Speech #710026392

President. I mean to speak as briefly as I may upon the resolution which is pending as the unfinished business. The question of immigration has agitated the Congress for more than 20 years. Back in 1913 Congress passed a bill to restrict immigration. It was vetoed by President Taft. Later it passed a bill to restrict immigration and imposed the literacy test. That bill likewise was vetoed by President Wilson. Only the outcome of the World War impressed upon the Executive as well as Congress the thought that it was vitally necessary for the welfare of America that the unlimited inflow of aliens from every country must be stopped if American prosperity and American standards of living were to be maintained. So in 1921 tie first such law was enacted. It limited temporarily immigration into the United States to 3 per cent of the number of foreignborn persons reported at the last census. the census of 1910. It gave quotas which bore no resemblance to the makeup of the United States as it then stood. It was wholly. unsatisfactory. and not only those who were concerned with the quality of immigration which we were getting but those who were concerned with the quantity of Immigration we were getting sought the enactment of a permanent law. In 1924 such a bill was introduced in each House and was debated at great length. In the Senate it was the unfinished business for more than six weeks and was constantly under debate during that time. It was the Impression of ninetenths of the Senators and. as I recall. ninetenths of the Members of the House of RepresentativesI think that was substantially the votethat immigration must be more sternly limited and that. so far as possible. each years immigration ought to bear the same proportion as to nationality as the population of the United States already here. The enactment of that law in 1924 was hailed with approval by every student of biology and of population problems. by every patriotic organization and every labor association. and it was regarded by many people as Americas second Declaration of Independence. If throughout the future that law can be kept impartial so that we may say to every man who challenges it. "We have restricted immigration for the national good. but we have done it impartially. according to the statement of the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal." then its permanency is more assured than if great groups of people can come and say that the stock from which they sprang is discriminated against in this law of the Congress. That is the reason why this question seems to me to be important. I am attracted by the fact that the nationalorigins basis will reduce the aggregate of immigration by about 11.000 persons below the number admitted on the 1890 census basis. It pleases me and others who think as I do that the annual inflow is throttled down just that much more. that under the nationalorigins scheme we will get only 153.000 as a maximum. instead of 164.000 under the 1890 census basis. But much more important than that seems to me to be the element of impartiality. which will serve as an armor for the protection of that law through the decades to come. when it Is bound to be challenged as the pressure for admission to the United States increases. and I think it is bound to increase from year to year. Mr. President. in all that I~have ever saidand I am afraid I have said a great dealon the subject of immigration. I have tried to begin with the statement that in dealing with a subject like this we must consider all men equal. When we remember that the architecture of the world still pays its tribute to the genius of Greece. and that the sculpture of the world has never known anything so fine as that which came from Greece. we can not speak slightingly of the Greek race.