to a boy in a south Texas colonia

too enthusiastic about the colonias' organizing Krueger said, and summer will be the first test of the new movement.

e are signs in Starr County that things are ng for the better, he added. For example, a n of the poor people, the United Farm Workers Rio Grande City, led by Gil Padilla, national esident of the union, and some teachers and smen concerned with the conduct of governbusted several county officials and elected two to the school board in the May primary

Is.

alition like this had never succeeded before in Texas; the current efforts may fail, or be long in changes but a new start has been made in he farm worker himself is crucially involved. A leader, who had a large family and who could rd to migrate, said: "We are fighting for the n. We must keep faith in one another-that is ounts. We face indifference everyday here but ough we've never united before, we know that he only way to change our children's future." eone suggested that the group should petition inty health department to send a county health o the colonia perhaps every two weeks or once h. The president canvassed the room, listening y opinion, drawing out by a nod of his head ord. There seemed to be consensus; he asked ote and it was unanimous. The migrant popula as about to appeal to government for services m. It was a start.

Tyser shared a converted school bus for the trip m West Palm Beach and traced New Jersey's ay 49 for the first time last summer when he on with a crew leader to pick strawberries. He t sugarcane for a while but he hadn't kept too t that; besides most of the cutting operations een assumed by Jamaicans under contract with s' labor supply associations. He knew that the for jobs was getting tougher here in the n area of the Garden State. Lou had been at the farm camps for three days without work e strawberries were still not ready except for pot picking.

2

e were about 15 men in the crew to which the ngular Negro belonged. At another nearby its front step practically alongside 49, another sat idle.

onions in a south Texas field

The land is fertile here and follows the gentle wave of old hills; farm homes and silos touch off with bright whites and reds the swelling green landscape. Along many slopes, too, farm worker barracks stand out in starkly white rows, one for Negroes, farther back another for Puerto Ricans. In the shade or in doorways, several Negro men pass the time. The young ones speak loudly, laughing often; the older ones say little -expressionless, they watch and wait. Down the road a dozen-man crew of contract Puerto Ricans worked a patch of collard greens. The crew leader, a white man, turned a scornful look at strangers who stopped by the field. His "Whadyawant" discouraged further conver

sation.

The migrant in New Jersey seems not to be aware of the means by which other farm workers are trying to gain self-sufficiency and self-determination. The tenacity and conviction of Delano are not here nor the new sense of community togetherness of south Texas. Predominantly, the migrant to this region is the Negro from the South, Florida in particular. But here also a variety of other segments of the farm work force augment the Negro crews; Puerto Ricans who are nearby residents, such as those from Vineland, a city heavily populated by Puerto Ricans; white workers; even a few Mexicans.

The dominant worker in the field is the contract Puerto Rican, brought here under an agreement between the Glassboro Service Association and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Workers hired under the

contract are guaranteed $1.40 an hour and 160 hours work a month, regardless of whether they actually work that length of time. A health insurance plan is provided, the worker paying 25 cents, and the employer 75 cents. In 1967 Puerto Rican contract workers numbered 7,500; Negro migrants, 2,350; day-haul and local or walk-in workers, 10,800; and Puerto Rican non-contract workers, 5,500. (New Jersey already has a statutory wage minimum of $1.40 an hour which will be raised to $1.50 an hour in 1969.)

There is every indication that the interstate or migrant Negro worker will in a few years be unable to find farm work in New Jersey. He will not be wanted or needed. The growing trend toward greater use of contract Puerto Ricans and local day-haul workers suggests that the economy would rather do without him.

Walter Gathers is a short, block-built Negro who has experienced every aspect of farm work short of owning a farm. He has mainly been a seasonal farm worker, but in recent summers he has recruited a crew of Southern Negroes for work in the Garden State. Gathers was the only true migrant on the Migrant Labor Task Force commissioned by Governor Richard J. Hughes to investigate the farm labor situation in his State. The Task Force report, Seasonal Farm Workers in the State of New Jersey, was published in March.

The Task Force, Gathers thought, had had visibly good effects on living conditions in many camps once growers had become aware of the official concern for the situation of the farm workers. Garden State was a good name for New Jersey, he pointed out, since the foodbasket comprised of some 10 New Jersey counties. serves a market of millions of people within a few hours' haul-to Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New York.

Nevertheless, Gathers said, the problems of the Negro migrant worker have not improved: he is still subject to changing patterns of demand and the weather, while, in fact, he cannot juggle income and outgo to provide his family a decent living in comparison to the Puerto Rican contract or non-contract worker who has relatively better work conditions.

The inequity of treatment of the interstate Negro along Highway 49 is obvious-Dozens of Negroes stand idle while contract workers earn an income far higher than the interstate worker can possibly make. The Task Force report disclosed that Puerto Rican contracts worked longer and earned an average of $76 weekly last year, while interstate Negro migrants worked less weeks and made only $55 weekly. Day

haul and local workers who are less depen farm work for a livelihood averaged $41 while non-contract Puerto Ricans (many ap under informal agreements with growers) gro weekly. The contract workers who are single out 34 percent weekly for food and meals; N grants including families, 40 percent. In turn workers were not able to save as much as com non-contract workers did.

A burl-armed young Negro, who had br younger brother and a young son with him, lea wife and two other children in Florida, typifie of the black migrants. He had joined the stre into New Jersey because he could not find wor he lived and hoped to tide himself over until so turned up. But for three or four years noth turned up and he had remained in the strea tired of coming up here," he said, "Maybe this the last time. I been thinking of taking a c barbering, maybe get a job that way. It's e to come up here and then you don't make an to speak of."

en

It had drizzled off and on in Bridgeton d day but now in the evening the water slash outside the migrant project office of the S Citizens Organization for Poverty EL: (SCOPE), an agency funded by the Office of Es Opportunity. What glimmer of hope might b for the transient farm worker stems from the ell work being conducted by the young people T tering the migrant program. SCOPE Migredi

life is set worth in the February 1968 Report (No. 1006) of the Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. Suggestions for revisions or provisions in the law dealing with collective bargaining right, foreign workers, voluntary farm employment service, unemployment insurance, workmen's compensation, old age, survivors, and disability insurance, residence requirements for public assistance and for voting eligibility, and for a National Advisory Council on Migratory Labor-all of these basic factors-are covered by the Senate Report.

From the evidence in Delano and south Texas, perhaps in the future for the Garden State, the migrant farm worker may yet obtain the essence of the American dream: self-determination through personal participation in the forces which shape our lives. He will

have to do this in spite of the indifference 20 ance of certain sections of society, but he is more aware that he can achieve a measure through his own efforts. The migrants, or are among the most oppressed and disadvanta ple in America. On the other hand, their e deprivation could be the easiest problem to How a man can be brought back to self-res confidence, is another thing. Perhaps, it is onl unionization and community organization tha possible. As long as inequities of law and persist, farm workers will continue to be deri and opportunities even while other groups ar ing them. They simply will not have the choi on or to abandon those highways of misery.

a

T

av

a

C

THE

HE 90TH CONGRESS acted on three major problem areas in assuring equality of opportunity and treatment for minority people in America with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The rights of persons participating in civil rights related activities. are protected by Federal statute, equality of oppor tunity in acquiring decent housing is promoted, and certain Constitutional rights and protections are af forded American Indians.

Title I of the Civil Rights Act is divided into two parts. The first part is a criminal statute designed to offer protection against violent interference with activities protected by Federal law or the Constitution.

The statute prohibits the use of force or threats of force by private individuals or public officials to interfere with participation by others in specified areas of protected activity, including:

Voting and related activities as well as running for office; participating in or enjoying the benefits of Federal programs; Federal employment, and serving on Federal juries.

Other activities protected by the Title from interference when it is motivated by the participant's race, religion, or nationality, include:

Enrolling in or attending public schools; participating in or enjoying the benefits of programs, facilities or activities of State or local governments; enjoying

private, State, or local employment, union me or the services of employment agencies; State juries; traveling in interstate commerce the vehicles or facilities of common carriers: the facilities of hotels, restaurants, gasoline theaters, sports arenas and similar public ac tions (specifically exempted are rooms rente: premises of the proprietor's residence). he

да

n

he

ra

01

ת.

r

Furthermore, the Title specifically prote interference persons who urge or aid partici the protected activities, as well as those who speak in favor of such participation, so long or acts of physical violence are not encourage ference during a riot with any person enga business affecting commerce is also prohibited law enforcement officers lawfully carrying duties, nor law enforcement officers or membe 01 armed forces engaged in suppressing riots, are 1 The penalties prescribed are graduated to the seriousness of the results of the violatio physical harm results, the maximum pect $1,000 fine and one year imprisonment. If jury results, the maximum penalty is a $1 and 10 years imprisonment. If death retr maximum penalty is life imprisonment. Existing laws are amended to increase to prisonment the maximum penalty for or

the constitutional rights of citizens or deprivple of such rights where death results. The Title ot prohibit the enforcement of similar State or ws and prosecution under this section may be nly upon the personal certification of the Attorneral or Deputy Attorney General that prosecuin the public interest and necessary to secure tial justice.

second part of Title I makes criminal interstate ign travel or the use of interstate or foreign facilities, such as the radio, telephone, and the or the purpose of promoting or inciting riots. on only occurs where such promotion actually or is attempted.

ot is defined as a public disturbance amongst an lage of three or more persons involving an act ence or threatened violence to persons or propThe maximum punishment prescribed is a O fine and five years imprisonment. Attorney General or other appropriate officer of epartment of Justice is directed to prosecute ly all violations of the Title or to notify the ess of the reasons for not doing so.

o way are State or local officials prohibited from uting acts which are violations of this part as - local law. However, a conviction or acquittal ate or local court is a bar to prosecution under w for the same acts.

ely related to the second part of Title I is Title is title prohibits (1) teaching the use of, or g of, firearms, explosives, or incendiary devices, ng, having reason to know, or intending that -ill be unlawfully employed in furtherance of a isorder which may adversely affect commerce or formance of a federally protected function; (2) orting or manufacturing for transportation in erce any firearm, explosive or incendiary device, ng, having reason to know, or intending that it e used unlawfully in furtherance of a civil disand (3) obstructing firemen, police or soldiers ed in the suppression of a civil disorder affecting erce. The penalty prescribed is a maximum O fine and five years imprisonment. e II grants to the American Indian basic cononal rights and protection from arbitrary tribal

Tribal governments are prohibited from: idging the freedom of religion, speech, press, or oly; conducting unreasonable searches and seizsubjecting persons to trial for the same crime compelling a person to testify against himself iminal case; taking private property without just nsation; denying a defendant in a criminal case

the right to a speedy, public, and fair trial, including the right to counsel; requiring excessive bail or fines or imposing cruel and unusual punishment (maximum penalty in an Indian court for any offense is a $500 fine and 6 months imprisonment); denying to any persons within their jurisdictions equal protection of the law or due process of law; passing bills of attainder or ex post facto laws; denying to any person accused of an offense punishable by imprisonment the right, upon request, to trial by jury of not less than six persons.

To insure the protection of these rights the legality of a person's detention by an Indian tribe may be tested in the United States courts by the writ of habeas

corpus.

Title III implements the provisions of Title II by directing the Secretary of the Interior to propose to Congress a model code to govern the administration of justice by Indian courts. The new code will provide the same rights in Indian courts as are guaranteed in Federal courts and will assure that the defendent is made aware of these rights. Furthermore, the code will establish proper qualifications for judges and provide for their training.

Title IV provides for the assumption by States of jurisdiction over tribal affairs. It authorizes States to assert criminal and civil jurisdiction in Indian country with the consent, expressed by a majority vote, of the tribes concerned. State laws would have the same effect over Indians as they have elsewhere within the State, but would not interfere with any privileges and rights enjoyed by Indians under Federal treaties, laws, or agreements. Indian tribal laws, not inconsistent with State laws, would be applied in State civil courts.

States having obtained jurisdiction under earlier Federal law are permitted to cede such jurisdiction back to the Federal Government.

Criminal and civil cases pending in Federal courts at the time of session of jurisdiction by the United States to States under this Title will not be affected.

Since Indian courts cannot impose a penalty in excess of six months imprisonment, Federal courts under the "Major Crimes Act," have jurisdiction over major crimes committed by Indians, except where States have assumed criminal jurisdiction. The effect of Title V is to amend the "Major Crimes Act" by adding criminal assaults resulting in serious bodily injury.

Title VI provides that applications related to the employment of legal counsel made by Indian tribes and other Indian groups to the Secretary of the Interior or Commissioner of Indian Affairs are deemed approved