Increased Immigration to “rejuvenate Country” is Urged by New York Daily News

Repeal or drastic modification of the 1924 Immigration Act and the 1929 quota law, under which total yearly immigration is limited to about 153,900, as a means to “rejuvenate the country” was advocated yesterday by the New York Daily News, tabloid newspaper with the largest circulation in the United States.

In a Lengthy editorial, the News expressed growing doubts that the immigration restrictions now in force have been for the best interests of the country and urged re-examination of the question “from a purely selfish viewpoint.” Citing an assertion by Federal Labor Statistics Commissioner Isador Lusin before the new Temporary National Economic Committee, that America’s population was slowing down and would become stationary by about 1960, the editorial pointed out that the nation’s productive machinery was “geared to meet ever increasing consumer demand.”

“And there, we think,” the editorial added, “must be one answer to some of our present troubles. Were we so smart, after all, to cut down the ‘alien tide?'”

The editorial, which is similar in approach and conclusions to one published recently by the Hearst Newspapers over the signature of William Randolph Hearst, follows in part:

“We believe the time has come to re-examine our immigration laws and regulations. We’re not speaking now of the refugees from various European dictatorships and Asiatic war-makers. There are too many of those victims of tragedy for us to hope to be able to take them all in, much as we’d like to if we could. We think our immigration laws and rules ought to be re-examined from a purely selfish viewpoint. Are they really for the best interests of the 130,000,000 people now in the United States? Are they helping us, or are they hurting us? If they are helping us, let’s keep them. But if they’re hurting us, let’s get up the energy and broad-mindedness to revise them, and do it promptly……..

“Ever since the United States began chopping down the ‘alien tide,’ as horrified immigration reformers used to call it, we’ve had our doubts of the wisdom of that policy. These doubts keep growing stronger and more disquieting. We’re made more dubious than ever

by what Dr. Isador Lubin, Federal Commissioner of Labor Statistics, said the day before yesterday to the new Temporary National Economic Committee, which says it is going to investigate monopoly, but seems to be setting out to investigate everything.

“Dr. Lubin said that our population is slowing down now, and at its present pace will become stationary, like France’s, by about 1960. Yet our productive plant is geared to meet ever-increasing consumer demand. And there, we think, must be one answer to some of our present troubles. Were we so smart, after all, to cut down the ‘alien tide?’

“We can’t throw open the gates to Chinese and Japanese immigration; that seems settled. But how about European immigration? It is a fact that this country grew most rapidly and most happily when the Pats, Mikes, Bridgets, Yettas, Stanislavs, Dmitris and Giuseppes were rolling in via Ellis Island in half-million and million lots per year. (Peak year was 1907, with a total of 1,285,349). They came with shawls over their heads and sometimes burlap bags or sabots on their feet. What forced us to grow was that the newcomers in no time wanted American hats and silk stockings, and watches, and all the other things Americans use in such profusion.

“Those things had to be made in increasing quantities; hence our tremendous industrial expansion in those decades. And those people, we believe, were the cream of Europe. The European upper classes weren’t the cream of anything. The immigrants were the people who had the ambition, energy and usually youth to haul out of their stuffy homelands and go after better lives in a new land.

“The results were magnificent. New York City, for illustration was always the great Melting Pot. You hear it said nowadays that the Jews, who comprise about 2/7 of the population of this city, control it through their side holdings in department stores, hotels, theatres and so on. If that is true, the only answer we know of is: So what? So New York City, by well-nigh universal consent, is the greatest and finest and most beautiful city in the world today.

“We keep believing that it might be the wisest step this counry could take to repeal or drastically modify the laws that came out of the wartime and postwar alarm over the ‘alien tide.’ To let a lot of new people come in might rejuvenate the country. Certainly it would bring us some more of those hungering stomachs and questing minds which used to keep us jumping to fulfill their desires and demands — and used to keep new ideas and new hopes fermenting all over the United States.”