Skip to main content

Full text of "Hearings"

See other formats



Given By 



82d Congressl 
2d Session / 







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 




2a Session J 







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 


25356 WASHINGTON : 1952 



Philip B. Perlman, Chairman 

Earl G. Harrison, Vice Chairman 

Msgr. John O'Grady 

Rev. Thaddeus P. Gullixson 

Clarence E. Pickett 

Adrian S. Fisher 

Thomas C. Finucane 

Harry N. Rosenfield, Executive Director 

^^'^S.'-. 15AI5'l 


House of Representatwes, 

Committee on the Judiciary, 
Washington, D. C, Octoher ^3, 1952. 

Hon. Philip B. Perlman, 

Chairman, President'' 8 C ommission on 
Immigration and Naturalization, 

Executive Of(lce, Washington, D. G. 
Dear Mr. Perlman : I am informed that the President's Commis- 
sion on Immigration and Naturalization has held hearings in a 
number of cities and has collected a great deal of information con- 
cerning the problems of. immigration and naturalization. 

Since the subject t>f" immigration and naturalization requires con- 
tinuous congressmjfal study, it would be very helpful if this commit- 
tee could liaveiKe transcript of your hearings available for its study 
and use, and/for distribution to the Members of Congress. 

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

Emanuel Celler, Chairman. 


President's Commission on 
Immigration and Naturalization, 


Washington, October 27, 1952. 

Hon. Emanuel Celler, 

House of Representatives, 

Washingtoji, D. G. 

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 were 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 somie 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. 

Tliird: 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: 

Seventh: October 6, 1952, morning session. 

Eighth: 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 ses.-!ion. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Persons heard or who submitted statements by session and order of appearance. 
Organizations rei)resented by persons heard or bv submitted statements. 
Persons heard or who submitted statements by alphabetical arrangement 

of names. 
Subject matter. 

(Page numbers may be obtained from indexes) 





fifteeniti session 

St. Paul, Minn. 

The President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization 
met at 9 : 30 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in the auditorium. State 
Office Building, St. Paul, Minn., Hon. Philip B. Perlman (chair- 
man) presiding. 

Present: Chairman Philip B. Perlman, and the following Com- 
missioners: Msgr. John O'Grady, Kev. Thaddeus F. Gullixson, Mr. 
Thomas G. Finucane. 

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

The Chairman. The Commission will come to order. 

This morning we will have as our first witness Rev. James E. 


Reverend Boren. I am Rev. James E. Boren, 1628 Fourth Street 
SE., Minneapolis. I am a university pastor at the University of 
Mimiesota, and I represent the committee on social education and 
action, Minnesota Council of Churches, and committee on social edu- 
cation and action, Presbytery of Minneapolis, Presbyterian Church in 
the U. S. A. 

I have a prepared statement I would like to read, and then make a 
few comments. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Reverend Boren. The plight of the world's uprooted peoples creates 
for our Nation, as for all nations who hold to the worth and dignity 
of the individual, a moral as well as an economic and political problem 
of gigantic proportions. Some of these people are displaced by war; 
others by a tyranny of government ; and more recently those by mili- 
tary hostilities in Korea and elsewhere; as well as those who take their 
lives in their own hands in seeking freedom by escaping from behind 
the iron curtain. These individuals long for the day when they may 
again have the opportunity to establish homes, have the right to sup- 



poit themselves throiigli honest work, and have the i-ight to freedom 
of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. A further problem are the 
surplus peoples of the world w^ho no longer can be supported by the 
economy of their respective nations. These constitute a pressure 
which threatens the stability and well-being of the entire world. 

Our Nation for a long period welcomed the peoples of the world. 
You and I probably would not be here today if it had not been the 
policy of this Nation to provide opportunity for peoples of other 
nations to find justice and freedom under a democratic government. 
It is our belief that as a member of the community of nations we should 
continue this policy. We believe that the United States for moral 
reasons as well as for its own economic and political security should 
continue this policy and cooperate with other nations in meeting needs 
of displaced persons, refugees, and surplus populations. 

There are certain steps we feel should be taken. One, on the na- 
tional level, it is desirable for our Congress to adopt such emergency 
legislation as will allow the completion of the displaced persons pro- 
gram to which our Nation is committed. This legislation should pro- 
vide for the admission to the United States of (a) those who were 
processed under the Displaced Persons Act but for whom visas were 
not available on December 31, 1951; (h) an additional number of 
persons for whom inadequate visas were issued; and (c) our fair share 
of those who have escaped from behind the iron curtain. We are con- 
tinually urging, through our Voice of America program, that indi- 
viduals escape; but to wdiat shall they come? Shall they be no better 
off when they have escaped or do we have a moral responsibility to aid 
them in finding a homeland which they may call their own ? 

Two, Congress should make the quota system more flexible. This 
quota system should be based on the 1950 census. Further, the quota 
system should be made so unused quotas may be shifted to other areas. 
Discrimination through the quota system should be abolished as a 
principle not acceptable to a democratic nation. 

Three, Congress should complete the process of amending immigra- 
tion and naturalization so that, within the quota system, all discrimi- 
natory provisions based upon considerations of color, race, or sex 
would be removed. One of the most devastating attacks on our 
democracy was used during my years in Thailand by governments 
trying to incite other peoples against us by using as an argument our 
feeling that certain races and peoples are inferior, and not worthy of 
a democracy. 

Four, the Congress should establish a system of fair hearings and 
appeals respecting the issuance of visas and deportation proceedings. 
There should be precautionary measures as may save our Nation from 
hostile action on the part of individuals who are not in harmony with 
the Constitution and institutions of the United States. We believe 
this may be achieved without imposition of measures which violate 
the American conception of justice. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Reverend Boren. Now, I would like to make five comments con- 
cerning our present situation in immigration and naturalization laws. 

First, I believe that it perpetuates the inequitable features of our 
growth by a system where it favors England, Ireland, and Germany 
where only about one-half of our visas are used each year. 


Second, it continues discrimination between racial and nationality 
groups and adds new ones. It adds, for example, a place of ancestry 
and not a place of origin for determination of eligibility of admission 
to the United States. It further discriminates against those people 
who are members of a colony of Great Britain and/or other nations. 

Third, it discriminates against those who are from the Philippines. 

It further restricts immigration into the country of desirable 
would-be citizens. And being in the university field I know that we 
have had professors from other nations who have made tremendous 
contributions to our Nation. 

Fourth, the basis of computation of quotas is out of date. We are 
still using a 1920 base which should be 1950. 

Fifth, it provides for many new unreasonable and arbitrary bases 
for deportation. In one instance, for example, it eliminates the statute 
of limitations in many deportation cases and it creates numerous 
grounds for deportation not easily susceptible to judicial review. It 
has always been a belief in our Nation and we have always felt that 
there was a right for judicial revicAv and yet in the new law there are 
instances when we believe this would not be possible. 

I thank you. 

The Chaiemax. Do I understand correctly that you do not favor the 
national origins formula in the quota system ? 

Reverend Boken. That is right, sir. I would suggest, for example, 
at the present time in England our present quota system, as I under- 
stand the law, is based largely on northern Europeans or English, 
German, and Irish, and that is simply saying to the southern Euro- 
peans, "You are an inferior people." 

Then, there is the Asiatic situation, I'll use as an illustration a 
friend of mine whose father was Siamese and mother was English. 
He has no chance of becoming a citizen. I understand that under the 
present system he could come under the 100 from Thailand. 

The Chairman. If you were to have an over-all ceiling for immi- 
grants, would you not have any quotas within that ceiling? 

Reverend Boren. I would have a quota system. I approve of a 
quota system. I also approve that if the quota system — for example, 
if the countries will not use the quotas, then other nations should be 
able to use them. At the present time it is cut off and it is not possible 
to make a sliift in those. The present quota allows 154,000 people and 
President Truman in his message to Congress said that we now receive 
less than half of those. So I would make it possible for this quota 
system to be shifted so that other peoples could come in. 

The Chairman. Within whate^ver number is fixed as the maximum, 
w^ould you peraiit any applicant to come in, no matter where he comes 
from, provided of course he meets other tests ? 

Reverend Boren. Yes, sir. I don't care where he comes from. 
Having been all over the world myself, in Asia and Africa, I think 
there are persons from all over the world who would make desirable 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Dr. Bernhardt J. Kleven here ? 



Dr. Kleven. I am Dr. Bernhardt J. Kleven, professor of social 
sciences, Augsburg College, Minneapolis, Minn. 

The Chairman. The Commission will be glad to hear anything you 
would like to state. 

Dr. KxEVEN. I am speaking f my own point of view and not from 
the point of view of any institution, although there may be full agree- 
ment and I am still not representing them. 

Mr. Chairman and the Commission : The McCarran-Walter bill 
seems to have been pushed through Congress with little consideration 
of the broader phases of immigration problems which would combine 
justice with our administration. That is the way I have felt about it. 
Perhaps too much consideration was given to protection from sub- 
versive influences, because I have wondered a good deal as to wliy the 
bill was pushed so hard when for a bill it seemed apparently dead, 
at least for the time being. 

The law has many provisions that make for injustice as well as 
provisions which may have an adverse effect on our foreign policy 
as well as our domestic policies. Now, I do not say that all of the law 
is bad, but a modification of the law which will make for greater 
justice and reasonableness should be undertaken by the coming Con- 

I have selected for consideration some of the sections which need 
revision in my opinion. The national origins provision, which bases 
the apportionment of the total immigration for any one year on the 
census of 1920. is not applicable at the present time. There has been 
a change in the proportion of the national origins in our country 
since that date which should be given consideration in setting up new 
quotas. A more recent census base would do justice to all nationalties. 

Provision should also be made whereby perhaps the full quota of 
some 154,000 possible immigrants could be admitted each year by 
reassigning the unused portions of any coimtry which does not make 
use of its full quota to other countries whose quotas have been used up. 

Provision should also be made by the next session of the new Con- 
gress to provide relief for the displaced persons and refugees of 
German ethnic origin who had been cleared by the DP authorities 
but who had not been able to complete fully the requirements which 
would have made it possible for them to come to the United States 
before the termination of the law. Likewise, the law should provide 
for immigration of our portion of escapees from behind the iron 
curtain, those who have a real desire to live in a society where the 
individual is recognized and honored. Emergency measures could 
well be made to admit these persons into our country as potential 

I would say in general there should be screening. I might say more 
on that later on. 

The section of the law which places a person who is "attributable 
by as much as one-half of his ancestry" to races indigenous to the Asia- 
Pacific triangle is not only placing the Asiatics in an inferior class, 
according to our view, it is also a discrimination of the other half of 
his ancestry, whether it be British, French, or any other nationality. 


It causes many hardships on many homes, which is contrary to our 

Now, this discriminating classification fails to give due regard to 
the Christian principle of equality of all peoples. The discrimination 
should be eliminated. 

The McCarran law provides for the exclusion of aliens who have 
been convicted of two or more offenses other than purely political 
offenses, regardless of whether or not the offenses involved "moral 
turpitude," if the aggregate possible sentence to confinement was 5 
years. This makes it possible for a person to be excluded if he has 
been convicted under a Nazi or Communist law which in no way in- 
volves moral turpitude. It might, for instance, be a violation of cer- 
tain acts, such as antireligious law; that is, the anti-Semitism the 
Nazis embodied in their program. 

Furthermore, a person found guilty of crimes not involving moral 
turpitude may be cleported. It may be questionable whether deporta- 
tion is the proper method to deal with such cases. In some cases of 
persons found to be deportable it would be difficult to know to which 
country he should be deported. Furthermore, if a person has lived 
in our country for many years and according to our laws is found 
to be deportable, then I say there are questions as to whether he should 
be deported, but I feel also that we have responsibilities to take care 
of those persons. I am not too sympathetic with them, but the ques- 
tion remains nevertheless : what should be done with them in justice 
and in fairness — can we just dump them out? The same question 
might arise regarding persons who have become public charges or 
committed to mental institutions from causes not having arisen after 
entry. Now, all of these things work undue hardships on human 

A further need for revision is found in the power of final determina- 
tion given consuls to gi'ant or refuse to grant applications for admis- 
sion into the United States for immigration purposes. Such power is 
open to abuse and subject to prejuclicial injustice. There should be 
given opportunity for ap})eal to some authority or board composed of 
at least two persons for final disposition. This is a basic American 
practice. Even the most fair and conscientious consul might make 
mistakes, which would be corrected if appeals were made. I don't 
want to cast reflection on our consuls, particularly in view of all the 
duties they have to perform. 

There appears to be no danger that admitting the full annual quota 
of immigrants which the law provides for would have any disturbing 
influence on our cultural pattern or mores. The total number would 
be a small percentage of our total population, and furthermore, the 
immigrants would be coming from many different areas and that 
would still further reduce any danger to our way of life. I might 
add here that perhaps an increase in our poplation to a certain ex- 
tent might be beneficial economically also. 

However, I believe that it is very important that we protect our- 
selves from admitting those immigrants which might cause a disrup- 
tion in our way of life, which already has influences which would 
destroy our freedoms, and democracy, such as various types of total- 
itarianisms. I believe we should maice careful selections all along the 
line. I think that is our duty. That is, for instance, in our screening 
process we should be very certain that we do not admit persons who 


have been convicted or persons who have criminal tendencies. Also, 
subversives sliould not be admitted, from my point of view, and also 
those who cannot support themselves. Selective immigration is, I 
think, our duty. If we can't make ourselves strong and keep our- 
selves strong I don't see how we can do much for the world itself. 

I think something should be done similar to that done for the DP's 
after they came to this country. Various welfare and church or- 
ganizations and others kept in touch with them and helped them to 
adjust themselves and helped them to get work and they really did 
a wonderful service. It gave the DP's a viewpoint of our society 
which was favorable. I think if such a thing could be worked out 
for all immigrants in the future it would help us a great deal, not 
only the immigrants but our society too. Of course, that has been, 
done in some cases. 

I feel strongly that a general revision of the immigration law should 
be made only after more careful consideration of the total problem has 
been made than I feel was made in the case of the present revision. 
It would appear that we, as a member of the United Nations, should 
work toward a solution of the problem of overpopulation in many 
countries and develop a program of world-wide resettlement of these 
populations in areas where there is need for more people to develop 
the resources and thereby to raise the standard of living in those areas 
which are now underpopulated. 

Primary consideration would necessarily have to be given to the 
choice of areas or countries to which immigrants might wish to go. 
I wouldn't disregard their wishes. 

Regarding resettlement, perhaps we have had some unanticipated 
experiences for not a few of the resettled persons in this first resettle- 
ment, which was the only resettlement the DP authorities could take 
care of, went to regions and countries which do not require a quota for 
immigrants wishing to come to the United States and after they had 
been there awhile they applied for immigration into the United 
States. So tliat was only a temporary phase, the first resettlement, 
and many of them, it seems, had planned that to begin with. I don't 
know if that type of immigrant was necessarily undesirable — I don't 
think so — but it presents a problem. 

Now, in the whole picture, of course, we are trying to ameliorate 
the whole position of mankind. There may be some consoling for us 
in our fumbling in Job's observation : that there will always be trouble 
for man as the sparks fly upward. But the problems are innumer- 
able and we have to work with them and see what we can do. Perhaps 
we can make for more mercy in the world. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, Doctor. 

The next witness is Mr. Plubert Schon. 


Mr. ScHON. I am Hubert Schon, 162 Bedford SE, Minneapolis, 

I have been asked, Mr. Chairman, by the Unitarian Society and 
Universal Society to present to you a joint statement of the past^ra 


of their churclies in the Twin Cities. I act in this capacity merely as 
a inesseiiiLrer and with your ])ermission will pass on this statement. 

The Chairman. We will make that statement a part of the record 
at this point. 

(There follows the prepared joint statement of the Unitarian and 
Universalist Churches in the Twin Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis, 

The First Umtakian Society, 
Minneapolis, Minn., October 9, 1952. 
Mr. Philip B. Perlman, 

Chairman, President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization. 

Dear Sir : We, the undersiirned, ministers of the Unitarian and Universalist 
Churches in the Twin Cities of St. Paul and ^Minneapolis, Minn., wish to express 
our strong disapproval of the McCarran-Walter immiiiration law, which was 
recently enacted by the Congress over the President's veto. While this law has 
made some needed advances over previous immigration requirements, it lias 
added and retained more inadequacies than it has eliminated. We are disturbed 
i)y the retention of the 1920 census figure for determining (luotas which means 
further discrimination against the countries of southern and eastern Pkirope and 
which still evidences a social and ethnic bias ; by the continuance of the noxious 
idea of racial discrimination in which ancestry and not place of origin determine 
eligibility for admission to the United States and whereby the seeming humane 
treatment of Asiatics is still drastically limited and the situation for Negroes 
from such areas as the West Indies is greatly worsened : and by the continued 
wastage of visas through an inflexible quota system. We are even more dis- 
turbed by the hysterical departure from democratic tradition and practice, as 
evidenced in literacy requirements for victims of religious persecution, and the 
elimination in many instances of the statute of limitations, and the creation of 
numerous grounds for deportation that are left to arbitrary decision and are 
denied judicial review. 

We are well aware that the whole subject of immigration is complex and diffi- 
cult. Our sympathy is with those who seek to make improvements, after more 
than a quarter of a century, upon what have been so obviously racially inspired 
and economically conditioned immigration policies. We can, however, only 
believe that the McCarran-Walter immigration law is an affront to our friends 
and a comfort to our enemies, a further weakening of democracy and an added 
inducement to condemnation of American intentions in a critical situation. 

We, therefore, urge the repeal of the McCarran-Walter immigration law and 
the adoption of a law, such as that endorsed in the Humphrey-Lehman bills 
which would pool unused quotas, eliminate racial discrimination, use a current 
census figure rather than that of 1920, and provide for fair hearings, judicial 
review, and other legal protections which are in accordance with established 
American traditions of fair play. 

We ask this with a deep conviction that America has a prominent role to play 
in Iveeping alive the vision of refuge from wrong and advanc-enicnt toward a better 
day. Because the Statute of Liberty faces away from America is no reason 
why we should turn our back upon it. 

Carl A. Storm, Minister, 
The First Unitarian Society of Minneapolis. 

Arthur Foote, Minister, 

Unity Church {Unitarian), St. Paul. 

Carl Olson, Fred A. Russell, Ministers, 
Church of the Redeemer (Universalist) Minneapolis. 

The Chairman. You are here representing what organization? 

Mv. ScHOX. I am here representing the United Labor Committee 
of Minnesota for Human Rights, which is a voluntary organization 
of members of the labor movement in the State of Minnesota for the 
purpose — or should I say, it was founded primarily for the purpose 
of developing an adequate human relationship program among the 
over 500 local unions in the State. 

The Chairman. Are those local unions affiliated with any national 
organization, sir ? 


Mr. ScHON. They are affiliated with both the American Federation 
of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations. 

The Chairman. I see. 

Mr. ScHON. This statement has not been approved by the executive 
committee of tlie United Labor Committee because of its inability to 
meet and consider the question before the hearing was held, and it 
must therefore be considered as an individual statement. 

I have also been requested by the secretary-treasurer of the Minne- 
sota State CIO Council to appear on behalf of the council at this 
hearing. I will read the letter requesting me to do so, if I may. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

(There follows the letter from tne Minnesota State CIO Council, 
read by Mr. Hubert Schon :) 

October 9, 1952. 
Re President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization. 
Mr. Hubert Schon, 

Minneapolis, Minn. 
Dear Hubert: The State CIO Council has received an invitation to appear 
before this Commission on the above-mentioned subject on October 10, 1952, 
at 9 a. m. in the State OflSce Building, St. Paul, Minn. I sincerely request that 
you appear in behalf of the State CIO Council at this hearing. 
Sincerely and fraternally, 

R. C. Jacobson, 
/Secretary-Treasurer, Minnesota State CIO Council. 

Mr. SoHON. The statement which I wish to read was discussed 
orally with the council. However, neither the council nor Mr. Jacob- 
son, who is the treasurer, has had a chance to read it. Though in 
general they agree with the whole of the statement, they might take 
exception to one or two items. 

The Chairman. When will the Minnesota council meet? 

Mr. Schon. The council has an executive meeting quarterly, and 
it was at their last meeting they decided they wanted to have a rep- 
resentation here. That was their convention, which was only about 
8 days ago. So, they will not meet probably for another month and 
perhaps it will be longer. 

The Chairman. Your committee, then. Wlien will it meet? 

Mr. Schon. It will meet before the end of the year. It meets only 

The Chairman. You will let us know if you are advised of any 
objections to your statement. 

Mr. Schon. Yes, sir; I will in both cases.^ 

The Chairman. All right. You may read your statement. 

Mr. Schon. I. Elimination of racial and ethnic considerations : At 
the very time that the Government of the United States is seeking 
to influence the rest of the free world, and indeed as many individuals 
as it can behind the iron curtain, on the values of individual liberty, 
individual enterprise, and individual worthiness, it is by means of 
reaffirming the archaic patterns of racial distinctions, ethnic and 
national origins, negating this important concept of the free world. 
In other words, we are dividing the world into privileged, unprivileged, 
and undesirable groups by means of the present legislatioon instead of 
measuring all individuals who may wish to seek immigration visas 
on the basis of individual worthiness. It is recommended that meas- 

1 On October 20, 1952, Mr. Jacobson wrote that the executive board, Minnesota State 
CIO Council, unanimously concurs in Mr. Schon's statement. 


ures be adopted that are in line with our fundamental beliefs and 
doctrines and tliat recognize the findings of social scientists during 
the past half century — those findings in the matter of race and ethnic 
origin. It would appear that a reasonable approach to a system other 
than the so-called national-origin system would be to yield preferences 
to relatives by blood or marriage of citizens and legal residents, vic- 
tims of racial, religious, or political persecution, and those who possess 
skills considered critical by the United States Employment Service. 
The balance of the annual quota could well be administered on a first- 
come, first-served basis. That is, of course, on the basis of individual 

II. Asian-Pacific problem : The McCarran-Walter law discrimi- 
nates and delegates an inferior status upon any person who attributes 
as much as one-half of his ancestry to the Asian-Pacific zones and 
provides that such persons, no matter where they were born, must be 
chargeable to the quota of the country of their Asian ancestry. 
Among the many other inequities of this law, its effect will be to 
exclude from immigration to the United States sons and daughters of 
American soldiers who were deserted by their fathers. It would 
appear that, inasmuch as these individuals are at least 50 percent 
Americans, in origin at least, they should attain some special treat- 
ment in being permitted to choose, prior to the age of 25, whether or 
not they desire to remain in their mothers' country or to immigrate to 
the United States with a view to becoming a citizen. As I see the law, 
it appears they would have to come in under the quota — 100 — allotted 
to countries such as Japan. 

III. Resident aliens. 

Under the new law, a host of regulations and statutes and the aboli- 
tion of existing statutes of limitations create and make retroactive 
grounds for deportation of resident foreign-born. In effect, it well- 
nigh requires a resident alien to apply for naturalization. While this, 
in and of itself, might conceivably be considered as a desirable func- 
tion, it might well jeopardize thousands of Americans who are living 
in foreign countries as resident aliens of those countries and thus tend 
to deteriorate the relations between the United States Government and 
other governments. 

In other words, we have those thousands of Americans who are 
living in other countries, and it might appear that you would get into 
a situation where nations start competing with each other in how to be 
exclusive, even among nations of the free world. 

IV. Judicial review : The new law introduces a number of admini- 
strative practices arbitrary in nature and not subject to judicial re- 
view. This introduces into American practice a type of bureaucratic 
authorit}^ criticized by almost all of our own leaders. It appears that 
administrative action of any individual governmental official should 
be subject to a review either of an appropriate judiciary or at least 
of a board of superior officials in the individual's own department. 
Some kind of review of individual officials' administrative action 
should be provided. 

V. Escapees and refugees. 

In the conflict of ideologies and patterns of value in which we as 
part of tlie free world are now engaged, the problem of appropriate 
and definite resettlement of escapees and refugees cannot be met under 
the provisions of the McCarran-Walter law. At the present the bulk 


of the problem appears to be in southern and eastern Europe, where 
individuals residing behind the iron curtain are daily encouraged to 
escape by the Voice of America only to find that the quota from their 
country has been filled. It must be admitted that much has been done 
and, even under the McCarran- Walter law, can be done to permit the 
United States Government to assume its appropriate and proportionate 
role for resettling these individuals who have chosen freedom. How- 
ever, the agressor in all warfare, including cold warfare, has the prin- 
ciple of initiative on his side and we have no way of knowing in what 
area he will strike next. Wliat has the United States to offer to refu- 
gees or escapees from Communist aggression who are from a country 
which has an immigration quota of 100 persons per year ? 

As was indicated in the introduction, every individual can rightly 
claim individual judgement on his own merit, which is a primary 
concept of American political philosophy. It appears incredibly in- 
consistent that we should adopt as our immigration policy a measure- 
ment of individuals according to the land of their birth, the kinkiness 
or straightness or color of their hair, or other purely physical char- 

If the United States Government is to fully assume its role as a 
leader of world opinion, it must achieve a consistence of practice with 
its own moral ethic. The over-all number of individuals admitted 
in any one year must obviously be controlled from time to time on the 
basis of the Nation's capacity to absorb them and is not here a subject 
of issue. However, the so-called quota system, especially one which 
uses the census of 1920 as a basis, is unfair and is prejudicial not only 
to the best interests of the United States but the best interests of free- 
dom-loving peoples anywhere. 

That completes my statement, Mr. Chairman, unless there are some 

Commissioner Gtjllixson. I should like to ask your view of a 
provision in section 212 of the McCarran Act which provides that 
visas may not be issued to "aliens seeking to enter the United States 
for the purpose of performing skilled or unskilled labor, if the Secre- 
tary of Labor has determined, and certified to the Secretary of State, 
and to the Attorney General that (A) sufficient workers in the United 
States who are able, willing, and qualified, are available at the 
time * * * and place * * * to perform such skilled and un- 
skilled labor. * * *" 

Mr. ScHON. I think one of the greatest protections of American 
labor actually exists in the principle of seniority. In other words, 
those individuals who are employed have seniority under their par- 
ticular contract, and I think that affords a considerable amount of 

The view I hold is that I think preference should be given to those 
skills which are critical to us. In other words, skills which are needed 
in our industries should be given preference to. But, on the other 
basis, let immigration be on a strictly first-come, first-served basis, 
using the basis of individual merit and worthiness of consideration, 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Dean James J. Raun here ? 



Dean Raun. I am James J. Raun, dean of Northwestern Lutheran 
Theological Seminary, 100 East Twenty-second Street, Minneapolis, 
Minn. I am accompanied by Millicent J. Roskilly, 2110 First Avenue 
South, Minneapolis, Minn., and we are representing the Lutheran 
Resettlement Committee of Minnesota. It is a committee appointed 
by the different Lutheran bodies working within the State of 

I should like to read our prepared statement, which grows out of 
our experience in the resettlement of displaced persons, particularly. 

The Chairman. We will be pleased to hear it. 

Dean Raun. Until the beginning of this century, the history of this 
country might well be written in terms of immigration and resettle- 
ment. It is only natural that new conditions should call 'for new 
regulations in the whole field of immigration. In this attempt, how- 
ever, it seems that un-American, undemocratic, and un-Christian prin- 
ciples have threatened to dry up and even totally choke off the source 
of fresh blood and life that so long has fed our American nation. 
Freedom's portals ceased to welcome those of many nations and creeds. 

To find a more satisfactory working formula, the President of the 
United States has appointed a special Commission on Immigration 
and Naturalization. On the State level, we have been asked to help 
seek a more just and satisfactory answer to this national problem. 
Many interested in this problem are conscious of the defects in the 
McCarran immigration bill. It denies the basic principles of the 
American concept of freedom and equality. It is discriminatory on 
the national, racial, and creedal levels. 

Though he does not propound a philosophy of immigration, the 
President of the United States does well to remind the Commission 
that as a people we must remain true to our great traditions. We must 
have an immigration policy that strengthens our Nation at home. 
Always, in the aggregate, the great waves of immigration, stimulated 
from within, have exhibited an enlightened self-interest. Strength- 
ened by the blood of many nations, enriched by the various streams of 
culture merging on her shores, uplifted by the living witnesses of 
varying faiths, ours has become a Nation of stout hearts and a place 
of refuge for the weary ones of all national backgrounds. 

Secondly, as the President suggests, w^e must assume and retain our 
world leadership in this area. Immigration must continue to be the 
open cloor for the underprivileged. Regulated it must be, but regu- 
lated in a truly democratic way. The Lehman-Humphrey proposi- 
tions point in that direction. Again we must show the world that we 
welcoine those w^iom we invited, on an equal basis, without thought 
of nation, race, or creed. As we protect the rights of citizens in every 
sphere, so also in the field of immigration we need to be vigilant lest 
our morals, our ideals, our freedom be undermined and lost. In the 
name of all divine truths, it is incumbent upon us as a people to remove 
every stain of discrimination from our immigration laws. Many of 
the European countries look with gratitude upon this Nation because 
they see the open doors. No greater boost could come to our foreign 


policy than the o{)eiiing of these doors to all nations, according to 
equal laws and regulations. East and West, North and South, can 
add untold riches to the homogeneity of our heterogeneous national 

Even within the smaller sphere of local State resettlement programs, 
we have sufficient reason to be grateful as our new citizens take a con- 
structive place in our society, homes, and churches. 

The mass immigration, experienced in the resettlement program, 
has been brought to a successful close. Our experiences, we believe, 
give ample proof that the opportunity for a new life in a Christian 
democracy have been repaid by the displaced persons or refugees in 
loyalty and devotion to their adopted homeland. Approximately 
2,000 Lutheran DP's and refugees have resettled in Minnesota. 
Among them are occupations ranging from skilled and unskilled 
labor to the professional fields. Nationalities represented are Lat- 
vian, Estonian, Lithuanian, Polish, Czech, Hungarian, and ethnic 
German. , Country of origin has not been a factor in resettlement of 
the individual or family. Boys are enlisting and being drafted into 
the armed services, proud to be wearing the uniform of the American 

It is true that among these 2,000 DP's in Minnesota there have been 
cases of mental illness, unmarried mothers, family problems, and 
employment difficulties, but — and we feel this is important — their 
problems have appeared in much lower ratio than in the general 

Among the principal contributions immigrants under the Displaced 
Persons Act have made and are making to the communities in which 
they have resettled are — 

1. Their desire to work and determination to become independent 
self-supporting citizens: It has been our experience that the vast 
majority liave eagerly gone to work, in mnny instances, wliere the 
job was far removed from their special training and skill as — 

(a) Professor of military history from Hungary happily 
served as church custodian for three years. 

(5) A judge from Latvia works conscientiously as ward jani- 
tor in hospital. 

(c) Teacher from Estonia is in charge of hospital dining room. 

(d) A pastor's wife scrubbed floors to pay for medical bills 
for her child. 

Time after time wives and mothers have gone to work — in some in- 
stances to help other DP's ; in other instances, to help pay off a down 
payment on a house which church organizations or individuals had 

Of all moneys loaned by National Lutheran Council for inland 
transportation, 76 percent has already been paid. 

The majority have shown the deepest appreciation for help they 
have received from sponsor and local church. One way in which 
they repay is their entering into community and church life. 

2. Their work habits are characterized by dependability, versatility, 
high level of skill, neatness, and accuracy: Thorough training and 
long apprenticeship explain a high degress of competence in their fields 
and in adapting to new fields. 

This has been especially true of power machine workere, seam- 
stresses, tool and die makers. 


A Jewish sewing-machine manufacturer was so impressed with 
Polisli Catholic DP's ah-eady working for him that he unhesitatingly 
welcomed a Polish Lutliei'an DP into his plant with loud comment: 
"Those Polish boys — they're so dependable." 

A Latvian foreman in high-precision work has trained other DP's 
and management is well pleased with his work. 

3. Their joy of achievement, adaptability, and pride of country: 
Majority shows a desire to belong to church and to become organic 
members of congregations, participating in activities long before they 
have mastered the English language. 

We have not known one who has failed to take steps to achieve 
citizenship. Coupled with the desire to become full-fledged citizens 
is the desire to learn our language, our traditions, and our way of life. 

Although language is a barrier for many adults, frequently after a 
year grade children have hardly a trace of foreign accent in their 
speech. Parents take great pride in their children's ability to use 
the English language. 

DP's in the Twin Cities have registered in large numbers for 
English and Americanization classes. 

4, Ideals, ideas, and culture: As has always been true with immi- 
grant groups, they cherish memories and folkways from their native 
countries. Each national group has brought new and interesting 
contributions to the communit}^ ranging all the way from the plan- 
ning of the family altar to using century-old recipes that are novelties 
to the neighbors. 

Many craftsmen, artists, and musicians have come, bringing new 
art forms that have enriched their communities. 

Throughout the State we have observed how, in the act of helping, 
volunteers have benfited by helping DP families to establish them- 
selves. There are instances where they have overdone, as in case 
of the Ladies' Aid giving a woman 14 hats. However, in the main, 
sponsor and sponsoring agency had the objective of helping the DP's 
to help themselves. 

Many have testified that this exercise of their Christian faith made 
them realize the real meaning of Christ's commandment "Thou shalt 
love thy neighbor as thyself." 

