many of these cases are defective congenitally where it has not even resulted in attacks of insanity in ancestry.

Mr. Brown and the commission of lunacy in New York believe that where the attack of insanity has developed, say within two years after the person is admitted, the burden of proving that it is due to causes developing in this country should be upon the individual himself or his friends rather than upon the Government. That is the modification they have asked may be inserted in the bill, and I only come before you now to urge the importance of it.

All you who have had any connection with your State governments know what a great burden the care of the insane is becoming in this country, and how rapidly the numbers are increasing. It is surprising. In every place it is the same, and the number is increasing out of proportion to the population. One of the large elements in this is the great number of foreign born who are coming into the country all the time, of whom the proportion developing into insanity is much greater than our own.

Senator MASON. Your proposition is that if insanity develops within two years we should change the burden of proof and deport a man?

Dr. RICHARDSON. Yes; that he should be deported unless he could show that it has developed from exciting causes occurring in this country, and that he did not have a predisposition to it when he came in.

Senator MASON. Two years is a long time.

Dr. RICHARDSON. I do not know, Senator.

Senator MASON. Two years in some parts of this country are long enough to drive almost any man crazy. [Laughter.]

Dr. RICHARDSON. Take, for instance, the cases occurring in the war among the enlisted men. We did not, as a rule, get any of those cases until a year after enlistment. The causes have to operate for a time. I will concede that owing to the changed condition in the case of the foreign-born population, putting them in a different country, taking them away from home and home surroundings, they are much more liable to develop insanity than if they had remained at home.

Senator MASON. About what is the approximate age when people become insane? Is there any average age?

Dr. RICHARDSON. The very large number develop during the active period of life, say from pubescence to the climacteric change, say from 18 or 20 to the period from 40 to 45.

Senator MASON. And in cases of women it is largely about the time of the change of life?

Dr. RICHARDSON. The pubescent change or the climacteric change is much more likely to develop insanity than any other period of life. Senator MASON. What do you mean by climacteric change? Dr. RICHARDSON. That is the change in life, the end of the childbearing period; and, of course, there is a similar change in men.

Senator CLAY. Doctor, let me see if I catch your proposition. If insanity develops within two years after the immigrant lands in this country, then the burden of proof, you say, should be on the individual?

Dr. RICHARDSON. On the individual or his friends against his deportation, as showing that it has actually developed from causes arising here.

Senator CLAY. Would it not be a pretty great hardship to a fel

low who has been here two years and lost his reason and who has no friends to send him off?

Dr. RICHARDSON. I do not know, Senator, about that. We have to look at both sides of the question.

Senator CLAY. Yes; but it would be a great hardship.

Senator MASON. There should be a reasonable period, but two years seems a long time.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the time one year under the present law?

Dr. RICHARDSON. There is no restriction at all at present. This language was suggested by Mr. Brown and the members of the New York commission of lunacy. It was there suggested, and he comes here as their representative in asking for this restriction. The truth is that the medical officers now investigating these cases are not sufficiently equipped to determine certainly the existence of a predisposition. That, however, is an administrative detail that we hope we may under the Secretary of the Treasury arrange with the Marine-Hospital Service by having persons of some experience appointed among the examiners.

Senator MASON. The practical fact is that the man who comes complies with the law and comes to work and make a good citizen. Dr. RICHARDSON. The question is whether he does comply with the law.

Senator MASON. I say, so far as we know. He suddenly becomes insane. Now, you propose to charge him with a violation of law in coming in here with the seeds of insanity and to place the burden upon him in his debilitated condition to show affirmatively, and to take evidence to show, that the insanity was not of a prior origin?

Senator MCLAURIN, of Mississippi. Is it not a misfortune of his that we ought to favor, rather than punish?

Dr. RICHARDSON. Bear in mind that 33 per cent of these cases do have that predisposition.

Senator MCLAURIN, of Mississippi. Is it not a fact that the predisposition exists sometimes many years before it develops?

Dr. RICHARDSON. It must. It is defect in the individual inherited from ancestry or through some defect in his development.

The committee, at 12 o'clock and 5 minutes p. m., adjourned until to-morrow, Tuesday, December 9, 1902, at 10.30 o'clock a. m.

The committee met at 10.30 a. m.

TUESDAY, December 9, 1902.

Present: Senators Penrose (chairman), Fairbanks, Mason, Dillingham, Dryden, Clay, and McLaurin, of Mississippi.

Also Hon. William B. Shattuc, Representative from Ohio; Hon. Samuel J. Barrows, of New York; Richard K. Campbell, of the Bureau of Immigration, Treasury Department; William Williams, commissioner of immigration at the port of New York; John J. S. Rodgers, commissioner of immigration at the port of Philadelphia; David Healy, commissioner of immigration at Vancouver, B. C.; Robert Watchorn, inspector in charge of the Canadian border; Gen. W. W. Dudley, representing the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railroad Company; Hon. L. E. Payson, representing the Southern Pacific Company; Maxwell Evarts, representing the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, and others.

STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL J. BARROWS, CORRESPONDING SECRETARY OF THE PRISON ASSOCIATION, OF NEW YORK.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Barrows, I understand you desire to be heard in opposition to the educational features of the bill.

Mr. BARROWs. Simply the educational feature. I wish to say that I do not want to appear as being in opposition to the general provisions of the bill. Our Prison Association, of course, would be entirely in favor of the clause respecting professional criminals.

The CHAIRMAN. You are opposing the vital principle of the bill when you oppose the educational feature.

Mr. BARROWs. I am not under the instruction of my association in regard to the educational feature. I speak of it independently, as far as that is concerned-I wish to be understood rather as a student of sociology and philanthropy.

Senator FAIRBANKS. You represent the New York Prison Association?

Mr. BARROWS. I am corresponding secretary of the Prison Association.

Senator FAIRBANKS. What is that association?

Mr. BARROWS. The Prison Association of New York, chartered under the laws of the State of New York, has been in existence for more than fifty years, for the purpose of inspecting all the penal institutions of New York, for aiding released prisoners, and for other objects. It makes its report to the legislature of that State for the purpose of conveying information and influencing legislation with regard to criminal law, penal institutions, and other penological subjects.

Senator FAIRBANKS. Is it supported by the State?

Mr. BARROWS. It is not supported by the State. It has powers of inspection under an order of the supreme court, but it is an independent association.

The CHAIRMAN. It is a voluntary philanthropic association? Mr. BARROWs. It is a voluntary association. In regard to the educational test I am not speaking as a representative of the association in my official position, but I wish to say that our association is entirely in sympathy with the provision in regard to the exclusion of professional criminals.

Some five or six years ago I presented a report to Congress, through the Secretary of State, urging the adoption of the method of identifi cation of criminals by the Bertillon system, which the State of New York is now itself developing in cooperation with other States, and which, I think, eventually the Federal Government may have to adopt for the sake of keeping out professional criminals. Our association also, I might say, although I have no instruction in regard to it, would favor, I should suppose, the exclusion of those who are diseased and the paupers, the imbecile, and the epileptic when forced upon this country.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, when you appear in opposition to the educational test, you do not speak for your association, but you are here as an individual?

Mr. BARROWS. I am here as an individual entirely, although representing, I think, a great many who are of my opinion in this matter, but whose opposition has not been organized.

My opposition to the so-called "educational test," in the first place,

is that it is not a true test of availability. We must remember the fact that in many of the foreign countries there is no such thing as a compulsory educational law, and that the standard of intelligence in those countries is not quite the same as it is in the United States. If you take a person in the United States who has gone through the public schools, his experience there represents not only the acquisition of reading and writing, but it represents also a certain grade of intelligence going along with the other studies; it represents the whole standard of that school. It is not so in many foreign countries. The standards are not parallel with our own. Emphasis has been laid rather, in some countries, upon industrial education and capability than upon the simple literary test. I do not call this an educational test in its proper sense. I call this simply a "literary" test. Education is too broad a word to be applied to a test which simply represents the capacity to read.

In some of the foreign countries from which immigrants come, it may be said that education in reading is scarcely possible for all. Take Roumania, for instance, from which so many of our Hebrews are now coming. As I think was pointed out by the Secretary of State in that admirable and remarkable appeal to foreign countries as to Roumania, the Jews there have not the privileges, not merely of citizenship-they being aliens in the country in which they were born-but they have not the privilege of acquiring an education. The Jew is not allowed to enter a school unless all other citizens are already provided for. If there happens then to be a vacancy he may get a chance. If he is to establish a school for himself he is obliged to pay the taxes not only of the State schools, but also for the private school which he establishes. The law is in some sense prohibitory so far as simple literary education is concerned.

We are familiar with similar laws in our own States, which have been practically abolished. Years ago in the Southern States there was a prohibition imposed upon literacy. We can go back even to New England days till we reach a period when young girls were not included in the scheme of literary education; they were almost entirely left out.

Nevertheless, making allowance for this handicap which exists in many countries, there is still an opportunity there to develop industry, capability, availability in other directions, and one of the most important is that which relates to manual training. We have changed our ideas in this country very largely in recent years in regard to what education is. We have come to feel that it does not consist merely in the education of the brain from a literary side, but it does consist in putting the brain into the hand as well, where at least a part of it belongs, especially if one is going to earn his way in life.

Manual education has wrought a great revolution in our ideas of what education is; and I think that manual education should be largely considered when we discuss the availability of any person who comes to the United States.

It has been said, Mr. Chairman, that when a man comes to Boston the question asked is, What does he know? When he comes to New York, How much is he worth? When he goes to Philadelphia, Who was his grandfather? When he goes to Chicago, What can he do? Now, it is very important when a man comes to this country that we should ask not merely what does he know, but what can he do, and the doing represents his capacity of hand, his capacity to put S. Doc. 62-17

his thought into his fingers, his capacity to earn, his honesty, his thrift, his intelligence. The very test that has been proposed in this bill would have excluded a great many of the Puritan fathers. If you look over the old records you will find that a good many of them could only make their mark. But they were honest and industrious people. The CHAIRMAN. They could not have stood a civil-service examination, either, I suppose?

Mr. BARROWS. Many of them could not have passed a civil-service examination under the present standard.

Now, let me take this test as it applies to a certain race whose statistics I have been studying a great deal lately in New York, where we have a vast number of them. Take the Hebrews. There were 57,688 who came to this country last year. The illiteracy of the Hebrews is given in these reports as 18 per cent. When I take the report of the Commissioner-General of Immigration and look over the record of skilled workers as given in the report I find that there are 30 per cent of skilled workmen among the Hebrews. I find that they lead all the other nations in this respect.

If you will allow me just to refer to the table here, it will prove it. Of these 57,688 Hebrews, there were 17,841 skilled workers, being, as I said, 30 per cent of the whole nnmber. If you look through this list of the skilled workers you will see what trades the Hebrews represent and how many there are of them. You will find that there were only 279 representing professions, but that there were 592 bakers, 2,018 carpenters, 434 blacksmiths, 315 locksmiths, 1,285 shoemakers, 6,110 tailors, and so on.

Senator FAIRBANKS. What per cent of the total of those admitted last year are represented in the trades? Have you worked it out to find the percentage?

Mr. BARROWs. Thirty per cent of the Hebrews who came last year are, according to the tables here, skilled workmen.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you say that is a larger percentage than is shown by any other race?

Mr. BARROWs. I say it leads all the rest.

Senator FAIRBANKS. You say the Hebrew race leads all the rest? Mr. BARROWs. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What race comes next?

Mr. BARROWS. I think it is either the French or the English. I did not expect to speak on this subject when I came to Washington. I telegraphed to New York for some figures that I have there, and I shall ask permission to add them."

Senator FAIRBANKS. According to the report of the CommissionerGeneral of Immigration 82 per cent of the Hebrews would be admitted, even under the application of this literary test. Are those represented in the trades there of the illiterate classes, or do they constitute a part of this 82 per cent?