Speech #680075726

I will just get the figures together at this point in the RECORD. In the last fiscal year there came to this country. in all. 11.571 Japanese. and there departed 11.172. so our net gain was 399 persons. Of the number who came 5.652 were ininigrants. so the Senate can readily see that if any of these quota methods were adopted. instead of getting 5.600 imniigrant Japanese we would get the reduced numbersay. under this racialorigins amendment. 360 Immigrant Japanesewhile there would be nothing to cut down the departures. So it is reasonable to expect that instead of gaining 399 Japanese. net. in the next fiscal year we would actually lose in numbers of Japanese by about 5.000 persons. because the incoming flow of immigrants would be cut down by the quota law. That is why I think the amendment suggested by the Senator from California Is unnecessary. He asks us. in place of the gentlemens agreement. to adopt an exclusion law like the Chinese exclusion law. and he Implies that the Chinese exclusion law works better than our gentlemens agreement with Japan. Yet I find by the report of the Commissioner of Immigration for the last fiscal year that. In spite of our exclusion law of 1882 and its amendments. 16.575 Chinese came into this country. while under our gentlemens agreement with Japan the total Incoming immigration of Japanese was only about twothirds of the number of Chinese. It was 16.000 Chinese against 11.000 Japs. and. as I have explained. the Incoming 11.000 Japs were quite balanced by the outgoing 11.000. So much. then. for my statement that it is unnecessary.