National Origin Plan, Cutting Immigrant Quotas, Submitted to Senate

(Jewish Daily Bulletin)

The report of the subcommittee on quotas under the national origin provision of the immigration act was submitted by President Coolidge to the Senate yesterday in response to requests of Senators for the figures.

The sub-committee, which consists of the Secretaries of State, Commerce and Labor, finds that under the national origin plan the total immigration would be reduced from 164,667 under the present quota arrangement to 153,541. Its figures show that the national origin plan would largely reduce the quotas from most northern European countries, especially Germany, Scandinavia and the Irish Free State. The quota of Great Britain and northern Ireland would be much increased and Russian and Italian quotas, among others, would expand. Nor do the national origin quotas agree with the 1924 estimates of what they would be.

Because of the reduction of immigration from northern Europe under the national origin plan, there is strong opposition to it in Congress and a determined movement for repeal. Protests are coming in from various national groups. The question has been raised whether it is mandatory on the President to proclaim the new plan April 1 to go into effect July 1 or whether he can use his judgment. This is being looked into by the Attorney General.

In their report Secretaries Kellogg, Hoover and Davis make the statement that the statistical and historical information from which computations were made is not entirely satisfactory. Moreover, they raise the question, though they do not pass on it, whether it is mandatory on the President to proclaim the national origin plan and whether Congress will repeal it.

The actual work of figuring out the quotas was done by experts of the three departments. Dr. Joseph A. Hill, head of the Census Bureau, was chairman of these experts.

In their letter to the President, Secretaries Kellogg, Hoover and Davis say:

“The report of the subcommittee is self-explanatory and, while it is stated to be a preliminary report, yet, it is believed that further investigation will not substantially alter the conclusions arrived at. It may be stated that the statistical and historical information available from which these computations were made is not entirely satisfactory. Assuming however that the issuance of the proclamation provided for in Paragraph 3, Section 11, of said act is mandatory, and that Congress will neither repeal nor amend said act before April 1, 1927, the attached list shows substantially the quota allotments for use in said proclamation.”

The report of the subcommittee is dated December 15, 1926. It says the work has not been completed and the figures, though subject to revision, indicate approximately the final results.

The available data which provided the basis of computations included:

“1. The records of immigration giving the number of immigrants arriving annually from each foreign country from 1820 to 1920.

“2. The reports of the decennial censuses which have classified the foreign born population by country of birth at each census from that of 1850 to 1920 inclusive; the native white population of foreign or mixed parentage by country of birth at each census from that of 1850 to 1920 inclusive; the native white population of foreign or mixed parentage by country of birth of parents at each census from 1890 to 1920 inclusive; and both the foreign born white population and native white population of foreign or mixed parentage by mother tongue at the censuses of 1910 and 1920.

“3. A classification by racial stocks of the white populations at the census of 1790 as published by the Census Bureau in the volume ‘A Century of Population Growth.’

“4. Standard reference works giving population of foreign countries at different periods by provinces and other small political divisions and by linguistic and racial groups.”

The subcommittee found that of the 94,820,915 white population enumerated in 1920 approximately 53,500,000 were of immigrant stock and 41,000,000 of original native stock.

In submitting their quota figures the subcommittee gave three sets of figures The first column shows the figures on the national origin basis as determined by the subcommittee. The second column shows the quotas now in effect under the present law. The third column shows the estimated quotas on a national origin basis which were offered to Congress and printed in the Congressional Record in 1924 at the time the immigration law was under consideration on the basis of 150,000 annual immigration. Eliminating those countries which take minimum quotas of 100 each, the figures are as follows:

| National | | 1924

| Origin Quotas | Present Quotas | Estimates

Austria | 1,486 | 785 | 2,171

Czechoslovakia | 2,248 | 3,073 | 1,359

Belgium | 410 | 512 | 251

Denmark | 1,044 | 2,789 | 949

Finland | 559 | 471 | 517

France | 3,837 | 3,954 | 1,772

Germany | 23,428 | 51,227 | 20,028

Great Britain and Northern Ireland | 73,039 | 34,007 | 83,135

Greece | 367 | 100 | 384

Hungary | 967 | 473 | 1,521

Irish Free State | 13,862 | 28,567 | 8,330

Italy | 6,091 | 3,845 | 5,716

Jugoslavia | 777 | 671 | 591

Lithuania | 494 | 344 | 458

Netherlands | 2,421 | 1,548 | 2,762

Norway | 2,267 | 6,453 | 2,053

Poland | 4,978 | 5,982 | 4,535

Roumania | 516 | 603 | 222

Russia | 4,781 | 2,248 | 4,002

Spain | 674 | 131 | 141

Sweden | 3,259 | 9,561 | 3,072

Switzerland | 1,198 | 2,081 | 783

Turkey | 233 | 100 | 100

The sub-committee finds that while the immigration act may have presupposed the total immigration from quota countries would be 150,000, the act does not definitely and directly limit total immigration.