Skip to main content

Full text of "Hearings"

See other formats


82d  Congress!  „^, 

2d  Session    /  COMMITTEE  PRINT 


HEARINGS 

BEFORE  THE 

PRESIDENT'S  COMMISSION 


ON 


IMMIGRATION  AND  NATURALIZATION 


SEPTEMBER  30,  OCTOBER  1,  2,  6,  7,  8,  9,  10, 
11,  14,  15,  17,  27,  28,  29,  1952 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 
HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 


^o^  Congressl  COMMITTEE   PRINT 

2d  Session    J 


HEARINGS 


BEFORE   THE 


U.S. PRESIDENT'S  COMMISSION 

V 


ON 


IMMIGRATION  AND  NATURALIZATION 


>J.. 


SEPTEMBER  30,  OCTOBER  1,  2,  6,  7,  8,  9,  10, 
11, 14, 15, 17,  27,  28,  29, 195.2 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 


UNITED   STATKS 
GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE 
25356  WASHINGTON   :   1952 


PUBLIC 


/ 


^^ 


PRESIDENTS  COMMISSION  ON  DDIIGRATIOX  AXD  XATL"RALIZ-\TION 

Ptttttp  B.  PESLMA^f,  Chairman 

Eakl  G.  Haesisos,  Fice  Chairman 

Msgr.  JOH^  OGrady 

EeT.  Thaddets  F.  Gnxixso:^ 

Claslxcx  e.  Pickett 

Aj>?.tax  S.  Fisheb 

Tttov  a  >  C.  Fetucaxe 

Haebt  N.  EosEynzu).  fTjrecufire  Director 


REQUEST  FOR  TRANSMITTAL 


HorSE    OF    EZPEZ^HXTATIVES. 

C030HTTEZ  OX  THE  .JUDICIAET. 

Wa^Ungtoru  D.  C ..  ^'  :^:^er  23, 1952. 

Hon.  Pffn.rp  B.  Peeuman.  ^^^ 

Chairman,  President' 8  Commission  Tm^ 
Immigration  and Xaturalizatii 

Executive  Oi^ce.  Washington.  D.  C. 
Deae  ;Mk.  Peroiax  :  I  am  inietmied  that  the  President's  Commis- 
sion on  Immigration  and  ^^xwc-aAizMion  has  held  hearings  in  a 
nmnber  of  cities  and  has«fflected  a  great  deal  of  information  con- 
cerning the  problems  o^^mmigration  and  naturalization. 

Since  the  subject  ofimmigration  and  naturalization  requires  con- 
tinuous congressipiml  study,  it  would  be  very  helpful  if  this  commit- 
tee could  havprf^  transcript  of  your  hearings  available  for  its  study 
and  use.  and/for  distribution  to  the  Members  of  Congress. 

If  this^cord  is  available,  will  you  please  transmit  it  to  me  so  that 
I  ma vj^ able  to  take  the  necessary  steps  in  order  to  have  it  printed 
for  the  use  of  the  committee  and  Congress. 
Sincerely  yours. 

Eaiaxttel  Cei-Ler,  Chairman. 


REPLY  TO  REQUEST 

President's  Commission  on 
Immigration  and  Naturalization, 

ExEcuTr\T]  Office, 
Washington,  Octoler  ^7, 1952. 

Hon.  Emanuel  Celler, 

House  of  Representatives, 

Washington,  D.  C. 

Dear  Congressman  Celler  :  Pursuant  to  the  request  in  your  letter 
of  October  23,  1952,  we  shall  be  happy  to  make  available  to  you  a 
copy  of  the  transcript  of  the  hearings  held  by  this  Commission.  We 
shall  transmit  the  record  to  you  as  soon  as  the  notes  are  transcribed. 

The  Commission  held  30  sessions  of  hearings  in  11  cities  scattered 
across  the  entire  country.  These  hearings  ^yere  scheduled  as  a  means 
of  obtaining  some  appraisal  of  representative  and  responsible  views 
on  this  subject.  The  Commission  was  amazed,  and  pleased,  at  the 
enormous  and  active  interest  of  the  American  people  in  the  subject  of 
immigration  and  naturalization  policy. 

Every  effort  was  made  to  obtain  the  opinions  of  all  people  who 
might  have  something  to  contribute  to  the  Commission's  considera- 
tion. All  shades  of  opinion  and  points  of  views  were  sought  and  heard. 
The  response  was  very  heavy,  and  the  record  will  include  the  testimony 
and  statements  of  some  600  persons  and  organizations. 

This  record,  we  believe,  includes  somia  very  valuable  information,  a 
goodly  proportion  of  which  has  not  hitherto  been  available  in  dis- 
cussions of  immigration  and  naturalization.  It  is  of  great  help  to 
the  Commission  in  performing  its  duties.  We  hope  that  this  material 
will  be  useful  to  your  committee,  to  the  Congress,  and  to  the  country. 
Sincerely  yours, 

Philip  B.  Perlman,  Chairman. 


CONTENTS 


Sessions: 

New  York,  N.  Y.: 

First:  September  30,  1952,  morning  session. 

Second:  September  30,  1952,  evening  session. 

Third:   October  1,  1952,  morning  session. 

Fourth:   October  1,  1952,  evening  session. 
Boston,  Mass.: 

Fifth:   October  2,  1952,  morning  session. 

Sixth:   October  2,  1952,  evening  session. 
Cleveland,  Ohio: 

Seventli:   October  6,  1952,  morning  session. 

Eiglith-   October  6,  1952,  evening  session. 
Detroit,  Mich.: 

Ninth:  October  7,  1952,  morning  session. 

Tenth:   October  7,  1952,  evening  session. 
Chicago,  111.: 

Eleventh:   October  8,  1952,  morning  session. 

Twelfth:   October  8,  1952,  evening  session. 

Thirteenth:   October  9,  1952,  morning  session. 

Fourteenth:  October  9,  1952,  evening  session. 
St.  Paul,  Minn.: 

Fifteenth:   October  10,  1952,  morning  session. 

Sixteenth:   October  10,  1952,  evening  session. 
St.  Louis,  Mo.: 

Seventeenth:  October  11,  1952,  morning  session. 

Eighteenth:   October  11,  1952,  evening  session. 
San  Francisco,  Calif.: 

Nineteenth:   October  14,  1952,  morning  session. 

Twentieth:  October  14,  1952,  evening  session. 
Los  Angeles,  Calif.: 

Twenty-first:   October  15,  1952,  morning  session. 

Twenty-second:  October  15,  1952,  evening  session. 
Atlanta,  Ga.: 

Twentj-third:  October  17,  1952,  morning  session. 

Twenty-fourth:   October  17,  1952,  evening  session. 
Washington,  D.  C: 

Twenty-fiftli:   October  27,  1952,  morning  session. 

Twenty-sixth:   October  27,  1952,  evening  session. 

Twenty-seventh:   October  28,  1952,  morning  session. 

Twenty-eighth:   October  28,  1952,  evening  session. 

Thenty-ninth:   October  29,  1952,  mornings  session. 

Thirtieth:  October  29,  1952,  evening  session. 
Appendix:  Special  studies. 
Indexes: 

Persons  heard  or  who  submitted  statements  by  session  and  order  of  appearance. 
Organizations  re])resented  by  persons  heard  or  by  submitted  statements. 
Persons  heard  or  who  sul:)mitted  statements  by  alphabetical  arrangement 

of  names. 
Subject  matter. 

(Page  numbers  may  be  obtained  from  indexes) 


HEARINGS  BEFORE  THE 

PRESIDENT'S  COMMISSION  ON  IMMIGRATION 

AND  NATURALIZATION 


saturday,  october  11,  1952 

eighteenth  session 

St.  Louis,  Mo. 

The  President's  Commission  on  Immigration  and  Naturalization: 
met  at  1 :  30  p.  m.,  pursuant  to  recess,  in  courtroom  No,  1,  New  Federal 
Building,  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  Hon.  Philip  B.  Perlman,  chairman,, 
presiding. 

Present:  Chairman  Philip  B.  Perlman  and  the  following  Commis- 
sioners :  Msgr.  John  O'Grady,  Mr.  Thomas  G,  Finucane,  Rev.  Thad- 
deiis  F.  Gullixson. 

Also  i^resent :  Mr.  Harry  N.  Rosenfield,  executive  director. 

The  Chairman.  The  Commission  will  come  to  order. 

Is  Mr.  Marvin  Rich  here  ? 

STATEMENT  OF  MARVIN  EICH,  REPRESENTING  TEAMSTERS  AND 
CHAUFFEURS  LOCAL  688  OF  THE  AFL 

Mr.  Rich.  I  am  Marvin  Rich,  1127  Pine,  St.  Louis,  Mo.  I  am  re- 
search analyst  for  the  Teamsters  and  Chauffeurs  Local  688  of  the 
A.  F.  L.,  which  I  am  representing  here. 

I  have  a  statement  I  would  like  to  read. 

The  Chairman.  You  may  do  so. 

Mr.  Rich."  The  question  of  immigration  policy  in  1952  is  inevitably 
linked  in  the  minds  of  many  Americans  with  the  cold  war  which  is 
being  waged  with  international  communism. 

Throughout  the  nineteenth  century  America  won  a  place  in  the 
hearts  of  millions  in  Europe  as  the  refuge  of  the  oppressed,  who  fled 
from  religious,  racial,  and  political  persecution. 

In  the  1920's  primarily  for  ecqnomic  reasons,  we  restricted  immi- 
gration. Since  then  America  has  learned  much  about  the  operation 
of  an  economy  for  full  employment. 

Regulation  of  the  flow  of  immigration  to  suit  the  economic  facts  of 
life  is  wise.  Yet  today  America  is  unnecessarily  risking  good  will  and 
damaging  the  cause  of  democracy  in  the  eyes  of  the  world  by  its  new 
innnigration  policy.  The  introduction  of  factors  such  as  race  and 
religion  into  this  policy  are  particularly  reprehensible. 

The  proposals  that  follow  are  not  our  ideal  proposals.  Rather 
they  are  a  compromise  between  the  most  desirable  and  the  most 
realizable. 

953 


954         CORIMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND   NATURALIZATION 

1.  The  total  number  of  immigrants  allowed  to  enter  the  country  in 
any  one  year  should  be  a  fixed  percentage  of  the  total  population. 
The  use  of  some  arbitrary  figure,  such  as  154,000  cannot  be  defended, 
as  our  population  increases  and  our  economy  expands.  If  a  percent- 
age were  used  there  would  be  at  least  a  rough  approximation  of  im- 
migration with  the  ability  of  our  economy  to  absorb  the  immigrants. 

During  the  period  from  1925  to  1930,  the  ratio  of  immigration  to 
population  was  25  per  10,000.  In  previous  periods  the  ratio  was  much 
higher— going  as  high  as  141  per  10,000  from  1847  to  1854.  That  is 
the  peak  period  for  the  time  we  have  been  keeping  those  figures.  If 
the  present  immigration  quota  of  some  154,000  were  completely  used 
the  ratio  of  immigration  to  population  would  be  about  10  per  10,000 
the  first  year  and  would  gradually  decline. 

2.  The  most  recent  available  census  information  should  be  used  to 
determine  both  the  over-all  quota  and  the  quota  for  each  country. 
This  is  more  realistic  than  using  some  arbitrary  date  (such  as  1920  or 
1950)  which  will  soon  become  obsolescent,  and  saying  the  composition 
of  our  country  ought  to  remain  the  same  as  it  was  at  that  period. 
Using  more  recent  data  would  allow  for  a  gradual  shift  to  meet  chang- 
ing world  conditions. 

3.  If  the  system  of  national  origins,  which  is  not  desira])le  in  that 
it  implies  a  sense  of  self-satisfaction  and  of  superiority  on  our  part, 
is  used  at  all  it  should  be  used  throughout.  There  should  be  no 
deviation  from  the  system  of  national  origins  to  discriminate  against 
Asiatics  who  reside  in  other  parts  of  the  world.  This  portion  of  the 
McCarran-Walter  Immigration  Act  is  sheer  racism  which  cannot  be 
defended  before  science,  our  own  ideals,  or  the  people  of  tlie  world. 
It  is  not  only  arrogant.  It  is  stupid.  We  cannot  aiford  to  accept  the 
conce])t  of  "inferior  races." 

4.  Unused  quotas  should  be  pooled  and  used  the  following  year. 
This  would  allow  a  certain  flexibility  for  difi'erential  economic  condi- 
tions throughout  the  world  and  would  not  impair  our  economy  in  any 
Avay,  if  the  first  proposal  I  mentioned  was  adopted,  since  the  total 
number  of  immigrants  would  not  exceed  the  ratio  determined  in  ad- 
vance as  sound. 

5.  Colonies  should  be  allowed  to  use  the  quota  of  the  proprietor 
country.  It  appears  that  tlie  only  purpose  in  establishing  separate 
quotas  for  colonies  was  to  cut  off  the  predominantly  Negro  immigra- 
tion from  the  West  Indies.  This  serves  no  useful  purpose  in  terms 
of  our  economy  and  hurts  us  in  our  international  relations — not  only 
with  the  peoples  of  tlie  Caribbean  but  also  with  the  rest  of  the  darker- 
skinned  peoples  of  the  workl. 

6.  There  should  be  a  time  limit  on  the  deportability  of  aliens.  We 
cannot  take  exception  with  the  liuiit  of  5  years  set  in  the  previous 
statute.  In  periods  of  economic  stress  many  aliens  who  have  had  a 
long  history  of  economic  responsibility  may  become  public  charges. 
It  does  not  seem  just  to  make  such  people  return  to  their  native  land 
for  conditions  over  which  they  have  relatively  little  control. 

7.  The  provisions  of  the  new  Imniigradon  Act  allowing  all  im- 
migrants to  become  citizens  are  desirable.  In  our  country  there  should 
not  be  any  least  favored  who  are  deemed  to  be  unfit  for  citizenship. 

Asiatic  immigration  deserves  much  more  consideration  than  it  has 
been  given  in  the  past.     The  greatest  failure  of  xVmerica  to  win  friends 


COMMISSION  ()\   i.\imk;hati()x  and  naturalization       955 

lias  probaljly  been  in  f  lie  ( )ii(Mit.  Tlu'  proliibit  ions  respecting  oriental 
immigration  were  used  as  propauanJa  by  the  Jai)anese  militarists 
in  buildino-  up  hatred  for  America  in  the  generation  before  World 
War  II.     That  })roi)aganda  is  now  being  continued  by  Soviet  Russia. 

In  sununation,  we  urge  consideration  of  a  policy  of  immigration 
that  discards  all  factors  exce])t  the  economic  repercussions  which  may 
result.  People  should  be  considered  as  individuals.  We  should  not 
judge  the  prospective  American  citizen  born  abroad  on  the  basis  of  the 
color  of  his  skin,  or  eyes,  or  hair,  or  of  his  religion.  We  sliould  con- 
sider only  the  contribution  he  can  make  to  America. 

Mr.  KosKXFiELD.  Ml-.  Rich,  one  of  tlie  statements  made  frequently 
in  comiection  with  discussions  of  innnigration  relates  to  tlie  com- 
petitive nature  between  new  immigrants  and  people  already  here  who 
are  in  the  labor  market.     Would  you  have  any  connnents  on  thati? 

Mr.  Rich.  Yes;  a  conple  of  things.  I  think  real  wages  in  the  last 
generation  or  more  have  increased  from  about  25  to  35  percent.  It 
is  true  that  our  innnigration  has  been  greatly  restricted  during  this 
period.  Nonetheless,  it  has  been  large,  at  least  during  the  early  })art. 
We  have  managed  to  do  a  job.  Population  and  even  a  large  labor 
force  does  not  necessai'ily  mean  a  loss  in  real  wages.  It  is  the  initiative 
we  have,  our  ability  to  utilize  that  labor  force,  which  is  important. 

I  think  this  is  the  {position  of  our  union :  that  immigration  does 
not  in  and  of  itself  adversely  affect  the  work.  The  problem  is.  What 
can  the  economy  do  to  absorb  and  utilize  that  innnigration?  It  is 
a  different  question. 

The  Chairman.  Do  your  peo|)le  have  seniority  rights  that  couldn't 
be  disturbed  by  any  new  labor? 

Mr.  Rich.  That  is  true,  and  as  the  new  immigrant  comes  in  lie 
would  be  part  of  that  seniority  system  in  his  shop. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Is  Mrs.  E.  V.  Cowdry  here  ? 

STATEMENT  OF  MKS.  E.  V.  COWDRY,  REPRESENTING  THE  ST. 
LOUIS  YOUNG  WOMEN'S  CHRISTIAN  ASSOCIATION  AND  THE 
YOUNG  WOMEN'S  CHRISTIAN  ASSOCIATION  PUBLIC  AFFAIRS 
COMMITTEE  OF  MISSOURI 

Mrs.  CowDRY.  I  am  ]\[rs.  E.  V.  Cowdry,  1411  Locust  Street,  St. 
Louis.  1  am  representing  the  St.  Louis  Young  Women's  Christian 
Association,  of  wliose  i)ublic  affairs  connnittee  I  am  a  member,  and 
the  Young  Women's  Christian  Association  public-affairs  committee 
of  Missouri,  of  whicli  I  am  chairman. 

I  have  a  prepared  statement  I  should  like  to  read. 

The  Chairman.  You  may  do  so. 

Mrs.  CowDRY.  The  Young  Women's  Christian  Association  of  the 
United  States,  by  vote  of  its  1952  national  convention  which  was  com- 
posed of  delegates  from  St.  Louis  and  ')()7  other  conununities,  adopted 
a  public-affairs  program  which  included  the  following  statement : 

We  continue  to  sni)poit  an  inuiiiiiration  policy  which  is  based  not  only  on  our 
own  needs  as  ;i  nation  liiit  npoii  human  welfare,  and  also  to  work  foi-  free  immi- 
gration and  naturalization  laws  that  ai'e  free  fr(Hii  racial  discrimination. 


25:-!56-.'J2 61 


956  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

As  a  world-wide,  as  well  as  a  national  and  local,  organization  the 
YWCA  is  greatly  concerned  with  the  problems  of  refugees — especially 
women  and  children — in  those  countries  which  are  suffering  from  over- 
population caused  by  war  and  by  changing  of  national  boundaries. 
The  World's  YWCA  Council,  meeting  in  Lebanon  in  October  of  last 
year,  decided  that  the  work  with  refugees,  started  as  emergency  work, 
should  become  part  of  the  regular  program.  Inevitably  this  means 
that  the  YWCA  members,  especially  young  adults,  in  many  countries 
will  be  increasingly  aware  of  the  problems  and  needs  of  women  and 
girls  in  countries  like  Germany,  Austria,  Lebanon,  Korea,  and  India 
where  there  are  thousands  of  homeless  persons.  A  most  important 
need,  in  addition  to  adequate  shelter,  food,  and  so  forth,  is  confidence 
on  the  part  of  other  members  of  the  World's  YWCA  in  the  American 
association  just  as  the  world  needs  to  have  confidence  in  the  United 
States.  Immigration  and  naturalization  laws  which  eliminate  exist- 
ing racial  discrimination  and  provide  for  the  pooling  of  unused  quotas 
would  do  much  toward  strengthening  this  confidence. 

My  husband  and  I  were  in  India  this  year  where  he  was  making  a 
survey  of  cancer  research  for  the  Indian  Government.  We  saw  liter- 
ally hundreds  of  thousands  of  refugees  in  Karachi  and  in  the  large 
cities  of  India  and  realized  in  part  the  problems  of  such  masses  of 
people  in  distress.  We  read  accounts  of  instances  of  racial  discrimi- 
nation in  the  LTnited  States  which  were  headlined  by  many  of  the 
Indian  newspapers. 

The  Communists  and  intense  Xationalists  never  lost  an  opportunity 
to  point  out  that  we,  in  the  States  talk  democracy  and  practice 
discrimination. 

Incidentally,  in  Bombay,  I  worked  several  days  a  week  in  the 
women's  rehabilitation  depot — a  shop  run  by  Indians,  under  Govern- 
ment sponsorship,  which  sold  articles  made  by  refugees  and  destitute 
women  and  girls  in  the  refugee  camps. 

We  saw  the  grain  for  India  program  the  point  4  program,  the 
Technological  Cooperation  Administration,  the  technical  assistance 
program  of  the  U.  N. — all  of  which,  in  limited  degrees,  demonstrate 
the  concern  of  the  American  people  for  helping  other  countries  help 
themselves.  Changes  which  would  liberalize  our  immigration  policies 
are  another  needed  step  toward  building  confidence  in  us. 

Although  for  many  years  the  YWCA  has  worked  to  secure  equal 
treatment  for  all  people,  it  is  becoming  more  and  more  aware  of  this 
responsibility  through  contacts  with  students  and  other  visitors  ob- 
serving American  life  and  with  populations  of  other  countries  visited 
by  American  members.  That  is  why,  even  here  in  St.  Louis,  though 
somew^hat  more  removed  from  first-hand  contact  with  numbers  of  new 
immigrants,  we,  in  the  YWCA  have  some  understanding  of  the  ten- 
sions and  fears  of  those  who  live  nearer  the  east,  west,  and  southern 
coasts. 

We  appreciate  this  opportunity  to  express  our  strong  conviction 
that  we  need  in  this  country  an  immigration  policy  based  not  only 
upon  our  own  needs  but  upon  human  welfare:  and  immigration  and 
naturalization  laws  free  from  racial  discrimination. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Our  next  witness  will  be  Mr.  Nicholas  Potje. 


COMMISSION    OX    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         957 

STATEMENT  OF  NICHOLAS  POTJE,  REPRESENTING  THE  AMERICAN 
AID  SOCIETY  OF  ST.  LOUIS 

Mi-.  Pot.tk.  T  am  Nicholas  Potje.  8147  Merrimac,  St.  Louis,  Mo.  I 
}e))rosent  the  American  Aid  Society  of  St,  Louis. 

1  would  like  to  make  a  few  observations  based  on  my  experience  in 
(he  refu^xee  field  with  the  American  Aid  Society. 

My  idea  is  this :  Let  a  certain  amount  come  over.  Li  other  words,  a 
certain  amount  of  people  in  Germany,  Austria,  or  whatever  it  is  and 
whoever  Avants  to  come  over,  let  them  come  over;  that  is,  those  w4io  are 
willing::  to  work.  In  other  words,  we  cannot  set  a  quota  of  150,000. 
iMaybe  you  have  160,000  who  like  to  come  over  to  this  country,  and 
why  let  the  10,000  sta}^  over  there  who  would  like  to  come  over  here? 
In  other  vroi-ds,  if  vou  have  room  for  150,000  you  should  have  room 
for  100,000. 

A  lot  of  people  are  driven  away  from  their  homes.  People  born 
and  raised  in  some  of  those  countries  were  hard  workers  and  in  their 
ways  of  living,  and  all  of  a  sudden  were  driven  away  from  their  homes. 
Xobody  wanted  tliem  and  they  were  put  in  a  country  where  nobody 
)nuch  cared  for  them.  If  they  still  have  that  much  courage  after 
having  l)een  down  and  out  on  their  feet  altogether  and  still  have  hopes 
to  come  back  on  their  feet  and  there  is  a  chance  for  us  to  help  those 
people  and  we  can  do  charity  to  those  people,  I  think  we  should  help 
them  regardless  of  whether  it  is  150,000  or  160,000,  I  wouldn't  slight 
the  10,000  or  15,000  people.  Why  set  a  quota  at  a  certain  amount  and 
leave  the  other  ones  over  there?  It's  just  those  types  of  people  with 
strength  and  Avill  who  w^^nt  to  go,  after  losing  everything,  to  different 
parts  of  the  world,  to  get  up  on  their  feet  and  come  back  to  it.  Re- 
gardless of  what  color  or  what  they  are  I  think  those  shoidd  be  given 
a  chance  to  come  over  and  to  make  their  home  up  here  again. 

It  is  just  like  when  this  country  had,  say,  about  50,000  or  60,000 
inhabitants.  This  country  wasn't  built  only  on  those  50,000,  There 
is  always  more  and  more  added  to  make  this  country  strong.  There 
is  ahvays  more  workers  and  they  develop  more.  That  is  like  if  you 
have  a  front  and  if  you  don't  reinforce  that  front  naturally  you 
get  w^eak.  I  think  if  we  help  those  people  over  there  who  need  help — 
I  think  we  should  do  something  and  help  those  people,  give  them  an- 
other chance  and  bring  them  back  to  this  country  so  they  can  start  up 
again  and  be  hap])y  and  successful  just  like  they  have  been  over  there. 
Quite  a  few  are  in  Germany  and  some  in  Austria  and  some  in  Italy. 
I  don't  know-  much  about  the  eastern  part  or  what  is  going  on  up  there. 

In  the  last  7  or  8  years  when  this  American  Aid  Society  and  these 
DP's  and  refugees  came  I  have  been  working  with  them  right  along, 
and  I  have  seen  what  took  place,  I  think  w^e  should  help  all  those 
who  need  help  at  the  present  time, 

Mr.  RosENFTELD.  How  many  DP's  and/or  expellees  did  you  settle, 
sir? 

Mr.  P()T,7E.  I  wouldn't  know,  sir.  You  see,  you  set  a  quota  for 
150,000  and  suppose  there  are  160,000  like  to  come  over.  I  think  the 
Government  has  got  a  quota  number  of  people  over  there.  Thousands 
over  theie  would  like  to  come  over.  I  would  like  all  to  come  over  who 
are  willing  to  come  over  here. 

The  CiiATRMAN.  That  might  be  a  million  people. 

Mr,  PoTJE,  Yes,  it  is  true. 


958  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

The  Chairman.  Or  two  million  people. 

Mr.  PoTJE.  That  is  true,  but  there  is  not  a  million  refugees  over 
there  I  don't  think,  sir. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  You  mean  refugees. 

Mr.  PoTjE.  Yes,  that  is  what  I  am  talking  about;  those  driven  away 
from  their  homes. 

The  Chairman.  It  is  more  than  that  if  you  take  the  actual  number 
of  displaced  persons  and  refugees  and  expellees  and  escapees.  It 
would  run  into  several  million. 

Mr.  PoTJE.  That  is  true.  I  grant  you  that,  but  not  all  want  to 
come  over.  Well,  say  a  certain  amount  of  quota,  whatever  the  Gov- 
ernment sees  fit  to  come  over  and  just  give  them  a  chance  to  come  over. 

The  Chairman.  Then  you  coukln't  take  tliem  all. 

Mr.  PoTjE.  No,  I  guess  not.  Then,  for  instance,  if  a  farmer  comes 
over,  let  him  be  a  farmer  and  stay  on  the  farm,  you  see,  and  then  the 
farmer  should  pay  a  certain  amount  of  his  salary  and  he  should  not  go 
to  the  farm  and  come  back  to  the  city.  If  they  volunteer  to  go  to  the 
farm  they  should  stay  there  for  a  year  or  so  and  those  coming  to  the 
city  should  stay  in  the  city. 

i  think  that  is  just  al)out  all  I  can  say. 

Tlie  Chairman.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Mr.  W.  A.  Peter,  representing  the  German-American  Societies  for 
Omaha,  Nebr.,  was  scheduled  to  be  here  but  ]\Ir.  Kosentield  has  received 
a  message  from  him. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Mr.  Peter  of  Omaha  has  notified  us  he  was  unable 
to  get  a  plane.  He  says  he  will  try  to  appear  at  the  Washington  hear- 
ings and  will  write  to  the  Commission  regarding  the  exact  time. 

Tlie  Chairman.  Is  Dr.  Homer  C.  Bishop  here  ? 

STATEMENT  OF  HOMEE  C.  BISHOP,  REPRESENTING  THE  ST.  LOUIS 
CHAPTER  OF  THE  AMERICAN  ASSOCIATION  OF  SOCIAL  WORKERS 

Dr.  Bishop.  I  am  Homer  C.  Bishop,  8913  Madge  Avenue,  Brent- 
wood, Mo.  I  am  associate  professor  of  social  work  at  the  George 
Warren  Brown  School  of  Social  Work  of  Washing-ton  University. 

I  am  appearing  here  in  behalf  of  the  St.  Louis  cha]Her  of  the 
American  Association  of  Social  Workers. 

I  have  a  statement  I  would  like  to  read. 

The  Chairman.  You  may  do  so. 

Mr.  Bishop.  It  should  be  made  clear  at  the  outset  that  we  are  not 
experts  in  the  analysis  of  legislation  nor  in  the  administration  of  im- 
migration policies.  Even  if  we  were,  I  suspect  the  very  length  and 
complexity  of  Public  Law  414  would  tend  to  humble  us  in  any  attempt 
to  discuss  it  before  the  public.  However,  a  review  of  the  major  as- 
pects of  the  act  "brings  us  up  short''  and,  whether  as  citizens  or  social 
workers  or  both,  directs  our  attention  to  a  consideration  of  some  of  our 
basic  beliefs. 

We  would  like,  therefore,  in  this  statement  to  propose  some  princi- 
ples to  be  considered  either  in  evaluating  existing  legislation  or  draft- 
ing new  laws  to  regulate  immigration  and  naturalization.  In  doing 
this  we  will  be  on  sounder  ground  than  if  we  attempted  any  direct  as- 
sessment of  Public  Law  414.  We  recognize  that  considerations  of 
immigration  policy  must  keep  one  eye  on  our  Nation's  ability  to  absorb 


COMMISSION    OX    IMMIGKATION    AND    NATUKALIZATION  959 

newcomers.  We  do  believe,  however,  tliut  the  other  must  be  kept  on 
conditions  ])revailing  in  those  parts  of  the  world  from  wiiich  peo[)le 
wish  to  emijrrate.  ()ur  ability  to  absorb  is  not  fixed  or  absolute  in 
extent.  Our  recent  history  as  a  nation — in  fact,  all  of  our  history — is 
a  parade  of  events  in  which  we  rose  and  successfully  met  challen<res 
that  the  moie  timid  among  us  said  we  could  not  do.  In  1952  and  in 
1955  and  19(50  we  must  consider  honestly  the  pli^j^ht  of  the  "'wretched 
refuse"'  and  the  "homeless  tempest-tossed"  abounding  in  our  world 
before  we  decide  how  many  we  can  absorb. 

There  is  one  other  general  observation  I  would  like  to  make.  The 
profession  of  social  work  and  the  American  concept  of  social  welfare 
are  based  on  firm  belief  in  the  individuaPs  ability  to  grow  in  his  capac- 
ity to  deal  with  life's  problems.  He  cannot  be  condenmed  forever  be- 
cause of  a  mistake,  a  misfortune,  or  a  bad  judgment.  The  crippled 
and  maimed  have  become  self-supporting,  the  delinquent  have  become 
reliable  citizens,  the  unemployed  have  taken  their  places  in  the  ranks 
of  the  workers,  and  the  aged  have  found  new  hope  and  usefulness. 
Xot  all  of  them  to  be  sure.  But  in  sufficient  numbers  that  we  can  never 
again  write  them  oil  as  millstones  around  our  necks  or  spare  any  effort 
to  share  and  help  them  with  their  burden.  We  believe  that  any 
measures  which  lead  to  harsh  and  arbitrary  prejudgment  of  people  de- 
siring to  take  their  place  in  our  midst  violate  not  only  American  stand- 
ards of  fair  play  but  ignore  what  we  know  about  man. 

Now  to  be  a  little  more  specific.  Any  legislation  which  reflects  in 
any  way  the  now  completely  discredited  ideas  of  racial  superiorities 
and  inferiorities  is  out  of  place  in  today's  scene.  Measures  which 
either  directly  or  ultimately  are  discriminatory  or  preferential  belie 
our  position  in  the  world  of  freedom  and  freedom  of  ideas.  Whatever 
the  rate  of  immigration,  it  must  be  applied  with  equity  to  all  men  with- 
out regard  for  race  or  national  origin. 

We  believe  that  an  individual's  eligibility  for  admission  to  the 
United  States  should  not  be  jeopardized  by  an  act  of  his  government  or 
of  other  citizens  of  his  native  land.  Whatever  the  criteria  to  be  used 
in  selection — and  there  must  be  some — each  person  must  be  judged  on 
his  own  merits  and  not  of  his  countrymen. 

We  are  firmly  opposed  to  any  measures  which  make  retroactive  new 
grounds  for  deportation.  Ex  post  facto  laws  are  appearing  at  more 
points  than  deportation  and  naturalization.  We  must  not  threaten 
the  future  and  the  security  of  those  who  emigrate  to  our  shores  by 
forcing  them  to  live  under  a  cloud  of  anxiet}^  that  some  past  act  wall 
suddenly  become  a  cause  for  deportation. 

There  are  other  as])ects  of  our  legal  system  that  ought  not  be  vio- 
lated in  our  dealings  with  immigrants,  aliens,  and  naturalized  citi- 
zens: Fair  hearings  in  which  all  parties  may  be  represented  by  com- 
petent coiuisel.  may  cross-examine  witnesses,  nniy  present  witnesses, 
and  may  know  exactly  what  are  the  charges  and  the  evidence  against 
them :  judicial  review  in  which  both  administrator  and  applicants  may 
have  the  protection  of  impartial  and  open  consideration  of  adminis- 
trative decision :  and  adherence  to  the  concept  of  due  process.  This 
keystone  of  our  individual  liberties  is  as  essential  for  one  man  as  for 
another  if  it  is  to  have  value  foi-  any.  We  do  not  profess  to  be  lawyers, 
but  we  have  come  to  realize  that  in  some  Avay  these  conce])ts  lie  close 
to  the  heait  of  the  Amei-ican  wavof  life.     Without  tliem  wc  have  little 


960  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

to  offer  the  free  world.  We  cannot  set  tlieni  aside  in  onr  dealings  with 
a  few  men  without  risking  their  loss  to  all  men. 

And  similarly  we  suggest  that  legislation  pertaining  to  immigration 
and  naturalization  must  reflect  our  long-standing  belief  in  the  free- 
dom of  thought,  discussion,  and  assembly.  It  must  take  in  account 
realistic  dangers  due  to  subversives,  but  it  cannot  move  us  closer  to 
those  totalitarian  methods  which  we  claim  to  abhor.  There  is  a  far- 
reaching  difference  between  ''one  who  is  proved  to  be"  and  "one  who  is 
thought  to  be."  The  law  must  not  make  possible  summary  action  by 
any  official. 

As  social  workers,  we  have  a  special  concern.  Inmiigration  measures 
should  be  designed  so  as  to  facilitate  keeping  families  together.  We 
know  from  our  daily  work  the  essential  worth  of  family  life.  We  also 
know  of  the  heartaches  resulting  from  families  torn  apart  by  what 
seem  sometimes  to  be  the  vagaries  of  innnigration  laws.  Our  social 
scientists  have  sketched  the  prime  value  of  a  satisfactory  family  ex- 
perience as  preparation  for  participation  in  the  American  democratic 
system.  This  preparation  should  not  be  denied  those  who  are  other- 
wise eligible  to  migrate  to  this  country. 

In  conclusion,  it  seems  to  us  that  immigration  and  n.duralization 
laws  and  policies  ought  to  be  the  following : 

1.  An  aid  rather  than  a  barrier  to  a  reasonable  flow  of  people  to 
our  shores  and  to  our  fellowship  in  democracy. 

