Mr. LUTZ. That he has made an investigation?

Mr. RAKER. Yes, and that what he did make is correct?

Mr. LUTZ. Yes; except that the results as stated are not true. He found these results, but the logical deductions from them showing a superiority of the negro race over the white on every count except one, is inaccurate.

Mr. RAKER. It is true so far as his investigation went?

Mr. Lutz. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. That that was a true condition as to the asylums and criminal institutions? Is that right?

Mr. LUTZ. Yes.

Mr. VAILE. In other words, it is true that he found those propor-tions of people suffering from these defects in these particular institutions. That is what I intended to say.

Mr. LUTZ. Was that the purpose of the investigation?

Mr. RAKER. Yes; that is as far as he could go, or attempted to go. Mr. LUTZ. The purpose, as stated, was to determine the incidence or frequency of these things among the various groups in the population.

Mr. VAILE. Does it not also do that, except with a certain class of people like the negroes, comparing them with the cattle on the range and the cattle in herds on pasture, and that relatively the proportion of the latter suffering from these defects will largely be found in those institutions?

Mr. LUTZ. Exactly.

Mr. VAILE. If you wish to show that the comparison is unfair to the white aliens, would you not have to go over that to show that they also would be taken care of largely outside of custodial institutions!

Mr. LUTZ. I do not know how far that is true.

Mr. RAKER. To amplify further the suggestion you have made, you feel that he has not taken into consideration those unbranded, unaccounted for, unknown numbers from where these people came from, in estimating defects of those that are already here and in those institutions. If you took the other half across that border, you might find the percentages 5 to 1. He has not taken into account that at all, has he? Where you have that 50 per cent over here you have the 50 per cent in a foreign country. He has not taken into consideration the number of defectives and diseased from the countries from which they came.

Mr. LUTZ. You mean in the country of origin?
Mr. RAKER. In his summary.

Mr. LUTZ. There is no reason why he should.

Mr. RAKER. He did not do it.

Mr. LUTZ. He could not.

Mr. RAKER. He could not; that is true.

Mr. LUTZ. And get his figures to a comparable basis.

Mr. RAKER. Therefore, he took into account those in the institutions?

Mr. Lutz. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. And then left it to the committee and the country to say that notwithstanding the fact that we have made this analysis, there is a law that prohibits those even from coming to this country, and notwithstanding that, compared with those in these institutions, here is your percentage.

Mr. LUTZ. I make no criticism except that the percentage is inaccurate.

Mr. RAKER. Inaccurate? You do not mean that the figures are inaccurate?

Mr. LUTZ. Absolutely. You mean the basic figures?

Mr. RAKER. Yes.

Mr. LUTZ. No.

Mr. RAKER. And his deduction is correct from what he has presented.

Mr. LUTZ. No, not numerically, because if he had thrown out the defective data for negroes he would have gotten different quota fulfillments for all the rest of the groups.

Mr. Box. Is not this true, as illustrated by taking an uncounted number equal to the number counted? Is not the value of your criticism reduced by the fact that that element which was only partially enumerated, only figures about one-tenth of the population of the country?

Mr. LUTZ. Yes, it is only one-tenth.

Mr. Box. It would minimize the error to that extent.

Mr. LUTZ. The only significant figure that is used is the amount over or under 100. Take feeble-mindedness-the foreign white stock quota fulfillment is 114.76 in the report. If you take the negroes out of the feeble-minded group, and out of the population group, and make the computation on the basis of whites only, the ratio is reduced to 104. What happens? Editors and publicists when they use these figures do not talk about quota fulfillment. Nobody would know what this is, so they say the foreign white stock exceeded the proportion that it was entitled to on the basis of population by 14 per cent.

The CHAIRMAN. The public does not know it either, but every effort has been made through immigration laws for a long time to eliminate from the United States people of these defective characteristics. When we find any excess whatever of alien people in any institution of any kind, we know there has already been an elimination whereby that excess should not have been there at all. That is to say, carrying the thing out to the fullest degree, there should not be an insane person of foreign birth in any of the insane asylums.

Mr. LUTZ. I am in absolute sympathy with the argument that we should not admit any. But I take the point of view of the scientist in these matters, that after all, if we are going to think about this, let us get our figures right. Do not use statistics that will not stand careful scientific examination.

The CHAIRMAN. We will have it up again and will welcome your suggestions.

Mr. RAKER. Take Albania. What figures has he there?
Mr. LUTZ. I do not believe he has Albania in his figures.

Mr. VAILE. He has Bulgaria in the figures for criminal institutions. Mr. RAKER. Serbia is suggested to me by one of the committee, which suggestion I accept. What is wrong with Serbia, comparing its number in these institutions with Americans in the institutions? Mr. LUTZ. It depends on what you mean--the insane?

Mr. RAKER. Yes.

Mr. VAILE. That is on page 740, Serbia, 1,400, Table No. 3 on crime.

Mr. LUTZ. I would make that 5 per cent. It will reduce the quota fulfillment about 5 per cent.

Mr. VAILE. That is not very much on 1,400.

The CHAIRMAN. I am looking at the crime table, No. 3, opposite page 740 of the report.

Mr. LUTZ. That is crime. I thought you said insane.

Mr. RAKER. What is there wrong in his deduction in the general table as to the quota of Serbia in these institutions?

Mr. Lutz. In this particular instance the quota is wrong about 15 per cent.

Mr. RAKER. How wrong?

Mr. LUTZ. Because his basis is wrong. He is assuming a wrong basis to calculate it. For example, if you are figuring a disease rate for the United States, and you get your returns for diseases from only the part of the United States east of the Mississippi and do not get any returns from the States west of the Mississippi, at the same time including in your population data all the population west of the Mississippi, your figures necessarily are wrong. You must have comparable figures, and the moment you acknowledge, as he acknowledges, that the negro is not institutionalized and that the negro figures are, in the final analysis, of no value, then you can not include the negro population in your comparison. You have got to take out the figures for defectives if they are wrong and at the same time take out the population figures.

Mr. VAILE. Let us see if we can not work out roughly the comparable figures from the present table, taking that same table No. 3 on crime, in which the native white percentage is 81.84. Would that be increased 15 per cent?

Mr. Lurz. I should say so; yes.

Mr. VAILE. Then the comparison between the native white and the Serbians, and those between and those below, would be exactly proportional by taking out that error, would it not?

Mr. LUTZ. I think in most cases it would, but in the next table it will not be 15 per cent. Your 15 per cent will hold for all comparisons of crime; in insanity it would be 5 per cent.

Mr. VAILE. The variation will be proportional in that table again? Mr. LUTZ. Yes, but a comparison of one type of inadequacy with another will give an erroneous result.

Mr. RAKER. What should have been eliminated in making the total deduction from which he took a total? From what did he start with. to make these entire deductions or comparisons?

Mr. LUTZ. He took the total population of the United States in 1910, or 91,000,000.

Mr. RAKER. That is everybody.

Mr. LUTZ. Everybody.

Mr. RAKER. He found that in that population there was a certain per cent of American born in these institutions and a certain per cent of various diseases.

Mr. LUTZ. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. He then also took during the same period in the same institutions those that came from Serbia?

Mr. LUTZ. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. And he found that for criminality, for tuberculosis, failure of eyesight, and other things, they were a certain per cent ?

Mr. LUTZ. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. He treated them all alike, did he not?

Mr. LUTZ. Except one big group, for which he got no adequate data.

Mr. VAILE. Is there any other large group which has some vitiating error that spoils it?

Mr. LUTZ. I have not had much time on this. There may be. I have not discovered it.

The CHAIRMAN. We agree on the feeble-mindedness in the United States, that a conparatively small percentage are in State or Federal institutions; so in order to have perfect figures as to feeble-mindedness, we would have to know all that are in county and private institutions and in the homes of the country, to get figures of the feebleminded, which we would not be able to get in an ordinary survey.

Mr. RAKER. Taking all the population of the United States, and if we knew what people were affected that are not in these institutions, then we would have it absolutely correct.

Mr. LUTZ. Yes. Let me illustrate. For example, you have a census of the blind in 1920, a special census, and you are able to say you have all the blind in the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. We agree to that.

too.

Mr. LUTZ. There is a census of the deaf, and that is pretty good, Your figures on prisons are pretty good figures. You can get that. The people who have committed crimes are in prison and you can find them. The figures for insanity are pretty good. On the other hand, there are other types of inadequacy you can not get at. For instance, there is no census of feeble-mindedness.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me correct you there. The getting of figures as to aliens and natives in State institutions is not so easy as one would think. Quite a difference arose, particularly as to the insane, and the nativity you can not always tell.

Mr. RAKER. Put it another way. Had he taken the entire population of the United States, as he did, and then the negro population in these public institutions, had he been able to obtain the number that were not in these institutions, among the negroes, then he would have had it correct.

Mr. Lutz. Yes.

Mr. RAKER. He did not attempt to do that.

Mr. LUTZ. No.

Mr. RAKER. He did not attempt to do it before the committee. Mr. VINCENT. Your point is that he should have dropped out figures of negro delinquency and also reduced the total for the United States by the number of negroes?

Mr. LUTZ. Exactly; to limit the comparison to the white population of the United States. That is very simple.

Mr. RAKER. Is that the principal point wherein you and Doctor Laughlin differ?

Mr. LUTZ. No; there is another one coming; but this is bad, and I think the next one is much worse. I will reach it in just a moment. Mr. RAKER. Is it your contention that if we had figures for private institutions where the negro people are cared for that it would increase their percentage in these various defects?

Mr. LUTZ. I imagine it would a little, but not very much. The fact is that most of the Southern States make no provision, public or private, for taking care of negro defectives.

Mr. Box. I do not know of any State of which that is true.
Mr. Lutz. I do not mean to exaggerate.

Mr. Box. I am stating the fact.

Mr. McREYNOLDS. I come from another State and I agree with you. Mr. RAKER. Put it another way. If all of the negro defectives were specified in this list as to the kind and character of defect, outside and beyond those that he did include in the public institutions, then he would have been correct.

Mr. LUTZ. Yes; if he had a census of defectives.

Mr. RAKER. What is your complaint or objection to his taking it as he did, and in the form he took it and not the way you suggest? Mr. LUTZ. I make no suggestion how he should have taken it. What I maintain is that the population figure for negroes is a perfect figure. It represents a cross section of the population made through a careful count by the enumerators of the census. It is a reliable figure. Against it he has utterly defective figures for different types of social inadequacy among negroes. The figures for tuberculosis are simply absurd in view of the mortality statistics. That tuberculosis is much more common among negroes than it is among whites can be proved by the census mortality reports. He shows that tuberculosis is twice as frequent among whites as among negroes. Mr. RAKER. Do you not take into consideration Doctor Laughlin's statement that he only presented the condition for the social inadequacy and question of disease and otherwise of those that were in the institutions so as to show the status of various people in the institutions and not considering it otherwise?

Mr. LUTZ. That is exactly what he has done, but I can not see that it is accurate. The investigation was started for the practical purpose of finding out what was the relative frequency of these defects among the different population groups. It was for a practical purpose that he did this work and the fact that the figures are true as far as they go is of no importance if the results are misleading. If they can not be applied to a practical end they are of no use.

Mr. RAKER. It would be impossible for you to present a like statement covering the same condition, taking the United States with its population, those that are here of all kinds and classes from every country and then find out the condition of relatives and others, the health conditions and inadequacies, where they came from.

Mr. LUTZ. Probably not impossible, but that is outside of the scope of this survey, which did not attempt to investigate such conditions to that extent.

Mr. RAKER. If you were figuring the negro proposition, if you had 10,000 people from Serbia, would you not want to know what kind of inadequacy there was in Serbia ?

Mr. LUTZ. In the foreign countries?

Mr. RAKER. Yes.

Mr. LUTZ. It would be of the greatest value.

Mr. RAKER. You would not be able to give an intelligent presentation unless you did.

Mr. LUTZ. I would not agree with that, if you had only such data as we have before us. The statistics of inadequacy by nationality for the foreign-born population of the United States would be all the data we want, for the reason that although you might find certain conditions in England or Bulgaria or some other country, it