The amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigap is logical and indispensable to the perfection of the provision of the statute. It is directly in line with the provision that has been amended in the bill. and ought to be adopted if the former amendment ought to have been adopted. The provision of the former amendment was that no matter how fraudulently a man got into this country. if he could prove that he was In danger of persecution. political or religious. whatever that may be. if he went back to his former country he should not be deported. Now. I submit that the man who comes boldly to the door and says. "I am an anarchist. I am here because I am afraid I will be persecuted. or I believe in a certain kind of religion. to witnaming itand that if I go back I am going to be persecutel. and therefore I want to get in." I say he is the manly man of the two. and if the other fellow ought not to be deported. the man who would sneak in. this man ought to be permitted to come in. How can that proposition be answered? These two amendments deal with the same class of people exactly. men who have fled from political or religious persecution or are afraid they are going to have it.
Keywords matched
deported