of miscegenation. We recognize that the people of Asia by their industry and talents have, on occasion, produced great civilizations; to be sure, these civilizations are now at a low ebb, but as in the case of Japan, it is conceivable that great advances along material and cultural lines may be possible in the years to come. But these facts and possibilities do not justify Congress in passing an act which will inevitably add to the race problems which are now tormenting the body politic.

In the course of our history three racial problems have borne fruit in deplorable controversies. One of these controversies shook the nation to its foundation in a dreadful fratricidal war. Another of these controversies forced Congress to pass the Chinese Exclusion Act to put an end to a situation in California which threatened a social upheaval of the first magnitude. Still another deplorable situation impelled Congress to terminate Japanese entries into the United States by the enactment of a provision for the exclusion of all Asiatics in the Immigration Act of 1924. That is the law which H. R. 5004 would amend, if the present

Congress approves it.

If you, Mr. Chairman, and the members of your committee want proof of the terrible consequences which inevitably develop from the admission of undesirable and divergent races into the United States, you have only to go to the city of New York and see how the Puerto Ricans live and their effect on social conditions in the community. These people are citizens of the United States, and under the existing law nothing whatsoever can be done to check their entry.

If Congress enacts H. R. 5004 into law, Mr. Chairman, it will turn loose into the community a class of immigrants whose presence will not only aggravate the racial animosities which already exist in our midst, but it will thereby give rise to incidents which will render infinitely more difficult the efforts of our Government to promote amicable relations with the various races and states whose people are the beneficiaries of this bill.

On behalf of the American coalition, permit me to express the hope that your committee will not render a favorable report upon H. R. 5004.

Mr. FELLOWs. Mr. Ennis. Mr. Edward J. Ennis, Committee for Equality in Naturalization.

Mr. CULLUM. Mr. Chairman, I am very sorry to have to say that Mr. Ennis was in the country this morning and his car broke down. I am here as the secretary of this committee and would like to appear in his place.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT M. CULLUM, SECRETARY, COMMITTEE FOR EQUALITY IN NATURALIZATION

Mr. CULLUM. I am Robert M. Cullum. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say in further qualification of my own testimony that during the war period I served as supervisor for the War Relocation Authority, had the responsibility for the relocation program in Ohio, Michigan, parts of New York, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and West Virginia.

I would like to say also that during the latter part of the year 1946 and 1947 I was employed by the Department of Interior to conduct a study which would indicate the postwar adjustment of the evacuated people, and that that study has eventuated in a report called People in Motion.

Mr. FELLOWS. May I interrupt you at that point? You have a statement here before us of some 27 pages, with a supplement of similar length.

Mr. CULLUM. Yes, sir.

Mr. FELLOWs. And to save time

Mr. CULLUM. If I may, there are one or two short pages I would like to read, and I will not read the rest of it.

Mr. FELLOWS. And you want this statement incorporated in the record?

Mr. CULLUM. If you please, sir.

Mr. FELLOWS. Without objection, that may be done.

Mr. CULLUM. Mr. Ennis has arrived. I think I will yield to him. But since I am here there are one or two things I would like to say.

I would like to say that there is a gentleman here in the room, a man of Japanese ancestry, to whom during the war it was my responsibility to administer the oath of office. He was a member of my staff in Cleveland. One does not take that sort of a responsibility too lightly, because I asked him to relinquish his citizenship, which is the only citizenship he was permitted to have. I might say he is certainly a respected member of the community of Cleveland. His name is Tom Sashahari. His wife is the district president of the parent-teachers association there. She has been active in Girl Scouting and so on.

I might also say that on one occasion when about 60 or 70 young Nisei lads left Cleveland for the Army I was asked to make a short speech at the time of their send-off, and I said then that as far as I was concerned I was going to do as much as I could to help bring them up to a point where they would be equal with every other American.

I would like to yield to Mr. Ennis at this point.

STATEMENT OF EDWARD J. ENNIS, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE FOR EQUALITY IN NATURALIZATION

Mr. ENNIS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by apologizing for being late. I went to spend last night with a friend in Virginia, and I spent most of the morning in a garage getting his car in shape so that I could get here.

I heard all of the testimony on Monday, and although I have not the advantage of hearing the testimony today the committee has been very kind and patient, and I will not abuse that kindness by attempting to cover everything that is in my written statement.

Mr. FELLOWS. That statement is to be incorporated in the record. Mr. ENNIS. I would appreciate that very much, Mr. Chairman, because we have done a good bit of work on this, and we have included in this statement a statistical appendix in which we try to tell the members of the committee the facts about the people who will be affected by this legislation.

Now, our committee is just a committee of American citizens who are interested in eliminating a racial discrimination from naturalization. It includes many people who have had the advantage of meeting and knowing the minorities who will be affected.

One member of our committee, who intended to testify today except for his absence on official duties, is John McCloy, the President of the International Bank, who was the Assistant Secretary of War. In the course of Jack McCloy's duties as Assistant Secretary of War in charge of the wartime aspects of the evacuation from the west coast, he had occasion to learn about the one minority group, the Japanese. He also, as Assistant Secretary of War, had occasion to put over the use of our Japanese-American boys in combat troops, and he has spoken to me personally about what a wonderful thing it was for all of our people that we used these citizens and gave them the chance to prove how much they were completely a part of us.

Any qualifications I might have to speak to you this morning are based on the fact that prior to the war I was the general counsel of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and, as such, am familiar with our immigration policies. During the war I was Director of Alien Enemy Control in the Department of Justice, and it was my job not only to deal with the problem of the internment of all Japanese aliens but I was the Department of Justice representative in dealing with the evacuation from the west coast.

I handled for the Government the litigation which went to the Supreme Court upholding the right of the Government to do that as an extreme wartime measure. I also handled the martial law litigation from Hawaii. I went out to Hawaii and discussed the problem of the large Japanese minority in Hawaii with Admiral Nimitz and General Richardson, in determining what attitude should be taken by the Government in respect of martial law.

So, I have had ample opportunity to become familiar with the largest minority affected by this legislation.

Now, all I am going to say to the committee, and very briefly, is that I think it beyond debate, serious debate, that in our country all of the persons who are living here ought to have a chance to become citizens without being barred by their national origin or race. Of course, every man should be required to fulfill the highest persona! standards in order to become a citizen. His moral character, his loyalty and devotion to the United States should be beyond any question. But he is entitled as an individual to prove his worth as an individual and not to be barred as a member of a race or a national group.

I would like to emphasize that my committee was not interested in the immigration aspects of this legislation. All we were interested in is obtaining an equal right to naturalization for persons who are lawfully in the United States.

But immediately as we studied the question we ran into the fact that the phrase "ineligible to naturalization" in our naturalization law is also used as one of the grounds of exclusion in our immigration laws. So, as far as my committee was concerned, we had two choices. We could just suggest a simple bill which would say that everyone who is a resident of the United States up to today, or up to 20 years ago, should become citizen without discrimination based on race, in which we would be proposing to you that you do a piecemeal job. We would be back again in a couple of years saying, "Now, let the people in who were lawfully here in the meantime."

We discussed this question with the State and Justice Departments, and the bill which they produced, we think, ties the naturalization thing and which we are interested in-to an immigration program which I believe does not in any way change our immigration policies, does not in any way violate the principle of the quotas which we have had since the 1924 act.

Now, I am not going to analyze the law. I know that Monday you heard a very able exposition of the law, and I am sure that if Commissioner Miller and Mr. Shaughnessy have spoken this morning you have heard an exposition of the law. If there are any questions about its actual operation, I would be glad to answer them.

Mr. CHELF. How many familles are involved here in the United States who are lawfully admitted that are Japanese-American, for instance? How many are already here in the country?

Mr. ENNIS. Mr. Congressman, I cannot give you the answer in families. I can tell you very roughly that there are about 40,000 aliens, individuals, in the United States who would be affected, and there are about 50,000 in Hawaii. No, it is about 50,000 in continental United States and 40,000 in Hawaii-individuals who would be affected by this legislation.

Mr. CHELF. Are there any families in Japan now that will be affected?

Mr. ENNIS. No; I do not believe so, unless you are going to have this minimum quota for Japan of 100.

Mr. CHELF. I mean mothers and fathers of boys who fought--the nisei. Were there any involved in that, Doctor?

Mr. JUDD. No, they could not come in except on quotas if they are not here. This applies only to people already legally admitted for permanent residence.

Mr. CHELF. I see.

There was confusion in my mind on that point.

I am glad to get it clear.

Mr. GOSSETT. Let's keep the record straight, not that it is very important, but if one here became a naturalized citizen who had a spouse, for example, in the other country, would not the spouse come in as a nonquota immigrant?

Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. He would under the terms of this bill.
Mr. ENNIS. Yes; that is correct, Mr. Gossett.

Mr. GOSSETT. That would probably apply to very few cases, but nevertheless

Mr. ENNIS. That is correct, Congressman. The Congressman suggested fathers and mothers.

As I say, I am not going to analyze this bill nor am I going to say much of anything about these people. My written statement which will be in the record contains the facts which we have gathered about the fine record that this minority-and I speak of the Japanese, not because we are interested in the Japanese, but it just happens that 95 or 96 percent of the people affected are Japanese.

In studying the statistics of what kind of a record, what kind of a social record, they have made in this country, we have considered what their record is for crime, what kind of a job have they done as residents of this country, and so forth. The record is a splendid one, and those facts are included in my statement.

Now, the thing that I would like to say a few words about, if it is in the mind of any of the members, is what the wartime record of these people consists of. And there are three points I would like to mention. One is the actual combat record.

Now, I do not have to repeat for you gentlemen, because the record will show it amply, that their war record is as good as any group in our community. The four hundred and forty-second, which was in Italy, is, I believe, the most decorated group of its size in the whole

war.

And you have in the record testimony of the officers under whom these people fought. You do not need it from me.

I will say only a word about the interment program, which was under my immediate direction, and the evacuation, which, although operated by the Army, I was in daily contact with.

Now, about internment, of course, a large

Mr. CHELF. Excuse me. How many families were actually involved in that? How many families actually were involved that had to be transferred from California inland?

Mr. ENNIS. The entire Japanese-all persons of Japanese ancestry; something around 120,000 persons. That consisted of about a third aliens and two-thirds citizens.

Mr. CULLUM. Mr. Congressman, I think we can get that figure and have it in the record for you if you would like to have it.

Mr. ENNIS. It is around 120,000.

Mr. Chelf. Just approximately.

Mr. ENNIS. Of course, on the night of Pearl Harbor the Department of Justice picked up hundreds of Japanese aliens, and we interned several thousand Japanese aliens, as we did German aliens.

The sum of my experience as Director of that program is that after studying their records and watching the Japanese as carefully as we could, we finally believed in the Department that the Japanese never offered the aggressive menace which the Germans did. We found the Germans much better organized both on the propaganda front and on any possible attack from the point of view of sabotage.

You must understand that the Government in wartime interns persons of enemy nationality not because they are proved to be guilty of any hostile conduct but simply as a precaution for the Government that nothing shall happen. If there was any suspicion of any kind against any alien enemy, whether German, Italian, or Japanese, we would intern them. We were not taking any chances.

But, on the whole, I think I can fairly say that we found even that small proportion of the Japanese population which we thought it was wise and safe to intern entirely docile, an easily manageable group. We had no trouble with the Japanese aliens.

I think it was said on Monday, and you will recall that there is no case of a Japanese person either in the United States or in Hawaii being convicted of sabotage of any kind against our war machine. That is a pretty extraordinary thing when you go out to a place like Hawaii, as I did several times during the war, and find that our great naval base at Pearl Harbor is in a community where one-third of the residents are persons of Japanese ancestry, and yet our military have the highest praise for the way that that part of our population conducted themselves in that wartime outpost during the entire struggle, and even in the beginning, after the immediate Japanese success, where, if there was any planned sabotage, you would expect it to have sprung up on that fateful Sunday, December 7, 1941.

Now, on the evacuation, I was in the discussions with the Secretary of War and the Attorney General and Mr. McCloy, the Assistant Secretary, when that difficult decision was made to evacuate all of the Japanese people from the west coast. What it finally came down to, as perhaps it had to come down to, was that no official in Washington in those early days of the war, from the President down, would take the responsibility for making that decision. It was felt in the last analysis that that had to be left to the military commander sitting in the Presidio on the west coast-General DeWitt.

Now, I went out and talked at great length in the first days of the war to General DeWitt about the terrible problem it was to the civilian departments, with our great responsibility not only to help wage the war but to enforce the Constitution of the United States. And he agreed that it raised serious problems in our kind of a country.

But, in those days, we did not know whether Japan, after the successful attack on Pearl, planned an attack upon our west coast