NATIONAL ORIGINS PROVISION OF IMMIGRATION LAW 30
the organization on record at this time by stating that we have
studied the laws of immigration on both sides, and that we find that
the 1924 law, with the national-origins provision. is the one we wish
to adopt and have adopted.
Almost every State 1 have been in has signed this document unani-
mously, and also in our national organizations when they met last
year they were unanimously adopted.
One of our first objects of the organization is the restriction of
immigration to our country; consequently we feel that this 1924 act
is the only one with which we could stand.
I want to state before I sit down that I represent over 300,000
members in the United States. Thank you.
Senator Reep. Mr. Chairman, I have a letter here from Mr.
Charles Steuart Davison, of New York, which he asks may be placed
in the record. Have you any objection to that?
The CrairMaN. None at all, sir.
(The letter referred to is as follows:)
New York, February 3, 1929.
Hon. Davip A. REED,
United States Senate, Washington, D. C.
Dear SENATOR REED: I am wiring you by night letter as follows:
“Notice of meefing Senate Immigration Committee too short to perhic my
personal attendance. Please put upon the record my request to you by wire
of January 27 for representation in the immigration quotas which is at present
denied me. * Every citizen is entitled to representation in the quotas under any
application of the principle of fair play.” }
My night letter to you of January 27 read as follows:
“Have wired chairman Immigration Committee as follows: ‘ Your reputa-
tion for. a belief in the American principle of fair play for all and special
privilege for none encourages me to believe that vou will not permit any fur-
ther deprivation of the American born of their just proportion in the immigra-
tion quotas by another postponement of the going into effect of the national
origins provision. I ask through you for my share of representation in the
immigration quotas which at present is withheld from me. Respectfully
request you urge this aspect of the matter upon the whole committee.”
It appears to me that there is a plain proposition here which denuded of
all mystery and of all confusion, is as follows:
(1) The present quotas ave based on a calculation, admittedly more or less
erroneous, derived from the census of 1890.
(2) It is proposed that a calculation more or less erroneous based upon
the census of 1790 shall be substituted therefor.
(3) It is openly admitted that it is impossible to attain to absolute ac-
curacy as to racial derivation present here at the respective times from the
information given in either of the two censuses.
(4) Tt seems to be a consensus of opinion of those qualified to judge that the
approximation to accuracy is greater as to the census of 1790 than as to the
census of 1890—that the percentage of probable error is less as to the earlier
census, and indeed common sense would indicate the probability of this being
rue.
(5) It is openly. admittedithat quotas based upon the census of 1890 do not
give fair representation to those races who were here in 1790,
(6) Ouly one deduction can be made from the above. That deduction is that
the present quotas are unfair.
(7) The constant effort of Congress toward the carrving on of this Republic
by legislative enactments is to produce equality of opportunity which is sim-
plified in the colloquial phrase ‘fair play.”
(8) Present immigration quotas constitute special privilege for certain races.
(9) This is contrary to American principles. -
I shall be very glad if you have opportunity %o to do, if you will place this
letter as well as my two telegrams upon the records of the hearings now about.
being held by the Senate Committee on Immigration,
Yours very respectfully,
CHARLES STEWART DAVISON.
