General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Nov. 22, 1963: 50 years, and still no conspiracy|Op Ed LA Times [View all]OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)except for the economic factor, i.e. farm corporations had lobbied for decades for legislation allowing them to exploit Asians for profit.
In 1913 the California state legislature passed the Alien Land Act, which prohibited
ownership of land to aliens ineligible to citizenship (Daniels, Taylor, & Kitano, 1986, p. xv).
The author of the Alien Land Act, California Attorney General Ulysses S. Webb, had this to say:
The fundamental basis of all legislation upon this subject, State and Federal, has been and
is, race undesirability. It is unimportant and foreign to the question under discussion
whether a particular race is inferior. The simple and single question is, is the race
desirable... It {the law} seeks to limit their presence by curtailing their privileges which
they may enjoy here; for they will not come in large numbers and long abide with us if
they may not acquire land. And it seeks to limit the numbers who will come by limiting
the opportunities for their activity here when they arrive (War Relocation Authority,
1947, p. 37 as quoted in Okihiro & Drummond, 1986, p. 168).
The law was ineffective and openly evaded, but at a cost to the Japanese. According to
Ichihashi (1913), the largest number {of Japanese farmers} have little property and many of
them have a form of tenancy which limits their freedom in production (p. 29, as quoted in
Okihiro & Drummond, 1986, p. 170). One of these forms of tenancy was one in which the
lessee agreed to pay the lessor a fixed cash rent, yet the lessor maintained an absolute control
over the management of the industry as well as the disposition of the crops leading Ichihashi to
conclude, All these systems were initiated by white farmers for their own convenience and
economic gains to them were thus secured (pp. 29, 28, as quoted in Okihiro & Drummond,
1986, p. 170).
The second California Alien Land Act went into effect in 1920. Plugging the loophole in
the previous Land Act, the law prohibited leasing of land to aliens ineligible to
citizenship (Daniels, Taylor, & Kitano, 1986, p. xv). This law was similarly ineffective due to
lack of enforcement. According to McWilliams (1944):
Enforcement of the Alien Land Law of 1920 was vested in local law-enforcement
officials. The act was easily evaded: title to a farm land was placed in the names of
Hawaiian or American-born Japanese; verbal agreements were entered into that ran
counter to the terms of written documents; Japanese were employed as managers
instead of tenants. By these and other devices, and with the connivance of lawenforcement
officials, the act was blithely ignored. The amount of land escheated to the
state under this statute is wholly negligible (p. 65, as quoted in Okihiro & Drummond,
1986, p. 170).
McWilliams argued that the reason for the lack of enforcement for the Alien Land Act
was that the removal of the Japanese would harm the economic interests of the capitalist class
who depended on them for their labor (Okihiro & Drummond, 1986). Thus the propertyless
condition of the Japanese left them dependent upon and open to exploitation by organized groups
who, in turn, were dependent upon the Japanese for their existence. According to McWillams
(1944), The grossest imposition was practised upon the Japanese, ranging from petty chiseling
to large-scale fraud.... In Santa Maria -in Santa Barbara County- local interests have been
charged with bilking the Japanese out of holdings valued at $500,000 (p. 139, as quoted in
Okihiro & Drummond, 1986, p. 170). The Japanese were also forced to pay high rents in
comparison to Caucasians. (see Table 1.)
Earl Warren was a part of that, your ignorance notwithstanding.