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 Edward R. lewis, chairman executive committee, Immigration Restriction Legislation, Chicago, Ill.

Collection:: Economics Books

78 NATIONAL ORIGINS PROVISION OF IMMIGRATION LAW the way the 3,172,000 that were divided. That is really where the whole dispute has come, the size of the 1790 stock. The origins committee finds that the 1790 stock—they do not give these figures in this approximate, but they do give in document No. 65 the total population in 1920, derived from the 1790 stock, which is 41,285,570, and then they give the amount for each country. So to arrive at what the strength was in 1790 I simply divide those totals in this column, column 2 of page 11, document 635, by 13, and that would give us the strength in 1917 to those derived from Eng- land, Scotland, Wales, and North Ireland as 1,439,915; and the Irish Free State, 140,076; to Germany, 231,360; to the Netherlands. 104.519; and those are the largest groups right there. The Cuamrmaxn. Pardon me. Mr, Lewrs. Yes, sir. The Cuamman. First, if T am following you, and if I am not you will correct me, please; you are figuring that back from the 1920 census to indicate the appropriate number of each of the racial groups in 1790; is that correct ? Mr. Lewrs. IT am figuring back, sir, from the origin committee, Mr. Hill’s report here, where he gives those derived from the original native stock in column 2. The Crairman. I understand. Mr. Lewrs. And that is part of the 1920 census. The Crmarman. That is the conclusion from the 1920 census? Mr, Lewis. Yes, sir. Senator Reep.. It is not stated in the 1920 census. Mr. Lewis. No; it is not stated in the 1920 census. The Cramyan. But it is derived from the 1920 census? My. Lewrs. Oh, yes; the whole origin figures are. The Cuamrman. You are reaching the conclusion as to the racial groups in 1790 by dividing by 13. Mr. Lewrs. The 1790 population was 3,172,000, I believe, and the origin committee finds that the population in 1920 derived from that vas 41,288,570. The Cuamrman. Then, I am correct, am 1 not, in my estimation ? You take the result of the 1920 census. Am I wrong? Senator Reep. Yes, sir. The Cramrman. Let us get it right. That is all T am seeking to do. Mr. Lewis. I am starting off, Mr. Chairman, with the origins com- mittee’s figures, the 1790 population, and I was going to compare those with the estimates of some representative historians of several racial groups in this country. Now, then, to start off with, the origins committee—— Mr. Rern. Let me interrupt vou, to make it clearer? Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir. Senator Reep. In the 1920 census the population of the United States was shown to be about 105,000,000, was it not? Mr. Lewts. Yes; white, colored, and all that. Mr. Rep. The origins committees quota board finds that 41,000,000 of those were descended from what is known as colonial stocks: and they state that the factor of increase has been 137 Mr. Lewis. Yes, sir—they do not state that, but it is. Mr. Ree. It follows necessarily ? Mr. Lewis. It is the mathematics of it: that is all.

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