Imagini ale paginilor

ous territory to the United States, may affect surreptitious entries from Mexico and Canada, is impossible to determine.

Sub-sections (a), (b), (d), (e), and (f) of Section 13 of the Act, are for the most part administrative, and of little general interest, being self-explanatory. It may, however, be well before closing the discussion of the provisions of this section, to call attention to the definition of the term “ineligible for citizenship”, as given in section 28, sub-section (c). The substance of the definition in so far as it applies to other classes of persons than those debarred from citizenship by reason of their color, relates to individuals who have failed in their duty as citizens called for service, or as soldiers enrolled in the armed forces of the United States.


[ocr errors]

(Sections 19, 20, 26 and 27) Experience has demonstrated that the efforts of Congress in the passage of acts over a period of many years excluding undesirable aliens from the United States have been thwarted to an alarming degree by the surreptitious entry of persons debarred by the terms of the statutes. One of the most fruitful sources of evasion of these provisions has been the crews employed on ships entering ports of the United States. "It is generally understood" says Mr. Furuseth in a letter to the Hon. John E. Raker, dated December 29, 1923,2 "that $1,000 is paid by the Chinese for being landed in the United States in such a way that he can at once mingle with others of his kind; and when we know that vessels manned with Chinese are constantly going away with from 10 to 40 or even 50 men less in the crew than they had on arrival we must realize that we are here dealing with a temptation to shipowners and to officers of vessels that is great enough to tempt the shipowners as well as the officers. Again, vessels coming from Europe have on one trip to this country left behind them from 50 to 150 persons, a great many of whom would have been refused admission if coming as regular immigrants."

While a serious effort was made in drafting the Act of 1917 to deal with this condition of affairs, Congressman Raker points out that "due to a weakness in section 32, there has been no proper enforcement for several years. The flaw was that the

1 Appendix "A". 2 Congressional Record, Monday, June 23, 1924, page 11637.


shipmaster, although required to detain inadmissible seamen, could not be punished for failure to detain unless it was shown that he had notice in writing so to do. Notice in writing anterior to the breach of responsibility to detain was physically impossible.”

In an apparent effort not to impair in any way the liberty accorded to seamen under the Act of March 4, 1915, commonly known as the LaFollette Law, and at the same time, not to impose regulations so onerous as to cripple the free movement of shipping, and possibly arouse retaliatory legislation abroad, Congress in sections 19 and 20 evolved provisions which in all likelihood will prove inadequate to correct the evils that they were designed to cure. Section 19 provides that “no alien seaman excluded from admission into the United States, under the immigration laws and employed on board any vessel arriving in the United States from any place outside thereof, shall be permitted to land in the United States, except temporarily for medical trettment, or pursuant to such regulations as the Secretary of Labor may prescribe for the ultimate departure, removal, or deportation of such alien from the United States."

Section 20, sub-section (a) provides that "the owner, charterer, agent, consignee, or master of any vessel arriving in the United States from any place outside thereof who fails to detain on board any alien seaman employed on such vessel until the immigration officer in charge at the port of arrival has inspected such seaman ********, or who fails to detain such seaman on board after such inspection or to deport such seaman if required by such immigration officer or the Secretary of Labor to do so, shall pay to the collector of customs of the customs district in which the port of arrival is located the sum of $1,000. for each alien seaman in respect of whom such failure occurs." Sub-section (b) provides that “proof that an alien seaman did not appear upon the outgoing manifest of the vessel on which he arrived in the United States******** shall be prima facie evidence of a failure to detain or deport after requirement by the immigration officer or the Secretary of Labor."

Unquestionably these provisions and amendments to Sections 9 and 10 of the Act of 1917, embodied in Sections 26 and 27, will help to give effect to the general principles upon which the law is based, but as intimated above, it is doubtful whether they are altogether adequate.


(Sections 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26,28, 29, 30, 31 and 32)

The remaining sections of the Act dealing with “Deportation", "Penalty for Illegal Transportation", "Entry from Foreign Contiguous Territory”, “Unused Immigration Visas,". "Preparation of Documents”, “Offenses in Connection with Documents", "Burden of Proof" (which has already been referred to), "Rules and Regulations", "Act to be in Addition to Immigration Laws" (which has already been referred to), “Steamship Fines Under 1917 Act", "General Definitions" (which has already been referred to), “Authorization of Appropriation", d'Act of May 19, 1921", "Time for Taking Effect" and "Saving Clause in Event of Unconstitutionality" are one and all, with the exception of the latter, of a purely technical administrative character. In general, it may be said that these sections are so drawn as to correct defects in the Act of 1917, where interpretation by the courts or experience in practice have demonstrated that the underlying intent could not be carried out in the administration of the Act.

The last section No. 32 entitled "Saving Clause in Event of Unconstitutionality" provides that if any provision of this Act or the application thereof is held invalid, the remainder of the Act and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.

In conclusion, it may be said that the Immigration Act of 1924 may reasonably be expected to accomplish the following results: (1) A definite improvement in the quality and character

of immigrants lawfully admitted to the United
States through more efficient means of enforcement
of the provisions of Section 3 of the Act of 1917, exclud-

ing undesirables from the United States.
(2) An elimination of the so-called hardship cases at ports

of entry of the United States in respect to immigrants
who answer accurately and in good faith, all the ques-
tions contained in their application for an immigra-

tion visa.
(3) A definite restriction upon lawful immigration into

the United States without the violation of treaty

(4) The progressive development of a homogeneous

population. On the other hand, it is probable that there will be a stimulation of surreptitious entries through the ports and over our northern or southern frontiers for three reasons: (1) The Act embodies no provision requiring the registra

tion of aliens now within the borders of the United

(2) Because there is no general registration statute cover-

ing citizens, native born or naturalized, in effect, by
which a provision such as that indicated in the previous

paragraph could be made effective.
(3) Because of the lack of coordination in Government

agencies charged with the enforcement of the Federal



OF 19241

(PUBLIC-No. 139–6874 CONGRESS)

(H. R. 7995) An Act To limit the immigration of aliens into the United States, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the “Immigration Act of 1924."

IMMIGRATION VISAS SEC. 2. (a) A consular officer upon the application of any immigrant (as defined in section 3) may (under the conditions hereinafter prescribed and subject to the limitation prescribed in this Act or regulations made thereunder as to the number of immigration visas which may be issued by such officer) issue to such immigrant an immigration visa which shall consist of one copy of the application provided for in section 7, visaed by such consular officer. Such visa shall specify (1) the nationality of the immigrant; (2) whether he is a quota immigrant (as defined in section 5) or a non-quota immigrant (as defined in section 4); (3) the date on which the validity of the immigration visa shall expire; and (4) such additional information necessary to the proper enforcement of the immigration laws and the naturalization laws as may be by regulations prescribed.

(b) The immigrant shall furnish two copies of his photograph to the consular officer. One copy shall be permanently attached by the consular officer to the immigration visa and the other copy shall be disposed of as may be by regulations prescribed.

(c) The validity of an immigration visa shall expire at the end of such period, specified in the immigration visa, not exceeding four months, as shall be by regulations prescribed. In the case of 1 Reprinted from the official text furnished by the State Department.

« ÎnapoiContinuați »