Thus, 72 women who visited consuls were assured of visas.

STATEMENT OF MOLLIE STAFMAN KOLINSKI-Resumed

Mrs. KOLINSKI. I would like to ask, Chairman Dickstein, that you permit me to produce evidence to clear the doubt about my husband's right to come to this country, trying to come several times.

The CHAIRMAN. If you have any evidence, we will be glad to have it. Mr. FREE. I would suggest that the record of the Labor Department be produced, showing that he tried to come in first as a minor son of an American citizen and that was revoked.

The CHAIRMAN. There is no objection to that. That will not change the situation. That would not debar him under the immigration laws.

Mr. FREE. Except that it would show that he lied to the consul. The CHAIRMAN. That is splitting hairs and does not interest this committee.

Mrs. KOLINSKI. I also want to ask whether it shows on that statement how old my husband was when he tried to come here?

The CHAIRMAN. We are not interested in that question. We are interested in the evidence in all of these cases, and whatever you have you can submit, and I will take it and it will be before the committee.

This hearing will be continued until next Tuesday, for those that want to speak for or against the bill, including all of these ladies. Mr. FREE. I hope that we will not run over.

The CHAIRMAN. You see what the situation is here. The ladies were here and I wanted to finish with them.

Mr. FREE. I do not want to protest, but I hope that you will not hold hearings after a quarter past 12.

The CHAIRMAN. I thought that we ought to hear these ladies. Mr. FREE. I am not complaining about to-day, but we are now doing it every day. We are just overworked.

(Thereupon, at 1.30 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned.)

EXEMPT FROM THE QUOTA, HUSBANDS OF AMERICAN CITIZEN WIVES, AND TO LIMIT THE PRESUMPTION THAT CERTAIN ALIEN RELATIVES MAY BECOME PUBLIC CHARGES

TUESDAY, JANUARY 19, 1932.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION,

Washington, D. C.

Hon. Samuel Dickstein (chairman) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. We will continue the hearing on H. R. 5869, a bill to exempt from the quota husbands of American citizens, coupled with the other bill H. R. 7614, a bill relating to admission to the United States of aliens likely to become a public charge. Some of the folks are here to-day and we will listen to those who are for the bill and also the opposition.

WALLER C. JENNINGS, SECRETARY TO CONGRESSMAN LONERGAN OF CONNECTICUT

Mr. JENNINGS. Congressman Lonergan would like to go on record as in favor of H. R. 7614, particularly as it applies to the case of Mrs. Zilma Petrovsky, an American citizen living in Hartford, Conn., whose husband is in Warsaw, Poland.

Mr. JOHNSON. How many such cases are there?
Mr. JENNINGS. We only have this one, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. If you have any memorandum with you that you want to file with your statement you may do so.

STATEMENT OF J. H. KELLY, SECRETARY OF CONGRESSMAN CARLEY OF BROOKLYN, N. Y.

Mr. KELLY. My name is J. H. Kelly and my purpose here is to present the statement of a witness who appeared here the other day, a supplemental statement because she is unable to be here, and I will just read her statement.

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 15, 1932.

Mr. Chairman, gentlemen of the committee: My name is Mrs. Mollie Kolinsky. At the hearing of this committee yesterday, January 14, I made a statement concerning a matter being discussed before the committee.

After giving the committee some information, Mr. A. Dana Hodgdon, chief visa division, State Department, asked permission to ask me some questions, which he proceeded to do.

His questions pertained to my own individual case, and as to the facts and as to whether I knew these facts.

He then proceeded to state his alleged facts stating his information was from a report made to the State Department by J. Klahr Huddle, American consul general, Warsaw, Poland, dated January 21, 1931, relating to my petition No. 177098 (V 149816) to bring my husband to the United States.

73

The substance of this report as given by Mr. Hodgdon was according to the consul, that my husband married me for the purpose of evading the restrictions of the immigration laws. That the consul arrived at this conclusion from the fact that my husband had made three attempts to enter the United States or as he stated to "emigrate" to the United States.

That my husband Hersz Kolinsky's first attempt was on the petition of his father to bring him in as a minor; that at that time he was not a minor, therefore petition refused.

That my husband's second appearance was on his application to come to the United States as a visitor, that twice during his examination he stated that he had never made an attempt to emigrate to the United States. That he was confronted with his former application showing this attempt in 1927. Therefore, his application was refused.

The third time my husband appeared was on my petition, which had been approved by the Immigration Bureau September 5, 1930. Our marriage having occurred in August, 1930. At this time he was again asked under oath whether he had ever attempted to emigrate to the United States and according to the consul he denied that he had, until again confronted with the record.

Mr. Hodgdon concluded leaving the impression that this was the record in the case. This is not the fact. If Mr. Hodgdon wanted to be fair he could have related what the records show in the office of the Commissioner of Immigration and what they should and no doubt do show in the records of his department. The record of my case in the Labor Department shows, that the State Department on receipt of their consul's report upon which he based his statement addressed a letter to the Immigration Commissioner with the consul's report and asked the Immigration Bureau if the bureau desired to change or cancel the approval of my petition. On receipt of such report and request, the Immigration Bureau called on the commissioner at Ellis Island to make further investigation with reference to my marriage to my husband and whether my marriage was in good faith or for the purpose of assisting my husband to evade the immigration laws.

In response to this request by the Immigration Bureau, Inspector Habib A. Bishara made a thorough investigation and submitted a detailed report dated March 31, 1931.

The best evidence is this report and I think this committee should have same submitted.

In substance this report detailed what investigation was made and what persons were interviewed and what facts ascertained and in closing stated that he was satisfied and it was his opinion that this marriage was an honest one and there was no intent or attempt to bring in the husband simply to evade the immigration laws but that it was entered into honestly.

