USA > North Carolina > Chowan County > Economic and social history of Chowan County, North Carolina, 1880-1915 > Part 6
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21
1 Cf. table 12, p. 275.
82
CHOW AN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA [82
without injuring it. When following this method, there is little hoe work to be done, except in case of a very wet season. In traveling through the county, I have observed that, by and large, the greatest amount of machinery is used and the least amount of hoe work done on the farms of the white farmers who are cultivating their own land and largely with their own, rather than with a hired, force. It seems that neither the negro tenants nor the negro laborers, as a rule, handle the more complex farm machinery to much advantage.
In the housing of crops, the chief advance has been made in the picking of peanuts. This is all done now, and satis- factorily so, by machinery, while until twelve or fifteen years ago it was all done by hand. A good hand-picker working steadily can pick about four bushels a day. A machine picker handled by two men 1 can pick four hundred bushels, or more, a day. Had it not been for the invention of a successful picker the increase in the production of peanuts would have had to stop long before now, because of the inability to get them picked off. Incidentally, the cost of picking has been cut down to from a third to a fourth of what it would otherwise be. There have been some thrashers for cowpeas, but thus far they have not been very successful. The soy-bean thrasher, however, is
1 As a usual thing five or six men work around a peanut-picker, but the extra men are not engaged in the actual picking. They hand the peanuts up to the picker, place the sacks, take them away when full and sew them up, and take away the vines-all of which work had to be done just the same when the nuts were picked by hand. In fact, for the same amount of nuts, it requires far more extra time when picking by hand than when picking by machine, and for two reasons: in the first place, in picking by hand the work is drawn out over a much longer time, requiring the attention of one or more persons (besides the pickers) at various intervals; second, instead of having one person to deal with, there are several, whose work must be measured up, usually every day, if there are many pickers.
83]
83
AGRICULTURE, FRUIT CULTURE
a success, having attained to a fair degree of perfection within the past four or five years. Only a few peas are raised for market, and these are mostly picked and flailed by hand with a hoop-pole. Cotton must still be picked by hand, a fact which greatly curtails its production. The capacity for picking, however, seems to have increased from fifty to one hundred per cent during the past thirty years. This is probably due to two causes : first, an actual increase in capacity for picking ; second, a production of better cotton, making it possible for one of former capacity to pick more. Many now pick from two to three hundred pounds a day in the early part of the season, while in the eighties compara- tively few picked more than a hundred pounds a day.
Some idea of the degree of change from the antiquated methods of the eighties to the more modern methods of the present may be gained from the fact that in 1880 the average value of farm implements and machinery per acre of improved land was 64.5 cents, while in 1910 it was $2.75-more than a quadruple increase. What is most significant is that more than 75 per cent of this total increase occurred during the last decade.1 From my own observations, I am confident that the next census will show the present decade to have made an even greater increase in the value of farm ma- chinery used than did the previous decade. These facts would seem to indicate that the Chowan farmers are only just beginning to wake up.
Other facts which indicate the degree of improvement in cultivation, are the change in the quality of the " stand- ard work animal," and the increase in their number in pro- portion to the improved land area. In 1880 more than 14 per cent of the work animals on the farm were oxen.2 The
1 These calculations are made from table 6, p. 269.
2 For the data and calculations of this and the previous paragraph cf. table II and footnotes to same, p. 274.
84
CHOW AN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA [84
service of the ox, however, in the capacity of a farm animal is now practically a thing of the past. In 1914, during more than a six months' stay in the county traveling back and forth all over it, I saw but one ox being plowed, and learned of only one other. Possibly there were two or three more, but the few work-oxen now in the county (in 1910 estimated at 20) are used mostly for hauling, either on the farm, or in the log woods.
Not only has the efficiency of the "standard work animal" been increased by the ox having been practically dropped out, but also by the mules and horses having been considerably improved. They are larger now than formerly, and on the whole much better fed. Hand in hand with this increasing efficiency of the " standard work animal," has gone the cutting down of the number of acres he has to work. From 1880 to 1910, the average number of improved acres per horse dropped from 34 to 22.3-a decrease of 34.4 per cent in the short space of 30 years. Furthermore, in 1880 the work animals had to do much more work that was not strictly agricultural than they have to do now. Then, most of the cotton raised was ginned by horse power, a majority of the seines were hauled by horses, much of the produce marketed was carted from twelve to sixty miles, and the traveling was done largely with horses. At present, all cotton is ginned by steam, there are no more seines pulled, most farmers are near some railroad station, making it no longer necessary to cart produce very far, and all traveling of more than a few miles is done either by rail or by auto- mobile. Less than ten per cent of the produce now has to be carried more than five miles, and the larger part of it less than three. As for traveling, the horse is now seldom driven so far from home but that the return trip can be made the same day, and many use the automobile almost entirely.
85
AGRICULTURE, FRUIT CULTURE
85]
Variety of Crops .- When we compare the variety of crops grown in 1880 with those grown in 1910 we note two radical changes. Wheat, a crop ranking in average fairly close to oats and sweet potatoes, which held third and fourth place respectively, has dropped out entirely; the peanut crop which was so insignificant in 1879 that the Tenth Census took no account of it, has increased in acreage to within a few acres of cotton, and in market value, probably has a slight lead.1 In acreage, cotton and Irish potatoes have remained about the same, while corn, oats, peas, and forage have each actu- ally decreased. The increase of the sweet-potato acreage has just about kept pace with the increase in population.
A new crop-the soy-bean-has been receiving consider- able attention during the past four or five years. In view of the following facts-that it will produce something on almost any of the land, that it yields a crop while at the same time improving the land, that it is easily cultivated, that it is one of the best and cheapest hog-feeds that can be grown here, that there is a good market for the bean, that there is already in use a fairly satisfactory machine for threshing out the bean, making the cost of gathering from a third to a fourth of what it would be by hand-in view of these facts, the soy-bean is destined to attain a high degree of importance in the very near future.
Production per Acre .- Turning to production per acre, if the census figures for 1879 be compared with those for 1909 it will be seen that they register very little change in pro- ductivity per acre for the three crops-corn, cotton and sweet potatoes-which were the most important in both periods. The facts in the case, however, seem to justify a very different conclusion. I personally have interviewed
1 Since the rise in cotton prices during the present European war, the market value of the cotton crop has again taken first place.
86
CHOW AN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA [86
a number of the most successful farmers all over the county and they tell me that they are now raising from two to three times the amount of produce per acre they were raising thirty-five years ago. My own observations, going back some twenty-five years, are in strict accord with their testimonies.
Of course, there are some farmers who are producing no more per acre now than they were in the early eighties, but these are in the minority. Many farmers who were then making from eight to fifteen bushels of corn per acre are now making from twenty to thirty bushels. Several men in the county have produced well over a hundred bushels per acre. In 1914, I myself stood in a piece of corn which measured out 137.5 bushels per acre. Thirty-five years ago few men in the county would have believed that an acre coud be made to produce so much. With cotton it is the same story over again. In the eighties from a half to three- quarters of a bale was considered good cotton. The aver- age for the county, according to the Tenth Census (1880), was only 166 pounds of lint-a third of a bale (500 pounds) per acre. Many acres fell far short of this amount. During the last five or six years not a few farmers have produced from a bale to a bale and a half per acre for their entire crop.
Not only does the testimony of the farmers contradict the census reports in this particular, but the reports them- selves offer additional proof of the discrepancy. From 1880 to 1910, the acreage of improved land decreased more than 6 per cent,1 while the amount spent for commercial fertilizer in 1910 was 12.6 times the amount spent in 1880,2 and the value of farm machinery in 1910 was practically four times what it was three decades before.3 Why this
1 Calculations based on table 6, p. 269.
2 Cf. table 12, p. 275.
3 Calculations based on table 6, p. 269.
87
AGRICULTURE, FRUIT CULTURE
87]
tremendous increase in the use of commercial fertilizers if they produced no results? The principal manure made on the farm was (and continues to be) that from work animals, which from 1880 to 1910 increased some forty per cent in number.1 Since the value of manure is being more and more realized it is most probable that the increase in " stable manure " was at least as great (most probably greater) as the increase in the number of work animals, which are its source. Does any one conversant with the facts suppose that all this extra amount of manure, the far better tilth that now prevails, and the beginning made in the planting of leguminous crops for building up the soil,2 are necessary to keep the land up to the low fertility of the eighties? Again, by far the greater part of the annual income of the farmer is from the field crops. Orchard products have decreased both in bulk and in value owing in part to the State's having "gone dry," and in part to the damage done in recent years by the coddling moth and other fruit pests. Population increased more than 43 per cent 3 from 1880 to 1910. With this augmentation in the number of mouths to feed, with a somewhat smaller fish- catch,4 and with the live stock production 5 remaining about the same, if the soil productivity has not in- creased, then what has been the source of the phe- nomenal increase in economic welfare observable on all sides? Surely not a few thousand dollars worth of vegetables sold, nor the small manufacturing interests which furnish employment for less than 600 people at any season of the year, and part of the time for even a much smaller number.7 Again, if land productivity has not increased,
1 Calculations based on table II, p. 274. 2 Cf. supra, pp. 80 et seq.
3 Calculated from table 4, p. 264. 4 Cf. table 14, p. 279.
5 Cf. table 7, p. 270.
6 Cf. infra, ch. xx.
7 Estimated. Cf. infra, pp. 117-118.
88
CHOW AN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA [88
why did land more than treble in value from 1900 to 1910? 1 It was certainly due to no artificial boom, to no land adver- tising, to no land speculation. Produce prices rose to some extent, but nothing to compare with the rise in the price of land. Believing that the foregoing facts amply sustain my contention, I shall here rest the case.
From agriculture in its more narrow sense, let us turn to fruit culture, animal husbandry, and poultry raising, which, in reality, are only other branches of the general subject of agriculture. This is especially true when carried on as here in Chowan.
FRUIT CULTURE
Orchard products have decreased in bulk, quality, and value. Very little fruit, even of medium quality (except grapes) can now be raised without spraying. And since no one sprays, the result is that (exclusive of grapes) many a fair-sized orchard does not annually produce a single bushel of non-defective fruit. Aside from grapes, the county is not even supplying itself with fruit. Much of that consumed in Edenton, even during mid-season, is now shipped in from the outside. Large quantities of good- qualitied apples and peaches could be raised here if only a little care were taken with the trees, but the time has passed when all one has to do is to plant the tree, and thereafter gather the fruit.
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
The general conditions regarding the breeding of live stock and poultry and the handling of their products, for the majority of the people, have changed but little. The free range still exists, though for hogs it is far inferior to what it was in former days, due to the fact that most of the
1 Cf. table 6, p. 269.
89
AGRICULTURE, FRUIT CULTURE
89]
mast-bearing trees have been cut. The breeds of hogs and cattle are still largely scrub, though the strains of good blood intermingled are on the increase.
The horses, mules, and sheep bred, continue to be a negli- gible quantity.1
The number of cattle has actually decreased. And while there are probably a few more good-blooded milk cows, the increase in the number was not sufficient in 1909 to show in the milk and butter report of that year.2
Hogs have increased in number, but the increase has failed by more than eight per cent 3 to keep pace with the increase in population. It should be noted, however, that the retardation of increase in hogs, as compared to increase in population, is more apparent than real. At the time of the Thirteenth Census (1910), the average age of hogs when slaughtered was three or four months less than it was at the time of the Tenth Census (1880), which means that a smaller proportion of hogs are now kept over from one season to the next than formerly. A larger per cent of those pigged in 1909 were killed the following season, than of those pigged in 1879, which, in turn, lessened the number to be enumerated the following year. Of course, the true test of the relative increase or decrease of the hog product is not the number of hogs on hand at any one time, but rather the annual output of such products as lard, pork, and bacon. If this item were given in the census reports I am inclined to think that it would show an acceleration of in- crease, in comparison to population increase, instead of a retardation .
1 Cf. table 7, p. 270.
2 Cf. table 9, p. 272.
3 Calculations made from data of table 4, p. 264, and table 7, p. 270.
4 My own estimate.
90
CHOW AN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA [90
The cutting down of the age of hogs slaughtered has been brought about by two factors-better breeding and better feeding. Many farmers have improved their stock of hogs to the point where it is no longer necessary for them to be- come a year or two old before they will fatten. The ap- proach to the balanced ration, however, has doubtless had far more to do with this than has the breeding. The more intelligent farmers now know that the growing animal needs a comparatively large amount of nitrogen-bearing food, or legumes. A great many more have learned by sheer experi- ence that young hogs do far better when allowed to run on either peas or peanuts while eating potatoes, than if fed on potatoes only. With the spread of the cultivation of pea- nuts, the hogs, since they have always had the run of the field after crops are housed, canie into a source of especially good muscle-building food by force of circumstance, rather than by any premeditation on the part of the farmer. Also. the recently introduced soy-bean is now being planted to some extent for hogs, and is proving to be a very high- grade, as well as a cheap feed.
POULTRY
In numbers, poultry 1 has remained about the same. The egg production, however, was nearly two and three-quarter times as great 2 in 1909 as it was in 1879. This increase doubtless was due to the introduction of better-laying breeds and to some approach to scientific feeding. Many people no longer feed their chickens on corn alone.
1 In table 7 the number for 1910 is nearly double that for 1880, but the former is for "poultry of all kinds," while the latter is "exclusive of spring hatching," which I estimate to be at least equal in number to the mature poultry.
2 There was an increase during three decades of 172 per cent. Cal- culations from table 9, p. 272.
CHAPTER VI FISHING IN THE EIGHTIES
RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE OF FISHING
FROM the standpoint of the labor and capital employed, there was in 1880 no industry that could claim to rank second, or even third, to agriculture. Fishing was next in importance, but, according to the best estimates from the known facts, only about four per cent of the taxable property values in the county was given over entirely to this industry.1 There was, however, in addition to this specialized capital, a certain amount reckoned as agricultural, which was devoted to seine-fishing during the season-roughly speaking, from the Ist of April to the Ioth of May (about six weeks) on the river, and from the 10th of March to the 15th of
1 Cf. table 13, p. 276. In 1880 the fishing equipment was not re- corded separately from other personal property, but in recent years this has been done. In 1914 all property of Chowan county was listed at $3,709,255, while the fishing properties alone were listed at $29,337 (figures furnished by the county registrar of deeds direct from the tax books), less than one per cent of the total. It will be observed (table 13) that the list value of the fishing apparatus is less than one- third (30.3 per cent) of the estimated market value ($96,838). In 1880 the taxed property values (exclusive of solvent credits) of the county amounted to $750,648. (North Carolina Executive and Legislative Docu- ments, Session 1881, Raleigh, N. C., Document No. 4.) Assuming that all property in 1914 was listed at the same per cent of its market value as were the fishing properties, and assuming that the same percentage held for 1880 as for 1914, the market value of all property in 1880 was $2,478,204. On these assumptions the estimated market value of the fishing properties for 1880 ($102,700) was 4.14 per cent of the value of all property in the county.
91]
91
92
CHOW AN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
[92
May (about nine weeks) on the sound. Under the latter class of capital were the mules and horses used in pulling in the seines, where this was done by horse power. The labor, too, employed in fishing was labor which at other seasons of the year was engaged chiefly in farming; but even if the time of the horses, mules, and men occupied in fishing should be capitalized and the amount added to the specialized capital of this activity, the aggregate would still be comparatively small.
IMPORTANCE OF DIFFERENT VARITIES OF APPARATUS
At the time when this account begins, gill-nets, pound- nets, hand seines, and power seines-both horse and steam -were all being operated. Of the first there were com- paratively few in use, and these were the short, stake-net variety set principally for shad. Some were set for herring, but the herring caught this way were a negligible quantity. Pound-nets had recently been introduced (1869) and their possibilities were fast being realized, though seining was still the all-important method-probably responsible for eighty-five per cent of the total fish-catch.
