The country store as the original credit in stitution of the American farmer has been superseded, except in the negro farming regions of the South, by the local bank. These are everywhere found, but are frankly commercial and profit-making. In fact, neither personal nor mortgage credit institutions have reached a satisfactory stage of development, and little to compare with the Raffeisen system of Europe has yet appeared. In the corn belt the life in surance companies have loaned largely on farm mortgages. Elsewhere the local banks furnish the only facilities, with the attendant evils of high interest and frequent foreclosures. Since 1910, however, there has been extensive agita tion and an official commission went to Europe in 1913, with the result of attempted Congres sional action, some State laws favoring credit societies, and action in a number of Western States to allow the loaning of certain State funds (e.g., school moneys) on mortgage. In response to the general agitation many joint stock-loan companies have been organized in Middle Western States.
The need for credit is evident from the fact that the old tradition regarding the unde sirability of mortgages has been latterly lost in view of their indispensability under our sys tem of agriculture to-day. There has been no comprehensive report by the government since 1890, but even at that time 18.6 per cent of all farms were encumbered to one-third of their value. Infrequent in the South, one-half of all the mortgage encumbrance was centred in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Iowa and Kansas. The average duration of the mortgage was five years, and only about 3 per cent were indicated as foreclosed, the vast majority of all the adventures being thus of successful issue.
It is doubtful if co-operative credit institu tions of the European variety will become com mon here, hut the need for new credit will he met by greater local control of the local banks, associated with local distribution of funds through the Federal Reserve system. This will provide a solution more in harmony with our need and the individualistic traditions of our farming population.
Along all lines the need for organization is being felt, not only in matters of business but in re-creating rural social institutions and reor ganizing local politics. The early appearance, widespread scope and great variety of farm er's associations is evidence that the farmer is not incapable of organization, but that wher ever he feels the need and recognizes the pos sibility of results he is ready. For more than a century there have been local, State and even national associations for promoting agricul ture. Soon after 1800 the °fair') took its rise and now over 3,000 fairs are annually con ducted, devoted to general; as well spe cial, farming interests. The great majority of farmers' organizations have been directed to some form of business co-operation, and often for this sole purpose. In 1908 it was estimated
that there were 85,000 co-operative organiza tions with a membership of more than 3,000,000. About 30,000 were irrigation associations, and others were co-operative telephone companies, grain elevators, creameries, insurance com panies, associations for marketing and for the purchase of supplies. In the United States Department of ture established a Rural Organization Serv ice to assist farmers and farmers' organiza tions. Several associations have at various times assumed a position of leadership among the rest and even reached the status of a politi cal party. Especially should be mentioned the or Patrons of Husbandry, the and the °Farmers' Na tional But although these serve a useful purpose in subserving the larger inter ests of the farmer they cannot take the place i of thorough going local reorganization in the home community alike for social, business and political needs.
Education and leadership have always been at a premium in American agriculture. Rapid changes of condition, with the necessity for abrupt and radical changes of idea and practice in farming, make them vitally necessary. Agricultural education developed from the down, the agricultural college and ex periment station first appearing, and only re cently agricultural high schools, the introduc tion of agriculture into the common schools, the short course and the general extension services. Farmers' institutes have long been widespread and active, the agricultural press has become a powerful and permeating influ ence, and above all the multitudinous activi ties of the United States Department of Agri culture leaves little to be desired in the way of adequate leadership.
Locally the new country school, especially where consolidated, and the new country church, have become centres of community leadership and wider social service. Reorgan ization of the social institutions of our farm ing population is perhaps the most backward phase of rural progress. But its importance is being recognized; more than half of all the school children in the nation are in country schools, and nearly two-thirds of all the churches are in country or village, and the lines of reorganization are clearly seen.
There is danger that the fundamental im portance of the family may be overlooked. The traditional American farm was a family unit; rural social organization has always been patri archal; social life in the country in the past has centred in the home. But later conditions associated with the shift of farming population disintegrated the rural family, and to-day a lowering birthrate, prevalent divorce, many un married, though of marriageable age, may be said to characterize it. The new agriculture calls for reform in the domestic relations on the farm, and is a problem no less pressing than that of the school and the church.