Part 21

+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ CANADA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 16.4 +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+

DIAGRAM 2

Average interval before filing petition after arrival at ages 21 or over by races. The bars which are in black ((filled with / character)) represent countries from which the subject people constituted almost entirely the immigration to this country.]

RACE AND RELATIVE AGE AT ARRIVAL

The racial distribution of these petitioners, with reference to age at arrival, is interesting and to some extent significant. Table XXVI, including only those races represented by at least 50 petitions, is arranged in the order of percentages of those arriving after attaining the age of 21 years. It throws sidelights upon the variations of the age at which the individuals of various races came to this country:

TABLE XXVI

RACIAL DISTRIBUTION OF PETITIONERS, SHOWING PERCENTAGES FOR THE AGE PERIODS “OVER TWENTY-ONE,” “FIFTEEN TO TWENTY,” AND “ONE TO FOURTEEN,” IN THE ORDER OF THE FIRST-MENTIONED AGE GROUP

======================================================================= | | NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF THOSE | | ARRIVING AT AGES | WHOLE +---------------------------------------------- COUNTRY | NUMBER | 21 and Over | 15 TO 20 | 1 TO 14 OF BIRTH | OF +--------+------+--------+------+--------+----- |PETITIONERS| Number | Per | Number | Per | Number | Per | | | Cent | | Cent | | Cent ------------+-----------+--------+------+--------+------+--------+----- Scotland | 288 | 218 | 75.7 | 57 | 19.8 | 13 | 4.5 Switzerland | 197 | 140 | 71.7 | 50 | 25.4 | 7 | 3.5 France | 86 | 57 | 66.3 | 10 | 11.6 | 19 | 22.1 England | 831 | 538 | 64.7 | 216 | 26.0 | 77 | 9.3 Holland | 139 | 90 | 64.7 | 32 | 23.0 | 17 | 12.2 Germany | 2,305 | 1,425 | 61.8 | 600 | 26.0 | 280 | 12.1 Ireland | 1,773 | 1,087 | 61.3 | 609 | 34.3 | 77 | 4.3 Denmark | 200 | 122 | 61.0 | 65 | 32.5 | 13 | 6.5 Norway | 389 | 228 | 58.6 | 148 | 38.0 | 13 | 3.3 Finland | 144 | 84 | 58.3 | 54 | 37.5 | 6 | 4.1 Hungary | 2,443 | 1,291 | 52.8 | 960 | 39.3 | 192 | 7.9 Canada | 385 | 198 | 51.4 | 99 | 25.7 | 88 | 22.9 Sweden | 616 | 316 | 51.3 | 269 | 43.7 | 31 | 5.0 Russia | 7,864 | 3,936 | 50.1 | 3,055 | 38.8 | 873 | 11.1 Rumania | 569 | 278 | 48.9 | 202 | 35.5 | 89 | 15.6 Italy | 3,591 | 1,742 | 48.5 | 1,198 | 33.4 | 651 | 18.1 Austria | 3,875 | 1,828 | 47.2 | 1,658 | 42.8 | 389 | 10.0 Turkey in | | | | | | | Europe | 92 | 42 | 45.7 | 42 | 45.7 | 8 | 8.7 Turkey in | | | | | | | Asia | 142 | 63 | 44.4 | 69 | 48.6 | 10 | 7.0 Greece | 90 | 31 | 34.4 | 47 | 52.2 | 12 | 13.3 =======================================================================

Inferences or generalizations from this table in connection with the age statistics given heretofore would be perilous, since we have not tabulated the data which would show, with regard to any particular racial group, how many of those between 15 and 20 years of age came at 18 or 19; or how many of those over 21 came after they were 25 or before they were 30. So far as it goes, however, it would appear to indicate that those of the so-called “older” immigration left their homelands at a later age, while a larger proportion of those of the “newer” came in younger manhood. The larger percentages in the column “over 21” are credited to the “older”; the larger in the second column, “15 to 20,” to the “newer.”

AT THE BEGINNING OF MARRIED LIFE

More than two-thirds (68.5 per cent) of the petitioners were married at the time of their petition for naturalization. One may hazard the guess that the majority were either unmarried or newly married when they came to this country, because, while 89.9 per cent of the 18,017 married petitioners reported wives of foreign birth, 10,563 (73.5 per cent) of them had children exclusively native-born. Only one in ten had foreign-born children only, and only 16.5 per cent had both native and foreign-born children. And 14,371 (79.8 per cent) of the married petitioners had one or more children under 21 years of age.[118]

AS FOR “STABILITY OF RESIDENCE”

The question of what might be called the “residential stability” of the immigrant in this country has been the subject of much assertion and little substantial information. The general tenor of the assertion and the vague impression of the average person are to the effect that the immigrant is more or less of a wanderer, shifting from place to place, and for that reason failing to establish anything resembling permanent residence or to relate himself to the community as a neighbor. Very little statistical data on this point is available, and it is unsafe to generalize. There is, however, a somewhat startling disclosure in the 1915 census of the state of Massachusetts, showing that in the class of otherwise “justified” voters disqualified solely by reason of not having resided one year in the state or six months in the city or town, there were 21,226 native and 3,845 foreign born; in other words, that 3.6 per cent of the native-born voters were disqualified because they were moving about; while only 1.9 per cent, or just about half the proportion, of the foreign-born were disqualified for that reason.

The analysis of petitions by the Americanization Study sheds a little further light on this subject, by segregating the figures in each court showing petitions which were filed by aliens who had filed their declaration in another state. Of the total of 26,284, there were 1,859 of these, or 7.1 per cent. Undoubtedly this moving about, in search of employment or for other reasons, is a considerable factor in the delay between arrival and declaration and between declaration and petition. Naturally, the figures would tend to be high on the Pacific coast, to which immigrants travel by rather long stages of time. The court in Portland, Oregon, showed 234 out of 714 petitioners--almost a third--who had filed their declaration in other states. This court shows also the longest average interval between declaration and petition. The courts in Seattle also show high figures in this regard. The same tends to be true of rapidly growing industrial centers, such as Cleveland, Bridgeport, Paterson, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

TABLE XXVII

PETITIONERS WHOSE DECLARATIONS WERE MADE IN A STATE OTHER THAN THE ONE IN WHICH THE COURT IS LOCATED

=========================================================== | PETITIONERS WHO DECLARED COURT | IN OTHER STATES +-------------+----------- | Number | Per Cent ---------------------------------+-------------+----------- Norwich, Conn. | 52 | 43.7 Portland, Ore. | 234 | 32.8 Seattle, Wash. (state court) | 42 | 29.4 Bridgeport, Conn. | 96 | 23.4 New Brunswick, N. J. | 84 | 21.6 Cleveland, Ohio (U. S. court) | 158 | 13.4 Paterson, N. J. | 76 | 10.2 Seattle, Wash. (U. S. court) | 69 | 9.8 Middletown, Conn. | 7 | 9.5 Cincinnati, Ohio | 34 | 9.4 Cleveland, Ohio (state court) | 152 | 8.9 Easton, Pa. | 10 | 8.7 Ithaca, N. Y. | 2 | 8.7 Akron, Ohio | 16 | 8.0 Iowa City, Iowa | 1 | 7.7 Rochester, N. Y. | 57 | 7.0 Jamaica, L. I. | 39 | 6.5 Elmira, N. Y. | 1 | 5.3 Mineola, L. I. | 7 | 5.2 New York City (U. S. court) | 121 | 5.0 White Plains, N. Y. | 28 | 4.3 Worcester, Mass. | 27 | 4.3 New York City (state court) | 452 | 4.1 Bronx, N. Y. C. (state court) | 47 | 3.5 Brooklyn, N. Y. C. (U. S. court) | 47 | 3.0 ---------------------------------+-------------+----------- Total | 1,859 | 7.1 ===========================================================

That upward of 13 out of 14--nearly 93 per cent--of alien petitioners for American citizenship, in a total of more than 26,000, should have been able to file their final petitions in the same states in which, on an average of more than five years before, they had declared their intention to do so, certainly attests a degree of “stability of residence” comparing favorably with that of other, native-born residents of the country. And it would seem also to justify the inference that those who become naturalized have generally become well assimilated into the life of the communities where they live.

INTELLECTUAL EQUIPMENT AND OCCUPATION

As for the intellectual equipment and the general usefulness of the aspirants for citizenship represented in the petitions studied, one may infer something from the occupational range shown in an analysis of the petitions for 1913-14 in seven cities,[119] representing a wide variety of locality. This analysis showed, for each of the 17 kinds of occupations listed, the ratio between the number of naturalization petitions filed by persons in those occupations in those cities in 1913-14, and the foreign-born white males in those occupations in those cities as shown by the census of 1910. Perhaps the most striking fact emerging from this analysis, illuminating to those who have supposed that the naturalization process swept into citizenship the dregs of immigration, is that the smallest percentage is shown in the class of common labor; the highest in the grade of executives, and the preponderance throughout attaching to trades requiring a degree of dexterity and general intelligence and information, if not technical training. It is unsafe, however, to infer too much from these percentages, because of the relatively small numbers represented in some of the classes, and the large proportions accredited to the garment trades and to “retail dealers,” among whom, doubtless, there were many mere peddlers. The distribution of occupations is here set forth in the order of the percentages:

