NATIONAL ORIGINS PROVISION OF IMMIGRATION LAW 157

of the first census (1790), published by the Census Bureau in the
Jocument entitled “A Century of Population Growth,” were subject
 to substantial correction in one respect. It was claimed that
in relying upon the Christian and surnames contained in the census
 of 1790 to determine the proportion of people of English, Scotch,
[rish, or German descent, a certain allowance should be made for
the Anglicization of some of the names which were not in fact
English,
The revised national-origins report (S. Doc. 65) by the committee
 of experts, shows how this problem was dealt with. Says
the report (p. 4):

It was to be expected that whatever error there might be in this classifisation
 would be in the direct.on of an overstatement of the English element in
the population, because that was the dominant element in most parts of the
United States at that period, and for that reason the name changes would
paturally be in the direction of the Anglicization of names of non-lnglish
origin. Moreover, there would be a natural and justifiable tendency on the
part of the class.fiers to assign to the dominant element in the population
111 names not clearly of other origin.
“The investigations carried on by the research experts employed by the
American Council of Learned Societies bore out this expectation, indicating
that the English element as given in the Century of Population Growth was
too large; and on the basis of data which they submitted and of information
derived from other sources your committee came to the conclusion that the
English element as there given should be reduced by a little over 10 per cent
and the amount of the reduction distributed among the other nationalities
represented in the population of the United States in 1790. This revision affects
only that portion of the several quotas which is derived from the 1790 population,
 which we termed ‘the original native stock.” It does not affect that
portion which is derived from immigrant stock coming into this country after
1760."

It is quite apparent from this that the experts, after much conscientious
 work and corroboration of their work by expert assistance
 of the Council of Learned Societies, gave liberal recognition
of the claim above referred to. This resulted in the only changes of
any importance made in the revision report of the national origins
quota board as compared with the original report, namely, changes
affecting the quotas of Great Britain and Ireland and to a less extent
Germany, as shown in the following table:

Nationalorigins
 quotas

SO iain and North Tn
Jreat Britain and North Ireland... o.oo... IIIT
rish Free State. A
i

Revised
fiotirae

%, 908
65, 804 |
17 497

Preliminary

report

23,428
73,039
13. R62

Considerable testimony has been offered during the present hear-‘ngs
 to show that the final national-origins quota awarded to Germany
 is fair and corresponds very closely with the claims as to the
number of persons of German origin in the United States by authorities
 having a high standing with the German element in the United
States. But there is also evidence, not alluded to during these
hearings, that the national-origins quota allotted to the Irish Free
I5RR5— 929.11