Letter from William J. Gibbons to President Harry S. Truman

FILED BY 3 XATIONAL MR. HOPKINS 9 1952 CATHOLIC RURAL LIFE CONFERENCE MOST REV. EDWIN V. O'HARA, D.D., Honorary President MOST REV. WILLIAM T. MULLOY, D.D., Episcopal Adviser MOST REV. EDWARD C. DALY, O.P., D.D., Moderator MOST REV. A. R. ZUROWESTE, D.D., President BELLEVILLE, ILL. MR. MARTIN SALM, 3rd V.-Pres. CHILTON, Wis. RT. REV. MSGR. L. G. LIGUTTI, Exec. Director Des MOINES, Iowa RURAL REV. JOSEPH HYLDEN, 4th V.-Pres. EDGELEY, N. DAK. REV. JOSEPH F. FROMMHERZ, ist V.-Pres. SWANTON, OHIO I REV. JOSEPH B. GREMILLION, Recording Secretary SHREVEPORT, LA. DR. PAUL SACCO, 2nd V.-Pres. DAVENPORT, Iowa MR. JOSEPH TRAINER, Treasurer NEWTOWN, PA. mb. ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS 3801 GRAND AVENUE DES MOINES 12, IOWA, U.S.A. REV. WILLIAM J. GIBBONS, S.J. Executive Committee 30 West 16th Street Public Relations New York 11, New York 133 WAtkins 4-7900 June 13, 1952 Pro x 76-B Dear Mr. President: Before you is a piece of legislation which has occasioned extended discussion and aroused deep emotions, namely that providing for revision and codification of the laws on immigration, naturalization and nationality. Despite the sharp divisions of opinion and regrettable misunderstandings which have surrounded this legislation, I am firmly convinced that it does not merit a veto. For the past four years I have followed closely the evolution of the bills which resulted in the recent action of the Congress. On two occasions opportunity was afforded me to present the views of my organization to the subcommittee working on revision pursuant to S.Res 137 of the Eightieth Congress. This was at the hearings of July, 1948 and March, 1951. During the fall and winter of 1950-51, I participated in several technical study groups of voluntary agency representatives examining the legislation section by section. Since reporting of the bills, and during debate in House and Senate, I followed the discussions daily. Against this background I reached the conclusion that the details of the legislation were given serious and careful attention, and that Congress was not acting hastily when the bills were passed after amendment and extended debate. That not all groups and individuals concerned are satisfied with the results in every aspect is only to be expected. No government can assure such universal satisfaction to all its people, especially a democracy which must respect the honest views of all. Admittedly there remain desirable objectives to be pursued for the improvement and liberalization of our immigration system. This is particularly true as regards the allotment of quotas under the existing law and the bill recently passed. Nevertheless, it would be less than truthful not to recognize that the final conference version of the The President, The White House, Washington, D.C. CHRIST TO THE COUNTRY THE COUNTRY TO CHRIST