CHAPTER XV!
!
!IMMIGRATION!
!
There are now in
the United States some 14,000,000 foreign-born persons,
together with
other millions of the sons and daughters of foreigners who although born on
American soil have as yet been little assimilated to Americanism. This great
body of aliens, representing perhaps a fifth of the population, is not a pool
to be absorbed, but a continuous,
inflowing
stream, which until the outbreak of the Great War was steadily increasing in
volume, and of which the fountain-head is so inexhaustible as to appal the
imagination. From the beginning of the century, the inflow averaged little less
than a million a year, and while about
!one-fifth of
this represented a temporary migration, four-fifths of it meant a permanent
addition to the population of the New World.
!The character
of this stream will inevitably determine to a large extent the future of the
American nation. The direct biological results, in race mixture, are important
enough, although not easy to define. The indirect results, which are probably
of no less importance to eugenics, are so hard to follow that some students of
the problem do not even realise their existence.
The ancestors of
all white Americans, of course, were immigrants not so very many generations
ago. But the earlier immigration was relatively homogeneous and stringently
selected by the dangers of the voyage, the hardships of life in a new country,
and the equality of opportunity where free competition drove the unfit to the
wall. There were few people of eminence in the families that came to colonise
North America, but there was a high average of sturdy virtues, and a good deal
of ability, particularly in the Puritan and Huguenot invasions and in a
!part of that of
Virginia.
!In the first
three-quarters of the nineteenth century, the number of these "patriots
and founders" was greatly increased by the arrival of immigrants of
similar racial stocks from Ireland, Germany, Scandinavia, and to a less extent
from the other countries of northern and western Europe. These arrivals added
strength to the United States, particularly as a large part of them settled on
farms.
This stream of
immigration gradually dried up, but was succeeded by a flood from a new
source,--southern and eastern Europe. Italians, Slavs, Poles, Magyars, East
European Hebrews, Finns, Portuguese, Greeks, Romanians and representatives of
many other small nationalities began to seek fortunes in America. The earlier
immigration had been made up largely of those who sought escape from religious
or political tyranny
and came to
settle permanent homes. The newer immigration was made up, on the whole, of
those who frankly sought wealth. The difference in the reason for coming could
not fail to mean a difference in selection of
the immigrants,
quite apart from the change in the races.
!
Last of all
began an immigration of Levantines, of Syrians, Armenians,
and other
inhabitants of Asiatic Turkey. Beyond this region lie the great nations of
Asia, "over saturated" with population. So far there has been little
more than the threat of their overflow, but the threat is certain to become a
reality unless prevented by legal
!restriction.
The eugenic
results of immigration are partly indirect and partly direct. Direct results
follow if the newcomers are assimilated,--a word
!which we shall
use rather narrowly to mean that free intermarriage takes place between them
and all parts of the older population. We shall discuss the direct results
first, the nature of which depends largely on whether the newcomers are
racially homogeneous with the population already in the country.
If they are
like, the old and new will blend without difficulty. The effects of the
immigration then depend on whether the immigrants are better or worse in
average quality than the older residents. If as good or better, they are
valuable additions; if inferior they are
!biologically a
detriment.
!But if the new
arrivals are different, if they represent a different subspecies of Homo
sapiens, the question is more serious, for it involves the problem of crossing
races which are biologically more or less distinct. Genetics can throw some
light on this problem.
Waiving for the
moment all question as to the relative quality of two distinct races, what
results are to be expected from crossing? It (1)
!gives an
increase of vigour which diminishes in later generations and (2) produces
recombination of characters.
!The first
result may be disregarded, for the various races of man are probably already
much mixed, and too closely related, to give rise to much hybrid vigour in
crosses.
The second
result will be favourable or unfavourable, depending on the characters which go
into the cross; and it is not possible to predict
the result in
human matings, because the various racial characters are so ill known. It is,
therefore, not worth while here to discuss at
!length genetic
theory. In general it may be said that some valuable characters are likely to
disappear, as the result of such crosses, and less desirable ones to take their
place. The great bulk of the population resulting from such racial crosses is
likely to be more or less mongrel in nature. Finally, some individuals will
appear who combine the good characters of the two races, without the bad ones.
The net result
will therefore probably be some distinct gain, but a greater loss. There is
danger that complex and valuable traits of a race will be broken down in the
process of hybridisation, and that it will take a long time to bring them
together again. The old view that racial crosses lead fatally to race
degeneration is no longer tenable, but the
view recently
advanced, that crosses are advantageous, seems equally hasty. W. E. Castle has
cited the Pitcairn Islanders and the
!Boer-Hottentot
mulattoes of South Africa as evidence that wide crosses are productive of no
evil results. These cases may be admitted to show that such a hybrid race may
be physically healthy, but in respect of mental traits they hardly do more than
suggest the conclusion we advanced in our chapter on the Colour Line,--that
such miscegenation is an advantage to the inferior race and a disadvantage to
the superior one.
!On the whole,
we believe wide racial crosses should be looked upon with suspicion by
eugenists.
The colonisers
of North America mostly belonged to the Nordic race.[143] The earlier
immigrants to the United States,--roughly, those who came here before the Civil
War,--belonged mostly to the same stock, and therefore mixed with the early
settlers without difficulty. The
!advantages of
this immigration were offset by no impairment of racial homogeneity.
But the more
recent immigration belongs mostly to other races, principally the Mediterranean
and Alpine. Even if these immigrants were superior on the average to the older
population, it is clear that their assimilation would not be an unmixed
blessing, for the evil of crossbreeding would partly offset the advantage of
the addition of valuable new traits. If, on the other hand, the average of the
new immigration is inferior in quality, or in so far as it is inferior in
!quality, it is
evident that it must represent biologically an almost unmixed evil; it not only
brings in new undesirable traits, but injures the desirable ones already here.
A. Ross has
attempted to predict some of the changes that will take place in the population
of the United States, as a result of the immigration of the last
half-century.[144] "It is reasonable," he thinks, "to expect an
early falling off in the frequency of good looks
in the American
people." A diminution of stature, a depreciation of morality, an increase
in gross fecundity, and a considerable lowering of the level of average natural
ability are among other results that he considers probable. Not only are the
races represented in the later immigration in many cases inferior in average
ability to the earlier immigrant races, but America does not get the best, or
even a representative selection,[145] from the races which are now contributing
to her population. "Europe retains most of her brains, but sends
multitudes of the common and sub-common. There is little sign of an
intellectual element among the Magyars, Russians, South Slavs, Italians, Greeks
or Portuguese" who are now arriving. "This does not hold, however,
for currents created by race discrimination or oppression. The Armenian,
Syrian, Finnish and Russo-Hebrew streams seem representative, and the first
wave out of Russia in the
!eighties was
superior."
While the
earlier immigration brought a liberal amount of intelligence
and ability, the
later immigration (roughly, that of the last half century) seems to have
brought distinctly less. It is at present principally an immigration of
unskilled labor, of vigorous, ignorant peasants. Some of this is
"promoted" by agents of transportation
companies and
others who stand to gain by stirring up the population of a country village in
Russia or Hungary, excite the illiterate peasants
by stories of
great wealth and freedom to be gained in the New World, provide the immigrant
with a ticket to New York and start him for Ellis Island. Naturally, such
immigration is predominantly male. On the whole, females make up one-third of
the recent inflow, but among some
!races--Greeks,
Italians and Romanians, for example--only one-fifth.
!In amount of
inherent ability these immigrants are not only less highly endowed than is
desirable, but they furnish, despite weeding out, altogether too large a proportion
of the "three D's"--defectives, delinquents and dependents.
The amount of
crime attributable to certain sections of the more recent immigration is
relatively large. "It was frequently stated to the
members of the
Immigration Commission in southern Italy that crime had greatly diminished in
many communities because most of the criminals had gone to America." The
amount of crime among immigrants in the United States is partly due to their
age and sex distribution, partly due to
their
concentration in cities, partly to the bad environment from which they have
sometimes come; partly to inherent racial characteristics, such as make crimes
of violence frequent among the Southern Italians, crimes of gain
proportionately more frequent among the Jews, and violence when drunk more a
characteristic of the Slavs. No restriction of immigration can wholly eliminate
the criminal tendencies, but, says Dr. Warne,[148] after balancing the two
sides, "It still remains true
that because of
immigration we have a greater amount of pauperism and crime than would be the
case if there were no immigration. It is also an indisputable fact that with a
better regulation of immigration the
!United States
would have less of these social horrors."
To dwell too
much on the undesirable character of part of the present immigration would be
to lose perspective. Most of it consists of vigorous, industrious, ignorant
peasants, induced to come here in search of a better living than they can get
at home. But it is important to remember that if they come here and stay, they
are pretty certain to be assimilated sooner or later. In cases superior to the
average of the
!older
population, their arrival should be welcomed if not too racially diverse; but
if, as we believe the record of their achievements shows, a large part of the
immigration is on the average inferior to the older population of the United
States, such are eugenically a detriment to the future progress of the race.
The direct biological result to be expected from the assimilation of such
newcomers is the swamping of the best characteristics of the old American
stock, and a diminution of the average of intelligence of the whole country.
The
interbreeding is too slow at present to be conspicuous, and hence its effects
are little noticed. The foreigners tend to keep by
themselves, to
form "Little Italies," "Little Russias," transplanted
Ghettoes and "foreign quarters," where they retain their native
languages and customs and marry compatriots. This condition of segregation can
not last forever; the process of amalgamation will be more rapid with each
generation, particularly because of the
!preponderance
of males in the newer immigration who must marry outside their own race, if
they are to marry at all.
The direct
results of immigration that lead to intermarriage with the older population are
fairly easy to outline. The indirect results, which we shall now consider, are
more complex. We have dealt so far only with the effects of an immigration that
is assimilated; but some immigration (that from the Orient, for example) is not
assimilated; other
!immigration
remains unassimilated for a long time. What are the eugenic consequences of an
unassimilated immigration?
The presence of
large numbers of immigrants who do not intermarry with the older stock will,
says T. N. Carver,[149] inevitably mean one of
!three things:
!Geographical
separation of races.
!Social
separation of races (as the "colour line" in the South and to a large
extent in the North, between Negroes and whites who yet live side by side).
!Continuous
racial antagonism, frequently breaking out into race war. This third
possibility has been at least threatened, by the conflict between the white and
yellow races in California, and the conflict between whites and Hindus in
British Columbia.
!None of these
alternatives is attractive. The third is undesirable in every way and the first
two are difficult to maintain. The first is perhaps impossible; the second is
partly practicable, as is shown by the case of the Negro. One of its drawbacks
is not sufficiently recognised.
In a
soundly-organized society, it is necessary that the road should be open from
top to bottom and bottom to top, in order that genuine merit may get its
deserts. A valuable strain which appears at the bottom of the social scale must
be able to make its way to the top, receiving financial and other rewards
commensurate with its value to the state, and being able to produce a number of
children proportionate to its reward and its value. This is an ideal which is
seldom approximated in
government, but
it is the advantage of a democratic form of government that it presents the
open road to success, more than does an oligarchic government. That this
freedom of access to all rewards that the state can give should be open to
every one (and conversely that no one should be kept at the top and
over-rewarded if he is unworthy) is essential to eugenics; but it is quite
incompatible with the existence within the
state of a
number of isolated groups, some of which must inevitably and properly be
considered inferior. It is certain that, at the present time
in this country,
no Negro can take a place in the upper ranks of
society, which
are and will long remain white. The fact that this situation is inevitable
makes it no less unfortunate for both Negro and white races; consolation can
only be found in the thought that it is less of a danger than the opposite
condition would be. But this condition of class discrimination is likely to
exist, to a much less extent it is true, in every city where there are
foreign-born and
!native-born
populations living side by side, and where the epithets of "Sheeny,"
"Dago," "Wop," "Kike," "Greaser,"
"Guinea," etc., testify to the feeling of the older population that
it is superior.
While eugenic
strength in a state is promoted by variety, too great a heterogeneity offers
serious social difficulties. It is essential if America is to be strong
eugenically that it slow down the flood of immigrants who are not easily
assimilable. At present a state of affairs is being created where class
distinctions are likely to be barriers to
!the promotion
of individual worth--and equally, of course, to the demotion of individual
worthlessness.
The arrivals of
the past
!few decades
have been nearly all unskilled labourers. Professor Carver believes that
continuous immigration which enters the ranks of labor in larger proportion and
the business and professional classes in a smaller proportion than the
native-born will produce the following results:
!Distribution.
It will keep competition more intense among labourers and less intense among
business and professional men: it will therefore raise the income of the
employing classes and lower the wages of unskilled labor.
!Production. It
will give a relatively low marginal productivity to a typical immigrant and
make him a relatively unimportant factor in the production of wealth.
!Organisation of
industry. Immigrants can only be employed economically at low wages and in large
gangs, because of (2).
!Agriculture. If
large numbers of immigrants should go into agriculture, it will mean one of two
things, probably the second:
!Continuous
subdivision of farms resulting in inefficient and wasteful application of labor
and smaller crops per man, although probably larger crops per acre.
!Development of
a class of landed proprietors on the one hand and a landless agricultural
proletariat on the other.
It is true that
the great mass of unskilled labor which has come to the United States in the
last few decades has made possible the development of many industries that have
furnished an increased number of good jobs to men of intelligence, but many who
have made a close study of the immigration problem think that despite this,
unskilled labor has been coming in altogether too large quantities.
!If the
immigration of large quantities of unskilled labor with low standards of living
tends in most cases to depress wages and lower the standard of living of the
corresponding class of the old American population, the consequences would
appear to be:
!The employers
of labor would profit, since they would get abundant labor at low wages. If
this increase in the wealth of employers led to an increase in their
birth-rate, it would be an advantage. But it apparently does not. The
birth-rate of the employing class is probably little restricted by financial
difficulties; therefore on them immigration probably has no immediate eugenic
effect.
!The American
skilled labourers would profit, since there is more demand for skilled labor in
industries created by unskilled immigrant labor. Would the increasing
prosperity and a higher standard of living here, tend to lower the relative
birth-rate of the class or not?
!The answer
probably depends on the extent of the knowledge of birth control which has been
discussed elsewhere.
The wages and
standard of living of American unskilled labourers will fall, since they are
obliged directly to compete with the newcomers. It seems most likely that a
fall in wages and standards is correlated with
!a fall in
birth-rate. This case must be distinguished from cases where the wages and
standards never were high, and where poverty is correlated with a high
birth-rate. If this distinction is correct, the present immigration will tend
to lower the birth-rate of American unskilled labourers.
!The arguments
here used may appear paradoxical, and have little statistical support, but they
seem to us sound and not in contradiction with any known facts. If they are
valid, the effect of such immigration as the United States has been receiving
is to reduce the birth-rate of the unskilled labor with little or no effect on
the employers and managers of labor.
Since both the
character and the volume of immigration are at fault, remedial measures may be
applied to either one or both of these features. It is very desirable that we
have a much more stringent selection of immigrants than is made at the present
time. But most of
!the measures
which have been actually proposed and urged in recent years have been directed
at a diminution of the volume, and at a change in character only by somewhat
indirect and indiscriminate means.
The Immigration
Commission made a report to Congress on Dec. 5, 1910, in which it suggested the
following possible methods of restricting the
!volume of
immigration:
!The exclusion
of those unable to read and write in some language.
The reduction of
the number of each race arriving each year to a certain percentage of the
average of that race arriving during a given
!period of
years.
!The exclusion
of unskilled labourers unaccompanied by wives or families.
!Material
increase in the amount of money required to be in the possession of the
immigrant at the port of arrival.
!Material
increase in the head tax.
!Limitation of
the number of immigrants arriving annually at any port.
!The levying of
the head tax so as to make a marked discrimination in favour of men with
families.
Eugenically, it
is probable that (3) and (7), which would tend to admit only families, would be
a detriment to American welfare; (1) and (2) have been the suggestions which
have met with the most favour. All but
one member of
the commission favoured (1), the literacy test, as the most feasible single
method of restricting undesirable immigration, and it
!was enacted
into law by Congress, which passed it over President Wilson's veto, in
February, 1917.
Records for 1914
show that "illiteracy among the total number of arrivals of each race
ranged all the way from 64% for the Turkish to less than 1% for the English,
the Scotch, the Welsh, the Scandinavian,
!and the
Finnish. The Bohemian and Moravian, the German, and the Irish each had less
than 5% illiterate. Races other than the Turkish, whose immigration in 1914 was
more than one-third illiterate, include the Dalmatians, Bosnians,
Herzegovinians, Russians, Ruthenians, Italians, Lithuanians, and
Romanians."
It is frankly
admitted by the proponents of this method of restriction that it will keep out
some who ought to come in, and let in some who ought to be kept out. It is in
some cases a test of opportunity rather than of character, but "in the
belief of its advocates, it will meet the situation as disclosed by the
investigation of the Immigration
Commission
better than any other means that human ingenuity can devise.
!It is believed
that it would exclude more of the undesirable and fewer of the desirable
immigrants than any other method of restriction."
On the other
hand, it is argued that the literacy test will fail of success because those
who want to come will learn to read and write,
!which will only
delay their arrival a few months without changing their real character. But the
effect of such attempts will separate those who succeed from those who are too
inferior to succeed, which would be an advantage of the plan rather than a
defect.
The literary restriction
has been a great step forward but should be backed by the addition of such
mental tests as will make it fairly certain to keep out the dull-minded as well
as feeble-minded. Long division would suffice as such a test until better tests
relatively
!unaffected by
schooling can be put into operation, since it is at this point in the grades
that so many dull-minded drop out of the schools.
What are the
grounds, then, for forbidding the yellow races, or the races of British India,
to enter the United States? The considerations urged in the past have been (1)
Political: it is said that they are unable to acquire the spirit of American
institutions. This is an objection which concerns eugenics only indirectly. (2)
Medical: it is said that they introduce diseases, such as the oriental liver,
lung and
intestinal
flukes, which are serious, against which Americans have never been selected,
and for which no cure is known. (3) Economic: it is argued that the Oriental's
lower standard of living makes it impossible for the white man to compete with
him. The objection is well founded, and is indirectly of concern to eugenics,
as was pointed out in a preceding section of this chapter. As eugenists we feel
justified in objecting to the immigration of large bodies of unskilled Oriental
!labor, on the
ground that they rear larger families than our stock on the same small incomes.
Eugenically,
then, the immigration of any considerable number of unskilled labourers from
the Orient may have undesirable direct results and is certain to have
unfavourable indirect results. It should therefore be prevented, either by a
continuation of the "gentlemen's agreement" now in force between the
United States and Japan, and by similar agreements with other nations, or by some
such non-invidious measure.
This exclusion
should not of course be
!applied to the
intellectual classes, whose presence here would offer advantages which would
outweigh the disadvantages.
It appears that
even a small infusion of Chinese blood may produce long-continued favourable
results, if the case of the Ilocanos is correctly described. This tribe, in
Northern Luzon, furnishes perhaps the most industrious workers of any tribe in
the islands; foremen and overseers of Filipinos are quite commonly found to be
Ilocanos, while the members of the tribe are credited with accomplishing more
steady
!work than any
other element of the population. The current explanation of this is that they
are Chinese mestizos: their coast was constantly exposed the raids of Chinese
pirates, a certain number of whom settled there and took Ilocano women as
wives. From these unions, the whole tribe in the course of time is thought to
have benefited.[154]
The history of
the Chinese in the Philippines fails to corroborate the idea that he never
loses his racial identity. It must be borne in mind that nearly all the Chinese
in the United States are of the lowest working class, and from the vicinity of
Canton; while those in the Philippines are of a higher class, and largely from
the neighbourhood of Amoy. They have usually married Filipino women of good
families, so their offspring had exceptional advantages, and stand high in the
estimation of
the community. The requirement of the Spanish government was that a Chinese
must embrace Christianity and become a citizen, before he could marry a
Filipino. Usually he assumed his wife's name, so the children were brought up
wholly as Filipinos, and considered
!themselves
such, without cherishing any particular sentiment for the Flowery Kingdom.
!The biologist
who studies impartially the Filipino peoples may easily conclude that the
American government is making a mistake in excluding the Chinese; that the
infiltration of intelligent Chinese and their intermixture with the native
population would do more to raise the level of ability of the latter than a
dozen generations of that compulsory education on which the government has
built such high hopes.
And this
conclusion leads to the question whether much of the surplus population of the
Orient could not profitably be diverted to regions occupied by savage and
barbarian people. Chinese immigrants, mostly traders, have long been going in
small numbers to many such regions and have freely intermarried with native
women. It is a matter of common observation to travellers that much of the
small mercantile business has passed into the hands of Chinese mestizos. As far
as the first few generations, at least, the cross here seems to be productive
of good
results. Whether
Oriental immigration should be encouraged must depend on the decision of the
respective governments, and considerations other than biologic will have
weight. As far as eugenics is concerned it is
!likely that
such regions would profit by a reasonable amount of Chinese or Japanese
immigration which resulted in interbreeding and not in the formation of
isolated race-groups, because the superior Orientals tend to raise the level of
the native population into which they marry.
The question of
the regulation of immigration is, as we have insisted throughout this chapter,
a question of weighing the consequences. A decision must be reached in each
case by asking what course will do most for the future good both of the nation
and of the whole species. To talk
of the sacred
duty of offering an asylum to any who choose to come, is to indulge in immoral
sentimentality. Even if the problem be put on the most unselfish plane
possible, to ask not what will be for this
country's own
immediate or future benefit, but what will most benefit the world at large, it
can only be concluded that the duty of the United States is to make itself
strong, efficient, productive and progressive. By so doing they will be much
better able to help the rest
!of the world
than by progressively weakening themselves through failure to regulate
immigration.
!Looking only at
the eugenic consequences, we can not doubt that a considerable and
discriminatory selection of immigrants to this country is necessary. Both
directly and indirectly, the immigration of recent years appears to be diminishing
the eugenic strength of the nation more than it increases it.
The state would
be in a stronger position eugenically (and in many other ways) if it would
decrease the immigration of unskilled labor, and increase the immigration of
creative and directing talent. A selective diminution of the volume of
immigration would tend to have that result, because it would necessarily shut
out more of the unskilled than the skilled.
No comments:
Post a Comment