HUNGARY-L Archives

Archiver > HUNGARY > 2002-06 > 1024747753


From:
Subject: Re: [HUNGARY-L] Second Trip to US
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 08:09:13 EDT


In a message dated 6/21/2002 10:02:59 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
writes:

<< Would he have had to process through Ellis Island again? Or simply get
off at the company dock? >>

I'm going to try this one more time -- as it seems the incorrect and
incomplete recent article from FTM that has made the rounds of Rootsweb lists
(including this one on ~June 10) is resulting in WRONG conclusions. I'll
apologize upfront for the length -- and if you already know and understand
the basics of 19th/20th century immigration to the USA -- then DELETE now!

1. When one is researching for their family's immigration (time=~1885-1924)
one is looking for their "immigration record". The ONLY thing that
constitutes that record is the *immigrant passenger arrival* document. That
is its proper name. They are also called passenger manifests and passenger
lists in common jargon.

2. There were numerous USA LAWS that determined the how, what, when, and
where of everything about immigration. If one wants to understand the
immigration experience, and figure out what some family historical documents
or stories mean, then a good place to start is to understand what impact
those LAWS had. This is easy research - easily available in dozens of books
at libraries, the bookstore, and at 100s of Internet sites.

3. The BIG law - the one with the most impact, declared that all passengers
*had to be enumerated* on a passenger list on specific FORMS that were
printed by the USA government, and supplied to the shipping companies for
use. These forms required information to be supplied by all passengers --
and THAT information was the data necessary to determine whether or not they
met the criteria for entering the USA. Lists included US citizens (which is
not the same as an alien resident) -- who obviously had no need to be
"processed" as an alien under immigration LAW. The exact information changed
on the forms over time, because new LAWS were passed requiring more and more
information needed by processing officials.

4. The forms (passenger lists, passenger manifest, passenger arrival record)
were completed BY THE SHIPPING companies at the port of departure AND/OR
during the voyage. Other things that happened at the port of departure were
medical exams, and fumigation and isolation -- as shipping companies were
barred from bringing in anyone who was sick with a contagious disease, and if
a passenger was denied entry because of an illness the shipping company was
liable for the costs of meals and lodging at Ellis Island while the person
awaited deportation, and the cost of taking them back home.

5. Therefore, EVERYONE who is a known passenger on a ship is LISTED on a
passenger arrival record (and later crews also) no matter how many times they
went back and forth -- which alot of people did quite often. This aspect of
trans-Atlantic travel has nothing to do with the someone being PROCESSED *ON*
Ellis Island, or being *Processed* onboard the ship. No one was allowed to
simply walk off a boat onto USA territory in violation of US immigration law
-- as the Q & A from the FTM article implies.

6. In case it is not obvious yet, the purpose of the manifest was to provide
immigration LEGAL inspectors the information they needed to determine a
person's eligibility for entering the USA. Whether on the ship, or in the
Ellis Island Registry Room (the Great Hall), a person underwent a brief
verbal exam by an inspector who had the manifest in front of him which he
scrutinized while at the same time judging the veracity of the persons
responses. Granted, I doubt that John J. Astor and similar others were
questioned much on the ship, if in fact, at all by some inspectors.

So while I'm at it, here are my comments about this misinformed article. If
anyone wants to refer back to it in entirety, I wrote (but did not post) in
response to
In a message dated 6/10/2002 12:57:12 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
writes:
<< A: It is true that only steerage passengers were processed at Ellis
Island. The first and second classes disembarked at the ocean liner's dock,
then the steerage class was taken by ferry to Ellis Island, >>

_____I've seen this "discussion" making the rounds on a few lists -- and have
to say that the innuendoes and lack of historical facts appears to me at
least to have large potential for confusing the 'immigrant experience'
situation even more. There is quite enough bad/incorrect information floating
around because of the romanticized folklore that has become ingrained in
American history, without adding more. FTM is apparently not immune from the
"sound bite" age, -- nor the lack of sound historical research.

After about 1905 or so, the majority of immigrants traveled in 3rd class, NOT
steerage. The author does not even mention this class. 3rd class is NOT the
same as steerage, -- most shipping companies took out steerage
living/sleeping arrangements, and installed rooms for 4-6 people, bunking
together, ie=3rd class. There was also a 4th class, but not steerage, on
most larger vessels after about 1906 or so, although in some cases, it is
still labeled as steerage.

The original question about NOT setting foot on Ellis Island in the 1920s???
Not surprising at all if it was after 1924 -- since NO ONE, except detained
persons, went to the Island after 1924 since there was no need for
immigration processing, because the processing was done on the departure end
because the law to enter the US now required VISAS. (dah! just like today)
That's the short, direct answer.

It is ludicrous to conclude (as the author does) that an immigrant who was
barred from entry the first time (there had to be a reason for being
excluded, and these were defined by LAW) could turn around the come back as a
"1st/2nd class" passenger and thereby somehow FOOL immigration officials.
This story has now grown on some lists with people concluding that 1st/2nd
class passengers were somehow whisked into the USA completely bypassing
immigration requirements. Hogwash! (no offense to pigs intended). The
single largest reason for persons being excluded was MEDICAL. (so maybe the
immigrant went home and got over his whatever kept him out the first time).
ALL passengers on an ocean liner had to have daily medical checks and cards
issued by the ship's medical personnel to certify as to their medical
condition -- regardless of class of travel. These were presented to the
MEDICAL inspectors at the ports of arrival in USA.

It is true that 1st/2nd class passengers were PROCESSED onboard the ship.
But the operative word here is *processed*, because the second largest reason
for excluding an immigrant was being deemed "likely to become a public
charge". The presumption then was that if someone could afford 1st/2nd class
rates (which were VERY VERY expensive and therefore completely unlikely that
anyone excluded the first time as a pauper could put together that kind of
money in even 3 lifetimes!), then they *probably* had the means to keep them
off the streets and out of the public welfare system. It was also an attempt
to cut down on the hassle for the Rockafellers, the Carnegies, and the
hundreds of business people who VERY frequently traveled to and from Europe.
A regular ole immigrant was not going to escape scrutiny of the ship's
personnel (who would be liable for the cost of housing the immigrant while
they awaited deportation at EI and for the cost of taking them back IF the
immigrant were found to be excluded!!), and of the immigration officials who
came onboard ship to conduct processing WHILE IT was anchored in New York
Harbor. (for most of EI history, there were not enough berths for all ships
to actually DOCK in the USA, and some shipping companies didn't even have
docks!! -- the ships waited in the harbor for immigration officials to be
ferried to the ships, and for 1st/2nd class people to be ferried after
processing from the ships to either New York City proper, or the New Jersey
shore where the train station was if their final destination was somewhere
other than NYC.) Passengers required to be processed more formerly, and
actually ON Ellis Island were then also ferried to the Administration
Building.

Everyone was processed - because that was the law prior to 1924, and from all
historical accounts immigration officials carried out their jobs with respect
and regard for the future citizens, and went to some extraordinary steps at
times to "spin" situations so that entries could be allowed. But if someone
was found to not meet the criteria established BY LAW, then they were not
allowed entry. (investigations were done by Boards of Special Inquiry -- it
was not arbitrary and capricious)

All people also had to be scrutinized because regardless of travel class,
immigrants were required to pay a HEAD TAX, (suspended for a time of and on)
that USA citizens did not have to pay. Traveling 1st/2nd class was not an
automatic entry into the USA as the article implies, and as folks are now
concluding because of the lack of details necessary to understand what the
immigrant experience (specifically 1885-1924) was actually like. The truth
about immigration is a much more fascinating story/history than the corrupted
folklore, but it takes some reading (including accounts written at the time)
and therefore some decent investment of time and research to learn about it
-- something that in my opinion, the author of this Q&A has not done._______

So back to original query. The answer is NO - possibly
getting off at the dock has nothing to do with NOT finding them on a New York
Port of Arrival passenger record. Since the post does not indicate HOW the
arrival records are being researched -- the online EI database?, or the
original microfilms?, it's hard to *know* why the record cannot be located,
but there could be any number of logical reasons. 1) -- you're using the
online database which has about a 50% transcription error rate in the names
and resident locations -- so you're using the spelling you know to search,
but your ancestor is in the database other some other unknown (and possibly
unreasonable) spelling, 2) the name is transcribed from the manifest
correctly, but it is spelled differently than the one you're searching under,
3) he arrived at some other port (but New York is most likely after 1912) and
you need to research these the old-fashioned way, 4) there is no second
arrival, 5) he arrived at Canada and not the USA.

If you'll post the name and other pertinent details of who you;re looking
for, several people on the list have become pretty proficient at searching
the online EI database and would be happy to spend some time assisting you in
your search.

Regards
Linda

This thread: