Then there is this paragraph in reference to two or more previous convictions for any crime:

(7) An alien who is convicted of any offense (committed after the enactment of this act and within 10 years after entry) for which he is sentenced to imprisonment for a term which, when added to the terms to which sentenced under two or more previous convictions of the same or any other offense (committed after the enactment of this act), amounts to two years or more.

That paragraph refers to the alien habitual criminal, and the only place where it may run afoul at all is in Michigan, and that, I assume, will be corrected by the Michigan Legislature, because Michigan made a crime with three months' sentence or more a felony, and then the legislature forgot that they had done that, and made a certain law as to the habitual criminal, and that creates the cases we see discussed in the daily press. I think the Michigan Legislature forgot their law about crimes involving three months' imprisonment. That seems to me to be a legislative excess.

We think this deportation bill will meet the public demand and is safe and within bounds and that it can be properly carried out and be a safeguard against viciousness.

The CHAIRMAN. Did your committee act unanimously on this bill?

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The only one in connection with which there is any difference of opinion is H. R. 13793?

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; and that can go to conference in all probability.

Let me explain the matter. The short deportation bill was made up as fast as we could work after I had been before this committee, and about that time the Senate had added the Blease bill, which was one paragraph out of the big deportation bill, which was on the calendar, and that paragraph relates to making it a felony for a deported alien to return under certain conditions. We desired to substitute the Johnson short bill and the reason I said I had a suggested rule

The CHAIRMAN. Have you not stricken out all after the enacting clause in the Senate bill?

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; but we want to be very sure a point of order can not lie against the House bill, as substituted for the Blease bill. The Blease bill is one paragraph out of the original deportation bill. with one or two little minor matters added. So we had suggested here—and it is not my province to suggest, but merely so the committee would not forget it, that it be worded something like this: "In the case of the bill S. 5094, it shall be in order to consider, without the intervention of a point of order, as provided in clause 7 of Rule XVI, the committee amendment recommended by the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization now in the bill, and such committee amendment, for the purposes of amendment shall considered under the 5-minute rule as an original bill.”

That would make in order all matter in the House bill on the Senate short bill.

Mr. BANKHEAD. In other words, your committee amendment adds a lot of new subject matter to the Senate bill which was not covered in the Senate bill?

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. As soon as I can get the committee together, if we have this rule for the Schneider bill and can go to conference, of course, we will not want that bill up.

We are very anxious that the rule should not provide that we take the bills up seriatim or in the order designated, so we have left out those words.

The CHAIRMAN. Those are the four bills you want to take up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. How long do you expect it will take?

Mr. JOHNSON. I doubt if we can do it in one day. We think there should be 1 hour's debate on each bill, and that means 30 minutes on each side. But it is worse than that because debates on bills from our committee has to be divided into quarters, and there would be members for and against them on the minority side and for and against on the majority side.

The CHAIRMAN. You say the committee is practically unanimous except as to one.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. But even if you confine the debate to the matter in a particular bill, the debate will run to the subject of immigration generally, because it is all so interwoven.

I would not crowd the committee and the House at this time if I did not feel that these bills are urgent, one being to meet a court emergency, another being for deportation, to meet the condition that we find, and another being to assist in the administration of the 1924 act. The fourth deals with naturalization.

(Thereupon, the committee proceeded to the consideration of executive business, after which it adjourned.)