NATIONAL ORIGINS PROVISION OF IMMIGRATION LAW MONDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1929 Ux1rep STATES SENATE, CoMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, Washington, D. C. The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10.30 o’clock a. m., in the room of the Committee on Military Affairs. Capitol, Senator Hiram W. Johnson presiding. Present: Senators Johnson (chairman), Keyes, Reed, Nye, Gould, King, Harris, Copeland, Blease, and Stephens. Present also: Representatives Johnson (chairman of ‘the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House of Representatives) and Jenkins. (The committee thereupon proceeded to the consideration of S. J. Res. 192. which is here printed in full as follows:) [S. J. Res. 192, Seventieth Congress, second session] JOINT RESOLUTION To amend subdivisions (b) and (e) of section 11 of the immigration act of 1824, as amended Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That subdivisions (b) and (e) of section 11 of the immigration act of 1924, as amended, are amended by striking out the figures “1928” and inserting in lieu thereof the figures “1930.” The CmammaN. Gentlemen, there is a quorum of the committee present and the committee will please come to order. We have met this morning to hear certain testimony of representatives of various departments in reference to the national-origing provision of the immigration law, the particular matter pending before us being the resolution of Senator Nye postponing the proclamation of the Président for one year. I will call Secretary Carr, of the State Department. STATEMENT OF HON. WILBUR J. CARR, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF STATE The CaamrMAN. Mr. Carr, we have under consideration the resolution of Senator Nye postponing for one year the proclamation of the President, to be made in accordance with the immigration law relating to the national-origins provision. The committee is anxious to be informed in regard to the view of your department respecting that provision and would welcome any suggestions you have to make in respect to the pending legislation or the provision itself. Would you proceed, therefore, in your own fashion and tell us your views and the views of the Department of State?