revealing to note what vocations have been followed by some of the people; one discerns, for example, only 3 of the first 1,000 people are farmers.

The summary mentioned follows:

The following is a summation of occupations of the first 1,000 refugees whose names were submitted by the President's Advisory Committee on Political Refugees. (The following was compiled according to the latest information available.) Of this number, 697 have received visas.

Mr. WEAVER. Now, gentlemen, I want to digress here a moment to read some of these. Here is a list of 1,000 that the Department has supplied to Mr. Beckworth, and let us see what kind of people they are. They came here as visitors; they are the very class of people that will be protected by this section; they are the very class of people that those who have been trying to break down the immigration laws have been seeking to clothe with protection. We have a stack of bills now before my Immigration Committee covering this class of people, which we consistently refuse to report out.

Mr. HOBBS. What is that a list of?

Mr. ALLEN. A list of persons who are here, who have come here as visitors and so forth. Here are

Merchants, businessmen, industrialists, manufacturers, and bankers, 89.
Attorneys and lawyers, 32.

Do we need any more of them? Do you want them to come here and become citizens?

Editors and publishers, 27.

Can you imagine what sort of editor or publisher would come out of that hellhole of Europe?

Professors and teachers, 25.

Artists and dealers and lecturers, 17.

Physicians and doctors, 15.

Government officials, and so forth, 15.

Secretaries and stenographers, 14.

Social workers, 8.

Imagine social workers coming out of those countries—

Labor leaders, 7.

Do you think that is going to meet the approval of labor leaders in this country? Perhaps Bridges is a sample of what to expect.

Photographers, and so forth, 4.

I ask the committee before you pass on this bill to carefully examine that list, because, gentlemen, that is just a sample of what you are going to have when you report out this bill.

Now, this section would automatically place all those persons in line for citizenship. You know Congress would not think of doing that directly. It may not be possible to deport some of them right now,

but to permit them to remain here and become citizens is an entirely different matter. This is infiltration, nothing more nor less. I understand that many such persons are permitted to come here who have relatives back home and they are bound, with the life of their loved ones at stake, to make regular reports to Germany of conditions found here. Beware, gentlemen, that you do not ease the way for the "fifth column."

Let me say, gentlemen, I do not care to give my authority for that statement, but I understand that they have been coming here as visitors and in every conceivable way, and they have their relatives back home, hostages, so to speak, and they are told by Hitler, "You get me the facts; you report to me regularly." In other words, they are sent here as "fifth columnists," and if they do not carry out their obligations to Hitler here in America, their children and their wives and loved ones back home may have to suffer.

Gentlemen, beware of the "fifth column" that is here already, and beware of legalizing that "fifth column" here. I ask you with all the sincerity of my soul not to report this amended bill out. We will gladly go along with you, Mr. Hobbs; we will gladly go along with you, my friend, on any bill to curb the menace here, and we will gladly go along with you on any bill to restrict immigration; we will gladly go along with you on a bill to protect this country, but we cannot go along with you on a bill that will absolutely do away with the immigration quota system and will absolutely make it possible for Bridges and his kind to be frozen here, if he could get the proper order, and will absolutely tear down everything we have tried to do since 1924. Mr. WEAVER. Any questions, gentlemen?

Mr. HOBBS. I just want to call the gentleman's attention to the fact that the enactment of title III would aid in the presentation of the pending Bridges case by removing the requirement of proof that the Communist Party does advocate the overthrow of this Government by force and violence. In the second place, I would like to call attention to the fact that there are two restrictions that Bridges could not meet in order to entitle him to be frozen here. Even if he persuaded Mr. Jackson, in whom discretion is left, to issue an order. He could not prove to the satisfaction of Mr. Jackson that he is not a member of the Coirmunist Party-Mr. Jackson has already in the public press and in his letters to this committee, signified he is a member, or was a member of the Communist Partyand, second, I don't believe the gentleman will admit that Mr. Bridges is a man of good character.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Hobbs, you know that I wouldn't admit it. But, unfortunately, I am not the one who passes on it. If it had been up to me to pass on it, he would have been gone long ago. I will not be called upon to pass upon that question, but I think the gentleman from Alabama will agree that Mr. Bridges would have no trouble in getting an abundance of people to swear to his good character. He would get his own kind, of course, but they would swear to it. The gentleman will agree to that, will he not?

Mr. HOBBS. Why, of course.

Mr. ALLEN. Now, may I ask the gentleman from Alabama a question? I have carefully recited what I consider to be the situation with reference to title IV, and I want to ask the gentleman from Alabama if my statement as to title IV is fair.

Mr. HOBBS. Why, I think the gentleman is absolutely sincere and is trying to be fair. I don't agree to some of his conclusions. I think the main difference of opinion between him and me is that I have the highest regard for Mr. Jackson, and believe that he will honestly administer this act. That is why we left it to his discretion in title IV, as to who would have this additional leniency extended to him. But it seems to me that when you required as a condition precedent to the extension of any clemency the number of things set out here as a prerequisite-that he is racially eligible to naturalization, that he has been here since January 1, 1941; that he is a person of good moral character, that he is not subject to deportation except for having remained here longer than the period for which he is permitted to remain; that he has complied with the requirements of the Alien Registration Act of 1940, that there is substantial reason to believe that he would be subject to political, racial, or religious persecution if he were to return to his country of residence; that we have hedged it about with prerequisites that must be found by the Attorney General to be true before we extended any further leniency to him. I don't think there is any dispute between us as to exactly what it does, but it is all subject to the determination of the Attorney General that these facts are true.

Mr. ALLEN. In other words, I can only say there with reference to the Attorney General that a "burned child dreads fire." Mr. Hobbs, with reference to title IV you concede that the Attorney General could, if he desired, do away with the quota system.

Mr. HOBBS. No, sir; I do not concede that.

Mr. ALLEN. What is your position on that? I would like to know, because that is very vital.

Mr. HOBBS. I think this bill preserves in its integrity essentially the quota system. I think those unfortunates who are described in this bill, and who are not Communists-if he is a Communist or has ever been a Communist, he is excluded from the benefits of title IV

Mr. ALLEN. Will the gentleman be good enough to read paragraph 2, on page 18, line 12? Read that paragraph and explain it to me, or, rather, give me your interpretation of it.

Mr. HOBBS. I think your understanding of that, as set forth in your testimony, is correct.

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, sir. Now, then, is my understanding, as set forth in my testimony, as to paragraph 1, just above that, substantially correct?

Mr. HOBBS. Yes, sir.

Mr. ALLEN. Well, then, it appears to me, Mr. Hobbs, that this does mortgage the quota for all time to come, in a way.

Mr. HOBBS. That is right, sir, if you grant the figures which were quoted by Mr. Starnes, that there are 505,000 admitted here within the last 3 years, but while that number was admitted, I think about 489,000 of them observed their visa permits and returned. In other words, my information is that there are only 23,000, as a maximum, not counting those that returned since, to which this section applies. Mr. ALLEN. Is it your understanding, then, under these paragraphs on page 18, which we are discussing, that one could come from Czechoslovakia, say, or France, and come in here at any time and have his entrance charged against the quota several years from now?