NATIONAL ORIGINS PROVISION OF IMMIGRATION LAW 91
:akes a long time to work up these institutions. People have got to
get the political habit. Very few countries have got the political
habit. 1 am not going to mention any countries by name, but we
snow we have seen country after country which has gone into a
dictatorship in Kurope. They have not got the habit of governing
themselves. It takes a long pressure of heritage bought by much
blood and much suffering.
I am afraid I am taking too much time, gentlemen of the com-
mittee.
The Caarrmax. Are there any other questions?
Senator Regn. First, I would like to ask Mr. Lewis his reasons for
oreferring the national-origin plan over the 1890 plan?
Mr. Lewis. Now, sir, I would like—I have worked out a little
theory on that—to try to go to an advocate of the 1890 basis and
find out what his attitude is. I would like to ask any man who
says “I favor the 1890 foreign-born basis,” “ Why do you not favor
the 1920 basis? If you are going to get a foreign-born basis, why
do you not get the latest and most up to date?” I can imagine him
saying one of two things. He would either say “ The 1920 foreign-
born basis is not representative of the whole country, because it gives
52 per cent of our population foreign born in i920, where from
southern Europe and southeastern Europe only represent about 16
per cent of our population.”
I have nothing against southeastern Europeans, but I do not see
why they should get three times their share. He wants the national-
origins basis then. If you want to get a more representative basis
than the 1920 basis why do you not go the whole way and get a na-
tional-origins basis, not based on the foreign born only but base it
mn the whole population?
If he talks about the possibility of error in our system, I am frank
to admit that oir system is not 100 per cent accurate. I would be
very foolish to make such a bald claim as that. But it is substantially
accurate, because for the whole population the margin of errors, as
I have shown for two large groups like the Irish—there is practi-
cally none on the Irish. The origins committee gives practically the
same as Shaughnessy, and on the Germans the total difference is only
2,800 in the quota; and if you would allow for the various individual
eroups of other immigrations from other countries than Germany by
(xerman blood, of which Faust speaks, you will reduce that margin
to 700 in the quota.
On the other hand, I would say to the 1890 man, “ Your system is
not accurate. If you talk about our accuracy, you are 100 per cent
off, because on the very figures of Shaughnessy and Faust the Ger-
mans get about 31 per cent upon the 1890 quota basis when they are
antitled to about 16 per cent.”
Senator Reen. They only claim 16.
Mr. Lewis. They only claim 16, practically, under this book; they
laim about 17 per cent under the claims of Mr. Faust.
Senator King. What was that, Mr. Lewis? They claim 17 per
cent of the entire population?
Mr. Lewis. The only dispute can be on the 1790 population—the
back check of 1790 population does not change from 1909 to 1928.
Senator King. I was wondering whether vou meant based on the
population away back.
