 Long Jean watches have won 10 World Fair Grand Prizes, 28 gold medals and more honors for accuracy than any other timepiece. Long Jean, the world's most honored watch, is made and guaranteed by the Long Jean Wittner Watch Company. It's time for the Long Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, a presentation of the Long Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Long Jean, the world's most honored watch and Wittner Distinguished Companion to the World Honored Long Jean. Good evening. Our co-editors for this edition of the Long Jean Chronoscope are William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury, Lucian Warren, Washington correspondent of the Buffalo Courier Express. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable Herbert Lehman, United States Senator from New York. The opinions expressed are necessarily those of the speakers. Senator Lehman, our Chronoscope audience, of course, knows you, sir, for your long and distinguished public service career as Governor of New York, your humanitarian service with UNRWA, and now as Senator from New York. And we understand, sir, that your paramount interest now is in immigration. Now, why is the question of immigration an issue at the present time, sir? Well, Mr. Huey, I think that is of great importance today because the present immigration laws go back to 1924, and they're based on the 1920 census. They are confusing, complicated, and based on intolerable concepts of racism and racial discrimination. They need humanizing, liberalizing, and codifying. There's another important reason why we have to take up the matter, because the President recently suggested to the Congress that at least 300,000 additional persons be admitted into this country, refugees from communist tyranny and surplus peoples from Italy, Greece, the Netherlands, and Western Germany, they are pending in Congress today two bills on immigration. One the McCarran-Walter bill, and the other, a substitute bill, the Humphrey-Lieman bill. Senator Lieman, I understand that you are not particularly in favor of the McCarran-Walter bill. Could you tell us what some of the provisions are? Well, I'm not in favor of it. I'm very much against it, because I think the law, the McCarran bill, rather, uses police measures and fixes racist principles and discrimination into our laws which are utterly repugnant to American ideals. Some of the defects of the McCarran-Walter bill are that discretion with regard to the admission of people is left entirely to the consuls abroad, and based on his opinion, not on facts, and there's no appeal from that opinion. I believe the bill would slam the door on future immigration. I believe it would threaten hundreds of thousands of aliens now in this country with deportation on technical and unsubstantial grounds, and finally, by threat of revocation of citizenship, it would be a cloud citizenship of thousands, literally thousands of people who have been naturalized or may be naturalized in the future. May I give you just a couple of examples of what I mean? Take the question of deportation. Under the McCarran bill, an alien in this country, 30 years, with American wife, children, grandchildren, could be deported if he committed a crime however insignificant 25 or 30 years ago. He could be suddenly seized and deported and sent back to Greece, hungry Italy with no chance of ever seeing his family again. Another alien might have lived here 30 or 40 years, way back in the 1920s, let us say, he might have belonged to an organization which attorney general now finds subversive. The alien might have severed connection with this organization 20 years ago or more. But under the McCarran bill, not only could he be seized and deported, no matter how low or abiding since then, but no, he would have no chance of appeal. The question of the revocation of citizenship, which I think is a thoroughly evil thing. The Constitution, of course, our Constitution, of course says that there is no distinction between native born and naturalized citizens. Yet, the McCarran bill authorizes the revocation of naturalization taking away of citizenship for acts not serious enough to constitute even a crime for native born citizens. Just a couple of instances on that. A naturalized citizen refuses testimony before congressional committee investigating subversive act. He can be deprived of citizenship if this refusal is within 10 years after he had been naturalized. Another naturalized citizen joins a communist front organization for any purpose or reason within five years of his naturalization and his citizenship could be taken away from him. When you have an answer to all that, Senator, in your own legislation, you have an answer to that in the legislation. Yes, I have, but I want to say that the McCarran bill would create a huge number of second class citizens constantly under threat of losing American citizenship. Now, a famous newspaper columnist recently said, if this pending legislation, the McCarran Walter bill, should be enacted, we might as well take the Statue of Liberty out of New York Harbor and send it back to France from whence it came. Now, our bill, the Humphrey Lehman bill, safeguards to the fullest extent possible civil rights and liberties, even for aliens. It not only revises and codifies but also liberalizes and humanizes our present immigration laws. It makes it possible for an increased number of worthy immigrants to come to this country. We pool the unused quotas. Today, the unused quotas, which come because such a large number in way back in 1924 were assigned to the northern countries like England and Holland and Belgium and France and not used. We pool those and use them for people anywhere in the world from which they may come. And that means the admission, not the increase in the total number of immigrants because that will still be limited to 150,000, but increases the number that actually can be increased and will be increased by about 80 or 90,000. I believe too that it is important as we do in our bill to lay emphasis on the importance of family unit and the desirability of reuniting divided families. And finally, it would improve relations with peoples in Europe, not only by permitting increased immigration into this country, but by removing racial and national discrimination which have aroused deep antagonism against us among peoples abroad. Well, Senator, I'm sure that our audience very much appreciates your views on immigration. Now tonight in the news is the steel seizure, the President's seizure of the steel properties and has been a great deal of criticism. Now are you, sir, generally in sympathy with the President's action? I think the President had no alternative but to seize the steel companies. I think if he hadn't, two things would have happened. If a settle had been made on the basis demanded by the steel companies, in other words, an increase of $12 a ton, which in my opinion was entirely unjustifiable, it would have inevitably led to serious and violent inflation, which would have been a great threat to the solvency and security of this country. And furthermore, if he hadn't seized the steel mills, it would have meant a curtailment possibly of as much as 5 to 7 million tons of steel, a greatly needed commodity, which is in short supply, and would have in that way threatened our defense activities, our security, and our national economy. I don't think the President had any alternative. And you're not gravely concerned over the constitutional issue that's been raised here. I'm not a constitutional lawyer and I can't express any opinion, but I believe that a President, and it's been shown, I think, by the history of this country, not only has the right but the duty to do everything he can to safeguard the security of our country. Now, I think the security of our country could easily have been threatened by a steel strike. And I think the President, under those circumstances, did the only thing that any courageous and right-thinking President could have done by seizing the steel mills. Senator, may I take the questioning into the political field for a moment? We are having some conventions coming up. I understand you're going to New York tomorrow at a dinner honoring W. Averell-Haremann, at which there will be some presidential candidates. Number one on the political questions, do you have any preference for a candidate at this time on the Democratic ticket? I am going to the dinner. I'm going to speak there. I have not expressed my views up to the present time with regard to the candidate on the Democratic ticket or on the Republican ticket. I see. But after the dinner, I believe there's to be a meeting and a favorite son from New York is to be selected. Is that right, sir? Yes. On Friday, I'm consulting with some of the other Democratic leaders in New York and we will discuss the whole situation. Do you favor a candidate for the U.S. Senate for the seat held by Irving M. Ives for the Democratic nomination? No, I don't think, Mr. Warren, that has been discussed at all. That's still wild. I have not discussed it. The field, in my opinion, is wide open. Both of them are about it. We have not reached any decision. What is your opinion, sir, as a final question? What is your opinion of Mr. Avril Harriman? I have a very high regard for Avril Harriman. I've known him for a great many years. And in my opinion, there is no more patriotic, no more able man in this country of ours than Avril Harriman. Well, thank you very much for being with us, sir. Thank you. The editorial board for this edition of the Longing Chronoscope was... William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury. Lucian Warren, Washington correspondent of the Buffalo Courier Express. Our distinguished guest was the honorable Herbert Lehman, United States Senator from New York. The big news in the world of sports is the opening of the major league baseball season. This year, as for years past, all umpires of both American and national baseball leagues will use Longing watches exclusively for timing all games throughout the season, winding up with the World Series in the fall. It is a fact that Longing is official watch for leading sports and contest associations the world over, including the Contest Board of the American Automobile Association, the American Power Boat Association, the National Aeronautics Association. And for 1952 again, the United States Olympic Committee has selected Longing watches for timing all events for the selection of the United States Olympic team. Why is this so? Well, the answer is found in the greater accuracy which is inbuilt into every Longing watch, accuracy as an established fact, proven year after year in the competitive accuracy trials conducted by the great government observatories. That is why throughout the world, no other name on a watch means so much as Longing, the world's most honored watch. Premier product of the Longing Wittenor Watch Company since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. This is David Ross speaking for your regular host, Frank Knight, inviting you to join us every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday evening at the same time for the Longing Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour. Broadcast on behalf of Longing, the world's most honored watch, and Wittenor, distinguished companion to the world honored Longing, sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display the emblem, Agency for Longing Wittenor Watch. This is the CBS television network.