2.  An  embodiment  of  our  convictions  about  human  rights,  civil 
liberties,  and  legal  processes  that  implement  our  l^elief  in  the  worth  of 
the  individual. 

3.  An  intelligent  and  compassionate  use  of  the  admissible  number 
of  immigrants  recognizing  the  plight  of  the  troubled  peoples  of  the 
Avorld  and  the  tremendous  responsibility  for  leadership  that  has  been 
thrust  upon  us. 

Thank  you  for  providing  this  opportunity  for  our  Association  to 
appear  before  you  and  present  our  vieAvs  and  our  beliefs. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Professor  Bishop,  in  your  statement  you  say : 
"Whatever  the  rate  of  immigration,  it  must  be  applied  with  equity 
to  all  men  without  regard  for  race  or  national  origin.''  Do  you  present 
that  to  the  Commission  in  terms  of  your  professional  knowledge  and 
background  as  to  the  ready  absorption  of  all  peoples  of  all  national 
origins  into  the  United  States?  In  other  words,  can  people  of  all 
races  or  national  origins  be  absorbed  in  the  United  States  from  your 
knowledge  of  people  ? 

Dr.  Bishop.  All  races  would  not  ])e  accepted  and  absorbed  in  the 
same  way  with  the  same  willingness  and  at  the  same  rate.  I  am  quite 
sure  of  that.  But  I  think  we  ought  to  strive  to  set  up  our  legislation 
in  such  a  way  that  we  make  it  possible ;  that  w^e  do  not  freeze  into  the 
system  elements  which  existed  20  or  5  years  ago  or  may  exist  today. 

Mr.  RosExriELD.  Are  you  saying  that  some  people  can  assimilate 
more  easily  in  the  United  States  than  others  ? 

Dr.  Bishop.  I  think  that  my  hunch  would  be  that  it  is  because  of 
the  situation  in  the  United  States,  and  not  because  of  any  inherent 
differences  in  these  various  immigrants. 

The  Chairman.  Let's  assume  for  the  purpose  of  the  question  that 
from  a  scientific  viewpoint  there  are  no  real  differences  in  race.  Is  it 
to  the  best  interest  of  the  United  States  to  admit  everybody  on  that 
basis? 


COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         961 

Dr.  Bishop.  I  Avould  say  in  tonus  of  our  responsibility  now  as  a 
world  leader  aud  the  kiud  of  nation  \ve  are  ji^oino;  to  have  to  be  if 
we  aie  going  to  have  anything  near  like  the  world  we  want,  w'e  will 
have  to  admit  them  on  that  basis  and  work  out  the  problems  of  adjust- 
ments as  they  come.  I  don't  think  that  is  the  critical  problem,  helping 
them  to  adjust.  I  think  we  luive  got  to  think  in  terms  of  the  w-elfare 
of  the  workl  now  and  not  just  how  are  we  going  to  get  along  here 
between  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific  Oceans.  That  day  is  gone  and  if  we 
thin.k  in  terms  of  the  world-wide  welfare,  then  we  will  of  necessity 
come  out  with  a  dilferent  answer  about  who  can  adjust  and  who  can 
adjust  to  what  and  how  much  can  we  absorb. 

■    Connnissioner  Fixucane.  But  you  agree,  don't  you,  that  the  people 
admitted  into  our  country  should  be  integrated? 

Dr.  Bishop.  That  raises  two  questions.  One,  What  is  the  rate  of 
immigration?  AVe  recognize  there  has  to  be  some  control  of  that 
and  I  think  we  have  the  techniques  for  determining  how  that  might 
be  arrived  at.  Not  many  years  ago  we  had  a  serious  problem  in  deter- 
mining policy  Avith  regard  to  atomic  energy  and  some  of  our  American 
citizens  were  gathered  together  and  they  did  a  tremendous  job  in 
arriving  at  a  policy.  I  think  we  could  apply  the  same  technique 
to  inmiigration  and  use  facts  and  scientific  truths  in  arriving  at  it 
rather  than  the  free  play  of  political  forces. 

Secondly,  you  have  got  to  help  them  adjust.  We  have  been  doing 
that  for  150  years.  Part  of  my  work  has  been  in  the  lower  north  side 
district  of  Chicago. 

But  immigration  should  not  be  determined  on  the  basis  of  other 
problems  we  have.  It  should  be  determined  on  policy  with  its  own 
merits. 

Commissioner  Gullixsox.  Dr.  Bishop  do  you  think  that  our  rela- 
tionship in  the  world  problems  of  today  is  so  acute  and  so  important 
that  it  might  be  advisable  to  set  up  a  mticli  smaller  over-all  number 
for  admissions  in  order  to  be  comj)letely  equitable  toward  all  the 
peoples  of  the  earth  ? 

Dr.  Bishop.  I  deal  daily  with  students  from  many  foreign  lands; 
Germany,  India,  Israel,  Belgium,  and  South  America.  This  kind 
of  situation,  how  we  act  toward  them,  rankles.  It  takes  considerable 
time  to  work  through  that  and  to  get  them  to  ttnderstand  a  little 
bit  about  the  situation  so  they  are  free  to  talk  with  me  and  listen 
in  our  classes  freely  and  openly.  I  wouldn't  want  to  answer  your 
question  '*Yes''  if  it  was  to  be  interpreted  that  I  said  we  should  have 
smaller  (juotas.  If  that  is  the  oi,ily  way  we  can  have  fair  quotas, 
then  maybe  we  should  have  smaller  ones,  but  I  want  everything  else 
I  said  about  looking  at  the  world's  ]n"oblems  and  seeing  what  is  our 
fair  share  taken  into  that  account.  We  make  that  kind  of  decision 
personally  every  day  of  our  lives.  The  community  chest  wants  us 
to  make  a  contribution.  The  question  is.  How  much  should  I  give? 
Who  can  I  turn  to  to  ask  how  much  I  should  give^  It  is  my  con- 
science who  tells  me.  If  it  is  quite  bad  I  am  likely  to  give  $5  more. 
There  is  no  formula.     I  have  looked  for  one.     It  just  isn't  there. 

That  is  somewhat  our  position  now.  How  do  we  share  this  ])rob- 
lem?  And  for  a  direct  answtn-:  If  that  is  the  only  way  we  can  get 
a  fair  share  then  make  them  snmller.  I  would  not  like  to  see  them 
smaller. 


962  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGHATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

Mr.  KosKNFiKM).  As  ]  undorstinul,  niv  you  as  a  teachei"  of  social 
Moi'kers  sayiii<j^  (o  the  Commission  that  the  facts  of  life  are,  that 
some  o-i-oiips  ^vill  he  assimilated  more  (|uickly  than  others,  but  in  the 
ovei--all  i)icture  you,  as  a  social  woi'ker,  are  not  concerned  that  they 
want  to  make  the  ultimate  adjustment  to  the  Amei'ican  scene  ^ 

Dr.  Bishop.  That  is  correct,  as  1  understand  your  (juestioii. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  think  the  ])i'oblem  of  assimilation  is  not  a 
vital  problem  in  the  Ion*!;  run  ^ 

Dr.  IJisHoi'.  Not  in  tlie  least. 

I  was  thiidvino-  us  J  «»;ot  ready  to  come  here  about  some  of  my  own 
hackiiround.  I  can  remember  the  boys  I  j^layed  football  with  in  high 
school  and  the  boys  1  was  on  the  swinnning  team  with.  There  were 
Japanese,  Jewish,  l^olish,  Ne^'roes,  (liermans,  and  so  forth,  and  they, 
so  far  as  I  know,  are  all  fine  citizens  today.  Some  of  them  had 
hiirder  times  than  others. 

The  Chairman.  What  town  was  that? 

Dr.  Iksiior.  Kenosha,  Wis.  It  is  a  small  industrial  city  just  above 
Chica<2:o.  A  ]ar<:^e  ])ercentao:e  of  the  foreign  population  was  engaged 
in  the  industries.  We  grew  up  together.  We  knew  it  wasn't  as  easy 
for  some  as  foi"  othei's. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  thiid<:  a  system  ol'  admission  of  innnigra- 
tion  should  contain  the  factor  of  race  ^ 

Dr.  Bishop.  I  would  not  make  the  fact  of  i-ace  a  factor  in  admitting 
or  refusing  to  admit  any  liuman  being. 

Connnissioner  OXirady.  How  about  nationality? 

Dr.  Bi8H(U'.  If  nationality  is  necessary  in  order  to  have  some  kind 
of  regulation,  then  we  may  have  to  go  along  with  it  ])r()vided  you 
stick  to  nationality  and  not  use  it  to  play  around  to  get  the  kind  of 
selection  you  want,  because  sometimes  by  controlling  nationality  you 
control  lacial  elements.  Sometimes  \'ou  don't.  To  say  that  a  man 
is  born  in  England  who  has  a  Chinese  mother  nuist  come  under  the 
Chinese  quota  is  not  a  national  quota :  it  is  a  racial  kind  of  quota. 
I  would  be  quite  content  to  have  him  come  on  the  Knglish  quota  if 
he  is  an  English  citizen. 

'i'he  Chaihivian.  What  do  you  think  of  the  situation  m  heiv  a  quota 
is  quite  iviiularly  unused,  as  in  the  case  of  England  ''. 

Dr.  Bishop.  I  (liink  that  is  very  unfair.  1  am  not  willing  to  go  on 
and  say  that  it  was  set  U])  that  way  because  of  somebody's  prejudice, 
but  it  is  unfair  whatever  the  reason.     In  October  1952  it  is  unfair. 

Mr.  KosENFiELi).  What  would  you  propose  as  a  method  for  using 
these  unused  quotas? 

Dr.  Bishop.  Well,  just  off  the  lop  of  my  head,  T  would  think  that 
there  oug'it  to  be  enough  ilexibility  that  some  oHicially  designated 
group  could  take  that  and  use  it  in  this  way  1  suggested;  an  intelli- 
gent, comj)assionate  way  to  share  the  burdens  of  the  world  and  not  be 
harnessed  to  a  law  that  does  not  allow  them  that  ilexibility. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you,  sir. 

IsMr.  Paul  B.Eava  here? 


COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         963 

STATEMENT  OF  PAUL  B.  RAVA,  REPRESENTING  THE  ITALIAN 
CLUB,  THE  COLUMBIAN  SOCIETY,  AND  THE  ITALIAN  WAR  VET- 
ERANS OF  ST.  LOUIS,  MO. 

My.  Kava.  I  am  I'aul  1>.  Ka\a,  an  attorney,  705  Olive  Street,  St, 
Loui.s,  Mo. 

I  represent  the  Italiuii  (Jlub,  the  Coliinibitin  Society,  and  the  Italian 
War  Veterans  of  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

I  have  i  l)rief  statement  whicli,  with  your  permission,  Dr.  Homer 
C.  Bishop  will  i-ead  foi'  me,  owin^'^  (o  diliicnlty  1  am  havin<r  with  my 
voice. 

The  CiiAii.'MAN.   We  will  he  pleased  to  hear  it. 

Afr.  Kav.\  (as  read  by  Dr.  Homer  C.  Bishop).  I  am  a  member  of 
the  Missouri  bar,  admitted  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  Unitetl 
States  and  before  the  Board  of  Immi<j:ration  A])peals.  My  statement 
is  made  on  behalf  of  the  Italian  Club,  of  the  Italian  War  Veterans, 
and  of  the  Columbian  Society,  which  is  an  association  of  sixteen  civic 
and  fraternal  societies  of  St.  Louis. 

It  is  my  privilege  to  i-epresent  before  this  honorable  Commission 
the  point  of  view  of  this  large  group  of  American  citizens  of  Italian 
origin  or  extraction  concerning  our  immigration  laws. 

We  shall  consider  this  complex  problem  in  a  spirit  of  objectivity 
and  fairness,  in  full  confidence  in  the  principles  of  morality  and 
justice  Avhich  have  motivated  the  basic  policies  of  our  country  of 
ado])tion. 

From  the  Declaration  of  Independence  to  the  Atlantic  Charter  and 
to  the  United  Nations,  equality  and  dignity  of  men,  irrespective  of 
race,  creed,  color,  or  national  origin  have  been  the  ethical  foundation 
of  our  legal  and  social  system  at  home  and  of  our  foreign  policy 
abroad.  These  are  not  pious  expressions  of  good  will,  but  the  fornui- 
lation  of  those  great  truths  which  bring  forth  and  energize  the  best 
traits  in  the  human  race,  and  which  made  this  country  the  moral 
leader  of  the  free  world. 

But  adherence  to  these  principles  is  impeached  and  weakened  by 
the  reaflirmance  in  the  11)52  innnigration  and  natui-alization  law  of 
quotas  wdiich  discriminate  against  certain  nationalities.  Among  these 
is  Italy,  the  largest  country  in  continental  Europe  west  of  the  Rhine. 
The  restrictive  provisions  against  Italian  immigration  are  inconsistent 
with  the  ethical  premise  of  our  constitutional  dogmas. 

In  addition  to  the  all-impoi'tant  moral  issue,  we  are  concerned  with 
the  ecoiKjmic  reasons  which  militate  in  favor  of  liberalizing  oui'  im- 
migration laws.  The  ti'emendous  economic  expansion  of  this  country 
was  due  to  a  considerable  extent  to  the  great  inunigrational  influx. 
The  rise  of  our  population  from  4  million  to  150  million,  and  the 
corresponding  phenomenal  economic  growth  of  this  country  is  largely 
the  result  of  immigration.  The  forecast  for  our  population  in  1970  is 
170  million  people,  whereas  that  of  the  Soviet  Union  is  251  million. 
AVe  should  consider  seriously  the  ])roblems  of  our  growth  and  i)io- 
ductivity. 

History  has  shown  that  Italian  immigration  has  been  rapidly  ab- 
sorbed in  this  count i-y,  to  the  mutual  benefit  of  Italy,  which  is  bur- 
dened by  overpopuhition,  and  of  the  United  States.  Italian  innni- 
grants  have  brought  many  skills  to  this  country :  tailors,  miners, 
fainiers,  terrazzo  workers,  are  still  in  demand,  some  in  increasing  de- 


964  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

mand.  Among  the  scientists  the  names  of  Enrico  Fermi,  Bruno 
Rossi,  and  Emilio  Serge  are  known  to  all  of  ns,  because  of  their 
leading  part  in  the  atomic  field. 

The  McCarran  Act  deprives  college  professors  of  the  nonquota 
classification  which  they  enjoyed  under  the  old  laAV.  Under  the 
new  system  none  of  these  great  scientists  would  be  likely  to  find 
admission  here  through  the  ordinary  quotas.  Incidental!}',  this  policy 
is  in  conflict  with  our  leading  position  in  UNESCO  and  the  free  ex- 
change of  cultural  information  to  which  UNESCO  is  dedicated. 

Again  directing  our  attention  to  the  economic  reasons,  Italian  pro- 
fessional men  and  businessmen  who  immigrated  here  have  created 
working  opportunities  for  themselves  and  others.  To  make  one  illus- 
tration, let  me  refer  to  the  Italian  Club  of  St.  Louis.  Its  40  mem- 
bers are  all  American  citizens,  even  though  more  than  90  percent 
were  born  in  Italy.  Of  them  28  own  their  independent  businesses,  in 
which  some  400  people  are  gainfully  employed.  Of  the  remaining  12, 
6  are  professional  men  who  employ  their  own  help.  Only  six  are 
employed  by  others,  and  these  in  a  managerial  capacity. 

This  Commission  is  too  well  acquainted  with  the  demographic  and 
unemployment  situation  of  Italy  to  make  it  necessar}^  to  recite  ap- 
purtenant statistics,  which  I  am  sure  are  already  in  j^our  files.  The 
two  crucial  figures  are  2,000,000  unemployed  and  450,000  yearlj^  in- 
crease in  population. 

We  are  not  suggesting  that  a  liberalized  immigration  policy  of  the 
United  States  by  itself  would  solve  this  problem.  But  remedial  legis- 
lation by  our  Congress  would  point  the  way  for  other  countries,  such  as 
Canada,  Australia  and  New  Zealand  to  do  their  part  in  the  re- 
settlement of  surplus  population. 

Free  Europeans  living  under  substandard  economic  conditions  con- 
stitute an  element  of  weakness  in  the  striving  democratic  institutions 
of  our  outpost  across  the  Atlantic.  Immediate  and  long-range  stra- 
tegic and  economic  considerations  all  point  to  the  same  conclusion. 
Let  America  take  the  lead  in  solving  this  crucial  problem. 

We  respectfull}^  urge  the  Commission  to  recommend  the  adoption 
of  legislation  of  the  type  formulated  in  H.  R.  7376  and  S.  3109,  and 
to  permit  the  utilization  of  at  least  half  of  the  unused  quotas  by  coun- 
tries whose  quotas  are  oversubscribed. 

Appendix  A.    List  of  Orgakizatioxs  Represented 

Italian  Club  of  St.  Louis. 

Italian  War  Veterans  of  St.  Louis. 

Columbian  Society,  which  is  an  association  of  the  following  16  societies : 

Campobello  tli  Mazara 

La  Misericordia 

San  Giuseppe 

Italo-American  Mutual  Society 

St.  Fara  and  Mazzara  del  Vallo 

Citta'  di  Marsala 

Unione  and  Fratellanza  Italiana 

Vincenzo  Bellini 

Megara  Augusta 

G.  Marconi 

Amore  and  Vits 

Casteltermini 

La  Pace 

Loggia  Iccardi 

St.  Anna 

St.  Elena 


COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         965 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Rava,  under  the  bill  that  you  favor,  H.  R.  7376, 
that  bill  would  irive  Italy  ;jl),()()0  a  year  for  3  years  as  an  additional 
quota — that  is  correct,  isn't  it? 

Mr.  Rava.  That  is  correct,  sir. 

The  CiiAiuMAN.  Do  you  think  that  if  that  were  done  that  would  do 
any  substantial  itood  in  I'elievino-  the  over]:»opulation  in  Italy? 

Mr.  Rava.  We  make  a  twofold  proposition.  That  is  one,  and  the 
other  is  to  use  half  of  tlie  unused  quotas  of  the  countries  which  don't 
use  their  full  quota,  and  make  them  available  in  the  same  ratio  to  the 
countries  whose  quota  is  oversubscribed. 

The  Chairman.  How  many  would  that  add? 

Mr.  Rava,  Well,  I  haven't  made  the  mathematical  computation, 
but  it  would  be  soniethino;  in  the  nature  of  between  30,000  and  35,000. 

The  Chairman.  You  mean  you  would  give  Italy  one-half  of  all  the 
unused  quotas? 

Mr.  Rava.  No,  I  didn't  say  that — make  it  available  in  a  pool  to  those 
countries  which  have  an  oversubscribed  quota,  and  use  those  in  the 
same  ratio  as  the  quotas  for  those  countries  has  been  determined.  In 
other  words,  if  there  are  100,000  people  from  the  Enolish  quota,  and 
other  quotas  which  are  not  subscribed  make  that  100,000  available  in 
the  same  ratio  to  those  countries,  whose  quota  is  oversubscribed. 

The  Chairman.  What  is  the  population  of  Italy? 

Mr.  Rava.  In  excess  of  47  million. 

The  Chah{man.  Have  you  any  information  to  indicate  how  many 
l>eo])le  can  be  ])roperly  supported  in  Italy? 

Mr.  Rava.  Well,  the  unemployment  statistics,  I  believe,  are  perhaps 
the  best  answer.  There  are  2  million  unemployed  in  Italy  at  the 
present  time,  and,  in  addition,  there  are  at  least  2  million  only  partially 
employed  whose  economic  standards  could  be  according  to  average 
construction  substantially 

The  Chairman.  That  is  4  million. 

Mr.  Rava.  Well,  one  could  rationalize  and  triple  it.  I  was  con- 
sidering the^ ■ 

The  Chairman.  That's  how  many  ? 

]Mr.  Rava.  That  would  be  3  million. 

The  ('hairman.  You  said  2  and  2 — that  makes  4  million. 

Mr.  Rava.  Two  are  only  partially  employed,  and  apply  a  sort  of 
rule  of  thumb. 

The  Chairman.  Does  that  include  the  Italians  who  are  expellees, 
or  refugees? 

Mr.  Rava.  That  includes  the  Italians  who  are  expellees;  they  are 
being  reabsorbed,  some  of  them  have  made  mai'velous  strides  in  finding 
jobs  for-  themselves;  those  who  came  from  North  Africa,  Africa,  and 
other  j)arts. 

The  Chah{Man.  Well,  if,  as  you  say,  Italy  has  a  surplus  ])opulation 
of  approximately  3  million,  what  good  would  it  do  to  take  100.000  or 
200.000? 

Mr.  Rava.  Well,  our  point  is  that  it  would  be  of  great  value  because 
there  are  other  countries  which  would  be  likely  to  follow  the  example 
of  the  United  States,  even  the  present  emigration  in  Italy  today  is  in 
excess  of  150,000  a  year — they  go  to  various  countries,  there  are  agree- 
ments with  Ai'gentina.  with  B)-;izil.  with  other  South  Americans  and 
Central  Americans.     Ti-aditioually,  many  Italians  have  worked  in 


966  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

France  and  in  Switzerland — that  is  teni])orary  eniio:rati()n  as  dis- 
tingnished  from  permanent  emijrration.  They  go  there  to  work  in 
the  winter  season  or  summer  season,  accordino;  to  the  various  places. 
However,  theie  are  now  about  150.000  emigrants  every  year.  In  addi- 
tion, an  opening  of  the  immigration  policy  in  the  United  States 
w^ould  have  a  great  effect  upon  such  countries  as  Canada,  Australia, 
New^  Zealand,  and  perhaps  South  Africa. 

I  think  that  the  leading  jwsition  that  the  United  States  lias  at 
the  present  time  is  such  that  if  the  United  States  adopts  a  policy 
which  is  more  restrictive  than  the  previous  policy,  the  effect  would 
be  to  induce  those  other  countries  to  take  restrictive  measures;  cer- 
tainly, not  to  liberalize  their  policy.  I  believe  that  what  the  United 
States  can  do  is  not  only  make  available  so  many  working  opportuni- 
ties here,  say  150,000,  but  that  would  work  as  an  example  in  setting 
a  precedent  for  other  countries  to  follow  the  same  example. 

I  think  it  is  very  difficult  for  the  United  States  representative  at 
the  Intergovernmental  Committee  for  Movement  of  ^Migrants  from 
Europe  to  make  proposals  toward  inducing  other  countries  to  lessen 
their  restrictions  when  at  home  the  United  States  is  embarking  on 
a  policy  which  is  to  some  extent  racially  controlled,  and  restrictively 
inclined,  and  I  think  that  weakens  tlie  ]wsition  of  any  leader  and  any 
diplomatic  representative  of  the  United  States  in  any  form  of  inter- 
national agreement. 

Now  there  is  a  tremendous  movement  in  Europe  toward  achieving 
a  European  Federation — the  progress  is  very  real  and  very  sub- 
stantial. However,  one  of  the  big  obstacles  to  the  Economic  Fed- 
eration and  Political  Federation  of  Europe  is  that  in  certain  areas 
you  have  this  surplus  population,  and  if  some  of  it  could  be  absorbed 
elsewhere,  in  the  New  World,  as  they  call  it,  I  think  even  the  possibility 
of  an  Economic  and  Political  Federation  of  Europe  would  be  con- 
siderably increased. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you  very  nnich,  Mr.  Rava. 

Mr.  Rava.  May  I  ask  the  leave  of  the  Connnission  1  second.  Cluni- 
celor  Arthur  H.  Compton,  of  the  Washington  University  of  St.  Louis, 
was  unable  to  be  present,  and  he  asked  that  I  ])resent  to  the  Commis- 
sion a  letter  he  has  sent.     Would  that  be  possible  ? 

The  Chairman.  Yes.  His  letter  will  be  read  into  the  record  by 
Mr.  Rosenfield. 

(The  letter  of  Chancelor  Arthur  H.  Com])ton.  Washington  Univer- 
sity, read  into  the  record  by  Mr.  Harry  N.  Rosenfield,  follows:) 

Washington  ITni\^i!Sity, 
Office  of  the  Chancelor, 
St.  Louis.  October  11,  1952. 
To  the  Person  Before  WJiom  Hearings  Are  To  Be  Held  Regardiiif/  Revision  of 
Immigration  Laws. 
Dear  Str  :  I  wish  to  testify  relative  to  the  change  in  the  Federal  law  which 
eliminates  professors  in  colleges  and  universities  from  the  status  of  nonquota 
immigrants.      I    refer   to    House   of    Representatives,    Eighty-second    Congress, 
second  session.  Eeport  No.  1365,  page  101,  accompanying  H.   K.  5678,   where 
comparison  with  the  "existing  law"  shows  that  this  category  of  nonquota  immi- 
grants is  omitted  in  the  proposed  law. 
I  desire  to  make  two  points : 

1.  Professors  admitted  on  a  nonquota  hasis  have  performed  services  to  the 
United  States  of  extraordinary  value,  and  the  elimination  of  them  in  the  future 
will  correspondingly  cause  our  Nation  unnecessary  harm.     As  evidence,  I  may 


COMMISSION    OX     I.MMKiHATlON    AND    NATURALIZATION  967 

State,  as  of  my  lii-st-liand  UiH>\vU'(l-t\  tluit  witliout  the  services  of  Enrico  Feriui, 
who  came  from  Koine  to  lie  professoi-  at  Coliimbia  T'liiversity,  Eufiene  Wij,nier, 
who  came  from  Hudaiiest  to  he  jirofessor  at  I'riiicetoii.  iiml  Hdward  Teller,  of 
lUidapest.  who  came  as  professor  at  Columbia,  the  United  States  would  not  and 
could  not  liave  produced  the  atomic  bomb  in  time  to  have  been  of  value  in 
World  War  II.  In  many  otliei-  ways  also  tlie  recently  imini.iirated  scientists 
were  of  substantial  help"  durinu'  AA'orld  W:n-  II,  In  the  case  just  cited,  their 
help  to  our  Nation  was  decisive. 

2.  In  the  .jnd,uinent  of  those  Americans  best  qualified,  the  professors  wlio  have 
recently  been  admitted  on  nonquota  visas  have  been  foiuul  to  1h>  citizens  of 
exceptional  value  to  the  Nation.  As  evidence,  1  may  call  attention  to  the  fact 
that  durinji  the  past  10  years  an  extraordinarily  larue  number  of  re<-ently 
immigrated  iirofessors  have  been  elected  to  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences. 
This  is  of  esiiecijil  si,u'inli<-ance  because  this  body  is  cbar.iied  with  the  resjionsi- 
bility  for  advisin.y-  the  United  States  (iovernment  reyardin.u  scientific  matters 
affecting  the  Nation's  welfare.  Tlie  members  of  the  Academy  take  this  respon- 
sibility seriously  as  they  elect  new  members.  There  is  no  body  more  competent 
than  are  these  men  to  judiie  the  value  to  the  Nation  of  their  professorial  col- 
leafirnes.  ;tnd  their  Jud.nment  rej*arding  tlie  recent  immigrants  is  strongly 
favoral)le. 

I  should  add  that  in  my  considered  jiulgment  other  provisions  ot  the  bill  known 
as  H.  K.  5(j78  are  also  .seriously  damaging  to  the  Nation's  safety  and  welfare, 
to  such  an  extent  that  in  my  opinion  it  would  be  preferable  to  retain  the 
previous  law. 

Yours  very  truly, 

Arthitk  H.  ("omptox. 

The  Chaikmax.  Is  Air.  H.  M.  Raniel  liere  ^ 

STATEMENT  OF  HUBERT  M.  RAMEL,  MEMBER  OF  EXECUTIVE 
BOARD  OF  THE  NATIONAL  METAL  TRADES.  THE  NATIONAL 
ASSOCIATION  OF  MANUFACTURERS,  ST.  LOUIS  CHAMBER  OF 
COMMERCE 

Mr.  Ramel.  I  am  Herbert  M.  Rnmel,  vice  president  of  tlie  KaiiKsey 
Corp.,  of  St.  Louis,  Mo.  Tliis  is  a  subject  that  is  a  little  afield  from 
niv  endeavors.  I  am  presently  on  the  executive  board  of  the  National 
Metal  Trades,  the  Xational  Association  of  Manufacturers,  St  Louis 
Chamber  of  Commerce,  Associated  Industries  of  Missouri,  and  I  have 
been,  and  I  am  presently,  industry  member  of  the  Reo;ional  Labor 
Management  Connnittee  of  Kansas  City.  I  have  also  been  the  industry 
member  of  the  International  Labor  Organization.  I  presume  maybe 
the  latter  has  caused  me  to  be  thrown  into  immigration.  Frankly, 
1  don't  know  too  much  about  it.  I  haven't  had  much  opportunity 
to  form  any  definite  opinions  upon  the  old  law  or  the  new  law. 

We  did  have  a  problem  in  Kansas  City  here  about  a  year  or  : o  ago 
when  we  ran  into  the  problem  of  wetbacks  from  Mexico,  but  I  don't 
think  that  wa.s  too  serious,  especially  as  it  only  atfected  the  lower  part 
of  our  State. 

If  there  are  any  (juestions  that  I  might  be  asked  I  will  be  glad  to 
answer  them. 

Mr.  R  jsEXFiKLi).  Mr.  Ramel,  the  ])urj)ose  of  the  invitation  of  the 
Commission  to  you  was  to  incpiire  of  3'ou  not  bO  much  as  to  the  techni- 
calities of  the  innnigiation  law,  past  and  present,  as  to  inquire  of  you 
as  to  the  needs  of  industi'v.  if  any,  in  this  general  area.  What  is  the 
general  manpower  situation?  Have  the  |)eoj)le  in  industry  in  this 
area  been  able  to  obtain  the  ))eo])le  they  have  needed  for  their  work? 

Mr.  R.A.AiEi..  (lenei'ally  s])eakiiig.  we  have;  St.  Louis  has  never  been 
considered  a  tight  area.     1  think  in  our  whole  region  the  oidv  area 


968  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

that  we  had  any  real  difficulty  with  was  Wichita.  Now  I  can  speak 
with  some  authority  on  that  because  that  was  the  only  place  that  we 
even  set  up  an  area  committee,  outside  of  Kansas  City  and  Kansas 
City  was  set  up  primarily  because  of  the  flood  rather  than  of  any  acute 
shortage  in  labor. 

Commissioner  O'Grady.  Has  there  been  a  real  shortage  in  Wichita  ? 

Mr.  Ramel.  Yes.  Wichita  has  a  problem  because  of  the  large  air- 
craft production  in  Wichita. 

Commissioner  O'Grady.  Has  there  been  a  large  influx  of  workers 
there  ? 

Mr.  Ramel.  Yes,  there  has,  and  they  have  been  trying  to  get  more, 
but  it  has  been  mostly  technical  help,  as  I  understand  it,  rather 
than  that  of  the  less  unskilled  labor. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  How  have  they  met  then  the  needs  in  that  area? 

Mr.  Ramel.  Well,  they  have  gotten — I  happen  to  know  a  couple 
of  personnel  managers  down  there,  and  they  seem  to  have  satisfied 
their  needs.  I  don't  think  they  are  too  far  behind  on  their  quota, 
so  they  have  gotten  them  from  highways  and  byways,  they  have  sought 
other  cities,  they  have  attempted  to  bring  them  in  from  the  other 
various  places  when  they  could  get  them,  going  into  other  areas.  I 
know  we  have  had  some  difficulty,  at  least  on  one  occasion,  where 
they  have  come  into  this  area,  where  it  has  caused  some  confusion. 

Commissioner  O'Grady.  Have  they  been  recruiting? 

Mr.  Ramel.  Yes ;  they  have  been  recruiting.  That  is  the  only  area 
where  there  is  a  problem  I  know  of  in  this  region,  and  that  takes  in 
five  States. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  What  use  has  been  made  within  the  general  area, 
particularly  in  the  railway  centers  of  the  Mexican  migrant  labor? 

Mr.  Ramel.  Right  in  this  immediate  area,  we  haven't  had  much 
Mexican  labor.  I  think  you  will  find  possibly  up  around  Kansas  City 
there  is  some,  but  in  this  general  area,  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  it  is 
not  universally  used. 

Commissioner  O'Grady,  What  States  are  in  this  region  or  area  ? 

Mr.  Ramel.  Well,  there  is  Nebraska,  Kansas,  Arkansas,  Missouri, 
and  I  think  Oklahoma — I  am  not  certain  of  that — no,  Iowa. 

Commissioner  O'Grady.  Is  there  a  labor  shortage  in  Omaha? 

Mr.  Ramel.  Omaha  was  on  the  verge  of  it,  but  not  too  bad. 

We  have  been  on  the  verge  of  shortage  on  about  three  difl'erent  oc- 
casions— we  are  running  into  one  now.  There  are  anticipations  that  in 
this  region  we  may  have  some  acute  shortages,  but  at  the  present  time, 
no.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Labor  Management  Committee  liasn't 
had  a  meeting  since  last  spring. 

Commissioner  O'Grady.  Is  the  labor  supply  here  the  subject  of 
any  planning  in  anticipation  of  possible  shortages? 

Mr.  Ramel.  We  here  in  the  Middle  West  are  not  as  conscious  of  the 
labor  supply  as  from  the  same  viewpoint  tliat  might  be  had  from, 
say,  the  East  and  the  Far  West,  or  even  the  South,  especially  around 
Texas,  because  there  you  do  run  into  the  immigration  problem  more. 
But  St.  Louis  has  always  been  a  pretty  fair  labor  market  because  of 
its  diversification  of  industry,  and  I  can  speak  from  that  because  I 
was  on  the  War  Manpower  Commission  representing  industry  during 
that  period,  and  even  though  we  had  our  problems  we  always  were 
.able  to  meet  our  problems  in  one  way  or  another.     On  the  immigra- 


COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         969 

tion  end  of  it,  of  cour^^e,  your  ecouoiuists  can  figure  these  things  up, 
and  your  engineers  pull  out  their  slide  rules,  but  whether  or  not  they 
are  absolutely  correct,  I  don't  know.  They  may  know  more  about 
it  than  I  do,  and  1  am  not  an  economist  nor  am  1  an  engineer. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  liamel. 

Mr.  John  W.  Hamilton  > 

STATEMENT     OF    JOHN     W.     HAMILTON,     REPRESENTING     THE 
CITIZENS'  PROTECTIVE  ASSOCIATION  OF  ST.  LOUIS 

Ml'.  ILvMiLTdX.  I  iim  John  W.  Hamilton,  representing  the  Citizens' 
Protective  Association,  3847  West  Pine  Street,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

I  first  wish  to  take  exception  to  the  remarks  made  by  Dr.  Wagner 
here  this  morning.  I  am  a  Protestant  and  he  does  not  represent  me. 
He  claims  to  represent  500,000  Protestants  in  this  area.  Only  last 
April  before  a  hearing  of  the  police  board  here  in  St.  Louis  he  claimed 
he  represented  ()00,000 — I  do  not  know  which  is  correct.  He  doesn't 
represent  the  Southern  Baptists,  the  Lutherans,  he  doesn't  represent 
hosts  of  other  Protestants  in  this  city,  and  I  do  not  feel  that  he  repre- 
sents the  views,  wishes,  or  desires  of  the  vast  majority  of  those  who 
are  members  of  churches  connected  with  the  Metropolitan  Church 
Federation. 

We  fundamentalists  do  not  make  connnon  cause  with  liberal,  Christ- 
denying  modernists,  who  have  distorted  and  perverted  the  faith  once 
and  for  all  delivered  unto  the  Saints. 

I  was  very  deeply  shocked  to  hear  the  monsignor  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  in  Des  JVIoines,  Iowa,  indulge  in — whether  he  knew 
it  or  not — Communistic  propaganda.  In  giving  his  definition  of 
discrimination  he  called  our  attention  to  15  children  and  1  apple,  and 
he  said  that  apple  must  be  divided  exactly  equal. 

I  am  sorry  to  say  that  that  is  a  parroting  of  a  hackneyed  and  dis- 
credited Communist  philosophy :  to  each  according  to  his  needs,  and 
from  each  according  to  his  abilities,  divide  up  everything,  divide  up 
all  the  wealth  among  the  people.  But,  of  course,  that  is  where  this 
business  about  "thou  shalt  not  discriminate''  which  has  been  added 
to  the  Ten  Commandments  is  going  to  lead  us. 

The  doctrine  of  equality  did  not  originate  with  Karl  Marx;  it  came 
before  that  with  Adam  Smith,  and  the  French  Revolution  that  threat- 
ened the  whole  Christian  civilization  of  Europe,  liberty,  equality,  and 
fraternity.  It  led  them  to  bloodshed,  to  chaos,  to  atheism,  and  all 
forms  of  perversion.  Beware,  beware,  beware  of  those  who  scream 
and  cry  "equalit3\"  God  discriminates,  all  nature  discriminates,  life 
itself  discriminates.  The  person  who  does  not  discriminate  is  either 
a  knave  or  a  fool. 

Before  going  on  with  my  own  opinions  I  have  a  short  prepared 
.statement  from  the  Citizens'  Protective  Association  which  reads  as 
follows : 

Mr.  Chairman,  and  gentlemen  of  the  President's  Commission  on 
Innnigration  and  Naturalization,  I  represent  the  Citizens"  Protective 
Association,  a  group  of  })eo[)le  interested  in  and  dedicated  to  the 
juaintenance  and  extension  of  the  rights,  privileges,  integrity,  heritage, 
social  edicts,  and  culture  of  the  white  race  in  America.  America  has 
done  much  more  than  her  share  in  accepting  refugees  throughout  the 


970  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

years.  This  is  the  time  to  evaUiate  our  policies.  St.  Louis  was  first 
settled  by  the  French;  soon  after,  came  the  English.  The  English 
were  not  welcomed  with  open  arms  by  the  French  and  considerable 
trouble  ensued.  After  the  Enolish  came  the  Germans.  They  were 
resented  and  fought  for  a  long  time.  The  Poles,  Latts,  and  Slovaks 
came  next  and  they  received  the  same  treatment.  Last  on  the  scene 
were  the  Italians. 

Yet  in  spite  of  all  the  differences  we  have  in  St.  Louis  today,  a 
amalgamation  of  the  various  nationalities  from  Europe,  each  national 
group  in  its  turn  proved  that  it  was  worthy  to  be  accepted  after  a 
long,  hard  fight.  We  still  have  our  Dago  Hill,  yet  it  would  amaze 
you  gentlemen  to  learn  how  many  members  of  the  second  and  third 
generations  of  Italian  descent  are  marrying  Anglo-Saxons  and  others. 
St.  Louis  has  been  a  melting  pot  for  the  members  of  the  white  race. 
One  hundred  years  ago  we  had  a  Negro  i^roblem,  and  we  still  have  it 
today  in  a  far  more  aggravated  form.  The  early  and  late  settlers  in 
America  were  Europeans  of  the  white  race.  They,  in  spite  of  na- 
tional and  religious  differences,  have  largely  blended  together  to  form 
the  great  United  States  of  America.  The  oriental  has  been  in  our 
midst  for  many  years,  but  only  the  exception  showed  any  desire  to 
mongrelize  with  our  white  racial  stock. 

Our  forefathers  showed  great  insight  into  the  racial  question  by 
passing  the  Oriental  Exclusion  Act,  which  prevented  our  country 
from  being  inundated  by  the  hordes  of  the  yellow  race.  Prolific 
breeders,  they  would,  if  unlimited  immigration  had  been  permitted, 
have  swamped  the  west  coast  and  gradually  swarmed  over  the  entire 
continent.  Yet,  these  orientals  even  until  this  day  seek  the  company 
of  each  other  and  are  proud  of  their  race,  language,  customs,  and 
heritage.  However,  they  remain,  and  always  will  remain,  an  unas- 
similable  minority. 

Members  of  the  Negro  race  were  brought  here,  against  their  will 
in  many  cases,  as  slaves;  sold  or  bartered  by  their  African  chieftains 
to  the  slave  traders.  They  were  brought  to  the  New  World  to  replace 
the  native  American  Indian  who  could  not  live  under  slavery.  The 
Negroid  race  being  an  inferior  people  is  the  only  race  which  thrives 
under  slavery.  They  became  a  problem  during  slavery,  but  after 
(hey  were  given  their  freedom  became  even  more  of  a  burden  on  white 
society.  As  the  years  go  1)V  they  become  an  ever-increasing  burden 
on  the  white  community.  Having  no  culture  or  civilization  of  their 
own,  and  belonging  to  a  race  which  all  history  proves  is  substandard, 
and  uncreative,  the  Negro  seeks  by  means  of  the  weight  of  numbers, 
and  political  influence  to  gain  the  objectives  which  he  was  unable 
to  obtain  because  of  lack  of  ability.  Worse  than  that,  many  of 
their  leaders,  as  well  as  many  Negroes  themselves,  seek  a  solu- 
tion to  their  racial  inferiority  through  a  gradual  amalgamation 
of  the  white  race.  This  fact  presents  a  very  definite  problem  to  white 
society.  The  white  man  built  every  one  of  the  21  civilizations  known 
to  history.  Yet,  the  creative  works  of  the  white  man  have  time  and 
again  been  destroyed  through  the  process  of  mongrelization  with  the 
colored  races.  Each  great  civilization  of  the  past,  such  as  the  Chinese, 
Indian,  Babylonian.  Egyptian,  Carthaginian,  Grecian,  and  Koman 
Avas  destroyed,  when  the  white  creators  took  unto  themselves  willing 
colored  slaves  and  concubines,  and  destroyed  their  racial  heritage. 


cojMiMission  on  immighatiox  and  naturalization      971 

The  history  of  civilization  is  the  liistory  of  the  white  race.  The  mis- 
guided do-gooders,  the  mongrelizers,  the  Marxists,  and  the  Negro 
leadersliip  seek  to  throw  open  the  doors  of  America  to  the  Negroid 
and  Oriental  hordes.  They  completely  ignore  the  fact  that  each  race 
in  its  own  country  has  had  an  equal  opportunity  to  build  its  own 
civilization.  Yet,  after  the  white  man  built  and  verily  ci-eated  a 
civilization  out  of  the  wilderness  of  North  America,  the  uncreative, 
])arasitical  liordes  of  the  colored  races  sought  to  descend  upon  us  and 
devour  our  substance.  All  the  white  man  asks  is  the  same  seniority 
rights  that  the  gentleman  from  local  688  of  the  Teamsters'  Union  is 
so  very  concerned  that  his  members  shall  enjoy. 

The  colored  races  are  at  best  the  imitators  of  white  society.  The 
higher  type  of  the  colored  races  can  imitate ;  the  lower  type  is  unable 
to  do  even  that.  Yet,  we  are  urged  by  the  politicians  and  the  preach- 
ers to  accept  them  as  our  equals. 

While  the  native  Indians  roamed  America  for  countless  years,  it 
was  the  white  man  who  brought  civilization  to  this  continent.  He 
built  it,  and  it  belongs  to  him.  Now,  the  vicious  conspiracy  is  to  flood 
America  with  the  dregs  of  colored  society,  to  lower  our  standard  of 
living,  and  pervert  our  culture,  and  to  destroy  our  way  of  life.  Is 
America  to  be  made  the  dum})ing  ground  for  this  wretched  refuse? 
Tlie  McCarran- Walter  Immigration  Act  is  the  wisest  possible  solu- 
tion to  the  problem.  It  is  based  on  the  national  antecedents  of  the 
poi^ulation  of  the  United  States.  What  could  be  fairer,  and,  to  use 
a  much  misused  term,  more  "democratic"'  than  that. 

According  to  Rabbi  Abraham  L.  Hartstein,  the  Boston  Jewish  Ad- 
vocate of  April  1941),  there  were  only  6,000  Jews  in  the  United  States 
100  years  ago.  They  did  not  build  the  country.  They  did  not  aid 
in  conquering  the  frontiers.  They  contributed  but  little,  if  anything, 
to  the  development  of  America.  Why  should  they  demand  to  be 
admitted  in  unprecedented  numbers,  largely  from  behind  the  iron 
curtain?  How  are  they,  and  they  alone,  seemingly  able  to  flee  from 
the  tentacles  of  Soviet  Russia  i  How  many  Soviet  agents  are  in  their 
midst?  I  call  the  attention  of  the  Commission  to  the  report  of  the 
Honorable  Ed  Gossett,  Congressman  from  Texas,  which  was  made  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  on  July  2,  1947.  It  contains  much 
factual  information  concerning  the  refugee  racket  being  perpetrated 
on  an  unsuspecting,  generous  American  Republic. 

The  Jew  remains  an  unassimilable  minority.  I  also  call  your  at- 
tention to  the  statement  by  Senator  Pat  McCarran,  of  the  United 
Statas  Senate,  on  January  6,  1950,  entitled  "Displaced  Persons — Facts 
vs.  Fiction."  Senator  McCarraii's  Senate  Committee  on  the  Judiciaiy, 
Avhich  has  jurisdiction  over  immigration  legislation,  made  a  detailed 
and  thorough  study  of  the  entire  situation,  and  the  McCarran-Walter 
Immigration  Act  is  the  net  result.  This  bill  was  overwhehningly 
passed  by  both  Houses  of  Congress  after  long  debate.  When  it  was 
vetoed  by  our  ]:)oliti('al  President,  both  Houses  of  Congress  overrode 
his  veto  overwhelmingly,  and  thereby  expressed  the  will  of  all  patri- 
otic American  citizens. 

There  is  no  need,  gentlemen,  for  this  Commission.  It,  I  fear,  is  the 
device  of  political  ex])ediency  in  a  flagrant  ai)i)eal  for  su])])ort  from  the 
racial  minorities  in  the  coming  election.  I  am  interested  to  note 
that  while  the  Negro  press  has  viciously  attacked  the  McCarran-Walter 

25:-!56 — 52 «2 


972  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND   NATURALIZATION 

Immigration  Act,  I  do  not  see  one  representative  of  the  Negro  race 
here  today,  though  there  are  some  150,000  in  St.  Louis.  Evidently, 
they  are  not  concerned  enough  about  this  so-called  discrimination 
that  we  hear  so  much  about  to  even  bother  to  send  one  representative 
to  appear  before  your  Comjnission. 

I  am  quite  disturbed  that  so  many  of  the  clergymen  that  have 
appeared  here  today  mentioned  the  economic  aspect  solely  of  admitting 
people  from  different  races,  different  cultures,  different  environments, 
and.  as  Dr.  Wagner  woulcl  say,  500,000  over  a  period  of  3  years.  I 
do  not  know  whether  they  are  economic  materialists,  or  believe  in  the 
doctrine  of  economic  determination — I  certainly  hope  not.  I  under- 
stood that  they  were  religious  gentlemen.  What  they  did  not  consider 
was  the  fact  that  America  has  its  culture,  its  heritage,  its  social  edicts, 
its  welfare. 

America  cannot  assimilate  the  racial  minorities  now  within  her 
own  border,  much  less  contend  with  a  deluge  of  unassimilable  racial 
groups  which  would  flood  our  shores  if  given  the  slightest  opportunity. 
Look  for  yourselves  at  the  formerly  fine  residential  sections  in  city 
after  city  that  have  been  turned  into  slums  by  the  black  plague.  Yet, 
some  appear  before  you  and  advocate  further  increases  in  the  Negro 
population  by  lowering  our  immigration  laws  to  admit  countless 
thousands  of  West  Indians  and  even  Africa  itself.  No  matter  how 
many  times  men  say :  "All  races  are  the  same.  All  men  are  equal." 
Tliat  does  not  make  any  fact.  Two  brothers  are  not  equal — no  two 
men  are  equal;  neither  are  races  equal.  These  men,  consciously  or 
otherwise,  are  enemies  of  the  white  race,  and  all  it  stands  for.  Study 
the  high  crime  rate  in  our  northern  cities — among  the  Negroes  in 
our  northern  cities,  after  they  have  been  exposed  to  education,  advance- 
ment, and  opportunity.  Study  the  results  of  admitting  vast  numbers 
of  colored  Puerto  Ricans  to  New  York  City,  and  find  out  for  yourself 
what  would  happen  if  its  floodgates  were  lowered  to  color  immigra- 
tion. "Discrimination"  some  say— if  anyone  is  being  discriminated 
against  in  America  today  it  is  the  white  man  who  built  our  civilization 
and  our  culture. 

We  need  no  modification  or  change  in  the  McCarran-Walter  Im- 
migration Act  unless  it  be  to  tighten  even  further  the  protective  walls 
against  Negi^oid  and  oriental  immigration.  The  white  race  in  all 
its  glory  built  and  developed  America.  To  attempt  to  lower  our 
immigration  laws,  and  allow  a  flood  of  Asiatics  and  Negroids  to  pour 
into  our  country  is  treason  in  the  worst  form. 

The  Citizens'  Protective  Association  wishes  to  go  on  record  as  being 
unalterably  opposed  to  any  changes  in  the  McCarran- Walter  Immi- 
gration Act  as  the  present  time. 

I  thank  you,  gentlemen. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you,  sir. 

Commissioner  Gullixson.  Mr.  Chairman,  in  the  limitation  de- 
nominational, I  presume  that  it  is  not  understood  that  Mr.  Hamilton 
speaks  for  the  Lutheran  Church  or  for  other  theological  conservatives. 

Mr.  Hamilton.  May  I  answer  that,  sir.  Of  course,  I  do  not.  sir, 
but  I  do  wish  to  bring  out  that  the  American  Council  of  Christian 
Churches,  and  the  National  Association  of  Evangelicals — two  large 
interdenominational  agencies,  which  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
national  council  because  of  its  modernism,  its  liberalism,  and  its  even 


COMMISSION    OX    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         973 

left-wingisni — have  broken  away  and  founded  their  own  interdenomi- 
national agencies.  Both  of  those  organizations  at  recent  conventions 
have  gone  on  record  in  support  of  the  ]McCarran-Walter  Immigration 
Act. 

I  am  a  member  of  a  church  that  is  a  constituent  member  of  the 
Xational  Association  of  Evangelicals.  I  do  not  speak  for  them,  how- 
ever, I  just  wish  to  bring  this  to  your  attention,  and  I  wish  to  point 
out  that  Dr.  Wagner  does  not  speak  for  all  of  the  Protestants  in  St, 
Louis  by  any  manner  of  means,  although  he  did  seem  to  give  the  im- 
pression that  he  claimed  to  be. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  mind  telling  us,  Mr.  Hamilton,  liow  many 
members  are  in  the  Citizens'  Protective  Association? 

Mr.  Hamilton.  Yes.  Our  organization  was  formed  a  year  and  2 
months  ago.  We  have  some  225  members  in  St.  Louis,  and  a  member- 
ship at  large  in  a  number  of  States.  We  also  have  a  branch  in 
Tennessee — we  publish  a  bulletin. 

The  Chairmax.  You  speak  for  St.  Louis  ? 

Mr.  Hamilton.  I  speak  for  the  St.  Louis  group.  I  have  been  di- 
rected to  come  here  by  the  executive  board  of  the  Citizens*  Protective 
Association.  I  am  not  the  chairman — I  am  editor  of  our  monthly 
publication,  the  White  Sentinel.  They  asked  me  to  appear  before 
your  Commission,  and  to  give  our  feelings  on  the  situation.  We  are 
very  strongly  in  support  of  Senator  McCarran's  great  work. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you. 

Is  Mr.  William  Sentner  here? 

STATEMENT  OF  WILLIAM  SENTNER.  REPRESENTING  THE  ANTONIA 
SENTNER  DEFENSE  COMMITTEE  OF  DISTRICT  8,  UNITED  ELEC- 
TRICAL, RADIO  AND  MACHINE  WORKERS  OF  AMERICA 

Mr.  Sentner.  I  am  William  Sentner,  representing  the  Antonia 
Sentner  Defense  Committee  of  District  8,  United  Electrical,  Eadio 
and  Machine  Workers  of  America,  705  Olive  Street,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

I  have  a  prepared  statement  I  wish  to  read. 

The  Chairman.  Does  it  deal  with  the  deportation  order  in  the  case 
of  Mrs.  Antonia  Sentner.  and  is  she  your  wife  ? 

Mr.  Sentner.  That's  right,  sir.  I  am  only  using  that  case  to  sup- 
port the  position  we  take  with  regard  to  the  bill.  I  might  say  that  our 
union  nationally,  which  represents  about  275,000.  people  associate 
themselves  basically  with  the  positions  in  resolution  at  the  convention 
recently  concluded  in  vSeptember,  with  Mousignor  Ligutti  with  regard 
to  restrictions  in  the  bill.  I  will  be  glad  to  send  you  a  copy  of  that 
resolution,  but  in  essence  that  was  their  position  with  regard  to  the 
law  itself. 

I  only  want  to  deal  with  three  aspects  of  it,  and  I  am  using  this 
particular  case  to  point  it  up.  I  know  it  well,  St.  Louis  knows  it 
well,  and  since  it  is  a  case  in  point  I  thought  this  Connnission  might, 
])X  its  exam])le,  show  supi)ort  to  a  position  with  regard  to  the  law 
itself. 

Tlie  Chairman.  Is  it  a  case  that  has  received  a  lot  of  publicity  in 
this  area  ( 

Mr.  Sentner.  Yes,  sir:  and  it  doesn't  lend  itself  only  to  this  one 
•case,  but  it  lends  itself  to  the  application  of  the  bill  to  29,000  non- 


974  COMMISSION    ON    IMIMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

citizens  in  the  St.  Louis  area,  and  it  also  lends  itself  to  some  questions 
relating  to  naturalized  citizens  who  come  under  danger  from  this  law 
for  acts  they  might  have  committed  prior  to  their  naturalizatif)n  or 
entries  into  the  country. 

The  Chairman,  Are  you  going  to  confine  yourself  to  the  recom- 
mendations or  do  you  want  to  read  the  whole  statement  \ 

Mr.  Sektner.  It  will  only  take  5  minutes. 

The  Chairman.  All  right;  j^ou  nuiy  read  it. 

Mr.  Sektner.  There  are  two  aspects  of  our  presentation  : 

1.  Ethical,  moral,  and  legal  questions  raised  in  the  deportation 
order  in  the  case  of  Mrs.  Antonia  Sentner. 

2.  The  family. 

THE  ANTONIA  SENTNER  CASE 

1.  She  legally  entered  the  United  States  at  the  port  of  Xew  York, 
on  July  20,  1914,  from  Yugoslavia.  She  was  8  years  of  age  upon 
entry. 

2.  She  filed  her  petition  for  naturalization  in  1940.  Her  applica- 
tion was  denied  by  the  late  United  States  District  Judge  Charles  B. 
Davis,  on  September  2,  1942.  Judge  Davis'  ruling  was  based  on  the 
sole  fact  that  5  years  had  not  elapsed  since  Mrs.  Sentner  had  dropped 
her  membership  in  the  Communist  Part}'  in  1938. 

8.  She  refiled  her  application  1945.  She  was  advised  by  Walter 
Wolf,  chief  naturalization  officer  in  St.  Louis  that  he  would  deny  the 
application  and  her  petition  was  withdrawn  without  prejudice  in 
1946. 

4.  She  w-as  arrested  on  an  order  of  deportation  on  September  1, 
1949.  She  was  released  on  a  $2,000  bond  and  rearrested  and  held 
without  bail  on  October  28,  1950.  After  spending  5  days  in  jail  her 
I'elease  was  ordered  on  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus  by  United  States 
District  Judge  Kuby  M.  Hulen. 

5.  On  November  29,  1950,  a  hearing  on  the  deportation  warrant 
was  started  in  St.  Louis.  The  hearing  was  recessed  almost  innnedi- 
ately  after  opening  and  was  resumed  on  November  14,  1951.  A 
week  later  the  hearing  officer  recommended  deportation,  whicli  re- 
commendation was  affirmed  by  the  Assistant  Commissioner  of  Im- 
migration. An  a])peal  was  taken  to  the  Board  of  Immigration  Ap- 
peals which  a])i)eal  was  heard  on  May  8,  1952. 

6.  On  September  29,  1952,  this  a])])eal  was  denied.  A  petition  for 
reversal  was  filed  with  Attorney  General  James  F.  McGranery  on 
October  6,  1952.  I  give  this  merely  to  indicate  how  long  this  hangs 
over  a  person's  head. 

THE  ETHICAL  AND  MORAL  ISSUE 

In  this  case,  as  in  others,  the  person  involved  has  lived  in  our  coun- 
iry  since  childhood.  She  was  schooled  here,  reached  maturity,  and 
raised  a  family  of  citizens.  Mrs.  Sentner,  now  46  years  old,  has  two 
childi-en  10  and  14  respectively,  and  a  married  daughter  and  four 
grandchildren. 

We  nuist  ask,  should  a  law,  or  its  a])plication  transcend  the  moral 
and  ethical  rights  of  human  beings^  Except  for  a  technical  question, 
Mrs.  Sentner  is  a  citizen,  having  been  in  our  country  since  8  years 
of  age.     She  was  educated  in  Catholic  parochial  schools.     She  worked 


COjVrMISSION    ON    IMXriGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         975 

111  factories  aiul  as  a  clerk.  She  lias  raised  a  family,  all  of  whom 
4ire  citizens.  Her  husbaiul  is  a  citizen.  Her  mother,  father,  and 
four  sisters  and  hi'others  are  citizens. 

Then  by  what  rhyme  oi-  reason  can  C'on<iress  decide  in  1950,  under 
the  law  that  this  Connnission  is  considerinjr,,  that  persons  in  a  certain 
class  may  be  j)unishable  with  a  sentence  equal  to  death  for  joinin<>;  a 
]e<ral  political  party  in  19-55^ 

Mrs.  Sentner  is  now  subject  to  deportation  for  having  been  a 
member  of  the  Connnunist  Party  from  19-55  to  1938.  It  was  legal 
for  an  alien  to  be  a  member  of  the  (\)nHnunist  Party  in  1935,  but  a 
crime  in  1950.  On  what  moral  or  ethical  basis  can  a  ])erson  be  sub- 
ject to  (le])ortati()n  in  1950  for  a  legal  act  connnitted  in  19^>5? 

THE  FAMILY 

Our  literature,  court  rulings,  airways  and  press  makes  much  of 
the  sanctity  of  the  home  and  family  as  the  very  founchition  of  Ameri- 
can democracy.  What  about  Mrs.  Sentner's  home  ?  She  was  not  of 
age  in  1914:  when  she  was  brought  to  our  country.  She  didn't  have 
anything  to  do  with  being  here.  She  worked,  got  married,  and  raised 
a  family.  All  during  this  time  she  had  no  reason  to  suspect  that  in 
1950,  Congress  would  pass  an  act  that  would  make  her  subject  to 
de|)ortation  for  something  she  had  considered  legally  right  in  1935. 

What  constitutional  rights  do  her  minor  children  have  as  American 
citizens.  If  their  mother  is  deported  involuntarily,  what  shall  they 
do?  And  what  are  the  constitutional  rights  of  her  married  daughter 
and  four  grandchildren?  We  only  pose  these  questions  for  your 
committee  to  ansAver  in  your  recommendation  to  the  President. 

Mrs.  Sentner's  punishment  is  banishment  from  her  home  and 
adopted  lancL     This  punishment  is  akin  to  a  sentence  of  death. 

The  case  of  Mrs.  Sentner  is  like  that  of  an  orphan  who  is  adopted 
at  birth  and  then  torn  from  their  foster  parents  and  banished  from 
their  love,  affection,  and  protection  for  the  remainder  of  their  lives. 

The  McCarran  law,  as  is  the  McCarran-Walter  law,  is  unjust  and 
cruel  and  has  no  place  in  the  laws  of  a  democratic  republic.  It  is 
fundmentally  an  antilabor  law,  as  is  the  Taft-Hartley  and  Smith  Acts, 
as  we  show  in  our  exhibit  A  attached. 

RECOMMEXDATIOXS 

1.  In  most  cases,  people  involved  in  naturalization,  deportation,  and 
exclusion  cases  are  poor.  The  Government  should  establish  and  fi- 
nance a  ])ublic  defender  for  such  people. 

ii.  The  right  of  the  Attorney  General  to  hold  persons  subject  to 
de])ortation  without  bail  must  be  abolished.  A  maximum  bail  of 
$500  should  be  established  in  all  such  cases. 

3.  A  statute  of  limitations  must  be  established  or  should  I  say  we 
ought  to  return  to  the  5-year  statute  of  limitations  so  that  noncitizens 
or  naturalized  citizens  and  their  children  are  not  subject  for  a  life- 
time of  uncertainty  as  to  their  status  as  citizens  or  residents  of  our 
counti'v. 

(Exhibit  A,  Tlu>  T;\vin't  Is  Lalioi',  ;t  p.-iiniililet  issued  hy  tho  Aiitonia  Sentner 
Defense  Committee  of  District  No.  s.  United  Electrical  Radio  and  Machine 
AA'(»rkers  of  America.  T0.">  Olive  Street,  St.  Louis  1.  Mo.,  attached.) 


976  COMMISSION    ox    IMMIGRATIOX    AND    NATURALIZATION 

Mr.  Sextner.  These  tire  our  recommeiKlatioiis  based  upon  this 
particular  case  of  which,  of  course,  there  are  hundreds  of  others,  now 
and  to  come  in  the  country. 

Thank  you. 

The  Chairmax.     Thank  you. 

Is  Mr.  Eoy  A.  Dillon  here^? 

STATEMENT  OF  EOY  A.  DILLON.  REPRESENTING  THE  COUNCIL  OF 
CHURCHES  FOR  THE  STATE  OF  OKLAHOMA 

Mr.  DiLLox,  I  am  Roy  A.  Dillon,  and  I  am  representing  the  State 
Personnel  Board  of  Oklahoma  of  which  I  am  the  director,  606  Wright 
Building,  Oklahoma  City.  I  was  formerly  chairman  of  the  Okla- 
homa Displaced  Persons  Commission  for  about  3  years. 

I  am  a  lay  member  of  a  committee  with  the  Council  of  Churches, 
which  is  interested  in  resettling  and  assisting  in  the  DP  program;, 
and,  in  fact,  it  has  established  a  fund  Avhich  I  have  been  administering 
on  DP  matters,  since  the  United  States  Displaced  Persons  Commis- 
sion terminated  this  past  August  31.  You  see,  with  the  termination 
of  the  United  States  Displaced  Persons  Commission,  the  local  State 
groups  had  to  take  over,  so  the  Council  of  Churches  has  taken  over^ 
and  it  has  assisted  all  the  wa}'  through  the  program  in  any  way  it 
could. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  speak  for  the  Council  of  Churches  for  the 
State  of  Oklahoma  ? 

Mr.  DlLLOx.     That^s  right. 

The  Chairman.  And  that  council  includes  how  mauy  denomina- 
tions ? 

Mr,  DiLLOx.  There  are  29  officially  connected  with  the  national 
council — there  are  20  denominations  in  that. 

Mr.  RosExriELD.     Are  all  20  located  in  Oklahoma  City  !* 

Mr.  DiLLOX.  In  the  State,  I  think.  You  see,  it  is  connected  with 
the  29  major  denominations. 

The  Chairmax.  Mr.  Dillon,  the  Commission  will  be  glad  to  hear 
any  statement  that  you  would  care  to  make  as  to  your  views  on  a 
proper  immigration  policy  for  the  United  States. 

Mr.  DiLLox.  First  of  all,  I  should  like  to  mention  tluit  as  chair- 
man of  the  State  Displaced  Persons  Commission,  I  Avorked  closely 
with  all  religious  groups,  Catholic,  Protestant,  and  Jewish,  and  the 
program  was  highly  satisfactory. 

In  Oklahoma  we  desperately  need  farm  people  and  we  would  like 
to  recommend  that  some  emergency  legislation  be  put  in,  if  possible, 
to  bring  over  those  people  to  whom  visas  were  not  available  on  the 
date  of  December  31,  1951.  Then,  we  would  like  to  have  an  addi- 
tional number  of  people  who  can  get  visas  under  proper  legislation 
that  are  German  ethnics,  people  that  are  willing  to  get  out  on  our 
ranches.     We  lost  300,000  in  population  in  Oklahoma — 

Mr.  RosEXriELD.     In  what  period  of  time  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.     From  1040  to  1950. 

Mr.  RosEXFiELD.  What  happened  that  caused  that  loss  of  popula- 
tion? 

Mr.  DiLLox.  'V^Hien  my  father  went  to  Oklahoma,  Uncle  Sam  gave 
him  160  acres  of  land  for  $15,  and  evervbodv  took  that  land  and 


COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         977 

started  out  and  tried  to  make  a  living.  My  dad  said  they  should 
have  oriven  everybody  a  section.  My  dad  was  able  to  nuike  it,  but  the 
three  other  men  on  that  section  didn't  make  it,  and  dad  took  over 
their  places. 

Mr.  EosENFiELD.     In  other  words,  were  the  farms  too  small  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  That's  right,  and  could  not  support  them — but  the 
farms  became  larger,  and  that  left  vacant  houses.  We  had  plenty  of 
houses  over  the  State,  and  the  DP's  that  were  willing  to  go  out  to  these 
farms  had  plenty  of  opportunity  to  do  it. 

Mr.  E.0SENFIELD.  And  do  they  have  full-time,  year-round  jobs? 

Mr.  Dillon.  That's  right.  No  sharecropping  in  Oklahoma.  We 
insisted  that  they  be  put  on  salary. 

At  the  urging,  I  might  say,  of  the  Displaced  Persons  Commission 
in  Washington  I  was  requested  to  assist  in  getting  some  of  the  larger 
families  into  Oklahoma,  and  on  telegraphic  orders  five  Ukrainian 
farm  families  arrived  in  Oklahoma  City,  and  I  had  five  sponsors  wait- 
ing for  them.  The  man  that  took  what  seemed  to  be  the  hardest 
family,  from  the  point  of  resettlement,  which  was  the  father  and 
mother  and  four  little  girls— most  of  the  sponsors  wanted  a  father  and 
mother  with  boys  in  the  family — but  he  took  the  father  and  mother 
and  the  four  little  girls,  and  paid  the  father  $100  a  month  for  the  first 
3'ear,  and  gave  him  housing,  and  gave  him  produce  from  the  farm, 
milk  and  eggs,  saw  that  he  had  some  help  in  clothing,  and  one  thing 
and  another.  After  the  first  year  he  found  the  man  was  such  a  good 
Avorker,  because  the  man  would  work  12  and  14  hours  a  day  if  he  didn't 
get  his  work  done,  and  he  was  always  working — he  cleaned  up  the 
fence  rows  and  even  though  he  fell  off  the  horse  and  broke  his  arm  he 
still  insisted  he  had  to  work  every  day  doing  something.  After  the 
first  year,  the  sponsor  said :  "I  will  now  put  you  on  a  50-50  basis." 
The  first  thing  he  did  was  to  buy  the  DP  a  car,  and  paid  for  it,  and 
said :  'Tf  you  make  any  money  this  year,  you  can  pay  me  half  the  price 
of  the  car."  At  the  end  of  the  first  year  with  a  very  good  crop  they 
were  able  to  clear  $10,000— $5,000  for  the  DP  and  $5,000  for  the  spon- 
sor. In  the  third  year,  which  is  this  year,  they  had  200  head  of  hogs 
to  sell  in  May,  and  I  am  sure  that  the  DP  will  do  better  this  year  than 
he  did  last.  He  has  a  new  television  set,  and  he  has  already  traded  his 
car  in  and  bought  a  new  car  this  year.  One  of  his  daughters,  although 
she  was  only  16,  married  the  farm  boy  across  the  road,  and  they  are 
well-established  in  the  community. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Mr.  Dillon,  do  you  think  that  Oklahoma  could  ab- 
sorb people  from  overseas  wlio  would  stay  on  the  farm  and  work  the 
farms  as  needed  in  Oklahoma  in  any  substantial  numbers? 

Mr.  Dillon.  I  would  answer  in  the  affirmative  because  I  know  the 
calls  I  have  had,  especially  since  we  started  to  bring  the  German  eth- 
nics in,  who,  to  me,  have  been  the  best  farmers  that  we  have  had  com- 
ing into  Oklahoma.  We  have  had  so  many  calls  since  the  program 
ended  that  we  could  place  as  many  more  as  we  have  already  placed. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  How  many  have  you  placed  already  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  The  records  in  Washington  show  we  had  around  1,600 
first  placements,  and  then  we  have  had  an  influx  of  more  than  that 
coming  into  the  State. 

Mr.  RoSENFiELu.  Then  what  would  vour  estimate  be? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Between  3,000  aiid  4.000. 


978  COMMISSIOX    ON    IMMIGRATIOX    AND    NATURALIZATION 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Aiid  do  you  think  tliat  Oklahoma  could  absorb 
iind  needs  an  additional  4,000  or  so  ( 

Mr.  Dillon.  Desperately  needs  that  type  of  person. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  In  what  kind  of  farming  would  they  be  engaoed^ 

Mr.  Dillon.  Of  course,  they  have  the  big  ranches  and  they  need 
people  on  the  ranch,  but  there  is  always  enough  caretaking  around  un- 
til they  can  learn  how  to  take  care  of  stock  and  the  dairying  is  all  done 
by  machinery,  and  they  soon  handle  the  mechanical  milkers,  and  we 
had  very  little  trouble  wath  that — required  in  dairying  and  stock  in- 
dustry. There  is  very  little  oil  industry  in  Oklahoma — we  do  not  need 
that  type  of  person. 

]Mr.  RosENFiELi).  Would  they  be  needed  for  cotton? 

Mr.  Dillon.  The  cotton  is  mechanically  ])icked  now,  and  cultivated, 
and  almost  everything  has  gone  into  machinery. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  The  reason  I  ask  about  the  cotton  is  that  the  Com- 
mission has  been  given  information  that  as  of  the  beginning  of  Sep- 
tember there  Avas  a  demand  for  some  900  cotton  pickers.  Is  that 
seasonal  work? 

Mr.  Dillon.  That's  seasonal  work.  It  is  simply  transit,  the  cotton 
picking,  what  little  there  is,  simply  transit  work — it  is  not  good  for 
that  type  of  resettlement. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  But  on  year-round,  permanent  work,  which  would 
enable  families  to  settle  down  and  become  part  of  the  community, 
•do  you  estimate  that  somewhere  between  3,500  to  4,000  are  desperately 
needed  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  That's  right.  I  am  sui-e  of  that.  I  know  that  sponsors 
not  only  would  be  willing  to  sponsor  the  people,  but  willing  to  pay 
their  transportation  from  Europe  to  America,  that  is,  the  steam  boat 
and  the  railroad  both. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Coulcl  j'ou  advise  the  Commission,  on  the  basis  of 
jour  experience  in  that  part  of  the  country,  as  to  the  situation  of  other 
States  in  the  southwest? 

Mr.  Dillon.  I  have  first-hand  knowledge  of  Arkansas  being  in  a 
like  situation,  although  Arkansas  is  not  as  good  a  cattle  country  as 
Oklahoma. 

Mr.  Rosenfip:ld.  Are  you  saying  that  Arkanwis  is  in  the  same  situ- 
ation— in  desperate  need  of  labor  for  year-round  employment  ? 

]Mr.  Dillon.  That's  right,  on  a  great  many  of  the  Arkansas  ranches, 
and  I  have  placed  people  in  Arkansas  and  also  in  Texas,  west  Texas, 
especially,  bordering  on  Oklahoma  City.  Of  course,  Oklahoma  City  is 
the  largest  and  most  up-to-date  and  progressive  city  in  the  Southwest. 

We  have  provided  work  with  the  DP's  in  Texas,  and  in  Arkansas, 
and  in  Oklahoma.  We  have  done  very  little  work  in  Kansas,  but 
sometimes  we  have  had  some  people  come  in  from  New  Orleans  and 
make  a  stop  and  then  go  on  up  into  Kansas,  but  I  am  sure  northern 
Texas  and  western  Texas,  and  Arkansas  and  Oklahoma — they  could 
absorb  more  than  probably  in  Oklahoma,  at  least  Texas  could. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  In  your  judgement,  what  number  could  Texas 
absorb  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  8,000  oi- 10,000  peo])le,  because  I  know  the  Texas  people 
lire  writing  to  me  all  the  time,  calling  me  long  distance. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Aud,  is  this  permanent,  year-round? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Permanent,  year-round,  all  the  farms  are  modern,  elec- 
tricity, water  in  the  house,  gas  for  heat.    Of  course  there  is  the  ])roblem 


COMMISSION    OX    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         979' 

of  adjustment  to  the  wide-oj)eii  spaces,  you  see,  the  DP's  are  used  to- 
liA'iui;  closely  to<:ether  from  the  experience  in  displaced  persons'  camps, 
and  they  are  not  accustomed  to  the  open  s])aces. 

Mr.  RoSf-XFiELD.  Do  they  <j:et  accustomed  to  it '. 

Mr.  DiLi.ox.  They  like  to  l)e  in  Texas  now.  "We  had  to  move  thenL 
back  from  Texas  and  Oklahoma  because  there  was  a  family  spotted 
liere  and  one  here,  and  they  had  to  move  back  and  foi'th.  The  program 
should  be  arranged  so  that  if  there  are  (xerman  ethnics  there  can  be 
8  or  10  families  in  one  county. 

Mr.  RosExriELD.  8uch  a  ])lanned  lesettlement.  to  be  given  neighbors- 
among  themselves. 

Mr.  DiLLox.  Yes. 

The  CiiAiRMAx.  Will  you  tell  the  Commission  where  the  DP's  that 
you  have  lumdled  came  from '. 

Mr.  DiLLox.  One  of  our  largest  settlements  came  from  Latvia,  al- 
though the  Latvians  haven't  always  turned  out  to  be  the  best  farmers. 
The  Latvians  have  more  or  less  congregated  into  the  larger  places 
and  are  doing  work  on  a  smaller  scale  like  dairying  and  little  acreages 
where  they  are  just  raising  chickens,  working  on  chicken  ranches,  and 
tilings  like  that. 

The  Chairmax.  Do  they  become  self-supporting? 

Mr.  Dillon.  They  do.  They  have  their  own  services  and  are  very^ 
fine  citizens.  The  Estonian  group  have  done  very  well  the  same  way. 
Tlie  Ukrainians  have  been  able  to  work  out  on  the  farm.  They  have- 
been  more  successful  on  the  farm,  but  the  very  best  success  has  been 
with  the  German  ethnics.  The  Hungarians  have  been  very  good,  al- 
though the  native-born  Hungarians  that  are  not  German  ethnics 
are  skilled  artisans,  so  many  of  them,  that  they  haven't  been  too  happy. 
We  had  many  doctorates  of  laws,  and  skilled  men  coming  in  that  just 
weren't  too  happy  on  the  farm. 

The  Chairman.  But  have  they  succeeded  in  integrating  themselves 
into  the  American  life  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes.  One  boy  took  an  idea  that  he  could  sell  life  in- 
surance to  the  other  DP's  because  he  spoke  seven  languages.  While- 
he  was  selling  about  five  policies  to  DP's  he  sold  some  50  policies  to 
Americans,  and  he  is  now  in  charge  of  the  Tulsa  office  of  this  insurance 
company,  wdiich  is  considered  one  of  the  best,  and  he  is  considered  one 
of  the  best  insurance  men  in  the  State.  He  has  a  very  fine  person- 
ality. I  have  had  him  down  to  talk  to  the  civic  clubs  and  this  in- 
surance company  wouldn't  trade  him  for  10  ordinary  fellows. 

The  Chairman.  Has  it  been  your  experience  that  most  of  those  who- 
are  not  farmers,  or  do  not  become  farmers,  but  are  skilled  or  have  some 
profession,  become  integrated  into  American  life  and  make  a  con- 
tribution in  the  skill,  in  the  trade,  or  in  the  profession  they  have 
studied  abroad  before  they  came  here? 

Mr.  Dillon.  If  there  is  opportunity  for  that,  j-es.  but,  of  course, 
wdiere  in  the  professions  licensing  is  required  it  is  a  long  process  of 
them  getting  their  citizenship.  I  am  thinking  now  of  medicine  and 
dentistry,  and  even  the  nurses  training  are  having  a  little  difficulty  in 
getting  them,  establishing  their  high-school  graduation  before  they 
are  admitted  to  the  scliool  of  nursing.  But  that  is  working  out,  it 
takes  a  little  longer  time  for  that  kind  of  a  program. 

The  Chairman.  But  does  it  Avork  out? 

Mr.  Dillon.  It  works  out. 


980  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

The  Chairman.  And  do  they  become  valuable  citizens? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Very  valuable;  yes.  sir. 

The  Chairman.  Now  you  say  the  German  ethnics.  Now  Avliat  coun- 
tries do  they  come  from? 

Mr.  Dillon.  My  experience  with  German  ethnics  has  been  mostly 
Avith  those  who  came  from  Hungary. 

The  Chairman.  Hungary? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes.  There  seem  to  be  some  good  farmers  from  Hun- 
gary that  are  making  a  fine  establishment.  Now,  of  course,  there  are 
a  lot  of  people  that  have  come  into  Oklahoma  under  direct  sponsorship 
through  the  Displaced  Persons  Commission,  that  did  not  come  through 
the  State  commission  office. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Are  these  in  addition  to  some  1.600  that  came 
through  you? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Neither  the  office  in  Washington  nor  my  office  have 
an  accurate  account,  I  am  sure,  of  all  the  people.  As  soon  as  I  could 
get  a  boat  list,  I  would  make  out  a  card  of  everyone  that  was  coming  to 
Oklahoma,  and  kept  that  on  file  in  my  office,  so  that  I  would  know 
they  were  going  into  certain  localities,  but  I  would  never  have  a 
chance  to  see  these  people,  and  never  heard  anything  about  them  unless 
they  were  having  trouble.  There  are  a  lot  of  success  stories  that  I 
know  nothing  about. 

No  one  was  paid  in  Oklahoma  for  any  of  the  resettlement  work.  I 
was  not  given  any  funds  at  all — simply  my  board  allowed  me  to  spend 
some  time,  and  the  (rovei-nor  paid  my  traveling  expenses. 

The  Chairman.  Has  most  of  your  experience  been  with  displaced 
persons  from  Eastern  Europe? 

Mr.  Dillon.  What  countries  are  you  speaking  of  ^ 

The  Chairman.  I  am  thinking  of  Latvia,  and  Estonia,  and  Lithu- 
ania, and  Southeast  Europe,  and  the  Ukraine — Is  that  where  most  of 
your  experience  has  been,  with  people  that  came  from  those  areas? 

Mr.  Dillon.  We  had  a  couple  of  doctors  that  came  from  the  Philip- 
pines— the  Shanghai  refugees  that  came  through  the   Philippines. 

Mr.  Eosenfikld.  You  mean  European  refugees  who  tied  to 
Shanghai  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  No;  these  were  Russians. 

They  went  from  Russia.  When  the  Communists  took  over  they 
went  to  Shanghai — they  are  Russians.  They  fled  to  Shanghai, 
and  then  to  the  Philippines,  and  then  to  America.  Originally  they 
were  East  Euro})eans. 

We  also  hel])ed  in  the  resettlement  of  some  Greeks;  mostly  young 
persons,  young  men  from  Greece. 

JNIr.  RosENFiELD.  How  did  they  work  out  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  They  worked  out.  Of  course,  they  come  mostly  to  their 
relatives,  and  they  worked  out  in  following  the  food  business — doing 
fine  in  the  restaurants.     We  can  always  absorb  a  good  many  like  that. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Do  you  mean  that  in  the  service  trades  there  is  also 
a  demand  that  hasn't  been  met  from  within  the  State? 

Mr.  Dillon.  That's  right. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  What  service  trades  would  you  say  are  affected 
now? 

Mr.  Dillon.  From  all  the  chamber  of  commerce  talk — you  see, 
Oklahoma  City  has  the  greatest  number  of  conventions  in  the  United 


COMMISSIOX    OX    I:\IMIGRATI0X   AXD    XATURALIZATIOX         981 

States  except  Xew  Yoi'k  and  Chicago,  and  it  is  a  great  convention 
city,  so  we  have  a  tine  nnmber  of  hotels,  and  they  have  a  lot  of  people 
there  all  the  time,  so  there  is  a  great  demand  in  Oklahoma  City,  and 
in  Tnlsa,  as  well,  and  in  some  of  the  other  cities  for  cooks  and  service 
people  around  the  hotels. 

The  Chairman.  What,  if  anything,  would  you  like  to  say  to  the 
Commission  with  respect  to  the  present  methods  of  selecting  persons 
for  admission  to  the  United  States '. 

Mr.  Dillon.  In  Oklahoma  I  would  feel  tliat  because  of  the  chang- 
ing demand  of  labor,  for  instance,  in  the  picking  of  cotton,  now  the 
cotton  is  picked  by  machinery,  and  the  cotton  picking  is  not  a  problem 
as  it  used  to  be ;  therefore,  as  our  conditions  change  we  would  like  to 
have  people  admitted  to  the  United  States  who  could  migrate  to  Okla- 
homa, who  were  especially  skilled  or  had  special  abilities  along  what 
our  need  was  at  that  time  at  that  year.  In  one  current  year  we  would 
say  a  survey  in  Oklahoma  would  show  that  we  need  so  many  people 
in  the  service  field,  and  so  many  people  especially  trained  in  agricul- 
ture, so  many  people  that  were  mechanics.  We  find  a  great  demand 
for  auto  mechanic  people,  people  that  were  mechanically  inclined.  I 
have  had  no  trouble  at  all  in  placing  any  fellow  that  had  any  knack 
with  working  Avith  automobiles.  Therefore,  we  could  absorb  those 
types  of  people,  and  regardless  of  race  or  color.  I  would  rather  that 
we  wonld  select  them  on  their  ability  to  fill  our  needs,  and  absorb  our 
part  of  the  quota. 

The  Chairman.  What  is  your  view  of  the  national-origins  system 
of  selection  in  our  present  quota  system  i 

Mr.  Dillon.  That  is  a  mistake. 

The  Chairman.  Do  I  correctly  understand  your  view  to  be  that 
whatever  number  is  admitted  annually  to  the  United  States  ought  to 
be  admitted  on  a  basis  of  what  this  country  needs,  what  the  States 
need,  and  different  sections  of  the  country? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes;  of  the  country  at  that  current  time. 

The  Chairman.  At  that  period. 

Mr.  Dillon.  It  must  be  flexible  enough,  so  that  it  can  be  changed. 
If  Oklahoma  absorbs  10,000  one  year  and  fills  their  needs  and  the  next 
year  they  only  need  2,000  people. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Are  you  thinking  in  terms  of  permanent  ad- 
mission ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  I  am  thinking  of  permanent  admission. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Mr.  Dillon,  what  form  of  administration  would 
you  recommend  for  the  type  of  program  you  are  suggesting  i^ 

Mr.  Dillon.  I  think  it  should  be  administered  through  our  present 
immigration  and  natnralization  set  up.  We  feel  that  with  the  immi- 
gration and  naturalization  office  in  Kansas  City  they  are  close  enough 
to  us  to  handle  the  situation,  I  believe,  after  the  preliminary  work  is 
done,  and  the  people  are  ])laced,  and  the  filing  of  their  papers  to  become 
citizens. 

Mr.  RosENEiELD.  Who  would  nudve  the  determinations  and  how 
would  you  go  about  making  the  determination  Xation-wide  of  the 
numbers  to  be  admitted  within  the  ceiling,  and  where  they  are  to  be 
chosen  from,  if  they  were  not  to  be  admitted  on  the  basis  of  national 
oriffin? 


982  COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION 

Mr.  Dillon.  Of  course,  with  us,  we  would  like  to  Avork  it  thi'ou<^h 
our  county  agents,  and  through  our  county  set-up  of  agricultural 
men.  We  have  right  now  so  many  of  the  boys  and  girls  that  are 
sent  over,  the  farm  boys  and  girls  that  are  sent  to  Oklahoma  to  stay 
1  year  under  the  State  Department — I  think  they  have  the  i)rogramy 
and  that  has  been  handled  through  our  county  agricultural  set-up  and 
State  agricultural  set-up.  That  would  be  the  set-up,  and  your  survey 
work  would  be  done,  and  your  preliminary  work  in  your  States,  and 
then  it  would  have  to  be  cleared  through  a  national  commission,  a 
special  commission  that  would  have  to  do  the  screening  along  some- 
wdiat  the  line  that  our  Displaced  Persons  Conunission  carried  on  this 
program  for  the  past  3  years. 

The  Chairman.  Do  I  understand  that  your  proposal  would  pro- 
vide a  national  commission  that  would  fix  the  OA^er-all  mnnber  for 
each  year  based  on  local  needs  throughout  the  country  f 

Mr.  Dillon.  The  demands  from  the  States,  yes. 

The  Chairman.  And  would  that  agency,  whether  it  was  a  commis- 
sion, or  a  board,  then  have  the  responsibility  for  screening  those  that 
came  in  as  to  security,  and  as  to  health,  and  other  qualifications  to 
meet  the  local  needs  throughout  the  country  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes,  according  to  their  ability.  That  w^ay  it  seems  like 
your  whole  program  could  be  kept  current.  A  law  that  is  set  up  now 
on  quotas,  or  anything  else,  in  10  years  from  now  has  changed,  so  that 
we  need  some  way  to  have  it  flexible  enough  so  that  it  could  be  changed 
around  each  year  as  the  Commission  would  see  fit,  according  to  that 
demand. 

The  (^HAiRMAN.  Woidd  that  also  embrace  the  use  of  unskilled  labor? 

Mr.  Dillon.  That's  right. 

The  Chairman.  If  a  person  or  persons  are  broug"ht  in  under  such 
a  plan,  would  you  also  provide  that  their  families  would  accompany 
them,  so  that  their  families  would  eventually  take  their  places  in  the 
community? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes,  in  the  conmuinity,  that's  right,  sir. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  Would  you  have  any  general  estimate  of  whether 
you  think  the  Southwest  in  the  next  5  j'ears  would  have  a  continuing 
demand  of  the  kind  that  you  have  indicated,  or  is  it  likely  to  slough 
off  immediately? 

Mr.  Dillon.  You  are  acquainted  with  the  golden  circle,  which  in- 
cludes the  Southwest.  There  is  nothing  that  can  stop  the  advance 
that  we  are  making  out  there,  that  I  see.  for  5  years  there  is  going  to  be 
a  great  demand  for  the  type  of  people  that  I  have  been  talking  about. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  What  States  would  you  include  in  that  demand  in 
which  you  foresee  a  great  demand  for  the  next  5  years  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Well,  I  just  came  through  the  States  of  Kansas,  and 
Nebraska,  and  Iowa  this  last  week,  and  I  talked  a  little  bit  about  what 
their  needs  are,  and  there  is  some  demand  for  labor  there,  but  not  as 
much  as  when  we  get  into  Arkansas,  and  Oklahoma,  and  Texas,  New 
Mexico — that  part  of  the  coimtry  has  a  lot  of  Avealth  in  oil,  and  my 
best  sponsors  have  been  fellows  tliat  have  had  fainis  and  ranches  that 
they  have  bought  through  profits  in  oil.  and  they  are  raising  fine  cattle 
and  have  established  themselves,  and  they  need  families  to  help  them 
in  that  type  of  work  all  throughout  the  SoutliAvest,  and  besides  our 
agriculture.     When  you  <x^t  into  southern  Iowa  where  we  were  toflay. 


COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         983 

I  believe  that  they  have  small  farms  80  to  160  acres,  and  one  or  two 
farm  homes  already  with  people  li-sdng  there,  and  they  can  support 
the  families  that  way.  I  didn't  see  the  vacant  farm  houses  in  those 
three  States  that  I  can  take  yon  to,  that  I  am  acquainted  with  in  Texas, 
Oklahoma,  and  Arkansas.  It  is  not  a  sharecrop  proposition,  it  is 
people  that  will  make  tjood  money  because  they  know  how  to  work. 

I  would  like  to  ask  a  question,  if  I  may,  of  the  Connnission  :  I  would 
like  to  know  whether  you  are  also  concerned  with  the  matter  of  over- 
j)opulation  ? 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  In  the  President's  directive  to  the  Commission, 
section  2  (c)  includes  the  subject  of  overpopulation,  so  that  the  Com- 
mission is  receivino'  testinu)ny  and  judgments  of  people  in  that  area 
as  well  as  in  the  general  area  of  iunnioration. 

Tlie  Chaikmax.  Of  course,  that  has  to  do  with  the  needs  of  other 
countries,  as  well  as  the  needs  of  this  country.  Would  you  be  in  favor 
of  filling  the  needs  that  actually  exist  in  this  country  from  those  who 
are  in  want  in  Europe,  the  displaced  persons,  the  escapees,  the  ex- 
pellees by  screening  those  people  just  to  fill  the  actual  needs  in  this 
country? 

Mr.  Dillon.     That's  right. 

The  Chairmax.  And  what  is  your  opinion  regarding  relief  for 
overpo])ulated  countries ? 

Mr.  DiLLOx.  That  would  be  all  right.  But  I  don't  think  that 
overpopulation  should  be  used  as  too  important  a  factor  in  itself,  be- 
cause any  relief  that  we  might  give  in  America  to  overpopulation 
of  some  of  the  countries  in  Europe  would  purely  be  temporary,  a  small 
country  would  again  become  overpopulated.  Unless  the  people  had 
the  required  skills,  unless  they  would  fit  in — I  am  thinking  about  the 
people  of  southern  Europe.  I  am  not  familiar  with  any  of  them  being 
happy  to  live  in  our  Southwest.  They  prefer  to  live  as  near  the  con- 
ditions. I  guess,  as  they  have  left  in  the  overpopulated  country. 

Mr.  RosENFiiXD.  "\Vliat  about  the  people  from  (jreece,  j^ou  men- 
tioned earlier? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes,  but  then  they  won't,  again,  go  into  the  open 
spaces,  they  congregate  in  the  cities. 

Mr.  EosEXFiELD.  I  see.  Then,  is  your  point  that  the  people  who 
come  to  meet  the  needs  that  you  have  indicated  to  be  your  criterion 
for  the  selection  within  the  ceiling  should  be  people  who  are  selected 
specifically  to  meet  the  needs  as  you  see  them? 

IVIr.  Dillon.     Yes  and  not  from  any  other  pressure. 

The  Chairman.  Suppose  another  part  of  the  country  would  need 
the  kind  of  work  that  can  be  furnislied  by  those  in  Southern  Europe? 

Mr.  Dillon.  That's  right — I  am  speaking  from  the  point  of  view 
of  our  ])art  of  the  country,  that's  all  I  am  familiar  with. 

The  Chairman.  Are  you  in  favor  of  any  emergency  legislation  by 
Congress  to  provide  for  the  admission  of  those  applicants  who  were 
caught  in  the  DP  pipeline? 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes.  Also  I  think  in  recent  years  those  people  have 
become  more  unpopular  as  they  have  lived  on  the  German  economy — 
I  mean  they  haven't  been  accepted  by  the  economy  quite  so  much  now 
as  they  were  then,  because  immediately  after  the  war  there  was  need 
for  them,  now  they  seem  to  be  a  little  bit  extra,  and  they  are  surplus 
population  now.     That   seems  to  be  the  reaction  we  get,   and  it  is 


984  COMMISSIOX    ox    niMIGRATIOX    AXD    XATURALIZATION 

because  they  have  rehTtives  liere.  somebody  here  who  has  been  writing 
back  and  telling  them  how  things  are  over  here. 

Mr.  RosENFiELD.  So  far  as  you  know.  Mr.  Dillon  are  these  pipeline 
people  the  same  kind  of  people  that  made  out  so  Avell  in  Oklahoma  i 

Mr.  Dillon.  Yes.  Further  cases  we  know  are  the  same  kin — they 
are  the  relatives. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  3'ou  very  much.  Mr.  Dillon,  the  Commission 
appreciates  your  coming  all  the  way  to  St.  Louis  to  make  this 
statement. 

Mr.  EosENFiELD.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  request  that  the  St.  Louis 
record  remain  open  at  this  point  for  the  insertion  of  statements  sub- 
mitted by  persons  unable  to  appear  as  individuals  or  as  representatives 
of  organizations  or  who  could  not  be  scheduled  due  to  insufficient  time. 

The  Chairman.  That  may  be  done. 

This  concludes  the  hearings  in  St.  Louis,  Mo.  The  Commission 
will  now  be  adjourned  until  it  reconvenes  in  San  Francisco,  Calif.^ 
at  9  :  30  a.  m.,  October  14,  1952, 

(Whereupon,  at  6  p.  m.,  the  Commission  was  adjourned  to  recon- 
vene at  9 :  30  a.  m.,  Tuesday,  October  14, 1952,  at  San  Francisco,  Calif.) 


STATEMENTS  SUBMITTED  BY  OTHER  PERSONS  AND 
ORGANIZATIONS  IN  THE  ST.  LOUIS  AREA 

STATEMENT  SUBMITTED  BY   SANDOK  D.  PAPP,  M.  D.,  JOPLIN,  MO. 

OcTOBPJR  3,  1952. 
Hon.  Philip  B.  1'eklman, 

t<peciiil  Commission  on  Inniiigration  (in<l  N(tti(raHzuti<jn, 
Wa.shinyton  25,  D.  C. 
L)EAR  Mk.  Peklman  :  With  refereru'c  to  the  uew  imraigratioii  hiw  which  comes 
into  effect  next  December  24. 

Before  this  law  becomes  effective,  I  would  like  to  suggest  that  every  effort  be 
made  to  reunite  families  who  have  become  separated  through  immigration  to  the 
United  States  from  Europe  after  World  War  II. 

As  a  case  in  point,  I\Ir.  and  Mrs.  .Joseph  Say,  of  this  city  were  sent  to  the 
United  States  through  International  Refugee  Organization  in  1!)40.  However, 
through  misunderstanding  and  confusion,  their  two  sons  were  shipped  to 
Australia. 

Attempts  liave  been  made  to  reunite  this  family,  but  because  of  quota  restric- 
tions, it  seems  as  if  it  will  take  another  5  years  to  reunite  these  pai-ents  and 
their  sons. 

We  feel   sure   there   must   l)e   many   other    similar   cases   of   families    being 
separated  through  no  fault  of  their  own,  and  sincerely  hope  that  our  Govern- 
ment can  and  will  act  in  the  name  of  humanity  to  correct  this  injustice. 
Yours  very  truly, 

Sandor  D.  Papp,  M.  D. 


STATEMENT  SUBMITTED  BY  JOSEPH  SAY,  JOPLIN,  MO. 

JoPLiN,  Mo.,  October  3,  1952. 

Hon.  Philip  B.  Perlman, 

Chairman,  Special  Coin  mission  on  Immigration  and  Naturalisation, 
Washington,  1).  C. 
Dear  Mr.  Pearlman  :  Regarding  the  new  immigration  law  which  will  become 
effective  next  December  24. 

May  I  suggest  that  before  this  law  becomes  effective  every  effort  be  made  to 
reunite  families  who  through  no  fault  of  their  own  have  become  separated  by 
immigration  from  Europe  after  World  War  II. 

As  an  example,  my  wife  and  I  came  to  the  United  States  from  Hungary  in 
]94!)  through  the  International  Refugee  Organization  but  because  of  luisunder- 
•standing  our  two  sons  were  sent  to  Australia. 

We  know  of  several  other  cases  such  as  ours  and  sincerely  hope  that  it  will  be 
possible  f(ir  the  United  States  Government  to  reunite  these  families  before  new, 
restrictive  quotas  can  be  set. 
Yours  very  truly, 

Joseph  Say. 


STATEMENT  SUBMITTED  BY  S.  G.  WIDIGER,  EXECUTIVE  SECRETARY, 
LUTHERAN  CHILDREN'S  FRIEND  SOCIETY  OF  KANSAS,  WINFIELD, 
KANS. 

WiNFiELD,  Kans.,  October  8,  19.52. 

Harry  N.  Rosenfield, 

Executive  Director,  President's  Co\mmission  on  Imniigration.  and 
Naturalization,  Washington,  D.  C. 
I>ear  Mr.  RosEiN field  :  Thank  you  so  much  for  your  letter  of  September  23  ex- 
tending me  an  invitation  to  appear  at  a  hearing,  on  the  matter  of  the  President's 

985 


'986         COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND   NATURALIZATION 

Commission  on  Immigration  and  Naturalization,  to  be  held  in  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  on 
October  11. 

A  previous  commitment  prohibits  my  attending  ttiis  hearing,  but  I  am  taking 
the  liberty  of  writing  you  to  express  in  part  my  feelings  toward  the  displaced 
persons  program.  We  have  handled  many  of  these  family  units  in  the  area  as- 
signed to  me  as  committee  executive  for  Oklahoma,  Missouri,  and  Kansas,  and 
have  been  very  active  in  this  work  from  the  beginning  of  the  program.  I  want 
to  say  that  with  very  few  exceptions  the  placement  and  resettlement  of  these 
family  units  has  been  most  satisfactory.  These  displaced  persons  have  been  well 
accepted  by  the  people  in  the  various  communities.  It  is  my  definite  opinion  that 
for  the  most  part  these  displaced  persons  have  been  a  definite  asset  to  our 
-country. 

Let  me  commend  you  on  the  fine  work  that  you  have  done  in  carrying  out  the 
work  of  your  Commission.  We  know  that  you  have  given  your  best  efforts  to 
;help  these  unfortunate  people.  We  are  only  sorry  for  the  ones  that  were  left 
behind  due  to  lack  of  time.  It  is  the  hoi^e  of  our  agency  that  further  legislation 
will  be  enacted  to  allow  more  of  these  displaced  persons  to  be  brought  to  our 
country.  We,  as  an  agency,  and  as  a  church,  want  to  participate  and  lend  our 
■every  assistance  and  cooperation  so  that  this  may  be  possible. 

Thank  you  again  for  your  kind  invitation  to  appear  at  the  hearing.     I  only  wish , 
that  I  could  appear  and  express  in  person  my  deep  feeling  for  these  people,  and 
jiiy  sincere  desire  that  the  program  may  again  be  made  active. 
Cordially, 

Lutheran  Resettlement  Committee, 
S.  G.  WiDiGEK,  Executive. 


STATEMENT   SUBMITTED   BY   C.   T.   PIHLBLAD,   PROFESSOR   OF 
SOCIOLOGY,  UNIVERSITY  OF  MISSOURI,  COLUMBIA,  MO. 

Through  Dr.  C.  E.  Lively 

Columbia,  October  SO,  1952. 
Mr.  Elliot  Shirk, 

President's  Commission  on  Immigration  and  Naturalization, 
White  House,  Washington,  D.  G. 
Dear  Mr.  Shirk  :  Following  our  conversation  by  telephone  while  you  were  in 
St.  Louis,  I  suggested  to  our  Dr.  C.  T.  Pihlblad  of  the  department  of  sociology, 
:that  he  prepare  a  statement  for  your  Commission.  Dr.  Pihlblad  teaches  courses 
in  population,  race  i-elations,  and  allied  subjects.  Therefore,  I  feel  he  is  qualified 
.to  make  a  statement. 

He  prepared  the  statement  and  I  am  enclosing  it  herewith. 
Sincerely  yours, 

Dr.  C.  E.  Lively, 
Chairman,  Department  of  Rural  Sociology. 

Comments  on  the  Immigration  Law  of  1952  Commonly  Known  as  the 

McCarran  Act 

I  have  been  invited  to  make  such  comments  on  the  immigration  law  of  1952 
.as  might  appear  to  be  appropriate. 

First,  I  would  advocate  the  abandonment  or  radical  revision  of  the  quota 
:features  which  have  been  a  part  of  our  basic  immigration  laws  since  the  National 
Origins  Act  of  1924.  The  quota  principle  is  based  on  the  assumption  that 
immigrants  from  the  countries  of  northern  and  western  Europe  are  biologically 
and  socially  superior  and  to  be  preferred  as  potential  citizens  to  those  from 
■countries  in  central,  south  and  east  Europe.  This  assumption  is  scientifically 
unsound,  politically  inexpedient  and  morally  indefensible.  There  is  common 
agreement  among  anthropologists,  psychologists  and  sociologists  that  there  exist 
no  significant  inherent  differences  between  so-called  races  in  intellectual  ability 
or  capacity  for  cultural  achievement.  There  is  no  evidence  in  American  history 
that  some  immigrant  groups  have  made  better  citizens  than  others,  or  that,  in 
relation  to  the  length  of  their  sta.v  in  America  and  their  opportunities,  have  been 
less  assimilable  than  others.  From  a  political  point  of  view  our  quota  policy 
has  long  been  a  standing  offense  to  national  groups  whose  friendship  and  co- 
•operation  we  sorely  need  and  are  struggling  hard  to  secure.    From  a  moral  point 


COMMISSION    ON    IMMIGRATION    AND    NATURALIZATION         987 

of  view  it  ill  becomes  a  nation  which  occupies  a  position  of  leadership  among 
the  democratic  powers  to  practice  an  official  policy  of  discrimination  based  on 
race  and  nationality.  It  seems  to  me  that  we  need  to  modify  our  immigration 
policy  by  abandoning  the  "national  origins"  principle  in  favor  of  a  policy  which 
determines  admissibility  primarily  on  the  basis  of  individual  fitness  and 
desirability. 

In  addition  to  the  basic  discriminatory  feature  of  the  law,  which  is  inherent 
in  the  quota  principle  based  on  national  origins  there  are  certain  details  which, 
it  seems  to  me.  are  highly  objectionable.  During  recent  months  the  exclusion 
of  foreign  scholars  and  distinguished  scientists  from  the  United  States  by 
refusing  them  visas  has  become  a  public  scandal.  Tlie  current  issue  of  The 
Bulletin  of  the  Atomic  Scientists  documents  this  story  in  detail.  A  part  of  the 
difficulty  lies  in  the  shortsighted  and  bureaucratic  administralion  of  both  the 
Innuigration  law  and  the  McCarran  Security  Act.  But  the  laws  themselves  are 
faulty  in  not  safeguarding  the  rights  of  the  applicant  for  a  visa  by  explicitly 
permitting  the  right  of  appeal  from  the  decisions  of  consular  employees  and  the 
staff  of  the  immigration  service.  Certainly  it  would  be  most  unfortunate  if 
we  are  to  adopt  a  policy  of  intellectual  and  scientific  isolationism,  and  cut  our- 
selves off  from  scientific  developments  and  achievements  abroad  by  making  access 
to  European  scholarship  and  scientific  achievement  difficult  or  even  impossible. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  repeal  of  the  provisions,  contained  in  the  National 
Origins  Act,  for  admission  of  scientists,  professors  and  scholars  from  foreign 
countries  outside  the  quota  of  their  countries  has  been  most  unfortunate.  To 
place  the  discretion  as  to  their  admission  in  the  Attorney  General's  office  is  a 
doubtful  expedient.  Certainly  neither  the  Attorney  General  nor  his  staff  are 
qualified,  either  by  training  or  experience,  to  pass  on  the  scientific  attainments 
of  such  applicants  for  admission  or  judge  as  to  the  need  of  the  Nation  for  their 
services. 

The  vesting  of  complete  deportation  authority  in  immigration  officials  without 
any  provision  for  judicial  review  is  another  feature  of  the  law  which  needs 
amendment.  To  permit  immigration  oflicials  to  serve  as  prosecutor,  judge  and 
jury  without  any  right  of  the  defendant  to  judicial  procedure  is  not  consistent 
with  our  traditional  concept  of  justice.  According  to  accounts  in  the  daily  press 
persons  have  been  arrested,  held  for  long  periods  of  time  and  deportation  pro- 
ceedings instituted  against  them  without  even  informing  the  defendant  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  charges  against  him,  or  the  reasons  for  his  undesirability  as 
a  resident. 

Another  feature  of  the  law,  which  constitutes  a  danger  to  American  citizens, 
is  the  provision  which  makes  possilile  investigation  into  the  conditions  under 
which  citizenship  was  obtained  indefinitely  retrospective.  (Even  for  those 
accused  of  crime  the  statutes  of  limitations  impose  some  limits  on  their  liability.) 
Even  inadvertent  mistakes  in  the  filing  and  preparation  of  applications  for 
citizenship  might  constitute  grounds  for  revocation. 

Finally  the  arbitrary  power  of  immigration  officials  to  deny  passports  to 
American  citizens  for  travel  abroad  should  be  restricted  by  clear  provision  for 
court  review.  This  issue  has  received  wide  publicity  in  connection  with  the 
case  of  Dr.  Linus  Pauling.  This  is  not  only  a  matter  of  right  to  travel  abroad 
but  also  involves  the  issue  of  destroying  the  reputation  of  an  American  citizen 
without  provision  for  an  answer  and  defense.  We  cannot  leave  such  matters 
to  the  arbitrary  decisions  of  some  immigration  officials  who  may  have  neither 
the  competence  nor  the  judgment  for  wise  decisions  in  such  cases. 

C.    T.    PlHLBLAD, 

Professor  of  Sociology,   University  of  Missouri,  Columbia,  Mo. 


25356—52 


BOSTON  PUBLIC  LIBRARY 

,  Jillilfiliill, 

3  9999  06352  477  9