Speech #590039223

I have given that proposition no thought. but. as stated by the gentleman. I should say it was all moonshine. To go on. in accordance with suggestions of Commissioner Sargent. after a close examination and full hearing. two bills for the better distribution of immigrants have been introduced. one of them by my colleague on the committee. Mr. HAYES. of California. and the other by myself. In my opinion. neither of them amounts to much as a practical measure for distribution against the current of supply and demand. Now. in discussing immigration matters. people who have not given study to the subject fail to appreciate the difference between selection of immigration and restriction of immigration. For instance. we have laws which exclude those who are likely to become paupers. those who have certain physical defects. loathsome diseases. and the ike. Those are selective laws. Then we have the contractlabor law. which is a restrictive law. tending to cut down the numbers that are coining in. irrespective of whether aliens have certain given mental. moral. or physical qualifications. Then we have the $2 head tax. That is an excellent thing as a revenue measure. but is not a success either in the direction of selection or of restriction. The proposed educational test. which I believe to be good as far as it goes. is both a selective and a restrictive measure. but it does not begin to be restrictive enough. I do not believe it would accomplish what I want to see accomplished. which is a horizontal cut right through the center of our immigration. Now. if it is selection that the people of the United States want. pass the Dillingham bill. I understand from immigration anthorities that if that had been in operation last year it might have cut down the immigration a few thousand.