Always the Laborer, Never the Citizen: Anglo Perceptions of the Mexican Immigrant during

the 1920s
Author(s): Mark Reisler
Source: Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 45, No. 2 (May, 1976), pp. 231-254
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3638496 .
Accessed: 31/07/2014 22:40
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Pacific
Historical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Neverthe
theLaborer,
Always
of
Citizen:AngloPerceptions
theMexicanImmigrant
duringthe1920s
Mark Reisler
The authoris a researchanalystwiththe Officeon Youth
of the city of Richmond and a member of the adjunct
historyfacultyin VirginiaCommonwealthUniversity.

IN RECOUNTING THE SAGAof the peopling of the UnitedStates,

historianshave tendedto focuson the movementof people across
the Atlanticand neglectanothersignificant
aspect of American
immigration:the migrationof workersacross the Rio Grande.
Perhaps as much as 10 percentof Mexico's population,approximatelyone and a half million people, trekkednorthwardto the
United Statesbetween1900 and 1930.1Only in the past fewyears
have suchscholarsas RodolfoAcufiaand MattMeier and Feliciano
and AbrahamHoffman
Rivera,in theirsurveysofChicanohistory,
and MercedesCarrerasde Velasco,in theirmonographson repatriation duringthe GreatDepression,begunto delve into the history
While these
of the Mexican immigrantin the twentiethcentury.2
1 Carey McWilliams,North fromMexico (Philadelphia, 1949), 163. This work stood
for two decades as the only comprehensivehistoryof Mexican immigration.

2 RodolfoAcufia,OccupiedAmerica:The Chicano'sStruggletowardLiberation

(San Francisco, 1972); Matt S. Meier and Feliciano Rivera, The Chicanos: A History
of Mexican Americans (New York, 1972); Abraham Hoffman, Unwanted Mexican
Americans in the Great Depression (Tucson, 1974); Mercedes Carreras de Velasco,
Los mexicanos que devolvi6 la crisis,1929-1932 (M6xico, D.F., 1974). For a discussion of recent historical literature on Chicanos, see Arthur M. Corwin, "MexicanAmerican History: An Assessment,"Pacific Historical Review, XLI (1973), 269-308.
231

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

232

PACIFIC HISTORICAL REVIEW

scholarsand othershave noted in a generalway the attitudesof

AmericanstowardMexicans,we stilldo nothavea detailedinquiry
intothenatureofAngloperceptions
ofMexicanimmigrants
during
overMexican
the 1920s,thedecade whenthe politicalcontroversy
immigrationreachedfeverpitch.Based upon opinions expressed
in the periodicalpress,in congressionalhearings,and in heretofore untapped archivalmaterial,this studyattemptsto explore
how Americans,both thosefavoringand thoseopsystematically
unrestricted
posing
entry,viewed Mexican workers.In addition,
this investigationanalyzesthe mannerin which popular perceptionsof thisimmigrantgroup were translatedinto public policy,
as well as the role pressuregroupsplayed in influencingfederal
actionon the Mexican immigration
issue.
Mexican
immigration
began shortlyafterthe turnof the
Major
a
of
of
result
the
Americanwagesand the
attractive
century,
pull
of
Mexican poverty.The arrivalof Mexican workerstook
push
place veryquietly.Of all thenon-Anglo-Saxon
groupsenteringthe
United Statesin largenumbers,Mexicanswereprobablythe most
inconspicuous.At firsttheywereobscurednotonlyby thehuddled
masseslandingat Ellis Island,but also by thelocationof theiremploymentopportunitiesin the Southwestwheretheywere hidden
fromsightin theboxcars,tents,and shacksofrailroadand migrant
farmlabor camps.
AfterWorld War I, however,Mexican immigrationbecame
morevisibleas thenumberoflegal entrantsincreaseddramatically
to a peak ofabout 90,000duringfiscalyear1924.3But Immigration
Bureau figurestell onlya fractionof the story,forthosestatistics
do not include a large but undeterminablenumberof Mexicans
who enteredsurreptitiously
in orderto evade literacytests,head
taxes,and visa fees.The large numberof legal and illegal immigrantswerenow comingin responseto the demandsof southwestand midwestern
ern farmers
industrialists.
By theearly1920sMexican workerswereappearingin the steeland meat packingplants
of Chicago,the automobilefactoriesof Detroit,and on the track
maintenancecrews of most of the nation's major railroads.As
Mexican immigrants
urbanizedand dispersed
becameincreasingly
8 U.S. Dept. of Labor, Annual Report of the Commissioner-Generalof Immigration
(Washington,D.C., 1924),8. In 1900 therewere about 100,000Mexican-bornindividuals in the U.S. By 1930 there were nearly 1.5 million first-and second-generation
Mexicans living in the U.S.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

233

Americansgraduallygrew consciousof the alien

geographically,
tide frombelow the border."When it getsinto the citiesand gets
in a mess,"announced RepresentativeAlbertJohnsonof Washwho chaired the
ington,the nationallyrenownedrestrictionist
House Immigration
and NaturalizationCommittee,"thenwe begin
to hear of it."4
The intrusionof Mexicansinto new areas and new occupations
promptedAmericansforthe firsttimeto ponderseriouslythe nahis relationshipto Americansocitureof the Mexican immigrant,
and
his
within
it. Most Americansalreadyharety,
possibleplace
boredgravedoubtsabout thewisdomof ethnicheterogeneity,
and
thesedoubts provokedboth consciousand unconsciouscomparisonsofMexicansto otheralien and nonwhitegroupsin theUnited
States.How Anglos perceivedMexicans can best be illuminated
view whichgained currencyduring
by analyzingthe stereotyped
the 1920s.
During thatdecade a lengthyand bitterdebateragedoverlegislative proposalsto restrictimmigrationfromMexico, but both
proponentsand opponentsof restrictionaccepted a remarkably
Both campsbelieved thatmostMexisimilarMexican stereotype.
can immigrants
were Indian peons whose characteristics
and potentialitieswereraciallydetermined.Both groups,as well as many
describedMexicans as
social scientistsinterestedin immigration,
and
backward.
clashed
docile,indolent,
They
onlyoverthequestion
of whetherpermittingsuch people to labor in the United States
would prove ultimatelyadvantageousor disadvantageousto the
nation. Those in oppositionto Mexican immigration-nativists
and labor leaders-viewed docility,indolence,and backwardness
as antithetical
and threatening
to thevaluesupon whichtheUnited
Stateswasfounded.Those favoring
Mexicanimmigration,
however,
consideredthesecharacteristics
to be splendidprerequisitesforthe
typeof labor theyrequired.
From the earliestappearanceof Mexicanson the railroadsand
farmsof the Southwest,Angloscommentedon theirseemingdoofhaving
contemplatedthebenefits
cility,and employers
cheerfully
an easilymanipulatedlabor supply.The Mexican,reportedeconomistVictorS. Clark in 1908,"is docile,patient,usuallyorderlyin
4 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Seasonal
AgriculturalLaborers fromMexico, 60 Cong., 1 sess, (1926), 240.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

234

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

camp, fairlyintelligentunder competentsupervision,obedient,

and cheap. If he wereactiveand ambititous,he would be lesstractable and would cost more. His strongestpoint is his willingness
to workfora low wage."5Twelve yearslater a representative
of
the South Texas Cotton Growers'Associationassureda congressional committeethat "thereneverwas a more docile animal in
the worldthanthe Mexican."6Farmersattributedthistraitto the
Mexican's lack of mental development,to the belief that "the
Mexican is a child,naturally."'Like children,Mexican workers,
if handled with understanding,
could be coaxed into behaving
Their
made themsuperioremployees
allegedtractability
properly.
in theeyesof southwestern
growers."They are contentwithwhateveryou givethem,"declareda Texas cottongrower."The whites
If thereis a labor
want more water,etc.,and are troublemakers.
want
exhorbitant
the
do it some.
Mexicans
shortagethey
prices.Yes,
But you can handletheMexicansbetter;they'remoresubservient,
if that'sthe word."8In the mid-1920s,S. ParkerFrisselleof California,who laterhelped organizetheAssociatedFarmersand combattedMexican strikers
duringthedepression,candidlyvoiced the
view of mostlargegrowers:"The Mexican is ... a man who gives
us no troubleat all. He takeshis ordersand followsthem..
.*."*
Those favoringthe curtailmentof immigrationfromMexico
thattheMexicanwas,bynature,extremely
agreedwiththefarmers
tractable.KennethRoberts,a leading restrictionist
as well as an
historicalnovelist,maintainedthatthe Mexican "is probablythe
most docile and gullible of all the immigrantarrivalsthat the
United Stateshas everseen."'xBut if employersconsideredmeekness and simplicityto be ideal traitsforfarmworkers,restrictionistsbelieved themto be seriousdangers.Docile Mexicans would
5 Victor S. Clark, "Mexican Labor in the United States," Bulletin of the Bureau
of Labor, No. 78 (Washington,D.C., 1908), 496.
6 Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Admission of Mexican Agricultural Laborers, 66 Cong., 2 sess. (1920), 4.
7 Ibid., 23; House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on
Seasonal AgriculturalLaborers from Mexico, 107.
8 Quoted in Paul S. Taylor, An American-MexicanFrontier (Chapel Hill, 1934),
130.
9 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Seasonal
AgriculturalLaborers from Mexico, 21.
10 Kenneth L. Roberts, "Mexicans or Ruin," Saturday Evening Post, CC (Feb. 18,
1928), 15.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

235

willinglyacceptinferiorlivingconditionsand therebybe thecause

of hygienicand social problems."
Not onlywereMexicansdocile,accordingto thestereotype,
they
also possesseda "birthrightof laziness."12 Most Americans,both
believed that Mexicans,
those favoringand opposingrestriction,
Walter
economist
a
that
from
Weyl (a futureedicountry
coming
land
of
called
"the
of
tor theNew Republic)
mafiana,"caredlittle
whethertheyworkedor not and never planned forthe future.13
forAnglosto imaginethatthe Mexican carried
It was not difficult
his homeland's"mafianaspirit"with him to the United States.'4
"The Mexican peon dislikeswork,"observedan Americanization
teacherin California."Work is work;Joyis joy. The two are not
the same. There is joy in play,in music,in color, in rest,in the
dance,butnotin work.There is no suchthingas thejoy ofworking
at difficult
tasks.One does disagreeablework formoney,not for
joy."15
SociologistEmoryBogardus,one of themorescholarlycommenalso stressedslothin hisevaluation
tatorson Mexicanimmigration,
of Mexican work habits,althoughhe, unlike mostrestrictionists
and employers,identifiedcultural heritageratherthan heredity
as thesourceofthe Mexicans'negativequalities.WroteBogardus:
"UnskilledMexicansas a classrequiresupervision.Withoutsomeone directingthem,theyare likelyto take time offfreely.They
live so largelyin the presentthattimehas no particularmeaning
to them."'' EmployersgenerallyagreedthatMexicanworkerswere
indolentand tendedto quit theirjobs and loafonce theyhad accumulateda littlemoney.Consequently,advisedgrowers,the wages
of the Mexicansmustbe keptlow.'7
11
camuel J. Holmes, "Perils of the Mexican Invasion," North American Review,
CCXXVII (May 1929), 617; see also the statementsubmittedby Robert DeC. Ward
of the ImmigrationRestrictionLeague of Boston in Senate Committee on Immigration, Hearings on Restrictionof WesternHemisphere Immigration,70 Cong., 1 sess.
(1928), 187.
12 Roberts, "Mexicans or Ruin," 15.
13 Walter Weyl, "Labor Conditions in Mexico," Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor,
No. 38 (Washington,D.C., 1902), 17.
14 Emory S. Bogardus, The Mexican in the United States (Los Angeles, 1934), 47.
15 Helen W. Walker, "Mexican Immigrantsand American Citizenship," Sociology
and Social Research, XIII (1929), 466.
16 Emory S. Bogardus, "The Mexican Immigrant,"Sociology and Social Research,
XI (1927), 478, 488.
17 Taylor, A-nAmerican-MexicanFrontier,127.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

236

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

Having investedthe Mexican with the qualities of indolence

him
and submissiveness,
manyAnglosfoundit easyto characterize
as generallybackwardor, to use the favoredtermof the period,
groups,as a resultof racial or culUnprogressive
"unprogressive."
turaltraitsor a combinationof the two,wereout of stepwiththe
movementof American civilization.They lacked
ever-forward
and strongmoralfiber,qualitiesupon
ambition,intelligence,
thrift,
ofthe
and thefutureimprovement
whichthepastaccomplishments
nation rested.To mostAmericans,Mexicansfitthe criteriaof an
unprogressivegroup since theywere seen as prodigal,illiterate,
and nomadic,and, therefore,
unable to rise in occupationalstatus
and contributeto communitystability.xs
Due to theirbackwardness,theywould alwaysremainin an inferiorstatus.Accordingto
a Texas grower:
Goodwhitelaborerssaveup theirmoneyand go intofarming
forthemselvesand don'tlabor anymoreforothers.The Mexicanswill spend
whattheymake;theywillspend$1 a yardforsilkfora dress,and sleep
on a dirtfloor .... What's the use of tryingto help themsave money?

Theywon'tdo it anyway.
They'relaboringpeople.You knowwhatthe
Bible saysabout thehewersof wood and drawersof water;thepoor
notprogressive.'9
we alwayshavewithus; they're

Many Anglo observersrelatedthe alleged negativeworkhabits

of Mexican immigrants
to theirexperiencein the old country.Because mostMexicanshad been servilelaborerson largeestatesand
entrappedin a systemofdebtbondage,theyhad become,as Emory
As a peon,theMexican
Bogardusphrasedit,"hacienda-minded."20
had no opportunity
to exerciseindependence,initiative,or respon21 Sincelandlords
sibility.
expectedhimto be patientand obedient,
he becameimprovidentand irresponsible,
ratherthan self-reliant.
"Their idealsand ideas,"notedtheprogressive
Republicansenator
18 U.S. ImmigrationCommission [Dillingham Commissioni,Abstract(Washington,
D.C., 1911), I, 683-690, and Reports of the Immigration Commission,Immigrantsin
Industries (Washington,D.C., 1911), Part 25, Vol. II, 59; JeremiahJenksand W. Jett
Lauck, The ImmigrationProblem (New York, 1913), 227-228; Samuel Bryan,"Mexican Immigrantsin the United States," Survey,XXVIII (Sept. 7, 1912), 730.
1.9Taylor, An American-MexicanFrontier,300.
20 Bogardus, The Mexican in the United States, 16-17, 46.
21 Robert F. Foerster,The Racial Problems Involved in Immigrationfrom Latin
America and the West Indies to the United States (Washington, D.C., 1925), 55;
Walker, "Mexican Immigrantsand American Citizenship,"466; Roberts, "Mexicans
or Ruin," 15.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

237

fromIdaho, William E. Borah, "are quite different

fromours."22
In discussingMexican immigrants,
both
those
Anglos,
pro and
con on restriction,
oftenemployedthe term"peon" as a synonym
for"Mexican."23Justas Americans'perceptionsofthe Chinesebecame inextricablylinked to the image of the coolie, so theirconcept of the Mexican melded with the image of the peon. Unlike
the peasantimmigrants
fromGermanyand Scandinavia,who rapidlyachievedfarmownership,and theIrishand easternand southern Europeans, who generallybecame industrialworkers,most
Mexicansin the United Statescontinuedto be landlessfieldworkers. "The Mexican,"remarkedsociologistMax Handman,"comes
as a laborerand remainsa farmlaborer,and thatof a unique kind
-unique forAmerica.For he comesin the majorityof cases as a
peon."24Classifyingthemas peons,Americanscould comfortably
view Mexicansas a caste,distinctfromand below therestofsociety
-and destinedto remainso.
Althoughduringthe 1920sthereexistedan implicitconsensus
and mostsocialscientists
thatthe
amongrestrictionists,
employers,
the
Mexican
of
the
negativequalities
peon image aptlycaptured
therewas a smallnumberofAmericanswho refusedto
immigrant,

thinkin termsofstereotypes.25
This groupconsisted
of
primarily
Protestant
missionaries
the
Mexiwhile
to
convert
who,
attempting
can workers,
also recognizedand sympathetically
describedthe
valueoftheHispanicculture.
Liketheexponents
ofculturalplurala
believedthatall ethnicgroupspossessed
ism,thesemissionaries
and important
distinctive
culturalheritagewhichcouldmakea

22 William E. Borah to W. G. Swendsen,June 9, 1928, box 288, Borah Papers, Libraryof Congress,Washington,D.C.
23 Both proponents and opponents of Mexican immigration used "peon" interchangeably with "Mexican." See, for example, the statementsof CongressmenJohn
C. Box and John Nance Garner,in House Committeeon Immigrationand Naturalization, Hearings on Seasonal Agricultural Laborers from Mexico, 43, 189. This
"peon" image pervaded the popular American mind. Emory S. Bogardus, Immigration and Race Attitudes (Boston, 1928), 20.
24 Max Handman, "The Mexican Immigrant in Texas," SouthwesternPolitical
and Social Science Quarterly,VII (1926), 35.
25 The most significantof the social scientistswho refused to do so was economist
Paul S. Taylor, whose classic studies of Mexican labor in various parts of the United
States during the late 1920sand early 1930sare eminentlyobjective. See, for example,
Mexican Labor in the United States, the Imperial Valley (Berkeley,1928); Mexican
Labor in the United States,Dimmit County, Winter Garden District, Texas (Berkeley, 1930); Mexican Labor in the United States,Bethlehem, Pennsylvania (Berkeley,
1931); and other studies by Taylor cited below.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

238

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

valuable contributionto the developmentof Americancivilization. They emphasizedthe Mexican's artisticand musical ability
and his love of beauty,and implied thatthe United Statescould
learn much fromthe Mexican.26 But thoseAngloswho celebrated
theMexican'spotentialculturalcontributions
composeda tinyand
In theeyesofmostpeople,theMexicancould conlonelyminority.
tributelittlebut brawn.

coinThe influxof Mexicanimmigration

duringthetwenties
forpseudoscientific
cided witha periodof immensepopularity
Led byMadisonGrant,
racialexplanations
ofculturaldifferences.
raciststaughtthat
chairmanof theNew YorkZoologicalSociety,
mankindwas neatlydividedintodistinctbreedingstockswhose
weredetermined
bythefixedqualityoftheir
unequalpotentials
believed
with
In
this
accordance
theory,
manyAmericans
genes.27
in
Mexican
that the disreputablecharacteristics
saw
the
they
Mexicanswerenot
fromhisinferior
racialbackground.
stemmed
As proof,
white,theyargued,but ratherIndiansand mestizos.28
that
from
Mexican
which
indicated
cited
the
census
figures
they
Mexico'spopulationwasabout60 percent
30 percentInmestizo,
economist
dian,and only10 percentwhite.Princeton
University
RobertFoerster
notedthat,historically,
few
very Spanishwomen
to
uneveremigrated Mexicoso "beyonddoubtthemostfrequent
ionsofSpanishmenwerewithIndianwomen."29To someAnglos,
theSpanishconquestclearlydemonstrated
ofMexitheinferiority
can Indians.A stronger
nor
racewouldnot havebeendefeated,
wouldit havealloweditselfto fallintoa stateof peonage.A few
wentso faras to arguethatonlythemostunfitofMexico'snative
Indianswhodid notfight
to extincthose"low-grade
population,
tionbutsubmitted
andmultiplied
hadsurvived
as serfs,"
theSpan26 Robert N. McLean, "Mexican Workers in the United States," National Conference of Social Work Proceedings (Chicago, 1929), 536-538; Charles A. Thomson,
"Mexicans-An Interpretation," National Conference of Social Work Proceedings
(Chicago, 1928), 499-503; Vernon M. McCombs, From over the Border (New York,
1925), 59-61.
27 John Higham, Strangersin the Land (New York, 1966), 155-157.
28 Clark, "Mexican Labor in the United States," 501; Dillingham Commission,
Dictionary of Races or Peoples (Washington, D.C., 1911), 96; "'Little Mexico' in
Northern Cities," World's Work,XLVIII (Sept. 1924), 466.
29 Foerster,Racial Problems Involved in Immigrationfrom Latin America, 9-10;
Paul S. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the United States, Migration Statistics(Berkeley,
1929), 238-239.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

239

ish conquistadores.30
And now theirprogenywas inundatingthe
United States. "More Indians," declared one observer,"have
crossedthe southernborderin one year than lived in the entire
of New England at the timeof the Plymouthsettlement.
territory
This movementis the greatestIndian migrationof all time....31
The appearance of a large Indian population in the United
Statesraisedperplexingsocial questions.How would Mexican Indians fitinto theracial patternsof Americansociety?Could Mexicans be acceptedas whites?If not, could theyeasilybe relegated
to the subordinatepositionof blacks?SociologistMax Handman
of the Universityof Texas, a close studentof Mexican labor
throughoutthe 1920s,warned of the problemscreatedby immigrationfrombelow the Rio Grande.America,he advised,"has no
social techniqueforhandlingpartlycoloredraces.We have a place
forthe Negroand a place forthewhiteman: the Mexican is not a
Negro,and the whiteman refuseshim an equal status.What will
resultfromthisI am not prophetenoughto foretell,but I know
thatit maymean trouble.""Are we," asked Handman, "creating
for ourselvesa social problem full of dismal prospects,of racehatredsand bruised feelingsand social ostracismsand, perhaps,
and theracewarsofa twentieth
lynchings
centuryAmericancity?"32
a
few
staunch
such as Representatives
restrictionists,
Although
JohnC. Box ofTexas and Thomas A. JenkinsofOhio, maintained
that Mexicans "have a strainof negro blood derived fromblack
slavescarriedto Mexico fromAfricaand the West Indies," most
Americansseemedto agreewithHandman thatMexicanswerenot
black.33Yet Mexicanswerenot recognizedas simplyanotheralien
whitenationalitygrouplike the Poles or Italians.Throughoutthe
countryAnglosutilizedthe term"Mexican" to distinguishimmiheld on Jan.18,
conference
30 Speechof Rep. JohnC. Box beforean immigration
1928,in MemorialContinentalHall, Washington,
D.C., in Cong.Rec., 70 Cong.,1
sess.(1928),2817-2818.
31GlennE. Hoover,"Our MexicanImmigrants,"
VIII (Oct. 1929),
ForeignAffairs,
107.
32Max Handman,"EconomicReasons for the Comingof the Mexican ImmiXXXV (Jan.1930),609-610;Handman,"The
grant,"AmericanJournalof Sociology,
MexicanImmigrant
in Texas," 37-41.
33House Committeeon Immigration
and Naturalization,
Hearingson Western
70 Cong.,2 sess.(1930),410,419,and Hearingson TempoHemisphereImmigration,
ofIlliterateMexicanLaborers,66 Cong.,2 sess.(1920),192.
raryAdmission

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

240

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

grantsfromsouth of the border fromboth whitesand blacks.34

A Texas congressman
in 1921notedthat"thewordMexicanis used
to indicaterace,not a citizenor subjectof the country.There are
probably250,000Mexicans in Texas who were born in the state
but theyare 'Mexicans'just as all blacksare Negroesthoughthey
When quesmay have fivegenerationsof Americanancestors."35
tionedas to therace of Mexicans,a Chicagochamberofcommerce
official
responded:"No, theyare not regardedas colored,but they
are regardedas an inferiorclass. Are the Mexicans regardedas
white?Oh, no!"'3 Some Americanscould apparentlyfeelcomfortable onlywhenattributing
a specificcolordesignationto Mexicans,
such as "littlebrownpeons," "chocolate-colored
Mexican peons,"
or "copper-coloredmen." Otherssimplyreferredto Mexicansas
"half-breeds"and "mongrels."37
In almost all cases, "Mexican"
became a racially-loadedterm.
Those mostconcernedwiththe racial implicationsof Mexican
immigrationwere the nativistswho had alreadystruggledto protectthenationfromthenon-Anglo-Saxon
aliens fromEurope and
Asia. In the mid-twenties
theserace-conscious
stood
restrictionists
at the forefront
of a crusadeto limitthe entryof Mexicans,a crusade whichhad gained the backingof organizedlabor by the end
of the decade. Defendingthe Mexican againstefforts
to bar him
were the growersand railroadswhichrelied upon his labor. The
battle over restriction
raged in the committeeroomsof Congress
and the popular periodicalpress.The rhetoricalammunitionemployedby both sides playedheavilyupon the peon image of the
Mexican.
Passageof the 1921 ImmigrationAct and the 1924 National Orover those who
igins Act marked the triumphof restrictionists
34 Paul S. Taylor, "Crime and the Foreign Born: The Problem of the Mexican,"
in U.S. National Commissionon Law Observance and Enforcement,Report on Crime
and the Foreign Born, No. 10 (Washington,D.C., 1931), 200.
35 James L. Slayden, "Some Observations on Mexican Immigration," Annals of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science, XCIII (Jan. 1921), 125.
36 Paul S. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the United States, Chicago and the Calumet
Region (Berkeley,1932), 235.
87 Lothrop Stoddard, Re-forgingAmerica (New York, 1927), 214; Kenneth Roberts, "Wet and Other Mexicans," Saturday Evening Post, CC (Feb. 4, 1928), 137;
House Committeeon Immigrationand Naturalization,Hearings on TemporaryAdmission of Illiterate Mexican Laborers, 143; House Committee on Immigrationand
Naturalization, Hearings on ImmigrationfromLatin America, the West Indies, and
Canada, 68 Cong., 2 sess. (1925), 345; House Committeeon Immigrationand Naturalization, Hearings on WesternHemisphere Immigration,75.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

241

favoredan open immigrationpolicy.The United Statesfor the

firsttimeplaced quantitativelimitson the admissionof European
aliens. In thislegislationCongressacceptedthenativistaxiom that
a wise immigration
policymustnot onlylimitthe totalnumberof
newcomers,but also discriminateamong prospectiveimmigrants
on thebasisofbiologicalheritage.As a result,Congressestablished
the quota principlewhichfavoredaliens fromwesternand northern Europe over thosefromthe easternand southernpartsof the
continent,the sourceof non-Anglo-Saxon
immigrants.38
Nativiststook great pride in theirachievement.They looked
and theexcluforwardto bothan absolutedeclinein immigration
sion of inferiorpeoples.But as theyexaminedthe resultsof their
handiworkin themid-1920s,
theywereshockedto learnofa serious
omission.The legislationof 1921 and 1924,in givingspecial considerationto the Pan-Americanneighborsof the U.S., excluded
WesternHemispherenationsfromthe quota principle.Thus, aliensfromCanada and Mexico,thetwoleadingsourcesofNew World
continuedto flowunabated into the United States.
immigrants,
Canadian immigrants,
nearlyall ofwhomwerewhite,did not concernnativistsas muchas the "Indian peons" fromMexico.39Prior
to thepassageofthelegislation,nativistsscarcelynoticedthemovementofworkersfromMexico,overshadowed
as it was by themultitudes arrivingfromEurope. During the firstdecade of the centuryMexicanscomprisedonly0.6 percentof the totalnumberof
Between1911and 1920 the percentagerose only
legal immigrants.
to 3.8 percent.40
WiththepassageoftheNationalOriginsAct,howThe number
ever,the Mexican percentageincreaseddramatically.
ofMexicanslawfullyadmittedduringfiscalyear1924-some 87,648
-equaled about 45 percentof theyear'sentrantsfromeasternand
southernEurope and 12.4 percentof the total number of newcomers.41
88Higham, Strangersin the Land, 308-311, 316-324; Robert A. Divine, American
Immigration Policy, 1924-1952 (New Haven, 1957), 8-18.
39 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Immigration fromCountriesof the WesternHemisphere,70 Cong., 1 sess. (1928), 680.
40 William S. Bernard,American ImmigrationPolicy (New York, 1950), 40.
41 U.S. Dept. of Labor, Annual Report of the Commissioner-Generalof Immigration (Washington,D.C., 1924), 9. From 1925 to 1927, Mexicans were second only to
Germans as the nationality most frequentlyadmitted. Mexicans accounted for 11.2
percent of the total number of immigrantsto the U.S. during the decade from 1921
to 1930. California, Governor C. C. Young's Mexican Fact-findingCommittee,Mexicans in California (San Francisco, 1930), 20-23; Bernard, American Immigration
Policy, 40.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

242

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

reactedwith horrorto thisnews.

Race-consciousrestrictionists
UnrestrictedimmigrationfromMexico would negate theiryears
of painstakingeffortto save the purityof America'sgeneticpool.
Surelythe same vital racial reasonswhichnecessitatedthe enactmentof the National OriginsAct,nativistsargued,also required
thatMexico be placed under the act's provisions.It had been the
heightof follyto restrictEuropean immigrationand at the same
timeleave the "side doors" to thiscountry"wide open."42"From
the racial pointof view,"assertedMadison Grant,America'smost
influentialnativist,"it is not logical to limitthe numberof Europeans whilewe throwthe countryopen withoutlimitationto NeThe smallportionofwhiteblood
groes,Indians,and half-breeds."43
flowingthroughthe veins of Mexicansdid littleto enhancetheir
biological worth,accordingto nativists,because it stemmedfrom
Spanishsources,and theSpanish,beingof "Mediterranean"rather
than "Nordic" origin,were among the most undesirableEuropeans.44The addition of hundredsof thousandsof "low-grade"
Indian-Spanishhybridscould result only in disasterfor the nation's futureracial integrity.Mestizo, Indian, and black stock,
warnedRobert Foersterin a studysponsoredby the U.S. Departmentof Labor, "does not attaintherace value of whitestocks,and
therefore...

tend[s] to lower the average of the race value of the

whitepopulationin the United States."45

Nativistspokesmenlike
H.
a
of
Harry Laughlin, eugenics"agent" the House Immigration
and NaturalizationCommittee,argued thatthe National Origins
Act represented
a momentouspolicydecisionto choosenewcomers
on the basis of "race biology,"ratherthan labor need, and that
continued Mexican entry undermined that policy. Observed
Laughlin: "We can now, if we desire,recruitour futurehuman
seed stockfromimmigrants
of assimilableraces,who will also imour
prove
existinghereditaryfamilystockqualities.We conserve
42 "Effectsof the Immigration Act: Third Annual Report of the Committee on
Immigrationof the Allied Patriotic Societies,Inc.," sent to President Calvin Coolidge
by Dwight Braman, presidentof the Allied Patriotic Societies,Feb. 27, 1926, Calvin
Coolidge Papers, Library of Congress,microfilmreel 79, file 133.
43 Madison Grant, "America for the Americans,"Forum, LXXIV (Sept. 1925), 355.
44 Foerster, Racial Problems Involved in Immigration from Latin America, 44;
Roberts, "Wet and Other Mexicans," 11.
45 John C. Box, speech in Cong. Rec., 70 Cong., 1 sess. (1928), 2817-2818; Foerster,
Racial Problems Involved in ImmigrationfromLatin America, 57.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

243

and improveour domesticplantsand animals,whynot our human

seed-stock
also?"46
Not onlywould thenationhave to cope withthe immediaterace
problemscaused by unassimilableMexican immigrants,
explained
nativists,it would also have to grapplewith an even more acute
situationin thefuturedue to thebackwardpeon's "indefinite
powers of multiplication."'47
AlthoughMexican males in the U.S. outnumberedfemales,observedRobert Foerster,therewere enough
Mexican womenavailable to influencethe "permanentrace stock"
ofthenation.Moreover,he noted,as thevolumeofMexican immigrationhad climbed,the proportionof femalearrivalshad also
With Mexicanimmigration
likelyincreased.48
reachingpeak levels
in the 1920s,nativistsbecameobsessedwithwhattheytermedthe
"excessivefecundity"of Mexicans.In the pages of World'sWork,
C. M. Goethe,a Californianativist,urged Americansto ponder
would facein a counthe kind of futuretheirgreat-grandchildren
tryoverrunby Mexicans."The averageAmericanfamily,"he declared,"has threechildren.Mexicanlaborersaveragebetweennine
and ten. . ... At the three-child
rate a couple would have twentysevengreat-grandchildren.
At thenine-childrate729 would be proAmericanchildrenand 729 hybridsor Amerduced. Twenty-seven
to one, assertedGoethe, the
inds!" With odds like twenty-seven
Borof Mexicanswould overwhelmthatof Americans.49
offspring
race
suicide
the
theme
nativists
rowing
originallydevelopedby
opSamuel J.Holmes warnedthatthe
posingEuropean immigration,
pressureof the burgeoningMexican populationwould become so
intensethatAmericanswould cease reproducing."You cannotlet
a foreigngroupinto a country,"the Berkeleyzoologistexplained,
"withoutits havingthe effectof keepinga greatmanythousand,
46 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Immigration from Countries of the WesternHemisphere, 705, 712, 722.
47 Testimony of Henry DeC. Ward, in ibid., 15.
48 Foerster,Racial Problems Involved in ImmigrationfromLatin America, 4. According to the 1920 census, there were 276,526 Mexican-born males and 209,892
Mexican-born females residing in the U.S.
49 Samuel J. Holmes, "Perils of the Mexican Invasion," 616. Kenneth Roberts said
that Mexicans breed "with the reckless prodigalityof rabbits." "The Docile Mexican," Saturday Evening Post, CC (March 10, 1928), 41. See also C. M. Goethe, "Peons
Need Not Apply," World's Work, LIX (Nov. 1930), 47-48; Goethe, "Other Aspects
of the Problem," Current History,XXVIII (Aug. 1928), 766-768; Goethe, "The Influx of Mexican Amerinds,"Eugenics, II (Jan. 1929), 8-9.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

244

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

perhapsmillions,of our nativepopulationfrombeing born. Are

you goingto sacrificeour childrenforthe sake of assimilatingthe
Mexican?"50
In additionto fearinga boomingMexican birthrate,nativists
anxiouslycontemplatedthe possibilityof miscegenation.Because
Mexicans themselveswere the productof intermarriage
among
and
Box
whites,Indians,and blacks,arguedRepresentatives
John
Thomas Jenkins,theyharboreda casual attitudetoward interracial unions and were likelyto mix freelywithboth whitesand
blacksin the United States.To thecongressmen,
"such a situation
will make theblood ofall threeracesflowback and forthbetween
themin a distressing
processof mongrelization.""No otheralien
raceenteringAmerica,"Box toldhiscolleagues,"providesan easier
channelfortheintermixture
ofblood thandoes themongrelMexican. . . . Their presenceand intermarriage
with both white and
black races . . . createthe mostinsidiousand generalmixtureof
white,Indian,and negroblood strainseverproducedin America."5'
Thus, the presenceof Mexicanswould encourageviolationof the
nation'smostinviolateracial taboo. HarryLaughlin,the eugenics
agent of the House Immigrationand NaturalizationCommittee,
warnedominouslythat"if the timeever comeswhen men witha
smalltractionofcoloredblood can readilyfindmatesamongwhite
women,thegateswould be thrownopen to a finalradicalrace mixture of the whole population.""The perpetuityof the American
race," he explained,dependedtotallyupon the "virtue"of American women.52Apparently,
nativistsbelievedthatthe exclusionof
nonwhiteswas a much wiserpolicythan reliance upon feminine
virtue to guaranteethe nation's race purity.If race mixing,or
"mongrelization,"were allowed to occur, cautioned Samuel J.
Holmes,the United Stateswould decline to the substandardsocial
and culturallevels of South America.53C. M. Goethe furtheradTransactions
50SamuelJ. Holmes,"An Argument
againstMexicanImmigration,"
Club of California,
XXI (March23, 1926),27.For a discussion
of theCommonwealth
of FrancisA. Walker's"racesuicide"theory,
of thedevelopment
see Higham,StranRace: The Historyof an Idea in
gersin theLand, 147-148;and ThomasF. Gossett,
America(Dallas, 1963),302-303.
51House Committeeon Immigration
and Naturalization,
Hearingson Western
75, 410.
HemisphereImmigration,
52House Committee
on Immigration
and Naturalization,
Hearingson ImmigrationfromCountries
709.
of theWestern
Hemisphere,
53Holmes,"An Argument
27.
againstMexicanImmigration,"

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

245

monishedthatwhenevera people ofsuperiorblood interbredwith

thedecayofcivilizationwas theoutcome.
inferiors,
Does ourfailureto restrict
Mexicanimmigration
spellthedownfallof
ourRepublic,withall itshopesofbetterment
forall humanity?
Athens
coud notmaintainthebrilliancy
of theGoldenAge of Pericleswhen
ofhercitizenry
hybridization
began.Romefellwhentheold patrician
families
losttheirraceconsciousness
and interbred
withservilestocks.54
Nativistsobjectedto Mexicanson social as well as racialgrounds
and oftenfusedthe two typesof arguments.Being Indians,immigrantsfrombelow theborderhad no appreciationofeven themost
standardsofcleanlinessand decency.As a result,Mexielementary
cans contributedgreatlyto crime,health,slum,and welfareproblems.The costofMexicanlabor to greedyemployers
mightbe low,
nativistsargued,but the cost to Americansocietywas immeasurable. At thesame timethatmunicipalitieswereforcedto subsidize
Mexican farmworkersduringtheoff-season,
the presenceof those
veryworkersthreatenedthewell-beingoftaxpayerswho supported
them.55
Not onlywould Mexican immigration
engenderimmediateand
severesocial problems,nativistsasserted,but it would also have
detrimentallong-rangeeffects
upon Americansociety.Due to racial differences,
Mexicanswould comprisean undesirableelement
in thenation'ssocialstructure,
a caste"to fillan underworldofmillionswho can not sharein theimpulsesand besthopesofAmerican
life."56Nativistsdisapprovedof the creationof anothercolor caste
in theUnited Statesfora varietyofreasons.First,as alreadynoted,
a distinctMexican class would mean furthersocial divisionand
therebyviolatethecherishednativistdreamofa morehomogeneous
America.Second,theexistenceof a servilegroupwas likelyto underminethe moral fiberand will to workof Americans."I don't
believethatit is safeto divideAmericaintoan upperand an under
world,"said Congressman
JohnC. Box.
54C. M. Goetheto SenatorArthurR. Gould,Jan. 16, 1930,SenateImmigration
Committee
Records,file:"S. 51 Harris,"RecordGroup46, NationalArchives.
55Holmes,"Perilsof theMexicanInvasion,"615-622;AlbertBushnellHart,"The
National OriginsPlan," CurrentHistory,XXX (June1929),481; Goethe,"Other
Aspectsof theProblem,"768.
on Immigration,
56Testimonyof JohnC. Box in SenateCommittee
Hearingson
66 Cong.,3 sess.(1921),231; ChesterH. Rowell,
Emergency
Immigration
Legislation,
LXVI (May 1, 1931),180.
"WhyMakeMexicoan Exception?,"
Survey,

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

246

PACIFIC HISTORICAL REVIEW

I don'tbelieveit is goodtohavethousands
ormillionsofpeopleamong
us whocanhaveno partorparcelwithus exceptas ourmenialservants.
ofsuchpeoplewithus,we willhavea
... If we do havegreatnumbers
conditionsuchas someof theoldernationshad whenthereweremillionsof slavesand fewcitizens.I thinkit tendsto destroy
democracy.
I thinkit tendsto makeour own peoplehelpless.57
Finally,nativistsinsistedthata castesystemdid violenceto thetraditional Americanideals of libertyand equality. Mexican immigrationhad led, in the wordsof Madison Grant,to the establishmentof "an exploitedpeasantclassunconformable
withthe prinof
American
civilization."58
A
of schoolsin
ciples
superintendent
Colorado'ssugarbeetregionexpressedwell thedilemmawhichthe
presenceof Mexican workersposed to nativists.
as alternatives
as I see it. Either
Only twothingspresentthemselves
thetwopeopleswillamalgamate
whichformypartI mustwaiveaside
as absolutely
or we mustcreatea castesystem.
If we createa
repulsive,
castesystem,
it will be worseupon us, thearistocracy,
thanupon the
Mexicansin theirserfdom.
We wouldbe sacrificing
theidealswhich
our fathers
workedso hardto establishand preserve
and whichwe are
morallyboundto perpetuate.59
Like those who had attackedslaveryon principlebut simultaneouslyfavoredthe returnof blacks to Africa,nativistsdesired
to preserveboth theirideologicaland theirracial purity.They refusedto recognizeanycontradictionbetweenopposinga castesystemon ideologicalgrounds,on theone hand,and refusingequality
to some men on the basis of race, on the other.To protecttheir
veneerofidealismand toavoidtheanxietywhichmightariseshould
theirdemocraticvalues be put to the test,nativistssaw only one
courseofaction-exclusion of the Mexican.
Nativistsportrayeda Mexican caste as an economicmenace to
both farmers
and urbanworkersin theUnited States.A continued
influxof Mexican laborers,theycharged,would bringabout the
perpetuationofa plantationtypeagriculturalsystemin the Southwestand the destructionof the familyfarmsystemin the South.
57 Senate Committeeon Immigration,Hearings on EmergencyImmigrationLegislation, 230.
58 Madison Grant, The Conquest of a Continent (New York, 1933), 327.
59 Quoted in Paul S. Taylor, Mexican Labor in the United States, Valley of the
South Platte, Colorado (Berkeley, 1929), 220.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

247

It was not the honest,hard-working

yeomanwho desiredMexican
labor, but the large, oftencorporate,growersof the Southwest.
These growers,said KennethRoberts,thoughtonlyof selfishgain
in demandingcheap labor. To them,sneeredRoberts,"fifty
thousand chimpanzeesa yearwould admittedlybe acceptable,if they
knew how to pick cotton."60By using Mexican workers,southwesterncotton growers,whom nativistsdepicted as "plantation
lords"ratherthantruefarmers,
could undersellsmallcottonoperations in the South.As a result,the living standardof American
farmers
would plummetto a peon level,and thenation'sindependent, highlyindividualisticagriculturalstructurewould be transformedintoa decadentOld World feudalsystem.Ratherthansubmit to the livingconditionsof a "pauper peasantry,"Americans
would abandon theirfarms,leaving the country'scherishedagriculturein the handsof the Mexican. Invokingthe agrarianmyth,
Madison Grant,the Manhattanpatrician,predictedthatMexican
immigrationwould destroythe nation "since the maintenanceof
Americancivilizationdepends largelyon the maintenanceof a
healthyand prosperousfarmpopulation.""6
Accordingto the nativists,Mexican immigrationrepresenteda
dangerto Americanworkersas well as farmers.
Justas cheap peon
labor would grinddown the yeoman,so it would hurtthe American factory,transportation,
and constructionworker.Mexicans,
due to theirracialheritageand experiencewithpovertyin Mexico,
wereable to live on next to nothing,explainednativists."No selfrespectingwhite laborer,"wroteRobert DeCourcy Ward of the
ImmigrationRestrictionLeague of Boston,"can competewitha
Mexican peon who worksfora small wage and existsin poverty
and wretchedness."02
The Mexican laborer would replace the
American,not becausethepeon was a superiorworker,but simply
because he was cheaper.Since Congressprotectedwhitemen from
thecompetitionofOrientalcoolies,it shouldalso shieldthemfrom
Mexican peons.The restriction
of Mexican workers,nativistsconnot onlywiththenation'spolicyof Oriental
cluded,was consistent
60 Roberts,"Mexicans or Ruin," 145.
61 Grant, Conquest of a Continent,328-329. For a discussionof the agrarian myth,
see Richard Hofstadter,The Age of Reform (New York, 1958), chap. 1.
62 Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Restrictionof WesternHemisphere Immigration,188.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

248

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

exclusion,but also withits tariffpolicy.Since Congressdesigned

the tariffto protectAmericanworkersfromcheap foreignlabor
abroad,it followedlogicallythatsuchlabor mustnot be permitted
to competewithinthe nation'sborders.6"
No one could agree more heartilywithnativiststhatMexicans
constituteda menace to Americanworkersthan leadersof organized labor.Union spokesmenfortheAmericanFederationofLabor
and the Railroad Brotherhoodschargedthat "cheap peon labor"
admittedto the United Statesforfarmworkinevitablymade its
way to citieswhereit drovedown wage levels,replacedAmerican
The "stupid and igworkers,and contributedto unemployment.
norant"Mexican,said labor officials,
acceptedlow wagesand "unAmerican"living conditionswhichwhitewage earnerswere unable to tolerate.64
While the main thrustof their objectionsto
Mexican immigrationcenteredon jobs and wages,labor leaders
oftenvoiced racial argumentsthat echoed those of the nativists.
Aftermaintainingthatthe AFL had "the kindestfeelingtoward
the Mexican people," union representatives
warnedCongressthat
aliens frombelow the borderwere of Indian ratherthan Spanish
stock. As such, they constitutedan unassimilablegroup which
"would bringanotherrace problem."65Edward H. Dowell, vice
presidentof the CaliforniaStateFederationof Labor, askedmembers of the U.S. Senate ImmigrationCommitteewhethertheydesireda nationfilled"witha mongrelpopulationconsistinglargely
of Mexicansand Orientals."BecauseoftheMexican'sIndian backWilliamC. Hushing,no Amerground,arguedAFL representative
63 Madison Grant to Albert Johnson,April 1, 1928, House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization Records, file 70A-Fl4.3, Record Group 233, National
Archives.See also Richard Strout,"A Fence for the Rio Grande," Independent, CXX
(June 2, 1928),518; House Committeeon Immigrationand Naturalization,Hearings
on Immigrationfrom Countries of the Western Hemisphere, 682.
64 Arizona State Federation of Labor, Proceedings of the Annual Convention
(N.p., 1929), 34; testimonyof Edward Dowell, vice president, the California State
Federation of Labor in Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Restriction
of Western Hemisphere Immigration,6-11; testimonyof A. F. Stout, representing
the Railroad Brotherhoods,in House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on WesternHemisphere Immigration,347-351.
65 Testimony of AFL legislative representativeWilliam Hushing, in House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Western Hemisphere Immigration, 365-366; testimonyof AFL legislative representativeEdgar Wallace, in
House Committeeon Immigrationand Naturalization,Hearings on Seasonal Agricultural Laborers from Mexico, 297.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

249

ican "would care to have any memberof his familyintermarry

with the generalrun of theseimmigrants-peons..
...",6
In an effort
to block the combinednativistand union drivefor
southwestern
restriction,
growers,railroads,and mininginterests
with
midwestern
sugarbeet companiesin a vigorouscoordijoined
nated defenseof Mexican immigration.67
At the urgingof their
theNationalGrangeand theAmericanFarm
southwestern
affiliates,
Bureau Federationpublicly opposed any precipitouschange in
Mexico's nonquota status.6s
Similarly,the United StatesChamber
of Commerce,in deferenceto its memberswithclose ties to agriculture,objectedto limitingtheentryofaliensfrombelow theRio
Grande."9
While almostall employersof Mexicanlabor claimedto support
the generalprincipleof immigration
restriction
and defendedthe
acts
in
national
the
nevertheless
as
interest,
being
they
quota
pleaded that an exceptionbe made for Mexican workers.Unlike the
European immigrant,
employersexplained,the Mexican did not
with
American
workers,but,rather,tookonlythosejobs
compete
whichAmericanscould not or would not perform.70Growerrepresentativesclaimedthatthe Mexican'sracial backgroundmade him
formonotosuited,bothbiologicallyand psychologically,
perfectly
nous, backbreakingstoop-laborin desertheat. The use of Mexicans,theyargued,would sparewhitesthe "seriousphysicalconse66 Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Restrictionof Western Hemisphere Immigration,12; House Committeeon Immigrationand Naturalization,Hearings on WesternHemisphere Immigration,366; see also AFL, Proceedings (Washington, D.C. 1927), 328; ibid. (Washington, D.C., 1928), 125; ibid. (Washington, D.C.,
1930),333.
67 "Mexican Immigration and the Farm," Outlook, XCLVII (Dec. 7, 1927), 423;
Senate Committeeon Immigration,Hearings on Restrictionof WesternHemisphere
Immigration,Ill, 118-122; Cong. Rec., 71 Cong., 2 sess. (1930), 7218-7219.
68 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Immigration fromCountriesof the WesternHemisphere,160; and Hearings on WesternHemisphere Immigration,342; National Grange, Patrons of Husbandry, Journal of Proceedings (Cleveland, 1927), 144.
69 Chamber of Commerce of the United States,FifteenthAnnual
Meeting (Washington,D.C., 1927), 52; House Committeeon Immigrationand Naturalization,Hearings on Immigrationfrom Countriesof the WesternHemisphere, 268; and Hearings
on WesternHemisphere Immigration,76-77.
7o Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Restriction of WesternHemisphere Immigration,47-49; House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization,
Hearings on Restrictionof Immigrationfrom Countries of the WesternHemisphere,
268.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

250

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

quences" of manual labor in the Southwest.71

Employersalso contendedthatonlythe Mexican could supplyagriculture'sunskilled
labor needs.ObservedFredH. Bixby,a representative
oftheAmerican CattleRaisers'Association:"We have no Chinamen;we have
not theJaps.The Hindu is worthless;the Filipino is nothing,and
the whiteman will not do the work."The restriction
of Mexican
on theother
aliens,proclaimedBixby,"willstophalfofthefarming
side of the MissouriRiver.... ,"72 To curtailthelabor supplynow,
growersmaintained,wouldnotonlydoomheroicpioneeringefforts
to transform
the Southwestfroma barrendesertto a flourishing
but
would
also mean the wasteof hundredsof millionsof
garden,
federaldollarswhichhad been spenton reclamationprojectsand
farmloans.73
By usingfinancialargumentssuchas these,employershad some
successin counteringthe economiccontentionsof restrictionists,
and in doing so theystavedoffspeedycongressionalactionon the
Mexican immigrationissue. They had greaterdifficulty,
however,
in refutingthe racial and social argumentsagainstMexicans.Because growersand theirbusinessallies generallyacceptedthe same
adversaries,
peon imageas theirrestrictionist
theycouldnotcontend
thatMexicanspossessedthecharacterfromwhichthiscountrycould
fashionacceptablecitizens.Instead,employerstriedto manipulate
thestereotype
in sucha wayas to demonstrate
thatMexicanswould
not have a detrimentalimpacton Americansociety.They argued
thatthe Mexican's inborntraitsmade him a lesserracial menace
than any otherunskilledlabor group.Because Mexicanswere inherentlytractable,growersasserted,theyminded theirown business,willinglyseparatedthemselvesfromwhites,and caused few
social problems."They are a verydocile people,"said Congressman
JohnNance GarnerofTexas, thefutureVice President."They can
be imposedon; thesheriff
can go out and makethemdo anything.
That is thewaytheyare."74C. S. Brown,an Arizonacottonfarmer
71 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Western
Hemisphere Immigration, 231-232; and Hearings on Immigration from Countries
of the WesternHemisphere, 276.
72 Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Restrictionof WesternHemisphere Immigration,26-30.
73 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Western
Hemisphere Immigration,228; Senate Committeeon Immigration,Hearings on Restrictionof WesternHemisphere Immigration,45, 60; C. C. Teague, "A Statement
on Mexican Immigration,"Saturday Evening Post, CC (March 10, 1928), 170.
74 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Seasonal

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

251

representinghis state'sFarm Bureau, testifiedthat southwestern

growerswerenaturallyendowedwithskillin thehandlingofMexicans. Just as southernerswere particularlyadept at controlling
blacks,so "we of the Southwest... know the Mexican; we know
how to please him and how to get him to please us."'75
To furtherbolstertheirposition,employerscontendedthatin
the eventCongresscurtailedMexican immigration,
theywould be
compelledto turnto farmoreundesirablegroups--blacks,Puerto
Ricans, or Filipinos-to meet the Southwest'sunskilled labor
needs.7'"The Americannegrowe all know,"said Ralph Taylor,a
growerspokesman."Are we Americans,witha full knowledgeof
theveryseriousracial problemswhichhe has broughtto theSouth
and otherpartsofAmerica,willingdeliberatelyto spreadhimover
The Puerto
therestof thecountryin everincreasingnumbers?"77
Rican representeda racial menace even more insidiousthan the
Negro,accordingto GeorgeClements,directorof the Los Angeles
Chamberof Commerce'sagriculturaldepartment."While theyall
have negroblood withintheirveins,the greaterpartof themare
withoutthose physicalmarkingswhich can only protectsociety.
They are red-headed,freckle-faced,
thin-lippednegrohybridswith
theviciousqualitiesof theirprogenitors."78
Filipinos,too,presented a seriousdangerto the purityof the nation'sbloodstreamand
thechastityof itswomanhood."I dread theday whenwe getfilled
up with Filipinos," shudderedCongressmanArthurM. Free of
California."Withthemcomesthesex problem.This is whatmakes
the race problembecome acute on the Pacificcoast."'79
Unlikeblacks,PuertoRicans,and Filipinos,maintainedtheantiAgricultural Laborers from Mexico, 190; George Harlan, president of the Ventura
County, California, Farm Bureau to William Borah, March 4, 1926, box 268, Borah
Papers.
75 Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Restrictionof Western Hemisphere Immigration,148.
76 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Immigration fromCountriesof the WesternHemisphere, 323; C. B. Moore, "Why New Laws
to Restrict Immigration?," Western Grower and Shipper (Feb. 1930), 36; George
Marvin,"MonkeyWrenchesin our Mexican Machinery,"Independent,CXX (April 14,
1928), 352.
77 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Western
Hemisphere Immigration,238.
78 George Clements to RepresentativeW. E. Evans, Dec. 28, 1928, House Immigration and Naturalization Committee, file 70A-D10O,RG 233, National Archives.
79 Senate Committeeon Agricultureand Forestry,Hearings on AgriculturalLabor
Supply, 71 Cong., 2 sess. (1930), 84-85.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

252

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

Mexicans presentedno miscegenationproblem.

restrictionists,
HarryChandler,who publishedtheLos AngelesTimes and owned
a largeamountof Californiafarmland, assuredcongressmen
that
the Mexicans"do not intermarry
like thenegrowithwhitepeople.
They do not mingle.They keep to themselves.That is the safety
of it."o80Mexicans, antirestrictionists
argued,were less dangerous
than othernonwhitesbecause theydid not desire whitewomen.
CattleraiserFred Bixbyexpressedconfidencethathis threedaughtersweretotallysafe"ridingtherangewith. .. the kindof people
who are workingforme, and theyare Mexicans.Do you suppose
we would sendthemout witha bunchofnegroes?We would never
thinkof such a thing."8'
In additionto assertingthatMexicanworkersconstituted
neither
nor
nor
antirestrictionists
social,
economicthreats,
racial,
employed
a finalargumentagainstdemandsfora quota. The Mexican alien,
pointedout,livedjust a shortdistancefromhis homeland.In
theytheeventthatlabor demanddiminishedor theMexican did create
seriousracial or social problems,he, unlikeblacks,PuertoRicans,
and Filipinos,whowerenotlegallyaliens,could easilybe deported.
With such insurance,employersconcluded,restrictive
legislation
was superfluous.82
Congress,however,did not acceptthisposition.In 1930 the restrictionist
pressurewhichhad been buildingup duringthe twenties triumphedover all employerarguments.The Senate passeda
quota bill singlingout Mexico alone of all WesternHemisphere
nations. A similarmeasurehad strongsupportin the House, but
was killed by Republican leadersof the Rules Committeeat the
behestof the HerbertHoover administration.83
The administra80 House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Western
Hemisphere Immigration,61-69.
81 Senate Committee on Immigration,Hearings on Restrictionof WesternHemisphere Immigration,30.
82 George Clements to W. E. Evans, Dec. 27 and 28, 1928, House Immigrationand
Naturalization Committee, file 70A-D10, RG 233, National Archives; House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Hearings on Western Hemisphere Immigration,238, and Hearings on Immigrationfrom Countries of the WesternHemisphere, 325; Teague, "A Statementon Mexican Immigration," 170.
83 Cong. Rec., 71 Cong., 2 sess. (1930), 8842-8844; Albert Johnson to V. S. McClatchy, June 5, 1930, House Immigrationand Naturalization Committee,file 71AF16.4, RG 233, National Archives; Francis Kinnicutt, "Immigration: Stalemate in
Congress,"Eugenics, III (July 1930), 279. For an analysis of the legislativefightover
the Mexican quota and the role of executive departmentsin the issue, see Mark
Reisler, "Passing throughOur Egypt: Mexican Labor in the United States,1900-1940"
(Ph.D. dissertation,Cornell University,1973), chap. 9.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Perceptionsof the Mexican Immigrant

253

tion was attempting

to improverelationswithMexico at the time,
and Secretaryof State Henry L. Stimsonbelieved thatthe quota
would
measure,whichMexico viewedas blatantlydiscriminatory,
both underminereconciliationefforts
and be "prejudicial"to "the
veryconsiderableAmericaninterests"southof the border.84The
executivebranch was able to thwartrestrictivelegislationonly
becausetheStateDepartment,as earlyas 1928,had begunto reduce
Mexican immigrationdrasticallyby administrative
means. In the
of
the
congressionalaction,
hope forestalling
departmenthad instructedAmericanconsulsin Mexico to adherestrictly
to existing
in
visas.
Due
to
this
immigrationregulations issuing
policy,legal
immigrationwas cut to a trickleas almost all Mexican workers
were denied entryunder the public charge,literacy,or contract
labor clausesof the 1917 ImmigrationAct.85
While restrictionists
may have been denied a formalvictorya quota law applicable to Mexico-they had largelysucceededin
stoppinglegal Mexican immigrationby compellingthe State Departmentto undertakea novel formof administrative
regulation.
In theirdrive againstaliens frombelow the Rio Grande,restrictionistshad been able to use to good advantagethepervasivestereotypeof Mexican as Indian peon. They continuallystresseda dual
theme: the Mexican's Indian blood would pollute the nation's
geneticpurity,and his biologicallydetermineddegeneratecharactertraitswould sap the country'smoralfiberand corruptits institutions.Given theiracceptanceof the Mexican's inferiority,
antifoundit impossibleto affirm
restrictionists
thattheU.S. could mold
the "peon" into a worthwhilecitizen.Thus, theydefendedtheir
toprove
positionbyrelyingon speciousracistarguments
purporting
thattheMexicanconstituted
a lesserracialevil thandid othernonwhites,an evil thatcould be erased at will by deportation.Most
Americans,by the 1920s,had lost all faithin the country'spower
to assimilatenon-Anglo-Saxon
newcomers,and had become fixed
in theirdevotionto the chimeraof an ethnicallyhomogeneous
society.Perhapsnothingbetterillustratesthisthanan editorialin
theNew YorkTimes,a newspaperwithno crucialstakein theMex84 Henry L. Stimson to James J. Davis, Sept. 23, 1929, U.S. Conciliation Service
Records, file 165-223B, RG 280, National Archives.
85 New York Times, Jan. 16, 1929, p. 9; James H. Batten, "New Features of Mexican Immigration,"National Conferenceof Social Work Proceedings (Chicago, 1930),
486; Paul S. Taylor, "More Bars against Mexicans," Survey, LXIV (April 1, 1930),
26-27.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

254

PACIFIC

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

ican immigration
issue."It is follyto pretendthatthemorerecently
arrivedMexicans,who are largelyofIndian blood,can be absorbed
and incorporatedinto the Americanrace."86 Few Americansdissentedfromthisview.To mostAnglos,the immigrantfromsouth
of the borderwas alwaysthe peon laborerand neverthe potential
citizen.
86New YorkTimes,May 16,1930,p. 2.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:40:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions