IF YOU HAVE PROBLEMS READING THIS DOCUMENT, … · spite of the large increase in its inspections work. The size of this problem can be sug-gested perhaps by the experience of our

IF YOU HAVE PROBLEMS READING THIS DOCUMENT, PLEASE CONTACT THE USCIS HISTORY LIBRARY AT [email protected].

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

IMMIGRATION t7n /

NAT U R A LI Z AT 10 N S E R V I C E

0; ////77 2tJ/duj

DECEMBER 1947

Vol. V No. 6

In This Issue PAGE

The Increase in Air Travel ----------------------------- ------------------ 67

Supreme Court Decides on Question of "Entry .............. 68

A. Century of Chinese Immigration: A Brief Review 69

The Crystal City Internment Camp- --------------------------------- 75

Aliens Naturalized by Country of Former Allegiance: Years Ended June 30, 1938 to 1947 ------------------------78

News of the Month --- ------------------------------------------------------- --79

Reader's Guide --------------------------------------------------------------------80

WATSON B. MILLER - Commissioner of immigration and Naturalization

JERRE MANGIONE Editor, Monthly Review

On matters pertaining to subscriptions, please write Monthly Review, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. Other correspondence, including copies of pub-lications reprinting material contained here-in, should be sent to the Franklin Trust Build-ing, Philadelphia 2, Pa.

Monthly Review

The Increase in Air Travel By Commissioner Miller

As was indicated in the October issue of Monthly Review, travel by aircraft to and from the United States has in-

creased tremendously duriig the pastyear. Our records show that in 1941 there were 99,988 persons who arrived or departed by air; in the fiscal year of 1947 this total jumped to 873,292. Over half of all the citizens and aliens who ar-rived or departed traveled by air.

Although this sudden development in air travel was more or less expected, it has created a number of important problems for the Im-migration and Naturalization Service since, under the law, all persons arriving in the United States must be examined by its in-spectors to determine whether or not they are qualified for admission. The Service must carry out this responsibility with the same care and diligence it has always tried to exercise, in spite of the large increase in its inspections work. The size of this problem can be sug-gested perhaps by the experience of our Bos-ton District Office, which has the responsibility of examining pasengers arriving at Logan Field. In 1945 planes were arriving there at the rate of 124 per year. Now, less than two years later, planes are arriving at the rate of 2,600 per year. Fortunately, there has been some decrease in ocean travel and in naturali-zation work, so that by ingenious juggling of personnel and the addition of some sixty pri-mary inspectors we have been able to meet the problem fairly quickly and efficiently.

The Service is quite aware of the fact that air travel, being a fast mode of transportation, necessarily means a quickening of tempo in our inspection operations. With this in mind, we are doing everything possible to cut down de-lays without impairing the thoroughness of in-spections. A number of actions in these direc-tions have already been taken. Early in the year a shortened manifest form was put into use, which combines both immigration with customs information, eliminating the need of

making up two separate lists of data. Another innovation designed to save time is to inspect airline passengers arriving from foreign con-tiguous territory in the same way that passen-gerg of other vehicles crossing the borders have been inspected under existing laws. We have recently simplified the inspection procedure fur-ther by the general use of an immigration form (1-94) which may be filled out by the passen-ger at the time he purchases his ticket. This, of course, means a substantial saving of time for both our inspectors and the air passengers.

An amendment to the Air Commerce Regu-lations which went into effect November 7 pro-vides that persons traveling by air from Hawaii to the mainland will receive their immigration inspection in Hawaii before proceeding to their• destination. This final determination of admis-sibility to the United States will apply to both passengers and crew members of airplanes. In the past passengers in-bound from foreign countries have had to undergo two immigra-tion examinations—one upon arrival at Hono-lulu and a second at Los Angeles or San Fran-cisco. The new procedure will undoubtedly speed up traffic and prove advantageous to both the airplane companies and the traveler. In workitig out these new procedures helpful sug-gestions have been offered by the airlines them-selves.

An important factor that should be borne in mind is that our basic immigration laws were enacted before air travel on a large scale came into existence and therefore do not deal with the new problems created by• this addi-tional and flexible mode of travel. Nonetheless, it is believed that to date the Service has adapted itself to those problems in a manner that is generally satisfactory to all concerned. How long the Service can, without additional personnel, keep abreast with the regular duties assigned to it by law and the absorption of new work created by the increase of air travel is for the present a matter of speculation.

67

Monthly Review

Supreme Court Decides on Question of "Entry"

I N 1942 a resident alien by the name of Jose Audon Salazar Delgadillo shipped on an American merchant vessel bound from Los

Angeles, California to New York City via the Panama Canal. He testified in the Immigration hearing that he had been granted shore leave at Panama City, Panama. Subsequently. the ship was torpedoed and in consequence Delga-dillo was landed in Cuba and was thereafter brought back to the United States through Miami, Florida. The question arose as to whether his arrival at Miami constituted an "entry" into the United States within the meaning of Section 19(a) of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917 (8 U. S. C. 155(a)). The question was of importance since if ar-rival at Miami constituted an "entry," the alien was subject to deportation as one who had committed a crime of robbery subsequent to entry for which he had been sentenced from one year to life imprisonment.

The United States District Court, Southern District of California, Central Division, had granted a writ of habeas corpus and ordered petitioner discharged. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed (159 F. (2d) 130), re-ferring only to the Cuban landing, and stating that the question for determination was: Was the arrival of appellee at Miami, Florida, in July 1942, after landing in Cuba, an "entry" within the statute cited, supra? The Circuit Court found that it was. In doing so it was following, among other cases, its prior deci-sion in Taguchi v. Carr, 62 F. (2d) 307, where-in it was held that a fisherman-alien, ship-wrecked and ordered by his captain to land on an island of Mexico, upon subsequently re-turning to the United States made an entry within the statute.

On November 10, 1947 the Supreme Court handed down an opinion reversing the Ninth Circuit. It referred only to the landing in Cuba, holding that the petitioner's passage from Havana, Cuba, to Miami, Florida, on July 19, 1942 did not satisfy the statutory require-ments for deportation. The Supreme Court also stated-that other grounds sought to be advanced in support of the deportation order were not open on the record. It is assumed this statement had reference to the argument based upon the landing in Panama. The Court construed its previous decisions in United States ex rel Claussen v. Day, 279 U. S. 398, United States ex rel Stapf v. Corsi, 286 U. S. 129, and United States ex rel Volpe v. Smith, 289 U. S. 422, as cases "where the alien plainly

expected or planned to enter a foreign port or place," whereas Delgadillo "was catapulted into the ocean, rescued, and taken to Cuba. He had no part in selecting the foreign port as his destination. His itinerary was forced on him by wholly fortuitous circumstances."

Conflicts on the question involved have ex-isted between some Circuits. The Sixth Cir-cuit held in Zurbrick v. Borg, (47 F. (2d) 690), that the alien who, in going from New York City to Detroit, Michigan, after leaving Buf-falo, passed through a portion of Canada be-fore reaching Detroit, made an "entry" within the meaning of Section 14 of the Immigration Act of 1924 (8 U. S. C. 214) on his arrival at Detroit. That decision was considered by the First Circuit in 1935 in the case of Ward v. DeBarros, 75 Fed. (2d) 34, wherein that Court said:

The only difference between that case and this one-is that there it did not appear whether the alien (Borg) knew or did not know he was entering foreign terri-tory; while here the petitioner testified, without con-tradiction, that he did not know. Does this alter the conclusion reached?

***If what the supposed traveler did, in either case, is to be controlled by what he knowingly intended to do, he might not be said to have left the country. But, if the question depends upon what he in fact did, there can be little doubt but that he left the country. We think the petitioner left the country and was arriving from a foreign place when he .reached Calexico, and made a re-entry. Sec. 14, Act of 1924 (8 U. S. C. A. 214). (Italics supplied.)

The stated issue of what the alien in fact did, as distinguished from what he intended to do, came up for consideration by the Second Circuit in the case of Di Pasquale v. Karnuth et al, 158 F. 2d. 878, decided January 11, 1947, wherein that Court held that since Di Pasquale traveled between Buffalo and Detroit on a rail-road which, unknown to him, passed through Canada while he was asleep, and when he was unaware that he had left or returned to, the United States, his return did not constitute an entry under Section 19 of the Immigration Act of 1917. In the Di Pasquale case the Court said that "With deference, we cannot follow Ward v. DeBarros; we think that the intent of the carrier, unknown to the alien, to carry him across a border and back again, upon a route whose termini are within the United States, should nt be imputed to him."

The holding in the Di Pasquale case is sig-

*Tn the United States Supreme Court, on Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Jose Audon Salazar Delgadillo, Peti-tioner, v. William A. Carmichael, District Director, Los Angeles, California. Decided November 10, 1947.

68

Supreme Court Decides on Question of "Entry"

Monthly Review

nificant, since the Supreme Court, in the Del-gadillo case, granted certiorari because of a seeming conflict between the two cases in the Second and Ninth Circuits, respectively. Fur-thermore, the Supreme Court in its opinion in the Delgadillo case discusses the Di Pasquale case approvingly, by implication at least, al-though distinguishing the Delgadillo case as one where the alien "chqe to return to this

country, knowing he was in a foreign place." Nevertheless the Supreme Court said that "the exigencies of war, not his voluntary act, put him (Delgadillo) on a foreign soil," and pointed out by footnote that if his intercoastal voyage had continued without interruption, it is clear that he would not have made an "entry" when he landed at its termination, citing United States ex rel Claussen v. Day, supra., p. 401.

A Century of Chinese Immigration: A Brief Review

By Timothy J. Molloy

CHINA'S policy of isolating herself from the Western nations long prevented. many Chinese from venturing abroad.

Even visitors to the United States from China were few and far between. 1 The Opium War of 1840 finally broke down the barriers be-tween China and the Western world. News of the discovery of gold in California' stirred the imagination of adventurous Chinese and soon small numbers of Cantonese' were embarking for the "Golden Hills." To this day, "Gim •San" (Golden Hills) is a Chinese name for the United States.

By 1852 there were about 25,000 Chinese in the United States, practically all of them in California. The welcome with which they had been greeted at first, gradually gave way to a feeling of antagonism as the gold boom subsided. In 1855 the California legislature imposed a head tax on every Chinese immi-grant. Within the next few years communities in the West took various measures, legal and otherwise, directed against the Chinese. Never-theless, by 1862, California alone had over 50,000 Chinese—about half of them engaged in mining and the rest in trade (chiefly among themselves), farm work, fishing, common labor, domestic service and factory work. In that year the first Federal law directed against the Chinese was passed—the Act of February 19, 1862. It provided for punishment of cer-tain persons engaged in the transportation and sale or transfer of subjects of China, Japan or any other oriental country known as "coolies," as well as of persons who contracted to supply such labor. The Act also imposed upon consuls of the United States abroad the duty of refusing documents to masters of yes-

sels carrying immigrants who had entered into contracts or agreements for service within the United States for lewd and immoral purposes.

The anti-Chinese agitation which had arisen in the early fifties subsided somewhat during the Civil War and in the beginning of the Re-construction Period. In an effort to regain China's good will, the Burlingame Treaty of 1868 was concluded, granting Chinese free access to the United States. As a result, Chi-nese immigrants resumed coming to the United States in substantial numbers;' many of them joining their compatriots in the construction of railroads in the.West.

With widespread unemployment, financial panics, and general unrest in the early seven-ties, anti-Chinese sentiment became stronger than ever. This was due in part to agitation by organized labor and patriotic societies. The President, in 1874, called the attention of Con-gress to the problem of Chinese immigration and stressed the fact that Chinese immigrants,

Mr. Molloy is a Research Analyst in the Division of Research and Education, Immigration and Naturaliza-tion Service.

1 The Chinese first appeared In the Immigration statistics of the United States in 1820 when one Chinese person was admitted. From then Until 1880 less than 50 ChInese are shown In available arrival records.

2 California, It will be recalled, did not become part of the United States Until ceded to this country by Mexico In 1848, the year of the gold discovery.

The word • 'Cantonese' • is an Anglicizatlon of • 'Kwongtungese." The province of Kwongtung Is known to Westerners by that name, but the capital city of the province bearing the same name Is known as ' Canton." Virtually all immigration to the United States from China has been from Kwongtung Province—from a relatively small area consisting of the so-called "Four Districts" ("See Yip") and "Three Districts" ("Sam Yup"), and a few adjoining districts, out of the 94 districts Into which the province Is divided.

4 12 Stat. 340. 16 Stat. 739, 1 Malloy, Treaties 234.

641,397 came In from 1851 to 1860; 64,301 from 1861 to 1870; and 123,201 from 1871 to 1880. 39,579 in 1882 Is the largest number that came in a single year.

69


Monthly Review

men and women, were coming to this country involuntarily under contracts with head men who owned them absolutely. 7 In 1876, both political parties had anti-Chinese planks in their platforms. 8

A new treaty with China was concluded on November 17, 1880,' conceding to the United States Government the right to regulate, limit or suspend the arrival or residence of Chinese laborers. This treaty stipulated that Chinese subjects proceeding to the United States as teachers, students, merchants, or from curios-ity, "together with their body and household servants," as well as resident Chinese laborers, be "allowed to go and to come of their own free will and accord." The treaty was imple-mented by the Act of May 6, 1882. That Act, as amended,'° and the Act of September 13, 1888, as amended, 11 became the two basic acts governing the admission and exclusion 12 of Chinese aliens; they remained in effect until the Act of December 17, 194312 repealed all of the Chinese Exclusion Laws.

Enactment and Repeal of Chinese Exclusion Laws

The Act of May 6, 1882,14 suspended the immigration of Chinese laborers, specified the classes of Chinese persons entitled to enter the United States, declared that no Federal or State Court should admit Chinese to United States citizenship, and provided for the depor-tation, in judicial proceedings, of Chinese per-sons found to be unlawfully in the United States.

One of the most far reaching parts of the 1882 Act (as amended and added to by the Act of July 5, 1884) ,w was Section 6. That section provided that every Chinese, other than a laborer, who might be entitled by the Treaty of 1880 to proceed to the United States and who was about to do so must obtain the permission of and be legally identified by a certificate issued by the Chinese Government, or such other foreign government of which he was at the time a subject. The document so required came to be known as a "Section Six Certificate." The law required that the Certificate be in the English language and state the individual's family and tribal name in full, any title or official rank he might pos-sess, age, height, physical peculiarities, former and present occupation or profession and place of residence. The certificate also had to state that the holder had received the permission of his government and was entitled to enter the United States.

If the applicant was a merchant, the law required that the Section Six Certificate state the nature, character and estimated value of

his business prior to and at the time of appli-cation. Hucksters, peddlers and those who en-gaged in taking, drying, or otherwise preserv-ing shell or other fish for home consumption or exportation, were excluded from the "mer-chant" class. 6

In the case of a Chinese seeking a Section Six Certificate for the purpose of traveling for curiosity, the law required that the cer-tificate show whether the applicant intended to pass through or travel within the United States, and to state his financial standing in the country from which the certificate was sought.

A Section Six Certificate properly visaed by a diplomatic or consular representative of the United States abroad was declared by the 1882 Act to constitute prima. facie evidence of the facts set forth therein, and was the sole evi-dence permissible to establish the right of the holder to entry into the United States. The certificate, however, could be controverted and the facts therein stated disproved by the au-thorities of the United States.

The right of resident Chinese laborers to return to the United States after a temporary absence was recognized by the Act of Septem-ber 13, 1888.17 That Act provided that no Chi-nese laborer would be permitted, after having left, to return to the United States except under the conditions set forth in the Act.

Throughout the life of the Chinese Exclu-sion Laws, possession of a Section Six Certifi-cate by a Chinese alien was a prerequisite for his admission to the United States. This re-quirement was waived, however, by statute or otherwise, for those admissible as wives and minor children of merchants (either accom-panying or following to join them), transits (whether laborers or members of the exempt classes), seamen in pursuit of their calling, government officials and members of their en-

7 President Grant, Annual Message, Dec. 7, 1874, For. Rel. 1874, VII. 4 Moore's International Law Digest 567.

8 Stephenson "A History of American Immigration," p. 259, Ginn & Co. (1926).

22 'Stat. 826, 1 Mafloy, Treaties 239. 10 22 Stat. 58, 23 Stat. 115. Those Acts were continued in force

for ten years by the Act of May 5, 1892 (27 Stat. 25) By the Act of April 29, 1902 (32 Stat. 176) all Chinese Exclusion Laws then in effect were reenacted, extesided, and continued, without modifica-tion, limitation, or condition."

11 25 Stat. 476, 25 Stat. 504. 12 The basic Act governing the deportation of Chinese laborers

found within the United States in violation of the Chinese Exclu-sion Laws was the Act of May 5, 1892 (27 Stat. 25), as amended by the Act of November 5, 1893 (28 Stat. 7, 8). Those laws were repealed by the Act of December 17, 1943 (57 Stat. 600).

1157 Stat. 600.

14 22 Stat. 58. 12 23 Stat. 115. 16 TheAct of November 3, 1893, (28 Stat. 8) declared to be

laborers, Chinese engaged in mining, fishing, huckstering, peddling and laundry work and those engaged In the fish taking and process--ing business. The 1893 Act defined "merchant" as a person engaged In buying and selling merchandise, at a fixed place of business con-ducted in his own name, and who during the time he claimed to be so engaged, did not perform any manual labor except such as was necessary in the .conduct of his mercantile establishment. 17 25 Stat. 504.

70


Monthly Review

tourage, wives of United States citizens and residents of the United States returning in possession of valid return permits. Merchants, travelers for curiosity or pleasure, teachers and students-the "exempt classes" specifically mentioned in the Treaty of 1880-were not exempt from the Section 6 requirement unless they were lawful residents of the United States returning to resume residence and in posses-sion of valid return permits.

The "lawful resident" class of Chinese en-titled to receive documents to permit their return to the United States was composed mainly of laborers who were in the United States during the period of registration of Chinese laborers (1892-1894) ,w who had cer-tificates of registration as evidence thereof, and persons who had been admitted to the United States prior to July 1, 1924 as mem-bers of an "exempt class"-whether they had remained members of such class or had be-come laborers. Prior to July 1, 1924, members of the "exempt classes," when inspected on arrival and duly admitted, were thereafter under no obligation to maintain any particular status. 18 They were eligible to receive, prior to departure from the United States, documents to facilitate their return to this country after a temporary absence. Qualified lawful resident laborers were issued Laborer's Return Certificates (Form 1-142-old Form 432) 21 Qualified residents of the "exempt classes" were issued Immigration Return Per-mits (Form 431) or, after June 30, 1924, Re-entry Permits (Form 632) •22 A person admitted for the first time on or after July 1, 1924 as a merchant, or as the wife or child of a mer-chant, though not entitled to receive such re-turn documents, was nevertheless furnished a specially endorsed affidavit evidencing status, which served to facilitate reentry to the United States after a temporary absence. 2'

The right of the lawful wife and minor child of a Chinese merchant to admission to the United States, whether accompanying or fol-lowing to join the merchant, was settled in 1900.24 Although the Act of May 26, 1924 made no provision for their admission, it was determined judicially that they were admis-

20 under the Treaty of 1880. Minor chil-dren of a merchant were admissible whether natural or adopted 27 and, prior to July 6, 1932, whether married or single. 28 .

The Act of 'July 6, 1932 25 amended the Act of May 26, 1924 to provide for the admission of the wife and unmarried minor children of certain international traders. From July 6, 1932, until repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Laws, the admission to the United States of the wives and children of Chinese merchants

was governed strictly by the requirements of that Act, if the merchant was admitted on or after July 6, 1932. If the merchant was law-fully admitted under Section 3(6) of the Act of May 26, 1924, between July 1, 1924 and July 5, 1932 and had maintained his mercan-tile status since his admission, his wife and his minor children-whether married or single-were admissible. If the merchant was a law-ful resident of the United States since prior to July 1, 1924, he need not have maintained an "exempt status" continuously since his ad-mission; his wife, and his minor children-whether married or single-were admissible when, in advance of their arrival, he estab-lished he had been maintaining a mercantile status for at least one year9 5°

The alien Chinese wife of a United States citizen was admissible notwithstanding the Chinese Exclusion Laws' 1 until Section 13(c) of the Act of May 26, 1924 made her inadmis-sible. However, the Act of June 13, 1930 amended Section 13(c) to provide for her ad-mission as an immigrant, if the marriage took place prior to May 26, 1924. The Act of June 13, 1930 remained in effect until repealed by the Act of December 17, 1943. Under the Chi-nese Exclusion Laws, from July 1, 1924 until

is The Act of May 5, 1892 (27 Stat. 25) requIred all Chinese laborers living in the United States to register within one year. The Act of November 3, 1893 (28 Stat. 7) extended the period within which they might register to May 3, 1894. To each person so regis-tered, the local Collector of Internal Revenue issued a Certificate of Residence containing the registrant's description and photograph. Thereafter, any Chinese laborer found in the United States without a Certificate of Residence was presumed to be here unlawfully, and was subject to deportation in proceedings before a judge, justice or commissioner of a court of the United States; the burden of proof was upon the Chinese to establish affirmatively his right to remain in the United States.

10 In re Yew Bing HI (1904), 128 Fed. Rep. 319. 20 Government officials and their entourage, for example, were not cansidered to have been admitted for permanent resi'tence be-causeWMbn their arrival they were not subject to regular inspection under he immigration laws; generally they were not entitled, there-fore, to receive return documents. 22 These were issued pursuant to the Act of September 13,. 1888. as amended (25 Stat. 477). Applicant was required to show that he had In the United States a lawful wife, to whom he had been married for more than one year prior to date of application, or child, or parent, or that he had therein property of the value of $1,000, or debts of like amount due him and pending settlement. The certificate was valid for reentry within one year of departure; urder special circumstances it could be extended, on application to a United States consul abroad. 22 The permits were issued to such members of the ''exempt classes" admitted prior to July 1, 1924 as merchants and their wives and minor children, teachers and students. np'on proof that they had maintained an 'exempt status" for at least one year prior to application. Former laborers might so qualify. They also were is-sued to persons who were admitted on or after July 1, 1924 as the Chinese wife of a United States citizen, a returning resident of the United States, or a minister or professor, or his wife or unmarried minor child, under Sections 4(a), 4(b), or 4(d) of the Act of May 26, 1924. 25 Chinese General Order No. 13, September 27, 1929, and its three supplements. 24 UnIted States a. Mrs. Gus Lim, 176 U. S. 459. 25 43 Stat. 153. 20 Cheung Sum Sflee a. Nagle (1925), 268 U. S. 336. 27 U. S. ex Pierce (D. C., N., Y., 1922), 285 F. 633; Ex parts Fong Ylm (D. C., N. Y., 1905), 134 F. 988. 28 Woo Hoo a. White (C. C: A., Cal., 1917), 243 F. 541. 20 47 Stat. 607.

108 C. F. R. 210.1(b), rescinded Jan. 25, 1944, was in effect from Jan. 18, 1933 (First Supplement of Chinese General Order No. 17). See also 8 C. F. R., Part 230, also rescinded.

31 Tool a. U. S. (C. C. A., Cal., 1902), 116 F. 920; U. S. a. Pierce. (D. C., N. Y., 1922), 285 F. 613. 52 46 Stat. 581.

71


Monthly Review

their repeal, there was no provision for the admission of an alien Chinese woman who married a United States citizen on or after May 26, 1924.

Seamen, though not deemed excludable as laborers, were amenable, nevertheless, to the Chinese Exclusion Laws and were admissible only in pursuit of their calling."

The Chinese Exclusion Laws related to alien Chinese persons whether born in China or else-where. 84 They had no application to United States citizens whether born in the United States or abroad, 85 nor to non-Chinese natives of China.

Chinese were subject to the laws applicable to aliens generally, as well as to the Chinese Exclusion Laws. A Chinese applicant for ad-mission. first was examined to determine his admissibility under the Chinese Exclusion Laws and, if found to be admissible, was examined next to determine his admissibility under the general immigration laws. 55 As laws were en-acted from time to time imposing head taxes, forbidding the importation of contract labor-ers, extending the excluding provisions to ad-ditional classes of criminals, the mentally and physically affected, the politically subversive, the immoral classes and others, and imposing documentary requirements for admission, Chi-nese also became subject to them.

The 124 Act drastically changed the favor-able position of the "exempt classes" by classi-fying travelers, merchants and Government officials as nonimmigrants admissible only for so long as they maintained their status; by classifying students as immigrants admissible under terms similar to those imposed upon nonimmigrants; by classifying teachers and clergymen as immigrants and imposing s rict requirements for their admission and by. mak-ing nonimmigrants and students who failed to maintain their status or remained beyond the time of their authorized stay subject to de-.portation. Since virtually all Chinese who were inadmissible under the Chinese Exclusion Laws became subject to exclusion under the Act of May 26, 1924, the Chinese Exclusion Laws became a less important barrier to the immigration of Chinese upon enactment of that Act.

The passing of the years witnessed a marked change in the sentiment of our country toward Chinese persons residing here and Chinese per-Sons generally. Effective enforcement of the laws had reduced to an insignificant trickle the flow of alien Chinese to our shores at a time when the entry of immigrants from Europe was relatively large. The presence of the comparatively few alien Chinese persons in our population seemed to have had no ad-

verse effect upon the nation's economy; on the contrary, our Chinese residents had come to be recognized as persons quite capable of ris-ing to the levels that modern education and opportunity afford. They were to be found in the learned professions, the arts, skilled trades, agriculture and in a variety of other endeav-ors. Their children born in the United States acquired our citizenship at birth, became iden-tified with this country's customs and institu-tions and, save for their distinctive physical appearance, were practically indistinguishable from their non-Chinese fellow citizens.

The Congress was receptive, therefore, when proposals were introduced in the 78th Congress to repeal the Chinese Exclusion Laws, so as to grant to Chinese persons the right to immigrate to the United States under a quota and to become naturalized citizens. Influential elements of organized labor which originally had backed passage of the Chinese Exclusion Laws endorsed the proposed legis-lation. Representatives of churches and of church organizations of Protestants, Catholics and Jews were among its most active sup-porters, along with numerous social service organizations.

Proponents of repeal pointed out that the proposed legislation would permit the entry under a quota of a number too small to affect seriously this country's immigration problem and that existing general immigration laws were fully adequate to prevent the admission of undesirable Chinese aliens. 87 The President remarked, upon signing the Act of Decem-ber 17, 1943 that repeal of the Chinese Exclu-sion Laws manifested the affection and regard of the people of this country for the Chinese people.

Since Repeal of the Uhinese Exclusion Laws The Act of December 17, 1943 not only

repealed all laws which operated "to exclude Chinese persons, as such, from the United States, but it authorized creation of a quota for Chinese persons. The quota-105 a year-is available to those Chinese, indicated below, who seek admission to the United States for permanent residence and who are not exempt from quota requirements. The Chinese quota is for persons of Chinese blood wherever born;

3 Wong Hop v. U. S. (C. C. A., Cal., 1929), 35 F. 2d 596; U. S. v.Stump (C. C. A., Md., 1923), 292 F. 354; In se Jam (D. C., N. Y., 1900), 101 F. 989; In se Ah Kee (D. C., N. Y., 1884), 22 F. 663.

4 United States v. Woo ,Tan (1918), 245 U. S. 552; Be Ah Lung (C. C. A., Cal., 1883), 18 F. 28.

85 U. S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), 169 U. S. 649; Np Fung Ho v. White (1922), 254 U. S. 628, modifying C. C. A., Cal., 1920, 266 F. 765.

86 Nagle v. Lim Foon (C. C. A., Cal., 1931), 48 F. 2d 51. 37 Hearings, H. R. 1882, H. H. 2309, Committee on Immigration

and Naturalization, House of Rep., 78 Cong. 1st Sees. 88 57 Stat. 600.

72

A Century of Chinese Immigration: A Brief Review Monthly Review

it is entirely separate from the quota of 100 set aside for non-Chinese natives of China. Persons who are as much as fifty percent of Chinese. blood are considered to come within the term "Chinese." Generally speaking, per-Sons who are of as much as one-half of a race ineligible for naturalization are subject to ex-clusion from the United States under Section 13(c) of the Act of May 26, 1924.'

Chinese immigrants outside the quota in-clude professors and clergymen, as well as the largest group in the immigrant class—those Chinese previously admitted to the United States for permanent residence who are re-turning after a temporary absence. Chinese wives of United States citizens were placed in the nonquota category by the Act of August 9, 1946,° which extended to them the same rights that alien wives in general have to ob-tain visas to proceed to the United States for permanent residence without regard to numer-ical limitations of a quota.

Removal of Chinese persons from the cate-gory "aliens ineligible to citizenship" especially benefits those Chinese aliens already residing in the United States. Those lawfully here for permanent residence are eligible; in most cases, to proceed toward naturalization. Those un-lawfully here are in a position to be considered for the exercise of discretionary relief under Section 19(c) of the Act of February 5, 191742 or, if entry occurred before July 1, 1924, to apply for a certificate of lawful entry, 4' and thus to change their status to that of per-sons admitted to the United States for per-manent residence.

The simplified naturalization requirements and procedure applicable to members of the Armed Forces, of the United States during World War II" also apply to the Chinese who served. In addition, veterans who are citizens may bring their wives and minor children to the United States under exemp-tions from certain, excluding provisions of the immigration laws. These privileges have been especially beneficial to Chinese veterans; in many cases, their wives through marriages entered into many years before World War II, and children born before the war, have been able to come to the United States outside the quota for Chinese persons.

United States Citizens of the Chinese Race A frequently overlooked phase of Chinese

immigration is the work of the Service in cases of Chinese persons claiming United States citi-zenship. 46 In the twenty years from July 1, 1920

until June 30, 1940, 71,040 Chinese persons were admitted to this country as United States citizens; 41 the number of Chinese aliens ad-

mitted during the same period was only 66,039.48 The determination of claims of United States citizenship by Chinese persons involved a far greater portion of the Service's time and effort than the cases of Chinese aliens. The Act which repealed the Chinese Exclusion Laws and the legislation enacted to benefit World War II veterans have resulted in the acquisi-tion of United States citizenship by many more Chinese persons, placing them in a position, in many cases, to confer United States citizenship upon their foreign-born children. To this num-ber should be added persons whose right to confer citizenship upon their foreign-born prog-eny was not affected by the Chinese Exclusion Laws. Thus, it is apparent that repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Laws caused no diminution in the volume of this little understood work of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

From the earliest days of the Chinese Ex-clusion Laws a major difficulty has been the absence of vital statistics in China. Worthy applicants for admission as United States citi-zens were hampered in their efforts to produce evidence in support of their claims, while fraudulent applicants sometimes were able to mislead the Government and receive benefits to which they were not entitled. To cope with this difficulty, the Immigration and Naturali-zation Service has kept a written record of all statements made by Chinese principals and witnesses upon their various appearances be-fore the Service in regard to their present and past family composition, home place in China and similar matters. Through the years, with the arrival of successive generations of Chi-nese persons—foreign-born and native-born, United States citizens and aliens—this data has been accumulating in official files. These old records often have been of inestimable

2943 Stat. 162; 46 Stat. 581. 40 60 Stat. (8 U. S. C. 212a). 41 At the time of repeal, the largest group was composed of Chi-

nese persons admitted to the United States prior to July 1, 1924 who would have been entitled to receive documents to' permit their readmission to the United States as returning residents under Section 4(b) of the Act of May 26, 1924 (43 Stat. 155).

1239 Stat. 889-890; .54 Stat. 671-673: 56 Stat. 1044. This Section authorizes the Attorney General to permit certain deportable aliens (1) to depart from the United States at their own expense without entry of an order of deportation, or (2) suspend their deportation If such deportation would result in a serious economic detriment to specified near relatives.

43 54 Stat. 1151-1152.

44 56 Stat. 182, 187. 59 Stat. 659.

46 Under the law in effect from February 10, 1855 until January 12, 1941, inclusive (10 Stat. 604; Revised Statutes, Sec. 1993), all persons, whether Chinese or otherwise, born abroad of fathers who were citizens of the United States at the time of the birth of such persons, acquired United States citizenship at birth, if the fathers had resided in the United States prior to such birth (Woed.ln V. Chin Bow, 274 U. S. 657 (1927)). The law in effect since January 13, 1941, regarding the acquisition of United States citizenship at birth abroad, may be found in the Nationality Act of 1940 (Act of October 14, 1940; 54 Stat. 1137).

42 This Includes natives of the United States and foreign-born citizens, whether coming for the first time or returning to this country from a visit abroad.

48 This includes those coming to the United States for the first time and returning residents of this country.

73


benefit in assisting applicants for admission to prove their claims to United States citizen-ship; they have also been the principal means of discrediting false claimants. Inasmuch as public records of births, marriages, and deaths still are nonexistent in China, it has been neces-sary for the Service to continue to gather such vital statistical data and similar information from applicants for admission as they arrive. This information is used in the cases of the applicants themselves and also in the cases of persons related to or otherwise connected with them.

The task of obtaining statements that ac-curately reveal the desired facts always has presented extraordinary difficulties in Chi-nese immigration cases. This has been due, as much as anything else, to the marked differ-ences between the Chinese and our language, method of time computation, usages with re-spect to the number and kinds of names one may have as well as to changes of name, laws in regard to adoption of children, attitude to-ward plural marriages and the children of such marriages—in short, to manifold differences in attitudes, customs and practices. Because of these differences a number of fraud cases have been difficult to combat.

The background of one class of Chinese cases is reflected in a situation which resulted from early court decisions holding that the administrative branch of the Government was without power to determine finally the admis-sibility to the United States of persons claim-ing citizenship. 4' Such persons when denied entry by immigration authorities at the port were able to go directly to the courts for adju-dication of their claims. Usually they asserted they were born in the United States, taken to China shortly afterwards by relatives, and that they were returning to the United States. They were able to speak and understand no language but Chinese. W h e n questioned through Chinese interpreters they had no rec-olection of living in this country. Invariably, they had no birth certificates or other docu-ments to identify them, and could present no evidence in support of their claims beyond their own statements and the testimony of witnesses whose credibility was as doubtful as their own. Many such persons coming from China, seeking to avoid the careful scrutiny of experienced courts on the Pacific coast, found their way into Canada and crossed the border into New York and Vermont. They submitted themselves for arrest under the Chinese Ex-clusion Laws to be taken before United States Commissioners for trial. More than half of them were discharged as United States citi-zens.'0 Since the Chinese Exclusion. Laws failed

to provide for an appeal by the Government, the finding of citizenship by the United States Commissioners constituted a final adjudication which could not be relitigated.' 1

For some years after the right of the Serv-ice to determine finally the admissibility of claimants to United States was established,' 2 such Chinese persons continued to enter from Canada. Steps by the Canadian Government to prevent the entry to Canada of these persons, and procedural and other reforms by our Gov-ernment, finally brought an end to the prac-tice. According to a survey of Service records made some time ago which covered a fifteen-year period, these so-called "Court natives" claimed to have, on an average, 4 sons each,, or the ratio of fifteen sons to one daughter. Studies made in China have shown no such difference in the sex distribution.' 4

False testimony in a record sometimes had its origin in cases one or more generations back. A United States citizen grandfather, per-haps, or other remote relative may have brought one or more impostors to the United States as his own children, thus frustrating the immigration laws. Present day members of the family are constrained to include in their testimony in regard to their family not only the spurious relatives but the descendants, if any, of such spurious relatives, and to have their own children "coached" so that they too will include the spurious relatives if questioned by the Service in regard to their family. Thus, otherwise honest persons are sometimes under a compulsion to give false testimony, primarily to protect others, but also in their own in-terests because, ironically, to disclose the truth might adversely affect their own credibility and endanger their own status.

Instances are known where present day mem-bers of a family, secure in their United States citizenship acquired by birth in this country, but obliged by the exigencies of the family's immigration history to masquerade under an assumed family name, have resorted to court action for change of name in order that they might gain the use of their true family name. There have been cases, also, of persons who were duly admitted to the United States as citizens—foreign-born children of United States citizens - but who procured naturalization

0 Gee Fook Sing a. U. S. (C. C. A., 1892), 49 F. 146. 0 Based upon early population figures in regard to Chinese fe-

males in the United States, If all such claims of birth in the United States were true, each Chinese woman would have given birth to an Incredible number of sons.

51 U. S. v. Mar Ying Yuen (D. C., 1903), 123 F. 159. Z U. S. v. Sing Tuck (1904), 194 U. S. 161.

50 'Population in Modern China" by Ta Chen, The University of Chicago press (1946), p. 19: 'It seems clear that In China relatively more female infants are born; but as they grow up, the male babies gradually catch up with them In numbers, evidently Indi-cating a proportionately higher mortality among female children."

74


under another name (presumably their true name) in order, it may be supposed, to rid themselves of the necessity of continuing to pose as someone else.

In all fairness to the Chinese, it should be stressed that cases involving fraud are con-fined almost wholly to a relatively small group of foreign-born Chinese claimants to United States citizenship. As high-minded Chinese persons, through organizations of veterans,

civic associations, and otherwise, continue to direct their attention to solving the problem presented by those cases, irregular practices eventually may be reduced to a minimum. The great majority of Chinese persons in– their dealings with the Immigration and Naturaliza-tion Service have conducted themselves in a manner that bears out the excellent reputation for truthfulness and probity enjoyed by the Chinese people in the United States.

The Crystal City Internment Camp By N. D. Collaer

W ITH the removal on November 1, 1947 of the last internees from the Crystal City Internment Camp, the Immigra-

tion and Naturalization Service ended another of its important war-service functions—that of operating camps for the detention of those alien enemies believed to be potentially dan-gerous to the security of the United States. The Crystal City Camp, the largest to be operated by the Service, was opened on No-vember 2, 1942 as a family internment camp. It was the last facility for the detention of alien enemies to be closed.

Early in the internment program it was re-alized that considerable hardship ntight result through the internment of husbands and wives in separate facilities, especially if there were children involved. A decision was reached in October 142 to establish a family internment camp to house the considerable number of Japanese families that were being brought to the United States from Central and South America for internment pending repatriation.

A former migratory farm labor camp located at Crystal City, Texas was chosen as the site of the internment camp. Family groups were interned at Crystal City in the following in-stances: (1) where both parents were ordered interned; (2) where only the father was or-dered interned and it was decided, after care-ful investigation - by a social agency, that family reunion in an internment camp was the best solution; (3) Japanese families residing in War Relocation Centers where the father was interned and it was not considered safe from a security standpoint to permit him to rejoin his family in the Relocation Center, and (4) where entire family groups were brought to the United States from Central and South America for internment.

Although considerable experience had aiready been gained by the Service in the establish-ment and management of internment camps by the time Crystal City Camp was established, this camp presented many problems uniquely its own. For the first time a camp had to be organized to meet the requirements for the housing of men, women and children of all ages, from infancy to senility, and from all walks of life. The camp which originally con-tained only 41 small three-room cottages and 118 one-room shelters, with various Service buildings, had to be augmented by 219 tem-porary housing units-61 of duplex, 62 of triplex and 96 of quadruple design. Fifteen additional three-room cottages were also built, to provide the internees with 44 such cottages having better conveniences for cases requiring prenatal and postnatal care. 103 victory huts were erected in the fenced-in portion of the camp for emergency housing measures. The total number of structures in the camp pro-vided for 962 families, with each building a housekeeping unit, some equipped with toilet facilities.

In formulating policies concerning housing, feeding, medical care, schooling and other im-portant considerations involved in the deten-tion of family groups, it was found that the provisions of the Geneva Treaty, except in re-gard to broad humanitarian principles, were inadequate in dealing with the internment of civilians for it was apparently never coiltem-plated at the time the Treaty was drafted that other than male combatants or camp followers would be detained.

In order that human beings who are ac- Mr. Collaer is the Chief, Detention and Deportation

Section, Alien Control Division, of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

75

The Crystal City Internment Camp Monthly Review

customed to liberty of action might make the best possible adjustment to conditions which restricted their activities, the Service imposed only necessary deviations from normal living conditions. With this thought uppermost in mind, each family unit was provided a separate place in which to live. The floor space pro-vided each individual was 60 square feet per person. This was reduced at times while addi-tional housing facilities were undergoing con-struction.

Another action calculated to make intern-ment more like normal family life was the issuance of camp money to' housewives. This money was used to make purchases of food and clothing from the facility stores located in the camp. Early experience at Crystal City in making direct issues of food to family units had clearly indicated, that dissatisfaction and wastage would occur if the dietary tastes of the detainees were ignored. Since it would have been a herculean task to make direct issues of food according to individual taste there was a careful study made which was based 'on scientifically balanced diets for chil-dren of different age groups and adults of both sexes. Prices on foods were fixed and each week every family received sufficient camp money to purchase the quantity of food to which it was entitled.

The same procedure was followed with re-gard to clothing. Based on studies made by agencies familiar with family requirements, clothing allowances were fixed and sufficient money allotted for their purchase.

It was both interesting and gratifying to note the favorable response of internees to this program. Husbands and wives had family budgetary problems to occupy their minds, and families, accustomed to American, German or Japanese diets, could suit their dietary tastes at no greater cost to our Government and with considerably less wastage of foods. Sufficient diversification in wearing apparel available through the facility clothing store, and an ample selection of materials for the making of clothing, provided a sufficiently wide selection to keep down the objectionable uni-formity usually apparent in all institutions.

Some other matters involving basic policies were resolved early in the establishment of the Crystal City Camp: (a) pay and non-pay work performed by internees; (b) floor-space allow-ances and assignments of living quarters, taking into consideration age, physical condi-tion, race and language, education and social training; (c) composition of families to be sent to the camp—maximum age for unmar-ried females and males, relationships, and so forth; (d) whether interned children should

be permitted to attend schools outside the facility, spending vacations with their parents in the camp; (e) the extent to which the Gov-ernment would provide educational facilities-whether the Service or the internees would staff the schools, the types and, courses to be offered, whether an attempt should be made to teach in other than the English language, and whether all racial groups should be merged in kindergarten, grammar school and other classes; and (f) whether arrangements should be made to permit interned aliens to work on farms adjacent to the camp and, if so, under what conditions.

After careful study of these problems the following procedure Was adopted. A planned paid-work program was inaugurated. Special care was given to billeting internees and, 'when-ever possible, quarters assigned to families In such a manner as to form amicable neighbor-hood groups. It was also decided to keep at a positive minimum unmarried adult males and females; to establish Government-controlled kindergartens, grammar schools and high schools for both the German and Japanese colonies and to adopt standard accredited cur-riculums, at the same time permitting the internees to staff and maintain schools in their own languages with curriculums approved by the management. This latter policy, adopted only after very careful study, was based on the theory that children whose parents desired to repatriate would be greatly handicapped if they were deprived of the opportunity to re-ceive training in their respective languages. It was decided that children could not attend local schools outside the camp, but that volun-tary internees would be permitted to withdraw from internment to attend schools.

Insofar as possible internees were given em-ployment at the detention facility rather than attempting to supervise their working on farms in the vicinity of the camp. The Service was aware that keeping internees occupied made for a smooth-running facility. Therefore, great importance was attached to work pro-grams which proved both economical to the Government and beneficial to the internees. All manner of vegetable crops were planted by internees' qualified in farm work who had been selected through the officially supervised camp employment office. Other internees were en-gaged in the production of eggs, poultry, honey, meat, slaughtering and curing of meats, making of sausage, in laundry work, the bakery, the shoe repair unit, in repair and maufac-turing of clothing, preservation of foods and vegetables, manufacturing of mattresses and furniture' and in other activities.

The basic organization of the camp, internee

76

The Crystal City Internment Camp Monthly Review

and official, was not substantially changed from the beginning, although as the internee population grew personal problems increased. It became necessary to appoint an internee re-lations officer and to divide the activities of the facility into two major headings—operations and internal relations, each major section being under the supervision of a competent head directly responsible to the Officer in Charge. Under the operations officer were placed admin-istrative services, surveillance and internal security; while the internal relations officer handled educational and internee services. The administrative services officer was responsible for all fiscal and miscellaneous services, main-tenance, construction, repair and supplies with the internal security officer responsible for policing, fire protection and censorship.

The duties of the internal relations group were perhaps the most interesting, and without doubt the most trying, for it was its responsi-bility to work personally with the detained persons in an effort to keep down squabbles and to assist the internees to live as peace-fully as possible within the confines of the enclosed area. The Chief Internal Relations Officer was made responsible for all relations between service personnel and the internees, including supervision of the internees' educa-.tion and recreation. He was also responsible for examination and observation of internees to determine their status under immigration laws, their eligibility for release or parole and maintaiiiing of dossiers on each internee. He acted as arbitrator in internee relations, super-vised the assignment of living quarters and other property to internees and, in general, was responsible for the welfare of those detained.

It was found that it was of as much impor-tance to settle the relatively unimportant com-plaints of the internee as the major issues, for many matters which would be insignificant to the person at liberty become unduly significant when viewed by a person, deprived of liberty and unable to shift for himself. In fact, the major issues were settled with comparative ease; it was the day-to-day annoyances which kept internees disturbed and made it impera-tive that each individual be kept as fully oc-cupied as possible with work and play activi-ties and that every possible means be employed to avert rnalcontentment. The representatives of the Protecting Powers, the International Red Cross, the War Prisoners Aid of the YMCA, the YWCA, the American Friends

Service Committee and the National Catholic Welfare Conference, as well as priests and ministers of various religions, assisted greatly in keeping the internees reasonably contented. Additionally, the Service employed a Special Assistant to the Commissioner who acted as liaison between the Service and the various social agencies given access to the camp.

On the whole, the morale and health of the internees detained at the Crystal City family internment camp were excellent. Many level-headed leaders developed among those who realized the necessity for the actions taken by our Government and bore no malice. Such leaders rendered great service not only to the management but to their own people as well. Other would-be leaders, whose stock in trade was strife, if not openly antagonistic to the management; were either effectively squelched by fellow internees or by the official personnel. Some were transferred for it was determined that the growing children should be provided a place to reside from which they could depart to live normal, wholesome lives, without un-pleasant memories of their camp life.

The Crystal City Internment Camp was pop-ulated by Germans, Italians and Japanese alien enemies. The latter formed the largest group. The population peak was reached in May 1945 with 3,326 internees. Those detained came from Continental United States, Puerto Rico, Alas-ka, Hawaii and countries in Latin America and the West Indies. Many of the camp's resi-dents were not ordered interned, but had re-quested voluntary internment in order that the family unit might not be split.

Except for the floodlighted ten-foot wire fence that surrounded the facility, the Crystal City Camp resembled any thriving and bus-tling southwestern town. Its 3,000 inhabitants, men, women and children in proper ratio, fol-lowed the usual pattern of small-town life. As in any town there were stores, small busi-nesses, schools, a hospital, church and even beauty and barber shops. Movies were shown twice weekly and the townspeople often pro-vided their own amusement with recitals, festi-vals and plays. There was a variety of recrea-tional facilities available, including a tennis court and baseball diamond. Although the Im-migration and Naturalization Service never re-laxed its vigilant guard over those in intern-ment, it did everything possible to make life behind the wire fence as normal as possible.

77

Country iie° I 1938-1947 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947

All countries ---- ------ ------ --------------- -------------------------- ---------------- 2,370,089 162,078 188,813 235,260 277,294 270,354 318,933 441,979 231,402 150,062 93,904

Europe- ---------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- -... 2,256,721 158,762 184,727 229,763 270,160 262,002 302,843 425,125 215,769 133,391 74,179 Albania ----------------------------------------- -- ............................................ 3,193 195 223 280 316 311 548 588 340 249 143 Belgium ------------------------------------------------ - -------------------- --------- -------- 10,378 745 917 1,082 1,290 1,532 1,497 1,345 776 698 496 British Empire --------------------------------------------------------------- -------- 590,597 42,106 47,500 59,680 72,760 90,405 94,361 88,493 43,643 31,321 20,328 Bulgaria- ----------- ---- ----------------------------------------------------- ---- ----------- 2,867 256 310 364 346 166 206 542 293 247 137 Czechoslovakia ----- ------------ ----- ---- ---------------- ------------ ------------------- 83.260 6,158 7,848 9,059 10,890 11,106 13,018 12,899 5,878 4,165 2,239 Danzig-- --------------- ------ -------- ----------------- ----------------------------------------- 749 - 58 53 51 50 21 51 170 144 84 67 Denmark ---------------- ------- --------- -................................................... 18,348 1,365 1,440 1,874 2,408 2,817 2,903 2,733 1,337 894 577 Estonia -------------- --- --- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,387 91 95 116 114 162 198 261 138 105 107 Finland ---------------------------------------- -.............................................. 22,572 1,713 2,047 2,610 2,786 3,143 3,216 3,153 1,931 1,220 753 France ----------- ------- -------- ----- ---------------------------------------------------------- 22,450 1,227 1,625 2,104 2,267 - 2,611 3,194 3,035 2,809 2,136 1,442 GermanyfAustl'b0. --- ------------------------------ ------ ----- ------- ------------- 8,287 6,357 1,930

iGermany ---------------- ----------------------------------------------- 258,793 19,312 19,940 25,802 27,719 12,360 17,883 62,274 45,336 17,464 10,703 Greece ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- -45,306 2,625 3,540 4,378 4,913 5,873 6,963 7,549 4,305 3,313 1,847 Hungary ---- ------ ---- ---- ---------------------------- ---- ----- ---- --------- -------- --- ----- 55,666 3,168 4,347 6,291 7,992 3,794 4,810 13,964 6,320 3,385 1,595

- Italy -------------- ----- ------------------------------- ------ -------------- ---- -------- ------ ---- 374,208 26,306 31,933 37,357 40,827 18,663 36,238 106,626 41,643 23,099 11,516 Latvia ----------- ------ -------------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------- 5,789 369 379 574 578 858 877 1,017 540 387 210 Lithuania--------------- ---------------------------- -------------------------------------- 39,218 2,140 2,986 3,809 4,999 5,687 6,081 6,624 3,581 2,250 1,061 Luxemburg------- ................. ------- ------------------------------------------------ 961 84 68 105 114 171 123 147 64 43 42 Netherlands ---- --- ----------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 22,955 1,656 1,955 2,618 3,102 3,075 3,267 3,020 1,681 1,538 1,043 Norway ------------------ ------------------- ------------ ----- ------------ ------- -------------- 36,993 - 2,848 , 2,810 3,413 4,581 5,799 5,755 6,031 2,838 1,819 1,099 Poland- --------------------------- ----- ---------------- ------------------------- -------------- -260,458 18,356 21,585 26,964 31,654 36,757 42,170 42,758 20,812 - 12,907 6,495 Portugal-- -------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------- 29,352 1,686 2,725 2,889 2,668 3,303 4,639 4,589 3.330 2,237 1,286 Rumania- ----------- ----------------- ----- ------------ ------------ ---- --- ------ ----- ------- -- 33,410 2,466 2,955 3,935 4,692 1,955 2,782 8,137 3,730 1,829 929 Spain ------------------------- -................................................ ----------------- -21,694 1,348 1,955 2,271 3,028 2,851 3,278 3,060 1,826 1,324 753 Sweden ------- --- --- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------- 57,219 4,112 4,718 5,746 8,128 9,241 9,472 8,106 3,809 2,482 1,405 Switzerland -------------- --.......... -.................................. -................. 14,522 1,216 1,397 1,735 1,725 1,956 2,136 1,891 1,040 841 585 Turkey ------------------------- -------- -------------------------------------------------- --- 20,268 1,585 1,938 2,140 2,390 2,804 3,164 3,115 1,571 1,039 522 U. S. S. R ------------------ ----- ----- ------------------------------------------------------ -159,187 11,189 11,499 15,598 19,939 26,811 25,488 25,533 12,164 7,404 3,562 Yugoslavia ---------------- ----- ----- --- -------- ------------------------- ------------------ 56,325 4,365 5,916 6,908 7.867 7,745 8,484 7,409 3,849 2,524 1,258 Other Europe- ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- 309 17 - 23 10 17 - 25 41 56 41 30 49

Asia-- -------------------------------------------- -........... -................. ---------------------- 14,837 921 1,068 1,246 1,567 1.837 2,487 2,946 982 806 977 China ---------------- ------ ----- --------------------- ------------------------ ------------------- 3,579 30 30 - 20 57 45 497 731 739 599 831 Iran ..... -- ------------------------------------- ------------ ------ ------- ------------------------- 1,629 143 163 170 176 250 251 218 124 74 60 Palestine- --------------------------------- ----- ----- ---- --- ----- -------------------- ------- 7362 ' 49 45 89 68 102 160 233 2 - -- 2 2

Syria --------- ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7,588' 567 735 873 1,017 1,283 11,518 1,595 OtherAsia ------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,305' 132 95 94 249 157 61 179 119 133 86

Mexico ---------- --- ...................... ---------------------------------------------------------- 42,547 1.082 1,643 2.669 3,757 4,300 6,799 7,474 6,352 5,135 3,336 West Indies ------- ----- ---------------------------------------------------------- ---- ------ -7,897 303 415 472 543 751 1,317 1,604 964 876 652 Central America- ----------- --............................... -............................ 3,807' 144 175 226 285 425 605 659 475 489 324 South America- --------------------------- ------- ---- ----- ----------------------- ----------- 7,235 447 476 563 664 771 1,145 1,362 799 - 644 364 Africa ---- ------------ ------------ ------------------------------------------------ ------------------ 405' 29 46 44 41 40 91 98 5 7 4 Philippines --- ----- ----- ----- - --------------------- ---------------------------------- ----- --22,708 390 263 277 277 238 3.646 2.646 1,563 2,644 10,764 U.S.Possessions ----------------------------------------- ----------------- -............. 722 654 93 88 - 476 Stateless ---------------------------------------------------- ----- ----------- ------- --------- ----13,210 4,400 5,982 2.828

1 Independent couitries. - UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 2 Palestine is included in British Empire 1945-1947. - IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE - -

Syria is included in France 1945-1947. In 1944 includes 5 persons who formerly owed allegiance to Western Samoa. -

00

Cb

ALIENS NATURALIZED, BY COUNTRY OF FORMER ALLEGIANCE: YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 1938 TO 1947

Monthly Review

News of the Month

James J. Davis Dead; Was Secretary of Labor

On November 22, in a sanitorium located in suburban Washington, D. C., the Honorable James J. Davis died. Born in Tredegar, Wales, 74 years ago, he came to the United States at the age of seven, landing together with his parents, brothers and sisters at Old Castle Garden which was then the immigration gate-way to America at New York.

The family settled at Sharon, Pennsylvania. There "Jim" Davis began his long career which saw him rise step by step from an iron puddler to Secretary of Labor under three Presidents and later Senator of the United States from Pennsylvania. The Immigration and Naturalization Service, during the three terms Mr. Davis was Secretary of Labor, com-posed two bureaus of that Department.

Mr. Davis, himself an immigrant, was always interested in immigration matters. He early advocated that our immigration laws provide for greater selectiveness and was in office as Labor Secretary when, in 1924, the present quota limitations law was enacted with his support.

Administrative Decisions Made Available to Publië

Volume 1 of Administrative Decisions under Immigration and Nationality Laws has been printed and is now available from the Super-intendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C., $2.25 per copy. The publication is issued pursuant to the re-quirement of Section 3(b) of the Administra-tive Procedure Act (Public Law 404, 79th Congress, approved June 11, 1946) that all final opinions or orders in the adjudication of cases, regardless of whether they are confi-dential, which may be cited as precedents shall be made, available to the public. Because the records of the Department of Justice and the

Immigration and Naturalization Service are re-garded as confidential, names of persons are omitted in the decisions.

The first volume of over 700 pages, hand-somely bound in buckram, contains precedent-creating decisions of the Attorney General and of the Board of Immigration Appeals from the time of the creation of that Board in August of 1940 through the month of December 1943. Succeeding volumes will be issued at such times in the future as the accumulation of de-cisions may require and will include not only decisions of the Attorney General and the Board of Immigration Appeals but also deci-sions of the Commissioner or those acting by his authority.

Four Suboffices of Service Closed During Past Year

A recent survey reveals that four suboffices of the Immigratiton and Naturalization Serv-ice were closed during the past year. The one most recently closed was located at Port Huron, Michigan. It ceased to be an appli-cation receiving office on November 1, 1947. The work formerly done there has been trans-ferred to the district office in Detroit, Mich. Other suboffices closed were: Rochester, New York. All immigration and naturalization work done there was transferred to Buffalo and Syracuse, New York on August 1, 1947. Under the new arrangement, Rochester is retained as a station for inspection purposes. Youngs-town, Ohio. Although closed on August 1, 1947, Youngstown is still being used as a sta-tion with an investigative force detailed there.. All of its immigration and naturalization work has been transferred to Cleveland, Ohio. Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. Closed as a suboffice on March 31, 1947, it is presently used as a sta. tion with an investigative force. All of its im-migration and naturalization work was trans-ferred to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

79

Reader's Guide

Europe's Population in the Interwar Years, by Dudley Kirk. League of Nations, 1946. Date of publication in the United States, September 1947. Available from Columbia University Press, New York. (Price $3.50, paper, $4.00, cloth cover.)

This is the fourth and final volume in a series of studies carried out by the Office of Population Research of Princeton University for the Economic, Financial and Transit De-partment of the League of Nations.

It brings together a vast amount of infor-mation on the population of Europe. The basic materials had appeared in 25 different lan-guages and were collected for no less than 29 different national purposes. However, this is not a collection of statistical tables. The mate-rials have been thoroughly assimilated. The more important results are given in superb maps, several in color, prepared by Mrs. Daphne L. Notestein.

Viewing the population of the European con-tinent as a whole, fundamental changes in trend are emphasized. Rather than being an area producing a surplus of population, much of western Europe faces a declining population, with net reproduction rates below unity. Of particular interest to the readers of the Monthly Review are the author's conclusions regarding migration trends and the possibilities of per-sons from Europe migrating to other portions of the earth:

"The overseas movement reached its climax in the early nineteen-hundreds. Europe lost a net balance of some 8 million through migra-tion between 1900 and 1910 and about 5 mild lion in the decade 1910-1920, despite the war. The net loss of the 'twenties was approximately

Monthly Review

3 million, or less than half that of the last pre-war decade of peace. During the 'thirties net loss through emigration was negligible. Aside from the relatively small flow of refugees, emi-gration responded little to the economic re-covery of the late 'thirties. There has been a clear downward trend."

Two reasons for the change of trend are set forth: (1) rising industrialization in Europe and the attendant growth of cities, (2) a diminishing rate of population growth as, Eu-rope approaches a stationary population. The writer anticipates considerable distress migra-tion of uprooted Europeans as an aftermath of war, and expressed the belief that European governments iy take action to restrain emi-gration should it reach large proportions.

In addition to the study of international mi-gration, this volume analyzes other major demographic facts about Europe. There is' a comprehensive chapter on the balance of births and deaths, as well as on the social and eco-nomic development of the population. Internal migration and international migration within Eurape are treated. The chapter on the ethnic divel'sity of Europe points out the numerous pitfalls faced in classifying this population on the basis of the language. (Different results are obtained by census enumerators who record "mother" tongue, or "usual" language, or who inquire regarding knowledge or ignorance of a specific language.) A summary is given of the available information on the major lan-guages spoken on the continent.

In the appendices there appear the biblio-graphical and statistical matçrials from which the rader is spared in the text.

FPI ATLANTA-12-23-47-7500-5788

Subscriptions may be sent to: Monthly Review, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. Price, 10 cents - - - - Subscription price, $1.00 a year

Remittances must be in the form of a check or money order made payable to the Treasurer of the United States Published monthly with the approval of the Director of the Bureau of the Budget

Ku