TABLE XXVIII

LIST OF PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS REPRESENTED IN PETITIONS FOR NATURALIZATION FILED IN SEVEN CITIES, 1913-14; SHOWING RATIO BETWEEN NUMBER OF PETITIONS AND TOTAL OF FOREIGN-BORN WHITE MALES IN THOSE OCCUPATIONS IN THOSE CITIES IN 1910

========================================================= | NUMBER OF | RATIO TO OCCUPATIONS | PETITIONERS | FOREIGN BORN | IN THOSE | IN THOSE | OCCUPATIONS | OCCUPATIONS -----------------------------+-------------+------------- Total | 9,930 | 3.0 | | Managers and superintendents | 154 | 7.1 Chauffeurs | 176 | 5.9 Tailors | 2,120 | 5.3 Clergymen | 67 | 4.7 Bartenders | 248 | 3.6 Plumbers | 193 | 3.6 Barbers | 372 | 3.2 Bakers | 328 | 3.1 Retail dealers | 2,103 | 3.1 Painters and glaziers | 514 | 3.1 Carpenters | 779 | 3.0 Salesmen | 591 | 2.8 Manufacturing and officials | 511 | 2.7 Blacksmiths | 161 | 2.7 Motormen | 92 | 2.4 Brick and stone masons | 219 | 2.2 Laborers | 1,302 | 1.5 =========================================================

Analysis of the entire total of 26,284 petitions from which the data were obtained shows a general occupation distribution as follows:

TABLE XXIX

NUMBER AND PER CENT OF PETITIONERS IN EACH OCCUPATION

=============================================================== | PETITIONERS OCCUPATIONS +--------+--------- | Number | Per Cent --------------------------------------------+--------+--------- Total | 26,284 | 100.0 | | Manufacturing and mechanical industries | 15,335 | 58.3 Trade | 4,427 | 16.8 Domestic and personal service | 2,382 | 9.1 Clerical | 1,388 | 5.3 Transportation | 1,010 | 3.8 Professional service | 1,026 | 3.9 Agriculture, forestry, and animal husbandry | 454 | 1.8 Public service. | 170 | 0.6 Extraction of minerals | 40 | 0.2 No information | 52 | 0.2 ===============================================================

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

Certain inferences and conclusions seem to be warranted on the whole by the examination and analyses in this chapter and that preceding it, of the compilations of the United States Census, the Immigration Commission of 1907, the Naturalization, Bureau and the Americanization Study.

First, and most important, is the destruction of the legendary presumption of some change for the worse in recent years in the inherent character-quality of immigration to this country, and in the attitude of the typical immigrant of those years toward American citizenship. There has been no such change; indeed, if there is any substantial difference in “quality of assimilability” between the “older” races and the newer, _it is in favor of the latter_.

Second, it is evident that such difference as exists among races is not an inherent racial quality, but _a difference between the political, social, and economic conditions at the time of migration in the country of origin_. Those nations whose people are most free from tyranny and oppression and most contented with the conditions under which they live at home, send the fewest immigrants to America; their emigrants come at a later age, and when they do come they retain longest or altogether their original citizenship.

Third, and broadly corollary, is the fact that the major, not to say exclusively, controlling factor in the political absorption of the immigrant is _length of residence_. The longer the individual lives in America the more likely he is to seek active membership therein.

Fourth, the interval between arrival and petition for naturalization--or even the original declaration of intention--is much longer than has generally been supposed. The average immigrant, regardless of racial extraction, does not concern himself about political privileges or activities until after long years of residence and the attainment of a considerable degree of permanent social and economic status.

Fifth, knowledge of the English language at the time of arrival is not a material factor in determining the rapidity with which the individual seeks citizenship. On the contrary, those of other tongues who have been in the United States as long as those whose mother speech is English show even greater interest and a higher rate of naturalization. In the ordinary case, by the time the immigrant of any race has been in this country long enough to reach the normal stage of interest in naturalization he has acquired a good working knowledge of the language.

Sixth--and from the common-sense point of view it ought to occasion no surprise--is the evident influence upon the display of “civic and political interest” as shown in the desire for citizenship, of social and economic conditions in this country as they practically affect the individual. Whether from northwestern or from southeastern Europe, whether from the so-called “recent” or “older” immigration, the racial groups show a slower desire for citizenship and a lower rate of naturalization while they are employed in the more poorly paid industries; both the individual interest and the rate increase as the individuals toil upward in the social and economic scale.

