Skip to main content

Full text of "Hearings"

See other formats

82d Congress! „^, 







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 

^o^ Congressl COMMITTEE PRINT 

2d Session 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 


25356 WASHINGTON : 1952 





Ptttttp B. PESLMA^f, Chairman 

Eakl G. Haesisos, Fice Chairman 

Msgr. JOH^ OGrady 

EeT. Thaddets F. Gnxixso:^ 

Claslxcx e. Pickett 

Aj>?. tax S. Fisheb 

Ttto v a > C. Fetucaxe 

Haebt N. EosEynzu). fTjrecufire Director 




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. 


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. 



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. 

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) 




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,, 

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 ? 


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 



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 ? 


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 


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 

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 

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. 



Mi-. 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, 

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. 


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 ? 


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 


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 


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 


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 

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 


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? 



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 

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 

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- 

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- 


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 


La Pace 

Loggia Iccardi 

St. Anna 

St. Elena 


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 

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 


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 


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 

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 ^ 


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 


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- 


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 > 


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 

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 


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 


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 


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 

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? 


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 

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- 


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. 


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 

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 

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. 


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 

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 


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? 


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. 


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 

(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.) 


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^? 


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 

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- 

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 


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. 


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 

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 


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. 


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 

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


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 

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 


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 

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 

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. 


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 

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 


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 

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.) 



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 

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. 


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. 


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 



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 

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. 

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


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 


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 

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 

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. 


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



, Jillilfiliill, 

3 9999 06352 477 9