Two bills were introduced recently in the State legislature of Illinois. Both of them tend toward one goal, although not in the same degree. What is most suprising is the fact that the authors of these two proposed enactments are State representatives of Polish descent, elected principally by Polish votes.

And so State Representative Albert Rostenkowski requests that it be prohibited for persons not citizens to conduct individually or even in partnership any enterprise requiring a license. This proposed law reads as follows:

"A person not a citizen of the United States, cannot be in any way interested financially either as sole owner or as a partner or as a shareholder in a saloon or in any other enterprise for the conducting of which a license is demanded by law. For every day of commission of such transgression the guilty 2person shall be punished by being imprisoned from thirty to sixty days in the County jail."

The proposal of State Representative A. Trandel limits the prohibition to saloons. Because Mr. Rostenkowski expressed his wish to hear the opinions of citizens on this bill, the Dziennik Zwiazkowy thinks that he would also like to hear the opinions of newspapers, which influence the opinions of citizens. Unfortunately their opinion of his proposal will not prove favorable or flattering, and for this there are many reasons. The very motivation of the bill, charging persons not citizens with "uselessness in the development of this nation, this State, this county, and this city" and as a result refusing them the right "to profit upon citizens," cannot stand up against criticism. True, Mr. Rosteakowski directs these charges against other nationalities, not against Poles, but the law does not recognize nationalistic exceptions. The charge, therefore, must necessarily fall also against the great mass of Polish immigrants who do not as yet possess the rights of citizenship. Equally illogical is the 3contrast of "citizens paying rent and license" with persons not citizens because the latter also pay rent and license. It oftener happens that citizens profit by those who are not citizens, than, that those who are not profit by those who are. Not infrequently a clever citizen, who understands better the conditions of this country, exploits persons not citizens or even forces them out of business.

To forbid persons not citizens to participate in any enterprise requiring a license even in the capacity of partner or stockholder would kill stock corporations and co-operatives to which persons not citizens belong. Moreover, it would ultimately bring about the ruin of the whole country. Finally, this proposition tends to create unheard-of monopoly, the concentration of all commerce and industry in the hands of citizens to the exclusion of the great mass of those not citizens. Those who are not citizens would then be deprived of the right of existence, the right of managing and investing their money. In 4one word, several million people would be condemned to a fate similar to that of the most miserable slaves. They would be compelled to work for the citizens, regardless of the exploitations imposed upon them. What would Lincoln say to this were he alive?

In addition to this, the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says clearly:

"Nor shall any State....deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

The United States cannot create exceptional rights and laws on the pattern of those practiced in Prussia. An enactment of that type would redound to the detriment of all immigrants. It would be far worse than the immigration laws of Rott, Burnett, and Dillingham. The results of it would be that not only 5would an immigrant who was a skilled laborer fear to enter the State of Illinois, but an exodus would ensue of all those now residing within the State. They would avoid Illinois as if it were a spot infested with pestilence. It would be different if Mr. Rostenkowski made a request for trade qualifications for permission to conduct an enterprise. But that would not be so good even for many citizens. And so, as the propositions stand, in one instance as well as in the other, the proposed laws fundamentally miss the mark and cannot possibly be enacted.