214 WESTERN HEMISPHERE IMMIGRATION

Mr. Tayror. I think so.
The CruatrmMaN. Very well, you may proceed.
Mr. Tayror. I am allowed but 10 minutes to present our side of
this tremendously important problem when I should have a couple
of hours at least. Representing fully half of the farmers of California
 who look upon the proposed legislation to place Mexico on
a quota basis as a serious menace to their social, racial, and economic
existence, I can with the time at hand touch but one phase of this
important question and ask permission to file with the committee
for inclusion in the printed record as a part of my testimony certain
other material including a paper which I read before the seventh
western divisional meeting of the Chamber of Commerce of the
United States, at Ogden, Utah, October 1, 1929, and also before the
annual meeting of the California Farm Bureau Federation, at Fresno,
Calif., N So 5, 1929. This states our position more effectually
than I can do here now. Please read it carefully before you act on
this important question.
The truth is inescapable. If we refuse to face facts, our acts may
appear satisfactory at the time, but as sure as I stand bere any
uction which is not wholly sound and based solely on the facts, as
we believe the proposed legislation is not, will rise up and smite
its supporters in the face in the future. Politics should have no part
in the settlement of a matter of such vital importance to the Nation.
It seems to me doubly essential now that we should face all the
facts rather than a slected portion. If they are not all available,
certainly at least an honest attempt should be made to make them
so. With all the facts before us, the agricultural people in the Southwest
 are willing to face the situation fairly and squarely and accept
the course which they indicate, regardless of whether it may be
immediately to their interests or not.
Farm relief has been one of the most talked of subjects agriculturally
 throughout the Nation for a number of years. A number of
gentlemen urging the application of a quota, particularly gentlemen
from the South, have cited the labor situation in the Southern States
as a valid objection to both the Mexican and the itinerant laborer
generally. Recently the MacMillan Co. has published a book by
Lewis F. Carr, entitled “America Challenged,” in which some very
pertinent and unescapable facts are brought out. Among other
things he points out that the average agricultural worker in the
Southern States, wherein the great Cotton Belt lies, doing the work
of one man, and one man only; i. e., the worker who has nothing to sell
but his labor, receives for his labor only about 25 cents a day. Further
extensive studies of these “one-man” farms, or ‘“‘one-man-and-amule”
 farms, show this conclusively to be the case. May I quote from
what Mr. Carr has to say on this subject?
Now, incredible as this low wage may seem, it appears, on second thought, a
natural thing. For the agriculture in that section—like 90 per cent of our
agriculture—was producing a crop, in this case, cotton, that sold on the world
market at the world price. And the labor producing that crop was inefficient in
the particular sense that one man did only one man’s work. Therefore, the only
wage that such work could pay was the wage that the world paid for such labor.
And when we look at the world, we find that crops that are sold on the world
market at a world price and that are produced by labor that does only one man’s
work a day will pay that labor about 20 to 25 cents a day; 20 to 25 cents a day is
about what the inefficient East Indian makes in his cotton field, Is there anv