in only a week that they shall be compelled to go out on that boat and thus nullify the statute which gives them 60 days' leave on shore? Is that your proposition?

Mr. HODGDON. No, sir.

Senator KING. That is the effect of it, is it not?

Mr. HODGDON. No, sir.

Senator KING. You propose that they shall take out either those aliens or some other aliens?

Mr. HODGDON. Yes, sir.

Senator KING. Then they would have to go out and find aliens in some part of the United States in order to meet the suggestion which you have made.

Mr. HODGDON. Or at a later date take out an equal number of aliens illegally here to those who had deserted, in the meantime putting up a bond to guarantee taking them out.

Senator KING. Then, you are not insisting that they shall take out aliens?

Mr. HODGDON. Yes, because if you do not take out aliens who are here illegally, then you have allowed the alien population of the United States to increase by desertion.

Senator KING. Well, do you not think that you could avoid the situation to which you refer, in part at least, by inspecting the crew and having them deported by the Government at the expense of the boat that brings the mala fide seamen?

Mr. HODGDON. There is at present a provision of law for inspecting the crew, and in spite of these inspections to determine whether or not these men are bona fide seamen, there are some desrtions. So what good did the inspection do?

Senator KING. Is it your idea that this section is duplicating the inspection law?

Mr. HODGDON. In so far as inspection is concerned.

Senator KING. Do you mean to say that now the law requires an inspection to determine whether they are mala fide or bona fide seamen ?

Mr. HODGDON. The law requires that there shall be an inspection; and, further, that if required the owner or captain or master detain on board any alien designated by the inspector.

Senator KING. Designated for what purpose?

Mr. HODGDON. I am coming to that. If during that inspection the immigrant inspector finds out that any alien on that ship is not a bona fide alien seaman serving as such on a vessel arriving at a port in the United States and seeking to enter temporarily the United States solely in pursuit of his calling as a seaman, then he is not admissible.

Senator KING. What you have just stated in your own conclusion? Mr. HODGDON. I have been reading from the law.

Senator KING. You are projecting some other words into the statute.

Mr. HODGDON. I am reading from section 3 (5) of the immigration act of 1924.

Senator KING. Proceed.

Mr. HODGDON. Under the 1924 act any alien departing for the United States is an immigrant, with only six exceptions. The first

exception is a Government official, his family, attendants, servants, and employees. The second exception is an alien visiting the United States temporarily as a tourist or temporarily for business or pleasure. The third is an alien in continuous transit through the United States. The fourth is an alien lawfully admitted to the United States who later goes in transit from one part of the United States to another through foreign contiguous territory. The fifth is a bona fide alien seaman serving as such on a vessel arriving at a port of the United States and seeking to enter temporarily the United States solely in the pursuit of his calling as a seaman.

The sixth is an alien entitled to enter the United States solely to carry on trade under and in pursuance of the provisions of a present existing treaty of commerce and navigation.

Therefore, if one of these seamen is not bona fide when he arrives here he is not admissable as a seaman and must be excluded. If during this inspection, which is now provided for in sections 19 and 20 of the 1924 act, a mala fide seaman deceives the inspector, goes ashore, and later deserts in the United States, that is the only way that desertions may now occur under existing laws and regulations. Therefore, what is the use of adding any more inspection laws to the present laws? But, if you had a law which would require ships to take out the same number of aliens who deserted ships in the United States and who were not entitled to remain here as immigrants; take out from the United States the same kind of aliens, those who were here illegally, then your alien population would be kept in status quo, and there would be no actual increase in alien population through desertions and your quota laws of the country would then be the governing factor of how many aliens you were going to have in the United States. But this bill under consideration allows the ships to take out not aliens alone who deserted here and who had no right here legally, but allows them to take out the same number of aliens legally here or American citizens in their crew. It does not say who they must be. They may be American citizens. They may be seamen who are legally here. Therefore, it is not an immigration measure; and that has been the great appeal of this bill to the people, who erroneously believe S. 7 is an immigration measure. The Department would be behind an immigration measure which gives that sort of relief without the unfortunate provisions of S. 7 heretofore referred to.

