Mr. Chairman. I think the appropriation Is adequate. but in order to correct any misapprehension that may exist as to the situation in New York City with reference to the work of the county clerks offices and the Naturalization Bureau. I want to say a few words in order to make the situation entirely clear. For some years the county clerks of the counties of New York. the Bronx. and Kings handled some of the naturalizatidn petitions. and maintained a force of 37 clerks at an annual cost of some $60.000. paid from the Federal Treasury. It was in a sense a duplication of the work performed by the Federal Bureau of Naturalization. A year ago there were pending some 11.000 petitions for naturalization before the supreme court in New York County. and some 12.000 pending In Kings County. or a total of 23.000 petitions. and it took anywhere from 3 to 18 months for the papers to go through under the system then prevailing. The Bureau of Naturalization undertook In March. 1924. to do all the work itself and took it away from the offices of the county clerks. But they only employed 6 or 8 clerks. as compared with 37. because there was not an adequate appropriation available. Even so. they reduced the cost of handling each petition from 55 cents a petition to 20 cents a petition. If in the southern district of New York they had been able to put into full effect the system that now prevails in the eastern district. the United States courts alone. without any help from the State courts. would have been able almost to keep up to date. providing the Bureau of Naturalization had been permitted to employ a reasonable number of employees. Now. it is suggested that If we deprive the county clerks of this patronage--and that is what it amounts towe can not get the Supreme Court of the State of New York to help in the naturalization work. I should have to have that statement from the judges themselves before I would be willing to accept that as their attitude.
Keywords matched
Naturalization naturalization