Mr. BACON. And rabbis.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it necessary for people of various countries other than the United States to have passports to return?

Mr. UHL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean that under the law of each of those countries passport is necessary for one of their own citizens to go back?

Mr. UHL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. There is no such law here?

Mr. UHL. They must have the visé of the proper representative of any country through which they may desire or have to pass en route after they get to the Continent.

The CHAIRMAN. If you and I are United States citizens going to Europe we have to get passports to enable us to go through those countries. We come back here to the United States. I take it we can get back if we can prove to their satisfaction at Ellis Island that we are citizens and do not have to have passports.

Mr. UHL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Every other country in the world is different in that respect and requires that the only way they can get back into their own country is by having a passport?

Mr. UHL. As far as I know that is so.

The CHAIRMAN. They can not get back by proving citizenship in some way?

Mr. UHL. I do not think that applies to Great Britain. They have to establish beyond any doubt that they are British subjects. The CHAIRMAN. Obviously a passport is the most convenient way of proving it?

That is the whole proposition of passports. In this country up to a few years ago one could go out without them but on attempting to go out now you can not get anywhere.

Mr. UHL. Correct.

The CHAIRMAN. An American citizen coming back, when he comes to a country to take a steamship back will probably have to have a visé to pass into that foreign country.

Mr. FREE. Do you have to have a passport out of the United States now?

The CHAIRMAN. You can go without it if you want to. If I am in France and want to go to Liverpool to take a ship to the United States, do I not get the passport viséed in both countries?

Mr. UHL. French and also British visés.

The CHAIRMAN. But not a United States visé.

Mr. BACON. Before the afternoon session began, mention was made of a boatload of Russian rabbis coming in under the nonquota. provision of the act. What passports do they travel on?

Mr. UHL. I do not know.

Mr. BACON. They came in under the nonquota provision?

Mr. UHL. They did. Frankly, I do not know what particular passports.

Mr. BACON. About 100 of these rabbis?

Mr. UHL. An entire group of rabbis and families, approximately that number.

The CHAIRMAN. Can we not find out what kind of passports they had?

Mr. UHL. I do not know.

Mr. BACON. They came in under the 1924 act, which permits ministers and preachers to come in, and apparently it takes but a very few days to become a rabbi; under that pretext any Jew can become a rabbi in a few weeks.

Mr. RAKER. Under this law he must have been such for at least two years in the old country before he starts.

Mr. BACON. Approximately 100 have come in with their families. It is the beginning of a procession.

The CHAIRMAN. When these rabbis came in, was there any effort made to find if they had been in that profession two years?

Mr. UHL. My belief is they were all held for special inquiry and the matter gone into thoroughly. They required visés under the law.

Mr. RAKER. And evidence to prove they had been practicing their profession?

Mr. BACON. Did they travel on Russian passports?

Mr. UHL. I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. Find out and telegraph to this committee an answer to that question.

Mr. UHL. Yes, sir.

Mr. FREE. Is it not a fact that if it is at Ellis Island, we are taking the visés of the consul, and try to establish the fact that they have been rabbis for two years before?

Mr. UHL. Prima facie evidence, yes; but we could inquire into that if there is any doubt.

Mr. RAKER. Are you entitled to go into that whole subject?

Mr. CURRAN. We have a Spiritualist now seeking entry as a minister of religion.

The CHAIRMAN. Let him change the name to Swedenborgian and he can come right in.

Mr. BACON. The old rule that you have described as to Latvia applies to Russians coming through Poland?

Mr. RAKER. I will get to Russia first.

Russians can come to this country, but there is no method by which we can send them back. Mr. UHL. That is right, at the present time.

Mr. RAKER. That applies to Poland, too.

Mr. UHL. As to Russians who come out of Poland on a Polish document.

Mr. RAKER. In other words, the Polish Government issues à document to the Russian to come to the United States?

Mr. UHL. That is correct.

Mr. RAKER. But they could not use the document to return to Poland nor to Russia?

Mr. UHL. Correct.

Mr. RAKER. Nor can the United States through its Government officials return them to Poland or Russia?

Mr. UHL. Correct. The Polish authorities refuse.

Mr. HOLADAY. Why should we honor that passport?
Mr. BACON. That is exactly the point.

Mr. RAKER. I put that squarely to this committee, as you remember, in a bill I introduced-offered it as an amendment. I thought it remained in the bill but on looking it up since I find as far as I

got was an amendment; and the committee lifted it up and me, too, and threw me out the door.

Mr. HOLADAY. We are trying to invite you back in now.

The CHAIRMAN. We took the statement of a man down here in Turkey who raised the issue with the State Department at the time Russians were coming in through the Near East.

Mr. RAKER. There was a provision in the bill that was a companion of yours that we should not permit visé or entry to all those countries not recognized by the United States. I have not gotten an answer yet; not any fault of yours, but mine. What countries now outside of their agents in the United States, have refused to admit an alien that has been physically and actually sent aboard a vessel and deported to that country? I tried to get all the conditions in.

Mr. UHL. Ukrainia, three, as far as the Ukrainian border at Government expense; that is as far as we got them. They were insane Ukrainians. They were turned back at the Ukrainian border. They were at Bremen or Hamburg for a week or so and then were brought back to Ellis Island.

Mr. RAKER. Can you give us the names of those cases so that we can go into them?

Mr. UHL. I can get them at Ellis Island.

Mr. RAKER. Send it down here.

The CHAIRMAN. Send it to the committee by telegram, collect.
Mr. RAKER. Was the State Department advised of your attitude?
Mr. UHL. I can not answer that.

Mr. WATKINS. What became of the aliens? Are they still at Ellis Island?

Mr. UHL. I think one of them was returned to the New York institution from which originally taken. I think the second one was sent back to the Wisconsin institution from which he or she had been taken; and the third one is at Ellis Island, I think.

Mr. RAKER. Is it not quite likely they are out under bond or under their own recognizance?

Mr. UHL. No, sir; they were insane.

Mr. RAKER. They were sent back to the institutions?

Mr. UHL. Yes, sir.

Mr. RAKER. What other foreign country besides Ukrania or Rumania under the same conditions has refused?

Mr. UHL. I could have had these exact facts if I had known what I was to testify to.

Mr. RAKER. I wanted to draw the distinction in the fact that the official here, the agent, refused to give the passport, and the fact that we have attempted to enforce our own law and put a man aboard a vessel and send him over to that country and that country refused him admission.

Mr. UHL. There is another definite case in the hospital at Fiume at present at the United States expense. He was on the way to Armenia, got as far as that, and they would not permit him to proceed farther.

Mr. RAKER. What country refused permission?

Mr. UHL. I am not sure whether it was Czechoslovakia or Rumania.

Mr. RAKER. Get that country for us.

Mr. UHL. Yes.

(Held passport issued by Armenian Legation in Washington, but Russian representative refused passage through Russian territory.) Mr. RAKER. Can you think of any other country? You will bring us a statement as requested?

Mr. UHL. I think there is another specific case where Poland is involved, where we got the case to the Polish border. I am not positive of that.

The CHAIRMAN. The commissioner is requested to secure and send to us as quickly as possible this case, and also, from me, an inquiry as to the attitude of certain countries in refusing to accept return of prostitutes. I will ask the clerk of the committee to write to the Department of Labor about that.

Mr. RAKER. What difference would it make if the party is a national of a country and is in this country unlawfully and we in all probability start proceedings to deport him and land him at their border, if any of them have attempted to refuse the United States from landing in their own country the nationals of that countryif they have, has it been taken up actively with the Secretary of State?

Mr. UHL. Whether it has been taken up or not I do not know, but those are the nationals you have in mind. The cases I am speaking of are of that very category. What was done subsequently I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. Those countries refused to take them on the ground that they were not nationals of the particular country? Mr. UHL. I assume that is their ground.

The CHAIRMAN. What did that date from in the case of Latvia? Mr. UHL. That was the date on which all citizens or subjects of Latvia were to register with its government.

The CHAIRMAN. Anybody not registering was considered not a citizen of Latvia?

Mr. UHL. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. Are there any other difficulties that you encounter in the question of deportation?

Mr. UHL. There are innumerable difficulties.

Mr. RAKER. What are they?

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have trouble with sailors?

Mr. UHL. Yes; trouble with sailors. Incidentally, the number of desertions has apparently decreased since July 1.

Mr. RAKER. You have a complete method of handling it. The act of 1924 to some extent did help the sailor question a little? Mr. UHL. It did.

Mr. RAKER. By proper amendment it could be strengthened and improved, to not only help the country but the seamen themselves? Mr. UHL. I think so.

Mr. RAKER. As a matter of fact, the way it stands now, a seaman who has been examined under the act of 1924, before he leaves the vessel and is found not diseased, can land irrespective of his nationality for shore leave, which means about 60 days. He can return to the same or another vessel?

Mr. UHL. Correct.

Mr. RAKER. Or he can desert. If he deserts it is then up to the Federal Government to apprehend him and deport him. He can

have any sort of a position, but if he registers on a vessel as a seaman and signs their roll and passes a medical examination, he can enter temporarily?

Mr. UHL. Not necessarily. If during the course of the examination by the inspector who is examining the crew members, doubt is raised in his mind as to the return of the man as a seaman, whether he had ever taken a trip to sea before, and there is reasonable belief that is the fact, he may issue an order on the master of the ship to detain that man on the ship.

Mr. RAKER. That was not in the law before 1924?

Mr. UHL. No.

Mr. RAKER. So we have passed in the 1924 law this wholesome. effective provision?

Mr. UHL. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. If, notwithstanding the man's name is on the crew list as a seaman, as a matter of fact he is a cook, and is on the trip for the purpose of entering the United States only, you can detain him and if you prove the fact that he is not a bona fide seaman, deport him?

Mr. UHL. Yes; he stays on board the ship and goes out.
Mr. RAKER. Is that a fact?

Mr. UHL. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. In other words, all these seamen that are not actually bona fide seamen, upon investigation can be prevented from landing in the United States?

Mr. UHL. Yes, sir; at the time of arrival.

Mr. RAKER. So notwithstanding what has been said, that this did not affect the seaman proposition, it is put within the power of the immigration officers to prevent spurious parties claiming to be seamen from entering the United States?

Mr. UHL. Correct; if you develop that fact at the time of the examination. They are not fools.

Mr. RAKER. That is, the right of deportation.

The CHAIRMAN. How about stowaways? Do you have trouble in getting them out?

Mr. UHL. I do not know that we have any particular trouble in that respect, unless they come on some tramp and she gets away before final action is taken. Then we have difficulty in getting them

out.

Mr. RAKER. Stowaways can not land?

Mr. UHL. Not ordinarily.

Mr. RAKER. If you find a stowaway, he has not a visé and is deported?

Mr. UHL. He is taken before a board, going through the process of exclusion in the usual way.

Mr. BACON. Does that case have to go to Washington?

Mr. UHL. He has the right of appeal.

Mr. BACON. In the case of stowaways, with the right of appeal to Washington, the tramp steamer is liable to sail before you get word from Washington?

Mr. UHL. In a good many instances, that is so.

Mr. BACON. If the commissioner's recommendation was in effect, you could handle those cases promptly and send them back on the steamer on which they came?