IMMIGRATION

While the immigration authorities were last week considering and reconsidering the case of the Countess Cathcart (TIME, March 1) who had been denied admission on the grounds of moral turpitude, having been divorced for adultery ?and while her lawyers were taking her case to court?the law-makers of the nation were not ignorant of world events.

One of them, Congressman Emanuel Celler, Democrat from Brooklyn, issued a statement: “If the Carthcart case shows anything it proves that our Government has no right to meddle in private morals of foreigners visiting us. The so-called ‘moral turpitude’ of the Countess Cathcart is nothing compared to the ‘moral turpitude’ of the chasing but not chaste Prince of Wales. Why was he allowed to enter? His parents are up all night worrying about his night life. How about Sarah Bernhardt and Eleanore Duse? They made no bones about their affairs and were admitted. Gaby Deslys was no novice in the art of ‘moral turpitude.’ She was admitted and feted.”

Another Congressman (Fiorello H. La Guardia, Socialist of Manhattan) wrote a letter to the Secretary of Labor: “My attention has been called to one Count Ludwig Salm Von Hoogstraeten, an alien, who arrived in the United States on or about Dec. 1, 1925. . . . The alien in question apparently has no occupation, and, therefore, the usual inquiry by immigration officials to ascertain whether he had visible means of support should have been made. Inquiry should also have been made to ascertain whether or not this alien’s passage was paid for in whole or in part by others as in the law provided.”*

*The Count’s lawyer, Mr. Goodstein, made the following statement to the press: “Count Salm has neither required, sought nor obtained financial aid and he is not indebted to anybody on any account. He is quite able to pay his own way and has shown in court proceedings that he was and is about to support his wife [the onetime Millicent Rogers] and child [Peter] and to provide a suitable home for them.”