Mr. Chairman. I am going to discuss. first. the restrictive remedies offered. not merely measures for the improvement in the quality of our immigration. but measures calculated to restrict the numbers coming in. whether they are good. bad. or indifferent. First. there is a proposition before our committee introduced by the gentleman from Pennsylvania . It provides that only a certain number shall come in from any one country of origin in any one year. His present bill provides that no more than 80.000 annuilly shall come from any country. That. of course. would include Italy. and so if it had been in force last year we should have had only 80.000 immigrants from that nation instead of 220.000. My criticismI do not say objection. because I do not want to pass final judgment upon anything until my committee has found what it is going to reportof the Adams bill would be this: The reports of our inspectors abroad show that certain foreign governments are directly involved in sending over these immigrants. If we restrict the annual arrivals from Italy to 80.000. the chances are. if the Italian Government takes a hand in the matter. which it would. that we should get 80.000 of the worst instead of 80.000 of the best. That seems to be the main criticism on Mr. ADA3ss bill. Otherwise. I like it very much for the reason that irrespective of race or country. if it had been the law last year. it would have cut down our immigration by about 500.000. That. I believe. would have been a very great benefit to this country at some time in the near future.
Identified stereotypes
Foreign governments may send over the 'worst' immigrants if quotas are imposed.