Speech #700170324

Chairman and members of the committee. the subject that I am going to discuss is quite different from the full and able speech which has just been rendered by the distinguished Member . who has just preceded me and which I found very interesting. I might say in passing that I have listened to the gentleman on two different occasions and his profound knowledge of the subject that he has discussed has made a marked impression upon me. One of the most important questions remaining to be determined before this session of Congress is over is what action will be taken from the repeal. deference. or going into operation of the nationalorigins clause of the immigration law of 1924. The interest in this question is not confined to any one section of our country. neither is it confined to any one of the socalled nationals that constitute our inhabitants. The action of Congress on this question is being watched closely. At the outset it must be borne in mind that the controversy over the nationalorigins clause of the immigration act has been misrepresented so as to be made to appear a controversy over increasing or decreasing numerically the number of immigrants that can come to this country. This misrepresentation is very unfortunate because it gives a false statement of facts. The repeal of the nationalorigins clause has nothing to do with the question of the number of people that shall be permitted to come here each year. The effort to repeal the nationalorigins clause has been characterized as an attack upon the immigration law of 1924. It is nothing of the kind. It is. in fact. an effort to prevent the law from being ridiculous. The nationalorigins clause is a part of the immigration law of 1924. Nobody seems to know its real parenthood. although one John B. Trevor. of New York City. who was a captain in the Intelligence Department of the Army. detailed in New York City during the war. appears to claim the credit for it. I have heard that the KuKlux Klan claims the credit for conceiving it and securing its adoption as an amendment to the immigration law. I am satisfied. however. that their only knowledge of it was after its adoption in the Senate in 1924. as an amendment to the bill that passed the House. and that thereafter the KuKlux Klan used it as a means of trying to carry out its purposes by attracting additional members to its ranks. It seems rather hard for me to believe that anything that such an organization might sponsor would receive the favorable consideration of either or both branches of Congress. It appears from the records of the hearings of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization which reported the 1924 immigration law. that the nationalorigins clause received little. if any. consideration from the committee. It is quite probableand so far as I can find it is a factthat it was not presented to the committee for consideration. In any event. when the bill was reported to the House it was not a part thereof. and during debate an amendment was offered In the House which included in substance the provisions of the present law.