We are advised that the Treasury department will be closed for business on December 26, 1931, and January 2, 1932.

As these two days, December 26, 1931, and January 2, 1932, are succeeded by Sundays, which are legal holidays for all purposes; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Washington, D. C., Clearing House Association petition the Congress of the United States to enact legislation necessary to make Saturday, December 26, 1931, and Saturday, January 2, 1932, legal holidays in the District of Columbia for all purposes.

Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be sent to the chairman of the Committee on the District of Columbia in the Senate of the United States and another copy be sent to the chairman of the Committee on the District of Columbia in the House of Representatives.

The foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by the Washington, D. C. Clearing House Association, Monday, December 14, 1931.

V. B. DEYBER, Secretary.

SR-72-1-VOL 1- -2

Mr. KING, from the Committee on Immigration, submitted the

following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 7]

The Committee on Immigration, to whom was referred the bill S. 7, to provide for the deportation of certain alien seamen, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report the bill to the Senate with a recommendation that it do pass.

A bill, substantially in the same form as S. 7, was introduced in the Sixty-ninth Congress, and after hearings by the Committee on Immigration, it was favorably reported to the Senate. Upon consideration by the Senate, and after being amended, was passed. The House did not act upon the bill. In the Seventieth Congress a bill textually the same was introduced in the Senate, and after consideration by the Committee on Immigration it was favorably reported, but no action was taken upon the same during that session. In the Seventieth Congress a bill in the same terms was introduced and after consideration by the Committee on Immigration was favorably reported to the Senate. After having passed the Senate a motion to reconsider was submitted which was not disposed of for several months. The motion to reconsider was rejected and the bill as passed by the Senate was transmitted to the House. The Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House conducted hearings and later reported the bill with some slight amendments for the purpose of clarifying the text. There was also a further amendment which did not affect the merits or important features of the bill. The bill reached the House Calendar but a short time before the adjournment of Congress, but for lack of time was not considered in

the House.

A similar measure was under consideration in the House during the 1923-24 session and testimony was then taken by the Committee

on Immigration of the House in behalf of the measure. The testimony then taken, together with the hearings conducted by the Senate Committee on Immigration during the Sixty-ninth, Seventieth, and Seventy-first Congresses, and also the annual report of the Commissioner General of Immigration for 1931, established the fact that our exclusion and immigration laws have been and are being violated in various ways. Some of these violations fall into the following categories:

(a) The Chinese exclusion act passed in 1891 has been steadily, and in a constantly increasing number of instances, violated by means of substitution by young Chinese for aged ones, desiring to return to China, departing as seamen on the same ship.

(b) By smuggling Chinese excluded by law into the United States. (c) By bringing to the United States a larger number of persons as seamen than the vessel carries away on departure.

(d) By shipping as seamen persons who are in fact immigrants unable to obtain a visa and who, on the vessel's arrival in the United States, leave the vessel to mix at once with such of the population as are of their own language and nationality.

The hearings established that large sums of money-in some instances as much as $1,100-were paid by Chinese in order to secure entrance into the United States; and that a large number of persons from Europe had entered the United States as seamen, though in fact they were immigrants and not entitled to enter the United States. They masqueraded as seamen but were not, and in entering the United States they violated the provisions of the immigration laws. In the pending bill such persons are designated as mala fide seamen.

From the testimony and the reports submitted by Government officials it appears that many thousands of persons have entered the United States in violation of law since the quota law of 1921 was adopted, who, if the provisions of this bill had been enacted into law, would have been prevented from landing upon our shores. To meet the situation described by the testimony and to prevent so far as possible, violations of the immigration law of the character referred to in the testimony and herein, this bill is submitted. Among other things it provides:

(a) That all foreign vessels must, on leaving the United States, carry as many persons in her crew as she had on arrival.

(b) It adds to the immigration laws by prohibiting anyone coming as a seaman, who could not enter as an immigrant, except

1. Any seaman coming into port in a vessel in distress.

2. Any seaman being a citizen or subject of a sovereign nation and serving on one of her merchant vessels exclusively, however, of persons racially excluded who are natives or inhabitants of any such sovereign nation's colonies, dependencies or mandates.

(c) That all vessels, regardless of their flags, coming from foreign ports are to be examined at quarantine for the purpose of identifying those racially excluded or found to be mala fide seamen. Those found to be either mala fide seamen, or racially excluded, according to this act, are to be delivered to an immigrant detention station or a prison designated by immigration officials, thence to be sent, as a passenger on some vessel other than that on which they were brought, back to the port in which they were hired or to their native country, delivery, detention, and deportation to be paid for or payment fully guaranteed by the vessel on which such seamen were brought.

The bill has been opposed by some shipping interests, foreign and American, not on the ground that it was in violation of any treaty

or of comity but because it would prove to be harsh, costly, and inconvenient. Communications from the Department of State indicate that the bill is not in violation of treaty. Communications of protest do not mention comity.

Not infrequently officers of foreign vessels have dismissed and left in the United States members of their crew whom they did not need or desire on their departing ships. The United States has had the expense of arresting them and paying the expenses of deportation. This bill places the expense upon the vessel and relieves the United States therefrom, except such as may be entailed in making proper investigation at quarantine, where immigration officials are stationed for the purpose of examining the crew for loathsome and contagious diseases. It is not claimed that the bill will abolish all violations of the exclusion and immigration laws. It will, however, materially strengthen our immigration laws and prevent the illegal entrance into the United States of a large number of persons.

As a part of this report reference is made to the reports heretofore submitted by the Senate upon the various bills above referred to, and which were favorably reported to the Senate by the Committee on Immigration.