Canada. which is almost on the border. for any port in the United States. whether the passenger is afflicted with a disease or not? The railroad company has no power to compel an examination on Canadian soil. and if the railroad company had such power. I submit it would be an extraordinary spectacle to compel every immigrant. or. as this bill says. "every passenger." to submit to such examination to ascertain whether he had a disease or not. As I read the bill. it is going to be a tremendous burden upon some transportation companies. if. indeed. it does not become absolutely unendurable. It does seem to me that this distinguished committee. with its wisdom and its earnestness for the passage of improved immigration measures. might devise a bill that would be less burdensome on the transportation companies on the New England border. Recurring to the first amendment. I am not disposed to contest it any further. I presume the Senate will adopt it and it will go into conference. but I want to say that in my investigations. which have not been very thorough. because I have been busy in other matters. I have utterly failed to discover any valid reason why at the present time the head tax should be increased from $1 to $3. The House has increased it from $1 to $1.50. and I submit that unless some evidence is forthcoming showing that there is a necessity for a head tax higher than that. lnless it can be shown that the Treasury is suffering in some way and that we need this $2 extra above what the present law imposes. then we ought not to impose it upon these people or upon these transportation companies. With that statement. Mr.
Keywords matched
immigration head tax immigrant