cultivated, wheat and other small grains were drilled, harvested and threshed, hay was mown and lifted into the mow or on to the stack by horse power that is, on the more progressive farms.

The first factor in this transformation, aside from the native ingenuity of the American farmer, was the opening up of the great prairies of the West. At the beginning of this period the vanguard of the great army of settlers was just emerging from the great forest which extended continuously from the Atlantic coast to the western end of Lake Erie and the Wabash River in the middle streak, and to the Mississippi and beyond on the north and on the south. These prairies, though regarded as of doubtful value by the first settlers, soon proved themselves to be more fertile than the timber lands previously settled. Besides they were smooth and comparatively level and free from stones and other obstructions. They were therefore well adapted to, the use of horsedrawn machinery. This fact, together with their seemingly boundless expanse, offered a challenge to the inventor which he was not slow to accept. The reaper, the mower, the thresher, the corn planter and the cultivator followed one another in quick succession.

Another important factor in bringing about this transformation was the coming of the railroad. In 1830 there were no railroads in the United States. In 1860 there were 30,000 miles in operation and they had penetrated every State east of the Missouri River. They brought the markets of the world near to the Western fields and furnished an outlet to all that could be produced by means of the new farm machines. Through the repeal of the English corn laws, English markets were opened to American farm products in 1849. New England factory towns were growing at the same time, so that the factory populations of both Old and New England began to be fed with food grown in our great West.

The joint result of all these changes was an agricultural_revolution, not only in this country, but in Europe as well. A flood of agricultural products began to pour into the Eastern markets and later into the European markets. The Eastern farmers and the European farmers began to feel the pressure of the new competition. On the more broken and stony farms of New England the farmers were unable to stand the pressure and public attention began to be called to the abandoned farms. This pressure, which began during the period we are now studying, continued and increased during the next period.

The Period of the Settlement of the Far West. The period from 1860 to 1888 begins with the use of horse-drawn machinery well established. Many improvements were made, particularly in reaping and threshing machinery, during this period. The Marsh harvester, the wire binder and the twine binder followed in quick succession. The roller process of manufacturing flour made it possible to manufacture excellent flour out of Northern spring wheat, a thing which had previously been considered impossible. This, together with the improved harvesting and threshing machinery, made it possible to cultivate the vast prairies of the Northwest, making Minneapolis the centre of the flour manufacturing industry. The building

261

of the transcontinental railway lines, most of them projected in advance of settlement through subsidies of government land, still further hastened the settlement of the far West. More important, possibly, than any of these were the homestead laws of 1862 and 1864, already referred to, which gave the land free of charge to actual settlers. The tide of settlement literally swept across the prairies during the seventies, the eighties and the early nineties, all but exterminating the buffalo and crowding the Indians into reservations where they could be protected against the competition of the white man. The settlers were mainly people from the Eastern and middle Western States, but their numbers were greatly increased by the immigrants from northern Europe who began coming to the United States in unprecedented numbers after the close of the Civil War. During the decade from 1860 to 1870 there arrived more than 2,000,000 immigrants, nearly 3,000,000 during the decade from 1870 to 1880, and 5,250,000 from 1880 to 1890. During the decade from 1870 to 1880 more than 297,000 square miles were added to the cultivated area of the United States. This is a territory equal to that of Great Britain and France combined.*

One result of this rapid expansion of our agricultural area was the disorganization of agriculture in the older States and in Europe. Wheat began to be exported in enormous quantities, and its price, in consequence, fell to unremunerative levels, While this, and a similar fall in the price of other products, tended to discourage the farmers of the older sections, it did not deter the western settler from the work of extending the agricultural frontier farther and farther west. Many of the settlers, in fact, had no intention of remaining in the farming business, planning rather to get a piece of government land, hold it for a few years and then sell it at a price which would remunerate them for the time spent. Crops were grown and sold, meanwhile, in order to live until a buyer with a satisfactory price arrived. They lived literally by mining the soil and selling it, rather than by farming. Against this kind of competition the recent buyers of farms found it hard to strive. The result was a vast amount of agricultural discontent. Shameless demagogues flourished and fattened on this discontent, telling the farmers that it was the fault of the monetary system, or that it was due to some other more or less occult force rather than to the over-supply of agricultural products. The seventies, the eighties and the early nineties witnessed several political movements among the farmers of the South and the West, none of which, however, succeeded in seriously modifying the financial system.

The complete reorganization of the cottongrowing industry constitutes the most violent agricultural change of this period. In 1860 the bulk of the cotton crop was grown by slave labor. After the Civil War cotton prices were soaring because of the cotton famine during the war. It sold for 43 cents a pound in 1865 and for 30 cents in 1866. Under the stimulus of these prices many planters undertook to grow cotton on a large scale with hired negro help and with borrowed capital. The price fell rapidly and brought bankruptcy to many of the *Bogart, Economic History of the United States,' p. 267.

planters. But both the landowners, and the negroes had to live, and to live mainly on cotton. It was therefore necessary that some workable system should be devised. This was found in the one still in vogue throughout the greater part of the cotton belt, at least in the eastern half of it. The land is worked by negro tenant-farmers who cultivate small tracts on shares. Thus both landowner and laborer share in the risk and the danger of complete bankruptcy is avoided.

The Period of Reorganization.- The year 1888 is chosen as the beginning of the fifth period in our agricultural history, not because any profound change was noticeable on that date, but because there began about that time a series of changes which are destined to produce, which have, in fact, already begun to produce, profound agricultural changes. Congress had, in the preceding year, passed the famous Hatch Act, or the Experiment Station Act, as it is sometimes called. Agricultural experimentation began at once on an enlarged scale. This led to a more comprehensive and systematic application of the principles of experimental science to agriculture than had ever been undertaken before.

Another large fact is that through the rapid occupation of the public lands the available free lands in the humid belt were nearing exhaustion. The old pioneering period in American agriculture was therefore drawing to a close and a new period was opening, wherein the 'farms must first be created by considerable outlay of labor and capital before profitable farming can begin. During the old period waste land was merely land which lay to the west. It was only necessary for the settlers to move to it in order to bring it within the cultivated area. From now on waste land is land which goes to waste not because of geometrical distance, but because of bad physical, chemical or political conditions. Bad physical conditions may be described as (1) too wet; (2) too dry; (3) too stony; (4) too sandy. The cure for the first is drainage; for the second, irrigation; for the third, the clearing of the stones; for the fourth, the supplying of humus through the plowing under of manure and green crops. Bad chemical conditions may be described as (1) too much acid, and (2) too much alkali. The cure for the first is lime. The second is a complicated problem too difficult for discussion within the limits of this article.* Bad political conditions may be described as (1) bad taxation; (2) undesirable social surroundings; (3) poor educational facilities; (4) poor sanitation. The cures are obvious.

The point to remember is that it is no longer possible for the landless man who can acquire a team, a wagon, plow, harrow and a few other implements, to begin farming on free public land. The drainage of wet land, the irrigation of dry land, the clearing of stony land, the supplying of humus to sandy land are laborious and expensive processes. These opportunities

are consequently open only to men with some capital, either of their own or advanced to them on easy terms by others. The same may be said of land which is either too sour or too alkaline. Land which is going to waste through bad political or social conditions is more abun*Consult Hilgard on 'Soils.'

dant than is commonly supposed. A detailed description here would provoke resentment and do no good.

In the early settlement of the continent, when serious difficulties had to be overcome, experience showed that the colony system rather than the system of individual settlement was the practicable method. The system of individual settlement flourished under the easy conditions found in the Mississippi valley. Now that we are again face to face with difficult conditions, the lesson of history shows that we must again return to the colony method. In the field of irrigation the Mormons and the Greely colony of Colorado have furnished us with excellent examples.*

The tendency, which has almost become a habit, of well-to-do farmers to leave the farms and retire to the towns, is primarily a result of bad social conditions in the open country. These call peculiarly for the colony idea as a corrective. Though the physical difficulties in the way of the new pioneering call for united or community effort, such as can only be found where the colony idea prevails, these do not point so unerringly toward the colony system as do the social difficulties. Where families of unlike ideals, customs and traditions are thrown together, higgledy-piggledy, in the same neighborhood through the method of individual settlement, it is difficult to secure effective community action. Such a settlement may succeed in overcoming the physical difficulties where they are as easy as they were in the middle-western prairies, but it can never succeed where they are as great as they are in most of the lands which remain to be subjugated, and it is utterly incapable of handling the social difficulties which are found in very many of our rural communities.

Unity of sentiment and feeling, or likemindedness, which is the condition of all effective community work, may grow out of a feeling of common and pressing necessity, as in the case of the early pioneers in time of physical danger; it may be based upon a common kinship, nationality or language, as in the case of some Scandinavian communities of our Northwest, or it may be based upon a common religion, as in the case of the early New England towns, many Pennsylvania German communities, a few Quaker communities, a few Scotch Presbyterian neighborhoods, and especially the Mormon settlements of the Far West. A combination of all these unifying factors gives the best results. The agricultural statesmen of the future must build our agricultural civilization on community action. Effective community action must have some unifying sentiment to give it body and consistency. Therefore the problem of agricultural statesmanship is to discover or create these unifying senti

system," under which all the labor of the farmer is concentrated on his most profitable crop. Later on there is, in every progressive community, a tendency toward diversification. The reason for the change is not that one crop has ceased to be more profitable than any other. There are two reasons which combine to force the change. The first is the necessity of economizing the soil, and the other is that of economizing the labor time of the farmer. Growing one crop continuously on the same soil tends not only to exhaust those elements in plant food which are required by the crop in question, but to multiply the enemies and parasites which prey upon or injure it. A change of crops not only gives the soil a rest, but interferes more or less with the development of the enemies of each crop. The crops which are introduced into the rotation need to be chosen very carefully in order to give the soil the maximum rest and also in order to afford the most effective check upon the enemies of the major crop.

Quite as important, however, is the necessity of economizing the labor time of the farmer and his labor force. No crop requires equal time and attention at all seasons of the year. When the major crop requires all the time of the labor force it would be uneconomical to turn aside to work on a less profitable crop. But if the farmer grows as much of the major crop as he can handle when it demands the most attention, he will have time to spare at other seasons of the year. This time will ordinarily be wasted unless he has other crops which require his time then. If minor crops can be found which do not demand attention when the major crop is requiring it, but can be handled at other times and seasons, the farmer can obviously make a more economical use of his labor force by growing some of these minor crops.

Neither of these reasons in favor of rotation are very strong in a new and undeveloped farming community. In the first place the soil is usually so rich as not to require immediate conservation. In fact, the pioneer farmer was usually in great need of other forms of capital, while possessing a superabundance of soil fertility. From his point of view it was not unbusinesslike to reduce his over-supply of one form if by so doing he could increase those forms which he lacked. Therefore he would be inclined to grow only his most profitable money crop. In the second place, on a pioneer farm there are so many other things to do besides growing crops that the farmer need never spend an idle day from the beginning to the end of the year. Fencing, draining, erecting buildings, clearing stones, stumps and other obstructions and a multitude of other improvements have to be made. Under such circumstances it is natural and economical that he should grow only his most important money crop, and spend his time during the slack seasons making these necessary improvements.

In case, however, as in some portions of the South, the labor force is not inclined toward steady and continuous work the year round, the tendency to stick to the principal money crop rather than to rotate and diversify persists long after the pioneering period has been passed. Seasons of strenuous work followed by periods of idleness seem to be preferred by

263

the negro farmer. This is one of the chief obstacles to the proper diversification of crops in the South. There is probably no other crop which the cotton farmer could grow which is so profitable as cotton. Therefore, if diversification meant less cotton, it would probably reduce his income. But if he will equip himself with first-rate teams and tools he can grow more cotton than he can possibly pick. There is a tendency, therefore, to work with inferior teams and tools with one mule per man, for example, instead of with two, three or four, because one man can usually grow as much cotton with one mule as he can pick. The way for the cotton farmer to increase his income is to cultivate more land, growing as much cotton as he can pick, and some other crops besides, provided he can find crops which can be handled when cotton does not demand the full time of his labor force. In order to do this each hand should work at least two mules, though four would be better if the land is fairly smooth and free from obstructions. This habit of working with large teams and tools has had a great deal to do with the prosperity of the farmers of the upper Mississippi valley. It is also one of the factors in the increasing tendency toward rotation and diversification.

The principal crop areas of the country must be defined in terms of the principal money crops rather than in terms of the subsidiary crops. The cotton belt, the corn belt and the spring and fall wheat belts are fairly well defined, provided we observe the above definition. There is, for example, scarcely an agricultural county in the United States in which corn is not grown, but it is grown as the principal money crop in what is known as the corn belt. Wheat is widely grown, but only in restricted areas as the principal crop. Potatoes are grown as the principal money crop in small areas scattered here and there, such as Aroostook County, Maine, parts of western New York, of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Montana and Colorado; barley in parts of Wisconsin and California; buckwheat in a few counties in Pennsylvania and New York; hops in a few counties in New York and Washington; tobacco in many and widely scattered areas from Louisiana to Vermont, particularly in the Connecticut valley, southern Ohio, eastern Pennsylvania, southern Wisconsin and the border States between the cotton belt and the corn belt.

Turning from field crops to farm animals, we find the hog in greatest numbers in the corn belt, cattle are widely scattered, dairy cattle being found in greatest numbers in the thickly populated States of the east, and beef cattle in the corn States and the contiguous grazing States to the west. Horses are raised in greatest numbers in the corn States, though Kentucky, Tennessee and Texas raise considerable numbers. Sheep are diminishing in numbers, but are grown in considerable numbers in Ohio, Michigan, Wyoming and the Pacific Coast States.

If one were to describe American agriculture in terms of the size of the business unit, one would say that the characteristic farm is middle-sized farm, or the one-family farm. That is, it is a farm of such size as can be worked by the labor force of one family, with an occasional hired man, when equipped with

the best teams and tools that are to be had. It differs from the small peasant farm of Europe -La petite culture. -in that it includes a larger area, and because of the larger area The makes use of larger teams and tools. tendency toward this type of farming is growing, as shown by the fact that the large farms -those of above 1,000 acres -are diminishing in number and area, and that the small farms also those under 100 acres - are diminishing in number. In other words, the tendency is toward the farm of from 160 to 320 acres. From the standpoint of production, this middle-sized, or one-family farm is the most efficient unit yet discovered in this country. From the trading point of view it is less efficient than the larger unit. In other words, where the farmer's success depends primarily upon his efficiency in production, the middlesized farm will beat all others in competition. But where the farmer's success depends primarily upon his efficiency in bargaining, that is, in buying and selling, the large farm has the advantage. In the growing of staple products, for which there is always a well-organized market where they always sell at a quotable price, the farmer's success will depend more upon his skill as a producer than upon his skill as a bargainer. But in the growing of specialties, which do not sell at a quotable price and for which there is no organized market, the farmer's success will depend more upon his success in selling than upon his success in producing. This is the field where the large farm has the advantage. In the other field, which is much the larger, the middle-sized farmer more than holds his own in competition with the_big farmer.

Bibliography. Arnold, B. W., 'Industry in Virginia from 1860-1894) (Baltimore 1897); Bailey, Liberty Hyde, Cyclopedia of American Agriculture' (New York 1910-11); Benton, C., 'A Statistical View of the Number of Sheep in the Several Towns and Counties of Various States' (Cambridge, Mass., 1837); Blodgett, James Harvey, 'Relation of Population to Food Products in the United States' (Washington 1903); Bogart, E. L., 'Economic History of the United States,' chaps. i, v, ix, xvii, xviii, xxi (New York 1908); Bruce, Philip A., Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, Vol. I, chaps. iv-vii (New York 1896); Buck, Solon Justus, The Granger Movement' (Cambridge, Mass., 1913); Caird, Sir James, Prairie Farming in America' (New York 1859); Carver, Thomas Nixon, (Principles of Rural Economics' (Boston 1911), Selected Readings in Rural Economics' (Boston 1916); Chilcot, E. C., 'Dry Land Farming in the Great Plains Area' (Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, p. 451, 1907); Coleman, Henry, Agriculture in the United States (New York 1841); Coman, Katharine, 'Economic Beginnings of the Far West' (New York 1912); Coulter, J. L., Agricultural Development in the United States, 1900-10' (Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1912); Dahlinger, Charles William, The New Agrarianism' (New York 1913); Emerick, G. F., 'Agricultural Discontent' (Political Science Quarterly, Vol. IX, p. 436); Flint, Charles H., Progress in Agriculture, 1780-1860 (Eighty Years' Progress of the United States,' New York and Chicago 1864); Hammond, M. B.,

(

"The Cotton Industry) (Publication American Economic Association, New Series, Vol. I, No. 1); Hart, A. B., The Disposition of our Public Lands (Quarterly Journal Economics, Vol. I, pp. 169, 251); Holmes, George K., Causes affecting Farm Values' (Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, p. 511, 1905); Levasseur, Emile, L'agriculture aux Etats Unis' (Paris 1894); Mead, Elwood, Irrigation Institutions (New York 1903), The Relation of Irrigation to Dry Farming) (Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, p. 423, 1905), 'Report of Irrigation Investigation in California (Washington 1901); Newell, F. H., Irrigation in the United States (New York 1902), The Reclamation of the West' (Washington 1903); Nimmo, Joseph, Report in Regard to the Range and Ranch Cattle Business of the United States' (Washington 1885); Nourse, Edwin G., ‘Agricultural Economics) (Chicago 1916); Olmstead, Frederick Law, A Journey Through the Back Country (New York 1860), A Journey in the Seaboard Slave States) (New York 1856), A Journey Through Texas' (New York 1857, Journeys and Explorations in the Cotton Kingdom (London 1861); Pierson, C. W., 'Rise and Fall of the Granger Movement' (Popular Science Monthly, December 1887); Report of the United States Industrial Commission, Vol. XI; Sato, S., History of the Land Question in the United States (Baltimore 1886); Stevenson, George M., 'Political History of Public Lands, 1840-1862) (Cambridge, Mass., 1914); Taylor, Henry C., Agricultural Economics (New York and London 1911); Turner, F. J., The First Official Frontier of Massachusetts Bay) (Cambridge, Mass., 1914), Geographical Influences in American History) (New York 1914), 'Outline Studies in the History of the Northwest' (Chicago 1888), Rise of the New West (New York 1906); Walker, C. S., 'Is There a District Agricultural Problem? (Publication American Economic Association, p. 56, 1897); Weeden, William B., 'Economic and Social History of New England, 1620-1789 Vol. I, pp. 53-89, Vol. II, pp. 492-507 (Boston 1890); Wellington, R. G., The Political and Sectional Influence of the Public Lands, 1828-1842) (Cambridge, Mass., 1914); Wright, C. W., Wool Growing and the Tariff' (Boston and New York 1910).

The

AGRICULTURE, Department of, an executive department of the United States, whose head is a member of the Cabinet with the title secretary of agriculture. It was formed early in 1889 under President Cleveland, the first secretary being Norman J. Colman of Missouri; he was succeeded in the same year, under President Harrison, by Jeremiah M. Rusk, of Wisconsin; in 1893 President Cleveland in his second term appointed J. Sterling Morton, of Nebraska; in 1897 President McKinley appointed James Wilson, of Iowa, who was succeeded in 1913 by David F. Houston, of Missouri, the present incumbent (1916). Its germ was a distribution of seeds to farmers by the Commissioner of Patents in 1836, enlarged by Congress in 1839 to include the prosecution of agricultural investigations and collection of agricultural statistics; in 1854 a special appropriation was made and an entomologist employed; in 1855 a chemist and botanist were added and

a propagating garden begun. In 1862 the Agricultural Bureau was established separate from the Patent Office, and President Lincoln__appointed Isaac Newton, of Pennsylvania, Commissioner of Agriculture; the last commissioner was Mr. Colman, the first secretary. The Department's quarters in Washington are in a large park near the Washington Monument. Its functions are expressed by statute as: "To acquire and diffuse among the people of the United States useful information on subjects connected with agriculture in the most general and comprehensive sense of that word, and to procure, propagate and distribute among the people new and valuable seeds and plants"; but scientific and administrative duties have been heaped upon it till it has become not only an enormous workshop and museum of every class of scientific research relating to plant and animal life and that of agricultural animals, but an establishment of practical services in trade and commerce, quarantine, statistics, treeplanting, road-making, irrigation, insecticides and almost everything that can affect the interests of those engaged in raising and marketing all articles that grow from the ground or living things that feed on them. Even the Weather Bureau was transferred to it, in 1891, from the War Department.

Its cost is over $20,000,000 a year, of which about $2,200,000 goes to extension work. The detailed statement below will give a full conspectus of its activities.

ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS.

Office of the Secretary.-Supervision of public business relating to the agricultural industry and management of department subdivisions; advisory supervision over government agricultural experiment stations; control of quarantine stations for imported cattle and of interstate cattle quarantine, including inspection of cattle ships; also carrying into effect the interstate game laws and those on importation of noxious animals, with authority to control that of other animals.

The Weather Bureau.- Records daily existing atmospheric conditions and formulates therefrom-for distribution forecasts of probable weather during the succeeding 48 hours. It maintains a central office in Washington, and 197 subordinate stations in the United States and West Indies, whose work is supplemented by the services of 4,500 voluntary observers. It also receives daily telegraphic reports of observations in Canada, Mexico, the Azores and the western coast of Europe.

The Bureau of Animal Industry. Investigates the nature and prevention of communicable diseases dangerous to live stock, and takes measures for their extirpation; inspects live stock and their food products in interstate and foreign commerce, also the transport vessels for exported and quarantine stations for imported animals; disseminates information on our dairy interests and their foreign markets; and reports on our animal industries and means of improving them.

The Bureau of Chemistry.― Studies the chemical problems of agriculture; soils, fertilizers and irrigation waters; agricultural products and industries; insecticides and fungicides; foods of man and beast; raw materials, products and processes of agricultural-chemical

265

industries; chemical relations which modify the results of environment—as soil, latitude, altitude and meteorological conditions -- on agricultural products; inspects food products imported or for export; and examines quality of materials used in road construction. The chemical problems of other departments are turned over to it. It has under its charge the inspection of foods and drugs, as authorized by the Pure Food Act.

The Bureau of Plant Industry.— Studies plant life in relation to agriculture, including vegetable, pathological and physiological, botanical, pomological, grass and forage plant investigations and experiments; has charge of experimental gardens and grounds, the Arlington experimental farm, Congressional seed distribution, seed and plant introduction and teaculture experiments.

Forest Service.- Prepares and executes plans for conservative lumbering of woodlands, public or private; investigates trees and methods for planting, and gives practical assistance to tree-planters; studies commercially valuable trees for their special uses in forestry, and the relations between forests and fire, grazing, lumbering, stream flow and irrigation; maintains a photographic laboratory and collection and a library. On 1 July 1915 it had under its administration 162,773,280 acres of national forest land.

The Bureau of Soils.- Studies physical and chemical properties of soils, and materials and methods of artificial fertilization, with their influence on the original soils; classifies and maps soils in agricultural districts to show the distribution of soil types for adaptability to certain crops and their management; investigates alkali problems and their relations to irrigation and seepage waters; reclamation of abandoned lands; studies tobacco soils and methods of cultivation and curing, introduction of improved varieties and methods of exporting tobacco. The total area covered by detailed soil surveys in the United States from 1899, when the work was begun, to 30 June 1915 amounts to 369,928 square miles.

The Bureau of Crop Estimates.- Collects and digests statistics of agricultural production; area annually sown to each of the leading crops, their condition on the first day of each month, the quantitative results at close of the crop year, and estimated farm value 1 December. Supplementarily it collects periodical information on minor crops of importance, meadows and pastures, and the principal foreign crops. The stock of corn, wheat and oats on United States farms at certain regular fixed dates is estimated, with the proportion shipped out of the county where grown; the number and value, by species, of animals on United States farms at the beginning of each year, and the annual losses from disease and exposure; also the annual clip of wool and average weight of fleeces, by States and Territories. It computes the world's production of the chief crops, by countries, and prices of principal agricultural products in various United States markets.

The Division of Publications.— This is the publishing house of the Department. It has general charge and assignment of expenditures under the appropriation for printing and distributing agricultural documents, preparation