100 NATIONAL ORIGINS PROVISION OF IMMIGRATION LAW
other day, and was rather astounded; and put side by side with
the other one he wrote in 1927, it is inexplicable. Co
The Cmatrman. What did he write in 1927, if you have it in
mind ? ]
Mr. Mowrrz. I have the article. }
The CHARMAN. I do not care for the article.
Mr. Mowirz. Here is just an exerpt from it, Senator: Mr. Ray
L. Garis, Professor of Economics at Vanderbilt University, in an
article on the subject of immigration in the Saturday Evening Post
of October 10, 1926—that is when he wrote—had this to say:
As one critic put it, “Against this iniquitous ‘conspiracy of statistics it
behooves all good Americans to rise in righteous wrath.” Naturally this ig
z0ing to lead to serious charges of discrimination,
The I quote him still further. [Reading :]
The national origins plan means, therefore, that we must abandon practical
methods and adopt something which we do not know anything or at best very
little about.
That there are no figures in existence which show completely the national
origins of the population of the United States.
Those are the words of Professor Garis,
Senator Reep. That was written before the report of the quota
board, was it?
Mr. Mowrrz. Yes, sir; before the report of the quota board; and
according to the letter which accompanied that report, I doubt
whether that would change his opinion. You might say the same,
for instance, of men who have been in the midst of this thing, and
have to deal with it every day. Our Commissioner of Immigration,
Mr. Hull, who said in 1925. [Reading :]
The bureau feels that the present method of ascertaining the quotas is far
more satisfactory than the proposed determination by national origin, that it
has the advantage of simplicity and certainty.
It is of the opinion that the proposed change will lead to great confusion
and result in complexities, and accordingly it is recommended that the perti-
nent portions of section 11, providing for this revision of the quotas as they
aow stand, be rescinded.
Mr. Curran, Commissioner of Immigration at Ellis Island, said:
The 1890 measure is the soundest, the healthiest, the fairest, and the best.
Senator Reep. When was that?
Mr. Mowrrz. That was said March 5, 1924.
Senator Reep. That was before the national origins was suggested.
Mr. Mowrrz. I think it was on the question; it must have been on
the question.
Senator Rep. Was not that the time we were confronted with a
choice between 1920, 1910, and 1890¢ I think you will find that
the national Cit had not been suggested. }
Mr. Mowrrz. That may be so, Senator. Now, then, there is no
need of my taking up your time beyond quoting the New York
Herald-Tribune. (Reading:)
The present quota limitations, admitting 2 per cent of the foreign born from
each country residing in the United States in 1890 has proved satisfactory. It
has the solid census basis, and it is believed to correspond nearly with the
racial compositions of the American people. The national origins theory car-
ries out the priniciple to an ideal degree, but if the theory presents practical
difficulties for lack of data, it can be put on the shelf without damage.
