758 WESTERN HEMISPHERE IMMIGRATION

And repeatedly in subsequent acts the same policy has been made unmistakable.
Under this definition of policy, and with this obvious and legitimate interest
of the public in the affairs of the carriers, they are duty bound to recognize, and
they cheerfully admit, their obligation to do what can be done lawfully to disclose
 their interest in any legislation which in their opinion threatens the efficiency
 of the service which they must render or which promises to increase the
difficulties which they must overcome in rendering it.
Legislation which would prevent immigration from Mexico, or restrict it substantially,
 would affect the carriers seriously and adversely, especially those serving
 the West and Southwest. In each particular the threatened injury to them
bears intimate relation to that which threatens agriculture and it is not possible
to present the views of the carriers without constant reference to agriculture.
In so far as concerns this legislation the two interests are interrelated and can
not be dissociated.
Representatives of agriculture have disclosed that the fruit and truck farming
industry of the States along the Mexican border, and particularly of the lower
Rio Grande Valley and the region west of the Pecos River, in Texas, the Salt
River Valley in Arizona, the other irrigated sections of Arizona and New Mexico,
the Imperial Valley, and other extremely productive sections of California, the
cotton industry of Arizona and Southern California, and the sugar-beet industry
in the Western States, depend largely on Mexican labor and have expressed their
fear that if this supply of labor is cut off or foreshortened the volume of products
of these regions will be substantially diminished.
Fruit and vegetables will be discussed particularly because the injury to those
industries would be immediate and obvious and because they serve well as illustrations,
 but one should not forget that similar hardships will result to those who
are raising cotton in Arizona and California, those engaged in raising livestock,
including sheep, along the Mexican border, those engaged in producing sugar
beets in the West and Southwest, and those devoting themselves to other products
 of the soil in those regions. Furthermore, it must be realized that if a labor
shortage is created in one section of the States in question, it is natural to expect
that the demand thus created will reflect itself throughout the whole of these
and neighboring States, affecting even those industries and persons who do not
now employ Mexican labor.
Perhaps a sketch of the California, fruit and vegetable industry may not be
drawn more briefly or better than by the following quotation from the decision
of the Interstate Commerce Commission rendered July 20, 1927, in the deciduous
fruit case:!
“During the past 30 years much land formerly used for cattle raising or the
growing of grain and general field crops has been diverted to the growing of
fruits and vegetables. The transition has been such that the annual total farm
value of fruits and vegetables now exceeds that of the field crops. In 1926,
264,214 carloads of fruits and vegetables originated in California of which about
210,000 moved to interstate destinations, ‘This is equivalent to more than 10
trainloads of 55 cars each for every ‘day of the year. The soil and climate are
peculiarly adapted to fruit and vegetable culture, and there are large areas that
can be used for those purposes only. Should the growing of deciduous fruits
become progressively unprofitable, it is the opinion of economists that much of
this land will go back to its native state. California is now a wheat-importing
State, as the California farmer finds it impossible to grow wheat at a profit in
competition with the producers in the Middle West. For the year 1925, the
farm values of the respective products were as follows, based on December 1,
1925, prices: Deciduous fruits, $105,756,000; citrus fruits, $85,243.000; vegetables,
$52,047,000, and main field crops, $194,675,000.”
As this quotation relates to the State of California and relates to that State
as a whole, it may be preferable to consider separately the tonnage of fruits and
vegetables in those districts lying nearest the Mexican border, and there is presented
 as Appendix I a schedule confined to those products grown in substantial
quantity in southern California or in Arizona or in New Mexico or the Lower
Rio Grande Valley of Texas.?
From this statément it will be noted that, leaving out of account California
apples, peaches, pears, grapes, celery, and sweet potatoes, of which there were

I California Growers’ and Shippers’ Protective League ». Southern Pacific Co, et al. (1291. C. C. 25.)
? The seasonal movement of fruits and vegetables seems to make it impossible at this time to procure
complete official statistics for g Crop movement season later than that of 1925; figures given are figures published
 by the Department of Agriculture or furnished by the commissioner of agriculture of Texas and
relate to the crop planted or grown in 1925 and marketed in 1925 or 1926.