This report on its receipt by the Commissioner of Immigration was forwarded to the State Department as a reply to the report of the consul and further stated in the letter transmitting such report: "This department at this time does not contemplate any action to disturb the approval of preference within the quota status accorded this alien as the husband of a United States citizen. (Sept. 5, 1930.)" The parentheses date is the date of the approval by the department. This letter to the State Department of April 9, 1931, was in fact a second approval by the Immigration Bureau after a thorough investigation that this petitioner had entered into a legal marriage and that there was no intent to evade the immigration laws.

MOLLY S. KOLINSKY.

STATEMENT OF A. DANA HODGDON, CHIEF OF VISA DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. HODGDON. For clarification of the record the report of the consul was read by Mr. Free and not myself.

The petition that was canceled by the Department of Labor was the first petition for a nonquota status of this alien as the minor child of an American citizen.

Mr. FREE. Clarify that.

Mr. HODGDON. At that time he was not a minor. He made the representation that he was a minor, which was not true, and that was

turned down by the Department of Labor because he had misrepresented his age and he was not a minor.

Mr. MILLARD. How old was he?

Mr. HODGDON. There was a difference of one year.

The report from the consul is a statement of facts which occurred in Europe, therefore any investigation conducted in the United States by interviewing witnesses who may or who may not have been interested in the case, would not relate to this statement of facts that

occurred in the American consulate at Warsaw. I may add to it that this inference that was put out by the consul in his report was based on several attempts to come to the United States. I personally do not know whether or not it was a bona fide marriage. The Labor Department here in the United States on the basis of their investigation were of the opinion that it was a bona fide marriage, and for the purpose of the record I will put that in.

Mr. FREE. To clear this up-if I remember the facts in the case, this man first applied to come in as a minor

Mr. CABLE. Did this man apply, or did some one else apply for

him?

Mr. FREE. He applied himself-maybe I am wrong-and he gave his age as a certain age which would show him to be a minor. Investigation was made showing he was not a minor. His application was turned down. He then made application to come in as a temporary visitor and denied that he had ever made application to enter the country before that application, and that was denied, and then he made application to come in as the husband of this lady and himself gave what is apparently his real date of birth. This shows when he made the first application he was telling untruths and that it was under oath, violating the law in America in the first application he made.

The CHAIRMAN. The department does not contend that they are holding him up on that ground, but on the ground that he is going to be a public charge.

Mr. FREE. As the kind of citizen he will make.

Mr. CABLE. Did this boy make the application or did some one make it for him?

Mr. HODGON. To refresh your memory, I can read from the consul's report again:

The records further show that on December 18, 1929, Hersz Kolinski appeared at this office for hearing on his application for a visa as a temporary visitor under section 3 (2) of the act. Twice during the examination under oath, he stated that he had never made any previous attempts to emigrate to the United States. He was confronted with his former application which contained his photograph and admitted that he had attempted to emigrate to his father in 1927.

Mr. MOORE. Was he married when he made that application? Mr. HODGDON. No; he was not married when he made this application.

Mr. CABLE. The usual procedure is for the parent to file the petition for his minor child. Does the record show that he was a party to it?

Mr. HODGDON. The record shows as follows: Both in his application, which is made before the consul, and in his father's petition, the birth of Kolinski was given as May 11, 1906. He failed to produce evidence that he was the son of the petitioner and the consul

reported that in this report and submitted it to the Department of Labor, and that petition was canceled.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Are we just trying to show a case here in connection with this bill? I do not know as it is important.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not think so myself.

Mr. JOHNSON. A written letter by a lady who testified has just been read by a clerk of a Member of the House. In making it appear apparently that the records of the Department of Labor were not the same as those of the State Department, I would like to ask Mr. Hodgdon if the consul in his examination of this man on a previous occasion, before he was married, was not performing the duty imposed on him by the United States.

Mr. HODGDON. He was.

Mr. JOHNSON. He was authorized to make inquiry as to the statement presented by him. All that was done according to the law.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask you one question that ought to settle this dispute. Is the consul withholding this visa on these statements he made some time before his marriage, or is he holding this visa on the ground he is likely to become a public charge? That ought to settle it and then the committee will bear that in mind.

Mr. JOHNSON. All this was brought up in the bill to admit husbands. It is becoming an item before this committee. woman, wanted to get to the United States, willy-nilly, hokus-pokus, He married this truth or untruth. If we are going to run them out we have a summer's work here.

The CHAIRMAN. If you are going to bring up that issue I would like to ask the State Department if there are any more cases like that. Mr. HODGDON. This case was brought out because this particular wife came here and appeared as a witness.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any more of that kind among the witnesses who testified here last week.

Mr. DIES. I understood he said that the majority of these husbands were excluded on account of the depression.

The CHAIRMAN. If he is excluded on the ground of the depression, let us go on.

Mr. DIES. Why should we rehash it.

The CHAIRMAN. He was held back on the ground of the depression. That is my understanding.

Mr. DIES. That is not the answer.

Mr. FREE. That sort of thing would indicate to me the bootlegging of husbands into this country. This girl admits it was a chance marriage.

Mr. HODGDON. The consul's report of January 21, 1931 reads:

A review of the records in this case covering three attempts of this alien to emigrate to the United States leads to the assumption that his recent marriage to the petitioner was brought about simply with a view of evading the restrictive provisions of the United States immigration laws.

The Labor Department investigated that and was satisfied that this was a bona fide marriage.

Mr. PALMISANO. Does the petition of this boy show that he was the only child there?

Mr. HODGDON. I haven't got the petition.

Mr. PALMISANO. I understand that a boy being abroad and having his parents here, brothers and sisters here, likely stretched a point to get into the country.