Speech #820200456

R. 5678 because it Incorporates principles of restriction which I believe to be both outdated and discriminatory. And here let us look at the facts. You will recall that national origins principle. outlined in the Immigration Act of 1924. reduced quotas from Southern and Eastern Europe to only 14 percent of the annual total. while increasing the percentage from Northern and Western Europe to 84 percent. If such a distribution seemed inequitable in 1924. certainly it is far more unreal and inequitable today. Moreover we now know that the methods used in determining the national origins of the population were necessarily superficial. since nationality was chiefly determined by surnames. If a name had been Anglicized either legally or to simplify procedure at Ellis Island during an earlier period. it went down on the British list. I know of instances for example. where. Italian immigrants early in the century. struggling to give their proper names. were "assisted by the Inspectors at port of entry through the expedient of translating the first name "Paolo" into a surname of "Pollock." If the national origins principle is to apply. certainly it should at least be brought up to date. both by adopting the 1950 census rather than the 1920 census. and by using the more precise methods of refined statistical research which we have today. But I should like to point out. too. that the record of the past quarter century shows us first of all that immigration has not. in fact. flowed in the national origins channels for the major reason that established quotas of many countries have never been fully realized. And these unfilled quotas were not confined to the favored countries of northern and western Europe. Let us look. for example. at the quota for Italy.