The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
A?R R - W O R K S P R O G R E S S J.. D M IN I S T R J.. T I O N Harry L. Hopkins. J..dministrator Corrington Gill J..ssistant J..dministrator - REJ..SOl�S FOR c1osr1;G RURJ..L R..�LIEFC.tSES MJ,"R..C . H-JUIE J..lf.9 JULY-OCTOBER, 1935 Digitized by NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 Howard B. Myers, Director Social Research Division R E SEJ..RCH BULLETIN March 30, 1936 1936 H -7 Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 INTRODUCTION This bulletin analyzes the reasons for closing relief cases in nine agricultural areas during the period March through June 1935 by residence and area, and during the period July through October 1935 by residen~e. It is one of a series of bulletins concerned with various aspects of the rural relief situation. The basis is data collected periodically by the Survey of Current Changes in the Rural Relief Population from the relief records of 138 sample counties. These counties are · so distributed as to be representative of nine principal farming areas in the United States. In these counties, 40,724 rural relief cases were closed during the period March through June 1935 and 36,750 rural relief cases were closed during the period July through October 1935. The sample counties ~ontained 8.7 percent 0f all rural cases on:relief in the nine areas in February and 8.3 percent of all rural cases on relief in the same areas in June. The areas in turn contained more than half of all rural relief cases in the United States in February and June. The term rural as used here applies to the open country and to villages of fr om 50 to 2,500 inhabitants. - - - - Prepared -- ------- - by Daniel D. Droba under the supervision of T. J. Woofter, Jr. Coordinator of Rural Research ------- -------- Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 .b.i:mroxima tely l ,81 ~) , 000 rurt1 l relief cases were closed i n the United States during the eight months from Ma.rch 1 thr ow,;h October 31, 1935, exclusive of t he tra~sfers from relief to the Rural Rehabilitation Program of the F.E.R.~., a nd later to the Resettlement h dmini stration, which t ook place dv.ring that period. The latter a~ounted to about 2~0 ,000 aiditional cases s o that i n all some 2,053,000 s eparations from the rural r elief rolls to ok . place. The net reduction in cases on t r1e rolls viras only 878 , 000 howeve r, since there were 1,1 75 ,000 accessions of new and reop ened cases during t he ~e ri od . In the sa mpl e of closings s ecur ed in the Su rvey of Current Change s in the Rur al Relief ·population the r 0asons for closing during the e i ght months we re distribut ed a.s f ollows: Reason Percent }~arch- J u ly- Sep tJune hU~ . Oct . 100 . 0 100 . 0 100 . 0 Total Hous ehold becF..me s el f -suppo rti ~g Hous t::ho l d found oth er supl'.)o rt hC1..ministrative p oli cy Cli ent moved or failed to r epo rt~/ Works Program c.c.c. Othe r Miscellaneous 57. 4 52.l 38 .9 1 3.l 7.8 ,.~ . 7 1 2 .6 14.1 9.5 11,3 1.7 3 .9 9.3 7.6 8 .2 6.6 1. -3 8.5 34 .2 8 .6 25.6 5 .1 §} For r eli ef ord e r or for work. Economi c factors, such a s p l anting and crop s e2 son, incr e~s e i n i::-:.du s tr ial C!'Op prices, increas ed employment, etc ., were the most important i nf luenc e s effect i ng cl osing s in th~ first period , but from July to October e mergency governmental agenci e s, chi efly the Works Progrn.m, were of increasing import ance . The Works Progr;un bec'."..me the most effective si ngle sovernmental fact or du :::- i n 6 Sr:rr> t emb or and. Octobe r. The ratio of cas e s closed, owing to the fact that they obtai ~ed emplo?ment, i nc r eased from 37 pe rc ent i n July-August to 60 p ercent in SepThi s change was t embe r-Octobe r. Tiho lly due to an i nc rease i n t he proportio~ of cas e s employed under the TTorks Progra m from a pe rcent in July-August to 34 percent in Sep tembe r -October. In both ~eriods p roportionat ely ~ore vill~ge than ouen c ount ry cases wer e clos ed b ecause th ey had obt a i ned pr~vate emploJ'lT1ent. In the p e ri od July-Oct ob er, o large r pro~o rtio n of o~en country cases than of v illage cases wer e closed be ca.us e of C.C.C. employment, while a large r proportion of vill age cas e s found employment in othe r Works Progra m p roj ec ts. In both pe riods, as would b e expecte d, closing s due to marketing of crops,increase i n crop prices or n.5 v:1::'.ce s by the l anllord s, we re conc en 't; rated in the open cou..'YJ.t ry. Da tA. show i ng rna1·ked area d i f f erence s erA available :::'o r the pe rio d the se Harch throug~ J une . Du ring f our months the l'.)rouo rtion of cases cl os ed becaus e they beca,ne s elf-su~po rti ng wa s h i ghe st i n the Lake Stat e s Cut-Ove r, E~.y and Dairy, and Almos t nalf of the Ranchi ng a r eo.s. cl osed ca s e s in the s e areas were able to ob t ain pr ivate empl o]!'.lent. l1h e :9 ror,ortion employed in a.gricult u r e was 1n,<;r:e st in the t wo Cott on Tl:e ratio for manufc;.ctu.ring areas. and. mAchan ica l industries was highe st in the Hay and Dairy a r ea , and ior trar.sp ort a tion and COL1l1I'J.nication ind.ustries in the Win t er W'ne:, t a r ea . Employment in mi r. i ng was higtly conc entra ted i n the Appal achi an-Ozark a r eH and empl oymen t in forestry and fishing was still more h ighly cJncentra~d in t~e Lake Stat e s CutOver a r ea. Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 -1- RFASONS FOR CLOSING RURAL RELIEF CASES WARCE-JUNE AND JULY-OCTOBER, 1935 Approximately 1,813,000 rural relief cases were closed throu 6 hou t the United States, durin g the ei ght months from March 1 to October 31, 1935, exclusive of the transfers to the Rural Rehabilitation Program of the F.E.R.A., and later to the Resettlement Administ~ation, which accounted for an au.di tional 240 ,000 cases. During this period, however, there were approximately 1,175,000 accessions, resulting in a net decrease in the rural relief load of 878,000 cases as indicated in Table Of the 1,213,000 general closings 900,000 were closed in the first four months. Of the 913,000 cases closed during July-October, 528,000 were closei in July-August, and 385, 000 in Septe~ber-October. The slackenin~ rrte of separations owing to the declining opportunity to find priva<~e em,:,loyment, and to market crops ~s the winter period approaches, was more than compensated for by the increasing nu.inber of persons assigned to the works Program (see Table E). A. Tg,ble A. Net Change in Ru ra.l Relief Loa.d, March 1 to Octob er 31 1935 ! Closing s Transf er s t~ Total !Tet General rtehabilita- ~ccessions Ch:i.nge I tion and Resettlemen ! 1,175,000 - 878,000 i2,053,000 1,813,000 240,000 l Total March-June July-August Septernber-Octob er Table?. 1,130,000 536 ,000 387,000 900,000 528,000 385 ,000 230,000 8,000 2,000 I 655,000 271,000 249,000 -475,000 -265,000 -138 000 Reasons for Closing Rural Relief Cases, March l to October 31 1935 I'.!:.0.r ch,Tune Reason Total Household became self- sllpporting Hou sehold fou nd other su.ppo rt Admi nistra tive policy Client moved or f a iled to report§) Works Pro gram C. C .C. Other Miscellaneous ~/ J 100.0 57.4 13 .1 12 . 6 11. 3 1. 7 - 3,9 Percent JulySeptemberOctober Au~st 100.0 52 .l 7. 8 14 .1 9 .3 8.2 6. 6 1. 6 8 .5 100.0 38 .9 4.7 9.5 7. 6 34.2 8 .6 25. 6 5,1 For relief order or for work. Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY I 6671 -2- The rate of separ8tions for s~1fsuppc rtlng fPmilies fell fr0m 57 percent to 39 p ~rce~t, a~d for fBmilies securing SUH ort other thon relief,from 13 percent to 5 percent. Administr8tive closin 0 s £na closings due to moving or f ailurc> t0 repo:-t f or a relief order or f or work declined less markedly. Works Program closings, accounting for only 8 percent Jf the July-August closingf , accounted for one third of the closings in September-October. I. March-June Closings The forces operatin~ to produ ce the great volume of separations from March through June were largely of Pla!lting and an economic neture. crop season, increase in crop prices, increased opp ortunities in rural industries, and similar factors, we.re found to be the most impo rt8nt inagencies Governmen tal fluence3, perticulerother than t he F .E. R.A., ly t he A.A.A., had an impo rtant but l a rgely indirec t effect on relief turnover, while the revie w of cases which took pl e ce durin g thet period, and wh ich resulted in the closing out of the cases of thos e who were f ound to be no longer eli g ible for relief and in the transfer of t hos e loc2i considered unemplo yo ble to di influence secondary a genc.ies were (Table 1), Reasons f or Cl osing Cases ClassiFift 7-s even pe rcent fied b y Area . of the closings were due to the cases becoming s elf-supp orting. The propo rti on of cases closGd fo r this reason was high0s t in t he Hay end Dairy, the La~e State s Cu t-ov~r, and the Ranching ar8as. This can be ex- l/ The Rural Rehabilitat ion Progr2m had taken over many rural r cl i 0f case s, but for th0 purposes of t his study suc h cas e s were not inclu ded in the detailed tabl e s. From Feb~iary to June 1935 the numbe r of Rurel Rehabilitati on ccses under care ir.creas e d from 135,000 to 364,000. plained mainlv by the fact that almost hr lf of the closed cases in these t1rree are2s (49, 47, and 49 percent, respectively) were able to secure private employment. The propo rti~ns securing such employment were lowest in the Viestern Cotton and the Wheat areas, due largely to the severe effects cf the drought during recent years. Three fourths (74 percent) of the cases securing employment were engaged in agriculture, manufacturing and mechanic al industries, and in transportation and communication indu stri e s. Seven p e rcent cf the c~ses were engaged in extrac ting minerals, and the remai n ing 19 percent in domestic and personal se rvice, trade, forestry and fishing, public r,nd professional servi ce, and in unknown industries (Table II). Variations fr om area to area in the prop crtions secu ring employment in the different industries were The p ercent employed in striking. agriculture was highe st in the t wo Cotton areas. In th~ We stern Cotton area 72 percent of the cases, or about t wice the average number, were emplr"yed in agric1.1l ture, while in the Eastern Cotton area 61 percent of the cases found wo rk on farms. The proportion ~as lowest in the namely, least agricultural areas, the Lake States Cut-Over, the Appalachian-Ozark , and the Hay and Dairy areas. Employment in manufacturi.:1g and for closed mechanical inm.1stries cases was most important in the Hay ana Dairy area where 33 out of every 100 closed cases were employed mainly in bu ilding and co nstruction and iron, steel, machi ~1e ry, and vehicle are a i ndustries. The Wi nt er Wheat con tai ned t he highest proportion of hous eho l ds ( 3 9 r ,e rceYJ. t) employed in the transpo rtati on and cornmu.nication indus tries, chiefly in street and road construction a nd maintenance. This area als o con tained the highest Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY -3- proportion of cases (9 nercent) in trade and in domestic and personal service (8 pe rcent). Em9loyment in m1n1ng v,as highly conce11trated in the Appalachian-Ozark area, F.ere the number