POUND-NETS
Advantages Over Seines .- The pound-net has three big advantages over the power seine, its only rival in herring fishing. In the first place, a much smaller amount of labor is required to beach a given quantity of fish. Secondly, the labor force can, in a large degree, be regulated according to the size of the catch, which fact makes it unnecessary to keep numerous hands on the pay-roll for several weeks before the fish begin to run in large quantities. The power seine, on the contrary, requires about the same complement of labor force-aside from the cutters 1-when the catch is small as
1 The cutters are those who head and gut the fish.
1
93
FISHING IN THE EIGHTIES
93]
when it is large. Third, only certain beaches are prac - ticable as seine-landings, while the pound-netter can land his fish almost anywhere he can get a canoe ashore. Another feature of pound-netting is that, from the standpoint of catching fish, a small amount of capital invested produces proportionately as great results as does a large amount.1 With the seine this is not true. There is first a considerable outlay for cleaning up the beach and seine-ground. Then one must have sufficient capital to rig up and fish a seine long enough to reach well out into the water, else it is needless for him to fish at all, except when the fish are play- ing in close to shore, which never occurs more than a few days during a season, and some seasons hardly at all.
Responsible for the Break-up of the Fish Monopoly .- From Cannon's Ferry on the Chowan river clear down to the Albemarle sound, and along its shore to the Yeopim river-practically the county's entire water-front of some forty miles-one would find in 1880 a power seine every few miles. Sandwiched in between were the small oper- ators of hand seines, gill-nets, and pound-nets. Under the conditions existing prior to the introduction of pound- nets, the fishing industry of the county was practically mono- polized by a very few-probably fifteen or twenty-com- paratively well-to-do people.2 This monopoly existed for two reasons : first, a few people owned all the best sites; second, only a few people had the capital necessary to estab- lish and maintain seine fisheries. To start one of these, even on the river, required an initial outlay of some four
1 This is hardly true in handling them, though the proportional ad- vantage of a large amount of capital is not very great even in this respect.
2 The few little hand seines and gill-nets operated were almost negli- gible when their catch was compared to the total catch of the county. Cf. table 14, p. 279.
94
CHOW AN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA [94
or five thousand dollars, while the big seine fisheries on the sound were rigged out at an expense of from eight to fifteen thousand dollars each. With the coming of the pound-nets this monopoly melted away. As above stated, a pound-net fisherman can land almost anywhere. Also, at this time he could begin business on a very small scale, hence those who had only a little capital, but who, nevertheless, wanted to fish on their own responsibility, now had an op- portunity. Some of the first pound-netters were those who had formerly fished seine on wages. Not a few persons started with a total capital outlay well under three hundred dollars, and operated but one or two nets. In 1880, few if any persons or partnerships operated more than four or five pound-nets. In fact, at that time this number was con- sidered a big stand, while at present the larger operators fish from twenty to thirty pound-nets.
SEINES
Hand Seines .- The hand seine was a small affair of from seventy-five to two hundred yards of shallow netting, and required only from four to six people to handle it. These seines were shot by boats propelled by man power, and also were hauled in by man-power windlasses. They were fished intermittently, since, because of their fewness of yards, it was useless to haul them except when the fish were playing in close to the shore. The men would make a haul, say in the morning, and if there were no fish they would hang up till the afternoon, and if there were still none and no prospects of any soon, they would hang up till the next day. When there was a big run of fish on, and coming in close, these little seines would sometimes catch from fifty to seventy-five thousand herring a day for a day or two in succession.1
1 I have it on unquestionable authority that on one occasion a certain hand seine of 140 yards (exclusive of rope) caught between 140,000 and 150,000 in two days.
95
FISHING IN THE EIGHTIES
95]
Power Seines .- At this time there were eight horse-power seines and four steam seines being fished. The former were shot by boats propelled by men, each of the two boats having from six to twelve oarsmen, the number depending upon the size of the seine. They were pulled in by wind- lasses drawn either by horses, mules, or oxen. The steam seines were shot by steam-propelled flats and hauled by steam-driven windlasses.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.