National origins provision of immigration law

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1796380105

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-196168

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: National origins provision of immigration law

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1929

Scope:: III, 171 S

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Statement of John B. Trevor, National Immigration Restriction Conference, New York City

Collection:: Economics Books

NATIONAL ORIGINS PROVISION OF IMMIGRATION LAW 51 claimed by the President. If you will permit me, without reading too much nto the record, I have here some tables from which I will quote one or two figures. This is a comparative statement of esti- mated quotas, 2 per cent of the census of 1890, and the present quotas. When you gentlemen passed the act of 1924, it was the impression of Congress that the German quota would be 45,229; when the quotas were proclaimed it was 51,227, a rise of 13.2 per cent, as a result of the estimates which I have already alluded to. Great Britain and Ireland at that time were credited with a quota of 41,772 and the actual quota accorded was 84,007, a decrease of 22.8 per cent. Senator Rep. In other words, at the present moment Great Britain and northern Ireland have about 25 per cent less than Congress expected they would have when they passed the law? Mr. Trevor. Precisely so, in spite of the fact that Congress had reason to expect—I am quoting the statistics from Report No. 350 of the House, which was the latest publication of statistics available at that time—and in spite of that fact that approximately equal quotas were accorded Great Britain, Germany, and northern Ireland, you will recall, Senator, that a bitter attack was made by many restrictionists in the Senate on the fact that the quota, even for temporary purposes, was substantially larger to a country with which we had recently been at war than was given to countries with which we were allied. I could go on indefinitely. I could point out, for instance, that the Irish Free State was accredited with a quota of 20,886 in 1924, and the present quota is 28,567, an increase of 36.7 per cent. Now, some of the Irish societies, as you know, are very vigorous in their opposition to the national-origins provision, but I wonder what their attitude would have been if their quota on the 1890 basis had been reduced 36.7 per cent? In other words, this table serves, if you care to have me introduce it in the record, to show the divergencies, and you will see that the thing was juggled up and down, not in any way reflecting on the census authorities in so doing, because Doctor Hill and, I think, Mr. Hunt—I do not recall positively the name of the gentleman who had charge at that time of the population division, told the House committee that any census date—the 1910 census base was based on estimates and that the 1890 census base must be based on estimates likewise. The CrairManN. Who made the original estimates that you refer to? Mr. Trevor. The census authorities, I believe. They were printed by the congressional committees and obtained from the census au- thorities. The CrmamrmaN. And those were incorporated, as I understood you, in the House committee’s report ¢ Mr. Trevor. Yes, sir; Report No. 850, for, that session. The Cramrman. Can you state whether or not those estimates were made by Doctor Hill? Mr. Trevor. It is my recollection, Senator—I am speaking strictly from recollection—that about January 5 or 15, 1924, Doctor Hill and Mr. Hunt—if you have the record here you can verify it in a mo- ment-—appeared before the House committee and explained to them

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: National origins provision of immigration law

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation