OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES.

By act of the legislature of 1911 (Chapter 485, Statutes of 1911), every medical practitioner in the State of California is required to report to the State Board of Health all cases which he attends of persons "whom he believes to be suffering from lead, phosphorus, arsenic or mercury or their compounds, or from anthrax, or from compressed-air illness, contracted as a result of the nature of the patient's employment." The medical practitioners receive 50 cents for each case reported. The State Board of Health is directed to transmit a copy of the practitioner's report to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1912, only ten cases of occupational diseases were reported, five of which resulted in death. This number is far too small to be of any statistical value. It is undoubtedly true that many physicians have failed to report the cases coming under their observation, but at the same time it is also a fact that there are only a small number of industries in this State, in which the employees are particularly liable to contract these diseases. At the present time there are only two white lead factories in the State.

Record of certificates of occupational disease filed during fiscal year ending

IMMIGRATION

With the opening of the Panama Canal a new labor problem will confront us in this State, namely, that of restricting the immigration that will come to our shores. The first step in this direction was taken on August 20, 1912, when an Immigration Commission was appointed by the Governor. The immigration problem is one that particularly affects the conditions of labor and we should be prepared to meet the problem when the Canal is opened. The position of this bureau is best stated in an address by the Commissioner before the conference of State Immigration, Land and Labor Officials, with representatives of the Division of Information, Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization, Department of Commerce and Labor, which was held in Washington, D. C., November 16 and 17, 1911.

The following is a copy of the above mentioned address:

MR. MCLAUGHLIN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen: I am representing in this conference the State of California. The title of the office to which I have been recently appointed is that of Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. At the outset, let me state that in California I believe we have a situation different from any I have heard described here to-day. California, until recently, has been a state of large land holdings, due to the fact that when the United States acquired its western possessions it recognized as valid the Spanish land grants. These land grants - of which there are about 600-contained immense areas. When agriculture succeeded gold mining, some of the owners turned to cultivating these lands, while others held them and are still holding them until such time as they shall be divided up into small farms. This led to two problems that have confronted the people of California for the past thirty or forty years. The former called for a large amount of cheap labor, while the latter prevented the American farmer from the Eastern States and the European immigrant agriculturists from obtaining small acreages at reasonable prices.

The influx of the Chinese, after the Burlingame Treaty, gave the farmers the cheap labor they desired, and I believe it was about the cheapest labor that could be obtained at that time. The cheapness of this labor, the high quality of the products raised and the successful sale of same increased the land values of these farms, and also those land grants that were being held, until the price of both had risen to such a point in many sections of the State that it was practically impossible for the average man to go into the business of farming. Then came the exclusion of the Chinese and the subsequent demand for some other labor to take his place. The Japanese became the successor of the Chinese in farm labor, but let it be understood at this time that the people of the State of California did not desire the Japanese, but were compelled to accept him in lieu of any other.

Probably the most important point in farming in California, and the one I desire to call your particular attention to, is that it is highly specialized. It was early demonstrated that certain crops could be grown to great advantage in certain localities, with the result that practically everybody in that locality went into the raising of that particular crop, thus calling for a large amount of labor during the season when such crop was barvested. This condition accounts for the employment of the Japanese. The Japanese is a migratory laborer, whereas the white man seeks to live where he works. The Japanese who is picking cherries in Vaca Valley (which is in the northern part of the State), say in May, will follow the different seasons and crops until he is picking oranges in the southern part of the State (over 500 miles away) during the months of December and January. The Japanese are under a directorate that simply shifts them from place to place and from crop to crop, with the result that they obtain a maximum amount of employment during the year. Of course there are certain classes of work which are distasteful to the white man

and to which the Japanese is adapted, namely those which must be performed in a stooping or squatting position, such as picking berries, cutting asparagus, etc. No alien race has supplanted the white man in our grain fields. Even on land owned and operated by Japanese, the white man handles the horses and does the cultivating, but the balance of the work is done by the Japanese.

In the past year California has come face to face with a new problem - that is, the replacement of the Japanese. Since the adoption of the agreement between the United States and Japan in 1907, the Japanese laborer has to some extent remained away temporarily from our shore and the number of Japanese farm laborers has diminished. We must now look forward to Europe to obtain our supply of farm labor. We have already started to solve this question by the employment of Greeks. Thousands of Greeks have come to California in recent years to be employed in railroad construction work, but owing to lack of this class of work during the past year and dissatisfaction of condtions under which they were laboring they were induced to take up agricultural work, principally grape picking. In the early part of this year a shortage of help was reported in the Fresno grape district. In many instances Japanese contractors announced that they could not fulfill their contracts for the picking of grapes, owing to their failure to obtain a sufficient number of their own countrymen. Through the efforts of a society into which the Greeks have been recently organized, and who have established a free employment agency in the city of Fresno, about 2,000 Greek laborers were brought into the Fresno district and picked a large part of the crop. Even some of the Japanese employed these Greeks. From reports received so far the Greeks have proven satisfactory and have been a positive influence in driving the Japanese out of this district. The shortage of help for the harvest has been universal throughout the State. Just before my leaving, I called upon an agency in Sacramento, representing the same Greek organization, and requested them to send 200 to 300 men into Butte County for the purpose of picking oranges, as I had heard of a shortage of labor in that vicinity.

An important point regarding white farm labor in California is that they are not shown the respect that, in my estimation, is due them. This is accounted for largely by the fact that the short period of time they work on any one farm does not seem to justify the owner in providing accommodations for them, with the result that they are required to carry their blankets on their backs and use the sky for a roof. This condition is not conducive to the development of a good class of farm labor, but rather to a class of "hobos." For six months of the year they have the sheriff chasing them out of town for refusing to work and the other six months they get chased out of town for asking for work. Personally, I sympathize with the man who is migrating from place to place, sometimes looking for work and at other times trying to dodge the tax collector or the sheriff. Perhaps I cannot help that, owing to the fact that my life has been spent in close contact with the man who toils.

The opening of the Panama-Pacific canal will probably solve the farin labor problem in California, but at the same time will place us on guard against the possible influx of undesirable immigrants from southern Europe, Asia Minor, and Africa. For an additional cost of from $7.50 to $10.00, the immigrants that are now pouring into New York will be landed in San Francisco. California wants immigrants to cultivate its soil, but it wants the good, sturdy peasants of Europe, not the people from seaport towns who bring with them all their vices and no virtues and who congregate in our large cities and form colonies, in which they maintain their own habits and customs and are a continual source of annoyance to our police departments. But I realize that in order to obtain the class of immigrants I describe it will be necessary for us to look after their interests upon their landing on our shores. We have no Bureau of Immigration in California. At the last session of the legislature a bill was introduced providing for a free employment bureau, but owing to the fact that it did not carry with it an appropriation, the Governor did not see fit to sign it. However, we have hopes that it will be provided for by the next legislature, and I know the Governor is inclined to favor it as an experiment. A free employment bureau would be of invaluable assistance in securing work upon the farms of our State for the incoming immigrants. An effort should be made, however, to have the immigrants arrive during the months of the harvest say from May to August. It would then be a comparatively easy task to secure employment for them in the agricultural and horticultural districts. The immigrants once placed in the fields, the question would solve itself. The industrious immigrant could acquire a small farm in a few years under the proper schemes of colonization, which are now under way, dividing up the large land holdings of our State. These people in turn would develop an agricultural community, which in time would solve

the farm labor problem, with the adoption of a scheme of varied crops within certain localities and the gradual doing away with high specialization. But if the immigrants arrive after the harvest they will associate with their own countrymen in the large cities, with the result that after being there for six or eight months it will be practically impossible to place them upon the farms. Once given a taste of city life, they would never turn to agricultural pursuits. I believe this is the experience of all the large eastern ports of entry.

My Bureau, I am satisfied, is willing in every way possible to give you all the information that can be had and to lend any and every assistance possible to this Division. I believe myself - though along lines suggested by my friend, Mr. Nugent that without the Government or State lending first aid to these people as they arrive something to sustain them at least for the first year to get them established it will be almost useless to send them out for a month or two, where they meet the conditions that I have related, and then let them go back into the city and throw them on the hands of the municipality.

At this time of the year they come from all over the State of California into the city of San Francisco. We have a large county hospital and an almshouse there, and the inhabitants of these institutions jump 700 or 800 as soon as the winter months come on. Possibly San Francisco is better situated in that respect than some other cities, but such is the case, and they all come that way.

I might add, further, that I am one who believes in restricting immigrants to a certain extent. Mr. Gompers, in his report at the last convention of the American Federation of Labor, had this to say regarding immigration:

"The sixty-first Congress during the short session refused to take up for consideration the immigration bill, requiring an educational test for immigrants, by Mr. Gardner of Massachusetts, which had been placed on the discharge committee calendar in the previous session, and it refused to take up for consideration the bill of Mr. Hayes of California, introduced by him for the purpose of obtaining legislation excluding Asiatic immigrants.

"The Commission appointed by the fifty-ninth Congress, February 29, 1907, to inquire into the general subject-matter of immigration, made its final report to Congress December 5, 1910. The Commission recommended several methods of restricting immigrants, among which were:

(1) The exclusion of those unable to read or write in some language. (2) The reduction of the number of each race arriving each year to a certain percentage of the average of that race arriving during a given period of years. (3) The exclusion of unskilled laborers unaccompanied by wives or families. (4) The limitation of the number of immigrants arriving annually at any port.

(5) Material increase in the amount of money required to be in the possession of the immigrant at the port of arrival.

(6) Material increase of the head tax.

(7) The levying of the head tax so as to make a marked discrimination in favor of men with families.''

Now, any of these points I believe would be drawing a line that could properly be exercised, because as it stands at present a great many of the larger corporations are bringing immigrants into this country and treating them as nothing more than common slaves. Those of us who have been around know that condition, and God forbid that it be allowed to continue, because I can foresee to what it is going to lead.

In speaking of migratory laborers, President Gompers has this to say, and there is a good deal of truth in it, as I think you will agree :

"Resolutions 44 and 86 of the St. Louis Convention, relating to migratory laborers, was referred by it to the Executive Council. By reason of my then contemplated visit to the Pacific Coast States, the Executive Council referred the subject-matter to me for investigation. I have seen and spoken with some of the migratory laborers and their spokesmen, and held prolonged conferences with the representative labor men of the Pacific Coast who have given this subject of migratory and casual labor their closest observation, and the following is the result of my investigations, with the recommendations I submit for your consideration and action.

"The lot of the migratory laborer in the United States to-day is in some points worse than slavery. The slave was at least sufficiently well nourished to enable him to perform his allotted tasks. He was assured of a shelter in case of illness; of as much care as a thrifty farmer will give to his horse or

other domestic animals. But the very large proportion of unskilled or casual workers who at the present time usually find employment only on short jobs or at season work suffer a precarious existence. As they move from place to place, they often go hungry, and while at work their food is usually of a poor quality, ill prepared. Many of them do not earn enough to establish a home or to pay for medical attendance when sick or suffering from accidents. The character of much of the work performed in the United States does not permit of the steady employment of a regular body of men. Railroad extension work, the construction of bridges and highways, much work in lumbering, waterway, canal, and drainage, and in the building trades, which are mostly carried on in the less inclement seasons of the year, are characterized by idleness for months together of tens of thousands of men. In agriculture, large bodies of men are employed during the seasons of ploughing, seeding, planting, and harvest, only to be left without steady work the rest of the year. In all, it is difficult to estimate how many men are thus living in the United States to-day, but the number reaches into the millions."

He goes on to explain what the Pacific coast has to fear with the opening of the canal, and I thoroughly agree with him.

I desire to thank this Bureau for the call, and hope to be able to render you any and every assistance when called upon. [Applause.]

THE CHAIRMAN. Have you in your brief period of activity in your Bureau had any knowledge of the Swiss and Italian colonies that are out there?

MR. MCLAUGHLIN. The Italian in California is very thrifty, more so, I dare say, than in any other state in the United States. With the Italian we have had little or no trouble. There are some of them on railroad work, but many of them have taken to farming, particularly in the grape and wine business, and we have no cause to complain in any manner of the Italian.

The Swiss has largely taken to dairying, and we have never had any trouble whatever with them. They have colonies in some sections of the State. The Swiss is entirely in the dairy business; the Italian is largely in the fruit, vegetable and produce business.

MR. TRENOR. Mr. Chairman, I should like to make an observation with reference to the passage just read from Mr. Gompers' report, in which he says that the Immigration Commission recommended the various measures of restriction. I think a perusal of the report will show that they did not recommend them, but pointed them out as a means by which restriction could be had, without specifically recommending those things.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN. I read from his report.

MR. TRENOR. I understand, but I think he is mistaken in that, although afterwards it was formulated into a bill.