Speech #750043635

I do not know whether the gentleman from New York was in the House at the time we were calling the bills on the Private Calendar. at which time I made a statement with regard to the bills on the calendar today concerning immigration and naturalization. For the benefit of the gentleman I will repeat the statement that the purpose of our objection today was to give all bills of the same character the same kind of treatment. and as some 15 or 20 bills from the gentlemans committee had been objected to on the floor previously. it was my opinion we should give the bills that were called today the same treatment and refer them back to the committee. The reason those bills were referred back to the committee was because we. as objectors. did not feel we should set ourselves up as a group that would definitely commit this Congress to a policy concerning immigration. Every one of these bills involves a question of fraudulent entry into this country and all of these cases are known as hardship cases. Personally. I did not object to any of the first bills that appeared on the calendar. that is. the first 15 bills that were called approximately a month ago. but I think these bills should be afforded the same treatment as the earlier bills. and I do feel that the Congress. as a body. should express its opinion on whether the Congress desires to extend to these hardship cases the hand of sympathy and allow these immigrants to remain in this country. and In each particular instance abrogate the laws now in existence. I do not think the duty rests upon a half a dozen of us here. acting as unofficial objectors. to set ourselves up as judges and definitely determine. by reason of the fact we let one bill go through. what is going to be the law to be followed by this Congress. For this reason we objected.