A letter to the New York State Chamber of Commerce calling upon its members to repudiate the report on “Conquest by Immigration” of its special committee on immigration and naturalization, was made public today by the New York section of the American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom.
The letter, which received the additional sponsorship of eight eminent scientists and historians, charged the Chamber of Commerce and Harry H. Laughlin of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, who prepared the report, with unethical conduct in their attempt to lend scientific support to “the very same racial myths which are causing so much hatred and brutality in the world today.”
The Chamber of Commerce report recommends reduction of the present immigrant quotas by sixty per cent, strict “racial” selection of prospective immigrants, suspension of all immigration “during periods of economic emergency,” authorization of the President to deport any alien whose presence is “detrimental to the public welfare,” cancellation of the citizenship of any naturalized citizen who has committed a crime, and similar measures to a total of thirty-eight.
The American Committee charges that the arguments brought forward to support these recommendations are both unscientific and un-American. Its statement was prepared by members of the New York section of the committee who are experts in the fields of genetics, anthropology, and history, including Prof. Franz Boas, world famed for his scientific work on race questions; Prof. Donald Lancefield of Queens College, an outstanding geneticist; Professor William M. Malisoff, editor of Philosophy of Science, and Dr. Nelson P. Mead, acting president of the College of the City of New York and a leading authority on American history.
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.