The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
WORKS PROGRESS A0MINISTRATION
DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCI-I
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RURAL RELIEF
AND NON-RELIEF I-IOUSEI-IOLDS
BY
11-IOMAS C. McCORMICK
OF Tl-IE RURAL SECTION
RESEARCH MONOGRAPH
II
WASI-IINGTON
1935
Digitized
byGoo~le
WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
I-IARRY L I-IOPKINS, Administrator
CORRINGTON GILL
Assistant Administrator
1-lOWARD B. MYERS, Director
Division of Social Research
Digitized by
Google
LBTTBR OP TRANSMITTAL
WORIS PROGRBSS ADMINISTRATION
Sir:
I bue tile boaor to tru•i t .berewi tll a report bued oa a
s11ne1 of rural relief ud aoa-relief bo11sebolda coldacted iD
IJ7 couatiea ia tile aa,jor a,ricaltaral. areas of tile Dai ted
States. Tbe sa"eJ aplified, for selected nral relief lloasellolds, tbe iafonaatioa obtaiaed bJ t.be Ua•plo,-eat Relief
Census of OctQber 1933, Ia ldditioa it aade poaaible aocial.
&lld ecoaoaic coapariaoas of · relief ud aoa-relief llov•llolda.
TIie aaneJ wa ■alle daria1 tile viater of 1933-3aJ.
Ia its
earlier ataeea tbe iaTeati1atioa vu aader tbe directioa of
I. D. fe&reau, vitb aotlanJ. r. Blier• Ull RoaoUlld f'oql& assist•
hr, TIie preliaiaarJ ualJais of t.be data was ■ade bJ I. I.
lcGlll, 11, 1, DOM1heri11, J. D. ailiJGr'de, aad I. latl tn. aader
tbe supeniaioa of r. C. lcCOratclt,
Tbia report vu prepared
bJ f'. C. lcCoratc/t,
Botb tbe suffeJ ad tile preparatioa of
tbe repon wre uader tbe 1eaeral directioa of bardB. II/fire,
Asaiataat Director iD cbar1e of reaearcb aader tbe
Federal
&terreac1 Relief Adaiaistratioa.
.Actaowled1•e•t is 4ae tile
•ea wllo acted as supe"iaora of t be field wol'k ia tbe aneral
States ia Wlaicb tbe uffeJ was aale.
<X>RRIRn'ON GILL
Aaataian, Jdatnta&rotor
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
CONTINTS
Pa,e.
l
lat.roclactioa . ............................................ .
<:.apter
I. T•e Raral Relief Si taatioa ia October 1933 9
Sectioa 1. liads of Relief Received .•......
9
Sectioa 2. -,uats of Relief Received ....•. lO
Section 3. Relief History of Cases Receiving
Relief in October 1933 •••••••• 12
Sectioa II. Plablic &Jld Private Assistuce,
Otber tba F•er1eac1 Relief 13
Clapter II. T•e Reaideace, Coaposition, aad Educatioa of
Relief aad Non-Relief lloaseltolos ••....•... 17
Section 1. Resideace....................... 17
Sectioa 2. Cbu1es ia Re~idace ..•.••.•.••• 17
Section 3. Race aad NativitJ ...•••....••.•• ~
Sectioa "· Tne of F•ily aad Household 2'.>
Sectioa !5. She of Housebold............... 22
Sectioa 6. .e,e Distribatioa ad Sex Ratio 26
Sectioa 7. 8dacat1on..... . • • • • . • . . • . . • • . . • . 30
Sectioa 8. lforters ad Depeadeats ••..•.•... 35
~aeter III. laniqs ad Ot•er Ecoaoaic Assets ud Liabilities of Relief aad Noa-Relief Housebolds 39
Sectioa 1. Source of Earainas. • • • • . . • . . . . . • 39
Sectioa 2. -,unt of Earninas ...•.•.•.....• qo
Section 3. Size of F&l'IIS.. . . • . • . • . . . • . . . . . • ""
Section"· Owaersbip of Livestock •••.....•. "5
A. 'Workstoct....... . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,
B. Otlaer Livestock............. "7
Sectioa ,. lndebtedlless. • • . . • . • • . . . • • • • • • . . !50
C.apter IT. Occapations, ladustries, aad Uaeaplo711eat of
Nale Beads ud Other Heabers of Relief aad
loa-Relief Households. • • . . • • . • . . . . . . • . . • . . 53
Sectioa 1. Usual Occupatioa of Male Heads !53
Sectioa 2. Occupations of Kale Heads in
October 1933 •••••••••••••••••• !57
Sectioa 3. Iadastries PaploJina Male Heads (JO
Sectioa "· Occapatioaal. Chu1es ad Uaeaplo,-eat of Male Beads.. • • • • • • 6"
Sectioa ,. Daration of Uaeaplo711eat aoa1
Mal.e Bemla. • • . • • . • • • • . • . . • • . . . 71
Section 6. Coaparison of Occupations
ad
Occupational Cbu,es of Wlai te
ud Nearo Hale Heads.......... 73
Section 7. Occupatioas, ladustries, aad Baplo711eat of Persons 16 Tears
of .e,e Md ~er• Other t••
leads of lloaellolds, ia October
73
S-.,...................................................
"
w,,. .........................
•
Digitized by
Google
vi
CONTENTS
Page.
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
ARCO-
Supplementary Tables ........•••..••.•...•.•
Methodological Note ......•..•••...•..•...••
Bulletin::. Ba:,ed on, Survey .•.....•..•....•.•
Schedules ....................•....••.......
11
115
121
125
TEXT TAB LES
Table A.
Table B.
Table C.
Table D.
Table E.
Table F.
Table G.
Table H.
Table I.
Table J.
Table K.
Table L.
Percentage Distribution of Rural Relief Households by Type of Relief Receivea in October
1933, and by Color, Sex, and October 1933 Occupation of Head of Household.. • . . . . . . . . . . . .
Average Value of Direct and Work Relief in October 19 33, by Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . .
Number and Percent of October 1933 Rural Relief
Households That Had Received Relief prior to,
or Only after January 1, 1930, by Sex and Last
Usual Occupation of Head . .'..................
Types of Other Governmental Assistance Received
by Relief and Non-Relief Rural Households
during 1933, by Occupation of the Heao in Oc-·
tober 1933. . . • . • . . • . • • . . • • • • • • • . . • • • • • • • • • • •
Place of Residence of Relief and Non-Relief
Households, by Sex and October 1933 Occupation of Head. . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • .
Inter- County Changes of Residence of 'Rural
Relief and Non-Relief Households with Male
Heads, between November 1, 1923 and October
31, 1933 by Last Usual Occupation of Head
Percentage Distribution of Qural Relief HouseHolds by Nativity and Race of Head, October
1933........................... •. . . . . • . . . . . .
Average Size of Rural Relief and Non-Relief
Households by Sex and Usual Occupation of Head,
October 1933................................
Median Age of Heads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Household::., by Sex and October 1933
Occupation of Head..........................
Percent of Heads of October 1933 Rural Relief
Households Who Completed Specified Grades in
School, by Age and Race.....................
PercentofHeadsofOctober 1933 Ruraltt>n-Relief
Households Who r~mpleted Specified Grades in
&hool, by Age and Race.....................
Percent of Rural Relief and Non-Relief HouseHolds with No Workers, with Workers but with
No Workers nor Potential Workers, by Sex and
October 1933 Employment of Read.............
Digitized by
9
10
12
lLJ
18
19
~
23
26
30
~
3,
Google
vii
CONTENTS
Table II.
Page.
herqe Nuber of Workers per Rural Relief and
Noa-Relief Bousebold with Workers, and .ATerage
Nuaber of Depeadellts per Worker ia the Same
Boa~lds, bJ Sex and October 1933 Fmploy-
36
aeat of Bead.............................. . . . .
Table
)I.
Table O.
Table P.
Table Q.
Table I.
Table S.
Table T.
Table U.
Table Y.
Table lf.
Table I.
Table l.
TabI.e Z.
Souce of Earaia1 s of Rural Reli et and NonRelief Households ia October 1933 ••••••••••••
.ATerqe MoatblJ Earaings of Rural 'Relief and
Noa-Relief Male Beads Other Thao Fara Operators, Wbo Were FaploJed during October 1923,
1928, and 1933, bJ Age Groups •••.•••••..•..••
Percent of Rural Relief and Non-Relief farm Operators Other Than Croppers, Who Owned No
Work.stock, and the Average Number of Work.stock
Owned Oil JanuarJ 1, 1934 by Farm Operator::;
vitb Wortstoct, bJ Acreage Groups •••••••.•...
Percent of Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households That Owned No Livestock, January 1, 1931.J
bJ Sex of Head and bJ October 1933 Occupation
of Male Bead ........ ........................ .
ATerage Nu■ber of Livestock Owned by Rural Relief and Noa-Relief Households Reportiag Such
LiYestoct, JaauarJ 1, 1931.J, bJ Sex of Head
aad bJ October 1933 Occupatioa of Male Head
hteat aad Aaount of Indebtedness of Rural Relief aad Non-Relief Households on January 1,
1934, by the Usual Occupation of the Head
Usaal Occupatioa of Hale Heads of Rural Relief
Households, by Area, October 1933 ••••••••••••
Usual Occupation of Male Heads of Rural NonRelief Bousebolds, bJ Area, October
1933
Perceatqe Distributio11 of Last Usual and October 1933 OccupatiollS of Hale Beads of Rural
Relief aad No11-Relief Households •.•.•..•.•••.
Perceatqe Distribution of Male Beads of Relief
ad Noa-Relief Households Classified bJ Last
Usual ad October 1933 Industries ..••••••.••.
Percat of Male Beads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households, October 1933, Engaged in
Forestry ud FishiDK••·······················
Percent of Male Beads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households, October 1933, En1aged in
Mineral Extraction...........................
Percent of Ti■ e Hale Heads of Rural Relief and
Noa-Relief Households were Uaeaployed during
tile Periods November 1, 1923 - October 31, 1933;
Noveaber 1, 1923 - Octooer 31, 19'..:19;
NOveaDer 1, 192<) - Octooer 31, 1933
Digitized by
I.J5
I.J7
q9
!53
57
6"
71
Google
Viii
CONTENTS
Page.
Table AA. Percent of Persons 16 Years of Age and Over,
Oner Than Heads, in Rural Relief and NonRelief Households, Who Were Gainful or Potential Workers in October 1933, by Sex......
Table BB. October 1933 Occupations of Members 16 Years
and Over, Other Than Heads, of Rural Relief
and Non-Relief Households, by Sex............
7q
75
MAPS
Map A.
Map B.
Map C.
r.ounties Sllllpled •••••••••.•••••.•.••..••••.•••••.
Primary Areas Represented and Counties Sampled
Areas Represented and Coanties Sampled •••••••••••
5
7
8
FIGURES
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure q_
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Distribution of Rural Relief and Non-Relief
Households by Size, October 1933............
Comparison of Age Distribution of Heads of Rural
Relief and Non-Relief Households, October 1933
Compa:r ison of the Education of Heads of Rural
Relief and Non-Relief Households, October 1933
Co■pari30n of Average Earnings of Rural Relief
and Non-Relief Households, 'Whose Heads Were
Not Fara Operators, by Size of Households,
October 1933 ..................•... • • • • • • • • • •
Usual Occupation of Male Heads of Rural Relief
and Non-Relief Households, October 1933 •••••
Percent of Male Heads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households Eng aged in Their Usual Occupation in October 1933, by Type of Occup~
tiOll .. ........... • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
2tJ
28
31
43
66
SUPPLF.MENTART TABLES
( }ppendix At
Table
Table
1.· Percentage Distribution of Rural Relief Households by Type of Reli e! Received in October
1933, bf ArP.a... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Average Value of All Relief Received by Rural
Relief Households in October 1933, by Race
79
and Area. • • • • . • • • . • • • • • . . • . • . . • • . • • • • . • . • • • .
79
Table
3,
Table
LJ.
Cumulative Distribution Percentage of Value of
All Relief Received by Rural Relief Households
in October 1933, by Sex and October 1933 Occupation of Head of Household...............
Average Value of All Relief Received by Rural
Relief Households in October 1933, by Race,
Sex, and October 1933 Occupation of He
of
Household......... • . • • • • • • • . • • • ; iti.:i.dt.y. -;,
80
g~
ix
CONTENTS
Pqe.
Table
5.
Table
6.
Table
7.
Table
8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
Table 11.
Table 12.
Table 13.
Table lLJ.
Table 1!5.
Tabl.e lf.i.
Table 17
Value of All Relief Received by Rural Relief
Households during October 1933, by Size of
Household ••••••••..••..•••••••••••••.•••••••
Percentage Distribution of October 19~3 Rural
Relief Households, by Sex and Last Usual Occupation of Bead a.nd Number of Years in Which
Any Relief Was Received between 1930 and
1933, Inclusive •••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••
Perceatage Distribution of Rural Relief Households by Area, Residence, and Number of Years
in Which Relief Was Received from 19" to
1933, Inclusive ............................ .
Aver.age N1111ber of Months in Which October 1933
Rural Relief Households Bad Received Any Relief between January 1, 19,:) and Dece111ber 31,
1933, by Area, and by Race and NatiTity
Average NWDber of Months in Which October 1933
Rural Relief Households Received Relief Between January 1, 1930 and December 31, 1933,
by Size of Household, Race, and NatiYity
Percent of All Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households wi tll Members Fmployed by the Civil 'llbrks
.Administration, and F.nrollea in the Civilian
Conservation Corps, during 1933, by Area
Percent of Rural Relief and Nc>n-Relief Farm Operator Households Assisted by the .Agricultural
Adjustment and Fann Credit Administrations
durini 1933, by Area •••••.•••••••••••..•••••
Place of Residence of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households, by Area, October 1933, •.•
Inter-County Changes of Residence of Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households with
Hale
Beads, between November 1, 1923 and October
31, 1933, by Area .•..•.....•...•.••......•••
.Average Annual Inter-County Moves per One Hundred Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households
11oi th Hale Beads, 1923-1929 and 19~ 1933, by
Usual Occupation of Head ..•..•..•••••..••.••
Percentage Distribution of Rural Relief Households by Nativity and Race of Head a.nd by
Area, October 1933 ...••...•.••••••...••..••.
Perc·entage Distribution of All Rural Relief and
Non-Relief Households and of Tho~e Living
Alone by Type of Household and Sex and October Occupation of Head, October 1933 ..... .
Average Size of Rural Relief and Non-Relief
Households by Age of Head, October 1933
Digitized by
8)
81
81
82
82
83
83
84
84
85
85
86
87
Google
x
Table 18.
Table 19.
Table 20.
Table 21.
Table 22.
Table 23.
Table 2q.
Table 25.
Table 26.
CONTENTS
Pa:? e.
Average ~ize of Rural Relief and Non-Relief
Hou~eholds by Nativity and Race of Head, for
All Areas, and for the Old fouth r.ot ton and
Tobacco Areas, October 1933-................
87
Average Size of Fural Relief and Non-Relief.
Householas by Area, October 1933............
88
Percentage Distribution of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households by Size, October 1933
88
Average Age of Heads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households by Area, October 1933
89
Age Distribution of Heads of Rural Relief and
Non-Relief Households by Sex and F.mployment
Status of Head, October 1933·................
89
Age Distribution of Members, Other Than Heads,
of Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households,
by Sex and Usual Occupation of Bead, October
193 3. ....•................•..•..•.•.... · • · · ·
90
Percent Female Heads Wereof All Heads of Rural
Relief and Non-Relief Households, by Race and
Nativity, October 1933......................
90
Education of Heads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households, by Area, October 1933 91
F.ducation of Heads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households by Race and Area, October
1933........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 27.
Education of Children in Rural Relief ud NonRelief Households, by Age and Residence, Oc-
Table 33.
Educational Attainments of Children of Rural
Relief and Non-Relief Households by Residence,
October 19 33. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Education of Children of Rural Relief ud NonRelief Households, by Area, October 1933
Education of Children of White and Ne1ro Rural
Relief and Non-Relief Households, by Area,
tober 19 33... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 29.
Table,:>.
October 1933................................
Table 31.
Table 32.
Table 33.
Percent of Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households with No Workers and With Neither librk.ers
Nor Potential. 1,hrkers, by Area, October 1933
Average Number of ',hr.leers per Ruu.1. Relief and
Non-Relief Household with ',hr.leers and AYerage
Number of Dependents per Worker in the Sae
Households, by Area, October 1933............
Average Numberof Dependentsper Employed Worker
in Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households
with Workers, by Sex and October 1933 Occupation of Head. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . • . • •
Table 3".
Table 35.
91
91
92
92
93
93
9q
9q.
Average Number of Dependents per Faplo7ed Worker
in Rural Relief and Non-Relief Housellolds
with "k>rkers in October 1933, b:fgitibte,a,,. •
g{(9q
Percent of Jlependents ill Rural Relief ud Non-
xi
CONTENTS
Page.
T6ble
36.
Table 37.
Table 38,
Table ,:J.
Table
q().
Table '11.
Table ii2.
Table IJ3.
Table qq_
Table iJ5.
Table "6.
Table IJ7.A.
TabJ..e ii7B.
Table 118A.
Relie.f Bousebolds Who Were Potential \lbrlters,
by Sex and October 1933 Occupation of Head
.Averaee October Earnings of F.mployed .Rural ~elie.f and Non-Relie.f Male Heads Otrer Tb an
Fara Operators in October 1923, 1928, and
1933, bJ Area. •••••••••••••••••• • . • · • • • . • •
Cumulative Percentage Distributiono.f All Rura.l
Relie.f and Non-Relie.f Non-Farm Operator Households with Head or Members Fmployed in October 1933, by the Earnings in That Month o.f
Heads and of All Members Including Heads
Average October 1933 Earnings of Rural Relie.f
and Non-Relie.f Households Whose Heads Were
not Fara Operators, by Size of Household
Average Earnings of Heads and of All Members of
Rural Relief and Non-Relief Non-Farm Operator
Households Faplo7ed in October 1933, by Area
Median Acreaee of Rural Relie.f and Non-Relief
Fara ~erator Households on Januar7 1, 19~,
bJ At-eL • • • . . . . .. . . • . • . • . . • . . • • . . . . • • . • . . • . . .
OlaalatiTe Percentaee Distribution o.f Rural Relief aad Noa-Relie.f White aad Negro Fara Operator lloaseJaolds, b7 Acreage Operated Decelll>er 31, 1933.............................
Perceat of Rual Relief ud Noa-Relief Fara Operators Otller Tllu Croppers, Who Oned No
lbrtstoc.lt •d tile Jlyer aee Nu■ber Owned on
Ju,arJ 1, 19311, bJ Area................... .
Percent o.f hral. Relie.f and l«Jn-Relief Households
Tbat Owed No Livestock, Januar7 1, 1931J, by
At-ea. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . . . • . .
.A.-erage Nu■ bersof Livestock Owned by Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households Reportiag Sucb
Livestock, Januar7 1, 193Q, by Area....... .
Cuaulative Percentaee Distribution of Rural Relie.f and Noa-Relief ~.:>useholds by A■ount of
lndebteda~ss on January 1,193" ••••••••••••••
Extent ad A■ount o.f Indebtedness of Rural Relief and Non-Relief BouseJlolds on Jaauary 1,
1934, bJ Ar-eL • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Perceataee Distribution o.f the October 1933 Occupational. Groups o.f Hale Rural Relie.f Beads
bJ Usual Occapatioa.........................
Perceataee Distribution of the October 1933 Occupational Groups of Hale Rural Noa-Relief
Beads by Usual Occupation...................
Chan1es between Last Usual and October 1933
Industries of Male Heads of Relief Households
Digitized by
95
95
96
96
97
97
98
98
99
99
100
100
101
101
102
Google
xii
CONTENTS
Pqe.
Table qsB. Changes between Last Usual ud October 193~
Industries of Hale Heads of Non-Relie.f Bouseholds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table q9_ Percent of Male Heads of Rural Relie.f ud NonPelief Households, October 1933, Usually F.ag aged in Manufacturing and Hechuical Indus-
trie:;,.......................................
Table 50.
i.02
103
Percent of Male Heaas of Rural Relief ud NonRelief Households, 0c tober 1933, Engaged in
Manufacturing and Mechanical Industries, bJ
Areas.......................................
Percent of Male Heads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households, October 1933, Eoeaged in
the Transportation and C,ommunication Industry, by Areas. . . . • . • • • . . . • • . • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • •
52. Percent of Male Heads o! Rural Relief and NonRelief Households, October 1933, Engaged in
Trade, by Areas....................... .......
53A. Percentage Distribution of Hale Heads of Rural
Relief Households by Last Usual Occupa:tion and by October 1933 Occupation •••••••••
53B. Percentage Distribution of Hale Heads of Rural
Non-Relief Households b·y Last Usual Occupa:tion ud by October 1933 Occupation .........
5q.A., Percent of Male Heads of Rural Relief ud NonRelief Households F.mployed at Their Usual
Occupation in October 1933, by Occupation and
Area........................................
!>QB. Percent of Male Heads of Rural Relief and NonRelief Households Who Wer.e Unemployed in October 1933, by Usual Occupation, by Area
55. Percentage Distribution of Male Heaas of Rural
Relief and Non-~elief Households by October
1933 Occupation, by Area....................
56. Percent of Time Hale Heads of October 1933 Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households Were
Unemployed during the Periods
November 1, 1923-0ctober 31, 1933;
November 1, 1923-0ctober 31, 1929;
Noveinoer 1, 1929-0ctober 31, 1933,
by Area.....................................
57 A. Changes from Last Usual Occupation to October
1933 Occupation of White and Negro Male Beads
of Rural Relief Households ••••.•••.••.•••.•.
57B. Changes from Last Usual Occupation to October
1933 Occupation of White and Negro Hale Heads
of Rural Non-Relief Households..............
103
Table 51.
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Digitized by
lOlJ
lOlJ
105
105
1.06
107
108
109
110
111
Google
xiii
CONTENTS
Table '8.
Table '9.
Table 60.
Table 61.
Percentage Distribution of Last Usual and October 1933 Occupation of White and Negro
Male Heads of Rural Relief and Non-Relief
Households.................................
Faplo111eat Status and October 1933 Industry
of Meabers 16 Years of Age and Over, Other•
Than Beads, of Rural Relief and Non-Relief
Households. . . . . • . . . • • • . . • • • . . . . • • . • . . . . . . • •
Percent of Members 16 }ears of Age and Over,
Other Than Heads, in Rural Relief and NonRelief Households Who Were Uneaplo7ed and
Seetina lbrt in October 1933, bJ Usaal ID-
112
112
dustry.....................................
113
Perceatqe Distribution of Uaeaplo1ed KC!llbers
16 Tears of Aee and OTer, Other Tbu Beads,
ia Rural Reliel ud Non-Relief Households,
•
Vere SeekiDa Wort in October 1933, b7
U•al <>ccapatioa. . • . • . • • . . • . . • • • • • • • . • . . • . .
ll3
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
SUMMARY
The preaeat stud¥ wu desianed to show in what ways, if anf,
ud to what extent the rural household& receiving public emereeacy relief in October 1933 differed .fro• their nearest
■eiehbora who had aot received such relief.
A ■ ullber of differences were found.
These differences not
only pointed to larger f•ilies, greater unemployment and
Sllaller iaco■es in the relief group, but also indicated possible e1pluations of why one group of t aailies caae to be in
ereater aeed than the other group.
Differences were found as
to aee, educatioaal. attaiuents, stability, t •ily composition,
uul occapations ud industries.
It ■aat be stated, boweYer, that the differences between
the relief and Don-relief households were not cleaacut.
Ia
the cue 01 eYery trait ■euured there was considerable overlappill&, ao that no sharp line could be drawn between the two
eroapa. A couiderable nW1ber of households in the non-relief
eroap were ao near the position of the relief aroup that it is
aot aarprisina that ■ any who were not on relief in October 1933
ban beea obliged to go on relief since that time.
Unless specifically stated, in tne sWDmary that follows the
differences mentioned are averages which existed not only between
the total.populations surveyed but also, in the majority of cases,
between the s•e occupational classes in the relief and nonreliet groups, often with other pertinent factors controlled.
Relief households with ■ale heads had changed residence
acroaa county lines within the past ten 1ears to a greater exteat tbq bad the corresponding non-relief households, a fact
P01Sibl1 indicating less stability among those who eventually
cae 0 11 relief.
b Bousebolds receiYin& relief averaeed about one person larger
t_ 11 •011-relief households.
The normal family of husband,
wife, anc:1 children, and broken f•ilies of mother and children
~d .father and children, occurred ■ore o.ften in the relief
tau .
in ~be noa-relief population; but the reverse was true of
•••bud-wife f•ilY,
The saallest type of household,
tter. - peraoaa living alone - appeared about as often in
08
\ero11p u ia the other.
tho he beads o.t relief households tendee1 to be younaer thu
•al.se 0 t 11on-relie.f households, especially uion" unemployed
. e llel fe■ale heads. The differences were slight and inconsisteat .
beada lifltb reaard to employed heads.
There were mor~ male
r 1. 811 der 25 yeara of aee and over 6q years of age 1n the
e
tban in the .uon-relief group.
e
relief group contaiaed over a third more children under
15
Yeara of qe than the non-relief group; and this ratio would
:!:
;:f
l
Digitized by
Google
2
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIBP HOUSBHOLDS
ll&ve bffll little ch&need if the occupation&!. distribution of
the healis of householoa had been the s1111e for relief and noareliet eroups.
The relief population contained a. larger percentaee of fe•ales thu the non-relief, the sex ratios beine 10'1 and 111 reapectiYel7. Bouaeholoa with f•ale heads coapriaed 13 perceat
of all relief laouaeholc18 and 8 perceat of all non-relief houaellolc18.
The heads of relief bouaelaolc18 had leu fonaal eclacatioa
tbu tboae of non-relief bouaeholda, eapeci-111 i ■ tbe older
a,e groups. Childrea of relief pareats were alao edacatioaall7
budicapped in coaparieon vi th tboae of non-relief parents, but
wre sc.ewbat 1... budicapped thu the older beada.
As aigllt be expected, the perceata,e of llouellolda vi tb ao
eaplo7ed workers vu aucb ereater ia the relief C26 perceat t
tbu ia tbe noa-relief 1roup (q perceatt; ud the aaae wu UH
of the aUllber of depeadeata per eaplo7ed worker ia houHbolda
!Jae allllber
haTia1 aucb worker• (relief 3.0, aoa-relief 1.et.
of llouaeholda that iacllded aei tiler worur aor poteatial wrkff
wu aot laraie, but the proportioa ill the relief populatioa (7
perceatl exceeded that ia the lloa-relief CQ perceatt.
Atai• aa would be expected, fewer relief (66 perceat I t•u
10a-relief households 192 percent), exclaahe of fara operatora,
reported earnings in October 1933; and o1 bouHbolda wit•
incoae, those on relief earned 0111 a tllird aa aucb C$26t u
\hose not on relief ($821. Mellbers other than t•e ••ad ,;oatributed a larger part of the f•il.¥ earnines UIOII relief loae
fifthl than aaone DOil-relief householc181oae eiebtht.
Fanaers on relief enrphere operated •aller faraa tbaa
BYen with size of fara held coatheir non-relief neighbors.
atut, about 10 percent aore of the relief 1roup, or a total
of 3'1 percent, were without workstock.
Fewer relief than non-relief houaeholda owned cova and poaltr1,
Onl1 half aa aan1 relief as non-relief houaeholda had ao
debts outstandin& on January 1, 193'1; but because of lack of
credit theaaouat ot indebtedness per indebted relief bouaebold
wu a third a.a ereat C$!l()O coapared to $1,6001. It the uaual
occupation and sex distributions of the beads of both eroupa
bad been the s•e as in the relief group, boveYer, the latter
ratio would na.ve been cha.need from a third to Aearl7 a bal.f.
By last usual occupation, 28 perce•t ot the ■ale beads o.f
households receivine relief were semi-and unskilled industrial
laborers, 28 percent were fa.rm tenants aad croppers, 12percent
were fana owners, 11 percent were f&n1 laborers, 8 percent were
skilled laborers, 8 percent had no usual occupatioll, ud q perceat were "white collar" workers.
••c•
1
I
Digitized by
Google
8CNNAIJ
ne occapatioaal cluaea tllat leut frequn tlJ resorted to
relief were profeuiooals, proprietors, clerical workers, fana
owers, •d skilled llborera, ia order; while those witll the
lareeat proportioaa oa relief roll• were sllare-crcppers, f &n1
llboren, aai- •d aaakilled iadaatrial laborers, aeads witll
10 asaal occapatioa, •d f.,. tea•ta otller tll• croppers.
• • it tlle occapatioaal tliatri,nio■ ia tlle aoa-relief
1ro•p llad beea tlle aae • ia tlle relief ll'OIIP, •etwen tllree
Md foar tiaea u
relief u aoa-relief aale lleada woald
ll•e bea -■-,lo7ed la October 1933.
,_
B1 l•t •••al iadHtrJ, ,2 perceat of tie ..ale lleada of rer lief llouellolda were eaplo7ed ia a,ricaltare, 16 percat ia
.' / auufactariq •d MCIIMical iadastriea, 8 perc•t ia aiac:eliadutriea, 8 perc•t ia tr•-,ortatioa •d c:ioaaaaic~
1
q pwc•t ia trade, 2 perc•t
-' tioa, 8 perc•t ia ao iadutrJ,
- · ia extractioa of aiaerals, .1 perceat ia dolleatic Md per•■ al
aenice,
percnt i ■ pablic aenice, •d
percat ia
profasioaal serTice.
Aaoae tlle lut aHal iadastriea reported bJ aale lleads of
llo111ellolds recehia1 relief, tlloae that f11raialled well lboYe
tbeir qaota to tlle relief poplllatioa wre the aiac:ell•eous
iadastries, foreatrJ •d fialliar. •d extractioa of aiaerals,
ia the order 1hea; wllereu tlloH tllat fan1Med aartedl7 leu
tllu their 4110ta were profeaaioaal aenice, dollntic •d per••al aenice, •d trade.
Acricaltare, auafactariq •d
aech•ical iadastriea, Md tr•-,ortatioa •d c:oaaaicatioa,
wllicb sappUed the balk of all relief cuea, vere repreaeatecl
ia aearl7 tlle ••e proportioaa aoa1 tlle relief •d 10a-relief
aaples.
Two tllirds u
■ale relief •
aoa-relief lleada woald
lloe reaaiaed eaplo7ecl at tlleir uaaal iadaatriea ad occap~
tioas ia October 1933 U tlle 11•&1. iadaatrial •d occupatioaal
dbtributioaa ia tlle 10a-relief 1roap llad bffl tlle aae u iD
tlle relief 1ro11p.
Daria1 tlle ab-rear pre-depreaaioa period .fraa bcaber 1,
1923 tllroa1II Octoba- 31, 1929, tlloae ■ale lleada of lo■.alda
wo were 01 relief iD October 193' woald lloe 1>eea umploJed
ao aore tau their aoa-re.Uef aeiellbora if tlle ••al occupatioa
ad aee distribatioaa had beea tile ••e ia tlle two 1ro11ps.
Dariae the .first four 7ears of tile depreaaioa, llowner, troa
llovellber 1, 1929 tbroaeb October 31. 1933, the aale beads of
M>useholds who were recehia& relief ia October 1933 woald
~•e beea aae■plo7ed
ti■ea as ■ ucll u tlle correapo1diq
11C>a-rellef beads.
••1
/. -l•eo••
o.,
o.,
••1
2.,
Digitized by
Google
INTRODUCTION
.As a :follow-up o:f tbe Relief Census taken b7 tbe Federal
Faergenc1 Relief .Adainutrauon in October 1933, a need wu
:felt :for a survey that 1110uld describe in 1110n. detail a saaple
o:f the rural failles receiving relief in the chief comaercial
farming regionso:f the country, and that would compare tnt:111 with
their nearest neighbors who had never received public relief.
Accordingly, tne Survey o:f Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households was conducted as of October 1933 in in sanple counties
selected in 19 states and :falling within 13 distinct types of
farming areas.
The sample counties alone are snown on Hap A.
Map B includes also the counties in the same types o:f farming
areas that w~re found to resemble the sample counties rather
closely with respect both to Ill basic economic and population
factors and 121 proportion of the rural population receivine
relief. Hap C indicates all of the counties that were like the
sample counties with respect to basic economic and population
factors, whether or not they were like them in regard to the
proportion of the population receiving relief.
It is apparent that the sample counties were too :few in 011111oer to provide a reliable picture of the total rural population
o:f the United States. Moreover, because of small area samples,
it was necessary to avoid detailed analyses by separate areas.
The chief value of the investigation, therefore, lies in the
comparisons that it affords between hi rly large relief and
aoa-relie:f populations in certain rural areas in the moath of
October 1933.
As additional f aailies were forced on relief after October
(
'\
1
,1933, it is probable that an increasing proportion of the -upper
"
economic classes was included.
If so, the composi uon and
cllaracteristics ol the relief population at later dates \IIOuld
,differ S01Dewbat from those found in this survey.
The sections on kinds and amounts of relieI received, in
which relief and non-relief comparisons do not appear, are
offered cbieflf as a preliminary to the comparisons that follow.
Although the essence of this study is a cQmpari.80D of differences between the rel1e:f and non-relief populations, on account of the erossness o:f the data it bas seemed pointless to
eaplo7 refined statistical methods for testing the significance
of the dif..t.erences.
bstead, these dif..t.erences have simply
been exhibited as the1 were found to exist.
SeTeral sectio~s
included in tile original field schedule do not appear in this
report as tile data were found to be seriously lackine either ia
definition or reliabilit7. These difficulties were due partl7
to tbe un&Toidable use o:f untrained :field Tisito,a in ao11e
ar-eas, partlr to the widely scattered territory ia whicll the
survey wu
■ ade.
Digitized by
Google
MAP A. COUNTIES SAMPLED
ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
OCTOBER 1933
•
.
0
~
I
cci"
;c.
f:j"
CD
o_
CT
-<
C;
___,_,
..
'
- I
-
■
:z:
➔
,a
I •
~
l
\~
~
t1' ~'ti
0
0
c::
("')
-
...
➔
~
-
-
-
,:::,
~
:z:
~
"'
I
0
-
~
rv
-
'
-
"'
6
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
Interpretations have been confined rather clo:iely to what
could be drawn directly from the data. Further explanation requires special studies, some of which are now under way.
COUNTIES SURVEYED, BY AREAS
( I)
Old South Cotton
Dalla:;, Alabdllia
Li11,es tone, Alabama
Cleveland, Arkansas
Lee, Arkansas
Anson, North Carolina
(II)
!)airy
Grt:t:n, Wisconsin
Cecil, Maryland
Frederick, Maryland
Tompkins, New York
Wayne, Ne1"' York
Dorchester, Maryland
( III)
(IV)
(V)
(VI)
Tobacco
Todd, Ken tuck)'
Madison, Kentucky
Sampson, Non h Carolina
Pitt, North Carolina
(VI I)
Massachusetts
Middlesex, Massachusetts
Worcester, Massachusetts
(VIII) Cut-Over
Marathon, Wisconsin
Sawyer, Wisconsin
(IX)
Corn-and-Ho~
Wright, Iowa
Poweshiek, Iowa
Fayette, Ohio
Logan, Ohio
Cash Grain
Hiner, South Dakota
Linn, Kansas
Norton, Kansas
(X)
Wheat
Meade, Kansas
Gray, Kansas
Baca, Colorado
Spink, South Dakota
Walworth, South Dakota
Mountain
Elbert, Colorado
Larimer, Colorado
Ptah, Utah
Sanpete, Utah
Duchesne, Utah
(XI)
New Mexico
Guadalupe, New Mexico
Socorro, Ne1o Mexico
, 'Southwestern Cot ton
Hi 11, Texas
Runnels, Texas
Clevt:land, Oklahoma
Payne, Oklahoma
\
(XII) Orei:on
Tillamook, Oregon
Clatsop, Oregon
Marion, Oregon
(XIII) Cali!ornia
Contra Costa, California J
Riverside, California
Digitized by
Google
ENTED ANO COUNTIES SAMPLED
MAP B. PRIMARY AREAS REPRES
CTOBER 1933
-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS-O
SURVEY OF RURAL RELIEF ANO NON
~ WHEAT
I -o
;:;·
::g_
wr -O t~~
--
CA8"
(I"
&
-
,,;
• 'ImI!! -= !••~I" av
Ill • , J.M. ~
1l J5' "
'II
'i..,;1 ...!. BH "o ,l 1P
r
Nti♦
~~
'Ill \)H l
(l\
QANO
..
7!JT iijC I"
.... .
CJ
m
adIJl'llm ~ fm mimuuD
~
cg
f
.
. "~·
i~
SOUTHWEil
COTTON
4
'
e
,
'<)
.
Cl
,,
rJ
0
C
-
0
➔
0
z:
•
COTTON "
tt
➔
0
C
W3
'CU> SOIJTH
'
I
-
G G2 .
0
q
0
z
:.,
~
r·
~
CJ
0
~
( i)
...,
MAP C.
AREAS REPRESENTED AND COUNTIES SAMPLED
en
::0
c::
::0
>
t""
::0
tr.I
......
......
er,
"Zj
>
:z
0
:z:
0
:z
0
0
A
0
co
;c;.·
i::j'
~
O"
'<
CJ
~ 7R,;t;
oOo
o
conoN
el
fi'
t""
......
::%1
"Zj
::r:
0
c::
rn
-
tr.I
::r:
0
:-
0
C,
(/)
~,.......
(i)
I
:;o
::-:,
-·
I.
TIB IUIAL RBLIBP SITUATION IN OCTOBER 1933
I.
KiRda of Relief Received
raral 1
Ot tile
laoaseholds recei vine relief in October 1933,
alaoat oae laal.f receiTed direct relief, 1 two fifths work relief,' ud oae ei1lltb both direct ana work relief ITable Al.
TABLE A.
PERCENU6£ OISTRl8UTIOII OF RUIIAL RELIEF HOUSEHOI.OS BY TYPE OF RELIEF
RECEIVED IN OCTOBER 19H, ANO BY COLOR, SEX, ANO OCTOBER 19B
OCCUPATION OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
ALL A ACII
So •• 0c. roet.• 195~
o, ..,,
Occv,n10N o,: Niu.,
Of HouSlMOLD
ALL Hu1s
llikLt. HlADS
Tou.L
,.._,.,
-·
Ru•
.......
WNIT(
DI ■ ICT
o,aec,
...
Wo8tl
TOTAL Rt.L 11,
AILI If
o,nc,
wou
01ucr
TOTAL
AllLIIF AILIIF
AlLIH
RlL. llf
100
q7
01
12
100
118
lC:0
"2
116
12
100
02
.,
100
00
- -. .
N1a•a
Outer
~ lLllf
11
JOO
29
13
JOO
29
116
2,
03
28
"
J7
16
100
00
116
10
•9
100
26
22
100
,0
27
100
",. "
12
C.or,aa
.,
10
100
100
l,8
100
,.
07
Fahl 0111•1 ■
00
26
100
n
118
,0
0TNU Ttu,•T
2'
100
27
'9
IU
100
7
61
10
27
10
32
2,
37
09
'2
00
11
11
100
89
8
'
90
1
100
100
100
100
71
ftMALI HlADS
100
100
100
100
~3
•8
'9
28
,1
01
16
IJIIIMf'LOUD
100
100
100
100
AMtCULhlU
Fa, ... LAHAU
--····Cut. Tw■ I
(Q
37
32
12
11
'
311
•
'2
29
33
61
29
10
71
21
II
Tlaere wu, laoWffer, c:oaaiderable Yariatioa froa area to
area ia tbe proportioas wllicb obtaiaed oae or tile other tn,e
of reliet (Table lt.
Tlaia was partly because local circuatances lareelJ dete111iaed the tor• ot relief eina. Ja tile
Cub Graia, Wheat, So11tlaveat Cottoa, Old Soutb Cotton,. and
O,n-ud-Jloi COHtiea tlaere was 110re worY-tnaa·c11rect relief,
witll u aan7 u nine teatlaa of &11 cues ia the Casb Graia
co1&atiea llaYiq soae work relief durine October 1933.
Tile
coaaties ia all of tile reaaiaiae tnes of fanaiq areas s1&rYe7ed distributed 110re direct than 1«>rk reliet.
Sectioas
nere tile ext•t of .ork relief wu particularl7 liaited were
tile Ctat--OYer and Daiey areu, New Mexico, and Oreeoa, ia nicll
titan oae fifth of the cases .orted for _ . or all of
tlleir relief eraat.
Sli1btl1 mre work relief wu 1h• to
lleads of lloHeholds ••eared in aoa-a,ricllltu&l YocatioH and ·
to tara tenuts tbu to fana owaers aad laborers.
Aa would be expected, a ■llcll ereater proportioa of relief
llollsebolas beaded bJ feulea than by aales recehed direct relief. Ia eeaer&l,work relief was eraated to a lar1er percent~
... of Ne,ro than of white relief bouebolds.
(·
l••
la.taH• er ceatere •1 u. 1, , .. or aore 1uu1 tau.
'a.lier la retva rer
ao work wu to~ aor re,.,..at !Ude.
'a.a.1et
la relU'a ror work •••·
&1•••
•ic•
9
Digitized by
Google
RUR.AL RBLIBF AND NON-RBLIIF BOUSBBOLDS
10
2.
A110unt1 of Relief Received
The average value of the relief grant per case in October
1933 was approximately the same tor both direct and work relief - $12 - but since sane households received both types of
relief, the average for all reliet rose to about $1Q.
The
ratio between the average value of work and direct relief
grants, however, changed considerably from one type of tar■ina
area to another (Table Bl.
In 9 out of 13 areas, erants for
TABLE B.
AVERAGE VALUE OF 0 IAECT ANO WORK RELIEF IN OCTOBER 19,,, IY AREA
••••
Av11•e1 Vaa.11,
D111cr R•L11,•
••• ••••• Co,,oa
Oa.•
Sou, ■
SOUTNWIIT COTTON
Toeacco
DAIIY
MAIIACNVII. TTI
Cur-Ov1 ■
....
Co ■ •-••D-Ho•
CAIN
,
GIAIN
lloUNTAt ■
NI ■
ll111co
011.10 ■
C•a.••o••••
A
I
•
•o••
•
A11.11,•
12
' 11
12
6..
1
'
6
16
9
"
26
1,
9
11
11
9
27
'
6
12
8
1'
12
10
8
17
8
15
INCLUDII ALL GASII IICIIVINS ANY Dlll~t IILIIP.
l ■ CLUDII ALL CAIII IICIIVINI ANT WOIC IILlt,.
work relief were greater than grants for direct relief.
Areas differed widely in the amount.of total relief received
per case during October 1933.
In New Mexico, the average
was $5; in the Southwest Cot ton counties $7; in the Dair)'
counties $2:J; in Massachusetts $28 !Table 21. Ninety-nine out
of every 100 cases obtained less than $55, and approximatel1 9
out of 10 obtained less than $30, q out of~ less than $20,and
one half less than $10 !Table 31.
Arwunt or Rel Le( b11 Occupatton, b11 lllplo11aent,
and by Sex.
Some variations in size of relief benefits appeared also in
relation to occupation.
Households whose heads were emplo1ed
in private industr1 during October 1933 received an average of
$2 more if the heads were engaged in non-agricultural occupations than if engaged in agriculture, although this was not
true in all areas I Table qi.
In the non-agricultural group
skilled workers obtained considerably larger relie1 grants
than any other class, but this was partly because these workers tended to be concentrated in areas where high relief bener fits prevailed.
In the agricultural group, there was little
·difference by tenure. The low average for croppers was lareely
a result of their concentration in areas of small reliet benefits for all clients.
The average value of all relie! received bJ f•ale heaoa
was$15, and by unemployed male lleada$17.
Both of tlleae
Digitized by
Google
TBI RURAL RILIBP SITUATION IN OCTOBBR 1933
11
averaees, in tile case of wbi tea, were above that for employed
headS.
Aaone Neeroes, boweYer, female heads received
less than the average for all heads, probably due in part to
the fact that in the Negro relief group the women were as frequently and as profitably employed as the men. It should also
be noted that households with male beads eaployeu in private
industry and ia agriculture were given &11 average of only $q
to $6 leas relief during October than were households with totally un-.ployed ■ale beads, indicating the extreme meaeerness
of the earnings of the so-called 'eaployed" men on relief rolls.
AIIOUnt of Relief bli Race. In practically all areas and occupations, Negro households were givea leas relief than white
households.
The aYera,e in October for Negro households was
$8 and for white households $1", wit~ a greater proportion of
Nqroes receiYiq saall UIOunta of relief.
lncllading all occupatioaal. classes except croppers, the differential in favor
of whites ran froa $3 to $9,being especially la.ziie ia the case
of the uneaployeo, and reaching a aaxi ■ua la the case of house-_
bolds with female heads.
The average grant receiYed by Negro/
croppers, however, thoug-h consistently smaller ia ever, share-'
cropping area, was not usually much below that receiveo bf
white croppers.
_)
It should be recalled that Negroes were concentrated in the
Cotton and Tobacco regions where relief allowances were below
averaee for all clients, white and Negro. Moreover, a larger
perceataee of Negroes tbaa whites had some private employmeat ,
while oa relief. A further point is that Negroes were largelf
confined to the lower occupational levels.
Nevertheless, t~e
f.ict reaaias that there was a differential operating against
Ne&,roes which ove~rides all of these considerations.
,,.,
hlown of Reltef bli Stze of HousehOla ana bJi lncou.
The
averaee aaount of the relief grant increased with the size of
the housebola fJ'OII about $8 for one-person households to about
$27 for bou~holds with 10 or more members I Table 51.
There
was, boweYer, a decrease in the value of relief per person
with the increase in si&e of household, the averaees rang in"
froa about $8 per person in one-person households to about
$2 per person in households of 10 or more persons.
It might be anticipated that as the usual income of relief
households !omitting tarm operators! increased, there would be
a decrease in th~ amount of relief granted.
The figures show
that this was the case within a limited range of incomes only,
and there to but a small extent.
Households that had less
than $D income in October generally obtained slightly more relief than llouaellolds that had incomes of $10-$19; but the data
were too se&Dtf to allow aa1 c011parisons with higher incoae
&roaps.
Aaoae fara operator households there was no evidence
t~t the aout of relief receiHd decre&Nd with increase ia
■ale
Digitized by
Google
.
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RBLIBF HOUSBHOLDS
12
size of farm, even when allowance was made for tbe fact that
small farms were most concentrated in areas of low relief
grants.
3.
Relief Hiatory of Cases Receiving
Relief in October 1933
The great bulk of the rural families receiving relief in
October 1933 were unknown to local relief agencies, where any
existed, before 1932.
Very few rural families with ma.le
lle&ds, who maoe up nearly nine tenths of the total rural relief load, had ever been public charges before the beginnia,
of the present economic depression in 1929 - 30. 1 Only aaoa1
tile remaining 13 percent consisting of families with feaale
lle&ds was there an important proportion of cases with a reliet
record dating further bock than 1930 !Table Cl. Of the latter
TABLE C.
NU~BER AND PERCENT OF OCTOBER 1955 RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS THAT HAD
RECEIVED RELIEF PRIOR TO, OR ONLY AFTER, JANUARY l, 1950,
BY SEX AND LAST USUAL OCCUPATION OF HEAD
OF
HIAO Of
Hou~f.NOLD
Nuw ■ Elt
,.335
ALL HEADS
Puct ■ T
ALL Hou51NOLD~
5€1 A ■ D LAST Usual Occu,u1011
Pucu,
WNO RICI I YID AIL I l!f
O ■ LT ... , . .
Juuu, 1, 19~
P1101 TD
JAIIUAIT },
100
94
6
'•
HEAD$
u,63'
IOO
9,
AGAICULfUH
2.'l9I
100
96
FAA"' OWNER
7UQ
100
98
2
CIIOf'P(Jt
30,
100
93
7
Toot
87•
100
9B
2
Fuw LAIOIIE.A
629
100
93
7
I.SB•
100
9'5
19
100
100
0
IOU
JOO
95
7
81
100
98
2
51•
]00
96
•
1.166
100
9"
6
350
100
94
6
~
100
80
20
\l.t.LE
OTNER
NON-AGIIICULTUlll
PaoFESSIONAL
PauPlll(UIU
CLEAi CAL
S.
ILLf.U
SEWI-
AtilO UN5KILLED
No LA5T US.JAL OccuPUION
FEMALE HE AUS
type of
in 1929
during
ereater
19'1
'
family, at least one in every five had received re11e1
or earlier. The number o! years since January 1, 1930,
which the family obtained some relief was also much
in the case of faailies with female hems I Table 61.
1AA uact riaure 11 11ot JuatlCled llere. bec111u tile rePllH or the Callin
couJ.d not uwallJ be clleclled ac&111at reu.r ege11clea• recordabetor• 1930.
TIie trutll or t.11• &•a•r&1 atat•eat. 11owner. 1a NJ.l HtabJ.lallad 111 tko
data,
Digitized by
Google
THE RURAL RELIEF SITUATION IN OCTOBER 1933
13
These stateaents hold true tor all except two or t_hree ot
the 13 types of farming areas surveyed. It is quite probaole,
however, that a 11uch larger proportion of families of all
types woula have bad a relief record before 1930 if more adequate relief-giving facilities had existed in the rural areas
at that time.
This is sug~ested by the fact that the highest
ratios of these chronic cases tended to occur in more progressive, urbanized areas.
In most aericultural regions, betore
the advent of the &aergency Relief Administration, the principal organization for dealing with the destitute was the "poor
fara" to which only the most hopeless indigents were a.omitted.
It is, nevertheless, quite clear that most of the relief
faailies treated in this report were emergency rather than
chronic cases.
The few ■&le heads of householas that haa received relief before 1930 were most often far11 croppers ana
unskilled laborers by usual occupation, 1 and least oiten
professionals ud tar■ operators, but the differences by occupation were not great nor consistent among areas.
A larger proportion of cases living in villages than in the
open country bad obtained relief in as many as three or four
calen<1ar years since January 1, 1930 I 22 ana lQ percent, respectivelyt, and this situation prevailed in most of the areas
!Table 7).
The greater proportion of families with female
heads in the villages accounts for some of the difference. It
is also a fact that fuilies of all types in neea of relie.C
tended to 111<>ve into the villages where it was usually simpler
to get relief than in the open country.
One-person cases, especially among Negroes and foreign-born
whites, had regularly obtained aid in a greater number of months
during the past four years than householu:1 composed of two or
110re persons.
A large proportion of these one-person cases
were probably old people with no relatives able or willing to
support the11.
There was also a tenaency for very large families to be on relief in 1110re months than smaller families
ITable 9t.
Negroes in the South consistently reported fewer
IIOntbs on relief than the whites !Table 81.
q•
Public and Private Assistance, Other than
EMergency Relief
In aJdition to eaergencf relief, the Federal ana State gover1111ents distributed during 1933 various types of aia to both
relief and non-relief households. Civil Works employment and,
on a much smaller scale, Civilian Conservation Corps jobs were
substitutes for emergency relief, and were largely confined to
lib, ....... ,• OCCIIP&tlOD
••• d1flned U the laat occupatloo at whlcb tba head
••• •Ployed berore October 1,
1929, and ror not leas than three years
111t41n the P11"1Od NoY . . bar 1, 192}, to October ,1, 193}.
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIBF BOUSIBOLDS
the relief iroup.
Airicultur&l. Adjustaent and Far11 Credit
.Administration benefits, desiineel to aid hra operator tailiea
in maintaining their status as producers, usuall7, altboueb aot
always, benefited a greater proportion of non-relief tbaa of
, relief cases. Hore permanently available fonu' of assistaace Old Age anu Mothers' Pensions - reached a very Mall proportion of the population and went to a ereater extent to boaseholds receiving emer11ency relief tbaa to laoasebolds aot receh\_ing such relief (Table D).
TA8U D.
TYPES~ OTHER GOIIERIIENTAL ASSISTAIICl• AECllVED IT AURAL RELIEF AIID _,.LIEF ..._NILDS
OUR ING 1933 . IT a:cuPAT ION ~ THE HUD IN OCTOl!EII 19'3
Ptacu, o, ttot.111110t.•• W..o R1cu•••
h,11 o, Gov1l•l•Ut..
Au
Aa11 HHCI 0tNII TNA ■
MouNNOLDID
E111 ■ &1•CY R1L11P' . .
1933
R1L11F
~
AIIT 0TNllt AslllTHCI
q9
8
Q8
0.LY 0..l ltPI
IGltt tNAN 0.1 T,,1•
CIVIL ·Olll•S EMPLOTMl ■ T
C!WILIAN Co■ HIVA.TIOII COIPI
-
Rn1a,
2'I
20
•7
3
l
AD11t•1.....,+oa
6
11
f......,. CAtDIT -'oul4UIIIATIO ■
MofNtaa• AtD
'
F
1i-.
OPIIATOII
KOUH,NOl..11
""""
RtLIII R11.11,
66
•9
17
.,.
27
'J8
3
'7
2
7
l
16
19
1(6)1
2
0..D 451 Pl ■ SIOtill
Ml lCILLAIIIOWIC
0.' PUCl ■ f.
'
.·u,•
'
. ..
•
9
2
l
6
- - ., -
2
-1
l
'
13
13
.
.
8
2.
l
-
2
10
•
l
3
19
2
l ■ CLUHI VUlU,11 1 CCIIWl ■ IATIO• ••D ,1 ■ 11o•s, LOHI OIi ADJ•ITII CCIIIPl■ IATIM
CO..ODITT CAlDIT COttPOtUTIO ■ LOA■ s, HD OTNIIS.
l ■ CLUDII NOUSlNOLDS I ■ NICII TNl OCCUPATIOtt M
TIil IIIAI WAI IIOT AaCIITAl ■ AII.I.
Ptar,;1 ■ '4511 I ■ P . . l ■ TNllll IAIID 011 TOTAL NOUSINOl.01 WI TM PINAi.i •tAllo
■ 1c1sua1u
'2
.
23
22
j
1
2
11
2
. .. . ..•
. - •
l
~
l
2
C
■o,
l
6
.:.
LlSS TNA■
OTNl8 TNA•
■ IL
11
"''1
•
A
I
1M18il ■ CT
o,; a..,e,.wca
Rll.llf RILllf R11,,111 R11.111 RILIU IIILUP
61
A• ■ I CVL TUIAI. .lioJUSflill. ■ T
3
FAlal LAecNtll
HOUN..._,a
'2
6
--·--. -. --··....
Srtc••••• T,,1
•
•
l
9
I IP•
IIWLTA ■ lOUS.
Cl ■ Tl,icaua,
t
I
Prtuate Relief.
Only about 10 percent of all October 1933
relief households reported receiving priYate reliet ia addition to public emergency relief.
ID the Old South ~tton,
Tobacco, New Mexico, and California counties, however, as mu7
as 20 to 30 percent of the emergency relief clients were also
receiving relief fro11 non-governaental aeencies.
Tbe Yalue o:t
these private grants was usually e.1.treaely •all, ud in ll&D1
cases the . aid consisted of supplies fllrnislied by the Federal
government but distributed by private aeencies.
Ciuil Tlorlls Adl&tnistratton.
Civil Works eaployaent was
available in only the last two months of 1933.
About half of
the October 1933 relief cases, but only seven percent of tbe
non-relief households, obtained this fora of assistuce in
that short time. The few non-relief f•ilies wbo receiYed sucb
aid were supposedly in difficult circU11Stances, aad tbe C.W.A.
job was iiven to keep them fro■ bavini to apply for relief.
Digitized by
Google
THK RURAL RELIEF SITUATION IN OCTOBER 1933
15
Partly because of the varying oates on which it became
effective in different locations, there was considerable variation by areas in the extent 01 Civi 1 Works employment.
As
SB1all proportions as 16, 22, and 23 percent of the relief families in the New Mexico, Tooacco, and Dairy counties, respectively, and as large proportions as Sq ana 85 percent in the
Cash Grain and Wheat areas, obtained this type of aid during
November and December 1933 I Table 10 I .
On the other hand,
nowhere, except in the Wheat and Cut-Over counties, were more
than 10 percent of the households in the non-relief groups
directly affected by the C.W.A. In the two regions mentioned,
however, 18 ana 50 percent, respectively, of the non-relief
households had members employed at C.W.A. jobs. 1
There was no consistent variation in the extent of Civil
Works employment obtained by persons of diUerent occupations
in October 1933, although in the relief population relatively
more fan11 laborers than others tenoed to be benef itea I Table
DI. Fifty-seven percent of farm laborers, and 5q, q9, and qq
percent of 1ara operators, non-agricultural, and unemployed
cases, respectively, were given C.W.A. jobs. In the non-relief
group the unemployed receivea more Civil Works assistance than
the employed. For both relier and non-relief households, tenants and croppers were somewhat more likely to be employea by
the C.W.A. than were farm owners.
Ctutltan O:>nseruatton Corps.
Enrollment in the Civilian
Conservation Corps in all areas combined affected but three
Percent of the relief and one percent of the non-relief households.
Only in the California and Dairy counties did as many
as !i ve percent of the relief cases have members enrolled in
the Corps.
In practically all areas more relief than nonrelief households were represented in C.C.C. camps.
",
A;ricultural Adjl.lstJlent AdAltntstration.
The Agricultural /
Adjustment Administration, set up to assist farm operators,/ /
benefited 16 percent of the relief and 1g percent of the non-.
relief operators !Table 111.
To many areas there were few or"
no payllents of this type in 1933.
In the three regions most
affected by this program - Old South Cotton, Southwest Cotton,
and Wheat - ,31, 91, and 19 percent, respectively, of the relief,
and 62, 38. and 19 percent of the non-relief farm operators.
received crop limitation pa,yments.
The di.fference between the percentages of relief and nonrelief operators that participated in the A. A. A. program was
l
In tbe C\at-O·nr region tbe high proportion or non-reuer households whlch
received Clvll Worll.a •11Plo7aent u uplalned by tbe real need or even
those bouaeholda not on r111er and by the uncertainty ln the eauy days
or the C.W.A. aa to th• 1.1tent to wblch tb1 noo-reuer population abould
be aasuud.
B1caua1 or th• var7lng 11ngtha or tla• 1t tooll. to aet up
tb1 C.W.A. lo dltf1rent statea, lt la posalbl1 that ln aome cases thl
1 1t111t1oa or the aupll count11a ln 193' waa not Yel7 tJPlc&l G
,
Digitized by
008
I
e
16
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIBF HOUSBBOLDS
· marked only in the Old South Cotton and Tobacco coaaties,
where twice as large a proportion of the non-relief as of the
1 ( relief farmers received these pa,aents.
Ia tllese two areas,
,where most croppers were located, a considerablJ saaller proportion of croppers than of otller fant operator• ia the aoarelief group reported crop or liYesto~k pa,aeats. Tllere was,
however, little consistent di:Uereace __ betwe• croppers ud
·. other operators in the relief grouo.
far• Creatt Adlltntstration. The Fara Credit .Adaiaistratioa,
also designed to assist fant operators, !Ude lldYaaces to aiae
percent of the relief and six percent of tile aoa-relief operators surve7ed.
In 110re than baU of tile areas, lloweYer, this
t1pe of aid was obtained by aore Don-relief than relief faraers.
The largest proportioaa, fr011 about 10 to 20 perceat, of botll
relief and non-relief faraers receiving adYaacea were found in
• h• 01,t South Cotton. Tobacco,
Cash Grain, and Wbeat regions.
\
As with the A.A.A. benefits, in the Old South Cotton ud
Tobacco counties a greater perceatage of operators ia tile aoarelief than in the relief group received Fant Credit .Adaiaistration aid.
The non-relief proportion benefitiae froa the
F.C.A. was also considerablJ lareer in the Cut-0.er,New Mexico,
and Mountain areas. Though this was the case ia IIC>St re,ioas,
the Cash Grain and Wheat areas were exceptions, as the1 were
with respect to A.A.A. pa,aents. The F.C.A. further reselllbled
/ )\be A.A.A. in that share-croppers participated relathel1 lit\tle in its benefits.
·· Other '!JJpes of Gouernaental Asststance.
Mothers' Aid aad
Old Age Pensions were receiYed by onl7 one and two percent of
the relief cases, respectively, wb'ile oD.11 a fractioa of one
percent of the non-relief poplllation was affected.
RoweYer,
six percent of the relief and three percent of the non-relief
households wi tb female beads reported soae foni of Mothers' Aid.
During 1933, three percent of the relief and five perceat
of the non-relief .households reported still other t7Pes of
governaental assistance, such as Veterans' Coapensation •d
Pensions, loans on Adjusted Compensation Certificates, Md
Coaao'1i ty Credit Corporation lous.
J
J
Digitized by
Google
II.
TBB RBSIDBNCB, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
OP RELIEF AND NON-RILIIF BOUSBROLDS
I.
Rea ldence
Tllree fifths of tlle rural households that were receivini relief ia October 1933 in the co•ercial fa.raing counties surYeJed in this study were residents of the open couotry, 1 while
tlle other two fifths were located in villaees of ~ or 110re
iababituts 11930 Census! ITable El.
By area. however, the percentage of relief cases living in
the ope• country ran aa high as 84 in tlle Old Soulll Cot ton and
Cut-c>Yer regions, and as low as 33 in the New Mexico and Cornud-Hog coutiea.
Other regions in addi tioo to the two last
aaed, wllere aore than the average proportion of cases on the
relief rolls c•e fr011 the villages, were the Cash Grain, Mountaia, and Cali:foraia areas !Table 121.
Siac:e eacll relief case was ■atched with two non-relief
households in the same place of residence, the distribution of
•on-relief households between village and open country was approxiaately the same as that o:f the relief, Only in Massachusetts, New Mexico, the Old South Cotton, ana Dairy areas did the
open country-village ratios differ much in the non-relief as
compared with the relief population. The variation was due to
a scarcity of non-relief families in the open country in Hassachnsetts and in the villages in the other three areas.
Place of Reatdence, b/1 Sex of Head of Bousehola.
In both
the relief ud non-relief groups households with female heads
tended to congregate in villages, 111ore than half of them residine there, coapared with about one third of all households
with ■ale beads' !Table El.
Place of Reatctence, bJI Occupaiton of the !tale Head Ln October 1933.
As would be expected, nearly 9 out of every 10
households whose ■ale heads were engaged in agriculture in
October 1933 lived in the open country.
On the other hanl.1,
onlJ about three fifths of those employed in non-agricultural
pursuits were located in villages, indicating that open country residence does not necessarily imply agricultural pursuits.
Households with unemployed male heads, however, like those with
feaale beads, were found in villages more often than in the
open country (Table El.
2.
Changes In Residence
TIie greater :frequency with which relief households with male
lle&ds llad changed residence across county or state lines in the
tea Jears prior to the suney indicates that they were somewhat
lo.1a14e ceaura •IUl ,o or aore 1111111111t111t••
OBlJ 1] peroeat of tlll reu,t IIOUHIIO14• &ad I Ptroeat ot thl DODl'ellet IIHHIIOlda . . . , • •u ....4., tile ao&11•U 1D tllU report U Prl--11,
oa 11ouuo10 111 ua aai, 11,.,••
1
11••·
,aee4
17
Digitized by
Google
18
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
less stable than their non-relief neighbors.
Io every area,
relief households with 11ale heads were found to be so11ewbat
TA8LE E.
PLACE OF RESIDENCE OF RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
8Y SEX ANO OCTOBER 1933 OCCUPATION OF HEAD
PUetMT
Su,
AflllD
Oc101u 1933
Occur.u
IOtil
NON-Rll. 1lF
RU..IH
Of HEAD
VI LL AGl
OPo
CoutiiTAT
VtLL.ACil
0,,fN CoUNTH
39
61
36
5q
37
63
311
66
AciR I CUL TURl
13
87
11
89
NON-4Glt I CUL TUlill
61
70
30
UNt ..P'LliHlO
,,
39
FtwAt.t Hu.us
'3
"'07
63
.,
ALL HlA0$
MALl HlAOS
''
37
more mobile than the correspondinlil non-relief households ia
the sa111e occupational class. For all areas and groups combiaed
in the ten-year period from November 1, 1923, through October
31, 1933, 36 percent of the relief and 21,percent of the noarelief households with male beads reported changes ia residence as defined above !Table Fl. In a majority of areas there
was not much variation from these percentaees; but ia Cal.iforni a the proportion of households in both groups that bad changed
the county of residence within ten 1ears was twice as ereat
as the averaee, a.nd in Oregon almost twice as ereat. Mobilit7
was least in the Tobacco and Hassachusettl regions (Table 13t,
Percenta;e of Households tna, Chanted Restdsnce, bV Occupation of the Head. Relatively few relief and non-relief households with beads usually eneaeed as f&r11 operators bad aade
such 110ves, compared with those in other occupational classes.
Fewer farm owners had changed residence than ambers of aaJ
other class. Fant laborers, on the other band, were aboYe the
average in this respect.
It is also interestine to note that
there was little difference in 1K>bili tf between fant laborer•
on and off relief.
Among non-agricultural households, the relationahip betweea
occupational levelandaobility was the reverse fr011 that •oq
agricultural households.
Households of higher socio-econo■ic
status, professional, proprietary, clerical, and skilled
laboring classes, were more mobile than the semi- and unskilled
workers.
A mobilitf rate below the average characterized
households in which the head had no usual occupation.
This
latter group, however, contained man1 young persons who had become heads late in the ten-year period, and for this reason is
not strictly comparable with the others !Table Fl.
frequenc11 of Koves, bl/ Area. The aeraee interval betweea
inter-county·moYes for the households that had changep~residence
Digitized by '-.:1008 e
RESIDENCE, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
19
varied between five and six years. In every occupational class,
and in 12 out of 13 areas, the interval was from 1 to 22 months
shorter for the relief than for the non-relief households. In
the Old South Cotton area, relief families moved at relatively
short intervals, non-relief families at unusually long intervals. The difference between relief and non-relief householas
was also particularly marked in the Dairy region.
The time
between moves was short for both relief and non-relief families
in the Wheat, Mountain, and Oregon counties. Moves were most infrequent in the Cut-Over, California, Southwest Cotton, and
Massachusetts counties I Table 131.
For all areas taken together, and in both relief and non-relief groups, agricultural
and non-agricultural averaees differed but slightly.
Relief
households headed by farm laborers, howevec, moved somewhat
110re frequently than other classes, in most of the areas surveyed.
!&81.E <.
1•TER-COU•TY CHA•GES Of O[SID[NCE Of OUOAl RELl[f AND NON-RELIEF
HOUSEHOLDS 'lftht ... au. 11EADS.,BE.TWHN NOVEYS[R l. 1923 A.NO
OCT:JMR ~l, 19!3, ijY LAST USU-'l OCCUPATION OF HEAD
.t.W"tRAC.l Nuwl(ft o,
Pu,cl11T Of
ALL
Huustr101.os
ht AT
YtU5 "[ll
(.Hnr.[D ~lSIOlNCl,
TOTAL
y;
.\t,i;.1cu1.TUAl
JU
01tJ1(k
Tt11U,T
A
LOl)!itlA
SE•U-SII ILLlU AIID
'ilo Usu,u Occu,• r, o•
U.. ._, H.LlD
ll(5.I Dl•Cl
1923-193!
N<.,1ii-Rll..1U
R(L1H
No .. -Rh 11,
1,
s. I
"· 7
•. 2
•• 7
?I
9
•.u
6. 3
!•
23
•. 2
,i
JU
U.9
,;
29
·~
U7
Scu.LlD
•o•
11ou SE"Ol D5 T,u.r
C"""~lD
192'1-IY3l
RlLIH
1.. T[~-
Cvu11TY ~W'l
37
B
21
,.,
lO
~-'
•.1
S.I
•• 7
,.1
•.6
:ie
".8
•. 2
19
"· 7
,. 7
6.0
,.6
frequencu of Koues bu Perioas, 1923-1929 and 1930-1933. The
rate of change in residence was little affe~ted by the period
0
t depression.
Neither relief nor non-relief households as a
ru1e m&c1e inter-county moves more frequently durinll 1930-1933
than during 1923-1929 I Table 1q1.
Among farm operators such
llloves appear even to have diminished during the later period.
There was, indeed, an apparent increase in the mobility of
heads with no usual occupation, but this was probably traceable to the presence in this group of many young heads who had
reported no moves in the earlier period. By area, a noticeable
Digitized by
Google
20
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RBLIBP BOUSBBOLDS
decline in mobility during the depression years was indicated
among the relief groups in the Oregon and Mountain counties,
and among both relief and non-relief households in California.
3.
Race and Nativity
The method of choosing the non-relief sample that was used
in this study, namely, the selection ot. the two nearest self.supporting neighbors oi each relief case, resulted in such a
strong tendency to equalize the proportions of racial and na..;
tivity groups between the relief and non-relief samples that
co111parisons between them would have little significance.
Accordingly, only a descriptive sketch oi the racial and nativity
composition oi the relief sample is given.
A great majority - 84 percent. - of the beads oi rural relief households were whites of native parentage I Table GI.
Tl8U G.
PERCENTAGE DISTRIIUTION Of RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS IY NATIVITY ANO RACl OF NOii
NATIVITY
A■D
Rnu•
RACI
100
ALL RACII
91
...
WHtTI
th.If I VI
•.,
Fo1111 ■ -10111 ■
N1110
1
Foreign-born whites· constituted only eight percent of the saaple, Negroes seven percent, and other races, ■&inly Mexicans,
one percent.
Io most areas, native whites comprised between eight and
nine tenths of all relief cases ITable 151.
In New Mexico,
however, they accounted for less than one twentieth.
In the
Old South Cotton area, the relief sample was divided about
equally, half native whites and half Negroes.
Io the Tobacco
area Negroes made up about a fourth of all reliel cases. Forei gn-boro whites were more prominent on relief rolls ia the
Massachusetts and California regions than elsewhere, forming
about one fifth of all cases in California and one third in
Massachusetts.
Smaller but significant numbers appeared also
in the Dairy, Cut-Over, Wheat, Mountain, and Oregon areas.
IJ.
Type of Family and Household
Four out of five of the rural households on relief rolls in
October 1933 were normal families, coosistinll of husband and
wife, or of husbanu, wife, and children.
The remaining one
fifth was composed of non-family persons and broken fuilies,
Digitized by
Google
RBSIDBNCB, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
21
especially DHUaciled ■ ff ud the aotber-and-cilildren t7Pe.
la coatrut witil relief llollseholda, tileir aoa-relief neiehbors
included tewer brokea f•iliea ud unattached persons, but also
fever f•iliea of lllasbaad, wife, aad childrea aad aore fa■iliea ot oaly ilaabud ud wife !Table 161.
loraal 1aUt.a.
Aaoa1 the aoraal f•ilies rece1v1De relief the lluabud-wife-children type predominated, conatit11till1 approd■atel1 three fifths of all relief households and
half of all 11C>a-reliet lloasellolds. It was, however, ■uch less
c:oaoa aaoa1 Ne,roes thu aaoae wilitea.
Ia oaly the Cash Graia re1ioa wu there a ereater proportioa ot aoraal t•ilies aoa1 relief than uone non-relief
bnuiteholds, tllou1h ia tile Corn-ud-Ro1 and Wheat re1ions the
proportioas were about the •••·
There was an unusuall7 low
perceatqe of noraal f •iliea, 56 percent, uoa1 the relief
boasellolda in tile New Mexico counties.
la tile relief 1roup, disree ardine households with feaale
lleads, noraal f•iliea witll children occurred ia about equal
proportioas aaon1 faraera ud other employed heads, and to a
less fl!Xteat aon1 aaeaplo7ed heads. The non-relief population
showed a sli1lltl7 ualler perceataee of such noraal f•ilies
a■o111 faraers thu aon1 other eaployed beads, and a relatively
low perce■ tqe aon1 tne uneaployed.
The ■ore aavanced averaee aee of faraers eTideatl7 influenced these results. Nor■al
!aailiea with children were relatively more frequent in the
relief tbaa iA the DOD-relief population in each of the broad
occupational cate1ories already ■entioaed.
The husband-wife f•ilJ ranked second in iaportance aon1
tai17 typea.
It occurred in one out of every six of the relief bousebolda ud in 11earl7 one out of three of the ao11relief. It wu aost proaiaeat uon1 the uneaployed, both relief
uo non-relief, and least so •one far■ operators receiviae telief. It wu auch aore proaiaeat aon1 non-relief than relief
bouseholda ot all classea.
Broun 1aatltes and lon-1atzu Persons. Broken t•ilies and
1on-f•il1 persoas each coaprised approxiaately one tenth of
&11 relief llo11sebolds, but one twe11ty-sixth and one ninth, reapecti'tel7, of DOD-relief llouseholds.
Three fourth of the
broken t•ilies oa relief co11sisted of aothers and children.
'his trpe ot brokea f•ilY was found three ti ■ es as ofte■ in
tile relief u in the 0011-relief population.
As wuld be expected, it constituted bf tar the largest 1roup aao111 relief
households with feaale beads.
Neero relief cues contained a
aucb 1reater proportion of the aother-wi tb-childrea type . tbu
did correspondi ■1 white households.
Broke• boaee~olda were mst aaerous aoa1 tile relief cues
of the Tobacco aad New Me~ico reaioaa, uountina to one fifth
of all cues.
Digitized by
Google
22
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
Ariong non-family persons unattached men outnumbered unattached women nearly two to one.
Non-family persons occurred
in greatest numbers among the non-relief households of the
Cash Grain area and the relief households of the New Mexico
area, accounting for over one fifth and one fourth, respectively, of all cases in those regions.
fa,atl Les IncludLnt Other Persons.
One out of ·every three
families receiving relief reported the presence in the household of some person or persons other than the husband, wife,
and their minor children.
These "other persons" were defined
as adult own children, other adult relatives, minor children
other than own children of husband and/or wife, and unrelated
persons.
Some of these households were families which had
combined or "doubled-up" because of unemployment or underemployment; but the majority were combinations of nonaal f•ilies
with unmarried or widowed adult children ud disabled or
elaerly relatives, such as are co•on during normal tiaes.
In. comparison with the relief, the non-relief population
contained somewhat more combined households, the proportion
being two households out of five. This difference was probably
due to the higher age level of non-relief families resul.ting
in more children over 21 living at home, and to the fact that
the non-relief faailies were better able to support dependent
relatives.
In all but the Southwest Cotton ~d New Mexico areas, 'a
larger proportion of relief than of non-relief cases were families living alone.
Among both relief -and non-relief households with male heads,
farm operator families included other persons more often than
did non-farm or unemployed families.
This was true of about
two fifths of the non-re lie.! farm househofcis with male beads
and of slightly fewer of the relief. However, households with
female beads led in this respect, about half being combined
families.
Negro households, with relatively high percentages
both of farm operators and of female heads, were more &iven to
combination than were white households.
The normal family consisting of husband, wife, and ainor
children included non-family persons less often than any other
type; whereas unattached women and fathers with children were
most likel,Y to be living with others.
5.
Size of Household
Rural households receiving relief in October 1933 were larger than those of their non-relief neigftbors, the average sise
being q_9 and q,o persons, respectively 1 (Table 171. Moreover,
1ni.
relUt Ud non-r•ll•t ••dU.ne,
,.o e.nd ,.o, reapect1ve11.
l••• arr.cud
111
•r•
Google
u:tre■a
Digitized by
cu•••
RKSIDBNCB, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
23
this held true for households with beads o! the same age, withia eYel'J occupational. class except professionals, for eacb race
ad aatiYi tJ 1roup except Mexicans, ud in all areas except
New Mexico (Tables H. 17. 18. 191 1 • There was ~ Sli[.htly larger
JABU
N.
AV£RAlil Sil£ Of RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS BY SEX AND
USUAL OCCUPATION OF HEAD, OCTOBER
Al.1.
19'5
..,
•.o
NU,DI
•. 1
k l HlAOI,
••~C:~tw•t
•.1
CIOPP'II
"· 7
••.9
°'"'·L•-•~
11.... ,
F__
...,_, ....
3. 7
•.O
3. 7
lloN--1.u I CUI. IW ■ I
flao, lU I .....
,(
3. 7
3. 7
Cl.UICAL
S. ,u.10
•.2
•.1
Laaoat•
Se.1- ... U.••ua• LAaN
2.9
lo ltMM. 0cCUPAIIOII
F...._t l<aAOI
2.~
proportioa of one-person households ia the relief than in the
aoa-relie! sample, however, probably indicatin& tbe frequent
aeed !or relief aaong old people living alone (Table 20 and
Figure 11.
Tbu sin&le-person households &Dd households with
fiYe or aore aeabers occurred ia the relief populatioll relativel7 mre oftea than in the aoa-relief, whereas the u&l.ler
f•ilies with two to four llellbers were found 110re frequentlJ
aoaa the aoa-relief
Al.aost oiae half o! the aon-relie! f•ilies bat little mre thu oae third of the relief f•iliea consisted of three persons or less. About one fourth of the l4tter ia coatrut to only one ei&hth of the fomer llouseholds
iacladed mre thaa six persona.
StN of I01UJehold bJJ Area. Re1io11&1 differences in size of
boasehold were related to variations in the prevailin& occupational. cluses, in deeree of arbanilation, and ia other factors.
Tbe tm hiehly rural aoathera reeions, Old South Cottoll and
Tobacco, llad f•iliea of mre than averqe size ia both the relief aad aoa-relief populatioH (Table 191. Thia wu not tne,
bowner. of the Southwest Cotton area. Lar&e f•ilies were also
foaad ia the Dairy, Massachusetts, and Cut-()yer areas. CoaParativelJ uall averaee failies were found in both rel1.ef
and non-relief eroups in tbe Corn-and-Ho& ud California areas.
Relief households were eenerally about one person larger
than the non-relief.
ID the Mountain and Cut-Over areas the
difference was quite sa&ll, while ill the Tobacco and Cash
Grain re&ions it aounted to 1.3 peraou. Ollly in theNewMuico
~ - . .Pl . . 'Of PINIUaaloaau .OA reUef
.:u
Of IIH1C&aa ..... ••U.
Digitized by
Google
..J
......
....
0
I
--
(§1
......
..J
....
I
0
...
0
...
1u,-u
..."'
C\
0
.,,
L
0
"'
°'..."'
0
u
0
--......
N
..,
...
..J
Q
►
-...
0
......"'
•"'
......"'
I
Google
.-...•
...
...
Q
•"'
.,,
-...
...
0
0
-
"'
..J
C
--...
..J
......
....
C
0
•
•
0
..J
-...
-...... •
RURAL RILIIF AND NON-RBLIBF BOUSIBOLDS
'"'
...
Digitized by
IISIDINCI, COMPOSITION, AND IDUCATION
2,
coantiea were tbe aoa-relief bouaeholds larger than the relief.
Tbi• vu partly due to the lar1e 11u11ber of broken fuilies
_,., the Mexicua oa relief.
Occupattonal rartatton tn Stzs of Household.
In both the
relief ud aoa-relief groups, households headed by males usually ea1a,ed u fal'II operators tended to be larger than those
wlloH beads were aot so employed (Table Bl.
Among the fara
operator cluaea, cropper ud teaaat families were consistently
tu lar1ut, partly becaase their beads were younaer than fani
ovaen. Cropper■ were also concentrated iD areas of large f 111ilies.
Skilled ud . .1- and uaakilled industrial workers
ruked aext to fara operators ia size of f•ily, evea exceedia, fU'll laborers iD tbia respect.
The white collar 1roup,
fro■ tbe liaited nideace &Yailable, bad faailiea smaller than
uy otbera except those beaded by females and by males with no
ua&l occupatiOD.
Because of the disproportionate number of
701191 ■ea included ia the latter group, however, it is not
1trictl7 coaparable with the others. The &11all size of families
lleaded by teaales is accou ■ ted for by the fact that they were
lar1el7 brokea faailiea.
St• of Boua•holcl b/1 latt11tt11 and Race of Bead,
For all
areas cmbi ■ ed, Ne1ro boaeholda were larger than na.tive white
llouaebolda (Table 181.
Ia the case of the relief 1roup, this
reaalted froa the coacentratioa of Ne1roes in areaa where lar1e
f•iliea prnailed aoa1 both races. Thus ia practically ~er1
iutaace Ne1ro f•ilies on relief were not as large as white
f•ilies oa relief in the saae area. The aoa-relief Negro faailiu, bowenr, were ali1htly lar1er than corresponding white
f•iliu ia the reeiou where Ne1roes were aaerous; but this
aa, lloe beea due to occapatioaal or other diUereaces which
were not controlled.
Poreiga-bora vhitea iD the Massachusetts and Dairy areas
laid lar1er taailiea tbu tbe aatiYe wbi tea.
Those scattered
tllro•1b tbe reaaiai-, areu Iliad •aller f•ilies than tbe
••the wbitea ia the relief population but not iD the DOD-relief.
Ia New Mexico a nry lar1e proportioa of the cues included wei-e
Nexicau, aad U1ese bad lar1er f•iliea than did the few Dative
Qitea ia the aaple. Vbea all areas were considered, however,
tile Mexicu f•ilJ oa relief bad fewer ambers tbaa tbe averaae
l&tiYe white f•ily.
St.- of Boua•hold bl/ Afe of Head. Householda with heads 3,
to IPJ Jeara of a,e llad tile largest f•iliea, oeraaina 6.1 peraoaa ia the relief ud q_9 ia the aoa-relief popalation (Table
171. There wu a steady decrease ia size of households as the
held becMe older, the •alleat f•ilies beiae found where the
held vu 6, 7eara ot a,e ud ewer.
Digitized by
Google
26
RURAL RELIBF AND NON-RBLIEF BOUSBHOLDS
6. Age Olatrlbution and Sex Ratio
Ate of Heads of Household.8.
Heads of households rec,iviq
relief tended to be younger than their non-relief neiillbors,
but this difference was largely associated with differences in
occupation and sex between the two groups.
The aedian a,e of·
all heads on relief was about i.i6 years compared to 149 years for
those not on relief ITable 11.
The iaequali tJ was auch leas
TABLE I.
MEDIAN AGE OF HEADS OF RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS, BY SEX
AND OCTOBER 1933 OCCUPATION OF HEAD
NON-RH IH
RlL llF
kL Ht•os
U';,.8
"'1.0
MALl
·~-1
OP. 2
,u,.-5
Q1. 7
HE ADS
EMPLOYfD
F' UM
O ■ MlR
,,_n
,2.2
CMOPP(R
,1. I
FuM L.t.90RlR
•2.A
q;_q
.,.o
02.'
No11-A,G,M I \.UL lu•t
\.tNiMPLOYiO
F°lMALl Ht ADS
""·'
lll.l.l.l
03.Q
"6.•
•19.A
60.,
60.9
----
between ■ ale heads engaeed in the sue occupation in October
1933; but relief heads were slightly younger in all occupatioaal
classes except among croppers and those employed in aon-a,ric:al•
tural pursuits, where the reverse was the case. Especially lar1e
differences existed amoni unemployed male lleads aad feaale
heads, those on relief averaeing 1 fourteen and elevu 7ears
youngei, respectively, than those not on relief, due to tlle
number of retired old persons in the non-relief eroup.
The heads on relief were younger thaa those in tbe noareli ef control group in 10 out of the 13 areas surve7ed (Table
211.
In general, the aee differential tended to be ereateat
in regions of high average f&n1 values, where 110re ti ■e 1110uld
probably be needed to acquire land ownership.
The median qe
of relief heads varied from 143 in the Wheat ud Old Soutll Cotton
areas to over 50 in the Oreion, Mountain, aad New Mexico
counties. Among the non-relief heads tbe raaee was froa nearly
143 in New Mexico to almost 5q in the Cora-aad-Boe area.
TIie
differences were partly associated with unequal proportion• of
fam owners, unemployed male beads, aad feaale lleads ia tlle
populations of the several areas.
The oldest group among both relief and non-relief heads wu
tha.t of farm owners, who averaeed over !)() years of a,e; tile
youngest was that of share-croppers, whose aediaa aee was between 3!5 and lJO I Table I I.
Extremes of youth and aee seea to have been factors precliaposini to relief.
The 110st noticeable differeaces ia tile a,e
Digitized by
Google
RBSIDBNCI, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
27
distributioa ot. all relief aad non-relief beaas appeared in the
eroups under 2' years of age, the relief showing relati't'ely
aore than twice as 11&11y beads in tbat age class as the nonrelief IT&ble 22 ud Fiaure 21. Moreover, in six out of a total
of seven occupational &Rd sex classes there were proportionately
mre YerJ JOH& beads of households in the relief thao iD
the aoa-reliet. popalatioa. Oa the other hand, in four out of
tbe seYea cluaes there were larger perceotaaes of Yery old
beads aoag tile relief tllaa the non-relief.
Special iDterut attaclla to ■ ale heads who were UDeaploJed
in October 1933.
Leu tllaa a third of those oa relief out
aearl7 three fUtlls of tllose aot oa relief were 55 years of aee
or oYer; aad relatiYelJ mre tbaa foar ti ■es u 11UJ relief aa
aoa-relief lleada wi tboat e11plo111eat ..ere under 25.
Yet the
proportioa ot. relief beilda 65 years of ace and oYer -.s 1reater
ia the uaeaplo7ed 1ro•p tllu ia uJ other except fana owaers
ad fea&le lle.da.
Altlloqll old aee llade for ueaplo111eat ia
tile aoa-proprietvJ occupaiiou, it did aot result ia relief
aalesa it wu acce11paaied b.r abaeace of resources.
Ne,ro relief cuea ia tile Old South Cot too ud tbe Tot>acco
areu coataiaed ■HsaallJ larie olUlbers of elderly ooe-persoa
f•ilies. Tllis caaaed tbe beads of Nqro relief households on
tlle aYerage to be older tllaa the beads of white cases.
