WESTERN HEMISPHERE IMMIGRATION 321

Aliens in the United States: There are a large number of aliens in the United
States. Many of them undoubtedly will in time become citizens, and the residence
 here of others will prove beneficial alike to themselves and to our country.
It is inevitable, however, that many questions will arise respecting individual
aliens who are within the country, and it is important that lezal entry and presence
may be clearly established.
To this end we support the present policy of issuing certificates of arrival to
immigrants who have legally entered the country since June 30, 1924, and we
advocate the issuance of certiffcates of arrival to those aliens who entered the
country before July 1, 1924, and who can present satisfactory evidence that they
are not subject to deportation. We oppose, however, any project for the compulsory
 registration of all aliens in the United States, believing that such a system
would be accompanied by undue hardships for large numbers of law-abiding aliens
who are leading useful lives, would entail large expenditures for the Federal
Government, and would be of doubtful success for its chief purpose, of establishing
 the facts as to aliens who may be offenders against our laws. (Resolution.
fourteenth annual meeting, 1926.)
Immigration: To a number of situations arising under the immigration law
there should be immedite attention. We believe that imposition of the head tax
upon travelers and tourists causes hardships which are unnecessary, and advocate
amendment of the law to permit entrance into the United States of travelers and
tourists who remain for no more than 60 days without the payment of this-tax.
Humanitarian considerations cause us to urge that children of American citizens,
 when the children are between 18 and 21 years of age; the parents of American
 citizens, when the parents are over 55 years of age, and widowed mothers of
American citizens, regardless of the age of such mothers, should be admitted to the
United States regardless of the quota.
We think it inappropriate to extend the principle of the quota to Mexico, and
we believe that, for the proper administration of the immigration law, immigration
visas should he treated as separate and distinct from passport visas in the discussions
 which may occur with foreign governments respecting passport visas.
‘Resolution, fifteenth annual meeting, 1927.)
Immigration: The provisions of the immigration law of 1924 which apply the
quota limit system to the countries of Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australasia on the
1890 Census basis of foreign born, have been in operation now for nearly five
years. These provisions have become an accepted part of our national policy.
Our industrial and sociological life, our citizens, and our foreign-born residents, as
well as foreigners abroad who are contemplating coming to this country for permaaent
 residence, have largely adjusted themselves to this policy.
During this period the so-called national origins provision of the 1924 immigration
 law, which originally was intended to replace on July 1, 1927, the quota limit
system based on the 1890 census, referred to above, has not been in operation.
This provision purposes to limit immigration from Old World countries to about
150,000, as compared with the 164,667 at present admissible, and to allow an
annual quota to any nationaiity equal to a number which hears the same ratio to
150,000 as the number of people living here in 1920 having that nationality bears
to the total number of our inhabitants. This provision has been twice postponed
by Congress in the face of problems, as yet unsolved, connected with the development
 of a satisfactory plan for the accurate determination of the racial content
of the country. -
It would br a mistake, in our opinion, to disrupt the adjustments which have
been made under the actual operation of the law to date, and by changing the
basis of present quotas unnecessarily to stir up racial antagonisms. We, therefore,
 recommend the repeal of the national origins provision of the immigration
law of 1924, and urge the continuance of the quota limit system now in operation
based upon 2 per cent of foreign born living here in 1890. (Resolution, seventeenth
 annual meeting, 1929.)
Mr. Box. I want to say, in connection, with what was said the
other day with regard to what the legislature of California had done
in nearly unanimously asking for the passage of this Mexican restriction
 bill. It was said at that time that was right at the end of the
session, and therefore, they did not know what they were doing, or
something of the kind. }
The resolution which has already been before the committee that
was passed bv the Arizona Legislature was Resolution 1 and was