Senator KING. Your immediate chief, Mr. Carr, said a few moments ago that this would cost $600,000 more for inspection. You contend now that the inspection is made such as this bill calls for under existing law?

Mr. HODGDON. Yes; but I do not think the inspection is made going out.

Senator KING. No; but coming in, your contention is that the inspection is made now to determine whether they are bona fide seamen or mala fide seamen. Your contention is that the existing law requires inspection to determine whether they are bona fide seamen or mala fide seamen. Is that right?

Mr. HODGDON. Yes, sir.

Senator KING. Your chief, Mr. Carr, contended that it cost $600,000 more to make an inspection which you say is already made. Was he wrong or right?

Mr. HODGDON. I do not think that he contended that it would cost $600,000 to make inspections. He said loss of fines and additional inspection.

Senator KING. He said the cost was $600,000, a part of which, some two hundred thousand odd dollars were fines, and the rest was the cost of inspection.

Mr. HODGDON. Of course, these figures come from another department. My personal opinion is

Senator KING. I do not want your personal opinion. Do you agree with that statement which he made? If you do not you can

say so.

Mr. HODGDON. I did not discuss the matter personally.
Senator KING. You heard his statement, did you not?

Mr. HODGDON. Yes.

Senator KING. He stated that this bill would cost some three hundred odd thousands additional for inspection.

Mr. HODGDON. The record shows that.

Senator KING. You heard his statement, did you not?

Mr. HODGDON. Yes; but I do not remember his figures.
Senator KING. He was arguing that there was no inspection.

Mr. HODGDON. He read from the 1924 act regarding inspection. He maintained that there was an inspection.

Senator KING. Then, why did he state, if you know, that it would cost three hundred and some odd thousand dollars more for an inspection when one was already made?

Senator BINGHAM. Senator, I do not think it is quite fair to cause trouble between a bureau chief and his subordinate. The bureau chief is not present now.

Senator KING. I am not trying to cause any trouble, Senator.

Mr. HODGDON. Mr. Carr told you that he received this information from the bureau of the Government having to do with these inspections, and he based his statement on that. I doubt if he could describe in detail himself where this additional cost of inspection would be, because he made a very general statement, you will recollect. Senator KING. All right. Then, you do not admit that there would be any additional cost for inspection at the entrance?

Mr. HODGDON. My personal opinion is that there will be additional cost when the ship leaves for inspection on going out. Your bill, Senator, requires inspections in going out to make it effective, for otherwise you will not know whether a ship departs with a full crew. That is the reason they claim there is a diversion between these figures.

Senator KING. No; that is not my reason. How do you know that they make an inspection now or do not make an inspection now? Mr. HODGDON. When they depart?

Senator KING. Yes.

Mr. HODGDON. Because I have been so informed.

Senator KING. You are not familiar with that, then?

Mr. HODGDON. I have been informed by a competent department of the Government.

Senator KING. That they make inspections now?

Mr. HODGDON. Coming in but not going out, and that they rely on the list that is required under the existing statute to be submitted by the master of the number of men in his crew when he departs.

Senator KING. They inspect sufficiently to determine

Mr. HODGDON. They do not muster the crew going out, but they do muster coming in.

Senator KING. Then, as I understand the gist of your objection to section 6, it is that, instead of requiring the departing boat to have the same number of crew as when it enters our harbor, it ought to be so amended as to require that he shall take out the same number of aliens, either the identical ones who come in, or go out in the country and find aliens sufficient to make up the same number. Is that right?

Mr. HODGDON. Of aliens who are not entitled to remain here as immigrants.

Senator KING. Your contention, as I understood you, Mr. Hodgdon, was that the enforcement of section 6 would also delay the ships and might inconvenience them very greatly?

Mr. HODGDON. Yes, sir.

Senator KING. Do you not think that it would inconvenience them very greatly and delay them much longer if they had to go out and search through the country? Supposing they brought 30 aliens and when they were ready to depart they had only 10 and they had to go out and find, in New York or Pennsylvania or Ohio or some other place, 20 more aliens to make up the crew and must reject 20 bona fide American boys or seamen who come there and ask for employment?

Mr. HODGDON. If you allow such a ship to depart by putting up a substantial bond for every alien that has deserted and have that bond refunded should the vessel at a later date take out a seaman illegally here an alien deportee at its expense, designated by the Secretary of Labor, you would still be keeping the illegal alien population of the United States in status quo.

Senator KING. But the aliens have a right to remain for 60 days, under the shipping laws, have they not?

Mr. HODGDON. It need not necessarily be an alien seaman that they take out later. It might be any alien here illegally. We have quite a number of those here, I am informed.

Senator KING. Suppose that when a crew came in they did not know that they had alien seamen and that those alien seamen were mala fide and came ashore and subsequently that was determined? How would you visit upon them the penalty which you require that they impose when they discover it?

Mr. HODGDON. I do not quite understand your question.

Senator KING. Perhaps it was a little involved. You can conceive of a captain coming with a crew the nationality of which he may not be fully cognizant of and that crew going ashore and mixing with the population, and it would be discovered subsequently that some of them were illegally in the United States. In that event, how is he to be protected against that situation? And how are you going to enforce a penalty against him?

Mr. HODGDON. You mean the master of the vessel?

Senator KING. Yes.

Mr. HODGDON. It seems to me that is an analogous situation to section 6 in this bill, which provides that

All vessels entering ports of the United States manned with crews the majority of which, exclusive of licensed officers, have been engaged and taken on

at foreign ports shall, when departing from the United States ports, carry a crew of at least equal number.

Are you going to penalize him for the same type of person who comes ashore?

Senator KING. No; he must take an equal number on his boat. Mr. HODGDON. If just before sailing a vessel is short one or two men, a provision in a bill could be made for a bond in an amount sufficient to cover the expense of deporting one or two men, and if at a later date the vessel takes out an alien seaman not admitted as an immigrant or an individual who is here illegally that bond could be refunded? That would seem to be very equitable.

Senator KING. Then, as I understand you, you are not insisting upon a full crew for a departing ship?

Mr. HODGDON. That is entirely a matter for the committee.

Senator KING. You will remember that in the letter written by Mr. Justice Hughes when he was Secretary of State he suggested an amendment to the bill because, he said, some person who came might be in the hospital or be ill and provision ought to be made for that contingency.

Mr. HODGDON. Yes; that is in the proviso, is it not?

Senator KING. The suggestion made by Secretary of State Hughes is as follows:

If, for example, a seaman on a vessel coming within the provisions of subdivision (e) should die or become ill and have to be taken to a hospital, or if one or more members of the crew should desert immediately before the scheduled time for sailing, it is quite possible that a considerable time would be required to obtain other seamen to fill their places. It is quite conceivable that a delay of several hours or of a day or more might be required to fill the quota of the crew. In the case of a large vessel a delay of an hour or more may result in a very large loss. Therefore, if the proposed provision should be adopted, it would seem desirable to amend it in such a way as to make it less rigid. Perhaps this might be done by adding a provision to the effect that the Secretary of the Treasury should have authority to give the vessel clearance where the crew loss has occurred within a specified time before the scheduled time for sailing and where such loss has not been caused by the fault of the vessel.

Senator BINGHAM. Did you adopt that suggestion, Senator? Senator KING. I think that was adopted. That is a part of the bill.

Senator BINGHAM. I do not find it in the bill. Mr. Hughes, when Secretary of State, suggested that the Secretary of the Treasury, I think it was, could authorize them to depart provided within a certain number of hours or days the crew was full so that those deserting at the last moment might not hold up the ship. That suggestion does not appear to have been adopted.

Mr. HODGDON. Foreign governments have in their protests, some of them, stated that this would work a hardship in case a ship was not allowed to sail because at the very last moment they should lose a few from their crew. Of course, in the case of these large trans-Atlantic liners with a large number of men forming the crews it is a very costly proposition to hold them up.

Senator KING. The men must be on board 24 hours before departure.

Mr. HODGDON. If they do not desert.