of cases sec~ring jobs in the mines equaled 31 ~e rcent of the tntal. Cases that secured employment in forestry and fishing were still more highly concentrated in the Lake States Cut-Over area where 29 out of every 100 cases found such jobs. Practir,ally all cases closed as a result of obtaining advances from the landlora during the planting season were found in the Cotton areas. The marketing o: crops a~d increased crop ~rices were most significant in closing cases in the Hay and Dairy ani Sp ring W'neat areas. The Western Cotton area containP-d the highest proportion (15 percent) of cases closed because they received benefi ts from government agencies in the form of ~gricultural Adjustmen t ~dmir, i stra t ion payme;nts t Farm Credi t ~dministration loans,and advances from the Commodity Credit Corporat ion. This was due t o the fact that the highest p roportion of closed cas es whose usual occupation was in a:]icul t u r e resided in that area. In the least agricultural areas. clcsings we re only very slightly affected by the above agencies ( Table 1). Thirteen percent of all closed c~ses were no longer eligible for r6li ef, according to state and local administrative policies. Thes e cases were closed becc,use they r efused Rural Rehr,b ilita ti on , r e fused to work, were found physically handicapped, because private employment was thought to be available for them or for other reasons of like nature. 8671 The proportions of closings cai.J.sed by loss of eligibility for relief were high e st in the Winter Wh eat area and in the two Cotton areas,due to tne fact that most of the states in these areas had issued orders to re-examine all r e lief cases in order to determin e which ones could be referr ed t o the Rural Rehabilitation Program and then closed. The largest percentage of c~ses closed because clients moved or failed to report for work or for a reli ef order was founa in the Spring Wheat area. Reaso~s for Closing Cases Classified b Residence. Prono rtionately more village 6~ ue rcent) than open c ountry cases ( E5 pe rcent)wer e taken off r eli ef rolls because they became self-supno rting (Table III). Hous ehol C:.s s ecur ing privat e err.ployment ·vere sig~ificantly c0ncentrated in villages. fully 51 P'? rcen t of the villat>;e rs found jobs while only 23 nercent of the open country cases were included in this gr oup . This is to be accounted for by the grea ter opportuniti e s in villages for employment in non-agricultural industries. Farm tenants and cropuers who left the relief rolls because the landlords f1-,.rnished their subsistence accounted for 13 percent of all open country closings and f or less thu~ l nercent of all village closings.sf. Nine percent of the open country closings and 1 percent of the villne;e closings were due to the marketing of crops. 2/ Practically Qll cf the s e c~nc s we r e in tne t wo Cotton areas where they acc oun t ed for 27 percent of all open country closings and 3 percent of ~11 village closings. Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 -4- Fourteen out of every 100 onen country cases ~nd 11 out of every 100 villnge cases thnt left the relief rolls did so because they received loa.~s or benefits from government agencies, were transferred to other agencies, or were given assistance by relatives and friends. JJ.most all of the cases receiving h,h,h, payments, F.C•h• loans, and advances from the Commodity Credit Corporation lived in the open country. However, more village than op en country cases were transferred to other tyPes of assistance such as county poor relief, mothers' aid,old age pensions, and private agencies. Relatives and friends assisted slightly more cases in villages than in the open country. Enrollment in the Civilian Conservation Corps accounted for about two percent of the closings of both village and open country cases. The open country contained a higher proportion of cases closed as a result of administrative ~olicy than the villages (14 percent and 9 pe rcent, res9 ectively). Failure to renort for wo rk or for a relief order and migration from the county V1 1ere of about equal importa:1ce in bn th· reside.nee e,io\1ps. Ei scell ane nus reasons such as 11 closed in error" 11 no relief work available 11 , and 11 deceased11, accounted for the same proportion of closings in each residence group. II. July-October Closings~/ ilthough private employment continued to play an important part during the July-October period in causing the great volume of separa~/ Results for July-October closed cases are based on preliminary data. tions, emergency governmental agencies bec ame equally im!-)ortr.nt in influence. During September-October the Works Program was the most important single factor effecting relief turnover. kdministrative policies of the states, loans, and pensions were sec0ndary influences2/ (Table IV). Changes from July-kugust to Se.12~ tember-October. Forty-eight pcrceht of the total number of cases closed from July through October secured employment in private organizations or under the Works Program. However, this ratio was by no means constant during the four-month period. From 37 percent in July-August it increased to 60 percent in SeptemberOctober. This change was due wholly to an increase in the proportion of cases employed under the Works Program. While the proportion of cases closed because nrivate emuloyment was obtained decreased slightly, the percentage of cases closed becmise of employment under t ~e ~ Jrks Program increased from 8 ·oer~ n,"t in July and August to a fi~1r e m0re than four times as large (34 nercent) in Sent ember and October (r;:'a'ble IV). The p roportions of cases closed for all reasons other than employment either decreased or remained constant. The ratio of closings due to atministrative policy decreased from 14 to 10 percent, the proportion of closings due to marketing of 13:} Approximately 10,000 rural re1 i ef cases were taken over by the Re settlement Administration from July through October 1935 but for the purposes of this study such cases were not included in the detailed tables. Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 -5- crops or to an increase in crop prices decreased from 14 to 4 percent. The percentage of cases clo sed because they received a.ssistP..nce from governmental ~gencies other than the E.~.A., from relatives or friends, from local agencies or through pensions decreased from 8 perc ent in July and August to 5 percent in September and. October. Rl?asor.s for Clo sir,g Cases Cla3sifi ed by Residence. Important differences exist between the closed open country and village ce.ses as to employment and marketed crops or increased crop prices. The percentage of cases obtaining ~rivate or Works Program employment was higher for the village (57 percent) than for the open country cases (42 percent). This difference was mostly evi¥nt in private employr.:ent. .As :r.1any as 37 percent of the village cases secured such employment whereas only 21 percent of the open country cases ~ere able to find such jobs. .A higher proportion of open countr:r than of villa,:;e cases found _eITJploymen tin C.C.C. camps (9 percent end 5 percei1t, respectively), while a higher pro~ortion of village than of o 8cn country cases (15 percent and 1:_~ perc ent, respectively) were employed in otb~r types of Works Program projects. A combination of all closings due to W()rks Program employr.ient does not reveal any mark ed difference, however, between the open country and. the village cases. Almost all of the closings due to marketing of crops or to an increase in crop prices were naturally found in the open country. Cases closed for the remaining reasons were about evenly distributed between the open country and the villages (Table V). Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 .,A Table I. Rural Relief Cases Closed from March 1 throup; h June 30, 1935, Classified by Reasons for Closing and by Areas (137 counties representing 9 agricultural areas).V Appala-:r--- --.----~La-ire-_,_ ____ _ Reason f or Closing ~ I ~ -,Western l/l -- ----l lO m rt ;:o ;::;· _ z~ err ;:o l/l _____________________,_1____ i I.I ~ 54.5 22. 5 27.6 0.5 3.9 I 'f Household found other support Go-;e rnmenta l assistan ce other t han E.R. A. reli ef~ Trs.ns f er to ot her agencyd/ Ai r1 from r e l ati ves and f riends 7 z 0 ~ Cotton! Belt_f-airy 6,192 ~' 042 15,798 100.0 ilOO .O j100 . 0 TI 2.2 3.0 mo l/l -, m 3· OJ z::;; eel z3 I Client moved or failed to reportf 13 .1 12.9 ! 12.7 8.1 6.1 I.~. l-1- 6.41 5.0 3-9 j 5.7 2.6 I 2,0 1 a/ Y, c/ d/ e; f/ 1,34oa./ 100 . 0 1,20G 100.0 68.0 h8.6 I 76.6 46,6 34,7 22.2 0.2 6.6 12.8 ' 10.6 19.4 1,576 100.0 lh. 7 . /' ., 1 Oe) - lI 1.8 3.4 I 1.8 I 0.2 6.1 1.8 o.8 2. 6 4.5 ,51 12.6 16,7 12. 6 5.7 13 11.3 8.1 18.2 5.1 12.9 3,9 Miscellaneous ;:o ~ I W"int er Wheat I 8.3 16 . 5 17 .4 11.4 1.6 2. 6 Administrati v-e policy.v' ----l <.0" l/l 5,090 2,358 100.0 100.0 I ~ < m i 0.7 I ;:o chi an jSpring "Ranch- States Ozark :Vn1e at ing Cut-Over 52.8 53.4j 76. 8 7>2.7 !1 27.7 . l-1-8 . 9 ·14. 9 1 - 2,31 1.7 Civilian Conservation Corps ;!;:~ 1 Household bec~me self-supporting ! 57.4 Secured private employti7nt l 31. 2 A,lvances from landlord..:::J' 9 .4 Crops markete d-Increase i n fa rm prices ii 6.3 Other reasons 10.5 '-< < m EusterJ Corn! Cotton 39 , 88L1~/ 10,280 !100.0 100 .0 Number A"l.l reasons: Percent mo z -- -----i~-:-al ---------------------1---1 z 0 0.. 5 2,l-1- 1.3 6.9 3.0 1,0 I 1.2 2.2 3.4 . 4,8 I 10.4 I 22.8 6.o 6,2 11.1 1 Data not a•rai labl e f or Pine County, Minne sota. Total closings amounted to Lp ,724, To farm tenants and croppers. A~ricultur a l Adjustment Administration payments. Farm Credit Administration loans, and Comnodity Credit Corporation advances. County poor relief, mothers' aid, old age pensions, and private agencies• Cases refusin~ rural rehabilit ation, refus i ng to work or to coowrate with relief officials, cases with no employable membe r, cas e s for whom private emp·loyment was thought to be a vai lable, etc. For reli s f order or for work. 8671 Rural Relief Cases Clos ed from March 1 through June 30, 1935, Classified by Industr i es Responsi ble for Closing and by Areas Table II. (138 Count ies Repres enting 9 Agricultural Areas) z - 0 ~ ! I Industry Re sponsible for Clo cing: ~ mo l/) -lO ---1 m rt :;;o ;:::;· C z All Indus t ries: o'< < m Number Pe rcent --- :;;o l/) ~ Total Western Cotton 12,384 100.0 2,312 100 .0 - z~ I i I Ea stern Spring Cot ton Wheat 2, 024 100. 0 328 100.0 Ranch-I ing 738 100.0 II I Hay and Dairy Corn Winter Belt 1.Vheat 2,836 1,544 100.0 100.0 1,6721 262 100.0 100.0 I II 71.8 61.0 37.1 35.5 31.3 20.8 15.7 13.0 7.5 19.4 3.3 19.9 11.5 8.7 22.7 12.1 33.1 15.9 17 .9 5.2 5.0 24.8 27.4 25.8 38.5 29.7 I 24.o I 15.2 16.5 6.8 1.2 0.5 4.8 9.5 3.3 2.3 31.0 11.1 3.2 2.2 3.0 3.6 L;_.1 3.2 s.o I 3.5 3.1 3.6 Trade 3.0 1.3 1.6 6.7 1.6 4.4 8.6 3.7 3.8 2.1 Forestry and fishing 2.6 0.1 1.8 o.6 2.4 0.2 o.o 0.5 3 •.1 29.2 Public s e rvice 1.4 o.4 1.3 5.5 6.2 1.1 2.3 0.7 o.6 2.4 Professiona l service Workers ;;,e r 64 years of a ge a 1.1 0.5 0.7 3.0 o.8 o.8 1.7 2.3 0.4 1.2 2.5 , 2.5 2.0 o.6 1.9 1.9 1.1 3.4 2.2 6.3 Unlmovm 5.3 ! 11.9 3.2 1.8 1.9 5. 