The
heads of Negro f•ilies aot receiYiag relief, however , ■ade up
a relatiYelJ ,.,.., 1roap ia coaparisoa.witb those of white aoorelief lloaaellolda.
llofUleholda wUla Chtldr911 wntier 16 Tears of Af• and Persons
R5 and Ouer.
Nearly two tllirds of all relief hoasebolds, but
less tllaa half of tlile aoa-relief households, reported one or
■ore cllil$1rea Hder 16 7ean of aae.
Io eYerJ occupational
clus, also, tile perceatage of boaseholds of this type was
1reater aaoag tlle relief. TIier occurred in the larcest proportioas amag teaaata, far■ laborera, and skilled industrial
laborers oa relief, c:oaprisiq aearl7 three fourths of all housebolds.
Old people 65 7ears of aae and over were found i o lti perceat of the relief aad 18 perce■ t of tbe non-relief households.
Relief boasellolda coataiaiq tbea were ■ost coaaoa aa<>D& the
Professio■ al,
proprietarJ, ud fara ower classes. Very few
lloaaellolds aoq croppers Md other teauu lochded aaea per~
1e>as; bat two GIit of ne17 fiYe 001-reliel households with uat11plo7ed aale heads aad with feaale beads contained tbea.
Olli, alM>at 16 percent of all llousebolds oa relief compared
lfitll 30 perceat of tllose aot on relief had ■either cbilarea
•■der 16 ■or M¥ peraoa aa old as 65 1ears.
A,- of
of lo••mlda Otlaer fllan leotUJ. Nore tllu
h&J.f of all Maben other tllaa llellde of relief llouaebolds were
•Ider 15 7ear• of age, •ile this vu trae of less tllaa two
•••ra
Digitized by
Google
28
UJ:>IJ4
0
.
•"'
.
"'
N
•a
0
•...
"'
N
"'
"'
It
"'
0
.
"'
00
►
u
Google
.•
•:a
...
N
u
0
C
0
.•
.•-•
0
...
C
•
0
►
...•
...
a
►
-
0
0
...
"'
•
0
C
0
.... •..."'
... "'•
•:a
C
.J
•
.J
..."'
...
••C
0
••
•
•
...
"'
.J
0
.•
"'•
•...•
.J
•"'
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF BOUSE0OLDI
.J
......
...
•I
0
--
~
.J
•
......
...
0
N
Digitized by
RISIDINCI, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
29
fifths ia t~e case of non-relief booseholds !Table 231.
This
differeace was due to the presence on relief of a larger proportion of the lower economic classes which aver~ed 110re children per f•ilJ, to the younger age of relief heads, and to
other factors.
On the other hand, the non-relief population
was carrying a percentage of persons 55 years of age and over
110re tbaa half again as large as that carried by the relief
\)Opulation. The non-relief population also included relatively
110re aeabers of the 110st economically productive a.?es between
aad q' years than did the relief population.
Ia ner, occupatioaal class, the proportion of children under
15 years of age was 11ucb greater in the relief than in the
non-relief population.
The highest percent4Re of members
under
years of age occurred among share-croppers on relief,
p&rtlJ because croppers were a relatively young group, and
p&rtlJ because they were concentrated in areas of large families. T~e lowest percentages of children, on the other hand,
were foud iD households with male heads who had no usual occapatioa.
Non-relief households whose heads were usually employed, iD DOD-11Rricultural industries bad a larger percentage
of children than any agricultural class except croppers.
Relief ~ouaeholds, ~ain excepting croppers, showed relatively
little differnce in this respect.
The greater proportion of
cllildrea aoag aoa-agricoltural households, as compared with
fana ~oaaeholda, is probably explained by the more advanced
lfe of faraera.
SiDce feaale heads and a&le heads with no usual occupation
wre SClllewllat older thaa aale heads who had a usual occupation,
t~eir c~ildrea were &lao slightly older, resul ti og_ in larger
percnt11ea of aeabers, other than heads, who were 15 years of
11e ud OYer.
S.:ic RaUo.
Boase~olda with female heads comprised 13 percnt of relief households and 8 percent of non-relief houseM>lda (Table 2CJ). TlleJ were aost numerous among •other races"
Cc~iefl7 Nezicaaa) and Negroes, probably because of high rates
of faai.17 deaertioa h those races, and were less frequent
a>ag aatiYe wlaitea t~aa aaoag foreign-born whites. 1
Ia the total relief aaple, iDchdin~ beads and all other
••bera, t~e aez ratio, or proportion of ■ ales to feaales, was
1011:100, aad ia t~e aoa-relief s•ple it was 111:100. It thus
appear• Oat the relief popalation contaiaed a larrer proportioa of feaalea t~aa did t~e non-relief population.
2,
1,
1
1M
,.a.a.A. HNU'U 11a1uua
11,r ...... i.a, Oe&eller 1111•
•r...ie ■•ed• or 1111ra1 aauer aad 1oa-aaJue ,, 111111.
,~e,,
Digitized by
Google
30
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
7.
Education
Education of Heads of Households. The heads of rural house-
holds receiving relief in October 1933 had distinctly less
schooling than their non-relief neighbors.
Nearly eight percent of all relief heads surveyed had never attended school,in
comparison with three percent of the heads of households not
receiving relief ITables J, K, and Figure 31, An additional 19
PERC(NT OF HEADS CF OCTOelR 19'3 IUIAL RHIEF HOJ5£HCl..OS tHJ CXJliFL[T[D SPECIFIED GRAD(S IN SOfOCI., IN' A(;( UI) RAa
TAII.E J.
Cow...tno ,.
to,...
U•DU 2'--
Au A611
ou.1. ••"1n
Se..oa
5'}--11•
·~,..
65 ... o.t•
,~
Tt NlHC Toud1t..,1t11Nt.-i Tou1
lw .. 1r1
.., . . OUL lht1t11Nt. .
100.0 100.oboo.oboo.o 100.1 100.1 oo.o 100.0 oo.o 100.c 100.cb00.011oo.oboo.0 100.c 100.1 '°"·o boo.o 100.0 100.c 100.0
••••
1., ,.,
28.3
2.1
l.!
GIA&tl SctlOOL.:
U.DU
2~511
tc:.ac TouLlw,.1u Nt~.. Tor.u. ""1rtN1i-it.: Tou,lw,11
5
19.2
27.2
29.•l
!5-T
to-•LttlD
7.•
2 ..9
1.8 11.,
•• ,
2., ,i.7
8.9
6.• '2-1 11.!
9-•
2'-2 1•.6 11).1 ., ••
,1.
'2.•
17.1 56.9 \0.5 5.6
13.l 11.2 35., 17.1 15.7 55.• 16.1 l•.7 '6.1 2".: 22.9 56.9
52.! ,0.0
27. 25.l 20. l 19., 22.1 2'-9 2'l.6 29.5 55.C 55.I 2". 7 20., 2'l.• 16.1 27.C 21.2 2'.2 2'.8 26. 23.6
51.1 7.2 ,0.2 5•.~
- '5.9
1•., 29.! 51.l 5.8 5'1.0 56.6 1.5 2'.I 27.• 7.0 18.2 19.!
1.9
s,.,
H1D1 Sctt00L:
1-2
'
Coal•LtllD
9.1
2.•
10.1
2.1
5.8 17., 18.l 11.1 10.2 15. l
0.1 9.0 10.)
5.6 5.9
2.8
5.1
-
9.• 10.E
-
5.6
5.9
-
2.6
2.8
-
1.0
,.,
-
0.2
0.2
-
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
CoLL.Uil:
1-2
1.8
,.,
0.6
5
0,3
o.,
-
C.0.Pl,.ITU
0.3
0.
1.0
1.7
8. I
8. 1
,. 5
I}.
5,8
5. l
II. 1
11 ,I
l. l
L8
-
1,11
lr!5
-
2. •
2.~
2.•
2.6
-
2.C
2.2
L5
1.l
-
1.9
0.6
O.!
-
1.9
l.O
0.9
2.2
0.9
0.8
o.,
o.
0.1
0.1
o.o 10. 10.1 o.•
0.8 I.!
l.O 2.11 2., -
-
-
-
-
2.S 5.5
0.1 0.2
0. l 0.1
-
Poat Gu,011a1t
o.,
PlRCTNT OF HEADS Of OCTO!IER 19'3 RUJIAL NON-RELIEF IO.&HOlOS tntO COIPLETEO sPECIF'IC GRA.0£S IN SOtOll., 9Y AGE ANO ltAa.
U.8LE k
ALL Aws
CCNl"LlTID I•
Sc•OO<.
TOTAL•
100.0
....
lot&L
2.9
n.ri
U.01• 2'5
iwt.,,t Nu;ll, houL
"IOIH NH,ll
.....
0!5-50
5!5-4•
2'""5'1
.Mill INtHO TOUI
MN,n lrttr.1:0 'i'ou.1
"°·'
11.2
\00.• 100, 100.1 100.1 100D 100-'l 100.0 100.1 IOOD \00.0 100.0
I.
252
1.,1
9.1
...,
IL5
Ga,t,Ol Sc"OOL:
UNPUI'
,_
A&.1 Gltou"
Nu1111la o, Ytu·s
-
"'
0.9
0.3
8-5
1.0
0.9
o.o
5.1 57-9 7.0 5.7 "6.3 8.7 6.1 ,Lo
7 .7 36.1 l!, l 15-5 5'l.O 17.0 16.11 25-7
:11.0 21.6
57.6 59-1 IL<
5 - 7
1s.1
IB.! 22.l J2JJ
Coeti,LlllO
36.l
,S.l
5-5 22.3 >,.6
-
11.9
5.1
8.2
12.6
5.5
8.7
1.6 19)1 25-0
0.5 9.1 1(1.9
o.o I0.9 n.e
0.7
5-7
10
C:0.PLIJID
5.5
0.9
2.2
Po$1 GA,ovAll
0.7
,..
""'''
;,a,
lOTAl.
··-
2.2 59.2
5.B
"'""'
•.. ,,
6, ....
TotA,
011'1.
---
lW.O w.o 100.0 ¥l0.0 ):)0.0 100.1 JOO-() DI.O
1.9
,o.,
•-2
u., 10.,
2.2 6'A
19.2
117. 7 15.3 IL6 37,0
19.'} 17.U 21.6 22.0 l'l.l!
,e.2
111.1
2.2 51., 59.8
lll.l 15-9 l'l.2
2"-2 20.7 LI
5.6 ,c).7 llll,-, LO
IL5
12.1
0.6 11.6
" ' " ' SCNOOL:
I - 2
5
COMPL(TU
Count:
I - 2
'
--·
·-~L
...
IU
10
o.~
2.a
0.1
0.1
2.2
0.7
2.6
0.7
-
o.,
0.2
-
-
-
-
is., 17.7
2.0
IQ,)
0.5
ta.7 1,.9
o.6
15-5
o.7
8.7
5-6 6.1
3-0 5.3
•.7 ,.1
-
o.6
2.6
o.6
o. 7
2.8
0.6
-
Ll
I.I
,.9
6.o
1).6
-
•.9
9-5
L6
0.2
-
-
5.1
'l.8
5-1
0.5
LI
7.0
2.5
26
0.,
30
0.0
llO
-
1).2
16
1.6
0.7
09
2.1
0.2
0.9
1.2
1.2
-
0.2
0.2
LC
6.o 0.9
1.7
2.8
0.9
1.0
0.0
o.,
26
0.8
0.5
0.2
-
12,1
,..
2-~ 0.6
2-"
'l.9
LI
-
'l.9
1.1
1.,
1.6
1.6
-
-
percent of the relief and 11 percent of the non-relief heads
had not progressed as far as the fifth grade, having achieved
little more than the bare ability to read and write.
Less
than half of the heads of relief households, compared with tw
thirds of th'!ir self-supporting neighbors had completed grade
school or better.
As educational attainments advanced beyond those~ar.{I · All
acquired during the years of compulsory sch8iJfz8a!ete t1iJ e~
e
,
!I
...
0
~
.-
5
'
u
~
u
0
..,..,.....,
I
,.
D
j
:s
~
"
I
~
:,:
=
I
.8
!'
I
,.
.., u
:,:
5
0
.
.
~
:,:
0
~
0
......,"'
0
C
0
"'..,.,,
C °"
~~
"'"'
0
C
l!s~
., 8
"'
...
l!s
.
0
►
31
Google
!
.
"'::,
..."'
u
1
"'C
!!
s
l!s
~
...
0
...
u
::,
C
~
.
.
◄
u
..-
0
a
~
J
~
D
..
!
;.
..
.... ....
- . .....
J
0
0
IISIDINCI, COMPOSITION, AND IDUCATION
.
~
;
~
II
ll!.
II
I
Digitized by
32
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RBLIBP BOUSIBOLDS
handicap of the beads of relief households becae pro1ressiYel7
greater. While 0D11 one out of ner1 ro relief lleada had beea
graduated fr011 high school, one out of sh: noa-relief lleads
had progressed that far.
College traiuing was relatiYelr rare aaoa1 both relief beada
and their non-relief neighbors. 0.17 three perceat of tile aoarel ief and less t ban one half of oue perceat of tile relief
beads were college graduates. In additioa, SOIi-at less tllaa
one percent of the non-relief beads bad post-1radaate or profession&l training, while no relief heads llad Heh tr&iaiq •
There were significant Yariations ill the aaouat of acllooling by areas, reflecting differences i-n educatioaal opporuai.;.
ties in the various sections of the countrJ. Areu with lar,e
nullbers of Negroes and Mexicans 1 bad particularl.J hi1h rates
of illiteracy. Regardless of Yariations froa area to area ia
the average aaount of schooling received, boweYer, aoa-relief
heads in each area had a decided advuta,e oYer relief laeads
with respect to educational attaiueats (Table 2't. Tile coasistently higher educational attaiuents of tbe aoa-relief
heads has added significuce i11 Yiew of tile fact tllat OeJ
.-ere aa older group, 011 the &Yerage, thu the relief heads,
and hence a lareer proportioa of them had the aore liai ted
educational opportunities of a generation ago. 1
lctucatton of Beads of Bousehold.s, bJI Afe. The7oaa1el' laeads
in both relief and non-relief groups had had mre scllooliq
than the older, a difference to be expected fr011 the exteuioa
of educational opportunities duria2 receat decades IT•les J,lt.
The proportion of illiteracy decliaed froa l!5 perceat aoe,
relief heads 65 rears of age ud oYer to two perceat aaoq
those under 25 rears. Among non-relief beads, tile correspoading decrease was froa four perceat to oae percent.
MoreoYer,
the percentage completin" grade school illcreased froa 27 aad
58 for heads 65 years of age and oYer to 68 aad 76 for those
under 25, in the relief and Don-relief groups, reapectivelJ.
About three percent of the relief heads 65 years of age ud
over had coapleted high school, in coapariso11 with 11 perceat
of those under 25 years of age, the correspoadiq perceata,es
for tbe non-relief heads being 10 and 25, respectiYelJ.
Although the amount of scboolina was less •0•1 relief tllaa
non-relief beads in nery age group, there wu a aarted teadeacr for the differences to diminish in the 7oaa1er aroupa. Tlais
1014
aov,1:1 eouoa, Tollacco . . . . llea1co.
waai ,u UlldeaQ coward ue 1ae111a1oa or a
1
lU'IH' ,ro,ortloa er ~
•ft•r•
oa Ule re11er roua •• ue , ....aa1 . . ...uavH, a u pro-..,lt '1l&C U•n •lll lie • allp, lDCNU• 1& ••.-.c• -~
"■lllU
couar•ciua or
11cac1oae.1. ana1aauu or ltada or IID11auo1e1a reoe1•1aa nu.r.
Digitized by
Goog Ie
RSSIDENCE, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
33
aadoubtedly reflects the general rise in educational opportunities and probabl7 also the effects o! the extension of compulSt;Jry school attendance laws.
lducatLon of Reads of Rural Rel Le( and Non-Rel Le{ Household.a bv Race.
Negro heads not on relief showed less superi-
orit7 oTer those on relief with respect to amount of schooling
receiTed tbaa was the case among whites !Tables J,Kl. Twentyeight perceat of all Negro relief heads bad bad no formal
schooli•r in coaparison with 25 percent of the non-relief. In
fact, a laraer percentage o! relief heads than of non-relief
heads was reported aa havina coapleted arade school. 1
In
aeitller group hd as 114117 as one percent ot all beads been
araduated froa biell school.
The proportio1 of Nearo heads wi tbo11t schooling declined
sharpl7 ia the youager &1e groap, reflect bi the recent advance
in Nearo edacation.
ne percenta,e ot illiterate Nearo beads
raaged froa "" perceat of the relief ud 6!5 percent of the
•on-relief lleada 6!5 1ears ot aee aad OTer,
to eight and
fiTe perceat, reapectiTely, of the heads uder ~ 7ears of aee.
Table 26 giTea a coapariaon of the extent of Negro and
white education ia tile two areas in which large ni111bers of Negroes were iacladecl i1 tile ...,1e.
It •pllasizes the results
of tile greater ed1catio1&1 opportui ties for wbi tes thaa !or
Negroea ia tile Soath.
lducatton of ClatldrM. Lite tlleir p•eata, childrea of relief llouellolcla were laudicapped educatioaa1.l1 in coapariaoa
with tllose of aoa-relief boaaellolda, bat tile differeace wu
leaa tlau betwee1 beads 2!5 7eara of aee ud older. Duriaa the
7eara of coapalao17 atteadaace only •all percentaees ot both
relief ud 1101-relief children were not atteldiag school. 1
Yet in Tiew of tile fact tllat less thu one percent ol the populatioa is ao lludicappecl aeatally as to De unable to aaster
the radiauts of education, too aan1 children 7 to 13 1ears of
ace ia each rroup were not atteadina acllool, a condition which
ia true of the populatioa in aeneral.
No data were obtained relatiTe to reaulari tf of attendance.
Aa soon as the aee of c011pulsor1 attendanct: was passed, howeTer, relief children dropped out of school ■ore rapidly than
aoa-relief.
For exuple, 70 perceDt of the Don-relief but 55
perceat of the relief children, 16 and 17 1ears of aee, were
ia acllool (Table 27).
0:>11Wletion of grade school was fairly
coaon, but the percentaee· was considerably larger for the
10n-reliet 161 percent of all children 12 to 19 years o! agel
thaa for the relief (ij7 percent) fTable 28).
The rate 9f
1T.1a • • probabl7 u acctdeat or uapuaa.
'r,..,.
peroeat or tilt cbUdren ln bo11Hbolda recen1aa reu,r
ceat or &lie c•11drea 1• Q00-r,11et bo11ae11olda.
and tbru ur·
Digitized by
Google
3q
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
graduation !rom high school di!!ered still ■ore widely.between
the relie! and non-relie! groups. Tvent7-seven percent of the
non-relie! children 15 to 23 years o! age bad completed high
school, cOD1pared with 11 percent, or less thaa hal! as ll&Df,
of the relief children. 1
As was the case with heads o! households, there was considerable variation by areas with respect to the educational attainments o! rural youth. The southern areas bad a low propo~
tion of both grade school and high school graduates in c011parison with otlrer sections o! the country, re!lecting lower-th&11average educational opportunities and also the presence of
Negroes and Mexicans whose educational adva.ncemeat as a group
Whether the
lags behind that o! white children (Table 291.
general educational standard in an area was above or below
average, however, relief children consistently received less
With respect to
schooling than their non-relie! neighbors.
completion of grade school, the differences between the relie!
and non-relief groups tended to be greater in the areas with
the lowest educational standards.
Children living in
Education of Children, bJI Restdence.
villages received more schooling than those in the open counIn almost every age-group the proportion of children
try.
attending school was larger for those residing in the villages
than for those in the open country, in the case o! both relief
and non-relief children, indicating the tendency toward better
and more accessible schools in villages. In each type of residence, however, relief children were at a disadvantage co■pared with their non-relief neighbors (Table 271.
Approximately six in ten relie! and seven in ten non-relief
village children 12 to 19 years of age had completed grade
school, as compared with only four in ten relief and six in ten
non-relief children of the open country group (Table 281. Th!
difference was even more marked with respect to high school.
In relief families the percentage of village youth who had completed high school was twice as great as that of open country
Among non-relief youth the difference by residence,
youth.
while less, was also important, indicating the much 110re adequate high school facilities to be found in villages.
In Negro as well as white
Education of Children, bJI Race.
families, the record of school attendance and of graduation
from graoe and high school was better among children of selfsupporting parents than aioong children of parents receiving
1
P'or the Unl ted States u a Whole, an &Yerage or about S> percent or 'tile
-SClloola
clllldrenor a glnn age gro11p reacll the last 1ear or 111~ ac11001.
an<1 Ed11cat1on• b7 W.H.Oawanlts 1D lconoaic and Soc1ai l'robl-s Gll4 Cod,t,o~s oft~• So~tllerff A~~aiac~ia-.s, u. s. Dept. or A&r1c111t11re, Mlac.
P11bl1catlon No. 8)6, p.103.
Digitized by
Google
R8SIDENC8, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
3~
relief. As in the case of beads, however, there ~as & tendency
!or the differences between relief and non-relief to be greater
aa<>Di wbites thaa uong Negroes.
While Negro children had the advantage over their parents
of increased educational opportunities, they were still at a
definite disadYantage when compared with white children !Table
,>).
8.
Worker• and Dependent•
Percenta,, of Households wtthout 'llorkers. Although twice as
lu1e a proportion of relief as of non-relief households had
ao 1110rkers of either sex 1, in neither 1roup was the proportion
lar1e 18 perceat ud ij percent, respectively) (Table LI.
Coaplete lack of workers occutred only in households with
a&l.e beads ueaploJed ill October 1933 and ill households beaded
bJ feaales. Of tile fonaer, about one seventh of the relief but
oae tUrd of the non-relief households had DO workers. The
lack of workers aaon1 the non-relief unemployed probably reAl ted froa the auaber of retired persons in that group. Among
households with feaale beads, about one fourth of both those
oa relief ud their non-relief neighbors were without workers.
Bouselaolds with feaale beads, and to an even greater degree
tbose with uae11plo7ed aale beads, however, were more numerous
;" the relief tbu i11 the non-relief population.
T-( L.
l'UIC(IT 0, 11111& llJ..llF MD - L l ( F IIOUSlNDI.DS Wl'nt 110 IP)llt((AS, Wlfll 1111111(11$
IUT WITII 11011( llPLOYE0, AIIO Wlfll 110 ll)lll(US IIOR l'OTENTIAL aoAl((AS,
II\' SlX •D DC109U 19H (IPI.CJYMUT
Puct ■ t 0, HOull'NCM.H
. , ,.. lo . . . . . .
..... t ........... , ., .....
...........
ll&&.1 IIUH
AHICULT ■ •t
lto.-Au I Ck T•I
U.1WLOYl8
F....._e Niue
l
"'"'"
No►R11.1tP
•
•
1,
-
•
.
"'
:Ill
a,
HUii
P1 ■ C11T
o, HouMltOLDI
Wit ■ lloa ■ III Mt
•1 t• IOIII (~OHi
Ru.10
21
-
No ■~lt,.IIP
•
-
Pucan o, HoUNN(ILDI
WIT" lo . . . , ...
■ OIi
Pota ■ tlM. -- ■Ill
Au.,u
Mo....au,,,
7
•
-
-
1111
68
12
51
7
:Iii
"
22
or ... or O'UI' •■Pl1171d, or Prl'fl0Ull7 UPl071d Uld
la October 1183, ezclua1•• of 1Ule■plo7ed peraona eo 1•ar•
ot II• Md oYer, wu coaa1dered a •orur.
.1117
Hl'aGII te , • .,..
Hekla1 work,
Digitized by
Google
36
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
Among the households on relief, the percent;aee with ao
workers ranged from less than 5 in the Cash Graia, Old Soutla
Cotton, and Cut--Over areas to 15 in the Mountain area, 17 ia
Oregon, and ijQ in New Hexico 1 (Table 311. These low and hiall
percentages were related respectively to Slllall and larie nuabers of cases with unemployed or female heads in the s•e
areas.
There was much more unifor111i ty iD the cue of 11oarelief households. In only one area, the Cora-and-Roi conties,
were more than four percent of the households without workers,
and in only one area was the proportion less than two percent.
In all areas except the Cash Grain the proportion of households without workers was ireater in the relief than ill the
non-relief population.
The areas in which there were sm&l.l
percen t;aees of relief households without workers, however,
showed only slight differences between the relief ud noarelief groups in that respect.
The proportion of households with no workers wu considerable greater amoni S111all thu large households • .Approxiaatelr
three tenths of all persons constituting one-person households, relief ud non-relief, were not workers. la the cue of
two-person households less than two tenths of the relief
one tenth of the non-relief had no workers.
Practically ao
non-relief households, and only a small perceDt of relief
households, containini more than four persons lacked a worker.
Nwaber of Norkers per Household. The 11umber of workers per
household with workers was 1. ij for the relief &Dd 1. !5 for the
non-relief (Table Ml. The figure also remained a little saaller
for relief tha.n fOF non-relief households with the occupatioa
and sex of the head held constant.
aa,
TABLE M.
AVERAGE NUWBER OF WORKERS PER RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLD
WITH WORKERS, AND AVERAGE NUWBER OF DEPENDENTS PER WORKER IN THE
_____________S&W_~Cl_U~E~_OLOS, BY SEX AND OCTOB_~__..!_9~3 EWPLOYWENT OF HEA_D_ _ __
SUt ANO EMPLOYMENT
OF HEt.D
ALL HU.OS
~AICUL TUAf
N011-AG.A I CUL ruu:
UNtMPLOUO
FfMALf. HtAOS
Ni,IMIEA OF
lllf(Hl:9'(111S PlA Housu,o_""L"---D--4------- _NU)d(A o, - ~ ~ ~ E _ ! ~ ~ R l ( f A_ _
REL lff'
No11-Rn I ff
1.•
1.5
I. 3
I.•
l.~
1.3
1, 3
1.,
J.6
J.•
J."
1.6
REL I ff
2. 6
2.B
2. 7
2.8
2. B
I. 7
NoN-filfL I EF
I.~
I. 7
J. 7
1.9
I.B
O. B
Among both relief and non-relief cases beaded by aales,
agricultural households averaged only sliihtly more workers
1.niu blgb percentage 1n New Medco 18 a result or an adalnUtratlve pouc.,
or eua1nat111g raauua containing e■Ployable aaJ.e buda rroa the roua
during the suaaer ■ onths and or the ayate■ or contract labor wh1reb7 tilt
■ &le beads are •■ Ployed la the barnst flelda 1eu1111 itie w1-,,a and cbUdr•
at bo■ e on re11er.
Digitized by
Google
RBSIDINCB, COMPOSITION, AND EDUCATION
37
per household than did those in other occupational classes.
Households with unemployed male heads were at no avpreciable
disadvantage in this respect compared to households whose
beads were engaged in non-agricultural pursuits.
Households
beaded by females, because of the usually 111ore advanced age of
the members, averaged as ■ any or more workers than agricultural
households with their relatively large numbers of children.
There was coa~iderable variati.on among areas in the number
of workers per household with workers (Table 321.
The lowest
ratio in the relief eroup was 1.1 in the Cut-Over area, and the
highest wu 1.8 in the Old South C'.ottoa area; while ill the nonrelief aroup the range waa fr011 1.3 to 2.1.
luaber of Depenaents per llorker.
Of the households that
contained one or aore workers, those on relief averaged 2.6
dependents per worker, whereas those not on relief averaged
only 1.7 ud this ratio remained about the same for each occupational cateeory (Table Ml. That the above difference was in
the ■ ain a reflection of the larger hailies in the relief
population is indicated bf the sliiht variation in the number
of workers per household.
Households headed by females had
about one less dependent per worker th&n did households headed
b7 ■ ales. This was lareely due to the smaller size of the foraer households. In nearly all area.a relief households averaged
about one more dependent per worker than did non-relief housellolda (Table 321.
Onlf in New Mexico, where there was 110re
thu , the ave, aee nu■ber ot. dependents per worker amoae both
relief and non-relief households, did no difference appear.
MoreoYer, in ■ost areas there tended to be but little variation froa the average of all areas. The Old South Cotton area,
llowever, bad considerably fewer than the aver41ie au■ber of dependents per worker, probably because of the extensive agric~ltaral &ad Neero population.
Aaona the households with workers, the averaee nullber ol.
dependeata per worker hcreased steadilf with the increase in
size of household.
In the relief. ~opulatioa the increase was
froa
in the case o! one-person households to a little over
q ia the cue of households with 8 or 110re ■ embers; in the
noa-relief population it was from 0.1' to sliehtly over 3 dependents in similar households. Thia was true in spite o! the
hct that the number of workers per household likewise increued with size ol. household, ran ii Iii from 0. 7 for one-person
relief cases to 2.1 I.or cases of 10 or 111ore persons, and from
0,7 to 2.6 for non-relief households ol. correspondini size.
Percent ate of Households 111t th No hplo11ed 'llorkers. Many of
tlle households wit b female or unemployed male heads that cont&iaed workers bad no workers employed in October 1933. Of the
llouaeholds h~aded by females that reported workers, 31 percent
of tM>ae oa relief and 7 percent of those not 011 relief were
o.,
Digitized by
Google
38
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
without employed workers !Table LI. As would be expected, the
largest percentages of households with workers who were unmployea occurred among the households oi unemployed male heads.
In this group, gq percent of the relief and 68 percent of the
non-relief haa no worker employed.
Number of Dependents per Kn.ployed Worker. The relief housebolos with workers averaged 3.0 dependentsperemployed worker,
compareu with 2.6 dependents per worker !Tables 32 and 3lll.
For the corresponding non-relief households, the figures were
1.8 and 1.7, respectively.
In the case of relief households
with unemployed male heads, the average number of dependents
per worker was 2.8 and per employed worker was 3.3. The rates
were somewhat lower for non-relief households (Tables M, 33).
The aver~e number of dependents per employed worker in the
relief households with workers varied from 2.ll in the Mountain
area to 3.6 in the Cut-Over area, the southern, central, mountain, and California regions generally having lower rates than
the northeastern and Oregon regions (Table 3q), In every area
surveyed except New Mexico the non-relief households with workers
had fewer dependents per employed worker than did the relief.
Perce11t~e of' HousellOl<is witn NeLtner Workers nor PotantLal
Workers. The proportion of households with neither workers nor
potential workers 1 differed little from the proportion without workers I Table LI. Only seven percent of all relief housebolos and a little less than four percent of all non-relief
households had no persons of either sex, 16 years of age and
over, working or seeking work in October 1933,
The percentage of households with neither workers nor potential workers changed from area to area in practically the same
way as the percentage of households with no workers !Table 311.
Percent{l€e of Dependents 'llho "I/ere Potential llorkars.
Only
six percent of all dependents' in relief householas and four
percent in non-relief households were potential workers !Table
351. There was also little difference between relief and nonrelief groups in the proportion of dependents who were potential workers when households were compared accordin-g to the
occupation an<1 sex of the heao.
The proportions of oependents who were potential workers
showed little variation by area, those in the relief group
rangin~ from four to nine percent, and those in the non-relief
group from about three to eight percent. In no area, however,
was the percentage of depenaents who were potential workers
greater in the non-relief than in the relief sample.
1.Any person 16 years or age or ovtir never e■1>lo7ed but sHlr.111& work 111
October 1933 was considered a potential worlr.er.
D>lng chorea or bel1>ln~
w1tu housework was not considered e■ pioy■ ent,
2Any ■ember or a household Who was not a worker, u pr1v1oua1y detlned,
was regarded as a dependent,
Digitized by
Google
III.
EARNINGS AND OTHER ECONOMIC ASSETS AND
LIABILITIES OP RBLIBF ANO NON-RELIRF HOUSEHOLDS
I.
Source or Earnings
Altbough a ■acll •al.ler proportioa of relief tbaa of aoarelief hoasebolds had ea,raiags ia October 1933, 66 percent of
the houselaolds receiving pablic relief in rural area.; reported
earaiags fr011 oae or ■ore sources !Table NI. la two thirds of
all cases, Oerefoi-e, relief was giTen to supplement rather
tJaaa to replace f•ilJ earniars.
TUI.(
■•
SOURCE Of EAHIIIS OF IUIAL IELIEF AID IOI-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
•■ OCTOIU 195'
,11c1 ■ TA&I
OP
0,., •••• ,,01
No1111 ■ 01.11
RIL I lfl
..
,,_,
11)1).0
TOTAL
, ,
lo la1111ea
No•• , ....
o, ••• , •••
101-Aaa I C•L TIii
No•1 Fae•••• 01•1•
100.0
1.6
'9.1
,.ti
,.,
22.8
, •. 1
2.0
Fa ■•
lo•-IILIIP
,
..
·••-•·••c•LTl ■ I
,.,
10.2
KoMI Fa ■•• 0T ■ I ■ Fa ■ M, All lo ■ -Aa ■ 1C•LTIII
0.2
0.1
Ot ■ I ■
1. 2
0.9
"···Fa ■•
•••
Fa ■• a ■ e IO ■ -AellCILTl ■ I
U tile soarcea of earain1s are broadlJ defined as tbe bo■e
otller tar■s, ud non-agricultural occupations, oalJ 10
perceat ot tile relief households wno earaed an incoae in October drew their earnings fro■ ■ore tbaa one source, although 1q
perceat of tie bousebolas had aore tnaa one me■ ber gainfull7
eaploJed. The diL!ereace reflects trequeat employ■eat of ■ore
tllu oae ■eaber oa tbe boae Lara. A soaewbat larger proportioa
116 perceat I of the correspoadiag aoa-relief household:i had
diversified earaiags, and a still larger proportion 130 percent) of thea had two or ■ore members employed.
The cllief single source of earnings in both groups was tbe
hoae far■ , witb non-agricultural occupations second in importance. It is iateresting that aore than twice as many non-relief
as relief households with earnings coabined farming .itb non&ericultural. e■plo,aeut, a.ltnougo tbis was confined to only
about one aon-relief household ia nine.
Source of larntnls, bg Area. In 110st of the areas suneyed
fro■ one to two fifths of the relief fa■ ilied bad ao earnings.
In Ne. Mexico, ho.ever, and in tbe Massachusetts and Dairy
areas, ball of the relief ilousebolu~ bad ao perdon emplo7e<1.
la Ne11o Mexico, one fourth of the non-relief bou.3ebolds also
far■,
39
Digitized by
Google
ijQ
RURAL R_ELIEF AND
NON-RELIEF
HOUSEHOLDS
were without earnings; but in no oiher area did this ratio exceed one eighth of sucn households.
In most areas a smaller proportion of relief than of nonrelief families reported income from the home farm, and the
same held for non-agricultural earnings. la the ■&Jority of
il,reas, however, more relief than non-relief households gave
"other farm" as the source of earnings - that is, the members
were employed as farm laborers. In the California counties,
where part-time farming is important, more than one fifth of
both relief and non-relief households received earnings fro11
more than one source.
In the Oregon and Mountain areas, and
among the non-relief households of the New Mexico, Cut-Over,.
and Dairy regions, there was more than average diversification
in source of earnings, again because of the prevalence of
part-time farming. In every area the proportion of households
that derived earning:. from farming and non-agricultural employment combined was smaller in the relief than in the Don-relief
group.
2.
Amount of Earnings
Male heads of relief bouseholos other than farm operators.
wno were employed in October 1933 earned during that 1100th
less than one third as much as their non-relief neighbors, the
average earnings being $26 and $92, respectively. The beads of
tne bousenolds t11at were on relief in October 1933 had also
earned about 30 percent less than the beads of the non-relief
bousebolCls in October 1928 and October 1923.
Differences in
toe age distribution of relief and non-relief beads Dad little
effect on the differences in earnings (Table 01.
Earn.Ln.ts of NaLe Heads tn. October 1923, 1928, and 1933.
Especially among beads of relief households, average earnings
in October 1933 were considerably lower than earnings in the
corresponding month of the years 1923 and 1928. In most areas
the average October 1933 earnings of heads on relief were approximately qo to 50 percent of their October 1928 earnings,
although in the Old South Cotton, Southwest Cotton, and the
Corn-and-Hog regions, particularly, tney fell even lower when
compared with the 1928 level.
Among tne non-relief heads,
earnings in 1933 were about 80 percent of those in 1928, although
in New Mexico they were only half as large !Table 361.
In practically all regions earnings in October 1928 were
slightly less than those in October 1923, the relief incomes
being 5 to 10 percent less in most instances, and the non-relief
about 5 percent less.
Vartatton in Earn.in.ts of Kate Heads bg Ate Groups.
Among
both the relief and non-relief households, October 1933 earnings reached a maximum for male beads between LJO
d "9 years
Digitized by
oogle
EARNINGS AND OTHER ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
ql
of age, .itn a steady increase from the younger groups, and a
rather sharp decrease above that age interval •
.Cuaulat Lve DtstrtbutLon of larnLnts of Employed. Beuds. More
than ba.lf of all relief beads wi tn earnings, inclu,iing females,
eaned less than $20 during October 1933, whereas less than
one tenth of the non-relief heads received so small an income
(Table 371. Almost two thirds of tne non-relief and about one
tenth of the relief beaus bad earnings of more than $60. One
TABLE
0.
&Y[RAGE
MONTHLY EAONINGS OF RURAL RELIEF
ANO
NON-OELl[F MALE
HEADS
OTHER THAN FARM OPEOATORS, WHO IOERE EMPLOYED DUOING OCTOBER
192 3, 19?8
••□ 193 3 BV 4GE G• cup,
0C TOttlllll
O~TO!ltA
193.5
AGl OJ HlAO
.... '661
U•DC• 2,
2' - 29
Ru1111
s !IO
.
6~
t?:?,
0:Touu 19'2A
No .. -RtL1lf
S
.
111
78
30 - 39
82
49
90
100
12•
91
128
Q() -
50 - '9
~
- ~9
70
HD 0'4'11
~,,1
100
R7
Rt 1.
S
1t►
•
- -19'3
---
()c T01O.lil
NON-RlL I U
;h:Ll(f
~ON-RtL llF
73
S 11)1
S 2F
~9
'8
M
1,,
se
103
2Q
27
~
72
23
811
77
119
113
33
9'
811
71
71
82
s2
Q2
90
''"
2e
17
17
S 82
third of the nou-relief but extremely few of the relief heacb
earned 1BOre than $100. A part of tuis difference in wages was
occasioned by the larger proportion of low income groups - farm
laboren, semi- and unskilled laborers, Negroes and female heads
in the relief group.
larntnfs of WhLte and Heiro Kale Reads.
Among botn relief
and non-relief households, approximately the ~ame proportions
of heads of Negro and white families, exclusive of farm operators, were employed in October 1933.
The average wage of employed Negro heads on relief was $17
and of corresponding white beads $25. Most of this difference,
however, was due to regional ratner than to racial differences.
In the Old South Cotton and Tob.icr.o areas, where most Negroes
were located, the differential in favor of the wnites was only
one dollar.
For every area, on the other hana, there was a widespread
difference bet1oeen the average wage of tne white auu Negro
beads not on relief 1$8q as compared to $231. In tile two southern areas mentioned above, there was practically no difference
between the earnings of relief and non-relief Negro heads, which
indicates the low economic statu;; of tha.t race in the rural
South.
larntnfs of Kembers of Households, IncludLnt Heads. Fortylive percent ot relief and 83 percent of non-relief households
Other than farmers bad s011e member gainfully employed auring
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
October 1933.
The average combined earnings of all members
were $31 for relief and$~ for non-relief households. Comparing these earnings with those of heads alone, members other
than the head of relief housenol<ls were found to ha.ve contributed almost one fifth of the total earnings of th~J!ousehold,
whereas other members of non-relier households contributed
a.bout one eighth. This was in spite of the fact that a greater
proportion of non-relief members other than the head were employed. The greater proportion contributed by other members in
relief households emphasizes the low earnings of relief heads.
The efrect of the earnings of other members was to decrease by
a small percentage the proportion of households in the low earnings group and to increase correspondingly those in the higher
groups.
Approximately equal proportions of white and Negro householas
had some member employed, but members other than the head of
Negro relief and non-relief households contributed a greater
share or the income of the family than did other members of
white households.
One fourth and one J:iftn of the average
earnings of relief and non-relief Negro households, respectively, were added by other memoers, whereas the corresponding
proportions for whites were about one fifth and one eighth.
Earntnts by Stze of Household.
Among all households earnings increased consioerably with increase in the size of household, and were largest among relief households of nine or more
persons and among non-relief households of six to eight persons ITaole 38 and Figure in.
Tbe increase in earnings with
increase in size of household is chiefly explained by the earnings of members other than the head.
larntnis tn October 1933, by area.
The earnings of beads
Part of this
and of all members varied considerably by Area.
difference was the result of the unequal proportions of
unskilled, skilled, professional, and farm workers in the several
regions; but some of it resulted from local wage scales. Particularly low total earnings for October 1933 - $20 or less for
relief households, and $70 or less for non-relief households, were found in the Old 8out.h Cotton, New Mexico, a.ndCorn-and-Hog
regions (Table 391. Rather low earnings also prevailed in tne
Tobacco and Cut-Over areas. Average earnings of more than $q0
for relief and more than $115 for non-relief families were reported in the Dairy, California, and Massadb..~~~t ts regions. The
Oregon and Wheat areas were the only others where the non-relief
earnings were more than $100.
Rarnings of beads alone varied
in much the same way as did total earnings.
Digitized by
Google
0
.
~
••
0
~
n._,.,oo
..
•
0
0
""
0
.
•..,
0
c,.
•
.,
...
...
0
•
0
::0
......-=
0
J
...
""
....
0
J
0
J
C
0
I
::0
0
J
0
-.
0
0
::0
0
J
0
0
u
0
-
c,.
•... ....
....
...
..,-= •..,
...
-= ...
......
...
• ...-=
• ...
•
• ...-=
...... ..,...
... ...
•
J
C
::0
0
• 0,.
•
::0
.
...
...•
•
u
0
C
C
0
..,•
•...
0
-=
..,C
•
0
.
'O
0
•...
...
•
••
C
0
.••
...
.•
q3
Google
•
•
~
0
.
C
•
0
0
.•,. ...,.... .•
0
...•
0
... ...•
C
C
...'°•.
C
...• ...
... ...
-
C
...,• .... .•...
0
• ... • ...• •
...• ... ...
0
EARNINGS AND OTHER ASSETS AND tlABILITIES
J
......
...
•
I
•
0
•
m
J
......
...
•
I
...
0
0
Digitized by
qq
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSBHOLDS
3.
Size of
Far■•
In each of the areas surveyed, farmers on relief operated
smaller fanns than their non-relief neighbors, the ■ediu total acreages being 93 and 119, respectivel7 (Table tlOI.
Acreage by Area. A number of factors, such as t7Pe of faming and tenure, affect the size of fana.
In the Califoraia,
Oregon, New Mexico, Massachusetts, Old South Cotton, and Tobacco areas, acreages of operators receiving relief were ■ach below the average, the median being 26 acres or less (Table 'IOI.
In the first four of these areas there was considerable truck
and part-time farming, while in the last two the effect of
share-cropping .was. evident. The faras of aoa-relief operators
in the same areas were also small compared to faras of noarelief operators in the seven other areas.
ParticlllarlJ lli&h
acreages were found 811Dng both relief ud aoa-relief faraers ill
the Wheat and Cash Grain areas.
Nevertheless, reeardless of
t7Pe of farming, tenure, or area, faras operated b7 households
on relief were consistentl7 saaller thu tbose operated b7
households not on relief.
Acrea;e by 7'enure Groups. Compared to other teaure classes,
share-croppers operated the smallest farms, oera,iq aboat 30
acres. There was, furthermore, no differeace between relief aad
non-relief croppers in this respect.
In the Old South Cotton
and Tobacco areas, where most croppers were located, their fanas
averaged only about 20 acres. In these saae teeions other t7Pes
of tenants on relief operated a somewhat larger oera,e acrea,e
than did croppers, and farm owners on relief operated faras
about three times as large as the croppers.
laong non-relief
farmers the tenure differences were even greater.
There was no unifom relationship when the acreages 01 farm
owners and of tenants other than croppers were COllpared.
Acreate by Race.
Only in the Old South Cotton aad Tobacco
regions were there sufficient Negro faraers to make aa acreage
comparison with white farmers feasible.
In these areas the
11e<1ian acreages of relief Negroes Nld whites were 19 and 33,
respectively; of non-relief Negroes and whites, 30 aad 7q, respectively.
A part of the difference was the result of the
larger number of farm owners among the whites.
The acreage
data nevertheless are further evidence of the well-known inferior economic situation of the Negroes.
In the above mentioned regions more thaa half of the Negro
farmers on relief and three tenths ot those not on relief
operated less than 20 acres, while the corresponding proportions
for white farmers were t"hree tenths and one teath (Table 1n1.
Practically all Negroes operated less thaa !50 acres, while oae
fourth of the white relief and six tenths of the white aoarelief fanaers operated more than that aaouat.
Digitized by
Google
.,
IAIIINGS AND OTIII ASSITS AID LIABILITIIS
Jc,..a,e of rart-and flaole-t'ta. l'ara o,,.ratora. Part-tiae
1araen, IIOSt of tit• tara owen, oera,ed oalJ 19 acres ia
~e cue of tllloae recehi•t relief, ud 114 acrea ia tile cue of
tlloae aot receidq relief, u ccapared wit~ JOO ud 128 acrea
of tile corrapolldia, nole-tiae faraer aroups. Tile acreqe of
nole-tiae operators ia - t cases wu aboat doable tbat of tile
pan-tiae 1roap; bat ia sacll areu uOrqoa, Calitoraia, Muaacnaetta, aad Hew Mexico, wllere track faraers were ••ero■s,
tile differeace, particalarl7 aac>q tlloae oa relief, was pr.o,ortioaallJ ■acll las.
,.
Ownerahlp of Llveatock
A.
VDrkatodl
lec:aae of tile ut ■ re of tlleir coatract witll tlle ludlord,
croppers did aot on wortstock. _,., tlle rfill&iaiq fara operaton, Nlfiffff, a ■aijoritJ of botll tllose oa relief ud tllose
aot oa relief owaed oae or ._,. llonea or •lea, lt■ t tlle proportioa .,.. ...Uer ia tlle cue ot relief tba of aoa-nlief
open.ton. Worbtoct otller tba llones ud aalea was aot reported altlroqll afew...U. fuaera, particalarl7 mae of tllloae
oa relief, Hed oxea ud otJler cattle for wrt perpoaea.
ProporUoa of ,a,. ~ r • Otller
tua
aa ,.,.,
era,,p.ra
lbra~..
Tlirt7-f011r perceat of fara o•en Mli teuata
Cotller tllu cro,persf oa relief, coapared witll 18 perceat of
tltoae aot oa relief, owed ao wortstoct (Table Pf.
T-.t P.
-...........
.... ., -·
~
---•If ,_
CPOAllm OTIIUI ~ ~ . WI
.....,. t# ..._ IE.llF llalS1IIOI, MD M MIRAIE . . . . t# -'IQQI ONO oa JIIIIJ- 1, 5'4, "
Cl'llA,._ Willi llla!100[, IY IIClllaa _ ,
., _ 19
ill-.
!Kl - 99
- .. 1.,.
2'0-519
17'- 219
,., - ""
,00-7•
7'0 - 999
"·"'
1.000 -.......
,.ooo
r...r.:.=~·..,
- ·,.,
•
"'
,2
•
"'
.at
•n
6
'
"2?.
11
~
11D
71
12
29
1'
12
7
f-
Ill
a,:::~.:..°_'~~-,,,.
Au.11,
3-6
1.6
1.•
1.9
2.,
,.2,
..
6.0
!I
6.1
1'
6.•
9-~
I)
.
oaaa
.
-··•·
•.2
1.6
1.,
2.1
2.,
,.,...
J. 7
7.t
1.7
!1.9
11.?
.Is au7 u eiallt tea.tits ot tbe relief ud seTea teatlts of
tile aoa-relief faraers vtao c■ lthated less tbu 10 acrea did
ao vi tlloat owaia, a llorse or ■ule. With iacrease ia tile sile
of fara tllere wu a steadJ iacreae, _,., both relief ud aoaDigitized by
Google
t16
RURAL RBLISF AND NON-RBLIBF HOUSIBOLDS
relief fanaers, ia the aaaber witl vortatoct, aatil ia U1e
larger acreage groups oalJ one ia tweatJ of tile relief opera-tors was without such aai■als. &owner, ia tile case of extremely larie acreage• tllere was soae iacreue ia tile proportion of farmers lactiai workstoct, probabl7 becaqse of tie
substitution of tractors.
On practically all sizes of far■s relathei7 ■ore relief tllu
aoa-relief far■ers were witllout horses or ■ales.
Ia a ■&1orit7 of areas soaewhat ■ore far■ owaers tllu teauta
(other thaa croppersl on relief were prodded witll writ ui-·
■ als, but differeaces b7 teaure aaoai aoa-relief operators were
aot-consisteat.
Auer-a,, luaber of llorbtoclt OIIIUd b11 1ara 0,,.,-atora Otw
than Crop,,.rs.
Noa-relief far■ers wllo owaed wortstoct oerqed Ll.2 llorses ud ■ales, whereas tlleir relief ■eiillbors oeraged 3.6 (Table Pl.
Bowenr, a few areas ud f&nlS with a
ireat aaaber of wortstoct ■ ate tllese a~erqes leas represeata-tiYe tllu tile correspoadi•i aediusof 2.7 ud 2.0.
Altllouih ill ■oat acreqe classes tile relief operators vita
wortatoct owaed •aller auabers of uiaals tllu did tJae aoarelief operators, tills was aot alwa,s troe, ud tile absolate
differences were ieaerall7 •all.
011111,rahtp of for/tstoclt, b11 Area. There was coaaiderable
variation, depending oa tile prevalent t7Pe of faraia1 UMl sise
of far■, in tbe proportion of far■ operators witboat workatoct
fro■ area to area. At least three foortbs ot the relief ad
half of the non-relief operators ia tbe CalUonia, Oresoa, ad
Massacllusetts regions bad ao workstock, but ia tileae resioaa
there was considerable part-tiae or track farailli (Table ti21.
Ia tbe Wheat, Casb Grain, New Mexico, aad Tobacco reaioas, oa
tbe other hand, less tban oae fifth of both relief and aoarelief operators were without workstock.
Particularly in tbe Old South Cottoa, Cora-and-Boa, Cut-0Ver 1
and Dairy regions, and to a less extent ia tile Oreeoa and Masaacbuset ts areas, a much larier proportion of aoa-relief tlla
of relief.operators possessed such stoct. Ia tbe Tobacco area
there was little difference in the proportion of ovaersllip of
work animals by relief and non-relief operators.
Fara operators on relief in aost areas wllo owaed u7 wortstock at all usually bad one teaa. OnlJ ia the Mouatain, Cull
Grain, and Wheat areas did they average ■ore tllu tlaree uimals each. In these same regions, and also ill the Con-aad-Bot
and Southwest Cotton areas, non-relief operators averaged foar
or more work animals a_piece.
Generally, in areas where a high percentage of far■ opera-tors owned workstock the average number of aniaals owaed was
also large.
Digitized by
Google
BARNINGS AND OTHBR ASSBTS AND LIABILITIES
q7
In a •&Jori tJ of areas aon-relief operators O'llllling workstock averaged at least one head 110re thaa relief operators.
Part of this diUerence was due to the larier faras of nonrelief operators; but tbe concentration of relief far11ers in the
Cash Grain and Wheat reiiou reduced the average relief and
non-relief difference for all areas c011bined to a little over
half a head.
B.
Other Livestock
Not onJ.1 did a saaller proportion of relief tnan of nonrelief households own such livestock ascows, hogs, and poultry,
but the relief bousebolds, as a rule, owned tbea in saaller
nu■bers than did the aon-relief.
Hore than two thirds of tbe
relief households, c011pared with less than half of the nonrelief households, bad no cows ITable QJ. There was less di Her..
ence in tbe ownership of ltOiS, 72 perceat of tbe relief and 6,
percent of the non-relief households reporting none.
Fortyfive and tllirtJ-four percent of the relief and non-relief households, respectivelJ, had ao poultrJ.
TABLE
Q.
P(RClNT OF RUQAL RELltr AND NON-P[Ll[F HJUS~HQL~S T~AT QWNlD NO
LIVESTOCK. JANUARY 1, 193•, BY SEX Of HEAD ANO
8Y OCTOBER 1953 OCCUPATION OF VALE HEAD
Pt RC(.
o,
Sl•
Ht.&D HD
0eTOIU 19,5 Occu,u 10•
OJ llf4l.l HU,lll
W1 TNOU T Co ■ $
R(Lllf
~L "lADI
\141.1 HUDS
Faa.. Onlll
CIOPPI ■
01111• Tout
NVJ1-RlL 11,
07
68
6,
.,
51
13
fl
o,
T
Huuilrt0LD5
WI TNUUT
RtLIH
'l,1f,HJuT
Hvli,!i,
Nu111-"(LIO
7?
6,
69
6)
.,.
RU.![f
3•
•?
33
,.
27
1,
".
..
12
7
81
9,
:?9
86
97
07
IJ~
'°
~c;.
i,
17
9
20
10
eu
e,
q~
93
,,
U.ihll'L01'1U
87
76
~8
e1
51
FIIIIALl HEAD~
89
7?
91
B•
12
LAac;, ■ u
"fOfll-Q(L IU:
.,
lluN-A&tl1CVLTUIII
Fu..
PuuLfR'f
• 57
,2
~,
n,1 . . ALLI• PUCt•Tt.Gl~ ,ofl CAU,l'fAS OU tl1tA•U T"A• ,ufl u111111ffllS
AAl Dul TO T,i( c.:; .. cf11fl11ATU)llf v, c••t•~ ltrll AllAS . . . . ,
WIil .Cl"T, lSl'ltli\1..LT Tott
r,lAl ■ T
, , . "U(;i:t
Altlll.
Area Vartatton, tn Ownerahtp of Ltuesioc~. In almost ever,
area, botb the percentage of households owning cows, hogs, and
poultry, and the averaee nu~ber of animals owned, were smaller
aaoni relief households than 111110ng tbeir non-relief neighbors.
fbe ownership of cows was more prevalent among both relief and
ooa-relief housellolds in the Southwest Cotton, Cut-Over, Wheat,
&Dd Mountain areas than elsewhere ITable IJ3 I.
Hois appeared
■oat ienerallJ in the Old South Cotton, Soutllwest Cotton, and
Digitized by
Google
q9
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
Wheat areas, al though even there they were owned less often
than cows.
The high proportion of relief households in the
Corn-and-Hog area without bogs is due to the relatively small
number of farm operators and the large number of unskilled laborers on relief. Poultry was relatively common, especially
in the same areas as hogs. Massac bu set ts, New M"exico, and
California had the fewest households keeping food animals.
Hogs were unusually scarce in the Dairy area, while cows were
noticeably rare in the Corn-c111d-llog area.
The largest numbers of animals, per household having any,
were found in the '¥°heat and Cash Grain areas in the case of
cows, hogs, and poultry; and in the Southwest Cotton area in
the case of hogs alone (Table 44 I. On the other band, the
smallest average numbers of cows and chickens appeared in the
Tobacco and New Mexico areas, and the smallest number of hogs
in the New Mexico and Cut-Over areas.
OwnershLp of Livestock by Par~ Owners and Tenants. Approximately three tenths of the farm owners and tenants on relief
owned no cows, but only one eighth of the corresponding nonrelief operators were wi tbout them. No bogs were reported by 53
percent of relief and 45 percent of non-relief farm owners,
whereas the percentages of tenants owning none were 35 and 29,
respectively. Very few relief or non-relief operators lacked
poultry - only 17 percent of relief owners and 12 percent of
relief tenants, and less than 10 percent of the corresponding
non-relief beads. Though these figures for all areas combined
would indicate that relatively more tenants than owners were
provided with livestock, in most areas, analyzed separately,
the reverse was true. Greater concentration of tenants in
areas where ownership of livestock was most common explains
the apparent discrepancy.
The same factor explains the slightly higher average nlllllbers
of livestock owned by tenants than by farm owners among relief
operators in all areas combined. Relief owners and tenants reporting such livestock averaged, respectively, 3.!5 and 3.9 cows,
4.6 and 4.7 hogs, and 49 and 52 chickens ( Table RI. Nonrelief operators owned more livestock of every kind than did
relief operators of corresponding tenure.
OwnershLp of Ltuestock by Croppers. Fewer share-croppers
than other farm operators in the South owned livestock, and
the average number owned was smaller. Moreover, croppers not
on relief were little better supplied with the various types
of livestock than were those on relief. Approximately half of
both relief and non-relief cropper households owned no cows
!Table QI. The possession of hogs was not so limited, although
about two fifths of both relief and non-relief croppers -were
without them. Ownership of poultry was most common, only one
Digitized by
Google
IUNINGS AJID OTBIR ASS&TS AND LIABILITIBS
q9
fiftll of tile relief aad oae teatll of tile aoa-relief cropper
lloasellolds reportiag aoae.
Botll tile relief ud aoa-relief cropper families owning cbickeas reported u anraee of about 25 I Table RI. Nou-relief
tallies, lloveYer, bad about two cows and four bogs, whereas
relief fai.Iies had about oae cow and two or three hogs.
- ■ Of LIVlSTOCI( - 0 r, IIM'I. ll(Ll(F ANO - L t ( F IIOUS(ID.05 ll(POIIT t llG SUCH
LIV[S100C, J-lllf'I I. 19~, 1Y SU DF MOD ANO 1Y OCTOBlR 19,5 OCOJPATtOlt OF MAU HUI:
Ta£ t.
IU
M
NIU
AVEIIAIE
A ■8 OcTDNI
19,,
0ccwATIOII . , IIM.I NIM
...... _
___
,
o,a
CD• ■
......, ............,
S.t>
,.I)
,.1
........Ho••-.....
o,
Ru IIP
No ....... LIU
"·•••1
IUIMU
o,
POUL TH
Iii. •• ,
,. 1
11. I
,1
'·"
•.6
11.1
No ► Ru. 11,
81
81
FMM L•--■
1.1
1.6
1.8
2.9
~
-..Aa11,ca111u
1.1
1.9
2. l
6.0
.,"
,,
,,
,,
"
1.1
2. 1
1.2
1.,
2. ,
1.,
11
Ill
1.2
25
66
. . .I . . . . .
C-.11
OTNI Tl ■ UT
..........
,
hllU& . . . . . .
---..0,1•
,.,
,..
1.1
2.2
6.2
6 .8
,..
1.8
n.o
2. 6
'-9
I .7
ID.I
11)
26
l9
,2
0-,-81&tp of Ltueatocll bl/ 1ara Laborers. The ownership of
lheatock wu bardly 110re coaaoa aaiong households whose heads
wre eagaged u fara laborers tllaa among non-agricultural worken. Relief st&t ■a ■ade little difference ia tkis class. Belweea ei1lat ud aiae teatlrs of all farm laborers owned ao cows,
1pproai■atel7 tlle aae proportioa had ao ho~s, and almost half
wre witlaoat po■ltr, ITule 0).
Tile allllbers of ani■ala owaed b7 far■ laborers were considerabl7 belvw tlaose reported bJ far■ owners ano tenants. Farra laborers wbo llad sucb liYestock averaged less than two cows, betweea two ud tbree bogs, ud about 30 chickens ITable RI.
o.,,..,-ahtp of Ltueaiocll bV lon-AfrtculturaL Households. Few
lao■sebolds whose beads were e•iaeed ia aon-agricult,ural pur••its laad UJ lhestock, but sliibtl7 110re of those oa relief
tlau of tbeir aoa-relief aeiabbors laad cows, pigs, or chickens,
possiblJ tile result of tbe efforts of sucll llousebolds to supple■ eat tlaeir ■eager iacoae. More thaa 80 percent of the housebolds werewitbout cows, betweea 80 aad 90 percent bad no bogs,
ad a.DOU~ one third llad ao poultr7 !Table QI.
Aaoag tlle failies possessing food aai■ als, those not on relief llad 110re !Table RI. When relief bousellolds bad sucb ani■11.s tlle7 coaai.tted oa tbe average of a cow or two, a couple
of pies, ud t1110 dosea bens.
Digitized by
Google
50
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RRLIEF HOUSEHOLDS
Ownershtp of Ltvestock bg Households wt th Fe11ale and Une•ploged lfale Heads. F1·om 85 to 90 percent of the relief nouse-
holds having female or unemployed male heads owned no cows,
and about the same proportion had no hogs !Table QI. The corresponding non-relief figures were 75 and 85 percent. Approximately 60 percent of the relief households with unemployed
heads and 70 percent of those with female heads were without
pouLtry, as compared to little more than half of the non-relief
households of the sam~ types.
The average numbers of livestock owned by relief households
in these two groups who had livestock were consistently smaller
than the numbers owned bf non-relief households.
5.
Indebtedness
Eighty-two percent of the relief and 6q percent of the nonrelief households reported debts !Table SJ. The average amount
TABLE S.
EXTENT ANO A~OUNT OF INDEBTEDNESS OF RURAL RELIEF ANO "ON-RELIEF HO~SEHCILOS ON JUUARY 1, 1934, BY THE USUAL OCCUPATION OF THE HEAD
t"lllClNT
USUAL OccUPATION o, Ml AD
RlLllF
ALL Hl4D1
MALI Hl.&DS
Alll I CUL lUlll
FAIIN
o..,.
NON-RELIU
18
36
35
14
32
8
OTNIII TUIANl
10
FAIN LAIOll.11
21
.
"
AYllla&I ...uUNT OP INDllUDNISa
I NDIITIDNIU
OF HOUHHOLDS WI TN
RlLIEf
'
'lOO
510
670
1,311D
Now-RlLII'
'
1,600
1,677
1,920
2,600
qq
130
2Q
'l90
1,000
23)
•30
,2
.
"'°
15
36
370
12
780
CLlRICAL
~l
43
37
39
1,230
1,600
P110PIII ETAIIIY
No ■-AGll I CUL TU"I
P10,1ss10NAL
Sil lLLlD
17
36
"°°
•30
2,Q,:)
l, 310
1,000
SUII- AND UNIKILLID
15
35
~10
660
2Q
'°
190
9'l0
380
1,311D
No USUAL 0ccu,u10N
38
f-lMALl HlADS
•
HouUNOLDS •1 TN
1,
23
CIIOPPIII
o,
No I NDllTlDNf.SS
LIii TMAII
10
CASI$.
5q
,lvllA'l NOT COlll'IHID.
outstanding per indebted household, however, was $500 for the
relief and $1,600 for the non-relief. The larger proportion of
property owners among the non-relief households accounts for
the difference. The borrowings of both groups were evidently
closely related to their credit ratings.
Almost one fourtb of tne indebted relief households had
petty obligations ot less than $50, approximately half owed
less than $150, three fourths owed less than $500, and only
one eighth bad incurred an indebtedness of more than $1,000
(Table q5J, Among the non-relief households with debts about
one tenth owed as little as $50, whereas nearly two fifths owed
$1,000 or more.
Area Yartatton tn lxtent and A11aunt of Indebtedness. In the
relief population, theproportion of those without illclebteclness
Digitized by
Google
EARNINGS AND OTHBR ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
,1
varied froa around 5 percent in the Wheat and Cash Grain regions to aore than 50 percent in New Mexico I Table 1J6 I. In
most areas, however, the proportion was between 15 and 2, percent. Tnere was less extreme variation among the non-relief
households, about 35 percent in most areas being without liabilities, though the figure fell to some 20 percent in the
Wheat and Mountain regions and rose to over !JO percent in the
Dairy and Southwest Cotton areas.
Among both the relief and non-relief households, the amount
of indebtedness also varied greatly. In the Old South and Tobacco regions the average obligation was less than $22, for the
indebted relief ud $800 for the indebted non-relief households; and in New Mexico the figures were still lower. This
1oas partly a reflection of the large number of croppers or farm
laborers in these areas.
In tne Cash Grain and California
counties, on the other hand, the indebtedness averaged more
thu $700 for the relief and over $2 ,!JOO for the non-relief,
and reached a maximum in the Wneat area with $1,300 and $3,300
for relief and non-relief, respectively. In tile Cash Grain and
Wheat regions large-scale farming accounted for the heavier
indebtedness.
Areas with large proportions of the relief population in
debt tended to have large debts per relief case. In the nonrelief population this tendency was less marked.
Extent and A110unt of Indebtedness by UsuaL Occupat ton of
Bead of Household. Particularly in the relief group, more farm
owners and tenants than heads usually employed in other occupations reported indebtedness ITable SI. Tbe greater fre1uency
with which non-relief farm owners and tenants other than croppers had indebtednes;;, compared to other classes, is somewnat
obscured by the concentration of non-relief o.,..ners and tenants
in a few areas in which indebtedness was quite limited. In
most areas, about three fourths of the owners and tenants and
a third or more of other heads were indebted. A comparatively
large proportion of female heads, and to a less extent, male
heads with no usual occupation, croppers, and !arm laborers,
had no obligations. In every occupational class there were
relatively more relief than non-relief nousebolds with indebtedness.
Toe average amount of indebtedness per indeoted housenold
was usually largest among those occupational classes in wnich
the largest proportions of household;; .,..ere indebted. In all
classes the amount of indebtedne;;;s was several times greater in
the case of the non-relief than of the relief households. Tne
proprietary classes, both agricultural and non-agricultural,
were the most heavily indebted. In the case of farm owners,
the average indebtedness of relief beads was over $1 300, and
Digitized by
oogle
,2
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
of non-relief beads $2,600. Tenants, also, bad large amounts
of indebtedness , as did tbe upper non-agricultural classes. In
t be non-proprietary occupations, those beads employed at tbe
more skilled types of worlt, i.e., professionals, clerical workers, and skilled trade3111en, generally bad the larger debts.
Tne average debt of farm laborers, croppers, and semi- and unskilled industrial la.1'orers was small. Though the indebtedness
of female relief heads and male relief heads with no usual occupation was low, tnat oi the corresponding non-relief groups
was fairly. high. The relatively high indebtedness in tne nonrelief group was probably caused by the high proportion of farm
owners among employed female beads and by the presence of a
number of retired beads among the male heads with no usual occupation.
Digitized by
Google
IV.
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT OF
MALE BEADS AND OTHER MEMBERS OF RELIEF
AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
I.
Usual
Occupation of Male Heads
No characteristic of relief households is more fundamental
than tbe usual occupation of their beads. The occupation is
aormall7 tbe source of self-support, and may be more responsible tbaa tbe f•ilJ itself when the latter is forced on public
relief.
Occupattonal Dtatrtbutton. In primarily agricultural counties j t is S011ewhat surprising to find that only a small maJ ori tJ of ■ ale beads, i ■ both relief and non-relief samples, ~ere
usuall7 eneaged in agriculture. The proportions from agricultural occupations were al110st the same for the two groups, 52
percent tor the relief and 56 percent for the non-relief. Tois
si■ ilaritJ, however, was in part due to tile method of sampling
e■plo7ed,
whereb7 each relief case was matched by the two
Dearest aon-reliet aeiahbors IT&ble T and U and Figure 51,
TOLE T.
USUAL OCCUPATION OF MALE
U•A&. 0CC.WPAnN
-
TOTAL
.... ,ca.,..
c..,••
Tu.uT
FAIII LA9NIII
IIGHM I CUI. T•II
.....
100.0
!11. 7
12.•
61.l
22.e
~ 16.6
21.0
•o., ,o.,
22
10.9
2.1
1.9
7.9
•.6
:Ill...
21.!
7.8
e.,
0tCVPATIOII
,1.0
22. 7
.l!,! . 2,,
ll'IW ■ IITAAY
Ct.UIC4L
HOUSEHOLDS, BY AREA,OCTOBER
$OUTM-
lOD.O 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
011, ... WHAT Cui-
UI ■
0. 2
Sc ILLII
RELIEF
COTTO ■
i---
,.O,IISI . . AL
S1111- a. ■ o 1aINIUII
No LAil USUAi.
HEADS OF RURAL
To- Da,n
,011 ■ 1 Alaac.co
AL&.
0.11
2.E
1.1
13. 7
15.0
,e.o
o.6
§.6
72. 7
22.,
,9.9 70.9 3&.6 ~ 6".i
20.2 1,.• 10.8 ,...l~-3
,2.,
-,....2-!!.
15.0 13.e
~
1,., 6.1 10. 5
3.1
21.9
31.2
l. 7
0.2
,.e 1.1 0.2 2.0
0.6 1.1
1.6
11.6 ,.2 10. 7
- ••1.•1
39.e
10.8
19. l
0.2
2.9
,a..
u 0.6 ,.o
••• ,.o
26.1 12.• ,e.,
8.2
WIIT
8.•
L8
"·'-
-
,. '
Ill•
Mr.11co
CNII-
HlTI
Ga••·
<LD
Co••
Sou,"
no-
Cotto■
HO<
1935
cu,<>vu
100.0 1)0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
62., 21. 7 63.o
31.• ,1.1
J_O.Q _.!I.! . 6.6
3L 7
~-~
o.6 ,o.!l. 1.,
7.9 _l,•1
6. 1 1,.,
1.8 20.1 6.0
11.1 lLO
3).0 75. 5 29.0 16... 62., .,.1
0.6
0.6 0. 7
,. 1 0.7
0.·7
2.6 2.11
1.,
2.9
•.1 ,.11
1.3
2.1 21.3 e.6
2.0 9.6
n.6
-
-
Qii.'
.,., ,,,,_
a.,
o.•
-
16.8 •1.,
l7. I
17.6
8.,
9.,
17.8
8.4
......... c....
116. 1 15-2
,.o
1.'
,.,
-
12.0 •6.1
12.•
6.•
-
..,
,,.,
,_.,
'Within the aericultural group, most of the heads on rel iet
wer~ants other thancr9ppers 123 percent I, witb farm owners
~econd 112 percent I , farm laborers third 111 percent I , and
~~are-croppers fourth 15.'5 percentl. Wnen the proportions of
these several agricultural classes in tbe relief group are compared with the non-relief, it i~ seen that, in spite of an unknown amount of matching when ta.J(ing the non-relief sample, the
relief rolls exerted a strong selective action on certain occupational classes. Farm owners were very much under-represented on relief, while each of the other classes was overrepresented, particularly share-croppers, and to a somewbat less
degree, tar■ ·laborers and tenants.
Passiaa to the in percent of all male beads of relief households who were eaploJed in industries other than agriculture,
the greatest part, 28 percent, were found to belong in the
53
Digitized by
Google
\ll
s:
,a
C
,0
►
t""
,a
mRELIEF
-...,
l"'
t""
~NON~EllEF
lo:!
z►
C
z
z
0
'
,0
tl:J
t""
....
...,
lo:!
:a
0
cg
[;:l
~
~
TOTAL
IIGlll~TIJIE
Onus
C1o,tPUI
~
( i)
...
,:-,.
LAIOlll ■ S
TOTAL
--...GIUCUI. IIJIE
SION6"
PIOPll-
S• ILLID
lfHf
LAIOII
110 UST
U ■ l• 1 LLIO
USUAL
OCQJPATION
0
0
TINA ■ TS
0
=
en
o,:I
:a
0
t""
C
en
FIGURE '
USUAL OCCUP&T I ON OF WALE HE AOS OF RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-<!EL I [F HOUSEHOLDS, OCTOSER 1933
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
55
categorJ of semi-skilled and unskilled laborers. The next largest group, eight percent, was ma.de up of skillea laborers oi
various kind;;;, The so-called "w11i te-co1lar" classe;:; - clerical
workers, proprietors, and proies.sionals - composed only four
percent of all male neaas on relief. Here again, when tne proportion.s of the non-agricultural occupational clas.ses in the
relief group were compared with those in the non-relie! group,
ine1ualities were found. The semi- anti unskilled laborers occurred on relief rolls out of all proportion to their numbers
in the non-relief population; but each of the other classes
was under-represented on relief, tne degree of under-repre;:;entation diminisning from the higher .socio-economic cla;:;ses to the
lower (Table VI.
TAIi.£ U.
UNA&. 0c.c:WPATIO■
-
--
USI.,_ OCOJPATIOII Of" Wol.£ HEADS Of" RIIR.,_ IIOIHlill(f HOUS(HOI.OS. IY AIIU, OCTOBER 19H
-... ,.,.
......
TOT-.
...
c..,- ,~
, ,_,.
... -- ........--
s..,,...
0,ulT
"""""
a,,-
MI.J1ICO
.00.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 IOO.O 100.0 100.0
67. 7 116.8
69., '3.8 66.C '3.8 68.8 56.•
'3.6 110.I ,u
,1.2 ,;i .•
3'.1 "4.2 ,;I.• '3.2
~u
1. 7 O.• o.,
o.6
1.5
r,•.,
,.
7
1,.e
13.7
1,.0 •.2 2"1.1
7.0
16.1
6.o
f-~
0.5
,.2
2.2 7,0
11 .0
2.•
110.2 3.• 09.5
26. 2 05,1
11. 1
,i.1
23.9
Pw1u1oua..
2.1
3.0
2.1
2.1
•.6
1.5
1.9
0.1
1.•
Plon1tt.tlff
1. 1 13. 7
1.9
10. 3 6.o
l.O
6.3
•.e
Q.MICM.
,.6
o.e
,.e
o.e
3.6
•.6
1.2
S-tLLU
,.
7
10., 6.,
8.6
6.6 17. 1
1'-~
SIM•----ILLI.D 10.6
8.8 17.0
20.0
1.9 l•.9
9.2
2"1.8
.lala&.TIN
"·'
11.,
.....,a..,...
,.,
-
i,.'
... '
,.,
It)
w,
llluM.
0to,u10.
...
,. '
2.9
,.e
-
o.,
1.,
6.,
-
,.o
MTTI
100.0
17.2
13.1
0.1
,. ' ,.,
,.o ,.~
1.,
2.0
2.1
-
a..-
s..,,.
a,no,
Hoo ~
,,. '
100.0 100,0
,e., 67.l
20.0 i,1.2
0.1
12 ll
6.2
3.0
!00.0 100.0
,2. 2
27. 2
0.2 11.CI
1',9
2.6
2.,
11.0
•.O 0.4
,.6
17.5
10.0
2.•
•. 2 2.8
1.6
7 .8
- "·'
,.. .,.& "'·'
BO.A
2.1
9.?
9.5
20.1
3'.6
1.9
Q.o
c..,
GIA.Ill
•.2
8.0
Qi?-
-,..
'6.• ,O.!I
2.0
9.0
6.5
13.7
20.•
,.1
l.!I
,.e
3.6
7.0
12.6
,.,
OccupattonaL DtstrtbutLon, by Areus. Although all of tile
areas surveyed were commercial agricultural re~ions, considerable variation by area in the occupational distribution of the
~eads o! households who.ere receiving relief would be expected
because o! differences in climate, crops, re,jources, and industries. Moreover, the u3ual. occupational distribution of relief
Deads would be affected by still other factors. The use of
October as the survey month would probably reduce tile proportion ot those engaged in agriculture, particularly those employed as fa.rm laborers, but the reduction .ould be unequal in
the several areas. Likewise varying administrative procedures
would unquestionably iniluence tDe occupational. composition of
the relief population from ;;;tate to state.
Tne distribution of the relief oead::; among tne several occupational clas;;;ifications mentioned above was found to be no
■ore uniform from one area to another than the above con,jiderations would sugge;;;t. Tile proportion usually employed in agriculture ranged from 22 percent in the urban Massachusetts
countie3 to 73 percent in the counties of tne great plain3
Digitized by
Google
56
\
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
Wneat region, being above average 152 percent I in the Mountain,
Oregon, Wheat. Tobacr.o. Southwest Cotton, New Mexico, Cash
Grain, and Old South Cotton areas, and below average in the
remainder. In 8 out of the 13 areas surveyed, agriculturalists were under-represented 0.1 relief; in five !Oregon, ~•heat,
Tobacco, Massachusetts, and Cash Grain) they were over-represented.
When the agricultural group was analyzed by areas it was
I,
found that farm owners were relatively numerous on the relief
/ \ rolls in Oregon, California, and t11e Cut-Over areas; farm
~
1 owners ana tenants other
tnan croppers dominated in the Dairy
area; farm o;;ners and farm l aoorers in Massacnuset ts and toe
Moun.tain area; tenants other tnan croppers in the Wneat, Soutowest Cotton, and Ca.sh Grain areas; tenants and share-croppers
in tne Old South Cotton area; share-croppers in tne Tooacco
\area; and farm laborers in New Mexico and the Corn-and-Hog
~rea.
In some respects, however, consistency did appear. In every
'type of farming area surveyea, farm owners were under-repre, seated in the relief group compared with the control group,
/ this fact being especially striking in the Caso Grain, Old
Snare-croppers were
/ South Cotton, and f:orn-and-Hog· areas.
I
, over-represented on relief in all areas where they occurred in
/ auy number::;. Tenants otner than croppers were over-represented
in 9 out of 13 areas, but to a notable extent only in the Wheat
and ~ash Grain areas. Farm laborers were over-represented in
all but two areas.
·
\
/ Tile non-agricultural occupation al group on relief, unlike
tne agricultural group, •.-as everywhere dominated by a single
class. Semi- and unskilled laborers made up the bulk of this
iroup in each area, ranging from half in the Cash Grain area
to nearly nine tenths in Neh Mexico. They also constituted not
· less than one third of all male heads receiving relief in 5 of
tne 13 areas, namely, California, the Dairy region, Massachusetts, the Corn-and-Hog area, and tile Cut-Over area. Skilled
labor was the second largest suo-class in the non-agricultural
category receiving relief in all areas but one. The proportion
varied by areas from one tentl.l to nearly three tenths of all
non-agricultural relief households and was most important in
the Caso Grain counties and Massacnusetts.
The "white collar" classes I professionals, proprietors, and
clericals) were most prominent on tne relief rolls in California, Massachusett;:;, Oregon,the r,0rn-and-Hog area, and the Cash
Grain area; but noi.nere did they form as much as one tenth of
toe total male heads on relief. Tney were especially unimportant in Ne1,· Mexico, the Dairy area, toe Tobacco area, the Old
Souto Cotton area, and tile Cut-Over area, where they varied
Digitized by
Google
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTIIIS, AND UNKMPLOTHKNT
57
fro■
0.3 perceaat to 2. 7 percent of ■&le relief beads. In all
areas, profesaioD&ls ■ ade up a smaller part of tbe male beads
oa relief tlau UJ otber class, usu&llJ beini considerably
aader oae perceat of tbe tot&l, and never ■ore than 1. 7 percent
IC&lifonia).
Ia all areas except New Mexico, semi- and unskilled laborers
fonaed a ■ucll laraer proportion of the relief tban of the DODrelief 1roup. On tie other band, skilled laborers were underrepreaeated oa relief in 11 out of 13 areas. The "wbi te collar•
classes werenerywhere ■ arkedly under-represented in the relief
iroup co■pared with the control group.
This was also true
of proprietors and clerical workers considered separately.
Professioaals were an exception in 3 out of the 13 areas, undoubtedl7 becuse of tbeir small numbers in the samples taken.
Occupation• of Male Heads In October 1933
2.
Wide-spread loss of tbe usual occupation due to the depression led to a decrease ia the proportion of beads of relief
llo■ seholds wbo were e■ployed in October 1933 in nearly ever,
occupational. class. Although unemployment was a comparativelJ
■iaor factor in the non-relief population, a decline occurred
tllere also ITable VI. la both iroups, however, tbe amount of
TABLE V. PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF LAST USUAL ANO OCTOBER 193l OCCUPATIONS
________
O_F_M_AL'-E-----'-HEA~5__9!: ~UR_~!:__ RELl_i_~ .. D_ NON-ll_EL l!_F.__H_DUSE_HD_LO_S_ _ __
L,. :s,' US.UAL Occu,•110111
Oc f Oil II 1933 Occu,.&flO ■
OccuPATION o• WALi '°4E 1.0,
----- Rll. it:,
No11-RtL1l,
RIL I I ,
No111-Rt1. 11,
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
'I. 7
".'
03.0
,9.7
12.a
3'.6
11.'
38.6
,.,
I. 7
o.6
2.'
n.9
13.7
22.2
10.9
10.9
o.,
,.1
3.9
oo.,
00.2
20.,
B. l
P1tuf(SSIO ■ AL
0.2
2.1
P ■ OllllllTAIIT
2.1
7.9
o.,
7.9
CLl! ■ ICAL
1.9
,.3
0.2
•. 3
Tor
AL A
I.GRfCULTUltl
O••E•
CROf'f'tA
Tt • •• T
f
l
UIM
AIOllt ■
No ■ -AGltlCULTU ■ l
SI( ILL IE
0
5(1111-
.. 0
No l
o•
U .. 5-lllLLlU L AIOA
A5 T U 5U AL
U ..
(MPL J 'f (
•.883
1.8
7. 9
10. 3
2.0
6.3
28.•
1•.6
11 .e
12.e
7.8
"·"
36.o
7.3
OCCUllATIO ..
D
Iii f LI [F
...
11,093
JriiU--lt l LI f f
Ill AL l
11 [ AD 5,
altriuace differed froa oae occupation to uother, so that tie
October occapatioaal distribution departed consi I:Jbl7 f Oil
Digitized by
008 e
58
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
the distribution by last usual occupation. It is also certain
tnat tne employment of many of those who were working in October was temporary, often nothing more tnanodd Jobs. Tne fact
that a majority of the heads receiving relief were employed in
October indicates the inade1uacy of the employment.
ChanF2es tn the Proportion ElapL011ed tn October 19.'3.3,
by
Usual Occupation. Farming was more stable than any other occupation, as Judged by the proportion of neads employed in farming in Octooer 1933 compareu i.-i tll tne proportion usually so
employed. Tne only occupational class among relief beads tnat
main tainec1 practically the same quota in October 1933 as usual
1;as that of farm tenants otner than croppers. It appears that
relatively fei,; tenants \'iere dispossessed, and that tneir places
were largely fillec1 by the unemployed from other occupations.
Tnere .. ere, inc1eed, actual increa.:;es in October 1933 in the
proportion of farm tenants other than share-croppers in 8 out
of the 13 regions surveyed. The decrease in farm owners and
share-croppers from the number usually so employed was also
small, 7 and 16 percent, respectively, and in four areas, particularly the Cut-Over, more heads reported the occupation of
Lum o .. ner in October 1933 than gave this as their usual occupation.
Among non-relief heads, there \'ias a slight increase in farm
operators of all classes in October 1933 relative to the usual
number in every area except the r:orn-and-Hog Belt.
The "white collar" vocations, at which a small percentage
of the heads on relief were formerly engaged, had been abanduneu by most of these heads in October 1933.. The same was
true of skilled manual work, which normally claimed about
eignt percent of relief neads, but in October 1933 was reduced
to only ti.-o percent. Similarly, the percentage of relief beads
usually employed as farm laoorers had declined more than half
in Octooer 1933, and iocrea::.ea only in the Old South Cotton
counties, Semi- and unskilled industrial laborers decreased
more than one third, in spite of a considerable drift into this
class of tne Jobless from other classes. In tne Corn-and-Hog
area alone was tne proportion working as laborers in October
1933 greater than usual.
In tne case of the heads of households not on relief, tbe
skilled latior class slumped more than any other in October
1933,
about 40 percent of its member:. being unemployed or
shifteJ to other occupations. The semi- and unskilled industrial labor cla.3s fell off 12 percent, the "white collar"
classes not 1uite so mucn, anel farm laborers 13 percent. All
of these declines in employment, boi.-ever, were more moderate
than those experienced by the relief group.
Digitized by
Google
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
,9
Co,aposttton of the OccupattonaL Groups ln October 1933 Ln
'feru of the Last Usual Occupation. The occupations wnicll in
October employed the smallest proportion of outsiders - men
who were not usually engaged in those occupations - were skilled
labor, the professions, and farm ownership !Tables 47A, 47Bl.
On the otoer band, fam labor, share-cropping, and, in the relief group, semi- and uns~ille<l inoustrial labor, showed relatively nigh average percentages of new-comers, although this
was not true of farm labor on relief in the Corn-and-Hog, New
Mexico, and California areas, nor of inoustrial labor on
relief in the Cut-Over an<l Oregon area.,. The ranks of sharecroppers were most heavily invaded in the Southwest Cotton
area, where 43 percent of tne croppen on relief were not
croppers by last usual occupation. In the Old South Cotton
counties 29 percent, and in the Tobacco counties only 20 percent of the croppers receiving relief in October were tirawn
from other occupations and from young men Just starting. In
each of these areas, a large proportion of the non-relief
beads who were croppers in October also reported otner usual
occupations.
The sources of these new recruits varied with the occupation. Of the 17 percent of the farm owner class on relief in
October that had recently entered it from other occupations,
two thirds came from non-agricultural vocations or had no
usual occupation, while one thir<l were formerly farm tenants and
farm laborers. In the Corn-and-Hog, Ca.sh Grain,and New Mexico
area.3, however, no relief bead not usually engaged in agriculture became a farm owner, and there was great irregularity in
these proportions in the other areas. Just how much e1ui ty was
involved in this recently acquired ownership is not known.
One third of all the heads of relief households who were
share-croppers in October did not report share-cropping as
their usual occupation, most of tllem being drawn from the
ranks of those with no usual occupation, largely young men,
semi- and unskilled industrial laborers, and tenants. Twentyseven percent of farm tenants other than croppers were new recruits, most of them having formerly been semi- and unskilled
industrial laborers, young heads and others with no usual occupation, and farm owners 15 percent I. Skilled laborers resorted to farming as tenants in appreciable numbers in the CutOver, Cash Grain, and California counties.
Of the relief heads engaged as farm laborers, 40 percent
bad been employed in other occupations, or never U:3ually employed, about 6 percent having been forced down fr011 the position of farm owner and 11 percent from that of tenant, while
10 percent had been semi- and unskilled industrial laborers,
and 7 percent had bad no usual occupation.
G
Digitized by
008
I
e
60
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
More than one third of the relief heads employed at seaiand unskilled industrial labor in October had not lone beloneed
to this class. Host of these were fol'ller fal'll laborers, tenants,
and young men and others with no usual occupation, althoueh
an appreciable .i11111berwere skilled artisans, especially in California and Massachusetts, and a few were .farm owners. S&illed
workers on relief showed few invaders, only 10 percent.
These were drawn from unskilled laborers, .farm tenants, and
beads too young or too old to have a usual occupation. It is
probable that some of those from the last two classes were
once skilled artisans who were forced from fanning or retirement back into their former trades. 1
Co11posttton of the
Une11pLoved
Group tn October 1933 tn
Teras of the Last Usual Occupation. Semi- and unskilled industrial labor contributed nearly 39 percent of all beads of
relief households who were entirely unemployed in October. This
was 110re than three times the contribution o.f the next occupation, farm labor, which was responsible .for 12 percent of the
idle.
Skilled labor and the group with no usual occupatioa
each supplied more than 11 percent of the jobless, and fara
tenants 10 percent. Among non-relief beads, about 25 percent
of the relatively small number of unemployed were traceable to
the group \Iii th no usual occupation, 2q percent to semi- aad
unskilled industrial labor, 19 percent to skilled labor, and 9
percent to farm ownership, while the remainine 23 percent were
scattered aaone the other occupations.
The above percentages do not apply in all areas, however.
In the Old South Cotton counties share-croppers, rather thaa
industrial laborers, furnished aore 139 percentl uneapio7ed
heads of households on relief than did any other class. la
Massachusetts, skilled laborers led with 25 percent; in the
Cash Grain area, farm tenants were responsible for 25 percent;
and in New Mexico !ara laborers supplied 38 percent of the jobless. In the case of non-relief heads, most of the unemployed
in October were drawn from seai- and unskilled industrial laborers in seven areas, and from those with no usual occupatioa
in four. In onl7 three areas was the chief source of the unemployed the same for the relief and non-relief eroups.
3.
lndu1trle• Employing Male H1ad1
Usuaz Industrtes. 2 Only eight percent of the male heads of
rural relief households and four percent of their non-relief
neighbors in October 1933 had not been usually employed ia
1Tbe •wblt.e collar• claaHa - proteaa1onal, proprute.r1, and clerlOa&
workera - are 0■ 1t,ed rro■ ,n1a d1acuaa1on because or u&ll •-■Pl•••
2Tae •usual• 1ndua,r7 waa deUned as th• last 1nduatl'1 at whlcb ,be 11,..
wu uplo7ed bltore oc,ober 1, 1929, and tor no, l••• Ulan '°rH ,...,.
w1,n1n ,ne pertod NoYuber 1, 192, ,o oc,ober ,1, 19,,.
G
Digitized by
008
I
e
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
61
SOiie industry within ten years (Table WI. Part of these small
percentages was accounted for by natural causes such as age.
Thus, with few exceptions, the rural relief clients of the
Eaereency Relief Administration were emergency unemployment
cases or cases earning insufficient income.
Aericulture, manufacturing and mechanical industries, and
transportation and c011111unication formerly employed approximately
tbree fourths of allaale heads, with little difference between
tile distributions of th e relief and non-relief groups. Amone
tile reaainine one fourth smaller proportions of relief than of
aoa-relief beads bad been engaged in professional senice,
pablic senice, trade, and doaestic and personal senice.
PERCENTAGE OtSTRt8UTtON Of IIALE HEADS OF OELIH ANO NON-•EuEr H0US[HOLD5 CLA5S1r1[D
BY LAST USUAL AND OCTOB[O 1955 t•DUSTOl[S
TAIII.E ••
la:U U:i.uAL
l111,11JSlkf
OCTu•trt
IQll
1 •uu)UU
houuu Of WALi H&Ai.11
RtL I l f
RlL I lF
IWN-RtL IU
100.0
100.0
"·'
I.'
,,5_q
,9. 7
o. 5
0.5
0.2
"· 7
7. 7
,.,
0.R
1•. 5
7 .6
2. 7
6. I
T ■ ADI
3,b
g,9
o.u
R. 3
PvaLIC SIIVICI
o.,
1.3
0.2
1.•
P10,11110t1M. S11v1c1
0 .,
2 .•
2. 3
OoMIITIC AND P& ■ IOIIAL Sll'f'ICl
1.1
2. 3
o. I
o.,
W11ClLLA ■ IOUI
R.,
1.,
12. 7
2.2
7 .R
"·"
'5/i.O
7.'
,1.
A& ■ ICULTYll
7
FoHSTIY AIID F1•"'•"
0. 7
(IT ■ ACTIO ■ Of WUIIA&.S
2. 2
....u,actull ■ C. A ■ U WtCNHICAL
Tta ■ uo ■ TUIO ■
No UIUAL
A
No•-Rn It,
100.0
100.0
TOTAL A
IJ,98'5
AND COtialu ■ ICATIOII
l ■ DUITIY 01 UUIIIIPLOU&,
IILllf At1D
11,095
0, 5
9,U
2.2
■ ON ➔ ILllf MALl "lADI,
The iaportance of the different industries naturally varied
fl'OIII one part of the country to another.
lnduatrtes tn October 1933.
In October 1933, after four
7ears of the depression, the percentage of male beads employed
in every industcy had dropped sharply in the case of relief
beads, and much less sharply or not at all io the case of nonrelief beads (Table WI. The hiebest rates of displacement fr011
the usual industry among relief beads occurred in professional
se"ice, trade, public senic.e, extraction of minerals, transportation and c011111unication, and manufacturing and mechanical
industries, in the order given, and the lowest rates occurred
in agriculture, 1 domestic and personal service, and forestry
1.&u beade repor,1n1 t.belr occ\lpa,1oa aa ran operator were re1arded aa
-.PloJed.
Digitized by
G 008Ie
62
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
and fishing; but the first three and the last two industries
mentioned involved relatively few households ITable q9 A).
Among non-relief heads also, extraction of minerals and manufacturing and mechanical industries showed relatively higb
rates of displacement, and agriculture and domestic service,
low rates; but in this group professional service, trade, and
public service showed low rates as well ITable q9 Bl.
The proportion of male beads engaged in miscellaneous industries, usually odd jobs, showed some increase in October 1933
over the usual distribution; a.nd the number of non-relief heads
in agriculture was also a little larger.
Kanufacturtnt and KechantcaL Industries. Sixteen and fourteen percent of male relief and non-relief heads, respectively,
were usually employed in manufacturing and mechanical industries, of which building, the manufacture of iron and steel
machinery, and lumber and furniture were 110st iaportant (Table
1'91.
There was extreme variation by area with respect to the importance of this group of industries. About half of tbe aale
beads in the Massachusetts area and almost a foartb in the
Dairy and California regions bad usually been occupied at aanuf acturing and mechanical work (Table 501. About one fifth of
the relief heads but somewhat fewer non-relief beads in the
Cut-Over and Corn-and-Hog regions were ordinarily engaged in
these industries. In New Mexico there were practically none.
Elsewhere the proportions varied from about one tenth to one
twentieth of the beads on relief.
Of the beads usually working in this group of industries
only 17 percent of the relief, but 57 percent of the nonrelief, retained employment in their accustomed occupation in
October 1933. About 60 percent of the relief and 1q percent
of the non-relief heads were uaeaploJed. Tenure of employment in manufacturing and mechanical industries was particularly low among the relief heads of the Old South Cot ton and
California areas.
In the former area, of the relief heads
usually occupied in these industries less than one tenth were so
occupied in October. Total unemployment affected three fourths
of the factory and mill workers on relief in the Old South
Cotton and Massachusetts areas, and almost asman1 in the nairf
area. More than four fifths of the non-relief heads usually
engaged in manufacturing, however, continued at work in these
industries.
Only four percent of all the relief and nine percent of all
the non-relief beads in the sample were employed in the manufacturing and mechanical industries in October 1933. Except
for 10 percent in Massachusetts, a negligible proportion of
the heads in any of the areas surveyed were emploJed in these
Digitized
by~Oogte
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
63
industries &t that time. The proportions were somewhat higher
among the non-relief beads, particularly in the Massachusetts,
Dairy, California, and Oregon areas.
rransportatton and Couuntcatton. Transportation and com■unication industries usually employed about eight percent of
rural ■ ale heads !Table 511. Only in the Massachusetts, New
Mexico, T>airy, and Corn-and-Hog regions were more than a tenth
of either relie.! or non-relief heads customarily occupied in
these industries.
By October 1933 less than three percent of the relief and
about six percent of the non-relief beads i.·ere still engaged
in transportation and co111111unication.
Trade. Trade formerly employed almost four percent of the
relief and nine percent of the non-relief heads !Table 521.
Smaller percent"ie3 occurred in the southern areas - Old South
Cotton, Southwest Cotton, and Tobacco - and in the C-:ut-Over
and New Mexico counties; Whereas larger percentages were found
in the Massachusetts and Corn-and-Hog counties, and among the
non-relief beads of the Wheat and Cash Grain regions.
Practically none of the beads receiving relief were still
employed in trade in October 1933; but there was little decline among the non-relief beads in this employment. In no
area did the proportion of relief heads still engaged in trade
exceed one percent, whereas only in California did tne proportion of non-relief heads in trade decrease mucb below the proportion usually employed.
Public service, professional service,
Servtce Industrtes.
and domestic and personal service each formed the usual occupation of only about one percent of relief and about two percent of non-relief beads. Roughly about one half of tbe relief
beads in these three iroups were unemployed in October 1933. In
tbe non-relief population, however, only about one seventh of
the beads in public service and in domestic and personal service
and about one twentieth in professional service, bad no employment. At that date, also, less than one percent of all relief
but the proportion of
heads were engaged in these industries,
the non-relief so engaged remained about the same as formerly.
Tbe number of male heads usually
forestrv and ftshtni.
engaged in forestry and fishing was too small to be significant
except in the Oregon and Cut-OVer areas. In both these areas
more of the heads receiving relief than of those not receiving
relief bad usually been engaged in these industries and were
employed in October 1933 !Table XI.
lxtractton of /Hnerals. The percentage of male beads usually engaged in the extraction of minerals in t~e areas surveyed
was also slight. Althou~h mining was of some importance in the
Southwest Cotton, Mountain, and New Mexico areas, it employed
very few heads in these areas in October 1933oiJi&z 1r
0ogle
6q
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
KtsceLLaneous Industrtes. Miscellaneous industries usually
furnished work for about nine percent of all relief and two
percent of all non-relief male beads. However, in the Cornand-Hog area, more than one fourth of the relief beads were
usually so engaged. In most regions one twentieth or less of
relief beads and still fewer of the non-relief beads generally worked at miscellaneous industries.
TlBLE x.
PERCENT OF N•LE HE•ns OF RURAL RELIEF ANC N:JN - RELIE F HOUSEHul. OS , OCT:JBER
ENGAGED IN FOREST•Y ANO FISHING
19B,
PEJ,,t.:[11 r Of !il4L£ Htt,DS
1---.-:..E•=•=-'
C.f.O
- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - -
1 11 fvlol:)htY
-+--- "·'
8.0
,.1
Allt.1
Ft ~ INfot
- -- - + - - - - 3. 7
2.1
1.,
2.,
l.0
Large numbers of the beads usually employed at aiscellaaeous industries continued so employed in October 1933, cbieflJ
at odd jobs. This was true of seven tenths of the relief and
two thirds of the non-relief. A little more than one tiftb
of the former and one twentieth of the latter in tbis group
became totally unemployed.
TABLE Y.
PERCENT CF NALE HEADS CF ~UUL REL I EF ANO NO-E Ll[F HOUSEHCl.OS, OCT!ll[R 1933,
ENGAGE D IN Wltr~(RAL EXTRACT I ON
-----------~
- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pu:1..tNl
ARu
As
LAST
-- -~lLIH
sOur11•tsr Cano•
Ntw . . XICO
1.0
6.6
MnuNT A
3.8
.
U SU AL
l"UU!:,llfl
No,.~u.,o
3.•
12 -~
1.8
Of
WA1..t
HE.A.OS ENG,1.G(O
l~ 0C.TO&f;A
1?}3
I 11 1.HJ S TA'f
N0,.-1-'t,.. 1lf
RU.. l t f
0.9
2. I
OIL
1.7
COAL, QT,tf. A
':O AI., C,Tr,fi;i
a.,
1.8
0.1
C" l ( f
ExHUCT 10111
IN &U::O fW l lS
At the time of the survey almost 13 percent of all relief
and 2 percent of all non-relief heads reported employment at
miscellaneous industries. This increase over the proportion
usually so employed in the relief group was not general, however, being most marked in the Corn-and-Hog area, where almost
half of all the male beads interviewed bad tbis type of employment.
ij.
Occupational Changes and
Une ■ployment
of Male Head,
Following the loss of their usual occupations, heads of
relief households in October 1933 were generally found to be
unemployed, or employed at occupations farther down tbe occupational ladder. Heads o! non-relief households not only
Digitized by
Google
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
65
showed greater stabili tf of employment tbu did relief heads,
but those wbo failed to bold their usual employment wer~ ■ore
likely to obtain other employment, and in so doing, to improve
tbeir occupational status.
Among all male beads reporting
a usual occupation, about qg percent of the relief and 79 percent of the non-relief retained their usual occupation in
October. Approxi ■ately 35 percent o! tbe relief and 6 percent
of the non-relief beaas were entirely unemployed ouring that
month !Tables 5qJ and ~Bl.
A maJority o! the beads of households who were displaced
from their usual vocations but were employed in October had
turned or returned to farming, usually as tenants, but not
in!re1uently as owners of !arms.
In the relief group, this
llt'as true of the "white collar" cla.,ses, semi- and unskilled
industrial la.borers, those witn no usual occupation, and croppers and farm owners who cbanged their tenure status.
On
the other band, non-agricultural occupations gave work to the
largest number of relief heads llt'bO bad formerly been farm tenants other than croppers, fa.rm la.borers, or skilled la.borers.
Among the displaced non-relief heads, only 3<.illed laborers
found less emplo111ent in agriculture than in industrial occupations.
Chanfes tn Occupat ton.
Farming, even when share-cropping
is included, revealed less change o! personnel and less unemAmong !arm operators,
plo111ent than an1 other occupation.
owners rated highest in these respects.
More than three
fourths of the fara owners by usual occupation on relief were
still !am owners in October 1933 and a majority of the remaining one fourth bad obtained some employment, generally
becoming far■ tenants !Figure 6, Table 53Al. Only one in ten
farm owner.s bf usual occupation on relie.f was without employment in October.
Still .fewer, or five percent, o! the nonrelief far■ owners bad left their farms, and less than two
percent were without employment !Table 53Bl
Tenants showed a little less stability tllan farm owners.
Among those on relief about 28 percent failed to retain tneir
usual occupation in October.
A slight majority of these some 16 percent of all tenants on relief - were unemployed,
and the bulk of the others bad dropped to the status of farm
laborers and ·semi- and unskilled industrial workers.
Among
non-relief tenants, about 16 percent were not engaged at their
usual occupation, but, with some exceptions, their tendency
was toward an improvement in status, especially farm ownership.
Share-croppers showed a higher rate of occupational displacement than other farm operators, altnougb less than that
of f'ara laborers and the several non-agricultural classes.
Some q5 percent of all croppers on relief rolls were no longer
Digitized
by~oogle
66
.
0
...
0
-
0
uun.i
....
•
0
.
0
0
0
...
u
0
C
•
0
...
C
0
u
u
::0
C
...
.
0
..,,•... •
.J
"'
0
0
:s
...
...
"'::0
0
:s
0
.
►
...... ...
...
.J
•
0
C
.J
C
►
u
•
0
C
::0
0
u
u
0
C
ll::
Google
...
=-
....
u
-.....-..
-....
0
...• •=... ......
C
...... .,,...=:s
...
"'
0
C
=- 0•
-... ....
-...
0
•0
....
• ....
f
...
.-.
...
...
...-......
...
-... ...
•
...
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
I
......
0
-......
--
~
.J
......
-...
I
0
0
...
Digitized by
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
67
occupied at share-cropping. Of these only one in five llad obtained other employment, which was about equally divided between
farm tenancy other than share-cropping, on the one band, and
fa.rm and semi- and unskilled industrial labor on the other.
Approximately 80 percent of the croppers in the non-relief
sample continued as croppers in October. Moreover, practically
all of those displaced had obtained other employment, some
becoming tenants other than croppers, a few beco■ing farm owners, and others becoming fara laborers and semi- and unskilled
1110rkers. It is possible, however, that those who became tenants
other than croppers were not far reaoved froa cropper conditions.
Fara laborers in the relief aad non-relief groups were at
a dis.advanta,e compared to fara operators of all tenures, but
especially fara owners and tenants other than croppers, with
respect both to retention of their usual occupatioa and to
rate of uneaployaent. NeYertheless, a soaewbat •aller proportion of fara laborers was unemployed thaa wu tne of ac,st
of the non-agricultural classes. About 72 percent of the relief
heads who were usuallJ occupied at fara labor had lost that
eaployaent.
.As ■aa1 as ,n percent were totallJ unemployed iD
October 1933, while of the reaaining 31 percent, about two
thirds had becoae semi- and unskilled industrial laborers and
Slightly aore
one third fara operators, chieflJ tenants.
than balf of the non-relief fara laborers had left their usual
eaplo111ent, aad nine percent were unemployed. A surprisinelf
large proportion of these non-relief former farm laborers alaost a third - had becoae farm operators (about equallJ
divided between fara owners aod tenants other than croppers),
whereas less thaa one tenth had gone in to coaoll labor off
the fara.
For couenience, th e "white collar" classes - professional
aad clerical wrkers aad llon-a,ricultural proprietors - haYe
been grouped together. The relatively few represelltatives of
these classes Oil the relief rolls lrad higher rates of loss of
usual occupation 1 19 ill 101 and of Ullemployment lmore than 1
in 21 than aay other occupational group.
One fifth of those
displaced becaae farm operators, usually tenants, while llJ
percent accepted employment as semi- and unskilled non-aericultural laborers.
Relatively few - about one in five - of the
non-relief "white collar" workers were no longer employed at
their usual occupations. OnlJ seven percent were uaeaplo7ed,
and of those displaced who were reemployed, alaost tw out of
three had becoae far11 operators, largelJ owners.
Of all occupational classes Oil relief with the exceptioa of
0
l
•1
,. ,
1111
•n1 u collar• won,r c11.11111n1 to 1aot111r Hctloa or tllat cl ua ( ,.
clerlcal to prorualonll won) wu not coaald1r1d to llan c11aaa1d
1111111 occupauoa.
tro ■
Digitized by
Google
68
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
"white collar• workers, skilled workers showed the heaTiest
loss of usual occupation ana the greatest amount of aaemployaent. A little less than one fourth continued as skilled laborers
Those tindiai
while ■ore than one half were unemployed.
e11plo1111ent in other occupations went about equall1 into agriSkilled 1«>rkers made
cultuce and unskilled industrial labor.
a relatively poor sbowiRg in the non-relief group also, where
nearly one half were displaced from their usual occupatioa,
although only 13 percent remained unemployed.
Serli- and unskilled industrial laborers, though retai■ iq
their usual occupation to a greater extent than skilled laborers, had nearly as ■uch unemployment. In the relief iroup, QO
percent were still employed in their usual capacit7, ia tile
non-relief iroup, 66 percent. Forty-nine percent of those oa
relief were unemployed, compared with 12 percent of those aot
oa reliet. Host of the workers iD both groups who obtained aew
eaplofllent went into agriculture as tenants, farm laborers, or,
occasionally, owner-operators. In the aoa-relief group, a few
of the former laborers had apparently ■ anaged to advance their
status by entering skilled and "white collar" occupations.
These !or the most part were probably young 11en who bad beea
working at common labor while preparing or wai tini tor soaething better.
In addition to including a number of very JOU.Ilg beads of
households, the class with no usual occupa.tioD contained a
nll!lber of heads who were aged or incapacitated, or, principally in the non-relief groups, retired. It is therefore not surprising that aore tbaa laalf of those with no usual occupat10D
on relief and two fifths of those not on relief were totally
unemployed in October 1933. Most of the remainder who were
l«>rking probably bad only recently become old enough to enter
aa occupation, and bad not been employed sufficiently long to
be regarded as having a usual occupation under the definition
used in this study. 1 So11e older heads also, who could not
meet the definition of being usually employed, had irregular
wort in October, or had had regular work for.onl.r a short time.
Many of these were no doubt forced to find some work because
A aajori ty of the
ot loss of inc011e due to the depression.
relief a.ad non-relief heads with no usual occupation who were
eaployed in October had entered aericul ture, usually as tenants.
Froa area to area the
c1ian,es tn Occupat ton, bl/ Areas.
rates of displaceaent !r011 the usual occupation, and the degrees of difference between relief and non-relief beads in
lni,
tbl lUt occupaUoa. at .aalOII CII•
~eual • OCCIIP&tloa WU dltlDld u
laud wu •Plo1ect blfor, October 1, 1111!9, tc;ron, 1 ... t11111 tllrH 1•ar1
Wlt1:11D tlll Plrlod NOY-lier 1, 11128, to Octoll•r 81, 1988.
Digitized by
Google
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIBS, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
69
this respect, showed considerable variation. In .tbe Southwest
Cottoa·, Tobacco, and New Mexico regions, tbe displacement rates
tor relief and non-relief beads differed less than in the other
areas. This was accounted for in the first two regions by relatively high occupational stability among tbe relief heads,
and iD New Mexico by relatively low stability in tbe nonrelief groups also.
The widest differences occurred in tbe
Massachusetts, Dairy, and California regions, where relief
heads bad lost their usval employment to a much greater extent
than non-relief beads ITables 54A,5qBI.
There was also little unifonaity by areas in the proportion
of male beads on relief who were unemployed in October 1933,
the range being from about 8 percent in tbe Cut-Over area. to
6q percent in Massachusetts. Areas where the rate of .unemploy■ent was much below the average included, besides the Cut-Over
area, the Southwest Cotton, the Wheat area, and the Tobacco
area. On the other hand, tbe rate was markedly above average
only in New Mexico, Massachusetts, and the Dairy area. On tbe
whole, there was soae tendency for rates of unemployment to be
higher in the aost industrialized regions ITable 551,
The situation of tar■ owners on relief was apparently 'WOrse
in the higal7 developed Corn-and-Hog area than elsewhere.
Whereas in other areas from l!) to 3!5 percent of HCh owners
were dispossessed or had left their farms in October, in the
Cora-aad-Bog regiua tbe percentage was 62.
Also aaong bra
owners not oa relief, 18 percent had lost their owner statas
in thb area, coapared with less thu 10 percent in others.
About a third of the owner-operators by usual occupation on
relief in the Corn-ud-Rog counties were unemployed.
Retention of the usual occupation by tenants other thu
share-croppers on relief was also particularly low in the
Corn-and-Bog area, where only about one fifth, and in the Dairy
and California areas, where about 011e half continued as tenants.
la the aoa-relie! group froa eiaht to nine tenths of tbe tenants retained their status except in the Corn-ud-Hog, CutOYer, aad Mountain regions, where the proportion was seven
teaths. Uneaployment •ong relief tenants was between 10 ud
20 percent in aost regions; but rose to one fourth or ■ore in
the Cora-and-Hog, Dairy, and California regions. Tenants not on
relief reported little unemployaent, the maximum in any area
being four or five percent.
Of the share-croppers rece1Ting relief, about two fifths in
tlae Old &>\1th Cotto~ area, t1110 thirds in tbe Tobacco area,
and seveneighthsin the Southwest Cotton area remained in this
occupation in October 1933.
Corresponding .figures for croppers not receiTing relief Taried from eight to nine tenths.
More than half 1!53 percent) of all croppers on relief in the
Old South Cotton area were without employment; but therwise
Digitized by
oogle
70
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
the rates of unemploflllent aaong croppers were not high.
Only in the Corn-and-Hog, Tobacco, and New Mexico areas
were more than two fifths of the fani laborers on relief still
employed at their usual occupation.
In the first two areas
and in Massachusetts, fran six to seven tenths of the nonrelief farm laborers also retained their employment. Unemployment existed among three fourths of all farm laborers on relief
in the Massachusetts region, however, and among ■ore than half
of such laborers in the Dairy and Old South Cotton regions.
Elsewhere the range of unemployment was from practicall7 none
to ~ percent. Among the non-relief farm laborers about 10
percent were unemployed in most areas, and none in a. few areas.
It is not known to what extent seasonal factors entered into
these changes, but in most regions they were probably of ainor
importance.
Less than one fourth of all skilled laborers on relief retained their usual occupation in October 1933, In the CalHorni a area the proportion fell to about one twentieth, and in the
fuuntain, Massachusetts, and Wheat counties, to one tenth. On
t be other band, in the Dairy, Tobacco, and Cash Grain areas
one third were employed at their usual skills.
As ■any as
three fourths were unemployed in the Massachusetts area, but
only one fourth in the Cut-Over region of Wisconsin. .Among
the skilled laborers not on relief the proportions eaplo7ed
ranged upward to two thirds in the Massachusetts ud Cash
Grain areas and to three fourths in the Wheat area. Usually
about one ei_g:htb to one tenth of these men had no job. but in
Massachusetts and the Cash Grain regions the rate was as high
as one fifth.
While only 11 percent of the semi- and unskilled indus~rial
laborers receiving relief in the New Mexico region and 15 1 ercent in the Old South Cotton region, were employed at their
customary occupation in October, this was true of one fifth to
one fourth in the California, Mountain, Dairy, Massachusetts,
and Southwest Cotton areas, and of three fourths in the Cornand-Hog area. There was less variation by areas among nonrelief laborers, the range being fro ■ five to seven tenths.
Total unemployment overtook from four to six tenths of all seaiand unskilled laborers on relief in most areas; . but in New
Mexico four fifths, and in the Dairy and Massachusetts areas
llk>re than two thirds of the cases had no work. About oae
eighth of the common laborers not receiving relief were unemployed everywhere except in the New Mexico and Tobacco areas,
where the rates were five eighths and one fifth, and in the Cornand-Hog region, where it was only about one twentieth.
The "white collar" classes as a rule occurred on the relief
rolls in such small numbers that ratios for this group by sepa1·ate areas are not dependable.
Digitized by
Google
OCCUPATIONS, INDOSTRIIS, AND ONIMPLOTMENT
5.
Duration of Un111Ployaent
a■ong
71
Male Heads
Prior to 1930, there is no clear evidence in this survey
Uat aale llleada oa relief tended to be unemployed a>re than
tllloae aot oa relief.
In the six-year pre-depression period
frCIII NoYeaber 1, 1923 to October 31, 1929 the ■ ale heads of
tallies recehiae relief in October 1933 were unemployed aa
•era,e of 1.4 aoatllls annually - about 12 percent of the time
- l»at oal1 two weeks ■ore than the non-relief heads, who were
DelllPloJed about 8 percent of the ti ■ e I Table ZI. A difference
ia ue ••e directioa prevailed in 9 out of 13 areas. It was
.,t, lloWYer, coaaiatat by occupation. The aount of annual
aaaplo,aeat aoq far■ operators by last usual occupatioo on
relief vu
aoatb, coapared to 0.3 ■ontb aaone those not oa
relief.
'Noa-relief llleads reportiq other than qricultural
occapatioH also bad sliebtly less unemployment than relief
beads aillilarl7 eaeqed, or 0. 7 mnth against 0.8 ■oath. Oil
tbe otber lllud, ill the case of tar■ laborers, those on relief
wre ueaployed aa average of 1.2 months, those not on relief
1.3 aoatba.
TIie aaae was true of heads with no usual occupatioa, tlle aoant of annual uneaploy■ ent for those on relief
l»eia1 9. 7 aoatbs, and for those not on relief 11.0 ■ontbs.
NoreoYer, nea tllle •all differences in favor of the non-relief
1roap ia Oe cue of tar■ ers and non-agricultural workers can
1»e explaiaed 1»7 the unequal ages of the relief and non-relief
llead• in tllese occupations, there being ■ore young beads in
tllle relief fl'OOp vlllo were not eaplo7ed during the earlier part
of tllle ab-7ear period.
o.,
UIL£
z.
l'lllCUT o, Tl .. ll'Ll MUDS 0, IIUIUL AELl(f MO .,.._11(1.l(f ICIUSf.lQ.DS llAE UIIE~O'l{O OUIIIII&
Tltl l'lAIOOS IIO'llllllEII I, l!l~~T08EII 31, 193'; IIOVEll8f.11 I, 192~'108(11 31, 1!129;
110Wlll8lll I, 192!1-ocT08EII '1, 195'
lttlCl•T 0, TIMI IIALI MIADI WI.at lhltwLOTtO
Now. 1, \9n-
l•AT UIH&. OCCUP•TI •
ta.-•
oc,.
.... ,.,
' ,OW,
oc,.
,1. 193'
lkM-Ra1.11,
lillLIIP
'
1
u
21
15
'
29
I
,&
,&
1
9
JO
.,
6
71
1
9
1,
16
Noa-A11.11r
22
,.., L•-H
10
R11,.11P
'J
2
lo UNM. Occtw•TIH
tlO~ILIIP
I
1
IOII-M.IIC¥LHIIIIL
C)c-r.
12
16
,..,o,.......
au
IIOY . l, 19&'1, 19'3
l, 192'-
,1. 19:29
7
92
In tbe depreaaioa period Noveaber 1, 1929 throueb October
31, 1933, llowner, relief beadaautfered severelr increaoed uneaplo,aeat, beina uae■plored and average o! 2.6 months annually,
or ro11eU1 22 percent o! the ti11e; whereas beads of
U et
Digitized by
~
C
72
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
families reported, on the average, no increase in unemployment.
This striking divergence betweea relief and non-relief heads
since the beginning of the depression occurred in every usual
occupation, although it was less in some occupations thu in
others.
The widest spread appeared in the case of farm operators, those on relief being unemployed an average of ll.3
months annually and those not on relief 0.5 month. In the case
of !arm laborers, the amount of unemployment was 9.6 months
for those on relief and 2.9 months for those not on relief;
while in the case of heads engaged in non-agricultural occupations, the corresponding .figures were 13.9 and 3.8 months.
These differences are only slightly decreased when the age composition is equalized between the two groups.
The greatest increase of unemployment in the depression period occurred among those usually employed at non-agricultural
work, and this was true for both relief and non-relief heads
(Table ZI.
In this occupational group the proportion of time
unemployed was over four times as great after 1929 as before
in the case of relief heads, and over one and a half times as
great in the case of non-relief heads.
Also, the amount of
time unemployed in the depression period was greater in this
class than in any other, except heads with no usual occupation.
In the pre-depression period, 1923 through 1929, high rates
of unemployment prevailed in the southern regions among the
heads who were not receiving relief in October 1933 (Table 561.
In these regions both the heads mentioned and those who later
came on relief were about equally unemployed. In the New Mexico area the heads oft~ future relief households were out of
work one fifth of the time, a greater amount than anywhere
else.
Particularly low rates of unemploflllent occurred among
relief and non-relief heads in the Massachusetts, Cut-Over,
and California regions, where all heads were unemployed only
about one twentieth of the six-year period.
Between November 1, 1929 and November 1, 1933, however, the
trend in unemployment for those found on relief rolls in October 1933 was upward, compared with the preceding period, everywhere except in the Old South Cotton area, the most violent
changes occurring in Massachusetts and California. Among the
heads who never came on relief befo_re November 1, 1933, on the
contrary, the amount of unemployment increased in only q out of
13 areas, and actually declined in six areas. Tire New Mexico
counties, which showed the highest rate of unemployment before
1929 for heads who later came on relief, also had the largest
amount of unemployment among both relief and non-relief heads
in the depression period. Massachusetts ranked next to New
Mexico in this respect.
As would be expected, regions less rural in character, or
closer to urbanized sections, tended to be most affected by
Digitized by
Google
OCCUPATIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
73
The smallest
aamplo111ent, although there were exceptions.
a.cunt of unemployment, as well as increase in unemployment,
was experienced in the Cut-0.er region of Wi~consin. Unemployment in the Wheat region, preYiously about aYerage, changed
little and hence was comparatively low in the 19:,J-1933 period.
6. Co•pariaon of Occupation• and Occupational
Changes of White and Negro Male Heads
In eYer1 occupation in which both wbi te and Negro 11ale beads
on relief were usually employed in the Old Soutb Cotton and
Tobacco areas, where Negroes were an important part of the
population, proportionately more whites than Nearoes were unThe same was true of
eaployed ia OctQber 1933 (Table !571.
laeads not on relief I except in tile class of seai- and ansk.illed
labor. MoreoYer, relatiYelJ 110re Negroes than wbi tes reaaiDed
eaployed at their asaal. occupation iD October, and tbiR applied
to eacla occupation iD the case of relief beads, and to eacb
occapation except semi- aad ustilled industrial. labor in tbe
Tbe occupations whica were the
cue of noa-relief laeads.
aost stable for the Negroes, boweTer, were also the 110st stable
for the wbites.
The 1reater occupational stabili tJof Negroes tban of whites
ia tiae of seTere econoaic. depression in the two t7Pes of famine re1ions where the bulk of Negroes was found is possibly
accounted for in part bJ tile personal. responsibili tJ co111110nl1
assaed bJ landlords in the South toward Negro croppers and
tenants on their plantations, and iD part bJ the willingness
of souuaern Negroes to accept interior emploJ111ent aDd lover
wa,es than wbites.
A.oag both relief and non-relief beads, proportional.lJ 110re
Negroes than wbi tes were usually eng qed in agricultural. pursai ts. Wbi tes were fana owners more often than Negroes, howeYer. RelatiYelJ more wbi tes than Negroes in tbe relief group
were croppers bJ usual occupation, ~ut the reYerse was true of
those in tbe DOD-relief group, so tb at a wbi te cropper was
onr three and a half times 11ore likely to appear on the relief
VerJ few Negroes ei tber on or
rolls tbaa a Negro cropper.
off relief reported •white collar• or skilled iadustrial occupationa (Table 58 I.
7.
Occupatlona, lnduatrlea, and EaploYMnt of Peraona
16 Year• of Age and Over, Other than Head• of
Houaeholda, in October 1933
.About one sev-entb of the households receiYin1 relief reported SOile aeaber or aeabers 16 rears of qe aad over, other than
The available
the bead, gaiafullJ employed in October 19'3.
occupational data for otber members are verJ si ■ilar~ to those
Digitized by
·
1iveD for heads of housebolds.
l;oog e
7q
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
PreuatLtnt Aie of Other lembers. Most of the other members
as defined above were under 25 years of age. This was especially true of those who were gainfully employed.
Workers and PotenttaL Workers. Of the male members other
than heads in the specified age classification 116 years and
overl in the relief population, half were men or boys of some
experience who were working or seeking work ( called "workers" I,
more than one fifth were seeking work but had never worked
( "potential workers"), and nearly three tenths were neither
working nor seeking work (Table AAI. In the corresponding
non-relief group there were proportionally about one third more
workers, half as many potential workers, and slightly fewer males who were neither working nor seeking work.
Occupattons and Industrtes of Other Jfembers.
In October
1933 more than half 157 percent) of the male workers other
than heads in the relief group, and three fifths of those in
the non-relief group, were or had been employed in agriculture
(Table AAI.
Of the few female workers in both groups, most
were engaged in non-agricultural pursuits.
PERClNT U: PE_Q'..)0'~~ 16 YEi\"?S ~ AGE. A.NO OVER, OTH[R THA.N HEADS, IN RURA.L RELIEF
~~ \'QN-RELtE~ 1-!0LBEHOLDS, 'lfHO P.'ERE GAl~FUL 00 POTENTIA.L
H..~Lt U.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _jlj<PK~~~
Sutus
..,,.o
AS. ilW0~11.lR~
1933
Ocroef.R
E... PL.J'fl,lf""T
Rt.LI f f
Tou.L
ft'QRklhl~
[,,ll•LQ1f.O
'.
U1o11:.1,0•1..uTlV,
A_,N ILUL TUM[
"r
Pkt.VIOUSLT
A1.,,R I CUL T•Jl'll
E""PLOTf.0
'.
•u'
Pk~YIOUSL1'
I•
NE.1 r,n.i.
UP1U•f'LU1'l0,
"Ok
PoTEflTIAL.
l:IUI
PRl:YIOUSL1'
""'
PR[YIOUSLT
AU"11.__UL TU Mt
UNlMPLOlEO,
.\(,RI t,,;UL TUR[
~EYLM
E1,0'LOHO
#oRKl:MS
"
"
Noir.-Rt.L I
MA.lf.
ff
Rn1lf
Ft.MALE
NON-RELIEF
RHlf.f
NO~EL I lF
100,0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
23. 3
7 -~
30.~
13. 9
09.~
19. 7
~3.9
35, 9
12 ,6
17.0
5. I
I.I
8.3
10.~
2.9
17. u
10.~
2 l, 7
2e.e
26.•
1.,
3J
lfoR11.t;QS
'NORIIEMS
1?332-~v_·J[_x_ _ _~ - - - - - -
.e
11.B
'i.11
3. 7
12 .3
I,,·"
~- 7
~3. e
2 ,3
0. 7
3 .o
".9
~7 .2
~-9
'16.2
?. l
2 .6
,.2
J.6
0.3
9.~
7. 7
3 .2
2.1
9, 7
e.~
7R.9
•. l
78,9
2.1
o.•
~.o
8.9
69.~
NON-
AuM I C.:UL Tu>il
Poru,T IA,L
o:r9er~
A.HO FE,..AlE
1"'1,0
f
I"' NUN-A.t.M H.UI.,. Tu Ht
UNlMl"LOH O,
~ALf.
MON-
23. 7
2.1
22.R
70,8
More than 90 percent of the males other than heads on relief
who were employed in agriculture in October were working
as farm laborers, largely on the home farm, and more than 70
percent of those occupied in non-agricultural occupations were
semi- and unskilled laborers (Table BBi. In the non-relief
group the proportion of common laborers was about the same in
the case of agriculture, but somewhat less (58 percent) in nonagriculture.
Domestic and personal service ranked second to agriculture
in the proportion of members of both sexes employed in relief
Digitized by
Google
1,
OCCUPATIONS, INDOSTRIRS, AND UNEMPLOYMENT
and non-relief groups alike !Table 591. Trade was much more
pr011inently represented among non-relief than relief members.
The female non-relief group, which was the only one in which
professional employment was important, apparently included a
relatiTely large number of rural school teachers.
The percentages of 11ernbers engaged in the various industries
ud occupations differed from area to area.
Agriculture employed from two percent of the relief and four percent of the
non-relief members in Massachusetts to more than 20 percent of
each in the Tobacco area and 20 percent of the relief and 46
percent of the non-relief members in the Old South Cot ton area.
Manufacturing and mechanical industries were unimportant except in the Massachusetts, Oregon, and California areas.
TAil£ BIi.
CX:ToeEA 19,5 OCCl.f'ATIONS Of ME"8lRS 16 YEARS Of A<I ANO OYER , OTHER THAN HEAOS,
Of R\J! AL RELIEF AHO HOIHIELIEF HOl.6EHOI.OS, IIY SEX
Ocro1u 195, 0cou,u10t1 .uo
E••Lo, ... , ;;u.H,a
To,"'-
!I
E•LOUD OctOIIO
19'3
......
No t1-Rt1. ,u
A1L10
m .o
100. 0
100 .0
100 .:J
,0 . 2
"·'
7. 7
1u.,
2.6
,.o
1.,
IS.•
19.7
AcllC"'L 1'111
Fa111i1 0.11uo•
fa-. L•ao•11
Notiill Fahl
11.,
OTNII FAhl
lo.-Ael I CUL TUii
P ■OPIUIOIAL
7 .1
10.,
0.l
o.•
P ■OP ■ IU,Hf
Q.111tA1.
l. 7
,.,
SI I LLII
0.8
U.hlLLIO
U.IWLOt'ID
s. .. , •• .,••
1o, saau ., 11o1c
•
J/
o.o,
69.8
•1.0
28.8
LIii TNAI
,uc1u.
IILII' ..... 6,00, NOtt-llLII' ....... Ml•N ■ I;
2.u19
•---If:
f&ad,LI
RtL IIP
6,un
3,. 9
2.2
H.7
Not1~tLl1'
2 .6
0.1
U.9
1.9
9.0
o. 7
•.6
o.,
17.U
0.6
1.2
, .1
0 .2
0.1
9.,
2.,
211. 7
,.o
o.,
2.~
1) . 0
0.1
• .2
•6 . 7
'» .,
o.,
.
2.,
• .2
a, .,
20 . ,
1' .•
~.6
26.•
78.9
78.9
■ILIIP A.RD
i--,97•
•o--•u11P
ltlM■ l•I•
lxtent of UneapLov11ent aaonf Other Jle,tbers. Approximately
70 percent of all males 16 years of age and over other than
beads of households in the relief group were unemployed in
October 1933, compared with 47 percent in the non-relief group
(Table BBi. RelatiTelJ ■ore of the relief than of the nonrelief anemployed ■eabera, however, were seeking work.
That the earniDr• of females helped to keep a small percentage of families oft relief is suggested by the fact that nearly
1'5 percent of the feaales 16 years of age and over in the
non-relief population were gainfully employed, whereas this
was true of less tban 8 percent in the relief population.
Of the ■eabera of both sexes on relief usually engaged in
a,riculture wbo were working or seeking work in October, nearly
Digitized by
Google
76
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
a third were without employment, whereas almost half of such
members engaged in non-agricultural pursuits were unemployed
Among similarly defined
and looking for a job I Table 60).
members of households not on relief, less than one tenth of
the agricultural and about one fourth of the non-agricultural
groups were unemployed and seeking work. The minimum amount
of unemployment in both relief and non-relief groups occurred
in the case of members who were farm operators, and the maximum in the ::ase of skilled and semi- and unskilled industrial
laborers.
Agriculture showed a smaller percentage of members wno were
unemployed and seeking work in October than any other industry,
whether the relief or non-relief group is considered; ~bereas
manufacturing and mechanical industries showed the highest percentages, except that in the non-relief group they were slightly exceeded by transportation and communication.
More than four fifths of themalc members in both the relief
and non-relief groups who were neither working nor seeking work
in October 1933 had never been employed (Table AAI.
A large
proportion of these were youths who bad not yet entered gainful
emolovment.
Nearly four fifths 01 all females other than beads in tht.
specified age classes were neither working nor seeking work.
Of these, between eight and nine tenths had never been gainfully employed, a large proportion being housewives. There
was little difference between the relief and non-relief groups
iu this respect.
More than half of both the relief and non-relief members
who were unemployed and seeking work were without occupational
experience lTable 611. Moreover, only 5 percent of the relief
ana 10 percent of the non-relief members had experience in
occupations other than manual labor.
Digitized by
Google
APPENDIX A
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
79
'ERCEITAGE D15TRIIUTIOI OF RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE OF RELIEF
RECEIVED IN OCTOBER 195,, BY AREA
TABLE 1.
r,,,,
.....
...,.
Tor,1.
0 I II Cl
o,
Ru, 11,
•••
•o• •
01 ■ 1ct
•o••
Co•• 1 • • •
100
•7
•I
12
so,, ■
COTTO ■
So1T ■ w11T
COTTO ■
100
100
100
100
2•
21
07
61
II
10
29
1B
•6
6
ALL
Ou
To11cco
D.111,
100
100
100
100
100
MIAIIACNIIITTI
Cut-OYII
Cou,- A11e-Hoe
.....
c, ••
,
31 •••
(ALlllOIIIIA
LIii TNAII
0.,
•7
9
29
7B
61
13
10
•9
Bl
B2
71
•8
1B
10
20
.....,,
....
AACII
•
A1111 Co11111110
o•• so.,"
COTT011
S011, •••It
COTTO ■
10
12
7
10
20
To11.cco
o.,.'
...,.,c ... ,.,,.
1,
C111-0w11
Coe ►, ■ o- Ho1
GIAIN
.'
8
'
17
..
LIii TNAII 10 Cl.Ill•
AWIIAIII
AYIIAII POI MIi i Cl.Ill.
■ OT
•
1,
Nt G•O
s
8
7
8
7
11
21
B
1,
9
'e
CAL.,Ol ■ IA
AlLIIP
1•
28
10
..... ,. ,co
ALL
WN I Tl
16
9
I'
0111·0•
o,
YAL Ul
28
10
,
Mo ■■ TAII
U
,o
•IICINT.
ALL
c,,.
....
B
.,9,
AVERAGE YALU£ OF ALL RELIEF AEC£1Y£0 BY AURAL RELIEF HOUSlHOLDS IN
OCTOBER 19,,, BY RACE ANO AREA
,
ALL
28
I
6•
100
100
100
100
MoulllTAI ■
••• W111co
01110 ■
TAILE 2.
•5
B•
u
1,
10
6
8
19
..
.
.,u
.
8
7
20
COM•UTIO.
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
80
TABLE 3.
CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF iALUE OF ALL RELIEF RECEIVED BY
RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS IN OCTOBER 1933 BY SEl ANO OCTDB,R 1Y33
OCCUPATION OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
Su
AND
OcTOHA 1933
Occu,uro ■
o,
o,
Hr AO
Hou Sl"OL D
MAL! HlADS
AYtllAGl VALUl
AG•1 CUL ,u1u
NON-AG A I CUL TUii
o•
At.L Ru,u
r ....
ALL
Huos
TOTAi..
~
.. . '
.
.. ...
. . •o
.. ..
. . "'
Lt IS
18
08
68
79
20
23
58
79
89
73
87
91
9q
96
9q
96
98
99
97
98
99
100
99
99
99
100
fNAh ;'.
JC
1,
2C
2'
50
35
,a
"
100
!/
0TH!A
CAo,,t:A
lftUNT
A ■ ALTZl
IU
HBLE ••
r,.,.
Luo•lR TouLAI S. ILLlD
· ~I
FtWAt.l
81
17
59
79
91
22
5•
80
89
26
5•
70
79
67
90
93
96
98
97
97
•8
100
9s
96
98
99
93
97
98
99
83
92
9•
95
67
87
90
90
98
99
99
100
100
100
100
100
99
99
99
100
99
99
100
100
98
98
99
100
28
56
72
80
••51
12
36
14
56
60
39
71
70
81
92
95
95
82
86
91
92
99
99
99
98
98
99
95
91
97
99
99
100
100
100
100
AND CLlllC:.AL •011:•tAS.
85
8<;
94
96
98
IN THI
fOO SMALL tlUWllRS
~ll'ARATlLT.
U"l OCTOIUI
1g,, Occur AT ION
lvlRAGI YA.LUI OP 41.L RILIII'
HUD OF Ho uSUtOLD
Au
ALL HlAOI
MALI HEADS
1'GRICUL TUAI
"""'
NIUO
$ I•
$ l•
SA
B
1•
9
11
11
8
RA.Cl&
7
12
9
13
CROf>l"U
Q
8
0THllil
TUIANT
11
8
F.uw LAIORf.R
11
11
11
B
13
PrtOPR I£ T AAT
I?
12
CLEAi CAL
1•
17
FA•• OWN(A
.
Notrt-lGRICULTUAl
Pli0Ff.5SIONAL
SI( ILL.lO
SEMI-
ftMALl
10 CASES.
Lf.55 TNU
UBLE 5.
AYfAAi.E
7
9
.. .
lU
1,
HEADS
..
.
I?
17
AJIO UNSICILLED
UNEWf>LOTfO
17
13
17
9
12
16
7
IIOT COMf'UHI'.
VALUE Of All RELIEF REC£ IVEO BY RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS DURING OCTOBER 19''•
BY 51 lE OF HOUSE HOLD
VALUl"OF
SIU OF HOURNOLD
f'flit
RUllf
VA&.Ul OF
Housl "01..a
RHIEF
HR tilfWHA
HllUStNOLO5
l PERSON
2-~ PERSONS
"-5 PERSONS
f-7 PtW50H5
8
~9
2
~
H1ao1
AVERAGE V4LUE OF ALL RELIEF RECEIVED BY RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS IN OCTOBE~ 193',
BY RACE, SEX ANO OCTOBER 1933 OCCuPATION OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
OF
ALL
s,.. ,-
UllSlllLLlD UNlMrL01'1D
lb
26
72
88
96
52
lfilCLl.li.lfS ll'lolvf-l~~IOI\IAL 1 P'AOl'llllTAA,.
fOTAL
~ANl'Ll
Su
Ow,iu
r----
''
3
PlRSOIIS
2
PUS.OHS UD OYER
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
19,,
TAIU 6,
'llCENTAQE OISTIIIUTION OF OCTOIEI
AURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLOS,
IY SlX ANO LAST USUAL OCCUPATION OF HEAO ANO NUW8EA OF YEARS
II IMICM ANY AELl(F IAS IECEIVEO 8ETIEEN 1950 ANO 195,,
INCLUSIVE
'••c••'•••
....... o,
I ■
S11 ••• La1T
DrlJIIIIITIO ■
OP NIAi
••
Ae ■ ICVLT•II
, .... o....
CIOPPI•
o, ••• ,, ••• ,
Fa ■■ LAIOIII
•o ■ -A• ■ tCWLTltll
,.0,11110111.
,.0,.,1,, •• ,
C1.IIIC&L
S ■ ILLII
Suu- ••• U ■ l ■ ILLII
•o LIIT u, •• L Occu,.,, ••
F■ IIILI " • • · ·
...
v, •••
Y1a11
28
28
28
21
26
21
9
9
8
'"
6,
60
61
41
76
,.
,.
-
6
1
,•
9
1
12
"
62
1
12
7
27
,1
H
II
SI
2J
,s
2
7
2
7
1
11
9
2Q
•9
'
•
JI
"
6
8
"
21
28
4'.\. AHAi Coi,ae1•11
Cono•
Cot IOtt
loeacco
Dain
lifUUCNUllffl
c.u,...ovu
....,
Col ► A• ► HOCi
CA.,. 611ua
llolf ■ UI I
••• llllli• 1co
01Sflt1Uft01 O•
N11111111
19B t• ... , , .
A11.11P
...
a, Y1a ■ 1 11, ■ 11 ■
1
22
I
2
YIAI
Y1 ,11 I
100
"8
,,
10?
100
100
100
78
78
II
IS
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
63
'6
'6
,0
'6
,2
'8
II()
,1
76
.,
",,
"
",,
<16
"
"6
41
21
"
lBO
AlCll'IID
o, •• Cou•T••
VI LL 1.•I
lor•1.
CM.tPCNIIU
•
'
Y1a11
'EACENTAGE OISTAl8UTION Of AURAL IELIEf MOUSEHOLOS IY AREA, RESIDENCE,
ANO NUMBER Of YEARS IN IMICM RELIEF IAS AECEIVEO FROM 1950 TO 19,,,
INCLUSIVE
....
0.1100
lt1c11v10
HOUIIIIIOL.11
",1
100
100
100
PIICINTAII
So", ..... ,
NOUIINOLDI 11'
2
1
Y1a•
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
..... "····
Sou,,.
...
1950 ... 19B
RILII'
No1111-
ALL NIAii
~D
A■,
a.L
Tot t1,.
U8LE 7,
01
ltT•II ■
Yt•••
••re ■
k•&L Occ11Pat1••
......
81
•
'
'
Tot Al.
't'1 •••
1,
9
100
'9
27
1
7
Q
1
10
6
'2
11
11
1
'
100
100
100
100
2
1
1,
16
14
1,
17
2
1
8
6
,oc
'
'
100
100
100
YIAII
2
26
•
'
1
12
8
-
'
2
100
100
100
100
100
l
2
't'1a1
't'a•• I
,.
86
" "
2,
'6
"6
51
"
"
69
'2
,2
•1
'4
?9
'6
'
'ft •• ,
't't •• ,
•9
1'
13
19
2
10
12
2
7
'
.
18
.
I
2
78
22
6,
77
,..
-2
-1
16
'
2
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
82
AVERAGE NUWdER OF MONTHS IN •HICH OCTOdER 1953 RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
HAD ij(CEIYED ANY RELIEF dET•EEN JANUARY I. 1950 AND
UECEMSEW H. 11B, BY AREA, ANO 8Y RACE AND NATIVITY
TAdLE 8.
-.. ··- · .
I
'lac1 uo Nuu-1n
Au. Racts
.
.hu
Au.
,htAS
Cowa1•10
OLD ::,outM Corro11
SouTtt1tl.lT
Cono•
Toucco
••rt
.... "
Ne~o
11
11
12
8
9
10
8
'
'
"
.
10
.,
8
oa,n
9
I•
'IIASSACMUSITTI
18
Cur-Ovu
WMtAT
16
7
6
iitoUNTAIII
CASH GIA I.
18
10
7
22
10
9
12
11
11
Nt• Mu1co
9
8
8
8
10
~
LIii TNAN
10
cu11.
AWIIAGI ■ OT
20
.
...
u
.
8
12
17
c011,uuo.
Rael
...
..
AVERAGE NUMBER OF WONTHS IN ••1CH OCTOBER 1933 RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
RECE-IVEO RELIEF BETWEEN JANUARY I, 1930 ANO OECEWBER 31, 1933,
BY SIZE OF HOUSEHOLD, RACE AND NATIVITY
TA8LE 9.
S1 ZI
•
8
7
18
6
Oltt50tl
CA~IPOlt ■ IA
..
)
9
Co•"""""~HoG
Fou I 51f-lO ■ •
•ht1w1
o,
HOt.1IIN..,LO
ALL
RACII
NaftYITT
.... ,.
f I VI
Fo•••••-•o••
Ntsao
II
12
8
10
1,
11
HOUIINOLOI
,,.,o.
&110
••• fl
NA
13
20
2-3
P11tlONI
10
10
10
8
•-,
fl ■ ION I
II
ll
II
7
6-7
P111011s
IQ
10
1,
7
8-9
Pa ■ so ■ s
12
12
13
8
12
13
9
10
l
10
P111,•I
A■D
O"lll
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TABLE 10.
83
PERCENT OF ALL RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS •1TH MEMSERS
EWPLJYEO 1H
THE
Cl'IIIL
lfORKS AOMIHISTRAflOlril,
A~J
E"IQOLLEO
IN
CIVILIAN CONSER>ATIJN CO,PS, OURING 1933, BY AREA
Puc, .. , o, Houst .. OLDS •• TN WlWll• [Wll'LOYIO
....
CIVIL tlo ■ ICS
Cono■
liflL ll'P
No11-RtL 11,
"8
1
5ouT"91ST ColTOII
•I
69
To ■ ACCO
22
OuH
25
MAISACJtUHTTI
118
DL.o 5ouTN
Cut-0.u
.
I
2
I
5
5
.
18
I
I
,1
10
7
I
I
I
1
I
I
••• 1i1111co
16
0.HOtl
"6
CAL1,0■ 111.1
"
,,
'
•5
10
a,
0,.,
.
2
I
2
.
,0
flll
LISI TNO
I
'
eo. ...a ■ a~o•
A/
No•-Qu 11,
lhLIIP
5
CAIN GaAI ■
11Aou-1AIII
C.0.P'I
5
10
6
JI
••n
,.
C1 VIL, ....
Co ■ SIOATIOII
AoMlfllSUUIOlf
ALL MIAS COlll11110
THE.
•9
I
5
I
•
7
l9llCl!!lfT,
CUT~VU HLIIP Ullfll'LI UU• IIPO ■ I C, ■ .A, NAD IICUN OPUUIOII.
TABLE 11.
PERCENT OF AURAL RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF FARM OPERATOR HOUSEHOLDS
ASSISTED av THE AGRICULTURAL AOJUST~ENT ANO FARM CREDIT
ADMINISTRATIONS DURING 1955, BY AREA
Pr ■ ct ■ T
......
... ......
O,o Sou,11
••
All I CUL TIIIU,
....
F&IW 0PIIATOI
Hou ■ IIIOLDI
, ., , . ,.,
F••• C11011
··••1111,11,1011
RI LI If
ASIIITIO IT
Ao1111111,1a,10 ■
No11-RtLII'
Rt l
I
If
NON-RtLIIP
Co111111111
16
19
9
6
COTTON
51
•I
62
,a
9
5
I•
I
9
2
9
1'
S01tTN•l1T COTTO•
TotACCO
Dil llT
•-
W.111&CNIIIIITTI
-
-
Cut-Ov11
Co1t1t-A•o-Ho1
...... ,
c........ ,.
Mo••t.1.111
.....,.,co
LIii TN&N 0.9
7
q
l
1'
l
.9
9
19
19
21
18
I
l
I
2
1•
a
-
Ottaeo ■
C&&.,.IPOIIII
-5
-
-
-I
-
-
'
Ii
'
I
PIICl ■ T.
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
Sq
PLACE OF RESIDENCE OF RURAL RfllEF AND NO■ -RELIEF HOUSENOt.11$, 1Y AIEA,
OCTOBER 193,
TAIL£ 12.
,,1c1 at
••••
IIL IIP llo•IINOLII
ToT Af..
v, ......... o, •• c•••,.,
ALL MU.I CoMa1•1
100
39
Ou s ...,.
100
100
100
100
16
Cono ■
Soltllftlt Cono ■
fDIACCD
Ou1,
W..aAC•11n•
eu,-0.11
c......_._
CAM GIAI ■
••n
-.......
••• •••co
27
29
,.
100
100
100
100
100
,1
16
67
100
17
61
ea.........
I
tell
IJ
,a
66
1m
20
69
100
IIO
100
UIO
100
•
"•
••"
,,""
,,••
IO
11
.,•
"'u
",1
100
•
1411
,1
100
c......
"'
•
-
61
•"
100
lOD
100
•
""
n
~ ...
,6
100
71
,1
100
100
Oluo■
..,,
."
61 •
. -···-··
,., .... -·····
v, ........
Q
OF RURAL RELIEF A ■ D NOtl-lllLIEF
MALf HEADS. 8ETIEEN NOVEMBER 1, 1925 ANO
OCTOtER 31, 1953, BY AREA
l ■ TER-COU ■ TY r.ttA ■ llS 0, RlSIDl ■ CE
HOUSEHOLDS, WITH
.....
P11c111, o,
....... ,
WNI A.T
Mou•ta111
No ■ -RILIIP
,1
4. 9
6.5
2,
1'
,o
,. 5
,.a
,.
,.o
6.2
6.5
2,
20
2,
6.0
4.Q
,.,
•o
29
20
•o
19
••,.
,2
011.ao11
21
61
CAL 110 ■ 11 I A
71
N1• i,IXICO
AIL I IP
,.1
COTTO ■
CAIN filAIII
•o ■ -AIL 11,
192'-19'3
6.q
Sou1 .. w111
Cut-0•1•
Cola- ,110-Ho•
, •• , c., ••••
lt11101•c1,
q.6
,o
w,111c11v11,,1
HOIIIIINOLII
YtA.11
.. OYI ,01
18
21
11
11
COTTO ■
to1,cco
o,
,.1
OLI SouTN
o,,.,
.
NUIIIII
,AYIIAII
I IITIJI-CdutllfY
21
,6
All A.I
HOYIIMOLDI
192'-19H
Co,,.11111
ALL
ALL,
fNAT CNA ■ IIO RIIIDl ■ CI
,o,6
,. 7
,. ' .
..
,,.a
,.,.q'
u.6
,.,
,. 1
4.6
6.,
,.1
,.6.
6.0
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TABLE l•.
AVERAGE
ANNUAL INTER-COUNTY MOVES
NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS •1 TH ~Al£
'EA ONE HUNDRED RURAL 1£LIEF ANO
HEADS, 192,-1929 ANO l930-19H,
or
8Y USUAL OCCUPATION
Av•••H NVtMU
HEAD
INTl•~u•n Wov1s
O■ l Hu•Dtll HO\ISINOLDI
192rl929
Sitt.. •• ,
Tout..
-.
•
, .... ,.&1
9
SCILUD
SUII-S ■ ILLIO A ■ D U.••1L1,.I0
'
No USUAL Occv,aT ' "
'
'
I
•
8
10
6
9
6
,
II
6
6
8
'
12
1
ID
9
9
•
6
7
9
No•-AtL I a,
6
2
10
A Ct..u1c•1.
1
'
'
6
litolt-Ae• I CUI,. TV• ■
AIL 11,
•
AIIICILTVH
F.1111 Luoa1•
l9,0-19H
NON-AIL IR'
8
P•o,1u10■'"-• P■ o•a11ua,,
0,
•u
MADI A ■■ IIAU. T
UMAL OccuPAT 10■
85
1
10
'
'
PERCENTAGE OISTA18UTION or RURAL REL IH HOUSEHOLDS, BY NATIVITY" ANO
RACE or HEAD ANO 8Y AREA, OCT08ER 1933
P1 ■ Cl ■ TAil
All A
... ....
WN 111
Co•11 ■ 10
100
8•
COTTO ■
100
100
100
100
87
100
100
100
100
100
6,
82
96
90
90
To1acco
o.,.,
......c., •• ,,.
Cn-0.u
....,
.....,.,.
Co11-a ■ 1-t101
c ••••••••
••• M111co
01110 ■
C.11.1,01 ■ 1.1
NATIYI
••c11
•••••
0Lt SOITN
, , eo,101
AH
A,,
100
100
100
100
'1
9~
1,
a,
•
82
7'2
..
DIITIIIUT 10 ■
Fou ,, ■ -101•
,,,
N1, ■ o
A,c 11
1
8
-.
10
o, .. ,.
•9
1
27
-,.
16
2
9
I'll
10
-
17 .
20
Digitized by
2
1
2
.
..
1
-6
I
-.
..
.
.
2
--
'
9b
I
2
Google
-
86
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
c o
gg
,~
g ;
►
•
0
&
.
-
.....
..
•
0.
3
•
n
•
I
.--. ~ ~ ~ :s"- ~ "!0:, 0:r-. ~~
...., :S- • 11" N
,r, .,...
,
0
... -
~
~~
-
O
~ ,-
:SO
,-.
I
~ ~ -
,r,a,.N
::I
~iii 0 o ·
...
.......
u
:so•
I
I
I
I
I
I
...
L0
:;
O
C
IC _,-.. °"::,r- r,,,a,,-.q,. N
§ § ii
0
;;:
':,i ...:OOci ~i ci
0
z
~ ,.. ..... C:
N
Cl:'
~ :1_ ~
.
0
C"-0 -
0
t,,, "-' .....
on..,
- - ""' ': I
0
T
,r. N
ii~£ N ...: o
I
a; '~
...
0
.....
•
...
I
'"'
•
•u .....;;, .....-
. . . .
:;..--o o
,r,. >£:ON C..ltl,..._
. .
,.. ::,
•
0
.I
~
N
,.._ ,-
- ~ ,o •
.
◄
~ ~
0
,
°;'~,...- ~~"":'Cl?~C-: ~ .
-
.........
""""'r-..r....... ,... "'
t; "~
...
.
0
": C: ":' ":'-:~~'"".~ 0-:~ ~ ~
...
C°'~ ~:;.. -o'::1-..-. ......
"";;, ....-. "'0..,
.....
....
._
0 0 - 0 -c
N
I
N O
0
%
""::::1. ---:"!~ ::l'. ~~'; :::I. ~ --: ~
I
:,;:;;~~c-.-r-c... ,-.. r-"'::r o
.. . . .......
. .. ...... .. . . .. ......... ........
...........
- - - - --- - ..,--- - .- ...
.
-
'r
:.
!
j
1
.11
0
0
T
1
I
I
:
l
~
j
.
2
j
..
.
u
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TABLE 17.
Au
,
u••••
2,-,.
AVERAGE SIZE Of RURAL R(Ll[f ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLOS, BY AC,£ OF
HEAD, OCTOBER l9S,
A51
...2,
OP
MIAO
...
No ■ -AlLll'
RI LI IP
3'-••
.,_,.
55-6•
63
87
•.8
• .o
' .6
• -9
6. I
.. ,
3. I
, .a
•.a
,.,
•. o
TA8l.E 18,
3,6
2, 7
2,9
OYt•
AVERAGE SIZE Of RURAL RELIEF ANO NOIHIELIEF HOUSEHOI.OS 8Y NATIVITY ,INO RACE OF HEAD,
FOIi ALL AREAS, AND 'OIi TH( 01.0 SOUTH COTTON ANO TOBACCO AREAS, OCI08ER 1935
ALL
.,, ... ''
•..,.........
..,.,.,.
.....
•••••
AWIIAII S111
••• Aact
••
F'o••••••••••
Ouu l&eu
..
Ho1,111•0LO
AILIIP
No1-A1L IIP
• .8
, .o
,.a
,. 2
3.9
,.2
,.o
,.,
•. l
•••
0LI SOYTN COTTO•
,,,,,,
AwtlAII
••• l1.c1
••
s,,.
.,
HOU II NOLD
Nt ao
........,.,,
A11.11,
.....,.,,,.
No ■ -AIL
, .2
&LL hcu
, .1
,. 1
....
,
••
HUI
FOllll ■ •IOI ■
Ouu
tlP
•••
,. 1
lac ■ a
.
,,,,,,,
TOIACCO
All A ACI
••
NIU
.,......
All 911,
S111
••
HOM II NOLD
No ■ - RlLIIP
.......,,,.
,.6
•.3
,.e
,.a
11110
,.a
..... ,
o, ... . l&CH
6.,
&LL .l&HI
• •2
•.2
. Fea111•-.10• ■
6. 7
Digitized by
Google
88
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF BOUSBBOLDS
TABLE 19.
AVERAGE SIZE OF RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS IY AREA,
OCTOBER 19H
AVIRA81 S111
o,
HOUIINOLD
AILIIP
•••
••••• Co••••••
ALL
OLD S011TN
.. ,
11.0
.. ,
,.2
COTTON
,.9
11.7
SOIITNWIIT COTTON
TOIACCO
,.6
,.1
,.1
DAIIT
IIAIIACNIIITTI
Cn--Owu
11.2
•-2
,.,
"·"
,.,
11.8
11.•
o.8
....,
Co ■► &NO-HOI
CAIN 61,11
11.6
11.D
..
•. 6
llo• ■ TAI ■
fl.II
,.9
.."·",
••• 1111,co
011101
CAL IPOII I A
TABLE 20.
NoN-fllL 11,
,
,.,
11.8
PERCENTAGE OISTRIIUTION OF RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHl>LDS
IY SIZE, OCTDIER 1955
Pt ■ CINTA ■ I
SUI. OP
Ru.u,
,...
1
2
No1a1 ■ 01.••
Puao•
l'a . . o••
PHao••
......
' ,......
,......
•' ,
,.-. .0 . .
6
PuaoH
7
8
9
10
Puao•
Pau•• ••• ••••
OIITIIIUTIOI
NGIIIN"OLD
No ■ -AILIIP
100.0
100.0
n.,
'·"
,.6
21.1
i,.1
1,.1
111.9
11.,
8.8
6.,
,:,
!1.2
Digitized by
21.,
18.11
11.8
8.9
,.o
,.o
1.9
2.2
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TABLE 21.
- -
89
-- --
-
- -------
AVERAGE AG( OF H(AOS OF AURAL R(LIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
IY AREA, OCIOBER 1955
RIL I I '
Au
•••••
o,.
So11t11
SowTN ■ IIT
JIIO•-AILII,
.,.e
•9.0
COTTO ■
• 5,'
., .9
C.otfOI
•6.6
., . 9
•• . 6
•9. l
19 . l
Co101 ■ 10
Toaacco
Da, ■ T
07,7
50.0
07 ...
•6 . 0
ll&IIACIIIIIIITfl
Co ■■ -a11-Mo1
.,••.6..,
c•••
U. •7
•9.,
0.9
411.0
,1. ·2
,0, ,2
•9.11
Cut-Ow ■ •
...., ..
, ,.
IIOll! ■ TAI ■
•c• ll111co
'5.8
,2.6
•9.6
.....
,1. .. ,
0111011
CALIFOIIIIIA
••. 6
l&BL( 22. AG( OISIAIBUTION OF HEA~S OF AURAL A[llEF A•D NON-A(Ll[F HOUSEHOLO.S
BY SEX ANO EMPLOYMENI STAIUS OF HEAD, OC108EA 1955
s..
...
ST&TUI
E•,1.0UU ■ T
o,
ALL
"' ...
ALI. HtAOI
....... "••··
(IIPLOTII
,,1 a
RtL IH
No ■ ~lL
11,
RlltU
No.-Ru.,s,
Ru,u
No....alL 1t,
F,. .. 0.Ha
Au.1a,
No...,Qn1.,
C ■ OPPII
RILIH
No.....a11. •• ,
OTNII FA . . Tc ■ ,UT
A1L11P
No....a11. ,,.
FAIN LAIOIIU
R11.1a,
fll011..a11. t IP
NO.-AtllClll.fVl'I
U.IIIM'\.OYID
,.,
"-5•
6,
20.5
1,.2
!9 ,C
1• . 7
19. l
,...
20. 7
2',5
1,.1
19,2
12.,
19.,
2,.,
18..9
1, .•
19.8
16 . 5
25.9
22.,
20 . 2
2, . 2
100 .0
100.0
, .6
2,9
20.,
16 . ,
20.0
100.0
100.0
100 . 0
100 . 0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.6
,
'.,
,.,
7.6
10.1
6.5
50 . 9
52 .2
22.9
20.2
19. 7
20,0
:n.e
20.6
21. 7
25.6
29.6
,0. 7
27.0
17,0
26.2
28. 6
11.,
19,l
20. l
2,.9
2,.0
2,.1
2'1.'l
22.4
2', 7
11.6
22.0
22.,
n.,
:n.9
u .•
M.O
17.l
17.7
II0.6
21.'I
1,.,
26.2
17. 7
l&.6
21.9
11,2
40.2
o.,
11. l
n.,
..
100.0
,.9
2,9
Rn 11,
100.0
l<X>.O
6.2
1.,
le.,
1,.5
100.0
1<11.0
•. l
1, 2
11.6
Rn1a,
...
o.,,.
2 .6
, .8
2 ,8
100.0
lloa-ltLlt,
5'-•• .,_,. ,,_6Q
100 .0
100 .0
100 . 0
100.0
RlL IIP
•o.--1t11.11P
N~tLllf
ft..,LI HIAOI
2,
U111 •
..,
,,_,
21.8
25.8
21.l
:n.•
Digitized by
2'.•
9.•
1.1
i,.6
1',9
12.,
I0.8
16.,
10.,
12.1
11.6
,.,
6.6
e.5
,.o
10.,
1,.e
10. 7
16.2
l'J,b
15.8
9.,
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NUN-RELIEF BOUSEBOLDS
90
2,.
Tll!l.E
DISTAl81/TION
Ali(
~
IIOIB(A~, OTHER THAN HEADS,
~
SU ANO USUAL OCCIJPATIOOI
~y
~
AURAL REl IEF AND -..ilf:llEF IIOUSEIIOI.OS,
HEAO, OCT08£A 19H
litlt•IUa Oun hu Mta11
UHAL Occv~ATIN 0,
Hu.,
ALL
AHi
qlt,, I lf
ALL Hl4DI
.. Al.I MIAOI
Fa ... 0...11
••a Tl•••'
Ceori,,1 ■
JfON-RILII'
100 .0
100.0
AILIH
NON-RH 111'
100 .0
100 .0
AU.tu
No•-Au,1,
RU.1 0
No•-Rn1a,
Fa1M L.ttot11•
RIL
It,
No ■~ILII,
Jtoa-MIIICW\.TMI
lfMAL 0cCIIP&T 10■
fll,IIIM.I MUOI
1,
,2 . 7
,S . 8
,,._ .,_,..
1,-2N
2,-,.
21.•
8.6
10.9
6. 1
9.9
•.6
7. 1
2,.6
,.2
•• 7
• •7
2, . '
~-8
10 . 8
6 .6
9 ,0
• .8
7.'
6.0
100 .0
100. 0
,2 . ,
,1.0
21.,
2,. 2
7. 2
9.,
7. I
9.,
,.8
8. ,
6.•
,.o
..,
100 .0
100.0
119.,
62.0
16. 7
2•.9
9 .•
9.0
• -9
9. 1
2. 6
, .1
2. 0
2. 1
2.•
1.9
19.8
2".•
9.1
1• . 2
6. 1
6.,
G. l
59 . 1
, .5
6.1
,. 2
1. 9
100.0
100 . 0
,._.
,,_,
18 . 7
19 . ,
9.•
12 . Q
6. 1
9. ,
No■ ~u.,1,
100 .0
100 .0
47.9
5'.0
25 .8
,2 . ,
1.6
8.1
, .2
• -5
100 .0
100 . 0
'"·'
,,.9
NON~l!LI ■ ,
,.q
6.0
20.,
• 2.8
RILlt,
6, ...
Ono
,S .9
100 . 0
100 . 0
Alt. 10
5!J-OII
,,_,
1■,
ijtL 10
kON-RIL
lfo
u....
ll).6
6 .6
I.I
'°·"
I•.•
e.•
..,
..,.,'
• -8
6. ,
2.'
I.I
,., ,.,
2,9
o.O
5.0
,.6
, .9
6.6
..,
5.6
6.,
.. ,
2.0
2.9
2.,
PERCENT FE~AlE HEADS WERE OF All 11€lOS OF RURll RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF
HOUSEHOLDS, dT AlCE ••O NATIVITY , OCTOB(R 1955
PtlCt ■ T
AACI
AND WAfl¥11 f
'---
F ■ WALI
HIADS
----~------8
ALL lhCII
.... ,.
IA TI VI
II
12
21
Fo111a ■ -10••
••••o
o,"11
Aac11
(c~ ••'L' ~•••c••>
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TABLE 25.
91
EDUCATION OF HEADS OF RURAL AlLIEf AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS, IY AREA,
OCTOBER 19H
P1•c1•r CW Au. HIHI
.....
w,,.
Sc:•-
Jlk>..,.QILIII
Au. ,1,
'
•
...... c-, ...
116
61
•
27
1,
DUIT
8
I
,0
2'
61
'9
1,
""""''"'"'''
c.,-ow••
eo. .. , .... ttoa
c.. ... &I••·
8
'
.'
.,
",1
Z7
s.,,.,..,, Conoa
'••cco
''
b ■ UI ■
LIii fNAN
'
6
0.,
TAIU 26,
so., ■
COTTO ■:
Toucco:
"···· ... ,..
lo
20
19
"
"
22
9
16
2,
16
H
1
'
0
22
I
9
l•
22
3l
68
o, H1a11
P11c1 ■ t
Co••1.1,11
l■ o
IP
...... ,
...... ,
N111 Sc ■ ML
lo ■ -RILIIP
.,
21
1
1
26
u
44
9
11
u
.,
11
•
.
11
''
1
10
•e■ -IILI ■•
'.
I
6
o, Mt•••
COIIPLITle
12
1:1
1
l
lDUCATIDI OF CNILDRlN IN IUIAL llLIIF AID IOl◄ ELllF NOUIENDLDI,
IY All AID llSIOllCl, OCTOlll 195J
.... ,,.,
TOTAL
No ■ -AIL
,-2,
61
68
'
16
12
66
9'
7J
6
7-1'
1'-1'
16-17
18-20
21-2,
1
6
ID
16
I
2,
PIICIMT
(Y1111)
10
&IAII ·SCNOOL
IO ■ -IIL I
S6
•..••••o,.
•..•••••,.
■■ o
... o,
CNtLIII ■
18
•8
q7
1J11c1 ■ t
SC ■ OOLl ■ I
Ru.11,
... ,.
TAlll 27,
17
1
111,,
NUH
01.•
•
EDUCATIOII OF HUDI OF RURAL RELIEF AND NON ◄ ELllf NOUIENDLDI
IY RACE AND AREA, OCTOIEA
Rae ■
TOTAL~
6
11
10
,.ICl ■ f.
P11c1•, o•
AIIA
16
2
2
2
"
'6
'6
2
N011~u.1a,
'
11
78
,2
2
11
1
44
.... ,.,
1,
'9
2
1
......,,co
Olt•CM,.., . . . . .
1q
I
I
2
-AT
,e
COW'LITIO
"''" Sc•OOI.
Jfo~1L11,
16
1
11
Ol.1 SO.r. Conoe
•"°
WNO ColwLITIO
G'IAOI
Sc•OOLl ■ I
llu.11,
~
"°
.,
"
17
2
91
90
10
27
1
11,
o,
C••L•••• ATTI•••••
......,
72
,.
,,
lcaHL•
o... c••• ,.,
VILLAII
•o ■ -IIL I
7J
1,
IIL 11,
NO ■ -l8LII ..
66
"
,."
21
11
10
61
97
91
1'
99
96
22
2
87
'1
11
9'
71
49
l•
2
.
1'
71
:H
r_
'l"--
- -1 -
UI g lllzed by '-JVV
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
92
TABLE 28.
EOUC4TIONAL ATTAINW[NTS OF CHILO~EN OF RURAL RELIEF ANO NONRELIEF HOUSEHOLDS BY RESIDENCE, OCTOBER 19,3
Pt•cu,T
,-2, Y1
~IS
I
01 IIICI
TOT AL
'ill.LAil
o.. ,.
Cou11TIT
TABLE 29.
ST. I LL
Of
C,111.o•U•
••s o, •••
S c"oo1.
111
PlliCl•T
o,
CN11.0•111
12-19 ., .... , o,
AGI Wft<
CO•ll'lfTlO GIADl
Sc•oo,
o• C,eno•1•
Y1a•s o,
P11ct•T
1,-2,
••1 ••o
COWPLITID H11 ■ SCN00L
Rt:1.11,
No11-Ru. 11,
Rt L II'
No ■ -A11.11,
flt LUI
Noa-Ru.,,,
6B
68
q7
61
11
27
72
66
73
6,
"
6,
17
'7
8
2•
,9
•2
EDUCATION OF CHILDREN OF RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS, BY AREA,
OCTOBER 193'
Ptll'CfMT Of CNILOlt ■
,-2, Vtus
.u-u
STI LL
Rn1u1
o,
AGl
1111 SCHOOL
NoJ11-fh1.1r.,
Pu,co, o, CNI LOll'O
12-19 Yt US o, A,t WNO
Puc1u o,
COlll'Ll TlO GIUDl ScNOOl.
C.0..ll'l.l TlD HI'" ~NOOL
l,._23 Yuo
CN11.011u
O¥
6'1 #No
RtL l l f
~ON~lLIH
Ru 11,
MON~ILlt'
Au AIIEA5 Cowa1-ro
68
58
UT
61
11
27
01. 0 SouTN CO TT OII
Sovtl'.l wt.)T '.:O T T O N
,1
67
58
11
q
70
8
28
TO &A CC O
58
50
•6
ID
,1
26
68
!htlY
n
71
qQ
69
,1
6,
l1ih.S3A C11 wsr. T TS
72
10
~3
tvT-0'o'[A
69
66
•9
68
67
0oA,.._uer-HOG
12
70
55
CASH ~.llll
69
68
66
6,
58
58
68
68
68
68
'9
'9
69
I•
q6
611
6~
72
fht(,t,T
l,lou 11T -.11t
Nr. ■
"'u1co
0Al .i0N
C ALl, ORN I A
11
78
67
7•
28
Digitized by
12
I
9
13
12
1'
17
19
12
I
7
20
1,
28
29
11
37
""
30
6
.16
"
Google
SUPPLIKBNTARY TABLES
TMU ,0.
EOUCATIOI Of OIILOIEN Of .. ,TE &Ill 11£1110 Rl.aoll. RELl(F SY MU, OCTOIEA 19,,
,.ac, ■,
·-
.....
a,,n
o., ...,.
Conoo:·
,_:
c,........
lcllOOI.
..... .,
'•ltCl•f
,,
"'
49
,.,.
,1
lA
",.,
17
61
ID
'
6
•
"'
•••••
.....
s.,, ••••,
Co••····
Cont ■
COTTOI
...... ,
•
'
•'
11
l1Aa1ac1111,,1
10
Cu-Ona
Co1 ■-a ■ 1-flH
.....
........,...,.
W■■ AT
o, ....
C&&.tfel ■ tA
....
,.,
No ■ -AIL
,.,
1,
~
10
.
I
14
9
1
1
"'1'
l
0
19
'
'
.
.
TIIACCO AIIAI.
,OTENTUL .,_UIS, SY AIU, OCTOIU " "
"·•··••1.11
..,. •••• •••••••
Ttucco
o,,.,
c...... ,.
.,
II TWI OLI IO ■ t ■ COTTO ■ A ■ I
,IICINT
AH•
Au
Noa-111.1 ■,
P11tet ■f o, C.ILIII ■
15-23 Yuao o, A11 ..,
C-Lnll H11N Sc:NOOI.
PEIIC(IT Of II\IUI. IU.llf A110 . . . .ElllF IIIIIEQ.DI IIUN _, IIBPI ..,-111111
llllTMO .,_UIS -
Ou
c., .......
C-uru GaaN l e -
60
,0
0,
__.Ll(F HOUSEICJLOS,
12-19 Yuu"" AN..,
.........., ......,
T• • ■ tTII All ■■ -1011
LIMITII
TAil.£ '1.
o,
!l-2'Yua,w AN
STIU. I ■
._
. _.,.
._
.,.
Jo,114.AI :
j/
93
•
10
2
6
.,1'
.l7
'
IH-IIIL 1 ■,
•
1
••
'•
. ..•. ,..........
'J•c ■■ T
. ..,
.... 11,
1
l'
'
10
••
••
''
''
,au
'
2
•
••
NoeH ■ •1.••
..._......
Potl ■ flaL . . . . . . .
l
•
16
Digitized by
•
1
•'
'
•'
••
•
2
,'
j
I
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
9q
TABLE 32.
AVERAGE NUMBER OF •ORKERS PER RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLD
WITH WORKERS AND AVERAGE NUMBER OF DEPENDENTS PER WORKER
IN THE SAME HOUSEHOLDS, BY AREA, OCTOBER 1933
...
...
•o•••••
Av1•a11
A'i'I.A&I
HOUIINOLI
All A
ALL
Al LI I ,
...... Co••••••
1.4
2.6
1.1
2.1
0.9
1.8
1.'
1.6
1 ••
1.6
1.6
I.'
2.0
2.1
2.6
2.9
cu,-ow11
1.'
1. I
1.6
1.Q
I. q
I..
,
Coa ■ -AND-HOI
CAIN GIA
1.'
1.2
1.Q
1.'
1.'
1.2
1. 3
I.'
1.Q
DAIIT
IIAIIACNYIITTI
....,,
IN
Wou ■ fAllt
....... 'co
011101111
CALl,OINIA
TABLE "·
I.'
NON-AIL 11,
1.,
COTTO ■
To ■ ACCD
•011111
R ■ L IIF
NON-AILI I'
COTTO ■
OLD SouTN
50UTNWIIT
o, ....... ,.
2. 1
1.1
1.6
..
2.,
1.1
2.1
1.6
2.,
2.8
2.9
I.'
1.8
2.,
2.8
2.,
2.6
1.'
1.'
2. 1
2.8
I. 1
1.7
AVERAGE NUMBER or DEPENDENTS PER IMPLOYEO •ORKER IN RURAL RELIEF ANO
NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLO~c~~;:r~~:K~:s~E:~ SEX ANO OCTOBER )H5
S11 ••• Oc,011 ■
193,
O ■ P ■■ e ■■ ta
PII EMPLOT ■ e ■ e ■■ &I
Av11aa1 •••••• o,
OccuPATION o, HIAD
RILIII'
ALL HlADI
,.o
1.1
MALI H IADI
,.2
1.9
,.2
1.8
1.0
2.2
0.9
AIIICIIILTVII
,.1
U ■ IMPLOTID
'.,
FUULI HIAOI
TABLE, •.
1.,
AVERAGE NUMBER OF OEPENQENTS PER EMPLOYED WORKER IN RURAL RELIEF ANO
NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS WITH •ORKERS IN OCTOBER 19',, BY AREA
AwtlA&l
NUMIII
o,
DIPINDINTI Pll
EMPLOYlD ■ o ■ •ll
ALL
.. ..
,
,.o
OLD Sou," COTTON
2.,
SouTNWIST COTTON
To ■ ACCO
2.8
2.8
3.2
o•.• ,
lb ■ SACNUII TT$
,.6
Co••-••o-Hoa
2.8
2.7
■ NlAT
,.1
IIOUNlAIN
2 _q
3,0
3,1
N1w W1s1co
1. 8
1.3
2. I
1.8
1.8
1.8
5-1
Cu1-0v1•
CAIN G••··
NON-RILi if
R lL I IP
CowllNID
2 ·"
1.8
1.6
1.8
,.,
2.1
1.8
1.9
2.7
Digitized
byL,oogle
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
UIU "•
95
PHCUT OF DlPllDUTS II RUUl ltfllEF UO NON-RHIH HOUSEHOLDS WHO
WU£ POTENTIAL WORKERS, IY SIX ANO OCT08ER 19H
OCCUPATION Of NUO
P1•c1 ■ T
SI• ••• EMPLOTIU ■ l
o, DIPINOlNTI INO WIii
Po,1 ■ TIAL
•o••···
OP HIAD
No ■ -AIL 11,
RI L 11,
A•1telLflll
6
6
le ■ -A<CILIIII
Q
•
•
U ■ IMl'LOTII
6
Q
F ■■ALI N ■ ADI
6
1
6
IIALI Ill.II
Q
'
TAIU '6• AVUAll ICTOIU UUINIIS Of EMPLOYED RURAL RELIEF
&•D •OI-REllE, MAI,( MEADS OTHER THAN FARM OPERATORS IN
OCTOl(R 1925, 1921, ANO 1955, BY AREA
.......
.,
OcTHII 192'
AHA
IILtt,
Au AHAi
een ..
ILD lewu
lwlT ■ HIT COTTO ■
Touoc•
Dun
.......... n,
en-on ■
c., ...........
c... •u••
,
....,...
•...
......
••••,. ,.o
c... ,, •••••
•
IO ■ -RIL I
IF
RILIIP
•
• ,,
95
11•
,0
18
91
q9
128
8•
1J2
99
90
109
115
91
68
'5
67
19
102
19
U2
1'1
62
11
80
11'
95
10
66
711
72
..
71
102
120
oc,011•
0CTOIII 1928
61
80
EA ■■ u11
111
15
62
8'
No ■ -AI~ I
•
100
IP
A1.t.11,
$
16
110
90
120
116
98
80
100
111
92
11
129
156
Digitized by
26
20
29
2,
.,
••
2,
1•
50
29
,o
25
52
12
19B
frlo•-RtL 11,
$
82
61
B•
68
9~
102
12
,1
90
9•
18
51
100
101
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF BOUSBBOLDS
96
CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE OISTRIBUTION OF All RURAL A(LIEF ANO NO•-RELIEF
NO•-FAAW OPERATOR HOUSEHOLDS WITH HEAO OR MEMBERS EMPLOYED IN
OCTOBER 195,, BY THE EARNINGS IN THAT WONTH OF HEADS ANO
OF All MEMBERS INCLUDING HEADS
TABLE 57.
Cu,un. "TI
wt Pt•ClNTA,t 011,111wt10•
,01 HOUU. NOLDS
No11 - FAIM
0cTOlll
RtL 11,
..
..
..
..
..
...
..
.. ,,un
...
.
..
...
1'1U,N
$
1n
20
30
60
70
80
90
100
12,
1,n
175
200
11()()
TAijLE 38.
26
"
72
0,78
No ■ - Atl
15
22
30
57
"''"
No11 - RtL l lP
62
66
0,
100
9
1,
Au
89
92
9•
95
,oU2,i;'"
21
28
60
9A
Q9
77
A•
!'10
90
100
100
95
100
90
Qu
~i;
'
u/i
65
72
79
AVERAGE OCTOBER 1933 EARNINGS OF RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLosY
WHOSE HEADS WERE NOT FARM OPERATORS, BY SIZE OF HOUSEHOLD
lYIIAII
SIz1
o,
[AINl ■ II
HouSINOLD
NoN-AILII•
AILIIH
s
P1110 ■
-
'
, •• 90 ■ 9
41 -
,
P1 ■ so ■ e
2
6 - 8
9
P1110 ■ 1
PlllO ■ I
Of
lllllllllltl
n
'
9U
96
97
97
[M,-LOYlD
E••·••II
AtL I ti
1 1,
9
a~
99
99
1(10
100
100
ALL
Of
ALL
Ht AD
EAIIINIIIGS
llll
••
0,, ••
IQB
AND OYU
•.,
9•
31
15
2'
29
88
102
114
,2
36
9,
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
'9,
TAIi.i
97
AYl.llMiE (Allllll&S Of ~•OS AIIO Of All lllll8[AS Of ALIIAI. A(LIH UO ~ H l l f
110114- OPIAATOII HClJSI.IQ.0S IIIPI.OYEO IN OCTC~IA 19'5 , 8Y ARI.A
No ■ -F&IM
0Pll&f01 HOUIINOLllj/ CLAIIIPIII
If 0Cf0111 19H [Al ■ 1 ■ 51 OP
••••
H1ull
IILIIP
•
ALL
No ■ -IIL
•
11,
ALL
•••••
Co1111 ■ 11
Ou
So,u ■
~OTfO ■
17
,9
COTTO ■
o, •• ,
28
2•
38
100
...,.,c,.. ,.,,.
17
so,, •••• ,
To1acco
21
82
29
28
9,
21
77
18
'1
011•0•
,0
CAI.
11
102
112
TAIL£ 11G.
•
91
69
2,
6,
Caa ■ I■•••
,,o•• ,.
lo•-RILIIP
,1
,a
8,
Co ■► A ■ D-Hoa
••• M111co
~
18
101
71
,2
89
....
,
.....,...
RI L II P
$
2•
141
c,,-ov11
.......
90
1,
u
118
,a
121
2,
20
60
19
,o,o
96
10,
,.
17
10
11•
20
,6
,2
uo
111110 ACIUII Of AURAi. RH IH AND MON-RELIEF FAIIW OP(AATOA HOUSIHOLOS
ON JANUARY 1, l9'ij, BY ARIA
••••
ALL
•••••
OLD
so,, ■
So ■ r• ■ t ■ T
No ■ -RILIIP
COIi ■ 1111
9'
119
COTTO ■
21
,9
Cono ■
11•
26
72
1' 1
0a IIT
... , ... c •• ,.,,.
c,,-0.11
....,
Co•---••t-Mo•
c.... , ••••
•• •
M111
O.uo•
. . ALL
..
1'
19V
162
'58
19
c•
CALIPOIIIA
"
Ac11Ael
AILII'
To ■ acco
llol ■ TA 11
Ml DI A•
80
101
"
81
116
288
"9
9
16
92
18
• I
8
1'
a&1tl'LI .
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
98
Cu..JLU!VE PERCENTAGE OJSTRISUTIOII o, RURAi. RELIH AIID NO•-RELtE• lllilTE AIIO HEGIIO •ARM
OPERATOII HOUSEHOLDS. BY ACREAGE OPERATED DECEIIBER 31, 193'
TAIII.E •I.
Ot.o
SOUTH CoTTON AND
Toucco AIIAI
CPJWULAfl'II PUCINTA•II 0,
Of'UAfO• HOUHNOl.01
ACltlAH
W111Tt
Rtl 11,
..
..
...
..
.. .. ,o
.. .. 11,
... ... ,eo,oo
.. .
ro Ac•11
l t l l fNAN
20
100
260
1,0
• 1,000
TABLE •2.
NIHO
NON-AILII'
AILllf
31
16
93
,e
63
99
100
100
100
100
100
82
91
9,
91
99
100
NON~ILllf
,..
2
10
II.
.....
18
6
911
90
96
,0
96
98
:i9
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
WO
PERCEHT O• RURAL RELIH AHO HON-flELIE• •ARM O"ERATOIIS OTHER THAN CRO"PERS, llt(J
OONEO HO #ORKSTOCK AHO THE AVERAGE HUM8ER
OH JANUARY l, 195'1, BY ARO
o""rn
Pucu, o,
F-- ■ 111
Owu•s AND
AVUAH NUMIU 0, -.0.•ITOCIC
0.NID
TttHNTS -.1 TNOUT WCHt•STOC•
Al
AUA
Ru1H
AIL I IP
No.....11.11,
18
5,6
•.2
Cano•
'9
18
2,7
SoUTH ■ lST COTTON
13
1,8
2.6
1.6
1.8
Au.
Auu COMIINlD
OLD
SOUTH
'"
,.,
Toucco
21
1•
DAIRY
'9
tb,ISACNUH TTS
87
57
56
1
17
'6
.
2.7
21'
l, 7
2.1
•
l•
•-9
b,l
6.2
,e
27
12
,. 3
2.1
...
c,u--Ovu
COIIN-AIIIO-HOI
CUN GIIAIN
......,
M0UNTAIN
,.
16
NI• WU ICO
OIUC.ON
as
CALIP0OIA
I,/
NON-AlLIIP
15
19
19
2.,
.,
o. 7
61
1.9
l,Q
.
Q,O
8.3
2,7
2.6
,.2
AYU HIS UIID OIi TNOH WNO OWtllD S()lifl -.OIISTOCC •
LISS TNAN
10
CASIS.
A'llllA&l NOT CO.,,UTID.
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TA8LE
Q,.
P(IICENT Of RURAL RE..l(f UO IION-41ELIEF HOUSEHOLOS TllAT ~D 110 L1'1£STOCIC,
JANUARY l, 19,-. 8Y AIIU
P1 ■ CIIT
....
eo..1 ■ 11
•0•~11.11,
OP Houll .... 11
W1 tNOUT Hoel
WITN®T Coal
R1L1t,
N• ◄ n11P
AIL 11,
65
"'l!I
q7
72
Ou Soot• CoffOII
61
Cono•
II()
,2
21
TolACCO
Oun
75
86
q9
•5
49
6,
9,
..,,aaCNVNTTI
95
89
,,
97
97
,a
96
76
Col~A■l-flOe
88
66
811
CA ... GIA.IN
,2
,0
,a
'1
'9
118
,a
,a
69
q5
1,
SovtN•IT
eu,-0,,,1
....,
llouNU.IN
••• .... ,co
9'I
01•-
64
811
CAl.t,CNtNU
TASLE qq,
118
I I TNCMfT ,CMIL TIT
RII.IIP
68
ALL Aa1a1
99
72
91
87
96
28
,0
NOlf-lllLllt'
,.
11
18
19
2'
28
611
,1
78
"
.,
,,
71
•1
'9
"u
,1
!19
47
22
"°
68
.,.,"
!ID
42
71
18
911
:1111
all
,..
,1
AVERAGE •LIMS(RS Of LIVESTOCK JllljEO BY RURAL RELIEF A•O NCIH-41ELIEF HOUSEHOLOS,
REPORTING SUCH LIVESTOCK, JANUARY I, 193", 8Y AREA
AVIIU,H NuMIU
.AYIU,H lhtMIIU
OP CO.I
Dfl' HO.I
Av ■ ••H
Nuwsu
OP PouLTIIY
AIIA
RIL,.,
A&.L AIIIAI
Collll ■ ID
Ou SouTN Conoo
sou,.,.,,
Cono■
lOIACCO
Datlf
W..IIACNIIITTI
CUT-0VII
ea. ..... ~
CAIN Gl:AI ■
··"'
llou ■ TAIN
••• ..... ,co
OIHOII
CALt,Oll ■ IA
A/
,.o
1.5
2.5
I.'
I.•
2.,
2.6
1.6
o.e
5.'
2.8
1.'
2.0
1.2
NON~ILI ■ ,
Rn 11,
NO■-R■ L 11,
,. 7
,. 7
11.1
2.1
5.5
2.6
1.6
2.5
,. 7
,.q
2.6
,. 7
9.0
1.'
,.6
6.2
6.2
,.o
,.o
1.9
2. 7
1.0
7.2
,.9
•.a
q_q
2.,
1.6
1.9
1.6
t.•
•.O
1.8
2. 7 41
2.6
26.o
21.5
11.0
•.a
1.6
1.'
.. ,
RILIIP
,1
,.
"
15
NON~ILIIF
Bl
29
100
19
"
qg
.,
'1
2,
66
61
qq
16
,0
'9
87
64
79
12'
911
~2
19
52
198
IIYIIAL NOit-TYPiCAL CAUi •NICN IAIIIO fNI AVUHI 11•DULY ■l•I IICLUOIO.
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF BOUSEBOLDS
100
TABLE .,.
CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE OISTAIIUTION OF WURAL Rllllf AID ■ 0 ■ -RILllF
HOUSEHOLDS BY AMOUNT OF INO(BTEONESS ON JANUARY l, 19:14
CIMMLAfl•I ,IIAl ■ Ta••·
OP ILL No•alNOLtl6'
■ o ■ -IILIIP
R11.1t•
tNa ■
Lias
,n2,
S
1'
1,
100
f!IO
'
2'
'2
,1
11
16
19
19
26
"
1,
Jl
62
66
""
S9
71
600
700
79
Bl
1,000
,.
.,
76
97
91
9~
100
1,000
,,ooo
10,000
l ■ CLlftl TIii
II •l ■ Cl ■ T OP
IIOlt-etUe, IICMIHNOl.11 f••T
TAILE 16,
■ Al
90
Ta ■ 111.IIP a ■• fa ■
l ■ IIHlllllal.
90
92
100
H P ■ lalaf
• · 'f ■ I
ANO AMOUNT OF INDEBTEDNESS OF IURAL ■ ELIEF ANO
NnN-RlLllF NOUSlHOLOS ON JANUARY l, 1951, IY AREA
EITE ■ T
....
No ■'1llL 11,
18
Au. ..... C - I H I
2,
Ou-••
OoT••
_,..... Co•-
17
IIAeRACWNf. .
c.,-..
c:o..--•-.....
'9
,1
J1
'2
:.Ill
,0
22
0■
fltON IIIIO NH
2::111
''°
63)
160
a,
110
l,"'1
2,
'6
,a
.,
"
Oa•c....,, ••,.
".n
110
'2
1,
........ co
• ,00
16
215
19
•
. . . IITAt ■
'6
22
7
ta• Gou•
Rll.llP
1111
21
fffACCO
o.,.,
AYIIAN WAL.Ill OIi , . .llflldU IAHO
.....,........,
, .......
0, NOUHNOLII WlfN
No l ■ OIITID ■ IU
l'IICINT
Ruu,
.A/
6o
61
17
2,000
,,ooo
tOII ■ OT
,2
",.
.,
s,
800
'101)
A/
•1
M)III
AMolf ■ T 0,
No ■ -Ru.11,
$ 1,600
"'°
l,'60
790
1.,10
1,710
1,no
1,,,0
2,11!!0
,.,w
6'IC)
1,960
100
270
1,8!!0
2,•10
''°
1,060
1. . . ITIO ■ III,
Digitized by
Google
101
SUPPLEMENTARY TA BJ.F.S
Tlllll •7
P(RUNTAGE 0 ISTR IIIUT ION Of THE OCTCllER 1935 OCCUPATIONAL GRruPS Of IIAL~ RURAL
A.
RELIEF HEADS SY USUAL OCCUPATION
Oc,o,u 1933 Occu•.u ION
Las,
USUAL
Occu,u 10•
O....•
Qto,,pt ■
!CD.?
Tor AL
Tt111o11,
...
,
l .. ~ •
IID.O
ICD.O
IID.O
Pllo-
S..ILLlD
U.C,,.1LLtD
IID.O
ICD.O
IID.O
IID.O
-
-
O.•
J.6
0.2
0.8
82.~
0.3
,.o
,. 7
0.1
64.2
1.2
2.3
Tt1111M1
5.3
•.A
1.1.2
11.2
LMCN ■
2.2
3. I
'-6
PaaFu111C11ML
0.1
-
.
II0.3
-
O.•
/U.2
fl'ttaia,n,..,
o.6
1.0
0.9
Cwuc...
1.5
.
1.2
1.5
.
Sl:ILLID
2.2
I. 7
2.1
1.7
U...ILUD
,.2
8.A
7.2
10.2
1'.8
Nola.ST l.BUAL
0tcu,Afl0111
2.~
16.1
~.;,
1.,
-
F,...
SEw1- AND
C4.UICAl
... lt1AA'f
C.0-.
a....
Pllo-
f(Ml0914L
-
-
-
-
,1.5.J
9.2
5'\.8
U..W\.Olf.D
IID.O
,.1
,.,
7.•
JO.•
11.9
12.•
2.9
-
100.0
.
O.•
2.1
2.7
17.0
I.I
1.2
,.o
-
fJM
M
11.5
1.9
10••
2.A
53.5
,i.8
lM
,..
2.A
6.0
II.~
o.,
Slut-~
-~ I.HS TNAII
-
0.0, ,ua:wr.
TAIILE q7 8.
PERCENTAGE Jl:il~III JIIJN JF IHl OCTJ~EO
OF MALE RURAL NOS-OELIEF HEADS
1}~3 OCCUPATIJNAL GROUPS
BY
USUAL OCCUPATION
Oc101r• 1933 Occu•ATIOJII
LAST USUAi.
OCcu•A r 1011
Fu ..
Loo"~
Pao,rs-
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
•. 2
2.,
o. 7
1.•
o.,
5'1.5
1. I
J.9
-
-
7 ••
75.9
.. ,
}.O
0.9
2.,
55.9
0.2
o.,
o.,
86.1
o.,
o.•
18,4
0.N( ■ CAOOlR
T(u .. ,
100.0
100.0
47. 4
I.I
C■ OPf'U
0.2
hNANT
2. I
FHM LANIIU
I. 7
o.8
TouL
0.11u
$101'1AL
PAOf'A 1f. TANT
u,uw-
Sf.WI- UD
U11s1t ILLlO
PLO"ffO
100.0
100.0
100.0
2.0
I.I
8.8
-
-
o.,
o.,
I.I
1.9
1.9
,. 7
0.8
,.2
,.6
o.•
-
0.1
,.8
9.,
I.I
1.6
6.,
.. ' ...
2. 7
2 .•
•• 1
45,8
9.11
18. 7
[Lfll ICAL
$1( IL.LEO
P ■ Qf'1S•1011A1.
0.'
0.J
o.,
P ■ OPlllTAIIT
I.I
0.J
1.0
-
CLUIC&L
1.1
2.8
0. 7
1.2
0.•
S.ILLID
2. 7
1.0
2,7
7. I
1.0
2.•
a.1
3-9
1•.'
I.I
6.1
2. 7
,.a
15.5
211.0
0.6
1,.'
•.II
7.9
8.6
1.9
I.•
1.1
•. 1
24,1
•.8
79.1
Suu- ,HO
UNl ■ ILLID
No LAil U111A1.
Oc:c"""''°"
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
102
TABU •BA.
CHANGES BETWEE• LASl USUAL AND OCT06ER 1933 l•DUSlRIES OF WALE HEADS OF
RE l r EF HOOSE.HOLDS
Oc,ouo 1933
... ,_
LAST UIU AL
l•ousnv
TotAL ICILH>llf
lou1.
100.0
•3.,
.._,.ICUl.TuRE
100.0
100.0
INDUSTRY
I
FCJtE►
bTIIA(>-
........,,,..
T,UIC)I AND
Puk,c
TAT~
11 011 01-
TIJR1"6 .UG C.0...,1t11CA---
Tuot Sutv1a.
F 1SH1MC.
MINOAl.5 lii\CH.UICAL
Poe,.
fRAN5"CIA-
"""
......
AL
0,3
0.3
3.•
2 .7
a.a
69.8
0.1
0.1
0.7
1.9
23.8
:v.2
-
-
-
100.0
:>M
-
9.6
0.1
100.0
10.3
0.1
-
100.0
100.0
100.0
1,.2
1•.9
,:?. 7
0.8
100.0
lQ.6
D<M.s11c •JC>
Pf.as.ow.. SUIY'ICL 100.0
10.,
100.0
,.3
-
-
0.2
100.0
'1.2
-
-
0.8
Oot,,ie5T1C
!\HO
P(A-
-.....
SIOlf-
SUVICl
M,,.._
cu.-
L,..._
IN»"-.OTlO
ous
0.1
D.5
12.6
1i.O
0.1
.
0.1
0.3
•.7
Z2.2
-
1.0
5.8
'9.2
0.3
-
-
0.1
-
16.2
,0.2
16.7
2. 1
0.1
0.1
-
-
10.9
'9.7
0 .6
8.1
/A.4
-
-
0.2
8.8
--
9.7
3.•
0.?
7./
2.0
0.3
2.8
-
2.•
'9.6
'16.7
,0. 7
-
-
-
-
6./
-
0.9
El?.•
o.,
I.•
-
1.•
0 .6
:K}.9
-
-
I.•
7 /.7
22.,
2.3
0.3
0.8
0.1
0.2
10.8
52.5
0.2
FnttSTIIY AIC)
F1SM1-.-.
hra.tiet
'°"
Cl
MtNfRALS
...
.......... a.c.,111, ..
Mlc"••I CAL
-
fllA,c:.,olTATIOII
~IIIICATION
luot
P\a.1c Sutv1a
flto,:f. Qt()t.\L
5cRVlct
M15ClLL.ANtOU$
No llsUAI.
hDUSTRY
UBL[ '18 B.
-
-
-
-
0.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
M
"5.8
CHANGES BET•H• LAST USUAL AIIO OCTOBER 1933 INDUSlRIES OF IIAU HEADS OF ---LIEF
HOUSEHOI.DS
--
0ctOltR
last Usu AL
FORES- [llTRAC-
I 110usu,
Au1-
Ac.a1CUL1'1.Al
F"c,tUUIY i\H)
F1s.t1hli
INOUSltllY
1...-
TUftlNli,UO
UTICII ANG"
lOU.L CUL YUIil FISH ING ,..ltlflULS tr.4ECHAJ1M:N..
C:0...NICII-
100.0
TOUL
TRY ANO ~ 10111 Of
1953
~-6
0.3
Do.lDTIC
1•-
...
...
Sla.,a
TIOlo
a.a
9.•
6.0
B.•
1.,
0.7
0.7
0.1
Mr:CH#flCAL
~NICATIOfll
f\al.lC 5thtCf.
Alorts.,,°""L
SU>1tCl
M1S.Clu,""llOJ~
No UISuAL l111e>usr•r
.
2.5
- --
......
ClL-
2.2
2.2
0.2
0.•
2.•
5.2
0.3
-
e.,
-
2.6
e.•
15.0
1.5
3-5
1•.•
o.,
o.,
2.2
2.0
0.2
U.5
94.8
0. 1
0.1
'9.5
-
1.3
, .7
•. 1
100.0
225
0.1
4J.l
6.?
1.B
2.3
-
100.0
16.4
o.,
0.1
s,.a
2.6
,.1
o.,
0.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
1•.2
Q.3
7.•
0.1
o.,
2,q
6.6
73.7
2.2
0.6
3.•
7/.4
1.1
•.2
63.5
1.0
2.8
1ro.o
6.2
-
-
0.6
1.0
1.0
8'.3
0.7
0.o
1(}').0
8.•
17. 7
'5.Q
1.7
?.1
0.4
,.6
0.1
4.7
3.9
2.6
3.•
O.•
O.B
o.~
-
70./
2.7
,.3
0.1
~-6
0.2
63.6
2.2
100.0
100.0
Ll~ TH.ah C,()-i P(~(...t,ol.
-
-
a.,
0.1
-
-
1.1
5.1
~
.
27.•
~ S T IC A..0
PtA::-..JlfAL. cOVICE
·-
S!RY1CI.
100.0
,oAU.IION
T•..at
...... ........
.......
100.0
~ACTUAtHC.
Tu
Poe,. .,., Pu-
o.,
hTIIACTIOM C7
liili,1tR.\U
Puk1c
.
-
Digitized by
1.3
.
7.3
8.9
5.1
,.a
JII.Q
,.1
.
\...:JOU~>te
4J,2
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TAIL( 119.
l'lACUT
103
-II.
HOOS OI
RtllH ANO ~ H I r• IIOUSlHOlOS, OCTOl!EA
USU.II.LY [NGAG£0 IN NANUFACTUAING ANO NlO<ANIC,i. ,.OU 5TAIES
(11 IIALE
1955,
P1ac1•T OIi WALi Huos
lla. ■ 11,&cr,111••
HD WtCNHICkL.
l ■ DHHIU
Ru.1u
r.,...,"
No .. ~u11,
1,. 1
t• . }
h•L•• ..
6.2
•.6
Fooe 1 ■ .!IITIY
o.,
1.1
2. 0
2.•
1.2
0 .9
1.4
1.1
o.,
0 .6
TllflLI IHIITIY
0.1
1.0
OT•■
, .2
2.6
IIOII Ult STIIL
IIACNl ■ IIY
-
AeTO fKTOltf Ael R1rAtl
L. . .• • • F11■ 1r1111
PAPI ■
II
...
'81 ■ TIU
'6lH1.1•
THLl ,0.
AN
1,,18 .......LIIP
MM.I ■ IUI,
PUCUT '111111.E IIUOS '11 AURAi. llll.l[f AIIO 11011-«[LIU HOU'SllCllDS, OCTOB(A 1935,
lllGMiEO IN IIMUfACTUIIIN6 #10 Mf.CHMlt.11. INOUSTRl[S, 8Y AREAS
Pt ■ Cl ■ T OP W.&&.1 H1&DI hU,IIO t ■
,,.,.,,,,
C:0..1 ■ 1D
ALL Mau
ll.t.aaACIMfHffl
IIA ■ U•ACTll ■ I ■• HI IIICNH ICM. hDUIUlll
J,1 LAIT UIUA&.
......,
.,.
1,. 7
NO-ILIIP
P11 ■ Clill'A1i.
1953
Al 0CTOIU
WUUPACTUlllffi AIID
l ■ DUIUY
l ■ DIIITH
IIILte,
1■ . '
,.,
118.7
w.o
•o•..a11.11,
9.4
"·"
.. ,c,.,.,c.a.
Su1-l1tDUIYllll
...... ,... ,.... ...
lu11.01 ■ 1,
...
lfllL ttACN lltllt
lUTILI
,....
o•••,
:111 .9
:11.,
6.•
12. •
8utLDt11, ,
c... ..- ..
2,.•
211.,
2.8
15.9
luu.o,,.,,
c-..--
3).2
9.,
0.2
,.1
18 . 6
14.6
,.6
9.1
IIIULOIII, A¥fD ,1.CfOIIY A•D ui,1.11
11 . 1
1. g
,.1
6.1
B"IL_.U,I
Oo11oa
11.2
16.9
1.1
12. •
8.2
9.,
2.•
,.1
c.,-ova ■
C...
a.u ■
....,...
Taa.cco
Sou fNWIIT
C:0no■
•..
....... .
O..t So,,u C..noo
,
,
·-~
1.,
7.6
1.,
6.6
0.9
6.1
•••
•.6
o.g
o.,
1.•
0. 6
1.1
o.,
• •1
8UIL01Na -
,.... •••
ltlll.. MACNINl•Y
ITIIL NACNl•ltt
AILII'
huu.1 - No.~u11,
BYILOl•I - l,hi.lU
LY•H• ••o f., ••• ,., •• - No11~11.1u
LUMaU UO
1 hal - RlL I U
BIHLDI•& - No•~1Lt1,
Bu11.01•c. - AtLtU
,1i1••
Fooo - Noa-Rau.,
•. I
8UILOINI
2.1
LIIMIU AND ,ua• I TUii
,.1
llu11.01•1
0 .9
NONI
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
104
PERCENT
OF MALE HEADS OF WuRAL RELIEF
OCIOBER
1933, E•C.AGEO
COMi.lJNICATION
PtllClNT
o,
ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS,
TRANSPORTATION AND
INOUSTRV, SY
AREAS
,.
HO COWWUNICATION
P•1NCIPM. T1a ■ SPOIITATIOII ANO
As Ocroet" l}33
As LAST Usu,u.
I N01JSfAY
RHIIF
THE
MALl Hr.AO~ ENC.AC.10
hANSPOlilTATION
ARuAI
IN
IJ11ou!Uf
'ION~ILlll'
Rn, H
C:0...IUIIU,JION
INDUSUIIS
.. Oll~lLllf
1, 1
7.6
2. 7
&. I
Sr ■ ll TS - RtL I 1.,
RAILIOADS - No11-RILIIP
0.t.lRf
15.7
5.1
5.o
•.O
STRUTS - R1L11,
AA I UOAOI - No ■ -RI LI lfl
'.1,1,su,CMUH T rs
13.2
10.8
3.1
9.2
~b,ILIOADI
lrlt• Mu ICO
IJ.5
12.3
-
"· 7
lhlLIOADS
1.1
•.a
ALL AlltU Cow11111tO
MOUNTAIN
a.•
,..
RAILROADS -
Suu u
RlLlt,
- No•~IL I If
Co• ► AN~Hoc.
8,]
15.,
l.O
13-•
AAILIIO-.OS
c,.u,o••uA
7 ,2
6.'
~.·)
3,9
RA I LIIOADS
C,t.51'1 l".JAAIIII
6.8
7. 2
2.1
7. I
RAIL•OAOS
WHEAT
,.1
,. 7
2. l
,.0
AA ILIOAOS
Cwt-OYU
•.9
,.a
1.3
•.O
G.UAC.lS -
0ttEG0N
l,9
8.6
1.7
6.0
RAILAOUS
S0UTNWE ST CoTTON
,.9
•· I
o.5
,.a
R,1,11.•o••• - Ru 11,
GHAGII - NON-AILll'
SUUTS - RILIIP
0Lo Sou TN CoTTON
3.0
3, 7
1.0
2.6
Ra1L•o-..01 - NoN-RIL IC,
To1acco
2.9
,.o
•.6
2,9
i:IAILIOAOS
TAIILE
,2.
RAILAOAOS -
AIL IIP
NON~lLllf
PERCENT Of IIALE HEADS Of RURAL RELIEF AND NOIHl[LIEF HOUSEHOLDS, OCTOIIEA 19,,,
ENGAGED IN TRAOE, 8Y AREAS
PIICIH CW MALI HIAII E ■ aAIID 1a T■ AH
••••
Al LAIT UIUM. l ■ DIIITIT
Rn 11,
ALL AIIAI C0..11 HD
01.1 So11TN Cono•
SoUTNWIIT CoTTO ■
TOIACCO
o,,.,
lilAIIACNUHTTI
CUT-Ov11
Colt ► A■► Hoe
CAIN Gltua
.....,
Mou ■ TAIN
- • lla11co
o.,_
CALIP Olla I A
5,6
No■ -AIL
9,0
I IP
Aa Ocrotu 1953 l•Hnn
R1L1 ■,
Noll-AILIIP
o••
1,5
1.•
•-5
0.2
•• 1
2, 5
1.8
8.•
0.6
•• 2
6.9
0,2
7,1
6.8
,.a
11,7
0.6
1.,
6,5
,.2
2.7
•.6
18.•
2.2
a.,
1.,
5,8
,.,
•.8
-
12.9
0.7
10.5
0.9
0.1
9,9
6.o
•• o
12.,
5,2
12.6
17,6
9.,
0,9
,.1
0.8
0,7
7,9
1.2
0,5
Digitized
~
l
byuUU~lt'.'
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
THU t5 A.
105
PERC(NTAG( DISTRIBUTION OF WALE H(AOS OF AURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
BY LAST USUAL OCCUPATION ANO BY OCTOBER 19,, OCCUPATION
L Alt Ulu AL
o,, ••••
0cc 111"," o•
19'5
OccuPATION
O.■ u
100.0
TOTAL.
CI0PPO
Fu ..
T1 ■ .ut
•INI Tl
LAM>IU
CoLLAA ■ AJ
S• I LLID
SIMI- AND
No USUAL
U ■ SltlLLU
Occu,ar ION
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
I00.0
XJO.O
100.0
75.4
0.2
1.6
2.,
,. '
,. '
2.1
,.6
C.OPPII
0.1
.'4.5
1.0
1.'
I.I
1.0
1.'
9-•
r,.,.,
8.9
1.8
1'.9
6.o
,.6
I•.'
2.,
2.2
"·'
7 ••
F.1, ... LHOIIII
"'·'
1.6
I.I
1.8
•• 1
9.9
-
0.1
I.I
0..11
-
-
S.ILLID
0.1
0. l
S.1111- A ■I U ■ l•ILLIO
2.2
2.,
. . ITI C:0..LAO-.A/
10.6
U. ..-1.0YID
j/
P ■ o,a1110 ■ AL,
TABLE '5 B.
2.,
-
o. 7
"· 7
o.,
,.e
16.•
o.,
1.,.3
0.2
0. 7
19.•
11.2
12.•
311.~
i,.,
11.2
"·'
,2,9
•9.1
/JJ,5
PIOPIIIUU, AND CL.IIICAL .OUUI.
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF WALE HEADS OF Rl.llAL NOii-RELiEF HClJSEl()lOS BY LAST
USUAL OCCuPAT ION ANO BY OCTOBER 19,, OCCUPU ION
-Lu,
0ctOHI 19"
o. ...
Occuu,, 10•
C.OflPII
h•ut
USUAL OccuPAT I ON
Fu111
•·••U
LAIOIIU
COi.LAi • .,
Stw15&1L.Ll0
AND
U•-
SK ILL(O
·-
ho UIUAl
OccuuTIOII
---
100.0
100.0
100.0
I00.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
94.I
,.,
6.o
I•. 7
9,9
6.,
Caw"•
0.1
11.3
1.,
,..
6.1
o.,
0.2
1.,
8.1
r,,.,..,
1.8
9. 7
83,1
1•.8
2.0
•.o
•.O
16.•
FAM1 laaoau
0.,
•.2
2.6
'7.1
o.,
2, 7
•■NU'I COI.LH•6/
o.•
1.7
1.2
11.3
,.,
.. ,
S.ILLID
o.,
-
0.9
1.1
1.6
~,.c
1.6
1.6
St:1111- A ■ I U ■ l■ ILI.ID
o.•
2.1
1.8
9.0
,.1
12, I
55.3
11.9
.... Ml'I.OHD
1.8
1.2
2.0
8,9
6.8
1,.2
12. l
41.3
Tot&&.
a. ...
~
no,1u1o ■ AL,
PI0PIIITAl1', AND
CLl ■ ICAL.
'.9
100.0
,.,
7.0
8.•
woau••·
Digitized by
Google
106
►
..,
ij
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
0
u
u
.
.
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF ilOUSEilOLDS
.
0
.
Q
Digitized by
'E•CENT OF WALE HEADS OF •UUL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS IHO IERE UNEMPLOYED IN OCT08ER
TA8LE ,. I,
P11c1 ■ T o, WALi " · • · ·
,
....
ALL lifolll HU.OI
RlLll'
"
"°
01.o SouT11 CoTTOII
Cono•
19
No111-Qn1,., R1L11, Nor•AU,11•
6
2
8
,1
Wus1.c"us1 T1'I
6•
20
12
l
7
2
2
"8
7
2d
•l
7
8
CuT-Vvu
8
Co•-••1>-HO&
JO
Cu .. Gl,1111
WMur
~
,.
"
W011NTA1•
11111• 1i1111co
0.tGOII
u .. ,,o... ,,.
Pll'Ol'ISSIOIIA&.,
•
LISS TIIAII
0.~
"IOPIIITAIT,
ll"f:ltCf .. f.
J/l
'
Dae,n
19
II
'l
6
Toucco
!/
Fu .. LHOtlll
••uu C.0...L.t.■ •&/'
Suu-
uo U•-
S..tLLID LUCHIU
SW.IL.LIO Laao•u
Au bus C:0.11•to
SouTM ■IST
IT U11UL Occw,at,011
U•tMl'LOYID,
T1uu
Caor,e•
Fu.. O..u
19H, IY USUAL occu,u,oN, IY UEA
7
,HO CLIIICAL""ao••t•s.
•
9
•
"
26
2
I
2
-I
I
.
I
8
7
I
lO
2
2
l
l
,i
2•
8
Rn,.,
No~lLIII'
Ru, ,1,
'l6
I
16
-,,_
~i•
----
2
'
---·Ji.
II
--
10
--
-5
ll
2•
20
6
19
-
B
27
No---'l11.,., Rn11J
N011-Q11,, 1H Rlllll' No•-Q11.11, Rt1,. l(f
-
2
.
l
'
•
--l
2
2
•
'
,
-8
''
•9
,0
9
B8
-
6J
9
IS
II
2,
71
12
21
I•
,
67
IJ
12
II
l7
I
2l
,2
II
,0
llO
•I
,1
-•
n
'
•
••••
•7
"8
..
,i
~-~
15
'9
2'
78
l
-
H
9
28
Noa-'111. 11, R11.11, No1t~ILIII'
---
7
•1
7
•
9
J6
70
"9
8
"'"
72
12
76
19
l
II
I
,1,,
l
,i
6
,a
"
71
q7
.,
I
l5
2,
I
-
.,-
I•
6l
22
l1
lo
I
n
-
,2
•I
•l9•
ll
1•
1•
18
,0
~2
1
lJ
'j/!
I
12
t•
'
lo
10
1a
62
l2
l8
{/)
c::
'"ti
'"ti
t""'
trl
::3::
trl
'Z
>-3
>
::;::,
><
~
>
tx:l
t""'
trl
{/)
0
cci"
""
i'j"
~
~
0
0
-
~
( i)
I-'
0
-..I
t--'
0
CX>
TASLE " ·
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUT-ON OF 11.11.E HEADS OF RUR.11. RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS av ocr:iaER 1911 OCCUPATION, BY AREA
AGR J CUL TuAf
Allu
:::0
~U---~•5M1t, LHllh
C:
TOTAL
TOTAL.
o.....
:110 PIU
llJfAlt1
LUOAU
Toru
su,.1 PAOflS!ilOPiAL
PNQPR I l TAltl'
C...UICAL
,111u
LJ1tM,LOUD
S11i1LLlD
UN$11l1._LlU
2.0
5. l
17. R
12.A
36.0
7. 3
-
3.'
•I. 7
2.U
19.9
6."
21.J
7. I
'2 8
7 6
::v
>
t""'
AL.L AIIIAI CoNl1111tD
qlL1ll1
NoN-RtL I lll
Ot.o SouTtt CoTTON
RIL 11,
NoN-RIL.11,
SoUTNWIIT CoTTON
I-le:: ... l '
NoN-RlL 11,
To1Acco
R(LI iF
HOM-Rf.LIE'
DAIH
'l(L l ( f
Ho1ri1-RtLIH
MASUCMUSITTI
~lL I (F
No,.-'lu.1,,
Cur-Ovu
RlLiU:
N0Jf--Af.L1EF
Cou-..o--HoG
Ru..1u
frfo11-RtL I IF
CAIN GIIAIN
Ru 11,
NON-Rl!L I IP
INIU
R1L1EP
NoN~lLll,
l/)0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
ICYl.1
100.0
JJO.0
100.0
100.0
•J "
'9. 7
11.5
,a.6
u.6
2. l
'IU.9
,.o
85.0
29.9
]U.8
U]. 7
17. u
15. 5
JU 0
2 5
27 I
13. B
0 I
0. 2
'I.'
75. 3
6•.'
13.A
71. 7
21. l
60.0
37. 7
l 5
'50.ri
16.5
111.,1
H."
15. 7
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
l'Xl.0
100,0
71.0
75.0
15.6
37 9
u7. 3
u
~-8
70. 2
JO') 3
52. 3
,1.
,a. 2
6£.9
I B
IS .5
5- l
36.9
""
Wou ■ TAI ■
i'j'
~
~
0
0
-
~
( i)
Naw M1x1co
RUJlF
NQN~ILIU
Rn 11,
NON-REL 11,
OHIO ■
e.,..,o•• ,.
RtLllP
~o ..-Ru1H
Ru. 1 a,
NQN-RtL I H
100 0
100.0
100.0
]/l(l.0
100.0
100.0
XIO.0
n.o
l9 9
lill.5
••.6
-
0. I
o.u
~. 2
0. I
,-,.o
:>.'
35.€
u.o
1.6
2. 3
16. 2
16 6
8."
6. 2
6. 2
l.B
I 2
21.1
7. 7
2 8
10. l
,i. 2
'l. l
u£.5
16.'
20. I
J.'
;>;l. 7
0. 2
J7 .8
••.6
9.0
56. 3
I•. 7
38. 2
6ri.2
25.,
fJ9, '2
I. 7
1.1
2. 2
J.9
l.9
11.1
2!' .A
-
5•.8
.,..
-
5. I
16.5
53. I
0
cci'
I
l
22. 2
lU.9
7 .0
9. 7
21.5
1,1.8
II.I
8.6
1.6
5. I
3.6
2.
l
5
33.:
J.8
o.,
7.9
u. l
3. u
12.5
B. 5
18. 3
15. 7 ·
21. 2
19.9
32.u
0. I
O.u
0. 2
l. l
0.1
2.0
1. 2
2. 5
u.o
0.1
6. 5
1.,
5.0
;l'.J.
-
o.:>
-
-
-
18.1
67.6
1.q
a.11
:>0.5
21. 2
J. l
'"·"
1.9
5. I
0.9
9. 7
1.3
0 2
I
i
i
2. 2
ti.~
I
1.1,
I
1.2
l. 9
u.o
9.9
2
8.1
13.7
:,'·..5
2. 7
1: .6
1.G
l. I
15 7
32. '1
19.0
8.6
0. I
l.~
,.6
7 .6
[.Q
51.8
27. 5
II. 2
6. 3
B. I
n.•
2.U
0. 5
2.8
0. I
'•.R
()' ~
2.6
I
I
i
:
T
11.2
. 6•.6
2. l
2.8
n.u
11.9
8.6
2.6
I.I
,n.Q
15. 2
-
!0.9
r;. 2
0. I
2.0
I.I
11.8
0. 7
? 9
1.1
3, 5
30
l.9
J.8
o.u
l 3
•.6
u.6
J0.1
11.1
0. 2
2. 2
0. 7
7 .0
O. l
2. 5
0. 7
9. I
7. I
2.9
8. 7
13.9
56. 7
7 ·"
2".9
Ju. 5
6. 7
•. 7
3. 6
u. 5
52. 2
n.n
J.1
11.2
!E. 5
36.9
16. I
27. 2
-
-
"·"
-
21..
-
0.1
o. l
1.0
12.u
-
u. ~
0. 5
1.0
-
"· 2
7 ·"
-
l. I
1.0
l- 2
0.9
o. 3
0.8
1.0
3.9
a,0
n.,
0.9
0.6
5.9
:: : . I
15. 2
13 2
8.•
3.8
,i.o
9.9
36.'
•• 7
8.0
'6-•
28. 3
,a,9
8,'
QJ.5
8.6
:,0
t':'J
-...,
t""'
t :l
>
z
0
z
0
z
I
:,0
t1'
t""'
-
...,
t 1'
:::i:
0
C:
u,
t1'
::i:i
0
t""'
:::,
Cl)
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TAII.E
'6.
109
PERCENT Of TIOE IIAI.£ HEADS OF OCTOBER 19B RI.IIAI. RELIEF ANO NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS IIIERE
UIIEIIP\.oYEO DURING TltE PERIODS NOVE"BER I, 192}--0CTOBER 31. 1933; NOVEMBER l. 192~
OCTOBER 31. 1929; NOVEMBER l, I929--0CHJBER 31, 1933, dY AREA
.. o....
ocr.
....
I, 191~
31. 1933
Now. I. 191~
oc,.
RILIIP
NoN-RlL It,
R1L11,
Au AatU C:0.1 ■ 10
16
1
12
Ori.I ScMiTN CoTTH
SoilTnilT CoTTOII
16
11
10
10
10
18
Toa,cco
OAIIT
22
8
21
6
10
16
1
13
......,e11, ..,,.
C.r--Owa
COl'► A■►Hoa
... ...
CAIN &IAI ■
. .u
,
••• M111co
01•c.v.,., ......
•
9
n
6
6
16
,0
7
1,
17
12
1
•
1'
II
13
6
6
10
12
15
11
21
15
•
Nov. 1.1929OCT • 31, 1933
51. 1929
lfo•-RIL,.,
Ru 11,
No11-A1LIIIF
8
22
1
1,
12
10
1,
13
,.
13
8
6
•
38
11
7
18
22
10
3
9
•
6
9
1
8
6
9
8
.,
2,
•
'
•
'
2,
1
•
2,26
Digitized by
Google
g
6
r
c:;,
,
I
·.J
_;,
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
110
TASLE
,1
&.
CHAliGfS FROM LAST USUAL OCCl.f'&TION TO OCT08ER 19~, OCCUl'&TION Of atlT( AliO NEGRO
ll&U HE&OS Of RURAL RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
(OLD Sou'"
CoTTON
tu,
0cTOHII
UD Tou,cco Aun)
USUAL OcctJPAt lONA/
1955
Oc. ..:u,.._, 10•
0.1111u
eao,,.u
Fo111
TtNAlfT
Laao•u
...
5(1,111-
Sic ILLf.O
No Usu.u
Octal, AT 10•
l.llfllc:ILLID
W6lrf
100 .1)
Toru
(>.u,u
C1110,ru
-
,.,
2.7
o.,
,.1
2.9
1. 0
'2,5
1.•
2 .0
2. 7
,.2
61. I
7. 1
0. 8
,.0
Jl',R
2.0
-
-
-
•.O
2. 7
"·'
1•. 0
"9,2
UNl!WPLOUD
6.8
o.•
2.'
0.6
AND U11SM ILL.ID
0.2
1•.1
73. 8
Fuw LUOUI
Sou-
)00.0
,.,
,. '
•Wturt ~Ld•I/
.o
100.0
r, • .,..,
S..ru.10
lflO .O
!00.0
-
100.ll
100
9.8
,.1
-
0.8
11,5
-
7. 1
6.2
111,3
26. 5
"6.0
72.6
66,1
.,,_.,
!00 . 0
)00,0
100.0
100.0
J0().0
0.2
n.,
-
3,6
6.8
RI.O
-
2.,
45 • .,
-
IWJRO
TOTAL.!/
100.0
0.NU
90.7
c.o,ru
-
5~.,
Tuur
,.6
7.6
-
fAAW LABOIIU
5'ctLLf0
Stw1- -,.,.D U•suu.1:0
lJNtWPLOTIO
,r.
..
,
-
-
-
1,.,
2.1.,
JO.,
'9,9
1.•
1.,
-
1.,
-
-
-
o.'
11.9
-
31.R
2.,
,.7
,o. 7
12. 3
3'.6
-
110.8
18,11
O.•
-
CASf.5 •• '"' .... ,u COl.La•• ~•ou, ,o. COIWUTUIOII.
y
TOO
!/
l'ROf"tSSIOU,L,
PROPAIIT,,_f ANO CI..IR I CAL •OINtlS .
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
TAII.E
,1
I.
OIMaS F - LAST -
111
ocal'lTIOI TO OCTOlfl 1M, ~ATIOI OF •11t -Ill. - L l ( F -ICllOS
111:GAO
M.l MUDS OF
Lu, Us,u,1. Occu,u10•
oc,oau
19"
Occu,u10•
.....
-··
Cl:0,,,1•
100.0
100 . 0
100.n
100.1)
95.5
7. 7
8.9
7.'
CIIOPPU
Q.•
,~ ..,
Tt ■ UT
2.3
7.2
,,_. .. ,
Fa ■M LAIOIU
0.2
,. 7
0.1
•••tt
O.•
-
n. 1
fo,, ...
0..11
Cou:a••~
SI I LL.ID
Sl.111- AU
U. .. I L.LIO
U.IWLOYID
ll ■ A ■ t
•••u
flo
USUAL
SalLL.U
s... ,- ·U.1111..uo
Occu,aT•OII
100.0
100 . 0
100.n
100.0
9. 7
10 . 8
II.'
,.e
Laeoau COI..L. ··•6/
~,rri
0.2
I.I
..,
1n.,
18. 2
,.e
,.e
2. ,
:Iii.'
H.6
-
1.6
0.9
-
,s.11
1.6
,. 2
17.9
O.•
-
-
l.7
~-'
-
n.1
1.8
o.,
Ill.•
-
"·'
,. '
12 . 2
U .9
0.7
D. 7
l.,
1.2
11).0
R. 9
~-8
7. 7
"·'
100.n
100.0
,. 7
1.0
2• . 2
•2.6
.. '
;o.1
•IG/IO
Tou1.II
1()().0
100 .1)
100.1)
100.0
O..u
99 . 1
n. ,
1.'
0.•
n.•
111.1
2.5
22.6
-
A.•
92. I
20.1
6.n
2. 7
0.•
2. 1
-
-
0.A
1. 2
CaoP,u
1 .. ,.,
Fa ... LAIOIII ■
S1.1u- uo U.H1u.10
U.IWL.01'10
t/
I/
,,.,
l.,
,.,
-
-
-
1,.2
19.,
12.•
n .o
2'.IJ
10 . 2
17 .9
5.~
PIMIIIIOIIAL, PIICWIIIUIY .UO CI.IIICAL M>lllllS.
TOO 'I• CAMI I I ' " ' ••NIL.I COL.LAI• AID aa1U.ID . . ow,1 POii COIIPUUTIOtl.
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
112
Tllll.E ,8.
PERClNUGl OISTRll!UTION Of LAST USUAL Alll OCTOBER 1953 OCCuPATION Of WHITE AIC)
N£Gl!O YALE HlAOS Of RURAL RELIEF AIC> ~ELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
(°'-.D SouTN Cono■ A•D To1•cco M1A1)
Ck:TOM■
L&&TUSUM_Clco,pATIOII
ClccuPAT l(JI
. _,
"'111(
Rutl' NOtto•AU.llf
At.L U.AMU
AGA1C11..Y,..l
RtLllf
1~
0ccuPaT tOII
•u1
NoN-Ru.1tf
"''""'
Rll.1tF Nott,,R(Lll'
ft•·•11..1a,
AlLlfF
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
IOO.O
(i!.9
67.8
1',.Q
79.8
"6.2
711.•
n.6
9l.7
9.8
!B.,
•.s
16.0
8.9
112.,
•.6
17.2
eoo..t•
~.8
7.6
25.7
18.0
19.2
9-•
al.•
25.2
ll ....T
19.0
20.8
•2.8
on.a
1•.9
21.,
115.0
M
0.9
2. 7
•.a
,.2
1.2
3.E
20.,
26.,
13.,
10.2
6.9
21.6
,..
"'·'
,.,
0.1
o.•
C.o«o
FA. . LM(IH ■
N~ICULTllll
f'IICPtN IOIW..
o.,
1.0
PlitCftllTMY
1.0
6.9
CLE.IIICAL
2.0
•-9
S.ILL(O
,.1
o.,
-
6.0
1,.,
10.6
SIMI- ANO IJNslLLfD
No IJl&,M., Ck.curATIC. <II i.NWLUTlO
TABLE 59.
o.,
0.1
1.•
0.7
o.~
6.•
o.,
o.,
o.,
o.,
o.•
7.5
12.6
8.2
,.9
12.,
10.0
0.1
7.8
,.1
-
0.2
•.2
0.1
o.•
,.8
5.9
,.2
46.9
•.o
25.0
0.8
,.,
,.o
E...LOYIIENT STATUS ANO OCTOBER 1933 INDUSTRY Of IIEYIIEAS 16 YEARS Of AGE AND ~R,
OTHER THAN HEADS, Of RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-IIELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
w, ..e111
OcTOIU
1933
OT•••
Twu H1ua
I NDUSTIY
RILIIP
Tor ALAI
Nbet-41tL I IP
100.0
100.0
10. 5
2'.6
AGRICULTURE
1.,
13.9
00MIST IC ANO Pl Ill SOUL S(IIVICl
2.6
2.1
........ , .. c,uRING ANO IAttftANICAL
1.7
0.9
0.9
0.2
E..,.LOTIED
lll-.01
fRANSl'OATATION AND Ca..u ■ ICATIO•
PAO,ISSIONAL Suv1c1
I NOUSTI I IS
o.,
0THIA
e,. 1
u.. , .., . . 0,10
SeUING WQIIC
Nor SHlllNA
A/
2.4
2.,
1.1
2.1
0.9
8 , ~ UL.IIF UD 20,981 NON-ttlLIH liKMlt ■ S OT"IR TNAN "IADI,
711.'I
10.,
21.'
Wo••
64,'I
16 YI.US
0,
65.9
Aal AH OHi.
Digitized by
Google
SUPPLEHE~TARY TABLES
TABLE 60.
'ERCENT OF YEIIBERS 16 YEARS OF
AGE
113
AND OVER, OTHER
THAN HEADS,
IN
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS WHO WERE UNEIIPLOYED
AND SEEKING WORK IN OCTOBER 19H, BY USUAL INDUSTRY
Pt ■ ClNT
UIIIAL
U ■ tM,LOYID
AID StlKINI WOIK.&,'
I •DutT•t
No11-RtL 11,
60
AIIICH,TIII
....
Ma ■ ,,ac,111 ■ 1
,
••• Co••11•• I CAT Io ■
Oo~IITIC ••• P111o ■ AL S11v1c1
M1 ■ CILLA ■ IOII
NIWII hlPLOTII
MIMll ■ I
ti
WIii
32
"
21
18
18
"
100
IIIUALLY
UNIMPLOYID
8
51
56
39
~I
'7
••• M ■ CIAIICAL
T1a ■■ POITITI o ■
29
IIIA,ID II
AIIID
lltlt, ■ I
TNI
100
IPICl,IID INDUITIY WNO
Ill OCTUIII, IG,3, lll-
WOllf.
PIIIIID Al A PIICINTAII OP ALL ~IMIIRI USUALLY lllGAIID
11 TNI IIDMITIT WNO WIii ■ OIKIII 01 IIIKIII WOIK 111
OCTOllle
------------------------------ -------- ------ -TABLE
PERCENTAGE
61.
DISTRIBUTION OF UNEIIPLOYED ll[IIBERS 16 YEARSOFAGE
AND OVER, OTHER
HOUSEHOLDS, WHO
THAN HEADS,
WERE
IN
SEEKING
RURAL RELIEF
WORK
INOCTOBER
ANO -EJ.IEF
19,3, BY USUAL
OCCUPATION
R1 LI 1,
TOTAL
Aa ■ ICULTUII
Fa111 0,11,1011
F1.111 LAIOIIII
No ■ -Acu IC lfL T Ult
100
100
17
11
I
16
11
2'
21
La.101111.il'
M1 tCILLAIIOUI.I/
~
,e
LIii fNA ■
0.5
No ■ -AlL IIP
3'
2,
10
,.
PIIC(NT.
Al
IIICLUHI IKILLID, HMI- AND U ■ l•ILLlD occu,allOfll.
J/
fKLUDll PIOf'IUIONAL, HMllllAll1', AIIO CLIIICAL occu,u10N1.
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
APPEND IX B
NETNODOLOIICAL NOTE
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
METHODOLOGICAL NOTE
The chief problea arising in the analysis of this study related to the reliability of the sample.
The method employed
in obtaining the sample was as follows:
Twenty states were selected because of their importance
fro■ the point of view of commercial agriculture.
~tates in
the corn-and-bog belt, the cotton belt of the Southwest, and
the wheat belt were obvious choices.
The final selection of
the states and of the counties within each state, in which the
suney was made, however, was necessarily made partly for
reasons of expediency. Within tbe counties fsee Map Al samples
of relief cases of varying size were ta.ken at random from the
files of the County Emergency Relief Administration office as
o! October 1933, eliminating all cases residing in towns and
cities of 2,500 or more population. For unavoidable reasons,
tile su"ey was ■ade in the Texas and Kentucky counties as of
NoYeaber rather than October 1933.
Each relief case ta.ken in
tile saple was visited by an interviewer. A control group was
secured by tilling schedules for the tw nearest non-relief
aeighbors of each relief case seen. Approximately ~.600 rural
relief households were included.
Adequate attention was not given to the problems of sampling
in the brief time allowed tor putting the survey in the
field.
As a consequence, when the schedules -.-ere in and
ualysis was under way, the question at once arose as to the
universe represented.
In the effort to answer this question
■ any difficulties were encountered.
The variable to be measured was multiple rather than single, being the composition
and characteristics of the population receiving relief, compared with the surrounding non-relief popiilation. Fvidently,
a ScSllple that would be representative with respect to some
traits would not be representative i.ith respect to others.
As one way out, the counties surveyed were first grouped according to the prevailing type of farming, except that counties which belonged in one geographical area !e.g. the Southeast I were not combined with those in another (e.g. Cali!ornial, even when the type of farming seemed to be the same;
and, second, certain population factors (e.g. percent of population rural, percent of farm tenancyl were considered.
After eliminating a few counties that did not fit in any of
the groups formed in this way, 13 fairly homogeneous areas,
as listed below, resulted.
The assumption then was that
since the chief factors that would affect the proportion and
composition of the rural population on relief were alike
among the sample counties in the same group, the characteristics of the population receiving relief would also tend to be
similar. Actual tests did not show as much ho1110geneity as was
desired, but much of this uncontrolled variability was certainly due to differences in administrative policies among
state and county relief officials, which were not reckoned
witb in the study.
. ..
D1g1t1zed by
Google
117
118
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
After the saaple counties were grouped, the next step was
to discover what other counties were sufficientlJ like thea to
be entitled to inclusion in the uni verse represented. Maps B
and C resulted. Map B shows all counties which resembled each
group of sample counties in respect both to basic economic and
social factors and the proportion of the rural population receiving relief. In this relatively sparse universe, which attempts in a rough way to control both background factors and
administrative policies of ·relief officials, the n1111ber of relief cases in the total sample forms about q_5 percent of the
total rural relief load in the universe.
It is, therefore,
open to serious question as to its adequacy. This deficienc1
is, of course, aggravated in the more ample universe pictured
in Map C, which included all counties that reseabled the saple counties fairly closely with respect to background factors
only, without regard to the proportion of the rural population
on relief in October 1933. In this latter case, the n1111ber of
relief households in the sample is a little less than t'WO percent of the total relief population in the shaded areas.
In combining the data. for the sample counties by groups or
areas, the figures for each sal!lple county were weighted in accordance with the ratio of the relief sample taken in tile
county to the total .rural relief load of the counties that resemble it in both background factors and relief load, as showa
The weights obtained fro■ the counties in Map B
on Map B.
were correlated to SOiie extent lr=.531 with those that were
calculated for purposes of comparison for the larger number of
counties in Hap C. The list of the s.-iple counties is repeated below with these weights attached.
The wide Tari at ion in
the size of the weights, even within the scme group of co11nties, means si111pl1 that so■ e of the sa111ple counties happened
to be representative of ■ any counties and large relief populations, while others were found to be representative of little
besides themselves.
Digitized by
Google
METHODOLOGICAL NOTE
119
SAMPLE OOU!ITI l!S ANO lll!IGHTS BT AREAS
kea ud Cout7
m
'- '
Old Soutb Cottoa
Dallas, Alal>•a
Liaestoae, Alal>•a
Cle-rel and, Arhasas
Lee, Arkusas
Aasoa, North Caroli a a
Weiebt
Weiebt
11111
22
11
!5
3
----
.
!Vil
Soutlnrestera Cottoa
Bill, Texu
Ruuel!", Texas
Clevela.od, Oir.lalloaa
Pa,ae, OU&boaa
Tobacco
Todd, leatucir.7
Madisoa, leatucll7
Sapsoa, Nortb r,aroliu
Pitt, Nortb Caroliaa
3
10
21
16
flVl
7
1
IVIII
Dair7
Greea, Wiscoasia
Cecil, Mar7lud
Frederick, Marylud
Toaplr.ias, New York
W&111e, New Yorlt
Dorchester, Mar7laad
Massacba set ta
Middlesex, Massac bu setts
Worcester, Massacbuset ts
!Villi Cut-(lyer
Harathoa, Wiscoasia
Sa,qer, Wiacouia
!5
q()
3
Cub Graia
Miaer, Soutb Duota
Liaa, 11:aasas
Nortoa, lusu
Wbeat
Meade, lusu
Gra,, 11:a.osas
Baca, Colorade
Spiall., Soutlt Duota
Walwru, Soutb Dakota
29
7
8
2
2
9
19
7
2
fXl
111,
II
20
II
f I'XI
; !VI
Corn-ud-Roe
Wriebt, lova
Povesbiell, lova
Fa,ette, Obio
Lo1u, Obio
2
3
11
81
7
l
6
8
f XI I
fXII I
1
7
!XIII I
llouataia
Flbert, ('.olorldo
Lariaer, Color ado
Utab, Utab
Sanpete, Utah
Duchesne, Utab
l
9
1
3
q
N"" Mexico
Guadalupe, New Mexico
~corro, Ne1. Mexico
3
Oreeon
Till~lr.. Oreeoa
Cl at sop, Oreeoa
Har ion, Orqion
q
q
9
C&litoraia
r.oura Costa, C&litornia
Riverside, Calitoraia
2
Digitized by
l
3
Google
Digitized by
Google
APPENDIX C
BULLETINS BASED ON SURVEY
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
BULLETINS BASED ON THE SURYEY 1
Balletia G-1.
The Ownership of Livestock by Rural Relief and
Non-Relief Faailies, October 1933, by H. lailin
lalletia G-2.
berqe HonthlJ Earninis of Rural Relief and
Noa-Relief Households Whose Heads Were Not Fara
Operators, October 1923, 1928, 1933, bJ W. F.
DanebertJ
l1lletia G-3.
laplo,-ent and Residential Mobilit7ofRural Relief ad Non-Relief Households, 1923-1933
B11letia G-4.
Tbe Uneaplo,-eat of Male Beads of Rural Relief
ad Non-Relief Households in q7 counties, bJ
I. B. McGill aad T. C. McCoraick
BalletiD c;..,.
bdutries ud Occupation of Male Beads of Rural
Relief ad Non-Relief Households, October 1933,
bJ A. D. Rdwarda aad T. C. McCoraick
lalletia G-6.
Peaale Beads of Rural Relief and Non-Relief
Bowsebolda, October 1933, bf A. D. Edwards
Balletia G-7.
Rdacatioa of Beads ud Children of Rural Relief
ud Noa-Relief Boaseholds, bJ A. D. Edwards ud
Bllea Yi ■aton
1 z... Ir . . lln•I• ot leHaru, lt.aUau.. ud raauoe, ra11era1 ....._
. - . lallet Aalala&ra&loa.
123
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
APPENDIX D
SCHEDULES
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
RELIEF SCHEDULE
127
•.&.a.&. .............c
ftllDAL IIIIDGIINct ....._. .tJ>IIINIST&ATION
11.ual I. BOPSIIII, U ~ o r
SURVEY OF RURAL FAMILI~ RECEIVING
RELIEF IN OCTOBER 1933
Dffl8ION Gr
tlJCII DD ffATlfflal
C~Glu...,_._
Digitized by
Google
128
RURAL RELIEF ANO NON-RELiiF HOUSEHOLDS
SURVEY OF RURAL FAMILIES RECEIVING RELIEF IN OCTOBER IW
I. Identificotion and Compooitfon of Household.
11. Occupation&! Huitory, Fa.rm Teuure, and Mobility of Head of Houaehold.
Ill. Employmeut Status of ~lemlwrs uf lfous,,laold Other Than llh&d.
l\'. Economic StatWI of Household.
Y. Tyf:,',.:';~f~~id.ros of Public and Private R•lief and Other Extraordinary
This survey is int.ended to amplify, for solecwd rural householda, the
mfotmlltwn obta.inACl by the Unemployment Helie£ Census conduded through•
out the country. It will furnish ha..~ns for detNmining- the types of rural
t~~~h:~1s::~:.tgr:::~:c!~of th~~i~o!:~~l{h_d ~ wifl~rh~:.nj~h:h::~:i
0
(
to which rural relief families have been affected by variuUB Federal, State, and
loc&l fomLS of as!'.listance.
Digitized by
Google
RELIEF SCHEDULE
129
J. WBNTmCATION .lND COMPOSITION OP BOIJUIIOLD
1. Sehedule No.··-··-···-···-2. _ . -
a.
Date of inteniew ·······--·••·•············· JIWd
....,t ----
of head of hoUMbold .... --········---············-·····-·······-··-----·--········· - · -
R..idmca: (al State••····•-·······-····-·· (6) County ...•..••...... ·····-·-·····
(cl) If t.hia family dooa not live in &11y -rillage, check (.,/) h. . (._.).
(e) Vill.ap •............ -
4. Color (or race) of head of household (check (.,/) one of the fol.l•nriog);
(a) White .. _( __ )
(e) Muican. ••. (.. _.)
(,l Jap&11-··-·--·····<··-·>
<,) Filipino ••. (•. _)
(6) Negro•.. (._)
(cl) Chin- __ (.. _.)
(j) AmeriC&D Indian.. ..• (.•_)
(A) Other·--····-··
_,
6. Memhen of houaehold during October 1933.
•...... ......
...... ·()(•., ......
.,.....
-...
i...,
,,
-
N411ff
h
Bou,
y....,
'fjT
...
......
U•,no
Ill
...
......
.....
-- = - --
Nnuaa Yuu Co■ l'LSTD
.,_
Ondo
"°
- - - - '---
•
--
.....
Mma
om.,_ ..
lo=T
CT••
Nol
:-,1...
GI
IIO
e. II hollNllold -
formed .,._ ,&1111.UJ' 1, 1930, give date of i1• formation ··········•··•·•···········•·····•····-Y• (._) No (•• -.)
(6 ) If Odober bo.....bald included• combined or "doubled-up" family, 111111wer the followinc:
7· (a) Did
Oolo._ bouabald . - • eomhiMd or "doubled-up" family?
(I) Did t.hia -.ihinalioo tab
(2) If ao,
plaoe .,._ ,H,OQ.UJ' 1, 1930? Y• (_) No(._.)
pw line oum!Mn of penona ahoW1l in qu•&ian II who joined
the family of head afw
, _ _ , 1, 1930 - · • - - · · · - · - · - · ·----·-·-·-·---···--···-········-··(e)
n
(I) ~ ft,r aahio•tino - - - - - - - - av __. ol Oelobm- boaNbold did om~ N1W ill Oolober 11111, give 1iDe nualNn . , _
......... 11----·-----------
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
130
D. OCCUPATIONAL HISTORY, FARM TENURE, AND MOBILITY
or
HEAD
8. Occupational history of head of houaehold (include peri.,_,. of unemployment).
pay. If "orking at home /or wags, write "home" under oolun,n (i) .
or
HOUSEHOLD
Begin with lint job for
==.::--·:.:__. -.
.:•;, ;..~";"~~~~1-~~~~--......
B&QU
0111::~T-
Col
~>
~-::;....~u=T-,==~-==-
E.t.urm'Ga ,
Co>
---------- -----------·····-··
(-,
Col
....
.....,.
Cauat.1
00
(I)
•
........... ·-···--·--·---------·-- ----·-·----·--1-----·----·---- ....... .
--1 --·---·--·----··--· -···-·----- ..........
-_ :.::::::::::1:::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::= .=::::=:: -=::::=:::::::::::-··----·------··-------- -:::::::~:~:~:::::::: ·····-··
II. Tenure history of head of household (cropper, tenant, mortgaged owner, owner, manager, or )Nll1aer).
If part,.t.ime farming, enter information below, and reoord oth~r occupation under qu•iion 8 aboTe.
Characterize reault of operation of each farm u ••profitable'', ''broke oven", or .. ,offered loa.''
-- --- - ----------------+---
-1--------+---t--+-------+-------+------1--------··--·--·----
=-::::::-:::-:::=:::=::::==:::::::_-·-+--+-·-·
······-·-··---·· ~-
.......1..,..............................
--.-_._ _ _ t:f········-==_
Digitized by
Google
131
RELIEF SCHEDULE
UL DIPWYMENT STATUS
or
MEMBUS
or
HOUSEHOLD OTHER THAN HEAD
10. Employment •lat.ua in October 1933. For each member of hou..,hold, other than bead, wbo wu UI
yeara of og,, or over in October 1933, ,upply the following information. If &1111wer to column (b) ia
"no", ent<lr a d1L•b (-) in each of rolumn• (c), (d), (e), (0, (g), and (h).
,.,
'"'
····· •• ····•······· ·······-····-········· ····································--·--
10. Continued.
If answer to (i) is "no", ent<lr a duh (-) in oacb of colultlJIJI (j), (k), and
ia "yee", enter a dll8h (-) in each of column• (n) and (o).
.......... 01~•··
Ir
Wura ■
No ■ an
••
lol
IM'ft.O'l'D
m
OnOIIS ■
,..,.
IYetOI
Nol
•
, u •••.
tlll
""" ..E•·
PU'>'f
!•I
Oailapal'-
,_,
UI
,.,
0). If
u-
1.awu
.......
Pauo ■
ll■&Ulle
answer to column (m)
,,. •OT F.IU"LOTD .A.ft Jt01' llsaaoro Woaa
DI l){'T<Jfll ■ 1 - C ■ K:11 ilD 0JT ■ R....,_
'1-0Y ■ ()fll
Ot'TO•u
-
. . IIOT
lla■&DIO
-
Wou
--·--
,,,,
l<aro- ,., """'"
,.,
Moalhly
--------
(Y••
No)
(e)
~)
··················-----
----················-·······························
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
132
IV. IICONOMIC STATUS
or
BOUSBBOLD
11. Lu,d t.nd liYeotock, January 1, 11134.
N'OMBI&
IT&II
Nt'MBER
(•l A.,.. o,rned_····--·····•···· -·········-·· ····-· ·············••···- (•l Other oattlo ........ ......•..... ;... :...... .... ......•....•..........._
E!:-~~~::::::::::::::,:::::::::::=:::::::=:=::::::::::::::::j ~ ::i:.~~.~:::::::: : : :::::::
1
: : :::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::
12. Total oulllt&nding indebtedD- of head of howw,bold January 1, 1934 .....•. ..•.••. .... .........•...........•.... . ...
13. Incre&B6 in indebtadn- lrom January I, 1930 (or Crom format.ion o( houaebold, ii afw Janun7 1, 1930),
to ._January I, 1934.
lTUf
TOTAL
(a) lncrMN In m ~ IDdobtedn-:
(I) l"um Wld and bulldinp. .......•. ..•........ '...............
1. •.•.•••. .•.........•••••• ••.••• ••• ••••.....•... •.•..•.•.•••••••••••••••
(2; Chattel lndobtedn-............ .............. ;... .... - ...........•...........................•............ ...................................••
;~ :=.:!1:~:n- ··········.··········:-·······················r--··--··············································•·•···············
<•l T-.- unpai<L••.....•.. - ••.•..........•.•............. : .....•••......•......••... .............................. ............ .... .........................
~- ·~:.:~(~y)···•·--···-·-·······.._._..l ...........................
1 _. ·· .. -····.·.- ··-·.·· __ .___ __·.·._ ..·_
14 . Deere....., in reeerveo from January 1, 1930 (or from format.ion of houaebold, ii aft.er January 1, 11130),
ID Jaoua.ry 1, 19341.
TOTAL
(o) Dnwn
COMMINT
OD•"---··•···••· ······-··-···-········ ···················-·····1-················-····-·-······················-······· - -
s~:: :~:=~:~~:;::{:: ; :;::: :: :~==-====
(t) Dooo..ln - ·
···- ·······-··•··•·····················{·····························-•· ··········· ········-········-··
s
15. LoeoM or extraordinary exp,mam. Include all loesM from January 1, 11130 (or from formation of boaebold, ii after January l, 1930), 10 Ju.uary 1, 19341.
lTJ:M
TOT.il.
L_--
-
OOWMINT
-
- --- ----
C-) Bank lalln,_~------··-·••-··•-··· •-······-·-···•·•••••· ••···•·•••··•---••••·••-··•- • - -- - - - - (lj 1 - ln (o)
-
- . ....... ········· ·•········· •·-···············-••··• ··········•······•···•························-···--···---·-
Bad-······-·--·-·····················-······ ·······- - ··- ···-····· ·-·····•···········•······- ·······················-····-·-····
{'> hilUN
al
eoopantlTW or otbe fumffl'
orpnl11ti-. ... -·-···-·····- ····-················· ··············· ····· ······ ····•·······-···-······- ············-·····················-···(•) 1 - ol H.-........................................ ··-············•··-·····'·························································•···-·····-··
(fJ CN>p falln_.___ _ _ _ _ _ ·············· ·····-····················•·~······ ··············· ···················· · · · · - · - - - - -
<,) Modlool ....,
'
I
~ §-----•.·~-=f=~- ---i ::-=::- :==: ~==
Digitized by
Google
RELIEF SCHEDULE
133
JI. 0 - - ill indaba.- from January l, 1930 (or from formation of boUNbold if after January 1, 1030),
•1-71,lllM.
. ......
.,__.
---------------1------ ·--···--··------------
---·-··--·----------1------1
f. ffPU AND 801JKBS O.P POm.lC AND PRIVATE RELID' AND OTBU DTRAORDINARY
l'ODIS o.r AID
17. IDdicale &ypea and..,.,,..,. of reliaf reoeind h;,' t1iii1 bouaehold during October 1933.
.....
,_
__
......
raaw: m
N.__,...,_.,
(Coob•
M
NI
Cit
ll'-'I
... Dlw"-------·1------+----·-----·····-·-··········
···-·····•··•···-···
• .......
-··t-------------------+----+··-·-···-··
c., ...... ----·--····-t------1--········--···---------+--+·-•·•···-··--
.. - - r.i-rr>-·---·--··1----1------
. ·--·
lL C•) W• ...,._bold bowD to an:, &:,pe of reliaf ..-:, before January 1, !NOT
T-.._. __ (... )
No.._ ..... (••. )
Nol -1Ainable.. ........ (... )
(t) NIIIDINr of monlba for wmch ho-bold ,-iTed an:, relief during: 1930 •.•••••...•.... 11111 .............. .
1• ··-····--··
lllU ······--·
..............
11. OtMr fonm of -iatance received from January 1, 1933, to January I, 193-f.
. 0...----
.....
_I!-______
~ Ondlf' t I
1doa) ·--··--··••·· ·••··-·-·-·--····-·······-•-·· '--····•·••·•··-···--Hu (C-.0., ~ o.i.-->-······-··· -······•············•--·•····-··••·· ..... ····••·•-···--··CII ..,._...__.....,_ !Ar-ltwe!
f It . . . _ •
...,_A---.
Ila).
(1) 1nllL-
-----------·---~--------1----·----
CII CII ~·····-·······---------------< ---------+---·----·--<tt Oooa.-.......... · - · - - - - - - - - - - - - · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · - - - - - + - - CII . . .
~-.. ~l------···········--··--+--·······---·····-•··- ····--·····---·-····
"'O.-~
(., a.I C,..,,.-----•·••···--········-·········-·······-··········-········--···-·-··-•·-•···-··--
-i,1o,-.
·········--·•····-········-·-··-·········· ·-··············-··- •··-··········· ·--··-···•·············-·
(I) · - - - - ,..,...... ·-·•····•······-···-·-··-··········· ··················-·················•···-····-·····-·-···•-
"' r... • ...,_ _ _ _ _ _ ·-•-·-·-······-·-············································-·- ··-·-··•···•······•··-····
w ow...~
··--············. ··················-············-···· -··-·············•···-·-•
Cl) ............. _ _ .
······················•·······- ················-··················································-
(J) - - ~·--·---·····---·····-····---··----·-··••········ ············· ·····--··-·-····--·· ···-···-········---
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
NON-RELIEF SCHEDULE
135
• . - . . . . . . . . D.&a.••
RDSRAL DRRGSNCY RELO:f ADMINIBTllATION
11.u■r L BOPl(.INI, Allmbd.trdor
SURVEY OF RURAL NONRELIEF FAMILIES
TIIJII ICIDDIJLS IBOULD a■ nLLIID ONLY APTl!R lrNUMSRATOR BAIi ll■COM ■
TBOROUGBLY FAMILIAR 'll'ITB TBS GENERAL DEFINITIONS AND
8PSCIJ'IC INSTRUCTIONS (P.E.R.A. FORM D.RB.-17) PROVIDED
l'O■ TRIS 8URVSY.
A COPY or r.E.R.A. FORM D.IIA-17
IBOULD BE IN THE P088F.88ION or UCB
SNUMS■ ATOR AT ALL TIMES
DIVISION
or
RESlliRCB AND STATISTICS
Gu.&., Dlrmor
Co■RINOTON
Digitized by
Google
136
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
SUJlVJ:Y
or
RUJlAL NONRELID' fAMILIB8
I. Identification and Compoeilion of Housobold.
II. Occupational History, Farm Tenure, and Mobility of Head of Houaehold.
III. Employment Statua of Members of Housobold Oilier Than Head.
IV. Economic Status of Houoebold.
V. Extraordinary Forma of Aid.
Thia !urTey, conducted u of October 19~3, ia intended lo furnish
information for a cont.ml group of oolected rural bouseboldo comparable lo
tboee included in I.be Survey of Rural Families Receiving Relief in October
1933. hwill provide buoo forcomparisom betwoen nonrelief bouaeholdoand
t.hooo which have been reoei-ring relief from public fundo.
Digitized by
Google
NON-RELIEF SCHEDULE
L JDSNTIPICAffON .lND COMPOSJffON
I. llabedule No. - - - - · -
or
137
BOUSBBOLD
Date of interriew -----···············-·····
Field l&"Dt - - - - - · - - - -
2. Full name of head of houaebold ···-······-····-·······-····················································-·---·---
a.
Baidence: (o) St.ale ··-···················--·· (6) County ·-··-··········-·-·-··
(d) If tbia family d - not li•e in any village, check (./) here (_.).
(e) Village ······-·-·-
,. Color (or race) of bead of houaebold (check (.J) one ol the following):
(o) While .•• (._)
(e) Mexieoo ••• (.•• )
(•) Japan _____•• (..• )
(g) Filipino ..••. (... )
(6) Negro .•. (.•• )
(d) Chio--·-·( ... )
(/) Amerieoo Indian •.. (._)
(A) Other..........•.•
. _,
I. Memben ol houaebold dwinc October 1933.
.....
........................
..
(lil.•PJ
•,;:
atrta.
..,
·-- - -.....
...
.....u
v1.h-..JI•
u .....
Wu
lbmbar
tltrnl ■
M\ool~
Ondo
'i::;·
• ..+--------------1------1-----1---~--1-----+--~• •
""
II)
(II
(J)
-
CIQ
.- +Rm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - .. ______ -----~--- -------L-
- - - - - - - - - - - - · · ...........- -..... --+-----1-·-·· -·-···· ......... --···
..•
.•
.•
-+--------------~---1-----1-·•·-- --·-·
-+-------------~---!----!------------·
-+-------------~---l-----!-----1----I••··-•··-•···· ...........-····· ····-·
··-··· ··-····· .......... ~........
1• -+-------------~---1----+---'--····
l'
..
..
1•
1•
I. U bouebold -
formed alter Jenuary 1, 1930, pn dale of ila formation _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
2'. (o) Did October houaebold include a oombined or "doubled-up" family? Y• (•.. ) No(.•• )
<•> U October bouebold included a oombined or "doubled-up" family, an.-trer the followinc:
(1) Did tbia oombination take place after January I, 1930? Y• (•.. )
No (••• )
(2) U oo, pve line numben of peroona abown in qu•tion 6 who joined the family of bead afta-
Jan_uary 1, 1930
(I) R..- for oombinalion - - - - - - - - -..- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Digitized by
Google
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
138
D. OCCUPATIONAL RISTORY, l'ARM TENUllB, AND MOBILITY 01' IRAD OI'
HOUSEHOLD
8. Occupational hiotory of bead of bou11ebold (includo periods of unemployment).
pay. If working at home for wages, write "home" under oolumn (i).
- ~T.
Dunlloll o1
Moolh
Jot, or
•n-l Yf'111r r .. r,n•t of
Bfcan l'rw:rt111loy-
,.,
-••
,.,
Begin with fiffl job for
. ,.
M~~~\J'
11------~-----~-----~M,,_
Earu!n,1
.....
,.,
<•>
(I)
C.W.t7
TnDlblp
"'
(II)
(I)
···············-······ ····-·······•··-····· ···········----1--
···•····· ··········· ···-·•·····-·--···· -------+--
-----I••·•·····--······-·
··············-··-···~---9. Tenure history of bead of bou..bold (croppor, tenant, mortgaged ownor, 01"11er, manager, or partner).
If part-time !a.rming, enter information below, and reoord other occupal.ion under queotion 8 abon.
Cha.racteriu result of operation of each farm as ''profitable''• .,broke even", or u ■ufl'ered Ima."
.....,.,
Month
,nd y -
NambM
orY .. re
ooon...i
,.,
.............
..,
. , ·-
Full"'
rartllm
Numbw
Oper•i.d
.....
(o)
(I)
l'a.rmi111
(run.
Part)
,_...,
.,_,
(II
_,,_
--
•
(l,j
-··-·· ·········· ················•···•··· ·····•···· ·····-·· ··•·-····-····-···- ····-··----1-----·--·· ....... . ....... ·· ...... _ ..... · .,. •... r • •••----.,,.
Digitized by
Google
NON-RELIEF SCHEDULE
DJ. DIPLODDNT 8TAT08
or IOIIBDS or
139
HOUSEHOLD OTBU TRAN IIB.lD
0. Employmm& ■tawa ill October 1933. For MCh member of boUMhold, ot.her t.han bead, who wu UI
yean ol ap or
in October 1933, ■upply I.be following information. II an■wer to column (h) i■
"no", Miter a dub (-) in eech of column, (c), (d), (e), (I), (g), and (h).
OT..-
-
-
-·Moa111, ..
y.., Lui Job
1.1 t·,uaJ
•
'•f'l"U-
CIII
···-· --··· -··· ····--1------------~-----····-········-···-----+---+----
1---1---· ------· ···--••I-----------~ ··-·········----··------1---1""------· ·····-··· --·····••l----1------------1------------+----4-·------·-···· ·····-···
t___ _ _ _ _ _ _..,__ _ _. __ _...__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-~-----------+----- ----
10. Coadnaed.
If to (i) ii HDO", . , . _ a duh (-) In eecb of columm (j), (k), and (I). U ......... to column (m)
ii "yeo", MIiar a dub(-) In eaeh ol columno (D) and (o).
,.=. ••,-.
'ti•
:=
,.
•
---
·-·--· ......... ··-------
. .•.
<.K"To•••
:s L------·_
. ._._...__.._._._.._.___
If tr-- b...,. Elfft09U ••• _,,. l ■ H . . . . . .
.,.....,_•O.--
=■,1-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _....
pltJJedl ■
••
1mc- ■ 1n ue Otff aM■
=<a
• - ..,
o..a
~~.,
-.
-1
--~--· ······-··············--··········· ······-···········--·····•--1--- -~--!--~----------l---.1-.-------········ ---···-·················-·· -----··
-------- . . . . . . . 1-----------1
-······1------------1
----1---~--------· ······-··-·-·····-·············· ---·· ---·
■--••
---1---·· ·-······
•••n•••---------
·--•·1------------1
Digitized by
Google
140
RURAL RELIEF AND NON-RELIEF HOUSEHOLDS
IT. SCONOMIC STATUS
-
or
BOURBOI.D
-
11. Land and liv..tock Januuy I, 1934 .
....
(e)
(t)
(c)
Ac,-•--·-----+---------
0U...-11L----.J.---------A.,... nnted ...·-··•-•-·-t----------(/) B----------+Ho,- and muleo·--·-·-·· · - · - · · - - - - - - - · · (1) Sb-.•------ r---------
(,1) MUk
oo'"······················•·· .
·····•···•···-··············
(1)
(l) l'oulll'J'
12. Total outatanding indebt,,dn.,,. of head of houae.~old Januuy I, 11134 •·····-··-········------·-··
13. Inc,_.., in indebWnees from Januu:, I, 1930 (or from formalion of bouaehold, if after Ju. I, 11130),
to Januu:, I, 1934 .
....
.,.....
C•J hu:,- I n ~ Indebted-=
(I) Farm land and bu..
Ddwln"IPP...---(2) Chal&..i ladebtednea .•_._·-·······-·-····
+----- .._________________
·-·-·••·-·-•--·· ····----------·-·--···-··--· -
(J) Houoo and lo\ In ~··········-·-·-····· ·······-·-••··-·-·· · - - - - · - · - · - · - · - · - · · · · · · · - · · · · - - - - - (4) Buatn- In Ylllop..·-·-·············-····-· ·····-····-·-····-··~------(1) Tu• unpaid ______________________ --------·······-··•-------·-·-·-····-·-----------·---·······
(c) O\hor debla (opeclly) ... --···-·-·············-·-•· ·····-·-··········-·· · - - · · · - · - - - - · · · - · - - · - · - · - · · - - - -
14. D«reues in n,eervee from Januu:, I, 1930 (or from formation of bouaehold, if after Jan. 1, 11130), t.o
January I, 1934 .
.....
....
•--·----4------------------
(e) Dnwn oa •"'ap
····--·--·-··
(6) ~ . . . . . . . . . . .
•. •···-·--·-·· · - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - · - - - - - - - -
<•> Doe,_ In land and buDdlnp..••.•...••••-·-·-·· ·-·-·-····-·-·-·· · - - · · - - · - - · - - · - - · · - · · · - · - - - - - - - (,I) Folfolted lnot.allmen\ peyman\L .. - •. ····-···-·•-··
(•) Dlcnia.Ma ln We 11..urm.......___________ - - - - - - - -
··•·-·-····---i------·-·-·-·--·-·-------
(/) Bormwed oa I l l e - ~ - - - - -
<,) ~
c-i-cu,>--------- !------+--------·--------
16. LoMee or extraordinary expenaM. Include aU I . - from Januq l, 11130 (or from formatio11 of
hold, if after Jan. I, I 030), to January I, 1934.
ho--
.....
....
--ll------+-----------------•-.._•-------+ _____ .~---------------..
·~
..~-------------+------- -------------------
(a) Baak lall1una..._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(t)
1-1n-uand
(<) -
(,1) Failure al
_ . u - ar -
-
-·-··--.....----------+------1-----------------
(o)
(/)
1-olll-----------~-----+---------------Crop l a l l u - - - - - - - - .J.-------11-------------············-···
C,) Medical (I) Doc\oP hfD•
(2) Boopl\■.I b"'-
(A)
(1)
.. ·-·-·---·--··
·--·-····· ·-·-·-·-·-·--·· · · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Childblnl,a..__-···-·-·-·---····· ·-·-·-·-·· ··-•-·· · - - - - -
ru•..,..____________, - - - - - l - - - - - - - - · - - - - - - - -
(1) Pw■oDallnJ• ....~ - - - - - - - · · · ·
(JI 0\'-1-(,roc,i!y) _ _ _ _ _ __
·-·-·-·-·---+----------------
Digitized by
Google
NON-RELIEF SCHEDULE
II.
n.-1n tnd4btldnla !Na .Ja11GU7 I, 1930 (or from formalioo of bcNalhold, It alt,.,.,.... I, 19111), kl
.
Jaaary I, 193'.
.....
,. DTa.lOSDIN.lllY roaMS or AID
17. J'onm o f ~ Nelind from .Janauy I, ID38, to January I, ID34.
........
,._
"'a.. ... • - - - (hac..111 •tat,_, ___. . . ___
Gt..._ _ _ (o-.ftFc..1110.--l---+ - - - - - - - 1,t , . , _. . . . _ _ _ _
c.......- ~ -
lllio),
-1-------
-+---------+------
(I) . . . ..___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Cit - ..
• -,..._,_______________-1---------1-------
-
1----------- -1 -------
.. o-,.___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
•
-
~--------:1--------
Oll,arc.-i,,)_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.. ca..r. C •-"°'-~,._-----------+---------1------fot a... _ _..,....__________- l l - - - - -
------------------1--------·--·-···•---------------1------• a.....----· - - - - - - - - - - - - --+--------1--- - - - • ......,...,_pa-~------- -----+----------0) ..- -
w ....__.,.... ___
~ (lpootty)
Digitized by
Google
@FedFRASER