EXEMPT FROM THE QUOTA HUSBANDS, FATHERS, AND MOTHERS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS MARCH 31, 1930.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed Mr. JENKINS, from the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, submitted the following MINORITY VIEWS [To accompany H. R. 5646] H. R. 5646, if passed, would admit as nonquota immigrants 15,000 immigrants, more or less, whose coming is delayed by the quota restrictions of the immigration act of 1924. That is but a small part of the breach it will make in the immigration laws. It is an opening wedge creating a serious rift. 1. It will presently admit the additional numbers mentioned above. 2. It will remove the classes of relatives named in the bill from the quota class to the nonquota class, so that not only the 15,000 mentioned above will be added to our present immigration, but both of the classes named in the bill will be permanently taken from their places in the quota and made admissible outside the quota, allowing all of these parents from all quota countries to have their place in the quotas filled by new immigrants who could not otherwise come because of the preference given to these classes now removed from the quota, which will add considerably to the total number of immigrants to be admitted. 3. It reverses the policy which your committee has heretofore declared to the House, under which certain near relatives of American citizens are permitted to join them here, but are counted against the quotas of the countries from which they come, which reunites families and tends to reserve the quotas for that purpose. This last tends to prevent more heads of families from separating themselves from their families, thereby creating an excuse to cry against the division of families as a pretext for the admission of the families from which they voluntarily separated themselves. If Congress is to adopt the policy represented by this bill, it will be encouraging families to separate themselves, and perpetuate the problem of the division of families. The policy of reserving portions of the quotas for near relatives of ★ 4-1-30 citizens, declarants, and aliens lawfully in the country, will gradually correct the situation arising when families are voluntarily divided by the action of some of their members in leaving other members to come to America. The admission outside the quota of people now charged to the quota, will allow the quotas to be filled up by units from new families, and thus perpetuate and aggravate the division of families. The problem of reuniting families was a vital one and it was solved by a rearrangement of the preferences within the quotas. If Congress desires to give further preference to fathers and mothers of American citizens this can easily be accomplished within the quotas and without letting down the bars. If the words "without priority of preference as between such classes" were repealed and words "priority of preference being given to class A over class B" were substituted, the whole situation would be cleared up without any letting down of the bars. This plan should satisfy all except those who continually wish to break down the quotas. 4. This bill will increase the number of nonquota immigrants, which is already much too large. 5. The admission of these relatives will have the ultimate effect of admitting other persons than those covered by this bill. For instance, the mother of an American citizen, over 55 years of age, having been separated by death or divorce from the father of the citizen and married to another husband prior to June 1, 1928, upon becoming a citizen, will be entitled to have the second husband join her, and to have admitted certain minor children not now admissible. If a father above the age of 55 years shall have been separated by death or divorce from the mother of the citizen, he will, upon becoming a citizen, be entitled to bring in his wife, not the mother of an American citizen, who will, in turn, be entitled to have admitted certain of her minor children. The chain could be traced further. The purposes of the quota provision of the immigration act of 1924 are being defeated to a disturbing extent by the large number of nonquota immigrants being admitted. The total number of all quota immigrants admissible for the fiscal year 1929 was 164,667. But the actual number of immigrants admitted for permanent residence for the fiscal year 1929 was 279,678, which shows nonquota immigrants adding heavily to the quota immigrants, though they are in every sense immigrants. In addition, there were 199,678 "visitors" admitted, making a grand total of 479,327 coming through the stations. Many of these last returned, but by no means all of them did. But all of these figures do not represent the whole of the annual addition to our alien population. Deserting seamen, reported as numbering from 11,000 to 30,000 annually, must be added. The great number of people who enter the country otherwise illegally must yet be added. No one knows how many they are, but every one who gives attention to the problem knows that they number scores of thousands, probably more than a hundred thousand. While talking of immigration quotas as numbering 153,000 to 164,000, the country should recognize that it is probably receiving annually aliens in numbers three times as great as the quotas, and probably more, when all the classes enumerated are computed. If the number of aliens legally and illegally entering annually is 450,000 to 550,000 that shows a heavy reduction of the volume of immigration of recent years, when 1,000,000 to 1,200,000 per year entered through the stations, in addition to which were those entering illegally. But 450,000 to 550,000 is entirely too many aliens to have admitted to the United States under present conditions. It is a mockery to have such numbers enter while talking of immigration quotas of 153,714, the present total of the quotas, or 164,667, the total of the quotas from 1924 to 1929. As illustrating how numerous are nonquota immigrants as compared with quota immigrants from some regions, Italy's quota for the fiscal year 1929 was 3,845, but more than 18,000 immigrants came from Italy during that year. The rate at which quota and nonquota immigrants have been coming from Italy during seven months of the current fiscal year, 1930, indicates that with a quota of 5,802 Italy will have sent us 25,000 to 27,000 immigrants during the year. The bill H. R. 5646, by Mr. Dickstein, as reported by a majority of the committee, proposes to aggravate the situation just described. It represents a departure in the direction of relaxing the laws. If gentlemen of the Congress want to restrict immigration, let them cease to loosen restrictions. THOMAS A. JENKINS. BRIDGE ACROSS THE CUMBERLAND RIVER NEAR BURNSIDE, KY. MARCH 25, 1930.-Referred to the House Calendar and orderd to be printed Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 10213] The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 10213) granting the consent of Congress to rebuild and reconstruct and to maintain and operate the existing railroad bridge across the Cumberland River near the town of Burnside, in the State of Kentucky, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it pass. The bill has the approval of the War and Agriculture Departments, as will appear by the letters attached and which are made a part of this report. WAR DEPARTMENT, March 8, 1930. Respectfully returned to the chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives. So far as the interests committed to this department are concerned, I know of no objection to the favorable consideration of the accompanying bill (H. R. 10213, 71st Cong., 2d sess.), granting the consent of Congress to rebuild the existing railroad bridge across the Cumberland River, near the town of Burnside, in the State of Kentucky. Hon. JAMES S. PARKER, PATRICK J. HURLEY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULture, Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. PARKER: Careful consideration has been given to the bill, H. R. 10213, transmitted with your letter of February 25, with request for a report thereon and such views relative thereto as the department might desire to communicate. This bill would authorize the Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Co., lessee of the Cincinnati Southern Railway, its successors and assigns, to rebuild, reconstruct, maintain, and operate its existing railroad bridge across the Cumberland River near Burnside, Pulaski County, Ky. The bill relates to a railroad bridge and is without objection so far as this department is concerned. Sincerely, C. F. MARVIN, Acting Secretary. O |