Speech #660274119

Chairman. under this bill we continue for the period to come the present practice of requiring a consular visd from our consular representatives abroad before an alien shall be allowed to start for the United States. That consul today and under this bill would have no discretion whatever in turning back even an obviously unfit alien. That is to say. a man who was a leper. who was a degenerate. who was clearly unfit to be admitted to the United States upon any conceivable theory under the provisions of the immigration laws themselves. might come before him seeking a vise. Yet the consul would have no option. provided the mans papers were regular. and although he could see at a glance the unfitness of the man for admission. that consul would have no right to refuse a vis& MIy contention is that if we are going to continue this elaborate system of consular vis6s that has grown up during the war. we ought to make it of some value. Of course. we all agree that the consuls of the United States abroad must be consuls primarily. and can not impose the elaborate tests which are necessary for the adequate enforcement in detail of the immigration laws. But I submit that for the welfare of the country and for the welfare of the individual immigrant also the consul ought to have some discretion to refuse the vis4 in cases where. as I say in the amendment. the applicant wvould be obviously subject to exclusion if he presented himself at a port of the United States. I assert that this is necessary for the protection of the country. because it imposes an additional test upon the immigrant. It puts him through a double sieve. The immigrationenforcement officers are frequently liable to error. The consular administration of the law. even if my amendment were adopted. would still be liable to error. But if you impose the two exactions. if you put the immigrant through the double sieve. you run just so much the less chance of having him creeping into the country when he should not be allowed to do so. Take it also from the standpoint of the immigrant. I can not conceive of a more horrible experience than for an immigrant to leave for a port of the United States with his passport from the consul duly visedwhich he thinks. ninetynine times out of one hundred. is all that he needs. and means that he has full authority to enter this countryand then. when he gets to a port of the United States he finds that he has not passed the barrier at all and that he m.st comply with the provisions of the immigration laws. Then that man is sent back in his steerage hole in which he came to this country. There can not be a more hopeless feeling than that immigrant has when the news comes to him that he must return to the country whence he came and he realizes that his savings of a lifetime have been sacrificed in order to make this useless journey. If the consul had the right to refuse in obvious cases. it is true that you will not correct the difficulty invariably. but you will correct the difficulty in a very large percentage of cases. For these reasons. Mr. Chairman. both from the standpoint of the country and from the standpoint of the individual immigrant. I believe that to give the consular representatives of the United States at the various ports of the world some discretion in the granting or withholding of vis~s will be extremely salutary. What is the use of having this elaborate system of vis~s if a consul can not in some degree. at least. say .yes or no to the man who asks for the vis6? ir.