Speech #590100230

Speaker. assuming that to be true. I still think the bill is absolutely unnecessary. and therefore vicious. Worse. much worse than the man who asks for naturalization and obtains it as a shield and panoply abroad. is he who born to American citizenship forfeits it. renounces it deliberately while still enjoying the protection of our laws for vast possessions inside our boundaries. and who while enjoying such protection despises privileges and evades obligations which are rightfully his. Not a line of this measure touches that man. the protection of whose property is an actual burden to us. while it changes our whole system of naturalization in order to reach a few men who have neither burdened nor harmed us. Mr. Speaker. this bill. as it was originally reported. embraced provisions which have been eliminated in Committee of the Whole. and they were the most objectionable. In addition to reading and writing his own language. it required that the immigrant be able to read and speak the English tongue. As the vast majority of immigrants are ignorant of- English. this meant that in almost every instance the applicant for naturalization must be master of two languages. That provision was changed in committee. so that no qualification is now imposed except ability to speak English. That was a great improvement. but even the requirement that remains is objectionable. It was justified on the ground that every person who lived here for five years would inevitably acquire a knowledge of the English language anyway. and that the provision was therefore of little significance. It was left in the bill. I supposeto use a colloquialismto save the face of the Committee on Naturalization. Now. I learn from gentlemen around me here that in many parts of this country there are vast numbers of men. excellent laborers. excellent producers. excellent inhabitants. peaceful. orderly. highly intelligent. but who can not speak the English language and who are not likely to be able to acquire it.