WESTERN HEMISPHERE IMMIGRATION 251

Mr. Husuing. I should like to insert the facts as brought out by
the University of California.
Mr. Moore. That is all right about the California people.
Mr. Box. I do not think that conflict between those gentlemen is
serious. I do not think either of these gentlemen said he appeared
as their representative.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH W. MARTIN, JR.,, A REPRESENTA.
TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. Martin. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, for 300 years there
has been no legal immigration barrier between the United States and
Canada. Subjects of these two countries have been allowed to come
and go without restraint. The result has been that the United
States has gained from our neighbor in the North many thousands of
splendid men and women, who have been of great help in the upbuilding
 of the country. New England has particularly benefited.
Their labor has been very essential in the development of our industries.
 They have been thrifty and industrious. They have been
home builders and have taken a full part in the development of the
community life.
There is no substantial reason for the limiting of the Canadians
coming to the United States. The ebb and flow of business in this
country takes care of that. When business is booming and employment
 easy to obtain, they come in large numbers, and when business
lags, this immigration falls off.
The figures do not sustain any claim of adverse effect in the
Canadian immigration of the past year. The total number of men
and women of Canadian birth admitted to the United States as
permanent residents in 1929 was 64,440 and the distribution of their
racial antecedents was as follows: English, 20,123; French, 13,206;
Scotch, 10,772; Irish, 9,142; Germans. 3.443: Scandinavians, 1,721;
and Hebrew, 1,629.
These immigrants were distributed to the several States briefly
as follows: Michigan, 15,976; New York, 11,980; Massachusetts,
10,242; California, 3,774; Washington, 3,052; Illinois, 2,688; Maine,
2,281; Vermont, 1,645; New Hampshire, 1.354; Ohio, 1,270: New
Jersey, 1,080; Pennsylvania, 1,077.
The number who left the United States to take up their permanent
residences in Canada was 16,889, which left a net gain of 47,551.
The committee proposes to admit 50,000 from Canada. Obviously,
the bill is not a restrictive measure unless it is in a year when business
is booming and there is an imperative need for additional labor.
Why, then, through unnecessary legislation, give affront to a
country with whom we have so much in common and which has our
standards of living? This legislation is unwise because it may give
offense to a country which is our best customer. It must not be
forgotten that last year Canada bought American goods to the value
of $868,057,000, an increase of more than $150,000,000 mn a single
year. These purchases gave employment to many thousands of
Americans and were a material factor in our industrial activity.
The legislation, furthermore, would entail a great expense and would
be an annavance and imeconvenience to both American and Canadian