Immigration Act of 1924
It was a legislation that was supposed to limit the immigration numbers from other areas of the world, and maintain the ideal of American homogeneity. The Immigration Act of 1924 was introduced by Congressman Albert Johnson in the House of Representatives and David Reed in the senate, purposely to regulate the influx of immigrants to the United States. It was also known as the Johnson-Reid Act, enacted with the aim of restricting immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, and the complete barring of Japanese from entering the American soil. It was signed into law on May 26 1924; it was more restrictive as it fixed the inadequacy of the immigration restriction of the Immigration Act of 1917. It was noted that prior to 1917, the absence of restrictive immigration laws permitted the legal entry of 10 million people into the United States. The congressional leaders imposed the immigration restriction because they were concerned about the enormous number of immigrants whose groups might introduce radical views into the American society, as well as stole the opportunity that was supposedly for the “pure” Americans (Immigration).
The Immigration Act imposed restriction on the number of immigrants allowed entry into the United States through a national origins quota. The law particularly specified who could enter as a “non-quota” immigrant: wives and unmarried children (under 18 years of age) of US citizens, residents of the western hemisphere, religious or academic professionals, and “bona-fide students” under 15 years of age. Individuals who are not under this group are categorized as “quota immigrants”. To add more restrictions, preference were given to family members of US citizens and to those who were skilled in the agricultural sector (US Immigration). The limit provided immigration visas to two percent of the total number from each nationality in the United States as of the national census in 1890. It is noted that during the presidency of Thomas Wilson from 1913 to 1921, he was an advocate of liberal immigration policy and was opposed to the restrictive act. Before the 1920’s, literacy test was used as a limiting measure to regulate the entry of potential immigrants, however, immigration expert and Republican Senator William Dillingham introduced the three percent Immigration quotas on the total population of each foreign-born nationality in America as of 1910. President Wilson opposed the proposition of senator Dillingham, and used the pocket veto to hinder the enactment of the law. It was during the presidency of Warren Harding that the law was finally passed.
When the congressional debate on immigration resumed in 1924, the quota system was not questioned, rather, it was adjusted and lowered to two percent of foreign born population. The new percentage calculation resulted to greater number of visas issued to British Isle and Western Europe nationalities because of the long residency of their descent in America; on the other hand, it severely limited the entry of people from Southern and Eastern Europe. The provision of this law also barred the entry of Asians, particularly the Japanese, who were previously allowed entry in the past decades.
The immediate effect of the legislation was the restrained migration of eastern Europeans, the Jews in particular, to set foot in the United States. There were about two million European Jews who were able to enter the American soil from 1880 to 1924, but in the year after the imposition of the law only about 10,000 of them were allowed to enter annually. The Poles were also affected as it was noted that the annual average of 95,000 individuals who enter the US was reduced to fewer than 10,000. However, the case of German immigrants were different; due to lesser restrictions and greater quota there were about 45,000 of them who were able to enter the United States, a lower number compared to that of annual British immigrants who reached 50,000 individuals annually (Immigration).
The restrictions of the Immigrant Act resulted in a tense relation with the other nations. It resulted in the feeling of resentment from affected countries, as the immigration framework imposed national quotas that discriminate against immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, as well as from Asian countries. Japan in particular, whose citizens were completely banned from entering the United States, reacted strongly as they considered the law as an insulting treatment to them. In retaliation, the Japanese formed consumer boycotts against American goods and demonstrated antagonistic attitudes towards them (The Senate). The Japan Times and Mail which was issued on the 19th of May 1924, criticized the immigration law in its’ editorial entitled “The Senate’s Declaration of War”. “Nevertheless the fact remains that the senate has passed, with an overwhelming majority, an amendment which they know is a most humiliating one to the Japanese race, and the event cuts the Japanese minds deep, a wound that will hurt”(Japan Times and Mail as cited in The Senate’s). The date of the effectiveness of the law, the 26th of May, was declared the national humiliation day in Japan. Despite the protest from the Japanese government, the law remained. The Japanese were single out among the races ineligible for citizenship because they are said to be particularly threatening in an economic way. “They come here specifically and professionally for the purpose of colonizing and establishing here permanently the proud Yamato race” (McClatchy, as qtd. in Densho Encyclopedia) The US congress was determined on its cause to preserve the racial composition of the American citizenry than to promote its foreign ties with Japan (The Immigration).
One of the reasons for the passage of the immigration act was to preserve what is left of the existing American resources. During the congressional debate over the 1924 Act, Senator Ellison Durant of South Carolina argued for the immigration law:
I think that we have sufficient stock in America to shut the door, Americanized
what we have, and save the resources of America for the natural increase of our
population. We all know that one of the prolific causes of war is the desire for
increased land ownership for the flow of congested population () let us shut the
door and assimilate what we have, let us breed pure American citizens and
and develop our own American Resources() I would rather see American
refined to the last degree in all that makes America what we hope it will be than
country. The time has come when we should shut the door and keep what we
have for what we hope our people to be. (Smith as cited in History).
The scrutiny of the Immigration Law of 1924 causes one to think that that immigration law and policy during that time were deeply concentrated in an extensive racial and ethnic realm. The national quota system which was used to restrict immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, did not only define people from their nationality and country of origin, but it distinguished individuals by race: from white to non-white and the colored races who were pictured as people who have no country of origin (Ngai). American historian Mae Ngai, argued that the immigration act of 1924 encompassed a cluster of related racial categories, in which race and nationality, are separate components that are realigned in new and uneven ways. It is noted that the immigration law distinguished the Europeans on the basis of their nationality and desirability. The restrictive quota system preferred to a great degree the immigration from Northern and Western Europe (Milestones), hence the increased number of individuals from the British Isle and Germany. The more restrictive law against the immigration of Europeans from the Southern and Eastern part exhibited the thought of the Americans that people of those descents are less desirable. Senator Ellison Smith points this out in his speech on the restriction on immigration: “We want men not like dumb, driven cattle from those nations where the progressive thought of the times has scarcely made beginning” On the other hand, Robert Clancy, a Congressman from Detroit spoke against provisions of the immigration law, “We find discrimination at its worst- a deliberate attempt to go back 84 years in our census taken 10 years so that a blow may be aimed at peoples of eastern and southern Europe” (Clancy) Despite the presence and arguments of those who are against the restrictive 1924 immigration law, it was enacted and was placed in effect until the 1960s.
The Immigration Law of 1924 has limited the number of immigrants from countries that were considered as undesirables. It has put restriction of Europe, particularly on individuals coming from eastern and southern Europe, as well as from Asia. It completely barred immigration from Japan, stirring anger and protest from the Japanese nationals. There were arguments against the passage of the law but those in favor of it triumphed, and the immigration law of 1924 shaped the policy of American Immigration for decades.
References
Clancy, R. An “Un-American Bill”: A Congressman Denounces Immigration Quotas. As cited in History Matters. Retrieved from http://www.historymatters.gmu.edu
Immigration Act of 1924. Densho Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.encyclopedia.densho.org
Immigration Act of 1924. Immigration in America. Retrieved on November 19, 2014, from http://www.immigrationinamerica.org
Milestones: 1945-1952. U.S. Department of State- Office of the Historian. Retrieved from http://www.chnm.gmu.edu
The 1924 Immigration Act. US Immigration Legislation Online. Retrieved from http://www.library.uwb.edu
Ngai, M. The Architecture of Race in American Immigration Law: A Reexamination of the Immigration Act of 1924, Retrieved from http://www.chnm.gmu.edu
The Immigration. U.S Department of State- Office of the Historian. Retrieved from http://www.history.state.gov
Smith, E. “Shut the Door”: A senator Speaks for Immigration Restriction. As cited in History Matters. Retrieved from http://www.historymatters.gmu.edu.
“The Senate’s Declaration of War”: Japan responds to Japanese Exclusion. History Matters. Retrieved from http://www.historymatters.gmu.edu.