* * * * *

The inherent thing in the racial quality, experience, and character of the immigrant that leads some to seek citizenship earlier than others, the essential element in the “quality of assimilability,” in the display of “civic and political interest,” is a human thing, which lies, and always has lain, broad upon the face of nearly all of the statistical tables over which students have labored so intricately and pontificated so solemnly--in some instances so absurdly. It is a thing so obvious that it is difficult to understand why so many of them have overlooked it.

IX

CITIZENSHIP VIA MILITARY SERVICE

We do not yet realize--perhaps we never shall fully realize--the profound effect upon the whole structure of our political life, and especially upon the quality of our citizenship, wrought by the World War. One effect, however, stands forth clearly: the war has destroyed the underpinning of the great structure of hand-picked citizenry which, during twelve years of arduous labor and scrupulous straining of technicalities, was built up by the Naturalization Bureau and the courts on the basis of the Naturalization Law of 1906, and turned into solemn farce most of the pontifical preachments by which that policy was justified. Almost overnight the whole long campaign for the establishment of an educational standard of admission, the system of technical exactitude of papers and microscopical scrutiny of the antecedents, length of residence, and even the personal opinions of applicants, and of the competency of their witnesses, and so on, was nullified. Aliens, helter-skelter, hit-or-miss, were swept into full citizenship to an aggregate well-nigh half as large as the whole number admitted previously during the entire period of the existence of the Naturalization Service.

When the United States entered the war, early in 1917, the instant necessity of raising a stupendous army swiftly out of our heterogeneous population injected an unprecedented factor into the question of naturalization. The body of native-born citizens, even together with the great mass of those among the foreign-born who were naturalized, was not sufficient. Aside from that, there were considerations of another character; such, for example, as were set forth by the Provost Marshal General of the Army:[120]

As soon as the estimates of population made by the Census Bureau had been received, it began to be apparent that the rule of the Selective Service Act, which based the apportionment of quotas on total population, and yet drew the quotas from citizens and declarants only, would operate quite differently upon communities having largely differing percentages of aliens in their population. In certain local-board jurisdictions, in which the element of alien population exceeded 30 per cent of the total, the burden placed upon the citizen population was very great.... If in two communities of equal population the citizen population of one were 100 per cent of the whole and in the other 50 per cent, the remainder being composed of aliens, the two communities, though equal in population, in resources, in industries, and in need of labor, the efforts, and the enterprise of men of military age, would fall under a very unequal tax upon their man power. The all-citizen community would be required to furnish twice as many men as the half-citizen, half-alien community.

POSITION OF THE ALIEN SOLDIER

The Provost Marshal General[121] reported 1,243,801 aliens registered under the first draft, and estimated that of these (21-30) nearly half a million (457,713) had been called for examination, and 16.72 per cent--nearly 17 out of every hundred--certified for service; a few in ignorance of their right to exemption, but virtually all of them voluntarily waiving that right.

The position of the aliens, even if they had declared their intention to become citizens, was unenviable. They still owed technical allegiance to European sovereignty--many of them to the nations with which we were formally or practically at war. Many of them were of the cobelligerent nations known as “the Allies,” but were here in evasion of military-service laws or other embarrassing legal obligations at home, making personally undesirable their return to the old country; and as for those of German, Austrian, Bulgarian, or Turkish nationality, there was for them short shrift--upon capture while fighting against armies of the Central Powers--only the dismal certainty of summary execution as traitors. Their only possible shadow of protection would lie in completed American citizenship.

Furthermore, there was the fact that only American citizens are eligible for commissions as officers in the military service of the United States; but in the new army, and the augmented navy and marine corps--to say nothing of the merchant marine--a very large number of officers would be needed. This last consideration seems to have been the one which chiefly impressed the Commissioner of Naturalization; for, in his explanation of the necessity for the legislation of May 9, 1918, which let down the bars to citizenship for the benefit of aliens and declarants taken into the military service of the nation, he twice refers to it:[122]

No man engaged in the actual military and naval operations of our country can attain to the rank of commissioned officer unless he be an American, either by birth in the United States or by naturalization therein, irrespective of his training or qualifications. As this restriction, made for peace times, was no less a detriment to the country in limiting its range of selection for commissions to citizens than to those who demonstrated their efficiency, legislative action was taken to remove this restriction....

... The foreign-born residents of the United States, nondeclarants and declarants, had not claimed exemption from military service because of their alienage; but, unless he could claim full American citizenship, none of them, however valiantly he might fight, could receive a commission as an officer, which is the laudable ambition of every soldier.

REVOLUTIONARY LEGISLATIVE ACTION

The revolutionary character of the legislative action with which Congress undertook to meet the situation in its various aspects is apparent in the description of it given by the Commissioner of Naturalization in this same report:[123]