Hon. HUGH MACRAE,

Wilmington, N. C.

ABERDEEN, N. C., January 21, 1924.

DEAR MR. MACRAE: I wish you well in your idea of bringing emigrants taking the bold stand your amendment contemplates.

I and my son jointly own 2,000 acres of land in Scotland County. Two years ago we took the matter up with Senator Overman, and requested him to ascertain if it would be possible for us to settle young Scotch families on this land, say a family to evry 40 or 50 acres.

It was our plan to go to Edinburg and secure these emigrants and convey to each family 40 or 50 acres of land in fee simple, and require no payment for the first two years; then they should pay one-tenth of the value of the land every year until finally paid for.

We had an idea if the land were sold in this way before the emigrants came over the immigration law and foreign contract law would be evaded, but Mr. Overman thought it would be impossible, and we were forced to let the matter drop.

To be sure, this is all beside the question, but it will go to show that other people have recognized the necessity of the relief contemplated in your amendment.

Very sincerely,

JOHNSON & JOHNSON, Per J. McN. JOHNSON.

Senator COPELAND. Mr. Chairman, may this letter, written to Mr. Johnson, chairman of the House committee, from Mr. Redfield, formerly Secretary of Commerce, be inserted in the record? The CHAIRMAN. Certainly.

(The letter is printed in full, as follows:)

Hon. ALBERT JOHNSON,

MARCH 4, 1923.

Chairman Committee on Immigration and Naturalization,

House of Representatives, Washington D. C.

DEAR MR. JOHNSON: I regret that I did not receive your letter of the 9th ultimo in time to call upon you as kindly suggested in the final paragraph. Since that time I have been prevented by illness from giving the matter further care.

Speaking as one who realizes the necessity of wise restriction upon immigration and who approves broadly the principle of selective immigration, I venture to think that sufficient weight has not been given in current discussions upon the subject to certain clearly known facts which can easily be confirmed from official sources. Having said this, let me add that facts are stubborn things and make themselves respected without regard to opinions or enactments. Therefore I am on firm ground in placing before you facts rather than fancies or preferences for consideration.

It is a fact that millions of acres of arable land have gone back to wilderness in some of our Southeastern States for reasons that are widely known, to wit, the boll weevil. the lure of the mill, and the negro exodus.

It is a fact that untouched areas in Virginia and North Carolina and deserted farms in Michigan and other States call for culture.

It is a fact that the authorities of Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, and responsible business bodies of Michigan will confirm these statements.

It is a fact that the price of farm products, such as vegetables and fruits, in our great cities is high and shows no present sign of falling while the demand is increasing.

It is a fact that we have no population on which we can draw, trained in the cultivation of garden truck for which the territories named are specially suited and for which the markets of our great cities call. Transportation is at hand in all these areas but not production. There is a social human vacuum here which we have no means of filling.

It is a fact that in the Netherlands (possibly elsewhere, but I speak from knowledge of the Netherlands) there are thousands of self-supporting small farmers trained in the cultivation of garden truck, all of whom have been taught the English language, whose coming offers the means, and the only visible means, of meeting the vacuum described.

It is a fact that an official committee exists in the Netherlands to make such careful selection of these proposed immigrants as will satisfy the most exacting demands.

It is a fact that the officials of the States named, or of counties and towns within them, are prepared to specify definite localities where these men are wanted.

It is therefore a fact that an officially ascertained demand exists for which there is an officially ascertained supply, and this supply is of trained men accustomed to institutions similar to ours, who have been taught our language, and whose sole purpose in coming would be to become citizens.

What reason can there be on any principle of restricting immigration to exclude Hollanders, taught our tongue and eager to do the work for which we ourselves officially admit our need? Surely this situation in which the facts are officially known on both sides of the sea should be favorably considered in pending legislation if for no other reason than that our Own interests demand it.

Yours very truly,

WILLIAM C. REDFIELD,

President the Netherlands-America Foundation.

The CHAIRMAN. We will hear Judge Freschi.

STATEMENT OF JUDGE JOHN J. FRESCHI, REPRESENTING THE ITALIAN WELFARE LEAGUE, NEW YORK CITY.

Mr. FRESCHI. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I want to thank you for the opportunity you have given me of coming here and presenting the views and work of the Italian Welfare League; and also of the advisory committee of the league, of which I have the honor to be chairman.