We know that the Nation is strengthened when a community is 
strengthened. We have seen so much evidence that we do not hesitate 
to urge the following changes in the Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion law : 

I. That the quota system be based on the census of 1950 instead of 

II. That the unused quota numbers be used for — 

1. Qualified DP's under our Displaced Persons Act processed 
but who had not received visas before termination of the law. 

2. Escapees from behind the iron curtain. 

3. Religious and political persecutees. 

4. Qualified persons in countries of surplus population that 
constitute a threat to the economic life and the internal stability 
of the country. 

III. The quota system eventually be replaced with a new fornuda 
for selecting immigrants. 

2535G — 52 55 


Commissioner O'Grady. May I ask wluit your view of the present 
quota system is? 

Dean Raun. We should find a substitute that is fair to all nations. 
We feel this is not fair particularly to southern European nations. 
Whatever the law be, we feel it should be equal to all peoples. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, sir. 

Is Mrs. Howard M. Smith here? 


Mrs. Smith. I am Mrs. Howard M. Smith, 2183 Jefferson Avenue, 
St. Paul, Minn., State regent for the Minnesota Daughters of the 
American Revolution, which is the organization I represent. We 
have approximately 2,000 members in Minnesota. Our national mem- 
bership is about 180,000. 

I might say that while I represent the Daughters of the American 
Revolution my grandmother was from Norway. She and her family 
came here, and I appreciate what the immigrants have done for our 

I am here to testify in support of the McCarran-Walter immigra- 
tion bill. I am not an expert in this matter, but I believe we should 
approach the situation in a realistic manner. 

In a republic we are governed by majority rule. The McCarran- 
Walter bill was drafted after nearly 4 years of study and research, 
during which time anyone who wished to testify was allowed to attend 
the hearings and voice an opinion. The purpose of the bill is to 
protect the national quota system and to screen those who wish to 
enter the United States that we may not allow too many subversives 
to come. It was passed over the veto of the President by a maiority 
of more than 2 to 1. 

Wliy, since these nations are overpopulated, are they not fighting 
with us in Korea ? This Korean war was endorsed by the nations of 
the United Nations, but we at the present time are furnishing 90 
percent of the fighting men. I am wondering what efi^ect an immense 
increase of immigrants would have on the labor situation. We at 
the present time are enjoying a prosperity and that prosperity is based 
in a large measure upon w\ar production. Will our economy stand 
more laborers? At the present time there are approximately 1 mil- 
lion Americans receiving unemployment compensation. 

The McCarran-Walter bill goes into effect December 24, 1952. I 
cannot believe that 6 days of operation is long enough a time to deter- 
mine the value of this bill. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. We are glad to have the 
expression of vour views. 

Is Rabbi Gunther Plant here? 


Rabbi Plaut. I am Rabbi Gunther Plant, rabbi of the Mount Zion 
Hebrew" congregation in St. Paul, Minn., and I represent the Minnesota 
Jewish Council, 1359 Fairmont Avenue, St. Paul. 


Tlie Minnesota Jewish Counil is an aji;ency that represents Minne- 
sotans of the Jewisli faith residin<]^ in Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth, 
and a nnniber of smaller comiunnities in this State. 

I have a prepared statement 1 wonld like to read on behalf of the 

The CiiAiKMAN. You may do so. 

Rabbi l^LAiT-r. This statement is submitted on behalf of the Minne- 
sota Jewish Council, an agency supported by Minnesota Jewry, to 
work on behalf of a more secure and more democratic Amei'ica. 

We a})preciate this opportunity to appear before the President's 
Commission on Innnioration and Naturalization to present our views 
on both of these fundamental matters. While we are in basic disa- 
greement with many provisions of the recent codification of immi- 
gration and naturalization laws known as Pul)lic Law 414, we will 
address ourselves at this time to the general assumptions upon which 
our ])resent innnigration policies, including Public Law 414, are buiTit. 

We would like it to be made abundantly clear that this presentation 
pleiids no special private cause. We are concerned only with such 
changes in our naturalization and immigration laws as would make 
them accord with democratic i)rinciple. There is not at present such 

This is not the place to recount the causes of the tragic fact that 
such imj^rovement in our immi<i;ration law will neither primarily nor 
directly redound to the benefit of prospective Jewish innnigrants, or 
to the sjjecial advantage of the Jewish connnunity in the United States. 
More than 6 million Jews in Europe were exterminated in the name 
of race supremacy; another 3 million are locked behind the iron cur- 
tain with no prospect of escape. The remnants of world Jewry are 
tiny scattered islands througliout the world — islands shrinkinor in 
size — mostly destined for immi<^ration to the new democratic state of 
Israel. Our concern with the immigration laws of our country is of 
an entii-ely different character. We feel that as representative of a 
large religious group of our citizenry, we can speak on these mattei^- 
the more forcefully since Jews will not in any foreseeable circum- 
stances benefit from the changes we advocate; our concern springs 
from motivations of a religious ethic which we believe is of vital im- 
portance for our entire Nation. 

Immigration laws and naturalization laws, more perhaps than any 
other single kind of legislation, express a society's basic human values. 
They treat of the broad and fundamental relationships with peo])le 
other than our immediate neighbors, of our respect for people different 
from ourselves. Thus, ultimately, they are an expression of man's 
attitude toward man — and what is better testing ground for a nation's 
moral outlook than this? 


Immigration laws hold up for the entire world to see our accept- 
ance or rejection as a Nation, of the essential quality of all human 
beings. It is with a sense of great tragedy that we must acknowledge 
that our immigration law, and particularly Public Law 414, has de- 
clared to the world that our practice as a Nation is not to correspontl 
to our great humanitarian ideals — ideals which have been glorious 
symbols to a largely oppressed world. 


Time does not permit a chronology and analysis of immigration 
legislation during the past quarter of a century or so. It may be 
asked : Where were we after 1924 ? Where was the public after the 
passage of that first act ? Was not its quiescence indicative of agree- 
ment ? 

We do not believe so. We rather believe that the after effects of 
the First World War and the subsequent period of depression removed 
the question of immigration from public consideration. It was only 
when the gigantic human dislocations of the last decade were felt, that 
we took a good second look at our basic law. The very passage of 
Public Law 414 is evidence of the need of a second look. We regret, 
however, that this second look now necessitates a third. 

Because we have the greatest respect for the broad human under- 
standing of the members of this Commission, we are confident that the 
Commission itself will conclude that our present immigration laws, 
and especially Public Law 414, are not in accord with and often in 
contradiction with that body of social and scientific knowledge we have 
acquired since 1924 — facts which have consistently verified the con- 
cepts of humanity and equality upon which our Nation was founded. 

We are confident that this Commission will conclude that since 1924, 
when the national quotas formula went into force, we have maintained 
by default a method for the selection of immigrants which has legal- 
ized practices to which most Americans would not really wish to give 
consent, but which have persisted by dint of moral inertia and because 
after some years the halo of precedent glorified them. Now, while 
correcting a few of the most glaring evils, Public Law 414 reinforces 
others which stand as a gratuitous affront to the peoples of many re- 
gions of the world and which contradict the concepts of human equal- 
ity preached and taught by every denomination in the land. 

We are confident that this Commission will agree that the welfare 
of our Nation requires that we come to grips with those central provi- 
sions of our immigration laws which have been a source of national 
embarrassment in the conduct of our foreign policy and which have 
produced immeasurable heartbreak, injustice, and waste. To be sure, 
Public Law 414 has abolished sex discrimination and has made a ges- 
ture in the direction of broader human equality, but both advances are 
overshadowed and nullified by the contrivance and even intensification 
of policies which cry for abolition. 


One of the points upon which our present immigration law turns, 
and this is certainly true of Public Law 414, is the national quotas 
formula, adopted in 1924. 

It has long since been the time to repudiate not only the national 
quotas formula, but more importantly, to repudiate once and for all 
the irreligious prejudice and moral falsehood upon which such policy 
is founded. 

The late Senator Reed, who introduced the national origins formula, 
and who served as chairman of the Senate Committee on Immigration 
which finally passed it into law made the motivation of the national 
origins formula distressingly clear. He said : 

I think most of us are reconciled to the idea of discriminatiou. I think the 
American people want us to discriminate * * * our duty is to the American 
people and we owe no duty to be fair to all nationals. 


The national quotas formula is based upon the demonstrably false 
assumption tliat racial frrou})S other than those of the Anglo-Saxon 
I3eo})les would contaminate the peoples of this country; and the 
equally patent falsehood that non- Anglo-Saxons would be detri- 
mental, if not fatal, to the creation of a distinctively American 

It is shocking and frightening beyond expression that we should 
incorporate into law today, as we have done with Public Law 414, the 
horrible m3'ths of race supremacy and race superiority. We are con- 
fident that this Commission, if it does nothing else, will once and for 
all press for the excision of these racist fictions from our body politics. 
We ask notliing else but that our country, which prides itself — and 
rightly so — on its loyalty to the dictates of scientific knowledge and 
discovery, as well as its adherence to the moral law, should no longer 
base so significant a portion of our legal and legislative structure on 
foundations so thoroughly and irrevocably exploded by science and 
research and so unequivocably denied by every religious and moral 

Our strength as a nation has not depended merely upon our great 
material riches. But it has depended far more upon our diversity of 
peoples and cultures and upon our unique ability to fashion a creative 
national unity out of that diversity, without the differences. 
The American people have not been nourished at a single font; it 
has drawn from many springs and it must continue to draw from many 
springs if it is to remain strong. 

While it is true that we Americans have an obligation to protect 
ourselves against those who seek to enter the United States for pur- 
poses of subverting our democratic system of government, we cannot 
allow ourselves to be party to a law, such as Public Law 414, which 
poorly disguises its hostility to all immigration and all immigrants. 
Further, our strength and vigor as a nation has come, in large meas- 
ure, from the polyglot peoples, the cast-offs of other nations wdio fled 
the autocracies of other lands to build a stronghold of freedom here 
in America. I read Public Law 414 and then I read the inscription 
on the Statue of Liberty : "Give me your tired, your poor, etc., etc.,". 
Which expresses better the spirit of America? Can there be any 

To be sure, the free immigration of 1900 cannot today be reinstated. 
We must have limitations, and we must have some preference within 
the limits of such legislation. We must have protection from foreign 
subversion. But our methods to achieve these ends must not be in 
glaring contradiction to our basic human principles. 

While preference sliould be shown for relatives of citizens or legal 
residents, and for victims of racial, religious, or political persecutions, 
and for those possessing special skills, the fundamental immigi'ation 
policy must become one of deliberate exclusion of religious and racial 
criteria as a basis for admission to American citizenship. It should 
be clear, too, that our advocacy of the abolition of the national origins 
quota system does not entail increasing the numl)er of innnigrants to 
be admitted yearly. The total number of immigrants we can absorb 
is a matter for scientific determination. What we are advocating here 
is a democratic policy — which we feel is a policy of wisdom — for the 
admission of whatever number of immigrants are allowed, be that 


number 150 or 150,000 — a policy that will erase the blot of racism from 
the escutcheon of American freedom. 

The question persists: How man}^ people shall be admitted — and 
what shall be done with unused quotas? Our answer is that all na- 
tional quotas should be abolished, and that there be one single yearly 
quota. Prospective immigrants should be chosen by our central con- 
sular authorities on the basis of over-all need. This would be a bold 
departure from present policy, but ultimately the only one wliich we 
can justly adopt. 

Let us assume for the moment that our present annual allotment 
of 154,000 is a desirable figure. This represents one-tenth of 1 percent 
of our total population. If we mean what we say — namely, that we 
are willing to admit an additional one-tenth of 1 percent every year to 
our shores — then why not be unequivocal in our action and law? 
Let us then not deceive ourselves into a false sense of generosity by 
setting quotas for tlie English which we do not expect to be filled. 
Whatnioral justification is there in charging up the needs of our gen- 
eration against possibly greater needs of tomorrow? What can we 
say before our own conscience when we face up to the fact that no 
further "normal" immigrants from Latvia can come here until the 
vear 2274? 


We further respectfully submit, that distinctions between native- 
born and naturalized citizens in our immigration laws must be elimi- 
nated as contrary to the spirit of the Constitution. 

In a democratic republic such as we are building in America, there 
is no room for any form of limited citizenship. This has been axio- 
matic in American law since the days of Chief Justice Marshall who 
laid down the principle, never since challenged, that the gi-ant of 
American citizenship is not a partial grant upon a condition subse- 

But Public Law 414 flouts this time-hallowed principle. It intro- 
duces a note which should have been forever repugnant to American 
practices, even as it is repugnant to American ideals. 

We trust this Commission will urge upon President and Congress 
that it face squarely the issues posed by the legislative creation of 
legal castes in America, and that we do not await a decision of the 
Supreme Court to nullify these sections of our immigration code as 
being contrary to our Constitution. 


Finally, we would like to place on the record our belief that funda- 
mental to the American system of justice is that each person shall be 
accorded a fair hearing. 

This is so much a part of the American ideal of justice that we 
sometimes tend to ignore the invasions, subversions and corruptions 
of it. Yet we are presented, in Public Law 414, with major legisla- 
tion which denies immigrants the right of appeal either to a board of 
immigration appeals or a visa review board, but which, to the con- 
trary, explicitly denies such opportunity for further inquiry to any 
alien who may appear to tlie examining officer to be excludable. 


riiis, we ^^iibinit. is Kiiropeaii Ixiivaucracv hut not ^Vuierictiu justice. 
The future of luunaii beiuo-s, of entire families. imsKt not be so de[)end- 
ent upon the judoinent of a siu<>le indivichial. To do so is far more 
than justice demands, and ceitainly far more tlian our security 

We are confident that this Commission will recommend tlie estab- 
lislunent of a boai'd of inunii»ration appeals and a \isa review board 
as reasoiu\ble re(]uirements of a fundamental area of hiw. 


In conchiding tliis statement presented on behalf of the Minnesota 
Jewish Council we want to connnend the President of the United 
States for his wisdom in establishino; this Commission to inquire into 
matters of immigration and naturalization. We have full confidence 
that it W'ill lead the way in the development of an immigration policy 
and law which will extend and encourage the growth of American 
justice and American humanitarianism. We pledge our support and 
assistance to this Commission. 

The CirAiR:\rAx. Thank you. 

Is Mr. Lowell Eastlund here''? 


Mr. Eastlund. I am Lowell Eastlund, and I represent the Depart- 
ment of JMinnesota, Veterans of Foreign Wars, 511 State OiRce 
Building, St. Paul, Minn. 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr. Eastlxtnd. I was not informed until yesterday of this meeting. 
I received a press release the day before. In the meantime I tried to 
check into the angles of the McCarran Act and I checked back into 
our resolutions and into the action of the Veterans of Foreign Wars 
and found that we had taken no official action. 

We are naturally concerned as individuals with the humanitarian 
aspect of the situation, but we are also concerned about the possibility 
of any new law or any present law which would not provide for suffi- 
cient screening and disci-imination against the type of person who is 
brought in here. Our concern in this is more on a patriotic viewpoint 
than it is from a humanitarian viewpoint. That is inherent in the 
make-ui) of our oi'ganization. We believe that any law which would 
permit a person in who will do harm to the country would nullify the 
good that is done by allowing in even a thousand pei-sons whom we 
could help. 

Thank you. 

The CiiAiKMAN. Of course we. are anxious to keep out subversives. 
Could your organization make any suggestions as to how the present 
law could be strengthened in order to make certain that no subversives 
are admitted to the United States? 

Mr. Eastiund. Possibly the organization could. I couldn't, be- 
cause I have not had a chance to confer with the people who have made 
a study of this and have taken any action. 

The Chairman. Are there any other suggestions you wish to make 
reerardins: the act? 


Mr. Eastltjnd. I am not familiar with the McCarran Act. 
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Eastkmcl, for coming. 
Our next witness will be Mr. Douglas Hall. 


Mr. Hall. I am Douglas Hall, an attorney, 211 Produce Bank Build- 
ing, Minneapolis, Minn. I am authorized to appear this morning 
on behalf of the Hennepin County CIO Industrial Union Council, 
which covers roughly Minneapolis and some suburban communities. 
The council is composed of delegates from CIO unions in Minneapolis 
and the suburban areas. 

I don't want to make any further comments on the quota system and 
the racist implications in our present immigration and naturalization 
laws because that has been covered beyond my ability to add to it. 
It suflSces to say that the CIO and the CIO in Minneapolis concurs 
in the statements that have been made in criticism of the present laws 
on those grounds. 

I would like to urge this proposition on the Commission as basic to 
the formulation of what I would hope would be a new approach to 
the whole problem of immigration and naturalization. We start with 
the constitutional proposition that the power of the Congress over 
immigration and naturalization is a plenary power. That is commonly 
derived from the concept of national sovereignty. Since the Congress 
has the authority to exclude anybody from this Nation, it has the 
authority to establish what standards it wishes. It seems to me that 
that is an outmoded concept of sovereignty and that we would best 
express the ideals of this nation if this Commission would recommend 
a new concept; that in the adoption of immigration and naturaliza- 
tion laws it is a policy of our democracy to extend that democracy to 
the world. The plenary power argmnent has been used to say that 
as long as we have the power to keep everybody out we don't have to 
extend the constitutional protections for those we consider for ad- 
mittance and for those we wish to exclude. But I would urge this 
Commission to recommend a new concept of sovereignty and to con- 
sider the specific provisions of immigration and naturalization laws 
which are complex in the light of a new concept and not this old 
plenary power argument as it has been applied. 

I would like to direct some specific remarks on the deportation aspect 
of the immigration laws because I think that the plenary power 
argument has been worked to death in that particular field. To the 
extent that principles of due process have been applied in deportation 
and naturalization hearings the courts have wrung from the Congress 
and from the administrative agencies the adherence to due process 
concepts and it has only been because of the courts that we have to the 
extent that we have now due process. Of course, as you gentlemen 
know, due process in deportation procedures is a procedural matter 
and not a substantive matter. It seems to me that it is a principle of 
our Nation that substantive due process should also apply to the 
consideration of huinan problems. 

I think specifically that the proposition that is established in our 
present laws that ground for deportation which exists at any time 
after entry can after 25 or 30 years or longer be relied upon to deport 


a father or luisband and to break up a family, even thouj^li there is 
no present findinj^ tliat that tjround which came into existence many 
yeai-s ao^o did exist — and I apply that i)articularly to the political 
cases, membersliip in any prescribed orj^anization — shovdd be adjusted. 
It seems to me that tliis Commission should reconnnend the principle in 
the new leo^islation that the Government has tlie responsihility to fiud 
out now at the time the deportation procedino; is in effect whether or 
not that individual still retains his prescribed views or his prescribed 
associations and that the mere automatic fact that he at one time 
was a member of a prescribed organization should not in 1952 be an 
automatic basis. 

You are probably familiar w^ ith the cases of where during the depths 
of the depression men and women joined organizations that are now 
proscribed as subversive and remained affiliated only for a short time 
and did not participate in the ideological aspects of those organiza- 
tions. They looked upon them for assistance in relief problems. Still 
that short membership, regardless of a person's record time, is basis 
for deportation and destruction of their lives. 

I would urge that the law provide a basis for investigation into the 
merits of each individual case so that you do not have automatic 

Another aspect of this thing is the removal of the period of limita- 
tions, so that in some situations jvhere there are not serious viola- 
tions of the regulations there is no statute limitation, and there is 
no period beyond which those are outlawed. 

Another problem I would urge the Commission to give very seri- 
ous consideration to, is the question of bail. It seems to me that the 
large discretion given to the Attorney General on the granting of 
bail in these cases, is a very serious breach of our normal procedures, 
and to put it bluntly, it seems to stem from the proposition which is 
well established that these are not criminal proceedings; and so the 
alien who is apprehended on a warrant for deportation, who is lodged 
in jail, and is denied bail, has the gloomy satisfaction of knowing that 
he is not charired with a crime; that is, he is not a criminal, but he 
still is lodged where criminals are. And I think that the courts 
generally — it has been my experience in this area — that the courts 
generally have a more humane and common-sense approach to this 
question than the administrative offices do, and that judicial review is 
a safeguard against a system of injustice, and specific cases of per- 
sonal hardship. 

I feel that once bail is granted that the Government should have 
the burden of establishing cause for revocation of bail ; that the alien 
should not be apprehended again and lodged in jail, and then have 
the burden of showing that he has not done anything in the meantime, 
th^t the Government should have the burden of saying "this man by 
his conduct has forfeited his right to bail." I think those are the 
specific things I wanted to use to illustrate that first concept, that 
as an exercise of our sovereignty we should apply in immigration 
and naturalization the basic principles that we ap])ly to our own 
citizens and that we should not rely upon an outmoded theory of 
sovereignty to discriminate. 

The CiiAiKMAN. Thank you. 

IsMr. F.W.Nichols here? 



Mr. Nichols. I am F. W. Nichols, 117 University Street, St. Paul, 
Minn., acting director of social welfare of the State of Minnesota. 

I have made no study of the act which we are considering, and I am 
not attempting to comment on it as far as that is concerned. I merely 
wanted to present our experience as a central agency for the displaced 
persons program, which we are under the law that is recently expired; 
I merely wanted to report to you that in our work the many religious 
agencies that were affiliated in that program and with our welfare 
boards we have had no serious difficulties in the absorption of the 
peo]3le that were brought over here under that act. 

One point we did want to make was to a very minor extent we did 
find some cases of tuberculosis, which happens to be administered 
through our department, and to suggest that in any planning for them 
probably a more adequate screening of the medical aspects would be 
advantageous particularly in a State like this that has a long history 
of trying to improve the care of people, the bringing in of other active 
cases is a matter of some concern. But in the main our experience 
has been very satisfactory, the sponsoring agencies, the various re- 
ligious groups have done a good job of absorbing them in the com- 
munities, the communities have accepted them. In the over-all plan 
if younger people can be added in a State of this kind which has a 
population of about o million with some 20 percent over 55 years of 
age, it would no doubt add to the general benefit of our general man- 
power condition. 

The Chairman. Mr. Nichols, how many displaced persons came 
to INIinnesota ? 

Mr. Nichols. The secretary of our State displaced persons commis- 
sion, Mr. Poor, says over 7,000 came into the State. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. May I ask one question, Mr. Nichols? You said 
20 percent of Minnesota's population was over 55. 

Mr. Nichols. That is right. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Is that a higher j^roportion than that of surround- 
ing States ? 

Mr. Nichols. I haven't looked at the surrounding figures. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Has that been rising; has it been a rising figure 
recently ? 

Mr. Nichols. It has risen 25 percent in the last 10 years. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Mr. Leonard H. Heller here ? 


]\Ir. Heller. I am Leonard H. Heller, 1838 Summit Avenue, St. 
Paul, and I am appearing here this morning on behalf of the refugee 
service committee of the Jewish Family Service of St. Paul, and I 
understand that the remarks that I make are intended to cover the 
situation in Minneapolis as well as St. Paul. 

In 19?)9 I went to New York at the urging of some community 
leaders here, and we formed a refugee service committee to help in 


resettlement of those victims of Nazi persecution that could be gotten 
out of the country. Our committee has continued in force, with the 
exception of the war, until this date. At present the service programs 
of the refugees resettlement program are supported by the community 
chest in both cities, and in both Minneapolis and St. Paul the money 
that's spent for furniture and resettling and transportation and food, 
and medical expenses and food and what not, is repaid by the refugee 
service committee, in other words, by the Jewish community. I don't 
have the figures for Minneapolis, but in St. Paul we have spent upward 
of a quarter of a million dollars in the actual expenses of resettling 
refugees since 1939. My figures are all for St. Paul, and Minneapolis 
I think you can assume half again as large in each case. 

Prior to 1946, I believe about 200 individuals were resettled in St. 
Paul. Since that date our figures in St. Paul are accurate. We have 
resettled 253 family units, about 600 individual cases. 

In St. Paul or Minneapolis, under the guaranty system that we had 
for some time, I believe that almost every Jewish citizen who was 
capable of providing a satisfactory financial picture did guarantee 
that the refugees that came in under their guaranty would not become 
a public charge. I know myself that I made out three or four of 
them, and everybody did. To my laiowledge not one did become a 
public charge. 

I want to say this, too, before I get to the points that I object to 
in the act : That of the refugees we have resettled here, every one has 
applied for citizenship ; every one has become a citizen after the re- 
quired time has elapsed ; with the exception of a few widows with small 
children and a few aged persons, all of our new residents are gainfully 
employed. Not one has become a public charge ; not one has run afoul 
of our laws. Juvenile court records in St. Paul, at least, don't reveal 
that any refugee child has been guilty of any serious mischief. The 
record does not show any. 

The first point I want to make is this : That in our experience there 
is no difference in the assimilative abilities of refugees from the high- 
quota countries and those from the low-quota countries. We see not 
one bit of difference. Under the new act, the quota for I*oland, for 
instance, would be relatively small, while that from Germany is con- 
siderably larger. I have in the prepared statement I will leave with 
you, two cases that are illustrative of what I mean. Two families, 
one from Poland and one from Germany, both resettled in St. Paul ; 
they both have made remarkable adjustments, and they both are on 
their way — I believe one is now a citizen and one is on his way to be- 
coming a citizen. We believe we are in a position to know that there 
isn't any difference at all in the rate or the desire of people from the 
low-quota countries as contrasted with the high-quota countries, in 
their desire or ability to become citizens. We object to the other view 
very strenuously, and I can't, I believe, put it any stronger than that. 
It has no basis in fact. 

The second point I wanted to make is in regard to the suspension of 
the statute of limitations in the case of our new residents. We see no 
validity and much harm in the fact that the statute of limitations 
is suspended, and that people who are here in this countrj^ are in 
jeopardy because of that fact, and that the interpretation of what 
constitutes a crime is left in the hands of our bureaucrats, and our 


consular officials, in foreign countries. We believe that is particularly 
unfair. We think that it will result in keeping a good many worthy 
people from coming to the United States. We think it is unduly 
restrictive, and of course we object to it. We foresee the possibility 
that a new resident may be deported before he actually becomes a citi- 
zen in the 5-year period, and although it hasn't happened we see the 
possibility of a new resident having his citizenship delayed for very 
unstable reasons, technical reasons of one kind or another, and we want 
to point out that until that person becomes a citizen he is in danger of 
being deported. We don't know from actual experience any of our 
new residents who have actually violated the law and been sentenced 
to punishment in the land from which they came, and yet we feel that 
that situation may be present not in one case or two cases but maybe in 
a lot of cases. 

The CiTAiRMAN. Are you thinking of instances where a person might 
be charged with the conmiission of an act in his own country which 
would not be regarded as a crime here ? 

Mr. Heli,er. Yes, I am thinking of that as one phase of a bad 

I am thinking of a new resident who may be on the verge of getting 
citizenship, and it then comes to light, for reasons which I wouldn't 
know, that that person had committed an act in his own country, in 
the country he came from, a punishable crime, and in that case until 
citizenship was granted, as I undertsand the new act, that person is 
subject to deportation. I don't know what the proof will be — the 
act hasn't been in effect — but I do know, as I read the act, and as I read 
the interpretation of it, that in the selecting of immigrants to come to 
this country, the word of our consular agent or our innnigration agent 
in the home country is more or less conclusive. I think this is a 
pretty tough situation. 

I recall, just prior to the war, that I was on the point of getting 
a young lady out of Vienna and into this country, a young lady named 
Cripple. I remember it very well; she was a kindergarten teacher 
and the thing looked all in order and I had ever}^ reason to believe 
she would come with another member of her family — the name escapes 
me, but her brother or sister who was coming — and one of our persons 
in Vienna unwound the red tape. The girl never got here. The last 
word I had from her was about the last letter I saw out of Vienna, 
at least, and about that time everything bad that could happen to 
anybody happened to her ; now Hitler did the dirty work, but it seems 
to me that the overreaching of our own consular agency kept that girl 
from coming to the United States, and, of course, she and her family 
are dead today. 

The third point that we want to make in objection to the new act 
is the fear, the uneasiness, that it has engendered in the minds and in 
the hearts of the people who are in St. Paul and Minneapolis at the 
present time. These people have come, as I told you, and they are 
good citizens ; they are self-supporting in most cases ; they are work- 
ing; they are doing everything they can to make our home their home. 

Since the act was passed and the attendant publicity to it, there has 
been an uneasiness. Some of them want to know : ''Will I ever get my 
citizenship?" They have something in their mind, unquestionably, 
that they don't tell us about : "Will my citizenship be delayed ? Will 


I be able to get my brother over? I have been saving to get somebody 
else over; ^yill they be able to come?" A veritable wall of fears in 
these people's hearts and in their minds and they have got enough to 
worry about already. I think that's inevitable in a piece of legislation 
that is as obnoxious as this, and it is obnoxious; the vote in the Senate 
was very close as I remember it. My son wrote a rather strong letter 
to Senator Thye objecting to the terms of the act. He didn't answer 
until he had voted in favor of it, at which time he admitted quite 
frankly tliat the act was bad, many objectionable features in it, but. 
he thought it was better to pass an Immigration Act and trust that 
amendments could be had in the act at a later date that would remove 
some of is objectionable features. If that is the attitude of one Sena- 
tor it seems to me it may be the attitude of a good many. In other 
words, we have a very bad act on the statute books which even the 
proponents admit is bad and they are depending u]:)on amendments to 
straighten it out. It is locking the barn door after the horse is gone. 

That is all I have to say and I would like to submit my prepared 

The CirAiRMAN. Thank you. Your prepared statement will be in- 
'=;erted in the record. 

(The prepared statement of Leonard H. Heller, representing the 
refugee service committee of the Jewish Family Service, follows :) 

My name is Leonard H. Heller. I have been a resident of St. Paul for the past 
.30 years. Prior to that time I lived in Minneapolis for over 20 years. I am a 
citizen of the United States and a World Wai" I veteran. My principal business 
interests are in Minneapolis. For the past 30 years I have taken an active par- 
ticipating interest in matters of social welfare. At present I am a board member 
of Elliot Park Neighborhood House in Minneapolis and the Jewish Family Service 
of St. Paul as well as a board member of the United Jewish Fund and Council 
of St. Paul. My interest in matters of this kind has not been entirely local. I 
am a board member of the National Association of Settlement Houses as well as 
the national budgeting committee of the Community Chest organization. Quite 
naturally, I am active in Community Chest fund-raising activities. 

It was, I believe, in 1939 that I went to New York at the urging of some Jewish 
community leaders in St. Paul to investigate ways and means whereby the St. 
Paul Jewish community could participate in the resettlement of refugees from 
Nazi Germany. As a result of this trip and the interviews I had in New York^ 
we formed the Refugee Service Committee of St. Paul. I have served as a chair- 
man of the committee which, in recent years, has been a branch of the Jewish 
Family Service a good deal of the time. Since the war, the service expenses of 
the refugee program have been the responsibility of the Community Chest but 
the direct expenses for relief, transportation, clothing, etc., are and always have 
been considered the responsibility of the United Jewish Fund and Council of St. 
Paul and upward of a quarter of a million dollars has been spent since the 
inception of the program by our St. Paul people in the project. I am certain 
that I speak for the whole Jewish comnrunity of St. Paul when I say that nothing 
has been or could be as satisfying as the remarkable results we have achieved, 
in this tield of resettling the unwanted, the persecuted, the sick, the aged, and 
infants cast off by Europe's dictators. 

I well remember when immigration could be accomplished only via the personal 
affidavit. In those years virtually every Jewish citizen of St. Paul, able to 
present to our State Department a passable statement of his financial solvency, 
undertook to guarantee that one or two, or possibly five, families would not 
become public charges. There was a lot of red tape — but our people did it 
willingly ; yes, eagerly. I recall the days of the corporate affidavit when St. Paul 
Jews rushed to absorb far more than their share of the residents of the Oswego 

Our records are not complete before 1946 but I believe about 200 refugees settled 
in St. Paul prior to that year. Since 194G our figures are accurate; 2.53 family 


units have been brought to this city, just short of 600 individuals, and note these 
facts : 

Every one has applied for citizenship. 

Every one who has been here the required time has become a citizen. 
With the exception of some widows with small children and a few aged 
persons, all of our new residents are gainfully employed. 
Not one has become a public charge. 
Not one has run afoul of our laws. 

Juvenile court records reveal that not one child has been accused of 
serious mischief. 

All have diligently studied to learn English. 

I would like to devote the ma.ior portion of my allotted time to discussion 
of those objectionable features of the McCarran-Walter Act w^herein I have 
first-hand knowledge. 

My first point is that the national origins provision of the act is discriminatory 
and will exclude highly desirable persons. Following are two thumbnail sketches 
-of actual cases from the records of the refugee service committee of the Jewish 
Family Service. One family is Polish and would likely be excluded because the 
quota for Poland is small. One family is German and would likely be allowed to 
enter because the German quota is large. Yet both families made excellent ad- 
justment to their new surroundings. 

One day last October a 12-year-old girl walked shyly into the first grade of the 
Jefferson School of St. Paul, found a place among the 6-year-olds in the class, and 
sat down to leani her ABC's. She towered head and shoulders above the other 
youngsters in the class and the boys and girls looked questioningly at the teacher, 
as if to ask whether this big girl belonged there. The teacher smiled and nodded. 
Yes, Susan Woller, just off a boat from a DP camp in Germany, did belong there. 

One day last week Susan Woller walked proudly into the sixth grade of the 
same school and took her rightful place among children her own age. In 3 
months Susan had grown from a shy youngster who knew not a word of English, 
to a conlident young lady who had learned enough reading, writing, arithmetic, 
geography, and American history to hold her own with all other 12-year-olds in 
her new homeland. 

Between October and last week lays the dramatic story of a child and her 
family who made their start in a new life. Herman Woller and Sara Woller, 
Susan's parents, had been born in IMinsk, Poland, but they had spent most of 
their lives in Wilna and Kovna. Before the Nazi persecution, Mr. Woller had 
owned an apparel shop and I\Irs. Woller worked in the business as a seamstress. 
They led a well-ordered, fairly prosperous, middle-class life. From 1943 to 1945 
the family was in a concentration camp in Stugholz, Germany. Liberation 
brought the WoUers to a DP camp in Munich and from there a community assur- 
ance given by a St. Paul family brought the family to this country. The Wollers, 
like others among our new neighbors, don't like to talk too much about their 
concentration and DP camp experiences. The passion to be like other people 
is revealed in what the family has done since coming to St. Paul. Mr. Woller 
went to work as a tailor 3 weeks after his arrival and a week later Mrs. Woller 
found employment as a seamstress in a St. Paul department store. The parents 
also went to school. Two nights a week at the International Institute plus twice 
a week with a private tutor left little time for anything else, but the Wollers did 
learn English quickly. 

The Wollers say they are pleased with St. Paul. They have their own apart- 
ment and they have found some friends. But above all, they find in the progress 
Susan has made a warming illustration of the potentialities which American 
life can hold for our new neighbors. 

Mr. Herman Jacob came to St. Paul with his wife on a community assur- 
ance some years ago. At first glance and even after close inspection, Herman 
Jacob looks as though he had lived here all his life. Speaking English as fluently 
as any of the teachers who tutored his fellow newcomers, well dressed, poised, and 
exuding an air of quiet confidence that comes from having been a successful 
person all his life, Mr. Jacob could have passed for a St. Paul businessman. How 
did Herman Jacob fit into this scheme of things? Did he have trouble because he 
had no skills to be a useful person? Twenty years of employment in an import 
business and then ownership of a taxi business operating a fleet of cabs does not 
suggest a person who couldn't do things. In 1933 the Nazis revoked his business 
license when it was decreed that Jews could no longer engage in a public service. 
Because it was hard to get any other kind of work he took a job driving a cab on 
the night shift. But in 1938, after 5 years on a cab every night, the Nazis denied 
him even that privilege by revoking his chauffeur's license. Mr. Jacob tells of the 


I'act that almost every night ho saw bauds of Nazi hoocllunis painting "Jude" on 
the windows and pavements of Jewish shops. Siek at lieail and foreseeing tlie 
events to come, Mr. Jacob and his wife left Berlin for Shanghai in late 1938. 
For the next S years Ilernian Jacob managed a large movie house, supervising a 
staff of 15 persons and leai-ning the ins and outs of the movie trade. During his 
last 2 years in Shanghai Mr. Jacob worked as a clerk for the United States Army. 
The Jacobs returned to Germany in 1947 to see their few surviving relatives and 
to arrange innnigration to the United States. 

Two montlis without work may not seem so long but it was a long time for a 
man who yearned to be independent and who tears that because he is 5") yeais old 
the doors of employers may be closed to him. "You Americans," said Mr. Jacob, 
"have a saying tliat a man is only as old as he feels. Starting all over again 
is not new for me. I did it at the age of 20 when I went to China for the lirst 
time. I did it years later when I returned to Berlin to go into the import busi- 
ness. I began at the bottom rung in Shanghai in 1938. I can do it again, but 
I need a chance." Mr. Jacob indeed did it again. Shortly after this history of 
the family was written, a matter of :> years ago, he found work with a large retail 
establishment. He is now doing invento)y control work for the same company 
and, as might be expected, he is doing it well. 

I repeat, we see no validity in the national origins features of the act, no 
difference in the capacity and desire for citizenship, or the speed of adjustment. 

My second point deals with the hazard that results from the fact that, under 
the terms of the act, the statute of limitations has been suspended and our new 
residents can, under foreseeable conditions, be deported until the day of their 
death for a violation of the law of the land of their origin. I stated that some 
GOU Jewish persons had come to live in St. Paul since 1946. I stated that none 
of them had become involved with the laws of our country. Do I know, do 
you know, does anyone know whether or not any or all of them may not have 
run afoul of the crazy Nazi or Communist laws under which they were forced 
to live? It seems reasonable to suppose that some may have committed so- 
called punishable crimes in order to exist or possibly they broke the law in 
order to get transportation to some point where emigration to the United States 
was possible. But our new immigration law is clear : If the law (and not neces- 
sarily a just law) was broken, deportation may result at any time. Our 
consuls or immigration inspectors are granted the authority to determine what 
act constitutes a crime. Are they trained or equipped to determine whether 
crimes committed under the laws of a foreign country involve moral turpitude 
as our American standards define it? 

I presume this is a feature of the law that even some of its proponents gagged 
at. In a letter to my son in July or early August Senator Edward Thye said, 
in explaining his vote in favor of the bill, that it had many objectionable features 
but he thought these could best be corrected by subsequent amendments rather 
than by defeat of the measure. Senator Thye has often felt that the best time 
to lock the barn door Is after the horse has made off. 

We citizens of St. Paul resent and utterly reject the idea that our hundreds 
of new and completely assimilated residents must be kept in constant fear that 
they may at any time be confronted with some alleged but long-forgotten law 
violation. May I add that we are well aware that the strong probability does 
not exist yet the possibility remains. All bureaucrats and government officials 
are not benign, not even those employed by the United States. Somewhere, 
and probably in an Austrian graveyard is a woman who might by this time have 
been a full-fledged citizen, and a useful o-ne, had it not been for an overreaching 
United States consular official. I prepared the affidavit. I remember the case. 

Finally, I want to have you consider the worry, the strain, the anxiety, that 
this legislation engenders with these newcomers already here. Many ai"e work- 
ing, studying, saving, with the hope of one day bringing a relative, friend, or 
a former associate to this country. Since the act was passed, many of them 
have come to our office expressing their serious concern as to whether this hope 
can be realized. Others fear, and with justification, that they themselves may 
be denied citizenship or that they will be subjected to further investigation and 
delay. These are hard-working, upright people — good neighbors. It is wrong 
to subject them to further ordeals. Their children have done well in our schools, 
and, incidentally, our schools have done well for them. A few days ago a teacher 
stopped a social worker to inquire the whereabouts and progress of two former 
refugee students, to whom she said she felt a deep personal attachment. An- 
other teacher, and not a Jew, has become a foster parent for one of the children 
brought here under the orphan children's program. 

I hope I have not been unduly long-winded in presenting our reasons for 
urging repeal or revision of the new immigration act. My plea is on behalf of 


the St. Paul Jewish community, its residents and citizens, new and old. My 
statement has been limited to practical objections and only those wherein we 
have had first-hand knowledge and experience. 

The Chairman. Is the Reverend Campbell here ? 


Reverend Campbell. I am the Reverend William J. Campbell, 
pastor of the Methodist Church, Austin, Minn. I represent the Jewish 
community of Austin today, as well as a good many people in the 
Methodist Church, and Mr. Frank Schultz of the CIO Packinghouse 
union, who is unable to attend due to the tragedy that befell his 
family in a fire yesterday morning. 

The Chairman. Do we understand, then, that you represent gen- 
erally all the people of Austin, Minn., no matter what denomination 
or what trade or industry ? 

Reverend Cambpell. Well, a good many of them. I wouldn't say 
all of them. There may be some that, like a great many people, I 
know are just somewhat confused, probably like some of the Congress- 
men and Senators who passed this act. I haven't read it all. 

As I have gone through this act, and read portions of it, and scanned 
a number of the parts of it, I have discovered that there is something 
about the act that I object to as a Christian minister, for I believe 
that we violate the spirit of what we are attempting to do. The act, 
as I understand it, is attempting to oppose all totalitarianism, and as 
I read the act, I discover that some of the things which we object to 
most in totalitarianism are found in the act itself. 

First of all, the whole matter of racism, where it purports to do 
away with that by allowing the people in the Pacific triangle to have 
a small quota, in the next breath the act, in section 202 (b) I think it is, 
sets the limit so that anyone born of Asiatic ])arentage or half- Asiatic 
parentage anywhere in the world will be included in that quota, and 
that to me, of course, is racism, and nothing more or less than that, and 
I believe that that violates the spirit of our Nation, even as the old 
immigration lavv's have violated it, and I am against it, and I think that 
a great manj' people in our community in Austin are against it on the 
basis of principle; that this is not an American approach to this 
situation; that this is not a Christian approach; that this is not a 
Jewish approach ; this is not a democratic approach, and we are a 
Christian society with democratic principles and I believe that tliis 
net ought to clear with those principles. We are very much concerned 
about that at the present moment, and I feel that this act ought to be 
rewritten in certain places so that it does clear with the basic principles 
of our democracy. 

Then, I have a young couple in my church who have had friends, 
they have been in Europe, and they have had friends they have tried 
to get into this country, and these friends have been, as many millions 
have been, members of totalitarian states, and to save their own sldns 
they have given lip service to these totalitarian states, and by this act — 
I think it is section 212 and other portions of the act — these people 


liave been discriminated against and cannot come to tliis country, al- 
though they would make fine citizens. One was a doctor and his wife. 
This doctor was married to a doctor, and tliey finally settled in Canada 
because they could not get into this country, and these young people 
were trying to get them into one of the communities of this country 
where they needed a doctor and needed a doctor very badly. But the 
spirit of this act and the whole tone of it has made that impossible. 

Then they had a young cou[)le, friends of theirs, and he was an 
American and the wife was of European extraction, and she couldn't 
get here because of her membership. Now, when in the church we deal 
with repentance, and we do know that a repentant sinner is sometimes 
a more firm believer in the thing that they repent to, and they are 
more against the thing they repent from, and I believe that Europe 
is filled with people who may have been members of some totalitarian 
party and they are repentant and therefoi-e probably would be more 
strong- feeling against totalitarianism than some others who may not 
have been members of some party or some group. 

Now I certainly am strongly opposed to all forms of totalitarianism. 
I believe that all religious groups, that all Christian groups and Jew- 
ish groups are set against this form of government. However, I do 
believe that where we have repentent people we ought to give them a 
chance to come into our fold and become citizens of the United States. 

I have letters from Governor Anderson and Senator Thye and oth- 
ers who in the same spirit as the gentleman who preceded me passed it 
because they had to have a bill and this was the best they had to offer, 
and although they intimated they weren't too keen about it it went 
through anyway ; and I believe that there are many of our Congress- 
men who in the last rush of the last days did not have an opportunity 
to read this and digest it and understand it, and therefore I believe 
it should be revised and brought into keeping with our own Christian 
and democratic principles. That I think is the extent of my testimony 
here this morning. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Do we correctly understand you as being 
in favor of the admission of immigrants on a completely equal basis, 
for people of Asia, Indonesia, Japan, South Africa, et cetera, as well 
as Europe ? 

Reverend Campbell. That is right. I feel very strongly about this 
thing. I have in my own background my mother Avho was a Norwegian 
immigrant who came from Norway, and my father's people were 
Irish immigrants and there is a strange mixture and there is a con- 
flict within me, you might say. So that we have the preferred group 
within my family but I lived iii a community Avhere they were not 
preferred people, a steel community which had 27 nationalities from 
Europe and I failed to find there was any difference in the things these 
people from Europe had to offer. One family, where a man still can't 
talk the language well enough to understand him unless you know 
him a while, has four boys who are doctors and they are from the group 
that we would more or less discriminate against, and I just donx feel 
that there is any reason for that at all. And I know that that is true 
because I worked in that kind of a community. 

(A statement submitted at a later date by Frank W. Schultz, presi- 
dent, local No. 1), United Packinghouse Workers of America, follows :) 

25350 — 02 56 


Statement Submitted by Fkank W. Shttltz, President, Local No. 9, Uniteu> 
Packinghouse Workers of America 

Local No. 9, United Packinghouse Workers of A3>ierica, 

Austin, Minn., October -J, 1952. 
Harry N. Rosenfield, 

Executive Director, President's Commission on Immgiration and Naturaliza- 
tion, Executive Office, 
Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir : I am writing to you to express my views in respect to the McCarran- 
Walter immigration law which will be the subject of a series of hearings by 
your Commission in a number of cities around the country. 

It appears to me the newly enacted iiumigration law is so beset with racial 
supremacy as to make it appear arro.^ant and offensive to serious-thinking 
Americans and to those in other parts of the world that look to our Nation for 
guidance and leadership. 

In theory it is true that the bill purports to eliminate racial discrimination 
in our immigration system, but it is well recognized that, for all practical pur- 
poses, this theory is not going to develop into a reality. The vague standards 
established in the new law for admission of aliens appear to be an unreasonable 
and unrealistic system for deporting those whom some Government official may 
have reason to believe should be deported. 

That aspect of the law appears to be in contradiction to our American pro- 
cedures that have in the past been based on justice, equity, and fair play. 

The bill, in my judgment, does not eliminate racial discrimination in our 
immigration laws, but only continues it in a new form. It takes away from the 
Attorney General much of his authority to susijend deportation of worthy and 
desirable aliens already in this country. It also discriminates on the basis of 
sex and skills. This aspect of the law is most difficult to comprehend in light of 
the fact that it is this very group that has helped make our country into one 
of the greatest nations on the face of the earth. From my vantage point, it 
would appear that the new immigration law would be a liability rather than an 
asset to our foreign policy leadership during the8e troubled times. 

All in all it appears to me that the new immigration law was written out of 
fear much rather than confidence in our ability to accept, rehabilitate, and 
assimilate portions of the down-trodden and oppressed peoples of the world who 
desire to come to America and establish a new way of life. 

It is my sincere judgment that many of us here today making our contributions 
to society would not be in this country had the present law been in effect and 
enforced literally when our parents came to America. 

No one will deny that we need necessary safeguards in regard to the immi- 
gration situation, but those safeguards ought to be based on what is humane, 
just, and liberal. Those are the things we tell the world we stand for. Our 
actions in respect to these things are the measuring sticks that the people in all 
parts of the world use when judging us. 

Aside from that the very fabric of our democratic conscience has always 
dictated humane and liberal policies. 

In conclusion, it is my humble opinion that those same policies should prevail 
in respect to our immigration laws. 

Thanking you considerably for any attention you might show my few remarks, 
I remain. 

Respectfully yours, 

Frank W. Schultz, 
President, Local No. 9, VPWA-CIO. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 
Is Rev. Caspar B. Nervig here ? 


Reverend Nervig, I am Rev. Caspar B. Nervig, 8038 Avenue East, 
Williston, N. Dak. I am pastor of the First Lutheran Church of 
Williston, a congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. 


1 happen to be a member of the North Dakota Eural Life Commis- 
sion of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, and am here because of the 
interest shown in rural life, and certain contacts with irrigation and 
agricultural developments on the Great Plains. I do not come offi- 
cially representing anyone as such ; however, I am here at the request 
of the representatives of the National Lutheran Council who thought 
in view of my contacts in the Great Plains area, and some work that 
I had done in the placing of displaced persons in our city and com- 
munity, that I might have some observations to carry here, and so I 
speak very largely on my own, of course, and I come with no prepared 

But I do have some thoughts on this subject that I would like to 
share with you, and I am not going to go into the technical details of 
the law because I do feel rather incompetent. I want to say right at the 
outset these 2 hours here today have added to the impression that I 
had before, that this is a very difficult problem, and I appreciate the 
position that our Congress was in, and the position that your Commis- 
sion is in, that you probably are faced with a conflict that is not per- 
fectly soluble. 

On the one hand, we have the question of what we think we ought 
to do, and w^hat we would like to do, and what we can do, and it is 
quite possible for us to be carried aw^ay, either by idealism or by the 
other extreme, entirely, utilitarianism, and I believe that there will 
have to be a solution that takes into account the broad picture, and of 
course that's your responsibility and not mine, 

I feel, first of all, on the question of immigration that we have to 
make at the present moment a distinction between a temporary pro- 
gram and a permanent program, and, of course, the McCarran Act, as 
T understand it, is the permanent program; but I also understand that 
in your discussions you are considering the immediate temporary 
needs as well, and I would like to point up that distinction : that when 
we come to the discussion of the displaced persons, and that whole 
group of people in which there is now an emergency situation, we are 
dealing with a group of people that are not typical immigrants, I 
can on this point quote the janitor of my church, who is a Latvian, 
formerly president of a state teachers college in Latvia, and inspector 
in the de]:)artment of education for the wliole of Latvia, the author 
of many textbooks, now keeping my church clean. One of the high 
points in my own contact with these Latvians was the day that I 
visited him early in my contact with him in the little basement apart- 
ment we had for him, and he took off from the bookshelf a few books 
and handed them to me, and I coiddn't read them for I don't know a 
word of Latvian, but on the title page I could read "Martin's Guide." 
One after another he handed me the books of which he had been an 
author, and with a gesture sort of like despair he tossed them on the 
bed, and in that gesture of despair I saw the man tossing aside his life. 
He is making a marvelous adjustment and at the same time typifies a 
unique problem. He says to me: "We aren't immigrants; we did not 
leave our country because of choice. We left it because we had to, 
and therefore I appreciate very much what your country has already 

I appreciate very much, too, what our country has already done, 
and I feel that we should try to do more, and I believe that there are 


two reasons for this: the first one is the humanitarian aspect, the 
Christian aspect that has been emphasized so well already today, 
and on this point I may be not fully qualified to have an opinion 
on it, but I have felt that perhaps we ought to do something that is 
more clearly charity, I believe that in the selecting process of the 
DP's we have been looking not only to the welfare of the DP's but 
to the welfare of America in that we have been trying to skim the 
cream, leaving for someone else to take care of that which is, shall I 
say, the milk, or even the buttermilk. 

I wonder if we couldn't, as a nation, make room for some of these 
folks that somebody will have to take care of. I refer to the sick, 
even the TB. I don't know why we should leave it to a country like 
Sweden to provide room for a few TB folks and for a country like 
Norway to take a handful of the blind. I wonder if we couldn't do it 

I realize that there are problems involved, but even if it did cost 
us as a nation some money it would be an act almost pure and simple 
of charity, while mixed with the other have been motives of self- 

For instance, now, I have amongst my DP's in Williston a couple 
who are middle-aged with two fine young people, but the grandmother 
is still in Germany waiting for what? To die? Nothing else. 
Couldn't we take her in — even if there was a possibility of her some 
day needing some old-age assistance? That's the pure humanitarian 
aspect that I would like to stress. 

In skimming the cream of the healthy and the strong and the 
skilled, we are leaving the others to someone else. But the question 
is. Do we have a responsibility ? I feel that we do, and I would like 
to especially stress that I feel that we have a responsibility to many 
of the displaced Germans, morally as a nation, I believe that we 
became party to a certain race ideology that we never intended to, 
and never realized when we underwrote as a nation the removal of 
10 million people from eastern Germany where their ancestors had 
lived for a thousand years or more, and in that way we became a party, 
unintentionally, to the uprooting of people, purely because of race. 

Now that's another aspect of the race issue that was raised today 
that is a little more remote from us and for that reason we don't see 
it. But I believe it has its place in the consideration of temporary 
legislation for that type of ])eople. 

Now when I go over to the permanent program of immigration, I 
feel that I don't want to say too much about the McCarran- Walter 
Act because, as I said before, I am not too competent, so I would like 
to speak in general terms on it. 

In the first place, I believe that in the permanent program of im- 
migration, we want to recognize the value of immigration as more or 
less an on-going part of American life; maybe it is true that even as- 
a city benefits from the constant sociological influx of rural people, 
so America as a nation will benefit through the years by the constant 
influx of new blood. 

In the first place, it is our tradition. We have been the melting 
pot and proud of it. In the second place, it is an essential part of 
our American ideals as has been brought our several times today, 
and has been written at the base of the Statue of Liberty also : more- 


over, I believe it is oood for oiir respective communities wlien we 
get some new blood willing to put in a full day's work, and a full 
hour's labor for an hour's pay. It puts to shame some folks whose 
attitude is to get as much as possible for as little as possible. And 
maybe there is a good moral benefit coming to our connnunities by the 
influx of many of this type of people. But now I come over to the 
side which is realistic, and here you will, maybe, say I am on the 
verge of contradicting myself, but here is where we must temper our 
idealism with realism. 

Everyone today, I believe, has granted the necessity of some type 
of limitation and regulation, and I don't believe that any one has 
urged the individual open-throwing of our doors. But we have had 
a good deal of objection to the quota system, and there has been only 
one suggestion brought out, and that's the suggestion of one overall 
quota to be determined by a central commission, I suppose, or bureau ; 
now if there is going to be any limitation at all, you are going to 
have selection and discrimination anyhow. If there are 500,000 peo- 
ple that want to come into the United States in a given year, and the 
law limits them to 150,000, someone is going to have to select and 
choose. The only difference is that the selection is made by bureaus, 
and not by law. 

Now, even within the framework of quotas, selection is made by 
bureau and persons, but in the over-all picture the guidance that they 
have is by law, and I think I would rather entrust to an act of Con- 
gress, a basis of selection, as long as there must be selection, rather 
than leave it to a bureau where there is a much greater opportunity 
for personal prejudice and group pressure and that type of thing. 

We are in a situation where we have to make a selection, and until 
someone comes with some other way of making a selection than the 
basic principle, I don't know why we can object to it. I realize there 
must be some weak points in it that have been brought out today, but 
fundamentally we will have to have something like it or else some- 
thing that nobody has thought of yet, at least I haven't heard about it. 

Now when it comes to the race problem, I think that we mustn't 
channel all our thinking about racial rights into the lone channel 
of immigration. I think that there are many other aspects of the 
equality of rights of nations that plays into our American picture in 
addition to the immigration one, and if this was the only point on 
which we ought to take this into consideration, then, it would be 
maybe a greater issue than it really is. 

Now, I agree with the attitudes of many of my colleagues in the 
clergy that have spoken here in the equality of races, and I think 
that there is much that we need to do in America for human liberties 
along that line ; and, yet, I believe that from a realistic point of view 
there is a limit to our thinking here too. 

Now, if a man from China moved to Willston who wanted to join my 
church, I would be glad to have him, I would like to have him as a 
deacon in my congregation, but frankly I don't want his son to marry 
my daughter. Now, is that racism? I don't think so. You know, in 
our farming territory out here in the Middle West, we are awfully 
fussy about pure-blood stock. It isn't so much a question of whether 
a Hereford is better than a Holstein, but one is good for milk and the 
other is good for beef, and a pure blood of either is better than a scrub 


of both. So in our enthusiasm for racial justice, I tliink we must 
temper it by othei' considerations. 

I believe that the various races, the orientals, are better people as 
orientals, with pride in their own race. So, therefore, alongside of 
our immigration approach to the question of race, it seems to me that 
there is another approach : in the past, while international economic 
world leadership centered in Europe, and America was a wide-open 
country with vast areas, we were the refuge of the oppressed, the 
poor, and the like. But, now, America holds the upper hand in w^orld 
economy, and it seems to me that a part of this brotherhood of races 
could be expressed by America in a desire for us to lift the otherf 
nations and races where they are. 

For instance, I read an article in a magazine the other day in which 
the author was deploring very much that German industry had now 
recovered to the extent that a certain steel company had successfully 
underbid an American steel company in selling a bridge in South 
America, and this was terrible. Well, I was glad and I think we all 
should be glad if we don't want to be forever handing out a dollar 
in Europe, we should be glad that a European nation is getting to 
the stage where it can support itself and support its own people again. 
And, therefore, I think this matter of racial equality and justice and 
human rights takes on an aspect in our. national policy that is beyond 
the function of this committee, and beyond the question of immigra- 
tion. But I believe there is a way in which we as an American nation 
can tell these other nations and races of the world, we love you as 
brothers, and think you have got as much right as we have. 

Commissioner Gullixson. May I ask a question : How would you 
go about it to settle 10 impecunious farm families in Williams County 
wheat farming areas ? 

Reverend Nervig. Quite impossible. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Wliy ? 

Eeverend Nervig. Well, in the first place you couldn't buy the land 
if you wanted to; after all, there is some oil business going on around 
there. You couldn't pay for a farm with almost any kind of money 
out there today, and if you could pay for the farm to start farming 
in Williams County, it would take at least $20,000 worth of equip- 
ment. It takes a young capitalist to be a farmer in the Great Plains 

Commissioner Gullixson. May I ask a couple more questions : Now 
in terms of happy farm life, we usually think of cows and chickens 
and sheep; how many cows are on your typical wheat farm? 

Reverend Nervig. Practicalh' none. They drink Minnesota milk,, 
some of them. Milk is shipped from places in Minnesota to Williston 
and we in Williston have often di'unk Minnesota milk. 

Commissioner Gullixson. What would hap]:)en to a farm family 
settled not only in an oil territory but tliroughout those territories 
during the winter months, what would the}' do for a living? 

Reverend Ne"rvig. Well, in the wheat-farming territory where it is 
a seasonable operation, there is nothing for them to do. and men aren't 
interested in hiring year-round people, or only a few. I don't want to 
give a false impression ; there is some dairying there, too ; for instance, 
I had a farmer who is a dairyman that wanted to get a DP as a hired 


Commissioner Guixtxson. A sinjrlo man or a family man? 

Reverend NEiniG. He was ready to take a family, but he was quite 
an exceptional case. It is very difficult because most of these farmers 
fold up. Because one of the jproblems of the Oreat Plains and folks 
interested in the family farm will agree with me on this, is that one 
of the problems in this Great Plains area is the tendency to become 
suitcase farmers as they now of late have been callinjy them. 

Commissioner Gullixson. You have some in that community who 
fly airplanes to their farms ^ 

Reverend Neevig. 1 have two that fly back and forth every day 30 
miles to Williston, every day, jump on their $5,000 combine and $5,000 
tractor and run it all day, sweep down a big acreage, and fly back 
home in the evening. 

Conmiissioner Gullixson. What is the average acreage of a fami 
in the irrigation project that has been developed in the Missouri 
River Valley, if you are familiar with it ? 

Reverend Nervig. The average acreage is 80 for an irrigated farm, 
the average for a family-size farm considered in our territory now is 
about a section and a half for the wheat farm ; but the irrigation farm 
they consider that a family-sized vmit is about SO to 100 acres. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Just f or the record, for those that don't come from 
North Dakota, will you indicate what a section and a half means in 
acreage ? 

Reverend Xervig. One section is 6-1:0 acres. 

The Chairman. What do they raise on an 80-acre farm ? 

Reverend Xervig. That gets to be a different type of farn.i. There 
is developing better industry and a good deal of alfalfa, and there 
also is the continuation of wheat farming even on irrigation. 

The Chairman. Can they raise much on 80 acres ? 

Reverend Nervig. Oh yes; you can raise double as much wheat on 
irrigation than you can on dry land, if it is handled right. It de- 
pends on the Lord, of course. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Who has the priority for these 80-acre 
farms ? 

Reverend Nervig. Of course, we don't have very many of them yet. 
Those two irrigation programs or projects we have on the bottomland 
of the Missouri are almost only experiments, you might say; but 
the policy in force there now is that the first choice for the purchase 
of the lands is to a veteran who is a citizen of North Dakota. 

Commissioner Gullixson. What opportunities, then, would there 
be for an immigrant to be settled in that area ? 

Reverend Nervig. I am sure that there is no hope for immigration 
settlement there in that way at all the present time, unless there is 
some vast change in the future. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. The Commission has been furnished current in- 
formation concerning the farm labor situation in certain States, and 
for North Dakota, for instance, we have been told that there is a 
shortage of help for general farm hands, and that husky men are 
necessary for loading and there is this indication that Mexican labor 
or nationals are employed in South Dakota, for example, as foreign 
agricultural workers, transported to the United States, under a pro- 
gram which the Employment Service is operating. Would you care 


to enlighten the Commission on the significance of any of this need for 
more people and the use of foreign nationals in these labor areas ? 

Reverend Nervig. That importation of labor doesn't apply in west- 
ern North Dakota, it applies in the Red River Valley where there 
is a good deal of beet farming and also potato farming, particularly 
the beet farming; and that, of course, is something that is entirely 
diiferent from immigration because that is seasonal labor, it comes 
up in the spring and they camp in some shacks and live under trucks, 
and in tents and what have you, very inadequate facilities and the 
farmer only has to have a shed he can fix up for a camp and they camp 
there until harvest, and then go back to Mexico. I don't know of 
immigrant labor that becomes permanent residents, if that could take 
care of them. They would have to be paid a year-round living wage 

Mr. RosENFiELD. And about the information made available to us 
of a shortage for help in general farm hands in North Dakota, what 
about that ; does that conform with your knowledge of the situation ? 

Reverend Nervig. I don't think that there is such an overwhelming 
demand. What they usually do is buy more machinery, it is such a 
terrific mechanization. I don't know, I have qualms about this in- 
creased mechanization ; I wish we could stay back to where the human 
being was more important than the machine. All along the line I 
think that is a basis concept. But at the same time, realistically fac- 
ing the situation there is a tendency for the farmer to buy bigger 

Mr. RosENEiELD. Let me put it in generalized terms : do you know 
from your experience in these areas in general of any continuing, of 
any temporary, of any partial demand for labor which is not supplied, 
and which is not met in the farm communities of the Plain States ? 

Reverend Nervig. I don't think there is any cry for labor. I think 
in my observation of a few cases that I know, where a man was looking 
for laborers, but not any crying need. 

Mr. RoSENFiELD. Wasu't it out of the Great Plain States that the 
general demand came for exemptions from the selective service for 
the farm youth on the ground that special attention was necessary 
there, else the farms would be seriously handicapped or hampered in 
meeting the farm production goals ? 

Reverend Nervig. I think that was true, and there it would be 
draining off farm labor that already was there; and of course I re- 
member at the time that there were many farmers that said his own son 
was worth two hired men. 

Mr. Rosenfield. Does that situation no longer prevail ? 

Reverend Nervig. No; I think that would still be true. I don't 
think there is any surplus of farm labor, and I think from situation 
to situation there is a need, but I don't think we should be misled by 
an overwhelming need. 1 might base that observation partly on 
DP's whom we were resettling. I had a hard time in finding farm- 
ers interested in taking on DP hired men. That is partly in the back- 
ground of my thinking. It wasn't easy to find farmers that were 
interested in taking on or needed that type of help. That was the 
problem. For a single man dropping in for the season, why there was 
a lot of seasonal work needed but very little of that year-round work. 


Mr. RosENFiELD. How many did you resettle in the State of North 
Dakota, do you know ? 

Reverend Nervig. Practically 600 DP's and ethnic Germans were re- 
settled by tlie Lutheran Resettlement Committee, I am informed. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have it 
be known that we have invited to testify in St. Paul a great many more 
people than have accepted our invitation. For instance, we don't 
have on the schedule as many farm representatives as we hoped to 
have appear. I would like to request that there be inserted in the 
record a full list of those who were invited, but did not accejjt. 

The Chairman. That will be done. The hearing will now recess 
until 1 : 30 o'clock this afternoon. 

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m. the Commission recessed until 1:80 
p. m. of the same day.) 





sixteenth session 

St. Paul, Minn. 

The President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization 
met at 1 : 30 p. m., pursuant to recess, in the auditorium. State Office 
Building, St, Paul, Minn., Hon. Philip B. Perlman, Chairman, pre- 

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

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


(The list referred to on p. 883, follows :) 

Baird, Julian, president, First National Bank, St. Paul, Minn. 

Berger, Rev. Leo J., Sibley, Iowa. 

Blegen, Theodore C., dean. Graduate School, University of Minnesota, Minne- 
aix>lis, Minn. 

Boxrud, Rev. David, Lutheran Memorial Church, Pierre, S. Dak. 

Butler, Pierce, attorney, St. Paul, Minn. 

Carlson, Dr. Edgar M., care Gustavas Adolphos College, St. I'eter, Minn. 

Chapin, Prof. Stuart, chairman. Department of Sociology, University of Minne- 
sota, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Ohristianson, Edwin, president, Minnesota Farmers Union, 2470 University 
Avenue, St. Paul, Minn. 

Christianson, Otto, executive vice president, ^Minnesota Employers Association, 
Pioneer Building, St. Paul, Minn. 

Curtin, Rev. Francis J., Minne.sota Catholic Welfare Association, 226 Summit 
Avenue, St. Paul, Minn. 

Davis, I'rof. Kenneth, Minneapolis Law School, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Diracies, John M., president. Junior Chamber of Commerce, Metropolitan Life 
Building, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Ettel, Michael, president, Catholic Aid Association of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minn. 

Finke, Walter, Minneapolis Honeywell, 27.j;j Fourth Avenue, South, Minneapolis, 

Ojenvick, Rev. Benjamin A., Lutheran Resettlement Service, Sioux Falls, S. Dak. 

Glabe, Rev. E. B.. ;^60(5 r^dmund P.oulevard, Minneapolis 6, INIinn. 

Graning, Carl, State adjutant, American Legion. 

Green, Lloyd M., State Federation of Labor, 418 Auditorium Street, St. Paul, 

Huncke, Mrs. Mary, chairman. Displaced Persons Committee, State Office Build- 
ing, Des Moines, Iowa. 



Jones, J. S., Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation, 478 St. Peter, St. Paul, Minn. 

Lawson, George W., secretary, Minnesota State Federation of Labor, 416 Audi- 
torium Street, St. Paul, Minn. 

Levy, Mrs. Irving, 609 Mount Calm, St. Paul, Minn. 

Mayo, William, regional director. Congress of Industrial Organizations, 150 
West Fourth Street, St. Paul, Minn. 

Miller, Paul, director of extension. University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minn. 

Mintener, Bradshaw, vice president, Pillsbury Mills, Minneapolis, Minn. , 

Moscrip, W, S., St. Paul Association of Commerce, 1543 Grantham, St. PauU 

Nelson, Dr. Lowry, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minn. 

Olson, R. A., president. Minnesota State Federation of Labor, 416 Auditorium 
Street, St. Paul, Minn. 

Pearson, William B., Minnesota State Grange. Ogilvie, Minn. 

Rein, Clayton, St. Paul Junior Chamber of Commerce, 1009 Fairmont Avenue^ 
St. Paul, Minn. 

Robinson, Paul T., manager, Ajnerican Crystal Sugar Co., Chaska, Minn. 

Siebenand, A. W., employee relations manager, Green Giant Canning Co., LeSuer, 

Sjelstad, Palmer, 500 North Highland, Pierre, S. Dak. 

Steefel, Mrs. Genevieve, Unitarian Service Committee, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Strenglis, Harry, president, St. Paul Chapter AHEPA, St. Paul, Minn. 

Stright, Rev. Hay den, Minnesota Council of Churches, 122 West Franklin Avenue,. 
Minneapolis, Minn. 

Thompson, Cameron, North West Bank Corp., North West Bank Building, Min- 
neapolis, Minn. 

Tregila, Miss Mary, Sioux City, Iowa. 

Upgi'en, Arthur, economist. Federal Reserve Bank, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Van Zinderin, John, Dutch Club, St. Paul, Minn. 

Vasey, Wayne, director. School of Social Work, State University of Iowa, Iowa 
City, Iowa. 

Whiting, Rev. Henry J.. Lutheran Welfare Society, 2110 First Avenue, South, 
Minneapolis 4, Minn. 

Wilson, Rev. John, secretary. Minnesota Council of Churches, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Wintou, David, Winton Lumber Co., MinneaiX)lis, Minn. 

Wyman, Mrs., president, IVIinneapolis Council on Americanization, 418 Metro- 
politan Life Building, Minneapolis, Minn. 

The Chairman. The Commission will be in order. 

Mr. Paul G. Eidbo will be onr first witness this afternoon. 


Mr. Eidbo. I am Paul G. Eidbo, and I am representing the Lutheran 
Resettlement Service of North Dakota, with headquarters in Fargo, 
N. Dak. That organization is an agency of the National Lutheran 

I would like to comment on the DP program of the past and of 
emergency legislation for the future. First of all, I would like to 
say that the DP program we have had in North Dakota has been very 

It has been my responsibility in North Dakota to effect the resettle- 
ment of these DP's who are brought in by the Lutheran Church. We 
have placed displaced persons and ethnic Germans in every type of 
job in North Dakota. I would like to point out, for instance, that 
North Dakota has gained seven very good medical doctors through the 
DP program. These doctors have filled in, in communities where 
before now it has been impossible to get medical services. The North 


Dakota Veterinarian Board lias hired and brought in several DP 
veterinarians, all of them doing very well. 

Among other vocations or professions represented are instructors. 
We have college instructors working in their professions in North 
Dakota and bookkeepers and office managers, and nearly anything you 
can name. 

The Chairman. How many came to North Dakota, do you know? 

Mr. EiDBO. All told, I wouldn't be able to say. I believe it is less 
than 1,500 but over 1,000 when you consider the Catholic Welfare 
Association and the Lutheran Church World Service. 

I wanted to point out, too, as Reverend Nervig said before, that the 
United States as a nation has the responsibility toward the refugees 
now in Germany. I don't know how many know that the Government 
of the United States agreed with communistic Russia to allow for the 
expulsion of the ethnic German people from their homelands. Had 
these people been allowed to remain where they were you would have 
at least 10 million less people in Western Germany. Therefore I think 
that, although the United States probably unknowingly agreed to 
this eviction of all these people from their homelands, they did so 
nevertheless and should help to take care of them. Not only should 
we skim the cream, as Reverend Nervig pointed out, but we should 
help the "hard core." 

The entire population of Latvia and Estonia that has escaped com- 
munism has been drained of all professional and educated people and 
are left now with many old people, crippled people or those that fall 
into the classification of "hard core" cases. 

In North Dakota we brought in six "hard core" cases with the 
understanding they would be dependent upon someone else. In our 
case in North Dakota all six cases are now self-supporting and the 
outlook is that they will remain that way. The cost of bringing in 
more "hard core" cases should be borne, I believe, by the country and 
not by any church group. If you consider the total cost of the DP 
Commission's activities, I believe the report states that there were 
$19 million spent and the income that these refugees have contributed 
to our country has exceeded $57 million. That is in a very short 
time. Over a long period of time the people would contribute much 
more than that. So, looking at it as far as an investment, I must 
agree with the DP story that it is a good investment. 

In North Dakota there was considerable talk about the opportu- 
nities for workers in our State. I believe someone mentioned the fact 
that there are not enough farm laborers. Right now in North Dakota 
the agricultural season is largely at an end. However, you still have 
many farm opportunities given because if they can get a farm helper 
at this time they are willing to pay him all through the winter for 
doing very little in order to have him during the summer months when 
they can use him. 

I wanted to mention that in North Dakota the farm buildings that 
are lived in in many instances are surrounded by vacant farm dwell- 
ings. I have seen many cases where we have put DP's in these vacant 
dwellings and they have worked for the farmers as farm laborers, 


and they have worked out satisfactorily. One of the big problems 
to the farmers in North Dakota is that many of them do not have 
extra housing. I think if you look at the total picture, however, you 
will find plenty of vacant housing on the farms and near enough to 
the work. 

Left in North Dakota are about 300 of the DP's that the Lutheran 
Church brought in. Most of them have left for the larger cities. 
Many of them came here to Minneapolis and went to Chicago and 
New York, the reason being that they have — I can say — been exploited 
by the sponsors who brought them into the State. There has been 
considerable criticism of the resettlement program or of the DP's or 
the ethnic Germans because they failed where they received their 
assurances, but I think if you will investigate any of the cases the 
reason you will find them leaving is that they have been offered jobs 
that far surpass the ones they have. Living conditions offered are 
much better. And after all, if we consider the original idea behind 
the resettlement idea, which was to help these people to become re- 
settled and useful people and self-supporting, then I think you must 
agree that the past resettlement ])rogram lias been very successful. 

I am advocating that we have emergency legislation again at this 
time which will allow us to bring over the pipeline cases or the cases 
that were in the pipeline and had to be canceled, in addition to others 
of these refugees over there. 

As far as the McCarran-Walter bill is concerned, I don't know too 
nuich about it. But I think it is my opinion that the statement pre- 
sented on behalf of the Minnesota Lutheran Welfare Society can be 
endorsed by North Dakota also. 

I have nothing further to say. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. I wouder. Mr. Eidbo, would you care to venture an 
estimate of the number of persons of German ethnic origin who could 
reasonably well be settled on the farms of North Dakota if such an 
emergency program as you propose were to be enacted ? 

Mr. EiDKC). I could no more than make a very rough guess, but I 
would say easily, if the families bi-ought over were screened and were 
farmers as they say they are. that it would be a small job to find places 
for 100 families. Over a little longer period of time you could work 
that into more families. Our big trouble has been misrepresentation. 
We get farmers who are not farmei's. Too, I have always known that 
a farmer from Eui-ope can't come out here and run om* mechanized 
machinery, and I have always pointed that out to the sponsors. But in 
so many cases they haven't even been European farmers. They have 
been something entirely different. 

Mr. RosETs^FiELD. And is there a need for these 100 farm families or 
is that something that would be created out of humanitarian reasons? 

Mr. Eidbo. No; I believe that exists as a lack. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Manpower shortage? 

Mr. Eidbo. That is right. 

The Chairman. You talk about these vacant houses. Why did they 
become vacant? 

Mr. Eidbo. Well, the first answei- might be because of machinery, 
but I have just talked to sevei'al farmers who have ])urchased all this 
expensive machinery because they can't <iet farm help. So, in order 
to maintain this machinery they have to farm a bigger area. 


The Chairman. So that tlie farms themselves have become much 
hirger than they once were ? 

Mr. EiDBo. That is ri<iht, in order to pay for that machinery. 

The Chairman. Is that situation liable to continue? 

Mr. EiDBo. That is correct. 

The Chairman. If that situation contii\ues to develop will there be 
less room for individual farmers ? 

Mr. EiDBO. Well, I think there is a limit to the point that you can 
increase the size of a farm. A lot of trouble is that farmers can't keep 
their sons at home. It sounds like an a^re-old char<ie, but I run into 
that quite often. A farmer will he condemnina" a DP for not staying 
on tlie farm and then I ask him where his son is and he replies, "Well, 
he went to town." It is getting so that some day these people are 
going to pass their farms on to somebody else and they will be split 
up. There are some splittings going on all the time, and I believe 
the increase in the size of farms has slowed down considerably since 
the war or in the last 5 j^ears. 

The Chairman. Do y(ni think they are being broken up into smaller 
units again? 

Mr. p]iDiio. Somewhat. They are probably pretty stable in that 
respect, but at least they aren't increasing in size too much. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Do you have any estimate of the average age of 
the North Dakota farmer? 

Mr, EiDBO. No; I wouldn't. 

Mr. RosENFiEiJ). Some people have told us that it is rather a high 

Mr. EroBO. They are not young people any more. I couldn't give 
you any 

Commissioner Finucane. I understand from what you said that 
when the farm help leaves the farm then the farmer, to take care of 
the situation, gets more machinery? 

Mr. EiDBO. Yes. 

Commissioner Finucane. Does that completely alleviate the need 
for farm help or is it a poor substitute or partial substitute? 

Mr. EiDBO. Well, it is a partial substitute, I would say. I wouldn't 
say it is complete. 

Commissioner Finucane. Not complete ? 

Mr. EiDBO. No. In the potato valley right now you are having 
the introduction of a new machine and there is quite a bit of pro and 
con in the local papers on the advantages of the machinery over the 
hired hand. The farmer can pick up so many more potatoes, it is 
true, but still you have just as mau}^ farmers who say they would 
rather employ the people than use the machinery. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Mr. Chester A. Graham here ? 


Mr. (traham. I am Chester A. Graham, director of radio for the 
North Dakota Farmers Union. I am here to represent the National 
Farmers Union and the North Dakota Farmers Union, Jamestown, 
N. Dak. 


I have a statement I should like to read. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Mr. Graham. Mr. Chairman, and members of the Commission, my 
name is Chester A. Graham. I represent the National Farmers Union 
and the North Dakota Farmers Union, slightly over 40,000 families, 
and would like to address our thinking to all three of the points raised 
in section 2 of the Executive order creating the work of this Com- 
mission. A large number of the farm families which have been 
members of our organization down through the years have been 
foreign born, or the sons and daughters of immigrants. When I 
returned from overseas service in June 1919 at the close of World 
War I, I served for a period of 2 years as service secretary to the 
foreign-born people of Akron, Ohio, for the Young Men's Christian 
Association. Following that service, I served for 5 years as director 
of Americanization for the public schools of Akron, Ohio, in which 
capacity I dealt directly with some 43 nationality groups of immi- 
grants in that great industrial city. It was during that time that the 
Immigration Act of 1924 was passed. I took an active part in the dis- 
cussion of that legislation throughout the State of Ohio, and since that 
time have maintained a close interest in our immigration and natural- 
ization policies. My testimony today represents not only the position 
of the organization which I represent, but also deep personal con- 
victions which have grown out of experience in work with immigrant 
people in the United States. 

Farmers Union thinking about the admission and assimilation of 
immigrant people in the United States is predicated upon a firm con- 
viction that as a nation we must build bravely toward a greater and 
greater fulfillment of an economy of abundance, and we dare not try 
to go back to an old economy of scarcity with its corollary of fears 
about not being able to have room for modern Pilgrims who come 
to our shores from other parts of the world. Farmers Union members 
believe that we should not only retain the Emma Lazarus inscription 
at the base of the Statue of Liberty but that we should continue to 
implement the sentiment of that inscripion in our personal attitudes 
and in our legislative policies regarding immigration and naturaliza- 
tion. We believe that due care should be taken in legislation to exclude 
all those who come to this country under explicit design to harm our 
Government and our social structure, but we want our Federal legis- 
lation on immigration and naturalization to be framed with the basic 
intention to bring worthy immigrants to this country. Our basic 
criticism of Public Law 414 passed by the Congress of the United 
States on June 27, 1952, is that more emphasis is given to excluding 
people from this country than to including them. Careful reading 
of the act gives us the impression that more attention is given to 
keeping prospective immigrants away from this country, than is 
given to making this country a haven and a home for oppressed and 
downtrodden people who have a vision of making a better world for 
their families and their posterity. 

Prospective immigrants should be judged by their overt acts rather 
than by ideas that they are alleged to have. People who have been 
under-nourished and hungry for a period of years do not think the 
same way that we, who have had plenty to eat, think. And I would 
like to add there that one of my sons was a member of the famous 


starvation project that was conducted here at the University of Minne- 
sota, My son is normally a cooperative-minded person, and he told 
me that as he got deeper and deeper into that experience of starvation 
it became more and more repulsive to think about cooperating with 
any others. 

I think sometimes we don't quite understand what happens to the 
thinking of people when they experience even semivStarvation. 

My own experience has taught me that those who become harmful 
members of our society come more from those having considerable 
education than from those who liad little opportunity for education. 
Wise immigration legislation will not make lack of opportunity for 
formal education a handicap for those seeking admission to the United 

Ample opportunity should be given to prospective immigrants for 
appeal to impartial appeal boards when their application for visa or 
for admission is denied. Aliens threatened with deportation should 
have the same protection. Public Law 414 does not provide this pro- 
tection, and it gives entirely too much arbitrary power to consular 
officers in foreign countries and to immigration and naturalization 
officers in this country. 

There has been a custom, all too common, in our American cities to 
compel foreign-born families to live in socially-neglected sections of 
our cities. This has resulted in a tendency towarcl crime and delin- 
quency in the children of these families in many instances. This 
tendency was the result of the urban community environment, and not 
due to the fact that the children had parents who were foreign-born. 
This error in thinking has led to an assumption that immigrant people 
are potential sources of social, economic, and political trouble. Wise 
legislation on immigration and naturalization should not be based on 
this false assumption. 

Home and family life are basic to a wholesome society. All immi- 
gration legislatin should be designed to facilitate the unity of families 
(father, mother, and children at least under 15 years of age) who want 
to come to the United States. All provisions for quotas should be 
flexible at this point, and some flexibility should be provided in the 
cases of curable diseases among children. It is mandatory that all dis- 
crimination as to race, religion, and economic status shall be elim- 
inated from legislation. 

Fears about immigrants interfering with job security and wage rates 
in industry are not grounded in fact. Labor organizations in some 
instances have opposed liberal immigration laws because they con- 
sidered the influx of newcomers would lower standards of w^ages and 
working conditions. As a matter of fact foreign-born workers have 
been faithful members of labor organizations. 

Those groui:)s in industry which have been willing to pull down 
the wages antl working conditions have come from underdeveloped 
areas in our own country, not from the foreign born. Public Law 414 
gives the Secretary of Labor power to stop immigration when he de- 
cides that there are enough industrial workers in this country to fill all 
available jobs. Such power needs to be carefully curbed, because 
the advent of immigrant families also creates demands for goods and 
services, and create-s new jobs. 

25356—52 57 


Throughout our history additions to our population by means of 
immigration have produced new jobs, new consumers, and new forms 
of industrial expansion. The fault has been more often in us and 
in our attitudes toward our immigrant people than it has been in 
them. Just as the State Department and the Labor Department are 
integrated into the total program in Public Law 414, so also the 
Office of Education should be a part of the total program. People 
who are to become citizens of our Government and neighbors in our 
communities need an understanding welcome and introduction to the 
new environment into wdiich they come. Lectures about this being the 
greatest country in the world are not much help to an immigrant 
mother who is put on a train at Hoboken with three small children 
with all the necessary baggage for her baby stowed away in the bag- 
gage car and no introduction to the sanitary provisions on the train, 
and no knowledge of the friendly services that might be available 
to her on a 14-day trip across the United States in an immigrant train, 
and I am referring to an incident I experienced myself. 

Private service agencies have done a valiant service to our immigrant 
families coming to this country, but that service should be a part 
of the friendly welcome of new pilgrims provided in the immigration 
and naturalization logii;lation. 

We further take the position that the mass migrations to the United 
States which we experienced in the first two decades of this century 
are a thing of the past. Even without any numerical restrictions we 
would not experience such extensive influx into this country in the 
foreseeable future. With immigration, or without immigration, our 
population growth in this country will soon take us through a basic 
change from a nation of exportable food surpluses to a nation gear- 
ing its agricultural program and policy to production of abundance. 
Wasteful methods of soil erosion and soil depletion, destruction of 
our timber resources and our forest potentials, waste of other natural 
resources, and uncontrolled rivers rushing madly to the sea carrying 
destruction in their wake practically every season, will have to give 
way to a more constructive planning, development, and use of our 
potential capacity to produce food and fiber. Our organization takes 
the position that we can develop out of our existing potentials, the 
capacity to produce food and fiber not only for our own growing 
population but also for pilgrims who want to come to our shores to 
help make here a home for people. 

The whole system of deportations, provided for at such great length 
in Public Law 414, as a method of dealing with persons who have been 
duly admitted to the United States, is not sound either domestically 
or in relation to the building of the kind of world order that we want 
today. The devastating fears that haunt the lives of native-born 
citizens are minor compared with the fears of a foreign-born citizen 
who can so easily become the brunt of prejudice and hysteria. Now 
we have added to that the fear of deportation under our immigration 
law. Social workers know all too well the social problems created for 
a family whose breadwinner has been deported. Undoubtedly, there 
are individual cases where deportation is the best possible alternative, 
but provisions for deportation of aliens should be very limited in our 
immigration policy and practice. Certainly no alien should be de- 
ported without a fair and open hearing on the charges claimed as 


grounds for deportation. To make a foreign-born person subject to 
deportation because of having had a nervous breakdown, or for 
liaving gone on i-elief during economic stress, would be a viohition 
of our sense of fair phiy and would create ill feeling in other parts 
of the world toward the United States. Even eagerness to come to 
the United States to the extent of entering without full compliance 
with the law should not be ipso facto grounds for deportation. 

The theory that certain portions of the human race are superior to- 
other portions of the race, which we now call racism, is a blight upon 
modern civilization. It is the heart of the quota system in the Immi- 
gration Act of 192-i and the national-origins system embodied in later 
amendments to that law. The same fundamental error is continued 
in I^ublic Law 414. The established total of 154,000 innnigrants 
theoretically provided in the law has never been filled because major 
quotas are assigned to countries which never fill their quotas — not a 
sufficient number of persons in those countries want to leave home 
and migrate to the United States. The quota system has been, and 
is, an insult to the peoples of the countries barred by extreme!}' small 

The oriental-exclusion clauses of the Immigration Act of 1924 was 
one of a number of regrettable international incidents that finally had 
their climax in Pearl Harbor. And I might just stop on that and add 
that when news came to us in 1925, sitting in my home in Akron I sug- 
gested to my wife, "Here is the beginning of our entrance into World 
War II." I think it was one of the regrettable incidents that helped to 
create the bitter feeling, particularly on the part of the Japanese. We 
can be thankful perhaps for the token progress made in the present 
legislation wliich makes Asian people eligible for admission and for 
citizenship, but the maximum quota of 100 for a country like India is 
an insult to the people of India, and is a part of an insult to all Asian 

If a quota system is deemed necessarj^ by Congress as a means to 
stabilize or control the volume of immigration in any one year, then 
the unused quotas from one country should \ye readily transferrable 
to other countries upon the basis of the sincere desire of prospective 
immigrants to come to the United States, and not upon any discrimi- 
natory assumption that people from soutliern Europe are inferior tO' 
people from northern Europe or that people from Asia are inferior 
to people from other parts of the world. Our organization believes- 
that this Nation could readily welcome and assimilate more than 
154,000 immigrants each year, but if that figure is set as the maximum, 
then the quota system should not be used to keep the total below that 

The undesirability of the national quotas was discovered in the 
admission of displaced persons in recent years. To meet the situation 
half of the annual quota for each of these years was mortgaged for 
future years. It is my understanding that half of the quotas for 
Latvia are mortgaged up to the year 2274, and for other countries 
nearly as long. We believe that all the quota mortgages should be 
comjiletely wiped off the books in new immigration legislation. The- 
Farmers Union heartily endorses the legislation on inunigi-ation and 
natui"alization which was introduced in the Uiiited States Senate? 
by Senators Lehman, Humphrey, Morse, and other Senators. We 


want the United States of America to continue to embody in our 
practices the spirit and the program of action embodied in the inscrip- 
tion at the base of the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor, not 
only for the benefit that it will be to individuals who want to come 
as immigrants to our country but also for awakening in the hearts of 
people all over the world a sense of fellowship with the people of the 
United States in a powerful unselfish effort to build a world where 
there is a good measure of brotherhood, justice, security and decency 
of man to man. 

The Chairman. Mr. Graham, can you tell us how many members are 
in the National Farmers Union ? 

Mr. Graham. In the national organization, I think it is about 

The Chairman. And how many in the State ? 

Mr. Graham. 40,000 in North Dakota. 

The Chairman. Would that roughly be 150,000 families ? 

Mr. Graham. That is right. It is a family organization. As a 
matter of fact, our membership this year is forty-thousand-five- 
hundred-and-some-odd families, but it is well over 40,000. 

Commissioner Gulx,ixson. From the contacts with the officers and 
members of the union you are in, might I ask you to say something 
about this uncertainty and anxiety about the possibility of a small 
farmer getting his feet on the ground that he can call his own. That 
is, how can not only immigi'ants from Europe but farmers' boys that 
have a farm home get started ? 

Mr. Graham. I am glad you are asking that question. It is taking 
a long chance to have a farm-union man on that question. It is a part 
of the thing I suggested here in the transition that needs to take place 
in our thinking. In the past we have thought of exporting surplus 
food, of wasting forests and using up land and moving on west and 
taking more. For instance, in my home in Pennsylvania in 1902 my 
father was renting abandoned farms within 50 miles of Pittsburgh 
and putting fences around them and putting livestock there. They 
were totally abandoned. Originally they were good farms but they 
w^ere just farmed out. 

Now we say we have to take a totally different attitude. We are 
going to make use of that land. We are having soil-conservation pro- 
grams and we are controlling our rivers. The development that could 
be possible if we wanted to do it would mean that many, many more 
people could have homes on the land. We believe that the land should 
be plowed and not left to be blown away. That it should be stocked by 
the Government for the interest of the future — the total program, in- 
cluding the price program and everything that is geared to the security 
of the farm family having a home on the land. I think there is no 
question but what it can be done. There has been a serious sense of 
insecurity with millions of farm families, and there still is. But we 
believe we have the conscience and intelligence in this country to 
redirect our thinking in ths program. 

I believe that we can't live here with great vast stretches of unoccu- 
pied land when other parts of the world are so overcrowded, and what- 
ever we think we can do there is going to be an adjustment of economy 
iu God's universe. We need to be thinking in terms of more 


I am very much in aojieemeiit with things Mr. Eidbo testified to in 
Nortli Dakota. It is my own conviction when we tliink in terms of 
making tiiat part or all parts of the country a home for people, that 
there will begin a nnicli more intensive use of our land. More educa- 
tion and irrigation and more use of our soil there and many, many more 
peo})le, not less, are needed to do that. 

Commissioner Guixixson. But to the present development with the 
extensive caterpillar and expensive machinery, doesn't it make it a 
little difficult on the small farms. 

Mr. Graham. It does in a certain kind of farming. For instance, 
wheat growing can be an extensive kind of farming, but vegetable and 
jjotato growing may not lend itself quite so well to those extensive ones 
that you can use in a grain like wheat. 

Conunissioner Gullixson. Are the potato farmers becoming 

Mr. (ti;>iia>i. I don't think that is necessarily true. What we have 
in North Dakota where Me have these huge potato farms is the em- 
ployment of Mexican families where the social conditions are de- 
plorable and a disgrace to the civilization we represent. There are 
no schools provided for the children and little children are working 
in the fields. They don't have ade(juate homes, and if we care any- 
thing about human values Ave need to redirect our whole development 
of that area so that the land will be a home for people and not some- 
thing where it may be a few people are on it and then the great masses 
of people in these conditions that we are almost ashamed to admit. 
So, there is a tendency for them to become larger. 

I think the thing we are representing here, if we want to be a part 
of the kind of world where there can be a home for people, is to redi- 
rect our thinking on some of these issues. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. There has been some testimony here today to the 
ert'ect that with the mechanization of farming and w^ith the growth 
of the size of farms there is less land available not only for immi- 
grants but for people already here. Are 3'ou saying that, if there 
was a proper organization of the use of that land, it would be in the 
best interests of the United States to bring in more people? 

Mr. Graham. That is right, and I would like to add to it, and I am 
sure Mr. Eidbo would agree witli me, that the use of this large ma- 
chinery is sometimes not entirely the choice of the farmer. It is 
partly an emergency situation because he is getting old and can't do 
the work himself without the large machinery, and his help is gone. 
He takes it not always as what he considers progress but as a n.eces- 
sity if he is going to stay in the home where he established himself. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Ouce having mechanized the farm, is it likely the 
farmer would go back from that procedure? 

jSIr. Graham. No, sir. I don't thin!: it means they will go back 
from mechanization. I think there are certain values in mechaniza- 
tion just as there are values in the mechanization of machinery we 
use to build roads, but we still have more roads to be built and they 
are not oeing built. There is work for people to do. There are so- 
cially needed services to be carried on, and in agriculture it will not 
mean we turn back from meclianization necessarily, but even with 
the macliinery we still need more intensive use of land and when you 
intensify you need more people. 


Tlie CiTAiRMAx. Do yoii mean that you would use machinery for 
wheat where you do need large areas to produce large crops, but in 
such things as potatoes and beets, where you can raise crops on rela- 
tively small areas of land, then it would be economically feasible to 
have smaller units? 

Mr. Graham. And socially very advantageous to our democracy, 
because the person who owns the land he works on is a better member 
of a democracy than the man who loses all that sense of belonging. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Is tlierc any reason to believe that w4th the kind 
of organization such as the National Farmers Union it would be pos- 
sible to have a system which would avoid the difficulties you have 
IDointed out about the Mexican labor situation? 

Mr. Graham. Of course, we have entered very strongly into that 
legislation because our observation has been that the main problems 
in regard to the importation of Mexican labor has not been where 
family-type farmers wanted them but when great corporate interests 
were bringing them in and sometimes even avoiding the law to get 
very cheap labor on these extensive operations. We would say "Yes" 
that if under the family-type farms additional Mexican labor was 
needed to be brought in. But you can't have the kind of effort made 
now to subvert the law. They would want to bring them in on some- 
what of an equal basis. The family-type farmer might need one more 
family and he would have them more integrated with his own family 
rather than way down on a huge operation. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is ]Mrs. Martin M. Cohen here ? 


Mrs. Cohen. I am Mrs. Martin M. Cohen, and I am here to represent 
the Minneapolis Council of Jewish Women and the Minneapolis 

I have a prepared statement I would like to read. 

The Chairman, You may do so. 

Mrs. Cohen, I am Mrs. Martin M. Cohen, representing the Minne- 
apolis Council of Jewish Women, and Minneapolis Hadassah, whose 
joint members number over 3,000 women. The views I present are the 
views endorsed by these organizations both nationally and locally. In 
the case of the Council of Jewish Women, we have during the past 48 
years done service to foreign-born work, meeting the varied needs of 
the newcomers, of all races and creeds, from their arrival on these 
shores to their eventual citizenship and complete integration into 
American life. 

We appreciate the opportunity to appear before the President's 
Commission on Immigration and Naturalization. We are interested, 
not in opening up avenues for Jewish immigration, since world Jewry 
outside of United States looks to migration to Israel, but we are acting 
from a recognition, that our organizations, along with other American 
organizations, have a vital stake in the continuing business of strength- 
ening our democracy. 


"We believe that immig:ration laws, particularly Public Law 414, have 
not brought our laws into accord with our own needs and with world 
needs, which have developed since 1924. 

Althougli C\)inicil of Jewish Women and Hadassah have many ob- 
jections to Public Law 414, 1 will coniine my remarks to two points, 
(a) distinctions between native-born and naturalized citizens and (6) 
right of review and appeal. 

Native-born and naturalized citizens: The Council of Jewish 
Women and Hadassah believe that the selection of immigrants should 
be on the basis of need, merit, love of democracy, and not on racial, 
religious, or birthplace criteria. Once a person becomes a citizen, he 
should be able to remain a citizen, unless his immigration was based 
on fraud or illegal entry. The concept of deportation as a penalty 
is inhuman and medieval; it most frequently punishes persons entirely 
innocent, such as members of the famil}^ of the deportee. Anyone who 
does wrong should be punished for his wrongdoing, and held strictly 
accountable for mistakes and crimes. There should be no distinction 
between native-born and naturalized. Otherwise we are setting up a 
second-class citizenry, living under fear, afraid to take an active part 
in American life. We believe in a single system for punishment of 
wrongdoers, equal standing under the law for all citizens. We also 
believe that such distinctions are contrary to the spirit of the Consti- 
tution and contrary to the principles laid down by Chief Justice 
Marshall that the grant of American citizenshi]) is not "a partial grant 
upon a condition subsequent." Public Law 414 abrogates this princi- 

We believe that section 340 (c) providing for revocation of citizen- 
ship for joining certain types of organizations will frighten new citi- 
zens from engaging in civic or political activity for fear that they may 
somehow stinnble into some error which will rob them of their prized 
citizenship. Membei'ship for instance in a PTA which concerns itself 
with curriculum, textbooks, principles of education, and so forth, can 
conceivably sometime be declared to be "subversive" or any other type 
of civic activity. This membership could then be the basis for revoca- 
tion of citizenship. This is the very kind of "silence of fear" which we 
criticize the totalitarian nations for. We believe that there is sufficient 
protection in the present laws against fraudulently denying totali- 
tarian beliefs or affiliations at the time of naturalization, or of obtain- 
ing citizenship by fraud and material misrepresentation. We recom- 
mend that this provision be eliminated. 

Right of review and appeal : Public Law 414 denies immigrants the 
right of appeal either to a Board ot Immigration Appeals or a Visa 
Review Board. Opportunity to obtain a visa is deniecl any alien who 
may appear to the examining officer to be excludable. Under present 
law consular officials have the right to deny visas. We urge that a 
Visa Review Board be established to review and reverse consular de- 
cisions, if necessary, when appealed to. Such Board should provide 
an opportunity for an American citizen or organization interested in 
bringing an alien to this country to appeal on his behalf to an admin- 
istrative body in the United States. We further recommend that 
existing procedure be retained, whereby appeal may be made to the 
Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization from a decision of 
a lower official to exclude an alien, and from the latter's decision, if 
adverse, to the Board of Immigration Appeals. Our American courts 


are so set up that there is always the right of appeaL Public Law 414 
abrogates this widespread principle and puts the future of individuals 
and entire families dependent on the judgment of a single individual. 

The Council of Jewish Women and Hadassah therefore reconmiend 
the establishment of a Board of Immigration Appeals and of a Visa 
Review Board as being an essential part of our immigration laws. We 
also believe that when set up, appeals should be heard as speedily as 
possible, with a minimum of red tape and delay involved. 

In conclusion, on behalf of Minneapolis Council of Jewish Women 
and Minneapolis Hadassah, I want to express our appreciation to the 
President of the United States for so promptly setting up an inquiry 
into the McCarran-Walters Act, and for the caliber and ability of the 
members of the Commission. We believe that this law made some 
slight advances in authorizing for the first time immigration quotas 
to Far East countries and for lifting racial barriers blocking the 
naturalization of a small number of Japanese Americans. However, 
Public Law 414 also adopted measures to confirm the racist character 
of the national origins quota system, and, in addition, introduced a 
series of new and even more restrictive immigration provisions. We 
regard this law as a major setback to decency and fair play, in our 
immigration laws. Our laws play a vital role in checking the cancer 
of communism. We need to bring them up to date to conform with 
the needs and urgencies of life today. United States is in the position 
of world leadership. We urge 1952 laws to fit the world of 1952. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Our next witness is Mr. Arthur L. Cadieux. 


Mr. Cadieux, I am Arthur L. Cadieux, and I represent the Minne- 
apolis Chamber of Commerce. I am also director of the International 
Trade Department of the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. 

The Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce subscribes to the policies 
adopted by the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce under date of July 
1952, as they pertain to international travel regulations and immigra- 
tion laws. 

The chamber is gratified to note the progress made during the past 
year by many countries under which visas and other restrictions to 
travelers have been eliminated or simplified. It urges that Congi-ess 
and the appropriate agencies of the Government in order to provide 
the greatest freedom of travel consistent with our national interests 
give further consideration to the liberalization of : ( 1 ) laws and travel 
regulations of our country controlling the entry of foreign persons 
on visits or in transit ; (2) laws and travel regulations of foreign coun- 
tries controlling the entry of United States citizens into those countries 
on visits or in transit. In other words, further to liberalize existing 
laws and regidations, our Government should endeavor to arrange 
agreements with friendly nations, so that where visas are required 
they will be issued promptly without the necessity of producing an 
excessive number of photographs, police or other certificates, or 
personally calling on the consul. 

The chamber also supports measures designed to modify to the 
extent consistent with national security, and the purposes of our immi- 


gration laws, the existino^ immigration laws and regulations imposing 
unfair burdens upon carriers for bringing aliens to the United States, 

That's the extent of our statement, gentlemen. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Alexander Granovsky, you are the next witness. 


Professor Granovsky. I am Alexander Granovsky, 2101 Scudder 
Street, St. Paul, Minn. I am a professor in ethnology at the Univer- 
sity of Minnesota and I have been helping with the resettlement of 
the Ukrainian, Latvian, and other displaced persons in Minnesota. 
I am also foreign students' adviser at the university. 

I am appearing here both as an individual and as a representative of 
the Ukrainian American Resettlement Committee of Minnesota, which 
is a registered organization with the former Displaced Persons 

Unfortunately I have no written statement, but I am going to pre- 
pare such and send it to the Commission. Today, however, I wish to 
take up a few points that I think are of interest. Some of them already 
have been discussed ; some of them have not been touched at all. The 
first one I would like to discuss briefly is the quota system. I believe 
that the present quota system as it is set up in the McCarran Act is 
based on antiquated data, and not under present-day statistics and 
scientific basis. It was based on 1920, the national quota. At the 
present time, we know that since 1920 and in 1952 the influx of immi- 
gration in recent years certainly changed the picture considerably. 

For instance, the national quota under the present act does not take 
into consideration at all stateless peoples; for instance, Ukrainians, 
which I represent. Not a single individual can come to the United 
States under the present law as Ukrainians. He has to come as a 
Russian, Pole, Czech, Rumanian, Hungarian, or anything else, but not 
as Ukrainian. Yet, there are 40 millions of Ukrainians in Europe in 
their ethnic territory. 

The Chairman. How many of them are in this country, in the 
United States ; do you know ? 

Professor Granovsky. We count about one million and a quarter 
in the United States at the present time; that's the conservative 

The Chairman. And they have come here over what period of time ? 

Professor Granovsky. Well, of course it is difficult to say, a good 
many of them are already the third and beginning the fourth gen- 
eration at the present time, because the Ukrainian immigration started 
in about the 1870's by a trickle and a very heavy immigration the 
first part of this century up to the First AVorld War. 

The Chairman. Were they not listed according to the country that 
embraced the Ukraine at the time ? 

Professor Granovsky. That's right. That's the point that I am pre- 
senting for your kind consideration, that really, according to ]:)resent 
]aw, not a single individual as a Ukrainian can come to the United 


States, which is, I think, undemocratic, nn-Christian and unfair, and 
that should be changed because the present act certainly is not fair 
so far as the quota is concerned. Then, if the quota is to be abolished, 
if this national quota is abolished, as some of the groups suggest, then 
I think to be practical still we have to devise some sort of method 
whereby in a practical way quantitatively it should be distributed all 
over the world's population that are clamoring to come to the shores 
of the United States. I think that perhaps it would be even a more 
difficult problem than the national quota problem. I am speaking from 
common sense practicability. 

I would like even to suggest that even those who do present their 
point of view against the national quota themselves perpetuate na- 
tional entry in the United States, which is also very important to take 
into consideration. I take the point of view of pride in my nation- 
ality rather than shed it. That's the point of view I take, and if we 
abolish national quota I believe there might be more room, for corrup- 
tion and world organization to stampede a given group into the con- 
sulates throughout the world in order to gain the first part of the year 
admission, and those who are less informed or less organized will not 
have a chance to come to the United States. I foresee such a possibility. 

I think that some practical way could be devised to provide a fair 
representation the world over, to various people, to admit them on a 
quantitative basis. 

My next point is that of naturalization. Since the President's Com- 
mission is charged not only to consider the immigration law, but also 
naturalization as well as deportation, and other features connected 
with it, I would like to call your attention to the fact that at the pres- 
ent time we are seriously troubled by displaced persons, people who 
came to this country and adjusted themselves very nicely and upon 
application for citizenship, say either a declaration of intention to 
become a citizen or for final citizenship papers, a fictitious nationality 
is being attached to their paper. I am speaking again of Ukrainians, 
stateless people, who fought against communism for a good many 
years, and against Russian imperialism, and came to this country, and 
here they have to carry in their paper that they are Russian and not 
Ukrainian, because citizenship is considered as synonymous with na- 
tionality, and I wish to again emphasize that I know some people who 
were born under the Czar's regime and are classed as aristocratic citi- 
zens, then as communistic Russian citizens, then for years under the 
Ukrainian Government they were shown as Ukrainian. Then under 
the Versailles Treaty given to Poland and they became Poland citizens, 
and then they escaped from Poland and they became stateless and be- 
came known as nonstate citizens, and so on and so forth until they 
became a displaced person, and tlien came to the United States under 
the Displaced Persons Commission to become an American citizen; 
and yet he had about a dozen or so variety of citizenships listed in 
his papers, and I think that he is only Ukraine by blood, and that is 
extremely important to consider, and it is only the case with the state- 
less disenfranchised and persecuted people — it is not the case with 
those that are more fortunate and have their own states. 

The ChairjVian. We have been told about that, Professor; there 
have been other representatives in other cities who have posed the- 
same problem to us. So we are familiar with it. 


Professor Graxovsky. I am <ilad that the other people also ])re- 
seiited this problem, because this is an exceed iiij^ly diilicult problem to 
those people who have their papers with fiictitious nationalities. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, sir. Are you going to file a 
statement with us ? 

Professor Granovsky. I am going to file a statement. 

The Chairman. Kindly send it to our office in Washington. 

Professor Granovsky. I will do that. 

The Chairman. Is Rev. Daisuke Kitagawa here? 


Reverend Kitagawa. I am Rev. Daisuke Kitagawa, and I am hei'e 
not as a representative but as one of the advisers of the local chapter of 
the Japanese-American Citizens League, and I have no statement to 
make excepting to say our local chapter has received a communication 
from the national headquarters, that the Japanese- American Citizens 
League has filed or is going to file a statement from the national office. 

Therefore, our local chapter is not to testify here, even though we 
had asked for a space of time this afternoon, sir. That is all. 

The Chairman. They are going to file a statement ? 

Reverend Kitagaw^\. That's right, from the national office, with 
which our local chapter concurs. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Mr. M. IMasoka has already been invited to testify 
at the national hearing in Washington. 

Reverend Kitagawa. Yes, I think that's the reason they advised us 
not to make a separate statement here. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Could you tell us. Reverend, something about the 
number of persons — of Japanese extraction in this area — how they 
have settled ? 

Reverend Kitagawa. Just about 1,000 in round number, and most 
of them are living in the Twin Cities, and their immediate suburbs. 

Mr, RosENFiELD. Are these the people that most recently came from 
the west coast ? 

Reverend Kitagawa. That's right. Before the war there were only 
a handful of Japanese people in this area. Therefore, the majority of 
them are here as a result of mass evacuation from the west coast. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Have they been able to find employment and hous- 
ing without mucli difficulty ? 

Reverend Kitagawa. I am very happy to report that we have had 
a most satisfactory adjustment here in this area, due to the wonderful 
cooperation of various agencies and groups who have helped us out. 

The Chairman. Thank you vei-y much. 

Is Mr. Forrest G. Moore here ? 


Professor Moore. I am Prof. Forrest G. Moore, 302 Eddy Hall^ 
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. I am foreign student adviser 
at the university. 

I have a statement I would like to read. 

The Chairman. We shall be pleased to hear it. 


Professor Moore. The interest expressed by my point of view may 
be a somewhat narrow one inasmuch as it affects only some 60,000 to 
75,000 persons each year. Yet, in a certain sense, it affects a much 
wider audience in every country of the workl. I refer to those sections 
of immigration Law that control the movements and affect the atti- 
tudes directly and indirectly of individuals who come to the United 
States for periods of temporary study, training, or observation. 

The immigration law of the United States with its far-reaching 
effect is no less a foreign policy document than any of the many acts 
of Congress that are so labeled. It seems almost too obvious to need 
to be stated here, that whatever basic policy we adopt must meet the 
tests of the broadest possible humanitarian interest, and the criticisms 
leveled by those who are in disagreement with us rather than the ap- 
plause of our friends. Our immigration policy should be rooted in a 
philosophy that is as basic and as selfless as the universal bill of 
human rights. 

Having said this, I would like to call the Commission's attention to 
what may be some inconsistencies of the present immigration law par- 
ticularly in view of its foreign policy implications, and laws that have 
to do with the exchange of students. 

First. The present law jipptais to be based, at It^ast partially, 
on the principle of reciprocity. That is, we give somewhat similar 
treatment to the nationals of other countries as their country accords 
to us in immigration matters. I Avould like to submit to you that we 
need to go further than this and establish a policy that leads rather 
than follows the policy patterns of other nations. 

Our system of quotas based on the year 1920 says to every national 
of a foreign country whose quota is based on it that we feel that the 
present or past composition of our population is the best possible com- 
position, and vre want to maintain it regardless of the effect it may have 
on j^our attitudes. Why not a svstem of quotas based on equal treat- 
ment for the nationals of all countries of the world? Equal numl^ers 
in ra,tio to the population ? Why must we persist in the discrimina- 
tory system that is now being perpetuated by our immigration laws? 
Do you feel, or does anyone feel, that we need to persist in a system 
that is based on quotas of a certain year ? 

Second. And this relates specincally to the students, trainees, and 
professors who visit us from abroad. Is there not some way that we 
can amend our laws so that they take into account the special nature 
of this strategic group and the effect that their encounters with the 
restrictions of the law may have upon them ? We have been fortunate 
in this area to have had representatives of the Immigration Service 
who believe strongly in the desirability of the exchanges of personnel 
and who leave our students with an almost uniformly pleasant im- 
pression of their experience with this branch of our government. But 
the stories we hear from our students who move to other areas of juris- 
diction, or of their impressions at the ports-of-entry on the occasion 
of their first entrance to the United States, or on their return from 
visits to Canada or to Mexico are quite another matter. These en- 
counters with law-enforcement officers remind them of the controls 
exercised in dictatorships and Communist-dominated countries, and 
are not what they expected in a democracy. Some of the changes 
suggested are : 


(1) A change that allows the wife of a student, professor, or trainee 
to accompany him to the United States and exercise whatever skills 
she may have in employment, whose benefits are used to assist the 
student, professor, or trainee to further his education. 

(2) A change in basic policy that allows the innniijjration official 
to regard the student, professor, or trainee not as a [)rospective im- 
mi<j;rant but as a foreign national Avith special i)rivileojes because of 
the mission that he is performinjj;. AVhile this has boon partially ac- 
com])lishod by the exchanoe-visiioi- piooraiu of the Echicational Ex- 
chanoe Act of 19-1:8, our basic policy of immigration is really one- 
of regarding the alien as an innnigrant unless he is able to prove other- 
wise, rather than that more consistent with your ideals, "regarding 
him as a nonimmigrant unless we are able to prove otherwise." I am 
aware that many persons who come here temporarily use the loop- 
holes in the law to stay here permanently, but I would also maintain 
that one of the major reasons that this is so, is our policy of quotas 
that closes the door to so many through an arbitrary method of es- 
tablishing who shall be allowed to immigrate. Why shouldn't we 
face realistically this jvroblem and admit that a number of persons 
wdio come to the United States temporarily might conceivably decide 
after they enter the United States that they wish to remain perma- 
nenth'? Why don't we establish within each country's quota a per- 
centage of quota that could legally be used by this group? Certainly 
I would be in favor of the sti'ictest sort of qualifications for this privi- 
lege, but think of the time that Avould be saved that is now devoted 
to the introduction by Senators and Representatives of private bills in 
Congress. And who is to say whether a foreign electrical engineer 
will make his greatest contribution to the world as a national of his 
own country or as a naturalized citizen of the United States? 

(3) Provision within the immigration law^ itself that recognizes 
the importance of the exchange-of-persons movement and brings its 
importance to the attention of all those who have a function to dis- 
charge in the administration of immigration policy. Some may say 
this is special privilege, but it is not. It is recogniton that the contri- 
butions made by this segment of the great mass of persons admitted 
temporarily to the United States may be enhanced both here and when 
they return home, by conditions of learing that are restricted as little 
as possible by regulation, and hampered not at all by feelings of 

Third. And last, that some recognition be given in amending legis- 
lation to the necessity for coordinating the basic points of view of 
those in the Department of State and the Department of Justice who 
are charged with, administering whatever immigration law may- 
be in effect. And this is not so much at the higher levels as it is at 
the level of contact with the foreign national. Granted that a system 
of checks may be needed, certainly it is not intended that each service 
should serve as a scapegoat for the other. The port-of -entry official 
needs to have some concept of the job of the American consul and! 
vice versa. Both of them ought to have some opportunity to see them- 
selves as the foreign national sees them. 

I suppose that these points are really minor ones when they are 
ranged alongside the many other considerations which go into the 
making of an equitable innnigration policy, yet I must say that I feel 


that many of them are at the heart of some of our present difficulties. 

Until we recognize that the language and conditions of immigra- 
tion law are no less foreign policy than are the Fulbright Act or 
the Educational Exchange Visitors' Act and the point-4 legisla- 
tion, I do not believe we will write an immigration bill that is con- 
sistent with the declared principles of democratic government in the 
United States. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Rev. Andrew Kist here? 


Eeverend Kist. I am Rev. Andrew Kist, pastor of St. George's 
Greek Orthodox Ukrainian Church, Minneapolis, Minn. 

I have a prepared statment I wish to read. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Reverend Kist. As the pastor of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of 
Minneapolis, I have been for many years in daily contact with the 
newcomers to the United States — the displaced persons. Most of these 
people are from the Ukrainian nation. I was helping these people to 
adjust to America — helping them to find living quarters and jobs. I 
was in contact with businessmen, and many factories. The new- 
comers, many of them professional people with many years of practice 
and experience behind them, many of them with degrees from the 
foreign universities, when they arrive in this country take any kind 
of work — doing janitor work in the large office buildings, washing 
dishes, digging ditches, factories, farmers, laborers jobs — until they 
can readjust themselves. In the meantime they dress their children 
better than they have ever been dressed, they are given milk and eggs 
and good wholesome food to eat — many of them sending their boys to 
the United States Armed Forces. Tliey are happy to see tlieir chil- 
dren in good schools, well dressed, and seeing them develop into good 
American citizens. They can attend the church of their choice and in 
their own language — this gives goodness of heart. They send some 
help to Europe — money and clothes to help those left behind. 

The managers of factories are very satisfied with the people that 
have come. People from the city plan to buy farms — they look for 
other places to live. They do not live in one community but spread 
out living among the Americans. The newcomer in America perhaps 
came from beliind the iron curtain and they do not forget terrible 
hard life in Europe under the Communist rule or the Nazi govern- 
ment. God made America the fortress of liberty and protector of 
human rights. Now America must do what is human and right for 
ourself. Basing the quota on the 1920 census should be changed so 
that the deserving people — people that cannot come in under the 
present law — will be able to come to America and make their home 
here. Law of IDS'! is too old; for example, Ukrainian people, Rus- 
sians, Poles, Rumanian, Yugoslavs. 

People that are coming to America naturally must be checked very 
carefully and with the help of sponsors. I know that America has a 
jfood system to control that. Only we humbly ask that tliey permit 
jftonorablf. and able-to-work people that can adjust to American life 


to come liere. God help America as slie has assumed great responsi- 
bility in leadership of the world. May God help us all. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Miss Leni Cahn? 


Miss Cahn. I am Leni Cahn, case-work supervisor, International 
Institute, 188 West Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul, Minn. I represent 
that organization. 

If I may, I should like to read a statement. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Miss Cahn. It is my impression, after listening to the views ex- 
pressed here today, and after examining the reactions to the McCarran- 
Walter bill expressed by groups and organizations all over the country, 
that there seems to exist almost unanimous agreement as to the need 
for certain modifications. Those who are concerned about the humani- 
tarian aspect of the law seem to have reached the conclusion that the 
new law is biased and discriminatory and, that with the perpetuation 
of the unequitable and rigid features of the quota system, the new law 
does not take into consideration the actual needs and situations which 
force certain countries to seek new havens where their surplus popula- 
tion can be absorbed. 

Since I have only a few^ minutes to express the views of the Inter- 
national Institute, I would like to refer here to two points only, 
about Avhich we are concerned. 

In the new law the so-called first papers or application for certificate 
of arrival have been abolished. Future applicants for citizenship, in 
general, cannot start applying for naturalization before they have 
spent 5 years in the United States. In the meantime they carry only 
their certificates of arrival which is no proof of their intention to 
become citizens of this country. It has been our experience that this 
has a psychologically and practically bad effect on newcomers. It 
not only makes it hard for them to convince employers, landlords, 
unions, and so forth, of their intention to become citizens but, at the 
same time, the elimination of the first papers adds to their foreignness 
and insecurity during these first critical years during which they 
should be given every possible help on their way to their assimilation 
and acculturation. Therefore, it is our opinion that in case the first 
paper has been definitely abolished, the alien registration card should 
state the intent of the newcomer to, become a citizen after the legally 
required 5 years which, of course, would have to be examined and 
decided upon a case-by-case basis. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Might I interrupt at this point? Wouldn't that 
delay the receipt of the alien registration card? 

Miss Cahn. I don't think it should. I think it could be probably 
examined at the time when they enter the country, when they are 
fing:erprinted and maybe it could also be mentioned on the back side 
of the alien registration card that the first paper has been abolished 
and that they cannot file for citizenship until shortly before they have 
been here for 5 vears. 


Mr. RosENFiELD. I ask that question because there have been com- 
plaints to the Commission that the alien registration cards themselves 
have already been delayed. 

Miss Cahn. Yes; that's true, but I think that's something which 
someone should be able to straighten out. It is an administrative 
measure here in the country that shouldn't be too difficult to adjust. 

The second point concerns the question as to how far the wider 
population has been kept informed about the new immigration law and 
how far public opinion has been mobilized. ?Iow much does the gen- 
eral population know about existing pressing needs, as well as about 
the dangers involved in the present immigration issue ? The experts in 
the field and those humanitarian circles who are directly concerned 
with the application of the new law need not be convinced. They, 
by now, have formed their opinions and taken a stand in the matter. 
It therefore, seems to us that the moment has come where the issues 
involved should be carefully explained to wider circles. Besides feed- 
ing the newspapers, radio, and other public channels, the Land 
Mannschaften nationality groups, foreign magazines, and other pub- 
lications should become active participants in a compaign for further 
legislative accommodations and improvements. An enlightened pub- 
lic would doubtlessly strengtlien the position of the President's Com- 
mission and, at the same time, would give also the foreign-born in our 
midst an opportunity to voice their opinions and to take part in an 
effort directed toward the improvement of the fate of countless 
members of their countrymen abroad. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Miss Cahn. There is one question I should like to bring up dis- 
cussed by the representative of the Council of Jewish Women in her 
statement earlier, pretaining to appeal. 

It concerns the question of appeal in cases Vvhere a visa has been 
refused, what kind of an appeal procedure could be set up. This might 
be a very naive question, but I worked abroad after the war, and have 
had dealings with the American consulates in Germany, and I have 
been wondering whether instead of having the case handled com- 
pletely by a consul, whether the appeal could not first go to the consul 
general and from the consul general to the Embassy where, in many 
instances, social attaches or at least somebody in the Embassy could 
deal with the matter, because in all countries, as far as I know, you 
have consulate generals in each place. 

The Chairman. Suppose a person desires to appeal in a place 
where there is no Embassy ? 

Miss Cahn. Well, it just occurred to me as one of the things that 
might be considered. 

Commissioner Finucane. Mrs. Cahn, I just have one question with 
reference to your first point about the declaration of intention. Now, 
under Public Law 414 it is permissive for an alien to declare his 
intention to become a citizen, although not required. 

Miss Cahn, Yes, but our experience has been many people have 
filed for first papers through our channels, and they have all been 
returned with a letter saying under the new law it is no longer 
required. So, they all have been returned absolutely without excep- 
tion. The letter was sent by the Immibration and Naturalization 
Service stating very positively that their first paper 


Coininissioiier Fini'cank. It wasn't taken up fiirtlier by the 
Immigration Service? 

Miss Cahn. Well, I don't know which grounds we could liave taken 
it up on. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is JNIrs. Alma Foley here ? 


Mrs. Foley. I am Mrs. Alma Foley, 2290 County Road, Minne- 
apolis, and I represent the Minnesota Committee for Protection of 

I have a prepared staten*nt I would like to read. 

The CiiAiRiMAX. You may do so. 

Mrs. Foley. The case of Peter Warhol will illustrate the need for 
revising the inmiigration and naturalization laws of this country. 
Peter Warliol has been ordered deported; he has appealed the order, 
and is awaiting a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals. 

Peter Warhol came to this country from a part of the Austro- 
Hungarian Empire that is now Czechoslovakia at the age of 2 years. 
He is a product of the jMinneapolis schools and the conditions under 
which he grew up in Minneapolis, Minn. He knows no other coun- 
try ; speaks no other langiuige. 

He volunteered in the service of his country in World War II,. 
although he could have had a defennent. He served for 20 months 
in the Combat and Utility Engineers, and has an honorable discharge- 
from the United States Army. 

He is at present em])loyed in a pole and tie yard, and is a delegate 
from his union to the Hennepin County Committee of the CIO. 

He is married to a native American citizen, has four native-born 
children whose lives will be torn asunder if the Immigration Service 
goes through with its plan to deport him. This workingman, father, 
veteran of \^^orld War II, has been ordered deported because he was 
a member of the Communist Party from 1935 to 1938. This informa- 
tion the Government kne-w' from the alien registration of 1940. The 
Government knew it when they accepted him into the Army in 1941, 

The case of Peter Warhol is similar to a whole series of cases in 
which men and women are being deported solely for membership or 
past membership in the Communist Party or some other organization 
on the Attorney General's proscribed list. There are approximately 
250 such cases throughout the country. In no instance has any per- 
son in this category, which we call political deportation, been charged 
with ever having done anything which would warrant the cruel and 
severe punishment of being torn from family, home, friends, and 
relatives by deportation. In many cases where charges arise out of 
membership in proscribed organizations there has been a lapse of 10 
to 20 years between membership and the initiation proceedings. 

Let me quote from an editorial appearing in the IMinneaj^olis Star 
of August 12 regarding the case of Carl Latva of Wendell, N. H., 
another person in this category of political deportees. [Reading:] 

The story of that payment was voluntered by Latva in connection with a citizen- 
ship application. The result of that freely given information was a Federal 

25350—52 58 


deportation order. This seems hardly possible, but it is so. Here in the United 
States, where our traditions have always run so strongly against the arbitraiy 
denial of the individual's rights and freedom, a man was actually order deported 
because of a folly innocently committed 18 years ago. 

Another case of political deportation here in Minneapolis is Charles 
Kowoldt. He is 69 years old, has lived in the United States since 1913, 
has been a resident of Minneapolis for approximately 30 years. 
Ordered deported in April, he applied for papers to go to his native 
land, Germany, on forms snpplied by the Immigration Service; but 
is kept in a state of nervous anxiety by communications from the 
Immigration Service implying that he has not done enough to ef- 
fectuate his deportation and may face a term of 10 years' imprison- 
ment. He has good reason to feel insecure, since last March, at a 
time when he was complying with all requirements of the Service, 
reporting twice a month to an officer of the Service, he was taken by 
this officer to the Kamsey County jail and bail was required in the 
amount of $4,000 to effect his release. This happened at 11 o'clock at 
night. No warrant was issued for his rearrest; he had no oppor- 
tunity to inform his attorney. No reason was given by the Service for 
this arbitrary action. 

Harry Roast is 73 years old; he has lived in St. Paul and Minneap- 
olis for 39 years. He is employed as a janitor in a St. Paul cap fac- 
tory. At the age of 73, work, the pleasures of a quiet life at home 
and an occasional movie with his wife, is the pattern of his life that 
was interrupted in January of this year with an order for his arrest 
for deportation based on a statement made on his alien-registration 
card of 1940. Anxiety about what will happen to him and the threat- 
ened breaking up of her home has had his wife under almost constant 
medical care since the onset of the proceedings. 

I call to your attention this intensification of persecution of our 
foreign-born because of political beliefs and urge that in giving con- 
sideration to a change in our immigration policy this be given serious 

Our present immigration policy is a punitive policy. It is not a 
policy designed to make immigration and naturalization easier, but 
rather a policy which is wielded to breed fear and intimidation in 
those communities where there are foreign-born, children and rela- 
tives of foreign-born. 

Let us just follow the course of a noncitizen who today has had 
deportation proceedings instituted against him, and let us use the 
provisions of the McCarran-Walter law as a vehicle. 

Under provisions of this law, any Government agent, so designated 
by the Attorney General, has arresting power. He does not have to 
prove the person he arrests is a noncitizen, nor does he have to produce 
a warrant before making the arrest. 

Secondly, after the arrest has been made, bail may or may not be 
granted at the discretion of the Attorney General. Hearings are 
held, but what of due process in these hearings? The arresting offi- 
cer is an employee of the Justice Department, designated by the At- 
torney General. The examining officer is an employee of the Justice 
Department, designated by the Attorney General. The hearing offi- 
cer is an employee of the Justice Department, designated by the 
Attorney General. 


The Justice Department initiates proceedings and sits, through its 
employees, as judge and jury. The person is guiUy in the eyes of the 
Justice Department, or he would not have been arrested in the first 
place. How can these hearings be considered unbiased or fair if the 
Department of Justice and its employees arrest at the outset and pass 
final judgment ? We submit that there should be an application of the 
Administrative Procedure Act to the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service, thereby affording the accused at least, a minimum opportu- 
nity to fair and impartial hearings. 

Not only is the Department of J ustice accuse)-, prosecutor, judge, and 
jur}^, but the witnesses are likewise the paid hirelings of the Justice 
Department. In some instances these professional informers travel 
from area to area giving testimony against scores of persons faced with 
deportation. In other instances the Department of Justice uses a 
person against whom deportation proceedings have been initiated to 
testify against another and promises the new informer that proceed- 
ings against him or her will be dropped because of his or her coopera- 

There is a further phase of our current immigration policy which 
has been carried over into the future with the McCarran-Walter law. 
This is the question of the right to bail. Today, and in the future, 
unless something is done about it, noncitizens arrested in deportation 
proceedings may be refused bail at the outset. They remain jailed 
throughout their hearings, and then after an order of deportation has 
been issued against them ther may be kept in jail, without bail, for 
(i months more. 

As you know, deportation cases can be, and often are, long and 
dragged out. There is no time limit as to when the Justice Depart- 
ment must hold hearings in deportation cases. Therefore, the non- 
citizen sits in jail until the Justice Department gets ready to hold 
hearings. But, assume that hearings are held quickly and an order 
for deportation is handed down, the noncitizen still can be held for an 
additional 6 months. 

Denial of bail at the outset is punishing a person before he has 
been judged guilty. It is contrary to any semblance of justice, and 
the Minnesota Committee for Protection of Foreign-Born submits to 
you that the right to bail should not be taken away from any American, 
to be citizen or noncitizen. 

We urge that there be no power to deny bail in deportation cases, 
and that in all deportation cases bail in reasonable amounts be granted. 

We further request that the G months' imprisonment after an order 
of deportation has been handed down be done away with. This policy 
of denying bail has resulted in Martin Young sitting imprisoned on 
Ellis Island for 11 months while final disposition of his case is being 

Mr. Justice Black dissenting in the March 10 Supreme Court deci- 
sion in the Carlson case declared, "I can only say that I regret, deeply 
regret, tliat the Court now adds the right to bail to the list of other 
Bill of Rights guaranties that have recently been weakened to expand 
governmental powers at the expense of individual freedom." 

I would like to touch fui'ther on the question of bail as provided for 
under provisions of the McCarran-Walter law. Even if bail has 
been granted, the Attorney (jeneral is given the right under law, to pick 
up and rearrest noncitizens and increase the amount of bail set. 


The McCarran-Walter law has been paraded as a modernization of 
our immigration and naturalization policy. The power to rearrest 
and reset bail was not previously a part of our policy and we submit 
to you that rather than modernization, this repressive measure is 
retrogression. We urge that that provision be done away with. 

The Minnesota committee is unalterably opposed to the racist, re- 
strictive quota provisions of the law. These provisions are absolutely 
no better than previous immigration quotas. 

They further are viciously discriminatory against the Negro people 
by the arbitrary limitation to 100 the number of West Indians per- 
mitted entry from any given colony in 1 year. While slightly raising 
immigration restrictions for other groups, the McCarran-Walter law 
singles out the West Indian people for special discriminatory quotas. 

Our immigration policy has net only resulted in a pattern of dis- 
crimination against West Indians, but the Mexican people have become 
the target and free game for deportation. Hundreds of thousands 
of Mexicans are picked up eacli year and hurled deep into tlie interior 
of Mexico, and it is not infrequent that citizens are deported with non- 
citizens, all deported in such fashion as to make the Constitution and 
our heritage of human rights and decency meaningless Dhrases. 

Perhaps one of the most undemocratic aspects of the McCarran- 
Walter law is its provision in relation to naturalized citizens. A high 
percentage of Minnesotans are naturalized citizens. Their citizen- 
ship is very precioris to them. Even before passage of this law, because 
of the broad powers granted the courts in denaturalization proceed- 
ings, the courts have grown to consider naturalized citizens as a special 
category, not quite as good as native-born citizens. According to the 
McCarran-Walter law a naturalized citizen can lose his or her citizen- 
ship because of refusal to testify before a congressional committee. 
Citizenship can be revoked if a naturalized citizen joins an organiza- 
tion which was a proscribed organization at the time of securing 

Concealment of a material fact is also grounds for revocation, but 
the meaning of concealment of a material fact is not spelled out. 
Furthermore, there is no statute of limitations. I know of the case of 
a trade-union organizer, James Lustig, against whom revocation pro- 
ceedings were started 25 years after he became a citizen. The ques- 
tion naturally arises whether the denaturalization proceedings were 
not started in order to intimidate other foreign-born members of the 

The Minnesota committee specifically requests that in giving con- 
sideration to changes in our immigration and naturalization policy, 
that a statute of limitations, involving a reasonable period of time, 
be binding in denaturalization cases. 

Once a person becomes a citizen his citizenship should not be easily 
revoked, but should be an honorable one, one which permits the 
naturalized citizen to partake of democracy and have democracy ex- 
tended to him, free speech, choice of association, the right to believe 
as he sees fit without the constant threat of revocation of citizenship 
as penalty for any dissenting thought regarding the status quo. 

The Minnesota" Committee for Protection of Foreign Born main- 
tains that there can be no such restrictive, repressive and unreasonable 
policy toward the foreign-born without that policy reflecting in gov- 


ernmental and administrative attitudes toward the whole American 
people, native-born as well as foreign-born. 

The Mimiesota connnittee respectfully requests that your primary 
concern be the removal of racist, restrictive, and antidemocratic phases 
of tliis Nation's immi<>ration and naturalization policy as the first step 
toward maintaining a democratic policy for all. 

The Chaikman. Thank you. 

The next witness will be Mr. Francis J. Xahurski. 


Mr. Nauurski. I am Francis J. Nahurski, an attorney, and I am 
here to represent District No. 10, xVmerican Relief For Poland. 

My statement will be brief. I have in the last 2 months studied 
the present law as amended in the last session of Congress and have 
had considerable experience in connection with trying to aid certain 
people with inunigration problems. I find that since the displaced 
persons law has terminated our old law has been very inadequate and 
the amendments passed in 1952 have not served to alleviate that 

I think that I can state my points of objection under five general 
headings, and in order not to go too far afield I would like to make 
them in very brief form. 

First of all, I think there should be a removal of the discriminatory 
features of the law as it relates to the allocation of quotas, with the 
idea of accomplishing the general objectives of the law under a broad 
program. In other words, my position is that in passing an immigra- 
tion law we should have some general objective to whicli we are aspir- 
ing and that there should be no discrimination as to how that objec- 
tive is to be accomplished on the basis of discriminating against 
nationaliiies or regional groups; that it should be done, for example, 
(m a percentage basis of populations of given countries, if possible, 
if the quota system is to be retained. 

The seconci is because of the fact that world conditions have been 
changing so rapidly and so drastically in the last few years, it has 
from experience been demonstrated that very often these quota num- 
bers cannot for various reasons be used up in the given time. So far 
as possible those quota numbers which are unusued in any given year 
should be recaptured and used in succeeding years so as to accomplish 
that general over-all objective of the program which I think should 
be the keystone of our immigration policy and law. 

Third : To remove the technicalities wdiich result under the present 
situation in the very impractical application of the law in very many 
instances. There are too few discretionary powers and the procedures 
that are set up are too technical so that they give rise to too many 
instances where it is impossible to meet the letter of the law, and no 
one has the authority to exercise the discretion to alleviate the admin- 
istration of it. 

Then, I think there is one additional problem I should like to touch 
-on and that is to plead for some relief for those who have come over 
in larger numbers most recently and who, because of various reasons, 
have been separated from other members of their families, whether 


they be minors or people of full age, and that the relief be, if necessary, 
in some form of extraordinary legislation to allow those people, 
whether they have acquired citizenship in this country or not up to 
the present time, to effect a reunion with their families so far as it is 
possible. There are a great many instances in w^hich the families have 
been separated because some member of the family has been held back 
for some temporary reason. In the meantime the displaced persons 
law has expired and the family again has been broken up and is in 
very much the same situation as it was in the wartime occupation of 
the belligerents. 

In very brief capsule form those are the four points I think are the 
most important, at least from the standpoint of my experience. Those 
are points on which I would very much welcome some sort of relief 
from Congress. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Do I understand you are not in favor of a quota 
system, or was it that you are in favor of changing the quota numbers 
within the quota system ? 

Mr. Nahueski. I am not prepared to say that I am against the quota 
system because I don't know how else it could be limited. If the pro- 
gram envisions a limitation of immigration, then I assume some sort 
of system of quotas would have to be maintained. 

The Chairman. If there were a total ceiling number, how would 
you handle it ? 

Mr. Nahtjeski. Well, I imagine under that set-up some sort of quota 
system would have to be retained, but if that is true then I would favor 
the elimination of the very obvious discriminations that exist in the 
present law. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. How ? 

Mr. Nahurski. Against the eastern countries. 

The Chairman. How would you do that? 

Mr. Nahurski. By creating or establishing some sort of formula 
which would be more in line perhaps with the numerical population 
of those areas. 

The Chairman. "Wliat is your opinion regarding the national 
origin system ? 

Mr. Nahurski. If it is possible within the program that we adopt 
as our program to eliminate it, I would favor the elimination of it 
or the broadening of it so it would work out on a more equitable basis. 
I think it is generally conceded that it has not worked on an equitable 
basis in the past. 

The Chairman. What do you mean by broadening it ? 

Mr. Nahurski. What I am looking forward to, if possible, is to 
work out a scheme which would eliminate those discriminations. 
Now, it may be that during given periods of world history people 
who have a large quota allotment, if we are going to maintain a quota 
system, have been incapable of using them and nothing has happened 
under that. I say that if it is a principle of our progi^am to admit 
150,000 or 200,000 immigrants a year and it is for the best interests 
of the United States, and that is what we are all interested in in the 
long run, then we should not hamstring ourselves with laws that con- 
tain such technicalities that, because of these changing conditions in- 
the world, the program cannot be accomplished. That is what I am 
speaking of. 


I don't tliink that you can acconii)lisli the things that I have in 
mind witliin the framework of tlie jiresent law and 1 personally have 
the feeling, whether it is right or wrong, that the present law is not 
based on any veiy profound or sound ]:)rinciple of general program 
or policy over a long period of years; that in many of its aspects it 
is quite arbitrary and to the extent that it is, it prevents administra- 
tion flexibly to accomplish the over-all program. 

The Chairiman. Thank you very much, sir. 

Is Mr. Fred A. Ossana here ? 


Mr. Ossana. I am Fred A. Ossana, president of the Twin Cities 
Ra]:>id Transit Co. I am here to represent the American Committee 
for Italian Migration, Hopkins, Minn. 

I have been interested in the Italian immigrant ever since 1922 or 
19213 when I got out of the University of Minnesota. I am an attorney 
by profession and I practiced law in this State for 30 years. I was 
admitted to this State as well as to the Supreme Court of the United 
States. I was president of the Italian- American Civic League from 
1934 to 1938 when I was made an honorary member of the board of 
trustees. That league is a civic league interested in the advanced edu- 
cation of children of Italian immigrants and in promoting civic activ- 
ity and participation among Italian naturalized, as well as native-born, 
of immigi'ants in the United States. 

The Chairman. Is the league a national league ? 

Mr. Ossana. Yes, and at the present time that league has merged 
with the UNICO and is nationally represented in 14 or 15 States. 
That is the league which was prevalent in the East and was taken 
from the National Italian Civic League, which is a league that was 
working from Denver, Colo., to Chicago, HI. We had chapters in 
eight States at that time, the time of the merger several years back, 

I think that I understand the Italian immigrant as well as anybody 
in this country. I have mixed with them, associated with them, and 
I have addressed them all the way from Boston to San Francisco, and 
I have done that on a number of occasions. I think I have been in 
every part of this country where there are found any Italian-Ameri- 
cans. I have been very much interested in spurring the parents to 
giving the children advanced education. In fact, when I organized 
the league in 1933 we had on that board Mr. Fiorello LaGuardia, the 
mayor of New York, Governor Horner, the Governor of Illinois, 
Senator LaFollette of Wisconsin, and Senator Johnson of Indiana, 
and so on, and they w^orked with us in promoting these problems. 

Since the formation of that league we have given out more than 1,500 
scholarships ranging all the way from $100 to $4,000 each. Every- 
thing that we have been able to do in promoting young Italian boys 
and girls to go to college and obtain advanced education as doctors 
and lawyers and engineers and teachers we have done. We have 
noticed and have been fortunate in witnessing a very fortunate prog- 
ress ever since it has been started. 

I can tell you that when I was at the university from 1914, with a 
short intermission to graduation, I was the only Italian- American 


born student at the University of Minnesota out of 14,000 students. I 
made up my mind that, if possible, that was going to be corrected ; that 
these sons and daughters of these miners and these street workers and 
these building workers and railroad workers and farmers should have 
an opportunity of going to college and making a more wholesome and 
helpful contribution to American civic life. I think we have been very 
successful in that respect. That is merely preliminary. 

I have had occasion to study the immigration policies and laws and' 
the reports of the Immigration Department, and as a result of the 
criticism that was advanced against the Italian immigrant, which 
began in the turn of the century and especially around 1920 or 1925, 
I made a study of the comparative merits of that immigrant with im- 
migrants from other countries and with our own native-born. For 
instance, I took the figures on the criminal tendencies and I was much 
surprised to find that the criminal tendency of the average Italian 
immigrant or those born in this country of immigrants was not only 
better than the average of the European immigrants who had come 
here from other sections of Europe, but it was much better than our 
own native-born Americans. In other words, contrary to the general 
impression that there was a high criminal index among the Italian- 
born immigrant or the children born of Italian immigrants the reverse 
was just exactly the truth. 

I also looked into the statistics on inebriety and contrary to the 
general impression, because of the common usage of wine as a beverage 
in Italy, I found that we had less people in feeble-minded institutions 
<iue to drunkenness of any nationality in the United States. I also 
found that convictions for drunkenness were in the lowest bracket of 
any other nationality in the United States. 

I was also impressed since I came of immigrants myself who came 
here around 1885, and I was 1 of 11 children. My father worked in 
the iron ore mines of Michigan in the nineties when the wage of under 
ground bosses was $1 a day. I had the privilege of working in those 
mines when I v.-as 18 or 19 years of age on a 12-hour shift for $0.75 a 
day. From that time on and after I got to the university I made a 
little study of Italian immigration and, as you know, the great influx 
of Italians came in 1890 and on up to 1914 and 1915. 

In my trips around the country I found that everywhere there was 
hard work to do, the Italians were doing it. They laid the rails, and 
they were laying the rails at that time across the continent under the 
blazing sun and living in little shacks and railroad cars. I went to 
West Virginia and Pennsylvania and I found that a great portion of 
the men underneath were Italian men and boys. I found a great many 
of them doing farming in various sections of the country. I found 
them doing street work in Boston, New York, Chicago and in some of 
our Midwest and western cities. I found a great many of then en- 
gaged in building trades and whenever they were in that trade they 
were doing the hard work, not the bossing. 

I made up my mind then that the Italians had made a great con- 
tribution to the physical development of this country for which they 
had never received proper recognition. When we were short of that 
kind of help, for the dirty work, the Italian man did it. I was all 
over this country from New Orleans to New York to San Francisco 
and not one of them but hundreds of thousands and millions of them 


were doing tliat kind of work. I think they made quite a contribution 
to the building of America in those years and subsequent to that 

Now when I think of how Italy needs help the most — and I know we 
have spent hundreds of millions of dollars there in the last 7 or 8 
years — and then hear that our own immigration has been cut off, you 
realize that they have to absorb all the immigrants of Africa and 
Yugoslavia and otlier countries with no outlets at all. When I was 
over there on my last visit they were farming every single foot on the 
sides of the mountains. When that time of greatest distress came we 
shut off immigration. I also think it comes at a time when our coun- 
try needs that kind of economic help the most. I ran a farm for 10 
years. I had all kinds of employees. The kinds of employees I had 
were the ones looking at the want ads every night and left you the next 
day, and that was at a time when I was raising things for the armed 
services. We raised German shepherd dogs that my wife gave to the 
Army. We were engaged in producing milk and beef and every other 
day or every other week an employee would get up and leave when we 
were trying to raise pedigreed products to do the best job for defense 
as well as the man on the front line. 

The condition has not changed since that time. Just speaking lo- 
cally, I know that a number of my friends — we were running the Day- 
ton farm — on some of the best farms in Hennepin County say they 
can't run them because they can't get employees who are loyal and 
willing to put in a day's work for a good day's pay. The average 
farm hand before the was was getting $25 a month and now he is get- 
ting $135 and $150 a month and board and room, and you can't keej> 
them for that. As soon as they see an ad in the paper for $20 a day in 
a defense plant they are gone. Nobody can fill those spots better than 
the Austrians, the Italians, or the Yugoslavians, who will give you a 
day's work for a day's pay. 

I think it would be economically sound, not only in the needs that 
Italy has now — the surplus of employees, workers — but the dire need 
we have for that kind of help, to bring them in. I also think it would 
be sound economics, from the standpoint of assistance in dollars we are 
giving Italy, if we could absorb some surplus population of hers and 
then we wouldn't have to give her so much. Which, gentlemen, you 
are going to find very important as this international situation 

It has been hard for me to understand and hard for the leading 
Italian-Americans throughout the country to understand why the 
quota for Italy was reduced to the minimum figure it was reduced to. 
In fact, it makes immigration from that country nonexistent, and I 
can't see the justice of the base that they have adopted for the number 
of immigrants that should be admitted from Italy. I think a large 
part of it was based on pure prejudice. Some of the gentlemen from 
the South and one or two gentlemen from elsewhere who had, I think, a 
good deal to say in basing those quotas were absolutely unfair in their 
considei'ation of the contributions those people have made. 

The Italians have not only made their contribution from the stand- 
point of physical effort in the upbuilding of this country, but I think 
everywhere from New York to California you find their participation 
in civic life and social life in the community has been greatly en- 


larged, and you can see that they are making a real contribution of 
vahie })oth in business and in the civic and social life of the country. 

I know that I speak as one voice when I say to you that the 6 or 7 
million or more Italian- Americans in this country feel that a great 
injustice has been done by reason of the changes and the restrictions 
imposed in our immigration laws ever since the period after the First 
World War, and they very much hope that a more liberal and more 
generous interpretation will be made and that changes will result in 
the immigration law which will afford a generous immigration from 
Italy to this country in the very near future. 

I am sorry that I haven't a more concrete and a more studied state- 
ment ready for you. I have been out of the city and didn't know 
until I looked at this letter that I had been invited to testify here 
toda}'. I am very thankful to you for the opportunity of appearing 
before you. I will be glad to answer any questions you may have. 

Commissioner Finucane. You spoke of the dire need of farm help. 
In what area were you referring to ? 

Mr. OssANA. Especially to the Minnesota area with whidi I am 
quite well acquainted. I don't know if it exists elsewhere, but I am 
sure it can't be very much different elsewhere than it is here. I know 
that with these farms around here it is just nip and tuck when they 
can get employees to carry on, and the reason some of them sold out 
these wonderful establishments that have been growing and develop- 
ing for many years is because they couldn't get the right kind of help 
to handle them. 

Commissioner Finucane. What type of help ? 

Mr. OssANA. Dairy farms, as well as beef and grain farming. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Are these dirt farms or gentlemen farms ? 

Mr. OssANA. Both dirt and gentlemen farms. I think they are the 
most efficiently run farms in the State. There is nothing better that 
I ha^'e seen among the dirt farmers or anything else, than the Griswold 
farm or the Dayton farm and several others. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Were they sold ? 

Mr. OssANA. They were just auctioned off. 

]Mr. RosENFiEiJi. Who is running them now ? 

Mr. OssANA. They are not being run at all today. The Dayton 
farm is going to be parceled out for home building sites, and there 
was one of the finest herds in America. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. How many people did they employ altogether 
when they were able to get help they needed ? 

Mr. OssANA. Well, I imagine Bolder Bridge must have employed 
20 or 25 people. I employed as high as seven. The Griswold farm 
had at least 15 or 18 employees. I could get a list of 50 or 60 farms 
like that where they have had just that trouble ever since Pearl 
Harbor and the beginning of the war. 

Commissioner Finucane. Up to the present time ? 

Mr. OssANA. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. We have heard testimony to the effect that the 
mechanical developments on the farms have lessened the number of 
employees, to begin with, and, secondly, that that has resulted in larger 
establishments, greater areas so that smaller farms have been absorbed 
into the larger ones and that it has been indicated that because of 


that there is less of an opportunity for inniiigrants or DP's to be 
absorbed in the farm areas. What is your opinion of that? 

Mr. OssANA. That is true on the prairie where hvrge machinery has 
resuhed in streamlined operation, where there are three or four thou- 
sand acres solid in corn, wheat, or flax. You have got that kind of 
operation there, but you don't have it on dairy farms. You put so 
many in the fields and so many in milking. I had a caterpillar and 
two tractors and a hay loader and a bailer and everything else and 
I still needed that many men to run it, and that was only a small 
operation — 160 acres. 

Mr. KosENFiELD. If we set aside the farm needs in this area or in 
other industrial areas that you may know of, is there likely to be a 
continuing demand, as you see it, owing to shortages of labor? 

Mr. OssANA. Yes, sir, I do, unless something happens in this country 
when we reach a stalemate and our production is such that business 
goes backward instead of forward. When you reach a saturation 
point in cars, radios, television sets, and sewing machines and all the 
other things that make up the comfort and luxury of the American 
family, maybe so. I don't think we have reached that point. I think 
there are still millions in this country without bathtubs. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. In this particular area what would you say the 
shortage is in ? 

Mr. OssANA. For the common laborer. Even if you advertise at 
$1.60 or $1.70 an hour you can't get them. I can tell you that because 
I have had ads in the paper looking for them. 

The Chairman. You talk about 6 or 7 million Italian persons in 
this country who did what you described as the dirty work, the hard 
work all over the continent. What has become of them ? 

IMr. OssANA. A lot of them are dead from hard work and a lot of 
them are crippled with gnarled hands and bent backs who hope their 
children will have something better. And I speak from visual observa- 
■ tion as well as from what 1 have read. 

When I made my research I also found that there were more Italian 
boys in the Army in the first World War per thousand population 
than any otlier nationality. When you look up the Distinguished 
Service Medals and Medals of Honor you will find a very fair and 
generous portion of them have been parceled out to those men. 

Commissioner Gullixson. In your suggestion for relief of this 
situation in Italy are you thinking in terms of special legislation? 

Mr. OssANA. I am thinking in terms, and I am perfectly frank in 
saying it, of that, and for the last few years I haven't made any state- 
ment on the Immigration Act except in generalizations. 

Commissioner Gullixson. How would you balance the needs of 
Italy against the needs of the rest of the world ? 

Mr. OssANA. Well, I would liberalize the immigration laAvs to admit 
more immigrants from that part of the world. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Is that applying particularly to the 
European scene ? 

Mr. OssANA. That is right. 

Connnissioner Gullixson. You aren't going beyond that for the 
present ? 

Mr. OssANA. I am not well enough acquainted with the rest of the 
world. However, although I am particularly interested in the Italian 


problem, I know there is an overpopulation problem and I would 
like to see it solved, whether it requires emergency or long-term legis- 
lation. I think it is a good policy to do so. 

I also might remind the Commission that when the elections were 
held in Italy the organization which I represent was responsible for 
sending some 350,000 messages by letter or cable, which I think had 
some effect on the elections which took place and which surprised 
some of the people in Washington. 

The Chairman. Have you been studying the situation in Italy re- 
cently ? 

Mr. OssANA. I can't say that I have given any intensive study on it. 
I have talked to a lot of people who have been over there in the last 
year. A few friends of mine have told me about changes that have 
taken place since 1935 and 1940. 

The Chairman. Well, you made the statement that it has a popula- 
tion of 45 or 48 million people in an area the size of the State of 

Mr. Ossana. Approximately. 

The Chairman. Well, approximately is close enough. And you 
said that you have found in the statistics that the land is not sufficient 
to properly sustain that population. 

Mr. Ossana. Not anywhere near sufficient. 

The Chairman. If efforts are made to relieve Italy of part of its 
excess population — they desire to come here, say — would that be a 
permanent relief or would that just be taking temporary remedial 
steps, and would the population in a few years again be to the point 
where it would be impossible to support it ? 

Mr. Ossana. Yes, if you give them temporary relief. I think the 
immigration law should be on the basis of a long-time program. You 
can't simply say that you will open the gates for 1953 and 1954. I 
don't think you will relieve anything by doing that. 

The Chairman. Do you think the policy ought to be to admit a large- 
number from Italy every year ? 

Mr. Ossana. I woukln't say a large number; I would say a fair 
proportion based not on a 2 or 3 or 4 percent basis, but ba'sed on the 
same quota percentage as some of the northern Europeans have gotten. 

The Chairman. What position would that place us in with respect 
to other nations that have overpopulation problems ? 

Mr. Ossana. Well, of course, we probably can't take care of the 
M'hole world and we can't take care of a lot of people in the Far East 
and the South East because their contribution to America has i)een 
down to a minimum in comparison with what the Europeans have 
done for this country. Our country is based on immigrants who have 
come from Italy, Germany, France, and England. I don't think we 
have to worry about hundreds of millions of those peoples in the far 
corners of the earth. We can give them methods and intelligent 
leadership that will teach them how to sustain themselves without 
having any thoughts of absorbing them by the hundreds of thousands 
into our country. That would only lead to disaster if we thought we 
could form a program based on that kind of help. 

The Chairman. Are you suggesting that our greater obligations 
are in Europe ? 

Mr. Ossana. I think so. 


You see, the oveii)()i)iilate(l countries of Europe have also been hit 
by conditions in Ai'^entina. The Italian is a very prominent citizen 
there. Wliatever Argentina has done up to Peron's reuime has been 
larofely due to the hai'd Mork and intelligence of the Italians, spurred 
on by special inducement, as in Brazil. I can tell you from stories 
I have read and personal incidents that I have had, some of the great- 
est citizens of that country are citizens of Italian descent. 

Commissioner Guixixson. Is there opportunity for immigration to 
Argentina and Brazil? 

Mr. OssANA. As I understand, it is practically cut off right now. 

Conunissioner Gullixson. Has it not been quite heavy? 

Mr. OssANA. Quite heavy up to about 10 years ago. I am sorry I 
don't have the figures on that. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Kev. Denzil A. Carty here? 


Reverend Carty, I am Rev. Denzil A. Carty, clergyman of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church, director of St. Phillips Church in St. 
Paul, representing the Minnesota State Conference of the National 
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, St. Paul, Minn. 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Reverend Carty. I might say by way of preface that my interest in 
this whole situation is a very real one because I am a naturalized citizen 
of America. I came to this country from the British West Indies at 
the age of 16 and went right to work, attending night school while 
working days. I attended the College of the City of New York days 
and worked nights. Then later I went to the seminary and served 
in the Army as a chaplain during the last war and I have been in the 
ministry ever since 19^M wlien I was ordained in the priesthood. 

The Minnesota State Conference of the National Association for 
the Advancement of Colored People, as well as the three affiliated 
branches located in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth, have gone on 
record in support of the Huni]ihrey-Lehman immigration bill and in 
oppositioji to the McCarran-Walter immigration bill. The changes 
which we think would be desirable in the present law are essentially 
those changes which were i)roposed by the Humphrey-Lehman bill. 
A more detailed statement of our reasons for supporting some of the 
more important changes will be given to you by Mr. Leland of our 
committee on legislation. 

I should like to emphasize most strongly the need for amending the 
existing law so as actually to remove discrimination against prospec- 
tive immigrants because of their race. I realize that the present law 
lias language which states that no person shall hereafter be excluded 
from the United States because of his race or color. I also know that 
the law now ))erniits jjcrsons of all racial and national backgrounds 
to become naturalized citizens. I approve these provisions as repre- 
senting progress in the i-ight direction. However, racial discrimina- 
tion has by no means been eliminated from the present law. 

For one thing, persons of oriental ancestry must come in under 
racial quotas, rather than under the quotas of the countries where they 


have citizenship. Furthermore, the quotas of 100 persons per year 
which apply to many countries having Large proportions of colored 
peoples in their populations are racially discriminatory in their effect. 
Provisions such as these are gratuitous insults to our own American 
citizens who are the members of nonwhite racial groups. Moreover, 
such provisions will certainly not win the confidence or respect of 
colored peoples in other parts of the world. 

The organization that I represent is very keenly interested in the 
impression America makes upon the nonwliite peoples of the world- 
How serious it is, I suppose, only those of us in the organization and 
the people who are M^orking in like fields can appreciate, but anything: 
that can be used as propaganda that our country is in any way dis- 
criminating against nonwhite peoples is something that we would 
like to eliminate because of America's opportunity to be the real 
leader of the world and to really help the nonwhite peoples of the' 

So I am here, like my organization in other parts of the country,, 
to urge that the present bill be amended or that the Lehman-Hum- 
phrey bill be substituted so that these discriminatory tendencies can be 
eliminated and our immigration quotas set up without the slightest 
regard even subtly or indirectly to racial discrimination. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Wilfred C. Leland, Jr. ? 


Mr. Leland. I am Wilfred C. Leland, Jr., appearing on behalf of 
the legislative committee, Minnesota State Conference of the National 
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, IVIinneapolis^ 

Our legislative committee as well as the membership of the organiza- 
tion has rather carefully considered some of the provisions of this 
act which we believe to be discriminatory in racial terms and also which 
we believe to be in opposition to a sound democratic program for peo- 
ple generally apart entirely from the racial factor. Perhaps the only 
thing we can actually contribute here — we can probably contribute 
nothing new in addition to testimony given you before on various of 
these points. 

I know there are many people much more expert on the immigration 
problem as a whole and on the particular points they are concerned 
about than we are. What we can do perhaps is to point these things up 
as things that have been of concern to our organization and to the peo- 
ple in it. It is an interracial organization, as you know, concerned 
not only with the relation between white and Negro people in the 
United States, but concerned with making democracy work more ef- 
fectively throughout the world. 

Eeverend Carty mentioned the first point, of course, this racial 
origins provision, which we feel is undesirable and should certainly 
be eliminated. In fact, our suggestion would be that all racial dis- 
crimination as such should be erased at every point. 


The second point abont which we are concerned is the basis for the 
j^resent qnotas, which I believe are now still using the 1920 census fig- 
ures. ^Ye believe, along with Senator Humphrey and Senator Leh- 
man, that it should be changed to 1950 and continuously changed 
every 10 years as the new census is taken. It seems to us that would 
be the proper way to keep our immigration policy abreast of our actual 
population groupings nationalitywise and to give proper opportuni- 
ties for people of various groups to come in and join their relatives 
and friends from the same country who have come before them. 

We believe also that the pooling of quotas is desirable. We think 
that our immigration policy should be to have the maximum figure 
set with a view to the number of people that can be successfully 
absorbed in our economy from year to year, and we think we should 
admit that full number. If the people from certain of those countries 
don't need to use those quotas, they should be pooled and passed on 
to people who are waiting in line to get on to a quota from another 

A fourth point is that we believe we should continue to be, and be 
much more successful than we think we have been under the present 
legislation, a haven for refugees and escapees from political persecu- 
tion in otlier areas of the w^orld. It seems to us that one of the great 
hopes for ultimate peace and democracy throughout the world is to 
gradually sell our democratic system to the individual persons under 
dictatorial government, and if we can assure them they will have a 
haven if they leave there and come outside and show their opposition 
to the system under which they now live, it will give great hope and 
encouragement to movements that will eventually change those situ- 
ations completely. It seems to us there should be special provisions 
for welcoming persons in those categories into the borders of the 
United States. 

Related perhaps to that fourth point is the fifth one, about which I 
might say the same : we think that legislation should be based on the 
concept that individual people can be reformed and improved as in- 
dividuals and that they can change their views and can change their 
allegiance to a system of government and so forth. We believe, in 
other words, that persons who have once belonged to the Communist 
Party in some country or once belonged to the Nazi Party or some 
other group should not forever be excluded, but if they give evidence 
of having subscribed to governmental principles which we believe in 
they should be achnitted and we should recognize the fact that this 
kind of progress is possible in the individual. We think the law 
should take that into account. s 

The sixth point relates to the matter of procedure, which at the 
present time in the present law we understand there is given a good 
deal of rather arbitrai-y authority to individual representatives of the 
United States Government in foreign countries to make administra- 
tive procedures about either admitting or refusing persons who may 
apply for admission to the United States. We believe that all such 
decisions should be subject to review by proper review machinery. 
We don't have specific proposals for this, but generally speaking we 
think there should be no opportunity for some individual, because 
of prejudice or arbitrary whims of one kind or the other, to be able to 
make final decisions on one individual who has no chance of appealing 


that to an impartial agency to give liim relief if he has been treated 

The seventh point also relates in ouq sense to procedures. Per- 
haps I should go further than that. We understand the act will go 
into effect in January and that it provides for the deportation of 
persons who have become naturalized citizens but who were subse- 
quently found to be disloyal to the United States and so forth. In 
other words, citizenship of naturalized citizens is not the same as 
that of native born citizens. This, we think, is wrong. We think a 
naturalized citizen should have the same rights and privileges and 
security as a citizen who by chance was born here in the United States. 

I think the final point we might like to mention is that we think 
the legislation should take into account the integrity of the family 
as an institution and should give more special opportunities than are 
given, and I admit I don't know how the present law reads in that 
respect. At lisast, if it does not provide this, we think it certainly 
should : that members of f amilities should be permitted to come and 
join other family members who are already in the United States. 
And this should apply rather broadly to the family groups so that we 
should avoid the situation that families are broken up because of 
more or less arbitrary applications of the immigi'ation law. 

Those are the major points we had in mind and I think I just would 
like to close by saying that we believe that this is a matter of concern 
to all Americans. It is of concern to the members of our organization, 
who are especially concerned with racial discrimination and problems 
of racial exclusion, but we believe that the interest of our member- 
ship represents the interest of all other citizens of the United States 
and people of the world who believe in democratic principles. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

A letter has been received from Mr. H. D. Bruce, 2402 Kendall 
Avenue, Madison, Wis., which will be inserted in the record. 

(The letter follows:) 

Statement Submitted by H. D. Bruce of Madison, Wis. 

Madison, Wis., October 18, 1952. 
Mr. Philip B. Perlman, 

Chairman, Commission on Immigration and 'Naturalisation, 
Department of Justice, Washington 25, D. C. 

Dear Sir: May I call to the attention of the Commission a peculiarity of the 
McCarran ImmigTation and Nationality Act, Public Law 414, passed by Congress 
on .Tune 27, 1952. 

Provision is made by the act for foreign wives of American men to enter the 
United States on a nonquota visa, but tjiere is no similar provision lor foreign 
fiancees. Therefore, the American man must travel to the foreign country of 
his fiancee simply to have a marriage ceremony performed. Thus the net result 
of the present wording of the act is to cost the couple up to several thousand 
dollars unnecessary traveling expense. 

I would like to raise the question, "Why not recognize proxy marriages or 
permit a bona fide fiancee to enter the United States on a nonquota visa?" To 
preclude abuse it would seem reasonable to permit fiancee entry on nonquota 
visa only if a bond be posted or suitable guaranty be made to ensure return 
passage, if the marriage is not contracted soon after arrival and does not 
remain intact until the wife has been naturalized. 

Very truly yours, H. D. Bruce. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Mr. Chairman, may I -request that the St. Paul 
record remain open at this point for the insertion of statements sub- 
mitted by persons unable to appear as individuals or as representa- 


tives of organizations or wlio could not be scheduled due to insuffi- 
cient time. 

The Chairman. That may be done. 

This completes the hearings in St. Paul, Minn. The Commission 
will now stand adjourned until it reconvenes in St. Louis, Mo., at 9 : 30 
a. m., October 11, 1952. 

(Whereupon, at 5 p. m.. the Commission was adjourned to recon- 
vene at 9 : 30 a. m., Saturday, October 11, 1952, at St. Louis, Mo.) 

25356—52 59 



Universitt of Minnesota, 

The Law School, 
MinnenpoUs I4, Octoher S, 1952. 
Mr. Harry N. Rosenfield, 

President's Commission on Immigraiiori and Ndturalizaiion. 
1740 G Street AW., WasJiington, D. C. 
Dear Mr. Rosenfield: I have decided not to testify at the hearing of your 
Commission in St. Paul. 

When I agreed on the spur of the moment in our telephone conversation, I had 
tentatively in mind a protest against the congressional irresponsibility in the 
Supplemental Appropriation Act of 1951 in exempting alien exclusion and expul- 
sion cases from the provisions of sections 5, 7, and 8 of the Administrative Pro- 
cedure Act. I now find that section 403 (a) (46) of the Immigration and Na- 
tionality Act of 1952 repeals tlie provision to which I object. Whether the pro- 
visions of sections 236 and 242 (b) will turn out to be fair with respect to the 
problem of separation of functions will depend upon the practices of the special 
inquiry officers, and since the new act is not yet in effect, it is too early to investi- 
gate that question. 

Sincerely yours, 

Kenxetii Gulp Davis. 


October 8, 1952. 
Dear Sir : As a student and as a voter I should like to express through you my 
sincere pleas for the modification of the McCarran immigration law. As a world 
leader and as an exponent of democracy the United States must liberalize its im- 
migration policy. 

Margia Ritssell. 


Bureau of Catholic CirARiTiES, Inc., 

Dulnth, Minn., October 17, 1952. 
Hon. Philip D. Perlman, 

Chairman. President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization, 
17J,2 G Street NW., Washington, D. C. 
My Dear Mr. Perlman : Having been unable to attend the recent hearings in 
St. Paul, I would like to siibmit this brief statement. 

As resettlement director for the Roman Catholic diocese of Duluth which 
covers the 10 northeast counties of ^Minnesota, I assisted with the resettlement 
of over 500 displaced persons admitted under the 1948 act. It is only on the 
results of this experience that I wish to touch. 

Three-fourths of this group of 529 were of Polish, Yugoslav, and Hungarian 
origin. They are slowly, but surely, finding their niche in our northeastern 
Minnesota communities. Only two of the group have become public charges and 
both of these for medical reasons. They have had a minimum of assistance. 



Resettlement consisted in locating lental housing, establishing credit of from 
three to four hundred dollars for the purchase of essential second-hand household 
furnishings ; immediate job placement. In only one instance was there appar- 
ent defaulting on repayment of inland transportation or credit extended. Em- 
ployers, with three exceptions, have given these people excellent work ratings. 
No effort was made to hold them geographically or employment-wise. Once they 
bcame established in the locality and the employment of their choice, they 
demonstrated their stability. 

When I consider the minimum effort required locally to give these people a 
new lease on life, I have no hesitation in saying that I would be glad to do it 
for another 500, if Congress sees fit to legislate the possibility. These people, 
you will note, were predominantly from sections of Europe which our quota 
system so largely excludes. Their appreciation of democracy will, I feel sure, 
be a shot in the arm for us native-born Americans in the years ahead. It seems 
to me we are not going to buy our friendships in Europe with dollars alone, but 
rather with doing our just share in admitting nationals from overpopulated 
countries and countries which we have heretofore treated as having less desirable- 
emigrants. I see no evidence of friendship in telling European governments that 
we will accept their skilled people only. The vast majority of the Poles, Yugo- 
slavs, and Hungarians who came under my supervision were unskilled and 
employment has not been a problem for them; 

Because so many others will be voicing opinions on the discriminatory aspects 
of the McCarran Act, I have confined my observations to my personal experiences 
with some 500 immigrants from the countries which our laws pretty much exclude 
from our shores. 

Very sincerely yours, 

Bureau of Catholic Chaeities, Inc. 
Rev. William D. Larkin, Director. 




seventeenth session 

St. Louis, Mo. 

The President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization 
met at 9: 50 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in courtroom No. 1, New 
Federal Building, St. Louis, Mo., Hon. Philip B. Perlman (chairman) 

Present: Chairman Philip B. Perlman, and the following Com- 
missioners: Msgr. John O'Grady, Mr. Thomas G. Finucane, Eev. 
Thaj:ldeus F. Gullixson. 

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

The Chairman. The Commission will come to order. 

Our iirst witness this morning will be Mrs. Maynor D. Brock. 


Mrs. Brock. I am Mrs. Maynor D. Brock, executive director of the 
Naturalization Council of Kansas City, 903 Kansas City Power & Light 
Building, Kansas City, Mo. I am here to represent that organization. 

Honorable gentlemen, it is with some apprehension that I come 
before this panel of distinguished gentlemen to air my views and those 
of my coworkers on the subject of naturalization and immigration. 

In the first place, it seems to me that this very Commission is pre- 
mature and that the Public Law 414 has not even been administered 
since it does not go into effect until December 24 midnight. It is per- 
haps the first attempt in America — this act I refer to — to bring within 
one comprehensive statute the various laws relating to immigration 
and naturalization and nationality. It makes significant and forward- 
looking changes, particularly in the field of immigration. There are 
48 measures especially repealed, with provisions for other parts of 
the act in controversy with this bill also repealed. 

To return to this panel : It seems that the writers of this bill in its 
final form understood the enormousness of such legislation for it 
established a Joint Committee on Immigration and Naturalization 
Policy composed of 10 members, five each from the Senate and the 
House, three of the majority and two of the minority parties in each 
branch of Congress, and the members to be appointed by the President 
of the Senate and the Speaker of the House and the committee electing 
its own chairman. 



The task of this committee is to make a conscientious study of the 
administration of the act and its effect upon the national security, 
ecoPxOmy, and social welfare of the United States and such conditions 
within and without the United States which might have a bearing 
on this subject. It must make reports to both Houses of Congress 
periodically and, further, the Attorney General and the Department 
of State are to keep this committee fully aware of all regluations, 
instructions, and information it requests concerning the administra- 
tion of the act. Such committee is appointed from the House Judi- 
ciary Committee already. I refer to Representatives Walter, Chelf, 
Wilson, Graham, and Thompson. They will start to work as soon 
as the Senate committee is in operation. 

Mr. Truman, our President, has used almost the same thing in the 
bill for the order to establisli this Commission of which I am speaking. 

I wish to endeavor to discuss the quota system after having had a 
background of 19 years' work with immigration and naturalization. 
I have no axes particularly to grind, and I am well aware of minority 
groups who feel that discrimination has occurred for their own people. 
I am quite aware that the Displaced Persons Act barred from it some 
Europeans quite heavily and made it quite impossible for some to 
come in. If these persons were barred by such quota of the skills we 
need and didn't have the necessarj^ qualifications for immigration, I 
see no reason why a special bill might not be instituted for such 
persons. This has been a possibility since 1924. It is still a possi- 
bility. Our own economy must still be considered in the light of the 
possibility of a less stable dollar than we now have. 

There was trouble with the Displaced Persons Act until John Gib- 
son and his Commission straightened it out. Even then, great num- 
bers of documents for worthy aliens were mysteriously not found and 
the screening is questionable in many instances. Mass immigration 
is exceedingly difficult under the most advantageous circumstances. 
I realize mistakes have occurred thereby, but the point I wish to make 
is to hold the line for quotas and make steps slowly before bringing 
social problems, more folks unadjusted to our midst to be sent away 
or tormented by petty folks here continuously. It doesn't help to have 
12 percent rearing its problem head while 88 percent are not. It is 
here that the 12 percent of the DP group are malcontent and there 
are no apparent agencies or communities which are able to do much 
about them. 

So, it seems to me that until screening is a reality in Europe for the 
betterment of America and for the aliens themselves I would favor 
the holding of the present quota as approved in this act. 

Furthermore, I should want to call your attention to the fact that 
there has been a long and studied effort made in behalf of this act 
before it was written. Organizations from all over the United States 
came to Washington to testify to their best knowledge on these 

I believe further that this bill in its own various 12 parts has much 
to commend it. Its naturalization procedures are more standardized. 
That is the goal. The inadmissible aliens are clearly defined. It sets 
down classes of deportable aliens and they are now more inclusive 
than formerly, particularly as far as the criminal alien is concerned. 
The procedural safeguards are more afforded by this new act than 


were afl'orded uiidei' the old law. The visa procedures for immigrants 
and nonininiiaiants remains practically the same. Entry and exclu- 
sion of aliens liave remained somewhat the same. There is, of course, 
some De])artment of State regulation which comes into all of these 
and 1 think probably that is the place it should be. The re-entry 
permits are just about the same. There has been no a])preciable de- 
parture from the former law. I think that the registration of aliens 
and the address reports coming the 1st of January as they do has 
lessened the tension for those who are known as noncitizens and then, 
now that it is only once a year I think perhaps it is urging some of 
them to become citizens. I think that all those persons who are 
permanently entered in this countiy should avail themselves of 
American citizenship. I approve of it. 

I wish we had some wa}' more of putting little needles into it so that 
we might have more citizens so we wouldn't come across those — and it 
has been so often in my experience — who have been here 40 years and 
then come crying, ''How can I become a citizen, because in this last act 
of 1950 I have to read, write, or speak English and I have been tor- 
mented by my neighbors because of the fact that I am not a citizen." 
Especially is that true in the period of national elections. It seems to 
me that if some urge could be put upon them to become citizens when 
they come to this country, for them to learn to write, read, and speak 
English, it would be a very great contribution to our country. 

Furthermore, the Government has made it possible for them because 
in the classes they do provide the books, which I must say are very 
excellent for their learning. 

Of course, the act is a large order and it is a very difficult thing to 
take into consideration in 15 minutes. These are 845 pages of legisla- 
tion and law embodied in it. But at the same time I am convinced 
that with this joint committee we have safeguards and that the bill 
is to be commended as a Mdiole and that it is trying to be a forward 
movement. As the law will be administered I tliink we will find that 
there are places that can be improved in it, and I hope sincerely that 
those places will be improved. 

I think, gentlemen, that that concludes my testimony. I must say 
that I have not talked otf the cuif : I have talked from experience of 
years of work. I might say that we have made a very intensive study 
of this bill. 

The Chairman. Mvh. Ih-ock, are there any parts of the new act 
which you think can be iniproved ?^ 

Mrs.' Brock. As I said in the first place, I think that it is premature. 
We haven't even tried it. It isn't a law- yet, not until the 24th of 
December, and we can't tell anything about it until we start to admin- 
ister it. I would hesitate very sincerely to say that I think this, that 
and the other thing. I am glad that the first paper was not completely 
wiped off the map. In many instances it can be had and I like that 
part of it because it means security on the part of some of the in- 
dustrial Avorkers to have a first paper. But I like the standardization 
of the naturalization proceedings and the requirements for naturaliza- 
tion, and I am hoping that a standardization will be more clearly 
written out as to requirements foi- citizenship, as it is not now done. 
Perhaps that is one place I would like maybe to see an improvement, 
but until a directive is given perhaps I too am premature in my sug- 


Commissioner O'Gradt. Do you favor continuing the national 
origins formula in the quota system ? 

Mrs. Brock. I think the national origins are quite correct and. I 
would have them remain so until such a time when we were sure that 
the assimilation of these aliens who are coming now will make the 
contribution we expect them to make when they come, rather than to 
bring great groups in and then settle it after we get them here. That 
we cannot afford economically and socially. We have a great deal 
of trouble. 

Commissioner O'Gkady. Do you think the national origins formula 
might make the United States vulnerable to a charge of being dis- 
criminatory ? 

Mrs. Brock, I think under the present act we can say that you are 
not excluded if you can qualify under immigration and if you are a 
good person and needed in tliis country we have provided the num- 
bers that can be brought here per year. No, I wouldn't say that we 
were discriminatory at all. Certainly we have the same right and 
we are not the only country in the Avorld who says that we don't 
want all the peoples of all the world because there are plenty of others, 
Australia, for instance. As nnich as we think Australia needs immi- 
gration they still have discriminatory policies, and less populous na- 
tions than ours continue to refuse orientals. 

The Chairman. Do I understand, then, that you favor the system 
of selection as provided in the act ? 

Mrs. Brock. I would continue to do it as the law implies, until such 
a time when the joint committee whicli Mas a])pointed within this 
law finds it not serving a purpose of leadership in the world, and then 
I would go along with the joint committee, but I still say that the 
joint committee was made as a safeguard for such problems. And 
until that joint committee, which is made up of five in the House 
and five in the Senate and two of which are majority and two are 
minority, finds that that is not the case and that we are excluding 
people we need here, why then I would say that I would go along 
with that joint committee. Until such a time occurs I still say that 
the law satisfies us as it is now written, as far as quotas are concerned. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Do you think there should be any dis- 
tinction between the people of the world, whether European or Asiatic, 
and so forth, under our immigration system ? 

Mrs. Brock. Well, I feel this way, personally. I am not speaking 
from the council's point of view. Unfortunately the orientals have 
been discriminated against in former time in that they had to come, 
whether they were born in South America or Europe of oriental 
parents, as orientals and, therefore, I would feel that there could be 
that arrangement made to have them come from the nation of their 
birth rather than from their nationality origin. I would say that 
particularly because I have worked with the orientals greatly recently 
and I have found that that is a great handicap. We have had some 
very fine orientals in our town who had returned to their coimtry 
because they had five or six years to wait since thej^ were born in South 
America and had to come under the oriental quota. That, I feel, was 
unfortunate and I would like to personalh^ erase that discrimination, 
if you wanted to call it such. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Our next witness will be Dr. Mihanovich, 



Dr. MiHANOViCH. I am Dr. Clement Simon Mihanovich, director of 
the department of socioloG:y. St. Louis University. I am liere as the 
representative of the Very Reverend Paul C. Reinert, president of 
St. Louis University, as Avell as in my individual capacity. 

In behalf of the Very Reverend Paul C. Reinert I would like to 
read you a petition he presents to your Commission. 

The Chairman. We shall be pleased to hear it. 

(The petition read by Dr. Clement Simon Mihanovich follows:) 

St. Louis University, 
St. Louis, Mo., October 11, 1952. 
Public Law 414 has removed the quota -exempt status formerly held by bona 
lide college and university professors. At the present under the McCarran law 
only bona tide ministers are exempt from the quota. 

Section 101 (a) (27) (F) of the McCanan law, by failing to specifically 
mention college and university professors, places them w^ithin the quota system. 
We consider this unfair and detrimental to the best interests of the United 
States. We, therefore, suggest and recommend that college and university 
jirofessors, who intend to carry out the work of their profession in the United 
States, be included in the list of nonquota immigrants. 
Very sincerely yours, 

Paul C. Reineut, S. J., President. 

Dr. Mihanovich. Now, I would like to speak in my own behalf, as 
a sociologist. I would like to talk about section 2 (b), Executive 
Order 10329. I am of the opinion that within the last few years the 
quota of 154,000 immigrants has not been fulfilled. Consequently, I 
suggest and recommend that a system be devised whereby the quota 
be filled on a basis of need. This need may be world-wide and should 
not be restricted on the basis of race, nationally, religion, or origin. 

Arguments have been presented by various peoples stating that the 
United States was incapable of economically supporting an annual 
admission of 154,000 or so immigrants. In my capacity as a sociolo- 
gist and a student of population, I am of the firm opinion that the 
United States can support a much larger immigration quota than 
the present quota. To cite one example, Harold Moulton, of the 
Brookings Institute, made a series of studies before and after World 
War II under such titles as "America's Capacity to Produce" and 
"America's Capacity to Consume." In his latest work on economic 
considerations in the United States he is of the opinion that the 
economic system of the United States is capable of supporting twice 
the present population at a level of living eight times greater than 
the present level of living. I realize that the Commission has been 
subject to petitions such as these. I do not wish to take more time. 

I am grateful for the opportunity of presenting Father Reinert's 
petition and my own petition before the Commission. 

Commissioner Gullixson. I have just one question to ask with 
regard to your observation "on the basis of need." Is that world- 
wide need or is that limited to Europe? 

Dr. Mihanovich. I think it would be, in my particular opinion, 
world-wide need. 


The Chairman. Would you then favor admitting immigrants up 
to the number that this country might need without regard to where 
they came from ? 

Dr. MiHANOviCH. That's right. 

The Chairman. Assuming they met such tests as Congress might 

Dr. MiHANOviCH. A common-sense test. 

The Chairman. And witliout regard to race, place of birth or 
national origin? 

Dr. Mihanovich. That is right. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Do I understand correctly that you are 
opposed to the present national origins system? 

Dr. Mihanovich. As far as I can see it, I imagine the immigration 
law has been intended, whether conscientiously or unconscientiously, 
to aid individuals in certain sections of the world who need aid in 
coming to the United States. I mean, it is not based upon or should 
not be based upon any preconceived nations and I am of the firm 
opinion that the immigration law of the United States as originally 
conceived under the McCarran law is based upon a concept which is 
found in the writings of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, a concept 
which can express itself, I think, in the idea of superior and inferior 

As a sociologist and somewhat of an anthropologist, that concept 
is alien to me and scientifically unproven. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Do you think our immigration policy is 
an important consideration in our foreign policy? 

Dr. Mihanovich. I think it definitely has to be taken into con- 
sideration. The foreign policy of the United States has to be taken 
into consideration, but I am also of the opinion that the foreign policy 
of the United States when it plays a part in immigration should not 
operate in such a way as to, shall we say, not take into consideration 
the lives of individuals — I mean, the United States should not be a 
cold-blooded instrument using lives of individuals through the process 
of immigration in order to carry out a foreign policy. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Is Kev. Victor T. Suren here? 


Keverend Suren. I am Rev. Victor T. Suren, 3835 Westminster 
Place, St. Louis, Mo., St. Louis Resettlement Committee for Displaced 
Persons, which is affiliated with the National Catholic Resettlement 
Council. I am also here as representative of the Most Reverend 
Joseph E. Ritter, archbishop of St. Louis and chairman of our Re- 
settlement Committee. 

I have here, Mr. Chairman, a prepared statement which I wish to 
read and at the conclusion of that I would ask the permission of the 
Commission to make a few brief remarks. 


The Chairman. The Commission will be glad to hear what you 
have to say. 

Keverend Suren. I am grateful to the Commission on Immigration 
and Naturalization for this opportunity to express my views on the 
present immigration policv of our country as it is represented in the 
McCarran-Walter Act of June 27, 1952. 

For the past 3 years I have held the office of director of the St. Louis 
Resettlement Conunittee for Displaced Persons and Expellees, which 
is a local branch of the resettlement division of war relief services, 
NCWC. The chairman of our resettlement committee is the Most 
Reverend Joseph E, Ritter, archbishop of St. Louis, whom I have the 
honor of representing before this Commission. I would like to state 
further t'lat the St. Louis Resettlement Committee has directly as- 
sisted in tlie resettlement of approximately 1,800 war victims in the 
Archdiocese of St. Louis during the past 4 years, in accordance with 
the Federal Displaced Persons Act of 1948 as amended in 1950. We 
continue to aid these people toward their ultimate stabilization as 
creditable and honorable citizens of our Republic. The Archdiocese 
of St. Louis represents approximately one-third of the State of 
Missouri, the eastern part. 

In view of the j)iesent world crisis and our country's recognized role 
of leadership, we feel that our present immigration and naturalization 
policy is in some respects detrimental to us as a nation and needlessly 
disadvantageous and discriminatory in regard to peoples of certain 
nationalities who are in dire need of the help we might give them. 
It is our studied opinion that a revised policy on immigration should 
reflect tlie following : 

(1) While it is recognized that immigration must be controlled by 
a quota system, it is regrettable that our present law continues the 
deplorable national origins formula. This formula has always been 
considered to be discriminatory toward the people of countries of 
eastern and southern Europe. The sting of this discrimination is felt 
with particular keenness today because the nations so affected are 
presently experiencing unspeakable economic hardships due to the 
pressure of surplus populations caused by the last war and the con- 
tinuing Communist tyranny. The immediate possibility of political 
upheaval inherent in the economic stress in such countries must not 
be lost sight of. Such a condition is a very definite obstacle to world 
peace. Hence we urge the adoption of a more just and equitable 
system in determining national immigration quotas. 

(2) WJiereas each year only a portion of the total of aclmissable 
immigrants come to the United States, because certain countries do 
not utilize their full quotas, we recommend the pooling of these unused 
quotas to relieve, at least in a measure, the overload of excess popula- 
tion in certain other European countries. If we continue to cancel 
unused quotas, we simply emphasize the discrimination inherent in 
the present national origins quota formula. 

Because we say, in effect, that we could absorb, say, approximately 
150,000 ])eop]e, 150,000 people don't come because certain countries 
don't fill their quotas. We could take these others but we don't, 
whereas in our economy we could absorb them. Certainly, as I feel, 
we emphasize the discrimination against those people: we just don't 
want you. That is the way it seems to me. 


(3) We feel that the present immigration law gives undue prefer- 
ence to professionals and skilled technicians to the prejudice of non- 
skilled workers. While we recognize the benefits which may accrue 
to our country from the acquisition of those enjoying preference, we 
must not be unmindful of the fact that our immigration policies should 
be inspired also by motives of charity and a desire to assist needy 
countries. Further^ we have learned from our experience in the re- 
settlement of displaced persons and expellees that the nonskilled im- 
migrant lias made his adjustment to our American way of life with 
remarkable ease and bids fair to be a great asset to our national econ- 
omy. We do have a need for unskilled labor. 

(4) The McCarran-Walter Act seems to give to American consuls 
abroad too broad powers to determine almost arbitrarily the eli- 
gibility of potential immigrants. Similarly, naturalized citizens 
now feel insecure in the possession of their coveted citizenship, be- 
cause their rights against deportation seem not to be sufficiently 

I have had several naturalized citizens who have been here 20 or 
more years come to me and ask me if they were not in danger of 
deportation for some slight infraction of a law of our city or State 
or country. I am just telling you the effect it has had on them. 

These suggestions are prompted by a sincere desire to see the United 
States completely vindicate itself as worthy of its place of moral 
leadership in the family of nations. We are convinced that a more 
Christian immigration policy is imperative, not in 5 or 10 years, but 
now, when the relief offered to suffering peoples by immigration is 
so urgent. 

It is not our thought that the United States can solve the surplus 
population problems of all the nations alone. We do feel, however, 
that we must set the example for other countries to imitate. Our 
present immigration law hardl}' sets a good example. We have in- 
augurated and are pursuing plans and programs for the relief of 
impoverished and backward nations. We have done this to thwart 
communism and foster peace and freedom. We have done this at a 
great cost to our nation. Much of our efforts in this regard, we feel, 
will come to nought, unless we demonstrate qualities of moral leader- 
ship. A more humane immigration law, a law more in keeping with 
our American traditions, seems to be demanded by our position in 
world affairs. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Reverend Suren. I wish to add these few reflections. We recog- 
nize that the number of immigrants ought to be determined by a care- 
ful study of our economy. Certainly we say that it should not be 
haphazard, unrestricted. It should be planned and the better planned 
the more successful it will be. 

Secondly, whatever be our permanent immigration policy, as long 
as the crisis of overpopulation exists to such an extent, I do not be- 
lieve we should rule out consideration of emergency immigration leg- 
islation such as we had in 1948, amended in 1950, commonly known 
as the DP Act. 

Thirdly, if we feel our economy can't stand a greater number of im- 
migTants we should be ready to give these immigrants more assistance 
once they have come here. 


As I have stated, our resettlement office of the St. Louis Kesettle- 
meiit Committee continues its interest and its contact with these people. 
How long? Indefinite!}^, as long as they need it. They come to our 
office for anything and everything they might need. We try to teach 
them the American way of life, to become self-reliant and dependent 
on their own resources and initiative. We help them not to become 
public charges and so on. We feel that these people have come over 
to us under very adverse conditions. They have come to us as war 
refugees. They have had psychological problems which we would 
expect immigrants of another time not to have and yet we have found, 
to our great satisfaction, that the percentage of successful readjust- 
ments made by these people is very high. That is why I feel that we 
could do a little more by way of immigration to our country primarily 
to set the good example to the world and demonstrate that we are 
worthier of the position of trust that the world seems to want to give 
to us as a leader among the nations. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Do the views you ex]:)ressed also represent 
the views of the Most Reverend Joseph E. Ritter, archbishop of 
St. Louis? 

Reverend Suren. That is right. In giving this statement I repre- 
sent his views. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. Father, for appearing here 
and giving us your views and the views of the archbishop. 

Dr. Walter Wagner is the next witness. 


Dr. Wagner. I am Dr. Walter Wagner, executive director of the 
Metropolitan Church Federation of Greater St. Louis, 1428 Locust 
Street, St. Louis, Mo. 

I am here to represent that organization and wish to read a state- 
ment in its behalf. 

The Chairman. We shall be pleased to hear it. 

Dr. Wagner. The Metropolitan Church Federation of Greater St. 
Louis represents 2^3 denominations, GOO pastors and more than a half 
million people. Among our 20 commissions are several that carry 
deep concern relative to our Nation's immigration and naturalization 
laws. The ecumenical commission concerns itself with the plight 
of the uprooted peoples of the world. Our commission on inter- 
national justice and goodwill is deeply concerned with the political 
implications of our immigration and naturalization policies. Our com- 
mission on human relations feels a responsibility for lifting the bar- 
riers in the recent quota system, and our international commission is 
dedicated to the elimination of all discriminatory provisions based 
upon color, race, or sex. 

Because we feel that other agencies will devote their major emphasis 
upon one or the other of these defects in the present omnibus bilF 
H. R. T/OT'S, I am devoting my time to the parti-cular need for emergency 
legislation in behalf of the u])rooted peoples of the world. These mil- 
lions create* for the United States and for all liberty loving nations, a 
moral, economic and political problem of vast proportions. Our 
National Council of Churches in an official statement lists amon<r the 


uprooted peoples those displaced by war, and its aftermath; the 
refugees made homeless by reason of Xazi, Fascists and Communist 
tyranny and more recently, by military hostilities in Korea, the 
Middle East, and elsewhere ; the expellees, forcibly uprooted from the 
lands of their father; and the escapees who every day break through 
the iron curtain in search of freedom. These millions long to live 
under conditions of peace and promise. A problem of equal urgency 
is involved in the surplus populations that cannot now be supported 
by the economies of their respective countries. The pressure exer- 
cised by these surplus peoples is a threat to the stability of the entire 

We believe it is of utmost importance to the peace and security 
of our world to adopt policies of justice, mercy and mutual assistance 
that will erase the great threat of war that these uprooted peoples 
present. In my travels around a good portion of the world and in 
many of the refugees" camps of central Europe, I was constantly 
reminded of the fact that the only people who would tolerate another 
war are these uprooted peoples. 

This is understandable. Their present plight is so pitiable it could 
not be worse. I have seen 16 people living in one room no larger than 
the average American kitchen. I have stood at the border and watched 
the escapees come across to what the}^ thought was a new lease on life 
only to find themselves herded into overcrowded dilapidated barracks. 
A new war to them might open up borders that are now closed. It 
might give them an opportunity to return to the land. 

We propose that the United States constantly call this problem to 
the attention of the United Nations. Its final and total solution can 
only be achieved there. 

As a sign of our good faith, we ask that this Commission seriously 
concern itself with the task of presenting emergency legislation to 
the Congress of the United States, providing for the bringing of at 
least 500,000 of these peoples to our country over a o-year span. This 
emergency legislation is not only needed as a humanitarian gesture, 
but it will be the most effective deterrent to communism. That is 
our official statement, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Do I understand that your views were addressed 
mainly to the need for emergency legislation ? 

Dr. Wagxer. In my opening paragraphs I made the fact known that 
our ecumenical commission is deeply concerned about the injustices 
in the quota system and the injustices in the law, and we would like to 
revise discriminatory clauses clue to race, color, and sex. I know there 
are other groups here that will be devoting time to that and we feel 
that there will be a minority of the peoples who present this need for 
emergency legislation. We wanted to have our case rest pretty heavily 
on that, as I understand my colleagues have also done. 

Mr. EosEXFiELD. What is your view of the national origins system? 

Dr. Wagxer. We recommend that it be studied and that they be 
lessened. The discriminatory clauses due to race, color and sex we 
would eliminate. 

The Chairmax. Thank you very much. 

Is Mr. Alfred Fleishman here ? 



Mr. Fleishman. I am Alfred Fleishman, 211 Xorth Fourth Street, 
St. Louis, Mo. I am representing the Jewish Community Relations 
Council of St. Louis composed of the St. Louis Chapter of the Ameri- 
can Jewish Committee, St. Louis Council of the American Jewish 
Congress, the St. Louis B'nai B'rith lodges and chapters and the 
Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, "the Jewish Federation of 
St. Louis, the St. Louis Section of the Jewish Labor Committee, the 
Department of Missouri of the War Veterans, the Rabbinical 
Association of St. Louis, Vaad Hoeir (the Orthodox Jewish Council) 
of St. Louis, the Zionist Organization of St. Louis, the St. Louis 
Section, National Council of Jewish Women, the Jewish Community 
Relations Bureau of Greater Kansas City, and the Kansas Section, 
National Council of Jewish "Women. 

I have a prepared statement in behalf of these organizations, which 
I will read, with your permission. 

The Chairman. We will be pleased to hear it. 

Mr. Fleishman. Speaking on behalf of these organizations I want 
to express our appreciation for the opportunity to be heard by this 
Commission on a matter of such vital importance — important not just 
to segments of our population — but to all our people because of its 
relationship to the basic concepts of our democratic tradition. 

At the outset it should be made clear that the organizations joining 
in this presentation do not appear as special pleaders. Their interest- 
lies in the correlation of our immigration laws to democratic principles. 
This is an imperative — the accrual benefits to any particular group — 
incidental. Recent history, not necessary to recount here, its tragic 
results, makes the interest of Jewish groups one of principle rather 
than one of any special advantage to the Jewish community in the 
United States or to potential Jewish immigrants abroad. 

If democracy is an idea and an ideal certainly its exjn-ession in our 
innnigration policies and laws is a reflection of that ideal. At the very 
least it is a rather basic expression of our practices as distinguished 
from our preachments. 

Codification per se of our immigration laws may be a good thing. 
But codifying and pei'petuating that which is undemocratic — adding 
to it other measures indicating our disbelief in the dignity of man — can 
be only a sorry reflection of fears and prejudices. Certainly we must 
protect our country, its people and its traditions against the criminal, 
the subversive and the insane. But our immigration policies should 
be selective, not discriminatory. Immigration is a two-way street of 
benefits — to the immigrant and to the United States. Who can deny 
the contributions made to the development of our country by immi- 
grants and their descendants. Such a list would be an endless one. 
On the other hand, the United States has been able to make tremendous 
contributions to the world under its general immigration laws. But 
the letter and the spirit from both viewpoints — that of the United 


States and that of the iniinigrant — must be rooted in democratic belief 
and practice. 

We often approach these problems in high-flown terms of vague 
generalities. Perhaps a few actual case histories of recent immi- 
grants who came to our community under the Displaced Persons Act 
of 1948 — just simply ordinary folk — would be more to the point. 

The A family consisting of a man, Avife, 2-year-old child and 
mother-in-law came to St, Louis about 2 years ago. The man had 
been a teacher in Europe. He went through a period of about a year 
before he could be placed in employment. During that time the 
family was assisted in the amount of about $1,500 for rental, food, 
clothing, etc. After that time Mr. A found employment as did his 
wife. After a lapse of another year they were able to save enough 
money to invest in a small market and grocery store. Currently they 
are giving employment to two or three additional people and are 
repaying the agency for the prior financial assistance. 

The B family came to St. Louis in August 1919 after bitter war 
and postwar experiences in concentration camps and displaced per- 
sons camps. Mr. B's father had owned a restaurant in Poland. 
Within several months he had secured employment as a cook in a 
Community Chest-supported institution with living quarters attached 
for himself and his family. He saved what he made and took night 
courses in cooking and baking. By July 1950 Mr. B used his savings 
and a loan to purchase a small restaurant. Currently they are em- 
ploying five people besides Mr. B and his wife, paying off the loan 
ancl repaying the agency for financial assistance received. 

The C family consisting of three people came to St. Louis in 1919. 
They too had been in concentration camps and DP camps. Within 
several months of their arrival, Mr. C was employed by a large firm 
as a printing shop operator and hy July 1950 was earning enough to 
maintain himself and family. 

These few current case histories taken from the files of the local 
Jewish agencies can be matched, I am sure, by similar reports from 
the files of the Catholic and Protestant resettlement agencies. These 
are the stories of people, real people, to whom democracy is a shining 
ideal — the United States its greatest example. 

The national origins quota system adopted in 1924 is not a selective 
formula — it is a discriminatory one that has achieved acceptance 
simply by the fact of its use. The need for (juantitative controls over 
immigration does not lead inescapably to the national origins quota 
system. The latter formula writes into law the scientifically dis- 
credited theory of racial superiority. It denies individual merit and 
upholds anti-democratic theories of group superiority directly con- 
trary to our stated principles. 

The basis for selection of those Avho will be admitted must not be 
dictated by fear or prejudice. The standards must be those to measure 
individuals — their needs and their qualifications — within the over-all 
economic, social and political framework of the United States. 

Public Law 414 (McCarran-Walter law) not only codifies the 
national origins quota system — it extends its racist base. Under its 
provisions the quota for Great Britain and Northern Ireland will be 
approximately 65,000 — Germany about 25.000 — whereas Italy, Greece^ 
and Tui-key will have quotas of about 5,500, 300, and 225 respectively. 


Siicli quotas seem to fly in the face of history, contradict the humani- 
tarian purpose of immigration laws, and prohibit the full use of the 
total number of visas available in any one year. Along with this is 
the restriction which denies British colonials in the West Indies the 
use of the quota assigned to the mother country, a direct slap at Negro 

A step forvrard was the assignment of quotas for the first time to 
certain Asiatic countries (the '"Asia-Pacillc triangle''). But what is 
extended with one hand is withdrawn by the other. Immigrant, no 
matter where born, who is "attributable by as much as one-half his an- 
cestry" to races in the Asia-Pacinc triangle is chargeable to the quota 
of 100 of the particular Asian country. This is a reversal of the 
national-origins fonnula and seems to be devised to emphasize the 
single criterion of racial ancestry. 

The need for numerical control of immigration can be met. An 
over-all quota figure based on the 1950 census — not on the 1920 census 
as at present — can be established. Sound standards and preferences 
can be. set up to meet United States economic and securit}^ requirements 
as well as to assure just treatment of prospective newcomers. Thus it 
will be possible to issue visas to applicants on a first-come, first-served 
basis just as tlie British quota is currently administered. This does 
not mean necessarily increasing the number of inmiigrants to be ad- 
mitted. It does mean using the available visas to the best advantage 
of both the United States and the pool of prospective immigrants. 
(Public Law 414 goes even to the extent of removing the quota-exempt 
status formerly held by bonafide college and university professors.) 

In addition, it is also suggested that it should be possible to estab- 
lish a firm and basic minimum number of visas annually with some 
flexibility upward to meet our own and world needs as they may 
change and evolve. This would result in the establishment of a long- 
range immigi'ation policy adaptable to changing world conditions 
obviating the necessity for piecemeal and emergency legislation. 

In discussing our immigration policies deportation is of course a 
basic concept. Its use as a "baiiishment" form of punishment too 
frequently wreaks vengeance on those it does not intend to harm or 
punish — families, dependents and others. Aliens should be subject 
to the same equal treatment under the law as citizens. This means 
punishment for wrongdoing but not the use of "exile." 

Deportation for fraud or illegal entry is a consequence that flows 
directly from the ideals and objectives of a fair immigration policy. 
Deportation for other reasons means application of law on a class or 
caste basis. Under Public Law 414 an immigrant is made subject 
to deportation for a number of acts even though there was no reason 
to believe or anticipate at time of entry the later occurrence of such 
personal difficulties either financial or otherwise (sec. 241). The use 
of the "Damoclean sword" of deportation hanging over the head of 
the innnigrant is an undemocratic extrajudicial procedure at befit. 

Once naturalized there should be no distinction under law be- 
tween the native-born and the naturalized citizen. This premise 
also flows from our traditions — our history — and basic democratic 
concepts. Under our Constitution and laws a naturalized citizen 
is not eligible for the Presidency; in all other respects he stands as 
an equal. This is as it should be. Revocation of naturalization 

25356—52 60 


should rest on a showing of fraud in obtaining citizenship. But 
Public Law 414 distinguishes between native-born and naturalized 
citizens seemingly for security reasons (sec. 340). The use of the 
device of revocation of naturalization is set up as added punishment 
for those not native-born. Thus, in practice, it would also seem to 
follow that after revocation of naturalization would come deporta- 
tion. The variation in treatment, in fact, the creation of dilferent 
classes of citizens, becomes obvious. The same objection applies to 
the reenactment into Public Law 414 of expatriation provisions from 
prior law. Hence naturalized Americans who reside abroad for hve 
years are expatriated, a penalty not applicable to native-born citizens. 
Ours is a government of laws. As such, guaranties should exist in 
law to protect people against administrative arbitrariness. But our 
immigTation law. Public Law 414, leaves much to be desired in this 
respect. Some of the more obvious gaps are : 

1. Extremely broad powers are given to innnigration officials, con- 
suls, and the xVttorney General's office wherein "opinion" and "satis- 
faction" of the particular official is made the basis for exclusion or 

2. The President is given the unreviewable right to suspend immi- 
gration at any time. Even under prior law he could do this only 
during war or time of national emergency. 

3. The Board of Immigration Appeals no longer has statutory 
basis, no provision is made for it in the law. 

4. Consular officials have an absolute right to deny issuance of a 
visa. There is no provision for a Visa Review Board where the deci- 
sion of a minor consular official in denying a visa can be questioned by 
interested parties. 

This Commission undoubtedly will receive many statements dealing 
with the various detailed provisions and legal aspects of this compli- 
cated subject. But certain broad concepts must be underlined. As 
a democratic nation our immigration and naturalization laws and 
policies are a large part of our "show window" to the world. These 
laws and policies articulate our national attitudes toward people. 
If our laws are humane, liberal, and just, our "show window" is a 
bright and shining front. But if our immigration laws and policies 
spring from fear, prejudice, and racism, then our window is indeed 
a dark and shabby display. 

Let's not say to the world that our fears have outrun our beliefs 
in the dignity of man and the democratic process. On the contrary, 
the ideal of democracy and the right of each person to be judged as an 
individual cry out for confirmation as never before in history. Let 
us look upon immigrants as "new Americans" in the full sense of the 
term rather than as strangers whom we fear and distrust. 

Tlie Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Msgr. L. G. Ligutti, you are the next witness. 


Reverend Ligutti. I am Msgr. L. G. Ligutti, representing the Na- 
tional Catholic Rural Life Conference, Des Moines, Iowa, of which I 


am executive director. I would like to read a prepared statement and 
then add a few remarks. 

Tlie Chahuian. You may do so. 

Monsignor Liou'rri. I Avas born in Italy. I arrived in the United 
States, January 1912. I became an American citizen in 11)18. I have 
served as a Catholic priest in various capacities since 1917. 

I wish to address myself before this Commission on two specific 
points : 


Section 2-b : "'Admission of inuniorants into this country in the 
light of our present and pros[)ective economic and social conditions." 

Wealth results from the application of human effort and ingenuity 
to natural resources. When an ample supply of natural resources is 
available it is desirable to apply an ample suppl}^ of human resources 
for the production of wealth. There is a possibility of reaching a satu- 
ration point, i. e., when human resources, l)ecause of excessive quantity 
or improper use, press against a limited supply of natural resources. 
Then it is clear that human resources should be limited, used more 
effectively, or moved to some spot on the face of the earth where un- 
developed natural resources are available. 

It is evident that a considerable amount of restriction in our immi- 
gration policies has been caused by fear of overpopulation and the 
thought that foreigners by their influx Avould take away jobs from 
native Americans. Certainly too quick an influx, too unbalanced an 
immigration might cause local and temporary economic difficulties. 
However, to state or act upon the assumption that the United States 
has reached or is nearing a saturation point is quite inaccurate, and it 
is based u])on a completely false economic theory, i. e., the economic pie 
theory. It goes something like this: The United States is just so 
big a pie, the less people, the bigger the slice for each person. That 
sounds very plausible to anyone who is not acquainted with real eco- 
nomic laws of wealth production. The economic pie theory is only 
valid in an aboriginal econ.omy. So many berries, so many fish, so 
many bison, the less squaws and braves, the easier the hunting and 
picking. The pie theory is not valid in a progressive economy where 
wealth results from the application of human effort and ingenuity 
to natural resources. Here a job creates another job. 

Let us not forget the danger of population pressures, but what 
economist is here today to say that admitting 150,000 or double that 
number yearly to the United States might bring about an economic 
danger ? 

Others have told you that we need agricultural workers, house 
servants. In practically every small or large business enterprise, if 
J ou ask the question, "Do you need a good man ?" The answer is, "We 
do. Can you get him for us and when?" Let our immigration policy 
be based upon valid economic laws, not fallacies or ])()pular baseless 

The second ap))arent cause for our restrictionist policies is founded 
upon cei'tain so called social desidei'ata. I (piote from a processed re- 
lease emanating from Senator McCarran's office entitled "Factual 
Resume." It is undated and unsigned : I have it here with me. 

"The McCarran-Walter bill continues in effect the policy of restric- 
tive inunigi-ation which was ovei-whelmingly determined by the ])eo])le 


of this country to be in the country's best interests some 25 years ago.. 
This policy is known as the national-origins-quota system under which 
the quota for each country is in proportion to the extent of that coun- 
try's contribution to the total population of the United States as it 
existed in 1920 and has as its purpose the maintenance of the relative' 
composition of the population of the United States." 

Would any social scientist say that through this quota system the 
hoped for biological situation can be brought about ( Even admitting- 
that such relative composition is desirable because of the superior- 
racial qualities of the Anglo-Saxons, an attempt to legislate biological 
reproduction on a racial or national origins basis is fraught with 
stupid hopes, undemocratic outlook, and completely against the laws^ 
of nature. Our American heritage is not as of one, but as of many. 
America is a sturdy tree. Its branches and leaves enjoy God's sun- 
shine, rain and breezes, its vigor, health and beauty are drawn from 
Mother Earth — through myriads of roots. This type of America we' 
beseech God to bless, maintain and prosper. 


The second part of my testimony will refer to section 2-c: "The- 
effect of our immigration laws and their administration, including 
the national oriiiins ouota system, on the conduct of the foreign policies- 
of the United States.'" 

I have had occasion to travel far and wide throughout the world.. 
I have met manj^ friends of the United States. I have also met people 
who honestly suspect our motives and our sincerity. I have heard the 
following statements made : "Hitler tore pages from the United States 
Congressional Record when he shouted forth his claims of Teutonic 
racial superiority." "Is democracy, which you Americans present as 
the salvation of the world, based upon the unity and equality of the 
human race, or do you define it to suit your own convenience and 
prejudices at various times and places?" 

Tlie work of UNRRA, Marshall Plan, EGA, MSA, and all as- 
sistance given to Italy, Greece, Turkey, and other nations have saved 
Western Europe from communism. The majority of the people there 
are deeply grateful and appreciative. The implications of the Mc- 
Carran- Walter bill as they were discussed and analyzed at the end 
of last June in the continental European press practically erased 
the great good that has been done. Communist papers headlined 
the news by, "We told you so." I remember what I saw in "Unita," 
the Communist paper in Rome. "Fatti maschi; parole femmine" — 
(Deeds are masculine, words are feminine) — followed by an anti- 
American tirade. 

Of course, the United States alone cannot solve the problem of over- 
population in Europe or elsewhere. Neither can America open the 
floodgates of unregulated immigration, but we can do at least four 
things : 

1. Adopt an immigration policy which is democratic and Christian. 

2. If a national-origin quota is to be kept, let it be based on the na- 
tional origins of the boys who gave their lives in World War II and 
in Korea. That would represent an unbiased standard, and very up 
to date. 

3. Consider and favor in a special way the reunion of families. 


4. Help solve the imbalances of population and resources in the 
"vvorld by our leadership, throujrh capital investments and movement 
■of people (PICCME and private agencies). 

Gentlemen, the world looks our way today. Civilizations and world 
leadership change hands as the centuries roll by. There are tides in 
the fortunes of men and of nations. "Do unto others as you would 
have others do unto you." (Matthew 7 : 12.) 

Reverend Ligutti. That is my statement, Mr. Chairman. 

Now, just a few other remarks, which I may insert at the end of 
my statement. For the ones who deny that the McCarran-Walter bill 
is discriminatory, it would be well to define the word "discrimination," 
not merely say "but the bill doesn't say it is discriminatory." Of 
course, would any of our people perhaps, who at times may be caught 
stealing or doing anything unjust, say "I am right now committing 
ti sin against this particular commandment of God"? Who is going 
to admit it? Of course, not publicly, but, remember, define it, and 
define it well, and be logical and consistent. 

If I have a number of 15 children around me here, and I have a nice 
apple, and I say "Now, my dear children, I am not going to be dis- 
criminatory, not in the least." Can't you see me? I don't mean to be 
discriminatoi'y, and I am not saying I am discriminatory. I am going 
to cut the apple into 15 slices — no discrimination — but, of course, 
to Greece, and to Italy, and to Turkey, and to Poland, I am giving 
the slightest wee bit of a slice, but I will give six-fifteenths of that 
slice to England ; so much to Ireland. But, of course, remember now, 
I am not discriminatory, not in the least; yvhy, of course not. Did 
I say I was ? Does that make sense ? Well, it doesn't. 

Besides that, just to say that 3'^ou don't discriminate, or don't vrant 
to discriminate as to color, race, or religion, but you are rather willing 
to discriminate as far as nations are concerned, don't forget that 
there is discrimination of that very type by national discrimination. 
Certainly, no; we don't discriminate because of race in Jamaica. 
No. of course not; but all the people of Jamaica are colored people, 
and when you just accept only so many from Jamaica you are dis- 
criminating against all people; oh, no, it is only that island which 
happens to have, of course, all colored people. You don't discriminate 
ag-ainst Catholics, of course; no, but Italy is 98 percent Catholic; but, 
of course, we are not discriminating against Catholics; no, of course 

Another remark, and it is concerning the cream coming from other 
nations. Well, brothers, and sisters, the cream of a country doesn't 
necessarily include only the professionals, or the men who go to 
universities, believe you me; the cream of this country is not there, 
even though I am a university graduate. The cream of our country is 
the ordinary man that works for a living — I am not implying we 
don't; you understand that — but the cream of Europe that came to 
this country, the poor fellow that worked with his hands to build 
the bridges and the railroads, and that went into the mines of this 
country. Let's be sure to analyze the expressions before we use them. 
Let's not forget, also, that when South America and Australia, par- 
ticularly, adopted restrictionist policies, which they did, they follow 
suit, they followed our example. They adopted them only after wa 
had adopted them because that seemed to be in the air. 


Then, the question of applying tests for immigrants into this coun- 
try. You know what I would like to do'^ I would like to apply the 
same tests that we apply for the immigrants coming to this country 
to our candidates for office, for our Senators, our Representatives, or 
any other public officials from a physical, a mental, or a moral view- 
point. After all, they are much more important when it comes to 
this country — the ones who are making laws and who are ruling over 
us. I wonder if the Senators and Representatives and so forth, and 
public officials, will be willing to adopt that type of test, or is it too 
low. I don't want to say that, but it is just by way of comparison, and 
that's all. 

Thank you very, very much. 

Commissioner Gullixson. I notice by the papers that you have just 
been in South America, and yesterday in our hearing in St. Paul one of 
the witnesses, Mr. Ossana, said there has been rather a heavy immigra- 
tion from Italy to the South American countries, particularly, the 

Reverend Ligutti. Before 1920. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Now, he made the statement that immi- 
gration to the Argentine has been cut off. 

■XT- -1 1 

Reverend Ligutti. i es ; it has been. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Quite completely? 

Reverend Ligutti. Not quite completely cut off. But it is still 
favored as far as the reunion of families is concerned. 

Commissioner Gullixson. And would there be no hope for relief 
of the overpopulation situation in Italy, in South America ? 

Reverend Ligutti. Yes, there is, but we have to give the example, 
and we have to furnish capital, returnable capital. I do not advocate 
merely handing over billions and billions even for resettlement of 
people. For resettlement purposes you can loan billions and billions 
returnable with interest. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Would it be a little easier for people 
from Italy to be admitted into the South American countries than 
from some other countries ? 

Reverend Ligutti. Yes, absolutely, because they in South America 
have also the prejudices, and we have to take things, you know, as they 
are. There is no use saying "Well, why are theyt" But they are. 

Commissioner Gullixson. At our hearings in Chicago, a witness 
suggested, on the basis of a chart covering New Mexico, Arizona, and 
western Texas, that there is a place for resettling a large number of 
immigrants by irrigating that region through harnessing the Missouri 
River for that ])urpose. I was struck with the impracticality of that 
approach, and wonder what your views are on it? 

Monsignor Ligutti. I think we can see the absurdity of that ap- 
proach. I am just thinking now of the State of Iowa where I come 
from. There is enough grade A land in the State of Iowa along the 
railroad tracks and along the highways going to waste — there is more 
there — than there is grade A land in Japan. I am not advocating" 
people along the railroad tracks, you understand, and I am not ad- 
vocating an awful lot of land settlements even in this country. We 
have to consider everything from an economic and social viewpoint. 
I do think that in the rural districts of America we need good farm 
workers. I do think that the villages of America have room, each 


village, for a fcnv families of ])eople coniiii<>- fi-om some country out- 
side of Amei-ica who will do some of the woi'k they are able to do, or 
that they will be asked to do and the Americans are not willing to do. 
xVfter all, that is the way America develoj^ed. 

I am not boasting of my own story, but I worked for $8 a week and 
I Avorked from 7 o'clock in the morning until 6 o'clock at night except 
on Saturdays when they let us off at 1 : 30 o'clock, and that was in 
1914. I was a college graduate. There is plenty of room for the 
tj'pes of workers that America needs. 

Commissioner (li llixsox. Yesterday we liad a witness from the 
National Farmers Union in North Dakota and in approaching this 
probleni of getting folks on the land he said that there must be a 
change in the basic concept of agriculture, and that it is a long-range 
program, and to take immigrants under emergency legislation into 
this picture presents some difficulty. What is your view of that? 

Monsiguor Ligftti. Of course. However, I think America has had 
to face other problems and America, whether we w^ant it or not, is 
the leader of the world today and we must adjust our thinking and 
our traditions and so forth. We may not be the leaders tomorrow\ 

Mr. RosENriELD. Monsignor, the Commission has been given infor- 
mation to the effect that in Iowa the demand for year-round farm 
hands continues to increase. Do you think that demand is such as 
to be of a kind which ought to be considered in the placement of 
persons from overseas ? 

Monsignor Ligtjtti. Yes. 

Mr. RosExriELD. Is it substantial? 

Monsignor Lioutti. Yes. But the selection of people from over- 
seas nuist be done in a sound fashion. Let us not make the mistakes 
that the Canadians made where they merely said, "Are you a farmer ?" 
The answ^er was "'Yes" and they came into Manitoba. Well, they 
weren't farmers. They were just the sons, perhaps, of some official 
Avho was somehow or other connected. We have to be very selective 
for the particular jobs, but there are plenty of boys in the mountains 
of Greece. I was there a few months ago and I was in southern Italy 
and I was in Turkey. We can get very reliable people. We can find 
plenty in Syria and plenty of Arabs and there are plenty in Iran and 
Iraq and Lebanon. Their relatives have made good citizens in the 
United States and we find plenty of them would be willing to work 
and make gopd citizens in the years to come. 

I think whilst we should be attentive as not to make blunders, let 
us not forget that blunders will be made. 

C(mimissioner (iui.Lixsox. In snpplying this farm situation in 
my home State of Iowa, would there be housing for families or are 
you thinking in terms of single men? 

ISIonsignor Ligutti. No, I am thinking of housing. Don't forget, 
we have all sorts of vacant houses in the rural districts of Iowa. 
Some of them are being torn doAvn. Some are dilapidated but they 
can be fixed \\y>. There is no lack of housing in the rural districts 
of Iowa or in the Middle West. 

The CnAiHMAx. How did these vacancies occur? 

Monsigner Li urn. I made this study some years ago. For every 
tractor that came into Iowa a boy left, and went to make tractors. 

The CiiATRMAX. Are the tractors still there? 


Monsignor LiGU'rn. That is right. The rural population of all 
the rural States, particularly Iowa, has diminished. See, we have 
gone down. Of course, even in the United States we have gone down 
from 25 to 30 percent from rural farming to 15 percent at the present 

The Chairman. But if you still have tlie tractors and machinery, 
do you need the labor ? 

Monsignor LiGum. Yes, but you need some fundamental labor, 
particularly in livestock and in dair3dng, of course, and even in the 
field work, as somebody has to run the tractors. 

It is a fact that some of these farms are being run directly by 
people in the city, lawyers and doctors and so forth, who feel that 
is a good investment to avoid income tax and not to be caught up 
with it. Then they employ managers and workers on the farms. 
"They are not owners and operators. Actually, they are what they 
•call the owners and operators. 

The Chairman. Is there anything wrong with that? 

Monsignor Ligutti. I am not saying there is anything w^rong with 
it, although it woidd require a great discussion to go into that, because 
I do think the family-type farm is the best thing for our democracy 
and I don't think the people in the cities ought to be owning the land 
and the people in the country working it for them. 

Commissioner O'Gradt. But do they need workers? 

Monsignor Lioux'ri. Yes ; they do and perhaps more than ever be- 
fore to keep their places up. 

The Chairman. Thank you, Monsignor. Is Mr. Stuart Moore 
here ? 


Mr. Moore. I am Stuart Moore, 1576 West Pine, St. Louis, Mo. I 
am representing the International Institute for St. Louis, a commu- 
nity chest agency. I am a staff woi'ker of the institute and the person 
who should be speaking for the institute today is not in town. That 
is the reason I do not liave a prepared statement. 

Might I say that I believe certainly that the staff of the Interna- 
tional Institute would underscore and subscribe to most of wha,t Mr. 
Fleishman and the Monsignor have said, but I understand you gentle- 
men are interested in having concrete and pertinent suggestions for 
consideration of the subject you have under deliberation. And I am 
sorry, sir, I do not come here with any suggestions to you. I have not 
made a study of tliis question and I can't give you that help. You 
may ask me any questions and I will try to answer them. 

Mr. RosENFiELD. Can you tell us something of your experience in 
your institute and the problem of integrating people into the area 
in which you serve ? 

Mr. MooRE. I have had experience here for about 4 years. Of 
course, we deal with Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. We are an 
international institute and we all come together there on equal foot- 
ing. We are not an emplojmient agency. These other organizations 
are responsible primarily for that, but occasionally different special- 
ized employment ]:)roblems do come up and we make an effort, and 


it is frequently successful, to get these people into work situations. 
"We have found over the years that I have worked there that these 
people, of course, need security when they come into this city. Many 
of them have no relatives, ^fost of them with whom we have been 
working have no relatives in this city. They do not speak the lan- 
guage and so it is our function to be a place where they can come and 
find hospitality and a security of meeting with other })eople who 
speak their language and m ho have the same problems. 

Last night 1 was having dinner with a trio of .lewish immigrants 
from Germany. They will very shortly become citizens of this coun- 
try. I hope, and they were speaking about the inmiigi-ation laws. 
1 will try not to speak in exact quotations, but just try to express their 
feelings. Their feeling was tliat when tliey become citizens they still 
will be second-class citizens because of these deportation clauses in 
the law. They said, for instance, ''Well, now, yesterday we had some 
coal delivered to oui' door and our neighbor complained bitterly that 
the truck driver drove the truck thi-ough their yards to deliver our 
coal. The neighbor, one of them, phoned us and it is feeling that 
anybody can make complaints and accusations that we are having 
Communist meetings here and have spoken Communist dogma per- 
haps, and then we have no recourse and might be subject to deporta- 
tion by the United States Government even though we have been 
naturalized citizens." 

Well, not being an expert on tliis question, I tried to allay their fears, 
but I wasn't too sure about that specific point. We have found in 
the city of St. Louis that very quickly the people with whom we deal, 
almost exclusively displaced persons, have become integrated into 
the community. Shortly after arrival here they get into some kind 
of work and make little complaints about the housing conditions 
they find and are willing to accept quickly the fact that they may 
not be able to go into the ])rofession or the work for which they were 
trained in the old country. 

In our international institute lives a man and his wife who were 
farmers in Yugoslavia. They are an elderly couple and they have 
quickly recognized that they could not learn the farm techniques 
perha})s that they would need to know in this country. They couldn't 
learn the mechanized Avays of farming that we now have in this coun- 
try, so they went into a different kind of job. 

We are working now with an opera singer and a producer of opera. 
I think he is from Czechoslovakia. He is now janitor in a church and 
making no complaint at all. 

A very well-bred woman from Poland, very cidtivated, is now 
doing janitorial work in a factory. She accepts this as being part of 
it, "V\^ell, I am 54 years old and I must accept this." She is living a 
rather happy life. 

We have found the integration of these people rather good in most 

Tlie Chairman. Mr. Moore, if your organization wishes to submit 
a statement in writing to us for incorporation in the record, please 
forward it to us at Washington as early as possible. 

]\Ir. Moore. Thanlv you, I will inform the Institute. 

Commissioner Gui^uxson. Yesterday your representative in St. 
Paul said that declarations of intention to become a citizen, which are 


now optional nnder the new act were submitted and were being returned 
to their offices as not being required. Have you had a similar exper- 
ience here ? 

Mr. Moore. We don't at the International Institute in St. Louis take 
those declarations of intention. Those are done by the Catholic and 
Jewish and Protestant groups or by the Department of Immigration 
and Naturalization here. 

Commissioner Gullixson. Is there any indication from the Immi- 
gration people that they are being sent back and that they are not 
required ? 

The Chairman. I think we have someone from the Inunigration 
and Naturalization Service here who could answer that. Mr. Wirsch, 
will you answer that ? 

Mr.WiRSCH. (Immigration and Naturalization Service) . They are 
being sent back due to the fact that they will no longer be required. 
There is no purpose being served. 

Commissioner O'Grady. Are they on occasion necessary for 
employment ? 

Mr. Wirsch. If there are any specific reasons why a ])erson desires 
a declaration of intention he can still make application for one, but 
unless he has some special reason there is no purpose served by making 
a declaration of intention. When the new law takes eifect there will 
be no necessity for it. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Moore and Mr. Wirsch. 

Is Rev. Edward D. Auchard here? 


Reverend Auchard. I am Rev. Edward D. Auchard, 1401 Clara 
Avenue, St. Louis, Mo., pastor of the local Presbj^'terian Church. 

I am appearing on behalf of Dr. Ralph H. Jennings, executive 
secretary of the synod of Missouri of the Presbyterian Church, U. S. A. 

I have a prepared statement I wish to read, and a statement on 
United States immigration and naturalization policy approved on 
March 21, 1952, by the general board of the National Council of the 
Churches of Christ in the United States I wish to submit. 

The Chairman. You may do so. 

Reverend Auchard. Tlie Reverend Dr. Ralph IT. Jennings, execiitive 
secretary of the synod of Missouri of the Presbyterian Church, U. S. A., 
was invited to appear here today. He was prevented by another 
engagement. Dr. Jennings asked me to represent him, but he did not 
instruct me what to say. 

I have corresponded with the department of social education and 
action of the board of Christian education of the Presbyterian Church, 
U. S. A. Investigation reveals that the general assembly of our 
church has not made any pronouncements in the field of inunigration 
and naturalization. The department of social education and action 
has provided the file of material Avhich I have studied in the ])repara- 
tion of this statement. So I am not here to relay any official pro- 
nouncements. I do hope that what I say is consistent with the 
Christian conscience of the church I represent. I believe that it is. 


I speak for an institution that recognizes love of neighbor as the 
highest ethical principle. We are deeply concerned over any violation 
of i)ersons anywhere when we function in the name and spirit of 
Christ. We are dedicated to the cultivation of persons in the deepest 
and broadest sense. AVe seek to encourage the organization of society 
in sucli a way as to secure the inaximuni benefits for every person as a 

We recognize tlnit it is not ahvays simple to apply the principle of 
neighbor-love, especially when ^^'€ have many neighbors, both near 
and far, to consider. We also recognize that in the interest of neigh- 
bor-love there nuist be just and orderly procedures in sucm matters 
as tliose that concern this Commission. 

This (Commission has been instructed by the President to consider 
three areas : 

(a) The requirements and administration of our immigration law 
with reference to the admission, naturalization, and denaturalization 
of aliens, and their exchision and deportation ; 

(l') The admission of immigrants into this country in the light of 
our present and pros|)ective economic and social conditions and of 
other pertinent considerations; and 

(c) The effect of our immigration laws, and their administration, 
including the national origin (juota system, on the conduct of the for- 
eign policies of the United States, and the need for authority to meet 
emergency conditions such as the present overpopulation of western 
Europe and the serious refugee and escapee problems in such areas. 

Those of us who appear here have been asked to designate which 
area is of greatest interest to us. It is obviously impossible to sepa- 
rate the areas of concern. However, I believe the more immediate, 
but not the exclusive, concern of the church has to do with one and 
three, because these most directly and immediately affect ])ersons. 

Furthermore, before turning to the more concrete and limited as- 
pects of this statement, I believe we must see clearly that there are 
closely related issues which must be faced. Overpopulation accentu- 
ates the need for immigration. The whole matter of birth rate is 
therefore apropos. 

Certain population movements are normal and natural. However, 
the present problem involves more than this. It arises out of the great 
displacement of po])ulation due to the war, Nazi and Comnumist 
policy, and postwar dislocations and relocations. The cold war makes 
this abnormal situation a continuing fact of life. The tremendous 
number of refugees from gross injustice present a special claim on our 
sympathy and our intelligent concern. 

I am sure that all churchmen recognize that in matters of immigra- 
tion some sort of quota system is necessary. The number must be 
limited in terms of our ability to assimilate new people. Yet the quota 
system must be continually reviewed in terms of actual situations and 
Christian conscience. 

One aspect of the new innnigration law that Christians heartily 
•commend is the elimination of oriental exclusion, even though the 
quotas are only token quotas. We can hope for more adequarte quotas 
following our change of national policy. 

The quota system, as is well known, gives preference to persons of 
British, Ii'ish, and German backgrounds whose ancestors, including 


mine, came to this country before immigration laws existed. The 
present quota system may therefore indicate a certain national arro- 
gance on the part of those of us from northwestern Europe that is not 
consistent with Christian conscience. 

The quotas for Great Britain and Ireland are not used up. There- 
fore Christian conscience in our world of desperate need seems to dic- 
tate some means of assigning unused quotas or portions of quotas to 
other nationalities wliere the need is great and immediate. 

The quotas for many nations from which many refugees and dis- 
placed persons have come in recent years are "mortgaged" for years to 
come — some for more than a hundred years. Yet some of these na- 
tions — such as Latvia, whose quota is mortgaged to the year 2274 — 
have suffered especially from both the Nazi and Comnnuiist scourge. 
There seems to be need for study here. Perhaps these mortgages 
could be paid off in terms of unused past quotas from Great Britain, 
for instance. 

Persons condemned by Communist courts may be excluded admis- 
si(m as criminals, when their only real crime is devotion to the ideals 
of liberty and justice that are the conunon heritage of Christendonu 
There is need for adjustment here. 

Limitations on the immigrations of colonial people need to be con- 
sidered in the light of need and justice. These are often areas of high 
overpopulation and long exploitation. 

Continuing attention needs to be given to uniting families that have 
been separated by the operation of any quota system. 

Consideration mip-ht be given to the admission of Arabs to this 
country in a number not to exceed the number of Jewish emigrants to 
Israel, with allowance for our limited ability to assimilate people from 
the Middle East. 

The Christian Church is deeply concerned with protecting our 
society against any Communist infiltration. We are all agreed that 
refugees must be bona fide refugees — not enemy agents in disguise. 
Yet we must protect our liberties in ways that are consistent with our 
tradition of liberty and justice for all. 

Broad discretionary administrative powers are granted to indi- 
viduals in our Government under the present law. Of course, in any 
administration some discretionary powers are necessary. The church 
has an interest in seeing that discretionary procedures are carried on 
in a manner that is altogether fair. Certain criticisms directed 
against the State Department in this area are already being corrected. 

Yet these broad discretionary administrative powers are potftntially 
dangerous. Judicial protection must be given to the rights of indi- 
viduals or the whole structure of civil rights for all of us may be 

I am very grateful for this opportunity to appear before the Presi- 
dent's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization. It is im- 
portant for the people to be heard, and this is a matter of great concern 
to many of us as a matter of private conscience as well as a matter of 
social concern. However, the church would be highly displeased to 
find any political intentions of a partisan nature lurking behind a 
mask of concern for human rights. 

In closing, let me add that I have attached to this statement that I 
have prepared a statement on United States immigration and natural- 


ization policy approved on March 21, 1952, by the j;eneral board of 
the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of 
America. The Presbyterian Church, U. S. A., is an active member 
church of the National Council of Churches. This statement from 
the national council therefore carries an official weight far beyond all 
that I have said. 

(There follows the statement submitted for the record:) 

The plight of the world's uprooted peoples creates for the United States, as for 
other liberty-loving nations, a moral as well as an economic and political problem 
of vast proportions. Amontc these peoples are those displaced by war, and its 
aftermath ; the refugees made homeless by reason of Nazi, Fascist, and Com- 
munist tyranny and more recently, by military hostilities in Korea, the Middle 
East, and elsewhere ; the expellees forcibly ejected from the lands of their 
fathers ; and the escapees who every day break through the iron curtain in search 
of freedom. These persons long for the day of their deliverance and for the 
opportunity to reestablish themselves under conditions of peace and promise. A 
problem of equal urgency is involved in the surplus populations that cannot now 
be supported by the economies of their respective countries. The pressure 
exercised by these surplus people is of a kind seriously to tiireaten the stability 
and well-being of the entire world. 

The National Council of Churches sees in this situation an issue that can be 
resolved only as nations, collectively and separately, adopt policies dictated by 
considerations not only of justice and mercy, but also of sound mutual assistance. 

On the international level, we believe the United States for moral reasons, as 
well as in the interest of its own economic and political security, should remain 
steadfast in its purpose to cooperate with other nations in meeting the needs 
of displaced persons, refugees, and surplus populations. Through the United 
Nations, the United States contributed generously of its resources in the work 
of the International Refugee Organization. Likewise, the United States is par- 
ticipating in the activities of the Office of the High Commissioner for Kefugees, 
the United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency, and the United Nations 
Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. Our country, 
through the United Nations, and in other ways, assisted in providing a haven 
in Israel for many tlious'ands of Jewish refugees. More recently the United 
States joined with 16 governments in the creation of the Provisional Inter- 
Governmental Committee for the Movement of Migrants from Europe. The 
purpose of this Committee, in part, is to continue, for a limited period, the mi- 
gration activities previously carried on by the Internatonal Refugee Organization. 

The National Council of Churches rejoices in the knowledge that the United 
States, as a member of the family of nations, is a party to these humanitarian 
endeavors. We believe our country, either thi'ough existing agencies, or through 
a single over-all international body under the aegis of the United Nations, should 
continue to press for a solution of the many problems related to displaced per- 
sons, refugees, and surplus populations. We would vigorously oppose any 
action b.y Congress whicli would hinder, in any way, the operations of these 
international agencies or which would diminish the participation of the United 
States in them. 

United States Immigiiatiox and Naturalization Policy — Statement Approved 
BY General Boakd of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in 
THE United States of America, March 21, 1952 

On the national level it is desirable that Congress adopt such emergency 
legislation as may be required fully to complete the displaced persons program 
to which our country is committed. This legislation should provide for the 
admission to the United States of (n) those who were processed under the 
Displaced Persons Act but for whom visas were not available by December 31, 
1951, (h) an additional number of persons of those groups for whom a clearly 
insufficient number of visas were provided in the original legislation, and (c) 
our fair share, under prcjper safeguards, of those who have escaped fx-om behind 
the iron curtain subsequent to .January 1, 1949, the cut-off date specified under the 
displaced persons legislation. The additional visas here recommended should 
be authorized within tlie pciiod ending December 31, 1952, and should be granted 
without regard to sectarian considerations. 


If and when Congress takes action along the lines here indicated, it is our 
position that no further legislation of an emergency character be enacted. The- 
time is past for dealing with these matters on a piecemeal and emergency basis. 
Rather, it is imperative that United States policy be now shaped in accordance 
with the long-range requirements of the problem. 

The National Council of Churches has taken note of the fact that legislation: 
is pending in Congress looking toward the revision of our immigration and 
naturalization laws. We believe it is of the utmost importance that legislation 
be ena'*ted that will conform with our democratic tradition and with our heritage 
as a defender of human rights. The adoption by Congress of enlightened im- 
migration and naturalization laws would add immeasurably to the moral stature 
of the United States and would hearten those nations with which we are asso- 
ciated in a common effort to establish the conditions of a just and durable peace. 

We do not propose at this time to pass judgment on the spe<nfic details of the 
proposed legislation, many of which are technical and legal in character. We 
believe, however, the views hereinafter set forth are in accord with the con- 
victions of our constituent communions. 

One. The Congress should make the quota system more flexible. Under exist- 
ing legislation provision is made for the possible admission to the United States,, 
each year, of 154,000 immigrants. For one reason or another, the quotas 
assigned to many countries are not now being filled. We believe serious consid- 
eration should be given to the pooling or adjusting of unused quotas in order to 
facilitate family reunion, to provide skills needed in our country, and to offer 
asylum to persecuted victims of totalitarian regimes. While any permanent 
solution of the problems of over-population can be effected only by basic economic 
and social adjustments within the countries concerned, it seems clear that 
migration opportunities, however limited, can be a helpful factor in easing the 
tensions occasioned by surplus peoples. 

Two. The Congress should complete the process of amending immigration 
and naturalization laws so that, within the quota system, all discriminatory 
provisions based upon considerations of color, race, or sex would be removed. 

Three. The Congress should establish a system of fair hearings and appeals 
respecting the issuance of visas and deportation proceedings. It is right and 
proper that Congress shall approve such pre<-autionary measures as may be 
required to insure our Nation against the infiltration of individuals hostile to 
the basic principles of the Constitution and institutions of the United States. 
We believe this end can be achieved without the imposition of such restrictive 
measures as would violate the American conception of justice. 

We believe the people of our churches would welcome the establishment of a 
national conmiission to study with due regard for our international dbjectives, 
the i)ro)ilem of population pressures throughout the world, and the possible bear- 
ing of these pressures upon our immigration policies. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 
We will now recess until 1 : 30 o'clock this afternoon. 
(Whereupon, at 12:20 p. m., the Commission recessed until 1:30 
p. m. of the same day.) 


, iSiiiiiiiii 

3 9999 06352 477 9