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
@FedFRASER