I do not intend to make a speech, Mr. Chairman, because as a judge for the last 12 years, I am not given much to speech making, but more to listening, and then I make my speech after the others have concluded, usually in one or two sentences. And it all depends on the character of speech whether it meets with disapproval or commendation.

I am here, Mr. Chairman, as a native-born American. My father came here in 1849, after he had fought in the rebellion of 1848. If my memory serves me right, his first vote was for Abraham Lincoln. It has been my good fortune in America to be honored by my fellow citizens. I have been serving them in Senator Copeland's city for a long time. And I was favored by the nonpartisan party, and the Republicans with the nomination for a place on the supreme court bench, but the people could not see me as they saw the other candidate. So I am out and he is in; but I am still holding the job. I am here, not in favor of or against any quota law. I suppose that had there been a quota law when my father came over, I might not be here to speak to this committee to-day.

I am here to say just a word, in the few moments allotted to me, respecting the sentiments of the Italian Welfare League, which is a social service organization. It has a branch office on Ellis Island, which devotes its energies and its time to the welfare of the incoming immigrants, in no way antagonizing the policy of the Government as at present administered.

The Italian Welfare League has had experience with families in Greater New York and vicinity. And they told me to tell you that in every case that has come to their notice they have found that where the immigrant in America has left his wife and children

abroad, the hardships are many. I will not bore you with details. They appreciate, and no doubt you do, that the primary object of legislation along this line, as so well expressed and forcibly and eloquently expressed by the chairman of this committee, is to make a good American citizen out of the immigrant; good financially, good economically, good industrially. We hold, and we therefore submit to you that there ought to be an exception or an exemption over the quota in this proposed statute so as to include within the exception the wife and all unmarried children under 21 years of age, of the immigrant.

Senator WILLIS. Judge, will you permit me to interrupt you just there, so as to be very sure we understand each other? I have before me this bill pending before the committee, and section 4 reads as follows:

Mr. FRESCHI. What page?

Senator WILLIS. Page 5. [Reading:]

In the issuance of visé certificates preference shall be given to an immigrant who is the unmarried child under 21 years of age, the husband, or the wife of a citizen of the United States.

Mr. FRESCHI. Yes, sir.

Senator WILLIS. Does that section meet with your approval?

Mr. FRESCHI. I do not think that meets the situation I have in mind, Senator. I have this supposed case: Mr. A comes to this country, and he remains a certain length of time; he either becomes an American citizen, or declares his intention to become such. If the monthly quota as fixed in your proposed law is exhausted, that man will be unable, as I understand it, to bring in his wife and his unmarried children under 21 years of age.

Senator COPELAND. Judge, there was a reason why we did that. If there was a quota which was exhausted in any one month, she could be given a preference the following month.

Mr. FRESCHI. Well, I am told that frequently an Italian immigrant who is a thrifty individual, has often been prepared to bring in his family at certain times of the year. Now, we know that as time goes on that fund of his may become exhausted, or used up. And unless he can use it immediately to bring in his family, there may be a possibility, or in fact a probability that that family may not be able to come in in the succeeding month, or any other period. When you find in this country an immigrant with his wife and his family of children, you have the best kind of a combination to make the best type of American citizen, and to make out of him a useful factor in this country, an economic as well as a political factor in this country. It tends to his happiness. It tends to place him in that class which Mr. Trevor speaks of in his preliminary study of the immigration problem. It makes for economic standards and their preservation. And I think it will meet just exactly the spirit of this paper of his when he speaks of impartial justice and national welfare.

Senator WILLIS. What amendment then do you suggest to this bill? Mr. FRESCHI. I think the statute proposed should in section 3, under the head of "Definition of immigrant" contain a clause, after the word "except " on the 17th line of the bill—a clause that will put in that exemption the wife and all unmarried children under

21 years of age, of any person who is a citizen of this country, or who has declared his intention to become a citizen. I think that if a man is serious about becoming an American citizen, his declaration will indicate his attitude of mind toward our national well being and permanency of Government, as Senator Shields spoke of it a moment ago. Senator WILLIS. Then why do you not get that same result, Judge, in the issuance of the visé certificate? The committee has sought to make a quota and get at this result by the issuance of a visé certificate. Mr. FRESCHI. Because I can imagine the provision in section 3, line 16 of page 5 operating as a limitation in certain cases.

Senator WILLIS. Then your argument is that the quota ought to be larger?

Mr. FRESCHI. I say that there ought to be no quota at all as to these wives and these children.

Senator WILLIS. And that is equivalent to saying it ought to be a good deal larger?

Mr. FRESCHI. Of course.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Willis, does not the preference merely extend to the wife, etc., of a citizen of the United States?

Senator WILLIS. Yes.

Mr. FRESCHI. Not to a declarant.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not think we realize that the statistics show that the average is about 10 years for aliens applying for final papers. I was going to say that it would eliminate the wives and children of those immigrants who came over recently.

Senator KING. Except as they come in under the quota.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to interrupt the witness, but it seems to me that this table prepared by Mr. Husband shows that immigration is largely a matter of relatives. I find that in the last year about 70 per cent, or 387,656 came over to join relatives. Those are the figures. If we include friends also, I was very much surprised to see that more than 80 per cent of the immigrants are selected from this side, by the relatives and friends of citizens who are here. Is that not true?

Mr. FRESCHI. That I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. That bears on the humanitarian grounds. I am suggesting to you that the law ought to be liberalized so as to admit the wives and the children of citizens.

Mr. FRESCHI. I agree with that, of course.

The CHAIRMAN. Your idea is that this has a definite bearing on Americanization. All I wanted to say is that this table shows that the relatives and friends come over in large numbers to join those who are here.

Mr. FRESCHI. I think any legislation, Senator, of this character is wholesome legislation, so far as the process of amalgamation or Americanization is concerned. We are all, as I said a moment ago, concerned with getting the best out of the races of the world in manhood and womanhood, and fusing their elements and attributes that those people bring to America, and making a composite American out of them, so that we will have good Americans.

I am absolutely opposed, as you are, to the man who is a contract laborer bringing in the aliens, or to bringing in those who are diseased, or those who are likely to become a public charge, or the

others who are now prohibited under the law; I have always been against that. But I think my country, our country, would make a serious mistake first to open the door to an immigrant and allow him to come in alone, because he comes in as an explorer or adventurer; he comes to this land to lay plans and explore, and then to settle here, if he finds those opportunities here that he expected to find. And then having made a resolve that he wants to come to this country, he sends for his wife and children.

It would be pretty risky business for him to come to this land with his wife and family, and then meet a situation that would mean poverty and destruction for him and his. But when he comes here and finds what America is, and when he finds that he can serve America as a friend, and later as a citizen, then he will bring his family. The answer, Senator Willis, if I can suppose the case of a quota barring out the preferred wife of a citizen, or the preferred wife of a declarant is, I think, that what you have done in the case of an alien who was born in the Dominion of Canada, Newfoundland, the Republics of Mexico, Cuba, or Haiti, or the Dominican Republic, or the countries of Central and South America, you should do in the case of those from other countries who want to become citizens. I am, therefore, interested-and I speak for the league-in so amending that statute so as to allow the coming in of the wife and unmarried minor children of those who are American citizens, or who have declared their intention to become citizens, and not apply the quota law to them.

And I would ask leave to submit the resolution to the secretary, which has been passed by the league, and which will be sent to you. I understand Mr. Marshall will take up other phases of this subject.

One thing more. I do not know the Senator to the chairman's left

Senator COPELAND. Senator King.

Mr. FRESCHI. He spoke of fraud. There is one answer to that: There can be such rigorous legislation along this line that fraud will be almost impossible, and when perpetrated will be ferreted out and prosecuted. Of course, if there are frauds, and a woman comes to this country as the wife of a citizen or a declarant, where she is really only a friend or an affinity, then the law should be broad enough to prevent that. Safeguards can be put into the law to prevent that.

Now, the Italian Welfare League is for a clean plan of immigration. We are asking this legislative body to give to this country a document in the shape of a statute law that will bring here those who will contribute to the progress and prosperity of America, and help to make America even greater than she has been in the years gone by and is now.

I meant to refer to a book which was written by Dr. Antonio Stella, which he told me he had sent to the members of the committee, and I wish to commend that to you.

Senator KING. I have read it, and it is a very able work.

The CHAIRMAN. It has been received by the members of the committee.

Mr. FRESCHI. It has splendid statistical value, and I commend it to you.