Speech #700170403

The situation would be the same as to Great Britain or any other country. The political institutions of a country are the result of a long growth. A steady influx of immigration. if of the right kind and in a quantity that can be digested. will not upset the national equilibrium. At the expense of repetition let me comment further on the law of 1924. Section (a) of this law provides that future quotas shall be 2 per cent of the number of foreignborn individuals of such nationality resident in the United States as shown by the census of 1890. The census of 1.890 was selected for no special reason. The same arguments that would apply for the selection of that census would apply to the selection of the 1920 census. Many people who are opposing the national origins law would like to see the 1.920 census selected. because there had been a much greater influx of immigration from southeastern Europe after 1890 than there was before that time. The basing of a quota on any particular census is not as serious as the basing of the quota upon the foreign born entirely. without any consideration of the native born. The nationalorigins sections of the 1924 law provide a maximum of immigration at 150.000 per year. The 1890 provision admits 164.000. There is a reduction of 14.000. Under the nationalorigins plan the annual quota of any nationality for each year shall be a number which bears the same ratio to 150.000 as the number of inhabitants in the United States in 1920 having that national origin bears to the number of inhabitants in the United States in 1920. This number is not to be ascertained by tracing back the individual ancestry of each individual but upon statistics of immigration together with rates of increase of population and on alr and any other authentic data that would tend to establish the national origin of the people. These quotas are all to be based on the last census. which was the census of 1920. Just how this is to be done is more easily understood than explained.