I thank you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen. (The following brief is herewith made a part of the record, as representing the attitude of the Chicago Committee of American Citizens of Italian Extraction, who were unable to reach Washington in time to present oral testimony :) BRIEF SUBMITTED BY CHICAGO COMMITTEE OF AMERICAN CITIZENS OF ITALIAN EXTRACTION. To the UNITED STATES SENATE IMMIGRATION COMMITTEE. MARCH 14, 1924. GENTLEMEN: The proposed House bill to restrict immigration introduced by Representative Albert Johnson is causing the citizens of Italian extraction of the Middle West, and particularly in Illinois, a great amount of concern and indignation and is attracting considerable criticism against it from this and other sections of the country wherein reside American citizens of Italian extraction. If it is the purpose of Congress to restrict immigration, we subscribe heartily to it; if it is the purpose of Congress to raise the standards of the would-be immigrants, we will say that we are in thorough accord and sympathy. In this there is no discrimination against any race. If Congress feels that the United States ought to have the best elements, clean in body and mind, that any country possesses, we will say that we are with you whole-heartedly. The supreme interests of America are paramount with us, but we earnestly submit that millions of Americans of Italian birth and extraction should not be humiliated and degraded through the passage of the Johnson bill. In restricting the quota of immigrants from Italy to a minimum and increasing that of the Nordic races to a maximum the American Nation will brand millions of its citizens as belonging to an inferior race. This we resent very strongly. There is nothing that Italy as a nation has done, and there is nothing that the Americans of Italian birth and extraction have done in this continent that would justify such unfair and brutally cruel treatment. It is being urged that the Italian immigrant is not absorbed into American life; that he is un-American and even anti-American in spirit, ideals, and aspirations; in short, that he is unassimilable. Who can testify best as to the assimilability of the immigrant? Is it not the man who is on the ground where the actual facts may be gleaned? Examine, for instance, the situation in Chicago, which has a considerable number of so-called unassimilated immigrants. The Johnson bill virtually admits that the Nordic race is superior to the Italian. We ask in what respect? What are the greatest attributes of civilization? What country has contributed more than Italy to the arts, science, and literature? Only to-day is the greatest scientific invention of modern times the product of a fertile Italian brain. Witness Guglielmo Marconi, not only the discoverer of wireless telegraphy but also the inventor of a system of broadcasting. Marvelous is this achievement, surpassed by no other, by whose ingenuity and mental power it is permitted to fight the forces of evil, of vice, of disease, of ignorance, and of injustice. Everyone knows of the great architect and builder of the New Union Depot in Chicago, Mr. Joshua Esposito. No man who has not some knowledge of the speech, customs, ways of life, and habits of thought of this great country of ours could be capable of this great work. And who is the great builder who is so truly representative of American customs and ideals? None other than Joshua Esposito, chief engineer of the Pennsylvania Railroad, one of those former immigrants whose alien elements have commingled with those wholesome teachings of liberty and freedom to form that sturdy virile nationality called American. Turning again to other discordant tones in American life produced by alleged un-Americans, we find that there is in Chicago the Justinian Society of Advocates, an organization composed of 100 American attorneys of Italian extraction, the children of the immigrant of yesterday. We find in this body the select of the lawyers practicing before the Illinois bar. Many have held public office, and we might name a few. Take for example Stephen A. Malato, one of the foremost citizens of Italian extraction in Illinois. He started his public career of service to the community by being elected a member of the Illinois State Legislature by an over whelming majority. His service in the legislature stands as a monument to the true ideals of Americanism. Never in his career as a lawmaker did he fail to represent his district, State, and Nation in a just and upright manner. That his success as a legislator was recognized was demonstrated further by the great, inspiring legal feats of Mr. Malato while acting as a public prosecutor under Maclay Hoyne, for eight years State attorney of Cook County. And what greater proof of the sterling qualities of this former son of Italy would one desire when the present State attorney, Robert E. Crowe, recognized again his extraordinary capabilities and retained him in a special capacity? Well might we call him one of the foremost if not the greatest of criminal lawyers in this section of the country, both as prosecutor and defender as well. We print below the commendatory letters of Mr. Hoyne, a Democrat, and Mr. Crowe, Republican, in which they give due commendation and regard for Mr. Malato's signal contributions: OFFICE OF STATE ATTORNEY, COOK COUNTY, ILL., Mr. STEPHEN A. MALATO, DEAR SIR: It is with regret that I send you this formal acceptance of your resignation as assistant State attorney, to take effect September 1 next. You leave the office with the knowledge that you have earned the respect and gratitude of the bar of this county, and the public at large. The splendid record you have made here I know will always be a source of great satisfaction to you. Your ability, energy, enthusiasm, and force have made you an ideal prosecutor. I have never known you to lose sight of the human element of the case, or to fail to temper justice with mercy when the circumstances demanded it. I am sure that in the new fields to which you go you will be successful, as you deserve to be. I must thank you for your loyalty to the county, this office, and myself. You take with you my sincere assurance of personal affection and esteem. Yours very truly, MACLAY HOYNE, State Attorney. CHICAGO, ILL., September 1, 1921. Hon. STEPHEN A. MALATO, Ashland Block, Chicago, Ill. MY DEAR MR. MALATO: In accepting your resignation to take effect September 1, 1921, I wish to tell you how sorry I am to lose so valuable an assistant. I realize that the time you have spent in this office has been at a personal loss to yourself and family. I wish to thank you most earnestly for the great assistance you have rendered me during the period you served as special assistant State attorney. During your tenure of office, you made a brilliant record and the many convictions that you secured in the automobile court made the stealing of automobiles during that period an extremely hazardous business. In addition to the splendid record you made in your special line, this community is indebted to you for breaking up so many organized bands of daring robbers--such as the Duben gang, the Lovers Lane, and the gang that held up the Ward Banking Co. You performed the signal service not only of securing convictions in these cases, but also in breaking up the perjury ring, headed by a physician and an attorney. But few fake alibis have been introduced since that time in the criminal court. Last year, over 500 people were killed by automobiles in Chicago, and no person was ever convicted of a murder by an automobile except the two persons you convicted when you were an assistant under Mr. Hoyne; and your conviction of Raymond Fox of a felony for injuring Mrs. Trude, the wife of Judge Daniel P. Trude, by recklessly driving an automobile, has done much to make the streets of Chicago safe for pedestrians. The successful manner in which you met the insanity pleas of such men as Carl Wanderer and Harry Ward has contributed largely to making life safe in this community. While I regret very much the loss of your services, I wish you all the success that a man of your splendid talents deserves. With kind personal regards, I remain, Yours truly, ROBERT E. CROWE, State Attorney. Examine, if you will, the private and public works of Hon, Francis Borrelli, Hon. John Lupe, Hon. Bernard Barasa, and Hon. Alberto N. Gualano. The first three are now sitting judges of the municipal court of Chicago. Have the descendants of any other nationality given greater proof of ability and judicial temperament? These men, regardless of party lines, have distinguished themselves by their unflinching stand and firm purpose to mete out justice without favor, and without discrimination. There are at present in the States Attorney's Office of Cook County three able law enforcing officers on the legal staff who are descended from a socalled inferior race. Joseph Nicholai has charge of the domestic-relations court; John Sbarbaro is the head of the investigating department which practically prepares the evidence and strengthens the State's case; Michael Romano is one of the ablest trial lawyers on the staff. These men have demonstrated their ability to the public which views daily their activities as successful law enforcers. We might cite another example of successful work done in legal circles. The eminent services of Michael L. Rosinia, whose work in the domesticrelations court and morals court has met with the unqualified indorsement of thousands upon thousands of the men and women whom he has restored to themselves and reinvigorated by his zeal and ardor with a love of hearth and fireside. His efforts have never failed to elicit eulogistic treatment not only from the press but also from the members of the Illinois bar as well. All these examples show how jealous of honor, integrity, honesty, and Americanism have been these representatives of the so-called inferior race. Again, may we point to a few examples of Chicago men in the commercial world-men who were mere immigrants some years ago but who to-day occupy positions of trust and responsibility in large establishments? We refer to Joseph Malatesta, a typical son of an Italian immigrant, who occupies the very important position of vice president of the Consumers Co., over whose destinies the well-known Fred Upham, treasurer of the Republican National Committee, presides. And then consider briefly the history and development of Joseph Soravia, manager of music department of Sears-Roebuck mail-order house. He started his upward climb a newcomer from Italy, arrived here at the age of 18, friendless and unacquainted without even the rudiments of the English language. His first employment was that of order picker at the munificent salary of $5 per week. To-day that immigrant of 1901 stands as one of the main props of the largest mail-order house in the world. There is, furthermore, a medical society composed of over 200 physicians and surgeons, the children of former immigrants, all of whom are having considerable success and are a distinct asset to the medical profession. Similar illustrations could be given showing conclusively that not only is the Italian assimilated and absorbed, but that when he starts even under a disadvantage he shows qualities of leadership and executive ability which are distinct assets to a government where law reigns supreme and where public sentiment stands as Lincoln said “With anybody that stands right." From reading the testimony given before the congressional Immigration Committee on the Johnson bill, it is noticed that a statement was made that the Italian newspapers published in the United States are all for Italy and all against the United States. This is a palpable lie. The Italian newspapers of Chicago, and it follows that they must be the same throughout the United States, are supported by American citizens of Italian birth more because the psychology of thought can be best understood in their parent language rather than through their adopted language; but although they naturally publish news of the readers' parent country which is not published in the Englishlanguage newspapers, they are, with but very few exceptions thoroughly American in thought and principles. Congress must at least be consistent in its actions. By enacting the Johnson bill into law will hold that the Italian race is an inferior race even though this country honored the district where Washington is located, the seat of our National Government, with the name of a man of that race. In April, 1917, our country declared war against Germany which was threatening seriously at that time to undermine the social, economic, and moral fabric of the world at large. In response to the call of our Executive armies were massed, all available raw material was collected, huge loans were successfully launched and the people of the Nation gave, gave until it hurt, all-all for our supreme effort which was to be cast into the balance in behalf of a civilization wrought out of blood and suffering and patterned after the idealism of a true Christianity. We can not give figures at this time as to the contributions of any citizens of foreign extraction, since none