Speech #700124904

Congressman SABATH. one of the House conferees. stated in reference to paragraph (b). section 11 (CONGRSSIONAL Rn tRa. p. 8138. pt. 8. vol. 65) : " Both the Director of the Census. Mr. Steuart. and Doctor Hill. first assistant. who appeared before the managers. declared that they would be obliged to adopt arbitrary methods to arrive at the proper basis upon which allocation will be based." Commissioner General of Immigration Hull in his annual report for 1925 (p. 29) states: " Thirteenth : Section 11 provides at the present time for an annual quota for each nationality of 2 per cent of the number of foreignborn individuals of such nationality resident in continental United States as determined by the census of 1890. with a minimum quota of 100. and further provides that beginning July 1. 1927. and for each fiscal year thereafter. the allotment shall be determined according to national origin. The bureau feels that the present method of ascertaining tile quotas Is far more satisfactory than the proposed determination by na. tional origin. that it has the advantages of simplicity and certainty. It is of the opinion that the proposed change will lead to great confusion and result in complexities. and accordingly it is recommended that the pertinent portions of section 11. providing for this revision of the quotas as they now stand. be rescinded." In the Saturday Evening Post for October 10. 1925. Doctor Garis quotes Director Steuart as making a statement on June 24. 1925 (p. 233) : " That there are no figures in existence which show completely the national origin of the population of the United States." After thoroughly considering the question of whether or not the census of -1910 or the census of 1890 should be used as a quota basis. Congress came to the conclusion that the census of 1890 eliminated all discrimination in favor of either the new or the old immigration as far as each type had contributed to our makeup of the different natlonalities. It may be true that the old amd the Dew Immigration gets about the same percentage of the total under either method. but it is when we come to divide the quota between the several countries in each group that the discrimination comes in when we try to apply the " national origins " method under what we have so far learned as to the distribution under the " national origins " method. and especially under the tables that were used before the Senate and House Committees on Immigration and before the conference committee. The 1890 basis is a practical law and is based upon definite statistics. but. as I have heretofore stated. the " nationalorigin" plan means that we must abandon a practical method and adopt something about which we do not know anything. or. at least. very little. The Senate and House during the first session of the Sixtyeighth Congress expended a great deal of time on different immigration bills. but there were several other important features in addition to the quota limitations that had to be considered and occupied a great deal of time. Of these I might mention the Japanese exclusion. alien seaman question. and nonquota immigrants. The necessity of passing a law during that session was very important. as the law then in effect would soon expire and we were threatened with being flooded with immigrants from many European countries. The House passed H. R. 7955. which provided for a quota of 2 per cent. according to the census of 1890.