2
»

WESTERN HEMISPHERE IMMIGRATION

various countries in this hemisphere for the purpose of placing quotas
thereon. I think it is a mistake to change any existing quotas. For
instance, if Jamaica and British Guiana get their quofas from Great
Britain it would be unwise in my opinion to place them under this
quota system. Will you please amplify that.
Colonel Martin. That is the point at which I was about to start.
The map of the world on the wall behind the chairman is colored in
black, yellow, orange, green, and buff. Its colors represent the
existing situation under the immigration act of 1924 and previous
legislation still in force. We are restricting immigration from the
barred zone, which is barred in red, and from the countries shown in
yellow and orange, which are China and Japan. The continents,
countries, and islands shown in green—Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia,
the East Indies, and so forth—are under the quotas of the immigration
act of 1924. The United States and her possessions are colored black
on this map to bring out the American possessions from which and to
which people from other countries often desire to migrate.
Mr. Johnson’s and Judge Box’s bills, H. R. 8530 and H. R. 8523,
start out with legislation affecting immigration to the United States
from the areas in North America and South America, which are
not brightly colored on that map, but are in buff, including Canada,
Newfoundland, Mexico, Central and South America, and the West
Indies. The exceptions in that area are small but important, namely,
(1) Greenland, which is part of North America, under the quota of
Denmark; (2) two small islands here [indicating St. Pierre and Miquelon],
 which are tied to the quota of France; (3) British Honduras, on
the mainland of North America; (4) British, French, and Dutch
Guiana, on the mainland of South America; (5) islands in the West
Indies that belong to England, like Jamaica, to France, like Martinique,
 to the Netherlands, like Curacao. All these and similar
islands are tied to the quota system of the immigration act of 1924, as
are the Falkland Islands, British, off the east coast of Argentina.
As I read the Johnson bill it leaves that system in full effect,
section 2 providing for the repeal of subsection (¢) of section 4 of the
immigration act of 1924, merely contemplates that nonquota immigrants
 from independent countries of North America, like Mexico,
Cuba, and so on, and from a British dominion, like Canada, are to
enter, according to this bill, into a new status, namely a quota status.
Section 3 of H. R. 8530 has to do with section 11 of the immigration
act of 1924 and provides further for approaching the same end without
 in any way modifying the situation, which is that if this bill
passes, unamended, its author intended that an immigrant coming
from Jamaica should be charged to the quota of Great Britain and
northern Ireland; and so on with the rest.
The geography of this bill is chiefly in section 4. In that section,
subsection (d) is one which will need, in my judgment, consideration
and modification of phraseology. I am speaking of the Johnson bill.
Section 4, subsection (d) provides that “the West Indies, including
all islands so characterized for statistical purposes in the annual report
of the Commissioner General of Immigration of 1929” is to be an
immigration unit. The “West Indies’’ in geography and the “West
[ndies” in this bill turn out to be different things. As I understand
the situation, in the annual report of the Commissioner General of
[mmigration for 1929, the table on page 181, No. 80, is what is referred
50 In the last clause of subsection (d) of section 4 of House bill