Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

in cases of unusual hardship, to aliens otherwise admissible but not covered by existing nonquota or preference classifications. Human relationships and exigencies are too complex to fit into any simple scheme of classification. Somewhere there should be discretion to deal with the exceptional case. One example will illustrate what we mean. In a small European country a young husband and wife were recently killed, leaving two infant children. These children have been placed in an orphanage. Their only near relatives are an uncle and aunt living in the United States. The latter are people of means, childless, and anxious to adopt and bring up these children as their own. These children have applied for places in the quota. If immigration is suspended, they must wait indefinitely. It is in such cases not covered by the law that we believe discretion should be exercised. In your recent testimony before the Senate Immigration Committee you are reported to have said that the pressure in such cases would be "heartbreaking.” If the pressure is heartbreaking does it not prove the necessity on humanitarian grounds for just such discretion?

We seriously question whether any new legislation suspending or limiting immigration is necessary or desirable, in view of the sweeping reductions you have already effected and of the international irritation and ill feeling which such legislation might be likely to arouse. On that point, however, we wish to express no opinion. What we do urge is that no legislation be adopted which makes it any more difficult to reunite separated families and we trust that your own influence and recommendations will be used to this end.

Respectfully yours,

Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America, by Worth M. Tippy, executive secretary commission on the church and social service; National Board of the Young Womens Christian Associations of the United States, by Edith T. Bremer, executive, department of immigration and foreign communities; The American Jewish Committee, by Max J. Kohler, chairman committee on immigration, National Association of Travelers Aid Societies, by Katherine E. Young, chairman committee on service to immigrants; American Jewish Congress, by Nathan D. Perlman, chairman administrative committee; National League for American Citizenship (Inc.), by Harold Fields, executive director; The National Council of Jewish Women, by Blanche Bauman Goldman, chairman department of service for foreign born; Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid Society of America, by Isaac L. Asofsky, general manager; Foreign Language Information Service (Inc.), by Read Lewis, director; Immigrants' Protective League (of Chicago), by Adena Miller Rich, director.

DECEMBER 31, 1930.

EXHIBIT B

Immigration quota visa statistics, December, 1930

[Report of State Department, countries with quotas of 300 or more. Monthly 10 per cent of quota, A; preference: Relatives of American citizens, B; farmers, C; relatives of aliens, D; nonpreference, E; total of quota visas reported issued, F1. Per cent issued, G; per cent under issued, H'. Per cent nonpreference issued, I. Per cent non preference underissued, K.]

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

1 Only 10 per cent of quotas which are 300 or over may be issued each month.

Per cent of total monthly 10 per cent issued or underissued.

The figures given under column I represent the percentage of nonpreference visas issued as compared to the monthly 10 per cent ratio after reduction of the preference cases listed under columns 2, 3, and 4.

The figures under column K represent the corresponding underissue of visas.

Lithuania
Netherlands.

Norway.

Poland

Portugal.

Russia..

Sweden

Switzerland..

Yugoslavia..

Totals..

Immigration quota visa statistics, December, 1930-Continued

[blocks in formation]

NOTE.-The above figures represent visas actually reported as issued under each quota. In some instances reports on other visas for which quota numbers have been allotted to distant consulates are received by the quota control officers only after the end of the month for which allotted. The figures given for visas issued at the end of a given month are therefore in some cases provisional in character and are slightly less than the total obtained at a later date.

Immigration visa statistics: On the basis of the following figures, both quota and nonquota, it is estimated that 135,000 aliens who would have come into this country during the quota year ended June 30, 1931, will not receive visas.

Quota statistics: Reports from American consular officers assigned to 21 countries whose annual quotas represent 148,466 of the total quota of 153,714, indicate that of the possible portion of the monthly 10 per cent of the total quotas, which 10 per cent equals 14,816, only 780 visas were issued to nonpreference aliens as compared to 944 in November. This means that there was an underissue in December of 12,915 numbers which were available for issue to such applicants from those countries. In other words there was an underissue of

94 per cent of numbers to this class of aliens who would normally have received visas during that month.

The underissue of the possible monthly 10 per cent of the above quotas amounting to 14,846 is 87 per cent if the visas issued to aliens entitled by law to preference as well as those classifiable as nonpreference aliens is taken into consideration.

Nonquota statistics: The two countries which have furnished the volume of nonquota immigrants to this country are Canada and Mexico which contributed 89 per cent or 70 and 19 per cent respectively of the total of 61,504 visas reported as issued to nonquota aliens during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1930. Consular officers in Mexico initiated stricter enforcement in that country in February, 1929, and in Canada in April, 1930. Reports received for the month of December indicate a continued decrease in visas issued in these two countries.

REDUCTION IN VISAS ISSUED IN CANADA

Canada: Reports received from Canada indicate that only 603 nonquota visas were issued in December, 1930, (which figure includes unmarried minor children, the wives or the husbands of American citizens married prior to June 1, 1928, as well as certain professors, ministers, students, and previous lawful residents of the United States who would not be chargeable to the quota if there were a quota for Canada) as compared with 2,109 visas issued during the same month in 1929, which represents a reduction in visas issued during this period of 71 per cent. The 603 nonquota visas issued in Canada in December show a reduction of 205 visas issued when compared with 808 visas issued in November of the current year (a further reduction of 25 per cent).

Mexico: Only 217 Mexicans (which figure includes unmarried minor children, the wives or the husbands of American citizens married prior to June 1, 1928, as well as certain professors, ministers, students, and previous lawful residents of the United States who would not be chargeable to the quota if there were a quota for Mexico) were issued visas in December, 1930, as compared with 2,569 in December, 1928 (the last corresponding normal month before stricter enforcement began) or a decrease of 92 per cent. The 217 nonquota visas issued in Mexico in December, 1930, show an increase of 28 visas when compared with the 189 visas issued in November of the current year.

1. Indicating continued and further reduction in visas issued to immigrants during December, 1930.

2. With the exception of most of the countries in the Western Hemisphere and of cert: in parts of the Far East known as the Asiatic barred zone, all countries in the world are quota countries. Of a total quota of 153,174 visas, 150,414 are allotted to Europe alone.

3. The nonquota countries are in North, Central, and South America.

Analysis of the latest statistics furnished by the State Department shows again an increase of rejections of prospective immigrants, on the ground that they may become public charges. Not only are reductions made from quota countries, but also from nonquota countries, like Canada and Mexico. The reduction for the month of December, 1930, shows that instead of a maximum of 10 per cent that each country was entitled to, not more than 1 per cent of visas was issued in any case. The Canadian immigration was reduced 71 per cent and the Mexican immigration 92 per cent.

House Report 2405, Part 3, Seventy-first Congress, third session

RESTRICTION OF IMMIGRATION

JANUARY 30, 1931.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. Cooke, from the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, submitted the following

MINORITY VIEWS

[To accompany H. J. Res. 473]

I am opposed to H. J. Res. 473 because I believe that under the claim of duress of economic depression an effort is being made to effect total exclusion of immigration, which may be interpreted to be a definition of the future policy of this Government on that subject. Exclusion may be a desirable policy for adoption, but the subject embraces so many considerations that it should be undertaken only after thorough consideration and discussion by the Congress with ample opportunity afforded for the expression of opinion by the public at large. The consular agents of the Government, acting under instructions from the Department of State, have, during the past five months compelled strict adherence to the provisions of the present law requiring the applicant immigrant to show that he or she is not liable upon admission to become a public charge, and have reduced immigration below the quota allowances more than 90 per cent. This method is effective in procuring the results desired to be obtained; possesses the desirable quality of flexibility and can not be deemed to be the expression of a national policy; it gives no offense to the countries whose nationals are involved. When, by degrees, prosperity is being restored, drastic requirements can be gradually relaxed until the normal economic condition is again arrived at. The prosperity and well-being of the United States are to a degree dependent upon cordial commercial and social relations with the civilized countries of the world. Friendliness between nations constitutes a firmer basis for flourishing trade relations than cheapness in price. In the present chaotic conditions prevailing in the economic world no disturbance should be permitted to the recovery of our equilibrium. The passage of a bill practically excluding immigration to this country can too easily be construed as an indication of

future policy and its adverse reception by the nations might disturb the balance we are seeking to recover. The measures being made effective by the State Department are, in my opinion, adequate to the exigencies of the situation.

Section 2 of the bill is economically and socially unsound. In addition the good faith and honor of the Government are involved. No barrier should be raised to the reuniting of the families of American citizens nor of the families of aliens resident in this country. Wives and minor children constitute a great majority of this class. Hundreds of millions of dollars, money earned in the United States, is being sent abroad annually for their support. Few of them, when admitted, would become competitors in the American labor market. Their admission would terminate the transfer of this great wealth abroad and permit the establishment here of the home and family of the immigrant, importing stability and permanence to his residence in the land of his adoption. The social values of that feature are obvious and need not be commented upon. Many of these relatives of American citizens or alien residents of America have for years been patiently awaiting the time when under existing laws, they might be legally permitted to enter this country. They have made compliance with those laws in thousands of instances, in reliance upon the continuation by this country of what was assumed to be a definite policy, unlikely to be modified without due consideration of the rights and expectations of those who had been impliedly invited into this country. I will not become a party to the breach of faith we must, in my opinion, commit in relation to these people by the enactment of this legislation.

Section 3 of the resolution is unconstitutional and unconscionable. The Filipinos are nationals of the United States Government. As such they are entitled to free ingress to the mother country without let or hindrance. The animadversion of some portions of our country to the Filipino must not be permitted to deviate us from our true obligations to our wards, nor should we be permitted, even by legal fiction to ascribe to our relationship anything other than that dictated by a righteous and just colonial policy. EDMUND F. COOKE.

JANUARY 30, 1931.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »