Skip to main content

Full text of "Hearings"

See other formats








Detroit, Mich. 

ninth session 

The President's Commission on Immigration find Naturalization 
met at 9 : 30 a. m.. pursuant to recess, in room 734. Federal Courthouse 
Building, Detroit, Mich., Hon. Philip B. Perlman (chairman) 

Present: Chairman Philip B. Perlman, and the following Com- 
missioners: Msgr. John O'Grady, Messrs. Thomas G. Finucane, 
Adrian S. Fisher. 

Also present : Mr. Harry N. Rosenfield, executive director. 

The Chairman. The Commission will come to order. 

Mr. Boris M. Joffe will be our first witness this morning. 


Mr. JoFFE. I am Boris IVI. Joffe, 803 Washington Boulevard Build- 
ing, Detroit, Mich. I am representing the Michigan Committee on 
Immigration, of wdiich I am chairman pro tempore. 

I have a prepared statement I Avish to read on behalf of the 

The Chairman. We will be pleased to hear it. 

Mr. JoFFE. My name is Boris M. Joffe. I thank the Commission 
for inviting me to testify. I am here as chairman pro tem of the 
Michigan Committee on Immigration, a State-wide unincorporated 
l>ody of religious, ethnic, labor, and civic organizations who are and 
have been concerned with the preservation of our American heritage 
and its translation into action in the field of immigration. 

The community spokesmen who Avill follow me will deal more spe- 
cifically than I shall here with the deficiencies, omissions, and danger- 
ous provisions of our immigration statutes as presently codified. I 
am here rather to present the broad aspects of the situation within 
which the testimony to follow may most appropriately be appreciated 
and considered. 

It would, therefore, be well to indicate the nature of the body for 
which I speak. The Michigan Committee on Immigration is a non- 
partisan, informal, coordinating body consistinir of many organiza- 
tions and individuals in our community. Representatives from 



nationality, religious, cultural, and fraternal groups, who are all 
interested in the contribution that immigrants have made and can 
make to the life of the United States, consult with each other on com- 
mon problems. In the course of its concern with these matters it has 
found it both necessary and desirable to become interested in the legal 
aspects of immigration to the United States and has, as a result, con- 
cerned itself with what, in our minds, should be the appropriate 
foundations for an American immigration policy, its appreciation 
by the American public which cannot be attained without the public's 
education in the whole area of immigration. Our committee is con- 
tributing, and your Commission will contribute to this education, 
and therefore inevitably to the better, and less biased, understanding 
of the problem by the public. On the basis of such foundations, our 
committee has considered the equities and inequities of our present 
immigration system. 

Among the organizations which thus come together to discuss these 
issues are — 

1. Detroit Arcluliocesan Resettlement Committee 

"2. Society for the Relief of Germans From Prewar Poland 

3. Jewish Social Service Bureau 

4. American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association 

5. Polish American Congress 

6. Jewish Community Council 

7. Latvian Association in Detroit 

8. Detroit Council of Churches 

9. Columbian Federation of Michigan 

10. Resettlement Service 

11. Epirotic Society 

12. International Institute 

13. United Lithuanian Relief Fund of America 

14. American Aid Society 

15. Refugee Aid Association of Nortliern Greece 

16. Latvian Relief, Inc. 

17. Ukrainian Congress Committee 

18. Jewish Labor Committee 

19. Legal Aid Bureau 

20. United Ukrainian American Relief Committee 

21. Polish Aid Society — Harper Community House 

22. Pan-Macedonian Aid Association 

23. Polish Activities League 

24. American Committee on Italian ^Migration 

It is the fundamental position of the Michigan Committee on Im- 
migration that the American point of view on immigration was ap- 
propriately voiced in 1864 by the platform of the Republican Party 
(then called the Union Party), which Abraham Lincoln helped to 
write, and which declared — 

foreign immigration which in the past has added so nnich to the wealth, re- 
sources, and increase of power to this Nation, the asylum of the oppressed of all 
nations — should be fostered and encouraged by a liberal and just policy.^ 

The question is what constitutes a liberal and a just policy? It 
seems to us that the policy that we would adopt with regard to im- 
migration should be based on precisely the same set of standards that 
we would use in considering Avhether or not any other procedure, law, 
or policy, of the United States was just and moral. Does the i)roposal 
fundamentally maintain the spirit of American democracy as ex- 

1 The above quotation is from. Charles A. and Mary R. Beard, The Rise of American 
Civilization, New Yorli, the McMillan Co., 1933, vol. II, pp. 110-111. 


pressed in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution? This 
is the test of whether or not a policy for America in any area, immigra- 
tion, naturalization, labor, taxation or any other phase of life is worthy 
of the name American. 

It is the interest of America that it should be able to draw from the 
talent, skills, ability, loyalty, and education of the best that the world 
has to offer among those who seek admittance to our shores. Such an 
assumption must mean inevitably that we wish to see the elimination of 
the national origins quota system. While some can and do differ as 
to the total number of immigrants who should be admitted annually 
to the United States, in principle there is no difference among us as 
to the proposition that the racist, false, and dangerous doctrine of the 
alleged superiority of particular national groupings as expressed in 
the present national origins quota system must be abolished. 

Similarly, we feel that native-born and naturalized citizens should 
be, as they have always been in the eyes of the United States Su- 
preme Court, subject to no distinctions. Our present legislation makes 
invidious distinctions between the naturalized and the native-born 
and introduces dangerous concepts into our system of justice. A more 
extended treatment of this problem will be presented in our legal brief. 

Yfe of the Michigan Committee on Immigration feel that the immi- 
grant has helped to make the Nation, we not only feel it we know it, and 
the sources of our knowledge will be presented by others today. In 
addition, however, we are aware of the fact that the Nation has done 
a great deal to shape the immigi-ant. We do not feel in this our de- 
mocracy that there should exist a rigid, inflexible, deportation system 
which hangs as a vague threat over the head of every citizen as is 
presently the case in our immigration legislation. Certainly under 
conditions over which the immigrant has no control, such as possibly 
becoming a public charge in a depression — if it comes — comparable to 
that of the unlamented 1930's, no legitimate immigrant should be 
penalized by the threat of deportation. It is our position that when 
to the best of our ability we have examined the prospective immi- 
grant and found him satisfactory as a prospective American from 
every possible angle — be it security, health, morals, etc. — when we 
have admitted him to our country, and when we have permitted him 
to become naturalized, we should do nothing to reverse this procedure 
except in cases where clear fraud has been shown to exist. Not only 
is this theoretical point of view important, but in addition it must 
be emphasized that the American procedure of judicial review should 
be applied here as well as to the other aspects of our American way of 
life. Our present legislation makes no provision for judicial review 
of immigration and deportation procedures. 

With regard to the points which I have just made, many otherwise 
well-disposed citizens have, of course, raised objections on the grounds 
that while in theory these ideas are all right, nevertheless they are not 
sure that people of all ancestries are transformed into good Ameri- 
cans. They suggest that theories need to be checked by facts. In 
this connection the report of President Hoover's Commission on Law 
Enforcement is instructive (Crime and the Foreign-Born, National 
Committee on Law Observance and Enforcement, Report No. 10, 1931, 
p. 195). That report states that "in proportion to their numbers, the 
foreign-born commit considerably fewer crimes than the native-born." 


If we are also concerned with the charge that our new immigrants 
may be illiterate, it is relevant to note that the most literate group 
in our population is not the native-born whites of native-born parents 
but the native-born whites of foreign or mixed parentage. We cannot 
measure Americanism by zeal for education, or literacy, or other qual- 
ities. Americanism is the spirit behind the welcome that America has 
traditionally extended to all races, religions, and nationalities. It is 
the spirit of George Washington who called upon all Americans 
"humbly and fervently to besiege the kind Author of these bless- 
ings * * * to render this country more and more a safe and pro- 
pitious asylum for the unfortunate of other countries." 

Certainly the more than 100 years of immigration to the United 
States from our American Revolution until the first of the quota laws 
was passed in 1921 has demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt 
that America became great precisely because of the contributions of 
people of all ethnic and religious and racial groups. To argue, as our 
quota system does, that one people is 30 times as valuable as another 
people is to perpetuate into law a dogma worthy of the Hitlerite 
forces against which America struggled in the greatest war of our his- 
tory, and emerged victorious. 

With regard to the details of our Immigration and Nationality Act, 
Public Law 414, sometimes called the McCarran-Walter Act, our 
legal adviser will render a more extended testimony upon the specific 
deficiencies of that law. I should like only at this time to point out 
that with reference to the basic assumptions I have already discussed 
above, the quota system as embodied in that law, the McCarran Act 
actually discriminates against Orientals in the racist sense and does 
not eliminate discrimination, as it professes to do. Its provisions 
on the "Asia-Pacific triangle" which requires tliat if there is any immi- 
grant, regardless of the country of his birth, of whose parents one was 
born in a country which was Asiatic to which it assigns a grotesquely 
hypocritical quota of 100, or in a country for which there is no quota, 
then such an immigrant is assigned to this "generous" quota for the 
"Asia-Pacific triangle." Is this the way to capture and secure loyalties 
and imagination of people of Asia to our side, or is this the way of 
furnishing to our adversaries additional arguments against us ? For 
the first time there is discrimination against would-be immigrants 
from Jamaica, Trinidad, and other parts of the West Indies, most 
of whom are Negroes, by the fixing of an annual quota of a hundred 
for any colonies regardless of the extent to which the quota of the 
mother country is not utilized, and it is another example of the dis- 
criminatory legislation in the McCarran Act. If we were to have 
accepted the McCarran Act's point of view on quotas — which, we do 
not, and which we believe to be unalterably un-American — at least 
the present legislation should have used 1950 as a base for the quotas 
rather than taking the figures of 32 j^ears ago which do not reflect 
the present composition of our population. 

The McCarran Act does more. As I indicated above, it makes 
arbitrary bases for deportation and in some instances eliminates the 
statute of limitations, thus puttin<T threats and a shadow over the 
life of any would-be American. Jiidicial review in this situation is 
no more difficult to establish than in many other areas. In effect, what 
the McCarran Act has done is that in addition to limiting by quota, 


it has also limited within quotas according to specific categories as 
was indicated in the veto message of the President. We have, in effect, 
adopted the theory of protecting ourselves against aliens. The way 
this law seeks to achieve such protection is fantastic. This alleged 
protection is against the countries of eastern Europe which have fallen 
under the iron curtain, and from which men and women have escaped 
at the risk of their lives, after personal experience with communism, 
and they are precisely the countries which we are choking off in this 
new anti-immigration system. We make it impossible for those men 
of worth to democracy, who are opponents of Soviet totalitarianism 
and who have risked their lives against it, to come to the United States. 
Such restrictions on immigration, in addition to being un-American 
in terms of the basic ideas which should govern our immigration laws 
as stated above, are also dangerous to our national security. 

The question has also been raised as to whether or not special emer- 
gency legislation is required for the present world scene which has 
as some of its more tragic aspects the presence in various countries 
of refugees, expellees, iron-curtain escapees, and surplus populations in 
various countries of Europe. It is here that there are many differences 
of opinion as to what ought to be done. We are of the opinion that 
the problem of refugees and surplus populations is a continuing emer- 
gency which will harass both America and the free world for many 
3^ears. Some of us are convinced that this problem should not be 
approached merely on the basis of piecemeal emergency legislation. 
We believe that the situation requires an overhauling and liberf.liza- 
tion of our basic law as previously suggested, thus permitting the 
immigration of a larger number of worthy immigrants to America. 
Over and above the changes thus suggested there may be the necessity 
for flexibility in revising from time to time the total numbers to be 
admitted for special emergency periods so that situations such as thf) 
present one of refugees from behind the iron curtain may be taken 
care of. 

One more point ought to be made. In 1946 Congress parsed an 
act known as the xldministrative Procedures Act. This act was de- 
signed to curb the threat of bureaucracy by making Federal bureaus 
more responsive to the people they were supposed to serve. The act 
required that officials before issuing decisions should give the people 
to be affected by them an opportunity to be heard, and to give lair 
hearing to all interested parties before making such decisions, as well 
as authorizing judicial review to check on just executive action. The 
authors of that bill were strangely enough the authors of our present 
Omnibus Immigration Act. It is curious because the bill of 1946 
which was supposed to apply to all Government bureaus was specifi- 
cally denied applicability by these very authors in the present immi- 
gration legislation which bears their names. 

It is important at tliis time to indicate that our attitude with regard 
to our immigration laws is not solely one which deals with the rights 
and obligations that we have to immigrants or that they have to us. 
We are concerned as American citizens with the need of the United 
States. We therefore have examined the present statutes relating to 
immigration and naturalization from the viewpoint of how they 
would affect our foreign policy, our domestic economy, our fight 
against the totalitarian menace of communism, and, as I have outlined 


above how they are rehited to our basic laws and values. All of these 
things are indivisible. 

Certainly our foreign relationships have been greatly damaged by 
the type of legislation which we maintain in this country in the field 
of immigration. We have in effect made it impossible for those who 
could best work with us in establishing the free world on a secure basis 
to work with us because they feel that we consider them — this time 
by law — second-class people, that we believe they are unfitted for the 
benefits of our democracy. Is it any wonder then that as a result of 
domestic legislation the foreign-policy position of America becomes 
less tenable ^ 

With regard to our domestic economy we know that grave man- 
power shortages liave plagued us in the past and will plague us in the 
future, not only tlie shortages of manpower to serve our vast machine 
economy, but shortages of scientific man])ower as well. Where would 
the United States have been today if with regard to immigration we 
had had a McCarran Act wliich would not have permitted entry to 
persons like Prof. Enrico Fermi or Prof. Albert Einstein or others 
instrumental in the development of atomic energy, persons who came 
to America in time to help this country stave off the threat of the Nazi 
totalitarian menace. There is no basis upon which scientific genius 
can be assumed to reside in the borders of only one or a limited number 
of countries. Any legal procedure which renders it impossible for the 
United States to take advantage of the most desirable qualities of men 
and women from all over the world who wish to contribute their 
talents to the building of America is a dangerous policy. It is one that 
may in time lead to fatal weakness on the part of the United States. 

We have seen in America that the fight against communism has 
been immeasurably aided by the activities of those who have had first- 
hand experience, through persecution long experienced, with the Red 
menace. If we are sincere in wishing to combat totalitarian commu- 
nism, it would, of course, be to our great advantage to make use of the 
unquestioned aid tliat such persons can give us. We are handicapped 
from receiving such aid by our legislation on immigration which makes 
it impossible for such persons to come to the IJnited States. For 
example, if an individual behind the iron curtain attempts to slow 
down, to revolt passively or otherwise against his Communist masters, 
and as a result is sentenced by the political kangaroo courts of tlie 
Kremlin to a term in prison, and then later escaj)es to a part of the 
world from which he can make application to be admitted to the 
United States, the very facts of his anticommunism preclude his being 
admitted to the United States because under Public Law 414 he has 
been convicted of a crime in his native country. Consider the mon- 
strosity of legislation which would leave to the determination of Com- 
munist Hungary whether or not Cardinal Mindzenty should be allowed 
to emigrate to the United States — since the present masters of Hun- 
gary accused him not of a political offense — and you get some idea of 
the travesty on justice and Americanism that such a law provides. 

These points of view then which I have expressed to you are in no 
sense to be considered as specific inclusive statements of position on 
the part of the Michigan Committee on Immigration, but rather as a 
broad overview of the subject and an outline which will be filled in by 
others present who will deal quite specifically with various aspects 


of the subjects that I have only briefly touched upon, or omitted al- 
together for reasons of time. 

May I again thank the Commission for an opportunity to be heard, 
and to express a fervent hope that your deliberations will serve to 
advise the public and the Congress of the need to repeal the present 
unwarranted immigration la^v with its impractical, un-American and 
unscientific "national origins quota," dangerous to the best interests 
of the United States. We also hope, no less fervently that your 
recommendations will result in adoption of a fair, sensible, practical, 
and moral immigration law consonant with the ideas of Washington 
and Lincoln, as quoted previously in this testimony. 

The CiiAiioiAN. Thank you very nuich. 

Mr. JoFFE. That completes my testimony. Mr. Chairman. 

I would ask your permission to read to the Commission at the 
request of Senator Blair Moody this statement which he in person 
could not deliver this morning. Senator Moody was very anxious to 
be here, but a previous engagement in Saginaw prevented it. 

The Chairjnian. We Avill be glad to hear the Senator's statement. 

(The statement of Senator Blair Moody, read by Mr. Boris JofFe 
is as follows : ) 

Statement of the Honorable Blair Moody, a Senator in Congress From the 

State of Michigan 

Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for the opportunity to place a statement in the 
record of your hearings in opposition to Public Law 414, the iniquitous McCarran 
immigration bill. 

This law passed over the veto of President Truman placed in the hands of the 
Kremlin a weapon of propaganda which will seriously damage our position. 
The Congress in taking this action served notice on thousands of people in Poland, 
Hungary, Greece, the Baltic States, and many others which have contributed to 
make America great and give her the position of leadership in this world that 
the majority in our Congress did not understand nor sympathize with the noble 
and couragous fight wiiich they have lead against Commnuist oppression. This 
action also showed a lack of understanding of the spiritual and emotional aspects 
of the immigration question and shattered confidence in our leadership. 

This bill failed completely to write a decent codification of the Immigration 
laws of the United States. It set up new grounds to deport persons admitted to 
the United States. It established new grounds for excluding people from the 
United States. It increased the ways by which people can lose their citizenship 
and their right to citizensliip. 

Further, tliis bill leaves the quotas of many countries, which were outmoded 
more than 30 years ago because of the rigid attachment to statistics, heavily 
mortgaged, in some cases for more than a century. 

For example, the Polish quotas are mortgaged until 1999 ; the Yugoslav quotas 
until 2001; the Lithuanian until 2087; the Latvian until 2274; the Estonian 
until 2146, and on and on. Is there any reason why Congress by a cruel, heartless, 
and inequitable law should destroy the hopes of millions of men, by keeping 
American families from uniting with their loved ones across the sea? 

I fought hard on the Senate floor against this "nefarious" immigration bill, I 
voted against it. Together with Senators Lehman, Humphrey, and Douglas, 
I went to the White House to urge its veto by the President. I then fouglit to 
sustain the veto. This bill which was termed '"harsh * * * discrimina- 
tory * * * undemocratic." by Senators Pastore, Leliman, Humphrey, and 
Douglas was passed over the President's veto by a margin of two votes in the 

When Congress convenes in January of 1953 I shall fight equally hard to 
remove the injustices of this act wliich fixed into law the un-American concept 
of second-class citizenship. 

The quota system drawn up for this bill used the census figure of 1920 to 
perpetuate the inequities of three decades ago and to continue the discrimination 
against peoples of southern and eastern Europe. This intentionally favors the 


peoples from northern and western Europe over the peoples of southern and 
eastern Europe. 

Because the Congress passed a bill full of hatreds, fears, and prejudices that 
have no proper place in American legislation or life, well over half of our pres- 
ent quotas go unused. At the same time, fugitives from Communist terror, 
aged parents, grandparents and other loved ones of some of our finest American 
citizens, wait in vain for the chance to come to freedom and reunion. But 
because of this law it will be generations before anyone from their country can 
obtain admission to America. What good is a quota number after death? 

This law constitutes a slur and an insult to the people of ethnic origin and 
contains dangerous implications which cannot be allowed to stand. I, together 
with the members of the Senate and House who are champions of the people 
and right thinking will devote our strongest efforts to obtain a just and equitable 
revision of our immigration rules during the Eighty-third Congress. 

The Chairman. Is David I. Rosin here ? 


Mr. Rosin. I am David I. Rosin, 428 Penobscot Bnilding, Detroit, 
Mich. I am here on behalf of the Miciiigan Committee on Immigra- 
tion, to discuss some of the technical and legal aspects of the new 
immigration law. 

I have a prepared statement which goes into the matter in detail, 
which I should like to submit, and, with the permission of the Com- 
mission, I should like to summarize briefly the contents of the state- 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Mr. RosiN. First, in order to discuss the general immigration 
philosophy and the possibility of changing the legislation that now 
exists, it nnist be necessary to analyze the acts we have. Now, I do 
not intend to discuss the policy giving rise to the present legislation 
or the social or economic factors. What I want to do is to try to point 
out some difficulties that exists in the attempts which may be made 
to enforce tlie present legislation, to administer it and some of the 
inconsistencies that occur. 

One of the inconsistencies, I think, is in the national origins quota 
system that is perpetuated in the act. xis I understand it, the purpose 
of the McCarran law was twofold. First, to eliminate some racial 
and ethnic barriers to citizenship and primarily as appears by the 
national quota preference system that is set up in the statute to give 
to this country the privilege of obtaining first the people who may 
be most useful to the economy of the United States. Now, if we are 
going to take the first principle, to remove the racial and ethnic bar- 
riers, then, of course, the national origins quota would be inconsistent 
with that. But even more fundamental, if the purpose is to allow us 
to have in this country first those people who are most valuable be- 
cause of talents and education, then by eliminating the number of 
such people who may come from any particular national origin we 
are immediately defeating the purpose. 

I can imagine a situation, for instance, of the need for sheepherders 
in this country. If our need is so great that more than 50 percent of 
the Spanish quota, where the sheepherders for this country most 
numerously come from, is exhausted we are out of luck for sheep 
herders. Consequently, the national origins program is inconsistent 
with the first preference given within the statute. 


Tliere are many other sections of the law which seem to be difficult 
because of administration of the law, because of powers vested in 
different branches of the Government and different individuals within 
those branches. For instance, in the matter of preferences, under the 
law a procedure is set up in the statute for approval of petitions for 
preference by the Attorney General. Once he has approved that 
petition he notifies the Secretary of State, who notifies in turn the 
appropriate American consul. Now after the Attorney General him- 
self or some officer designated by him approves that petition after 
investigation and after it is assumed there has been a reasonable 
amount of scrutiny, the law then says that if a consular officer, not a 
consul but any consular officer, decides that he should not give a visa 
because the applicant he has not established to the satisfaction of the 
consular officer, or even if he gets a visa the applicant does not satisfy 
to the satisfaction of the immigration officer, not the Attorney General 
but some local officer in the Department of Justice, that he is entitled 
to preference or nonquota status, then he does not get admitted. In 
the case of satisfying an immigration officer there will be a method of 
appeal in some way in some cases, but if the consular officer is not 
satisfied there is no provision for an appeal to a nation-wide interpre- 
tive body. 

It seems that the inconsistence and experience and burden of au- 
thorizing the Attorney General in the first instance of approving 
applicants and then having his approval subject to a complete change 
and a revocation, in effect, by a person who is not responsible either 
to the Attorney General or even to the Secretary of State who himself 
has no povrer to do that, would seem to be an inconsistency not intended 
or not practical in the administration of the law. 

Commissioner Finucane. What change would you suggest on this 
point ? 

Mr. RosiN. This is my personal opinion, of course. I think there 
should be two things : (1) that if the Attorney General has approved a 
petition, that approval should stand until the Justice Department 
itself questions it. There is a procedure in the deportation provisions 
of the law now under the McCarran statute whereby any improperly 
obtained visa may be investigated even after entry, and a person may 
be deported for being party to the improper obtaining of a visa and 
he would have an unlawful entry. 

Commissioner Finucane. But the Attorney General doesn't go into 
all phases of admissibility of the applicant, only the limited area of 
relationship and citizenship of a petition. 

Mr. KosiN. I appreciate that. 

Commissioner Finucane. In your judgment should the whole mat- 
ter be handled by the Consulate ? 

Mr. KosiN. I think it might be more expeditious and more practical 
as long as there is Nation-wide enforcement. I would feel there 
should be an appeal from rejection or denial by the consul to an 
agency within this country, and the possibility of judicial review of 
the agencies possibly of improper action. That would have the same 
safeguard. We would have a direct dealing with the visa officer and 
it would save the Government some expense and confusion. I believe 
that may be more practical. 


Commissioner O'Grady. As a practical matter, and from the point 
of view of American industry, how do you think a quota system of 
immi<2;ration based on preferences for skilled workers, will function? 

Mr. Rosin. My personal feeling is that it is going to be very difficult 
to administer and the probability is that it will not work effectively. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Do you think it might slow up immigra- 

Mr. Rosin. I think it will definitely slow it up because it is one of 
the elements of proof that is extremely difficult to ascertain, and it 
may be long before standards are sufficiently well established so that 
petitions can be expeditiously handled as to the need for a particular 
individual or group of individuals in this comitry. There are many 
industries and businesses where the need may be only temporary, 
where the Government may not feel there is sufficiently a continuing 
need for a group to be allowed to come in, and would only allow indi- 
vidual cases in cases of special urgency. 

The investigation that takes place today under the contract labor 
waiver provisions of the law for skilled labor is an extremely cumber- 
some process and takes sometimes many months. This new process 
will take, I believe, even longer. 

Now, we have in the statute also the problem of what to do to deter- 
mine whether a person is admissible in the first place. The statute 
says, among other things, if a consular officer feels that a person may 
at any time become a public charge during his residency in the United 
States he may be denied a visa. "If in the opinion of the consular 
officer" — ^that is the thing. 

Now, speaking from a purely legislative standpoint, this creates the 
possibility that a consular officer might say to a man, "I expect 20 years 
from now you may contract tuberculosis and have to go to a hospital, 
consequently I don't want to give you a visa as you just may become 
a public charge." That may not occur, but the fact that that possi- 
bility exists in this kind of legislation presents the opportunity for 
inequities and unfairness to persons and groups which should have 
been eliminated in an extensive codification of the law. It seems to 
me that a more objective standard should have been injected into the 
law so that even the consular officer himself would know the extent of 
the law. There is the fact of no individual appeal prevalent. 

We also have in the new statute a perpetuation of a combination of 
prosecution and judicial officers in the same person. You gentlemen 
are probably familiar with the fact that in 1946 when the Adminis- 
trative Procedures Act was enacted it was felt that various agencies 
had abused or had the opportunity at least to abuse this combination 
of being both the prosecutor and the judge, and that the Supreme 
Court of the United States ruled that in deportation proceedings the 
act should apply also, and then Congress decided it should not apply. 

It would seem that the possibilities of abuse which existed in 1946 
are no less imminent now ; the difficulty on the part of the adminis- 
trative officer himself to separate his personality to rule on his own 
questions. For instance, when an objection is raised there is a prac- 
tical difficulty which makes it extremely hard for the individual to 
act as fairly as he would like to. And it seems to me that the statute 
should have provided for a separation of these two functions even 
within the agency itself. 


Now, of coin*se, ^Ye have in tlie statute many changes and limitations 
on the rights of residents in this country. In order to avoid the politi- 
cal or social aspects of it I would like to limit myself to the two points : 
(1) I believe there are standards in the statute allowing for deporta- 
tion of individuals, which are contrary to our basic historical concepts 
of justice. We also felt in this country that a person took the chances 
on the consequences of his actions. But we also took the position that 
he should have known at the time the act occurred wdiat the conse- 
quences would be. Now, we say in this statute that persons who may 
have been in that class 5 or 10 or 15 years ago, that they may now be 
told that what they did then, which did not affect their status, now 
affects their status and subjects them to exile. 

We also have in the statute provisions for the deportations which 
are retroactive, I tliink in the worst sense, from the legalistic and 
legal point of view. There is a provision in the statute, section 221 
(i), where if the consul or Secretary of State wants to revoke a visa 
once issued, he can do it without any hearing or without an oppor- 
tunity for a man to testify himself. 

Now, carrying this out to its logical conclusion, if a man gets a visa 
and comes to the United States, having fulfilled his legal obligations, 
the Secretary of State or a consular officer could say, "I have changed 
my mind, I am revoking the visa given because the statute says that 
that revocation can come at any time." So a man finds himself here 
without the oppoi'tunity to develop himself, without even knowing the 
reason for revocation, and again legislation which gives the oppor- 
tunity to administrative officials to make their own law for a particu- 
lar case without a study, without an appeal, without an opportunity 
to develop one's self, I believe is not the kind of law we should have as 
a codification or an immigration code, after 35 years of administering 
a former code. We should be in a position at this time to preserve 
those rights, to streamline the operation, without prejudice to the 
individuals involved. 

We also have a naturalization section of the act which again com- 
plicates the picture on naturalization which was originally codified in 
1907, and revised in 1924 and changed in 1940, and again changed. 
R'ghts which a man may have on December 22 he may not have on 
December 24 of this year, because he may not have been able to come 
here fast enough to preserve those rights. Although under the old 
law he may continue for some time to have them. The opportunity to 
come to this country to assert a claim of citizenship is limited by the 
new statute. The opportunity to appeal a consul's denial of a pass- 
port to a person who may be an American citizen is limited to those 
v.dio have lived here previously or who are under 16 at the time of the 

It seems that is somewhat unjust and harsh denial to the right to 
appeal. I think that summarizes, I hope in a shorter time, than the 
prepared statement would have taken to read. 

I suggest to this Commission that these and other matters be com- 
pletely investigated from the viewpoint of the committee of the Gov- 
ernment v.'ith fairness to the individual and possibly a new structure 
completely be submitted to Congress for consideration. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. Your prepared statement 
will be inserted in the record. 


Mr. Rosin. Thank you again for the opportunity of being here. 
(The prepared statement submitted by Mr. David I. Kosin on behalf 
of the Michigan Committee on Immigration is as follows :) 

On behalf of the Michigan Committee on Immigration interested not only in 
the problems of the foreign born but also in the social and cultural development 
of the United States, I have been asked to present what I believe are significant 
technical and legal problems arising from an analysis of the act. I do not intend 
nor desire to discuss the propriety of the philosophy behind the legislation, the 
policy giving rise to its enactment, nor the social, economic, or political principles 
which may be involved. 

It appears to have been intended in the original legislation that racial and 
ethnic barriers to the acquisition of citizenship in this country would be removed. 
It would then follow that in order for such barriers to be removed as to citizen- 
ship, there would be a broadening of the base upon which would be determined 
the eligibility of individuals to enter the United States and apply for citizenship. 
This appears to be contradicted by the perpetuation of the quota system based 
on national origins established in the 1924 Immigration Act. Further, the new 
system of priority and preference apparently aimed at the economic and cultural 
usefulness of individuals to the United States defeats its own purpose since it is 
inodified and qualified by national origin quotas. In other words, where a pro- 
spective immigrant may have the most desirable skills and qualities and be vitally 
necessary to the economic or cultural interests of the United States and yet be 
aiot able to enter the United States because of the accident of an oversubscribed 
quota for the country of his birth or national origin, this country cannot use his 
talents. Consequently, as the principal behind the new quota system, as estab- 
lished in the act, is to foster priorities of immigration upon the needs of this 
country, then it would seem inconsistent to make national origin or country of 
birth a factor in determining the value of an individual as a resident of the 
United States. 

It cannot be argued successfully that a person who qualifies for a first pref- 
erence under section 203 (a) (1) is less desirable as an immigrant if otherwise 
qualified for admission under the inunigration laws merely because of his birth 
or national origin as defined in the act. 

In the administration of many other sections of the act, there can be confusion, 
arbitrary action, and administrative difficulty which not only will give rise to a 
substantial quantity of litigation before many of the issues are settled, but will 
also make for serious difficulty in many cases where a party claiming to be 
aggrieved by an administrative ruling may, because of the unavailability of courts 
for the enforcement of rights, be precluded from assorting them. Examples of 
this type of situation appear in sections 20.3, 204, and 20.5 of the act. 

Section 203 establishes that the Attorney General of the United States shall 
approve the status as to priorities. This procedure to obtain such approval is 
set out in section 204. Section 206 authorizes the Attorney General to revoke 
his approval in cases which subsequently are found to have been mistaken. Yet, 
section 20.3 (e) requires the individual who has already been the .subject of such 
approval through a Cabinet officer of the United States who has been entrusted 
by a statute to make such a decision to establish "to the satisfaction of the 
consular officer," when he applies for a visa, and "to the immigration officers," 
when he applies for entry that as a nonquota inunigrant or a preference quota 
immigrant he is entitled to the status already investigated and approved. Not 
only is this a cumbei-some and expensive procedure from the standpoint of the 
administration of laws by our Government, but also raises serious difficulties on 
the part of a prospective immigrant who is entitled to a preferred or nonquota 
status but to whom one of hundreds of subordinate consular officers or one of 
thousands of immigrant inspectors may capriciously and arbitrarily decide to 
preclude froiu the opportunity of accepting the approval already granted after 
scrutiny and investigation by the head of the Department of .Justice of the United 

The act provides numerous safeguards against the possibility of fraud, par- 
ticularly in section 200 with relation to petitions for preferred or nonquota status 
and the other sections which refer to deportation for those who have improperly 
been admitted to the United States. 

Where the Attorney General may have made an error in deciding the approval 
of a petition, the petitioner would have the right to obtain judicial review on the 
merits of the case. On the other hand, if a subordinate consular official who 
through whim or caprice denies the validity of a claim already established with 


the Attorney General, the aggrieved party would have no judicial or other recourse 
for a determination as to his rights. It is not believed that our system of justice 
has historically been based upon administrative and clerical caprice. 

This departure could lead to other types of cases involving rights of individuals 
to obtain a uniform policy decision in individual matters to legislative denial of 
the historically secure recourse to higher tribunals where administrative officials 
have abused or usurped power. 

It is recognized that the courts have held that an alien who has never resided 
in this country cannot seek judicial review of a denial of a claimed right, but 
where the statute provides for approval by the head of one branch of the Govern- 
ment, it does not seem to follow that it should also provide for a reversal of the 
approval by a lower echelon official in another branch of the Government without 
recourse to some tribunal of national scope to determine the propriety of the 
action of the subordinate official. This is especially true in the legislation under 
discussion because the act expressly provides for the Attorney General to give 
notice to the Secretary of State of his decision granting preference or nonquota 
status and does not suggest to the Secretary of State that he has any power to 
change the ruling. If the Secretary of State has no such power, it is manifestly 
unfair to allow a minor official who, by the mere accident of his taking a particular 
case in the area in which a particular individual may happen to reside, to warp 
or subvert the decision which his own top superior cannot change or revoke. 

This discussion is not intended to suggest that fraud or imijropriety should go 
undetected or unpunished. The law specifically provides for such situations. 
AVe do not intend to suggest that the caprice of an individual consular officer 
would be based upon improper motives, but we know that individual differences 
in background, philosophy, and approach to the problems of individuals leads to 
differences in decisions among such individuals and conclude that the only fair 
basis for the administration of policy must be by the determination of policy 
through the appropriate superior administrative or judicial agencies in our 
country so that the policy will be uniform and the administration of it will be 
t quitable. The necessity for administrative standards and the absence of such 
standards is evident in other sections of the statute. 

Section 212 (a) (10) precludes immigration by persons who may have been 
convicted for two or more offenses, not involving moral turpitude, for which the 
aggregate sentences for confinement actually imposed were 5 years or more. It is 
known that in many foreign countries the standards of justice differ greatly from 
those of our country. Not only do these standards differ as to what a crime is, 
but they also differ as to procedure in protecting the rights of persons accused of 
criminal acts, and they differ as to the punishment meted out for such acts upon 
conviction. Therefore, what may be a petty and insignificant offense in the United 
States or some other common-law country, may be in other countries a felony 
with punishment as high as 10 years. This is a departure from the former law 
which specifically provided that an alien was inadmissible for criminal acts only 
where the crime involved moral tiirpitude. In the 35 years of administration of 
the former law, the courts have established a structure of definitions by which an 
administrative officer could quite readily determine whether a particular crime 
fell into such a classification. The courts in construing moral turpitude have 
considered whether tlie acts complained of in a foreign country were cognizaDie 
as a crime in the United States and apply the standards of decency and justice 
that we in our traditions have develoijed with pride in its fairness and respect for 
the rights of both society and the individual. 

Section 212 (a) (15) points up the difficulty of administration of an immi- 
gration procedure where the agencies determining admissibility of individuals 
are far-flung and the agents are numerous. This section provides that any 
Itrospective immigrant who "in the opinion of the consular officer" or later at 
the time of admission "in the opinion of the Attorney General" is likely to be- 
come a public charge at any time is not admissible to the United States. Not 
only are no standards set up for the determination of this issue, but an indi- 
vidual consular officer, who may not even be a consul, may make decisions based 
upon his own feelings, and it allows for interpretations as broad as to say that 
a person who might contract poliomyelitis or tuberculosis at any time in his 
life after entry and who goes to a public facility which will not charge for 
treatment of such diseases, as is the case in Michigan, that such person could be 
denied admission. This allows an individual officer to preclude anyone from 
admission to the United States on a ground which is vacuous and obviously not 
in conformity with what the policy of tlie law was announced to be. 


The inconsistencies and uncertainties that will arise because of differences 
among consular officers, and consular officers within ofiices, could very well create 
chaos in the administration of this subsection and international ill will if such 
excuses are used indiscriminately by certain individuals and judiciously by 
others. There is no standard of any kind upon which the opinion of the officer 
or the Attorney General can be reviewed, and. as was pointed out before, there 
is no court to whicii one may go for review of a consular officer's opinion. 

Statutes, even those establishing administrative agencies, have often been 
held incomplete and improi^er where the standards for administration of the 
statutes have not been clear and capable of objective determination. Similar 
objections fi'om the legal and technical standpoint apply to subsections (13), 
(23), (27), and (29) of section 212 (a). The historical opportunity for refor- 
mation of one who may have committed a slight indiscretion in his life is with- 
drawn in the statute. 

Section 212 (a) (12) refuses to condone a temporary departure from the 
standards of society notwithstanding possible strong social environmental emer- 
gencies or other excuses which may in the minds of the most rigid moralists 
allow an individual the opportunity of reformation, rehabilitation, and adjust- 
ment as a respectable member of our society. 

A similar situation arises in connection with naturalization provisions of 
the law where the statute provides that adultery during the period during which 
good moral character must be established for citizenship precludes the granting 
of citizenship. Not only does the statute not define adultery, which is capable 
of several definitions, but it precludes naturalization of those who may not have 
even known that they had engaged in such acts. A divorce believed by the 
parties to be valid and the remarriage of one of the parties who ultimately applies 
for citizenship may be found to have been an improper relationship and preclude 
naturalization although the mores of our society are not in the slightest vio- 
lated. For well over a century, the statutes of our States have evidenced the 
understanding that persons may innocently engage in extramarital involvements. 
The so-called Enoch Arden statute, which provides for a complete defense to a 
charge of bigamy on the part of persons whose spouses have absented themselves 
unduly long without explanation, and who remarry, evidence this liberal ap- 
proach to the prolilems of the individual. The Federal legislation thus may 
create one standard of moral conduct for citizens and other standards of moral 
conduct for those who apply for citizenship. The courts have had occasion to 
review this question in naturalization petitions and have found in several cases 
technical adultery is not necessarily evidence of bad moral character. Not only 
does the problem arise in naturalization, but also in cases where discre- 
tionary benefits under the immigration or deportation procedure are dependent 
to some extent upon a finding of good moral character. 

Section 221 (i) is another example of the opportunity to exercise discretion 
without preliminary notice, hearing, or other privilege on the part of the per- 
son whose claim to admission is involved to contradict the basis for such revo- 
cation of a visa already granted. This revocation might even l)e effected long 
after a person has become a resident of the United States and could afford an 
opportunity to deport an individual on the basis of an alleged improper entry 
notwithstanding no other bases to effect deportation without notice and hearing. 
This section provides for such action notwithstanding the earlier investigation, 
examination, and approval of a prospective immigrant's applicatiton for admis- 
sion either by the Attorney General, consular officer, or both, and the issuance of 
the appropriate documents pursuant to such examination and investigation. 
Other provisions of this act provide sufficient protection to the Government by 
way of exclusion and expulsion proceedings if the document was obtained by 
fraud or misrepresentation, or was otherwise improperly issued. The logical 
remedy would appear to be either to have section 221 (i) repealed or to provide 
for hearings on proper notice and other safeguards for those who have already 
received rights under the law. 

Section 222 (f) limits the availability of documents and records in connec- 
tion with the issuance or refusal of visas or permits to enter the United States. 
It would seem that such documents and records should be availabe to either 
party in which the validity of the documents or procedure is an issue. 

The statute provides a one-man hearing on the question of exclusion of aliens 
in section 236. This continues the policv of having the interrogating officer 
and the deciding officer the same person 

A new categorization relating to the acquisition of nationality at birth is 
established by the statute in section 301. This is the fourth time in 4ri years and 


the third time in 18 years where the Congress has established rnles rehiting to 
citizenship at birth and retention of such citizenship. It may be pointed out 
that the Nationality Act of 1940 began to affect many persons born since 1934 
only 2 years ago. Now, while many such persons may be preparing to come to 
the United States for permanent residence, these persons may find themselves 
in a different position from others identically situated who were able to enter 
the United States before the effective date of the statute. To reconcile the var- 
ious nationality statutes and to adjudicate rights acquired during these over- 
lapping periods will be an extremely difficult task even for experts. This problem 
also exists in the cases of persons who may be derivative citizens under section 
321 of the act, since it reduces the age which derivative citizenship may be 
acquired to 16 years as against IS years in the 1940 act, and 21 years in the 
1934 and 1907 legislation. 

Section 241 (a) (4) is a departure from prior legislation on the same subject 
insofar as it concerns aliens who have twice been convicted of crimes involving 
moral turpitude after entry. Since neither a prison sentence nor actual confine- 
ment is necessary to render an alien subject to deportation, it is conceivable 
that an alien who during the .space of 20 years' residence is convicted twice of 
misdemeanors such as simple larceny for which the maximum sentence in any 
event would be 90 days would lie subject to deportation. It is not proper to state 
that under such circumstances, the alien is so undesirable that his deportation 
from the United States is either necessary or mandatory. 

Section 241 (a) (8) again leaves open to the opinion of the Attorney General a 
question as to whether a person is deportable and provides for no objective or 
factual standards upon which to base his discretion. The former law did not 
leave the question of deportability of one who may have become a public 
charge within 5 years after entry to discretion, but rather to proof — which the 
alien was required to estalilish — that the cause arose after entry. It could be 
that this subsection intended to give the Attorney General discretion to alleviate 
the hardship that might ensue if his discretion were not available, but as a mat- 
ter of statutory construction and technical administration, it would seem that 
the broad language should be clarified so that there would be no doubt as to the 
intention of Congress and the rights of an individual. 

Section 241 (d) creates retroactive revocation of an otherwise lawful status. 
Although this may be constitutional and within the purview of Congress to do, 
as a lawyer I cannot help but object to legislation which creates penalties for 
acts or status acquired prior to the enactment of the law. Courts have held that 
although the deportaiou laws are not criminal, exile is sometimes far more 
serious than imprisonment for crime. 

Section 242 (b) perpetuates the administrative technique which merges the 
prosecuting and judicial functions in one officer. The Administrative Proce- 
dures Act of 1946 was intended to remedy the evils that had been developed 
through such practices in prior years, and there seems to be no reason why 
administrative proceedings involving the freedom of an individual to reside in 
the United States should be different from those proceedings which involve 
property interests and which are covered by the Administrative Procedures Act 
of 1946. 

Section .340 in subsections (a) and (c) sets up conditions unon whicli a natu- 
ralized citizen may lose his citizenship. These are grounds which have no con- 
nection whatsoever with the eligibility of the individual to have been naturalized 
and place upon him burdens of conduct, investigation, and fact finding which are 
not expected of other citizens. It creates a second-class citizenship which the 
Suiireme Court of the United States has indicated is contrary to the Constitution 
of the United States. 

Procedure to determine whether a person whose citizenship status has been 
questioned by a consular officer as a citizen of the United States, has been sub- 
stantially changed by the statute. It does not provide for the judicial review 
allowed previously in cases of persons outside of the United States who have 
never resided in the United States, and, if they are over the age of 16 years, the 
opportunity for an administrative determination provided for in section 360 (c) 
is conditioned upon factors not specified in the act, namely financial ability of 
the claimant to make a trip to the United States, tlie availability of trJUT^nor- 
tation in the country where he lives, and similar conditions. Under the Nation- 
ality Act of 1940. it is possible for a suit to be filed on behalf of such a person 
even though he is not in the United States and for a judicial decision to be ob- 
tained regardless of his age and previous residence. 

25356—52 .36 


It is resi)ectfully suggested that it may be wise for Congress to review the en- 
tire immigration program, and pass completely new legislation to achieve a struc- 
ture more consistent with inherent justice and public policy. 

The CiiAiRMAX. Is Eev. G. Paul IMusselman here ? 


Reverend Musselman. My name is Rev. G. Paul Musselman, 301 
"Woodward Avenue, Detroit, executive director of the department of 
Christian social relations of the diocese of Michigan. Before I read 
the statement I have prepared, I Avant to say that I appear here at the 
request of the National Council of the Protestant Episcopal Church of 
the United States of America, although I speak as an individual. 

The Chairman, You may read the statement. 

Reverend Musselman. This statement has been cleared with Rt. 
Rev. Richard S. Emrich, bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Diocese of 
Michigan and the president of the Detroit Council of Churches, who 
also approves it as an individual and asks to be quoted as saying he 
agrees with the statement 100 ]Dercent. 

It is not the business of the church to interfere in matters of legis- 
lation, but it is definitely the business of the church and its leaders to 
sound warnings when certain legislation departs from the basic moral- 
ity of our American democracy. It seems to me that our present innni- 
gration legislation does depart from our basic moralities in the follow- 
ing ways. 

First of all, the present legislation on immigration does not express 
the neighborliness of our Nation. For most of our history "welcome'' 
has been the word by wdiich our neighbors knew us. Recently, the 
word "welcome" has given way to the Avord "warning." In this pres- 
ent legislation there is little welcome and much warning. We've nar- 
rowed the door to our house. Our neighborliness has become, by 
legislative act, negative and restrictive. 

Second, it seems to me tliat the present immigration policy rather 
pays tribute to something which I thought we had long since rejected, 
and that is the theory of race, which in an extreme form was the basis 
of the Nazi totalitarianism. It is not true that certain races, as the 
Nazis claimed, had, by reason of birth, greater potentialities than 
others. That racial theory flies in the face of our faith. It would 
seem from our study of the present legislation that it tends, perhaps 
unwittingly, to perpetuate that mistaken and vicious theory of race. 

Third, the present restrictive and disci'iminatory legislation is, in a 
most tragic fashion, advertising to the whole vrorld our lack of faith 
in America. America is a land of opportunity for the ordinary man, 
but you would not know it by reading the McCarran-Walters Immi- 
gration Act. It seems to me that while, through the Voice of America 
and in our many endeavors to aid other nations, we are saying great 


and creative things about the potentialities of America, we are, by 
our immigration policy, saying that we just don't really mean or 
actually believe what we are trying to tell our neighbors throughout 
the world. 

The other reason why I do hope we will have an immediate revision 
of our immigration legislation and policy is because I think our present 
laws as they now stand render the cause of security a disservice. For 
purposes of security, as well as for sheer human brotherhood and de- 
cent morality, we need to win friends because only friends working 
together can do the job of security that needs to be done. The present 
laws certainly do not win friends and, therefore, they do not do us a 
service in the way of security. 

It must remain for others more skilled in legislation than I to inter- 
pret in legislative terms basic moralities that would be true to the 
American scene. Into this field I would not trespass. I would, how- 
ever, strongly urge that we speedily change these laws, especially the 
most recent. Let us admit that we have made a very bad legislative 
mistake. Let us write and pass legislation that will really express 
the greatness, the kindness, and the neighborliness which is in the heart 
and soul of our great Nation. 

That ends my own prepared statement. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Van Antwerk, you are schecluled as the next witness. 


Mr. Van Antwerp. I am Eugene I. Van Antwerp, 16845 Muirland 
Avenue, Detroit, Mich. I am here as an individual. I am former 
mayor of the city of Detroit, in 1948 and 1949, past national com- 
mander in chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and a member of 
the Sons of the Revolution. 

I am also a member of the Common Council of Detroit and have 
been every j'ear since 1932. It is a nine-man council of the city of 
Detroit. I have a prepared statement I would like to read. 

The Chairman. We will be glad to hear your statement. 

]Mr. Van Antwerp. As representatives of many veterans of various 
religious and ethnic groups, we wish to make known our position and 
the position of our organizations on the McCarran immigration law. 
In doing so, we note also that many of our members are affiliated with 
other veteran organizations which in some instances, and with respect 
to this particular legislation, may have expressed different views. 

We recognize that the immigration laws of the United States have 
long been in need of revision and codification. We strongly feel, 
however, that such revision and codification should properly be made 
with a view to nullifying any existing inequities and to preserving 
the values and ideas which we and our comrades sought to protect as 
members of the armed services of the United States. 


111 reviewiiio; United States imnii<?ration policy as enunciated by 
the McCarran law, we find what we regard as serious and severe con- 
tradictions of the ideals for which we fought. It is our joint con- 
viction that in its wars with its foreign enemies our country's military 
might was turned against Godless and dangerous concepts of tyranny 
and racism which threatened to engulf the world. Similarly, it is 
our conviction that our country's peacetime policies must be guided 
by the same considerations if we are to render secure the military vic- 
tory achieved at such appalling cost. The McCarran immigration law 
appears to place a premium on values diametrically opposed to those 

It forbids, for example, the nonquota immigration of highly skilled 
professional persons such as teachers, professors, and scientists, whose 
knowledge and competence could contribute immeasurably to the rich- 
ness of our society and economy. 

Within the national-origin quota framework which it establishes 
and through its failure to fill the unused quotas of any nation, the 
McCarran Act embodies into law an un-American racist concept. It 
establishes in effect a repugnant "race superiority" method of select- 
ing immigrants. Its provisions thus inhibit the aspirations of eastern 
and southern Europeans, including those seeking refuge from iron- 
curtain persecution, and nullify our efforts to convince the millions 
under the Communist yoke of the sincerity of our democratic convic- 
tions. It penalizes those nationals in such countries as Greece, Poland, 
and Italy who fought with us during the last great war and who 
continued as stalwarts in the fight against an ugly tyranny. 

We note with misgiving that the McCarran Act arrogates to foreign 
governments the right as well as the power to determine who is eligible 
to emigrate to the United States. Section 212 (A) (10) requires a con- 
sular officer to deny a visa to any person convicted of two or more non- 
political crimes and sentenced \o an aggregate of more than 5 years 
in prison. Therefore, the judgments of the atheistic, immoral iron- 
curtain countries, as well as the judgments of the Nazi and Fascist 
tribunals as to what is or is not a political crime and as to what is or 
is not a crime in itself, are to be substituted for the American system 
of fair play. 

We have the same thing existing in China today, where obviously 
false accusation is made obviously for the purpose of punishing those 
in contradiction to the present government in China. They are not 
accused of political crimes. They are accused of such crimes as 
starving children in schools and stuff of that description and found 
guilty by Communist courts and sentenced to severe penalties. ThaL 
is obvious subterfuge to call these victims of political crimes, but as 
a matter of fact they are conjuring up a false charge to enforce a 
political unwillingness. 

With regard to freedom of political choice, we point out that the 
distinction now created between the native-born and naturalized citi- 
zen places in the hands of an administrative tribunal absolute discre- 
tion to determine what is a political or social group or "subversive" 
and in addition subjects the membership of these groups indiscrim- 
inately to denaturalization and/or deportation. It might also be 
noted that the veteran wlio is naturalized during his period of service 
is made a second-class citizen because he may be subjected to interro- 
gation without warrant — section 287 (A) (1). Further, because he 


is denied the right to exercise the privilege against self-incrimination 
for a period of 10 years following his naturalization : 

We are definitely opposed to any legislation which creates a pre- 
snm23tion of fraud for the doing of acts which in themselves can be 
excused by circumstances surrounding them. On many occasions 
it has been necessary for persons to represent themselves as members 
of the reigning political group or former members in order to obtain 
passports or border-crossing cards to free zones of Europe. At that 
time these persons were permitted to seek visas to the United States 
in order to obtain freedom. It seems a peculiarly harsh punishment 
to place these persons in a position where they can now be deported to 
their native countries to be prosecuted for seeking political and social 

In summing up, we are constrained to state that it is our feeling that 
although the immigration laws were and still are in need of codifica- 
tion and revisions, and while we recognize that the American people 
are in need of protection from totalitarian governments and their 
agents, the restrictions embodied in the McCarran Act, together 
with the broad grants of power to administrative and executive officials 
and boards without judicial recourse and the creation of second-class 
citizenry and unrealistic immigration quotas, represent a denial and 
scrapping of the values for which we have fought. It is our position 
that the McCarran Act should be extensively amended or repealed to 
insure that the values previovisly mentioned shall be an inherent part 
of our immigration law and to prevent the injustices and inequities 
the present act creates. 

In addition to this, I would like to call the Commission's attention 
to something I think needs remedial legislation so far as immigration 
is concerned, at least as our immigration laws are concerned. We 
have here in Detroit a number of people, particularly of Belgium 
and Polish extraction, who came here years ago and have been here 
in a nationality group almost, because they were constrained by 
circumstances to remain almost exclusively in a nationality group. 
These in their youth had little opportunity to become familiar with 
our language and customs. They are good citizens in the working 
cut of their daily lives, although they are not citizens as such. They 
aren't able to obtain citizenry because they know neither the language 
nor the customs and they have reached the age where they can never 
assimilate those things. 

Now, there should be a provision in the law that people who have 
resided here for a long number of years, who have done nothing 
repugnant and nothing of that nature shows in their record — they 
should achieve citizenry upon application after, say 25 or 30 years 
residency here legally achieved. A great number of people have 
appealed to me from time to time over the years I have been in public 
life asking that something be done in order that their fathers and 
mothers could become American citizens. They live here. They 
adore America and they are in accord with all its aspirations and they 
would like to be citizens. I would like to suhmit that to the Commis- 
sion for their consideration. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. We appreciate 
your coming here and making a statement to the Commission. 

Mr. Frank X. INIartel, will you testify next? 



Mr. Martel. I am Frank X. Martel, president of the Detroit and 
AVayne County Federation of Labor, AFL, 82 West Montcalm Street, 
Detroit, Mich. I am appearing here as representative of the Detroit 
and Wayne County Federation of Labor and its affiliated local unions. 

With your permission, I will read a statement. 

The Cjiairman. You may proceed, Mr. Martel, 

Mr. Martel. Gentlemen, appearing before your Commission as 
representative of the Detroit and Wayne County Federation of Labor 
and its affiliated local unions, I beg to submit the following : 

That presently the immigration laws are unsound in the methods 
used for selection because they embody a quota system that is outworn 
and prejudicial. The philosophy of the present quota formula is a 
rank discrimination against nationals from countries some of whom 
w^e have admitted and who have measured up in every respect to our 
standards on a behavior comparable with that of the countries more 
favored under our present immigration laws. Therefore, we are de- 
priving ourselves of a source of immigrants equal in capability of 
assimilating American custom and doing the useful work of an Ameri- 
can and at the same time gratuitously insulting the citizens of those 
countries by classifying them as less desirable than citizens from the 
more favored countries under our preseiit quota system. 

In my many years' experience as an official in the trade-union move- 
ment I have discerned nothing that would indicate that those immi- 
grants we now receiA'e from the more favored countries are better 
workmen, more law abiding, or make better trade-unionists than those 
from the countries that are discriminated against under our present 
quota formula. I do not want my statement pertaining to the quota 
to be misinterpreted as an advocacy of favoring unlimited immigra- 

It does seem that some fair formula could be worked out that would 
more satisfactorily meet not only our own needs but accommodate 
nationals from other countries who desire to come to our shores on a 
more equitable basis. Such formula might be better fitted to our 
foreign policy which is based on being not only fair and friendly to 
all democratic countries but to encourage their friendship and co- 
operation in the battle against world-wide communism. 

When an immigrant has passed the rigorous tests of our present 
standards on admission and then by good behavior and study earns 
the right of citizenship which we try to teach him to regard as most 
valuable there should be no depriving him of that citizenship and 
deportation without due process of law including the right to a judi- 
cial review of administrative decisions. 

A substitute method for the present national-origin quota system 
might be based on one in which "first come are first served." In 
other words applications processed in the order of their presentation. 
With some evaluations on priority for those who have blood relations 
in America, skills, and occupation preference in accord with our do- 
mestic needs and those vouched for by affidavit from responsible 
groups in the country who will assume responsibility for the immi- 
grant. If national-origin quotas are to be retained rather than the 


present prejudicial system, it sliould be based on the 1950 census and 
that the unused quotas should be pooled and made available for those 
still desiring to come. There should be no lowering of the standards 
or relaxation of safeguards to prevent subversive elements from en- 
tering the country. The requirements of mental and physical health 
and assurance of support against becoming a public charge should all 
be unquestionably retained. 

It would appear from a reading of the McCarran Act that those 
who have had the courage to make the good fight behind the iron 
curtain or who have been punished by autocratic governments for 
organizing strikes would be barred under the law because in those 
countries this is regarded as a criminal act. In other words, the very 
people that we want to encourage throughout the world who have the 
courage to make the fight against low economic standards or a totali- 
tarian form of government w ould be barred from entering this coun- 
try because of a determination by their masters in the country of 
their origin that such conduct was of a criminal nature. 

It is self-evident that the present immigration laws do not provide 
sufficient personnel for policing and enforcement of the law. Hence 
the large number of illegal entrants we have in this country. And 
it may be that the bulk of these illegal entrants come from countries 
that we now discriminate against which merely emphasizes the pres- 
sure in these countries for the need for an outlet or a sanctuary for 
those that have had the courage to make the good fight. 

While it may not be germane to the function of this committee in 
its survey, we desire to direct your attention to the scandal presently 
uncovered on the border at Detroit wherein private individuals in 
Windsor have become fabulously wealthy acting as expediters for 
people who seek to come into the country and having legal right to 
come. The services of these expediters have been sought out by the 
immigrants because of their inability to get their cases properly proc- 
essed in the offices of the United States consul at Windsor. Are there 
any who could believe that this situation grew up without the conniv- 
ance of the personnel in the office of the United States consul at 
Windsor? While I wish to commend the Attorney General's office 
in Detroit for the vigorous manner in which he has prosecuted the 
immigrants who have illegally entered through this process all of 
us, I am sure, recognize that the public can have no confidence that 
this mess has been cleaned up until those in the Government service 
who have cooperated with the so-called immigration expediters have 
been eliminated from the Service and punished for their acts. 

The question of immigration laws was a subject matter before the 
American Federation of Labor convention, at which the convention 
expressed its determination to continue its efforts for sound improve- 
ments and necessary revisions of the immigration and naturalization 
laws. And in accord with the above policy I leave this statement 
with you. 

Mr. EosENFiELD. Mr. Martel, may I ask one question: Have you 
given any evidence relating to the material you have indicated here 
concerning Windsor, to the law-enforcement authorities ? 

Mr. Martel. No ; but the record is here in this court. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. And you miderstand that that record is available? 

Mr. Martel. Oh, yes. 


The Chairman. Thank you. 

Rev. Arthur H. Krawczak, you are next. 


Reverend Krawczak. I am Rev. Arthur H. Krawczak, director of 
the Detroit Archdiocesan Resettlement Committee for Displaced Per- 
sons, which I am representing here. I have a prepared statement to 
read, which has been authorized by His Eminence Cardinal Edward 

The Chairman. We will be pleased to hear it. 

Reverend Krawczak. In discussing immigration and legislation 
policies, we are dealing with a matter of utmost importance to our 
country. The need for a study and recodification of our immigra- 
tion legislation becomes apparent' when we consider our present laws 
in the light of the history of our country, our philosophy of democracy, 
and our present position in the world of nations. 

Historically, United States is a land of immigrants. A greater part 
of our strength today lies in the fact that in years gone by we have 
welcomed people from Europe and the whole world. Many of our 
scholars, scientists, educators, business and labor leaders are sons and 
grandsons of immigrants. Practically every nationality group, today 
a part of the American tapestry, can boast of sons and daiighters, who 
have made outstanding, and, in many cases, heroic contributions to 
the progress and growth of our democracy. Obviously, we are im- 
measurably stronger not only in terms of economic power but also in 
spiritual values because of the millions who came from abroad in the 
past. Yet, current restrictive immigration policies disregard this 
sacred American tradition. 

The fii'st objective of our immigration policy during the past 35 
years has obviously been to reduce the number of immigrants coming 
to our shores. That objective has been achieved with a vengeance. 
Although our population has been increased by one-third since 1914, 
the quotas set under the 1924 act allow only one-sixth as many immi- 
grants to come to America each year as came on the average in the 14 
yeai'S immediately preceding World War II. 

Students of our economy recognize that we can absorb a consider- 
able number of immigrants into our industry and agriculture during 
a course of a year. It should not be difficult for us, on the basis of 
careful study, to decide how many immigrants the United States 
could absorb each year. Ours is a growing economy. 

Our Nation is built on the basic concepts of democracy under God. 
Our pliilosophy of democracy is historically a Christian philosophy 
which emphasizes "that all men are created equal; that they are en- 
dowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among 
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Unfortunately, 
this philosophy is not reflected in our present immigration legislation. 

Wlien our National Origin Quota Act was first passed in 1924 it 
was designed openly to restrict to a mere trickle immigration from 
southern and eastern Europe. The American people in this legisla- 
tion declared to the world that they didn't want people from southern 
and eastern Europe; that they were going to make it as difficult as 


possible for them to get into the United States, In the administration 
of immio;ration during the past 27 years we have proceeded on the 
same basis. We have made immigration of people from southern 
and eastern Europe more and more difficult. The McCarran-Walter 
Act passed by the last Congi-ess, although a detiiiite step in the direc- 
tion of much needed recodification, nevertheless retains all the dis- 
criminations against the people of southern and eastern Europe and 
it adds many other discriminatory features to our immigTation 

It seems very unrealistic in light of democratic ideals to attempt to 
legislate what kind of people make the "best" American citizens. 

Yet such is the case in our national-origin quota system. This 
concept of nationality "class"- — this effort to place millions of Amer- 
icans in the role of inferior citizens runs completely counter to our 
democratic principles. It is not only undemocratic, it is ridiculous. 
Where is there any evidence that Americans, who are descendants of 
southern or eastern Europe, have contributed less by and large to 
the building of our country than Americans descended from western 
or northern Europe ? Actually .the States in which Polish, Italian, 
Greek, and other immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe 
largely have settled — New York, INIassachusetts, Rhode Island, Con- 
necticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan — are now 
among the most prosperous in the Union. 

The United States must remain true to its traditions; safeguarding 
its democratic ideals; and it must also measure up to its position of 
leadership in the world. 

The United States has assumed a world-wide leadership in main- 
taining the democratic way of life. It is, therefore, interested in 
building up the economies of other countries and strengthening them 
in their fight against communism. This cannot be done by material 
aid alone. No amount of material aid can solve the problems of 
Italy, or even of Western Germany and Greece and Holland, without 
an oj^portunity of settling some of their people in other countries. 
For instance, there is still the question of refugees and displaced 
persons in Europe. There is a large group of refugees and displaced 
persons in Greece. There is still a very large number of German 
expellees in Western Germany that are displaced. There is no place 
for them in a German economy. There is a constant flow of expellees 
and persecutees from countries back of the iron curtain. There are 
still large numbers of people in these countries that are suffering from 
hunger and starvation because they cannot find any gainful employ- 
ment. These are conditions that confront the United States and other 
countries that are struggling against communism. The United States 
must do its fair share in meeting them. 

In view of the above observation, we are of the opinion that the 
present and proposed laws, unfortunately, are discriminatory toward 
certain nationality gi^oups — that the requirements as to eligibility 
should be tempered; also the processes of deportation; that unused 
quotas for a particular year should not be lost, but rather distributed 
to immigrants from other countries where the need is greatest, and that 
the United States should participate actively in relieving surplus 
population crises in European countries and lead the way by accepting 
some over here. 


The Chairman. Do I understand you advocate terminating the 
quota system ? 

Reverend Krawczak. No. We would not favor terminating en- 
tirely the quota system, but to arrive at some scientific formula that 
would bring an equity in admitting immigrants from other countries, 
some basis perhaps of need in that country and to the point that we 
could absorb people without injuring our own economy here. 

The Chairman. Would you propose a ceiling on the total number? 

Reverend Krawczak. Definitely some ceiling on the total number. 
The case indicated in my testimony would be based on careful examina- 
tion of how many people we could absorb in our economy. 

The Chairman, Having ascertained the number that could be ab- 
sorbed, how would you determine from what countries they should 
come ? 

Reverend Krawczak. That point I was trying to discover in the 
literature on the legislation on immigration now concerning the gen- 
eral policies in the McCarran-Walter Act itself, and since I haven't 
discovered it from the experts, I could hardly propose a formula my- 
self. However, it should be a formula not based on discriminatory 
basis of the national-origins quota. 

The Chairman. Are you proposing race and creed as factors? 

Reverend Krawczak. Not so far as nationality has been a factor 
on the present formula, basing it on the 1890 census wherein that 
process became very unjust and discriminatory toward South and 
Eastern Europe. 

The Chairman. If you were to use the census of 1930 or 1940, would 
you give any weight to place of birth or race? 

Reverend Krawczak. Yes; to a certain extent. I appreciate that 
to the extent that we take the 1940 or 1930 census, we would increase 
the total quota, but we still would not eliminate discrimination against 
the nationalities group of Southern and Eastern Europe, if we keep 
that formula of quotas. 

I suppose we should look at the specific need in Europe of relieving 
the surplus population countries which definitely reflects our own 
economy and own international security. That may be one of the 
proposed formulas. What is definitely would be I don't know. But 
definitely getting away from this national-origins quota which is 
basically discriminatory. 

The Chairman. Would you apply that to the whole world, or just 
Europe ? 

Reverend Krawczak. I was just limiting my remarks to Europe. 
I am just proposing that maybe one form of a formula. As I said 
in my testimony, it requires definite study. I am not in a position to 
make a study or pass an opinion on the formula. I am just saying 
that the way the quota system is and the way it is based is definitely 
unjust because the people whom you are apportioning according to 
that quota had their bulk of immigration safe, but specifically not 
so in the case of Italians. 

The Chairman, Are you saying you do not consider the present 
formula equitable ? 

Reverend Krawczak. Right. I am saying that nationality is only 
one factor in determining a quota system for a given country. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Is Reverend Kuntz present? 



Reverend Kuntz. I am Rev. Werner Kuntz, director, Lutheran 
Service to Refugees, 3919 John R, Detroit. I am appearing as direc- 
tor of that service. 

May I express my happiness over the fact that a commission of 
this kind has been appointed. I think the hopes of a great many peo- 
ple rest upon you in the hope that througli your good ministry we 
shall be able to accomplish some of the great purposes that so many 
of us have in mind. And it is particularly a pleasure for me to meet 
again with Mr. Rosenfield with whom we have had such pleasant asso- 
ciation in Europe and here during the DP program. 

I should like to read a statement, gentlemen, at this time. 

The Chairman. We will be glad to hear you. 

Reverend Kuntz. I want to begin my testimony with an appeal for a 
return to the basic philosophy and attitude toward immigrants which 
is so peculiar to and distinctive of our American history and which 
has helped so decidedly to make our country the great nation that it is. 
That philosophy was one which cared and was concerned about people 
everywhere. It had a warm heart in it. It expressed itself in the in- 
scription on the Statue of Liberty and constitutes America's first greet- 
ing to every immigrant. I was among them on the ship and saw when 
we came to New York Harbor with what reverence and devotion they 
pass toward the Statue of Liberty. On it are these words: 

Give me your tired, your poor, 

Your huddled masses, yearning to breatlie free. 

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. 

And they came by the millions through the years. They sought free- 
dom, and they found it, and they have helped us to keep it. 

I can appreciate the changes that have come into our world in recent 
years, the complications this has brought to the immigration problem 
and the additional safeguards that are required today. I am con- 
vinced, however, that the urge to protect our country has so dominated 
us that we have unwittingly, perhaps, permitted our basic American 
pliilosophy and attitude toward immigrants to thin out, grow cold, and 
fade away. Some of the things which I read in Public Law 414 seem 
more akin to the superiority complex that was spawned out of the foul- 
ness of nazism than to the humanitarian attitude which our fathers 
taught us. It is not the kind of thinking that one should expect of a 
nation that has been thrust into a position of world leadership and 
whose example can shape a better destiny for a disordered world. The 
drawing of nations toward the concept of freedom can be accom- 
plished more by the demonstration of a warm American heart than 
by the cold outpouring of American money. It seems to have been 
forgotten by some that America can be humanitarian without for- 
feiting in any way its security. 

What I am saying is not to be interpreted that I am opposed to all 
the restrictive provisions in Public Law 414. Some of them are wise 
and some of the criticism seems opinionated and unwise. I am en- 
tirely agreed that American citizenship is a privilege that should 
not be unquestionably given, but which should be earned by im- 
migrants who will prove themselves. I am not at all averse to the 


suggestion that a more complete record be kept of every immigrant 
in this country and that this record, fairly and sympathetically writ- 
ten, be a basic reference when citizenship is applied for. What we do 
want, however, and plead for, is that w^e give the opportunity of 
America, the opportunity to prove themselves, to larger numbers of 
people, particularly to offer asylum to the persecuted and distressed 
from other lands. This is the American tradition and we should not 
turn from it. We have enough history and experience, much of it very 
recent, behind us to show that such a policy exacts no sacrifice from 
us, but brings us gain in every way. 

In line with this thinking I offer three specific proposals : 

1. Special emergency immigration legislation, not chargeable to 
any quota, in behalf of 200,000 refugees in whatever countries they 
now are, especially the expellees of Europe. We must begin with 
these people because they are the homeless people of our world, and, 
for the most, unwanted wherever they may be today because these 
countries are already overpopulated. These are the victims of com- 
munism and are its most inveterate foes. They are among Europe's 
most resourceful people. I learned to know them intimately in 
Europe and I have been very close to them here and I have learned to 
appreciate what they mean to our country in terms of economic and 
moral value. And, it seems to me, that particular preference ought 
to be given to the more than 30,000 who had bona fide assurances from 
American sponsors under the old DP Act, as amended, but who were 
denied the opportunity to emigrate to American because the limited 
quota of visas was exhausted. The result was that many families 
were cruelly divided. Many who were compelled to remain lost their 
jobs and their living quarters, such as they were. 

2. Second consideration should be given to people living in areas 
or countries that are overpopulated and a special emergency quota 
should be established. 

3. A revision of Public Law 414 is needed to allow the admission 
of immigrants in the full number originally intended when the quota 
system was adopted. Unused quotas should be made available, espe- 
cially to refugees and people from overpopulated areas who were not 
given the opportunity to emigrate under special emergency legislation. 

I advocate these proposals for the following reasons : 

1. They are in line with the American tradition. 

2. They can be supported by all necessary security safeguards. 

3. They will bring hope and rescue to many deserving families 
whose sorrows and misfortunes are no more their responsibility than 
they are ours. 

4. They will create an atmosphere of hope among masses of Euro- 
pean people and relieve tensions on which all forms of political 
fanaticism like to thrive. 

5. They will relieve the treasuries of European countries from an 
overwhelming burden of public-welfare expenditure and assist these 
countries, especially democratic Western Germany, to recover and 
draw them closer to us and the free world and farther away from the 
enslaved world behind the iron curtain. 

0. They will not burden the American economy or overcrowd the 
labor market. I have at the present time requests from industry in 
Detroit for labor of every kind which I possibly cannot fill. 


7. They will help to fill the continuing and constant need for agri- 
cultural workers in this country. It has been our experience in the 
German ethnic program that about 90 percent of our farm place- 
ments have been more than satisfactory. My files are filled with 
thankful letters from sponsors and immigrant families. I brought 
imy mail along this morning and opened about half of it, but there 
were about 17 letters I opened again from sponsors and people out 
in the rural areas who ex])ress their gratitude and say there are no 
problems here and it won't be necessary for you to take the time and 
expense to come to visit us, but if you are in the neighborhood please 
do come and see ns. They are sticking to the farm and building their 
future there. 

8. They will return many times over in taxes, in civic and cultural 
contributions, the nominal cost involved in administering the program. 

9. They will give opportunity of expression for American humani- 
tarianism which will do as much to strengthen the moral tone in 
American society as it will command the respect of the nations. 

The Chairman. Thank you, Eeverend Kuntz, There are several 
questions I would like to ask you ; will you go to the three proposals 
that you have made and take the first one. You suggest there ought to 
be special emergency provisions for 200,000 refugees. Now, do I un- 
derstand correctly that in that number would you include 30,000 of 
those who had been processed under the old displaced-persons program 
but whose applications were not finally acted upon? 

Reverend Kuntz. That is right. 

The Chairman. What about escapees from behind the iron curtain ? 

Reverend Kuntz. Yes; I think they ought to be included in this 
minimum figure. This figure that I have suggested does not Include 
the surplus-population people. Something should be done certainly 
for the people who at such tremendous risk and sacrifice and who are 
still crossing over today from behind the iron curtain — I forget the 
exact number but there were 500 a day when I was last at Camp Posen, 
and about 1,500 a day at another camp. They tell them the number 
is just as great. I have met some of these people, the tremendous risk 
they take to get away from enslavement. Certainly America is looking 
for that type of people and we have got to include them. I feel that the 
risk of these people being tainted with communism is negligible. Of 
course we have got to be insistent on a thorough examination. But 
these people have lost their loved ones; have made tremendous sacri- 
fices; have lived in fear for many, many years; they are the type of 
people who are going to be the greatest bulwark in our position. 

The Chairman. In the emergency legislation you are suggesting for 
refugees and expellees, would you also include persons in the displaced- 
persons program whose applications were not finally acted upon ? 

Reverend Kuntz. That is right. 

The Chairman. Would you include all those groups under your 
proposal ? 

Reverend Kuntz. Yes ; because I don't think you will ever be able to 
get them in otherwise. I think maybe in 5 years we won't need any- 
thing like this. There will be more of an absorption which will be a 
difficult one. Every day over there looks like Saturday afternoon in 
Indiana where everybody shows up and all are window shoppers. 
Nobody has a job. It is the futility of life. We ought to come to their 


rescue immediatel}^ and I don't think we can under our regular immi- 
gration laws. 

The Chairjman. What program would you favor first ? 

Reverend Kuntz. That you have emergency legislation covering the 
groups we have just been discussing. 

The Chairman. And secondly, you suggested that consideration 
be given to those people living in areas or countries that are overpopu- 
lated and a special emergency quota should be established. Are you 
proposing that be done through an emergency quota also ? 

Reverend Kuntz. I think so. I am not so sure of that. I don't 
think the quotas already listed will be large enough from those coun- 
tries unless special quotas allowance is made, otherwise it will not be 
able to serve the purpose of those particular countries. Italy, for 

It seems to me if we are going to relieve those countries yon have 
got to make that not chargeable to any quota, and I think this perhaps 
would be the last emergency legislation that I would propose. 

The Chairman. What are the overpopulated countries you are 
referring to ? 

Reverend Kuntz. I would think first of all Italy, and I would 
think of the Netherlands. Holland is terribly overpopulated, 
there is no future for a young man because his prospect of owning a 
farm would be limited to about 7 hectare, which is about 14 acres, and 
usually there are about 5 or 6 boys in the family and fathers don't 
know what to do with their children. Tliere is just no futui'e for 

The Chairman. What do you propose to do about the rest of the 
world where overpopulation exists ? 

Reverend Kuntz. I think that needs study, but also needs study 
from this point of view as to how adaptable those particular people 
are from Asiatic countries, let's say, to our American waj' of life. 
You can bring harm to an individual by bringing him to America 
which is so completely strange to his environment throughout the 
years, and he will be strange and he will be unhappy even in prosperity 
because it takes him too long to make the adjustment. For that 
reason I think the European adjusts himself much more easily and 
happily than the Asiatic does. 

The Chairman. We have heard testimony directly to the contrary, 
indicating that people from Asia given the opportunity here would 
become just as valuable in our economy and in our way of life, as those 
wlio might come from any other part of the world. 

Reverend Kuntz. I wouldn't want to question that at all. I am 
speaking as a social worker in making the best possible adjustment 
over here, but certainly it is in the American tradition not to favor 
just particular groups, and if there is any reason to believe that the 
Arab or someone else can adjust himself, that is one way to say we 
like you as well as anybody else in the world. I would be whole- 
heartedly for that. 

My thinking, of course, is completely humanitarian and I singled 
out the refugee because the man in a surplus-population country is 
nevertheless at home and he is accepted, while the refugee is not at 
home and he is unwanted, and for that reason, from a humanitarian 
point of view, I think we need to deal with a refugee first, whether he 


is in Arabia, whether in China, or whether he is in Europe, and then 
take the next group. 

Commissioner Finucane. Reverend Kuntz, from your work and 
observation, is it your belief that the Italian and Greek do assimilate 
quite readily in the United States if given a chance ? 

Reverend Kuntz. Yes; they have got a large nationality relation- 
ship to go to first of all. There are a lot of people here who have 
made perfect adjustments and are excellent Americans, and they can 
always find themselves at home in this country. 

Commissioner Fisher. It has been testified to by some witnesses 
before this Commission that relieving excess-population pressures 
in countries like Italy and the Netherlands would make sense as a prac- 
tical matter, whereas it would have little beneficial effect in some other 
areas of the world which have large excess population. How can you 
justify a policy to relieve overpopulation in one area of the world and 
not in another ? 

Reverend Kuntz. That is the non-European problem basically. 
The areas where you have a growing national condition necessarily, 
and a growing national pride, and where from the point of view^ of 
our world leadership and foreign policy you will find a growing 
tendency to be sensitive to any discriminatory action, real or fancied, 
and the problem therefore is to work out a formula which would settle 
the real problem of my second proposal, in the light of the practical 
applicants and the birth rate of those countries and problems of re- 
settlement here, without at the same time taking steps which can be 
reflected either accurately or by the hostile means of our vicious world 
enemy as a racial stand, as that the United States is interested only in 
Europeans. That isn't true, because we do care about it otherwise. 
It is a real dilemma; and if you talk about swapping unused quotas, 
you say, "Let's swap them in Europe or in the European area." 

But how do you turn that about in India? I personally w^ouldn't 
want to be a party to anything that would make 3'ou feel — I think that 
is the point between us — I care any less about him than an3'body else. 
That is a problem of immigi-ation I am not particularly capable of 
solving; that seems to be a real forward step. It is the next dilemma 
we will face when we take the next steps. 

Forgive me; that is a very long problem. But it is the whole 
dilemma we face. 

I wish I could give you an intelligent answer to this question, but 
it is a great problem of relieving people, let's say, in India, and it 
isn't going to accomplish much. 

First of all, they are used to hardship and suffering. That is their 
normal way of life. But how to deal justly and at the same time get 
political acceptance for that thing all over the world, I suppose, will 
be a matter of interpretation to those governments. 

I threw this out ratlier boldly without giving too much thought 
to it, but I should like to think about that problem a little more. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Revercud Kuntz, have j'ou had an opportunity to 
observe the assimilability and absorptive capacitj^ within the country 
of non-European groups that were admitted under the displaced- 
persons progi-am ? 

Reverend Kuntz. No, I have no experience that I could quote that 
would be worth anything for the record as far as concerns people 
from any Asiatic countries, nonesoever. 


The Chairman. Reverend Kuntz, you said you would like to think 
about it a little more. If you come to any other conclusions that you 
think would be of interest to us, will you let us have them? 

Reverend Kuntz. I will be glad if I can think of anything con- 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you, sir. 

(There follows a supplementary statement by Reverend Kuntz:) 

No one can adequately piece together the complete story of pain and sorrow 
and injustice involving refugees from behind the iron curtain. Behind it all, as 
the causative factor, is the ruthlessness of Nazi conquest and, even more, the 
inhumanity and brutality spawned within the walls of the Kremlin. Millions of 
people were murdered, imprisoned, deported. Other millions, at the risk of 
life, fled for the safety of Western Germany and Austria. They survived an 
agonizing experience. These ai-e the refugees. 

As time passed these refugees began to wonder whether their survival was 
worth the further pain and privation which awaited them. They were homeless 
still and penniless, refugees in an impoverished land whose great cities lay in 
ruins. The influx of so many refugees was resented by many native Germans. 
Their own economic survival seemed threatened. 

Refugees of non-German background, though in great minority, were at an 
advantage. The International Refugee Organization, under U. N. sponsorship, 
assumed responsibility for them and supplied shelter, food, and clothing. Even- 
tually these people, about one million in number, were resettled in various parts 
of the world. About 350,000 came to our country under the DP Act. A number of 
chui'ch agencies served with distinction in resettlement woi-k. This is true, in 
particular, of the Lutheran Resettlement Service of the National Lutheran 
Council under whose direction some 35,000 Lutheran displaced persons were 
resettled in this country. Many pastors and people of our synod are indebted 
to this agency for its generous service. 

The majority of refugees were of German background, about 10 million in 
number. It is estimated that one-half of this number were Lutherans. Their 
forefathers many years ago had pioneered their way into countries now behind 
the iron curtain. The hatreds engendered in war die slowly and these unfor- 
tunate people received no consideration in the U. N. mandate. Eventually our 
Congress amended the Displaced Persons Act granting 54,744 visas to ethnic 
Germans for emigration to this country. The synod's new board of social welfare, 
still in its swaddling clothes, presented this situation to the synod's board of 
directors as a serious challenge for Samaritan and missionary service and was 
instructed, by unanimous vote, to set up, within the limitations of a modest 
l)udgetary allowance, a program of service. Subsequent developments demon- 
strate how appropriate this decision was and how close this cause to the heart 
of God. 

Our only regret has been that our Lutheran Service to Refugees was not born a 
few months earlier. From the beginning it was a race against time and called 
for a streamlined plan of processing. In the experience of other agencies refugee 
families required a period of 8 months or more to complete processing. Though 
we did not know it at the time, less than 4 months remained before the quota 
of visas would be exhausted. Our project had not .vet been launched. 

The fact that, in the face of these odds, our program prospered is due to the 
guidance and blessing of God and to the immediate response of warm-hen rted 
pastors and people. Within 4 weeks after our first letter to our congregations 
most of our assurances for 030 refugee families had been received. We were 
thrilled by this spontaneous response. On Fel)urary 1 we left to undertake, with 
a bit of apprehension, our European assignment of matcliing families to our 
assurances. Throughout the tense weeks when we interviewed many hundi-eds 
of families and individuals at Camp Wentorf in Germany, God's guiding and 
helping hand was constantly in evidence. The files of the United States Displaced 
Persons Commission and records of some 500 Lutheran refugee families which 
hnd been predocumented and which, therefore, could be processed more quickly, 
were made availal)le to us ; facilities and personnel of the United States Dis- 
placed I'ersons Commission were placed at our disposal without cost; the Ger- 
man Government paid transportation and maintenance costs for families we 
called in for interview from all areas of northern Germany ; many of our cases 
were expedited beyond our reasonable expectation. All of this and more revealed 


to us in glowingly clearer outline the concern of our church's Lord in our work. 
"We could ask for nothing more. 

Our work, as we look back to it now, was very denianding in terms of time 
and emotional energy. However, the light of hope as we saw it born in the 
lirighteuing eyes of men, women, and children, as we interviewed them and dis- 
cussed with them the possibility of emigrating to America, more than compensated 
for the demands. This experience constitutes one of life's deepest joys and we 
shall forever be grateful for it. Our most painful moments came when families, 
whom we had dethiitely accepted and assigned, came back to us and told us that 
they had been i-ejected for immigration by the examining physicians or by con- 
sular or immigration officials for some technical reason involving regTilations 
specified in the Displaced Persons Act. There were many tears, born of a hope- 
lessness and a despondency that had come unexpectedly like a shot out of the 
dark. We were unequal to the task of consoling such people. There was so 
little for them to go back to. It was heartening, howevei", to see how a living 
faith in God softened for many this additional tragedy in the long chain of bitter 

Toward the end of March we learned that some 35,000 refugees remained in 
the processing pipeline, hoping and praying, but that only 5,000 visas remained 
to be given out. A frantic note was added to our work as we quickened our 
tempo still more to expedite, if possible, the processing of our families, many of 
whom sensed the impending tragedy of being left behind. The crushing blow 
came on April 22 when it was announced that the entire quota of visas was ex- 
hausted. An estimated 32,000 people, each destined for a specilic new home in 
America, were stranded behind the gate which had suddenly closed. Among them 
were approximately 230 Lutheran families, to whom we had given assignments. 
ITie measure of their disappointment was beyond words. They had been lifted 
up to the moimtain peak of a great hope, only to see the mountain suddenly dis- 
integrate and to plunge with it, as in a thundering avalanche, back into the 

However, there is also a very happy side to our story. Approximately 850 of 
our people received visas. All of them are now with their American sponsors 
and are becoming acclimated to the life of our churches and communities. The 
ad.i'ustment is not easy. They live in a new world among strangers. Even so, 
the great majority of our LiUheran immigrants are happy and thankful. The 
threat of the Bed terror is now far away. They appreciate more than many of 
vs what it means to live in the land of the free. Even more heartening to many 
of them is the warmth of love and understanding with which they were received 
as brethren by many pastors and people of our congregation. 

These refugee brethren were resettled within Lutheran congregations of the 
Missouri Synod in 33 different States. The largest number, in relative order, 
settled in Michigan, Texas, Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, New York, Mis- 
souri, Minnesota, Connecticut, Washington, Ohio, Nebra.ska, Kansas, and Mon- 
tana. A great many of the refugee immigrants are at work on farms, where their 
lielp is desperately needed and where they are working to greater saitsfactiou 
than sponsors expected. Others have found very choice jobs in our cities as 
skilled laborer's and technicians. 

In a project of this kind problem situations are bound to develop. Incidents 
of dissatisfaction on the part of sponsors or immigrants have been proportion- 
ately rare. Where they have occurred, they have been due not only to the in- 
ability of the immigrants to adjust themselves with patience and contentment, 
but, even more so, to the lack of und('rstanding and compassion and, in a few 
cases, the attempt at exploitation on the part of an individual sponsor. Most 
problem situations, where they occur, are successfully worked out on the local 
level with the help of our pastors. 

Our Lutheran refugee immigrants have now been with us long enough to en- 
able us to evaluate this project reasonably well. The many letters wehave re- 
ceived repeat over and over again the gratitude of these people to our church 
and our church's people. One letter states, "It is simply unbelievable that so 
much interest and kindness is shown to just a poor refugee famiiv. It all seems 
like a dream. We shall never cease to thank God for what has happened to us. 
Yes, we are all well and I am satisfied with my work." This letter is typical. 

Our sponsors too, with rare exception, write enthusiasticallv. "They are ex- 
ceptionally fine people. What pleases me the most is this that thev are conse- 
crated Christians, eager for the word of life." "We are well pleased with our 
family. Not only have they acted properly in the community, but they are also 
25356—52 37 


very regular in their church attendaiue, not having missed a Sunday thus far. 
They have ah-eady received communion and Mr. Artelt has joined the voters 
assembly. IMy people gave them a wonderful reception. It has been one of 
the thrilling experiences of my ministry."' 

Our own reaction is just as enthusiastic. We count it a rare privilege to have 
been in the thick of this Samaritan operation. It lirought to us s'lme (.f the most 
deeply satisfying exiieriences of our ministry. The memory of Him who taught 
His people to love and help and the conviction that we were carrying out His 
wishes were to us a joyous compensation. It has l>een a very significant mission 
of our church executed at a very nominal cost which pi-omises to be less than 
$15 per individual rescued for this life and, perhaps, for the life to come. 

We are particularly indebted to Mr. Alvin Knorr and Mrs. Gertrude Droege 
for the generous assistance given to us as volunteers both in Europe and here at 
home. We are particularly grateful to those pastors of compassionate heart who 
presented this mission with keen Christian understanding to their congregations 
and spent generously of their time and energy in ministering to the various needs 
of these families after their arrival. We acknowledge as well the excellent pier 
reception services given to us at actual cost by the staff of the Lutheran Resettle- 
ment Service of tiie National Lutheran Council and the volunteers reception 
services given by many of our Lutheran women at the ports of New York and 
New Orleans. The only jdiase of this mission that does not give us a heartening 
memory is the spotted response to (Uir request for assurances. When measured 
in terms of an anonymous pessimistic prediction, the response was magnificent. 
After all, we did receive 530 separate and immediate assurances on the basis of 
a single, hurried appeal. However, we are a very large church, and we have 
difficulty escaping the feeling that the tragedy of lovelessness and self-centered- 
ness, as our Lord tells it of the Priest and Lovite, is still repeating itself with 
disturbing frequency in tlie lives of many of our people and congregations. We 
have a very long way to go to attain the warm-heartedness of our blessed Lord. 

What of the future, especially the families who failed to receive a visa? For 
a time we hoped that the late Congress would make special provision for them. 
Urgent appeals were brought by us, by our public-relations department, and by 
other interested agencies to committees of the House and of the Senate, to whom 
this matter had been referred. However, Congress adjourned before the com- 
mittees were ready to report definite recommendations. To our families still in 
Europe this comes as another crushing disappointment. It is likely that new 
proposals will be made to the next Congress in January. Our people can help to 
keep the cause alive by writing to or discussing it with tlieir Washington Repre- 
sentatives and urging further special action in behalf of refugees. 

For the moment, then, the only way that aliens can be brought to this country 
is under the regular immigration quota. This usually takes 1 to 2 or more 
years for processing and requires a different procedure. The Government does 
not provide a free ocean voyage, and the sponsors' responsibility is more definitely 
defined. Application cannot be processed through agencies such as ours, but must 
be filed directly with the Immigration and Naturalization Service, Washington, 
D. C., or with one of its branch offices. D?tailed information and guidance may 
also be had at most travel agencies. 

Our work is done, at least for the present. The Lutheran Service to Refugees 
will continue to operate only on a very limited basis to maintain contact with 
sncli families as have been resettled here and keep a watchful eye on refugee 
affairs generally. We are grateful to the Lord of the church to have had the 
opportunity to participate in a great and rewarding work. 

The Chairman. Is Rabbi IMorris Adler here. 


Rabbi Adler. I am Rabbi Morris Adler, 2062 Edison Avenue, De- 
troit. I am vice president of the Jewisli Connnunity Council of 
Detroit, Mich., which I am representing here. 

I have a pre])ared statement which I would like to read: 

The Ch.mrm.\x. Yon may j^roceed. 


Rabbi Adler. I speak in behalf of the Jewish communities through- 
out the State of jMicliigan. These communities of Je\YS represent a 
great diversity of opinion, interest, economic station, religious inter- 
pretation of their faith and political viewpoint. They comprise, 
as does any sulhciently sizable segment of the American people, the 
-wide range of differing opinions to be found in our citizenry generally. 
Yet, on the issues raised by Public Law 414, known as the McCarran- 
Walter Act, tliey have united upon one spokesman to voice the sense 
of pain and shock they unanimously feel, at writing into the law of 
the land, a bill whose substance runs counter to everything they believe 
and everything they have been taught about American ideals and 
values. Rarely in my kno^^•ledge has the American Jewish community 
been as completely united as it is today in its reaction against Public 
Law 414, 

1 speak in the only way I know how, as an American. My Ameri- 
eanism has been fashioned by the history and spii'it of this country, 
its dreams and hopes, and by the teachings of my faith and the shat- 
tering and tragic experiences of the Jewish people under tyranny 
and dictatorship. My American ideas are thus born of both faith and 
experience, of vision and reality. My Jewish tradition and the his- 
toric experiences of my group deepen and intensify within me the faith 
1 uphold and cherish as an American. I speak with but one voice, but 
it is a voice that has gathered into it the accents of the American 
promise, as well as the teachings of Judaism and the sorrow-laden 
events in the life of my group. 

Public Law 414 outrages my sensibilities as an American and as 
a Jew. 1 served as chaplain during World War II and saw action iii 
the Southwest Pacific tlieater of that war. I ministered among others 
1o American children of inunigrant parents. I was at their side in the 
diiticult hours of the ordeal I hey were undergoing in behalf of their 
coinitry. I stood prayerfully at their grave when they were laid to 
rest far from iiome. I remember vividly the names of some of the 
parents to whom it Avas ni}- sad duty to report tlie death of their sons. 
Not, a few of tlieni bore names that showed that their point of origin 
was in countries from which, for all practical purposes, all immigra- 
tion is now barred by this law. And I say to myself, destined as 1 
am always to carry the burden of memories of those sad and fateful 
days, "Have I honestly and truthfully interpreted the meaning of 
that war to those boys ? Have 1 given them the true picttire of Ameri- 
canism? And now, have we won the war against racist doctrine on 
the battlefield, only to lose it in our own legislative halls?" For this 
law per})eluates racism and keeps it as part of tlie law of the land. 

Ajuong the members of tlie JeAvisli communities 1 represent, there- 
are iuunigraiits, and children and grandchildren of immigrants. 
America spelt to these immigrants a new world in far more than a 
geographic sense. They could say in the words of Job, "From my own 
fiesli do 1 see", what tyranny and oppression mean. America appeared 
to them as a land that promised the freedom, the equality, the human 
dignity which they had for so long been denied in the old world. And 
now they are confronted by a law, which has provisions, sadly rem- 
iniscent of the world they believed they had left behind. 

Among the members of the Jewish communities I represent are to 
be found descendants of old and early settlers of America. During the 


coming year of 1053, American Jews will mark the three hundredth 
anniversary of the settlement of Jews in America. Jews have lived 
through the great struggles, and have shared in the great hopes, beliefs, 
and sacrifices out of which our democracy emerged. On August 17, 
1790, the Jewish congregation of Newport", R. I., sent a message to the 
first president of tlie United States in wliich they stated their gratitude 
for a Government which generously affords ''liberty of conscience and 
immunities of citizenship" to all of its people. They further stated, 
"For all the blessings of civil and religious liberty "which we enjoy 
under an ecpal and benign administration, we desire to send up our 
thanks to the Ancient of Days." President Washington graciously 
responded to the address of the Jewish congi'egation and the noble 
words he wrote in reply are part of the great literature of American 
history. He pointed out that the Government of the United States, 
"gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance." He ex- 
pressed the thought that the word "tolerance" is not adequate to de- 
scribe the spirit which America extends to all. "It is now no more," 
Washington wrote, "that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the 
indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of 
their inherent, natural rights." 

Out of our knowledge of what the absence of liberty means in suffer- 
ing and oppression, and out of our participation in the democratic 
life processes of America, we have formed a conception of what de- 
mocracy means. It means many things. It means above all, the dignity 
of the individual, the equality of the different, hospitality to people, 
generosity to backgrounds and faiths at variance with our own. It 
means the disregard of a man's race, ethnic origin, color, religion or 
place of birth in determining his worth, his rights, and his qualifica- 

It is this conception of the American way, shared by the majority of 
Americans, Jew^s and non-Jews, native-born and naturalized citizens 
alike, that is contradicted and denied by Public Law 414. It is no 
longer a matter of immigration alone that we are dealing 'with. It 
is the denial of the American promise, it is the flouting of the morality 
of democracy, it is the repudiation of that which we daily profess, 
preach and teach and it is the breaking of faith with those who died 
that freedom and equality may live — these things are involved. The 
entire structure of democracy is weakened when the foundations are 

A. Public Law 414 repeals the traditional hospitality which America 
his historically offered the oppressed, the homeless, and the dispos- 
sessed. If an objective and impartial study is made leading to a con- 
clusion that our traditional hospitality must at present be curtailed — 
and no such study has led to such a conclusion — then the criteria of 
limitation can only be our capacity to receive immigration and our 
need to protect ourselves against the entry of those who are set upon 
destroying our democratic system. This law, however, curtails im- 
migration by means of arbitrary, scientifically discredited and wholly 
un-American standards. 

B. The basic principle of the dignity and worth of the individual as 
an individual, at the heart of religion as it is at the heart of democracy, 
is flouted and denied by Public Law 414. A man's suitability for en- 
trance to this land is, under this law, established primarily in terms of 


his birthplace or his race or his ethnic origin. Color, accident of 
birth, and geography representing circumstances incidental to a man's 
basic humanity, are elevated to the status of determinants of a man's 
qualification for admittance to the opportunity and freedom of Amer- 
ica. The individuality of the single person is destroyed under the 
national origins quota system and he is treated solely as a national, 
as a part of a race, as a descendant of a certain ancestry — only that 
and nothing more. This approach is as undemocratic as it is un- 
moral. Man is more than a member of a group. He is a person and 
represents an individuality. Whole groups of men are practically 
barred from entering America. As a distinguished member of your 
Commission has pointed out — "Not a single Austrian can get into 
this country before 1955. Not a single Latvian can get in before 2074. 
No Lithuanians can get in before 2087, and not one Pole before 1999" 
(John O'Grady, The McCarran Immigration Bill, the Commonwealth, 
June 20, 1952). People of Asiatic ancestry are singled out for addi- 
tional special and unique discrimination in a provision that can only 
be defended in terms of racist doctrines. Negroes from Jamaica, 
Trinidad, and other colonies in the Caribbean that belong to European 
nations, are restricted from coming in on the quotas of their mother 
countries. Once again racism, which is repugnant to free Americans 
and incompatible with true Americanism, is perpetuated and rein- 
forced by Public Law 414. 

C. For the first time in the history of immigration legislation, two 
classes of citizenship are established. A chasm has been introduced 
between native-born and naturalized citizens. The very unity which 
our country needs today as never before, is undermined and weakened 
by a gratuitous insult to millions of naturalized Americans, who are 
Americans by worth though not by birth. It makes them citizens on 
trial, parolees of citizenship, and thus, by implication, in categorizing 
them the law stigmatizes them. Thus is a wide and dangerous tear 
introduced into the fabric of American life to its shame and enfeeble- 

D. Public Law 414 does not stop here. It tampers with the funda- 
mental due process of law and robs the defendant of the sacred 
guaranties which our Constitution offers to all accused. The burden 
of proof is placed upon him, and the presumption of innocence no 
longer prevails. We must think deeply on this issue, for we cannot 
weaken ilie democratic process of law at any point, without weaken- 
ing the ejitire legal system which our democracy has erected through 
the centuries. Penalties imposed retroactively, and a present law 
reaching into the past that preceded its adoption, are likewise prac- 
tices which have no place in the legal structure of a democracy. 
They rob the individual citizens of the protection which law should 
extend to him. 

E; Public Law 414 provides for the revocation of naturalization. 
The cancellation of citizenship is a penalty in the area of status com- 
parable to capital punishment in criminallaw. It means depriving a 
mail of his American life, as the other means the taking of human life. 
It is the most extreme penalty a government can visit upon a citizen 
as citizen. This law does not show due regard for the seriousness of 
such a procedure or for its severity as a punishment. Let us raise 
standards of acceptance rather than lower standards of dismissal. 


F. Aiiotlier element in tlie entire situation created by Public Law 
414 has grieved and disturbed the people 1 am privileged to represent 
before you. Our coimtry enjoys the trust, responsibility, and honor 
of world leadership. What happens Avithin the borders of America 
is no longer of specifically local interest. It has earth- wide reper- 
cussions. Public Law 414 holds up before the world a picture of the 
American democracy that perforce must lose friends for and alienate 
people from democracy. How we live in America may be a more 
important factor in interpreting the cause of freedom, than our public 
utterances and our foreign policies. When point 4 is negated by law 
414, many people will find the denial more eloquent than the affirma- 
tion. There is unrest throughout a large part of the world as the 
insecurities, fears, and hungers of multitudes cause upheaval and 
ferment. That America, the last great hope of the suppressed against 
the threat of Communist tyranny, gives by law its support to inequal- 
ity, racism, and discrimination cannot but shake their faith in us. 
We are trifling with the faith and prayers of millions the world over. 

Tlie Jewish community is engaged this very week in marking the 
ancient Biblical Festival of Tabernacles. Jews loyal to their ances- 
tral tradition sit with their families in little huts, reminiscent of the 
time when their forebears M^ere wanderers in the wilderness. Scrip- 
ture ordains, "Ye shall dwell in booths seven days; all that are home- 
born in Israel shall dwell in booths" (Leviticus 23:42). The native 
Israelite was to leave the shelter and security of his home and take 
up a week's residence in the rude and shaky hut in whicli nomads 
customarily dwell. Holy Writ ordained this law that the native-born, 
settled citizen might ever have vividly before him the plight and 
need of the wanderer, the displaced and the uprooted. 

An America that shuts its eyes, closes its heart, and bolts its gates 
to the homeless of the world has not only lost its humaneness, but it 
has weakened its democracy wTiich rests in the last analysis on humane 
insights and sensitivities. Our moral obligation in an age which has 
torn millions from their homes and has dispossessed them from their 
birthplaces, is to deal humanely, generously, luiderstandingly, and 
democratically. Let our humanity match their needs. Let our ac- 
tions mirror our ideals. 

Commissioner O'Gradt. Is there a tendency for various groups in 
Michigan, such as the nationality groups, to work together on ques- 
tions of material interest, such as the inmiigration law ? 

Rabbi Yes, sir, and on other questions of common concern 
as well. This city probably reflects as many of the nationality groups 
of the entire country as does any city of its size. We have a large 
majority of the nationality groups. We have worked together with 
all these groups in connection with civil rights and the FEPC. This 
is a city both of brotherhood and of tensions, and the people of good 
will, of these various ethnic and nationality groups, have worked to- 
gether in as splendid a way — and I have served in a number of com- 
munities—as I have seen anywhere. This is one manifestation of a 
whole program of year-by-year working together, sir. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Does it extend beyond the city to the 
smaller communities ? 

Rabbi Yes, sir. Bishop Hause is the bishop of a State-wide 
committee dealing with civil rights, which also comprises various 


reli<j^iou8 and nationality <^r()iii)s. Each group has its connections 
witli members of its ovrn groups in other cities, but, of course, the 
bulk of the population and t!ie center of gravity is right near De- 
trc:it. but we do have connections in nnuiy informal v.ays with the 
people throughout the State. 

The Ch viRMAN. 'Jluink you, sir. 

Tlie CriAiKMAx. Is IMr. Nicliolas Wag.ener here ^ 


Mr. Samuel Rhodes. Mr. Chairman, I am Samuel J. Rhodes, 3771 
West Outer Drive, Detroit. JNIr. Nicholas Wagener, whose address is 
801 Federal Building, Detroit, has asked me to appear for him and 
submit in his absence a statement in behalf of the Michigan depart- 
ments of three great national war veterans organizations: the Amer- 
ican Veterans of World War II, the Catholic War Veterans of the 
United States of America, and the Jewish War Veterans. Mr. Wage- 
ner is past national commander of the Catholic War Veterans. 

I will not read the statement, gentlemen, but will present it for your 

The Ciiairimax, It will be inserted hi the record. 

( The joint statement submitted in behalf of the American War Vet- 
erans of World War II, Catholic War Veterans of the United States 
of America, and Jewish War Veterans of the United States of 
America, Department of Michigan, is as follows:) 

As representatives oi many veterans of various religious and ethnic groups, 
we wish to make known our position and the position of our organization on the 
MeCarran immigration law. In doing so we note also that many of our members 
are affiliated with other veteran organizations which in some instances, and witli 
respect to this particular legislation, maj' have expressed different views. 

AVe recognize that the immigration laws of the United States have long been 
in need of revision and codilication. We strongly feel, however, that such 
revision and codification should properly be made with a view to nullifying any 
existing inequities and to preserving the values and ideas which we and our 
comrades sought to protect as members of the armed services of the United 

In reviewing United States immigration policy as enunciated by the MeCarran 
Law we find what we regard as serious and severe contradictions of the ideals 
for which we fought. It is our joint conviction that in its wars with its foreign 
enemies our country's militai'y might was turned against Godless and dangerous 
concepts of tyranny and racism which threatened to engulf the world. Similarly, 
it is our conviction that our country's peacetime policies must be guided by the 
same considerations if we are to render secure the military victory achieved 
at such appalling cost. The IMcCarran immigration law appears to place a 
premium on values diametrically opposed to those values. 

It forbids, for example, the nonquota immigration of highly skilled pi'ofessional 
persons such as teachers, professors, and scientists, whose knowledge and compe- 
tence couid contribute immeasurably to the richness of our society and economy. 

Within the national origins quota framework which it establishes and through 
its failure to till the unused quotas of any nation, the MeCarran Act embodies into 
law an un-American racist concept. It establishes in effect a repugnant "race 
superiority" method of selecting immigrants. Its provisions thus inhibit the 


aspirations of eastern and southern Europeans, incUuling those seekinji' refuge 
from iron-curtain persecution, and luillify our efforts to convince the millions 
under the Communist yoke of the sincerity of our democratic convictions. It 
penalizes those nationals in such countries as Greece, Poland, and Italy who 
fouuht with us durint: the last gi-eat war and who continued as stalwarts in the 
fight against an uuly tyranny. 

We note with misgivin.ii- that the McCarran Act arrogates to foreign gov- 
ernments the right as well as the power to determine who is eligihle to emi- 
grate to the United States. Section 212 (A) (10) requires a consular officer 
to deny a visa to any person convicted of two or moTe nonpolitical crinies and 
sentenced to an aggregate of more than 5 years in prison. Therefore, the 
judgments of the atheistic, immoral iron curtain countries as well as the judg- 
ments of the Nazi and Fascist tribunals as to what is or is not a political crime 
and as to what is or is not a crime itself, are to be substituted for the American 
system of fair play. 

To us this invokes both tlie question of freedom from religious oppression 
and freedom from political oppression. Were any of the al)ove-mentioned for- 
eign powers to make it a crime to attend religious services or to vote against 
the government in power, and permit maximum sentences up to 5 years, the 
victims of such unjust legislation must perforce be excluded from entering 
the United States. 

With regard to freedom of political choice, we p<.int out that the distinction 
now created between the native-born and naturalized citizen places in the hands 
of an administrative tribunal absolute discretion to determine what is a political 
or social group or "subversive" and in addition subjects the membership of 
these groups indiscriminately to denaturalization and/or deportation. It might 
also be noted that the veteran who is naturalized during his period of service 
is made a second-class citizen because he may be subjected to interrogation 
without warrant, section 287 (A) (1). Further, because he is denied the 
right to exercise the privilege against self-incrimination for a period of 10 
years following his naturalization. 

We are definitely opposed to any legislation which creates a presumption of 
fraud for the doing of acts which in themselves can be excused by circum- 
stances surrounding them. On many occasions, it lias been necessary for per- 
sons to represent tliemselves as members of tlie reigning political group of 
former members in order to obtain passports or border crossing cards to free 
zones of Europe. At that time these persons were permitted to seek visas to 
the United States in order to obtain freedom. It seems a peculiarly harsh 
punishment to place these persons in a position where they can now be deported 
to their native countries to be prosecuted for seeking political and social eciuality. 

In summing up, we are constrained to state that it is our feeling that although 
the immigration laws were, and still are in need of codification and revisions, 
and while we recognize that the American people are in need of protection 
from totalitarian governments and their agents, the restrictions embodied in 
the McCarran Act together with the broad grants of power to administrative 
and executive officials and boards without judicial recourse and the creation 
of second-class citizenry and unrealistic immigration quotas represent a denial 
and scrapping of the values for which we have fought. It it our position 
that the McCarran Act should be extensively amended or repealed to insure 
that the values previously mentioned shall be an inherent part of our immigra- 
tion law and to prevent the injustices and inequities the present act creates. 

Alvin Keller, 
Commavder, Department of Miohifjav, 
Amfirican Veteran f^ of World War II (AMVETh^). 
Nicholas J. Wagener, 

Fast Natio)ial Vatholie 
War Veterans of the United f^tates of America. 
Bernard L. Hoffman, 
Commander, Department of Michigan, 
Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America. 

The Chairman. Mr. Louis Levan is our next witness. 



Mr. Levan. I am Louis A. Levan, 1-2112 Griggs Street, Detroit. 
I am senior vice commander of the AVayne County Council, Veterans 
of Foreign Wars of the United States, which I represent here. 

I have a statement which I wish to read. It is more or less a re- 
quest for more time. 

The Chairman. You may read it. 

(The statement read 'by Mr. Louis A. Levan, senior vice commander 
of the Wayne County Council, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the 
United States, is as follows : ) 

Wayne Couni-y CouNcn., 
Vei'ebans of Foreign Wars of the United States, 

Detroit, Mich., October 7, 1952. 

In behalf of the Wayne County Council, Veterans of Foreign Wars, which 
constitutes over 18.000 members, I apijear before this committee with no 
recommendations dealing with immigration and naturalization laws of our 

In view of the short notice given our organization to aiii>ear before this com- 
mittee our organization does not have the complete opiwrtunity to fully study 
recommendations which could be made to this body. We fully realize that the 
purpose of the President's Committee is to get a cross section of opinion as to 
arrive at a conclusion in bringing about legislation dealing with naturalization 
and immigration. 

All of the posts of Wayne Connty have been duly notified that at our next 
council meeting which will be held on Monday, October 20. 1952, we will discuss 
at length all recommendations dealing with immigration and naturalization and 
that from this meeting and by action of the delegates assembled all recom- 
mendations will be forwarded to the Committee in Washington, D. C, prior 
to November 1, 1952, if this is permissible and agreeable. 

We are sorry that we are unable to make any recommendations at this time, 
but I am sure the Committee is more interested in receiving cross-section opin- 
ions as well as opinions agreeable to the majority rather than opinions of 

We also wish to express our sincerest thanks to the members of this com- 
mittee for the invitatioii and we feel that their approach on the matter of 
<'onducting these hearings across the country serves a twofold purpose. First, 
in getting the cross section of thinking of the citizens and organizations of our 
country and secondly, in giving them the opportunity to voice their opinions and 

Wm. D. Richert, 
Commander, Wayne Count ii Council, 
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States. 

Tlie Chairman. Thank you. Could you give us some idea when we 
may expect to hear from you ? 

Mr. Levan. We have a meeting October 20, an.d I would say about 
the 27th, which will give us a week. The only opportunity we had 
was to bring it up in one district, and there were so many diversified 
opinions, pro and con, and, of course, this happened to be a district 
with the foreign element, and I think that we ought to get together 
and we will be pleased to give you a statement. We ha^e our opinions. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 


(Submitted statement is as follo^vs :) 


Watxe County Coincil, 
Veterans of Fokeigx AVars of the I'nited States, 

Detroit, Mich., Norcmher 21, 1952. 
Mr. Harry N. Rosenfield. 

President's Commission on Immigration and XatiirfiliZ(itio)i, 
11. ',2 G Street NW.. Washinr/tov, D. C. 
Dear Sir: I am sorry to have inconvenienced you with oiir delay but wish to 
inform you that the W'ayne County Council, Veterans of Foreisu Wars, at its 
meetins held October 20, Ity majority vote adopted the same statement submit- 
ted by the Amvets, Catholic War Veterans, and Jewish War A'eterans in deal- 
ing with your hearing. We therefore request that the AVayne County Council, 
Veterans of Foreign AA'ars, be added to the statement as was submitted at your 
Detroit hearing by the afore-mentioned organizations. 
Thanking you. 

Very truly yours, 

(Signed) Edward .1. Chxtrch, 
Executive Sccreta?-}/, Wayne County Council, 

Veterans of Foreiyn Wars of United States. 

The Chairman. Mr. Donald Montgomery. 

Mr. Rosenfield. Mr. Chairman, Mr. ISIonto-omery, Avho Avas to tes- 
tify in behalf of Mr. Walter Renther, of the Thiited Automobile 
Workers, had someone call this morning. Unfortunately, he is ill, but 
asked that he be permitted to testify at the Washington hearing later 
this month. 

The Chairman. His statement may be giA^en to the Commission at 
that time on behalf of Mr. Renther. 

Mr. Oran T, JNIoore, you Avill be our next Avitness. 


Mr. MooRE. I am Oran T. Moore, 11454 Wisconsin Avenue, Detroit. 
I am president of the board of directors of the International Institute 
of Detroit and am testifying in behalf of that organization. 

I was in the Federal Naturalization Service from 1907 Avhen it Avas 
organized in the Department of Justice until I Avas retired in 1933, and 
I Avent Avith the Chrysler Corp. from 1933 to July of this year, A\dien 
I Avas retired as the director of citizenship of that organization. I am 
still connected Avith the agency of the Metropolitan Detroit Commu- 
nity Chest. 

The Chairman. We Avill be glad to hear from you. 

Mr. IMooRE. Thank you, sir. I haA-e a prepared statement I Avill 
submit and I Avould like to make a feAv remarks. 

The Chairman. We Avill insert the statement in the record and you 
may proceed. 

(The statement submitted by Mr. Oran T. Moore, president, Inter- 
national Institute of Metropolitan Detroit, Inc. :) 

OCTORER 6, 1952. 

The International Institute of Metropolitan Detroit is pleased to have the 
opportunity to submit to the President's Commission on Immigration and 


Naturalization a statement of its views regarding a desirable immigration and 
naturalization policy for the United States. 

The International Institute of Metropolitan Detroit is a nonsectarian, non- 
political social service agency incorporated under the laws of Michigan for the 
purpose of helping foreign-born people and their families in their adjustment 
to American life in the expectation that they will become loyal American citizens. 
The operating budget of approximately $100,000 a year is provided by the United 
Community Services (Community Chest) from the annual torch drive. The ex- 
tensive support and influence of this agency is indicated by the fact that it has 
a paid-up membership of 2,400 and has recently erected a new $500,000 head- 
quarters building by private subscriptions in over 4,000 gifts from individuals 
and organizations. 

The many services of this agency includes assistance with filing citizenship 
applications and in filling out all manner of Government forms, a translation 
and interpretation for social, civic, and medical services, casework service on 
complicated naturalization, immigration and deportation problems, English and 
citizenship classes, recreation activities designed to help foreign-born people 
feel at home in Detroit. This agency carries a professional and clerical staff of 
28 men and women who speak 20 different languages and are in constant touch 
with the various nationality communities in Detroit. 

The members of the staff and board of directors of this agency have seen at 
first-hand the tragic results of the injustices and unnecessary hardships which 
result from some features of the present laws. A study of immigration and 
naturalization laws and procedures has been one of their concerns for many 

Immigratitm into the United States previous to 1921 was based on the theory 
that the United States was a haven for the oppressed and for the refugees from 
the persecutions of other governments. These people and their children have 
made America great. They have fought three wars for this country and are 
the very backbone of the United States. This being true, we I'egard the new 
type of restriction which came into effect in 1921 as illogical, bigoted, and un- 

The operation of the Displaced Persons Act as judged from our own experience 
in Michigan and in accordance with the final report of the United States Dis- 
placed Persons Commission amply proves the folly of the quota laws, past and 

It is our conviction that immigration should be truly selective, that this selec- 
tion should be made on a more reasonable, equitable basis, on the basis of health, 
security, moral qualities, and skills. 

The International Institute is opposed to the increasing regimentation of 
foreign-boi-n persons and especially to the new type of policing in many features 
of the McCarran-Walter Act recently passed by Congress over a Presidential veto. 

We are especially opposed to the elimination of the statute of limitation against 
deportation and to the easy denaturalization which the new law makes possible. 
Denaturalization should only occur after deliberate, serious, and judicial con- 
sideration. It should not be a matter of administration. We are opposed to 
distinctions between naturalized and native-born citizens. There should be no 
second-class citizenship. 

The In,ternational Institute on Immigration and Naturalization favors the 
forgiving of mortgaged quotas and a more liberal provision for the naturaliza- 
tion of veterans than the present law provides. 

The International Institute deeply appreciate the opportunity to express its 


"The various governmental agencies administering the DP program spent ap- 
proximately $19,000,000 of appropriated funds. This amount was repaid to the 
United States Treasury many times over by the close of the Commission's activi- 
ties. It is estimated that the wage earners among the 400.000 admitted to the 
country will have paid $57,000,000 back in Federal income taxes alone by the 
end of the calendar year 1952. 

"But even more is involved. Reliable insurance company estimates indicate 
that it costs about $10,000 for an average American family to raise a child to 
the age of IS years. Of the 400,000 persons admitted into the United States under 
the Displaced Persons Act, some 300,000 had reached 18 upon their arrival. 
Therefore, the United States was enriched by some $3,000,000,000 in productive 
human resources through the act. Dick Whittington sought gold on the streets 


of London. The United States found wealth in these immigrants coming to its 

"The contribution made by the infusion into the stream of American life of 
new sidlls and new talents is not mea.surable alone in terms of money to be re- 
captured through taxation nor of the energy and talent brought to agriculture, 
industry, commerce, the arts and sciences, or some of the professions. Their 
devotion to democracy grew out of their first-hand experience with what it means 
to live under a tyrannical form of government. Their cultural, social, and other 
contributions have already been shown to be enormous. The over-all impact will 
be significant with the passage of time and the integration of these peoples, their 
children, and their children's children into the American way of life." — From 
the final report of the United States Displaced Persons Commission, 1952, page 
350. United States Government Printing Office. 

Mr. Moore. I will confine myself to what I considei- ai-e a few 
glaring defects in onr present immigration hnv. First, in my o]nnion 
the un-American and bigoted provision of the law relating to our 
quota system, where we grade our potential citizens on some foolish 
notion that their desirability depends entirely and solely on the 
original background of our composite citizenship at a certain speci- 
fied date. Hitler also expressed this theory. Our Declaration of 
Independence recites the fundamental theory that all men are created 
equal. We show our doubts of this statement by this very law, and 
we defeat the theory by a quota system which restricts immigration 
substantially to Nordic races. If other races are not desirable, let us 
be honest, say so, exclude them from entering the United States 
under any considerations. At a time when we are making every ef- 
fort, including tremendous financial grants to show our friendship to 
other nations, we slap in their face a law which says: "We want 
to be your friends, but Ave will not permit you to en'ter the United 
States on an equality Avith other nations." 

We have twice made a complete revision of our immigration and 
naturalization laws in recent years— in 1940 and again in 1952. In 
this most recent enactment Ave put in the law^ a fine feature providing 
for certain admission of immigrants based on selection. HoAveA'er. by 
tying this enactment of the old bigoted quota laAv Ave practically 
nullify it. For 150 years the United States Avas the haA^en of the 
oppressed and the political refugees from other lands. These immi- 
grants are the backbone of this Nation. Mj second point is covered 
under section 20o of the present act, Avhich reenacts the most vicious 
feature of the old laAv. By treating members of a family as indi- 
viduals, who are prospective immigrants from countries where the 
(juotas are small, we permit the husband and father of the family 
to enter the United States, but because of the small quota, Ave thereby 
enforce a 5-year separation of a family until he can acquire citizen- 
ship. He is not able to bring his family to the United States on a 
non-quota basis until this has been accomplished. You Avill say this 
is not true because Ave may liaA^e a provision in the new act that <a 
certain percentage of the quota is allocated to waives and children. 
But this is only for the immigrant qualified under the selective featui-e 
of the act if they accompany him. 

This enforced separation, as I knoAv from many years experience, 
is the cause of more broken homes and is a constant hindrance to do- 
mestic happiness of American families, and, in my opinion, a source 
of great immoralit3\ The laAv pi-ovides that the Avives and children of 
a legally admitted alien may enter the Uuited States on a non-quota 
basis at any time. In the long run this Avould not substantially change. 


That is my opinion as to what the Law should be. In the long run, this 
would not substantially change the number of innnigrants entering the 
United States. Tliis should be possible as soon as he is able to estab- 
lish to the proper Federal authorities that he is able to support and 
maintain them here. 

In my reading of this new law, I find two particular clauses that, 
in my opinion, are very harmful especially in our local situation. 
Section 290 of the new law provides tliat a record should be made of 
every innnigrant entering the United States, however, short a period 
of time is his proposed visit. The recording of such visitoi-s, by way 
(jf the bridge or tunnel here in Detroit, would involve an expense 
entirely out of proportion to any value that that record might have. 

.Vnother thing that is also local, probably to a greater extent tliai> 
anywhere else in the United States, is the provision of section 101^ 
and 15 (b) of tlie new law. This provides that students entering the 
Ujiited States for training, or education, must come under the strict 
interpretation of the student act. Many students coming to the 
United States through the port of Detroit, came in under the provi- 
sions of section 32. They attended our universities here in Detroit. 
Tliey attended our technical schools such as the General Motors and 
Clirysler Corp. maintain and Ford maintains. They attended the 
parocliia] schools here if they were under college age. They worked 
in Windsor or nearby Canada. They entered the United States from 
night to night to attend these schools. Under this new law, none of 
those students in that category would be allowed to enter the United 
States except that they come here and establish residence as students. 
Thousands of young folks from the Canadian border here will thus 
be denied the privilege of these technical opportunities we are able to 
olfer to them. Many of those people are employed by American con- 
cerns establislied in these nearby cities in Canada. I think that prob- 
ably I could go on record as objecting to some of the highly restrictive 
features of the new law, but it seems to me that these are the four 
technical points that I wanted particularly to cover. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Mr. Moore, could you enlighten the Commission 
in terms of your industrial experience with persons of immigrant 
backgi'ound in the Chrysler Corp., as to their contributions to the 
economy of this area, and so forth? 

Mr. MooKE. Well, the city of Detroit was a city of a quarter of a 
million people 50 years so. It is now a great metropolitan city of 
over 2 million — one-fourth of those are of foreign birth. They repre- 
sent a tremendous factor in this great industrial development that 
lias changed this city from the beautiful little residential town on the 
Detroit River into this great industrial area that has been called the 
backbone of our war industries during three wars. Without them, I 
doubt if we would have been able to accomplish many of the things 
we have. 

At one time Chrysler had a great many alien employees. Gradually, 
after I went into the services of Chrysler, we assisted in the naturaliza- 
tion of probably 10,000 or 15,000 of those people — we helped them 
establish their citizenship. They are able, trusted, worthy employees 
of that corporation. I think this arsenal of democracy might not have 
functioned so satisfactorily if it hadn't been for the great group of 
loyal, foreign-born employees we have. 


Commissioner O'Grady. Have you any views on the question of the 
labor supply, whether or not it is necessary to have additional immi- 
fi:ration to meet the labor supply needs of American industry ? 

Mr. Moore. Of course, the economic situation is a tremendous factor 
in the desirability of bringing in additional immigrants. 

Mr, RosENFiELD. What did the automobile industry do to meet their 
labor shortages during the critical war years? 

Mr. MooRE. Detroit was fortunate in that we had a very high wage 
situation here. So that when industrial expansion was necessary and 
tremendous increase in employment was required to carry on the in- 
dustry here, people came liere from other parts of the United States. 
We have had a great flow in of people from everywhere, all over the 

The Chairman. What is the situation now? 

Mr. MooRE. Now, there is, again, a tremendous demand for em- 
ployment. We are getting a lot of people from outside the State just 
at the present time coming in to industry. I am not in touch with it 
continuously, but I know from the fact that I go into employment 
offices to visit that we are getting a great many people from outside of 
Detroit who are coming here, transient employees. 

Commissioner Finucane. Is that in excess of the demands for labor 
here, or do the demands for labor invite those people, so to speak, 
to come here ? 

Mr. MooRE. The demand for labor invites them, because there is a 
big demand right now. There is enough expansion here in Detroit, 
so there is a big demand. 

The Chairman. Is there a surplus labor supply here, or is it short 
now ? 

Mr. MooRE. I would say now it has gotten to the point where it is 
a short labor market. 

The Chairman. Have you any opinion as to the capacity of the 
country to absorb more nonskilled workmen ? 

Mr. MooRE. I could only go back and cite the history of immigration 
over the years. In the years when we had unrestricted immigration 
they came and regardless of economic conditions we pretty well ab- 
sorbed them and spread them out across America, and our tremendous 
growth, in my opinion, was very closely allied to the unrestricted 
immigration of those years. 

The Chairman. Do you think that the saturation point is being 
reached ? 

Mr. MooRE. I am not an expert enough to determine when that time 
has, or if it will ever arrive. I personally don't think it has. 

I think the immigrant has been an asset to America continuously 
since the beginning of history here. I don't think there is any question 
about it, in my opinion. 

Commissioner O'Grady. How do you think the selection of persons 
by skills under the new act will work out as a practical matter? 

Mr. MooRE. By the time the certification required will be completed 
the job would probably be gone. That's one of the difficulties. There 
is a tremendous demand in Detroit as there has been for the last 2 j^ears 
for certain types of skills. I suppose that same situation prevails 
throughout the United States. There is a great demand here and has 
been for engineers of all classifications. But jobs do not wait ; no. 


The Chairiman. Thank you very much, Mr. Moore. It is very kind 
of you to come here and we appreciate it. 
Mr. Fred Bauer, you are scheduled next. 



Mr. Baiter. I am Fred Bauer, 15260 Maplewood, East Detroit, 
Mich. I am secretary of tlie American Aid Society, Inc., which I am 
representing here. It is composed of 11 groups, with central head- 
quarters at 1220 West Bostwort, Chicago, 111. 

I wish to submit a statement on behalf of the organization. 

The Chairman. It will be received. 

(The statement submitted by Mr. Fred Bauer, secretary, in behalf of 
American Aid Society, Inc., is as follows:) 

The Detroit chapter of the American Aid Society, Inc., submits, herewith, to 
the President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization, the following 
statement of its views regarding a desirable immigration policy for the United 
States : 

The American Aid Society, Inc., is concerned primarily with displaced and 
needy persons from Central and Southeastern Europe, usually spoken of as 
expellees. They are persons of German ethnic origin from Yugoslavia, Rumania, 
Hungary, and Czechoslovakia, many of whom are relatives of members of the 
Detroit chapter. The members of the society are United States citizens who 
are well established in Detroit and amply able to bring their relatives, who are 
in great need abroad, to this country and to give them good homes, if the United 
States immigration law permitted them to enter. The quotas, however, are so 
small that it is practically impossible for any considerable number of these 
relatives to come to the United States under existing law. 

The Detroit chapter filed assurances for 2(i2 families under the Displaced 
Persons Act but only 62 families came because the number permitted under 
section 12 of the Displaced Persons Act was not adequate for the remaining 
assurances. The home-and-job opportunities for those who failed to receive 
visas are just as good as they were for those who came. Sponsors throughout 
the United States bad the same exiierience of offers of sponsorship exceeding 
the number of visas available. 

The testimony of the Chairman of the Displaced Persons Commission before 
the House Judiciary Committee on May 22, 19-52, showed tliat 28,500 ijersons 
of German ethnic origin actually had received assurances and were eligible for 
visas except for the lack of visa numbers. It is the belief of this society that 
sponsors stand ready to renew their offers of sponsorship for these 28,500 persons 
and for thousands of additional expellees. 

The expellees or persons of German ethnic origin who came to Detroit this 
past year have proved their worth. They are working in defense industries in 
skilled occupations. For example, they are tool and die makers, model markers, 
etc. They are learning English rapidly and titling into the life of our community. 
Our society has every reason to believe that people like them still abroad will 
make equally good Americans. 

The letters which persons of German ethnic origin abroad have sent to 
members of the American Aid S')ciety indicate inability to earn a living in 
Germany and Austria because the economy will not support them, although they 
are skilled and energetic workers. It is, therefore, the conviction of the society 
that emergency legislation to permit the admission of 300.000 persons over a 
3-year period is urgently needed. At least 117,000 of this 300,000 should he 
assigned to persons of German ethnic origin now resident in Germany and 

The quotas for Yugoslavia and Rumania are extremely small and taken 
for years to come. The American Aid Society recommends strongly that the 
mortgage on future quotas, which was one of the provisions of the Displaced 
Persons Act, be canceled immediately. This should be done at once even though 
the greatly needed revision of the quota system, which may take some time to 
accomplish, has to be deferred for some months. 



Five immediate recommendations to the President's Commission on Immigra- 
tion and Naturalization, tlierefore, are as follows : 

1. Cancellation of the mortgage on future quotas. 

2. Completion of the unfinished business of the displaced persons program 
to make possible tlie admission of all 341,000 persons authorized under the 
Displaced Persons Act. 

3. Authorization of the admission of 300,000 persons over a 3-year period, 
including the admission of 117,000 expellees. 

4. C<»ntinuation of United States participation in present international 
programs for migration and resettlement. 

5. Aid for the refugees from conmiunism who have escaped communistic 
tyranny behind the iron curtain. 

As long-range policy, the American Aid Society recommends a complete revision 
of the national-origins-quota system, basing the number to be admitted on the 
needs of the present, not a percentage of the immigrants of the past. 

The American Aid Society deeply appreciate having been given this opportunity 
to express its views. 

The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Bauer. 
John Panchuk '\ 


Mr. Panchuk. I am John Panchuk, 5911 Harvard Road, Detroit. 
I am representing- the Michigan Commission on Disphiced Persons as 
its chairman. I also represent the ])resident of the United Ukrainian 
American Relief Committee, Inc., which is a national relief committee, 
which had been engaged in resettlement of displaced persons, and the 
Ukrainian Federation of Michigan, which represents some 40 civic, 
local organizations of Americans of Ukrainian extraction. 

The Chairman. We will be glad to hear from you. 

Mr. Panchuk. I wish to state that a statement will be filed. It has 
not been done already, but one will be filed in behalf of the Michigan 
State Commission on Displaced Persons. I am particularly interested 
in the immigration policies as reflected by the current law, and the 
new law that will go into efl'ect as I happen to be an American citizen 
by naturalization, of Ukrainian parentage, immigrants, a group which 
did not have and does not have any quota provisions under the immi- 
gration law. That's one phase of it. 

Working among the nationality groups, not only Ukrainian but 
people of foreign birth here, we have inevitably come to the conclusion 
that they are good citizens, outstanding citizens, and it becomes at 
times very painful to find inunigration restrictions based upon na- 
tional origins, especially where those quotas are unfair in their 

For instance, the city of Detroit has over half a million people who 
are of foreign origin. A large bulk of those people are from so-called 
P^uropean Baltic areas. We have found that during the two wars, 
during the periods of depression and prospei'ity. they have borne the 
duties of citizenship well in every respect. Their adjustment, eco- 
nomically and socially and religiously, I think has been above reproach. 
In any difficulties we have had in Detroit, as related to social and eco- 
nomic adjustments, they have been, as evidenced by certain happen- 


ings, due largely to conflicts of native-born Americans going back in 
the past. I have in mind some of the color problems that we have 
had here, people from the South and so on. True, that was due to the 
housing difficulty or situation and all of that, but the same economic 
factors have prevailed here. We find that for some reason there has 
been a philosophy of giving preference to the Anglo-Saxon groups on 
the nationality origin quotas, which, I think the facts of history dem- 
onstrate, so far as restrictive innnigration are concerned, are not justi- 
fiable, whatever the basis of that philosophy may have been. We have 
never used their full quotas, and we find that these people of whom I 
have spoken have met all their res]ionsibilities in every way, whether 
it is in time of great stress like war service — we have had very large 
numbers of people from that origin that have pei'formed outstanding 
service during wartime; in civic work. State work; in factories. 

For instance, within the last month I have had representatives from 
one of the leading manufacturers, the Ford Motor Co., come to me to 
put them in touch with DP*s who are here, labor groups. They need 
them badly. They said the}^ had put them to work in Buffalo and 
elsewhere and found them very good workers. Because of a shortage 
that developed they want to get every possible DP they can that can 
pass the physical examination they will put him through, and they 
will put him to work. 

The same is true with the Packard Co. My experience shows that 
from that standpoint industrially they have been very satisfactory. 

From some aspects of the unfairness of the nationality origin, I 
can cite 3^ou a number of examples as related to Ukrainians. They 
come from an area in eastern Europe, which was under Russia, before 
the war Austria, Hungary, and so on ; it is a large group representing 
about 40,000,000 people. When these immigrants tried to obtain 
their citizenship the naturalization clerk will tell you, if you will ask 
him, that he has had trouble after trouble because they will not recog- 
nize any such thing as Ukrainian, either for the purpose of country 
of which he is a subject, or nsitional origin. There have been tre- 
mendous dissatisfactions, and ill will brought about. Yet, in every 
respect, they are recognized as coming from that group with a good 
culture — a good cultural heritage and background, and, even now, 
they don't have a quota yet. Our own conmiittee, the United 
Ukrainian Relief Committee, brought 30,000 Ukrainians for resettle- 
ment under the DP Act who have gone into various States; the 
same is true with the NCW group, and from the standpoint of inter- 
national relations and getting and creating good will, it is bad. 

T can cite you as an example, my father. He came in a long time 
ago. He left Austria-Hungary. He was born in northern Bucovina. 
He never owed any allegiance to that country, never was born there. 
Twice he had to register as an enemy alien; he helped put me through 
school so that I could become successful, and married a girl that was 
of native American stock, if you will. I have had friends, went 
through colleges here. Now I am vice president of a big insurance 
company, vice counselor and a general board member. These things 
seem to irk people. Why these invidious distinctions? Is there a 
stigma attached to it? When he came over here Ul^raine was in the 
Austria-Hungary Empire. 

25356—52 38 

588 COMMISSION ON im:\iigkation and naturalization 

The Chairman. You say when he came over here Ukraine was in 
the Austria-Hungary Empire^ 

Mv. Panchuk. That's right. 

The Chairman, And when that empire disintegrated, what hap- 
pened to the particular province from which he came? 

Mr. Panchuk. That became part of Kumania and under the 1921 
act, he was shown as Rumanian; but he didn't like it and still doesn't 
like it, because it was ascribing something to him that he never was. 

Anyone who has dealt with people of national origins here knows 
that they are keen and eager to become a part of our American com- 
munity. You will tind that the children of the first generation forget 
the language so fast they can"t even talk it. They go to American 
schools ; they are thoroughly Americanized. Well, I came like Infor- 
mation Please, unrehearsed and unprepared. I've been so busy that 
I apologize. 

Mr. Rusenfield. Mr. Panchuk, I think the Commission would be 
interested to know a little bit about the general distribution and the 
general kind of employment in which the many Ukrainian DP's who 
have come into the United States have found themselves. Could you 
enlighten the Commission a little bit on that? 

]\ir. Panchuk. Yes. They have been employed in a great variety 
of employments. They have been skilled people, engineers, those 
have found employment very easily. They have been sought after. 
Some other professionals like doctors have had a tough time. How- 
ever, the State of Michigan is very badly in need of doctors; there is 
a shortage, and a number of them have been emploved in hospitals, 
in technical capacity, in accordance with their profession, however. 

We have made an eifoi't here to ]ierniit the examination by the 
State board of registry of DP doctors, and we have made some prog- 
ress. We have clerks working in industry, some of the girls have 
been found to be exceptionally good as stenogi-aphers and clerks in 
such skilled industries, and I know several insurance companies here 
have employed them and found them very good. They are in restau- 
rants; a great lumiber, of course, are in factories. Some of the pro- 
fessional groups like lawyers have to go through a complete retraining 
period, and there are some that have enrolled, and I don't know of one 
that has flunked first or second year. 

There are a number of them on farms. In the orchards of Michigan, 
I know that several have been highly successful in the orchard fields. 
Some of them in the dairy business here; there are some very good 
dairy men here. So they have been pretty well scattei-ed and assimi- 
lated. We had a great number of artists ; we have a Ukrainian opera 
in Detroit that was a success in Europe. We had the famous Ukrainian 
chorus which gave over 800 concerts to the DP's in Europe, they have 
made a tour of the United States, and have received the highest ac- 
clamation from critics throughout, and artists. Some of them have 
lielped to decorate some of our new churches here. So they have taken 
advantage of the op}:)ortunity and have been appreciated. 

The Chairman. What solution would you propose to the problem 
you mentioned where, as in the case of your father, he was ascribed 
to the Rumanian quota although born in the Ukraine? 

Mr. Panchuk. Well, that situation is no different, I believe, than 
you find with reference to other countries in Eastern Europe, There 
have been similar situations. 


The Chairman. Of course, Poland itself was divided up. 

Mr. Panchuk. That's right. Now the United Nations of which 
we are a member has recognized Ukraine as a country on equality as 
a matter of fact with other iiations. We all know it is a satellite, 
a very involuntary one, but in which the cultural and national heritage 
is very strong, and which is very anti-Communist, and it seems rather 
strange that for some purposes we would recognize it, and deal with 
them, and yet when it comes to dealing with people of that same back- 
ground who are our own citizens in our own country, doing everything 
here, we say : "-No ; we draw the line." And I think that can be very 
easily worked out so far as the cpiota is concerned because they do 
have their place of origin, they declare themselves, they produce 
documents, and you will have no more difficulty there than you will 
have with the Hungarian-Poles or other Balkan and eastern Euro- 
pean countries. 

The Chairman. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Mr. Chairman, may I submit for the record state- 
ments submitted to the Conmiission by several organizations : 

The first is by Mr. Adolph Dulin, chairman of the Kelief Associa- 
tion for Germans of Prewar Poland, of Detroit, Mich. ; 

The second submitted by Mrs. Estelle Gadowski, president of the 
Polish Aid Society; Mrs. Katherine Wojsowski, chairman, Immigra- 
tion Committee; Mrs. Estelle Sanocki, cochairman, Immigration 
Committee; all of Detroit, Mich. 

The third is a telegram by Eloise M. Tanner, executive secretary, 
International Institute, of Flint, Mich., addressed to the Commission. 

The Chairman. Those statements may be inserted in the record. 

(The statements identified follow:) 

Statement Submitted by Adolph Dulin, Chairman of the Relief Asso- 
ciation Fou Gekmans of Prewar Poland 

Relief Association for Germans of Prewar Poland, 

Detroit, Mich., October 7, 1952. 
President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization, 
Harry N. Rosenfield, Executive Director, Washington, D. C. 

Deab Sib: Seven years after war has ended in Europe there are some 10 
million expellees in Western Germany without employment and most without 
homes. Practically all of such persons can be made useful and desirable farm 
workei-s in this country. They caunot be adnjitted luider the quota system, 
because they are not classed as residents, entitled to benefit of quota and have 
no quota numbers. Their situation is getting worse rather than better. 

The United States must share the responsibility for the distress of these 
unfortunate persons and in recognition of the responsibility should do what 
can be done to help them to find homes and employment. Most of those who 
come out of Poland and other countries, are experienced farmers and will make 
good on American farms. 

Our problem stems from dislocation of millions of industrious people who 
have been deprived of their homes and the opportunity to provide for themselves. 
Full information as to all details is not available and, as is common in many 
social and economic adjustments, some persons take advantage and the program 
is condemned. 

We should have a program that meets the need of those who have been dis- 
placed, who have lost home, country, and the opportunity to work. 

From the survey that has been made and general knowledge of conditions, it 
appears that the United States is in need of manpower for agricultural work. 
The German ethnic origin expellees, and also others, are mainly farmers and 
desirable for agricultural work and are anxious to be settled on farms in this 

My recommendation is, that the next Congress set up emergency immigration 
legislation, to bring into the United States 300,000 expellees, of German ethnic 


origin, at the rate of 100,000 a year for the 3 years. And that the greater num- 
ber of these expellees should be farmers. 

The United States needs agricultural workers, and these expellees could be 
placed quickly on American farms without hardships to others. Farm families 
should be preferred, because they cannot be resettled in Germany where there 
is no land and are more satisfactory here. 

This emergency immigration should only be for expelled people, or, in other 
words, people without a country. 

All other inunigrants should come under the regular immigration laws. The 
German Government should be urged to let the expellees use their funds to pay 
for transportation to the United States and if the expellees do not have the funds 
for such transportation the United States Government should loan them the 
money, or they should obtain it from special emergency organizations, or possibly 
from relatives in this country to provide funds. 

In addition to this emei-gency allotment we should have a quota immigration 
system for all countries and the new immigration law should be revised with 
larger quotas. And to give special consideration for the overpopulated areas, 
and to those who are without countries, such as the expellees of German ethnic 
origin, now living in Germany. 

In this way, the United States in some degree can discharge the responsibility 
to the unfortunate expellees, particularly those of German ethnic origin, who 
have suffered most because they w^ere often standing neutral or with the AUie* 
in the late war. 

Very respectfully yours, 

Adolph Dulin, 
VhuU-nian, Relief Assoeiation for Germans of Prewar Poland. 

Statement Submitted in Behalf of the Polish Aid Society, by Mrs. Estelle 
Gadowski, President; Mrs. Katherine Wojsowski, Chairman of the Immi- 
gration Committee ; Mrs. Estelle Sanocki, Cochairman of the Immigration 

Polish Aid Society, 
Detroit, Mich., October 2, 1952. 
Hon. Philip B. Perlman, Chairman, and Members of the President's 
Commission on Immigration and Naturalization, 

Washington 25, D. C. 
Gentlemen : As an organization with a 50-year interest in the Polish citizenry 
of this country, their descendants, and the acculturation of the new arrivals in 
this city, we feel that an inquiry into the whole iield of immigration, nationality, 
and naturalization laws is of paramount importance. 

We are representatives of the Polish Aid Society and wish, on behalf of its 
members, to state our concern over clauses in the code of immigration laws 
which are unfair in the consideration of the national-origin quota system. 

We feel that some aspects of the immigration, nationality, and naturalization 
laws need to be revised. Moreover it is our belief that the revision be made in 
liglit of the augmentation of the quota system and the depletion of the mortgaging 
of quotas. 

In view of our position we may state that the immigration policy be examined 
with the aim of bringing it into line with our national ideals. 

Estelle Gadowski, 
Mrs. A. J. Gadowski, 
President, Polish Aid Societu- 
Katherine Wo.jsowski, 
Mrs. A. Wojsowski, 
Chairman, I mm if/rat ion Committee. 
Estelle Sanocki, 
Mrs. C. T. Sanocki, 
Cochairman, Immigration Committee.. 


Statement Submitted by Miss Eloise M. Tanner, Executive Secretary op the 
International Institute of Flint, Mich. 

I' [Western Union] 

October 6, 1952. 
Mr. Harry N. Rosenfield, 

President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalisation, 
Gonrthoiise, Detroit: 
We are happy that the recent immigration and naturalization legislation 
permits Asiatics to become naturalized, but we strongly disagree with the dis- 
crimination set up in the quota system against them. This may further jeopard- 
ize our i-elationship with the Far East. We believe that the stateless people 
living in America would find great security in having a first paper. Some provi- 
sions of the new deportation laws will work great hardship against aliens. 

Ei.oise M. Tanner, 
Executive Secretary, International Institute. 

The Chairman. Is Mrs. Marie Trilevsky present? 


Mrs. Trilevsky. I am Marie Trilevsky, and I am representative of 
the Tolstoy Foundation, whose headquarters are 300 West Fifty- 
eighth Street, New York, N. Y. It is a charitable organization, 
founded by Countess Tolstoy, the daughter of the great Russian 
writer, Leo Tolstoy, for the purpose of helping to resettle mostly the 
Russian displaced persons, and my brief statement is only my own 
opinion, inasmuch as I worked 3 years with the displaced persons 
on the Resettlement Conmiittee for Church ^Yorld Service ancl in the 
•capacity of a represelitative of Tolstoy Foundation. I have a pre- 
pared statement which I wish to submit. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. We will receive your state- 
ment and make it a part of the record. 

(The statement submitted by Mrs. ISIarie Trilevsky is as follows:) 

I recommend that changes in immigration laws be such that — 

1. First, preference be given those people who were displaced by war and 
made homeless by Communist tyranny, and escapees who every day break 
through the iron curtain in search of freedom. 

2. Congress sliould adopt emergency legislation as may be required fully to 
complete tlie displaeed-persons program to which our country is committed. 
This legislation shoaild provide for the admission to the United States of (o) 
those wlio were processed under the Displaced Persons Act but for whom visas 
•were not available on December 31, 1951, (6) an additional number of persons 
of those groups for whom a clearly insufficient number of visas were provided 
in the original legislation, and (c) our fair share, under proper safeguards, 
■of those who have escaped from behind the iron curtain subsequent to Janu- 
ary 1, 1949, tlie cut-off date specified under the displaeed-persons legislation. 
The additional visas here recommended should be authorized within the period 
ending December 31, 1952, and should be granted without regard to sectarian 

I submit the following recommendations for promoting integration and re- 
settlement of immigrants in the United States : 

1. A practical and realistic orientation program to be given each immigrant ; 
for example : 

(a) English language written and spoken in practical everyday American 
phrases and accents ; also tlie pronunciation of every letter in the alphabet ; 
and practice in answering questions when applying for employment. 

(&) Immigrants should know American standards of weight, in terms of 
pounds and ounces, and measurements in terms of feet and inches. 


(c) There should be practical and realistic job counseling, according to the 
cultural and economic standards of the United States, so that when immigrant 
applies for a job in the United States he will be prepared for the type of job 
opportunity available for him. 

Id) Personal appearance and conduct when applying for employment should 
be stressed ; for example, neatness, alertness, willingness to accept job oppor- 
tunities. They should be asked to avoid hard-luck stories and shabbiness to 
arouse pity from the prospective employer. 

(Signed) Marie Tkilevsky 

Mrs. Marie Trilevsky, 
Tolstoy Foundntion, State of Michlyan Representative. 

The Chairman. The hearing will stand in recess until 1 : 30 o'clock 
this afternoon. 

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., the Commission recessed until 1:30 
p. m. of the same day.) 





Detroit, Mich. 

tenth session 

The President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization 
met at 1 : 30 p. m., pursuant to recess, in room 734, Federal Courthouse 
Building, Detroit, Mich., Hon. Philip B. Peiiman (chairman) pre- 

Present: Chairman Philip B. Perlman and the following Commis- 
sioners: Msgr. John O'Grady and Messrs. Thomas G. Finucane and 
Adrian S. Fisher. 

Also present : Mr. Harry N. Rosenfield, executive director. 

The Chairman. The Commission will come to order. The first 
witness this afternoon will be Rev. Sheldon Eahn. 


Reverend Rahn. I am Pastor Sheldon Rahn, appearing as director 
of the social service de})artment, Detroit Council of Churches, 404 
Park Avenue Building, Detroit 26, Mich. I have a statement I wish 
to read. 

The Chairman. We will be glad to hear your statement, sir. 

Reverend Rahn. Thank you. There are about four Protestant 
agencies filing statements with you today, so I shall not duplicate some 
of the emphases they are making, but in my rather brief statement here 
1 shall attempt to summarize what seems to be the consensus of judg- 
ment in the Protestant community on some of these polls relating to 
our immigration and naturalization laws. 

The ]\IcCarran-Walter Act, passed recently by Congress over a 
Presidential veto, violates both Christian and democratic standards 
of justice. Unless it is substantially amended, the United States will 
most certainly jeopardize its moral leadership throughout the free 

Furthermore, the McCarran- Walter Act fails to provide a workable 
l)rocedure by which the United States along with other countries may 
resettle hard-pressed refugee families in Europe and Asia. 

There we have in mind the formalized quota system which does 
not provide for any pooling of quotas and any flexibility. Most 
serious of all, the present act actually carries the rejection of Asiatic 
and other colored peoples to the point of placing a new and dangerous 



racist principle of blood ancestry at the heart of our basic immigration 
law. The ]\IcCarran-Walter Act assigns quotas on the basis of earliest 
ancestry rather than country of birth and present citizenship. 

It is unthinkal)le that the United States should permanently adopt 
a blood and i-ace formula for dividing more desirable from less de- 
sirable people for immigration purposes. Such a formula is un- 
scientific, contrary to all religious precepts, and an irreparable insult 
to whole continents of people with quality families denied an equal 
opportunity for a quota number because of their race. 

Our Protestant denominations continue to support the following 
basic features for a long-range immigration and naturalization policy 
for this country : 

1. Pooling of unused quotas among all countries up to the maximum 
number allowable by law, now set at 154,000. 

2. Elimination of discriminatory provisions based upon race, color, 
or sex. 

3. Temporary increases by Congress of the maximum annual im- 
migration figure from 154,000 to 200,000 or more as may be realistic 
and practical as America's emergency share of the world's refugee 
problem. Our religious bodies believe that such short-term, carefully 
controlled adjustments within our basic immigration machinery are 
far more desirable than special legislation for first one section of the 
world, and then another, without adequate attention to long-range 
needs throughout the world. 

4. Provision for a visa and deportation appeal board of some kind. 
We welcome the activity of your Commission in studying this 

exceedingly importalit problem. 

The following spokesmen for Protestant and Orthodox religious 
agencies operating in the resettlement field will file statements in the 
course of this hearing: Detroit Lutheran Charities, Ilev. Harry Wolf, 
director : Lutheran Service to Refugees, Rev. Werner Kuntz, director ; 
Christian Social Relations Commission, Episcopal Diocese of Michi- 
gan, Rev. G. Paul Musselman, director; Tolstoy Foundation, Detroit 
office, Mrs. Anton Trilevsky, Detroit representative; Hungarian Prot- 
estant group. Rev. John Paul Xagy. 

Mr. RosEXFiELi). You say in the third recommendation of your 
report, "without adequate attention to long-range needs throughout 
the entire world"; would you care to enlighten the Commission on 
long-range needs which you think the Commission should give heed to 
in its considerations? 

Reverend Raiin. I don't believe it is possible to evaluate long-range 
needs in the world without pretty careful study, probably through 
an agency like the U. N. But, even thinking in terms of emergency 
needs for the surplus populations without homeland, et cetera, some 
sections of Asia, particularly Korea, and so on, suggest that this 
refugee problem is more than a European problem, as serious as it 
is in Europe, and we have always the temptation to think more of 
western and southern Europe than we do perhaps on other sections of 
the world which are less heavily represented. It could only be termed 
in such technical agencies' studies as those of the U. N. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Do I understand you to be advocating a 
flexible immigration policy? 


Reverend Eaiin. Yes; and presumably the emergency refugee prob- 
ably would get a high priority in utilization of any pooled quotas, at 
the present time leaving us free to deal with surplus and overpopu- 
lated areas, too, as a secondary measure, much as was introduced this 
morning with Pastor Kuntz. 

The Chairman. Thank jo\i verj' much. 

Is Mr. Coffey here ? 


Mr. Coffey. I am Reid Coffey, 8000 East Jefferson Street, Detroit, 
Mich., representing the United Automobile, Aircraft, and Agricultural 
Implement Workers of America, CIO. 

On behalf of our organization, I would like to express our extreme 
regret that our international union president, Walter Reuther, is 
unavoidably^ detained because of previous commitments in Washing- 
ton on a hearing, and it was determined as of last night that Donald 
Montgomery, in charge of our Washington office, would appear before 
this committee today, but he is sick with a bad cold and unable to 
attend, and we would like to ask the permission of the Commission to 
appear with a brief in hand at the Washington hearings later this 
month completely spelling out our opposition to the McCarran-Walter 

The Chairman. Your organization's statement may be presented at 
our meetings in Washington. I think that is the 27th, 28th, and 29th 
of October. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. I sliould like to read into the record a telegram the 
Commission has received, to the same point. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

(The telegram read by Mr. Rosenfield is as follows :) 

Because of my al).sence from Detroit and the illness of Don Montgomery of the 
UAW-CIO, Washington office, who was to have appeared in my stead, the UAW- 
CIO would like the record of the Detroit hearings to show that we have arranged 
to be heard during the course of your Washington hearings. We would further 
like for the record to show that the UAW-CIO is completely opposed to the 
McCarran-Walter bill as it is presently written. 

Walter Reuther, 
President UAM-CIO. 

The Chairman. Prof. Edgar L. Johnston. 


Professor Johnston. I am Edgar Johnston, professor of education, 
Wayne University. My home address is 2301 Vinewood, Ann Arbor, 
Mich., and I am here to represent the National Consumers League. I 
am a member of the executive board of the ]\Iichigan Consumers League 
and cochairman of the Governor's Study Commission on Migratoiy 

With the indulgence of the Commission I would like the privilege 
of presenting a written statement to be mailed to the Commission, if 
that is convenient in the next day or two. I ver}^ much regret that 


Miss Elizabeth Magee, the secretary, is prevented from attending these 
hearings on account of the President's Commission on the Health Needs 
of the Nation in Washington, and Miss McAllister, chairman of the 
board, was unable to be here, and I just learned of the hearings yester- 
day afternoon. 

I would like, if that is agreeable to the Commission, to comment 
briefly on the interest of the National Consumers League in the matters 
of administration and legislation and then to submit a written state- 
ment which would be a more organized presentation. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Professor Johnston. The National Consumers League is an organi- 
zation about 50 years old which represents the consumer's interest in 
the conditions under which the products we consume are developed. 
It was organized primarily at the time that sweatshops were very 
common in the garment- working and other industries, and at the time 
there was no protective legislation for women and children in industry 
and concerned itself primarily with the industrial type of industry. 

The Consumers League within the last few years has shifted its 
interest to a very great extent to migratory agricultural labor because 
the kinds of conditions which were found in the early 1900's in the 
urban industries are in part duplicated in the field of agriculture. 

In fact, one of the bulletins of the New" York Consumers League has 
I think an apt title in describing migratory agricultural labor, the title 
"Sweatshops Under the Sun," that will illustrate it. 

I am not going into detail on the problem of migratory labor, which 
has been dealt with very effectively by another Presidential Commis- 
sion and by hearings of Senator Humphrey's committee in the Senate 
earlier this year. I would like to touch on some phases of that problem 
which I think are directly related to both legislative and administra- 
tive relief, possibly through the report of this Commission. 

The Michigan Study Commission on Migratory Labor, of which I 
am cochairman, w^as organized this spring to consider the problems 
involved in the use of migrator}- agricultural labor in our State. We 
found that last year we had about 60,000 out-of-State migratory 
agricultural workers, coming in in April and leaving in October and 
November, some of them coming in in March, which for the most part 
were family groups witli — in most cases — children of varied ages 
engaged in agricultural work and without the protection of any child 
labor or other legislation. We found a number of related prol)lems. 

I started in it as a schoolman because I was concerned with the 
lack of educational opportunity for migrant children. I couldn't go 
far until I found that was related closely to health and housing and 
transportation and recruiting, and the very limited economic return 
of the families. 

Now, as to the relationship particularly to your Commission. The 
number of migrant laborers increases as in part the number of illegal 
entrants to the southwestern part of the country increases. Mr. 
Ducoff in the Bureau of Agricultural Economics estimated in 1949 
1,000,000 migrant laborers 14 and older. Incidentally, nobody, 
knows how many children. In spite of the Sugar Beet Act, I founcl 
children working regularly in sugar beets, and the same could be 
duplicated or multiplied in other crops in which no limitation as to 
age in which children may work is present. 


He found about 100,000 legal Mexican nationals in 1949 and esti- 
mated about 400,000 illegal entrants from Mexico, the so-called wet- 
backs. Incidentally, in the report of Senator Humphrey's committee 
the number of estimated migrant workers was up by 50 percent to a 
million and a half. The number of legal Mexican entrants was up 
to 151,000, and tlie estimate for the illegal entrants was something over 
500,000. The problem is getting more serious rather than less. The 
result of this influx of legal aiul illegal entrance from south of the 
border is to provide a supply of cheap labor. Evidences on record 
before the Humphrey committee show wages of 5 and 10 cents an hour, 
not uncomjnon on farms down there on wetbacks, because they were 
peculiarly vulnerable. They could be threatened with imprisonment 
and deportation. For that reason they were really not only migrants 
but also they were vagrants. 

The result has been the displacement of domestic workers. It has 
resulted in lowered wages. It has resulted in underemployment as 
well as unemployment, because in many cases it has expressed the 
work to a larger group. 

Now, as to the relationship of this to the concern of this Commis- 
sion, I think that some of the administrative procedures of the Immi- 
gration and Naturalization Commission are very definitely related to 
the extenuation of this problem: some of it obviously falls in other 
departments, the Department of Labor, the Department of State, 
which are involved in the Mexican agreement. 

I should like to just point out that the executive agreement between 
the United States and Mexico was arrived at to a large extent in virtual 
secrecy and without any hearings which involved representatives of 
other groups, laboi- groups and the public, in the matter of the demon- 
stration of need and the requirements of the stipulations of the particu- 
lar agreement. 

The determination on which that was based was the prevailing 
wage, but nobody knows what a prevailing wage is. It is whatever 
the county boards, representative of the large farmers of the areas 
using the migi-ant labor, are willing to pay or find they have to pay, 
and that in turn is passed up to the State department of labor and 
to the National Department of Labor. There is no open hearing with 
representation of public and of labor in regard to it. 

I suggest in terms of legal relief two bills which were before Con- 
gress, which would be directly related to the concern of your Com- 
mission. The bill dealing with control of labor contributors ; the bill 
dealing with the control of illegal entrants, and certainly the pro- 
vision of more adequate funds to the division of immigration and 
naturalization which was relatively successful in controlling the wet- 
back invasion in certain sections by an airlift by which the illegal 
entrants were taken back into the interior of Mexico. 

I should say administratively there could be a great deal of benefit 
through more public and thorough investigation of the factors of 
need at the time an executive agreement is reached ; the forecasting of 
labor needs should be based on adequate living wages according to 
American standards and not on what these very depressed people are 
willing or have to accept. 

I would like just to make one point before concluding, and that is 
that the National Consumers League is not insensitive to the needs of 
providing in America a refuge for people from other lands, including 


our neifjhbors to the south. But we think that tlie attempt to relieve 
need below the border by importino; misery here and further accentu- 
ating the workers of our own areas is not helping that problem. The 
migratory problem is becoming increasingly a serious problem. It is 
a problem of national and international immigi'ations, and unless we 
are to develop in this part of our industry a sj^stem of peonage we cer- 
tainly need to have remedial legislation and administrative relief 
which will eliminate some of the most serious of the ])roblems related 
to the importation of migrant labor. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. What would you suggest the Commission do ? 

Professor Johnston. In regard to the stipulation of the President's 
Executive order, section 2 (b), which refers to action in relation to 
the present economic situation in the United States, I am suggesting 
that the economic situation as it affects the migrant laborers is occa- 
sioned to a large part by an overestimate of the number needed, an 
overestimate that is accepted all too easily because there is no public 
hearing, because there is no determination of need in terms of the 
same basis as it would be determined in relation to industrial employ- 
ment. There is, of course, no spokesman for the migratory worker. 
He is without a spokesman. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

(The written statement referred to above, by Professor Johnston, 
was submitted and is as follows :) 

At the request of Mrs. Dorothy McAllister, chairman of the hoard of the 
National Consumers League. I am representing the league at the hearings this 
morning. While the league is sympathetic to the broad purposes of the inquiry 
conducted by this Commission and aware of the need for restudy of our immigra- 
tion laws as they affect immigration from all parts of the ^A'orld, I should like 
to dii'ect my attention this morning to one phase of immigration which \itally 
affects the welfare of migrant agricultural workers within the United States. 
With this purpose in mind. I shall direct my attention primarily to section (B) 
of the Executive order establishing the President's Commission on Immigration 
and Naturalization. 

The Consumers League was organized about 50 years ago as a group of sociall.v 
minded people concerned with the maintenance of satisfactory standards of 
working conditions and livelihood for the workers vrho produce the products we 
consume. The league has always been concerned with workers in family groups 
and conditions which affect the welfare of children. In its early days, much of its 
attention was directed to sweatshop conditions in urban industries. The league 
was instrumental in stimulating the passage of legislation protecting women in 
industry and eliminating child labor. For the past decade, much of its attention 
has been directed toward the plight of the migrant agricultural laborer in the 
American economy and the conditions affecting family life and the welfare of 
children among these groups. With the wide variety of industrialized agriculture 
and tlie need for large numbers of migrant agricultural workers for limited 
periods of time during harvest, there has developed a new class of "displaced 
person" within the American economy, a group entirely outside the protection of 
current legislation concerning labor conditions, social welfare, and protective 
legislation. Child-labor laws almost universally exclude children engaged in 
agriculture from their provisions. As a result, small children labor in t-he fields 
and are exposed to hazardous conditions of transportation and undesirable living 
conditions. As a bulletin published this year by the New York Consumers League 
implies in its title, we now have "Sweatshops in the Sun."' 

The Governor's Study Commission on Migratory Labor, of which I am cochair- 
man, was appointed by Governor Williams in IMarch of this year. It is broadly 
representative of producers and processors of agricultural crops, public healtii 
and welfare agencies, l.-ibor and education, and the three ma.lor religious denomi- 
nations in Michigan. The Commission was appointed in large part as a result 
of public concern about the problem involved in the employment of more than 
60,000 migrant workers at the peak of the harvest season in early August. Un- 
questionably the Report of the President's Commission on Migratory Labor fo- 


cused public atteutiou ou these problems and suggested the need of such a State 
commission to study the question and make appropriate recommendations for 
legislation and administrative improvement. 

Migrant woi'kers are employed in a wide variety of crops, particularly in the 
harvest of fruit and the cultivation and harvest of sugar beets and the varioiis 
vegetable crops. They begin to come to Michigan early in April or May, are 
migrant vpithin the State during a considerable portion of the summer, and leave 
the State at the close of harvest, the majority of them having completed their 
work and left Michigan for tiieir S'tate of origin by the middle of November. 
In spite of mechanization, which has decreased employment in certain crop 
activities, the total number of migrants employed has increased each year, and 
the number for the current summer will undoubtedly exceed the 60,000 brought 
into the State for seasonal agricultural employment last year. Most of the 
migrants come as family groups, a fact which presents serious problems of edu- 
cation, child labor, and satisfactory housing, lack of health facilities, and in- 
comes inadequate to maintain a satisfactory standard of living. *The life of the 
migrant family is particularly hard on children. 

My own interest was aroused several years ago when I had occasion to visit 
schools for the University of IMichigan and saw children, obviously of school age, 
working in the fields in the shadow of the schoolhouse, and found that school 
people by and large were unaware of their presence — except to enroll them on 
the school census in the spring in order that the district might receive its share 
of "itrimary school funds." Under the circumstances child labor is the rule 
rather than the exception. The Sugar Act of 1937, as successively amended, does 
provide an age limit of 14 years for work in sugar beets and limits the labor of 
children 14 to 16 to S hours a day. Unfortunately, even tliis limitation is rarely 
observed. In a study of the Spanish-speaking migrant workers in four coun- 
ties, which I carried out several years ago. children under 14 were reported as 
working regularly "in the beets." In 17 of 58 families interviewed, the youngest 
age reported was .j years and the median of the group, 11. In the four counties 
included in the survey, less than one-fifth of the children of school age were 
enrolled in school in late October when schools had been in session from 4 to 8 
weeks. The results are to be found in school retardation and educational depri- 
vation. A study of migrant workers in Colorado last year has presented evidence 
that migrant children are receiving even less education than did their parents. 

The question may be asked as to what relationship these conditions — deplorable 
though they may be — have to the investigations of the Commission on Immigra- 
tion and Naturalisation. The answer is that the supply of migrant labor and 
the wages and working conditions of migrant laborers as a group are directly 
affected by the entry of large numbers of Mexican nationals — both legal and 
illegal entrants) crossed the border. 

As pointed out repeatedly in testimony before that committee, the effect of 
this immigration — legal and illegal^ — is to lower wages and living standards for 
domestic agricultural workers and to force many of them to leave homes in the 
border States to seek work elsewhere at whatever wages they can get. It is 
clear, also, that the so-called prevailing wage in agricultural labor certified by the 
Secretary of Labor is, in actuality, a unilateral decision by the lai-ge-scale em- 
ployers of that labor. The certification by the Secretary of Labor is on the 
basis of data presented from State departments of labor concerning the prevailing 
wage as indicated by county farm employment committees which have only 
employer membership. I know of no instance in which the farm worker has 
been a party to the determination of prevailing wage. The same thing is true 
in regard to the certification of need on which the executive agreements for 
importation of nationals are based. Obviously, it is to the advantage of the 
large farm groups, which are the major employers of migratory labor, to have an 
abundant supply of cheap labor available and to use the importation of Mexican 
nationals and of wetbacks as a lever to keep wages down and workers docile. 
(Testimony before the Humphrey committee indicated cases of wetbacks employed 
at from 5 to 10 cents an hour in 19.51.) The result for domestic labor is that it 
is forced out of its home territory in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Califoi'uia, 
and adds to the migrant stream. The results are displacement of workers, 
lowered wages, underemployment of those who do remain, and increased migrancy 
of family groups. As the Report of the President's Commission on Migratory 
Labor says : 

"Migrants are children of misfortune. They are the rejects of those sectors 
of agriculture and of other industries undergoing change, ^^'e depend on mis- 
fortune to build up our force of migratory workers, and when the supply is low 


because there is not enough misfortune at home we rely on misfortune abroad 
to replenish the supply." 

I realize that the problems involved here are complex ones and that many 
phases of this problem do not come within the jurisdiction of this Commission. 
It appears to me, however, that certain remedies of abuses occasioned by the 
legal and illegal entry of Mexican workers to the United States are within the 
scope of the Connnission's recommendations. Some of the remedies are legisla- 
tive; others are administrative. Under legislative remedies come those measures 
which can make control of illegal immigration effective. Certainly increased 
funds for the employment of officials of the United States ImmigratioTi and 
Naturalization Service are in order. At present, that Service has had to man a 
1,6(X)-niiIe lica-der with somewhat less than !)()() men. It was also given only one- 
sixth of the amount asked to make possible transportation of illegal immigrants 
to their homes some distance from the border. It seems clear that much more 
important than penalties imposed on the inifortunate wetbacks alone is the pro- 
vision of penalties for those who employ them. The bill to control illegal entry, 
which was presented by the Humphrey subcommittee, would seem to give promise 
of eliminating this abuse. Unfortunately, the Congress did not see tit to pass a 
measure with teeth in it. 

The executive agreement of 1049 as continued from year to year certainly 
deserves careful consideration. Under it, both Cxovernments assume responsi- 
bility to control illegal immigration. That responsibility does not seem to 
have been carried out in action. The priority in contract employment .i;iveu 
to Vi'etbacks now in the United States appears to give definite encouragement 
to illegal entry. Testimony presented before the Humphrey conuuittee criti- 
cized the secrecy surrounding the negotiations for the executive agreement and 
the lack of representation of representatives of labor as well as farm employers 
in negotiations for the agreement. One witness before the Hrimphrey com- 
mittee referred to the 1951 international agreement as a foui'-power pact * * * 
among the Associated Farmers, the Department of State, the Department of 
Labor, and the Department of Justice. It seems clear that the executive agree- 
ment and the whole matter of forecasting;' of lal)or needs and consequent provi- 
sion for legal entry need careful and thorough consideration. There is a close 
relationship between this legal immigration and the illegal traflic in wetbacks. 
Uoth have a definite and devastating effect on the conditions of migratory 
labor throughout the United States. 

I would wish to emphasize at this point that the Consumers League is not 
unsynriathetic to the Mexican agricultural w<u-kers who seek employment here, 
driven by misery and economic necessity at home. Unquestionably, we In the 
I'nited States should be concerned in economic developments in ile .ico and. 
particularly, in proposals to develop the resources on both sides of the Rio 
Grande for the benefit of residents of both countries. This kind of cooperative 
relationship is constructive and desirable. <>n the other hand, the exploitation 
of poverty-stricken wetl)acks in order to maintain a supply of ch<-ap farm iabor 
here is neither good neighborliness nor good e<'onomics. Continuation of the 
abuses which have existed and inci-eased within the last few years is. in effect, 
to establish a type of peonage in the United Stales and t<^ further aggravate the 
disjidvantages of the n.nllion imd a half mi'rrant agricultural workers and their 
families who are virtually outcasts within their own land. 

The Chairman, Father Joseph C. Waleii is next on our scliedule. 


Father Walen. I ant Fatlier Joseph C. Walen, director of charities, 
diocese of Grand Rapids; director of the diocese and resettlement 
committee there, and editor of the Western JNIicliigan Catholic; 202 
Association of Commerce Building, Grand Rapids, Mich. 

I would like to read my statement, Mr. ('hairman. 

The Chairman. We will be glad to hear it. 


Father Walex. I wisli to pi-esent my statement regarding the need 
of a more liberal policy on immigration to the United States from the 
perspective of one who has seen the good done by the Displaced Per- 
sons Act. 

Wliile this act was in operation, the diocesan resettlement office of 
the diocese of Grand Eapids fonnd job and housing opportunities for 
approximately 800 persons. 

It was most heartening to see relatives greet relatives, a greeting 
intense in its warmth because the homeless victims of war seemed to 
the American residents to be I'eturning from the dead. These once 
displaced families did not need much time to take their place, and to 
have a place in the cities, villages, and farms of the •21) counties in 
western Michigan which comprise the area of the diocese of Grand 
Rapids of Avhich the Most Reverend Francis J, Haas is bishop. 

As the flow of Avar refugees slowly dwindled, we began to receive 
requests from American citizens interested in bringing friends or 
relatives to this country who could not qualify under the Displaced 
Persons Act. We had other requests from citizens who were inter- 
ested in bringing to America relatives or friends who were delayed, 
for one reason or another, in their admittance to the United States 
under the Displaced Persons Act, and their hopes to emigrate expired 
Avith the act. 

To all these persons Avho came to our office, eager and Avilling to aid 
people anxious to come to America, Ave explained that neAv legislation 
AA'ould probably be enacted to permit their relatives or friends to enter 
this country. We AA'ere sincerely hopefid that the record of the opera- 
tion of the Displaced Persons Act Avould result in continuance of 
policies making jwssible the admission of many Avho Avere Avanted in 
America, Avho Avere unAvanted in Europe, and Avho Avanted America. 

During the many months of necessary debate preceding the enact- 
ment of neAv immigration legislation, we Avere able to sustain tlie hopes 
of sev^eral people Avith the anticipation of a "new laAv,'' a law that 
Avould not shut the doors of hope for those Europeans who Avere corres- 
sponding Avith people in our area. Man}' a letter, I am sure, from 
persons Avith whom I dealt, contained the reassurances that new immi- 
gration legislation would permit entrj^ to this country. 

Needless to say, we Avatched the progress of immigration legislation 
in Congress. We Avatched the reception accorded the request of 
President Truman to admit 300,000 innnigrants over 8 years. Our 
friends w^atched the progress of House Resolution 7376 of Rejjresenta- 
tive Celler. They watched the progress of the Lehman-Himiphrey 

When the INIcCarran- Walter bill Avas passed we foresaAv Avhat a 
sense of discouragement Avould oA^ertake tliose Avho had hoped to greet 
in America victims of Avar. The hoped-for "neAv laAv," Ave Avere forced 
to tell our people, Avould not be helpful in bringing friends and rela- 
tives here. We explained that for some it might mean a wait of many, 
many years before their friends could hope to immigrate to this 

The despair on the faces and in the voices of those who learned the 
consequences of the new laAv spoke more tellingly than any written 
piece about the shattered hope of those Avho had looked to America as 
a haAen of hope. 


] would like to join many others who have been engaged in the work 
of the Catholic resettlement committee in asking for the elimination 
of some of the harshly exclusive provisions of the McCarran-Walter 
Immigration Act. I refer to the national origins theory which dis- 
criminates against persons from southern and eastern Europe. I refer 
to the provision that excludes the unskilled immigrant. In the light 
of the many contributions to the welfare and the progress in this 
country by the thousands of unskilled immigrants of two and three 
generations ago, this provision seems to ignore the value of looking at 
the record to determine how we can benefit in the future. 

Also, the provisions of the McCarran- Walter Act that jeopardize an 
opportunity for a fair hearing for those faced with deportation or de- 
naturalization are not consistent with the record and reputation of 
America for fair play to all. I acknowledge that the act provides 
for some necessary revisions of existing immigTation laws. But the 
most important revisions should relate to bringing up to date our 
immigration policy of seeing America in the forefront in leadership 
and cooperation with all free nations, without discrimination against 
any nation or any group of nations. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. We appreciate your com- 
ing here. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Does your statement represent the views of 
your diocese ? 

Father Walen. I wouldn't say I am speaking officially for the 
bishop, but I would say on the basis of public service record and his 
addresses, I would say his sentiments are pretty much in line with 
what I said here today. 

The Chairman. Our next witness is Prof. Amos Hawley. 


Professor Hawley. I am Prof. Amos Hawley, chairman of the de- 
partment of sociology. University of Michigan. 

I would like to talk particularly to the matter of the quota. It seems 
to me that the concept of the quota as it has been written into our im- 
migration legislation is defective in a number of respects. There are 
several rather doubtful and many greatly uncontested assumptions on 
which it rests. In the first place the assumption that a nation can only 
absorb a given number of immigrants regardless of the size of that 
migration legislation is defective in a number of respects. There are 
Nation's population ; another assumption is that there is only a fixed 
amount of work to be done and if you admit immigrants you take 
the work away from that amount of native people ; again, there seems 
to be an assumption that the consumers are not an important part of 
the economy. 

P^or these reasons in particular, I think it might be well to recon- 
sider the matter of a quota. The principle of the quota is, however, 
probably one which rests on political expediency, and in view of the 
various interests that are apt to be involved which will express them- 
selves maybe on something that is not escapable. 

It should be observed though that this country could not but benefit 
from immigration. Inmiigrants are typically young people and they 


probably are, with a small percentage of exceptions, in a more vig- 
orous condition of life and are on the whole a smaller risk population. 

From the standpoint of the sending nations, however, inmiigration 
is not in fact much of a solution to its problem. Problems are usually 
far more basic than those tliat can be solved by draining off a few- 
people. There are problems of dislocation in the economy ; of inade- 
quate participation in international trade and so on. We cannot 
really contribute materially to the solution of population problems 
in foreign countries by opening the doors to immigration. 

The issue thus, it seems to me, largely is one of politics and human- 
ity. Our present basis for a quota, the national origins principle, as 
others have indicated, is most unsatisfactory. It is invidious; it is 
based on a nonobjective basis. Thus it seems to me that if we are to 
bow to political expediency entirely and proceed with a quota, we need 
a more rational basis. I would like to suggest that population size, 
or relative population size, be observed as a quota basis rather than 
national origins. That, complemented by considerations of a sani- 
tary, educational, and political character. By political I am referring 
to the subversive risk — and that we do need some protection against. 

So I think that what is needed in the light of our international posi- 
tion in our relations with others, our foreign policy, is a more rational 
quota, accepting, as I said, rather hesitantly, the need for some restric- 
tion on the number. 

Commissioner O'Grady. When immigrants leave a country such as 
Italy, do these immigi-ants not return a part of their earnings to that 
country's economy, thus helping to build it up? 

Professor Hawley. That is a fact. It is a question, of course, of 
whether it is a very sound basis for the economy. That does provide 
for foreign exchange. The bulk of Italy's foreign exchange has been 
through immigrants. Probably it carried Italy through some difficult 

On the other hand, it is rather difficult to evaluate what Italy lost 
in terms of labor power and whether or not that was a deterrent, I 
don't know, in any case Italy did not develop a very sound economy. 

Commissioner O'Grady. How would you say the population of 
northern Italy has been faring, compared to the southern part? 

Professor Hawley. Italy is a country divided, of course, between 
north and south, and the population problem has been more serious 
in the south and the bulk of migrants have come out of the southern 
part of Italy. The northern industrial part hasn't developed rapidly 
enough to absorb the excess population in the southern area. It is 
comparable to northern Europe in the nineteenth century. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Do you think that the situation in Italy 
and Germany has been influenced greatly by the migrant? 

Professor HA^^a.EY. Germany, of course, is in a different situation 
than our own. It is a chaotic economy at present and it is not organized 
to even accommodate the population that is resident in the western 
parts, and in being a small population it does not require many im- 
migrants to make a considerable burden on that economy in the short 

In our case, however, population of 157,000,000, it is not very diffi- 
cult to absorb 3,000,000 people in a relatively short interval of time. 

25356 — 52^ 39 


That is a small fraction, about li/^ percent. It could not be a very 
important dislocating factor. 

There is considerable experience to show that when migration is 
unrestricted, in fact even when it is restricted, the volume of migra- 
tion seems to move from areas of low rates of capital development to 
areas of high rates of capital development, with about a 3- to f)-month 
lag. It is self-adjusting by virtue of that. You have communications 
between migrants and family members in areas of origin, so that in 
the past we have not gotten migrants from Europe when w^e were in 
the ebb phase of a business cycle, and a similar cojidition prevailed 
abroad in the probable points of origin, nor have we got immigration 
when we had a high level of business activity and the place of origin 
had a high level of business activity. 

Seemingly, this has only worked toward a net migration here when 
there was a low level abroad and high level here. "We observe the same 
thing internally within this country, with urban and rural areas. So 
there is considerable control exercised by the dii'ection of economic 

I think it is interesting that in the depression decades we actually 
lost 4G,000 people through a net emigration. 

The Chairman. Have you any data indicating what amount of 
immigration the United States might absorb over a given period of 
time ? 

Professor Hawley. No; I haven't. That is really a speculative 
matter. It is somewhat like trying to estimate the proportion of a 
population of a given national origin. There are a number of con- 
tingencies. It would certainly depend on what span of time one were 
dealing with. A matter of a year would present quite a different prob- 
lem than a decade or a generation ; it would assume some knowledge 
about the trend of the economy, and I would prefer that an economist 
forecast that. I haven't attempted to do what you say. 

Commissioner Finucane. With reference to your remarks about 
draining off some population from an overpopulated country, do you 
think it would be a temporary help which would give the country a 
chance to readjust itself more easil}- than if it had to cope with large 
excess population ? 

Professor Hawley. It depends, of course, on what proportion of the 
population you can move in a given interval of time. The population 
represents a rather bulky sort of cargo and when it becomes a matter 
of moving a million or more, it cannot be done in a short interval of 
time, under the best conditions of transportation. So most economic 
crises cannot really be treated by distributing the population abroad, 
unless this happens to be a very small number. A country with a total 
population of a few hundred thousand might conceivably have some 
quick alleviation through migration. With a population of 40 or more 
million you could not very well expect it. 

There are some speculations, certainly not very reliable, although 
seemingly reasonable, as to what happens to a population when immi- 
grants leave. It is thought that the immediate effect as to that is to 
reduce the death rate, particularly under periods of economic stress. 
If that is true, then the immigrants are perhaps quickly replaced by 
people who would have otherwise died, and certainly you cannot, if 
you look at the long-run population growth trends of some of our 


principle sources of immigrants, see any effect in them of large-scale 

The Chairmax. Thank you very much. 

Is Mr. Harold Silver here ? 


Mr. SIL^'ER. I am Harold Silver, executive director of the Resettle- 
ment Service, 5737 Second Avenue, Detroit. I speak on behalf of this 
organization, which is the major agency in the Detroit area for the 
adjustment of Jewish immigrants and has been conducting this 
activity for the past 15 years. 

I have a prepared statement, in which I am joined by two of my 
associates, Mrs. Julian H. Krolik, vice president, and Nathan L. 
Milstein, chairman, case committee. 

Before submitting the statement in the record, I would like to sum- 
marize it briefly to economize on time. 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr. SIL^•ER. In the great majority of its provisions the VValter- 
McCarran Act breathes restrictionism, raises the barriers against new 
immigration, regards prospective and recent immigrants with sus- 
picion prone as a class to breed disloyalty and crime. 

It perpetuates the national origins quota system which is iniquitous 
from a moral point of view ; it harms our position in our international 
relations and is based on an assumption without the least support in 
science and everyday experience. We have had thousands of D. P.'s 
and refugees come through our agencies. I have known hundreds of 
them personally. They came from countries of large quotas, like 
Germany, and of countries of small quotas like Poland, and countries 
of infinitesimal quotas like Lithuania. They are different in back- 
grounds, personality, and attitudes and education, and in the degree 
of their adaptability; but none of these characteristics had any rela- 
tionship whatsoever to the country of their birth. 

The second point I would like to make is that these immigrants 
from our own very intimate knowledge of them have made a re- 
markably good and amazingly rapid adjustment. They have been 
absorbed into the economy of this countr}^ or community without 
the slightest ripple and without displacing anyone else. 

Most of them, of course, have found jobs in factories and shops and 
there are numbers of them who are engaged in the professions and 
have made important contributions to the cultural and artistic life 
of this community. 

One of them is a professor of engineering in one of our State uni- 
versities ; another is a psychiatrist of note in one of the State hospitals ; 
we have had doctors, some lawyers, some dentists and businessmen who 
in opening businesses of their own have created jobs for others. 

"We find these people among contributors to the blood fund of the 
American Red Cross, among the contributors to community chests and 
other philanthropic organizations. They are completely loyal to our 
Government and devoted to the principles of democracy. 

Having experienced in their own pei-sons the effects of dictatorship, 
they have become inoculated against the danger of being propagan- 
dized against adherence to anj^ totalitarian system. 


The tliird point I shall wish to make refers to the deportation pro- 
visions of the Walter-McCarran Act. Over and above all the specific 
provisions on deportation, the whole concept of deportation of the 
act is one of punishment. Punishment in a manner abhorrent to the 
best traditions to America. An immigrant who sins against the law 
is liable to punishment the same as anyone else, and in addition to that 
he is liable to the cruel and inhuman punishment of deportation. 
That constitutes double jeopardy. And we think we might well head 
it with the Biblical injunction: "One law shall you have for the 
native as well as for the stranger within your gates." 

Of the numerous restrictive positions and in the deportation sections 
of the law, I would like to say just this, to cite two illustrations: the 
statute of limitations on certain grounds for deportation has been 
eliminated by the act ; an alien can now be deported for something that 
occurred ten, twenty or fifty years ago. Among grounds for deporta- 
tion introduced by this act is confinement in a corrective institution; 
corrective as distinguished from a penal institution. Thus, a 
youngster at the age of twelve or thirteen, gets into trouble and is 
sent to a reform school or industrial school, which is a treatment 
institution really, stays there for a year and is then liable to deporta- 
tion, no matter what his record has been since his release and how 
well he might have adjusted. 

The fourth point is our attention to the double standard which is 
introduced into the act for the native-born and the naturalized citizens. 
This is indefensible from any moral point of view. It subjects num- 
berless groups of people who have ]:)resumably passed the test and 
gained citizenship with the fear of losing this priceless possession. 
It creates second-class citizens. I would like to quote from a speech 
by General Eisenhower of October 1, reported in the papers : 

And neither at home nor in the eyes of the world can America risk the weak- 
ness wliieh inevitably results when any group of our people are ranked politically 
or economically as second-class citizens. 

We are convinced that more humane and libei*al legislation govern- 
ing our immigration and naturalization policy and legislation more in 
keeping with the leadership role in the United States and international 
affairs is called for, and that this can be accomplished with all due 
regard to our national security. 

The Chairman. Thank you. Your prepared statement will be iii- 
serted in the record. 

(The prepared statement by Mrs. Julian H. Krolik, vice president; 
Harold Silver, executive director ; and Nathan L. Milstein, chairman, 
case committee, on behalf of Resettlement Service of Detroit, is as 

We are grateful for your invitation to present our views to your Commission 
on the subject of your inquiry. 

Resettlement Service is a social agency established and financed by the Jewish 
Welfare Federation of Detroit. Through its activities and those of its cooperat- 
ing organizations, refugees and displaced persons have been helped to establish 
themselves in the community. This help is given in various forms: Housing, 
employment, English classes, maintenance relief, business plans, vocational guid- 
ance, child care, medical care, and counseling on personal and family problems. 

During the past W years we have served some 4,000 new Americans who have 
settled in tlie Detroit area. We can testify that these people can be compared 
favorably witli any group in the population — first, second, third, or nth-genera- 
tion Americans — with respect to their industry, honesty, adaptability. On the 


score of bein?: law-abiding residents, their rate of law and ordinance violations 
is delinitely lower than that or a good many other groups in the ui'etropolitan 
area. Their love of their adopted country and their complete loyalty to its Gov- 
ernment and institutions are beyond any question ; their horrible experiences at 
the hands of totalitarian dictatorships is a very effective inoculation against 
their falling victims to Communist propaganda. We have found them to be 
extremely eager to become American citizens, and they file their applications 
almost as soon as they arrive. 

On the basis of our many years of experience we can testify that the economic 
adjustment of the immigrants has been amazingly rapid. With the exception of 
minors, housewives and the elderly among them, they have secured employment 
in a very short time and have become integrated into the economic structure of 
the community. While most of them naturally have found their level in factories 
and shops, some have gone into business and, the professions — lilie teaching, engi- 
neering, dentistry, and the arts. A few have made noteworthy contributions to 
the professional and cultural life of Detroit and Michigan. A great many of 
them are contributors to charitable drives. 

The -scores of persons associated witli our organization, whether as mem- 
bers of tlie board, its various committees, volunteers, and staff, have been close 
to tlie iinniigrauts and their problems. We have been with them through their 
various stages of adjustment to a new land, a new language, new customs. We 
know their difficulties, their struggles, their achievements, and their attitudes. 
As Americans, we feel proud that our country has given these people an oppor- 
tunity to live as self-respecting men and women under free institutions. We 
know that they anrl their children will make their contributions to developing 
and strengthening our heritage of democracy and liberty. 

We are also convinced that many thousands of others in Europe and elsewhere 
can do the same if admitted to the United States. A generous immigration 
I>olicy will bring benefits to our economy, our society, and cultural institutions. 
It will also demonstrate to governments and people everywhere that we are 
willing to share our freedoms and our abimdance to tlie end of easing over- 
popuhilion and helping escapees from totalitarianism. 

In our judgment the McCarran-Walter Act does not do that. In the great 
majority of its provisions it breathes restrictionism, raises the barriers against 
new inuuigration, regards prospective and resident immigrants with suspicion, 
prone as a class to breed disloyalty and crime. It perpetuates the national-origin 
quota system, which is based on a racist philosophy, on an assumption that 
natives of some countries are inherently superior to others — an assumption with- 
out the least support in science or everyday experience. The quota system has 
always been unworthy of the spirit of America; in the present international cli- 
mate it lends credence to Communist lies about our foreign policy and our at- 
titude to other nations. 

As an agency dedicated to serving immigrants and helping them to become good 
Americans, we are profoundly disturbed by the harsh, unreasonable restric- 
tions and deportation hazards imposed by the McCarran-Walter Act on resident 
aliens and naturalized citizens. We wish to point to some of the major pro- 
visions of the act which, in our opinion, will instill fear into our foreign-born 
population, subject them to unnecessary police surveillance, and threaten them 
with investigations, arrests, deportation, and separation from their families. 

(rt) The requirement that every adult alien must carry his registration card 
on him at all times, and must notify the authorities within 5 days of every 
change of adddess, introduces a passport system characteristic of dictatorships. 

(h) Social-security records, considei-ed confidential for citizens, are opened to 
the immigration authorities as far as aliens are concerned. 

(c) Change of immigration status from temporary visitor to lawfully ad- 
mitted immigrant is so delimited that very few persons can take advantage of 
the provision. This will result in the deportation of many aliens who will leave 
American spouses and native-born children behind them. 

(d) New grounds for deportation have been added; and deportation is made 
retroactive notwithstanding that persons had entered prior to the enactment of 
the law or that the condition resulting in the deportation proceedings occurred 
prior to the enactment. 

(e) The statute of limitations on certain grounds for deportation has been 
eliminated (sec. 241 (a) (1) ). An alien can now be deported for something that 
occurred 10, 30, or 50 years ago. 


(/) Amoiifi tlie new grounds for deportation is confinement in a corrective (as 
distinguished from a penal) institution. Tims, a .vonnj,'ster who spent a year 
or more in an industrial scliool or reformatory would lie subject to deportation 
no matter how long ago that occurred and regardless of what his subsequent 
record has been. 

iff). A "subversive" is deportable even though he has reformed and discon- 
tinued his affiliation with subversive organizations. In this respect the act is 
liar.sber to resident aliens than to would-be-immigrants, 

ih) Home investigations in naturalization proceedings are made mandatory. 
This will cause many unhappy and tense situations for applicants for citizenship. 
It becomes a weapon in the hands of disgruntled- neighbors for harassment of 

(i) A mere showing of misrepresentation (not necessarily fraud) in any part 
of naturalization proceedings can be made the basis of the loss of citizenship. 
No naturalized citizen can feel completely secure from the jeopardy of 

(/) A naturalized citizen is also put in greater jeopardy in the matter of refusal 
to testify before a congressional committee on subversive activities. The act 
creates a double standard of morality and hazard and makes for second-class 

We have called attention only to the major restrictions and disabilities placed 
by the act on aliens and naturalized citizens, over and above those that prevailed 
by operation of previous legislation, nuich of which was already harsh. An addi- 
tional if less tangible factor is that, in administering the act, officers of the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service and of the Foreign Service become 
imbued with the punitive and restrictionist spirit of the law, thus adding to the 
atmosphere of fear and insecurity of our foreign-born and naturalized population. 
We have already seen evidence of that in the fact that authorities are beginning 
to enforce some portions of the act even before its effective date. 

We are convinced that more humane and liberal legislation governing our 
immigration and naturalization policy, and legislation more in keeping with the 
leadership role of the United States in international affairs, is called for, and 
that this can be accomplished with all due regard to our national security. 

The Chairman. Rev. Harry Wolf. 


Reverend Wolf. I am Rev. Harry Wolf, representing the Lutheran 
Charities, of which I am executive director, and the Lutheran Resettle- 
ment Committee of Michigan. 

I have a prepared statement I would like the privilege of reading. 

The Chairman. We will be glad to hear it. 

Reverend Wolf. It is scarcely to be expected that every voice raised 
on behalf of our immigration and naturalization policies will have 
something new or different to say. But it is expected that in a democ- 
racy the voice of the people shall be heard and heeded. We are grate- 
ful for this opportunity to express briefly our viewpoints in this 

I feel that the problems involved here must be viewed from four 
viewpoints: (1) the international aspect, (2) the national aspect, (3) 
the emergency or temporary nature of the problem, and (4) the 
permanent, long-range effects of our policies. 

On the international scene the United States is the acknowledged 
world leader in the economic field. All free nations look to the United 
States for assistance as well as guidance in matters of economics. 

Leadership cannot be limited to one aspect of a nation's life. Above 
all, there nuist be moral integrity which is the basis for moral leader- 


ship as well as leadership in every other department of a nation's life. 
Applied to our immigration policies, moral integrity requires that we 
look at the world full of refugees and study the requirements of 
justice and make our contribution to the solution of the problem on 
that basis. Our immigration policy of the recent past and expressed 
in the new legislation passed in 1952 can hardly be said to be geared 
to the solution of the international refugee problem. 

From a national viewpoint we can hardly say that the old immigra- 
tion laws were based on our national needs or the realization of our 
full potentialities as a Nation. The very narrow basis of national 
origin was chosen on which to base the quota rather than the fitness 
of the prospective immigrant to make his or her contribution to the 
American way of life. 

That same basis to a large extent has been carried over into the new 
legislation and forms the basis of the new quotas. This is most 
unjust and unfair to many most desirable refugees who wish to make 
their contribution to our free democratic way of life. 

Our national growth and development and the enrichment of our 
cultural life demand a larger number of new neighbors each year. 
Economically, we can sustain a much greater population. The present 
manpower shortage in many areas demonstrates our need in this 

When we look at the world picture with the vast numbers of uprooted 
people, we see problems requiring immediate attention. 

There can be no postponement of the refugee problem. People 
do not live in a vacuum. The man who is dispossessed of his country 
and his home is looking for a place to settle down and take root. As 
long as the refugee had hope, even a faint hope of finding such a place, 
life held meaning for him and he did not despair. 

Now, many are beginning to despair of ever finding a home. The 
DP program came to an end ; the ethnic-German program helped only 
a handful, and millions are still left in camps and in subhuman shel- 
ters all over Europe. Some plan must be devised immediately to 
keep hope alive in the hearts of these people or it will be impossible 
to win the struggle with the reactionary forces of a latent fascism 
and menacing communism. 

The fourth factor to be considered in developing our immigration 
policy deals with the long-term problems of our own Nation and 
the world. In this area we can take more time to deal with the vastly 
more complicated problem of surplus populations of many nations. 
This is a problem entirely separate from the refugee problem which 
should have attention now. 

In summarizing, I would like to list a number of points for repeated 
emphasis : 

1. There is room in our country for many more new neighbors. 

2. Our own recent experience with displaced persons indicates that 
they make good citizens and they are a strong bulwark against Com- 
munist ideology. 

3. Sociological studies reveal that the nations which have experi- 
enced a continuous influx of immigration have been strengthened and 
invigorated thereby. 


4. The United States has a continuing responsibility to admit a fair 
proportion of refugees and immigrants. This is a part of the price 
of membership in the world family of nations. 

5. Our professions of democratic faith must be expressed in actions 
if they are to have any meaning for our day. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Rev. Mr. Wolf, would you have any more explicit 
information about what you mean by your first point : "There is room 
in our country for many more new neighbors"? Would you care to 
express a more specific o])inion on that ? 

Reverend Wolf. I believe that our country has not become too 
exhausted of its resources, as far as its capabilities of providing food 
and the raw materials for a good life and all that it takes to support 
a much larger population. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Mrs. Anne Kurth here ? 


Mrs. KuRTii. I am Mrs. Anne Kurth, 1048 Yorkshire, Grosse Point. 
I am chairman of social action, the Detroit Archdiocesan Council of 
Catholic Women, which is the organization I represent here. 

The Detroit Archdiocesan of Catholic Charities and its affiliates 
believe in a Christian attitude toward immigration. May I read a 
prepared statement? 

The Chairman. We will be pleased to hear it. 

Mrs. Kurth. The Detroit Archdiocesan Council of Catholic Women 
and its affiliates believe in a Christian attitude toward immigration 
and repudiate any tendency to regard the peoples of other nations as 
essentially inferior. 

The Detroit council urges that Congress further liberalize the pres- 
ent restrictive and discriminatory provisions of the immigration laws. 
We especially urge that means be devised to use quota numbers remain- 
ing unused at the end of the fiscal year for the benefit of citizens of 
countries with oversubscribed quotas. 

We recommend that Congress enact special legislation that will 
admit additional numbers of refugees and displaced persons on a 
nonquota basis, to aid in alleviating the problems created by Com- 
munist tja'anny and overpopulation in western Europe. 

Studies indicate that the regulations of the executive agencies can 
be simplified to remove from the applicant a great burden of trouble 
and expense in time and money. While not overlooking considera- 
tions of United States internal security, we urge that regular studies 
and reviews be made to keep the administrative requirements as simple 
and feasible as possible. 

The Detroit Archdiocesan Council of Catholic Women expresses 
the hope that our Government will continue to participate in inter- 
national programs for the movement of refugees and residents of 
overpopulated areas to countries in need of additional manpower. 

The Chairman. Is Mrs. Alice L. Sickels here ? 



Mrs. SicKELS. I am Mrs. Alice L. Sickels, executive director, Inter- 
national Institute of Metropolitan Detroit, 111 East Kirby Avenue, 
Detroit, which is the organization I represent. A statement was sub- 
mitted this morning by our president, Mr. Oran T. Moore, which con- 
tained part of our material, and I wish to present some additional 
material and make an oral statement. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Mrs. SiCKELS. I should like first to invite your attention to a section 
of the report entitled "The DP Story," page 350, with the heading 
"The Problem Ahead," ^ stating the problem which remains unsolved. 

And, for your information, I have brought the want-ad section of 
yesterday's Detroit News, October 6, which shows the demand for 
labor in Detroit, although we accepted in Detroit 17,000 displaced 

The International Institute would agree most wholeheartedly with 
the statement of Mr. Eugene Van Anwork, past national commander 
of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, in his statement 
that the national-origin quota is contrary to the ideals for which the 
veterans in the United States armed services have fought, and that 
as a result of the McCarran Act some veterans become second-class 

In this view Mr. Van Anwork was joined by Mr. Wagener, past 
national commander of the Catholic War Veterans, speaking jointly 
for the American Veterans of World War II, the Jewish War Vet- 
erans of the United States, and the Polish War Veterans. 

The International Institute would go further and agree with the 
Reverend Arthur H. Krawczak, whose statement was approved by 
His Eminence Cardinal Edward Mooney, that the national-origin 
plan is more than undemocratic ; it is ridiculous. 

The Eeverend Sheldon Rahn, of the Detroit Council of Churches, 
in which over 600 Protestant churches and eastern Orthodox churches 
are affiliated, has also voiced his opposition to the national-origin plan. 

The question is asked: What to substitute? In this the institute 
feels that we must begin with the basic philosophy on which our immi- 
gration policy is based. The present national-origin plan through- 
out grew out of the philosophy of fear after World War I, the fear 
of the foreign-born. Since we are an agency devoted to Americani- 
zation, we would begin with an ideal of immigration that would be in 
accord with our national ideal : 

We hold these truths to be self-evident : That all men are created equal and 
endowed by the Creator with an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit 
of happiness. 

The experience of the International Institute in 30 different cities 
in the United States and our experience here in Detroit proves the 
truth of this basic assumption. For we have known, first and first- 
hand, the people of all origins who have migrated to this country 
through the last 30 years, and we have found them to be equally good 
Americans if given equality of opportunity. 

*The DP story, Washington, 1952, D. S. Government Printing Office. 


In the first generation people born in other countries often present 
unequal contributions to American life because of the inequalities of 
the oportunities in their backgi'ounds ; but we in the International In- 
stitute movement have watched the children of these parents grow 
up ; and, given the opportunity for adequate food, education, and 
freedom from fear, the foreign-born parents, with their limited educa- 
tion, who laid our streetcar tracks and our telephone lines and our 
gas mains, have given us American children in one generation who 
have become physists, attorneys, businessmen, judges, and, perhaps, 
even members of this Commission, 

The criteria for choosing the potential Americans should be the 
measure of a man or woman without reference to the pigment of his 
skin or the color of his eyes, the culture of his parents or their 

Now we have already in our immigration laws some of the criteria 
of a desirable American : Good health, sound mind, intelligence, 
honesty, and, perhaps we should also add, willingness to work. 
These should be definitely thought through and set up as the criteria 
for choosing our immigrants of the future, in whatever numbers it 
seems wise at the time to admit them. We recall that even our present 
154,000 annual number was limited during our depression years by 
policy, at the time, because it was not wise during those years to admit 
so many people. In other years it may we w^iser to admit more. We 
believe that at the present time it would be wise to immediately admit 
those who were ready to come, who had their quota numbers ready, 
and a certain number may be 200,000, maybe more, of those who are 
refugees, to help to solve this problem immediately. We know that 
any other basis than the measure of the man himself would not be 
in the end an American criteria for immigration. The American sol- 
diers with oriental faces and their buddies who fought on the shores 
of Italy were as equally American as their blond buddies of the 
Christian faith; and this is the philosophy of immigration which 
seems to us to be American. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Nicola Gigante. 


Dr. Gigante. I am Dr. Nicola Gigante, 1728 Seminole Street, Detroit. 
I represent the Michigan Chapter of the American Committee on 
Italian Migration, of which I am Michigan director. 

I have a prepared statement I wish to read. 

The Chairman. You may proceed, Doctor. 

Dr. Gigante. I am privileged to represent the Michigan Chapter of 
the American Committee on Italian Migration. 

The people I represent, and I, have read with a feeling of thanl<:ful- 
ness the statements of the President of the United States requesting, 
in one, emergency legislation to permit entry of a certain number of 
peo]3le from Europe to relieve overcrowding in some nations, and 
establishing in the other this Commission on Immigration and Natu- 

We feel that both of these moves represent the most logical and effec- 
tive effort to help world democracy. For the first time in American 


liistorv, an appreciation of onr iinmiirration and naturalization struc- 
ture is being registered on local levels, giving us the opportunity of 
making known our views on this truly human issue. 

We feel that, although the financial aid generously given by this 
country has done an immense amount of good, and in the case of Italy 
it has saved that nation for democracy for the time being, a solution 
to the eternal problem of overpopulation is what is needed to help the 
Italian nation permanently. 

The admission into this country of 300,000 people from Europe is 
not going to solve the demographic problem of Europe, but it is going 
to be of considerable immediate help and of great moral value. It 
obviously is not going to create upheaval in the labor market of this 
country ; instead, it will materially benefit some branches of American 
industry now in distress because of lack of skilled labor. As an 
example, the marble industry is in dire need of skilled marble cut- 
ters. The garment industry needs skilled workers. Terrazzo workers, 
tile setters, decorators, cooks, and so forth, are needed. 

The President's statements bring hope that immigration laws based 
on racial or national origin might in the future be modified so that the 
stigma of discrimination against the people of Southern and Eastern 
Europe will be erased. Twenty-seven years of experience with our 
existing immigration laws have proven that the likelihood of a for- 
eigner becoming a good American citizen is not related to the country 
of his birth. We feel that the requirements for admission should be 
based solely on the qualities of the candidate for immigration and on 
the possibilities of his placement in the economic structure of this 

Obviously, it would not be in the best interest of our Nation to open 
wide the doors to anyone who would enter. Obviously, the weight 
of relieving the chaos of Europe should not rest on the shoulders of 
Americans alone. But we believe that nations with room to spare 
will follow the example of the United States, as they have before. 

When in 1924 this country inaugurated the principle of national 
origin as a limitation on immigration, other nations followed the ex- 
am])le, other nations like Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, and Aus- 
tralia. If the United States, which has assumed leadership of the 
free world, will now liberalize its immigration laws, those countries 
in need of manpower, undoubtedly, will follow. 

After World War II there developed increased interest in immi- 
gration problems. These was an awareness on the part of the Ameri- 
can public of the injustice of the present im.migration law and of its 
inadequacy in coping with the dislocations brought about by the war 
in Western Europe. In some nations the already sei'ious problem 
of overpopulation was enormously aggravated b}^ the arrival of 
refugees and escapees. 

The American people have accepted the necessity of keeping de- 
mocracy alive in Western Europe. They have supported that accept- 
ance with a tremendous investment of tax money to keep freedom- 
loving people free. But UNRRA aid or Marshal-plan aid are not 
solutions to the problem of overpopulation. Financial help was neces- 
sary, but of temporary value. Nations such as Italy, with 47 million 
people living in a land area barely as large as California and with 
almost a total lack of raw material for large-scale industrialization. 


can only be helped effectively by absorbing part, at least, of their sur- 
plus mtinpower. 

Conmiiinisni thrives where unemployment and poverty rule, and 
in unemployment and poverty lie the strength of the Italian Commu- 
nist Party. Italy carries on her back the dual burden of surplus 
manpower and underemployment, and if her burden cannot be light- 
ened her economic and military usefulness to herself and to us will 
be impaired. 

The postwar immigration problems were recognized in several bills 
j)reseiited to Congress, but unfortunately the McCarren bill was 
passed, eten over the veto of the President. The McCarran bill has 
been a great disappointment to all concerned. It is an anachronistic 

It was hoped the new bill would be one that would temper the act 
of 1924 and liberalize it while at the same time disposing with the non- 
sensical idea of national oriain. The new bill is exactly the opposite 
of what it was hoped it would be. 

I am basing my opinion of the bill on our President's veto message 
and on his order establisning your Commission. I have drawn, too, 
from the criticism expressed by Senator Douglas, of Illinois, in his 
talk on the Senate floor on May 19, 1952; from opinions of Senator 
Herbert Lehman, of New York, expressed in his talk of July 4, 1052, 
and from the views of Congressman Machrowicz and Senator Blair 
Moody, of Michigan; from labor leaders like Walter Reuther and 
many other persons interested in the immigration problem. 

The McCarran bill does not touch the un-American concept of 
national origin. It adds only 400 people to the total amount of quotas, 
and bases the quota determination on a census which excludes rightful 
citizens of this country such as the Indian and Negro. It curtails 
the rights of citizenship to the point of dividing citizens into two 
classes. It deprives naturalized citizens of their right of protecton 
by trusting their destiny to the discretion of the iVttorney General or 
of consular authority. It makes these authorities supreme judges of 
their present status and their f tfture course. Is this an American law ? 

I respectfully submit that the McCarran bill does not belong with 
the body of laws of this country, a body of laws which for 176 years 
has represented the beacon, the hope, the refuge of all freedom-loving 
people of the world. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Dr. GiGANTE. I would like to ask this Commission's permission for 
the possibility of introducing to you an Italian mother Mrs. Carolyn 
Sinelli Burns, who would like to relate an incident in relation to 
something that was said to the Commission this morning. 

The Chairman. All right. Mrs. Burns may appear. 


Mrs. Burns. I am Mrs. Carolyn Sinelli Burns, 16924 Stoepel Av- 
enue, Detroit. 

I have asked to testify in order that I may furnish for the record 
a little experience in our home. I am an American of Italian origin 
married to an Irishman, and who has adopted a Chinese girl, and 
we have a little Irish-Italian daughter of our own. But I thought it 
would be important to place in your record that when I was asked 


to consider adopting a Chinese girl ^Te had not liesitated to accept her 
in our home because of our past experience in my mother's home, 
when she was livin<r, over a number of years with foreign students 
from the Asiatic countries who have made their home with us; and, 
therefore, we found that the students that have come here recently, 
particularly from China and Korea, have adjusted as readily as those 
who came here during the depression days, and had to endure the 
hardships of the American depression; and we find that this little 
girl that we have adopted has adjusted very magnificently iri our 
American way of life and economy. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Joseph W. Skutecki. 


Mr. Skutecki. I am Joseph W. Skutecki, president of the Polish 
American Congress, Inc., Division of Michigan, 2281 East Forest 
Avenue, Detroit. I am here to represent that organization of 600,000 
Americans of Polish descent, residing in the State of Michigan, 

I have a prepared statement setting forth our views which I wish 
to submit. 

The Chairman. It will be received and inserted in the record, 
(The statement submitted by Joseph W. Skutecki, president of 
the Polish American Congress, Division of Michigan, is as follows:) 
To the Chairman and Members of the Commission: 

The Michigan Division of the Polish American Congress, representing 600,000 
Americans of Polish ancestry, submits the following- memorandum exi)ressing 
its views, opinions, and wishes concerning the immigration policies of the United 
States : 

As we see it, there are two main aspects to the problem of immigration : 

(a) Long-range immigration policy affecting the economic growth, national 
ideals, world leadership and strength of the United States, and 

(6) Emergency legislation to relieve overpopulated areas of Europe and to 
allow immigration to the United States of escapees from communistic oppression. 

Looking at our immigration policy from the wide and long range, the present 
over-all number of 1,54,657 immigrants eligible to be admitted ^ach year, as 
provided in Public Act 414, Eighty-second Congress, is not sufficient for the 
economic needs of the United States. Shortage of sljiiled craftsmen, artisans, 
technical workers or even farm laborers is very apparent in many sections of 
the country. From the broad humanitarian standpoint, the present quota is 
neither sufficient to admit the recent refugees from communism, nor large enough 
to relieve the explosive situation in overpopiilated countries. 

It must be admitted that America is greatly indebted for her greatness, in- 
dustrial might and present power in the woi'ld to the immigrants and their 
children or children's children. And the very future of our country in large 
measure depends on the influx of new blood, new ideas, and new manpower. 
Stagnation is death. 

Even within the small number permitted to enter the United States under 
the McCarran-Walter Immigration Act the distribution of admissible immigrants 
is not fair. It is still based on the deplorable national origin theory devised to 
exclude people from Poland. Baltic States, or central European countries — it is 
still based on the absurd and false assumption that a person born in Northern 
or western Europe is more desirable for United States citizenship. 

This is a faulty and presumptuous opinion. 

The rpcord will show that immigrants or their descendants fi'om eastern or 
central European countries are no less loyal, patriotic, industrious, and deeply 
artached to the American prineiplps of democracy than the immigrants from 
the favored countrips. They are among the very best citizens of the United 


States, contrilmtinji in a much greater peroenlage to the military strength, 
defense and protection of onr country than their number would indicate. (Ac- 
cording to the published reports, 17 percent of the enlistees in the United States 
Armed Forces are of Polish descent, whereas only 4 percent of our population is 
of Polish ancestry.) ^ ,, , , 

If you consider the sinallness of the quotas for Poland, for the central 
Euroijean countries or for the Baltic States under the new immigration law 
and the fact that these quotas are mortgaged for years to come, it is apparent 
thai it is almost impossible for the new immigrants and refugees from the 
countries under the communistic oppression to enter the United States. The 
cut-off date of January 1, 1049, in the Displaced Persons Act closed to door 
to all recent escapees from the countries behind the iron curtain. The Radio 
free Europe and the Voice of America blare to the peoples behind the iron 
curtain the superiority and advantages of our American democracy, and 
encourage them to escape to freedom, but if the unfortunate victim of 
Communist t.vranny escapes to the American zone, he finds the gates to liberty 
and freedom shut tight against him. 

Tlie very severe and stringent attitude toward Polish escaped seamen, those 
men of excellent character and of unquestionable loyalty to democratic 
principles and ideals, has caused special hardships to hundreds of worthy 
individuals. They could not return to Poland, governed today by the Moscow- 
trained Communists, because of their political views and danger of death in the 
mines of Siberia. Yet, at the same time, they cannot legalize their entry into 
tiie United States. By our existing acts in the field of immigration, we negate 
the hopes of unfortunate victims of Communist tyranny. 

Considering our future immigration policy from a broad humanitarian 
standpoint and from the point of the welfare, strength, and world leadership 
of the United States, we recommend the following corrections and improvements 
in our immigration laws: 

:, (1) The over-all total of immigrants to be admitted per year should be greatly 

(2) The quota for Poland and all other countries should be based not on 
the narrow national origin theory of 1924, but on broad humanitarian consider- 
ations and the 1952 economic needs of the United States. 

(3) The unused quota numbers of a given year, within the total allowed 
by law, should be made available the next year to other qualified immigrants 
who are barred because their particular quotas ai'e exhausted. Such unused 
quotas should be used in hardship cases and for those who have skills needed 
in this country or are victims of Communist tyranny and oppression. 

(4) We recommend immediate cancellation of the mortgage on quotas result- 
ing from the Displaced Persons Act. The visa numbers used for displaceti 
persons should have been charged to the unused quotas of the past, as pi'ovided 
in the original Stratton bill, not to the quotas of the future. 

(5) We recommend impartial judicial review in denaturalization and de- 
portation cases. 

(G) We rect)mmend provisions in the immigration law to allow escapees from 
Comnumist oppression, who are bona fide political refugees or excellent char- 
acter, to enter the United States. 

(7) We recommend that legally admitted immigrants should not be subject 
to denaturalization and deportation after a certain number of years for any 
cause except for treason to the United States or for major criminal offenses 
committed prior to naturalization. 

(S) We recommend urgently needed emergency legislation to permit the 
admission of 800,000 people over a 3-year period. These 300,000 numbers should 
l)e I. sell for refugees and escapees from the countries dominated liy conununism 
and for persons residing in countries where there is an acute problem of over- 

The CiiAiRM.\N. Mr. Benjaman C. Stanczyk will be the next witness. 


Mr. Stanczyk. I am Benjamin C. Stanczyk, president of the Central 
Citizens Committee of Detroit, Mich,, 3001 Penobscot Building, De- 
troit, Mich. I am here to represent that organization. 


I have a prepared statement to submit for the record and wotdd like 
to enlarge upon that somewhat in my remarks. 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr, Stanczyk. The Central Citizens Committee of Detroit, Mich., 
is an organization consisting of approximately 200 civic, social, vet- 
erans, and cultural organizations; included amongst them in our 
membership, Mr, Chairman and gentlemen of the Commission, are the 
Polish Legion of American Veterans ; the State Department with its 
several posts; the Polish Army Veterans Association; the Polish 
National Alliance; the Polish Roman Catholic Union, and other simi- 
lar organizations in the Detroit area, approximately 200 of them with 
a combined membership of about 150,000. 

In enlarging somewhat upon my formal statement for the record, 
I should like to make a few remarks: First of all, people of Polish 
descent are freedom-loving people; they are people who have done 
much throughout the world for the cause of freedom and independence. 
History records the first armed rebellion of the white man on the north 
continent as being a rebellion against the House of Burgesses in the 
Virginia Colony in the year 1617. 

This was 3 years before the people settled, the group of the May- 
flower settled in Massachusetts. At the time the House of Burgesses 
attempted to restrict voting to Englishmen only, and that group of 
25 or 26 Poles took arms against the House of Burgesses, and that 
fight for freedom, for independence, for equality, has come right down 
through the ages. 

I am told that in World War I of the first one— the first 100,000 
volunteers for the x4.rmed Forces, 40,000 were men of Polish descent. 
I am told further than in World War II, 17 percent of our Armed 
Forces were men and women of Polish descent. The founder of our 
Military Academy was a gentleman of Polish descent. 

May I call upon my own observations and experiences as an assistant 
prosecutor in Detroit during the past several years. We find that 
of the 17,000 DP's who have come to the Detroit area, we have had 
a negligible amount of crime which has been limited to misdemeanors, 
I know of no felony involving a displaced person recently arriving in 
the Detroit area during the past 4 years. 

We find further that of the total crime committed in the Detroit 
area only about 3 percent of our felonies in the last 4 years have been 
committed by noncitizens. So it would appear from that that the 
displaced persons make good citizens. It would appear that the non- 
citizen does an excellent job of acclimating himself to our system. 

During World War II and the period of occupation thereafter, 
Poland suffered approximately 7 million casualties. There are still 
several thousands, several hundred thousands of men and women 
throughout the world who fail to find a refugee haven. We find them 
in Venezuela sharing their earnings with some racketeers who exploit 
them to give them a working permit. They are people who had to 
leave Poland, who were with the Armed Forces throughout the world. 
They are attempting to gain access and entry into the United States. 
It is my contention that the American policy of immigration should 
give a haven and a refuge for these men and women who fought val- 
iantly not for their cause but for the cause of independence and democ- 
racy for the rest of the world. They were fighting our battle when 


they were fiehtiiio^ at Tobriik, when tliey were fightino; at Monte 
Cassino, and I feel that any approach to an immigration policy should 
be based upon those humanitarian considerations. 

I say that our policy of immigration should change, first of all, the 
national origin basis for quotas. That should be done away with and 
a system of priorities should be substituted in its place, such as I have 
described in some detail in my written brief, a system which would, 
first of all, depend upon an American citizenship interest, which has 
been well-defined over a period of years, upon the entry of the prospec- 
tive immigrant into the United States; secondly, the status of rela- 
tives in the United States of that prospective immigrant; and then, 
thirdly, the skills or the occupations of that person. 

Just a few minutes ago, a witness on this stand testified that there is 
a serious labor shortage in the Detroit area, and I have personal expe- 
rience that we have have great difficulty in finding artisans in Detroit. 

It appears that in the last few years we have developed new indus- 
trial techniques which have opened new vistas, and the barriers and 
the frontiers in industry have disappeared because of improved indus- 
trial techniques. 

I believe that in the field of agriculture, with the reclamation of 
millions of acres of arid land, we have found new frontiers, we have 
opened new frontiers through new chemical processes, new fertilizers, 
new chemical catalysts. So this country has much room for those 
people in Europe who have very many valuable things to bring to us. 

Thank you very much. 

The Chairman. Thank you. Your formal statement will be incor- 
porated into the record. 

(The statement submitted by Benjamin C. Stanczyk, president, on 
behalf of the Central Citizens Committee is as follows:) 

Central Citizens Committee, 
Detroit 26, Mich., October 6, 1952. 
Mr. Philip B. Perlman, 

President's Commission on Immigration and NftturaUzatiO'n. Federal Build- 
ing, Detroit, Mich. 
Dear Mu. Perlman : Pursuant to invitation of Mr. Honry M. Rosenfiekl, under 
date of September 24, 19.")2, we are sulnnittins hcrewitli a brief explaining the 
views of the Americans of Polish Descent in the Detroit area. 

I. Our present policy of limiting immigration to 154.000 aliens a year, which 
figure is divided into a series of quotas based on the national origin of the im- 
migrant, does not meet the reiiuirements of this country. The formula gives 
Eire (the Irish Republic) Ifi.OOO immigrants annually, and Great Britain 
(England, Scotland, Wales) 63,000 immigrants; experience has shown that this 
quota is utilized only to the extent of approximately 25 percent, and some visas 
remain unused each year. This means that actually we limit immigration to 
approximately 100.000 each year. 

World AVar II .started because Germany violated the territorial integrity of 
Poland. Poland suffered approximately 7,000,000 ca.sualties during World War II 
and the period of occupation thereafter. Those Poles who managed to survive 
are barred from the United States by our present immigration laws. 

Frequently we have seen the situation where merchant seamen from countries 
behind the iron curtain have .lumped their ship and entered the United States. 
These persons have not been treated as bona fide political refugees and should 
be allowed admittance into the United States rather than deijorted. 

Our statutory requirements for the naturalization and deportation should be 
based on — 

ia) Acts of treason by the naturalized citizen. 

(&) Criminal offenses involving moral turpitude committed prior to 


The standards expressed in the McCarran Act results in a second class of 
citizenship because that act provides for deportation based on criminal offenses 
committed after naturalization. It is not consistent with the traditional Ameri- 
can system of fair play. It is in contravention of the spirit of that portion of 
our Federal and State Constitutions which prohibit ex-post facto punishment. 

II. Our policy of immigration and naturalization should be flexible to meet 
clianging conditions iu the liuiit of social and economic conditions in — 

(fl) The United States 
(b) The rest of the world. 
The United States has been moving its frontiers continually during the past 20 
yeai'S and it has opened new areas for agricultural rehabilitation because of — 

(a) The availability of irrigation water whicla lias resulted from the 
construction of our huge dams all of which have reclaimed millions of acres 
of wasteful desert laud and converted them into rich farm land. 

(b) New and improved agricultural techniques, sucli as improvements 
in chemical fertilizers, chemical catalysts, which allow greater yields per 
acre, improvements in seeds especially for grains, new farm machinery, and 
other scientific farming techniques. 

(c) Improved industrial techniques which result in greater production 
per man-hour. 

In light of the foregoing, it is urged that our immigration should provide for 
the entry into this country of not less than 300.000 and not more than 600,000 
immigrants each year. The President of the United States, acting with the ad- 
vice of the Labor Department, should be authorized to fix the quota based on 
economic systems prevailing in the United States and in other parts of the 

Such a flexible policy of immigration is necessary in order that the United 
States sliould be prepared to offer refuge to escapees and refugees from countries 
behind the iron curtain and from such areas wiiich suffer from serious over- 
population which results in economic crises. 

Our immigration policy should take into consideration the need in this country 
for skilled artisans and craftsmen who bring with them .skills and crafts which 
are rapidly disappearing in this country. In this category we should include 
chefs, cooks, bakers, cabinetmakers, glass blowers, tailors, barbers, milliners, and 
other similar craftsmen. It api^ears that during the past 50 years the emphasis 
in our industrial system has been on mass production rather than on the develop- 
ment of skilled artisans and craftsmen. This has resulted in a serious shortage 
of such craftsmen especially in those areas where mass-production industries are 
prevalent. These include Detroit, Pittsburgh, Birmingham, and other similar 

III. It is urged that the national-origin quota be done away with entirely. 
The reasons and arguments set forth in the first portions of this brief should be 
included herein by reference. It is repeated here that the quota allocated to 
Great Britain has never been used beyond 25 percent of such quota. Instead of 
the system of national origin for a quota system, the system of prt^fei-ence should 
be worked out based on the following considerations : 

(a) American citizenship interest in the arrival in this country of the pros- 
pective immigrant. 

(h) Relatives in the United States of the prospective immigrant. 

(c) "The skill or craft of the prospective immigrant and its need or demand in 
the United States as indicated by our own Labor Department. 

(d) The country of origin and the effect of the emigration of the applicant 
from that country on the economic conditions of his native country. 

(e) Other pertinent considerations such as political refugees, refugees from 
religious persecution, physicians, surgeons, ministers, priests, rabbis, and other 
learned individuals coming into this country. 

It has been urged in Congress that the immigration of 350,000 persons of 
Italian origin from that country would aid substantially in employment or eco- 
nomic conditions in that country and would also mean the enrichment of our own 
economy because of the valuable crafts and skills possessed by the immigrants. 
The problem of refugees and escapees from areas behind the iron curtain will 
continue to loom as an important factor in shaping our immigration policy. This 
Is based upon the humanitarian consideration of giving haven and refuge to those 
who have fought for the Allied cause in the past, who have made sacrifices of 
their economic fortunes and who have suffered otherwise in resisting the oppres- 
25356—52 iO 


sion and tyranny of the Nazis or by the Russians. By giving refuge to these 
refugees and escapees we are giving moral support to the struggle for liberty 
which is being carried on in such places as Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, 
Russia, and the Baltic States. 

There should be a critical evaluation of our immigration policy with regard to 
the Far East. The Pacific triangle as defined in the McCarran bill and the pro- 
vision for the entry of 100 persons into the United States from the triangle is 
incongrvious with our former policy of giving aid and assistance to countries in 
Asia and particularly India, China, Korea, Manchuria, and Japan. 


It is urged that the national-origin system for immigrations quotas be done 
away with and in its stead a system of preferences based upon social and eco- 
nomic conditions be worked out. It is further urged that the inflexible figures of 
154,000 immigrants be scrapped and in its place a flexible system be established 
which would allow not less than 300,000 and not more than 600,000 immigrants 

It is urged that proper consideration be given to escapees and refugees from 
behind the iron curtain and to the serious overpopulation in Western Europe. 

Respectfully submitted. 

The Central Citizens Committee, 
By Benjamin C. Stanczyk, President. 


Mr. Diamond. I am Charles N. Diamond, 18911 Lindsay Street, 
Detroit. I am here as -representative of the Order of American Hel- 
h'nic Education Progressive Association and citizenry of Greek 
origin in Michigan. 

I have a prepared statement I would like to read. 

The Chairman. We will be pleased to hear it. 

Mr. Diamond. My name is Charles N. Diamond. I reside at 18911 
Lindsay Street, in the city of Detroit, Mich. My occupation is a tax 
collector for the Wayne County treasurer's office. I am an American 
citizen of Greek origin and have been a resident of the United States 
of America since 1913. I am a World War I veteran, member and past 
commander of American Legion Post No. 100 and a life member of the 
Disabled American Veterans. At the present time I am a vice chairman 
of the Michigan committee on immigration ; a member of the Michigan 
State committee on displaced persons and for 2 years have been a 
member of the AHEPA displaced persons connnittee. 

Taking into view the fact that the vast majority of European immi- 
grants who came to this country, irrespective of nationality and despite 
their disadvantages at the time of their admission, have become an 
invaluable asset and have decidedly contributed to the molding and 
advancement of our social, economic, and political institutions and 
ideals, we strongly recommend that the general immigration laws of 
this great country of ours, the United States of America, should be 
more liberalized and the gates left open to such immigrants as those 
who are honest, hard-working, and freedom-loving persons, to enter 
this country and become good American citizens and real, assets to this 
land of ours. 

Regardless of nationality, there should not be any discrimination 
of citizenship. There should not be two classes of citizenship. 


Our present laws and policies, especially since the McCarran-Walter 
bills were passed and became tlie new law for immigration, appear to 
be based on the assumption that no honest, hard-working, freedom- 
loving person in the world would attempt to enter the United States 
for permanent residence. 

We all know that the American consulates everywhere are required 
to presume that anyone applying for an immigration visa has some 
evil design for destruction of this Government, the industry and moral- 
ity of the American people. We know that every immigrant has to 
prove to the satisfaction of the American consul. Secretary of State, 
Attorney General, Secretary of Labor, immigration commissioners, 
and to the President of the United States that he does not plan any 
harm to the American people and to the American Government and 
also prove that he or she will not become a public charge. 

All immigrants are subject to the rules, regulations, and discre- 
tionary sensibilities of the Attorney General, under the present laws. 
After the alien has become an American citizen, having passed all 
necessar}^ forms and qualifications, he is immediately subjected to 
special laws which operate to his special disadvantage and to the 
disadvantage of his American-born children. 

To avoid the stigma of having second-class citizens, there must be 
laws which apply to aill citizens alike and equality under the law should 
be to have one standard; one system of dispensing justice and meting 
out punishment to all persons alike within the jurisdiction of the United 
States of America. 

\\'liile we cannot speak with any authority regarding the needs of 
other countries and peoples of the world, we can speak about the needs 
of Greece and her suffering people. 

One of the gravest problems of Greece, arising from the present 
world crisis, is created by the overpopulation, because the people of 
Greece also were and are the victims of oppression, being people who 
lost everything they possessed while fighting for freedom and liberty — 
fighting communism. 

Under the Displaced Persons Act, 7,500 Greeks were permitted to 
enter the United States. Not one of them has given any trouble to 
the Government or to the people of the United States of America. 

The American consuls in Greece reported that 42,000 applications 
were investigated and ready to be approved if there were more visas 
available; the regular quota of the Greek immigration has been mort- 
gaged to 2,063. 

The old Greek quota was based on a basis of 1896 — some say 1920, 
but it goes back farther than that — yet, was applicable under such 
basis until 1952, and now under the new law of McCarran, there is 
none— until 2063. 

If American participation in the international effort is to be con- 
tinued to assist in the imigration and resettlement of a substantial 
number of persons from the overpopulated areas of western Europe, 
the present laws need a drastic change, and if necessary an emergency 
legislation must be passed by the new Congress. However, they may 
not be the permanent solution to the future and for that reason we 
strongly recommend that the entire quota system be abolished; that 
the so-called mortgaged quotas be forgiven as of this date — as of Jan- 
uary 1953 — and the immigration and naturalization laws and policies 
should be brought up to date. 


We speak of freedom. We speak of our freedom-loving allies, but 
we close the doors to them. 

Our common defense requires that we make the best possible op- 
portunity of the material resources of the free world ; we should per- 
mit such material to come and become the productivity and assets of 
our industries. We can and we should take some of the migrants now 
available in Europe. Our expansion of industry and the enlargement 
of our defense forces have increased the demands on our available 
manpower reserves. We need skilled and traineel personnel in the 
immediate future. Let us help ourselves by helping the unfortunate 
and remembering that they are willing to come and work — the people 
of Europe. Farmers and farm workers are needed and we can draw 
them from the overpopulated Europe. 

There is a great danger now ; the danger of permitting those suffer- 
ing people to become the real victims of communism unless we extend 
to them the American helping hand; not as charity, not for welfare, 
but for an opportunity for them to come here, go to work on farms and 
industry, and live the American way of life. 

It was an unfortunate act of Congress when the McCarran Act was 
enacted over the veto of President Truman. It permitted our own 
allies to lose faith in America and it helped the cause of Stalin. 

We pray that the President's Commission will find cause to recom- 
mend that the new Congress must take action immediately to re{)eal 
the unjust and unfair present laws of immigration. 

We pray that the voices of the suffering, heroic people of Greece will 
he heard and the proper relief be given to them. 

We pray that the appeals from the people of other countries will 
also be heard and be considered, irrespective of which nationality or 

If the Commission finds it necessary to urge the quota system be 
continued, we strongly urge that the 1950 census be used as a basis 
Mnth the beginning of 1953 and all past mortgaged quotas be forgiven. 
An increase of the quota number is necessary and legislation authoriz- 
ing the President of the United States to recommend special emer- 
gency legislation if and when necessary. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Diamond. May I ask the Commission, if possible, to permit 
Mr. Constantine A. Tsangadas, who is one of the most prominent 
attorneys of Greek oricin in the city of Detroit, past national president 
of the Order of AHEPA, to appear and take a little time for oral 
presentation, in addition to this statement, if you please? 

The Chairman. Yes ; is Mr. Tsangadas here ? 


Mr. Tsanoadas. T am (^onstantine A. Tsangadas. 1400 Dime Build- 
ing, Detroit. I am admitted to practice law in the States of Ohio 
and Michigan, being admitted in 1921. 

I appear before this Commission in connection with this matter, 
first, of having direct interest as being an immigrant myself, and 
being originally connected with the order of AHEPA since 1923, and 
as one of the original members of the displaced persons commission of 
AHEPA, which was sponsored 5 j^ears ago. 


My interest as a member of the bar is such that I must make a state- 
ment first, that the immigration Laws as well as the naturalization laws 
of the United States should be properly codified. Although there is 
tremendous criticism against the McCarran xVct, there are certain 
phases of it which would enable those who are appointed to administer 
the law to carry it out, or to carry out the purpose of Congress. 

However, it is time that Congress should consider appropriate 
legislation of considering every angle connected with immigration and 
naturalization. I will not discuss particular phases on the quota 
except to bring out to the Connnission this point: That the greatness 
of America is due to the contribution of all those wlio came to the 
United States either by force or through their willingness. That is 
the cause of the greatness that America was destined and is now 
leading the whole world. 

Taking the question of quotas, which is one of the controversial 
points, for which most of our groups are interested, I want to say 
to the Commission that ybu cannot consider the quota on the basis of 
origin as it has been considered by Congress up to this time; there 
are economical questions to be considered as well as ideological ques- 
tions presented throughout the world today. America is spending 
billions of dollars to carry out the true civilization of the world, and 
preserve peace, and we come here in connection with the immigration 
question, and discriminate upon certain minor points which are spoken 
to disgrace us to the people who are to be considered our friends. 

I must say that, although the southeastern })art of Europe has a very 
small quota, the Commission should consider that nnd ofFer some 
solution to Congress, if Congress is going to amend this legislation, 
to cure these conditions. 

I will refer particularly to the trouble that exists today in Greece. 
It is not a present question. The question of the unsettlement of 
conditions in Greece goes back not only economically but ethnically. 
We all well remember that after the First World War Greece was 
compelled to be the policeman of the civilized world, to go into Asia 
Minor after the loss of the skirmish between Greece and Turke}^; 
one million and a half of the people of Asia Minor were thrown into 
Greece — one-fourth of the then existing population of Greece, which 
was around 4 million people. 

In other words, Greece itself had a population of nearly 4 million 
people and we had one million and a half more thrown into that little 
country to be taken care of by Greece. With great thanks to the 
American Friends of Greece and the Near East relief associations and 
other charitable associations, Greece tried to solve that problem ; but 
that problem could not have been solved in a short time. The eco- 
nomic condition of Greece today is due to that particular point, be- 
cause there were one million and a half people thrown there, who, 
although most of them were Greeks or of Greek origin, Christians, 
there were some other. There were Jewish people there, and there 
were Armenians, Syrians, Arabs, against which the Greek people and 
the Greek Government did not discriminate but it opened its doors to 

Since 1923 and through the Second World War, these people were 
not able to be assimilated because Greece is a poor country and is not 
a farming country that could have absorbed all these people. 


We claim noAv that Greece had the internal trouble of commimisni. 
There isn't any more communism in Greece than you will find in most 
of the other European countries. But when people have not sufficient 
food, when the father sees his children starving, he wnll try to get 
food some way, even to rob, to help his family through. The question 
of the quotas based on the basis of origin could not be helpful to the 
situation of Greece. Mr. Diamond stated that 7,500 displaced persons 
from Greece came to America ; in addition to that there were 2,500 of 
those who had been so classified who had been in the United States, 
and a number of orphans were brought in by citizens. 

At this point I w\ant to beg the committee to consider the question 
of the orphans. Greece has today more than 75,000 orphans that she 
could not properly take care of. I have been instrumental in helping 
to bring some of the orphans into the United States. But with the 
closing of the Displaced Persons Act, those orphans cannot come to 
the United States; no one can adopt orphans in any country, to bring 
them into the United States, unless there is a quota opened. These 
orphans could not be considered under the immigration laws as chil- 
dren who could come in through exemption from the quota. 

I believe as a question of humanitarians, as Christians and human 
beings, we should consider the question of not only orphans in Greece 
but throughout the entire Europe of today that are suffering, and 
some in Asia that are suffering. 

Now I believe the unused quotas based on national origins, which 
are not being used by countries such as Great Britain and Germany, 
should be used by other countries. I believe east and southeast from 
the border of Czechoslovakia and Hungary the entire quota for that 
part of Europe is about 6,500 population — 6,500; that w^ould be the 
number. I don't believe that amount is sufficient; that is, the number 
is so small that even those who are in the United States could not 
bring in under the present law their own close relatives, 

I wanted to bring my mother here after the Second World War, 
and she could not come because she had to be on the first preference 
quota. I bring these short remarks to the Commission, and I say 
most emphatically that the question of immigration is not only an 
economic question for America, it concerns the entire world and we 
must not be considered as looking after n pound of flesh or ti-ying to 
make money out of everything at all. It is. our obligation if we 
are going to lead the whole world, we must lead them at every point 
and not only try to spread our civilization. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Is Rev. Paul Nagy here ? 


Reverend Nagy. I am Rev. John Paul Nagy, 9181 Mason Place, 
Detroit, pastor of the Free Hungarian Reformed Church in Detroit. 

I have a statement I wish to read, which expresses the views and 
stand of the Protestants and displaced persons of Hungarian origin 
in Detroit. 

The Chairman. We will be pleased to hear it. 


Reverend Nagt. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, article 
XIV, section I of our Constitution says — 

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the juris- 
diction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they 
reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges 
or immunition of citizens of the United States : nor shall any State deprive any 
person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law : nor deny to any 
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. 

A great American, Alexander Hamilton, said: "The Constitution 
is itself in every rational service and to every useful purpose a bill of 

A naturalized citizen, father of four American-born children, pastor 
of a bilingual Christian congregation and representative of the dis- 
placed persons of Hungarian origin, I feel and believe that our Con- 
stitution is the most perfect defender of human rights and dignity 
next to the Holy Scriptures. 

Therefore, using our Constitution as my bill of rights, on behalf of 
my fellow citizens and legitimate immigrants of Hungarian origin, 
I respectfully ask the revision of the immigration and naturalization 
laws passed by the Eighty-second Congress, in order that they may 
conform more perfectly with the above amendment taken from our 

As it now stands, "our privileges" (privileges of American citizens 
of Hungarian, Polish, Italian, etc., origins) have been abridged 

* * * our equality has, in a sense, been denied, when according 
to the quota allotments in the new immigration law a citizen of the 
United Kingdom is far more welcome than a citizen of any country 
on the Continent. In other words, our parents, relatives, and country- 
men are less desirable. 

"To err is human" is a well-known proverb. The Eighty-second 
Congress erred in passing a defective and discriminatory bill of Sen- 
ator McCarran, which is an insult to many honest and loyal citizens 
of the United States and hundreds of thousands of persons who would 
like to come to the United States. 

All mistakes can be corrected by noble-hearted, intelligent men. 
As our Constitution begins: "We, the people of the United States 

* * *" so I say. We, the people of the United States, of foreign 
origin, demand and believe the Eighty-third Congress will correct 
this great mistake and will : 

1. Take into consideration the privations already borne by those 
who were uprooted from their homes ; the circumstances under which 
refugees live in the overpopulated countries of Germany, Austria, and 
so forth, the heartbreaking misery inflicted on many because families 
were split up, leaving behind aged parents, depriving them of affection 
and support of their children. Alleviate the suffering by having leg- 
islation provide for the admission of those who were processed under 
the Displaced Persons Act, but for whom visas were not available on 
December 31, 1951. 

2. Give serious consideration to the adjusting of unused quotas in 
order to help reunion of families, persecuted refugees and provide 
workers needed in our country. 

3. Remove all discriminatory statutes which are based upon con- 
sideration of nationality, race, or color. As Almighty God has 


created all men equally, our great Abraham Lincoln proclaimed all 
men equal, so should Congress classify all citizens of the United States. 

4. Provide for admission of those displaced persons who are in the 
South American countries, Australia, New Zealand, and so forth, and 
are suffering ill health under the unaccustomed climate of the Torrid 

5. Give the refugees and immigrants of Hungarian descent equal 
standing with those of other small or great nations. 

6. Take precautionary measure to ensure our Nation against the 
infiltration of hostile forces and protect from the attack of subversive 
groups and newspapers those who are not as yet citizens of our country 
but are loyal and honest workers of our American society. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 
Is Joseph P. Uvick here ? 


Mr. Uvick. I am Joseph P. Uvick, 907 Fox Theater Building, sec- 
retary of the American Council of Nationalities, in whose behalf I am 

I have a prepared statement I wish to file, but before doing so, I 
would like to make a brief observation. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Mr. Uvick. I would just like to add a brief observation to this 
effect : That I would be willing, in fact, anxious, to have your honorable 
Commission determine the benefits the United States received, on the 
basis as a witness suggested here earlier, of "a pound of flesh," what 
the United States has received in admitting 300,000 recently displaced 
persons aside from any other humanitarian considerations. I do that 
iDccause I am aware of the fact that you have had the humanitarian 
phases of it presented to you very adequately. 

As a lawyer and as a city magistrate of Grosse Point, Mich., and 
being of Lithuanian origin, speaking the language fluently, my contact 
with at least the Lithuanian group is quite intimate. As a good Amer- 
ican I would have to say that I am more than proud and sometimes a 
little ashamed that they have done so well compared to sometimes our 
own native sons. There isn't a week but what I examine several ab- 
stracts of men purchasing ])roperty. As of yesterday a man, being 
here 2i/4 years, has paid up his mortgage, which is something that we, 
not having been shocked by the adversities they have experienced, 
would feel it impossible to do. 

Based on their share of Army volunteers and draftees, it would be 
immodest in my case to even suggest the success of the family, being a 
son of a coal miner and immigrant, a penniless man when he came. If 
this Commission could properly picture to Congress the assets that 
the United States has gained, not necessarily being humanitarian at 
all but strictly selfish in the national interest being served, I think that 
Congress would not have to feel they have to find a way to limit and 
lessen the number, but would feel the need as an objective of attaining 
the maximum number of immigrants to the point of reasonable 

True, if we would open the doors wide as they were up to the time 
of the First World War, humanity is so unsettled in other parts of the 


world that the avalanche would smother us. There are at least ten or 
fifteen thousand people just across the river here who would give any- 
thing they had to get across the border legally. That is true of every 
border we have, so we must have regulations. But the number of 
300,000 has proved so insignificant during the past 3 or 4 years and 
has been absorbed so readily, as was indicated by the lady from the 
International Institute, that you gentlemen going through the United 
States collecting that phase of it, I believe, would be able to put in 
your report a consensus report to this objective as a proven fact. 

I just viewed 1,500 in a hall the other day. Most of them were 
young and in their prime and ready to be hitched to our industrial 
machine, ready to be put into the Army. If it is true that it costs 
us about $16,000 — it must cost us at least $10,000 because even the 
Government allows a child to be counted as an exemption — to raise a 
child to where he would be fit for the Army or be fit to be put to work, 
every one of these men and women who has come has saved us ten 
to fifteen thousand dollars. 

I thought I would ]3resent this idea : That on a purely selfish dollar- 
and-cents, pound-of-flesh business, do we want only 100,000 or 200,000 
of grown-up human beings ready to be hitched to the plow, or should 
we have at least a half million? I think we could absorb a half mil- 
lion a year. It's just as we do in our tariff. We could do the same 
thing in immigration. There shouldn't be any argument in Congress 
on that score. Many men of Congress are of necessity the product 
of their environment, their contact with people of foreign extraction. 
Their approach to that in Congress is limited by their environment, 
when they think that when they leave a foreigner in here they have 
given away something. 

We should, I believe, accept at least 300,000 or probably one-half 
million a year and really open the gate past the discriminatory idea 
that people from one part of the world are different from the others. 

The Chaieman. Thank you, sir. Your prepared statement will be 
inserted in the record. 

(There follows the prepared statement submitted b}' Joseph P. 
Uvick, secretary, American Council of Nationalities:) 

October 6, 1952. 
President's Commission on Immifiration and NaturaUzation: 

Gentlemen : Responding to your invitation to present my views and those of 
Lithuanian organizations on immigration policies, law, and administration, may 
I, as its secretary, give the views of the American Council of Nationalities, 
supplementing the views of particular organizations or nationality groups. 

This council consists of representatives from the following nationality groiips : 
Croation, Czech, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish, Rumanian, Slovak, 
Macedonian and White Russian, Serbian, and Armenians. 

While the council was not organized with immigration as a primary considera- 
tion, it is of deep interest to all represented nationality groups. The articles 
of association of the council express its purposes, and a paragraph from the 
articles that may be pertinent reads as follows : 

"We, the undersigned representatives of the several nationality groups in the 
metropolitan area of Detroit, descendants of the nations behind tiie iron curtain, 
or those countries endangered by the communistic aggression, having considered 
the threatening danger of comnumism to the United States of America and the 
communistic oppression of the lands of our forefathers in Euro))e and Asia, do 
hereby unite and associate ourselves into the American Council of Nationalities." 

The underlying purposes of the council's existence obviously imply that we 
earnestly recomniend enactment of laws that would effectively screen out all 
immigrants of sympathetic leanings toward communism. 


Our collective views on immigration are predicated upon and must stand the 
test of what would bring the best present and future results for the United 
States. Would our reconmiendation benefit the United States economically and 
culturally, and increase her manpower effectively in no less ratio in each instance 
than our normal increase of native population? 

No one we know of now questions the wisdom of our country's founders to 
the open-door policy or the subsequent continuation of nonquota immigration up 
to a time when it appeared that we may be flooded because of unsettled condi- 
tions abroad. We then limited the number and sought preference by the quota 

Conditions are even more unsettled now, and if we dared to open wide our 
gates, a flood of humanity would inundate us, so some regulation is inevitable. 

1. How many per year is the primary question. 

2. Has the quota system proven itself as a justification for its perpetuation? 
Rolled into one, it's how many should be accept, then whether to favor certain 

nationalities and thereby at the same time discriminate against others. 

We believe that the number can be substantially increased and that it was 
and is a mistake to slant the quotas to favor northern or western Europe on 
the false assumption that the Baltic State and Central Eiiropeans would be less 
valuable to the United States. 

Because of humanitarian reasons primarily, we have accepted many more 
since World War II than the former or new qiiotas allow. What is our expte- 
rience with the great number of displaced persons? Haven't we absorbed them 
without economic indigestion? In proportion to their numbers, won't we find 
them with as many or even more homes purchased than our general average? 
As many volunteers and draftees? And one factor we must not forget that most 
all of them grown up and in their prime to be hitched to our economic machine : 
That they did not cost us anything to raise or educate them. In effect, we 
adopted future full-grown sons and daughters who are rooted here to stay. 

Therefore, when we consider immigration in terms of generations as being a 
part of our basic growth, or most recent influx of displaced persons, we were 
and are the gainers, and we should increase our adoption of manhood at its best. 

Uittle need be said that our discrimination was not and cannot he of any 
benefit. We find no advocates that seriously contend that races or European 
geographic origins produce provable differences measured by results of our 
exi>erience with innnigration here in the United States. 

In conclusion, we may summarize by stating that we should increase the 
number to be admitted. Then seek to achieve that number by allocating pro- 
portionately the unused to those that have exhausted theirs and forget about 
the mortgaged future quotas as a means of limitation. 

Fundamentally, it's still a question of whether sound wisdom should dictate 
that it's safer to grow slower by normal native birthrate, or grow stronger more 
quickly and increase our productivity in every field as we have in the past by 
adding to our humanity. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Joseph P. Uvick, Secretary. 

The Chairman. Lee A. AVliite, yon are tlie next witness. 


Mr. WnrrE. I am Lee A. White, a director of Cranbrook Institu- 
tions, chairman of the nationality cle]:)artment of the United Com- 
munity Services, and a member of the ]Michip;an Commission on Dis- 
placed Persons. I am also a member of the board of directors of the 
International Institute of Metropolitan Detroit. 


Miss Florence G. Cassidy, secretary of the Michigan Commission 
on Displaced Persons and the nationality department of the United 
Community Services has prepared a statement in behalf of those organ- 
izations, which will he submitted. This statement deals with, as I 
need not deal with, specific recommendations w^ith regard to possible 
improvements in the legislative program, and is in hearty support of 
the suggested intensive study of the whole problem with a view to 
further beneficial legislation, 

I should like only, in being present myself, to supplement very 
briefly, with what I hope is not too sentimental an approach, this 
material with experiences of my own, and I speak out of 40 years of 
background experience. In the immigration connnection I am a 
member of the board of directors of the International Institute of 
Metropolitan Detroit. 

I have mentioned my connection with the Cranbrook Institutions; 
and, while a dollar is a poor measure of the worth of an institution 
or an individual,it is perhaps interesting that if those institutions 
were to be reconstructed at this date it would cost perhaps $-15,000,000 
to do the job. They are now 25 years old. 

What interests me very greatly in relationship to your problem is 
that those institutions were built and given to the people of Michigan 
in furtherance of its cultural program by a man who is an immigrant 
to the United States and whose father was an immigrant to the United 
States, and tlien a migrant to Canada, and then a returned immigrant 
to the United States. This man who gave so greatly and his w^ife, 
who add^d so much from her own resources, both were children of 
immigrants. Mrs. George G. Booth, like her husband, was the child 
of an immigrant parent. These institutions include students ranging 
all the way from the age of 3 to postgraduate students who have com- 
pleted the professional work at universities. The students in those 
institutions have come from 25 foreign countries. They have been 
taught by faculties brought from many parts of the world — Danish, 
Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, German, French, Welsh. The product 
of the institutions has gone back to the countries of their origin, with 
the hope that they may make a contribution to their national devel- 
opment, to the well-being of their beings. The institutions, which 
are six in number, include the Cranbrook Institute of Science, whose 
distinguished head is Dr. Robert Hatt. Dr. Hatt has just left for 
Iraq to render a high service, we trust, to the Iraq National Museum 
of Research. Dr. Hatt passed through the streets of Detroit at the 
time of the most unfortunate race riots of a very few years ago, ancl on 
the w\ay to Cranbrook pondered the problem of what those institu- 
tions ought to be able to do to help meet this problem, and so, eventu- 
ally, an exhibit was opened there of a scientific nature, purely anthro- 
pological, and that exhibit has ever since been traveling in this and 
neighboring countries, and is a scientist's scientific preparation of the 
equality of peoples, or, at least, let us say, the absence of those inequali- 
ties which are popularly presumed to exist. 

Well, you can see why, aside from any convictions I might have had 
of a prior character, I should be considerably moved by the atmos- 
phere, and the circumstances under which I work, and especially 
recognize what many peoples have contributed to make America what 
it is. And, in this field, perhaps, so broad a statement of conviction 


as to seem sentiment jind an emotion, T should like to add these few 
words: that I do not find it easy to believe that God intended to 
bestow on one ^ronp of immigrants, and their dependents, and to 
deny to others, the blessings and the material advantajzes that Amer- 
ica offers. Lookin<r upon America and its citizens as "One Nation 
indivisible with liberty and justice for all," I have not inclined myself 
to divide my allegiance to the United States in its entirety, or my 
sense of indebtedness to its pioneers regardless of whence they came, 
or whither they journeyed, or where they settled, nor have I felt 
disposed to sit in judgment upon an immigrant or a native son and 
apportion liberty and justice in accordance with my pride or my 
prejudices. It does not seem to me the part of wisdom to waive the 
opportunity, which is still ours, to increase by importation the rich 
human resources, cultural, spiritual, and material, which the world 
offers us. I doubt that I have a right of inheritance, or at least an 
exclusive or particular right of inheritance to those things whi'-h, 
while called America, are actually the accumulation of centuries to 
which diverse peoples have contributed. I believe that I shall enjoy 
the more that part which comes to me in propor-tion to my willingness 
to share it with others now and in the future. But I am not so guile- 
less as not to recognize those abuses, and those problems which may 
attend hospitality, those problems which make it extremely difficult 
to be humanitarian, and I feel the need, as the President stated when 
your Commission was established, "to make a study of the basic 
assumptions of our immigration policy, the quota system and all that 
goes into it, the effect of our immigration and nationality laws, and 
the ways in which they can be brought into line with our national 
ideals and our foreign policy." 

The Chairman. Thank you, sir. 

Miss Florence Cassidy, you are the next witness. 


Miss Cassidy. I am Florence G. Cassidy, secretary of the Michigan 
Commission on Displaced Persons and secretary of the Nationality 
Department of United Community Services, on whose behalf I am 

I have a prepared statement I will submit, and will be glad to answer 
any questions. 

The Chairman. Your statement will be inserted in the record. 

(The statement submitted by Miss Florence G. Cassidy, secretary 
of the Michigan Displaced Persons Commission and secretary of the 
Nationality Department of United Community Services is as follows :) 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, the nationality department of 
the United Community Services has been in clos<^ touch with United States citizens 
of more than 30 different nationalities for the past 15 years. Its testimony, 
therefore, is based on first-hand knowledge. The department is extremely glad 
to have an opportunity to express its views both on the subject of a desirable 
long-range immigration policy for our country and the special needs of the 
immediate future. 

coivijviission on immigration and naturalization 631 

Ever since 1924 the immigration policy of the United States has been based 
on the fallacious assumption that persons born in northern and western Europe 
are more readily assimilated and make better United States citizens than 
persons born in other parts of Europe. In our experience we have found no 
evidence to support this assumption. People of education, skill, integrity, char- 
acter, and ambition are to be found in all nationalities. Individual fitness 
rather than country of birth should be the criterion. Ever since 1924 the 
quotas of certain countries have been so small that it has been impossible to 
bring about promptly, the reuniting of separated families and the establishment 
of normal family life in America. This we believe to be bad for our country 
as well as a great hardship to the individuals concerned. The smallness of these 
quotas has also resulted in feelings of inferiority on the part of immigrant groups 
in this country and in feelings of resentment in their countries of origin. 

We believe that relationship to United States citizens, technological qualifica- 
tions, and the economic needs of the United States are a better basis than country 
of birth for determining the number to be admitted. Public Law 414 sets up 
certain technological and other preferences, but still within the framework of 
quotas based on country of birth as determined by the 1920 census. The needs 
of the present ratlier than a quota based on population distribution in the past, 
in our judgment, should be the main consideration in our immigration policy. 

We are not advocating a wide-open-door policy, but even within a restrictive 
policy it should be possible to allocate visa numbers on a much fairer basis 
than that which prevails in the national-origin quota system. 

If the American people are unready and tlie Congress hence unwilling to 
discard completely the national-origin formula, certain readjustments can and 
should be made within the present quota system. The quotas can be based 
on the census of 1950 instead of 1920. They would not be wholly satisfactory 
but they would be less discriminatory than the present quotas. The unused 
quota numbers of a given year could be pooled and used the following year 
for hardship cases regardless of the country of birth of the applicant. The quota 
for Great Britain and Northern Ireland is not used at present, and the unused 
numbers under existing law are wasted. To correct this situation, we are sug- 
gesting a plan that would keep these numbers from being wasted. 

There should be some relation between our immigration policy and our 
foreign policy. Discriminatory quotas are cited by enemies of the United States 
as evidence that we are not the champion of all free peoples. Our past policy 
toward Asiatics has been especially damaging, and it has not been fully cor- 
rected by Public Law 414. This new act is excellent so far as most of its natu- 
ralization provisions are concerned. We heartily approve of the section which 
makes foreign-born residents of the United States, regardless of race or country 
of birth, eligible for naturalization on the basis of individual worth. Tlie 
immigration provisions of Public Law 414, however, are less satisfactory. For 
example, the Asia-Pacific triangle can still be cited by Communists as evidence of 

Tlie lack of correlation between our foreign policy and our immigration policy 
is seen in the matter of escapees from behind the iron curtain. On the one 
hand, we encourage persons who are dissatisfied with communism to escape 
and, on the other hand, we fail to make any provision under our immigration 
laws for them, once tliey have escaped. Even the Displaced Persons Act, which 
was much more liberal than Public Law 414, provided only for those escapees 
who had come into the western zones before January 1, 1949. 

Our immigration policy ought to be sufficiently fiexible to allow the United 
States Immigration and Naturalization Service discretion not to deport in far 
more instances than those provided for under Public Law 414. In the period 
from 1940 to 1950, this country witnessed the growth of procedures such as 
suspension of deportation, preexamination, and other devices for the regulariza- 
tion of status which prevented the separation of the families of United States 
citizens and those of aliens long resident in the United States. We feel that 
by greatly curtailing this discretion, Public Law 414 has been a step backward : 
For example, limiting suspension of deportation procedure to cases which present 
"exceptional and extremely unusual hardship." The main consideration should 
not be a matter of whether hardships are usual or unusual. Hardships can 
be severe, undeserved, and devastating and still be usual, as in Nazi Germany 
or Communist countries. The consideration in our deportation policy should be 
whether cases actually present serious hardship, not whether the hardship is 
usual or unusual. 


"We believe that much more considernticin should be given by the Congress 
than has been given in the past to applying the principle of a statute of limita- 
tions to our immigration laws. We have long had a limitation of 5 years on the 
deportation of aliens who become public charges from causes not aflSimatively 
shown to have arisen subsequent to entry. This principle should be applied 
to far more cases, even to those involving criminal offenses when the alien came 
to the United States as a child and received his entire "education in crime" in 
the United States. 

The foregoing statements have to do with our long-range immigration policy. 
It will require a considerable amount of education of public opinion before 
changes along these lines are made. Pending, sudh changes,, we recommend 
certain emergency measures to cfire for the crucial needs of the present hour. 

The danger of Communist control in Italy is increased by overcrowding, over- 
population, and lack of industrialization in certain sections of the country. 
Emigration to the United States and other countries is one answer to this 
problem. Thousands of United States citizens of Italian extraction are amply 
able to forward the necessary affidavits of support and to guai'antee that Italian 
immigrants to this country will not become public charges. ITiere is no question 
about our ability to absorb such immigrants from the angle of our own economy. 
There is no question, also, about the explosive situation which now prevails in 

Similarly, overpopulation in Greece could be relieved without a severe strain 
on our economy. Excellent assurances or affidavits forwarded under the Dis- 
placed Persons Act by United States citizens of Greek birth or descent were 
received by United States consuls in Greece for more than three times the number 
of persons eligible for immigration under the sections of the Displaced Persons 
Act which applied to Greeks. The offers of homes and .iobs contained in these 
affidavits still hold good. If an emergency quota for Greece is provided for 
along the lines of last year's Celler bill, there would be no question whatsoever 
about the necessary financial guaranties being forthcoming. 

The need for provisions of a temporary nature for escapees from behind 
the iron curtain was disci;ssed above in the paragraph having to do with the 
rlPtion of our immigration policy to our foreign policy. It is a matter <^'f 
tremendous importance and one which should he considered in the formulation 
of an emergency policy if it proves impossible to care for this need within the 
framework of a revi.sed long-range policy. 

Regardless of whether at this time we advocate a complete revision of our 
quota system or the passage of emergency legislation, we should never depart 
from two basic principles : 

(1) Our immigration policy should be a sensitive instrument of our foreign 
policy capable of being used to relieve tensions in critical areas and to provide 
hope for persecuted and oppressed peoples. 

(2) Our cherished institutions, which guarantee fair hearings, sound admin- 
istrative procedures, and judicial review, should be applicable to foreign-born 
as w^ell as native-horn, to alien as. well as citizen, so that in the administration 
of our immigration laws we may demonstrate to our own people and to the world 
the quality of our Americanism. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Florence G. Cassidt. 

Mr. RosKNFiET.D. Miss Cas^dy, are tliere any observations yon 
would like to make to tlie Commission in connection with the recent 
experience you have had in the DP prooram, and the resettlement and 
absorption of those peo])le? 

Miss Cassidy. T Avould be ^ilad to answer any questions T can now. 
The question was about the displaced-persons proirram and how they 
have been absorbed into the State of Michijsjan. We have had, Mr. 
Chairman and members of the Commission, 17,000 disiolaced ]:'ei^ons 
m Michiofau. Tliey have represented every conceivable pi'ofession. 
We have had a very hic;h percentage of peo})le who were university 
p:raduates and who were professionals, but we also have had unskilled 
workers. We have had fai'mers: we h'-''-o i>ad every profession and 
evei-y occupation that it is possible to think of, as we were the fifth 
among the States in the United States in the number of displaced 


persons who came. I would like to say that we have had only 100 
complaints from dissatisfied sponsors, wdiich, I think, is a very high 
"battino- average" out of 17,000. 

We also feel that we can add to the testimony that has been sub- 
mitted regarding the fact that these displaced persons have been yomig 
people in the prime of life, that a very much higher ratio of people 
between the ages of ^5 and 55 have come than one finds in the general 
population of Michigan, so that they have been very great economic 
assets as well as very great cultural assets. We have found no difH- 
culty in their absorption, which ties in to the testimony that has been 
given this afternoon about how many people can the United States 
economy absorb. We are quite sure from our experience with the dis- 
placed persons, and from our knowledge of the Michigan labor market, 
that there is no problem of absorption. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Is any research being done by any of the 
universities in the State concerning how displaced persons have been 
absorbed into Michigan industry and agriculture? 

Miss Cassidy. I think that there are such studies in process; they 
have not been finished. There has been one study that has been made 
of a certain group of Russian and Ukrainian displaced persons, which 
lias been made for the east European side. But, so far as all displaced 
persons are concerned, it has not been completed; but I think it a 
wonderful subject for many theses, and I believe that it is in the 
thought of a number of the departments of sociology to do that very 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Miss Cassidy, Michigan happens to be a State that 
is crucial in discussions of labor-market supply and labor-market 
shortage. We have had information and testimony today from several 
people to the effect of increasing labor shortages. Is there any general 
disposition on the part of people in Michigan to be concerned if new 
people come in ? 

Miss Cassidy. Well, we believe that we can handle this because dur- 
ing the period of the displaced-persons program we had two extremes. 
We had a critical unemployment period, and we also, now, have a 
period of shortage of labor. And during that unemployment period 
we were able through the cooperation of voluntary agencies in neigh- 
boring cities to work out, as I thought was brought out this morning, 
the influencing of labor to go to the place where there was need. For 
instance, we had many displaced persons that went to Buflfalo, by 
arrangement with voluntary agencies and the New York State com- 
mission, that had originally thought they were coming to Michigan ; 
and, if any policy that is set up in the future under our immigi-ation 
law envisions in its administration the cooperation with State bodies 
and voluntary agencies, I think there can be that exchange. There is 
a Iso the possibility of that exchange of information and the rerouting 
of people through the United States Employment Service machinery 
itself, so that when there is a critical unemployment situation in one 
area people can be deflected from that area during that period. We 
had that situation once when Muskegon was a critical area under the 
displaced-persons progi-am, and once when Detroit was a critical area, 
so that it did not cause us any trouble. It is true that you will have 
periods of employment and unemployment until our employment is 
better stabilized than it now is, but that isn't an insuperable problem. 
State and private agencies have learned to cooperate to solve it. 


Another point is that the whole growth of the United States Em- 
ployment Service, with exchange of information between States, was 
not a factor in the situation when the 1924 immigration law, for in- 
stance, was passed. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Mr. Willard C. Wichers here? 


Mr. Wichers. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, I am Willard C. 
Wichers, of Holland, Mich. My address is City Hall, Holland. _ I 
am the mid western director of the Netherlands Information Service, 
director of the Netherlands Museum, and secretary of the Netherlands 
Pioneer and Historical Foundation, all of which are in Holland, 

Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, I am speaking today as an American 
of Dutch extraction long interested in Netherlands-American rela- 
tions. By way of a personal note, I am a member of the Michigan 
Historical Commission, and am deeply interested in the history of 
the development of our State by immigi-ants from many countries, 
not the least of whom were the Dutch. 

I have prepared a statement which I would like to read. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Mr. Wichers. I should like to direct my remarks today to section 
2-c of the President's Executive order; namely, the effect of our im- 
migration laws and their administration, as it relates to the serious 
problem of overpopulation in the Netherlands. Since New Amster- 
dam days, the Dutch people have played an important part in build- 
ing America. May I recall that it was Amsterdam bankers who made 
loans to the fledgling United States, and thus servecl to tide our 
struggling Nation over one of its greatest financial crises. And, it 
was Dutch guns on the island of St. Eustatius that fired the first 
salute honoring our Stars and Stripes. From that time on, the Dutch- 
Americans have contributed substantially to the growth and develop- 
ment of our Nation. Citizens of Michigan are well aware of the 
important contributions made to the building of our State by the 
Dutch immigrants who came in such numbers to western Michigan, 
105 years ago. The accomplishments of Dutch immigrants of the 
past are being matched by the good citizenship of today's immigrants 
from the Netherlands. 

I would like to take a few moments to explain the critical situation 
which exists in the Netherlands today, and the country's need to find 
outlets for emigrants. In 1950, the population of the Netherlands was 
in excess of 10 million, and it is estimated that it will be 11 million 
by 1960. The central planning office estimates that, by January 1, 
1953, the working population will have increased by 148,000. This 
figure represents only the increase due to population growth, and does 
not take into consideration the increase due to greater efficiency and 
modernized equipment. It is estimated that increases due to popula- 
tion and efficiency will make it necessary to find employment for ap- 


proximately 245,000 new workers by January 1, 1953. It is impos- 
sible for the industry of the Netherlands to absorb this additional 
number of workers, even though large industrialization programs 
have been carried out since the war, and are still being developed. 
The Netherlands Go^•ernment is confronted with the fact that their 
population ijroblem is so acute. It has the greatest population con- 
centration of any country of Europe. 

Therefore, the Netherlands Government has started an active emi- 
gration program to take care of this surplus occupation population. 
Its aim is to have between 60,000 and 70,000 emigrants per year. 
This program includes financial, and other, assistance to prospective 
emigrants. And, as a result, the number of emigrants has been in- 
creasing steadily. It was expected in 1952 that a goal of 60,000 would 
be reached with, approximately, 25,000 each to Canada and Australia, 
6,000 to New Zealand, 3,500 'to South Africa, 3,000 to the United 
States, and 1,500 to other countries outside Europe. 

However, during this summer, both xVustralia and Canada an- 
nounced substantial cuts in their immigration program. The Aus- 
tralian cuts are particularly damaging to the emigration progTam of 
the Netherlands, because many of her nonagricultural workers could 
be absorbed in the industry of Australia. Australia has announced 
lliat it vrill only accept 50 percent of the estimated total of 25,000 
Netherlanders; and that, next year, it will only be able to accept about 
40 percent of this number. Housing problems and inflation are the 
most com])elling reasons for the Australian and Canadian cuts. 

Therefore, the Netherlands is obliged to look for new outlets for her 
people. Naturally, she turns toward the United States, where so many 
NetherlaPxders have gone, from the very first. Unfortunately, the 
Netherlands quota of emigrants to the United States is much too small 
to substantially aid in the solution of this country's problem. Pres- 
ently, only 3,155 people born in the Netherlands can enter the United 
States; and, after December 29, when the McCarran Act goes into 
effect, this number will be reduced to 3,136. Currently, Netherlands 
jjeople who apply for permission to enter the United States, will have 
their applications placed on file, for consideration some 18 months 
to 2 years from now. 

The difficulty of raising the specific national quota of one country, 
against that of another, is understood. However, apart from a direct 
increase in the quota, there is another way which would help the 
Netherlands solve its population problems without establishing an 
undesirable precedent. During the war, the Netherlands quota could 
not be used, because the country was occupied by the Germans ; and 
thus, approximately, 18,000 quota numbers were lost. If these could be 
restored to the Netherlands, it would greatly assist her efforts to 
establish a population equilibrium. It may be pointed out that the 
Netherlands, with Greece, is the only wartime ally of the United States 
which is now desperately in need of outlets for its people and is ex- 
hausting its annual United States quota for immigration. Since the 
innnigration quota of Greece is only 300 per year, the adoption of the 
above solution, if extended to Greece, would cause no great increase in 
Greek emigration. 

It is my firm belief that an increase in the Dutch immigration quota 
to the United States will be beneficial, not only to the Netherlands, 
but the Unted States as well. History has proved that Dutch immi- 

25356—52 41 


grants have quickly adjusted themselves to our American way of life, 
and have become desirable citizens. 

History also records that immigrants from many nations have 
helped build our great Nation. 

About a year ago Her Majest}', Queen Juliana, sent a personal com- 
munication to President Truman expressing her great concern over 
the need of the displaced persons of Europe. She reiterated the 
humanitarian consideration of this problem vrhen she was a guest of 
the United States last Ai)ril. The Netherlands has given haven to 
many of these deserving refugees. 

Commissioner Fixucane. May I ask just one question : Earlier to- 
day Professor Hawley, of the University of JNIichigan, expressed the 
view that draining off the surplus of excess population in these 
European countries would not result in substantial good to the coun- 
try itself, although he thought as a humanitarian matter it might be 
M'ell to do that. Have you any observations on that point at all? 

Mr. WicHERS. Well, 1 think that the situation as described by 
Professor Hawley might be sometliing of a generalization. I think 
tliat in specific instances the problems might vary. In Holland, the 
Dutch have since the war, through Marshall-plan aid, opened large 
new areas of land by draining sections of the Zeider Sea, but they 
simply can't cope with the gi-owing population fast enough, and I 
think that is particularly true in the agricultural areas, where there 
just is not opportunity for farm labor to find much employment. As 
a result of this, farm labor has been going to Canada, and Australia, 
and has done a very significant job, in some cases almost under 
pioneering conditions, and I think the attitudes of governments change 
by their own needs. 

In the postwar period the Netherlands for a time restricted the type 
of people who they pei-mitted to emigrate because certain skills, cer- 
tain crafts, were required. Under the occupation, thousands of lives 
were lost, and not only in Holland is this a peculiar problem, but 
is was generally a problem in these countries that the skills were not 
available for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the country, 
so that there was an attitude, or a general prevailing ])olicy to keep 
these people at home until this job could be done. But I think we are 
now approaching a point where in Western Europe a substantial re- 
covery has been made, and these very able craftsmen could come to 
the United States, and, as other speakers appearing here have testified, 
the growing opportunities in American industry, and the real needs 
for skilled people are apparent on every side, and it could really make 
a contribution. 

Commissioner Finucane. Suppose, for example, it were possible 
to drain off the excess unemployable population in the Netherlands 
within the next few years. As I gathered from Avhat Professor 
Howley said, that would be tempoi-ary relief and in the next 10 years 
we would be back right where we are today. Have you any thought 
on that? 

Mr. WiciiERS. I am inclined to agree that that is a continuing j)rob- 
lem. When you have predictions that the population is now just 
slightly over 10 million, and the birth rate is surpassing the death 
rate oy 150,000 a year, the most elemental mathematics will show you 
that b}' 1960 we will have another million people, and to support those 
people on so small an area of land — industrialization was part of the 
answer, but it is not completely the answer. 


Commissioner Finucane. Do you consider it part of the answer? 

Mr. WiCHERS. Yes, indeed. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Mr. Wichers, I was interested in your recital of 
the areas to wliich the 65,000-70,000 planned annual emigration from 
Holland was scheduled, and I notice that was all to overseas areas. 

Mr. Wichers. Substantially. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Has there been any intra-European migration? 
For example, France is said to be in need of farmers. 

Mr. Wichers. There has been some, sir, but very limited. 

Mr. Rosenfield. Why is that? 

Mr. Wichers. I confess I can't answer that. I just don't know 
the reason for that. I suspect it must be some restrictive problem, 
because the Dutch have ahvays had close ties with France, and natural 
ties in many ways, both b}' religion and culturally, and I think that 
it certainly must be some treaty restriction that prevailed. 

Mr. Rosenfield. With respect to movement overseas, does this new 
organization, Provisional Committee for the Movement of Migrants 
from Europe, play a substantial role with respect to the Netherlands? 

Mr. Wichers. Yes. They work very closely with the committees 
that have been established in the Netherlands for immigration. 

Mr. Rosenfield. How many of the 65,000-70,000 are planned to be 
moved by this PICMME organization ? 

JSIr. Wichers. I don't know that, I'm sorry. 

The Chairman. In view of some of the testimony we have heard 
in these hearings as to the beneficent effects of immigration, how do 
you account for Canada and Australia having reduced the flow of 
immigration to their shores? 

Mr. Wichers. I think perhaps the problem is one that in immigra- 
tion is rather new, and with such a shortage of foreign exchange very 
little subsidy can be given by the Netherlands Government to these 
people, so that they have a very difficult role after they get there in 
the whole problem — if they are agriculturalists, in housing, not only 
in securing farm implements. 

I tliink the experience in Canada and Australia has been a very 
happy one on both sides. I think the Governments of all of these 
counti'ies have been very satisfied. But apparently they are now faced 
with this practical problem and are imposing quota restrictions on the 
basis that economically they had better slow down the rate. 

]\Ir. Rosenfield. Mr. Wichers, I would like to go back to your recom- 
mendation and see if I understand it. Are you proposing to this Com- 
mission as a solution in connection with the Netherlands the use of 
the unused quotas which were unfilled during the war period ? 

Mr. Wichers. That is correct. 

Mr. Rosenfield. What is your opinion of the proposal made by the 
President last March 24 in regard to a special emergency progi'am for 
the Netherlands, Germany, Greece, and Italy, which would have pro- 
vided an outlet in tlie case of the Netherlands of 7,000 a year for 
3 years ? 

Mr. Wichers. Well, I think that could be a very desirable solution 
to a problem that exists now. I only presented Holland's 
problem because I am more familiar with it, but I am very much in 
su]jport of the sentiments that have been expressed here by others. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mrs. Zaio Woodford Schroeder is our next witness. 



Mrs. ScHROEDER. I am Mrs. Zaio Woodford Scliroeder, 1011 Bishop 
Koad, Grosse Pointe Park, Mich. I am here to represent the General 
Federation of Women's Clnbs, international affairs department. 

The International Affairs Department of the General Federation of 
Women's Clubs consists of the 5 million women in the United States, 
and the Council of International Clubs ; that includes some 16 foreign 
countries that have a membership of 5i/^ million women. 

My purpose here today is, of course, to add my voice to an intensive 
study of the entire problem, but I would like to particularly add em- 
phasis as to the question of the corelationship between immigration 
laws and restrictions in our entire foreign policy. It is very interest- 
ing when we are in the process of preparing programs for our inter- 
national clubs to try to reconcile the differences that exist, and the 
restrictions that exist, in our immigration law in conjunction with 
our foreign policy. In other words, it is something like this: We 
will say to them "We have an American heritage, and that is it." We 
are planning programs for you in your clubs, and we want to give you 
an insight as to how freedom-loving people live and function in an 
economy built upon that kind of heritage. Let me say that my mail 
is very voluminous in replies from these clubs, when they say to me : 
"Yes, you say you invite escapees from communism into your country, 
and then, in turn, after you have given lij) service to that principal, 
then you, in turn, make restrictions." After all, as a citizen of this 
country, I am responsible for the making of those laws. So, my plea 
is this: You.r immigration laws in this country, our immigration laws, 
should be a flexible instrument of our foreign policy. We haven't any 
right — and I say this with a tremendous amount of sincere vehe- 
mence — to say this is one problem and this is another. There is no 
differentiation — they must be considered together. 

One of the outstanding examples that I would like to bring to your 
attention is the Voice of Russia, particularly as it is broadcast in India 
today. The Voice of America may come over the air and say : "This 
is what we stand for." Then, Russia, in turn, broadcasts these restric- 
tive problems that we have here, the positions we take on displaced 
persons and I don't know what all. I say to you, as a sincere per- 
son, I don't know what to reply to these women when we have these 
kinds of problems. 

It is my viewpoint — I am not going to offer a solution because I am 
not an economist, nor am I an internationalist in any sense of the word, 
I am not a trained person in that respect, but I do know if we are going 
to create the kind of relationship with the women in the foreign coun- 
tries, we have got to do something about our immigration problems, 
and certainly revise our laws after due study and consideration. I 
think that is about all I would like to say. I do feel most sincerely that 
we are not preserving our American heritage in permitting our laws 
to remain as they are. 

The Chairman. '\^Tiat is your criticism of the laws as they are? 

Mrs. ScHROEDER. Well, in the first place, they are antiquated. I 
am speaking now from the standpoint of an individual. I don't know 
why we would exi)ect to follow laws that were established in an econ- 


omy of, say, 20 to 25 years ago. After all, the world has become 
dwarfed in 25 j^ears, Mr. Chairman, in every way, and I certainly 
think we can't dwarf onr thinking in these problems to the degree 
that we are affected by what happens in these countries in the Far East 
and in tlie Americas. 

Commissioner OTtrady. Has yonr organization given much at- 
tention to immigration problems'^ 

Mrs. ScHROEDER. They haven't done as much as I would like them 
to, but I expect them to do more in the future. May I say. Father, that 
pei'haps they were a little ingi'own during the years, but, like other 
Americans, maybe the}' have expanded themselves, and I do believe 
they are going to do a great deal more in the near future. Certainly, 
we are confronted with these problems, and we hope to present a 
projected line of study, so that they may come to an opinion. We be- 
lieve that if 5 million women have an intelligent opinion, that the im- 
pact of their opinion might have an impact on some of our country, 
]io matter how good or how poor they might be. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. EosENFiELD. Mv. Chairman, I have been asked by three indi- 
viduals to introduce, if the Commission be willing, their prepared 
statements in the record. With your permission, I should like to 
insert those statements now. 

The Chairman. They may be inserted in the record. 

(The three statements follow:) 

Statement of Msgr. O'oseph Ciarrocchi, Pastor, Detroit, Mich. 

To the Honorahic Presidential Co)ii}nissio7i on Immigration: 

As editor of an Aiuerican-Itaiiaii weekly. La Voce del Popolo, and as pastor 
of the Italian Church of Santa iMaria in Detroit, I wish to present my views 
anent legislation on immigration which would meet today's needs. I have in 
mind, mainly, the needs of Italian immigration. 

1. The present allotment to Italy is 5,799 immigrants per year, which in con- 
clusion is reduced to ahout l.OdO when all exceptions and retroactive considera- 
tions are taken into account. Its benefit is hardly felt at all. 

2. For other countries, emigration may he a surplus ; for the life of Italy, it is 
essential. Italy has very poor resources, while its population increases every 
mouth, making conditions continuously worse. 

3. The unrest in Italy for such a condition is dangerous, not only for the 
Italians but also for the whole of Europe and, by reflection, for America itself. 
Communism, which is very strong in Italy, is waiting for a chance, because Italy 
is the key to the expansion of communism to Western Euroiie. 

4. The famous fourth principle of President Truman to meet world conditions, 
calls for the uplifting of countries in need. For peace on earth, this principle 
is as important as the building of a strong army to prevent invasion. No matter 
the help you may give to Italy, the disproportion of resources and population is 
such, that only emigration would prove effective. 

5. Objecting to Italian immigration as un\^anted, seems to me short-sighted. 
After all, the Italians have contributed quite a deal in material work, and have 
contributed especially on a cultural line. All considered, it is an immigration 
which the United States not only can stand well, but find also beneficial. 

6. Waiting for the recall of the McCarran law (even if possible) and pass 
another law on immigration, would take too long for the urgency of the problem. 
It is good that the work is started, but for the present time, a supplementary 
law is needed immediately to help the countries most in need — something in the 
line of the Celler bill. In that bill, Italy would be allowed immediately 117,000 
immigrants to be distributed in 3 years. It would be a considerable help. 

7. It has been discussed also that the total amount of 150,000 immigrants al- 
lowed per year should not be allocated exclusively to particular countries, but 
some way kept in a bloc, so that it could be used liy a needy country, when not 
used by the country to which it was originally allocated. 


8. As a general principle, it is good to keep in mind that this country can 
stand a much larger immigration than the 150,000 per year. In Detroit, today, 
we experience lack of workers, not lack of jobs. 

Statement by A. L. Zwerdling, Detroit Chapter Chairman, Americans fob 
Democratic Action (ADA) 

We congratulate President Truman on his farsighted action in directing this 
Commi-ssion to hold a series of hearings in various parts of the country which will 
give the American people a better opportunity to make themselves heard on 
this basic issue. 

When the Eighty-second Congress adopted the Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion Act of 1952, overriding the courageous veto of the President, it retained and 
expanded a discriminatory quota system founded on racism. The 1952 act effec- 
tively turns our backs on the noble sentiment expressed on the Statue of Lib- 
erty, and announces to the Vv^orld that democracy is for home consumption only. 
Even at liome the naturalized citizen and alien are given only limited access 
to our traditional rights. After lighting a costly war to defeat racism abroad, 
we have made it tlie keystone of our philosophy in dealing with immigration 
and naturalization. 

Less than half of the 154,000 immigrants whose admission is provided for 
per year are allowed to enter this country because the McCarran-Walter Act 
retains an inflexible quota system which discriminates against the peoples of 
southern, central, and eastern Europe. In the year ending June 30. 1951, 50,000 
of the 65,721 quota for Great Britain and Xortliern Ireland went unused, while 
in other parts of Europe there were tens of thousands of displaced persons and 
victims of totalitarianism clamoring for entry to our country. 

The act eliminates tl^.e previous quota-exempt class of intellectuals which made 
possible the enrichment of American culture by facilitating entry of European 

The legislation flies in the face of our costly and all-important efforts in the 
field of foreign affairs to cultivate the support of peoples of Europe and Asia. If 
appeals to justice, morality and mercy go unheeded, at least national self-inter- 
est should dictate consideration of these arguments. 

While Americans spill blood in Asia where bloodshed could be avoided if we 
had the allegiance of the peoples of the east, this legislation adds further fuel 
to the flames by making racial ancestry the most important test on which ad- 
mission of peoples from wbat is called the "Asia-Pacific Triangle" is based. 

In the field of deportations this law revives the medieval, un-American concept 
of "banishment" for those who are aliens, no matter how long in tlie United 
States. It creates a second-class citizenship and inequality of opportunity. Fur- 
ther, it makes provision for harsher treatment for the naturalized citizen than 
for the native-born. 

One of the most vicious features of the act is its failure to afford immigrants 
or aliens the rudiments of a fair hearing, which are basic to our way of life. 
It erects an absolute power on the part of administrative officers to flout the 
rights of the individual in the name of the state. 

We urge this Commission to spell out in strong and unniistakable language 
the need for basic revision of this law. Only by eliminating our present discrim- 
inatory system can we effectively rebuff the Comnumist attack on our effort to 
win the allegiance of freedom-loving peoples in Europe and Asia. 

Statement of P. G. Nicholson, Detroit 26, Mich. 

Honorable sirs, I believe that the Greek quota of 308 persons to migrate to the 
United States is terribly low. I beg to submit the following comments. First, 
the fact that the McCarran-Walter Act allows 25 percent of the quota to be 
allotted to aliens who have brothers and sisters in the United States, citizens 
thereof. Under this portion of the law, it can be seen that quota numbers allowed 
for allotment of 25 percent would mean that only approximately 75 persons are 
admitted in this category. Inasmuch as the McCarran-Walter Act has its pur- 
pose in unifying families, it is respectfully prayed that more consideration should 
be given to this portion of the act. 


It is also to be considered the question of whether or not legal resident wives 
of American citizens will be considered under this act as nonquota immigrants, 
or preference quota immigrants. If they are considered preft-rence quota immi- 
grants, are they to be charged against the quota for Greece, and, if so, would this 
possibly destroy any benefit whatever which might accrue from the fact that 
United States citizens' brothers and sisters applying for their alien relatives 
inasmuch as it would decrease the quota from Greece, it would seem. 

As the department is well aware, the quota for Greece is exhausted for the 
next 100 years and there are many persons born in Greece and living there who 
are desirous to come to the United States. The conditions in Greece at the 
moment are pitiable and they have relatives in the United States who would 
gladly guarantee through the United States Government that the said persons 
would not become public charges. 

Furthermore, it is a well-known fact that poverty in itself breathes communism 
and tlie poverty in Greece at the moment is tremendous. It is sincerely 
believed that should the quota be made larger or should the law be made broader 
so that more of these poor unfortunate persons might be able to come to the 
United States, bear in mind not to be public charges, but to be taken care of and 
supported, if nece.ssary, by their relatives, it would relieve the situation in Greece 
tremendously at the moment and of necessity would not require the huge dona- 
tions of money now sent for their benefit. I respectfully sulimit that inasmuch as 
the quotas for many countries are not filled each year, it appears possible that 
some additional quota numbers should be allotted to Greece. Inasmuch as it 
does not increase the number of immigrants entering the United States other 
than stated as allowed by the over-all quota. It is a well-known fact that the 
quotas for England. Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, and Germany are never 
filled and it is hoped that some of the quota numbers from these countries might 
be allotted to Greece to give her some addition to what she now has, 308. 

It is a well-known fact that the people of Greece have fought for the freedom 
of the world and against communism and it is also a well-known fact that they 
have been well supplied with money for that purpose from the United States 
Government. Under the circumstances it would seem that the allotment for 
Greece insofar as the quota is concerned, should be 5,000 or more a year instead 
of the measly 308 which they are now allowing. 

While I am making my plea for a larger allotment of quota numbers to be 
issued, I feel that inasmuch as the McCarran-Walter Act attempts to unify 
families, certainly more consideration sliould be given to aliens applying for 
admission to the United States from Greece where such aliens do not have rela- 
tives in the United States. 

The Chairman. Mrs. B, A. Sej-moiir, will you appear? 


Mrs. Seymour. I am Mrs. B. A. Seymour, 876 Edgemont Park, 
Grosse Pointe, Mich. 

I am a member of the Michigan Commission on Displaced Persons, 
which I represent. 

I shall go back to the beginning of the DP program. I happened 
to be the archdiocesan chairman of Volunteers for the Archdiocese of 
Detroit. In that capacity I greeted the first arrivals, the first boats 
that came over, and I had first-hand dealings with the displaced per- 
sons, and I followed them up very carefully to see v>'hat type of per- 
sons and what type of citizens they would make in the United States. 
In our follow-up system through volunteers, many of whom were 
trained, we followed these people out into the country to find out 
how they adapted themselves, whether they would be good citizen 
material. I cannot vouch for the success of them 100 percent, but I 
will say that on an average 85 to 95 percent adjusted themselves very 
well. I think if these people coming into the United States adjusted 
so well, Avhy should we not increase our immigration quotas. 


As tlie law now stands, we know tliat the quota based on the na- 
tional origin status is not just. It makes for the separation of fam- 
ilies, and where there is a separation of families, where we cannot 
unite them, well, many other problems, as you may imagine, will result 
from that. I believe that where we have the large quotas, and these 
quotas go to countries who do not use them, that these quotas should 
be used by the other countries, so that the small countries would 
l;enefit thereby. I think that in dealing with the people coming into 
the country first-hand we have had adequate examples of the true 
success that they have made, these people who have come in. They 
have their bare hands, but they have the intellect, and using their 
intellect and with nothing except their bare hands, they have been able 
to achieve success. I think we want more of them. 

If you could envision the people that I have dealt with, not only of 
one nationality, but of many nationalities — the Estonians, the Lati- 
vians, the Italians, the Lithuanians, so many of them — they have been 
such successes. I know you don't want to go into details as to cases, 
but so many of them have been successful that I feel that all of us 
who are in the field and dealing with them day by day realize that 
some basic change should be made in our immigration laws. As they 
stand now, I feel they are unjust, and I think that we in the United 
States are held as a beacon light to the European countries of justice 
and reliance, and I think, for one, that we should not let them down. 

Mr. Chairman, I also have a prepared statement I wish to submit for 
the record. 

The Chairman. It will be received. 

(There follows the prepared statement submitted by Mrs. B. A. 
Seymour, member of the Michigan Commission on Displaced Persons :) 

Comments on United States Immigration 

There should be a basic revision of the entire immigration policy. It is 
obvious that the national origins quota system is absolutely unjust for it favors 
immigrants, from western and northern Europe and discriminates against the 
peoples of eastern and southern Europe. The injustice of this national origins 
quota system is apparent in that it is readily recognized that nations who have 
lai-ge quotas never fill their quotas while nations with small quotas could more 
than fill them — as an example, Italy has been able to enter only 200 persons a 
year ; Greece's quota is hypothecated for the next 50 years, and Lithuania's for 
the next 100 years. 

The law, as it now stands, is unjust as it tends to disrupt family life by 
separating members of the family — in its very essence the law is cruel and 
should be revaluated. 

We can readily absorb 150,000 persons a year — even more. Emergencj 
measures could he taken to raise the number to be taken into tlie country 
This will ease the overpopulation of parts of western Europe, such as Italy, 
Ti-ieste, Greece, the Netherlands, and Western Germany. 

We have raised the hopes of Europeans in a just United States. Can we let 
this faith and reliance be misplaced? I say "No." Let us be just in our 
immigration policies. 

Marceixa Seymour: 
(Mrs. B. A. Seymour), 
jSfemhef, Michigan Coiiiniission Displaced Persons. 

Octoker 7, 1052. 

The Chairman. Our next witness is Mr. Saul Grossman. 



Mr. (trossmax. I am Saul (irossiiiaii, secretary of the Michigan 
Committee for Protection of the Foreign liorn, 1442 Griswold Street, 
Detroit. I am here to represent that organization. 

I have a prepared statement I wish to read, to which is attached a 
statement of Marko Kosta, which I also wish to submit. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Mr. Grossman. There are three glaring defects in the immigration 
and naturalization laws that I wish to deal with: (1) Deportations; 
(2) denaturalization; and (3) police-state practices of Immigration 
Department agents. 

1. Deportations 

The inequities of the i)resent laws can best be described by regard to 
one particular case that has received Nation-wide attention — the Louis 
Ragni case. Mr. Eagni was recently ordered deported to Italy. At 
present, his case is before this Federal court for review. 

Hearings in Mr. Rugni's case have taken place over a period of 18 
years. He faces de})ortation for alleged past membership in the 
Communist Party. Mr. Eagni worked as a coal miner in Pennsyl- 
vania and was an organizer of the Mine Workers Union. It is because 
of his labor activities that he came to the attention of the Immigration 
Department for possible deportation. 

Never arrested or convicted of any crime in this country, he is mar- 
ried to an American citizen and the father of live children, all born in 
the United States. His oldest son, Lawrence, is in the Marine Corps 
on active duty, recently returned from 1 year's combat duty in Korea. 
A second son, Joseph, 20, is with the Marines in Korea now. His 
father just received a Purple Heart awarded his son for w^ounds re- 
ceived in battle. A third son works in a General Motors shop in 
Detroit. His daughter Joami, 18, is a student at the University of 
Michigan. Nancy, 16, is a senior in high school. 

On the basis of present laws, JMr. Ragni"s deportation is practically 
assured. This will result in the breaking up of this American family 
in a manner reminiscent of the slave auction blocks of the last century. 
Which members. of Mr. Ragni's family should accompany him to Italy 
is a problem I would like to see solved by those Members of Congress 
who voted for the McCarran-Walter law. 

I have just been informed that Mr. Ragni's son, Joseph, was awarded 
the Bronze Star which was delivered to him today. 

Mr. Ragni's case is oidy 1 of more than 45 in Michigan alone. The 
terrible personal tragedies involved cry out for a humane solution. 

2. Denaturalization 

The status of naturalized citizens in the LTnited States is such that 
such persons can never be certain that their citizenship will not be 
taken away from them. In Detroit alone, more than 10 people face 
loss of their citizenship on political grounds. One, George Tacheff, 
a 67-year-old pensioner, had his citizenship taken away and has already 
been arrested for deportation. The new McCairan-Walter law sets 
up even further grounds for denaturalization. There is no room for 
second-class citizenship in our democracy. The lav\' should be changed 


to provide for a reasonable statute of limitations in denaturalization 

3. Police-state fractwes of immigration agents 

Imnii«ration Departnieiit agents have arrested people without war- 
rants, planted eviclence, intimidated elderly men and women, threat- 
ened and cajoled people into becoming informers, and caused people 
to lose their jobs. We enclose a copy of an affidavit which was sent 
to the Attorney General over 2 years ago. No action was taken. 
These re])rehensible practices still coPitinue. I could document many, 
many of them. The provision of the McCarran-Walter law author- 
izing such agents to arrest anyone without warrant runs counter to 
constitutional guarantees and should be repealed. 

(The statement of Marko Kosta submitted by Saul Grossman 

My name is Marko Kosta. I live at the Milner Hotel, Detroit, Mich. On Mon- 
day, April 17, 1950, at about 9 a. m., I was in my room, just getting out of bed, 
when I heard a knock at my door. I went to the door and opened it. There were 
two men at the door. One of them showed me a badge and said they were immi- 
gration officers, and they walked into my room. 

They asked to see my passport, and I told them I had no passport. 

They said : "Well, just get dressed." 

When I was getting dressed they looked around my dressers. They asked me 
many questions. They asked: "You have a Bible?" I said "Sure." They said: 
"But you don't believe in the Bible?" I said, "Sure, in the old country vphere 
I was raised everyone learns the Bible in school." 

As I picked up my private papers, which I keep in my inside pocket, from the 
dresser, I noticed on top was the constitution of the Communist Party. The docu- 
ment was not there before the two officers came into tlie room, and when I saw it 
I threw it at them. I said, "That don't belong to me." They said, "Never mind, 
you just put that in your pocket." So I did. 

They said, "Well, come on, we'll go down and see about your passport and a 
few other things." I went with them in their car to the innnigration office on 
Jefferson. They kept me tliere and questioned me for about 7 hours, until about 
3 o'clock in the afternoon. 

During the course of the questioning there were five or six agents of the depart- 
ment coming in and out, questioning me. An inspector identified to me by the 
name of Gorman said : "Why don't you be a good American and tell all you know 
about these organizations?" I said, "I am a good American." He said, "No, 
you're not." 

Another inspector came and said : "This is the great Marko Kosta. He wants 
to be the martyr of the Communist Party." 

After many, many questions which they kept asking over and over again, they 
gave me two papers to sign. One of them was my statement which I read and 
signed. The other was a paper authorizing the agents of the Immigration Depart- 
ment to search my home, and in which I was asked to give iip my constitutional 
rights. I refused to sign the paper. They kept on insisting I sign it. Finally 
they told me that they could get a search warrant but it would take them a long 
time to do so, so I should make it easier for tliem by signing the paper. They 
finally asked me to sign a statement appearing on the bottom of this document to 
the effect that I read but refused to sign the statement. This I signed. 

During the questioning one of the men — I think it was Williams — appeai'ed to 
be mad at me. He said, "You know, we are going to start a war with Russia in 
2, 3 months. We are going to do it just to knock Russia out of existence. Before 
we do that we will put all you Reds in jail so we won't have any trouble with 
you." I said, "That don't depend on me what you are going to do." He said, 
"Aren't you going to help the United States when we fight Russia?" I said, 
"Sure." He said, "Don't tell me you'll help the United States, you'll help Russia." 

They then took nie downstairs and took my fingerpi'ints. They didn't ask me 
whether I wanted them taken, but just told me they were going to take them, and 
did. They then took me upstairs and started questioning me over again on the 
same points. After I refused to make any further statements they told me to get 
my coat, they were going to take me to tlie county jail. 


On the way downstairs the two immigration men who had come into my room 
that morning stopped, and one of them said : "Marko, you can do a great tiling 
for this Government and country. Because this country depends on men like 

I said, "What do you want me to do?" He said, "Just admit that you are a 
Communist, then we will tell you what to do." 

I said, "What do you want me to do? Do you want me to join the Communist 
Party so I can admit I am a member?" He said, "No, we don't want you to do 
that. If you only admit you are in it, we will find something for .you to do." 
I said, "Well, I won't admit that." He said, "Well, if you don't admit it we will 
put you in jail for 5 years." I said, "That's all right, better men went into jail 
than I. So what's difference if I go in, too?" 

They then took me back upstairs, and one of the two men stayed with me in the 
room. He said, "Marko, you know Williams got yon in a spot, don't you?" I 
said, "Why?" 

He said, "He wanted you to deny you were a Communist so he could be sure to 
put you in jail for 5 years. Why don't you tell me the truth and I will fix it up. 
It will be easier on you. We just want to know if you are or not." I said, "I can't, 
because I ain't." 

They then took me to the county jail, seventh floor. They took my fingerprints 
and one picture. They then took me downstairs, and outside the building they 
again asked me whether I was going to change my mind about being a member 
of the Communist Party. I said I couldn't because I wasn't. 

Makko Kosta. 

Dated : April 26, 1950. 

Commissioner O'Grady. What was the charge against Tacheff 
whose case you mentioned? 

Mr. Grossman. The charge against Tacheff was fraud in connection 
with his citizenship. At the time he became a citizen he alleged that 
he was not previously a member of the Communist Party and concealed 
the fact from the immigration agency. 

One case I think is interesting, it just came to my attention, the case 
of a naturalized citizen, naturalized since 1934, who works for the 
Ford ]\Iotor Car Co. Two immigration agents came to the depart- 
ment in which he worked, had him summoned to the office, and told 
him they had a warrant for his arrest, and asked him to come with 
them, and he did, he actually went with them. Of course, they did 
not have any such warrant for his arrest, they are only enabled to 
arrest noncitizens, they cannot legally arrest a citizen, but this didn't 
stop them from doing that, just taking him down to the Immigration 
Department and "working him over," as we say, for several hours. 

While immigration agents supposedly have jurisdiction over non- 
citizens under this section of the McCarran-Walter law, it is — I don't 
know how to ])l:ice it exactly — all noncitizens were supposed to 
register. I su])pose they are supposed to carry registration cards 
with them show^ing they are noncitizens. But if this section of 
law is in force, I think it will be up to the Government to reform 
the registration laws, so that you can prove you are a citizen. It is 
likely you and I would have a difficult job in proving we were Ameri- 
can citizens before immigration authorities. 

Mr. RosENriELD. What section are you referring to as authorizing 
the arrest of anyone without a warrant { 

Mr. Grossman. It authorizes immigration agents to arrest non- 
citizens without a warrant actually, but there are no limitations on 
who they can arrest; that is to say, what criteria they would use to 
determine who is or is not a United States citizen. 

Commissioner Finucane. Do you remember the section? 


Mr. Grossmax. No, I'm sorry. I looked tliroudi the law several 
times, but I can't recall the section by number. 

Mr. KosENFiELD. You say "arrest any one" — do you mean anyone 
who is an alien ? 

Mr. Grossman. Who is supposedly an alien — I'm sorry — perhaps I 
should make that clear. 

Tliis is a brief statement, and I intend to supplement this statement 
with another I will submit. 

The Chairman. You may send it to us. 

(The statement submitted by Saul Grossman for the Michigan Com- 
mittee for Protection of Foreign-Born supplementing a statement 
originally submitted before the Commission on October 7, 1952, in 
Detroit, Mich., follows :) 

1. Deportations 

A great deal of material has already been submitted to the Commission 
analyzing the deportation sections of tlie McCarran-Walter Act. These sections 
literally deprive noncitizens of all rights of fi-ee speech, bail, due process of 
law, and other constitutional guaranties. One particular point that has been 
overlooked in the material I have seen submitted is in the definition of "advo- 
cates." Section 101 (a) (2) defines it as follows: 

"The term 'advocates' includes, but is not limited to, advises, recommends, 
furthers by overt act, and admits belief in." 

This provision strikes directly at the guaranty of freedom of speech, and 
explicitly imix)ses thouglit control on noncitizens. This is particularly so in 
view of the fact that mere membership in organizations that the Attorney 
General may from time to time place on a subversive list has been held to 
establish guilt by association. 

Instead of just another analysis of the law, I would like to continue itemizing 
what deportation means in human terms. In my oral testimony before the 
Commission, I mentioned the case of Mrs. Monica Itryna, who left for Poland. 
Motlier of seven living children, two of them veterans of World War II, she 
left them and her five grandchildren, a citizen husband, her home, friends, 
and relatives for a country she originally left as a little girl of 11 some 40 
years ago. Why did she leave? Because she was ordered deported for alleged 
meml)ership in the Community Party some 20 years ago. True, she could have 
stayed on for a while longer while clever attorneys searched for loopholes in 
the law which would enable them to drag the case through the courts for another 
year, 2, or even 3. In the meantime, however, she might be tossed into jail 
and held without bail ; she would have to submit to medical and psychiatric 
examinations ; she would have to report on her associates, activities, beliefs, 
friends ; in other words, she might as well be in jail as free under such condi- 
tions. And, in the end, she might still be deported not to Poland, which lan- 
guage she speaks, but to a Fascist country because the Attorney General might 
decide that "in his discretion, (he) concludes that deportation to such country 
would be prejudicial to the interests of the United States" (sec. 243 (a) ). 

Bewildered, uncomprehending, one^ of Mrs. Itryna's sons, a grown man witli 
children of his own. wept luiashame'dly as he told me: "Why do they have to 
deport her? I fought Hitlerism in Europe. Tliis is just as bad." 

Previously mentioned was the case of Louis Ragni, who has two sons who are 
marine veterans of the Korean war. Then tliere is Mrs. Ruth Fabian. The 
last 1.5 years of her life have been spent in and out of hospitals. A mass of 
scar tissue from serious burns, she recently underwent surgery for internal 
cancer. Soon afterward she A'wns arrested for deportation. Periodically she 
returns to the ho.spital for further operations — they have to be scheduled be- 
tween hearings at the Immigration Service. Her daughter speaks proudly of heritage — a descendant of Revolutionary War heroes on lier father's side. 
When younger she would boast that one of her relatives was Buffalo Bill. 

It would appear from the enclosed pamphlet Exile that the Innnigration Service 
delights in harassing eldei'ly women with fnmilies. women who should be honored 
for their contributions to raising the living standards of the American people. 

There are more than 200 men and women who face deportation for their past 
political beliefs at the present time. That number will be greatly increased 
after December 24. The personal tragedies in covmtless American families will 


be a direct result of the inluiruan and backward policies of the American Govern- 

I endorse the proposal made to your Commission that no legal resident of the 
United States should be deported except for false statements made upon entry. 

2. Denaturalization 

Here, again, there has been sufficient said upon this .subject to warrant repeal of 
these sections of the law. Besides making it as easy to take away citizenship as 
it is difficult to secure it, the law makes the denaturalization provisions retro- 
active, a clearly unconstitutional proviso (sec. 340 (i) ). 

Revocation of citizensliip for naturnlize'd citizens should be the same as for 
native-born. There should be no distinction made in their status. 

3. Police-state practices 

In my appearance before the Commission. I made the statement that under 
the McCarran-Walter law even citizens could be arretted by immigration agents 
without warrants. At the time, I coi;Id not give the Commission the section of 
the law which I thought could do this. 

In rereading the law, however, it seems even more dangerous than I had 
previously thought. The .ejection in question reads as follows : 

"Sec. 287. (a) Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regu- 
lations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have the power without 
warrant — 

"(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his 
right to be or to remain in the United States ;" 

You will recall the hue and outcry that the Palmer raids brought forward 
from prominent people thoughout America — "Illegal," ''arrests without war- 
rant," "unconstitutional," etc. In the eyes of the civilized world, this was one 
of the worst blots on our democracy. Thousands of people, citizens and non- 
citizens, were arrested without warrant in illegal raids. 

Under the McCarran-Walter law, however, there can be no charge of illegality. 
It will now be legal to arrest without warrant any persoii. Prove your citi- 
zenship or stay in custody for "interrogation." The noncitizen who has to carry 
an alien registration card is better off than the citizen in this regard. He can 
l)rove his status, but how many people are presently in the habit of carrying 
proof of citizenship with themV The next logical step nnist be to require every 
person to carry on his person, at all times, a passport. This law lays the legal 
basis for mass Palmer-like raids. 

Immigration agents will liecome even more brutalized than they are at pres- 
ent. They are getting the training in treating foreign-born as inferiors that 
the Gestapo got in their treatment of "inferior" Jews and foreigners. This 
brutalization process must be halted or we will face the prospect of the s:ame 
const'iiuences that befell the victims of Hitlerism. 

4. Conclusion 

Forty million people in the United States, the approximate number of foreign- 
born and their immediate families, are condemned under the McCarran-Walter 
law to a separate status, denied the freedom of speech and thought guaranteed 
to all under our Constitution, under threat of deportation, denaturalization, and 
destruction of their families. 

What can the children of foreign-born Americans think of our democracy when 
they see the pall of fear their parents live under? How many of these children 
are warned by their parents not to discuss certain things because "they might get 
into trouble." 

In the eyes of the world, America under the INIcCarran-Walter law must seem 
a strange land. The strongest, greatest nation in the world, proud of its demo- 
cratic traditions, cringing luider the possibility that a 6-year-old girl coming from 
a foreign country might grow up and join a "subversive" organization. Mothei-s 
must be torn from their children, families and homes destroyed to prove how 
democratic a country this really is. In a frenzied attempt to supposedly preserve 
democracy in the United States, democracy itself must be outlawed. 

Let no one thiidi that the INIcCarran- Walter law affects only those who are 
foreign-born. All American history shows that the restriction of noncitizens 
inevitably leads to the assertion of unrestricted power over citizens and that their 
rights are iiidivisil)le. As in ITiKS with the Alien and Sedition Acts, in tlie l.S4(>'s 
with the Know-Nothing movement, and in the l!)2()'s with the Palmer raids, .so 
again today attacks on the rights of noncitizens are the forerunner and a founda- 
tion for attacks on the rights of citizens. 


Let us reaffirm our belief in the democratic traditions of American history. 
A necessary start is the repeal of the McCarran-Walter law. 

The Chairman. This conchides tlie hearings in Detroit. The Com- 
mission will stand adjourned until we resume hearings in Chicago, 
111., at 9 : 30 a. m., October 8, 1952. 

(Whereupon, at 5 : 15 p. m., the Commission was adjourned to re- 
convene at 9 : 30 a. m., October 8, 1952, at Chicago, 111.) 


3 9999 06352 477 9