The Immigration Question: A Detailed Study of U.S. Immigration Policies at Ellis Island (1897)

📌 Explore the historical insights into U.S. immigration policies at Ellis Island from 1897. This study covers the evolution of immigration laws, the role of steamship companies, and the challenges faced by immigrants arriving in America.

Ellis Island - The Immigration Question: A Study of Migration (1897) 🌍🛳️

Overview and Relevance to Immigration History

Published in 1897, The Immigration Question by Joseph H. Senner provides an in-depth exploration of the immigration challenges faced by the United States during the late 19th century. It addresses economic, social, and political concerns surrounding the immigration process, particularly at Ellis Island. This article is of immense value to teachers, students, genealogists, historians, and anyone interested in understanding the historical context of immigration to America. The article provides key insights into immigration laws, the processes at Ellis Island, and public attitudes toward immigration at the time.

Among the many problems that civilized humanity's rapid and restless progress created in the nineteenth century, the issue of immigration is not the least interesting. Past centuries have known migration on an extended scale; in fact, the settlement of the earth is based on it.

Empires have sprung into existence and vanished by large migratory movements, to which all the present powers owe their final development.

Such migration of tribes, which changed the fate of nations and states in single violent onslaughts, has been superseded by immigration. That is the change of the domicile of individuals and families in large numbers but without any apparent union of interests or destination.

It is no longer the conqueror of the past centuries who threatens with open invasion. Still, it is now the humble and needy applicant modestly knocking for admission in the hope of securing at least a small share of the wealth and culture of a more affluent nation.

As long as there is an abundance to divide, as long as the newcomer can be adequately provided for without any severe loss to the older settler, and especially as long as the latter sees an advantage to himself in the labor or services of the newly arrived, immigration is welcomed with open arms.

The time comes, however, in which the "Beatus possi dens," the fortunate possessor who came ahead of the new arrival, may no longer be desirous of sharing his abundance with another, may have nothing further to divide, or may be unable to foresee any immediate advantage to be gained from the presence of such new arrival.

Then, the conflicting interests of the former settler and the new arrival may assume the proportions of a severe problem.

In addition to these purely economic difficulties, there may arise the danger of social and political evil influence through the arrival of too many heterogeneous immigrants, which may threaten the progress and welfare of a highly civilized nation.

Then, indeed, by the supreme law of self-protection, the state authorities would be obliged to interfere in the interest of their subjects' freedom, happiness, and culture.

Denunciations hurled from some of our more popular pulpits, editorial chairs, public meetings, and congressional debates have created a critical stage in our public life. Our economic, social, and political lives have been and are still threatened with the greatest possible danger from such immigration.

In the four years of my official life as the chief gatekeeper of the United States, I may freely state that of the many strange and unaccountable things with which I have been brought in contact; nothing has surprised me more than the conspicuous and permanent ignorance of the public at large about the actual condition of immigration matters.

For more than five years, the port of New York, which handles about four-fifths of all immigration to the United States, has enjoyed the privilege of a particular immigration station, established on Ellis Island, in the harbor of New York, on a large scale and with every improvement.

Nevertheless, it is found that not only immigrants but also citizens of the United States still speak and write of Castle Garden, which was the great receptacle for immigrants for nearly forty years, as the present point of landing.

For eight years, the old State Board of Commissioners of Immigration, which formerly consisted of the mayors of New York and Brooklyn, the presidents of the German and Irish societies, and six other commissioners appointed by the governor of the state, has been superseded by one United States Commissioner of Immigration.

Nevertheless, it is a common belief, shared even by many editors, that a Board of Commissioners still exists to control immigration at this port.

The same anachronism exists about the immigration laws and their enforcement, and the ignorance regarding the number and character of immigrants of past years and their handling by the federal authorities is almost as profound.

Now, it is true that in years gone by, as many as eight hundred thousand immigrants arrived in a single year at the various ports of the United States, not counting those who simply crossed the borders of neighboring countries into the United States.

It is undoubtedly true that a comparatively large portion of that very heavy immigration became charges upon our public institutions or, through the assistance of unwise and antiquated naturalization laws, were permitted to assert an undue influence in our public affairs.

It is undoubtedly true that, for years, communities and private associations in Europe freely unloaded their charges upon the United States without the formality of any question or restriction on the part of our laws or concern by our officials.

If such conditions had still existed or had prevailed during the last four years, I should have been among the first to say, "Stop it, and stop it at once, most energetically and efficiently, in the interests of American liberty, American welfare, and American civilization."

I am, however, in a position to declare and prove that such unrestricted immigration has, for some years, been a thing of the past and that massive immigration has been made practically an impossibility for the future.

In the face of facts, that part of our Declaration of Independence appears indeed like a glimpse of ancient history, which records, among the injuries and usurpations on the part of the King of England, his endeavor "to prevent the population of these states, for that purpose obstructing the Laws for the naturalization of foreigners, refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither."

As late as 1864, Congress passed a law to encourage immigration, in which no safeguards were provided to protect us against the dangers to be expected from the very worst refuse of the foreign population.

Even in 1872, attempts were made in Congress to pass new laws promoting immigration. The first law of any restrictive character was passed in 1875 to prohibit the importation of prostitutes from China and Japan.

Still, the law regulating the landing of immigrants in this country was not passed until 1882, and legal examinations were not required until 1891.

The most radical change in our laws and in their practical enforcement was introduced by the Act of March 3, 1893, which I have had the privilege of putting into actual execution on Ellis Island since the beginning of May of that year. Since that time, it may be said that immigration has, in the broader sense, almost come to a standstill.

The number of immigrants landed since the enforcement of the new law of 1893, that is, such as may properly be called new arrivals, is hardly more significant than the average immigration into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

At the same time, the number of immigrants debarred from landing has increased to a marked degree. However, by the provisions of the same law, the most significant part of the undesirable immigrants are trim, deterred from even embarking for the United States.

On the other hand, the number of foreign-born persons who have become public charges in our American communities or public institutions has decreased chiefly.

Furthermore, there is no necessity under the present law and its enforcement. With proper administration by our American municipal or state governments, any alien cannot become a permanent public charge. These statements appear to be sweeping and may create some surprise. Still, I am in a position to verify them.

I have taken special pains to determine the actual immigration under the new law, and with this end in view, I have directed the statistical force at my command on Ellis Island to ascertain the number of aliens arriving in the most detailed and reliable manner and arrange them according to nationalities.

This allows us to determine who had been in the United States before or who came here to join members of their immediate families. This method applies only to immigrants related to the first degree, such as children, parents, brothers, or sisters. Last year, this method was adopted for the entire service.

It will be readily conceded that neither of these two classes can be appropriately called immigrants, nor do they, if not per se, belong to the excluded categories liable to add to the dangers experienced through former immigration. These are the surprising figures for the port of New York:

Finally, in 1896, out of the 233,400 arriving at 190,928 Island, only 108,563 could be classified as immigrants proper.

The above figures will conclusively prove to any thinking person that total immigration to the United States has fallen to such a small number within the last four years that it is insignificant compared with our own enormous population.

It is worth noting that with such nationalities generally regarded as least desirable, the proportion of actual immigrants to the total immigration is tiny.

To illustrate in figures, out of 42,074 Italians in 1893-94, fully 8,111 had been in the United States before and is, tot came to join members of their immediate families, thus leaving only 18,862, a little over 40 percent, as the immigration proper for that period.

Only 12,099 of 28,736 Russians, the same percentage, may be appropriately called immigrants. On the other hand, out of 38,711 Germans, 20,641, or nearly 60 percent, were new immigrants.

In this way, the much-dreaded immigration from nationalities more foreign to us dwindles considerably under proper analysis.

The immigration authorities readily admit that a large share of the credit for the remarkable decrease in immigration during the last few years is due to the unprecedented financial crisis prevailing. However, they also assume some share of the credit for themselves.

The "lynx-eyed" officials at Ellis Island have, I may venture to say, become almost proverbial abroad and only too well known to the steamship companies and their agents, upon whom rests the full financial responsibility for all immigrants who are not "clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to admission." A few significant figures will serve to indicate the direct effect of the new law and its rigid enforcement:

• During the fiscal year 1891-92, only 1,727 of the 445,987 who landed in New York were excluded, and in 1892-93, out of 343,422, not more than 817 were excluded.
• In 1893-94, from 219,046, fully 2,022 were debarred from landing.
• In 1894-95, out of 190,928 aliens arriving, 2,077 were debarred from landing at Ellis Island.
• In 1895-96, out of 263,709, at least 2,512 were debarred from landing at Ellis Island.

While in this way, notwithstanding a continually decreasing immigration, a continuously more significant number of would-be immigrants was debarred from landing, the number of persons returned within one year after landing as public charges from the whole United States decreased from 637 in the fiscal year 1892 to 577 in 1893, 417 in the fiscal year 1894, 177 in 1895, and 238 in 1896.

The preceding figures clearly show that the enforcement of immigration laws during the last four years has been much more efficient and beneficial than at any time before that.

The number of immigrants debarred from landing, as above indicated, increased absolutely and relatively, and with them increased the amount of the most efficient of the anti-immigration agents, i.e., those who endeavored to come here in violation of the law but were detected through the vigilance of the immigration authorities, and compelled to return to their native countries, there to spread the story of the difficulty experienced in meeting or getting around the strict immigration laws of the United States and their rigid enforcement.

It is hardly possible to estimate the number of those who have been refused tickets by the steamship companies or who have been deterred from risking their money to purchase passage accurately; however, the number has unquestionably reached hundreds of thousands during the last few years.

On the other hand, as the number of those becoming public charges within one year after the time of landing and who were returned at the expense of the steamship companies, under the law, became so small, very few persons likely to become public charges could have evaded the inspection of government officials.

It is necessary to outline the methods of our present inspection to explain the possibility of such results. However, I am convinced that no mere explanation could be as satisfactory as a visit to that unique institution at Ellis Island, the immigrant station of the port of New York.

It is impossible to get an intelligent idea of the letter and spirit of the present law, with its efficient enforcement, without such a personal observation.

The fundamental principle of our present immigration laws is that the steamship companies are directly responsible for the full financial responsibility for all undesirable immigration.

Final Discharge From Ellis Island—the Emigrant Showing Passport, Money, and Answering Questions With a View to Ascertaining Whether He Is Likely to Become a Charge on the Country, Is Amenable to the Contract Labor Law, Etc. The Maltine Company, Quarantine Sketches, 1902. GGA Image ID # 14ae20fc90

They are obliged to conduct a personal examination, through their agents, of all intending immigrants, not only as to the general qualifications of age, sex, married or single, calling or occupation, nationality, last residence, and final destination but also as to the ability to:

• Read or write,
• Whether such immigrant has a through ticket to the point of final destination,
• Whether he has paid his passage or whether it has been paid by another person or persons or by any corporation, society, municipality, or government;
• Whether in possession of money and if so, whether upwards of thirty dollars and how much, if thirty dollars or less; whether going to join a relative and if so, what relative, his name and address;
• Whether ever before in the United States and if so, when and where; whether ever in prison or almshouse or supported by charity;
• Whether a polygamist;
• Whether under contract, express or implied, to perform labor in the United States;
• And finally, as to the immigrant's condition of health, mentally and physically, and whether deformed or crippled and if so, from what cause.

Responsibilities of the Steamships and Steamship Lines

The steamship companies are obliged to have complete ship manifests containing replies to these twenty questions, sworn to by the master of the vessel and the ship's surgeon in the presence of a United States Consul before embarkation.

By a simple arrangement of dividing all passengers of a single ship into groups of thirty or fewer and providing each immigrant with a ticket containing the numbers of the sheet and his entry on the same for identification, it is made possible to bring each immigrant in turn before an inspector who has the sworn statements of the steamship company about the immigrant before him and is thus able to control the matter by his re-examination intelligently.

As soon as steam or sailing vessels reach the Quarantine Station of any port in the United States, immigrant officials board them, and at the same time, the customs officers arrive.

While the last-named busy themselves in seeking to discover violations of law in the importation of merchandise, the immigration bureau officials inspect the ship as to her arrangements for immigrants, especially in the steerage, and conduct a general inspection of cabin passengers because practical experience has found that no small proportion of undesirable aliens come as other than steerage passengers.

While this inspection is going on, the proud ship proceeds on her way through our most beautiful Bay, which extends in all its grandeur between Staten Island, New Jersey, New York, and Brooklyn; she passes the imposing Statue of Liberty and immediately afterward the immigration station at Ellis Island, which, though just under the eyes of this Statue of Liberty, for the proper protection of the country, has, unfortunately, to be surrounded and guarded in such a manner as more to resemble a prison than an institution of a free and enlightened nation.

When the ship reaches her dock, all citizens of the United States, even those coming in the steerage, are discharged by the proper immigration officials upon the production of sufficient proof of their citizenship. In contrast, according to law, all steerage passengers are brought in special boats provided to Ellis Island for further inspection.

Here, on the large main floor of the government-erected building for this purpose, they pass before the critical and scrutinizing eyes of the matrons and the officers of the medical staff, who examine their physical condition.

After this, they must be further investigated as to their eligibility to land by inspection officers who stand at the heads of the various aisles prepared for the purpose.

It is the duty of every inspector, and to this, I call special attention to detain every person who may not appear to him to be clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to admission for a special inquiry.

All such special inquiries are conducted by at least four officials acting as judge and jury. No immigrant is permitted entry by the said board except after a favorable decision made by at least three inspectors in such judicial capacity.

It depends entirely upon the character of the immigrants as to how large a proportion of the passengers of any incoming ship has to be detained for such special inquiry.

Giving the Green Light to English, German and Scandinavian Ships

On English, German, or Scandinavian ships, a mere 5 percent or less of immigrants did not seem to be clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to admission. After a special inquiry, it was found that perhaps not one of the detained immigrants had to be finally returned as undesirable through their exclusion by law, underscoring the meticulous care in the examination process.

We frequently have ships from Italian ports, of which 50 percent or more have been detained for special inquiry, resulting in the final debarring from the landing of some 20 percent of such ships.

The simple fact that 24,000 cases in 1894-95 and 40,539 in 1895-96 (43,645 in the calendar year 1896) were brought before our Boards of Special Inquiry speaks volumes not only about the amount of work to be performed under the present law on Ellis Island but also about the meticulous care exercised in the winnowing process.

Any immigrant who is held or sentenced to be returned is permitted to consult with counsel and friends, under proper restrictions, and to file with the commissioner an appeal from the excluding decision of the board. In contrast, in cases of exceptional merit, even immigrants who may not be eligible per se for admission are permitted to land if the authorization to accept a real estate bond to the amount of $500 in each case, conditioned that the immigrant will not become a public charge, is given by the Secretary of the Treasury.

During the entire examination, which sometimes takes several weeks, the detained immigrants are appropriately housed and fed at the expense of the steamship company bringing them here. If ailing, they are received in the hospital and treated without expense to themselves but at the cost of the steamship company. The company also has to stand the expense of returning all immigrants not permitted to land.

From these facts, it is evident that the steamship companies, in their own interest, are very careful before issuing tickets to such persons. They necessarily exercise special care before issuing tickets to those whose examination alone, not to mention the return, results in an expense that, in many cases, is larger than the price of the ticket, demonstrating their responsible approach.

As the steamship companies hold their agents who have sold such tickets for them, responsible for the outlay in each case, it naturally follows that the agents themselves exercise greater vigilance in the conduct of their business, ensuring a secure oversight in the immigration process.

