LIVING Set over against opinions as to how the cotton farmer lives, we have the studies done by the United States De partment of Agriculture and other research groups on rural standards of living. These studies have been under taken in many of the divisions of the United States, but the returns from southern states are tabulated separately and can be compared with those from other sections. Variable factors in the analysis are the levels of tenure, the races, and the extent to which southern farmers are cotton farmers. Enough separate tabulations have been made for landowners, share renters, and for white and black farmers to show the general trends. The extent of diversification may be judged from the ratio of food furnished by the farm to living purchased. Both of these factors are given and furnish valuable material for study. The variations in living standards between the different areas can be shown by citing studies from the eastern, western, and Gulf states.
In 1926 E. L. Kirkpatrick published the results of a study of the farmer's standard of living carried on over a period of years by the Department of Agriculture in cooperation with twelve colleges and universities in eleven states." Only white farmers were studied, and localities were chosen in which average farming conditions pre vailed. The data were gathered during the years 1922 to 1924. As will be seen, the study represents a high level of southern farming conditions. Three hundred and seventeen families were studied in New England, 1,439 in the North Central States, and 1,130 in localities rep resenting the dominant type of farming in three southern states: South Carolina, Alabama, and Kentucky." Cash tenants, share tenants, and croppers were included, form ing almost 30 per cent of all farmers studied.
The average size of farms reported was 147.5 acres, their average value, $13,788, and the average value of belongings was $1,597.50 per family of 4.4 persons." The New England families owned personal goods to the value of $1,692.20, and southern families ranked last with $1,551. For all families the farm furnished $683.70 worth or 42.8 per cent of total value of all goods ; the New England farms furnishing $656.40 or 38.8 per cent
of goods consumed by their families as compared to southern farms which furnished $707 worth or 45.6 per cent." Food proved, of course, to be the most important item of the living, making up 41.2 per cent of the value of all goods used. These findings agree with previous studies. The houses occupied by New England families were largest with 9.6 rooms, in comparison with 5.9 rooms per southern household. This gives two rooms per person for New England families and 1.2 per person in the South." In New England 52.7 per cent of the families studied, owned and used automobiles, 54.1 per cent of the south ern families, and 78.2 per cent of the north central fam ilies. Southern farm families had the highest average expenditure for household help and laundry sent out." This item is owing to the presence of cheap domestic help furnished by Negro women. This fact also throws light on the rather high social and economic status of the southern families studied.
Tables of expenditures for personal and advancement goods show interesting rankings. Southern farm families spend more for formal education, church, Sunday school and missions, and tobacco, and less for reading matter, dues of organizations, recreation, gifts, toilet articles, candy, and sodas than any other farm group in the United States.' They also spend less for clothing. These studies are highly valuable as offering grounds for com parison between the higher levels of farm families in the various sections.
The value of goods consumed by the Alabama and South Carolina families is divided into living furnished and purchased in the table 29 on the following page.
The South Carolina families spent for their living an average of $1,481.80. Of this amount 47.1 per cent was furnished by the farm. The greatest single item was food, which made up 45.4 per cent of the total budget. It is shown that 74.8 per cent of the food was furnished by the farm. Alabama families had a higher budget of $1,614.80 but with approximately the same proportion furnished by the farm.