The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Digitized by Google Research Monographs oF the Division oF Social Research Works Progress Administration I Six Rural Problem Areas, Relief - Raourcft - Rehabilitation II Comparative Study of Rural Relief and Non-Relief Households Ill IV V The Transient Unemployed Urban Worlcen on Relief Landlord and Tenant on the Cotton Plantation VI Chronolo9y of the Federal Emer9ency Relief AdmlnImation, May 12, 1933, to December 31, 1935 VII The Misratory • Casual Worlcer VIII Farmers on Relief and Rehabilitation IX Part - Time Farmin9 in the Southeast Digitized by Google WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION Harry L. Hopkins, Admlnldrofor Corrlnston GIii, Aulsfonf Admlnldrofor DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH Howard B. Myen, Dl,edor PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST By R. H. Allen • L. S. Cottrell, Jr. • W. W. Troxell Harriet L. Herrln9 • A. D. Edwards • RESEARCH MONOGRAPH IX 1937 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON Digitized by Google Digitized by Google ~' cu.J_'J,,,,-,;,t/cJ', cf: .O--~-<'-o.p ,;i. -/ 0. 3 . ',,-").'L'.A _,.~.,._,,.J • 1 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL wORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D. 0., March 1, 1937. Sm: I have the honor to transmit the results of a study of combined farming-industrial employment conducted in the Southeast by the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. Comparative social and economic data for part-time farmers and for nonfarming industrial workers form the basis for this report. The findings are fundamental to any proposal for the public encouragement of part-time farming, both in the Eastern Cotton Belt and in other areas. The report emphasizes the fact that while part-time farming has proved beneficial to families engaged in it, such farming activity can be expanded only where fodustry has sufficiently recovered from the depression to offer satisfactory wages and hours to its workers, or where future prospects for an industry's development are promising. It is unlikely that industries will resume the long hours of predepression days. Workers today are in the process of adjusting their habits to the additional leisure that shorter hours have given them, and the encouragement of part-time farming activities at this time, under proper safeguards, will help to absorb this margin of leisure time and will increase income. Instruction in improvea farming methods and in every phase of farm operation from planting to preservation of the product was found to be needed throughout the Southeast. It is believed that assistance by educational agencies will make existing part-time farms more consistent producers of food and of a varied diet. The study was made by the Division of Social Research, under the direction of Howard B. Myers, Director of the Division. The data were collected under the general supervision of T. C. McCormick. Analys1S of the data was made under the supervision of T. J. Woofter, Jr., Coordinator of Rural Research. The report was edited by Ellen Winston and Frances Mason. The work of setting up the study and of collecting and analyzing the material was the joint responsibility of R. H. Allen, whose services were made available by the Land Policy Section, Division of Program Planning of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, L. S. Cottrell, Jr., and W. W. Troxell. Mr. Allen was mainly responsible for the material on farming operations, Mr. Cottrell and A. D. Edwards for the social aspects of the problem, and Mr. Troxell for the industrial analyses. Harriet L. Herring prepared the present summary volume. Respectfully submitted. CORRINGTON GILL, Hon. Assistant Administrrrtor. L. HOPKINS, Works Progress Admfaistrator. HARRY Ill Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Contents PART I Page xv Introduction - - - - - - - - - - - - - Background and reason for study _ _ _ _ _ Pe.rt-time farming an old practice _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Extent of part-time farming _________ Reasons for present study of part-time farming _ Objectives of present study ________ _ Reasons for selection of Ea.stem Cotton Belt _ _ The Eastern Cotton Belt_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Comparative extent of part-time farming_ Basic homogeneity _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Division of area into subregions_ _ _ _ _ _ _ The Cotton Textile Subregion _ _ _ _ _ The Coal and Iron Subregion __ The Atlantic Coast Subregion_ The Lumber Subregion ______ _ The Naval Stores Subregion _ _ _ _ Selection of cases for survey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ xv xv _ XVI XVIII _ _ _ _ XIX xx - - xx - - - xx XXII _ _ _ _ XXIII XXV XXVII XXVII XXVIII XXIX _ _ Summary _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ XXX XXXIII 1 Chapter I. The part-time farmer and his farm - Characteristics of the part-time farmer_ _ 1 1 2 3 5 6 Age ______ _ Size of household _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Farm experience _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Years engaged in part-time farming _ _ Enterprises in 1929 and 1934 __ The farm_ _ _ _ _ Location _ _ _ Type and size_ 7 7 7 V Digitized by Google VI CONTENTS Page Tenure_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Value and indebtedness _ _ Buildings_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Implements and machinery_ Livestock _ _ _ _ _ _ Farm production _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Gardens _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Poultry and poultry products_ _ _ _ Dairy products _ _ _ _ _ _ Pork _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Field crops _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Fuel _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Fann receipts and expenses_ Sale of products_ _ _ _ _ _ Expenses ________ _ Labor requirements of part-time farms_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 9 _ 10 _ 12 _ _ _ _ 13 13 14 15 21 23 _ _ _ 25 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 27 _ _ _ _ _ 29 29 29 30 31 35 Chapter II. Off-the-Jann employment - Distance to work _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Industry and occupation _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Employment, earnings, and income Employment of other members of household _ _ Contribution of farm enterprise to family income Changes in income, 1929-1934 Relief _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Outlook for employment __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ 35 37 39 42 45 46 47 48 51 _ _ _ _ _ 51 _ _ _ _ _ _ 52 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 56 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 57 _ _ 60 Chapter Ill. The part-time fanner's living and social conditions - _ Location _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Housing _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Conveniences and facilities _ _ _ _ Stability and tenure _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Health_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Education ____ _ Library facilities _ _ _ _ _ _ Participation in social organizations _ _ _ _ _ ___ 61 65 66 _ _ 69 Chapter IV. Conclusions _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - The part-time farmer a hybrid _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Advantages of part-time farming _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Possibility of increasing the number of part-time farms Desirability of increasing part-time farming _ _ _ _ _ The improvement of existing part-time farming _ _ _ A governmental part-time farming program _ _ _ _ _ Digitized by _ 70 _ _ _ 70 73 _ _ _ 74 _ 75 _ _ _ 77 Google CONTENTS VII PART II Page 81 lntrodudion - - - - - - - Chapter I. The Cotton Textlle Subregion of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 83 _ ___ General features of the subregion _ Counties covered in field survey __ The cotton textile industry _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Growth and distribution in the South National problems of the industry Competing materials _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Exports and imports _ _ _ Outlook for employment Labor _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Hours and wages _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Seasonal variation in employment _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ The mill village_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Farming activities of part-time farmers _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Types of part-time farmers _ _ _ _ Location of part-time farm$ _ _ _ _ Farm production _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Gardens _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Corn _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dairy products _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Poultry products _ _ _ _ _ _ Pork _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Fuel _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Changes in size of farming operations, 1929-1934 _ _ _ _ _ Cash receipts and cash expenses _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Value and tenure of part-time farms _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Labor requirements of part-time farms and their relation to working hours in industry _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Employment and earnings in industry ___________ The industrial group _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Industry and occupation ______ Earnings of heads of households _ _ _ _ _ _ Total family cash income _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Living conditions and organized social life _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Housing _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Automobiles, radios, and telephones __________ Home ownership ___________________ Education _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Social participation _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Economic status of part-time and full-time farmers _ _ _ Relief _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 83 85 Digitized by 86 86 87 89 89 90 91 91 93 93 94 94 94 96 96 98 98 99 99 99 99 100 100 101 102 102 102 103 104 105 106 107 107 108 109 110 111 Google VIII CONTENTS Page 113 Chapter II. The Coal and Iron Subregion of Alabama - _ - ___ 113 General features of the subregion _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ 117 The industries of the subregion _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 117 Iron and steel manufacturing _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ 118 Trend of production and employment _ Hours and wages _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 119 120 Bituminous coo.I mining _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ________ 120 Employment and mechanization _ ____ 121 Hours and wages _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ 121 Seasonal variation in employment _ _ _ _ _ __ 121 Outlook for employment _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 123 Farming activities of pa.rt-time farmers _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 123 Location of pa.rt-time farms _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 125 Fa.rm production _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 125 Gardens _ _ _ _ _ Corn _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 127 Dairy products _ _ 127 _ __ 128 Poultry products _ _ _ _ _ Pork _____ _ _ _ 128 FueL _____ _ _ 128 ______ 129 Cash receipts and co.sh expenses _ _ _ _ Value and tenure of part-time farms __ _ 129 Labor requirements of part-time farms and their relation to _ __ 129 working hours in industry ___ _ _ 130 Employment and earnings in industry _ _ Industry and occupation 130 _ _ 131 Earnings of heads of households _ _ _ _ 133 Total family cash income _ _ _ _ _ _ 135 Changes in family income, 1929-1934 _ 136 Living conditions and organized social life _ _ 136 Housing of white households _ _ _ _ _ ______ 137 Housing of Negro households_ _ _ _ Automobiles, radios, and telephones _____ _ 137 _ ____ 137 Home ownership _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Education _____________ _ _ _ _ _ _ 138 _ _____ 138 Social participation of white households _ _ 139 Social participation of Negro households_ Relief _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 139 _ 141 Chapter Ill. The Atlantic Coast Subregion _ _ General features of the subregion and of Charleston County __ 141 Charleston County _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 141 Population_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 142 Agricultural features _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 142 Area covered and cases enumerated _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 144 Digitized by Google CONTENTS IX Page Industries of Charleston County _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Service industries _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Manufacturing_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _______ Outlook for employment_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Farming activities of part-time farmers _____ Types of part-time farmers_ _ _ _ _ ________ Farm production _ _ _ ________ Gardens _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Com _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ Dairy products _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Poultry products _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ Pork_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FueL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Fish_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Cash receipts and cash expenses _ Value and tenure of part-time farms _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ Labor requirements of part-time farms and their relation to _ ___ working hours in industry _ _ _ _ _ Employment and earnings in industry _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ The industrial group_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Industry and occupation of heads of white households ___ Industry and occupation of heads of Negro households _ _ _ Earnings of heads of white households _ _ Earnings of heads of Negro households_ _ _ _ _ Total cash income of white households_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Total cash income of Negro households _________ Living conditions and organized social life _ _ _ _ Housing of white households _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Housing of Negro households_ _ _ _ _ ______ Automobiles, radios, and telephones_ _ ____ Home ownership _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Education _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ Social participation _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Relief _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 144 146 147 149 150 150 150 150 152 152 153 153 153 153 153 154 155 155 156 157 158 159 160 162 162 163 163 164 165 165 166 167 168 Chapter IV. The Lumber Subre9ion of Alabama, Geor9ia, and South Carolina _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _ 169 General features of the subregion and of Sumter County _ _ _ Sumter County_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ________ Population _____ _ __ Agricultural features ______ Industry_ _ _ _ _ _ _____ Area covered and cases enumerated _ _ _ __ Lumber and woodworking industries ______ _ ____ _ Lumber consumption in the United States _ Digitized by 169 169 170 170 171 172 173 174 Google X CONTENTS Page Employment in the lumber industry in Alabama, Georgia., a.ndSouthCarolina._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 174 Hours and wages _ _ _ _ 174 Seasonal variation_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ 175 Type of labor_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 176 _ _ _ _ _ 176 Outlook for employment _ _ _ _ _ _ Lumber industry _ _ _ _ _ 176 Pulp and paper industry_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 177 Woodworking industries_ _ _ __ 177 Farming activities of part-time farmers _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 178 Types of part-time farmers_ _ 178 Farm production _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 179 Gardens _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 179 Corn _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 181 Dairy products _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 181 Poultry products _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 181 Pork _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 181 Feed crops _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 181 FueL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 182 Ca.sh receipts and cash expenses _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 182 Value and tenure of pa.rt-time farms _ _ _ _ _ 183 Labor requirements of part-time farms and their relation to __ 183 working hours in industry _ _ _ _ __ 184 Employment and earnings in industry _ _ The industrial group _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 184 _ 184 Industry and occupation_ _ _ _ _ _ Earnings of heads of white households _ _ 185 _ _ 186 Earnings of heads of Negro households _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 188 Total cash income of white households_ _______ 189 Total cash income of Negro households _____ 190 Living conditions and organized social life Housing of white households _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - _ 191 192 Housing of Negro households ______ 192 Automobiles, radios, and telephones _ _ 193 Home ownership _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ 193 Education _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ 194 Social participation _ Relief _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 195 Chapter V. The Naval Stores Subregion of Alabama and Georgia _ 197 _ General features of the subregion and of Coffee County_ Coffee County _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ The gum naval stores industry _ _ _ _ _ _ The industry _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Digitized by Google 197 197 200 200 XI CONTENTS Page Location of the industry _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Method of production _ _ _ _ _ _ Types of producers and the labor force _ _ _ Camps _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Trend of production_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Competing materials _ _· _ _ _ _ _ _ Problems of the industry_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . Outlook for employment _ _ _ Farming activities of part-time farmers _ Types of part-time farmers_ _ _ _ _ _ Size of farms _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Farm production _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Gardens _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dairy products _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Poultry products _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Pork _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Feed crops _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FueL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Cash receipts and cash expenses _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Value and tenure of part-time farms ___________ Labor requirements of part-time farms and their relation _ ____ to working hours in industry _ _ _ Employment and earnings in industry _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Industry and occupation _ _ _ _ _ _ Earnings of heads of households _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Total family cash income _ _ _ _ _ _ Variation in earnings in the naval stores industry _ _ Living conditions and organized social life _______ _ Housing _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Automobiles, radios, and telephones _ _ _ _ _ Home ownership _ _ _ _ ____ Education _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Social participation _ _ Relief _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 200 200 202 202 202 203 203 204 205 205 206 206 206 208 209 209 209 210 210 210 211 212 212 212 213 214 214 215 215 215 216 216 216 _ _ 221 Appendix A. Case studia of part-time farmen _ Appendix B. Supplementary tables _ _ 243 Appendix C. Methodolo9ical note - 281 Appendix. D. Countia in industrial subre9lons - - _ 293 Appendix E. Schedula _ 297 Index _______ _ 303 Digitized by Google COHTEHTS XII FIGURES Figure Page 1. Census part-time farms, 1929 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ xx1 2. Industrial subregions of Alabama, Georgia, and South xx1v Carolina _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3. Regionalized types of farming in the Southeast _ _ _ _ _ xxv1 4. Number of cotton spindles in place _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 87 5. Location of part-time farms included in field survey, Greenville County, South Carolina _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 95 6. Location of part-time farms included in field survey, Carroll County, Georgia _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 95 7. Size of principal enterprises on white noncommercial parttime farms, Greenville County, South Carolina, and Carroll County, Georgia, 1934 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 97 8. The Coal and Iron Subregion of Alabama ________ 114 9. Location of part-time farms included in field survey, Charleston County, South Carolina _________ 124 10. Size of principal enterprises on part-time farms, by color of operator, Jefferson County, Alabama, 1934 ______ 126 11. Portion of Jefferson County, Alabama, covered in field survey ______________________ 145 12. Size of principal enterprises on part-time farms, by type of farm and by color of operator, Charleston County, South Carolina, 1934 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 151 13. Location of part-time farms included in field survey, Sumter County,SouthCarolina ______________ 173 14. Size of principal enterprises on part-time farms, by type of farm and by color of operator, Sumter County, South Carolina, 1934 ___________________ 180 15. Active Naval Stores Belt showing the number and approximate location of turpentine processors-sea.son 1934-35 _ 201 16. Size of principal enterprises on white part-time farms, by type of farm, Coffee County, Georgia, 1934 ______ 207 Digitized by Google Part I Part-Time Farming in the Southeast XIII Digitized by Google Digitized by Google INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND AND REASON FOR STUDY Part-Time Fannlnt an Old Practice ONE OF the conspicuous changes wrought by the industrial revolution was the concentration of working people in cities. No longer, the critics of its ruthless march complained, could the journeyman, with his few apprentices, live in his cottage, and tend his small plot of land in odd moments taken from the craft he followed as his main occupation. Not only did the coming of the factory bring monotony into his work and increase the uncertainty of his employment, but at the same time it took away from him the healthful activity on his garden plot, his little bulwark against the ups and downs of the market. Division of labor, it appeared, had arrived, not only within the work place, but within society. Men tended machines and lived in towns and cities or tended farms and lived in the country. The clear-cut distinction that came to be made between rural and urban activities has perhaps blinded many students of socio-economic life to the fact that there always have been some workers who managed to combine the two. Such combinations have existed in New England from the beginning of the nineteenth century, for the soil was stony and the opportunity for a supplementary cash wage was offered in many rural localities by small factories. A13 the industrial cities grew, overrunning the nearby fields, they were populated by waves of immigrants who came from rural areas. These people were accustomed to intensive cultivation of small plots of ground, and always a few of them escaped the teeming slums to tend abandoned farms. 1 In the South, industrial development came tardily, and for a generation longer than in most other areas, the weaver, the cabinetmaker, the wheelwright, and the cooper plied their trades in sparsely settled areas. With limited markets for their services, they made part of their living from the land. When industrial development did 1 Davis, I. G. and Salter, L. A., Jr., Part-Time Farmi11f1 in Connecticut, Bulletins 201 and 204, Department of Agricultural Economics, Connecticut State College, March and July, 1935; Rozman, David, Part-Time Farmi11f1 in Massachmetts, Bulletin 266, Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station, 1930. xv lGOOOl "-37-2 Digitized by Google XVI PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST come, it brought the industrial village to isolated locations. These villages were laid out where land was cheap on the premise that a rural people out of reach of stores, both financially and physically, could tend gardens. With the coming of the automobile and improved roads, the rural dweller was placed within reach of industrial employment in the city and the urban industrial worker was placed within reach of land on a scale that had not existed since the rise of the factory system. Cityweary people with city jobs could and did move to the country for esthetic reasons, for the creative pleasure of growing things, for space for their children, and for the economy and freedom of country life. The farmer went to the nearby village, town, or city for a cash wage that would help to stabilize an income based on gambling with both the weather and the market. Extent of Part-Time Fannlnt So common had the custom of combining farming with other employment become that the United States Census of Agriculture took cognizance of it in 1930 by counting and classifying the fa.rm operators who worked part-time off their farms. Granting the inaccuracy and incompleteness of any census of farmers and farming, the numbers discovered were impressive-approximately 1,903,000 persons, or 30.3 percent of all farm operators of the United States, reported some time worked off their farms. More than a million of them worked 50 days or more off the farm, and half of these (540,000) worked 150 days or more, thus enabling them to be classified as part-time farmers, according to the 1930 Census definition. 1 A quarter of a million (267,000) worked 250 days, or had what amounted to practically full-time jobs off the farm. 3 During the depression the general movement of people from country to city was retarded, and on January 1, 1935, the farm population was over a million and a third larger than in 1930.' Almost 2 Those farms were classified as part-time farms whose operators spent 150 days or more at work in 1929 for pay at jobs not connected with their farms or reported an occupation other than farming, provided the value of products of the farm did not exceed $750. This presupposes the census definition of a farm as comprising at least 3 acres or more unless it produced $250 worth of farm products or more in 1929. Under the 2 definitions there were 339,207 persons classified as part-time farmers in 1929 tFifteenth Census of the United States: 1990, Agriculture Vol. III, pp. 1 and 12). Census figures in this introduction include the total number of persons reporting time off the farm rather than the more limited group of part-time farmers as determim,d by these definitions. • Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1990, Agriculture Vol. IV, p. 430. 4 United States CensU8 of Agriculture: 1935. It is generally agreed among agricultural economists and students of population, however, that census procedure was so changed in 1935 as to result in a much more complete enumeration of small farms than in any earlier census. Digitized by Google XVII INTRODUCTION 2 million of the total farm population in 1935, or 1 out of every 16 persons on farms, had been living in a nonfarm residence 5 years earlier. Many of them were unemployed, having returned to farms owned by themselves or relatives, or having become squatters on other people's land. They had moved from urban areas to secure the benefits of low living costs, or to carry on subsistence farming, or for both reasons. A large number of them, however, had retained or found employment in villages, towns, or cities. The number of operators employed 50 days or more off the fa.rm was higher in 1934 than in 1929, despite the unemployment and part-time work prevalent in 1934.1 Over one-half of the 1,121,000 fa.rm operators with 50 days or more of off-the-farm employment in 1934 fulfilled one phase of the census definition of part-time farmers by working at least 150 days off the farm. Surveys in different States and areas have shown that there are many individuals combining farming with other employment who have farms smaller than 3 acres and hence are not included in the census count. A study published in 1930 in Massachusetts estimated that there were at least 60,000 farming enterprises in that State on a part-time basis.6 The Census of Agriculture of 1930 reported only 25,600 farms in Massachusetts and only 9,900 farm operators reporting any time worked off the farm. A study of part-time farming in Connecticut, published in 1935, concluded that 60 percent of the farms in that State were operated on a part-time basis.7 The 1930 Census listed 37 .3 percent of the operators as reporting time worked off the farm. According to a study of rural nonfarm workers in Ohio in 1934, there were an estimated 100,000 rural nonfarm families (and, therefore, not counted as farm operators in the census) who obtained some of their living from the land. 8 The supervisors of the Civil Works Administration survey of part-time farmers in 1933 made general community surveys in addition to securing full schedules from households that combined farming and other employment. An estimate of the number of farmers making such combinations in six Piedmont and foothill counties of North Carolina ranged from 50 to 90 percent of all farmers. 9 1 1,121,000 in 1934 as compared with 1,059,000 in 1929. Rozman, David, Part-Time Farming in Mcusachusetu, op. cit., p. 146. 7 Davis, I. G. and Salter, L. A., Jr., Part-Time Farming in Conn«ticut, op. cit., p. 4. 1 Morison, F. L. and Sitterley, J. H., Rural Homu and Non-agricultural Workers, A Survey of Their Agricultural Activitiea, Bulletin M7, Agricultural Experiment Station, Wooster, Ohio, February 1935. • Woofter, T. J., Jr., Herring, Harriet L., and Vance, Rupert B., A Study of the Catawba Valley, unpublished manuscript in the Institute for Research in Social Science, University of North Carolina. 1 Digitized by Google XVIII PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST All of these data refer to families in which the head divided his time between farming and some other occupation. In addition, there are, of course, families in which the head is a full-time farmer while one or more other members work at another occupation and bring in a cash wage, or vice versa. Partly because the Census of 1930 indicated the extensiveness of the practice, partly because of recent pronouncements and policies of large manufacturers concerning decentralization of industry with just such combinations in mind, and partly because the depression focused attention on the many individual efforts to bridge the gap between earnings and living costs, the various types of part-time farming have roused much interest. Remon1 for Pr-mt Study of Part-Time Fanning A great deal of the recent interest in part-time farming has centered around proposals that the various combinations of farming with industry be given public encouragement as a means of improving the living conditions and increasing the security of many more families, of keeping needy families off relief, or of removing them from the relief rolls. Proposals for the advancement of part-time farming fall into three major groups: Provision of garden plots for industrial workers in order that produce from these plots may supplement their income from industrial employment and aid in tiding them over seasons of unemployment. Establishment of new communities of families, each family to be provided with a small acreage on which to raise a considerable portion of its food, with the expectation that industries will locate in such communities and provide supplementary cash income. Settlement of families on small farms near communities in which industrial establishments already exist, where they may produce a considerable portion of their food and may also obtain some employment in the industries. In view of the scarcity of factual information available for use in formulating public policy with respect to such proposals, the Research Section, Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration in cooperation with the Land Policy Section, Division of Program Planning of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, undertook a study of this question. 10 Such public programs as have actually been undertaken have been chiefly of the second type, but they are too new to allow an adequate appraisal of incomes and living in the resulting communities. In this investigation attention was directed toward families that had already made farming combinations of the first and third types. 10 Since the study was undertaken, the former agency has become the Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration, and the latter has hecome the Land Use Planning Section, Land Utilization Division, Resettlement Administration. The study was continued by these agencies. Digitized by Google IHTRODUCTIOH XIX ObJecllftl of Praent Study The principal objectives of this study were as follows: To describe existing types of combined farming-industrial employment. To appraise the benefits and disadvantages of these existing types. To determine the possibilities for further development of desirable farmingindl18trial combinations; in particular, to appraise the extent to which these combinations might be utilized in a rehabilitation program. In order to reach these main objectives, answers were sought to questions concerning the part-time fa.rm enterprise, 11 off-the-farm occupation, and living and social conditions. The questions relating to the pa.rt-time fa.rm were: What land, buildings, and equipment do existing part-time farming units have; in other words, what amount and kind of investment is necessary for a practicable part-time farming unit? What do these farms produce for home use and for sale? What are the cash expenses and labor requirements of these farms? Questions relating to the off-the-farm occupation were: What industrial employment is, or may become, available for combination with farming? What are the labor requirements and wage scales of these industries? Do his farming activities place the part-time farmer at a disadvantage in opportunities for employment or in earnings? Questions relating to living and social conditions were: What living conditions are associated with these farming-industrial combinations, and how do the part-time farmers compare in this respect with other groups at the same occupational levels? What are the social characteristics of persons and families who have combined farming with industrial employment? In the light of survey findings, the possibility and the desirability of further development of pa.rt-time farming, either by extension to more families or by the improvement of existing part-time farms, were considered. Secondary sources of information were first explored. The Bureau of the Census cooperated in making special tabulations of data from the 1930 Census of Agriculture and the 1930 Census of Manufactures. A field study was undertaken to provide the additional factual information needed in the analysis. This field study included a schedule study of a sample of part-time farm families and, for comparative purposes, a sample of nonfarming industrial employees. It also included an inspection of the areas in which enumeration was made, an inspection of industrial establishments, and interviews with employers, public officials, and other informed persons. 11 For definition of part-time farming used in the survey, see p. XXX. Digitized by Google xx PART-TIME FARMJNG IH THE SOUTHEAST RNIOIII for Selecllon of EClllenl Colton Belt It w88 evident that answers to the above questions should be sought in an area where the practice of combining farming with industrial work had been of sufficient duration to furnish examples of varied experience, and in a region where relatively homogeneous conditions prevailed. Since it W88 believed that part-time farming might be found to have a bearing on rural rehabilitation as well as upon the entire question of relief, it was considered desirable to select an area in which the need for a soil program was widespread and urgent, and where the relief load was at least average for the country. The region selected as fn)fiUing all these conditions was the Eastern Cotton Belt, which is composed of the whole or parts of eight cottonraising States as follows: North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Mississippi. This study was limited to the three States, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina, which comprise most of the eastern end of the Cotton Belt. THE EASTERN COTTON BELT Comparative Extent of Part-Time Fannlnt The Eastern Cotton Belt is preeminently an agricultural region and in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina roughly one-half of the gainfully occupied males are engaged in agriculture. According to the 1930 Census, all other occupations employ less than onefourth of a million males in South Carolina, less than one-half of a million in Georgia, and a little over one-third of a million in Alabama. This means that opportunity for off-the-farm employment in the Eastern Cotton Belt is relatively much more limited than in States like Massachusetts, which has 1,232,000 males in other occupations and only 54,000 in agriculture, or Pennsylvania, which has 2,674,000 males in other occupations and 244,000 in agriculture. Yet, to revert to the Census of Agriculture classification of a parttime farmer, the number of farm operators in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina who reported work off the farm in 1929 comprised 28.9, 24.7, and 31.3 percent, respectively, of all farm operators (table 1), which was close to the national average of 30.3 percent. 12 The percentages of farm operators reporting work off the farm in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania were higher than those for the three southern States. When the number of farm operators working off the farm is taken as a percent of males in nonfarm occupations, the three southern States show higher percentages than do the three northern States: 19.4 percent for Alabama, 14.4 percent for Georgia, and 22.0 percent for South Carolina 13 as compared with 1.3 percent for Connecticut, 0. 7 percent for Massachusetts, and 2.6 percent for Pennsylvania. 12 18 Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1980, Agriculture Vol. IV, p. 432. For location of part-time farms, see fig. 1. Digitized by Google INTRODUCTION XXI Tal,/e 1,-Number of Farm Operators Working Part-Time off the Farm in 1929 1 Compared With Number in Occupations Other Than Agriculture State Males 10 yean or Farm orratora reporting 10 ,-rs or ~andoverln wor off the farm Males 10 Males age and over In occupations yeanor agriculture other than agrl· ageand culture Percent over Peroent of males plntully of all Nnmber In non• occupied farm farmoooperators oupatlona Nnmber Percent Nnmber Percent MIIIS!IOhmetta •.• ••..... 1, 2811, 310 Conneotlout. ____________ Pennsylvania ___________ 2, 499,201 DUI, 211 South Carolina__ •••••••• 480,978 860,219 Oeol'Rla---·-···-·-······ Alabama_-----------···· 772,281 SS,73) 36,311 243,860 2M,0311 412,311 388,810 4.2 1,281,lilHJ 7.1 4Q,8ll0 8.4 2,874.801 68.2 224,937 437, II08 48. 6 50.2 383, 11116 16.8 112.D Dl.O 40.8 61.6 49.8 D,862 6,420 1111, 717 49,484 113,140 74.493 88. 6 87.8 40.4 8L3 K7 21. D 0.8 1.4 2.0 22.0 14.4 111.4 • Flgnrea for lD'lD are med ao u to have oomperable llgnrea for other employment. The CeDIWI or Agriculture of 1936 shows that the actual number reporting time worked off the farm bu lncrll88ed In South Carolina and d - 1 In Oeonrla and Alabama. All 8 or the above-mentioned northern States showed 1 n - , In part-time farmers. The chanps, however, were not ao great u to alter the general relationship, Source: F1/IU111A Ct111111 o/tlu Unlltd Slain: 1~, Agriculture Vol. IV, p. 432; and Population Vol. IV, p.19. As a result of the straggling character of towns of the South, there are many out-of-the-way places where pa.rt-time farms would not be looked for. Moreover, since many heads of industries have e.lways encouraged a large number of their employees to engage in some agriculture.I activity, there must be numerous plots of this type in the South that would be too sme.11 to be included by a census enumerator. Evidence of this was seen in the present survey, which showed that 61 percent of the part-time farmers included had less than 3 acres of F10. I - CENSUS PART-TIME ,vtRY COUNTY IN THtSt THREE STATU FARMS, 1929 CONCE:NTAATM)f.i O<;CURRCO AA OUNO ATLANTA MO a111MllritOHAM Al WILL Al ALONG MUCH' 0# THI ATLANTtC AND GULi' CGUTS M-1410,W PA Digitized by Google XXII PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST cropland, and 55 percent had less than 3 acres in their entire farms, and 80 would not have been counted as farmers by the census. It will be apparent from a consideration of the amount of products produced on the average part-time farm that not many of those having less than 3 acres would have produced $250 worth of farm products and so have been included in the census definition of a farm. Balle Homosenslty In spite of the variety of industries in the region, the subregions of the Eastern Cotton Belt have several common features that make for a basic homogeneity. The entire Cotton Belt has a long growing season and a good climate for raising food products. It has a fairly fertile soil a,lthough much of it has suffered from erosion and harmful farming practices. The industries of the region, while not 80 large and varied as in the northeastern part of the United States, are less concentrated in congested areas. Recent road improvements place much of the rural population within easier reach of existing industries than are their city cousins of their jobs. One result of the lack of intense concentration of industry is that land values within a reasonable radius of employment are not so high as to make purchase or rental prices for farming enterprises exorbitant. Many houses for rent in small towns have lots large enough for family gardens. Suburban houses often include an acre or more of land, while plots unattached to houses frequently can be rented for as little as $5 an acre. The Eastern Cotton Belt is an area of low wages, largely because of the great surplus of labor. Studies of income, of consumption, of living conditions as associated with housing, and of the possession of modern conveniences show the entire region to be one of low standards.a The people in this area are more homogeneous than are those in any other area of sinular size in the United States. Even differences between whites and Negroes are, as they relate to the problems of parttime farming, those of degree rather than kind. Both races are of native stock long subject to the same cultural and economic patterns, and a majority of both have a recent if not immediate farm background, with an elemental, although limited, knowledge of farm practices and familiarity with farm living. All have been fundamentally affected by the commercial fanning habits of the South, where the growing of a single cash crop has for generations minimized the custom 14 Heer, Clarence, Income and lVages in the South, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1930; Odum, Howard W., Southern Regions of the United States, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1936; Leven, Maurice, Moulton, Harold G., and Warburton, Clark, America's Power to Consume, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D. C., 1934. Digitized by Google INTRODUCTION XXIII of producing foodstuffs. As a result, unfamiliarity with a variety of vegetables, dairy products, and meats limits their production almost as much as does the lack of experience in producing them or the lack of land and capital with which to do so. The rural background and habits also result in a minimum of participation in social and group organizations which the paucity and feebleness of these agencies in the villages and small towns have done little to counteract. In the purely rural neighborhoods, the church, almost as exclusively as in the pa.st, is the principal center of group activity. DIVISION OF AREA INTO SUBREGIONS An examination of industrial employment within the three States, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina, to which this study was limited, indicated the necessity for dividing the area into subregions, in each of which a different type of industry predominated. For the purposes of this study, industrial employment was taken to mean any gainful pursuit other than agriculture, though exceptions had to be made in some areas to include casual or contract work in agriculture for cash wages. Industry, thus defined, was divided into two groups, for convenience called "manufacturing and allied industries" and "service industries." Manufacturing and allied industries included those classified in the 1930 Census under forestry and fishing, extraction of minerals, and manufacturing and mechanical. Service industries included transportation, communication, trade, public service, professional service, and domestic and personal service. The 1930 Census was used as a basis for delimitation of the subregions. The first step was to rank the manufacturing, extractive, and building industries of each county according to the number of persons occupied in each industry. The important industries in each county were then marked on a map, and the boundaries of the subregions were drawn by inspection. These boundaries, shown in figure 2, do not indicate any sharp break in condition, but they roughly mark out those areas in which types of industry are sufficiently different to warrant separate study. Named according to the predominating industry, the subregions are Cotton Textile, Coal and Iron,Lumber,and Na.val Stores. In addition, there is a fringe of Atlantic Coast counties which differs rather materially from the other groups of counties and is treated as a separate subregion. Within each subregion a county was chosen which showed a distribution of employment typical of the subregion, and which reported considerable part-time farming in the 1930 Census. An effort was made to avoid the selection of any county possessing some special condition which would prevent it from being generally representative of the subregion. Figure 3 shows the counties chosen. Digitized by Google t < F1G. 2 - INDUSTRIAL SUBREGIONS* OF ALABAMA, GEORGIA, AND SOUTH CAROUNA ~~ ;::! l i ~ 2 :i! .,, 0 co· ;:;. ~ ;::;- ~ (l) Q. .'l § 0 0 ~ rv * Based on o ronlun9 ot the 1ndu1triH of 11och couniw occord ln9 to the number of per1on1 occ:upltd 01 reported bJ" lht 1930 .. . c,n..,,. ICALl o, W.IUI A1 •11 11 , W, P L XXV IHTRODUCTIOH In the separate subregion studies of part-time f8.I'IIlll'g, which make up Pa.rt II of this report, 16 the areas a.re described in some detail. Suffice it here, therefore, to characterize each subregion very briefly. The Collon Tutile Subre,lon The most important industry in these three States of the Eastern Cotton Belt is textiles. In the 73 counties of western South Carolina, northern Georgia, and eastern Alabama, which make up what is herein designated as the Textile Subregion, textiles employs 52.5 percent of those engaged in manufacturing and allied industries (table 81, page 84). No other manufacturing or allied industry except building employs as many as 10 percent of the gainful workers. The industry experienced rapid expansion during and immediately following the World War, but in many localities it has existed for 2 generations and in some for 100 years. Thus it has built up a definite pattern of working and living conditions, customs, and traditions, and many of these favor the carrying on of a part-time farming enterprise. The textile industry suffered from underproduction and shortened working hours before as well as during the depression. The shortened hours of the N. R. A. have, in part, been continued by the industry through voluntary agreement, 16 thus providing the leisure for farming activities. Traditionally low wages were lowered further by the depression and, although the N. R. A. raised wages considerably, incomes are still small, making any addition to the family living important. Most mill villages offer space for gardening, and many mill managements have long given encouragement to this enterprise as well as to the keeping of cows and pigs. 17 The scattered location of the mills in many towns and villages places a large number of rural people in reach of employment. After the monotonous, though relatively light, indoor work of the mill, farming is enjoyed as a healthful change and as recreation. Some part-time farmers raise cotton, the chief crop of the subregion. The subregion is, however, an area of small family-sized farms growing 16 Preliminary reports on the subregions included: Troxell, W. W., Cottrell, L. S., Jr., Edwards, A. D., and Allen, R. H., Combined Farming-Industrial Employment in the CoUon Textile Subregion of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; Combined Farming-Industrial Employment in Charleston County, South Carolina; Combined Farming-Industrial Employment in the Coal and Iron Subregion oj Alabama; Combined Farming-Industrial Employment in the Naval Stores Subregion of Georgia and Alabama; Combined Farming-Industrial Employment in the Lumber Subregion of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; and Troxell, W. W., Employment in the Collon Textile lndu.,try in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; Research Bulletins J-1-J-6. 11 Bowden, Witt, "Hours and Earnings Before and After the N. R. A.," :Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 44, No. 1, January 1937, pp. 13-36. 17 Herring, Harriet L., Welfare Work in Mill Villages, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1929, pp. 206--209. Digitized by Google F11.3 - REGIONALIZED TYPES OF FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST ~ ~ I -;-t ;:! l I 2 LEGEND I COTTON IIEL T 0 Ii ,;"" N 1-M •N l•O 1.P 1-Q MISS.• ALA. CLAY HILLS & IIIOLLING U"LANDS SO. [.UT TEXAl•MISS. PINEY WOODS• COTTON & SCLf•SUfflCING TENN. IIIVCR & LIMCSTONC VALLEYS NORTHUIN P'ICOMONT SOUTHERN PIEDMONT GULF COASTAL ~-COTTON& l'IANU13 EASTERN C:C,0.SlAL P'LAIN & SANDHILI.S I·[ l•f ATLANTIC & GU\.f COA,ST f L A T ATLANTA All[A <i'i" (1) Q_ ~ 0 0 ~........ (i) 1-G BIRMINGHAM AREA THIS MAP SHOWS THE EASTERN COTTON BCLT SUBOIV10CO BY TYPE Of" FARMING AREAS. THE GEORGIA P[ACH AREA ANO TH[ ATLANTA AND BIRMINGHAM AREAS LI[ WITHIN THIS R[GIOH. TWO OTHER IMPORTANT ARCA$ INCLUO[O IN SOUTH CAROLINA, GEORGIA, AND ALABAMA AR[ THE ,we CURED TOBACCO All[A ANO THC ATLANTIC ANO GULf COAST fLATWOOOS AREA. ...,.. u •. o.,,,, ...... •• ..,•••it.,,. 2-K 7•r 9-A ll·B 11-, G-GIA P'EACH AIIEA TCNN .•.SH[NAN-..-CUM ■ EIILANO L.IMltSTONC VALLEYS SO. AP'P'ALACHIAN 1111:GION fLUC CURED TOBACCO AIIEA CIGAR TYP'[ I or TOBAGCO AIICA ,., ........ ,.a. ~ ~ c:: ~ -4 XXVII IHTRODUCTIOH a. variety of crops rather than an area. of larger farms with the tenant system and the concentration on cotton that characterize the lower South. The Coal and lion Subretlon The coal, iron, and steel industries a.re centered in 10 counties of north central Ala.ha.ma., with a concentration in Jefferson County. There the close proximity of coking coal, iron ore, limestone, and dolomite ma.de possible the development of a group of interdependent heavy industries. These enjoyed a rapid growth during the period following 1900, when national expansion opened markets for steel and iron. In the last quarter of a century, intensive and highly specialized industry has created in Birmingham and its vicinity a metropolitan district of dense population, the majority of the population being rural people, predominantly young, and economically and biologically productive. In 1930, 55.9 percent of the persons gainfully occupied in manufacturing and allied industries were in coal and iron industries (table 89, page 115). No other industry in this group employed as many as 10 percent of the workers. During the depression, unemployment and underemployment cut sharply into the relatively high incomes made possible by the former large and profitable markets and a fairly vigorous trade union movement. Families who had had good wages and high standards of living felt the sharp declines in incomes more than those who had had smaller incomes. Pressed by necessity and encouraged by their employers, many coal, iron, and steel workers began gardening. Such farming enterprises were limited in size by the la.ck of available land and in productivity by the nature of the soil on the rough stony ridges and mountain slopes. The Atlantic Coast Subregion The Atlantic Coast Subregion is in an intermediate position between the regions with a single large factory industry and those with essentially rural industries. Small and varied manufacturing industries a.re found in the three port cities of Charleston, Savannah, and Brunswick, which also offer possibilities of employment in the service industries. In Charleston County, particularly, truck farming is a major industry. Thus, in this region, as throughout the Eastern Cotton Belt, pa.rt-time farming is combined with agriculture itself as an outside, cash income industry. A long growing season and suitable soil make gardening easy, while association with truck farming familiarizes workers with the growing of vegetables. In Charleston County, chosen as representative of part-time farming conditions in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, several factors favorable to this enterprise a.re counteracted by factors just as unfavorable. Low wages on the truck farms, irregular work on the docks, and sea- Digitized by Google XXVIII PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST sonal employment in the fertilizer factories result in low annual incomes and make production of food for home consumption desirable. Charleston County is cut up by rivers that are spanned in some cases by toll bridges, while the city, with its opportunities for employment, is concentrated on the peninsula. The large-scale truck farms have taken up most of the land near transportation facilities, pushing farther away the sites that would be available in small parcels for pa.rt-time farming. Geographical features of the area thus place farming out of immediate reach of industry. The pa.rt-time farmer is placed at an unusually great disadvantage if he is dependent for employment upon industries where demand is for casual labor, and where hiring methods make it necessary for the applicant to be on hand when wanted. A further disadvantage to pa.rt-time farmers of this region is the fact that seasonal peaks of employment a.re common and conflict a.bout as often as they dovetail with activities on pa.rt-time farms. In many of the industries, the hours a.re long and the work is heavy; and workers who might undertake part-time farming a.re still further discouraged by the fact that truck products, at reasonable prices, are abundant. The Lumber Subretlon The Lumber Subregion includes the southeastern half of South Carolina, the lower Piedmont Area of Georgia, and most of the Coastal Plain and Piedmont Region of Alabama. It is predominantly an agricultural area with 68 percent of the gainfully occupied persons engaged in agriculture as compared with 37 percent in the Textile Subregion and only 19 percent in the Coal and Iron Subregion. Manufacturing and allied industries employ only 11 percent of the ga.infully occupied persons, who are distributed among a fairly varied group of industries (table 112, page 170). The only concentration worthy of note is in the group exploiting the forests or processing their products. Saw and planing mills, furniture, and other wood manufacturing employ 43 percent of the persons in manufacturing and allied industries. The group of lumber and woodworking industries is affected by the demand for lumber, and is subject both to local market variations and to the long national trend. Lumber consumption has been gradually falling off in the United States since 1906, due to the substitution of material other than wood in building construction, and in vehicles, furniture, and other former wood-using manufactures. The depression especially decreased building activities on farms, which are large users of lumber. The lumber industry in the South is limited by the amount of sawtimber drain the forests can stand. Destructive cutting and uncontrolled fires in the past have so depleted the growing stock that pro- Digitized by Google XXIX IHTRODUCTION duction will not be able to reach former high levels for many years to come. The future of the industry will depend largely on the forest management policies adopted. Within these limits, the lumber industry is suited to combination with farming because it is widely scattered, the sawmills, planing mills, and woodworking plants being located in small towns easily accessible to farm lands. The work in the sawmills is heavy and the hours are long, thus discouraging the additional exertion of part-time farming; but wages are very low and so encourage enterprises that supplement the family food supply. In this area, as in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, agriculture itself constitutes a form of employment to be combined with part-time farming, especially among Negroes. The basis is somewhat different, however, the laborer being under contract to work for the landlord, and furnished with a house and a little land on which to grow food products. Sometimes he even grows a little cotton as a cash crop. The Naval Stora Subre,lon The area designated as the Naval Stores Subregion consists of southeastern Georgia, northern Florida, and southern Alabama. The division between this subregion and the Lumber Subregion (figure 2) is somewhat arbitrary, since there is some overlapping both in territory and in the nature of the industries. The Naval Stores Subregion is another distinctly rural area in which the chief opportunities for employment center around the forests and their products. Here, however, forest industries mainly includethe collecting and distilling of turpentine from pine forests, and employ nearly two-fifths of the persons engaged in manufacturing and allied industries (table 123, page 199). Saw and planing mills and woodworking factories employ another fifth. In the turpentine industry, activity is greatest during the farming season, the hours are long and the work fairly strenuous, all of which factors tend to discourage parttime farming. On the other hand, gum collecting in the forests in which the majority of workers are engaged makes possible the arrangement of working days to permit the part-time farming enterprise. Both the forest activities and the stilling are scattered over a sparsely aettled area, and land for farming is easily available. Wages are so low that additions to the family food supply are necessary for maintenance of anything beyond a bare subsistence standard of living. The agriculture of the subregion centers around the growing of cotton, although in some of the Georgia counties in the area tobacco forms a second cash crop. During the early years of the depression the low prices received for these products forced many families to seek a supplementary wage in off-the-farm employment. Many became gum producers, working in the turpentine woods part of the Digitized by Google XXX PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST time, either on their own or on someone else's land, and continuing their farming much as before. Thus, in this area most part-time farmers are really commercial farmers who work part-time in industry. SELECTION OF CASES FOR SURVEY The part-time farmers were selected without regard to the industry in which they worked, and included workers not only in the chief industry of each area, but in the minor manufacturing and extractive industries of each region and in the service industries. This made possible an examination of every possible industrial combination with part-time farming, and showed, in particular, how part-time farming is best carried on under conditions which offer the most opportunities for employment. It is believed that the 1,113 part-time farmers surveyed in the Eastern Cotton Belt represent a fair cross section of those who throughout the region are combining farming with some other occupation. In order to include a wider range of farming-industrial combinations than would have resulted from selection of families according to the census definition of a part-time farmer, rather low limits were set upon the amount of each type of employment necessary to qualify a family for inclusion in the field survey. These limits were that in 1934 the family should have operated at least three-quarters of an acre of tillable land and/or have produced farm products valued at $50 or more;18 and the head of the household should have worked at least 50 days off the home fa.rm. Only families which had operated the same fa.rm during both 1933 and 1934 were included. The purpose of this limitation was to exclude part-time farmers who were just getting established. All professional and proprietary workers, except small storekeepers, were excluded, since it was considered that a different set of considerations was involved in the case of white collar workers with small farms, and of "gentleman" farmers. Following popular usage, the heads of the families surveyed will be referred to in this report as part-time farmers, meaning that they spend part of their time operating a farm and part at some employment away from this fa.rm. Their farms will be referred to as part-time fa.rms and their activities on them will be called part-time farming. Part-time farmers with small enterprises which would not normally be expected to produce beyond the needs of a single family will be designated as noncommercial farmers, while those with larger acreages and at least 11 Objection may be raised to calling a home which included only a 1-acre garden plot a farm, especially when its owner is a full-time industrial worker. The same criticism applies to the dweller in an industrial village whose only farming enterprise is the keeping of a cow. For the purpose of this study, however, it was desirable that the term farm be used to refer to any holding upon which farming activities were carried on. For further details regarding methodology, see appendix C. Digitized by Google XXXI INTRODUCTION one crop produced primarily for market will be referred to as commercial part-time farmers. For comparative purposes, a sample of nonfarming industrial workers in each subregion was included in the study. Only those families were enumerated which had raised less than $50 worth of farm or garden products in 1934; which had a male head physically capable of working at a full-time job during 1934; and whose head was employed at least 50 days each during 1933 and 1934 in certain clerical and kindred occupations or in skilled, semiskilled, and unskilled occupations. The number of cases included in the field enumeration, by areas, is given in table 2. Table ~.-Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households Enumerated, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Subregion and color Part-time farm house- holds TotaL _______________________________________________________________ _ Tertlle: White __________________ ---- - --- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- - --- --- --- -- -- ----- Coal and Iron: White __________________________________________________________________ _ Negro. ______________________________ ---- --- --- ----- ----- -------- -- ----- Atlantic Coast: White __________________________________________________________________ _ Negro.----·•- _______________________ . ____________ . _____________________ _ Lamber: White __________________________________________________________________ _ N~O------------------------------------------------------------------- Naval Stores: White __________________________________________________________________ _ Nonfarming industrial households I, 113 1,33-4 293 3H 314 124 22'J 34G H2 71 103 105 76 132 92 103 71 49 150061°-37-3 Digitized by Google Digitized by Google SUMMARY THE COMBINATION of farming with a job that brings a cash wage has long existed in the United States-particularly in rural areas where the presence of natural resources has led to the growth of industries and of industrial communities. The widespread ownership of automobiles and the extension of improved roads have contributed to the development of combined farming-industrial employment in the Southeast by placing residents of outlying rural districts in touch with industrial centers. The long depression in agriculture and, more recently, the depression in industry have had an important influence on the growth of part-time farming in the Southeast. In recent years industrial workers have sought to supplement their reduced wages in industry with part-time farming, farmers have been induced to supplement their reduced farm incomes with off-the-farm employment, and many persons already engaged in combined farming-industrial employment have extended their farming activities. One-half of the families surveyed had been carrying on part-time fe.rming for 6 continuous years prior to 1935, however, indicating that part-time farming enterprises were not undertaken purely as a result of the depression. Part-time farming in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina is at present carried on by workers in all of the major industries of the region---cotton textile manufacturing, lumber, naval stores, and coal and iron mining-as well as by workers in other manufacturing and mechanical industries, in transportation and communication industries, in trade, and in public service. In none of the industrie.'3, with the possible exception of coal and iron mining, is the labor involved so heavy as to discourage the additional work required by a farm enterprise, although the nature of available employment and the lack of available transportation facilities in some urban areas, such as in Charleston, discourage daily commutation of farm operators from remote rural areas. The survey of combined farming-industrial employment in five major subregions of the Southeast showed that economically the parttime farm is an advantage. It requires in investment in house and XXXIII Digitized by Google XXXIV PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST land little more than ordinarily would be spent in housing; it requires only a small amount of capital for equipment or livestock; and the expenditure for seed, fertilizer, or hired labor is negligible. A part-time farm enterprise undertaken on as small a scale as those found in the Eastern Cotton Belt, however, does not give the operator and his family economic self-sufficiency. At best, it only supplements a cash wage from employment in industry, and the possibility of carrying on part-time farming activities successfully is contingent upon possession of off-the-farm employment. In all of the subregions, the part-time farms surveyed were small, and the enterprises were conducted mainly to produce food for home consumption. Most of the farms surveyed had less than 5 acres of cropland, and almost half of them had less than 2 acres. The small acreage was sufficient, however, for the farm to produce a definite contribution to the family living-not only fresher and more abundant products for the diet, but also a monetary saving in grocery bills during the summer months that ranged from a few dollars to as much as $20 per month. The value of products consumed by typical part-time farmers during the year ranged from about $70 by part-time farmers who had only a garden to about $400 by those with a garden, a cow, several hogs, and a small flock of poultry. Since the majority of the parttime farmers surveyed made less than $500 a year at their principal off-the-farm employment, the farm's contribution to family living was an important one. Although most of the part-time farmers kept a cow, a hog or two, and a flock of chickens, a vegetable garden was the activity that was most general. On half of the farms, gardens produced three or more summer vegetables for 3, 4, and 5 months. Many of the gardens were only ¼ acre in size. Few of the farmers reported three or more vegetables for as long as 8 months, in spite of the long growing season throughout the Eastern Cotton Belt and the small expense attached to garden production. Most part-time farm families were obviously unfamiliar with winter vegetables, but some garden products, such as sweet and Irish potatoes and corn, were stored by two-thirds of the families, while vegetables were canned by three-fifths of the households, thereby prolonging the period of the garden's usefulness through the winter months. In view of the actual saving in dollars and cents that was made possible by the part-time farm's contribution of vegetables, pork, dairy products, and livestock products, the operators on the whole did not feel that their farm enterprises took a burdensome amount of time. From 3 to 5½ hours a day were required in farm work from April through August on the white noncommercial part-time farms. Although in some cases the head of the family did all of the work alone, the farm tasks were usually shared by members of the family. Digitized by Google XXXV SUMMARY Few of the part-time farmers spent as much as $15 for hired. labor in 1934. The part-time farmers' investment in farm buildings and land was small, amounting to less than $2,000 in over one-half of the cases surveyed.. Only a few of the farmers had holdings valued at more than $5,000, and these were commercial farmers, for the most part, who produced. some cash crop for the market or carried on some distinctly commercial livestock enterprise. Investment in implements and machinery was practically negligible, most of the farmers owning only a few simple hand tools, such as hoes and rakes. In most cases, only the part-time farmers operating 10 acres of land or more owned horses or mules. The limited cropland on most enterprises prevented. the growing of sufficient feed for work animals, and besides, the small enterprises common to the majority of part-time farmers did not warrant ownership of a mule. In order to carry on farming activities, part-time farmers on the average were forced to live slightly farther from their places of work than were the nonfarming industrial workers. But residence at a greater distance from an employment center placed the workers in only one subregion at a disadvantage in securing work, as was shown by a comparison of part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers with respect to rates of pay, total earnings, and number of days employed.. Further evidence that part-time farmers on the whole were not at a disadvantage with respect to employment opportunities was given by the fact that part-time farmers and nonfanning industrial workers were closely parallel in distribution in the industries of each subregion, as well as in the proportions of their numbers who were skilled and unskilled workers. The suburban or open country residence that was involved in a part-time farming enterprise in some subregions carried with it some definite advantages. Housing cost part-time farm families who lived in the suburbs or open country less than it would have in town. Since families of part-time farmers were larger than those of nonfarming industrial workers, the lower rents, especially for large families, were one of the advantages that accompanied part-time farming. Nearly one-fourth of the part-time form families consisted of seven or more persons. Part-time farmers' homes were larger than those of nonfarming industrial workers, but because of the larger families, there was slightly more overcrowding in the farm group. Lack of modern conveniences was one of the disadvantages that frequently accompanied part-time farming, because power lines and water mains were not generally extended into sparsely settled rural areas. Electric lights, running water, and bathrooms were often lacking. Home ownership was more common among part-time farmers than among the nonfarming industrial workers, but a large proportion of Digitized by Google XXXVI PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST tenancy existed even among part-time farmers, and especially among Negro part-time farmers. From the social viewpoint, too, the part-time farmer's life had its advantages and disadvantages. In general, more part-time farm than nonfarming industrial families participated in organized social and community life. Also, the extent of participation of part-time farmers was greater than that of nonfarmers in almost every type of activity available to them, which was surprising in view of the greater distances many of them had to go to attend meetings. More members of part-time farm than nonfarm families were in positions of leadership as represented by officeholding, and enumerators in more than one area remarked that the part-time farmers enjoyed a higher social status than that of the nonfanning industrial workers. Fewer social organizations, however, were available to part-time farmers. Inasmuch as such groups stimulate social intercourse and interest in community affairs, the lack of social organizations was particularly disadvantageous to young people in part-time farm families. The present survey shows that while part-time farming can be a decided financial aid, in the sense that it supplements wages from industrial employment, no blanket endorsement for developing or extending present part-time farming or for encouraging new part-time fanning enterprises may be given. Because a fairly small part-time farm enterprise alone is not enough to give self-sufficiency to the operator, part-time farming cannot be considered as an economic "way out" for unemployed persons or for families on relief, although a part-time farm, coupled with even a small cash wage, would alleviate the acute distress of many families now on relief. Part-time farming cannot be a solution for unemployment in the Eastern Cotton Belt, because possibilities of increased industrial activities, which would provide the necessary cash wage, are slight. Consequently, part-time farming as an activity can be encouraged only where industry has sufficiently recovered from the depression to offer satisfactory wages and hours to its workers, or where future prospects for an industry's development are promising. From the point of view of available land in the Eastern Cotton Belt, there is a possibility of increasing the number of part-time farms, and many nonfarmers expressed a wish to become part-time farmers. Whether or not they should be helped to attain this objective depends on many factors other than existence of a cash wage. The possession of such qualities as industry, energy, and initiative is an essential prerequisite to the undertaking of a farming enterprise, and the willingness to follow farm supervision is equally important. Possession of the above characteristics was found to be more essential to the success of a part-time fanning venture than actual previous farm experience. Digitized by Google XXXVII SUMMARY Although about one-fifth of the farmers surveyed had had no farm experience since they were 16 years of age, the garden production of those without such fa.rm experience did not differ greatly from that of part-time farmers with previous experience. While the extension of part-time farming to households not at present engaged in this activity is not recommended as generally desirable or possible, the improvement of existing part-time farming is strongly advocated. Assistance by existing educational agencies would be valuable in improving some of the present farming practices, and with this aid part-time farms couJd be made more consistent producers of food and of a more varied diet. Because people are familiar with a variety of governmental activities, the present would be an auspicious time in which to launch an educational part-time farm program, especially since many Federal agencies now in existence-such as the Farm Credit Administration, the Federal Housing Administration, and the Resettlement Administration-have facilities for putting such a program into effect. Another argument for the introduction of a part-time farm program at the present is the unlikelihood of industries resuming the long hours of predepression days. Workers today are in the process of adjusting their habits to the additional leisure that shorter hours have given them, and if part-time farming activities are encouraged now, they will absorb this margin of leisure time. Some industries in the Southeast were found to be better adapted to a combination with part-time farming than others, although, as it has been stated, none of them gives any promise of a marked increase in employment. The textile industry offers particular advantages to workers who wish to engage in part-time farming. Farming land in the Textile Subregion is conveniently situated in relation to the textile industry, which is widely distributed in the area. Even the mill villages, such as those surveyed in South Carolina and Georgia, afford space for small fa.rm enterprises. Employment in the textile industry involves no heavy manual work and the hours in the industry allow the worker time for carrying on a farming enterprise. The variety of work within the industry normally offers employment to employable members of all ages in a single family, thus increasing the family cash income, essential to the success of part-time farming. A special advantage accrues to part-time farmers in the Textile Subregion through the provision by mill villages of group activities usually denied to parttime farmers who live in the open country or on the outskirts of a town. Coal mining and the steel and iron industries are less well adapted to part-time farming under normal conditions. The mines and mills are located in thickly settled metropolitan areas, where farm land is poor and scarce. The labor involved, when operations approximate full Digitized by Google XXXVIII PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST time, is too heavy to make anything more than a small enterprise physically desirable. Part-time farming, however, has been remarkably successful in the Coal and Iron Subregion in spite of the handicaps of poor and limited farm land, and as long as the mines continue to operate so few days per year, such farming would seem to be both feasible and desirable for those workers who have access to the necessary land. Normal full-time wages in these industries will suffice to insure a standard of living equal to, or better than, that of the average industrial worker in the South. Any future approximation of normal work schedules and wages, by reducing the need for incomes to be supplemented, may result in a decrease in part-time farming. Charleston County, in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, offers opportunities for combined farming-industrial employment to workers in rural areas engaged in the truck farming industry. Truck farming pays such low wages that an additional income in the form of homegrown products is highly desirable, and those wishing to undertake part-time farming activities have plenty of good farming land at their disposal. The fact that the rush season on truck farms coincides with the necessity for work on the part-time farm is one disadvantage to such a combination. The manufacturing, service, and port industries of the city of Charleston do not offer reasonable chances fof combined farming-industrial employment, due to the isolation or Charleston from the mainland and the scarcity of farming land within commuting distances. In the port industries, in particular, only workers whose residences are accessible to places of employment can avail themselves of the irregular work offered. With respect to location, the lumber industry is well adapted to part-time farming. Saw and planing mills are located in rural areas and woodworking industries are scattered in many small towns and cities. Hours are not now, nor likely to be, so long as to make small farming enterprises burdensome. Wages are low enough to make food production desirable. The cash-crop tenant system provides some part-time farmers with a cash income, and at the same time, it insures land and equipment for farm production for home consumption. The naval stores industry is almost entirely a rural industry, and land is easily available for part-time farming. In the Naval Stores Subregion, wages are so low that a bare subsistence level of living is common. The chief disadvantages to combining farm work with employment in turpentining are the rather strenuous work and the coincidence of its rush season with the growing season on the farm. The outlook for increased employment in the industry is particularly unsatisfactory, depending upon development of new uses and markets for naval stores products and upon the development of an enlightened forest policy which will preserve the natural resources of the subregion. Digitized by Google Chapter I THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM h IS the operation of some sort of farming enterprise in addition to his regular job which distinguishes the part-time farmer from the usual worker in manufacturing, mechanical, and service occupations. The first objective of this study, therefore, was an examination of the farming enterprise: its requirements and its operation. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PART-TIME FARMER Though most of the data on the social aspects of part-time farming has its place in later discussions, a few facts about the characteristics of the part-time farmers studied in this survey are appropriate here. Age In age, the part-time farmers enumerated ranged from 20 to 65 years (tables 3 and 4). Few were in the extremely young age brackets. The median ages varied somewhat in the different areas, with 43 years the highest average age occurring among whites or Negroes in any of the five areas studied. This average age was found among Negro part-time farmers in the Coal and Iron Subregion, white and Negro part-time farmers in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, and white part-time farmers in the Lumber Subregion. The lowest median was 34 years, the average for white part-time farmers in the Naval Stores Subregion. The average age of the nonfarming industrial group ranged from 41 years among the whites in the Coal and Iron Subregion to 29 years among the whites in the Naval Stores Subregion. 1 Digitized by Google I PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Table 3.-Age of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households,1 1934 Part-time farm households Age of head Number TotaJ _________________________ ------------------Under years ________ ---------------------------------_ 20 to 2420 .9 years ________________________________________ 2.5 to 29.9 years _______________________________________ .. 30 to 34.9 years .. ______ . __ . ______ .. ________ . ___________ . 35 to 39.9 years _________ . _____________________ . ____ . ___ . 40 to 44.9 years __________ . ________ .. ___________________ _ 45 to 49.9 years __ . ______________ ._. _____ . ______________ _ 50 to 54.9 yenrs ________________________________________ _ 55 to -~9.9 yenrs. _____________ . _________________________ _ 60 to M.9 years ________________________________________ _ Non!annlng Industrial households Percent I. 113 Numoor 100 5 67 126 143 186 172 159 115 72 6 11 13 17 16 H JO 7 6 68 Percent 1,334 JOO 11 130 10 1 18 17 17 12 10 8 4 3 23S m 2'l8 JOO 132 109 57 41 • Less than 0.5 pert'ent. ' For data by subregions, see appendix table 1. Table 4.-Average Age of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Median age ol head Subregion and color Part-time farm households Nonlarmlng industrial households Total.. _______________________________________________________________ _ 36 41 l=====I===== Textile: White. _________________________________________________________________ _ 39 35 an•! Iron: CoalWhite __________________________________________________________________ _ 42 41 Negro ..... __________________________________________________________ . __ _ 43 311 Atlantic Coast: White __________________________________________________________________ _ Negro. __________ -----_ ---- ----. - ----- - -- -- . ----- --- -- -- ----- --------- -- Lumber: White. _________________________________________________________________ _ Negro_ .. _________ ._. ___________________ . _______________________________ _ NavRl Stores: White __________ ----------------.---- - ---- - - -- - -- - - - - -- -- -------- -- -- -- · · 43 43 35 43 36 33 30 34 211 31; Size of Household The difference in the median ages of the heads of part-time farm and nonfanning industrial households partially accounts for the difference in size of households of the two groups, the average 1 for the former being 5_2 persons and for the latter 4_2 persons (table 6). Nearly a fourth (24 percent) of the part-time farm households consisted of seven or more persons, while only one-eighth (12 percent) of the nonfanning industrial households consisted of seven or more persons (table 5). The average size of part-time fann households varied only slightly by subregions while the size of nonfarming industrial households ranged from 4.8 persons among whites in the Atlantic Const Subregion to 3.8 persons among Negroes in the Lumber Subregion. 1 Unless otherwise specified, the averages used in this report are arithmetic means. Digitized by Google THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM 3 Table 5.-Size of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households,1 1934 Part•tlme farm households Size of household Number TotaL •.........•...•...•...........•....•....... I person ...................................•............ 2 persons .......•..........•................•........... 3 persons ...........................•.................. 4 persons......•........................................ 6 persons ............•............................••.... 6 persons .....••..................••.................... 7 persons ....... . ............. . ........................ . 8 persons.....•......................................... II persons .......•....................................... 10 persons .................. . .......................... . 11 persons or more ..•..................... .............. Nonfarmln~ Industrial households Percent Number 1,113 100 1,334 6 1 II 14 18 19 4 ---- ----1--IOI 161 203 213 157 105 66 37 32 32 14 9 6 3 3 3 Percent 100 235 328 273 192 137 79 41 25 11 g 18 25 20 14 10 6 3 2 I I •Less than 0.5 percent. • For data by subregions, see appendix table 2. Table 6.-Average Size of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Average number of persons Subregion and color Total .........................................•.......•......•..•...... Part•tfme farm households 5. 2 Nonrarming industrial households 4. 2 l=====I===== Textile: White ..................... . ....................................•........ 5.3 4.1 White ..•.•.......•...............•.....•.....•.•........................ Negro ..................•.....................•.......................... Atlantic Coast: 5. 1 4.5 5.0 4. 2 White .............................................•.•..•...•..•..••..... 5.2 5.2 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.5 3.8 5.0 3.11 Coal and Iron: Negro .............................................•..........••......•.. Lumber: White ..••.................................•..•••........................ Ne1ro ................................................................. . Naval St<ires: White .............................•..................................... 4. 8 Whether the needs of a larger household caused the families to engage in part-time fanning or whether the presence of family labor to carry on the enterprises made part-time fanning appear practicable is not clear. It was found, however, that part-time farming was particularly advantageous to large families. 2 Fann Experience The common assumption that the industrial workers in the Southeast have farm backgrounds was strikingly supported by the results of this survey. Eighty-two percent of the part-time farmers had had some regular farm experience since they were 16 years of age (table 7). Over 75 percent reported 3 years or more of farming, which was enough to give them considerable familiarity with forming routine, even if 1 See p. 15. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 4 that experience had not been preceded by a childhood on the farm, as was so of ten the case. The average length of time that had been spent on & farm varied greatly from subregion to subregion (table 8). The average was as high as 22 years among white commercial part-time farmers of the Tobie 7.-Farm 1 Experience of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarmin9 Industrial Households,2 1934 Number of yean, head had lived on latm since 16 years of age Part-tlme farm households Number Number Percent Percent rota! ...•...................... ··•·•··· .......•.. I, 113 100 1,334 100 1None year...•..•••••.•.••..•••...•...•...................... _______ • _________________________________________ _ 200 19 47 130 18 2 4 12 19 14 9 683 51 4 2 yearll ..•.•••.••.•••••••••••••.•.••.•...•.•••.•.•••..•• 3 to 4 year,, ••••••••.•••••••••••••••••.••••.•.••••••••••• 5 to 9 yeal'll .••.••••••.•••.••••••.••••••••••••••••••.•.•• 10 to 15 to 20 to 30 to 40 to 14 yel\rll ...................................•.....•. 19 years .................•...•.............•.....•. 29 yenrs .....................................••..•• 39 years .............................•......•....•. 49 years ...•.........•.•...........•.....•...••.... Unknown ............••............ . ......•..•........• 208 155 101 12!1 79 39 7 II 7 57 88 7 12 162 190 70 36 34 12 14 6 3 3 I 3 I 2 • Less than 0.6 percent. • Following the census definition, a farm wa.s deflllt'd as a \ract ol land ol at 188.'lt 3 acres tmless Its agricultural products were valued at $2.',0 or more. Hen<.'O, those who had had !arm experience on small acreage., only appear In this table as haYing had no experience. • For data by subregions, see appendi.t table 3. Tobie 8.-Average Length of Farm I Experience of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Average numberolyel\rll on farm since 16 years or age• flubregion, color, and type of farm Part•tlme !arm households Total. ...................................•............................. 12 Textile: White ............•••....................................•...•........... Cornn1erriRJ. ___ .. __________________________________________________ _ 20 N oncommerclal. ................................................... . Coal end Iron: White ........•.......................................................... Ne!!fo .................................................................. . Atlantic Coast: White ...................... . ........................................... . CommerciaL ______________________________ . --------· _______________ _ Nont'OinmerciaL __ . ______________________________________ -----· ___ _ Negro .•.........••.•.......................•.........•.................. Lumber: White .............•..................................................... Commercial _____________ ___ . ___________ __________________________ ___ Noncomrnercial __ . _________________________________________________ _ Negro .................................................................. . Navnl Stores: White ....... __ ............................ . ............................ ._ Comrnercial ________________________________________________________ Noncommercial. ................................................... . N onfo.rming industrial housebolds 4 II II 5 7 2 4 12 14 2 II 20 15 19 II 18 13 22 2 6 8 8 3 1 Followlnl( the census definition, a !arm was defined es a tract ol land of at least 3 acres unle.ss its agrirultural products were valued at $250 or more. Hence, those who had had !arm experience on small acreo.gea only appear in this to.bl<> as having had no experieuce. • Averages based on total number or households. Digitized by Google THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM 5 Naval Stores Subregion,8 where regular farmers had recently become part-time turpentine workers. The lowest average length of farm experience (3 years) was found among the noncommercial part-time farmers in the Naval Stores Subregion. When the previous farming experience of part-time farmers was compared with that of the nonfarming industrial workers, it became obvious that an agricultural background played an important part in the decision to undertake part-time farming. Over half of the heads of the nonfarming households had had no regular farming experience since they were 16 years of age, and an additional 11 percent had spent only 1 or 2 years on a farm. For the 49 percent of industrial workers who had had some experience on a farm, the average number of years for each color and subregion was considerably less than that spent by part-time farmers (appendix table 3), though their younger average age somewhat reduced this apparent difference. Yean Ensasecl in Part-nme Fannins The undertaking of a part-time farming enterprise was not entirely a result of the depression with all of the households studied though it apparently was with many of them. Over half of the part-time farmers in the sample had been farming for 6 continuous years prior to 1935. The schedules did not ask for data earlier than 1929, and the field workers were instructed to omit households which had been engaged in part-time farming for only 1 year, so that the study might cover a group that had had at least a reasonable amount of experience with farming. Since the farmers reported the number of years and not the specific calendar years that they had been farming, it was impossible to find how many of those who had done part-time farming less than 6 years (48 percent) had done so intermittently. However, the additions to the group by the number of years the head had been Table 9.-Number of Years Head of Household Had Been a Part-Time Farmer Since December 31, 1928 1 Number or years head had been a part-time farmer Heads of part-time farm households Number Total.. ______________________________________________________________ ._ year'------------------------------------------____________________________ .1 2 years. _____ ---------------------------------- _________________ .____________ I, 113 100 -----1---- • 165 3 years______________________________________________________________________ 4 years_. ------ __ ________ ___ ____ __ ____ _______ ______ ____ _____ ____ ______ ___ ____ 6 years. _______ .••.••• __ •• ___________________________________________________ 6 Percent 183 120 68 years_ .. --- ____ .. __ .... ________ . ____ . ______________ . ___ _____ ____ ____ _____ __ 673 15 16 11 6 52 •Leas than 0.5 percent. For data by subregions, see appendix table 4. Practically all of these cases were eliminated by definition. See pp. XX X-XXXI. I 1 1 Regular farmers who had undertaken part-time work in the turpentine forests. Part-time turpentine workers would be a more exact term. Digitized by Google 6 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST a part-time farmer were such as to suggest that, for the majority at least, the 6 years could be numbered serially from 1929 to 1934. Thus, with 5 years of part-time farming representing those beginning in 1930, the addition was only 6 percent of the total. As the depression deepened, the additions to the number of part-time farmers increased (table 9). This is even more apparent in the figures for the subregions (appendix table 4). In the Textile Subregion, for example, where the depression had been of longer standing than in the other areas, the number who had been part-time farmers for at least 6 years prior to 1935 was comparatively large (56 percent of all cases), and the additions were gradual. Among the Negroes of the Coal and Iron Subregion, on the other hand, where wages had been good, the facilities even for gardening were limited, and the number farming for 6 years was small (28 percent). The additions to the number of part-time farmers were small until 1932 and 1933, when the increasing force of the depression and encouragement of the employers caused large numbers to undertake some food-producing enterprises. Enterprisa In 1929 and 1934 Of the 1,113 part-time farmers surveyed, there were 573 who were known to have been part-time farmers in 1929. A comparison of a few indices of their activities in that year with those in 1934 shows that a few part-time farmers were carrying on more extensive enterprises in 1934 than in 1929 (tables 10 and 11). The comparison indicates, however, that the majority of part-time farmers had reached what they considered an optimum general size of operations in 1929. In 1934, 97 percent of the part-time farmers had gardens as compared with 88 percent in 1929, but the gardens averaged only 0.2 of an acre larger. Fifty-three percent had cows in 1934 as compared with fortythree percent in 1929, but the average number of cows owned had not Table 70.-Size of Garden on 573 Part-Time Farms,1 1929 and 1934 Part-time farms Aetts In garden Number Total .••••...•... __ ·- .... --··· ___ -···--_-······· • Nonc ....•............................ ·- _·-··· .. . ..... .. l4 acre .••........................ ··- ............ -··. •·- 1934 1929 Percent Number 573 100 573 67 202 12 35 16 176 1---+----1---- 105 ½acre .••....................... -··................... . 110 19 '4 ac·re .•.•....................................... _.•.. _ 40 66 7 89 15 I acre_ ............. -·········- ................ _-· __ .... 85 52 1½ acres •......................................... _.... 18 3 2 acres................................................. 23 34 4 3 acres or more ••.•.............................•...... _ 28 35 5 l====l====I==== Average for those having a garden................ o. 9 1.11 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 5. Digitized by Google Percent 100 3 31 18 12 15 g 6 6 THE PART-TIME FARMER AHD HIS FARM 7 changed. A few more farmers had hogs, but the average number of hogs was slightly less than in 1929. The proportion having poultry had increased from 67 percent to 72 percent. The number of those having large flocks had decreased, however, and the average size of all flocks had decreased by four birds. TafJle 11.-Number of Livestock on 573 Part-Time Farms,1 1929 and 1934 Part•tlme farms Number ofllvestock 1929 Number Total •••••••••.••••••••••••••••••...••........... None.............................................. 1................................................. .. Average ror those owning COW!................... Hogs: Average ror those owning poultry •••••••••..•...• 100 326 20.5 57 36 7 269 251 53 47 44 59 19 11 11 298 52 lOll 62 66 136 61 78 3. 3 II 24 11 13 2. 8 l====l====I== None.............................................. 1 to 9......................................... ...... 10 to Jg_............................................ 20 to 29............................................. 30 to 4g __ ...••..•••••.•••••..•........•............• 50 or more........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 573 336 3 or more .......................................... . Average ror thcee owning hogs ..•......•••....... 100 l====l====I=== 1. 2 1. 2 l====l====I=== None ........•...................................... 1..••••••••••••••.•••••.•••.•••••••...••............ Percent 573 ~ 2 .••••. ·••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••·••• ·••••·••·. Poultry: Number ____ ,____,___ , Cows: 2or more........................................... Percent 187 59 142 86 53 46 33 JO 25 15 9 8 159 90 152 78 l====l====I== 30 53 41 28 lG 71 13 II 7 26 • For data by subregions, !lee appendix table 5. THE FARM Location Forty-four percent of the part-time farms were located in what was designated as open country, though the relatively short distances to work (table 50, page 35) indicate that many must have been in what were really the outskirts of small towns. Forty-one percent were in villages and the remaining fifteen percent in cities(table 62, page 51). Four-fifths of those in cities and almost two-fifths of those in villages were in the Coal and Iron Subregion. Nearly one-half of those in villages were in the Textile Subregion. Type and Size The part-time farmers included a small group (2 percent) that only kept a cow, a large group (14 percent) that only grew vegetables (table 21, page 14), and a group (13 percent) that carried on what might be termed. commercial farming. The commercial part-time farmers Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 8 grew for market whatever was the local cash crop, such as cotton in the Lumber and Textile Subregions, cotton or tobacco in the Naval Stores Subregion, and truck produce in the Atlantic Coast Subregion.' The commercial farms were usually in the open country and were larger than the noncommercial ones. The commercial farmers had more livestock and machinery than the noncommercial farmers, and often hired considerable labor. Since it was the production of food for home use with which this study was primarily concerned, no analysis of commercial part-time farming, as a. whole, was attempted, except as it bore upon production for home consumption. In spite of a wide range in size and variety, nearly all of the parttime farms studied were small. Only 1 percent contained 75 acres or more of cropland and only 3 percent contained 50 acres or more (table 12). The majority of those with 10 acres or more belonged to Ta&le 12.-Acres of Cropland on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part•tlme farms Acres of cropland Number Total.................................................................. I, 113 Percent 100 1----1---- None........................................................................ !acre........................................................................ 2acres....................................................................... 3 to 4 acres.................................................................. 5 tog acres.................................................................. 10 to IQ acres.,.............................................................. 20 to 29 acres. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30to49acres................................................................ 50 to 74 acres................................ . ............................... 75 acres or more............................................................. Unknown................................................................... 24 2 528 47 137 152 82 71 54 39 18 7 1 12 14 7 G 5 4 2 1 •Less than 0.5 percent. t For data by subregions, see appendix table 6. the group described as commercial part-time farms. Three-fourths of all part-time forms surveyed had less than 5 acres and almost onehalf had less than 2 acres. Part-time farms containing only an acre of cropland or less were found among four-fifths of the noncommercial part-time farmers of the Textile Subregion, among three-fifths of the whites in the Coal and Iron Subregion, and among four-fifths of the Negroes in that subregion {appendix table 6). For the white noncommercial farmers the average amount of cropland was not more than 3 acres in any of the areas studied (table 13). The size of these part-time farms does not seem so small when it is remembered that all forms throughout the South are small in comparison ·with farms in other parts of the United States. In 1929 the ' Due to the limited amount of land available, there was practically no commercial part-time farming in the Coal and Iron Subregion. In the other four subregions, the part-time farmers who had the larger acreages and who produced at least one crop primarily for sale were classified as commercial part-time farmers. Digitized by Google 9 THE PART-TIME FARMER AHD HIS FARM Tal>le 13.-Average Acres of Cropland on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average acres or cropland Subregion, color, and type ol farm Total ....•.•.............•.. ···················•·······················•········ ...•.. Textile: White: Commercial. ......•.......•..................•.••.•••...•...•.......•.........•. •·• Noncommercial. ....•..••...•...•...•..............•...•..••......•.•............•• Coal and Iron: White ..•.••.•....••..................•................................................. Negro ................................................................................. . Atlantic Coast: White: Commercial ••.......•••.•.........•.........•..•.••..•...•..............••.•....... Noncommercial. •.••••••......•...•......•.•...•.•.•...•.•..........••••...•....•.. Negro •..•••••••.•••.•.•••...•...•.•.•...................••...•.......•.•.•••...•.•••... 6.9 I==== Lumber: White: Commercial. ..............•.....•.•.................•...•...............•.......... Noncommercial •..........•.•...•...•...................•...........•...•...•...•.. Negro ....••••................•............•...................•.......•...•.•.......... Naval Stores: White: Commercial.. .........•.....................•.•..••.•..••..•.•.•.•.•............... Noncommercial. .................................................................. . 20.4 1.5 2.9 1. 5 26.4 3.0 4.1 40.4 2.9 7.4 41.3 I. 5 average amount of cropland harvested per farm for the South as a whole was 34 acres. 6 The number of Negroes who carried on commercial enterprises was so small that no separate classification of Negro commercial part-time farmers was made. Hence their inclusion in the group of noncommercial farmers served in some areas to raise the average acreage above that of the noncommercial whites. In the Atlantic Coast Subregion, for instance, a few Negroes had what amounted to fairly sizable truck farms, and in the Lumber Subregion some worked as contract agricultural laborers for landlords who allowed them some acreage for cotton or corn. Tenure Over half (58 percent) of the part-time farmers not living in mill villages were tenants (table 14). The amount of tenancy was much greater among Negroes than among whites. Forty-eight percent of the whites as compared with seventy percent of the Negroes were tenants. There was considerable variation among the subregions with respect to the tenure of operators of commercial and noncommercial part-time farms (appendix table 7). Data on part-time farmers, however, were considered primarily by color and by production for market versus home use (i. e., commercial and noncommercial) and a detailed analysis of tenancy or trends of tenancy was not properly within the limits of this survey. 1 Abstract of the Fifteenth Census of the United States, p. 547. 1~0061°-37-4 Digitized by Google 10 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Table 74.-Value of 610 Part-Time Farms, 1 by Color and Tenure of Operator,' 1934 Part-time farms Ve.Jue of farm Total Number White Perc,>nt Owner Tenant Owner Tenant --- --- --- --- --Total. ______________ ----------- -- --100 610 161 81 193 175 - - - - - - - - -8 - - -5 - - -46 1.Rss thRn $50() ___________________________ _ ---59 '500 to $999 ______________________________ _ $1,000 to $1,999 ___________________________ _ $2,000 to $2,999 ___________________________ _ $3,000 to $3,\lll9 ___________________________ _ $4,000 to $4,\199 ___________________________ _ $5,000 or more ____________________________ _ lij 121 158 122 70 37 43 20 1 15 58 18 55 43 11 6 7 44 29 28 20 20 26 6 11 2-1 34 13 3 1 1 78 54 8 3 1 3 • Exclusive of 328 white and NejlTO ca."'"' in the Cool and Iron Subregion, 162 white CSst'l! in the Textile Bubrel!:ion (59 mill-villBl(e cases In Oreenville County and 103 cases in Carroll County), and 13 white sharecroppers In the Naval Stores Suhre~ion_ 1 For dnta by subregions, sec appendix t&ble 7. Value and lndebtedn.. Estimates of the value of the properties represented in this study are necessarily of uncertain accuracy because of housing conditions peculiar to the Eastern Cotton Belt. Company housing by industries at nominal rents in the Textile and Coal and Iron Subregions precludes the capitalization of the rental rate to secure approximate values. In the Coal and Iron Subregion the garden plots were often located on company land, unattached to the house and used by the employee free of charge or at a nominal rent. If rental values had been used, the resulting calculation would not have included the actual farming enterprise. Property estimates could not be obtained for sharecroppers of the Naval Stores Subregion, whose houses and land were part of their crop contracts with the landlord, and for agricultural con tract laborers in the Lumber Subregion, whose houses and land were likewise perquisites of the working arrangement with the landlord. The chief fact of importance that emerges from any estimate of the value of the farms of the remaining part-time farmers is that the investment was small. In 56 percent of the cases, it amounted to less than $2,000. Only 7 percent of the farms were valued at more than $5,000 and these were mostly the holdings of commercial parttime farmers (table 14). As was to be expected, the holdings of owners were considerably more valuable than those of tenants: 31 percent of the owners' holdings, as compared with 73 percent of those of tenants, were valued at less than $2,000. A considerable portion of this advantage of owners over tenants, however, was counterbalanced by more frequent and larger debts (table 15). Among the white owners, commercial parttime farmers having mortgage indebtedness reported consistently higher debts than did noncommercial farmers (table 16). In contrast, white tenants operating noncommercial farms had larger debts than those with commercial farms except in the Na val Stores Subregion. Digitized by Google THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM 11 TafJle 75.-Total Debt 1 of Part-Time Farm Households, by Color and by Tenure,• January 1, 1935 White Total N111?0 Total debt, January 1, 1936 Total Owner Tenant Total Owner Tenant Owner Tenant Total - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - 104 715 2M 451 898 Number ••..•...... 1,113 MS 745 -= 100 = 100 - -100- = 100 · -100- - -100- = 100 - 100 Peroent ..........•. None ••......•.•••....... St to kfl .............•... S60toSW ................ SUJC> to S249 .............. S2110toS4flfl ..•........... S600 to f749 . ............. f760 to ll)flfl •• ••.......... Sl,000 to Sl,9flfl .. ......... '2,000 to S2,9flfl ........... '3,000 toS3,9flfl ...... ..... '4,000 or mDff ••••.••••.•• Unlcnown ................ A ~ total debt ror ON haviD1 debts ..•....•••.. -67.8 7.5 4. 0 4.8 2. 8 2. fl I.fl 6. 8 I. 7 0.4 0. 7 0.4 64. 8 6. 3 4.11 6. 0 8. 8 8. 2 2. 0 7.1 2. 6 o. 7 1.1 o. 1 4fl.3 1.1 8. 0 8. 8 1. 1 77.fl 8. 2 3. fl 4. 4 1.3 7 0.4 2.0 7 0. 3 0.1 0. 1 $1,0lfl S402 SU()O $1,281 47.3 11.2 4. 1 4.fl 6. 7 7.3 4. fl 12. 0 8.8 0.8 I.fl o. o. tl.4 - - - -- - - - - = f733 73.11 7.8 6. 5 6. 8 2. 0 7 7.11 6. 3 14. 4 4. fl 1. 1 2. 7 0. 4 o. - 2. fl I.I 0.4 0.2 = - '475 73. 1 11.11 2. 8 8. 8 1.3 2. 3 1.8 2. 0 0.3 42. 4 lfl. 2 ti. 7 7. 7 8. 8 6. 7 8. 8 6.8 1.0 1. 0 2.11 s:m '4(11 -- 294 100 84. 4 8. 8 I. 4 2. 4 o. 8 0. 7 I. 0 0. 7 - - 0. 3 - -- - Mortpp Indebtedness (real estate and chattel). • For data by 1Ubl'81iona, see appendix table 8. 1 TafJle 76.-Avera9e Total Debt1 of Part-Time Farm Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, by Tenure, and by Subre9ion, January 1, 1935 A= total debt for how,eho da havlD1 debts Subregion, color, and type or rann Owner Total •.••••.•.•......••.........•.•••••.•.••••.••••.........•••..•....• Textile: White: Commercial ........................................................ . Noncommercial •••••....••••.•.•...•...•...................•.•...... Coal and Iron: White .................................................................. . Negro .................................................................. . Atlantic C081t: White: Commercial ........................................................ . Noncommercial .................................................... . Nesro .................................................................. . Lumber: White: Commercial. ....................................................... . Noncommercial .................................................... . Negro ••..••.•..........•...................•••...•........•••.•...••.•.. Naval Stores: White: Commercial ........................................................ . Noncommercial .................................................... . 1 Tenant $1,019 S402 1,602 1,443 160 438 1,377 9M 9XJ 560 2,291 46G gg 275 1,298 437 lfll 106 6.IO 718 75 108 87 176 42 50 Mortpge Indebtedness (real estate and chattel). Except in the Coal and Iron Subregion, Negro part-time farmers were in debt for only small amounts, reflecting their limited assets. The holdings of whites were much more valuable than those of Negroes, only 29 percent of the white holdings, as compared with 88 percent of those of Negroes, falling below $2,000. Fifty-six percent of the holdings of Negroes were below $1,000, and nineteen percent were below $500. Digitized by Google 12 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Average values are always unsatisfactory because a few cases in the higher ranges can easily distort the picture. When the data are classified by subregion, type of farm, and tenure and color of operator, however, they bear out the general statements made above, as is shown in table 17. Table 77.-Average Value of 610 Part-Time Farms,1 by Type of Farm, by Color and Tenure of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average value of part•tlme !arms White Negro Subregion Commercial N oncommerclal Owner Textile ___________ ·····----··---·-·--····-· Atlantic Coast_ ____ .·--· .. ·-··_·-·-·-·---Lumber ____ -----·. _·- .. ___ --- ·-- --- ·- .. __ Naval Stores--····--·············-·· ..... . Owner Tennnt $4, 3.11 7,705 3, i80 3,000 $2,532 4,584 3,214 2,000 ___ ,____ ,___ Owner Tenant $3,528 4,400 2, 3.12 2,500 $2,141 2, 2113 1,500 1,800 Tenant - $1,242 1,876 $5\HI 1,217 1 Exclusive of 328 white and Negro""""" In the Coal and Iron Subregion, 162 white cases In the Textile Subregion (59 mill•village cases In Oreenville County and 103 cases in Carroll County), and 13 whioo sharecroppers In the Naval Stores Subregion. Buildings When it is remembered that the average values of farm enterprises given above represented the farm dwellings as well as the plots of land, it is not surprising to find that relatively little of the farmers' modest investments went into other buildings. A lack of buildings is fairly general in the South, and really adequate farm buildings are rarely found, even among full-time farmers. All except 6 percent of the sample part-time farmers had some sort of building other than the dwelling, and all except 9 percent had at least two farm buildings (table 18). However, less than one-half of the farms were equipped with barns. Table 78.-Buildings Other Than Dwellings on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part·tlme !arms Buildings other than dwelllngs Number Total.. .•.• --·----·--·-·-.···-···--·-··-·-·----·--·-·--................ None........................................................................ Barn only. __ ·-·----·-·-······-···---·······················-·············-·· 8~~~notf;'~~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Barn and other bull<lings __ ·-··-·-•--····-·-·-·--··--·•·-·•·················· Oarnge and other buildings_·--·----·-··--·•··-·-·-·---·······--·-····--···-· ~f~~; ~':JJ~r~:snin1~~"_'_~.~i!~!~.~.·--.:::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::: ::::::::: 1 1, 113 100 1-----1----63 8 13 J 286 141 m For data by subregions, see appendix table II. Digitized by Percent Google l ~ 26 13 ~; THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM 13 lmplem_,. and Machinery The small investment in the farm enterprises was also reflected in the limited amount of working equipment. Three-fourths of the farmers had no farm implements or machinery (table 19), although most of them had a few simple hand tools, such as hoes and rakes. Ta&le 19.-Cost of Implements and Machinery on Part-Time Farms, 1 193-4 Part•tlm& farms Cost of Implements and machinery Number Percent TotaL ............................................ . ........... ··· ..... . 1.113 JOO None................ .... ... . .. . .................................. ... .. . .... . SI to S4........ .. ...... .. . .. .... ..... .. .. . . ... . ... .............. . ... .... . . . .. 813 7i 1 I 12 65 52 to $14 ......... ················· ································· ........ .. Sl5 to $24....... . ......................................... ... ...... . ......... S25 to $49 ..•••. ···· •·• •••• ••..... .....•..••........................•••• • •••.. $50 to $00........... . .. ... . . . .. ... .. .. . .. ... . .... .. . ... . . .. . .. ... .. .. . ... .... SIOO to $149.................................................................. $ 1 "0 to $199.. ....••... •••••• ••••.. ... •. .. ..... ••• •. •.. .. . •. .• •...•••••••• •• •• 36 70 8 23 15 2 Unknown................ .. .................................. . .... . . . .. ..... 3 $6 $200 or more...... .. .... .. .. . ..................................... ..... ...... Average cost for those having machinery................ .. .. . ...... . .. 6 I 1 24 2 • [====[,==== $100 •Less than 0.6 percent. data by subregions, see appendix table 10. 1 For Only 5 percent of the farmers had implements costing $100 or more; most of these farmers were in the commercial group (appendix table 10). Almost one-half of the farmers who owned machinery had paid less than $25 for it. Llvatoclc Work stock was chiefly found among part-time farmers with 10 or more acres of cropland, except in the Atlantic Coast Subregion where nearly one-half of the Negroes had work stock (appendix table 11). As has already been pointed out, a number of Negroes in this subregion did considerable truck fanning. In individual cases even there, however, it was apparent that small enterprises did not warrant the ownership of a mule, especially since limited cropland prevented the growing of sufficient feed for the animal. Over three-fourths of the part-time farmers owned no horses and mules. Less than one-fourth of the farmers with horses or mules owned two or more (table 20). One-half of the part-time farmers owned at least one milk cow; almost one-half of them owned one or more hogs; and seven-tenths owned some poultry.' • For further disCU88ion of livestock, see following section on Farm Production. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 14 Taltle JO.-Number of Livestock and Size of Garden on Part-Time Farms,1 January 1, 1934 Part-time farms Number of livestock and acres In prden Percent Number Total_ ________________________________________________________________ _ 100 1,113 1-----1----- Cows: None ___________________________________________________________________ _ l________________________________________________________________________ - - --------------------------------------------------· ------------------_ 2 3 or more ________ -----_----_ - ---- ---- --- ----- -- ---- ------- --- ---- ---- -- -Poultry: None ___________________________________________________________________ _ 1 toQ ___________________________________________________________________ _ to 19 _________________________________________________________________ _ 20 to 29 _________________________________________________________________ _ 30 to 49 ________________________ . ____ . ___________________________________ _ 60 or more _________________________________________ --- ___ -- ---- ---------Hogs: None _________________________________________________________ -------- - __ 10 l________________________________________________________________________ -----------------------------------------------------------------------_ 2 3 or more _________________________________________ --- --- ----- ___ --------. Horses and mules: None ___________________________________________________________________ _ 1_or - - more ------------------ -------------- --- . ----------------------- --- . ----_ 2 ____________________________________ . __________________________ Acrns In garden: None ___________ ---------- --- -- ----- --- - . ----- ------ -- -- --- --- -- ---- -- - -- ¼----------------------------------------------------------------------Y., ______________________________________________________________________ _ ¾----------------------------------------------------------------------1 _______________________________________________________________________ _ lY., _____________________________________________________________________ _ 2 or more _______________________________________________________________ _ 1 5!18 448 83 24 50 40 8 2 341 31 16 23 13 g 8 184 255 141 100 92 5S 814 239 103 157 22 g H 77 852 202 18 59 5 37 3 320 225 20 29 13 16 8 11 141 182 87 121 For data by subregions, see appendix table 11. FARM PRODUCTION Pe.rt-time farmers in the Eastern Cotton Belt produced one or more of four principal types of products for home consumption: vegetables, dairy products, poultry and poultry products, and pork. Only 16 percent of the part-time farmers produced one type only, and 27 percent produced two types (table 21). Almost one-third produced three types of products, and one-fourth produced all four types. Those reporting all four types of products included threeTalt/e 27.-Types of Food Produced for Home Use on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part-time farms Food products Number Total _____________________________________________________________________ . 1, 113 Percent 100 1-----1----- };~ii;;•~:~~~l:oiiiy::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~~~!i~bfe~Oa~~~a~:'?pr~durts::::: :::::::::: :: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : :: : : :: :: : : Vegetables and poultry products________________________________________________ Vegetables and pork _______________ ---------------------------------------------Vegetables, dairy and poultry products__________________________________________ Vegetables, dairy products, and pork____________________________________________ Vegetables, poultry products, and pork__________________________________________ Vegetables, dairy and poultry products, and pork_______________________________ Other combinations ___ -------------------------------------------_______________ •Less than 0.5 percent. 1 lfil 1; 189 41 17 4 s: 152 54 141 272 18 For data by subregions, see appendix table 12. Digitized by Google ; 14 5 12 :M 2 THE PART-TIME FARMER AHD HIS FARM 15 fifths of the white commercial group, one-fourth of the white noncommercial group, including the Coal and Iron Subregion, and slightly over one-tenth of the Negroes (appendix table 12). Thus, it would seem that among the whites size of farm had a direct bearing on the variety of products as well as on ownership of work stock. With the Negroes, however, who averaged somewhat larger acreages than the noncommercial whites, capital and custom probably had more to do with the matter. Of the 182 part-time farmers who produced only one type of product, one-half were Negroes, although Negroes constituted only 36 percent of the total families surveyed. Onehalf of the Negroes with only one product were in the Atlantic Coast Subregion where these part-time farms averaged 4.1 acres of cropland. Most of the remainder were in the Coal and Iron Subregion where they had only garden plots. Gardens The sine qua non of part-time farming in the Eastern Cotton Belt was the vegetable garden. All except 3 percent of the part-time farmers had gardens in 1934 (table 20). These ranged in size from }~ acre to 2 or more acres. Production for sale often took place when gardens were in the larger sized group. Approximately one-half of the gardens contained ½ acre or less, and over three-fifths contained less than 1 acre. A much larger proportion of the white commercial part-time farmers than of the noncommercial group had gardens of 1½ acres or more, while a slightly larger proportion of white noncommercial farmers 7 than Negroes had gardens of this size (appendix table 11). The long growing season and the small expense attached to garden production was responsible for the popularity of gardens. They supplied not only fresh vegetables to families cultivating them but vegetables in larger quantities than would have been consumed had the families bought them. A garden is obviously of special advantage to a large family. The gardens varied in productivity perhaps even more than in size. No attempt was made to estimate the amounts of vegetables produced because of the very doubtful accuracy of such figures. Some rough measures that were likely to be more accurate were the number of months in which the various vegetables grown were used fresh from the garden, the number of quarts canned, the amounts stored, and the amount of reduction in the grocery bill during the 6 summer and fall months when garden vegetables were most likely to be available as compared with the rest of the year. The results of the first of these measures form a commentary on the gardening practices in the Eastern Cotton Belt. Fairly varied 7 Including whites in the Coal and Iron Subregion. Digitized by Google 16 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST summer gardens were common, but only a few families grew winter vegetables, and only a small variety was grown. Three or more vegetables were consumed fresh from the garden for 3, 4, or 5 months on about half of the part-time farms and for 3 to 7 months on almost three-fourths of the farms (table 22). Only 9 percent had three fresh vegetables for 8 months or more, and only 1 percent had them for 10 months or more. Tal>/e JJ.-Number of Months Three or More Fresh Vegetables Were Consumed on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part•tlme farms Number or months 3 or more fresh vegetables were consumed Number Perrent Total .........................•.. ······································ 1,113 None ......................................................•................ 1 month ......••............................................................. 2 months .••............•.•.................................................. 3 months ......•......................................•...................... 4 months .............•••.•.................................................. 5 months ...•.•.••••.....•..•.•.............................................. 6 months .•.....•••.•••••..••................................................ 7 months ..........••.•.......•.............................................. 8 months ...•....•....•................•..•.................................. 9 months ..........•.•.•.............•........•..•.••.•...................... 10 months or more ........•.......•................•..................•...... 94 1 41 8 4 96 8 142 193 177 143 133 63 19 12 13 17 16 13 12 6 2 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 13. Surprisingly enough, the number of months in which three vegetables were available varied in the several subregions in almost inverse proportion to the length of the frost-free growing season. In the Textile Subregion, where there was a frost-free period of 7 months, the families had three vegetables for an average of about 5 months (table 23), while in the Coal and Iron Subregion, with 8 frost-free months, three or more fresh vegetables were available for almost 7 months for Tal>/e J3.-Average Number of Months Three or More Fresh Vegetables Were Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Color of Operator and by Subregion, 1934 Average num• ber or months 3 or more fresb vegetsblee were consumed Subregion and color 4. 4 Total ••.•.•.......................... ·············································· 1===== Textile: Wblte ....•••.••••••................••••...•.........•••.•• •······· ·· · · •· ····•·••·· · • Cool snd Iron: Wbite .••..•••••.•.•...................................•.•.••...•............•..•••••• Negro .....•••••.........•..........................•.••.•.•...•••.•..••.•••••.•..•.•• Atlantic Coast: White ........•...........•.............•................... ·•····•··•····••·••······ Negro••••••.•.•...••••.•.••..•••......•..•.••....•...•....•••....•.•••••.••••••••••.. Lumber: White ••.•••........•.........•.•••............ ·······•••··•···•·•·•••·••••·••·•·••·• Nsv~i8~~res: ··•······•·•···············•···················•·•····•·••••••••••••••••••·• 4.3 3.4 White •.••••....................... •· ....•..... ···················••••··•·•··••·•·••• 4. 4 Digitized by Google 4. 5 6.8 5.3 3.4 1.9 17 THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM the whites and for 5 months for the Negroes. In the Lumber Subregion with an 8-month frost-free period, white families had three vegetables for an average of about 4 months, and Negroes, for a little over 3 months. In the Naval Stores and Atlantic Coast Subregions with a 9-month frost-free period, the white families had three vegetables for more than 4 and more than 3 months, respectively. Negroes in the Atlantic Coast Subregion had three vegetables for only 2 months. 8 The average southern gardener is notoriously unfamiliar with a variety of winter vegetables. Collards and turnips are the only ones frequently grown, although cabbage can be grown throughout the Eastern Cotton Belt from early spring until late fall, and in many areas during the entire winter. To&le !4.-Number of Months An_y Fresh Vegetable or Fruit Was Consumed on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part·tlme !arms Number of months any !resh vegetable or fruit was consumed Number Percent Total. ...................•....... . .... ·····················•··········· 1. 113 100 None ...•••.................................................................. 1 to 2 months .•.............................................................. 3 to 4 months..................................................•............. 6 months .....•.............................................................. 8 months ....•..............................•................................ 7 months ..•................................................................. 8 months ..•............•....................................•............... 9 months ................................................................... . 10 months ...........•.........................................•.......•..... 11 months .................................................................. . 12 months ..••.......................................•....................... 33 3 22 85 84 6 6 1 2 121 147 11 13 14 160 185 16 14 7 8 164 77 86 For data by subregions, see appendix table 14. To&le !S.-Avera~e Number of Months Any Fresh Ve\)etable or Fruit Was Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Color of Operator and by Subregion, 1934 Average number of months Subregion and color :fiibf:g~f~Ft· was consumed• Total .........•.........................................•....•....•.............•.. Textile: Coar:.~~telron: •.............................. ··•··· ..........••.••••..................... ~e~~·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·:::::.:··:::::::::: Atlantic Coast: White ............................................................................... . Negro ..•••.•.•............................•.••••..................................... Lumber: White ..•.•......•.....................................•..............•.•............. Na!i8~~res: ..••••••.....................................•...•.......................... White .•.••.•.•.•.•••••..•..••.•....•..••..••••...••................. ·••·············· 1 7.8 I===== 7. 4 8. 8 7. 6 8.1 6.0 8.8 b. I 8.6 By those ronsumlng fresh vegetahles and fruit. 8 The table includes fruits as well, but since these obviously are available in summer months, their inclusion does not lengthen the period. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 18 Since three fresh vegetables are a rather high standard, a count was made of the months in which any vegetable was consumed fresh from the garden (table 24). On this basis, the periods lengthened considerably. Twenty-nine percent of all families had something fresh from the garden for 10 months or more, and eight percent had some garden product for 12 months. The average was a little less than 8 months (table 25). Moreover, the length of time when some fresh vegetable was available varied considerably among the subregions. In the Atlantic Coast, Naval Stores, and Lumber Subregions, it was customary to grow at least one of the fresh winter vegetables. In all groups in theee three areas, the average number of months when one vegetable was available was at least double (and among the Negroee of the Atlantic Coast treble) the months in which three were available. In the Textile and Coal and Iron Subregions, the summer and early fall gardens were generally much more varied than were those in other regions, but many households had no late fall and winter vegetables at all and there was not as much dift'erence between the average number of months when one vegetable was available and when three vegetables were available. The production of fruits was far less common than that of vegetables. Three-fiftbs of the part-time farmers produced no fruits, berries, or nuts (table 26). Peaches were produced by 29 percent of the farmers, but only 10 percent of the farmers produced apples. Figs were grown Tol,le .td.-Part-Time Farms Producing Fruih, Berries, or Nuts,1 193-4 Part-time farms Fruits, berries, or nuts produoed Number Tot.al......... . .. . ............. ...... ..... .... . . .. ..... . . . ....... . .. ... ____, ____ 1,113 100 None... . ............... . ... . ..... . .... . .... . ... . . .. . ... ......... . ...... . . .. . l or more..... ... .... ....... .... ....... ... . . ..... . ... .. ..... . . . ....... . .. .. . . 660 453 69 41 PeachM . .. . . •... ... ........... . . . . .. .. . ... . .. . .. ... . . . . . ..... . . . . ·. · ... . . · . · 323 29 ~fg~'.~~::::::::::::::: :: ::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::: ::::::: ::: ::::: ::::::: Grapes .. •.•.... •.• .... ... . . . . . ....... . ...•. ... . . . . .... ....... .. ... .. .. . . . •. . 106 113 82 10 8 8 67 33 10 3 I Pears . .. .. . . ....... .. ..... ..... .......... ... .... . ..... . . ..... ............ ... . Plums . . ...... .. . . .. . .... ....... ...... . .... . ... ........ ....... . . ...... .. .... . Cherries .. .... . . . ... . . . . ......... . . .. ... . . . .... . ..... .......... .. . .. . . . ..... . Other fruit. . . . ... .. . . . . . ......... ...... . . .. .. . . . . . .. ..... . .... . . ..... .... . . . Strawberries . . . ......... ........ ... . ... . . . . •... . .... .. . ........ .. .. . ... ... . . . Blackberries . . ... .. ...... ....... .. . ... . ...... .... .. . ... ..... . . .......... . .•.. Huckleberries . . . ..... .. ... . . . . ....... . . . .. . . ..... .. ..... . . ... . ... .. . . .. . ... . Beales unknown . . . ... .. . ... . .. ........ . . . . ... . . ... . ... . .. ... . . .. . .... .. ... . Walouts. . .• .•....... . ..... .. ........... . .. .. .. ........ . .. . .. . . . .......... . . . Pecans . ... . .•.. ... .. . . . .... . .. . ..... ····· · ·· · · ·· · · ·· · · ·· ···· ·· ·• ·· ·· · ···· · ·· 6 l50 69 6 '3 5 • . 4 5 4 3 23 2 •Less than 0.5 percent. t For data by subregions, see appendix table 15. by only 8 percent and grapes by only 6 percent of the farmers. Only 4 percent produced strawberries. It is likely that all other berries were wild. Digitized by Google THE PART-TIME FARMER AHD HIS FARM 19 More commercial than noncommercial part-time farmers produced fn1it, while relatively few Negroes produced any {appendix table 15). In most cases the amounts grown were small-a few bushels or even 1 bushel of fruit and sometimes only a few quarts of berries. Some canning of these products was done, however, so that the fruit added variety to the family diet over a period of time. Fifty-seven percent of the part-time farmers did some canning of fruits and vegetables (table 27), and thirty-three percent of all households canned 50 quarts or more. Both the proportion of households doing any canning and the average number of quarts canned varied greatly in the several subregions (table 28 and appendix table 16). Almost ninetenths of the white part-time farmers and over one-half of the Negroes of the Coal and Iron Subregion did some canning, but only 21 percent of the whites and practically none of the Negroes in the Atlantic Coast Subregion did canning. The average amount canned ranged from about 110 quarts by the whites in the Atlantic Coast, Coal and Iron, and Naval Stores Subregions to 37 quarts by the Negroes in the Lumber Subregion. Tal,/e .27.-0uantity of Fruits and Vegetables Canned on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part•tlme farms Quarts or fruits and vegetables canned Number PMcent Total. ••••••••...............•.................................•....... I, 113 JOO None .•.•••..••.•..•......................................................... I to 19 quarts ..•................ .. ..... . .................................... 20 to 49 quarts••••.•.•.. . .... _........ _..................................... . 50 to 99 quarts ..••.••........................................................ JOO to J99quarts ..••......................................................... 200 quarts or more .•••....................................................... 470 103 166 167 43 9 1 147 15 15 13 60 6 For data by subregions, see appendix table 16. Tal,/e 28.-Part•Time Farm Households Canning Fruits and Vegetables and Average Quantity Canned, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Subregion and color Total.•.................... . ..........................•.......•.... Textile: Whlte ....••••..................................•...........•...••... Coal and Iron: White ....••...........................•......................•...... Negro•.....••.•.............................. _........•............ _ Atlantic C088t: White .••.•...........................•.............................. Negro .••••••.•...........................•..•.. ••·••······••••·•···· Lumber: White .••.•.•..........•••.•.....•....•••..•......................... Negro....•......•............•.•............... . .................... Naval Stores: White •.•.•..•.....••................................................ PerCf'nt oltotal households doing canning Average num. ber or quarts canned by those doing canning 57 88 81 111 87 65 110 47 21 Ill 1 t 74 36 83 37 66 lll t Average not computed ror less than 10 ca.sea. Digitized by Google 10 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST ' Storage of garden and field products was somewhat more frequent than canning, two-thirds of the part-time farmers storing some products. At least half of the whites in all areas except the Naval Stores Subregion stored vegetables, but the proportion of Negroes storing vegetables varied greatly from area to area. (table 29). In the Coal and Iron Subregion all Negroes stored some products, while in the Lumber Subregion both the number that stored products and the amounts stored were small. Sweet potatoes were the most frequently stored product, being reported by 55 percent of all families. The average amount stored was 22 bushels (appendix table 17). Irish potatoes were stored by about one-third of the families, the average amount being 11 bushels. A wide assortment of products-onions, peas, peppers, beans, apples, peanuts, cane syrup, etc.-were stored by a few families. Tal,le 29.-Part-Time Farm Households Storing Vegetables,1 by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Peroont storing vegetables Subregion, color, and type of farm Total ______________________________________________________________________________ _ 66 Textile: White: Commercial _____________________________________________________________________ _ Noncommercial __ . ____ . _____ . ________ . ____ ... _. ____ . ______ .. _. ______ ._. _________ _ ,Cool and Iron: White__________________ ___________ --- ----.. -- . ---. -. ------ -- --- - .. ------__---- .---- · - -- · · - ----- .--N011:ro ______ ____ . ________ . ___ _... .. __ ________________ ___--. __--_ Atlantic Coast: White: Commercial ________________________ .. _. ______ . __ .. _. __ . __ .. _____________________ _ Noncommercial _________________________________________________________________ _ Negro ________________ . ___ ._._. ___ ._. _____ .. _. __ ... _.. __ . __ . ___ .. _____ . ______________ . Lumber: White: Commercial. _____ ... __ . ______ . ___ .. ____ ._._. ___ .... _. __ ._. __ ... ________ . ________ _ Noncommercial._._ .. _________ .. _____ .....•......... _... _._ ...... ____ ... ________ _ Negro .... ________________ . __ .. ----------.---- -- -- . --- - ..• -- -- -- --- -- - --- --- --------- Naval Stores: White: Commercial .... ______ .. __ . ___ . __ ....... ___ ..•... __ . __ .. __ .. __ .•.•...•• _______ ... . Noncommerrial. _______ .•.. ____ .•. _... _____ ..... _... __ . ______ . _. __ •...• ____ . ____ _ 1 98 53 88 100 711 51 71 !12 49 33 19 211 Grown in garden or truck patch. Another measure of the contribution of the gardens and fields to the family living is the amount by which the grocery bill was reduced during the productive months, as compared with the rest of the year. The proportion of families with gardens reporting reductions varied from 88 percent among the whites in Carroll County in the Textile Subregion to 37 percent among the Negroes of the Atlantic Coast Subregion. 11 The average amounts by which grocery bills were reduced varied from $10 a month among the whites of the Coal and Iron Subregion to $3.50 among the Negroes of the Atlantic Coast Subregion. With many individual families the reductions amounted to only $2, $3, or $4 a month, but with a few families they were as high as $20. 9 See Gardens under subregion reports in Part IL Digitized by Google THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM 11 This method of measuring production is unsatisfactory in that it makes a poorer rather than a better showing for those groups of families in which winter gardens and canned and stored products are most common. The latter had a reduction in grocery bills for all 12 months and hence reported little difference between summer and winter. For those families who raised pork the greater use of this product in winter would also conceal differences in the grocery bill made by the garden. Some heads of families noted this factor as responsible for small differences between summer and winter grocery bills. Poultry and Poultry Products Next to a garden, the most common type of enterprise among parttime farmers was the keeping of poultry; 69 percent had some birds. Tol,le 30.-0uantity of Home-Produced Eggs Consumed on Part-Time Fanns,1 1934 Part-time farms Eggs consumed Number Percent TotaL. •.••••.•••.•...•...•.•...•...•..... ·•··· ·· ·· -··· ·· ···••··• · ••••· I, 113 100 None ....................•...•....•...••...•.•••....••..•••••................ I to 19dozen ..............................•...••••...•....................... 20 to 49 dozen .•..........•................•.....•..•...•...•................ 60 to 99 dozen ....•.......................................................... 100 to 199 dozen ....••...................•....••.•...•.••.................... 200 dozen or more ........................•••......•............•............ 368 109 33 10 19 19 214 212 1118 52 5 • For data by subregions, see appendix table 18. Tol,le 37.-Average Quantity of Home-Produced Eggs Consumed on Part-Time Fanns, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average num• her of dozens of eggs con• Subregion, color, and type of !arm sumed • Total •••••.••••••••••...•.................•••. ···········-·····•··················· TextDe: White: Commercial ....•••.•••.••••.••.••••............................................. Noncommercial ...••••••.••.••••••••••..................................•..•..... Coal and Iron: White ••••••••••••................•..••••.....••••.•......•.•.•.•.................•.. Negro •.••••••••••..............••••.....•••...•.••.••••.•••••.•••.................... Atlantic Coast: White: Commercla.. .•.•••.....................................•.......•...•••••••••••.•. Noncommerclal •••.•.............••.....................•.•..••.•...•.•.••.•••.•. 84 I===== Negro ............................................................................... . Lumber: White: Commercial .•.•••••.•...................................................•..•••••• Noncommercial •••••.••...........................••...............•.••..••.••••• Na~Tt!:res:·································································•··•······· White: Commeralal •••••••••••••••..••••.•.••.••..•..•..........••.......•........•...•. Noncommerclal •••••••••.••••••••.•.•••.•.•.•.•................••.............•.. 92 73 113 38 152 84 47 160 117 (Ill t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. 1 By those consuming home-produced eggs. Digitized by Google u PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST In general, the flocks were small. Almost three-fifths (57 percent) of those keeping poultry had fewer than 20 birds (table 20). Only 12 percent of those keeping poultry had 50 or more birds. The great majority (89 percent) of the commercial part-time farmers had some poultry (appendix table 11), and the flocks of more than half of those who had poultry consisted of 30 or more birds. Three-fifths (63 percent) of the noncommercial group, including the whites of the Coal and Iron Subregion, had poultry, but less than one-half of those with poultry (44 percent) had 20 birds or more. Almost three-fourths of the Negroes (72 percent) kept poultry, but most of the flocks were small. Consumption of home-produced eggs was limited; 33 percent of the families had no home-produced eggs and 29 percent averaged less than 1 dozen eggs a week throughout the year (table 30). There were wide variations by type of farming, color, and subregion (table 31). White commercial part-time farm families in the Textile Subregion consumed an average of nearly 2 dozen home-produced eggs a week, while in the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions their average consumption was approximately 3 dozen a week. The average consumption of home-produced eggs for white noncommercial part-time farm families was from 1½to 2 dozen per week in all areas except the Naval Stores Subregion. Here the average consumption was less than three eggs per week. Consumption of home-produced eggs by Negro families was less than 1 dozen a week throughout the year, except in the Lumber Subregion. Table 32.-0uantity of Home-Produced Poultry Consumed on Part-Time Farms,' 1934 Part-time farms Dres.sed poultry consumed Percent Number Total. ________________________________________________________________ _ None _______________________________________________________________________ _ 1 to 19 pounds. __________________________________________________ .. _________ . 20 to 49 pounds ______________________________________________ . ___ .. _________ _ 50 pounds. -- -----------------------------------------------------_ 100toto99199 pounds______ .. _________________________________________________________ :axJ pounds or more _____ .. __ .---------------------- __________ .. -------------1 For 1, 113 456 100 >---- 1()4 193 181 124 56 41 10 17 16 11 ~ data by ~ubregions, see appendix table 19. Consumption of home-raised poultry was also limited (table 32). A few families in each subregion used 200 pounds of dressed poultry or more in 1934, which was enough to be a real contribution to the food supply. The average amounts consumed, however, were very small, ranging from 26 pounds among Negroes in the Atlantic Coast Subregion to 173 pounds among white commercial part-time farm families in the Textile Subregion or from a chicken now and then to Digitized by Google THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM 23 about one a week (table 33). The amount consumed hv commercial part-time farm families was about twice as large as that consumed by their noncommercial neighbors in the Atlantic Coast and Textile Subregions, while that consumed by Negroes in general was so small as to be an insignificant contribution to the food supply. Ta&/e 33.-Average Quantity of Home-Produced Poultry Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average number or pounds Subregion, oolor, and type of farm of poultry consumedt 81 Total __ - _- --- -- -- - - -- -- - --- --- -- - -- --- -- - ---- -- --- -- ----- -- --· - ---- -- ----- - -- ---- -I==== Textile: White: Commercial __________ . __________ . ________ . __________________ . ______ . __ . __ . __ . -- . _ 173 Noncommercial. ________________________________________________________________ _ 86 CoalWhite and Iron: _______________________________________________________________________________ _ 70 Negro _______________________________________________________________________________ _ 36 Atlantic Coast: White: Commercial. ______ . ______________ ._. ____________________________________________ _ 117 Noncommercial _________________________________________________________________ _ Negro ________________ . ___ --- ---- - -- _- -- --- --- -- - -- - --- --- -- -- --- --- -- -- ---- -- --- --- - . Lumber: White: Comm~rctaL ____________________________________________________________________ _ NoncommerclaJ _________________________________________________________________ _ Nav1:iTt~res: -------------· - ------- -------- --- -------------------- ------ ---- --- ----- --- -White: Commercial ___________________ - __________ -______ -- __ -_________ --- __ ---- -- - ---- --N oncommericaL ________________________________________________________________ _ tfl lllS 168 lllll 711 44 t tAverage not computed for leM than JO cases. • By those consuming home-produced poultry. Dairy Products A cow was the most important contribution to the family living of any single phase of part-time farming in food value, in continuity of contribution, and in production of surplus available for sale. Onehalf of the part-time farmers had one or more cows on January 1, 1934, but only 10 percent had two or more (table 20). More than four-fifths (83 percent) of all white commercial farmers and over threefifths (61 percent) of all white noncommercial farmers, including all farmers in the Coal and Iron Subregion, had one or more cows, but only one-fifth (22 percent) of the Negroes had a cow (appendix table 11). Most of the part-time farms with two or more cows, except those in the Textile Subregion, were in the commercial groups. Some of the cows were very poor milk producers. On 11 percent of the farms having cows, production was less than 1,000 quarts a year, or less than 3 quarts a day (table 34). There were some individual animals that produced 3 to 4 gallons a day, but the average was considerably below this. In the Textile and Coal and Iron Subregions, the average amount of milk per cow ranged from about 2,500 to 3,000 qu~ts during 1934 (table 35), which is well above the national aver- Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST age. 10 The averages for cows in the Lumber and Na.val Stores Subregions, however, ranged from a little over 1,000 to less than 2,000 quarts a year. The few cows belonging to Negroes in the Atle.ntic Coast Subregion averaged less than 1,000 quarts. Although more commercial part--time farmers had two or more cows, the average milk production per cow was better among the noncommercial groups, except in the Atlantic Coast Subregion. As in the case of gardens, a cow was a great advantage to the large family. Few part--time farm families would have been able to buy milk in the quantities they used. Ta&le 34.-0uantity of Milk Produced on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part-time rarms Milk produced Percent Number• Total.. .. _________ ·--·--.·--· .. ·--·----· --- ·--·-- ·-. -------- ·--··-- .. - . I, II3 100 None ...... ·-·--··-----·-··-·······-·----·-----··--····----····---·----··---· 1 to 499 quarts ______ ....... ··--·--------------- __ .. ____ ··-·----····-··-·-··-· roo to 9W quarts_ .... ·-··-····-···-·-·-----.·--·_·---·-·--·--·- .... ·--··---·1,000 to 1,499 quarts._··-· ..•....... ··-· .. ______ ·-.·-.·- .................•... 1,500 to l,!XKI quarts ......... ·······-··-·•-·· ........ ··-····· .. ·-· .. ·-··· ... . 2,000 to 2,499 quarts .............•...• ·-······························-·····-2,500 to 2,900 quarts .. ---···----·-··---·-·--··--·--------------·-··---------· 3,000 to 3,499 quarts .... --·········-··-·-···-·-•-·-·-·---··--·--·----·----·-3,,500 to 3,999 quarts ... _---·-------·-·--·-··---·--.-·-·-··-·· ..•.•.......•••. 4,000 to 4,900 quarts .................. ·--·--· ..••....•......•....•... ······-. 6,000 quarts or more ...... _•.• _.•...... _..•.•. _•. _.••••••....•.• _•.... _.• _•.. 637 48 2 4 7 4 8 8 1 1 IQ {7 82 39 84 87 71 45 6 4 5 4 57 45 For data by subreizjons, see appendix table 20. The difference in the number of farms with milk production and the number ol farms with oows (table due to the dates for which the data were taken. :Kl) is Ta&le 35.-Average Ouantity of Milk Produced per Cow on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average nurn• ber or quarts per cow producing mil.Ir. Subregion, color, and type of farm Total .•••. ·-. - .•......•... - ••.••••••••••• ••. • • •• • · • · • · · ·· · ·• · · · · •••·• · • · ·-··· •• ·- • • Textile: White: Commercial. ........ - .• ·······-·········-···-···········-················-···-··· Noncommercial ...................... ·--··············••·········-····-·········· Coal and Iron: ;:.~1:·:=::::::::::: :: :::: :: ::::::::: :::::::::: ::: :::::::::: :: :::: :::::::::::::: :: :: :. Atlantic Coast: White: Commercial ....•....•..•.... --· .•. -· .... ·- .........•.••••...•.•.•.......•. -·· .•.. Ne:Ooncommercial ..•.... -····-·········-···········-······--·······-·············-: Lumber: White: Commerclal ...•••••••.•••.•..•.••• _._············-···-············-·············· Noncommercial .••..••........ _. ___ •• -· .•.. -· •...•.....••.••.••.•....... _... _.••. Negro ...•••••••••••••••••••••. -- -••• - •••••• -•••• ·-- ••••.•. •- .••••••••. •- •. •· •·· ... - . • Naval Stores: White: Commerclal. ... -••.••...•.•••••••...•...•...•...•.•.•..........••.••.•• --·····-·· Noncommercial ••.••.• -· •••••••..••.•.••.••••• _.•••.•••..••....... _•••••••.••••.. • 0 4,030 pounds in 1934, or about 1,874 quarts. U. S. Department of Agriculture, p. 601. 2,180 I===== 2,440 2, 6liO 3,069 2,'/W 2,440 J..770 1W J..375 1.941 I. 2115 1,081 J..283 Yearbook of Agriculture, 1935, Digitized by Google THE PART-TIME FMMER AHD HIS FARM 15 Families keeping a cow usually consumed 2 or 3 quarts of milk fresh per day and made butter and buttermilk out of the remainder. Buttermilk is a common article in the diet of Eastern Cotton Belt families, as it is throughout the South. .Any surplus buttermilk was fed to the pigs or chickens. Nearly all of the part-time farm families with cows made butter (table 36). The amount varied widely from family to family and from region to region, from an average of less than 1½pounds a week among the Negroes of the Lumber Subregion to 4}' pounds among the whites of the Coal and Iron Subregion (table 37). Ta&,. 36.-0uantity of Home-Produced Butter Consumed on Part-Time Farms, 1 1934 Part-time (arms Butter consumed Number Percent Total. ................•........•••.. ·····••·········•·················· I, 113 100 None ..........•..........•....••.•.••.......•••.......•••.........•......... I to 49 pounds ..•...........•••...•......••.......••••...••••..•........••••. IIO to 99 pounds ........•......•....••.•.............•........•....•.......... 100 to 199 pounds .•••......•..•..••...•.•....•.....••..........•............. 200 to 299 pounds ...•......................................................•. 300 pounds or more .....•.•.•...•••..•..•....••............•............•.... Unknown •.•••...................................•.............. . ...... . .... 689 63 • 46 8 18 9 8 89 200 . 104 83 ll •Less than 0.5 percent. 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 21. Ta&le 37.-Average Quantity of Home-Produced Butter Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Color of Operator and by Subregion, 1934 Avernge number or pounds or butter consumed 1 Subregion and color Total ....•................................... ······································ Textile: 180 I===== White ........•.•.•.•.....•................•....•...•..•................•...•..•....• Coal and Iron: White .•.........................•.................................................... Negro .......•.•..••....•......................... . ..................................• Atlantic Coast: White .••........................•................................................•... Negro ••.............................................................................. Lumber: White .•..•....••.. .. ........................... . .................. . ..............•... Ne~ro ......•............... . ......... . .........................................•...•. Naval Stores: White ....••............................................... . ....................•.•... 1 100 234 176 151 100 124 73 167 By tbose consuming home•produced butter. Porlc Almost one-half of the part-time farmers, including some who lived in cities or villages, had one or more hogs (table 38). One-half of those who raised pork had only one hog (table 20). Except in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, a greater proportion of commercial than noncommercial white part-time farmers raised pork, and the majority of the commercial farmers who had hogs reported two or more (appendix 150061°-37--5 Digitized by Google 26 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST table 11 ). Negroes received about the same advantage from this phase of part-time farming as did their white neighbors, 50 percent of the Negro part-time farmers owning hogs. Ta&le 38.-0uantity of Home-Produced Pork Consumed or Stored on Part-Time Farms, 1 1934 Part•tlme Carma Dressed pork oonswned or stored Nwnber Percent Total.................................................................. I. 113 JOO 1-----1-------603 M 30 3 103 g 95 g 85 8 59 5 45 4 57 S l,OOOpoundsormore............................................ . .... . ...... 36 3 Nnne........................................................................ I to99pounds............................................................... JOO to 199 pounds............................................................ 20Oto299pounds............. . .............................................. 300 to 399 pounds...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 to 499 pounds... . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . 500 to 599 pounds............................................................ 600 tom pounds. ________ ._. ___ .. ___________________________ . _____ ._________ • For data by subregions, see appendix table 22. Consumption and storage of home-produced pork averaged around 400 pounds for those families which had hogs (table 39). In view of the general use of lard as a cooking fat and of pork and bacon as seasoning for vegetables in the South, this a.mount represented an important contribution of the part-time farm to the family living. The average amount of home-produced pork consumed or stored ranged from 217 pounds among the Negroes in the Coal and Iron Ta&/e 39.-Average Ouantity of Home-Produced Pork Consumed or Stored on PartTime Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average number or pounds or dressed pork I oonsumed or stored Subregion, oolor, and type or rarm Total ..•....•............................................ ·•·· · · ···················· Textile: White: Commercial._. ___ ...............................................................• Nonoommerclal ................................................................. . Coe.I and Iron: White ............................................................................... . Negro ...•...•.............................. . . ......... . ...... . .. . ............. . .•.... Atlantic Coast: White: Commercial.. .............................. . .................................... . Nonoommercie.l. .......................... . .......... .. ...... . ........ . ......... . Negro ..•..••........................... . ............... . . . ... . .......... . ............ Lumber: White: Commercial.. ................................................................... . Nonoommercle.l. ..................................... . .·............. . ........... . Nav~rft~res:······ •·· .................... . .................. . . . ................ ··•······ 406 I===== White: Commer~laL ............................................................•....... Noncommercial. ...........................................................•.•... t A vere,ge not computed for less than JO cases. 1 By those consuming or storing home·produced pork. Digitized by Google 460 366 378 217 t 306 230 51<3 249 263 1,263 t THE PART-TIME FARMER AHD HIS FARM 27 Subregion to 683 pounds among the white commercial part-time farmers in the Lwnber Subregion (table 39). Over 1,200 pounds were produced by the commercial part-time farmers of the Naval Stores Subregion, but many of the families who dressed and stored such quantities traded cured meat for groceries throughout the year. Field Crops Only a very small nwnber (18 percent) of the part-time farmers, most of whom were commercial part-time farmers (appendix table 23), grew any roughage, and over half of these produced less than 3 tons (table 40). Therefore, most of the feed for cows had to be purchased. Commercial farmers in the Naval Stores and Atlantic Coast Subregions produced the largest average amounts of roughage, 13 and 11 tons, respectively (table 41). Noncommercial farmers produced very Table 40.-0uantity of Roughage Produced on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part·tlme farma Roughage produced Number Total.................................................................. 1, 113 100 913 8~ 39 31 11 3 1----1----- None........................................................................ 1 to 2 tom................................................................... 3to4toDS................................................................... litolltom................................................................... 10 to 14 tom................................................................. 16 to 111 tons ............................... ··•···············................ ~ tom or more.............................................................. 108 10 3 1 • 3 7 1 Unlr:Down................................................................... • Less than 0.6 percent. Percent • For data by subregions, see appendix table ZI. Table 41.-Average Quantity of Roughage Produced on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average nwn• ber ol tons ol roughage produced I Subregion, color, and type offann Total ••••.•........................ ···········································•···· TenDe: White: Commercial. •...•.........................................•...•.................. Noncommercial ................................................................. . Coal and Iron: White.................................................................... . .......... . Negro ................................................................. . ............. . Atlantic Coast: White: Commercial ......•................................................................ Nonoommerclal .........•...................... . ........... . ..................... Neero .....•........... ................ · · ·. · ·· · · · · · · · · ··· · · ··· · · · · · · · · ··· · · · · · · · · ··· · · Lumber: White: Commercial ...........•.....•.................................................•.. Nonoommerclal .................................................. . . ............. . 5.0 I===== 3.4 1.4 2.9 t 11.0 3.0 3.4 6.5 t 2. 8 Na~T°tores: ............................................. •·-. ·••········ ............... . White: Commerclal ...................................................•.................. Nonoommerclal ..••.....•..........•..............•.....................•.•...•.. t Average not computed !or less than 10 cases. 13.1 • By those producing roughage Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 21 little. In the Textile Subregion it was common for employers to have pastures available for workers' cows, but the pastures were often overgrazed and of little value. In all areas the farmers made a practice of .tying their cows along the roadside or in vacant lots, and in the Naval Stores Subregion, the cows were allowed to roam in the woods (hence their name: "piney woods cows"). A much larger proportion (51 percent) of the part-time farmers produced some field com, and nearly all who grew any com at all produced enough for meal for the family and to help in the feeding of chickens or a hog (table 42). The commercial pa.rt-time farmers, most of whom had work stock to feed, produced fairly sizable amounts of com (table 43). Tal>le 42.-0uantity of Field Com Produced on Part-Time Farms,1 1934 Part•tlme farms Field com produced Percent Number Total.................................................................. I, 113 JOO 651 70 106 84 ~5 52 411 1-----1----- None............................................................ . ........... 1 to 9 bushels. . • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 10 to 19 bushels.................... . ......................................... 20to 29 bushels.............................................................. 30to 49 bushels.............................................................. l50 to 74 bushels.............................................................. 76togg bushels.............................................................. 100 to 149 bushels................... . ........................................ ll50 to 1gg bushels............................................................ 200to 299 bushels............................................................ 300 to 300 buslwls.... ............. ............... .. .. ..................... ... 400 to 500 bushels............................................................ GOO bushels or more.......................................................... 6 II 8 8 5 3 32 42 20 37 4 2 3 1 1 13 II 12 1 • For data by subregions, see appendix table 24. Tai>,. 43.-Average Ouantity of Field Corn Produced on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 A veroge bush• els of corn produced • Subregion, color, and type or fann Total .................................................. ···························· Te.tile: White: Coal 81 I===== anfr!~~~ciai:.:.: ............................................................. 101 21 Au,Ei;t~i::::::: :: ::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: :: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::::::: :: :: :::: :: :::: :: White: Commercial. ....... . 310 Lu~ia~~~.~.e~~.~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 48 21 White: NeJ~~~~;:~~!~!:: : ............................................................. Naval Stores: White: · ···· ··· ··· 411 · ~~~~~!~ciai::::: ............................................................ . 1 281 41 By those producing com. Digitized by Google :?28 THE PART-TIME FARMER AHD HIS FARM 29 Fuel Part-time farms, especially in the more populous areas, were too small to provide firewood. Only a few part-time farmers in the Textile, Coal and Iron, or Atlantic Coast Subregions cut their fuel. In the Coal and Iron Subregion, the chief industrial employers made provision for the sale of fuel at wholesale rates. In the Lumber Subregion, most commercial and some noncommercial part-time farmers were able to cut their fuel from their own or their landlords' woodland, while in the sparsely settled, wooded Naval Stores Subregion practically all were able to cut their fuel. FARM RECEIPrS AND EXPENSES Sale of Produc:11 Commercial part-time farmers, by definition, were those who produced some crop for market. Since no attempt was made in the study to analyze this phase of their activity, the commercial group is omitted from the discussion of the sale of products. Of the white noncommercial and the Negro part-time farmers, 11 one-half sold no products and one-fourth sold less than $50 worth (table 44). In the Textile Subregion and among the white part-time farmers of the Coal and Iron and Atlantic Coast Subregions (appendix table 25), the relatively large proportion selling products (59 percent, 47 percent, Taf>/e 44.-Relation Between Cash Receipts From All Products Sold and Total Cash Fann Expenses 1 on White Noncommercial and Ne9ro Part-Time Farms,• 1934 Part-time farms Average cash receipts Cash receipts from all products sold Number Percent Average cash expenses Net receipts Total .•.•...•....................... 970 100 $40 SM None ....••..•...••........................ SI to $49 .•••••.•.•....•••••...•.•.•.•.•.•.. $50 to $99 .••••••••••••••.••.•••••••.•..••.• $100 to $199 ••••••••..••••••.• ·• ••.••••••••• $200 or more ......•..•.........•........... Unknown ..•.............................. 493 51 0 37 M :u4 114 84 34 I 25 12 . 9 3 25 75 15() 384 66 100 174 20 S-16 -'SI -30 -9 44 210 • Less than 0.6 percent. Ezclmlve oft.axes and rent. , For data by subregiom, see appendix table 25. 1 11 The Negro part-time farmers of the Lumber Subregion should likewise be omitted from the discussion of the sale of products because two-thirds of them cultivated from 1 to 16 acres of cotton, and very few sold any product except cotton. The proportion of Negroes in this subregion selling products (77 percent) and the average cash receipts ($96) are, therefore, not strictly comparable with the figures for the other groups. Some Negro part-time farmers in the Atlantic Coast Subregion were commercial farmers in the same sense, in that they grew several acres of vegetables for sale. Digitized by Google 30 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST and 45 percent, respectively) was due chiefly to their production of surplus milk or butter, these two products accounting for from onehalf to three-fourths of all sales. It is pertinent to recall at this point that it was these groups which had cows producing the highest average number of quarts of milk. If receipts of part-time farmers were small, so also were expenses. Roughly one-fourth of all who sold any products took in more than enough to meet their cash outlay for farm expenses (table 44). Those whose receipts averaged less than $50 had an average deficit of $30, while for those whose average receipts were between $50 and $100, the deficit was very small. Those whose sale of products brought them $100 or more showed a cash surplus at the end of the year. Exclusive of white commercial farmers, average cash receipts exceeded average cash expenses only among Negroes in the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions, who raised truck crops and cotton, respectively, for sale (table 45). Tal>le 45.-Average Cash Expenses I and Receiph on White Noncommercial and Negro Part-Time Farms, by Subregion, 1934 A vera~e cash A v - cash expenses receipts Subregion, color, and type or rarm Total ..•................•...•...... . . ·································· Te:rtile: White: Noncommercial ........•...................•.........•........•..•.. Coal and Iron: White .•.•.•••.•.........•.•..••••..•.•.•••••..•.........•....•.•••••••.. Negro .....•....••.......•........•......••••............•......••....... Atlantic COBSt: White: Non commercial. .•.•.••••..•..•....•.....••.••••••••...•..•••....... Negro ••••..................•......................•••...............•... Lumber: White: Noncommercial ......•........................•......... . .........•. $56 V2 45 73 33 16 e2 26 65 Nav~i8~~ras:····· .......................············ ...................... . 38 White: N oncommerclal ••..........•..............•......................... 26 t Average not computed for less than 1 $40 l====I,==== " 30 38 16 116 10 cases. Exclusive of taxes and rent. Except in the Textile Subregion and among white farmers in the Coal and Iron Subregion, where feed for a cow added from $50 to $75 to the expenses, from one-fifth to two-thirds of the expenses of parttime farmers went for labor (tables 45 and 47). Since few members of these groups had work stock, they usually hired labor for plowing. On nearly half {48 percent) of all part-time farms no labor was hired, and on 40 percent the amount paid for labor was less than $25 a year (table 46). Of the remaining 12 percent, whose expenses for labor ranged from $25 to $500 or more, almost two-thirds were commercial part-time farmers (appendix table 26). Digitized by Google 31 THE PART-TIME FARMER AND HIS FARM Tobie 46.-Amount Paid for Hired Labor on Part-Time Farms,1· 1934 Part-time fanm Amount paid for hired labor Number Total________ ._. __________________________ . _______________________ .____ None _____________________________ ,1 to 1,113 if!!:::: ::: :• : : : :•:•••••:: . . : : : : :: UnlcnoWD•• _________________________________________________________________ 1!88 100 1----+---··------···--------------------··--------671 48 1'---------------------------------------·-·--------------·------------- •Less than 0.6 percent. • For data b;r mbregions, Percent 216 111 ·1 ·1 1 • appendix table 26. Table 47.-Amount Paid for Hired Labor per Farm and per Crop Acre on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Average amount paid for hired labor I Subregion, color, and type of farm Per crop acre Per farm Total____ . ____ -________ -- ___ . ____ - _-- ___ - -- --- -- . ---- - --- - -- - . -- ---- -- . $41 l====I==== Textile: White: Commercial_ .. ___________________________________________ ••• · ______ _ Noncommercial __ . _________________ . ________ ------------------ _____ _ CoalWhite and Iron: __________________________________________________________________ _ Negro ... __ . ______ --- ________ ------ --- - -- -- - -- - ---- ___ -- . -- - ---- __ -__ --- Atlantic Coast: White: Commercial ... ____________________________ . ________________________ _ Noncommercial. _______________________________ .-------------------- 8& 11 4.00 0.40 14 6.150 4.40 6 34 18 Lumber: White: Commercial ________________________________________________________ _ Noncommercial ____________________________________________________ _ 11.150 11.30 4. 70 151 17 3.60 Nav~,::Otorea,------------------------------·------------------------·-------- 25 3.150 Whlte: Commercial_ _______________________________________________________ _ Noncommercial ____________________________________________________ _ 76 1.80 5 3.60 350 Negro ____ . -- ---- - - . - -- -- - -- - - . -- - - -- - - -- - - - - --- - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- - - -- - - · · I On 6. 10 rarma having hired labor. LABOR REQUIREMENTS OF PART-TIME FARMS The relatively small amounts spent for labor indicate tkat the part-time farmers and their families did most of the work. Labor requirements were greatest from April through August (table 48). On white noncommercial part-time farms, the average labor requirement ranged from a little less than 3 hours to about 5½ hours a day for these months. On commercial farms, the averages ranged from about 6 hours to about 16 hours per day. After August the number of hours required on noncommercial farms decreased. but on the commercial farms where there was more Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 32 harvesting, labor requirements were heavy until November. During the winter months, both types of farms required relatively fewer hours of labor. Table 48.-Average Number of Houn Worked per Day on Part-Time Farms by Heads and Other Memben, by Type of Farm, by Color, by Season, and by Subregion, 1934 Beason Subregion, color, and type or farm April-June JulyAugust September- NovemberOctober March AVEB.lOE HOURS WORKED PER DAT BT HliDS AND OTHER KEKBERS Tuttle: White: Commercial .................................. .. Noncommercial ••.....................•........ Coal and Iron: White ............................................. . Negro ............................................. . Atlantic C088t: White: Commercial.. •.•.........•.................•... Noncommercial. •.............................. Nwo....... ...................................... . Lumber: White: CommerclaL. ......•....•......••.•.....•...... Noncommercial ............................... . Negro ............................................. . Naval Stores: White: Commercial .......•.•................•......... N oncommerclal •.•••••••...•••...•.•.•••...••.. 10. 3 3. 5 10.11 10.6 2. 7 6.11 3. 6 4.7 6. 4 4.3 6.3 3.1 3.11 LS LI 8.0 3.9 6. 4 6. 8 3.4 6.1 6. 8 3. 1 6.3 6.1 2. 6 3. 8 10.6 5.5 9.0 10. 4 6. 4 8. 2 10. 2 4.6 8. 0 7. 2 3.6 4.11 H.8 2. 8 18. 9 2.6 12.3 LS 7.8 1.5 4.5 1.5 .. 8 L4 8.8 L2 2. 1 0. 7 2. 5 3.1 2. 3 3.0 1.8 2.0 0.9 0. 6 4.6 2.0 2. 7 3.11 1.6 2.1 .. 2 1. 7 :u 3.5 1. 4 L8 8.5 2. 2 2. g a. 4 1.9 2. 6 8.2 1.8 2.6 2. 3 1.3 1.8 8.5 1.9 8. g Lil 7.3 L8 6. 8 Lt 5.8 2.0 8. 8 2.1 8. 7 L5 a. 4 2. 2 3.3 2. 0 8.3 L3 L9 0.11 0.6 1.5 1.9 3. 7 1.11 1.8 8.0 L8 1.4 2. g 1.8 1. 2 2. 0 7.0 3.3 6.1 7.0 8.5 6. 6 7.0 2. 7 5.5 2. 3 3.3 6.3 0.9 8.0 0.6 5.0 0.2 2. 2 0.1 Digitized by Google L7 AVERAGE HOURS WORKED PER DAY BY HEADS Textile: White: Commerrlal. ..•................................ N oncommerclal •••.•.........••................ Coal and Iron: White.•••••.....•...........•.•.................... Negro ...•.•••••............•.....•.•............... Atlantic Coest: White: Commercial. ...•••...•......................... Noncommercial .•.............................. Negro ••••.•.•.•........•........................... Lumber: White: Commerrlal. ......................•...•........ Noncommercial. •...............•.........••... Nav1:iTi:;res: •••·•· •·· ·· · · ·· • · · · • ••• · · · ··· •· ·· · · · · · · ··· White: Commercial ..•.••••.••••••••••••..•............ Noncommercial. ••••••••••••••.....•.•.•....... AVERAGE HOURS WORKED PER DAY BY MEKBEB8 Te1tlle: OTHER THAN HEADS White: Commercial. .........•......................... Noncommercial. .............................. . COBI and Iron: White ...•.......................................... Negro ...••••••.••.................................. Atlantic Coest: White: Commercial. .•.....•••.•....•.•.•.••.•...•••.•. Noncommercial .................•.............. Negro .•••••.••.............•................•...... Lumber: White: Commercial ...................•................ Noncommercial ..........•..................... Negro ...••••••••.•.•............................•.. Naval Stores: White: CommerctaL. ....•.....•..•.•.................. Noncommercial ...•.•.......................... 1.0 4.9 THE PART-TIME FARMER AHO HIS FARM 33 In the Coal and Iron Subregion, the Negro part-time farmers seem to have spent more time on their farms than did their white neighbors, although their farms or gardens were only about half as large. Negroes of this region spent, on an average, as much time on their farms from April through August as did the Negroes of the Atlantic Coast Subregion, and almost as much as did those of the Lumber Subregion, where the presence of some semicommercial truck farmers and cotton growers increased the need for labor. Because of the presence in the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions of these semicommercial farm operations, figures for these groups do not reveal the true situation as to the labor requirements for home consumption. In some areas and groups, the head of the family worked half or over half of the total time spent by the family on the part-time farm, but in most cases other members of the family did as much work on the farm as did the head. On 16 percent of the farms, the head of the household did all of the work. Both the head and his wife worked on almost two-fifths of the farms; on one-third of the farms work was done by the head, his wife, and one or more other members (table 49). The work of children under 12 years of age was not included in labor calculations. While it was not uncommon for younger children to help, their work was not of great importance. In many households, there were some boys and girls, elderly parents, relatives, or friends sharing the house who did not work on the farm. To&le 4P.-Number of Penons, Except Heads, 12 Yean of Age or Over, Working on Part-Time Farms,' 1934 Part•tlme farms Number or peraons, except beads, 12 years or age or over, working on !arms 1---~--Number Percent ____ ___ TotaJ _______ ------------------- ________ _____ ___ __ __ __________ __ _______ _ 1, 113 !:::Y17o::~:::~~:~:~~-:~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ru 1 other member ____________________________________________ -------····---·_._ 2 other memben._________________________________ ________ __ _________________ 3 other members_____________________________________________________________ 4 or more other members. ____ ----------------- _____________________ .. ______ • J'or data by 111breglons, - ,_ 86 47 20 11 100 ~8 4 2 1 appendix table '11. The relation of the time spent in working on the part-time farm, especially by the head, to the hours worked at off-the-farm occupation is of considerable importance in any estimate of the value of parttime farming. If the farming enterprise takes too much of the head's time and energy, it not only handicaps him economically in obtaining and keeping a job, but absorbs all his spare time and leaves none for recreation and normal social activities. Both of these questions are treated more fully in sections of this study dealing with off-the-fa.rm Digitized by Google u PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST occupation and the social features of part-time farming, and also in the more detailed discussion of the several areas in Part II. Suffice it to say here that, in general, there was no indication that the farm enterprise took a burdensome amount of time. Hours in the chief industries were shortened by the N. R. A. in 1934 and were of ten shortened by market conditions to less than those allowed by the codes. When this study was made, hours in the service industries were a.bout what they always were, but part-time farmers engaged in service industries apparently had sufficient time for their farming enterprises. Even the part-time farmers working in rural industries, such as turpentine, or in agriculture, as truck fa.rm laborers, made no complaint of lack of time. Digitized by Google Chapter II OFF-THE-FARM EMPLOYMENT THIS STUDY was concerned both with the off-the-farm employment of part-time farmers and with comparisons of their employment with that of their nonfarming neighbors in similar occupations. DISTANCE TO WORK Over half (57 pe:i:eent) of the part-time farmers included in the survey lived within 1½miles from their work, or within easy walking distance (table 50). An additional 13 percent lived between 1½ and 2½ miles away-a not unreasonable walking distance. Not all of those living at short distances walked to work, however; nor did all those who lived at even considerable distances ride. A number of the part-time farmers walked 2 miles, a few walked 3 miles, and an occasional part-time farmer, especially among the Negroes of the Atlantic Coast Subregion, walked 4 miles or more. Automobiles were the most common form of transportation, although in the Coal and Iron Subregion trolleys and buses were used Tobie 50.-0istance to Place of Emplorment of Heads of Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming lndustria Households, 1 1934 Nonlarmln!( Industrial workers Part-time farmers Distance to place of employment Number Total._ •.•..•.•........................ •········· None ...•••.•...•........•...........•.•..• •·-········-Less than ~ mile ......... _..........•.....• _... _. _... _. l mile .••.•.•.•••..................•.. ····••·•···•···•·· 2mlles •.••••••..•................ -·················-•-· 3 miles ......•.•...... -····· __ ······-·················-· 4 to 6 miles ..•...................... -·-·-···_ ... -· .... . . 8 to II miles ..••......................................... 10 miles or more .................... _·- ......... -···-. _ UnkDown ••..•............. _..... . ....•... _-· .. _. _____ _ Percent Number l, 113 100 1,334 25 2 320 211 2 612 2111 26 Percent 38 30 13 3114 1611 148 108 13 10 66 6 1111 85 II 8 3 126 46 17 10 3 l 36 2 . . 3 • Lesa than 0.5 percent. • For data b:v subregions, see appendix table 28. 35 Digitized by Google 36 PART- TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST almost as frequently. Work trains operated by employers were common in the Coal and Iron Subregion, and in other areas, though to a less extent, work trains, buses, or trucks were used. Bicycles were rare as a means of transportation. It may be that distances of 10 miles or more, traveled by 3 percent of the part-time farmers, are uneconomical, but this would depend upon the wages earned and the mode of transportation. Part of those going long distances were in the Coal and Iron Subregion, and since they traveled by trolley, they probably paid little more to ride a longer than a shorter distance. Many others traveled in groups in an automobile, sharing expenses, so that the distance traveled was not burdensome from a financial point of view. In general, the time consumed in going to and from work, except for the few who walked more than 2 miles, did not make serious inroads into the time available for farm work. To get to their work, the Negroes traveled considerably shorter distances on the average than did the whites-a fact which may have been the result of their lack of transportation facilities and their smaller incomes. In all subregions except the Atlantic Coast, the commercial part-time farmers traveled twice the distance the noncommercial farmers did, since they had to be farther from town to secure the larger acreages to cultivate (table 51). The nonfarming industrial group lived a little nearer their work on the average than did the part-time farmers (table 50). Thus 68 perTa&le 51.-Average Distance to Place of Employment of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Average ntnD ber of miles to plaoe ol elllplo)'Jilent Subregion, color, aad type of fann Part•tlme lannera Total ...•............... --..... -...•.... ·•• ••··•· ··•· · ·····-··-· ·• · · -•·· Te1tlle: White .•........•.............•.•.•.•...••....•...........•..••••••..•••. Commercial_ ...............•.•.....•.............•.•.•...•.•...• •..• NoncommerclaL ..................................••.•.....•.•.•...• Coal and Iron: White .••••••.••••••••..........................•...•••.••••••....... _•.. Negro ..... ··-··- •••.•.•.•.•.•...•..•....•...•..••......•••••...••. -·· ... Atlantic Coast: White .....•..•••••.•••.•••••••....•••.•.•.••.•.•••.••••................. Commercial. ....••••..••.•..••.••.•.••••.•••.••••.•................. N oncommerclaL ....•......•••••••••.•.•••.••..•.••................• Negro ..••••••.••••••••••..••.••••••••••••••••••••••••.• ················Lumber: White ...••••.•.•......... ·-····································•·•······ Commercial. .............................••............•..•••••...•. N oncommerclaL .......................................•..••......•. Negro ......•....•...............•......•.•.•......•..........•.•....•.•• Naval Stores: White ...••••.••••.•............•...........................•.•.••••••.•• Commercial. ....•.......... _._ ............... -•·· .....•..•..•....••• Noncommercial. ...•..... _... __ ..... -·_ .... ···········••···-· ...••.• Digitized by Nonfarmlng industrial worken 2. 3 UI l====I==== 1. 7 3. 2 1-4 3.3 1-6 0.8 1.11 2- 8 3.9 3.0 4.3 1.8 Ll 3.2 1.3 Ll 4. 5 1. g 1-6 L3 1-0 2- 1 1.6 2- 7 Google OFF-THE-FARM EMPLOYMENT 37 cent of them, as compared with 57 percent of the part-time farmers, lived within 1½ miles from work; 81 percent, as compared with 70 percent of the part-time farmers, lived within 2½ miles. Only 4 percent of the nonfarming industrial group lived 6 miles or farther, whereas 11 percent of the part-time farmers lived that distance. An examination of figures for the various subregions shows that the greater average distances traveled by part-time farmers is largely due to the inclusion of the commercial group (appendix table 28). In the noncommercial group, with which the nonfarming industrial workers are more nearly comparable in respect to location, the actual distances traveled are not much greater in some areas than those traveled by the nonfarming industrial workers. In the Naval Stores Subregion, the nonfarming industrial workers traveled greater average distances than did the part-time farmers (table 51). INDUSTRY AND OCCUPATION Every main census classification of industry was represented in the off-the-farm employment of the part-time farmers in the Eastern Cotton Belt. More than half of the farmers (54.7 percent) were in the manufacturing and mechanical industries, which were representative of all the chief manufacturing industries of the three States in which surveys were made (table 52). There was a small group (8.8 percent) in transportation and communication and a similar group (7. 9 percent) in trade. Sixteen percent of the farmers, chiefly Negroes in the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions, found a cash wage in agriculture. With respect to distribution in industry, the nonfarming industrial workers and the part-time farmers were in the main comparable (table 52}. However, some differences were to be expected inasmuch a.s the sample of part-time farmers in all subregions was made without 11.ny regard to the industry in which the farmers worked, whereas the sample industrial workers were chosen to represent the major industries of each subregion1 (appendix table 29). In general occupational level,2 the two groups were more closely parallel (table 53). One-fourth of each group were classified as skilled; 29 percent of the part-time farmers and 32 percent of the nonfarmers were classified as semiskilled; and 37 percent of each were classified as unskilled. In all areas, Negroes made up the bulk of the unskilled workers in both groups (appendix table 30). Within these industries and occupational levels, part-time farmers worked at a large variety of specific jobs. The combination of farming 1 See Introduction for criteria used in selecting part-time farm households and nonfarm industrial households. ' The occupational classification used follows Dr. Alba M. Edwards' socialeconomic groups. See Journal of American Statistical Association, December 1933, pp. 377-387. Digitized by Google 31 l'ART-DME FARMJHG IH THE SOUTHEAST with another type of job was limited, apparently, only by the resources of the locality and not by any lack of ingenuity on the part of the workers. Jobs held by part-time farmers ran the gamut of the division of labor within the main industries-textiles, coal and iron mining, iron Tol,le 5.t.--lndustry of Heads of Part-Time Fann and Nonfanning Industrial Households,1 1934 lndns• Part.time l'anDen Nonlarm.ln« trial workers Industry In 1934 Number Percent Nmnber I, 113 100.0 15. 9 0. 6 0.1 1,334 Total .................................................. .. Aln'ieulture .. . ... .. ........................ .................. . . Forestry ...................................................... . Fishing ............................................... ........ . Extract.Ion or minerals: Coal mining ............................................... . -----in 7 I Percent - - - - -100.-0 lllS Iron minlng ........ ............... ....................... .. Other extraction or mlnerala ............................... . Manufscturing and mechanical lnduatrles: 76 1 2. 2 6.8 0.1 130 H.li 9. 7 ~::!!i~d~~.~.~~~_-_-_-::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 47 9 4. 2 0. 8 20 10 LIi 0. 7 170 16 19 16 38 218 16.3 43 42 153 11 166 11. 5 113 7 74 3 37 19 15. 3 1. 4 1. 7 1. 4 3.4 0.1 10.2 0.6 6. 7 0.3 3.3 I. 7 40 8.6 15 ~ 1. 3 0.5 0.3 4.4 3.3 18 64 4 12 6 13 2 1.6 6. 9 0. 4 1. I 0.5 L2 0.1 lronL.ceel, macblnery, and V11hlcle11 : Blast rum~ steel rolling mills, and coke works..... .. Car and rallroed abOPIL ............................... . Other Iron, steel, machinery, and vehlclea ............. . Saw a.nd planing mills ..................................... . Purniture and other woodworking ........................ . Paper, printing, and allied ............................... .. Cotton mills .............................. . ............... . ~~~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Independent hand trade11 .............. .... ............... .. Turpentine farms and dlstllierle11 ....... . .................. . Fertilizer factories .......................... _.............. . Asbestoe products .... ..... _... _........ .... _.............. . Other mauufacturing and mechanical ..................... . Transportation and communication : Comtructlon and malntenanoe of streets . •• ••............ .. Oarage11, greasing atatioos, etc . •.....••.•...... .•.••. -..... . Postal aervloe .......... ......... .......................... . Steam and Ktreet rallroada ....... .. ........................ . Other tramportatlon and communication ................. . Trade: Automobile i.gencle11 and ftlllng stations ................... . Wholesale and retail trade ................................ .. Other trade ....................... . ......... . ............. . Public 1111rvice (not elsewhere classl!led) ...................... . . Professional service ..... ..... . .... ............ .. ...... ..... _... . Domestic and personal -..1011.............. . ......... _..... _.. . Industry not speclfled .................................. _...... . • For data by subregions, - 24 I 6 3 49 3.2 a.1 0. 4 12. 4 1.5 20 29 1 49 18 42 30 2. 2 0.1 a.7 1.3 3.1 2. 2 1 1 0. 1 0. I 0. 2 1.4 2.7 3 19 ae 13 1.0 a.1 0.1 1. 3 0.2 2. 2 0.2 42 I 17 2 211 2 appendix table 29. Tal,le 53.-0ccupation of Heads of Part-Time Fann and Nonfanning Industrial Households,1 1934 Part•tlme r11r111en Occupstion Number Percent Nonfarmlng industrial workers Number Percent Total . . . .... _..... .... . ............... . ......... · 1--_ _ 1._11_3--1----100_ _ _1.;.,334_-1-_ _ _1_00 1 Proprietary ..... ...... _................ .... ...... __ .. __ 27 2 6 Clerical.............. . .................. .. ............. 72 7 78 II Skilled. ......... .. .... ..... .. ... .... . .................. 282 25 1136 25 Semiskilled................. ... ............ . .... . ...... 321 29 432 32 Unskilled : Farm laborer.. .................. .. ................. 17! 16 Bervsnt . ......... ....... ... ... . ... ................. 16 I 21 2 Other unskllled ....... . .. ... . ....... . ........... _.. 224 20 463 35 • Less than 0.5 percent. 1 For data b:, subregions, see appendix table 30. Digitized by Google OFF-THE-FARM EMPI.OYMEHT 39 and steel manufacturing, port industries, truck farming, fertilizer factories, saw and planing mills, veneer and cooperage factories, and turpentining. Part-time farmers held a variety of jobs connected with railways and railway shops, ranging from locomotive engineer to section hand. They held many kinds of mechanical and construction jobs, such as those of machinist, garage mechanic, electric welder, steam-shovel operator, carpenter, mason, painter, plumber, and blacksmith. Among part-time farmers, there were drivers of trucks, buses, and delivery wagons. There were automobile salesmen, filling station attendants, store clerks, and peddlers. Others held public service jobs, such as policeman, constable, postman, rural mail carrier, drawbridge attendant, road construction guard, forester, and convict guard. Some held service jobs, such as janitor, caddy, barber, hostler, gardener, and caretaker. There were a number of small proprietors: cobblers, barbers, millers, and operators of markets and stores. There were bank employees and preachers. It must be remembered also that some other members of the parttime farm households were employed. The gainfully occupied women worked at jobs within the chief industries which were almost as varied as those held by the men, thus adding to the total list many which, within certain factories, were normally women's jobs. Outside manufacturing industries, workers other than the head of the household held jobs as teachers, stenographers, telephone operators, seamstresses, beauty parlor operators, newspaper carriers, and messengers. It may be of interest to note in passing that among the part-time farmers and the nonfarming industrial workers there was remarkable stability both in the industry in which they worked and in their occupational level since 1929. In only two areas were there notable shifts in industry. In Carroll County in the Textile Subregion, nearly all of the cases surveyed who were full-time farm operators in 1929 had become textile operatives by 1934. In Coffee County in the Naval Stores Subregion, practically all of the cases that were farm operators in 1929 had become turpentine workers (table 52 and appendix table 31). Both of these changes represented a movement from full-time farming to a combination of farming with an industrial job. There was a similar movement, involving fewer cases, in the Lumber Subregion, in Greenville County in the Textile Subregion, and among the Negroes of the Atlantic Coast Subregion. In the last-mentioned area, Negro farm operators became part-time farmers, with day labor in agriculture furnishing their cash-wage employment. EMPLOYMENT, EARNINGS, AND INCOME In questions relating to hours, regularity of employment, wages, and earnings, the difficulties of comparing part-time farmers with Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST nonfanning industrial workers were multiplied by the fact that the two groups were not parallel in their off-the-farm industry. The widest differences between the two groups in employment and earnings occurred in the areas where there were the greatest differences in industrial groupings. In the Atlantic Coast Subregion, for example, two-thirds of the Negro part-time farmers found their cash-wage occupation in agriculture, which has long hours, seasonal employment, and low wages. It was not surprising, therefore, that these Negro part-time farmers reported longer working hours, an average of almost 20 percent fewer working days, and somewhat less than half the annual earnings of the Negro nonfarming industrial workers (appendix tables 32 and 34). A similar situation, though not so extreme, existed among the Negroes of the Lumber Subregion. In the Naval Stores Subregion the situation was almost reversed. The nonfarming industrial workers surveyed were concentrated in the turpentine industry, where a very low wage placed them at a disadvantage, as compared with the neighboring noncommercial parttime farmers. Members of the commercial group in this area were at even a greater disadvantage than the nonfarming industrial workers as regards their off-the-farm occupation, since they were chiefly farmers working relatively few days at the low-paid job of turpentine collecting. 3 Since summary figures comparing part-time farmers and nonfanning industrial workers are reliable only in a very general way, the questions of earnings and employment are discussed very briefly here.' That a man's status as a part-time farmer did not affect his opportunity for regularity of employment is suggested by the fact that the commercial part-time farmers averaged almost as many days' employment as did the noncommercial farmers (appendix table 32), though the former lived farther from their jobs and spent much more time working on their farms. Only 19 percent of the part-time farmers and 27 percent of the nonfarmers had 250 or more days' work, while 57 percent of the part-time farmers and 53 percent of the nonfarmers had less than 200 days' employment (table 54). The area of greatest underemployment was the Coal and Iron Subregion, where the average for each group of whites was approximately 150 days and for each group of Negroes slightly less than 115 days (table 55). With a somewhat smaller average number of days employed, and a large number in some areas working at low wage agricultural day labor, the heads of households in the part-time farm group as a whole had 1 The effect of local labor conditions on employment and earnings was naturally reflected in this survey. In one locality, for example, a large number of the part-time farmers worked in a plant that closed down for several months in 1934, while in another subregion a large number of the nonfarming workers were employed in a plant that closed down. 4 For data by subregions, see Part II. Digitized by Google OFF-THE-FARM EMPLOYMENT Tol,le 54.-Number of Days of Off-the-Farm Employment 41 I of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households,1 1934 Nonfarmlng Industrial workers Part•tlme farmers Number or days employed Number Percent Number Percent ___,____ ____ ____ Total............................................ .._ 1 to 49 days I........................................... 50 to gg days........................................... 100 to 149 days......................................... 150 to 199 days......................................... 200 to 249 days......................................... 250 to 299 days..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 300 to 349 days......................................... 350 days or more....................................... Unknown _______________ . ____ -------------------------- 1, 113 100 11 226 213 1 20 184 270 94 79 17 24 II 7 35 J 3 • 1,334 ,, , 1 241 274 187 284 224 ll 1 19 100 18 21 14 20 17 8 2 32 • Less than 0.5 percent. • At principal ol!•the•farm employment {Job with the largest earnings). • For data by subregions, - appendix table 32. • A rew cases working off the farm less than 50 days were enumerated. Tol,le 55.-Average Number of Days of Off-the-Farm EmEloyment I of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Average number or days or ol!•the·farm employment Subregion, color, and type or farm Part•tlme farmers Nonfarmlng Industrial workers Total ••.................•.....••.••••....................•....•.....•. · l====l=80=l=====l80=- Textlle: White ..•.......•.•.•.•.....•...•.•.•.•...••••.•.•••..•.......•••.••••••. Commercial ....•.•.•.......•...•.•.....•....•....•....••••...•..••.. Noncommercial ..•......••..•..•....••.••...•.......•••..•....••..•. Coal and Iron: White ...........................................•......•....•........•.. Negro ......•...•..................•....•.•••..•......•.......•..•.....•• Atlantic Coast: White ..........................................••............•.......•.. Commercial .......................•....•.•.................••.....•. Noncommerelal ............•.....•.....•.•.••....•.•........•....•.. Negro ••....•.•••••.•.........•.......•.•.......•.•.........•.......••.•. Lumber: White •.•.........•.....•.•......••..••..........•.......•...•.......•.•• Commercial. ...•.•............•..................................... Noncommercial. .......•............................................ Na!.:l1%res: ······· ·························· ········· ····· ······ ······ ···· White ...••.......•••.....•....................•...•....•.•...••...•..••• Commercial. ....•....•............•..............................••• Noncommercial ••.•..•.•......................•......•.........•.••. 1 217 214 218 233 156 151 112 114 226 219 261 229 155 1811 216 240 211 221 1111 221 1-~9 221 83 241 At principal ol!•the•farm employment (Job with the largest earnings). somewhat smaller average earnings than nonfarmers (table 56). Fifty-six percent of the part-time farmers made less than $500 in 1934 at their principal off'-the-farm employment 6 as compared with fifty-one percent of the nonfarming industrial group. Only 12 percent of the part-time farmers and 14 percent of the nonfarming industrial workers made $1,000 or over. a For the few cases that reported more than one type of off-the-farm employment, see appendix table 33. 150061°-37---6 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST Tobie 56.-Earnings 1 From Industrial Employ~ent of Heads of Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming Industrial Households,1 193-4 Nonfannlng lnduatrlal workers Part-time tanners Earnings Crom lndW!trial employment ____ ____ ___ Number TotaJ__ ___ __ __ ______ ____ _____ __ _____ ________ ____ __ I, 113 $1 to $IXL______________________________________________ $100 to $249_____________________________________________ $2.50 to $499 _______ _---- ------- _---------- ------ __ ---- _-$500 to $749 _______________________________________ -----$750 to $999_____________________________________________ $1,000 to $1,249_ .. -- . _. -- . ---- --- . --- ------- --- _.. _. -- -$1,250 to $1,499_________________________________________ $1,tiOO to $1,999_________________________________________ $2,000 to $2,499. ______________ . ________ . ____ . __ . _..... __ $2,tiOO or more ____________ ._ ... ____________________ ... __ Unknown•----------------------------________________ 100 Peroent , 100 9 22 25 246 271 225 128 67 :I) 12 6 2 3 I 25 36 9 2 4 Number ,_ Percent 1,334 11 174 491 297 180 78 311 46 13 7 • Less than 0.5 peroent. principal otT-the-fllrm employment (job with tbe largest earnings). • For data by subregions,""" appendix table 34. 14 Negro cases In the Atlantic Coast Subregion included services or a mule. 1 •.\t Commercial part-time farmers not only worked almost as many days as did the noncommercial farmers, but their average annual earnings from all off-the-farm sources were at least as high in all areas except in the Naval Stores Subregion. In the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions, their earnings averaged approximately the same as those of the nonfarming industrial workers O (table 59). EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER MEMBERS OF HOUSEHOLD Another indication that the farming enterprise does not handicap the part-time farm family in filling outside jobs was found in the records of employment for other members of the household (table 57). Tobie 57.-Employment of Members I in Addition to the Head of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households,2 193-4 Part-time !arm households Number or members working In addition to the bead Nonlarmin11 Industrial households I--------I----~--Number Peroent Number Peroent Total __ •• ________ ------._ .. _•..... -- ... -- -- . - . - .. I, 113 100 1,334 100 No member except head ____________ -------------------Wife only ________ . ____ . _______ ........ ----------------. Wife and I or more other members _____________________ _ I other member. ___________ .. _________________________ _ 2 other members ______________________________________ _ 3 other memhers ... __ . _______________________ .. ___ . ___ _ 4 or more other members ___ ....... ______________ . ____ _ 632 162 67 16 8 12 6 877 215 48 145 37 9 3 65 16 4 11 3 93 139 61 16 10 I 1 . 1 • Less than 0.5 percent. 1 HHl4 years or a11e. • For data by subregions, see appendix table 35. e Comparison of data in table 59 and in appendix table 34 indicates the small amount earned on the average from jobs other than the principal off-the-farm job. Few heads had more than one off-the-farm job either simultaneously or through changing jobs. Digitized by Google OFF-THE-FARM EMPt.OYMEHT -43 In 43 percent of the part-time farm families, someone besides the head was employed in industry, as compared with 35 percent of the nonfarming households. Wives of part-time farmers had industrial employment in 23 percent oft.he cases, as compared with 20 percent of the nonfarming industrial cases. The distribution of households by number of members employed showed a slightly larger percentage of part-time farm than of nonfarming industrial households in each classification. It will be remembered, however, that part-time farm households were larger and their heads were older so that the members available for employment would naturally be more numerous than in nonfarming industrial households. This consideration partly counterbalances the more frequent outside employment in part-time farm families, but it is safe to conclude that the opportunities are no less for part-time farm than for nonfarming industrial households. The proportion of households with only the head working varied considerably from area to area, but there was a close parallel between part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers within each area (table 58). In the case of employed wives, differences among the Ta'1le 58.-Employment of Heads and Other Members 1 of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 193-4 Percent of households with only the head employed Subrecton and color Part• time farm Total ••••••.••..•..••.•••.•..••.••.• Textile: White ..••••...•.........••...••••.••. C081 and Irou: White .••••......•...........•••••••.• Negro..•••••...••....•.•.••....••.•••• Atlantic Coast: White .••••••.••.•...•.••••..••••.•••. Negro .•••••••••.••.•..•...•..•.•••.••• Lumber: = 67 Non• farming Industrial Percent or boll!&holds with the wife employed Non• farming Industrial Part• time farm Percent of YoUlll people 16-:H employed Part• time Non• farming Industrial farm --------- -----35 65 23 20 34 = = = = 4& 4& 24 39 64 75 2 6 1 6 20 83 84 81 9 16 80 75 6 48 4 32 65 40 25 48 33 511 65 18 White .•••••...••.••.•.••••.•••••..•.. 62 65 15 13 Na!iT~res:····························· 'D 42 68 50 32 61 40 White •••••••••....•.•••••.•.•..•..••• 77 68 7 22 17 70 48 • 16-64 years of age. areas were more marked than for heads. In the Coal and Iron Subregion, for example, there was not much opportunity for women to work, whereas in the Textile Subregion, there was almost as much industrial opportunity for wives as for their husbands. In the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions, about half of the Negro women found employment in domestic service and in the fields of regular and truck farms. On the average, young people in part-time farm households had opportunities for employment equal to those in nonfarming industrial Digitized by Google 4-4 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST families, despite their greater distance from towns. Over one-third of the youth 16-24 years of age in both part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households were employed. The employment opportunities for young people varied considerably in the different areas, however. The highest percentages of young people employed were among whites in the Textile Subregion and among Negroes of the Atlantic Coast Subregion. The amounts earned by the employed members of part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households varied greatly from area to area, depending upon the employment opportunities for women and young people. Earnings of members other than the heads of parttime farm households ranged from 7 percent of the total off-the-farm household earnings for Negroes in the Coal and Iron Subregion to 54 percent for white commercial part-time farm families in the Naval Stores Subregion. Members other than the heads in nonfarming industrial households contributed from 8 to 25 percent of the total household income. Tobie 59.-Earnings af Heads and Other Members of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Households at Industrial Employment, by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Average total nonfarm earnings Subregion, color, and type ol larm Percent 1------;----...,.....---1earned by Total PART·TUlE FARM HOUSEHOLDS Total................................... ........ Texttle: White............................................. Commercial.................................... Non commercial................................ Coal and Iron: White............................................. Negro.............................................. Atlantic Coast: White............................................. Commercial.................................... Noncommercial................................ Negro.............................................. Lumher: White.............................................. Commercial.................................... Noncommercial.. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . Negro.............................................. Naval Stores: White.............................................. Commercial.................................... Noncommercial................................ Heads Other members othermembera S723 $/;46 $187 26 I, 097 956 1, 116 739 i38 740 358 218 376 :k 899 370 739 345 160 18 25 7 1, 184 1,440 1,054 909 1,055 275 385 218 68 23 l====1,===,1====i=== 836 196 264 33 23 27 21 :l6 802 6.16 808 7lHl 339 612 276 166 149 184 63 21 18 299 87 95 104 24 531 IIO M 16 626 137 18 I, 150 859 291 25 810 432 733 373 77 00 10 1,244 196 503 1,048 413 IIO 18 834 646 fi79 155 456 IIO Ill 16 290 268 22 8 Digitized by Google 659 394 191 621 23 Ill NONFARIUNO INDUSTRIAL HOUSEHOLDS Total............................................ Textile: White.............................................. Coal and Iron: White.............................................. Negro.............................................. Atlantic Coast: White.............................................. Ntl!(ro.............................................. Lumher: White.............................................. Negro.............................................. Naval Stores: White............. . . . . . . . .......................... 7113 l====l====•I==== 14 16 OFF-THE-FARM EMPlOYMEHT -45 Earnings by members other than the head in both part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households were relatively low in the Coal and Iron Subregion and relatively high in the Textile Subregion (table 59). Earnings of members of part-time farm households in the Coal and Iron Subregion amounted to 18 percent of the total off-the-farm earnings for the whites and 7 percent for Negroes; those of members of nonfarming industrial households averaged 10 percent of the total for the whites and 14 percent for the Negroes. In the Textile Subre.gion, earnings by members other than the heads of all white households studied, averaged 33 percent of the total off-the-farm income among the part-time farmers, and 25 percent of the total in.come among the nonfarming industrial group. In the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions, there were employment opportunities for members other than the heads of Negro households in agriculture, but the rates of pay were so low that the amounts earned were small. In all areas, the employment of other members, especially of young people, was often irregular and poorly paid. CONTRIBUTION OF FARM ENTERPRISE TO FAMILY INCOME Among the commercial part-time farmers, the cotton, tobacco, or truck crops constituted a considerable addition to the family income. No detailed analysis of this phase of their farming enterprise was made, but with a net cash farm income averaging $165 in the Lumber, $343 in the Naval Stores, and $324 in the Atlantic Coast Subregions,7 the commercial group was well ahead of the nonfarming industrial workers in total income. The average value of products sold by noncommercial part-time farmers was so little in excess of cash expenses that it would not serve to lessen the difference between part-time farm and nonfarm cash incomes. The value of products consumed by the family was not calculated for all part-time farmers. Some typical cases 8 reveal, however, that even modest enterprises, such as those of Negroes in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, yielded products worth about $70 to a typical part-time farmer, while those of typical Negroes in the Lumber and Coal and Iron Subregions yielded twice that amount. Enterprises which included a cow produced an average of from $200 to nearly $400 worth of products in all areas. Thus, the value of the products consumed among the whites of the Lumber, Atlantic Coast, and Textile Subregions would make the incomes of the noncommercial part-time farmers equal to, and in many cases greater than, those of the nonfarming industrial workers. It is doubtful whether the small amount of produce of the Negroes in the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions would make up the difference 7 8 See Part IT. See Appendix A, Case Studies of Part-Time Farmers. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 46 between incomes of the farming and nonfa.rming groups. In these regions Negro part-time farmers were at a disadvantage in the kind of employment that was open to them. In the Coal and Iron Subregion, where the industrial earnings of part-time farmers and nonfarmers were nearly the same, the value of products used and sold constituted an advantage of some $200 or $300 for the more successful white part-time farmers and an advantage of about half that amount for the Negroes. CHANGES IN INCOME, 1919-193-4 To secure another side light on the reasons that caused part-time farmers to undertake fa.rming enterprises, incomes for 1929, where it was possible to obtain them, were compared with those for 1934. In general, of course, incomes for 1934 were smaller than those for 1929, though reductions varied greatly from area to area. In the Coal and Iron Subregion, practically all part-time farm households had suffered large income decreases between 1929 and 1934 (table 60). Similar Table CSO.-Avera9e Total Income from Nonfarm Sources of All Memben of PartTime Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1929 and 193-4 Part-time farm households Number of Subregion and oolor households whose in• Aver• Aver• come we.s age 1929 age 1934 known In income inoome 1929 and 1934 Total ••........ Textile: White ....•..•.•. Coal and Iron: White ......•.•.. Negro .....•••••. Atlantic Coast: White ••••••••••. Negro ••••••••••• Lumber: White ..••....... Nav~i"~~~rM:·----· .. White ....••••••. $712 Nonfarmlng Industrial households Number of Number of households households whose In• Aver• Aver• with less was age 1929 age 1934 Income In oome known in income inoome 1934 than 1929 and in 1929 1934 428 I, 116 1,095 65 893 159 91 19 31 857 Sil« 1~5 l,OM 198 121 1,561 i75 45 119 1,294 298 1, 142 65 95 865 378 818 335 23 26 29 867 639 H -- 373 258 Numb&of households with less lnoome in 1934 than In 1g29 SI, 108 $751 232 1,11g 1,192 t,7 213 326 1,605 1,049 80!I 42o 193 21H 80 83 I, 34-4 695 1,252 604 34 39 M 83 1,164 678 824 641 36 35 394 325 16 703 34 income reductions, though not so extreme, were reported by part-time farmers in the Atlantic Coast and Naval Stores Subregions. In the Textile and Lumber Subregions, on the other hand, the operation of the N. R. A. codes in 1934 had resulted in some income increases since 1929. In the Textile Subregion, about two-thirds of the parttime farm families, who knew the amount of their incomes in 1929, had as much or more income in 1934. In both the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions, almost three-fourths of the Negro part-time farm families had as much or more income in 1934. Digitized by Google OFF-THE-FARM EMPLOYMENT 47 RELIEF Relatively small proportions of the part-time farm and nonfarming industrial families studied in the Eastern Cotton Belt had ever received relief. The qualifications for part-time farmers used in this survey automatically eliminated most relief cases,• however. Tobie 67.-Percent of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households That Received Public or Private Relief During the Period 1929-35 and Public Relief in 1934, by Color and by Subregion Part•tlme rarm bowie- bolda Nontarn~\~1tustrlal 8ub1"91POD and color 1934 only 11121>-36 llm-35 lQM only Textile: White ••••.•••.•.•.•...•••.•••...•••••••••••••••••.. Coal and Iron: White.•••••...•.•.•.•..••••.....••••.••.••••••••.•. Negro .•...•.•...•...........•.•...•.•.•.•••••.•..•• 13 4 18 2 40 82 32 78 44 71 28 118 77 21 16 IS 22 18 16 Atlantic Coast: White •••..•.•.......•.•...•...•.........•....••.•.• Negro•.••••.•....••••........••..•..•.......••••••• Lumber: 34 Na:!i8f{~:·········································· 17 7 11 13 7 8 7 White••••....•.••....•••...•••.••..••..•••.•.•..•.. 10 8 211 10 White•••••.••.•.........•.•.........•.•...•..•••••• • Figures on the number of sample households that received public or private relief from 1929 to 1935 and public relief in 1934 (table 61) show that there was no consistent difference between part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers in the matter of relief. In some area.s more of one group had been on relief, and in others just the reverse was found. The families which were on relief usually received small amounts and were aided ma.inly because of illness or prolonged unemployment. The only area in which many fa.milies of either group were on relief was the Coal and Iron Subregion where employment and earnings were most sharply curtailed. Eighty-two percent of the Negro parttime farm households and seventy-one percent of the Negro nonfarming industrial households received relief at some time during the period 1929-1934. At some time during 1934 a.lone, 78 percent of the Negro part-time farm households and 58 percent of the Negro nonfarming industrial households were on relief. While the relief figures of corresponding white groups were not so high as were the Negro figures, they were greater than those for whites in any other subregion. Doubtless the fact that the Coe.1 and Iron Subregion was a metropolitan area partially explains the comparatively high relief figures for this subregion, since relief standards in cities are usually • To secure a sample of part-time farmers as the term is usually understood, i. e., heads of households who were employed at some cash-wage job while carrying on farming enterprises, it was neceBSary to place some minimum on the amount of employment at the industrial job. The minimum was set at 50 days. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST higher than those for rural areas. The large relief load in this subregion can also be explained by the high turnover of labor that accompanied fluctuations in employment. In spite of the high relief load, however, part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households in the Coal and Iron Subregion had not received relief a disproportionately large number of years (appendix table 36). The relief statistics by themselves do not justify any conclusion as to whether part-time farming kept families off relief or not. Many of the heads of part-time farm households, however, asserted emphatically that their gardens and other farm enterprises had kept them from the relief rolls. Many of those who were classified as nonfarming industrial workers had become convinced of the value of part-time farming enterprises by the spring and summer of 1935, when they were interviewed, and were joining the ranks of part-time farmers. OUTLOOK FOR EMPLOYMENT From the survey, it would appear that the greatest need of parttime farmers and nonfarming industrial workers alike is more regular work, and more opportunity for the employment of other members of their families who would normally be contributing to the support os the household. The outlook for employment is best considered in relation to the chief industry of each subregion. Since the status of the service industries depends upon the activity of the leading industry of a locality, employment opportunities in those industries will improve as the main industry recovers. 10 In the cotton textile industry, it seems probable that the general trend of employment will be downward for some time to come. Many factors point to a decreasing amount of labor per unit of output: new labor-saving machinery, now in the experimental stage, which eventually will replace several machines now being used; the probable retirement of obsolete plants; and the application of scientific management principles in the interest of economy and efficiency. Other factors which will adversely affect future cotton textile employment are declining foreign trade and the increasing competition of cotton substitutes. The major possibilities for stimulated employment in this industry are the increased activity of the knit goods industry and the recent development in the South of mills for the finishing and dyeing of textiles, which will probably lead to some increase in employment in this region. In the Coal and Iron Subregion, low production of iron ore, pig iron, steel, and cast iron pipe has been general since the middle twenties. Because of technological improvements, as well as loss of demand for the products, employment in iron and steel manufacturing has decreased steadily since 1923. Employment in the coal mines °For detailed discussions of major industries in the subregions, sec Part If. 1 Digitized by Google OFF-THE-FARM EMPI.OYMEHT -49 declined from 30,000 to 18,000 men between 1923 and 1933, and average work days were drastically reduced. Replacement of old blast furnaces by more efficient ones resulted in a 55 percent employment decrease in this industry between 1923 and 1929. In 1933, the coke plants employed less than one-half the number employed during the peak period of the middle twenties, and the cast iron pipe plants were employing barely one-third of the previous number. A revival of general business activity to predepression levels would increase total employment in the iron and steel and allied industries of Alabama, but because of technological advances, return to predepression employment figures would be possible only with an output considerably beyond former high levels. N eve~eless, some increase in employment will come with any boom in construction activity, railroad buying, expansion of gas and water utility systems, etc. Although no hope of any marked industrial revival is held out for the Atlantic Coast Subregion, the fact that manufacturing employment figures have remained fairly steady during the depression augurs well for those who are already engaged in part-time farming. The shipping and fertilizer business of Charleston, South Carolina, the industrial center of this subregion, and to a certain extent the trade industries of the city depend on the agricultural prosperity of the region. Any marked employment increase in those industries must await a solution of the agricultural problem. The future of the forest products industries in the Lumber Subregion depends on the solution of many problems, such as the ownership and management of forest lands, the balancing of timber drain and growth, taxation of forest lands, and the development of new uses for forest products. Because of the widespread saw-timber drain of recent years, the lumber cut in the South must remain substantially below the 1925-1929 rate, and such a reduction will obviously be accompanied by an approximately proportionate decrease in employment. The greatest possibilities for employment in forest industries lie in the expansion of such wood-using industries as the pulp and paper industries. Employment in the Naval Stores Subregion appears to depend almost wholly on a general world trade revival, although technological progress may bring changes in demand for the gum turpentine and gum rosin which are produced in this subregion. Improved practices within the industry itself may enable it to extend its markets, but such changes usually develop slowly. Because of continued underemployment in the major industries of the Southeast, and the small hope of any vigorous industrial revival, the immediate future of part-time farming would seem to rest largely in the hands of industrial workers who have already had experience and success in part-time farming and of those with reasonably secure sources of income who would like to undertake such farming. Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Chapter Ill THE PART-TIME FARMER'S LIVING AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS THE THIRD group of questions with which this study concerned itself related to the living and social conditions of the pa.rt-time farmers as compared with the living and social conditions of their nonfanning neighbors. LOCATION As was to be expected, the great majority of part-time farmers included in the survey lived in the open country or in villages and towns, the number living in the open country being almost equal to Tal,le df.-Residence of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Part-time rarm households Total Subregion and color Num• her N onrarmlng Industrial households Residence Per• cent City Village and town Total Open country Num• her Residence Per• cent City Village and town Opeu country ---- -------- -- -- -1,334 100 462 486 100 805 165 Total •••••••• 1,113 44 - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - ™ -- Textile: White ••.••••••• Coal and Iron: White •••••••••• Negro .......... Atlantic Coast: White.••.•••••• Negro •••.•••••• Lumber: White ••••••••• Ne11ro .....••••• Naval Stores: White .••.•••••. 293 26 1 212 80 314 23 79 231 204 124 18 11 47 86 136 21 - 17 26 110 200 112 38 222 346 71 142 7 13 5 - 18 15 48 127 103 105 8 8 59 89 44 76 132 7 12 II 1 8 64 92 7 83 15 109 103 8 115 9 8 --- 71 e - 34 37 49 3 - g 40 66 16 4 -- 51 Digitized by Google 52 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST the number living in villages and towns. Well over one-half of the nonfarming industrial workers enumerated lived in cities 1 (table 62). Almost one-half of the nonfarming industrial households living in villages and towns and the same proportion of part-time farm families were in the Textile Subregion.2 One-half of the nonfarming industrial households and almost three-fourths of the part-time farm families that lived in cities were in the Coal and Iron Subregion. Practically all of the nonfarming industrial families studied who lived in the open country were in the Naval Stores Subregion. HOUSING In the Textile and Coal and Iron Subregions, company housing, higher town standards, and better industrial wages resulted in many neat cottages and bungalows with grass and shrubs, though there were some ramshackle farmhouses. In other areas, however, particularly in the Naval Stores Subregion and among the Negroes in the Lumber and .Atlantic Coast Subregions, rough "up and down" houses and shacks were commonly found. In these regions paint is a luxury many houses have never known, and a. lawn and flowers are not in the folkways. The houses of both white and Negro parttime farmers averaged larger, on the whole, than those of nonfarming industrial workers (appendix tables 37 and 38). The one exception to this was among the Negroes of the Coal and Iron Subregion, where the dwellings of part-time farmers and non farming industrial workers were the same, averaging 3.5 rooms per house. Houses of white parttime farmers averaged from 4.5 rooms in the Lumber Subregion to 5.6 rooms in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, with three-fifths of the houses of all white part-time farmers having 5 rooms or more. Houses of white nonfarming industrial workers ranged from an average of 2.9 rooms in Carroll County of the Textile Subregion to an average of 4.8 rooms in the Atlantic Coast Subregion and in Greenville County of the Textile Subregion. .A little over two-fifths of the houses of all nonfarming industrial workers had 5 rooms or more. Houses of Negro part-time farmers were smaller than those of the whites in all areas. Those of Negro part-time farmers ranged from an average of 3.2 rooms in the Atlantic Coast Subregion to 3.7 rooms in the Lumber Subregion, with only 16 percent of all Negro part-time farmers having houses with 5 rooms or more (appendix tables 38 and 39). Houses of nonfarming industrial Negroes ranged from 2.8 rooms in the Atlantic Coast Subregion to 3.5 rooms in the Iron and Coal Subregion, with 12 percent having 5 rooms or more. 1 Open country---outside of centers with 50 or more inhabitants; villages-centers with 50 to 2,500 inhabitants; towns-centers with 2,500 to 10,000 inhabitants; cities-centers with 10,000 or more inhabitants. 2 The distribution of the part-time farmers by residence is closely rele.ted to the sampling method used. See appendix C. Digitized by Google UVING AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 53 It will be remembered, however, that part-time farm households were larger than those of their nonfarming industrial neighbors (table 6, page 3), so that the apparent advantage of the part-time farmers disappears when the size of houses is considered in relation to the size of households. The commonly used standard for adequate housing allows only one person per room, while more than one person can be called crowded, more than two persons overcrowded, and more than three persons greatly overcrowded.3 An analysis of housing facilities of part-time farmers and nonfarmers based on the number of persons per room (table 63 and appendix tables 38 and 39) makes it apparent that there tended to be slightly more crowding and overcrowding among white part-time farmers, and considerably more among Negro part-time farmers, than among their nonfarming industrial neighbors. There were only a few households in the white groups where there were more than three persons to a room, but in the case of Negroes such serious overcrowding was more frequent. Tol,le 63.-Number of Penons per Room I in Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color,2 1934 Type of household, by color Total persons or less 3 persons or less l person or less 2but more than but more than per room l per room 2perroom Number Percent Number -----White: Part•time rarm bouse• bolds ....•............ Nonrarmind Industrial househol s ..•.••••.... Negro: Part-time farm housebolds ................. N h~=~~.Js-~~~.~~r!~~ _ Percent Number Percent More than 3 persons per room Number Percent ---- -- ---- 715 411 68 265 37 36 5 3 . 780 475 61 262 34 35 4 8 1 398 145 37 155 39 77 19 21 5 554 254 46 231 41 60 11 9 2 •Less than 0.5 percent. • According to accepted housing standards, 1 person or less per room is considered adeQuats; 2 persons or 1-, but more than l per room, crowded; 3 persons or Jess, but more than 2 per room, overcrowded; and more than 3 persons per room, greatly overcrowded. 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 39. Among both white part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households, crowded conditions existed most frequently in the Lumber Subregion. Among Negro part-time farmers, crowding was greatest in the .Atlantic Coast Subregion, but was apparent also in the Coal and Iron and Lumber Subregions. Among Negro nonfarming industrial households, crowding was greatest in the .Atlantic Coast Subregion (appendix table 39). Crowding, however, was more closely related to local housing conditions and standards than it was to the location and size of part1 Real Property Inventory, 1984, Summary and Sixty-four Cities Combined, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1934. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST time fann households as compared with those of nonfa.rm.ing industrial workers. The areas with the most crowded living conditions among part-time farmers showed almost identical crowding among the nonfarming industrial groups. The largest proportions of white part-time farm families with adequate housing were in the Coal and Iron Subregion (63 percent), in the Atlantic Coast Subregion (62 percent), and in the Naval Stores Subregion (62 percent). The largest percentage of adequacy among white nonfarming industrial families was in the Atlantic Coast Subregion (67 percent), although almost two-thirds of the nonfarm families in both the Textile (62 percent) and the Coal and Iron (64 percent) Subregions reported one person or less per room. The most adequate housing conditions among Negro part-time farm families were found in the Lumber Subregion; among Negro nonfa.rm.ing industrial families, in the Coal and Iron Subregion. It is impossible to compare the rents which the part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers paid. As was pointed out in the discussion of value of the part-time farm holdings, the subject is complicated by special local conditions and variations. Some of both groups-but not necessarily the same proportionlived in company houses and paid lower rents than would be asked for the same houses by a private landlord. In many cases tenants, especially Negroes in the Atlantic Coast, Lumber, and Naval Stores Subregions, paid little or no rent, receiving a house as part of their labor contract or upon agreement to work for the landlord whenever he needed them. Some tenants had land attached to their houses, while other tenants had to rent land for gardens. Houses of nonfarming industrial tenants usually had no land. It seems incontestable, however, that housing costs part-time farm families, especially those living in the suburbs and open country, less than it would in town, and that lower rents, especially for large families, are another of the advantages that go with part-time farming. Many of the heads of households included in the survey told interviewers that they had moved to the country to secure lower rents. Figures on the general condition or state of repair of houses of parttime farmers and nonfarmers are likewise unsatisfactory. They are derived either from statements of members of families or from estimates of enumerators and are colored to a certain degree by the personal standards of one or the other. Also, standards as to what constitutes a good or poor state of repair vary from community to community. In Greenville County of the Textile Subregion, for example, many of both part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers lived in houses of mill companies whose policy was to keep their property in good condition. In the Naval Stores Subregion, company housing consisted of barrack-like houses or rough shacks belonging to Digitized by Google UVING AND SOCIAL COHDITIOHS 55 small turpentine companies that were unable to maintain them in good repair. Houses of resident owners or private landlords likewise reflected the low wages and low rentals of the area., as well as the varying community standards. In genera.I, the homes of pa.rt-time farmers were not very different from those of their nonfa.rming neighbors (table 64). About the same proportion of houses in both groups needed no repairs, though slightly more houses of pa.rt-time fa.rm families than of nonfa.rming industrial families needed ea.ch type of repairs. The homes of both part-time fa.rm and nonfa.rming industrial households needed more exterior and interior repairs than they did roof or structural repairs. Ta&le 64.-Condition of Dwellings of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households,1 1934 Nonlarmlng Industrial holl&lholds Part•tlme farm households Condition of dwelling Total dwellings.................. . ..................................... 1 Percent needing: I, 113 1,334 27 28 63 ====1==== ~:~~iinierioii-eiia1i-s::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~:~ctui-ai"ieiiair•::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 1 ft7 31 22 24 17 For data by subregions, see appendix table 40. The percentage of part-time fa.rm homes in good repair (i. e., needing no repair) was greater among the white households in the Textile, Coal and Iron, and Lumber Subregions than among the white households of the Atlantic Coast and Na.val Stores Subregions (table 65). In all except the Atlantic Coast Subregion, there was a larger proportion of white farm homes than nonfa.rm homes in good repair. With the exception of the Coal and Iron Subregion, however, a greater percentage of white pa.rt-time fa.rm homes than nonfa.rm homes needed general structural repair. Ta&le 65.-Condition of Dwellings of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Percent needing no repairs Subregion and color TextJle: White .............•.....................•.•.•..•... Coal and Iron: White ............................................. . Negro ......•....................................... Atlantic Coast: White .••.•......................................... Negro •.••••............•.••......•••...........•... Lwnber: White .••.•......................................... Negro ..•.•••..........•...............•............ Naval Stores: White ••..•.....•......•............................ Percent needing gen• era! structural repalrs I Part.time Nonfarm• Part-time Nonlarm• farm house• Ing farm house· lnd\~frial ~~~~~\~s holds households holds 32 28 10 6 45 19 37 28 13 41 19 1ft 27 6 41 21 14 5 24 9 37 20 15 14 42 8 11 4 37 27 25 Digitized by 1 Google 56 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST In all subregions, more Negro than white part-time farm homes were in need of general structural repairs, as high as two-fifths of the Negro farmers' houses in some areas needing this type of repairs. The proportions of the Negro nonfarmers' houses in the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions needing structural repairs were extremely low. The greater need of structural repairs by pa.rt-time fa.rm homes can be partially explained by the fact that heads of these households were supporting larger families than were heads of nonfa.rming industrial households on approximately the same incomes. Other explanations are that more of the nonfa.rmers than farmers occupied company houses, which in general were more frequently repaired than were houses owned by low-income resident owners, or by landlords receiving low rentals; and that more part-time farmers than nonfarmers lived in the country where the upkeep of houses is neglected more, as a. rule, than in the city. CONVENIENCES AND FACILITIES In the matter of household conveniences, differences between parttime farmers and nonfarming industrial workers were more apparent than in any other comparative phase of their living and social conditions.' In some areas, electric lines and water mains did not reach out into the country, and part-time farmers, located on the edges of small towns or in the open country, did not possess conveniences to as great a degree as did nonfarming industrial workers located in urban districts. A little over one-half (53 percent) of the part-time farmers had electric lights as compared with over three-fifths (63 percent) of the nonfarmers (table 66). In the Textile and Coal and Iron Subregions, where electricity was available, almost as large a proportion of the white part-time farmers as nonfarmers had electric lights. Few of the Negro part-time farmers or industrial workers in the Atlantic Coast or Lumber Subregions had electric lights. Tobie 66.-Conveniences in Dwellings of Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming Industrial Households,1 1934 Part-time farm howeholds• Con venlence Total dwellings _____ -------------------------------------------------Percent having: Electric lights___________________________________________________________ Running water ____________________________________ . _________________ .___ Bathroom_______________________________________________________________ No conveniences ___ ------------,---_____________________________________ Nonfarming industrial households 1,334 I. 081 l====I,==== 53 !13 41 74 20 34 42 18 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 41. • Exclusive or all white commercial farmers and of white noncommercial farmers with off-the-farm employ• ment In agriculture in the Atlantic Coast Subrei:ion. ' The point must be kept in mind that such differences were probably due largely to differences in residence. Digitized by Google LIVING AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 57 Only two-fifths of the part-time farmers, as compared with threefourths of the nonfarm group, had running water. .About one-half of those in each group who had running water also had bathrooms. Forty-two percent of the part-time farmers, as compared with eighteen percent of the nonfarming group, had none of these three convemences. In respect to telephones, radios, and automobiles, the part-time farmers were not unlike their nonfarming neighbors. Few of either group had telephones (table 67). .About the same proportion of each (38 and 40 percent, respectively) had radios. Since electricity in the house is not a prerequisite for a radio, a few more households in some areas had radios than had electric lights. .A larger proportion of white part-time farmers than of white nonfarmers had radios in the Textile and Naval Stores Subregions, while the reverse was true for the other subregions, although the differences were slight except in the Lumber Subregion (appendix table 42). Very few Negroes owned radios. TafJle 67.-Communication and Transportation Facilities of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, 1 1934 Part-time farm households• Facility Total honseholds _____________________________________________________ _ Percent having: Nonrarmlng Industrial households 1,081 I. 3.14 1====i,==== 'fi:f;,hone.::::: ::: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ::: ::: : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : :_ .'.utomobile. _______________________________________ . ___________________ No telephone, radio, or automobile. ____________________________________ _ 4 38 39 47 • 40 25 52 1 For data by suhrel(ion~, see appendix table 42. • Exclusive or an white commercial farmers and or white noncommercial farmers with off-the-farm employment in agriculture In the Atlantic Coast Subregion . .Almost two-fifths of the part-time farmers, as compared with onefourth of the nonfarming industrial workers, had automobiles (table 67). Part of this ownership of cars was, of course, associated with distance from work, but this relationship held for individual cases rather than for whole groups. For example, among white part-time farmers and nonfarmers alike in the Textile, Atlantic Coast, and Lumber Subregions, the percentage having cars was higher than the percentage who had to travel 2 miles or more to work (appendix tables 28 and 42). In all areas, the percentage of Negroes who owned cars was much smaller than the percentage of those who had to travel 2 miles or more to work . .Approximately half of all part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households were without telephones, radios, or automobiles. STABILITY AND TENURE It has been argued that a stake in a crop tends to make a man more stable and, therefore, less apt to leave his job; and it is also argued that 150061°-37-7 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 58 a. secondary source of living makes a man more independent and more apt to leave a job. Perhaps the crops of part-time farmers interviewed in 1935 were too small or jobs too scarce for either of these antipodal contentions to he borne out. At any rate, only 5 percent of both pa.rt-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers wer~ found to have changed jobs during 1934. There was no striking difference between the pa.rt-time farm households and nonfarming industrial households in the number of changes in residence since 1929. A few more nonfarming industrial workers than part-time farmers had made no change in residence in the period 1929-1934 (67 percent as compared with 60 percent of the part-time farmers). Almost the same proportion had made two or more changes, 11 percent for the nonfarming industrial workers and 12 percent for the part-time farmers (table 68). Ta&le 68.-Changes in Residence Since October 1, 1929, of Part-Time Farm and Nonlarming Industrial Households, 1 1934 Part-time fRrm households NonlRrming Industrial households Number or che.n11:es In residence since October 1, 1929 l - - - - - - r - - - - l - - - - - , - - - - Number Total •............................. - . - . - - • • • • • • - None ........................ . ....................•.. . . L .........................•............................ 2 ..•.•••.•......•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ···············•··••···•····················· 43..••.•... or more, _________ . ___ . _______ .. ________________ .. ____ .. Unknown................... .. . .................... . Percent Lira JOO Number 1,33-1 Percent JOO 6i2 l----ccc-l----cc-l·---67 60 896 308 28 285 22 ~ 8 92 7 35 3 45 3 1 10 15 I I . • Less than 0.5 percent. 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 43. It will be remembered that a group of full-time farmers in the Textile and Na.val Stores Subregions and a few in other areas had changed to part-time farming with an industrial job. 6 For all of these, except in the Naval Stores Subregion where they became turpentine workers in adjacent forests, this change necessitated a change of residence. There were 69 such cases, which, if added to the 672 who made no change, would make the percentage of those changing residence exactly the same for part-time farmers as for nonfarming industrial workers. More part-time farmers than nonfarming industrial workers owned their homes. Part of this difference was due to the fact that in the Textile and Coal and Iron' Subregions, and to some extent in the Naval Stores Subregion, nonforming families surveyed were more concentrated in company villages than were part-time farmers. The amount of home ownership was largest among white part-time farmers in the Atlantic Const and Lumber Subregions, half of them owning their own homes (tuhle 69). Home ownership by Negro part-time farmers was highest in the Atlantic Coast Subregion. $ 8ce p. 39. Digitized by Google LIVING AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 59 Table 69.-0wners Among Part-Time Farmers and Nonfarming Industrial Workers, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Part-time farmers Subregion and color Number owning homes Total Total ........•.......... Textile: White .•.................. Cool and Iron: White .••............... Negro .......•............. Atlantic Coast: White .•......•..•....... Negro ..•••.............. . Lumber: White •••...•........•. .. Negro .................... Nave.I Stores: White •••........•........ Nonlarming industrial workers Percent owning homes Number owning homes Total Peroont owning homes 1, 113 368 33 1,334 175 293 102 35 314 29 9 204 70 34 22'.! 40 iO 18 20 13 124 23 10 346 71 142 35 50 ]ft 39 103 1C5 ]ff 55 7 7 76 132 37 92 103 2 26 49 20 2 ll 71 20 28 49 II There was some change in the tenure status of part-time farmers between 1929 and 1934 (table 70). Because of the small numbers involved, however, and because the records relate only to those who were farming full or part time in 1929, the data are by no means conclusive. With these limitations, it may be said that there was more movement toward ownership than away from it. Forty-one tenants Table 70.-Tenure Status in 1929 and 1934 of Part-Time Farmers I Who Operated Farms in 1929 Tenure status in 1934 Tenure status In 1929 Owner Number Total. ••..•..................... ················· Owner ______________ . _________ .__ ___ .. __ . ______ .. ___ . Tenant........................ •-·········· . 1 Tenant Percent 321 100 280 41 ,7 Number 488 Percent 100 2 ll8 13 For data by subregions, see appendix table 44. in 1929 had become owners by 1934, and only ten who were owners in 1929 had become tenants by 1934. Most of the changes were among the white part-time farmers, 36 of the 41 who had raised their status and 9 of the 10 who had lowered it being whites (appendbc table 44). It is noteworthy that nearly all of the part-time farmers who were owners were able to retain their status during a period of depression when so many owners were losing their homes, and that a few parttime farmers were able to raise their status. However, a number of the owners were in debt. 6 •See pp. 10-11. Digitized by Google 60 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST HEALTH This survey made no attempt to secure detailed data on the highly technical question of health. The only measure obtained by which this subject could be judged was the number of days the heads of part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households were incapacitated during the year 1934. On this score, no marked difference between part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers was found. Thirty percent of the part-time farmers as compared with twentytwo percent of the nonfarming industrial workers were incapacitated for work at some time during the year (tables 71 and 72). However, part-time farmers were incapacitated for shorter periods than were Tobie 17.-Number of Days Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households Were Incapacitated,! 1934 Part•tlme farm house• holds Nonfarmlng industrial households Number of days head was incapacitated Number Total............................................ None................................................... 1 to 4 days............................. . ............. 6 to 9 days............................................. IO to 14 days.......................... . ................ 15 to 19 days........................................... 20 to 29 days........................................... 30 to 39 days... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •• . . . . . . 40 to 49 days........................................... 60 days or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 1 For data by subregions, - Percent Number Percent 1, 113 100 1,334 100 781 70 1,043 38 54 78 3 -----1-----1-64 6 6:l 6 72 17 6 30 3 39 3 69 16 39 30 15 32 1 3 34 11 2 • 5 1 3 2 I 1 3 appendix table 45. Tobie 7.2.-Percent of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households Who Were Incapacitated and Average Number of Days Incapacitated, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Percent Incapacitated Subregion and color Part•tlme farmers Nonfarm• ing indus• trial work· ers Averain, number of days incapacitated 1 Part•time farmers Nonfarm· Ing indUS· trial work· ers Total. •..•••....•..•••.••.•..•...•..••.•..•.•.... 30 22 20 25 Textile: l====:====l====I=== White ..................................••.......... 33 34 18 Coal and Iron: White ............•.•.....•......................... 16 14 33 Negro .•..................•......................... 18 33 8 Atlantic Coast: White ..............................•...•....•..•..• 17 6 t Negro ..............•...........•................... 50 13 24 Lumber: White ........•...•.•............................... 43 47 'rT 45 41 32 Nav~(~i~res: •••• •••••.•••.......•....••............... White ..••••••••••••.....•.........•....•...••..•... t Average not computed for less than 1 7 47 IO case&. For those who were incapacitated. Digitized by Google H LIVING AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 61 nonfa.rming industrial workers, the averages being 20 days and 25 days, respectively (table 72). By subregions, the highest percentages of those incapacitated during the year were found among both groups of whites and Negroes in the Lumber Subregion, among Negro part-time farmers in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, and among white nonfa.rming industrial workers in the Naval Stores Subregion (table 72). EDUCATION The amount of formal education received by part-time farmers was strikingly similar to that received by nonfa.rming industrial workers. In each group, one-tenth had had no formal education while twothirds had had a partial or complete grammar school education. Slightly over one-fifth had been in high school, and only 2 percent had attended college (table 73). Ta&le 73.-Education of Heads af Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households,1 1934 Part.tfme farm households • Nonrarmlng Industrial households Education of beads Number Total............................................ None................................................... 1 to 4 grades completed................................. Grade school not completed•........................... Grade school completed................................ 1 to 3 years high school................................. High school completed................................. 1 to 3 years college...................................... College completed...................................... Unknown.............................................. Percent Number Percent 1,081 100.0 1,3:U 100.0 114 333 268 II 7 169 40 16 JO. 5 13-1 364 364 174 208 57 22 6 6 10.0 27. 3 27. 3 13. 0 15. 6 4. 3 1. 7 0. 4 0. 4 1----1-----1------1---- 4 20 30. 8 24. 8 10. 8 15. 6 3. 7 I. 5 0. 4 I. 9 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 46. • Exclusive of all white commercial farmers and of white noncommercial farmers with off•the-farm employment in agriculture in the Atlantic Coast Subregion. • This category includes grades 5 to 7 for the Coal and Iron Subregion, and grades 5 to 6 tor all other Ill breglons, Of those who had had no formal schooling, the great majority in both groups were Negroes, and the lack of education was more marked among the part-time farming Negroes than among the nonfarming Negroes. Of the 114 part-time farmers who had had no schooling, 89 (78 percent) were Negroes, while of the 133 nonfarming industrial workers who had had no schooling, 85 (64 percent) were Negroes (appendix table 46). The proportion of Negroes with no education was highest in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, where one-third of the Negro pa.rt-time farmers and one-fourth of the Negro nonfarming industrial workers bad bad no formal schooling. The Negro parttime farmers in this subregion were at a disadvantage because most of them lived in the rural areas of Charleston County where schools for Negroes were nonexistent or far a.part, or were operated for very Digitized by Google 62 PART-TIME FARMJHG IN THE SOUTHEAST short terms during the years in which the heads of households were of school age. The same situation was responsible for the lack of education among the Negroes of the Lumber Subregion. The proportion of Negroes in the Coal and Iron Subregion having had no education was about the same as that of Negroes in the Lumber Subregion due to the fact that workers in the coal and iron industries were drawn from the surrounding rural areas. The proportion of white heads of households having had no formal education was highest in the Coal and Iron Subregion, where there had been extensive migration from rural areas with poor school facilities, and in the Naval Stores Subregion, where a sparse population had resulted in poor school facilities. The average grade attained by white heads of households in the various subregions ranged from 5.7 to 7 .0 grades among part-time farmers and from 4.3 to 6.8 grades among nonfarming industrial workers (table 74). Within each area, however, the difference between part-time farmers and their nonforming neighbors was slight except in the Naval Stores Subregion. To&le 74.-Average Grade Completed by Heads of Part-Time Farm and· Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Average l'J"ade complet<ld by heads Subregion and color Psrt·tlme farm holl!i&holds Nonfanning industrial households 5. 2 Total .......................... ·· .. · .. ································· Textile: i====J,= White .....................•.............•............... . .•...•....••... 6.4 Coal and Iron: White ...........•.................... . .... .. ..........................•• 7.0 Neitro .................................................................. . 3.8 Atlantic Const: White 1 •.••••.••••••••••.......•.•.•••••.•..•• • ..•••.•...•.••...•••••••.• 6. 5 Negro .......•............. . . ........................... . ·- ........ . .... . 2.1 Lumber: White •................. ... .. . . ............. . .. . .. . ....... . ........... . .. 5. 7 Ne,ro ................................. . ..............•................. 3.2 Nnvnl 8tores: White ..............................................................•... 6.0 5.5 6.4 6.S 4.3 6.B 4.0 6.2 3. 7 4.3 • Exrlush·e or all while commerdol fnrmers nnd or white noncommercial farmers with off·the·farm employment in agriculture. There was a striking similarity between the part-time farm and nonfarm groups in regard to education of the children. Over one-fourth of the children 7-16 years of age in both groups who were not in school in 1933-34 were children 7 years of age who had not yet stn.rted to school (table 75). There were a few children who were physically unable to attend school, and an occasional child in each group who was employed. In most areas, the children 7-16 years of age in both part-time farm and nonfarming industrial white households had made nearly Digitized by Google Table 75.-School Attendance of Chi ldren, 7-16 Yea rs of Age, in Part-Time Farm and Nonfa rming Industri al Households, by Color and by Subre gion , 1934 Texti le Item Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast Naval Stores Lumber Total White Negro White Negro WWte White Negro White - - - - - -- PART-TlllE f'AlUt HOUSEHOLDS Total number or house bolds with cbildreo 7-16 years or age ........... Total number or children 7- 16 y~nrs or age ... . .... . ........ Number or children ln school.. .. . .. Number o r children not in school. Number employed... ......... --------- -------..:: :·:······ - ------------ ------ .... ·: ::: •.... Numw17{hng;;::;'J)~:~d :::· •· ....... :::·... ..::::.:.::::::::: :: :: Without disnhility . . ....••• .. .••• . . •...•....•......... ... •. Age, 7 years ........ ------------------------------Age, 8-14 years ....... ---- - ... -- ---- ---------Age, 15--16 years .. ...... : :: . -·•·----- ------- -------- 716 100 1-14. 85 '23 1, 632 454 312 174 62 1,505 416 38 300 127 12 115 10 105 33 45 27 166 8 12 6 32 -12 32 3 9 8 - 4 14 14 - 1 -8 I 7 - 6 l = 62 05 215 174 41 2 39 - --- l 38 8 27 3 = 63 126 79 41 195 95 ---- ---- 120 177 5 18 6 - 6 - 2 3 4 14 00 6 -5 4 l I 13 6 3 6 -I - 0 co· ,,"" 678 161 137 176 62 Tot.al number or children 7- 16 years of nge .......................•..... 1,267 295 252 329 111 ), 181 263 315 14 I 13 3 24 32 2 30 I 29 4 15 240 12 I 11 I 10 10 108 86 20 JO Number or children in school.. .. .. .. !\"umber or children not ln schooL. Number employed 1 •••• •• •••• Number not employed ...... With disability.. ... . Without disability .. _... Age, 7 years . ___ .. Age, 8- 14 years ...... Age, 15-61 years... . . --- ---- ------- -- --- ------- -------- --- ------------ ----- ---- -- ---- -------· ------·------------- -· ---- - --- .. -----·--- ·------ ---- ·- ·- -- ------- --- -- 13 73 4 69 25 -- -13 6 2 5 -3 I 2 -2 - = 44 44 19 81 79 33 80 76 7 5 I 4 71 8 28 5 45 87 2 6 I 4 2 1 I - - -- -4 2 -2 3 6 5 - 3 2 ~ ~ 8 ~ NOSPARML'iG INDUSTRIAL BOCS.EDOLDS Tot.al cumber or households witb children 7- 16 years ot ago ... . .... ... ,.. s 3 8 i ~ 2 -2 ~ - I l (1) Q_ ~ 1 1 All except 2 of the employed children were 15 or 16 yeara ol lll!e. Exclusive of commercial households and of noncommercial bouaebolds with off-the-farm employment In agriculture. 0 0 - r2 ro e PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 64 normal 7 progress in school (table 76). The children in white nonfarming industrial households in the Naval Stores Subregion were the only ones who averaged more than 1 year retardation. Among Negroes retardation was particularly evident in the Atlantic Coast Subregion. There the children of Negro part-time farmers were retarded about 3 years on the average, while the children of nonfarming industrial workers were retarded 2.4 years. This reflects the poor school facilities for Negroes outside the city of Charleston. A similar situation existed among the Negroes in the Lumber Subregion. It would appear that provision by the local communities rather than part-time farming per se was the determining factor in the question of educational facilities. Tobie 76.-Retardation in School of Children, 7-16 Years of Age, in Part-Time Farm and Nonlarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Av•ra~e number or years of retardation or children i-16 years or age • Subregion and oolor Part-time farm households Nonfarmlng industrial households Total.. .............................................................. .. 0. 97 0. 75 Textile: l=====I===== White .................................................................. . 0.33 0.411 Coal and Iron: White .................................................................. . 0.47 0.34 Negro .................................................................. . 0. 79 0.37 Atlantic Coast: White ................................................................. .. 0.31 1. 01 Negro .................................................................. . 2. 96 2. 40 Lumber: White ................................................................. .. 0. 72 0.82 Negro .................................................................. . 2. 06 1.64 Navnl Stores: White .................................................................. . 0.43 2. 21 t For method or determining retardation, see footnote 7. The following age.grade schedule was taken as normal in the computation of retardation. 7 La•I grn<te complrttd iR 1chool Age 7 years ____________ ·-··--····---·------·-------· 1 8 years._ ............ _..... _......... _. _. _.... . . 2 0 years ..... _... _..... _ .. _............... _.... __ 3 lOyears ..... -··············•-··•······-······-4 11 years·•······-·---··························5 6 12 years·-··-··---··--······---··-·-······-·--·· 13 years ...... _... __ .. __ .... _.......... ___ ... _.. _ 7 14 years. __ ... _.. _. __ .... _......... _. ___ .. _____ . 8 9 15 yenrs .......... ·-··············--············ I 6 years ....................................... . 10 All children 7-16 years of age were included whether in school or not. A child who had not completed the specified number of grades for his age level was con• sidered retarded. For example, a child 9 years of age who had completed only the second grade was retarded 1 year. Digitized by Google LIVING AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 65 There was no great difference between the amount of education of young people 16 through 24 years of age in part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households, though such as existed was in favor of youth in pa.rt-time farm families. Thirty-six percent of the young people in part-time farm families between those ages were in school, as compared with thirty percent of the youth in nonfarming industrial Ta&le 77.-School Attendance and Employment of Youthf 16-24 Years of Age, in Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Househo ds, 1 by Sex, 1934 Youth In pArt-tfme rarm households Youth In nonrarming Industrial households School attendance and employment. by sex Number Total.-------------------------------- ----- · · --· · In school.. _______________________________________ .. Employed _____ ·----·--·---._.--,- ________________ _ Neither employed nor In school.-----------------·_ Percent Number Percent 831 100 6« 100 200 2-17 29 195 217 232 30 288 31\ 35 34 36 1 = = = 1= 0 419 100 311 100 Male ___________ -- ----------------- ----- ------ ----- -- · · · In school. _________________________________________ . 144 87 34 28 179 43 133 43 Employed. - __________ - ---- -- ---- -- --- ----- ------ -Neither employed nor In school. __________________ _ 91 96 23 29 Female ________________________________________________ _l = = = = l = = = = l = = = c l = = = 412 100 1----1---1,52 37 100 26 151 37 In school. _________________________________________ _ Employed _______________________________________ .. Neither employed nor In school. _________________ __ 333 100 108 84 141 32 25 43 • For data by subregions, see appendix table 47. families (table 77). As has been previously noted, the two groups were about equal in the proportions (slightly over one-third) that were employed. Only 29 percent of the young people in part-time farm households, as compared with 36 percent of those in nonfarm families, were neither employed nor in school. LIBRARY FACILITIES Library facilities varied greatly from area. to area. Such facilities were available to nearly all white families in Greenville County of the Textile Subregion and in the Coal and Iron Subregion. They were also available to nearly all white noncommercial families of the Atlantic Coast Subregion, but outside of Charleston there were no such facilities for Negroes in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, nor were there library facilities for whites in the Naval Stores Subregion (table 78). Use of library facilities was not always proportionate to the number of families to whom such facilities were available. In the Atlantic Coast and Lumber Subregions, for example, libraries were available to practically all white nonfurming industrial workers, but only onefifth of those in the former area and only one-tenth of those in the latter area made use of them. In the Textile, Coal and Iron, Atlantic Coast, and Lumber Subregions. on the other hand, half or more of the white part-time farm Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 66 Table 78.-Availability and Use of Library Facilities Among Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Percent havln~ library lacilities available Subregion and color Textile: White ..................................... . Oreenvilie ............. ·-· ......... ·- .. CarroiJ. __ ... _.. . . . _... -·. ·-·· ...... ·-·· Coal anrl Iron: White·-·---·.·--· .. ·- .... ·-·· ...... ·-· .... . N~ro ... •···----·········-····· ·-··-----·· Atlantic Coast: White .. ----················ •· · - · ·----···-·· Negro._.---·-·---·· ............ ·-------.•-Lum her: White_________ .... --•·--··········· · ··- · ··-·····_ Neji!'ro _____________· -_______________ Naval Stores: White. ____ -- .. - ... - . - . - . - - ..... - .. --- · · · · -- I Percent haYing Jlbrnry facilities who used them Psrt•tlme farm hous&holds Nonfarming Industrial bou.sebohls Part-time farm households Nonfsrming industrial households fl/) 83 17 70 !14 40 58 61 24 13 86 82 49 17 /;!I 41 47 74 43 85 JOO 78 58 22 0 21 98 97 62 37 II I 4~ 12 12 0 I -1 1 Ra.sed on ag nonrommercisl pnrt·tlme farm households with off·the-farm employment In nonagriculture. • Based on 68 part·time farm households with olT•the-farm employment in nonagriculture. families to whom library facilities were available used them; while in the Textile and Coal and Iron Subregions, about half of the white nonforming industrial families also used such facilities. Libraries were available to only a small percentage of Negro part-time farmers except in the Coal and Iron Subregion, but only one-sixth of these Negroes used the libraries. PARTICIPATION IN SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS As in the case of library facilities, great differences existed among the areas ·with respect to availability of social organizations. In Greenville County of the Textile Subregion, for example, the number of organizations common to most urban, suburban, and village communities was augmented by mill community programs, thus making a wide variety of organizations available to all who lived near their places of work (appendix table 48). For those in Greenville County who lived in the open country, there were special types of rural organizations common to thickly settled forming communities. Few social organizations, on the other hand, were available in the Na val Stores Subregion, where towns are small and the country population sparse and scattered. In this area, almost the only organizations outside of the town of Douglas were a few connected with church and school. The extent to which members of fumilies, whether part-time form or nonfarrning industrial, took part in availnble social organizations varied j11st as widely as did the number of organizations available. 8 8 The differences in social participation among the subregions were so great that much of this discus.~ion must be reserved for the detailed reports on the subregions which make up Part II. Digitized by Google LIVING AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS 67 All members of some large families attended regular]y while in other families only one or two members attended, and then only occasionally. In general, more part-time farm than nonfarming industrial families participated in organized social and community life. Also, the extent of participation of part-time farmers was greater than that of nonfarmers in almost every type of activity available to them (table 79). Ta&le 79.-Avoilobility of Specified Social Or9oni1otions and Participation of PortTime Form and Nonforming Industrial Households in These Or9oni1otions, 1 1934 Part-time farm households Organization Households to which organization was available Number Percent N onfarmlng Industrial households Hous,,holds to whom avail- able with one ormoremem• bers participating Numbor Percent Households to which organ1,ation was available IIouseholds to whom availahle with one or moremem• bers participating Number Numbor Percent Percent -- ---- ---- ---1,334 - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - 1,312 1,068 00 1,013 95 00 1,242 93 Total households .••........ ___ '1,073 Church ___ ·-···-·---····----·-----·-Adult church organl,ation_ .. _____ . __ Young P<'ople's organi1ation __ ._ -·- .. Sun•fay School. •••.• _____ -· _____ ._ . School club ____ ._ .. ___________ Athletic team .• --.-·····-·-- ________ Fraternal order··-···--·-··--·-- _____ Labor union_-··-··-·-·--··--- _____ -· Parent•Teacher Association . Boy Scouts ...•.•... ·-··-·----::::::: Girl Scouts ..••. _._ ..... ··-. _________ Cooperatives. __ -·-·-····-- __________ '\Vornen's organization __________ .. 4-H Club ... •--•·--·-··-··-·--··----Special interest group ____ ... _________ Other •..••• - - --·- - ·-·- ···-····-· -- -- 918 887 1,022 413 6ll6 6.1S 86 83 95 38 64 404 59 38 744 69 304 201 15 323 267 90 166 38 19 I 30 25 8 15 336 350 875 89 136 165 157 221 19 14 2 62 57 10 61 37 40 86 22 20 25 39 ao 6 5 13 Ill 21 II 37 1,219 1,172 1,244 910 1,053 982 851 1,100 655 5.ll 319 621 lt!S 387 259 91 88 93 68 ;-g 74 411 24 78 uo 24 1~2 142 293 218 28 19 15 47 60 14 2 29 20 19 17 64 89 42 40 31 284 971 15 15 14 3' 18 4 4 6 10 1 6 7 1 For data by subregions, see appendix table 4R. • Exclusive or all white commercial farmers and of white noncommercial farmers with off-the•farm employment in agriculture In the Atlantic Coast Subregion and or white farmers with olI•the-Carm employment in agriculture in the Lumber Subregion_ Since all types of organizations were not available to all part-time farmers, however, their greater rate of participation is more apparent if the participation of the two groups is compared on the basis of the number to whom each activity was actually available. Young people's organizations, for example, were available to 83 percent of the part-time farm families and to 88 percent of the nonfarming industrial families. Yet, there were 40 percent of the part-time form and only 24 percent of the nonfarm families who had one or more members participating in such organizations. Fm ternal orders were available to 74 percent of the nonfarming industrial workers but to only 59 percent of the part-time farmers. Yet, 25 percent of the parttime form households in comparison with 14 percent of the nonfarming industrial households had participating members. The same situation was true of other organizations. The greater participation of part-time form families in young people's organizations, Parent-Teacher Associations, and women's organiza- Digitized by Google 68 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST tions was surprising because of the greater distance many of them had to go in order to attend meetings. Particularly surprising was the comparatively large percentage of part-time farmers who were members of labor unions. Individual members of white part-time farm families, on the average, participated to a greater extent in social activities than did white nonfarm members. In the Coal and Iron and Atlantic Coast Subregions, the participation of Negro nonfarming industrial workers was greater on the average than that of Negro part-time farmers while the reverse was true in the Lumber Subregion (table 80). To&le 80.-Average Attendance at Social Gatherings of Members of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, and Number of Households in Which One or More Persons Held Office, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Number ol hou...,holds in which one or more per• sons held office 1 Average attendance pl'r person Subregion and color Part-time farm households Nonlarmlng Industrial households Part-time farm households 69 69 304 245 8.1 Ml 84 29 107 35 4 l 78 89 70 92 76 26 M 102 161 65 56 7 63 48 8 Z1 48 67 6 76 I X1 11 11 14 3 5 TotaL _..... _________________ . ______ . __ .. Nonrarming inrlustrial households l=====;=====l=====,I==== Textile: White: Greenville ____ . ___________ . __ ._ .. __ .. __ _ Carroll __________________ .. ____________ _ Coal and Iron: White. ___ .. _____ . ______________________ . __ _ Negro ________ . ____________________________ _ Atlantic Coo.st: White _____________________________________ _ Negro. ___ . __ . _________ . _______ ------ __ --- . _ Lumber: White _____________________________________ _ Negro ________ . _______ .. _________ .. __ .. ___ ._ Naval Stores: White _____________________________________ _ I 69 1 In I or more soda! organirotion.s, Hl34. In practically all households, only I member held office in an7 gin•n organization. 1 F.xclusive of all white commercial farmers and ol white noncommercial farmers with otl-the-larm employment in agrieulture. The average attendance ol the entire group ol 71 cases was 53. 3 Exclusive of white farmers with otl-the-larm employment In agriculture. The average attendance lor the entire group of 76 cases was 68. In most areas, members of part-time farm families held office more frequently than did their nonfarming industrial neighbors (table 80 and appendix table 49). The average amount of officeholding by members of part-time farm households was so much greater in some areas than that by nonfarmers that some factor other than more frequent and more regular participation of the former group must be present. It seems likely that the higher esteem in which the farmer was held in comparison with the factory worker may have had something to do with the more frequent officeholding of members of part-time farm households. "\¾natever the cause, it seems fairly evident that in leadership as well as in participation the part-time farm family takes a more active part in the organized social life of the community than does the nonfarming industrial family. Digitized by Google Chapter IV CONCLUSIONS THE PRESENT survey shows that part-time farming is economically advantageous. It requires in investment or in rent for land little more than ordinarily would be spent in housing; it requires only a small amount of capital for equipment or livestock; and the expenditure for seed, fertilizer, or hired labor is negligible. The survey makes equally clear, however, that while part-time farming activities may be encouraged within certain limitations, they cannot advantageously be extended on a large scale to unemployed families. Part-time farms alone cannot make families self-sufficient, and possession by the head of the household of a cash income job is indispensable to any part-time farming undertaking. A program calling for the building of new communities remote from industry, with the hope that unemployed farmers or industrial workers can be rehabilitated by part-time farming, appears to be of doubtful wisdom. Industry moves to these communities very slowly, if at all. The possibilities of increased industrial expansion in the Eastern Cotton Belt hardly warrant hope of sufficient work in the near future to take up the slack of underemployment and to set to work the unemployed previously attached to these industries. 1 The promotion of part-time farming, therefore, except in the vicinity of established industry and for those employed or with definite prospect of employment, would not be likely to meet with success. 1 For discussion of the outlook for increased industrial employment, see Part I, pp. 48-49 and Part II, pp. 90-91, 121-122, 149, 176-178, 204-205. 69 Digitized by Google 70 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST THE PART-TIME FARMER A HYBRID As the cover design of this monograph suggests, the part-time farmer faces two ways. The division of his time and interest between two types of enterprise ranges from almost complete attention to the farm to almost complete absorption in the industrial job. This division has both advantages and disadvantages. For many, the outdoor exercise involved in looking after a part-time farm iR a welcome change from monotonous factory, office, or other indoor work. Some of the part-time farmers surveyed said that their gardens were a source of recreation to them. It was clear from their comments, and from those of the interviewers, that in some cases, where discouragement with economic conditions had resulted in _lowered morale, the farm work had therapeutic value. For others, especially those whose industrial jobs were very fatiguing, the extra effort required by the part-time farm had no charms. If hours in the industries of these areas are lengthened, or even if full time at current hours is resumed, the labor required for anything more than a small garden may easily become burdensome. For all with livestock there is the everlastingness of daily chores. As some part-time farmers as well as nonfarming industrial workers expressed it, they would rather "just sit around after work." Part-time farming in the Eastern Cotton Belt was not entirely a product of the depression, although the depression increased its volume, and prosperity may decrease it. For example, industrial workers living in areas where land is poor and scarce and not easily accessible, such as Jefferson County, Alabama., may discontinue their parttime farming activities as soon as wages become high enough for them to support themselves by industry alone. Better times may also decrease part-time farming among farmers who undertook it primarily as an emergency measure. In this category would be placed many part-time farmers in Coffee County, Georgia, in the Naval Stores Subregion where off-the-farm jobs are scarce, where the seasonal peak of off-the-farm employment comes at the height of the busy season on the farm, and where industrial wuges are so low that a small increase in the price for staple crops would make undivided attention to the farm more profitable than part-time farming. On the other hand, there are many industrial workers who have long done some farming and '\\ill continue to farm because it is an economic asset over and above its cost in money and lo.bor. ADVANTAGES OF PART-TIME FARMING The part-time farms surveyed produced a definite contribution to the family living: not only fresher and more abundant products for the diet, but also a monetary saving in grocery bills during the summer months, ranging from a few dollars to as much as $20 a month. Some- Digitized by Google CONCLUSIONS 71 times small amounts of additional food products were produced for sale, while may of the families canned or stored products for winter use. Typical part-time farm families which had only a garden consumed products during the year valued at $70, while those with a garden, a cow, several hogs, and a small flock of poultry consumed products with an equivalent value of about $400. The garden's contribution represented a definite financial advantage for part-time farmers, whose earnings in industry were practically the same as those of nonfarming industrial workers. Over one-half of the part-time farmers surveyed, and almost that proportion of nonfarming industrial workers, made less than $500 a year at their industrial employment. Only a small proportion of the workers made as much as $1,000 or more yearly. That the garden's products were appreciated during periods of unemployment and underemployment was apparent from the comments of many of the part-time farmers, who declared that they "could not have made it," "would have starved to death," or ''would have had to go on relief," had it not been for the farming enterprise. From the social viewpoint, also, the part-time farmer's life has its advantages. From the rather intangible evidence of the survey, it would appear that the status of the part-time farmer, especially if he owns his home, is a degree higher than that of the nonfarming industrial worker. In spite of the longer distances from town, participation by part-time farm families in available group life in the community seemed to be more frequent than that by nonfarming industrial workers; and positions of leadership were more often held by part-time farmers and members of their families. The fact remains, however, that the part-time farmer had fewer social organizations available. To the extent that these organizations stimulate social intercourse and interest in community affairs, the lack of group life is a disadvantage, especially in the case of young people in the family. A large number of the working people of the Eastern Cotton Belt have a farm background and are to an extent rural-minded. Many of the heads of families interviewed expressed a preference for country life and an opinion that the country is the best place in which to rear children. Since the contacts and the interests of the part-time farm family are necessarily those of the village, town, or city, the former tastes and wants of such families are modified by these quasi-urban · standards and activities. This contrast of rural and urban ways of living makes adjustments difficult for some part-time farm families. For others, such as those who take pleasure in the creative activity of a farm or garden, the part-time farm affords a satisfying and even stimulating way of life. More part-time farmers than nonfarming industrial workers mvned their homes. Aside from any sentimental, social, or economic argu- Digitized by Google 72 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST ments for home ownership, it is a fact that under modem industrial conditions, home ownership tends to limit the mobility of the worker whether he is a part-time farmer or not, and in so doing may constitute a disadvantage. Since a garden alone, whether or not the home is owned, may deter the part-time farmer from moving to better himself in his industrial job, part-time farming may also be said to limit mobility. However, there was no striking difference between the part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households surveyed in the number of changes in residence since October 1, 1929. If the part-time farm enterprise is conceivably a limit to mobility, it is just as conceivably a source of industrial independence and advantage for the part-time farmer who lives in a community large enough, and industrially complex enough, to contain a number of opportunities for employment. Having the resource of a part-time farm enterprise to fall back upon, the worker is less subject to control by the employer. It might be thought that the pos<,ession of a farming enterprise could, in individual cases, threaten employment security. When industrial workers in the Eastern Cotton Belt are known to need work badly, employers might be tempted to lay off a man known to have a farm enterprise large enough to enable him to get along. In one neighborhood, there was so strong a suspicion among those interviewed that the reporting of an additional resource might affect employment security that the survey had to be abandoned. On the other hand, employers, like those in the Coal and Iron and Textile Subregions, actively encouraged part-time farming, or at least gardening, and at times of reduction in labor force, they did not penalize employees who had responded to their garden programs. The findings of this study, regarding opportunity for employment, days worked, and rates of pay and earnings, indicated that up to the present time there has been no discrimination against part-time farmers. Many employers in the Eastern Cotton Belt expressed satisfaction and even pride that some of their workers came from nearby farms. In recent years, many textile mill managers have begun to question the necessity of the mill village. The cost of building and maintaining the type of houses and villages now common has increased. in recent years at the same time that a large labor supply has been made available through the depression in agriculture. Moreover, the automobile has greatly enlarged the territory from which workers may be drawn. There is no further need to domicile all the employees within the shadow of the mill. Part-time formers as a whole were thought well of by their neighbors, and were spoken of as "the hardest working men in this community." OocaRionally a few fellow industrial workers expressed antagonism, saying that a man with a farm "and a way to make a Digitized by Google CONCLUSIONS 73 living" should leave his industrial job to an unemployed industrial worker. A complete "living," however, was made only by some of the commercial part-time farmers, since they were the only ones with any sizable financial returns from their farms. Moreover, many of them operated farms too small to support a family. A number of the full-time industrial workers expressed a desire to join the ranks of the part-time farmers. Most people believed that if a man were energetic enough to use his leisure time to produce food, he was entitled to the economic advantage it gave him. It has been objected that the part-time farmer competes with the full-time farmer by producing for his household foodstuffs that otherwise would have to be purchased. To an extent this is true, but as was pointed out above, 2 the part-time farm family probably would not buy as large a quantity of fa.rm products as it produces for home use. A study of the possible effects of this small reduction in the demand for products of commercial farms was beyond the scope of this study. Certainly, most of the part-time farmers surveyed offered no competition by selling products. The few who sold much truck, or poultry, or milk were really farmers with an industrial job on the side. Any competition that these offered was with industrial workers, therefore, rather than with other farmers. POSSIBILITY OF INCREASING THE NUMBER OF PART-TIME FARMS Land is plentiful in most parts of the Eastern Cotton Belt, except in the more congested metropolitan areas, so from this point of view, there would be no obstacle to increasing the number of part-time farmers. As long as a plot of land comes free with the rent of a suburban or country house, is made available to a tenant by a landlord, or can be rented for $5 or less per acre, part-time fanning is possible. Improvement in roads is constantly increasing the radius from which industry draws its workers, and so increases the land available for the farming enterprise. Many of the nonfarming industrial workers surveyed had a farm background. Among the heads of households, 49 percent of such workers had had some regular farm experience since they were 16 years of age, and 38 percent had had 3 years or more. Many of these, as well as others who had had no farm experience, expressed a wish to become part-time farmers. Whether all who say they want to farm would do so if given assistance is questionable. In any event, the survey did not indicate that past experience on a regular farm is necessary for the success of a small farm enterprise or that it guarantees success. Of the 1,113 part-time farmers surveyed, 200 had had no farm experience since I Seep. 15. 150001 °-a1-s Digitized by Google 74 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST they were 16 years of age, but, on the whole, the garden production of those without such farm experience did not differ greatly from that of part-time farmers with previous experience. The average number of years' experience on farms was greatest among part-time farmers in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, but in general part-time farming in that area was poor. The average amount of previous farming experience was shortest in the Coal and Iron Subregion where, considering the limited opportunities, part-time farming was most successful. DESIRABILITY OF INCREASING PART-TIME FARMING In spite of the obvious advantages of part-time farming, it should again be emphasized that such farming is not sufficient for the support of families engaged in it. Part-time farm families may be kept off the relief rolls only if they have some type of industrial employment which provides an income sufficient to meet necessary cash expenses. As was pointed out elsewhere in this report, the possibilities for expansion of employment by the various industries of the region appear to be sharply limited. This fact suggests the doubtful wisdom of any plan for the wholesale extension of part-time farming to unemployed households. The wholesale extention of part-time farming to employed households not at present engaged in farming activities is also of doubtful wisdom, even though the members have expressed a desire to cultivate gardens and keep cows, pigs, and chickens. It has been shown earlier that successful noncommercial part-time farming requires from 3)~ to 5 hours work per day during the spring and summer months. This will be considered a heavy burden by many families. It is one thing, therefore, to assist households which have shown the initiative, energy, and desire to undertake such an enterprise. It is quite another to encourage part-time farming among families which would not only require assistance in establishing themselves as part-time farmers, but which would also need close supen·ision over an extended period. In fact, experience with relief families has shown that large numbers are unable to farm successfully even with such supervision. That part-time farming offers a wide field for improvement, however, is clearly indicated by the survey. Any public policy for encouraging part-time farming in the Southeast might well begin with the improvement of existing enterprises carried on by those who have had the interest and the initiative to undertake farming. It is believed that part-time farming would be greatly benefited if encouragement, advice, actual guidance, and perhaps small loans were given both to present part-time farmers who want to increase their farming activities and to nonfarming industrial workers with steady employment who wish to begin farming and who appear to have the qualifications needed for success. Digitized by Google CONCLUSIONS 75 THE IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING PART-TIME FARMING Some part-time farmers need a little more land or better land. One of the most frequently expressed desires of heads of families in the more thickly settled areas was for 1 or 2 acres on which they could raise enough potatoes for the family, feed for the cow, or carry on more varied part-time farming. Many expressed the wish for a 3- or 4-acre farm, which they felt would be a safeguard against the uncertainties of industrial employment or would offer a bit of security in old age. Some needed, and would merit, assistance in securing a cow, while others would not properly care for stock if they had it. Quite a number remarked that they could do much better if they had work stock, but sensibly recognized that the overhead would be too large for the size of their enterprise, and thought a good solution would be to own a mule with some other part-time farmer. As a matter of fact, one mule would probably be sufficient for several small-scale parttime farmers. The survey disclosed that one of the greatest needs of part-time farmers is instruction in improved farming methods. Training is needed in every phase of farm operation, from planting to preservation of the product. A few expressed a wish to know how to farm more efficiently, and an occasional part-time farmer was trying to improve his farming methods by studying Government publications or taking extension courses. There are today more agricultural extension workers-farm agents, home demonstration agents, and so on-in the Southeast than in any other region of the United States,3 showing that there is already public recognition of the need for such educational work. So far, however, these agents have given their attention and services almost exclusively to commercial farmers. More recently, the relief agencies have taught gardening and canning to relief clients, in order that they may help themselves and so lighten the relief load. Few of the part-time farmers were on relief, however, so they have missed both sources of information-the one by having too small enterprises, the other by retaining economic independence. Production of a greater variety of foodstuffs should be a major item in any program for improved farm practices in the Eastern Cotton Belt. There are numerous useful and nutritious vegetables, especially among those suitable for fall, winter, and early spring gardens, with which many part-tin1e farmers interviewed in this survey were not familiar. Only a few grew English peas, carrots, or spinach; none grew parsnips, asparagus, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, or a variety of winter kale and greens. Only a small number of part-time farmers had fresh vegetables during 10 months of the year. a Odum, Howard W., Southern Regions of the United States, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1936, p. 56. Digitized by Google 76 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST The growing of fruits and berries is another farm activity that needs stimulating. Relatively few part-time farm households grew fruits and berries or attempted the canning of surplus garden products. This is one of the fields in which instruction is eagerly received. Instruction in relative values of crops is also needed. For example, many part-time farmers with small plots of land planted corn; and while this crop is made into meal and is also used as feed for pigs and chickens, it takes considerable space in relation to its value. The same amount of land planted in a. variety of vegetables, sweet potatoes, and Irish potatoes would yield greater food value. An extreme example of impractical use of cropland found in the survey was the planting of ½ to 1 acre in watermelons, although the growers did not report selling the melons. This proposal to acquaint part-time farmers with new products and the methods of producing them is not as difficult as it may sound. Fann and home demonstration agents, working among full-time farmers, already have done much to stimulate diversified and yearround gardening and to overcome prejudices in favor of former farming practices. Planting, like many other activities, is of ten influenced by fashion, and what one person does, his neighbor can be encouraged to do. Examination of the schedules revealed examples of some very good local farm activities in the Eastern Cotton Belt which might easily be made more general. For instance, many part-time farmers in Coffee County, Georgia, of the Naval Stores Subregion grew winter cabbage and cane for syrup, which were produced by few, if any, parttime farmers in other areas. Only in Sumter County, South Carolina, of the Lumber Subregion did part-time farmers raise rutabagas, although they are hardier than turnips, give better yields, and are good feed for stock. In some areas nearly all farmers raised collards, while in others few part-time farmers seemed to recognize the hardiness and palatability of this typical southern vegetable. Examples of the possibilities of educating groups in better gardening practices were furnished by the Textile and Coal and Iron Subregions, where employers have long encouraged gardens by making land available, hy having plowing done, and by giving prizes. It is hardly an accident that the summer gardens in these two areas were the best of any surveyed. Need of improved practices, not only in gardening but also in other types of farming enterprises, was evident. Many families had only a half dozen chickens or so, which were too few to produce sufficient eggs or meat for family consumption, whereas the products of a larger flock, the care of which would have taken no more time, would have been a real contribution to the food supply. Digitized by Google CONCLUSIONS 77 Need of improvement in the quality of the livestock owned was also seen, particularly in areas where practically all of the feed for cows had to be purchased. There were as many owners of cows producing only 1,000 quarts of milk a year who spent $75 to $150 for feed as there were owners whose cows gave 3,000 or 4,000 quarts. There is apparent need for stimulating the interest of young people in sharing the work on part-time fanns. As has been pointed out earlier,' many young people between 16 and 24 years of age did not help in part-time farm work, although 29 percent of them were neither employed nor in school. An adaptation of 4-H Clubs for young members of part-time farm households might rouse their interest. Such a program would not have to meet the prejudice, common among some classes of southerners, against girls and women working in the field. There were some instances in all areas of girls 14 to 20 years of age helping in the gardens, and in commercial part-time farm families, they helped in the fields. It will be remembered that more than twothirds of the wives helped with the farming enterprise. Since the amount of interest and energy spent on part-time fanns in all areas is considerable, the provision of educational direction would markedly increase the returns from the various enterprises. A GOVERNMENTAL PART-TIME FARMING PROGRAM The recent spread of part-time farming throughout the Southeast and the increasing interest of industrial workers in this activity as a means of supplementing their wages have prepared the way for the public encouragement of part-time farming. The fact that shorter hours than formerly prevailed now exist in all of the major industries of the country, allowing workers adequate time to tend a part-time farm, suggests the present as the psychological time in which to inaugurate a program of assistance for those who have already undertaken parttime farming and for those who have both the supplementary income and personal characteristics which are basic to successful farming. Workers today are in the process of adjusting their habits to the additional leisure that shorter hours have given them. In a few years, they may have developed activities to absorb this margin of time. If they have not already undertaken part-time farming, they may find it as difficult then to add part-time farming to a 40- or 44-hour week as they formerly did to a 50- or 56-hour week. The majority of industries have maintained the shortened work schedules initiated by the N. R. A., and it is generally believed that most industries will not resume the long hours of predepression years. An added argument for launching a public part-time farming program at the present time is that people throughout the country are familiar with a variety of governmental activities, and would be apt 'Seep. 33. Digitized by Google 78 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST to receive an educational part-time farming program sponsored by the Government with more understanding and cooperation than they formerly would have given to it. Establishment of credit that would enable industrial workers to acquire land for farming would be the first essential in any governmental program directed either toward setting up new part-time farming enterprises or toward enabling existing farmers to expand their activities. Part-time farmers in either category would need aid in order to purchase work stock and farm equipment. Instruction of part-time farmers in modem farming practices and, in many cases, actual supervision of the enterprises would be needed to enable farmers to make the most of their farming enterprises a.nd so justify the expenditures of time, money, and effort. Within the limits prescribed for part-time farming by specific geographic and industrial conditions, this aid could be supplied by existent Federal agencies, which have the facilities for putting such a program into effect. The Farm Credit Administration and the Federal Housing Administration could, under certain circumstances, provide credit to individual part-time farmers. The Resettlement Administration could furnish valuable advice and experience, aa well as make loans to finance the purchase of land or equipment. Agencies now concerned with families on relief could assist in the necessary field work and supervision. Results of the survey suggest that any program for the improvement of existing part-time farms should have as its first goal the restoration of the individual families to the highest standard of living which they have enjoyed, rather than their establishment on some level recognized by scientific social work as a desirable standard. The practical common sense of this observation will be apparent to all, especially as applied to the region surveyed, and indeed to the entire South. Because of the exceptionally low standard of living in southern rural districts, it would be a temptation to establish for a few families a high standard of living which others could not attain, and which even the experimental families would not be prepared, economically or psychologically, to maintain. Digitized by Google Part II Part-Time Farming in the Southeast 79 Digitized by Google • Digitized by Google INTRODUCTION THE FOLLOWING sections give somewhat detailed accounts\ of the basic industries of the subregions surveyed and analyze in detail the farming activities, industrial employment, and social activities of the part-time farmers and their nonfarming neighbors. The major part of the income of part-time farm families is earned by work off the farm. The success of part-time farming, therefore, and the possibilities for future development of combinations offarming and industrial employment depend to a considerable extent on the probable future trends of employment in industry, as well as on the amount of industrial employment which will be available to them. Therefore, production methods and organization, trends in production, wage rates, types of labor required, and other features of the principal industries of a region must be studied before an adequate appraisal of the possibilities of part-time farming can be made. 81 Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Chapter I THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION OF ALABAMA, GEORGIA, AND SOUTH CAROLINA GENERAL FEATURES OF THE SUBREGION THE COTTON Textile Subregion of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina is located generally in the Piedmont Area of these States 1 but does not coincide exactly with it (figure 2, page XXIV). It includes roughly 85 percent of the textile industry of these States, and has no other single industry approaching textiles in importance (table 81). This subregion and the 10 counties surrounding Birmingham are the 2 important industrial areas of the Southeast. The textile industry is spread unevenly throughout the subregion, and is located mostly in the smaller towns and on the outskirts of large cities. This decentralization of the industry is made possible by the fact that most of the subregion is well supplied with railroads, roads, and electric power. There is a wide variation from county to county in amount of industry, northwestern South Carolina, particularly Spartanburg, Greenville, and Anderson Counties, being the area of greatest concentration. The Piedmont Region of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama is, next to the Mississippi Delta, the most intensive cotton-farming area in the country. But whereas the latter area developed large plantations based first on slavery and later on the tenant system, with all the attendant evils of absentee landlordism and bad agricultural practices, the upper or northern portion of the 1 Atlanta, the largest urban center in the Southeast, is quite different industrially from the rest of this subregion. Likewise the agriculture of nearby counties, because of the metropolitan influence, is quite different from that of the rest of the Piedmont Region. Hence, the findings of this report do not apply to the Atlanta Area. 83 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 8.f Piedmont developed an agriculture characterized by small familysized farms with white owner operators. This system has been conducive to diversified farming and maintenance of soil resources in a much more productive state.2 Attention will be directed to the agriculture of this portion of the Piedmont, since it is in the northern Piedmont that most of the textile industry is located. Table 87.-Distribution of Persons, 10 Years Old and Over, Gainfully Occupied in the Textile Subregion, 1930 Cities or 25,000 Total to 100,000 Atlanta population 1 Rural areas and cities or 18911 than 25,000 population Industry Number Per• cent Num• ber Per• cant Num• ber Per• cent Number Per• cant --- ---- -- ---- --- -2711,010 270,366 1,981,535 - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - = Total galntul)y employed.. 1,039,150 100.0 130, lM 100.0 128,212 100.0 780,'IM 100.0 --- - -- Agriculture .......•...•.......... 380,108 36.6 0.5 1,811 1. 4 377,613 684 41!.4 Total population ••..•..... 2,530,911 Bervlce Industries ..•. _. __ .. __ .. __ Manufacturing and allied Industries ..................•........ Total manufacturing and allied Industries ......••. Forest3: and fishing .....••.•.... Extract on or minerals •......•. _. Building .•••..............•••... Chemical and allied ... _....•...• Clay, glass, and stone ........... Clothing .•......••.... _. __ .... _. Food and allied .........•....... Automobile factories and repair shops .•..•. -······---.-···-···· Blast furnaces and steel rolling mills ..••••••.................. Other Iron and steel. _______ --•-_ Saw and plani':f mills._ .. ___ . ___ Other wood an furniture ... ____ Paper, printing, and allied ...... Cotton mills.. •••.•.•••• _._ .. __ ._ Knitting mills ..•. _____ ..... _____ Other textile ..... ··-- ......... __ Independent hand trades •• ______ Other manufacturing_ ....•.. ____ 37i, 107 38.3 9Z, 753 71.3 87,625 GB. 4 1116, 7211 ~2 281,935 27. 1 36,717 28.2 38, 776 30.2 206. 442 26. 4 281,935 100.0 36,717 100.0 . 38, 7i6 100.0 206. 442 100.0 78 8ll3 0.' 1. & 8. 4 2. 0 1.5 --- - -- -- -- -- ---- - -986- - 0.3 -- 15 32,626 8,319 4,589 6,960 9,6113 1.2 11. 4 3.0 1.6 2. 5 3.4 57 8,040 2, 146 567 1,940 3,028 0.2 21.9 5.8 1.5 5.3 8.3 7,253 2,112 872 1,0IH 2, 1173 0.2 0. 7 18. 7 5. 5 2. 2 2. 8 7. 7 7,513 2. 7 . 2,281 G. 2 1, 2118 3.3 3,505 11.6 321 1,379 2,903 2,360 122 "82 I, 475 6, OU6 0.9 3.8 7.9 8.4 0.3 l. 3 4.0 10. 6 3. 484 IOI! 10,691 10,875 5,081 6,264 133,290 5,849 8,625 6, 9()5 ~. 189 3.8 3.9 1.8 2.2 -i7.3 2.1 3.1 2.5 7.2 264 JO 2,409 891 741 1,161 11,357 490 7"6 1,322 3, 738 . G. 2 2.3 1.9 3.0 29.3 l. 3 I.II 8.4 11.8 3. Ul3 17,333 4, OGl 3,150 3,1121) 3, 5112 1.9 1.7 3,GM 1.9 116 0. l 2. 3 .. 7 1.4 1.1 58. 0 2. 5 3. G 2. 0 5. 0 4. m 11,663 2,961 2, 190 1111, 573 5,237 7,397 4,108 10,355 • Less than 0.06 percent. ' Spartanburg, Greenville, and Columbia, South Carolina; Augusta and Columbus, Georgia; Montgomery, Alabama. Source: Fi/lufllA Cemiu of lhe United St4tu: 198(), Population Vol. Ill. The northern Piedmont is about 300 miles long and 70 miles wide (figure 3, page XXVI). The surface of this area is rolling to hilly with sandy loam soils on the smoother lands and clay loam soils on the slopes whm·e erosion has taken place. Both types of soils are fairly productive where the slope is not too steep. 8 In 1930, 71 percent of the total land area in the northern Piedmont Region was in farms, and of the land in farms 48 percent was cropland. 2 Hartman, W. A. and Woot.en, H. H., Georgia Land Use Problems, Bulletin 191, Georgia Experiment Station, 1935, pp. 48-49. 1 Yearbook of Agriculture: 1932, U.S. Department of Agriculture, pp. 916-919. Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 85 Seven-eighths of all farms were classified as cotton farms, and twothirds of the farm income was derived from the cotton crop.' Small farms predominated and part-time farms were common. There were 2,752 part-time farms in the area in 1929, according to the census classification 6 (figure 1, page XXI). The population of the Cotton Textile Subregion is predominantly white. Negroes constituted 32.4 percent of the total population in 1930. The urban population averaged 32 percent Negro, the ruralnonfarm population about 20.5 percent Negro, and the rural-farm population about 40 percent Negro. The relatively small number of Negroes in the rural-nonfarm population reflected the limited employment of Negroes in cotton mills, which are located mostly in rural areas. In 1930, 27 percent of the farms in the northern Piedmont were operated by Negroes. Prior to 1930, there was a considerable migration from rural areas to the larger cities and textile centers, these showing substantial increases in population between 1920 and 1930 while most of the rural counties either lost population or remained stationary. Countie1 Covered In Field Survey Wide variations among textile mills affect conditions of part-time farming so greatly that no one area properly represents the situation. Therefore, field surveys were conducted in two areas selected to illustrate marked contrasts: Greenville County, South Carolina, and Carroll County, Georgia. In Greenville County a large number of mills are clustered around a city, the combination making for dense population, opportunity for employment in occupations outside the predominating industry, and readily available urban conveniences and social advantages. Several of the mills make fine fabrics and pay wages higher than the average in the industry. In Carroll County, on the other hand, there are fewer mills and these are scattered in small villages or rural areas. They make chiefly coarse goods and pay wages lower than the average for the industry. In other respects, the counties are quite similar. Both had considerable part-time farming in 1930; both are in predominantly cottongrowing areas, 29 percent of all farm land in Carroll County and 26 percent of the farm land in Greenville County being in cotton. Cotton acreage in both counties has increased in recent years. Size of farms, • These data for the northern Piedmont Area were calculated from 1930 Census of Agriculture reports. Five counties surrounding Atlanta were omitted. 6 Part-time farms included all farms whose operators worked 150 days or more at jobs not connected with the farm and whose products did not exceed $750. See Methodological Note (Appendix C) for definition of part-time farm used as basis of sample in this survey. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 86 cotton yields, and value of products per farm were about the same, though value of farm lands and buildings per farm averaged 68 percent higher in Greenville County-probably a reflection in land values of denser population. The population of Greenville County was 117,000 in 1930, while that of the city of Greenville and its metropolitan area was 64,000. The population of Carroll County was only 34,000 and that of the largest town, Carrollton, was only 6,000. In both counties in 1933, over 90 percent of the wage earners in manufacturing and of the wages collected came from the textile group: in Greenville, mostly from cotton mills; in Carroll, about half from cotton mills and a little less than half from knitting mills. THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY Growth and Distribution In the South In any consideration of the possibilities of part-time farming in the East.em Cotton Belt, the manner in which such activities can be and are combined with employment in the textile industry is of primary importance. The oldest and most conspicuous industry in the South, the cotton textile industry, or "cotton goods" industry, employs the greatest number of workers of any single industry, and in South Carolina it employs more workers than all other industries combined. Although there is considerable concentration of textile mills in the southern Piedmont Region of North Carolina and in northwestern South Carolina, the industry is one of the most widely scattered of any of the great factory industries. Figure 4 shows the distribution of cotton spindles in the three States of $e area under consideration. Not only is the industry scattered among more than 120 counties, but often it is found in several communities of the individual counties. The 345 cotton manufacturing establishments in these 3 States in 1933 a were located in some 240 cities, towns, and villages. 7 Only 10 percent of the cotton millworkers in the Textile Subregion designated in figure 2 lived in cities having a population in excess of 25,000. Thus a great majority of the workers are within reach of farm lands. The growth of the industry was founded on an immense supply of cheap labor, cheap power, and relatively low taxation. The lastnamed factor has ceased to be important, but the first remains an advantage of no mean proportions. By the end of the World War, the industry in the Southeast had almost caught up with that in the other great textile area, New England, in volume of output and in Biennial Cernius of Afanufactures: 1933, p. 152. Davidson's Textile Blue Book, 1934. (This represents data collected in early 1934 and so is comparable with the Biennial Cemu.s of Manufacturu covering 1933.) 6 7 Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION importance. The growth of the cotton goods manufacturing industry during the l 920's in the South and its decline in New England were accompanied by a shift or migration southward, and by 1933 the South had nearly twice as many spindles in place and more than twice as many active spindles as New England. The South, predominating in the coarse goods industry, used three and one-half times as much cotton as New England in that year. F11.4- NUMBER OF COTTON SPINDLES IN PLACE SPINDLES □ NON[ ffWVI TMN 100,000 ~ llID 100,000 TO 100,000 - 100,000 TO 300,000 - !00,000 ~ ..Ofl [ C0H5UMP'flOM. Y[AJI. 1133-1134, tor Chfthll • 1111100.000 IPlft41,u • - "-OAvtOeOtfS ILUI: IOC)tl.lHJ,..,~ ... . _ . _ 1110000- ,, ....... .. ~ National Problems of the Industry Throughout most of the 1920's the industry, or some branch of it, suffered from difficulties arising from excess capacity. Since it is a highly decentralized industry, made up of many small independent units and linked to a complicated selling system, competition and price cutting became major ills. So severe did they become that in 1926 8 the industry in self-defense established the Cotton Textile Institute, which has endeavored to work out methods of voluntary control of production. Indifferent success of this and several other such cooperative efforts made the leaders of the textile industry welcome the N. R. A. The cotton textile industry was the first to present a code. Its code, which was adopted and made effective July 17, 1933, provided for a maximum 40-hour week and limited machine hours to two 40-hour shifts. The minimum wage was set at $12 per week for the South and $13 per week for the North, with specified exemptions for learners, and 8 Address of the Hon. Henry F. Lippitt, Textile World, October 23, 1926, p. 27. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 88 later for outside employees, and with provisions for wage differentials based on skill. The N. R. A. set a differential in the minimum wage rate in the North and South, principally to offset the low rents charged in southern company villages.D Employment of any minor less than 16 years of age was prohibited. The effect of the code was to increase the wage bill of the industry by approximately 65 percent, 10 the greatest increases in rates being in the lower paid brackets, and to spread payment to a greater number of employees. In Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina, the number of wage earners in the industry in 1933 was above the number in 1929, and substantially above that in 1931 (table 82). Table 82.-Wage Earners in State 1921 the Cotton Goods Industry, 1921-1933 1923 1925 1927 1929 --- --United States total.. _____ 412,058 471, li03 445, 184 467,596 424. 916 --------------164,074 127,041 185, 1141 1114. 891 154,634 -----------Massachusetts. __ . _______ ... ___ 5NewEngland States ____ Rhode Island __________________ New Hampshire. ______________ Connecticut. _____ . __ ._._ .... ___ Maine __________________________ 100, 3.17 1931 329,962 379,445 90,127 90,596 46,990 13,089 10. 663 10,IM 9,220 45,418 87,709 74,593 57. 238 28, 762 96, 182 29,276 14, 745 12,020 11,&ol 90,875 22, 733 14, 279 13,264 113, 707 33,993 18,516 14,865 13,810 14, 722 12, r,39 10.195 70,788 21,833 13,769 10, 789 19,862 66,316 51,509 35,237 18,275 7,395 81,041 62,479 47,479 20,325 7, 88.3 84,139 66. 378 48,612 21, fi07 8,03.5 95, 786 75,069 56,607 24,825 8,426 91,844 71,731 65,368 27,724 7,672 73, ro; 47,385 57,405 52,339 62,249 43,036 31, 171 29,328 1933 --- --- 26,m 13.077 10,988 9,1',f,7 11.446 ------------------ = 178, 732 260, 713 208,664 228,771 219,207 2-"4, 839 256,838 -----Carolina ________________ 6 southern States _________ North South Carolina _________________ Oeor~ia. _____ ... ___ .... __ .... __ Alabama _____ .. ___ ...... ____ . __ Virginia _________ . ____ ... ____ . __ All other States __________ w,m 44,102 24,097 7,180 ------------------ = 8, 5.36 32,011 • Includes 3 establishments in Vermont, 16 In Malne. Source: UnUed Statu Ctn8U.T of Manufacturu: IIJtJ-195:J. Since the N. R. A. was declared unconstitutional, May 27, 1935, evidence indicates that a majority of the cotton goods manufacturers have continued to adhere to the code hour and wage provisions.11 Some of the smaller mills have not done this, but these make up only a relatively small part of the industry. Many of the mill executives interviewed during the summer of 1935 thought it would be possible to maintain N. R. A. standards indefinitely, but others feared that the pressure of competition would gradually force a decrease in wage rates and an increase in hours. Even as late as the summer of 1936, N. R. A. Code/or the CoUon Textile Industry, Letter of Transmittal. Wage Rates and Weekly Earnings in the Cotton Goods Industry from July 1933 to August 1934, Mimeographed Report, 2d edition with minor corrections, Bureau of Labor Statistics, p. 12. 11 From statements of trade association and mill executives (July 1935). See also Cotton Textile Industry, 74th Congress, Senate Document 126, p. 127; and Bowden, Witt, "Hours and Earnings Before and After the N. R. A.," Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 44, No. I, January 1937 pp. 13-36. 9 10 Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXnLE SUBREGION 89 the Cotton Textile Institute was confident of holding the majority of the mills in line for the principal gains of the N. R. A. Competln9 Matwlals Wool, linen, silk, and jute have always competed with cotton. The recent increase in the use of paper for containers, towels, napkins, and handkerchiefs has cut into important markets for cotton products. The increased use of rayon for clothing and household furnishings in the last decade also has decreased the market for fairly high-grade cotton fabrics. The use of cotton cloth as a tensile element in asphalt-surfaced, sand, or gravel roads has raised hopes for the opening of a large new outlet, provided, of course, that its use proves economical. Exports and Imports For generations, the export trade has been a minor but highly valued outlet for cotton goods. During the 1920's, exports of cotton cloth amounted to more than half a billion square yards a year, going chiefly to the Philippines, Cuba, Central America, and Canada. This trade has fallen off rapidly, and in 1934 it amounted to only 223 million square yards, or one-half of the previous amount. Exports to the Philippines dropped sharply. Imports, of which there were over 218 million square yards in 1923, dropped to 109 million in 1925 and to 40 million in 1934.12 The prime factor in these changes in international trade in textiles is the recent growth of the industry in the Orient. From 1926 to 1934, the index number for spindles dropped 18 percent in the United States and 19 percent in Great Britain, while in Japan the index number increased 63 percent, in China 38 percent, and in India 13 percent. 13 The Orient now supplies a large part of its own needs, and Japan has become an exporter of such proportions as to displace the United States, first in China, and more recently in the Philippines. Most recently Japan has begun to figure prominently in exports to the United States itself. Prior to 1931, the United Kingdom supplied the bulk of cotton cloths imported into this country, and Switzerland was the leading source in the period 1931-1934. Late in 1934, the imports from Japan became important, and that country was the principal source of imports in 1935 and in early 1936. The cotton cloth imported from Japan is competing with domestic nainsooks and muslins manufactured in southern mills. The activity of the Japanese textile industry stands as a threat to this country's export rather than to its domestic trade, however, since the competition of imports from Japan is confined to 12 11 Cotton Textile Industry, op. cit., p. 99. Idem, p. 43. 1500(ll 0-:J7-9 Digitized by Google 90 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST only part of the textile field-that of print cloth-and since imports of countable cotton cloth from Japan were equivalent to only one-half of 1 percent of the total yardage of domestic production in 1935. Starting June 20, 1936, further tariff protection was provided the domestic industry by new rates of duty on about 90 percent of the cotton cloth imported from Japan.H The proclaimed duties represent an increase over the existing duties of about 42 percent for both bleached cloth and printed, dyed, or colored cloth. Outlook for Employment In view of the situation as discussed above, it seems probable that the general trend of employment in the industry will be downward for some time to come. The perfecting of textile machinery has been so slow a process that technical improvements have not recently made striking changes in the amount of labor required. However, new labor-saving machines now in the experimental stage, such as the long-draft roving frame, eventually will displace several machines now being used. In addition, the probable retirement of obsolete plants, accompanied by increased efficiency in others, will mean less labor per unit of output even though an increase in demand may arise. During the last decade, the application of scientific management principles to labor in the interest of economy and efficiency has resulted in considerable reduction of the labor force and rather radical reduction in the more skilled of the machine operations, such as weaving. It is probable, however, that the principal impact of this movement reached its crest during the hard times in textiles in the late 1920's or during the depression itself. With prospects of a continued low or further declining foreign trade and increasing competition with cotton substitutes, employment in the cotton textile industry faces a still further set-back in the possible ,vholesale breakdown of the hour-reduction agreements achieved under the N. R. A. and continued by voluntary action. With longer hours, fewer workers can produce the necessary amount of goods. On the other hand, textiles other than cotton goods are increasing in the South. The average number of workers in the knit goods industry in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina totaled 11,571 in 1933 in comparison with 2,607 in 1929. 16 Also, a recent development in the South of mills for the finishing and dyeing of textiles probably will lead to some increase in employment. The average number of wage earners in the dyeing and finishing plants in South Carolina, where the southern development is u United States Tariff Commission, Public Information Release, May 21, 1936. Biennial Cen.ms of Manufactures: 1933, p. 168; and United Statu Cemu., of Manufactures: 1929, Vol. II, p. 300. 16 Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTIU SUBREGION 91 chiefly centered, was 4,561 for 1933, an increase of 135 percent over 1929.10 Labor The labor force of the southern mills ha.s been drawn from the native-born white stock of the farms of the South, so that large numbers of the workers have a farm background. Although there are now many second-generation millworkers, many of these also have had some farm experience. Negroes are employed only as sweepers and outside helpers and make up less than 7 percent of the total mill force on the average. The percentage of females among the employees varies from mill to mill but averages about 35 percent in the South. Most tasks in textile mills require manual dexterity rather than physical strength. About 75 percent of the employees are classified as semiskilled, 15 percent as unskilled, with only a small group of mechanics and repairmen classified as skilled. 17 The period of training varies from a few weeks to 6 months or more. New workers are recruited from the nearby farms or mountain districts. Child labor, long a matter for debate and criticism, has been gradually disappearing under improved State laws. The N. R. A. established 16 years as the minimum age for employment, but for several years prior to adoption of the code, it had been illegal to employ any child under 14 years of age in the cotton mills. 18 Houn and Wases Prior to the adoption of the N. R. A. code, the standard working week varied from 55 to 60 hours. 19 Many of the mills operated two shifts at these hours before the N. R. A. limited them to two shifts of 40 hours. Curtailment is effected sometimes by reducing numbers but more commonly by reducing the hours per week, both shifts being retained. Pay is on a piece-work basis, except for a few workers, such as loom fixers and cleaners, whose output cannot be directly measured. Full-time wages in 1928 in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina averaged about $10 a week for spoolers, $12 for spinners, $14 to $16 for doffers and speeder tenders, and about $16 to $17 for weavers (table 83). Rates of pay declined from these figures between 1928 and 1933. Then, with the adoption of the N. R. A. code, hourly 18 Biennial Census of Manufactures: 1988, p. 140; and United States Census of Manufactures: 1929, Vol. II, p. 271. 17 See appendix table 30 for occupational distribution of sample. 18 Ala.bama-Code of 1923, section 3494; Georgia-Code of 1926, Civil, section 3149 (1); South Carolina-Code of Laws 1922, Vol. 2, Criminal, chapter 7, section 413. See also, Child Labor Facts and Figures, Publication No. 197, U. S. Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, pp. 56-57. 19 Wages and Hours of Labor in Cotton-Goods Manufacturing, 1910 to 1928, Bulletin 492, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARM/HG IH THE SOUTHEAST 9t earnings rose sharply, ahnost doubling in many occupations (table 84). On the basis of a 40-hour week, the weekly earnings of the above series of occupations in 1934 were approximately $13.40 for spoolers, $12.80 Table 83.-Earnin9s in Selected Occupations in Cotton Mills, in Alabama, Geor9ia, and South Carolina, by Sex, 1928 Alabama Occupation and sex Per hour Per week lull time Sou th Carolina Georgia Per week actual time Per hour Per week lull time Per week actual Per week lull time Per hour time Per week actual time - - - - - - - - - --- --- --- - - - --Loom 0xers, male ...•...•.•. $0. 395 Card grinders, male ......... 0.365 Warp-tying machine ten• ders, male .........••.•... 0.348 machine ten• Drawin~·in ders, male ________________ 0. 318 'l\teavers, IDBle ______________ o. 311 Weavers, female ••••••.••... 0. 299 Blubber tenders, male .•....• o. 286 Spe,eder tenders, male ....••• o. 276 Speeder tenders, female .•... 0. 2.'i!! Sia.sher tenders, male .•••••• 0.286 Dotfers, male ...........•••. o. 264 Warper tenders, female ..••. 0.21l9 Drawers·in·bund, female ...• o. 216 Card tenders and strippers, male .....•••••••••........ 0.234 Drawing· frame tenders, male ..•...•.•••••......... 0.235 Drawing• frame tenders, female .•.................. o. 195 Spinners (lrame), lemale •... o. 215 Picker tenders, male ........ 0.213 Creelers, female •.........•.. 0.205 Spooler tenders, female ..... 0. 183 Trimmers and inspectors, female ..•••••••..•.•....•. 0. )80 $21.30 19. 72 $18. 94 18. 32 $0. 377 0.359 $20. 74 19. 75 $16. 44 16.87 0.336 18.85 18.49 0.3M 19.47 15.86 0.341 0. 309 0.292 0.317 0.307 0.294 0.304 0.282 0.251 0.284 19. 40 17. 33 16.35 17. 82 17. 16 16. 55 17. 12 15. 88 14.01 15.68 19.08 13. 41 !l. 97 13. 99 12. 79 12. 87 15. 87 12. 35 II. 59 14. 01 0.351 0.313 0.277 0. 311 0.296 0. 274 0. 286 0.270 0. 287 0. 266 19.31 15. 24 17. 11 16. 28 15. 07 15. 73 14. 85 15. 79 14.63 16. 50 11. 79 10. 09 11.(!1 10. 48 10.30 12.02 9. 63 11. 40 9.31 0.248 14.01 10.25 0.262 14. 41 11.34 12. 93 8.53 o. 245 13.82 9. 91 0.256 14. 08 11.40 10. 73 11.83 II. 72 11. 28 10.07 7.80 8.60 8. 52 8. 26 7. 53 0. 208 0. 222 0. 218 o. 201 0.210 11.63 12. 45 12.36 11.30 11.68 8. 26 9.09 10.00 8.94 9.29 0. 215 11.83 7.09 0. 210 0.212 0. 186 11. 5.~ 11. 66 10. 23 7. TI! i. 51 6.H 9.90 7. 88 0. 202 II. 31 9. 61 0.188 10.34 7. 78 $19.82 17.60 $0. 379 0.349 19.14 17.88 17. 49 17. II 16. 45 15. 73 15.18 14.19 15. 73 14. 52 14. 80 11. 88 15. 45 13. 50 12.39 11. 74 10. 94 10.31 12. 50 10. 30 11.35 9.30 12. 87 $21. 73 20.08 17. 22 s. 98 - Source: Waqu and Hour, of Labor i·n Cotton•Gooda Manufact11ring, 1910 to 1918, Bulletin 492, United States Bureau or Labor Statistics. Table 84.-Avera9e Hourly Earnin9s in Selected Occupations in Southern Cotton-Textile Mills, by Sex, 1933-34 A versge hourly earnings Occupation and sex July 1933 Loom fixers, male ____________________________________________ _ l'ard ~rinders, male .•........ ·-··-··············-··••····•·•·· Warp-tying machine tenders, male .... ········-··-········· .. . .••••••••..•... ·-·-·····-··-. ________ .. ·-······ .........._. Weavers, .• _______________________ . _________ W esvers, male female Blubber tenders, male ....••..•. ·-·····-·--··---··--- ......... . Speeder tenders, male .. -·-·····•·•··.·--·--···-·--·--····--··. Speeder tenders, female •••••••.•.......... _.·-- ........... ___ . Dotlers, male ....... ·-···············-···-··-·-··-····-··· ... . Warper tenders, female_-···--····-··--···-·· .. ···--····-····. Drttwers--in-hand, female. _____________________________ . ______ _ Card tenders aod strippers, male .... _________________________ _ Drawing-frame tenders, male. ____________________________ . __ _ Drawing-frame tenders, female _______________________________ _ Spinners (lrame), female.- .. ·····•-·············· ····-······· Picker terulers, male ... ·-·········-········•··········--·-· ... Creelers, lemale....... -··-·-···················-·-··-······•·· Spooler tenders, female ..... -·.·-········ ......... ·-·· ....... . • Trimmers and inspectors, renUt.le _____________________________ _ $0. 324 0.27:I 0.255 0. 235 0. 215 0.213 0. 215 0.196 0.195 0.194 0. 232 0.194 0.191 0. 180 0.161 0.173 0. 160 0.162 0. 160 August 1933 August 1934 $0. 499 0.440 0.424 0.395 o. 384 0. 372 0. 365 0. 346 0. 344 0.340 0.383 0. 324 0.328 0. 315 0.322 0.309 0.315 0. 328 o. 309 $0. 507 0. 443 0.436 0.-IOI 0. 382 o. 374 o. 3li8 0. ;153 0.349 0.333 0. 388 0.3:!.~ 0.338 0.309 o. 321 0. 313 0. ;JIO 0. 3.14 0.310 Source: Hinrichs, A. F., "Wage Rates and Weekly Earnings in the Cotton-Textile Industry, 1933-34," Alonthlv Labor Revi<w, March rn35, p. 615. Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 93 for spinners, $14 to $15 for doffers and speeder tenders, and $16 for weavers. Semonal Variation In Employment While some mills experience a dull season in summer, thus allowing more time for gardening, most of the variations in employment are irregular in response to market conditions. There is very little demand for regular seasonal part-time employment in cotton mills. Trained workers among the families in the villages or vicinity, or floating labor, have been sufficient in recent years to take ca.re of periods of increased activity. The MIii VIiias• No discussion of incomes of cotton millworkers would be complete without some consideration of the services and facilities furnished them in the company-owned mill villages. These vary widely from mill to mill and what is furnished depends on the financial resources of the individual mill as well as on the sense of social responsibility and the ability of its management. The villages vary from a collection of shacks, badly in need of repair and with only the most primitive sanitary facilities, to well maintained homes with electric lights, water, sewerage, and gardens in a community with good schools, medical care, and recreational facilities. 20 Many company houses have additional land for farming activities, pasturage for cows, and pens for hogs. The rental charged is most frequently 25 cents per room per week, the house ranging from three to six rooms. A recent study of 50 southern mill villages 21 showed the average rental to be 33 cents per room per week, including lights and water. The number of workers living in mill villages was 69.5 percent of the total number employed. The low rents constitute an addition to the real income not shared by the 30 percent who do not live in company houses. Comparable housing by home ownership costs more than these rentals, and rents from private landlords are substantially higher. In addition, it is quite customary for the company to charge no rent when a mill is temporarily shut down. 22 The mill villages were at first essential because mills were erected in isolated communities or on the outskirts of towns. Now the workers 20 Welfare Work in Mill Villages by Harriet L. Herring, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1929, is a comprehensive study of North Carolina. mill villages. The general features of the picture presented would apply in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina as well. 11 From an address by President William D. Anderson before the American Cotton Manufacturers Association, April 25, 1935, Pamphlet, issued by Ralph E. Loper and Company. 11 This practice is enforced by law in South Carolina. South Carolina Acts of 19SS, Act No. 269. Digitized by Google 94 PART-nME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST have come to expect the company to provide them with houses at the customary low rentals. Employers, on the other hand, have in general accepted the extra housing cost as a pa.rt of their labor costs and as a price to pay for their ability to control the community. In recent years this control, exercised in strikes by way of evictions, has been the subject of considerable criticism. A provision was inserted in the N. R. A. code for the industry setting up an agency "to consider the question of plans for eventual employeeownership of homes in mill villages.'' After preliminary investigation, this provision was abandoned in view of the force of tradition, the habits of both employers and employees, and the undeniable social and economic difficulties of such a change. FARMING ACTIVITIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS Typa of Part-Time Fannm The part-time farmers included in the field survey in both counties (190 farmers in Greenville and 103 in Carroll) were chiefly operators of small acreages on which products were grown primarily for home use. There were a few cases with sufficient land and a large enough volume of sales to be considered commercial or semicommercial farmers. These were essentially different from the large group with only an acre or two of land, a small garden, a cow, a few chickens, and a pig. They usually were located in the open country, where they had considerable land, machinery, and work stock, and grew corn, cotton, or other field crops. They carried on at least one distinctly commercial farm enterprise, and in many cases they had been until recently fulltime farmers. The noncommercial group, however, was numerically of much greater importance in these counties than was the commercial group, and most of the discussion will be devoted to it, with occasional references to the other group for purposes of comparison. Since the population of the Cotton Textile Subregion is predominantly white, and opportunities for the employment of Negroes in industry limited, the field study for this subregion included only whites. Location of Part-Tim• Farms The location of the part-time farms included in the field enumeration is shown in figures 5 and 6. Grouped around the towns and cities, the majority of these farmers lived near enough to their places of employment so that transportation was not an important item. This was particularly true of the noncommercial group. In Greenville County 67 percent and in Carroll County 93 percent of this group lived less than 1%miles from their work. Those few who were not within walking distance of their places of employment usually drove their own cars. Frequently two or more persons rode together to reduce transportation costs. It should be noted in this connection Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 95 F11. 5-LOCATION OF PART-TIME FARMS INCWOEO IN FIELD SURVEY GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA JI' I ____,_II ______ _ I I I I OIIEEIMU.t PARIS COUNTY Al'i, : • LEGEND 0 U S. HIGHWAYS 0 STATE HIGHWAYS • MRT-TIME FARMS - I i • • I I .... : . . RAILROADS O I L.J 4 I ICM.£ f1F 1111.LS • TWtl MAI' INOWI TNI IIIOUPtNI o, THC MltT•TIIIC ,.,.._ TMI TU.TILi IIIU. VILLMID 0, UUJt. IMIJMUI, ANO . _, _,. TAY\DM wmt AN OCCAIIOML OIIII IN THI IUflllOUNOIN Ol'IN that about one-third of the families surveyed in Greenville County and two-thirds of those in Carroll County lived in textile mill villages.• F11.6-LOCATION OF PART-TIME FARMS INCWOEO IN FIELD SURVEY CARROLL COUNTY, GEORGIA TMII IMP 1MOW1 TN( POU,_. Oil MIIIT• TIii( ,,... . • TlC TUTU •ILL VIU.AOII .... 0, CA'tftOUTON, YIU.A lhGA,ANO ........ ANO tit THI To,ntl o, 90900N MO ••TH• L!HNO 0 Q u, .......,, ITATI ......,, ,011••· ., ........ ICM.( 0, lflLll 11 Associated with these differences in location were certain social and economic differences. Where these were significant, the data were analyzed on a county rather than on a subregion basis. Digitized by Google 96 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST In the Carrollton mill village, there were large areas of tillable land directly back of the mill houses and conveniently located pasturage for cows. Hence, a large majority of this mill's employees were parttime farmers. In Banning, the land was difficult to work because of the steep slopes and poor soil, and in Fullerville there was a lack of land suitable for gardens near the workers' homes. Therefore, there were only a few part-time farmers working in these two mills. Fann Pracluctlon Almost four-fifths of the noncommercial part-time farmers surveyed had less than 2½ acres of cropland (appendix table 6), and the average amount was 1½ acres. Of the types of food produced-vegetables, dairy products, poultry products, and pork-nearly one-third of the noncommercial and over two-thirds of the commercial farmers reported all four (appendix table 12). Figure 7 shows graphically the proportion of noncommercial farmers in each county with varying sizes of the several farm production enterprises. Gardens All of the farms surveyed had vegetable gardens, except for 7 in nonmill villages and 13 in mill villages in Greenville County, where the only farming operation was keeping a cow (appendix table 11 ). Both Greenville and Carroll Counties have an average frost-free growing season of about 7 months, which means that there are about 5 months in which the less hardy vegetables may be consumed fre.sh from the garden. The hardy root crops and leafy vegetables may be available during the colder months. In this subregion, there was an average of 7½ months when some fresh vegetable or fruit was consumed on part-time farms {appendix table 14). In Carroll County two-thirds of the gardens supplied three or more fresh vegetables over a period of 4 or 5 months, and about one-fourth of them for 6 or 7 months. Only one garden supplied three or more vegetables for more than 7 months. In Greenville County more variation was reported in the length of the garden season. It varied from 2 to 8 months for 82 percent of the cases, with five gardens supplying three or more vegetables for 9 months, and one for 12 months (appendbc table 13). These facts suggest the possibilities for improvement of many of the gardens so that they can be made to produce over a longer period. In view of these variations, it is noteworthy that so many of the gardens made sufficient contributions to the family living to reduce the grocery bill during the 6 summer months, the estimated individual reductions ranging from $1 to $14 monthly. 2' In Greenville County 14 See Case Studies of Part-Time Farmers (Appendix A) for specific evaluation of the contribution of gardens. Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 91 ClREENVILLE COUNTY, S, C. P[IIC:[NT y ~ ~ • • ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ YU - p~,a111111111111111111111111:,:1111111111111111111m1 .. I ,oocm I -~· 11111111:·:IJl~II -~· 1111:·~llll--:::: 0 80 a OYER ~-.... ·-·· 81111111111111:·:,~IIIIIIIIIIIIBJII CARROLL COUNTY, GA. ••u -· E-dll l l l l l l l l l l l l l·l l l l l l l l l l l l l l .... I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1:·:I I I I I I I ■ .... . ."~ I -~·dlll--U 3"0-49 ~. . . -~. lllllllllll~jllllllll-i~= 0 ~ W R W ~ PERCENT ~ ro ~ ~ Fua.7- SIZE OF PRINCIPAL ENTERPRISES ON WHITE NONCOMMERCIAL PART-TIME FARMS, GREENVILLE COUNTY, S.C., AND CARROLL COUNTY, GA., 1934 AF-2411,W. P.A. Digitized by Google 98 PART-TIME FARMIHG IN THE SOUTHEAST 82 percent of the families that had gardens reported reductions, the reductions averaging $7.60 per month. In Carroll County 88 percent reported reductions, these averaging $3.75. This difference was probably not entirely the result of better gardens in Greenville County, although the Greenville gardens were somewhat larger and produced over a longer period. As will be shown later, incomes were considerably lower in Carroll County, and it is probable that expenditures for food were normally lower than in Greenville County. The above figures do not measure the entire contribution of the garden. During the garden season, the family may not only buy less groceries, but it may fare better in quality and variety of food consumed, while the canning and storing of vegetables serve to reduce the grocery bill for the winter months. In the Textile Subregion, as a whole, less than one-fifth of the parttime farm families did no canning (appendix table 16). In Carroll County all but 5 percent of the families did some canning, and the average quantity canned was 98 quarts. This included fruits as well as vegetables, since some of the families had a few apple and peach trees (appendix table 15). In Greenville County there was somewhat less canning, 26 percent of the families doing none. The average for those who did canning was 86 quarts. The more extensive canning of fresh fruit and vegetables in Carroll County may partially explain why summer grocery bills in that county were reduced less than in Greenville County. Almost all of the commercial farm families in the subregion and over one-half of the noncommercial families stored vegetables (table 29, page 20). Both sweet potatoes and Irish potatoes were frequently stored, the average amounts stored by the noncommercial part-time farmers being 12 bushels of sweet potatoes and 6 bushels of Irish potatoes (appendix table 11). Other products occasionally stored were onions, peanuts, sorghum syrup, peas, beans, apples, and peppers. Corn Field corn was grown by 88 percent of the commercial part-time farmers, average production being approximately 100 bushels. Less than 10 percent of the noncommercial part-time farmers produced corn, the average production being 21 bushels (appendix table 24). All those producing corn used on an average about 10 bushels for meal and the remainder as feed for livestock. Dairy Products The ownership of a cow was very common in this area. Practically all of the commercial and over three-fourths of the noncommercial group owned at least one cow (appendix table 11). The average production of milk per cow was over 2,400 quarts a year (appendix table Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 99 20). About 2 quarts were used fresh, the remainder being used to make butter (appendix table 21). A few part-time farmers sold milk, and about half of the noncommercial farmers who kept cows sold butter. For those selling dairy products, the average value of sales was $66 in Greenville County and $98 in Carroll County. Dairy products accounted for about three-fourths of all sales of farm products. It was customary for textile mills in this region to have a common pasture where each employee might graze his cow. These pastures were frequently overstocked and did not supply all of the roughage needed. Frequently cows were staked out along the roadsides or on vacant lots, but farmers who lived in mill villages or on part-time farms of 1 or 2 acres had to purchase most of the feed for their cows. For those who purchased all of the feed other than pasturage, the cost was usually from $60 to $75. The amount of roughage produced by many noncommercial part-time farmers was very small, averaging only about 1½ tons (appendix table 23). Pou/1,ry Products About two-thirds of the families in each county had poultry, flocks varying in size from 10 to 50 birds (appendix table 11). The consumption of home-produced eggs varied widely, the average being about 75 dozen a year, or 1½ dozen eggs per week for noncommercial farmers who had poultry (appendix table 18). For the households that had chickens, consumption of poultry amounted to about one 3-pound chicken every 2 weeks for noncommercial, and every week for commercial, part-time farm families (appendix table 19}. Pork More than three-fourths of the commercial, and over one-half of the noncommercial, part-time farmers produced pork in 1934 (appendix table 22), although some of the mill villages had restrictions against keeping pigs. Most families had only one pig. Considering this, the poundage produced, averaging 385 pounds, was comparatively high. Fuel Only 9 percent of the part-time farmers in Greenville County and 3 percent in Carroll County cut wood for fuel on their farms. This is explained by the fact that many of them lived in villages, and only 12 percent in Greenville County and 8 percent in Carroll County had woodland. Chansa In Sli:e of Farmlns Operation,, 1929-1934 The group of families under consideration had about the same size of farming operations in 1934 as in 1929. A few more families had cows, but the average number of cows had not increased. There were Digitized by Google 100 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST no significant changes in the ownership of hogs or chickens. Gardens were the same average size in both years (appendix table 5). The data do not accurately measure the change in amount of pa.rt-time farming in the region, however, since they do not include families that may have given it up during this time. Cash Recelpll and Cash Expensa In Greenville County 66 percent and in Carroll County 47 percent of the noncommercial part-time farmers sold some farm products. The average cash receipts for all products sold, however, was under $50 (appendix table 25). Cash expenses for the noncommercial group, exclusive of rent and taxes, averaged $107 in Greenville County and $66 in Carroll County, and on the average, those who sold more than $200 worth of farm products in Greenville County and more than $50 worth in Carroll County covered cash expenses. The more favorable cash be.lance in Carroll County is explained by a combination of slightly higher receipts and considerably lower expenses. This probably is associated, at least in pa.rt, with the lower income status of the Carroll County group which made it urgent for them to take advantage of every possible source of income and to reduce expenses to the minimum. This was accomplished by selling as much of their farm products as possible and by hiring no labor to do work that could possibly be done by members of the family. The net effect was that the food products from the farm were obtained at a lower net cash cost. Value and Tenure of Part-Time Fanni In Greenville County 45 percent and in Carroll County 16 percent of the part-time formers owned their homes. Many part-time farmers lived in mill villages where there was little or no opportunity for home ownership. Outside the mill villages, the usual differences in economic status between owners and tenants appeared. The procedure used for arriving at real estate values, namely, capitalizing the rental value at 5 percent, was not satisfactory for those living in mill villages because company rents were lower than normal. In Carroll County, there were too few cases outside the mill village for an analysis of differences between owners and tenants to be made. Therefore, calculations of real estate values were made only for those outside the mill village in Greenville County. Here real estate of owners was of considerably greater value than that leased by tenants, that of noncommercial owners being 65 percent higher than that of noncommercial tenants, and that of commercial owners being 71 percent higher than that of commercial tenants (table 17, page 12, and appendix table 7). Since the tenants operated considerably more land than did the owners, it is evident that the difference in values must have been chiefly h1 buildings, of which the dwelling was, of Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 101 course, by far the most important. This fact indicates that better housing conditions prevailed among the ovn1ers. Commercial parttime farmers, on the whole, had more farm buildings than did noncommercial farmers (appendix table 9). Owners had more machinery than did tenants (appendix table 10), although this was a minor item, since in Greenville County 87 percent and in Carroll County 93 percent of the noncommercial groups (composed mostly of tenants) had no machinery other than small hand tools. The average cost for the noncommercial farmers having machinery was only $65 (appendix table 10). Livestock was not a very important investment item, since the typical combination of a cow, a pig, and 15 hens was usually not worth much over $100. The high value of the owners' real estate did not represent assets alone, however, since their mortgage indebtedness was greater than that of tenants. The average mortgage indebtedness for the noncommercial owners who were in debt was $1,443 (appendix table 8). The owners in Greenville County who were not in mill villages earned substantially higher wages at their off-the-farm employment than did the nonmill-village tenants in all industries except building and construction, the 83 owners averaging $924 at off-the-farm employment, and the 48 tenants averaging $660. The higher wages were due both to the higher occupational level of the owners and to the fact that a larger proportion of owners were in industries paying higher wages. Larger earnings in this group had doubtless made possible the purchase of pa.rt-time fa.rm homes. Labor Requirements of Part-Time Fanu and Their Relation to Working Hours In lndullry The 40-hour week established by the N. R. A. code was divided by most mills into a 5-day week. The two shifts which most mills operate change at about 2 or 3 o'clock in the afternoon. Thus workers have plenty of daylight hours for work on their part-time farms. In the service industries, the N. R. A. codes were either nonexistent or ineffective.. The hours, except in those industries that are highly unionized, such as railroads, were generally more than 8 hours per day and averaged nearly 10. Workers in those industries, however, did approximately as much farming as did textile workers. Among the noncommercial pa.rt-time farm households, work on the farm absorbed about 3½ hours a day from April through August, and considerably less time during the rest of the year (table 48, page 32). In terms of hours, the heads of households did less than half of the fa.rm work. Commercial farms required over 10 hours of farm work a day from April through October, heads working over 4 hours aday on the average during the summer months. The wife did some farm work on 75 percent of the farms in Greenville County and on 82 percent in Carroll County. Unemployed youth, Digitized by Google 101 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST workers too old for outside employment, and, to a small extent, children also helped. There were only 12 percent of the farms in Greenville County and 3 percent in Carroll County in which no member of the household other than the head worked. Labor was hired for the heavier work on field crops if the occupation of the head did not leave him sufficient time for it (appendix table 26). EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS IN INDUSTRY Employment in the textile industry was affected in 1934 by the N. R. A. order limiting hours to 30 per week for 12 weeks from June 4 to August 25, and by the textile strike in September. The former affected cotton mills in both counties studied, the latter chiefly in Carroll County. In addition, the knitting mills of Carroll County and the finishing plants of Greenville County suffered a seasonal slack period in the summer. The lndwlrlal Group For comparative purposes, the enumerators were instructed to take schedules of industrial workers as follows: approximately 100 schedules of white textile workers, 30 of white workers in other manufacturing and mechanical industries, and 70 of white workers in the service group of industries in Greenville County, and 100 schedules of white textile workers in Carroll County.25 lnduatry and Occupation The part-time farmers included in this study were selected without regard to the industry in which they worked (appendix table 29). In Carroll County, because of the lack of other manufacturing and service industries, 80 percent worked in cotton or knitting mills. In Greenville County, 58 percent of the part-time farmera were employed in textiles, the others being widely distributed among other manufacturing and service industries. There was very little difference between the part-time farm and nonfarm groups in the proportions in various occupational classes (appendix table 30). There was considerable difference in skill between the occupational groups of Greenville and Carroll Counties, however. Roughly one-half of both part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers were classified as semiskilled in Greemille County, while 70 percent of the part-time farmers and 79 percent of the 25 The term "industrial workers" covers a large group of individuals of such widely varying income, type of employment, and social status that it was decided to limit those to be included in this survey to the predominant industrial groups of the respective areas. Because of this arbitrary selection of industrial workel'll, there was some disparity between the occupational distribution of the nonfarming industrial workers and the part-time farmers. It was believed, however, that the industrial groups would be homogeneous enough in themselves to form a basis for comparison. See Introduction and Part I, chapter II, pp. 37-39. Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 103 nonfarming workers were in this classification in Carroll County (table 85). Proportionately fewer part-time farm and nonfarm workers were in the skilled group in Carroll County, however, partly because of the preponderance of cotton mill workers in Carroll County. All mill operators except loom fixers, mechanics, and foremen were classified as semiskilled. Ta&le 85.-0ccupation of Heads of White Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Textile Subregion, by Industry, 1934 Part-time farmen .' Industry ~i . ] 0 p. E- Nonfannlng lndmtrlal worlcen . al I I ii 1 p 0 ] ~ ~i . p. II al ii 1 p - - - - -"'- -- ---- - - - - -"'- - - - - CJ.BBOLL COUNTY AU Industries ...•••••••••• 103 Cotton mllJs .•...• ---·- ••• Knitting mllls .. ···--··-·· 7e 1 17 72 7 118 8 IIO 7 -" 78 21 30 M 88 9 216 1 2 12 18 21 53 3 87 lM 12 6 -- -" - 7 -- s 11 77 "1 10 1 SIi 18 63 108 s s - OBJ:UVlLLJ: COUNTY AIJ lndnstrles •..•••••.• _.. UMJ Cotton mllJs •••••••••••••• Other textile .••..•.•...... Steam and street railroads. Auto agencies and lllllng stations.••..••.••••.•..• Wholesale and retail trade_ Personal service'··-·-···· 37 9 -- 73 - - "5 -166 10 22 - - -- - -- --I - 11 22 15 2 37 -- -1 232 11821 8 - -2 1711 -- -"3 - " 1 10 6 5 1 -- - • Barben and laundry employees. Earnings of Heads of HoUMholcls The part-time farmers included in this survey were, with very few exceptions, full-time workers in industry. A comparison of hourly rates of pay, hours worked per day, days worked per year, and average yearly earnings of part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers 26 shows differences that are explainable by better industrial conditions in Greenville County rather than by participation in parttime farming operations (table 86). In Carroll County, part-time farmers earned an average of $554 per year, the nonfarmers $447, the difference being due partly to the fact that many of the nonfarming industrial group worked in the Banning and Fullerville mills, one of which was closed for 2 months and the other for 3 months during 1934. In Greenville County, the part-time farmers averaged $816, the nonfarming industrial workers $1,037. Here a few cases of very short time in the cotton mill group served to pull down the first average, while a few highly paid salesmen raised the average unduly in the nonfarm group. On the average, commercial part-time farmers in this subregion earned $733 a year in industry, noncommercial part28 See appendix tables 32 and 34. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARM/HG IN THE SOUTHEAST 1CM time farmers earned $722, and nonfarming industrial workers earned $853 (appendix table 34). Ta&le 86.-Rate of Pay Working Tinie, and Annual Eamin9! 1 of Heads of White PartTime Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Textile Subregion, 1934 Nonfarmlng Industrial workers Part•tlme farmers Aver• age hourly Industry rate Aver• 111!8 hours worked .ra; of pay Aver• 111!8 full days worked A..-er. 111!8 earn• ings A..-er• A..-er. A..-er• A.-e,. 81!8 111!8 111!8 w,e hourly hours full rate worked days earn· ings of worked pay ~ -- -- -------- -CJ.RROLL COUNTY All Industries •••.•••.••••.•.•••••••.. $0.34 8. 3 111S $5M $0.31 8. 0 180 $,U7 Cotton mi11s ..•.•••••..••.•..••.. -··Knitting mills .••••••••••....•••.••.. 0.34 8. 0 203 566 t t 0.30 8. 0 7.9 180 181 461 t o. 31 t 428 ORl:11:NVILU: COUNTY All Industries•••••...••••............ 0.43 8. 6 228 816 0.48 8. 6 257 1,037 Cotton mills .••..•••.•••.•••••••• _.•• Other textile ...... -·_····-········ ___ Steam and street railroads _______ -·-Aut-0 llj!encies and filling stations .... Wholesale and retail trade .•••••••• ·Personal service'········-········--- 0.41 0.47 8.0 8. 0 217 213 722 841 9.1 Zl4 230 2!!"2 308 2llO t t 8. 0 8. 0 8. 3 10.5 9. 3 9.5 8-15 800 1,716 0.37 o.« 0.43 o. 74 o.« o.« 294 1.0..'IO t t l t t 238 t l 784 t 0.39 1,361 1, 117 t Average not computed for Jess than 10 cases. At principal off-the-farm employment (job with the largest earnings). • Barbers and laundry employees. 1 Total Family Cash lnco■• There was no significant difference between the part-time farm and nonfarming industrial groups in average total family cash income from nonf arm sources, except for the differences in earnings of the heads, explained in the preceding section (table 59, page 44). In average number of employed members per household, in percentage of households with only the head employed, and in average earnings of members other than the head, the part-time farm and the nonfarm groups in Greenville County did not differ greatly (table 87). In Carroll County, the earnings of the other members of part-time farm and nonfarming industrial families differed in the same fashion that earnings of heads differed and for the same reason. In this county there was a greater total number employed per household than in Greenville County. There was no difference between the farm and nonfann groups in this respect, however. In both counties, there was a higher proportion of large families in the part-time farm group, the average being over one person more per household, than in the nonforming industrial group (table 87). A farming operation is a greater help to a large family than to a small one. The reduction in cash outlay for food is greater, there is less waste of farm produce, and the dependent family members can help considerably with the form work. These reasons may have prompted many of the heads of large households to go into farming or gardening. Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 105 Tol,le 87.-Eamings and Employment of Members of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Textile Subregion, 1934 Carroll County .\11 Industries Greenville County All Industries Textile Industry Item PartNon• Non• Non• Part• time farming Part- flll'IIling time farming Indus- farmers Indus• farmers Industime farmers trial trial trial workers workers workers --- ---------Average annual earnings of head at principal off-the-farm employment.•.••••••.••.•••••.... $664 Average annu9l earnings of members other than head per household ..•••••..•.•.••.•.•••...... $487 Average annual off-the-farm Income per house• hold'·······-························-·······- $1,060 Percent of households with only the bead employed••.. _. ___ ·-. __ ._ .. _..... __ -- __ . ·------. 28 Average number of employed members per household .... ____ . __ ... ___ ... _____ ·- ... ·-- .... 2.1 6. 2 Avera~e size of household.-·········-·--··--·-·· Average number of dependents per employed worker. ____ ·-·- .. _.•. _... _.. ·--._._. -- ... -- . -1.5 AverB!le annual off-the-farm income per person_ $203 1 $447 $816 $1,037 $801 $330 $280 $267 - - $801 $1, lUI $1,308 $1, 06li $1,131 $836 21 116 67 M 49 2.0 4.0 1. 7 11., L6 ,.2 I. 7 li.3 1. 7 4.3 1.0 $198 2. 2 1.6 $316 2.1 $:JOO 1.6 $267 ~ Includes all off-the-farm sources. The data presented here show that the part-time fann families in this area were able to get about as much industrial employment and earn about as much money as the comparable nonfarming industrial workers' families in the same locality. This indicates that cash income from industrial employment was not affected by whether or not the family did part-time farming. The characteristics of the individual, the amount and type of employment available, and wage scales are the important factors. It should be emphasized that the earnings discussed here are for 1934, a year in which the N. R. A. was effective in the textile industry. Whether the industry will be able to maintain the N. R. A. wage rates in the face of keen competition and a large supply of available low-income labor on the farms of the South is problematical. These industrial incomes were substantially higher than farm incomes in the same counties in 1934, as will be discussed later. Some differential existed in 1929 also, but it has undoubtedly widened during the depression. Such differentials ordinarily exert a pressure toward reduction of earnings, but there are always resistances to be overcome. Two important elements of resistance in this case were the efforts of the textile manufacturers' organizations to maintain the N. R. A. scale, and the constant battle of the labor union, although weak in numbers, against any wage reduction. LIVING CONDITIONS AND ORGANIZED SOCIAL LIFE Living conditions and opportunities for participation in organized social life in this subregion depended to a great extent on whether the part-time farmer lived in the open country, in a mill village, or other 150061°-37--10 Digitized by Google 106 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST village. The textile industry is so located in relation to good farm land that part-time farmers live either in the same communities as do nonfarming industrial workers or within easy commuting distance from town (table 62, page 51, and appendix table 28). Hence the problem of rural isolation is not a serious one. In Greenville County, 30 percent of the part-time farmers lived in mill villages, 40 percent in the open country, and the rest in country or suburban villages. Of the nonfarming industrial group, about onehalf lived in mill villages and the others in the city of Greenville or in other villages. In Carroll County, 55 percent of the part-time farmers and 85 percent of the nonfann group lived in mill villages; very few were in the open country. Living conditions of the mill village inhabitants depended in part upon the policies of the mill management in the maintenance of the village and furnishing of facilities. The type and general state of repair of the houses and the household facilities provided were fairly uniform in any one mill village, but these items and the general community facilities varied widely from village to village, as was pointed out above. It was observed by those making the study that, in general, housing and facilities in mill villages in which a considerable number of the workers were part-time farmers were somewhat better than the average, and living conditions of part-time form families in such villages were better than those of nonforming industrial workers. Electric power, which sometimes was not available in the open country without a private generating plant, was almost always supplied in the mill villages. The fact that a large proportion of the part-time formers in Greenville County lived in the open country tended to place them at a disadvantage in this respect. Housing In general, the houses in Greenville County, both in mill villages and outside, were in better repair and had more conveniences than those in Carroll County. This was to be expected in view of the higher wages and investments in the former county. Slightly more part-time farm than nonfarm houses in both counties needed no repairs, but on the other hand somewht1t more part-time farm houses needed such fundamental attention as general structural repairs (appendix table 40). A typical mill-village dwelling in Carroll County, occupied by a part-time form family of five persons, consisted of three rooms in a. one-story, single-family house with electric lights but without running water. The building was in need of paint and minor repairs. The annual rental was $91, which included¼ acre for a garden and pasturage for a cow. Mill-village d,vellings of the nonfarming industrial families were often double houses, crowded together, and with no available land for gardens. Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 101 A typical dwelling of a part-time farm family of seven persons in Greenville County was a six-room, single-family house in good repair with electric lights, running water, and bathroom. The annual rental, which included 2½ acres of ground, was $78. Part-time farmers .had larger homes than industrial workers. The difference in size was greater in Carroll County where the dwellings of nonfarming industrial households were smaller than those of the part-time farmers for all but the largest size of household. Parttime farm families in Greenville County had larger dwellings than did those in Carroll County, due, for the most part, to the greater size of houses located outside the mill villages (appendix table 38). In Carroll County approximately three-fourths of each group had electric lights, but only a few had running water or bath facilities. Nearly all families in Greenville County, except those living in the open country, had electric lights and running water. Electric lights were available to only about two-thirds of those living in the open country and running water to approximately one-fourth. Over onethird of the nonfarming industrial households but only one-fourth of the part-time farm households had bathrooms (appendix table 41). Automobiles, Radios, and Telephona Almost two-thirds of the part-time farmers had automobiles, as compared with two-fifths of the nonfarming industrial workers (appendix table 42). In Greenville County 41 percent of the parttime farmers were 1½miles or more from their places of employment, and an automobile was required for transportation to and from work in many cases. Only 17 percent of the industrial workers were 1½ miles or more from their places of employment. Since 90 percent of the part-time farmers and all of the nonforming industrial workers in Carroll County were less than 1½ miles from their places of employment, distance from work cannot explain the larger number of parttime farmers having automobiles. Three-fourths of the part-time farmers and somewhat fewer of the nonfarming industrial workers in Greenville County had radios, while one-half of the part-time farmers and one-third of the nonfarming industrial workers in Carroll County had them. Telephones were so infrequent in all groups as to be insignificant. One-sixth of the parttime farmers and almost one-third of the nonfarming industrial group lacked all three of these facilities. Home Ownenhip The proportion of h~me owners was much greater among part-time farmers than among nonfarming industrial workers. In Greenville County, almost one-half of the part-time farmers, as compared with slightly over one-tenth of the nonforming industrial workers, owned their homes; and in Carroll County, there was an even greater differ- Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 108 ence. This was associated with a somewhat greater proportion of the industrial households living in mill villages where there we.s little or no chance for ownership (table 88). However, when the comparison is limited to part-time farmers and nonfe.rming industrial workers living outside of mill villages, the part-time fa.rm group still had a higher percentage of home owners. As has already been noted, 27 the low rents of those living in company villages gave them a considerable advantage over either owners or other tenants in cost of housing. Tol,le 88.-Tenure Status of Part-Time Farmers and Nonfarming Industrial Worlcen in the Textile Subregion, 1934 Greenville County All Industries Carroll County Textile Industry All industries Tenure status Total. ..•••....•..•...•. Owners ____ • ________________ ._ Tenants: Mill village ............... Nonmill village ...•••..... Pe.rt•time farmers Non• farming Industrial workers 190 216 86 28 56 105 48 83 Non• farming industrial workers Part•tlme farmers 110 35 Ill 103 2 16 57 18 105 4 58 29 Pe.rt•tlme farmers Non• farming industrial workers 98 1 83 14 Education Children 7-16 years of age of both part-time farming and nonfarming industrial groups who had attended school during 1933-34 had made approximately normal progress 28 (table 76, page 64 ). However, 4 percent of the part-time farm children in Greenville County between these ages had not attended school, as against 9 percent of those in nonfarming industrial households. In Carroll County, however, 18 percent of the children of both groups were not in school during the 1933-34 term. Most of these children were 7 years of age and had not yet started to school, or had left school between the ages of 14 and 16. Only four children in Greenville County and three in Carroll County were employed (table 75, page 63). One-half of the heads of part-time farm households in the Textile Subregion had completed grade school and most of those had attended high school (appendix table 46). Of those not completing grade school, two-fifths had completed four grades or less. There was no significant difference between the education of part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers (appendix table 46). Greenville County had a free public library service with over 100 distributing points outside the city of Greenville receiving some form of library service. 29 The main library in Greenville supplied books to Seep. 93. See Part I, pp. 62 and 64. 2D Frayser, Mary E., The Libraries of South Carolina, Bulletin 292, South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, 1933. 27 2s Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 109 branch libraries, reading rooms, rural schools, crossroad stores, filling stations, post offices, churches, clubs, and homes. More than threefifths of the part-time farm and approximately one-half of the nonfarming industrial families made use of this service (table 78, page 66). Library services were available to very few households in Carroll County, and less than one-fourth of either the part-time farm or nonfarming industrial households which had library facilities made use of them. Soclal Participation Participation in organized social activities was usually confined to the local community, although occasional families in villages near Greenville were able to attend meetings in the city. In Greenville County, the villages were well organized. The church was the center of social life, and members of both part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households had an opportunity to participate in church, Sunday School, adult church organizations, Parent-Teacher Associations, labor unions, and young people's organizations (appendix table 48). In some of the mill villages, community houses formed a center for many social activities, such as athletic contests, club meetings, plays, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other groups. A baseball league, including teams from a number of mills, played about four games a week during the season. In Greenville County, there was an equal amount of participation in church and adult church organizations by members of part-time farm and nonfarming industrial families, but participation in Sunday School, and particularly in young people's organizations, was much greater among part-time farm families. Labor unions were available to only about two-fifths of the families in both groups, and participation was slight. Greenville County textile workers in the part-time farm group averaged 91 attendances at meetings per person, as against 78 for the nonfarming industrial households in 1934 (table 80, page 68). Extremely small households participated less in community social organizations than did larger households because children, especially children of school age, tended to increase the interest of the family in community activities. This was responsible, to some extent, for the favorable showing of part-time farm families in Greenville County. Carroll County villages showed less variation in the number of available social organizations, and participation in them by both part-time farm and nonfarm families was considerably less than by those in Greenville County. In church, Sunday School, and church organizations, however, there was more participation by members of part-time farm households than by those of nonfarming industrial households. The average number of attendances per person was 56 and 29, respectively, for part-time farm and nonfarming industrial Digitized by Google 110 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST households (table 80, page 68). This difference was related to the scarcity of social organizations in some of the mill villages where industrial workers lived. The part-time farm groups in both Greenville County and Carroll County furnished a larger proportion of the leadership of local organizations than did the industrial households (appendix table 49). An average of nearly one out of every two part-time farm households . in Greenville County furnished an officer for a local organization, as compared to one out of six for the nonfarming group. In part-time farm households, 21 husbands, 31 wives, 34 children, and 5 other members were officers of 1 or more organizations, whereas only 10 husbands, 12 wives, and 6 children in the nonfarming industrial households held office. In Carroll County, only four persons from the part-time farm and one from the nonfarming industrial group held office. ECONOMIC STATUS OF PART-TIME AND FULL-TIME FARMERS The survey indicated that the part-time farmer suffered no handicap in employment or earnings, and in some phases of living conditions and social life, he had a slight advantage over the nonfarming industrial worker. Since the part-time farmers were farmers as well as industrial workers, it is pertinent briefly to compare them with fulltime farmers. The 1930 Census showed that the average value of products sold or traded by farmers in Greenville County, plus receipts from boarders and lodgers, was $777 in 1929. Deductions for the three major expenses---feed, fertilizer, and labor-which averaged $171, left $606 as the farm income. This amount may be compared with the off-the-farm cash income, $1,116, for part-time farm households in Greenville County in 1934 (table 87). In Carroll County, the gross receipts on full-time farms were $758. Chief expenses totaled $193, leaving a net cash income of $565, which may be compared with the $1,060 off-the-farm income of part-time farmers in 1934. The use of 1929 data for farm incomes for comparison with 1934 part-time farm incomes requires a word of explanation. Farm incomes were somewhat higher in these counties in 1929 than they were in 1934. The value of crops harvested in 1929 reported by the census was $695 per form in Greenville County as compared with $393 in 1934, 30 nnd $604 in Cnrroll County for 1929 as compnred with $510 for 1934. In the absence of actual net income data for full-time formers in 1934, these figures may be used a.s rough indice.s of net incomes for the 2 yenrs, since form receipts vary much more from ao Value of crops harvested was calculated by using quantities reported by the census for the counties and prices reported for the States. Digitized by Google THE COTTON TEXTILE SUBREGION 111 year to year than do farm expenses in this subregion. The value of farm real estate, a further index of agricultural conditions, was substantially lower in both counties in 1934 than in 1929. These facta indicate that if 1934 net income data for full-time farmers were available, the comparison would be even less favorable to this group than thn t indicated above. RELIEF Very little relief was received in 1934 by either part-time farmers or nonfarming industrial workers included in the study. Employment in the textile mills, the major industry of the subregion, was as high or higher in 1934 than in 1929. Most of the textile workers on the relief rolls in Greenville County were, according to a local relief official, either too old to work in the mills or were members of the floater class. Since only those having at least 50 days of industrial employment during 1934 were included in the survey, many on relief undoubtedly were excluded. There were only three part-time farm cases enumerated in the sample, all in Carroll County, in which the amount of relief received during 1934 exceeded $10. One industrial household received $19 from private relief sources, due to 5 months' unemployment of the head, during which time his leg was amputated. A part-time farmer, having had only 94 days of industrial employment during the year, received $75 of public relief to care for doctors' bills and to replace mattresses following a contagious disease in the household. The third case was an 11-person part-time farm household which was handicapped by dependenta and unemployment. This household received $60 during 1934. Only 2.1 and 1.4 percent, respectively, of the part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households in the sample in Greenville County received any relief in 1934, as against 13.6 and 9.2 percent in Carroll County. In Greenville County, the relief reported was from public sources. More than one-half of the Carroll County relief cases, however, received this help from the Red Cross or other private agencies. In the subregion as a whole, the average time part-time farm families receiving relief had had assistance was almost 1½ years, and that for nonfarm families was slightly less (appendix table 36). Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Chapter II THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION OF ALABAMA GENERAL FEATURES OF THE SUBREGION THE COAL and Iron Subregion of Alabama is located at the southern end of the Appalachian Range. The presence of deposits of coking coal, iron ore, and limestone has led to the development of an industrial area based on iron and steel manufacturing and coal mining (figure 8). Included in this industrial area are 10 counties, with the city of Birmingham at the geographical center. Jefferson County, in which Birmingham is located, is the most populous and the most highly industrialized of the group. Most of the iron mining, a substantial part of the coal mining, and the bulk of the iron and steel manufacturing of the area are concentrated in this county. Walker County is an important coal producer, and coal is also mined in Tuscaloosa, Bibb, Shelby, St. Clair, and Blount Counties. Outside of Jefferson County, there a.re two minor industrial centers where most of the remaining iron and steel manufacturing of the subregion is located. These are the adjacent towns of Gadsden and Alabama City (combined population about 32,600) in Etowah County, and Anniston (population 22,300) in Calhoun County. Cotton goods manufacturing is the most important industry of Talladega. County, and is also found in the other counties of the subregion, except Bibb and Blount. The relative importance of the various industries in this subregion and in Jefferson County is indicated by the number of persons occupied in each industry (table 89). The pre-eminence of Jefferson County and of Birmingham dates from 1897 when real development in the manufacture of steel started, although a small beginning in steel manufacture was made in 1888. Rapid expansion of the local steel business took place after the United 113 Digitized by Google F',o. 8-THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION ' ·, ,.,. OF ALABAMA ...- / . ,,,.,.,.-! ---~·-J ___,--- _,,... ,.: ~~'-\,j /~:LOUNT ll R '-. LKE "«-,S,-., ' WA ~ JASPE R • \ ,, ··-1 --.. i ,.I' •" ,,..___ ,-.>r· .,,,.r -1 ,. r.:· I ·'"--- . .!!.t,lllllil(~~-1,--- , ~ ::! I i i ~.Y , /? r- ~ _; / i ;i! j TU SC ALOOSA "' PRODUCING 0 ~ DISTIIICTI I <B" "" N "' Q_ ~ i 0 I' a- ' 0 ) TU5C A II ftllllNtlML l"ON OA[ l'lllM>OUCING A"[A OIID MOUNTAIN} • PR&NCIML COM. l'IIC>OUCING All[AS \.~ J l ___,..J.I'------~ I'S'- (v i I t-·-, . ' . . . ,~.: Uwt . . ., ............. - - " '· ICAI..C .:& or 1111.la II '" 4'•1) ... WPA THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 115 Tol,le 89.--0istribution of Penons, 10 Years Old and Over, Gainfully Occupied in the Coal and Iron Subregion and in Jefferson County, Alabama, 1930 Jefferson County, Alabama Coal and Iron Subregion Industry Number Percent Number Percent Total population _________________________________ ==8=20=·=22=8='====i==43=1,=493=l==== 1 Total gainfully employed ____ -·--·-·---·--··--·-_ __3_1_2,_25_2_ ___1_00_.0_ __1_73_,_00_1_ _ _ _ 100_.0 1 1 1 1 Agriculture ____ --··----------------··--·-··-----------60,215 19. 3 6,409 3. 7 93,456 Service industries______________________________________ 131,135 42.0 Manufacturing and allied industries ____________________ l==l20=,=90=2=l===38=.7=l===73=•=13=6=!==== ~j Totalmanufacturingandallledindustrles ________ _ _ 12_0._00_2_1-_ _1_00_._0_ _ _73,_13_6_1-_ _ 100_.o 1 1 ~.n ~~~:rn~~-~~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Other extraction of mineraJs_____________________ ______ _ 26.6, !~ 762 2?J 5. 6 Building_------··-------------------------------·--··-Chemical and allied____________________________________ Clay, glass, and stone__________________________________ Clothing _____________________________________________ - Food and allied_--------------------------------------Automohilelsctoriesandrepalrshops__________________ Blast lurnaces and steel rollmg mills____________________ Other iron and steeL_________________________________ _ 11,560 3,206 3,167 1,108 3,098 2,280 16,070 18,311 9. 6 2. 6 2. 6 0. 0 2. 6 1.9 13. 3 15. 2 13. 5,505 8,351 2,572 2,187 846 2,483 1,636 12,950 13,189 ::f~ 572 u l,:J~= ~~;u:.:ian..;,i:r,~1isture:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~~~~'::;\f1;i_~•-~~'."_1~i~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Knitting mills__________________________________________ Other textile___________________________________________ Independent hand trades_______________________________ Other manufacturing___________________________________ tm 1,360 l, 837 7, 740 u 0. 5 I. 1 I. 5 6. 4 13 121 l, 258 5,115 1i7. ~5 11. 4 3. 5 3. 0 I. 2 3. 4 2.2 17. 7 18. l ~i ~:~ • 0. 2 I. 7 7. O •Less than 0.05 percent. Source: Fiftet11lh Cenau, of the United States: I9JO, Population Vol. III. States Steel Corporation bought the Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company in 1907. By 1914, the Steel Corporation had spent over 20 million dollars for improvements and additions to the Tennessee Company's properties. 1 Under the impetus of this development, population in the subregion increased 58 percent between 1910 and 1930. Jefferson County secured a major portion (68 percent) of this increase. From a population of about 12,000 in 1870, the county had increased to 431,500 in 1930. Birmingham, a cotton field in 1870, had grown to a city of a quarter of a million in 1930, receiving 60 percent of the population increase. Eleven percent of the increase went into other urban areas of the county. A large migration into this subregion from other areas has resulted in two factors of importance for consideration in this study. First, the migration has resulted in a concentration of population in the biologically and economically active age groups, which means fewer dependents per person capable of working. In 1930, 50 percent of the population of the subregion were in the 20- to 44-year age group, as compared with 35 percent for Alabama as a whole in this group, and 1 Cotter, Arundel, The Authentic History of the United States Steel Corporation, New York: Moody Magazine and Book Company, 1916, p. 204. Digitized by Google 116 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 38 percent for the United States. 2 Second, many of the migrants have come from surrounding rural areas, bringing with them a. background of farm experience. In 1930, the Coal and Iron Subregion had a. larger proportion of whites (69 percent) than had Jefferson County (61 percent), with its concentration of industries employing unskilled labor. The ratio of Negro to white population in this county has remained almost constant during the entire period of industrial development. Jefferson County suffered severely in the depression, as did other steel centers. From 1929 to 1933, the average number of wage earners in the manufacturing industries of the county declined 42 percent, total wages declined 64 percent, and value of products 64 percent.3 In the same period, the coal production of the county decreased 50 percent in amount and 62 percent in total dollar value.' Since the business of the local service industries is largely dependent on manufacturing and mining pay rolls, these figures give an indication of the loss of income suffered by all workers in this area. during the depression. Cotton farming is the predominant type of agriculture in northern and central Alabama. However, the metropolitan development in the vicinity of Birmingham has had a modifying influence upon the agriculture of the immediately surrounding area. The production of dairy and truck crops for the local market has been stimulated. As a result Jefferson, Shelby, Walker, and Winston Counties may be considered a separate type of farming area.. Farm production in this area. is limited by the rough topography and by the unproductiveness of some of the soils. In 1934, only 40 percent of the total land area. was in farms, and of the land in fanns, 37 percent was cropland. 6 In Jefferson County, only 28 percent of the total land area. was in farms, and of the land in farms, only 42 percent was cropland. 0 The 1930 Census of Agriculture reported a considerably larger number of part-time farms in Jefferson and Walker Counties than in any other county in the State. 7 In Jefferson County, there were 496 parts Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930, Population Vol. III, Part I, p. 37. 1 United States Census of .Manufactures: 1933; Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930, Manufactures Vol. III. 4 Coal, 1929 and 1933, United States Bureau of Mines. 1 United States Census of Agriculture: 1935. • Idem. 1 Fifteenth Census of the United Stateg: 1930, Agriculture Vol. III, Part 2, county table 1. Those farms were classified as part-time whose operator spent 150 days or more at work in 1929 for pay at jobs not connected with his farm, or reported an occupation other than farmer, provided the value of the products of the farm did not exceed $750. This presupposes the census definition of a farm as comprising at least 3 acres unless it produced $250 worth of farm products or more. Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 117 time farms, or 15 percent of all farms, and in Walker County 427 part-time farms, or 12 percent of all farms. THE INDUSTRIES OF THE SUBREGION Iron and Steel Manufacturing The low mountainous ridges and narrow valleys around Birmingham contain the principal raw materials for iron and steel manufacturing: iron ore, coking coal, and limestone and dolomite for fluxing. They exist in quantities estimated to last over 300 years at the 1925 peak production rates 8 and are located so close to the furnaces that the cost of transportation is lower for the Birmingham district than for any other district in the country. Several important disadvantages partially counterbalance the advantage of low transportation costs. The iron ore is low grade, averaging about 36 to 37 percent metallic iron, compared with an average of over 50 percent for the United States.11 Most of it has to be mined by underground drilling and blasting instead of by the open pit methods used on the Lake Superior ranges. The principal disadvantage of the Birmingham district is its distance from the great steel consuming areas since freight rates are an important item in price competition. Hence, the market for Birmingham's iron and steel products is primarily in the South, with some export via the Black Warrior River and the Gulf to Central and South America and the West Indies. About 86 percent of the pig iron of this district is consumed in local plants making steel, cast-iron pipe, and machinery. 10 A large part of the steel also is used in local plonts. Another important industry of this district is the manufacture of cast-iron pipe, of which Alabama produces more than 40 percent of the country's supply .11 A little over one-half of the employees of the costiron pipe industry in Alabama are in Jefferson County. Before 1929 the principal products of the Alabama steel industry were railroad and structural steel. Since 1929 there has been a slump in requirements of the railroads and the construction industry, which has been offset to some extent, however, by the increased activity of the sheet mills. The dominant position in the steel industry is held by the Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company (commonly referred to as the T. C. I. Company). The total rated productive capacity of this company's units is about 50 percent of the pig iron and 80 percent of the steel • Burchard, E . F., "Alabama Ores Equal Lake Supply," The lron Age, March 24, 1927. • Mineral& Yearbook: 1934, United States Bureau of Mines. 10 White, Langdon, "The Iron and Steel Industry of the Birmingham, Alabama, District," Economic Geography, Vol. XV, p. 359. 11 Biennial Census of Manufactures: 1933. Digitized by Google 118 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST making capacity of the State. 12 It owns and operates mines, quarries, furnaces, and mills for all stages in steel manufacturing from the extraction of the raw materials to the finished products, a railroad for the transport of its materials, and a fleet of barges on the Black Wdl"rior River. The Gulf States Steel Company's Alabama City Works at Gadsden is the only other large producer of steel. Three other companies, the Sloss-Sheffield Steel and Iron Company, the Republic Steel Corporation, and the Woodward Iron Company, also owning mines and quarries, produce pig iron. Trend of Production and Employment The peak of production for iron ore was reached in 1925, and for pig iron, steel, and cast-iron pipe in 1926. The low point for the production of iron ore was reached in 1932, and for cast-iron pipe a year later. The severity of the depression in these industries is indicated by the ratios of minimum annual production to maximum, which were as low as 19.6 percent for iron ore, 22.6 percent for pig iron, 22.9 percent for cast-iron pipe, and 28.6 percent for rolled steel products. 13 There has been some recovery since these low points, pig iron production in 1934 amounting to 40 percent of maximum, and rolled steel production to 49 percent of maximum. However, operations during the last half of the year were decidedly less than during the first half. Generally speaking, the steel industry in Alabama has followed the trend of the industry as a whole. It did not share in the high peak of the country's output in 1929, however, because it did not supply the automobile business, which was largely responsible for that demand. The prosperous years for the cast-iron pipe industry coincided with the period of great building activity and of suburban housing development, which passed its peak about 1927. Employment in iron and steel manufacturing has decreased because of technological improvements as well as loss of demand for products. The output of iron ore per man increased 79 percent from 1923 t-0 1931. Employment in the mines dropped from an average of 7,710 men working 294 days in 1923 to approximately 2,800 men working only 106 days in 1932. 14 Replacement of old blast furnaces by more efficient ones resulted in a decrease of 55 percent in the number employed in this industry in Alabama between 1923 and 1929 (table 90). 16 In 1933, only 964 11 Directory of the Iron and Steel Works of the United Stales and Canada, 22d Edition, American Iron a11d Steel Institute, 1935, pp. 370, 372, and 373. 13 Annual Statistical Reports of the American Iron and Steel /nstitv.te. 14 Minerals Yearbook : 1984, United States Bureau of Mines, p. 339. 16 For a discussion of technological improvements in blast furnaces and their effects on productivit.v, see Productivity of Labor in Merchant Blast Furnace,, Bulletin 474, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 119 men were employed in this industry. Coke and cast-iron pipe plants have drastically reduced workers also, the former employing in 1933 less than one-half and the latter barely one-third of the number employed during the peak years of the middle twenties. Tol,/e 90.-Avera9e Number of Wa9e Earners Employed in Iron and Steel and Allied Industries in Alabama, 1923-1933 Year Total Total Iron ex~ludlng Including mining steel steel Coke plants Steel Blast works and rolling furnaces mills --- -----1923 ...•........................ 1925 ......•..................... 1927 ••.••••••••••••••••••••••.•• 1929 .....................•...... 19.11 ............................ 1933 .•.•........................ 25,236 25, 5119 22,928 18,837 n,419 8,516 32, Hl,1 33,238 - 28,090 - 7,710 7,15.5 6,172 5,498 3,672 2,940 Ca.,tIron pipe --2,071 I, 932 1,759 1,606 I, 147 804 5,343 4,861 4,157 2,398 1,468 964 6,927 7,669 (l) 9,253 (') (') 10,112 II, 621 10,840 9,335 7,132 3,808 • Data not given. Source: Mineral, Y•arbook: 19" and 19',4, United States Bureau of Mines, and United Statu Ctmu• of Manufadure•. Hours and Wages In most of the Alabama. ore mines, the 10-hour day was standard in the years prior to 1933. In 1931, the average pay of all employees in iron and steel and allied industries was 38½ cents per hour, and actual weekly earnings averaged $12.08. 18 In 1933, the 8-hour day was adopted by most of the important mines and some pay raises were ma.de. The 123 white ore mine employees included in the present study received an average of 59 cents per hour in 1934 and the 83 Negroes an average of 48 cents per hour. The 8-hour day was adopted by most blast furnaces and steel mills in 1923, though continuous night and day operation for the 7-day week remained until 1931. 17 TheN. R. A. code for the iron and steel industry, approved August 19, 1933, limited hours to 8 per day, and to an average of 40 per week for any 6-month period, with a maximum of 48 in any 1 week. The "spread work" system in effect during the depression, however, has reduced hours of labor for the great majority of workers to considerably below nominal full-time hours. The code also set a minimum wage rate of 27 cents per hour for the Birmingham district with provision for differentials above the minimum rate for those already earning a higher wage rate. Average earnings per hour for the industry as a whole increased 37 percent from June 1933 to April 1934. 18 16 Wages and Hours of Labor in Metalliferous Mines, 1924 and 1931, Bulletin 573, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. 17 Wages and Hours of Labor in the Iron and Steel Industry, 1931, Bulletin 567, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. 18 N. R. A. Code/or the Iron and Steel Industry (Amendment No. I), Letter of Transmittal, p. 6. Digitized by Google 120 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST Bituminous Coal Mining The principal coal producing areas of Alabama are the Black Warrior River, Cahaba, Coosa, and Blount Mountain fields (figure 8). Part of the Black Warrior River area, which is the largest field, lies in Jefferson County. The coal mined in Alabama is used principally for production of by-product coke and for railroad fuel. In 1929, coke production accounted for 38.5 percent of Alabama's coal output, railroad fuel 28.5 percent, electric utilities 1.7 percent, and all other uses 31.3 percent. 111 A large number of the mines are owned by steel and iron makers who consume their own product in making coke for the blast furnaces. Production by "captive" mines (i. e., those owned by and producing for steel and iron companies) was about 48 percent of the total output of the district in 1924. The principal market for Alabama coal is within the State itself, in southwestern and western Georgia, and in Florida. The markets in Mississippi and Louisiana have dwindled to small proportions because of the introduction of natural gas. Natural gas is now used extensively in Birmingham itself. The burning of fuel oil by ships has cut sharply the demand for bunker coal at Mobile and New Orleans. The production of coal in Alabama declined steadily from a peak of 21 million tons in 1926 to a low of less than 8 million in 1932.20 The reduction in output has been relatively somewhat greater in Alabama than in the country generally. Employment and Mechanization The peak in numbers employed in Alabama coal mines was reached in 1923, when approximately 30,000 men were engaged. By 1929 the number had decreased to 25,200, 21 and by 1933 to 18,200. 22 Beginning in 1929, there was also a drastic curtailment in number of days worked, which reached a low of 107 days (average) in 1932. The proportion of the coal mined in Alabama by machine cutting, the oldest mechanized process, has been steadily increasing since 1922. Loading of coal into the mine cars by mechanical devices is a newer development 23 and has greater effect in reducing employment because loading has always been one of the most labor-consuming operations iu Trapnell, W. C. and Ilsley, Ralph, The Bituminous Coal Industry With Survey of Competing Fuels, Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance, Federal Emergency Relief Administration, l\lay 1935, p. A-40. 20 Mineral Resources of the United States, 1930, United States Bureau of Mines, Part II; and Minerals Yearbook: 1933, United States Bureau of Mines. 21 Mineral Resources of the United States, 1930, op. cu., p. 651. 72 Minerals Yearbook: 1984, op. cit. 23 See "Employment in Relation to Mechanization in the Bituminous Coal Industry." l14onthly Labor Review, February 1933. Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IROH SUBREGION 121 in the mines. The percentage of Alabama coal mechanically loaded reached a maximum of approximately 19 percent in 1929. The effect of mechanization on employment is difficult to measure statistically because of the peculiarities of timekeeping in the coalmining industry, the "spread work" system, and changes in the length of the working day. In general, however, the output per man-day increased between 1929 and 1931, and then decreased. Part of the decrease in output per man-day in 1933 and 1934 was due to the shorter working day introduced by the N. R. A. code. H011,rs and Wages There was a steady decline of wage rates in the coal-mining industry from 1922 to 1931, and a precipitous drop from 1931 to 1933. 24 Average hourly earnings of miners and loaders, based on time "at face," u fell 42 percent, from 45 cents in 1929 to 26 cents in 1933; and bimonthly earnings fell 63 percent, from $33.58 to $12.45 between 1929 and 1933. The N. R. A. code for the bituminous coal district including Alabama set an 8-hour day, which later was amended to a 7-hour day and a 5-day week. Basic minimum rates for outside unskilled labor, set first at 30 cents, were later amended to 40 cents an hour, and those for inside skilled labor were set at 42½ and later at 54 cents an hour. 26 A large proportion of the coal miners in Alabama are members of the United Mine Workers, and wage rates in most of the mines are set by agreement between that organization and the mine operators. After the N. R. A. was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court on May 28, 1935, the wage rates in effect under N. R. A. were continued by such an ·agreement until September 1935, when a new agreement was negotiated. This new contract raised wage rates slightly while retaining the 7-hour day and 5-day week. It is effective until April 1, 1937. Seasonal Variation in Employment There is some regular seasonal swing in production of the Alabama coal mines, with October, December, and January usually the busiest months, and April, May, June, and July the slackest. The mines usually work with a full labor force and shut down entirely (except for maintenance crews) when orders are filled. Outlook for Employment Birmingham's iron, steel, and coal mining industries and the railroads are to a certain extent interdependent. The demand for coal depends principally on the iron and steel and railroad fuel require14 Wages and Hours of Labor in Bituminous Coal Mining, 1939, Bulletin 601, United Stat.es Bureau of Labor Statistics. 11 Time "at face" means time at the working place in the mine. "N. R. A. Code/or the Bituminous Coal Industry. 1110061°-37-11 Digitized by Google 112 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST ments. At the same time, hauling coal is an important source of railroad revenue, and the railroads are large consumers of steel. The principal factors affecting the future activity of the iron and steel industries in Alabama may be summarized as follows: The demand for pig iron is affected directly by requirements for steel, cast-iron pipe, machinery, etc. Increased use of scrap in steel making reduces this demand. The market for steel products depends largely on railroad buying, construction activity, and industrial expansion in the South. A large potential demand for steel has accumulated during the depression, due to the deferring of maintenance expenditures by railroads and industrial plants. The market for cast-iron pipe depends on resumption of building activity and expansion of gas and water utility systems, which are not likely to reach the proportions of the boom years of the 1920's in the near future. The market for Alabama cast--iron pipe is not limited to the South. The favorable i,,ituation of the iron and steel plants of this di.strict with respect to raw material makes for stability of the industry. It is evident that a revival of general business activity to predepression levels would increase total employment in the iron and steel and allied industries of Alabama. Because of technological advances, however, return to anything like the amount of employment during the peak period of 1925 to 1926 would be possible only with an output considerably beyond former high levels. In recent years there have been large numbers of underemployed men on the pay rolls, and these will probably be restored to full-time work before many new men are hired. The number employed will depend, of course, on the number of hours per week that will be considered to be full time when industrial production approaches normal. This is an uncertain quantity, but the nun1ber is quite likely to exceed the maximum set by the N. R. A. code. Because of its dominant position in the steel business of the Birmingham district, the policies of the United States Steel Corporation are an important factor in the employment situation here. The consumption of Cotti by manufacturing plants, electric utilities, and domestic users will probably be adversely affected by increased use of water power and natural gas and other fuels. Therefore, with the return of general business to normal activity, the consumption of Alabama coal will most likely be somewhat below its normal level of the past. Future coal mine employment will depend on two opposing factors: recovery of market demand and mechanization. The use of mechanical loaders in Alabama mines has been relatively small, but with recovery in demand for coal, there is likely to be an increase in the use of these devices. Retention of the 7-hour day in effect since April 1934 will increase the number of miners required for a given output, as compared with the number employed under the fonner working day which averaged nearly 9 hours. Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 113 FARMING ACTIVITIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS Location of Part-Time Farm, The pattern of part-time farming in the Birmingham. area has been largely set by the interaction of two factors peculiar to the area: the limitation of land, and the fact that much of the land available for farming is owned by large employers of industrial labor who have for a long time rr encouraged gardening by their employees. The iron and steel industry is centered in two long, narrow valleys, Jones and Opossum, enclosed by rough mountainous ridges. These valleys, varying from 1 to 2 miles in width and separated only by a low ridge, are largely taken up by the metropolitan development of the Birmingham. district. Hence, the amount of land available for farming is quite limited in relation to the number of industrial workers who might be interested in part-time farming. Most of the land available is not very productive. The soil, which is largely Clarksville stony loam, 28 erodes badly. Because of its structure and the topography, it does not hold water well, suffering periodicallyfrom drought. And yet, because of its availability, this soil is used extensively for gardening by the industrial workers. Coal and iron workers live, for the most part, in company houses in villages and mining camps, or in cities and towns near their places of employment. House lots are usually about 50 x 100 feet in size and offer so little opportunity for gardening that the companies often make available plots of land on unoccupied company property. The practice of the T. C. I. Company is a case in point. It allots 1 acre or less to a family, offers to plow the plots for 50 cents each, and employs a man to help improve garden practices. At times when mules used at the mines are not needed, they are made available for use in cultivating the gardens; garden seeds are furnished; ammonium sulphate (a coke oven by-product used for fertilizer) is made available; and prizes are offered for the best gardens. These advantages are largely counterbalanced by the fact that the plots are often located at some distance from the homes, thus discouraging the keeping of livestock and adding to the effort necessary in cultivation. In spite of these handicaps, part-time farming was popular in this district before the depression, 52 percent of the white families and 28 percent of the Negro families having farmed for at least 6 years (appendix table 4). Part-time fanning increased markedly during the depression, following the reduction in working hours and wages 17 As early as 1908, the Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company, in order to encourage gardening by miners, built v.ire fences around their yards and hired an agricultural expert. See Mims, Edwin, The Advancing South, New York: Doubleday, Page and Co., 1926, p. 102. 28 Smith, H. C. and Pace, E. S., Soil Survey of Jefferson County, Alabama, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1910. Digitized by Google Figu,_ 9 and 11, pag911 12 4 and 14 5. reversed ... tO Fie. 9-LOCATION OF PART-TIME FARMS INCLUDED IN FIELD SURVEY CHARLESTON COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA 1~- KET-~ CHARLESTON COUNTY ~ + l':'4 I i ~ ,TSt JAMES CREEK 2 ~ n, 0 0 .. ,, (0. ~ EDISTO ;c. LEGEND N 0 0. Q ,:Z 0 ◊ STATE HIGHWAYS 0 ~ - U.S. HIGHWAYS • ATLANr1C' l'v I O I ■ I- ---- 2 l 4 S • 7 SCALE OF MILES I 9 - PART-TIME FARMS RAILROADS ~ I ocEA" Af•1411,W.'-A- I THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 125 (appendix table 5). Aid given by the T. C. I. Company to its employees, for example, was made contingent upon cultivation of a garden, and after the introduction of Federal relief, the company continued to encourage gardening. Many families not coming under company programs have purchased or rented land for farming purposes. So common had smallscale pa.rt-time farming become in this area that the 328 cases (204 whites and 124 Negroes) covered by the survey (figure 9) constituted only a small proportion of the number actually engaged in pa.rt-time farming at the time. It is also important to note that the greater part of the industrial workers in the group classed as nonfarmers actually did some gardening, although they did not produce $50 worth of food and hence were classified as pa.rt-time farmers. Fann Production The relative scarcity of land available for farming is indicated by the fact that 60 percent of the white farmers surveyed and 80 percent of the Negroes had only 1½acres or less of cropland (appendix table 6). Only 15 (7 percent) white pa.rt-time farmers and only 1 Negro had 10 acres or more. Most of the Negroes had only ¾or ½acres in gardens (appendix table 11 and figure 10). Barely 18 percent of the whites and 4 percent of the Negroes reported all of the four chief types of production (vegetable, poultry products, dairy products, and pork). One-third of the whites and nearly two-thirds of the Negroes had only vegetables or vegetables and poultry (appendix table 12). Gardens All of the Negroes and all except seven of the white pa.rt-time farmers had gardens. At Birmingham, the average frost-free growing season is almost 8 months. 29 This means that there a.re a.bout 6 months in which the less hardy vegetables can be used fresh from the garden. In addition, a number of hardy vegetables, both root and leafy, may be available during the colder months. Ninety-one percent of the whites and seventy-three percent of the Negroes had three or more fresh vegetables for at least 5 months. Nearly two-thirds of the white families had three or more fresh vegetables for at least 7 months (appendix table 13). Only 3 percent of the whites had three or more fresh vegetables for 10 months or longer, but more than one-third had at least one fresh vegetable for that period (appendix table 14). No Neg-ro family had three or more fresh vegetables for as long as 10 months but 16 percent had at least one vegetable for that period. During the 6 summer months, the products of the garden reduced the purchase of groceries from the amount normally bought to a H Yearbook of Agriculture: 1934, U. S. Department of Agriculture, p. 731. Digitized by Google 116 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST WHITE PERCENT o ~ ~ ··" ·- I .... -'" ~ ~ ~ .,.. I ~ ro ~ ~ ~ l l l l l l l l l lf:11111111111111~ 1 1 1:·:I I■ -~· ~ 11:m:IWMBI I .,. ~ _.,, _,. •111111:·ff:11111 ~ · ~;,: NEGRO ••u .... I .... I """" I .,.. 1111 :rnl .,.. .,.. l l l l lf:il]li~ lllllllllllllllllf~lllllllllllllm ~"' .. """ 11111111111111111:111111111111111...a o ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ro ~ ~ ~ PERCENT F1G.IO-SIZE OF PRINCIPAL ENTERPRISES ON PART-TIME FARMS, BY COLOR OF OPERATOR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALA., 1934 AF•2470, W.PA. Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 127 considerable extent. Seventy-six percent of the white part-time farmers with gardens and fifty-seven percent of the Negroes estimated that their grocery bills were reduced, the reduction averaging $10 per month for the white families and $5.50 per month for the Negroes. The fact that 24 percent of the whites and 43 percent of the Negroes surveyed reported no reductions was perhaps not surprising, considering the small size of gardens in this area. Rather, it is surprising that 11 percent of the whites reported reductions estimated at over $20, and over 12 percent of the Negroes reported reductions estimated at more than $10. These reductions do not measure the entire contribution of the garden since the diet is improved in quality and variety during the garden season. Furthermore, canning and storage of garden products tend to reduce the grocery bill during the winter months. Canning of fruits and vegetables was done by 87 percent of the white families and 55 percent of the Negro families, the average quantity canned being 110 and 47 quarts, respectively. Of the 204 white families, 23 canned 200 quarts or more {appendix table 16). Vegetables were stored by 86 percent of the whites and by all of the Negroes (table 29, page 20}. Sweet potatoes were the most common vegetable stored, 65 percent of the white families storing an average of 22 bushels, and 83 percent of the Negro families storing an average of 15 bushels. More than one-half of the whites, but only about oneeighth of the Negroes stored Irish potatoes, the average amount being 7 and 3 bushels, respectively {appendix table 17). A popular item in this area was peanuts, 29 percent of the whites storing an average of 10 bushels, and 60 percent of the Negroes storing an average of 3 bushels. Onions, peppers, beans, and peas were stored by relatively smaller numbers, while okra, cabbage, figs, peaches, walnuts, grapes, and apples were stored occasionally. Gorn Over one-third of the white part-time farmers grew corn, the average production being 68 bushels. In view of the small areas cultivated by the Negroes, it was surprising that as many as three-fifths grew corn, producing an average of 21 bushels (appendix table 24). Both white and Negro households had from 5 to 15 bushels of the corn ground into meal, and the remainder was fed to livestock. Dairy Products Considering the smallness of the farms and the great reduction in incomes during the depression in this area, it is noteworthy that onehalf of the white part-time farmers had cows {appendix table 11). Mille production during 1934 averaged over 3,000 quarts per cow {appendix table 20). Butter was made by all but one of the families Digitized by Google 128 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST whose cow produced milk, butter consumption averaging 234 pounds a year (appendix table 21}. Of the 103 white families with cows, 47 sold dairy products. The average receipts from such sales were $75. In the matter of dairy products, the production by Negroes was far behind that of the whites, instead of being roughly half that of the white part-time farmers, as in the case of other farm activities. Only 13 Negro families (10 percent) had cows, and milk production averaged 2,700 quarts in 1934, a little less than the average for the whites. Butter production averaged only 176 pounds per year for those producing butter. In general, of course, the proaucts were consumed by the family. Two or three quarts of milk were used fresh, the remainder being used for making butter. The buttermilk was used as food and the surplus was fed to pigs and chickens. Most of the feed for cows was purchased, since only a few of the whites and none of the Negroes had pastures, and only 14 white families and 2 Negro families grew any roughage (appendix table 23.) Frequently cows were staked out along the roadsides or on vacant lots. Purchas~ feed usually cost from $50 to $75. PO'Ul,try Products Almost two-thirds of the white part-time farmers and almost as many of the Negro farmers had poultry (appendix table 11}. The flocks of white farmers usually contained from 10 to 20 birds, while those of the Negroes contained fewer than 10 birds. The white parttime farmers with chickens reported an average of 113 dozen eggs consumed a year or over 2 dozen a week, while Negroes reported only 8 or 9 eggs a week (appendix table 18). An average of 70 pounds of dressed chicken a year, or less than 1½ pounds a week, was consumed by white part-time farmers, while Negro families consumed about half that amount (appendix table 19). Pork One or more pigs were kept on 27 percent of the white part-time farms and on 29 percent of the Negro farms (appendix table 11 ). Most of the families had only one or two pigs, but a few had more. The quantity of home-produced dressed pork consumed or stored was considerably higher for the whites (376 pounds) than for the Negroes (217 pounds) (appendix table 22). Fuel In view of the metropolitan nature of the area, it is not surprising that few families were able to cut fuel on their land. Only nine white and eight Negro part-time farmers had any woodland, and of these only four white farmers and five Negroes cut wood for fuel. Arrange- Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 129 ments are frequently made whereby employees of the coal mining companies may secure coal for fuel at wholesale prices. Cash Recelpll and Cash ExpLess than one-half of the white and only one-tenth of the Negro part-time farmers sold any farm products, sales from all products averaging $33 for the whites and $4 for the Negroes (appendix table 25). Among the whites, dairy products were most frequently sold, and they accounted for 54 percent of the total sales. Cash expenses of both groups were for plowing, seeds, fertilizer, and livestock feed. For the whites, expenses exclusive of rent and taxes averaged $73, for Negroes only $15 (appendix table 25). The 24 white part-time farmers who sold as much as $100 worth of products more than covered their cash outlay. For the remainder, expenses were somewhat in excess of receipts, this excess representing the net cost in cash of the products used by the family. Value and Tenure of Part-Time Farms Only 34 percent of the white and 1.9 percent of the Negro part-time farmers owned their homes (appendix table 43), and some of these had to rent land for farming purposes. However, the average investment for the farming enterprise was rather small. Farming lands were frequently owned by the employers and the rent paid, if any, was nominal. Very few families had work animals or any equipment other than a few simple hand tools. The average cost for those having machinery was only $30 for whites and only half that amount for Negroes (appendix table 10). For the relatively few farmers with the combination of a cow, a pig, and a :flock of chickens, the investment did not amount to over $100. Labor Rcqulremenll of Part-Time Farms and Their Relation to Wodclng Houn In lnduttry During 1934, underemployment in this area was so widespread that the work necessary for cultivation of gardens and small farms took up only part of the workmen's spare time. Slightly more than 4 hours a day were spent on farm work by white part-time farm families during the growing season. The heads of the households put in more than half of the total time required for the farm work (table 48, page 32). About one-fourth of the white households contained young men between the ages of 16 and 24, inclusive, who helped with the farm work, and on 57 percent of the farms the wife did part of the work (appendix table 27). It is quite possible that the essential farm work could have been done in somewhat less time than that actually spent, since in many instances the farm work filled in spare time. Negro part-time farm families worked an average of over 6 hours a day from April through .August, although their enterprises were Digitized by Google 130 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST only about half as large or productive as were those of the white parttime farmers. Slightly less than half of this worktime represented labor of the heads of the households, the balance that of other members. One-half of these households contained one or more persons from 16 to 24 years of age, who worked about 1½ hours a day for about 7 months of the year. EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS IN INDUSTRY The outstanding fact concerning employment and earnings in this area is the drastic reduction in hours and wages that has occurred since 1929. The principal industries of the region, depending largely upon the market for iron and steel, were severely hit by the depression, which led to decreases in the number employed as well as in the earnings of those still retaining some employment. On the average, total family income from nonfarm sources for whites, including both farm and nonfarm households, 30 was 46 percent lower in 1934 than in 1929 (table 60, page 46). Negro workers in this area, even more than the whites, have borne the full brunt of the depression, the average total family income from industrial employment being 58 percent lower in 1934 than in 1929. A large proportion of the Negroes were unskilled workers and were the first to be laid off when a mill or factory was shut down. Not only were heads of families underemployed, but members other than the heads bad great difficulty in finding work. Industry and Occupation Part-time farmers included in the field survey were selected without regard to the industry in which they worked. However, most of them, both whites and Negroes, were engaged in one of the three major industries of the region: coal mining, iron mining, or iron and steel manufacturing. Sixteen percent of the whites and eleven percent of the Negroes were in other manufacturing industries, transportation, trade, and miscellaneous industries (appendix table 29). For purposes of comparison with the part-time farmers, a group of 222 white and 346 Negro nonfarming industrial workers 31 were included in the enumeration. These were selected to represent the three chief industries of the area. There was one marked difference in occupational grouping between part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers. Among the whites, only 16 percent of the part-time farmers were in the unskilled group, as compared with 30 percent in the nonfarrning industrial group. Among the Negroes, 59 percent of the part-time farmers as compared with 70 percent of the nonfarming industrial workers were in the unskilled group (appendix table 30). This may be without 30 11 See following section on Industry and Occupation. For explanation of the selection of industrial workers, see pp. XXX-XXXI. Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 131 significance, the result of the relatively small sample or of the limits set on the selection of the nonfarm sample, or it may indicate a slight occupational advantage among the part-time farmers. While there was thus some difference in general occupationa grouping between part-time farm and nonfarming industrial workers, there was a greater difference between whites and Negroes. More than one-half of the whites, as compared with only one-seventh of the Negroes, were in skilled occupations. In the blast furnaces and steel rolling mills the number of skilled workers among the Negroes was somewhat higher, amounting to 20 percent (table 91). Le~s than one-fourth of the whites as compared with two-thirds of the Negroes were in unskilled occupations. The predominance of unskilled workers among the Negroes, a common characteristic of southern labor, was particularly striking in the heavy industries represented in this area. In general, whites filled the ranks of electricians, machinists, mechanics, and especially of foremen. To&le 97.-0ccupation of Heads of Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Coal and Iron Subregion, by Industry and by Color, 1934 Part-t!me farmers Occupation N onfarming industrial workers Blast Blast Coal Iron furnaces Coal Iron furnaces All Total min- min- and steel All Total min- min- and steel others rolling ing Ing rolling others Ing Ing mills mills ------------- WBITII Total---------------Proprietary _______________ _ Clerical._--------------- --Skilled .. __ --------------Semiskilled _______________--_ U118ki1Jed ____________ --- --- 204 14 - -2 - 17 105 47 83 7 1 6 M 3 35 2 93 43 8 45 2 6 18 28 16 12 1 14 ===== NIIOBO 222 61 69 76 16 11 4 29 2 26 4 48 3 34 13 26 II 7 l:irl 23 68 1 16 ---- --= 15 346 132 61 10 ~ 77 Total---------------- - 124 - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - Proprietary_ ---- -- --- -----Clerical. ______ - --- --- ----- Skilled. ___________________ _ SemLsk!lled _______________ _ Unskilled _________________ _ 19 32 73 9 4 2 16 14 25 38 6 46 5 10 53 241 11 5 1 120 3 53 = 142 -----11 6 30 42 64 7 4 Eamln91 of Heads of HouMholds Since no significant differences in earnings in 1934 were found between white part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers, the two groups are not presented separately. More than one-third of the white workers earned less than $500, over three-fifths earned less than $750, and only one-fifth earned more than $1,000 (table 92). The low annual earnings were due principally to part-time work. The high hourly rates, averaging 59 cents, reflect the large proportion of skilled workers (table 93). Slightly over one-half of the Negro part-time farmers, but only about one-fifth of the Negro nonfarmers, worked in a steel plant Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 132 Tal:,le 9!.-Earnings From Industrial Employment I of Heads of Hausehalds in the Coal and Iron Subregion, by Color, 1934 COBlmlnlng Total EarnlnllS from lndustri•l employment Blast furnaces and steel rolling mills Iron mining All others White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro Total •••••••••. 426 470 75 142 123 83 169 219 59 215 $1 to $IXL ..••.•....•. $100 to $249 .........•. $2.'>0 to $499 ........... $500 to $749 ..........• $'i50 to $1199 ........... SI.000 to Sl,249 ....... SI ,250 to $1,499 ....... Sl.500 to $1,999 ....... $2,000 to $2,499 ....... $2,500 or more ........ I 26 124 111 81 40 14 20 I -6 - -4 -32 -12 -47 1 6 43 7 -- 44 46 34 14 5 10 3 128 37 7 1 4 15 Average earnings. $733 $324 $751 124 276 59 10 6 3 21 13 24 7 2 2 - - $363 $723 I 41 90 II ----$:136 - 51 36 13 8 3 4 2 2 $682 I - I -- 8 1e 10 11 4 4 4 2 I= - - $390 SS06 $tQ! • At principal off•the•farm employment Oob with the largest earnings). which was shut down entirely for 5 months in 1934. As a result, the average earnings of part-time farmers in that year {$337) were somewhat smaller than the average earnings of the nonfarming industrial workers {$372) (appendix table 34). Since the differences in earnings between Negro part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers were not due to the farming activities carried on by the part-time farmers, the earnings of the two groups are discussed together hereafter. Twenty-seven percent of the Negroes earned less than $250, fiftyeight percent earned $250-$499, and only fifteen percent earned $500 or more. The average earnings for iron and steel workers were slightly higher than for miners (table 92). Tal:,le 93.-Rate of Pay I of Heads of Households in the Coal and Iron Subregion, by Color, 1934 Total Coal mining Iron mining Hourly rate or pay White Negro White Negro White Negro Blast furnaces and steel rolling mills White Negro All others White Negro ---Total •.••.•..• JO to 19 cents .••..... 20 to 29 cen•,s ........ 30 to 39 cents .....•.. 40 to 49 cents ...•.... 50 to 59 cents ...•...• 60 to 69 cents ...••... 70 to 79 cents ...•.... 80 to 89 cents ....•••. 90 to 99 cents ...••••• $1.00 or more ...••••• A..-erngehourly rate of pay .. 426 470 75 142 - - - -- - - 2 8 41 72 119 91 40 20 = II 16 $0.59 18 214 144 84 g I 4 17 24 II II 3 114 60 23 I 123 83 169 219 59 26 -1 -1 -3 -13 2 3 -I 5 21 10 12 8 12 4 I 2 I 9 19 36 40 12 34 33 3 23 26 47 32 13 11 10 -I -I -4 I I 3 --2 4 - -- - - -- - -·- $0.41 $0.59 $0. 42 $0.59 $0.48 6 8 so. 59 127 49 26 4 --- $0.39 I 2 so. 58 • At principal off•the•farm employment Oob with the largest earnings). Digitized by Google --- $0. 37 THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 133 The low earnings of heads of both white and Negro households of all groups in 1934 were due not so much to low hourly rates as to the lack of full-time employment. Some mills shut down entirely for part of the year, retaining only a small maintenance force. Several of the larger mines and mills operated for 6 months or less during 1934. Others gave partial employment throughout the year, either on a curtailed working schedule or on a "spread work" system. More than one-half of the white part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers were employed less than 150 days in 1934 (appendix table 32). The average for the whole group of whites was only 153 days, and for white iron miners only 138 days (table 94). The situation of the Negroes was even worse beca~e of the predominance of unskilled workers who were more comm.only laid off during shutdowns. Eighty-five percent of the Negroes bad less than 150 days of work, and the average for the group was only 114 days. The average for those in iro11 mining was only 92 days. Only a little more than 6 percent of the Negro heads of households were employed for as much as 200 days during 1934. Table H.-Number of Days Heads of Households in the Coal and Iron Subregion Were Employed off the Farm,1 by Color, 1934 Nomberof days employed otr the IBrm Coalmlnlng Total White Negro White Iron mining Negro White 611 47 16 10 Blast furnaces and steel rolling mills Negro White All others Negro White Negro - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 470 142 169 2111 611 26 Total •••••••• 76 123 83 - 103 - - 209 - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - 71 61 69 18 40 9 8 60 to 1111 daJ; ....... 4:16 36 100tol49 ys ..... 160 to 11111 days ••.•• :100 to 2411 days_ ..• _ 260 to 2911 days .•.. _ 300 days or more ••. A vernge days employed .• 1 132 112 61 18 20 1111 153 114 40 26 2 3 ---- 18 21 13 II 3 2 3 -- 156 105 19 1 1 6 -1 65 40 28 6 4 138 112 153 4 102 28 Ill 12 15 10 11 2 2 l 6 7 2 126 186 142 - l - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - At principal off•the•!arm employment (Job with the IB1'11:est earnings). Total Family Cash Income Total family incomes of white pa.rt-time fa.rm households from nonfarm sources were greater ($899) than the incomes of nonfarm households ($810), while the per ca.pita income was approximately the same, $176 and $179, respectively. Among the Negroes the reverse was true, the incomes of part-time farm families averaging $370 and those of nonfarming industrial families averaging $432, with per capita averages of $74 and $103, respectively (table 95). This difference in income between the two Negro groups may be due primarily to the fa.ct, already cited, that over one-half of the Negro part-time farmers but only one-fifth of the nonfarming industrial workers surveyed were employed in a steel plant that remained closed for 5 months in 1934. Digitized by Google 134 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST The scarcity of employment opportunity was such that very few members of the households other than the heads had any work. Few of the young people who had recently become of working age had found employment. Only 20 percent of the young people 16 to 24 years of age in white part-time farming households and 9 percent of the young people in Negro part-time farming households had any employment in 1934 (table 58, page 43, and appendix table 47). Tal:,/e 95.-Cash Income From Nonfarm Sources of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Coal and Iron Subregion, by Color, 1934 Part-time farm households 81.te of household Numheror Income per capita cases White Nonrarmlnr Industrial households Negro White lncom~ per capita Numherof ca.,e., Negro White Negro White Negro ----------·1---------------221 Total.......................... 204 1:M $176 $74 lper!!on ..••••..•...•...••..•........ 2persons............................ 3 persons............................ 4 persons............................ 6persons............................ 6person.s............................ 7 persons............................ 8 persons or more.................... 1 I t t t Average Income per household. 8 13 28 22 20 26 14 14 14 liO 45 28 21 23 324 216 180 142 169 87 346 I 165 126 74 76 1511 67 61 $1711 $103 I 2 21 68 397 20II liO 84 79 42 27 19 25 :Ml 197 162 13-1 128 139 122 115 62 36 32 19 II 118 M 67 87 ----;;;----;;-I----~,~--,= t Average not computed for 16'-• than 10 cases. 1 Total family Income unknown for 1 case. The occupations of the young white people were widely varied. Their earnings ranged from $20 to $1,500 annually with an average of $369. The fact that 21 youth earned less than $200 indicates that many were employed only part-time. Among the Negroes, there was less variety in the occupations. Their earnings ranged from $15 to $624 and averaged $205. Only about one-fourth of the white part-time farm and one-sixth of the nonfarming industrial families had one or more members other than the head employed in 1934 (appendix table 35). The earnings of these other members averaged $467 per employed person for the part-time farm group and $432 for the nonfarming industrial group. This contribution increased the average family income of white part-time farm households by $160 and of nonfarming industrial households by $77 (table 59, page 44). Sixteen percent of the Negro part-time farm and nineteen percent of the nonfarming industrial households had one or more members other than the head employed during at least part of 1934. Their earnings averaged $174 and $245, respectively, per employed person. This amounted to an average of $25 for all part-time farm households and $59 for nonfarming industrial households. Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 135 Chansa In Family Income, 1929-1934 The incomes of workers enumerated in this area were greatly reduced between 1929 and 1934. Among the whites, 85 percent of the households had lower incomes in 1934 than in 1929, 11 percent remained in the same income class, and only 4 percent had risen to a higher income class. Table 96 shows the extent of the decrease by income groups. As might be expected, the most drastic reductions occurred in the higher income groups. On the average, the incomes of all white households had decreased 46 percent. A typical case was that of a condenser operator in a steel mill whose earnings were reduced from $900 to $477. He was the only wage earner for a family .of six persons. A more drastic reduction-from $1,500 to $230-was made in the case of a drill runner in an iron mine. The family consisted of the head, his wife, and eight children. Such a marked reduction was not typical, but occurred frequently. In both of the cases cited above, the earnings of the head constituted the entire family income from off-the-farm sources. Both cases received relief in 1934, $95 for the steel mill employee and $25 for the iron miner. Table 96.-Changes in Family Income From Nonfarm Sources in the Coal and Iron Subregion, by Color, 1929-1934 Total family Income, 1929 Total family Income, 1934 Tot.al $1- $100- $2/;o.. $500- $750- $1, 000-- SI, 2.IO- $1, 500- $2, 000-- $2,500 $99 $249 $499 $749 $999 $1,249 $1,499 $1,999 $2,499 or more --------\-- -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WHITS Total .................................. 1 411 6 $1 to $99 ........................................ $100 to $249 ................................. $2.SO to $499 .................................. $500 to $749 ................................. $750 to $999 .................................. $1,000 to $1,249 ........................ $1,250 to $1,400 .......................... $1,500 to $1,999 ...................... $2,000 to $2,499 ........................... $2,500 or more ........................... 1 12 107 101 1 1 2 2 80 26 41 77 1 14 7 3 I 20 3 27 30 10 46 17 30 12 5 Average rnmlly In· $848 come, 1934................ .. 8 10 I -~ 50 11 17 11 8 2 1 126 49 6 18 27 10 5 6 8 11 1 10 2 I 4 9 3 2 4 6 3 $936 $1, 158 $1,349 29 18 11 13 3 1 36 f $528 $591 $620 $757 41 110 99 109 35 31 12 I 20 5 13 2 1 6 2 10 9 4 4 2 2 $497 $479 $406 NIIORO Total.................................. 1 447 $1 to $99 .......................... _.......... $100 to $249.................................. $2.'iO to $499.......................... ...... .. $."JOO to $749................................ $750 to $9119..................... $1,000 to $1,249................ $1,2.'iO to Sl.499 .................. . $1,500 to $1.999 ............... . $2,000 to $2,999 ........................ . 1 99 A~~!~ l~~..~~.... ~~: .. 5 1 248 70 21 2 12 33 23 2266255 1 3 11 14 4 4 62 6 2 4 $413 $417 $411 I fI f $334 $358 20 20 2 t Averai;e not computed !or less than 10 cases. 1 1 Exclusive or 15 white cases for which 1929 income was unknown. Exclusive or 23 Negro cases for which 1929 income was unknown. Digitized by Google 136 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST The average family income of all Negro households in 1934 from all sources other than the farm was only 42 percent of the average income of the same families in 1929, $411 as compared with $975. Eighty-six percent of the Negro households received less income in 1934 than in 1929; 11 percent remained in the income group; and only 3 percent were in a higher income group. As with the whites, the reductions were relatively greater in the higher income groups (table 96). The meaning of the reductions may be gained by citing two examples. The income for one Negro part-time farm family was reduced from $920 in 1929 to $192 in 1934. During 1934, the head of the household, an iron miner, received only 12 days of employment a month for 5 months. Although there was a son 27 years of age, and a daughter 26 years of age, the head· was the only wage earner. Such reductions, though greater than the average, occurred frequently. The added contribution of the garden was not sufficient for self-support and the family received $140 of public relief. Similarly, the wages of a Negro brickmason helper in a steel mill dropped from $1,000 to $475. Since a family of 10 depended upon his earnings, such a reduction was a serious loss. The children were all under 16 years of age and therefore too young to seek employment. This latter family was able to maintain self-support by the aid of the garden and by mortgaging the home for $600. LIVING CONDITIONS AND ORGANIZED SOCIAL LIFE Since the part-time farmers surveyed in this subregion lived in the same urban and suburban environment as did the nonfarming industrial workers, the living conditions and proximity to urban facilities of the two groups were similar (table 62, page 51). Housing of White Households The only significant difference between dwellings of white parttime farmers and of white nonfarming industrial workers was that the former had slightly larger houses, averaging 5.2 rooms per dwelling, while the houses of the latter averaged 4.5 rooms {appendix table 38). This advantage of slightly more than half a room per dwelling does not mean that housing conditions of part-time farmers were superior to those of nonfarming industrial households, since the part-time farm households were somewhat larger in size. Approximately two-thirds of each group had the relatively high standard of one room per member of the household (appendix table 39). The state of repair and the available conveniences were about the same for the two groups. About 40 percent of all the houses needed no repairs. More than one-half were in need of paint, new floors, siding, window panes, porch repairs, papering, or other minor repairs. Approximately one-fifth needed roof repairs and one-tenth needed general structural repairs (appendix table 40). Almost all of the Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 137 houses had electric lights and running water while about half of them had bathrooms (appendix table 41). HoU1ln9 of Negro Houteholds In general the living conditions of Negroes in the Coal and Iron Subregion were somewhat above the average for southern Negroes. The houses of the families surveyed averaged 3.5 rooms, with 37 percent of the part-time farm and 51 percent of the nonfarm families averaging one person or less per room (appendix tables 38 and 39). The size of the houses did not increase with the size of the household as consistently as among the whites. The typical Negro dwelling consisted of two, three, or four rooms, and was either part of a double house or a single family residence. The dwellings varied from rough shacks to well-kept modem homes. Approximately one out of four dwellings needed no repairs (appendix table 40). More than one-half were in need of paint, screens, siding, porch repairs, window panes, new floors, plastering, papering, or other minor repairs. One out of three dwellings needed roof repairs, while one out of six required such major repairs as new foundations, franies, and sills. Approximately one-half had electric lights, six out of seven had running water, and one out of seven had a bathroom (appendix table 41). Automobiles, Radios, and Telephona Radios were found in the homes of almost three-fourths of both groups of white workers, and in the homes of more than one-fifth of the Negro workers (appendix table 42). Telephones were rare in all groups. Only 8 percent of the white part-time farm and 4 percent of the white nonfarming industrial households had telephones; and only two Negro families had them. Automobiles were owned by 46 percent of the white part-time farmers as compared with 38 percent of the nonfarmers. This difference is related to the fact that 66 percent of the part-time farmers lived 1½ miles or more from their places of employment, as compared with only 27 percent of the nonfarming industrial group who lived at that distance (appendix table 28). Less than 5 percent of the Negro part-time farmers owned cars, although 38 percent of them lived 2½ miles or more from their places of employment. However, cars were not necessary in all cases, since street cars or buses were available to many, and since the most common means of getting to work for both whites and Negroes was for several neighbors to drive together in one car. Home Ownenhlp Approximately one-third of the white part-time farmers owned their homes, as compared with only 18 percent of the nonfarming industrial workers (appendix table 43). Among the Negroes, 150061°-37-12 Digitized by Google 138 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST there was no difference between the part-time farm and the nonfarming industrial groups, about one-fifth of each owning their homes. Most of the white and Negro coal and iron miners lived in company villages, so it is perhaps noteworthy that so many workers owned their homes. Education Elementary and secondary schools were available for all children, Negroes as well as whites. Less than 5 percent of all children from 7 to 16 years of age, inclusive, were not in school (table 75, page 63). Most of these were 7-yee.r-old children who had not yet started to school. There was comparatively little retardation in school of eit er white or Negro children (table 76, page 64). Heads of white households had completed about seven grades on an average. Less than one-half of either white group had completed grade school, and only about 1 out of 9 of the part-time farmers and 1 out of 11 of the nonfarming industrial workers had completed high school. Negro heads of households had completed approximately four grades (appendix table 46). Only about 13 percent had completed grade school, and only 2 percent had been graduated from high school. More than 80 percent of both white groups reported library facilities available, but only 49 percent of the part-time farm and 58 percent of the nonfarming industrial households with such facilities had made any use of them (table 78, page 66). Although three-fourths of the Negro part-time farm and 43 percent of the Negro nonfarming industrial households reported library facilities, only one in six and one in eight of these households, respectively, made any use of the facilities. Social Participation of White Households Organized social life in this area offered a considerable variety of activities. The church was an important center of social life with both adult and young people's organizations. Church services and Sunday Schools were available to nearly all white households. School clubs, athletic teams, and fraternal orders were more frequently available to, and more often attended by, members of nonfarming than of farming households (appendix table 48). Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, women's organizations, and special interest groups were also more often available to the nonfarming industrial households, but were seldom attended by either group. About one-third of both groups of white households reported membership in labor unions, while others snid that they would be members if they could pay the dues. Although the nonfarming industrial households participated in more organizations than did part-time farm households, their total numerical attendance per person in 1934 was slightly less, being 70 as against 78 for the part-time farm group (table 80, page 68). Similarly, while members of part-time farm households furnished somewhat more Digitized by Google THE COAL AND IRON SUBREGION 139 leadership to local organizations than did nonfarming industrial households, the leadership was confined to a smaller number of organizations. About 37 percent of the pa.rt-time farm households in comparison with 24 percent of the nonfarming industrial households had a member who was an officer in some organization (appendix table 49). Social Paitlclpatfon of Negro HoUHholcls The church was by far the most important factor in the social life of Negroes in this area. Nearly all families attended church and Sunday School regularly, while adult church organizations and young people's organizations were available to nearly all and were well attended. Approximately 40 percent of the heads of Negro households attended labor union meetings. Whites and Negroes were members of the same unions. Parent-Teacher Associations, athletic teams, fraternal orders, school clubs, and women's organizations were generally available and attended by occasional households. Practically no participation in Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts was reported. The average number of attendances per person in 1934 was about 90 (table 80, page 68). Leadership was confined largely to the church and related organizations. On an average, 1 out of 16 persons in these households held an office in some organization (appendix table 49). RELIEF It is evident that small fanning operations, such as those being carried on in this area, are quite inadequate for the support of a family. Also, the data show that such operations have not compensated for the decline in industrial earnings and have not served to keep either white or Negro families off relief. Thirty-two percent of the white part-time farm group and twenty-eight percent of the white nonfarming industrial group received public relief at some time during 1934 (table 61, page 47). The average amounts received were $50 and $58, respectively. However, only 22 percent of those who bad been part-time farmers for 5 years or more received relief in 1934. During the period, 1929-1935, those who received some relief had received it for an average period of 1½ years (appendix table 36). Seventy-eight percent of the Negro part-time farm group and fiftyeight percent of the Negro nonfanning industrial group received public relief at some time during 1934. The average amounts received were almost identical: $56 and $55, respectively. The higher proportion of Negro part-time farmers than of nonfarming industrial workers on relief was associated with less steady employment. Those workers with the least employment were the most likely to receive relief. Also, due to the fact that they had more time available and lower incomes, they were most likely to undertake farming activities. Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Chapter Ill THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION GENERAL FEATURES OF THE SUBREGION AND OF CHARLESTON COUNTY THE COUNTIES which comprise the Atlantic Coast Subregion (figure 2, page XXIV) are part of the larger region designated on the type of farming map (figure 3, page XXVI) as the Atlantic Coast Flatwoods. Most of this region is covered by forest. Only 33 percent of the total land area in the portion located in Georgia and South Carolina was in farms in 1934, and of the land in farms only 15 percent was in crops harvested that year. 1 From an agricultural standpoint, the truck-farming area centering in Beaufort and Charleston Counties, South Carolina, is the most important area of any considerable size in the whole region. These two counties together include 50 percent of the total value of farm land and buildings for the entire Flatwoods Region of Georgia and South Carolina. 2 In the Atlantic Coast Subregion nearly all of the industry, except some lumbering and naval stores operations, is clustered in and around the three seaports of Brunswick, Charleston, and Savannah. In 1930, 44 percent of the 107,100 persons gainfully employed in nonagricultural pursuits in this subregion lived in Chatham County, Georgia, which includes Savannah; 33 percent lived in Charleston County, South Carolina; and 8 percent lived in Glynn County, Georgia, where Brunswick is located. Charleston County The considerations leading to the selection of Charleston County for study in this region were as follows: (1) It includes one of the three leading seaports; (2) it includes part of the principal truck-farming area; (3) it includes a considerable number of part-time farms; and (4) the relief load has been relatively high. The 1930 Census of 1 United States Census of Agriculture: 1935. 1 Jdem. 141 Digitized by Google 142 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST Agriculture reported 347 part-time farms in Charleston County, accounting for 18 percent of the total number of farms. In October 1934, the number of families receiving relief in Charleston County amounted to 28 percent of the number of families recorded in the 1930 Census of Population. Populatwn The population of Charleston County was 62 percent urban in 1930. That year, for the first time in its history, a majority (55 percent) of the population of the city of Charleston was white. While the white urban population had increased from 1920 to 1930, the Negro urban population had declined as a result of considerable emigration. The total urban population, which had increased gradually since the Civil War, showed a decline of 8 percent during this decade. In 1930, the rural nonfarm population was 61 percent Negro and the rural farm population was 83 percent Negro. The total rural population declined between 1920 and 1930, but the decline was relatively less than that for the urban population. Agricultural Features The great majority of the rural population, both fa.rm and nonfann, is directly dependent upon agriculture. In 1930, 77 percent of the gross farm income of the county was derived from the sale of potatoes and other vegetables. Hence, the truck-crop industry is of major importance. For some distance inland, the area to the south of the city of Charleston is comprised of islands separated from the mainland by a series of narrow tideways commonly referred to as rivers. Much of it is marshy and covered with woods, but there are also considerable areas of sandy soil well adapted to the production of truck crops. The normal annual rainfall is about 45 inches, with the heaviest precipitation in the summer months. 3 The normal frost-free growing season is 9 months, from February 28 to December 1.' Thus, soil and rainfall are adapted to vegetable growing and the season is long enough for two or even three crops of certain types. l\fore significant perhaps than the length of the growing season is the fact that it normally begins early enough to permit farmers to harvest their first crop of vegetables at a time when the markets are not well supplied from competing areas. Their potato crop reaches northern and eastern markets before the North Carolina crop but after the Florida and Texas crops. The time when the crop is marketed is all-important from the standpoint of prices received. The significance of seasonal price movements is further evidenced by the fact that • Yearbook of Agriculture: 1935, U. S. Department of Agriculture, p. 707. • Idem, p. 709. Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 143 the local trucking area does not supply the markets of Charleston during off-eeasons, but devotes all of its resources to producing for the seasons when high prices prevail. Some of the produce leaves by motor truck but shipment by rail predominates. In 1934, a total of 3,150 carloads of vegetables were shipped from Charleston. Of these 2,028 were carloads of potatoes, 838 of cabbages, and the remaining 284 of miscellaneous vegetables. Potatoes are shipped chiefly in May, cabbages from November through January and again in May. Shipments of other vegetables reach their height in May and June, but there is some movement throughout the yea.r.6 Of the 3,733 farms O in Charleston County reported by the 1935 Census of Agriculture, only 20 percent were operated by whites. However, these 20 percent included 83 percent of all land in farms. All farms operated by whites averaged 209 acres in size and those operated by Negroes averaged 11 acres. The commercial agriculture of the county is carried on for the most part on a relatively small number of large-ecale truck farms operated by whites. Many Negro operators of small farms depend for part of their living upon labor on the large commercial farms. Only 30 percent of all the farmers in the county reported hiring labor in 1929.7 For those hiring labor, the average expenditure was about $1,230. Ninety-six percent of those reported as farm. laborers in the 1930 Census were Negroes. 8 The demand for vegetables varies decidedly with general business conditions. The effects of the last two general depressions resulted in small shipments in 1920 and 1932. Aside from this type of fluctuation and occasional fluctuations in yields resulting from weather conditions, production has remained fairly uniform. There is reason to believe that with further increases in business activity production of vegetables will also increase. However, any expansion beyond the volume produced during the twenties seems ·unlikely in view of the limitations imposed by the available area of good vegetable land and by markets for the crop. There is an adequate supply of labor in the area to produce such a volume of vegetables. Increases in production would merely mean more employment to be shared by the large underemployed labor force. 1 "Car-Lot Shipments of Fruits and Vegetables in South Carolina During 1934," Market News Servi.ce, United States Bureau of Agricultural Economics. e The number of farms reported by this census was almost double the number reported by the 1930 Census, but approximately the same as the numbers reported by the 1925 Census and the 1920 Census. This difference in number of farms is probably accounted for chiefly by the difference in the number of small Negro holdings enumerated as farms. With a 91 percent increase in number of farms between the 1930 and 1935 Censuses, there was only an 8 percent increase in acres of cropland harvested and a 30 percent decrease in the acreage of potatoes, the principal crop. 1 Fifteenth. Censua of th.tJ UniwJ States: 1930, Agriculture Vol. III, Part 2. • I rum. Digitized by Google 144 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST Area Covered and C.... Enumerated Field enumeration was limited to the Charleston peninsula and to the four nearest townships across the Ashley River. This area included most of those who work in the urban industries since a high bridge toll renders commuting from across the Cooper River to the north of the city impractical. It also includes a portion of the truck farming section. Records were secured from 213 white and N e,gro families that met the above requirements. Their location is shown in figure 11. This represents a nearly complete census of white part-time farmers (according to the definition used) in the eight minor civil divisions included in the enumeration. The enumeration of Negro part-time farmers was equally complete in and near Charleston, but less nearly complete in the rural portion of the county where farm laborers were found in large numbers. INDUSTRIES OF CHARLESTON COUNTY Charleston is primarily a seaport and trading center. A majority of the workers are employed in the service industries. Some of these workers derive their incomes from serving the local population, while others are dependent directly on the commerce of the city with other areas. Manufacturing, while not employing directly as many people as the group of service industries, is a very important element in the economic life of the city. Therefore, discussions of both port commerce and manufacturing are included in this section. These activities not only employ large numbers of people directly, but they are also the principal factors determining the city's general prosperity, and hence its industrial employment opportunities. Charleston's situation between the Ashley and Cooper Rivers, with ample waterfront and anchorage space only 7½ miles from the ·open sea, is ideal for a port. Before the Civil War, Charleston was the business center and principal port of the Southeast. When railroad building began, railroads were projected from Charleston to the interior and were partly built before construction was stopped by the Civil War. Before the South could recover from the effects of the war, the expansion of railroads from northern ports to the West and Northwest had established the overseas traffic of these regions through the northern ports. Some of the Middle West's foreign trade has been diverted through New Orleans, but the South Atlantic ports have not shared in it. The port of Charleston is dependent on the Southeast for its traffic. In the development of this traffic other ports more favored by the railroads, notably Savannah, have surpassed Charleston. Probably the development of Savannah is due in large part to the fact that it is the terminus of the Central of Georgia Railway, and also is served by Digitized by Google figures 9 and i i , p ages 1 2 4 and 1 f ,• . 11- po 4 5. r,;u RT\011 O e:' .·; ~•~ f J E f fER 49: SOII coo t1TY , covE.RE O \N f \EI LO s uR• V- E'< I I I I 44 I 29 2"' I Al.AB"-"'" ' I I I I I I I I ..-.,c:• " '" ""' I ~----I' I -----~-- '-'1 I I ..J II ,,,. I 40'11 /2 ' I I , I I I ~· . I ,/ ,~0 I \ I I '~ - " _ .,.. _ ,,.. ... ► , 20 I ·---.., : I I 0 24'11 ,....... -...,r-"' I I I 0 -------e-- ( ') 0 0 09... ~ • I \~ 0. .' l I I 1 cu ... ✓-- I I I I I ,-' ~. N I I I I "" I ~ ~ .J I 't --- I / 41 -- ---------- I I I ' <' \ \ ,, , ,,..- I I c, r_J - - - - - - ' I I I I ~ LEGEND - I --- I I I I I - - - - - - •I i - : 3G f I I \----- ~ l 1 I 4GI I ✓I V \ I/ ' \ 7 I I ,.,. I '°"' GII"'" I L - - -I -- - 1 -' ) \ ,.. BIRMINGH~ \\ M ,, ,, '" 21 I \ ,/ I 37 \ 9 \ \I I I 40 42 -, I J( I I -----i,,~-' \ ,,.r--~ M &IRY III - S'TREE'T CAR \.IN ES RAII.ROA OS Cl'f''I' 1.1! -'l'TS MINOR Cl'l/11. O \\IISION so\JNOA RIES •r -2 0 2 ." ' P " .,.. ~ U6 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST four other railroads. Charleston is served by three railway systems: the Southern, the Atlantic Coast Line, and the Seaboard Air Line. Charleston has 44 piers, wharves, and docks, which are owned by the Port Utilities Commission, and by railroads, steamship companies, and other private interests. The United States Navy has a yard for the construction and repair of naval vessels located on the Cooper River about 4 miles north of the city limits. The water-borne commerce of the port of Charleston (exports, imports, and coastwise traffic) showed a downward trend from 1925 to 1932 but recovered somewhat in 1933 and 1934. Petroleum products, the principal item of tonnage handled in the years 1924 to 1934, inclusive, declined from a peak of 1,680,000 tons in 1925 to less than one-half of that amount in 1933. Coal exports reached a high level in 1926, due to the strike of British miners in that year, and then fell to negligible amounts in 1929 and succeeding years. The total of all other items also decreased, due mainly to the drop in imports of fertilizer materials, the principal item in this group. The total traffic in all commodities, except petroleum, coal, and fertilizer materials, varied between a high of 751,000 tons in 1926 and a low of 482,000 tons in 1931.9 Lumber and cotton are important items in this miscellaneous group. Savannah is Charleston's principal competitor for port business. Savannah's water-borne commerce also showed a downward trend from 1925 to 1932 and an upturn in 1933 and 1934 in the total of all items except petroleum products. 10 Savannah's traffic in petroleum products increased greatly in this period. Evidently, some of Charleston's petroleum business was lost to Savannah. The principal items of Savannah's water-home trade are petroleum, fertilizers, cotton, sugar and molasses, lumber, and naval stores. Service lnclustrla Of the 43,200 gainfully occupied persons living in Charleston County in 1930, 55 percent were service workers (table 97). Of the largest group, "Other domestic and personal service," 88 percent were Negro women. Wholesale and retail trade, the next most important group, was made up of about 55 percent white men, 18 percent white women, 25 percent Negro men, and 2 percent Negro women. More than 60 percent of the railroad workers were white men. "Other transportation and communication" included the workers in the shipping industry. Many of this group were Negro longshoremen and dock laborers. The public service group included the Navy Yard workers, largely skilled shipbuilding mechanics. 9 The Ports of Charleston, S. C., and Wilmington, N. C., Port Series No. 9, Revised 1934, Corps of Engineers, United States Army. 10 Idem, Port Series No. 10, 1925 and 1935 (Revised 1935). Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 147 Tol,le P7.-0istribution of Penons1 10 Yea11 Old and Over, Gainfully Occupied In Service Industries in Cnarleston County, South Carolina, 1930 Total IndWltry N=• White :~i Male Negro Female Male Female --------------------------Total ••.•••••••••••••••••.......••••••••••••.•.• 23, 70i 100.0 8,498 2,960 4,887 7,3MI - 226 - - 0.9 --- -I - 132 - - -2 Construction and malntenanre ofstreets .•••••.••••... 91 Garages, greasing stations, etc ....••••••........•••.... Postal oervice ..............••••••••••••••••.•....••... Steam and street railroads ........................... . Telegraph and telephone ................••.••...•..... Other transportation and oommUDlcatlon •••.•••••••.. Banking and brokerage .••••••••••••••••••.••.•..•••.. Insurance and real estate .....•..........•.•••••••••... t~i1' !:::si1::! .-'!~ ~.:':1~. 1!~~::::::::::::::: Other trade ...•........•....••...•••••.••••••......... 0 8 .~. Public service (not elsewhere clBSSitled) •••••••••••••.• Recreation and amusement. .....•..............•••.•. Other profes.slonal and semiprofessional service .••••... Hotels, restaurants, and boarding hoW!e6 .•.••..•...••. Llltmdries, cleaning and pressing .........•.••.••..•.•. Other domestic and personal service .•••.••••.•....... 160 174 1,516 311 2,040 368 566 389 4,523 83 2,065 2.,2 2,299 1,222 3~4 7,186 0. 7 0. 7 6.4 I. 3 8. 6 1.6 2. 4 1.6 19.1 0.3 8. 7 I.I 11. 7 6.2 I. 4 30.3 110 115 924 143 750 267 415 288 2,512 47 I, 701 69 664 179 2 17 38 157 'rl 48 42 648 10 G 1 7 4 72 1,256 25 123 26 799 18 87 76 95-1 309 17 74 11 I, 109 18 273 103 88 22 135 233 86 310 355 83 601 I 4 21 372 379 131 6,317 Source: Fif!u'nt/1 Cemu, oftl&e United Slaita: 19$0, Population Vol. Ill. The shipping business of Charleston varies with the seasons, because of the seasonal nature of fertilizer shipments. The first 3 months of the year are the busiest time, and summer is the dullest. The demand for stevedore labor varies with the tonnage and kind of goods handled. Petroleum products, which form a large part of Charleston's port traffic, and coal require little or no dock labor for handling. Manufacturlns "Manufacturing and allied industries" accounted for 23 percent of the gainfully employed in Charleston County in 1930 (table 98). Building is the only important nonmanufacturing industry in this group. Although Charleston County is on the seacoast, fishing is a means of livelihood for comparatively few persons. The principal manufacturing industries of Charleston County are fertilizer and lumber, each represented by several establishments. There are also a cigar factory, a factory making jute bagging for cotton bales, an asbestos products plant, a wood-preserving concern, and a petroleum refinery. A cotton mill was in operation in 1929, but has since gone out of business. Average employment remained fairly steady between 1929 and 1933, the losses in the fertilizer and forest products groups being offset by an increase in other industries. Total wages for 1933 were about two-thirds of the 1929 figure. Even before the depression, however, manufacturing activity in Charleston County was declining. On the average, 7,000 wage earners were employed in 1919, 6,200 in 1927, and 5,300 in 1929. 11 11 Biennial Census of Manufactures. Digitized by Google 1-48 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Tal,le 98.-Distribution of Pe11ons, 10 Yea11 Old and Over, Gainfully Occupied in Manufacturing and Allied Industries in Charleston County, South Carolina, 1930 White Total Negro Industry N~':'· Percent Male Female Male Female - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , - - - ------------ - - Tota!._ _________________________________________ 10,021 100.0 4.198 18. 3 19.2 0. 4 I. 2 6. 6 2. 3 12. 2 6. 3 2.5 2. 0 I. 7 3. 2 4.0 Ii. 2 10 3 12 860 638 15 55 2 945 I, 210 25 818 4,211 9!M - 2117 - -0.2.-72 - - -2 -177- - 87 minerals _______________________________ . Forestry and fishing__________________________________ Extraction of Building ____ . __ ._. __________________________________ . _ Chemimlandallied ·---------- --------·----------·· Clay, glass, and stone.·-·--· ______ .. ______ ... ___ . ____ . Clothin~---- .. _________ . ______ ····--·· _________ .. ____ . Food and allied .. __ . __ ........ __ .... ____ ·- .......... __ Automobile factories and repair shops. ______ . ___ .. ___ . Iron and st<'t'I. __ . _..... __ ..... _____ ... _. __ .. _... ___ .. Saw and planing mills_._. __ .. _. ____ ._ .. _. __ .. __ .. ____ Otherwoodworking ... _______________________________ Paper, printing, and allied. _____ .·-·__________________ Cotton mills _____________ . _____________________ ··--·-. Other textile ... ____ ._ .... ____ . _______ . _____ . __ . _____ .. Indel)('ndent hand trnde11_____________________________ Other manuracturing .• __________________________ . ___ . 2.~ I, R29 1,923 46 117 fi.19 228 I, 2'20 634 253 :al3 173 321 403 I, 7:al 19 39 215 183 841 155 74 150 83 49 57 738 9 20 14 44 20 28 2 21 4 4 37 252 42 357 430 158 16 164 45 12 87 287 29 86 58 370 16 174 201 325 I I 45 Ii Source: Fiflunth Ctmu• of tht t'niled St11tu: 19~, Population Vol. III. With the exception of a very few small plants, all of the manufacturing industry of Charleston is located within the corporate limits of Charleston or on the peninsula north of the city. The bagging factory and the cigar factory are in the city. Most of the fertilizer plants, the large sawmills, the wood-preserving plant, and the petroleum refinery are on the narrow neck just north of the city. The asbestos plant is in North Charleston. Since fertilizer manufacturing is a highly seasonal business, a great part of the year's operations is crowded into the months of February, March, and April. The low point is in the summer, and employment then gradually increases through the rest of the year as stock is accumulated for the next spring's business. Most of the wage earners in fertilizer manufacturing are unskilled Negroes. In 1923, the average wage in this industry in the South was 13.7 cents per hour. 13 The minimum rate of pay under the N. R. A. code, effective November 10, 1933, was 25 cents per hour in the South, and this rate was maintained in the Charleston factories during the summer of 1935 after the N. R. A. had ceased to function. The fertilizer industry has been on the downgrade since the World War. Because its customers are farmers, it has felt the full impact of the agricultural depression. There are many small concerns in the business, and it is highly competitive. The N. R. A., with its open price provisions, rescued the industry from a state approaching demoralization, but its future is rather uncertain. Any considerable 12 "Code of Fair Competition for the Fertilizerlndustry," letter from the N. R. A. Administrator to the President. Digitized by Google 149 THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION shift in the South from cotton raising to diversified forming will be likely to result in decreased use of commercial fertilizers. The lumber industry mostly employs unskilled Negroes and wages are low. This industry had an N. R. A. code which set the minimum pay at 23 cents per hour in the South and limited working hours to 40 per week, but wages have been reduced and hours lengthened since code enforcement stopped. The largest single manufacturing establishment in Charleston is a cigar factory, which normally employs several hundred persons. A large majority of the workers are white women who operate the cigarmaking machines. Some Negro women are employed as strippers. N. R. A. code wage rates and hours were being maintained in 1935. The minimum rates were 22}'2 cents per hour for certain strippers classed as show workers, 25 cents for other strippers and unskilled laborers, and higher rates for cigar makers. Maximum hours were set at 40 per week for most employees, except during the two peak seasons of the year. In the industries of Charleston, the unskilled work is generally done by Negro men. White men are usually skilled or semiskilled workers or foremen. Outloolc for Employment While no detailed analysis of the industries of Charleston has been attempted, the foregoing description may serve as a basis for a few generalizations as to the probable future trend of industrial employment. The shipping and fertilizer businesses, and to a certain extent the trade industries of Charleston, depend on commerce with the city's agricultural hinterland; hence, these industries will probably tend to rise or fall with the fortunes of southern agriculture. Any substantial increase in employment in these industries must await a solution of the agricultural problem. There is no indication that any marked change in the numbers employed in manufacturing in Charleston County is likely to take place within the next few years. Manufacturing activity and population both declined in the decade from 1920 to 1930. However, manufacturing employment has remained fairly steady throughout the depression, the 1933 average being about equal to 1929, and the 1931 average only 8 percent less. Charleston has no raw materials other than the products of southern farms and forests. In fact, none of the important local industries, except the forest products group, draws its raw material from local sources. The principal advantage that Charleston has to offer to manufacturers is low freight rates by water to eastern seaboard cities and foreign ports, particularly those in Cuba and the Caribbean Islands. Digitized by Google 150 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST FARMING AOIVITIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS Types of Part-nme Fc:n1• Most of the part-time farmers enumerated in this study, both white and Negro, produced farm products chiefly for their own use. About one-third of the white group, however, in addition to production for family use, conducted operations on a scale beyond that normally expected to supply the needs of a single family. Among the 24 farms involved, there were 14 truck farms, 3 dairy farms, 2 combined truck and dairy farms, 2 cotton farms, 2 poultry farms, and 1 general farm. No study of the success of the commercial part of these farming ventures has been attempted, but comparisons have been made between their self-sufficing aspects and those of the noncommercial farms. The average acreage in cropland was 26 acres for white commercial part-time farmers, 3 acres for white noncommercial part-time farmers, and around 4 acres for Negroes (appendix table 6). Over one-third of the white farmers had less than 1½ acres, but only one-fifth of the Negroes had as small a plot as this. Another third of the whites had from 1½to 9 acres, while nearly three-fourths of the Negroes had crop acreages of this size. Fc:n1 Production One-fourth of the whites and less than 6 percent of the Negroes produced all four types of food products: vegetables, dairy products, poultry products, and pork. On the other hand, 90 percent of the whites and nearly 70 percent of the Negroes had more than one type of enterprise (appendix table 12). Gardens Gardens were practically universal among the part-time farmers, all except two whites and two Negroes having them (appendix table 11 and figure 12). Since the area is adapted to vegetable growing and marketing channels are well developed, many produced vegetables for sale or at least sold their surplus. Most of the commercial group had what amounted to commercial truck farms. Only five in the noncommercial group sold as much as $100 worth of products, and less than one-fifth of the Negroes sold $50 worth or more (appendix table 25). Since Charleston has an average frost-free growing season of 9 months, there are about 7 months in which the less hardy vegetables may be consumed fresh from the gardens (appendix table 14). The more hardy vegetables may be available during the colder months. However, nm1rly three-fourths of the gardens of the white farmers supplied three or more fresh vegetables for only 4 months or less. One-eighth of the Negroes' gardens supplied at least three vegetables for 4 months or more (appendix table 13). Usually gardens were planted only in the spring. Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 151 WHITE COMMERCIAL MIU< COWS HOGS POULTRY ACRES IN GARDEN WHITE NONCOMMERCIAL MILK COWS I HOIS 1111111111111111:l:1111111111111~ L----NON[ ·rma 11111 :·: I 11111: :11• NON[ 2 ~ II~ .............. §T~1~1111111m:11111111@11 o-, POULTRY FNONE8H·l~~111111m:,Ht:111 NEGRO AGRICULTURAL. WORKER i: 1oaov~ MILK cows ....____ NON[ _ _ :rn 1111111 II HOGS I-----NONE-----11111111111: :1111111~ POULTRY IA 1 ACRES IN GARDEN ~ 0 NONE+a11111111:tr:1111111~ H-H llll!Htllll~f-·-·i NONE 10 20 30 40 &O 60 70 80 90 100 PERCENT F11. I 2-SIZE OF PRINCIPAL ENTERPRISES ON PART-TIME FARMS. BY TYPE OF FARM ANO BY COLOR OF OPERATOR, CHARLESTON COUNTY, S. C., 1934 "'•2411, WP.A. Digitized by Google 152 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Despite this fact, the gardens, especially of the white families, contributed fairly well to their living. Two-tpirds of the whites with gardens and well over one-third of the Negro families with gardens reported that their grocery bills were less in the 6 summer than in the 6 winter months, the average reduction being $6.60 and $3.50 per month, respectively. In one white family the reduction was over $20 per month, and in two Negro families it was over $10. Canning and storage of vegetables did not extend the contribution of the garden very much in this area. Less than one-fifth of the white part-time farm families and only two of the Negro part-time farm f8,Il\ilies did any canning (appendix table 16). Storage of vegetables was somewhat more common (table 29, page 20). Onehalf of the whites stored sweet potatoes and about one-fourth stored Irish potatoes, the amounts usually ranging from 10 to 20 bushels (appendix table 17). These vegetables were stored by the Negroes in somewhat smaller quantities. Storage of other vegetables by either whites or Negroes was too limited to be significant. Gorn Field corn was grown by four-fifths of the white commercial and by about one-half of the white noncommercial part-time farmers, their average production being 310 bushels and 48 bushels, respectively (appendix table 24). Practically all of this was used as feed for livestock, only four families reporting use of corn for food. Over three-fourths of the Negroes grew corn, their production averaging 21 bushels. Thirty-five percent of the Negro families consumed an average of 7 bushels for food. Dairy Products About half of the white farmers had one or more cows (appendix table 11). One-fifth of the Negroes had cows, but only a few of them had more than one. :Milk production during 1934 averaged 2,440 quarts per cow for the white commercial part-time farmers and 1,770 quarts for the white noncommercial part-time farmers (appendix table 20). However, only two-thirds of the whites and -one-fourth of the Negroes who had cows made any butter (appendix tltlble 21), the amounts averaging 3 pounds a week for the whites and less than 2 pounds for the Negroes. Only nine of the white noncommercial part-time farmers sold dairy products. Most of the white commercial group produced roughage, averaging 11 tons (appendix table 23). Few of the white noncommercial or the Negro part-time farmers produced roughage and when they did it was in such small quantities that they had to purchase additional feed for their cows. The pnsture season is quite long in this area, but the soil does not produce good pasturage. Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 153 Pomtry Products Over four-filths of the white noncommercial part-time farmers and 70 percent of the Negro part-time farmers had poultry, the most common size of flocks being from 10 to 30 birds (appendix table 11). The flocks of the white commercial group were somewhat larger than those of the white noncommercial group and egg and meat production was more than twice as high; consumption by the former averaged 152 dozen eggs and 117 pounds of dressed poultry in 1934, and that by the latter averaged 84 dozen eggs and 67 pounds of dressed poultry (appendix tables 18 and 19). Nearly all of the flocks of the Negroes contained less than 20 birds, which produced an average of only 47 dozen eggs. Consumption of home-produced poultry by the Negroes averaged less than one chicken a month. Pork Two-fifths of the white and one-sixth of the Negro part-time farm families raised pork for their own use. Home-grown pork was a fairly important contribution to the living of these families, the consumption or storage being 531 pounds in 1934 for white commercial part-time farmers, 306 pounds for the white noncommercial part-time farmers, and 230 pounds for the Negro part-time farmers (appendix table 22). Fuel Only 21 of the white and 16 of the Negro part-time farmers had some woodland and cut fuel for their own use. Six other whites and thirtyseven other Negroes were able to cut wood in nearby woodlots. The quantity used ranged from 5 to 15 cords. Fi.sh The Negro part-time farmers who lived on the islands in the southwestern part of the county had favorable opportunities for fishing close at hand. Seventeen Negro families on Wadmalaw Island reported catching fish for home use throughout the year, the quantities ranging from 20 to 500 pounds per family. In addition, each of these families reported gathering oysters for home use in the winter months, the quantities ranging from 4 to 50 bushels. Sea food was thus an important item in the living of these families. Cash Receipts and Cash Expensa Only 21 of the white noncommercial part-time farmers sold farm products, the average being $30 (appendix table 25). Dairy products accounted for 71 percent of the sales. Cash expenses were in most cases in excess of cash receipts. On the average, however, those who sold over $50 worth of farm products more than covered cash expenses exclusive of rent and taxes. Comparatively, the Negroes did some1500610-a1-1a Digitized by Google 15-4 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST what better; 56 percent sold some products, and though the average cash receipts were only $38, all who sold anything more than covered expenses. For the 62 who sold no products, cash expenses, exclusive of rent and taxes, averaged only $7. Expenses of the whites averaged $62 and of the Negroes $26. Value and Tenure of Part-Time Farms One-half of the white and two-fifths of the Negro part-time farmers owned their homes (appendix table 7). The real estate of owners was of considerably greater value than that leased by tenants, averaging approximately twice as high for the noncommercial whites and Negroes, and 68 percent higher for the commercial whites. The acreage operated by white owners and tenants was approximately the same, the difference in real estate value being accounted for largely by more buildings and better homes for the owners. Negro owners had larger farms than did the tenants, the averages being 9 and 4 acres, respectively. There was a great difference in real estate values between the whites and Negroes. Average values of white part-time farms ranged from $2,293 for noncommercial tenants and $4,400 for noncommercial owners to $4,584 for commercial tenants and $7,705 for commercial owners, while those for Negroes averaged $599 for tenants and $1,242 for owners (table 17, page 12). Investment in implements and machinery was not an important item for any except white commercial part-time farmers. Threefourths of the white noncommercial group and one-half of the Negroes had only small hand tools. The average cost for those having implements and machinery was only $33 for the white noncommercial farmers and $35 for the Negroes (appendix table 10). Two-thirds of the white owners held their farms free of debt (appendix table 8). The owners of commercial part-time farms with debts had a much larger average mortgage indebtedness than did the owners of noncommercial part-time farms. For the noncommercial group, the total mortgage indebtedness of owners who were in debt averaged $466. Only five of the white tenants reported any mortgage indebtedness. The indebtedness for these few averaged $235. Only 44 percent of the Negro owners reported any mortgage indebtedness, and the amount reported by those who were in debt averaged $99. Among the tenants, 14 percent reported mortgage indebtedness averaging $42. White owners earned more at employment off the farm than did tenants, but the reverse was true for Negroes employed in agriculture. For Negroes employed in some industry other than agriculture, earnings away from the home farm averaged the same for owners and tenants (table 99). Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 155 Tal,le P9.-Eamings at Off-the-Farm Employment of Heads of Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, by Type of Farm, by Tenure, and by Color, 1934 Number olcases Type of farm, tenure, and color Average earnings WHJTJ: Commercial part.time !arm owners ......................................... . Commercial part•tlme !arm tenants .•.••••••••••.•••.•.••••••••.••.•••...... Noncommercial part-time farm owners ..••••••••.•••.•••••••••••••••••••••.. Noncommercial part•tlme farm tenants .•••••••.•...••..•...•••...•.•.•...... 13 11 22 25 SI, 223 856 1,040 656 133 1111 141 331 326 11'110B0 Owners employed In agriculture •••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Tenants employed In agriculture .•••••••••..•..•••••••••.•.••..•••..•••••••• Owners employed In nonagrlculture ..••..•.•....................•....•...... Tenants employed in nonagriculture ..•....•....•..........•.......•......••• 1 I 57 20 28 The actual earnings of 2 owners and 2 tenants were unknown. Labor Requirements of Part-nme Farms and Their Relation to Worlclns Houn In lndllltry On commercial part-time farms, members of the household averaged about 6 hours of work per day during the busy season, of which roughly three-fourths was by the head (table 48, page 32). About half of this group had full-time jobs, and all but three commercial farmers hired outside labor (appendix table 26). On the noncommercial part-time farms, the average number of hours worked by all members was 4 hours a day in spring and early summer, divided fairly equally between the head and other members of the household (table 48, page 32, and appendix table 27). Almost half of the household heads in the noncommercial group worked at industries in which the 8-hour day prevailed, thus having plenty of time for farm work. The remainder, employed for the most part in agriculture or service industries, worked longer hours but apparently found sufficient time for work on the farm. Among the Negro part-time farmers, the average number of hours spent by all members of the household was larger than that spent by the white commercial part-time group from April through June. The large amount of time relative to the size of the enterprises was due to the fact that a few had sufficient acreage in truck or cotton crops to employ considerable labor. The members of the family other than the head did well over half of the work. In the rural areas, all members of the family worked as laborers on commercial forms. Hence, an abundance of family labor accustomed to farm work was available on most part-time farms. Negroes employed in industry worked only 8 hours per day, those on truck forms 10 hours; but all considered that they had ample time for their own forming operations. EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS IN INDUSTRY White workers in the industries of Charleston were largely skilled or semiskilled workers and foremen. Steady employment was the rule Digitized by Google 156 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST for those workers who had jobs, with the exception of those engaged in the building industry. Even in such a seasonal industry as fertilizer manufacture, white workers were regularly employed throughout 1934. The high proportion of skilled workers resulted in higher average earnings than those which prevailed in the Textile Subregion. Only nine white agricultural laborers were found, but low wages and irregular employment placed them on an economic level definitely below that of the other part-time farmers. The commercial part-time farmers, on the other hand, were on an income level definitely above that of the other part-time farmers. About half of them had part-time jobs which frequently paid high hourly rates. Only the white noncommercial part-time farmers with off-the-farm employment in agriculture are included in this section.u Negro workers in Charleston County were largely laborers on truck farms and unskilled workers in Charleston industries. Both groups had extremely low annual earnings due to irregular employment and low wage rates. The farm laborers, who received even lower wages than did the urban workers, have not been included in the text tables for this section. The lndulfrlal Group A group of 103 white nonfarming industrial workers was included in the study for comparative purposes. The term "industrial workers" covers a large group of individuals of widely varying incomes and social status. For the purposes of this study, it would have been desirable to select a few homogeneous groups of workers employed in the same industries as were the part-time farmers. However, in Charleston white part-time farmers were distributed throughout many small industries rather than concentrated in a few large ones. The enumerators were instructed to take approximately 100 schedules from workers in industries other than forestry, sawmills, and woodworking. For comparison with the Negro part-time farmers, 105 Negro industrial workers who did no farming were included in the study. However, there were certain differences between the farming and nonfarming groups with respect to the industries in which they were employed that must be kept in mind in making any comparison of incomes. In the first place, most of the Negro part-time farmers in Charleston County were truck-farm laborers who, in addition to this work which was of a more or less irregular nature, operated small farms of their own. Farm laborers who did no farming on their own account were not included. It was found that some types of urban workers, such as longshoremen and those engaged in domestic and personal service, rarely undertake part-time farming, because their work is such that they must live in the city where there is little or no land 11 For distribution of all workers, see appendix table 29 ff. Digitized by Google ..:•. THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 157 available for gardening. The few Negroes employed in rural industries were on a definitely lower income level than those in the urban industries. lncluttry and Occupation of Heads of White Householcll The white part-time farmers were selected without any regard to the industry in which they worked. Table 100 gives the distribution by industries of the white noncommercial part-time farmers and of the nonfarming industrial workers. The part-time farm group was subdivided into those who were employed in industries of a distinctly rural nature, such as operating country stores and driving school buses, and those who were employed in urban industries. This was done because the former group was distinctly different from the industrial workers with respect to employment and income, while the latter group was roughly similar, except for the large group of 42 workers in the asbestos factory. No part-time farmers were found who were employed in that plant. Tobie 700.-lndustry of Heads of White Noncommercial Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 1934 Industry of head Pe.rt·tlme tanners 1 Nonfarm• 1 - - - - - - - 1 1 n g indus• trial Rural Urban workers Industries Industries Total .••••••••......••....•.••..••.•••••••. · ••• · •• ······•·•••· 10 1 211 103 1----1----·1---- Manufucturlng and mechanical Industries: Building.••.....•••.......•••••.......••••••.••••••••••.•••..... Cigar and tobacco factories .•.•••.......•...........•....••....•. Food and allied .••••••••••••••••..•.....................••....•. Iron and steel.. •••......••••........•••............••.....•...•. Saw and planing mills ...•..........••............•.......•..... Printing, publishing, and engraving ...............•..........•. Textile .....•.••.••...........•••••....•.....•.......••.......... Electriclight and power .•..••.•.••...•.•..••................... Fertilizer factories ......••.••.........•......................... Other chemical factories .•.•••..•.•......•..•.•...•••.•..•.•..•. Asbestos products ......••...... __ ._ .....•..............••...... Other manufacturing and mechanical. .. _•....• _.. _•............ Transportation and communication: Construction and maintenance of streets .••...•...•..•....•..•.. Steam and street railroads ..••...........•.......•.......•...... Other transponation and communication .•.......•••....•...... Trade: Automobile agencies and filling stations ...••..........•.......•. Wlwlessle and retail trade •••••..••••••••.....••..••..•......... Other trade ...••.•••••••••••••...•..••••..•..........•.•........ Pnblic service .....•..••.......••.•••..•..••......•..•...•....••..... Domestic and personal service .......•.................•..•..•...... 2 3 3 7 1 2 1 2 2 4 1 4 1 3 42 1 6 3 5 2 5 2 II 6 1 12 2 2 Exclusive of 8 white noncommercial farmers with off-the•farm employment in agriculture. The principal difference in occupational levels between the parttime farm and nonfarm groups in urban industries was in the higher proportion of clerical and semiskilled workers in the nonfarm group (table 101 and appendix table 30). Most of the latter were employed in the asbestos factory. On the other hand, a larger proportion of the part-time farmers were skilled workers. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 158 Tobie 707.-0ccupation of Heads of White Noncommercial Part-Time Farm and Nonlarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 193'4 Part·tlme farmers Occupation of bead Nonfarmlng Industrial workers Rural Industries l'rhan Industries Total .••.••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••.. · •• • • · · ·· ·•• ··· · · · · · · ·· 10 29 Proprietary .•••.....••••..•.•.......•••...•.....•••.••••..•......... Clerical.. ..••••••...•....••.........•.••..•.••......•.•...•.• ••·•••· Skilled ..•....••.•.•.•.•.•.•...•.............•••.•................... Semiskilled .....•.•.•.•.•••••.••...•.••........•.................... Unskilled .....•.••..•••.••.•..•••••••••...•....•..•....•............ 3 2 I 15 g 3 13 33 49 7 I 2 4 JOO lndullry and Occupation of Heads of Negro Households Most of the Negro part-time farmers with employment in urban industries worked in the fertilizer factories or in transportation (table 102). These two industries, together with trade and domestic and personal service, accounted for the majority of the nonf arming industrial workers. Tobie 102.-lndustry of Heads of Negro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 1934 Part•tlme !armers 1 Industry of bead Rurnl industries Urban Industries 13 35 Tota.I .......•.......•.•..•..•...•...•.....•......•.....••.•••. Fishing .......••........ _................ _............•..••.•..•..•. Manufacturing and mecbanleal industries: Jluil<!ing ........... _..................•.•.....•.•.•.........•... Cigar and tobacco factories .................................... . Food and nllied ..••.••.......................................... Iron and steel.. ••••.•............•..•.......•••.•...••....•..... Lum her ........................................•...........•.•. Printing, publishing, and engraving .........................•.. Textile ...............................•............••.•....••... Electric light and power ...........................•............ Independent band trades ...................................... . F€rtili1.er foctc:.ries ____ • ________________________________________ . Other chemiml factories .......... _ .......................•.... Other manufacturing nod merhnnical. .......................•.. Transportation and communication: ConstruC'tion and maintenance of ~treets _______________________ _ Rtenm nnd street mil roads ....................................•• Other transportation and communication •...................••. Nonlarming industrial workers 105 g 5 2 3 2 I 1 3 2 I It 17 4 3 2 JO 2 211 I 2 Trade: Whole-sale and retail trade ....•.••...••...............•..•.•.... Other trnde ..•...•.................•....•.........•.........•... II Public serYice _______________________ . _________ . ___ . _______________ _ 3 Prnfos.~ional servioo. ____ . ____ . __ . ___ . ____ . __________ . ___ . _______ ... Domestic and personal s~n·lce .......... . . ·················-········ Industry not specified .•..•.................................••••••.. 1 2 2 12 2 Exclusive ol 94 Negro part·time farmers engaged In agriculture, mostly as !arm lubore.... The Negro non farming industrial group bad a somewhat higher proportion of skilled and semiskilled workers than did part-time farmers in nonagricultural occupations (table 103). The more highly skilled nonfanning industrial workers included carpenters, black- Digitized by Google 159 THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION smiths, bakers, and brickmasons. All except three of the part-time farmers engaged in agriculture were farm laborers. TolJle 103.-0ccupation of Heads of Negro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 1934 Part•tlme farmers Occupation or head Rural Agriculture Industries Total ••.•••..•..••••••..•.••.••••••••.••••••••••• 94 Proprietary •.••••••••••••..•...•••.•...•..••••••..••••• Clerical •••••••••.•••••••••••••••••.•.•••.......•.....•• Skilled_ ....•.•••.•••..•..•...................•......... Fe.rm laborer ••.•..•.•.......•....••.•.•..••.•.•...• Servant ...•.....••............•.•......•........... Other unskilled •••.....................••.••••..... Non!arming industrial workers 13 35 106 1 1 2 I 1 6 3 1 12 23 8 2 'rT 13 63 3 Semiskilled .•••.•..••••••..••..•.•................•.... Unskilled: Urban industries 91 Eamlngs of Heads of White HouHholds The total annual earnings of white noncommercial part-time farmers employed in urban industries averaged about the same as those of the nonfarm group. These part-time farmers in general received slightly higher hourly rates, because there were proportionately more skilled workers among them. However, this was offset by the fact that they worked fewer days. The greater average time worked by the white nonfarming industrial group is partly explained by the inclusion of several city fire department employees who worked 7 days a week throughout the year. The white noncommercial part-time farmers working in rural industries received lower pay, worked fewer days, and earned considerably less money than did the other two groups (tables 104, 105, and 106, and appendix tables 32 and 34). TolJle 104.-Rate of Pay I of Heads of White Noncommercial Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 1934 Part•time farmers - - - - ~ - - - , Nonfnrming inclustrial Rural Urhan workers Industries Industries Hourly rate or pay Total................................................... 10 103 29 1-----1----·f-- !Oto 19 cents...•................. •····················--······ 20 to 29 cent•-················································· 30 to 39 cents ..••.•...•...•...•...........................•... _ 40 to 49 cents.................................................. liO to 50 cent•-····· .................................... _...... . 60 to 69 cent•-······ .......................................... . 70 to 79 cents_ .....................•........•............... _.. 80 to 89 cents ........•.•..•.• _..•.............................. 00 to 99 cents ...•..••.•.•...•..........•...................•... $1.00 or more .••••....•....•....•...••••••..••••.•.•...•.•.•... Average hourly rate of pay ..•••••••.••••••••••••••••••.. 1 At 1 5 2 1 1 3 1 6 7 6 2 2 2 l====,l=====I== $0. 36 $0.54 1 8 36 16 18 8 7 6 3 I $0.48 principal off•the•farm employment (Job with the largest earnings). Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 160 To&le 105.-Number of Days Heads of White Noncommercial Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion Were Employed off the Farm,1 1934 Part•tlme farmen 1----,-----1 Number of days employed off the farm Rural Industries Urhan Industries 10 Nonfarmlng Industrial workers 29 !Oil Total ................................................. __ 1 - - - - 3 - - - - 4 - 1 - - - - - 3 t&itio~4t·J:ys:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ 2 150 to 100 days................................................ 200 to 249 days................................................ 2.'10 to 200 day•-·••··················-......................... 3 9 7 ti Average days employed ...••••.•....••.....•......•••••• 215 ZlO 2 1~ 11 38 35 300 days or more.•••••.........•.•.............•........••.••. l====,l=====I==== 1 261 At principal off·the-rarm employment (Job witb tbe largest earnings). To&le 706.-Earnings I From Industrial Employment of Heads of White Noncommercial Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 1934 Part·tlme farmers Earnings from Industrial employment 1----,-----1 Rural Industries Urban Industries Nonfnrmirlg industrial workers 10 29 103 Total ................................................... 1 - - - - 2 - 1 - - - - 2 - 1 - - - - - l $100 tn $249................................................... 2 3 10 $2,50 to $400 .•••.•••••.••••••.••••••••••.•••.•••••.•.••• _•• . . •. 2 4 14 $500 to $749................................................... 3 ti 30 $7;,0 to $009................................................... 1 2 21 $1,000 to $1,249................................................ 6 13 $1,250 to $1,400 .•••••••.•••••••.••••••. _••••••• •••• ••• ••••• •••. 6 11 $1.500 to $1.009 ............................................... _ 1 3 $2,000ormore ......•...............•...... -··················l====,:====I==== Average earnings ......•...•.............•.........•.•.. $1,058 $1,03'.l $588 1 At principal off.the-farm employment (Job with the largest earnings). Earnln91 of Heads of Nesro HoUNholds There was a slight difference in wage earnings between the Negro nonfarming industrial workers and the Negro part-time farmers in urban industries. Both of these groups were at a distinctly higher earning level than the rural Negroes (table 107 and appendix table 34). The difference in average cash earnings of part-time farmers employed as farm laborers and those employed at other rural jobs is partially but not entirely offset by the fact that the former frequently had the use of a house and a small piece of land rent-free. The low annual earnings of the rural Negroes were due partly to the small number of days they were employed, but even more to the low rates of pay-an average of 8 cents an hour for those in agriculture and 14 cents an hour for those in rural industries (table 108 and appendix table 32). The Negro part-time farmers worked an average of 144 days in 1934 and the nonfarming industrial workers were employed off the farm an average of 173 days (table 109). Employment for all groups \\"RS irregular and subject to seasonal fluctuations. Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 161 Tobie 107.-Eamings 1 From Industrial Employment of Heads of Negro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 1934 Part-time farmers , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Nonfarmlng Earnings from lnduatrlal employment industrial workers UrbRn industries Total __ ---------------- __ ------------······· ..... 190 13 35 106 Sl to $99 ....•.•.•...•...•..•.•.•••.•••••••••.•••.•.•.... 4 $100 to $249 •.•••••.•.••••••••••••.••••.••.••••••.••.••.. 47 37 $250 to $400 •.•••••••.•••••••••••••••••.•• - •••••••••••••. 6 6 11 12 50 5 4 $/iOO to $749 ..•••••••••.•••..•.••••••••••.•••••.••••.••.. 6 25 19 3 1 1 4 $750 to $9911.. •••••••••• ··- •• ····-······ ••••••••••••••..• $1,000 to $1,249 .••• -· •.•••••..••••••••.••••••••..•••..•. 3 $1,250 to $1,400 .•••••••.•.••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••.. $1,500 to $1,9911 ........•.........•..•..•••.......•...... Average earnings....•..•..••••..•.... ______ ..... . 1====1====1====1,= $352 $171 $116 1 At principal off-the-fann employment (Job with the largest earnings). • Excludes 4 cases in which Negro farm laborers worked with a mule or horse. this combination were reported. $388 Only the total earnings of Tobie 108.-Rate of Pay 1 of Heads of Negro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, 1934 Part-time farmers Hourly rate or pay 1-------------1~~~=:::g Agriculture in~~es Total.. .•••.••..•.•••.•••.••. ·-···-·····--········ Le!s than 10 cents .••. __ --·········-····-···............ 10 to 19 cents .............•.•.••...• ------·-··· ..•.•.. __ 20 to 29 cents ...•.•.•...•...••.•.•.•.•••.•.••..•.• -..... 30 to 311 cents .•.•.•.. __ ..•.••..•.• ---········· ___ ..•.... 40 to 49 cents ..•.• -·············--·-·· ... -···........... 60 to 59 cents ..•••.•.•.•...•....•• ·······-·····--··..... 60 to 69 cents .•..•. ______ ..•.•...•...... ···-·········-·. 70 to 79 cents •••••••••••••••••••••••••• _•••••.••••••• _.. Urban Industries workers 106 190 13 35 1-----1-----1-----1----68 4 1 Averagehourlyrateofpay .. -.................... 22 7 9 20 3 1 27 61 17 6 2 2 1 1====1;====1====1,==== •$0.08 $0.14 $0.25 $0.25 • At principal off-the-farm employment (job with the largest e11rnings). 1 Excludes 4 Negro farm laborers who worked with a mule or horse. Only the total earnings of this comb!• nation were reported. 1 This does not include rent of house and land which were frequently furnished by employers. Table 109.-Number of Days Heads of Negro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Indus- trial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion Were Employed off the Farm,1 1934 Part-time farmers Number or days employed off the farm Nonfarmlng industrial workers Agriculture Rural Industries l:rban industries Total .•••.•..•..•.....•.•... ___ •.•. __ •.....•.•.•• 94 13 35 IG5 50 to 119 days ....•.................•.............•...... 100 to 149 days ...................................••.... 150 to 100 days .••....•..............•.........•........ 200 to 249 days ..•••.........•.•..............•......... 2.'iO to 200 days ..••••....•...•.......... ------·-·------300 days or more._--· ••. _.•.•.•••.•••.•.••.. _._ .••.• _._ 28 32 2 4 11 8 16 2 11 2 24 19 15 14 2 2 l Average days employed .•••.•.•. ·······-··· ..••.. 144 1 5 1731 I 6 6 3 liO 11 22 I 189 At principal off-the-farm employment Oob with the largest earnings> Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 162 Total Ccnh lnco111e of White HoUNholds In white households, cash income other than earnings of the head was in nearly all cases derived from earnings of other members of the family. In over three-quarters of the cases, however, there was no member of the family employed except the head (table 8, page 4, and appendix table 35). There were very few cases of income from investments or other sources. The average total family incomes of the noncommercial part-time fa.rm group in urban industries and the nonfarm group were a.bout the same (table 110). Per capita incomes of the part-time farm families averaged somewhat less than those of the industrial workers because of the higher proportion of large families in the former group. Table 110.-Cash Income From Nonfarm Sources of White Noncommercial Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, by Size of Household, 1934 Part-time !arm households in urhan industries Nonlarmin~ industrial households Size ol household Number of Income per Number of Income per cases capita cases capita $222 451 312 176 150 29 Total __ ._ -- -- . -- -- - ---- - --- - -------------------- 1 to3 persons___________________________________________ 4 to 6 persons___________________________________________ 6 to 7 persons ..... ----------------·-------------------·· 8 persons or more_______________________________________ 8 7 7 7 103 $265 30 40 422 ~9 22 11 218 IY2 l====l====lcc====i==== A vernge Income per household. ________ __________ SI, 264 $1, 244 Total Cash Income of Negro Households The average family cash income and income per capita for all sizes of Negro families were lower for the part-time farmers in urban industries than for the nonfarming industrial workers (table lll). In both Table 111.-Cash Income From Nonfarm Sources of Negro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Atlantic Coast Subregion, by Size of Household, 1934 Part-time farm households Agriculture Size of household Rurnl Industries Nonlarmlng industrial households Urban Industries Num- Income Nurn- Income per ber of bcr of per capita cases capita cases Num- Income Numper ber of ber of cases capita cases Income pe.r capita -- -- -- -------$127 13 $44 $79 105 $39 36 ---- 149 ----1 to 3 persons ________________________ - 30 72 4 84 12 54 li3 TotaJ _____ --------- ____________ 94 4 to 5 persons ________________________ G persons or more ____ . _______________ 41 Average Income per household. 1 23 47 29 4 5 59 9 14 ~ 32 19 86 65 108 98 - -- -- -- - - -- - - - - 1 $206 $223 $411 $503 This does not include rent or house and land which were lrequently furnished by employers. Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 163 of these groups half of the fa.milies had some member other than the head working (appendix table 35) and the average number employed per household was the same, but these other members in the nonfa.rm group earned more. The pa.rt-time farm families more frequently lived in rural areas where their members could secure employment only as fa.rm la.borers or at other jobs paying low wages. The differences in earnings per capita. were further increased by the fact that the part-time fa.rm group included a. higher proportion of large families than did the nonfarming industrial group. Among the three part-time farm groups, average incomes per household show approximately the same relationships as average earnings for heads. The group of farm laborers' households is raised slightly relative to the other two groups by the fact that more members were employed. LIVING CONDITIONS AND ORGANIZED SOCIAL LIFE The geography of Charleston County is such that little land for farming is available except at some distance from the city of Charleston. Two-thirds of the white part-time farmers studied lived in the open country, most of them on the peninsula north of the city but a few on the islands south of the Ashley River (table 62, page 51). This means that many of the white part-time farmers have had to forego certain living facilities that are available to the city dweller. The nonfarm group, on the other hand, lived in the city or in the village of the asbestos company at North Charleston. Rural-urban differences between the living conditions of the two white groups are evident in the data which follow.a Living conditions of both part-time farm and nonfarming industrial Negro workers reflected their small incomes. Ninety percent of the part-time farmers lived in the open country. In spite of the lower incomes of the farm laborers, their living conditions were about the same as those of the other part-time farmers; hence, in the following discussion, all part-time farmers are treated as a single group. The differences between this group and the nonfarming industrial workers are typical of the differences between rural Negroes and city Negroes in the South. The industrial workers lived in the city except for a small group of fertilizer workers who lived in villages just north of the city limits. Housing of White Households Although a considerable number of the dwellings of white households were reported as needing paint and minor repairs, most of them were in fairly good condition. Only 1 out of 5 houses in both groups " Because of differences in living conditions as a result of differences in economic status, pointed out in the preceding section, white commercial farmers and white noncommercial farmers with off-the-farm employment in agriculture are omitted from most of the analysis. Digitized by Google 164 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST needed roof repairs and 1 out of 7 pa.rt-time farm houses, as compared with 1 out of 20 nonfarm houses, was in need of general structural repairs (appendix table 40). The dwellings of noncommercial parttime farmers were somewhat larger on the average than those of nonfarmers (appendix table 38). Dwellings of white part-time farmers showed considerable variation. Two extreme cases may be cited to show the range of conditions. A six-room frame house for a family of six, constructed in 1932, in excellent repair and with electric lights, running water, and bath, was somewhat above the average. A three-room frame house, also occupied by a family of six, constructed in 1885, with rotting porch, no paint, and no modern conveniences, was below the average. Some houses had been constructed recently, but a number of them had never been completed. Many lacked paint, partitions, porch :flooring, etc. Approximately half of the white noncommercial pa.rt-time farm families had electric lights, running water, and bath facilities (appendix table 41). There was less variation in the condition of dwellings of white industrial workers. Typical families lived in four-room apartments of two-family houses or in four-room bungalows. Practically all dwellings of white nonfarming industrial workers had such conveniences as electric lights, running water, and bathrooms. Housing of Negro HouHholcls The typical Negro part-time farm dwelling was a two-, three-, or four-room shack, unpainted, unplastered, with leaky roof, no windows, and otherwise in poor condition. Only 1 out of 18 pa.rt-time farm families lived in homes which needed no repairs, as against 1 in 5 of the nonfarming industrial families (appendix table 40). However, industrial workers lived mainly in congested tenements, in some cases with as many as 10 persons in 2 or 3 rooms. Negro homes in Charleston are not segregated from those of the whites, but a.re fairly well distributed throughout the poorer sections of the city. Some of the houses occupied by several Negro families were once residences of wealthy white families. Many of these houses were in need of porch repairs and paint, and few had any screens. The roofs, however, were usually in good condition, and the houses had been plastered, although the plaster was usually dirty and cracked. In certain sections of Charleston, the older houses were interspersed with rows of Negro shacks constructed of slab lumber and unplastered. With respect to size of dwelling, there was little difference between the pa.rt-time farm and nonfarming industrial groups (appendix table 38). Nearly all of the Negro nonfarming industrial workers had running water, but in many cases it came from a faucet situated in the yard or court, which frequently supplied several families. Only 1 out of 4 industrial workers' homes had electric lights, and only 1 out of 10 Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 165 had a bathroom. In some cases, the houses were wired for electricity, but it was not utilized either because of the occupant's inability or his unwillingness to pay the electric bills. Bathrooms with running water were extremely rare in Negro homes. In most cases, toilet facilities were provided by a small house in the yard, resembling a privy but connected with the city sewerage, and utilized by several families. Only one Negro part-time farmer had electric lights, and only four had running water (appendix table 41). Automoblla, Radios, and Telephona Among the whites, automobiles were more frequently owned by noncommercial part-time farmers than by nonfarming industrial workers, largely because of their need of some means of transportation to work (appendix table 42). Twenty-six of the entire group of noncommercial part-time farmers 16 lived 2}' miles or more from their places of employment; the average was more than 4 miles (appendix table 28). Practically all of those engaged in urban industries drove to work in their own automobiles. Slightly more than onehalf of both the noncommercial farm and the nonfarm groups had radios, while few members of either group had telephones. Few Negro workers had automobiles, radios, or telephones. Ten of the Negro nonfarming industrial workers had radios, two had automobiles, and three had telephones. None of the Negro parttime farmers had telephones, and only one part-time farmer had a radio. Eighteen part-time farmers, including six farm laborers, owned automobiles. The cars, however, were usually 7 to 10 years old, three were not in running order, and in only two cases were they used in driving to work. Home Ownenhlp Home ownership was much more common among white noncommercial part-time farm than among nonfarming industrial households. The numbers owning their homes were 22 and 16, respectively {appendix table 43), all of the part-time farm owners being engaged in nonagriculture. Part-time farm tenants effected a substantial saving in rent by living out.Bide of the city. Their average annual rent amounted to $114, as against $225 paid by nonfarming industrial households living in the city. Home ownership was fairly common among Negro part-time farmers, but was infrequent among nonfanning industrial workers. About 40 percent of the part-time farmers owned their own homes as against 6 percent of the nonfarming industrial workers. The average amount of rent paid was $42 per year for part-time farmers engaged in industry, as against $95 for nonfarming industrial workers living 15 All of whom were engaged in nonagriculture. Digitized by Google 166 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST in the city. As previously stated, the Negro farm laborers were frequently furnished with a house and plot of land rent-free by their employers. Education The opportunities for securing an education were approximately the same for children of white noncommercial part-time farmers and of white nonfarming industrial workers. There were only two oneteacher elementary schools for whites left in the county. 111 The term was 9 months for all schools. School buses were commonly used to transport rural children to both elementary and high schools. Children 7-16 years of age in the part-time farm group had made approximately normal progress in school, while those in the nonfarming industrial group were retarded 1 year on the average (table 76, page 64). All children of these ages in the part-time farm group were in school, as were all but three of the children of nonfarming industrial workers (table 75, page 63). About one-third of the heads of both white noncommercial part-time farm and white nonfarming industrial households had attended high school (appendix table 46). On the average, both groups had nearly completed grade school. All of the industrial workers and most of the noncommercial parttime farmers had library service available (table 78, page 66). Charleston was one of the three counties in South Carolina having a countywide library service. 17 Books were provided for nearly all of the white population of the county, including all children in school. Negroes living in the country were at a decided disadvantage with respect to securing an education. Most rural elementary schools were one- and two-teacher schools having terms of 6 months or less. 18 All city schools had 9-month terms. There were only two Negro high schools in the county: one in Charleston and the other in Lincolnville. The Lincolnville High School, which had only 89 students, was located in a remote corner of the county, more accessible to parts of Dorchester and Berkeley Counties than to Charleston County. Children of Negro part-time farm households showed an average retardation in school of 3 years (-3.3 for farm laborers and-2.9 for other part-time farmers) as compared to an average retardation of almost 2½ years for the nonfarming industrial group (table 76, page 64). This reflects the meager educational facilities provided for Negro children in rural areas. A total of 41 out of 215 children of Negro part-time farmers between the ages of 7 and 16 did not attend school Annual Report of the State Superintendent of Education of South Carolina, 1984. Frayser, Mary E., The Libraries of South Carolina, Bulletin 292, South Carolina. Agricultural Experiment Station, 1933. 18 Annual Report of the State Superintendent of Education of South Carolina, 1934. 16 17 Digitized by Google THE ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION 167 during 1933-34, as compared to only 7 out of a total of 87 children in the nonfa.rming industrial group. Two children of each group were employed, but most of the remainder were too young to secure employment (table 75, page 63). Heads of Negro households also were handicapped by a lack of schooling. Thirty-five percent of the Negro part-time farmers and twenty-five percent of the nonfarming industrial workers reported no school attendance (appendix table 46). On the average, Negro parttime farmers had completed two grades as compared to four grades for the nonfarming industrial workers. Libraries were not reported as being available to Negro part-time farm families (table 78, page 66). Although libraries were accessible to 82 of the nonfarming industrial Negroes, most of whom lived in the city, only 17 reported making any use of them. A limited number of books from the county circulating library were available to the Negro elementary schools but not to the high schools. 19 Social Participation Church and Sunday School were accessible to all families, white and Negro, and members of nearly all households attended one or both of these organizations (appendix table 48). Adult church organizations and young people's organizations were available to nearly all white and Negro nonfarming industrial households and to somewhat fewer of the white noncommercial part-time farm households. But attendance by part-time farm families was as great as that by nonfarm families among the whites and, in the case of Negroes, it was greater. Of the organizations not centered around the church, Parent-Teacher Associations and fraternal orders were most important for white families. · Such organizations as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts were rarely found in the country although they were frequently available for white children in the city. However, the children of only five white nonfarming industrial and two white part-time farm families were members of these organizations. Except for railroad workers, labor unions were not an important factor in Charleston. A Farm Bureau, agricultural cooperatives, and 4-H Clubs were not reported, indicating that the white noncommercial and the Negro part-time farm families had no contact with the Agricultural Extension Service. Although white noncommercial part-time farm households had fewer social organizations available, they took advantage of them to a greater extent than did white nonfarming industrial households. The average number of times of attendance per person at all organizations in 1934 was 61 and 56, respectively, for the 2 groups. Negro attendances per person in 1934 averaged 63 times for the nonfa.rming industrial liouseholds, and 55 times for the part-time farm households (table 80, page 68). H Frayser, Mary E., op. cit. Digitized by Google 168 PART-nME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST RELIEF The number of Charleston County cases receiving relief among the groups studied was so small (appendix table 36) and the circumstances surrounding the cases so diverse that relief data afforded no direct evidence as to the value of part-time farming in keeping families off relief. There was no significant difference between part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers in amount of relief allowances. However, consideration of the value of the contribution of many of the part-time farms indicated that by producing some of their o,vn food a number of families may have kept themselves off the relief rolls or may have reduced the amount of relief needed. A rehabilitation program for the relief population involving parttime farming must depend on recovery or expansion of the urban industries to provide the necessary jobs, since the existing rural industries employ very few workers and the establishment of others is not probable. Such recovery or expansion is likely to be slow (see page 149). Even if industry were stimulated in Charleston, there would be enough labor to fill a considerably increased demand without going outside of the city proper. In March 1935, there were 7,900 persons eligible for employment on the Charleston County relief rolls_., The possibilities for rehabilitation of relief clients in this subregion by the part-time farming method appear limited. Part-time farmers can produce a considerable portion of their household food, but a cash income is needed to secure the other necessities which must be purchased. Hence, it is essential that these people have some industrial employment. It cannot be assumed that any group that may be selected and provided with small farms will be able to obtain jobs for ·themselves in private industry. Skilled workers in one of the urban industries would have the best chance of getting a job. Unskilled workers, located at any considerable distance from places of employment, would be greatly handicapped in the keen competition for such work as may be available. Another consideration is whether or not relief families would be successful in carrying on small-scale farming operations. Those with a farm background and reasonable amounts of energy and initiative would have a good chance of being successful, although it is likely that, as a rule, they would require some supervision. 20 Workers on Relief in the United Statea in March 1935, A Cemm of Usual Occupations (in preparation), Division of Social Research, Works Progress Adm.i.nistra.tion, 1937, table VII. Digitized by Google Chapter IV THE LUMBER SUBREGION OF ALABAMA, GEORGIA, AND SOUTH CAROLINA GENERAL FEATURES OF THE SUBREGION AND OF SUMTER COUNTY THE AREA designated as the Lumber Subregion is a large and rather heterogeneous region covering about one-third of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina (figure 2, page XXIV). It is a region of farms and forests, but is primarily agricultural, approximately twothirds of the gainfully occupied persons being engaged in farming (table 112). The lumber industry is a much less important source of employment than is agriculture, but it is the only important manufacturing industry. Since the principal virgin forests have been removed, lumbering has been carried on in only a limited way in much of this area as well as other parts of the Southeast. Scattered throughout this area are villages, towns, and small cities which serve principally as centers of trading and transportation and of the wood products industries. Sumter County Sumter County, located in central South Carolina, was selected for the field study because it is in general similar to the rest of the subregion with respect to industry, and because the 1930 Census indicated that it has a large number of part-time farms as compared with other counties of the subregion. The county is rep~esentative with respect to agriculture of the type of farming area designated in figure 3 (page XXVI) as the "Eastern coastal plain and sand hills." This area is located chiefly in the eastern portion of the Lumber Subregion but also extends into the Naval Stores Subregion. 150061°-37-14 169 Digitized by Google 170 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Tobie 112.-0istribution of Persons1 10 Years Old and Ove!, Gainfully Occupied in the Lumber Subregion and in Sumter County, South \.arolina, 1930 Lumber Subregion (e,clurling Macon, Georgis) Industry Number 2. 104,888 Total population................................. Total ii;a.lnlully employed........................ Percent Sumter County, South Carolina Number Percent 45,902 l====l,====l===~=I==== 828, 723 100. 0 18,286 100. 0 l----f----1-----l---- 564, 4Q3 68. 1 10, 182 55. 8 174, ~74 21.1 6,336 29. 2 89, 3511 JO. 8 2. 76!l Is. 2 l====f====l=====F=== Total manufacturing and allied industries........ 89, 356 100. o 2. 768 100. o Agrlculture.. ..........................••...... ........ Service indu~tries. ..................................... Manufacturing and allied industries.................... 1----1-----1----•I---- Forestry and fishing................................... Coal mines............................................. Other extraction of minerals............................ Building............................................... Chemical and nilled.................................... Clay, glass, and stone.................................. Clothing............................................... Food and allied........................................ Automobile factories and repair shops.................. Iron and steel.......................................... Saw and planing mills................................. Other wood and lurnilure. ........ ......... .. .. ........ Paper,printlng,andallied............................. Cotton mills........................................... Knitting mills......................................... Other textile........................................... Independent hand trades.............................. Other manulacturlng ....•............................. _ 6,324 610 1, 700 9,987 1, 8f,3 I, 279 f21 3,289 2. 732 2, 51( 34,388 3, 765 1,315 7,051 766 740 3, 225 7,281 ?. 1 O. 7 1. 9 11. 1 2. 1 I. 4 O. 6 3. 7 3. 1 2. 8 38. 4 4. 2 1.5 ?. 9 O. 9 o. 8 3. 6 8. 2 133 4. 8 D 398 55 60 25 180 137 146 809 489 21 6 39 8 86 177 0. 3 14. 4 2. O I. 8 0. g 6. 5 4. 9 5. 3 29. 2 17. 7 0.8 0. 2 I. 4 O. 3 3. 1 6. 4 Sooroe: Fi/tu-nth Cen,u, oftM United &alu: 1930, Population Vol. ill. Population The population of Sumter County, 46,000 in 1930, was entirely rural with the exception of 12,000 in the city of Sumter. Slightly more than one-half (56 percent) of the population of the city was white in 1930, but the rural population was predominantly Negro (76 percent). 1 The city, which serves as a trading center for the county and also carries on some manufacturing, based chiefly upon the products of the forests of nearby areas, has grown steadily since 1880 when its population was about 2,000. From 1910 to 1930, the population of the township of Sumter, which includes the city, increased 42 percent, while that of the remainder of the county (making allowance for changes in boundaries) decreased slightly. Agricultural Features Sumter County is located partly in the sand hills and partly in the coastal plain. The western portion of the county is representative of the sand hills while the remainder is fairly level country with sand and sandy loam soils interspersed with swampy areas along the rivers and streams. The county was originally covered with forests, but 1 Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930, Population Vol. III, Pa.rt 2, pp. 794 and 795. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 171 clearing the land for farming began at an early date. 1 In 1935, 69 percent of the land area of the county was in farms. 8 Most of the remainder was forest land, and in addition 41 percent of the land in farms was woodland. Cotton became the chief crop shortly after the Civil War and has been the chief source of income since that time. Of the land in farms, 45 percent was in crops harvested in 1934, and 31 percent of the cropland harvested was in cotton. In 1929, the last year for which income data are available, 59 percent of the farm income was from the sale of cotton and cottonseed.' In that year, 73 percent of the farms were classified as cotton farms. The next most important cash crop, tobacco, accounted for 9 percent of the farm income. Cotton farming in Sumter County received a severe setback in the early twenties as a result of the ravages of the boll weevil. 6 The number of farms decreased 20 percent from 1920 to 1930 but increased 3 percent between 1930 and 1935. The acreage ·of land in farms increased 27 percent during this 5-year period. Cotton acreage declined, but there was an increase in the mqnber of livestock and in the acreage of feed crops. There is a great diversity in the form of land tenure of the rural population of the county. 8 According to the 1935 Census, 602 white owners and managers operated 34 percent of the total cropland harvested, 612 white croppers and other tenants operated 19 percent, 474 Negro owners and managers operated 9 percent, and 2,382 Negro croppers and other tenants operated 38 percent. Thus, there is a tendency for the farm lands to be concentrated in the hands of the white owners. ' Industry In general, Sumter County is similar to the rest of the subregion with respect to type of industry, but there are some differences. The proportion of workers engaged in nonagricultural pursuits is somewhat higher in the county than in the subregion as a whole (table 112). While the principal manufacturing industries of both Sumter County and the subregion belong to the forest products group, the county has relatively more woodworking plants, as distinguished from sawmills, than has the subregion generally. The ' Bennett, Frank and Others, Soil Survey of Sumter County, South Carolina, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Soils, 1908, p. 8. • United Statea Cemus of Agriculture: 1995. 'Fifteenth Cemus of the United States: 1990, Agriculture Vol. II, Part 2, pp. 69 and 73; Vol. III, Part 2, p. 313; and Yearbook of Agriculture: 1998, p. 661. 1 The United States Cemus of Agriculture: 1985 showed the 1924 crop to be 62 percent below that of 1919. a Jensen, W. C. and Others, An &onomic Study of Sumter County Agriculture, Bulletin 288, Clemson Agricultural College, 1933, pp. 9 and 34. Digitized by Google 171 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST distribution of numbers employed in manufacturing and allied industries in 1930 for the subregion and for Sumter County has changed somewhat since that year, owing to the severe depression in the lumber industry. The original stands of yellow pine timber in the county were cut some years ago. At present the lumber cut is mostly hardwoods from the swamps that border the Wateree River and other streams. These hardwoods are the raw material for Sumter's woodworking industries. Except for a few sawmills, nearly all of the manufacturing plants of the county are located in the city of Sumter or on its outskirts. The principal factories are two large sawmills (cutting mostly hardwoods), a planing mill, two veneer plants, a cooperage stock plant, two furniture factories, and a casket factory. The largest employers of labor are the furniture factories, one of the veneer plants, and the cooperage stock plant. The latter concern is a subsidiary of a large sugar refining company and produces staves and heading stock for sugar barrels exclusively. The sawmills and woodworking plants employ about 80 percent of all the factory employees of the county. The lumber and woodworking industries of Sumter County have fared relatively better during the depression than have those elsewhere in the subregion, probably because the local industry is not dependent on the construction business for a market, much of the lumber cut being consumed in the local factories. In "lumber and timber," which includes the sawmills and veneer and cooperage stock plants, the decline from 1929 to 1933 in average number employed was about 15 percent and in wages 40 percent, as compared with declines of 60 percent and 75 percent, respectively, for the total of the same industry for the three States of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina. 7 Area Covered and Cena Enumerated Field enumeration centered around Sumter. All of Sumter and the two adjacent townships of Concord and Privateer were covered, as well as adjacent portions of four other townships. In these areas a complete census was not made, 8 occa..<iional cases being passed by 7 United States Census of Manufactures: 1929 and 1988. s According to recently published data from the 1935 Census of Agriculture, 1,210 farm operators in Sumter County worked 50 days or more at off-the-farm employment during 1934. These data afford no basis for determining the completeness of enumeration in this field study because most of these farm operators are not classified by the census as to the industry in which they were employed; no breakdown between Negroes and whites is available; and the criteria for a farm were different from those of the present study. Moreover, the present study was limited to those who had done some farming and were employed off the farm at least 50 days during both 1933 and 1934. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 173 when some difficulty or delay would have been involved in securing the essential information. However, most of the part-time farmers who worked in the city of Sumter and lived in the outskirts or in the nearby open country areas were included. In addition, smaller samples of part-time farmers who lived and worked in the more rural portions of the county were included. Records were taken from 208 families; 76 were white and 132 were Negro. Figure 13 shows their tendency to cluster about Sumter, with a thinner distribution over the more isolated portions of the county. Fua. 13-LOCATION OF PART-TIME FARMS INCLUDED IN FIELD SURVEY SUMTER COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA . GC '\ ) , ,~ LEGEND 0 0 • - .. U. S. HIGHWAYS STATE HIGHWAYS PART-TIME FARMS RAILROADS 1 0 I 2 3 4 5•8 7 I I IO SCALE OF MILES LUMBER AND WOODWORKING INDUSTRIES The major part of the cash income of part-time farm families in the Lumber Subregion is earned by work off the farm in the lumber and woodworking industries. The best timber stands of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina are found in the coastal plain, the principal species being longleaf, slash, and loblolly pines, cypress, and hardwoods. In this area, most of the cutting of old growth timber was done long ago, so that now there are large areas of second growth of merchantable size. Digitized by Google 17-4 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST Lumber COMUmptlon In the United Slata 1 Consumption of lumber, both total and per capita, has been declining in the United States since 1906. Peak consumption was nearly 45 billion board feet. In 1932, when the lowest level of the depression was reached in this industry, consumption was less than 12 billion board feet. The principal reasons for the downward trend of lumber consumption are the cessation of agricultural expansion and the postwar agricultural depression, and the displacement of wood by other materials, such as brick, fiberboard, steel, concrete, etc., in such former large wood-users as the construction industry, automobile manufacture, boxmaking, and freight car construction. The country's normal annual lumber requirements are estimated in the Copeland Report at 31 to 34 billion board feet, approximately the same as, or a little less than, consumption in 1929. Among the important factors which will affect future lumber consumption are population growth, changes in construction practices, use of new materials, development of new uses for wood, and the rate of replacement of dwellings. Employment In the Lumber Industry In Alabama, Georsla, and South Carolina The term "lumber industry" as used here covers logging camps, sawmills, planing mills, veneer mills, and cooperage stock plants. The number employed in the lumber industry in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina reached a peak of about 66,800 in 1923, and dropped to about 25,000 in 1933. 10 Employment in the wood-using industries in these three States is relatively very small. The most important of these industries are furniture and box and crate manufacture, which employed roughly 4,000 workers in the 3 States in 1933. However, these constitute only about 3 percent of the total workers in these industries in the United States. 11 Hours and Wages The lumber industry in the South has always been characterized by low wages and long hours, largely because its labor force is drawn from the fnrm population, which is notoriously a low income group. A c;tudy of wages and hours in the lumber industry made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1932 showed an average hourly rate of pay of about 13% cents and average weekly earnings of $5.67 to $6.49 in sawmills in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina. 1 The discussion in this section is based on "Our National Timber Requirements," by Frank J. Hallauer in A National Plan for American Forestry, 73d Congress, 1st Session, Senate Document No. 12, hereinafter referred to as the Copeland Report. 10 United State11 Censm of Manwacluru. 11 Idem. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 175 Wages were greatly below previous levels in 1932, the year of severe depression in the lumber industry. 12 Some laborers were paid less than 8 cents per hour. Average wages in this year were roughly 60 percent of the 1930 figure. An indication of the variation in wage rates from year to year can be obtained from the average wage per wage earner in the Census of Manufactures data. This "census average wage" does not truly represent an average annual income per worker, but it may be used as an index of full-time earnings. 13 Full-time earnings were fairly constant from 1923 to 1929, but they fell sharply during the depression (table 113). Ta&le 713.-lndex of Wage Rates in Lumber, Timber, and Planing Mill Industries in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina, 1923-1933 Average Year Total Wage8 nwnher of waile earners 1923. ________________________________________________ _ 1925. ________________________________________________ _ 1927 _________________________________________________ _ 1929. ________________________________________________ _ 19:31_ ________________________________________________ _ 1933 _________________________________________________ _ $40, 370, 507 42, 3211, 73!! 40,902, 5.5-1 Average wage per wage earner 66, 769 $005 65, 03!! 12,709, 07.5 64,137 63,376 26,145 642 638 619 486 9,609, 719 25,120 3<l3 39. 240, 5~6 Index of lull-time earninJ,?s, 1929-100 98 lot 103 100 79 6:1 Source: United Statu Cen..u of Manufaduru. Prior to f!,doption of the N. R. A. code, full-time hours in the sawmills in these States were usually 60 per week. In the Bureau of Labor Statistics study referred to above, it was found that of the 45 sawmills studied in 1932 in the 3 States, 28 were operated 60 hours per week, 10 less than 60 hours, and 7 longer than 60 hours. The minimum was 48 and the maximum 72 hours per week. The N. R. A. code, approved August 19, 1933, provided for a maximum of 40 hours per week, with certain exceptions. The minimum wage allowed in the South varied from 23 to 26 cents per hour in the several divisions of the industry. Enforcement of the code was abandoned early in 1935, before the Supreme Court decision declaring all of the codes unconstitutional was handed down. Seasonal Variation There is very little seasonal variation in the lumber industry in the South. Hardwood logging operations are frequently shut down when high water makes the swamps impassable; and much independent logging is done by farmers at times when they do not need to work 1' Wage, and Hours of Labor in the Lumber Industry in the United State,, 1931!, Bulletin 586, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. 11 For a discussion of the census average wage, see Earning3 of Factory Worker,, 1899 to 19!!7, by Paul F. Brissenden, United States Census Monograph X. Digitized by Google 176 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST on the fanns. These factors result in only minor fluctuations m employment, however. Type of Labor A large majority of the workers in the lumber industry are unskilled. According to the 1930 Census, the unskilled group, which includes laborers, teamsters, lumbermen, raftsmen, and woodcutters, made up about 70 percent of the total labor force of the industry. The remainder was about equally divided between the skilled and semiskilled groups. Because of the heavy nature of the work, women are not employed in this industry except in clerical and kindred positions. Like other industries in the South which require large numbers of unskilled workers for heavy tasks, a majority of the labor force of the industry in this area are Negroes. The proportion of Negroes is somewhat lower in planing mills than in sawmills and logging camps. Lumbering is a rural industry. In the three States, about 18 percent of the labor force is drawn from the urban population; 55 percent is drawn from the rural-nonfarm population; and 27 percent from the rural-farm population. 14 Outlook for Employment The future of forest products industries will depend on the solution of many pressing problems, such as the ownership and management of forest lands, the balancing of timber drain and growth, taxation of forest lands, and development of new uses for forest products. These problems have been studied intensively by the Forest Service and other agencies for many years. 15 To work them out will take a long time, and the results cannot be forecast now. However, probabilities for the near future and possibilities for long-time development will be indicated here. Lumber Industry Employment in the lumber industry in this area would appear to be somewhat limited by the saw-timber drain that the forests will be able to stand. With normal demand, the South would easily be able to regain lumber sales at least equal to its 1929 amount, provided it had a sufficient stand of merchantable timber. In the Copel.and Report, it was estimated that the 1925-1929 annual rate of saw-timber drain in the South was nearly four times the annual growth, and it was stated that, because of the resultant severe depletion of growing stock, a continuation of the 1925-1929 drain seems impossible.us The later u Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1980, Population Vol. Ill, Part 1, pp. 91 and 463; Part 2, p. 783. 15 The major forest problems are very fully discussed in the Copeland Report, op. cit. te Coveland Report, op. cit., pp. 222 and 224. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGIOH 177 and more accurate figures of the Southern Forest Survey may change the estimates of drain and growth somewhat, 17 but it seems clear that the lumber cut in the South must remain substantially below the 1925-1929 rate for many years. A reduction in the lumber cut will mean an approximately proportionate decrease in employment in the industry. Pulp and Paper Jndu.stry The greatest possibilities for increased employment in forest industries in the South lie in the expansion of such wood-using industries as the pulp and paper industry. However, the desirability of this development from the standpoint of maintenance of the forests and stability of employment will depend largely on the forest policies that will be adopted. If sound practices are followed, the pulp and paper industry can be expanded and at the same time the growing stock can be built up. At the present time, however, a large proportion of the pulpwood operations in the South are based on destructive methods. 18 The employment possibilities in an expansion of the paper industry in Sumter County are indicated by the fact that in 1929 imports of foreign pulps, pulpwoods, and paper (mostly newsprint) were equivalent to full-time employment for more than 70,000 wage earners. 19 Although domestic supplies of spruce for pulpwood have been diminished, processes for making newsprint paper from young secondgrowth southern pines have recently been developed and have been successful on an experimental scale. 20 Woodworking Industries Some increase in employment may be gained by the expansion of wood-using industries, but as has been pointed out above, the munhers engaged in these industries are relatively small. From the standpoint of numbers employed, furniture manufacture is the most important of these industries. 17 The Southern Forest Survey found that "the drain for the year 1934 in the deep South was only about one-third of the 1925--1929 production, and in those units where such computation has been made, the findings of the survey tend to show growth and drain figures much closer together than those used in the Copeland Report. The 1934 dra.in was exceeded by from 20 to 30 percent in 1935." Letter from I. F. Eldredge, Diirector, Southern Forest Survey. 18 Eldredge, I. F., Spillers, A. R., and Kahler, M. S., The Expansion of the Pulp and Paper Industry in the South, Forest Survey Report. This report presents data for several areas in the South within which the development of the pulp and paper industry is possible. iu Copeland Report, op. cit., p. 270. 20 Curran, C. E. and Behre, C. E., National Pulp and Paper Requirements in Relation to Forest Conservation, 74th Congress, 1st Session, Senate DQcument No. 115, D. 18. Digitized by Google 178 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST The furniture factories draw largely on the South for their supplies of hardwoods, but nearness to consuming areas is more important to them than nearness to raw materials. These factories are located mostly in the northeastern States with the southern branch of the industry concentrated in and around High Point, North Carolina. FARMING ACTIVITIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS Typa of Part-Time Farmers The 76 white part-time farmers included in the field survey were of 2 types. One group had small farms, usually including about an acre of cropland. They produced chiefly food for home use and sold nothing more than an occasional seasonal surplus. They hired little or no labor. The 37 part-time farmers of this type will be referred to as noncommercial. The remaining white part-time farmers had larger enterprises, producing principally for market. These farms ranged for the most part from 20 to 50 acres, and averaged 40 acres (appendix table 6). They all had 2 or more acres of cotton or tobacco and 15 or more acres of com. The work on these farms was usually done, at least in part, with hired labor since only a few of the heads of families had sufficient time from their outside employment or sufficient family labor to carry on a one-mule farm, the minimum-sized commercial farming unit. Of the Negro part-time farmers included in the field study, 63 were farm laborers and 69 were industrial workers. Most of the farm laborers were contract hands. They usually worked as contract laborers for 7 months, and received about $8 per month in cash, plus their rent, fuel, and certain supplies, usually 3 pounds of meat and a peck of meal per week. During the remainder of the year, they worked when needed, usmilly for about 50 cents per day. It was customary for the landlord to furnish them a plot of land large enough for a garden, and sometin1es 2 or 3 acres for corn and cotton, as well as a mule and implements for cultivating the land. Thus, these Negroes divided their time between production of food and occasionally a little cotton at home, and work for large commercial farmers. They are included in the present study to describe a situation which accounts for an important amount of the part-time farming in the county. 21 About three-fourths of the nona.gricultural Negro part-time farmers lived in the open country, and their farms averaged twice as large as those of the farm laborers, 9.7 acres compared with 4.8 acres. However, the farming operations of the two groups were so similar that they will not be considered separately in this section. 11 Special tabulations of 1930 Census data indicated that many of the farms classified as part-time were of this type. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 179 Fann Production Four principal types of food were produced for home use: vegetables, dairy products, poultry products, and pork. Three-fourths of the white commercial part-time farmers, almost two-fifths of the white noncommercial farmers, and about one-fourth of the Negro farmers produced all four types. Much larger proportions of each group produced at least three of the four types (appendix table 12). Gardens All but two of the white and three of the Negro part-time farmers had gardens (appendix table 11). Those of the white commercial part-time farmers averaged somewhat larger than those of the white noncommercial farmers, but in both groups most of the gardens contained only 1 acre or less. Among the Negroes, two-thirds of the gardens contained less than ½ acre (figure 14). Sumter County has an average frost-free growing season of about 8 months. Thus, there are about 6 months in which the less hardy vegetables may be consumed fresh from the garden. The more hardy vegetables, such as parsnips, collards, and kale, may be used directly from the garden during the colder months. There was considerable variation among the farms studied in the length of the garden season. Measured by the number of months in which three or more fresh vegetables were used, this ranged from 1 to 9 months among the whites, averaging over 4 months, and from a few weeks to 7 months among the Negroes, averaging almost 3½ months (appendix table 13). The Negroes had at least one fruit or vegetable available for an average of 8 months during the year, and the whites for almost 9 months (appendix table 14). Almost three-fourths of all families reported that the gardens reduced their grocery bills during the summer months. The average was $5.90 for the white and $3.60 for the Negro families reporting reductions. Canning and storage of vegetables extended the period of garden contributions. Almost three-fourths of the white part-time farmers and over one-third of the Negro part-time farmers did some canning. The amounts canned were small, however, averaging only 83 quarts for the whites and 37 quarts for the Negroes (appendix table 16). Storage was more important. Over three-fifths of all the families stored sweet potatoes, the white noncommercial part-time farmers averaging 27 bushels, and the Negroes averaging 29 bushels. White commercial part-time farmers stored over twice as many bushels as the other groups. Thirty-eight percent of the whites and thirty percent of the Negroes stored Irish potatoes, the white noncommercial part-time farmers storing an average of 9 bushels and the Negroes an average of 10 bushels a year (appendix table 17). Peas, onions, lima beans, pecans, peanuts, and apples were also stored occasionally. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 180 WHITE COMMERCIAL PERCENT o MILK to 10 30 40 •o 50 70 10 .o 100 COWS HOOS POULTRY ACRES IN OAROEN ACRES IN COTTON COR1>s OF wooD 2-5 NONE curl fo':.j5 &-t ~• llllll:1H:IIIII¼',~ NONE 15 WHITE NONCOMMERCIAL MILK cows HOGS POULTRY NONE I I NONE NONE a ,m 1111111111111111111111 :•: 11111111111111111111 11111111:,:11111111%1~ 1111:+:~IIWffh~§Jo=iu1E31 811111111111111 IIHf 1111111111111111~--CORDS OF WOOD CUT I 11m1 ®sm ACRES IN GARDEN ~0NE NONE NEGRO MILK cows HOGS POULTRY ACRES IN GARDEN I11111111111:.:111111111 ~ NONE 1111111111111:,:111111111111w~~-,-,· I11111111:m111111 Wdrh~(o-,521 NONE I NONE @.11111111111111 III IIIII II\~~ IIIIll II II IIIII II I111Wm®t/4W/: 1 I !1111111:•:IIIIIIIJW&~@s-~M 3 NONE ACRES IN COTTON CORDS OF WOOD CUT NONE I o ~ONE ~ ro ~ ~ ~ PERCENT ll+tWd'/2~ = ~ ro ~ ~ Fio.14-SIZE OF PRINCIPAL ENTERPRISES ON PART-TIME FARMS, BY TYPE OF FARM AND BY COLOR OF OPERATOR, SUMTER COUNTY, S.C., 1934 AF-2454, W. P.A. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 181 Corn Com was grown by all except one of the white commercial parttime farmers, by almost two-fifths of the white noncommercial parttime farmers, and by over four-fifths of the Negro part-time farmers, the average production being 281, 41, and 49 bushels, respectively (appendix table 24). White families used an average of 10 bushels and Negroes an average of 20 bushels for food, the remainder being fed to livestock. Eight Negroes sold some com. Dairy Products Four-fifths of the white commercial, three-fifths of the white noncommercial, and one-third of the Negro part-time farmers kept at least one cow and a few kept two or more (appendix table 11 ). During 1934, milk production averaged 1,375 quarts per cow for the white commercial, 1,941 quarts for the white noncommercial, and 1,265 quarts for the Negro part-time farmers (appendix table 20). Butter was made on most of the farms that had cows, the white families consuming an average of over 2 pounds and the Negroes almost 1½ pounds a week (appendix table 21). Very little milk or butter was sold by part-time farmers in this area. P<ndtry Products Poultry flocks were almost as common as gardens in this area. .All of the white commercial, all except 5 of the white noncommercial, and all except 17 of the Negro part-time farmers had flocks (appendix table 11). The size of the flocks varied greatly. The flocks of white farmers contained, as a rule, less than 75 birds. .All but 4 flocks on Negro farms contained less than 50 birds. Consumption of homeproduced eggs averaged 3 dozen and 2 dozen a week for white commercial and noncommercial farmers, respectively, and 1½ dozen eggs per week for the Negro families (appendix table 18). Consumption of home-produced poultry averaged 3 pounds per week for the whites and nearly 1½ pounds per week for the Negroes (appendix table 19). Pork .All except one of the white commercial part-time farm families produced pork, consuming or storing an average of 583 pounds a year. About two-thirds of both the white noncommercial and the Negro part-time farm families produced pork, consuming or storing an average of 249 and 263 pounds, respectively (appendix table 22). Feed Orops The white commercial part-time farmers grew most of the feed for their cows and other livestock. Six white noncommercial part-time Digitized by Google 182 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST farmers grew part of their feed in spite of their limited amount of land (appendix table 23). Occasionally as much as $50 worth of feed was purchased for the cow. Few of the white noncommercial group and of the Negroes had any pasturage and that of the commercial group was quite limited. Fuel All but six of the white commercial part-time farms included some woodland, and in all but five cases the families with woodland cut their own fuel, the a.mounts varying from 4 to 15 cords. On one fa.rm, $200 was secured from the sale of wood. Only 5 of the white noncommercial and only 20 of the Negro part-time farms included woodland. However, eight of the white farmers and most of the Negroe.s cut fuel on land owned by their employers. Cash Receipts and Cash ExpenNS Only 15 of the 37 noncommercial part-time farmers sold any farm products, and none of these sold as much as $100 worth. Sales for the 15 averaged $15. For the entire noncommercial group, cash expenses, exclusive of rent and taxes, averaged $55 (appendix table 25). In the commercial group of 39 part-time farmers, there were 29 small-scale cotton farmers growing from 2 to 18 acres of cotton, and 1 small-scale tobacco farmer growing 4 acres of tobacco. For this group, the net farm cash income 22 averaged $165 and ranged from minus $285 to $645. There were six others who kept livestock and grew feed crops but had very little to sell. For five of these, expenses were greater than receipts. Of the three remaining cases, one was a dairy farmer and two were cotton farmers who also had important truck crop enterprises. For these three, the net cash incomes from farm enterprises ranged from $800 to $1,400. 23 Over two-thirds of the Negro part-time farmers grew an acre or more of cotton. In most cases, however, less than 5 acres were grown and 16 acres were the most grown on any one farm. Cotton was practically the only product grown for sale, and total sales amounted to less than $100 on over two-thirds of the part-time farms. In most cases, the cotton sold for enough to more than cover all direct cash farm expenses. Hence, the part-time farmers received in return for their own labor and that of their families the products described above plus a small net cash income (appendix table 25). 21 The difference between cash farm receipts and cash farm expenses, including rent and taxes, but excluding purchases of livestock in excess of normal replacements. 33 Schedule data are on file in the Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 183 Value and Tenure of Patt-Time Farms The value" of the white commercial part-time farms was considerably greater than that of the white noncommercial part-time farms, and in both groups the real estate of the owners was of considerably greater value than that leased by the tenants (table 17, page 12). The proportion of owners was higher among the commercial than among the noncommercial part-time farmers (appendix table 7). Only 26 of the Negro part-time farmers owned their homes. The owners had houses and farms of considerably greater average value than those of the renters. Implements and machinery represented an average investment of $136 on the white commercial part-time farms having machinery, while only three white noncommercial part-time farmers had any farm equipment other than small hand tools (appendix table 10). Only 35 of the Negro part-time farmers owned farm implements and machinery other than small hand tools. Most of the Negro farm laborers used mules and machinery owned by their employers. In only four cases was the investment more than $100. Mortgage indebtedness was reported occasionally, but when found, it was usually small except in the case of the owners of white commercial part-time farms. Of the 25 farmers in this group, 16 were in debt and their indebtedness averaged $1,300. Only four of the Negroes who owned their homes, and none of those who rented them, were in debt for as much as $250 (appendix table 8). Labor Requirements of Pait-Time Fanas and Their Relation to Worlcln9 Houn In Industry A working week of five 8-hour days predominated during 1934 as a result of the N. R. A. maximum for the lumber and woodworking industries. Those in service industries worked longer hours. A small number of whites and one-half of the Negroes were farm laborers, whose standard work week was made up of five and one-half IO-hour days. Employment for this group, however, was irregular, and all Negroes averaged only 191 days in 1934 (appendix table 32). The heads of the households were able to spend some time in the mornings and evenings and on Saturdays on their part-time farms. Heads in the white commercial group averaged about 3}' hours, in the white noncommercial group about 2 hours, and in the Negro group about 3 hours per day during the summer season (table 48, page 32). In this area the other members of the families worked more than the head. In 83 percent of the white families and in 87 percent of the Negro families, the wife worked on the farm (appendix table 27). Members of white commercial part-time farm families spent an average of 7 hours a day in farm work, in addition to con14 Real estate values were arrived at by capitalizing the actual rent or theoretical rental value of property at 5 percent. Digitized by Google 1U PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST siderable hired labor (appendix table 26), and those in white noncommercial part-time farm families averaged over 3 hours a day during the garden season. Negro families spent a total of 8 to 9 hours a day in farm work during the spring and summer months, but this labor was not all employed in producing food for home use. Little labor was hired, most of it being done by members of the family. E'MPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS IN INDUSTRY Minimum wage rates and hours of work in the lumber and woodworking industries were set by an N. R. A. code during 1934. As compared to 1929, there was a shorter working day. Eight of the white part-time farmers in the sample were engaged in agriculture. They have been omitted from the discussion of earnings26 because of the small number of cases involved and because they constitute a distinct group. Seven were farm laborers on a contract basis with about the same income as Negro contract laborers, and one was a farm overseer with a considerably higher income than the other part-time farmers. The lnduttrial Group For comparison with white part-time farmers, a sample of 92 nonfarming industrial workers in the lumber and woodworking industries was included in the study.211 A group of 103 nonfarming Negroes who were employed in woodworking industries was enumerated for comparison with Negro part-time farmers. Industry and Occvpatlon The part-time farmers were selected without regard to the industry in which they were employed. In the area covered, only 68 white part-time fanners engaged in nonagricultural industries were found, of whom 25 were in lumber and woodworking industries. Of the 69 Negro workers employed in industries other than agriculture, 28 were in lumber and woodworking industries (appendix table 29). Building and construction, the industry next in importance to lumber and woodworking, included seven white carpenters, a brickmason, and a painter. Four school bus drivers, three truck drivers, and an auto mechanic were included under "Other transportation and communication." There were two salesmen in filling stations, one manager and one owner of filling stations, and four salesmen in retail stores. The two cases in personal service were truck drivers for a laundry. Most of the white workers in these industries were either skilled or semiskilled laborers, the bulk of the unskilled work being performed by Negroes (appendix table 30). Although a larger proportion of the white part-time farmers in lumber and woodworking industries were 21 They are included, however, in appendix table 29 ff. • For criteria used in their selection, see Introduction, pp. XXX-XXXI. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 185 classified as skilled workers, their earnings were not significantly different from those of the white nonfa.rming industrial workers.27 For this reason, the two groups are not presented separately in the discussion of earnings of heads of white households which follows. All except 1 of the 63 pa.rt-time farming Negroes engaged in agrl. culture were farm laborers. The proportion of unskilled nonagricultural workers was greatest in the service industries and least in the building and construction industry. About half of those engaged in lumber and woodworking indui;tries were unskilled workers. The occupational distributions of part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers engaged in the lumber and woodworking industries were roughly similar, about half of each group being unskilled laborers. Eamln91 of Heads of White HouMholds Annual earnings of heeds of white households employed in lumber and woodworking industries averaged somewhat less than those of heads in service industries, but more than those of heads in "Other manufacturing and mechanical" industries (table 114). The low Ta&/e 77.f.--Eamings 1 From Industrial Employment of Heads of White Households in the Lumber Subregion, 1934 Earnings from Industrial employment . Total....................................................... $100to$249....................................................... $?fJ' to $499.. .. . .. . . . . .. .. . . . .. . .. .. . . . .. .. ... .. ... ... . . . . ... . . . .. $500 to $749....................................................... $7 50 to $999. . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . • . . . . . $1,000 to $1,249................................... ................. $1,2.50 to $1,499.................................................... $1,500 to $1,999.................................................... Average earnings........................................... 1 Other manu• Lumber factoring and Service and wood· mechanical Industries Industries working 117 17 3 3 6 26 1---1----1--- 26 61 15 6 2 1 4 2 l===,l====I== $655 $500 '' '' ' II 5 $SOU At principal off•th&-farm employment (Job with the largest earnings). annual earnings of this latter group were due to the small number of days worked. About half of this group were in the building industry in which work has been very irregular during the last few years. Most of the lumber and woodworking employees had stee.dy employment, about four-fifths of them working 200 days or more during 1934 (table 115). Workers in service industries were employed slightly fewer days but at a higher average hourly rate of pay, 45 cents, as against 35 cents for the lumber and woodworking group (table 116). Hours and rates of pay in lumber and woodworking industries were regulated by an N. R. A. code during 1934. Eight hours was the 17 Average annual earnings in 1934 were $662 and $654, respectively, for the white part-time farmers and the white nonfarming workers in the lumber and woodworking industries. 150061°--37-15 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 186 usual length of the working day in that year. As compared to annual earnings in 1929, wages were substantially less in 1934. The average reduction for the 87 workers who were employed in lumber and woodworking industries in both 1929 and.1934 was 29 percent. With the subsequent collapse of the N. R. A., hours of work were increased and wage rates further reduced. A local employer expressed the opinion that this adjustment had resulted in little change in weekly earnings. Ta&le 775.--Number of Days Heads of White Households in the Lumber Subregion Were Employed off the Farm, 1 1934 Lumber Other manu• and wood• facturin!!' and &,rvice working ind:::t:.\:!I lndwtriEB Number of days employed olI the Cann ____ ________ Total....................................................... , 80 to 99 days...................................................... 100 to 149 days.................................................... 150 to 199 days.................................................... 200 to 249 days.................................................... Average days employed..................................... 1 17 :M 2 , 6 3 , 2 3 17 250 to 299 da>-S.. .. ... . . .. . . . .. ... . . .. .. . .. . . . .. . .. . ... .. . .. . . . . . .. 300 to 349 days.................................................... 3bO days or more.................................................. 117 , 6 35 3 '8 9 3 I 7 I 5 I , 237 167 1====1=====1,=== 2'l6 At prlnclpel off•the-fann employment (Job with the largest earnings). Ta&le 116.-Rate of Pay 1 of Heads of White Households in the Lumber Subregion, 1934 a!'3~::i. Hourly rate of pay worklng Total....................................................... Othermanu• facturin!!' and 8,,rnr,e ind:::~\:!I industrieo 117 17 25 2 2 5 to 59 cents...................................................... 1 35 61 17 6 ' 6 7 2 2 3 80 to 89 cents...................................................... 3 1 2 ' $0. 35 $0.40 so. 45 10 to 19 cents...................................................... 20 to 211 cents...................................................... 30 to 39 cents...................................................... 40 to 49 cents...................................................... 15() 1----1-----~- cents...................................................... 70 to 79 cents...................................................... , 60 to 69 Average hourly rate of pay.................................. l===,J====I•= I 2 2 • At prlnclpsl off.the-farm employment (Job with the largest esrnlngs). Eamlngs of Heads of Netro HOUMholds Differences in earnings between Negro pa.rt-time farmers engaged in the lumber and woodworking industries and nonfe.rming workers in the same industries were not significantly related to the farming activities carried on by the part-time farmers; hence, the two groups are not presented separately in this discussion. Among nonagricultural workers, those employed in building and construction had the lowest annual incomes, due to irregular employment, in spite of slightly higher average hourly rates (tables 117, 118, and 119). The higher average earnings of lumber and woodworking employees were due to steadier employment, 94 out of the total of 131 Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 187 Tobie 117.-Eamings 1 From Industrial Employment of Heads of Negro Households in the Lumber Subregion, 1934 N onagrtculture Earnings from lndmtrlal employment Total............................................ Sl to SIML.................... .......................... SlOO to $249............................................. 12$ to $4911-................ .•..•....•••...••..•...•••.• $500 to $749 ......••.••.... ··••·•·•·•••···•·•·•···•··••·• 1750 to $900............................................. Sl,000 to $1,249 .• ·•••·•·••·•·•··•·•·••••·•••••·••••••••• $1,200 to $1,499 .•.••..•.••.....••••••••••••.•••••••.•••• $1,!IOO to $1,999 •••.•.•.•.••.••.•..•••..•••••••.•.•••.••• Average esrnlnl!S... . • • • • • . • . . • . . . • • . • . . • • • • •• • • . . Alrlculture Building and con• stmctlon Lnmber and wood• working Other Industries 83 131 15 20 5 2 2 56 1 16 70 43 II 3 4 4 7 1~ 1----+----+-----1------ 1 l====I==== $416 SI 50 $377 $301 • At principal off•the-farm employment (Job with the largest earnings). Tobie 118.-Number of Days Heads of Negro Households in the Lumber Subregion Were Employed off the Farm, 1 1934 N onagrtculture Nnmber of dan employed off the farm Total............................................ 1 to 49 days............................................ 50 to 99 days........................................... 100 to 1 ◄ 9 days......................................... 150 to 199 days......................................... 200 to 249 days. . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . • ... .. . .. 200 to 299 days......................................... 300 to 349 days......................................... 350 days or more....................................... Agriculture Lnmber and wood· working Building and con• structlon 83 131 15 20 5 3 23 24 4 4 111 17 7 2 2 II 3 4 3 3 Other lndmtriell 1-----1------1---------1 1 48 40 3 2 4 3 2 3 3 1====1====11====1====-= Average days employed.......................... 195 218 121 200 1 At principal off•tbe-farm employment (Job with the largest earnings). Tobie 7 7P.-Rate of Pay 1 of Heads of Negro Households in the Lumber Subregion, 1934 N onagriculture Hourly rate of pay Agriculture Total .•.•••..•••.••..••••••••.....•••.•••••...... 63 Le8s than 10 cents .....•....•..•••.•.•.•.•••••..••...... 10 to 10 cents............•...••..•.............•...•.•.. 57 20 to 29 cents........•.........................•........ 30 to 39 cents.....••.....•....•........••............... 40 to 49 cents .....•.•....•...•.......................... 50 to 59 cents ........•...............•....•........•.... 60 to 69 cents .••••.............................•.....• 70 to 79 cents ......•...............................•.•.. 80 to 89 cents ........•...••...........•................. Average hourly rate of pay ...........••.......... Lumber and wood• working Bullding and con• struction 131 15 211 6 105 3 5 6 7 7 3 5 1 20 4 1 1 1 $0.28 $0. 2-i 2 $0. 087 $0. 24 Other industries 'At principal off•the-larm employment (Job with the largest earnings). Digitized by Google 188 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST working 200 days or more during 1934. A number of these workers reported hourly rates less than the code minimum of 23 cents, and six reported rates of less than 20 cents an hour. As compared with 1929, the average annual earnings of lumber and woodworking employees were somewhat reduced in 1934. The average earnings of 93 heads who were employed in these industries in both 1929 and 1934 were 11 percent less in the latter year. Agricultural laborers had incomes considerably lower than those of workers employed in other industries. It was customary for contract farm laborers to work for their employer as needed during the growing season or throughout the year, and in return to receive a definite amount in cash, a stipulated amount of meat and meal, a house, wood as needed for fuel, 2 or 3 acres of land, and use of farm implements. The payments were sometimes based on a daily rate and sometimes on a lump sum for a year or part of a year. The average cash earnings of this group in 1934 were about $100, and the estimated average value of the payments in kind, including rent, was $50. The number of days worked varied considerably, but averaged a little less than 200. The usual length of the working day was 10 hours. The computed hourly rate of pay, based on total earnings including payments in kind, was less than 10 cents per hour for all but six of these laborers. Total Cash Income of White Households Total cash incomes of white part-time farm households from nonfarm sources were slightly greater than were those of nonfanning industrial households, while per capita incomes were somewhat less (table 120). When households of similar size were compared, parttime farm households of two to four persons had larger per capita incomes than nonfanning industrial households, while those containing five to seven persons had smaller per capita incomes. Practically Table 120.-Cash Income From Nonfarm Sources of White Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Lumber Subregion, by Size of Household, 1934 Nonfarminit lndustcial households Part•tlme farm households Size of household Number of ra.ses Total. ___ ----- - -- ... --- --- -. -- -- . -.. -- · -- · · -- · · · · 2 to 3 persons ..... ___ .·--·-···---·--·.--·.·-···-• ... ·-.. Income per capita Income per capit.a 68 $152 92 $188 13 274 34 247 210 191 216 12 14 163 139 15 105 14 1====1====1 Average Income per household----·-·--------·--$863 4 persons. ________ ... ·-· ... ·--·---·-·-·---··-·--·....... 5 persons. ____ ·--· ___ . ____ ._._-·._ ... __ ·-_ .......... _... 6 to 7 persons .... ·-·--- .. ----·--··-- .. ·-··--·---.·-·--·· 8 persons or more .. _... ·---·-···--·--·--·.--·--·.··-·-- Number o( cases 18 14 20 6 $834 t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. Digitized by Google 1« t THE LUMBER SUBREGION 189 the entire family income from nonfann sources for both groups was from wage earnings. White commercial part-time farmers worked approximately the same number of days and had the same annual earnings as white noncommercial part-time farmers. In addition to this off-the-farm income, commercial farmers had a very considerable cash income from sale of farm products, which exceeded farm expenses by $300 on the average. In approximately one out of three families of both groups, one or more members other than the head were employed (appendix table 35). Employed female members in part-time farm households earned an average of $143, and employed male members other than the head earned an average of $392, as compared to $175 and $436 in the nonfarming industrial group. One-third of the young people 16-24 years of age in part-time farm families and almost one-hall of those in nonfarm families were employed (table 58, page 43). Fifteen women in each group were engaged in bedspread manufacturing. The manufacturer delivered the bedspreads and returned to collect them at the end of the week. The women tufted and embroidered the spreads at home. The earnings seldom amounted to more than $1 or $2 a week. The average amount earned by the women in this employment in 1934 was $53. Other women were employed in personal and domestic service, retail stores, nursing; sewing, and teaching. Most of the employed male members of the household other than the head were in woodworking industries or in retail stores. Total Cash Income of Nesro Hou..holcls Negro part-time farm families whose heads were engaged in nonagricultural work had an average of $98 a year less income from industrial employment than did nonfarming industrial households; Part of this difference was due to the irregular employment of parttime farmers engaged in the building trades. In addition, members other than the head contributed less to part-time farm households. The earnings of both heads and other members of agricultural parttime farm households were considerably less than those of the other groups. Besides having smaller family incomes, part-time farni families were larger than nonfarming industrial households (appendix table 2), and their per capita incomes were therefore relatively smaller (table 121). The employment and earnings of members of Negro households other than heads are shown in table 122. Although a larger number of members other than heads were employed in families of Negro farm laborers, they usually worked on the farms during the busy season only and their earnings were small. Most of the male members of households in which the head was engaged in industrial work were employed in woodworking or service industries. Female mem- Digitized by Google 190 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Toftle 721.--cash Income From Nonfarrn Sources of Ne,ro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Lumber Subregion, by Siz:e of Household, 1934 Part-time farm houaeholds Agrioulture 81"8 of household N onagrloulture Nmnber of ca!leS Income Total ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 113 2 to 8 persons •••••••••••••••••••••••••••.. f to 5 persons .••••••••••••••..••••••••••.• II to 7 persons •..••••••••••••••••••••.•...• 8 persons or more .•••••••••••••••••••••••• 20 17 16 Average Income per honaehold •••••• = 11 $219 Nonfarmlng Industrial households Nmnber of casee Income per capita Nmnber of C8lell $42 69 S83 103 $143 70 52 39 24 14 27 13 15 138 102 82 M 32 14 206 132 86 per capita - - - - -$448- M 3 $646 Income per capita t = t Average not computed for less than 10 CBlell. hers were usually employed in domestic and personal service, with the exception of 15 in the nonfarming industrial group who were engaged in embroidering bedspreads. As in the case of white women, the earnings of one person seldom amounted to more than $1 or $2 a week. Over half of the young people 16-24 years of age in part-time farm families and two-fifths of those in nonfarming industrial families were employed (table 58, page 43). Toftle 1.2!.-Employment and Earnings of Members Other Than the Heads of Negro Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in the Lumber Subregion, 1934 Part-time farm households Item Agriculture N onagrlcul· ture Nonfarming Industrial how,eholds Total ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••.•..•••••••••••••••. 63 69 103 Number of households with employed members .••••••••••••• Number of members employed: Male .....................•..••.•..•••..•....•.•••••••••••• Female ... _....•...••.....•••••...........••..••••••••••.. Average earnings: Male ...•........•....•......•••..•..••.••.....••••••••••• Female ..••..•.•..••..•....••••.••.•.•..•...•••••••••••••• 60 36 6U 28 81 18 32 60 $47 $185 60 26 14 $281 84 LIVING CONDITIONS AND ORGANIZED SOCIAL LIFE Part-time farmers generally lived in the open country or villages and were frequently without conveniences common to urban dwellers 28 (table 62, page 51). Nonfarming industrial households lived in the city of Sumter or on the outskirts, with the exception of the workers in a logging camp 25 miles from Sumter. Those in the logging camp had no modern conveniences, and they had no social organizations 18 The eight white part-time farmers engaged in agriculture had about the same living conditions as Negro contract laborers. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 191 nearer than the ones in the village of Pinewood, 6 miles distant. Workers living on the outskirts of Sumter generally had electric lights but not city water. Hollllng of White HoUNholcla Dwellings of white part-time farmers were somewhat larger for each size of household and in better condition than were those of nonfarming industrial workers {appendix tables 38 and 40}. On the average, they contained 4.5 rooms as against 3.7 rooms for the homes of the nonfarmers. Approximately two-filths of the part-time farm houses and one-fourth of the nonfarming industrial houses needed no repairs (appendix table 40). Paint, screens, weatherboarding, porch repairs, :flooring, and papering were needed by nearly one-half of the part-time farm and by three-fourths of the nonfarm dwellings. Onethird of the part-time farm houses and over one-fourth of the nonfarming industrial houses needed roof repairs, while a few needed more extensive repairs. The availability of electricity and running water depended largely on the location of the home. Electric power lines were available to people living in the city of Sumter or in the immediate vicinity, while city water was generally available only to families within the city limits. Since most of the white part-time farmers lived in the open country, only 3 had running water, 2 had bathrooms, and 12 had electric lights (appendix table 41). There are a few power lines leading out of Sumter, but cost of installation and service is practically prohibitive for the vast majority of rural residents. A few part-time farmers whose houses were wired for lights were found close to town, but because of the high rates, they had been forced to abandon the use of electricity. In the city of Sumter were 57 nonfarming industrial families and of these, 53 had running water, 47 had bathrooms, and 43 had electric lights. Of the 26 nonfarming industrial households on the outskirts of Sumter, 16 had electric lights only, and 3 had electric lights and running water. None of the nine nonfarming industrial white families who lived in a logging camp 25 miles from Sumter had any of these conveniences. Better than average conditions were represented by a part-time farm family of five persons living on the outskirts of Sumter in a four-room dwelling with electric lights and radio, although without running water. The house was in good condition, having been constructed in 1929. The annual rent for the place, which included 3 acres of land, was $101. Conditions somewhat below the average were represented by a carpenter with a family of 10 living in an old 5-room house which had never been painted, was in need of porch and window repairs, and had Digitized by Google 192 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST a leaky roof. No conveniences were available. Annual rent of $130 was paid for the farm, which included 25 acres of land. Houalns of Nes,o HoUNholch The typical dwelling of a Negro contract farm laborer was a shack of two, three, or four rooms owned by his employer. It was usually constructed of rough boards and was without paint, plaster, or screens. Frequently the roof leaked, window panes were broken, and porch and floor repairs were needed. Negro part-time farmers engaged in the industries in Sumter were also without modern conveniences, but their houses were in a better state of repair than were those of farm laborers. Better than average conditions were represented by a family of four living in a single-family frame house of five rooms constructed in 1925 and kept in good condition. A number of dwellings were fairly comfortable but lacked screens, paint, or other minor repairs. Approximately one-fourth needed roof repairs, and many of these dwellings were old and dilapidated (appendix table 40). The dwellings of nonfarming industrial workers were smaller than those of part-time farmers (appendix table 38), but they had more modern conveniences. Twenty-four dwellings of nonfarmers, but only two of part-time farmers, had running water; 20 nonfarmers, but only 2 part-time farmers, had bathrooms; and 11 nonfarmers, but only 2 part-time farmers had electric lights (appendix table 41). The five nonfarming industrial families living in the logging camp had fairly new dwellings which were crudely constructed and without conveniences. Automobiles, Radios, and Telephona Very few of the white or Negro families had telephones and few of the Negro families bad radios. As compared with the part-time farmers, a relatively high proportion of the white nonfarming industrial workers had radios, partly because a greater number of this group had electricity in their homes (appendix table 42). More than two-thirds of the white part-time farmers owned automobiles, while only one-third of the nonfarming industrial workers had them. An automobile was the chief means of getting to work for those who lived at a distance, and those who had cars usually drove them. A few rode with relatives or friends. Three-fifths of the white part-time farmers and less than one-fifth of the nonfarmers lived 1 ½ miles or more from their places of usual employment (appendix table 28). Twenty-three Negro part-time farmers, including five employed in agriculture, and seventeen of the nonfarming industrial workers had automobiles. Only one farm laborer and one nonfarming industrial worker lived more than 2½ miles from their places of employment. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 193 Twenty-four of the part-time farmers engaged in nonagricultural industries were located 3 miles or more from their places of employment. Most of these rode in their own or friends' cars, or rode bicycles. Several who lived 3 or 4 miles from their places of employment walked to and from work daily. Home Ownership Home ownership, by both whites and Negroes, was greater among part-time farmers than among nonfarming industrial workers. Thirtyseven, or one-half, of the white part-time farmers, but only two of the nonfarming industrial workers, owned their homes (table 69, page 59). Tenants on white noncommercial part-time farms paid $75 rent per year on the average, which provided a small plot of land in addition to the house. This was less than the average of $110 paid by the nonfarming industrial tenants, most of whom lived in Sumter. As already pointed out, however, the rent for nonfarm dwellings more frequently included such facilities as running water, bathroom, and electric lights. Twenty-three, or one-third, of the Negro part-time farmers working in industry owned their dwellings, as compared to only eleven owners among the nonfarming industrial workers. Only three of the Negro workers in agriculture owned their houses. One of these was an overseer for a pigeon farm, who had an income of $750, and another had a son employed. in a furniture factory in Sumter. Both of these workers had houses which were in excellent condition and both owned automobiles. The third family owned a farm of 23 acres, but the dwelling seemed to be little better than those of the farm laborers. Education Children of school age of white part-time farm and nonfarming industrial households had made slightly less than normal progress in school, both groups being retarded about three-fourths of a year on the average (table 76, page 64). Only 10 children between the ages of 7 and 16 in the families studied were not in school. Four of these were 7 years of age and had not yet started to school; two were 15 and three were 16 years of age and had dropped out. Only one, a boy of 16, was employed (table 75, page 63). Heads of white households had completed six grades in school on the average (appendix table 46). There was no significant difference in this respect between part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers. Slightly less than one-half of either group had completed grade school, and only three members of each group had completed high school. The term for white children varied from 7 to 9 months, and transportation to and from school was frequently furnished. 29 Library 11 Annual Report of the State Superimendent of Education of South Carolina. 1984 Digitized by Google 194 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST service was available more frequently to nonfarming industrial families, but was used more often by part-time farm families. While 31 part-time farmers with off-the-farm employment in nonagriculture reported having a library available, only 16 used it during the year. Although the library was available to 90 of the nonfarming industrial families, only 10 made any use of it (table 78, page 66). There were three Negro schools in Sumter in addition to a Negro college, which also had a grammar school and a high school in connection with it. Most of the schools in rural districts were one- and twoteacher schools which had terms of less than 7 months. Negro children were somewhat retarded in school. Children of farm laborers were retarded more than 2½ years on the average, while children of the other part-time farmers and of the nonfarming industrial workers were retarded about 1½ years. Of the children 7 to 16 years of age in the families studied, 26 were not in school, and of these 7 had some employment during 1934. Negro heads of households had had very little education (appendix table 46). This low level of educational achievement for heads reflects the limited opportunities available to Negroes in past years. Social Participation Organized social life, particularly for Negroes, was centered largely around the church and related organizations (appendix table 48). Although a considerable variety of social organizations were available in Sumter, many of them were not attended by the white factory employees. In fact, their participation in social life was limited largely to church, Sunday School, and the labor union. Adult church organizations, young people's organizations, 4-H Clubs, fraternal orders, athletic teams, and women's organizations were the types most frequently attended by members of white part-time farm households. Of those reporting labor unions available, about the same proportions of both groups attended. Not only did the nonfarming industrial group participate in fewer organizations, but the average number of attendances per person in 1934 was less. This number was 48 for the nonfarming industrial group as against 69 for the part-time farm group (table 80, page 68). Only six members of white part-time farm households and one member of a white nonfarming industrial household held offices in social organizations during 1934 (appendix table 49). Among the Negroes, the members of part-time farm households in which the head had nonagricultural employment showed the greatest participation in organized social life. The average number of attendances per person during 1934 was 84 for this group, 68 for the group in which the head was a farm laborer, and 67 for the nonfarming industrial group. Digitized by Google THE LUMBER SUBREGION 195 Negro leadership was largely confined to the church and related organizations. Among members of Negro households, 38 held offices in social organizations: 18 in church; 9 in Sunday School; 4 in adult church organizations; 2 each in young people's organizations, in women's organizations, and in fraternal orders; and 1 in a ParentTeacher Association. Of these officers, 21 were from nonagricultural part-time farm households, and 6 from agricultural part-time farm households, while 11 were from nonfarming industrial households. RELIEF Only five white part-time farm households and seven white nonfarming industrial households included in the survey received any relief during 1934. The amounts they received varied from $27 to $169, averaging $74. Fourteen Negro part-time farm households and seven nonfarming industrial households received relief in 1934, the amounts ranging from $5 to $200. In general, those receiving relief had unsteady employment. During the period 1929-1935, only 11 percent of the whites a.nd very few more Negroes received any relief (table· 61, page 47, and appendix table 36). The number of cases receiving relief was too small for any conclusions to be drawn regarding the value of part-time farming in keeping families off relief. However, from a consideration of the net value of the farm contribution to the family living, it would appear beyond doubt that the farm, even when it is too small to provide cash crops, is an aid in tiding industrial workers over short periods of unemployment. For complete self-support, a minimum of industrial employment, or some cash crop, is necessary. Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Chapter V THE NAVAL STORES SUBREGION OF ALABAMA AND GEORGIA GENERAL FEATURES OF THE SUBREGION AND OF COFFEE COUNTY THE NAVAL stores 1 producing area, located mainly in the southern tier of counties in Alabama, northern Florida, and southeastern Georgia, is distinctly rural and sparsely populated, with its population primarily dependent on the farms and forests. The towns and small cities of the region serve mainly as trading and transportation centers. A portion of this area, lying in the States of Alabama and Georgia, has been designated for purposes of this study as the Naval Stores Subregion (figure 2, page XXIV). Coffee County, centrally located in the Georgia portion of this subregion, was chosen as generally representative of the area, and the field study was conducted in that county. Coffee County The topography of Coffee County is level to gently rolling. The soils are sandy and sandy loams with clay subsoils. 2 Rainfall is adequate for most crops, but considerable areas are swampy and poorly drained. Twenty-four percent of the land area of Coffee County was cropland in 1934 and most of the remainder was forest and woodland. 3 Over one-half of this forest and woodland was in 1 The chemical products of the pine tree, specifically turpentine and rosin, are known as "naval stores," probably because in the past they included tar and pitch which were used in wooden ships. :1 No soil survey has been made of Coffee County, but the Bureau of Soila of the U.S. Department of Agriculture has made surveys in three adjacent counties, Jeff Davis, Ben Hill, and Ware, where soil conditions are quite similar. 1 United State8 Census of Agriculture: 1935. 197 Digitized by Google 198 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST farms, that is, was owned or rented by farmers. The original pine forests of the county were cut over some years ago and have become restocked with second growth longleaf and slash pines, which are now being worked for turpentine and rosin. The population of Coffee County, 19,700 in 1930,4 was entirely rural with the exception of the 4,200 persons living in the city of Douglas. This city is centrally located, and there were 3 small outlying villages with populations of 830, 651, and 66 in 1930.6 Making allowances for two changes in county boundaries 11 the population of the county has approximately trebled since 1890. Agriculturally, Coffee County represents the flue-cured tobacco growing area of Florida and Georgia (figure 3, page XXVI), which is more limited in extent than is the Naval Stores Subregion. The county is located near the center of this agricultural area, and in 1929 was the leading tobacco producing county in it. That year, 45 percent of the farm income of the county was from the sale of tobacco and 23 percent from the sale of cotton. 7 Coffee County is primarily agricultural with a relatively small amount of industrial employment. Only 22 farms, or 1 percent of all farms in the county, were classified as part-time by the 1930 Census of Agriculture.8 There were, however, 168 farms which reported 75 days or more of off-the-farm employment for the operator.' This latter group included in addition to those classified as part-time many more on which the operator either worked away from the farm less than 150 days or produced more than $750 worth of farm products. Although 27 percent of the population of the county were Negroes, only 15 percent of the farm operators were Negroes. Of the 2,090 farms in the county reported by the 1935 Census of Agriculture, 772 were operated by white owners and managers, 1,014 by white croppers and other tenants, 41 by Negro owners, and 263 by Negro croppers and other tenants. Sixty-five percent of all land in farms was operated by white owners and managers, their farms averaging 239 acres in size as compared with 82 acres for the white croppers and other tenan ts. The number of farms in the county has remained fairly constant for 15 years, being approximately the same in 1935 as it was in 1920. However, the acreage of land in farms decreased 10 percent from 1920 to 1930, but increased again by 6 percent prior to 1935. 10 During this 'Fifteenth CenstU of the United States: 1980, Population. 1 Idem. e In 1905 and 1919 parts of Coffee County were set off to form new counties. 7 United States CenstU of Agriculture: 1935. 8 For census definition of part-time farms, see p. XVI, footnote 2. 9 Special tabulation of census data. 1°Fifteenth CenstU of the United States: 1980, Agriculture, and United State.a CenstU of Agriculture: 1935. Digitized by Google THE NAVAL STORES SUBREGION 199 last 5-year period there was a decrease in the acreage of cash crops and an increase in the acreage of feed crops. The change in total acreage in farms, however, was brought about chiefly by a 25 percent increase in the acreage of woodland. Coffee County is fairly representative of the Naval Stores Subregion with respect to industry as indicated by the distribution of workers by industries in 1930 (table 123). The principal industries of th~ area are naval stores and lumber. The principal manufacturing establishments in Coffee County are the turpentine stills which are scattered throughout the area, and the repair shops of the Florida and Georgia Railroad at Douglas. In the "Other manufacturing" group the railroad shops are the most important. They normally employ about 125 men. In Coffee County, 71 records were taken from white part-time farm families. 11 While this was not a complete census of all cases meeting the above requirements, it probably included about threefourths of them. The entire county was covered, but those cases were omitted where some delay or difficulty would have been involved in securing the necessary information. Because the population of the Naval Stores Subregion is predominantly white, this report deals only with whites. Table 1.23.-Distrlbution of Persons, 10 Years Old and Over, Gainfully Occupied in the Naval Stores Subregion and in Coffee County, Georgia, 1930 Naval Storel! Subregion Coffee County, Georgia Indmtry Number Total population................................. Total gainfully employed........................ Agriculture .. _......................................... Service industries .. _... __ . ___ .. _____ ................... Manufacturing and allied Industries.................... Total manufacturing and allied lndlllltries........ Percent Number Percent 19,739 887,018 l====l====I= 321, 044 100.0 191, '1J'!l 76, 273 59.6 23. 7 16. 7 7,126 1----1----1--- 4,287 1,619 1.220 53. 504 l====t==== 63,504 100.0 1,220 1----1----1--- Forestry and fishing.................................... Extraction or minerals.................................. Building............................................... Chemical and allied.................................... Clay, ~lass, and stone.................................. Clothing .. __ .....•..•.................•......•......... Food and allied_....................................... Automobile factories and repair shops.................. Iron and steel. ...•.. _.................................. Saw and planing mills................................. Other wood and furniture.............................. Paper, printing, and allied............................. Cotton mills........................................... Other textile._ .....................•.................. _ Independent hand trades............................... Other manufacturing'·................................ 3,237 400 4,803 1, 143 195 805 2, 52:1 1,442 2,431 9, r,17 1, 164 443 2,230 164 1,470 21,511 53 6.1 o. 7 9.0 2. 1 0.4 1. 5 4. 7 2. 7 4. 5 17. 8 2. 2 0. 8 4. 2 0.3 2. 8 40. 2 2 88 9 1 4 25 31 102 182 100 s 1 28 589 t "Other manufacturing" Includes workers on turpentine !arms and In distilleries. Source: Fiftttntll Q1l8UI oftAt Unittd Statu: 1930, Population Vol. III. 11 An additional 26 cases were enumerated, but they were so heterogeneous as to size of farming enterprises, type and amount of industrial employment, and sources of cash income, that they were eliminated from the study. Digitized by Google PART-nME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST THE GUM NAVAL STORES INDUSTRY The lnclualry There are two principal types of turpentine and rosin: "gum turpentine" and "gum rosin," and "wood turpentine" and "wood rosin." Gum naval stores are obtained by distilling the oleoresin (gum) exuded from the pine tree when it is wounded. Wood naval stores are obtained by destructive distillation or sooam and solvent extraction. from the resinous stumps and other wood left in the forest after cutting the virgin pine stands. Small amounts of by-products, known as sulphate turpentine and liquid rosin, are obtained from the sulphate process of papermaking. In recent years the gum distillation process has produced approximately 85 percent of the country's turpentine and nearly 80 percent of the rosin output. 12 Unless otherwise stated the following discussion will be devoted exclusively to gum naval stores. l.ocallon oE the lndutlry Naval stores are produced in quantity in this country by only two species of pines-longleaf and slash. Slash pine, which is more favored because it gives relatively higher yields and its gum is more liquid, grows in the Coastal Plain from the southern corner of South Carolina to the Mississippi River. Present distribution of the industry is indicated in figure 15, which shows the number of processors (gum distillers) by counties as determined by the Southern Forest Survey in 1934. The total number of processors in the active belt was 1,110. The area of greatest concentration was in the survey's Georgia Unit #1 18 which produced about 45 percent of the country's output of gum naval stores in the 1933-34 season. Method oE Production The production of gum naval stores is a relatively simple and crude process. In advance of the operating season, which begins in March, the first streak is cut in the trees to be turpentined, and the cups and gutters for collecting the gum are hung. To maintain the flow of gum, fresh streaks must be cut periodically, usually once each week. This successive "chipping" gradually lengthens the scar, or "face," on the tree as the season proceeds. When the cups are filled with the gum, they are emptied into barrels 14 (this process is called "dipping"), which Annual Naval Storu Report, 1994-95, U. S. Department of Agriculture. This concentration was due mainly to the presence here of second-growth timber, which was of a size and age to attract the industry when the last of the large stands of old-growth pine were worked out in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. H On the average, for every 50 gallons of turpentine 3~ round barrels of rosin (500 pounds gross weight) are produced. One 50-gallon cask of turpentine and 3!, round barrels of rosin are therefore known as a unit. Production figures are frequently quoted in unite. 11 11 Digitized by Google ...g ...8 Fie. IS-ACTIVE NAVAL STORES BELT SHOW ING THE NUMBER ANO APPROX IMATE LOCATION OF TURPENTINE PROCESSORS - SEASON 1934- 35 l i l "' i f ~ i i ~ CJ J: •: j PROCESSORS N ~ ~: ~ ~ INSIDE ACTIVE BELT KNOWN PROCESSORS OUTSIDE ACTIVE BELT SURVEY UNITS ARE DESIGNATED THUS : GA.-1, FLA.-1, ETC. C; 0 ~ rv Soutc11 · sout~trft For111 [1perl1111n1 Statioll, For11I Sunoy R1l1011 No. 17. AF-2482, W PA g IOI PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST are then hauled to the still. There the turpentine and rosin are separated by distillation. The work of chipping, dipping, and stilling the gum continues from March until November. At the end of the season the gum which has hardened on the face of the tree (called "scrape") is removed and stilled. Some operators continue to chip the trees at longer intervals throughout the winter, but the yield of gum is small. During the winter, the labor force is usually engaged in repairing tools, in thinning and fire-protection operations in the woods, and in raising the cups and gutters on some of the trees and installing new ones. Thus, employment is held fairly steady throughout the year. When a tree has all the faces it can stand (two or three, depending on diameter) and the faces have been lengthened by successive chipping to such a height that further working is unprofitable, the tree is considered worked out, and can be cut for pulpwood, ties, or lumber, thus bringing an additional income to the forest owner. The number of years a tree can be worked depends on its size and the width of the streaks cut. Under careful operation, each face may be worked for as much as 7 years. Types of Producen and the Labor Force Naval stores operators usually work their own or leased timber· They may also buy crude gum from producers who own no stills or they may still gum for these producers for a cash charge per barrel. Sales are usually made through naval stores factors, who in many cases finance the entire operation. The labor force of a typical operation consists of a stiller, a still hand, one or more woods riders who supervise the woods work, the woods laborers, and the necessary teamsters or truck drivers. The proprietor (operator) usually manages the business and keeps the accounts. A great majority of the operators have only a single still. The operator, stiller, and woods riders are usually white. A great majority of the laborers are Negroes. Payment for chipping and dipping may be made on a time, piecework, or share basis. Camps The still is usually located in the woods or in the open country near the operator's timber. Nearly all of the operators have camps for their woods laborers. A typical layout of this type in Coffee County, Georgia, consists of a still, a commissary, and about 25 two-room or three-room cabins for workers and their families. Trend of Production The country's output of gum naval stores showed a declining trend from 1912 to 1918, then an increase to a peak in 1927, and a decrease durir.g the depression. Production of wood naval stores increased sharply in the early 1920's. Digitized by Google 103 THE NAVAL STORES SUBREGION The declining production of gum turpentine and rosin from 1912 to 1918 coincided with a drop in exports, which was due to the World War, and also with the period in which the old-growth timber was being worked out. The postwar rise in output was roughly paralleled by rising exports. In fact, from 1910 to 1930, the amount of gum and wood naval stores available for domestic consumption (production less export.a) has shown in general a level trend. 111 Competing Materials Gum and wood naval stores have the same general uses. The principal use for turpentine is in the manufacture of paint and varnish. Some is also consumed in making shoe polish and other products, but a very large proportion of the turpentine is sold over the counter by retailers to ultimate consumers. Competing with turpentine are petroleum distillates, known as mineral thinners, which are used as thinners for paint and as solvents for varnish because they are much cheaper than turpentine. At present, about 10 gallons of these mineral thinners are used by the paint and varnish industry to every gallon of turpentine. Rosin is used principally in the manufacture of varnish, lacquers and laundry soap, and for paper sizing. The principal competitors of rosin are synthetic resins used in varnish ·and lacquer making. At present there is no evidence of a trend toward the further displacement of turpentine and rosin. On the other hand, new uses for turpentine and rosin may also be developed. 10 Problems of the Industry The future of the industry is largely dependent upon the adoption of better forest practices, improved methods of handling and marketing, and the expansion of markets through development of new uses for turpentine and rosin. Reform in forest practices is needed. The Forest Service, as a result of years of research, has worked out the principles to be followed to obtain the maximum return from the pine forests while maintaining their productivity. However, for various reasons approved methods are not generally followed. Financial pressure has frequently caused owners of timberlands to attempt to derive an income from the trees at the earliest possible moment rather than wait several years for a larger ultimate return. This has in many cases led to the turpentining of trees considerably smaller than the 9-inch diameter minimum recommended by the Forest Service, resulting in a low yield of gum, and little or no return from the cutting of worked-out trees for timber. 11 The Naval Stores Review (Savannah), April 1934, and The Journal of Trade (Savannah), April 1934. 18 Research in this field has been undertaken by the U.S. Department o! Agriculture, but it is too early to indicate results. Digitized by Google 1()4 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Management of the pine forests for sustained yields h88 not been generally adopted in this country, where the practice of leasing a tract, obtaining what it would yield, and then moving on h88 prevailed. 17 The processing methods followed in the industry are very crude, resulting in a lower-grade product than could otherwise be obtained. Some stills have recording thermometers for controlling the stilling, but in most cases the stiller regulates his fires according to the sound issuing from the discharge pipe. Rosin grades· are determined by color, the lighter colors bringing the higher price, but frequently little attempt is made to keep out dirt which discolors it. Improvement might be obtained by shipping the gum to large centrally located stills where better control of the process could be exercised, and a more uniform, higher-grade product made. This centralization would only slightly reduce employment opportunities in the rural areas, because the labor involved in the stilling operation is only a small part of the total. Wood naval stores, on the other hand, are produced by a relatively few chemical companies at large central plants. These concerns can keep in contact with industrial consumers, and adjust the quality and quantity of their output to the changing needs of these consumers. The gum naval stores industry consists of about 1,200 individual producers, who have no contact with consumers and little knowledge of market requirements. Since 1929, prices received for turpentine and rosin have been so low as to bring about a condition of distress in the industry, and consequently, wages have been depressed to extremely low levels and profits have about vanished. Prices fluctuate widely from year to year depending on the amount produced, stocks on hand, and business &etivity. 18 This distressed condition has led to efforts to obtain better prices through marketing associations or agreements, but they have not met with much success. In 1931, Congress passed a bill which declared gum turpentine and gum rosin to be agricultural commodities, and as such entitled to the benefits of any farm relief legislation. A cooperative marketing association was then formed, and an attempt made to maintain prices by withholding part of the supply from the market. This effort collapsed after 3 months, prices dropped to new lows, and the association had large stocks left on its hands. 111 Outlook for Employment It does not appear that any marked change is likely to take place in the next few years in the general level of activity of the industry "A Naval Stores Handbook, Miacellaneous Publication 209, U. S. Department of Agriculture, p. 36. 18 Braun, E. W. and Gold, N. L., Some Facts Respecting Price, and /flCQme in the Naval Stores lndWJtry, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 19 Gamble'a International Naval Stores Yearbook for 1932-SS, pp. 2-3. Digitized by Google THE NAVAL STORES SUBREGION 205 other than the recovery that can be expected if and when world trade revives. Of course, technical progress may bring about changes in demand for turpentine and rosin which may be either harmful or beneficial to the industry, or impro,ved practices within the industry itself may enable it to extend its markets, but such changes usually develop slowly. The amount of timber available for gum production is sufficient for present requirements, and the amount of second growth coming to maturity appears to be sufficient to allow an expansion of the naval stores industry to two or three times its present size within the next 20 years. 20 The industry may decline temporarily in certain areas where the maturing stock of trees is insufficient to replace the ones that are worked out, but this will probably be offset by increases in other areas, thus causing a shift in the geographical distribution of the industry. Such shifts can be avoided by sustained yield management where the condition of the forests is favorable. FARMING ACTIVITIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS Industry and farming activities are closely related in the Naval Stores Subregion, chiefly because of the proximity of the turpentine forests to the farm land, and because the work of gathering gum from which turpentine is distilled is similar to agricultural labor. In recent years, many farmers have turned to gum production as a means of supplementing their reduced farm incomes. They worked part-time in the turpentine industry either as wage hands of turpentine producers, or as independent operators of small areas, usually their own land. The latter usually sold their gum to a stiller, or had it processed and sold the turpentine and rosin. In 1934, the Southern Forest Survey found 8,460 of these small turpentine producers in Georgia Survey Unit #1 (figure 15).21 There were 1,150 of them in Alabama Survey Unit #1, but very few in Florida. In the belt surveyed, there were 11,250 turpentine producers of this class, whose production in the 1933-34 season was about 19 percent of the total production of all classes of producers in this area. Types of Part-Time Farmers Thirty-seven farmers who worked part-time in the turpentine industry, and who operated cotton and tobacco farms quite similar to those operated by full-time farmers throughout the county, were included in the sample studied for this survey. They will be spoken of as commercial part-time farmers. Letter from I. F. Eldredge, Director, Southern Forest Survey. Statistics on Gum Naval Stores Production, Forest Survey Release No. 17, Southern Forest Experiment Station. :io 11 Digitized by Google 106 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST An entirely different type of part-time farmer in this subregion was the full-time worker in miscellaneous (nonturpentine) jobs (appendix table 29) who had taken up small-scale farming activities as a means of supplementing industrial earnings. Thirty-four of these industrial workers were studied. These workers lived in Douglas or in the villages of Ambrose, Broxton, and Nichols, and their farming activities were limited chiefly to vegetable growing. They will be spoken of as noncommercial part-time farmers. Size of Farm1 The part-time farms of the town workers were usually not much more than family garden plots and the largest included only 6 acres of cropland. Those of the commercial farming group, who had parttime employment in the turpentine industry, ranged in size from 16 to 74 acres of cropland (appendix table 6). Farm Production Production for home use was important on all of these part-time farms. Four chief types of food were produced: vegetables, dairy products, poultry products, and pork. Nearly two-thirds of the commercial group produced all four types, while on the other hand about the same proportion of the noncommercial group produced only vegetables (appendix table 12). While gardens were common to both commercial and noncommercial groups, and were about the same size for each, cows, hogs, and poultry were generally found only on the commercial farms (appendix table 11 and figure 16). As an additional enterprise, nearly all of the noncommercial group and about two-thirds of the commercial group cut their own firewood. Gar<kns All but one of the entire group of part-time farmers had gardens varying in size from ¼ acre to 2 acres. 22 There is considerable variation in the contribution that a garden of a given size may make to the family living. This depends upon the number of different vegetables grown, the yields, and the manner in which the various crops are planned seasonally. In southern Georgia, the winters are mild, but cold periods of a few days' duration are of common occurrence. Freezing weather is rare. Vegetables, particularly the more hardy types, may be grown almost continuously if temporary protection is given them during periods of cold weather. The average frost-free growing season is about 9 months. 23 22 Three gardens were completely washed out by heavy re.ins in 1934 and hence produced nothing. 23 Wood, Percy 0. and Others, Soil Survey of Jeff Davis County, Georgia, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Soils, 1914, pp. 7-9. Digitized by Google 107 THE HA VAL STORES SUBREGION COMMERCIAL PERCENT p MILK 1p &p 110 410 r,1o • 19 710 Ip l•O Uf ENONEg11111111:,:1111111~ cows HOGS POULTRY ACRES IN GARDEN ACRES IN COTTON ACRES IN TOBACCO COROS OF wooo CUT 1 - - - I- NONE -1111 t:H:11~~ NONCOMMERCIAL MILK COWS HOH POULTRY ~ -NONE--------,111111:rn11~ ---NONE------11:•:+:oo 12&-m ACIIES IN GAIIOEN PERCENT F11.l6- SIZE OF PRINCIPAL ENTERPRISES ON WHITE PART-TIME FARMS, BY TYPE OF FARM, COFFEE COUNTY, GA., 1934 AF-1471, W.P,A. Digitized by Google 208 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST The length of the garden season on the farms studied, as measured by the time during which three or more fresh vegetables were ava.ilable, ranged from 1 to 12 months and averaged about 4½ months (appendix table 13). For an average of 8½ months, at least one fruit or vegetable was ava.ilable (appendix table 14). Several of the best gardens supplied cabbages, turnips, and collards from October through March. From one garden, in addition to these winter vegetables, carrots,onions,andradishesweresuppliedduring theearlyspringmonths and pumpkins in the late fall, with a much greater variety ava.ilable during the summer. These facts suggest that most of the gardens could be made to contribute more by the planting of early and late crops. During the 6 summer months in particular, the products from the garden reduced to a considerable extent the purchase of food. Fiftyseven percent of all part-time farmers with gardens reported that their grocery bills were less in summer than in winter, the amount of the reduction averaging $3.70 per month. About four-fifths of those with only a garden reported a reduction in their grocery bills, this reduction averaging $4.70. Those with livestock and field crops used fewer purchased foods because they depended in large measure upon such home-grown staples as com meal, sorghum syrup, sweet potatoes, and pork throughout the year. As a result, the substitution of home-grown vegetables during the summer made less of a reduction in their grocery bills than was true for those with less extensive farming operations. As pointed out in the other subregion reports, such figures do not measure the entire contribution of the garden. In the first place, during the garden season the family may not only buy less groceries, but it may also fare better in quality and variety of food consumed. In the second place, to the extent that vegetables are canned or stored (table 29, page 20), they serve to reduce thegrocerybillduring the winter months. Two-thirds of the noncommercial group and nearly half of the commercial group did some canning, the average for both groups being 111 quarts (appendix table 16). In a few cases, sweet potatoes (appendix table 17) and pecans were stored for winter use. Another field crop commonly grown for food by the commercial farmers was sugar cane. Usually from ¾ to 1 acre was devoted to this crop and from 20 to 50 gallons of syrup were stored for use throughout the year. Dairy Products More than three-fourths of the commercial part-time farmers, but only one-fourth of the noncommercial farmers, had one or more cows {appendix table 11 and figure 16). These animals, known locally as "piney woods cows," are of mixed breed and are given very little care, being left to pick up most of their forage by roaming through Digitized by Google THE HAVAL STORES SUBREGION I09 the "piney woods." As might be expected, they are inferior milk producers, but can be kept with little expense. Those on the commercial farms studied produced on the average slightly over 1,000 quarts of milk for the year, while those on noncommercial farms produced almost 1,300 quarts (appendix table 20). Families with more than one cow usually had fresh milk throughout the year and those with one cow had it for all but 2 or 3 months. Most of the families who kept cows made butter, the average for the commercial farmers being 191 pounds, and for the noncommercial farmers only 86 pounds a year (appendix table 21). Only six part-time farmers sold dairy products. Poultry Products All but five of the commercial group, but only seven of the noncommercial group, kept poultry (appendix table 11). Flocks were quite variable in size. The poultry was given very little attention and egg production was low. Thirteen families sold eggs. The quantity of home-produced eggs consumed averaged about 2.½ dozen a week for the commercial group (appendix table 18). In addition to eggs, most of the families with poultry flocks consumed chicken as well and in three cases small quantities were sold. The amount consumed was small, however, being about one chicken a month on the average (appendix table 19). Pork Thirty-three of the commercial farmers, but only three of the noncommercial group, kept hogs (appendix table 11 and figure 16). Four-fifths of the commercial farmers had three hogs or more. Pork production for all commercial farmers who had hogs averaged 1,263 pounds, and for noncommercial farmers only 220 pounds a year (appendix table 22). In only two cases was pork sold directly for cash. Most of it was salted and stored on the farm. It is customary in this region to take salt pork to the local storekeE\per from time to time to exchange for other supplies. Because of the difficulties involved, no attempt was made in the present study to determine just how much was used at home and how much was traded. Most of the families, however, had several hundred pounds of salt pork to eat during the year, pork being one of the principal articles in their diets. While the pork traded for supplies has not been figured in the cash income, it amounts, in effect, to a small increase in the family purchasing power. In a few cases, sharecroppers gave one-half of their pork to the landlord as rent, but usually a share of the pork was not included in the rental agreement. Feed Crops Practically all of the feed used was home grown. Since the non commercial part-time farms were small and had very little livestock Digitized by Google 110 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST the growing of feed crops was almost entirely limited to the commercial group (appendix table 23). All of this group grew com, the average per farm being 24 acres, and the average production 228 bushels (appendix table 24). This was nearly all fed to the livestock, since only a small proportion was needed for food. Only six commercial part-time farmers sold com. Peanuts, cowpeas, velvet beans, and soybeans were the crops usually grown for roughage. Frequently, these were planted with com and sometimes with, or following, tobacco. Sometimes they were cured and stored as hay for winter use and sometimes the livestock was turned into the lot to feed off the crop. Futl Most of the commercial but only two of the noncommercial parttime farms included woodland. However, since this is largely a wooded region, all could readily cut their own firewood. Twentyfour commercial families cut an average of 9 cords, and thirty-three noncommercial families an average of 6 cords. Cash Receipts and Cash Expenses · Only four of the farmers in the noncommercial group sold any farm products, and the maximum value of products sold was $51. For this group cash farm expenses, exclusive of rent and taxes, varied from $6 to $59 and averaged $25 (appendix table 25). All the commercial part-time farmers grew cotton or tobacco, and nearly four-fifths of them grew both. Cotton acreages varied from 2 to 18 acres, and tobacco acreages from 1 to 6½ acres. Most of the remaining land was given over to the production of feed crops. The average value of the tobacco crop on these farms was slightly more than double the average value of the cotton crops. On the owned and cash rented commercial farms, cash receipts ranged from $116 to $1,668 and averaged $583. Ce.sh farm expenses, including rent and taxes, ranged from $87 to $460 and averaged $240. In only three cases were expenses greater than receipts. Value and Tenure of Part-Time Farms In view of the usual difficulties in arriving at significant real-estate values, the very simple procedure was adopted, as in the other subregion studies, of recording the rental charge if the property was rented; or, if owned by the operator, of recording his estimate of what he could rent it for. The resulting rental values were capitalized at 5 percent to give a figure to serve as a rough index of value. The value of farms in the open country was great~r than that of homes in town since the farms included not only dwellings but also other buildings (appendix table 9) and farm land. In both cases, the real estate of owners was of considerably greater value than that of tenants (appendix table 7). Digitized by Google THE HAVAL STORES SUBREGION 111 Only three of the noncommercial group had any implements and machinery other than small hand tools. Each of these three had a plow representing an original investment of $6.50. None of this group had work stock. Only a few had livestock and their gardening required an almost negligible investment in addition to the usual investment in a home. Since most of them rented their homes, their indebtedness consisted of chattel mortgages, not exceeding $400 in any case. The commercial owners and tenants at had an investment in implements and machinery of from $25 to $200, averaging $115 (appendix table 10). Typically, this included three to five one-horse plows, a two-horse steel-beam plow, a fertilizer distributor, a harrow, and a wagon. Occasionally, tobacco transplanters and stalk cutters were also included. Eight of the commercial farm owners had mortgages on their farms. These ranged from $500 to $1,900. About three-fourths of the commercial part-time farmers had chattel mortgages of varying amounts, the maximum being $450. This usually represented claims on furniture, mules, and automobiles. The indebtedness had increased substantially since 1929. Indebtedness of the commercial fa.rm owners averaged $718, and that of the commercial farm tenants $108 (appendix table 8). Fourteen of the commercial owners and tenants (exclusive of sharecroppers) kept one mule, and seven kept two. The other three borrowed or hired work stock. Labor Requirements of Part-Time Farms and Their Relation to Worlclns Houn In Industry While the busy season on farms coincides in a general way with that in the turpentine industry, a fairly satisfactory basis for combining the two has been worked out. The commercial part-time farmers who worked as chippers and dippers in the turpentine forests usually were allotted slightly over one-third as many trees as were included in a unit for a full-time worker. The work on these trees required about eight 12-hour days a month from April through October, and somewhat less through the winter. There was some flexibility in the time for performing the 8 days of work each month; hence, each farmer could work out an adjustment between farming and turpentine work which suited his particular situation. The commercial part-time farmers averaged nearly 9 hours of work a day on their farms through the spring and sum.mer (table 48, page 32). In addition to the usual amount of family labor (appendix table 27), most of them had some of their work done by hired labor, the amount varying with the scale of their operations (appendix table 26). " Exclusive of 13 sharecroppers. Digitized by Google 111 l'ART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Among the group of noncommercial farmers, those working in the railroad shops in Douglas had their working day curtailed to 6 hours in 1934. Most of the other town workers had an 8-hour day. Since their farm usually consisted of an acre or less of garden, they all had time to do this farm work. It required about 2 hours per day during the summer and could be done at the end of the regular working day. Little work was done by other family members. EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS IN INDUSTRY Incomes of industrial workers in this subregion are generally low. In the naval stores industry the laborers are very poorly paid, wages tending to be roughly on the same level as those for agricultural laborers. This is probably because the work is similar to agricultural labor. Earnings of workers in the railroad shops and in other enterprises in Douglas are higher than those of the turpentine laborers, but lower than those of similar white workers in the other subregions studied. For comparative purposes, a sample of 49 white nonfanning industrial workers engaged in gum naval stores production was included in the study. Industry and Occupation The noncommercial part-time farmers were employed in a variety of industries (appendix table 29). The largest single group consisted of skilled and semiskilled workers in the car and railroad shops (appendix table 30). The others were scattered among the trades, communication, and mechanical industries. Most of the work in the turpentine industry is unskilled labor in the woods. All of the commercial part-time farmers in this industry were woods laborers, except two who were woods riders (supervisors). About two-thirds of the nonfarming industrial group were laborers, and the remaining third included two woods riders and a semiskilled group of stillers, still hands, and truck drivers. Earnings of Heads of Households The off-the-farm employment of the commercial part-time farmers was distinctly secondary to their farm work, the source of the major part of their cash incomes. They worked only part time at turpentining, averaging 83 days employment in 1934, for which they received an average of $95 (appendix tables 32 and 34). The full-time turpentine workers had, on the average, 221 days of work and received $260 in annual earnings. Hourly earnings were from 8 to 12 cents for the laborers and somewhat more for the others (table 124). This industry never had an N. R. A. code. Employees in the naval stores industry are frequently furnished with houses, rent-free. Forty-three of the forty-nine nonfarming Digitized by Google THE NAVAL STORES SUBREGION !13 Ta61e TH.-Rate of Pav 1 of Heads of White Part.Time Fann and Nonfannin9 Industrial Households in the Naval Stores Subregion, 1934 Part-time farmen N 0Dll01IIIINllnlal Hoarb'nte olpq 1---~---1 C~ Car and railroad shops Total............................................ 1f1 14 10 19 to ID cents........................................... 40 to 49 cents......................••................... l50 23 1 - - -4924 1-----1----1----1 Less than 10 cents...................................... 20 to 29 cents........................................... 30 to 39 cents........................................... 11 Other !ndUBtries 2 1 to 59 cents...................•..•.................... Non• fanning Industrial workers 2 6 111 6 2 8 4 1 8 1 • II ;:: ~ ~ :&::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::l====l====l====I=== "'i 1 Average hourly rate of pay....................... SO. 13 SO. 38 S0. 27 $0. 12 • At principal off-the-farm emplo)'lllent Ooh with the largest earnings). industrial workers paid no rent. Although this represents an addition to real income, it is usually not taken into account in setting wage or piecework rates, all employees being on the same basis whether living in a rent-free house or not. The noncommercial part-time farmers carried on small-scale farming operations in their spare time. Their average annual earnings from industrial employment were over $500, or considerably higher than average annual earnings of workers in naval stores employment. Workers in railroad shops had a 6-hour day during 1934, but their annual earnings were about the same as those of workers in other nonnaval stores industries, the shorter day being offset by higher hourly rates of pay. Total Family Cash Income A major part of the cash income of the commercial part-time farmers came from the sale of farm products. The net cash farm income (receipts less cash expenses, including rent and taxes) in 1934 averaged $333 for owners and $360 for tenants, exclusive of croppers. 24 A small amount of cash was earned by members of the family other than the head (appendix table 35), 14 members earning an average of $55. There were also a few cases of income from other sources, such as Agricultural Adjustment Act payments and turpentine leases. Total family cash incomes from all sources averaged $545 for owners and $453 for tenants other than the 13 sharecroppers, omitting earnings from bootlegging in 3 cases. The value of farm products consumed by the family or traded for other goods is not included in these income figures. 11 The net cash farm income of the 13 sharecroppers averaged $159 and the total family cash income averaged $267. Digitized by Google 114 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Cash incomes of the noncommercial part-time farm families averaged $621 in 1934, the principal item being the earnings of the head (table 59, page 44). Outside labor of 10 other members contributed an average of $147 per worker, and there was a small amount of income from other sources. The farm contributed food to the family, but no cash income except in four cases. This family income is not comparable with the figures given for the commercial part-time farmers because rent and taxes have been figured as farm expenses for the commercial group. Total cash incomes of the nonfarming turpentine workers' families averaged $290. There were 23 working members other than the heads and they earned an average of $63 during the year. Variation In Eamlnss In the Naval Stora lnclutlry Earnings of workers in the naval stores industry, while very low in 1934, are likely to improve as the industry and agriculture in the region recover. An idea of the increase in wages in this industry that might be expected with such recovery can be obtained from a consideration of past levels of earnings. No wage studies are available, but the ratio of wages to the average number of wage earners as reported by the Census of Manufactures can be used as an index. This ratio, the "census average wage," does not truly represent average actual earnings, but where there has been no substantial change from year to year in the relative amount of part-time work by the wage earners included in the census figures, the average wage is a fair index of changes in full-time earnings 20 (table 125). Ta&le 125,•:-lndex of Wage Rates in the Gum Turpentine and Rosin Industry, 1919-1933 Year Total wages Average number of wage eemers 1919 .••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1921 .••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1923 .....•.........•...•........•..•...•...........••••• 1925 .••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1927 ...•.....•...........................•.............. 1929 .••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1931 .••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1933•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• $16, 972, 881 9,512, 177 15,448,590 15, 090, 076 16, 953,0M 15,036, 175 7,280,389 6,501,000 28,067 27,422 34,328 29,413 37,913 40,157 28,257 :11.285 Average Index of wage per waJ;re earner lull·time earnm2s 1929=100 $605 3-17 450 513 447 3;4 2-'\8 :zog 102 Q3 l:ll 137 120 100 69 Ml Source: United State, Ctntm of Manufacture,. LIVING CONDITIONS AND ORGANIZED SOCIAL LIFE Turpentine orchards and stills are scattered throughout the rural areas. Hence, commercial part-time farmers who worked in the turpentine industry and nonfarming workers in the industry lived in the open country and experienced the same lack of conveniences 28 For a discussion of the census average wage, see Earning, of Fadory Worker,, 1899 to 1927, by Paul F. Brissenden, United States Censll8 Monograph X. Digitized by Google THE HAVAL STORES SUBREGION 115 and of organized social life as full-time farmers. Noncommercial part-time farmers, most of whom lived in Douglas, had a more varied social life and their dwellings were in much better condition than those of the commercial part-time farmers or of the nonfarming turpentine workers. They frequently had such conveniences as running water and electric lights, but only a few had bathrooms. Houllng Dwellings of commercial part-time farmers were typical of farm dwellings in general in-this area. The walls of the houses were usually constructed of rough boards with narrow vertical strips nailed over the cracks between them. They were unpainted, unplastered, and most were in a poor state of repair (appendix table 40). They usually contained four, five, or six rooms and were without such modern conveniences as running water and electric ligh~. Many had no glass windows and where these were found, panes were frequently missing. The dwellings of the noncommercial part-time farmers were typical of those in small towns and villages. Their houses had substantial foundations, weatherboarding on the walls, and were plastered inside and painted outside. The average size of all part-time farmhouses was 4.9 rooms (appendix table 38). Of the 27 families living in Douglas, 17 had running water, 5 had bathrooms, and 11 had electric lights. Seven families lived in villages, and of these none had running water and only one had electric lights. Over 70 percent of the part-time farm families had no such conveniences (appendix table 41). As previously mentioned, the houses of the nonfarming turpentine workers were usually furnished rent-free by their employer. They were smaller than the farmhouses, averaging 3.6 rooms. None had electric lights and only one in the sample studied had running water. A number of these houses were fairly now. Automobiles, Radios, and Telephones Only a few families reported having automobiles, radios, or telephones. The only family reported as having a telephone was in the noncommercial part-time farm group. Five noncommercial and three commercial part-time farm families and one nonfarming household had radios. Automobiles were owned by 10 nonfarming turpentine workers, and by 5 commercial and 6 noncommercial part-time farmers (appendix table 42). This lack of communication facilities tended to intensify the isolation of the turpentine workers in scattered communities or on farms. Home Ownenhlp Sixteen of the commercial part-time farmers owned their homes, as compared with only four of the noncommercial part-time farmers Digitized by Google 216 PART-TIME FARM/HG IH THE SOUTHEAST (table 69, page 59, and appendix table 7). None of the nonfarming workers in the turpentine industry owned their homes. Home ownership was rather a disadvantage for turpentine workers because it prevented them moving about and because employers usually furnished houses rent-free. Eclucatlon Children of nonfarming workers in the turpentine industry were retarded about 2 years in school on the average (table 76, page 64). This is indicative of inadequate school facilities in some of the rural areas and the low cultural and economic level of this group. Children 7-16 years of age in the commercial part-time farm households, who had the advantage of better schools, were retarded less than 1 year, while those in the noncommercial part-time farm group had made approximately normal progress. Part-time farmers had completed an average of six grades in school, as compared with less than five for the nonfarming industrial workers (appendix table 46). Social Partldpatlon Very few social organizations were found in the rural areas of Coffee County because the people required to support them were widely scattered 8.!ld had low incomes. Monthly church services, and sometimes Sunday Schools, were the only organized activities in which commercial part-time farm families participated. In Douglas, where most of the noncommercial part-time farmers lived, there were Parent-Teacher Associations, athletic teams, labor unions, and fraternal orders in addition to the usual church organizations. Participation in social organizations of the families enumerated in Coffee County was much lower than that of families in the other areas studied (appendix table 48). The average number of meetings of all social organizations attended per person in 1934 was 19 for the noncommercial part-time farm group, 14 for nonfarming industrial households, and only 4 for commercial part-time farm families (table 80, page 68). A considerable number of the households did not participate at all in organized social life. This included 15 commercial and 7 noncommercial part-time farm households, and 14 nonfarming industrial households. There were only three part-time farm households and five nonfarming industrial households in which one or more persons held office in social organizations in 1934 (appendix table 49). RELIEF Only two commercial and four noncommercial part-time farmers and five nonfarming turpentine workers reported receiving public relief during 1934. The amounts of relief received ranged from $3 to $75, Digitized by Google THE NAVAL STORES SUBREGION 117 and averaged $23. The small number of cases reporting relief is partly due to the fact that nearly all workers who qualified as part-time farmers in the Coffee County sample had steady employment throughout the year. Since those families whose heads had worked less than 50 days off the farm during 1934 were automatically excluded from the category of part-time farmer, this excluded most of the cases receiving relief. Only 10 percent of the part-time farmers had received any relief during the period 1929-1935. Slightly less than 30 percent of the nonfarming industrial workers had received relief (table 61, page 47, and appendix table 36). 150061 °-37-17 Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Appendixes 119 Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Appendix A CASE STUDIES OF PART -TIME FARMERS FROM WHAT has gone before, it may be seen that part-time farmers are not a homogeneous group of people, but may be considered in many respects as a fairly representative cross section of the population of a given area. The only thing which part-time farmers have in common is the specified twofold source of income. A description chiefly in statistical terms of such a group of people may not accurately describe any one family in the group, or convey a concrete picture of the activities of the people under consideration. For this reason, descriptions of actual representative cases of part-time farming are introduced. COTTON TEXTILE SUBl_lEGION Textile Mlllworlcer, Greenville County, South Carolina This man was 34 years old, a millworker, and a typical noncommercial part-time farmer. His household consisted of his wife and four children ranging from 7 to 15 years. They lived in the open country 7 miles from Greenville to which both parents commuted daily in their 1931 Ford to work in a textile mill. The head was a weaver and in 1934 worked 8 hours a day for 5 days a week, except for 3 months during the summer when employment was curtailed to a 30-hour week. His total earnings were $864. The wife worked in the same mill, also as a weaver, for 4 months and added $300 to the family income. This family rented a five-room house and 4}~ acres of land for $100 a year. The house, while fairly substantial, was 25 years old, needed painting, and was unattractive in general appearance. It did not have a telephone, electric lights, or running water. Two and one-half acres were planted in crops in 1934. These crops included 1½ acres of field corn, ¼acre each of sweet corn and peanuts, and ½ acre of other vegetables, including Irish and sweet potatoes, tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lettuce, peppers, squash, cucumbers, onions, turnips, and melons. This garden furnished a good supply of 121 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST vegetables from June through October, with turnips somewhat earlier and later. The grocery bill was only $20 per month during the summer, as compared with $25 during the winter. In addition, 59 quarts of vegetables were canned for winter use, and potatoes, peas, beans, and peanuts were stored. Sales from the garden amounted to $9. The com crop of 15 bushels was fed to the pig and chickens. Six pear trees and a fig tree together yielded 1½bushels of fruit. The livestock consisted of a cow, a pig, and eight chickens. The cow produced 2,500 quarts of milk during the year, but was dry for 2 months. Two quarts of milk were consumed per day. In addition to the sweet milk, the family had almost 3 quarts of buttermilk per day and about 5 pounds of butter a week for 10 months. The pig was killed in November, and its dressed weight was 200 pounds. Most of the meat was cured for use throughout the year. The eight hens laid 25 dozen eggs over a period of 8 months. The family did practically all of the work on the farm, paying only $5 for hired machine work. The head worked on the farm all day Saturday and 1 or 2 hours after work during most of the year. His wife fed the chickens and sometimes did the milking. Cash expenses exclusive of rent were $70 for the year. The feed cost was considerably reduced by the fact that the landlord allowed the use of a pasture for the cow. The exact cash value of the farm's contribution is difficult to determine. In the first place, the quantities of garden products consumed are not definitely known, since the family used them as needed from day to day. When a particular vegetable or other product was available in abundance, the family used much more of it than it would have done had it been necessary to purchase it. It should also be noted that the quantity of products grown on this farm would be worth more to a larger family than to a smaller one. This is so because larger quantities of one product could be used in a given period by the larger family, thus reducing the waste from surplus. The variety of products is therefore very important since with a greater variety more can be utilized to advantage. Recognizing these difficulties it still seems worth while to estimate a value for this production. 600 200 800 200 25 64 15 2;~ qts. milk ___________________________________ @ 10¢ lbs. butter __________________________________ @ 2~ qts. buttermilk ______________________________ @ 3¢ lbs. pork___________________________________ @ 10¢ doz. eggs ____________________________________ @ 20¢ qts. canned vegetables and fruits ______________ @ 2~ bu. sweet potatoes stored _____________________ @ $1 bu. peas, beans, and peanuts __________________ @ $1 Fresh vegetables and fruits ___________________________ _ $60.00 50.00 24. 00 20. 00 5. 00 16. 00 15. 00 2. 50 75. 00 Total value ________________________________________ 267. 50 Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS U3 The chief guide in arriving at the prices used in the above calculations was the prices paid to millworkers in this area in 1934 when they sold farm products to one another. Although this fe.mily had moved from Greenville to the farm only 2 years before, the head, who had had 5 years of previous farming experience, was managing this smail place very well and wanted a larger farm. The children were all in school and all members of the family were going to church and Sunday School regularly. There were no organized social activities in this community. The parents had attended school through the elementary grades. Textile Mlllworlc•, Carroll County, South Carolina This household, a noncommercial part-time farm fe.mily, consisted of a man and wife, aged 29 and 39, respectively, and their two daughters, aged 4 and 2. They lived in the Mandeville Mill Village, only ¾ mile from the mill where both husband and wife worked. Each worked an 8-hour day for 5 days a week during 1934 except for the month of September during the textile strike. They worked on different shifts, however. The head ran a waste machine on the afternoon shift and earned $516, and his wife was a spinner on the morning shift, earning $480. This fe.mily rented a three-room, company-owned house with ½acre of land for $90 a year. Rents in this village were higher than those usually charged in mill villages. The house was in fair condition except for the need of paint. It had electric lights, but no telephone or running water. The fe.mily had a radio, but no automobile. Virtually all of the land except that on which the house was located was used as a garden in 1934. The vegetables grown were tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lima beans, cabbages, lettuce, peppers, squash, cucumbers, beets, onions, turnips, collards, and sweet com. A good supply of vegetables was available from June through September, with turnips and collards in October and November. The wife canned 44 quarts of vegetables. The grocery bill was reduced an average of $8 per month during the 6 summer months. The livestock consisted of a cow, a pig, and 11 chickens. The cow produced 2,600 quarts of milk during the year, being dry only 1 month. Two hundred pounds of -butter were made. The fe.mily sold $27 worth of milk, butter, and buttermilk, and had on the average 2 quarts of milk a day and 4 pounds of butter a week for 11 months. The pig was slaughtered in December, and its dressed weight was 250 pounds. The chickens laid throughout the year, producing about 30 dozen eggs. Ten chickens were raised. The roosters were eaten and the pullets replaced the hens that were culled from the laying flock. In this way, the fe.mily had 10 chickens to eat at various times during the year. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMJHG IH THE SOUTHEAST The mill supplied a shed for the livestock and pasturage for the cow. All other feed. was purchased at a cost of $80, most of whi~h was for the cow. Cash farm expenses, exclusive of rent, totaled $106. Deducting the $27 received from sales of dairy products leaves $79 as the cash cost of the fa.rm products used by the family. The value of these products, at the prices used in the calculations for the farm in Greenville County, would be as follows: 650 qt.a. milk _______________________________________ @ 1~ $65 200 lbs. butter ________________________________ r _ _ __ _ @ 25¢ 50 600 qts. buttermilk __________________________________ @ 3¢ 18 30 doz. eggs _______________________________________ @ 20¢ 6 20 lbs. chicken_ _ ______________ ________________ ____ @ 25¢ 5 250 lbs. pork_____________________________________ __ @ 1~ 25 11 44 qt.a. canned vegetables ___________________________ @ 25¢ Freshvegetables _________________________________________ 50 Total value _______________________________________ 230 The garden was considerably smaller than the one on the Greenville County farm, and there were no fruit trees on the place. Consequently, in spite of the greater variety of products grown, smaller quantities were available for preserving for winter use. The smaller size of the family also meant that fewer vegetables could be used. As a result of these considerations, the value of the products of the garden was estimated at $50, as compared with $7 5 for the Greenville County farm. The head and his wife did all of the work on this farm in 1934. The wife milked the cow and fed all of the livestock in the evening while her husband was working, and he did these chores in the morning. She also helped him with the gardening. The head was a full-time farmer until 4 years ago, when he moved into town and began working in the mill. Since then, he has been a part-time farmer at two places in this mill village. He thinks parttime farming very much worth while. This family takes no part in the many organized social activities in the village except for attending church and Sunday School. The head completed three grades in school and his wife five. Unusually Successful Part-Time Farmer, Greenville (aunty, South Carolina Mr. Pickens 1 was one of the most successful part-time farmers in the Greenville Area. He was 38 years of nge, his wife 28, and four children ranged from 4 to 12 yenrs. Mr. Pickens wns a weaver in one of the lnrger cotton mills in Greenville. He had been with the mill for 7 years, and hnd rarely been without employment, a record considerably above the average for cotton mill weavers. This mill makes fine goods, thus requiring a skilled labor force, and wages are correspondingly higher than in most mills. Mr. Pickens earned a little over $1,000 in 1934. In addition to his work in the mill, he owned and operated a 15-acre farm about 5 miles from his place of employment. 1 The name used is fictitious. Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-nME FARMERS U5 When he was 11 years old his father was permanently disabled. His mother ran the farm for a few years, but it eventually became necessary for them to sell at a sacrifice. When he was about 12 years of age, he started to work in a textile mill. When he was 18, he entered school at Berea College but left during his first year to join the Navy Medical Corps in 1917. After the war, he was honorably discharged and returned to work in a mill near Greenville where the other members of his family were then employed. He saved money while he was working in the mill and bought 4 acres outside the city limits. At the end of 3 or 4 years he had improved this land to such an extent that he was able to sell for more than twice the amount he had paid. With the money received for his first venture, he purchased a 100-acre farm in the lower part of Greenville County and went into commercial farming. His farming venture promised to be very successful, -but his wife (he married shortly before moving to the farm) was not satisfied with rural life and was in poor health besides. So the family moved back to the city of Greenville where they lived for a time in the mill village. Five years ago, however, they decided to move to a small farm near enough to town for Mr. Pickens to keep his employment and for the family to enjoy advantages offered by proximity to the city. During his 5 years of operation of his present farm, Mr. Pickens had built a six-room, two-story brick house, doing most of the work himself, and at the time of the survey was completing the inside :finishing. He had wired the house for electricity and had installed plumbing. He had improved his farm to the point where it produced all of the vegetables, dairy products, and meat which the family needed. He was building up a small fruit orchard and a vineyard, and already had small bush fruits and berries well established. Each year he has mapped out some plan of permanent improvement on the place. In 1934, Mr. Pickens had 1}~ acres of garden, 3 acres of corn, 1 acre of wheat, and 2 acres of pea-vine hay. He had vegetables from the garden during all but 2 months of the year, and in addition Mrs. Pickens canned 80 quarts of vegetables and 52 quarts of fruit. Since he grew 50 bushels of grain and 3 tons of hay, and had 5 acres of pasture, Mr. Pickens spent only $10 for feed for his cow, 2 heifers, 2 hogs, and 150 chickens. In addition, he had corn and wheat ground for home use; he had a good supply of milk and eggs throughout the year; and also had 225 pounds of dressed poultry, 700 pounds of pork, and 140 pounds of veal. Mr. Pickens did practically all of the work himself with what little help his children were capable of giving. He spent only $8 for hired labor. He sold practically nothing, although he had considerable surplus which he gave away. The family was active in the social life of the local neighborhood, and both Mr. and Mrs. Pickens were regarded as "pillars of the Digitized by Google 116 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST church." Mrs. Pickens was an officer in the circulating library. Mr. Pickens was contributing part of his land fronting on the road for the building of a women's club house. The family favored part-time farming as a mode of living. Mr. Pickens said: ''Aman likes to feel that he is building himself a home that is his. You can't do that in the mill village. Another thing-you feel independent when you have a place of your own that you can depend on in an emergency. You don't feel cramped. Your kids have plenty of room to play in and they learn to work and not get into mischief. "I am almost 40 years old, and I know that I have earned as good money as I will ever earn. Pretty soon I will have to take less, and before many years I will have to quit the mill, although I will not be too old to work for a living. Now if I have a place where I can raise all I need to eat and something extra to sell, I will be set for my old age. If I can save up money while I am working and not spend it for food and rent, I can give my kids a better education than I have." COAL AND IRON SUBREGION A White Iron Mine Worlcer This man, the head of a household of eight, was 48 years old, and a blacksmith at an iron mine. In 1929, he earned $2,100 at this job, but after July 1934, the mine was closed. As a result, even though his wages were 70 cents per hour, he earned only $616 during the year. Three sons, aged 19, 21, and 22, had completed high school, but were still at home. The oldest had a job in 1934 as a clerk in a grocery store and earned $650. The other two had no industrial employment. The remaining children were two daughters aged 8 and 5, and a small granddaughter. The home was located in Bessemer, a mile from the mine, and was rented from the company for $11 per month. It was a five-room house equipped with electric lights and running water, but had no telephone or bathroom. It was in fairly good repair except for lack of paint. The family had a radio and a 1928 model car. In 1934, the company allowed this man free use of l½ acres of land located about ½ mile from his home. He planted ¼ acre of peanuts, ¼acre of sweet corn, and 1 acre of various other garden crops. There were eight fig trees on the place which yielded 8 bushels of figs, of which 90 quarts were canned and the remainder used fresh. The vegetables grown included Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lima beans, cabbages, lettuce, peppers, squash, cucumbers, beets, onions, radishes, turnips, and collards. The garden season lasted from May through October, with radishes and turnips in March and April as well. A total of 90 quarts of tomatoes, okra, and corn were canned. Twelve bushels of Irish potatoes, twenty bushels of sweet potatoes, and ten bushels of peanuts were stored for Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS 211 winter use. .As a result, the grocery bill was only $2 per month more during the winter than during the summer. In addition, $50 worth of com and tomatoes were sold. The only livestock was a cow which produced 3,200 quarts of milk in 1934. The family used 3 or 4 quarts of sweet milk and over 1 quart of buttermilk per day, and made 100 pounds of butter during the year, or about 2 pounds per week. All of the cow's feed, except that supplied by a few cornstalks and peanut vines, had to be purchased, the total cost being $72. The only other expenses were $20 for labor, $4 for fertilizer, and $2 for supplies. The approximate value of the production of this farm, using prices which prevailed in this area when products were sold at the farm, was as follows: 1,200 qts. milk ....••..•........................•.... @ lCl; $120 100 lbs. butter.................................... @ 25; 25 400 qts. buttermilk ................•............... @ ~ 12 180 qts. canned vegetables and fruits ................ @ 25; 45 32 bu. potatoes.................................. @ $1 32 10 bu. peanuts................................... @ 7Cl; 7 Fresh vegetables and fruits............................. 75 Totalvalue........................................ 316 The head of this family and one son worked about 4 hours per day each on the garden from April through October. The wife milked and fed the cow, spending about 1 hour per day at this work throughout the year. This miner had carried on part-time farming on this place for 4 years. He had had no previous farming experience, but was much interested in farming and was continually trying out new crops, new varieties, and new methods. He had completed the filth grade in school. A number of community social organizations, including church and related groups, athletic teams, school clubs, a labor union, library and women's organizations, were available. However, participation by members of this family was limited. The head of the family rarely took part in any religious activities, but attended his labor union meetings regularly. The wife attended church about twice a month. The children went to Sunday School, and one of them attended a. young people's society. A White Steel Mlllwoilc• The head of the household was a rigger in a steel mill in Ensley. In 1934, he worked 20 days per month until August, but only 14 days during the remaining 5 months of the year. His pay was 50 cents per hour and his total earnings $616. This was the entire cash income of the family. In 1929, he earned $1,000 at the same job. He was 42 years of age and was not incapacitated for work Digitized by Google m PMT-nME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST in any way. Besides his wife, th~ family included four children from 1 to 10 years of age. The three oldest were in school in 1934. The home was a six-room house in good repair, owned by the family. It had a bathroom, running water, electric lights, and a radio, but no telephone. It was located in the open country 3 miles from the mill where the head of the family was employed. He drove to work in his 1929 Chevrolet. There was about ¾ acre of land in the house lot, and an additional acre was rented. All of the land except that occupied by the house and yard was used for a garden. Vegetables and fruits were grown, including Irish and sweet potatoes, tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lima beans, cabbages, lettuce, peppers, beets, ca.ITOts, onions, radishes, turnips, watermelons, sweet corn, peanuts, popcorn, blackberries, and strawberries. From 3 to 13 vegetables were available from March through October. Forty quarts of vegetables and forty quarts of berries were canned; 8 bulilhels of Irish potatoes and 15 bushels of sweet potatoes were stored. A cow was kept, and from the 2,200 quarts of milk produced the family had over 1 quart of fresh milk and nearly 2 quarts of buttermilk per day, as well as about 2 pounds of butter per week during the whole year. A small pig was raised and slaughtered in December, providing the family with 150 pounds of pork. Forty pounds were eaten fresh and the rest was cured for use throughout the yea.r. The pig was fed surplus skim milk and buttermilk as well as other waste food, and the cow was fed cornstalks and peanut vines and was staked out along the roadside. As a result, the cost of purchased feed was only $40. The value of the products of this fa.rm may be estimated as follows: 400qts. milk ________________________________________ @ 10¢ $40 100 lbs. butter_ _ _ _ _________ ___________ ___________ ___ @ 25¢ 25 18 600 qts. buttermilk __________________________________ @ 3¢ 80 qts. canned vegetables and fruits___________________ @ 25¢ 20 23 bu. potatoes _____________________________________ @ $1 23 15 150 lbs. pork _________________________ . ______________ @ 10¢ Fresh vegetables and fruits _________________________________ 75 Total value _______________________ . _______________ 216 Farm products were valued at less than those of the preceding farm chiefly because of the smaller production of the cow. All of the farm work except plowing was done by the head of the family. He worked about 4 hours a day on the average during the summer and about 2 hours a day during the remainder of the year. The company charged $2 for plowing the garden. Total expenses other than rent and taxes were $45. No farm products were sold. This family moved out of town and undertook part-time farming late in 1932, but the head had had 5 years of earlier farming experience. The organized group life in the community was rather limited. There were a church and related religious group activities, Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS H9 athletic teams, a Parent-Teacher Association, and a woman's organization. The participation of this family was confined to occasional church and regular Sunday School attendance, and regular attendance at the Parent-Teacher Association by the wife. There was a library in the community, but it was not used by any member of the family. A Negro Steel Mlllworlcer The head of the family was 50 years of age, and worked in 1934 as a ladle liner in a steel mill in Ensley. He was employed regularly 20 days per month until July, when the mill was closed. His rate of pay was 37 cents per hour and his total earnings $385. In 1929, when he was fully employed at the same job, he received $1,050. In 1934, the family received $90 from the relief agency. Five children ranged from 2 to 15 years of age. The two older ones were in school in 1934. The family lived in a. five-room house, 16 years old but in good condition, which was rented from the company for $11 per month. It had running water but no bathroom and no electricity. It was }' mile from the mill. The family owned a 1925 automobile. The acre of cropland nearby which the company furnished was planted half in corn and hali in garden vegetables. These included sweet potatoes, tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lima beans, cabbages, lettuce, peppers, squash, beets, carrots, onions, turnips, collards, and peanuts. Three or more fresh vegetables were available from May through October. In addition, 14 quarts of tomatoes and snap beans were canned, and 12 bushels of sweet potatoes were stored. There were five peach trees which yielded 10 bushels of fruit, of which 100 quarts were canned. Twelve bushels of corn and four bushels of peanuts were stored for winter use. Some of the com was ground for use as food and the remainder fed to the three chickens, which were eaten during November and December. The value of the contribution of this farm to the family living may be estimated as follows: 16 lbs. chicken ________________________________ @ 25¢ 114 qts. canned vegeta.blesandfruits ______________ @ 25¢ 12 bu. potatoes_______________________________ @ $1. 00 4 bu. peanuts ________________________________ @ 70¢ 4 bu. peaches ________________________________ @ $1. 50 Fresh vegetables_____________________________________ $4. 00 28. 50 12. 00 2. 80 6. 00 70. 00 Total value ________________________________________ 123. 30 All the farm work was done by the family. The head, his wife, and their 15-year-old son each worked about 2 hours per day on the crops from April through September. There were no direct cash expenses in connection with the operation of the farm other than about $3 for seed and fertilizer. The family had been doing part-time farming for 3 years, but had no previous farming expPrience. Digitized by Google 130 PART-nME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST The community in which th.is family lived had a number of organizations, but the family limited its participation to regular attendance at church and Sunday School. A Nqro Iron Ore Miner This man was 34 years old, and his family consisted of a wife and six children. He worked 64 days in 1934 as a mucker in an iron ore mine, receiving 45 cents per hour. His total ea.rni.ngs were $230. In 1929, when fully employed at this same job, he received $720. In 1934, the family received $120 from the relief agency. This family lived in Bessemer in a two-room house, rented from the company for $5 per month. The house needed extensive repairs, and had not been repainted since it was built 22 years ago. It had running water, but no bathroom and no electric lights. An acre of company-owned land located ¾of a mile from the home was used rent-free for a garden. One-half acre was devoted to corn and the remainder to 14 kinds of vegetables. Three or more vegetables were used from the garden from May through October, while turnips were also used during March, April, November, and December as well, and collards during the latter 2 months. In addition to fresh vegetables, 2 bushels of Irish potatoes, 30 bushels of sweet potatoes, 25 bushels of corn, and 4 bushels of peanuts were stored for winter use. The six peach trees on the place yielded 2 bushels of fruit, from which 6 quarts were canned. Twelve hens were kept and twelve chicks were raised during the year. About a dozen eggs per week were produced throughout the year, and 80 pounds of chicken were used during the second half of the year. The value of the farm products consumed by the family may be estimated as follows: 50 doz. eggs__________________________________ @ 20¢ 110.00 80 lbs. chicken_--·-___________________________ @ 25¢ 20. 00 6 qts. canned fruits ___________________________ @ 25¢ 1. 50 32 bu. potatoes _______________________________ @ Sl. 00 32. 00 10 bu. corn ___________________________________ @ Sl. 00 10. 00 4 bu. peanuts ________________________________ @ 70¢ 2. 80 l½ hu. peaches ________________________________ @ Sl. 50 2. 25 Fresh vegetables _____________________________________ _ 65. 00 Total value ________________________________________ 143. 55 The head of the family worked on the farm an average of 6 hours per day during the summer, and 1 hour per day during the remainder of the year. He paid $10 for hired machine work. Feed for the chickens, in addition to the corn and other surplus garden products grown, cost $5. The only other cash expenditure was $2 for garden seeds. This family had been doing part-time farming for 3 years, and the head previously had had 5 years of farm experience. The members of the family attended church and Sunday School regularly. The Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS 131 head of the fa.mily attended labor union meetings, and the wife went regularly to meetings of a woman's club. ATLANTIC COAST SUBREGION A Whffe 5-vlce lnclulfry Employee Mr. Andrews,1 40 years old, was a railroad section foreman. His family consisted of his wife and five children, who ranged from 8 to 18 years of age. He was representative of part-time farmers who were skilled workmen or foremen. He worked regularly throughout 1934 for six 8-hour days per week, with 1 week's vacation, and earned approximately $1,500. This family lived rent-free in a house owned by the railroad. Threefourths of an acre of cropland went with the house. In addition, discarded railroad ties were used for fuel, and the cow was pastured along the railroad right-of-way. All of these advantages were equivalent in effect to an annual addition of about $175 to the family income. The land was planted in 1934 in a variety of vegetables, including tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lima beans, peppers, squash, cucumbers, radishes, collards, and sweet com. Collards were used from December through March, radishes in April, and the other vegetables through May, June, and July. The grocery bill was reduced $6 per month, or 12 percent, during the summer by the garden contribution. The livestock consisted of a cow and a small flock of chickens. The cow was dry for 2 months of the year, but produced 2,000 quarts of milk during the remaining 10 months. Two or three quarts of fresh milk per day were consumed and the remainder was made into butter. Thus the family had 3 pounds of butter per week for home consumption, and about 3 quarts of buttermilk per day. Twelve hens were kept and ten chicks r11.ised during the year. Thirty dozen eggs were produced over a 9-month period. Although it is difficult to determine the farm's contribution with precision, its value can be roughly estimated as $187 .50. Prices used are those which prevailed in the area when farm families sold products to one another. 800 125 800 30 qts. inilk _____________________________________ lbs. butter ___________________________________ qts. buttermilk_______________________________ doz. eggs ____________________________________ @ 10¢ @ 25¢ @ 3¢ @ 20¢ 25 lbs. chicken_____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ @ 25¢ Fresh vegetables ____________________________________ _ S80. 00 31. 24. 6. 6. 40. 25 00 00 25 00 Total value ________________________________________ 187. 50 The entire farm work, with the exception of the plowing, was done by the family. During the summer, Mr. Andrews spent about 1 hour a day in the garden. The older boys cared for the livestock before and 1 The name used is fictitious. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMIHG IN THE SOUTHEAST 131 after school. Farm expenses totaled only $10 for feed, $3 for plowing, and $2 for supplies. This family lived in the open country 6 miles from the city. They owned a 1933 Chevrolet sedan, used chiefly for pleasure. The house was in good repair but had no running water, no electricity, and no telephone. An Unu111ally Succe.ful White Part-Time Fami• Mr. Williams 3 was 45 years old, with a wife, two children, and two grown stepdaughters. He earned $36 per week as a millwright in Charleston until the depression, when he was forced to become a parttime machinist at $350 per year. He undertook pa.rt-time farming at that time to establish greater security for himself and his family. The family lived on a rented 4½-a.cre plot with a six-room cottage about ½ mile from his plant and, at the time of the survey, he had rented an additional 2½ acres of cropland. Mr. Williams said that without his farm, he could not have kept off relief during the period when his income was curtailed. This man made intensive use of his cropland. In 1934, he grew 19 kinds of vegetables, and had at least 2 kinds of fresh vegetables during every month of the year. Following the early vegetables, first a com crop and then a crop of pea-vine hay were planted, and enough feed was grown for the livestock on his farm: a Shetland pony, 5 pigs, and 50 chickens. Besides supplying home needs approximately $200 worth of crops was sold. From the poultry, the family had a.bout 4 dozen eggs a week throughout the year, and an average of one chicken a week. Four hundred pounds of pork also were used during the year. The approximate value of home-consumed products was as follows: 120 200 400 140 doz. eggs _______________________________________ @ 20t S24 lbs. chicken _____________________________________ @ 25¢ 50 lbs. pork _______________________________________ @ lOt 40 qts. canned vegetables ___________________________ @ 25¢ 35 Freshvegetables _________________________________________ 75 Total value ___________________________________________ 224 Mr. Williams worked about 4 hours a day on his farm throughout the 6 summer months, and from 1 to 2 hours a day during the remainder of the year. In 1934, he held a full-time job as watchman, yet did all the farm work except that of gathering vegetables. Cash expenses were $50 for fertilizer, $20 for supplies, and $20 for rent for the land exclusive of the house. Hence, at the above prices, Mr. Williams received a net return in cash and in products of $334. Mr. Williams' investment in farm equipment was small. Besides hand tools, he had a plow, a harrow, and a cultivator, and his only work animal was the Shetland pony. 1 The name used is fictitious. Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS 133 The Williams' house had running water, inside bathroom, and electric lights. The family had a radio and a 1929 Ford. A Nesro Fatilb:er Factory Employee This man was 54 years of age. His family consisted of a wife, a son 30 years old, two daughters 19 and 20 years of age, and the son of one of the daughters. The head of the household had full employment of six 8-hour days per week during February, March, and part of April 1934. His wages were 25 cents per hour, and his total earnings were $130 per year. His wife did washing and ironing for several families and earned $150. In addition, the family received relief amounting to $130 during the time the head was unemployed. The family had been receiving relief since 1933. This situation was typical of fertilizer factory workers, many of whom are employed only in the spring, but it was not typical of the entire Negro group studied. The family owned a four-room house and little more than an acre of land in a suburban village 2 miles from the head's place of employment. They had lived in this place for 23 years. The house was in a poor state of repair, with no electric lights and no running water. However, the family kept a 1926 Chevrolet touring car for pleasure purposes. One-fourth of the cropland was used to grow sweet potatoes, and the rest was planted in tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lima beans, peppers, turnips, and sweet corn. These vegetables were available during May, June, July, and August. No vegetables, other than 12 bushels of sweet potatoes, were stored. The family grocery bill was reduced $4 per month, or one-third, during the summer months by use of the home-grown vegetables. Twenty-five hens, that produced slightly more than a dozen eggs per week, were kept, and twelve chickens were raised and eaten during 1934. The value of the farm products used by this family was: 60doz. eggs _____________________________________ @ 20t Sl2. 00 25 lbs. chicken_ _ ___________ _____________________ @ 25t 6. 25 12 bu. sweet potatoes ____________________________ @ Sl 12. 00 Fresh vegetables ______________________________________ _ 40. 00 Total value _______________________________________ _ 70.00 The head of this family was able to do all of the farm work, since most of it came after the fertilizer season was over. His operating expenses, exclusive of taxes, were only $10. A Ne9ro Fann Laborer The head of this family worked 130 days in 1934 as a truck-farm laborer. His employment was distributed throughout the entire 150061°-37-18 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMIHG IH THE SOUTHEAST year, but there were two peak periods: one in April and May, and the other in October and November. At the rate of 8 cents an hour, his annual earnings were $83. His wife and four children, 10 to 20 years, worked for the same truck farmer during the busy seasons and earned a total of $84, making the total family cash income $167. This family owned a 12- by 20-foot cabin with 1 acre of land on Wa.dmalaw Island, 20 miles from Charleston, and 16 miles from a ha.rd-surfaced road. The family was allowed the use of 2¼ acres of cropland by the truck farmer, rent-free. This was a common practice in this area.. The house was unplastered and unpainted, and had no conveniences. The head had never gone to school, and the wife had had only 2 years of schooling. The oldest child had 4 years of schooling; the 19-year-old boy had completed the fourth grade; and the 15-year-old girl, the third grade. . Two acres of the cropland were planted unsuccessfully in corn in 1934, the 5 bushels harvested being fed to the mule. Of the remaining land, ¼ acre was planted in sweet potatoes, and ¼ acre in tomatoes, okra., peas, lima beans, peppers, squash, and watermelons. With the exception of a few peppers in September, the fa.rm products were available only in June and July, since all were planted at the same time. No vegetables were preserved or stored. The chickens laid 20 dozen eggs during the spring months, and two fowls were eaten. The head caught 100 pounds of fish in the river during the year, and gathered 20 bushels of oysters during the winter months. Five cords of wood for fuel were cut on the land owned by the employer. Cash fa.rm expenses totaled only $5. No fa.rm products were sold. The farm's production, plus wood, fish, and oysters, was: 20 8 100 20 doz. eggs _______________________________________ @ lbs. chicken ____________________________________ @ 2~ lbs. fish _________________________________________ @ 10; bu. oysters ______________________________________ @ 5o; Fresh vegetables __________________________________________ 5 cords wood _____________________________________ @ $5 ~ 14 2 10 10 20 25 Total value ____________________________________________ 71 Both fa.rm and general conditions were typical of those of truckfarm laborers in this area. LUMBER SUBREGION A White Commercial Part-Time Fminer This man, with his wife and eight children, lived on a rented 25-acre farm 10 miles from Sumter, South Carolina, and 1 mile from a hard.surfaced road. He was a carpenter employed by a contractor in Sumter, and commuted with a relative who owned a car. His employment in 1934 was not steady. He worked 20 days a month from May Digitized by Google 135 CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS through September, but only about 10 days a month during the remainder of the year. Working a 10-hour day and receiving 22½ cents an hour, his total earnings were $382 for the year. These earnings were somewhat below the average for all part-time farmers studied, but fairly representative of those in the building industry where employment was quite uncertain. The entire farm was in crops in 1934, with the exception of about an acre of woodland. The crops were, approximately, 15 acres of com, 7 acres of cotton, and 1 acre of sweet potatoes. About ¼acre was used for a garden. Of the 175 bushels in the com crop, 150 bushels were used for feed, 15 bushels for food, and 10 bushels were sold. The 4 bales of cotton produced were sold, together with the seed, for $320. The 50 bushels of sweet potatoes produced were used by the family. The garden supplied tomatoes, okra, peas, lima beans, and cabbages during July, August, and September. Turnips and onions were supplied 2 months earlier, and collardsamonthlater. The only food canned was 8 quarts of peaches from the three trees on the place. Enough feed was produced on the farm for the mule, the cow, the 7 pigs, and the 26 chickens. The cow was milked throughout the year, her total production being 1,460 quarts. About 1½ quarts of fresh milk were used daily, and the remainder was churned. About 100 pounds of butter were made during the year. Four hogs were butchered in the fall, and their total weight dressed was 800 pounds. Fifty pounds of pork were sold, and the remainder was used by the family. The hens le.id throughout the year. Only 6 dozen eggs were sold, the family keeping 200 dozen for home consumption. Poultry was eaten from time to time throughout the year, since chickens were raised to replace those culled from the flock. About 200 pounds of poultry were used. In addition to these food products, the farm supplied 6 cords of firewood. Using prices which approximated those which prevailed when products were sold at the farm, the value of the production of this farm may be estimated as follows: fiOO qts. milk. ______________________________________ @ 10¢ $50 104:lbs. butter ______________________________________ @ 25¢ 26 (00 qts. buttermilk __________________________________ @ 3¢ 12 200 lbs. chicken_____________________________________ @ 25¢ 50 200doz.eggs _______________________________________ @ 20¢ 40 750 lbs. pork ________________________________________ @ 10¢ 75 8 qts. canned fruits ________________________________ @ 25¢ 2 50 bu. potatoes ____________________________________ @ Sl 50 Fresh vegetables and fruits________________________________ 50 6 cords firewood ___________________________________ @S5 30 Value of products used ___________________________________ 385 Receipts from products sold_______________________________ 333 Total value ___________________________________________ 713 Digitized by Google t36 PART-TIME FARMJHG IN THE SOUTHEAST •· Cash expenses of running this farm were $60 for hired labor, $130 for rent, $32 for fertilizer, and $~1 for several minor items, bringing the .total to $243. With total sales of $333, the cash balance was $90. While the farm operator worked only about 2 hours a day on the farm, his 'wife and three oldest children (13 to 17 years) worked on the place 4 to 5 hours a day through the summer and even longer during the· cotton-picking season. ·The two oldest children, both daughters, had left school after completing the seventh grade. The others were still in grade school, commuting 3 miles by school bus. · The family had been living on this farm for 10 years. The dwelling was a very old, poorly-kept house, which had never seen paint, and had never been finished inside. The roof leaked and the boards in the &or of the porch had rotted. Electricity and running water were not available. The family had no automobile or radio. While several organized social activities existed in the community, the members of this family took part in none,·other than church and Sunday School. A White Saw ancf Planfn9 MIii Employ" This man, with a wife and two daughters, lived 3 miles out of Sumter on a rented 2½-acre farm. He was a skidder operator at a Sumter saw and planing mill, and during 1934 worked a total of 240 days: 5½ days a week for 8 months, and about half that time from July to October. His workihg day was 8 hours, his rate of pay 35 cents per hour, and his total earnings $672 . .The older daughter, who was 19 years of age, had completed high school and was employed as a clerk in a 5- and IO-cent store in Sumter, earning $432. Thus the total family cash income was $1,104, somewhat above the average. The younger daughter attended high school in Sumter and expected to be graduated in another year. Of the form's 2½ acres, 2 acres were planted in com and¾ acre was in garden in 1934. The vegetables produced were sweet potatoes, tomatoes, okra, snap beans, lima beans, cabbages, cucumbers, onions, radishes, watermelons, cantaloupes, and mustard. Three or more vegetables were used fresh during the 5 months from May to September. Thirty-two quarts of tomatoes and thirty quarts of peas were canned for winter use; and 15 bushels of sweet potatoes were stored. Thirty bushels of com were raised; 20 bushels were fed to livestock and IO bushels were ground into com meal for home use. There were two apple and two peach trees from which about 5 bushels of fruit were picked. Eight cords of firewood were cut on a nearby farm wood lot. The livestock on the place included a cow, 5 pigs, and 12 hens. The cow was dry during 2 months of 1934, but supplied the family with a quantity of milk, of which about I}~ quarts were used every day. Two pounds of butter a week were made, and an abundance of buttermilk was used during the 10 months. Two pigs weighing about 150 Digitized by Google i37 CASE STUDIES OF :PART-TIME FARMERS pounds each were killed in the fa.ll, ~nd the pork was cured for use throughout the year. The hens produced 60 dozen eggs, and in addition 100 chicks were raised and 2:t0 pounds of fowl were eaten by the family during the year. All the feed for the livestock was , produced on the farm. The value of the products of this farm Ihay be estimated as follows: 420 qts. milk _______________________ ~- ______________ @ 10¢ ·so lbs. butt.er ______________________________________ @ 25¢ 300 qts. butt.ermilk __________________ .. ~--~----------- @ 3¢ 240 lbs. chicken _____________________________________ @ 25¢ 60 doz. eggs ____________________ "_--,--~_"-_________ @ 20¢ 300 lbs. pork __________________________ ~ _____________ @ 10¢ 60 qts. canned vegetables_ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ @ 25¢ 15 bu. sweet potatoes __________ ~-'-~---·-··------------ @Sl 10 bu. corn ___________________________ a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ @ S1 Fresh vegetables and fruits__ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ ___ __ _ __ _ __ __ _ 142 20 9 60 12 30 15 15 ,' 10 60 · Total value ____________________________________________ 273 I Nearly all of the farm work was done by the head and his wife, who each spent at least 2 hours a day on the farm throughout the year and more during the spring months. The older daughter helped regularly with some of the chores. The only farm expenses were $10 for hired labor and $10 for fertilizer. No farm products were sold. This family moved out of town and tqidertook part-time farming 3 years ago. The head had had no previous farm experience. The rent for their five-room house and the farm, which included a barn, garage, and poultry house, was $60. The dwelling was in good con-: dition, but did not have running water; electric lights, telephone, or radio. The family had a 1928 automol>ile, which was used in getting to and from work and school. While within easy reach of the organized social activities of Sumter, the family took part only in church and Sunday School. A Negro Woodworking, Employn This man, the head of a family of' seven, worked as a clipping machine operator in a veneer manufacturing plant in Sumter, South Carolina. He was employed only 5 days a month during January, February, and March, but worked from 20 to 25 days a month during the remainder of the year, a total of 225 days'. He worked 8 hours a day at 28 cents per hour, earning $504 during 1934. This was the sole cash income of the family. This family lived 4 miles out of to~ in a fairly new three-room house on 2 acres of land. The ,house· was without running water, electricity, or radio. The family did ·,not have an automobile and the head went to work on a bicycle.. 'There was a county school }' mile away which the three oldest children attended. The dwelling• barn, poultry house, and land were JebtM for $42 a year. Digitized by Google 138 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST An acre of com and¼ acre of garden were cultivated by the family. Twenty-five bushels of com were produced; 20 bushels were fed to the pig and the chickens, and 5 bushels were ground into grits for home use. Garden vegetables included Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, peas, cabbages, peppers, carrots, turnips, collards, and watermelons. Three or more fresh vegetables were used from May through September, with cabbages and collards during the winter months as well. In addition, 5 bushels of Irish potatoes and 15 bushels of sweet potatoes were stored. The pig was butchered in November when it weighed 125 pounds. The 20 hens laid 75 dozen eggs during the summer months, and in addition 120 pounds of fowl were ea.ten during the year. The value of the contribution of this fa.rm to the family living may be estimated as follows: 100 lbs. chicken ____________________________________ @ 25t 125 75doz. eggs _______________________________________ @ 20t 15 120 lbs.pork _______________________________________ @ lOt 12 5 bu.potatoes ____________________________________ @ $1 5 15 bu.sweet potatoes ______________________________ @ $1 15 5 bu.com _______________________________________ @ $1 5 Freshvegetablee _________________________________________ 40 Total value ___________________________________________ 117 All farming was done by the family, with the exception of a few days' work received in trade from a neighbor in re tum for plowing his ground. The operator spent about 1 hour per day on the fa.rm, leaving most of the work to his wife and two oldest children. The family averaged from 4 to 9 hoUl'B of farm work per day, depending on the season. Cash expenses included $4 for feed, $2 for fertilizer, and $1 for supplies. The family had lived at this place for 3 years, but had engaged in part-time farming continuously since 1928. The head had always lived on a farm. All members of the family attended church and Sunday School each week. The head belonged to a fraternal order and a labor union. The only other organization reported as available was a 4-H Club to which none of the children belonged. Laborer This man of 35, with a wife and five children, lived in a threeroom house on 2½ acres of land which he received rent-free from his farm employer. In 1934 he contracted to work on this fa.rm for 7 months at 60 cents per day, and besides his house and land, he received fuel, the use of a mule for working his land, and fa.rm implements. During the remaining 5 months of the year he worked by the day, as needed, and this amounted to from 10 to 12 days per month. The usual length of the working day was 10 hoU1'8. He received wages estimated at $152, $122 of which was in cash, and the A Negro Contract Fmm Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS 139 remainder in food supplies and rent. His wife earned $35 for work for the same farmer. The available land was used to grow 1 acre of com, 1 acre of cotton, and ¾ acre of vegetables. The vegetables included Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, tomatoes, peas, lima beans, cabbages, cucumbers, beets, onions, collards, and watermelons. Three or more vegetables were available only during June, July, and August, with only collards during the winter months. Four bushels of Irish potatoes and six bushels of sweet potatoes were stored. Twenty bushels of com were produced, of which half was ground for home use and half fed to livestock. The acre of cotton produced 1 bale of lint which, with the seed, sold for $81, the only cash farm receipts. The only livestock was a young pig, which was not butchered during the year, and seven hens. The hens laid only 15 dozen eggs during the year, but 25 young chicks were raised and 40 pounds of fowl were eaten. The value of the products of this farm may be estimated as follows: 40 16 4 6 10 lbs. chicken _____________________________________ @ 2~ $10 doz.eggs _______________________________________ @ 20¢ 3 bu. potatoes ____________________________________ @ Sl 4 bu. sweet potatoes _______________________________ @ Sl 6 bu. corn ________________________________________ @ Sl 10 Freshvegetables __ _______________________________________ 40 0 Value of products used ___________________________________ 73 Receipts from products sold________________________________ 81 Total value ___________________________________________ 154 No labor was hired. The head of the household worked an average of 1 hour a day on the place throughout the year. Most of the work was done by the wife with the help of the two oldest children, 10 and 12 years of age, when they were not attending school. The only farm expenses were $10 for fertilizer and $4 for ginning the cotton. The dwelling was a crude three-room shack in a generally dilapidated condition. The family had lived in this place for 5 years. All members attended church and Sunday School regularly, and the wife attended a women's organization monthly. The children were retarded in school, the girl of 12 having completed only the second grade, and the two girls of 10 and 8 having completed only the first grade. NAVAL STORES SUBREGION A Turpentlne Worlcer This part-time farmer is typical of the group of commercial farmers who have employment in the turpentine industry, with respect to outside employment and food production for home use. Since the man is a farm owner, he is in certain respects not representative of the tenants and sharecroppers. In 1934, this farmer had a commercial farm Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST business slightly larger than the average for the group. He was not in debt, and his economic status was a little above average for farm owners. The farmer in question was 36 years old, with a wife and four children ranging from 4 to 14 years. He had been farming continuously since he was 16 years of age, but took up turpentining only 3 years ago. His 150-acre farm was located in the open country 7 miles from town. It included 95 acres of woodland and 55 acres of cropland. The woodland was leased to a turpentine operator for 3 years for $200. The cash crops in 1934 were 6 acres of cotton and 3 acres of tobacco. The 3½ bales of cotton and 2,600 pounds of tobacco produced sold for $200 and $490, respectively. In addition 23 acres of corn, 6 acres of peanuts, and 2}' acres of pea-vine hay were grown for feed. Enough feed was produced, together with the pasturage which the woodland supplied, to carry all of the livestock. The livestock included 2 mules, 2 cows, 7 head of young cattle, 25 hogs, 25 chickens, and 30 goats. Like most other farmers in the county, this man had recently been increasing his livestock because of low farm prices and the curtailment programs for cash crops. Consequently, most of the livestock was young and did not add to the income during 1934. The two cows were of the "piney woods" variety, and had to pick up most of their feed in the woods. However, they produced about 2,200 quarts of milk during the year. About 4 quarts per day were used fresh, and about 1½ pounds of butter a week were made from the remainder. Thus, the family had milk and butter throughout the year. Twelve hogs were butchered in December and their total dressed weight was 2,900 pounds. About 100 pounds of meat were used fresh, and 2,300 pounds were salt-cured and stored. In addition, 500 pounds of lard were stored. The family used about 700 pounds of pork and lard during the year, and exchanged the remainder for other supplies. This surplus pork production added the equivalent of approximately $125 to the family mcome. The poultry flock was given no attention and produced only 5 dozen eggs during the whole year. Five 4-pound fowls were eaten. The flock of goats foraged in the woods. Twenty-one kids were sold for $16. In addition to the livestock products, about 1 acre of garden crops was cultivated for home use. The garden had a fair variety of vegetables, including Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, tomatoes, okra, peas, snap beans, lima beans, cabbages, peppers, squash, cucumbers, onions, collards, and cantaloupes. Since it was a summer garden, most of the vegetables were available only during May, June, and July. Collards and cabbages were used earlier and sweet potatoes later in the season. Approximately 60 quarts of tomatoes, 22 quarts of peas, 10 quarts of Digitized by Google CASE STUDIES OF PART-TIME FARMERS H1 snap beans, and 16 quarts of ca:bbage-a. total of 108 quarts-were canned. In addition, 26 gallons of syrup, produced from }~ acre of sugar cane, were stored for use during the year. The estimated value of the contribution of this farm to the family living was as follows: qta. milk ___________________________________ @ 10¢ lbs. butter_ : _ ________ _________ ___ __________ @ 25¢ qta. buttermilk_____________________________ @ 3¢ lbs. poultry___ ______________ _______________ @ 25¢ doz. eggs_ __ ____ ___________________________ @ 20¢ lbs. pork and lard_____________________ ______ @ 10¢ gal. sugar syrup _____________________________ @ 50¢ qta. canned vegetables _______________________ @ 25¢ Fresh vegetables_____________________________________ 8 cords wood ________________________________ @ S5 1,460 80 300 20 5 700 26 108 $146 20 9 5 1 70 13 27 50 40 Value of products used_______________________________ 381 835 Receipts from products sold and traded_________________ Total value _______________________________________ 1, 216 This farmer worked from daylight to dark on his place from March through September, with the exception of about 2 days a week when he worked off the farm in the turpentine woods. He cured tobacco, an operation which requires almost continuous tending of the fires for 4 or 5 days at a. time. Hence for a part of the time, he worked longer hours than the 14-hour day that was customary. His wife and the two older boys, aged 14 and 10, worked 10 hours a day on the farm during June, July, and August, helping in the cotton chopping, and in the tobacco and cotton harvesting. The only labor hired was for harvesting hay and tobacco. Wages paid hired labor totaled $35. The chief expense item was $115 for fertilizer, and total cash expenses were $192. The off-the-farm job consisted of dipping gum about eight 10-hour days a month throughout 1934. There were no certain days that the operator had to work, but he was assigned a definite task to perform each month. He received 10 cents an hour, and his total earnings from this work were $92. The three oldest children went to a country school 2 miles away. The family lived in a crudely constructed six-room house, unpainted and unplastered. They had a radio but no electric lights, running water, telephone, or automobile. An Industrial Worlccr The part-time farmer to be described was outstanding among the industrial workers in Douglas, Georgia, in his success in gardening and poultry keeping. He was a young man of 28 with two small children. He had done some gardening ever since his marriage 5 years earlier, and when his earnings were reduced, he had expanded his acreage of vegetables and added a flock of chickens. Digitized by Google l<tl PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST This man was an apprentice machinist in the railroad shop. He received 42 cents an hour in 1934, but since he worked only part time, his total earnings were only $464-lower than they had been 5 years earlier when he was just getting started at this same job. The home was located at the edge of town about a mile from the railroad shop. A comfortable seven-room house with running water and electric lights, together with 4 acres of land, was rented for $60 a year. Two acres of com and two acres of a large variety of vegetables were planted. The various crops were planted in rotation so that several fresh vegetables were available throughout the year. In addition, 52 quarts of vegetables were canned; and 15 bushels of sweet potatoes, a supply of pumpkins, 10 bushels of com, and 18 gallons of cane syrup were stored for home consumption. Vegetables worth $50 were sold. A flock of 60 hens was kept. During the year birds were culled from the flock from time to time and dressed for home use. About 80 pounds of chicken and 25 dozen eggs were available for family use. The poultry was fed on home-grown com and no feed was purchased. Six cords of firewood were cut on a nearby farm. The value of the food and fuel production may be estimated as follows: 80 lba. poultry______________________________________ @ 25' S20 25 doz. eggs _________________________________________ @ 20¢ 5 15 bu. sweet potatoes ________________________________ @ Sl 15 18 gal. cane syrup ___________________________________ @ 50; 9 10 bu. com _________________________________________ @ so; 8 52 qts. canned vegetables _____________________________ @ 26; 13 Freshvegetables __________________________________________ 60 6 cords wood _______________________________________ @ 16 30 Total value ___________________________________________ 160 The only cash expenses were $10 for hired labor and $16 for seed and fertilizer. The head of the family had ample time to take care of the garden and the chickens with only 24 hours of outside work a week. It was evident that by means of his farming activities this man had raised the level of living of his family considerably above what it would have been had he been entirely dependent on his rather low industrial earnings. He had the reputation of being the hardest working man in town. He had taken several agricultural courses in the local branch of the State College, and at the time of the survey was taking a correspondence course in mechanical engineering. The head was active in community affairs, attending lodge and labor union meetings regularly. Members of the family attended Sunday School and church once or twice a month. Digitized by Google Appendix B SUPPLEMENT ARY TABLES Appudlx Tal,le 7.-Age of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 193-4 Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast White White White Naval Lumber Btonlll A.pothead Negro Negro White White Negro -------------1--- ___ ,____ ---1---1----1---PilT-'l'Dlli Pilll BOVSliBOLDS Total-·-·-·-··· •••••• -· •••••••• 293 --ll04 ----- Under 20years...................... 20 to :14.9 years...................... 211 to 29.11 years...................... IO to 34.11 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86to 311.9 years...................... 40 to 44.9 years. • • . . . • . . • . • • • . • . . . . . . 46 to 49.11 years •••••. _............... 60 to 64.11 years...................... 66 to 611.11 years...................... IIOto64.llyears ••••••••••• - ••.•...•.. 3 24 33 49 49 44 32 30 16 13 ____ ,______ ___ 2 II 13 23 11 :14 37 36 33 33 20 10 71 20 16 6 10 71 142 8 I 8 13 14 13 4 7 6 2 8 20 10 22 15 22 16 10 17 7e , a 8 8 12 13 19 6 6 1 132 71 17 28 16 20 18 14 6 6 8 10 H 13 10 6 11 6 3 8 ~~-==::=.=::::t:::::::::::::z:::::=::=~:::::z::::::i:: Median IIP•--··-·-·-·-······· ll'Ollrilll!NO INDVSTBI.U. = 39 = 42 == = 43 43 222 346 1m 106 112 l 14 3 17 18 = 43 43 ==-== = 36 = 34 BOV!liBOLD8 Total-··············-·········· 314 Under 20 yeers •• ······-········· •••. 20 to 24.9 years •.•••••••.•.••••.•...• 26 to 29.9 yeers .•••••...•.•.•••.•.•.. 30 to 34.11 years .••.....•..•.••....••. 86 to 89.11 years .•.•••••••••••.•••.•.• 40 to 44.9 yeers •.••...•.•.••..••..•.. 46 to 49.11 years .•••.•.•.•.•.•.•.•..•. 50 to 64.11 years .•••.•••.••....•...... M to 611.11 years .•••.••.•..•.........• GO to 64.11 years •..••••.•.•..••••..•.. 6 Median a~e .....•.•.......•.•.. = 35 70 50 45 30 5 26 47 29 32 12 42 62 83 51 28 23 28 48 29 11 10 11 32 11 7 35 21 = 41 = 39 14 = 20 16 17 10 5 4 3 36 13 23 14 15 11 4 6 14 22 6 8 7 4 = 7 35 1m 411 -----1 23 28 12 15 11 11 2 3 3 = 3 33 = 30 11 17 II 3 3 = 2 l l l 211 1-43 Digitized by Google 144 PART-TIME FARMIHG IN THE SOUTHEAST A,,,,endl• Tol,le !.-Size of Part-Tim• Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Tartlle Coal and Iron White White A tlantlc Coast Naval Lumber Storea Sise of hOUll!hold Neero White Neero White Necro White -------------!--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --PilT-TQIS Pilll BOUIISBOLDII Total-- ----- - -- --- ··- - •. - • -- --· 1 penon----·--·. ······---··. ·-· ·---2 persons_._·---··--··-···-······-··3 persons __ ···--·····-·· ....... ··-··. 4 persoDll..- --············-·········· 6 pal'!IODS.- - --·· •••.. ·-··-·. ···-····· II persons ____ ... ··-···· .......... ··-· 7 parsons_--··-··· .................•. 8 parsons.-._ •.................... ·-· II persons·-··-······················· l0persons .. - .. ······-··········--··· 11 penons or more .•.......... _..... . A varage slse of household. __ •. NONP.t.BIIINO INDUSTlll.t.L BOl/8SBOLD8 Total.- ••.. - . -· -- .•. -- . - .••.••. 1 peraon ___ • ·---·---····-···· ....... . 2 pal'!IOns_. -··· ..................... . 3 parsons.···-··-···· ............... . 4 persons ___ -··.··-·· .......... ····-· 6 pal'!IOns .. - -·· ...•.................. II parsons •. __ .. ·-·· .................• 7 parsom_. ···-···· ··-·· ..... ··-··· •. 8 pal'!IOns. ---······-·· ........•. ·-· •. II persons_··-·······-················ 10 parsons... --············-········· 11 persons or more·-··---·-·-····---· Average size of household ••• _.. 2113 Z4 13' 71 H2 13 12 8 18 26 12 ---1 ---1 ---1 ---1 --2 111 8 40 28 60 116 66 411 21 20 46 28 14 21 13 3 8 4 3 7 3 13 22 20 26 H 4 3 4 II 9 13 24 22 16 7 4 2 4 II 6 II 2 6 76 132 71 9 II 22 12 2'J 22 17 3 111 H H 8 8 6 2 6 2 11 17 II 11 11 8 4 4 3 8 3 - - - --- - - - ------ - - - --- = 5. l 5.2 5.3 6.0 6. 2 6.3 5. 3 ------ = = = 222 3411 21 118 84 'Ill 42 Z7 6.0 10/i 112 103 22 13 21 18 14 10 10 II Z7 Z7 10 20 12 13 411 ---1 --- ---2 --- --- --- --- --1 314 114 83 53 47 30 32 14 Ill II 4 6 1 8 4 = 60 63 311 1 4.1 19 11 4 4 II --- = --4. 5 4. 2 103 10 20 33 16 111 21 111 16 6 7 11 3 2 2 2 2 4.8 = 4.0 Digitized by --= 4.5 11 II II 3 2 2 2 1 8 3.8 Google = 3.11 SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES Appendix To&le 3.-Farm 1 Ex_eerience of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Numbero(yelll'llhead had Ii ved on R farm slnco 16 years of age Coaland Iron Atlantic Coast White White e.; '-- "' ee~ .,8'll. za 8 -- White s. .,80. I I 8' 8a1 8cl Naval Stores Lumber Sa! e-;; 8'll 37 :,; ~ White s-;; g·;:; '-sa~ 5t za -z- -8 - -zS I 8 ze - ---- -8'cl .,:,; PART·Ttlllt P'ARlf HOUSEHOLDS Tota] __ . ______ . _____ 43 250 20I 124 24 47 142 39 42 2 -1 3 17 1 2 10 9 21 1 132 37 34 - -5 - -7 - - - 17 1 -- -3 --3 1 3 9 14 3 1 6 18 6 6 -7 10 6 6 8 8 66 39 19 3 28 5 10 22 6 41 17 6 6 2 8 12 14 5 4 17 7 3 8 22 14 2 5 19 27 9 31 6 1 6 3 6 8 8 6 27 7 2 16 2 6 6 9 1 4 4 14 2 2 8 6 3 1 --- - - - -- - - -1 6 --= ----------------= Average years on a 12 22 20 13 19 22 6 20 II R 14 10 farm•------------== = --==----= === NONFARMINO INDUSTRIAL None _____________________ l year ____ ------------ .. __ ____ ..______________ -------------· years 4 year,, 32 to 5 to 9 years __ . _______ ._ ... 10 to J.l years _____________ 15 to 19 years _____________ llll to 29 years _____________ 30 to 39 years _____________ 40 to 49 years _____________ Unknown_------------- .. - -- - 37- - 71-- 165 109 33 1 35 HOUSEHOLDS Tota] _____________ .. None _____________________ 1 year _____________________ 2 years ____________________ 3 to 4 years _______________ 5 to 9 years _______________ 10 to 14 years _____________ 15 to 19 years _____________ 20 to 29 years _____________ 3o to 39 years _____________ Unknown ________________ 314 222 144 136 9 13 27 27 12 19 44 49 20 6 II 13 2 - - 1 2 1 farm•------------ 8 103 105 92 103 82 36 46 9 17 80 3 8 4 2 4 6 7 9 2 5 14 6 2 2 3 1 20 7 18 7 6 6 6 14 4 2 2 4 30 4 6 64 52 23 1 I 2 -4 -- - 6 8 10 II 5 -- A vera11e years on a 6 49 346 -151- 4 4 4 - - - 10 8 3 1 1 7 'Following the census drflnltlon, a farm was defined a.s a tractofland or at least 3 Bert's unless Its 81:rlcultuml products were valued at $250 or more. H,•nce, those who had had farm experience on small acreages only appear In this tahle as having had no experience. • For those having lived on a farm. Appendix To&le ...-Number of Years Head of Household Had Been a Part-Time Farmer Since December 31, 1928, by Color and by Subregion Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast White White White Nnvnl Stores Lumber Number or years head had been a part-time Carmer Negro Negro White Negro White -------------1--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --Tota) _________________________ _ 1 year'-----------------------------2 years ______________________ . ______ . 3 years _____________________________ _ 4 years. ____________________________ _ 6 years_----------------------------6 years. ____________________________ _ 1 293 20! 2 57 25 2 124 71 142 76 132 64 15 22 8 3 5 13 10 9 105 7 16 12 6 35 3 18 18 9 84 71 - - - - - - ------ --- --- - - - --28 18 163 23 32 24 17 106 28 6 1 35 23 1 29 14 6 22 Practically all or these cases were eliminated by definition. See pp. XXX-XXXI. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST Appendix Taf,t. 5.-Number of Livestock and Size of Garden on 573 Part-Time Farms, 1929 and 1934, by Color of Operator and by Subregion Coal 1111d lroll Tutlle Number of llveatoclc and acres In garden White Necro White Necro White Nani Lamber Atlantlo Coast White Bt«es Necro White -,-----,---,>---1---,--1---r--it---r--1----,-- 19291934lll'J91934Ul'J919341929193419291934192919341929Ul34U12111QM Total •..••.••.••..••.••.. Cows: None. •••..••.•••..••••.•... 1. •••...•...••.....•........ 2ormore...•........•...... Ul3 Ul3 108 108 - - 37 211 104 111 22 23 - - 70 31 6 36 35 23 23 106 106 3S 3S 84 84 22 22 --1--1--1--t--l---t--·I-- - - - - - - 47 63 6 211 6 1 Z II - II 8 6 11 6 6 84 Ill 2 83 111 3 17 14 10 19 6 61 22 1 63 17 4 1 12 4 I I. 2 1. 2 I. 0 I. I 1. 2 I. 8 4 :Ill 3 A~~~=-----=----------oowa ................... I. 2 1. 2 I. 2 1.1 1. 2 1. 0 2. 4 2. 8 1.1 1. 1 Bop: n u n n None....................... 76 88 811 79 26 ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 :111 18 66 42 10 13 6 12 2 2 16 26 3 6 18 3S I 2••••••••••••••••••••••.••.. 2626 5 8 3 3 1 2 7 11 2 1 17 10 I 1 Bormore..••••.•••..•.••... 6 8 2 6 2 I 4 6 12 11 17 :IO 21 22 3 4 Averageforthoseownlng - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - hop •.....••...••• _ •••. 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.4 3.6 4.3 2.4 1.9 9.6 7.0 2.8 2.728.013.0 ~~ None....................... 62 63 40 38 18 12 7 4 36 28 4 16 10 16 H 1 to 9.. •••••••.••.••..•..•.. 12 16 6 9 6 15 2 3 15 24 1 3 17 :IO 1 10 to !IL .•......•.......... 37 46 22 23 8 6 2 3 45 311 4 7 24 26 2 :IO to 211.... .. . . . . . .. ... .. . . . 26 23 18 13 1 4 4 6 10 13 II 16 111 2 30 to 49..................... 18 12 12 16 3 4 3 4 8 9 II 7 80 or more.................. 18 H 8 7 2 I 6 6 1 5 7 3 2 4 6 A~forthoeeownlng poultry................ 33 27 43 29 :IO 11 42 63 16 14 43 47 21 18 1511 40 Acres In garden: None...................... 12 10 12 4 ti 2 23 11 2 1 2 34.......................... 64 65 63 28 111 Ill 2 2 7 13 14 53 56 1 1 1 : 2 : 1.. .•.•... ..•.•...•••..••••• 26 11 11 19 I 4 3 3 16 28 10 II 11 7 7 8 Hi......................... 7 11 4 16 1 2 2 2 17 2 1 1 2 a 2.. .• . . . . . .•. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . • 6 6 2 10 2 1 11 16 1 1 1 3 or more................... 8 10 5 1 3 3 6 8 13 1 3 1 1 Averageforthoeehavagarden .....•.... - •.. 0.11 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.6 1.3 4.4 1.3 I.ti 0.7 1.1 0.4 0.6 0.11 1.0 1................. ... ....... --------=--------------------=- ,-==============:=:s. ~ ~ U:::::::::::::::::::::::::: : : ~ • g : rn ~ ; r l i =----'=---------- Appendix Table 6.-Acres of Cropland on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Testlle Coal and Iron White Naval Lamber Atlantlo Coaat White Btorea White White Acree of cropland .,:.. s8{! e.i e-n §j B zi m.. s.i 81:l h g:a ! 2 1 1 3 8 3 2 1 3 23 27 30 47 28 7 26.4 a. 0 e-a 0 Ba! 813 Qli5 ~i zB 0 ! ia.a i;-. ---1 - 813 c,li! zB zB z ~ 0 0 0 - - - - - - -- - - - --124 47 37 132 43 250 24 142 89 37 M Total ..••••..••••••. 20f - -1 - 15- - -4 - I 1 2 None ..••..•••.••••••••••• 0 1 acre .............••...•.• 2 acres ......•...•••....... 3 to 4 acres ...•••..•...•••. 6 to 9 acres ........•...•... 10 to IQ acres .•...••..••.. 20 to 29 acres .•••.••..••.. 30 to 49 acres_ .......... _. 50 to 74 acres ...•••.•.••.. 75 acres or more.••••••.••• Unknown •••••••••••••••. -3 3 17 13 4 2 196 13 13 9 2 1 123 29 19 14 12 3 100 18 4 1 6 8 7 2 0 -1 -2 -4 14 7 27 5 1 44 11 17 14 2 II 17 0 II -- -1 1013 -17 -- -- --1 10 5 -- -1 -- -- - --- --- -4 --- --- -- - - - - - - -- -- - = - - - - - - - - = Averal!9 B<Te8 of cropland_·····-·· 20. 4 1. 5 2.11 1. 6 '-1 40.4 Digitized by 2.11 7.4 41.3 Google 25 e 2 --1 -- - LIi Appendix Table 7.-Value of Part-Time Fanns,1 by Type of Fann, by Color and Tenure of Operator, and by Subre9ion, 1934 White Value of farm Commercial Owner Tenant Lamber Atlantic Coast Textile Noncommer- clal Own- er Tenant Commercial Own- er Ten- ant White Negro White Noncommer- clal Commercial Own- er Tenant Own- Tenant :M M 87 II 1 6 7 2 1 6 23 18 7 40 31 16 er Naval Stores Negro Noncommer- clal OwnOwn- er Ten- ant White Owner Ten• er Commercial Noncommer- Own- Own- Tell- clal Ten- ant er ant Ten- ant er an& -Total. ___ --······· •. __ Less than $500 ______________ 16 16 ---$500 to $99!L. ----------·-·-$1,000 to $1,9911 ______________ 4 1 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $6,000 to $2,WIJ ______________ to $.1,9\19 ______________ to $4,9911 ______________ or more _______________ 6 3 2 5 6 4 l l ----= 07 32 13 11 22 -1 -2 --- -3 -1 -2 -6 l 28 22 8 7 Average value •• ___ •.. $4,331 $2,532 $3,528 :M 14 12 :M 211 - -4 --4 2 7 -l 108 II 47 39 8 2 1 3 8 Ill -1 - 4 -1 -6 -2 111 7 6 4 7 II 10 2 2 9 -1 4 3 2 1 l 9 -1 --1 6 2 6 2 l 8 6 3 1 - = 3 -- - = - - = - - - - $3,780 = t = - - - - - - - - - - -$699 $2,141 $7,705 $4,584 $4,400 $2,293 $1,242 $3,214 $2,332 $1,500 $1,876 $1,217 $3,000 t 14 10 4 2 1 7 6 4 - -ao 5 18 4 6 -- ==-= $1,800 t Average not computed ror less than 10 cues. • E1clusive or 328 white and Negro cases In the Coal and Iron Subregion, 1112 white cues In the Textile Subregion (88 mDJ-'rilla&'e Carroll County), and 13 white sharecroppers in the Naval Storee Subregion. - In Greenville County and lal cues In I ~ "'( i 0 co· ,,"" (1) 0. O" '< 0 0 0 - 0.0 ro to ti ,. Appendix To&/e 8.-Total Debt 1 of Part-Time Farm Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, by Tenure, and by Subregion, January 1, 1935 Textile Coal and Iron Atlontlo Const Wbite Totul clebt, Jnnuary I, 1935 I Co,omocial 0 <i5" ;,.· N g_ 0 ~ ---ro I N..,. w clal I Noooommercial I I N..,. C.mmocl&.! I ~ Noooommerclal N"" w OE-< 0 ,__ ,___ ,__ ,___ , E-<OE-< 20 I 23 82 I 168 10 134 9 I 16 40 153 39 - I f Com,oo- Wbite Com.merclal 3 3 I -- 6 --3 -4 7 6 4 11 8 i 2 3 - 1 1 I -- I -I 89 12 6 3 2 2 3 15 2 6 3 -- I - -2 11 4 2 I I 23 2 I I l I 4 4 6 I --2 I 0 E-<OE-<OE-< 101 13 86 3 7 - 3 I 2 3 2 -- --2 -2 -I I I 11 9 -2 ---- I 22 16 - I 25 22 I -I -I 2 3 --- 1 - --- I 65 31 15 4 2 -2 --- I 0 E-<OE-<OE-< t Average not computed !or Jes,, than 10 cases. 1 Nonoommerclal i ill ~I Jljl 87 25 75 10 I I 9 - --- -3 I I I 5 2 I l I I 14 9 1 2 2 --- I 12 6 I I 25 22 - I 26 I 100 I JI 87 13 3 3 4 -2 -I 52 2 I 3 - 1 --I I -- -- - 0 E-< 16 I 21 Mortgage lndebtedneas (real estate and chattel). E-< 30 9 9 7 4 1 6 - 3 I Average total debt !or I.hose having debts . . ········-·--············.I $1,6021$160 ISi. 443 1$438 ISi, 377 1so20 IS965 1$.560 j$2, 291 1$175 1$466 j$275 1$99 IS4 2 ISi, 298 IS 105 j$437 IS650 j$1V l 1$.56 1$718 1$108 ~ 0 I Whl" White I !wl~I wl~I ~ 1~1~1 w1-1 ~~ 1~1~1~,~ !Ii .,a I ! l~l i~i~1~i i~i~i __i~i ,__ ,__ ,___ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,___ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,__ ,__,__ ~wI O Total.. . . .. ..••..• .• ••..... . .. •.. .. l None. _______ ______ _ $1 lo $49 ....... .. .•.•........ .. .. . . . ... . $50 to $99 .. . .. . .••..•.•. . .•• . •.••..•.••• • $100 to $249 ........ . .. . $250 to $499 . .... ... . $500 to $;49 .. . ......... .. .......... . ... . . $750 to $999 ........... . $1,000 to $1,999 ..... . .•......•.... ...... • $2,000 to $2,999. $3,000 to $3,999 ... ....•.•. • .. ••.. . . . .. . .. $4,000 or more . •...... •..••............ .. Unknown .... . .•••.......•..•.••...•...• I NoooomI mcrcial Naval Stores Lumber White IO ':-t ::! ~ i i ~ ~ $87 I 149 SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES Appendix TalJle 9.-Buildings Other Than Dwellings on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile White Buildings other than dwellings ] "~ White White l] .; cl ~ l] .a 3 "., a a a g :a~ ~., a i ~ 0 z ~ z 0 z z 0 - -- - - - -- - 250 204 124 24 47 142 39 TotaL_ -- . __ -----·····- --- ------- --- 43 - - -4 - 8 -14 - - - -36 0 0 None----···-···---····-·-·-···-··--··---Barn only _____ .. -------·-------.----_.··-. Barn and garage·--·--·-··---·-·····-----· Garage only ... -·-···------·------··-·-·-· Barn and other buildings _________________ 14 Garage nnd other buildings.--·---··--·-·· 3 Barn, garage, and other buildings .. __ ._._. 22 Other buildings onlY---··-----·--····-···· 3 2 2 7 77 44 51 63 Naval Stores Lumber C1)o";d AUantlc Coost C 0 White .; ~., ta ~., 1 2 4 16 1 2 8 3 u 97 2 3 13 17 12 36 3 6 57 0 2 4 4 6 15 31 54 45 l] a a g z z 0 z --- - -37 132 37 34 -- - - -8'cl g II 1 25 2 7 9 14 7 63 6 15 46 31 3 4 2 28 1 1 Appendix Table 70.-Cost of Implements and Machinery on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Coal and Iron Textile A tlantlc Coost White Cost or Implements and machinery s. White ;; ~ "., §;; a s·a ~ a " "' 0 ~ z .a ·a., Naval Stores Lumber White l] White i;; ."., 3 ~ 3 "~ se;; g·a 0 0 a ~ s·a ~., a g z z z" - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Total. ______________ 43 250 47 204 124 24 142 37 132 37 39 34 -223- -168- -122- - - 36- - 71- - - 34- -- 13- - None _____________________ - 8 6 4 31 97 0 2 3 4 6 7 6 1 $1 to $4. ·-·········-··---$5 to $14. -·-···--···-----$1.5 to $24 ••••• ··-·-······· $25 to $49 ....... _. _. _. ____ $50 to $99 .. ---··-···-·--·· to $14Q .. -··· ··-··-·-· $200 or more ........ ______ Unknown._ .. ·-······--·· 0 $1UO $150 to $109. _. ______ .. ____ 6 4 9 6 4 - 2 -2 5 13 8 3 5 1 1 -- i a 0 z C) -1 1 ---- $65 1$301 2 4 1 1 1 8 - 9 i 0 z -1 -3 l tl~ - -- === Average cost !or those having machincry.•... --·-·· $241 z6 4 1 3 --- 0 1 23 20 C) -2 l 20 5 10 3 1 5 6 - - -- $33 $35 7 2 - - -11 656 ---1 -142 96 1 l 8 - I I t $l 36 1 $60 - I $115 - 3 --- -- t t Average not computed for less than 10 CBSOS. 150061°-37--19 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 250 Appendix Table 11.-Number of Livestock and Size of Garden on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, January 1, 1934 Coeland Iron Textile Atlantic Coeat White Number of llvestoclt and acres In garden White 1 1 I I " 0 -- -zTotal _______________ 0 Cows: None _________________ }_ _____________ I l z i z 0 0 z" ~ - - - - - - - - -- - - Is z 0 -------- 3or more ______________ Poultry: None _________________ 1 tog _________________ 10 to 19 _______________ 20 to 29 _______________ 30 to 49 _______________ 60 or more ____________ Hogs: None _________________ --- ------- 2 ______________________ 3 or more _____________ Horses and mules: None _________________ ___more - --------------- 2}_or _____________ Acres In garden: None _________________ 0 43 260 20t 124 24 47 142 39 37 132 3 118 169 22 1 101 94 9 111 13 10 4 5 5 23 19 3 2 113 24 5 7 21 8 14 22 88 41 1 3 - II 14 II 78 51 li3 17 5 2 8 4 10 14 4 7 43 35 47 II 5 1 6 6 8 6 7 6 17 83 39 28 11 4 5 1 4 6 6 16 :II 8 4 1 2 27 9 4 6 1 11 8 10 7 00 27 60 39 15 13 16 15 7 5 153 67 9 23 238 11 2 25 b 10 I -4 19 ~---------------------- -- -- -------21½-------------------or more _____________ 6 8 II 13 87 70 38 18 7 II }_ _______ White I; I I 1 ! I i e= White ------------ -- 2 ______________________ }_ ___________ B :a NanlBtora Lumber -- - - - .a -1 21 52 18 24 11 - 160 24 22 8 8~ 27 6 3 - 24 12 5 6 78 34 15 15 34 7 34 46 17 35 180 23 1 120 3 1 5 10 9 35 11 4 18 17 35 2 103 27 l 75 61 6 7 51 40 25 40 -53 -- 2 4 9 10 13 3 6 2 I -13 17 23 38 25 36 7 1 8 2 8 I 1 6 II 2 1 19 22 37 14 16 4 - 14 2 8 2 l -3 18 4 10 11 13 2 2 2 I - 34 5 25 5 4 - 27 1 2 --4 31 1 1 1 80 14 2 2 17 4 5 6 1 2 87 3 84 18 8 13 2 4 34 14 II -- 1 - 2 6 7 12 6 1 8 11 3 10 4 - Appendix Table 72.-Types of Food Produced for Home Use on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Cool and Iron .Atlantic Coast White ,! 'E., 8 8 u 0 Tota\ _______________________________ - 43 Ve~etoh!es only ___________________________ Dairy proclul'ts only ______________________ Poultry products only ____________________ Vegeta.hles and dairy products ____________ Vegetables and poultry products __________ Vel!t.'tahles and pork. _______ . __ ... ________ VPgt:lahlr~-.;, dairy ,md poultry proClucts. ___ 7 Vegetable:-., dairy product'-, nn,I pork .. ____ I Vegetahlt•s, poultry produc-ts.1,nd pork ____ 2 Vl ~Pt11bl(•$, dairy and poultry products, and pork ________________________________ 30 Other combinations _______________________ White White 3 Focd products ":;i a! 8 80 s :a ""0 z ,, I., ~ z'" 31 3 35 -- - 250 204 124 -- - 10 11 1 30 1l :;i ~ 0 u NavAI Stores Lumber i 3 8 8 ~ 8 0 I., ., z" z 0 8 ~ 0 White ] I § z 3 0 ., z I., ~ 0 zIs 8 80 I 1 1 2 9 1 2 I 1 2 42 II 1 3 5 8 10 2 53 2 15 4 3 20 7 10 34 12 22 2 I 9 16 8 2 6 48 3 4 79 36 5 6 10 8 29 H 32 22 8 3 2 2 3 4 44 8 - - - -142 -39 - 37- -132 -37 - -34 24 47 - 4 - -3 -44 - - -2 - 9 - - -20 17 35 13 43 10 12 17 ] ~ 2 6 I I I I 3 1 Digitized by Google 6 4 I 2 251 SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES Appendix To&fe 13.-Number of Months Three or More Fresh Vegetables Were Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Color of Operator and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast Naval Stores Lumber Number or months 3 or more fresh Velletables were consumed White White Negro White NellfO White Negro White _____________ ,___ - - - --- - - - --- --- --- --Total _________________________ _ 1None-------------------------------month ____________________________ _ 2 months. ______ . ___________________ _ 3 months ___________________________ _ 4 months.--------------------------6 months months_--------------------------6 __________ . ________________ _ 7 months ___________________________ _ 8 months ___________________________ . 9 months ___________________________ _ 10 months or more. _________________ _ Average number or months 3 or more !re.sh vegetables were consumed--------------- 293 204 124 23 7 1 1 - - - --- - - 6 15 35 67 59 37 32 2 4 6 4 'Z7 37 75 37 33 16 36 4 5 1 9 1 4. 5 6.8 14 22 132 71 71 142 76 --- ---3 - -16- ---3 --12 1 9 15 15 8 6 2 29 23 2 6 50 14 20 22 10 6 3 a. 4 1. 9 8 7 1 3 4 1 --- = --- --- - - - ------ = 5. 18 26 11 4 3 3 2 3 22 30 13 8 4 4 6 14 20 4. 3 3. 4 4 4. 4. Appendix Table 7.f.-Number of Months Any Fresh Vegetable or Fruit Was Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Color of Operator and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic COBSt Naval Stores Lumber Numoor or months any fre.sh \"egetable or fruit was consumed _____________ ,, TotaL ______________ . ________ _ None _______________________________ _ 1 to 2 months. ______________________ _ 3 to 4 months _______________________ _ 6 months. months.--------------------------6 __________________________ _ 7 months ___________________________ _ 8 9 months_--------------------------months. __________________________ _ 10 months __________________________ _ 11 months __________________________ . 12 months __________________________ . Averagenumherofmonthsnny fresh vegetable or fruit was consumed___________________ ___ - - - - - - - - - - - - --- --- --White White Nwo White Negro White Negro 293 204 124 71 142 76 132 71 19 3 1 1 2 2 1 3 3 5 7 12 4 7 14 3 4 4. 8 11 9 19 20 - - - --- --3 9 16 25 51 65 2 2 10 5 2 9 34 3 7 14 28 10 3 28 26 10 9 23 9 9 15 45 36 13 24 7.4 8.8 44 37 9 40 9 37 6 4 8 8 7 12 7.6 8.1 10 7 18 7 1 6 17 13 3 10 15 White 1 19 21 16 JO 7 4. 8.1 8.11 =I= = = = = = = 6.0 8.8 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 252 Appendix Tal>le 75.--Part•Time Farms Producing Fruih1 Berries, or Nuh, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Coal and Iron Textile White White Fruits, berries, or nuts produced .., Es eo.! C:;; "" a" zEl !! 0 0 Total. •••••.•.•••••. None ...•.•.••••••••••••.. 1 or more ••.. - ..•••••••••. Peaches .••••••.•••...•.... App 1es ..•.••.•.•...•...... ·Figs ....•....•......•...•. Grapes •.•••...•.•.•.•...•. Pears .••••••...•.......... Plums ..•••.....•.•.•••.•. Cherries ...••••...•.•...•. Other fruit •.••••..•.•.•••. BtTawberrles•••••••••••••• Blackberries ..•.•.•.•••.•. Huckleberries .....•.•.•.•. Berries unknown .•••••••. White .., eeo.! ~ i z 204 124 E~ 0 0 Naval Stores Lumber Atlantic Coast c:;; "" zEl Wrute .., e0 E-; "~ Elu za C"' ~ .~ z 0 ~ . -=-" "'~ C"' ., .! 0 E-; o- EU za 0 u - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 43 2.'i0 47 24 142 39 132 37 37 - -6 -154- - S5- - 77- - - 40- -113- - 16- - 25- - 78- - 2416 37 96 119 47 8 7 29 23 24 21 2 65 86 4 18 21 45 4 4 36 13 13 7 1 6 1 50 5 2 8 20 12 3 3 3 1 3 5 4 2 4 20 23 13 8 8 g -- -- -- -- ------ = 5 3 1 1 1 JO 14 6 22 17 4 7 5 JO 3 3 3 3 12 54 13 10 u 6 4 3 4 3 1 2 4 3 1 4 3 6 1 6 11 34 ~ 211 8 ----= = 5 4 2 3 3 1 3 3 2 Walnuts.•.•.•.•••••••••.. Pecans...•.•.•.••...•...•. 5 3 4 4 3 5 Appendix Table 76.-0uantity of Fruits and Vegetables Canned on Part.Time Farms, by Color of Operator and by Subregion, 1934 Coal and Iron Textile Quarts of fruits and vegetables canned Atlw::tlc Coast Nsval Stores Lumber _____________,___ --- - - - --- - - - --- --- --TotaL........................ None................................ l to 19 quarts........................ 20 to 49 quarts....................... !IO to 99 quarts....................... JOO to 199 quart.,..................... 200 quarts or more................... Average quarts renned by those doing canning......... White White Negro White Negro White Negro 293 204 55 30 27 9 White 124 71 142 76 132 71 56 31 56 4 140 2 20 7 S5 20 31 --- ------------------19 4 16 15 5 71 48 22 .58 23 II 3 4 1 2 4 14 16 3 8 15 Jn 4 91 110 47 111 83 3i 6i 40 47 4 = = = = = =I=I= t t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. Digitized by Google 111 153 SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES A,,_oendlx Ta&le 77.-0uantity of Sweet Potatoes and Irish Potatoes Stored I on PartTime Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Cosle.nd Iron Textile White Quantity White White White .:. :. 0 0 s;; . so.!l g-a e;; ~~ B;; oe- aa., f: e-~ §j ! Bel !l. e-a §~ ~ Eel §j zB z 0 z z 0 z 0 0 z I= - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.,:. .,:. 43 Total._--------------9 ----····----------1None to 2 .. bushels .•• __________ 1 3 to 4 bushels .• ___________ 6 to 9 bushels .• ___________ 6 10 to 14 bushels .. _________ 6 15 to 19 bushels .. _________ 6 20 to 29 bushels .• _________ JO 30 to 39 bushels .... _____ .. 2 40 bushels or more •••• ___ . 4 c;C> .<l i 6 4 4 204 71 6 6 21 26 15 25 9 27 124 21 6 10 20 26 11 15 9 6 12 22 0 IWJl:IIT POTATO&ll STORED Naval Stores Lumber Atlantic COBSt 2.50 178 9 7 22 16 6 d :_ 0 24 47 142 39 9 26 6 -- 3 4 2 3 3 43 1 8 33 26 16 7 2 6 19 13 60 -- -3 -2 ' 5 1 1 5 1 1 2 7 1 21 132 48 37 23 -1 - 3i 34 34 ~ 3 -- 5 2 20 ' 2 3 2 9 17 7 23 27 29 - 24 DW111 POT.A.TOICS STORJ:D Total _______________ None .. ___________________ 1 to 2 bushels .• ___________ 3 to 4 bushels •• ___________ 6 to 9 bushels. ____________ 10 to 14 bushels. __________ 16 to 19 bushels .. _________ 20 to 29 bushels. __________ 30 to 39 bushels .. ···-·-··· 40 bushels or more •• ______ Average bushels stored by those storing Irish potatoes _____________ - -20483- 4311- -2.50 158 2 4 7 12 2 26 21 23 13 3 4 1 1 15 -- 23 21 44 25 53 142 39 47 - 2413- -- 20 - 3727 42 135 11 1 1 -4 -- -21 -1 -6 -31 124 108 - - - -- 2 2 6 12 7 3 t 114 t 13 -t 132 37 34 - 93 - - 37 - -- 6 9 1 ~ -- t 9 34 --- --- 1 4 21 4 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 3 2 -3 - -2 -2 6 1 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 4 3 1 ~ 2 Avera!e bushels - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - store by those sweet postoring tatoes _____________ -- -1 = - - 10 --- t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. 1 Grown In garden or truck patch. Appendix Taf>fe 78.-0uantity of Home-Produced Eggs Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Type.of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Cool and Iron Textile Eggs consumed White Atlantic COBSt White . E-;;; White .. sa-; 8-;a g'E e·.i ""' zB 0 Naval Stores Lumber .,:. White 8-;a . E-;;; ti i e·s z u z§~ c-:!l 13-;;; 0·c;c.> c;<> s t, e·.i c:O !l.., Ei"<l ":. :a 0 0 0 0 zB z 0 i:l: z 0 - ---Total _______________ 43 124 142 132 204 24 47 39 37 37 34 -2.50 -None .. ___________________ 64 53 20 11 95 80 7 8 1 6 1 to 19 down ______________ 20 to 49 dozen. ____________ !iO to 99 do1.en. ____________ 100 to 199 dozen .. _. _______ 200 down or more._. ____ •. A vera~e num her or dozen of eggs consumed hy those consuming homeproduced eggs ... _ --. zS . -- 2 6 16 12 7 62 53 29 26 4 9 15 43 48 9 3 92 28 10 6 1 2 1 3 7 4 3 9 13 13 1 21 42 21 4 I 2 3 II 1 4 II 10 10 12 73 ll3 38 152 84 47 160 29 --' - 0 6 3 3 5 23 38 28 17 6 6 -- Iii 69 124 t .1 t Avel"llll:e not computed for Jess than 10 cases. Digitized by Google 15.f PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Appendl• Tobie 79.-0uantity of Home-Produced Poultry Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 193.f Coal and Iron Textile White Atlantic Coast Na'°al Lumber Stores White White White Dressed poultry consumed t S.; e;;; u Total _________ . _____ None. ____________________ 1 to 19 pounds. ___________ 20 to 4U pounds .• ____ ._._. 50 to !Ill pounds ___________ 100 to 199 pounds. ________ 200poundsor more _______ Average numher of pounds of poultry consumed by those consuming poultry ________ .... .,i. e;; S;; s·u Ct s·.i 0 s i. "' E.; b E·u Ct ~ E;; c► <> c:►" ~a :a ~ . zS z u zS z u zS z u i a -- - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - Bel ct s·.i 0 ~ ~ s·a 0 ~ 0 ct -- -- 43 250 204 124 24 47 142 30 15 8 5 1 5 2 25 - 8 2 5 14 11 4 2 - 35 117 67 26 39 37 132 37 34 1 3 3 3 8 6 10 12 39 37 12 3 16 8 2 1 I 3 I 153 75 44 t -- ---- -- -- -- --116- - 114- - 66- - -23 86 9 6 11 2 7 8 2S 1 2 10 36 6 44 12 13 36 8 12 32 41 22 3 173 85 70 27 g 4 16 8 9 -- -- -- -- ------ -- ------ = 156 t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. Append#• Tobie 20.-0uantity of Milk Produced on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal nnd Iron White Milk produced .., e;; s·u None. ____ ------ .. -------1 to 499 quarts. ____ . __ . __ . 600 to 990 riuarts. _________ 1,000 to 1,499 quarts _______ 1,500 to J,!MI quarts _______ 2,000 to 2,4!!9 quarts _______ 2,r,00 to 2,1/W quarts _______ 3,000 to 3,4U9 quarts _______ 3,;,oo to 3,999 quarts _______ 4,000 to 4,\I\J9 quarts _______ 5,000 quarts or more. _____ . Number of COWS producing milk•-- Na..-al Stores Lumber White White White i. e;-;; .,i. ~ b b s;; s.; g·E E-::: 8°E s·u c~ ~ s cl ~ s·.i Eil C" ~"' ia zS :a~ z 8 fS z"' 0 z 0 - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -8-;; Total. ______________ Altantlc Coast s·.i 8 ~t 43 2,IO .s 204 ~ zS . 0 124 24 47 142 39 37 0 132 37 34 ---- -- ------------ ---- -87 II 23 116 92 110 3 43 8 14 5 25 2 -6 1 -- -3 -11 43 31 165 42 -1 4 2 11 2 21 -1 -2 111 -8 -8 g7 65 -3 2 6 3 14 2 2 2 40 6 3 6 5 5 3 6 21 1 4 2 2 1 42 1 3 6 2 2 2 7 8 2 8 1 39 21 1 1 12 1 3 3 3 24 1 2 2 17 1 3 7 - - -' ' 1 1 2 I 2 7 6 16 9 -- -- -- -- --------= -- -- = 31 24 69 IS 216 112 13 47 35 56 64 ---- -- -- = = ---- -- ---- -- .Avellll(e number of quarts per COW producing milk ___ 2,440 2,650 3,069 2,700 2,440 1,770 ·~ 920 1,375 1,941 1,265 1,081 • Exclusive of cows purchased after January 1, 1934. Digitized by Google 1,283 SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES 255 Appendix Table J7.-0uantity of Home-Produced Butter Consumed on Part-Time Farms, by Color of Operator and by Subregion, 1934 Tenlle Coal and Iron Naval Stores Lumber Atlantic C088t Butter CODllltned White White Negro Wh!te Negro White Negro White -------------11--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --293 124 71 Total •••••••••••••••••••••••••. :1n4 142 76 132 71 ----------None .. __ .....•.•••••••.•••••••••••.. 48 93 110 134 29 46 93 36 1 to 49 pounds ..•.••••••••••••••••.•. 7 4 1 11 106 69 29 1 4 100 to 199 pounds ..••.....•••.••.•••. 200 to 2W pounds ...••.•...•••••••••• 300 pounds or more .•••••...•.. _•.• _. Unknown •••...•.••...•...••....••.. 37 21 37 1 5 1 3 190 234 176 50 to 99 pounds ..••••••••••••••••••• 33 7 12 2 6 4 14 20 2 4 2 --- --- - - - --- = Average number of pounds of butter consumed by those consuming hom&-produced butter •••.. -··-. -- . -·-···--·- 2 1 4 3 100 12 1 8 8 --- 151 7 7 19 9 = 124 167 73 Appendix Table JJ.-Ouantity of Home-Produced Pork Consumed or Stored on PartTime Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal nnd Iron Atlantic Coast White Dressed pork consumed or stored .,~ e.; e·;;; 0 (..) White sg·~ "IS zEl White c·!I e.; sg~ e·o:. 0 zEl (..) ~ ~ s ~ zI Naval Stores Lumber e;; e·s 0 zi (..) White sg-~ ~ ~] ~] .,13 ze ! 37 132 37 5 17 10 6 6 6 2 1 1 1 8 7 18 .,13 zEl 8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- Total •••.........•.• 43 250 :1n4 124 200 to 299 pounds .••.••••• 300 to 399 pounds._ •.•.••. 400 to 499 pounds ......••. 500 to 599 pounds ... -····600 to 1199 pounds._ ....... 1,000 pounds or more .•.. _. 6 4 29 34 23 13 13 8 9 3 3 5 5 3 12 4 15 3 12 1 460 366 24 47 142 4 5 1 39 34 - 10- -117- -136- -84- - 16- - 26- -119- - - 14- - 44- - -1 None.-·---- .....••••••••• 4 1 to 99 pounds ..•.••••••.• 5 1 8 2 14 -2 -321 100 to 19'J pounds ..•.••••• 2 17 17 18 4 2 6 27 7 A vernlle number of pounds of pork consumed or stored by those consuming or storing hom&-produced pork .. _ •.. 8 -- = = 1 2 1 2 --- 376 -1 217 = 2 1 t 1 3 2 3 2 - -- 306 230 3 --= 5 6 6 4 8 1 -1 --8 --------= 6 7 583 249 263 1,263 t t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 256 Appendix Table .23.-0uantity of Roughage Produced on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Cos! and Iron Textile White Roughage produced Nsv!I! Stores Lumber A tlantlc Coast White White White . o--eo1 .le- o-eo1 .,.E.! E-o.!! ~] clil ":. :E ":. i i E~ ":. i Eel zE zB u i:!: z u zB z u zB z 0 -- -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - Total _______________ 43 250 124 24 47 142 39 37 132 37 34 204 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --11 31 34 220 100 122 130 13 103 H 37 8 None.-------------------I to 2 toru ________________ 5 17 27 18 9 2 2 7 10 6 5 3 to 4 tons ________________ 4 12 2 3 I 2 2 6 8 5 to 9 tons_ _______________ 2 I 10 4 1 I 6 6 JO to 14 tons ______________ 1 3 -- -I 6I -- -- - 1 -15 to 19 tons ______________ 2 -- --20 tons or more ___________ 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -5 -Unknown ________________ I - - - - - - - - - - - - = = - - - -- - - Average number or ." g~ E;; Eel '-'" 3. 4 I. 4 s c.,c.> 0 tons or roughage produced by those producing roughage _______________ c.,'-' 0 t 2. 9 c.>'-' 0 11.0 3.0 3.4 0 t 6.6 2. 8 - 13. 1 t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. Appendix Table 24.-0uantity of Field Corn Produced on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Coal and Iron Textile White Field com produced . E-;; E·;:; White e-;; o-- s :a . e;- ~ Naval Stores Lumber Atlantic Coast White White so1 O·- 0 . E.! . so1 " E-; Eel o-- eo1 o- "" clil r u zB zE zi 0 zB u - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - TotaJ _______________ 47 142 37 132 37 34 43 250 124 24 39 204 - 25- - 33- - -1 - 23- - 20- - -- - -226- -130- - 49- - None _____________________ - 6 5 3' 1 to 9 bushels. ____________ 2 34 5 2 11 -I 1514 - 2 10 to 19 hushels. __________ 4 8 4 37 37 20 to 29 bushels ___________ 12 4 18 23 1 3 4 14 2 3 0 u 30 to 49 bushels ___________ 60 to 74 bushels ___________ 75 to 99 bushels ___________ 100 to 149 bushels. ________ 1r,o lo 199 bushels_ .• _____ 200 to 299 bushels _________ 300 to 399 bushels _________ 400 to 599 bushels. ________ 600 bushels or more _______ A vera~e number or bushels of com produced by those producing corn ___ . __________ "'"' ":. zE 3 6 4 3 ""' e·~ ":. 0 z ~ 15 13 12 9 3 .,t. z 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 5 12 4 4 310 48 e·;:; 0 2 1 2 4 8 7 "'" ":. 5 3 2 0 29 12 - 1 2 6 2 4 9 --- -2I 4 2 14 2 4 1 1 1 6 3 -- 3 - --I 5I 5 5 -- -- ---- -- -- ---------- 5 12 1 8 JOI - -- 21 8 3 68 I - 21 21 281 Digitized by 41 49 228 Google ----- - Appendix Tobie !5.-Relation Between Cash Receiph From All Products Sold and Total Cash Farm Expenses 1 on White Noncommercial and Ne9ro Part-Time Farms, by Subre9ion, 1934 Textile Cash receipts rrom all products sold Cool and Iron White DOD· commercial Allant!c Coast White noncommercial Negro White Lumber White noncommercial Negro Naval Stores White nonco=erclal Negro Aver- Num- Aver- Num- Aver- Num- Aver- Num- Aver- Nom- Aver- Num- AverNum- AverNum- age cash ber or age cash ber of age cash ber of age cash ber or age cash ber or age cash ber of ago cash cash ber ber of ageex• of exex81· exexOX· excases penses cases pensos cases penses cases penses cases pensos cases penses cases pensos cases pensos -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- --- - - - --- --- --47 $62 142 124 $15 132 $38 34 $25 $26 37 $56 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - -- --- --- --- --- - -t 71 None __________ ----·--------·· __ ---··-- ___ 52 112 13 44 62 31 12 24 22 30 102 108 26 7 60 TotaL __________________________ ____ $1 -----------------------------$50toto$49 $99.... __ ____ ___________________________ $$200 100 or to $199 more_·-···----······--·-····-·-··-__ ____________________________ Unknown. _________ ___ ____ .. _·· -·-··-·--_ --- --- - -- - 250 , Sl)2 204 $73 75 37 28 83 68 107 132 8 t 55 16 21 3 1 - Average cash receipts _______________ - $45 t Average not computed for less than 10 cases. Exclusive or taxes and rent. • E1clusive of 1 case for which expenses were not available. 1 100 147 t t $33 8 3 - I - - t t t $4 13 3 3 2 - 69 -f $30 M 21 14 7 6 85 - - t t $38 10 5 - 62 - t $16 26 35 24 22 24 54 16 120 - - $96 8 l -- 1 --t "' i Is -< s5 0 co· ,,"" (1) Q_ ~ 0 0 - r2 ro to .... UI PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 158 Appendix TalJle 26.-Amount Paid for Hired Labor on Part-Time Farms, by Type of Farm, by Color of Operator, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Amoant far.Id for hired abor Atlantic Coast Coal and Iron White a-; 8cl ! ! ii Ela! a·a -g 62 Stores White White ~e-~ Naval Lumber ~ ! h White ~ a. iz u ~i c~ Ela! ee 8"6 ='" ze ~~ ~El ze 8 8 8 - - - - -- - 43 124 37 2M 204 24 47 142 39 37 132 34 TotaJ_ ------------- -146- - 61- -----------12 43 3 19 110 II 9 90 7 22 Ill -I -4 I II 8 4 4 II 8 4 l II 8 3 3 l -S110 totoSIMI. - ---------------I l 3 -- - II I I $200 -----------St,oo to or 1499 more___ ______________ 8 -- -- -- - -- -- -I -- -- -Unknown. ________________ ---- ---- - - -- = -- -- ---Average amount None __ ------------------- SI to 84------------------SIi to S14-----------------_--------------SIii S211 to '24149 _________________ SIOO Sl99 _______________ !:lid for hired bor on farms having hired labor_ 4 4 9 l 3 I $86 27 63 1111 6 )1 Ill -29 I -I II 7 l 2 8 Cc, 0 1 2 2 2 3 2 $11 $14 ---- -- = SIi Average amount !:lid for hired abor ~ crop acre on arms havIng hired labor ____ $4.00 $6.40 $5.IIO $4.40 saro 8 18 8 14 10 16 7 II 7 2 12 7 10 2 2 $76 SIi S9.80 $4. 70 $3.60 $11. 10 $2.IIO $1.80 13. 60 $34 $18 $151 S2II S17 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ==-= sn. ro Appendix TalJle 27.-Number of Persons, Except Heads, 12 Years of Age or Over, Working on Part-Time Farms, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Number of persons, except heads, 12 years of age or over, working on Textile Coal and Iron .A tlantlc Coast Naval Stores Lumber farms White White Negro White Negro White Negro Whit. --- --Tota) __________________ -- ______ 142 76 132 71 124 71 293 204 - - - --- - - - - - - --- --- --- --No member except bead___________ .. 31 4 4 47 24 27 26 19 - - - --- - - - ;ii: ~i~h"i or-moniiiiiiermembe.ri: other member ______________________ 1 2 other members _____________________ 3 other members. ____________________ 4 or more other members. ________ . __ Farms on which wile worked ________ 132 IIO 94 611 17 25 15 15 6 2 4 -----226 115 - 42 40 14 2 27 11 6 3 30 56 10 33 3 119 7 4 2 4 114 42 4 3 -2 -1 1 - - - --- --- --- = = 115 96 63 82 38 6 2 Digitized by Google 20 12 4 2 l 1 32 SUPPf.EMENTARY TABLES 259 Appendix Table 28.--0istance to Place of E~loyment of Heads of Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Type of Fann, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Coal and Iron Textile White Distance to place or employment White e;; ~-a ~ 8-; Lumber Atlantic Coast ~ ~ E!;; i z 204 124 ~ 8-; 8·;;; g·a §] -=~ White za zi za - - - - - - - - -- - g·;;; Alil (.) "lil 0 (.) Naval Stores White '-- ~] st i zB z 0 (.) E!o! g·;;; "' 8~ g·a "lil z= (.) - - -- -- - - - - - - P.lBT-TIKJ: r.&.JU(J:BS TotaJ_ -------------None _____________________ Less than ¼ mile _________ 1 mile _____________________ 2 miles ____________________ 3mlles ____________________ 46 to to 69 miles._------------miles. ______________ 10 miles or more __________ Unknown _________________ Avera!le number or miles to place or employment ____ 43 250 24 47 39 H2 37 132 37 34 9 13 4 4 2 1 2 3 43 43 17 8 g 7 1 I 2 17 10 5 I 1 1 3 13 14 3 1 -- 1. 9 1.6 2. 1 1.6 -- -5 - -- - -- - - -5 - -3 - -I - - - --- - 2 2 4 28 30 II 5 7 10 1 I 6 2 4 3 3 1 3.3 1.6 3.0 314 222 346 103 105 92 103 49 2 181 113 -43 -49 -40 -37 -II 42 13 3 38 12 1 -38 5 131 10 64 5 8 7 3 3 13 20 13 11 2 1 - 42 39 31 23 - 62 30 g 4 8 4 2 JO 6 H 14 4 I 4. 3 1.8 8 26 51 6 4 2 4 9 7 6 29 -- ==-------- ---------3.2 1.4 I 4. 5 I NONrABIIINO INDUSTIIUL WOBS:ltBS Total _______________ None _____________________ Less than¼ mile _________ 1 mile _____________________ 2 miles ____________________ 3 miles ____________________ 4 to 5 miles _______________ 6 to 9 miles. ______________ JO miles or more __________ Unknown _________________ Average number or miles to place or employment ____ 94 50 21 23 20 11 IOI - - 7 6 3 0.8 1.6 2. 8 3 1 1 27 16 92 56 22 28 4 - I 2 3 3 3 1 -2 1.1 1. I a 2 -1 - 3 1.3 40 II 23 6 I 5 9 6 2 -I - - 1. 3 • 2. 7 Exclusive or I cs.se who traveled 40 miles weekly to work. t Exclusive ol 1 case who traveled 170 miles weekly to work. • Exclusive or 3 cases who traveled 36 miles biweekly, 50 miles weekly, and 26 miles weekly, respectively, to work. • Exclusive or I case ..,.ho traveled 87 miles weekly to work. 1 Digitized by Google g Appendix Ta'1le 29.-lndustry of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Part-time farmers Industry in 1934 Textile I Coal and Iron I Atlantic Coast Nonfnrmiog Industrial workers rt~;:~ I Lumber Textile I Coal nod Iron I Atlantic Coa.,t Naval Stores Lumber White I White I Kegro I White I Negro I White I Negro I White I White I White I Negro I White I Negro I White I Negro I White --- --- --- --- --- --Total.. .........• ... ...........•.... 293 204 124 71 142 76 1321 Agriculture ............................. . _ 3 - - 9 94 8 63 Forestry ........ ...... .........•......•... 1 - - - - 2 3 =I =I 71 I 3141 222 I 3461 103 1 1051 921 103 1 49 0 co· ,,"" (1) 0. 0- '< 0 0 - r2 ro Manufacturing and mechanical industries: Building and construction ........... Food and allied ... .............. ...•.. Iron, steel, machinery, and ,·ebicles: Blast furnaces, steel rolling mills, and coke works ...••............ Car and railroad shops •••........ Other iron, steel, machinery, and vehicles .......•.••.. ........... Saw and planing mills ................ Furniture and other woodworking .... Paper, printing, nod allied .....•.•..•. Cotton mills .•........................ !f ~~~i~xfi\~~=== == == == == ==: === == =:: =: Independent hand trades ....•.•..... . Tur~tioe !arms and dlstlllerles ..••.• Fert zer factories .•.....•.•...•...•.. Asbestos products .•••..••.•.....•.... Other manufacturing and mechanical. - &I 1 141 ~I =I JO 4 ~I =I ~I -2 93 1 77 5 -- 1)3 7 73 1 -1 -10 - 7 ------ -6 - 1 ----- -6 - 1 3 3 --1 1 -3 -7 ~, ~, --- -1 ---14. -a ----1 2 1 2 4 19 -2 =I 1 fI - -8 17 ----I -6 =I =I ti ~, -I -I ll 1 1 --- -37 -l 61 60 I i 132 61 =I =I !I 76 I ~I ---- -I ---9 - ----- 2 2 42 11 2 9 :i!l"li 3 142 ~I ~I ~I 165 20 2-l ':-t I Fishing ..•............. ..... ......... . .... Extraction or minerals: Coal mining ......................... _ Iron mining_·-----------------------Other extraction ol minerals .......... i 1 =I ~, ~ :i! 30 73 § 3 l - I 17 -10 -I -I 49 Transportation and communication: maintenance or Construction ____ ___________________ streel8 _____ __and Garages, greasing stations, etc ________ Postal service ____ __ ___________________ Steam and street railroads ____________ Other transportation and communlcatlon __ ___ ·------------ - ____________ _ Trade: and !llling stnAutomobile __ _______________________ tlons __ ____agencies I 6 I I 2 10 Wholesale and retail trade _____________ Other trade ___ ---------- -------- ______ 25 Public service (not elsewhere classUled) ___ 6 Professional service __________ _____________ • Domestic and personal service ____________ Industry not specified ___ __________ _____ __ I -9 6 2 I - 2 8 --6 - 2 I - 3 - - - I --9 --• 10 8 2 3 I 16 I -I I 3 2 2 - I 3 8 • 6 - I - - - - - I 2 - --2 6 2 1 I - I 2 :I -6 - I: II 22 - 3 16 6 1 I 3 - - I =I =I :1 -- -- - 2 91 2 29 II I 12 2 - 2 2 - I: I =I =I - I ~ -< i 0 <D ;. ;::, g_ er '< 0 0 ~ ('i) . ~ PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 161 Appendix Table 30.-0ccupation of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal and Iron White White AlantlcC088t Na..-al Stores Lombel' Occupation Negro White Negro White Negro White --- --- --- - - - --- --- --- --PART·TDU: rARKll:IL!I Totnl ••••••••••••.•••.•••.•••.. 293 :m Proprietary •••••.••••••••••••••...•• C"lerical. ••...••••.•••••••••••••••... Skille<l ......•••..••.•••••••••••..... Semiskilled .•••••••••••••••••••...... Unskiiied: Farm laborer .......•....•...•••. Servant ...........•••••.•.•••••. Other unskilled •••..••...••••••• 10 2 17 36 71 160 106 47 124 19 32 142 76 10 4 1 3 1 8 22 6 32 22 132 n 2 17 10 14 111 1 4 24 6 8 7 112 3 Ill 2 M 4 6 31 40 346 103 106 92 103 49 6 1 13 33 4g 3 1 12 23 2 33 49 15 36 1 3 H 7 63 8 60 3 4 9 31 2 71 Totlll •..••••••••••••••••••••••• 314 222 Proprietary •.•••••.•••••••••••••••• _ Clerical .•.••..•..•.......••••.•••.•. Skilled ....•••...••....•.•••••..••••. Se11,iskilled .•••••••.•••.••••••••••••• Unskilled: Servant. ••.....••••.••.......... Other unskilled •..•.••.......... 2 2 71 NONURKIN<J INDUSTRIAL WORKERS 185 11 120 23 46 63 2 9 68 237 42 74 4 2 13 Digitized by Google 31 Appendix Ta&le 37.-lndustry of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfanning Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1929 Industry ln 1929 . Textile Coal and Iron White Non!arming lndust.rlal worker., Pnrt-tlme rarmer.i White Negro Atlantic Coast White Negro Naval Stores Textile Lumber Wh.l te Negro White Coal and Iron White WhJte Negro Atlantic Coast White Negro Naval Stores Lumber White Negro White - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - -142 71 124 204 293 Total •. ____ - - . --- - ----- --- - -- --- -- ---- ------ -----Agriculture. ___________________________ ._. 84 12 38 Forestry and fishing . _________________ ___ I I Extraction or minerals ________ . ______ ____ 30 70 ManuractUilng and mechanical lndw.trles: Building nnll construction. ___________ 3 4 16 7 4 Food and allied ---------------------3 Iron, stool. mnchfnery, and ,-ehicles .. n 08 7 Snw and plnnl n11 mills .. ______________ 2 a 1 FumltUie and other woodworking ___ . 1 1 allied-----------and printing, P a per, mills ______________ _______ _ Cotton 76 Knllllng rnlUs Rnd other textile _______ 68 Independent hand trades ---- ______ . __ 1 2 Turpentine Cnrrns and distilleries __ .. 12 7 4 Other mnnufncturing and rnechanJcaJ _ 8 7 Transportation and communication _____ . 19 18 11 20 6 Trade ______________ - _- ___ - . ---- - ---- -- --4 34 16 2 3 3 3 2 7 Public senice (not else\\ hero classified) ._ Pro!essionnl service _______________________ 4 2 Domestic nnd personal service ________ .. __ I 2 3 Industry not specified ____________________ I 3 l Unemployed _____________ ---------------1 3 3 9 6 - -- -- -- - --- -- --- - 70 132 71 314 222 346 103 105 02 103 49 - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - ----17 4 10 2 12 12 2 30 3 37 64 4 l 2 3 --l& 119 -1 2 3 10 7 3 16 -2 9 -2 2 4 I 7 I -8 -4 I 1 139 90 11 I -12 14 2 28 2 10 I II -38 60 I 16 16 2 ---1 1 I -2 ----- 132243 --- --I -- -< -I l 1 --2 -1 6 1 7 1 6 41 22 2 2 -30 2 7 4 24 2 4 26 8 10 6 8 I 2 4 13 -- 5 2 28 6 2 6 7 10 2 1 7 3 1 I -11 -1 -3 -- -- -3 39 -- -2 -I 3 I -2 -2 -17 -4 -I 3 13 9 Is 1 2 4 0 <i'i' ;c.· ;;; 0 Q_ O" '< C"') 0 ~ (v ! PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 164 Ap_,-,dlx Tobie 32.--Number of Days of Off-the-Farm Employment 1 of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 C0&land Iron Textile a- .,~ o-"1 e-;; e·u 0 s "" =:;; zB u ~ i 204 124 .e-;; Nsval Stores Lumber White White Number or daya employed A tlantlc Coast White e-;; White .B- sg~ .B- e- ~ o·- Btl "" =:;; 0 zB u ! 8~ 0 u ~ 0 = .. ti. z zB c.3 c;<> c:;; ze 8~ 0 0 - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - PABT-TIK• l'illolll:£8 Total ••••••••••••••• 1 to 49 days'·············· 50 to 99 days •.•••••••••.•. 100 to 149 days •••••••.•••. 150 to lW days •••••.•••.•. 200 to 240 days .••••..•••.. 250 to 299 days ..••••••.••. 300 to 349 days •...•.•••... 350 days or more .•..•••.•. 250 43 24 47 - -1 - -1 --1 - -- - -1 - -- 11 21 6 4 9 « 50 58 29 JO 12 63 58 6 6 1 1 « 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 7 1 4 15 9 8 3 142 3 38 « 19 19 10 5 4 132 311 37 ----- 372 - --34 1 1 2 4 6 10 fl 2 8 12 6 5 1 20 13 32 43 11 -3 31 2 2 7 13 -2 fl 6 fl fl 1 3 Unknown ••••••••••.••... - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - -------- ------ -Average number or days employed ..• 214 218 156 112 219 m 155 211 221 191 83 241 -- ---- ---- - = ' = '===lll01111ARMING INDUSTBLU 112 31 19 JO 1 10 3 8 3 9 WORKERS Total ••••••••••••••. 314 222 346 103 105 92 103 49 1 to 49 days .••.•••••••••••• 50 to 00 days .••••••••••••. 100 to 149 days .•.••••••••• 150 to 199 days ....••••..•. 200 to 249 days .•.•....•••. 250 to 299 days .....•.•.... 300 to 349 days .....•...••• 350 days or more ..••....•. -3 -52 156 -3 1 -1 -2 -1 47 10 74 48 32 8 7 1 133 34 20 1 2 3 13 11 38 27 8 233 151 Average number of days employed .•. 24 39 113 78 -114 261 23 19 15 4 14 11 14 10 14 11 14 23 35 lfl 41 8 fl 3 37 2 2 189 240 221 fl 10 -e 221 At principal off•the•farm employment (Job with the largest earnings). • A few cases working off the farm less than 50 days were enumerated . 1 .Ap_pendlx Table 33.--Number of Different Off-the-Farm Jobs Held by Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast White White White NsVlli Lumber Stores Number or off•the-farm Jobs Negro Negro White Negro White - - - - - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - --- - - - - - - --- - - - --P ilT·TIJ,111: 1 ABYERS Total.. •.•.•...•...•••••.•••••• 1 .••..•.••.••.•••..•••••••••••••••••• 2. ·•······••·•·••••••··•·••••·••·•··· 3 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 76 -------n 73 124 293 204 124 71 142 276 15 2 199 5 123 1 66 5 129 13 314 222 346 103 105 92 103 49 305 8 1 218 4 340 6 96 92 83 7 12 1 7 2 go 11 2 41 8 - - - --- --- --- --- 132 68 3 7 l a NO!,'FARHING INDUSTRIAL WORKJ:£8 Total•••••••••••••••••••••••••. 1. ..•••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••. 2. ··••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••·•• 3 ••••••••••••••••• ••••••••• •••••••••• - - - - - - - - - --- --- Digitized by Google SUPPI.EMEHTARY TABLES 165 Ap_penc#lx Table 34.-Eamings 1 From Industrial Employment of Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Earnings from indmtrlal employment Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast White White 0" Total ............................ White White .,.:. ~ se.ff e.; 8' 8-.; g·~ 8~ §:;s <=lil §~ "lil !i i i zB zS ~ z zB z z= z - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -~ ~] e9..'!1 s :a ~ e-;; 0 250 43 204 s·ci 0 0 ~-ci 0 0 PABT..TllU: l'ABlU:Bll Naval Stores Lumber 124 24 47 142 ~-ci 0 39 37 132 M 37 -- 12- - 26- --2 -11 5356 -7 - --6 12 38 6 16 77 11 8 42 M 74 28 11 10 22 5 7 12 5 II 12 96 69 4 11 4 3 13 8 6 62 34 1 2 11 4 10 4 4 6 22 5 22 1 4 2 3 3 3 1 II 7 l 6 -- -4 1I -1 ---2 10 4 7 3 6 3 4 1 I -- I I -- ---- -4 -- --- -- ---------- ---- ---- = -------Average ea.-nln1r.1 •• $733 $722 $736 $337 $1,006 $820 $181 $650 $610 $258 $536 $95 ----------------------= NONl'ABIUNO INDUSTRIAL $1 to$99 ............................ $100 to $249 .................. $250 to $499 ...................... $500 to $749 ................. $7 50 to $999 ................. $1,000 to $1,249 ............ $1,250 to $1,4W ............ $1,500 to $1,999 .••••••••.. $2,000 to $2,499 .•..•.•••.• $2,600 or more .............. Un.known ................... -- -2 - -I 2 I WORKERS Total ..................... 314 - $1 to $99 .. ........................ $100 to $249 ................. $250 to $411\l .................... $50u to $7 49 ................ $7.IO to $999 .................. $1,000 to $1,249 ............... $1,2.'iO to $1,499 .............. $1,500 to $1,911\l ............ $2,000 to $2,499...•••••••• $2,600 or more .................... Average eamln~ .. 6 75 74 76 33 16 23 II 3 $853 222 346 -u - -8669 52 47 18 7 10 2 3 $731 202 50 - 8 -- -$372 103 -1 10 14 30 21 13 11 2 I $1,020 105 6 25 50 Ill 3 1 1 I -- $388 112 - 103 49 I 8 3 32 57 37 9 3 - --- $430 $260 2 Ill 48 14 5 8 --1 $664 --- 2 - I Ac principal off.the-farm employment Oob with the largest earnings). 150001°-s1--20 Digitized by Google AppendlIC TolJle 35.-Employment of Membe11 1 in Addition to the Head of Part-Time Fann and Nonfarmin9 Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Coal and Iron Textile Number or members working in addition to the head White White Num• ber --- Per• cent Num• her Atlantto Coast Negro Per• cent Num• ber White Per• cent Num• ber Lumber Negro Per• cent Num• ber White Per• cent Num• ber Naval Stores Negro Per• cent White Per• cent Num• ber - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - Num• ber Per• cent --, _ --- PART·TWE FAR>I UOUSEBOLDS Total. ......•.....•...•......••....• No member except head . . .....• . . . ....... Wi!eooly ....... .•.. .. . . . . ... . . . ........ . Wire and 1 or more other members . ...... 1 other mern ber. . . ... . •.•................ 2 other members..••...... . ...... . ......... 3 other members . ..•..•.. . ........ . ....... 4 or more other members...•... . . . ....... 293 100 204 100 124 100 18 6 16 10 154 2 1 37 9 1 75 1 1 18 104 6 2 10 2 83 5 2 8 2 ----135 46 53 Ii 46 31 5 6 2 2 314 100 - 4 1 - -- - - 71 100 ----57 80 2 1 5 4 2 - a 1 7 6 3 - 14.'2 100 76 100 132 45 4.2 86 5 32 30 4.7 6 36 0 6 62 8 7 17 1 4. 1 3 2 25 5 4 13 1 3 1 2 1 4.8 29 13 4 1 1 100 100 71 - -----Zl 54 77 36 22 3 2 0 <D. ;,.· N g_ ~ 0 0 ~,..._ (v No member except head ... . ........•..... ~l{: ~~:!i ;;;.·rrioni·octier·ineiiitie~~:::::: 1 other member .•••..................... . 2 other members ...••.•..•............... 8 other members •••.•..•..•..........•.... 4 or more other memben ••••.. • .•........ • 1 - tban 0.6 pen,ent. llll-&&7eanofap. 222 100 346 100 103 100 105 ------------------144 46 187 61 81 78 75 84 280 105 16 31 14 4 I 34 6 10 4 1 . 1 1 28 4 1 - .. . 13 2 16 5 4 1 37 8 1 11 - . 2 - 4. 1 16 3 -I 4 1 16 8 -1 33 9 8 2 1 1 100 02 100 103 4.8 60 65 7 5 18 1 1 8 6 44 42 31 9 8 2 1 1 - 20 1 1 - 9 6 2 1 - 100 4.9 100 4.1 9 6 2 1 7 4. 2 3 l◄ 14 1 1 -- ~ 2 -------68 4.2 33 - I I - - 1 1 -:-4 s 10 3 1 1 10 i 4 NONJ',U\1,11:NO INDUSTlllAL BOOSJ:BOLDS Total_ •••••••••..••••...••••••..•.. I 0- 8 4 e -- i ~ I 167 SUPPlEMENTARY TABLES Appendix Table 36.-Number of Yean In Which Public or Private Relief Was Received by Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1929-35 Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic C088t Naval Stores Lumber Number or years In which relief waa reoei ved _____________ ,___ --- --- --- --- --- --- --White White Negro White Negro Total ___ •. ________ -··---·_. ___ - 293 204 None ____ --··-·-· ______ -·-- ____ -· ___ _ 254 27 JO 2 123 67 18 6 1 White Negro 124 71 22 62 7 9 3 White 142 76 132 71 93 119 4 3 )Oil M 1 1 PART-Tnn: rARK BOUSKBOLDS l .•• ·---·--------·------------------2•• ----·-------------·----·---------4_. ____ . ______________ ··--···--·····6••••••• ·--··-·······-···-··-·-······ Cl ••• ·-··-·····-·············---·····- 3-···------------·------------------A vern(ffl num bcr of years In 64 31 6 1 1 38 7 4 6 2 1 - - - --- --- = which relief waa received'-·· JO 10 - - - - - - - - - --2.0 1. 3 t 1.4 1.4 1. 5 1.8 314 222 346 103 105 92 103 49 256 38 20 124 99 87 7 9 82 80 JO 2 96 35 10 NONrARIIINO INDl'STRIAL BOUSE• HOLDS Total·-···--·--··-···-·····-·- - None_···-··-··-·-·-·-·--·--·----·--· - - --- --- - - - --- 1. ·-····-···-··-···-·-···-····-······ 2 •••••• ·--···-·-···-··---···-········ 158 59 17 11 58 36 4 3 •• •-··•··-···················-·--··· 4 .. ·-··········-····--···-··········· 3 4 " 2 6.••.•..•• ·-·····-······--···--·--··· Unknown .•.• ·-·-·-···-····---··-·-· Average num bcr or yell.I'S In which relief was received 1••. 8 11 2 2 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- = 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.2 I. 7 1.3 f Average not computed for less than 10 cases. t By those receiving relief. Appendix Table 37A.-Number of Rooms in Dwellings of Part-Time Farm Households, by Size of Household and by Color, 193" Size or household Rooms In dwelling Total 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 48 IOI 149 141 104 66 46 24 6 18 17 14 6 12 4 11 - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WHITS Total_.····-· •. -. ·1 room·-··-········---··2 rooms·--·-··-·---··-··· a rooms.·--··-·····-···-· 4 rooms.·-·-·--·-·---··-· 6 rooms.·--·-·----····· .. 8 rooms .•.•... ·-·--·-·-·· 7 rooms __ ····-··--·····-8 room•····-···-··-····-· 11 roomtL. ... _··-··--··· .. 10 rooms or more ••. ·-···- 715 3 20 14 6 6 8 3 3 4 2 - - -- - - -- - - ---- - - - - - - - - - 2 17 67 196 217 136 40 17 JO 13 7 14 13 3 2 2 2 1 2 10 29 31 18 4 3 2 2 -' I 1 15 ,IO 49 30 g 1 7 10 2 12 44 26 ~ 28 4 6 3 11 9 I 4 1 6 1 16 g 3 1 7 4 2 3 1 I 1 4 1uoao Total •• ·-····--···1 room_···---····--····-- 2 rooms_··········--····3 rooms __ ··············-· 4 rooms ..•• ·-···--······6 rooms .....•. •-·····-·-· 8 rooms ....•• --·········· 7 rooms.·-·-·-·-·-···-·-8 rooms __ -···-···-·-··- .. Unltnown._ ... ----···-··- 398 3 63 60 64 72 63 40 2) 13 12 18 00 99 2 1 16 17 14 3 2 17 IO 16 4 10 13 20 15 IO 8 13 10 20 1 6 11 3 2 3 6 3 3 6 3 2 11 1 7 10 16 2 2 22 9 6 - - - - --- - -----1 - -1 - - ---1 1 6 2 140 39 20 2 1 1 6 -'1 4 Digitized by 2 2 1 Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 168 Appendix Table 378.-Number of Rooms in Dwellings of Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Size of Household and by Color, 1934 Size or honsehold Rooms In dwelling Total 2 3 8 7 6 10 9 11 - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - ---l•--+--11-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - WHIT& Total .•••.•.••• : ••. 780 1 room .•.••.....•••...•.• 2 rooms .•..••••.••••••..• arooms ...••...••....•.•• 4 rooms .•..•.•....•..••.. 6 rooms ..••.•........•..• Grooms ..•..•.....•••.... 7 rooms ......•.....•.••.. Brooms ....••............ II rooms ....•............. 10 rooms or more .•..••... 6 92 112 240 JOO 103 29 4 3 3 2 118 186 158 4 1 31 l 30 16 32 18 16 2 l 8() 55 411 18 3 122 91 61 28 10 28 66 11 111 39 37 ~ 3 7 19 13 2 3 6 6 22 14 4 4 8 28 28 16 7 1 l 1 6 8 4 6 l 2 8 17 7 -- -- II 3 7 1 2 2 l l 1 NJ:080 4 8 13 2 117 143 116 70 28 8 --1 1 room .•...••••.•.••••..• 13 14 Total .••••••••••••. 46 664 l 29 2 rooms ..••.•.•...•.•.... a rooms ..•.•••..•.•.....• 4rooms ..••.......•.•.... 6rooms ...............•.. 6 rooms .•.•••.•.......•.. ?rooms .•••.....•.•...... 8 rooms ................. . 9rooms ......••.......... Unknown .••.••....••.... 116 216 121 41 21 2 4 I 3 19 63 15 6 2 37 60 'Z1 8 6 'Z1 49 t7 8 4 13 26 21 3 18 7 2 6 14 I 4 16 3 1 2 1 Digitized by 2 2 6 3 1 1 4 2 l Google 4 1 I 2 2 I I Append/11 Table 38.-Average Number of Rooms in Dwellings of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal a.nd Iron Groonvllle Carroll White White White Size or household Atlantic Coo.st Negro White Lumber Negro Wbite Naval Stores Negro White Average Average Average Average Average Average Average Average Average number Num• number Num- number Num- number Num- number Num• number Num- number Num- number Num- number Num- of rooms of rooms of of rooms o!rooms rooms ber of ber ol ber of bero! otrooms ber of of rooms ber of of rooms ber or ber of ber of of rooms per per per per per per per per per CllS('S coses dwellcases dwelldwell- coses dwell- coses dwell- coses dwell- cases dwell- cases dwell- cases dwelllog Ing Ing ing log Ing ing ing Ing - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - --- - - PART·TIME FARM HOUBKIIOLDS Total._- -- ---- -- -l to 3 persons ____________ I to 5 persons ____________ 6 to 7 persons ____________ 3 persons or more __ ___ __ _ 190 5. I 103 4. 7 204 5. 2 124 3.5 76 45 32 5. 0 5. 0 5. 5 4.5 4. 3 5.0 4. 1 95 49 5. 2 6. 4 6.3 46 3. 4 3. 6 4. 1 - - - - ---- -4.-9 - -20- - -4.-2 - -37- --4. 9 37 36 3. 4 22 16 23 28 14 I 39 5. 6 '141 3. 2 76 II 6.0 4. 7 4.9 6.8 145 36 37 2. 9 3. 2 3. 4 1 28 4. I 10 4. 5 132 3. 7 71 4. I 34 3. 2 3. 9 3. 9 19 4. 9 44 28 26 28 4.8 6.6 6. 1 4. 9 4.3 4. 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - 10 9 9 23 a. 18 14 3. 9 17 7 0 co· ,,"" (1) Q_ ~ 0 0 - r2 ro Ii 2: -< ~ Ji!! NONFARMlNO INDUSTRIAL HOUSEHOLDS Total_.--- -- - --·-I to 3 persons ____________ I to 6 persons __ __________ 6 to 7 persons ____________ B per-..ons or more __ ______ ~ t:I 216 4. 8 98 100 70 4.6 4. 9 5. 0 5.2 48 29 17 30 16 5 2. 9 m 4. 5 346 3. 6 103 4.8 105 2.8 92 3. 7 • 101 2.9 49 4. 3 4. 6 4. 9 5.0 15'1 121 46 3. 2 3. 4 3.8 4. 4 30 40 3.9 4. 7 6. 5 5. 9 54 32 2. 2 3. 2 3. 4 4. 2 34 32 3. 1 3.8 4. I 4. 5 153 2. 6 3. 2 3. 2 4. 7 22 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - --- - - - --- - - - --- 2. 4 3. 0 3. 5 4. 2 71 89 51 11 25 22 11 14 5 20 6 32 • 13 3 19 6 3 3. 6 - -4.. 2 3. 6 3. 8 3.0 • Exclusive of all white commercial farmers and of white nollCOilllllerCial farmers with off.the-farm employment in Bll?lculture. • Number of rooms unknown lor 1 cue. • Number of r00ID8 unknown for 2 cases. ! 170 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST Appendix Table 39.--Number of Persons per Room 1 in Part-Time Farm and Nonfarmin9 lndultrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Non!armlng Industrial honaeholds Part-time !arm hoUll8holds 2per2per3per3 persons or 90ns or More sons or sons or More 1 per- less 1 per- le.ss but less but than 3 but Je.ss but 3than per. son or son or more more persons Total le.ssper more Total less per more per than 2 sons 1 than 2 than 1 room than per room per per room per per room room room room room Subregion and color - - - - - - - --- --- - - - - - --- --- - Textile: White __________ Coal and Iron: White·-·-····-Negro _____ . __ •• Atlantic Coast: White ____ ..... Negro- .•••.••.• Lumher: White ..•..•••.. Negro _____ •• ___ Naval Stores: White _____ •••.. 293 159 115 18 1 314 194 117 ~ 3 204 129 67 8 142 46 61 26 346 in 73 124 -1 222 142 II 23 71 142 44 24 M 103 105 69 81 -16 32 M 1 17 • 3 76 132 35 36 49 • 1 92 20 44 68 6 103 47 40 34 7 20 1 2 71 44 23 8 1 49 211 20 1 2 41 3 30 1 1 t According to accepted hou.sing standards, 1 person or less per room Is considered adequate; 2 per,,ons or es.,, but more than 1 per room, crow<led; 3 persons or less, but more than 2 per room, overcrowded; and more than 3 persons per room, greatly overcrowded. ,Appendix Table 40.-Condition of Dwellings of Part.Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast Naval Stores Lumber Condition or dwelling White White Negro White Negro White Negro White --l'ART-Tlldll: FARII HOUSEIIOLD8 · Total dwellings ..•••••••••••.•• 293 No repairs needed_··----······-··-·· F.xterior or interior repairs needed ... Roof repairs needed __________________ General structural repairs needed .••• 115 = 181 61 30 204 Ill = 101 42 27 124 23 86 33 = 71 Ill 47 = 16 10 61 142 8 127 = 94 34 76 28 = 132 26 = 71 8 40 116 60 24 66 11 65 21 26 NONJ' ARHINO INDUSTRIAL BOUSEHOLDS Total dwellings .••••••••••••••• = No repairs needed .•.•••.• ·-······--· Exterior or interior repairs needed •.. Roof repairs nee<led __ . __ ....• __ ..••• General structural repairs needed ...• 314 89 214 44 19 = 222 82 128 42 42 = 346 98 = 103 174 42 411 133 64 18 6 = 105 22 n 16 II Digitized by = 92 23 67 21 1 = 103 16 ., = 49 2 80 47 1 3 13 Google 171 SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES Appendix Tobie 41.--Conveniences in Dwellings of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarmin9 Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Convenience Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast White White Naval Stores Lumber Green• Carroll ville --- - - Whlto White Negro Negro White Negro White --- --- --- --- --- --- --- PART·fflflC l'ARlll HOUSI.BOLDS Total dwelllngs .••••.• Number having: Electric lights ..••.•.•••. Runninl( water ••••.•.•. Bathroom ......•••••... No con veniances •••••••. 39 204 124 81 108 12 12 22 18 17 24 192 186 102 7 216 98 222 211 191 109 6 71 7 216 221 Ill 190 103 168 98 71 79 20 --- = 8 6 I 142 76 132 71 1 12 4 3 12 17 61 - - - --- --- --- --- --- = 14 137 M 2 2 2 1211 346 103 )().'j 92 103 49 145 293 97 103 101 24 82 11 86 M 24 -1 10 111 47 17 20 71 2 6 NONl'A.RMING INDUSTIUA.L BOUSICBOLDS Total dwellings .••.... Number h~ving: Electric lights .•••.•••••• Running water •.•.•••.• Bathroom ........••••••• No conveniences..•••••• --- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - --- --- = 4 27 - 66 - 60 -48 1 Exclusive of all white commercial farmers and of white noncommercial farmers with off•the-larm employ• m~nt in agriculture. Appendix Tobie .fJ.--Communication and Transportation Facilities of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Coal and Iron Textile Facility Atlantic Coast Naval Lumber Stores Green• Carroll ville --- --- White Negro White Negro White Negro White White White --- - - - - - - --- --- - - - --- --PART-TIIIJ: l'A.Rlll BOUSltBOLDS Total households ••••• Number having: i:~ra~~~~:::::::::::::: Automobil~ ............. No telephone, radio, or automobile•••••••••... 100 103 204 13 140 133 2 64 62 17 14-1 93 21 29 216 124 I 39 142 4 -l 76 132 4 -4 - - - --- --- - - - - - - --- --- - - - -19 7 1 6 20 31 42 102 8 98 222 346 103 103 27 85 17 49 3 10 2 34 30 ~ 10 43 60 62 264 30 96 44 84 39 18 17 49 124 23 8 11 26 108 64 92 103 49 l!IO!ll'A.RIIING INDUSTRIAL BOUSICBOLDS Total households ••••. Number having: Telephone •••••••••••••• Radio .••.••••••.•••••••. Automobile ...•.•.•••••. No telephone, radio, or automobile •••.••••.•. --- --------- = 2 2G -33 1619 151 84 8 67 = lM ------ = 7 1 2 1 1 Exclusive of all whl te commercial farmers and of white noncommercial farmers with off•the-larm mnplo7• ment In agrlcul Cure. Digitized by Google Appendix Ta&le .of3A.-<:hanges in Residence Since October 1, 1929, of Part-Time Farm Households, by Type of Farm, by Color, by Tenure, and by Subregion, 1934 Number of changes In rl'$ldence since October 1, 1929 Commer• cial ~ ~ Noncom. mercial .. . :! Cl .... ~ i:i .... :! Negro White .. Cl IJ 0 . "...:!. ~ i.... Cl Negro Commer• cial ~ Cl IJ Wblte White Wblte White Nonrom• merclal Negro Commer• clal Nonrom• merclal Commer• cial . . . . . .:! . ...j. ~ a.... ! ...i. ~. ...j. ~ ...j. ~. ...j. i:i Cl Cl IJ 0 IO Na val Stora!I Lumber Atlantic Coast Coal and Iron Textile !: Noncom• merclal i:i ~ .... :! ~ t -:-c I -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- - - -- -- -- - - - - -- -- - - -- - - - - - - ,_ -21 30 4 18 12 106 14 25 2'I 25 87 II 65 13 25 101 22 Zl 82 134 23 70 UIS Total ................ 20 ---------------12 3 6 II 7 23 8 6 64 6 17 67 3 61 11 8 22 62 79 85 75 5 69 None .••••••...••.........• . 14 11 1 7 2 41 3 10 6 6 17 7 4 2 8 13 24 28 44 14 35 14 8 6 !. ...... ..... .............. . 8 8 3 6 I 2 2 10 2 3 28 2 .•••••••••••••••••••••••••• - -I I -2 -- -6 -- -2 II 42 -li 1 1 6 21 I 2 1 3 .......•••..•....••.•.•.•.• 11 - --- - -- I - -- - -- - - - -- - 2 4 or more .•.....••••.....•.• - - - - - --- - -- - - -- --= = = = = = = = -- = = - - = = 0 0 0 0 E-< 0 0 0 0 0 0 i Avel'Blle for tho98 changing their residence .. •••••. •. . t 1.3 I.I 2. 2 0 ci'i" ,.- ;cc (1) Q_ ~ 0 0 r2 ro t A V&llie not computed for less than IO cues. 1.3 1. 2 t 1.1 t t I. I I. I t 1. 2 t t t 1. 7 t 1.3 t 1.6 t 1.4 :i! ft'j ~ I Appendix To&le 438.-Changes in Residence Since Odober 1, 1929, of Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color, by Tenure, and by Subregion, 1934 Number of changes in residence since October 1, 19211 White Negro White Negro White Negro White White Naval Stores Lumber A tlantlc Coast Coal and Iron Textile ___ Tenant! Owner I Tenant! Owner !Tenant I Owner !Tenant I Owner !Tenant I ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ ,___ , ----------------, Owner I,___ Owner !Tenant I Owner I Tenant! Owner I Tenant Total .• .•• .• ..•.•.•.••....••• .••..•... None _____ ______ _________________________ _ 1 .......... ..... .................... .. ... . 211 26 3 2 ••••••••••••••• • •••••••••••••• ••• •••••••• ••• • ••••••••••••••• • ••••• • ••••••_ .••________________________________ 3 or more 4 .•••.• Unlmown .••••.........•••.••.•••.....••. I 285 144 90 2i 18 6 40 182 35 117 2 36 17 II 3 1 I I 70 276 65 6 212 39 -- 21 3 1 16 87 16 114 -- 20 3 -- 7 98 7 82 -- 14 l - 2 90 11 92 - 411 --- --- --- --- ---11 24 --2 4112414 -83 58253 --6 7 2 5 -2 l l - ---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1---1--- Average for tho9'l changing their residence ..• ······--· .•••. ---·-· •• t A verago not computed for less than IO cases. I. 6 I. 7 1. 6 1. I LI 1. 5 1.5 1.8 I I -< ffl 0 co· ,,"" (1) 0. O" '< 0 0 0 0.0 ....... (v ....IOw PART-TIME FARM/HG IH THE SOUTHEAST 17-4 Appendix Table 44.-Tenure Status in 1929 and 1934 of Part-Time Farmers Who Operated Farms in 1929, by Color and by Subregion Tenure status in 1~ Subregion, color, and tenure status In 19211 Owner Textile: W hlte ___________________ -··· •• _••••••••• _••••••••••• _••••••••••••• _. ___ _ Tenant 111 Owner_--·· __ •• _._ ••• _••• _. __ •••••• _••••••• _._._ •••• _••• _•••• _. ____ . _ 76 16 Tenant __ -• -••••••••••••••••••• -• -•• ···--·· •••••••• -••••• -•• ·---·. -- 1=====1== Ooal and Iron: 164 4 160 White_ - - -• - • - • -• - -· •• - -·-- -·· ••••••••••• - --- -- - - --- - - -- -- -- - - - • -- - -- - - - . 66 Ill Owner ___________ -·- ______________ -· ____________________ -·---·- _____ . Tenant _______ -_---·-·--· _-·- _-·-- __ -_-- ___ ---- -- -__ -- ______ -- __ -__ -- Ill 4 511 21 26 111 2 26 White. __ - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - • -·· --· - --- - - -- - -· - - -- --·- -- --- -- -··-·-·-- - - - - - - 111 15 Owner _______________ ---- __ --·--·-···-·----. _____ ---·-----··----··--_ Tenant __ --------·- --- ---·----- -- --- -- -- - -- -- ... ---·--·---·-·---·--. - 16 Negro_ - -- -- ---• - --- --- -- -- --- - -- --- --·- --·-· - --- -- --- - --·-- -··- -- ---· --Owner _________________________ -·- _____ ·- ____ -- ----- ---··- -- --- - -- --Tenant. _________ ._-· ____________ -·-- __________________ -·-- ______ - _-. Atlantic C08llt: 3 l=====I== Negro_ -- --- --• -• -- -- -- -- --· - --- -- -·· --·- -- --·-·-- -- ---·-·- --·--·· --· -- - - f - - - - -63 +-61 2 0 wn er ----- -- --- - --- --- -- -- -- --• -- -- --- - --- - -• ---· -- --- •• -- -- -- -- -- -- Tenant------------------------·---------------------------·--------- Lumber: 6 15 64 1 fl3 1=====1== W bite_. ___________ ._ - - -- -- • --- - - -- -- - - --· -- - - -- - - - • - - - -- - -· -- - -··- - - - - - - 30 Owner. ______ . __________________________________ ------------·--- __ . __ Tenant.._. ____ --·---- _________________________ -----·------ ________ ._ 18 12 28 Negro_ -- -• -- -- --• -• -- -- --- -- -- -- --· -- - --- --·-·-- -- --- -- --· -- -- -· --- -- --• 22 89 f-----+-21 0 w n er---- --- -- -- --· --- -- --·-· -- -- -- - ---- -- -- --- -- -- --·-- -· •••• -•••• 1 Tenant.. ····················-······································· l=====I== Naval Stores: 28 89 White ..••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ·-···························· 20 41 Owner .••••.• ··-······-··············-···· ••••••.•••••••••• ······- ••. Tenant .•••.• ·-··· •••••••••••••••••.••••••• ·····-···················· 18 2 ♦1 Digitized by Google SUPPLEMENTARY .TABLES 175 .Appendix Ta&/e 45.-Number of Days Heads of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households Were Incapacitated, by Color and by Subregion, 193-4 Textile Coal and Iron A tlantlc Coast White White Negro White Negro 293 ~ 124 71 197 20 19 171 3 6 101 6 4 4 2 4 2 1 1 69 Naval Lumber Stores Number or days head was Incapacitated White Negro White 142 76 132 71 71 4 "3 6 73 21 19 6 1 66 4 ------------ - - - --- - - - --- --- --- --- --Pil'f-lrlJIJ: l'~B)( BOUBJ:BOLDII Total ••••.•••••••••••••••••••.. None •.......••••••••••••.••••••••... 1 to 4 days.••••.••••••••••••••••••.•. 6 to 9 days ...•••.•••••••••••••••••... 10 to 14 days ..•..•••••••••••••••••... 15 to 19 days .••.••.••..••••••••••••.. - - - - - - - - - - - - --- --- --- --26 4 7 10 6 6 6 s 18 28 Total•••••••••••••••••••••••••. 314 222 None ......•..••••••••••••••••••.•... 1 to 4 days ...•..•.•.•.•...••..•...... 6 to 9 days .....••.•••••.............. 10 to 14 days ...••••.•••.......••..... 15 to 19 days ......••••............... ~ t-0 29 days ..........•.........••... 30 to 39 <lays ....•••••.•.•...•...•.... 40 to 49 days ....••.......•••.•...... 60 days or more ••••................ ~7 192 23 :Ill 17 6 18 6 3 4 7 2 2 6 2 6 18 33 ~ to 29 days •••.•....•.•..•••••••.... 30 to 39 days .•...•.••••••••••••••••.. 40 to 49 days .....•••••••.•••••.•••... 60 days or more .•••••••••••••••••••.. Average number or days In• capacltated for those who were incapacitated ••••••••.. --- 7 4 4 Average number or days In• capacitated for th0118 who were incapacitated •••••.••.. 8 --- = 8 7 21 10 6 2 2 2 3 2 14 2 12 6 3 6 6 3 2 24 26 26 14 346 103 105 92 103 49 319 6 3 4 4 3 1 1 6 97 92 49 6 7 16 61 1 4 11 26 2 4 2 8 9 10 2 6 27 32 --- --- --- --- - - - = 15 NONl'ARVINO rNDUSTRLU. HOUSEHOLDS :, 2 1 3 = 33 ------ --- = 1 2 7 1 2 = 3 t = t 8 8 3 3 1 --- --- --- = :u 14 t Average not computed for lees than 10 cases. Digitized by Google 176 PART-TIME FARM/HG IH THE SOUTHEAST Appendix Table <fd.-Education of Heads of Part-Time Fann and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coe! and Iron A tlantlc Coast Na..-al Stores Lumber Education or heads White White Negro White Negro White Negro White ------ ------ ------ --PAR'f-Tll(J: J'ARK BOU811HOLD8 Total. .•••••••••••••••••••••••. None .•................•••••••••••••. 1 to 4 grades completed ....••.•..•••. Oro.de school not completed'········ Oro.de school completed ....•.••.•••. 1 to 3 years high schooL •..•.•...••• Iligh school completed ..••...•...... 1 to 3 years college............•...... College completed ..••.....•..••••... Unknown ......•.•.....•.......•.••• 293 204 23 78 83 47 34 79 28 II 18 7 6 3 1 6 --- = 6. 4 7.0 Average grade oompleted ..... . NONl'ARVINO INDUSTRIAL 124 139 142 63 25 6 9 1 7 JO 74 17 76 132 71 19 82 16 3 8 2 1 17 17 ---9 ------------------4 7 20 2 49 3 20 58 6 10 2 1 1 1 1 22 14 15 3 10 II 19 3 2 3 == = = = --3.8 6. 6 2.1 6. 7 3. 2 6.0 --- = == = = = --- BOUSll:HOLDS Total. •..••..••••.•••••••••.... None ..•••..•.........••••••••••••... 1 to 4 grades completed .....•..••.... Grade school not completed'········ Grade school completed .......•..•.. I to 3 years high schooL ..••••••••.. High school completed ............. . 1 to 3 years college .................. . College completed .•••••••••.••••.... Unknown.••.•••••.•.•.••........... Average grade completed ..... . 314 222 346 103 105 92 103 49 66 33 76 42 79 20 12 2 65 137 120 16 17 6 5 15 16 31 25 10 32 23 13 29 15 27 3 49 22 7 6 2 1 19 14 7 4 - - - - - - ------ ------ ----17 li 44 4 26 6 16 6 --6.4 45 41 15 3 2 1 2 1 2 11 9 2 1 1 --= = = = = = 6.8 4.3 6.8 4.0 4.3 1.2 3. 7 t Exclusive of all white commercial farmers and of white noncommercial farmers with off•the-farm employment in agriculture. • This category includes grades l>--7 lor the Coal and Iron Subregion, and grades l>--6 ror all other subregions. Digitized by Google SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES !77 Appendix To&le 47.-School Attendance and Employment of Youth, 1~24 Years of Age, in Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households, by Color, by Sex, and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic Coast White White White Naval Stores Lumber School attendance and employ• ment, by sex Negro Negro White Negro White -------------1--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --YOUTH IN PART·TUIJ: l'ABK HOlJSJ:HOLDS Total•.•••••••••••.••••.••.•••• In school .•••••••••••..•....•...••... Employed ........••....•............ Neither employed nor In schooL ••.. Male ............................... . In schooL •• ·-················· Employed....................... Neither employed nor In school.. 212 167 110 48 109 ----------77 51 18 31 51 59 74 52 20 20 28 115 46 33 10 49 12 18 52 57 26 19 20 38 16 111 84 48 28 51 29 39 29 21 69 21 37 26 26 6 11 7 25 8 16 10 16 31 4 9 9 21 11 6 16 6 7 ll 15 - - - --- - - - --- --- --- - - - - - - --- ---1= --- --- --- --- --- Female...••• •••••·•·····•·••••.·•·•· IOI 83 62 20 58 30 35 23 -----------------In school. .......•..•••..•....••• 15 30 40 25 i 11 12 12 Employed ...................... . Neither employed nor In school.. 7 36 4 33 5 21 10 25 8 22 ll 13 10 3 8 Total ..••..••...•••.••••.•••••• 141 134 177 67 41 37 37 10 In school. ••••••••••••••••.•••••••••• Employed ........•...•..•.......•••• Neither employed nor In school.. •••. 38 78 53 52 25 28 25 22 56 20 11 8 18 II II 15 25 97 6 24 40 10 21 21 18 42 16 10 II 2 13 4 10 2 38 15 4 10 35 55 6 10 15 II 5 7 5 II 46 TO'GTH IN NONFARlllNO INDUSTRIAL HOlJSJ:llOLDS 11 2 7 1 - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - = --68 63 82 41 13 21 16 7 - - - --- --- - - - - - - - - - - - --In ~rhool. .•••.•••••........•.•.. 18 21 22 15 2 4 4 Male ............................... . Employed .•......•.............. Neither employed nor in school.. 1 e - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - = --73 71 115 26 28 16 21 3 - - - --------------In school. •...•...•...•......•... 20 32 30 10 4 4 7 Female ............................. . Employed ...................... . Neither employed nor in school.. Digitized by Google Appendix Table 48A.-Availab ility of Specified Social Organizations and Participation of Part-Time Farm Households in These Organizations, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Greenville Organitation Coal o.nd Iron A tlo.ntic Coast Lumber Navnl Stores Carroll Wblte White White White Negro White noncommercial Negro Wblte Negro Oommercial ParParParParPar ParParAvail- tici- Avail- tici• Avail- tici- Avail- tici- Avail- ticl- Avail- tic!- Avail- tic!- Avail- Partici- Available 1 pat- able 1 r,at- able 1 pat- able 1 pat- able 1 e,at- able 1 able 1 rcnt- able 1 pat- able 1 e,at,ng' ng • ing' ing• ng, g' g' Ing• 0 <6" ;.- ;;;- (1) Q_ ~ 0 0 ~ (v ... tO CID Noncommercial ParPartic!- Avail- tic!able 1 c:t- f:i; g• - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- -Total housohol,Js .. __________ __ 100 103 204 I 39 124 142 168 132 34 Church ___ ... ______ ____ ___ __.. _. ____ _ - - - - - - - - - - - -- = = 124 -123- = 39 - 36- - -142- =141! = 67 63 = 132 -129- = 3737 21 = = 188 180 103 103 195 202 21 34 Adult ch urch organization __________ _ 187 91 93 24 198 123 56 30 JO 33 7l 48 22 66 119 63 28 2 Younp: peoRle's organization ______ ___ 187 IOI 03 9 199 123 95 62 32 48 8 18 Sunday Sc ool.. ________ _____________ 63 116 18 35 27 -1 -- 31 II4 190 li7 93 202 86 161 124 108 26 39 142 122 68 132 63 121 School club ..... _____ ---- ------ --- -111 41 79 112 27 7 57 I 7 Athletic team . _________________ ______ I -10 14~ 102 30 16 170 35 112 19 3 -8 --36 --21 334821 II132 7231 136 -- -31 Fraternal order. ._ .. __ .. __ .... _______ 142 49 03 130 27 19 110 11 25 Labor union _________ . _______________ 42 16 28 76 12 152 123 75 47 5 3 -4 6819 66 3315 144 - - 14 103 Parent-Teacher 140 .... - -- -·75 93 106 7 79 122 22 13 35 24 Boy Scouts. ___ __Association __________________ 9 _. 34 2 66 55 3 131 12 13 1 12 I 32 Girl Scouts .. __ __ _____ __ _______ __ ____ 1 - -6 2 65 II 108 7 12 1 8 Cooperatives _.. _. ___ ________________ 1 I I 1 -6 823 5I -l -l - 6 -12 334 -22- -- --;- -- -Women's orgo.niuitlon . --------· _____ 12 64 71 4 44 28 - 422 II Club_.----------2 --------------78 5 Special interest group ________ ________ - --4 50 16 5 7 ----3 --3 --10 --g 6716 311 100l -19 -- -Other __ __ __ __ . ____ . ___ . __ .. ---- -- --- 63 40 17 2 62 - -3 6 4 6 - - • "A vallable" means number of households to which specllled organization was available. • "Partlclpatin&" means number of hou.holda with 1 or more members participating in apecl1led orcanlzation. • Does not include 8 agricultural cases. l-:1 ::! ~ i ~ i i <3C: ...~ Appeedlx Ta&le 488.-Availability of Specified Social Or~nizations and Participation of Nonfarming Industrial Households in These Organizations, by Color and by Subregion, 1934 Textile Orranlzatlon Coo.I and Iron Greenville Carroll White White White Lumber Ac.lantlo Coo.st Negro White Negro White Naval Stores Negro White ParlloPartlcPartloPa.rtloPartlcPartlcPartlcAva!l· PartlcAvail- Partlclpat• Avail- lpat• Avail- lpat• Avail- !pat· A. vall· tpat• Avail- lpat• Avail· !pat• Avail- !patable• lpatIng I able I Ing I able I Ing I able I Jng I able 1 Lng • able 1 Ing 1 able• Ing I able 1 Ing. nble • Jng I - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 216 98 222 346 103 105 92 103 49 = 190 346 = 340 = 103 = 95 = 105 = 103 92 = 80 103 101 43 Church .••...•.•...•.........•.•..•. ...••• = 216 = 200 = 98 = 89 206 35 Total hollS6holds ......•...•.....•••• Adult church organization .•.....•..•.••.• Young peoJ:le's organization••••.••.••..••• Sunday S 001. .•.••.•.•.•.••..••••......• School club .....•••..•..••.••..•••..•... .. Athletic team •.•. ... •.••• ........•........ Fraternal order ••.•.•.•.•.•. ... .•.....•.. .. Labor union ..••..•.•. ..• ...•.....•.....•• Parent•Teacher Association ....•.•........ Boy Scouts ....••..•••.•.•..... •..•.•.•••.. Oirl Scouts ...•....•.•••.....•...•.••••.• •• Cooperatives......................•...... • Women's organization.••...•.............. 4-H Club .......• .. ........•.....•.•...... Special Interest group ...•••..•.•••••.••••• Other •••.........••....•..•...••.. .... __ .. 216 216 216 152 200 207 94 208 168 167 2 67 9 27 15 )12 79 190 29 39 48 16 51 JO 3 -10 - 2 7 49 49 50 49 97 49 - 48 9 - -10 JO -- 9 3 39 4 7 9 - 6 --- 213 206 206 205 187 159 67 68 159 66 44 43 3411 345 346 323 340 206 83 336 210 179 176 17 127 3 82 2 81 12 16 333 -II -16 2 284 134 91 JOI 290 103 40 69 6 134 37 I 126 112 148 - 233 28 2 103 162 16 -2 - 99 I 18 80 42 103 87 u -2 -3 0 <i'i" ,;"" (1) 23 22 76 1 10 22 13 33 4 - 1 2 --3 96 24 55 105 2 2 23 7 -6 83 90 82 4 30 3 66 24 94 2 2 --3 -I -5 - 1 84 - 11 92 91 92 92 82 -60 82 67 82 33 18 9 51 -2 - --l 4 2 -4 103 103 103 95 103 97 77 98 l 92 93 97 93 43 23 3 2 71 8 23 -- 4 20 ---2 -- -7 1 --4 -2 -- 1 3 11 - l Ii s "( ---- "' -- i - • "Available" means number of households to which the epect!led organization wu available. • " Pu:Uclpathic" 11M1UM1 number of bOUlebolda with 1 or more memben partlclpaUng in specllled orran!zatlon. Q_ ~ 0 0 ~........ ('i) ~ Appendix Tobie 45>.-Number of Part-Time Farm and Nonfarming Industrial Households in Which One or More I Persons Held Office in One or More Social Organizations, 1934 Part-time rann households Omen• ville I Car• roll Textile Coal and Iron Atlantic Coaot Lumber Naval Stores Oreeo• ville I Car• roll Coal and Iron Atlantic C088t Lumber Naval Stores --White White Negro White Negro White Negro White 0 ,,"" (1) Q_ ~ C") 0 - r2 ( i) White White Negro White Negro White Negro White --- - - --- - - - --- --- ----- --- --- --- -- --Total households ..•..••••• 190 168 103 204 124 132 142 216 71 • 62 98 222 346 103 105 02 103 49 - - - --- - - - - - - --- - - - --- --- - - - - -- - - - --- = - - - --- - - - - - - = 107 76 26 Total offices held•·-······ 4 7 48 27 6 36 1 3 102 64 27 8 1 II - - - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- - - - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---6 Church . .•..••.............••••. II 13 15 3 36 4 I -1 14 5ll I -2 144 17 -4 Adult rhurrh orgaoi.tation .. . •.. 13 13 I 6 4 -I -14 2 ---2I Youn~ peoF,le's organization • ••. 18 23 2 2 6 I 9 4 I Sunday Sc 36 I Zl 7 14 I 15 17 3 7 I 2 4 School riuh ..•..• ..•.••.•.• • •.•• 8 I 3 I -2 3 -3 --II --4 --6 -------Athletic team .. .•..•.••.•..•••.• 2 3 1 4 3 Fraternal order .• _•..••...•••.•. 2 I 1 I 3 1 -- -- -- -1 -I -I ---Lnhor union .................•• . . --2 -1 I ' Parent-Teacher Association .. ... 7 1 1 3 2 Boy Scouts. ______ __________ ____ 2 -2 -3 - -- -2 -Women's organization._·-····· · I I --I ---Otber ..•••••....•••.........•••. I 2 1 ---1001. ••••••••••••••••• co· o Non farming industrial households Textile Orgaoi.tatioo !! • In practically all households, only I member held office lo any given orgaolzatlon. • Assumi ng I member per bousehold per org11Di.tal.ion. • Now,grlcultural cases. ! ';"I ;:! I i ~ :E % "' ~ C: % § Appendix C METHODOLOGICAL NOTE THE METHODS of studying combined farming-industrial employment must be evaluated with reference to the questions which the survey was designed to answer 1 as well as with reference to the procedures employed. A sample representative of all types of part-time farming enterprises was not desired but rather a sample of specific types of farming-industrial combinations. The present study differs from most part-time farming studies in that it was based on a selected rather than an unselected sample of part-time farms and in that it compares specific farming-industrial employment combinations with full-time industrial employment. SELECTION OF COUNTIES After the subregions were roughly delimited on the basis of prenominating manufacturing or extractive industry (figure A), the next problem was to select counties for special field studies. Criteria for selecting the counties were as follows: That the county have as its predominant manufacturing or extractive industry the industry which characterized its subregion. That the county be representative of a major type of agriculture in the subregion. That the county contain a reasonable number of part-time farmers as indicated by 1930 Census data. On the basis of these criteria, and as a result of preliminary field investigation, the following counties were chosen for survey: I. Cotton Textile Subregion: Greenville County, South Carolina. Carroll County, South Carolina. II. Coal and Iron Subregion: Jefferson County, Alabama. 1 See Introduction, p. XIX. 150061°-37-21 !81 Digitized by Google H» H» Fie.A- INDUSTRIAL SUBREGIONS* OF ALABAMA, GEORGIA.AND SOUTH CAROLINA l ';'i ::! ~ i ~ :2 :t ..., clC: :t 0 co· ,,"" (1) Q_ ~ 0 ■ COUNTIES SEL£CTED FOR SPECIAL STUDY 0 - r2 ro ICAL£0¥MIUI * BaHd on a ranking of lh1 Industries of !<>- ~ each county occordin9 to the n~mber at person, occupied oa rtporttd by the 1930 Cen1UL 1A'•Z414, w., L E ... METHODOLOGICAL HOTE 283 III. Atlantic Coast Subregion: Charleston County, South Carolina. IV. Lumber Subregion: Sumter County, South Carolina. V. Naval Stores Subregion: Coffee County, Georgia. For the location of the counties, see figure A. REPRESENTATIVENESS OF COUNTIES Since the objective of the survey was to learn how persons who combined farming with specific types of industrial employment fared . economically and socially as compared with full-time industrial workers in the same industry in the same locality, the validity of the conclusions of the study does not hinge entirely on the representativeness of the selected counties, however desirable it may be that each county be reliably representative of its subregion. One basis for the selection of counties, as pointed out above, was the presence of certain industries employing a proportionally larger number of persons than other industries. To that extent the selected counties represent the subregions. Moreover, they represent the major types of agricultural conditions within each subregion. However, they are not representative in some other economic and social aspects (tables A-E). Furthermore, some counties are fairly closely representative of their subregions on many points while others deviate sharply on most of the items listed. Table A-Medians of Specified Economic and Social Indices for the Cotton Textile Subregion and for Greenville County, South Carolina, and Carroll County, Georgia Medians Speclfled Ind!- Cotton Textile Subregion (73 counties) Percent Negro 1930 .. -----------------·········----··-········ ••.... Percent illiteracy 1930 __ ·-·-········································ Percent increase in population 1910-192(L ···--···················-·· Percent increase in population 1920-1930 .....• ···············-······ Percent tenancy lll30 .. ·······--··-·· .. ---·---------·-··-··----· ·-·· Value land and buildings per farm 1929 .. ----·-····-················ Value land and buildings per acre 1929........••..•.••••••••.•••.•.. Per capita retail trade 1929 .....•••••••.... -.•.•••...•••••.••...•••.. Inhabitants per telephone 1930_ .. ··-···· ·····-······················ Inhabitants per passenger car 1930 .....••.• ····-·· •.••••••••..••.... Inhabitants per income tax return 1930 .••..•.•••••••••••••••••••... Percent population under 20 years 1930 ..... ····················-··· Per capita value of manufactured products 1929•••••••••••••.•••.... Greenville County, South Carolina Carroll County, Georgia 31. 7 23.8 17.2 29.4 8.1 6. 6 • 1. 1 68. 1 $2, Ill $.10 32. 2 62. 7 $3,285 $69 12. 11 -J.4 67.6 $150 $265 H.8 $1,001 $39 $185 26. 4 40.8 • 10. 5 267. 5 6. 8 8.1 1 1 49. 1 1 $192 69 47.0 $495 22. 2 ll.9 346 49.1 $159 1 Following 12 rountfes not Included due to change in boundaries or oritanization of new county during the 1910-1920 period: Barrow, Campbell, Fulton, Gwinnett, Jackson, Lamar, and Walton, Ga.; .Abbeville, Fairfield, Greenwood. Lexinitton, and Hlchlan<I, S. C. • Following 12 counties not included due lo change in boundaries or organi,atlon of new county during the 1920-1930 period: Campbell, Fulton, Lamar, and Pike, Ga.; Cherokee, Kershaw, Lexington, Newberry, Richland, and York, S. C.; Elmore and Montgomery, Ala. • Following 4 counties not Included due to lack of census Information: Haralson, Heard, and Pauldlnc, Ga.· Randolph, Ala. • Following 3 counties not Included due to Jack of census information: Ha.-alson and Paulding, Ga.; Randolph, Ala. • No report on Income tax returns for Heard, Ga. • Exclusive of 8 counties witb less than 10 manufacturing employees. Digitized by Google !84 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST To&le B.-Medians of Specified Economic and Social Indices for the Coal and Iron Subregion and for Jefferson County, Alabama Medians Specllled Indices Coal and Iron Subregion (10 counties) Percent Negro 1930_ -······--········-·-·--·----- --·-- -·······-····-····-··-Percent Illiteracy 1930 __ ·- -··--- _____________ ------··-···--·-·· -·-···-·---- __ Percent Increase In population 1910-IP20 ___ • _____ ._····-·-·-·-···-·-·---···-Percent increase In population 1920-1930 ___________ ·----···----··-----------Percent tenancy 1930_ -·-··- __________ ---··-·-··--··--· --·-·-····---··-·---·Value land and buildings per farm 1929 ____ ·····--··---·-·---·-···-·---····-Value land and buildings per acre 1929-------·--·--··---·-----------·-··----Per capita retail trade 1929 __ ·····-·--- -·- ___ -·-····-- ·-----·---- -···-· _____ _ Inhabitants per telephone 1930 _____ --·-···-··-····----·····--·----·- -·--·--Inhabitants per passenger car 1930 _____ ------·--·---------------------·----·Inhabitants per Income tax return 1930. ··-··-----------·---------·····---··Percent population under 20 years 1930. ------------·----------··--··-·--·--Per capita value of manufactured products 1929.·------·-----------·---··--·1 Jefferson County, Alabama 23.9 8.6 38.9 7.6 36.U 39.2 16. 0 I 10.0 65.9 42.9 $4,775 $26 $!19 $357 $1,990 $171 56. 4 16.1 II. 8 8. 6 184. 6 47. 4 $193 M. 0 39.4 $559 Following 2 counties not Included due to change In boundaries: Calhoun and Etowah, Ala. Tohle C.-Medians of Specified Economic and Social Indices for the Atlantic Coast Subregion and for Charleston County, South Carolina Medians Specified lndioes Atlantic Charleston Coas t Sub- County,South region (D counties) Carolina Percent Negro 1930 __ -· _------·····-·----··-----···---- ___ -·· ---···-- -·-- ···Percent Illiteracy 1930 _____ --·- _________ --·--·-·- __ -···-- _-·--- -·-- __ -··- ___ _ Pert-ent increase in population 1910-1920_ ---··-····-··----------------------Percent population 1920-1930_ ----·-··-·-------------------------Percent Increase tenancy In 1930 __________________________ ---·---- -·- __________________ _ Value land and buildings per farm 1029_. ___________________________________ _ Value land and buildings per acre 1929 ____________ • ____________ --·---·-----·Per capita retail trade 1929.------··---------·-···---------------------·-----Inhabitants per telephone 1930_. -----··-----····--- _---··-----·------ ---···-Inhabitants per passenger car 1930 _____ -·--·-·-------·----------·-----------Inhabitants per Income tax return 19~0- --····--·---·---·-------·-----------· Percent population under 20 years 1930_ --·-----·---·····---···-··------·-•·Per capita value of manufactured products 1929·--·--·--·---·--·········-···· 59.1 13. 4 12.5 IQ. I 20.8 $2,469 M.2 17.0 (') (1) 31.8 $4,621 $20 ~58 $105 $267 92.9 13. I 169 46. 7 $124 19.1 9. I 40 42.11 $322 • Following 2 counties not Included due to change In boundaries: Beaufort and Charleston, S. C. 1 Following 2 oounUes not Included due to change In boundaries: Liberty, Oa., and Charleston, S. 0. Digitized by Google METHODOLOGICAL HOTE 285 Taf,/e D.-Medians of SpeclRed Economic and Social Indices for the Lumber Subregion and for Sumter County, South Carolina Medians Speel fled Indices Lumber Subregion (UM counties) Percent Negro 1930. _.•• _.•. ·- ___ ·----. ·-. _·-· ·- ··- --·-- __ •• _____ ·--. __ •• ___ _ Percent illiteracy 1930. ·-········. ············-·······-···-·····-·-······ .... Percent Increase in population 1910-1920. ·············-·-···--·--·-···-······ Percent increase In population 1920-1930.. ·-· .. ·-·-····-·--······---··· ·--·-· Percent tenancy 1930.. ··---· .......... ··-·········-·--------·-·--·-·-·--··-· Value land and buildings per farm 1929 ........• ·-······-·-··-·-············· Value land and buildings per acre 1929·-··----·---·----··---·-·--·-·······-·· Per capita retail trade 1929 .... ·-·····-·····•···•·····-·----·--··-·--··-·-··· lnhahitants per telephone 1930...... ··-·--·· •.. ·-·--·-------···-· ···-·-··-·-· Inhabitants per p8S8enger car 1930 ... ····--·········-··-··········---··--···· Inhabitants per mcome tax return 1930. ·--·-······----·-·-·-··--·-·-··-·--·· Percent population under 20 years 1930 ........ ·-·······-·-·-···-···-····-··· Per capita value of manulactured products 1929•.•.... ·-·····-········---·-·- Sumter County,Soutb Carolina 67.6 15. 5 67.6 18.11 (I) (') 11.8 •-3.4 72. 3 $1,868 73.8 $2,397 $43 $23 $113 $192 I 52. 5 •H.4 397 50. 4 '$58 35.2 10. 7 12G 53.1 $117 1 Following 20 counties not included due to change in boundaries or organirntlon or new county during the 1910-1920 period: Bleckley, Houston, Macon, Peach, and Pulaski, Ga.~Allendaie, Bamberg, Barnwell, Berkeley, Clarendon, Colleton!. Edgefield, Florence, Hampton, Jasper, Lee, McCormick, Orangeburg, Sumter, and Williamsburg, S. u. • Following 14 counties not included due to change In boundaries or organltatlon of new county during the 1920-1930 period: Houston,,_ Macon, Monroe, and Peach, Oa.; Bamberg, Berkeley, Clarendon, Colleton, Edgefield, Florence, Lee, Mccormick Sumter, and Williamsburg, S. C. • Following 5 counties not includ;;;f due to lack of census information: Choctaw and Cleburne, Ala.; Chattahoochee, Glascock, and Quitman, Oa. • Cleburne, Ala., not included due to lack of census Information. • Exclusive ol 6 counties with less than 10 manufacturing employees. Table £.-Medians of Specified Economic and Social Indices for the Naval Stores Subregion and for Coffee County, Georgia Medians Specified indices Percent Negro 1930 .. ·-·-··-· ·-···. ··--· ····-·--·--···--····-·-·-·--·-·-··-·· Percent lilireracy 1930 ................. -··········-····-·-··-····-··········· Percent increase in population 1910-1920. ···-······-·-·--·-····-·-·--········ Percent increase in population JY20-J930 ..•......... ----·----·--·-·-········· Percent tenancy 1930 .. ···-···· ..........•. -·· ..•.•.• ·-·· •..• ·---·· ·-•·• ·---· Value or land and buil<llngs per form 1929 .. _·········-·-·-···-····••········ Value or land and buildings per acre 1929 .•.. ·-···-····-··-·····•--··-·--·-·· Per capita retail trade lll29 .. -············-·-···•·•·-·-·--··················· Inhabitants per telephone 1930 .. ·····-···-·······-····-··············-··--·· Inhabitants per passenger car 1930... _....••....... ····-·-···· ......... ···-·· Inhabitants per Income tax return J930 ..• __ ······-·····-··-·---·····-····-·· Percent population under 20 years IV30 .. ·•··-···········-·-·---··········-·· Per capita value of manufactured products 1929.. ·--·····--·--·-··--··------· Na.VIII Stores Subregion (54 counties) 34. 5 II. 4 115. I I 2. 6 f\.'i. 4 $2,361 $25 $119 154_ 3 14. 8 402 51.5 •$00 Coffee County, Georgia 26.8 (1) 8.8 5.8 63.11 $2,634 $20 $139 39. 7 14.7 267 62.8 s.~g 1 Following 22 counties not inclnrled due to change in boundaries or organlrntlon of new county during the 1910-l920period: Appling, Atkinson, Bacon, Berrien, Bulloch, Brantley, Candler, Cook, CofTee, Clinchi Emanuel, Evans, Lanier, Long, Lowndes, Montgomery, Pierce, Tittnali, Trentlen, Seminole, Wate, ana Wheeler, Os. • Following 11 counties not inchulo<l due to change in boundaries or organl,ation of new county during the 1920-1930 period: Berrien, Brantley, Charlton, Clinch, Decatur, Lanier, Long, Lowndes, Pierce, Seminole, and Wayne, Ga. • Echols, Oa., not Included due to lack of census lnfonnatlon. • Exclusive of I county with less than JO manufacturing employees. Digitized by Google t86 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST SELECTION OF CASES FOR ENUMERATION After sufficiently typical counties were selected, the next problem was that of determining how cases should be selected for enumeration in the field. Since the survey dealt with combined farming and industrial .employment, the part-time farmers were to be found in the vicinity of centers of employment. Hence, for each selected county a center, or centers, of the leading manufacturing or extractive industry was designated. Thus, the textile mill areas of the city of Greenville were the centers of enumeration for Greenville County. Carrollton and two small neighboring mill towns were the centers of enumeration for Carroll County. As both time and field staff were limited, and as it was desired to limit the sample to homogeneous and specific industrial and occupational groups, the types of cases to be enumerated in each county were definitely specified. In view of the primary interest of this study in problems connected with low income groups, the occupational classifications to be enumerated were limited to clerical and kindred occupation~, and skilled, semiskilled, and unskilled occupations as classified by Dr. Alba. M. Edwards of the Bureau of the Census.2 Certain groups within these classifications were also omitted to give a sample within a fairly limited income and status range (table G). For each center of enumeration, the industries within which to enumerate the full-time workers were specified. The only limitation put on the comparable sample of pa.rt-time farmers was that they be in the same genera.I locality (same or contiguous townships) and that their nonfarm occupations fall in the groups indicated above. The assumption was that in most cases part-time f a.rmers would be enumerated who were in the same industrial and occupational classifications as the full-time workers. Since industries differed as to the employment opportunities they offered Negroes and whites, a policy was adopted of taking white samples only in industries that employed whites chiefly (i. e., textile mills); Negroes only in industries that employed Negroes chiefly (i.e., lumbering and sawmilling); and a divided sample in those industries that offered considerable employment opportunity for both racial groups (i. e., iron and steel mills or mining)- In each case, the so.me restrictions as to race were applied to full-time workers and to parttime farmers. Table F indicates the number sought in each category and the actual sample enumerated. Further criteria for the selection of the cases to be enumerated in the part-time farm and nonfarming industrial groups, as specified in 1 See Journal of American Statilltical Association, December 1933, pp. 377-387. Digitized by Google METHODOLOGICAL NOTE 187 the instructions accompanying the household schedules, were as follows: S.lectlon of Full-T1me lnclutlrlal Fa111llla 1. Include only households which had male heads who were physically capable of working at a full-time job during 1934. 2. Include only households whose heads were employed for at least 50 days each in 1933 and in 1934 in clerical and kindred occupations, and skilled, semiskilled, and unskilled occupations, with the exceptions indicated on the list of occupations (table G). 3. Do not include families operating (whether owning or renting) as much as three-fourths of an acre of tillable land in either 1933 or 1934 or who produced farm products valued at $50 or more in 1933 or 1934. Ta&/e f.-Siz:e of Sample Sought in Each County, by Industry I and by(olor,and Actual Sample Enumerated Part-time farmfll'S Negro White Cowlty Nontarmlng lnduatrlal wcrken Negro White Sample Sample Sample Sample Sam~le enumer• Sam~le enumer• Sa~le enwner• soug t ated soug t ated 10 t ated ' = \ e enumerated - - --4M) 715 398 775 335 750 780 6M - ---IIIO Greenville, S. C .•..•.•.•.....••..••. 200 200 216 Total •.••••.•••.....•.•...•.•.. Industries to be sampled: Textile Manufacturing other than teztile Servloe Carroll, Ga. •••••••.•.•••...•.••••••• Industry to be sampled: Textile J efffll'80n, Ala•••.•••••.•.•••••••.••.. Industrlee to be aampled: Coal mining Iron mining Iron and steel milling Oharleeton, 8. 0 ...............••.•.. Industrlee to be ~led: Any manufact ng or allied lndust3'. exoept forestry, aawmll , woodworking, Iron and steel, or teztlle Sumter, 8. C ••••.••.••••••••••..•••• Industrlee to be aampled: Forestry, sawmill, wood• working Coffee, Ga. .......................... Industry to be samjled: Turpentine an rosin 1 Induatrlal 100 103 100 118 200 21M 100 124 200 222 250 HI 75 71 135 142 100 103 100 IOI 100 76 100 132 100 112 100 103 100 71 50 49 rstrlotiona were not applied to pen-time farmen. Selection of Part-T1me Fann Fa111llles 1. Include only heads of households supplementarily engaged off the farm in 1934 in clerical and kindred occupations, and skilled, semiskilled, and unskilled occupations, with the exceptions indicated on the list of occupations (table G). Digitized by Google 188 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 2. Do not include families operating (whether owning or renting) less than three-fourths of an acre of tillable land in 1934 unless they produced farm products valued at $50 or more in 1934. 3. Include only families that have been operating the same farm at least since January 1, 1933. They may have been fulltime farmers in 1933 or before, in which case they are eligible for enumeration provided. that they were part-time farmers in 1934. 4. The total number of days of "off this farm" employment for the head of the household must have been at least 50 in 1934. 5. Include only households which had a male head who was physically capable of working at a full-time job in 1934. In each case the oldest able-bodied male (physically capable of holding a full-time job) between the ages of 18 and 64 inclusive in 1934 was considered the head of the household. Households which did not have an able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 64 in 1934 were not enumerated. METHOD OF ENUMERATION In enumerating full-time industrial workers, the field man went from house to house along the streets previously selected as represen ting the industry to be sampled until he had secured the prescribed number of cases that met the conditions of eligibility for enumeration. In enumerating part-time farmers, the main and auxiliary highways of the townships contiguous to the enumeration center were mapped out. The enumerator assigned to the partrtime farm sample was instructed to cover the roads in one township and to enumerate all part-time farmers who met the conditions of eligibility. When one township was thus covered, he proceeded to do the same for the adjacent one; and so on until the required number of qualified cases had been enumerated. The cases enumerated were spotted on a map. In each section of this report dealing with the individual counties, these maps are exhibited, and it will be seen that the cases are fairly well distributed. STUDY OF INDUSTRIES The chief manufacturing and extractive industries of each subregion were carefully studied. Special tabulations by counties were made from the original schedules of the Census of Manufactures for 1929, 1931, and 1933. Special tabulations of the 1930 Census, reports of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Federal Emergency Relief Administration studies of the usual occupations of relief clients were used. Other principal sources of data were the following: the Bureau of Mines, Department of Agriculture, Department of Labor, Department of Commerce, Federal Trade Commission, N. R. A. reports, and trade publications. The material was analyzed by expert industrial engineers. Digitized by Google METHODOLOGICAL NOTE 189 In addition to this material, field inspection of the selected industries in each of the six counties was made by the engineers. Taf,le G.-Gainfvl Worf<ers In the United States Classified Into Social-Economic Groups,1 by Occupation: 1930 GROUPS AND OCCUPATION W OBll:EBS: Inspectors, scalers, and surveyont-log and timber camps.1 Baggagemen and freight agents-railroad. Ticket and station agents-railroad agents-express companies.1 Express messengers and railway mail clerks. Mail carriers. Radio operators. Telegraph messengers. Telegraph operators. Telephone operators. Advertising agents.• "Clerks" in stores. Commercial travelers.I Decorators, drapers, and window dressers.I Inspectors, gaugers, and samplere--trade. Insurance agents.1 Newsboys. Real-estate agents.I Salesmen and saleswomen. Abstracters, notaries, and justices of peace. 2 Architects, designers, and draftsmen's apprentices.I Apprentices to other professional persons. Officials of lodges, societies. 2 Technicians anrl laboratory assistants. Dentists' assistants and attendants. Librarians' assistants and attendants. Physicians' and surgeons' attendants. Agents, collectors, and credit men. Bookkeepers, cashiers, and accountants. Clerks (except "clerks" in stores). Messenger, errand, and office boys and girls. Stenographers and typists. Cl.EBO AND KINDRED 811:ILLED WORKERS AND FOREMEN: Farm managers and foremen. Foremen-log and timber camps. Foremen, overseers, and inspector-xtraction of minerals. Blacksmiths, forgemen, and hammermen. Boilermakers. Brick and stone masons and tile layers. Cabinetmakers. Carpenters. Compositors, linotypers, and typesetters. Coopers. Electricians. ----Exclusive of Professional Persons and of Proprietora, ManageTB, and Official,. 1 1 Excluded from enumeration. Digitized by Google l90 PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST SKILLED WORKERS AND FoREMEN--Continued. Electrotypers, stereotypers, and lithographers. Engineers (stationary), cranemen, hoistmen, etc. Engravers. Foremen and overseers--manufacturing. Puddlers. Glass blowers. Jewelers, watchmakers, goldsmiths, and silversmiths. Loom fixers. Machinists, millwrights, and toolmakers. Mechanics.• Millers (grain, flour, feed, etc.). Molders, founders, and casters (metal). Painters, glaziers, and varnishers (building). Paper hangers. Pattern and model makers. Piano and organ tuners. Plasterers and cement finishers. Plumbers and gas and steam fitters. Pressmen and plate printers (printing). Rollers and roll hands (metal). Roofers and slaters. Sawyers. Shoemakers and cobblers (not in factory). Skilled occupations (not elsewhere classified). Stonecutters. Structural ironworkers (building). Tailors and tailoresses. Tinsmiths and coppersmiths. Upholsterers. Bus conductors. Cond uctors--street railroad. Foremen and overseers-steam and street railroads. Locomotive engineers. Locomotive firemen. Aviators. Foremen and overseers '-transportation. Inspectors--transportation. Floorwalkers, foremen, and overseers-trade. Firemen-fire department. Marshals, sheriffs, detectives, etc. Policemen. Foremen and overseere------cleaning, dyeing, and pressing shops. Foremen and overseers--laundries. SEMISKILLED WORKERS: Semiskilled Workers in Manufacturing: Apprentices to building and hand trades. Apprentices (except to building and hand trades)-manufacturing. Bakers. Dressmakers and seamstresses. Dyers. Filers, grinders, buffers, and polishers (metal). 1 Not otherwise specified. Digitized by Google METHODOLOGICAL NOTE 8EMl81ULLED w ORKJ:Re--Continued. Semiskilled Workers in Manufacturing-Continued. Milliners and millinery dealers. Oilers of machinery. Enamelers, lacquerers, and japanners. Painters, glaziers, and varnishers (factory). Operatives '-manufacturing. Other Semiskilled Workers: Boatmen, canal men, and lock keepers. Sailors and deck hands. Chauffeurs and truck and tractor drivers. Boiler washers and engine hostlers. Brakemen---steam railroad. Motormen--steam and street railroads. Switchmen, flagmen, and yardmen-steam and street railroads. Telegraph and telephone linemen. Apprenticea--transportation. Other occupation-transportation. Apprentice-wholesale and retail trade. Deliverymen-bakeries and stores. Other pursuits in trade. Guards, watchmen, and doorkeepers. Soldiers, sailors, and marines. Other public service pursuits. Other occupation-professional service. Attendant-pool rooms, bowling alleys, golf clubs, etc. Helpe~motion picture production. Theater ushers. Other attendants and helpe~professional service. Barbers, hairdressers, and manicurists. Boarding and lodging house keepers. Other operative-leaning, dyeing, and pressing shops. Housekeepers and stewards. Deliverymen-laundries. Other operative-laundries. Midwives and nurses (not trained). Other pursuits---domestic and personal service. UNSIULLED WORKERS: Farm Laborers. Factory and Building Construction Laborers: Firemen (except locomotive and fire department). Furnacemen, smelter men, and pourers. Heaters (metal). Laborers '-manufacturing. Other Laborers: Fishermen and oystermen. Teamsters and haulers--log and timber camps. Other lumbermen, raftsmen, and woodchoppers. Coal mine operatives. Other operatives in extraction of minerals. Longshoremen and stevedores. Draymen, teamsters, and carriage drivers. 1 Not otherwise specified. Digitized by Google 192 PART-TIME FARM/HG IH THE SOUTHEAST UNSKILLED wORK ERB-Continued. Other Laborer&-Continued. Garage laborers. Hostlers and stablehands. Labore~truck, transfer, and cab companies. Labore~road and street. Laborers, including construction laborers-steam and street railroads. Laborers L-transportation. Laborers in coal and lumber yards, warehouses, etc. Laborers, porters, and helpers in stores. Labore~public service. Labore~profeBBional service. Labore~recreation and amusement. Stagehands and circus helpers. Labore~leaning, dyeing, and pressing shops. Labore~omestic and personal service. Laborere--laundries. Servant Class: Bootblacks. Charwomen and cleaners. Elevator tenders. Janitors and sextons. Launderers and laundresses (not in laundry). Porters (except in stores). Servants. Waiters. 1 Not otherwise specified. Source: Edwards, Alba M., "A Social-Economic Grouping of the Gainful Workers of the United States," Journal of the American Statiatical Aaaociation, December 1933, pp. 377-387. Digitized by Google Appendix D COUNTIES IN INDUSTRIAL SUBREGIONS J. TEXTILE Alabama: Chambers Elmore Lee Montgomery Randolph Russell Tall&pooB& Georgia: Banks Barrow Bartow Butts Campbell Carroll CatooB& Chattooga Cherokee Clarke Clayton Cobb Coweta De Kalb Douglas Elbert Fayette Georgia----Con tinued. Floyd Franklin Fulton Gordon Gwinnett Habersham Hall Haralson Harris Hart Heard Henry Jackson Lamar Madison Meriwether Muscogee Newton Paulding Pike Polk Richmond Rockdale Spalding Stephens Georgia--Continued. Troup Upson Walker Walton Whitfield South Carolina: Abbeville Aileen Anderson Cherokee Chester Fairfield Greenville Greenwood Kershaw Lancaster Laurens Lexington Newberry Oconee Pickens Richland Spartanburg Union York II. COAL AND IRON Alabama: Bibb Blount Calhoun Etowah Alabama-Continued. Jefferson St. Clair Shelby Talladega Alabama-Continued. TuscalooB& Walker 293 Digitized by Google 194 PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST III. ATLANTIC COAST Georgia: Bryan Camden Chatham Georgia-Continued. Glynn Liberty McIntosh IV. Alabama: Autauga Barbour Bullock Butler Cherokee Chilton Choctaw Clarke Clay Cleburne Coffee Conecuh Coosa Crenshaw Cullman Dale Dallas Fayette Franklin Greene Hale Henry Lamar Lowndes Macon Marengo Marion Monroe Perry Pickens Pike Sumter Wilcox Winston Georgia: Baldwin South Carolina: Beaufort Charleston Georgetown LUMBER Georgia-Continued. Bibb Bleckley Burke Calhoun Chattahoochee Clay Columbia Crawford Crisp Dooly Dougherty Glascock Greene Hancock Houston Jasper Jefferson Jones Lee Lincoln McDuffie Macon Marion Monroe Morgan Oconee Oglethorpe Peach Pulaski Putnam Quitman Randolph Schley Stewart Sumter Talbot Georgia-Continued. Taliaferro Taylor Terrell Twiggs Warren Washington Webster Wilkes Wilkinson South Carolina: Allendale Bamberg Barnwell Berkeley Calhoun Chesterfield Clarendon Colleton Darlington Dillon Dorchester Edgefield Florence Hampton Horry Jasper Lee McCormick Marion Marlboro Orangeburg Saluda Sumter Williamsburg V. NAVAL STORES Alabama: Covington Escambia Geneva Houston Washington Georgia: Appling Atkinson Bacon Baker Ben Hill Georgia-Continued. Berrien Brantley Brooks Bulloch Candler Digitized by Google COUNTIES IN INDUSTRIAL SUBREGION Georgia--Continued. Charlton Clinch Coffee Colquitt Cook Decatur Dodge Early Echols Effingham Emanuel Evans Grady Georgia-Continued. Irwin Jeff Davis Jenkins Johnson Lanier Laurens Long Lowndes Miller Mitchell Montgomery Pierce Screven 195 Georgia-Continued. Seminole Tattnall Telfair Thomas Tift Toombs Treutlen Turner Ware Wayne Wheeler Wilcox Worth Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Appendix E SCHEDULES fEl)[AAL _.,CJICH ::; IOOS[)QJ) . PART-TIME fAIII SCHEDULE § ~-~ 11:l.ATIOtl TO MUD 1€J&l10f ~ z 1 OlT[ 1 .,... ii !~~= I § ~~ STAT'£ Of 1cou.-rRY . ~~~ PER 0AY IORICCO ,. nt: i """' 1r ono ' . ,...,, ,._.., FA.Ill IN UOf IOlnt IN 19)4 !l IEXCl LC( .......... , THAN U.S.I ,! JflJA , • ' ~ JIJ _______ ruo, _ _ _ _ __ _,...,... (OARlllli,TOI Gill. DllllCTOlt n.sHl, OR DISTRICT_._ _ _ __ 'JI ., OIVISIIM 0, RESLUOt, ST,\TISTIC:S, NO flMAIICl ~------- i ___ ____ EMfRGENCY RELIEF lOIIINISTRATIOII KARff t.. HOPIUIIS, .IOIINISTRATilt STATE------- ~~ i,>:'e! ,._., !,i'al~ PHYSICAL st IIIY g~ ~~~ ll.ll()ICAP SP«:ln ~I • 10 11 !l ~ !! i ;~ ~~ u ~a ii! !If I! 2 lo~ ;::: I! A 5:) "0 I ' 1) 12 1' z ) • ' •, • • 10 11 12 1) 14 " . ,....,. ., ruu. twi( Of flfM ANO/OR 1YPC Of' Bl.IS I IC$ OR IIIIOOSTln' $f{ClflC 0COJPATICJN PLJil HR( "M>fi( ISlQ.IAUYOOIIC 2 1 3 ~lie 1:~ ti1~ ~ ~,;;~ ~i; ~~ is~ 0AY5 EMF'LOYCQ IN: . li ''. '"' J•5 0110 • • ~ • 1 1 2 . J C PRHICIPAI. OIF\OYW(IIT fS ~u,o or HQ.IS( Off M f,UM Ill 1929: TYPC <, ll.lS!ll[SS 0A U1~'S1llY O Ol'I.Cn"«:IIT or Qnf[R OCCVPATIOII.._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ · NitUIT U,1111[0 IN UZ9 flil)t THIS Dl'l.OYIOll1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ WCMBCRS Of' THC tQ.WQ.D tMCCIIC rACM ~y [ Off TklS fAJN Ill 19~: SPCClf'IC CCOJl'ATI~ ~ Olll[R TKM FARlit OR £W'tO'llUT lliOICAT[Q Ut II MIO D 1934: ?[ Tm: Of MIWSS ;i CR 1ro.rsnn . ,. #«lift ,. so.,a =-1o 1 2 J I z J • ' ' 1110061°--37--22 297 Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IN THE SOUTHEAST 298 r. L F• LMOOPCRATtD -1 """'""' P.1.STtlR[ I A.GAROCM ,mo .. • '• l"'° onu ro,.._ IRl5HP'.)U1'0(5 SW'£ET POf.lTO[S """"'' WPlLl'CS lilU BC.lJIS 10 ll " O,CN!f:,S 14 ASPLR1:.'1JS IL " ,, 20 11 "" " 1000( "" t IF PL.IC{ 1$ (al(0 IHA.t UAJ) If REIT RJR JOI _ _ _ _ __ ...,...,., EUT~ CJJ?i,()l5 ()111("'5 lll015,t;(5 TLiW<iiPS J, (OlllPOO llYlSTOCI: JM. I 193' I •AT[Rll"lO'fS l"Ol,'SCSA>IOM.US C.l/\lAL.IJ.ff.S OTl"{A IIIL• CAffi[ ono CATT\.£ SWIii£ P'JL\Tln' 11 I. fAJITS lb APPL[S JO '"''"''' OTi,(A 15F{CIFYI 'll. l~.1. BE~ttS )l " OTHCA )~ MILi( J6 llJTTtR n I, X bT. fEED fUiTILllt:~ OTH{R '° .," 0. POJLTJn' •) C. LIY£STOC•PQJO., SiJPPl.lLS .. IUT 6 bl. [(LS ""~ 11 TOTAL or, l( R x '",) COTTOIII \&AO!lflll[ll'f' R[Pllll5 rw.s LB. lB. VOL ,,_.. EXPOcSCS MIRED l).OOR L~. E.~£_£~S['------i-~-F"~--tt+++t+H-tt++~+---+-+---t ., rrn BU. 6ll[S l. laCIIIPTICII r6 Ml l8. lU. . . . 1UX. llllTtt QI 1Ut ISDIVICUI IIE1IIIII FNIICIIIICAIIDOllO 111'1.0nUr ro, ,AL. OT,[R ,. (.,3 M. Ml:.a:U..uc[l)JS LB. OH!ER u " .. , t,(lir(.$11.hTE.D I lf, )fl ,.,. .ICA'(S C.[D PF'f'lr.'S Sl't.J.1.5" 11 " "" ,. urn.a: 1 9&S GAOCUrt' &Ill L£S,S MAY-0CT08[R 1KM OIJRIIIG ■ I NTUt IOITKS?::'----'------- lf SO >Ol' la.01 PU D T h ' P ~ - - - - - - - 2 APPAIIJIT STAfiiWIO Of LIWIIC,: 1 l ) ' 5 Digitized by Google "" ' SCHEDULES 199 'L ,me a, 1MCH. ca 1WL. SIZ[ 111£ I IUll!R aJSTG (1F ""'5 l€.I0 '1F IQJSC HAS lltDI 01 THIS F..,_ _ t . . .II YEARS t€AO HAS 8tD A f'AIT~TIMC fAIIO $INC[' 1 1 ~ ' Ql:C!C R(SICOa: Of 1€.AD Of H0USC 1M OCT. 1ST. 192': OfCN o;LJNm__,. V I ~ T ~ CIT'f- 1 ' • • N.U9CR (IF owa5 IN IICSIDOct 1¥,0( IY t0D a, H:IUS( SIIIC[ otl'. JST 0 1921- •', auaBCA Of YOR5 tCAD rs }QM MU LIYCD 011 A F'AIII $111CE t€ US SlXTllli YEARS Of' , a _ .. 1 KIICIS ()IF OK POfOIIG 0111 f,_ IJI. 1i)t lElClUSlvt a, tQJSOOIIJ: IY Wirt _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ l'I' OLCCR OIIWICN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ - - - IY YOUNGER 0 1 1 ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - J KINDS Of Cft ,CRftl!IIE) 01 fAal 1• 11.N fClCUJSIY[ Of IO..ISEl(MI(): IY WIFE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,. BY 0U0 C X I L O R E ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - ' J Ir YQ.IIG(.I (NIW!(N _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ IU&ROflatSINGARDENIM,Li29 _ __ ,. 1 Cll(U.lNC: TYPC OF CONSTII.CTtOff _ _ _• 0nos1M _ _ _• NUIBCR 0, S1t,.U£S_; 'ft.d C)NSllk;tCT(D, _ _ _ _ _ ___ NLIIBCA OF ROCIIIS--• ,.,_ING U.TUl _ _ _• BATl1AOCM WITH RJJ»N!JG •Arut_ _. (U.CTIUC LIC-,.T"..._,; C.OliOITUJN Of D I C L L l ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0Tt£A Q)W[)IIENC[S: TrLEPt<lliE _ _• RADIO~ AUTCIOBILE l'fUR 4,'IJ M H £ ~ - - - - - - - OT,£1i1' llllL.01~ (Ot(CI( THOS£ PAE.S{liT); IWI•_; GA,UG£ _ _. P\)JLTF;'Y ~ - - · OTl<A I S P E C I F Y ~ - - - - - - - - 4 TYP( Of AOAO 0111 WHICM THIS F#M IS LDCAT'EO: CO"-CRtTE----. HMO SUU'ACtO__; GIUOC:)_; turn_ S to1 fNI IS TklS f'AIM no, A KARO SlM"ACCO r«:IAD---. Q. lll)ICATt rr .,. SCCTl0111 LU( ...0 nt: Fll[~JCY Of ATTOOUCC or EACH PV!50fil IN M tOl.&l«D AT TN)S( cw.ANIZ&TrONS LIST[D ICU. ~•CH EXIST IN Tl-£ O),t,UIITY (lliFOlllATIOJf AS Of U)'J: ATTl~DA.',C( IN 19),l t; -;,. 0~ ., !?~ §II nn . ' I CHI.PCM ' ;,J 11. s~ SOCIA&. OIICiAHIZATIOI i!! ~i l[,S""" 0NC[ 1W1et 0,,C,:!'[R PCl! ..,.,. PCII ATTOI~( ""'"' 11~ 0~ ;:~ l ) ""'" , • ' 11411[[ mes FO FW!OR ID!( TIIC ""'" "-'""'"' • tt:~ OfflC[ ,. 19'4 • I> AOU..TOUlOl~lZATION .' """'''°""'" ' ycu,,; PCOPl.£5 ~IZATtoi. 5Ct(Ql ClU8 ', ATl(.CTICTE,M ' ' \...l8)Q l.111109! ri:l.t.T(INAL ORD£R H!i!I: Oil IUSlll[SS AS=-oc:IAT!!)lf 10 ll&RAJl'I' ll P. "1J !WJTSoro.lTS . ,, r.,.. Gt'1l. 5C!X.IT'S COOPl~Tl'if5 0fl·U!IOl["')~1ZAT1~S 16 441 CLUB 11 SPCCt.t,LINT[R(STCJt:lVP l8 omc• . s. .IIO.MT OF IWJt8Tt[)lll(SS J.U. 1ST, H35: IOl [STAT( GTCIC£ _ _ _ _ _ _.,. CNATT(L ll')AT.,a _ _ _ _ __ Ml:JUll;T OF ll()(STCOH(SS JIit. 1ST, 19)0: AOL [STAT( YlR~ .ll«UfT IN 01:tLJRS (Jf ACLIU' MD AIO MCCl't£0 !'t nus · OU.ITEL liORTC'.MX------ t(]IJS(l()t,0: "" l l "'4.IC (GD¥El>tN:frlT.IU ~ll[f ' 11CLP rACM Kl.ATIV(S ' PRIVAJ'[ l[J.CU/5!Y[ Of t•HP rF.CM 19)0 , 1,)1 1 . lH? lQ)J tH• 1))5 • 1 ' R{L1T!V[5J R{Ll(F' Digitized by Google PART-TIME FARMING IH THE SOUTHEAST 300 fall 01$-lJI f'.Llf.A. FEDERAL ITAT( _ _ _ _ _ _ __ TtJIIIGIIP .i . r, OF' [.l,CH IO&:R Tl< .oJS(K)IJ) RELIEF Alllfl NISTR.lTIOII ruu-i1w£ ,., ~ i~ Q[LA,T!(),i '"'" ,a ' 1 ;i ~l'i tUD ~~ ~~ ~:! INOIJSTRIAL l ~ !!i !!i !i H • N,.ICR1TOR _ _ _ _ _ _ __ SCH£OU\E ,I STAT[ 0, BIRTH ICO'.;t,TTN IF Oft,£R Tr.AH U, S.J .' ~ l Ol.lEU.TOR'S ll"IXl'ID - - - - - - CORlltliCTOII C.TLL, OIRtCTOR OlSTIIICT _ _ _ _ __ ~ STREU AlilO l<IUSE MMICR _ _ _ __ IU,lil[ EMEJ!GENCY HNltlY L K)PIOJIS. ACl,IINt$TRATOI O!'ilSJOI Of RCSOJICH, STATISTICS A110 FIIWC(. cn;,n_ _ _ _ _ __ 5 1!,'i llf't PEIIW.OT PHYSICAL HJJ.OICAP ~!!i ~8 ~~;,_ ~~!! ~ . B, ' g ~~ . do 5 i~ ' ~~ 1!~ 1 ""~ i~n~e !t ~e ~§ !SPECIFY) 10 " 11 11 l ) • ' • 1 8 ' 10 11 12 " " 15 ,. Df'\.OYl,l[NT or !-CAO or H)lJS[)()U) Ill 1'),. 1UM: Of Flllf ANOIOR P'I.ACC KR(~ TYPE SPCCIFlC ISO:-[ or __. ruu. II.ISi Jll(SS _, t"' l l OAl'S ~~~ Dl"LOYU>III: ~lli:IJSTli'Y OCCIJPAllON ) ,., ,, '"" ~ . "' ! :! :! • l! ~ :21! ~2.§ 5 ::l I" l:t~ "' • 1 l .' J c. PRINCIPll Dl't.0'1\OT Of ..:.lii'.l or KllJ5C IN U19; OCCuPATIOfl _ _ _ _ _ __ AM:UIT [AR,11£0 IN 192'1 FIOI TN!$ D6't.0n(.NT _ _ _ _ TOT.\l CASH lt.C.,l,( lYPC or tUO or a.rsucss OA tfOJSm_ _ _ _ _ __ FRCII A U . ~ IN U29•------- TOTAL CAStl l!ICOlr,£ OF AU or,os '" ~U'OLO f ~ llL S.:l'RC[S "' 1~.?"J _ __ Cl, Dif"I..Ol'IOT OF 0TH[ll lll()J8£R"S Of THC IOJS(HOL.l) IN 19~ [. f~,:,,t( FROM AIO' SOVIIC( OTIICR TMAN Of\.O't'.,. Ll£NT I11:)IC.H[O Ill 8 AkO O Iii 19)4 ,. S OIOM ..:AD or ntlS IOJSDOJ) DO lltr GAl!OOIII(; 7'CCIFIC T"rPC Of M1M(SS QXUPlTl(JI ()Iii l~TiiY 3 S<IJIC( """'' '" "" ..,.__ .__. """ (II r,UIIU(i IN 19)4 _ _. . fODfS Kl.IS[ K'S LIW:0 0. '4 rl.lN sua: tt: w.s SIXT[[Jf t!MS '1F"'---- Digitized by Google 301 SCHEDULES ..,. l0C HM t€AD OJI HOOS( uvm IN THIS COlilUIITY·-----. . . . Of o,rruor 0)1M/N1T1(S HUD HAS LIVll> II $INC( OCT- 1ST, 1921•----Ot:Cl ACSl0£1C( Of .«.AO Of tOJS£ ON OCT. 1ST, 1121: OPf.N CO..tfTA't--- YIUAGC___,; (XCIC TCll.lfll Of T'l-llS tOl: c»W:D,_,; I I O ~ QJl€D i't OFLDYtl-. If tO€ 1$ RENTtO. 11kAT 1$ ,l/rlfrlUAl R(llTAL. _ _ __ Tt•- c1n_ If IQ( IS CIIMCD. .U.T W')IJJl IT ROT fOlt (ANIIUAL A O I T 1 - - - - - otsat1PTIOI Of DICU.lll(j,: T'(P[ _ _ _ _• T'fflt Of COltSTR\.CTI~-----.· .._..IICA STOAID_____,; I I . U I C I ~ ru.NIIIG UTIR---o IATl-tRCOI WITM lilJNfillliG •TER,_,; (l(CTAtC LICHTl--; CO,C1TIClf _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ TIL[PK!l'I(_,: AAD!Q_; AUTOICl91L[ IYEIIR ,.,C, W A . l < . ( . ~ - - - - - - OI STIUT OR tOAD Ofll ltHOt DIICLLl!Ci 1$ l.OCATtO: CO,.:llCTt--· on£R HARD S.W.ICl- GRAll:D--• DIH-- I OMA COHVE.NICIICCS: 9 1YP'( tt. UC)ICATt If .,. SCCTIOI LIii( frll.111110 fl,( ncc:ioa OF ,m~ OF [Q u, nus P0tsoN tGJSOQ..D AT nos( OCIN'IZATIOIIS LISTED BUDr ltHOi UIST IN Tl£ C(lll..iflJTY ONfORIMTJOIII Ai Of 11.)flJ ATTEIUJl.:C IN liJ4 SOCIAL ~IZATIOII ; !! E'!'~ ~;~ d ~~ "g! i! 1 ' 1 ,....,. .p~ ~i ~n 2 ~:. . .lTTCIII).. A,CC ~~ J • L(S$ nu.4 ,.,cc (loC( H(LD ,.... Mtt omcc INl!lJ' o,,c(fU fU PU rnc TIIICS ""'"' ' ""1M. ""'™ PEAOTit ,u""'n, ' 7 • ., ' l,[UT OU~H 0i&lHIZATIOIII . '~PCOPUS~l].UIOIII ,u,o.v SO<lOl 5 SO<lOI.CU.00 • AT~TIC 7 FRAHSIUJ.. or«RS 8 Ll8Ji L'NlOII! ' It.IMS TflAOC OR IJJSIICS ASSOC. 10 LI,_, 11 P.T.l. " ,.,, """' I) Grll\. SCOUTS " 4--14 CLUB 16 OTKR IClUl'S OAG,IJIIZ. 15 COOPlRATIV[S 17 SP{CIAI.. HiT[ll[ST c.AXlP'S UI ono ,. l Mlll.lllT Of IJl)(BTClriCSS. JAN. 1ST, 19)5: 2 .-:u.r o, IIU.BTWICSS. ,. I JNt. R£AL ESTATE 1()1:!'T _ _ _ _ _ _ _• isr. 19.)0: flOl iSTAfi. lil)fflr..t,(,f AIO.lfT II OOI.LAAS OF' IEL1(F ANO .llO R[C[l~ OIATTU t0n'G.1Ci£ _ _ _ _ __ · CXATTCl ll)llJr.Ai.{ _ _ _ _ __ fr nus tt:lOS£NOI.D l'J19 m> 19)1 I l J . "" ,.,, ,.,. 5 • • UIJ~ 7 Pueuc ACL!EF' (~(R!M)4TAI..J 2 PRIVATE RCU(F' (txCLUSl'IE C1F t<LP fl'OI li'(LA.TIY(SI J H£LPfACUACUTIV(5 . APPARENT STANDARD OF LIVING: 1. 2,l, Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Index 303 Digitized by Google Digitized by Google INDEX Page Age of heads of households_______________________________________ 1, 2, 243 Agricultural features of subregions: Atlantic Coast_ _____________________________________________ 141-143 Coal and Iron _____________________________________________ ---116 Cotton Textile ________________________________________________ 83-85 Lumber ____________________________________________________ 170-171 Naval Stores__________________________________________________ Annual Naval Swres Report_________________________________________ Annual Report of the State Superintendent of Education of South Carolina, 1934------------------------------------------------------- 198 200n 166n, 193n 118n Annual Statistical Report& of the American Iron and Steel Institute________ Atlantic Coast Subregion: Area covered and cases enumerated______________________________ 144 Charleston County, South Carolina ____________________________ 141-149 Agricultural features _____________________________________ 142-143 Population________________________________________________ 142 Description ___ - - - -- --- - - - - -- - -- - --- - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - -- ---- XXVII-XXVIll Part-time farmers, type of, in___________________________________ 150 Automobiles, &ee Communication and transportation facilities. Bathrooms, see Housing. Behre, C. E. and Curran: National Pulp and Paper Requirements in Rela- tion to Forest Conservation_________________________________________ 177n Bennett, Frank and Others: Soil Survey of Sumter County, South Carolina__ 171n Biennial Censua of Manufactures ____________________ 86n, 90n, 91n, 117n, 147n Bituminous coal mining, see Industries and occupations. Bowden, Witt: "Hours and Earnings Before and After the N. R. A."_ xxvn, 88n Braun, E. W. and Gold: Some Fact& Respecting Prices and Income in the Na val Stores Ind us try_ _ _ _ ___ ___ _________ _________________________ 204n Brissenden, Paul F.: Earnings of Factory Workers __________________ 175n, 214n Buildings, number on part-time farms _______________________________ 12,249 Burchard, E. F.: "Alabama Ores Equal Lake Supply"_________________ 117n Canning and storing fruits and vegetables (see also Production): Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 152 Coal and Iron Subregion_______________________________________ 127 Cotton Textile Subregion_______________________________________ 98 Lumber Subregion_____________________________________________ 179 Naval Stores Subregion________________________________________ 208 "Car-Lot Shipments of Fruits and Vegetables in South Carolina During 1934"---------------------------------------------------------- 143n Carroll County, Georgia, see Cotton Textile Subregion. Case studies: Atlantic Coast Subregion: Building trade worker ____________________________________ 232-233 Fertilizer factory worker____________________________________ 233 305 Digitized by Google 306 INDEX Case studie&---Continued. Page Atlantic Coast Subregion-Contiimed. Service industry worker _________________________________ _ 231-232 Truck-farm laborer _____________________________________ _ 233--234 Coal and Iron Subregion: Mineworkers ___________________________________ 226-227,230-231 Steel mill workers________________________________________ 227-230 Cotton Textile Subregion: Textile mill workers ______________________________________ 221-226 Lumber Subregion: Building trade workers ___________________________________ 234-238 Farm contract laborer ____________________________________ 238-239 Naval Stores Subregion: Railroad machinist- __ ---- _______________________________ 241-242 Turpentine worker _______________________________________ 239-241 Cases in survey _______________________________________ XXX-XXXI, 286-288 Enumeration, method of________________________________________ 288 Selection of _________________________________________________ 286-288 Cash expenses, see Expenses. Cash receipts, see Bale of products. Charleston County, South Carolina, see Atlantic Coast Subregion. Child Labor Facta and Figures_________________ __________________ ____ 91n Coal, 1929 and 19SS_ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ ___ _ _ _ __ 116n Coal and Iron Subregion: Agricultural features___________________________________________ 116 Bituminous coal mining, see Industries and occupations. Description _____________ ----- ____ --- _____________ ------ _____ 113-116 Iron and steel industry, see Industries and occupations. Jefferson County, Alabama ___________________________________ 113-116 Part-time farms, location of_ __________________________________ 123-125 Coffee County, Georgia, see Naval Stores Subregion. Commercial part-time farmers, definition_____________________________ xxx Communication and transportation facilities: Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 165 Coal and Iron Subregion_______________________________________ 137 Cotton Textile Subregion __________________________ -- ____ -- __ - __ 107 LumberSubregion ___________________________________________ 192-193 Naval Stores Subregion________________________________________ 215 Telephones, radios, automobiles, number of households having _____ 57,271 Conclusions of study __________________________________________ ----- 69-78 Advantages of part-time farming _________ -------------------- ___ 70-73 Desirability of increasing part-time farming_______________________ 74 Governmental part-time farming program, need for and essentials of __ 77-78 Improvement of existing part-time farming_______________________ 7fr-77 Part-time farmer a hybrid______________________________________ 70 Possibility of increasing number of part-thne farms ________________ 73-74 Copeland Report__________________________________________ 174n, 176n, 177n Cotter, Arundel: The Authentic Hiswry of tM United States Steel Corporation __________________________________________________________ 115n Cotton Textile Industry ___________________________________________ 88n, 89n Cotton textile industry, see Industries and occupations. Cotton Textile Subregion: Agriculture ___________________________________________________ 83-85 Counties covered in survey, description, population ________________ 85-86 General features of_ _ _ _______________________________ ______ ____ 83-86 Digitized by Google 307 INDEX Cotton Textile Subregion-Continued. Pare Hours and wages, aee Hours and wages in indUBtry. Mill villages, description _______________________________________ _ 93-94 Mills, location of, in relation to part-time farms __________________ _ 94-96 Part-time farmers: Economic atatll8 of, and of full-time farmers ________________ 110-111 Typeof,in_______________________________________________ 94 Counties in industrial subregions, list of, by States ___________________ 293-295 Counties surveyed: Carroll County, Georgia, Cotton Textile Subregion________________ 85-86 Charleston County, South Carolina, Atlantic Coast Subregion _____ 141-142 Coffee County, Georgia, Naval Stores Subregion ________________ 197-199 Greenville County, South Carolina, Cotton Textile Subregion ______ 85-86 Jefferson County, Alabama, Coal and Iron Subregion ____________ 113-116 Method of selection oL ______________________________________ 281, 283 Representativeness of ________________________________________ 283-285 Sumter County, South Carolina, Lumber Subregion ______________ 169-172 Cropland, acres of_ __________________________________________ 8--9, 206,246 Curran, C. E. and Behre: National Pulp and Paper Requirement, in Relation to Forut Comervation____________________________________ 177n Dairy products (see alao Production): Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 152 Coal and Iron Subregion _____________________________________ 127-128 Cotton Textile Subregion _______________________________________ 98-99 Lumber Subregion_____________________________________________ 181 Naval Stores Subregion ______________________________________ 208--209 Davidson', Textile Blue Book, 1994-- ____ ___ __________ __ ____ ______ ____ 86n Davis, I. G. and Salter: Part-Time Farming in Connecticut_ ________ xvn, xvun Debts, see Indebtedness. Directory of the Iron and Steel Works of the United State, and Canada______ 118n Dwellings, see Housing. Earnings in industry: Atlantic Coast Subregion: Heads and other members of households _____________________ 162-163 Heads of households _______________________________ 154--155, 159-161 Coal and Iron Subregion: Heads and other members of households _____________________ 133-134 Heads of households _______________________________________ 131-133 Cotton Textile Subregion: Heads and other members of households ______________________ 104--105 Heads of households_ ________ _______________ ___ __ __________ 103-104 Heads and other members, all subregions _________________________ 44--45 Lumber Subregion: Heads of households _______________________________________ 185-188 Wage earnings, index of______________________________________ 175 Naval Stores Subregion: Heads of households _______________________________________ 212-213 Wage earnings, index of______________________________________ 214 Part-time farmers _____________________________________________ 39--45 Eastern Cotton Belt: Basic homogeneity of subregions in __________________________ xxn-xxm Comparative extent of part-time farming in _____________________ xx-xxn Digitized by Google 308 INDEX Ea.stern Cotton Belt-Continued. Division of, into subregions _________________________________ xxu1-xxv Rea.sons for selection of, for study ___________________ ~ _ _ __ ___ _ __ _ xx Education: Children and heads of households: Atlantic Coast Subregion _________________________________ 166-167 Coal and Iron Subregion____________________________________ 138 Cotton Textile Subregion _________________________________ 108-109 Lumber Subregion_______________________________________ 193-194 Na.val Stores Subregion____________________________________ 216 Grades completed by heads of households _____________________ 61--62, 276 Retardation___________________________________________________ 64 School attendance _____________________________________________ 62-63 School attendance and employment of youth _____________________ 65,277 Edwards, Alba M.: "A Social-Economic Grouping of the Gainful Workers of the United States"----------------------------------- 3711, 28611, 292n Eldredge, I. F., Spillers, and Kahler: The Expansion of the Pulp and Paper Industry in the South_____________________________________________ 177n Electric lights, see Housing. "Employment in Relation to Mechanization in the Bituminous Coal Industry"_______________________________________________________ 120n Employment, off-the-fa.rm (see also Industries and occupations; Jobs): Distance to place oL _______________________________________ 35--37, 259 Earnings, see Earnings in industry. Heads, wives, and young people _________________________________ 42--45 In lumber and woodworking industries _________________________ 174-178 Members in addition to the head ____________________________ 42-45, 266 Number of days in 1934 ____________________________________ 40-42, 264 Atlantic Coast Subregion _________________________________ 160-161 Coal and Iron Subregion___________________________________ 133 Cotton Textile Subregion _________________________________ 103-104 Lumber Subregion ___________________________________ 185--186, 187 Naval Stores Subregion __________________________________ 212-213 Outlook for: Atlantic Coast Subregion __________________________________ 49,149 Coal and Iron Subregion ___________________________ 48-49, 121-122 Cotton Textile Subregion ________________________________ 48, 90--91 Lumber Subregion ____________________________________ 49, 176-178 Naval Stores Subregion _______________________________ 49, 204-205 Enterprises of part-time farmers _______________________________ 6-7, 246,250 Enumeration, method of, see Cases in survey. Expenses of pa.rt-time farmers: And ca.sh receipts: Atlantic Coast Subregion _________________________________ 153-154 Coal and Iron Subregion___________________________________ 129 Cotton Textile Subregion___________________________________ 100 Lumber Subregion_________________________________________ 182 Na.val Stores Subregion____________________________________ 210 For labor, see Labor. Relation between, and sale of products _______________________ 29-30, 257 Farm experience _________________________________________________ - _ Fa.rm production, see Production on part-time farms. Farms, pa.rt-time, see Part-time farms. Digitized by Google 3-5 INDEX 309 Field crops (see also Production): Page Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 152 Coal and Iron Subregion_______________________________________ 127 Cotton Textile.Subregion _______________________________________ 98-99 LumberSubregion ___________________________________________ 181-182 Naval Stores Subregion ______________________________________ 209--210 Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930 ________________ xvm, xxn, xxm, 9n 84n, 115n, 116n, 143n, 147n, 148n, 170n, 176n, 198n, 199n Frayser, Mary E.: The Li"braries of South Carolina ________________ 108n, 166n Fruits, see Canning and storing fruits and vegetables; Production. Fuel (see also Production): Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 153 Coal and Iron Subregion ______________________________________ 128-129 Cotton Textile Subregion_______________________________________ 99 Lumber Subregion ______ . ___________________ .__________________ 182 Naval Stores Subregion________________________________________ 210 Gainful workers, classification of. __ ._______________________________ 289--292 Gamble's International Naval Stores Yearbook for 1982-33 ________________ 204n Gardens (see also Production): Atlantic Coast Subregioa _____________________________________ 150-152 Coal and Iron Subregion _____________________________________ 125--127 Cotton Textile Subregion __________________ ,-- __________________ 96-98 LumberSubregion ___________________________________________ 179--180 Naval Stores Subregion ______________________________________ 206-208 Gold, N. L. and Braun: Some Facts Respecting Prices and Income in the Naval Stores Industry ______________________________________________ 204n Greenville County, South Carolina, see Cotton Textile Subregion. Hallauer, Frank J.: "Our National Timber Requirements" _____________ 174n Hartman, W. A. and Wooten: Georgia Land Use Problems______________ 84n Health, number of days incapacitated ____________________________ 60-61, 275 Heer, Clarence: Income and Wages in the South ________________________ xxxm Herring, Harriet L.: Welfare Work in MiU Villages _______________________________ xxvn, 93n Woofter, Vance, and: A Study of the Catawba Vafley _______________ xvun Hinrichs, A. F.: "Wage Rates and Weekly Earnings in the Cotton Textile Industry, 1933-34" __ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ ____ __ __ _ __ _ __ __ _ 92n Home ownership: Atlantic Coast Subregion ___ . ______ . __________________________ 165-166 Coal and Iron Subregion_____________________________________ 137-138 Cotton Textile Subregion _____________________________________ 107-108 Lumber Subregion_____________________________________________ 193 Naval Stores Subregion ______________________________________ 215--216 Part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers __________ 58-59, 274 ours and wages in industry: Atlantic Coast Subregion: Rate of pay, hourly ______________________________________ 159--161 Coal and Iron Subregion: Bituminous coal mining____________________________________ 121 Iron and steel_____________________________________________ 119 Rate of pay, hourly________________________________________ 132 Cotton Textile Subregion: Cotton textile _____________________________________________ 91-93 Rate of pay, hourly________________________________________ 104 Digitized by Google • 310 INDEX Hours and wages in industry-Continued. Lumber Subregion: Pap Lumber and woodworking ________________ -·-·--··-- ____ -· 174-175 Rate of pay, hourlY----------------------------•·-------- 186,187 Naval Stores Subregion: Rate of pay, hourly ______________________________________ 212-213 Part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers ______________ 39-42 Households: N onfarming industrial, definition___________ _____________________ XXXI Number enumerated in study------------------------------- XXXI, 287 Part-time farm, definition______________________________________ xxx Size of·-·------·····----·---·---·--------·------------·---- 2-3,244 Housing: Atlantic Coast Subregion _________________________________ ---· 163-165 Coal and Iron Subregion _____________________________________ 136-137 Condition of dwellings _________ ---·· ....... _.-·----··_ ..... 54-56, 270 Conveniences and facilities in dwellings .... _... _._ ... __ ... ___ 56-57, 271 Cotton Textile Subregion.-. ___ . ___ -·.-·--· __ ... _..... _. 93-94, 106-107 LumberSubregion.·--·····-····--····------···-·-·······-··· 191-192 Naval Stores Subregion ..... _......... _.. _.. _. ___ ...... _. __ .... 215 Persons per room._._ . _. __ . ____ . _.. _... _... ___ . __ . _. _. _.. _. 52-54, 270 Roome in dwellings, number oL ..•.•.........•. ·-··-·-·· 52-54, 267-269 Ilsley, Ralph and Trapnell: The Bituminous Coal Industry With Sun,ey of CompetingFv.el8 ••.•.•••••.•••••• -·····-·-····-···--··-·-··--···· 120n Implements and machinery: Atlantic Coast Subregion ... __ ........ _._ ... __ ....... _.. __ ...• _. 154 Coal and Iron Subregion_ •••........ _..... _.............. _..... 129 Cost of, on part-time farms·-···--·······-···············-·-··· 13,249 Cotton Textile Subregion._. __ . __ . __ .. __ .. _. __ .. _. _____ ._ ..... _. 101 LumberSubregion.·-·-·······--···-·····-···-··--·-·······--·· 183 Naval Stores Subregion ••••. -·-··-·--····- .•..... ············-· 211 Income: Changes in, 1929 and 1934 •........••.......•.•••••.• _... -· --·· _ 46 Changes in, 1929 and 1934, Coal and Iron Subregion ..••. _.•..•.• 135-136 Contribution of farm enterprise to ••• ·-····················--···· 45-46 From farm and nonfarm sources: Naval Stores Subregion __ .• _-· ............. ··- •. _••....•• 213-214 From industrial employment, ,ee Earnings in industry. From nonfarm sources: Atlantic Coast Subregion_·-··-·-···-···-······-·····-···· 162-163 Coal and Iron Subregion_._._._._. ___ ._._ .• ____ •. _.... _.. 133-134 Cotton Textile Subregion_ ........• _._._._._. ___ ._. __ .•• _. 103-105 Lumber Subregion_ .. _. ___ ._. ___ . ___ . __ ......•. _.•.. _... _ 188-190 lndebtednese of part-time farmere_··-···---··-·-···-·-···--·-·-· 10-11, 248 154 Atlantic Coast Subregion ___ •. _._ ... __ .• _____ ._._ .... ·- ..... __ ._ Cotton Textile Subregion .•.... -· .... _....... _.....• _•• _.• __ .. 100--101 Lumber Subregion .... __ . ____ .... _._ .•... _._._ .•.•.. _... _.... _. 183 Naval Stores Subregion __ ._ •.... _._._ ...... _.... _._-·.......... :.111 Indices used in selecting sample counties: Atlantic Coast Subregion ••••.•........... ·-···········-·--····· 284 Coal and Iron Subregion •••• _.·- __ ....... _•... _._ ........ --·_.. 284 Cotton Textile Subregion .... ·-····-----·-········--·-·········· 283 LumberSubregion ... ·-·--···-······--····-·-··-····-···-·-···· 285 Naval Stores Subregion........................................ 285 Digitized by Google IHDEX 311 Industrial workers: Paee Atlantic Coast Subregion_____________________________________ 155-159 Coal and Iron Subregion_____________________________________ 130-131 Cotton Textile Subregion------------------------------------ J.02-103 Definition ____________________________________________ xxx-xxxx, 287 LumberSubregion ___________________________________________ 184-185 Naval Stores Subregion________________________________________ 212 Industries and occupations: Atlantic Cos st Subregion_____________________________________ 157-159 Bituminous coal mining, Coal and Iron Subregion: Description_______________________________________________ 120 N. R. A., effect of, see N. R. A. Seasonal variation in employment____________________________ 121 Charleston County, South Carolina ____________________________ 141-149 Coal and Iron Subregion ______________________________ 117-122, 130-131 Cotton textile, Cotton Textile Subregion: Competing materials ______________________________________ _ 89 Exports and imports ______________________________________ _ 89-90 Growth and distribution in South ___________________________ _ 86-87 Laborin _________________________________________________ _ 91 N. R. A., effect of, see N. R. A. National problems of _______________________________________ 87-89 Seasonal variation in employment___________________________ 93 Wage earners, 1921-1933_ __ __ ____ ___ ____ _____________ ___ ___ 88 Cotton Textile Subregion_____________________________________ 102-103 Gainful workers, classification of_ ______________________________ 289-292 Gainfully occupied persons, 1930: Atlantic Coast Subregion_________________________________ 146-149 Coal and Iron Subregion __________________________________ 115-116 Cotton Textile Subregion___________________________________ 84 Lumber Subregion and Sumter County_______________________ 170 Naval Stores Subregion and Coffee County___________________ 199 Iron and steel, Coal and Iron Subregion: Description_______________________________________________ 117 Hours and wages, see Hours and wages in industry. N. R. A., effect of, see N. R. A. Production and employment, trend of_ _____________________ 118-119 Wage earners, 1923-1933_ _____________ _______ _____ __ __ __ ___ 119 Lumber and woodworking, Lumber Subregion: Description ______________________________________________ _ 173 Employment in __________________________________________ _ Labor,typeof ___________________________________________ _ 174 176 N. R. A., effect of, aee N. R. A. Seasonal variation ______________________________ - _____ - __ 175-176 Manufacturing and allied, Charleston County ___________________ 147-149 Naval stores, Naval Stores Subregion: 202 Camps, types of___________________________________________ Competing materials_______________________________________ 203 Description_______________________________________________ 200 Location of_______________________________________________ 200 Problems of _____________________________________________ 203-204 Producers, types of, and the labor force______________________ 202 Production, method of_ __________________________________ 200-202 Production trend ________________________________________ 202-203 Digitized by Google 311 INDEX Industries and occupationa--Continued. Pace Part-time farmers and nonfarming industrial workers ______ 37-39, 260-263 Service industries, Charleston County ____________ ______________ 146-147 Shifts in, since 1929 ______________________________ _____ 39, 260-261, 263 Sources of data on ___________________________ ________________ 288-289 Iron and steel industry, see Industries and occupations. Jefferson County, Alabama, see Coal and Iron Subregion. Jeneen, W. C. and Others: An Economic Study of Sumter Counly Agriculture ________________________________________________________ _ 171n Jobs (see also Employment; Industries and occupations) : Number held _________________________________________________ _ 264 Types of ____________________________________________________ _ 37-39 Journal of Trade, The _____________________________________________ _ 203n Kahler, M . S., Eldredge, and Spillers: The Expan11ion of the Pulp and Paper Industry in the South _________________________ __________________ _ 177n Labor: Expenses for hiring, on part-time farms __________________________ 30-31 Requirements of part-time farms: Hours worked per day ________________________ ____________ _ 31-34 Persons working ___ _______________________________________ 33-258 Related to hours in industry: Atlantic Coast Subregion______________ ____ _____________ 155 Coal and Iron Subregion _____________________ ________ 129-130 Cotton Textile Subregion _____________________________ 101-102 Lumber Subregion ___________________________________ 183-184 Naval Stores Subregion ___________ ___ ________________ 211-212 Leven, Maurice; Moulton; and Warburton: America's Power to Consume_ xxun Library facilities: Availability and use of_ _______________________ • ____ . ___________ 61>--66 Atlantic Coast Subregion _______________ __ _______________ 166-167 Coal and Iron Subregion___________________________________ 138 Cotton Textile Subregion __ . __ . __ . ___ . ________ . ___________ 108-109 Lumber Subregion ____ ________ _____________ ______________ 193-194 Livestock on part-time fanns: Number, 1929 and 1934 ___ __. __ . _____________ _. _. _______ ___ ____ 6-7 Number of, and size of garden _____ _________ ______ ______________ 13-14 Living conditions (see also Housing) ________ .. _._._._. ____ . ________ . __ 51-57 Atlantic Coast Subregion. _______________ . ___________________ . 163-166 Coal and Iron Subregion _____________ .. _._ .... _____ . _________ 136-138 Cotton Textile Subregion _________________ _____ __._. _____ . ____ 105-108 Lumber Subregion. _______________ ... _.. . ..... __ .__________ __ 190-193 Na val Stores Subregion._ . __ • ________________ .... ____________ 214-216 Lumber and woodworking industries, see Industries and occupations. Lumber consumption in the United States______________ ______________ 174 Lumber Subregion: Area covered and cases enumerated ____________________________ 172-173 Description_ - - - - - - - - - - -______________________________________ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - XXVIII-XXIX Industry _____________ 171-172 Part-time farmers, types of, in__________________________________ 178 Sumter County, South Carolina ___________ ____ _______ _________ 169-172 Agricultural features ____________________ . ______ ----_---- 170-171n Population______________________ __________________________ 170 Digitized by Google 313 Machinery, see Implements and machinery. Pap Methodological note_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ ___ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ ___ _ __ _ 281-292 Mims, Edwin: The Advancing South_________________________________ 123n Mineral Re&ourcu of Ui6 United Statu, 1990__ _________________________ 120n Mineral, Yearbook--------------------------------------- 117n, 119n, 120n Morison, F. L. and Sitterley: Rural Homu and Non-agricu.Uural Workers, A Survey of Their Agricultural Activities ____________________________ xvun Moulton, Harold G.; Leven; and Warburton: America's Power to Consut11e_ XXIID N. R. A. Code for the Bituminoua Coal lndmtry_ _ _ ____ ___ _ ________ ____ N. R. A. Code for the Cotton Te:rtile Industry_________________________ N. R. A. Code for the Iron and Steel Industry _________________ -------N. R. A., effect of, on: 121n 88n 119n Bituminous coal mining________________________________________ Cotton textile industry _____________________________________ 87-89, Iron and steel industry____ _ __ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ Lumberindustry______________________________________________ Naval Stores Handbook, A___________________________________________ 121 102 119 175 204n Naval stores industry, see Industries and occupations. NaMl Stores Review, The ________ .___________________________________ 203n Naval Stores Subregion: Coffee County, Georgia ______________________________________ 197-199 Agricultural features ____________________ - ________________ 198--199 Population________________________________________________ 198 Description _______________________________________________ XXIX-XXX Part-time farmers, types of, in ________________________________ 205-206 Negroes: Age of heads of households___________________________________ 1-2, 243 Buildings, number on part-time farms____________________________ 249 Cropland, acres of____ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ __ __ __ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ 8, 246 Earnings from industrial employment____________________________ 265 Earnings, heads and other members ______________________________ 44--45 Education, see Education. Employment, see Employment, off-the-farm; Industries and occupations; Jobs. Expenses on part-time farms, relation between, and sale of products_ 29-30, 257 Farm experience _____________________________________________ 3-5,245 Gardens, see Gardens; Production. Health, number of days incapacitated ________________________ 60-61, 275 Home ownership______________________________________________ 58--59 Atlantic Coast Subregion___________________________________ 154 Coal and Iron Subregion___________________________________ 129 Lumber Subregion_________________________________________ 193 Households: Number of, enumerated in study _________________________ XXXI, 287 Size of _________________________________________________ 2-3,244 Housing: Atlantic Coast Subregion _________________________________ 164-165 Coal and Iron Subregion___________________________________ 137 Condition of dwellings_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ 52-56, 270 Conveniences and facilities in dwellings _______________________ 56-57 Lumber Subregion __________________________ ----___________ 192 150061°-37--28 Digitized by Google 31-4 INDEX N egroee--Continued. Housing-Continued. P... Number of rooms in dwellings _______________________ 52-53, 267-269 Persons per room__________________________________ 53-54, 269-270 Implements and machinery ______________________________ . ___ ___ 249 Income changes, 1929 and 1934_________________________________ 46 IndebtedneBB ______________________________________________ 10-11, 248 Industry (see also Employment; Industries and occupations; Jobs) ___ 37, 260 Industry shif~ since 1929 ______________________________ 39, 260-261, 263 Jobs, off-the-farm, number held--------------------------------- 264 Labor requirements on part-time farms: Expenses for hiring _______________________________________ _ 258 Hours worked per day ____________________________________ _ 32-33 Persons working, other than head __________________________ _ 258 Library facilities, availability and use of_ ________________________ _ 65-66 Atlantic Coast Subregion __________________________________ _ 167 Coal and Iron Subregion __________________________________ _ 138 Livestock: Number, 1929 and 1934____________________________________ 246 Number of, and size of garden_ _ __ _______________ __ _____ 13, 15, 250 262 Occupations (see also Industries and occupations)__________________ Part-time farming, years engaged in_ _ _ _ ___ _____ _________________ 245 Part-time farms: Type and size of_ ________________________________________ 7-9, 246 Value of_ _____________________________________________ 10-12, 247 Production (see also Production): For sale, and cash receipts_______ _______________________ 29-30, 257 Types of, for home use _________________________________ 14-15, 250 Relief, public and private, percent that received, and number of years of _____________________________________________________ 47-48, 267 Residence: Changes in, since October 1929 _________________________ 58, 272-273 Location of _______________________________________________ 51-52 Social organizations, availability of and participation in ____ 66-68, 278-280 Atlantic Coast Subregion___________________________________ 167 Coal and Iron Subregion___________________________________ 139 Lumber Subregion_________________________________________ 194 Telephones, radios, automobiles, number having __________________ 57,271 Tenure: By subregion ___________________________________________ 9-10, 247 Residence changes ____________________________________ 58, 272-273 Status, 1929 and 1934 _______________________ . ___________ _ 59, 274 Non commercial part-time farmers, definition___ ________ ____ ___________ xxx Nonfarming industrial households, see Age of heads of households; Earnings in industry; Education; Employment; Farm experience; Health; Home ownership; Housing; Income; Industrial workers; Industries and occupations; Occupations; Relief; Residence; Size of households; Social organizations; Tenure. Objectives of study____________________________ ___ _______________ __ xix Occupations (see also Industries and occupations) __________________ 37-39, 262 Odum, Howard W.: Southern Regions of the United States ____________ xxnn, 75n Organizations, social, see Social organizations. Ownership, see Home ownership; Tenure. Digitized by Google INDEX 315 Page Pace, E. S. and Smith: Soil Survey of Jefferson County, Alabama ________ 123n Part-time farmers (see also Part-time farming; Part-time farms): Case studies, see Case studies. Definition __ -----------------_---- ________ --- ___ -- XXX-XXXI, 287-288 In selected States_______________________ ___ ______ _____________ XXI Number enumerated in study ________________________________ xxxI, 287 Part-time farming (see also Part-time farmers; Part-time farms): Advantages of, see Conclusions of study. Development oL ________________________ ________ ____________ xv-XVI Extent of, in United States_________________________________ XVI-XVIII Part-time farms (see also Production): Location of___________________________________________________ 7 Location of, in relation to industry: Coal and Iron Subregion _________________________________ 123-125 Cotton Textile Subregion___________________________________ 94-96 Naval Stores Subregion____________________________________ 205 Size, acres of cropland_________ ___________________________ ______ 8-9 Size of operations, changes in, 1929---1934, Cotton Textile Subregion_ 99---100 Type ________________________________________________________ 7-9, 246 Value and tenure ___________________________________________ 9---12, 247 Atlantic Coast Subregion _________________________________ 154-155 Coal and Iron Subregion___________________________________ 129 Cotton Textile Subregion ___________________________ 100-101, 108 Lumber Subregion__________________________________________ 183 Naval Stores Subregion __________________________________ 210-211 Pork (see also Production): Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 153 Coal and Iron Subregion_______________________________________ 128 Cotton Textile Subregion_______________________________________ 99 Lumber Subregion_____________________________________________ 181 Na val Stores Subregion__ _ _________________ _________________ ___ 209 Ports of Charleston, S. C., and Wilmington, N. C., The__________________ 146n Poultry and poultry products (see also Production): Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 153 Coal and Iron Subregion_______________________________________ 128 Cotton Textile Subregion _______________________ ~-______________ 99 LumberSubregion_____________________________________________ 181 Naval Stores Subregion________________________________________ 209 Production: And employment trend, iron and steel industry, see Industries and occupations. Method of, in naval stores industry, see Industries and occupations. On part-time farms: Atlantic Coast Subregion _________________________________ 150-153 Canning and storing fruits and vegetables ____________ 19---21, 252-253 Coal and Iron Subregion _________________________________ 125-129 Cotton Textile Subregion___________________________________ 96-99 Dairy products ____________________________________ 23-25, 254-255 Field crops ___________________________________________ 27-28,256 Fish_____________________________________________________ 153 Food, for home use ____________________________________ 14-15, 250 Fruits ________________________________________________ 17-19, 252 Digitized by Google 316 INDEX Produotion--Continued. On part-time farms-Continued. Page Fuel_____________________________________________________ 29 Gardens, size of_ ______________________________________ 6,246,250 Livestock ___________________________________________ 6-7, 246, 250 LumberSubregion _______________________________________ 179-182 Naval Stores Subregion __________________________________ 206-210 Pork _______________________________________________ .. _ 25-27, 255 Poultry and poultry products _______________________ 21-23, 253-254 Vegetables, number of months consumed_________________ 15-18, 251 Produ,ctivity of Labor in Merchant Blast Furnaces______________________ 118n Products, sale of, see Sale of products. Radios, see Communication and transportation facilities. Real Property Inventory, 1994- _ _ ___ ______ ___ ___ ________ ________ _____ 53n Reasons for part-time farming study ______________________________ xvm-xx Relief, public and private: Atlantic Coast Subregion_______________________________________ 168 Coal and Iron Subregion_ _ _ ____________________________________ 139 Cotton Textile Subregion_______________________________________ 111 LumberSubregion_____________________________________________ 195 Naval Stores Subregion ______________________________________ 216-217 Percent that received, and number of yeanJ of_ ________________ 47-48, 267 Residence: Changes in, since October 1929 _____________________________ 58, 272-273 Definition_ _ _____________________________ _______ ______________ 52n Location of ___________________________________________________ 51-52 Rozman, David: Paf'i-Time Farming in Massachusetts _____________ xvn, xvim Running water, see Housing. Sale of products, cash receipts____ ____ ___________________________ 29-30, 257 Salter, L.A., Jr. and Davis: Part-Time Farmi71{1 in Connecticut_ ____ xvn, X'\'llll Sample, size of_____ ____________________________________ ________ ___ 287 Schedules, for enumeration of sample ______________________________ 297-301 School attendance, see Education. Service industries in Charleston County, South Carolina, 11ee Atlantic Coast Subregion. Sitterley, J. H. and Morison: Rural Home11 and Non-agricultural Worker11, A Survey of Their Agricultural Activities ____________________________ xv1m Size of households_ ______________________________________________ 2 -3, 244 Size of part-time farms, see Cropland. Smith, H. C. and Pace: Soil Survey of J ejferson County, Alabama________ 123n Social organizations: Availability of and participation in ______________________ 66-68, 278-280 Atlantic Coast Subregion_________________________________ 167 Coal and Iron Subregion _________________________________ 138-139 Cotton Textile Subregion _________________________________ 109-110 Lumber Subregion_______________________________________ 194-195 Naval Stores Subregion____________________________________ 216 Sources of information__ ______________ __________ ________ ___________ XIX Spillers, A. R., Eldredge, and Kahler: The Expansion of the Pulp and Paper Industry in the South_______________________________________ 177n Statistics on Gum Naval Stores Production_____________________________ 205n Digitized by Google INDEX 317 Subregions: Pace Delimitation of ___________________________________________ xxm-xxJV Description: Atlantic Coast _____________________________________ xxv11-xxvm Coal and Iron ______________ ......................... ·-- ___ xxvn Cotton Textile--·------·---·--·····-···-··-···-·------·--- xxv Lumber----······-·-·-·---·····-----···-···-··----- XXVJIJ-XXIX NavalStores---·-··---······-··-···-····-··---·-·----· xxu-xxx Division of Eastern Cotton Belt into __ ··- ____ . __ ._ .. _.. __ .. ·- xxm-:x:xx Of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina ___ ... _...... _.. _... ____ 282 Sumter County, South Carolina, aee Lumber Subregion. Telephones, aee Communication and transportation facilities. Tenure: Of part-time farmers ________ . ___ . ___ . ______ . __ . __ . ______ . ___ 9-10, 247 Residence changes by _____ .. _... _..... ____ ... _._. ______ 57-58, 272-273 Statue, in 1929 and 1934, of part-time farmers. __ .... _....... ____ 59, 274 Transportation facilities, aee Communication and transportation facilities. Trapnell, W. C. and Ilsley: The Bituminous Coal lnduatry With Survey of CompetingFuel, _________________________________________________ 120n United State& Censua of Agriculture ____ • xvm, 116n, 141n, 171n, 172n, 197n, 198n United States Cemua of Manufacture,_ 88n, 90n, 91n, 116n, 119n, 172n, 174n, 214n 90n United States Tariff Commission ____ .. ________ .. _.__________________ Value of part-time farms, aee Part-time farms. Vance, Rupert B., Woofter, and Herring: A Study of the Catawba Valley!._ xvun Vegetables, aee Production. Wage Rate, and Weekly Earnings in the Cotton Goods Industry From July 193!1 to August 1934 ___ . ___ •.. _... __ ....• __ .• _. _• _. _. _..• _____ •• _ 88n Wage rates, index of, see Earnings in industry. Wages and hours, see Hours and wages. Wages and Hour& of Labor in Bituminous Coal Mining, 1933 ____________ 121n Wage, and Hours of Labor in Cotton-Goods Manufacturing, 1910 to 1928_ 91n, 92n Wages and Hours of Labor in Metalliferous Mines, 1924 and 1931-_. _____ 119n Wages and Hours of Labor in the Iron and Steel Industry, 1931_ __ ._______ 119n Wages and Hours of Labor in the Lumber Industry in the United States, 193:8_ 175n Warburton, Clark; Leven; and Moulton: America's Power to Consume ______ xxnn White, Langdon: "The Iron and Steel Industry of the Birmingham, Alabama, District"-·-·--· .... ·---·.-· .... -·-·•·-·.··-· ... _______ 117n Wood, Percy 0. and Others: Soil Survey of Jeff Davis County, Georgia______ 206n Woofter, T. J., Jr., Herring, and Vance: A Study of the Catawba Valley ______ xvnn Wooten, H. H. and Hartman: Georgia Land Use Problems. ____ ·----·----84n Workers on Relief in the United States in March 1935, a Census of Usual Occupations ______ ._··---·-----------·--··--··---·-----------·-·- 168n Yearbook of Agriculture .•... ·-·····--···----·-·--- 24n, 84n, 125n, 142n, 171n Years engaged in part-time farming .. _.... __ .... _________ .. __ ... ___ 5-6, 245 0 Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Digitized by Google