COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, UNITED STATES SENATE, Washington, D. C., May 7, 1902. The committee met at 10 o'clock a. m. Present: Senators Penrose (chairman), Fairbanks, and Dryden. STATEMENT OF H. R. FULLER. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Fuller, will you state whom you represent? Mr. FULLER. I represent the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, the Order of Railway Conductors, the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, and the Order of Railroad Telegraphers. These organizations are made up of employees in the engine, train, yard, and telegraph service of the railroads of the country, all of whom are in favor of a restriction of immigration by educational test. Senator FAIRBANKS. By the way, Mr. Fuller, do these embrace all of the railroad organizations? Mr. FULLER. Practically all of them, Senator. There is a new organization of trackmen, but they are not so thoroughly organized as the men in train, yard, engine, and telegraphic service. There is a new organization of switchmen, but it only comprises a very small minority of the switching service. There is also a new organization which seeks to take in all the different classes of labor on railroads, something on the principle of the American Railway Union. That is very small and is yet in its infancy. Senator FAIRBANKS. Embracing the same classes that you represent? Mr. FULLER. Yes. I will say that I represent a very large majority of the men in the services I have mentioned. These other organizations are new and have a small membership, The CHAIRMAN. What is the total membership, roughly speaking, of the organizations you have mentioned? Mr. FULLER. The number is, approximately, 175,000-that is, it was at the end of this year. Our first and main reason for desiring an educational test is because it seems to be the most effective plan which has yet been proposed for the restriction of that objectionable class of immigrants who come here and enter our labor market in competition with our own workingmen, and who, by their manner of living and lack of higher ambitions and interest in our country, are undesirable competitors with the American workmen. These immigrants work for lower wages than the American workmen like to work for, it being their practice to accept employment without inquiring about the amount of wages they are to receive or the number of hours they will be required to work, and this has a tendency to drag the American workmen down to their level. Many of them come here with no other desire than to accumulate all the wealth they can for the purpose of returning with it to their native country, and to accomplish this they live in holes and hovels and subsist on what an American could not long endure. The American workman has a family to support and children to educate in accordance with American standards and customs. The foreigner has not. In this way our workman is competing under a disadvantage, and I believe it is wrong to compel the American workman, whose wages contribute so much to the good of our country, both materially and morally, to compete with the foreigner who absorbs all and gives nothing in return. The American workman has high ambitions. He loves his country and his American home. He is a taxpayer. He is a part of, aye, and the principal part of, our Government. The foreigner who comes here to compete with him is not. Why, then, is he not entitled to this protection at the hands of his Government? Every engineman, fireman, conductor, trainman, yardman, and telegraph operator who seeks employment in this country to-day is required to pass not only an educational test but a physical examination. Why, then, should not the alien who comes here to compete with him be required to stand at least a perfunctory educational test? And that is all we ask by this bill. While, as I have said, we favor a restriction of immigration by an educational test because it seems to be the most restrictive means yet proposed, we also think it will incidentally benefit our country. Education and education alone will civilize the world; and it is through education only that the great army of wage-workers can ever hope to achieve industrial success. Why, then, not encourage it? In urging the passage of this bill we do not feel that we can in the least be considered as asking for something that is not reasonable. measure far more restrictive, as I understand it, passed both Houses in the Fifty-fourth Congress. The subject of restricting immigration is not a new one. It has been before the country for many years, and has been indorsed by practically all of the labor organizations of the country. During this session of Congress over 4,000 petitions have been sent by labor organizations alone to Senators and Members, asking for the passage of a bill requiring an educational test of all immigrants coming to our shores. The great political parties have at various times touched upon this question in their platforms. While the Democratic platform of 1896 did not say what means should be adopted, it said this on the general subject: We hold that the most efficient way of protecting American labor is to prevent the importation of foreign pauper labor to compete with it in the home market. The Republican party in that year was, however, more explicit as to the means to be employed. In its platform it said: For the protection of the equality of our American citizenship and the wages of our workingmen against that fatal competition of low-priced labor we demand that the immigration laws be thoroughly enforced and so extended as to exclude from entrance to the United States those who can neither read nor write. In 1900 the Republican party again said: In the further interest of American workmen we favor a more effective restriction on the immigration of cheap labor from foreign lands. President Roosevelt in his message to Congress on December 3, 1901, said: The second object of a proper immigration law ought to be to secure by a careful and not merely perfunctory educational test some intelligent capacity to appreciate American institutions and act sanely as American citizens. It will be noted that the President says that the educational test should be not merely a perfunctory but a careful one, and one, too, that will secure some intelligent capacity to appreciate American institutions. The President, therefore, would go further than this bill goes, for the test prescribed by this measure is merely a perfunctory one. I think, in view of all these declarations, that it is not immodesty on our part to come here and ask for the passage of this bill, especially in view of the fact that employers of labor are already amply protected from foreign competition by tariff laws, and I do not think Congress could be accused of inconsistency if it were to pass this bill. I will say, in addition to advocating an educational test, that we are also in favor of the administrative bill that the committee has before it, which is good, and, as I understand it, has some very essential provisions. The CHAIRMAN. What are the essential provisions of the administrative bill to which you refer? Mr. FULLER. As I understand it, the Commissioner of Immigration The CHAIRMAN. You refer to Senate bill 662, do you not? Mr. FULLER. I had reference to a bill, Senator, that corresponded to what was known as the Shattuc bill in the House. The CHAIRMAN. Yes; that is No. 662. Mr. FULLER. I have not taken the time to examine this bill, however. Briefly, I will say that I understand that the administrative features of the law are put more in the hands of the CommissionerGeneral of Immigration. We think that the man who is responsible for the administration of the law is the man who should have the authority to administer it. Therefore we favor the bill. Senator FAIRBANKS, Is bill No. 662 a codification of existing immigration laws, supplemented by the educational test? The CLERK. Yes; it is practically the law that is now in force, revised, and with some new features incorporated in it. The CHAIRMAN. It is based on an old bill, I think, that was introduced by Senator Chandler some years ago. Do you know who was Commissioner of Immigration then? Mr. FULLER. I do not, Senator. The CHAIRMAN. It was very carefully considered in the Senate, but never voted on; and Mr. Powderly has presented it this year as the bill of the department. Mr. FULLER. It is the department bill to which I refer. Senator FAIRBANKS. In what section does the educational test appear? The CHAIRMAN. That is in the other bill. Mr. FULLER. The educational test is not in the bill. The CHAIRMAN. It is in bill 1891, "to provide an educational test for immigrants and for the deportation of aliens." That bill is the same as the Lodge bill, with the exception of an addition relative to the exclusion of aliens. Senator FAIRBANKS. Then you are advocating the two bills? Mr. FULLER. Yes, sir. Senator FAIRBANKS. Nos. 662 and 1891? Mr. FULLER. Yes, sir. While we believe that the educational-test bill will be the bill that will restrict, nevertheless we think that the administrative powers of the Commissioner-General of Immigration should be strengthened; and, as I understand it, this bill does so. The CHAIRMAN. As I understand it there is no opposition whatever to an educational test among labor organizations, is there? Mr. FULLER. Not so far as I know; I have yet the first labor organization to hear from that is against an educational test. They are practically all in favor of a restriction of immigration; but it is just as I have said, we advocate the educational-test bill because it is now the most prominently before the people and before Congress. We think that it is the most restrictive means that has been proposed. There has been, as I said, a more restrictive bill passed by both Houses. Senator FAIRBANKS. You think you represent the sentiment of labor organizations aside from those you have mentioned in your statement? Mr. FULLER. Of course, I could not authoritatively speak for them. Senator FORAKER. No. Mr. FULLER. But I think an examination of the Congressional Record, Senator, will show that not only the labor organizations that I represent, but practically all of them, favor a measure of this sort. Senator FAIRBANKS. In short, they are all understood to be in harmony upon this subject? Mr. FULLER. Yes; it is understood that they are in favor of it. Senator DRYDEN. You propose to apply this educational test to all immigrants? You do not propose that there shall be any exceptions made at all? Mr. FULLER. No; we think it should be applied to all. Senator FULLER. It allows a parent to bring in a child under 18 years of age, I believe. The CHAIRMAN. Of course, however, Senator, the educational test will affect practically 60 per cent of the undesirable immigrants that come from southeastern Europe, I believe. Mr. FULLER. Yes, sir; about 60 per cent. It is estimated by experts that it will bar about 60 per cent of the class which is so objectionable. Senator DRYDEN. So far as the organizations which you distinctly represent are concerned, I suppose they would be protected under the educational test which is now applied to them before they can obtain their positions? Mr. FULLER. Yes. That system has been in vogue for several years. A man who to-day seeks employment upon a railroad in any of the classes of work which I represent here has to stand a very rigid physical examination before he can get employment. Senator DRYDEN. I ask this question for information: It is not proposed, I suppose, that this educational test should be limited to a knowledge of the English language? Mr. FULLER. No; this bill says any language. I thank you very much for your attention, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. We are much obliged to you, Mr. Fuller. The committee thereupon adjourned. |