3 4.6 3.7 3.6 4.2 z I I i I ~ mo l/) .., ---1 co· m 3· :;;o OJ z::::;; co z3 < m :;;o l/) ~ 668 100.0 36.8 Agriculture Manu f acturing and mech anical Transport ation and I communic ation r--Extra ction of minerals Domestic and personal service ~ Lake States Cut-Over ' I 1 0 AppalachianOzark I I I ' ' a/ Indus t ry not tabulated. I I I 3.7 I 8671 -8- Table III. Rural Relief Cases Closeu from 1':arch J through June 30, 1935. Classified by Reasons for Closing and cy Residence (137 Counties R~prcsenting 9 Agri~ultural Areas)§:/ Total Rea son for Closing ~fomber 39 , 8849:-/ 100 .0 Household became self- supporting Secured private emplo~rment Advances·· from l a ndor~/ Crops marketed - Incree.se in farm prices Other re3.sons 11,588 100.0 54.9 22 . 8 13 .1 51.l 57.4 Household found other support Governmental assistance o~her than E.R.A. reli ef9/ 'Tran s fer to other afency9-I Aid from rel a tives and friends Miscellaneous 28 , 296 100 .0 31. 2 Civilian Conservation Corps Client moved or f a iled to report!/ Villag e --+------ l,.11 Reasons: Perc e nt ( ~ ~dministrative policy§/ Open Country 63 .3 9.4 6.3 10.5 10.4 0.6 0. 8 10.8 1. 7 1. 7 1.6 1 3 .1 6 .1 13 . 9 · 11.3 0.5 8 .6 8 .3 4 .4 3 .3 2.6 2 .3 7 .4 3.4 12 . 6 1 3 .9 9.3 11.3 11. 7 10.6 3.9 3.9 3.9 g_/ Data not available for Pine County, i,linnesota. Total closings amounte,i to 40,724 b/ To farm ten ::in t s and cropp ers. 9.../ Agricultura l Adjustment Ad.mini stra.tion payments, Fa.rm Credit Admi ni strati on loans, and Co mmo dity Credit Corporation a.dva nces. gJ County poor relief, mothers' aid, old age pensions, and private agencies. !lf Cases refusing rural rehabilitation, refusing to work or to cooperate with relief officials, cas8s with no employa·ble member, ca3es for whom private employment was thought to oe available, etc. For relief order or for ivork. Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 -9- Table IV. Rural Cases Closed from July l through Octobe~ 31, 1935, Classified by Reasons for Closing and by Mont~/ (138 Counties Repres~nti~ 9 .Agricultural Areas) July- ISeptemberJulyReason for Closing October ')----------------- ----------+-"-0.; ;..c_to-'--b_e-'r ~-"'A~st 14,294 22,456 36,750 All Reasons: Number Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 - - - - - - - - - - - --·------------ ---1----~..- ---------Household became self-supporting Secured private emp l oym~ nt Advances from landl orc.E.I Crops marketed - Increase in farm prices Other reasons 45.5 27.0 0.5 9.3 8.7 52.1 28.4 0.7 14.3 8.7 38.9 25.6 0.3 4.1 8.9 Works Program Civilian Conservation Corps Other 21.0 7.6 13 .4 8.2 34.2 6.6 1.6 8.6 25.6 6.3 3.6 7.8 0.6 3.0 4.2 4.7 0.1 1.6 3.0 11.9 14.1 9.5 8.4 9.3 7.6 6.9 8.5 5.1 Household found other support Governmental assistance other than E.R.A. relief£/ Transfer to other agency§) Aid from relatives and friends 0.4 2.3 Administrative policy~/ Client moved or failed to reportf/ I i! Misc.ellaneous i a/ ,b/ 1£/ d/ i_/ f/ Preliminary data. To farm tenants and croppers. Agricultural Adjustment Administrati on payments, Farm Credit Administration lonns, and Commodity Credit Corporation advances. County poor relief, mothers' aid, old age pensions, and private agencies. Cases refusing n .1.rr, l r eh··bili : ,., t io n, 1·efusine,: to 'Fork or to cooperate with relief officials, cases with no employable member, cases for whom private emp loyment was thought to be avail able, etc. For relief order or for wor~. Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8671 -10- Table V. Rural Cases Closed from July 1 through Oc tober 31, 1935, Classified by Reasons for Closing and by Residencea/ (138 Counties Representing 9 Ar,ricultural Areas) Open Country Village 36 ,750 100 .0 18,542 100.0 18 , 208 100 .0 45.5 27.0 0.5 9.3 8 .7 44.2 20. 8 0.8 14.8 7.8 47.7 36.5 0 .1 0.8 10.3 II 21.0 7.6 13.4 21. 5 9.0 12 . 5 20.1 5.4 14 . 7 i Hous ehold found. other support Governmental assistance other than E.R.A. reli ef.Q~ Transfer to other agency~/ Aid from r elat i ves and. friends 6.3 0.4 2.3 3.6 6.3 0.6 2 .1 3.6 6 .3 2.8 3.5 i 11. 9 12.6 10.8 Client moved. or failed to report!./ 8.4 8 .7 8 .1 Miscellaneous 6 .9 6.7 7.0 Reason for Closing I All Reasons: Total Humber Per cent Household became s elf- supporting Secured private employment Advances from l andlordb/ Crops marketed - Increase in farm prices Other reasons Works Program Ci vi lian Conserva tion Corps Other I I i I I Administrative Policy§/ §;./ 2._/ £1 d/ i/ f/ ; - Preli mi na r ~r data . To farm tenruits and cropp ers. Agricultural Adjustment Administration pa~rmcn ts, Farm Credit Administr2tion loans, and Co mmodity Cr edit Corporation advances. County poor r eli ef, mother s• aid, old age pen sions, and private agencies. Cases refusing rural reha.bili tatio n , refusing to work or to coop i: : rate wi th :celief offici al s, cases with no eruployabl e mmuber , ca ses for whom pri v2,te emplo ymen t was thought to be available, etc. For relief order or for work. Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 8071 COUNTIES SUnYEY::SD AND AREAS REPRESEETED 3Y 'IEE SURVEY OF C'"LJERSNT CH_~TGES IN THE RURAL RELIEF POPULATIQl-; EASTERN COTTON Alabama: Bullock, Calhoun, Conecuh ana Winston; Arkansas: Calhoun, Craighead and Pike; Georgia: Chattooga, Dodge, Eeard, Jenkins, McDuffie, i.118.dison, l✓iitchell, Pike and Webster; Louisiana: Concordia, lviorehouse, Natchitoches and Webster; i1.1ississippi: La·.v1·ence, Tippah, Washington and Winston; Missouri: Pemi sco tt; Korth Carolina: Ce.barrus, and Sampson; South Carolina: Allendale, C;::i.l:101.1.'1, Fairfield and Pickens; Tennessee: Henderson. CORN BELT Illinois: Scott, Whi tesicle, and. Woodford; Ina.ian3.: Fountain, Hancock, lviorgan and Shelby; Iowa: 3lack Ravi:c, Calhoun, Guthrie, Ida Nahaska, Page, Marshall and Washin,~ ton; Kansas: Smith and wa·oaunsee; Missouri: Ray and Hickory; Nebras'.ca: Eal 1, Ei tchcock, Johnson and Pierce; Ohio: Clinton and Putnam; Sout h B3.kota: Brookings anc Hutchinson APPALACHIAN-OZ.ARK ( Self-Suffi cinr;) Arkansas: Madi son; Georgia: Lumpkin; Illinois:· Franklin; Kentucky: Johnson, Knox, Lee and Muhlenberg; Mi ssou.ri: Shannon; :'-Tor th Carolina: Jackson and Wilkes; Tennessee: Cocke, White and Williamson; Virginia: Lee, Bedford and Page; West Virginia: Boone, ~.Iarion, Nicholas and Pendleton. HAY AND DAIRY Michigan: Sanilac; Minnesota: :Benton, Olmstead and Otter Tail; New York: Broome, Livingston, Oneida and Was~ington; Ohio: Geauga and Stark; Pennsylvania: Bradford, Wayne, and Wyoming; Wisconsin: Chippewa, Sauk and Walworth. WESTERN COTWN Oklahoma: Jackson and Lincoln; Texas: Bastrop, Ce.ss, Collin, Houston, Karnes, McLennan, 1-:ontgomery, Shelby, Terry and Wilbarger. RANCHING Colorado: Archuleta, Garfield and Routt; Montana: Garfield, Madison, Meagher, and Granite; Oregon: Balcer and Crook; µtah: Garfield, Grand and Piute. SPRING WHEAT i-:iontana : Chouteau; North Dakota: Ramsey; Sou th Dakota: Corson and Edmunds. WINTER W'2E.AT Colorado: Sede""Wick; Kansas: and Kingfisher; Texas: Car son. :Burke, Emmons, Hettinger and Pawnee and Saline; Oklahoma: LAKE STATES CUT-OVER Michigan: Gogebic, Oscoda and Schoolcraft; ~(innesota: Wisconsin: Forest and Sawyer. Harper Pine; Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AREAS REPRESENTED AND COUNTIES SAMPLED SURVEY OF THE RURAL RELIEF SITUATION ~ JUNE . 1935 l/1 a:: w > EZ e => "-Z ro a:: -~ w -~f.... l/1 Ow sI ~ 0 z ~ l/1 a:: w > z -oz >-, ..0 :::> ~ a:: :,µ w "o, f- 0 ~ sI ~ 0 z WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION SOCIAL RESEARCH DIVISION Digitized by Original from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY