Part 20

[note 1: Denied because declaration of intention was more than seven years old.]

In this table there are 14 countries listed whose per cent of denials exceeds that for all countries. Of these only four supply the “new” immigration. And of the seven showing a lower than 11.5 per cent denials, five constitute the “new” immigration. This would point to greater success on the part of the new races in attaining their naturalization papers. The qualifying fact here, as elsewhere, is that more than twice as many petitioners belong to the “new” races as to the “old.”

The two causes of denial showing the largest per cents for the country as a whole and for most countries are “want of prosecution” and the invalidity of their “old-law” declaration. That so large a proportion of immigrants have taken the trouble to take almost the last steps toward citizenship and then fail by default is symptomatic of waste somewhere along the line. This condition seems to prevail among both the “old” and “new” peoples.

AS REGARDS “IMMORAL CHARACTER”

For some of the less mechanical causes of denial, let us segregate and arrange the countries in order of percentages. The following table shows denials for “immoral character.”

TABLE XIX

PER CENT OF DENIALS DUE TO “IMMORAL CHARACTER,” BY RACE

================================= Country of Birth Denials Per Cent --------------------------------- Total cases 1.9 Turkey in Europe 7.6 Denmark 6.9 Sweden 5.0 Canada 4.6 Rumania 3.7 Hungary 3.2 England 2.5 Germany 2.4 Russia 1.7 Italy 1.7 Austria 1.4 Ireland 0.6 =================================

The average percentage of denials for the whole United States for the period 1908-18 on the ground of “immoral character” was 4.0 per cent. With the exception of Turkey in Europe, not one of the “newer” races came up to this average in the year 1913-14, so far as may be judged by this analysis of the court records of more than one in five of the petitions passed upon in that year. Austria, Hungary, Italy, Rumania, all showed a record materially better, and the figures generally show that cause to be negligible, anyway.

THE SHOWING AS TO “IGNORANCE”

In considering the statistics of denials on the ground of “ignorance,” it is to be remembered that the examinations which disclose this “ignorance” do not go as a rule to the subject of illiteracy or general intelligence, but deal in the majority of cases with the understanding of the petitioner as to the form of government, and sometimes decidedly minute details of the history, of the United States. The average percentage of denials on the ground of “ignorance” in the whole United States during the eleven years 1908-18 was 10.3. The records of the petitions of every one of the “recent” races, except Italian, for the year 1913-14--if one may judge by this study of more than one-fifth of them--was far better than that average, though generally higher than that of the old races.

TABLE XX

PER CENT OF DENIALS DUE TO “IGNORANCE,” BY RACE

================================ Country of Birth Denials Per Cent -------------------------------- Total cases 7.2 Italy 14.2 Norway 8.3 Switzerland 8.0 Hungary 7.6 Rumania 7.4 Austria 7.2 Russia 6.2 Turkey in Asia 5.6 Germany 4.7 Sweden 3.8 Scotland 2.4 Ireland 1.8 England 1.7 ================================

TIME-INTERVALS IN NATURALIZATION

Generally speaking, judging by the 26,284 petitions examined, each of which must show the date of arrival and declaration of intention, the immigrant is in this country in the average case anywhere from 5.4 to 12.7 years before he files his declaration of intention to seek citizenship. (See Table XXI.)

The evidence on this point was strikingly uniform in all the courts save one. The lowest average shown was 5.4 years in Cincinnati; the highest average but two was 8.6 in the State Superior Court at Worcester, Massachusetts. The extreme exceptions were 9.4 years in the Superior Court for Middlesex County, at Middletown, Connecticut, and 12.7 years in the Androscoggin Supreme Judicial Court at Auburn, Maine. The latter court in naturalization matters deals largely with French-Canadians; of all the 385 Canadian petitioners falling under this analysis, this one court passed upon 61.5 per cent.

TABLE XXI

THE AVERAGE TIME ELAPSING BETWEEN ARRIVAL AND DECLARATION OF INTENTION; BETWEEN DECLARATION AND PETITION, AND BETWEEN PETITION AND NATURALIZATION AS SHOWN BY 26,284 CERTIFICATES, 1913-14

===================================================================== | AVERAGE | AVERAGE | AVERAGE | INTERVAL | INTERVAL | INTERVAL | BETWEEN | BETWEEN | BETWEEN COURTS | ARRIVAL |DECLARATION| PETITION | AND | AND | AND |DECLARATION| PETITION |CERTIFICATE | (Years) | (Years) | (Months) ---------------------------------+-----------+-----------+----------- New York Co. Supm. Ct. | 6.7 | 4.7 | 5.1 U. S. Dist. Ct., Southern Dist. | | | New York, N. Y. C. | 7.2 | 4.3 | 3.9 U. S. Dist. Ct., Eastern Dist. | | | New York, Brooklyn | 7.1 | 5.2 | 4.1 Bronx Co. Supm. Ct., N. Y. C. | 7.7 | 3.9 | 5.0 Queens Co. Supm. Ct., Jamaica, | | | L. I. | 7.4 | 6.5 | 4.6 Westchester Co. Supm. Ct., White | | | Plains, N. Y. | 6.9 | 5.2 | 5.8 Nassau Co. Supm. Ct., Mineola, | | | L. I. | 7.0 | 4.9 | 4.7 Passaic Co. Ct. Com. Pls., | | | Paterson, N. J. | 6.3 | 5.2 | 4.1 Fairfield Co. Supr. Ct., | | | Bridgeport, Conn. | 7.7 | 4.8 | 5.3 Knox Co. Circt. Ct., Galesburg, | | | Ill. | 7.7 | 4.6 | 4.8 Johnson Co. Dist. Ct., Iowa City,| | | Iowa | 6.1 | 3.5 | 4.6 Androscoggin Co. Supm. Jud. Ct., | | | Auburn, Me. | 12.7 | 3.0 | 4.2 Tompkins Co. Supm. Ct., Ithaca, | | | N. Y. | 8.0 | 3.5 | 6.4 Middlesex Co. Ct. Com Pls., New | | | Brunswick, N. J. | 6.6 | 4.6 | 5.2 U. S. Dist. Ct. Northern Dist., | | | Cleveland, Ohio | 5.4 | 5.0 | 4.5 Cuyahoga Co. Ct. Com. Pls., | | | Cleveland, Ohio | 6.7 | 5.0 | 4.5 Multnomah Co. Circt. Ct., | | | Portland, Ore. | 7.2 | 11.1 | 5.1 Monroe Co. Supm. Ct., Rochester, | | | N. Y. | 6.3 | 5.5 | 4.6 U. S. Dist. Ct. Western Dist. | | | Washington, Seattle | 6.1 | 7.1 | 4.8 King Co. Supm. Ct., Seattle, | | | Wash. | 6.0 | 8.8 | 11.1 Chemung Co. Supm. Ct., Elmira, | | | N. Y. | 7.0 | 4.8 | 12.7 Summit Co. Ct. Com. Pls., Akron, | | | Ohio | 6.2 | 4.2 | 5.7 Northampton Co. Ct. Com. Pls., | | | Easton, Pa. | 7.5 | 4.2 | 5.5 Worcester Co. Supr. Ct., | | | Worcester, Mass. | 8.6 | 4.1 | 5.4 Middlesex Co. Supr. Ct., | | | Middletown, Conn. | 9.4 | 3.7 | 5.3 Rensselaer Co. Supm. Ct., Troy, | | | N. Y. | 6.2 | 4.1 | 7.7 U. S. Dist. Ct. Southern Dist. | | | O., Cincinnati | 5.7 | 5.4 | 5.1 New London Co. Supr. Ct., | | | Norwich, Conn. | 8.5 | 4.2 | 6.8 | | | Average | 6.8 | 5.1 | 4.9 =====================================================================

Having filed his declaration of intention after an average residence in this country shown in all courts as 6.8 years--nearly two years more than the five years’ minimum residence required for the _completion_ of citizenship--our average immigrant _waits more than five years_ longer before he files his final petition for naturalization--although under the law he need have waited only two. The range, however, was wide, between an average of 3.0 years in the Supreme Court of Androscoggin County, Auburn, Maine, and 11.1 years in the Circuit Court at Portland, Oregon. The whole average shown in all the courts studied was 5.1 years. These are very surprising figures for those who have been complaining that we have hurried aliens into citizenship.

Once the applicant has his petition filed, the process becomes more expeditious. The figures collated for the year 1913-14 show an average interval between petition and certificate of naturalization of 4.9 months; the range is between 3.9 months in the United States District Court in Manhattan, and 12.7 months in the State Supreme Court at Elmira, New York. From the point of view of delay, three months must always be subtracted, since the law requires, in any event, an interval of at least ninety days after the petition is filed before it can be considered by the court.

HOW DO THE RACIAL GROUPS COMPARE?

What light do the petitions throw upon the question of the relative “civic and political interest” of the various racial groups, as shown by the interval that elapses between their attainment of the age of 21 years, or if they come here after they are 21, between their arrival and their filing of the final petition?

TABLE XXII

AVERAGE INTERVAL BEFORE FILING PETITION, AFTER ATTAINMENT OF TWENTY-ONE YEARS, FOR THOSE ARRIVING AT AGES OF ONE TO FOURTEEN, BY RACES

========================================= | NUMBER IN | AVERAGE COUNTRY OF BIRTH | AGE GROUP | INTERVAL | 1-14 | (Years) ------------------+-----------+---------- All countries | 2,900 | 6.2 | | France | 19 | 12.9 Norway | 13 | 12.5 Switzerland | 7 | 12.4 Sweden | 31 | 12.4 Scotland | 13 | 11.8 England | 77 | 11.6 Ireland | 77 | 10.8 Germany | 280 | 10.3 Canada | 88 | 9.8 Denmark | 13 | 9.5 Holland | 17 | 9.5 Hungary | 192 | 5.8 Greece | 12 | 5.5 Finland | 6 | 5.3 Russia | 873 | 5.0 Italy | 651 | 4.9 Austria | 389 | 4.5 Turkey in Asia | 10 | 4.0 Rumania | 89 | 3.8 Turkey in Europe | 8 | 3.6 =========================================

We have three groups of statistics on this point: those petitioners arriving at the ages of 1 to 14, those at 15 to 20 years, and those 21 years and over. In the following table the countries of birth are arranged in the order of the average interval for those arriving at the ages of 1 to 14 years. The complete table will be found in the Appendix.

TABLE XXIII

AVERAGE INTERVAL BEFORE FILING PETITION, AFTER ARRIVAL, AT AGES OF FIFTEEN TO TWENTY, BY RACES

========================================= | NUMBER IN | AVERAGE COUNTRY OF BIRTH | AGE GROUP | INTERVAL | 15-20 | (Years) ------------------+-----------+---------- All countries | 9,512 | 11.0{1} | | France | 10 | 17.7 Canada | 99 | 17.3 Switzerland | 50 | 15.6 Germany | 600 | 14.1 England | 216 | 13.6 Sweden | 269 | 12.7 Scotland | 57 | 12.7 Denmark | 65 | 12.2 Holland | 32 | 12.2 Finland | 54 | 11.7 Ireland | 609 | 11.5 Norway | 148 | 11.3 Italy | 1,198 | 10.8 Hungary | 960 | 10.8 Austria | 1,658 | 10.6 Rumania | 202 | 10.2 Russia | 3,055 | 9.9 Greece | 47 | 9.7 Turkey in Asia | 69 | 9.0 Turkey in Europe | 42 | 7.9 =========================================

[note 1: This average includes the figures for races whose numbers are too small to justify generalization.]

The striking thing in these tables is the fact that almost without exception the countries showing the longest intervals are those representing the old immigration.

TABLE XXIV

AVERAGE INTERVAL BEFORE FILING PETITION, AFTER ARRIVAL, AT AGES TWENTY-ONE OR OVER, BY RACES

========================================= | NUMBER IN | | AGE GROUP | AVERAGE COUNTRY OF BIRTH | 21 YEARS | INTERVAL | AND OVER | (Years) ------------------+-----------+---------- All countries | 13,849 | 10.6{1} | | Canada | 198 | 16.4 Sweden | 316 | 13.1 Switzerland | 140 | 12.2 France | 57 | 11.9 Germany | 1,425 | 11.9 England | 538 | 11.7 Italy | 1,742 | 11.4 Norway | 228 | 10.8 Scotland | 218 | 10.6 Finland | 84 | 10.5 Austria | 1,828 | 10.5 Denmark | 122 | 10.2 Holland | 90 | 10.1 Hungary | 1,291 | 9.9 Rumania | 278 | 9.8 Russia | 3,936 | 9.6 Ireland | 1,087 | 9.6 Greece | 31 | 8.6 Turkey in Asia | 63 | 8.5 Turkey in Europe | 42 | 8.1 =========================================

[note 1: This average includes the figures for races whose numbers are too small to justify generalization.]

THEY ARE YOUNG PEOPLE

They were young men. More than 60 per cent of them were between the ages of 18 and 30 years. Of the 26,284 applicants for citizenship whose petitions were examined, 16,586--over three-fifths--came to this country between the ages of 18 and 30. The preponderance is striking:

TABLE XXV

NUMBER AND PER CENT OF PETITIONERS FOR THREE AGE GROUPS{1}

======================================= AGE AT ARRIVAL | NUMBER | PER CENT -------------------+--------+---------- 1-17 | 6,589 | 25.1 18-30 | 16,586 | 63.1 31 and over | 3,093 | 11.5 No data | 16 | .... -------------------+--------+---------- Total | 26,284 | 99.8 =======================================

[note 1: The full table showing distribution of ages at arrival from infancy to fifty years or over, is given in the Appendix, Table 57.]

RELATIVE AGE AND “POLITICAL INTEREST”

It is interesting to note, in this connection, the relation between the age at which the alien arrives in this country and the length of time that elapses before he files his final petition for citizenship. The following diagram exhibits this:

Close analysis of these lists further emphasizes the importance of the factor of _age at arrival_ as affecting the lapse of time after the attainment of lawful age before filing the final petition for citizenship. It appears, as might well be expected, that those who come in childhood are more prompt than those who arrive between 15 and 20; but even those coming in childhood appear, on the average, to wait until after they are 27. The averages indicate, almost without exception, that those coming at ages over 20 waited more than 10 years before filing their petitions. Few come after they are 40 and then seek citizenship. The petitions show that on the average those arriving at 1 to 14 applied 6.2 years after 21. Those arriving at 21 years or over applied 10.6 years after arrival.

Those arriving between 15 and 20 applied 11 years after arrival, but it is fallacious to compare this interval with those in the case of the younger or older immigrants, because the five years’ required residence might mean application at 21 years of age by an immigrant who came at 15 or 16, or at 25 years by one who came at 20; while one who, coming at 15, waited the full average of 11 years would apply at 26, apparently more promptly than one who, coming in infancy, did not apply until he was 27 or over. The questions suggested by the discrepancy here apparent are many, but the data available furnish no definite answer to them. Perhaps fuller statistics might substantially modify the apparent discrepancies.

THE REAL RACIAL DISTINCTION

These men, the cream of our immigration--regardless of any fanciful distinction of race “older” or “newer”--came in the flower of their young manhood to try hazard of new fortunes in what they rightly believed to be the land of promise and opportunity; lived here from five to twelve years before they registered in normal declaration their intention to become citizens; lived here upward of five years more before filing their final petition for citizenship, and nearly nine out of ten of them passed their examinations and were admitted.

There is visible in these statistics a distinction of race--a very interesting and inspiring distinction, but it is not one of the “older” or “newer” races. It has little to do with any supposititious difference of racial quality or character. Indeed, it redounds on the whole to the credit of the more recent immigration, and, so far as it goes, would indicate, if anything, a greater potential fitness for American citizenship. In Diagram 2, which is based on Table XXIV, the bars which are black represent countries which have entirely a subject people, or in which a proportion of the population is subject. In the latter case it is the subject peoples who come to this country in larger proportions than the sovereign peoples. This is only one of the instances which illustrate an interesting conclusion. Certainly to a discerning eye this fact stands forth:

_Those from countries where, at the time of their migration, there was either autocratic government or political discontent, or inferior economic opportunity, head the list of those who seek, and upon examination prove their title to, fellow-membership with us._

_Those from countries where government was relatively democratic, where individual liberty prevailed, where political, social, and economic conditions were conducive to contentment, were satisfied to keep the citizenship of their fatherlands._

Why should it require exhaustive investigation to demonstrate so obvious, so inevitable an operation of human psychology? What else was to have been expected?