WESTERN HEMISPHERE IMMIGRATION 161

have arisen in connection with this problem. Some members of this
sommittee are familiar with the testimony presented before it at
previous hearings. Other members recently assigned to the committee
are probably not so well conversant with the issue. It is difficult, in
the multiplicity of duties of the average member of Congress, to
take time to read and digest great masses of testimony presented
before a congressional committee. . If, however, you gentlemen had
an opportunity of visualizing the actual conditions existing in the
agricultural sections of the Southwest and West, acquainting yourselves
 with all the sidelights which would present themselves in a
survey on the ground, you undoubtedly would be in a better position
to act more intelligently in your decision as to the advisability or
inadvisability of the proposed legislation, and its effect upon agricultural
 labor in general.
Mr. ScaneipEr. Have you seen the McNary resolution introduced
mn the Senate?
Mr. Austin. No; I did not know there had been such a resolution
introduced.
The CrairMaN. Did you not know about that resolution?
Mr. Austin. No; I did not know that. I knew that subject had
been talked of.
The CuairMaN. Do you know anything about the resolution of
the chamber of commerce who have a representative here?
Mr. Austin. No, sir; I do not know anything about that. I know
that we have had no connection with the McNary resolution, if there
is such a resolution.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. As to your thought expressed there about delaying
this legislation before this committee so as to have a comprehensive
survey of all these beautiful remedies that we have had presented in
the last two years before this committee, just what is there, in your
estimation, that anyone could picture to this committee, and explain
to them, in addition to what has been explained with reference to
shis immigration problem?
Mr. AusTiN. My answer to that would be that you have had, you
might say, a deluge of evidence on both sides; that is you have had
statements on one side that the sociological conditions in Los Angeles
were bad, and that the housing conditions in Colorado were bad; and
you have had equally strong evidence on the other side that they were
perfectly good, and the sociological problem presented no serious
trouble; and it seems to me that if the committee would go down and
investigate on the ground as to the conditions, they would be better
acquainted with them. ]
Me. ScENEDER. Do you not think there would be two sides, and
if we went to Los Angeles, and then went to some of those localities
and had a hearing there—— ) .
The CrarrMAN. The experience in an inquiry along the Pacific
coast in 1920 was that the effort to present evidence on both sides
was so heavy, that three sessions a day were necessary; and yet the
members of the committee found time to go to the places where the
poor people lived, and to a man they were amazed. Everywhere
there was the same contention. Men would get offended and say
that they would be insane to talk about stopping the Japanése from
coming in: and a little further back they said it was insane to talk