are available. There was no distinction created at that crucial period with regard to race, color, or previous condition of servitude. All were considered and acted as Americans and truly did the results attained bear out their purposeful resolves as the slogan of the day put it, "Make the world safe for democracy." A perusal of the Army enlistment records will show a remarkable number of foreign names of the so-called inferior race. A glance at the fatality lists will show again a correspondingly large number of names of boys of the so-called inferior race. How times have changed. Lo, the Johnson bill would show what a difference a few years make. The heroes of yesterday, their desires, their choice, their feelings, their opinions disregarded and no attention paid to their appeal! Those who were assimilable in 1917 are not capable of being assimilated in 1924. Oh, woe betide the times! But our country-" May she be in the right; but our country, right or wrong." And even though there is a scattering of sentiment in the country which calls for race discrimination, yet the American citizen of Italian extraction will not rise up in righteous wrath and indignation and smite down the foe, but by better example, by kindlier deeds, "with malice toward none and charity for all," will portray to his fellow Americans the real and true characteristics of ideal American citizenship. If the Nation's welfare requires restriction of immigration let it be upon a basis which deals fairly and impartially with the problem. Let us as Americans resolve upon a solution of this question since the public good is vitally concerned in its settlement. Let us have before us that fundamental concept of fair play which is so strongly prevalent in American life. Let it not be said here or in any quarter of the world that Americans are biased and predjudiced against one another. Thus and in such manner have the citizens of Italian extraction throughout the Middle West, and particularly the State of Illinois, registered their protest against unfair and un-American legislation. Respectfully submitted. CHICAGO ITALIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. ANTONIO FERRARI, Chairman Publicity Bureau. Chicago committee: Stephen A. Malato, Hon. Francis Borrelli, Michael L. Rosina, Elliodor M. Libonati. The CHAIRMAN. We will hear you now, Mr. Marshall. STATEMENT OF MR. LOUIS MARSHALL, NEW YORK CITY. Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. chairman and gentlemen of the committee: There have been many occasions in the past 10 years when I have had the privilege of appearing before this committee and the parallel committee of the House of Representatives on the subject of immigration. I do not propose to repeat anything that I said on those occasions. I may, however, be permitted, if you have the desire to read my views, as hitherto expressed on the various branches of the subject, to refer you to the hearings of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House of Representatives, held in 1922, and especially pages 310 to 372. Senator HARRISON. Of the House hearings? Mr. MARSHALL. Of the House hearings. The CHAIRMAN. And what year? Mr. MARSHALL. 1922. I appeared before this committee in 1921, but unfortunately I can not give you a reference to the particular date; but you will find it in your printed hearings of 1921. I also call your attention to the remarks that I made before the House committee, which appear on pages 285 to 315 of the hearings which took place in January of this year. The reason why I make this statement is that there have been many remarks made here which I feel that I have answered, at least to my satisfaction, to show that there is no peril at all to this country in the immigration of past years; to show that the great mass of immigrants, with the sporadic exceptions that you can find among all people, have made contributions to the resources of our country and its defense in days of stress. I am not a member of the Allied Patriotic Societies which have been represented here, but I am proud to be a member of the greatest allied patriotic society in the world, and that is to be an American citizen. I am one who regards the citizenship of this country to be one unitary thing. I regard it as a peril to our country to talk about races or language groups. I have had probably as much experience with immigrants as anybody in this country. My father came to this country in the same port that Judge Freschi's father came, in the year of 1849, and for the same reason. He was unwilling to live under a tyranny, and desired to come here to this country to develop with it and to found a family here. And I feel that the immigrants in this country, whether they have come from southern and eastern Europe or from northern and western Europe, are one in that respect, that they have all equally helped the country. The question has been raised as to the patriotism of our immigrants from the South and the East during the late war, and I was very much impressed by the admission made by the representative of the Allied Patriotic Societies, that he could see no difference, so far as patriotism was concerned, between the various elements that entered into our Army, whether they were immigrants; whether they were citizens; whether they had become even declarants, or whether they were native sons of the soil. I had the great privilege of serving on the district board of the city of New York during conscription days, during 15 months of the war. Judge Hughes was the chairman of that board. We had 30 members, a large proportion of them being judges, or ex-judges. We passed on 175,000 cases, and carefully passed upon them, and I wish to give testimony to the fact that these derided immigrants were as loyal to this country as though they had been sons of the American Revolution; that they did not claim exemption, though they might have claimed it in hundreds, yes, thousands of instances, on the ground that they had not even become declarants. But they went into the Army, went abroad and laid down their lives to save the country and to save civilization. And there was was no murmur on their part. I have heard more indignation against serving under our colors from amongst some of the elder citizens whose parents and grandparents were born here than I have heard from the humble workmen who had been in this country not more than three or four years. I could give you some very interesting illustrations, if we had the time. The question that has greatly agitated the public has been as to whether or not the foreigners from the South and East were loyal, |