The same trends are shown in the averages of the The value of the family living diminishes from owner to cropper as one would expect, although they have the larger families. It is worthy of note that the percentage of goods furnished by farm is lower for the tenants, and lowest for the croppers.
These studies may be said to represent the higher levels of southern farmers. That they practice diversifi cation is shown by the large percentage of supplies fur nished by the farm. The living purchased comes from the cash crop, and from the expenditures it is clear that the farms are larger than the average southern holdings. The exclusion of Negroes leaves out of this group a body of cotton producers who would have brought the averages down.
A later study by the Department gives an analysis of cotton farmers on smaller acreage. Gwinnett County, Georgia, is a typical Piedmont cotton-producing area, inhabited mostly by white farmers. The average cropper cultivates twenty-four acres ; the average tenant twenty six, and the average landlord, with his tenants, has forty eight acres in cultivation. From the 288 farms studied, it was found that the typical farm had eight acres in cotton, thirteen in corn, and four in other crops.
The standard of living study of these 288 white farm families showed an average net cash income in 1924 of $424 per family of five. Their cash income was supple mented by food, fuel, and shelter from the farm to the value of $396 per family, giving a total of $820 a year. Of their net cash income they had to pay ordinary living expenses averaging $291 per family, leaving $133 to be applied to their debts or added to their capital. Most of these farmers were tenants. Only one work animal was found on 40 per cent of the farms and only 14 per cent had over two. These people have meager wants, but their wants exceed or equal their income. The average annual expenditure of each family for books, magazines, recreation, amusements, education, and religion was $24 per year. It was almost equaled by the purchase of their only luxuries, $15 per year for tobacco and snuff. Thirty four per cent of the families live in houses of only one thickness of lumber. Their wants would be even more scantily supplied but for the fact that 90 per cent of the housewives have cheap sewing machines and make part of the clothing for the family. The exodus of young
people from these farms is increasing. Forty-seven per cent of owners' children who have grown up had left the farm to go into some other occupation besides agri culture. However, only 29 per cent of the croppers' chil dren leaving home have deserted agriculture. The Depart ment of Agriculture estimates that there are perhaps 100,000 families along the border of the old Cotton Belt who live no better than those of Gwinnett County.' Even lower levels of living were found for Negro farm ers in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Texas." Six hundred eleven dollars and ten cents was found to represent the living of an average family of 4.8 people. Of this amount $239.70 was furnished by the farm and $371.40 pur chased. The following table shows how the expenditures were distributed: The decrease in goods furnished by the farm shown by croppers may be regarded as the diagnostic sign of the one-crop system with cotton for cash. Unlike the white farmers, black landowners and share tenants as a class show little difference in income.
It is desirable to present one study of the older east ern and another of the newer western cotton area. One of the most thorough and painstaking investigations made of living conditions of the eastern cotton farmer was carried out by the North Carolina Tenancy Com mission in 1922. The data are presented by C. C. Taylor and C. C. Zimmerman in Economic and Social Conditions of North Carolina Farmers. The survey included 1,014 farm families divided between three counties typical of the Mountain, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain sections. In the Coastal Plain county, the 339 farms studied had 93.6 per cent of their crop land in cotton, corn, and tobacco ; in the Piedmont the 335 farms surveyed had 81.4 per cent in these three crops. As the mountain farms do not grow cotton they are omitted. The data were analyzed both in regard to race and status of tenure: operator landlords, owner-operators, tenants, and croppers. In comes ranged all the way from $2,385.85 for white land lords to $640.59 for Negro croppers in the Coastal Plains. In the Piedmont the range for the same groups is from $994.70 to $208.60. The highest group received $1.25 per day per member of the family; the lowest barely ten Table XIV shows the average cash income these investi gations show per family of five for 1921.