56175/100
Decided by Board February 3, 1945
Illiterate Immigrant — Exemption from literacy requirements — Section 3 of the act of February 5, 1917.
An admissible alien twenty years of age may be considered as "bringing in" her accompanying illiterate mother who seeks permanent residence here and thus the mother was deemed exempt from the literacy requirements in view of the provision in the first proviso to section 3 of the Immigration Act of 1917.
EXCLUDED BY BOARD OF SPECIAL INQUIRY:
Act of 1917 — Unable to read.
BEFORE THE BOARD
Discussion: The subject, a native of Turkey, citizen of Cuba, 43 years of age, arrived at the port of Miami, Fla., via Pan American Airways on January 18, 1945, accompanied by her three children, aged 20, 15, and 12, and applied for admission for permanent residence in this country. She presented nonpreference quota immigration visa No. 125 issued at Habana, Cuba, on December 11, 1944, valid until April 10, 1945, and Cuban certificate of identity issued at Habana on November 17, 1944, valid until November 17, 1945, but following hearings before a Board of Special Inquiry on January 18 and 19 she was excluded on the above-designated ground. She appealed.
The appellant testified that she is unable to read and when tested in the Spanish language which she elected, she was unable to read any word on any of the three cards presented to her. The immigration visa presented by the subject bears a notation to the effect that the holder thereof is unable to read but that she claims exemption from said ground of inadmissibility on the fact that she is the mother of an admissible alien. The Board of Special Inquiry, after due consideration of the matter, concluded that she was not exempted from the literacy test by the terms of the first proviso to section 3 of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended, and accordingly denied her admission but directed the admission of her three children. The proviso, supra, reads as follows:
(1) That any admissible alien, or any alien heretofore or hereafter legally admitted, or any citizen of the United States, may bring in or send for his father or grandfather over fifty-five years of age, his wife, his mother, his grandmother, or his unmarried or widowed daughter, if otherwise admissible, whether such relative can read or not; and such relative shall be permitted to enter (8 U.S.C., 136).
The issue to be determined is therefore whether or not the appellant is exempt from the literacy test as the mother of an admissible alien who is bringing her to the United States. The Board of Special Inquiry apparently based its unfavorable decision upon that in the case of U.S. ex rel. Arizian v. Curran ( 12 F. (2d) 502 (C.C.A. 2d, 1926)), wherein it was held that the provisions of the above-mentioned proviso do not authorize an admissible alien, 9 years of age, to bring in her illiterate alien mother, but it is the opinion of this Board that this case is distinguishable from the subject one in that the appellant's oldest child is 20 years of age. As stated in the Arizian case, supra, "the statute implies a `bringing in,' if not by one with authority at least by one who causes the act of bringing" and the verb "bring" has among its definitions "to escort (one) on his way" (Webster's New International Dict., 2d Ed., Unab.). Webster's, supra, in distinguishing between the word "bring" and the word "fetch" also states that "to bring is to come with", whereas "to fetch is to go to, get, and bring back something." Accordingly, it is evident that the 20-year-old daughter of the appellant, while acompanying her mother, might also be "bringing" her to this country, and we are of the opinion that the record supports this construction of the situation. The subject's eldest daughter takes the position of looking after her mother and the mother of leaning upon said daughter as evidenced by the following excerpts from the testimony of record:
(Daughter). I would not remain here without my mother. I would not leave her alone. She is a widow and would have to be alone.
Q. Is it your desire to bring her to the United States?"
A. Yes.
(Mother). Q. Who is the head of your immediate family?
A. I consider myself but now my daughter because she is the principal one.
Q. Why do you consider now that your daughter is the principal one.
A. Because she is more capacitated than I. She can work and I can't. She can write and everything, that is, she can work.
On two occasions during the hearing the daughter volunteered information which her mother did not know or could not remember and she testified that she is able and willing to work, if necessary, to earn a living for herself and help support her mother. It is accordingly concluded, irrespective of the fact that the appellant's fare to this country was paid by her brother, that she is being brought by her eldest daughter and is exempt, therefore, from the literacy test.
Findings of Fact: Upon the basis of all the evidence presented, it is found:
(1) That the appellant is an alien, a native of Turkey, and a citizen of Cuba;
(2) That the appellant seeks admission into the United States for permanent residence;
(3) That the appellant is unable to read in any language or dialect;
(4) That the appellant is being brought to the United States by her 20-year-old daughter who has been admitted to this country for permanent residence.Conclusions of Law: Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, it is concluded:
(1) That under the first proviso to section 3 of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, as amended, the appellant is exempt from the literacy test;
(2) That under section 3 of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, as amended, the appellant is not inadmissible to the United States as a person who is unable to read in any language or dialect.Order: It is ordered that the appeal be sustained and the appellant admitted to the United States for permanent residence.