Before turning to a series of statistics about which there can be no dispute, it must be pointed out that column G, which presents an enumeration of what is called "foreign stock" by the Census Bureau, includes an element which in the apportionment of our racial strains, in solution to-day, ought to be assigned to column E. This element to which I allude comprises the descendents of mixed parentage whose native parent was born of native parentage. It will be readily appreciated that while an apportionment on a 50-50 basis would credit the native born with its proper quota, an apportionment of this particular native element involves an error impossible to determine. The net result, of course, occasioned by transferring one-half or any fraction of this half of the mixed parentage to another column is to change the apportionment assigned to the various racial groups. On another occasion, it may be, further studies upon this question will enable a more comprehensive and accurate picture to be given of our racial analysis than has been possible at this time, but it may be said there is reason to believe that the basic stock originating in northwestern Europe will receive more than is credited to that element in the table printed above.

Now, if the reader will turn to page 897 of Volume II of the Census of 1920 a table will be found showing the country of origin of the foreign white stock by nativity and parentage for the United States; that is to say, as already mentioned, the foreign born, the native born of foreign parentage, and the native born of mixed parentage. As already indicated, the substance of this table in so far as it relates to the quota groups, has been enumerated in the table under column G. The division into northwestern, central, and southern Europe, etc., as given in the census table, must, however, be disregarded because it does not correspond with the commonly accepted division of territory for immigration purposes into northwestern Europe as distinguished from southern and eastern Europe.

It will be found, if the foreign stock credited to countries constituting the group of States located in southern and eastern Europe be added together, that the total contribution made by races of this origin to our total population amounts to 12,557,614, or 11.8 per cent. This 11.8 per cent of our population credited to southern and eastern Europe is the figure which we must bear in mind for the purpose of comparing its relation to the total quota alloted to southern and eastern Europe if the census of 1890, or that of 1910, be taken as the basis of computation of quotas in permanent immigration legislation. Under the provisions of the present quota law, based on the census of 1910, approximately 44 per cent of the quota is alloted to southern and eastern Europe, or, let us say, nearly four times the number of immigrants are admissible on this basis as southern and eastern Europeans in the United States to-day are justly entitled to claim-that is, if we take into consideration the relation existing between what that element has contributed to our population and the total number of persons enumerated by the census of 1920. As a matter of fact, Secretary Davis points out in his annual report for the year ending June 30, 1923, that out of 522,919 immigrants, 156,879, or 30 per cent, came from northern and western Europe, and 153,224, or 29.3 per cent, came from southern and eastern Europe; in other words, the admissibles from abroad split an almost exactly a 50-50 basis. On the other hand, if we take the census of 1890 as a basis for the computation of quotas, southern and eastern Europe would receive an allotment of approximately 15 per cent, or above the ratio existing between that element and the total population of the United States, as pointed out above. It must be pointed out that in making this computation no deduction has been made, as might properly be done, for one-half of the total credited by the census to mixed parentage, it being the assumption of the Census Bureau that persons having one parent native born and one foreign born are properly to be classified as foreign stock, and, considering the question in a broad way, I think that this is a fair attribution. The result of such deduction would, of course, lower the percentage to which southern and eastern Europeans might lay claim, thereby making conclusive the argument that southern and eastern Europeans would get under the 1890 census a larger quota than that to which they are logically entitled.

If we turn back now to the table accompanying this analysis of our population and add up the totals in column H assigned to southern and eastern European States, we get a figure of 13,728,355. This 13,728,355 is equivalent to 12.9 per cent of our total population and is comparable with the percentage of 11.8 per cent subject to the following qualifications: In the effort to arrive at a preliminary analysis as soon as possible, the apportionment in the table

to which I have just referred is based on the element of our population subject to quota allowances; that is to say, substantially the white element as distinct from our composite population. It would seem, therefore, that a deduction of maybe 1.4 per cent ought properly to be taken from the percentage 12.9 per cent, reducing this percentage therefore to 11.5 per cent. If this assumption is correct, we reach the same results with a negligible difference by two distinct methods of approaching the problem. Under these circumstances anyone free from foreign attachments and devoid of selfish interest must conclude that the adoption of the 1890 census, as a basis for the computation of quotas renders substantial justice to our unassimilated population, who by noisy clamor are attempting to coerce our President and Congress in behalf of races and people having no stake or care in the welfare of the United States.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hooker is here, and he has to catch a train, and he says that it will only take him three minutes to make his statement.

The CHAIRMAN. We will hear Mr. Hooker.

STATEMENT OF MR. ELON HUNTINGTON HOOKER, NEW YORK CITY.

Mr. HOOKER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I have an address. here which I would like to make to the committee. You have not time to hear it. May I leave it and have it incorporated in the record?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. HOOKER. I would like to say one or two things, Mr. Chairman. I am a business man; I am a manufacturer, engaged in handling both common and skilled labor all the time. I happen to be president of the American Chemical Manufacturers Association at this time. I am also a member of the American Defense Society.

As one of the men who would be most hit if it is a bad thing to exclude southern European immigration, I beg this committee to report the Johnson-Lodge bill, based on the 1890 census, and if you do not report that I hope you will report something that will go further than that.

I just want to add that at the present moment a bill is pending in the Senate and in the House under which General Atterbury, of Pennsylvania, and General White, and myself, are hoping to procure the control of the Muscle Shoals buildings as against the offers made by Henry Ford. You will hear more about that later on. I know all of these men are in favor of the strictest exclusion. I make this statement as a background for speaking of the 1890 census.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. Mr. Hooker, you spoke of the Johnson bill. Have you seen the bill under consideration here in the Senate?

Mr. HOOKER. I am speaking of the original Johnson-Lodge bill. Senator REED of Pennsylvania. Have you seen the bill here under consideration in the Senate?

Mr. HOOKER. I know there have been some modifications.
Senator KING. That adopts the 1910 census.

Mr. HOOKER. The 1910 census? I do not want that, gentlemen. I want the 1890 census, or something with more exclusion.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. We want to get your view in at sentence. The bill before this committee is stricter than the Johnson

bill.

It cuts out all exceptions, and puts everybody in the quota. It has more in it than the Johnson bill, in that respect.

Mr. HOOKER. Yes; I know that. My impression is that the bill as it came out of the committee is more stringent than Mr. Johnson asked it to be. I am willing to stand by it as it is, or was, if you stick to the 1890 census.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. And your reason for sticking to the 1890 census is to get a population that corresponds more nearly to the whole foreign population at the present time; is that not it?

Mr. HOOKER. I think the result that those of us who have given this matter consideration want to attain will be attained by taking the 1890 census, and it would be more fair and just to the alien population that is here now.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. What do you think of the quota system, based on the racial quota as at present here, native born, which includes us, and foreign born?

Mr. HOOKER. I would prefer the 1890 census.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. Have you looked into the measure? Mr. HOOKER. Not thoroughly.

Senator REED of Pennsylvania. You realize that it cuts down the quota more than the 1910 census?

Mr. HOOKER. Yes; I would like to see that done. I will leave this paper, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. It will be inserted in the record. We thank you. (The paper is printed in full, as follows:)

RESTRICTED IMMIGRATION.

I want to say at the outset that I am for restricted immigration. I wish to go even further and state that if legislation in the present Congress is not passed to this effect I am in favor of definitely cutting off all immigration entirely until we can establish some law that will properly restrict and regulate immigration into America.

STANDPOINT OF CITIZENSHIP.

It seems to me that it is time for all American citizens to view this matter from the standpoint of citizenship and to disregard the individual pinch or inconvenience to which we may be put whether we are looking at it from a standpoint of servants in our house or employees for our industry.

AMERICA'S CONTRIBUTION TO THE WORLD.

America has been the target for a great deal of propaganda and criticism and some scolding on the basis of her responsibility to the world. I feel that the greatest contribution America can make to world affairs is to demonstrate that her people can, form a more perfect union," that a mass of humanity can "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility and carry out the other fundamentals mentioned in our Constitution. At this present moment we are only in the midst of this demonstration and the experiment of Government in these United States is not by any means assured.

FOUNDERS OF THIS COUNTRY.

We hear many people say that we are all of us immigrants and that it is the immigrants who made this country great. To such I should like to point out that this country was founded by a small body of men who cut themselves free from Europe because of persecution and thereupon founded a new form of Government. When they did so they were actuated by an entirely different motive than that of the latter day immigration. The originators of this Government had to conquer a wilderness and actually with their brain and brawn to build a Government. In doing that much bloodshed occurred. Their suffering