NEW PROBLEMS OF IMMIGRATION.

ABOUT three years ago' I called attention to the alarming deterioration in the quality of our immigration. The number of immigrants arriving had for several years been much smaller than previously; but, arguing from the well established relation between immigration and industrial activity in this country, it was perfectly safe to predict a speedy increase in arrivals at our ports. In the fiscal year 1898 the total immigration was 229,299; in 1839 it was 311,715, an increase over the preceding year of 36 per cent; in 1900 it was 448,572, an increase over the preceding year of 44 per cent. The Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of New York for September last takes note of this remarkable increase in the following words :

"A distinct idea as to the magnitude of immigration at the port of New York for the recent fiscal year may be formed when it is considered that in the past eighty-one years, or since the statistical record began, there were but seven other twelvemonths in which the arrivals exceeded those reported between July 1, 1899, and June 30, 1900. In the latter annual period the importations numbered no less than 341,712, and these figures were surpassed to a nominal extent only in each of the other years referred to."

In discussing the character of this recent increase I shall confine myself chiefly to the port of New York, the statistics for the whole country not being yet at hand; yet this is by no means a handicap, because not only does a very large proportion of the total immigration land at New York, but the most significant factors in the problem of immigration are more conspicuous there than elsewhere.

When the matter of immigration is being discussed the average citizen immediately thinks of those of foreign birth with whom he has come in contact. Unless he is engaged in some special trade or business in which the hiring of manual labor is involved, his mind will revert to the Irish or Germans, or, perhaps, to the Scandinavians or Canadians, or possibly he will think of his Italian fruit-seller. Such a man is very much surprised to learn that more than twice "North American Review," Vol. 163, p. 252, and Vol. 165, p. 393, October,

1897.

as many Croatians and Slovenians entered New York last year as English, three times as many Syrians as Scotch; as many Slovaks as Irish; three and one-half times as many South Italians, and twice as many Hebrews, as Germans. If you speak of Croatians, Slovenians, Lithuanians, Magyars, and Ruthenians, he will probably ask where in the world they came from and say he had never heard of them before.

The three largest elements in the total immigration of 1900 were South Italian, 84,346; Hebrew, 60,764; and Polish, 46,938. The next largest were the Irish, 35,607; Scandinavian, 32,952; and Germans, 29,682. Contrast this state of things with 1869, when the immigration from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Scandinavia constituted three-quarters of the total, or even with 1895, when it was still more than one-half. In 1898 it was about one-third of the total, in 1900, one-quarter, and it is rapidly approaching the point where, as a prominent immigration official says, may be considered a "negligible quantity." Indeed, if it were not for the large numbers of Irish and Scandinavians who come here to enter domestic service immigration from northwestern Europe might be said to have well-nigh ceased.

it

A new factor of growing importance is immigration from Asia. Last year Asian races sent us 18,044 immigrants, or nearly 4 1-2 per cent of the total, and half as many again as England, Scotland, and Wales combined. Most of these were Japanese and Syrians. There were also 3,773 Greeks, who might, from their characteristics, properly be classed with Asiatics from Asia Minor. The United Charities of New York report that these persons, accustomed to peddling and begging, are a great burden upon the hospitals and charitable societies to which they constantly appeal. Like many southeastern Europeans, they almost invariably practice fraud when obtaining relief, in order to prevent their being returned by the United States authorities as having become public charges within a year after landing. So successful is this method of deception that of immigrants admitted to the Boston City Hospital in a recent year barely 35 per cent could be identified so as to be handed over to the United States authorities for deportation. The unidentified in this instance were Poles, Slovaks, and Italians, and the deception consisted in giving false names, dates of arrival, and names of steamers, together with such inventions as would help to conceal their identity.

With the spread of railroad and steamship lines through Asia, and

the increasing contact with Europeans through the efforts of the latter to extend their political influence in Asia, it is inevitable that immigration of these teeming populations will shortly increase. China and Japan, for example, have been isolated for centuries; and even since the comparatively modern opening to trade, China, at least, has held aloof from Western life as far as possible. But how will it be in the future? What will happen if sections of China pass under the control of European powers, and the Chinese become German, Russian or British citizens, and entitled as such to the benefits of our immigration laws? For it is not to be supposed in such a case that any treaty made by snail-like Chinese policy will be tolerated by a European power. Indeed, it may be seriously questioned whether many of the Chinese are not superior to some European immigrants who have come to us recently; but the point is that the good and the bad are likely to come whether we want them or not, and it behooves us to get our immigration laws into proper shape before the stream wears a deep channel.

Whenever a marked change in the character of immigration takes place it challenges the earnest study of all citizens, who, through their representatives, make the immigration laws. In the previous article, above referred to, I called attention to the importance of educational characteristics as a test of general desirability, and to the close connection which we find to exist between illiteracy and other objectionable qualities. Undesirable immigration was therein defined as "that which is destitute of resources, either in money, or, still more, in ability and knowledge of a means to support itself; which is generally ignorant; which has criminal tendencies; is averse to country life, and congregates in our city slums; which has a low standard of living and little ambition to seek a better, and which has no permanent interests in this country."

One objection which was frequently made to inductions from immigration statistics has recently lost its force. Formerly, immigrants were classified according to the political state in which they were domiciled prior to emigration; and the illiteracy or per capita wealth of any class of immigrants was accordingly the average of all from a given political unit. This was manifestly unscientific and objectionable, yet no more accurate information was available. Beginning with July 1, 1898, a classification by race was substituted for that of nationality, on the sound principle that racial characteristics are much stronger than national ones. Where the race of an immigrant

is in doubt he is classified with those of the same mother tongue or religion. Italy is furthermore divided into Northern Italy and Southern Italy; Northern Italy including Tuscany, Emilia, Liguria, Venice, Lombardy, Piedmont, while Southern Italy includes the rest of the provinces. This also is based on well-known differences of type and habit. Indeed, so marked are racial characteristics that one purpose of the change in classification was to enable the authorities to predict and verify the occupations and destination of some of our future citizens; it having been found in the past that certain races tended to follow certain occupations and to settle in certain localities.

Now that we have the more accurate classification it is interesting to find that it bears out and strongly reinforces the inductions made from the less accurate figures. Under the old system, the illiteracy of all immigrants from northwestern Europe was 3.7 per cent, from southeastern Europe, 40.1 per cent. In 1899, under the new classification, the figures for all immigrants in the two groups were 3.6 per cent and 42.4 per cent, respectively; the average illiteracy. for all immigrants being 19.7 per cent. Hebrew illiteracy has apThe inverse ratio between

peared for the first time as 20.3 per cent. illiteracy and the average amount of money brought by immigrants was already dwelt upon in the article referred to; but a most striking example is furnished by the last report of the Commissioner at New York, and is instructive with regard to the races showing recently a great increase:

The above table shows, first, that in a general way, even among illiterate races, the more illiterate bring the less money; and, second, that taking examples from various parts of Europe, the races having a very small illiteracy bring a relatively large amount of money. Perhaps as striking an instance of the material results of education

as can be found is the fact that the Northern Italian, with an illiteracy of 11 per cent, brings $22 in money, while the South Italian, with an illiteracy of 46.5 per cent, brings only $8.79. The report calls attention to the oft-repeated fallacy of considering the money actually brought in about 4 1-2 millions—as a clear gain to this country, because it is estimated that nearly two-thirds of all immigrants come over on tickets purchased here or with money sent from here.

The need of some test for immigrants, in addition to those at present provided by law, is emphasized by the fact that during the past year only four individuals were debarred from entrance by reason of crimes of which they had been convicted abroad. It stands to reason that out of 341,000 immigrants of the general character we received last year there must have been more than four with a criminal history. The difficulty is with the proof. Our government some time since made an agreement with Italy by which the latter country was to furnish certificates of good character to intending immigrants; but this has not been done, and the Commissioner at New York is of the opinion that hundreds, if not thousands, of lawless and other undesirable characters have come to this country with the knowledge, if not the connivance, of the local Italian authorities. The Roman correspondent of the New York Times," in the issue of May 13, 1900, stated that there were 18,000 persons scattered through Italy engaged solely in trying to promote discontent and to encourage immigration by means of all sorts of trickery. That such information has much truth in it is confirmed not only by the report above referred to, but by the testimony of many immigration officials, interpreters, and even by Italian immigrants themselves.

This artificially induced and unnatural immigration has always existed to some extent, but for the last fifteen years or more we have been told by foreign governments that it had been stopped. It is interesting to see what can be done by those who have a pecuniary interest in forcing immigration when the foreign government has no desire to interfere. The Commissioner at New York says:

"Such a class of immigrants is necessarily made up of disgruntled, fanatic, and ignorant persons, whom the local authorities would be but too glad to get rid of, and which we should be very careful not to admit. This immigration is not spontaneous, but forced, and unless drastic measures are taken to check it, we shall soon find that this country is a harboring place for the malcontents and criminals of the world."

The complaint has been frequently made by immigration officials