Still, another safeguard has been provided for the protection of our country in the law, a section which requires the return of all aliens at the expense of the steamship company who come into the United States in violation of law and that any alien who becomes a public charge within one year after he arrives in the United States, from causes existing before his landing therein, shall be deemed to have come in violation of law and be returned.

In this manner, the responsibility of the steamship companies is practically extended over one year after the landing of immigrants. However, when on proper examination, it is found that any immigrant has become a public charge within one year from the date of arrival, from causes not existing before that, and that he has been permanently incapacitated from earning a livelihood, he shall be returned at the expense of the Immigrant Fund, which also bears the cost for the care and maintenance of any immigrant suffering from a disease of temporary character until the expiration of one year from the date of landing.

The complaint formerly prevalent that our almshouses, insane asylums, and hospitals were overcrowded with newly arrived immigrants will, therefore, be found to be no longer well-founded.

However, if such public charges do exist, it is solely through negligence on the part of municipal or state authorities, who have failed to avail themselves of the opportunities given by law, which are invariably most willingly rendered by the immigration authorities.

While I have endeavored to show that all immigrants are subject to rigid inspection under the new laws and that complaints based upon former methods and their results can no longer justly be made at this time, I do not wish it to be understood that our present laws or their enforcement are perfect or beyond improvement.

On the thirteenth of June, 1894, the Secretary of the Treasury appointed a commission consisting of three practical immigration experts to investigate and report, among other points, what changes, if any, in the rules and regulations now in force were necessary to secure a more efficient execution of existing laws relating to immigration; and this commission, of which I had the honor to be a member, recommended in its report, submitted in October, 1895, no less than twenty-nine practical amendments to the existing laws and regulations.

Still, this same commission was and is unanimous in the opinion that the fundamental principle of the present law should be upheld and that the current laws, with certain practical amendments, under proper execution, are sufficient to protect this country against too massive or undesirable immigration.

For reasons sufficiently explained above, the Immigration Investigating Commission does not believe heroic measures are necessary at this time.

We do not underestimate the dangers of unrestricted immigration. Still, we do believe, and are sincere in that belief, that there is not, and has not been, any unrestricted immigration for the last four years.

Our eyes are not closed to the evils that a sizeable foreign population, concentrated to a considerable measure in our larger cities and, unfortunately, in many states invested with the full power of citizenship, may bring to our political institutions. Nor do we overlook that the competition of less civilized workers, who have never been used to a higher standard of life, is liable, in turn, to lower our wages.

But we believe that any of these dangers and evils can be more successfully overcome and avoided than by introducing restriction methods that are likely to exclude the most desirable immigrant while not helping us about the many millions who have already come here under the unrestricted condition of previous years.

Referring primarily to the evil political influence which an ignorant foreign-born population is likely to exert in our public affairs, I am personally of the opinion that the dangers from that source are very much exaggerated in a country where voting is distributed with so little discrimination that millions of half-savage Negroes enjoy the right of suffrage. At the same time, our intelligent and highly cultured women are precluded from availing themselves of its privilege.

But suppose the ignorant Pole or Italian is a more dangerous citizen than the ignorant Negro. There is nothing easier than to apply the severest test to the privilege of American citizenship, granting naturalization only to the enlightened and completely assimilated foreigner.

Let us not forget that immigration is and will be a virtually economic question. At the same time, naturalization is purely political. What ought to be no more than hostility to the ready naturalization permitted in many states turns out, by an inexcusable confusion of ideas, to be a general hostility to immigration.

Many interested in the subject have hoped to solve the immigration problem by introducing a monetary test; however, this method is not suitable for close scrutiny.

The mere exhibition to the inspection officer of $200 or $1000 at the time of landing is not a sufficient guarantee that a person will not become a public charge within a short time, even if this money was not borrowed for the very purpose of an exhibition to such inspection officer.

It will be readily conceded that a young man with two dollars in his pocket, two good strong arms, and an earnest intention of engaging in any available work will, as a rule, find his way in this country. At the same time, a widow, hampered with several small children and without friends, could never convince me, even by showing as much as $5000, that she might not become a public charge within a given time.

A bankrupt merchant, unused to work and coming over here perhaps with hundreds of dollars, will almost invariably have to spend his last cent before finding any opportunity to earn a livelihood.

Another solution that has been proposed and much agitated is the plan of adopting Consular certification, but, in the words of Senator Lodge, " This plan is impracticable; the necessary machinery for it could not be provided, and it would lead to many serious questions with foreign governments and never be properly and justly enforced."

According to the Senator's declaration, the opinion of the committee he was chairman of is shared by all expert judges who have given careful attention to the question.

The Senate Committee's report appropriately designates another method involving a higher capitation tax as a severe but somewhat discriminating method for which the country is unprepared.

The Immigration Restriction League has finally decided, I may say after consultation with the officials on Ellis Island, to forego all those plans that were favored in former times and to adopt as their only demand the introduction of an educational test. I am in favor of a moderate academic test for the protection of American civilization and of the American standard of life.

Illiteracy is invariably coupled with a low standard of living, which inevitably leads to a lowering of wages. Under the present condition of education in Continental Europe, those nationalities that are considered to be sending the most desirable immigrants to the United States, such as the Germans, English, and Scandinavians, show the smallest percentage of illiteracy, while the southern part of Europe and the eastern part, which teach a low grade of education, furnish at the same time the least desirable immigrants.

However, with the progress of compulsory education in Europe and, especially strange as it may sound, with the growth of mandatory military service, illiteracy is rapidly waning in all of Europe. Any literary or educational test will, within twenty years or less, be entirely superfluous as far as Continental Europe is concerned.

In the meantime, it would undoubtedly appear extremely unjust to apply such tests to persons under sixteen years of age, to females, or in any other way that might lead to a separation of families or an aggravation of our severe and vexed servant-girl question.

With these limitations, I believe in introducing a limited and practical educational test as a natural and proper addition to the present immigration laws, to be made without radically changing their fundamental character. Since October 1, 1896, I have practically introduced this test on Ellis Island without being forced by law.

One of the chief reasons for the introduction of this literary test at the station under my charge was shown by my practical experiences during an official trip to Europe last summer, where I observed that the statistics about the illiteracy of immigrants are, if possible, even less reliable than I have found general immigration statistics of former years.

It is generally recognized that there is a tremendous discrepancy between the statistics on immigrants arriving within the last quarter of a century and the results of the three United States censuses taken at the same time.

Of course, our Bureau of Statistics has been obliged to rely on information gathered carelessly and recklessly by so-called officials of state agencies.

We are confronted with figures as to the age, occupation, destination, literacy, and money in possession of immigrants, which I can positively assert, from research I personally made, were based almost entirely upon guesswork up to the enforcement of the law of 1893.

Scholars, scientists, and legislators have been naturally misled by such erroneous premises and alleged facts to equally erroneous conclusions.

Even since the enforcement of the Act of 1893, which for the first time legally required an examination and sworn statements on these points, securing reliable statistics has been found to be a most challenging task, requiring more skilled material in expert statisticians than public service in the United States usually furnishes.

Further, about illiteracy, I have found by practical experience that it is necessary to demand some functional tests to arrive at reliable and definite figures.

The results of an actual test on Ellis Island made during the last six months show a marked divergence from data heretofore promulgated:

This inaccuracy in the immigration statistics formerly furnished is, in my opinion, one of the most persuasive arguments against the advisability of any heroic change in our present immigration laws, which, for the first time in our history, make it possible for us to secure reliable statistics that may be used as safe bases for scientific and legislative conclusions.

However, introducing such an educational test cannot solve the immigration problem, which is the very essence of which it fails to touch.

"The immigration question," I quote from the commission's report before referred to, ' 'is pre-eminently a national one; this nation consists neither of a few large cities, which, as in all the other countries, furnish only limited employment to a dense population, nor of the few states whose farms are deserted and whose manufacturing cities are overcrowded with idlers.

Immigration concerns the West as much as the East and the South as the North, and the only policy that can be consistently recommended is one that will benefit the whole country most and harm each part of it the least.

"No one can undertake to deny that an entire closing of our ports to immigrants would inevitably result in untold injury to, if not the very destruction of, our largest transportation and manufacturing enterprises; in a disastrous stoppage of the development of significant sections of the country; and famine of servants and menial laborers.

"There are some comparatively small densely populated sections, to be sure, where no immigrants or only the most highly qualified are desired, but in the more substantial part of this country, those immigrants who are only fitted for unskilled manual labor are still needed.

This is particularly true of the vast undeveloped agricultural and lumber areas of the Northwest, South, and Southwest.

"At present, immigrants herd together in densely populated centers. Nearly half of the steerage arrivals at the port of New York, for example, give their destination to the immigrant inspectors as New York City because they know of no other place to go.

The census figures show that a considerable proportion eventually drift elsewhere, for better or worse. Still, quite too large a portion remains to swell the ranks of the paupers or depreciate the labor market.

Only a tiny percentage get where they ought to be in the work they are peculiarly noted for.

Existing conditions, in a word, exhibit a clear case of maladjustment, which is principally due to the immigrants' lack of accurate knowledge and their complete inability to obtain it.

"Notwithstanding the rapid mail and cable connections and the enormous transatlantic trade, the geography, topography, resources, and industrial and social conditions of the different sections of the United States are practically unknown in Europe.

The only information accessible to an intending immigrant is in the letters received by himself or his neighbors or in the circulars of speculators, steamships, and railway companies.

Finally, he leaves home with the expectation of abundant opportunities to better his condition and an eager determination to avail himself of them, but without any precise knowledge of where or how he is to do it.

Under the circumstances, it would be strange indeed if glib-tongued agents did not sometimes, despite all the vigilance of the federal authorities, induce him to invest his funds in worthless lands and played-out enterprises or to let his labor to an unscrupulous padrone."

Hit Rhodus hic salts, here is the point where the real solution of the problem follows as a natural sequence: Let each immigrant receive the proper information, enlightenment, and guidance so that he may readily find the place where he can work to the best advantage of himself and his adopted country.

Give him the opportunity and knowledge to find the proper labor market where his services are needed, not in competition with American labor but to build up all sections of this great country and its industries.

Let the farmer or fruit grower be shown to those sections of the country where his experience and personal qualifications will secure him the most significant returns. You will very seldom hear any objection to or outcry against immigration.

Exclude all undesirables and ensure that the most desirable immigrants are adequately distributed throughout the country, and there will no longer be any immigration problem.

Do not turn over the distribution of the incoming to irresponsible speculators or padrones, but place the distribution of settlers and laborers under the responsible management of a National Land and Labor Clearing House, in close connection with and under full regulation by the authorities charged with enforcing immigration law.

This great National Land and Labor Clearing House is the instrument by which the whole immigration problem can be removed forever, all possible dangers from immigration can be prevented, and this nation will receive all the benefits in the future that it has unquestionably derived from immigration in the past.

Joseph H. Senner, "The Immigration Question." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, July 1897.

Engaging Content and Noteworthy Aspects 📚

1️⃣ Historical Context of Immigration 🌎

Senner's introduction outlines the historical importance of migration, contrasting the tribal migrations of earlier centuries with modern immigration. This framework helps readers understand how migration evolved from the movements of entire tribes to the individual and family migrations that shaped America's demographic landscape.

📌 Noteworthy Insight: The text emphasizes how migration was once seen as a violent conquest and has since transformed into the more peaceful, yet complex, process of immigration. This provides a unique perspective on the evolution of migration.

2️⃣ The Immigration Process at Ellis Island 🇺🇸

The article provides a detailed account of how immigrants were received and processed at Ellis Island. Senner describes the rigorous inspections, including medical examinations, financial assessments, and the critical questioning regarding each immigrant’s ability to contribute to the United States.

🖼 Noteworthy Image: Final Discharge From Ellis Island – This image captures the final stages of the immigration process, where immigrants are questioned about their eligibility to stay in the U.S. The detailed questions about money, health, and labor contracts illustrate the thoroughness of the inspection process at the time.

3️⃣ The Role of Steamship Companies 🚢

One of the most striking aspects of the article is the accountability placed on steamship companies to ensure that immigrants met the qualifications for entry. Senner outlines how these companies were responsible for not only the transportation of immigrants but also ensuring they adhered to the laws of immigration.

This creates an economic incentive for steamship companies to vigilantly inspect immigrants before they board, ensuring they are less likely to become a financial burden to the U.S. upon arrival.

4️⃣ Immigration Laws and Enforcement ⚖️

The article provides a clear breakdown of the evolution of U.S. immigration laws, starting with early, more lenient policies and moving toward more restrictive laws by the 1890s. Senner discusses the Act of 1893, which significantly altered how immigration was managed and enforced.

📌 Noteworthy Insight: The article's statistical breakdown of immigrant figures from the fiscal years (1893-1896) highlights the sharp decrease in immigration due to the newly enforced laws and the reduction in public charges, showing a shift toward a more regulated immigration system.

5️⃣ The Call for Educational and Geographic Reforms 🗺️🎓

Senner calls for a systematic approach to distributing immigrants across the country to places where their labor is needed, such as the rural areas and undeveloped agricultural regions. He advocates for creating a National Land and Labor Clearing House, which would match immigrants to areas based on their skills and local labor needs.

📌 Noteworthy Insight: This part of the article is forward-thinking, offering a practical solution to the problem of immigrants clustering in cities like New York, where they faced overcrowded conditions and struggled to find employment.

6️⃣ Addressing the "Undesirable" Immigrant 🛑

The article discusses how undesirable immigrants—those who were likely to become public charges—were excluded through stricter policies. It emphasizes the deterrent effect of these policies, which resulted in fewer undesirable immigrants being allowed to land and more vigilant checks on immigration agents and steamship companies.

Educational and Historical Insights 🏫📜

📌 For Teachers and Students: The article offers an invaluable resource for understanding the complexities of immigration laws and the processes in place at Ellis Island. Teachers can use this article to foster discussions on the historical evolution of immigration policies and their implications on both immigrants and American society. The detailed historical context and personal insights make this article a strong choice for U.S. history and immigration studies.

📌 For Genealogists: The article provides an excellent framework for understanding immigration records, including the types of questions asked to immigrants and the responsibility of steamship companies. This context helps genealogists understand how family records might appear in immigration documents and what factors were considered in the immigration process.

📌 For Historians: The article is a critical resource for historians studying the political and social climate of immigration in the late 19th century. Senner’s perspective as a chief gatekeeper provides a unique insider view of the official enforcement of immigration laws, making this an essential text for understanding the development of U.S. immigration policy.

Final Thoughts

Joseph H. Senner’s article The Immigration Question provides a thorough analysis of the immigration process at Ellis Island and offers valuable insights into the social, economic, and political dimensions of immigration during the late 19th century. His examination of the evolution of immigration laws and their enforcement adds depth to our understanding of how the U.S. regulated immigration and the measures taken to address public concerns.

While the article is highly informative, it could benefit from a more nuanced discussion of the human experience of immigration, focusing not just on the regulations but also on the individual stories behind the numbers.

This article is a must-read for those interested in immigration history and offers significant value to educators, students, genealogists, and historians alike.

🔎 Research & Essay Writing Using GG Archives

📢 This is NOT a blog! Instead, students and researchers are encouraged to use the GG Archives materials for academic and historical research.

🔎 Looking for primary sources on Titanic’s lifeboat disaster? GG Archives provides one of the most comprehensive visual collections available today.