ment and that it shall be included in the bill that the committee will draft.

Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. That is section 305.

Mr. MASON. That is all right.

Mr. LESINSKI. If there is no objection to that proposal, it is so ordered.

The CHAIRMAN. With that amendment, who is going to move that the bill be reported out favorably?

Mr. MASON. I move, Mr. Chairman, that the bill be reported out. Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. Í second the motion, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LESINSKI. There is a motion made and seconded that the bill be reported favorably with an amendment to section 305.

The CHAIRMAN. Are we going to report the bill out showing these amendments, or will we reprint them under a new title?

Mr. MASON. Let us reprint the bill.

Mrs. O'DAY. I think, Mr. Chairman, in view of what is happening in Holland and Belgium now, we ought to include the word Fascists as well as Communists.

The CHAIRMAN. I agree with you.

Without objection the amendment will include Communists and also Fascists and Nazis and any others who advocate attempting to overthrow the Government.

Mr. REES. I overlooked one point, and that is this, that it was suggested, as you remember, on page 84, section 406, that an amendment be offered providing for the day in court that was submitted by Mr. Butler the other day. I did not present that to the committee. It was discussed by the State Department and by the Department of Labor. Whether or not you are interested in that question, I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. Could we not agree now that if the new bill reaches the floor by next week we will discuss that amendment and offer that as the committee amendment?

Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. Yes; offer it as a committee amendment.
Mr. REES. All right.

The CHAIRMAN. Then we can discuss that in some other committee meeting before it reaches the floor and Mr. Rees can offer it. Mr. LESINSKI. On page 14, section 308, it provides:

Any alien who has been lawfully admitted into the United States for permanent residence and who has heretofore been or may hereafter be absent temporarily from the United States solely in his or her capacity as a regularly ordained clergyman-

And so forth. Now a nun is not a clergyman.

Mrs. O'DAY. There are women clergymen.

Mr. LESINSKI. How about nuns?

Mrs. O'DAY. Nuns and preachers are entirely different.

Mr. LESINSKI. Are we talking of clergymen or are we also talking of nuns?

The CHAIRMAN. We are talking of all clergy of all denominations. Mr. LESINSKI. Is a nun a member of the clergy? The word "nun” has not been used here.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you think, Mr. Rees? Should it state "or member of a religious order"?

Mr. REES. I would be careful about the use of the words "religious order."

Mr. LESINSKI. After the word "clergyman”, I suggest the insertion of "or nun."

The CHAIRMAN. The term "clergyman" is not confined to any particular religion or denomination. It may apply to any denomination. Why do you not use the language in the act of 1924?

Mr. REES. We had better act upon that.

Mr. LESINSKI. What are you going to do about nuns? For instance, a nun is sent in from the United States to Canada for 6 months to teach and then comes back. She would not be eligible.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you think?

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I do not see any objection to it, Mr. Chairman. Mr. REES. There is no objection.

Mr. LESINSKI. You say here "solely in his or her capacity as a regularly ordained clergyman."

Mr. REES. Is a nun ordained?

Mr. LESINSKI. I think the words "or nun" should follow the words "regularly ordained clergyman.”

The CHAIRMAN. Why do you not prepare an amendment, and before we take up the other bill ask to incorporate that in this section?

Mr. LESINSKI. Just inserting the words "or nun" in there will do it. I think that will cover it.

The CHAIRMAN. We will adjourn until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.

(Thereupon, at 12: 10 p. m., an adjournment was taken until tomorrow, Tuesday, May 14, 1940, at 10 a. m.)

TO REVISE AND CODIFY THE NATIONALITY LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES INTO A COMPREHENSIVE NATIONALITY CODE

TUESDAY, MAY 14, 1940

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met in executive session at 11:30 a. m., Hon. John Lesinski presiding.

Mr. REES. When we closed the discussion on this bill I think the record probably shows that we were approving the code with the exception of the amendments, two amendments that were to be offered. I am asking unanimous consent to open the bill for consideration of one further amendment. It is a rather brief one. Section 325 provides that a person who has "served honorably or with good conduct for an aggregate period of at least 3 years on board any vessel of the United States Government other than in the United States Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard," and so forth. I move that we make that 5 years. I see no reason why we should give this particular group a period of 3 years during which to live as American citizens, and provide for 5 years for other groups.

Mr. LESINSKI. The present law fixes 3 years.

Mr. REES. That is correct. I want to fix it at 5 years.

Mr. MASON. I move the amendment offered by Mr. Rees be favorably adopted.

Mr. LESINSKI. Motion made and supported.

Mr. REES. There is another amendment to section 331, on page 39, in line 8 thereof, to strike out the word "two" and insert in lieu thereof "not less than two nor more than ten."

Under the old law, until 1906, a person who declares his intention to become a citizen of the United States could, any time thereafter, file a declaration, provided he complied with the law, and go along and become a citizen of the United States. In other words, the declaration was good as long as he had it. In 1906 the law was changed so that the declaration of intention was good for a period of only 7 years. In the subcommittee hearings I suggested we go back to the 7-year period, but the Departments say that the terms of 7 years, limiting it to 7 years, is a little bit awkward. They say 10 years is a little bit easier to compute. So I am making it 10 years because I do not think that a person should be permitted to carry a declaration of intention around for all his life and finally come into court to complete his citizenship. Mr. MASON. We agreed on 10 years yesterday.

Mr. AUSTIN. It makes it easier?

Mr. REES. It makes it easier because of this difference: Under the present law a man who has a declaration of intention, and wants his certificate of naturalization, goes into court and does not file his petition for citizenship; he files an application first. Sometimes it takes the Government quite a while to get around to the place so he can actually get his petition filed. From there on they would take their time. They took their time before the petition was filed and these things have to be straightened out before he actually gets his petition filed. They say that the term of 7 years is a little bit confusing to the fellow who really makes an honest endeavor to come into court and become a citizen.

Mr. ALLEN. Does that make it easier, or harder, or what? I would say it makes it a little bit easier than the 7-year period, and it makes it harder than the code that was agreed on by the various depart

ments.

Mr. AUSTIN. Some are here 30 or 40 years and are not able to make up their mind. You are asking them to make up their mind; they have got to make it up quick.

Mr. LESINSKI. You have people coming in here from foreign lands with very little education and you expect them to absorb this language and read and write it perfectly in a year or two? It is impossible. There is no chance of that.

Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the amendment offered by Mr. Rees making it a 10-year period be adopted. Mr. LESINSKI. Are there any objections?

Mr. MASON. I want to vote on the 10-year period.

Mr. ALLEN. I do not want to agree to it. We are making everything easy, easy, easy, and we are easing ourselves out of a country. Mr. AUSTIN. I wish to be registered in favor of a 7-year limit.

Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. We compromised on 10 years. I do not think we figured it was vital.

Mr. REES. If you want to make it 7 years, all right.

Mr. LESINSKI. The law today is 7 years.

Mr. REES. I still offer the amendment to adopt a 10-year period.

Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. It takes a number of years to qualify in Americanization classes.

Mr. ALLEN. An alien ought to be able to qualify in 7 years.

Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. If you could go to some of these alien classes with me, Mr. Allen, you would be very much impressed with the sincerity of these aliens that attend these classes religiously, and you would appreciate some of the handicaps some of them have. It does give them a little bit more time to qualify.

Mr. MASON. I have struggled with individuals in these Americanization classes. I was considered a pretty fair teacher. In 5 years, I did not get them ready in that time, with the same individual repeating.

Mr. AUSTIN. I withdraw my 7 years.

Mr. LESINSKI. The motion made by Mr. Rees is supported.

The ayes have it.

Mr. REES. I propose an amendment to section 332, on page 42, in line 11, to include after the word "two" the words "nor more than ten." Mr. MASON. I move that it be adopted.

Mr. LESINSKI. The motion made by Mr. Mason is supported.