Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

COMPARISON OF RACES EMPLOYED.

The opinions of growers as to the general desirability as laborers of the different races employed vary, of course, according to individual prejudices and local race feeling, but they have certain striking features in common.

The consensus of opinion as to the Chinese is decidedly favorable, particularly when they are contrasted in certain respects with other races at present employed. The Chinese are regarded as thoroughly honest, faithful, conscientious, and efficient, though slow workers. They require no watching, and are said always to keep their contracts, regardless of losses to themselves. Furthermore, they take an interest in the outcome of the crop that often approaches servility toward their employers. For instance, it is said in one district that after they had finished the thinning they would often leave several of the old men at the camp to cut out weeds as fast as they grew. In this case the contract for each operation-thinning, hoeing, or harvesting-was apparently a separate one.

The chief criticism of the Chinese is based on their slowness and their reluctance to adopt new methods. In one district where they were employed for ten years they are said to have worked without tools for several seasons. They did not understand the kind of work desired, and consequently did all the thinning with their fingers. Later they consented to use hoes, and gradually became proficient workmen.

In weighing growers' opinions of the Chinese it must be remembered, however, that these opinions are expressed nearly a decade after the race had largely disappeared from the industry, and furthermore, that they refer to selected members of the race with years of experience in American methods of work and contractual relations. There is at least a question whether the Chinese have not risen in the appreciation of growers with their scarcity and at the expense of the reputations of the races at present employed.

The Japanese are commonly praised for their industry, quickness, steadiness, sobriety, cleanliness, adaptability, and eagerness to learn American ways and customs. They are condemned for lack of commercial honesty and for the pursuit of their own interests regardless of the cost to their employers. Many instances are reported of their disregard of contract obligations. The question as to whether a contract shall be kept or broken is apparently, in these cases, a commercial one, the answer depending upon the amount of money involved. If the contract price, less advances already made by the grower, is greater than the expense of completing the work the contract will be fulfilled; if it is less, the contract will be broken. One instance is reported where a bond was required from the contractor for the faithful performance of his agreement. This was in the case of a sugar company which employs nearly 300 Japanese for the hand work of its own fields. These men are all hired through a single contractor, a Japanese, who has been employed by the company for several years. The company in its contract with this man requires from him a bond, to cover penalties provided for in the agreement in the following cases: (1) If at any time both the contractor and his foreman should be found absent from the fields by officials of the company

during working hours; (2) if at any time the work should be stopped by disagreements between the contractor and his men. In the latter case the penalty is $100 for each day work is so interrupted. The company regards this contractor as a very reliable man and worthy of their entire confidence.

The average Japanese contractor is said to be very shrewd in choosing opportune moments for increasing his demands. It is said that one device used in the harvesting season is to postpone the work as long as possible on the pretext of a scarcity of laborers and then to demand increased prices because the beets have increased in size during the delay. The grower in such cases must usually accede to the demands made or see his beets suffer from neglect in the fields. The bond in his contract (if the contract is so guaranteed) with the Japanese is rarely sufficient to cover the loss of his crop.

Sometimes when the contractor, contrary to the usual custom, hires his men by the day he is forced to demand an increase in the contract price because of the demands of his men for higher wages. Sometimes the contract price in such cases is contingent upon his ability to secure men at a certain rate. If the men succeed in securing a raise in wages the additional amount in either case is an expense, not to the contractor, but to the grower. The latter must harvest his crop or bear the large losses risked in an intensive culture like that of the sugar beet.

The extent to which the Japanese have forced prices up in the past ten years is illustrated by the history of prices paid for thinning in a certain district. For this work the men are paid by the hour for an elevenhour day. When the Japanese first entered the district in large numbers in 1899, they worked at thinning for about $1 per day. Shortly after that they demanded and obtained 10 cents more per day. Since then their wages have gradually risen until in 1908 they were $1.65. During the thinning season of 1909 the men demanded 17 cents an hour, or $1.87 per day, but the "bosses" met and formally agreed to pay no more than $1.75 for eleven hours' work. The purpose of this agreement was to prevent overbidding for field workers. The men were forced to accept this rate of pay, but soon renewed their demands for the greater increase. At the time the special agent of the Commission visited this locality, no agreement had been reached. In short, the Japanese are accused of the tactics pursued by other monopolists; that is, of local price cutting to repress competition, and of exorbitant increases in prices when, for the time being, competition is impossible.

In addition to lack of respect for contract obligations the Japanese are further accused of doing dishonest work. Often, when a flat rate has been made to cover the hand work of the entire season, it has been found that the Japanese would hoe out as many beets as possible in the thinning in order to make easier work of that operation and leave less work for the harvesting season. Sometimes, it is said, they would simply chop off the part of the beet showing above ground. Partly to remedy this evil the sliding scale of prices for topping and loading has been generally introduced. In justice to the Japanese, it should be said that they are not the only race accused of overthinning. The sliding scale is used in contracts with Mexicans in districts where only Mexicans are employed; and at present

an attempt is being made to introduce this method of payment among the German-Russians in northern Colorado, for the same reason that led to its adoption among the Japanese in California.

As to Mexicans, conflicting opinions are expressed. Some employers complain that they are "hard to handle"; others say that they are much more tractable than the Japanese, who, they assert, are inclined to become conceited. All employers agree that the Mexicans lack ambition, and that they are addicted to the vices of drunkenness and gambling to an unusual degree. Consequently there is much complaint of their irregularity at work. In the face of this fact, however, some employers insist that the Mexican always keeps his contract. The reference here is doubtless to a practice of refraining from attempts to alter the terms of contracts rather than to the regularity with which the work called for is done.

In the two southern California districts where the force of field workers is predominantly Mexican, the Mexican is preferred to the Japanese. He is alleged to be more tractable and to be a better workman in one case. In the other he is said to be a quicker and better workman than the Japanese, but complaint is made that he is unreasonable. This is perhaps occasioned by a strike among the Mexicans for higher wages in the year 1908. This strike was broken by the temporary employment of German-Russians.

As previously stated, the Mexicans have been employed in several northern districts to provide competition against the Japanese. In at least one instance, already reported, it is said the Mexicans were soon "spoiled" by the Japanese, who persuaded them to be less careful in their work in order not to discredit Japanese standards.

To sum up, the Mexican is a fairly honest, efficient worker, whose usefulness is, however, much impaired by his lack of ambition and his proneness to the constant use of intoxicating liquor.

The East Indian has not yet had a fair trial in the industry. He is, of course, generally complained of on account of his uncleanliness, but this complaint is irrelevant in a consideration of his efficiency as a beet worker. So far as present experience goes, the East Indian is a slow but honest, steady, and exceedingly tractable workman. He is averse to entering into contracts, because he does not understand the contract system, but it is said that this aversion can be overcome after his confidence has been gained by his employers.

In the amount of work done in a day by individuals of different races the Japanese are far in the lead. The average Japanese can be counted upon to care for at least 12 acres during the season. The Mexicans and East Indians never average more than 7 or 8 acres. The explanation is that the Japanese not only works more rapidlyand less thoroughly-but that he also works longer hours.

IMMIGRANT RACES AS TENANTS AND LANDOWNERS.

Statistics of six beet-growing districts show that of an aggregate of 834 growers under contract, controlling in all 41,746 acres, the following members of alien races were included:

Japanese

Chinese
Mexican.

Total

106

Only 11.5 per cent of the "contract growers," then, are members of the immigrant races extensively employed as laborers in the beet fields. The remainder of the growers are Americans and Europeans. No East Indians are found among them. The East Indian is too recent an arrival and too inexperienced to become a grower of beets on his own account. The average area held by the growers in the above data is 50 acres. It has been impossible to ascertain how much of this land is farmed by the owner or what is the average area held by Japanese, Chinese, and Mexicans, but it is probable that the latter does not fall below the general average.

A few examples will strengthen this assertion.

In one district the sugar company there operating leases land to five Chinese and five Japanese. The Chinese hold in all 500 acres. The Japanese holdings were as follows: Eighty-seven acres, 79 acres, 51 acres, 81 acres, and 29 acres.

In another district Japanese tenants held tracts of 100 acres, 200 acres, 150 acres, 120 acres, 150 acres, and 50 acres. Some of these tracts were doubtless held by partnerships.

Still another district reports 480 acres leased by Mexicans and 300 leased by Japanese. These leases are covered by seven contracts with Mexicans (average 684 acres) and three contracts with Japanese (average 100 acres).

Mexican holdings are apparently the smallest as well as the least numerous. In one case four of them leased in 1909 an aggregate area of 100 acres.

The share lease is the most common form. The rent is usually one-fourth of the crop. Cash rents vary from $10 upward to $30 and over according to yield, location, and desirability of the land for other purposes. In at least one locality the share lease to Japanese is nothing more nor less than a labor contract. In this case the tenant is required to put up a bond varying in amount with the area leased, say $500 for 200 or 300 acres. The company advances the seed, the cost of which it deducts from the payment for the crop when it is harvested, and sometimes permits the tenants to use its seeders at a small charge. When the beets are thinned and hoed the company returns the sum of the bond to the lessee and also advances him money to pay his laborers for the thinning and hoeing. The company can afford to do this because it is now sure of its return. The crop is its property whether the tenant completes the work of the season or forfeits his lease leaving the company to harvest the crop. This ownership is secured by provisions throughout the lease to the effect that at all times and under all conditions the crop is the property of the company, which is to be the sole judge of the way in which the thinning, hoeing, and harvesting are to be done, as well as of the quality of the beets, upon which prices per ton are based. If, after the hoeing is done, the tenant sees fit to forfeit his lease the company simply harvests the beets on its own account, losing nothing by the tenant's failure to fulfill his contract. If the tenant observes his contract and harvests his beets himself,

The Chinese growers are naturally omitted in the calculation of this percentage, as the Chinese are no longer important as beet workers.

the company deducts the value of one-fourth of the crop, together with the cost of the seed and the amount of the money advanced at the close of the hoeing season, from the value of the total crop and pays the value of the remainder to the tenant. In effect, therefore, this lease is simply a labor contract under which the tenant raises and harvests beets belonging to the company for three-fourths of the net proceeds of the crop.

Leasing of beet lands by Japanese has begun in most cases within the last five years. This is true of localities in which the race has been employed for as much as a decade as well as of localities where the period of employment has been much shorter. In districts which have been converted to beet culture within the last five years, the system of leasing is practically as old as the industry.

Few instances of actual ownership of beet lands by Japanese are reported. None are reported for Chinese and Mexicans. In one district the only case of Japanese ownership is that of two Japanese who own jointly a 60-acre tract purchased in 1906 for $10,000, payment of which was made in three yearly installments. Thirty-five acres of this land is devoted to beet growing. In another district where upward of 1,000 Japanese are employed only 5 acres are held by the Japanese and these by one man. This land was bought in 1907 for $2,000, and was at first used for vegetable raising. This venture, however, proved unprofitable and the land has since been converted to beet growing.

In conclusion, therefore, it appears that in the progress made by handworkers in the beet fields in the leasing and ownership of land, the Japanese have made the most. As we have seen, of 834 growers under contract, 74 or something less than 9 per cent were members of that race. They were practically all tenants, most of them on a share basis. Such progress as they have made in this direction has been made within the last five years.

IMMIGRANT LABOR IN THE GROWING OF SUGAR BEETS IN COLORADO."

The beet-sugar industry of Colorado requires several thousand laborers in the fields and factories. Though the growing of sugar beets was not begun in the State until long after it was an established industry in California and Utah, Colorado now has a larger acreage in sugar beets and a larger number of beet workers than any other State in the West. In 1909 the total acreage from which the beets were harvested was 122,975. The distribution of this area between the southern, northern, and western districts of the State, the acreage grown by the companies operating the factories and by farmers under contract, respectively, the number of growers under contract, and the number of each race conspicuous as laborers in the beet fields, are shown in the table following.

The report on Japanese and German-Russian farmers of the northern part of Colorado should be read in connection with this section.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »