— ^ ■■ II I M
L^LL
r^
~
Bi
t
^
L
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
■-■ ■ —
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE INVESTIGATING
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
SEVENTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
PURSUANT TO
H. Res. 113
A RESOLUTION TO INQUIRE FURTHER INTO THE INTERSTATE
MIGRATION OF CITIZENS, EMPHASIZING THE PRESENT
AND POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE MIGRA-
TION CAUSED BY THE NATIONAL
DEFENSE PROGRAM
/
PART 19
DETROIT HEARINGS
(Agricultural Section)
SEPTEMBER 23, 24, 25, 1941
Printed for the use of the Select Committee Investigating
National Defense Migration
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE INVESTIGATING
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
SEVENTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
PURSUANT TO
H. Res. 113
A RESOLUTION TO INQUIRE FURTHER INTO THE INTERSTATE
MIGRATION OF CITIZENS, EMPHASIZING THE PRESENT
AND POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE MIGRA-
TION CAUSED BY THE NATIONAL
DEFENSE PROGRAM
PART 19
DETROIT HEARINGS
(Agricultural Section)
SEPTEMBER 23, 24, 25, 1941
Printed for the use of the Select Committee Investigating
National Defense Migration
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
60366 WASHINGTON : 1941
SELECT COMMITTEE INVESTIGATING NATIONAL DEFENSE
MIGRATION
JOHN H. TOLAN, California, Chairman
LAURENCE F. ARNOLD, Illinois CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska
JOHN J. SPARKMAN, Alabama FRANK C. OSMERS, Jr., New Jersey
Robert K. Lamb, Staff Director
II
CONTENTS
Page
List of witnesses V
List of authors V
Wednesday, September 24, 1941, morning session 7767
Testimony of E. B. Hill 7767
Statement of E. B. Hill 7768
Introduction of exhibits 7790
Exhibit 48— Diphtheria Outbreak Among Mexican Migratory Workers
in Saginaw County, Mich. — reports by Dr. V. K.
Volk, commissioner, Saginaw County Department of
Health; and Dr. T. M. Koppa, epidemiologist, Michi-
gan Department of Health 7791
Exhibit 49— Illegal Transportation of Sugar Beet Workers from
Texas to Michigan and Ohio Fields — report by Joseph
B. Eastman, Chairman, Interstate Commerce Com-
mission, Washington, D. C 7796
Exhibit 50— A Study of Sugar Beet Field Workers' Earnings and Ex-
penses— report of M. C. Henderson, Beet Growers'
Employment Committee, Saginaw, Mich 7855
Exhibit 51 — History of Sugar Beet Labor in Michigan— report by
Labor Division, Farm Security Administration, United
States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C_ 7862
Exhibit 52 — Agricultural Migration to Michigan — report by Agricul-
tural field staff, Select Committee Investigating Na-
tional Defense Migration, Washington, D. C 7918
Exhibit 53 — Characteristics of Farm Labor in Berrien County,
Mich. — -report by Labor Division, Farm Security Ad-
ministration, United States Department of Agricul-
ture, Washington, D. C 7918
Exhibit 54 — The Eastern Michigan Sugar Beet Region- — -report by
Labor Division, Farm Security Administration, United
States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C__ 7948
Exhibit 55 — Activities of Michigan Church Women in Program of
Relief for Defense Migrants — report by Sarah K.
Hepburn, Council of Women for Home Missions, De-
troit, Mich 7958
Exhibit 56 — Migration of Families Into Rural Districts of Wayne
County, Mich., Within the Past 12 Months — report by
Fred C. Fischer, superintendent, Wayne County Schools,
Detroit, Mich 7963
Exhibit 57 — Economic Opportunity and Population Movement in the
Cut-over Region of Michigan — -report by Willett F.
Ramsdell, Pack Forestry Foundation, professor of
forest-land management, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, Mich 7964
Exhibit 58 — Migration Problems of Farm Families Due to Defense
Activities in Indiana and Ohio — report by P. G. Beck,
director, Region III, Farm Security Administration,
United States Department of Agriculture 7977
Exhibit 59 — The Scioto Marsh, Hardin County, Ohio — special survey
by Labor Division, Farm Security Administration,
United States Department of Agriculture, Washington,
, D. C 7997
Index 8009
•
in
LIST OF WITNESSES
Detroit hearings (agricultural section), September'24,31941
Pag*
Hill, E. B., professor, farm-management department, Michigan State
College, East Lansing, Mich 7768
LIST OF AUTHORS
Of prepared statements and exhibits
Page
Agricultural field staff, Select Committee Investigating National Defense
Migration, Washington, D. C 7918
Beck, P. G., director, Region III, Farm Security Administration, United
States Department of Agriculture .' 7977
Eastman, Joseph B., Chairman, Interstate Commerce Commission, Wash-
ington, D. C 7796
Fischer, Fred C, superintendent, Wayne County schools, Detroit, Mich-_ 7963
Henderson, M. C, Beet Growers Employment Committee, Inc., Saginaw,
Mich 7855
Hepburn, Sarah K., Council of Women for Home Missions, Detroit, Mich. 7958
Hill, E. B., professor, farm-management department, Michigan State
College, East Lansing, Mich 7768
Koppa, Dr. T. M., epidemiologist, Michigan Department of Health, Lan-
sing, Mich 7792, 7793, 7794
Labor Division, Farm Security Administration, United States Department
of Agriculture, Washington, D. C 7862,7932,7948,7997
Ramsdell, Willett F., Pack Forestry Foundation, professor of forest-land
management, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich 7964
Volk, Dr. V. K., commissioner, Saginaw County Department of Health,
Saginaw, Mich 7791
v
For greater convenience the Detroit hearings are published in two
volumes. This, the second volume, under the title, "Part 19, Detroit
hearings (Agricultural Section)" includes the testimony of Prof. E. B.
Hill, of the farm-management department of Michigan State College,
his prepared statement, and 12 papers from other sources, devoted
exclusively to the subject of agricultural migration. Testimony of
all other witnesses at the Detroit hearings, together with prepared
statements, appears in the other of these volumes under the title,
"Part 18, Detroit hearings (Industrial Section)."
n
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGKATION
wednesday, september 24, 1941
House of Representatives,
Select Committee Investigating
National Defense Migration,
Washington, D. O.
MORNING SESSION
The committee, having met at 9:30 a. m. in the Federal Building,
Detroit, Mich., Representative John H. Tolan (chairman) presiding,
and having heard testimony of R. J. Thomas and Lt. Comdr. Walter
F. Eade, United States Naval Reserves, called as the next witness
Prof. E. B. Hill, of the farm-management department, Michigan
State College, East Lansing, Mich.1
Present were: Representatives John H. Tolan (chairman), of
California; Laurence F. Arnold, of Illinois; Frank C. Osmers, Jr., of
New Jersey; and Carl T. Curtis, of Nebraska.
Also present: Dr. Robert K. Lamb, staff director; John W. Abbott,
chief field investigator; Francis X. Riley and Jack B. Burke, field
investigators; and Ruth B. Abrams, field secretary.
The Chairman. Our next witness is Professor Hill.
TESTIMONY OF PROF. E. B. HILL, FARM MANAGEMENT DEPART-
MENT, MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE, EAST LANSING, MICH.
The Chairman. Congressman Curtis will interrogate you, Pro-
fessor Hill.
Mr. Curtis. You are Prof. E. B. Hill?
Dr. Hill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Curtis. Of the Michigan State College?
Dr. Hill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Curtis. What department?
Dr. Hill. The farm management department.
Mr. Curtis. Where is the Michigan State College located?
Dr. Hill. At East Lansing.
Mr. Curtis. And it is an agricultural college?
Dr. Hill. That is right.
Mr. Curtis. Professor Hill, you have prepared a paper which
will be received in its entirety in our hearing, including some rather
lengthy tables and figures.
! ' Testimony of Mr. Thomas, Commander Eade, and all other witnesses on nonagricultural phases of
migration covered in the Detroit hearings appears in a separate volume, under the title, "Part 18, Detroit
Hearings (Industrial Section)." Dr. Hill was followed on the stand by Earl Raymond, whose testimony
appears in pt. 18, followed by other witnesses in the order of their appearance.
7767
7768 DETROIT HEARINGS
(The paper referred to is as follows:)
STATEMENT BY PROF. E. B. HILL, FARM MANAGEMENT DEPART-
MENT, MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
The huge defense program, the operation of the lease-lend law, and other phases
of our present-day economic life are all causing decided changes in American
agriculture, and particularly so in Michigan agriculture. Some of these changes
in our agriculture, such as increased mechanization, have been taking place in
the past, but are being speeded up very decidedly under present conditions.
Other changes, such as part-time and self-sufficing farming, may be slowed up
for the present.
As a result of the many and rapid changes in our economic structure, particu-
larly in regard to the defense program and to the expansion of the urban indus-
tries, the American farmer, and the Michigan farmer in particular, is faced with
many new problems. A listing of these problems would include the following:
(1) Producing an increase in the essential items of our food supply for home use
and reports; (2) obtaining prices for farm products which will enable him to meet
present-day farm and living costs; (3) the difficulty of obtaining adequate amounts
of capable farm help; and (4) the conduct of his farm operations and personal
program which will enable him best to cushion the post-defense or post-war period.
In an analysis of certain of these problems and of the changes in Michigan's
agriculture with special reference to the defense program, it is desirable to look
back sufficiently to enable us to get a better view of the entire situation. This
procedure will throw light on both the predefense period since 1910 and also for
the defense period involving particularly the past 12 months.
Changes in Michigan Agriculture
During the past 30 years the following significant changes have occurred in
Michigan agriculture: (1) The type of farming has become more intensive; (2)
commercial farming has increased; (3) subsistence and part-time farming has
increased; (4) the number of larger farms and the number of smaller farms have
tended to increase, whereas the number of medium size farms has tended to
decrease; and (5) an increasing number of farmers have found it more difficult
to obtain farm incomes sufficient to enable them to maintain their farm, to make
the principal and interest payments and to provide for a satisfactory standard
of living.
TYPES OF FARMING IN MICHIGAN
Michigan has quite a number of different types of farming as a result of much
diversity in the climate, land, and markets within the State. The accompanying
map presents the outlines of the 17 different type-of-f arming areas into which the
State has been divided. The name assigned to each of these areas is indicative
of the predominating types of farming found within each area.
Migrant farm labor is found mostly in type-of-farming areas 1, 3, 8, and 11.
In areas 3 and 11 fruit and vegetables and areas 1 and 8 sugar beets and vegetables
are the crops which, because of their need for much hand labor, have a heavy
seasonal labor load that cannot under usual conditions be handled by local labor.
The dairy is the major and most widely distributed farm enterprise. Dairy
products, exclusive of meat from the dairy herds, contributed about 30 percent
of the total income from farm production in Michigan in 1938 and 1939. Income
from poultry and eggs was about 10 percent and income from all meat animals,
including dairy cattle, was about 20 percent. All crops including grains, fruit,
and vegetables made up approximately 35 percent. The remaining 5 percent was
from Government payments and other sources.
CHANGES IN TYPES OF FARMING
In general, the most significant changes in Michigan, as measured by the crop
and livestock enterprises, is the trend toward more intensive, specialized, and
commercial types of farming. The trend has been to have more dairy cattle,
more poultry, more fruit, and more vegetables in place of the more extensive kinds
of livestock and crops such as beef cattle, sheep, and hogs and wheat, rye, and
oats. The numbers of livestock and acreages of crops in Michigan since 1910
are shown in tables 1 and 2.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7769
7770 DETROIT HEARINGS
Table 1. — Livestock numbers on farms in Michigan, 1910-41
[In thousands]
Year
Milk cows '
Cattle,
other than
milk cows
Stock
sheep
Hogs
Horses
Mules
1910 --
740
766
780
782
785
810
820
840
850
818
824
815
823
831
847
850
800
784
775
785
800
832
864
888
912
905
887
896
905
923
932
960
582
554
515
536
585
638
681
691
732
766
762
721
683
629
573
556
550
536
538
550
591
559
569
628
632
613
661
698
721
752
776
833
1,714
1,885
1,696
1,442
1,197
1,053
1,000
900
944
970
960
778
752
775
745
830
870
950
1,020
1,040
1,025
1,025
1,035
1,035
1,025
1,015
1,066
1,055
1,023
1,033
1,043
991
931
1,060
1,050
1,000
1,000
1,060
1,115
1,025
975
1,035
1,106
1,060
1,100
1,150
1,143
855
820
845
862
759
630
542
661
793
730
512
594
701
666
713
891
829
605
622
634
640
653
673
680
680
673
660
606
576
559
542
520
482
462
440
420
404
389
385
381
377
373
377
377
377
377
373
354
340
4
1911 . - -
4
1912 .--
4
1913
4
1914
4
1915
4
1916 --
5
1917 - -
5
1918
5
1919
6
1920 - -
6
1921 .. --
6
1922 - --
6
1923
6
1924
7
1925 -
7
1926 ---
7
1927
7
1928 --
7
1929 - -
7
1930 --
7
1931 -
7
1932 --
7
1933 -
7
1934 . --- --
7
1935 ---
7
1936 -
7
1937 - -
7
1938
7
1939 .
7
1940
7
1941 .
7
i Cows and heifers 2 years old and over kept for milk.
Table 2. — Corn, oats, barley, wheat, and rye acreage harvested in Michigan,
1910-40 l
[In thousands of acres]
Year
Corn
Oats
Barley
Wheat, all
Rye
1910 -.. -
1911 --.- --•
1912
1,700
1,700
1,635
1,685
1,750
1,750
1, 650
1, 750
1,650
1, 746
1,781
1, 745
1,710
1,607
1,561
1, 530
1, 454
1, 250
1,288
1,197
1,281
1,512
1,542
1,511
1,588
1,667
1,500
1,590
1,590
1,590
1, 558
1,515
1,500
1,485
1,500
1,515
1,530
1,423
1,550
1, 658
1,530
1,561
1,592
1,498
1,528
1,497
1,617
1.504
1,534
1,534
1,268
1,384
1,495
1,420
1,207
1,323
1,402
1,262
1,224
1,224
1,139
1,287
93
90
87
85
90
87
120
165
300
302
242
218
140
128
115
129
133
182
264
226
231
268
303
230
173
185
179
202
166
199
173
930
1,020
700
850
910
1,010
820
880
760
1,056
1,055
925
1,023
910
793
801
898
801
785
790
724
734
734
885
855
874
823
1,011
913
739
761
427
400
370
1913
380
1914
1915
373
400
1916
410
1917 -.
430
1918
1919
530
913
1920
676
1921
649
1922
648
1923
395
1924
231
1925 ---
201
1926
161
1927 - ---
164
1928
167
1929
147
1930
147
1931
162
1932.
1933
168
131
1934 --
157
1935
228
1936
141
1937
144
1938
115
1939 .
121
1940
90
i Estimated by Bureau of Agricultural Economics, U. S. Department of Agriculture.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7771
Hay, alfalfa, potato, bean, and sugar-beet acreage harvested in Michigan, 1910-40
[In thousands of acres]
Year
Hay, all
Alfalfa
Potatoes
Beans
Sugar beets
1910 . ..-
2,600
2,470
2,510
2,510
2,560
2,590
2,900
2,770
2,800
2.817
2,789
2,813
2,841
2,811
2,907
2,632
2,699
2,785
2,589
2,696
2,598
2, 493
2,507
2,619
2,565
2,494
2,679
2,556
2,644
2,649
2,694
336
313
297
288
288
282
271
320
288
281
309
327
343
292
245
223
212
263
271
225
232
267
291
311
323
323
275
278
250
250
240
117
1911
145
1912
124
1913 .
107
1914 . .
490
506
470
537
543
315
334
314
458
536
625
650
637
567
521
575
690
635
552
567
632
562
466
461
466
485
567
101
1915 .-.
122
1916
99
1917
82
1918
114
1919 .
74
95
140
208
260
321
350
431
470
498
525
578
665
825
916
937
1,040
1,092
1,103
1,048
1,100
1,144
123
1920
150
1921
148
1922
84
1923 .
101
1924
134
1925
99
1926
100
1927.
99
1928..
71
1929
52
1930
74
1931
58
1932 _
122
1933
154
1934
117
1935
114
1936
98
1937
76
1938
122
1939
120
1940
114
The trend toward more intensive and specialized types of farming has been the
result of the rapid expansion of the local markets for farm products, particularly
in the southern part of the State. The population of Michigan has about doubled
since 1910 and on January 1, 1940, was about 5,250,000. At the same time there
has been a decrease in the number of persons on farms.
The trend toward a more commercialized and mechanized type of farming has
been under way since the turn of the century, but it has been gaining impetus
during the past 20 years. The process has been speeded up at an even higher
tempo during the crop season of 1941.
The trend toward the more intensive farm required more farm labor. The
trend toward mechanized farming has been to diminish the demand for labor,
MECHANIZATION OF MICHIGAN AGRICULTURE
The mechanization of Michigan's agriculture has occurred mostly during the
past 15 years. The numbers of tractors, trucks, combines, corn pickers, pick-up
hay balers, potato diggers, and milking machines on Michigan farms has increased
much since 1925.
The accompanying chart (p. 7772) shows graphically some of the changes in farm
power. The decrease in numbers of horses and the increase in the numbers of
tractors since 1920 has been very marked. In addition there were 33,095 trucks
on farms in 1940, and many thousands of electric motors. The introduction of (1)
the general-purpose, more flexible type of tractor; (2) tractors of greater range in
sizes; (3) rubber tires; (4) machinery adapted to tractor use; and (5) shortage of
farm labor have all been factors causing the increase in the numbers of tractors on
Michigan farms.
Data on harvesting equipment is not as complete as those for farm power.
Sauve, of the Agricultural Engineering Department of the Michigan State Col-
lege, reports 7 grain combine-harvesters in Michigan in 1927; 86 in 1930; and
about 3,000 in 1941. The development of the smaller combines, together with
the shortage of farm labor, has done much to increase the numbers of these
machines in Michigan.
Pick-up hay balers in small numbers have been used in Michigan for the last
5 years. This year the machine has appeared in large numbers. Corn pickers
have been in more common use, but their numbers are rapidly increasing.
The mechanization of Michigan's agriculture has been much speeded during the
last half of 1940 and the present portion of 1941. Farmers as early as the summer
7772
DETROIT HEARINGS
of 1940 began to sense the shortage of labor,
scarce since that time. See table 13.
Labor has become increasingly
EFFECTS OF MECHANIZATION OF MICHIGAN AGRICULTURE
The effects of the mechanization of agriculture have been to increase sharply
the cash outlay of operating Michigan farms and to reduce the requirements for
farm labor. The remaining labor has for the most part become more efficient and
has increased the production per man. The following data from the April 1941
issue of Farm Economics published by the Department of Agricultural Economics
and Farm Management of Cornell University (shows the reduction in farm labor
requirements during the last 25 years in New York State. Michigan conditions
are sufficiently similar to those in New York that the figures are undoubtedly
applicable to this State.
Progress of Mechanized Power Farming in Michigan
700
Horses and Mules ■»
60C '
50C ■
400-
300 ■
1?
Tractors
(Thousands)
1910
1920
[100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
1925
1930
1935
1940
Table 3. — Time required in former periods to produce amounts produced in 100
minutes in 1939
Product
Wheat
Dry beans. ..
Potatoes
Corn for grain
Alfalfa
Eggs
Corn silage...
Milk
Cabbage
Unit (amount produced
in 100 minutes in 1939)
238 pounds
63 pounds.
202 pounds
82 pounds.
630 pounds
152 eggs
889 pounds
100 pounds
298 pounds
Minutes of direct labor per unit
1914-18
248
233
215
207
189
167
160
138
131
1934-38
133
122
107
130
113
117
98
103
89
1939
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Table 3 is not only of interest in showing the increased efficiency in labor, but
also in showing the relative gains with each enterprise. The major gains have
been in the general field crops, such as corn, wheat, beans, and potatoes, the pro-
duction of which involves relatively more machinery than hand labor. There
has been less gain in the vegetable crops and in the poultry and dairy enterprises.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7773
During the past 5 years the Work Projects Administration has conducted a
research project on the changes in technology and labor requirements on farms
during the past 30-year period. These reports present the changes by agricul-
tural regions. The region in which Michigan is located is designated as the
western dairy region and includes also the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota.
In the following table data are presented from the reports of the project by Work
Projects Administration on some of the major crops for this region.
Table 4. — Total labor used in producing corn, wheat, oats, sugar beets, potatoes,
and vegetables in the western dairy region of the United States
Period
1909-13
1917-21
1927-31
1932-36
Hours per acre
Corn
31.7
28.7
24.0
23.2
Wheat
14.5
13.0
11.0
10.5
Oats
15.6
13.1
9.9
9.3
Sugar
beets '
123
113
104
100
Pota-
toes '
81
72
72
Vege-
tables l
(for mar-
ket)
183
180
177
1 Data for sugar beets, potatoes, and vegetables are not for exactly the same period as for corn, wheat, and
oats, but are similar enough for comparative purposes.
It should be stated, however, that not all of the reductions in labor require-
ments are the result of mechanization. Some reductions are the result of different
methods of production.
The net effects of the mechanization of agriculture in Michigan from a labor
standpoint has been decreasing job opportunities. There have been modifying
influences, however, which have tended to offset this reduction. These influences
in Michigan have been the livestock industry, particularly dairy and poultry.
The rapid expansion of the mechanization of farms since July 1940, however,
has speeded up the trend in reduction of labor requirements. This has definitely
reduced the useful job opportunities on Michigan farms.
Sizes of Fakms in Michigan
The family size of farm still remains as the typical farm in Michigan. The
great bulk of the farms in the State come under the designation of a family-size
farm, that is, a farm which is operated by the farmer and his family either with
or without the assistance of one to two hired men.
According to the 1930 census, a year when the supply of farm labor was rela-
tively high compared with the demand (table 13), there was 1.42 persons 10 years
old or over gainfully employed per farm in Michigan. There was an average of
0.38 of a wage worker per farm. This average, however, would be much greater
on the larger farms which employed significant amounts of labor and would vary
within the usual range from 0.75 to 2.0 wage workers per farm.
Of the 187,589 farms reported by the 1940 census for Michigan about 60,000,
or about 32 percent, were less than 50 acres in size and 127,000 over 50 acres in
size. About 69,000 of this latter group, or 37 percent of the total, were 100 acres
or larger.
There are only 932 farms above 500 acres in size and on many of these farms
the number of acres of tillable land is not much in excess of that found on smaller
farms.
CHANGES IN SIZES OP FARMS
Ther3 has been but little change in the average size of farms in Michigan during
the past 20- or 30-year period when considered on a State basis and presented
as single averages. When an analysis is made, however, of the different sizes of
farms, a somewhat different situation is presented. In general, the larger farms
(those 175 acres and over) and the smaller farms (those under 50 acres) have
increased in number. The medium-sized farms (those between 50 and 175
acres) have decreased in number. See table 5.
7774 DETROIT HEARINGS
Table 5. — Changes in sizes and distribution of farms in Michigan, 1920 to 1940
Size group
1920
1930
1935
1940
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total number of farms
196, 447
100
169,372
100
196, 517
100
187, 589
100
Farms:
Under 10 acres
10 to 49 acres
6,003
47, 506
71, 391
52, 645
13, 236
4,839
827
3
24
36
27
7
3
5,780
38, 639
57, 749
47, 723
13, 403
5,275
803
3
23
34
28
8
3
1
11,642
50, 800
63,900
50, 105
13, 765
5,421
884
6
26
32
26
7
3
12,675
47, 784
57, 977
47, 664
14, 337
6,220
932
7
25
50 to 99 acres_.
31
100 to 174 acres
25
175 to 259 acres..
g
260 to 499 acres
3
500 and over
1
Average size of farms, acres..
97
101
94
96
The changes in sizes of farms are more noticeable in some type of farming areas
than in others, as is indicated by the accompanying tables which show the situa-
tion by selected counties in different parts of the State. In Berrien County, the
southwestern fruit area of Michigan, where the average size of farm is less than
60 acres, the number of small farms has continued to increase and the number
of all others has decreased. In Oakland County, the industrial area of south-
eastern Michigan, the trend in the increase in the number of small farms is even
greater than in Berrien. The increase in Oakland County, however, is accounted
for largely by the increase in part-time farms. See tables 6 and 7.
Table 6. — Changes in sizes of farms in Berrien County, the fruit region of south-
western Michigan, 1920 to 1940
Size group
1920
1930
1935
1940
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total number
farms
5,443
100
5,390
100
5,896
100
5, 324
100
Farms under 10 acres.
10 to 49 acres
50 to 99 acres
100 to 174 acres
175 to 259 acres
260 to 499 acres
600 acres and over
376
2,773
1,346
708
180
52
8
7
51
25
13
3
1
408
2,952
1,217
608
137
63
5
8
55
23
11
2
1
608
3,222
1,223
637
148
50
8
10
55
21
11
2
1
462
2,899
1,160
572
155
66
10
9
54
22
11
3
1
Average size farms,
acres
60
55
52
56
Table 7. — Changes in sizes of farms in Oakland County, an industrial county in
southeastern Michigan, 1920 to 1940
Size group
1920
1930
1935
1940
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total number
farms
4,035
100
2,405
100
3,995
100
4,036
100
Farms under 10 acres.
10 to 49 acres
60 to 99 acres
100 to 174 acres
175 to 259 acres
260 to 499 acres
500 acres and over. . .
121
651
1,187
1,439
450
169
18
3
16
29
36
11
4
1
161
421
631
772
266
128
26
7
18
26
32
11
5
1
629
979
931
964
320
141
31
16
24
23
24
8
4
1
834
1,020
849
857
288
151
37
21
26
21
21
7
4
1
Average size farms,
acres
114
119
92
86
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7775
In the general agricultural regions as indicated by Lenawee, Eaton, and Mis-
saukee Counties the significant trend has been an increase in the numbers of
larger farms, those above 100 or 175 acres. See tables 9, 10, and 11.
St. Joseph County in the general farming area on the lighter soils in southwest-
ern Michigan is an example of a county in which very little change in the size of
farms has occurred since 1920. Bay County in the sugar-beet and bean area
shows some increase in the number of small farms of 10 acres or less, a decrease
in the number of farms between 10 and 100 acres in size, and an increase in the
numbers of those over 100 acres in size. See table 8.
Table 8. — Changes in sizes of farms in Bay County, in the sugar-beet and bean area
of eastern Michigan, 1920- 40
1920
1930
1935
1940
Size group
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total number
of farms
3,216
100
2,901
100
3,391
100
3,190
100
Farms under 10
acres
147
1,139
1,281
545
73
26
5
5
35
40
17
2
1
122
868
1,222
578
86
20
5
4
30
42
20
3
1
334
1,083
1,289
572
83
26
4
10
32
38
17
2
1
276
970
1,226
594
94
26
4
9
10 to 49 acres
50 to 99 acres..
100 to 174 acres
175 to 259 acres.
260 to 499 acres
30
38
19
3
1
Average size of farms,
71
76
68
72
Table 9. — Changes in sizes of farms in Lenawee County, corn and livestock area of
southern Michigan, 1920-40
Size group
1920
1930
1935
1940
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total number
of farms
5,080
100
4,453
100
4,661
100
4,186
100
Farms under 10
acres
220
1,008
1,978
1,499
292
82
1
4
20
39
29
6
2
164
827
1,553
1,418
366
123
2
4
18
35
32
8
3
252
934
1,595
1,408
338
126
8
6
20
34
30
7
3
196
735
1,371
1,348
384
146
6
5
10 to 49 acres...
50 to 99 acres
100 to 174 acres
175 to 259 acres
260 to 499 acres ■
500.acres and over
18
33
32
9
3
Average size of farms,
acres
90
99
95
103
7776 DETROIT HEARINGS
Table 10. — Changes in sizes of farms in Eaton County, dairy and general fanning
area of central Michigan, 1920-40
1920
1930
1935
1940
Size group
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total number
farms..
3,719
100
3,385
100
3,686
100
3,354
100
Farms under 10
126
777
1,440
1,075
234
63
4
3
21
39
29
6
2
107
701
1,185
1, 037
261
88
6
3
21
35
31
8
2
197
849
1,211
1, 050
272
98
9
5
23
33
29
7
3
167
727
1,082
953
287
124
14
5
10 to 49 acres
50 to 99 acres..
100 to 174 acres.
175 to 259 acres
260 to 499 acres
600 acres and over —
22
32
28
9
4
Average size farms,
92
98
94
100
Table 11. — Changes in sizes of farms in Missaukee County in the potato area of
northwestern Michigan, 1920-40
1920
1930
1935
1940
Size group
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total number
farms
1,359
100
1,072
100
1,200
100
1,214
100
Farms under 10
acres --
19
241
533
387
112
56
11
1
18
■ 39
29
8
4
1
16
105
338
398
126
68
21
1
10
32
37
12
6
2
9
151
427
405
111
76
21
1
12
36
34
9
6
2
25
161
335
418
160
90
25
2
10 to 49 acres
50 to 99 acres
100 to 174 acres
175 to 259 acres
260 to 499 acres.
500 acres and over. . .
13
28
34
13
8
2
Average size farms,
124
151
142
151
Rural-Urban Migration
Michigan is such a highly industrialized State that the importance of its agri-
culture is often overlooked. As a result of this industrialization the population
of the State lias about doubled since 1910 as indicated by table 12.
Table 12.— Population, total and rural-farm, for Michigan for selected years from
1910 to 1940
Total
popula-
tion i
Rural-
farm
popula-
tion '
Percent of total popu-
lation on farm?
Ratio-
farm to
Year
Michigan
United
States
nonfarm in
Michigan
1910
2, 810, 173
3,668,412
4, 281, 000
4, 842, 325
4,710,000
5, 256, 106
911,000
848, 000
792, 000
775, 436
840, 514
865, 174
32.4
23.1
18.5
16.0
17.8
16.5
35.0
30.0
27.0
24.6
1 :2. 1
1920
1 : 3. 3
1925
1 : 4. 4
1930
1 ; 5. 2
1035
1 : 4. 6
1940
22.9
1 : 5. 1
-First Series— Number of Inhabitants— Michigan. Except 1935 estimate
i 1910 Population Census-
is from the World Almanac. , . . ,,„„! w__
2 Years of 1910 and 1925 are estimates by E. B. Hill; year of 1920 estimate by Bureau of Agricultural Eco-
nomics, U. S. Department oj Agriculture; years of 1930 and 1940 from 1940 Census Preliminary Report.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7777
Since 1920 the movement to and from farms has gone through one cycle and is
well on its way to another. Since that date, the peak of the net movement from
the farms to cities, towns, and villages of 1,137,000 persons was reached in 1922
for the United States. It continued to be relatively high until 1927 when the
trend started downward. By 1932 net movement was away from the cities and to
the farms by 266,000 persons. Since 1932 the net movement has been away from
the farms and it has been particularly accelerated during 1940 and 1941.
As may be observed from table 12 the rural farm population in Michigan de-
creased from 1910 to 1930 but has been increasing since that date. The rural-
farm population is now about 16 percent of the total population as compared to
32 percent in 1910. At the present time in Michigan there is one person on the
farm to five nonfarm persons.
Rural-urban migration presents many problems of interest to society as a whole
as well as to individual farmers. During periods of reduced job opportunities in
industry the migration tends to be toward the country. Many families relocate
on farms in areas not adapted to farming. These settlements often develop into
situations which might be called the slums of the country. In other cases the
families relocate on land so distant from public institutions and services that the
cost to local government units is excessive. Other individuals return to the home
farm as a haven of refuge.
In previous periods, agriculture has stood more than its share of the con-
sequences of unemployment in the city. Lands have been settled and later
abandoned. Will this be repeated in the future? Farm labor has been attracted
to the city by wages higher than can be paid by the farmer at existing prices for
farm products. The need for some of this farm labor has been diminished by the
speeding up of the mechanization of the farm. Useful job opportunities on farms
are decreasing.
PART-TIME AND SUBSISTENCE FARMING
Part of the increase in rural-farm population which has occurred since 1929
has been caused by the increase in part-time and subsistence farming. The
increase in part-time farming has been greatest in the industrial agricultural
counties such as Genesee, Oakland, Wayne, Macomb, and Kent. See also figs.
42 and 43 of Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 206, "Types of
Farming in Michigan."
In too many places the families living on these part-time farms continue to have
their major interests in the city and do not participate in the social and com-
munity life of the region in which they live. In some areas at least this has led
to a very unfavorable reaction among the full-time farmers.
On most part-time farms, the production of crops and livestock is a secondary
consideration to the job in industry. When the part-time farmer no longer has
a job in industry he makes an attempt to farm. His success or progress is often
handicapped (1) by a lack of knowledge of how to do the job, (2) by a lack of equip-
ment, and (3) by a lack of capital, and (4) lack of a farm of adequate size.
In many instances the part-time and subsistence farmers have been aided by
the Farm Security Administration which not only supplied credit but also an
educational program which would aid these people to make the best use of their
resources. The activities of the Farm Security Administration, however, also
included credit and guidance to young tenants who had been, and were expected
to be, bona fide farmers.
Migratory Labor
The discussion of rural-urban migration for Michigan would not be complete
without refernce to migratory labor. The regions within Michigan in which
this type of labor is of most importance are the main fruit ;,regions of the
State, and the main sugar beet producing areas of the State.
Fruit and sugar beets both have such heavy labor requirements during the
growing and harvesting season that migratory labor has been about the only
means of handling the crop during these periods. In 1941, however, the supply
of labor available in southwestern Michigan was insufficient to harvest all of the
current peach crop.
Migratory labor in the sugar beet region has probably been of greater concern
, to Michigan citizens than has the migratory labor in the fruit belt. Under the
direction of Prof. J. F. Thaden, the Sociology Department of the Michigan State
College has recently made a study of sugar beet field workers in Michigan.
60396 — 41— pt. 19-
7778 DETROIT HEARINGS
Some of the following extracts from this unpublished manuscript are of particular
interest.
"The production of sugar beets and beet sugar requires much hand labor, usu-
ally 70 to 75 hours per acre. The beet field work is divided into two periods —
blocking, thinning, and hoeing from about the last of May to the last of July, and
pulling and topping from about the last of September to about November 20.
Most farmers expect field men of the sugar factories to secure beet workers for
them.
"About 15 percent of the farmers, usually those with small acreages, do their
own beet field work. Approximately 90 percent of the beet acreage is cared for by
hired laborers, by about 13,000 persons, 56 percent of whom are migrants from
Texas, all Mexicans; 5 percent are from other States, principally Illinois, Indiana,
Ohio, Kentucky, and West Virginia, one-tenth of whom are Mexicans; and 39
percent are residents of Michigan, of whom one-fifth are Mexicans. In 1939,
59 percent of the gainfully employed beet workers were Mexicans. Thev are an
increasing proportion of the beet-worker population annually.
"Of the Mexican migrants from Texas, 57 percent come from San Antonio and
the other from 120 different communities. Approximately one-half had previous
farm experience; however, very few had previous experience in beet fields. Some
7,600 were recruited in 1941 by the Acosta Employment Agency, a general agent
for the Sugar Beet Growers and Manufacturer's Association and their employment
committees in Michigan and Ohio. Applicants paid a registration fee of $1.50
which included a charge of 25 cents for the health examination for tuberculosis.
"Some 500 to 1,000 unsolicited Mexicans from Texas appear in Michigan fac-
tory areas each year and are given jobs in the beet fields. Some of them were
rejected by the health examiner and so were not acceptable to the recruiting em-
ployment agency.
"Ages of beet workers from Texas ranged from 14 to 78 years. Their average
age is 28.6 years. Their median age 23.8 years. Over 37 percent are under 21
years.
"Theoretically, larrners are supposed to house their beet workers. Very few
can or do. If they cannot they are usually assessed 50 oents an acre to compen-
sate the sugar company for supplying housing facilities. Nearly two-thirds live
in company beet shacks, of which nearly one-half are portable. Nearly one-third
live in vacant or abandoned farm houses leased by the sugar companies for the
beet season.
"Average beet worker takes care of 7 acres. First-year workers are almost in-
variably given smaller acreages. The average worker earned $133 for his beet
work in 1939 and 1940 during the 7-month period. His supplementary income
for nonbeet work during slack periods averaged $10. Eighty to ninety percent
could take care of considerably larger acreages than that assigned to them.
"Under the Sugar Act of 1937 the payment of fair and reasonable wages for
beet workers is obligatory and is determined by the Government after hearings
have been held. The schedule of payment was $11 for blocking, thinning, hoeing,
and keeping beets free from weeds, payable when work is completed, and for
topping, a certain amount per ton depending upon the yield per acre. As a
matter of fact two-thirds of the beet workers in Michigan are not paid in full at
the end of the weeding period. A hold-back of $2 is still commonly practiced.
"Almost universally credit is extended to Mexican migrants for transportation
to Michigan ana for groceries, household utensils, and beet tools.
"Mexican beet laborers are now examined in Texas for tuberculosis before they
can register with the employment agency or agencies for beet work. In 1939
of 4,271 persons examined 101 were rejected, 81 for tuberculosis. In 1940, of
5,753 applicants examined 157 were rejected, 121 for tuberculosis. In 1941, of
7,597 persons examined 201 were rejected, 197 for tuberculosis.
"The spring of 1941 was the first time that there was little or no illegal trans-
portation of beet workers from Texas by truckers. Eighteen hundred came by
train, others in their own cars or trucks.
"In recent years most direct relief that has been given to needy beet workers
by welfare relief agencies has been given to Mexicans who have established
permanent residence. Most migrants return to Texas at the end of the harvest.
"The child labor provisions of the Sugar Act of 1937 is rather rigidly enforced
so that child labor was practically nonexistent in beet fields last year.
"Three summer camps for children of migrant Ibeet workers near Mount
Pleasant, and at Alma and Blissfield, sponsored by the Home Missions Council
of North America, is a wholesome influence, of religious, educational, and recre-
ational nature on several hundred children."
NATIONAL, DEFENSE MIGRATION
7779
Professor Thaden makes the following recommendations with reference to
sugar beet field workers in Michigan:
"Every possible effort be made by beet growers and beet growers employment
agencies to hire unemployed persons in Michigan, especially those residing in
the principal beet-producing counties.
"No beet worker have less than 10 acres of beets so that his earnings will be
not less than $190.
"All labor to be employed under contract.
"School census enumerators be compelled to fill out Form CA-LA accurately
and completely when they take the school census, so that it will be possible to
determine State or country of birth of migrant Mexican beet workers.
"Mexicans recruited in Texas be strongly discouraged from coming to Michigan
if they have children under 14 years of age.
"Beet workers be paid in full at the end of the weeding period for work done.
"Communities, in which beets are grown, organize to conduct summer schools
for children of migrant beet workers, similar to those sponsored by the Council
of Home Missions.
"Migrant beet workers be strongly urged to return to their State at the end
of the harvest season and not be permitted to live in company beet houses during
the nonbeet season."
The Defense Program and the Farm Labor Situation
In Michigan, labor is about 45 to 50 percent of the cost of operating the usual
farm, not including interest on the investment. Thus, any program which affects
the cost or availability of farm labor soon presents critical problems to the farm
operator.
FARM LABOR SHORTAGE
As early as July 1940, many farmers began to sense the coming difficulties in
the supply of farm labor. The demand for farm labor for the year remained
about the same, but the supply began fast to diminish to the extent that the
supply became insufficient to meet the demand. This trend has continued until
in July 1941, the latest data available, the ratio of the supply to demand was 50.7
percent of normal. According to Crops and Markets of the United States De-
partment of Agriculture, the situation in Michigan was the worst in the United
States. Statistical data showing the trend in supply and demand of farm labor
in"; Michigan from 1924 to July 1941 are shown in table 13. Cash wages have
advanced an average of 30 percent, with the highest wages being paid in south-
eastern Michigan.
Table 13.- — Farm labor: Michigan supply and demand, 192J+-J+1 l
January
April
July
October
Year
o.
3
to
0
a
CD
Q
o
<S
>>
"a
a.
3
m
a
03
3
a
_o
el
"E
a.
■a
a
03
a
CD
Q
_o
03
"3.
D.
3
CO
a
03
a
CD
P
n
03
1924 ..
69
92
85
82
83
80
84
111
106
67
87
80
83
93
87
106
125
150
152
109
102
89
73
102
94
93
64
79
83
83
81
82
86
77
66
57
54
73
78
87
92
81
81
85
97
85
105
96
102
113
101
138
189
263
281
149
131
102
79
126
116
109
67
85
87
74
85
88
84
114
120
139
126
106
96
77
66
96
90
85
50
80
82
86
86
86
87
78
72
63
70
74
86
92
97
85
89
91
98
106
106
86
99
102
97
146
167
221
180
143
112
84
68
113
101
93
51
87
82
73
84
82
85
118
126
142
122
106
89
75
69
91
89
80
86
88
87
82
87
85
69
61
63
69
74
90
91
97
85
88
93
101
1925
93
1926
84
1927 ..
102
1928
94
1929
1930
99
130
139
147
115
108
94
76
95
95
95
79
73
61
53
53
59
67
78
85
79
78
84
90
136
213
262
277
195
161
121
89
120
122
113
88
100
171
1931
207
1932
225
1933..-.
177
1934.... -.
143
1935
99
1936
82
1937
71
1938
107
1939
101
1940...
86
1941
Average (1930-39) ...
110
69
170
110
75
157
103
81
134
103
79
138
1 Supply and demand as a percentage of normal.
2 Ratio of supply to demand.
Data from 1934 and 1941 annual crop reports for Michigan.
7780 DETROIT HEARINGS
MIGRATION OF LABOR FROM MICHIGAN FARMS
It is difficult to report statistically the actual extent of the migration from Mich-
igan farms to industry because representative records have not been kept. An
analysis of the records of the State employment service would not give a correct
idea of this movement since most farm boys and hired men have moved directly
from the farm to the job and they did not register with or go through the State
employment service. Able farm boys and hired men have readily obtained em-
ployment in the neaiby urban industries at rates beginning at 65 to 85 cents per
hour and many soon had their wages increased to $0.90, $1, and $1.25 per hour.
The lack of farm labor is critical in most regions of the State, and particularly
so in southeastern Michigan. High city wages have drawn many able-bodied men
to the city. The Work Projects Administration has not helped the farm labor
situation in the past, although in the summei of 1941 its rural program was modi-
fied so as to permit a better coordination with farmers. The conscription of young
men on the farm has still further depleted the farm labor supply.
Farmers are confronted with three major problems: (1) Increased wages for
farm help; (2) inability to obtain sufficient help, particularly seasonal labor, at
almost any price they could afford to pay; and (3) getting help of such a quality
as to be useful on the farm.
AGES OF HIRED LABOR
During the last half of 1940 and through 1941 there has been a decided tendency
for available farm help either to be older men from 50 to 65 years of age, or boys,
or others not so well suited to jobs in urban industry. One prominent southern
Michigan farmer wiites the following with reference to his 1941 hired help: "Good
help cannot be found. There are none in this neighborhood. My man is 65 years
old and I hire a school boy as extra help after school and on Saturdays. My neigh-
bors are doing the best they can without help." This statement is typical of the
statements of many other farmers on the labor situation in southern Michigan.
Contemplated Changes in Farm Business as Result of Defense Program
In the spring of 1941 a survey was made by the farm management department
of the Michigan State College in an effort to determine the changes planned by
farmers in the conduct of their farm business. Some of the changes reported by
the different farmers were as follows:
1. More power and more machinery:
(a) Larger power and machinery units.
(b) Buy tractor equipment.
(c) Buy general purpose tractors.
(d) Replace horses with tractors.
(e) Buy a combine.
(/) Buy a pick-up baler.
(g) Use more rubber-tired equipment.
(h) Buy a milking machine.
2. The farm operator to do more of the work himself.
3. Eliminate the hired help. Operator and family to do the work.
4. Do less work outside the farm.
5. Have more exchange work with neighbors.
6. Let the poorer land lay idle.
7. Produce more acreages of crops which require less labor, such as hay and
pasture, and sma'ler acreages of grain and row crops which require more labor.
8. Reduce labor requirements by keeping fewer dairy cows, and more beef
cattle, sheep, and hogs.
9. Increase the dairy herd.
10. Fa:m more land.
Most of the changes are planned with the thought of reducing labor require-
ments. In some instances the changes also involve a decrease in the volume of
business, others plan to maintain production, whereas still others contemplate the
expansion of the volume of production.
Some of these proposed changes, such as the purchase of new machinery, may
seriously increase the debt load on some farms. This is a situation to be avoided
unless there is a reasonable chance of paying off the debts within the next 2- to
4-year period.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 77gl
Conclusion
The migration of labor within the State of Michigan between rural and urban
areas as well as the interstate migration presents many problems of adjustment
of current interest and particularly so for the post-war period. It should receive
the attention of planning and other groups interested in present and post-war
adjustments.
Within the past 12-month period, (1) cash farm wages have increased an
average of about 30 percent in Michigan; (2) through migration to the city,
seasonal farm labor, aside from the migratory labor, has become practically
nonexistent; (3) farmers have lost many of their year help; (4) much of the help
that remains is not of the quality most desired on farms.
During the same period and together with the difficult labor situation, farmers
of Michigan have been asked to increase their production of essential food products
about 15 percent. Prices of such Michigan farm products as butter, eggs, poul-
try, pork, and beans have been supported by the Federal Government in order to
encourage the increase in food production. Most farmers are doing their utmost
to supply the additional food required.
Michigan farmers are attempting to carry on and do their part in the food-
production program by many different means, some of which are as follows:
(1) Increased mechanization of their farms as a means of reducing labor require-
ments; (2) by working harder and longer hours; (3) more help on the farm by the
family; (4) more exchange of work between neighbors; and (5) making more
efficient use of hired labor.
The increase in mechanization means decidedly fewer job opportunities on the
farm during the post-defense or the post-war period. The problem then presents
itself as to by whom and in what places will the slack be absorbed. It is my
opinion that farmers and agriculture in general have done more than their share
in taking up this slack in the past. It is my opinion that they will not either be
able or disposed to continue such a procedure in the future.
Safeguards in the nature of rural land zoning need to be set up at an early date.
This will help to avoid the mistakes of the past in the settlement, mostly tem-
porary, of our marginal and nonagricultural lands.
Exhibit A.— Action Program to Improve Michigan Farm Situation
RECOMMENDATIONS BY PROF. E. B. HILL, FARM MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT,
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
The following suggestions relate to an action program with reference to labor
migration and its effect on the present as well as the future of the agriculture of
Michigan:
1. More complete utilization of local labor. — Although this would undoubtedly
be difficult for complete accomplishment, yet much could be done by way of an
educational program and the more complete use of employment service facilities
toward this end.
2. Rural and urban zoning.- — Impetus should be given to zoning in order to
(a) direct and guide the development of new settlements and communities in the
open country and in the areas immediately adjoining the larger cities and (b) to
guide the anticipated post-defense or post-war migration to the country. This
would endeavor to guide the migrants to better land and better locations, thereby
avoiding isolated settlers and settlement on marginal and submarginal lands.
3. State employment service, more complete service. — The State employment
service should give added attention and assistance to agricultural laborers for
farm service and to the needs of farmers. In addition, the State employment
service or the Farm Security Administration could make a trial of serving as a
central clearing house for landlords and tenants.
4. Prices of agricultural products.- — Prices of farm products should be such as
will permit the producer of food to compete on the labor market for farm labor.
5. Educational program. — An educational program which will show to possible
migrants from farm to city and from city to farm the disadvantages as well as the
advantages of their proposed move. Information should be presented as to what
happened before, during, and after the last World War.
7782 DETROIT HEARINGS
TESTIMONY OF PROF. E. B. HILL— Resumed
Mr. Curtis. This committee is charged with a study of the migra-
tion of people. We would like to know what has been the nature of
the rural-urban movement within Michigan during the past few
decades.
RURAL-URBAN MOVEMENT WITHIN MICHIGAN
Dr. Hill. I would say, to begin, that between 1920 and 1930, for
the most part, there was a definite movement from the country to the
city. That continued up until about 1927. From 1927, that move-
ment slowed down a little bit, and by 1933 or 1934 there was a net
movement to the country from the city; so, in general, there was a
movement from the country to the city during the 1920's and from
the city back to the country during the 1930's — the early 1930's, at
any rate.
Mr. Curtis. Was this movement in the early 1930's from the city
back to the country primarily composed of farmers, or of people just
seeking a place to live on smaller tracts of land?
Dr. Hill. It was probably both; that is, there were city people
seeking places to live on the smaller tracts, and also farm folks, sons
or duaghters, for example, who went back to their homes.
Mr. Curtis. Has the long run population movement drained off
surplus labor from the farm?
Dr. Hill. It has not drained off farm labor except during the last
12 months. That is about the period when it has been serious. In
general, the amount of necessary farm labor has been fairly well main-
tained, with certain fluctuations, up until about the last 12 months.
EFFECT OF AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT UPON AGRICULTURE
Mr. Curtis. Has the development of the automobile industry in
Michigan in any way affected Michigan's agriculture?
Dr. Hill. Yes. I think it has made it just a little bit tougher for
farmers who are in the immediate vicinity of industrial cities like
Flint and Pontiac and Detroit, from tbe standpoint of getting and
keeping labor.
Mr. Curtis. Has it changed their type of farming?
Dr. Hill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Curtis. In what way?
MORE INTENSIVE FARMING
Dr. Hill. We bave had a more intensive type of farming. The
population of the State has just about doubled since 1910, and that
has meant an increase in demand for dairy products, and for poultry
and eggs and vegetables and fruits.
Mr. Curtis. All of which calls for more labor?
Dr. Hill. Yes, sir. There has been quite an intensification of
agriculture in the State of Michigan, which has called for more labor,
and to offset that there has been a mechanization, which to a certain
extent has released labor and made it possible to do this more in-
tensive job.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7783
MECHANIZATION
Mr. Curtis. Is mechanization on the farm still increasing?
Dr. Hill. Very decidedly, particularly during the last 15 years,
and I would say it has been speeded up tremendously during the last
12-month period.
Mr. Curtis. How do you account for the speed-up in the last 12
months?
Dr. Hill. Because of the increasing difficulty of obtaining satis-
factory farm labor and the higher wages that are necessary to pay
farm labor.
Mr. Curtis. Has that been true of the so-called family-size farm
as well as the larger enterprises?
Dr. Hill. I would say so, because I think most of our family-size
farms would employ help in addition to the family, at least for a 9-
month period. On the larger farms, those with over 100 acres of
tillable land, the mechanization has been speeded up because of the
difficulty of getting good labor and the higher price for labor.
Mr. Curtis. How is the priority system affecting the farm-ma-
chinery situation?
FARM MACHINE SHORTAGES
Dr. Hill. The only comment that I can give on that is a telephone
conversation I had with one of the distributors in the State, on the
matter of corn pickers. A corn picker is a relatively new machine,
as far as Michigan is concerned. And this distributor's statement
was that they couldn't get enough corn pickers this year to fill the
demand.
As to other machines, say a pick-up hay baler, which is also a rela-
tively new type of machine but which has come into Michigan in rela-
tively large numbers in the past 12 months, his statement was that
they couldn't get enough of the hay balers to fill the orders this year;
and apparently this one concern was not able to get all the tractors
that they could use in filling their orders.
Mr. Curtis. Do you have much small-grain farming here in
Michigan?
Dr. Hill. Not as much as you would have, say, in Illinois. Ours
is mostly a general type of farming, with dairying as the major enter-
prise, and with the small grains as a supplementary enterprise, pri-
marily for feed crops, for dairy cows and horses and cattle and sheep.
We don't sell much small grain.
Mr. Curtis. You did not run into the difficulty of securing steel
bins this year?
Dr. Hill. Not as far as I know.
Mr. Curtis. That was a very major problem in the small grain
country.
Dr. Hill. I understand it was.
MECHANIZATION AS AFFECTING JOB OPPORTUNITIES
Mr. Curtis. What are the future complications resulting from the
trend toward mechanization? What effect will this mechanization
have on farm labor when and if the emergency ends?
7784 DETROIT HEARINGS
Dr. Hill. That is a little difficult to say definitely. It can't help
but affect the job opportunities that exist in the country. There will
be fewer of what you might call useful full-time job opportunities as
a result of this increased mechanization. When there is a surplus of
labor, following any cessation of our defense program, we can't help
but have that situation, so far as I can see.
Mr. Curtis. Will it inject a personal factor into the picture?
Dr. Hill. Yes.
Mr. Curtis. Do farmers ordinarily think these labor-saving
devices are costly? Do they resort to them as a matter of choice, or
because of the shortage of labor at high prices?
Dr. Hill. They have done it for both reasons. Some types of
help can be most efficiently used on a mechanized farm. It is becom-
ing increasingly difficult to get a man who is good with horses. So,
to some extent, it is a desire on the part of the farmer to make more
efficient use of labor.
It has also been reported to me that farmers have found it neces-
sary to get some of this mechanized equipment to satisfy their hired
help. In other cases it is an actual shortage of help that has made
it necessary for the farmer to get some of these labor-saving devices.
labor piracy in agriculture
Mr. Curtis. Do you have anything to say about labor piracy in
agriculture?
Dr. Hill. I suppose you mean hiring away — one farmer hiring
away from another, or farmers in one region hiring labor from
farmers in another region?
Mr. Curtis. Yes. What I had in mind was the practice of going
out and bidding for the farmer's labor, taking it away from him,
either by other farmers or by industry.
Dr. Hill. There is a small amount of it going on, I suppose.
Naturally some farms are a little larger than others, and a little
more efficiently operated, and they would be able to pay a man a
little more. But there is not much of that. I have not heard of
much soliciting of these folks, or interviewing them and attempting
to have them take other jobs. If a young man, a farmer's son or
hired man, learns of a job in the city, he pretty much takes that of
his own free will.
Mr. Curtis. Are family-size farms increasing or decreasing in
number?
Dr. Hill. There has been no particular trend.
I was very much interested in making an analysis of the results
made available by the last census. That indicated that in the aver-
age size farm in Michigan, taking all the farms together, there has
been very little change in the number of acres. But if you break
that down by size groups, as is done by the census, by acre groups,
you find in certain regions of the State, particularly in the fruit and
truck growing regions, and in those adjacent to the industrial centers,
that there has been a decided increase in the number of small farms,
part-time farms.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7785
INCREASING NUMBER OF SUBSISTENCE FARMS
They might be called part time or subsistence farms, usually under
10 acres, but they may be somewhat larger.
In some of our agricultural counties in the southern part of the
State, which is nearer the Corn Belt, and in the central part of the
State, away from the industrial areas, the increase in the number of
small farms is not so marked. There has also been an increase there
in the number of large farms, say over 250 acres. But practically
all of these farms are what we would call family-size.
I think there are only something like 900 farms in this State that
have in excess of 500 acres, and many of those are in the cut-over
regions, in which the amount of tillable land is not excessive. They
still would be called family-size.
Mr. Curtis. Has the recent employment created by the establish-
ment of defense plants here in Michigan aggravated the shortage of
farm labor?
Dr. Hill. Very decidedly; from all the evidence I can gather by
talking with farmers, that is my own personal impression.
SUPPLY OF FARM LABOR 50 PERCENT OF NORMAL
The United States Agricultural Marketing Service, in their crop
and livestock reporting division, through their crop reporters get in-
formation of that sort, and the report for July was that the supply of
farm labor in relation to the demand was, as they designated it, 50
percent of normal in Michigan, and that was the lowest of any State
in the Union.
Mr. Curtis. Are the part-time farmers leaving their farms and
getting these jobs too?
Dr. Hill. I haven't made an exact study of that. What I can
tell would be only my impression.
It has been my observation that these part-time farmers, as soon
as they get a job, forget about their farms. Many leave some mem-
ber of the family to carry on the work on a reduced scale.
Mr. Curtis. In other words, they carry that farm as sort of a
cushion against unemployment, and a place to go to in order to escape
the high living cost of the city when they do not have work?
Dr. Hill. Pretty much. Even when they are unemployed they
don't have the equipment nor the livestock to resume farm operations
on a part-time basis; and in many cases don't have the finances or
the knowledge of how to operate the place if they wanted to.
An educational program is needed for them when they start in,
and some of that has to be done by the Farm Security Administration.
Mr. Curtis. Is the defense program altering the nature of agricul-
tural migration in Michigan?
DEFENSE PROGRAM INCREASES URBAN MIGRATION
Dr. Hill. I would say that it is speeding up this migration from
the farm to the city. It seems to me that is the only explanation for
this terrific deficiency in the normal supply of farm labor.
7786 DETROIT HEARINGS
Mr. Curtis. When the Farm Security Administration places people
on small farms as part-time farmers, perhaps they are short in equip-
ment and knowledge and livestock, from the viewpoint of agriculture;
but would you want to venture an opinion as to whether that is a
good thing to do, in view of the alleged surpluses of farm products?
SEES NO ADVANTAGE IN SUBSISTENCE FARMING
Dr. Hill. It represents no particular advantage to agriculture, as
far as I can see.
Mr. Curtis. Is it a disadvantage?
Dr. Hill. To the extent that it contributes to the excess production
and to added costs in rural communities, it would be.
Mr. Curtis. Would that land go unfarmed if Farm Security didn't
help these people?
Dr. Hill. Perhaps, for a short period of time.
Mr. Curtis. But the choice land would not go unfarmed, would it?
Dr. Hill. No, the choice land would not.
Mr. Curtis. Only the submarginal land goes unfarmed?
Dr. Hill. Submarginal land or small acreages that don't lend them-
selves very well to the present mechanized set-up.
MIGRANT FARM LABOR DEEMED NECESSARY
Mr. Curtis. Can you say whether the farmers in the southwestern
fruit area have adjusted their economy to the existence of a large
supply of southern migrant labor to the point where such supply is
essential?
Dr. Hill. Yes; it has been more or less a natural thing in the past,
and it hasn't created any unusual situation. It has just gradually
developed to a point now where the migratory labor, seasonal labor, is
definitely necessary.
Mr. Curtis. And some of those people come from deep down m
the South, do thay not?
Dr. Hill. Yes; many of them come long distances.
Mr. Curtis. Are they colored?
Dr. Hill. There are some colored. I don't know what percentage
is colored. A lot of them come out of the cities — young folks, high
school boys or boys of college age.
Mr. Curtis. What do they use them for?
Dr. Hill. The whole range of production, but primarily for picking
operations.
Mr. Curtis. What fruits do you grow down there?
Dr. Hill. In the southwestern part of Michigan, apples and
peaches arc the big crops.
Mr. Curtis. Berries, too?
Dr. Hill. Berries ; yes, sir.
Mr. Curtis. Potatoes?
Dr. Hill. Not many potatoes. Quite a little bit of vegetable farm-
ing in there, and farther north, along the lake shore, cherries. In the
south it is a more diversified production.
Mr. Curtis. Did the usual number of migrant workers come up
this year?
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7787
ANTICIPATED FARM LABOR SHORTAGES
Dr. Hill. I couldn't say as to that. Last week I had occasion to
talk to a member of the State land-use planning committee from
Berrien County, and he said this year, in his opinion, they would not be
able to harvest all of the peaches, because of the lack of sufficient
labor. They had a large peach crop this year, and maybe even a
normal supply of labor wouldn't have been able to harvest it.
Mr. Curtis. Some of it will go unharvested?
Dr. Hill. That is what I understand.
Mr. Curtis. Do you know of any other instances of crop loss
because of lack of farm labor?
Dr. Hill. No, I do not, because our harvesting season for the most
part is just starting in now. It is starting in with beans. However,
I don't think there is any great suffering as far as the grain crops are
concerned, because so many farms are mechanized for grain harvest.
We are just entering into the harvesting of crops like beans and
sugar beets, and they will be coming in shortly, say in another few
weeks. In potatoes and corn it is possible that in some locations there
might be some spoilage, because of lack of ability to harvest them on
time. The harvest will have to be drawn out over a longer period, and
more work will have to be done by the farmer and his own family.
W. P. A. AND FARM LABOR
Mr. Curtis. What is the situation in regard to the W. P. A. and
farm labor? Will able-bodied people employed on W. P. A. accept
farm labor?
Dr. Hill. That has been a pretty sore spot with the farmers in
Michigan, as it has with farmers in other States, in the first place,
because of the fact that if these workers on W. P. A. did accept a farm
job, they would have difficulty getting back on the W. P. A. rolls.
Now, since about midsummer the W. P. A. arrangement has been
modified in an attempt to make a large number of these folks in the
country available for farm labor. This is what the W. P. A. people
tell me, at any rate. They say if they don't accept the farm labor at
the going rates, then they are taken off the W. P. A. rolls.
I don't know how much that has helped in agricultural regions,
but it is certainly a step in the right direction, at any rate.
Mr. Curtis. Do the rank and file of W. P. A. laborers like farm
work?
Dr. Hill. Probably not. I would imagine not.
Mr. Curtis. Do the farmers consider them good hands?
TYPES OF LABOR AVAILABLE
Dr. Hill. Many farmers are this season having to accept almost
anybody who will work, whether they are good hands or not. You
see they are not quite so choosey as they have been before. A large
part of farm labor is older men who are not considered adaptable to
industry, and there is also quite a proportion of youngsters who are
doing farm work. While a good many of the individuals who are on
W. P. A. would not be good farm hands, they could do certain opera-
7788 DETROIT HEARINGS
tions, and that would be my answer to your question. I think it
varies, of course, in different counties, as to the quality of the W. P. A.
help.
Mr. Curtis. As a matter of fact, while the W. P. A. was originally
supposed to be a works program for able-bodied people, due to many
causes it has got to a point now where they are less able-bodied and
less qualified, isn't that true?
Dr. Hill. That is right at the present time. Of course, in some
cases, some of our part-time and subsistence farmers went on W. P. A.,
and some even, as I understand it, diminished the scope of their
agricultural operations to some extent, so they would have less to do.
But those men would have some training in agricultural work.
EFFECT OF PRIORITIES ON FARM MACHINERY
Mr. Osmers. Professor Hill, as I understand it, the Office of Price
Administration — Mr. Henderson's office — has allowed the manu-
facture of farm machinery and related products to go ahead full blast,
has it not, in the manufacture of tractors and farm implements?
Dr. Hill. That question I couldn't answer. I don't know. The
only statement I could make is the one I just made, in which I quoted
a local dealer for the John Deere Plow Company, who told me he
couldn't get all the supplies he wanted.
Now, there might be shortage in some particular types of equip-
ment that were almost available. For instance, they could get the
tractors, with the exception of a magneto. As I understand it, there
was a shortage, because they could not get all the types of farm
machinerv that they need.
Mr. Osmers. I have been informed that Mr. Henderson is allowing
the production of farm trucks from one and one-half tons upward in
capacity, but that he has curtailed the production of trucks under one
and one-half tons. Is that your understanding?
Dr. Hill. I could not answer that.
EFFECT OF CURTAILMENT OF SMALL TRUCK PRODUCTION
Mr. Osmers. Let us assume for the moment it is true. Would the
Michigan farmer be seriously affected by a lack of supply of trucks of
less than one and one-half tons in capacity? Do they use many
trucks of that type?
Dr. Hill. Yes; I suppose the most common farm truck would be
probably less than one and a half tons capacity.
Mr. Curtis. Above that you get into commercial vehicles?
Dr. Hill. Yes. The great majority would be around l}{; and I
presume if curtailment in the production of smaller sizes was continued
over a very long period, it would work some hardship, although if
the larger trucks were available for complete service in the country,
most farm products could be handled by the larger trucks.
Mr. Osmers. The difference in the cost of a %- or a 1-ton vehicle
and a 1^-ton vehicle is considerable. On a one-family farm, if there
was a difference of three or four hundred dollars in the cost, would it
not upset the finances of that family for possibly 2 years if they were
forced to buy the larger truck?
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7789
Dr. Hill. That is right.
Mr. Osmers. And it might lead to a serious situation.
Would you say it would be advisable, in view of the Nation's desire
to produce large quantities of food as efficiently as possible, that we
should, as a government, allow the farmer to buy all sizes of trucks
that he needs?
TRACTORS MORE IMPORTANT THAN TRUCKS
Dr. Hill. I suppose that would be the logical deduction. How-
ever, in Michigan, farm trucks are not as important as are tractors.
I think there are something like 30,000 trucks on farms in Michigan,
as compared with 66,000 tractors.
Mr. Osmers. You made a statement, in response to my first ques-
tion, that at least in one instance one tractor manufacturer — I believe
John Deere was the name — had been unable to keep his delivery
schedules because of the lack of tractors.
Dr. Hill. Yes.
Mr. Osmers. Do you think I am correct in making the assumption
that O. P. A. C. S. has told the tractor people to go ahead and make
all the tractors they wanted to, but didn't let them have all the mate-
rials that they needed to make them?
Dr. Hill. Yes.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Professor Hill. We appre-
ciate your coming here and giving us this testimony.
At 1:30 there will be a panel before the committee from the auto-
mobile industry.
The committee will stand adjourned at this time until then.
(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., the hearing recessed until 1:30 p. m.,
the same day.)1
1 Resumption of the hearing, with the testimony of Earl E. Raymond as the first witness on Wednes-
day afternoon, September 24, and with all other testimony taken at the hearing through that day and to
the conclusion of the Detroit hearings on Thursday, September 25, appears in pt. 18, Detroit hearings
(Industrial Section).
INTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS
(The following were among exhibits submitted to the committee
from various sources not represented by witnesses, and were entered
as a part of the record of the Detroit hearings.1 The exhibits grouped
in this volume, Nos. 48 to 59, deal exclusively with the subject of
agricultural migration in the area. Nos. 1 to 47, taking up the various
phases of industrial or urban migration -t are published in part
18, Detroit hearings (industrial section).)
1 See pt. 18, Detroit hearings (Industrial Section), p. 7544.
7790
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 48. — Diphtheria Outbreak Among Mexican Migratory
Workers in Saginaw County, Mich.
REPORT BY DR. V. K. VOLK, COMMISSIONER OF THE SAGINAW COUNTY DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH
On August 10, 1941, at 5:40 p. m., Dr. John W. O'Neill, of St. Charles, brought
Pauline Garcia, aged 1 year, to the contagious unit of Saginaw County Hospital,
with a clinical diagnosis of laryngeal diphtheria. The baby was very toxic and
breathed with difficulty. Dr. Walter Slack, local ear, nose, and throat specialist,
performed a tracheotomy but the child died before the operation was completed.
Positive laboratory findings confirmed the diagnosis of laryngeal diphtheria.
Investigation revealed that the child had been sick about 7 days, having devel-
oped illness about 2 or 3 days after coming to Saginaw County. To our knowledge,
the family had not sought medical care until the afternoon of August 10, when the
condition was very grave; Dr. O'Neill brought the child to the hospital imme-
diately.
We failed in our attempt to discover the source of infection. The home condi-
tions were most undesirable, so all 14 contacts, who lived in a 1-room house,
were hospitalized at Saginaw County Hospital for the purpose of finding and isolat-
ing the diphtheria carriers. Even though crowded hospital facilities made it neces-
sary to house some of the Mexicans in a storeroom, this procedure was deemed
wisest not only because of poor housing conditions, but also because it would have
been impossible to break the contacts of these people with other groups of Mexicans
who live nearby.
Throat cultures were taken daily and in this group of 14, 8 were at one time
or another found to be carriers. Four were still hospitalized on September 5.
Attached is a list of these 14 Mexicans. The entire group has been Schick tested.
Only 3 were Schick positive; but all have received one-half cc. of alum precipitated
toxoid to build up their diphtheria immunity.
With the help of the local priest, who speaks Spanish, we were able to learn
that in May 1941 this group came from San Antonio, Tex., to Huron County
to work in the sugar-beet fields near Sebewaing. They remained in Huron
County until August 2, when they came to Saginaw County to work in the pickle
fields, and were assigned a house about 5 miles south of Hemlock in which to live.
Enclosed are pictures dealing with the situation.1
14 Mexicans hospitalized at Saginaw County Hospital, after discovery of a
diphtheria case in the home, August 1941
Pauline Garcia Diphtheria.
Candelaria Garcia Diphtheria carrier.
Melchora Garcia Do.
Eva Garcia Do.
Consulo Sefeuntez Do.
Juan Hose Rodriquez Do.
Manual Sefeuntez Do.
Jesus Rodriquez Do.
Guadalupe Garcia Do.
Dominga Rodriquez Diphtheria contact.
Josephine Sefeuntez Do.
Juanita Garcia Do.
Erene Sefeuntez Do.
Joe Garcia L Do.
Valentine Garcia Do.
1 See photograph section in this volume.
7791
7792 DETROIT HEARINGS
Report of an Epidemic of Diphtheria in a Mexican Migratory Labor
Colony Near Blissfield, Lenawee County
By Dr. T. M. Koppa, Epidemiologist, Michigan Department of Health
The Michigan Department of Health was notified by the health officer of
Blissfield township on August 12, 1941, that an outbreak of diphtheria had
occurred in a migratory labor camp owned by the Great Lakes Sugar Co. Inas-
much as Blissfield does not have the services of a full-time health department
the health officer urgently requested aid from the Michigan Department of Health.
The individuals were working in potato and tomato fields in the vicinity but
were allowed to live on in the camp during the sugar-beet off season.
A trip was made to the camp to confirm the diagnosis and obtain cultures on
the cases, suspected cases, and immediate contacts. A culture previously taken
by Dr. E. V. Tubbs, Blissfield health officer, was brought back to Lansing and
the diagnosis immediately substantiated bacteriologically. At the time of the
first visit seven individuals were clinically ill; one of them was dying. This
latter individual had not had medical care until 5 days after onset of the disease.
After the laboratory confirmation, the entire camp was immediately quarantined
and inasmuch as 246 people were exposed it was necessary to ask the sheriff's
department and State police to maintain the quarantine on the entire camp.
The following day the Michigan Department of Health mobile laboratory was
sent and cultures were taken from the throat of each person in the quarantine
area. The bacteriology was done on the grounds in the trailer laboratory and
within 18 hours all individuals found on examination to carry diphtheria organisms
were placed in isolation in a separate building away from the colony proper. In
the case of children, adults accompanied them to look after their care. Forty
thousand units of antitoxin, however, were given to each patient. At the same
time the cultures were being taken, all children under 14 years of age were given
toxoid. Toxoid was administered rather than antitoxin in order that permanent
immunity might be started, and to avoid sensitizing individuals who later if they
developed diphtheria would need antitoxin. Those adults who were found to
have a negative throat culture were allowed to leave the camp to work provided
they arranged some other place in which to live.
After the quarantine had been in effect for 7 days the entire colony was again
recultured to determine if there were any more carriers of the disease. None
was found and the quarantine on the camp was released. The building, however,
in which cases, carriers, and contacts were housed was and is still under quarantine
until such a time when all throat cultures will be negative.
Up to September 12, there have been 12 clinical cases of diphtheria and 17
carriers have been discovered. After the camp quarantine had been lifted, two
new cases of diphtheria developed, indicating that the quarantine of the isolation
house was being broken. The entire camp was then recultured, and six new
carriers were found. One man who visited a movie theater was jailed for violating
quarantine.
Report of an Epidemic of Diphtheria Among Mexican Migratory
Workers in Saginaw County
By Dr. T. M. Koppa, Epidemiologist, Michigan Department of Health
A trip was made to Saginaw County on August 21, 1941, at the request of
Dr. Volk to determine whether or not the case of diphtheria occurring in that
county in Mexican migratory labor could be traced to the diphtheria outbreak
in Blissfield. The fact that diphtheria occurred in Mexican populations, in two
different parts of the State at the same time, was suggestive and because of this
an investigation was undertaken.
The outbreak occurred in four families who had come directly from San
\ntonio, Tex., last May to Sebewaing in Huron County to work in the beet
fields in that area. They remained in Huron County until August 2 when they
came to Saginaw County to work in the pickle fields. The four families lived in
a one-room house 5 miles south of Hemlock. Two days after coming to Saginaw
County one of the babies, 1 year of age, became ill. She had a sore throat, sores
on her lips, and could not swallow. Five days later they took the child to Dr.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7793
John W. O'Neill at St. Charles and upon examination the child was sent to the
Saginaw County Hospital. She died there of laryngeal diphtheria several hours
after admission. An emergency tracheotomy was performed to no avail. The
contacts of this patient were immediately isolated in the Saginaw County Hospital
garage and cultures were obtained from the entire group. At the same time
toxoid was administered to the contacts. The individuals who had a positive
throat on culture were taken out of the garage and isolated in separate rooms in
the hospital. However, because of the severe crowding in this hospital some
patients had to be discharged and others had to double up to make room for the
Mexican individuals in isolation. Those contacts with a negative throat, eight
in number, were confined to the garage where it was necessary to provide sleeping
and eating quarters.
After a thorough questioning of all the individuals concerned in this outbreak
no contact could be established between this group and the group in Blissfield
and we are reasonably certain that they were separate outbreaks.
Report of Bacillary Dysentery in Van Buren County
By Dr. T. M. Koppa, Epidemiologist, Michigan Department of Health
The bureau of epidemiology was notified on June 20, 1941, that an outbreak
of diarrhea had occurred in Van Buren County. A telephone call was placed to
Dr. M. R. French, director of the county health unit, who informed us that 11
cases had been reported and 1 death had resulted from the outbreak.
The department's mobile laboratory was sent to the field and an investigation
was begun on June 21 with the assistance of Mr. William Ferguson and Mr.
Robert Smith of the bureau of laboratories.
Attached hereto is a list of the cases by dates of onset, age, short history, and
location. The first case reported had its date of onset on the 9th of June followed
at intervals by the other cases. The individual who expired became ill on June
13, had little or no treatment, and was dead on admission to the hospital June 17.
Eighteen of the cases were found in one camp and two in another camp. Frank
disease was found only in the migratory workers, but upon investigating in the
surrounding villages it was learned that diarrhea had been widespread and the
majority of the natives had a mild attack this season.
In the migratory camp, where most of the clinical cases had occurred, sanita-
tion is poor. The migrant workers and families live in shacks or tents with no
screening and no isolation. Toilet facilities are provided for by two privies, but
these are in such bad condition that they are almost useless. In fact, fields are
used as often as the privies for sewage disposal.
The well is a 17-foot dug type with a board covering. The cover obviously is
not waterproof, and surplus water drains directly back into the well. Upon
questioning, it was learned that the entire colony bathes, washes dishes, clothes,
and diapers at the well allowing all the drainage to go back into the well water.
A common drinking tin cup is hung in a convenient place.
The logical hypothesis in this epidemic is that the infection was originally
brought into this camp and county by one or more carriers of the Flexner type
of dysentery organism and spread to the migrant workers through the media of
water, feces, flies, and personal unhygienic habits. The flies may have brought
the infective organism from the privies to the food where one or more individuals
were infected. In those cases where the mother was infected she transferred the
infection to the family with her hands in preparing the food. The diapers were
washed at the well and consequently into the well incriminating this source. With
so many channels of spread it is impossible to determine which was responsible
for the greatest transmission, but it is entirely probable that all factors entered
into it.
Proper sanitation is needed to break the chain of infection between feces and
mouth. The farmer who owns the camp promised to repair the privies, make a
concrete top for the well, and provide screens for houses "if possible." However,
his is but one of many such migratory labor camps and for him to clean up means
relief from dysentery only on his farm but not on the others. The solution is a
i migratory labor camp built on sound principles of sanitation and housing.
60396— 41— pt. 19 3
7794 DETROIT HEARINGS
Clinical cases of dysentery discovered in Van Bur en County, June 19J+1
Name
Laverne Wallace
Owen Walford
Roy Williams
Ella Lansforri
Clayton Walford
Raymond Walford '.
Harold Qobell '
Alice Gobell '
Mrs. Bessie Walford_
Joan Walford
Linda Wallace
J. W. Walford
Bertha Walford
Norma Nichols
Flossie Johnson
Jenny Walford
Georeia Wallace
Bill Hart
Note. — The above cases
are all on the Otis Klett farm
(Keeler Township).
Marcella Easton...
Mrs. Vedis Easton.
Note— The above cases
are on the Kenneth Robert-
son farm, Hartford Town-
ship, section 35. Dr. F. N.
Williams of Hartford is the
physician.
Age
32 years .
2 years..
50 years .
34 years -
1 year...
2 years .
do
32 years. --
3 years
15 months.
10 years. --
12 years...
15 years...
17 years. ..
7 weeks
lfi years. ..
27 years. ..
15 months-
Onset
June 9, 1941
do
June 11,1941
do
do
June 13,1941
do
do
June 16,1941
do
June 18, 1941
June 19,1941
June 23,1941
do
do
__..do
do
June 25,1941
June 18,1941
June 16,1941
Symptoms
Diarrhea, 4 or 5 days.
Diarrhea, fever 3 or 4 days.
2- or 3-day diarrhea.
Diarrhea.
Cramps, diarrhea (in bed).
Diarrhea (hospitalized, June 17,
1941).
Diarrhea (hospitalized, June 17;
died June 17).
Diarrhea (hospitalized, June 17).
Sick, nausea, old pain.
Vomiting, diarrhea.
Diarrhea (nursing).
Diarrhea, vomiting, fever.
Diarrhea 3 days.
Diarrhea.
1 Dr. Hall, of Hartford, is the physician on these 3 cases.
Report of Texas Program for Examination of Migratory Sugar Beet
Workers
By Dr. T. M. Koppa, Epidemiologist, Michigan Department of Health
After preliminary arrangements with the State and city authorities of Texas,
the examination program was begun on April 6, 1941, on somewhat the same lines
and arrangements as in the 2 previous years. The examination center was set
up in a large room adjacent to the employment offices of the sugar-beet companies.
This room was partitioned to provide for a dark room for the use of the fluoroscope,
with a dressing room on either side. Groups of males and females were admitted
alternately for examination and after the name, age, sex, and address were typed
on an identification card and master roster, each person was assigned a number
and thumb printed. They were then sent to the dressing room where they
removed their clothing to the waist and passed into the fluoroscopy room where
an examination of the chest was made. After completion of the fluoroscopic
examination they proceeded to the next room where they dressed, and where, if
suspicion was aroused for some reason or other, they were inspected for venereal
disease.
If the candidate passed the examination, he was given his indentification card
which was, in effect, a pass into the employment office because no individual
could be employed unless he had passed the examination. After being employed,
he journeyed to Michigan by train or private car carrying the identification card
with him. If pulmonary tuberculosis was found, the applicant was rejected and the
identification card was not given to him. The results of the examination were
recorded on the back of the identification card.
Table 1 shows that in 1939 there were 4,271 individuals examined, 81 of whom
were found to have pulmonary tuberculosis. It will be noted that 40.75 percent
of the cases found had minimal lesions, 40.75 percent were moderately advanced,
and 18.5 percent far advanced. The incidence in the number examined was 1.89
percent or a rate of 1,890 per 100,000.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7795
Table 1. — Number of cases of tuberculosis diagnosed by fluoroscopy in 1939
Stage of disease
Number
examined
Number
cases
Percent of
total
Percent of
cases
Minimal
33
33
15
0.77
.77
.35
40.75
Moderately advanced
40.75
Far advanced
18.50
Total - -
4,271
81
1.89
100. 00
Table 2. — Number of cases of tuberculosis diagnosed by fluoroscopy in 1940
Stage of disease
Number
examined
Number
cases
Percent of
total
Percent of
cases
Minimal
67
43
11
1.16
.75
.19
55.4
Moderately advanced
35.5
Far advanced
9.1
Total
5,753
121
2.10
100. 0j
In 1940, as shown in table 2, a total of 5,753 individuals were examined by
fluoroscopy, 121 of whom were diagnosed as having pulmonary tuberculosis, or 2.1
percent of those examined.
In 1941, as shown by table 3, a total of 7,597 individuals were examined, 197 of
whom were found to have pulmonary tuberculosis and 4 other 'major pulmonary
pathology. In the group rejected for entry into Michigan, 2.6 percent had pul-
monary tuberculosis and breaking this down further it was found that 42.6
percent were minimal, 49.75 percent were moderately advanced, and 7.6 percent
far advanced.
Table 3. — Number of cases of tuberculosis diagnosed by fluoroscopy in 1941
Stage of disease
Number
examined
Number
cases
Percent of
total
Percent of
cases
Minimal. .
84
98
15
1.10
1.29
.20
42 64
Moderately advanced
49 75
Far advanced _
7 61
Total
7,597
197
2.59
100. 00
Sex and age classification can be seen in table 4. Men were more frequently
attacked and both groups had the highest incidence between 15 and 50 years of
age.
Table 4. — Cases rejected by sex, age groups, and classification of disease
Males
Females
Age group
Total
Mini-
mal
Moder-
ately
ad-
vanced
Far ad-
vanced
Other
Total
Mini-
mal
Moder-
ately
ad-
vanced
Far ad-
vanced
Grand
total
14
2
30
15
12
21
24
12
4
1
15
5
6
7
8
2
1
1
14
8
6
12
12
7
2
0
1
2
0
1
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
2
15
19
10
14
14
5
2
2
10
8
6
5
4
3
1
0
4
10
3
7
10
2
0
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
1
4
45
34
22
35
38
17
6
15 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40 to 49
50 to 59
60 to 69
Total
120
45
62
9
4
81
39
36
6
201
7796 DETROIT HEARINGS
The incidence of tuberculosis has increased through the 3 years. This may
be explained in part on the basis of the group being drawn from widespread parts
of the State where tuberculosis may be more prevalent. A certain portion of the
group have been screened every year and return to Michigan every year but be-
cause of the greater demand for labor, particularly in 1941, there was a large
additional number of candidates who had not previously been fluoroscoped.
Inasmuch as no statistics were gathered in regard to tuberculosis in the popula-
tion other than those applying for sugar-beet employment, no other explanation
for the rate rise through the 3 years is offered.
The rates of tuberculosis among the persons examined are probably 10 times
the rates which would be developed by a similar examination among the native
population of Michigan. Michigan has one of the most effective tuberculosis-
control programs among the States, and it is greatly to our interest that persons
with known infection be refused work here.
By substituting thumbprinting for photographs of the candidate, the entire
process was speeded up considerably. In 1939 and 1940, it was possible to examine
a maximum of 350 in an 8-hour day while in 1941, 600 examinations could be
performed in the same length of time.
As you know, the whole Texas program of the sugar-beet workers is voluntary,
but it is believed that 75 to 80 percent of the Mexican migratory workers who
come to Michigan go through the examination in San Antonio first. Except for
the salary of the staffman in charge of the examinations, costs were borne entirely
by the Beet Growers Employment Committee, Inc.
A complete list of those individual examined and thumbprints of those indi-
viduals is on file in the offices of the Beet Growers Employment Committee, Inc.
Exhibit 49. — Illegal Transportation of Sugar-Beet Workers
From Texas to Michigan and Ohio Fields
REPORT BY JOSEPH B. EASTMAN, CHAIRMAN, INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION,
WASHINGTON, D. C.
(On September 15, 1941, the United States District Court, Northern District of
Ohio, adjudged one Julio dela Pena guilty of transporting passengers in interstate
commerce without a certificate. Also on that date and in the same court the
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., was adjudged guilty in the
same prosecution. Dela Pena was fined $1,000 and the Great Lakes Growers'
Employment Committee, Inc., was fined $2,000.
(The information on which these convictions were obtained was prepared by
attorneys of the Bureau of Motor Carriers of the Interstate Commerce Commis-
sion. Principal facts established by the information were that since the spring
of 1934 the defendant, dela Pena, had been transporting laborers each season from
the vicinity of Realitos, Tex., to Findlay, Ohio, and return, in three trucks, for
which he received a stipulated amount, generally $9 per person for adults and
$4.50 for children between the ages of 8 and 14. The Great Lakes Growers'
Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation controlled by the Great Lakes
Sugar Co., was charged with knowingly and willfully aiding and abetting dela
Pena in the violations.
(Preliminary investigation of the practice of transporting workers from Texas
to the northern beet fields was undertaken by the Interstate Commerce Commis-
sion following complaint by H. W. Acreman, executive secretary of the Texas
State Federation of Labor, Austin, Tex. In a letter to the Commission's Wash-
ington office, dated April 25, 1940, Mr. Acreman stated that annually there had
been a migration of thousands of Mexican laborers from Texas to the northern
beet fields, and that numerous truckers were engaged in transporting them for
compensation without authority from the Commission, and without compliance
with Commission regulations.
(At the Chicago hearings of the Committee to Investigate the Interstate Migra-
tion of Destitute Citizens (former title of this committee) appeared on August
21, 1940, one Vincent Neira, 26 years old, of San Antonio, Texas., as a witness.
Neira and the six others of his family had made a trip, according to his testimony,
from Michigan back to Texas in a 2-ton truck, in which other families, totaling
between 25 and 30 persons, also were transported. "They [the companyl told
me there was a truck taking some families back, that they didn't have enough to
pay the grocery bills and things like that," Neira testified. He described the
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7797
vehicle as a stake-bodied truck with a tarpaulin cover on it, presumably to keep
the rain off, but added, "when we crossed towns or toll bridges or something like
that, the tarpaulin was covered up, most of the time. We never got it off." He
further revealed in his testimony that "These truckers, they make money trucking
workers out here." '
(The complaint from the Texas State Federation of Labor was followed by an
investigation by the Interstate Commerce Commission of the migration taking
place during the 1940 season. The Texas State Employment Service, State high-
way patrol, State department of labor, licensed emigrant agents, and individual
workers were contacted. From this inquiry it was learned that between 7,000
and 8,000 workers had been recruited and had migrated to the northern fields in
that season, and the proportion of these who had been transported in trucks was
"conservatively estimated" at between 15 and 25 percent, or, numerically, be-
tween 1,050 and 2,000 persons. It was further stated that the workers^ were
transported "under very inhumane, unsanitary, and dangerous conditions." 2
(As a result of this investigation, the following recommendations were made by
A. H. Ribbink, the Interstate Commerce Commission's district supervisor at Fort
Worth, in his report, dated February 5, 1941:
("(1) That truckers, growers' associations, labor agents, and sugar companies
be put on written notice, before the 1941 season begins, concerning what con-
stitutes illegal transportation and what constitutes aiding and abetting.
("(2) That efforts be continued to secure further names and addresses of illegal
truck operators and that they be put on written notice.
("(3) That the offer of the Texas State highway patrol be accepted, i. e., by
furnishing them with a questionnaire form; that they will intercept trucks loaded
with Mexicans during the coming season and furnish such information to this
Commission.
("(4) That if violations continue, the case be assigned for final investigation
and legal proceedings be taken to secure evidence from the records of the sugar
companies and beet growers' associations." 3
(The report commented that —
("It seems very likely that the sugar companies and growers' associations
could be held to be aiders and abetters in violating the act because of the arrange-
ments as described heretofore. * * *
("Apparently our investigation of the case, both in Texas and in the beet-field
areas, is having a very salutary effect. One Mexican trucker, who is also a
labor agent, used three trucks and made two round trips, at the beginning of the
1940 season, in transporting laborers from Texas to the beet fields of Ohio. * •> *
("It is believed that if all the above were put on written notice, concerning
the act and its rules and regulations, a further salutary effect would be received.
If, in spite of such warning, violations continue to take place, a final and exhaustive
investigation should be made with a view of prosecution of not only the truckers
but the sugar companies and growers' associations as aiders and abetters." 4
(All available documentary material on the Interstate Commerce Commission's
investigation of the charge of illegal transportation during the 1940 season was
requested by the committee, and was published as a separate section of the com-
mittee's Washington hearings, part 11, March 24, 25, and 26, under the title
"Exhibit 40— Interstate Transportation of Mexican Laborers" (pp. 4771-4822.)
(Following the report of the first investigation, further inquiry was undertaken
by the Interstate Commerce Commission, which resulted in the information and
legal proceedings described on the pages following. — Ed.)
Interstate Commerce Commission,
Washington, September 30, 1941.
Hon. John H. Tolan,
Chairman, Select Committee to Investigate the
Interstate Migration of Destitute Citizens,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Tolan: With further reference to your letter of September 17,
requesting that your committee be furnished with all of the evidence collected by
this Commission in connection with the investigation and prosecution of Julio
• Chicago hearings, pp. 1310-1313. See also in the same volume, testimony of M. C. Henderson, repre-
senting the Beet Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., of Saginaw, Mich., pp. 1271-1298, and of A.
Kramer, of the committee staff, pp. 1298-1304, and photos of truck and migrants, facing p. 1306.
2 See Washington hearings, pt. 11, March 24, 25, and 26, Exhibit 40— Interstate Transportation of Mexi-
can Laborers, pp. 4771-4822.
s Ibid., p. 4775.
< Ibid., pp. 4774-4775.
7798 DETROIT HEARINGS
dela Pena, of Realitos, Tex., and my reply of September 23, in which I informed
you that the records in this case would be made available as soon as they were
received from the field, I take pleasure in sending you herewith the following
documents in connection with this case:
Copy of investigation report.
Exhibits to investigation report consisting of documentary evidence of viola-
tions alleged by Government.
Copy of criminal information filed against Julio dela Pena charging him with
violations of the Interstate Commerce Act, and charging the Great Lakes Sugar
Co. and the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., with aiding and
abetting Julio dela Pena in said violations.
Copy of judgment of the District Court for the Northern District of Ohio,
Western Division, imposing a fine of $1,000 and costs against Julio dela Pena
and a fine of $2,000 and costs against Great Lakes Growers' Employment Com-
mittee, Inc.
Copy of press notice of this Commission concerning disposition of the case.
The counts as to the Great Lakes Sugar Co. in this case were nolle prossed
upon the plea of nolo contendere by and imposition of the fine against the employ-
ment committee which, served as an intermediary between the sugar company
and Julio dela Pena.
In explanation of the omission of exhibits B, C, and D, as designated in the
investigation report in this case, I might say that these exhibits consist of form
reports from appropriate sections of this Commission stating that the respondent
carrier had not been issued a certificate to transport passengers; did not have a
tariff of fares and charges on file; and did not have on file evidence of security
for the protection of the public. These exhibits are not enclosed because it was
felt they would be of no particular value to your consideration of the facts in
this case.1
It is a pleasure to be able to cooperate with your committee by furnishing the
enclosed information.
Very sincerely yours,
Joseph B. Eastman, Chairman.
Correspondence With,Officers~of Sugar Companies on Transportation of
Workers
Interstate Commerce Commission,
Bureau of Motor Vehicles,
Detroit, Mich., June 27, 19S8.
Mr. Alexander V. Burns,
Director Great Lakes Sugar Co.,
Detroit, Mich.
Dear Mr. Burns: The purpose of this letter is to acquaint you, as an officer
of the above-named company, with the Federal Motor Carrier Act, particularly
section 206 (a) and section 222 (c). Briefly, the first section requires that any
motor carrier transporting persons for hire from one State to another have a
certificate or permit issued by this Commission, and obey certain regulations.
The second section provides fines ranging from $500 to $2,000, each offense, for
those who willfully seek to evade or defeat regulation provided in this act.
Our attention has been brought to the activities of certain sugar companies and
growers (particularly the Beet Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.) in arrang-
ing transportation of laborers from Texas to Michigan. Letters and telegrams of
this committee have been shown us, indicating that persons connected with
employers will advance transportation funds, and will honor assignments of
wages to nonpermitted passenger-carrying truckmen who transport these laborers.
Such arrangements appear as a device to evade or defeat regulation.
We must request that you avoid any further activity of this nature. You are
asked to issue instructions to your field and employment managers, that any aid
and assistance given nonpermitted passenger motor carriers is illegal, and is given
i Certain exhibits submitted with this report are not reproduced on the pages following, but are held in
committee files. They are in the form of photostat copies of checks made out to Julio dela Pena and others.
Of 20 checks made pavable to dela Pena, in amounts ranging up to $1,400, 7 are on the National Bank oi
Detroit and are signed by D. W. Esckelsen for the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.;
the remaining 13 are on the First National Bank of Findlay, Ohio, and are drawn on the Great Lakes bugar
Co. "Emergency Fund" and bear the signatures of Esckelsen and J. F. Nietzke. One of these checks is
reproduced on pp. 7844 and 7845. Exhibit numbers given in the statement of the case, and referring to
the material as presented to the court, have been eliminated.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7799
at peril of violating the above-named sections of law. In brief, your help in
ending any violation of this act is requested.
A written reply is requested stating your company's position in the matter.
If personal discussion of the matter appears desirable, I shall be glad to confer
with you, and ask that you write or telephone for an appointment.
Very truly yours,
E. M. Hymans,
District Supervisor.
[Copies of the above letter were addressed on the same date to Rudolph Beyer,
director, Great Lakes Sugar Co., Saginaw, Mich.; L. B. Beckwith, director, Great
Lakes Sugar Co., Detroit, Mich.; and James E. Larrowe, president, Lake Shore
Sugar Co., Detroit, Mich. The replies received were as follows:]
Bell & Beckwith,
Toledo, Ohio, July 11, 1938.
E. M. Hymans,
District Supervisor, Interstate Commerce Commission,
Bureau of Motor Carriers, Detroit, Mich.
Dear Sir: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter under date of June 27
addressed to Mr. L. B. Beckwith as a director of the Great Lakes Sugar Co.
In his absence, I should like to advise that Mr. Beckwith is not at all acquainted
with the subject matter under discussion in your communication. I am, therefore,
referring this to the executive offices of the company in Detroit.
Trusting this is in accordance with your wishes, I am,
Very truly yours,
G. L. Mouen.
Lake Shore Sugar Co.,
Detroit, Mich., July 14, 19S8.
Interstate Commerce Commission,
Detroit, Mich.
Gentlemen: I acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 27th concerning the
transportation of labor and I have taken this up with our operating department.
Thanking you, I beg to remain
Yours truly, _
Lake Shore Sugar Co.
R. Beebe.
Great Lakes Sugar Co.,
Detroit, Mich., August 4, 1938.
Mr. E. M. Hymans,
District Supervisor, Interstate Commerce Commission,
Detroit, Mich.
Dear Mr. Hymans: This letter is in response to your letter of June 27 ad-
dressed to me and others connected with Great Lakes Sugar Co. and Lake Shore
Sugar Co. ,
You may be assured that it is the policy of this company scrupulously to ob-
serve every law and regulation in any way touching the conduct of its business.
We are therefore obliged to you for calling our attention to sections 206-a and
226-c of the Federal Motor Carrier Act. Though we have not in any way
violated these acts, we are nonetheless indebted to you forcalling them to our
attention. . .
It may give you a better understanding of the situation if I give you the tact
that expert and experienced labor is required in the cultivation and harvesting
of sugar beets. It is not possible to do this work with the surplus common labor
available in the district or in the large cities. I should like you to note particularly
that the entry into the district from distant points of experienced labor in no way
operates to supplant local labor. If it were possible to give work to unemployed
persons residing anywhere within the district and to avoid the entry of persons
from distant points, we would gladly do our part to relieve local unemployment
conditions.
7800 DETROIT HEARINGS
It is a fact that a great many persons who have worked in the beet fields and
become experienced naturally and without solicitation come back to the district
to take up this work.
There was a time many, many years ago, in the early days of the beet-sugar
industry, when beet-sugar companies brought in field labor, mostly Belgian,
Bohemian, and Hungarian, which had been trained in the work, but nothing of
that sort has been done for many years. Our company has nothing to do with
the field labor. It is employed by the individual farmers at a rate per acre agreed
upon from year to year through the growers' associations or groups of growers
where no association exists.
The beet growers through their associations or otherwise set up employment
committees to allot labor to growers and to do cooperatively in connection with
field labor things that would be troublesome and burdensome for individual
farmers to do.
You can see that the growers have a direct and vital interest in obtaining effi-
cient and satisfactory labor, as the success of their crop depends to a very large
extent upon the quality and timeliness of the field work. Growers naturally like
to get on their farms men they have known before, as ~ien who have given satis-
faction to other growers, and I might say, men who will live and conduct them-
selves respectably on the farms in the communities.
I am very sure you will find, if you care to investigate, that the beet growers
employment committees do no more in the way of assisting field workers to get
into the district, or after they get in the district, than is reasonable and, one might
say, human. You can see that a farmer would not want to advance money to
an unknown and to a totally irresponsible person.
So far as this company is concerned advances made by us to farmers cover a
great variety of purposes. We provide seed, which is charged to the farmer,
advance money for fertilizers, and for almost any reasonable purpose.
Under present-day contracts between this company and its growers the opera-
tion of our plants is on a cooperative basis. The farmer shares on an approxi-
mately 50-50 basis in the net returns from sugar, pulp, and molasses. Inasmuch
as no sugar is produced until later in the fall and is not completely marketed
until sometime late in the following spring, many farmers have need for advances
for all sorts of purposes, including taxes. Every advance we make to a farmer
is charged to his account on our books and deducted from our settlements with
him, which are made when and as sugar is sold.
We do not know whether some of the motortrucks that bring labor into our
districts are required to have a permit. We do not know whether they are within
the purview of the Federal Motor Carrier Act, but taking the law to be as stated
in your letter, we feel we are not violating it in any way, but if you take any other
view or have any question about it, we shall be glad to have you inform us. As
stated above, it is our policy to observe every law and regulation in the conduct
of our business. Should you wish to discuss the matter further with us, we shall
be glad to see you at any time.
Yours very truly,
Great Lakes Sugar Co.,
Lake Shore Sugar Co.,
James E. Larrowe, President.
Bylaws of Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.
aktici/e i. membership
Section 1. Membership in this Corporation shall be limited to officer repre-
sentatives of incorporated associations of beet growers and individual beet growers
furnishing sugar beets to the several plants of the Great Lakes Sugar Company
and Lake Shore Sugar Company, exclusively. All such associations of beet
growers shall be represented in tlie membership of this Corporation on an equal
basis.
Sec. 2. All nominations of members shall be approved by a majority of the
entire membership of the Board of Directors. If any nominations is not so ap-
proved, the person or corporation making the nomination shall make a new
nomination which shall be similarly subject to the approval of a majority of the
whole Board of Directors. Such approval by members of the Board of Directors
may be evidenced by vote at a formal meeting of the Board, or by the individual
approval of any Director in writing signed by him, filed with the Secretary and
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7801
confirmed by a vote of a majority of the members present at any meeting of the
Board thereafter held. Upon approval of nominations, as aforesaid, and the
payment of dues hereinafter provided, such persons shall be admitted as members
in full standing of this Corporation.
Sec. 3. Members shall pay as membership dues, on or before the 1st day of
January of each year, the sum of One Dollar ($1.00V Nothing in these By-Laws
shall be construed to mean that members or the incorporated associations that
they represent may not voluntarily make such financial contributions to this Cor-
poration as they may deem proper and advisable for specific purposes. No
member or incorporated association of growers represented by any member shall
be liable (except with his or its specific consent) to any further or additional liability
by way of assessment or otherwise, in excess of the membership dues herein
provided.
ARTICLE II. DIRECTORS
Section 1. The property and business of the Corporation shall be held and
managed by a Board of not less than four (4) nor more than ten (10) Directors.
Every Director shall be a member of the Corporation.
Sec. 2. Directors shall be elected by vote of members at any annual meeting
and every Director shall serve until the next annual meeting and until his successor
shall have been elected and qualified.
Sec. 3. U/pon any Director ceasing to be a member of the Corporation, his
office as a Director shall automatically become vacant. Any vacancy on the
Board due to death, resignation or disqualification may be filled by a majority
vote of the remaining members of the Board, although less than a quorum.
Sec. 4. The Board of Directors may appoint, by resolution adopted by a major-
ity of the whole Board, an Executive Committee of four (4) members of the
Board. During the intervals between the meetings of the Board of Directors,
the Executive Committee shall possess and may execute all of the powers of the
Board of Directors in the management and direction of the business of the Cor-
poration in all cases where specific directions shall not have been given by the
Board of Directors.
Sec. 5. Directors shall receive as compensation Five Dollars ($5.00) per day
and travelling expenses for attendance at all meetings of the Board.
ARTICLE III. OFFICERS
Section 1. The officers of the Corporation shall be a President, a Vice Presi-
dent, and Executive Secretary, an Assistant Executive Secretary, one or more
Assistant Secretaries, a Treasurer and one or more Assistant Treasurers, who
shall be elected by the Board of Directors. Any two of said offices may be held
by the same person, except as otherwise provided by law.
Sec. 2. The President shall act as Chairman of the Board of Directors and shall
preside at all meetings of the members and Directors.
Sec. 3. The President, Vice President, Executive Secretary, and Treasurer
shall perform the duties usually incident to their respective offices. The Assistant
Executive Secretary shall possess all the powers and perform all the duties of the
Executive Secretary in the absence or disability of the latter, and he shall at all
times act as an assistant to the Executive Secretary and have such powers and
perform such duties of the Executive Secretary as shall be assigned to him by the
members, Board of Directors or the Executive Secretary. The Assistant Secre-
taries and Assistant Treasurers shall possess such powers and perform such
duties as may be from time to time assigned to them by the Board of Directors.
Because of the absence, incapacity or disqualification of any officer, or for any
other similar reason, the Board of Directors may delegate his powers and duties
to any Director for the time being, provided a majority of the entire Board concur
therein.
Sec. 4. All checks, notes, drafts or other demands for money, deposits in and
withdrawals from bank accounts of this Corporation shall be made and executed
by the Executive Secretary and the Treasurer.
article iv. meetings
Section 1. The annual meeting of the members of the Corporation for the
election of Directors and the transaction of such other business as may properly
come before the meeting shall be held on the second Monday in March in each year.
Such meetings may be held at any office of the Corporation in Michigan, or such
other place in Michigan as may be designated in the call. Written notice thereof
7802 DETROIT HEARINGS
shall be mailed to each member at least ten (10) days prior to the date thereof
unless such notice is waived by all members not present at the meeting. In case
of failure to give such notice prior to said date, it may be given thereafter and the
meeting adjourned to the date so fixed.
Sec. 2. The Board of Directors shall meet annually for the election of officers
and the transaction of such other business as may properly come before the
meeting, immediately after the adjournment of the annual meeting of Members.
Other regular meetings of the Board may be held without notice at such times and
places as shall from time to time be determined by the Board. A majority of the
Board shall constitute a quorum.
Sec. 3. Special meetings of the members and/or the Board of Directors may be
called by the President or by the Executive Secretary of the Corporation, and
shall be called by the President or Executive Secretary on the written request of
two (2) members or of two (2) Directors. At least three (3) days' notice shall be
given of any special meeting unless such notice is waived by all members or Direc-
tors not present at such meeting. Such notice may be given orally, by telephone
or in writing. It shall not be necessary to describe the purpose of any special
meeting in the notice thereof, and if described, the business of the meeting need
not be confined to the purpose or purposes described in the notice.
ARTICLE V. VOTING
Section 1. All members, whether original incorporators or otherwise, shall have
voting rights and every member shall be entitled to at least one (1) vote.
Sec. 2. Members may vote either in person or by proxy. A majority of the
members of the Corporation present in person or represented by proxy shall be
requisite and shall constitute a quorum at all meetings of the members for the
transaction of business, except as otherwise provided. If such majority shall not
be present or represented at any meeting of the members, the members present in
person or by proxy shall have power to adjourn the meeting from time to time
without notice other than announcement at the meeting, until the requisite num-
ber of members shall be represented. At such adjourned meeting at which the
requisite number of members shall be represented, any business may be transacted
which might have been transacted at the original meeting.
ARTICLE VI. CERTIFICATES OF MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Certificates of membership in the Corporation shall be numbered
and shall be entered in the books of the Corporation as they are issued. They
shall recite on their face that they are nontransferable, that the association is a
nonprofit corporation, and that no dividends shall be payable to the holders of
said certificates.
ARTICLE VII. RULES AND REGULATIONS
The Corporation through its officers and/or Board of Directors may promulgate
such rules and regulations governing the membership and designed to promote
the objects of the Corporation as it may from time to time deem advisable.
ARTICLE VIII. OFFICES AND SEAL
Section 1. The principal office of the Corporation shall be in Detroit, Michigan.
The Corporation may also maintain an office or offices elsewhere in the State of
Michigan.
Sec. 2. The Board of Directors shall provide a suitable seal containing the
name of the Corporation. The seal shall be in charge of the Executive Secretary.
If deemed advisable by the Board of Directors, duplicate seals may be provided
and kept for the necessary purposes of the Corporation.
ARTICLE IX. AMENDMENTS
These By-Laws may be altered, amended or repealed by either the members
or the Board of Directors at any regular or special meeting, unless otherwise
provided by law.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7803
Articles of Incorporation of Great Lakes Growers' Employment
Committee
United States of America,
The State of Michigan,
Michigan Corporation and Securities Commission.
To" All To Whom These Presents Shall Come:
I, Carl A. Olson, Commissioner of the Michigan Corporation and Securities
Commission, Do Hereby Certify That Articles of Incorporation of Great Lakes
Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., were duly filed in this office on the
22nd day of April, A. D., Nineteen Hundred and Thirty-eight and the said
Company is authorized to commence its business in conformity with Act 327,
Public Acts of 1931.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the
Commission, in the City of Lansing, this 22nd day of April, A. D. 1938.
[seal] Carl A. Olson,
Commissioner.
(Nonprofit)
Articles of Incorporation of Great Lakes Growers' Employment
Committee, Inc.
These Articles of Incorporation are signed and acknowledged by the incorpora-
tors for the purpose of forming a nonprofit corporation under the provisions of
Act No. 327 of the Public Acts of 1931, known as the Michigan General Corpora-
tion Act, as follows:
article i
The name of this corporation is Great Lakes Growers' Employment Com-
mittee, Inc.
article II
The purpose or purposes of this corporation are as follows:
The rendering of service and assistance to sugar beet growers represented in this
organization in connection with the obtaining and employment by them of field
labor and, in general, to do any and all things necessary, advisable, or expedient to
assist beet growers in the employment of beet field workers.
article III
The location of the corporation is Detroit, in the County of Wayne, State of
Michigan. Post Office address of registered office in Michigan is 1936 West
Lafayette, Detroit, Michigan.
ARTICLE IV
Said corporation is organized upon a Nonstock basis.
The amount of assets which said corporation possesses is:
Real Property: None.
Personal Property: One Hundred Dollars ($100.00).
Said corporation is to be financed under the following general plan: By the
payment of annual dues to the Corporation by its several members, as more par-
ticularly provided in its By-Laws.
ARTICLE V
The names and places of residence, or business, of each of the incorporators and
(if a corporation organized upon a stock-share basis) the number of shares of
common stock subscribed by each are as follows:
Name Residence or business address
Frank Oberst St. Louis, Mich.
George W. Bloom Fremont, Ohio.
Arthur J. Ingold Blissfield, Ohio.
C. J. Windau Findlay, Ohio.
7804 DETROIT HEARINGS
ARTICLE VI
The names and addresses of the first board of directors are as follows :
Name Address
Fred Rodesiler Blissfield, Ohio.
A. J. Ingold Blissfield, Ohio.
Frank Oberst St. Louis, Mich.
Ralph Densmore St. Louis, Mich.
George W. Bloom Fremont, Ohio.
Webb B. Smith Fremont, Ohio.
C. J. Windau Findlay, Ohio.
Paul Rockwell Findlay, Ohio.
Fred Kieft Grand Haven, Mich.
Abe DeKlein Hudsonville, Mich.
Art. VII. — The term of this corporation is fixed at Thirty (30) years.
ARTICLE VIII
Section 1. Membership in this Corporation shall be limited to officer repre-
sentatives of incorporated associations of beet growers and individual beet growers
furnishing sugar beets to the several plants of the Great Lakes Sugar Company
and the Lake Shore Sugar Company exclusively.
Sec. 2. Rules for the admission, retention, and dismissal of members may be
prescribed by the By-Laws.
Sec. 3. All members, whether original incorporators or otherwise, shall have
voting rights and every member shall be entitled to at least one (1) vote.
Sec. 4. Upon a dissolution or liquidation of this Corporation, members then in
good standing shall share in the assets of the Corporation in proportion to their
respective contributions to the funds invested in such assets.
Sec. 5. Membership in this Corporation shall not be transferable by assignment
or sale, nor be transferable to legal heirs or devisees upon the deaths of the respec-
tive members.
In witness whereof the incorporators have signed these Articles of Incorpo-
ration this 18th day of April A. D. 1938.
(Sgd.) Frank Oberst,'
President of St. Louis Beet Growers Association, Breckenridge, Mich.
(Sgd.) Geo. W. Bloom,
Pres., Fremont Beet Growers Ass'n, Fremont, Ohio.
(Sgd.) Arthur J. Incold,
Sec, Blissfield Beet Growers Ass'n.
(Sgd.) C. J. Windau,
Pres., Findlay Beet Growers Ass'n, Pandora, O.
State of Michican,
County of Wayne, ss:
On this 18th day of April, A. D. 1938, before me a Notary Public in and for said
County, personally appeared Frank Oberst, Arthur J. Ingold, Geo. W. Bloom, and
C. J. Windau, to me known to be the persons named in and who executed the fore-
going instrument, and severally acknowledged that they executed the same freely
and for the intents and purposes therein mentioned.
(Sgd.) John H. Jameson,
Notary Public.
My commission expires March 8, 1942.
Summary of Investigation
interstate commerce commission, bureau of motor carriers, district no. 4
December 12.J1940.
(L. & E.fNo. 20291-4)
To: R. M. Snetzer, District Director.
From: M. M. Emerv, District Supervisor.
Re Julio dela Pena, 421 Lynn St., Findlay, Ohio, and Realitos, Texas.
nature of alleged violation
1. Operating as a contract carrier of passengers without authority in violation of
Section 209 (a).
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7805
2. Operating without evidence of security for the protection of the public in
violation of Section 215.
3. Operating without a schedule of minimum rates on file in violation of Sec-
tion 218.
COMPLAINT
This complaint was originally brought to the attention of this office on August 2,
1940, by B. Silas of Hoytville, Ohio, and Chilton, Texas, who alleged that the
respondent transported him and his family and other laborers of Mexican descent
from Texas to Findlay, Ohio, in the spring of 1940 without authority.
SUMMARY
Investigation disclosed that the respondent transported in Ford and Chevrolet
straight trucks approximately 200 laborers of Mexican descent from the vicinity
of Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, Ohio, during April and May of 1940, for which a
charge of approximately $9.00 per person was collected. Such transportation
was performed for the purpose of permitting such laborers to work in the beet
fields of Northwestern Ohio for the Great Lakes Growers Employment Com-
mittee, Inc., a corporation controlled by the Great Lakes Sugar Company. Such
operation was conducted without authority from this Commission and without
a certificate of insurance or schedule of rates or tariff filed.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that this Supervisor be given authority to proceed and handle
the case with the view of submitting a 56 report recommending prosecution.
PACTS DISCLOSED BY INVESTIGATION
Investigation of the records of the Great Lakes Growers Employment Commit-
tee, Inc., hereinafter called the Committee, a separate corporation controlled and
operated entirely by officers and employees of the Great Lakes Sugar Company,
hereinafter called the Company, and interviews with the respondent and laborers
whom he transported from the vicinity of Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, Ohio, dis-
closes that during April and May 1940 respondent transported approximately
200 laborers of Mexican descent from Realitos, Texas, and vicinity to Findla>,
Ohio, for which he collected approximately $9.00 per person transported. The
respondent, during the winter, operates an employment agency in Realitos,
Texas, for the purpose of recruiting laborers to work in the beet fields of North-
western Ohio for the Committee. In the spring he transports a great number of
such laborers in his trucks, which are ordinary Ford and Chevrolet straight
trucks covered with a tarpaulin and equipped with benches. After arrival and
delivery of the laborers in Findlay, Ohio, respondent acts as an interpreter for
the Committee and also uses his trucks for the transportation of laborers to,
from, and between the beet fields and also for the transportation, in the fall, of
the beets from the fields to the refinery.
On completion of all work, he returns all laborers back to Realitos, Texas,
except those who have purchased second-hand automobiles during the summer.
No records are kept by the respondent and no receipts issued for transporta-
tion charges paid and therefore neither the respondent nor the laborers trans-
ported have any records which can be used in the case. A check of the "Accounts
Payable" record of the Committee shows, in each case where the laborers were
transported by the respondent, a charge in various amounts, always in excess of
$9.00, and shown as "Advance by Julio dela Pena." This entry gives no further
explanation and is supported by a filed order signed by the worker authorizing
the Committee to pay the respondent the indicated amount. The respondent
and employees of the Committee were questioned and both stated that the
amount was made up of employment bureau fees in Texas, doctor's physical
examination, transportation by respondent to Findlay, Ohio, and, in a number
of cases, loans of money for living expenses, such as food and shelter until such a
time as the worker had accumulated a sufficient labor credit to his account to
allow the respondent to be paid by the Committee.
The records of the Committee and the Company are not specific enough to
prove and show that any part of the amounts advanced by the respondent and
charged against the workers to be actual transportation charges and therefore
prosecution of the respondent will have to be made entirely by testimony of
workers transported. This office has on record at the present time the names
7806 DETROIT HEARINGS
and addresses of approximately 200 workers which respondent claims he trans-
ported from Texas this spring and also has evidence in the way of affidavits from
six workers transported. These affidavits indicate definitely that such transpor-
tation was furnished by the respondent and was for hire.
As respondent owns three trucks which are operated during the sugar beet
season in transporting persons and commodities between beet fields and refineries
and other places in Northwestern Ohio for hire, it is felt that the respondent^cannot
claim exemption under Section 203 (b) (9) of the Act.
As indicated above, prosecution of this case will have to be handled entirely
by testimony of workers transported and as such workers and the respondent
reside in Texas during the winter, this case, if approved for prosecution, will
necessarily have to be handled in Texas. However, as most of the information
necessary for the preparation of a 56 report has been accumulated by this office,
it is recommended that such report be prepared by the undersigned.
M. M. Emery,
District Supervisor, Old Federal Bldg., Toledo, Ohio.
This report also covers L & E No. 19311-12 as referred to in memorandum by
Scott, Chief, Section of Law and Enforcement, addressed to District Director
Snetzer dated November 27, 1940, subject "Evidence concerning unlawful inter-
state transportation of Mexican laborers." l
Summary of Final Investigation Report Submitted on' March 25, 1941
interstate commerce commission, bureau of motor carriers
(L. & E. No. 20291-4)
Respondents. — Julio dela Pena, Realitos, Texas.
Great Lakes Sugar Company, 7310 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan,
and Findlay, Ohio.
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., 7310 Woodward
Avenue, Detroit, Michigan, and Findlay, Ohio.
By personal interview made at this office July 31, 1940, Baldomar Silas, then
residing at a camp house located on the farm of John Rehss, R. R. No. 1, Hoytville,
Ohio, but present location unknown, complained orally that the Great Lakes Sugar
Company, Findlay, Ohio, was arranging with Julio dela Pena for the transporta-
tion of field laborers from Texas to Northwestern Ohio points for the purpose of
working in the beet fields. Such transportation was performed in ordinary straight
trucks equipped with benches (not buses) and by a motor carrier not having
authority under Part II of the Interstate Commerce Act.
Complaint was made for the purpose of compelling Julio dela Pena to refund
transportation charges to a group of laborers he represented.
Julio dela Pena, an individual, is a common carrier of (a) passengers between
points in Texas, in the vicinity of Realitos, and Findlay, Ohio, and vicinity, (b)
passengers between points in Ohio within a radius of seventy-five miles of Findlay,
and (c) property consisting of sugar beets from the fields within a seventy -five
mile radius of Findlay to the refinery of the Great Lakes Sugar Company, Findlay,
Ohio. He operates three straight trucks and had a gross income of approximated'
$7,509.21 in 1940.
No authority is held under Part II of the Interstate Commerce Act either by
a "grandfather" application or a certificate to perform interstate operations.
No rates have been filed, and the insurance requirements have not been complied
with.
Interviews with the carrier and several passengers revealed that the 10-hour
driving rule was violated, drivers' logs were not maintained and the motor vehicles
were not equipped as required by the Safety Regulations.
Respondent, Great Lakes Sugar Company, is a Michigan Corporation engaged
principally in the refining of sugar beets into sugar. It is also engaged, to a lim-
ited extent, in the growing of sugar beets.
Refineries are located at Blissfield, Michigan, Findlay and Fremont, Ohio.
General Offices are located at 7310 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan. W. F.
Schmitt is General Manager and supervises the operations of the refineries and
1 8ee Exhibit 40 — Interstate Transportation of Mexican Workers, Washington hearings, pt. 11, March
-"4, 25, and 26, p. 4771 ff.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7807
the activities of the Field Managers located at each refinery in the procurement
of the required supply of sugar beets.
L. W. Esckilsen is Field Manager for Northwestern Ohio with headquarters in
Findlay. Under Schmitt's direction and supervision, he has charge of all arrange-
ments and details resulting in an adequate supply of sugar beets being] furnished
the Findlay refinery.
Respondent, Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc. is a non profit
Michigan Corporation, sole assets consisting of personal property in the amount
of $100.00, and is engaged in obtaining and furnishing field workers to grower
members of the Committee, all of whom are under contract to furnish sugar beets
to the Great Lakes Sugar Company. The Committee likewise furnishes living
quarters (movable camp houses) and bare living necessities to the field workers
during the growing and harvesting season.
W. F. Schmitt, General Manager, and L. W. Esckilsen, Northwestern Ohio
Field Manager of the Great Lakes Sugar Company, are likewise Executive Secre-
tary and Treasurer and Assistant Secretary, respectively, of the Great Lakes
Growers' Employment Committee, Inc. As officers of the Committee, Schmitt
and Esckilsen, in the matter of procuring a sufficient supply of field laborers, made
an arrangement with Julio dela Pena which resulted in dela Pena opening up a
labor agency in Realitos, Texas, in the spring of 1940. He recruited several
hundred laborers of Mexican descent, who were first required to pass a physical
examination, and then were transported either in their own automobiles or in
trucks owned by dela Pena to Findlay, Ohio. During April and May 1940,
approximately 205 persons were thus transported by dela Pena.
Payment for this transportation, on the basis of $11.00 for each adult and
$4.50 for each child, was made by the Committee with funds advanced by the
Company and charged against the laborer's account. Deductions of such amounts
were made from the laborer's earnings and balances due after all deductions made
were paid by checks of the Great Lakes Sugar Company.
REMARKS
The interstate operations conducted by the carrier were only possible with the
aiding and abetting of the Great Lakes Sugar Company and the Great Lakes
Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.
Both the carrier and the Company and Committee disclaimed any intent to
violate the Act; the carrier claiming no knowledge whatever of the Act and the
Company and Committee claiming no violations occurred.
Notwithstanding this assertion, Esckilsen stated at the last interview that
neither the Company nor the Committee would have any connection, either
directly or indirectly, with the future transportation of laborers from Texas.
RECOMMENDATION
Criminal prosecution of the carrier and of the Great Lakes Sugar Company
and the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., as aiders and
abettors.
Interstate Commerce Commission, Bureau of Motor Carriers
check sheet on carrier
(1) L. & E. No. 20291, District 4-
(2) Date Report Submitted: March 25, 1941. Net Days Worked on Case: 21
(3) Period of Investigation: Dec. 1, 1940, to March 24, 1941.
(4) Respondent: Julio dela Pena.
Address: Realitos, Texas.
(5) Status shown by Commission records:
Common Carrier: No. Grandfather: No.
Contract Carriers: No. Interim: No.
Broker: Aro. New: No.
Tariff: No. Reg. State Cert.: No.
Schedule: No. P. L. & P. D. Insurance: No.
Contracts: No. Cargo Insurance: No.
7808
DETROIT HEARINGS
(6) Vehicles Operated: 8. Gross Revenue: $7,509.21.
(7) Other respondents: Great Lakes Sugar Company, 7810 Woodward Avenue,
Detroit, Michigan, and Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.,
7810 Woodward Ave., Detroit, Mich.
(8) Operating period covered by Investigation: 1940.
(9) Recommendation : Criminal prosecution of carrier and aiders and abettors.
(10) Types of Violations:
v ' J 1 Offenses
No. Dis-
By Julio dela Pena: covered No- ReP-
Unauthorized Operations 205
Transportation ivithout Insurance 205
Transportation without Rates 205 11
Failure to Require Drivers Logs 30 3
Failure to Observe 10-hr. Driving Limitation 30 3
By Great Lakes Sugar Company:
Aiding and Abetting 205 1 1
By Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.:
Aiding and Abetting 205 11
M. M. Emery, District Supervisor.
Check Sheet on Respondent
interstate commerce commission, bureau of motor carriers
(1) L. & E. No. 20291, District 4-
(2) Date Report Submitted: March 25, 1941. Net Days worked on Case: 21.
(3) Period of Investigation: December 1, 1940 to March 24, 1941.
(4) Respondent: Great Lakes Sugar Company.
Address: 7810 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan.
(5) Status shown by Commission records:
Common carrier: No. Grandfather: No.
Contract Carrier: No. Interim: No.
Broker: No. New: No.
Tariff No. Reg. State Cert.: No.
Schedule: No. P. L. & P. D. Insurance: No.
Contracts: No. Cargo Insurance: No.
(6) Vehicles operated: 0. Gross Revenue: Unavailable.
(7) Other respondents: Julio dela Pena, Realitos, Texas {Carrier) and Great Lakes
Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., 7310 Woodward Avenue, Detroit,
Michigan.
(8) Operating Period Covered by Investigation: 1940.
(9) Recommendation: Criminal prosecution of carrier and aiders and abettors.
(10) Types of Violations: xt °«en^s nm
By Julio dela Pena: No. Discovered No. Hep.
Unauthorized Operations 205
Transportation without Insurance 205 1 1
Transportation without Rates 205 11
Failure to Require Driver* Logs 30 3
Failure to Observe 10-hr. Driving Limitation 30 3
For other violations see reverse side of sheet.
By Great Lakes Sugar Company:
Aiding and Abetting 205 11
By Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc. :
Aiding and Abetting 205 1 1
M. M. Emery, District Supervisor.
Check Sheet on Respondent
interstate commerce commission, bureau of motor carriers
(1) L. & E. No. 20291, District 4- ,
(2) Date Report Submitted: Mar. 25, 1941. Net Days worked on Case: 21.
(3) Period of Investigation: December 1, 1940 to March 24, 1941-
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7809
(4) Respondent: Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.
Address: 7310 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan.
(5) Status shown by Commission records:
Common carrier: No. Grandfather: No.
Contract carrier: No. * Interim: No.
Broker: No. New: No.
Tariff: No. Reg. State Cert.: No.
Schedule: No. P. L. & P. D. Insurance: No.
Contracts: No. Cargo Insurance: No.
(6) Vehicles operated: 0. Gross Revenue: Unavailable.
(7) Other respondents: Julio dela Pena, Realitos, Texas {Carrier) and Great
Lakes Sugar Company, 7310 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Mich.
(8) Operating Period Covered by Investigation: 1940.
(9) Recommendation: Criminal prosecution of carrier and aiders and abettors.
(10) Types of Violations: 1 Offenses
By Julio dela Pena: No- Discovered No. Rep.
Unauthorized Operations 205
Transported without Insurance 205 11
Transportation without Rates 205 11
Failure to Require Drivers Logs 30 3
Failure to Observe 10-hr. Driving Limitation 30 3
For other violations see reverse side of sheet.
By Great Lakes Sugar Company.
Aiding and Abetting 205 11
By Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee,
Inc.:
Aiding and Abetting 205 1 1
M. M. Emery, District Supervisor.
Statement of the Case
BASIS OF INVESTIGATION
1. Complaint.— On July 31, 1940, Baldomar Silas, at that time living in a
camp house on the farm of John Rehss, RR #1, Hoytville, Ohio, but present
location unknown, appeared at the office of the District Supervisor, Toledo, Ohio,
and complained orally of the activities of The Great Lakes Sugar Company,
Findlav, Ohio, in arranging for the transportation of contract laborers of Mexican
descent from points in Texas, in the vicinity of San Antonio, to Plndlay, Ohio,
and nearby points, to work in the beet fields of Northwestern Ohio. Such arrange-
ments were made with Julio dela Pena, an unauthorized carrier, who transported
the laborers and their families in straight trucks (not buses) equipped with benches.
The complainant claimed to represent a number of laborers transported by Julio
dela Pena during 1940 and stated his only reason in reporting this situation was
for the purpose of endeavoring to secure the return of all or a part of the trans-
portation charges paid by the laborers he represented. Such charges, he claimed,
amounted to $12.00 for each adult and $6.00 for each child transported.
2. Preliminary investigation by the undersigned Supervisor during December
1940 and rep< rt thereon, which is attached hereto, revealed that Julio dela Pena
was transporting passengers without authority and without rates or insurance on
file; also that the Great Lakes Sugar Company and the Great Lakes Growers'
Employment Committee, Inc., were aiding and abetting Julio dela Pena in such
illegal operations. This investigation was predicated on said report.
3. Complainant — Laldomar Silas, complainant, is an illiterate laborer of
Mexican descent, who, at the time of making the complaint, resided in a movable
camp house belonging to the Great Lakes Sugar Company and located on the farm
of John Rehss, RR #1, near Hoytville, Ohio. A short time later and prk r to the
submission of the report of preliminary investigation, a call was made at the above
location but he had departed for parts unknown.
4. Therefore, for the purpose of this case, the complainant is not available and
it is believed his presence or testimony will not be necessary.
60306 — 41 — pt. 10-
7810 DETROIT HEARINGS
5. Previous Investigations. — The illegal transportation of Mexican laborers from
Texas to points in Northwestern Ohio and Michigan was the subject of a previous
complaint, L & E No. 8953-S, handled by District Supervisor Hymans of Detroit,
Michigan, and complaint, L & E No. 13415-4, handled by this Supervisor. Both
complaints were closed out on account of insufficient evidence.
DESCRIPTION OF RESPONDENTS
Respondent Carrier.
6. Julio dela Pena, an individual of Mexican descent and an American citizen,
resides at the present time in Realitos, Texas, a small town of less than 1,000
population located 70 miles east of Laredo, Texas, on U. S. Highway No. 59.
From May to approximately December 20, 1940, he resided at 421 Lynn Street,
Findlay, Ohio.
7. Everv year, since the spring of 1934, he has transported laborers of Mexican
descent and their families from Texas to Northwestern Ohio to work in the beet
fields, returning a portion of them to Texas in the fall after the beet harvest.
In the spring of 1940 he opened up an employment agency in Realitos, Texas,
licensed bv the State of Texas, for the purpose of recruiting these laborers. After
arrival at'Findlav, Ohio, and until his return to Texas in December 1940, he was
emploved bv the Great Lakes Sugar Company, Findlay, Ohio, as an interpreter
and field instructor and. in addition, used his trucks to transport the field workers
to, from, and' between beet fields where necessary work was to be performed.
To conduct the transportation activities described above, three straight trucks
were used; namely, two Chevrolets with fourteen-foot bodies, and one small
Dodge >£-ton pick-up truck.
8. Operating Authority. — No authority is or has been held under the Act to
engage in interstate commerce, as shown by reply from Section of Certificates on
L & E Form 5 under date of February 3, 1941, attached hereto.
9. Rate Publications.— The respondent carrier has never filed any rate publica-
tions or bilateral contracts with this Commission.
10. Insurance. — The respondent carrier has never filed evidence of compliance
with the insurance requirements of this Commission.
11. Records and Accounts. — No records are kept by the respondent carrier other
than a memorandum record which only he can understand. Any documentary
evidence contained in this report was obtained from the records of the respondent
shippers.
12. Because of lack of records of respondent carrier, it was impossible to
ascertain his gross revenue from the passenger transportation business for any
particular period of time. However, from the records of the Great Lakes Sugar
Company and the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., it was
ascertained that he received checks totaling as follows:
From the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc. — During 1940:
$5,591.36, which includes transportation of laborers from Texas to Findlay,
Ohio.
From the Great Lakes Sugar Company — During 1940:
$60.00 — to cover two loads of laborers transported back to Texas.
$1,426.30 — to cover intrastate transportation of laborers.
$431.55 — to cover use of his trucks hauling sugar beets to factory.)
Respondent — The Great Lakes Sugar Company.
13. Organization and Personnel. — Great Lakes Sugar Company is a corporation,
incorporated under the laws of Michigan in 1931 and reincorporated in 1934,
engaged in the manufacture of sugar from sugar beets and also engaged, to some
extent, in the growing of sugar beets to be used in its refineries.
General Offices are located at 7310 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan.
Field offices, refineries, and warehouses located at Blissfield, Michigan; Findlay,
Ohio; Fremont, Ohio.
Officers and business addresses are as follows:
Name Address
James E. Larrowe, Pres 7310 Woodward Ave., Detroit, Mich.
A. W. Beebe, Vice President & 7310 Woodward Ave., Detroit, Mich.
TrGRsur6r.
Searle Mowat, Secretary 7310 Woodward Ave., Detroit, Mich.
W. F. Schmitt, Gen. Mgr 7310 Woodward Ave., Detroit, Mich.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 781 1
The field managers of the company's plants and their business addresses are as
follows :
Name Address
L. W. Esckilsen Great Lakes Sugar Co., Findlay, Ohio.
Edward Grew Great Lakes Sugar Co., Blissfield, Mich.
A. C. Joost Great Lakes Sugar Co., Fremont, Ohio.
14. This company is one of the largest refiners of beet sugar east of the Mis-
sissippi River, operating three refineries and producing millions of pounds of sugar
annually.
Respondent — Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.
15. Organization and Personnel. — Great Lakes Growers' Employment Com-
mittee, Inc., is a corporation, incorporated under the laws of Michigan in 1938,
with offices located at 1936 LaFayette Blvd., Detroit, Michigan, and is engaged
"The rendering of service and assistance to sugar-beet growers represented in this
organization in connection with the obtaining and employment by them of field
labor and in general, to do any and all things necessary, advisable, or expedient
to assist beet growers in the employment of field workers" (Article II of Articles
of Incorporation).
It is a nonprofit Michigan corporation composed exclusively of Growers and
Associations of Growers furnishing sugar beets to the Great Lakes Sugar Company
and Lake Shore Sugar Company, an affiliated company. It is not authorized
to issue capital stock and has none. Attached hereto are copies of its bylaws
and articles of incorporation. Particular attention is called to Article IV of
articles of incorporation showing that its sole assets consist of personal property
in the amount of $100.00.
Officers, with business addresses, are as follows:
Name Address
George W. Bloom, President Fremont, Ohio.
Fred Rodesiler, Vice President Blissfield, Michigan.
W. F. Schmitt,1 Executive Secre- Great Lakes Sugar Co., 7310 Woodward
tary and Treasurer. Avenue, Detroit, Michigan.
John D. Kelly, Assistant Execu-
tive Secretary.
L. W. Esckilsen,2 Asst. Sec'y Great Lakes Sugar Co., Findlay, Ohio.
Edward Grew,2 Asst. Secretary Great Lakes Sugar Co., Blissfield, Michigan.
A. C. Joost,2 Asst. Secretary-! Great Lakes Sugar Co., Fremont, Ohio.?
Directors are as follows:
Fred Rodesiler, President, Blissfield Beet Growers Assn.
A. J. Ingold, Secretary, Blissfield Beet Growers Assn.
Earl Davis, President, St. Louis Beet Growers Assn.
Ralph Densmore, Secretary, St. Louis Beet Growers Assn.
George W. Bloom, President, Fremont Beet Growers Assn.
Webb B. Smith, Secretary, Fremont Beet Growers Assn.
C. J. Windau, President, Findlay Beet Growers Assn.
William A. Hess.
E. L. Woodhams.
16. Its principal business appears to be that of furnishing a supply of cheap
labor to the beet growers for the cultivation and harvesting of sugar beets. It
also furnishes tools, camp houses for living quarters, and honors orders for pay-
ment up to certain specified amounts issued by the workers in favor of grocers,
butchers, doctors, etc., for living and other necessary expenses. Such amounts
are charged against the worker's credits accrued for labor and at the end of the
season, the laborers are paid any difference.
17. The Assistant Secretaries of the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Com-
mittee, Inc., are also the Field Managers of the Great Lakes Sugar Company at
the three plants and have the power to sign checks for both organizations.
18. It appears that the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.,
was organized for the purpose of allowing the Great Lakes Sugar Company to
engage indirectly in the procurement and financing of cheap labor to work in
the beet fields of farmers who contract to sell their beets to the Great Lakes Sugar
Company and also to work in beet fields farmed directly by the Sugar Company,
i Also General Manager. Great Lakes Sugar Company.
» Also Field Managers of the Great Lakes Sugar Co. at the points indicated.
7812 DETROIT HEARINGS
19. Records and Accounts. — The Great Lakes Growers' Employment Com-
mittee, Inc., keep records at its Findlay, Ohio, office of amounts owed to and by
each field laborer. Such records are maintained in ledger system and from time
to time during the season and at the end of the season, payments are made and
accounts closed out by checks issued by the Great Lakes Sugar Company. The
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., accepts "assignments of
wages" from its laborers. The assignments referred to in this report made in
favor of Julio dela Pena include transportation charges from Texas to Ohio.
All records and accounts of this Committee are kept by employees of the Great
Lakes Sugar Company and no charge is made by the Sugar Company for such
services.
FACTS OF VIOLATIONS
Unauthorized Operations — Section 206 (a).
20. The respondent carrier, hereinafter called the carrier, does not have author-
ity under the Act to transport passengers in interstate or foreign commerce.
21. Since 1934, and every spring thereafter, he has been transporting laborers
of Mexican descent and their families from points in Southern Texas to points in
Northwestern Ohio to work in the sugar-beet fields and returning those in the fall
who wished to return. Starting with the spring of 1938 and every season there-
after, the transportation has been exclusively for the Great Lakes Sugar Company,
hereinafter called the Company, and its affiliate, the Great Lakes Growers'
Emplovment Committee, Inc., hereinafter called the Committee.
22. In April, May, and June, 1940, ten (10) loads of laborers and their families,
totaling approximately 205 persons, were transported from the vicinity of Realitos
Texas, to Findlay, Ohio, and, in August of the same year, one (1) load was returned
from Findlav to' Realitos. Names and addressed of these persons are shown in
Exhibit F attached hereto. This list was obtained from the records of the Com-
mittee and the names contained therein were pointed out to the undersigned by
Julio dela Pena those persons whom he had transported.
23. Due to the limited time available in which to interview these laborers, as
many of them had already returned to Texas and the balance were returning daily
during the period of this investigation, as well as their frequent migration from
farm to farm and the difficulty in conversing with them, only eleven (11) laborers
were interviewed who would definitely state the carrier transported them from
Texas to Findlav, Ohio, in 1940. The names of these eleven laborers are attached
hereto, on which form there is also listed the approximate date of movement,
the approximate point of origin and destination, the specification of the carrier's
transportation charges for such movement and a description of the records
evidencing pavment of such charges.
24. Affidavits were secured from these eleven persons and attached hereto.
It will be noted from the affidavits that the cost of transportation, with the
exception of John Vara Valasco was $11 per person. This amount was made
up of $9.00 transportation and the balance of $2.00 covered cost of medical
examination and employment bureau fees in Texas.
25. Two (2) straight Chevrolet trucks mounting fourteen-foot bodies were
used for this movement and the transportation charges received were $9.00 e^.ch,
one way, for adults, and $4.50 each, one way, for children under fourteen (14)
years of a^e. The trips were performed with almost continuous driving and in
violation of the Safety Regulations, as there was no place en route for the passengers
to sleep and rest, as very few, if any, tourist camps desired to accommodate them,
and also the majority were without funds, other than as advanced by the carrier,
and therefore everyone involved was anxious to reach the destination and get
established in the camp cabins.
26. Payment for Transportation. — Payment was received in the following
manner: In practically every case the laborers did not have the money available
to pay for this service and the respondent carrier would get them to sign an
"Assignment of Wapes" (form 252). The "assignment of wrges" forms executed
by the eleven (11) laborers listed in Table I are attached hereto.
* 27. The laborers were divided into groups and each group assigned a serial
number. One of each group, generally the eldest, was designated as the "Head of
the Group" and he signed a labor contract for the group with the grower or farmer
whose land the group was engaged to cultivate.
28. Photostatic copv of the only contract on file signed by or applicable to four
(4) of the laborers listed on Table I is attached hereto. Similar contracts are
supposed to be in effect covering all field laborers working the entire season, but
the files of the Company do not contain contracts for the balance of the laborers
listed on Table I.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7813
29. The Committee maintained a ledger account for each group and inserted
therein charges for tools, supplies, and services furnished to the laborers in a par-
ticular group and also inserted credits for wages earned by that particular group.
Photostats of the ledger accounts applicable to the eleven (11) laborers listed on
Table I are attached hereto. During the season and at the close of the harvest
season, payments were made by checks of the Company and entries of such checks
are shown on the ledger accounts of the laborers. The checks issued in favor of
the eleven (11) laborers issued by the Company as listed on Table I are attached
hereto.
30. No separate ledger account is kept by either the Company or the Com-
mittee covering charges due the carrier on the transportation of the field laborers
from Texas to Ohio. The only record maintained is that designated as "Advance
by Julio dela Pena" on the ledger account of each group of field laborers. From
time to time during the season, these advances are totaied and a check issued by
the Committee to the carrier for an amount not to exceed this total and at the
close of the season, the balance is paid. Photostatic copies of all checks covering
this entire account and which includes all payments for the heretofore described
transportation from Texas to Findlay, are attached hereto.
31. According to the affidavit of the carrier he transported one load of twenty-
five field laborers back to Texas in August 1940, for which he was advanced the
sum of sixty-eight dollars ($68.00) by the Company. The records of the Company
indicate that this actually consisted of two (2) loads and the carrier was advanced
sixty dollars ($60.00) instead of $68.00. The canceled check and copy of the
check carrying an explanation covering these two (2) loads are attached hereto.
It will be noted that this check is issued by the Company, whereas the balance of
the checks to cover this transportation were issued by the Committee.
32. Intrastate Operations.— The carrier also used his trucks regularly intrastate
from May to December in transporting field laborers, machinery, supplies and
materials, and also used his Dodge }^-ton pick-up truck supervising the laborers,
for which he was paid on a mileage basis by the Company. Five cents per mile
was paid for the use of the carrier's Dodge J>2-ton pick-up truck and six cents
per mile for the use of his two Chevrolet trucks. Daily mileage records were
turned into the office of the Company at frequent irregular intervals and from
these records payment was made by check of the Company. Copies of these
mileage records itemizing time periods and trucks used for the period June 1,
1940, to December IS, 1940, inclusive, are attached hereto. Canceled checks
covering this same movement and period are attached hereto.
33. The carrier, during beet harvest, also used one of his Chevrolet trucks to
transport sugar beets from the fields to the Findlay refinery, such transportation
being exclusively intrastate. The driver of this truck was named Jose B. Gonzlez
and, for this reason, the Company's ledger account was carried in his name and
checks covering this hauling made out in his favor. Photostatic copy of this
ledger account is attached hereto.
34. L. W. Esckilsen, Findlay Field Manager for the Company, stated he was of
the opinion that Gonzlez and the carrier adjusted the matter of compensation
between themselves and an examination of the cancelled checks covering this
account, which are attached hereto and marked "Table I, Exhibit 11," reveal
that although all checks are made out in favor of Jose B. Gonzlez, the respondent's
driver, one check, No. 17604, dated December 19, 1940, amount, $43.90, is en-
endorsed only by the carrier and one other check, No. 17078, dated December 12,
1940, amount, $71.75, is endorsed by the payee and also by the carrier.
35. The carrier also was employed by the Company as an interpreter from
May to December 1940, for which he received a salary of $90 per month.
36. An affidavit was secured from the carrier outlining in detail his complete
activities since his connection with the Company and the Committee. This
affidavit is attached hereto.
Driving in Excess of 10 Hours in Any 24-hour Period (M. C. S. R., pt. 5, rule 3 (b));
failure to Require Drivers' Logs (M. C. S. R., pt. 5, rule 5).
37. The trucks of the carrier used for transporting passengers were not equipped
with sleeper berths and no attention was paid to the Safety Regulations of the
Commission. In fact, the carrier had no knowledge of such regulations. The
one object was to get each load of laborers through in the shortest time possible.
38. The distance from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, Ohio, is approximately
1,600 miles and, by driving continuously, with the exception of a thirty-minute
stop every three hundred miles, the trip was completed in three days and three
nights. Drivers' logs were not maintained on any trips and drivers were per-
mitted to drive in excess of ten hours without having eight consecutive hours off
duty. See affidavit of Benito Hernandez.
7814 DETROIT HEARINGS
Aiding and Abetting — Section 222 (c).
39. W. F. Schmitt, General Manager of the Company and Executive Secretary
of the Committee, and J. K. Worley, Union Guardian Bldg., Detroit, Michigan,
attorney for both the Company and the Committee, were interviewed and dis-
claimed any connection between the Company and the Committee and the inter-
state transportation of the laborers and also any intent to evade or violate the
law.
40. However, during a previous preliminary investigation conducted by Super-
visor Hymans of Detroit, Michigan, warning letters dated June 27, 1938 were
sent to James E. Larrowe, President, and three directors of the Company. An
acknowledgment, dated August 4, 1938, was received from Larrowe outlining in
detail the field-labor situation and disclaiming any violations or intent to violate
the Act. This correspondence is attached hereto.
41. Notwithstanding this warning letter, the Company and the Committee
still actively engaged in making it possible for laborers to be transported from
Texas by the carrier by handling settlement for such transportation through
charges against their labor credits.
42. In one of the numerous conversations with L. W. Esckilsen, Field Manager
of the Findlay Plant, statement was made that one of the considerations offered
the carrier for recruiting these laborers in Texas was the agreement that he would
have the privilege of transporting a certain number of them to Lindlay ; the agreed
number being in excess of two hundred passengers. Esckilsen also stated the
majority of these laborers did not have sufficient money left in the spring and
that the arrangement concerning the assignment of wages was the only way they
could get to Findlay each spring. He also stated in many cases cost of automobile
licenses was advanced to laborers owning their own cars to enable them to use
their cars in transporting themselves and their families and relatives to Findlay.
43. The working capital used by the Committee is advanced by the Company
and all routine work handled in the name of the Committee at the Findlay refinery
is performed by employees of the Company at no cost to the Committee. It is
therefore evident that the Committee is merely an intermediary, functioning as
the Company in all respects except in name, in the procuring and furnishing of
field laborers to beet growers and to the Company for the cultivation and growing
of sugar beets sold and/or delivered exclusively to the Company.
44. The transportation of the laborers from Texas to Ohio by the carrier was
only possible due to the aiding and abetting of the Company and the Committee.
REMARKS
45. All representatives of the Committee and the Company and their attorney,.
J. K. Worley, at all interviews, continuously maintained they had not violated
any part of the Act. Nevertheless, during the last interview with Esckilsen, he
stated that the Company and the Committee had agreed to have absolutely
nothing to do with the future transportation of these laborers from Texas to Ohio,
either directly or indirectly.
46. In case it becomes necessary to use passengers transported as witnesses in
the case, it is suggested that those submitting affidavits as shown in Table I,
Exhibit 1, be used first and, should it be necessary to use any additional, those as
shown in Exhibit F be interviewed before being subpoenaed to make certain they
had actually been transported from Texas by this carrier in 1940. This list was
made up from information which the carrier furnished from memory, no written
records being available, and it is quite possible some persons named therein were
not transported by the carrier in 1940.
47. The number of passengers transported in 1940 and the regular intrastate
business conducted from June to December will definitely place the carrier out-
side the exemption contained in Section 203 (b) (9).
48. Particular attention is directed to the fact that the carrier transported
passengers in freight carrying vehicles and that such vehicles were not equipped
as required and the drivers thereon were not conversant with the Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations applicable to buses.
49. At the several interviews, Julio dela Pena expressed his entire ignorance
of Part II of the Motor Carrier Act and frequently stated he would not knowingly
violate any Federal statute. He cooperated wholeheartedly with this Super-
visor and was invaluable as an interpreter in the various interviews with the
numerous Mexican laborers.
50. The various representatives of the Company and the Committee were also
friendly and cooperative, especially L. W. Esckilsen, Field Manager of the Findlay
Plant, who placed all records at my disposal and assisted in every way possible.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7815
RECOMMENDATION
51. It is recommended that Julio dela Pena be prosecuted for the violations
as indicated below:
(a) Unauthorized transportation of passengers from Texas to Ohio points;
(6) Failure to maintain public liability and property damage insurance as
required;
(c) Failure to file rates as required;
(d) Failure to require the keeping of drivers' logs and driving in excess of 10
hours in any 24-hour period without 8 hours rest.
52. It is also recommended that the Great Lakes Sugar Company and the
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., be prosecuted for aiding
and abetting Julio dela Pena in said violations.
Appendix 1
list of witnesses
Detroit, Michigan.
Great Lakes Sugar Company, 7310 Woodward Avenue.
James E. Larrowe, 7310 Woodward Ave.
W. F. Schmitt,1 7310 Woodward Ave.
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., 1936 LaFayette
Blvd.
John D. Kelly, 1936 LaFayette Blvd.
Findlay, Ohio.
Great Lakes Sugar Company aud Great Lakes Growers' Employment
Committee, Inc.
L. W. Esckilsen.
Realitos, Texas.
Julio dela Pena.
Corpus Christi, Texas.
Trinidad Trujillo, 2611 Coleman.
Ramon Gonzales, 2611 Coleman.
Gilberto Gonzales, 2611 Coleman.
Eustaquio Barrientes, 2611 Coleman.
Francisco Bara, 2611 Coleman.
San Antonio, Texas
Benito Hernandez, 1316 Martin St.
Seferino Hernandez, 1316 Martin St.
Chicago, Illinois.
John Vara Valasco, 1616 Roosevelt Rd.
Tivala, Texas.
Eulogio Guerrero, General Delivery.
Eulogio Guerrero, Jr., General Delivery.
Benjamin Guerrero, General Delivery.
Frederico Guerrero, General Delivery.
Appendix 2
records and custodians
J. H. Jameson, Office Manager, Great Lakes Sugar Company, 7310 Woodward
Avenue, Detroit Michigan. Custodian of all general office records of the Great
Lakes Sugar Company, including all cancelled checks issued by both the Great
Lakes Sugar Company and the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee,
Inc.
L. W. Esckilsen, Field Manager, Great Lakes Sugar Company and Assistant
Secretary, Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., Findlay, Ohio.
Custodian of ledger accounts, assignment of wages, orders, and labor contracts
of the field workers in the Findlay District.
This information consisting of 45 counts charges Julio dela Pena, a common
carrier of passengers in interstate commerce by motor vehicle, with the following
violations of the Motor Carrier Act, 1935, and Part II of the Interstate Commerce
i Also Executive Secretary of the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.
JglQ DETROIT HEARINGS
Act, and the Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation; and Great Lakes
Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, with aiding and abetting
the above respondent in such violations. (49 Stat. L. 543; 49 U. S. C. A. 301 et
seq.) ,
1. Engaging in the transportation of passengers in interstate commerce, for com-
pensation, as a common carrier by motor vehicle without requisite author-
ity, in violation of Section 306 (a). Counts I, IV, VII, X, XIII, XVI, XIX,
XXII, XXV, XXVIII, XXXI, XXXIV, XXXVII, XL, and XLIII.
2. Engaging in transportation of passengers in interstate commerce, for compen-
sation, as a common carrier bv motor vehicle without tariffs on file, in viola-
tion of Section 317 (d). Counts II, V, VIII, XI, XIV, XVII, XX, XXIII,
XXVI, XXIX, XXXII, XXXV, XXXVIII, XLI, and XLIV.
3 Engaging in interstate operations as a common carrier of passengers without
having filed and in effect acceptable public liability and property damage
security, in violation of Insurace Rules and Regulations and Section 322 (a).
Counts III, VI, IX, XII, XV, XVIII, XXI, XXIV, XXVII, XXX, XXX-
III, XXXVI, XXXIX, XLII, and XLV.
Julio dela Pena, Realitos, Texas, and Great Lakes Sugar Company and
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., Findlay, Ohio (L&E-
20291-4, E1214).
In the District Court of the United States for the Northern District
of Ohio, Western Division — United States of America, Plaintiff, vs.
Julio dela Pena, and Great Lakes Sugar Company, a Corporation, and
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a Corporation.
Defendants. No.
information
Now comes Emerich B. Freed, United States Attorney in and for the Northern
District of Ohio, who for the United States in this behalf prosecutes, in his own
proper person, and with leave of Court first had and obtained, gives the Court
here to understand and to be informed as follows, to wit:
count i
1. That on, to wit, May 15, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highwav, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
highways from Corpus Christi, Texas, to Findlav, State and Northern District
of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain
passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without
there being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience
and necessity issued bv the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such
interstate operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and
provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
306 (a), U. S. Code).
2 That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid thei/and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT II
1. That on, to wit, May 15, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi,
Texas, to Findlav, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and
within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit,
$9.00 per person, then and there without having filed and without having on file
with the Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7817
or charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity
of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT III
1. That on, to wit, May 15, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective February
15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the protection
of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfully did
knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport passengers
by motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi, Texas, to Findlay,
State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction
of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without
having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Interstate
Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond, policy
of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and other
securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof, any final
judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the death
of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use of
motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss or
damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States
(Title 49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT IV
1. That on, to wit, May 16, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways, including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
highways from Corpus Christi, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of
Ohio, Western Division, and within the jusridiction of this Court, certain passen-
gers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without there
being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such inter-
state operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 306 (a),
U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
count v
1. That on, to wit, May 16, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
7g;[g DETROIT HEARINGS
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi,
Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and
within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to
wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without having filed and without having on
file with the Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any
fare or charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to
the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and
dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), TJ. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT VI
1. That on, to wit, May 16, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations effective
February 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the
protection of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, un-
lawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport
passengers bv motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and
there without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the
Interstate Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety
bond, policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifiactions as a self-insurer,
and other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount
thereof, any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries
to, or the death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance,
or use of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or
for loss or damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in
such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United
States (Title 49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code)*
COUNT VII
1. That on, to wit, May 17, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highwav, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
highways from Corpus Christi, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of
Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain pas-
sengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without there
being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such inter-
state operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and
provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
306 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Emplovment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then' and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7819
COUNT VIII
1. That on, to wit, May 17, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways, including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi,
Tex., to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and
within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit,
$9.00 per person, then and there without having filed and without having on file
with the Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any
fare or charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to
the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and
dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT IX
1. That on, to wit, May 17, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective Febru-
ary 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the protec-
tion of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfully
did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport passen-
gers by motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi, Texas, to Findlay,
State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdic-
tion of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there
without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the
Interstate Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety
bond, policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer,
and other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof,
any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the
death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use
of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss
or damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title
49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
count x
1. That on, to wit, May 18, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
highways from Corpus Christi, Tex., to Findlay, State and Northern District
of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain
passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without
there being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience
and necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such
interstate operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and
provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
306 (a), U. S. Code).
7820 DETROIT HEARINGS
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XI
1. That on, to wit, May 18, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi,
Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and
within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit,
$9.00 per person, then and there without having filed and without having on file
with the Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any
fare or charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to
the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and
dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XII
1. That on, to wit, May 18, 1939, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective Feb-
ruary 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the
protection of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlaw-
fully did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport
passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Corpus Christi, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and
there without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the
Interstate Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety
bond, policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer,
and other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof,
any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the
death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use
of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss
or damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title
49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XIII
1. That on, to wit, May 15, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7821
highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio,
Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers,
for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without there being
in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and necessity
issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such interstate
operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 306 (a).
U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT xiv
1. That on, to wit, May 15, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per
person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or
charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignitv
of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in "manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XV
1. That on, to wit, May 15, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective February
15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the protection
of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfullv did
knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport passengers
by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and
Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this
Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without having
filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Interstate Commerce
Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond, policy of insurance,
certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and other securities or
agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof, any final judgment
recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the death of, any
person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use of motor
vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss or damage
to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and
provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code)
7822 DETROIT HEARINGS
COUNT XVI
1. That on, to wit. May 16, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on pub-
lic highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of
Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain pas-
sengers, for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per person, then and there without there
being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such inter-
state operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 306
(a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XVII
1. That on, to wit: May 16, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transportation
of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Find-
lay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the juris-
diction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per per-
son, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the Inter-
state Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or charge
applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form of the
statute in such case made and provided and against thft peace and dignity of the
United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit: contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XVIII
1. That on, to wit: May 16, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective
February 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the
protection of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, un-
lawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport
passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay,
State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the juris-
diction of this Court, for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per person, then and there
without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Inter-
state Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond,
policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and
other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof,
any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or
the death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or
use of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for
loss or damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such
case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States
(Title 49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7823
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XIX
1. That on, to wit: May 17, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle on
public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on
public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of
Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain pas-
sengers, for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per person, then and there without there
being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such inter-
state operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
306 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XX
1. That on, to wit: May 17, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, tor compensation, to wit: $9.00 per
person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or
charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity
of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid
and abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to
do and commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignitv of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XXI
1. That on, to wit, May 17, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective
February 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the
protection of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlaw-
fully did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport
passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay,
State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction
of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without
having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Interstate Com-
merce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond, policy of
7824 DETROIT HEARINGS
insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and other
securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof, any final
judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the death of,
any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use of motor
vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss or damage
to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and
provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
322 (a), U.S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corpotation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XXII
1. That on, to wit: May 18, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio,
Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this. Court, certain passengers,
for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per person, then and there without there being in
force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and necessity
issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such interstate
operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 306 (a), U. S.
Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did kncwingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to dc and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XXIII
1. That on, to wit: May 18, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transportation
of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Find-
lay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the juris-
diction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per per-
son, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or charge
applicable to such transportation of said passengers, contrary to the form of the
statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the
United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XXi\T
1. That on, to wit, May 18, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective February
15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the protection
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7825
of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfully did
knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport passengers
by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and
Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this
Court, for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per person, then and there without having
filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Interstate Commerce
Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond, policy of insur-
ance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and other securities
or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof, any final judgment
recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the death of, any person
resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use of motor vehicles by
said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss or damage to property
of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S.
Code) .
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XXV
1. That on, to wit, May 19, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an
interstate operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor
vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern
District of Ohio, v'7estern Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court,
certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there
without there being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public
convenience and necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission
authorizing such interstate operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such
case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States
(Title 49, Sec. 306 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid
and abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do
and commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XXVI
1. That on, to wit, May 19, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transportation
of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per
person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or
charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity
of the United States (Title 49, Sec. e\7 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes'^Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
60396— 41— pt. 19 :.
e
7g26 DETROIT HEARINGS
COUNT XXVII
1. That on, to wit, May 19, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle on
public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective February
15 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the protection
of 'the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfully did
knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport passengers
by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and
Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this
Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without having
filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Interstate Commerce
Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond, policy of insurance,
certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and other securities or
agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof, any final judgment
recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the death of, any person
resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use of motor vehicles by
said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss or damage to property
of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S.
J 2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then"and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XXVIII
1. That on, to wit, May 20, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio,
Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for
compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without there being in
force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and necessity
issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such interstate
operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 306 (a),
U. S. Code). n ,„ ,
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid
and abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to
do and commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550,
U. S. Code).
COUNT XXIX
1. That on, to wit, May 20, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per
person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or
charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity
of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7827
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XXX
1. That on, to wit, May 20, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways, including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective February
15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission lor the protection
of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfully did
knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport passengers
by motor vehicle on public highways from Realitos, Texas, to Findlay, State and
Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this
Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without having
filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Interstate Commerce
Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond, policy of insurance,
certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and other securities or
agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof, any final judgment
recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the death of, any per-
son resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use of motor vehicles
by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss or damage to prop-
erty of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignitv of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid, then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550 U. S. Code).
COUNT XXXI
1. That on, to wit, October 13, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on
public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to Findlay, State' and Northern Dis-
trict of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain
passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without
there being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience
and necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such
interstate operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and
provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
306 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).,
COUNT XXXII
1. That on, to wit, October 13, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas,
7g28 DETROIT HEARINGS
to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per
person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or charge
applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form of the
statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the
United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then' and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrarv to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XXXIII
1. That on, to wit, October 13, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and
there being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of
passengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective
February 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the
protection of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlaw-
fully did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport
passengers by motor vehicle on" public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, for compensation, to w it, $9.00 per person, then and there
without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the Inter-
state Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety bond,
policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer, and
other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof,
any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the
death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use
of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss
or damage to property of others ; contrary to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title
49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, IT. S. Code).
COUNT XXXIV
1. That on, to wit, October 14, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicL
on public highways, including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highwav, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public-
highways from San Antonio, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of
Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passen-
gers/for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without there
being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such inter-
state operations, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 306 (a),
U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid, then and (here unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit, contrarv to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States. (Title IS, See. 550, I . .V
Code.)
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7829
COUNT XXXV
1 . That on, to wit, October 14, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
Wring a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways, including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transporta-
tion of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas,
to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within
the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00
per person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or
charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers, contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignitv
of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317(d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States. (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code.)
COUNT XXXVI
1. That on, to wit, October 14, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and
there being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of
passengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective
February 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the
protection of tlie public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlaw-
fully did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport
passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and
there without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the
Interstate Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety
bond, policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer,
and other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof,
any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the
death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use
of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss
or damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title
49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid
and abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do
and commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XXXVII
1. That on, to wit, October 15, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on
public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District
of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain
passengers,)for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without there
being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such
interstate operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and
provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
300 (a), U. S. Code).
7830 DETROIT HEARINGS
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XXXVIII
1. That on, to wit, October 15, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the
transportation of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San
Antonio, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Divi-
sion, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensa-
tion, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without having filed and without
having on file with the Interstate Commerce Commission and without having
published any fare or charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers;
contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against
the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XXXIX
1. That on, to wit, October 15, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and
there being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of
passengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways, including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective
February 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the
protection of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlaw-
fully did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport
passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and
there without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the
Interstate Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety
bond, policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer,
and other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof,
any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the
death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use
of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss
or damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title
49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XL
1. That on, to wit, October 16, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and
there being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of
passengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor
vehicle on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set
forth, for compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an
interstate operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7831
vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to Findlay, State and
Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this
Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and
there without there being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public
convenience and necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission
authorizing such interestate operations; contrary to the form of the statute in
such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United
States (Title 49, Sec. 306 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid
and abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to
do and commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec.
550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XH
1. That on, to wit, October 16, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transportation
of passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per
person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or
charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity
of the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XLII
1. That on, to wit, October 16, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective Febru-
ary 15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the protec-
tion of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfully
did knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport pas-
sengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to Find-
lay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and
there without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the
Interstate Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety
bond, policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer,
and other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount thereof,
any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries to, or the
death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use
of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for loss or
damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title
49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing
the premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid
and abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do
and commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
7832 DETROIT HEARINGS
COUNT XLIII
1. That on, to wit, October 17, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle, engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle on
public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in an interstate
operation on a public highway, in that he did transport by motor vehicle on public
highways from San Antonio, Texas, to Findlay, State and Northern District of
Ohio, Western Division, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, certain pas-
sengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per person, then and there without there
being in force with respect to defendant a certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing such inter-
state operations; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignitv of the United States (Title 49, Sec.
306 (a), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignitv of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S.
Code).
COUNT XLIV
L. That on, to wit, October 17, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier b}r motor vehicle, engaged in the transportation of passen-
gers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, unlawfully did knowingly and willfully engage in the transportation
passengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to
Findlay, State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the
jurisdiction of this Court, certain passengers, for compensation, to wit, $9.00 per
person, then and there without having filed and without having on file with the
Interstate Commerce Commission and without having published any fare or
charge applicable to such transportation of said passengers; contrary to the form
of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignitv of
the United States (Title 49, Sec. 317 (d), U. S. Code).
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
COUNT XLV
1. That on, to wit; October 17, 1940, Julio dela Pena, defendant, then and there
being a common carrier by motor vehicle engaged in the transportation of pas-
sengers for the general public in interstate and foreign commerce by motor vehicle
on public highways including those between the points hereinafter set forth, for
compensation, and as such subject to the rules and regulations, effective February
15, 1937, prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission for the protection
of the public pursuant to Section 215, Motor Carrier Act, 1935, unlawfully did
knowingly and willfully engage in interstate commerce and transport pas-
sengers by motor vehicle on public highways from San Antonio, Texas, to Findlay,
State and Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and within the juris-
diction of this Court, for compensation, to wit: $9.00 per person, then and there
without having filed with, and without there having been approved by, the
Interstate Commerce Commission, and without maintaining in effect, a surety
bond, policy of insurance, certificate of insurance, qualifications as a self-insurer,
and other securities or agreements, conditioned to pay, within the amount
thereof, any final judgment recovered against said defendant for bodily injuries
to, or the death of, any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance,
or use of motor vehicles by said defendant as a common carrier as aforesaid, or for
loss or damage to property of others; contrary to the form of the statute in such
case made and provided and against the peace and dignitv of the United States
(Title 49, Sec. 322 (a), U. S. Code).
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7833
2. That defendants, Great Lakes Sugar Company, a corporation, and Great
Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a corporation, well knowing the
premises aforesaid then* and there unlawfully did knowingly and willfully aid and
abet said Julio dela Pena the said offense in manner and form aforesaid to do and
commit; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States (Title 18, Sec. 550, U. S. Code).
»
United States Attorney.
By .
Assistant United States Attorney.
verification
State of Ohio,
County of Franklin, ss:
Marion M. Emery, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says: that
he is an employee of the United States Government, to wit: a District Supervisor
of the Interstate Commerce Commission; that in the course of his duties as such
District Supervisor he made an investigation of the matters set forth in the above
and foregoing information against Julio dela Pena, Great Lakes Sugar Company,
a corporation, and Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., a cor-
poration; that he has read the above and foregoing information and knows the
contents thereof and that the matters set forth therein are true of his own
knowledge.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this - day of — — . 1941.
— , Notary Public.
My Commission expires .
District Court of the United States, Northern District ok Ohio, Western
Division
United States v. Julio Dela Pena. No. 8472. Criminal ' Information in XLV
counts for violation of U. S. C, Title 49, Sees. 306 (a), 317 (d), 322 (a), and
Title 18, Sec. 550
JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT
On this 15th day of September 1941 came the United States Attorney and
the defendant Julio Dela Pena, appearing in proper person, and 2 by counsel and
The defendant having been convicted on 3 his plea of guilty of the offense
charged in the l information in the above-entitled cause, to wit 4 Transported
passengers in Interstate Commerce without a certificate, and the defendant hav-
ing been now asked whether he has anything to say why judgment should not
be pronounced against him, and no sufficient cause to the contrary being shown
or appearing to the Court, It Is by the Court
Ordered and Adjudged that the defendant, having been found guilty of said
offenses, is hereby 5 6 ordered to pay a fine to the
United States in the sum of $1,000.00 and the costs of prosecution herein taxed
in the sum of $53.90.
It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk deliver a certified copy of this judg-
ment and commitment to the United States Marshal or other qualified officer
and that the same shall serve as the commitment herein.7
(Signed) Frank L. Kloeb, Judge.
A True Copy. Certified this 25th day of September 1941.
(Signed) C. B. Watkins, Clerk.
(By) Ray Livingston, Deputy Clerk.
1 Indictment or information.
2 Insert "by counsel" or "having been asked whether he desired counsel assigned by the Court, replied
that he did not," whichever is applicable.
3 Insert the words "his plea of guilty," "plea of nolo contendere," or "verdict of guilty," as the case may be.
4 Name specific offense or offenses and specify counts upon which convicted.
5 Insert type of institution such as "jail," "training school," "reformatory," "penitentiary," or "special."
If prisoner's circumstances require special type institution. Marshal should submit facts and recommenda-
tions of Court to Attorney General where regulations do not apply.
6 Insert sentence and any provision for payment of fine and state whether sentences are to run concur-
rently or consecutively and, if consecutively, when each term is to begin; that is. with reference to termina-
tion of preceding term, or with respect to any other outstanding or unserved sentence.
7 Certified copy to accompany defendant to institution.
7§34 DETROIT HEARINGS
District Court of the United States, Northern District of Ohio, Western
Division
United States v. Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc. No. 8472.
Criminal ' Information in XLV counts for violation of^U. S. C, Title 49, Sees.
306 (a), 317 (d), 322 (a), and Title 18, Sec. 550
JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT
On this 15th day of September 1941, came the United States Attorney, and the
defendant Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., appearing in
proper person, and 2 by counsel and,
The defendant having been convicted on 3 its plea of nolo contendere of the
offense charged in the l information in the above-entitled cause, to wit 4 Trans-
ported passengers in Interstate Commerce without a certificate, and the defendant
having been now asked whether it has anything to say why judgment should not
be pronounced against it, and no sufficient cause to the contrary being shown
or appearing to the Court, It Is by the Court
Ordered and Adjudged that the defendant, having been found guilty of said
offenses, is hereby 5 6
ordered to pay a fine to the United States in the sum of $2,000.00 and the costs
of prosecution herein taxed in the sum of $68.90.
It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk deliver a certified copy of this judgment
and commitment to the United States Marshal or other qualified officer and that
the same shall serve as the commitment herein.7
(Signed) Frank L. Kloeb, Judge.
A True Copy. Certified this 25th day of September 1941.
(Signed) C. B. Watkins, Clerk.
(By) Ray Livingston, Deputy Clerk.
Interstate Commerce Commission,
Washington, September 26, 1941.
notice
E-1214. United States of America vs. Julio dela Pena and Great Lakes Sugar
Company, a corporation, and Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee,
Inc., a corporation. In the District Court of the United States for the Northern
District of Ohio, Western Division. Honorable Frank L. Kloeb, Judge
The Commission has been advised that on September 15, 1941, at Toledo,
Ohio, Judge Frank L. Kloeb imposed fines totaling $3,000 and costs upon Julio
dela Pena, of Realitos, Texas, and Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee,
Inc., of Findlay, Ohio, upon entry of a plea of guilty by the defendant, Julio dela
Pena, to all counts of an information charging him with violations of Part II of
the Interstate Commerce Act in connection with the transportation of passen-
gers in interstate commerce by motor vehicle, and upon entry of a plea of nolo
contendere by the defendant, Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee,
Inc., to all counts of the same information charging it with aiding and abetting
the commission of the violations of Julio dela Pena.
The information which contained 45 counts, charged the defendant Julio dela
Pena in 15 counts with having transported passengers in interstate commerce for
compensation without requisite authority from the Commission, in 15 counts with
having so transported passengers without having on file with the Commission his
fares and charges for such transportation, and in 15 counts with having performed
i Indictment or information. ,.-,... „ ,• ,,
2 Insert "by counsel" or "having been asked whether he desired counsel assigned by the Court, replied
that he did not," whichever is applicable. „..,.'*.*.. -.* »
3 Insert the words "his plea og guilty," "plea of nolo contendere," or "verdict of guilty," as the case may
be.
i Name specific offense or offenses and specify counts upon which convicted.
« Insert type of institution such as "jail," "training school," "reformatory," "penitentiary, or special.
If prisoner's circumstances require special type institution, Marshal should submit facts and recommenda-
tions of Court to Attornev General where regulations do not apply.
« Insert sentence and any provision for payment of fine and state whether sentences are to run concurrently
or consecutively and, if consecutively, when each term is to begin; that is, with reference to termination
of preceding term, or with respect to any other outstanding or unserved sentence.
'Certified copy to accompany defendant to institution.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7835
such transportation without having filed with the Commission evidence of public
liability and property damage insurance coverage. In all counts the Great Lakes
Sugar Company and the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.,
were each charged with having knowingly and wilfully aided and abetted the
defendant Julio dela Pena in committing the violations alleged.
Upon the defendant Julio dela Pena the Court imposed a fine of $1,000 and
costs, one-half to be paid within one week and the remainder on or before October
17, 1941. The Court imposed upon the defendant Great Lakes Growers' Employ-
ment Committee, Inc., a fine of $2,000 and costs, to be paid forthwith. It was
agreed that a nolle prosequi be entered as to the defendant Great Lakes Sugar
Company upon payment of the fine imposed upon Great Lakes Growers' Employ-
ment Committee, Inc.
The following facts were drawn to the attention of the Court: The defendant
Julio dela Pena engaged in the transportation in interstate commerce by motor
vehicle of Mexican laborers from points in Texas to points in Ohio. He has his
principal place of residence at Realitos, Texas. He is of Mexican descent, though
he is a citizen of the United Statas, and has wide acquaintance with Mexican
laborers residing in the vicinity of San Antonio, Texas. In the winter season he
operated at Realitos an employment bureau and recruits from that section, on
behalf of Northern employers, Mexican laborers to work in the sugar beet fields
of Ohio and other States. He has been employed since the spring of 1938 by the
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., to act in that capacity. In
the spring some of these laborers travel, with their families, to the places of their
prospective employment in automobiles owned by them. Others who are unable
so to make the trip are transported by Julio dela Pena in trucks which he owns
and operates. For the 1940 season he recruited more than 400 such laborers, and
of these he transported more than 200 to Ohio. The trucks he used were two
ordinary open trucks with tarpaulins spread over their tops and provided with
benches for seats. In most cases 48 persons were transported at one time in one
truck having 14-foot open bodies. The trip from Texas to northern Ohio takes
about three days of steady day and night traveling. His custom was not to make
stops on the wav of more than 31 minutes each.
On arrival in Ohio, the Mexicans were assigned by the Great Lakes Growers'
Employment Committee, Inc., to work with various sugar-beet growers as field
laborers. This committee had advanced to Julio dela Pena the fare of each laborer
transported, usually $9 per person, and on arrival the laborers executed for the
Committee an assignment of wages' to permit the Committee to deduct therefrom
from time to time the amounts of the advances. During the season Julio dela
Pena was also employed by the Committee as an interpreter and to use his trucks
in transporting laborers from field to field, and at harvest time to haul beets to
sugar refineries. At the close of the season he transported back to Texas such of
the laborers and their families as did not have other means of return transporta-
tion.
The Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., is a corporation organ-
ized by officers and stockholders of the Great Lakes Sugar Company for the pur-
pose of providing the various growers with adequate labor. This Committee is a
nonprofit corporation composed exclusively of growers and associations of grow-
ers furnishing sugar beets to the Great Lakes Sugar Company, and to Lake Shore
Sugar Company, an affiliated corporation. The Committee has no capital stock
and practicallv no assets. It is closely affiliated in operation with the Great
Lakes Sugar Company, which advances working capital, so that it may be said
that the Company functions through the Committee as its intermediary. The
evidence indicates that both corporations, and especially the Committee, had
knowledge of the transportation activities of Julio dela Pena and assisted him
therein, and knew that in performing such transportation he was not complying
with the provisions to the Interstate Commerce Act. The various counts of the
information related of the transportation of passengers under the circumstances
described.
The transportation and other activities of Julio dela Pena are typical of a
generally bad situation involving the employment and transportation of Mexican
laborers under conditions regarded as harmful to the public interest and which,
for that reason has received much consideration during the past few years. The
Department of Labor has for some time been giving attention to it, and a special
committee of the National House of Representatives, namely, the House Com-
mittee Investigating National Defense Migration, for some months has been,
and still is, conducting an investigation into the problem. Certain authorities
of the State of Texas have likewise been giving study to it. For several years
the Interstate Commerce Commission has had knowledge of the problem and
7836 DETROIT HEARINGS
has made, especially in Texas, extensive investigations with a view toward en-
forcement proceedings for violations of the Interstate Commerce Act. For va-
rious reasons it has been difficult to discover adequate evidence to justify enforce-
ment proceedings. However, in this case the Commission through its Bureau of
Motor Carriers was successful in obtaining the necessary evidence.
The information was filed by Emerich B. Freed, United States Attorney, in
connection with which he was assisted by Gerald P. Openlander, Assistant United
States Attorney. The case was prepared and presented to the United States
Attorney by Jack Garrett Scott, Chief Attorney, and John Dunning and David
H. Dantzler, Attorneys, of the Bureau of Motor Carriers.
W. P. Bartel, Secretary.
Sworn Statements and Exhibits Introduced at Trial
State of Ohio,
County of Hancock:
Julio dela Pena, of lawful age, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
I am a citizen of the United States and at the present time am residing at 421
Lynn Street, Findlay, Ohio. My permanent address is Realitos, Tex., to which
place I expect to return about December 20, 1940, and will reside there during the
winter and early spring.
I own and operate three motor trucks consisting of two Chevrolet trucks with
14-foot bodies and one Dodge pick-up truck, capacity one-half ton.
Since the spring of 1934 and every spring thereafter I have transported laborers
from Texas to northwestern Ohio and southern Michigan to work in the beet
fields. A majority of these laborers are returned to their homes in Texas in the
late fall when the beets are harvested and the operation repeated each year.
For this transportation I receive a stipulated amount per person generally $11
each for adults and $4.50 each for children between the ages of 8 and 14.
Since the spring of 1938 I have been associated with the Great Lakes Sugar Co.
and have brought laborers from Texas in the spring and returned a majority of
them in the fall for the said sugar company. This transportation is paid me by
the workers signing an order authorizing the Great Lakes Sugar Co. to pay me
this amount when the worker has accumulated a sufficient credit to his account
through his labor in the fields.
During the summer months my trucks transport the laborers between the
various beet fields where work is to be performed and also in the fall the said
trucks transport sugar beets from the fields to the mill located in Findlay, Ohio.
For this work I am paid by the Great Lakes Sugar Co.
In an individual capacity I am employed by the Great Lakes Sugar Co. as an
instructor in the beet fields and as an interpreter for which services I am paid a
stipulated monthly wage by the Great Lakes Sugar Co.
Since the spring of 1938 my transportation has been exclusively for the Great
Lakes Sugar Co., Findlay, Ohio, and my interstate transportation consisted of the
following :
In 1938 I transported two loads of workers in the spring from the vicinity of
Realitos, Tex., to Findlay, Ohio, and returned one load in the late fall.
In 1939 I transported four loads of workers in the spring from the vicinity of
Realitos, Tex., to Findlay, Ohio, and also returned one load.
In 1940 I transported ten loads in the spring from the vicinity of Realitos, Tex.,
to Findlay, and returned one load in August.
The workers were transported in the Chevrolet trucks heretofore described.
The load returned in August 1940 mentioned above consisted of 25 persons from
Findlay, Ohio, to Realitos, Tex. and vicinity, for which I was advanced the sum
of $68 from the Great Lakes Sugar Co.
In the spring of 1940 I opened an employment agency in Realitos, Tex., for
the purpose of securing laborers for the Great Lakes Sugar Co. to work in the
beet fields of northern Ohio. Under this arrangement laborers were secured and
sent to a qualified physician for a physical examination. For this service I charged
the laborer the sum of $2, which was paid to me under the same arrangement as
the transportation charges were paid heretofore described.
The details covering the payment of the load consisting of 25 persons returned
in August 1940 are as follows: These people were poor workers and of very little
use in the beet fields and consequently were not carrying any money and they re-
quested me to take them back to Texas. As they did not have any money I
took the matter up with L. W. Esckelsen, district manager of The Great Lakes
Sugar Co., Findlay, Ohio, and he agreed to help out in the expense of returning
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7#37
them to Texas. He asked me how much I needed from him to help out on the
expense of the return trip and I requested $75. L. W. Esckelsen then said he
would give me $68 to help out on the trip. As final settlement for the season has
not been made to date I have not actually received the said $68; however, it was
and now is my understanding that I am to receive this amount to help defray
expenses in making the said trip from The Great Lakes Growers Employment
Committee, Inc.
Dated this 18th day of December 1940 at Findlay, Ohio.
Julio dela Pen a.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th day of December 1940.
M. M. Emery,
Examiner and District Supervisor,
Bureau of Motor Carriers,
Interstate Commerce Commission.
State op Ohio,
County of Hancock, ss:
John Vara Velasco, of lawful age. herewith deposes and says, previous to
October 13, 1940, my address was 1020 Rip Ford Street, San Antonio, Tex.
On October 13, 1940, Julio dela Pena transported myself and approximately
15 other persons from San Antonio, Tex., to Findlay, Ohio. For this transporta-
tion I paid Julio dela Pena the sum of $12 and the motor vehicle used was a
1928 Ford truck.
I came to Findlay, Ohio, to work in the beet fields for the Great Lakes Sugar
Co. My work is now finished and on December 14, 1940, I expect to go to
Chicago, 111., and reside at 1616 Roosevelt Road until spring when I will return
to Findlay to again work in the beet fields.
On the trip from San Antonio, Tex., I arrived in Findlay, Ohio, on October 16,
1940. Two drivers drove the entire distance.
Johx V. Velasco.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of December, 1940.
M. M. Emery,
Examiner and District Supervisor, Bureau of Motor Carriers, Interstate
Commerce Commission.
North Baltimore, Ohio, December 9, 1940.
We, the following-named men, of lawful age, hereby depose and say, our present
address is rural route 1, North Baltimore, Ohio. Our address on and after Decem-
ber 14 will be as follows: Trinidad Trujillo, rural route 1, box 81a, Corpus Christi,
Tex.; Gilberto Gonzales, rural route 1, box 310, Corpus Christi, Tex.; Ramon
Gonzales, rural route 1, box 310, Corpus Christi, Tex.; Eustaquio Barrientes,
rural route 1, box 310, Corpus Christi, Tex.; Francisco Bara, 408 Seventeenth
Street, Corpus Christi, Tex.
During the month of April or May 1940 Julio dela Pena transported us from
the vicinity of Realitos, Tex., to Findlay, Ohio, for which we paid him $11 each.
Such payment was made by signing an order authorizing the Great Lakes Beet
Growers' Association to pay Julio dela Pena this amount.
Signed.
Trinidad Trujillo,.
Gilberto (his mark) Gonzales,
Eustaquio (his mark) Barrientes,
Francisco (his mark) Bara,
Ramon (his mark) Goxzales.
Witnesses:
Martin Studenka.
M. M. Emery.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of December 1940.
M. M. Emery,
Examiner and District Supervisor, Bureau of Motor Carriers, Interstate
Commerce ( 'ommission.
7838
DETROIT HEARINGS
Brownsville. Tex.
Eulogio Guerrero, Benjamin Guerrero, Eulogio Guerrero, Jr., and Fred Guerrero,
of lawful age, being first duly sworn, depose and say:
In May 1939 Julio dela Pena transported us (except Fred Guerrero) from Corpus
Christi, Tex., to Findlay, Ohio. We left Corpus Christi on May 15 and arrived
in Findlay on May 20. * For this trip we paid the sum of $12 per person. Also on
May 16, 1940, the undersigned four left Realitos, Tex., and arrived in Findlay,
Ohio, on May 20, 1940. On this trip we also came on a truck belonging to Julio
dela Pena. In fact both trips were made on trucks belonging to Julio dela Pena.
In 1939 it was a Ford V-8 truck and in 1940 a Chevrolet truck. For the trip in 1940
we paid the sum of $11 per person. The transportation both years was paid for by
each of us signing an order authorizing the Great Lakes Growers' Employment
Committee, Inc., to pay to Julio dela Pena these amounts from our earnings.
Signed this 18th day of December 1940, at Findlay, Ohio.
Eulogio Guerrero.
Benjamin Guerrero.
Fred Guerrero.
Eulogio Guerrero, Jr.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th day of December 1940.
M. M. Emery,
Examiner and District Supervisor,
Bureau of Motor Carriers, Interstate Commerce Commission.
Woodside, Ohio, October 28, 1940.
I, Benito Hernandez, of lawful age, herewith deposes and says:
I live on 1316 Martin Street, San Antonio, Tex. On May 15, 1940, my brother
Seferino Hernandez and myself left Rialitos, Tex., for Findlay, Ohio, to work for
the Great Lakes Sugar Co., in the beet fields of northwestern Ohio.
I was transported in a Chevrolet truck belonging to Julio de Lapina of Rialitos,
Tex. There were a total of 45 persons in the truck and 2 men drivers for Julio
de Lapina drove all the way.
The journey was completed in 3 days and 3 |nights arriving in Findlay about
May 18, 1940. A stop was made every 300 miles and no stop exceeded 30 minutes.
For the trip I paid $11 to Julio de Lapina and it is my understanding all of the other
passengers also paid $11 each for the trip.
At present I am living in Bradnor, Ohio, but expect to return to San Antonio,
Tex., in about 30 days. Payment was not made direct to Julio de Lapina but
the $11 was deducted from the first payment for wages received from the Great
Lakes Sugar Co.
Benito Hernandez.
Subscribed and swOrn to before me this 28th day of October 1940.
M. M. Emery,
Examiner and District Supervisor,
Bureau of Motor Carriers, Interstate Commerce Commission.
List of passengers transported by Julio dela Pena in 1940, taken from field labor
accounts payable of Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., Findlay,
Ohio
[Note.— Group numbeis are shown for ready future reference to the Great Lakes Growers' Employment
Committee, Inc., records. Dates shown under group heading indicates years in addition to 1940 in which
that particular group was transported from Texas to Ohio by Julio dela Pina]
Group No.
Name
Address
502
Cecilio Ancira, Bieente Ancira, Jose Ancira, Este-
ban Ancira, Hilario Ancira, Simon Ancira, Carlos
Ancira, Herinda Ancira.
Francisco Esquivel, Rafela EsquiveL-
2411 Guadalupe, San Antonio, Tex.
503
506 St. Augustine, San Antonio, Tex.
503A
Daniel Vega. Pablo S. Ybarra. .
1105 Chihuahua, San Antonio, Tex.
511
George Aguilar, Enrique Aguilar, Zacaris Aguilar,
Andrew Rendon, Julia Spata, Lidia Rendon.
Sebando Pina, Gabriel Ramos, Ambrosio Bargas,
Remula Bargas.
Realitos, Tex.
512
Hebbronville, Tex.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7839
List of passengers transported by Julio dela Pina in 1940, taken from field labor
accounts payable of Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., Findlay,
Ohio — Continued
Santos Castello, Maria Gaicia, Vincenta Castello,
Francisco Castillo, Juan C. Martinez, Maria
Castillo.
Remundo Mastinez, Felipe V. Rodrequez, Raul
Martinez (also transported in 1939).
Baldomar Silas, Francisco Silas, Fred Silas, Virginia
Silas.
Niebes Bargas, Tomasa Janna, Pedro Martinez,
Maria Martinez, Poutation Martinez.
Calixtro Serda, Victor Serda, Josefa Serda, Severi-
ana Barges, Octaviana Rodrequez (also trans-
ported in 1939).
Juan Cruz___
Ben Garza, Raul Garcia, Jesus Ramos
Martin Adame, Francisco Deleon (also transported
in 1939).
Ernesto Garza, Jose Angel Garza, Jose Vellarreal,
Amando Cantu (also transported in 1938 and 1939) .
Manuel Soto, Elma Soto
Leonardo Lopez, Albredo Lopez, Sara L. Santos,
Rosa Lopez.
Fausto Tovar, Cresencio Tovar, Manuel Perales,
Isabela Peiales, Filomeno Hernandez (also trans-
ported in 1938).
Trinidad Trujillo, Ramon Gonzalez, Eustaquio
Barrientes.
Eugenio Rodriquez, Ignacio Garcia, Eugenio
Rodriquez, Jr., Alex Rodruiquez, Maria S.
Rodriquez.
Filiberto Rios, Encarnacion Rios, Luis Rios, An-
tcnio Rios, Margarita Rodriquez, Locadio Rios,
Ernestina Rios.
Jesus Hernandez, Manuela Hernandez, Estefano
Hernandez, Euralia Hernandez, Jose Rodriquez.
Lina Benal, Genoveva Benal, Catalina Benal,
Trinidad Benal.
Eulogio Guerrero, Benjamin Guerrero, Eulogio
Guerrero, Jr., Federico Gueirero (also trans-
ported in 1938).
Jose Guerrero Cruz, Filipe De Luna
Salvador Pena, Alberto Saenz, Juan Florez, Ed-
wardo Myers.
Benito Hernandez, Seferino Hernandez
Juan R. Ruiz, Frances Ruiz, Mary Ruiz, Doria
Rodriquez.
Juan P. Perez, Luisa Perez, Juan P. Perez, Jr.,
Maria Perez.
Niebez Sanchez, Manuela Sanchez, Francisca
Sanchez.
Isabel Ojeda, Paula Ojeda, Fabian Ojeda, Ramona
Ojeda, Luis Ojeda, Maria Ojeda, Jose Ojeda,
Jesus Ojeda. Tomasa Ojeda.
Branlio Rodriquez, Militon Rodriquez, Ricardo
Rodriquez.
Jose Benavides, Antonia Benavides-.
Modesto Gomez, Francisco Gomez, Jesus Gomez,
Modesto Gomez, Jr., Elvira Gomez.
Bonifacio Barrientes, Cecilio Barrientes
Diego Aguilera, Raul Gomez
Inez Raugel, Manuel Raugel, Francisco Raugel,
Cecilia Raugel, Rodolfo Calderon, Jose Martinez.
Jose Garza, Raul Garza, Rene Garza, Genoveva
Garza.
Francisco Flores, Adolfo DeLeon, Andres Lopez,
Delfino Lopez, Jr., Delfino Lopez, Sr. (also trans-
ported in 1938 and 1939).
Manuel G. Garcia, Maria J. Garcia, Isaac Garamio.
Matio Gonzales, Anastacio Almaras
Luis Sarabia, Juana L. Sarabia, Eliza Sarabia,
Jesus Sarabia, Felipe Sarabia.
S imon Sefuentes
Lorenzo Ramirez, Rosa P. Ramirez
Ednardo Garza, Amador Garza, Ednardo Garza,
Jr., Dolorez Garza, Ramon Garza, Emelia Garza,
Rita Garza.
Manuel Gomez, Carlos Moreno, Margarito Mendi-
eta, Meliton Gomez, Florentino Gomez, Eva
Gonzalez, (also transported in 1938).
2207 Chihuahua, San Antonio, Tex.
Hebbronville, Tex.
Chilton, Tex.
Box 1093, Robstown, Tex.
Robstown, Tex.
Laredo, Tex.
San Marcos, Tex.
Robstown, Tex.
Realitos, Tes.
Rio Hondo, Tex.
San Antonio, Tex.
Laredo, Tex.
2611 Coleman, Corpus Christi, Tex.
General delivery, Farr, Tex.
General delivery, Asherton, Tex.
216 Leona St., San Antonio, Tex.
521 Matamora, San Antonio, Tex
General delivery, Tivala, Tex.
1919 Sanita Isabel, Laredo, Tex.
1017 San Edwardo, Laredo, Tex.
1316 Martin St., San Antonio, Tex.
R. No. 5, Box 148F, San Antonio,
Tex.
510 S. Nueces, San Antonio, Tex.
509 St. Augustine, San Antonio, Tex.
Not known.
Robstown, Tex.
608 11th St., Corpus Christi, Tex.
1523 Antelope St., Corpus Christi,
Tex.
115 Ventura St., Corpus Christi, Tex.
Hebronville, Tex.
Robstown, Tex.
2205 Davis Ave., Laredo, Tex.
200 16th St., Corpus Christi, Tex.
Robstown, Tex.
Do.
Do.
Oilton, Tex.
222 San Horasio, San Antonio, Tex.
Hebronville, Tex.
Do.
7840
DETROIT HEARINGS
List of passengers transported by Julio dela Pena in 1940, taken from field labor
accounts payable of Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., Findlay,
Ohio — Continued
Group No.
Name
Address
760
787.
789
Romulo Pena, Cristina Pena, Amador Pena.
Sabeido Pena.
Agustin Maldonado, Aurora Ramirez. . .
Emilio Ysaguerre, Eusebio Ysaguerre
Realitos, Tex.
Raymondsville, Tex.
Gregory, Tex.
790.
791
792
Manuel Lazo, Cruz Moreno
Henry Gorhan, Rafael De Lima, Josento Gonzales.
Belasario Pena - -- ..-. .--
San Benito, Tex.
Three Rivers, Tex
General Delivery, Raymondsville,
793
794
797 .
798
799
Guadalupe Sanchez, Trinidad Rebullazo, Reyeraldo
Sanchez.
Thomas Delas Santos, Juan Basques
Pablo Cortez, Mary Cortez
Tex.
Harlingon, Tex.
Zapata, Tex.
Lockhart, Tex.
Ysabel Lopez, Rosen do Ramoz
Inez Gutierrez, Isidro Reyna
Silvestre Reyna Alvear ... .
General Delivery, Raymondsville,
Tex.
Gregory, Tex.
800
823
825
826
General delivery. San Juan, Tex.
Genaro Ramirez. Rodalfo Cantro, Juan Floras,
Ben Soto (also transported in 1939).
Franciso Floras, Revmundo Segarra, Lenor Floras
(also transported in 1938 and 1939) .
John Vara (Valasco)
Corpus Christi, Tex.
Do.
1616 Roosevelt Rd . Chicago, 111.
Tenant 1938, Beth am Smith
[Specimen copy]
Grower's Contract With Field Worker
undersigned (irower and field worker agree
The field worker agrees —
To do all field work and properly care for the Grower's field of beets according
to instructions given from time to time by the Grower.
To bunch and thin beets so as to leave the beets, when hoeing is completed, not
more than eight to ten inches apart on the average, and not more than one beet in
a place.
To hoe the beets whenever required, so as to remove all weeds, keep the beets
clean in the rows and for four inches on each side of each low.
To pull and top beets when ready for harvest, removing all the dirt possible by
striking beets together before removing tops.
To top beets at the lowest leaf line at a right angle to vertical axis.
To pile topped beets in piles consisting of the beets from sixteen rows, the piles
to be at least two rods apart. To cover piles every night with all the leaves.
To level and prepare the surface of the ground where beets are to be piled.
To accept as full payment for said work the amounts shown on the schedule
printed on the back of the contract, payable as stated in said schedule.
To pay the cost and expense of doing any work which he fails or refuses to do
a1 the time or in the manner in which it should be done, and he authorizes the
deduction of any such cost or expense from the amount herein agreed to be Daid to
him.
To pav any cost or expense, including attorney fees, imposed on the Grower or
Great Lakes Sugar Company by reason of any attachment or garnishment of the
amount payable to him hereunder, or by any litigation of any nature, or by any
damage done by him to property of the Grower or said Company, and he author-
izes the deduction and withholding of the amount of any such cost or expense
from the amount payable to him.
The grower agrees —
To keep beets cultivated clean between the rows in a proper manner and give
them at least one cultivation before they are blocked and thinned.
To lift the beets when ready for harvest.
To pay the Field Worker for said work according to the schedule printed on the
back of this contract.
To make all settlements with the field workers through the Company s field-
men.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7841
That, to secure payment to the Field Worker, any and all proceeds to which
the Grower may in any way become entitled to receive under his contract with
the Company shall be charged with the payments and be paid out by the Com-
pany as provided in said contract, and this contract when filed with the Company
shall be an order for such payment.
To haul or deliver the beets to the Great Lakes Sugar Company's plant.
General agreements.
In case the Grower fails to obtain a satisfactory stand of beets, or if at any
time for the performance of work hereunder the condition of the crop shall be
such that in the judgment of the Grower further work on the crop would not be
justified, the Grower may terminate this contract by giving notice to the Great
Lakes Sugar Company, the Field Worker and the holders of any ordeis given by
the Grower and paying the Field Worker the fair value of what he has done to
such date as nearly as may be according to the schedule on the back hereof.
The Grower and Field Worker shall be bound by the acreage as measured and
/ the tonnage per acre as determined by the Company.
In the event the Grower and Field Worker disagree as to any matter pertaining
to this contract or the performance thereof in any respect, or as to the amount
payable hereunder, either party may notify Great Lakes Sugar Company, or
upon said Company hearing of any such disagreement, it may appoint a represen-
tative to look into such matter and his decision shall be final and binding upon
the parties, but that Company shall not come under any liability to the parties
or either of them if it fails or refuses to decide such matter or because of any
decision.
All debts incurred by the Field Worker as a result of credit extended or guaran-
teed by the Grower or Great Lakes Sugar Company shall be paid out of proceeds
due the Field Worker hereunder from whatever source.
Great Lakes Sugar Company by accepting this order or otherwise shall not
come under any obligation or liability to pay the Field Worker except out of
money that may become payable to the Grower and then only after deducting
therefrom any amount owing by the Grower to said Company and any other items
provided to be first paid by the terms of its contract with the Grower.
In accordance with the regulations of the U. S. Department of Agriculture
governing benefit payments to beet growers under the Federal Sugar Act of 1937,
children under 14 years of age are not permitted to work in sugar beets and those
between 14 and 16 years of age may not work more than 8 hours in any one day.
The grower and worker agree that if the worker permits his or any other children
to work in violation of these regulations or said Act, this contract shall automat-
ically terminate as of the date such violation shall first become known to the grow-
er; the worker receiving payment in full for work performed before such date.
SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS PER MEASURED ACRE
For Blocking, Thinning, and Hoeing: $11.00 for blocking, thinning, hoeing and
keeping beets free from weeds, payable when work is completed.
Ne1 tons per acre:
Below 4___ $1. 50
4
5
6 _
7...
8
9
For bar resting
e per ton
Nel
tons
per acre — Con.
tint i per ion
$1. 50
Below ]
_ $0. 91
1. 30
11
. 89
I. 15
12. .
. 87
1. 06
13.-.
. 85
1. 00
14__
. 83
. 96
15___
. 81
. 93
16 or
above
. 80
(The rate for all fractional tonnages between 4 and 16 tons rounded to the near-
est tenth of a ton shall be in proportion within each interval.)
(Provision has been made in the determination that if, because of unusual
circumstances, it is essential to employ labor on other than a piece-rate basis,
and/or in those circumstances in which the use of special machine methods are
used, rates other than the above may be applicable provided such rates are approved
by the State Committee as equivalent to the piece rate for such work specified
herein. See your Fieldman.)
Final settlement, according to terms of contract, to be made as soon as prac-
ticable after all beets have been delivered and net weight per measured acre
determined.
60396— 41— pt. 19 6
7842
DETROIT HEARINGS
Application for Employment With Beet Growers
Fully understanding the Grower's Contract with Field Worker for the Season
of 1940, copy of which is printed above, we have subscribed our name below and
do hereby faithfully promise to work for Growers of Great Lakes Sugar Company,
Findlay plant.
If accepted, we agree to take care of 25 acres of sugar beets, according to the
terms of aforementioned contract, which we agree to sign with grower when placed.
Signature Etjlogio Guerrero.
Name: Eulogio Guerrero, age 64; Benjamin Guerrero, age 22; Eulogio Guerrero,
Jr., age 18; Federico Guerrero, age 34.
Address: Gen. Del.
City: Tivala, Tex. Date: 5/20/40.
Experience: 1 yr., Findlay.
Worked for none Plant last year.
Signed K. B. Clark.
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., Findlay, Ohio
GROUP NO. 605. FIELDMAN: BOOTH. BEET WORKERS' NAMES: TRINIDAD
TRUJILLO, RAMON GONZALEZ, EUSTAQUIO BARRIENTES
Old
balance
0.00
0.00
Date
5/19
5/19
5/19
5/19
5/19
5/19
7/18
7/22
7/29
8/8
8/9
8/13
8/14
8/14
8/14
8/14
8/14
8/14
8/14
8/14
8/16
8/16
8/16
8/16
8/16
10/24
10/24
10/24
11/6
11/14
11/15
11/15
11/15
11/25
11/29
11/30
12/3
12/9
12/15
12/13
12/14
12/16
12/19
1/18
1/28
1/28
Detail
Advance by Julio Dela Pena
F. W. equip
F. W. tools
Grocery special
F. W. fuel
Cabin rental— No. 220
Groceries— Whiteys Food Market
Advance by Julio Dela Pena
Shoes— Fleckners Clothing— No Baltimore
B. T. Labor— C. Hendrycks #759—1.63 acres @ 8.00
Hoeing labor— O. Barringer #877—3.62 acres @ 3.00... _r
B. T. labor— Thackery #605—35 acres @ 8.00
Wirts Grocery
B. T. labor— M. Simon #896— .45 acres @ 8.00
B. T. labor— G. Cotant #905—52 acres @ 8.00
B. T. H. labor— McGarvey #58—2.86 acres @ 11.00
B. T. H. labor— Whiteacre #56—6.23 acres @ 11.00
B. T. H. labor— Manecke #38— .75 acres @ 11.00
B. T. H. labor— Schwab #39— 4.27 acres @ 11.00
B. T. H. labor— Deming #40—4.92 acres @ 11.00
Fleckners Clothing— No Baltimore
Hudsons Market — Cygnet
B. T. H. labor— Trout #900—1.24 acres @ 11.00
B. T. labor— Cole #531—14625 acres @ 8.00
EF CK#4439
Advance— EFCK #4832 -
F. W. tools
F. W. tools
Fleckners Clothing— No Baltimore
F. W. Fuel
Harvesting— Trout #900—8.97 acres @ 6.14...
Stambaugh #1265—31.325 tons @ 1.00
Stambaugh— Above entry posted in error
Advance— EF CK #5130
Transferred in from group #521
EF CK#5280
EF CK#5325
Harvesting— Solether #2077— .95 acres @ 6.25.
F. W. fuel
Wirts Grocery— No Baltimore
EF CK#5517._. - ----
Wirts Gas Station— No Baltimore
Harvesting— Bricker #38—39.64 acres @ 7.00
EF CK#6024
Harvesting— Bricker Manecke #38
EF CK #6094 — - -
Charges
$35. 00
1.20
3.10
3.39
.50
18.00
9.20
7.39
3.07
12.75
13.82
49.73
101.45
25.00
2.50
.50
64.32
2.09
16.00
25.08
7.00
20.00
2.02
84.37
90.00
1.71
16.84
.10
Credits
Detroit
Detroit
$13.04
10.86
2.80
3.60
4.16
31.46
68.53
8.25
46.97
54.12
13. 64
1.17
55.08
31. 33
-SI. S3
5.94
277. 48
Detroit
19.03
New
balance
0.00
$18. 93
0.00
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7843
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc., Findlay, Ohio- — Continued
GROUP NO. 826. BEET WORKERS' NAMES: JOHN VARA, PASMILLAN
Old
balance
Date
Detail
Charges
Credits
New
balance
0.00
10/16
11/17
11/16
11/26
11/25
12/13
12/16
12/16
12/18
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
Advance by Julio dela Pena
$25. 25
Harvesting, Bishop, #529, 5.95 acres @ 6.82
$40. 58
Advance, EF CK#5047..
10.00
15.25
1.00
Whiteys Food Market, Findlay,
F Wfuel
Harvesting, Cramer #31, 116 long rows
24.36
Whiteys Food Market, Findlay
1.00
6.06
1.00
Whiteys Food Market, Findlay
Whiteys Food Market, Findlay
Harvesting, Esckilsen #151, 1.98 acres @ 4.50. _
8.90
F W Equip.
9.21
1.25
.50
F W Tools
F W fuel
Harvesting, Edwards #52, .05 acres @ 8.00
.40
1.40
11.84
Harvesting, Edwards #52, 3H hrs. @ .40
Harvesting, Bricker #38, .53 acres @ 8.00 and 19 hours
@ .40
EF CK#5611
16.96
4.08
EF CK#5638.._
$4.08
GROUP NO. 614. FIELDMAN: TENANT. BEET WORKERS' NAMES: EULOGIO GUER
RERO, BENJAMIN GUERRERO, EULOGIO GUERRERO, Jr., FEDERICO GUERRERO
0.00
5/20
5/20
5/20
5/20
5/20
5/20
7/12
8/8
8/16
9/11
9/11
9/12
9/12
9/12
9/13
9/14
9/18
9/19
10/18
11/16
11/20
11/26
11/25
11/27
11/28
11/29
12/18
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
12/19
Advance by Julio dela Pena .
$50.50
2.65
4.05
3.39
.50
18.00
5.00
$189. 42
94.93
3.84
24.00
150. 59
52.99
41.07
41.83
24.08
17.60
F. W. equip
F. W. tools
Grocery special
F. W. fuel
Cabin rental— No. 110
F. W. fuel .'
B. T. H. labor— B. Smith #603—17.22 acres @ 11.00—.
Ef. Ck. #4442
105. 33
B. T. H. labor— Walter #603—8.63 acres @ 11.00...
Ef. Ck. #4649
92.83
1.60
.50
1.60
F. W. tools
F. W. fuel
F. W. tools
Hoeing labor— Bormuth #561—1.28 acres @ 3.00
Ef. Ck. #4700
2.24
B. T. labor— Inbody #567—3.00 acres @ 8.00
Ef. Ck. #4725
24.00
.50
5.00
5.00
6.00
F. W. tools
Advance— Ef. Ck. #5044
Advance— Ef. Ck. #5078 .
Advance by Julio dela Pena
•
Harvesting— Smith #603—17.23 acres @ 8.74..
Harvesting— Walter #602—8.63 acres @ 6.14. .
Simonis Gro. Co.— Carey
Ef. Ck. #5256.
22.58
25.00
5.06
Groceries — Dolans Grocery.
Harvesting— Miller #17— 5.97 acres @ 6.88
Harvesting— Shuey #2.5—7.03 acres @ 5.95
Harvesting— Creps #66—3.01 acres @ 8.00
Harvesting— Creps #66—44 hours @ .40
Ef. Ck. #5575
217. 34
39.51
2.17
Ef. Ck. #5633
Ef. Ck. #5632 to A. V. Mahnen.
0.00
GROUP NO. 621. FIELDMAN: CLARK. BEET WORKERS' Ni
DEZ, SEFERINO HERNANDEZ
IMES: Bl
5NITO H
ERNAN-
0.00
5/20
5/20
5/20
5/20
5/20
5/20
8/1
8/1
8/1
8/1
Advance by Julio dela Pena
$27. 25
4.96
2.15
3.39
.50
18.00
32.04
Detroit
$68. 08
33.90
F. W. equip ...
F. W. tools
Grocery special..
F. W. fuel-
Cabin rental— No. 37
Groceries— Burnaps White Front — Vanlue
B. T. labor— O. Phillips #651—8.51 acres @ 8.00.
Hoeing labor— O. Phillips #651—11.30 acres @ 3.00
Ef. Ck. #3972
13.69
0.00
7844
DETROIT HEARINGS
■&
M
c
a
1 1
.- c
43 C
5
■§ £
Q • • .
ci*~*
<§' i
4""
# # * •
f * *
c -
2 "£
;
j >-fjF**#
j
*
c «
; *•; ■ }
: St. i
* *
J
:'< J
2 y:
I s-
7 =*
2 a)
2 1
#
ri
"1 2
"s °
S p
c «
J- t-
§ 3,
*<*
™* Jr
03
EG t-
IH *
b
|
K
-
>
<
0
I"
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7845
7846
DETROIT HEARINGS
No. 4327
Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio:
Food and groceries for 2 loads of Texas field workers transported back to
Texas $60.00
Julio dela Pena. 8/15/40. $60.00.
Debit account
Amount
Credit account Amount
$60.00
1
First National Bank of Findlay j
Cont. No. —
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: 8/15, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Food and groceries for 2 loads of Texas field workers transported back to Amount
Texas $60. 00
Total 60.00
Chg. Agri. Exp., Payee of Order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W. E.
Original.
-, Fieldman.
Dated at: Findlay, Ohio, May 20, 1940.
For value received, I hereby assign, transfer and order payment to Julio dela
Pena or order, address Realitos, Texas, the sum of Dollars ($50.50)
from any sums of money due or to become due to me from or
other Beet Growers affiliated with the Great Lakes Growers' Employment Com-
mittee, Inc., which may be payable to me through the Great Lakes or Lake Shore
Sugar Companies, or otherwise.
Eulogio Guerrero (64).
Benjamin Guerrero (22).
Witness: Eulogio Guerrero, Jr. (18).
R. D. Newcomer. Federico Guerrero (34).
(Field Worker's Signature)
(Posted)
826
Dated at: Findl\y, Ohio, 10/16, 1940.
For value received, I hereby assign, transfer, and order payment to Julio dela
Pena or order, address Realitos, Texas, the sum of Twenty-five and 25/100
Dollars ($25.25) from any sums of money due or to become due to me from
or other Beet Growers affiliated with the Great Lakes Growers
Employment Committee, Inc., which may be payable to me through the Great
Lakes or Lake Shore Sugar Companies, or otherwise.
Witness: John Vara (40).
R. D. Newcomer.
Jas. Mills (33).
(Field Worker's Signature)
For value received, I hereby sell, assign, and transfer to
within Order.
Dated 10/16, 1940.
Witness :
R. D. Newcomer
the
J. dela Pena.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7847
Group, 614.
(Posted)
Dated at: Findlay, Ohio, Nov. 22, 1940.
For value received, I hereby assign, transfer and order payment to Julio dela
Pena, or order, address Realitos, Texas, the sum of Six and no/100 Dollars ($6.00)
from any sums of money due or to become due to me from
or other Beet Growers affiliated with the Great Lakes Growers' Employment
Committee, Inc., which may be payable to me through the Great Lakes or Lake
Shore Sugar Companies, or otherwise.
Eulogio Guerrero.
Witness:
(Field Worker's Signature)
(Initialed:) C. W. E.
#605
(Posted)
Acct. Trinidad Trujillo, Whitacre Lease, 2yi mi. E. of Cygnet.
Dated at: Findlay, Ohio, Posted 6/5, 1940.
For value received, I hereby assign, transfer and order payment to Julio dela
Pena, or order, address Realitos, Texas, the sum of Seven and 39/100 Dollars
($7.39) from any sums of money due or to become due to me from Great Lakes
Sugar Co., or other Beet Growers affiliated with the Great Lakes Growers' .Em-
ployment Committee, Inc., which may be payable to me through the Great
Lakes or Lake Shore Sugar Companies, or otherwise.
Schwab, Lease Cont. 39, $46.97.
Witness:
R. D. Newcomer T. Trujillo.
(Field Worker's Signature)
For value received, I hereby sell, assign, and transfer to
the within order.
Dated 6/5, 1940.
Witness: R. D. Newcomer J. dela Pena.
New. #605
Dated at: Findlay, Ohio, May 19, 1940.
For value received, I hereby assign, transfer, and order payment to Julio dela
Pena, or order, address Realitos, Texas, the sum of Thirty-five and no/ 100 Dollars
($35.00) from any sums of money due or to become due to me from Great Lakes
Sugar Co. or other Beet Growers affiliated with the Great Lakes Growers' Em-
ployment Committee, Inc., which may be payable to me through the Great Lakes
or Lake Shore Sugar Companies, or otherwise.
Deming Lease Cont. 40, $54.12.
Trinidad Trujiello (40).
Roman Gonzales (39).
Eustaquio Barriontes (27)
Witness:
R. D. Newcomer — ■ — — — .
(Field Worker's Signature)
For value received, I hereby sell, assign, and transfer to
the within Order.
Dated May 19, 1940.
Witness:
JOSE B. GOYALZ.
R. D. Newcomer.
7848
DETROIT HEARINGS
621
New.
Dated at: Findlay, Ohio, May ,i(), 1940.
For value received, I hereby assign, transfer, and order payment to Julio dela
Pena or order, address Realitos, Texas, the sum of Twenty-Seven and 25/100
Dollars ($27.25) from any sums of money due or to become due to me from O.
Phillips or other Beet Growers affiliated with the Great Lakes Growers' Employ-
ment Committee, Inc., which may be payable to me through the Great Lakes or
Lake Shore Sugar Companies, or otherwise.
O. Phillips Contract 651, $33.90.
Benito Hernandez (29).
Seferino Hernandez (32).
Witness:
R. D. Newcomer.
For value received, I hereby sell, assign and transfer to
the within Order.
Dated: 5/20, 1940.
Witness:
R. D. Newcomer.
' Field Worker's Signature)
J. dela Pena.
No. 3867
.Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio.
Mileage— 6/1/40 to 6/30/40:
Truck 6DF48 Trans, field workers, 961 miles, @ 60. _ -- 57. 66
Truck 6DG15 Trans, field workers, 2,474 miles ©60 148. 44
Pickup Truck 3BT97 Trans, field workers and field workers'
equipment, 2,998 miles @ 60 179. 88
Total, 6,433 miles @ 60 385.98
Less 353.45 gals, gasoline @ 150__ $53. 02
Less 2 qts. oil @ 150 • 30
53. 32
$332. 66
Julio dela Pena. 7/16/40. $332.66.
Debit account
Trans, field workers
Amount
$332. 66
Credit account
First National Bank of FindJay
Amount
('out. No. —
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
kindlay, ohio
Date: July 15, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Mileage, 6/1/40 to 6/30/40, inch:
Truck 6DF48: Trans field workers, 961 miles, @ 60 $57. 66
Truck 6DG15: Trans field workers, 2,474 miles, @ 60 148. 44
Pick-up Truck 3HT97: Trans field workers & field workers'
equipment, 2,998 miles, @ 60
179. 88
Total miles, 6,433 miles, @ 60 385. 98
Less 353.45 gals, gasoline, @ 150 $53. 02
Less 2 qts. oil, @ 150 j_30
Total
— , Payee of order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.)
(Initialed:) C.W.F.
$332. 66
332. 66
Dee, Fieldman.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7849
Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio.
Truck mileage — hauling dusting material to dusters, 545 mi., (« "n- $27. 25
Moving field workers in territory, 71 miles, @, 5^ 3. 55
Truck 6DG15, Julv 1-15, incl $30. SO
Julio dela Pena. 7/23/40. $30.80.
Debit account
Amount
Credit account
Amount
Dusting.,
$27. 25
3.55
First National Bank of Findlay
Trans F. W
30. 80
(Duplicate) Cont.No.—
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: July 22, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Truck mileage — hauling dusting material to dusters, 545 mi., @ 5^ $27. 25
Moving field workers in territory, 71 mi., (o 5<t 3. 55
Truck 6DG15, July 1-15, inc.
Total 30. SO
— , Payee of order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.
J. F. W., Fieldman.
Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio:
Truck mileage, transfering labor in territory, 2,305 mi. at 6c
Truck 3HT97, July 1-15, incl.
Julio dela Pena. 7/23/40. $138.30.
No. 3913
$138. 30
Debit account
Trans. F. Workers.
Amount
138. 30
•'redit account
First National Bank of Findlay
Amount
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Cont. No.
Date: July 22, 1940.
There is due (Name) J. dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Amount
Truck mileage, transfering labor in territory, 2,305 mi. at .06-. 138. 30
Truck 3HT97, July 1-15, inc.
Total 138.30
— , payee of Order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W. E.
J. F. N.
7850
DETROIT HEARINGS
No. 4029
Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio:
Mileage for truck transporting field workers in territory, 478 miles, at 6c. $28. 68
Julio dela Pena. 8/6/40. $28.68.
Debit account
Trans. F. Wrks.
Amount
$28. 68
Credit account
First National Bank of Findlay.
Amount
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Cont. No. —
Date: Aug. 5, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Amount
Mileage for truck trans, field workers in territory, July 11-31, inc., 478
mi. at .06 28. 68
Total 28. 68
, Payee of Order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W. E.
J. F. N.
No. 4031
Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio:
Truck mileage hauling dusting material to dusters, July 16-31, inch, 931
mi. @ 50 $46.55
Julio dela Pena. 8/6/40. 46. 55.
Debit account
Amount
Credit account
Amount
I, L. Dusting
$46. 55
First National Bank of Findlav
Cont. No. —
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: Aug. 5, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Truck mileage hauling dusting material to dusters, July 16-31, inch, 931 Amount
mi., @ .05 $46.55
Total 46. 55
-, Payee of Order.
(Original and Copy to Findlav Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W. E.
J. F. N.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7851
No. 4559
Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio: Truck mileage hauling dusting material,
Aug. 1-3 1st, incl.:
Truck 6DG33, 1,325 mi. @ U $66. 25
Truck 6DG15, 542 mi. © 50 27. 10
Julio dela Pena, 9/7/40. 93. 35.
$93. 35
Debit account
L. L. Dustine
Amount
$93. 35
Credit account
First National Bank of Findlay .
Amount
Cont. No. —
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: Sept. 7, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Truck mileage hauling dusting material, Aug. 1-31, inch: Amount
Truck #6DG33, 1,325 mi., @ 5 $66. 25
Truck #6DG15, 542 mi., @ 5 27. 10
Total 93. 35
, Payee of Order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W. E. J. F. N.
No. 4560
Julio dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio:
Truck mileage tranc field workers to work on leases for B. T. & hoeing Amount
beets, July 1-Aug. 31st, inch: Truck 6HT48, 2,394 mi., @ 6^ $143 64
Julio dela Pena, 9/7/40. —143 61.
Debit account
Trans F. Workers.
Amount
$143.64
Credit account
Firs 1 Nationa 1 Bank of Findlay.
Amount
Cont. No. —
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: Sept. 7, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena, Findley, Ohio, for the following:
Truck mileage, trans, Field workers to work on leases for B. T. & hoeing Amount
beets, July 1-Aug. 31, Inc., 2394 mi. @ 6(4 $143. 64
, Pavee of Order.
J. F. W.
(Original and Copv to Findlav Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W.E.
7852
DETROIT HEARINGS
No. 4561
Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio:
Truck mileage looking after Texas workers in territory: Truck 3HT97,
July 15-Aug. 31, incl., 3,093 mi., @ H $185.58
Less 140.1 Gals, gasoline, furnished @ 15^ 21. 01
Julio dela Pena. 9/7/40. -164.57.
$164. 57
Debit account
Amount
Credit account
Amount
Agr). Exp
$164. 57
First National Bank of Findlay _
(Duplicate)
Tont. No. —
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: Sept. 7, 1940.
There is due (Name) J. dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Truck mileage looking after Texas workers in territory. Truck 3HT97 -Amount
July 15-Aug. 31, inc., 3,093 mi., @ 6(4 $185 58
— , Pavee of Order.
J. F. W.
(Original and Copy to Finlay Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W. E.
Julio dela Pena, No. 4749
Findlay, Ohio:
Truck mileage hauling dusting material to dusters in territory, 177 mil.
@ 5 $ ". $8. 85
Hauling machinery 131 mil. @ o$ 6. 55
Truck 6DG33, Sept, 1-15, incl 15. 40
Julio dela Pena, 9/25 40 -15. 40
Debit account
Amount
Credit account
Amount
L. L. Dusting
Agrl. Exp ...
ss. N.i
6.55
First National Bank of Findlay
-
15.40
(Duplicate)
Cont. No.
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: 9-23 1940.
There is due (Name) J. dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Truck mileage hauling dusting material to dusters in territory, 177 miles Amount
@ 5tf $8. 85
Hauling machinery 131 miles @ 5^ 6. 55
Truck 6DG33 Sept. 1-15, inc.
Total 15.40
— , Payee of Order
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office. )
.1. F. N.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7853
No. 4949
J. DELA PENA,
Findlay, Ohio:
Truck mileage:
Hauling machinery, 380 mile at 60 *22. 80
Hauling Field workers in territory, 611 mile at 60, Oct. 9-
Nov. 1, inclusive 48. 66 Amount
$71. 46
J. dela Pena, November 8, 140,-71.46.
Debit account
Amount
Credit account
Amount
Agrl. exp
Trans. & maint. of F. L
$22. 80
48. 66
First National Bank of Findlay . .
71.46
(Duplicate)
Cont. No. -
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: Nov. 7, 1940.
There is due (Name) J. dela Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Truck mileage, Oct. 9- Nov. 1, inc.:
Hauling machinery 380 mil. @ 60 $22. 80
Hauling field workers in territory 811 mil. @ 6^ 48. 66
Amount
Total $71.46
, Payee of Order.
J. F. NUTKE.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.)
(Initialed:) C. W. E.
No. 5102
J. dela Pena,
Findlay:
Truck mileage: Trans, field workers in territory Nov. l-15th, 881 mi.
at 50 . $44. 05
J. dela Pena. 11/22/40. $44.05.
Debit account
Trans. F. workers-
Amount
$44. 05
Credit account
First National Bank of Findlay _
Amount
(Duplicate)
Cont. No. —
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
Date: Nov. 22, 1940.
There is due (Name) J. de la Pena, Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Amount
Truck mileage: Trans, field workers in territory 881 mi. at 50 $44. 05
7354 DETROIT HEARINGS
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.)
$0. 50
. 58
1. 60
. 55
1. 90
1. 65
1. 65
38
Mileage 8. 81*
. 05
Trans. F. Workers 44. 05
Xo. 5657
JULTO DELA PENA,
Findlay, Ohio:
Moving and supervising Texan field workers, Nov. 16th to Dec. 19th,
1940, incl., 3,304 Miles at 50 $165. 20
Julio dela Pena. December 21, 1940, $165.20.
Debit account
Agrl. & Field, Securing & Main-
taining Field Workers.
Amount
$165. 20
Credit account
First National Bank of Findlay.
Amount
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena.
Box or R. F. D. Findlay, Ohio, for the following:
Moving and supervising Texan field workers, November 16th to Decem-
ber 19th, 1940, Inch, 3,304 miles @ 50 per mile $165. 20
Cont. No. -
Date: December 21, 1940.
Amotint
Total 165. 20
, Payee of Order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.) , Fieldman.
No. 5662
Julio dela Pena,
Findlay, Ohio:
Moving and supervising Texan field workers, Dec. 16th and 18th, 1940,
198 miles @ 60 per mile $11. 88
Julio dela Pena, December 21, '40, $11. 88.
Debit account
Agrl. & Field, Securing and
Maintaining Field Workers.
Amount
$11.88
Credit account
First National Bank of Findlay.
Amount
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
(Duplicate)
Great Lakes Sugar Company
findlay, ohio
7855
Cont. No. —
Date: December 21, 1940.
There is due (Name) Julio dela Pena.
Box or R. F. D., Findlay, Ohio, for the following: Amount
Moving and Supervising Texan Field Workers, December 16th and 18th,
1940, 198 miles @ H per mile $11. 88
Total 11. 88
, Payee of Order.
(Original and Copy to Findlay Office.) , Fieldman.
Exhibit 50. — A Study of Sugar Beet Field Workers' Earnings
and Expenses
report by m.
C. HENDERSON, BEET GROWERS EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE, INC.,
SAGINAW, MICH.1
January 25, 1941.
Three fieldmen were chosen for assistants in compiling the data which follows
concerning the earnings and living expenses of sugar beet field workers during
the 1940 season. Tony Willems of Lansing, Gilbert Smith of Caro, and Norman
Gardner of Crosswell gathered the information. Each was asked to report on
three families, one exceptionally good, one average, and one poor family.
The information shown is more or less self-explanatory and does not require
interpretation by the writer. A summary of the information showing totals
and averages is shown on the last sheet of this report.
It has been anticipated that totals and averages would also be shown in con-
nection with interseasonal work. However, this type of information was the
hardest of all to get since there were no records in the plant offices covering such
work and also because certain of the reporting fieldmen used different bases in
reporting number of days of work, etc. At the time that this information was
requested, the interseasonal work had been completed and many of the workers
involved could not remember facts and figures concerning this work. Should
further information be desired next year it should be requested before the inter-
seasonal work begins.
The fieldmen involved have done an excellent job of reporting and without
their help nothing like accuracy in these figures would have been possible.
1. Name of head of group: Rafael Gomez.
2. Where from: Eagle Pass, Tex.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Rafael Gomez 39
Amalio Gomez 35
Walter Patino 17
Amado Patino 15
Ernesto Patino 11
Billy Patino 6
Dora Patino 13
Olga Patino 3
Julian Gomez 16
Amado Esqueda 39
4. Number of acres worked, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: 55.10.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $606.10.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation $50
(6) Grocery bill 92
(c) Company deductions $0
(d) Other items 13
7. Net cash received at time of first payment: $501.
1 Mr. Henderson was a witness before the committee in Chicago on August 21, 1940, when he submitted
a paper and testified on the employment in Michigan of migratory labor from Texas. See Chicago hearings,
pp. 1271-1298.
7856 DETROIT HEARINGS
Inter season work
8. Type of work engaged in: Picked pickles and farm work.
9. Approximate number of days of work : 80.
10. Total amount earned: $140.
11. Approximate living expenses: $80.
12. Net profit for interseason work: $60.
*******
13. Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 63.40.
14. Average tonnage per acre: 8.
15. Total amount earned, pulling and topping: $505.
16. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill $80
(b) Company deductions __ 0
(c) Other items 0
17. Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $425.
18. Total earnings for season, all work: $1,251.10.
19. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $315.
20. Net profit for entire season's work: $936.10.
Report submitted December 28, 1940.
Tony Willems.
1. Name of head of group: Louis Coultrerr.
2. Where from: San Antonio, Tex.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Louis Coultrerr 53
Minnie Coultrerr 47
Robert Coultrerr 17
James Coultrerr 16
Marie Coultrerr 16
Joe Coultrerr 15
Alfred Coultrerr 9
Rudy Coultrerr 6
Minnie Coultrerr 3
4. Number of acres worked, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: 22.90.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $251.90.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation $50,001 (c) Company deduc-
ts Grocery bill 128. 22 l tions ._ 0
(d) Other items 1 39
7. Net cash received at time of first payment: $251. 9C.
*******
Interseason work
8. Type of work engaged in: Picking pickles.
9. Approximate number of days worked: 100.
10. Total amount earned: $150.
11. Approximate living expenses: $150.
12. Net profit for interseason work : None.
*******
13. Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 23.90.
14. Average tonnage per acre: 6.50.
15. Total amount earned, pulling and topping: $146.88.
16. Total guaranteed accounts andldeductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill.. ... $140 (c) Other items 0
(b) Company deductions 0
17. Total cash received for fall work, including bonus:
18. Total earnings for season, all work: $548.78.
19. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $469.61.
20. Net profit for entire seasons work: $79.17.
Report submitted December 28, 1940.
Tony W illkms.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7857
1. Name of head of group: Louis Ruise Cortez.
2. Where from: San Antonio, Tex.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Louis Cortez 26
Melshore Cortez 23
Juan Cortez 60
Maria Cortez 50
Juan Cortez 33
Pedro Cortez 30
Simons Cortez 21
Jesus Cortez 21
Felix Cortez 20
Lupe Cortez 14
Louis Cortez 2
Alfonso Cortez 2
Marilen Cortez 4
Trinidad Cortez Dias 18
4. Number of acres worked, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: 53.80.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $538.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation.. $92. 00
(b) Grocery bill 14°.. 00
(c)
deduc-
Company
tions 0
(d) Other items $22.90
7. Net cash received at time of first payment: $275.10.
9.
10.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Interseason work
Type of work engaged in: Picking pickles and general farm work.
Approximate number of days of work: 60.
Total amount earned: $260.
Net profit for interseason work: None.
*******
Number of acres worked, pulling, and topping: 62.30.
Average tonnage per acre: 7.
Total amount earned, pulling, and topping: $436.10.
Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a)
(6)
(<0
Gro« y bill
Con ,ttny deductions.
Othff items
$130
0
0
Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $306.
Total earnings for season, all work: $1,234.
Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $652.90.
Net profit for entire season's work: $581.10.
Report submitted December 28, 1940.
Tony Willems.
1. Name of head of group: Rafael Munoz.
2. Wherefrom: 1314 El Paso Street, San Antonio, Tex.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children
Rafael Munoz 39
Candelaria Munoz •__ 32
Patricia Munoz 11
Lupe Munoz 9
Alvria Munoz 6
Margaret Munoz 5
Candelaria Munoz 3
Juan Munoz 42
Jesus Saldana 29
5.
6.
Spring work
Number of acres blocked and thinned: 33.40.
Number of acres hoed: 33.40.
Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $365.
Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation... $60.00
(6) Grocery bill 105.00
(c) Company deduc-
tions (hoes, file,
and clothing) _ _ 10. 25
(d) Other items (auto-
mobile) $71. 00
7. Net cash received at time of first payment: $118.75.
60396— 41— pt. 19-
7g58 DETROIT HEARINGS
Interseason work
8. Type of work engaged in: 2 weeks picking beans at McBain, Mich.; day work
on farms, R..F. D., care for sugar beet growers.
9. Approximate number of days of work:
10. Total amount earned: $155.
11. Approximate living expenses: $40.
12. Net profit from interseason work: $115.
*******
Fall work
13. Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 34.40.
14. Average tonnage per acre: 9.50.
15. Total amount earned, pulling and topping: $300.62.
16. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill $60. 00
(b) Company deductions (doctor bills) 35.00
(c) Other items (coal) 3. 85
17. Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $300.62.
18. Total earnings for season, all work: $820.82.
19. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $345.10.
20. Net profit for entire season's work: $475.72.
Report submitted November 22, 1940.
Rafael Munoz.
1. Name of head of group: Pedro L. Estrada.
2. Where from: San Antonio, Tex.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Pedro L. Estrada 25
Juanita Estrada 24
Jose Estrada 5
Margaret Estrada 2
* *
Pedro Estrada, Jr 1
Antonio Estrada 18
Petra Estrada 16
Spring work
4. Number of acres blocked and thinned: 30.70.
Number of acres hoed: 30.70.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $337.70.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation $40. 00
(6) Grocery bill 140. 00
(c) Company deductions (3 hoes, 1 file) 3. 25
(d) Other items (automobile payment) 25. 00
7. Net cash received at time of first payment: $129.45.
*******
Interseason work
8. Type of work engaged in: Picking tomatoes and pickles near Marshall, Mich.;
also day work on farms.
9. Approximate number of days of work: 10.
10. Total amount earned: $20.
11. Approximate living expenses: $20.
12. Net profit from interseason work: None.
*******
Fall work
13. Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 20.70.
14. Average tonnage per acre: 11.34.
15. Total amount earned, pulling and topping: $206.95.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7859
16. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill (company) $113. 00
(6) Deductions, company (doctor bills) 8. 00
(c) Other items *_ 3. 85
(rf) Milk and eggs from farmer 7. 001
17. Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $75.10.
18. Total earnings for season, all work: $564.65.
19. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $340.10.
20. Net profit for entire season's work: $224.55.
Report submitted November 23, 1940.
Peter Estrada.
1. Name of head of group: Desiderio Raygosa.
2. Where from: Box 35, Castroville, Tex.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Desiderio Raygosa 47
Petra Raygosa 38
Esther Raygosa 16
Sara Raygosa 16
Marcela Raygosa 15
Angelita Raygosa 14
Leocidia Raygosa 9
Josephine Raygosa 7
Antonio Raygosa 5
Augustine Raygosa 3
Spring work
4. Number of acres blocked and thinned: 42.75.
Number of acres hoed: 42.75.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $470.25.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a)
(own
Transportation
car) .__ $50
(b) Grocery bill 180
(c) Deductions, company. 0
Net cash received at time of first payment
(d) Other items (traded
cars, paid cash to
dealer) $200
$40.25.
Interseason work
8. Type of work engaged in: Head of the family worked day work on farms and
three girls worked in canning factory at Pigeon, Mich.
9. Approximate number of days of work : (?) .
10. Total amount earned: $200.
11. Approximate living expenses: $120.
12. Net profit from interseason work: $80.
Fall work
13. Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 49.35.
14. Average tonnage per acre: 11.40.
15. Total amount earned, pulling and topping: $497.01.
16. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill (total living expenses) $160
(6) Company deductions 0
(c) Other items 0
17
18
19
Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $497.01.
Total earnings for season, all work: $1,167.26.
Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $457.01.
Report submitted November 16, 1940.
Desiderio Raygosa..
7860 DETROIT HEARINGS
1. Name of head of group: Luis Gonzales.
2. Where from: Crystal City, Tex.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Luis Gonzales 23
Mary Gonzales 25
Andena Gonzales 14
Ernestine Gonzales 5
Johnnie Gonzales 3
Spring work
4. Number of acres blocked and thinned: 12.08.
Number of acres hoed: 12.08.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $132.88.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation $33. 85
(6) Grocery bill 55.00
(c) Company deduc-
tions None.
(d) Other items. .. $51.03
7. Net cash received at time of first payment: None.
*******
Interseason work
8. Type of work engaged in: String beans.
9. Approximate number of days of work: 35.
10. Total amount earned: $50.
11. Approximate living expenses: $48.
12. Net profit for interseason work: $2.
*******
Fall work
13. Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 12.
14. Average tonnage per acre: 6.50.
15. Total amount earned, pulling and topping: $76.
16. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill $41. 20
(b) Company deductions None.
(c) Other items 13. 92
17. Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $76.
18. Total earnings for season, all work: $258.88.
19. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $243.
20. Net profit for entire season's work: $15.88.
Report submitted January 6, 1941.
Norman Gardner.
1. Name of head of group: Simon Gutiericz.
2. Where from: San Antonio, Tex., Poteet County.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Simon Gutieriez 42
Carmar Gutieriez '- 39
Vincente Gutieriez 14
Rodolfe Gutieriez 17
Paul Gutieriez 15
Velia Gutieriez 14
******
Spring work
4. Number of acres blocked and thinned: 45.91.
Number of acres hoed: 45.91.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $505.01.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation $70
(b) Grocery bill 124
Net cash received at time of first payment: $279.01
*****
(c) Company deductions. $0
(d) Other items 32
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7ggl
Interseason work
8. Type of work engaged in: String beans.
9. Approximate number of days of work : 22.
10. Total amount earned: $115.01.
11. Approximate living expenses: $80.
12. Net profit for interseason work: $35.
*******
Fall work
13. Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 49.91.
14. Average tonnage per acre: 7.07.
15. Total amount earned, pulling and topping: $368.09.
16. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill $67. 00
(b) Company deductions 0
(c) Other items 13. 54
17. Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $368.09.
18. Total earnings for season, all work: $988.10.
19. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $386.54.
20. Net profit for entire season's work: $601.56.
Date report submitted, January 6, 1941.
Norman Gardner.
1. Name of head of group: Fred Vogt.
2.) Where from: San Antonio, Tex., Bexar County.
3. Names and ages of all persons in group, including children:
Fred Vogt 40
Salme Vogt 38
Ruben Vogt 18
Jose Vogt 17
Lupe Vogt 15
Fred Vogt, Jr 7
Spring work
4. Number of acres blocked and thinned: 32.83.
Number of acres hoed: 32.83.
5. Total earnings, blocking, thinning, and hoeing: $361.13.
6. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of first payment:
(a) Transportation $65. 00
(6) Grocery bill 136.70
deduc-
(c) Company
tions 0
(d) Other items 67. 55
Net cash received at time of first payment: $91.88.
Interseason work
8. Type of work engaged in: Picking cherries and tomatoes.
9. Approximate number of days of work: 44.
10. Total amount earned: $366.
11. Approximate living expenses: $216.
12. Net profit for interseason work: $150.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Fall work
Number of acres worked, pulling and topping: 32.83.
Average tonnage per acre: 12.80.
Total amount earned pulling and topping: $361.14.
Total guaranteed accounts and deductions at time of second payment:
(a) Grocery bill $23. 02
(b) Company deductions 0
(c) Otheritems 19.92
7862 DETROIT HEARINGS
17. Total cash received for fall work, including bonus: $361.14.
18. Total earnings for season, all work: $1,088.27.
19. Total guaranteed accounts and deductions, including living expenses during
interseason work: $528.19.
20. Net profit for entire season's work: $560.08.
Report submitted January 6, 1941.
Norman Gardner.
Total number of workers 50
Total number of men workers 25
Total acres blocked, thinned, and hoed 329. 47
Average acres blocked, thinned, and hoed 6. 59
Total earned, blocking, thinning, and hoeing $3, 567. 97
Average earned, blocking, thinning, and hoeing $71. 36
Total earned, interseasonal work $1, 456. 00
Average earned, interseasonal work $29. 12
Total earned, pulling and topping $2, 897. 79
Average earned, pulling and topping $57. 96
Total earned from beets $6, 465. 76
Average earned from beets $129. 32
Total earned for season, all work $7, 921. 76
Average earned for season, all work $158. 44
Total expenses for season, including nonworkers $3, 990. 69
Average expenses per worker, including expenses of dependents • $79. 81
Average cash received at the end of season $98. 74
Average number of days work per man in beets 2 29. 65
Average earnings per day per man in beets $4. 36
1 Includes automobiles, purchases, etc.
2 Based on ^ acre per day per man, blocking and thinning; 2 acres per day per man, hoeing; H acre per day
per man, pulling and topping (9 tons beets).
Exhibit 51. — History of Sugar Beet Labor in Michigan
REPORT BY LABOR DIVISION, FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, U. S. DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D. C.
The beet-sugar industry in Michigan began when the Michigan Sugar Co. built
a plant at Essexville, near Bay City, which operated for the first time in 1898.
A beet-sugar factory erected in" White Pigeon, Mich., in 1840, operated for a short
time, but there was no further development of the industry until about 1880 when
Michigan State College undertook investigations "on the subject of obtaining a
supply of sugar from plants that could be raised" in the State. The attention of
the college investigators was first turned to sorghum.
The interest of the State in the development of the sugar industry had been
evidenced by the passage of an act in 1881 to promote the manufacture of sugar
within its boundaries. This act provided that Michigan would pay $2 for every
hundred pounds of merchantable sucrose sugar manufactured in the State from
sugar cane, cornstalks, or beets grown in the State. The bounty was to be paid
each year for the 5-year period beginning with January 1, 1882. In addition, all
buildings and machinery used for the manufacture of sugar from these sources
were exempt from taxation for 5 years.
Encouragement from the State in the form of bounties and tax exemptions,
and the work of the college in developing sugar from sorghum failed to give
impetus to the sugar industry. Only one man applied for the bounty for sugar
made from sorghum, the total of payments to him for three years being $404.70.
No claims were made for bounties for sugar manufactured from beets or corn-
stalks.1
After the failure of the college to secure results with sorghum, its attention
turned to sugar beets. Seeds weie imported for distribution among farmers in
the State. Of 400 farmers receiving the seeds, 228 farmers in 39 counties reported
results and sent beets to the college for analysis. "The results of these trials were
most gratifying." 2 Michigan thereupon passed a second act in 1897 providing for
bounties of 1 cent a pound on all sugar from beets grown in the State, provided
the farmer received $4 a ton for beets containing 12 percent sugar.3 The State
i R. C. Kedzie, The Beet Sugar Industry in Michigan, 1901; Michigan Experiment Station Bull. 305,
Sugar Beet Costs and Returns in Michigan, by K. T. Wright, December 1940.
2 Kedzie, op. cit., p. 3. „ „ .1 , , ■ ,*
» Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States in 1898, U. S. Department of Agriculture,
Government Printing Office, 1899, p. 56.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7863
bounty law, as well as the Federal Tariff Act of 1897,4 gave great impetus to the
industry. During the 10-year period following the passage of these acts, there
was a remarkable expansion of the beet-sugar industry in Michigan. Idaho,
Kansas, Iowa, Minnesota, New York, and Nebraska also enacted laws to en-
courage the manufacture of sugar.5
The United States Department of Agriculture was extremely active in promoting
the sugar-beet industry. From 1897 to 1909, the Department issued annual
Reports on the Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry, several of which were printed
as congressional documents. The work of the Department along these lines can
best be summarized from one of the reports:
<<* * * rp^ Department of Agriculture, working in conjunction with the
State experiment stations, has been diligently experimenting and solving the
agricultural questions that entered into the beet sugar problem. The kinds of
soil, the conditions of climate, the sections of country, the cost and profits of
production, the direct and indirect benefits to the farming industry are subjects
that have been carefully studied, and the results have been published. The secular
and agricultural press and writers and lecturers on agricultural subjects have
aided materially in this work." 6
The number of Michigan factories manufacturing beet sugar increased from one
in 1898 to nine in 1899. The rapid expansion of the industry brought about many
problems, including a serious drain upon the State's finances, as a result of the
bounty payment.
"Michigan has been the storm center of the objection to this bounty system.
This probably grew out of the fact that nine factories were put in operation in
Michigan in the short space of 2 years. The legitimate claims of these factories
under the law seemed an enormous drain upon the State treasury. Under the
terms of the law it was provided that factories were to receive 1 cent per pound for
all sugar manufactured. The act appropriated $10,000 for the payment of the
bounty and provided that any excess above that should be paid out of the general
fund by warrants drawn against the same. The first factory built in the State
was that of the Michigan Sugar Co., which drew the bounty for the first year,
1898, absorbing the $10,000, and then put in a claim for the balance from the
general fund according to the law. Eight other factories were constructed and
put into operation for the campaign of 1899. These nine factories produced
33,150,873 pounds of sugar, and under the terms of this law were entitled to
$331,508.73.
"The people of the State were confronted with an enormous drain upon their
State treasury. These factories operating for the first year were late in beginning.
They were in the experimental stage; they were working on the first crop of beets
ever produced by Michigan farmers. Owing to all these causes it is probable
that the factories did not produce sugar equal to half their capacity. Thus if no
additional factories were built, the demands on the State treasury might reach
something like $700,000. The following legislature undertook to amend the law
by inserting one-half cent per pound instead of 1 cent, as under the old law; the
Governor has insisted in his message that there should be a clause limiting the
maximum amount that could be paid to any one factory to $25,000. The legis-
lature refused to take this view of the case, and the Governor vetoed the bill.
This left the old law in force. The attorney general rendered an opinion that
warrants could not be drawn on the treasury for this purpose; that the object
was not one for which a tax could properly be levied. The sugar factories in-
sisted upon their right under the law. The matter was carried through the
courts and finally it was decided by the Supreme Court that the law was uncon-
stitutional and the attorney general's opinion was sustained." 7
The action of the courts in putting a stop to the bounty on beet sugar had no
appreciable effect in slowing up the expansion of the industry in Michigan. A
factory erected at Marine City produced beet sugar for the first time in 1900,
making a total of 10 plants operating in the State during that year. Three more
factories began operations in 1901, four in 1902, and four in 1903. By the end
4 "The rapid development of the industry after 1897 has been largely due to the direct encouragement
by the Federal and State Governments, particularly the former. While customs tariffs have afforded a
large measure of protection to the industry since 1883, it was not until after the Tariff Act of 1S97 that the
rapid development of the industry began," (p. x). (Fedtral Trade Commission, Report on the Beet
Sugar Industry in the United States, May 24, 1917, Government Printing office, 1917.)
6 Report on the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States, Federal Trade Commission, May 24, 1917,
pp 14-15.
6 U. S. Department of Agriculture, Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States in 1900,
Rept. No. 69, 1901, p. 6.
' U. S. Department of Agriculture, Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States in 1900,
Rept. No. 69, 1901, pp. 19-20.
7g(34 DETROIT HEARINGS
of 1903, there were thus 21 factories in the State which had operated during one
or more seasons, and two more factories which had been built but never operated.
The industry was soon confronted with the results of over-expansion and
hasty, ill-advised building. Several factories removed to points outside the
State during 1904 — 6 years after the start of the industry.
"Michigan has installed more factories than any other State in the
Union. * * *
"In Michigan we find most of the unfortunate records chargeable to the beet-
sugar industry since its inception. These were the results of natural and eco-
nomic causes." There was too much rush and not enough careful study of eco-
nomic conditions in establishing the factories. Too many plants were located in
too small an area; few of them received enough beets on that account. If suffi-
cient time had elapsed for developing the resources, Michigan could have sustained
all the factories she had built. As it was, some of them led a precarious existence.
Two of them have been removed from the State, the one at Benton Harbor to
Canada, and the one at Kalamazoo to Chippewa Falls, Wis. Possibly two or
three more may find it necessary to seek new locations." 8
The competition between factories was so ruinous that many were unable to
obtain enough beets to slice. Some did not operate at all; others were forced to
seriously curtail operations and operate for very short seasons. Although there
were favorable weather conditions during the 1904 growing season, three factories
were idle. Only 16 plants ran campaigns during that year.9 During the 1905
season, again only 16 plants operated. Two additional plants removed from the
State during that year, four were idle, and many operated for short terms. The
United States Department of Agriculture observed on this point:
«* * * The factories in this State must content themselves, however, with
shorter campaigns and smaller supplies of beets than those in any other section
of the country." 10
By 1912, 7 factories had removed from the State. The Charlevoix plant, which
had begun building about 1902, operated for the first time during the 1906 cam-
paign. The only new factory to manufacture beet-sugar in Michigan after 1906
was the Mount Pleasant factory, which operated in 1920. Up until the depres-
sion, about 16 plants operated each year. During the depression, this number was
considerably reduced. For example, in 1931, only 6 of the beet-sugar factories
in the State operated, and during the years 1929-32, an average of 9 factories a
year. Thirteen factories have operated each year since 1934. At present there
are 15 factories in Michigan.
'labor force of the sugar beet industry
The most pressing problem of the sugar beet farmer, since the inception of the
industry, has been the securing of an adequate labor supply. Sugar beet cultiva-
tion requires periods of intensive hand work spread over 6 or 7 months of the year.
The hand labor requirements of the crop are exceedingly large as compared with
other crops. "More than 10 times as much hand labor is required to raise an
acre of beets as to raise an acre of wheat, over 5 times as much as to raise an acre
of corn, and more than twice as much as to raise an acre of potatoes." u
The difficulties faced by beet farmers in securing enough workers to meet this
unusual tvpe of seasonal* labor demand, were early recognized by the agencies
and individuals who had been instrumental in fostering and encouraging the
growth of an American beet-sugar industry. In 1902, for the first time, a section
of the annual beet-sugar industry report of the Department of Agriculture was
devoted to a discussion of the labor supply and the possibilities of meeting the
need created by the fast-expanding industry.12 Subsequent annual reports devoted
more and more space to this problem. The advisability of recruiting cheap non-
local labor was discussed, and the suggestion made that immigrant labor from
beet-producing countries be secured from the towns and cities and from abroad.
s U. S. Department of Agriculture, Rept. No. 80, Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United
States in 1904, p. 61.
• Ibid., p. 113, 115, 116. „ T J . .. TT ., ,
io U. S. Department of Agriculture, Rept. No. 82, Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United
States in 1905, p. 56. „ „ . , _, .. _ .
i> Franklin S Harris, The Sugar Beet in America, New York, 1919, p. 45. The Special Report on the Beet
Sugar Industry in the United States, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Government Printing Office, 1898
(also printed as II. Doc. No. 39C, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) states: "The raising of sugar beets requires consider-
ably more hand labor than any other farm product, and it is labor of such a kind and extent that no faimer
doing considerable business could hope to perform more than a small portion of it" (p. 170).
"U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rept. No. 72, Progiess of the Beet Sugar Industry in the United States
in 1901, Government Printing Office, 1902, p. 19.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7865
The vise of other immigrant groups, such as Chinese, Japanese, Italians, Rouma-
nians, Portuguese, and southern Europeans, who had no experience with beet work,
but who were "accustomed to this kind of work," was also proposed. Other
possible sources of supply named were Indians, the unemployed of cities and towns,
inmates of State penal and reform institutions, and juvenile delinquents. Children
were continually pointed to as a large and ready source of beet workers. The
desirability of building up a local labor supply by settling these migrant workers
in the beet areas was also recognized.13
As the need for more and more nonlocal labor grew, sugar companies assumed
the responsibility for recruiting labor and brought in large groups of workers, who
were distributed among the farmers contracting with the company. Not only the
individual farmer's inability to recruit the necessary labor, but the desire of the
sugar companies to obtain contracts for beets motivated this action. Farmers
were loathe to work a crop which required large amounts of hand labor, and they
disliked the idea of performing the type of work necessary in the hand operations,
which are among the most difficult and unpleasant of agricultural occupations.
The composition of the sugar-beet-labor force during the early years of the
industry is indicated from various sources:
"Detroit (Mich.) News, May 26, 1903. — Forty-five men left Detroit yesterday
afternoon for the sugar-beet fields in the vicinity of Flint, under the direction of
the Detroit Sugar Co. The men, who were mostly habitues of the river front,
will receive $1.50 per day, boarding themselves, or $1 per day and board."
"Alpena (Mich.) Argus, June 24, 1903. — The management of the beet-sugar
factory at East Tawas. has secured about 100 boys and girls in this city, to go to
the beet fields around Tawas and pull weeds. The dealers in sweetness pay
them $1 per day."
"Lansing (Mich.) Journal, July 23, 1903. — Nearly every morning persons
passing the city hall or the corner of Ottawa Street and Washington Avenue are
surprised to see crowds of children huddled together, barefooted, and heads
almost uniformly covered with broad-brim peak-crown straw hats, styled 'Pan-
ama.' These children are waiting for the farmers' wagons to take them out into
the country where they work all day weeding sugar beets. Both boys and girls
carry hoes that resemble the common garden variety, only the handle is about
1 foot long and the blade is about one-fourth as large."
"Detroit (Mich.) News, July 17, 1903 (special from Prescott, Mich.). — Two
coaches, filled with children ranging from 12 to 18, have arrived from Alpena to
work in sugar-beet fields."
"Grand Rapids (Mich.) Press, August 22, 1903. — Factory to field. Welcome
change for boys from Owosso. As beet weeders, hundreds of them are employed
all through the summer. Modern methods in sugar industry make room lor the
children at good wages.14
• <* * * An instructive lesson may be read by witnessing the behavior of a
crowd of juveniles as they receive their weekly pay for weeding beets. Some of
the tots are so small that their chins hardly reach the level of the paying clerk's
desk, but each receives his wages and marches off, a capitalist * * *.15
"The sugar-beet industry, now carried on so extensively in Michigan, gives
opportunity for foreign laborers. One iactory requires 5,000 acres of beets, and
as it takes 1 person a week to thin an acre of beets, 5,000 weeks' work are required
in June, and as much in September and October to harvest the beets. It is very
difficult to get the labor needed. This is partly due to the fact that this factory
was located in a district already given to peach growing, which requires much
labor at the same time that the beet crop requires it. Russian Jews and other
foreigners are brought over from Chicago during the 2 busy seasons." 16
"The Bay City (Mich.) Times-Press, April 25, 1903.— About 500 Russians
from Hastings, Nebr., arrived at Saginaw yesterday from Chicaro on a Pere
Marquette special train. They are under contract to work in sugar-beet fields
in Tuscola and Huron Counties and were distributed along the line this morning."17
Prior to 1906, it appears that the Michigan sugar-beet industry employed
mainly gang labor — groups of men, women, or children. Hired family groups in
13 See Appendix, excerpt from U. S. Department of Agriculture, Rept. No. 80. See also U. S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Rept. No. S2, Progress of the Beet Sugar Industry in the United States in 1905, pp.
10-13: Rept. No. 74, Progress of the Beet Sugar Industry in the United States in 1902, pp. 20-21; Rept. No.
86, Progress of the Beet Sugar Industry iu the United States in 1907, pp. 20-21.
>4 Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States in 1903, op. cit., p. 106.
18 Robert C. Kedzie, The Beet Sugar Industry in Michigan, Lansing, 1901, p. 4.
19 Reports of the Industrial Commission, Immigration and Education, vol. 15, p. 533.
17 Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States in 1903, op. cit., p. 104.
7866 DETROIT HEARINGS
the form which later predominated were not found, but there were undoubtedly
some family groups in the labor force during this period.18 Groups of laborers
were brought to the fields each morning and returned to their homes in the
evening. In some instances, workers migrated from distant places and remained
in the beet areas for the season. The contract system had already developed.
It seems probable that by 1906 the labor supply of the Michigan sugar-beet in-
dustry began to take shape in the fashion in which it was to continue until the
end of the first World War. The United States Department of Agriculture
reported on the Michigan sugar-beet industry during that year as follows:
"Rapid changes are taking place in Michigan which are beneficial to agricul-
ture generally. Many settlers are emigrating to the State and going to work as
laborers and tenants in the beet fields. These are of Hungarian, Russian and
German extraction." 19
Consideration began to be given to the settlement of laborers in the beet areas.
"While for a year or two these laborers may migrate back and forth from a certain
locality to the beet fields in which they are working, each year sees more and more
of them permanently settled in the vicinity in which the beets are grown. During
the summer months they engage in beet growing, and during the other months
they engage in other lines of labor connected with agricultural and other indus-
trial occupations. An extract from the Port Huron (Mich.) Times of May 12,
1907, indicates how this takes place:
"Lansing businessmen have under consideration a plan of colonization of the
foreigners who annually visit the vicinity to work in the sugar-beet fields. It is
proposed to purchase lands to be sold in tracts of perhaps 5 acres to the men as
an inducement for them to locate permanently there. "i0
The labor supply in northern Ohio sugar-beet fields, which are adjacent to the
southern Michigan fields, and which supply a factory in southern Michigan, ex-
perienced a similar development during the first decade of the century. When
the industry began, there was a sufficient supply of laborers in nearby towns and
communities to work the fields. In time it became necessary to recruit laborers
from distant localities. These were generally immigrants. A survey in 1909
found Belgian beet workers, although "several other nationalities had been tried
in previous years. The Belgians worked in gangs.
"About 350 men were brought into the area above mentioned [northern Ohio]
during the past season [1909] to work in the beet fields. All were Belgians, and
were secured by an agent of the sugar company from Detroit and neighboring
communities in Michigan. The entire labor force were either single men or mar-
ried men who came without their families, principally the former. When not en-
gaged in the beet fields they work in various industries in and about Detroit.
Many work in lumber camps during the winter. The agent of the company goes
to some of the Belgians who are in business in Detroit, usually saloonkeepers,
boarding-house keepers, and small shopkeepers, and through them gets in touch
with a number of laborers, who generally cooperate with him to secure others.
Many of the men return to the beet fields year after year, and in many instances
bring their friends.
"After experimenting with several races this company found the Belgians
more adaptable and generally better suited to the work than any other race. In
past years as many as four or five races have been employed during the season,
but for 2 years an effort has been made to employ Belgians only. In 1908 a few
Bulgarians and Poles were employed, but during the past season only Belgians
were brought in * * *" 21
During the very first year of the industry in Michigan gangs of local women and
children were hired by the day.
"* * * In the campaign of the Michigan Sugar Co. in 1898 beet raisers
found it possible to hire women at from 50 to 65 cents per day to thin beets.
Later in the season, as the labor supply proved inadequate, these same women,
and children as well, asked and received from 75 cents to $1 per day * * *" 22
18 See for example, Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in 1907, Rept. No. 86, U. S. Department of Agri-
culture, Government Printing Office 1908, "Throughout the beet districts the laborers are usually composed
of families consisting of father and mother and from 3 to 10 children" (pp. 22-23).
>s U. S. Department of Agriculture, Rept. Mo. 84, Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United
States in 1906, Government Printing Office 1907, p. 76. See also Michigan Bureau of Labor and Industrial
Statistics Bulletin, The Beet Sugar Industry, 1908(?), which describes the labor force in 1908 as being com-
posed of Belgians, Russians, and Hungarians, migrant and resident.
2° Progress of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States in 1907, U. S. Department of Agriculture,
Rept. No. 86, Government Printing Office, 1908, p. 23.
2> Reports of the United States Immigrant Commission, Immigrants in Industry, pt. 24, "Recent Immi-
grants in Agriculture", vol. 2, pp. 569-575. Government Printing Office, 1911.
22 Reports of the Industrial Commission, Agriculture and Agricultural Labor, vol. 10, Testimony of Clinton
D. Smith, director, Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, p. 574, Government Printing Office, 1901.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7867
The tremendous growth from 1898 to 1899 in acreage and factories exhausted
the available local labor. In 1899 gangs of men were brought from Detroit to
the Alma district to work at thinning and hoeing.23 Around Bay City at this
time, the wives and children of immigrant Poles were employed for the hand beet
work.24 As the industry grew, more and more nonlocal labor was brought in to
supplement the local labor force. Women and children as well as men worked
in beets.
The use of family contract labor appears to have grown steadily. Belgian,
German-Russian, and Hungarian immigrants with large families were recruited
to work on a contract acreage basis. Many of these families became tenants
and owners who also grew beets, and tbeir places as laborers were taken by groups
of new workers of foreign nationality. The movement to the beet fields each year
became regular. Some families remained in the beet areas, and lived in the beet
snacks which were provided by the companies to house their field laborers. These
families did not become farm tenants or renters, but tried to find work as farm
hands or in casual pursuits. Some sought and found industrial employment in
large towns or cities near the beet areas, such as Saginaw. Others subsisted on
their beet earnings and on credit supplied by the beet companies at local stores.
Although many beet workers undoubtedly returned to the fields each year and
brought new workers with them, recruiting each spring continued. Beet hand
work was unattractive to laborers who could obtain other employment. Thus,
early each spring, company agents went forth into large industrial centers, appeal-
ing to tne immigrant residents of the slum areas, holding out attractive and
glowing promises. Beautiful homes in the country, easy work, good pay, fresh
air, the opportunity of raising their food, and the chance of utilizing the labor of
their children — all appealed to the immigrant slum dwellers, who were frequently
of peasant origin.
During the World War beet workers of Mexican origin were first recruited to
work in the sugar-beet fields of Michigan. These families came from Texas and
other border States or directly from Mexico. The change from a European to a
Mexican labor force is discussed below.
MICHIGAN SUGAR-BEET LABOR FORCE 1919-22
Agents of the processing companies have recruited beet labor since the earliest
days of the industry. The activities of these agents were described in 1908 as
follows :
"* * * It is the fiist requisite of every sugar factory to see that sufficient
laborers are secured for growing the beets, and for doing the work of the factory.
Agents qualified for this work are immediately put into the field to secure thesa
laborers. They keep informed concerning the immigiation of laborers from
foreign countries, and carefully investigate the labor supplies of large cities." 2S
Theresa Wolfson, in her study of Michigan sugar-beet labor published in
November 1919, described the recruiting methods in use at that time.26 Com-
pany agents visited large industrial cities of the Middle West and East. They
broadcast their message by posters, advertisements, and public meetings in
vacant stores. They concentrated on foreigners, usually of peasant stock and
with large families. These workers lived in congested quarters — the slums — of
the city and were most anxious to get back to the soil. Families migrated to
the Michigan beet fields from Buffalo, New York City, Philadelphia, Erie,
Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, Milwaukee, Toledo, and other cities. Difficulties
in obtaining workers in the usual midwestern cities had forced company agents
to go far afield in recruiting the Michigan sugar-beet labor supply in 1919.27
More than one-half of nonlocal families interviewed by Miss Wolfson expected
to return to the cities from which they had migrated at the end of the beet season.
One-quarter of the families expressed an intention of moving to some nearby
city, and less than one-sixth planned to remain in the country.28
In 1920 the Children's Bureau of the United States Department of Labor
conducted a survey of beet workers' families in Michigan and Colorado.29 It
23 Ibid.
24 Ibid., testimony of Prof. Robert C. Kedzie, Michigan Agricultural College and Agricultural Experiment
Station, p. 547.
26 Progress of the Beet Sugar Industry in the United States in 1907, op. cit., p. 21.
26 People Who Go to Beets, by Theresa Wolfson, The American Child, November 1919, pp. 216-239.
27 Ibid., pp. 218-29.
28 Ibid., p. 234.
29 U. S. Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, Child Labor and Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields
of Colorado and Michigan, Bureau Publication No. 115, Government Printing Office, 1923.
7868 DETROIT HEARINGS
was found that the bulk of the beet, hand work in Michigan was done by nonresident
laborers, and that the great majority of the workers, whether resident or non-
resident, were in family groups.30 Approximately 90 percent of the beet acreage
in the State was tended by family groups.31
The company agents had experienced the same difficulties described by Miss
Wolfson in securing sufficient labor for the beet fields. "Labor agents of the
sugar companies in the spring of 1920 had had to go far to secure labor. They
had been obliged to bring in workers not only from Detroit, Chicago, and the
larger cities of Ohio, but also from the mining districts of West Virginia and from
small towns in Texas and even Mexico. There was no large resident population
of 'beeters' like the Russian-Germans in Colorado. Belgian labor, which had
been the prevailing beet-field labor in earlier years, had practically disappeared
since the war, and the supply of central Europeans had also fallen off. The labor
turn-over was high. In a number of cases cited by the sugar companies' agents
15 or 20 families brought in for the spring work had all disappeared by mid-
summer, and it was expected that an entire new lot would have to be brought in
for the fall work. Inability to secure labor had led in some places to the formation
of crews of day workers, usually boys, but occasionally girls, from 10 to 16 years
of age or over. The children generally lived in the towns where the factories
were located and were taken out bv the sugar company agent to the fields each
day * * *." 32
The Children's Bureau survey of 1920 found the method of recruitment to be
that described by Miss Wolfson. "Those who are brought in from the outside
for the work are usually recruited from the foreign quarters of large cities. During
the winter the agent of the sugar companies visits such localities as are likely to
furnish laborers, advertises in their papers, visits local employment agencies, and
otherwise gets in touch with the labor supply." 33 The difficulty of procuring
labor forced the company agents, who had formerly been able to recruit sufficient
labor from towns and cities of the Middle West, to go to New Mexico and Texas,
and to the border of old Mexico" to draw to a much greater extent upon the great
fields of Mexican labor." Fort Worth, El Paso, and San Antonio were found to
be important recruiting centers for beet workers for the eastern fields — which
included Michigan — as well as for the western areas.34
Both studies found that the migrant families had come to the beet fields for
the following reasons: Opportunity to utilize the labor of the entire family, par-
ticularly of the children; unemployment or the high cost of living in the cities;
desire to earn enough money so that they could save to buy homes; desire to settle
permanently in the country; and in many cases attractive descriptions of the pros-
pective employment.
The most detailed account of recruiting for sugar-beet work in Michigan at
this time is given in a study made by the National Child Labor Committee.
"Sugar companies assume definite responsibility for recruiting contract laborers
sufficient to supply all farmers applying for beet workers. They act as labor
agents, enter into agreements for hand labor on beets, furnish transportation to
the fields, and through the field boss direct all the work on the beets as specified
in the labor contracts.
"Sugar companies send their employees into immigrant districts of eastern and
midwestern cities for the purpose of securing families to work beets. Often
supervisors of the department of contract labor go in person. Advertisements
are inserted in foreign-language newspapers and periodicals, and local roustabouts
are used as means of advertising in advance. The agents make opportunities to
appear at numerous gatherings of immigrants for the purpose of 'talking up
beets.' They make a house-to-house canvass for the dual purpose of 'sizing up'
families in their homes and of explaining the advantages of beet work in the open
country. These advantages, as represented, include free railroad transportation,
free transfer of the families and their household goods from the railroad station
at the point of destination to a designated dwelling, free return to the railroad sta-
tion, a suitable dwelling rent-free until harvest is completed, pure water, fuel at
the door, a chance to have a good garden, chickens, pigs, cows, and horses.
Besides, they are promised as much work as they want, for large and small, at a
specified price per acre, in the fresh air of open fields, with a month or more rest
during the summer, when men can secure other work at $2 or $3 a day.
3° Ibid., p. 79.
81 Ibid., p. 90.
" Ibid., pp. 80-81.
« Ibid., p. 3.
« Ibid.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7869
"At specified times and places, the agents meet family heads of all prospective
workers and with them sign the 'Agreement for Hand Labor on Beets' for one
season. This contains the name, address, ages of all children, number of acres-
each family wants to work, and the schedule of payment per acre. This is usually
signed in duplicate; one copy is left with the family head, the other retained by
the company's agent. * * *" '
*******
"At a time designated by the agent of the company, the families congregate
at the railroad station where transportation is furnished, and they are literally
'shipped' by 'the train load' to points in Michigan for easy distribution. Here
the labor agent is often displaced by a local man known as field boss, for the
company acting as labor agent seems to be through when the families arrive in
Michigan at the railroad station. They have accomplished their purpose —
bringing laborers and farmers together. The company does not guarantee the
quality of the work done by the families of contract laborers, although agree-
ments with the growers, written or verbal, bind them to undertake to furnish
the best workers obtainable at the price set by the company; nor do they always
see that families get the full acreage signed for before they left the city." 35
The sources of beet migration were described by the National Child Labor
Committee study of 1922 as follows: 39
"The majority of the 274 contract laborer families are immigrant families, but
with the exception of the Mexicans, they did not come directly from the old
country to the beet fields. Seventy-two and two-tenths percent, or 199 con-
tract laborer families, migrated to the fields this year from 18 cities and 32 towns
and villages, and we refer to them as urban migrants. Twenty-seven and four-
tenths percent, or 75, spent last winter in the open country, and we refer to them;
as rural migrants. At one time or another all of them migrated to the Michigan
beet fields, coming from 13 States and Mexico. Sugar companies paid transpor-
tation for 238 families, farmers for 10, and 26 journeyed at their own expense.
There came from points in:
Families
Michigan 146
Illinois 31
Pennsylvania 7
New York 3
New Jersey 2
Colorado 1
Indiana 1
Ohio
Wisconsin
West Virginia,
Texas
Virginia
Iowa
Fa milies-
-_ 56
-. 8
4
-. 3
1
1
Mexico 10-
"Cities in which immigrants gathered furnished large numbers:
Families
Saginaw 50
Bay City 28
Detroit 19
Milwaukee 5
Owosso 4
Philadelphia 3
Morgantown 3
Youngstown 2
Muskegon 2
Families
Chicago 30
Cleveland 24
Lorain : 7
Cincinnati 4
New York 3
Flint 3
Toledo 2
Paulding 2
Newark 2
The three studies cited in this section show that beet laborers were recruited
from industrial centers, although many were of peasant origin. With the excep-
tion of the Mexicans, workers did not migrate directly from the old country to
the beet fields. Michigan had not built up a resident beet labor supply as had
Colorado, for example, and companies recruited anew each spring. Most of the
workers who did not settle in the vicinity of the beet fields returned to the cities
from which they had migrated. Beet laborers were not crop followers; they
showed a pattern of migration in which beets were the only agricultural occupa-
tion, aside from interseasonal farm work. Many of the workers who became resi-
dents in the beet areas also obtained nonagricultural employment during the
winter in nearby cities or towns.
as child Labor in the Sugar Beet Fields of Michigan, by Walter W. Armentrout, Sara A. Brown, and
Charles E. Gibbons, National Child Labor Committee, New York, 1923, pp. 42-4-1.
36 Ibid., pp. 30-31.
7870 . DETROIT HEARINGS
Beet-workers' families were generally large, and the majority of their children
over 6 years of age worked in the fields. The parents of the beeVworking families
were frequently foreign-born or first-generation Americans. Most of the families
had come from Russia, Germany, Belgium, Hungary, Rumania, Mexico, Serbia,
Bohemia. The Children's Bureau found that there "was little difference between
the nationality of resident and of nonresident labor in the Michigan fields, except
that only one resident family was Mexican." 37 Many workers were spending
their first year in the beet fields. The large majority of the families expressed
dissatisfaction with the conditions of work and living.
CHANGES IN THE SUGAR-BEET LABOR FORCE AFTER 1922
During the World War of 1914-18, there was a large expansion of-sugar-beet
acreage due to the increased market for American-grown sugar. In Michigan
alone the acreage of sugar beets harvested rose from 101,000 acres in 1914 to
150,000 in 1920.38 During this period Mexican workers were added to the ex-
panding labor force of the United States as a new reservoir of unskilled cheap
labor. Mexicans already resident in Texas were being recruited by northern beet
companies and railroads. Additional workers were sought to replace those
spirited away to the North and to meet the needs of an expanding agricultural
economy.
Pressure exerted by agricultural interests of the Southwest and the sugar-beet
industry caused the Department of Labor, in 1917, to waive the head tax and later
the contract-labor and illiteracy-test provisions of the immigration law, tempo-
rarily admitting Mexican laborers for agricultural work. This order was extended
to include laborers for work on railroads and in mines. These exemptions con-
tinued in effect until December 15, 1918. Renewed requests by various sugar-
beet interests made the Department of Labor on January 23, 1919, extend the
order for the temporary admission of Mexican laborers for work in sugar beets
until June 30, 1919. On July 9, 1919, it was again extended, to terminate on
December 31, 1919. 38 Shortly thereafter, the House Committee on Immigration
.and Naturalization held hearings on House Joint Resolution 271, calling for the
temporary admission of illiterate Mexican laborers into the United States for
purposes of employment in agricultural pursuits.40 These hearings were con-
ducted in January and February of 1920, and on February 12 and April 12, 1920,
-the Department of Labor again issued orders admitting temporarily Mexican
laborers for employment in agricultural pursuits. "The exemption order con-
tained instructions to admit alien laborers without the enforcement of the head
tax and the literacy test contained in the immigration law, for the purpose of
admitting temporarily agricultural laborers from Canada and Mexico during the
season of 1920 to perform labor in the border States and in Florida, together with
a provision expressly authorizing the sugar-beet growers in the large western belt
to recruit alien labor under the terms of the order.41 Although the provisions of
the 1920 order applied specifically to the western beet areas, the Michigan fields
as well as the border States were undoubtedly recruiting Mexican laborers from
Mexico at this time.
MEXICAN LABOR IN THE SUGAR BEET FIELDS OF MICHIGAN
Sugar beet hand work is considered one of the most arduous and disagreeable
of all agricultural occupations. The monotony, difficulty, and drudgery of the
work, frequently performed in inclement weather, combined with the long hours
of work and low earnings, make sugar beet field work one which most laborers
would avoid if they could find other means of employment. Since the work is
customarily done under contract, by the terms of which laborers are obliged to
remain in the areas from 6 to 8 months each year with long periods of idleness,
the total earnings are very small. From the beginning of the industry in Michi-
gan, immigrant labor of one nationality or another has been utilized for this work.
As one representative of a large beet sugar company in Michigan said to the inves-
tigators of the National Child Labor Committee: "We need more immigrants of
this kind from Europe. We have to bring it in. Americans will not do the dirty
3' Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan (op.cit.,pp. 82-83).
8' Wright, op. cit., table 23, p. 40.
39 Temporary Admission of Illiterate Mexican Laborers, Hearings before the House Committee on Immi-
gration and Naturalization, on H. J. Res. 271, January and February 1920, 60th Cong., 2d sess., Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1920, appendix A, pp. 358-373.
40 Ibid.
*i Monthly Labor Review, Results of Admission of Mexican Laborers, under Departmental Orders, for
Employment in Agricultural Pursuits, vol. 11, November 1920, pp. 1095-1097.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7871
work, as we call it." 42 Beet workers have been considered "cheap labor," and
have been regarded as a class apart in the communities into which they migrated
in Michigan. Miss Wolfson found that the traditional attitude of the Michigan
farmer toward these laborers employed by him was "Anything is good enough
for the Hunkies." Beet workers who were "good" moved up into the tenant and
owner class, and began growing their own sugar beets — those who weren't good
continued to be beet workers.
The attitudes of beet growers and sugar companies toward beet laborers, and
the reasons for using Mexicans came out very clearly in hearings held before
congressional committees during the 1920's. It was argued that the sugar-beet
industry could not survive without continued immigration from Mexico, following
the restriction on European immigration. Sugar-beet work was alleged to be a
form of work Americans would not do, and actually no "white man" would do.
The only workers among other nationalities who were left to perform this work
were the "dregs," who were inefficient and poor workers. The better workers
had gone into other employment, or had become farmers themselves. Mexicans,
according to the representatives of the sugar-beet growers of America, were defi-
nitely not desirous of becoming either tenants or owners of American land. Mex-
icans were also likened to "children," were characterized as law abiding, unde-
manding. They were excellent workers and peculiarly suited to "stoop" jobs.
It was also emphasized that Mexican sugar-beet workers did not settle in the
beet areas of Michigan, but went back to Mexico or to the State of their origin
after the harvesting season.
Representative Woodruff, of the State of Michigan, told the House Committee
on Immigration and Naturalization:
"In the past, before the enactment of the present immigration law, the sugar-
beet industry brought Europeans into our country to supply the labor necessary
to the raising of these beets. After the passage of the immigration law it was
necessary to go to Mexico for that labor, and without this labor, gentlemen, it
would probably have been necessary to close every one of the sugar factories in
my district and I presume the same thing applies to sugar factories of other
districts.43
<<* * * J have not known any [Mexicans] who remained during the winter.
The Columbia Sugar Co., when the season is closed, gets them together and
returns them to the Mexican border. I do not know whether under the law you
can compel them to go or not, but I have never observed a single Mexican family
around that section of the State in the wintertime. They may be there, but I
do not know of it. However, if they were there in any great numbers, I would
have known of it." 44
A representative of the beet growers of Colorado, testifying at the same hearing,
contended that the sugar industry would close if Mexican labor were not available,
since white men would not do the work, and only the worst workers among the
nationalities formerly used remained in the beet laborer class.
<<* * * -pen years ag0 our help came from Europe, largely Russians,
Germans, and Belgians. Now, the better class of that beet help, that was beet
help 10 or 15 years ago, are owning or renting farms; and the poorer class, that
could not accumulate, are still with us.
"The result is that if you compare acres tended by the Mexicans you will
see that the number of tons of beets they produce per acre, compared in this way,
that the Mexican help produces practically 1 ton more per acre than the present
Russian or German help. That is because the best has gone on up, and we were
left with the dregs. I do not know that our country will be absolutely ruined if
the beet factories are closed, but I say they will be closed in 3 or 4 years if some-
thing is not done now because their help is dwindling out. The reservoir from
which that help has come has been closed.
"* * * I want to say that there is not a white man of any intelligence in
our country that will work an acre of beets. The only help we can get to do this
work, and I think it is rightly so — I want to say that I do not want to see the
condition arise again when white men who are reared and educated in our schools
have got to bend their backs and skin their fingers to pull those little beets. But
you can do one of two things; you can let us have the only class of labor that will
42 Armentrout et al., op. cit., p. 26.
« Seasonal Agricultural Workers From Mexico, hearings before the Committee on Immigration and
Naturalization, U. S. House of Representatives, 69th Cong., 1st sess., on H. R. 6741, 7559, 9036, Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1926. p. 272.
" Ibid., p. 273.
7£72 DETROIT HEARINGS
do the work, or close the beet factories, because our people will not do it, and
I will frankly say I do not want them to do it.45
<<* * * jn 0ther words you might comb the town with a fine tooth comb
and yOu could not get two Americans who would be willing to get out there and
do that beet work, or, if you could, they would be such dregs of society that they
would not be any good * * *." 46
The same witness also stated:
«* * * if yOU are going to make the young men of America do this back-
breaking work, shoveling manure to fertilize the ground, and shoveling beets,
you are going to drive them away from agriculture. I will tell you, you have got
to give us a class of labor that will do this back-breaking work, and we have the
brains and ability to supervise and handle the business part of it. There is no
danger of that class of labor taking over the supervising work * * *." 47
Other witnesses stressed the insufficiency rather than the inferior skill of the
European beet workers. A Nebraska grower aptly described the situation as
most of the beet growers found it. He said: "Russian labor is not undesirable
to us if it remained labor." 48 The representative of a Michigan sugar company
stated that the Russians had been excellent beet workers, and still were.49 The
Europeans had become renters and owners of farms, and were no longer available
for sugar beet work.50 Others preferred the better jobs provided in industry.
"The reason for that is that the automobile industry is paying prices to Belgians,
particularly, and the Czechoslovaks and Hungarians, to work in the automobile
plant for 2 or 3 days' work, enough for them to say when you solicit them for
farm wrork: 'No; we would rather stick around. We are making $18 a week and
we are not going out into the beet fields when we can live in Detroit and see the
movies, etc' We cannot get them to come out, for the simple reason that the
automobile industry does not lay them off in blocks. The automobile industry
cuts down to 2 or 3 days a week, exactly as does the mining industry. In 1920
and subsequent to that we went to the mines of Virginia and Pennsylvania, in
conformity with a suggestion that I heard made today, and we received exactly
the same story over there: 'No; we can make enough money in 2 or 3 days of work
that we like 'rather than to go out to your beet fields.' They were somewhat
profane in the way they described the beet fields. Some of them had worked in
beet fields in their own country." 51
The Children's Bureau in 1920 found that only 10 percent of the laborers
families interviewed were Mexican.52 The prevalence of Mexican labor in Michi-
gan sugar beets by 1926 is indicated in the following testimony of a sugar company
official:
"During the spring of 1925, after a very thorough canvass of all the large cities
of the North and East in an endeavor to get labor for our beet fields, we found
that it would be necessary to go to Texas and ship in 1,000 Mexicans or curtail
our acreage to a very large extent.
"After a very careful survey, made in January of this year, we find that it will
be necessary for us to have 2,500 Mexicans or curtail our acreage 50 percent; in
other words, it will be necessary for us to close down one of our three plants if
we are not able to get this labor. During the past 4 years we have shipped in a
total of 4,000 Mexicans. * * *" 53
Another Michigan sugar beet company official predicted that whereas labor
needs had been fulfilled from among Mexicans living in Midwestern steel districts
during 1924 and 1925, it would be necessary to go to Texas during 1926.
"These farmers are raising sugar beets, and raising them in such quantities
they cannot take care of them with their own families and regular labor and we
have to supply the demand from the present market, which is mostly Mexican
labor.
« Ibid., pp. 61-62, testimony of Fred Cummings.
« Ibid., p. 64.
<7 Ibid., p. 66.
« Ibid., testimony of J. T. Whitehead, p. 103.
« Ibid , testimony of L. B. Tompkins, representing the Columbia Sugar Co., p. 17/ .
so Ibid , testimony of Mr. Whitehead, Mr. Tompkins, and S. R. McLean, plant manager of the Holland
plant of the ilollan'd-St. Louis Sugar Co., Michigan, pp. 103, 176, 178, 180.
si Immigration from Countries of the Western Hemisphere, hearings before the House Committee on
Immigration and Naturalization, on H. R. 6465, 7358, 10955, 11687, 70th Cong., 1st sess., Government Print-
ing Office 1928. Textimonv of T. G. Gallagher, Continental Sugar Co., Ohio. p. 556.
n Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. at., p. 82.
In 1922 the National Child Labor Committee reported only 13 families out of a total of 274 as coming from
Texas or Mexico to the Michigan beet fields. The acreage planted in beets in Michigan had decreased from
one hundred and fifty to eighty-two thousand acres from 1920 to 1922. There may have been Mexicans
from Northern States in the beet fields in 1922. but the figures on nationality are not given; only those on
Statcor city of origin.
« Seasonal Agricultural Laborers From Mexico, op. cit., testimony of L. B. Tompkins, p. L6.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7873:
"For the past 2 years we have not gone to the border for the Mexicans. We
filled our requirements from the steel districts of Gary, Calumet, Indiana Harbor,
Chicago, and South Chicago. We found we were getting a skilled class of labor.
* * *
"On account of the building program outlined throughout the States of Michi-
gan, Ohio, and Illinois, our survey of the labor market shows we will not be able
to fill our requirements of beet labor, whether Mexican or European, and unless
some relief is given we will again have to go to Texas and join in a merry scramble
with the cotton growers and the beet companies of the West in getting help."54
The recruiting of Mexican families for work in the Michigan sugar-beat fields
was common throughout the twenties. The Tariff Commission reported that
the number of Mexican contract laborers employed in beet work in the States of
Michigan, Ohio, Kansas, and Minnesota, rose from 7,140 in 1922 to 11,109 in
1926. These figures lepresented 34 percent and 50 percent, respectively, of the
total number of contract laborers employed in these 2 years. During the same
period of time, the number of foreign-born northern Europeans decreased from
12,125 to 10,199, or from 59 percent of the labor force to 45 percent. For the
entiie sugar baet industry of the United States, the proportion of contract workers
who were of Mexican origin, rose from 22 percent to 31 percent from 1922 to
1926.55
A survey of Mexican labor in the United States conducted by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, which was published in 1927, showed that Mexicans comprised
from 75 to 90 percent of the sugar-beet laboiers in the States of Ohio, Michigan,
Minnesota, and North Dakota. "The Belgians and German-Russians who
remained throughout the war have been drifting into trades and small businesses
in the cities or have become renters or owneis, often in competition with their
former employers." There were 6,720 Mexican beet workers in Michigan during
the 1926 season.56
At this time, most of the Mexican workers were recruited in San Antonio and
Fort Worth, Tex., where large sugar-producing companies maintained agents.
They were also secured in Kansas City, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, and other
cities with Mexican settlements, by the labor agents of the companies.57
Table 1.- — Estimated number of contract laborers engaged in sugar beet field work in
1939, by source and State
Total
number of
contract
laborers
1939
Within the State
Total
from
other
States
State
Total
Local
Other
areas
Comments on "Other States"
United States
total.
93, 109
62, 581
43, 499
19, 082
30, 528
Percent of total
California
100.0
16, 504
20, 822
7,356
623
1,149
663
12, 270
2,809
6,714
67.2
16, 504
19, 800
3,336
343
344
564
2,505
842
2,314
46.7
6,276
16, 359
3,336
249
57
199
2,237
140
1,378
20.5
10, 228
3,441
94
287
365
268
702
936
32.8
Colorado
Idaho
Indiana...
Iowa .. _
1,022
4,020
280
805
99
9,765
1,967
4,400
Largely from Kansas, Michigan, and
New Mexico.
From California, Oregon, and Wash-
ington.
Nearly 100 from Texas, others from
Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio.
Kansas. . . .
From Oklahoma and Texas.
More than 8,000 from Texas and 400
from Missouri; also Ohio and
Kansas.
Mostly from Texas, Oklahoma, Kan-
sas, and Nebraska.
About 2,600 from California. 800 from
North Dakota, 400 from Washing-
ton, 300 from Colorado, 300 from
Texas, and few from Arizona and
Oklahoma.
Michigan .. .
Minnesota. _
Montana
61 Ibid., testimony of S. R. McLean, pp. 178-179.
« United States Tarifi Commission, Costs of Producing Sugar Beets, pt. X. United States Summary.
Government Printing OfEce, 1928. Table 4, p. 17.
«« Mexicans Replacing European Labor in Sugar Beet Fields of Northern States, United States Daily,
Washington, D. C, July 23, 1927. Reprinted in full in the hearings on tariff readjustment, 1929, before the
House Committee on Ways and Means, 70th Cong., 2d sess., vol. 5, schedule 5, Sugar and Molasses, pp.
3216-3218.
67 Ibid. See also above, testimony of S. R. McLean.
60396—41 — pt. 19 8
7874 DETROIT HEARINGS
Table 1. — Estimated number of contract laborers engaged in sugar beet field work in
1939, by source and State— Continued
Total
number of
contract
laborers
1939
Within the State
Total
from
other
States
State
Total
Local
Other
areas
Comments on "Other States"
Nebraska
5,294
1,226
3,434
1,358
846
4,147
1, 159
1,665
5,070
4,765
77
2,066
679
761
3,940
580
1,249
1,912
3,963
77
841
665
676
3,940
464
957
1,685
802
1,225
14
85
116
292
227
529
1,149
1,368
679
85
207
579
416
3,158
Largely from Colorado, Kansas, Mis-
North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
South Dakota
Utah
Washington
souri, and Texas.
From California, Kansas, Minnesota,
Nebraska, New Mexico, Okla-
homa, Texas, and Iowa.
Largely from Michigan, Texas, and
Illinois.
From California, Washington, and
the drought States.
Wisconsin . .
Wyoming
About 300 from Illinois, more than 100
from Texas.
Largely from California, Colorado,
Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico,
' and Texas.
Source: Sugar Division, U. S. Department of Agriculture.
Table 2.- — Estimated number of contract laborers engaged in sugar beet field work in
1939, by nationality or race, and State
State
Total
number
of con-
tract
labor-
ers, 1939
Native
Ameri-
can
Mexi-
can or
Span-
ish-
Ameri-
can
Fili-
pino
Ger-
man
(prop-
er)
Ger-
man-
Rus-
sian
Other
Euro-
pean
Japan-
ese
Indian
Not
speci-
fied
and
other
United States totaL
93, 109
15, 350
52, 929
6,195
4,853
6,587
3,942
67
197
2,989
Percent of total
100.0
16.5
56.8
6.7
5.2
7.1
4.2
0.1
0.2
3.2
16, 504
20, 822
7,356
623
1,149
663
12,270
2,809
6,714
5,294
1,226
3,434
1,358
846
4,147
1,159
1,665
5,070
3,390
3,710
249
172
13
447
422
1,609
91
297
245
1,059
3,732
753
170
12,371
12,313
2,980
187
690
650
9,841
1, 609
2, 580
2,297
586
663
285
355
3,810
675
323
4,187
1,932
Idaho
187
115
Iowa
57
115
Kansas
Michigan
215
281
962
2,336
129
326
281
1,441
Minnesota
140
1,338
88
45
76
76
45
Montana
149
Nebraska
90
2,439
44
438
North Dakota. ...
Ohio
34
87
Oregon
South Dakota
14
389
102
Utah
415
Washington
Wisconsin
348
495
4,679
58
170
28
666
504
Wyoming
23
Source: Sugar Division, U. S. Department of Agriculture.
CONFLICT BETWEEN TEXAS AND MICHIGAN INTERESTS CONCERNING MIGRATION OF
MEXICAN LABORERS TO NORTHERN STATES
During the World War and immediately thereafter, the agricultural interests
of the Southwest and the West, the beet growers of the eastern and western
regions and the railroads vied with each other in their attempts to recruit Mexi-
cans. These groups were not only successful in lowering the bars during the period
from 1917 to 1920, but thereafter they successfully opposed all attempts! to impose
quota restrictions on immigration from countries of the Western Hemisphere.
The bars to Mexican immigration during that period were the head tax, the
literacy test, and the provisions against admission into the United States of any
individual who had contracted for employment in this country. While these
restrictions were removed during the World War years, the Texas employers who
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7875
depended upon Mexican labor were not too greatly concerned about the flow of
Mexicans to the North and West. When, however, the free flow of Mexicans
ceased, Texas employers found themselves competing with the sugar-beet growers
for the Mexican laborers resident in Texas.
This competition became acute in the years prior to 1929, when the beet
interests of Michigan found it necessary to recruit more and more Mexicans
each year. Many of the laborers brought up to the north at this time did not
return to Texas at the close of the sugar-beet harvest, but drifted off into the steel
districts and other industrial areas of the midwest. This failure of the Mexicans
to go back to Texas caused great concern to the Texas employers who wanted
them for agricultural and other types of work. The rivalry which sprang up was
expressed on several occasions in the hearings before the House Committee on
Immigration and Naturalization on bills placing restrictions on immigration from
countries of the Western Hemisphere. A Michigan sugar company official, in
deploring the shortage of Mexican labor in the North, remarked that unless some
relief were granted, his company would be forced to go to Texas and join in a
merry scramble with the cotton growers and the beet companies of the West in
getting help.58 The labor superintendent of the American Beet Sugar Co., of
Colorado, expressed the rivalry thus:
" Mr. Box. Do you meet a feeling in Texas that you are taking away labor that
the State of Texas needs?
"Mr. Heckman. Yes; naturally labor is a commodity and we are competitive
in going after it." 59
The concern of agricultural employers in Texas over this loss of Mexican
laborers to the sugar beet areas was formulated by a Texas farmer, thus:
"Whenever the beet growers of the various States of the Union come to south
Texas for laborers to harvest their crops, they are taking them away from us,
leaving us in an even worse condition than before, when they could find a supply of
labor in the eastern cities for their beet fields."60
Agricultural interests of the State of Texas agitated for the passage of State
legislation which would stop the flow of Mexican laborers out of the State, and
succeeded in effecting the passage of laws regulating the activities of employment
agents recruiting labor for work outside the State. The vigilance of the border
patrol in keeping out illegal entries also provided impetus for such measures.
<<* * * Agitated by the activities of the patrol inspectors, south Texas
interests as represented by the Winter Garden, South Texas, and West Texas
Chambers of Commerce sought to check the drain on Texas labor principally
through shipments to sugar beet fields of the North. First an occupational
tax on 'emigrant agents' was levied, to the amount of $7,500. Enforcement of
this act was immediately enjoined by a Federal Court upon application of a
Michigan beet sugar company. Apprehending that the law might be declared
unconstitutional on the ground of prohibitive fees, its sponsors had it repealed
and new laws passed. * * *
"The theory behind the laws was plainly stated by one of the sponsors:
" 'It is the same situation as where you have had a stream of water running
through your ranch. If someone turns its source off you want to put up a dam
to hold what you have.' " 61
When Paul Taylor pointed out to a Catarina farmer that he was in the same
way taking away the labor supply of Asherton growers, the former "was unwilling
to admit that it might similarly justify the Asherton growers in securing an injunc-
tion to stop the drain of labor to Catarina." 62 Said the Catarina grower:
"We will hold our present supply by our agency law. If the beet companies
would return the labor it would be all right. We did what the Asherton people
customarily did to get their labor when they needed it, but we did not move labor
a thousand miles away like the beet companies. They are the people who have
hurt the situation by taking the Mexicans north where they take other jobs." 62
Taylor wrote in 1930 that the "effect of the emigrant agency laws is harassing, but
it presents no insuperable barrier to sugar beet or other companies' shipping
thousands of laborers out of Texas." 62 Events have borne out this evaluation of
the effectiveness of the laws.
88 Seasonal Agricultural Laborers from Mexico, op. tit., testimony of S. R. McLean, plant manager of
the Holland Plant of the Holland-St. Louis Sugar Co., Michigan, p. 179.
s» Immigration From Countries of the Western Hemisphere, op. tit., pp. 463-9.
60 Seasonal Agricultural Laborers From Mexico, op. tit., testimony of S. Maston Nixon, president of the
Blacklanders, Inc., an organization of farmers and businessmen.
6i Mexican Labor in the United States, Dimmit County, Winter Garden District, South Texas, by Paul
S. Taylor. University of California Publications in Economics, vol. fi, No. 5, Berkeley, Calif., 1930, pp.
331-332.
« Ibid.
7876 DETROIT HEARINGS
The emigrant agency laws, which became cumulatively effective in 1929,.
provide for an annual license tax of $10, to be paid for each county in which the
agent operates. In addition, there are levied a State occupation tax of $1,000'
per annum, and a county occupation tax of from $100 to $300 per annum, gradu-
ated according to the population of the county in which the agent is soliciting.
According to the Texas State Employment Service, the emigration agency lasw
have not checked the dispersion of Mexican workers to other States.63
"Violations and evasions of these laws measurably reduced the effectiveness-
and weakened the original purposes thereof.
"The occupation tax provisions for emigrant agents in Texas, as in other States,
were intended to be a deterrent to the exploitation of migratory laborers. They
were established to discourage invasions from outside on the State's labor market
and mobile workers.
"That the occupation tax provisions for emigrant agents in Texas has been
largely inactive is apparent from the fact that, according to the records, only one
company has ever paid the State occupation tax of $1,000. That was shortly
after the passage of the Texas emigrant agency law." 64
"Chief offenders in this evasion and violation of the occupation tax provision
are employment agents and emigrant agents representing the cotton growers of
Arizona and the sugar-beet growers of Michigan and certain other States." a
Although this law is represented as preventing the exploitation of Texas workers
there is no doubt that the original proponents of the law, and the present employers
of Mexican agricultural labor in Texas, look upon it mainly as means of preventing
the loss of their cheap labor to competitors.
DISPERSION OF MEXICAN BEET WORKERS INTO NORTHERN CITIES
A bone of contention between the Texas employers of Mexican labor and the-
beet growers has been the dispersion of these workers after they have migrated
to the Northern and Western States. The sugar-beet interests have maintained
that the Mexicans do not stay in the beet areas, but drift back to Texas and the
border of Mexico after the season. On occasion it is admitted that the Mexican
beet workers migrate to northern cities.
Beet growers and sugar companies have strenuously denied that the Mexican
laborers whom they imported for agricultural work came into competition with
American workers for industrial jobs.
The Secretary of the United States Beet Sugar Association stated at a hearing
of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization:
"It has been asserted that there are millions of Mexicans now in the United
States, and that while they mostly enter for seasonal agricultural work many of
them eventually drift to the cities, becoming a menace to American labor and
causing a serious social problem. While this may be true to a limited extent, we
believe the statements regarding this condition have been very much exaggerated.
"The experience of the beet-sugar producers and sugar-beet farmers is that, as a
general rule, the Mexican has a 'homing instinct'; that he loves his country; and
even though he remain in this country for several years, the hope and expectation
ci returning to his homeland is always uppermost in his mind. * * *
"The very fact that each year the beet-sugar industry is compelled to exert its-
efforts to secure Mexican laborers clearly demonstrates that the greater proportion
of them return home. If this were not the fact, there would be sufficient labor in
the field to adequately fulfill this requirement, and it is evident that the industry
would not go to the expense of securing additional Mexicans each year if those
which they secured 1 year remained in this country for the succeeding year." 66
An official of the Continental Sugar Co. of Ohio testified:
"Mr. Brigham. Have they begun to employ Mexican laborers in the automobile
factories?
"Mr. Gallagher. Not that I know of. I know the Willys-Overland Co., of
Toledo, have not.
"Mr. Brigham. If they find out they are such good laborers, and the Mexicans
take employment with these plants at the scale of wages paid, what are you going
to do then? Do you not think the Mexican is as wise as the Belgian and will
take advantage of a wonderful opportunity of that kind?
•3 Interstate Migration, hearings before the Select Committee to Investigate the Interstate Migration of
Destitute Citizens, House of Representatives, 76th Cong., 3d sess., pt. 5, Oklahoma City hearings, pp. 1810.
m Interstate Migration, hearings before the Select Committee to Investigate the Interstate Migration of
Destitute Citizens, House of Representatives, 7tith Cong., 3d sess., pt. 5, Oklahoma City hearings, p. 1810.
« Ibid., p. 1811.
m Immigration from Countries of the Western Hemisphere, op. cit., testimony of Harry A. Austin, p. 418.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7877
"Mr. Gallagher. I personally do not think that the Mexican will ever compare
with the Belgian. For a monotonous piece of work such as the automobile indus-
try is, where a man sits and feeds a machine— they are extremely adept at using
their fingers and they seem to be tireless. The Mexican is perfectly willing to put
up with such monotonous work as beet work is.
"Mr. Brigham. Is it not true that the reason Mexicans are liked so much for
the growing of beets is because it is the only class of labor that you can employ
for just a short period and then turn them loose to shift for themselves?
"Mr. Gallagher. No, sir; that is not quite true in our territory. We go to
Detroit, we go to Cleveland, we go to Toledo, and as far west as Fort Wayne and
Chicago to get labor, and we cannot get them into the beet fields. I speak of
Bohemians, Hungarians, Czechoslovaks, when I say that. Now, the Mexican is
inclined to an agricultural life, and he wants an agricultural job if he can get one.
If he cannot get an agricultural job, strange as it may seem, he wants to work in
a furnace. This is true always of the Mexican. I was in the smelting and
mining business in Mexico, and the Mexican first applied to you for a job on the
furnace. It is a weird complex he seems to have in his make-up." 67
A Michigan sugar company representative stated at another hearing:
"These Mexicans wish to drift back to their land. They do not care to stay over
or stay out in our country, but wish to drift back, and while a few go to Texas we
:are getting a larger number around the southern end of Lake Michigan." 68
Representative Woodruff of Michigan testified that he knew of no instances in
which the Mexican beet workers remained in his section of the State, and reported
that the Columbia Sugar Co. returned their laborers to the Mexican border.69
An official of this company stated that only 20 percent of the Mexican beet-
laborers brought in by it had stayed in the north.
<<* * * During the past 4 years we have shipped in a total of 4,000 Mexicans.
Eighty percent of these Mexicans returned to Texas — we pay the railroad fare
"both ways — 10 percent remained over the winter in houses provided by the
•company, and 10 percent went to Chicago and other large cities and returned to
work for the company's beet growers the following spring." 70
Contrasting with the claims of the northern sugar-beet interests are data on
the migration of Mexicans to the industrial centers of the North. A study of
Mexican labor in the United States by the Bureau of Labor Statistics found that
about half of the migratory Mexican sugar-beet workers in the States of Ohio,
Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, and North Dakota, returned to the border States
after harvesting. This investigation also revealed that many of these workers
who remained in the North, and migrated to cities for industrial work, also went
back to Texas before the spring.
<<* * * About half of the beet workers leave for the border States about
November 1. Most of the others go to the cities to get work in foundries and
ships, but of these a number drift back to Texas before spring. A small number
remain in the beet country, some obtaining a little work from farmers, and on rail-
roads and others living on their summer's earnings * * *."71
Census data show the dispersion of Mexicans into northern cities and industrial
•centers. In 1910, the Mexican population of Michigan and Ohio was estimated
at 251. The number increased to 2,286 in 1920, and by 1930, there were 17,373
Mexicans in these States.72 Naturally, it is impossible to allocate the numbers
■of Mexicans who drifted away from sugar-beet work, since a large number of
workers migrated to the North for railroad and other work.
The Mexican migration from sugar-beet fields to industrial centers of the North
during the twenties is attested to by several writers.
"When work was plentiful and common laborers scarce, before the industrial
depression which began in October of 1929, the industries located in the Great
Lakes area had particularly felt the effects of the quota law. As a result, the
Mexicans who sought winter refuge in such cities as Chicago, Detroit, Saginaw,
Flint, and Pontiac found work in foundries and factories; but it was the sort of
work which other laborers were not eager to accept. Many were employed for as
much as $4 and $4.50 per day, which seemed a princely sum to the immigrant who
had had but one season in this country, and who had been accustomed to work
from daylight to dark, with all his family, in the thinning and weeding of beets.
67 Ibid., testimony of T. G. Gallagher, Continental Sugar Co., pp. 555-558.
«s Seasonal Agricultural Laborers from Mexico, op. cit., testimony of S. R. McLean, Holland-St. Louis
Sugar Co., Michigan, p. 180.
6' Seasonal Agricultural Laborers from Mexico, op. cit., p. 273.
70 Ibid., testimony of L. B. Tompkins, p. 176.
71 Mexicans Replacing European Labor in Sugar-Beet Fields of Northrn States, op. cit.
7? Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930 (U. S. Bureau of the Census) Population, Vol. II, p. 4.
7878 DETROIT HEARINGS
As a result, these laborers were unwilling to return to the beet fields when the
next season came around, and the beet growers were therefore under the necessity
of continually recruiting new workers." 73
"Sifting through the fingers of beet companies and the railroad companies
there is an increasing stream of Mexican labor which is annually lost for the pur-
pose for which it is recruited and which drifts into the industries. Where there
are both beets and automobile factories, the Mexican gets into industry. The
bulk of the Mexicans thus employed are, therefore, in Michigan, Illinois, Indiana,
western Pennsylvania, and western New York; in a word, in the industrial area
which borders the Great Lakes region. The general trend, therefore, which has
been noted in industries is from beets and railroads to factories and foundries." 74
"With reference to employment, it should be said that a great many of the Mexi-
icans who live near Hull House are recent arrivals and are out of work except at
the best season of employment. Many of the Mexican families go to the beet
fields of Michigan and Minnesota and, instead of returning to their southern
homes at the close of the season, come to Chicago. They seldom have enough
for a period of idleness, and work is always scarce in the winter. The first winter
is a hard one. Those already established lend a neighborly hand and do all they
can to alleviate the suffering, for the supply of clothing, bedding, and furniture
is meager. The Mexican Consul tried to prevent this suffering during the winter
of 1928 by inserting a notice in the chief Mexican papers warning the people not
to come to Chicago in the winter expecting to find work. Many, however, did
not see this notice. Most of those who have work are at the Illinois Central freight-
house, the beading factories on Roosevelt Road, at the Cracker Jack factory,
other candy factories, and at the hotels of the Loop.. All this work is irregular,
and during periods of depression many of the Mexicans lose their places." 75
The National Conference of Social Work in meetings during the twenties dis-
cussed the problems of the Mexican population of the United States. At the
1928 meeting, the dispersion and stranding of the Mexicans in northern industrial
centers was noted:
"The factor of unstable or seasonal employment explains much. The railroads
and the beets are the two agencies which more than any others have served to
draw the Mexican across the line and scatter him throughout the country. It
is worth noting that the railroads want him, as a rule, from March to October,
and the beet growers, roughly, for the same period. What he does for the rest
of the year does not as a rule interest them. He is supposed to go back to Mexico,
and in many cases he does. But very often he does not. He drifts into the
cities to pass the winter; jobs are scarce, his money goes, and he appeals to the
cha ities. Result, one more Mexican case. * * *" 76
Mexican beet workers are discouraged from remaining in the sugar-beet areas
after the season's work is done, because they are frequent relief recipients and a
burden to welfare agencies. However, the drift of beet workers to northern
cities continues. It is here that they become relief charges:
"Conditions are such that the sugar-beet workers have little opportunity to
secure an income in the winter in the locale of their summer toil. Occasionally
some of them attempt to remain in the North. Lack of training makes it difficult
to find positions as general farm hands. Relief or a trek to the South are about
the only alternatives. There has been, however, some movement to railroad
work. '* * * Sometimes sugar-beet workers move directly to industry.
The movement is not always one-way for the recruiting of beet workers is an
annual occurrence in Chicago." 77
LIVING CONDITIONS OF MICHIGAN SUGAR BEET WORKERS
Sugar-beet workers generally spend from 6 to 7 months in the beet areas. In
the early days of the industry, workers recruited frcin nearby cities and towns
were brought to the fields each morning and returned at night to their homes.
Their transportation was provided by companies or growers. When long-distance
« The Northern Mexican, by Robert N. McLean, 1932, pp. 9-10.
7< Ibid., p. 7. See also Mexican Colonies in Chicago, by Anita Edgar Jones, Social Service Review, vol. 2,
No. 4, December 1928, pp. 584-585, an 1 Mexicans North of the Rio Grande, by Paul S. Taylor, Survey
Graphic, Mav 1. 1931, p. 137.
75 Mexican Colonies in Chicago, by Anita Edgar Jones, Social Service Review, vol. 2, No. 4, December
1928, p. 589. See also Mexicans in Chicago, by Ruth S. Camblon, The Family, vol. 7, No. 7, November
'« National Conference of Social Work, Proceedings, 1928, Mexicans— an interpretation, by Charles A.
Thomson.
" Transient Mexican Labor, by Lawrence Leslie Waters, Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, June
1941, vol.22, No. l,p. 59.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7879
recruiting began, the sugar companies were faced not only with problems of trans-
portation, but with those attendant upon the use of a large seasonal migratory-
labor supply such as the allocation of labor to the acreages available, the extension
of credit, the payment of wages, etc. A division of responsibility for these
matters was accomplished between the growers and the companies, with the
latter taking over the major problems of recruiting, allocating workers to farm-
ers, housing, extension of credit, transportation to the beet area, and the payment
of wages. The beet growers were supposed to furnish transportation from the
station at the beginning of the season, fuel, wood, water, and, in most instances,,
garden plots.
An early report on sugar-beet labor refers to the housing of migrant beet workers
in tents.78 Laborers in the sugar-beet fields of northern Ohio around 1910 were
housed in the following fashion:
<<* * * The men in each gang are housed in a shanty 16 feet long by 7
feet wide and 7 feet high, with a door at each end and two windows on each side.
This shanty is built on ordinary wagon wheels so as to be readily moved. One
end is equipped with a stove and a table for cooking and eating, while the other
is fitted up with bunks for sleeping. An average of five men live in each of these
shanties. When a gang has finished the fields of one grower, the farmer hitches
his team to the wagon and readily moves them to the next farm. The portable
shanty has been in use only one season, and a sufficient number has not yet
. been built to house all the laborers. The company previously used a stationary
shanty, which could be easily taken down and moved, but at best considerable time
was required to move it. This house is still used to some extent. The shanties
of every kind are furnished by the sugar company, and with each house there is
a stove, table, knives, forks, dishes, and cooking utensils, as well as bedding — one
pair of blankets and a comfort for each man. There is little cold weather during
the period of employment and the houses furnished are sufficient for their needs." 79
The housing of the sugar-beet workers in the Michigan area has traditionally
been arranged by the companies. All references to the conditions under which the
beet laborers' families lived stress overcrowding, poor sanitation, and the usual
evils to be associated with rural slums. Workers were housed in old farmhouses,
shacks, and barns, or in dwellings built by the company. The latter were station-
ary shacks or houses, portable houses, and caravan or wagon dwellings. The
portable dwelling appears to have been the first and principal type of housing
built by the Michigan companies, with stationary dwellings appearing somewhat
later. In cases where company-built houses were not available, houses, shacks,
or barns were rented by the company and provided to the families of the beet
workers.
In 1919, Miss Wolfson found the living quarters of the workers she visited,
"unspeakably wretched" with a "shocking degree of insanitation." 80 The
Children's Bureau found that: "Many of the beet field laborers were obliged to
sleep with from 3 to 10 persons of both sexes in a small, ill-ventilated room, even
when the combined kitchen and living room was also pressed into service as a
bedroom. There were 112 laborers' families, two-fifths of the total number, with
2 persons or more per room and 39 families with 3 or more persons per room.
Thirty-six families with from 3 to 9 members lived in houses containing only 2
rooms, and 10 families, consisting of from 3 to 10 persons, occupied 1-roorn
dwellings." 81
Sanitary facilities were generally lacking. The great majority of the families
surveyed by the Children's Bureau in 1920 had outside privies, 3 had water closets,
and 2 families had no toilet accommodations at all. Although most families had
private privies, in 30 cases 2 families shared a common privy, and in 8 instances,
3 families used the same privy. Screens were almost never provided for windows
of the dwellings, and in only a few instances were there screen doors.82
The water supplies were unsanitary, inadequate, and, in many cases, great
distances from the dwellings of the workers. Seventy-five families were forced
to carry their water from distances of 50 yards or more. One-fifth of the families
had only a dug well, and these were frequently polluted. "Open wells were in
some cases protected by a few loose boards, and tin cans, pieces of wood, and
78 Progress of the Beet Sugar Industry in the United States, op. cit., p. 19.
7» Reports of the United States Immigrant Commission, Immigrants in Industries, pt. 24, Recent Immi-
grants in Agriculture, vol. 2, Seasonal Agricultural Laborers, pp. 569-575, Government Printing Office.
Printed as S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.
80 Wolfson, op. cit., pp. 218, 222.
81 Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit., p. 118.
82 Ibid.
7880 DETROIT HEARINGS
•other rubbish had, in some instances, fallen into the water. Some families re-
ported that the water was muddy or sandy; others that it had a bad odor or
made them ill. * * * Eight families obtained their water from springs or
brooks, and in one case from a ditch, all of which sources were likely to be dirty
and polluted." 83
Regarding the company portable houses, the Bureau wrote:
"* * * The portable houses were 1-, 2-, or 3-room structures, usually
•sheathed and shingled, set up on wooden props, and having 2 or 3 small windows
and 1 door. They were purposely kept as small as possible, 16 by 24 feet,
so they could be moved easily. When not overcrowded and when clean and
weatherproof, they were suitable enough camping places for the summer, but
all too frequently too many people were crowded in, and the houses were allowed
to fall into disrepair. In 1 house, for example, which rested on 4 stones and
looked as if it might fall to pieces, the floor had warpedand settled and was full
of cracks, which were stuffed with rags to keep out the cold. Several described
their houses as 'nothing but cardboard and paper' or 'cardboard papered.' The
buildings were neither suitable nor intended for all-the-year dwelling places,
though some families remained in them through the winter for lack of a better
place. Occasionally a 'shack' of tar paper or tin, or a caravan wagon to be moved
about as the work required, was the only shelter provided. These wagons fur-
nished such cramped quartets that, as one child told the agent, the family 'has
to take turns going in, as there isn't room for all of us at once.' One wagon
housed 2 families of Mexicans, 10 persons in all. A double-decked bed (about
the size of an ordinary double bed) , built of rough boards covered with a nailed-
down mattress, had been provided, each family using 1 berth." 84
The farmhouses and other dwellings not built by the company displayed all
the undesirable qualities of substandard housing that were found in the company
shacks.
"The companies also lodged the beet-field laborers' families to a considerable
extent in unused farmhouses. For one reason or another a good many old farm-
houses stood vacant, and where they were in decent repair the}7 made the most
desirable dwellings; often, however, they were even more dilapidated than the
portable houses. Families frequently reported that they were unable to use the
upper floor of such houses because the roof leaked badly. As one family expressed
it, 'in good weather we have three rooms, in bad two.' In one house some of the
windows were out and boards had been nailed over the frames. In another house
in which the window glass was out the family had repaired the windows with
glass taken out of their picture frames. * * *" 85
Of the 289 laborers' families canvassed by the Children's Bureau agents, only
4 were living in houses furnished by farmers, and only 9 others rented or owned the
houses which they occupied, making a total of 276 families occupying dwellings
provided by the company. These 276 houses reflected the view which both
Wolfson and the Children's Bureau found was prevalent among both companies
and farmers; namely, "anything is good enough for the beet workers." "One-
fourth of the 276 company houses, including portable houses and farmhouses, were
badly out of repair and did not furnish decent living quarters. Only two-fifths of
them were in fair condition, while but little more than one-fourth were in good
shape, that is, were tight against wind and weather, had doors and windows that
were whole, and wood or plaster that was sound." 86
It was found that many families complained about "the failure of the company
to provide such accommodations as had been promised by the company agent.
* * * 'Beet work isn't like it stood in the newspaper,' was a typical remark.
'Newspaper said company give wood and coal and big wages and nice house. But
it don't.' In a few cases' the families charged that no house had been given them.
One family had been housed in a shed until they had threatened to leave. The
father of another family stated that while waiting for a house his family of 5 had
been forced to live for 2 weeks in 2 rooms containing 19 other people; during this
time his baby had caught cold and had died." 87
Most of the houses were not provided with household furnishings; about three-
fifths of the families brought all their own furnishings to the beet shacks. One-
fifth brought everything except a stove. Twenty-five families were provided with
household furniture and equipment by the companies. In the cases where the
furniture, etc., was brought in by the family, the company paid the freight charge
«3 Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit., pp. 118-119.
84 Ibid., pp. 115-116.
85 Ibid., p. 116.
8« Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, p. 116.
"Ibid., p. 771.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7881
to the beet area, but not the return charge. The furnishings supplied "were-
usually insufficient and of the roughest sort — a stove, shelf or rough table board,
one or two chairs or boxes, and a bed, often boards with only a rough mattress
and a few blankets, comprising the outfit. * * * A Mexican family whose
house was exceptionally clean and tidy had been provided with only two beds,
one without any mattress, a rough board table, three tree stumps for chairs and a
few dishes. In many cases not enough bedding was supplied to keep the family
warm." 88
In a study conducted 15 years later, in 1935, the Children's Bureau found little
improvement in the housing and living conditions of beet workers' families.
Although this survey was conducted in several States, and the Michigan results
were not separately tabulated or discussed, it may be assumed that the conditions
applied to Michigan as well as to the other States. The type of dwellings occu-
pied show little change from 1920. It is interesting to observe that the sugar
companies placed the responsibility for the bad housing on the shoulders of the
farmers.89
The housing provided sugar-beet workers in Michigan has been improved, in-
some instances, in recent years. These improvements have been too limited,
however, to materially affect the housing situation. In 1937 and 1938 the
Michigan Department of Labor and Industry, acting upon complaints, surveyed
the conditions of sugar-beet workers in the State. An investigator reported —
"In one instance we found 27 people living in 1 house. In another, 3 families
are living in a scale shanty owned by the company. A family of 10 is living in a
trailer which measures 8 by 12 feet." 90
In Blissfield, the conditions were particularly bad:
"These people are living in a colony of dilapidated shacks on the property of
the sugar company at this place and inside the corporation limits of the village.
The majority of them consist of only 2 small rooms and are in a filthy condition,
full of vermin and without any sanitation whatsoever. Each of these houses is
occupied by 1 to 3 families. In one instance there were 14 people and only 1 bed.
"There is an inadequate number of outdoor toilets. All there is for the entire
colony probably have never been cleaned or limed.
"Ait least one dead Mexican baby is buried in a shallow grave there * * *."91
A report on health conditions in Saginaw County contained the following excerpt
on the housing of the workers in that county:
"The families, averaging 15-18 persons, live in deplorable 1- or 2-room shacks
with no sewerage facilities and only surface wells available." 92
The housing conditions of Michigan beet workers, common to most migratory
workers, are rendered more serious because the families must spend 6 to 7 months
each year in the beet areas. Their shacks are for the most part unprotected
against the cold weather which comes to Michigan during October and Novem-
ber— the harvesting season — intensifying the hardships which these workers
suffer.
WAGES AND EARNINGS BEET WORK
Although references are found to payment of wages on an hourly or daily basis
in the early years of the Michigan sugar-beet industry, the pattern of payment on
an acreage basis- was set by 1910. The method of wage payment traditionally
has been determined by contract, which is consummated at the beginning of the
season, between the sugar company and worker or between the grower and worker.
This specifies the number of acres, the method of payment, and other conditions
of employment. Formerly workers were paid three times each year. Thus,
when the blocking and thinning operations were completed, the worker was paid
at the rate specified; there was another payment after the hoeings, and a final
payment upon completion of the harvest. At present, Michigan beet laborers
are paid only twice each season — after cultivating and harvesting.
The contract system grew out of the desire of the companies and growers to
insure the maintenance of their labor supply. Contracts, either written or verbal,
called for the performance of all the hand operations on the sugar-beet crop. A
contracting worker would agree to block, thin, hoe, pull, and top a stated acreage
88 Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, p. 117.
8S Elizabeth S.Johnson, Welfare of Families of Sugar-Beet Laborers, U.S. Children's Bureau, Publication
No. 247, 1939, pp. 76-79.
B0 Letter to Chairman George A. Krogstad, department of labor and industry, from Forrest G. Brown,
inspector, dated August 18. 1937.
81 Memorandum from Forrest G. Brown, inspector, Department of Labor and Industry, Lansing, Mich.r
May 13-14, 1938.
82 Letter from V. K. Volk, health commissioner, Saginaw County Department of JHealth, to Dr. C. D.
Barrett, State Health Department, dated October 13, 1937.
7882 DETROIT HEARINGS
of beets. Because of the lapse of time — from 6 weeks to 2 months — between the
summer season which ends with hoeing, and the autumn season, in which the
pulling and topping are performed, it ordinarily would be necessary for the growers
and companies to secure a new labor force for the harvesting work. There
was not much expense or trouble involved in recruiting a local labor supply.
When, however, the sugar-beet industry became dependent upon migratory labor,
the employers wished to protect themselves against the possibility of workers
leaving at "the end of the summer operations and not returning for the topping
season. The labor contract was one form of protection against this contingency
though instances are found in which families failed to return to the beet fields in
the autumn.93 The contract usually contained a hold-back clause providing for
the retention by the company of $1 to $2 per acre from the blocking and thinning
or hoeing wage. In the past this was paid upon the completion of the harvesting
only if the worker kept his contract. As a result of recent legislation, farmers
are forced to pay full wages for work done.94
The family system of contract labor also resulted from the desire of the com-
panies to maintain a stable cheap labor force. Workers in family groups are less
mobile and more dependent than unattached or solo workers; they are more
attached to the job and less likely to leave employment at hand. Moreover,
family groups tend to consider earnings in toto, rather than earnings per worker.
This has a depressing effect on wage rates which is to the advantage of the
•employer.
During the first several years that sugar beets were raised for manufacture in
Michigan, wages were paid to the beet laborers on a daily basis. During the
1898 campaign of the Michigan Sugar Co., workers were paid from 50 to 65 cents
a day for thinning, and from 75 cents to a dollar a day for operations later in the
season. During the season of 1899, wages around Bay City were $1 a day and
dinner. At Benton Harbor, in this same year, wages were paid at the rate of
$1.25 per day and board, and elsewhere in Michigan, daily wages were set at
about $1 a day and upward.95
In northern Ohio beet fields, some years later, wages were paid on a piece-work
basis. They were set at $18 an acre, and paid as follows: $6 for thinning and
blocking for which $4 was paid at the completion of these operations; $4 for hoeing,
with a total payment at the end of this process of $5, including $1 due from the
blocking and thinning wage; $8 per acre for pulling and topping, at the end of
which a total of $9 an acre was paid, for that work and for the $1 due for hoeing.96
During the 1913 beet season, the average cost per acre of hand labor was $18.65
in Michigan.97
In 1919 Miss Wolfson found that the contract wages of sugar-beet laborers
were $22 an acre for beets planted in rows 28 inches apart, and $24 an acre for
beets planted 18 to 22 inches apart.98 The Children's Bureau reported wages
during 1920 of $28 an acre when the rows of beets were. 22 to 24 inches apart,
and $26 an acre for rows 26 to 28 inches apart. During that season, in addition
to the wages of $26 or $28 per acre paid by the grower, the workers received an
additional bonus of $7 an acre from the company if they had performed the
work according to agreement.99 The National Child Labor Committee reported
a wage payment of $18 per acre in 1922. >
Wage rates of Michigan contract workers cultivating and harvesting the beet
crop of the Michigan Sugar Co. are available for the years 1909 to the present
and presented in table 4. They indicate that for a long time payment was
based on the manner in which the beets were grown, and varied according to the
distance between the rows of beets. This has not been the custom for the last
decade. The work involved in cultivating beets becomes greater as the distance
between the rows of beets decreases, and payment on such a basis is essentially
more equitable. In table 3 are found average wage rates per acre for the years
1927 through 1940, as compiled by the Sugar Division of the United States Depart-
ment of Agriculture.
es Wolfson, op. cit., p. 233.
M See below, section on Federal legislation.
88 Reports of the Industrial Commission, vol. 10, op. cit., p. 574.
K Reports of the Immigrant Commission, pt. 24, Recent Immigrants in Agriculture, op. cit.
87 Report for the Committee on Labor Conditions in the Growing of Sugar Beets, by W. Lewis Abbott,
March 1934, table 1, p. 33.
»8 Wolfson, op. cit., pp. 219-220. .
•» Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit., p. 112.
i Child Labor in the Sugar Beet Fields of Michigan, op. cit., pp. 45-46. "The plots had not yet been
measured, but the grower estimated that Sam worked 30 acres (he had signed up for 45), so his first payment
would not exceed $210, with a second payment of $60 'when all hoeing is completed,' and the last of $270
when harvest is completed.' "
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7883
Table 3.— Average sugar-beet wage per acre by States, 1927-40
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
and
1940
United States..
23.74
23.23
23.26
23.18
18.76
15. 78
14.21
16. 33
18.23
18.87
20.05
' 22. 21
21.34
•Ohio
22.48
23.00
19.48
17.16
15.83
13.51
13. 83
13. 15
13.93
16. 12
14. 09
14. 76
14.00
13.24
14.64
12.57
14. 20
16. 05
14.10
17.44
15.29
16.90
15.14
16. 93
17.63
15.14
15.71
14.00
16.75
15. 32
15.18
18. 52
19. 31
16.36
16.72
17.28
16.13
15. 59
16. 93
17. 86
15.14
16.71
14.00
18.19
19.14
19. 24
20. 43
21.00
20.38
17.06
18.04
20.43
IS. 07
16.60
17.07
18.00
17.52
19.14
13.38
18.19
19. 15
19.05
20.42
21.04
20. 96
19.42
19.12
20.43
18.46
17.55
18. 00
19.29
17.88
19.64
14.38
19.66
20.11
20.19
21.73
22.81
22.45
20.17
20.93
21.55
10.28
19.32
18.86
19.07
19.29
21.08
16.63
20. 60
22. 61
22.65
23.20
24.36
23.64
24.92
23.73
22.24
18.84
Miehiean
23.00
23.66
23.00
18.90
IS. 43
"Wisconsin ...
23.00
23.61
23. 24
23.00
23.61
23.24
23.00
23.61
23.24
23.00
23.61
23.24
19.20
21.61
21.16
15.50
17.71
19.21
18.63
19.43
20.15
15.21
17. 44
20.27
16.43
16.13
17.14
16.50
13.79
14.79
14.62
17. 63
16. 40
15.88
16. 69
18.49
18.75
Minnesota
18. 73
Iowa
20.32
16.62
South Dakota
Nebraska
Colorado
Wyoming.
24.00
23.65
23.79
24.99
26.26
25.96
21.91
22.86
24.00
22.80
22.74
23.99
24.95
25.96
21.16
22.87
24.00
22.88
22. 85
23.99
25.26
25. 96
21.16
22.79
24. 00
23.00
22.90
23.99
23.90
26.13
20.26
23.80
19. 65
21.43
21.46
22.05
Montana
Idaho
23.38
22.38
Utah . . ...
23.18
•California
23.47
22.24
Source: Sugar Division, U. S. Department of Agriculture.
Table 4. — Labor contract rates
[State: Michigan— Company: Michigan Sugar Co.— District: Alma, Bay City, Caro, Crosswell,
Carrollton, Owosso, Lansing]
Year
Remarks
Block
and
thin
First
hoeing
Secondj
hoeing
Total,
sum-
mer
Topping
Source
1940 1939, 1938
$11.00
8.00
6.50
6.00
6.00
5.00
5.00
i 18. 00
i 23. 00
i 23. 00
i 23. 00
i 23. 00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
8.00
8.00
7.00
$11.00
10.00
8.50
7.50
7.50
6.00
6.00
$7 for 7 tons or
less; plus $1
per ton over
7 tons.
$6 for 7 tons or
less; plus $1
$1 per ton
over 7 tons
to 12 tons;
$0.50 per ton
over 12 tons.
$6.50 for 8 tons
or less; plus
$1 per ton
over 8 tons.
$7.50 for 8 tons
or less; plus
$1 per ton
over 8 tons.
$7.50 for 8 tons
or less; plus
$0.50 per ton
over 8 tons.
$6 for 8 tons or
less; plus
$0.50 per ton
over 8 tons.
do
Determination
■1937
2 $2. 00
2 2.00
2 1.50
2 1.50
2 1.00
2 1.00
data from com-
pany, Mar. 18,
1938.
Do.
1936
Do.
1935
Do.
1934
Do.
1933
Do.
1932
Do.
1931
Do.
1930
Do.
1929
Do.
1928
Do.
1927
Do.
1926
3.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
$1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
10.00
13.00
14.00
13.00
12.00
12. 00
11.00
$12 per acre_.
do
do
do
$8 per acre
$10 per aero. ..
$14 per acre.-.
$13 per acre
$12 per acre._
$10 per acre
$9 per acre
Do.
1925
Do.
1921
Do.
19?3
Do.
1922.
Do.
1921...
Do.
1920
.1919
22- to 24-inch rows.
26- to 2?-inch rows.
18- to 22-inch rows.
24- to 26-inch rows.
28-inch rows
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
1 Total wage, break-down not eiven.
2 Price shown as hoeing by company, shown as hold-back on contract.
7884
DETROIT HEARINGS
Table 4. — Labor contract rates — Continued
Year
Remarks
Block
and
thin
$8. 00
8.00
7.00
i 22. 00
" 20.00
i 18. 00
(3)
O
5.00
.5.00
5.00
i 16. 00
i 15. 00
i 18 00
W
m
w
5.00
6.00
6.00
First
hoeing
Second
hoeing
$2.00
1.00
1.00
Total,
sum-
mer
$14. 00
12. 00
11.00
Topping
Source
1918
18- to 22-inch rows.
24- to 20-inch rows.
28-inch rows_ .. .
IS- to 22-inch rows.
24- to 26-inch rows.
28-inch rows
$4.00
3.00
3.00
$10 per acre...
do
$9 per acre
Determination
1917
data from com-
pany, Mar. 18,
1938.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
1916
Do.
1915
Do.
1914
28-inch rows.
23- to 27-inch rows.
18- to 22-inch rows.
23- to 27-inch rows .
28-inch rows
18- to 22-inch rows.
2.00
2.00
3.00
1.66
1.00
2.00
8.00
8.00
10.00
$7 per acre
$8 per acre
do
Do.
1913
Do.
Do.
Table from com-
pany.
Do.
Do.
1912
Do.
1911
Do.
1910
Do.
1900
28-ineh rows
24-inch rows. . . .
18- to 21-inch rows.
3.00
3.00
4.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
$8 per acre
$9 per acre
$10 per acre . .
Do.
Do.
Do.
i Total wage, break-down not given,
s Same as 1914.
* Same as 1909.
Source: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Sugar Division.
Since 1938, wages of Michigan sugar-beet workeis have been set by the Secre-
tary of Agriculture in accordance with the provisions of the Sugar Act of 1937.
Rates are determined each yeai after healings and are set on the basis of several
geographic areas which may include one or more sugar-beet-producing States.
These wages are not mandatory, but they must be paid by growers who wish tO'
qualify for benefit payments under the Sugar Act. The wages are set at a mini-
mum, but tend to become a maximum. Worker representation at the wage
hearings for the Michigan sugar-beet area is generally lacking. Sugar-beet
laborers in Michigan are unorganized, and unable to bring concerted pressure to
bear upon the rates foi beet work. In only one instance has the going rate been
fixed as the result of collective bargaining, southern Michigan in 1935. The
prevailing wage in that locality was $3 and $4 higher than in central Michigan,2
where a collective agreement was lacking.
The wage rates set by the Secretary of Agiiculture 1938-41 have been generally
higher than previous wages in the Michigan sugar-beet area. These rates are
given below:
1938 — Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin:
Blocking, thinning, and hoeing, per acre $11. 00
Pulling and topping, for 7 tons or less (plus $1 for each ton per acre
in excess of 7 tons), per acre 7. 00
1939— Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin:
Blocking, thinning, and hoeing per acre.
Topping:
Below 4 tons per acre per ton.
4 tons per acre.
5 tons do...
•6 tons do---
7 tons do...
8 tons do...
9 tons. ..do..
10
11
tons per ton.
tons. ..do..
12 tons do.
13 tons do.
14 tons do.
15 tons do.
16 tons or above do.
11.00
1.50
1.30
1. 15
1.06
1.00
.96
. 93
.91
.89
. 87
. 85
.83
.81
80
2 Johnson, op. cit., p. 61.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7885
(The rate for all fractional tonnages between 4 and 16 tons rounded to the
nearest tenth of a ton shall be in pioportion within each interval.)
1940. Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin:
Blocking, thinning, and hoeing: per acre__ $11. 00
Topping:
3 tons per acre or below per ton.- 1. 50
4 tons per acre or below do 1. 30
5 tons per acre or below do 1. 15
6 tons per acre or below do 1. 06
7 tons per acre or below do 1. 00
8 tons per acre or below do . 96
9 tons per acre or below do . 93
10 tons per acre or below do . 91
1 1 tons per acre or below do . 89
12 tons per acre or below do .87
13 tons per acre or below do . 85
14 tons per acre or below do . 83
15 tons per acre or below do . 81
16 tons or above do .80
(The rates for all fractional tonnage between 3 and 16 tons rounded to the near-
est tenth of a ton shall be in proportion within each interval.)
1941 — Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin:
Blocking, thinning, and hoeing, $11 per acre, or 40 cents an hour for block-
ing and thinning, and 35 cents an hour for hoeing.
Topping: On a time basis, 45 cents an hour; on a piece-work basis, the same
rates as prevailed in 1940.
The Sugar Act has undoubtedly helped raise the wages of beet laborers above
the low level of the 1930's. However, the fact that the wages set for the 1941
crop are not higher than the 1940 wages would appear to place sugar-beet workers
at a disadvantage during the present year. One bad feature of the wage determi-
nations for Michigan since 1939 has been the lack of a guaranteed minimum for
topping.
The wages of sugar-beet workers are, on the whole, much lower than necessary
for the maintenance of a decent standard of living. The National Child Labor
Committee has recommended that sugar-beet wages be set at from $23 to $28 per
acre.3 The Committee on Labor Conditions in the Growing of Sugar Beets
pointed out that the minimum wage for sugar-beet work would have to be from
$21.50 to $24.50 an acre4 in order "to insure a minimum subsistence wage."
This was based on an average acreage of 7 acres per worker during the beet season.
The net earnings of Michigan sugar-beet workers have been marked by a
downward trend. The foremost factor is the decrease in the wage rate per acre,
which now stands at the pre World War level. Another important factor has
been the general reduction in the number of acres tended per worker. This has
come about because of changes in the method of planting the beets; whereas
farmers formerly staggered their plantings so that workers could go from one
field to the next, this is no longer the case. It is also contended that the sugar
companies and growers of Michigan recruit many more workers than are neces-
sary to care for the crop, and that reduced acreages are the result. The fact that
workers now pay their own transportation costs and the costs of moving their
furnishings to and from the beet areas also results in a reduction in their net earn-
ings from this work. It had been customary for beet workers' families to be pro-
vided with garden plots where they could grow vegetables, and enough land to
keep a few chickens or a cow. Fewer families are able to supplement their earn-
ings in this way at the present. The employment agency fee, and the health
examination fee paid by workers recruited from Texas for the Michigan fields
are other expenses which workers did not bear in previous years.
The low level of sugar-beet wages has been supported by the contention of
some growers that wages should be considered only in terms of the period of time
spent in beet work, i. e., the actual number of days of work which the laborer
performs in tending and harvesting the beets.
3 U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, hearing on clauses relating
to hours of labor, rates of pay, and other conditions of employment in the beet-sugar industry of the United
States, to be made part of a basic code of fair competition in the beet-sugar-refining industry, August 30, 1933,
testimony of Courtenay Dinwiddie.
* Abbott, op. cit., p. 9.
7886 DETROIT HEARINGS
Mr. P. V. Goldsmith, representing the Farmers and Manufacturers' Beet
Sugar Association, composed of growers and sugar companies in the States of
Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana, testified at the 1937 wage hearing before the Secre-
tary of Agriculture:
"The sugar beet grower cannot afford to pay the beet labor, for the short time
required for labor in the beet fields, an amount sufficient for the beet labor to-
live on the entire year. It is not to be expected that in a 3 months' effort and
labor a fair annual salary or wage can be obtained. There is ample opportunity
for the beet labor to work during periods when they are not required in the beet
fields. Contract labor may be had in the cultivation and harvesting of such
crops as tomatoes, pickles, onions, berries, peppermint, and many others. Day
labor may be obtained in general farm work throughout the season such as
threshing, making hay, cutting and husking corn, and numerous other odd jobs
that farmers have for him. The opportunity for other work is increasing every
year." 5
The Relief Administration of the State of Michigan, on the other hand, found
in 1934 that beet workers were not being paid subsistence wages and held that
relief payments constituted a subsidy to the industry. Dr. William Haber, State-
relief administrator, at a hearing on proposed labor provisions to be included in
beet-sugar benefit contracts, testified as follows:
"* * * As State relief administrator, we come in very intimate contact
with various aspects of it (the sugar-beet industry), labor conditions and wages in
the sugar-beet industry during the past 2 years, and I simply wish to present here
briefly the problem which we have had and the attitude of the State emergency
relief commission * * * as it has come down to us during the past year or
two.
"The State relief administration, in conformity with the requirements of the
Federal Relief Administration, and trying to follow the policy that relief funds
shall not be used to subsidize industry which cannot pay a living wage to its
employees- — with that in view we have been compelled to deny relief to people who
had or might appear to have full-time jobs on the theory that those jobs ought to.
pay those people enough to support themselves and their families.
"The problem in question arose, then very early last spring, with the beet
growers, in various parts of the State. They came to us and asked us to deny re-
lief, welfare relief, to any worker who refused a job in the beet fields on the theory
that to give such a person welfare relief in Michigan, who refused such a job
would cause a genuine shortage of labor in the beet fields, and that it would result
in the importation of Mexican and other groups in Michigan fields, something
which if at all possible we should wish to avoid.
"The State relief commission, after investigating the matter, and consulting
with the administrators in other counties, where sugar beets are grown to a large
extent, came to the conclusion that we would not deny relief to workers unless
they turned down a genuine job, at genuine wages, paid in American money, at a
reasonably short period of time after the work was done. That created, as some
of the growers know, a considerable problem in Gratiot County, particularly due
to the possible labor shortage.
"The conclusion which our commission came to, after an investigation of this,
matter, was that a very great proportion of the workers in the beet fields, even
though they had jobs and employment, still remained recipients of welfare. And
upon investigation * * * this year, they were found to have an income not
sufficient to meet the elementary needs in terms even of subsistence of their
families, and so in 8 or 10 of the Michigan counties, where sugar-beet acreage is
quite large, we have also a very large relief roll of persons working in the sugar-
beet fields at the time when they are so employed. And the only explanation
we can make of it is that in substance the income of those people would not be
sufficient, during the period of employment, to take care of their needs, and, in
another sense, that that income which they get is paid to them at a period con-
siderably after the work is actually done.
"Now, the first suspicion which we had, was, of course, that people were receiv-
ing relief when they were wage earners, and should not receive relief, and that the
difficulty may be due not so much to the sugar-beet contract as it may be due to the
ease of getting relief in those counties. So we checked our administrative depart-
ments in those counties to make pretty sure, and we investigated, and I wish to
make the statement that a large number of sugar-beet workers are on relief in the
State even when they are employed, and to amplify that they are getting relief
only if after the most thorough investigation which we know it appears necessary.
« ITearing with resppct tc waee rates for persons employed in the production, cultivation or harvesting;
of the 1937 suear-beet crop, Toledo, Ohio, October 29, 1937, before the Secretary of Agriculture.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7887
If there are some of them getting relief and they shouldn't get it, it is simply
because they are much more successful liars than we are investigators.
*******
"When the State relief commission had this problem presented to them, natur-
ally, as a basis for coming to a conclusion, some members of our staff interviewed
about 25 families in Ingham and Eaton Counties, counties which are close to Lan-
sing. They were families which had refused jobs in the sugar-beet fields, and
whom we had tentatively cut off relief until they proved their claim for assistance.
"I regret to say that I have not with me an actual transcript of those interviews-
and that data, but as my memory serves me the information which we had was
that the income of those people in the sugar-beet fields was not very much more,
if more, than they would be getting on welfare, if they turned down the sugar-beet
jobs, and the average compensation that a family of five on welfare in Eaton
County gets is $18.67 a month, and in Ingham County, outside the city of Lansing,
about $22 a month. Those two factors, Mr. Chairman, I wish to present simply
from the point of view of the State relief administration.
«* * * And during the sugar-beet season last spring and early summer,
the complaints from the sugar-beet counties were definitely discernible, and while
not entirely analyzed the sugar-beet workers feel that there are some serious
complaints' about being denied relief when they had a job, and presented in their
own testimony not only evidence as to working conditions which we accepted at its
face value, but the job' required hard physical labor, but evidence in regard to the
kind of income which they had and therefore needed to be supplemented. Our
interest in this problem is obviously the interest of not using relief funds in what is
supposed to be a going industry. It hasn't been followed consistently because
the human requirements of actually feeding people, even though they have a job,,
is greater than the rigid principle of supplementing an industry which is supposed
to pay a living wage." 6
The Committee on Labor Conditions in the Growing of Sugar Beets 7 believed
that the beet-sugar industry should bear the. brunt of the full support of its
working force. The committee, in its report prepared by W. Lewis Abbott,
reasoned as follows :
"In attempting to determine what would constitute adequate wages for contract
workers, in contrast to those which they are now receiving, it has been assumed
that their wage should render them at least self-supporting. This immediately
raises the question as to whether they should be expected to secure their entire
living from 6 or 7 months' employment in the beet fields, or whether they should be
expected to secure other employment during the remainder of the year. It has
been pointed out that in the period of the several studies, 44 percent of the families
had additional earnings during the summer, 50 percent had winter earnings, and
that this other income amounted to $300 to $500 for the midgroup of families.
Replies to the questionnaire sent to the county administrators of the Federal
Emergency Relief Administration indicate that about one-third of the families
are now able to secure other work, and that this income averages $60 per year.
Under these conditions, it would not seem unjust to require that the full burden
of supporting its workers must fall upon the beet-sugar industry." 8
The Children's Bureau study of conditions among sugar-beet workers in 1935
found that the "income from the arduous physical toil of the whole family in this
seasonal industry is seldom sufficient to provide a decent standard of living, and for
many it is not enough to provide even the bare necessities of life. As a result
they must either accept public relief or face absolute destitution during a part of
the year." 9 Forty-two percent of the beet workers' families in central Michigan
and 38 percent in southern Michigan had received relief during the year ending
October 31, 1935. 10 These figures do not reveal the full extent to which Michigan
beet laborers had been relief recipients, since the survey did not include those
families leaving the State upon the completion of the harvest work, i. e., the
out-of-State migrants.11
A comparison of the earnings of beet workers' families in 1920 and in 1935
throws considerable light on the question of the ability of the industry to support
6 U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, hearing with reference to
proposed labor procisions to be included in beet-sugar benefit contracts under the Agricultural Adjustment
Administration, East Lansing, Mich., September 21, 1934. Testimony of Dr. William Haber, State relief
administrator, pp. 68-72.
7 See below for composition and character of Committee.
8 Abbott, op. cit.; p. 6.
• Johnscn, op. cit. p. 82.
i« Ibid, p. 71.
ii Ibid., p. 8.
7888
DETROIT HEARINGS
its labor force. The earnings of Michigan sugar-beet workers' families surveyed
by the Children's Bureau in 1920 were distributed as follows:
"Between two-fifths and one-half of the 250 'aborers' families that reported the
amount their work would bring them expected to earn less than $800 for their 6
or 7 months in the beet fields, providing they performed all the processes on the
same acreage on which they had worked up to the time of the interview. Most
of them would earn from $500 to $800, including 66 families with but 2 workers —
usually 2 adults, but in some cases 1 adult and 1 child. In the group expecting
to earn $800 to $900 were 52 families approximately one-half of them having 4
or more workers. Thirty-two larger families expected to earn from $1,000 to
$1,199. Forty-seven families, averaging a little over 5 workers a family, expected
to earn between $1,200 and $2,000, and the earnings of 7 families with an average
of between 6 and 7 workers per family would amount to between $2,000 and
$2,600."12
Fourteen of the 22 families who expected to earn less than $400 for the season's
work had 2 working members. It was also found that the cash income of the
beet-field laborers survejred in 1920 was frequently supplemented by garden pro-
duce, and by the maintenance of a cow or chickens; 88 percent of the laborers
reported a garden, 60 percent kept some chickens, and 41 percent had 1 or more
cows.13
The median family earnings from beet work of Michigan workers were $854 in
1920. In 1935 they were $400 in central Michigan and $600 in southern Michigan,
representing declines of 53 percent and 30 percent, respectively. No adequate
data are available on the extent to which family incomes of Michigan beet workers
were supplemented by gardens, poultry, or livestock in 1935. It was found that
63 percent of all contract families in the survey had planted gardens,14 but that
"beet workers do not supplement their wages to any large extent through raising
their own vegetables or keeping livestock." 15 In central Michigan, median
earnings of beet-working families from beet work were approximately the same
in 1934 and 1935. In southern Michigan, where the wage rates and average
acreage tended by each family had increased as a result of a collective agreement,
yearly earnings "were significantly higher in 1935 than in 1934." 16 Beet earnings
increased noticeably after the passage of the Sugar Act. Thus, 70 familes who
had worked at all beet operations in Michigan during the 1939 season, showed
average earnings of $760. 17
Table 5. — Amount payable for work in beet fields, by number of persons working;
families working in beet fields1 Michigan group, 1920
Families working in beet fields
Total Number of persons working
2
Amount payable per work in
beet fields
Num-
ber
2
3
4
5
6
7
Percent
distri-
bution
1
Num-
ber
Percent
distri-
bution
8 to 10
Total
3 250
100.0
1
91
100.0
44
49
31
17
9
8
Less than $400
22
40
50
52
32
20
14
5
8
7
8.8
16.0
20.0
20.8
12.8
8.0
5.6
2.0
3.2
2.8
1
14
23
29
18
5
2
15.4
25.3
31.9
19.8
5.5
2.2
5
11
7
9
6
1
4
1
2
9
20
10
• 3
1
2
3
3
9
3
5
4
1
$400 to $599
2
....
1
6
4
$600 to $799-..
1
1
1
$800 to $999
$1,000 to $1,199
1
$1,200 to $1,399
2
$1,400 to $1,599
1
$1,600 to $1,799
1
$1,800 to $1,999
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
$2,000 to $2,559
1
i Excludes tenant and farm-owning families.
2 Percent distribution not shown where base is less than 50.
3 Excludes 39 families that did not report amount payable.
Source: Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit.,
p. 113.
'2 Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit., pp. 112-
113.
'3 Ibid., see note, p. 113.
t* Johnson, op. cit., p. 74. ...
n Elizabeth S. Johnson, Wages, Employment Conditions, and Welfare, of Sugar-Beet Laborers, Montmy
Labor Review, February 1938, p. 339.
i« Johnson, op. cit., p. 63.
'7 Sugar Division, Labor Section, U. S. Department of Agriculture.
-I-3 w w oo
si — — r:
S +3 o
o >- — -
lag
sal
G ^ o cc
ho s
ator
the
pots
X5 "G += CO
* r e
— G *=
■*.Sfj2 b,
i" e ~ ffl
t»-^:^ G
§ a .2 g
w ■— ce
,^0 3«
£ g/73 S
■g oaj^jg
7f w O ^
e^ '— "—
x " fe £
5 tL^, c
JH O ^ ft
-5 E _' =
G G oo £
~ ~ -T ~*
O -^ G
il - o3 l~-i
**ee.*j w
44—1 2? ^c ^tn FS
e~ 2 e
W — * f"» -"-^
Sail
'— ' — — 1 1 ' ~_
- E- £ ? S
. esse
^ — T so
© ° G _
|iis
3 ®^PhP
£ 5C g
* olU^
.^" so cj
bx— — -S G
0 o^ t,
3 +3 - O o
•G Bl-s g
r3 ~ _£ c3
[5 *S _§ G
r-9 ^ ~~G ^
-■5 s-i
"C ~ =/j*" Gh
ac.5 5 2
^ S. a >i °
•" a) -e
[> w bi e
5 bf o -
C^ CO ~
0/J " w _. .—
S*0*C 33 ~
ir> m tj _
^ ^^- ^- © G
^ is G — . "
- 0; Cj C
erve I
etroit
elds, t
hacks
g &3^ c^
f sevv(
;e (par
sugar-
two t.
- « c ?
a,ie sa &
§•§ a °'g
— v: tx o
^w ^ -i-^ r^
^o»
>iOfi c3
2 - . S^
1! o'-e >
o/j'5 oo -if oc
" ^-\ - 5D • 1— 9
"3P SQ P
t-< e c^
e — at t.
OiJ"*3 CL >— '
:CC"
> °'S - "■
^ .2 .e ^
C ^ G « —
E- £-^-
S'S'g.S
i:-- 2 o
c °
~ 03 O >
C X " ^
« 5£ ^™ 5
;-* =
^^.Si-^
y.
-d ^*^ G
60396— pt. 19
7888-A
0)
P
.08
3D 03
"1^
a 3
03 «
~ u
03 -
> B
0; 03
"3 S
CJ 03
2 .5
•SPAS
em
B
o
B
m o
» <u
rH O
— t-
±i -
to CO
8 OT
s-*ra
2 «
? 03
.53 03
' 03
o
^-. si
2 a
^ a
03 O
a a
■=• _
03 a
— * o
3 -
2 fe
788S-B
a>
—
—
a
a
3
3 o
-7
ai
a>
u
to
-
5
5
OT
<
a
'
CO
zz
—
a
c3
o
O)
j-T
J3
OJ
-i-3
~
r.
.^
be
©
^
7S.88-C
D
7888-E
O
as
z
■C
o
o
e
0»
c4
a
w
e
is
o
73
-t-3
o
a)
o
7888-F
7888-G
X!
3
s
E
C3
■sss ||
7888-1
7S.S.N .1
3
o
JS
a
03
5R o
>. O
.2 a
-S «
03-"
« o
03 .
o3 ai
03 J2
OS
■5-C
- 03
■a "
"3.2
<c 03
m 3
03 p
O
-
■r.
o
s
"en
3
7888-K
7888 I-
°5
03
si
£ 03
§■3
srl
co >
O 03
*&H
-.'•5
3-c
s °
-P W
*° OJ
M
PT3
.-. a
s 3
X c
WJC3
■a
o
o «
§H
■a .
g a
£ o
en **
""oJ
03 ~
a a
> o
03 -C
•^ .3 en
78S8-M
7888-X
L
7888-0
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7889
OTHER EARNINGS AND TOTAL INCOME
In 1920, Michigan sugar-beet workers had greater earnings from supplemen-
tary work than in 1935. "Of the total number of fathers, both resident and
migratory laborers, who had worked during the winter preceding the inquiry
and who reported the amount earned, 47, or slightly over one-fifth, had made
less than $300 from their winter employment, but over three-fifths had made
$400 or more, and approximately 40 percent had earned at least $600." 1S The
median earnings of this group of workers from winter work were $519. 19 The
median yearly income of beet laborers' families in 1935 from all sources except
relief was $520 in central Michigan and $740 in southern Michigan.20 "Among
the families in Michigan, where some industrial employment was available, only
30 percent received, in addition to beet earnings and relief, an income of $200 or
more in 1935." 21 In central Michigan, the median annual supplementary in-
come per family not including relief was $93. It should be noted that most
out-of-State laborers were not included in these data.22 Of the 70 families in-
cluded in the Sugar Division data on family earnings during 1939, only 65 per-
cent reported any other work during the previous year. Those who reported
other work showed average earnings of $275 per family.23
The economic status of sugar-beet workers has become less and less favorable.
Michigan beet workers earned more money per acre in the period from 1917 to
1930, with the exception of 1922, than they have in any year since that time.
The lowering wage level becomes more distinguishable when it is recognized that
wage rates at the present time are about the level that they were in the period
from 1909 to 1913, and that from 1932 to 1937 workers received smaller payment
for their work than they did in the pre World War years. The Sugar Act, through
raising the level of wages, had brought about some measure of economic relief to
this group of workers. The money income of beet workers is still inadequate to
provide any measure of security. Families who worked at all operations in 1939
earned $760 for their season's labor in beets. There was an average of five workers
in these family groups, making the average earnings per worker for this 6- to
7-month period, $152. Figuring on a 6>2-month basis, the average beet earnings
per worker were roughly $23 a month. Average earnings per worker from occu-
pations other than beet work were $55 for the entire year.23
The reduction of the Michigan beet workers from a fairly independent group of
workers who were able to become renters and owners to a permanent migratory
agricultural labor force has taken place over the past 20 years. The agricultural
ladder, which once operated to bring these workers out of the laborer class, has
broken down completely. Few Mexican beet workers have become renters and
owners of land, unlike the early Russian, Belgian, and other immigrant beet
workers. Not only did the higher earnings of the early beet workers enable them
to rent or purchase land, but they were encouraged by sugar companies to become
beet growers. Attractive offers were sometimes made to induce them to acquire
and rent farms. The contemporary Mexican beet worker is rushed out of the
community at the end of the season, and discouraged from settling in the beet
areas. His meagre earnings make acquisition of land impossible.
Wage rates in the early 1930's were changed in many areas to provide a scaled
rating for topping. This generally provided for a minimum wage based on a
given tonnage of beets per acre, with additional payments per ton per acre for all
tonnage exceeding the stated yield. There were variations of this type of pay-
ment; in some cases, the scaled payments stopped at a particular tonnage, and in
others, these payments were continued no matter what the yield per acre. The
main reason for introducing this new method of payment was the desire to take
into account differential yield and permit the farmer with low tonnage to pay less
wages than the farmer with higher yields per acre. In this way risk was passed
along to the field workers. The growers claimed that the scaled payment provided
an incentive to the beet laborers and that payments above the stated minimum
were compensation for good work which helped produce high tonnage per acre.
For the past few years there has been no stated minimum for topping wage, but
merely a set rate based on yield.
Workers have complained that this method of payment penalizes them, since
more work is required in a poor field with low yields than in a good field. It has
is Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit., p. 114.
19 Computed from table LVII, p. 115, ibid.
2° Johnson, op. cit., table 25, p. 68.
21 Johnson, Monthly Labor Review article, op. cit., pp. 336-337.
22 Ibid., p. 337.
23 Sugar Division.
60396— 41— pt. 19 9
7890
DETROIT HEARINGS
also been charged that poor fields are frequently the fault of the farmer who has
planted in bad fields, or of weather conditions, blights, plant diseases, etc., over
which the laborer has no control. Moreover, the same number of beets frequently
are handled regardless of the size and yield.
One of the most serious complaints leveled against employers is that beet workers
do not receive the acreage they can handle, which, as has been pointed out above,
results in the reduction of their earnings. The earnings of beet workers depend
upon the acreage for which they are able to contract. The unregulated system of
labor recruiting, the system of family labor, the use of an out-of-state migratory
labor supply, and the practice of recruiting more workers than are necessary to
cultivate the crop, all tend toward reduction in acreage per worker and per family.
These practices also have an adverse effect on the wage rate, and on the other
conditions of employment in sugar beet work.
The Texas State Employment Service, in a statement to the Tolan committee,
contended that Michigan beet growers in an effort to keep wages down encouraged
a surplus of labor to migrate to the fields each year, which caused a reduction in
acreage per family.
"However, the wages paid by the growers vary in scale approaching the mini-
mum established under the quota system, according to the supply of labor available
for the intermittent work during the 6-months' period; it is, therefore, obviously
to the advantage of the grower to encourage a surplus labor influx. As this is
true, it is also a fact that the acreage allotted to individuals or family groups is
reduced and thereby the income of the worker decreases." 24
The Children's Bureau found that many families of beet workers failed to con-
tract for the acreages which they were able to handle.
<<* * * -p/he problem of obtaining a large enough acreage of beets to provide
a maximum amount of employment during the brief working periods was an im-
mediate one to many families of beet laborers, particularly those in the Mountain
States beet region. The desire of the farmers to have their work done within a
brief period of time when it can be performed most advantageously has the effect
of shortening the working season to the extent warranted by the labor supply.
The great variation in the length of the working season among the families inter-
viewed suggests that many did not have all the work they could have done if
more had been available to them and time had been allowed for its performance." 25
According to the testimony of a beet worker at the Michigan hearing on the
wage rate determination for the 1940 crop, it was once possible for a single adult
worker to handle from 15 to 20 acres a season. Farmers staggered their plantings-
so that beet workers went from one field to the next as the various operations
became necessary. The present practice of seeding all fields at the same time
makes it impossible for a laborer to work more than one place in one field. As a
result, a worker can handle only 7 to 9 acres each season.26 The secretary-treasurer
of the Northern Sugar Beet Growers Association, who is a large grower of beets in
Arinac County, testified at the same time, that there are "some cases where
farmers plant too much at one time" instead of staggering their plantings.27
There was wide variation in the number of acres worked per full-time worker
between the two sections of Michigan studied by the Children's Bureau in 1935.
The average number of acres thinned was 8.5 in central Michigan and 12.6 in south-
ern Michigan. For hoeing, the averages for these two regions were 9.0 and 12.5
per full-time worker; and for topping, 7.9 and 13.1 per full-time worker. More
recently, the labor section of the sugar division has calculated the average acreage
per worker for States of the eastern sugar beet areas, on the basis of a survey
conducted in 1939.
Average number of acres per worker, 1989
State
Blocking
and thinning
Hoeing
Topping
Michigan .
8.9
12.4
11.3
9.1
12.4
11.3
9. 1
Ohio . - -
13.8-
Indiana.
11.5
24 Hearings, pt. 5, op. cit., p. 1845.
2« Johnson, op. cit., p. 55.
29 Hearings on Wage Rates and Prices for the 1940 Sugar Beet Crop, before the Secretary of Agriculture,,
Detroit, Mich., January 31, 1910. Testimony of Albert Marka.
27 Ibid., testimony of John R. Staebler, secretary-treasurer, Northern Sugar Beet Growers Association,
Bay City, Mich.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7891
Since there are few differences in the methods of cultivation and the growing
conditions in the States of Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana (the wage determinations
are made for these States and for Wisconsin as one section), the variations in the
amount of acreages handled by the workers are undoubtedly due to company
practice. The complaints of Michigan workers that they are able to tend larger
acreages appear to be well founded. Professor Thaden reported to the Tolan
committee that "Most families feel that they can take care of more acres and
that if fewer beet workers came up from Texas they would have a larger acreage." 28
In central Michigan, for the 1934 season, the median acreage thinned per family
amounted to 29 acres; this decreased to 28 acres during 1935. In southern
Michigan, on the other hand, the median acreage thinned per family increased
from 28 to 36 acres.29 The workers in southern Michigan had a collective agree-
ment with the growers in 1935 and were able to exert some control over the
number of workers hired. Their ability to tend the larger acreages was evidenced
by the fact that they hired fewer extra help in 1935 than any of the nine areas
surveyed. In central Michigan, in 1935, 33.9 percent of the beet laborers' families
hired workers to help them in caring for their acreages. In southern Michigan
on the other hand, where the acreages were much larger, only 7.1 percent of the
contract families hired extra help.30 It should also be noted that the necessity
for hiring extra help reduces the earnings of the contract labor family.
The Colorado and Nebraska beet fields were visited in September 1936 by an
investigator for the National Child Labor Committee, and the trends noted
above with regard to the oversupply of labor and reduction in acreages handled
were found to be very sericus problems. To quote:
"There are at present a number of elements that make the situation for laborers
worse than in the past. In the first place the number of laborers has reached the
saturation point. There are more adult laborers than are needed to do the beet
work. This is true in spite of the fact that the acreage in Colorado increased from
140,000 in 1935 to 174,000 in 1936, and in the Scottsbluff area of Nebraska from
about 40,000 in 1935 to about 62,000 in 1936. One complaint frequently heard
is that families are no longer able to get as large an acreage as they can handle —
certainly not enough to carry them through the year.
"Another factor imposing hardship upon beet laborers arises from a change in
the method of planting beets. The grower would plant one field, then wait a few
days before planting another, and so on. Now the tendency is to plant the entire
acreage as near one time as possible. Formerly the laborer family would have
time to finish the respective hand work processes in one field before the next one
was ready but now the entire acreage demands attention at once. The grower
reserves the right to hire extra help to care for the crop at the time when needed,
and charge the cost of the same to the contractor. So a family who may have a
sizable acreage stands to lose a considerable portion of its supposed income by
being forced to pay for extra help." 31
An evil of the wage-payment system in sugar-beet work is the dependence of the
contract laborer on credit during his stay in the beet fields. Laborers are recruited
in late April and early May, and generally arrive at the sugar-beet farms several
weeks before the hand work begins. Since most of the families are destitute or
have only a limited amount of cash on hand, the sugar companies or farmers
provide them with credit at local stores. As early as 1919, Miss Wolfson found
sugar beet contract families living on credit. The Children's Bureau survey of
1920 found that "Practically two-thirds of the total number of families, 190,
reported that they made their purchases entirely on credit. For about one-half
of the laborers' families credit was established by the sugar companies; that is, the
company vouched for their accounts up to a stated amount. This they did usually
by paying the store bills, deducting the amount from the laborers' pay. It was
customary, as has already been pointed out, for the company to pay the laborers
by taking the farmer's note for an equal sum. Many of the workers expressed
dissatisfaction with arrangements, saying that they were overcharged by the
stores; that they did not know where they stood financially; and that they bought
more than they should when they made a practice of buying on credit." 32
The 1935 study found the same widespread use of the credit system in the
sugar-beet fields that had prevailed 15 years previously. "In the Michigan
localities visited it was customary for the sugar companies to make the payments
to the laborers for summer work on assignment from the growers; and therefore
" Ilea rings pt. 3 p. 1302.
29 Johnson, op. cit., table 19, p. 59.
30 Idid„ appendix, table XI, p. 93.
si Charles E. Gibbons, the Beet Fields Revisited, the American Child, September 1936, vol. 18, No. 6, p. 3.
32 Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit., pp. 113-114.
7892 DETROIT HEARINGS
store-credit arrangements for the laborers were usually made by the sugar com-
pany's field men rather than by the growers themselves. The field man would
take the worker to the store, where he handed the worker his pay check, and in
this way he assisted the storekeeper to collect what the beet worker owed him." 33
The Children's Bureau found in 1935 that payment for the harvesting work
was frequently delayed in Michigan and other eastern sugar beet States, and that
about one-fifth of the Michigan families had not been paid in full for their work
on the 1935 crop at the time they were interviewed in December.34 This method
of payment still prevails in Michigan, the contract family receiving the wages
for the blocking, thinning, and hoeing at the conclusion of this work, and for the
pulling and topping in November or December. The holdback is still in force,
but growers usually pay workers in full for their summer labor. Farmers will
not receive their payments under the Sugar Act if workers have not been fully
paid for their work.
In the past, the wage pajunent system worked a hardship on the labor force of
the sugar beet industry, because bad fields could not be abandoned and new
employment sought. The worker had to peiform the operations contracted for,
even though conditions beyond his control made the work more arduous and
more exacting, or the holdback was forfeited.
The method of paying wages for sugar-beet work places a burden on the com-
munities in which the beet workers reside. Elsewhere in this report are described
the experiences of the Michigan State Relief Commission concerning sugar-beet
workers who were in need of relief. Dr. Haber stated that the presence of large
numbers of beet workers on the relief rolls of the State was due not only to low
earnings but also to the fact that workers were not paid while they were working.
At the same hearing Dr. Haber amplified this point.
"Two years ago the city welfare director of Lansing, which had 2,800 families
on relief, cut automatically without question, rigidly, cut off every person who
was offered a sugar-beet job, and people began to take the sugar-beet jobs, and
to their great surprise they had to supplement their income, the income of the
sugar-beet workers, at the end of the week or the end of the month.25
<< * * * j think our commission would have taken a very different stand if we
felt the sugar-beet workers were getting paid every week or every 2 weeks in
United States money, and would not have to wait this long period of time.
"We said this: The chairman of our commission said to me 'as administrator
if we say every worker must accept a job in the sugar-beet field, how many people
do we cut off from relief?' I said, 'none, because they would stay on relief until
they got their first grocery order,' and we don't want to object to the grocery
order * * *." 36
The commissioner of labor and industry, Daniel O'Connor, testifying at the
same hearing with Dr. Haber, stated:
<<* * * since I have been commissioner of labor and industry in Michigan,
one of the serious problems is the collection of the wage for sugar-beet workers.
The amounts do not ordinarily run as high as in some other industries, but the
complaints are very, very frequent.
"A man will come in and claim he worked for some farmer out here and that he
can't get his pay. He was to get so much an acre, and 1 believe that the men here
in the sugar-beet industry will understand this better than I. We go along until
June or July and there is a payment due, and he doesn't get his payment. Often-
times he is paid in an order, and that order can be taken to someone to cash for
him, or to a store to buy groceries, and so on, like that, and the complaint is that
the smaller grocer will not accept the order in payment for groceries because the
order reads that it is to be paid when the sugar is sold, something to that effect.
I may not have this just right.
"Another thing is that the man will come in and make a complaint against some
farmer that owes him for working in the beets. The farmer will say, 'Well, J.
haven't received my money from the sugar-beet company.' We then take it
up with the sugar-beet company and they say, 'We have paid the farmer.' Now,
it may be probable that they have paid the farmer and he needs that money for
something else and spends that instead of paying the workmen.^
"Again, in some cases these orders are cashed at a discount."
37
" Johnson, op. cit., p. 70.
34 ibid , p. 69.
35 Hearing with reference to proposed labor provisions to be included in beet-sugar benefit contracts under
■the A. A. A., op. cit., pp. 78-79.
3« Ibid., p. 78.
"Ibid., pp. 160-161.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7893
Some of the abuses associated with the withholding of wages and the failure to
pay sugar-beet workers what is due them, have been eliminated through the
machinery of the Sugar Act. Workers have received assistance in collecting
wages due, and a strong compulsion is placed on the growers to see that these
are paid in full.
The setting of a fair and adequate wage for sugar-beet workers is a complicated
problem. An analysis of the considerations involved are set out below:
"A complex of factors must be considered in setting the rates: The prevailing
market price of sugar beets, the general level of agricultural wages, the cost of
living, the annual earnings of sugar-beet workers, and the relation between the
price of sugar beets and wages in the past. Today the price which the sugar
company agrees to pay the growers for beets sets a limit upon the wage which the
grower can afford to pay the contract laborer. As a result the level of wages is
controlled, for the most part, by the processors. For this reason beet laborers have
asked that wage rates be agreed upon before the processors and the growers fix
the price for the season's crop.38 This request has received the endorsement of
the Industrial Commission of Colorado which recommended, in the spring of 1937,
'that the price of beet field labor should be determined or given consideration
prior to the time of the establishment of the price for the sale of sugar beets.'
It suggested that 'the price of beet field labor should be one of the determining
factors in the establishment of a price for the sale of beets.' 39
"The further problem arises as to what weight should be given to the loss of
earnings due to lack of off-season employment of agricultural beet workers in the
determination of wage rates. It has been shown that a considerable number be-
come public charges after the beet-growing season comes to a close. It is similarly
clear that even if the beet workers' earnings were doubled in the great majority
of cases, they would still fail to provide the minimum American standard of living.
"Any increase in wages, however, depends upon the rise in the income of the
growers. It is significant that the growers at the public hearings have not
attacked wages as being too high. They have pointed out, however, that wages
have been out of line with their returns. While the growers' income is in large
measure determined by the price of sugar, it is based also upon the share of the
sugar dollar which they obtain. To mechanically increase the price of sugar
without providing for a "more equitable distribution of the proceeds would benefit
the processor more than the grower. It would probably also penalize the con-
sumer several times the amount which the grower would receive, unless the_-
terms of the grower-processor contract were changed." 4U
HOURS OF WORK AND LENGTH OF WORKING SEASONS
Long hours of toil are customary in sugar beets, particularly during the thinning
and topping seasons. The extremely long hours reflect "both the traditional
10-hour day for agricultural labor and the pressure on workers to perform a maxi-
mum amount of work within a brief seasonal period." 41 They also result from
the worker's fear that he will be forced to hire help to finish the work on his
contracted acreage, and thereby reduce his earnings.
In 1920, the Children's Bureau found that beet laborers' families had the follow-
ing hours of work during the blocking and thinning season. "For the laborers'
families work usually started at 6 a. m., though 5 or 5:30 was sometime given as
the hour of beginning, and even 4 o'clock was reported. The laborers' families
usually took the shortest possible time for meals, and worked until 6, 7, and
sometimes 8 p. m., of later. Even when meal time is excluded these hours indi-
cate a long working day." 42 Children of contract laborers worked incredibly
long hours at blocking and thinning. The Bureau found only 9 out of a total
of 361 laborers' children working less than 7 hours a day at thinning and block-
ing.43 "Thus, Anna, the 11-year-old child of a Polish laborer, began her field
work at 5 o'clock in the morning, leaving the field at 8 at night, with only 1 hour
for dinner. The children of another Polish laborer, Helen, aged 14, Stevie, 12,
38 "In the matter of hearing (sugar hearing 2) before the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to wage rates
for persons employed in the production, cultivation, or harvesting of the 1937 sugar beet crop." Session
held in Denver, Colo., October 14, 1937. pp. 60-62; and in Billings, Mont., October 25, 1937. pp. 197-201.
39 Recommendations by the industrial commission of Colorado in the Matter of Colorado Conference af
Beet Field and Agricultural Workers' Unions, Employees, v. The Great Western Sugar Company and the Sugor
Beet Growers of the State of Colorado, Employers, May 7, 1937, p. 2.
40 Protection of Sugar Beet Field Workers Under the Federal Sugar Control Acts of 1934 and 1937, by
Samuel Liss, typewritten manuscript in the files of the Labor Division, Farm Security Administration.
41 Johnson, op. eit., p. 31.
42 Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. eit., p. 90.
43 Ibid., table XLIII, p. 91.
7894
DETROIT HEARINGS
and Julia, 10, worked from 4 a. m. until 8:30 p. m., with one-half hour for breakfast
and one-half hour for dinner. Another example of a 14-hour day is found in the
case of a Hungarian boy of 13 years, whose work in the beets had lasted 4 weeks." 44
Working mothers also labored long hours each day at blocking and thinning.
"Only 32 of the 232 working mothers in laborers' families worked less than 9
hours a day and 89, or more than one-third, worked 12 hours or more." 45
Laborers' children also worked for many hours each day during the hoeing
season. Over four-fifths reported that they had averaged from 9 to 14 hours or
more per day while hoeing.40 A workday of from 10 to 12 hours during the hoeing
was most commonly reported by the working wives of contract laborers.47
The daily hours of work of sugar-beet laborers do not show any appreciable
decline over the past 20 years. In 1934, Abbott reported that working days of
12 hours in blocking and thinning were not uncommon, and that 9 to 10 hours per
day was the average in pulling and topping.48 The Children's Bureau 1935
survey found that working hours were at least 12 a day for half of the fathers of
the families at thinning time and at least 1 1 hours a day for half of them at topping
time.49 The usual daily hours worked at each process by the father of the contract
labor family are set forth in table 6. These data are not available for the State of
Michigan, but it may be assumed that hours of beet laborers in that State were
similarly distributed.
Table 6. — Usual daily hotirs worked at each process by father of family, 1935
Father of family working at —
Usual daily hours worked '
Thinning
Hoeing
Topping
Number
Percent
distri-
bution
Number
Percent
distri-
bution
Number
Percent
distri-
bution
Total
946
946
946
Hours reported
799
100.0
696
100.0
512
100.0
Less than 8 hours
12
23
44
150
145
196
121
77
31
1.5
2.9
5.5
18.8
18.2
24.5
15.1
9.6
3.9
38
83
102
210
111
94
30
16
12
5.5
11.9
14.7
30.2
15.9
13.5
4.3
2.3
1.7
12
24
47
127
139
82
33
29
19
2.3
8 hours..
4.7
9 hours -.
9.2
10 hours 1-
24.8
11 hours
27.2
12 hours
16.0
13 hours --
6.4
14 hours
5.7
15 hours
3.7
Hours not reported
19
83
45
19
186
45
293
96
45
Father did not work at process
No father in family
i Hours are reported to the nearest whole number.
Source: Johnson, op. cit.
An unpublished report of the Children's Bureau, based on a survey conducted
in the autumn of 1939 in Michigan and Ohio,50 found: "The median hours re-
ported for blocking and thinning was 10.8 for both children and adults; for hoeing
it was 10.5 for both groups of workers; and for pulling and topping it was 9.3 for
the children as compared with 10 for the adults." sl A canvass made by the
Sugar Division of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration during the same
year reported that the hours of work for beet laborers in Michigan were:
** Ibid., p. 88.
« Ibid., p. 109.
« Ibid., pp. 92-3.
^7 Ibid., p. 110.
*e Abbott, op. cit., p. 4.
<B Johnson, Monthly Labor Review, op. cit., p. 332.
w See Appendix.
S1 United States Children's Bureau, Employment of Children in the Sugar Beet Fields Under the Sugar
Act, unpublished manuscript.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7895
Average hours
Process: (per day)
Thinning 11. 0
First hoeing 10. 2
Second hoeing 10. 0
Topping l 9. 8
i Sugar Division.
The shorter hours noted during topping in all of the studies cited are attributable
to the shorter days to be found during October and November when the topping
season is in progress, and in no way reflect decreased pressure to complete the
work.
The length of time actually spent in the fields during the 6- or 7-month period
of employment in beets, depends mainly upon the contracted acreage. The
pressure on beet workers to finish the hand operations as quickly as possible tends
to shorten the number of days spent in working an acre. The combination of
these factors must be considered in an evaluation of the working conditions of
sugar-beet laborers. The results are long hours and comparatively few days of
intensive labor. Frequently the condition of the fields are such as to make the
lot of the overworked beet laborer even more difficult and trying. Thus, the
length of time spent at hoeing does not depend on acreage alone, but upon how
well the farmer has cultivated his fields. The investigators of the Children's
Bureau reported that "numerous complaints were made by the families regarding
the poor cultivating that was done, and it was said that the hoeing had been
particularly hard that season [1920] on most of the farms because the weeds had
been so bad." 52 Workers have frequently complained about the difficulties
involved in working in rocky fields, and, in many instances, they have been com-
pelled to clear such fields with no extra compensation.53
In 1920, when the acreages worked by families, and presumably, by individual
workers, were larger than they are at the present, the Children's Bureau found
that more than half of the contract laborers' families reporting their acreages had
contracted for at least 25 acres. Four-fifths of their children had worked 4 or
more weeks at blocking, thinning, and hoeing, and three-fifths had spent from
6 to 13 weeks at this work.54 One Polish family, in which there were three work-
ing children under 15 years of age, reported that all of its members had spent
9 weeks at blocking, thinning, and hoeing their acreage.55 The 7-year-old child
of a Mexican laborer had worked more than 8 weeks for 11}^ hours each day.58
The families estimated that the working capacities of children were about one-
quarter of an acre a day in thinning and blocking, one-half an acre a day in thin-
ning alone, and one-half an acre a day in hoeing.57 The majority of laborers'
wives had worked at these processes from 8 to 9 weeks during 1920. 58
In 1935, the Children's Bureau found wide variation in the number of days
worked by beet-field laborers. In the eastern areas surveyed, which included two
areas in Michigan and one in Minnesota, the median number of working days of
the fathers or heads of contract families was 68; 10 percent of the fathers had
worked 95 days or longer.59 A distribution of the total days worked in the beet
fields by the fathers of families follows:
" Child Labor and the Work of Mothers, etc., pp. 93-94.
" Wolfscn, op. cit.
«* Ibid., p. 87.
« Ibid., p. 88.
« Ibid., p. 89.
w Ibid., p. 95.
«» Ibid., pp. 109-110.
m Johnson, op. cit., p. 56.
7896
DETROIT HEARINGS
Table 7. — Total days worked in beet fields by fathers of families in 3 eastern areas
and in 3 Mountain States areas, 1935
Families working in beet fields
Total days worked by fathers
in 1935 season
6 areas
3 eastern areas
3 Mountain State
areas '
Number
Percent
distri-
bution
Number
Percent
distri-
bution
Number
Percent
distri-
bution
Total
530
232
298
Days worked reported
405
100.0
195
100.0
210
100.0
Less than 20
28
31
40
67
60
72
41
36
30
6.9
7.7
9.9
16.5
14.8
17.8
10.1
8.9
7.4
7
7
14
22
19
38
30
30
28
3.6
3.6
7.2
11.3
9.7
19.4
15.4
15.4
14.4
21
24
26
45
41
34
11
6
2
10.0
20, less than 30
11.4
30, less than 40
12.4
40. less than 50.
21.4
50, less than 60..
19.5
60, less than 70
16.2
70, less than 80
5.2
80, less than 90
2.9
90 or more
1.0
Days worked not reported .
J 125
37
88
1 Includes northern Wyoming, southern Montana, and Sidney. Montana.
2 Includes 62 families in which there was no male head or in which the male head of the family did not work
at beets, and 63 families visited before the harvest work was completed or for whom the information was not
reported.
Source: Johnson, op. cit„ p. 89.
Table 8. — Days worked in beet fields by fathers of families in three eastern areas and
seven mountain States areas, 1935
Area and process
Families re-
porting days
father worked
at process
50 percent of
the fathers
worked less
than —
90 percent of
the fathers
worked less
than —
Thinning:
All areas
797
189
608
687
185
502
394
185
209
405
195
210
Days
21
24
19
13
18
11
22
25
21
56
68
48
Days
32
3 eastern areas
37
7 Mountain States areas
29
Hoeing:
All areas
26
3 eastern areas. . .*
7 Moutain States areas _
Topping: '
6 areas. ..
34
23
35
3 eastern areas . .
3 Mountain States areas '
40
28
All processes performed:
6 areas '
88
3 eastern areas
3 Mountain States areas '
95
69
i Exclusive of the three areas in Colorado and western Nebraska, visited before families had completed the
harvest work.
Source: Johnson, op. cit., p. 56.
The Sugar Division found the average number of days of work per laborer in
families which performed all the hand operations in Michigan during the summer
of 1939 to be: Thinning, 22 days; first and second hoeings, 16 days; and topping,
24 days.
CHILD LABOR IN THE SUGAR-BEET FIELDS OF MICHIGAN
It has already been indicated that the sugar-beet industry of Michigan, since
its inception, has been characterized by the widespread use of child labor. This
has been a direct consequence of the family contract system. However, children
have been hired by farmers and sugar companies apart from the family group.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7897
During the early years of the industry in Michigan, gangs of boys and girls Jiving
in the locality were employed on a daily basis; they were brought or came to the
fields each morning and returned to their homes each night. Later, as the in-
dustry developed, groups of children were brought in from cities and towns, and
stayed in the fields during the duration of their employment. This became a regu-
lar migratory movement. As the family system of labor developed, the recruit-
ment of solo workers, child or adult, diminished, and, in time, child labor apart
from the family group disappeared. It has reappeared at times, as, for example,
during the sugar-beet labor scarcity in 1920. It was reported that, "Inability to
secure labor led in some places to the formation of crews of day workers, usually
boys, but occasionally girls, from 10 to 16 years of age or over. The children
generally lived in the towns where the factories were located and were taken out
by the sugar-company agent to the fields each day."60
The early encouragement of child labor in sugar beets reflected the general
attitude toward child labor at the time. As the enlightened American public
began to understand the evils inherent in such a system of labor, the opposition
to child labor increased and began to make itself felt. One of the first studies of the
employment of children in the sugar-beet industry was that made by Theresa
Wolfson in Michigan in 1919. This was done under the auspices of the National
Child Labor Committee and appeared in its official publication. In 1920, the
United States Children's Bureau conducted a comprehensive survey in Michigan
and in Colorado. In 1922 the National Child Labor Committee again visited
the beet fields of Michigan and published a report on its findings. From that
time on, many investigators of private and public agencies, social workers,
magazine writers, etc., have made investigations and published reports on
child labor in the sugar-beet industry throughout the United States.
The economic status of sugar-beet families, the attitude of the community into
which they migrate, their inferior social status, and the fact that they have been
traditionally of foreign extraction, all combine to place their children in a dis-
advantaged position. Many communities have not cared whether or not the
children of beet laborers attended school, and have made no pretense of enforcing
the school attendance laws with regard to them. Parents of sugar-beet families
are frequently of foreign birth, are illiterate, and do not even speak English. Mexi-
can sugar-beet workers are isolated socially from other groups in the community,
their children are not permitted to become assimilated into the American culture
in the traditional fashion. That these children customarily are referred to as
"Mexicans," although they are practically all American born, indicates their
general isolation as a group.61
Beet work is essentially a "stoop" job. A description of the operations per-
formed and of the physical conditions under which they are executed, will suggest
the dangerous effects of such work on the bodies of children and young adoles-
cents. Blocking and thinning, performed during the months of May and June,
are necessary because the sugar beet is produced by a multiple seed planted in
continuous rows. Blocking consists of chopping out plants in a row so that
bunches of plants are left at intervals of 10 or 12 inches. This is done with a
short-handled hoe, and necessitates some stooping. The thinning, which im-
mediately follows, consists of removing all but one plant from the bunches, and
is performed entirely by hand. Workers crawl along the rows on hands and
knees, or work in a stooping position. This operation is exceedingly laborious
and is performed at great speed since the work must be finished before the plants
grow too large. The drive to complete these operations in as short a time as
possible makes for great haste and long hours each day. "An added trying and
doubtless injurious aspect of this work comes from breathing the dust raised from
the soil in the process. The thinning work, which is carried on in late spring, is
done under a hot sun that is very trying to many workers.62 If the season is a
rainy one, the work is even more unpleasant, since it must be done in muddy
fields.
The hoeing process, performed during late June and July, is not done under
the same pressure, but may have to be repeated two or three times during the
season. Hoeing keeps the soil loose and free from weeds and is done with a long-
handled hoe. It does not require stooping or crawling as does bunching and thin-
ning, but calls for more physical strength. The daily hours of work are shorter,
and the hoeing is done with less speed than any of the other hand operations per-
formed bv beet laborers.
«o Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, op. cit., p. 81.
81 See Johnson, op. cit., Wolfson, op. cit., Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of
Colorado and Michigan, op. cit.
82 Johnson, op. cit., pp. 29-30.
7898 DETROIT HEARINGS
Harvest operations, which consist of pulling and topping the beets, call for the
most strength and endurance on the part of the worker. The beets are first loos-
ened from the ground by the farmer or hired man who runs a machine known as
a lifter through the fields. Workers then pull the beets from the ground, knock
them together to remove the dirt and throw them in piles or windrows. The
pulling operation requires a stooping or bending position and is physically tiring
since the beets weigh from 1 to 3 pounds. Topping is the process of removing the
bunch of leaves from the top of the beet, and requires considerable skill. The
worker is equipped with a sharp-bladed knife weighing nearly 1 pound. The beet
is grasped with the left hand, and is topped with a single stroke of the topping
knife, which is held in the right hand. The combined weight of the knife and the
beet, the continual rapid stooping and lifting, and the speed with which the opera-
tion must be performed make topping an exceedingly arduous task. It is danger-
ous work, as well. Cuts on hands, legs, and knees, and even loss of fingers are
sometimes suffered from topping work.
Workers may also experience great physical discomfort during the harvesting
season. Sugar-beet cultivation requires that tbe beets be left in the ground as
long as possible during the growing season, and the harvest work in Michigan is
frequently performed during cold and freezing weather and even with the ground
covered with snow. Beets then have to be pulled from cold, stiff earth, or are
covered with frost which makes them difficult to handle. Besides the unpleasant-
ness surrounding the work in such weather, the possibility of accidents with the
topping knife, increases, for workers' hands become cold and raw. These opera-
tions must be performed with all possible haste because the beets cannot be
pulled from frozen ground. The hours of work are as long as is possible during
the short autumn days.
The physical effects of beet work on children are exceedingly harmful. In the
autumn of 1920, the Children's Bureau conducted examinations of approxi-
mately 1,000 childern in families employed in the beet fields of Colorado. A high
percentage of orthopedic defects were noted among the children: 676 cases of
winged scapulae were found, representing 66.1 percent of those examined; "hence
2 children in 3 were taxing the muscles of an undeveloped shoulder girdle in this
period of their growth. . . . This high percentage of winged scapulae sug-
gests that the steady stooping in the kneeling and crouching position which block-
ing and thinning necessitate and the intermittent stooping to handle and lift the
very considerable weights involved in the harvest has an effect on the outline and
posture of the growing child's body." In this deformity "the back is high and
bowed over, the chest is dragged downward, and free action in breathing is inter-
fered with." 63 Many cases of flat-foot were also found. The existence of left
flat foot only, in some of the children was attributed to the fact that children
topping beets support the weight of the body on the left foot and raise the right
knee. The Children's Bureau found that these defects occurred more frequently
among these beet-working children, than they did among groups of non-beet-
working children who had been studied elsewhere.64
Absence from school and retardation have been the rule among migratory beet
workers' children. This has likewise been the case with the children of resident
beet-working families, whether tenant or laborer. Many localities have "beet
vacations" during the harvest season, when the entire school is closed down for a
period of several weeks. This serves to diminish the effect of nonattendance on
the beet-working children, as compared to others, but tends to shorten the school
term. The most serious consequences of nonattendance have been felt most
among the children of migratory families. Leaving for the fields in late April or
early May forces the withdrawal of the children during the spring term. When
the families return to their winter homes in November or December, the winter
session has already been under way for 2 to 3 months. Thus, even when their
labor is not utilized in the beet fields, and even when under the most ideal circum-
stances, the children are immediately put into school, the constant change of
schools results in retardation. When children are used in the beet work, families
may not register them in schools at all. In cases where they are registered,
nonattendance to help in the fields frequently occurs.
A combination of factors tends to make the attendance of children of migratory
beet laborers irregular — indifference on the part of the school authorities, refusal
of parents to send children to school, difficulty in enforcing the school attendance
laws, and failure to acquaint parents with their obligations to send children to
school. This would be the case not only in the beet areas where families spend
from 6 to 7 months each year, but also at their winter homes.
« Child Labor and the Work of Mothers, etc., op. cit., p. 76.
« Ibid., p. 77.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7899
BEET WORKERS AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION
The wages and earnings of beet workers declined so seriously during the de-
pression that many of these families became public relief charges. Their incomes
had to be supplemented by relief, not only during the winter months, but also
during the beet seasons. Conditions in Michigan have been described elsewhere
in this report, but the situation was Nation-wide and not confined to this particular
State. In 1933 Federal agencies took steps to alleviate it.
A proposed marketing agreement for the sugar industry under the Agricultural
Adjustment Administration contained a provision directly related to beet field
workers. This provided that beet producers pay field laborers a commensurate
rate per acre, depending upon the price received for beets, and that the rate be
irrespective of the time of payment or the system of determining payment. At a
hearing on the proposed sugar marketing agreement, Katharine Lenroot, then
Assistant Chief of the United States Children's Bureau, stated that:
"Information obtained by the Children's Bureau regarding living conditions,
earnings, and child labor in the families of beet workers in Colorado indicates the
need for prohibiting the work of young children in the beet fields, limiting the hours
of work of older children, and providing for an equitable contract that will enable
the laborer and his family to have some assurance as to the amount of remunera-
tion, to arrange credit, and to receive pay at intervals following the completion of
sertain processes." 65
Miss Lenroot presented a statement covering the living and working conditions
of contract laborers. At the same hearing, Charles E. Gibbons, representing the
National Child Labor Committee, asked that the provision concerning payment
be retained in the sugar-stabilization agreement "with the proviso that it be so
interpreted as not to perpetuate the postponement of pay for labor until the
year after it is performed." 66 He put into the record a statement covering the
conditions of beet workers, which was based on a field study conducted by the
National Child Labor Committee during June and July of 1933. A beet worker
also testified at this hearing and asked that something be done to alleviate the
bad conditions of work and living of beet-field laborers.67
Miss Lenroot and a representative of the National Child Labor Committee,
at a hearing on the subject of a code of fair competition for the beet-sugar industry,
requested some consideration for the problems of the agricultural workers at-
tached to this industry. The sugar-processing companies disclaimed any respon-
sibility for the working conditions of beet-field laborers. One of their representa-
tives stated at the hearing, "We have no right to say to the farmer who he can
employ any more than we can tell him the plan under which he can irrigate or
harvest his crop." In answering the industry's contention that field workers
could not be classified as part of its labor force, both Miss Lenroot and the
National Child Labor Committee representative declared that beet work was an
industrial form of employment of agricultural labor. The beet-sugar companies
also turned down a proposal that they embody some form of disapproval of child
labor in their contracts with beet growers. The National Child Labor Com-
mittee asked for a minimum wage of from $23 to $28 an acre, as well as action
on the child-labor problem.68
As a result of the attention called to the problem of the living and working con-
ditions of sugar-beet contract workers during these hearings, the President author-
ized the Secretary of Labor to appoint a committee for "the immediate formula-
tion of a plan which will place the labor policies of sugar-beet production on a
reasonable and equitable basis." This Committee, which became known as the
Committee on Labor Conditions in the Growing of Sugar Beets, was composed
of one representative from each of the following: The Federal Emergency Relief
Administration, the National Industrial Recovery Administration, the Depart-
ment of Labor, and the Department of Justice; and two representatives from
the Department of Agriculture. It appointed W. Lewis Abbott to prepare a de-
tailed study of conditions in the sugar-beet fields. The Committee made a
general report which was signed by five of its members, the sixth being out of the
city and unable to see or sign it. The general report of the Committee and
Abbott's special report were transmitted to the President late in March 1934.
M Hearing on proposed sugar marketing agreement, Agricultural Adjustment Administration before the
Secretary of Agriculture, August 10 and 11. 1933, p. 418.
« Ibid., p. 445.
•7 Ibid., testimony of Leo Rodriguez, pp. 441-444.
68 Hearing on clause relating to hours of labor, rates of pay, etc., to be made a part of basic code of fair
competition in sugar-beet refining industry, op. cit.
790Q DETROIT HEARINGS
In a memorandum to the Secretary of Labor, the President said, "I have been
much interested in this excellent report. I think that labor and agriculture
should see to it that it is followed up during the coming beet-sugar season."81
The summary of Abbott's report follows:
"The average wages of hand workers in sugar beets were $13.87 per acre during
the summer of 1933, with some receiving as low as $8. In Colorado the average
rate was $12.37, equivalent to an income of about $78 per worker, or $312 per
family. Only one-third are able to add to this income from other sources.
"Employment of children under 16 and as young as 10 or 11 for long hours a
day is common in beet work.
"Many of these families are dependent upon relief from Federal Emergency
Relief Administration, or other sources during the winter. Reports from the
former show that in 15 counties heard from, 748 families of beet workers had
applied for relief up to February 15.
"To be self-supporting at a subsistence level, it is estimated that these workers
should have an income of at least $600 per year per family. This would amount
to $21.50 per acre, allowing for an income of $75 from sources other than beet
work.
"Wages have decreased more than prices. The average rate is 72.7 percent
of the rate paid during the base period of the Agricultural Adjustment Act,
August 1909 to July 1914. It amounts to 66.7 percent of the purchasing power
of the wages of that period. A rate of $21.50 would give the worker 102.1 per-
cent of his purchasing power of the base period. Exact parity at the average
price level of 1933, would be given by a wage of $20.80 per acre.
"Wages have decreased more in proportion than the gross income from beets.
In 1933, they were 23 percent of the grower's returns as against an average of
33 percent during the base period. In the base period, the grower received an
average price of $5.58 per ton for beets, and paid $19.08 per acre wages. In
1933, he received $5.32 per ton, and paid $13.87 for wages.
"Net profits from the growing of beets have also declined, however. A study
of a few growers shows profits of $10.83 per acre in 1933 as against an average of
$19.35 over a period of years preceding. An increase of wages to $21.50 per
acre would leave them a 'margin of about $3.20 per acre. Since these are aver-
age, many of the growers whose expenses exceed the average would make no
profits with this rate of wages.
"If sugar is made a basic commodity the payment of wages of $20 to $21.50
per acre would still leave the average grower with a larger net profit, and with
a larger cash return, than he had in 1933, even with a restriction of acreage of
17 percent."
In considering the "possible ways of securing an improvement in the compen-
sation and working conditions through the various agencies now operating," the
Committee found that: "It did not seem possible to apply to these workers the
provisions of a code under the National Industrial Recovery Act, because they
are engaged in an agricultural rather than an industrial pursuit." 70 The pro-
posals of the Committee and its reasons for formulating them are quoted in full
below:
"I» considering the situation of these workers the Committee recognized the
desirability of taking some action to eliminate child labor and to improve the
rates of compensation, but it was also faced with the fact that the farmers by
whom these workers are employed are also suffering grave economic difficulties.
"The Committee considered possible ways of securing an improvement in the
compensation and working conditions through the various agencies now operat-
ing. It did not seem possible to apply to these workers the provisions of a code
under the National Industrial Recovery Act, because they are engaged in an
agricultural rather than an industrial pursuit.
> "Higher compensation would result either in higher costs for the growers or
for the processors. If the expenses of the growers were raised by an increase in
the compensation of the contract workers, it seemed necessary to increase their
incomes in some way. This led to the consideration of the possibility of meeting
an increase in contract rates through an increase in the tariff on sugar. Such a
plan seemed undesirable in view of the reports of the Tariff Commission of 1924
and 1934 recommending lower duties on sugar and the present policies of the
Administration, which contemplate a decrease rather than an increase in the
«» Cited in a letter from the Secretary of Labor, transmitting the reports to the Secretary of Agriculture,
dated Apr. 25, 1934, the National Archives, general correspondence, Agricultural Adjustment Admimstra-
70 Report of the Committee on Labor Conditions in the Crowing of Sugar Beets, The National Archives
general correspondence, Agricultural Adjustment Administration.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7901
tariff on this article. The proposed reduction in the tariff and the proposed
change in the Agricultural Adjustment Act will have an effect on processors that
cannot now be estimated. In view of this lack of certainty it seemed unwise to
place the full burden of the improvement of labor conditions upon the processors.
"The proposals of the President in his message to the Congress, of February 8,
1934, seemed to the Committee the best means of securing the necessary increase
of income to the farmers to make possible the payment of higher compensation
to the beet workers, and these means can also be used for the elimination of child
labor. These proposals, it will be recalled, included the making of sugar a basic
commodity and the establishment of a quota system to restrict the production
of sugar in the various areas from which the United States draws its supply.
This would be accompanied by the levying of a processing tax upon sugar, the
lowering of the tariff by the amount of the processing tax, and the payment of a
benefit to the beet grower in return for a restriction of acreage planted in beets.
"If the latter proposal is embodied in law it will make possible the control of
the situation revealed by the investigation of this Committee. The payment
of benefits to beet growers in return for restriction of acreage could be made
dependent upon their signing a contract with the Secretary of Agriculture whereby
they agreed to pay an established minimum compensation for beet workers per
acre and to prevent the employment of children in the cultivation of beets.
"The drafts of the bill, S. 2732 introduced by Senator Costigan in the Senate
on February 6 (calendar day February 12) and H. R. 7907 introduced by Con-
gressman Jones in the House on February 12 (calendar day February 12), con-
tain a provision which would give to the Secretary this power, in the following
terms :
" '(F) In order to more fully effectuate the declared policy of the Agricultural
Adjustment Act, as set forth in its "Declaration of Policy" and to insure the
equitable division, between producers and (or) growers and the processors of
sugar beets or sugarcane, of any of the proceeds which may be derived from the
processing and (or) marketing of such sugar beets or sugarcane and the products
and byproducts thereof, all agreements authorized by this Act may contain pro-
visions (1) with respect to the terms which contracts between processors and pro-
ducers and (or) growers may contain, and (or) (2) which will eliminate child
labor among, and will fix a minimum of wages for, agricultural workers employed
by, or under the control of, processors and (or) producers who are parties to such
agreements, and the Secretary, upon request of any producer or grower, or of any
producers' or growers' association, or of any processor, of sugar beets or sugarcane,,
is hereby authorized to adjudicate any dispute as to any of the terms under which
such sugar beets or sugarcane are grown, or are to be grown, and (or) marketed,
and the products and (or) byproducts thereof are to be marketed. The decision
and any determination of the Secretary shall be final, if in accordance with law/
"The inclusion of a paragraph substantially in this form in the final draft of the
bill seems to this Committee essential to the improvement of the working condi-
tions of the industry through the benefit payment plan, for it appears doubtful
under the Agricultural Adjustment Act as presently drawn that the Secretary
would have the needed powers.
"There appears to be no scarcity of labor available for work in the beet fields.
Therefore the elimination of child labor would probably not result in any shortage
of labor. It is more likely that its elimination will make possible the continued
employment of adults who might otherwise be unable to secure work as a result of
the restriction of acreage in beets.
"The Committee is informed that this suggestion of a benefit payment of a
sufficient amount to enable the grower to augment the wages of the workers would
not require the imposition of a burden upon the Treasury of the United States.
"The study of the Committee and information received from the sources stated
indicate that at least $20 should be the minimum rate of wages per acre, in addi-
tion to housing.
"The Committee recommends:
"(1) That the policy of declaring sugar a basic agricultural commodity and the
application thereto of the powers of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration
should be carried forward, as a means of securing for the growers of sugar beets
and for the contract workers an adequate return.
"(2) That the act declaring sugar a basic commodity should include a clause
which will empower the Secretary of Agriculture to require that agreements-
authorized by the act may contain provisions eliminating child labor and ensuring
adequate compensation for the workers.
7902 DETROIT HEARINGS
"(3) That pursuant to this provision the Secretary of Agriculture should
incorporate in the benefit contracts a condition providing for the payment during
the current season of compensation of at least $20 per acre to the contract workers,
in addition to housing or its equivalent.
"(4) That pursuant to this provision the Secretary of Agriculture should
incorporate in the benefit contracts a condition forbidding the employment of
children under 16, other than those of the families of the growers themselves.
"Such a program, it is believed by the committee, will receive the cooperation
of the growers and processors."
The President signed the Jones-Costigan Act on May 9, 1934. Its labor pro-
visions marked the first effort on the part of the United States Government to
set labor standards for any group of agricultural workers. The Jones-Costigan
Act amended the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 by adding sugar to
the list of basic commodities. Its purpose was to stop the tariff stimulated
production of raw sugar in this country, and the sharp decline in the price of sugar.
It provided a means of limiting sugar marketings under a quota system and of
adjusting production of sugar beets and sugarcane in the producing areas. In
general, the act provided for:
(1) Adjusting available supplies for marketing to consumption requirements
by establishing of quotas.
(2) Adjustment of production in the various producing areas to bring sugar
within the limits of the quotas.
(3) Financing this adjustment through a processing tax on sugar.
The recommendations of the Committee on Labor Conditions in the Growing of
Sugar Beets formed the basis of the labor provisions of the Jones-Costigan amend-
ment, which are set out below:
"(3) In order more fully to effectuate the declared policy of this Act, as set
forth in its declaration of policy, and to insure the equitable division between
producers and/or growers and/or the processors of sugar beets or sugarcane of
any of the proceeds which may be derived from the growing, processing, and/or
marketing of such sugar beets or sugarcane, and the processing and/or marketing
of the products and byproducts thereof, all agreements authorized by this Act
relating to sugar beets, sugarcane, or the products thereof may contain provisions
which will limit or regulate child labor, and will fix minimum wages for workers
or growers employed by the producers and/or processors of sugar beets and/or
sugarcane who are parties to such agreements; and the Secretary, upon the
request of any producer, or grower, or worker, or of any association of producers,
or growers, or workers, or of anv processor, of sugar beets or sugarcane, is hereby
authorized to adjudicate any dispute as to any of the terms under which sugar
beets or sugarcane are grown or are to be grown and/or marketed, and the sugar
and byproducts thereof are to be marketed. The decision and any determination
of the Secretary shall be final."
The provision concerning child labor and minimum wages was simply an
enabling one. It permitted the Secretary of Agriculture to add provisions limiting
child labor and setting minimum wages to the adjustment contracts. In accord-
ance with the law, the sugar-beet and sugarcane production adjustment contracts
prohibited the employment of children under 14 years of age and limited the
employment of children of 14 and 15 years of age to 8 hours a day. Minimum
wages were set for certain areas in Colorado, Nebraska, Wyoming, and Montana.
A procedure was set up for settling disputed wage claims which had to be taken
care of before adjustment payments were made to producers. No minimum wage
order was issued for Michigan for either the 1934 or 1935 crop.
The Agricultural Adjustment Administration conducted hearings with reference
to proposed labor provisions to be included in beet-sugar benefit contracts in
various regions. During the hearings held in Michigan in September 1934, the
majority of the growers and their representatives who testified voiced no opposi-
tion to the inclusion of a minimum wage in the production-adjustment contract.
There was almost universal opposition among Michigan growers, however, to the
prohibition of child labor. The arguments opposing the prohibition of child
labor are presented below in the form of testimony of sugar-beet farmers at the
hearing: 71
71 Hearings with reference to proposed labor provisions to be included in beet-sugar benefit contracts
under the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, op. cit. Hearings were also held in Colorado.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7903
OTTO MONTEI, CARO GROWERS ASSOCIATION
"Well, as concerns this child labor, I don't know. Personally, myself, I think
we should have child labor, not too young, probably, but I think in our locality
that there hasn't been one child working in the field who hurt themselves, or also
to hurt them as having an education as good as anybody could expect. And
I don't see hardly how we could get along without our child labor as it is. Possi-
bly we could, but it is going to bring very much hardship on quite a few of the
beet laborers which we have."
Presiding Officer Ham. Excuse me. You are arguing that it would be a great
disadvantage to the beet laborer not to be able to use his family?
Mr. Montei. Yes.
Presiding Officer Ham. You are not arguing that there would be any particular
disadvantage to the grower not to be able to use the labor of children?
Mr. Montei. Yes, it will be both, both to the grower and also to the family.
Presiding Officer Ham. But would the costs be greater, the labor costs?
Mr. Montei. It certainly would. Our labor costs would be a great deal more,
I should think, yes, sir.
Presiding Officer Ham. You don't take the position that some have, that if
you could g.:t them you would rather have adults as laborers and no children?
Mr. Montei. Personally, myself, take a youngster from 10 years old, why,
I would just as soon have him as an adult, and really better. * * *
Jjl Sp Jfi Jj" *F "F t»
Mr. Folsom. But you, as a grower, would there be any greater expense to you
by reason of having to hire all adult labor?
Mr. Montei. I am afraid it would, because I am afraid he couldn't work that
for that $15 an acre, so I would have to pay probably $18 or $20 an acre for adults
to do all the work.
E. W. IRWIN, BAY CITY GROWERS
"The families are hired, the man of the house, the head of the family, is hired
to do this job, and he may have some minor children that can help him, and I
think he has got a right to employ them and to help him make a living.
"I have raised beets for over 30 years, and I have employed families to do the
work, and I have never seen a child yet that was abused or hurt in working in
sugar beets.
"Some of the families — some of the farmers that raise sugar beets employ their
own children, and have them help them. He don't employ them no more than
the man who contracts to take care of the beets employs his children. He simply
has them help him to do that job in order to make a living, and it makes a lot of
difference whether a man — whether you employ children — child labor, so-called — -
or whether the beet laborer employs his own children. They don't really employ
them. They have them help them. And it makes an income which they wouldn't
be able to make any other way.
"Raise them right. As the gentlemen said, it sometimes does not hurt them to
work. They are better off working at something like that than getting into mis-
chief. They talk about children 6 years old. I never seen a child working in the
fields that is that age. They go out and play around, piling the beets, the chil-
dren will throw the beets up together, and at the same time they are playing, is
really what they are doing. I noticed that yesterday, a little girl and a little boy,
one 6 and one about 8. They were out there and they were picking the beets up,
and they were helping their family do that work. And at the same time they
were really not working; they were playing doing that. It wouldn't hurt them
to do any more than to go out and play horse or something like that, as they
might call it. And the children 10 or 12 years old, some of them will help their
fathers throw them together, and maybe a few of them top them, but they work
as they feel like it. If they do not feel like it, they don't. I have never had a
family yet can ever say they compelled them to work any harder than they
actually felt like it."
C. E. ACKERMAN, DTTRAND, MICH.
Mr. Folsom. * * * Are you in the habit of working or employing children
from other families, that fall under the age of 14 or 12 years?
Mr. Ackerman. No; excepting in case of rare instances probably in the past
year, like picking potatoes, something like that, a day or two at a time.
7904 DETROIT HEARINGS
Mr. Folsom. But you do not employ them in sugar beets?
Mr. Ackerman. No; I wouldn't want to make a contract with a child. The
contracts are all made with the parents.
Mr. Folsom. And their parents alone do the work in the beet fields?
Mr. Ackerman. No, generally they — if they have a family, why, they bring
on the children and they do a part of the work.
Mr. Folsom. Regardless as to what the range of age may be?
Mr. Ackerman. Yes.
Mr. Folsom. Eight or Six?
Mr. Ackerman. Yes.
Mr. Folsom. Do you feel that a child at the age of 6 can turn out as big a day's
work as a grown man?
Mr. Ackerman. Oh, no, no. He can't turn out good work.
Mr. Folsom. And what hours do the children in the beet fields labor, a 10- or
12-hour day?
Mr. Ackerman. Well, yes.
Mr. Folsom. They do?
Mr. Ackerman. They get out early in the morning, and they work, say,
until — they work under their own conditions, sometimes the labor conditions
vary, depending upon the labor or the country from which they come. The
beet workers generally come out early in the morning, and they will work, say,
until 9 o'clock, and then they generally have a lunch. They may take a rest of
an hour or 2 hours and go back to work again and work until noon. During the
last summer, this summer it has been so hot that they tried to get out early in the-
morning, do the work, lay around in the middle of the day, probably 3 or 4 hours,
but if the weather is cool, they try to put in a full days' work.
Mr. Folsom. I believe, Mr. Ackerman, that you referred a moment ago to
the economic conditions which, as they are now, are there not a sufficient number
of unemployed able-bodied men available at this time that it would not be neces-
sary for you to employ the services of children, 6, 8, or 10 years old?
Mr. Ackerman. Oh, I think there is plenty. I think that is the answer to it.
Mr. Folsom. Do you pay these children on a basis of charity, I mean, do you
give them as much money for their services as you do the able-bodied men?
Mr. Ackerman. No, I don't think so.
Zfi 5f! !p -t* 3|s ^» 3J»
Mr. Simpson. Do you believe, then, that the child labor, without the child'
labor would be increased to the grower?
Mr. Ackerman. Under ordinary conditions, yes, but under extreme unem-
ployment, that would not be so marked.
^C S(C *t* JJs 1* *F 1*
"Now, personally, I think we would get better work done in the beet fields if we
did not employ any child labor. But, on the other hand, I object to that clause-
being incorporated on the ground of the old constitutional right that a child has
the right to work for a parent, under the supervision of his parents."
JOSEPH SCHUELLER, PRESIDENT, MOUNT PLEASANT BEET GROWERS ASSOCIATION 72'
"We believe that it would be better for these children to be helping their
parents in the beet fields than to be spending their time doing nothing and learning
nothing. Very often fathers with very large families work in the beet fields, and
the children actually earn more and are capable of doing more work than their
elders. Any children from 8 to 12 are able to thin beets, and thereby help their
fathers to maintain and support the family, which otherwise he could not do.
"The school laws of the State of Michigan provide that children of school age
should be in school when it is in session. Having been a school director for 18
years in a beet-raising district, I find that we have very little delinquency in our
schools among the children of beet workers. When school starts we insist on them
going to school, especially those who have not yet finished the eighth grade and
are below the age of 14. In many localities school authorities declare a beet
harvest holiday so that children can help their parents harvest the beets. At that
time small children carry water and also help pile up the beet tops, which is done
more in the form of play than work. There was a time when the children of beet
workers were kept out of school to work the beet fields, but that time is past, as
both the school officers and the State now insist that all children shall receive at
» Letter from Joseph 'Schueller, bound in the transcript of the Colorado hearings, held on September
25-26, 1934, at Denver.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7905
least an eighth-grade education. I see no reason why child labor should be pro-
hibited, but I agree with you that it should be regulated. I also think there should
be no age limit mentioned in section A."
Despite the objections of the Michigan growers to the inclusion of a provision
prohibiting child labor, the approved sugar beet production contract which was
drawn up contained such a measure. The labor provisions of this contract
follow: 73
Child labor. — The producer hereby agrees not to employ nor to suffer nor permit
the employment by any other person, directly or indirectly, in the production,
cultivation and/or harvesting of sugar beets on this farm, of any child under the
age of 14 years, except a member of his own immediate family, whether for gain
to such child or any other person; and he agrees not to so employ or permit such
employment of a child between the ages of 14 and 16 years, inclusive, except a
member of his immediate family, for a longer priod than 8 hours a day.
Fixing of minimum wages. — The Secretary shall have the authority (1) after
due notice and opportunity for public hearing at a place accessible to producers
and workers involved, and (2) on the basis of a fair and equitable division among
processors, producers, and workers of the proceeds derived from the growing and
marketing of sugar beets, and the products thereof, to establish minimum wages
for this factory district to be paid by producers to workers and, where ntcessary,
the time and method of payment in connection with the production, cultivation,
and/or harvesting of the 1935 and/or the 1936 crop of beets. The producer
agrees to abide by the determination of the Secretary when such minimum wages
and the time and method of payment have been established.
To insure a fair and equitable division among processors, producers, and workers
of the proceeds derived from the growing and marketing of the 1934 crop, the pro-
ducer hereby agrees to pay promptly, to the workers who work or have worked
on this farm, all bona fide claims for wages for said workers, rising in connection
with the production, cultivation, and/or harvesting of the 1934 crop, and to pro-
vide to the Secretary, prior to the time of payment of the final 1934 crop payment
under this contract, a certificate to the effect that such claims have been paid.
The Secretary shall have the right, in his discretion, to refuse to make the final
1934 crop payment, due under this contract, to the producer, unless the producer
shall submit additional evidence satisfactory to the Secretary that all such wages
have been paid.
Adjudication of labor disputes. — The producer hereby agrees that he will abide
by the decision of the Secretary with respect to any labor dispute involving the
producer, in connection with the production, cultivation, and/or harvesting of
sugar beets of the producer, when any such dispute has been presented to the
Secretary by the producer or any other person and the Secretary has determined to
adjudicate such dispute.
"The payment of benefits to growers was conditional upon the observance of
the above labor conditions. However, crop benefit payments were made on the
1934 crop, while the labor provisions applied to conditions of work only on the
1935 and subsequent beet crops. The nonapplicability of the labor provisions
with respect to the 1934 crop was due to the fact that at the time the sugar-beet
contract was approved, the crop had been delivered to the beet factories or was
in process of being harvested.74 This, of course, made it impossible to apply the
labor provisions that year.
"The only labor provision in the sugar-beet contract which was enforced with
respect to the work done on the 1934 crop was that relating to prompt and full
payment of wages. But the enforcement of even this provision was made difficult
by the fact that many beet workers had neglected to sign contracts with their
employers on the assumption that the Government would set wage rates for the
1934 season. The determination of what constituted a bona fide wage claim was,
therefoie, difficult to establish in many cases. To meet this situation, settlement
committees composed of persons elected by the growers were established. The
great majority of the complaints were settled by these committees. Those which
remained unsettled were dealt with by an agent of the Agricultural Adjustment
Administration. Over 1,400 cases were handled in this way.75
"The minimum-wage provisions in the contract gave the Secretary of Agricul-
ture the right to set minimum rates of wages and to determine the time and method
73 Sugar Beet Production Adjustment Contract, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, approved
October 16, 1934, pt. I, sec. 10.
74 W. T. Ham, Regulation of Labor Conditions in Sugar Cultivation under ,the Agricultural Adjust-
ment Act. International Labour Review, January 1936, p. 80.
75 Protection of Sugar Beet Field Workers Under the Federal Sugar Control Acts of 1934 and 1937, by-
Samuel Liss, unpublished manuscript in the files of the Labor Division, Farm Security Administration.
60396 — 41— pt. 19 10
7906 DETROIT HEARINGS
of payment only when and if the occasion arose. The Secretary adopted the
policy of exercising this right only when growers and laborers were themselves
unable to come to terms."76
No wage finding was made under the terms of the Jones-Costigan Act for the
Michigan sugar-beet area. Michigan production-adjustment contracts did con-
tain, however, provisions relating to minimum wage and hours of employment of
children.
"In order to provide a factual basis for a constructive consideration of the
problems of families of sugar-beet laborers and to ascertain the effects of the
child-labor and wage provisions of the Jones-Costigan Act on the families for
whose benefit these provisions were established," the Children's Bureau surveyed
the conditions of sugar-beet laborers' families in 1935.77 Their findings on
Michigan families follow:
CHILD LABOR
It was found that among southern Michigan 78 families, 12 percent of all children
6 and under 14 years of age worked in beets. In central Michigan 79 41 percent of
the children in this age group in the beet families surveyed, were employed in the
beet work.80 "The 8-hour limitation to daily working time for children under 16
prescribed in the Government contracts was found to be less frequently observed
in the areas of the eastern beet region than in those of the Mountain States beet
region." 81 Only 29 percent of the working children in the eastern families visited
reported a usual workday of approximately 8 hours or less while engaged in
thinning. In the Mountain States region, 43 percent of the working children
reported such a workday.82 "Children of the eastern areas of Michigan and
Minnesota were found to be working in the beet fields for more days in the season
than those in the three Mountain States areas for which the information could be
obtained, a median of 65 days for the former in contrast to a median of 48 days foi
the latter. * * * Whether or not a working child had passed his 14th
birthday appeared to have less effect on the length of the working period than the
region in which he worked. Children under 14 years of age in the eastern areas
for whom the information is reported tended to work more days in the season
(a median of 61 days) than those 14 and 15 years of age in the three Mountain
States areas (a median of 49 days)." 83
Changes were recorded in the use of child labor from 1934 to 1935. Thus, in
the three eastern areas, it was indicated that child labor was much more prevalent
in 1934 than in 1935. It was ascertained which of the families interviewed by the
Children's Bureau had worked in the beet fields in 1934. Then a check was made
to see if these families contained children from 6 to 14 years of age on June 15,
1934. On the basis of these data, the proportions of the children aged 6 to 14
working in beets were calculated for 1934 and 1935. In 1934 the proportion of
these children in the three eastern areas was 49 percent. In 1935 this proportion
had decreased to 33.5 percent for these areas. Though appreciable, this was a
smaller decrease than occurred in the seven Mountain States areas surveyed,
where the proportion of working children aged 6 to 14 years decreased from 40.4
percent in 1934 to 13.5 percent in 1935. 84
PAYMENT OF WAGES
The Children's Bureau found that about one-fifth of the Michigan beet laborers'
families interviewed had not been paid in full for their work during the 1935
season when seen by the investigators in December.85 This occurred despite the
provision in the adjustment contract calling for prompt payment of wages.
An evaluation of labor provisions of the Jones-Costigan Act must consider also
the extent to which beet workers were enabled to gain a higher level of living.
Data from the Children's Bureau 1935 survey reflect a decrease in the earnings of
"« Ibid.
77 Johnson, op. cit., "Each family interviewed performed hand labor in sugar-beet fields in that year
(1935) and each had at least one child under 16 years of age" (p. 3).
78 Southern Michigan families worked in the Blissfeld factory district and were confined to Lenawee
County. There were 42 families interviewed in this area.
79 Central Michigan families interviewed had worked in Mount Pleasant, Saginaw and Sebewaing factory
districts, and in Huron, Isabella, and Saginaw Counties. One hundred and fifteen families were surveyed
in this area.
80 Ibid., p. 26.
81 Ibid., p. 33. The eastern beet region com the two areas in Michigan, defined above, and an
area in southern Minnesota.
82 Ibid., pp. 33-34.
'a Ibid., pp. 35-36.
8< Ibid, tablo 8, p. 28.
m Ibid, p. 69.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7907
•central Michigan families from 1934 to 1935 and no change in the wage rate. In
southern Michigan, there was a substantial increase in both the wage rate and
earnings for beet work. Child labor decreased in both areas, but appreciably
more for southern Michigan than for central Michigan beet families. The acreages
worked by families interviewed decreased for those in central Michigan from 1934
to 1935, and increased for families in southern Michigan. Housing conditions
were definitely bad for Michigan beet workers' families in 1935. Many Michigan
families were forced to live on credit during the beet season of 1935. Hours of
labor for adults as well as children were still long, and working conditions showed
little improvement. The report of the Children's Bureau stresses the fact that
the highest earnings from beet work, the smaller amount of child labor, and the
generally improved working conditions found in southern Michigan were attribut-
able to the presence in that area of a labor union of beet workers which had bar-
gained collectively with the growers on terms and conditions of employment.86
The Children's Bureau study showed the necessity for continuing the protec-
tion of the labor conditions of beet workers which had been introduced in the
Jones-Costigan Act. However, in January 1936, the Supreme Court of the
United States declared invalid the processing tax and production-adjustment
provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, to which the Jones-Costigan Act
was an amendment. The quota provisions of the Jones-Costigan Act were
unaffected by the decision, and Congress ratified them by Public Resolution No.
109, Seventy-fourth Congress. This action assured a protected market for sellers
of sugar. It resulted, however, in the loss of benefit payments to sugar-beet
growers and in the suspension of the labor provisions. The inequalities resulting
from the extension of the sugar quotas without provision for returns to growers
and laborers are set forth in the 1936 report of the Agricultural Adjustment
Administration:
"Invalidation of the sugar-processing tax presumably did not affect the cost of
sugar to consumers, who paid an average price of 5.7 cents a pound for sugar in
1935 and 5.6 cents during 1936. The decision did result, however, in a wide
redistribution of income under the quota system; there was a loss to growers,
laborers, and taxpayers and a corresponding gain to domestic sugar processors and
foreign sugar producers.
"The loss to sugar-beet growers resulted automatically, under the established
grower-processor contracts, from invalidation of the former processing tax and
production-adjustment payments, was equal to approximately 50 percent of the
former tax. (The decline in the income of the growers was offset to some extent
by payments under the 1936 agricultural conservation program.) It is estimated
that at the same time the profits of beet processors were increased between 40
and 60 percent over their net income from operations during the calendar year
1935 when the processing tax was in effect. Sugar-beet growers whose returns
had been decreased, although the total income of the sugar-beet industry virtually
had not been affected, undertook to obtain an appropriate adjustment in their
contracts with processors in order to compensate for the reduction in their income,
but their efforts met only limited success.
"Invalidation of production-adjustment payments to producers also destroyed
the only practicable means that had been found to assure labor an equitable
share in the income from sugar-beet and sugar-cane production. Consequently,
both growers and laborers were denied assurances of an equitable and reasonable
share in the income of the domestic industry under a program in which they, as
well as the processors, were intended to be the beneficiaries." 87
New sugar legislation was proposed, and President Roosevelt, in his message
to Congress, recommended the inclusion of certain labor standards:
"It is highly desirable to continue the policy which was inherent in the Jones-
Costigan Act, effectuating the principle that an industry which desires the protec-
tion afforded by a quota system or a tariff should be expected to guarantee that
it will be a good employer.' I recommend, therefore, that the prevention of child
labor and the payment of wages of not less than minimum standards be included
among the conditions for receiving a Federal payment." 88
The Sugar Act of 1937 was approve by the President on September 1, 1937.
For the first time in the history of the United States, the Federal Government
was enabled to stamp out child labor in an important child-labor-employing
industry.
86 Ibid, pp. 26-27. 58. 61, 63, 67.
87 Agricultural Conservation, 1936, a report of the activities carried on by the Agricultural Adjustment
Administration, from January 1, 1936, through December 31, 1936, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agri-
cultural Adjustment Administration, pp. 103-104.
88 Cited in Liss, op. cit.
7908 DETROIT HEARINGS
"The Sugar Act of 1937 provided for the continuation, until December 31, 1940,.
of the sugar-quota system, of the processing tax on sugar, and of conditional bene-
fit payments to growers of sugar beets and sugarcane, established under the
Jones-Costigan Act in 1934. But, whereas under the Jones-Costigan Act the
detailed terms of these provisions were inserted in the production adjustment
contract entered into by the Secretary of Agriculture and the grower, they are-
now incorporated in the act itself. By eliminating the Federal contract, the
Sugar Act of 1937 overcame one of the basic reasons advanced for the invalidation
of the Jones-Costigan Act by the United States Supreme Court." 89 The Sugar
Act authorized conditional payments to sugar beet and sugarcane growers who
comply with certain soil-conservation practices, limit their production to quan-
tities not in excess of the proportionate share assigned to their farms, maintain
certain labor standards, and in the case of growers who are also processors, pay a
price for sugar beets and sugarcane purchased from other growers for processing
at a rate not less than that which the Secretary of Agriculture has determined to
be fair and reasonable.
The labor standards of the Sugar Act of 1937 follow:
"That no child under the age of fourteen years shall have been employed or
permitted to work on the farm, whether for gain to such child or any other person,
in the production, cultivation, or harvesting of a crop of sugar beets or sugarcane
with respect to which application for payment is made, except a member of the-
immediate family of a person who was the legal owner of not less than 40 per
centum of the crop at the time such work was performed; and that no child be-
tween the ages of fourteen and sixteen years shall have been employed or permitted
to do such work, whether for gain to such child or any other person, for a longer
period than eight hours in any one day, except a member of the immediate family
of a person who was the legal owner of not less than 40 per centum of the crop at
the time such work was performed.
"That all persons employed on the farm in the production, cultivation, or
harvesting of sugar beets or sugarcane with respect to which an application for
payment is made shall have been paid in full for all such work, and shall have been
paid wages therefor at rates not less than those that may be determined by the-
Secretary to be fair and reasonable after investigation and due notice and oppor-
tunity for public hearing; and in making such determinations the Secretary shall
take into consideration the standards therefor formerly established by him under
the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended, and the differences in conditions-
among various producing areas: Provided, however, That a payment which would
be payable except for the foregoing provisions of this subsection may be made,
as the Secretary may determine, in such manner that the laborer will receive an
amount, insofar as such payment will suffice, equal to the amount of the accrued
unpaid wages for such work, and that the producer will receive the remainder, if
any, of such payment."
The Sugar Act of 1937 also provides that:
"In order to facilitate the effectuation of the purposes of this Act, the Secretary
is authorized to make surveys, investigations, including the holding of publie
hearings, and to make recommendations with respect to (a) the terms and condi-
tions of contracts between the producers and processors of sugar beets and sugar-
cane and (b) the terms and conditions of contracts between laborers and producers
of sugar beets and sugarcane."
The provisions of the Sugar Act of 1937 were to apply only until December 31,
1940. The life of the act was extended for a year, and it expires on December
31, 1941. Michigan wage determinations have been made by the Secretary of
Agriculture for the harvesting of the 1937 crop, and for all operations for every
crop since that time. The Secretary has not, up until this time, recommended
any terms or conditions to be incorporated in the contracts made between the
growers and the laborers in that State. The wage provisions of the act have been
fairly well enforced; although a number of violations were reported for Michigan
growers several years ago, few were reported for the 1940 crop. The child-labor
provisions were more difficult to enforce in Michigan. A survey conducted by
the Children's Bureau, which is reprinted in part below, reveals some use of child
labor in the beet fields of Michigan and Ohio during 1939. It also shows work-
days of longer than 8 hours for children so employed in violation of the act. _ It
should be pointed out that difficulties existed in educating growers and families
to their responsibilities with regard to the labor of children . There were no fre-
quent and systematic check-ups made by the committees which assist locally in
the administration of the act to see whether or not these provisions were being.
•• Liss, op. cit.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7909
obeyed. More recently these committees have been quite active in checking up
■on the presence of children in the beet fields, and child labor has practically dis-
appeared from the sugar-beet industry in Michigan. The 8-hour provision is
more difficult to enforce, and no machinery has yet been set up to effectuate this
part of the act. There are undoubtedly many violations of this provision.
•United States Department of Agriculture, Report No. 80 — Progress
of the Beet-Sugar Industry in the United States in 1904
(Washington, G. P. O., 1905)
SUPPLY OF LABOR FOR FACTORIES AND BEET FIELDS
Living in cities there is a class of foreigners — -Germans, French, Russians,
Hollanders, Austrians, Bohemians, etc. — who had had more or less experience in
beet growing in their native countries. Their experience had been largely agri-
cultural. Emigrating to this country, they had congregated in cities and towns,
and were performing the work of ordinary laborers on public works, on railroads,
and in various other lines of employment. Their attention was attracted to this
industry when it started — old to them, new to us. They naturally sought this
new avenue of employment. It appealed to them for two reasons: (1) They could
secure employment in work to which they were accustomed and in which they
were expert; (2) in the beet fields they could find work for their whole families.
In this respect it differed from other lines of work. The head of the house could
go out and dig in the trenches of the city, or work on the sections of the railroad,
or in excavations and other kinds of employment under a contractor. The women
and children of the family could not do this. Growing sugar beets was a renewal
of their former experience. For the work of the beet fields more came from the
cities each succeeding year, and others came from Europe, induced by the news of
the installation of this new industry. They could secure immediate employment
of the kind to which they were accustomed. This source of labor supply for our
beet fields has grown to a wonderful extent. Every spring sees large colonies
of this class of workmen moving out from our cities into the beet fields.
There is another class of foreigners, not previously experienced in growing
beets, who readily adopted it on account of their natural adaptability to the
system. As a class, they are accustomed to hard drudgery work of any kind,
spending their lives during their stay in our country in work on public improve-
ment, railroads, large con tracts, etc., requiring hard manual labor. In this class
come the Scandinavians (a few of whom have grown beets), Italians, Japanese,
Chinese, Portuguese, etc. Large numbers of these, annually increasing, take
contracts in the beet fields. All these foreign laborers, of whatever class, live in
tents, barracks, and other temporary abodes. They board themselves, and grow
sugar beets under contracts with the farmers. It is rulable in such cases for the
work to be done by the acre. The farmer plows the ground, harrows it, puts
the seedbed in thorough condition, plants the beets, and does all the necessary
cultivation requiring horses. The contracting laborer does all the weeding,
bunching, thinning, hoeing, irrigating, topping, and loading, usually receiving for
the same from $15 to $20 per acre. The farmer does the work of plowing up the
beets and delivering them to the factory. Foreigners of this latter class were
originally more or less unsatisfactory on account of unfamiliarity with the work.
After 5 or 6 years, most of these workers in the beet fields are efficient. The
additional hands accompanying them each year have the advantage of associa-
tion with those acquainted with the methods, a d become satisfactory workers
more readily than otherwise. To this class we are also procuring large accretions
•every year, thus augmenting the sources of labor supply of sugar factories and
sugar-beet growers.
Philanthropic societies and eleemosynary institutions are also gradually aiding
in this respect. One of the strongest addresses made before the Trans-Mississippi
Commercial Congress at its meeting in Seattle, Wash., last year was that of Com-
mander Booth-Tucker, the head of the Salvation Army in this country. In this
address he explained the policy maintained by that society of finding employment
for everybody coming under the Army's influence. The beet fields appealed
especially to him in this connection. He proposed colonization and employment.
The plan as he represented it greatly impressed all who heard it. As a matter of
fact, considerable has been done by this organization along this line. It is also
quite common for the humane societies, associated charities, and other like organ-
izations of our cities and towns to procure, for those dependent upon them, em-
ployment in the beet fields.
7910 DETROIT HEARINGS
Our State reformatory institutions and asylums are also developing an interest
in the work of growing sugar beets. One of the great problems of such institutions
is to keep the inmates employed; in so doing it sometimes happens that they come
in conflict with the rules of organized labor. Possibly if the supply of labor for
the beet fields exceeded the demand the same objection might operate here. Under
the present circumstances it does not appear to be deleterious to regular labor. If
these people can be employed in rural pursuits it will have a tendency to strengthen
rather than to hurt labor in regular lines.
Our cities and towns are constantly increasing in importance as sources of labor
for the beet fields. Every year sees more and more of the unemployed seeking
the beet fields for remunerative work. In this respect we are developing a prac-
tice similar to that which prevails at harvest time. Most people are familiar
with the movement of laborers annually taking place from south to north, follow-
ing up the grain harvest as it progresses with the season. Harvest hands pour
into the South with the ripening of the grain, gradually working north as the work
is completed, finally winding up with the harvest in Canada. This custom has
developed the class of laborers known as professional harvesters. Similarly we
are developing a class of beet growers, who move toward the fields on the approach
of the beet season. To this class are continually added recruits who in a season's
experience become more or less proficient.
Our beet fields are also the beneficiaries of another class of labor possibly more
abundant, and at the same time adaptable to this work. In the cities and towns
public schools close about the time the active work begins in the beet fields.
Considerable attention is being given to directing this kind of labor to beet
growing. It is a matter of consequence and one fraught with valuable training
to the unemployed young people of the country. Ordinarily there is very little
that a boy can find to do during his school vacation. It so happens that the beet
fields offer active remunerative employment for this particular period. This
work serves a two-fold purpose: It gives a boy self-support to a degree, and relieves
the head of the family to that extent; it also lessens the work of charitable insti-
tutions. At the same time it inculcates habits of industry and frugality removes
the boy from the temptation of idleness and the school of vicious habits con-
stantly in session in the streets of our cities and towns. It promotes health,
physical strength, and vigor. It inspires confidence and self-support. This
applies not only to the poorer classes, but to all boys who otherwise would be idle.
Keeping the boys of the cities and towns employed, especially those who are
drifting into the classes of chronic idlers and criminals, is one of the social problems
of today. During the past few years agitation on the subject has crystallized
into a policy of establishing juvenile courts. Idleness is the most prolific of all
causes producing the two classes named. The work of these tribunals contem-
plates segregation and useful, healthful employment under supervision. Several
States have enacted laws establishing such courts, and relegating to them cases
of juvenile offenders. Such a court has regular officers, who list bo3rs liable to
its supervision. Such cases as come before it regularly, it places under the care
of its officers, who direct them to some field of active employment. In districts
having sugar factories, the beet fields have been playing an active part in this
species of education and reformation. At first the plan did not prove very satis-
factory. These boys, in groups or individually, were hired out to farmers, who
found themselves without authority, and as a rule without disposition to exact
of this class of workers faithful performance. In most instances the boy was soon
back in his old haunts. During the past year a better system involving closer
supervision was maintained. The boys were sent out in groups, with their pro-
bation officer over them. This officer was clothed with full authority for main-
taining discipline and executing the demands of the court. A group usually con-
sisted of 20 boys, who formed a club, all sharing equally in the expense. A cook
was hired who prepared all food. Contracts for the group were made by the
officer; he was present at all times to maintain discipline and the faithful perform-
ance' of the contract. The money earned by each boy was paid over to the court
and credited to him after deducting his share of expenses. Under this system
juvenile court work in the beet fields was much more satisfactory (pp. 37-40).
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7911
Employment of Children in the Sugar-Beet Fields Under the Sugar
Act
(By the Industrial Division, U. S. Children's Bureau, part of an unpublished
manuscript)
introduction
The Jones-Costigan Act of 1934, which amended the Agricultural Adjustment
Act bringing sugar beets and sugarcane under its jurisdiction as basic commodi-
ties, offered the first opportunity for a constructive and uniform program regulat-
ing child labor in an agricultural industry. State efforts to regulate the employ-
ment of children in agriculture, in addition to being confined to only a few States,
have been piecemeal and limited in scope. For the most part, such legislation
has amounted to little more than attempts to prevent children from dropping
out of school for work in the fields; and even this restriction has not always applied
to children of migrant families that are in the State only for the duration of the
crop season. With the passage of the Jones-Costigan Act it became possible to
establish improved Nation-wide labor standards in the sugar-beet and sugarcane
industries applicable to both resident and migratory children.
The Agricultural Adjustment Act, which, among other provisions, authorized
benefit payments to growers who complied with certain prescribed conditions set
out in the act, did not in itself contain provisions relating to child labor. The
Jones-Costigan Act, however, gave the Secretary of Agriculture power to include
in the production-control contracts made by the Government with sugar-beet
growers under the Agricultural Adjustment Act provisions regulating child labor,
making the observance of these provisions prerequisite to the payment of benefits.
Under the authority of this act the sugar-beet production adjustment contracts
entered into in 1935 provided that children under 14 years of age should not be
employed and that the hours of work of children between 14 and 16 years should
be limited to 8 a day. Growers' children, working on their parents' own farms,
were exempt from these provisions.
This program was short lived. With the invalidation of the production-control
contracts of the Agricultural Adjustment Act early in 1936, the gains made in
regulating child labor in the sugarcane and sugar-beet industries were also lost.
The way was pointed out, however, and when the Sugar Act of 1937 was passed—
providing for conditional payments to growers similar to those in effect under the
Agricultural Adjustment Act— it contained, as provisions in the law, the same
child-labor standards as had been incorporated in the 1935 sugar-beet contract
of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration.
Under the Jones-Costigan Act voluntary cooperation on the part of growers was
relied upon to obtain compliance with the child labor provisions of the sugar-beet
production-adjustment contracts. Local control committees, established by
the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, whose function it was to determine
whether growers were complying with the terms of their contract, were responsible
for informing growers and workers of the child-labor requirements and for investi-
gating reported cases of noncompliance. No administrative measures were
provided, however, to aid in maintaining the child-labor standards of the act or
for ascertaining whether these regulations were being generally observed; and,
while an improvement in child labor conditions was evident during the period in
which the act was effective, the employment of children under 14 years of age in
the sugar-beet fields was by no means eliminated. As was emphasized in a study
made by the Children's Bureau in 1935 while the act was still in operation, the
practice of relying on complaints for a knowledge of violations was not adequate
for effective administration; it was evident that there was need, also, of a well-
defined program for requiring proof of age before a child was permitted to work
in the beet fields and for acquainting growers with the advantages of such a
program.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
Information for the study was obtained chiefly through interviews with the
families of sugar-beet laborers and with school officials in charge of employment
certificate issuance. Other school authorities, representatives of county agricul-
tural committees, and the directors of education and labor in Michigan and Ohio
were also consulted.
The localities visited included 7 of the 48 counties in Michigan and 5 of the
25 counties in Ohio in which sugar beets are grown. These counties represent
both the northern and southern districts of the Michigan-Ohio sugar-beet area.
7912
DETROIT HEARINGS
Selected chiefly on the basis of the number of sugar-beet growers in the county,
they included:
Counties — Continued.
Ohio:
Fulton
Lucas
Ottawa
Number of
sugar-beet
growers
226
_ 255
440
Sandusky 326
Wood 720
s- . Number of
•Counties: sugar-beet
Central Michigan: growers
Bay 1, 175
Gratiot 1, 486
Huron 1,090
Saginaw 1,313
Tuscola 1,206
Southern Michigan:
Lenawee 468
Monroe 361
A part of at least nine factory districts falls within these counties, a factory
•district being the sugar-beet area surrounding a sugar-processing factory to which
it is tributary; i. e., to which the beets grown are sent for processing. These dis-
tricts included Saginaw, Alma, Bay City, Sebewaing, and St. Louis in central
Michigan; Blissfield in southern Michigan; and Caro, Findley, and Freemont in
Ohio. Since even the several factories belonging to a single company are usually
under different managements, conditions of work may vary with each factory
district.
Within the counties included in the study areas in which sugar beets were grown
extensively were selected for a farm to farm canvass. In the course of this canvass
all families of sugar-beet laborers in which there were children between the ages
of 6 and 16 years were interviewed, except those who owned at least 40 percent
of the crop on which they worked and who would therefore not be subject to the
child-labor provisions of the Sugar Act. Such families were included in the study
only if they "worked beets" under contract for other growers and in such cases
information was secured only for the work performed on a cash basis.
Field work for the study was carried on while harvesting was still in progress
from October 1 to November 8, in order to reach the migratory families before
they could leave the fields. Altogether, 262 families^were visited in the 12 counties
included in the study.
FAMILIES INCLUDED IN THE STUDY
Country of origin
With the exception of several families resident in the county and one family
that had come from Kentucky to work in the beet fields for the first time the
year of the study, the sugar-beet families interviewed in Michigan and Ohio were
of foreign stock. Some growers of American stock, with the help of their families,
worked their own acreage; but cohtract laborers of American stock are an excep-
tion in the sugar-beet industry.
In 1920, when the Children's Bureau made its first survey of conditions in the
sugar-beet fields, Mexican and Spanish- American labor was just beginning to
appear in the Michigan and Ohio areas. At that time Poles and Bohemians
predominated among both the workers brought in from outside the State and the
resident group.1 Other Slavs and Magyars were also present in both groups in
larger numbers than Mexicans. At the time of the present study Mexicans and
Spanish-Americans outnumbered all other groups coming in from outside the
State. Practically the entire roster of workers brought into the State were
Mexicans or Spanish-Americans, and while families of Bohemian, Polish and
other origins were still present among the laborers who were resident in the
State, even in this group they were represented in considerably smaller propor-
tions than formerly. Many of the Bohemian, Polish, and German families that
were sugar-beet laborers in 1920 are now farm owners and farm tenants, culti-
vating and harvesting their own crops or themselves hiring contract laborers.
Residence and migration
Approximately half, 130 of the 262 families interviewed in the course of the
study were migratory; i. e., nonresidents of the State in which they were working.
In the study of sugar-beet families made by the Children's Bureau in 1935 it was
1 Child Labor and the Work of Mothers in the Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan, p. 82.
Bureau Publication No. 115, Washington, 1923.
Children's
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7913
found that labor recruiting from outside the State, which had declined rapidly
with the increase in unemployment during the 5 years preceding that study, had
reached the point where it was a relatively unimportant feature of the sugar-beet
industry. In 1939, however, it was generally reported that the practice had been
on the increase during the last 2 or 3 years and that a large number of migratory
families were again being brought to the beet fields of Michigan and Ohio.2
With the exception of the 1 family from Kentucky mentioned above, 1
from Oklahoma, and 1 that had come from Ohio to work in Michigan, all those
families that had come from outside the State in which they were working had
come from Texas. San Antonio supplied the largest number but 23 other towns
scattered throughout the State were represented. Texas, for a number of years,
has been one of the important recruiting centers of the sugar-processing compa-
nies. Mexican families from Texas not only migrate to the fields of Michigan and
Ohio, but also to the sugar-beet areas of Colorado, Wyoming, western Nebraska,
Montana, and Minnesota. In addition to the families that are transported by
the sugar companies each season, many families, familiar with conditions from
other years, migrate on their own initiative flocking to the spinach and cotton
fields of Texas during the winter and the sugar-beet fields of the North in the
spring and summer.
Identity of beet workers
The total number of persons included in the 262 families interviewed in the
course of the study was 1,904, of whom almost two-thirds worked in the fields. In
keeping with the recruiting and employment policies traditional in the sugar-beet
and many other commercialized agricultural industries, by which families with
several children old enough to work are given preference in employment, in three-
fourths, or 196 of the families, there were children between the ages of 12 and 16
years. In more than half, 56 percent, there were children 14 and 15 years of age
who, without violating the child-labor provisions of the Sugar Act, could be relied
upon to become regular field hands. The remaining 66 families were composed of
adults and children under 12 years of age. The number of beet workers per house-
hold ranged from 1 to 18 but the median was 5.
Table 1. — Composition of families of sugar-beet laborers by number of beet-field
workers in the family, 1939
Composition of family
Total
Number of beet-field workers in the
family
Less
than 3
3, less
than 5
5, less
than 7
7 or
more
Total families.
262
40
99
87
36
Families with:
Adults and children under 12 years only
66
196
28
12
23
76
10
77
5
Adults and children 12 years, under 16 l
31
Children 12 years, under 14 only
48
80
68
8
3
1
25
33
18
11
37
29
4
Children 14 years, under 16 only
7
Children of both age groups
20
1 May also have children under 12 years of age
The extent to which members of the family of all ages helped with the work is
apparent from the following table, which shows the total number of persons in the
families visited and the number working in the beet fields. Since it is not unusual
for relatives and friends sharing work under one contract to live together as a
family group during the farm season, in some instances the figures in this table
refer to the household rather than the immediate family. Of the households
visited, almost one-third included persons other than members of the immediate
family. Sometimes these extra persons were adults but often, too, they were
children.
2 Although some movement of labor to the beet fields from inside the State was indicated, the problem of
intra-State migration is an unimportant one. Only 8 of the 132 families resident in the State came from out-
Bide the county in which they were working.
7914 DETROIT HEARINGS
Table 2. — Persons in family and number working in beet fields, 1939
Number of persons in family
Total
Working in the beet
fields
Number
Percent
Total
1,904
1,189
• 62.4
Father i...
240
231
538
654
241
224
159
496
310
93.3
Mother ._.
68.8
Others 16 years and over -
Children 6 years, under 16
92.2
47.4
Children under 6 years
i Or other male head of the family.
While the bulk of the field labor force was made up of adults and older children,
a very significant portion, 26 percent, was children under 16 years of age. The
distribution of the workers was as follows:
Number of
beet field
workers
Percent dis-
tribution
Total
Father, or other male head of family
Mother
Others 16 years and over
Children under 16 years
1,189
224
159
496
310
100.0
18.8
13.4
41.7
26.1
Hours of work
In the blocking and thinning season when the work must be finished before the
plants become stunted from crowding, only 21 percent of the children 6 and
under 16 reported a working day 8 hours or less. On the other hand almost
two-thirds, 65 percent, were accustomed to work 10 or more hours a day, and for
31 percent 12, 13, and 14 hours weie not unusual. Seventy-eight percent of the
children under 14 years employed in the fields were working more than 8 hours
a day (table 6).
Table 6. — Usual daily hours of work of children 6 and under 16 years of age at each
process, 1939
Usual daily hours of work '
Percent of working children em-
ployed at each process during the
season
Blocking
and thin-
ning
Hoeing
and weed-
ing
Pulling
and top-
ping
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
Less than 4 hours - . .
2.3
5.5
13.3
13.7
20.1
14.6
16.4
8.2
5.9
2.9
6.2
17.1
14.3
20.5
11.4
15.2
7.6
4.8
5.5
4 less than 8 hours
10.6
8 hours - .
30.9
9 hours.
11.5
10 hours
19.4
11 hours,- -- ....
9.2
12 hours _
9.7
13 hours .-
1.8
14 hours or more
1.4
1 Hours are reported to the nearest whole number.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7915
For hoeing and weeding, the only operation in connection with the cultivation
■of sugar beets that does not have to be done under pressure, the hours of work
were somewhat shorter. Due to the fact, however, that, as explained before, a
reduced force is sent into the fields for this work the hours do not vary consider-
ably in the two periods. A somewhat larger — though still appreciably small-
proportion, 26 percent, of the children helping with this work reported a working
day of 8 hours or less and a slightly smaller proportion, 60 percent, worked 10
hours or more.
The harvesting operations, which cannot be started until word goes out from
the sugar company that the maximum sugar content of the beet has been reached
and which must be completed before the ground freezes, are done under even
greater pressure than the blocking and thinning operations. Despite the fact,
therefore, that the hours of daylight at this time of the year are limited 53 percent
of the children reported working more than 8 hours a day and 13 percent worked
12 hours or more. These extreme hours in this season of the year meant that
the families often worked by moonlight or in fields lighted by automobile head-
lights or other improvised illumination.
A long working day in the beet field is customary for young and old alike and
there was little difference in the hours worked at any process by the children of
different ages, included in the present study. Of the 27 children under 12 years
who were able to give their hours of work on the blocking and thinning processes
20 reported a customary working day of more than 8 hours, while 80 percent of
the children 12 and 13 years and a like proportion of those 14 and 15 years reported
hours as long. For weeding and hoeing, 73 percent of the children under 12 years
of age as compared with 74 percent of those in each of the older age groups re-
ported usual working hours of more than 8. In the pulling and topping season
50 percent of the children under 12 years, 51 percent of those 12 and 13 years of
age, and 55 percent of the group 14 or 15 years worked more than 8 hours.
While there were some children who left the field in advance of the other
members of the family and some who reported for work at a later hour in the
morning, for the majority of the children the working day was the same or closely
approximated that of the adult members of the family working with them in the
fields. The median hours reported for blocking and thinning was 10.8 for both
children and adults; for hoeing it was 10.5 for both groups of workers; and for
pulling and topping it was 9.3 for the children as compared with 10 for the adults.1
Duration of work
At the time this study was made — in October 1939 — the harvesting of the
sugar-beet crop was just beginning so that it was impossible to obtain a report
on the total period that the children worked throughout the season. For the
blocking and thinning processes the median number of days worked by the
children from whom information could be obtained was 23, almost 4 weeks of 6
working days each. For hoeing and weeding the median was 15 days. As
pulling and topping require practically the same length of time as blocking and
thinning, it is estimated that the median number of days worked by the children
for the entire season would approximate 61 days or 10 working weeks.
SCHOOL ATTENDANCE
The employment of children in the sugar-beet fields is not a child-labor problem
alone; it is also an educational problem. Work in the beet fields means loss of
schooling not only for the children who help with the crop but, particularly in
the case of migratory families, it usually means nonattendance for all children
of school age in the family. Either schools are located at too great a distance
to permit younger children to attend unaccompanied by the older children in
the family; or the children of intermediate ages are kept at home to care for the
house and younger brothers and sisters while the older members of the household
work; or parents working daily in the fields have neither the time nor energy to
keep the children in proper condition for school attendance. Frequently, too,
so far as the migrant families are concerned it is not considered worth while to
enroll the children in school for the short time the family plans to be in the com-
munity.
Because of the limited time available for the present study the information
sought in respect to school attendance was confined to that most readily obtained
3 The hours of the adult workers were measured by the hours of the father in the fpmily or the person
taking his place in the sugar-beet fields.
7916
DETROIT HEARINGS
from the parent without recourse to school records; namely, to inquiries con-
cerning the attendance of the children from the time school opened in the fall
the year of the study to the date of interview. It was felt that absences in this
period were recent enough to be remembered accurately and while the figures are
not complete for the entire school year they represent the most serious inroads
upon school attendance resulting from the family's work in the beet fields. It
should be kept in mind, however, that the blocking and thinning season sometimes
begins as early as the middle of May so that children — particularly those in families
that come from a distance — may lose some time at the close as well as the opening
of the school year. It should be remembered, also, that a large proportion of
the families return to the beet fields season after season, and the picture depicted
here is not the picture of an occasional year but, in many instances, probably is
that of every year of the child's school life.
Of the children between the ages of 6 and 16 years in the families visited who had
entered or planned to enter school the year of the study, 237, 37 percent, had not
yet enrolled at the time of interview between October 1 and November 8; of these
139 were working and 98 nonworking children. As most of the schools in the
localities visited opened either the first or second week in September this meant
that these children had already lost from 3 to 7 weeks of the school term. Many
were to lose even more before the beet season was over. Children in the primary
grades who could not make the trip to school alone and those 14 years and over
who were looked upon as regular field hands were affected most when it came to
prompt enrollment in school. A little more than one-third, 34 percent, of the
children under 10 years of age and more than half, 57 percent of the children 14
and 15 years had not yet enrolled in school at the time of the study. Among the
children of the intermediate age groups, on the other hand, 26 percent had failed
to enroll up to the time they were interviewed (table 7).
Table 7. — School enrollment at date of interview of children 6 and under 16 years of
age in families working in beet fields, by age of child, 1939
Age of child
Total
Under 10 years...
10 years, under 12
12 years, under 14
14 years, under 16
Total
children
654
229
135
123
167
Enrolled
in school
408
147
101
89
71
Not en-
rolled in
school
237
77
34
33
93
Enroll-
ment not
reported
Late enrollment, however, was not the only factor to be considered in connec-
tion with the school attendance of children in sugar-beet workers' families. Even
among the children who did enroll promptly at the beginning of the term those who
were called upon to help with the field work were usually irregular in attendance
once the beet harvest was begun. Occasionally the children's work was confined
to "after school hours" but for the majority field work came first. Of the 169
working children that were enrolled in school at the time of the study 81, or almost
half, had dropped out for varying periods to work on the beet crop. Of these 81
children 44 reported absences of at least 1 week during the 1 or 2 months that
school had been in session, while a little more than one-third had lost 2 weeks or
more.
Altogether 44 percent of the children included in the study had either failed to
enroll in school up to the time of the interview or their attendance had been
seriously interrupted by, field work.
A strict enforcement of the compulsory school-attendance laws would have kept
the majority of these children in school. In Michigan children between 7 and 16
years, and in Ohio children between 6 and 18 years with the exception of high-
school graduates, are required to attend school for the entire term unless they have
obtained employment certificates authorizing them to leave school to go to work,
which are issued for certain specified occupations not including agriculture. In
Michigan an exemption to the compulsory school attendance law which permits a
child over 14 years of age who has completed the sixth grade to be excused from
attendance at school if his services are essential to the support of his parents
could be applied to the children included in this study. In Ohio, however, no
exemption from school attendance is possible for this group of children. While
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7917
the compulsory school-attendance law. in that State provides that a child who has
reached the age of 14 years may be excused from attendance at school for a limited
period not to exceed 15 days (except in extreme cases) "to perform necessary work
directly and exclusively for his parents and legal guardians" this exemption has
been interpreted to apply only to children working on their own parents' farms and
does therefore not exempt children of contract laborers, with which this study is
concerned, from attendance at school.
As has been found to be the case in most studies of children employed in agri-
culture, however, policies regarding the enforcement of the compulsory school
attendance laws and interpretations of the exemptions from the law varied from
county to county and even from school district to school district in the sugar-beet
areas visited. In some districts strict enforcement of the law was effected in spite
of the difficulties encountered in connection with the attendance of migratory
children. In others there was complete disregard of school attendance standards
during the sugar-beet season at least, and absences from the classroom were
countenanced without any more formality than a verbal message brought by a
neighbor's child.
In several communities visited in Michigan school authorities followed the policy
of closing the schools for 1 or 2 weeks during the harvest season for what is known
as a "beet vacation" to release the children for work in the fields but the date of
opening school in the fall was advanced to make up for time lost in this way.
The practice of beet vacations, however, was not general; even in Michigan and
in Ohio it was quite generally looked upon with disfavor.
Late enrollment was far more general among the migratory children than
among those rseident in the State, 65 percent of the former as compared with 14
percent of the latter having failed to enter at the opening of the fall term the year
of the study (table 8). So far as could be learned children of migratory families
were accepted in the schools in all the districts visited on an equal basis with
children of families resident in the State although they were not always encouraged
to enroll. While in some districts every effort was made to get the migratory
children in school, in the majority compulsory school attendance was more
strictly enforced in respect to resident than to nonresident children. In several
instances children of migratory families included in the study had failed to enroll
in school because the farms on which the families were working were located 6
miles from the district school and school authorities, when appealed to, had neither
been willing to transfer them to a nearer school in an adjacent district nor to
furnish transportation to the school in which they belonged. For the most part,
however, migratory children were not compelled to attend school because school
authorities, like the families themselves, did not consider it worth while to enroll
them for the short time they were to be in the locality or because of a definite
prejudice in the community against beet workers as a class.
Table 8. — School enrollment at date of interview of children 6 and under 16 years of
age, by residence status of family, 1939
Children 6 and under 16 years of age
Resident status of family
Total
Enrolled
in school
Not en-
rolled in
school
Enroll-
ment not
reported
Total
654
408
237
g
Resident of State
366
288
306
100
52
185
g
Migratory
3
So lax was the enforcement of compulsory school-attendance laws in respect to
children in families of migratory laborers in several communities that children
living near and even next door to the school building in sight of teachers and
principal daily had not yet enrolled in school several weeks after the term had
begun and the parents had no intention of sending them until their return to
Texas at the close of the harvest season. One family who had been told by the
fieldman that the 10-year-old girl should be in school instead of working the
fields reported naively that no one had come to "make the children go to school"
and therefore they would "not go" until they returned to Texas.
7918 DETROIT HEARINGS
Exhibit 52. — Agricultural Migration to Michigan
REPORT BY AGRICULTURAL FIELD STAFF, SELECT COMMITTEE INVESTIGATING
DEFENSE MIGRATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.
(Submitted for Consideration by the Committee in Connection With the Detroit
Hearings)
This study was undertaken in order to determine the extent to which agricul-
tural migration has been and is likely to be affected by the defense-stimulated
industrial boom, as exemplified in the Michigan area. Published data already
available were supplemented by field interviews with farmers, farm workers, and
other observers. Michigan was selected for first examination because it is a
wealthy agricultural State and one of the most important industrial areas in the
country. 4
Michigan agriculture is characterized by a high degree of diversification. The
State, with Ohio and Indiana, is in the center of the general farming area of the
United States. In Michigan 33 percent of all farms are classed as general farms;
in the United States 17.4 percent are so classed. In some areas in the State 40
percent of all farms are general farms.1 Such farms do not require large num-
bers of seasonal workers. Two major areas in Michigan, however, specialize in
the production of crops requiring large numbers of harvest workers — -the sugar
beet area of east central Michigan and the fruit and vegetable area of the western
portion ot the State adjacent to Lake Michigan. The two areas are considered
separately because they differ considerably in economic structure, and in type of
migration.
WESTERN MICHIGAN
Western Michigan is one of the important fruit and truck crop districts in
the United States. Large quantities of peaches, pears, apples, cherries, grapes,
berries, tomatoes, melons, and celery are raised either for the fresh market or
for processing, or for both. Such crops require large amounts of labor for short
harvesting and processing seasons.
All counties in western Michigan grow some fruits and vegetables. For most
of these crops acreages are greatest in the south and decline to the north.2 Fol-
lowing the general pattern of acreage, the demand for seasonal farm help is greatest
in the south, declining to the north. There are no accurate statistics on the
number of migrant workers entering these counties each harvest season. Esti-
mates, however, have been made from time to time for some counties. They are
necessarily rough approximations, but suffice to indicate the relative importance
of migration in the various counties. From 9,000 to 12,000 migrant workers enter
Berrien County each year; about 2,500 enter Van Buren County; and about 1,200
enter Allegan County. In a recent survey the Farm Security Administration esti-
mated that cherry harvesting gave employment to about 5,000 transient workers
in Oceana County and to upwards of 4,000 transient workers in Grand Traverse
County. Migration to northern cherry counties is greater than migration to
Allegan or Van Buren County but much less important than to Berrien County.
The numbers are fewer and the season is short.
Berrien County ranks among the first 10 counties in the United States in the
production of peaches, cherries, apples, pears, grapes, raspberries, blackberries,,
and strawberries. Large quantities of cantaloupes, cucumbers, and tomatoes are
also grown.
Problems similar to those in Berrien County are evident in the whole region,
though to a lesser degree. Changes occurring in Berrien County are occurring in
surrounding counties, but at a slower rate.
BERBIEN COUNTY
Location and boundaries.
Berrien County occupies the extreme southwest corner of Michigan. The-
county is shaped somewhat like a right-angle triangle, with Lake Michigan as the
hypotenuse and the right angle in the southeastern corner. The eastern boundary
of the county runs in a straight north-south line, a distance of about 34 miles.
Bordering on the Indiana State line, the southern boundary of Berrien County
extends some 31 miles westward to Lake Michigan. On the west the county line
tapers sharply toward the northeast along Lake Michigan for a distance of about
43 miles. The northern boundary of the county is a short 7>2-mile line. Berrien
> Data from U. S. Census. 1930.
2 Sweet and sour cherries are the only exception to this pattern. Cherry acreage is concentrated in the-
West central and northwestern counties of Mason, Oceana, Leelanau, and Grand Traverse.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7919
County enjoys a very favorable location with respect to available markets.
Only iOO miles from Chicago, 200 miles from Detroit, and even less from the
industrial areas of Illinois and Indiana, transportation problems are reduced to a
minimum. Almost all of the fruits and vegetables move out by truck to consum-
ing centers.
Industries.
Most of the industrial activity is concentrated in the twin cities of Benton
Harbor and St. Joseph, but there are a number of plants, each employing several
hundred workers, scattered throughout the count}'. In Benton Harbor and St.
Joseph there are some 10 fairly large plants, employing a total of more than 6,000
workers and producing a variety of commodities such as automobile parts, washing
machines, electric ironers, dies, castings, etc. This is exclusive of a number of
small miscellaneous plants which employ up to 100 workers. Some of these
smaller plants manufacture fruit packages in which local farm produce is marketed.
Resorts are found along the lake shore in Berrien County, and many of the
smaller farmers in the interior of the county supplement their farm income by
taking in summei-vacation boarders. There aie also several large "resort farms"
that concentrate on the summer-vacation trade and depend little, if at all, on their
enterprise.
The fruit area.
Although the nonfarm industries play a significant role in the whole economy
of Berrien County, agriculture, particularly fruit farming, is the major economic
enterprise.
Large crops of various kinds of fruit are grown throughout the county except
for three strips in the eastern, southern, and western parts. In the west there
is a narrow, intermittent stretch of sand and dunes bordering on the lake. At
only a few points to these' barren patches extend as much as 1)4 miles inland.
The southern belt.
Little fruit is grown in the southern part of the county. It is predominantly
a general farming area. In addition to farming there are several large resorts
on the lake shore and a few scattered industrial centers. This southern belt is
approximately 3 miles wide at the lake and broadens to about 10 miles where it
meets the eastern nonfruit area. The eastern strip is irregular in width and
extends the entire length of the county, but does not exceed about 6}<2 miles at its
widest point. Dairy, poultry, and general farms are found in the southern and
eastern parts of the county.
Physical and economic conditions.
In general, a considerable portion of Berrien County enjoys the advantage of
favorable soil and topographic conditions. There is, however, a wide range in
these natural conditions.
"* * * the soils are diverse in character ranging from deep, loose, dry sands
to heavy clays and are further characterized by a wade range in depth to water
table, moisture, and fluctuations in moisture throughout the growing season.
* * * Most of the land consists of smooth plains on which the local relief
does not exceed 30 to 40 feet, but elsewhere plains are pitted, and some hilly land
is present on which the local relief is 50 to 150 feet, on which slopes exceed the
amount of level land, and on which lakes and swamps are components of the land
types." 3
The environmental and economic factors, climate and proximity to markets,
combine to determine the type of crops grown. Furthermore, because these
combined factors are so favorable, they compensate in significant measure for
inferior conditions of soil and topography in many parts of the country. "A
higher proportion of relatively poor soil, on a physical basis, is in use in this area
(southwestern Michigan) than in some other parts of the State."4
"The influence of Lake Michigan makes possible the fruit areas along the eastern
shore of the lake * * * [The lake] is especially marked in its influence on
the length of growing season as it tempers both extremes in temperature. * * *
the autumns are long and mild, and hence favorable for ripening fruit and harden-
ing new growth on fruit trees, thus lessening winter killing. Summer temperatures
i along the shore are much more moderate than those across the lake or in the
interior of the State." Thus, "The growing season is much longer along the
i Lake Michigan shore than inland * * * the growing season inland is 20 to
3 Hill, E. B., Types of Farming in Michigan, Special Bulletin No. 206, Michigan State College, East
Lansing, 1939, p. 17.
4 Ibid., p. 17.
7920
DETROIT HEARINGS
50 days shorter than along the lake because of the greater distance from the lake
and the higher elevation."5
With its diversity of soil and topographic conditions, and with its lake-moder-
ated climate, Berrien County is capable, physically, of producing a wide variety
of farm products. Given these conditions, the particular crops grown are deter-
mined by the proximity to large local and out-of-State markets. "About 2}i
million persons live in the major cities in southern Michigan. About twice that
number are in near-by out-of-State markets. This large population has increased
the local demand for farm products * * * of a high degree of perishability,
products which tend to be produced near the markets because of transportation
costs. Examples of such products are fluid milk, small fruits, vegetables, tree
fruits, and poultry products.6 Because of its favorable climate, Berrien County
concentrates on fruit and truck crops rather than on poultry and dairy products
which are found in other areas in the region.
Size of farms: Economic factors.
Land prices in the southwestern corner of Michigan have been high largely
because of its proximity to markets, coupled with climatic conditions favorable to
fruit production. This type of agriculture, furthermore, requires a relatively
large and relatively long-term investment, since fruit trees do not produce before
3 to 7 years. These factors — high land values and large investments — result in
a tendencjr toward maintenance of small and intensively cultivated farms in
Berrien County.
The average size of Berrien County farms is 55.5 acres as compared with 96.2 for
the State. Only four other counties in Michigan have an average of less than 60
acres per farm. Two of these, Cogebic and Keweenaw Counties, are located in
the Upper Peninsulp "* * * where the cost and effort involved in the
clearing, combined with the uneven topography of the land, retard the
development of farms of adequate size." 7 The other two are Wayne County,
with an average farm size of 43.8 acres, and Macomb County, with an average
farm size of 58.9 acres. Wayne County includes the large metropolitan area of
Detroit and its suburbs; Macomb County adjoins Wayne County to the northeast.
Here, again, proximity to large markets encourages intensive agriculture, in this
case primarily truck, dairy, and poultry farming.
Table 1 shows the distribution of farms, by size of farm, for Berrien County and
for the State of Michigan. In Berrien County 63.1 percent of all farms are under
50 acres, whereas only 32.3 percent of all the farms in the State fall into that
category. Comparison with data from previous census years reveals that these
relationships are of long standing, showing little tendency to change since the
opening of the century.
Table 1. — Distribution of farms in Michigan and in Berrien County, Michigan, by
size of farms, 1940
Number of farms
Percent of total
Size of farms
Michigan
Berrien
County
Michigan
Berrien
County
Total, all farms- _ .
187, 589
12,675
18, 951
28, 833
14, 757
43, 220
29, 630
18, 744
8,597
^O^O
4,948
1,272
539
224
169
5,324
462
1,710
1,189
540
620
380
203
90
54
49
17
5
3
2
100.0
6.8
10.1
15.4
. 7.9
23.0
15.8
10.0
4.6
2.7
2.6
.7
.3
.1
.1
100.0
Under 10 acres
8.7
10 to 29 acres
32.1
30 to 49 acres
22.3
50 to 69 acres
10.1
70 to 99 acres ---
11.7
100 to 139 acres --
7.1
140 to 179 acres
3.8
180 to 219 acres
1.7
220 to 259 acres --
1.0
260 to 379 acres .
1.0
380 to 499 acres -
.3
500 to 699 acres
.1
700 to 999 acres
.1
1,000 acres and over
(')
1 Less than one-half of 1 percent.
Source: United States Census. 1940.
» Ibid., pp. 9-11.
• Ibid., p. 29.
? Ibid., p. 34.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7921
Berrien County's high land values and large investment requirements are
matched by its high rate of mortgage indebtedness. Mortgages are carried on
54.6 percent of all farms in the county, as compared with 46.3 percent for the
State as a whole. On the other hand, only 11.2 percent of Berrien County
farms are operated by tenants. This percentage of tenancy is low even for
Michigan, which has a much lower tenancy rate (17 percent) than has the United
States as a whole (38.7 percent).
Farmers in Berrien County, although they have suffered from depressed prices
in recent years, and although many have had to mortgage their farms, have been
able, on the whole, to maintain their status as individual producers. In the first
three decades of the century farming was very profitable in the county. When
the depression lowered farm prices, Berrien County farmers were financially able
to carry on for some time. Few farms were lost prior to the extension oi more
liberal farm credit by the Federal Government. Furthermore, the impact of
the depression was not as disastrous to Berrien County as to some other agricul-
tural regions. Production was directed to the domestic market and was highly
diversified. Most farmers raised several different crops, some of which, e. g.
tomatoes and melons, could be changed from year to year as market demand
changed.
Fruits and vegetables have become in recent years much more important ele-
ments in the national diet. Consequently, prices for Berrien County products
did not fall as much as prices for staple export crops or for less necessary or less
nutritive domestic products. In fact, as agricultural prices declined early in the
decade, Michigan fruit and vegetable producers found their competitive position
improved. Rigid transport charges made it increasingly difficult for producers
and packers of Arkansas strawberries, California grapes, pears, and peaches, and
Washington apples to ship to Chicago, Detroit, and other midwestern and north-
eastern markets. Berrien County producers, on the other hand, wrere in a
position to ship to these markets by truck at extremely low rates, permitting
them to sell at prices which, while they were low, usually yielded some net
income. They were able to realize more on such products than on field crops,
and dairy and poultry products, which suffered competition from other regions
•as favorably situated as their own.
Marketing.
The favorable location of Berrien County with respect to consuming centers
has been emphasized. The short hauls to these centers can be made almost
entirely by ordinary truck; refrigerated trucks or railroad cars are used infre-
quently. Five major methods are used by farmers in disposing of their products.
1. Most important of the outlets is the Benton Harbor fruit market. On this
market from 40 to 50 percent of all fruits and vegetables grown in the county are
sold directly by the growers to buyers for chain stores, brokers, and wholesalers,
■or to transient buyers who dispose of their purchases over wide areas. Com-
mission merchants also maintain representatives on the market but most trans-
actions are sales for Cash.
The present market facilities were established in 1931 by the city of Benton
Harbor, which operates the market as a nonprofit community enterprise. Prior
to the establishment of the present facilities transactions were carried on between
buyers and growers in the streets of Benton Harbor and adjacent areas. Most
of the farmers selling on this market are small operators and most of the loads are
small loads except at the height of certain crop seasons. Large operators use
"the market when prices are good or when other outlets are inconvenient or not
available for particular types of produce.
The open-market arrangement has many advantages for the fanner. He is in
a position to bargain with buyers; he can find out easily what prices other growers
have received; and, most important of all, he is paid in cash for his produce.
On the other hand, he is subject, to some extent, to the pressures of practiced
buyers. There is no evidence of any organized attempts on the part of buyers
to depress prices but that effect is sometimes achieved by tacit understandings
among buyers. Perhaps the greatest disadvantage for the farmer is the fact that
the sale of his produce takes so much time. It is not unusual for a farmer, after
he has driven to market, to wrait 2 or more hours before selling, in the expectation
that bids will improve.
To meet the competition offered by other marketing outlets the Benton Harbor
market has encouraged farmers to provide better packs, better quality, and more
standardized grading. The Michigan Department of Agriculture has an office
60396— 41— pt. 19 11
7922 DETROIT HEARINGS
on the market grounds and furnishes produce inspectors who are on duty during
trading hours.
During the 1940 season 113,681 loads of Berrien County fruits and vegetables
left the Benton Harbor market destined for 536 communities in 29 States. Ship-
ments, by truck, went as far as Florida, Texas, Arizona, and North Dakota.
These, however, were exceptions. Seventy percent of all shipments went to
cities in Michigan and to the nearby States of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Wis-
consin
8
2. From time to time cooperatives have been established to handle farm produce
in Berrien County. Some of these organizations that began as cooperatives have
become private stock companies at the insistence of the larger grower-stockholders.
These organizations grade, pack, and sell the fruit grown by their stockholders.
They handle fruit for outsiders when their facilities are not being fully utilized
by their stockholders, but in normal production years the amount of outside fruit
handled is small.
Two fruit-packing plants in the county are operated on a quasi-cooperative
basis. But membership fees are high and there is no desire to increase member-
ship. Both these quasi-cooperatives and the corporate packing plants sell farm
equipment and supplies.
The packing plants offer standard grade and high quality packs and can there-
fore secure the desirable business of large chain store and wholesale buyers.
The manager of one large exchange estimated that prices on peaches sold through
the exchange will average between 15 to 20 cents per bushel higher than prices at
the Benton Harbor market. The same source indicated that although there is no
desire to expand membership in the existing exchanges, the establishment of more
such organizations in the area would be welcomed because they would tend to
standardize and improve the quality of Michigan fruit and consequently raise
prices. Whatever competition existed among exchanges, it was stated, would be
more than offset by higher prices which would result from the improved reputation
of Michigan fruit packs.
At the present time there is close cooperation among the exchanges with respect
to prices. Two years ago four large exchanges in Berrien County maintained
agreements on price ranges and packed under the same brand label. This
branded produce of uniformly high quality was attractive to large chain store and
other buyers and gave the cooperating exchanges an additional advantage. Last
year, although daily contact on price was maintained, the crop and prices were
poor and cooperation among the exchanges was not quite as effectively carried
out. This year both price agreements and the use of uniform labels among the
four exchanges will be maintained. Beyond this some thought is being given
to the possibility of selling the produce from all the exchanges through a single
organization.
The cooperation among the exchanges is the only organized attempt to influ-
ence prices and to control marketing outlets. These exchanges operate for the
exclusive benefit of their stockholders. The large number of small farmers can
neither join them nor raise sufficient capital to set up effective organizations of
their own.
Farmers who dispose of their produce through the packing plants are generally
the larger growers in the county. Plant managers point out that it is very costly
to handle fruit in small amounts. Machinery has to be cleared of one farmers
fruit before another's load can be worked. The larger the load the less time is
lost and the lower are packing costs. Bookkeeping costs increase rapidly as-
small loads are accepted. Consequently packing plants are interested in doing
business with farmers who can furnish considerable quantities of a single crop.
Since most farms are small and highly diversified, the number raising a sufficient
amount of a particular crop to interest the packing plants is relatively small.
However, not all large growers sell through packing plants. Some prefer to-
grade, pack, and sell their own produce even though they may themselves be
stockholders in the exchanges. It appears that a large grower who manages his
own farm, or is able to hire a sufficiently capable manager, can grade, pack, and
sell for less than it costs the exchanges.
3. An indeterminate volume of produce is marketed directly from farms in.
Berrien County. Chain stores, brokers, and wholesalers, usually from nearby
markets, particularly Chicago, send their trucks direct to farms with which they
make day-to-day arrangements for the purchase of produce. No reliable estimates-
« Data concerning the Benton Harbor market are taken from the 1940 bulletin published by the market..
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7923
of the quantity of produce marketed in this fashion could be obtained, but all
observers agreed that the percentage is considerable.
4. One large fruit and vegetable cannery is located in Berrien County, and
absorbs considerable quantities of asparagus, tomatoes, cherries, peaches, and
pears. Purchases by the cannery are made by contract with growers. Tomatoes
are contracted for on an acreage basis before the planting season. Contracts for
all other products are signed just before canning begins. The purchase of large
quantities of produce for canning tends to improve prices received by farmers.
This advantage is minimized, however, because the canning company will not
discuss prices until the fruit is ready to pick, at which time offers are made in
terms of flooded fresh-fruit markets. When cannery prices are set, fresh-fruit
buyers have a lever with which to keep market prices down.
5. Proximity to large population centers has encouraged the widespread estab-
lishment of roadside markets, although these markets dispose of the smallest
proportion of the county output.
Farmers in the county continually change from one marketing method to
another. When prices are high on the cash market the flow of produce over that
market will increase. Large growers ordinarily selling through a packing plant
also will turn to it, and sometimes the exchanges will do likewise. On the other
hand, if prices sag at the market, the cannery will get more offers of produce.
The competition among these five produce outlets has the tendency of keeping
prices at maximum levels permitted by the consumer demand. Because of the
alternative outlets, no one outlet has been able to dominate prices or to control
the marketing process. While farmers have felt certain pressures, they have been
able to thwart control of prices or production by the simple expedient of changing
their selling connections.
Local labor sup-ply.
Employment opportunities in nonfarm industry in Berrien County have pro-
vided a source of additional income and stability to large numbers of farm workers
and small farmers. At the same time the large body of farm workers and small
farmers has provided a source of stable and relatively cheap labor to local nonfarm
industry.
In the present survey an attempt was made to determine the extent to vvhich
local industries draw upon the farm-labor supply. For this purpose questionnaires
were distributed in a plant employing about 900 workers. Preliminary figures,
shown in table 3, indicate that over 55 percent of the workers whose questionnaires
have been received and tabulated have farm-labor backgrounds. In this sample
of 507 male workers, approximately 11 percent are currently engaged in part-time
farming. Including the part-time farmers, 24 peicent of the tabulated sample
have worked on farms during the past 5 years.
Union as well as company officials indicated that this plant has a smaller pro-
portion of people with recent farm experience than any other plant in the area.
The reason given was that the work was more desirable at this plant than else-
where. Workers employed at other plants on more difficult or less desirable jobs,
in foundries for example, attempt over long periods of time to secure employment
in the plant that was circularized in this survey. It was stated, therefore, that
although large numbers of farm workers would be found in this plant, many more
would be long-standing industrial workers further removed in time from their
farm employment than workers in the other plants in the area.
Table 2. — Farm labor background of male workers currently employed in a Berrien
County, Mich., industrial plant
[Preliminary data based on 507 questionnaires received and tabulated to date]
[Roman numerals indicate numbers of workers; numerals in italics are percentages]
Total workers 507
With farm labor background 282
Proportion of total 55 5
Without farm labor background 225
Proportion of total 4/h 5
Living on farm as owner or tenant 56
Proportion of total workers 11. 0
On farm for 5 years or less 38
Proportion of total operators 67. 9
7924 DETROIT HEARINGS
Not living on owned or rented farm 451
Without farm labor background 225
With farm labor background 226
Total reporting most recent date of farm employment 203
Worked on farm prior to 1930 69
Proportion of total reporting 84- 0
Worked on arm between 1930 and 1935, inclusive 66
Proportion of total reporting 32 6
Worked on farm between 1937 and 1941, inclusive 68
Proportion of total reporting 33. 5
Available evidence is unanimous that owner and renter operators as well aa
local farm workers are entering industrial activity in steadily increasing numbers.
The effect on industrial wage rates of the labor supply available on farms is
indicated in the following table by comparisons with other areas. The differences
exist despite the proximity of Berrien County to several large industrial centers.
The relatively low level of Berrien County's industrial wages has been attributed
to a large available supply of farm labor accustomed to relatively low wages.
Table 3. — Current hourly rates in union 'plants and plants paying union wages,
selected areas
Location
Unskilled
Semi-
skilled
Skilled
Dayton, Ohio
Fort Wayne, Ind
South Bend, Ind
St. Joseph and Benton Harbor, Mich
$0.65
.65
.65
1.60
$0.85
.85
.90
.70
$1 to $1.40.
$1 to $1.40.
$1.10 to $1.50.
$0.85 to $0.90.
' Unionization during the past 3 months has brought an increase in unskilled rates from 45 to 60 cents
per hour.
Source: Local organizer for U. E. R. and M. W. A., Congress of Industrial Organizations.
Because the industrial wage scales are generally lower in Berrien County, there
has lately been a tendency for workers to commute or migrate to other nearby
centers of industrial activity. And at the same time a rapid and intensive
unionization of industrial workers is taking place in the county.
As compared with industrial rates of pay shown in the above table, farm wages
were generally 15 to 20 cents per hour in 1940 and 20 to 25 cents per hour in 1941
in Berrien County. During the peach harvest some farmers were paying 30 cents
per hour. These rates usually included some type of shelter or camping space.
Seasonal labor demand.
Demand for harvest labor in southwestern Michigan begins in early June and
continues throughout the summer until the latter part of October. The largest
number of workers is required for the overlapping berry and cherry harvest in
June and July.
Strawberries begin to ripen about June 1 and at the height of the season pro-
vide emp'oyment for from 4,000 to 5,000 workers. By the end of June cherries,
raspberries, dewberries, and blackberries are ready to harvest, and these crops
require from 10,000 to 12,000 workers.9
After the berry harvest is finished there follows a relatively slack period of 2
or 3 weeks, the length depending on weather condition. Apples begin to mature
at this time but the total labor demand is at the lowest point for the harvesting
season. Early peaches are ready to harvest by the end of August, the peak being
reached by the middle or the end of September. Pears, grapes, tomatoes, melons,
and apples add to the demand for labor through September and October. During
the peak of the peach season from 7,000 to 10,000 workers are needed for picking
and packing operations in the county.
The demand for seasonal labor has increased considerably in the past decade.
Table 4 shows a marked expansion of berries, cherries, peaches, tomatoes, and
melons between 1930 and 1940. Increases are shown in number of both bearing
(51.4 percent) and nonbearing (123.7 percent) peach trees and of bearing cherry
trees (117.8). On the other hand grapes, still an important crop, are declining
in importance rather rapidly. During the decade 1920-30 the number of bearing
» These and other estimates of labor demand are based on statements made by farmers and other persons
familiar with the agriculture of the county.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7925
grapevines increased by 245 percent.10 With the repeal of prohibition,11 and
because of grape diseases, many vineyards were turned to the production of other
crops. The number of vines in 1940 was little more than half the number in
1930. Grapes, however, do not reqiure the large numbers of harvest workers
that are required for other fruits and berries. Tomato and melon acreage fluctu-
ates greatly from year to year. Acreages increase when fruit crops are poor;
tomatoes and melons are planted to supplement income, and decrease when
those crops are heavy.
Table 4. — Acreages or number of trees, selected crops, Berrien County, Mich.,
1930-40
Strawberries, acres
Raspberries, acres
Blackberries and dewberries, acres
Cherries:
Trees not of bearing age
Trees of bearing age-,. __.
Peaches:
Trees not of bearing age
Trees of bearing age
Apples:
Trees not of bearing age
Trees of bearing age
Pears:
Trees not of bearing age
Trees of bearing age
Grapes:
Vines not of bearing age
Vines of bearing age
Tomatoes, acres
Melons, acres
1930
1,930
4, 575
1,134
80, 490
89,028
444, 565
763, 852
250, 143
434, 803
38, 822
331, 550
301, 339
, 557, 244
1,439
1,261
1910
2,972
5,760
1,271
84, 116
195, 187
994, 281
1, 156, 672
164, 978
587, 930
76, 221
325, 934
96, 041
4, 407, 122
3,541
1,532
Percent
increase or
decrease,
1930-40
+54.0
+26.0
+12.1
+4.5
+117.8
+123. 7
+51.4
-34.0
+35.2
+96.3
-1.7
-68.1
-41.7
+146. 1
+21.5
Source: U. S. Census, 1930, 1940.
The rapid increase in the acreages of labor requiring crops after 1930 may be
explained by three factors: (1) The improved competitive position, already
described, in fruit and vegetable production as prices declined, (2) the increased
emphasis on fruits and vegetables in the national diet, and (3) the supply of cheap
harvest labor made available by agricultural and industrial depression and by the
drought in the plains areas.
As the increased plantings of berries and fruits come into production it may be
expected that the demand for harvest workers will gradually rise. This will
certainly be the case in the immediate future as trees already planted begin to bear.
With improving prices for fruits and vegetables and with increasing emphasis by
Government officials upon the desirability of expanding such crops at the expense
of field crops, it appears likely that this increase in the Berrien County seasonal
labor demand will continue as long as suitable land is available for expansion.
Seasonal labor supply in agriculture.
Prior to 1930 the demand for migratory seasonal workers in southwestern
Michigan was small. Farmers diversified their plantings in such a manner that
most of the harvest work could be handled by family labor. Itinerant single
workers furnished such labor as could not be supplied by farm families or local
people.
After 1930 acreages in labor-requiring crops expanded rapidly, as described in
the preceding section. A factor explaining this increase was the large supply of
cheap labor available after 1929. This was partially a result of the general
industrial depression which made many local nonagricultural workers available
for farm employment. More important, however, were the distressed conditions
of 'plains agriculture, brought on by depression and intensified by drought.
Throughout the decade people from Arkansas and southeastern Missouri formed
i° TJ. S. Census, 1930.
11 Enactment of the eighteenth amendment resulted in the purchase of large quantities of bulk grapes for
use in nearby population centers. This demand ceased when wine from more distant vineyard areas was
again legally available.
7926 DETROIT HEARINGS
the largest part of the migratory farm worker supply in the area. This attraction
to Berrien County was explained very largely by publicity the county received in
Arkansas in 1931. At that time many people in Arkansas were suffering seriously
from the effects of the severe crop failure of the 1930 season. Citizens of Berrien
County undertook to alleviate this suffering by collecting and shipping to Arkansas
truckloads of food, clothing, and other necessities. The gesture of good neighbor-
liness was widely publicized in Arkansas. Berrien County, Mich., became to
many people in that region of the South an oasis toward which they turned their
conveyances when dislodged from their land.
A small initial migration was sufficient to stimulate a large movement. Reports
of high wages filtered back by letter and by word-of -mouth. Reports of earnings
of $5 and $6 a day picking cherries or peaches failed to mention that these earnings
were made only on special days which were few in number. The movement grew
steadily throughout the decade.
Tn July of 1940 the Labor Division of the Farm Security Administration con-
ducted a survey of migrant workers in Berrien County.12 Detailed schedules were
taken from 120 single workers and from 137 heads of families. It was found that
106, or 41.2 percent, of the persons interviewed considered Arkansas as their
permanent residence. Missouri was considered "home" by 55, or 21.4 percent.
In 1941, a year later, farmers, officials, and other observers agreed that the per-
centage of people from Arkansas and Missouri had increased considerably over
the previous year, estimates ranging between 75 and 90 percent.
Migration to Michigan is seasonal. Most of the workers return to Arkansas
or to other Southern States in the fall to supplement their earnings by cotton pick-
ing. Fears are occasionally expressed by local residents that these migrants will
remain in the county during the winter and become a relief burden. While some
relief is extended to migrants before harvesting starts, and during slack periods in
the summer, almost all migrants leave at the end of the season without pressure
and without assistance.13
The majority of these workers return to Berrien County year after year. In the
Farm Security Administration study, it was found that only 87, or 34 percent, of
those interviewed were in the county for the first time. On the other hand, 68,
or 26 percent, had worked one or more previous years for the employer for whom
they were working at the time of the survey.
Opinions differ as to the quality of the labor supply. Some farmers believe
that the southern workers are shiftless and lazy and will hire them only if they
can secure no other workers at the wages they are willing to pay. This attitude
probably is due largely to the fact that farmers often expect migrants born and
raised on southern cotton farms to handle efficiently specialized tasks such as
milking, pruning, or spraying, for which some experience is needed. Most
employers, however, are well satisfied with southern labor, some asserting they
prefer it to local labor. The manager of a large Benton Harbor fruit-packing
plant stated that he has been using southern labor for 4 years and found it very
satisfactory. An official of the local cannery summed up the situation in this
way, "They aie like any other group. Some of them are dumb as hell; some of
them are mighty fine people." As local industrial employment opportunities
increase, farmers are depending moie and more, whether they like it or not, on
migratory southern workers untrained for and generally unable to obtain regular
industrial employment.
Labor recruiting.
Until 1941 no labor-recruiting system was necessary in southwestern Michigan.
In 1932 one large grower is the county made a trip to Arkansas and arranged to
import by truck about 200 workers.14 The initiative, however, has in general
been taken by the workers rather than by the employers. They left Arkansas
because of necessity — -they went to Berrien County because they were told some-
thing about conditions there. As pointed out above, many families have returned
year after year to work for the same farmer. Correspondence between the
employer and his workers informed the migrants of the condition of the crops
and as to when work would be available. When workers arrived in Michigan
they went either to the farm on which they had previously worked or they applied
for work from farm to farm. Farmers, assured of an abundant supply of workers,
found no necessity of organizing a recruiting service.
1! A report based on this survey is included elsewhere in this volume.
'3 Chicago hearings of select committee, pt. 3, pp. 1243, 1244.
i< Ibid., p. 1236.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7927
In 1941, however, newspapers and periodicals all over the country carried
stories of anticipated labor shortages due to industrial expansion. Farmers be-
came concerned and began to act. Michigan Fruit Sponsors, Inc., an organization
of growers and fruit exchanges, formed to advertise southwestern Michigan
agricultural products, had been using time on Chicago radio stations WLS and
WMAQ. In April and May, well before the cherry and berry harvest, this organ-
ization inserted announcements in their regular programs relative to labor short-
ages in fruit areas of the State. These announcements continued from time to
time as the season developed.15 The determination of whether or not a shortage
was imminent was made by the director of publicity of the organization after
consultation with members of the board of directors. No check was made with
the area office of the Michigan State Employment Service to see how much
unemployed labor was available or to secure the judgment of the State officials
as to how best to remedy any employment situation which had arisen.
The results of this attempt at radio recruiting are uncertain. The stations
which were used serve principally areas which have not been important sources of
Michigan fruit workers in the past. Of 68 inquiries received by the Benton
Harbor Chamber of Commerce concerning these announcements, 38 came from
Illinois, 17 from Indiana, 6 from Wisconsin, 3 from Michigan, and 2 each from
Iowa and Missouri. Most of those who wrote were workers seeking year-round
farm jobs or high school and college boys interested in steady jobs for the summer.
These announcements may have contributed to the increase in supply of mi-
grant workers in the early part of the season, a condition discussed in a following
section.
During the 1941 season the Michigan State Employment Service established
a systematic attempt to place agricultural workers. An employment office was
established on the grounds of the Benton Harbor Market and posters were sent
out, urging farm workers to apply. Upon application at the office, workers were
referred immediately to jobs in the surrounding area, or, if no job orders were on
file, were told to report back from time to time. The records kept of applicants
were meager — a mere listing of the name of the applicant and the number of
workers in his party. More detailed records were not kept on the grounds that
applicants rarely had permanent mailing addresses and were continually moving
from place to place in search of work.16
The employment service at the beginning of the season prepared and sent to
over 5,000 farmers in the area work orders to be filled out and returned as soon as
it was possible to determine needs. By May 30, 464 of these orders had been
returned. By August 13 approximately 2,400 agricultural placements had been
made and no orders had gone unfilled for either seasonal harvest hands or for
regular farm hands.
This agricultural placement service in its first year of operation suffered from
several handicaps. Workers registered only after exhausting the possibilities of
getting work for themselves. The office was of necessity located in Benton
Harbor, the center of marketing activities and of farmers' business, but not the
center of the producing region. This location made it necessary for workers, in
order to use the service, to drive in from outlying fruit areas to the office and then
out again. Most farmers, accustomed to having plenty of workers apply at the
farms, neglected to use the service until late in the summer when it was evident
that the usual oversupply of labor was not forthcoming. Then the requests were
often received only when crops were ready to pick, making it impossible for
placement officials to advise workers of jobs available in the near future.
In 1941 for the first time, Mexican workers from sugar-beet areas appeared in
the southwestern fruit counties during the period between sugar-beet hoeing and
sugar-beet topping. Fruit and vegetable growers, and other people interviewed,
seemed pleased at this development and look to its growth to offset anticipated
labor shortages in coming seasons. Several reasons were given to account for the
enthusiasm expressed in this regard. Mexicans are thought to be excellent workers
who won't leave in the middle of the season. The farmer has to deal with only one
or two leaders in order to provide himself with a crew.
16 In reply to a request from the committee's staff for dates and transcripts of these announcements station
WLS replied, "We are sorry that we cannot give you transcripts of the announcements regarding the need
for farm laborers in southwestern Michigan, since these were ad lib and not from script, but simply explained
the situation informally on our noon 'farm program.'"
16 Factual information concerning the placement sprvice was furnished by W. T. Arend, manager, and
George Daly, farm representative, Benton Harbor office, Michigan State Employment Service.
7928 DETROIT, HEARINGS
Migrant living and working conditions.
Living and working conditions ot southwestern Michigan fruit workers are
described in detail elsewhere in committee hearings.17 These data are supple-
mented in the present volume by the study of the Farm Security Administration
made last year. This study reveals that during the week preceding the interviews,
411 people earned an average of $2.89. In that week the cherry harvest was
almost ended, and work was scarce. However, those interviewed (single men and
family heads) reported an average yearly income from earnings of only $394.
This figure includes the contribution to earnings by all family members.
This study also confirms reports on the inadequacy of housing for migrants.
Only 39 of the 257 persons interviewed were living in houses, 55 in labor cabins,
16 in garages, and 7 in barracks. The remaining 140 were living in makeshift
shelters ranging from barns, tool sheds, and chicken sheds, to cedars, tents, and
truck bodies. Generally shelter or space was furnished without charge. Only
16 persons reported that they paid any rent.
The Farm Security Administration has considered the establishment of migrant
labor camps in the county in order to alleviate the housing conditions during the
harvest season. Strong opposition was manifested to such a program. At a
public meeting called to discuss the question some growers expressed the fear that
the establishment of such camps would lead the workers to organize unions.
Others expressed the belief that the health and public order of the county wouid be
threatened by concentrations of agricultural workers. According to the Benton
Harbor News-Palladium, "Growers attending last night's meeting were mostly
large producers who employ large numbers of migrant workers each year. Most
of them opposed the proposal for camps, but the limited representation of small
growers appeared to favor the plan."18
Some of the larger growers prefer that the migrants live on or near their farms
so that they will be immediately available when they are wanted.
Labor shortage.
It has already been mentioned that the farmers of Berrien County became con-
cerned about labor shortage before the harvesting season began. This concern
appears to have been caused by newspaper reports and encouraged by data
released from time to time by the Agricultural Marketing Service of the United
States Department of Agriculture.
The Agricultural Marketing Service collect their data through the medium of
questionnaires mailed to farmers who serve as crop reporters. Included in these
reports are estimates on the supply of, and the demand for, farm labor as a per-
centage of normal. Instructions to reporters are to "Report percent of present
farm labor supply and demand at current wage rates, in comparison with the
normal supply and demand at this time of year.19 From the two figures thus
secured the Agricultural Marketing Service calculates the supply as a percentage
of demand. The Agricultural Marketing Service has long emphasized that their
reports on the supply of, and demand for, labor refer to the situation existing at
"current wage rates." They have also insisted that "The supply and demand
percentages serve only as a relative indication of where farm labor is considered
to be ample or short and are not useful as a basis for definite quantitative measure-
ment of a deficiency or surplus of farm labor." 20
The service reported the April 1 supply of farm labor in Michigan to be 66
percent of demand. By July 1 the ratio had fallen to 50. These figures were the
lowest of any State in the country. The U. S. Department of Agriculture's
Michigan office in a bulletin published in January of 1941 stated:
"In years when industrial employment is at a high level, many laborers move
from rural districts into the cities, and the supply of farm labor is reduced below
the level of the number needed for agricultural production. Such a situation has
prevailed during 1939 and 1940. During these 2 years industrial activity has
steadily moved upward, and the ratio of supply to demand with respect to farm
labor has declined almost as uniformly. It is interesting to note the comparison
of this ratio at the present time with that which prevailed during the worst
depression years, 1931 to 1934. With a further market increase in industrial
activity in prospect for at least the next 1 or 2 years, it is probable that Michigan
farmers are facing the most serious shortage of farm labor in the history of the
17 Chicago hearings, pt. 3, pp. 1220-1271.
18 December 20. 1940.
" 1941, (ictu'ral Schedule, Form C. E. 2 5777, Agricultural Marketing Service, U. S. Department of
Agriculture.
20 First Interim Report of Select Committee, p. 47.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7929
State * * *. A short supply of farm workers will add to the difficult situation
for fruit and truck crop growers whose operations require the employment of a
large number of extra workers for certain definite periods during the crop season."21
These figures and statements, based originally on reports and opinions of
individual farmers lent authoritative weight to complaints of labor shortage and
occasional increasing concern among those interested in Michigan agriculture.
Validity of Estimates in Light of Experience.
There undoubtedly has been a scarcity of general farm labor, at current wage
rates, in Michigan this year. However, the scarcity of harvesting labor in the
fruit and vegetable areas of the southwestern part did not materialize until late
in the summer, and with the exception of one short period, was never so serious
as to cause crop losses.
Farmers in Berrien County and other southwestern counties complained about
their inability to hire dairy help and general farm hands. Many workers, sons of
farmers and hired hands, had left the farm. Some had been drafted. Many
more had been lured to industrial plants by wages far above those that farmers
felt they could pay. Many farm operators themselves had taken jobs in nearby
manufacturing plants. The result was a scarcity of relatively skilled farm labor —
labor trained for such operations as tractor driving, pruning, spraying, milking,
and supervising harvest workers. Farm hands and sons of farmers are not
remaining on farms at $40 to $50 for thirty 10- to 14-hour days when they can
earn perhaps three times that much, or more, for four 40-hour weeks. Moreover,
farmers who have complained about a shortage of hired hands have not, in many
cases,-sought the help of the employment service. On August 13 the manager and
the farm placement representative of the Benton Harbor office of the Michigan
State Employment Service stated that that office had been able to fill all requests
for seasonal labor, dairy hands, and general farm hands, as of that date.
With regard to the supply of seasonal labor in southwestern Michigan, not
only were shortages absent, but there was an actual over-supply until after Labor
Day. Both the berry and the cherry crops were large. As pointed out above,
farmers became worried and attempts to secure labor were intensified. But in
August all persons contacted in the region agreed that the supply of labor had
been greater than in any previous year — and more than enough to satisfy the
demand. As one county official put it, "Why, we had plenty of labor during the
cherry season; turned them away by the dozens. Everybody was happy."
The most authoritative statement in this connection was made in a letter to the
committee staff by Mr. W. A. Godfrey, secretary-treasurer of Michigan Fruit
Canneries, Inc. He stated, "I have talked with growers relative to labor shortages
for picking peaches. With the influx of labor when it was most needed during the
cherry and berry season, there was more than ample help. These people were
without employment for some time and a big percentage returned to their homes
in the South. It now appears for a short period during the harvesting of Elberta
peaches that there is an acute shortage. My observations would indicate that this
is for a period of approximately 2 weeks only.22
During the last 2 weeks of August and the first week in September growers were
beginning to worry about the adequacy of the supply of peach pickers when the
peak of the peach harvest was reached. Apparently these fears were somewhat
better founded than those felt earlier. By September 5 orders in the farm place-
ment office were in excess of workers available. Mr. Godfrey, in the letter quoted
above points out a 2-week shortage in peaches during September. The investi-
gators have been informed, however, that no actual crop losses clearly resulting
from labor shortage have been sustained during this period. A letter under
date of September 18 from Mr. Edward L. Cushman of the Michigan State
Employment Service, Detroit, to the committee states:
"In reply to your letter of September 8, 1941, addressed to Mr. Daly, *you are
advised that it is difficult to determine whether or not any peaches were actually
lost because of an inadequate number of pickers and packers.
"A study that was made showed that about 125,000 bushels of peaches were
not marketed, but that this condition cannot be attributed solely to the lack of
help. During the harvest of this crop the weather was unusually warm for a few
days and as a result the crop ripened in advance of the time originally anticipated.
In many instances peaches which were too ripe for marketing were sold at reduced
prices for local consumption."
. 21 U. S. Department of Agriculture, in cooperation with Michigan State Department of Agriculture,
Lansing, Mich., 1941. Annual Crop Summary, 19Jfi.
32 Letter to committee, dated September 2, 1941.
7930
DETROIT HEARINGS
It appears, then, that while there has been a scarcity of general farm labor at
current wage rates, the shortage of seasonal labor, to the extent that it developed
at all, was vastly exaggerated.
Mr. Godfrey's letter, quoted above, indicates that the influx of labor in the early
part of the season was so great that many migrants could not find employment
and returned to their States of origin.
The over-supply of labor in Berrien County has therefore been ascribed in some
measure to publicity given to supposed shortages, based on data supplied by the
Agricultural Marketing Sen ice. It appears that data of the Agricultural Mar-
keting Service not only failed to prove "of real value as indicators of the need for
hired help and the availability of persons to fill this need,23 " but actually oc-
casioned or substantiated misleading reports of labor shortage.
Experience in Michigan during the 1941 season also has raised the question
whether any estimates of farm labor supply and demand can be other than
inaccurate when they are made on a State-wide basis. The estimates for Michigan
released by the Agricultural Marketing Service reflect in a general way the situa-
tion existing on general and dairy farms at current wage rates. They are not
applicable to the fruit and vegetable areas nor to other areas using large amounts
of seasonal labor. Column 3 of table 3 shows the average expenditure for labor
of farms in Michigan, by type of farm as reported in the 1930 census.24
Table 5. — Cash expenditure for hired labor— by type of farm, Michigan and Berrien
County, Mich.
Michigan
Berrien County
Type of farm
Percent
farms
(1)
Percent ex-
penditure
(2)
Average ex-
penditure
(3)
Percent
farms
(4)
Percent ex-
penditure
(5)
All farms
100.0
33.0
1.2
9.8
3.6
2.1
24.0
4.2
3.6
5.3
13.1
100.0
20.8
.9
9.5
12.7
5.4
23.9
8.3
3.0
.5
15.7
$117
74
91
113
412
298
117
231
71
11
140
100.0
15.5
1.3
2.1
45.0
2.5
9.3
1.0
2.9
3.3
17.2
100.0
General
7.8
Cash grain
Crop specialist
.4
1.2
Fruit
65.1
Truck
3.8
Dairy
9.2
Animal specialist
4.1
Poultry
1.5
Self-sufficient- .
.2
Abnormal or unclassified
6.6
Source: United States Census, 1930.
It will be noticed that while only 3.6 percent of all farms in the State are fruit
farms, these farms spent 12.7 percent of the cash expended for labor, an average
of $412 per fruit farm as compared with $117 average for all farms. These figures
indicate that fruit farms which hire large numbers of workers for short periods are
more important from the point of view of labor requirements than are the more
numerous general or dairy farms that require one, two, or a few men for the whole
year.
In Berrien County 45 percent of all farms are fruit farms (column 4). These
fruit farms expend 65.1 percent of all money spent for labor (column 5). General
farms and dairy farms combined represent 24.8 percent of all farms (as compared
with 55 percent for the State as a whole) and expend 17 percent of the amount
spent for labor. It would be an error to select an equal number of general, dairy,
and fruit farmers to serve as reporters of labor supply and demand in Berrien
County since fruit farms are so much the more important in the structure of the
county and so overwhelmingly important from the standpoint of labor expendi-
tures. Berrien County general farmers have some idea of the supply and demand
of harvest workers in their county, but general and dairy farmers to the east and
to the north cannot be expected to have any exact information of conditions in
Berrien County or other seasonal crop regions. Estimates of labor supply and
demand are heavily weighed by the opinions of these general and dairy farmers,
because the data are collected and the estimates made on a State-wide basis. This
« Agricultural Marketing Service, A New Technique for the Estimation of Changes in Farm Employ-
ment, January 1940.
24 1940 data not yet available.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7931
explains why the supply and demand ratio for Michigan stood at 50 at a time
when there was plenty of labor available in southwestern fruit areas. The 50 ratio
was the result of estimates of supply and demand based on the ability of crop
reporters to hire one or two general farm or dairy hands.
A memorandum to the committee from the Department of Agriculture states,
"If, as appears likely, the migratory class of labor is less fully represented in the
reported series than regular farm hands, this would tend to minimize rather than
exaggerate the 'swings.' " 25 In the case of reported shortages, this would be true
only if those crop reporters who make their estimates in terms of seasonal labor
requirements reported shortages of greater magnitude than the shortages reported
by other crop reporters who report hi terms of shortages of year-round hired hands.
If estimated shortages were of the same magnitude for both types of labor there
would be no tendency to minimize or exaggerate the "swings." If, on the other
hand, shortages are believed to exist by those who report in terms of hired hands,
but not by those who report in terms of migratory workers, and if the migratory
class is less fully represented in the series, then it follows that the "swings" will
be exaggerated.
Exaggerated estimates of shortages appear in southwestern Michigan and else-
where. Farmers in many regions are complaining about the way in which the
draft and industrial acitivity are siphoning off their regular farm help. But few
migratory workers are fitting into the industrial boom. Some are getting the
more unskilled jobs; others are filling farm vacancies created by the departure of
more experienced farm sons and farm hands; most of them are still available for
seasonal harvest work in the usual areas. Reliable farm labor estimates can be
made only on the basis of small areas delineated on a type-of-crop basis. Even
then, inaccuracies would result unless a clear-cut division was made between
seasonal labor and regular farm hands in the reports.
Next year, and in subsequent years during the emergency, farmers in this area
may find their usual labor supply curtailed. Some Arkansas and Missouri
migrants expressed the belief that with cotton-picking wages at $1 a hundred
pounds they could realize a greater yearly net income by staying in the South.
Higher wages in Michigan will be necessary to overcome the preference of these
migrants to stay at home. It is possible that a greater scarcity of labor, at wage
rates farmers now believe they can pay, is in prospect.
With regard to shortages of regular farm hands, changes are taking place
similar to those in the field of seasonal labor. Retired farmers are resuming the
operation of farms previously managed by sons or employees. Women are hand-
ling light work for which sufficient farm hands are not available. As long as the
disparity between farm and industrial wages remains so great, it is to be expected
that this situation will continue. There is, of course, a possibility that the
shortage of farm hands will be eliminated by industrial lay-offs occasioned by
defense priorities and by the failure of defense industries to absorb the workers
dismissed as consumer-goods industries are curtailed. Industrial workers of
recent rural origin may return to farms when faced with industrial unemployment.
Many farmers are mechanizing their operations. Actual or anticipated labor
shortages may be partly responsible, although other factors probably are more
important in explaining this tendency. Sales of farm machinery have been
increasing since the introduction of tractors and equipment adapted for relatively
small acreages and diversified agriculture. The increase in sales has been at a
much greater rate this year.
Most tractor sales are made in the spring of the year. Implement dealers
estimate their sales of tractors and equipment this year to have increased from 40
to 80 percent over the same period last year. Most of the sales accounting for the
increase were made to the operators of small farms. Labor shortages are not the
major cause of tractor purchases by these small operators, since they hire little or
no help. Some of these farmers are buying tractors so that they can take jobs in
industry and do their farming in their free hours. Most sales can be accounted
for, however, by the fact that only in the last 3 years have small, low-priced tractors
been available. As farm income has risen, more and more small farmers have
invested in farm equipment, many of them believing that if they don't buy this
year, prices will be too high for them to buy later. So far there is little evidence
in southwestern counties of a tendency for farmers to attempt to buy or rent
more land in order to utilize machinery more economically. When, and if, the
present boom is over and farm prices sag, farmers will probably be forced to utilize
their machinery to its full capacity in order to meet the charges against their
operations. This situation will make it imperative to expand acreages whenever
possible.
*• First Interim Report of Select Committee, p. 48.
7932 DETROIT HEARINGS
Exhibit 53. — The Eastern Michigan Sugar-Beet Region
REPORT BY LABOR DIVISION, FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D. C.
The Saginaw Valley district of east-central Michigan has felt the impact of the
national-defense program, principally as it has affected the migration of sugar-
beet labor. Michigan is one of the leading sugar-beet-growing States in the
country,1 and annually imports between 7,000 and 12,000 workers from other
States to meet the major part of the demand for additional labor in the sugar-beet
fields.
About 65 percent of the total beet acreage harvested in the State each year is
concentrated in the seven counties that comprise Saginaw Valley (see table 6)
and a commensurate proportion of the beet-labor supply is assigned to work in
that region.
Labor migration to the sugar-beet districts of Michigan differs from the influx
of workers into the western counties of the State in two ways. First, most sugar-
beet labor is recruited and assigned to particular work areas in an industrially
organized manner under the supervision of chosen representatives of the sugar-
processing companies and of the growers' associations. Consequently, the majority
of workers in sugar beets are not forced into haphazard job hunting upon arrival
in Michigan as are the migrant fruit and vegetable workers. Secondly, the peak
demand for hand laborers in beets is concentrated in two distinct periods — early
summer and late fall — separated by a 2-month period of total unemployment in
the beet fields. During this recess, their search for work is conditioned by the
necessity to return to the beet fields by the end of September. In the fruit-and-
vegetable area, however, the harvesting of one crop follows without long periods
of delay the maturing of another so that a more or less continuous season of
summer employment may be secured within the broad area.
The conditions of employment for sugar-beet workers in Michigan are also
different from those of beet workers in the other principal producing States such
as California and Colorado. There are few large beet farms in Michigan that
conform to the large-scale pattern characteristic of western beet-growing areas.
Even in Michigan's areas of concentrated sugar-beet cultivation the average farm
size is less than 100 acres and the average size of beet patch per farm is only 9
acres (see table 6). Most of the cropland is planted in numerous other crops,
some of which require manual labor during the slack season in beets, whereas
in the West the beet-farming areas are highly specialized so that the opportu-
nities for intraseasonal employment of beet labor within the immediate area are
limited.
Moreover, the major sugar-beet-producing section of Michigan lies within easy
distance of the currently booming industrial centers that might be expected to
siphon off some part of the customary local farm labor supply and thus create
additional employment opportunities for outside beet labor.
Importance of the sugar-beet crop in Michigan agriculture.
The sugar-beet crop ranked fifth in the production of cash incomes to farmers
from the marketing of unconverted crops, during the period from 1930 to 1939.
During that decade, the farmers realized an average of approximately $5,000,000
in cash annually from the sugar-beet crop, exclusive of Government benefit pay-
ments. Among the cash crops grown in Michigan, this amount was exceeded
only by the incomes derived from the sales of beans, potatoes, wheat, and truck-
garden products.2
Though sugar beets constitute an important crop in the production of cash
incomes for Michigan farmers, only a small proportion of the total number of
growers in the State raise sugar beets. Furthermore, an extremely small per-
centage of the total tillable acreage is devoted to the cultivation of beets. In
1940, for example, 12,757 or 6.8 percent of all farmers in Michigan harvested
sugar beets (see table 6) and only 1 percent of the total cropland was utilized
for the sugar-beet deal.
The production of sugar beets occupies a comparatively important place in
certain counties. Beets are grown in 46 of Michigan's 83 counties — from Delta
County on the Upper Peninsula to Lenawee County on the southern border and
from Ottawa County at the western edge to Huron County in the eastern
» In 1939, it ranked fourth in acreage of beets harvested and sixth in total production in the Nation. U. S.
Department of Agriculture in cooperation with Michigan State Department of Agriculture, Annual Crop
Summary, 1940, Lansing, Mich., 1941, p. 8.
2 U. S. Department of Agriculture in cooperation with Michigan State Department of Agriculture
Annual Crop Summary, 1940, Lansing, Mich., 1941, p. 7.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7933
"thumb" region. As table 6 shows, however, more than 60 percent of the acre-
age harvested between 1937 and 1940 was concentrated in the seven east-central
counties that comprise the Saginaw Valley— Bay-Gratiot, Huron, Isabella,
Saginaw, Sanilac, and Tuscola.
Table 6. — Concentration of Michigan sugar-beet production in Saginaw Valley
region
Counties
Bay
Gratiot
Huron
Isabella
Saginaw
Sanilac
Tuscola
Total, 7 counties
Total, State
Percent 7-county acreage is of
State total
Acreage harvested, 1937-40 «
1937
Acxes
6,001
10, 523
6,809
7,946
6,821
6, 423
6,112
52, 634
75, 253
69.9
1938
Acres
7,994
13, 934
13, 449
13, 207
8,158
9,696
12, 734
79, 172
122, 653
64.5
1939
Acres
8,518
12,467
13, 387
12, 726
8,009
8,999
11,412
75, 518
117,644
64.1
1940
Acres
8,183
9,480
12, 714
13, 558
7,143
10, 706
11,087
72, 871
113,469
64.2
Proportion of farmers growing
sugar beets, 1940
Number
of farms
in
county 2
3,190
3,346
4,155
2,619
5, 362
4,897
4,459
28, 028
187, 589
13.9
Number
of farms
growing
sugar
beets i
1,192
1,186
1,087
755
1,257
1,106
1,221
7,804
12, 757
61.1
Percent
of farms
in county
growing
sugar
beets
37.0
35.4
26.2
28.8
23.4
22.5
27.3
27. &
6.&
i Data furnished by U. S. Department of Agriculture, Sugar Section.
2 United States Census of Agriculture, 1940.
In the production of cash farm income, the sugar-beet crop plays a more impor-
tant role in the Saginaw Valley region than in the State as a whole. In the
delineated district, a comparatively large proportion, or 27.8 percent, of the
farmers depend upon the beet deal for some part of their farm income. Bay
County has the highest percentage of beet-growing farmers and Sanilac the
lowest in the Saginaw Valley area. However, in the period between 1937 and
1940, the acreage of beets harvested in Sanilac County has increased from about
6,000 to 11,000. To some extent this increase represents the concentrated
activity of the sugar companies to compensate for the decreased number of
growers in other areas that resulted from the successful competition of other
crops. Farmers interviewed in Sanilac County this year were again less enthusias-
tic about the beet crop, since other crops — especially beans — are now so profitable.
The other major beet-growing counties are located around the periphery
of the "sugar-beet block." In Clinton, Shiawassee, Midland, and Arenac
Counties, between 10 and 25 percent of the farmers raise beets. Growers of
Lenawee County and the southwestern portion of Monroe also raise a considerable
acreage and some good beets are grown in the rich muck soils of Ottawa County.
In Ottawa County, however, the soil conditions are especially well suited for the
growing of certain truck crops, such as asparagus and celery. These specialty
crops yield a higher return per acre than do sugar beets so that the farmers
generally prefer them. In those instances where the farmers wish to be assured
of a certain, cash income, however, beets are grown.
The Saginaw Valley sugar-beet block.
The seven counties that comprise the Michigan sugar-beet block are located
in the east-central portion of the State jutting westward from the Bay region for
about 125 miles. The block is primarily an agricultural region although there
are many industrial plants in the major cities. These factories produced a wide
variety of products — gray iron, automobile parts, hoists, and processed foods.
Most of these plants have increased their output since the inception of the defense
program. To a large extent, they have drawn upon the agricultural labor supply
of the immediate and adjacent counties for additional workers.
The pattern of commercial agriculture in the Saginaw Valley district is deter-
* mined largely by three factors; namely, the qualities of the soil, the proximity
to urban centers and the comparative price positions of various cash crops.
7934 DETROIT HEARINGS
In Saginaw Valley, large sections of the land are composed of loams and silt
loams that are high in lime content, humus and other elements of fertility. The
region was originally wet or semiswampy, but the application of careful drainage
techniques has transformed it into good growing terrain. The topography is
level or gently rolling for the most part. Both the type of heavy soil prevalent
in the valley and the topography are favorable for beet cultivation. The soil
is also good for the production of other crops. Chief among these may be noted
beans, potatoes, chicory, wheat, corn and alfalfa hay.3 The last three crops are
grown principally to provide feed for the dairy herds and only a small proportion
is sold for cash.
Nearby urban centers such as Pontiac, Flint, and Detroit provide outlets for
Saginaw Valley dairy products and potatoes. Under the stimulus of the defense
program, the migration of industrial workers into these cities has increased and the
market for food products has expanded. Some agricultural representatives antici-
pate an increase in the size of dairy herds in 1942 and concurrently an expansion
of feed-crop acreages in this region.
Competition between beets and other cash crops for acreage is a third deter-
minant of the pattern of farm organization. The market for the entire sugar-
beet yield and the price to be paid for the crop are guaranteed before the planting
season by a contract between the sugar beet processing companies and the growers.
The contract stipulates the acreage of beets to be planted by the farmer and the prices
to be paid per ton of beets delivered. To some extent, the assurance of a cash
income provided by the contractual agreement tends to neutralize the competition
between beets and other crops and even to give beets an advantage in years when
market and crop prices are low. If the prices of alternative cash products are
high or appear to be rising, the farmers will usually gamble on the market and limit
the acreage of beets on their farms. This year, the rivalry between sugar beets
and other cash crops — particularly beans — has been unusually keen because the
demand for beans has increased and the price has risen.
The average size of farms in the Saginaw Valley sugar-beet district is 96.1 acres.
The average sizes of farms in the counties under consideration range from 71.6
acres in Bay County to 117.1 acres in Huron.4 Comparison of census data for
1930 and 1940 does not indicate any marked trend toward larger farm units occa-
sioned by the merging of two or more individual enterprises. Farmers and county
agents interviewed in 1941, however, suggested that the increase of machinery
purchases this year had tempted some buyers to acquire more land. On the other
hand, most of the machinery purchased consisted of small tractors and combines
suitable for small farms. This suggests that there will be no immediate change
in the scale of farm operations.
The proportion of tenancy in the seven counties varied around the state average
of 17 percent in 1940. In Saginaw it was approximately 14 percent- in Gratiot
about 32 percent. In some cases, farms are rented to younger men by old farmers
who can no longer operate them themselves and who cannot afford to hire labor
or do not wish to do so. In some cases, the figures reflect the custom of per-
mitting a migrant family to "rent" some land from the farmer by clearing it for
him. In such cases, the tenant pays no cash. He does receive the use of the land
for planting his own crop the fiist year. This practice, however, appears to be
quite infrequent.
Production of sugar beets.
Between 1937 and 1940, the number of acres of sugar beets harvested in the
State increased by 38,215 acres. Approximately two-thirds of this increase
occurred in the seven major sugar-beet-growing counties in the Saginaw Valley.
Between 1939 and 1940, however, the acreage of beets harvested decreased both
for the State as a whole and for the seven major counties. It is expected that
the acreage to be harvested in 1941 will be much less than that of 1940.
The reasons most commonly advanced to explain the decline in sugar-beet
acreage are: (1) The decrease of the State allotment and (2) the competition
offered by other crops. A third factor is the destruction of part of the crop by
adverse climatic conditions and disease.
The cancelation of acreage contracts by the farmer before the crop has been
planted varies from year to year and from area to area with the attractiveness of
other crops. In one factory district in Saginaw Valley, approximately 3 percent
of the contracted acreage was not planted in 1939; this rose to about 10 percent
a Hill, E. B., Types of Farming in Michigan, Special Bulletin No. 206, Michigan State College, East
Lansing, 1939, pp. 20-21.
« United States Census, 1940
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7935
in 1940 and dropped to roughly 8 percent in 1941. Most of the county agents
attributed the cancelation of contracts in 1940 and 1941 to the rising prices offered
for other products. This year, most of the best acreage canceled was planted in
beans. The popularity of the bean crop increased when the Government pegged
the price at a minimum of $5 per hundredweight on the Atlantic seaboard. In
Michigan bean prices vary around $4.25 per hundredweight — about $2.40 higher
than last year.
In some districts the cancelations of beet contracts have been so numerous
that the processing companies took steps to fill their 1941 quotas and to protect
future allotments. Isabella Sugar Co., for example, rented 100 acres and the
St. Louis plant of the Great Lakes Sugar Co. rented about 65 acres on which to
grow sugar beets. Most of the company representatives held that it was bad
policy for them to grow their own beets because such activity would complicate
their position at the annual price-determination conference. They professed their
intention of withdrawing from the growing phase of the industry as soon as they
are assured that their allotted acreage will be filled.
The third factor that may effectuate a reduction in the acreage of beets har-
vested is adverse climatic conditions and attack by disease. This year, for ex-
ample, an early frost destroyed over 1,000 acres of beets in Saginaw County alone.
A severe drought later in the season has also had an adverse effect upon the an-
ticipated yield per acre. In Isabella and Gratiot Counties last year, the black-
rot disease destroyed a large part of the crop.
Most of the agricultural representatives do not entertain the notion that the
reduction of beet acreage this year due to the increased attractiveness of other
crops constitutes the commencement of a long time declining trend. They sug-
gest, instead, that the competition between beets and other crops has alwaj^s been
present. Most of the reduction in acreage this year is due to a reduction of 17
percent in the acreage allotted to the State by the Department of Agriculture
between 1940 and 1941. The disparity between the acreage allotted and the
amount planted, however, is due to the intensified competition between crops
occasioned by the peculiar circumstances of the defense program.
Marketing of sugar beets.
The sugar-beet crop differs from most agricultural commodities in that the
terms of the purchase agreements are determined between the processors and the
growers some time before the planting season. This procedure has the net result
of assuring the sugar manufacturing company of a supply of beets and the grower
of some cash income for his product at a predetermined price.
In Michigan, the price to be paid for beets is established early in the year at a
conference between the sugar companies and the representatives of the growers'
associations. Besides price, the terms of the contract establish particular pro-
cedures with respect to the purchase of seed from the sugar company, the planting
method, the transportation of the crop, the rights of the company in examining
the crop at any time during the growing season, etc.
Several factors enter into the relative positions of the processor and grower in
setting the price to be paid and the method and time of payment. For example,
the initial cost of constructing a processing plant is quite high and unless the sugar-
manufacturing company receives a sufficient supply of beets to keep the plant in
operation for about 3 months, the per unit costs of manufacture will be so large
that the return realized from the sale of sugar will be too low to warrant the opera-
tion of the plant. Therefore, competing plants are rarely constructed in the same
district. The actual effect of such procedure is to place any one company on a
quasi-monopolistic position in a given area. Of course, the grower may deliver
his beets to any plant that he chooses, but since the crop is bulky and perishable,
and since he must bear the cost of transporting the beets himself, he is under pres-
sure to sell at the most readily available market.
On the other hand, the price set must be such as to compensate the grower for
the risks involved in raising the crop. If the prices for alternative crops should
increase, the farmer may — and frequently does — cancel his contract. Thus, it is
generally maintained that a considerable portion of the disparity between the
acreage of beets contracted for and the acreage of beets harvested, in 1940, was
directly attributable to the enhanced attractiveness of other crops. In Bay
City, for example, the amount of beets delivered to the three plants last year was
so small that two of them have suspended operations this year. It is largely to
secure an adequate supply of the raw materials that the sugar companies will
cooperate with the growers to the extent of advancing funds, of waiting for the
payment for seed until the end of the season, and of aiding the growers to secure
and house a sufficient supply of labor.
7936
DETROIT HEARINGS
At present, payment to the growers in Michigan is made upon the basis of the
weight of the crop after delivery to the factory yard. The rate of payment is-
fixed at 50 percent of the "net proceeds" 5 per ton realized from the sale of sugar,
pulp, and molasses produced by the company calculated on an average of all beets
received. Part payment for the crop is made at stated intervals throughout the
year and full payment is usually not completed until all beets are processed.
Since this may run over into the following year, it has become a major source of
disagreement at the annual conferences between the growers and the companies.
Also, the processors usually include a clause in the contract that permits them to
refuse to accept any crop or part of a crop that they consider to be unsuitable for
manufacture.
In the final analysis, then, the market remains a buyers' market. The only
major bargaining weapon in the hands of the growers' associations is the right to
refuse to contract for beet acreage. Since the sugar-beet crop does constitute a
major cash income producer, the use that the growers' association makes of this
power is governed by the prices offered for alternative cash crops.6
Production and marketing of other crops.
Agriculture in the sugar-beet counties shows a wide diversification of crops
grown in the region. As one county agent pointed out: "We grow more than
52 different crops in this county." Besides beets, a considerable proportion of
the cropland is planted in potatoes, tomatoes, cucumbers, chicory, and beans,
as well as in corn, alfalfa hay, and wheat.
About 60 percent of the total tillable acreage in the sugar beet block is devoted
to the growing of hay, spring and fall grains, and corn. About 17 percent of the
land is used for pasture. Most of the grains and hay grown are used to feed the
numerous dairy herds. Proximity to the urban industrial centers plus favorable
physical conditions has made this area a profitable dairy region. According to
the 1940 census, approximately 25 percent of the whole milk sold in the State
by producers within the State was delivered by farmers from the 7-county region.7"
"The major labor-requiring crops grown in this region other than sugar beets
are potatoes, chicory, tomatoes, cucumbers, and beans. Table 7 shows the
number of acres in each deal harvested in the census year 1939.
Acreage of crops requiring hired labor in Saginaio Valley, 1939
Counties
Beets
Beans *
Chicory
Cucum-
bers
Potatoes
Tomatoes-
Bav
Acres
7.911
12, 2!il
7. 923
8, 504
12, 6.30
10, 757
12,314
Acres
19,319
21, 944
68. 801
12, .316
48,011
44. 868
46, 620
Acres
2, 032
Acres
274
55
44
102
679
94
310
Acres
6, 246
911
3,402
2,634
4,072
1.848
Acres
884
32
401
442
99
354
404
159'
Huron - -
6
162-
Sanilac -
4-
Tuspola
4
Total
72, 300
261, 709
3, 732
1,558
26, 000
1,251
i Dry field and seed beans (navy, pea bean, Great Northern, kidney, lima, pinto, lentils, etc.).
Source: U. S. Census, 1940.
In Bay County, potatoes have become an increasingly important cash crop in
the past decade. Acreage in potatoes has expanded until annual production has
far outstripped the needs of the immediate market and a large part of the crop is
now shipped to Detroit, Pontiac, Flint, and other industrial centers. Until 1941,
independent truckers came into the region and bought up the crop for resale to
the large wholesale markets in the industrial areas. The farmers depended com-
pletely upon the truckers to purchase the crop and to transport it to the wholesale
market. Consequently, the truckers could and did set the price.
{ "Net proceeds" is defined as the amount received by the company after the following deductions have
been made: Actual cost of out-bound freight, brokerage, cash discount, insurance, credit insurance, storage,
declines and allowance";, advertising and all expenses accruine after the sugar has been bagged that are
properly charsreable to the marketing of sugar, pulp, and molasses. Deductions are also made for all taxes
levied upon the processing, production, ownership, handling, possession or sale of sugar, pulp, and molasses.
The company reserves any differential accruing from the sale of sugar packed in other than 100-pound bulk
bass.
8 A more thorough analysis of the relationship between the processor and the producer may be found in
C. M. Nicholson, Preliminary Report with Respect to Processor-Grower Relations in the United States
Sugar Beet Industry, issued by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Sugar Section, 1938.
7 Based on data in United States Census, 1940.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7937
This year, however, the farmers went on strike and refused to sell the crop
until the price paid them by the truckers was more in line with the increased
prices that the crop was commanding at the wholesale and retail markets in the
cities. In retaliation, the truckers declared a boycott and some part of the crop
was spoiled. The strike was broken when one of the farmers arranged to have
his potatoes taken to market in Port Huron. Others followed suit and the
"strike" was ended. However, a potato growers' association has been formed to
provide a cooperative marketing service including more favorable transportation
facilities — so that next year the Bay County farmers may be independent of the
truckers. If the association does develop well, the acreage planted in potatoes
next year will probably be increased. This possibility is of some significance to
the migrant sugar-beet workers who depend upon the potato crop for part of their
intraseasonal employment.
All told, about 1,500 acres of cucumbers were planted in Saginaw Valley in
1939. It is variously estimated that the acreage has increased since then. Four
pickling companies operate in the area and a fifth company maintains salting
stations in several counties. Like the beet crop, the cucumber acreage is con-
tracted for at the beginning of the growing season. Since there are four companies
in the area, and since farmers cannot be compelled to deliver the cucumbers to
the company with which they have signed contracts, price setting is to some
extent determined by the growers as well as by the pickle companies. Last year,
for example, the cucumber harvest wras a poor one and the cash income realized
by the farmers was reduced. As a consequence, the farmers refused to contract
for pickles unless the price were increased before the growing season. In the case
of grade 1 and grade 2 pickles, all companies offered more this year than they did
in 1940 and some have increased the 1941 contract price. The crop this year is
again poor and the farmers are having some difficulty securing labor to pick the
pickles. The usual arrangement is for the grower to pay the picker one-half of
what he receives for the crop. Since the yield is poor and many of the pickles
of grade 3 quality, the cash yield is relatively low. The pickers have been demand-
ing a 60-40 division of the cash yield and the farmers have been asking that the
contracted price be increased. The workers have been completely unsuccessful
in changing the division of income paid but the farmers have been moderately
successful in securing the increased prices for grades 1 and 2.
Chicory is grown in six of the seven principal sugar beet counties. In 1939,
Bay County led these six with 2,000 acres in the chicory crop (see table 7). Since
then, however, the acreage has been somewhat reduced. It is difficult to deter-
mine who takes the initiative in the chicory deal. Company representatives
interviewed claimed that they were having difficulty getting farmers to sign con-
tracts to raise chicory. On the other hand, some farmers claimed that the com-
panies will not accept all applications.
A major problem in the chicory deal is to secure an adequate labor supply.
In the past, the provision of workers to harvest the crop was the concern of the
chicory companies. They used to recruit recent Belgian, German-Russian, and
Polish immigrants from industrial centers like Toledo and Cincinnati. To some
degree, they also depended upon the overflow of sugar-beet workers to harvest
the chicory crop which matures simultaneously with beets. At present, however,
the companies refuse to be involved in the intricacies and responsibilities of pro-
viding an adequate labor supply. Consequently, few farmers will agree to grow
more than the acreage they can handle themselves so that the chicory deal is of
no great importance in the scale of crops providing additional employment
opportunities for sugar-beet workers.
The bean crop has become very important this year. Partly as a result of
the increased demand for beans to supply the needs of the Army and for export
and partly as a result of the increased price that resulted from the floor established
by the Federal Government, the acreage devoted to beans has been expanded.
In certain counties, notably Saginaw and Gratiot, it is said that the major portion
of the cancelation of beet-acreage contracts has been due to the competition
between beets and beans.
For the most part, the labor necessary for bean harvesting has been supplied by
local agricultural labor. A large part of the bean crop was threshed last year.
This year, however, fear of a shortage of such labor, among other things, induced
many farmers to purchase small combines. In this way the labor requirements
are reduced from about 10 men needed on a threshing crew to about 2 or 3 men
per combine. In some few cases, migrant workers have been hired to help in the
bean harvest this year. This is a new field of employment for beet workers.
Examination of the pattern of agriculture in Saginaw Valley has revealed four
major characteristics that will govern the impact of the defense program upon
sugar-beet workers. (1) The principal beet-growing area of Michigan is rather
60396 — 41— pt. 19 12
7938
DETROIT HEARINGS
concentrated in the Saginaw Valley. (2) The farms in this district are of a size
that would require little additional hired labor were it not for the beet patches.
(3) The average acreage in beets per farm is small but the manual labor require-
ments are high. (4) Moreover, the competition for acreage between beets and
crops that require little additional labor is keen. It has always been a factor in
determining farm policy with respect to beet acreage. In a period such as this, the
competition ceases to be latent and becomes an extremely active determinant.
Partly as a concomitant of the small size of beet patches per farm and partly
to increase the comparative attractiveness of the best crop by assuring an adequate
supply of labor, the sugar-beet force is organized and distributed through coopera-
tion of the sugar company and growers' association in each factory district in a
manner that closely resembles industrial procedure.
Because of the active competition between crops for acreage, because of the
industry-like organization of the beet labor supply despite small acreage per farm,
and because of the diversification of labor-requiring deals in Saginaw Valley, de-
termination of the total impact of the national-defense program upon the migrant
beet workers in Michigan must take into account the effects it has had upon the
local agricultural labor supply as well.
Farm labor in the sugar-beet area.
There are four main types of labor utilized by farms in the sugar-beet areas:
Unpaid family labor; regular hired labor, retained on a monthly basis; seasonal
hired labor, retained on a daily or weekly basis; and sugar-beet labor, retained on
a contract basis. In practice, the personnel of these four kinds of labor force is
to some extent, interchangeable. Farm-family workers, for example, sometimes
secure summer day-labor work from neighboring farmers. Similarly sugar-beet
contract workers are sometimes hired for day labor.
Family workers are the core of the farm-labor force in the sugar-beet area.
In 1935, 84.2 percent of the farms in the seven-county area were operated entirely
by farm-family labor during the first week of January.8 This proportion, re-
flecting winter labor requirements in the area, describes the farm-labor force
when the minimum amount of hired labor is used.
Virtually all farms using hired labor in 1935 reported its use in conjunction with
family labor. Counting all types of workers reported, the mean average number
of workers per farm in January 1935 was 1.7.
Reports of the various types of hired farm labor used throughout the entire year
of 1939 supplement the 1935 data. From these earlier data, the proportionate
use of family and hired labor in the winter is indicated. The 1939 data, however,
expand the hired labor picture by reflecting the summer use of hired labor.
Approximately two-fifths of the farmers in the seven-county area hired farm
workers in the course of the year 1939. Regular monthly hired men were hired
by 12.7 percent of these farmers. More than one-fourth of the farmers reported
that they hired farm workers on a daily or weekly basis, and 13.9 percent reported
that they hired workers on "other" bases. In this area "other" would signify
contract sugar-beet workers for the most part.
Table 8. — Proportion of farms in 7-county area hiring labor and types of labor
hired, 1939
Percent of
all farms
hiring labor
Percent
hirin?
monthly
Percent
hirine daily
or weekly
Percont
hirinc
other,
including
contract
State
37.0
12.2
25.1
10.3
Bav
49.0
38.5
35.0
48. 1
42.1
41.7
40.7
10.9
11.7
13.1
15.4
11.0
15.5
11.6
32.9
26.4
21.9
33.5
26 2
25.0
29.0
21.9
Gratiot . .
14.5
Huron
8.1
Isabella
10.0
Sascinaw
16. 5
Snnilao . •
11.6
Tascola
11.2
7- county total 1
41.7
12.7
27.6
13.9
Source: U. S. Census, 1910.
8 United States Census of Agriculture, 1935
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7939
While census data do not provide a clear numerical picture of farm labor in the
seven-county area, they do irdicate the relative importance of the various types of
farm labor in that area. They show that many farms are operated by 2 or 3
year-round woikers and that most of these are family laborers. They 'also indi-
cate that in the course of a year additional workers are required. Summer day
laborers are lured by 27.6 percent of the farmers, and about half as many farmers
hired summer contract workers.
Year-round workers.
In 1941 farmers in the sugar-beet area commonly reported difficulty in obtain-
ing good hired men. By this they meant that, even if they should offer as much as
$75 a month, they could not hire a regular hired man who would be worth this
expenditure. The gocd hired man shortage was compounded of a general increase
in the rate of pay to regular hired men and a decrease in the supply of experienced
general farm workers. In its ramifications, this shortage reflected depletions in
the family labor supply as well as in the regular hired man supply.
Two facts, a general increase in the wages paid to hired men and an increased
use of farm machinery, suggested the existence of a conditional shortage of regular
hired men. In 1940 regular hired men received from $30 to $40 per month. In
1941 monthly wages paid to regular hired men increased to $40 or $50. The
spread of wages paid farm labor in Michigan this year was very wide, however.
On one hand some few farmers are paying $75 per month; on the other the employ-
ment service had "difficult-to-fill" orders that offered $25 per month. These
rates carried, as in the past, certain perquisites. Single hired men received board
and room in addition to their cash wages, while married hired men received a
house, garden plot, varying amounts of farm produce, and sometimes fuel and
electricity.
Increased wages, however, did not appear to secure a wholly adequate supply
of regular hired men. Particularly in the farming areas near industrial centers,
the increase in wages was not large enough to offset the counter attraction of
nonagricultural wages. Farmers in the sugar-beet area generally believed that
they could not compete with industrial wage rates. One Saginaw farmer re-
marked, "If a man is worth $50 to a farmer, that man can get twice as much
in a plant."
But the drain of farm workers to industrial centers, was by no means complete.
Older hired men, particularly if they were married, were apt to be immune to the
attractions of defense employment. The increase in wage rates for hired men
reflected competition among farmers for a reduced supply of experienced hired
men, rather than an attempt to outbid industrial employers. Since the competi-
tion was confined to farmer-employers, the upper limits of wages to monthly
hands were set below minimum industrial payments.
Although some of the farmers did turn to machinery to compensate for the con-
ditional labor shortage, the total increase of combine and tractor sales was not
occasioned solely by the labor situation. There are no complete data of farm
machinery sales in Saginaw Valley in 1941. Available estimates, however, indi-
cate a considerable increase over 1939 and 1940 sales, especially in sales of small
combines and tractors. Managers of farm-equipment outlets estimate that
about 50 percent of the sales in 1941 represent replacements of old machines.
Also, they attribute a large part of the 1941 demand for farm machinery to the
fear of increased prices and reduced supplies in the very near future. A fourth
factor that may have contributed to the rising demand for machinery was ex-
pressed by one machinery salesman: "Farmers are good spenders when they
have money and this year they've got it."
Behind the increase in wages to hired men and in the purchase of farm ma-
chinery are two defense factors: The Selective Service Act, and defense-stimulated
industrial expansion in Michigan cities. The Selective Service Act drew upon
the supplies of family labor and single hired men, but the effect of the draft
appears to be exaggerated in the minds of the farmers. When requested, defer-
ment of agricultural workers until November was granted. Next year, however,
the labor force will probably be further reduced by the draft. Even should such
reduction be considerably more appreciable in the future, the loss of farm workers
to the Army will be insignificant in comparison with the drawing power of in-
dustrial employment.
Fundamentally, the heaviest drain upon year-round workers is the expansion
of industrial pay rolls in defense-stimulated production centers. Two such
centers, Saginaw and Bay City, are loated within the seven-county area. In
July 1940 there were 14,079 workers on the pay rolls of Saginaw's industry; in
7940 DETROIT HEARINGS
1941, there were 23,246. In February 1940 Saginaw counted 18,032 industrial
workers, as compared with 29,097 workers in February 1941. A similar but
smaller expansion occurred in Bay City. In July 1940, 7,415 workers were em-
ployed in Bay City plants, as compared with 9,882 in July 1941.
It is estimated that 80 percent of the expanded pay rolls in Saginaw represent
the hiring of local men. There appears to be considerable preference for farm
workers without previous industrial experience on the ground that less time is
required to train a new man than to retrain an experienced man. As a con-
sequence of the defense-stimulated paj'-roll expansion and of the hiring policies
of the expanding plants, many erstwhile farm family workers and hired men have
taken industrial employment.
Industrial expansion in the area has further contributed to the demand for
hired men on farms by attracting full-time farmers to the cities. For example,
the records of Farm Security Administration show that approximately 30 percent
of the standard loan cases in Saginaw and Bay Counties have become part-time
farmers — farmers outside of factory hours — "for the duration." In Isabella
County, more distant from industrial expansion centers, it is estimated that
perhaps 10 percent of the cases have cut operations to a part-time farming basis.
These new part-time farmers have contributed to the demand for experienced
hired men. They seek $40-a-month hired men to replace them on their own farms.
Good hired men, while they work at $6-a-day factory jobs, however, are also at-
tracted by industrial employment. Consequently, the new part-time farmers are
unable to find replacements and, commonly, they reduce the scale and character
of their farming operations. In some cases, they acquire a small dairy herd,
since dairy chores can be done before and after factory hours. In other cases
they sell part of their dairy herds if the herds are too large for part-time care.
Shifts of cropland use from crops requiring summer care to hay and other feed
crops are also common. The net result of all of these adjustments, insofar as
farm labor is concerned, is that the part-time farm operator works longer hours
and his wife takes over part of his farm work.
The sugar-beet area has lost both family workers and regular hired men, partly
through the draft but mainly through defense-stimulated industrial expansion.
At the same time, the demand for hired men in this region has actually increased
with the shift to part-time farming from full-time farming.
In response to a tightened farm-labor market, wages to hired hands have
increased quite generally throughout the area. The farm-wage increase, how-
ever, has leveled off below the level of industrial wages; and consequently, has
had little effect in bringing the labor supply in line with current farm require-
ments. The major adjustments to the new situation have been some increased
use of labor-saving machinery and, in certain cases, reorganization of farm oper-
ations to reduce the labor required to operate the farm unit.
Shortage of day laborers.
In many respects, day-labor problems in the sugar-beet area resembles those of
year-round labor. In some quarters it was stated that there was a shortage of
good day laborers, and increased rates of pay to such workers were pointed to in
support of the allegation. In 1941 white workers were paid $2.50 to $4 a day,
including the midday meal, for summer seasonal jobs such as haying, harvesting
grain, or machine cultivating. Three dollars a day was the most common
wage. These 1941 rates compared with $1.50 to $2.50 for the same type of work
in 1940. Notwithstanding the increased rates of pay, many farmers complained
that they could not locate a summer hand who was worth his asking price. One
Saginaw farmer who usually rented acreage additional to his own 80 acres decided
to do day labor this year instead of working additional acreage. He had all the
work he could do at $4 a day.
A light crop in hay, and the return of temporarily unemployed workers from
nearby cities to harvest grain were factors easing the demand for day labor in
the area.
A further moderating factor was the use of contract beet laborers for general
farm work in the beet slack season. The 1941 situation has accelerated a practice
of some years standing. There is some evidence that these migrant workers were
paid less than the native workers for day labor. Moreover, they did not usually
receive the perquisite midday meal.
New purchases of machinery reduced the demand for day labor in the sugar-
beet area. Some of this 1941' buying can be attributed to the fact that farmers
feared labor shortages but perhaps the larger share was due to dissatisfaction,
with the traditional swap system of harvesting. In the past, it has sometimes
been customary for all farmers in an area to form a cooperative harvesting crew
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7941
and work on each farm as its crops ripened. In 1940, however, some farmers
took a loss on their grain and bean crops because the crew did not harvest them
before the rains set in. This experience induced some farmers to start buying the
newly developed small combines. In 1941 the reduction of local labor supplies
made it difficult to form a large enough cooperative threshing crew. Other
farmers also decided to avoid the complications involved in forming a crew by
purchasing combines.
The purchase of combines has in some cases increased the summer day-labor
work of the sugar-beet area farms. The hand-hoeing of field beans has become
more common in the area, because successful combining requires a minimum of
weeds. The increase of hoeing labor, however, has been smaller than customary
threshing labor needs.
The summer day-labor situation in the sugar-beet area contained symptoms
■of labor scarcity. Wage rates increased, and complaint of scarcity was common.
An actual shortage of this type of labor did not occur because no crops were lost.
Contract laborers.
The contract labor force is employed primarily for work in sugar-beet fields.
Recently, however, it has been supplying an increasing part of the labor demands
of other important cash crops both in the sugar-beet counties and other in agri-
cultural regions in Michigan and neighboring States. Insofar as the defense
program has induced farmers to alter the acreage proportions in various crops and
to the extent that defense activity has reduced the customary local supply of
agricultural labor, it has also affected the migration and employment of contract
laborers in Michigan.
The principal employment of contract laborers in the area is in sugar-beet field
work. For this work between 10,000 and 13,000 workers are employed annually
in the State. A recent study shows that 39 percent of the sugar-beet workers in
1939 were residents of Michigan, that 56 percent were migrants from Texas, and
that 5 percent were migrants from other States.9 There are no precise data
relating to the proportion of these workers in the Saginaw Valley counties but
estimates indicate that about two-thirds of the total force is employed in this
region. Beet work is highly seasonal. Between the early period of hoeing, block-
ing, and thinning and the final work in harvesting and topping there is a 2-month
period of complete idleness in beets. The first work ends in mid-July and the
topping period does not begin until about the third week in September.
The development of intraseasonal employment in the sugar-beet area illustrates,
on a small scale, the manner in which sugar-beet workers have come to a position
of key importance in many non-sugar-beet labor forces. Within the seven-county
area, the clearest example of this development is the use of beet workers as potato
pickers in Bay County. Some farmers place the beginning of this employment
pattern as early as 1932. Other farmers cannot remember when the Mexicans 10
started coming into the area, but simply have the impression that as potato acreage
increased each year more Mexicans appeared each year to pick them. In the
summer of 1941 potato growers repeatedly stated, "We don't know what we would
do without the Mexicans," but there seemed to be no organized recruiting of potato
pickers.
The Mexican sugar-beet workers are also employed to pick cucumbers during
the off season in the beet fields. It is estimated that one worker is required to
pick each acre of cucumbers. The recent increase of cucumber acreage in the
seven counties of Saginaw Valley has increased the demand for pickle pickers.
Today, the farmer relies more upon beet workers and less on his own family labor
to harvest the cucumbers.
As described above, the defense program has reduced the available supply of
resident farm labor and concurrently increased the job opportunities for contract
laborers. This year, this has been specially notable in the grain and bean harvests.
According to all reports, "if it had not been for the 'Mexicans' " it would have been
much more difficult to get through these harvests.
Outside the even-county area a similar gradual, uneven dependence upon sugar-
beet workers has developed. In some areas, such as the cherry areas around
Hart and Traverse City, the use of sugar-beet workers in non-sugar-beet work is a
fairly recent development. In others, such as the cannery bean area around Scott-
ville, the use of "Mexicans" is an established practice. Once sugar-beet workers
appear in a new crop labor force, there is a tendency for them to replace classes of
workers previously involved in these crop harvests.
e Thaden. J. F., Mexican Migratory Laborers in Sugar Beet Fields of Michigan, 1941 (unpublished).
10 In Michigan, the term "Mexicans" is commonly employed to designate the beet workers. Most of
"these are Texas citizens of Mexican antecedents.
7942 DETROIT HEARINGS
Two factors are involved in the potential replacement process; growers' prefer-
ence for sugar-beet workers, and the availability of these workers.
With few exceptions, preference for sugar-beet workers has followed their
appearance in new crop areas. Cherry growers, who are among the more recent
"discoverers" of sugar-beet workers, enumerate the advantages of these workers
as follows: They are more industrious and more stable than local workers. They
are easier to deal with than other types of workers, because transactions are
carried on through a single group leader. And, finally, it is believed that these
workers have a sort of racial aptitude for hand labor. Sugar beet, cucumber,
tomato, potato, bean, and pea growers have all preceded cherry growers in finding
out the desirable qualifications of sugar-beet workers. Their reasons for preferring
"Mexicans" duplicate those of the cherry growers.
The crucial factor in replacement is the availability of sugar-beet workers.
Notwithstanding the versatile character of summer employment, the number of
sugar-beet workers is determined, primarily, by sugar-beet acreage, and bears no
necessary relation to total summer labor needs.
The precise number of workers used intraseasonally in the seven-county area is
not known. It is estimated, however, that not more than one-fourth of the total
hired sugar-beet labor force was used in Saginaw Valley between the middle of
July and the end of September.
The relatively small labor requirements indicated by census data correspond
with local estimates. Although sugar-beet workers are essential to summer har-
vests in the seven-county area, the relatively small labor forces required by these
harvest affect only a portion of the seven-county sugar-beet labor force. The
major part of this force moves outside the area to other work locations in the intra-
seasonal period.
Although the intraseasonal employment of sugar-beet workers is of concern to
many Michigan farmers, intraseasonal placement shows only the most rudimentary
organization. Farmers wishing to hire sugar-beet workers during the intrasea-
sonal period may make arrangements with such workers personally, may apply to
the fieldman of the sugar company with which they are connected, who in turn
relays the offer to sugar-beet workers of his acquaintance; or they may apply to
third parties, such as pickle or canning company managers. These third parties
then apply to the sugar company fieldmen. In many cases, farmers simply rely
on the personal application of sugar-beet workers in search of intraseasonal
employment.
In 1941, the increased competition for sugar-beet workers during the intrasea-
sonal period accentuated the disorganization of what might be called the intra-
seasonal labor market. Farmers in some localities complained that there was a
near-shortage of pickle and cannery bean and tomato pickers, not because there were
fewer "Mexicans" in the locality, but because these workers moved around more.
Sugar-beet workers in one county would move to another on the rumor of more
advantageous working conditions. At the same time, sugar-beet workers in the
second county would move to the first on the same compulsion. The net effect
was a waste in man-days of labor, and considerable anxiety among farmers
concerning supplies of hand labor.
The 1941 cucumber crop was poor and the workers felt that they did not
receive adequate compensation for the time spent in the first picking. Conse-
quently, few "Mexicans" were willing to continue to work in the cucumber deal.
For example, 1 family of 5 workers spent 5 hours picking cucumbers and earned
16 cents each. They preferred to move to some other crop in which earnings
were greater. Furthermore, the resultant scarcity of pickers made it impossible
to pick over cucumber fields often enough to prevent the growth of "Jumbos" —
very large cucumbers which bring low prices from the pickle companies, if they
are bought at all. In the sense that a labor scarcity resulted in a depreciation
of the value of cucumber acreage, the farmers maintained that they experienced
a crop loss occasioned by labor shortage.
Some farmers and all of the sugar-beet workers questioned on this situation,
however, attributed the pickle picker shortage to the poor cucumber crop. The
low returns from pickle picking, however, indicate that, if the "Mexicans"
"jumped around" more than usual, the reason for increased mobility was that
they could not earn enough in pickles. Under pressure from farmers, the pickle
companies increased the prices paid for pickles about 20 percent, and consequently
the per hundredweight prices paid to pickers also rose. But the increase was
said to be not sufficient to offset the decline in earnings occasioned by the poor
crop.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7943
In most cases, relatively poorer earnings in particular crops were at the bottom
of labor scarcity. Disorganization of the intraseasonal labor market accentuated
these scarcities. Much of the intraseasonal movement of sugar-beet workers
from crop to crop was stimulated by rumor and was needlessly long. Neverthe-
less, there were some few attempts at organization. In Bay County, for example,
the sugar company wrote a letter to the County agricultural agent, offering to
cooperate with truck farmers in the placing of sugar-beet workers during the
slack season in beets. Some farmers did request tomato pickers of the sugar
company through the county agent as a result of this letter. In the area as a
whole, however, intraseasonal employment of sugar-beet workers is typically
haphazard.
The scarcity of workers in certain crops is reflected to some extent in the
increased wages. The minimum rates for sugar-beet work are set each year by
the Department of Agriculture. There was no change in rates paid for sugar-beet
work this year. Both for bean picking and cucumber picking, however, rates
have increased over those paid in 1940. The average rate for bean picking last
year was 75 cents per hundred pounds. This year the workers received $1 per
hundred pounds and, in some cases, $1.25. The remuneration for cucumber
picking increased with the prices paid for pickles since the workers receive 50
percent of the crop yield per acre. Potato pickers received 3 cents per bushel in
most cases. This is the same as the 1940 rate. A few farmers, however, were
paying 4 cents per bushel. At the time the field investigation was made, prices
to tomato pickers were also the same as those of 1940, being 3 cents per 40-pound
crate. Some farmers, however, anticipated that the cost of tomato-picking might
increase later in the season.
Housing perquisites, and sometimes farm-produce perquisites such as milk and
vegetables, are attached to intraseasonal wages, but these are commonly poor or
of little value.
Defense-stimulated expansion of industrial employment has, apparently had
little effect upon the supply of sugar-beet workers in the seven-county area. The
reduction of other farm-labor supplies through defense employment, however,
has stimulated the demand for these workers. The increased use of sugar-beet
workers by general fruit and truck farmers during the intraseasonal period consti-
tutes, potentially, one of the most significant developments in the Michigan farm
labor situation in 1941.
Sugar-beet migration
The findings of investigations undertaken by the Federal and State govern-
ment, as well as by private agencies, have demonstrated that substandard levels
of living, inadequate housing, and social isolation are part and parcel of the sugar-
beet workers' lives during the period of residence in the producing areas in Michi-
gan.11 These conditions are now reported to have become of increased import-
ance as they affect the procurement of a labor supply sufficient to meet the needs
of the industry. Already increasing competition from Texas cotton growers has
caused some concern in Michigan.
Approximately 7,500 workers were brought into Michigan this year to work in
the sugar-beet fields from early Maj7 to late December. Most of these migrant
workers are Texans of Mexican origin. They are drawn primarily from the
spinach and cotton ranches around Crystal City and San Antonio. Today, the
"Mexicans" are employed almost exclusively in Michigan beet fields. They have
largely replaced the Belgians, Poles, and German-Russians who used to be im-
ported for beet work from nearby industrial centers like Detroit, Toledo, and
Chicago.
The farmers like the Texas workers because the\T are said to be quiet, hard-
working, and untroublesome.12 Moreover, they usually come up in family groups
of several adult workers who work well together. In the winter, most of them
return "over the horizon" to Texas and other Southwest States of origin and
allegedly do not remain in the area to become burdens on public charity.13
» See. particularly, U. S. Department of Labnr, Children's Bureau. Child Labor and the Work of Mothers
in the Sugar Beet Fields of Colorado and Michigan. (Bureau Publication No. 115, 1923); National Child
Labor Committee, Child Labor in the Sugar Beet Fields of Michigan, (Publication No. 310, 1923); United
States Immigrant Commission. Immigrants in Industries, pt. 24. Recent Immigrants in Agriculture:
United States Department of Agriculture, A. A. A., Hearing with Reference to Proposed Labor Provisions
to be Included in Beet-Sugar Benefit Contracts, (East Lansing, Mich.. September 21, 1934; Haber, William,
Sugar Beet Workers in Michigan (manuscript in files of Sugar Division, dated October 3, 1934).
>* Oklahoma Citv hearings of select committee, pt. 5. p. 1S45.
f » See H. Rept. 369, Report of Select Committee, p. 379, footnote 85.
7944 DETROIT HEARINGS
Recruiting of labor.
The recruiting of the labor supply is accomplished by means of very close
cooperation between the field men of the sugar companies and the beet-growers'
associations.
There are seven sugar companies operating in Michigan and seven major
"employment committees." The growers of each factory district belong to a
growers' association organized among those who deliver beets to a particular
factory. The president of each factory district growers' association represents
his local unit on the board of the employment organization of the company. Thus,
the'growers who deliver beets to each of the plants of the Michigan Sugar Co. have
formed growers' associations, the presidents of which represent them on the
Beet Growers' Employment Committee, Inc. — the central organization. The
growers who deliver beets to the Great Lakes Sugar Co. and the Lake Shore Sugar
Co. have formed local associations in each plant district. The central organiza-
tion is the Great Lakes Employment Committee. Similar arrangements have
been made by each company.
The membership of the central employment committee consists of the presi-
dents of the local growers' associations and the chief field man of the company.
This varies between companies. Some claim that the field man is not a member
but merely acts in the capacity of a coordinator of all employment effort.
Early in the year, the company field men visit the farmers to ascertain how many
workers they think they will need. The total number is usually determined by
the field men on the basis of seven contracted acres per man.
In the middle of April, the Acosta Labor Agency 14 in San Antonio is notified how
many workers are required. Usually, the chief field supervisor of each company
and a representative of each growers' association go to Texas to supervise the
recruiting of the labor supply. In addition to the Acosta Agency, some companies
employ an additional Spanish-speaking scout to round up a supply of workers and
bring them to the employment agency.
Some attempt is made to secure the same workers each year. The company
frequently keeps a record of the worker, number in the family and place of winter
residence. However, the number of experienced workers who return year after
year varies widely. In Saginaw, for example, it is extimated that only about
60 percent of the workers have had previous beet experience. In the St. Louis
and Isabella districts, on the other hand, the estimate of the proportion of experi-
enced workers arriving each year averages about 85 percent of the total supply.
Funds with which to pay the Acosta Labor Agency and from which to advance
money to the workers are usually supplied by the sugar company to its growers'
association. The amount is deducted from the first crop payment made to the
farmer, or from the first check given the workers if, as sometimes happens, the
laborers deal directly with the company.
Transportation.
The transportation of workers from Texas to Michigan has been one of the
major evils of the annual northward trek of sugar beet labor. Many of the workers
secure cheap transportation in trucks of other migrants or of those who make a
business of bringing workers to Michigan. Frequently as many as 40 persons
would crowd into one truck and stand all the way from Texas to Michigan.
To some extent, this procedure has been arrested by the action of the Inter-
state Commerce Commission. The sugar company employment committees are
attempting to prevent violation of the Motor Carrier Act by encouraging rail
transportation for beet workers.15
The majority of workers who came to Michigan in 1941 traveled either by
automobile or by train. Those workers who own cars will frequently transport
their families and as many friends as can be accommodated. Transportation is
paid for on a share basis when this is done.
In 1940, some of the sugar companies made arrangements to provide the
workers with train transportation. A special rate of $15 per person is paid by
the worker for rail-fare. In 1940, the Michigan Sugar Co. advanced money for
rail transportation for about 200 workers. This year, the Michigan Sugar Co.
and its growers' associations arranged for train transportation for 2,000 workers.
None of the laborers employed by the Great Lakes Employment Committee in
14 In former years, 4 Texas employment agencies were used. This year, however, all companies worked
through the Acosta Labor Agency.
A more complete discussion of the role of employment agencies in recruiting workers for Michigan beet
fields is contained in the testimony of Robert M. McKinley at the Oklahoma City hearings of the select
committee, pt. 5, P. 1K40.
is Exhibit 49.— Illegal Transportation of Sugar-Beet Workers From Texas to Michigan and Ohio Fields,
p. 7796.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7945
1940 arrived by train. This year, however, arrangements for the transportation
of 500 workers by train were made.
The money advanced for the transportation of workers to Michigan is deducted
from the first payments they receive for work in the early period of thinning,
hoeing, and blocking.
Transportation back home must be arranged by the workers themselves. The
company insists that the workers leave the area at the end of the beet harvest.
This insistance has been occasioned by the adverse publicity the companies re-
ceived when the "Mexican" remained in the area and became public charges.
In the event that the season's earnings are insufficient to cover the costs of
transportation back to Texas, the companies deem it more advisable to pay the
return fare rather than to permit the workers to remain in Michigan and seek
relief.
Housing.
The exact arrangements for housing vary from county to county, but in general
the houses that are used make bad shelter in the summer and are almost unin-
habitable in the winter.
Most of the migrant families live in buildings owned or rented by the sugar-
processing companies. The Michigan Sugar Co., for example, owns about 100
houses and this, year, they are building about 12 new ones. In addition, the
Saginaw plant of the company rents about 30 houses on the Prairie Farm from
the Federal Government for a monthly rental of $5 per house. The Isabella
Sugar Co. owns 150 houses.
The companies charge the growers 50 cents per acre to provide dwelling places
for the migrant workers. In some cases the individual farmer provides his labor
with living quarters on his own land.
In most sugar-beet areas in Michigan the workers pay no rental for the shacks.
In Lenawee and Monroe Counties, however, the Great Lakes Sugar Co. deducts
about $18 per season for each house rented to workers. Farmers' houses in this
area rent for $25 to $35 per season. The payment for shelter in this area is
customary.
The houses are not always located on the farms where the worker is employed.
This is a major cause of complaint since no compensation is made for transporta-
tion to and from the beet acres.
In general, the beet workers live in tenant houses or in shacks. Kerosene
lamps are provided. Ordinarily one three-room house is assigned to one or two
families. Since most of the families are fairly large it is not unusual to find
numerous children and even adults sleeping on the floor. The following statements
concerning housing were made to the field investigators by people in the region:
Tuscola. — "General housing conditions are very poor. Most of the houses have
been deserted by the average farmer. Many are old tenant houses that the
average family would not live in. The general run of houses are sadly in need of
repair, especially the roofs, windows, and doors. The floors and plaster are
usually in very bad shape. These houses are only good to live in in the warm
weather although many families have to live in them throughout the winter be-
cause of lack of funds."
Isabella {concerning portable housing furnished by the sugar company). — "These,
however, are not quite warm enough for our cold winters, but these people manage
to bunch up in other houses and seem to get by all right."
Monroe. — The houses "used to be company houses, usually a small shack on
wheels or a portable shed, but they are now the property of the beet workers.
The usual agreement is that they pay $10 a year to the farmer for the rent of the
land on which their house stands. A few of the houses still belong to the com-
pany."
The increased competition for workers between Texas and Michigan is expected
to bring about some improvements in the housing conditions. Only recently some
of the companies have begun to make an attempt to reduce the crowding of workers
by providing tents to be used as sleeping quarters. As a result of the activities
of the State department of health, the sugar companies are taking greater precau-
tions in supplying an adequate water supply and in keeping the grounds clear of
rubbish.
Earnings of sugar-beet workers.
Few data relating to the earnings of sugar-beet labor in Michigan are currently
I available. Some of the estimates that have been made, however, indicate that
the level of earnings for the period of residence in the State is quite low.
7946 DETROIT HEARINGS
The seasonal nature of beet-field work requires that sugar-beet laborers be
resident in the State or within easy distance from the beet fields for about 6
monlhs of the year. The time devoted to the industry is somewhat longer since
it includes the period of travel to the State and back home. Despite the fact that
the worker must be available for 6 months, the work opportunities during that
period are limited to two peak periods: (1) The early period of employment in
blocking, thinning, and hoeing; and (2) the late period of work in harvesting the
crop. All told, the best crop provides workers with an average of 30 to 50 days'
employment during a 6-month period.16
While the period of employment is very short, the hours of work are very long.
During the work period, the usual hours of labor number between 11 and 12 per
day. Recent studies in certain areas suggest that hours have been slightly
reduced but in general hours of work remain unchanged.
The earnings of sugar-beet laborers while in Michigan are derived from two
principal sources — sugar-beet work and off-season employment in other crops.
Sugar-beet wage rates are determined on a piecework basis. The minimum
rates are set by the Secretary of Agriculture. Actually, these constitute the maxi-
mum rates paid in most cases. The schedule of payments to beet workers in 1940
and 1941 was $11 per acre for blocking, thinning, hoeing, and weeding, payable
when work is completed. For topping, a sliding scale per acre is paid on the basis
of the tonnage yielded per acre.
According to a survey made by Michigan State College of the costs of producing
sugar beets on land yielding an average of 1 1 .4 tons per acre, each worker spent an
average of 40 hours per acre blocking, thinning, and hoeing and 34 hours in
harvesting. Thus, 74 hours of labor were required, per acre.17 The payment for
such labor was $18.60 per acre. However, since the average yield per acre in
Michigan is only about 9 tons,18 the payment per acre is proportionately less.
Approximately 7 acres are assigned per worker in most cases. At an average
rate of $18 per acre, then, he will receive $126 for the 6-month period he spends in
Michigan. Not all workers receive a 7-acre assignment, however. For example,
in Saginaw County, this year, many of the workers had only 4 or 5 acres to work.
To some extent this was caused by the loss of acreage due to early frost and the
spreading of work among all who had been brought into the district. On the
other hand, most of the workers interviewed felt that more people had been
brought into the area than were necessary. They argued that an average worker
could satisfactorily handle about 12 acres of beets and that no one could earn
enough on 7 or less acres to make the journey worth his while.
A recent study of the earnings of 10 families in the Saginaw factory district,
prepared by Max C. Henderson of the Beet Growers' Employment Committee,
indicated that the average net earnings per worker tor beet work in 1940 was
$135 for the 6 months he was resident in Michigan.
No data are available with respect to the earnings of beet laborers in the slack
season. In 1941, however, more empjoyment opportunities were available in
other crops than in previous years. For example, many of the Saginaw County
workers went down into Indiana to pick tomatoes. From other areas, notably
Gratiot and Isabella Counties, workers went into Hart and Grand Traverse
County to pick cherries. This is a fairly new pattern but it appears to be the
beginning of a trend in intraseasonal migration.
Generally speaking, attempts to secure intraseasonal employment, have been
very informal and disorganized. Through a grapevine system workers are some-
times informed of job opportunities in other areas. Frequently, they just get up
and move in search of work. In the recent past, however, some of the companies
have been acting as a clearing house for labor information. The Heinz Co. in
Saginaw, for example, contacted the Michigan Sugar Co. to secure pickle p;ckers.
In other cases, the companies have urged farmers to employ the Mexicans for
general wrork around the farms, for threshing and for haying. This, however,
has been only moderately effective because the expected shortage of general help
was not as acute as farmers feared it would be.
The companies have taken more interest in securing intraseasonal employment
for the migrants because they fear that the Mexicans will not return once they
have left. This is especially pronounced in Saginaw County where the crop is
18 The 30-day estimate was made by N. C. Henderson, executive secretary of Beet Growers' Employment
Committee, Inc., in A Study of Sugar Beet Field Workers' Earnings and Expenses, 1941, unpublished, p. 11.
The 50-day estimate is included in U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Labor in the Suear In-
dustry, 1940, p. 12.
17 Wright, Karl T., 1936 Sugar Beet Costs on 87 Michigan Farms. Michigan State College, East Lansing,
1938.
18 Based on data supplied by U. S. Department of Agriculture, Sugar Section.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7947
Arery poor this year and the yield is expected to be very low. In other areas where
the crop is poor some migrants have already returned to Texas in response to
reports that high wages for cotton picking are current.
It is thought likely in the area that the attempts to secure dovetailing employ-
ment for sugar-beet workers will be more carefully organized in 1942. In the
past, the lack of adequate earnings in Michigan has not seriously jeopardized the
annual labor supply for the beet fields. Now, however, if some guaranties of
intraseasonal employment are not made many of the workers may prefer to remain
in Texas.
Two suggestions to increase earnings of beet labor were made by interested
persons. A representative of the sugar industry suggested that the minimum
rates of payment for beet work be increased next year. A Gratiot farmer argued
that a pickle clause be inserted in the sugar-beet labor contract. This, he noted,
would have a double advantage in that it would guarantee work for the Mexicans
and, at the same time, assure the farmers of an adequate supply of manual labor
for other crops. This proposal, however, did not receive full support from other
farmers. They indicated .that it might tend to discourage future migration if the
guaranteed work did not yield adequate payments.
The basic problem with respect to the earnings and labor conditions of beet
workers remains unchanged by the impact of the defense problem. It is essentially
a problem of securing an adequate income for a worker in a highly seasonal in-
dustry that does not pay enough during the peak periods to support the laborer
throughout the year.
SUMMARY
The migration of seasonal harvest workers is not a problem of Michigan agri-
culture as a whole. It is a problem of certain well-defined and limited sections
of Michigan.
In the southwestern fruit and vegetable counties, considerable numbers of
seasonal workers are required from June until November. The farms which use
most of this seasonal labor are on the whole small highly diversified farms, although
some, requiring large numbers of workers, are extensive and relatively specialized.
The farms in the area are often described as being "family sized" farms, but those
that grow fruits and vegetables find it necessary to depend on hired labor during
harvest seasons. The demand for nonlocal seasonal worker stems directly from
the type of crops produced, and the area devoted to labor requiring crops is
increasing.
The demand for labor has been satisfied to date by the supply of migrant labor
from the South, particularly Arkansas and Missouri. The social and economic
problems arising from this migration include increased taxes for relief, health
facilities, and schools, for the communities; low earnings, bad housing, inadequate
medical care, poor or intermittent schooling, for the migrants. The economy of
the region requires an influx of workers to harvest crops. To the extent that
migrant workers constitute a financial burden to the communities, a subsidy is
granted to agriculture from community funds. But since the community, in
turn, depends so largely upon agriculture, this subsidy involves to a considerable
extent taking money out of one pocket and putting it into the other. Only to
those whose incomes are in no way dependent upon agriculture is this a real
burden.
The migratory workers, on the other hand, have accepted existing conditions
only because of necessity. With improving economic conditions in the South, it
is considered likely that many of these workers will not be available for this work
unless farm wages and living conditions in the fruit areas improve.
The intermittent character of sugar-beet employment makes the labor force
available for non-sugar-beet work during the summer. The utilization of sugar-
beet workers during this intraseasonal period, however, is by no means complete.
The 10- week recess from beet work has spelled serious unemployment to many
sugar-beet workers.
Intraseasonal employment of sugar-beet workers is not organized. The
workers themselves are forced to find employment to supplement their beet work
and have gradually built up recognized patterns of intraseasonal employment.
The sugar companies and farmer employers have, until this year, taken little
active interest in the matter.
Wherever these workers have appeared, they have tended to become increasingly
significant in the harvest labor force. Generally, this has been a result both of
* the expansion of hand-labor requirements in particular crop areas and the dis-
appearance of customary classes of workers — particularly resident labor — from
the labor force.
7948 DETROIT HEARINGS .
Prior to 1941, the intraseasonal employment of sugar-beet workers has not been
organized and has depended primarily on the initiative of the workers. Deple-
tions of certain classes of farm labor, resulting from the expanding defense pro-
gram of the United States, aggravated by farmer anxiety concerning supplies of
farm labor, stimulated them to recruit actively during the summer of 1941.
In order to utilize effectively the intraseasonal labor of sugar beet workers, some
employers have decided it will be necessary to organize this employment. They
feel that neither the farmers nor the workers can afford the present disorganization
of intraseasonal employment. Secondly, since the sugar-beet migrants cus-
tomarily require housing in the work areas to which they travel, some provision
for housing is regarded as necessary in the new competitive areas which now lack
housing for seasonal workers.
As in western fruit and vegetable counties growers in eastern Michigan also
foresee the necessity of increasing wages and improving living and working con-
ditions in order to attract sufficient workers to harvest their crops.
Exhibit 54. — Characteristics of Farm Labor in Berrien
County, Mich., 1940
REPORT BY THE LABOR DIVISION, FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES-
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Migrant workers have been pouring into Berrien County for the summer harvest
of fruit, extending from early May to October, in steadily increasing numbers each
year. From a small beginning of a few truckloads of migrants in 1934, the number
of migratory workers entering the area during the 1940 season has been estimated
at 10,000. This rapid change in the source of farm-labor supply produced serious
problems for both the workers and the community. On the one hand, recruiting
and placement activities have been left largely unorganized, leading to chronic
labor surpluses and their attendant underemployment and low earnings. On
the other hand, failure to materially expand housing and sanitary accommodations
for the new supply of workers severely overtaxed existing facilities, creating
potential problems in the field of public health that menaced both the migrants
and the community.
In order to make a concrete appraisal of these oft-repeated generalizations, the
Labor Division of Farm Security Administration conducted a detailed survey of
seasonal farm labor in the area during the summer of 194Q. Through this survey
a total of 258 family units,1 including 138 heads of families and 120 single persons,
were interviewed. These 258 family units included a total of 648 persons.
Only one of the enumerated cases was a resident of the area. Though the sample
may not represent a true cross section of the seasonal labor force in terms of
"migrants" and residents, it is important to note that exclusive use of migrants
was especially typical of the seasonal labor force employed by the large fruit
growers. Smaller operators depended to a large extent on migrants but also
used resident labor more liberally than this sample might suggest. Interest as to
status and conditions of migrants was, of course, the dominant purpose behind the
survey.
Insofar as the migrant group itself is concerned, it is believed that the character-
istics measured in the sample group are reasonably typical foi migrants as a whole
entering Berrien County. Of the 258 enumeiated cases, 185 were white and 73
were Negroes, or a ratio of about 3 to 1.
Most of the whites (64 percent) were heads of family groups, whereas an even
greater proportion of the Negroes (73 percent) were single persons. Not only
were there relatively fewer Negro families, but Negro families were smaller aver-
aging 2.3 persons as compared with 4.0 for the white families and 3.8 for all
families.2
Increasing public recognition has been given to the fact that migrants at large
tend to fall in highly employable age groups. This is again borne out in the
present survey. Heads of families averaged 34 years and single workers averaged
31 years. Out of the total group of 648 persons, 10 percent were under 5 years
of age, a few more than one-fifth were from 5 to 14, and 57 percent were from 16
to 44.
1 For purposes of this report, the term "family units" refers to the heads of families or single persons inter
viewed.
* The term "average" refers hereinafter to the median, unless otherwise stated.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7949
While hardly well educated, the Berrien County migrants over 18 years of age
had completed the sixth or seventh grade. The prospects for their children, a
•commentary on migration, did not appear as blight since one-fourth of the
•children of school age had not attended school during the 12 months preceding
the survey.
SOURCE OF MIGRANTS
Migratory workers were drawn to Berrien County from at least 18 States.
However, nearly two thirds of the family units came from the Cotton Belt area
•of southeast Missouri and Arkansas. Southeast Missouri was considered the
home area by 21 percent of the family units, Arkansas by 41 percent; 11 percent
came from the nearby States of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. The Southeastern
States of Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Florida
accounted for 18 percent. A small number, approximately 4 percent, came from
five far Western States. Less than 2 percent considered that they had no home
State.
A small proportion, 4 percent of the migratory labor, was drawn from other
areas within the State of Michigan.
INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE MOVES
A high degree of mobility is characteristic of these people. The data show
that the migrants moved from 1 to as many as 11 times during the 12-month
period preceding the date of the survey, the average being about 3 moves. Nearly
■one-third moved 5 times or more during the year. Only 20 percent had moved
but 1 time.
The great majority of the residential changes undertaken in search of employ-
ment carried the families across State lines. Of those who moved at least once,
98 percent had moved across State lines, whereas 54 percent had made intra-
state moves. Thus, the average family unit made two interstate moves and one
intrastate move during the year.
YEARS OP MIGRATION
The resort to migration to secure employment has become a fairly well estab-
lished pattern for many of these people. The average family unit had been
migrating for about 2 years. Two-thirds of the family units had been migrating
for 1 year or more. Twenty percent have been migrating 5 years or more.
This pattern of life runs counter to the desires of the migrants. "We travel
'cause we have to, not 'cause we want to. You might say it's just compulsory
"to come 'cause there's nothing to do at home," was a typical remark of the
migrants when asked why they had migrated. Deeply embedded in them is the
thought that economic security can be achieved only through permanent settle-
ment on the land. Only one-fourth of the group surveyed did not include the
possibility of permanent settlement in their outlook toward the future. As
might be expected, the desire for settlement was strongest among family groups,
and 83 percent of these stated that they intended to settle down as compared
with 63 percent of the single men.
There is every prospect, however, that the pattern of the immediate future of
these migrants will conform to that of the present. Left to their own devices,
the desire for settlement appears to be doomed to frustration. Except for the
possibility of a drastic unanticipated reversal of current trends in agriculture or
the intervention of some outside agency, the outlook for them is for increasing
years in migrant status.
PREVIOUS ECONOMIC STATUS
The vast majority of the migrants interviewed had previously been engaged in
the field of agriculture. A mere handful, amounting to less than 4 percent,
reported that they had not done farm work of any kind before the "current experi-
ence.
The data on the agricultural backgrounds of the migrants interviewed cover
the 13-year period from 1927 to 1940.3 The trends which have been taking place
3 Persons who reported more than one type of agriculture experience were classified in the highest economic
status group to which they had attained; for instance, a migrant who had been both an owner and a tenant
. "was classified as an owner for purposes of analysis.
7950 DETROIT HEARINGS
in the South among the small-farm owners, tenants, and sharecroppers during
this period are revealed in the experience of the migrants interviewed. During
this period, 36 percent of the family units had enjoyed formerly an agricultural
status higher than that of farm laborers, ranging from sharecropper to farm owner.
Single persons tended to come from the farm-labor class exclusively, three out
of four having come from this class, whereas two out of four family heads previ-
ously had enjoyed some form of farm-operator status. A larger proportion of
family heads, compared with single persons, had at one time been owner-operators.
The data show, further, that the white heads of families had enjoyed a previous
higher economic status than had the Negro heads of families. Although there
were only 19 Negro family heads in the sample, it is interesting to note that not
one had been an owner-operator at any time during the 13-year period preceding
the survey. On the other hand, 12 percent of the white heads of families had at
one time been owner-operators.
A larger percentage of the white family heads, 18 percent as against 5 percent
for the Negroes, had been tenants. The number of family heads in the share-
cropping class was very similar for botn races, IS percent for whites and 16 percent
for Negroes.
A majority of both the Negro and white heads of families had been farm laborers
in the past, but 74 percent of the Negroes had been farm laborers as against 50
percent of the whites. A small proportion of each race had been in nonagricultural
occupations.
The differences in the agricultural status attained by the single persons accord-
ing to race were far less striking. About 70 percent of the single persons in each
race had been farm laborers. A few in each race had been owner-operators. The
major differences came in the distribution between the tenant and sharecropper
classes. More of the total number of single white persons in these two categories
had been tenants, while for the Negro group more had been sharecroppers.
NUMBER OF JOBS HELD DURING YEAR
Turning to an examination of the data on the number of jobs held during the
past year, the difficulty which these people experience in maintaining steady work
is clearly emphasized.
The fact that some migrants had moved as many as 11 times during the past
year, and that one-half of the migrants had moved 4 times or more, is indicative
of the rapid job turn-over. On the average, the migrants had 5 jobs during the
past year. The data reveal that some of the migrants had as many as 9 jobs during
the year.
The majority of these jobs consisted of agricultural work, though during the
past year tne migrant group interviewed had engaged in some nonagricultural
work. The ratio of the average number of agricultural to nonagricultural jobs for
the family unit was 4 to 1.
NUMBER OP DATS EMPLOYED
The loss of time and money involved in this frequent shifting from place to
place and from job to job is considerable. In searching for work, the migrant
must depend upon rumors or on his own previous experience. The data on the
"reason for coming" to Berrien County show that about 45 percent of the family
units stated that they came to Berrien County because they had "heard of em-
ployment." Twenty-seven percent had worked there before, and believed that
they could find work again. About 20 percent of them said that they had made
definite arrangements ahead of time with a job promised when they reported for
work. Other reasons given for coming to Berrien County were "just drifting,"
"looking for work," or "came with friend who had been here before."
Not only is the migrn .orced to waste time seeking employment but, when he
does find a job, the work is generally for part of the week or part of the day.
On many days, labor is kept idle because the market price may be at a low level
which will cause the farmer to hold back the harvesting of part of his crop, or the
weather conditions may not be favorable for picking, or more people than are
necessary are available for work.
The average number of days worked during the past year by the migrant group
studied was 155 days, or one-half of the total 308 possible working days during
the year, if Sundays and holidays are excluded. It should be noted that even
though a person may have worked only for 1 hour on any 1 day, it was considered
as a day of employment for the purposes of the survey. Only 11 out of the 258
family units surveyed, or 4 percent of the total, had worked a full year of 308 days
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7951
or more during the 12-month period preceding the survey. Seventy percent of
the family units had worked less than 175 days — the equivalent of about 29 weeks
of employment.
Obviously, the migrant group studied had suffered considerable unemployment.
Nevertheless, the number of families and single persons who had received any
relief at all during the past year came to a relatively small proportion of the total
included in the survey. Only one family out of every four had been on work
relief. The type of relief received was work relief in all but one case. Thirty-
three percent of the family heads were employed on work relief while only 10
percent of the single men were so employed.
Of the 258 family units, 58 reported relief income, but the actual number of
days en relief was ascertainable for only 49 cases. Although the sample is very
small, the average number of days on work relief was 175. Thirteen of the 49
cases had been on work relief for 200 days or more.
HOUSING
The farmers in Berrien County are not properly equipped to house the large
supply of seasonal labor which the harvesting of their crops both requires and
attracts. Adequate housing facilities are practically nonexistent. The problem
of housing seasonal workers has become more acute as the source of labor employed
in the area changed from local labor and old time "fruit tramps" — who had their
hobo camps along the railways — to the present family migrants. Sometimes the
migrants bring their own shelter with them, parking a truck in a field or pitching
a tent in the orchard. More often, however, they have no shelter of their own
and expect the farmer to provide it. Water and sanitary facilities are required
and often firewood also.
Practically no attempt has been made by the farmers to solve the housing
problem by constructing special quarters for the seasonal workers. The accepted
practice is to turn over to the migrants every possible type of shelter on the
farm. Wagons are pulled out of their sheds so that migrant families may move
into them, and garages are cleared out to make space for bedding piles. Barns,
chicken sheds, abandoned houses, and hastily improvised labor cabins are pressed
into service and crowded with families. One barn in the area housed 43 men,
women, and children. Literally, any structure on the farm capable of providing
a minimum of protection from sun, wind, and rain might be occupied. The
data reveal the great variety of structures in the area which are used for housing.
Labor cabins and barns were the most common types of shelter, providing the
housing for about 20 percent of the family units. Houses were used by 15 per-
cent, and tents by 12 percent; sheds, formerly used for tool packing, storage, and
chickens, provided housing for about 8 percent. Garages were another means
of housing. Other structures included a boxcar, trailers, a green hothouse, a
dance hall, and an empty store.
In about 83 percent of the cases, the migrants were housed or camped in shelters
which were provided by the employer. Migrants brought their own housing
with them in the foim of tents, trucks fixed for sleeping, trailers, and cars in the
remaining 17 percent of the cases. The employer provided the camping space
for the latter group by allowing them the use of his fields. Of those migrants
who depended on the employer to provide some housing, less than 10 percent
had to pay rent while in the Berrien area. The rents charged varied from $1 to
$3 per week.
Besides the poor type of housing available, there was serious overcrowding.
Over one-half of the migrant families were living with five or more persons in
one room. The number of persons living with only one or two persons in the
same room was small.
utilities
Water and sanitary facilities for the migrant camps were limited. An unpro-
tected well often supplied the needs of a whole camp. Community-toilet facilities
were the rule. No individual toilets were reported, and only two flush toilets
were in use by the entire group. One-fourth of the family units were without
facilities of any kind. The remaining three-fourths were served by the common
outdoor privy. Only 4 percent of these privies would have passed the standard
Government qualifications for a sanitary outdoor privy, which is the closed-pit
type. The rest were open pits, and closed- or open-surface privies, which were
in such bad condition that the families did not use them.
7952 DETROIT HEARINGS
Nearly two-thirds of the family units used kerosene lamps for light. About 16
percent had no lighting arrangements at all. Only 1 in 10 had electric lighting
of some sort.
HEALTH
Inadequate housing, water, and toilet facilities may seriously affect the health
of these migrants. But the health of the migrants is not only important to the
migrants as a group, but also to the community at large. Although the local
health authorities in Berrien County recognized that the health of the migrants
may menace the health of the community, no provisions were made by the public-
welfare agencies for granting medical assistance to the migrants.
It was common knowledge that some of the migrants were suffering with
malarial fever, and it was also common knowledge that the migrants were suffering
from many other ailments as well. The data reveal that of the 648 men, women,
and children covered by the survey, 50 persons suffered from disabilities during
the past 2 months. For persons who ordinarily work, this meant days lost from
work. For those women and children who would not ordinarily be employed at
wage work, this meant time lost from household duties or other family activities.
The disabiling-illness rate for the group as a whole amounts to 8 percent. An
average of 6 days was lost by these 50 persons. Although 68 percent of the persons
in the survey were 15 years of age or over, 88 percent of those disabled during the
2-month period were in this age group. From this fact it must be said that the
disability rate affects the important wage-earning members of the migrant group
to a larger extent than the younger persons.
Fourteen of the fifty disabling illnesses were attributed to malarial fever.
The prevalence of this iillness among the migrants is not only a serious threat to
the other migrants lout also to the community at large. Diagnosis of the dis-
abilities sustained by the 36 remaining cases reveals a vast array of other ailments.
Twenty-four of the fifty cases had the services of a doctor. The remaining 26
had various reasons for not utilizing such services. The reason given in 5 of these
cases was that they did not think a doctor was necessary. Ten persons stated
that they could not afford to have a doctor, 6 said that they treated themselves
with home remedies, 2 bought cure-all medicine at the drugstore, 2 persons did
not know a doctor in the neighborhood, and 1 reported that he had seen a doctor
once but could not afford another visit.
Certain illnesses of a minor nature, such as colds and stomachaches do not
necessarily require the attention of a doctor. However, many of the persona
might have benefited from a little expert care. Unable and unwilling to spend
money unless it was absolutely necessary, the migrants rely upon native intuition,
superstitions, and commercially advertised medicines.
INCOME
The average income tor all families and single persons, including income from
relief, was $355. The actual incomes ranged from less than $100 for the year
to one case of over $2,000, but about 70 percent of the family units reported a
total income under $500. About 22 percent of the family units had dependents
residing elsewhere who were also supported by the income of the migrants.
There were four major sources of income for the migrants. The most important
of these was cash earnings, which represented about 72 percent of the total income
of the family units. The !east important source was perquisites, which account
for only 5 percent of the income. Fourteen percent of the income came from the
sale of a capitai good or from a small enterprise and the remaining 9 percent was
secured from relief.
INCOME OF FAMILIES
The total income, including relief, of family groups and single persons will be
discussed separately. The average income for families, including relief, amounted
to $431. The average size of the 138 families, excluding the 120 single persons,
was about 4 members. In addition, 25 of these familis had 57 dependents resid-
ing elsewhere, who relied upon the income of the migrants for support.
Nearly two-thirds of the families had income of $400 or less. Only 7 percent
of the families had an income of $1,000 or more.
An examination of the two tables showing income including relief, and income
excluding relief, reveals that the major recipients of relief were the persons in
the low-income brackets.
Forty-five families, or one-third, received relief during the past year. The
average income from this source was $138.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7953
Although data are not available on the number of persons contributing to the
total family income, data are available on the number of persons contributing to
the cash earnings of the family. Two persons contributed to these earning in
about 50 percent of the cases. Three and four contributors accounted for another
26 percent of the cases. The rest of the families had over four contributors, and
there were two families in the survey who had as many as nine contributors.
Thus an average family of four persons had an average of two persons contributing
to the major part of the family income.
Although the number of Negro families in the survey is small, a comparison of
the total income of Negro families and white families reveals that the average
income for Negroes was $269 oompared with $467 for whites.
INCOME OP SINGLE PERSONS
The average income, including relief, of the 120 single persons amounted to
about $277. Nearly one-third of the single persons reported incomes of $200 or
less. Only 8 percent reported income of $600 or more.
Forty-one of these single persons had 108 dependents elsewhere who relied on
the means of the workers.
Income from relief is not an important source of income for the single persons
as a group. Only 11 percent of the single persons reported that they had received
relief. However, the average income from relief for the 13 single persons amounted
to about $188.
The average total income of Negroes was $256, whereas the income for whites
was $317.
TRANSPORTATION
The ability to get from one job to the next is of utmost importance to the
migratory worker. In this connection, importance of owning an automobile as
a contributing factor in the income of migrants is revealed in the survey.
Slightly more than one-half of the families owned automobiles. The average
income of these families was $518, whereas the average income for those families
who had to depend upon some other form of transportation was $340.
Only 10 percent of the single persons owned automobiles. Although, the num-
ber of automobile owners is small, it is interesting to note that their average income
was $325 as compared with $260 for single persons without automobiles.
The data reveal that the automobiles were old. Only one automobile out of
the 83 was a 1938 model or later. About 56 percent of the automobiles were
models from the years 1928 to 1930.
Employers in some areas pay the transportation costs for their migratory
laborers. This was not the case in Berrien County. Of the 243 family units
for whom data were available, only 1 had his transportation costs paid for by
his employer.
Attached to this report are 12 tables which include most of the data presented
in the text.
Table I. — Migratory
status of
all heads
of families and single persons
Migratory status
Number of families
and single persons
Number of families
Number of single
persons
Number of
cases
Percent
Number of
cases
Percent
Number of
cases
Percent
Residing in Berrien County:
Interstate migrants.- .
Intrastate migrants. ..
Nonmigrants .
1
0.4
1
0.7
All residents
1
.4
1
.7
Residing outside Berrien County:
Interstate migrants . . _
Intrastate migrants .
253
4
98.0
1.6
137
99.3
116
4
96.7
3.3
All nonresidents.
257
99.6
137
99.3
120
100.0
Not available .
Total
258
100.0
138
100.0
120
100.0
60396— 41— pt. 19-
-13
7954 • DETROIT HEARINGS
Table II. — Migratory status of ivhite heads of families and single persons
Migratory status
Number of families
and single persons
Number of families
Number of single
persons
Number of
cases
Percent
Number of
cases
Percent
Number of
cases
Percent
Residing in Berrien County:
Interstate migrants ..
Intrastate migrants. _ _ __
Nonmigrants . .
1
6.6
1
0.8
All residents
1
.6
1
.8
Residing outside Berrien County:
Interstate migrants .
181
3
97.8
1.6
117
99.2
64
3
95. &
Intrastate migrants .
4.5
All nonresidents .-
184
99.4
117
99.2
67
100.0
Not available. _ _ __ _
Total
185
100.0
118
100.0
67
100. 0>
Table III. — Migratory status of Negro heads of families and single persons
Migratory status
Number of families
and single persons
Number of families
Number of single
persons
Number of
cases
Percent
Number of
cases
Percent
Number of
cases
Percent
Residing in Berrien County: .
Interstate migrants
Intrastate migrants _ .. . _
Nonmigrants
All residents
Residing outside Berrien County:
Interstate migrants
72
1
98.6
1.4
20
100.0
52
1
98.1
Intrastate migrants -.
1.9
All nonresidents
73
100.0
20
100.0
53
100. 0'
Not available
Total
73
100.0
20
100.0
53
100. 0'
Table IV. — Number of interstate and intrastate moves made by heads of families and
single persons, 1939-40 1
Number of moves
Number of families and single
persons
Number of moves
Number of families and single
persons
All types
of moves
Interstate
moves
Intrastate
moves
All types
of moves
Interstate
moves
Intrastate
moves
None
1
38
46
42
46
29
30
5
56
78
49
43
11
8
119
62
34
24
12
5
1
7
8
11
7
3
4
1
5
1
1
1
2
9
3
10 or more .
4
Not available
All groups
1
1
5
6 ..
258
258
258
i During 12 months preceding date of survey.
. NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7955
Table V. — Number of years heads of families and single persons have migrated J
Number of years as migrant
Number of
families
and single
persons
Percent of
migrants
and non-
migrants
Percent of
migrants
Migrants:
5 years or more
4 to less than 5 years.
3 to less than 4 years.
2 to less than 3 years.
1 to less than 2 years.
Less than 1 year
54
14
35
24
37
93
20.9
5.4
13.6
9.3
14.4
36.0
21.0
5.4
13.6
9.4
14.4
36.2
All migrants.
Nonmigrants -
257
1
9.6
.4
100.0
All migrants and nonmigrants.
Not available
258
100.0
Total.
258
i A migrant is defined as a person who has moved his residence at least once during the 12 months pre-
ceding date of survey.
Table VI. — Previous agricultural experience of heads of families and single persons,
by race and family status
Race and family status
Previous agricultural
All races
White
Negro
experience '
Fami-
lies and
single
persons
Fami-
lies
Single
persons
Fami-
lies and
single
persons
Fami-
lies
Single
persons
Fami-
lies and
single
persons
Fami-
lies
Single
persons
Owner-operator
Hired manager
20
14
6
18
14
4
2
2
Tenant . ...
Sharecropper ._
34
37
156
9
2
22
24
72
4
2
12
13
84
5
31
25
105
5
1
21
21
58
3
1
10
4
47
2
3
12
51
4
1
1
3
14
1
1
2
9
Farm labor
37
Not a farmer
Not available
3
All groups
258
138
120
185
118
67
73
20
53
i Some persons reported more than 1 type of previous agricultural experience. Such persons were included
in the highest economic status reported.
Table VII. — Number of days heads of families and single persons were employed
during 12 months preceding survey 1
Number of days
employed
Number
of cases
Percent
of all
groups
Cumu-
lative
percent
Number of days
employed
Number
of cases
Percent
of all
groups
Cumu-
lative
percent
1 to 25
13
18
25
28
39
32
25
19
5.1
7.0
9.8
10.9
15.2
12.5
9.8
7.4
201 to 225
15
13
29
5.9
5.1
11.3
83.6
26 to 50
12.1
21.9
32.8
48.0
60.5
70.3
77.7
226 to 250..
88.7
51 to 75
251 and over
All groups. ..
Not available
Total
100.0
76 to 100
101 to 125..
256
2
100.0
126 to 150
111 to 17>5
176 to 200
258
1 Excludes days of work relief.
7956 DETROIT HEARINGS
Table VIII. — Total income, including relief of families and single persons, 1939-40 l
Number
of all
families
and
single
persons
Number
of
families
Number
of single
persons
Percent of all reported
classes
Cumulative percent
Income class, in-
cluding relief
All fam-
ilies and
single
persons
Families
Single
persons
All fam-
ilies and
single
persons
Families
Single
persons
$101 to $200
13
41
52
41
30
33
25
9
7
1
4
3
14
22
23
23
15
20
7
7
10
27
30
18
7
18
5
2
5. 1
16.0
20.3
16.0
11.7
12.9
9.8
3.5
2.7
.4
1.6
2.2
10.2
16.1
16.8
16.8
10.9
14.6
5.1
5.1
2.2
8.4
22. 7
25.2
15.1
5.9
15.1
4.2
1.7
5.1
21.1
41.4
57.4
69.1
82.0
91.8
95 3
98.0
98.4
100.0
2.2
12.4
28.5
45.3
62.1
73.0
8/. 6
92.7
97.8
97.8
100.0
8.4
31.1
$201 to $300
56.3
$301 to $400
71.4
$401 to $500..
77.3
$501 to $600
92.4
$601 to $800
96.6
$801 to $1,000
$1,001 to $1,500
98.3
98.3
$1,501 to $2,000
1
1
.9
.8
99.2
$2,001 and over
3
100.0
All classes
256
2
137
1
119
1
100.0
100.0
100.0
Not available
Total..
258
138
120
1 12 months preceding date of survey.
Table IX.- — Total income, excluding relief, of families and single persons, 1939-40 1
Number
of all
families
and
single
persons
Number
of
families
Number
of single
persons
Percent of all reported
classes
Cumulative percent
Income class, in-
cluding relief
All fam-
ilies and
single
persons
Families
Single
persons
All fam-
ilies and
single
persons
Families
Single
persons
$100 or less
$101 to $200
25
49
57
34
20
30
22
8
6
1
4
9
25
26
15
14
16
17
6
6
16
24
31
19
6
14
5
2
1
1
9.8
19.1
' 22.3
13.3
7.8
11.7
8.6
3.1
2.3
.4
1.6
6.6
18.2
19.0
10.9
10.2
11.7
12.4
4.4
4.4
13.4
20.2
26.1
16.0
5.0
11.8
4.2
1.7
9.8
28.9
51.2
64.5
72.3
84.0
92.6
95.7
'.is. 0
98.4
100.0
6.6
24.8
43.8
54.7
61.9
76.6
89.0
93.4
97. 8
97.8
100.0
13.4
33.6
$201 to $300. .
59.7
$301 to $400
75.7
$401 to $500
$501 to $600
80.7
92.5
$601 to$S00
96.7
$S01 to $1,000
$1,001 to $1,500
98.4
98.4
$1,501 to $2,000
.8
.8
99.2
$2,001 and over
3
2.2
100.0
All classes
256
2
137
1
119
1
100. 0
100.0
100.0
Not available
Total
258
138
120
J 12 months preceding date of survey.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7957
Table X. — Type of housing of all families and single persons, by ownership and
rental arrangements
Total
Ownership and rental arrangements
Type of housing
Owned
by
worker
Free housing
provided by —
Housing rented from —
Mis-
cella-
neous
Not
Em-
ployer
Rela-
tive
Em-
ployer
Other
persons
Not
speci-
fied
avail-
able
House
42
31
0
0
0
7
53
54
3
64
3
1
8
36
3
4
1
1
Tent
20
Rooming house
Trailer
Tourist cabin
Barracks
1
4
7
48
54
Labor cabin on farm
5
Barn
Car (not trailer)
2
7
1
Miscellaneous .
44
9
No housing
2
Not available
1
All types
258
13
192
4
6
10
30
3
Table XI. — Size of families, by race
Number of persons
per household
group
All families and single persons
Number of persons
per household
group
All families and single persons
Total
White
Negro
Total
White
Negro
Single persons
120
43
33
22
14
14
5
67
27
31
20
14
14
5
53
16
2
2
8
1
3
3
1
3
3
2
9
10 or more.
3
4
Not available -
5
All groups...
6.
258
185
73
7
Table XII. — Age distribution of all persons by race and sex
Age
All persons
Both
sexes
Male
Fe-
male
Race and sex
White
Both
sexes
Male
Fe-
male
Negro
Both
sexes
Male
Fe-
male
Under 1 year
1 to 4 years
5 to 9 years__
10 to 14 years
15 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
25 to 34 years
35 to 44 years
45 to 54 years
55 to 64 years
65 and over
Not available
All age groups
18
43
67
76
77
82
122
88
43
23
2
7
648
11
21
36
39
49
57
77
58
33
19
2
4
406
7
22
31
37
28
25
45
30
10
4
17
41
64
76
72
60
90
70
35
19
2
2
10
20
35
39
46
41
54
41
25
15
2
2
7
21
29
37
26
19
36
29
10
4
5
22
32
18
242
548
330
218
100
3
16
23
17
8
4
76
3
24
7958 DETROIT HEARINGS
Exhibit 55.— Activities of Michigan Churchwomen in Program
of Relief for Defense Migrants
REPORT BY SARAH K. HEPBURN, COUNCIL OF WOMEN FOR HOME MISSIONS,
DETROIT, MICH.
This is a report on various activities conducted in the State of Michigan, mainly
by churchwomen, in 1940-41. Deeply stirred by the needs of agricultural mi-
grants, these women have visualized programs for migrant relief as an essential
phase of home defense. They have been tr}ring to build a better today that
tomorrow may be stronger to meet whatever needs may arise. In this respect
their activities can be considered programs for defense in its truest sense.
In the fall and winter of 1940-41 Protestant churchwomen all over the State
studied in their home-missionary socities the pamphlets edited by Benson Landis,
Uprooted Americans. For many it was their first realization of the existence of
the "Joads" of America; for others their first intimation that these people were
anything but bums to be used when needed and then hustled on for someone else
to use. Farm Security Administration pamphlets and mimeographed material
further spotlighted conditions. Especially illuminating was the summary of the
Government report of conditions in Berrien County in 1939. This last, along
with photographs taken in Berrien County made a deep impression. Michigan
women comprehended for the first time the indignities being suffered right here
under their very noses. It was a direct challenge to their patriotism and to their
Christianity.
The survey of Berrien County had been made by the Farm Security Adminis-
tration preparatory to the establishment of three Government camps in western
Michigan. This plan met violent local opposition from farmers, many of whom
were misinformed as to the character and purposes of the Farm Security Admin-
istration camps. As a result, in February 1941, a resolution was introduced and
passed the State house of representatives memorializing the Federal Government
not to establish the camps. This was the signal for the women of the State to
go into action.
The resolution (No. 14) was sent to the Senate Committee on Rules and Reso-
lutions. Immediately letters began to arrive from church and club women
protesting against it and asking for a hearing. Meanwhile, through a few speakers
who were very active among church groups, through women's clubs, through
countless personal letters and contacts word went out all over the State that here
was the perfect chance to show that Christian democracy could and did work to
aid the underprivileged.
The hearing was set for March 12 which proved to be cold and slippery with
sleet and rain. The committee from Detroit which had been active in initiating
the opposition went to Lansing wondering who else would be there to help them
plead for the Farm Security Administration camps. To their great delight at
least 60 people appeared, people from all over the State who were in sympathy
with the camps. Among the groups represented favoring the establishment"of
Farm Security Administration camps were the Michigan Federation of Churches,
Detroit Council of Church Women, Detroit Young Women's Christian Associa-
tion, Detroit Consumer's League, Michigan Federation of Women's Clubs,
Michigan League of Women Voters, diocese of Michigan. In addition were
representatives of labor organizations, ministers of several denominations,
professors, representatives of the Farm Security Administration, and farmers
and their wives from the areas most affected.
FARMERS ADMIT NEED FOR BETTER HOUSING
When the bitter hour-and-a-half session was over, the issue had been squarely
faced. The farmers opposing the camps were frank to admit that they feared
that migrants made self-respecting by decent living quarters and a place to clean
up would join together in labor unions which would raise the wages paid the
laborers. Those in favor of the camps brought out their advantages and pointed
to the economic ills that result from a large class of underpaid, underfed people,
the health dangers both to migrants and to the State as a whole of their present
wretched way of life, the political dangers from a large group of desperate men
willing to work but finding themselves treated with such little regard for human
decency. The resolution was killed in committee, but before it died, every
newspaper in Michigan carried the story prominently and people all over the
State discussed the matter. One farmer from St. Joseph who had opposed the
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7959
■camps bitterly is reported to have said in a public meeting on the subject that
whichever side one was on, it had to be admitted that the situation was a bad one,
and if farmers did not want the Government camps, they must do better them-
selves for their pickers.
Meanwhile other projects for migrants were being carried on, especially by the
church women. Saginaw women renewed their interest in the Mexican mission
conducted there by the Baptist Church. The Detroit Public Library held an
exhibit of source material on and photographs of migrant life. Later, the photo-
graphs, furnished by the Farm Security Administration, were arranged with
pamphlet material both from the Government and the Council of Home Missions,
into two traveling exhibits under the auspices of the Michigan Library Association
adult education committee, and have been to 14 other towns and cities and are
being booked now for a winter of travel.
In the fall of 1940 the Michigan State Migrant Committee was formed to aid
the migrant program of the Home Missions Council of North America. This
committee is made up of representatives from various Protestant denominations,
and so far has acted mainly in an advisory capacity. The work of the Home
Missions Council in the State, however, has been greatly increased because of
greater cooperation from local communities and increased donations by church
women as a direct result of their study of conditions. Whereas in 1940 only
three full-season nurseries were operated, one more in Benton Harbor was forced
to close because of lack of funds, in 1941 a full-time nurse worked in the Berrien
County area, two Negro men planned recreation programs for Negroes at Sodis,
and nursery centers were held at Alma, Blissfield, South Haven, Benton Harbor,
and two at Mount Pleasant. All of these centers were plentifully supplied with
clothing and work materials; and in most cases, local church women gave food,
already cooked, for noon lunches for the children. In connection with the mission
at Blissfield, church leaders in the Metropolitan Methodist Church in Detroit
directed young people in a recreation program for the children. These young
people, most of whom worked through the week, made field trips to Blissfield on
their week-end holidavs.
ACTIVITIES OF DIOCESE OP WESTERN MICHIGAN
The diocese of western Michigan, which is in the heart of the fruit area, deserves
approval for the action of its women in devoting their spring convention to the
migrants. Miss Edith Lowry and Miss Helen White, both from the Home
Missions Council of North America, presented the national and the Michigan
picture of the work of their organization. As a result the diocese of western
Michigan now has a rural social worker whose services during the summer are
turned over to the council.
An independent church project was conducted by the young people of Central
Methodist Church of Detroit under the direction of Rev. Franklin Littell. A
group of students picked cherries in the Traverse City area until they had earned
enough to pay their own expenses. Then they conducted a mission where they
cared for the children of pickers. This effort was well received by the migrants
and the farmers as well.
In the Detroit area an effort was made by several organizations to give help
directly to Centerline, a community that is growing by leaps and bounds as a
result of defense migration. Money and service were given toward the summer
recreation program for the children of defense workers. The groups participating
in this were the diocese of Michigan, Merrill-Palmer College Women's Volunteer
Service, Daughters of the American Revolution, Detroit Business and Professional
Women, and Chi Omega.
While the record is one of achievement for the women of Michigan, they are
quite aware that they have only scratched the surface. This year there were
fewer migrants in Michigan, and their pay was better, on the whole, but the
conditions under which they lived were for the most part deplorable. The
writer in June visited camps occupied by strawberry pickers in the South Haven
area. In some of these 8 and 10 families were camping with no toilets, and water
to drink was carried some distance. In beet areas time after time she saw over-
crowding. At Lansing, hardly a stone's throw from the main road, five families,
each in an improvised room, were herded into a small warehouse behind a sugar
factory with no safe place for a dozen or so small children to play. At Blissfield
the diphtheria epidemic revealed miserable conditions. Everywhere in the beet
' sections are children who do not speak English. And in the fruit regions, little
children 8 and 9 years old picked for long hours. Housing supplied to beet
7960 DETROIT HEARINGS
workers (described in the contracts as "adequate") was barren, usually over-
crowded, on land with no trees or grass, with insufficient garden space, and with
no provision at all for children's play. At Alma in the school a mission nursery
center is conducted by local church people under the direction and with the help
of the Home Missions Council. In this school classes in English and Americani-
zation are held. However, no attempt was made in most places, so far as the
writer could find from personal questioning in six other beet regions to provide
schooling for the children of laborers who come to Michigan for 5 or 6 months to
work the crops.
EIGHT OBJECTIVES OF JOINT PROGRAM
There emerge, then, from the general situation, eight main objectives toward
which the women of Michigan, in cooperation with State and Federal efforts,
must still work.
1. Better housing. — In the program for the future the establishment of Farm
Security Administration camps for migrant workers is till a main objective.
With even one such camp as a model, local communities would be able to pattern
their local tourist and farm-labor accommodations by it, and in many sections of
western Michigan we would find immediate improvement in housing and sanita-
tion standards.
2. Better education facilities for migrant children. — With a Federal camp as a
center to start from experiments in educating transient children could be carried
on by the State department of education. In beet-sugar areas it is hoped that
parent-teacher groups may be aroused to the vital need to enforce attendance
laws for children of beet laborers and further to provide local centers for the
teaching of English and Americanization work. Government statistics show that
half of the children of migrants never go to school or at most never get beyond the
first grade. Thus they are caught in a vicious circle. Knowing no other way of
life than migrant agricultural labor, they will perpetuate the misfortunes of their
fathers and be a constant problem in days to come. Defense of democracy cer-
tainly demands that these children be given a chance at education.
3. Better sanitation. — All people in Michigan should work for a close coopera-
tion between Federal and State health departments and between those depart-
ments and the employers of migrant laborers. This means regulation of workers'
camps to check on toilets, water supply, garbage disposal, and safe playgrounds
for children.
4. More health control. — This would demand an extension of the health examina-
tions of beet laborers in Texas to their families. Preventive measures for smallpox
and diphtheria should be routine for children brought into the State by beet
growers or sugar companies. There should also be an extension of the public
health nursing service among migrants, especially in the fruit areas not directly
served by the medical unit of a Farm Security Administration camp.
5. Closer control of working conditions of children. — The building of a State
organization to investigate child labor in Michigan is being planned. Functioning
through local branches it will be the job of this group to educate communities as
to the need for limitation of child labor in commercial agriculture. What the
provisions of the Sugar Act have done for the children of beet laborers should be
an encouraging factor in this part of the program.
6. Better functioning of employment agencies. — In the past too little use has been
made by employers of agricultural labor of State employment agencies. Beet
labor is recruited in Texas, for the most part, through private agencies that exist
to take what profit they can. Only in times of great scarcity of labor have State
employment facilities been called on for workers. The practise of advertising the
bounteous Michigan crops in areas where laborers are likely to be found has been
followed, so that every year there is an influx of floating labor coming into the
State (enough to keep labor "dirt cheap," of course), looking for work with no'
known destination or any assurance of finding a job. Much of this waste effort
could be eliminated by better employment agencies undei State or Federal opera-
tion where farmers could register their needs and workers could apply for jobs.
If Government camps were established, something of this sort would undoubtedly
follow for the regions served by such camps. Such agencies would be able to
adjust wages and hours more fairly for worker and grower, and might gradually
evolve a plan whereby all agricultural laborers might be included in old-age
pension security.
7. Religious education and opportunity for migrants. —Churches in rural areas
should enlarge their summer programs to include migrants, especially children.
Daily vacation Bible schools in areas where migrants are congregated could do the
country a great service in buttressing the morale of these farm laborers who seem
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7961
to most of us to have so few of the joys of American life. City churches should
"adopt" communities where the need is great, as was the case this summer in
BHssfield, and lend a hand with finances and with personal service as well.
Christian democracy presupposes a sharing of things spiritual as well as material.
Michigan women have this last year pioneered in this field; much still remains to
be done.
8. Wider education programs for people in general on the problem of the migrant
laborer in Michigan. — This means more study groups in clubs and churches; more
competent speakers to arouse such groups; further extension of library exhibits,
etc.; better and wider publicity for work done by the Home Missions Council
through an active publicity plan by the Michigan migrant group; and more
publicity for the Farm Security Administration camps. As part of this educational
program a scheme is under consideration whereby scholarships (the money to be
raised by the study groups referred to above) be offered to students of sociology
for field work during the summer among migrant workers. It is hoped that this
will serve the threefold purpose of drawing into cooperative action club and
church women, departments of sociology in our colleges, and students who plan
to specialize in social service. As these students would report back to the groups
who sponsored them, we would have a perfect example here in the State of the
effectiveness of democratic cooperation.
The agricultural migrant as he exists today is a pitiful example of our failure to
realize in this country equality of opportunity for all. He is a weak link in the
chain of our defense program, for he carries with him the dangers of ignorance,
poverty, disease, and unrest. What has been done in Michigan by earnest,
patriotic, Christian women seems insignificant when compared with what remains
yet to be done; but the fact that the problem is being faced courageously means
that something has been accomplished in defense of our ideals.
Resolutions on Farm Security Administration Camps for Migrants,
Offered in Michigan State Senate
The following resolution was reported in the State of Michigan Journal of the
Senate, issue of February 6, 1941:
A message was received from the house of representatives transmitting House Concurrent Resolution
No. 14.
A concurrent resolution opposing the establishment of any migratory workers camps by the Federal
Government in the State of Michigan.
Whereas there is being considered at this time by Federal authorities a plan of establishing migratory
workers camps in certain parts of the State of Michigan, which plan is based upon a consideration of matters
and information from sources that cannot be deemed the result of careful and thorough investigation; had
such investigation been made, had the wishes of the people of the localities where the camps are to be
located been considered, had the true facts surrounding the present method of equipment of such workers
and the full details of certain camps of somewhat similar design been considered, it would have been found
that such camps are undesirable, unnecessary, and unsuited for the short periods that such labor is required;
and
Whereas the investment by the Federal Government in this matter as planned for the establishment of
two such camps is placed at $450,000 is considered as a waste and useless expenditure of public funds; and
Whereas we oppose the establishment of any migratory workers camps by the Federal Government in
Michigan: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the house of representatives (the senate concurring), That the 1941 Michigan Legislature opposes
the establishment of any migratory workers camps by the Federal Government in the State of Michigan;
and be it further
Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the President
of the Senate, and Speaker of the House of Representatives of Congress, and the Michigan Members in the
Senate and House of Congress.
The message informed the senate that the house of representatives had adopted the concurrent resolution;
in which action the concurrence of the senate was requested.
Pursuant to rule 59, the concurrent resolution was referred to the committee on rules and resolutions.
The following resolution was reported in the State of Michigan Journal of the
Senate, issue of February 21, 1941:
Mr. Nowak offered the following concurrent resolution, Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 26.
A concurrent resolution relative to the establishment of migratory workers' camps by the Federal Gov-
ernment in the State of Michigan.
Whereas Federal authorities have made a careful and thorough investigation of the migratory farm labor
situation in Michigan particularly as it applies to Berrien County; and
Whereas said investigation, made by nine investigators who spent 10 days in obtaining data which has
been published in a report known as "the Field Survey of Migrant Farm Labor in Berrien County, Michi-
gan—by the Labor Division— Farm Security Administration, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1940, ; and
Whereas said report revealed deplorable conditions to be existing in said county because of a lack of proper
shelters for such workers, their families and children, which has resulted in the springing up of jungle camps
along highways, on the edges of towns, and in the fields, etc.; and .
Whereas it was found by these investigators that in many instances such families were being housed in
said county in garages, shacks, tents, and barns and in one instance as many as 40 persons in one barn where
the toilet facilities were so filthv that they were little used by such families; and
Whereas the lives of all consumers of Michigan fruit and berries are endangered in that these workers do
not come under the health regulations as applying to beet workers and because these families must live in
unsanitary conditions (as reported in Michigan Public Health Vol. 29 No. 1, Jan. 1941); and
7962 DETROIT HEARINGS
Whereas at least 10,000 such families in the area in 1940 and increasing the problem of these workers is a
Federal one in that these migratory workers ar,e not citizens of any particular State, and
Whereas the Federal Government has indicated a willingness to assume this burden by the construction
with Federal funds of two camps in said Berrien County to provide these families with proper bathing,
washing, toilet, and housing facilities; and
Whereas such Federal camps would remove the unsightly, unsafe, and unsanitary temporary shacks from
our State highways and other roadsides and communities; and
Whereas such expenditures would result in economies to the State of Michigan and would pay dividends
to the public as a whole in better health among the workers, in crime reduction, etc.; and
Whereas we favor the erection of such Federal camps; now therefore be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring) , That the 1941 legislature favors the estab-
lishment of such migratory workers camps by the Federal Government in the State of Michigan; and be it
further
Resolved, That copies of this resolution be forwarded to the President of the United States and to the Mich-
igan Members of Congress.
Pursuant to Rule 59, the concurrent resolution was referred to the committee on rules and resolutions.
Hearing of Michigan State Senate Committee on Farm Security Adminis-
tration Camps for Migrants
report by sarah k. hepburn, council of women for home missions, detroit,
MICH.
The hearing on the question of whether Michigan should or should not have
Federal migrant camps was held in Lansing on March 12 before the senate com-
mittee on rules and resolutions. The committee was composed of the following
senators: Herman Dignan, chairman, of Owosso; Earl W. Munshaw, of Grand
Rapids; D. Hale Brake, of Stanton; Ben Carpenter, of Harrison; and Joseph A.
Baldwin, of Albion. Senator Baldwin left when the hearing was about half over.
Those who spoke against the camps were Gail Handy, representative; Charles
Miller, former sheriff; William Dech, president Derrien County Horticultural
Society; J. T. Hammond, senator; W. G. Armstrong, master of the State Grange,
all from Berrien County.
Speaking in favor of the camps were Mrs. Oscar Shapiro, farmer's wife from
St. Joseph; Mrs. Charles S. Goudy, club and church woman from Grand Rapids;
Mr. Sumner, clergyman from Grand Rapids; Roscoe Carr, Farm Security Ad-
ministration representative; Senator Stanly Nowak, Detroit; Darrell Smith, legis-
lative representative for the Congress of Industrial Organizations; Mrs. Mar-
guerite Dwan, social worker, Benton Harbor; Sarah K. Hepburn, social worker
and teacher and representative of the Metropolitan Young Women's Christian
Association of Detroit; and Mr. Drake, Congregational minister of Breckenridge.
Although by actual count those in favor of the camps had more representatives
who spoke, the time allotment was largely in favor of the opposition. As they had
first chance, their first three speakers took the lion's share of the time, an old
political trick. With the exception of the main point made by Senator Ham-
mond, the remarks of the opposition speakers presented the situation of the mi-
grants in Berrien County as a perfectly happy one for all concerned. We were
assured over and over again that housing conditions were pleasant, "just like a
nice vacation," in fact. There are no disturbances of the peace, we were told by
the sheriff, that authorities were not able to "keep under control." According
to the speakers of the opposition side, workers are perfectly satisfied with present
wages and the only fly in the ointment is the well-meaning but misguided inter-
ference of busybodies from clubs and churches who never ran a farm and are
therefore not competent to judge of such matters [as child welfare, child education,
public health measures, and common American justice]. The words in the brackets
are mine, but the inference was plain. Only when Senator Hammond spoke did
the real objection appear. He stated frankly that the opposition was based upon
the feat that if migrants were allowed to live together they would organize and
demand higher wages. One speaker voiced the fear that the camps would enable
migrants to stay all winter and become a welfare burden, a fear which seems un-
founded in view of the fact that the camps are to be seasonal, opening and closing
at definite dates, thus making it impossible for migrants to stay the necessary year
to establish settlement rights.
Those in favor of the camps brought out the fact that the situation in Berrien
County is part of a national problem which can be solved only with national
help. It was pointed out that successful camps had been established elsewhere.
Mrs. Marguerite Dwan stated positively that conditions had been deliberately
misrepresented by the opposition, and she cited the case of inadequate hospital
facilities which had come under her personal observation. Senators Nowak and
Darrell Smith both asserted the essential American right of the migrants to organ-
ization if they wanted it, and pointed out that labor troubles are much older
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7963
than Federal camps. Both asserted that the likelihood of formal organization
was negligible because of the temporary nature of the work and the desperate
situation of the people involved. It was further pointed out by those favoring
the camps that the children of migrants receive little or no education, hence no
chance to get out of the migrant group. That they have such a chance is to the
advantage of the farmers and of society as a whole. The right of club and church
people to participate in decisions affecting farmers was defended on the ground
that public health and child welfare are the concern of every public-spirited
citizen. The best witness for the camps was Mrs. Shapiro, who spoke with
sincerity and forcefulness for the plight of the small farmer who needs seasonal
help but cannot afford decent quarters on his own farm and who is too self-
respecting himself to offer his fellow human beings a chicken coop or a dirty barn
as a home, no matter for how short a time. For these farmers the camps present
the perfect answer. Decent living, sanitary local conditions are achieved,
migrants are fairly treated, and the farmer gets his help when he needs it. Mr.
Drake brought out the question of the possibility of camps for other regions,
saying that he disliked the idea of having one county close the doors of the State
to a benefit that other counties might like to enjoy.
The hearing closed without our having had a chance to hear from other farmers
who had seen the camps in action in other places and whose testimony would have
been equally valuable. It was gratifying, however, to know that more than 50
people came to Lansing on a stormy March day as witnesses to^the fact that they
believed that Michigan would benefit from having Federal camps for migrants.
Exhibit 56. — Migration of Families Into Rural Districts of
Wayne County Within the Past 12 Months
REPORT BY FRED C. FISCHER, SUPERINTENDENT, WAYNE COUNTY SCHOOLS, DETROIT,
MICH.
September 23, 1941.
This survey is based upon a sampling of 20 of the 73 rural districts of Wayne
County. Since these 20 districts are representative of the entire county, figures
appearing in the second column are determined upon the basis of the sampling.
The districts surveyed included 38 percent of the total census population of the
73 rural districts.
20 districts
73 districts
(estimated
figures)
Total number of families
425
1,117
Living in homes more than 2 years old
Living in homes less than 2 years old
166
216
28
15
436
568
Living in trailers. . ..
74
Living in tents or other temporary structures other than trailers.
39
Homes having city water_
101
142
182
39
386
265
Homes to which city water is carried . .
373
Homes without city water ..
478
Homes with sewer connections.-
fl02
Homes without sewer connections..
1,115
Number
families
School
children
Number
families
School
children
From Detroit .
222
77
28
31
55
373
153
69
56
116
584
202
73
82
144
981
From other Wayne County cities and villages..
402
From other Wayne County rural districts
181
From other Michigan cities
147
From other States
305
7964 DETROIT HEARINGS
Exhibit 57. — Economic Opportunity and Population Movement
in the Cut-over Region of Michigan
report by willett f. ramsdell, pack forestry foundation, professor of
forest land management, university of michigan, ann arbor, mich.
September 17, 1941.
The cut-over region of Michigan is most often referred to in general discussion as
"north of the Muskegon-Bay City line." Obviously there is not a sharp, clear-cut
line across the State, and the use of county boundaries is quite arbitrary. How-
ever, counties form convenient statistical units, and the boundary most generally
used and accepted is somewhat irregular and extends to the south borders of
Oceana, Newaygo, Clare, Midland, and Arenac Counties, leaving Bay and Muske-
gon Counties to the south of the region. There is much land of typical cut-over
region character to be found south of this arbitrary division and many areas of
good farm and orchard lands to the north. However, the predominant charac-
teristic by area to the north is forest land and to the south is nonforest land.
Other factors fall into line to develop a distinct regional pattern. The region
comprises 46 of the 83 counties of the State, and 33,313 square miles of the State
total of 57,022 square miles. Map 1 shows the region and the county groups
described below.
Within the cut-over region of the State in turn, certain county groupings have
been recognized and used which are helpful in studying the problems of the region
as a whole.
MINERAL COUNTIES
Quite distinctive are the six mineral counties of the western portion of the
Upper Peninsula.
Dickinson Houghton Keweenaw
Gogebic Iron Marquette
They have outstanding economic and social problems relating to the mining
industries which are being given separate and expert consideration. They are
also important forest industry counties, containing much of the remaining mer-
chantable timber of the State, but are rapidly becoming "cut-over" counties
and are included in this statement as a portion of the cut-over region. The
group probably provides the most acute present and prospective problems of
population stabilization.
FOREST-FARM COUNTIES, UPPER PENINSULA
This group differs from the mineral counties in the absence of any appreciable
mining industry and the somewhat greater farm development.
Alger Delta Mackinac
Baraga Schoolcraft Menominee
Chippewa Luce Ontonogon
Taking all factors into consideration, this county group has probably hit bottom
economically, and subject to general State or national prosperity influences
should maintain its present or a somewhat improved position with respect to
population support.
FOREST-FARM COUNTIES, LOWER PENINSULA
This group comprises the territory cut over earlier and with more complete
removal of the old growth timber than the Upper Peninsula.
Alcona. Grand Traverse. Newaygo.
Alpena. Iosco. Oceana.
Antrim. Kalkaska. Ogemaw.
Arenac. Lake. Osceola.
Benzie. Leelanau. Oscoda.
Charlevoix. Manistee. Otsego.
Cheboygan. Mason. Presque Isle.
Clare. Mecosta. Roscommon.
Crawford. Midland. Wexford.
Emmet. Missaukee.
Gladwin. Montmorency.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7965
It was in this area where unwise farming venture was most pronounced, and where
farming has now become somewhat more stabilized on the better soils. On the
whole it seems to have reached its lowest economic ebb some years ago and to be
slowly but surely improving in this respect.
Map 1
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
The population of Michigan when admitted to the Union in 1837 was 87,000
predominantlv located south of the described cut-over boundary. Not until
after the Civif War, when the State population (1864) was 803,661 and of the noith-
i ern region 46,000, did rapid exploitation of the northern forests begin. By 1880-
lumbering was at its peak in the northern portion of the Lower Peninsula and it
had pretty well run its course as a major industry by 1900. Meanwhile, agiicul-
ture followed closely in the wake of lumbering, and for various reasons greatly
exceeded its possible successful limitations. The peak lumber production period
7966
DETROIT HEARINGS
for the Upper Peninsula came some 20 to 30 years later than below the straits and
held up over a longer period. Since that time lumber production has gradually-
decreased and, while still a major industry of the territory, continuing decrease is
inevitable. The story of the round products such as pulpwood, posts, etc., is
somewhat different and will be given further consideration.
REGIONAL DATA
On chart 1 is shown the relationship of the cut-over region area, 33,313 square
miles, comprising 58.4 percent of the State total of 57,022 square miles. The
regional area is 21% million acres.
Chart 1
Michigan Area and Population, 1940
Prepared by Pack Forestry Foundation, University of Michigan
57,022
33,313
CUT-OVER
REGION
5,256
ENTIRE
STATE
6J.S%
685
CUT-OVER
ENTIRE
STATE
(RUDAL
92.2
ENTIRE
STATE
20.6
cur- OVER
REGION
AREA,
SQUARE
MILES
TOTAL
POPULATION,
THOUSANDS
POPULATION
PER SQUARE
MILE
POPULATION
Chart 1 also shows the relationship of the cut-over region population in 1940,
684,981, comprising 13 percent of the State total. The State average is 92.2
persons per square mile, while the cut-over region has 20.6 persons per square mile.
Using the census definition of towns of 2,500 and over as urban, the State popula-
tion in 1940 was 34.3 percent rural. The cut-over region, on the other hand, was
63.8 percent rural. On chart 2 is shown the population trend by 10-year census
periods from 1900 for the county groups and for the region.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7967
The mineral counties reached their population peak, 201,014, in 1910 and have
declined each period since, with 179,550 recorded in 1940.
The forest-farm counties of the Upper Peninsula form the only group showing an
increase in each census return, from 107,225 in 1900 to 143,994 in 1940.
The forest-farm counties of the Lower Peninsula were most populous in 1910,
399,614, declined sharply in 1920 and again in 1930, but increased 14 percent in
the next 10-year period to 361,437 in 1940. The percentage increase was con-
siderably greater than the State average of 8.5 percent but still left this territory
with nearly 5,000 fewer people than in 1900.
Chart 2
Michigan Population of Cut-Over Region, by County Groups
Prepared by Pack Forestry Foundation, University of Michigan
700,000
600,000
500,000
<
_j 400,000
D
Q.
O
0. 300,000
200,000
100,000 -'
-^f**M
■-£!:^L
..-— £j^
FQR£
ST.
t0VV^ ft*,
la
^^_ MINERAL -UPPER PENINSULA
FARM FOREST- UPPER PENINSULA
J.
_L
1900
1910 1920 1930
YEAR OF CENSUS
1940
For the region as a whole the lowest population of this 40-year period was in
1900, followed by an increase of nearly 100,000 people to the highest point of
725,242 population in 1910. Then followed sharp declines in 4920 ,and 1930.
The downward trend was reversed in 1940 with an 8-percent increase over 1930,
which compares weU with the State average increase of 8}4 percent. This reversal
in population trend was, of course, a reflection of the national trend away from
urban centers and more particularly a reflection of the sharply decreased^economic
' opportunity in Michigan's industrial centers during the 1930-40 decade.
7968 DETROIT HEARINGS
LAND USE IN THE CUT-OVER REGION, 1940 Acres
Land in farms 1 5, 646, 487
This is 26}^ percent of the regional area and represents an
increase of 390,174 acres in farm-land ownership during the
decade. Crop land and plowable pasture make up but 51 per-
cent of the land in farms and 13.5 percent of the total regional
area.
Urban, municipal, industrial, rights-of-way, waste, other nonforest
land 1 , 100, 000
Forest and recreation land, not including farm woodland:
State ownership (mostly in State forests, game
areas, and parks) 4, 880, 000
Federal ownership (mostly in national forests) 2, 000, 000
Public ownership, approximately 6, 880, 000
Private ownership, approximately 7, 693, 853
14, 573, 853
Total area, region ., 21, 320, 340
1 Of the land in farms, 28 percent, or 1,571,000 acres, is classed as woodland. This, added to the other
forest and recreation land, gives 16,144,853 acres, or nearly 76 percent of the region, in forest -recreatioD,
wild land use.
VALUATION AND TAX TRENDS
The total assessed valuation of real estate and personal property for the cut-
over region in 1939 was just under a half billion dollars, and but 8.1 percent of
the State total. The rural property valuation of the cut-over region, not includ-
ing mines, is only about 3 percent of the State total. The per capita assessed
valuation was $727 for the northern region and $1,164 for the State average.
(See chart 3.)
Michigan Assessed Property Valuation, 1939
Prepared by Pack Forestry Foundation, University of Michigan
TRENDS
In common with national trends, property valuations were reduced in Michigan
during the past decade. The State total valuations were over 2}i billion dollars
less in 1939 than in 1929. Every county in the State showed a decrease. The
percentage of decrease was greatest in the Upper Peninsula mining counties, and
next in the larger urban-industrial counties of southern Michigan. Many of the
cut-over region counties, particularly those with growing recreation business,
were among the lowest in proportional decrease.
During the past decade a major change in public revenue policy has taken
place in Michigan. This found expression in the 15-mill real property tax limi-
tation law effective in 1933, together with the initiation of the sales tax for major
public revenue production. It should be noted that the 15-mill per dollar of
valuation tax rate can be and is exceeded by local taxing units under certain
limited conditions. The rural section of the State has subsequently benefited
tremendously through very sharp reductions in the real property tax load and the
increase in State and Federal aids and subsidies. A study by Ford and Landers 2
indicates that for Cheboygan, a typical cut-over county, the revenues for local
government derived from local sources declined from 81 percent of the total in
1924 to 41 percent in 1938. This same trend, however, is reflected to a very
considerable extent throughout the State. A study by the same authors 3 of
Branch County, a substantial farm group county on the Indiana State line, shows
a similar reduction in proportion of local revenues (primarily real property tax)
from 88 percent in 1924 to 66 percent in 1938. Property taxes amounted to 63
percent of total revenues in 1924 and only 34 percent in 1938.
Keeping in mind State-wide valuation and tax trends, it is interesting to
examine the trends in some northern Michigan townships which reflect varying
local conditions and economic opportunity for their people. Burt Township, in
Alger County, is characterized by a large area of merchantable timber, nonresi-
dent owned, with a relatively small resident population, 570, in 1940. Rock
River Township, in the same county, has been going through a period of rapid
8 Local Government in Cheboygan County, Bureau of Government, University of Michigan, 1940.
• Local Government in Branch County, Bureau of Government, University of Michigan, 1940.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7969
removal of the merchantable timber, and growth of farm ownership and develop-
ment. Valuation has steadily declined from $1,410,000 in 1920 to $406,500 in
1940. The tax levy has dropped from $60,584 in 1923 to 10 percent of this amount
in 1940. Meanwhile, the population has increased from 1,450 in 1920 to 1,727
in 1940. In 1940 the per capita property tax levy was $51 plus for Burt and
$3.53 for Rock River Township. The tax rates were 23 mills and 15 mills per
dollar, respectively. Clark Township, in Mackinac County, and Denton Town-
ship, in Roscommon County, illustrate the relatively good position of those locali-
ties with strong and increasing recreation developments. Denton, while excep-
tional, is striking in its rise from a "poverty" community in 1920 to relative pros-
perity by 1930 and a strong position even during the depression years. Popula-
tion increased from 71 in 1920 to 165 in 1930, and 461 in 1940. The tax rate has
Chart 3
496
CUT-OVER
6.119
ENTIRE
STATE
14,957
CUT-OVER
REGION
106,449
ENTIRE
STATE
711
CUT-OVER
REGION
1,164
ENTIRE
STATE
TOTAL,
MILLION
DOLLARS
AVERAGE,
DOLLARS PER
SQUARE MILE
AVERAGE,
DOLLARS PER
CAPITA
been hiked from a low of 14.7 mills in 1936 to 25 in 1940, which is still well below
the 40-mill rate in 1923. Clark Township has had considerable cutting of valuable
timber, but recreation development has more than offset the timber loss. Hudson
Township, also in Mackinac County, is typical of those sections where public
ownership has prettv well taken the place of private values. There has been a
steady annual decrease in valuation from $440,000 in 1920 to $210,000 in 1930,
and but $65,400 in 1940. With a 15-mill tax rate the total tax levy of this town-
ship in 1940 was $981 and the per capita levy was $3.98. By way of contrast
with the above, Lodi Township, in Washtenaw County, illustrates the relative
stability and frugal management of public revenues of a southern Michigan farm
communit3r. Valuations, tax rates, and tax levies remain stable over considerable
periods of years. Reflecting the general trend, the 1940 tax rate was only 7 mills
per dollar. The per capita tax levy was $11.45.
60396 — 41— pt. 19-
-14
7970 DETROIT HEARINGS
Table showing valuation and tax trends for selected townships
Township
Resource characteristics
Total property valuation
Tax rate in mills
per dollar
1920
1930
1940
1920
1930
1940
Cut-over re-
gion:
Burt
Rock River
Clark
Denton
Hudson
Farm region:
Large area valuable timber,
nonresident owned.
Rapid cutting of valuable tim-
ber. Increasing farm use.
Timber and recreation
Recreation. Almost no other-.
Timber. Liquidation, and
transfer of land to public
ownership.
Good farms
$1, 498, 315
1,411,725
798, 303
95, 660
441, 820
1, 990, 415
$1, 563, 175
574, 615
1,112,000
514, 475
208, 700
2, 057, 980
$1, 285, 220
406, 530
1, 174, 430
629, 680
65, 400
1, 386, 700
49
38
35
36
42
20
47
60
49
23
70
20
23
15
20
25
15
7
Lodi.
Table showing valuation
and tax trends for set
'ected townships .
Township
Resource characteristics
Tax levy in dollars
Population
Property
tax levy
1920
1930
1940
1920
1930
1940
per cap-
ita, 1940
Cut-over re-
gion:
Burt
Rock River
Clark
Denton
Hudson
Farm region:
Large area valuable timber,
nonresident owned.
Rapid cutting of valuable
timber. Increasing farm
use.
Timber and recreation
Recreation. Almost no other
Timber. Liquidation, and
transfer of land to public
ownership.
Good farms
73, 934
53, 774
27, 944
3,420
18, 819
40, 472
73, 782
34, 370
53, 843
12, 005
14,517
41, 230
29,281
6,099
23, 339
15, 822
981
10, 290
568
1,450
859
71
525
966
518
1,733
777
165
210
1,064
570
1,727
793
461
290
898
$51.37
3.53
29.43
34.32
3.38
11.45
Lodi.
THE TAX DELINQUENCY PROBLEM AND ECONOMIC TRENDS
In common with the northern Lake States region, tax delinquency and reversion
of land from private to public ownership has been widespread in northern Michi-
gan.4 It was the inevitable result of destruction of the merchantable forest values
through] clear cutting, ,the expansion of farming onto poor nonfarm lands, exorbi-
tant tax valuations and rates, and the failure of many of the servicing commu-
nities to survive in such an economy. After a moratorium period from 1932, there
were in 1939, 2,208,975 acres of the Michigan cut-over region deeded to the State
for nonpayment of taxes. The 1940 deeding of tax-delinquent lands dropped to
245,523 acres. Land abandonment will continue in this region, but there seems
to be much evidence that the worst is over and that future delinquency will not
be a major factor in the economy of the region. A study by the author indicated
that in 1938 cut-over lands averaging better than those reverting to State owner-
ship were being taxed an average of 6 cents per acre per year. At the same time
the State is paying the local government units 10 cents per acre on State lands in
lieu of taxes. In 1940 this 10 cents per acre payment was made on 4,423,495 acres.
Studies in Cheboygan County by the author disclosed that about 8 percent of
the farm ownership acreage reverted to the State in 1939. However, about half
of this reverted farm land has been or is being restored to private ownership.
The remaining 4 percent represents almost entirely lands which are totally unsuited
to farming and whose elimination actually strengthens the farm economy of the
county.
It should be recalled that farm-land ownership increased nearly 400,000 acres
in the region during this decade of poor-land abandonment.
On the other hand, about 40 percent of the wold cut-over land which had
been in private ownership reverted to the State. These lands had been paying
* See chart 4, page 7971.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7971
little or no taxes for an average of about 9 years, so the public revenue adjust-
ments had been made and they will now in addition return 10 cents per acre to
local government from the State. Some of this forest land is also being returned
to private ownership through sale by the State, but the proportion of the total
is relatively small.
A study by Andrews and Bromley 5 covering Alpena, Ogemaw, and Roscom-
mon Counties and the eastern portion of Antrim County indicates a continuing
shift in the land-use and ownership pattern.6 For the period 1923-38 forest
Chart 4
PERCENT OF
TOTAL AREA
1001
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
\
>
TOTAL 1939
_ACREAGE
US GOVT
_ 5L97L_
HUNT CLUB
68.210
STATE
312.085
CORPORATE
83.240
LARGE PRIVATE
159.875
SMALL PRIVATE
354,275
1923-24
1939
land decreased 19,110 acres, or about 2 percent. Farm land increased 3,205
acres, or about 1 percent. Actual shifts were much greater, in that some 16,000
acres of farm land were abandoned, just about an equal area of forest land was
cleared, and about 4,000 acres previously abandoned were brought back to farm
use. At the same time there was a net increase in abandoned farm land of
• Trends in Land Use in Northern Michigan, by H. J. Andrews and W. S. Bromley; Pack Forestry
Foundation, University of Michigan.|
6 See chart No. 5, p. 7972.
7972
DETROIT HEARINGS
7,000 acres. This is a slow and painful trial-and-error process of shifting from
the poorer to the better soils, which if continued at the same rate would take
many years to complete, and herein lies one of the major problems of the region.
In the ownership pattern there is a significantly great shrinkage in the large
private and corporate holdings, and a much smaller reduction in area covered
by small private holdings. Hunting-club ownership has increased greatly, but
there is evidence that this trend is being reversed. Public ownership has in-
creased greatly.
Charts 4 and 5 illustrate the major trends in land ownership and use for these
four cut-over counties.
Change in Ownership of Land
From "Trends in Land Use in Northern Michigan" by H. J. Andrews and W. S. Bromley, School ot
Forestry and Conservation, University of Michigan. Published by the C. L. Pack Forestry Foundation,
Washington, D. C, 1941.
Chart 5
X X X x
XXX
X X X X
xxx
x x x x
xxx
x x x x
xxx
3
z
1
4
5
6
LAND USE IN 1923-4
From Land Economic
Survey Map
LAND USE IN 1938-9
From Agricultural
Adjustment Admmi stration
Aerial Photograph
CHANGES IN LAND USE
I - forest b Abandoned
Z - Farm to Forest
3 - Farm to Abandoned
4 - Abandoned to Forest
Farmland
Abandoned Farmland I I Forested Land 5 - Forest to Farm
6 - Abandoned to Farm
Major Changes~in Land Use on Hypothetical Section of Land Containing
640 Acres
From "Trends in Land Use in Northern Michigan" by H. J. Andrews and WS. Bromley, School of
Forestry and Conservation, University of Michigan. Published by the C. L. Pack Forestry Foundation,
Washington, D. C, 1941.
THE RECREATION BUSINESS
Probably the most encouraging feature of this four-county study was the show-
ing of increased use of the so-called wild land zones as evidenced by the tremen-
dously increased number of resort cottages and commercial buildingS( a,nd the
increase in occupied residences. This rests upon the steadily expanding tourist
business, which includes all phases of the hunting, fishing, and general recreation,
travel, and use. In this study the counties were divided into farm land and wi.d
land zones, in accordance with dominant use. Chart 6 shows that there was
practically no increase in occupied residences in the farm land zone during the
16-year period, with an appreciable increase in the wild land zone. Chart 7
shows only a small increase in number of commercial buildings in the farm zone,
while such buildings more than doubled in the wild land zone. Chart 8 shows, as
might be anticipated, a tremendous increase in resort cottages in the forest or
wild land territory with a slight increase in the farm territory. Chart 9 shows
the relatively large increase in mileage of improved roads for both zones.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7973
Chart 6
OCCUPIED RESIDENCES
FARM-LAND ZONE l923"
1939
24
to m
to m
to to
tei to
to
is
to
to
to
to
to
li
WILD-
LAND
ZONE
1923-
1939
24
totototoiitotototot
totototototototototob
VACANT
FARM-
RESIDENCES
LAND ZONE l923 "
1939
24
f3
WILD-
LAND
ZONE
1923
1939
-24
& & & e
UNIT
m = 250 RURAL
RESIDENCES
Change in Number of Rural Residences
From "Trends in Land Use In Northern Michigan" by H. J. Andrews and W. S. Bromley, School of
Forestry and Conservation, University of Michigan. Published by the C. L. Pack Forestry Foundation,
Washington, D. C, 1941.
Chart 7
1923-24 rf^
FARM-LAND ZONE
1939 MEM I
*
1923-24 tf^l
WILD-LAND ZONE
1939 rf^«5
4
UNIT tf^l =
50 COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS
Change in Number of Stores, Gas Stations, and Other Commercial
Buildings
From "Trends in Land Use in Northern Michigan" by H. J. Andrews and W. S. Bromley, School of
Forestry and Conservation, University of Michigan. Published by the C. L. Pack Forestry Foundation,
"Washington, D. C, 1941.
Chart 8
FARM-LAND ZONE
1923-24
f
1939
*
WILD-LAND ZONE
1923-24
** 4
1939
***********
UNIT
* = 100 RESORT COTTAGES
Change in Number of Resort Cottages
From Trends in Land Use in Northern Michigan by H. J. Andrews and W. S. Bromley, School of Forestry
and Conservation, University of Michigan. Published by the C. L. Pack Forestry Foundation, Washing-
ton, D. C, 1941.
7974 DETROIT HEARINGS
Chart 9
1923-24 l~~
FARM-LAND ZONE
1 sel
1939 IZ
1 1
I
*sl
1923-24 IZ
1 1
M|
WILD-LAND ZONE
1939 LZ
1 1
1
1 1 1
pei
LES OF
IMPROVED ROADS
UNIT IZ
Zl-100 Ml
Change in Mileage of Improved Roads
(Improved gravel and better)
From Trends in Land Use in Northern Michigan by H. J. Andrews and W. S. Bromley, School of Forestry
and Conservation, University of Michigan. Published by the C. L. Pack Forestry Foundation, Washing-
ton, D. C, 1941.
The same encouraging evidence comes to light in the Cheboygan County studies
and from innumerable directions. In a study of Balance of Payments for Cheboy-
gan County, Stone 7 found that for 1938 the tourist, including all sorts of non-
resident recreation seekers, accounted for $1,116,496 out of the total receipts in
commercial enterprise, or 30 percent of the county total. Here we have new enter-
prise. The extent to which this may be depended upon to continue the economic
and social betterment of the northern region is, of course, another question.
PUBLICLY OWNED LANDS BECOMING PRODUCTIVE
Meanwhile the publicly owned lands, both State and Federal, are beginning to
produce for local and Stale benefit. Even the Silver Creek Ranger District of the
Huron National Forest, containing largely worst first lands acquired by the public
has an annual stumpage receipts revenue of about $5,000 from forest products,
including moss, boughs, and Christmas trees. In the first process of cutting these
products and making them ready for transportation for further processing or sale,
their value increases to about $40,000.
FOREST PRODUCTS OUTLOOK
There is at present a spurt in sawed forest products (lumber production) and
employment throughout the region, but the limited supply of old-growth timber
means eventually a gradual reduction until this form of enterprise becomes rela-
tively small in the total regional economy. A study by Stoddard 8 showed that
of the 48 large sawmills operating in northern Michigan and Wisconsin in 1937,
only 18 would probably remain in production in 1950. These mills could be
expected to cut about 330,000,000 board feet of lumber per year, compared with
approximately 700,000,000 feet in 1937. On the other hand, with continued fire
protection, there is no other prospect but continuing increase in employment and
production in round products or "short stuff," pulpwood, railway ties, posts,
poles, cabin logs, furniture stock, box bolts, novelty or specialty stock, fuel wood,
Christmas trees, greens, moss, etc. There is no centralized recording of cut and
employment for most of this material, but it is growing in volume and importance
and is the logical forest crop from the viewpoint of employment, financial returns,
and raw material supply for a large proportion of the northern cut-over region.
Michigan does not rank high as a paper-manufacturing State, and yet Michigan
wood-pulp mills, which consumed 216,000 cords of pulpwood in 1932, used 337,000
cords in 19-10. Jack pine and aspen of good quality have for years been in strong
demand for the manufacturing of paper products, and now the restrictions on
quality of the trees used have been greatly reduced. Even white birch is now
being used in great quantity and some of the pulp mills are now accepting Balrn-
of-Gilead, a week tree up to this time. It has been said that probably more log
buildings have been erected in Michigan during the past 10 years than during
the previous 50. The new log structures for the most part are well built, with
modern conveniences, in contrast with the one- and two-room pioneer cabins.
7 Unpublished manuscript by Edward Stone, graduate student in economics, University of Michigan.
« The Two-cut System of Forest Liquidation in the Lake States Region.by Charles H. Stoddard, Jr.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7975
POPULATION MOVEMENT
We have noted that for two decades, 1910 to 1930, the Michigan cut-over
region lost steadily in population. This period, particularly the latter portion,
coincided with the period of industrial expansion in the lower Michigan manu-
facturing centers. In common with the national situation, the predominantly
rural northern cut-over region sent surplus population in large numbers to the
industrial centers during this time. The northern Michigan exodus, while un-
doubtedly increased by the generally poor economic status of its territory, was
only part of a national movement from rural to urban districts. A comparison
of the populations of Cheboygan and Wayne (Detroit) Counties and the State
average by 5-year age groups from the 1930 census shows a striking surplus in
Cheboygan of the young, up to about 20 years, and the old, over about 47 years,
and a corresponding deficit through the most productive years, from 20 to 47.
See chart 10. There is a difference of 21 percent between the two counties in
the portion of their respective populations found in the ages from 20 to 45. For
this period of greatest earning capacity, Wayne has a surplus of 7.3 percent and
Cheboygan a deficit of 13.7 percent from the State average. Not all the Cheboy-
gan exodus was in the productive age class, nor to Detroit or other manufacturing
cities, but there can be no doubt that it accounted for a large proportion. The
rural counties in general during this period were sending vast numbers of their
ablest wage earners to the cities, while the youngsters and the old folks remained.
Chart 10
MICHIGAN
PERCENT OF POPULATION BY AGE, 1930
I2r
I'0
la
Q.
O
0. .
Z 4.
UJ
O
Q. 2.
CHEBo
10 15 10 25 30 35 40
AGE, YEARS
45
50
55
60
65
Unfortunately the 1940 census figures by age groups are not yet available.
There is no question, however, that the northern cut-over region with its greatly
increased population in 1940 (including an increase for the 1930-40 decade of 18. &
percent for Cheboygan County) reflected the decreased industrial employment
during the depression years and a resultant back-to-the-land movement. Analysis
of the 1940 figures when available will not show the great discrepancies in age
groups to the extent of the 1930 analysis. Carrying beyond 1940, we all know
there is again a large-scale movement of young men and women from rural
Michigan, including northern Michigan, back to the high factory wages. This
ebb and flow poses our cut-over region migration problem.
How to Improve Economic Opportunity in the Michigan Cut-over Region
Leaving aside the six mineral counties for their special consideration, it is
believed that inquiries into this northern region have resulted in the conviction
that there is no opportunity or need for mass population out-movement and that
the people should and can best be supported substantially in place. In order to
7976 DETROIT HEARINGS
reduce the labor migrations we have noted, economic opportunity within the
region must be enhanced.
FARMING
In spite of the national farm problem and the handicaps of this northern region,
farming remains the substantial backbone of the local year-long support for most
northern counties. Increase in the productive crop and pasture acreage of the
well-located farms on good soil has been generally agreed upon as the No. 1 need
for economic betterment. Abandonment of the isolated farms on poor soils and
resettlement of their occupants are clearly needed. To meet the impact of the
inevitable back-to-the-farm movement after the present "emergency" every
northern county should have its lands classified for agricultural use. This infor-
mation should be in the hands of local authorities and every reasonable effort made
to guide people only to good soils and locations and to keep them from poor soils
and locations. The county land-use planning committees and local option rural
zoning can be of inestimable value in such a program. Michigan has excellent
rural zoning enabling legislation and an encouraging start in the adoption of
county ordinances. Whether wise or unwise as national policy, the broad pro-
grams of the United States Department of Agriculture have been helpful to
agriculture in this section. They might become increasingly helpful in adjusting
the farm folk from poor to good locations.
THE RECREATION BUSINESS
The reestablishment through fire protection of a generally green forested cover
and background and the development of a good road system, together with the
great natural attractions of the territory, have been the major factors in increased
economic opportunity through the recreation business in northern Michigan.
With the continuation of these supports, the most that can be done in addition is
dependent upon State and local action, such as raising standards of sanitation,
salesmanship, and service in the broadest sense.
The recreation-seeking public desires service in the form of good fishing and
hunting, largely a function of the State. It desires good bathing beaches of both
the public- and private-access types. Probably most that needs to be done in
raising standards of service is dependent upon intelligent private action, often
through cooperative approach.
FOREST INDUSTRIES
The most critical and difficult problem of forest industry is the major prolonga-
tion of those industries based upon old-growth forests. It seems a reflection upon
American ingenuity to conclude that the only practical solution lies in public
forest ownership with attendant selective logging. Even such a program could
not possibly continue present production and employment, which would suffer a
decline over a long period of reestablishment of "sawlog" forests.
According to a very recently published report, Forest Resources of the Upper
Peninsula of Michigan by the Lake States Forest Experiment Station, Raphael
Zon, director, the complete application of sustained- yield cutting to that territory
would result in taking away the employment of approximately 6,000 men.
The increased production of small-diameter material for a great variety of uses
seems assured with continued fire protection and will be supported from both
public and private lands. Intensity of management will develop only as the
forest industry increases in profits, except under subsidy. Remanufacturing
establishments, providing a maximum of labor and value for the raw materials
used, are one of the greatest forest-industry needs. Research should be pushed
to discover new and better ways of utilizing the tremendous volume of low-grade
wood available and now largely wasted.
Michigan's relatively few pulp and paper plants emploved 13,800 persons in
1939, with wages and salaries of $20,000,000 and value of products of $96,000,000.
Continuity of the present major conservation programs over a long period of time
is the major "need" in building up the large-volume annual production of raw
materials from the forest upon which forest industries rest: Some methods must
be found of insuring maintenance of an adequate growing stock, upon which all
sustained timber production rests. This continuity of the conservation programs
enhances not only the forest industries but the great recreation business and many
other byproducts of the forest as well. Income and employment from fur trapping
can be tremendouslv increased.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7977
OTHER INDUSTRIES
Oil and gas have not previously been mentioned, but they have become very
important in the financial and employment support of a considerable portion of
the Lower Peninsula cut-over territory. There seems to be wise State legislation
governing the industry and good public control, promising a maximum of life
and of benefits to the State and its people. These controls should be maintained.
The northern region needs more varied industry, in seeking which it must compete
with all outside territory, and consequently must make the most of any raw
material or other advantages it possesses.
CONCLUSION
The Michigan cut-over region is a deficit region in relative economic oppor-
tunity. It seems to have passed its lowest period in this respect and to give
promise of slow, gradual improvement in economic opportunity and total popula-
tion support. In this process it is being aided by a large number of public pro-
grams. The element of time and continuity of these programs is of utmost im-
portance if continued betteiment is to be secured.
There is population movement from the area to industrial centers during high-
wage periods, and back to the area during periods of industrial depression. A
large portion of this movement apparently is by individuals from families remain-
ing in the North, and only a limited number in the form of family units. Even
in the latter case, many families retain ties of property, relatives, etc., in the
North. In this respect the migrations, even though generally detrimental, are
not entirely so and do not generally form the acute problem of the movement of
colored and other families from the South or other regions to the southern Mich-
igan cities.
Intelligent land classification and application of the resultant information in
some effective manner is probably the most urgent need in cushioning the ill
effects of probable large-scale movement of population to the cut-over region in
search of cheap land after the present world-conflict period. All public agencies
involved should make every effort to inform would-be settlers of the exact nature
and limited character of their opportunities for making a living.
Exhibit 58.— Migration Problems of Farm Families Due to
Defense Activities in Indiana and Ohio
REPORT BY P. G. BECK, DIRECTOR, REGION III, FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Seven huge Government ordnance plants and proving grounds, constructed on
sites in Ohio and Indiana which 2 years ago were productive farm lands, have
brought about a difficult problem in agricultural adjustment.
Nearly 1,500 farm families have been displaced, 1,284 individual farms totaling
154,200 acres have been taken out of production, and the full impact of the change
has not yet arrived.
A far greater number of farm families have been affected by the primary dis-
placements. Owner-operators living in defense areas, selling their farms, are on
the market for land in other localities. In buying elsewhere, present occupants
and tenants are displaced. Tenants on defense land move to other localities and
compete in the scramble for rented farms.
The reaction moves on like ripples across a pond. Hundreds of farm families,
turned out of a defense area, hunt elsewhere for farms, displace other families who
in turn must displace others again.
Families with money to purchase a farm or tenants with operating capital
better equipment, or better farm experience are able to obtain land in preference
to others less equipped. In the end, the disadvantaged groups, ill-prepared to
meet competition, are left stranded.
Some of the 1,500 displaced farmers have found work in the defense industries
near their old homes. Such work has operated to the temporary advantage of
some whose normal livelihood is from agriculture. But to others it has proven a
disadvantage.
New and pressing problems have been created for agriculture by the injection
of industrial incomes in areas heretofore dependent primarily upon agriculture.
7978 DETROIT HEARINGS
Six hundred farms, and a few more than 600 families, were located on a 60,000-
acre tract of land north of Madison, Ind., which the Army purchased as the site
of the Jefferson Proving Ground. Here is what has happened to 400 of these
families which our county supervisor could trace: Fifty-five of them were able to
relocate by renting other farms, but a number of these already have been dis-
placed again when the farms they rented were sold. Two hundred seventy-five
of those who owned their land have purchased other farms with the money paid
them by the Government. Twenty of the evacuees retired, moving to town or to a
small plot near a town. Fifty others retired on social-security payments.
One hundred received employment on the proving ground construction, and
others found jobs on construction of the powder plant at Charlestown, 40 miles
away.
The proving ground has employed as many as 6,000 during its construction, but
by December 1941, when construction is scheduled to be completed, the pay roll
will be curtailed to about 800 "permanent" employees, nearly all from the civil-
service rolls. Few of the farmers will be afforded permanent jobs, and those who
have been living in the towns are expected to want to buy or rent farms again
when their jobs end. No desirable farms are for rent in the vicinity, and few are
for sale.
DISPLACEMENT IN OTHER AREAS
The same conditions hold good generally at the other defense areas. A survey
made in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri by the Farm Security Adminis-
tration shows that 10,000 rural families in those 5 Corn Belt States who have
been receiving aid or had applied for aid from the Farm Security Administration
were unable to find farms during the fiscal year 1940-41.
Less than one-third of the farm families displaced from the defense areas in
these States are now farming again, the survey showed. Most of the displaced
farm families have been unable to find farms upon which it was possible for them
to locate. Some are performing rural nonfarm work, a few have been absorbed
into defense industry and other industry, and others are now either unemployed
or on relief.
The survey reveals that 35,000 farm operators in the 5 Corn Belt States are
now employed in defense industries, about half of them on a full-time basis.
Many who are employed did not leave their farm at the time of their employment
but instead turned the farm operation over to some other member of the family.
Thus in such cases no new farms were made available to displaced farmers.
Already the employment peak has been passed at some of the ordnance plants,
and hundred of workers are being laid off each week. There will be little land
available for them unless the Government extends aid and cooperation.
Because of the gradual laying off of construction workers, and because the
plants will be completed one by one over a period of months, the jolt will not be
a sudden one. But it will be severe. It will begin to be felt this fall and in the
ensuing year will be most serious when farmers who have lost their construction
jobs on ordnance plants will want to return to farms.
TYPE OP FARMERS AFFECTED
Mostly affected by the defense program is the disadvantaged class of farmers
including the tenant farmer and the farm laborer. Owners and operators of
large farms have not been so prone to take work in defense plants. The substan-
tial farmer instead redoubled his agricultural efforts and is enjoying the fruits
of better prices.
Farm laborers, tenants, and operators of poor land on which they had difficulty
making an adequate income naturally have been the ones to whom industrial or
defense jobs looked best.
Few cf the farmers working in industry or defense have voiced plans to become
permanent industrial workers. They have generally used the money they have
been earning to pay old debts and buy new clothing, furniture, or equipment they
have long wanted. Few have been found who had saved any money, and it is
possible that when their jobs end many of them will be saddled with newly
acquired debts as the result of unwise installment purchasing.
Near LaPorte, Ind., one wife in a Farm Security Administration borrower
family living on a rented farm took in 10 roomers and boarders when the defense
boom struck that community. She charged them $10 a week each, grossing
$100 a week. Her husband obtained a $45 a week job helping construct the
ordnance plant. The wife did the plowing, cultivating, and farm chores with
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7979
the help of the children and the aid of her husband before and after his working
hours. They thus had their usual farm income and when they market their hogs
this fall they intend to pay off their Farm Security Administration loan in full.
They have started a bank account and are saving with the intention of making
a down payment on a farm.
This case is not typical, but it serves to show how some families are benefiting
from defense.
The more general effect of defense upon the farmers working in industries has
been to intensify the dangers of farm distress. Much installment buying of fur-
niture, household goods, automobiles, and clothing is being done on the strength
of defense pay checks. A tendency has been noted in some cases,, too, for the
purchase of more mechanical equipment than the smaller farm will maintain.
Farm income alone will not be sufficient on these farms to meet the payments
after the defense pay checks stop coming in.
Mechanization is being speeded up on both larger and smaller farms, attribu-
table to the unusual income available from nonfarm sources and the decreasing
supply of labor and the increasing cost of obtaining the services of farm labor.
In the defense areas Farm Security Administration has found it necessary to
make loans for a number of tractors and other mechanical equipment in order
that crop production would not suffer.
LARGE GOVERNMENT PURCHASES
In Indiana, 126,100 acres have been retired from farming by Government pur-
chase for defense sites, wiping out 903 farms. Another area embracing 400 more
farms may yet be purchased for military purposes in Indiana.
In Ohio, 30,200 acres have been taken and 381 farms absorbed into defense-
plant sites. Two hundred more Ohio farms will be taken if proposed projects
materialize.
The Jefferson Proving Ground extending through Jefferson, Jennings, and Rip-
ley Counties, Ind., and displacing more than 600 families is the largest single
project in the two States in respect to size. In respect to employment, however,
the du Pont powder plant (Indiana Ordnance Works) and Goodyear bag-loading
plant (Hoosier Ordnance Works) in adjoining Clark Count}', rank first. To-
gether, their peak employment was close to 40,000 men, drawn from as far as 80
miles away. Bus lines were established operating to the powder plant from
Bedford (SO miles away), French Lick (62 miles), Seymour (50 miles), to haul
workers to and from the plant. Others commuted by automobile equal distances,
and the defense pay checks were spread over a large area in southern Indiana.
The $76,000,000' du Pont powder plant absorbed 6,000 acres of fertile Ohio
River Valley land and took 35 farms out of production. The bag-loading plant
"took 5,100 more acres and wiped out 41 more farms in Clark County.
The East Coast Naval Ammunition Depot in Martin County, near Burns City,
Ind., will take in 160 farms and 16,000 acres of generally poor hill land which
provided a livelihood for the families living there and which they are reluctant
4;o give up. They are clannish and steeped in the tradition of the hills. None
of them do commercial farming but grow large gardens which provide their food.
Practically all of them were born and reared here.
Another 26,000 acres of submarginal land in an adjoining tract had been ac-
quired several years ago by the Soil Conservation Service and retired from farm-
ing because of its unproductivity. This tract, with the 16,000 acres newly ac-
quired, will give the Navy Department 42,000 acres for its ammunition depot.
The Kingsbury Ordnance Works in LaPorte County, in northern Indiana, put
67 farms, totaling 13,000 acres, out of existence.
The Plum Brook Ordnance Works at Sandusky, Ohio, absorbed 169 farms
totaling 9,000 acres, and the Ravenna Ordnance Works at Ravenna, Ohio, ab-
sorbed 212 farms totaling 21,200 acres.
Table 1 shows the acres of farm land in each county, the acres taken for ordnance
plants, the number of farms in the county and the number absorbed by ordnance
plants, the degree of tenancy among displaced families in each displacement area,
condition of land which was taken for each plant, and employment figures on
>each project.
7980
DETROIT HEARINGS
-I
M
H
^
H ■»
i-H
d "P
o d
©
CD
Q
• 03 00
d o
- —
T3 . fe
d
+J
oo
^4.
hCju
d
d
00
d
03
a
©
s
^
i-H
aSd
_o
*h
eg
03
IM
■Hi
<3>
en
.-H
i-i
CO
501-1 00-*
CO
d
T3
'3
Si
03
o
-4-3
o
a5" >> 0.03
0-- r-H
O
—
a
-4-3
CO
'I
o
o
5
o
o
a)
-O>o
o
o
o
a
o i—
o
o"
lO
6 s
o.
o
t>»
00
CO
t^
(M
_o
a
1 !
a
* — *
/~\ '
H
.2
©
3
CR
t-h
i-H
1 3
CO
t»
4-i
d
03
a
2 si
o
©
g,
CO
to 3
O <J
' V '
C8
o
o
o
CD
o
o
o
o o
o
O
Ph
o
©
o
o o
o_
o
o
o
V
« o
oo"
lO
to
CO
•^r tC
1-1
CD
1
o
■3
fl
o
o
.2-3
M
.■s d
o
•3°5
a
o
O
4^
fr4
o
o
73
o
O
o
■3
CO S
o o
'o3
•3
O
O
Pi
O
Ph O
fe
o
co
>>
>.
>> >>
>.
>>
a
1,4
o
o
O CO
CO
o
d
d
d d
d
d
03
03
03
03 03
03
03
•in
d
d
d d
d
d
a d
o a>
S?o3
d~
09
oo
o
00 CO
00
CD
4n
+J
-*J +3
■+J
45
+3
d
43
d
d
43
00
co
CO
CO
6
8 8
00
CO
00
CO
IH
00
ft
CO
CO
-3
00 CO
IH
oo
d
a
a
ft ft
ft
oo
EH
, — i
lO
IM O
115
m
i-H lO
IM
tfo
CO
o
ira
_
o t-
N
OS
-<*<
5 g- 8 g
o
CO
"»<
co CO
CO
00
CO
t— 1
N
^H
CM
58 m H "S d
+^ W a>
T3
num-
irms
unty
>o
t~
I>
lO CO
CO
o
CD
o
CO
CO
co r^
CO
CO
CO
■H<
CO
CO
i-H ■"*<
CO
lO
lO
co
i-H CN
CO
»o
^
£.s.s
aken
ited
for
sites
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o
o
o o
<N
o
CO
pds^
o
CO
lO
CO CO
r— i
Oi
CD
cres
yU
Itatc
fens
CO
c*\
lO
4*>«>%
CO
CO
as
OM
O C5
•o
_,
l>-
Ci
■Hi
"H*
CO CO
o
CM
fca.g^
CO
o>
OS
en ■*
O
i-H
CO
— c3T) a
<N
lO
»o
lO -c«
o>
o
OS
CO
t-
t^
CO CO
Tft
CO
CO
C3 ^ P 3
CO
l-H
T-t CO
IM
f-H
CO
O O^ Q
T— '
e
„
^
1 €
„
,
d"
o
s
1
03
d
d
03
+3
1
©
to
a
CD
CO
DO
•a
03
d
o
0
s
03
a
o
d
03
5
i
q
c
03
s
•3 o
a p^
3 03
a ^
< a a
^ >>5S
>■« CO
03;- d
d
00
>
03
Ph
d
03
Ph
S
d
03
d
•a
t~t
o
-4-T
d
03
5
oo
CO
d
03
d
o
a
C8
be
d
'>
o
Ph
d
o
CO
CO
CO
d
03
d
■a
00
CO
d
03
d
M
!>U o3
en d ;-;
CD C JH
-3 DO
■Spq >,
T3
go
'cQ
|Z5
O O
03 u
• d • »
3 o3T3"w
M -h co £ -
O
.^
te
-1 «
S§fl-30.SaSO3-a
0)
d
t-H
a
£> M
PS
Ph
i-H *3
oo
B
is
o
a
d
oo
t»
o
o
>>
n
03
00
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7981
CO
I-
o
cr
i-
to
o
cr
cr
I
z
o
©
cr
s
7982 DETROIT HEARINGS
OTHER REASONS FOR FARM RETIREMENT FROM PRODUCTION
It must also be borne in mind that farmland is constantly being retired from
production for other purposes than defense.
The Indianapolis Water Co. a few years ago purchased 5,000 acres of farm-
land in central Indiana. The farms on this land have been operated by 49 tenant
families. Within a few months when the water company floods the area as an
addition to the city waterworks system these families will have to vacate and
look for other farms.
Portage County, Ohio, in addition to the acreage taken for the Ravenna Ord-
nance Works, lost 1,500 acres of farmland to the Akron, Ohio, "watershed" and
8,000 more acres to provide a water reservoir for Youngstown.
These nondefense displacements serve to make more acute the shrinkage of
farmlands, speeded up by the huge Government defense site purchases.
The fact that all of the displaced families have not sought to relocate imme-
diately on farms has alleviated the immediate problem of finding land for them.
But the problem is one that will have to be met in the near future, when defense
plant construction is curtailed and the farmers who located temporarily in towns
and cities again seek land to cultivate.
Urban housing shortages have been responsible for some displacements of farm
families by city families, desiring only to use the farmhouse for shelter. Land-
owners have rented farmhouses for living quarters to defense workers for from
$20 to $40 a month — as much as the entire farm had brought previously — and
rented the land to a neighbor who with mechanized equipment could operate
both farms.
NOT ENOUGH FARMS TO GO AROUND
The absence of available land on which farm families can settle is becoming a
serious problem in Indiana, Ohio, and other Corn Belt States. There are not
enough farms to supply the demand. Obviously, there are a certain number of
farms for rent or purchase. Some of these are of an uneconomic size — too small
to provide a living. Some are composed of submarginal crop land, unsuited for
general farming. And others are of sufficient size and adequate fertility, but
the cost of rent or purchase is exorbitant when compared with expected
earnings.
Because of this, and because of the inability to locate any sort of farm, 667
applicants in Indiana and 918 applicants in Ohio who were otherwise eligible
and in need of Farm Security Administration assistance were turned away dur-
ing the fiscal year 1941. In addition to this group, by the end of the fiscal year
1941 there were 423 standard borrowers in Indiana and 456 in Ohio with no
farms to operate.
This number of families is small in comparison with a total of 184,549 operators
in Indiana and 233,783 in Ohio as shown in the 1940 census. But the number
is increasing. Seventy-five years ago it was unbelievable that any farm family
desiring to farm would be unable to find cropland. Seventy-five years ago,
farms were not consolidated and operated by machine, nor at the other extreme,
were they cut up into tiny, uneconomic units. Seventy-five years ago the rich
topsoil now lying at the mouth of the Mississippi delta was growing crops on
midwestern farms.
The depletion of factory-age farm workers who have taken defense jobs be-
cause of higher wages and better working conditions, and the gradual effect of
the draft which has taken and will gradually draw more sons of farm families,
has curtailed the amount of farm labor available. As the defense program
continues this labor supply will grow shorter and shorter.
The retirement of 1,284 farms for defense sites in Ohio and Indiana, coupled
with the merging of others with the rapid step-up in mechanization and the
decrease in the supply of farm labor, points to difficulties for the future. The
machines that are being purchased today — farm machinery sales in defense areas
have increased more than 25 percent over a year ago — will be doing the work
when the labor supply increases. This will be a factor in causing farm laborers
in the future, then, to be able to command less pay when their ranks again
become bountiful.
On the beneficial side, the defense program has enabled some of the disadvan-
taged farmers temporarily to raise their standards of living. Their morale has
become better, they are buying necessities they have long desired, and they are
on the road to better health because they can afford to buy medical care and
proper food.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7983
Yet there are other areas in which rural poverty and all its social ills remain as
serious problems as they ever were, accentuated now because the general welfare
of the better-class farmers has been improved somewhat. Increased farm prices
rarely help the farmer who grows just about enough for his own needs.
ENLARGEMENT OF FARM SECURITY PROGRAM
The Farm Security Administration undertaking to aid displaced farmers in
relocating their families, has had to enlarge its program to cope with this problem.
Grants have been necessary to pay moving expenses of some displaced families
who were in need, and in some instances to pay for food and shelter for penniless
families until they could find a place to settle permanently.
Farm owners who were displaced were eligible for loans from Farm Security
Administration, to be repaid when they received payment from the Government
for their land. Tenant farmers who relocated were given loans for equipment
and to make improvements when such were necessary for successful farming
operation.
Tenant-purchase loans also have been made to some tenants who were able to
find suitable farms for sale. Land values are rising so rapidly that some diffi-
culty is being experienced in obtaining farms in the price-limitation classification
and productive enough to be desirable for tenant purchase under the Farm Security
Administration program.
One of the difficulties in locating land in the better land areas revolves around
the fact that large owners and institutional landlords are not willing to break up
large holdings in order to sell a small farm such as 60 or 80 acres, these large farms
being for sale as a whole rather than in small parts, which makes it virtually im-
possible for the small operator to buy in the good land areas generally. * The
tendency is for the large farms to expand rather than liquidate.
In the better land areas it is no doubt true the larger operators are finding it
more profitable to farm larger acreages under commercial farming practices. It
has been our observation that these people crowded off the good land areas because
of the expansion of larger farms are finding it necessary to relocate in poorer
land areas where farms are already too small, thus further crowding these areas;
or else they can find no farm and must become farm laborers, industrial workers,
or accept public assistance.
The Farm Security Administration need not point out the dangers of this trend.
To break up large farms and make room for families that wish to remain on the
land, cooperative farms have been established, leasing associations have been
encouraged, and defense relocation corporations have been formed in each State.
The cooperative farms have been established to provide a basis for studying
their success in enabling small farmers to work together in order that they might
compete with commercialized farms on a more equitable basis. Each family on
the cooperative farm has its own homestead, but the land is farmed jointly and the
income prorated.
The leasing and purchasing associations consist of farmers wishing to lease or
purchase farmland. The group leases or purchases land and then subleases
various tracts to the members, to be farmed as individual farms. Cooperative
buying, marketing, and use of equipment under such an arrangement are easily
carried on.
To meet the immediate problems presented by the farmers who cannot find
land to farm, defense relocation corporations have been established in both Ohio
and Indiana. With funds, loaned by Farm Security Administration, thev have
purchased large holdings in good land areas which will be broken down into
smaller farms in order to make available family-size units to families displaced
by the defense program.
In Indiana 17,397 acres have been accepted for purchase by the defense reloca-
tion corporation, and 13,889 acres in Ohio. (See charts A and B.) These will
be broken down into family-size farms of about 80 acres, permitting a self-sufficient
standard of living for each family.
RELOCATION FOR ONLY 260 FAMILIES
But while 1,284 farms have been absorbed by ordnance-sites purchases in Ohio
and Indiana, only 260 families can be placed satisfactorily on the relocation land
purchased. There are already 101 farm families living on that land, who will be
given an opportunity to remain on an equal footing with the 260 defense-displaced
farmers.
7984
DETROIT HEARINGS
903 161
INDIANA
381 99
OHIO
1,284 260
TOTAL IN
INDIANA & OHIO
NUMBER OF FARMS TAKEN FOR DEFENSE SITES
[\\\| — NUMBER OF NEW FARMS TO BE CREATED THROUGH
k N N1 DEFENSE RELOCATION CORP. ACTIVITIES
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION
7985
n
126,000 17,399
INDIANA
30,000 13,889
OHIO
156,000 31,189
TOTAL IN
INDIANA & OHIO
— NUMBER OF ACRES TAKEN FOR DEFENSE SITES
L\\\|-- NUMBER OF ACRES BOUGHT BY DEFENSE RELOCATION CORP.
60396— 41— pt. 19 15
7986 DETROIT HEARINGS
None of the displaced families has actually been resettled yet on relocation
land in Ohio and Indiana, due primarily to the impossibility of getting possession
of the land before March 1, 1942. The rights of the present tenants on the land
have been recognized and their leases with the present owners will hold until
the beginning of the crop year.
The relocation program on its present scale is entirely inadequate. The Ohio
and Indiana relocation purchases have exhausted the funds made available under
the present program in those States. And while these purchases are providing
260 farms to replace part of the 1,284 taken out of production, it should also be
borne in mind that each succeeding farm census has shown Indiana and Ohio
with fewer and fewer farms because of mechanization. Machine farming makes
it possible for large landowners to increase their holdings and operate with fewer
laborers and tenants. This creates a problem for those whose services are no
longer needed and have no place to locate in their search for a living.
With the money that has been provided, all of the defense relocation purchases
in region III (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa) will not create enough
additional farms to relocate those families displaced in Indiana and Ohio alone.
The relocation program in the entire region can provide only 823 additional farms.
In Indiana alone 903 farms have been eliminated by the location of ordnance
plants.
The effort has been limited by the availability of funds to hire personnel to
buy and develop land, and also by the availability of land that could be bought
at a reasonable appraisal. Demands on our present personnel have been increased
to such an extent that the planning and development is not moving as rapidly
as we would like.
The immediate problems created by the defense effort have been given prime
consideration. At the same time we have endeavored not to allow our rehabilita-
tion program to. suffer. A large segment of farm families, not in acute distress,
is living far below healthful standards and is in need of the aid and cooperation
of Farm Security Administration. This segment of families has been little
affected as yet by the Farm Security Administration program, which to date has
been largely confined to the lowest-income class of families because they have
been most urgently in need of assistance.
Many of the displaced families are not faring so well. Each displaced family
remaining in agriculture displaces another, which in turn displaces a third. Each
dislocation and moving, constitutes a drain upon the tenant farmer's usually
meager purse. Indications are that this dislocation problem will be more serious
in the spring, when the farm year ends. Loans and grants will be needed for
many families moving into defense relocation areas, and as more families are
displaced by Government purchase of land for Army camps, arsenals, and proving
grounds this problem will increase.
All divisions of the United States Department of Agriculture are cooperating
to meet the problems that have arisen, but Farm Security Administration is
directly affected and must take the initiative in this work.
Family Case Histories, Farm Displacement for National Defense
plum brook ordnance works, erie county, ohio
Case No. 1.
This family, consisting of the husband, 57, and the wife, 55, wanted about
$30,000 for their farm. The War Department gradually raised its offer to
approximately $27,500.
The family chose to attempt to obtain the $30,000 price through resort to the
courts. The farm was condemned by the Government. No settlement has been
reached, and the case has not yet come up in court.
The family held a sale to dispose of their machinery and livestock, with the
exception of two cows and a team. They purchased a small farm of 15 acres,
3 miles from their old location, as a temporary home. They are interested in
purchasing a larger farm and continuing to be farmers.
During this summer this man and a neighbor were the successful bidders to
combine all wheat on the land bought by the Government. He plans to operate
the small farm he has purchased until he has received a definite settlement from
the War Department and until he locates another desirable farm.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 79S7
Case No. 2.
This husband, 42, wife, 25, and three children ranging from 4 to 6, had been
living for 2 years upon a 42-acre farm which they rented on a cash basis. The
farm did not provide sufficient income to support the family, and the husband
worked part-time on Work Projects Administration and bought and sold junk
to increase the income. His application for a Farm Security Administration
loan to buy livestock and machinery to operate the farm had been rejected because
it was not possible to arrange a satisfactory farm and home plan.
When the farm was purchased by the Government for the ordnance plant site,
the Farm Security Administration had to render immediate assistance to this
family. They were .not interested in moving into town, but desired to farm, so
a Farm Security Administration representative contacted a landowner and
rented a 100-acre farm 20 miles away on a cash share basis of $400, drawing up a
3-year lease. The Farm Security Administration placed particular emphasis
upon the writing of a sound farm lease and loaned the family $1,129 for the
purchase of machinery and livestock to start farming.
The family was delinquent in its rent and thus received no reimbursement
when moved off the 40-acre farm. It was necessary for Farm Security Adminis-
tration to grant the family $120 to pay moving expenses, and for subsistence.
The county Farm Security Administration supervisor has reported that he is
well pleased at the progress this family is making, that the family has taken such
interest in their new farm that it is requiring less supervision than had been
anticipated. The Farm Security Administration worked out with the neighbors
an arrangement whereby this farmer can borrow a portion of the machinery he
needs from them under cooperative service terms, which saved the family a
considerable amount in its machinery investment.
Case No. S.
For three generations this family name had been associated with their 134-acre
farm which the Government bought for $35,000 for the ordnance- works site. The
husband, 57, wife, 60, and daughters 24 and 27, were very successful as a farm
family. They were growers of hybrid corn and certified wheat. The farm was
very productive and, too, the family attached considerable sentiment to the land.
The first offers for the land were rejected and before a settlement finally was
reached the owner hired an outside appraiser and sought counsel and advice on
the value of the farm; also from the agricultural department at Ohio State
University.
The family moved to the city of Sandusky, temporarily, but plans to purchase
a farm within a few years. Prices are high for the type of farm they wish to buy,
and they believe it wise to wait a few years in the expectation of a drop in farm
prices.
The husband was quite lost when he moved to town, as he had always lived on
a farm, but being interested in the growing of hybrid corn he has worked with
other farmers in the county this year with their hybrid seed plots. He plans to
work this winter selling hybrid seeds.
Case No. 4-
An old couple, 84 and 74 years old, and their single son, aged 50, had operated
their 136-acre farm for many years. The elder man was blind, and both he and
his wife were in poor health.
The family was happy to sell the farm to the Government for $14,000, although
they regretted having to move to new surroundings because of the elder man's
blindness. There was considerable debt, consisting of chattel loans and judg-
ments on the chattel property, and a heavy mortgage on the real estate, held by
the Federal land bank. Frequent delinquencies were shown on the mortgage
payment records.
The family sold all its chattel property and moved to a small town nearby,
renting a vacant house. The mother died shortly after and the son and father
now are living alone, the son doing farm labor.
Case No. 5.
Three years ago this family, consisting of the father, 46, wife, 44, and eight
children, purchased their 87-acre farm for $10,500. They sold it to the Govern-
ment for $17,500 and retired their mortgage of about $8,000.
They had always been fanners and desired to continue. They wanted to
purchase a farm of about 80 acres and would pay about $10,000. They checked
many farms in surrounding counties. They wanted a farm of black sandy loam
soil. Farms with this type soil that were being offered for sale were offered at a
7988 DETROIT HEARINGS
much higher price than they were willing to pay. Consequently they were
forced to change their minds on the type of soil. They purchased a l29-acre
farm in an adjoining county, and plan to farm it with horses.
This family seemed to be happy at selling its farm for $17,500, but they stress
now that they would be more than glad to repurchase it at the price they sold it
for.
Case No. 6.
For many years this couple, aged 61 and 59, had operated their 175-acre farm,
on which they owed a heavy debt as well as chattel debts.
The husband owns an interest in the concessions at a summer resort nearby
and spends most of his time during the summer managing the concessions. They
appeared pleased to sell their farm to the 'Government for $40,000. They sold all
their machinery and livestock, then purchased a large four-wheel trailer house
-which they moved to the summer resort and have been living in.
They are not interested in returning to the farm, although at some later date
they wish to purchase about 10 acres near Sandusky.
The man's mother had lived directly across the road from him in a house where
she had lived since childhood. In poor health and bedfast for months, she died
a short time after learning of the Government land purchases.
Case No. 7.
The Government paid $28,000 for this 40-acre truck farm, including a green-
house, which was the basis for a good-size business. The operator lived on the
farm with his wife and three children, aged 10 to 26. A married son who helped
operate vhe business built a house also on this farm.
The family apparently was well pleased wilh the settlement and purchased a
62-acre farm just outside the Sandusky city limits. An extension of time was
granted them so they could complete new greenhouses upon the new farm.
Case No. 8.
On their 186-acre farm lived this family of eight — the husband and wife, four
children from 8 to 16 years old, the husband's mother and sister. A hired man
made his home with them.
The family was opposed to selling the farm, and when convinced it was neces-
sary, asked a price that was considered exorbitant. The Government had to con-
demn the farm.
The family are outstanding farmers, hard workers, and good managers. They
have purchased a 150-acre farm nearby for $15,250 and made arrangements to
move out the tenants living on it.
Case No. 9.
For 25 years this man, now 70, and his wife, 68, had farmed their 116 acres
near Sandusky. They had raised two daughters who had married and left them.
It was a shock to them to be called upon to sell their land to the Government.
However, they agreed upon a price of $22,500.
They wanted 10 continue farming and looked at many places that were for
sale. They wanted a farm with two sets of buildings so that one of their daughters
and her husband, who are now tenants, could move into one set of buildings and
help with the farm work. They could not find such a farm so they sold their
livestock and tractor equipment and moved into a small town in an adjoining
county, where they purchased a business building for an investment and a small
home for a residence.
KAVENNA ORDNANCE WORKS, PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO
Case No. 10.
This family was crowded off the farm it was renting because another family,
which was displaced from the ordnance works site was able to buy the land.
The father, mother, and two young daughters thus secondarily dispossessed
were unable to find another farm to rent and sold their chattel property. He
found work as a carpenter, but still hopes to locate a good farm and return to
farming.
Case No. 11.
This family was composed of father and mother and five children, from 13 down
to 5 years of age.
They had owned a 133-acre farm for a number of years. Notified that the
Government wanted the farm, they quoted their price, and it was readily accepted.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7989
After being notified that the option was accepted, the couple could not agree
on what they should do. It was said that this and past family troubles resulted
in the wife securing a divorce. He then sold off all his chattel property, with the
exception of his farm truck and bailer. He used his bailer throughout the area
bailing straw, and his truck for moving families.
She moved her family and household goods to Ravenna, and secured work at
a restaurant as cook. He moved in with another family. He has found work
with a construction company at the Ravenna ordnance plant, and also does
trucking on the side.
Case No. 12.
This family is composed of a father, 76, and one unmarried son, who still lives
at home. When their dairy farm was purchased by the War Department they
purchased a good farm of 155 acres that is suitable for dairy farming and has a
house with modern conveniences.
Moving presented such a problem that the father finally purchased a truck
for this purpose. He stated that he was too old to farm, but that since the son
wanted to continue farming he felt that they should relocate on a farm. As he
stated, he had purchased a bigger and better farm, paid cash for it, and still had
$2,700 in cash left from the transaction.
There was a secondary displacement in this case.
Case No. 13.
This family is composed of 9 people. The father is 50 years of age, the
mother 43, and there are 7 children at home ranging in ages from 21 to 4 years.
There were 103 acres in their farm, which they inherited. It was of very poor
fertility and very poorly drained. They operated it for a few years after inherit-
ing it and then because of low prices and lack of equipment the farm remained
idle for 3 or 4 years.
During this time, he worked on Work Projects Administration while she was
in the chicken business on a fairly large scale. In 1937 they again started oper-
ating the farm and increased the number of poultry considerably. From then
until the fall of 1940 the family was getting along fairly well.
After the land was purchased for the Ravenna ordnance plant, the family
purchased another farm of 100 acres near by. They are very well satisfied
because after making the necessary repairs and improvements and paying off
the mortgage against the other farm, they now have their home free of indebted-
ness.
He has obtained work at the Ravenna ordnance plant with his team of horses,
furnishing a supplementary income.
There was a displacement on this farm which they purchased. However, the
family they displaced had been working for the Work Projects Administration.
They moved to town and the head of the family now is working at the shell-loading
plant.
Case No. 14-
This young family was renting a 160-acre dairy farm on a share basis, when their
farm was sold to another family which had been displaced by the Ravenna ord-
nance purchase. He is 22 years of age and she is 24. They obtained a satisfac-
tory settlement and gave immediate possession.
At first the}' were unable to locate a farm for rent and just when they were
ready to sell out they heard of a farm which they could get on a cash rent basis.
Considerable difficulty and expense were involved in moving and the family did
not have sufficient chattel property to farm for themselves. They finally borrowed
sufficient money for this purpose from a local bank.
Their new farm has 87 acres and the soil is of good fertility. The family is
satisfied and feels that they may be better off.
There was a third displacement, the owner-operator of the 87-acre farm selling
out and moving to Cleveland to take urban employment.
Case No. 15.
This farm family of four was tenant-operating a 100-acre farm of only fair
fertility and not too well drained, owned by an absentee landlord who lived in
Detroit, Mich. When the Government bought the land the owner refused to
make any settlement with the tenant and this proved to be the most difficult
case in the acquisition of land for the Ravenna ordnance plant. The tenant re-
fused to move and give possession. Finally when the construction company
started blasting across the road, and sent rocks flying into the yard, the tenants
began to move out. They had to sell off their crops and cows.
7990 DETROIT HEARINGS
They moved into the village of Hiram when they were unable to locate a farm.
The horses were pastured out, and the machinery was stored. The tenant was
advised to take legal action to tie up the funds of the owner, but he failed to do so.
The tenant obtained employment at the Ravenna ordnance plant, where he
has been working since. He hopes to find a farm and to again start farming.
In the meantime, he is satisfied to continue working.
The family has moved three times within the past year, and are not sure how
long they may remain in their present house. There was no other displacement
in this case.
Case No. 16.
This family represents a somewhat different situation from the other cases
described, but was typical of the farms bordering the area. In this ease, this
family of two owned an 87-acre farm with 30 acres in crop land. The War
Department purchased 71 acres, leaving 16 acres of land and the buildings. This
destroyed the farm unit and meant that the family did not have sufficient acreage.
The husband in this case is 56 years old, the wife 48 years, and they have no
children left at home. At first they thought they would have to sell their remain-
ing land and buildings and purchase a farm elsewhere, or sell out and quit farming.
However, after inquiry they located a 33-acre tract down the road, which was
vacant, and purchased this. They have now only 49 acres of land with 24 acres
of crop land. This is a very small unit and they will have to depend partly on
renting outside farm land.
He has secured employment at the Ravenna ordnance plant and will work there
and do part-time farming. The family, upset at first, apparently has become
fairly well satisfied. Their financial condition is such that they do not need aid,
although they still have a mortgage on their farm. They will become full-time
farmers when the work at the ordnance plant ends.
Case No. 17.
This is a young family, the father 35, the mother 26, and four children, the
oldest of which is 6. This family owned their farm, which they inherited several
years ago.
The farm is composed of 39 acres, of which 29 acres were crop land. The soil
was poor and had been very poorly operated during the past few years. During
the 2 years prior to its purchase by the War Department, it was operated as a
dairy farm.
When they were bought out, the family purchased a farm in a nearby county,
making a $50 down payment. After some consideration they decided not to move
so far away. The husband in this case wanted to continue farming, but his wife
felt that considering past experiences it would be better if they did not. He then
purchased a 3-acre tract of land in Portage County. Here they have an especially
good house and a fair barn. The family experienced considerable difficulty in
obtaining their money from the Government and did not have sufficient money
left to make a down payment. It therefore became necessary for them to live
with the wife's family until the money came through.
After making this purchase they sold all of their livestock and equipment and
the husband found a job with a construction crew at the Ravenna ordnance plant.
He now hopes to obtain an operating position at the plant when the construction
work is completed in the near future.
This family's financial condition has been greatly improved through the sale of
their farm, and their relocation. They were badly in debt on their farm and
might have lost it at some future date if it had not been for this sale. There was
no secondary displacement in this case, as the house which they purchased was
vacant.
Case No. 18.
This family was composed of four people — the father, 45 years old, mother 44,
and two children, 19 and 16.
They owned an exceptionally productive 92-acre farm within the bounds of the
Ravenna ordnance plant site.
After the purchase of their farm by the War Department, this family pu- chased
a farm nearby. A few days later, they sold this and 10 days later bought it back.
They became quite discouraged because they were unable to find a farm that suited
them. "The husband was found dead in his garage at his old farm with the motor
of his automobile running. His wife was crushed by the whole affair, and said,
"They not only took our farm, but they took my husband, too."
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7991
Their new farm has 80 acres, of which 41 acres are cropland. It is of good fer-
tility and a very good dairy farm. The wife hopes that her son will stay at home
and continue farming, but he appears to be more interested in industrial employ-
ment.
This family was definitely not satisfied with having to move and relocate else-
where. It is thought that it would probably be true of them regardless of any
farm they might have purchased, because of their love of the farm and home
which they had spent years in building up.
The relocation of this family caused a secondary displacement of another family.
Case No. 19.
This young family, consisting of a father and mother, both 27, and children 5
and 2, was renting a good 80-acre farm. Good managers, they built up an excellent
dairy herd and were quite successful and contented.
But not far away another family's land was taken by the Government for the
ordnance plant. And that displaced family relocated by purchasing the farm this
young family had been renting.
A satisfactory settlement was reached and immediate possession was given.
However, the young family was unable to find a satisfactory farm. Finally they
rented a 7-acre tract with a good house but no barn. They had to sell off all their
cows, one horse, and part of their feed. They did save a team, machinery, and
most of the feed.
He then obtained a position in nearby steel mills. They expect to find a good
farm at a later date and return to agriculture. For the present they are satisfied
but do not wish to remain in industry.
JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND, JEFFERSON COUNTY, IND.
Case No. 20.
This family of four owned an 80-acre farm in the Jefferson Proving Ground
site, and had long farmed in the immediate vicinity. About 50 years old, the
couple had a sufficient equity in their farm to enable them to buy another farm
in Bartholomew County, two counties distant. They are nearly independent
financially. Their purchase of the Bartholomew County farm displaced another
farm family there.
Case No. 21.
This tenant, aged 65, was renting a poor farm on the site of the Jefferson
Proving Ground. He has three sons at home, aged 16, 14, and 12 years, and a
girl, 18. He had to have aid from the Farm Security Administration to pay hia
moving expenses when his land was taken. He received $200 disturbance money,
which he used to buy feed, seed, and a new team. He has farmed all his life
and rented another farm, but his crops are poor and he will not make more than
a bare living this season. He will have to move this winter, and is unable to
find another farm. His problem is acute.
Case No. 22.
This man, 50, his wife and children, 12 and 15, have farmed 8 years in Jefferson
County as tenants. He has sufficient equipment, and received $400 disturbance
money. He bought a poor 120-acre farm in the same county on contract, at
$200 a year. He paid $500 down. He is farming now, with a probable income
of about $600 a year.
Case No. 28.
This man, 35, his wife and son, 14, and daughter, 3, lived on a farm which he
part-owned. He had farmed all his life.
The Government optioned his farm. He borrowed money on the option, and
bought a house in a rural village. Sale of his farm to the Government has not yet
been closed. He is working in the proving ground as a laborer now, but plans
to resume farming when the job ends. He had enough equity in his farm to pay
for his village house and settle all his debts.
Case No. 24.
This man, 25, owned 40 acres of land on the Jefferson Proving Ground site.
He has a wife and one small child. He came from a farming family, and has
farmed all his life. When his land was purchased, he and his family moved into
the city of Madison, rented a house, and he found employment at the proving
ground. When his employment ends he will want to return to a farm.
7992 DETROIT HEARINGS
Case No. 25.
This man, 42, and his wife owned 160 acres on the Jefferson Proving Ground
site. They have a daughter, 10. He has farmed all his life. When his land was
optioned, he had to borrow money on the option for immediate expenses. His
equity in the farm was not so great, but it enabled him to purchase another farm
nearby, not so fertile as the farm he had to sell. He is now farming and working
part time. He may have financial difficulties on his infertile farm when he is
unable to obtain part-time work to supplement his income. His purchase of the
new farm displaced another farm family.
Case No. 26.
This 60-year-old man has farmed all his life in the vicinity, has six children,,
three now at home, including girls 18 and 14 and a boy 9.
He had about $2,000 equity in his farm, and owed $1,000 in debts when the
Government optioned his farm. He bought a 70-acre farm in an adjoining county
for $1,700, paid $1,000 on it, and financed $700 with a local bank. He paid all
his debts but $300. Until he secures possession of his farm in the spring of 1942,
he is paying cash rent for a place to live.
His new farm is unfertile. He will need to spend $300 to $400 on improvements
before he can begin to farm it. He is now working in the proving ground, and
will get one-half the income from the crops on the farm he purchased, which will
amount to about $150. When he moves onto the farm he has bought, the tenant
on it will be displaced.
Case No. 27.
This man, 51, his wife and two boys, 16 and 9, owned their 40-acre farm in
the Jefferson Proving Ground site. He had a $2,000 equity in his farm, and
borrowed money on his option when the Government acquired his land. He
paid off his debts and had $1,700 clear from sale of his farm. He bought $1,700
worth of livestock, dairy cows, a tractor, tractor equipment, seed, feed, etc., and
rented another farm.
The farm he rented has now been sold. He has little money, but he has found
a poor farm of 70 acres in Jefferson County which he wants to buy. He plans to
hold a sale in February to dispose of enough livestock and equipment to give
him the amount needed for a small down payment.
Case No. 28.
This man, 26, his wife and 1-year-old child farmed 120 acres which he was
buying. His father-in-law and brother-in-law live with him. He received $1,700
for his equity, and paid it down on an 80-acre farm in the same county which he
purchased for $2,500. He borrowed the balance of $800 at 6 percent interest.
He could not get possession this year so he paid cash rent for a small farm in an
adjoining county. He is working in the proving ground as a laborer. He will
obtain possession of his new farm in March, and will displace another family then.
He will receive $150 as half interest in this year's crops.
JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND, RIPLEY COUNTY, IND.
Case No. 29.
This man, aged 59, his wife, his son, 20, and daughter, 16, tenant-operated a
120-acre Ripley County farm which was taken for the Jefferson Proving Ground.
He received $200 disturbance money, but required Farm Security Administration
aid to meet moving expenses, and needed subsistence help.
He found another farm, which he rented. He has poor crops this year and will
have no income above a bare existence. The farm has been sold since he rented
it, and he must move again. He is unable to find another farm to rent. His
problem is acute.
KINGSBURY ORDNANCE WORKS, LA PORTE COUNTY, IND.
Case No. 30.
This family had been farming 240 acres of land in La Porte County, 120 acres
as owners and 120 acres as tenants. They had lived in that locality about 15
years. They refused to sign an option on their farm and the Government started
condemnation proceedings.
In November 1940 they liquidated all their personal property and went to
Michigan, where they spent the winter with relatives. They came back to La
Porte County in May and purchased a 160-acre farm on a "shoestring." When
the condemnation suit is settled, they will be able to pay cash for their new farm.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7993
They have been operating on borrowed capital. Their probable income for the
year will be approximately $2,000.
Case No. SI.
This young family had been operating a 160-acre farm in La Porte County for
2 years. They were told to move by January 1, 1941, and were unable to find an-
other farm. They finally went to his father's farm, just outside of the defense
area, built a three-room house, and obtained work on construction of the ordnance
plant about April 1, 1941. He is making about $140 a month from this work, and
is helping his father on the farm during the extra time.
There are five children, the oldest 10 years and the youngest only 1 year of age.
They have a cow, chickens, and a garden for maintenance. He has applied for
permanent work in the ordnance plant when it begins operating.
Thev received no compensation from their landlord for the loss of their lease
for 1941.
Case No. 32.
With their 10 children, this man and his wife moved from their 175-acre farm on
December 1, 1940. They had been operating the land as tenants for 2 years.
Unable to find another farm, they rented a house and a few acres of ground. He
obtained work on construction in the defense area in November and has been re-
ceiving around $140 a month. The older children are working wherever they can
find jobs. Of the five sons, the oldest is 18, the second oldest, 15. The oldest
girl is 15.
The family is doing no farming. They received no compensation from their
landlord for loss of their lease for the 1941 crop year.
Case No. S3.
For 38 years this family operated a 160-acre tract in La Porte County as tenant
farmers. When they were compelled to move, the landlord paid them $1,400 for
disturbance. With this money they purchased a 3-acre tract a few miles from
the area and built a house with the financial assistance of their son.
They paid off their Farm Security Administration loan in full and are keeping
a team of horses, a cow, and pigs, and chickens. They also are raising a few
truck crops for sale. Their probable yearly income from truck and livestock
sales is around $150. In addition they are receiving $200 a year in old-age pension
money. The balance of their living expenses is being paid by their son.
Case No. 34.
This man, 43, and his wife had owned and operated 130-acres of farm land in
La Porte County for 15 years. They have one daughter, 16. When they sold
out they purchased an 80-acre tract 10 miles from their old home. The farm
they are now operating had previously been field rented and they displaced
another family.
As a result of their move they have materially improved their housing. Their
probable yearly income for 1941 will be around $1,400. They have no other
income.
Case No. 35.
Operating a 20-acre tract as tenant farmers this family had a team of horses,
a few cows, hogs, and other livestock. The bulk of their income came from doing
odd jobs but they did farming on a small scale. Because of faulty land titles, it
was necessary to start a condemnation suit, which delayed settlement to the
owner and in turn to the tenant family.
They lived on their farm until August 1941. They purchased the house which
they had been occupying with the intention of moving it to a small tract which
they have purchased. In dismantling the house the husband broke his ankle.
The family is being helped with Farm Security Administration grants.
They have three children, the oldest a boy, 16. The other children are girls,
one 13 and one 4.
Case No. 36.
This family had been purchasing a 40-acre farm in La Porte County on a land
contract. They had lived in that locality for 7 years. When the land was sold
to the Government they used their equity as down payment on a 60-acre farm
about 10 miles from their old home. They are buying this farm on contract.
The husband, 51, has been working at the Kingsbury project since last Novem-
ber. They have five children, the oldest two being boys, 20 and 17, who have
been operating the farm.
7994 DETROIT HEARINGS
Their farm income probably will abount to $600. The income from work in
the area will amount to about $1,600. The farm which they purchased was
somewhat inflated in value.
Case No. 37.
This man has been operating a 154-acre farm as a tenant since 1936. His wife
died about that time and he has raised the family himself. His children include
a girl, 20, and two sons, 18 and 14. The family moved out of the defense area
about March 1, 1941, to another farm purchased by the same landlord.
Sale of his crops to the Government enabled the tenant to buy feed necessary
for his livestock and to move to the new farm, located about 5 miles from the old
one. His probable income from farm operations during 1941 will be about $2,000.
EAST COAST NAVAL AMMUNITION DEPOT, MARTIN COUNTY, IND.
Case No. 38.
This man, 52, and his wife, 47, have one girl at home, 22, who has a child 1 year
old. They owned their own farm in Martin County. An average of 25 crop-
acres were farmed each year. This provided, mainly, feed for subsistence live-
stock. He worked out by the day, providing a cash income. Since they were
displaced this family has rented a 40-acre farm in Daviess County and seems to
be happy. He works at the depot at $6 a day. The relief from financial worries
apparently helps to govern their happiness in relocation. This $6 a day income is
greater than they have enjoyed at any time previously. They displaced another
family when they moved on their present farm. It is unknown where this secondly
displaced family moved, but it is likely another family was displaced.
Case No. 39.
This man,'a~part-time farmer and former railroad laborer, is 63 years of age and
his wife is 58. He purchased the 40-acre tract of land near Burns City, Ind.,
about 8 years ago, and he and his son were living on it at the time of the Govern-
ment acquisition. Farming operations were carried on by the son. The father
more recently has been working on Work Projects Administration. Since the
Navy bought his farm he has purchased a home and two lots at Burns City, where
he has a small garden and continues to work for Work Projects Administration.
Case No. 40.
This man, aged 32, his wife, 30, and infant son lived with the wife's blind grand-
father who owned the 40-acre farm purchased by the Navy Department. The
younger man has had some outside employment, but has made most of the living
on the 40 acres which he rented. When his farm was bought by the Navy the
grandfather purchased a 54-acre farm in adjoining Daviess County. They have
relocated and are happy. The neighbors helped move the family to the new farm.
The younger man planted his crops and made hay before he started work in the
depot area at $6 a day. He is continuing to farm.
Case No. 41.
This man, 53; his wife, aged 41; and four boys, 17, 12, 10, and 4, moved to their
124-acre farm in Martin County, Ind., from Michigan in 1937. Since that time
they have struggled along in an endeavor to live and meet the payments on the
farm. They kept a cow, sow, and some poultry, thus making a meager existence,
but fell short on their payment for the land. They farmed from 10 to 40 acres of
their farm. The oldest boy provided the main source of income the last year.
Foreclosure was in progress at the time the Government purchased their farm for
a naval depot this year. The family has moved back to a small farm at Hopkins,
Mich., where they intended to truck farm.
Case No. 42.
This man, 28, his wife and two children, owned a 28-acre farm near Burns City,
which was taken by the Navy last March. They then rented a 40-acre farm near
Hobbieville.
Although he has been employed in the defense project continuously since
leaving his farm he has 5 cows at the present time, 100 chickens, and a garden.
He rented out a small amount of cropland on this 40 acres. He pays $8 a month
rent. He taught school in 1932 and since that time has held various temporary
nonfarm jobs. He never did any farming on the land that was acquired for defense
except to pasture 5 or 6 cows, raise some chickens, and produce enough hogs for
his meat and some pigs for sale.
He is very happy about his present financial status because he is making more
money than ever before.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7995
Case No. 43.
This middle-aged couple and their eight children were paying $5 a month rent
for a small tract until it was purchased by the Government. They had enough
land for a large garden, chickens, and pasture for one cow. By having a good
garden, Work Projects Administration employment, and some odd jobs he has
provided for his family. Although a Work Projects Administration worker, the
family never has been on direct relief. This family moved to a small plot near
Linton, Ind. The house was vacant so no one was displaced. At the present
time they have a cow, room for a garden, and live some better since he is working
on the Navy project at $6 a day, commuting to work. When this project is
completed, he probably will be on Work Projects Administration again or rely on
odd jobs for a livelihood.
Case No. 44.
This man and his wife, 60 years old, sold their 100-acre farm to the Navy
Department and bought an 18-acre farm in Daviess County near Elnora, Ind.
Though the acreage is far different, th.3 tillable crop acres remain about the same.
A cripple for years, his main enterprise was poultry and he intends to continue it
at the new location. The income provides a meager living. That along with a
garden enables this family to live independently, however.
Case No. 45.
This couple, age 50 and 48, have two boys, 21 and 18, at home. They have
spent most of their lives in Martin County, on their 60-acre farm. Father and
sons operated their own sawmill and farmed some. Subsistence livestock and a
large garden were maintained, thus keeping the table. When their land was
taken over, they purchased a 40-acre farm near Stanford, in an adjacent county,
where they plan to live and do limited farming while the father works at the
Navy depot. They intend to operate the sawmill and live about the same as
they did in Martin County when work is no longer available at the defense-plant
site.
When this family bought its farm, it displaced another family.
INDIANA ORDNANCE WORKS, CLARK COUNTY, IND.
Case No. 46.
This man and his wife, each aged 68, owned their farm without mortgage near
Charlestown, Ind., where they had lived for more than 25 years. They were near
retirement when their farm was purchased for the defense site. Within a short
time, they probably would have retired on this farm and lived on the rental
income from the land.
After their farm was purchased for the defense area, however, they bought~a
house and an acre of land in adjoining Floyd County, just outside New Albany,
where they moved. They are not attempting to farm. He has worked on his
own place and for various farmers in the vicinity this summer.
This family has had no defense income, but is fairly well off financially.
Case No. 47.
This man, 70, anu nis wife, 69, had lived a lifetime on the farm which they
owned near Charlestown, Ind., and were almost ready to retire. They planned
to live on the farm and field-rent the land.
However, when they were required to sell their farm as a part of the defense
site, they decided to retire in California, where they have a son. They made a
trip to California, but were not satisfied there, and returned to Indiana.
They bought 30 acres of poor land without buildings in Clark County, on which
he has been trying to build a house. He has been trying to build it himself,
because he could find no carpenters. The house is partly finished and the work-
manship not very good. It is understood that he paid a rather high price for the
bare land.
Case No. 48.
This woman, aged 56, is a widow and an outstanding farmer. She had lived on
a farm near Charlestown, Ind., since her marriage. She has two daughters married
and one, age 18, at home.
After her farm was purchased for the defense site, she bought a farm at Bloom-
field, Ky., but they have not been satisfied there this summer and plan to return
to Clark County soon. Returning to Clark County may mean that she will have
to sell her Kentucky farm at a loss.
Before moving from Indiana, she kept a number of roomers and boarders, but
otherwise has had no defense income.
7996 DETROIT HEARINGS
Case No. 49.
This family consists of the husband, aged 66; his wife, 58; two daughters, 22
and 20; and a son who is living away from home. A father-in-law, 87, also makes
his home with them.
The family had to move from their farm in Clark County, Ind., which they
owned without mortgage, but the Government has not yet paid them for it.
They cash-rented a small place near Jeffersonville, and sold most of their livestock,
retaining 1 mule and 2 cows. Farming operations this summer have been limited
to raising 300 pullets. He receives a pension in addition to his farm income, as
he is a retired Government employee.
The family has contracted to buy a 9-acre place near Jeffersonville, and will
obtain possession September 20, 1941. They are required to pay 6-percent interest
on the purchase price of their new farm, while their own capital can earn no in-
come until they are paid for their farm in the defense area.
Case No. 50.
This man, about 75, owned a farm with a mortgage in Clark County, Ind.,
where he has reared a large family. The only two children now at home are an
incompetent son and an afflicted daughter. His wife is aged, and the shock of
having to move from her home has brought a near nervous break-down.
He purchased a 10-acre farm near New Albany in adjoining Floyd County,
where he moved his family. This is being used as a subsistence farm to supply
part of the family living.
This family has not been able to earn any defense income.
Case No. 51.
This man, aged 52, owned a Clark County farm with a mortgage, where he
lived with his wife, 49. Their son, 19, is a student at Purdue University. They
had lived on their farm for 25 years.
When notified that the farm was in the defense area and that they must give
possession, they had a sale and liquidated their farm equipment. Since that
time, they have not been able to locate a farm to buy or rent. They have lost a
year on the farm and still no job or farm is in sight.
At present, they are living in the community with a friend and former neighbor.
Case No. 52.
Family A was displaced from the powder-plant site and purchased a farm which
family B had been renting for 3 years. Family B, consisting of a middle-aged
couple and three children, retained possession of the farm until March 1, 1941.
Meanwhile, family A had been forced out of the powder-plant site and their
equipment was scattered over the community in storage.
Family B obtained credit for the purchase of another farm in the same county,
but had difficulty in obtaining possession, as family C which was renting that
farm had no place to move. Family C eventually moved in with relatives and
family B was able to move into its newly purchased farm. Thus by a third
displaced family moving in with relatives, the original and secondly displaced
families were enabled to move into newly purchased farms.
Family B has been renting two rooms for light housekeeping to defense workers,
as a means of obtaining additional income.
Case No. 53.
This man and his wife and three children lived on a farm within the ordnance
plant site. They have been paid a small amount, but settlement for the remainder
of the farm has been delayed.
The family bought a farm near Bloomfield, Ky., and bought a new 1^-ton truck.
He made more than a score of trips to complete his move to Kentucky. The
family was not satisfied in Kentucky and finally sold their farm there at a loss.
They are planning to have a public sale of their equipment, and will purchase
other equipment when they get relocated on another farm in Clark County.
The family owned their original farm without a mortgage but are now operating
entirely on borrowed money. They have had no defense income.
Case No. 54.
This young man, his wife and their three children, from 3 to 8 years old, had
lived in Clark County several years as renters. Six months after they purchased
a farm through a Farm Security Administration tenant-purchase loan, it was
bought outright from them by the Du Pont Co. They received an amount suffi-
cient to liquidate their indebtedness and leave a residue sufficient to purchase
another farm.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7997
They bought another farm in Clark County from a man who was retiring from
agriculture. They continued full-time farming and did not seek employment in
the defense industries.
Case No. 55.
A share renter on a farm of 236 acres in Clark County, this man, his wife, and
two sons operated a part of the farm and managed the balance of it. His sons
maintained their own homes.
He had lived on this farm for 4 years when it was sold to the Government and
they had to give possession. They had a public sale, completely liquidating their
farm equipment, and moved to Charlestown. He is too old to be employed in any
of the defense industries, and has been doing odd jobs this summer. The two sons
are employed in the defense area.
Case No. 56.
This man, 55, his wife and their son, 18, lived on a farm which they owned with
a small mortgage. It had been in the wife's family for four generations, and their
son was the fifth generation to be brought up on the farm.
When this farm was purchased for the defense site, and it was necessary for the
family to leave, they bought a farm nearby and moved with their horse and wagon.
They' displaced a tenant, who moved to town and obtained work in the defense
industry.
The family's pride was badly wounded when they had to give up the farm.
They have been keeping roomers and boarders, and have been receiving as much,
as $80 per month from this source, since they moved.
Exhibit 59. — The Scioto Marsh, Hardin County, Ohio
SPECIAL AREA SURVEY BY LABOR DIVISION, FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Distress in the Scioto marsh area has emerged as a result of changes in land use
and the inability of existing population to adapt itself to these changes. Briefly
described, the history of the area has been that of increasing intensity in the pro-
duction of onions on the rich muck-land soil accompanied by steady increases in
population to provide the labor requirements essential to this production; a grad-
ual decline since 1915 in productivity with respect to onions, a gradual abandon-
ment of the crop unaccompanied by a proportional emigration of population.
Throughout the period of development and decline, land tenure has been charac-
terized by large commercial holdings and the opportunities for the farmer popu-
lation to adjust itself to changing production on an individual basis has been greatly
curtailed or completely inhibited.
The key to the distress problem in this area is the fact that a substantial portion
of this population is surplus or stranded. Of this distressed population 330 fam-
ilies, or approximately 90 percent, were included in this survey.
The stranded population is predominantly white and has had its principal ori-
gins in Ohio, contrary to the common belief that the working population of the
area consisted largely of emigrants from Kentucky. In any event, four-fifths of
the families have resided in the Scioto marsh area for 5 years or more.
The distressed groups consist largely of families, with the average family group
having a membership of 4.6 persons.
Family heads incline toward middle-age with one-sixth of the heads having
passed their fifty-fifth birthday.
Employment as farm workers has been virtually the exclusive occupation of
this stranded group but almost two-thirds of them receive only seasonal employ-
ment. A small portion of the distressed group has operator status and a little
less than one-fourth secures fairly stable employment as regular farm workers.
The practice of sharecropping plots of onions, ranging from 2 to 10 acres in
size, underlies the otherwise usual employment opportunities of roughly one-
fourth of the families.
The median cash family income for distressed families in the area was $416 dur-
ing 1940, with perquisites and the consumption of homegrown produce adding
slightly to the value of nonrelief income.
Over half of the distressed families received relief, including all types of public
assistance, and about one-third of the farm labor population is dependent princi-
pally upon this source of income.
7998 DETROIT HEARINGS
Housing is consistently bad with slightly more than two-fifths of all the dwellings
being unfit for human occupancy and an equal number suffering from varying
stages of neglect.
Sanitary conditions are at a low level, there being only 2 flush toilets and 11
closed pit toilets in use among the surveyed families. The remainder used open
pit privies. There was no regular channel for garbage disposal and the general
practice is simply to deposit it in out-of-the-way places.
Although 90 percent of the marsh familes surveyed had gardens, less than 5 per-
cent followed a satisfactory home-canning program and two-thirds of the families
raised no livestock other than poultry and half of the families raised no poultry.
Of the total surveyed population of 1,466 persons, 430 were disabled at least
1 day through illness in the 60 days preceding the date of enumeration; 191
families reported an average medical expense of $10.42 in the 2 months preceding
the date of enumeration but one-third of this sum was still owing and one-half of
those who had had disabling illnesses received no medical care at all.
The distress of the marsh families is also measured in part by the degree of
personal indebtedness, exclusive of medical debt. The average family debt was
$66 and the average amount owed to personal finance companies, charging 3 per-
cent per month, was $40. Only one-fourth of the families were debt-free.
In terms of rehabilitative possibilities, it must be recognized that because of
limited occupational capacity and weakening of morale through a prolonged period
of distress, an acute problem is faced both in providing the economic means for
rehabilitation and in stimulating an urge toward improvement among the dis-
tressed families.
History of the Area
The Scioto Marsh, which contains approximately 10,000 acres of muck land, is
located in the western part of Hardin County, Ohio. The main problem area
embraces the marsh proper and an additional 15,000 acres of the surrounding
upland fringes. Since other sections of the eight western townships of Hardin
County contain distress conditions similar to those found in the marsh, however,
the problem area is delimited with sufficient flexibility to incorporate these
scattered areas.
The problem identified with the Scioto Marsh is the distress suffered by a
stranded farm-labor population. This problem developed as a result of the
abandonment of onion production on the marsh. Throughout most of its history,
the agricultural economy of the area has been dominated by the onion. In recent
years, onion-growing has moved to other, more productive areas; but the farm
families whose economic welfare long depended upon the onion crop, remain in
Hardin County. A brief review of the rise and fall of the marsh as a commercial
onion center will help to an understanding of the present marsh problem.
DRAINAGE
In the first attempt to drain the Scioto Marsh, begun in 1850 and finished in
1862, approximately 4,550 acres of land were drained. Drainage work continued
sporadically until 1916, when the upper Scioto drainage and conservancy district
was formed to survey and adequately drain the entire area. Altogether, this
drainage system affected some 28,000 acres, including the marsh and its im-
mediate environs. It^was completed in 1920 at a cost of $267,000.
SPECIALIZED FARMING THE ONION
The rick muck soil of the marsh was found to be peculiarly suitable to onion
growing. Onions were first planted on the marsh in the 1880's, about the time
the second major draining project was completed. Thereafter, onion culture
expanded rapidly on a commercial basis. By 1910, storage space for 294 000
bushels of the crop was available in the three villages adjacent to the marsh,
and as many as 1,000 cars were shipped annually By 1915, the year of peak pro-
duction, approximately 5,500 acres were planted to onions. All through these
years the Scioto March was one of the principal onion-raising centers of the
country.
IMPORTATION OF LABOR
A substantial supply of labor was required to handle this large crop during the
growing and harvest seasons. The local labor supply was inadequate. Seasonal
farm workers migrated to the marsh from other parts of Ohio; many sharecropper
families came from the southeastern hill counties of Kentuckv. The onion
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 7999
growers, ever solicitous about the adequacy of labor supply, were responsible for
initiating the Kentucky migration. Once under way, this flow of workers from
Kentucky increased in volume, flooding the marsh with ample cheap labor and
affording the migrants opportunities to earn larger cash incomes than was possible
in their home communities.
GROWTH IN POPULATION
Farm operators, finding it desirable to have their migrant workers quartered
nearby the onion fields, erected all manner of temporary housing facilities. At one
time, cheap cabins and shacks literally dotted the marsh. Originally, most of
these frail structures were not designed or intended for year-round occupancy.
Most of the migrant labor families returned to their home bases at season's end.
Through the years, however, many families settled in Ohio and upon the marsh,
taking up permanent residence in the shacks. The houses and living conditions,
though deplorable, possibly approximated the previous arrangements of some of
the newcomers, especially those from the Kentucky hills. Unemployed out of
season, the families lived from one onion crop to the next, but onion earnings
usually carried them through the winters. There was no effective protest to
their settlement, hence the population of the area increased substantially during
the years of onion prosperity.
SOIL CHANGES
Just as the rich muck soil formed the basis of the Scicto Marsh onion prosperity,
changes in that soil were basically responsible for upsetting the area's onion
system.
Year by year, the muck has grown more shallow. A half century ago, residents
claim, 5 feet of muck covered much of the marsh, and the maximum depth may
have approached 10 feet. By 1920, 5 feet was the maximum depth. Today an
average depth of 2 to 2x/> feet remains on about 4,000 acres, while the muck on the
rest of the marsh is less than plow depth. This change has been caused by (1)
decomposition of the organic material which constitutes the muck and by (2)
wind erosion. Decomposition was natural. The rate of wind erosion, however,
was speeded up by the present drainage system, which left the top soil dry and
encouraged soil blowing.
Some of the muck has been completely destroyed bv burning.
As the muck grew shallow and became plow mixed with the subsoil, per-acre
yield dropped. Yield also was affected by the present drainage system, which
lowered the water table, leaving the top soil too dry for onions and preventing the
annual flooding which may have tended to keep the soil conditioned favorably to
onion production. Intensive and relentless onion-cropping itself contributed to
reduced yields; failure to rotate prompted the appearance and spread of onion
plant diseases. When the soil was new, onion yields were excellent, running as
high as 800 or 1,000 bushels per acre. By 1934 average yields had dropped to
between 200 and 300 bushels per acre. Moreover, the total acreage which could
be planted successfully to onions had dropped to 4,000 acres.
THE STRIKE
Some onion growers were beginning to adjust their operations to this new
situation created by soil changes when in 1934 a crisis confronted the whole
marsh onion economy.
During the depression years of 1932 and 1933, onion prices took a sharp drop.
The decline in prices, together with decreased yields, placed the growers in a
precarious position. Labor families, on the other hand, already excessive in
number as a result of continued migration and declining onion acreage, found
themselves in a still more serious predicament; low wages for the limited available
work made it impossible for most families to survive independently without
considerable hardship. There was a wholesale resort to relief. More than 150
families were supported by local public relief agencies during the winter 1933-34.
The following summer, at the height of the growing season, a strike of the onion
workers for a 35-cent hourly wage rate caused a near ruination of that year's
crop. As a demonstration, the strike was successful. As a procedure for achiev-
ing a decent living wage for the whole labor population, the strike was doomed to
failure. The local farm labor wage rate became stabilized at 17% to 20 cents an
hour, but work opportunities declined abruptly.
8000 DETROIT HEARINGS
CROP CHANGES
The strike precipitated a general flight from the onion. Acreage planted to
this crop dropped sharply in 1935 and has continued to drop every year since.
From 4,000 acres in 1934, onion production declined to 1,100 acres in 1938 and to
800 acres in 1940. Although some growers still insist that onions were abandoned
deliberately to avoid dealing with recalcitrant labor, the facts indicate that
onions were already on the way out. The strike merely hastened an inevitable
development.
A more generalized farming system has been adopted by marsh operators in
recent years. Some specialty crops are grown successfully; sugar beets and
potatoes have — to a limited extent — supplanted onions as labor-requiring cash
crops. The 1940 potato acreage was nearly double that of onions. Problems of
both yield and quality have been solved by the Muck Crops Farm at McGuffey,
operated by the State agricultural experiment station. Sugar beets were intro-
duced 3 years ago, and the 1941 acreage in this crop will be slightly larger than in
1940. Most of the abandoned onion acreage has been planted to corn, however.
Coincident with changes in the cropping pattern has been a rapid acceleration
of mechanization — increased use of tractors, combines, corn pickers mechanical
sprayers. During the past two seasons, the largest potato fields have been dusted
by airplane.
STRANDED LABOR
These abrupt changes in the agriculture of the marsh effected a drastic reduction
in labor requirements. Whereas one worker and some family labor could formerly
tend only 10 or 12 acresof onions, one worker with family labor could now handle
15 to 20 acres of sugar beets; and one worker on a mechanized farm can tend from
60 to 100 acres of corn. A number of operators attempted to rid the marsh of its
excessive labor population by burning the worst of their labor shacks and ejecting
the occupants; these families drifted away or moved to the villages of Alger and
McGuffey at the edge of the marsh. Some labor families voluntarily migrated
from the stricken onion center; many followed onions to Michigan when new marsh
areas were brought under cultivation in that State after 1934. Another 75 or 100
families, many Kentuckian, were forcibly removed from the marsh area and
deported from the State.
Many labor families remained. They had become residents. Some have found
regular farm employment with the large operators. Some accept whatever
seasonal work may be available. The economic base for many has been destroyed,
however, by the shrinkage in labor demand. Landless and tool-less, these people
are stranded upon the land they once cultivated.
CONCENTRATED LAND OWNERSHIP
Although soil, crops, and employment opportunities have changed, the pattern
of land ownership has altered very little. Large land holdings, developed con-
currently with the early drainage operations, still dominate the marsh. At
present, the largest holding contains approximately 3,500 acres. The next largest
operating unit contains 900 acres. The eight largest units embrace a total of
6,900 acres. Six individuals and companies own 5,141 acres. Some few farm
labor families have been able to acquire small tracts of marshland so that the
ownership pattern consists of a few large holdings and a somewhat larger number
of holdings smaller in average size than found in the typical farm community.
Since the large units predominate, however, and since the level marsh is so well
adapted to large-scale operations, there is little possibility of the area evolving
into a generalized farming community composed of family-size units. Much less
basis exists for expecting any natural increase in the number of small acreage
units: as long as the large units continue to operate they will continue to require
a considerable supply of landless labor.
The Situation Today
The foregoing summary of agricultural developments in the Scioto Marsh area
provides the historical perspective to a present situation. The principal aspects
of this situation will be set forth in the following pages in some detail as revealed
by a survey of the area conducted in the months of February to April 1941 by the
Labor Division of Farm Security Administration.
In a sense, the problem of the Scioto Marsh area is a "people" problem — surplus
population, under-employment, and distress. Under existing conditions more
farm people live in the area than the land is supporting. This situation is a
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 8001
result, as indicated in the historical summary of soil changes, crop changes,
mechanization, and a rigid system of land ownership dominated by large com-
mercial holdings. It is partially a result of the limited skills of the people and of
their inability to adjust individually to a changing economy. Since a corrective
program for the area would involve changing the purpose of land use to that of
creating a livelihood for all the people on the land, it is essential to know the
specific effects of past agricultural developments upon the people. Since a cor-
rective program would involve, also, the development of new skills, habits, and
patterns of living, it is essential to know the present capacities of the people.
These essential, specific "people" facts are presented below.
POPULATION
Since many of the farm families adversely affected by changes in the marsh
economy reside either in the marsh proper; on the upland fringes of the marsh;
or in the villages of Alger, McGuffey, and Foraker at the northern rim of the
marsh, the Labor Division survey concentrated upon this area. In the open
country, all families not in the successful large-scale operator class were inter-
viewed; in the villages, only families with a background of farm labor in the area.
Although the survey approached being a census, it would be safer to estimate that
approximately 90 percent of the low-income farm population were interviewed.
A total of 330 schedules were taken on farm families in this compact area. The
location of these families was as follows:
Villages :1
Alger 48
McGuffey 82
Foraker 26
156
Open country 174
They represented one-fourth of the population in Alger, one-half of that in
McGuffey, and four-fifths of that in Foraker.
Between 1930 and 1940 the population of Alger declined from 857 to 811 and
that of McGuffey from 710 to 618. Although these figures suggest a slight migra-
tion from the area, the present farm population seems rather stable. A few young
men have enlisted or been drafted into the Army. Prior to April 1941, not more
than 8 or 10 men had succeeded in breaking away and finding defense jobs. Al-
though defense opportunities may attract a few more from the marsh, the general
lack of skills will probably prevent an exodus large enough to affect the problem.
(a) Race and sex.
The population is predominantly white. Only 9 of the 330 families are Negroes.
No other races are represented in the resident population.
Practically all families are headed by male breadwinners. In only four cases
are females considered as heads of the house. Nearly every family, therefore,
contains a white male worker.
(6) Original source.
Contrary to local belief, the permanent population is not now predominantly of
Kentucky origin. Slightly more than one-third of the heads of the 330 families
were born in Kentucky. Slightly less than one-third of the family heads are
natives of Hardin County; and if natives of other Ohio counties are included, a
total of 188 are native Ohioans.
The Kentucky families came principally from Magoffin, Breathitt, and Floyd
Counties. Their emigration was induced by the depressed economic conditions
long prevailing there — scanty employment opportunities, low farm labor wage
rates, the impossibility of wresting a decent living from poor hillside farms. Their
migration to Hardin County was prompted by the desire "to better conditions" by
gaining employment in the onion fields. Some came as single men and married
local Ohio girls. Some brought their own families. Some became assimilated
into the marsh community. A few families, unable to improve the low living
standards brought with them from the Kentucky hills, have been characterized
erroneously by local residents as "typical Kentuckians." Such indictments are
usually made by persons eager to solve the problem by shipping the Kentuckians
back home.
60396— 41— pt. 19 16
8002 DETROIT HEARINGS
(c) Length of residence.
More than four-fifths of all families have lived in Hardin County 5 years or
more. Only 47 of the families have lived in the county less than 5 years; only 13
families have moved into the area during the past 12 months. All these new
settlers came with the intention of establishing residence. These figures show that
the problem is not, as currently believed by many native leaders, a migrant prob-
lem. The distressed farm population is a resident population. The distress prob-
lem must be approached on that basis.
(d) Family composition.
Counting all members of the families, including the heads, a total of 1,466 per-
sons are represented in the 330 families interviewed. Average family size is 4.4
persons. Excluding the 18 single-member families, the average family size is 4.6
persons. More than half of the families have 3, 4, or 5 members. Only 10 per-
cent of the families have 8 or more members. Present needs of a family may be
determined as much by size as by the extent of regularity of employment.
Less than three-tenths of this total population, or 424 persons, are able-bodied
males, aged 16 years or older. Three-fourths of the families have only one poten-
tial worker thus defined, and no family contains more than four. Other family
members — women and children — -do work in the fields. Women frequently per-
form seasonal tasks; and children under 16, though prevented by State child labor
laws irom hiring out to operators, can and do labor on their family sharecrops.
The majority of the family heads are middle-aged or older. While 135 are
between 35 and 54 years old, 51 are aged 55 years or older. These age figures
indicate that a small proportion of the farm labor population is approaching a
point where it will no longer form a part of the potential labor force. It is sig-
nificant that 16 of these men over 50 years in age were unemployed last year.
The importance of age as a factor influencing the future of a number of the
distressed families increases the urgency of rehabilitative action.
(e) Occupational status.
A classification of this low income farm population, according to tenure of job
and regularity of employment of the head in 1940, shows the following occupa-
tional groups:
Tenants and owners (including 10 onion sharecroppers otherwise unem-
ployed 34
Regular farm workers 95
Seasonal farm workers 58
Very irregular farm workers 84
Unemployed 51
Nonagricultural 8
Total 330
This is a somewhat arbitrary classification but serves to indicate roughly the
varying degrees of occupational security — or insecurity — that exist. It indi-
cates, also, to what extent access to the available farm work in the area is channel-
ized. The irregularly employed and the totally unemployed constitute, of course,
the most severely affected groups in the stranded population.
EMPLOYMENT
This same classification of families into groups on the basis of security and reg-
ularity of work serves as the best means of showing the inadequacy of present
employment opportunities in the area.
Regular farm workers.
There are 95 regular farm workers. These men have a preferential work status
with a single farm operator, are usually paid by the day, and receive enough reg-
ular work so that no prolonged unemployment periods occur. Two large oper-
ators control about 70 percent of these regular jobs. The winter employment
consists of work in the potato and onion storage houses, owned and operated by
the larger growers. Several of these storage houses are located in McGuffcy, a
few on the marsh. Approximately four out of five of these regular workers live
on farms and receive perquisites; the others reside in the villages.
The median average employment for this group in 1940 was 251 days.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 8003
Seasonal farm workers.
There are 58 seasonal farm workers. These men have a preferential employ-
ment status, usually with a single operator, obtaining most of the seasonal farm
work available during the year. They work during the planting, cultivating,
and harvesting seasons and perhaps obtain some winter work at the storage houses.
These workers have one or two definite periods of unemployment, usually in
winter. Slightly more than one-half of these workers live on farms and receive
perquisites; the other half live in the villages.
The median average employment for this group in 1940 w-as 188 days. Two-
fifths of this group received relief in 1940.
Irregular farm workers.
There are 88 irregular farm workers. These men have no preferential work
status. They are paid by the day, by the hour, or at piece rate for whatever
highly seasonal work they can find — onion weeding, onion topping, potato picking,
haying, corn husking, perhaps some scattered days at the storage houses in winter.
Slightly more than half of this group live in the villages; less than half on farms.
Of this latter group only 15 receive perquisites; only 7 are provided housing,
whereas 16 rent from nonemployers.
The median average employment for this group in 1940 was 58 days. Three-
fourths of this group received relief in 1940.
Unemployed.
There are 51 unemployed workers. These men may perform a few days of
farm work (in addition to work on an onion sharecrop), but the amount of em-
ployment on a day-rate or piece-rate basis is negligible. Three-fourths of these
families live in the villages, the other one-fourth in the country. Only 2 of the
latter receive any perquisites. All but 2 of these 51 families gained their principal
1940 income from various kinds of relief.
Sharecroppers.
Onion sharecropping: Since the strike year of 1934 most of the onions raised
on the marsh have been tended by families on a sharecrop rather than an hourly-
rate basis. The operator "fits" the land, i. e., prepares the ground, plants the
seed, furnishes all machine w^ork, usually furnishes the fertilizer. A small tract
of from 2 to 10 acres is sharecropped out to a family, which wreeds, tops, and
harvests the crop. The family may or may not pay a "fittin' " bill of several
dollars an acre, and the crop is usually shared on the halves cither in the field or at
the storage house. The sharecrop family may live in the country or in the village;
housing does not enter into the picture. The sharecrop is really a local labor
arrangement whereby the operator avoids all labor troubles. The sharecropper
can work his entire family, children included, without violating the State child
labor laws; and the sharecropper must hire his own additional labor whenever
the famiby force proves inadequate.
Nearly one-fourth of the 330 families had onion sharecrops in 1940. Share-
crops averaged 3% acres in size. There is no way of estimating the number of
man-days required to tend and harvest an acre of onions, hence no way to esti-
mate the number of days of employment represented by these sharecrops. Fre-
quently the family tends the sharecrop if the head is employed otherwise. Of the
78 families which had sharecrops in 1940, 23 were regular' farm workers, 19 sea-
sonal workers, 20 irregular workers, and 12 unemployed. The median average
net income from these sharecrops was $103, and represents a very low rate of
pay on the basis of the labor required by the average crop.
Many operators have continued to grow onions on this basis principally, as they
say, to provide additional work for their laborers. Onion production was so
unprofitable to operators in 1940 that the estimated acreage for 1941 will drop by
one-third — down to approximately 500 acres. The onion sharecrop, as a source
of employment and income to labor families, is on the way out.
Migrants.
There are an indeterminate number of migrants. Migrant farm workers con-
tinue to enter the area during the summer months, some from Kentucky, some
from other Ohio counties. These workers pick up such peak seasonal farm jobs
as may be available. Operators frequently prefer the transients to local irregular
and Work Projects Administration workers. Another, but controlled, migration
of specialized farm workers is developing in connection with the sugar-beet crop.
Growers apparently experimented with both local and migrant workers the past
two seasons but have turned over the problem of recruiting labor during 1941 to
8004
DETROIT HEARINGS
the sugar-beet companies. The opinion seems to be that local workers cannot do
the beet work so well or do not choose to do it at all. The sugar-beet companies
will import Mexicans from Texas and Belgians from the cities, provide their
housing, and guarantee their departure from the area at the season's end. The
importance of this development lies in the fact that the sugar-beet work no longer
will be available to the marsh labor families.
With reference to total employment opportunities afforded by the area's agri-
culture, most growers believe that every local worker could obtain some employ-
ment during the crop seasons. A few growers insist that the local labor supply is
insufficient to meet the seasonal peak needs. All growers concede, however, that
there is not adequate work in the marsh area to give year-round support to all
resident labor families.
ECONOMIC STATUS, 1940 INCOME
An examination of the annual income of the marsh families reveals most clearly
their present economic status.
The total value of 1940 income for the 330 families was $174,616. More than
half of the families received a total income with a value of less than $500. The
form of this low income, in a sense, further reduces their economic status; for non-
cash and relief income constitute a third of the total. In gross terms, the 1940
income structure of the Scioto Marsh families was:
Amount
Percent
Cash earnings (of family heads)
Other cash income (including all earnings of other family members and incomes
from sharecrops, etc.)
Noncash incomes (including perquisites and value of farm products consumed in
cases of tenants and owners)
Relief income
Total
$74, 016
46, 345
13, 650
40, 605
174, 616
42.4
26.5
17.8
23.3
100.0
Excluding relief and noncash income, the total cash income of the marsh families
was $120,362. This embraces all income from farm. work, including onion share-
crops. On this basis the median cash family income was $416. The average
cash income per family member was $82.
Perquisite income — consisting of the value of housing, gardens, fuel, food, and
other products furnished by farm operators to their employees — was received by
about 4 out of every 10 families. Nearly three-fourths of all perquisite income was
received by the regular and seasonal farm worker groups.
Slightly less than one-half of all the families — 164 — received relief. Approxi-
mately three-fourths of the relief families were in the irregularly employed and
unemployed groups. Relief income included all types of public assistance —
county relief, county work relief, surplus commodities, old-age assistance, National
Youth Administration, Civilian Conservation Corps, aid to dependent children,
soldiers' relief, blind pensions, etc.; but the principal relief income was| from Work
Projects Administration. The relief situation in Alger, though somewhat more
serious than in McGuffey or on the marsh, will illustrate. Of the 43 farm families
resident in Alger, 37 received some relief in 1940. Relief provided the main source
of income for 26 of these families, and Work Projects Administration provided
the major portion of the relief income of 21 of these.
During the past 5 years, relief has gradually become a permanent part of the
marsh economy. Almost one-third of the farm labor population is dependent
principally upon this source of income. Another segment of the population finds
relief a necessary supplement to earned income. Still another segment strives to
avoid relief assistance and maintain pride at the expense of family living standards.
For the past decade the main burden of the Hardin County relief load has been
in the western half of the county and, according to the relief director, has centered
in the marsh area.
With further reference to the relief problem it has been alleged that the people
who originated in Kentucky constitute the major portion of the marsh relief load.
There is little evidence to support this allegation, whereas, 38 percent of the popu-
lation originated in Kentucky, exactly 40 percent of all families receiving relief
in 1940 were from Kentucky. Kentucky families constituted the same percentage
of total recipients of relief in the amount of $100 or more.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 8005
DISTRESS CONDITIONS
Housing.
Most of the marsh families live in dwellings described as houses. Only 18
families were found to be living in structures classified as "shacks," "shanties,"
or "cabins." Many of the houses, however, are in such a state of disrepair as to
resemble shacks in appearance and to approximate shacks in the adequacy of
shelter afforded.
More than two-fifths of all dwellings were described by the survey enumerators
as poor or unfit for human occupancy. A like number of houses were described
as "fair"; but in view of the difficulty of achieving a uniform appraisal of housing
conditions on a qualitative basis, it is probable that a portion of the "fair" houses
approach being poor, depending upon the extent of neglect.
Slightly more than one-half of the poor and unfit dwellings are located in the
open country, many upon the marsh, and are occupied for the most part by the
irregularly employed and totally unemployed families. These houses are the
poor remains of the hastily constructed labor quarters bequeathed by the more
prosperous onion era. They represent one of the worst aspects of the area's
housing problem.
Farm labor families residing in the villages enjoy, on the whole, somewhat
better housing than is found in the country. A reappraisal of village housing
(made at the termination of the survey) revealed, however, that two-thirds of
the families interviewed actually occupy unfit or poor houses. It is evident, from
observation and analysis, that these villages together present a woeful picture in
terms of rural housing.
Less than one-fourth of the families own their homes. Most of these home
owners live in the villages and fall in the irregularly employed and totally unem-
ployed groups. Because of their low-income status, the families have allowed
their homes to deteriorate. One-third of the families live in rented houses: these
are included in all occupational groups, from regular farm laborers to the totally
unemployed. Two-thirds of the renters live in the villages and pay from $5 to $10
in monthly rentals. The shortage of houses which exists in the area at the present
time may account for the fact that rental charges have in many cases little apparent
connection with the condition of houses. Very few vacancies were discovered,
either on the marsh or in the villages. About 10 cases of doubling-up were noted.
Slightly less than one-third of the families are provided houses as prerequisites in
connection with farm employment.
Inadequacy of housing accommodations is indicated further by the degree of
crowdedness. Although the average labor home contains from four to five rooms
and although two-fifths of the families have more than one room per family-
member, many of the rooms are small and many unusable in winter because of
heating problems. Excessive crowdedness is better shown by the number of
persons occupying a sleeping room. In the winter of 1940-41 more than half of
the families were sleeping more than 2 persons to the room; two-fifths of the
families were sleeping more than 3 persons to the room; and 38 families had 5 or
more persons per bedroom. This crowdedness condition is found more frequently
on the marsh than in town.
Sanitation.
Toilet conditions are generally insanitary. Only 2 of the houses have flush
toilets. All toilets arc outside privies; and in only 11 instances were they described
as of the "closed pit", or approved sanitary type. Most of the others serve merely
as shields and are in various stages of deterioration or collapse.
Water pumps are frequently located dangerously near these insanitary privies.
Wherever this occurs, the likelihood of contamination serves as a health hazard to
the family.
More than halt of the families dispose of their garbage by depositing it in the
yard or in a nearby drainage ditch. Seventy percent of the families living in the
country dispose of garbage in this manner. Whether this practice results from
ignorance, indifference, or indolence was not ascertainable. Lacking livestock to
which this waste might be fed, lacking fences if the waste is fed to chickens, or
lacking the means to make their marsh-home surroundings attractive, these
people appear to have met the problem of garbage disposal by opening the back
door and tossing it away.
Subsistence production.
The marsh families as a group achieved meager results in the way of subsistence
production. Less than 1 family out of 3 owned a hog and even fewer owned a
milk cow. One significant result of this is the fact that 119 of the families, many
8006 DETROIT HEARINGS
with growing children, were without any fresh milk. Over half the families
raised no poultry. Those that did attempt to raise livestock worked with inade-
quate facilities and under adverse conditions.
Almost 90 percent of the marsh families had gardens but those of the village
families were less than a one-eighth of an acre in size and those of the families
living in the open country less than one-quarter of an acre. Only 23 gardens
were one-half acre or larger. The prevalence of gardens was not reflected in
canning activities by the families. Two-thirds of the families canned 100 jars
or less in 1940 with tomatoes the garden product most commonly preserved.
Using 80 quarts per family as a minimum adequate standard, less than 5 percent
followed a satisfactory home canning program.
Lack of physical equipment and storage space weighs heavily in the failure
of these families to produce more for subsistence. In addition, ignorance of the
desirability of this practice and, to a lesser degree, interference with other em-
ployment are contributing^factors.
Health.
Low income, poor housing, undernourishment, insanitary living conditions,
together with the dust and dampness of the marsh, have combined to undermine
the health of many families in the marsh area.
Three out of ten of all persons in the 330 families lost at least 1 day from illness
in the 2 months preceding enumeration. These 430 disabled persons lost a total
of 4,626 days in that period, an average loss of nearly 11 days per person. Nearly
half of the persons disabled were under 15 years of age. Loss of time through
illness had its most serious effect, for these young people, in time lost from school.
The effect of time lost among older people was apt to show in working days lost.
Counting all medical charges — expenses for prescribed drugs and patent
medicine as well as for medical and dental services — 102 of the open country
families and 89 of the village families incurred an average of $10.42 in medical
expenses in the 2 months preceding enumeration. At the time of enumeration,
$1,324 of the gross medical charge of $1,990 had been paid. One-third of the
2 months' medical expenses was still owing.
In the 10 months preceding the 2-month period before enumeration, 198 of the
330 marsh families incurred a total medical debt of $5,675, or an average debt
of $26.03 per family. About three-tenths of this debt ($1,700) was still owing.
Although medical expense was a sizable item in the expenditures of the marsh
families, they did not have adequate medical care. Half of those disabled in the
past 2 months had no medical care at all, and about one-third of them received
treatment at the doctor's office. It is impossible to state the hardship occasioned
by these visits to doctors' offices. Since a number of the illnesses treated were
serious, the undesirability of the journey to town in winter weather is obvious.
No physician lives in the marsh area; the nearest available doctor lives at Ada
or Kenton, some miles distant. Charges for rural home calls range from $2.50
to $4 per visit.
The inadequacy of medical care was specifically evidenced in cases of confine-
ment. During the year preceding enumeration, a total of 57 confinements was
recorded for the 330 marsh families. All except three of these occurred at home,
and in three of the home confinement cases the baby died. About half of the
home confinements were visited by the doctor one or two times; and about half
the mothers lost 10 days or less at the time of confinement. Costs of confinement
were carried by relief agencies in four cases. For the families who bore their
own expenses, the costs ran under $30 in most cases.
A majority of the marsh families have current unattended needs for medical,
dental, and optical attention. Many of the needs appear to be urgent. Several
active cases and several suspected cases of tuberculosis were noted.
Debt — Credit facilities.
The distress of the Scioto Marsh families is further evidenced by their present
indebtedness. Income inadequate to meet current family needs has forced many
to borrow, frequently at high interest rates. Only one-fourth of all 330 were
debt-free at time of enumeration; and the average family debt, excluding medical
debt, was $66. Nearly half of these families were in debt to personal finance
companies, and the average amounts owed such companies was $40. In gross
terms, the total non-medical indebtedness of the marsh families amounted to
$30,169, of which $5,416, or nearly one-fifth, was personal loan company indebted-
ness. Total medical and non-medical debt was $32,537.
Inadequacy of credit facilities is suggested by the general resort to loan com-
panies, whose interest rate is 3 percent per month on the unpaid balance.
NATIONAL DEFENSE MIGRATION 8007
CAPACITIES AND ATTITUDES
The low-income farm population'of the Scioto Marsh is on the basis of present
occupation and past experience, principally a farm labor population. Less than
three-tenths of the family heads have had some connection with farm operation
in the past — as owner-operators, share tenants, or as sharecroppers other than in
onion production. Only 26 of the 330 families have operated farms either as own-
ers or tenants. About the same number are currently connected with farm opera-
tion in some managerial capacity. All others have a farm labor or farm and
non-farm labor background.
None of the families, excepting present operators, possess farm equipment.
Nearly all workers, the regularly employed as well as the unemployed, insist
they are unable to make a "living" at farm work in the area. They mention
mechanization, "land hogging," and crop changes as the chief causes of their
distress. The regularly employed group tends to emphasize increased wage
rates as the most desirable solution to their problem. Present rates range from
17J4 to 25 cents per hour. Seasonal workers and the unemployed are more
inclined to desire a "division of the land" so that they might have farms of their
own. The majority believe that a farm program of some kind is necessary if the
marsh problem is to be solved at all.
Most of the workers like farm work and expect to continue in this occupation.
Long years of displacement are tending, however, to make a number disgusted
with farm life as they have experienced it in the marsh; these express a desire to
obtain "a defense job"; but the general lack of skills renders these ambitions
wishes rather than intentions.
Morale is low, especially among those who are chronic relief clients. Most of
the Work Projects Administration "regulars," though grateful for the security of
relief work and satisfied to continue a Work Projects Administration "career"
under present conditions, really prefer farm work if they could find reasonably
steady employment. Many feel that a rehabilitation program started 5 years ago
would have benefitted the marsh families far more and might have cost the Gov-
ernment far less than work relief.
INDEX
Agriculture. (See Berrien County, Mich.; Michigan agri-
culture; Sugar-beet industry.)
Allocations. (See Priorities.)
Berrien County, Mich.: Page
Age distribution of all persons by race and sex 7957
Cash expenditures for hired labor, by type of farm 7930
Changes in size of farms, 1 920-40 7774
Crops, by acreage or number of trees 7925
Distribution of farms, by size of farm, 1940 7920
Farm and nonf arm industries 791 8-7920
Farm-labor background of male industrial workers. _ 7923-7924
Health conditions among migrant workers 7952
Housing of migrant workers 7951, 7957
Income of migrant families 7952, 7953, 7956
Labor recruiting 7926-7927
Labor shortages, anticipated 7928-7931
Local labor supply 7923
Markets for growers 7921-7923
Mexican workers 7927
Migrant, labor 7948-7949
Migratory status of heads of families and single per-
sons 7953-7955
Percentage of farms operated by tenants 792 1
Seasonal labor demands 7924-7925
Size of families by race 7957
Transportation facilities of migratory workers 7953
Case histories of farm families displaced by defense con-
struction 7984-7997
Child labor:
Hours of work, percent of time at each process, beet
work 7914-7915
In sugar-beet industry 7896-7898, 7899-7909
Percent of children employed in beet work 7906
Prohibitory provisions in Sugar Act of 1937 7907-7909
Prohibitory provisions inserted in beet-production con-
tracts 7905-7906
Studies by Children's Bureau 791 1-7917
Testimony favoring retention of 7903-7905
Children's Bureau: Child-labor studies, 1935 7911-7917
Churchwomen (see also under Michigan State Migrant Com-
mittee): Program for migrant relief 7958-7963
Committee on labor conditions in the growing of beets: Ap-
pointment, report, and recommendations of 7899-7902
Cut-over region. (See Michigan cut-over region.)
8009
8010 ixdex
Defense program: Pae*
Acceleration of farm-urban migration by 7786
Contemplated changes in farm management as result of__ 7780
Effect on farm industry 7768
Effect on farm labor 7982-7983
Type of farmers affected by 7978-7979
Defense relocation corporations: Established for displaced
farm families 7983
dela Pena, Julio: Case of illegal interstate transportation of
migrant workers 7796, 7797-7855
Diphtheria. (See under Health.)
Displacement of farm families in defense areas 7977-7979, 7985
East Coast Naval Ammunition Depot, Indiana:
Case histories of displaced farm families 7994-7995
Farm-dislocation problems created by establishment. 7979-7980
Education:
School attendance of beet-workers' children 7915-7917
School terms in beet-work areas 7898
Employment (see also Farm labor; Sugar-beet industry):
Effect of defense program on farm families 7977-7978
Quality of Work Projects Administration labor 7787-7788
Scioto'marsh area 8002-8004
Employment Service:
Placement of agricultural workers by 7927
Suggestions for farm aid by 7781
Farm families in Indiana and Ohio displaced by defense con-
struction 7977-7979
Farm labor:
Dislocations caused by defense construction 798 1
Supply and demand 7785-7786
Required to produce certain crops, by year, hours per acre,
and variety 7773
Farm lands retired from production 7982
Farm-land shortages 7982
Farm Security Administration:
Enlargement of farm-aid program 7983
Ineligibility of loan applicants due to farm-land shortages, 7982
Migratory workers' camps 7961-7963
Scioto Marsh area survey by 7997-8007
Great Lakes Growers' Employment Committee, Inc.:
Articles of incorporation and bylaws 7800-7804
Case of participation in illegal interstate transportation of
workers 7796, 7797-7855
Health (see also under Berrien County, Mich.; Sugar-beet in-
dustry) :
Diphtheria outbreaks among Mexican migratory
workers 7791-7793
Dysentery outbreak among migrant workers 7793-7794
Effect of beet work upon children 7898
Scioto Marsh area 8005-8006
Tuberculosis incidence among Mexican applicants for
sugar-beet work 7794-7796
INDEX 8011
Housing (see also under Berrien County, Mich.) of — Pago
Scioto Marsh families 8005
Sugar-beet workers 7878-7881,7945
Income:
Families in Scioto Marsh area 8004
Migrant workers in Berrien County, Mich 7952, 7953, 7956
Indiana ordnance works:
Absorption of farm land and labor by 7979, 7980
Case histories of farm families displaced by 7995-7997
Interstate Commerce Commission: Investigation and prosecu-
tion of Julio dela Pena 7796-7855
Jefferson Proving Ground, Ind.:
Case histories of farm families displaced by 7991-7992
Farm dislocation problems created by establishment
of 7978 7979 7980
Jones-Costigan" Act" "11" 11" 111 "7961-7902," 7906-7908', 7911-7917
Kingsbury ordnance works, Indiana:
Case histories of farm families displaced by 7992-7994
Farm lands absorbed by 7979
Land purchases in Indiana and Ohio by Federal Government _ 7979,
7985
Maps showing types of farming in Michigan 7769
Mechanization:
Chart showing progress of, in Michigan 7772
Extent and effect of, in Michigan 7771-7772
Major factors accelerating trend toward 7783-7784
Table showing decrease in time required to handle certain
products 7772
Mexicans. (See under, Berrien County, Mich., Health;
Michigan agriculture; Sugar-beet industry.)
Michigan agriculture:
Absorption of farm workers into defense industry 7939-7940
Acreage in grains, 1910-40, by year and variety 7770-7771
Acreage of crops requiring hired labor, Saginaw Valley,
1939 7936
Age of farm labor 7780
Cash expenditures for hired labor, by type of farm 7930
Changes in farm business required by defense program 7780
Changes in past 30-year period 7768
Distribution of farms, by size of farm, 1940 7920
Diversification of crops 7936-7937
Effect of defense program on 7768
Effect of development of automobile industry upon__ 7782-7783
Effect of small-truck curtailment on 7788-7789
Farm-labor shortages 7780, 7787
Farm-labor supply and demand 7779, 7785
Farm-machine shortages 7783-7784
Farm-population fluctuations 7776
Labor costs 7778
Labor turn-over resulting from low wages 7942-7943
Livestock numbers on farms, 1910-40 7770
8012 INDEX
Michigan agriculture — Continued. Pag«
Major farming areas 7918
Mechanization. (See Mechanization.)
Mexican labor in in traseasonal employment 794 1-7943
Migration -guidance program 7781-7782
Migratory labor in 7777-7779
Production in Saginaw Valley region 7933-7935
Progress of mechanized -power farming in 7772
Rural-urban migration 7780, 7782
Seventeen type-of-f arming areas 7768, 7769
Size of farm units, with tables showing changes 7773-7776
Subsistence and part-time farming 7777,7785
Michigan cut-over region:
Economic opportunities in 7975-7977
Economy of 7964-7965,7968-7972
Forest-products outlook 7974
Historical development 7965-7967
Land use, 1940 7968
Land valuation and tax trends _ 7968-7970
Major changes in land use 7972-7974
Population trends 7966-7967,7975
Tax-delinquency problem 7970-7971
Michigan State Migrant Committee: Program and achieve-
ments 7958-7963
Migration (See also Berrien County, Mich.; Michigan State
Migrant Committee; Sugar-beet industry):
Average term of mobility 7949
Camps for migratory workers 7961-7963
Geographic origin of sugar-beet families 7912-7913
Into rural districts of Wayne County, Mich 7963
Living and working conditions of migrants 7928
Mexican labor. (See under Sugar-beet industry.)
Necessity for seasonal farm labor 7786
Of dislocated farm families in Indiana and Ohio 7977-7979
Previous economic status of families 7949-7950
Program to discourage farm-urban movements 7781-7782
Rural-urban movement 7777-7779, 7780, 7782
Seasonal farm labor in —
Berrien County, Mich 7925-7926
Fruit and beet areas 7777-7779
Scioto Marsh area 8003-8004
Texas in-migrants to Michigan beet fields 7943
Types of labor migration in Michigan 7932
Urban-farm movement increased by defense program 7786
Negroes. (See Berrien County, Mich.; Size of families, by
race.)
Plum Brook ordnance works, Ohio:
Case histories of farm families displaced by 7984, 7987-7988
Farm lands absorbed by 7979, 7980
Population:
Total and rural farm, for selected years, 1910-40 7776
Trends, Michigan cut-over region 7966-7967,7975
Potato growers' association: Organized in Bay County, Mich__ 7937
index 80i3
Priorities: Page
Curtailment of small- truck production 7788-7789
Effect on farm-machine purchases 7783
Ravenna ordnance works, Ohio:
Case histories of farm families displaced by 7988-7989
Farm lands absorbed by 7979, 7980
Relocation of displaced farm families 7983-7984
Scioto Marsh, the: Special area survey by Farm Security Ad-
ministration 7997-8007
Sugar Act of 1937: Labor provisions 7907-7909
Sugar-beet industry (see also Committee on labor conditions in
the growing of beets; Julio dela Pena; Great Lakes Growers'
Employment Committee):
Average net earnings of workers 7946-7947
Average wage per acre, by States, 1927-40 7883
Between 7,000 and 12,000 workers imported annually 7932
Child labor in 7896-7898, 7899-7909
Composition of families in 7913-7914
Conflict of State interests in migration of workers 7874-7876
Contract laborers engaged, 1939, by nationality or race, and
State 7874
Contract laborers engaged, 1939, by source and State- 7873-7874
Credit-system abuses.. 7891-7893
Crop production, compared with other industries 7932
Decline in acreage planted 7934-7935
Dispersion of Mexican workers into northern cities. _ 7876-7878
Earnings and expenses of selected workers in 7855-7862
Employment of boys on probation from juvenile courts. _ 7910
Evils of wage-payment system 7890-7893
Grower's contract with field worker 7840-7841
Health examination in Texas for Michigan applicants. 7794-7796
History and development of 7862-7864
Hours of work and length of season 7893-7896
Housing of workers 7945
Illegal transportation of workers from Texas 7796-7797
Impact of defense program on workers 7937-7938
Intraseasonal employment of Mexican workers 7941-7943
Labor-contract rates, by year and type of work 7883
Labor needs 7777-7779
Labor provisions in production contracts 7905-7906
Labor sources 7777-7779, 8003-8004
Labor-supply development 7864-7874
Limitation of work opportunities 7946
Living conditions of workers 7878-7881
Marketing factors 7935-7936
Mexican labor 7778
Production concentration in Saginaw Valley region 7933
Recruiting of labor 7944
Relief status of migrant workers 7886-7888
Shortage of day laborers 7940-794 1
Sources of labor supply 7909-79 1 1
Supplementary earnings and total income of workers. 7944-7945
Tuberculosis incidence among Texas applicants 7794-7796
8014 i*dex
Sugar-beet industry — Continued. Page
Types of farm labor utilized 7938
Variation of amounts payable for field work 7888
Wages and earnings of workers 7881-7885
Tuberculosis. (See under Sugar-beet industry, Michigan.)
Wages (see also under Sugar-beet industry) :
Current hourly rates in selected areas 7924
Farm workers 7943
Wayne County, Mich.: Migration into rural districts 7963
Work Projects Administration: Quality of labor 7787-7788
X
BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY
3 9999 05706 1390
'm>
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11