.93 .116 S84 Copy 1 A PLANTATION EXPERIMENT BY ALFRED HOLT STONE Bunleith, Miss. reprinted from The Quarterly Journal of Economics Vol. XIX., February, 1905 436 7«; QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS Let me illustrate one of these removals. In December, 1 900, we moved in a crew of 7 people. They all represented themselves as working hands, though one of the men was over sixty-five, with a wife past sixty. Their entire outfit consisted of a horse, worth at a liberal valuation $50, and $58 worth of miscellaneous and indescribable household effects. In December, 1903, while riding over the place one day, my attention was arrested by a procession slowly approach- ing me. It consisted partly of two wagons, one buggy, two mules, one horse, three cows, two calves, and five dogs, — the property of this same crew of seven. In addi- tion they had with them outside wagons enough to assist them in hauling away 285 bushels of corn, $190 worth of household effects (including a sewing-machine for each woman and a gun for each man), and a half-dozen crates of hogs and several of poultry. During the three years they had paid rent and accounts amounting to $4,168.96, had received in cash $747.85, and had cash paid for help in their crops to the amount of $393.90. Their accounts, of course, included a variety of purchases in addition to their living expenses. They carried away $1,100 worth of personal property. They left to get rid of the supervision incident to plantation management, and removed a short distance to the property of a non-resident, and secured their advances from a merchant. In November last I learned that the head of the squad had applied to a neighboring planter for a location for 1905, and wanted the latter to lift a debt of $1,000 for him. 1 Of those who have left I have said that it was not so much their number as their condition that concerned us. In tli is connection let us look into the condition of the thirty- one families who left us at the close of 1903. It may sug- gest itself to some that the single illustration just given can- not be typical of the possible consequences of the removal of a lar-re number of renters at one time, but that it is ' 8ince the above was put in print this squad has returned to us, to make a crop the present year. It surrendered all it had, save household effects, to its merchant, ami in a-Mition we advanced f75 to cover a balance. It begins where it started before, with nothing, and this time will work on shares. A PLANTATION EXPERIMENT 277 an isolated instance, selected to prove a case. A study of the entire group of families who left that same year will also serve as a reply. Thirteen of these families were renters, and carried with them the following personal prop- erty:— 25 head of stock $3,125.00 9 wagons 360.00 8 cows and calves 200.00 Implements 325.00 " Household effects 650.00 1,400 bushels of corn 700.00 $5,360.00 They also had between $800 and $900 in cash; but, as this is an estimate it is not included. One of these families had rented 23 acres of land, and had been paid a cash balance of $659.60. Another rented 25 acres, and drew a cash balance of $734.72. Of the 31 families 18 were sharehands, and had but $360 worth of property, and that in the shape of household effects. It is not difficult to see why the removal of the 13 renters was a more serious matter than the loss of the 18 sharehands. We hear a great deal about the unequal distribution of wealth in this country, but I have always believed the wealth of the American negro to be more unequally shared than that of any other class of our population. Of course, these figures are too insignificant to be worth anything whatever in this connection, nor is this paper concerned with such a discussion. The remark is suggested, however, by a glance at the average holdings of these two groups of families. If we stop with the statement that 31 families owned $5,720 worth of property, we have the very fair showing of $184.51 per family. The actual distribution of their total holdings, however, gives the renters $412.30 per family, and the sharehands but $20. This inequality holds also with the 79 families on the plantation in 1904. They own, all told, $7,180 worth of property. This would be $90.88 per family. An analysis, however, shows that 278 QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 30 renters own $177.33 per family, or $5,320 of the total. (This is within $40 of the exact amount taken away by the 13 renters in 1903.) Of the balance, $1,120 is held by 12 sharehands, an average per family of $93.33. The re- maining $740 is made up of a distribution of $20 each to 37 sharehands, solely for household effects. But a further analysis shows a still more striking inequality. The 8 families who have been with us since 1899 constitute but little more than 10 per cent, of the total in 1904, but own more than 60 per cent, of the total property. They own $4,375 worth, or $546.87 per family. While there is no question in my mind as to the cash rent tenancy being preferable, from the laborer's standpoint, to any form of metayer, yet I must not be understood as holding that all the advantages by any means accrue to the side of the former system. Earlier in this discussion I gave an entirely unexaggerated statement of what the planter will do in the way of "staking" the sharehand who comes to him with a capital consisting only of ability to work. Thanks to a crop lien law and a fertile soil, such a man can secure advances in my section of the country upon the sole security of the crop to be grown by him. He has the advantage over the renter of having the planter for a partner, and the latter takes all the risk. If dis- aster overtake him, the renter may lose his stock and im- plements, but the sharehand operates on another's capital. At worst he can lose but his labor, and for this he has in any possible contingency at least been sheltered, clothed, and fed. After all, the net results to the tenant depend far more upon his individual efforts and upon his habits, whether of extravagance or economy, than upon any fixed features incident to one system of tenure or the other. Upon every plantation are to be found sharehands who make just as much as do any of the renters, and the nature of whose tenant relation is entirely of their own choosing. A Dumber of accounts could be adduced to illustrate the relative results of the two systems, but the personal equa- tion is so large a factor as to impair the value of bare figures A PLANTATION EXPERIMENT 279 for purposes of comparison. The two following are selected because they are accounts of families equal in all essential respects. They are for 1903, and are condensed as much as possible. Renter: 18£ Acres (15$ in Cotton, 3 in Corn). Debits. Rent $129.50 Merchandise 96.75 Stock feed 52.65 Blacksmith, doctor, and planting seed 25.58 Work in crop, picking and ginning 42.60 Cash 162.48 $509.56 Credits. Net proceeds of 8 bales of cotton, 4,543 pounds, and seed from same $509.56 Sharehand: 18 Acres (16 in Cotton, 2 in Corn). Debits. Merchandise $91.85 Work in crop, picking and ginnins; 40.00 Cash 196.40 $328.25 Credits. One-half net proceeds of 10 bales of cotton, 5,327 pounds, and seed from same $328.25 The renter made 75 bushels of corn, and the sharehand's half of his was 25 bushels. The sharehand made 333 pounds of lint cotton per acre, the renter 293 pounds. The latter was 27 pounds above the plantation average for the year, and 73 pounds above the average yield of renters. The sharehand's yield was 67 pounds above the average of the plantation and 15 pounds below the average sharehand's. The renter had three items on his account which the planter has to provide under a share contract, — namely, black- smith, stock feed, and planting seed. The sharehand hap- pened to have no doctor's bill. The renter drew $4.90 more in merchandise than the sharehand, but received $33.92 less cash. The renter owned two mules, a wagon, 280 QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS and implements, which may be said to have represented his operating capital. He also owned a buggy. The share- hand operated with plantation stock and implements, but owned a riding horse and a cow. In immediate bearing upon our experiment and as illus- trating the gradual transition from a rent to a share system, the most significant figures in the appended table are those which show the stock owned by renters, those showing the rented acreage, and those giving the number of families renting, with per cent, of total number. There are other figures, however, of more or less interest in any general discussion of plantation economy. Take the acreage produc- t ion of lint cotton, for example. The figures show a range of from 215 pounds to 471, and illustrate the fluctuations that may result from various combinations of yield and price. Their study will exhibit the ups and downs of the business, — its possibilities and its hazards. The most valuable lesson they offer is the heavy advantage shown to follow a large yield per acre. 1 In the figures showing the amount of cash advanced tenants each year on the two accounts of outside work in making their crops and in extra picking, we are dealing with two of the most important factors in the net results of the negro's crop. These two items are shown to have been $4.52 for each bale raised in 1902. Even if equally distributed, this would have im- posed an average charge that year of $74.17 per family. But the amount of such assistance needed or demanded by the negro varies all the way from nothing up to enough to consume what would otherwise be handsome profits. These two items alone during this five-year period would have increased the cash balances to our tenants in the total suin of $15,248.90. 1 The fluctuations of yield exhibited here were under conditions well-nigh abso- lutely uniform during the five year?,— save in the one respect of weather. Cotton is essentially a "weather crop," and this truism points to the fallacy of most of the de- ductions and speculations founded upon the indicated yield of 1904. The most assured conclusion as to labor and other conditions, and the most solemnly an- nounced prediction for ensuing years, may both be rendered absurd by too much, or too little, nun during the growing season, by two much while the crop is being saved, or by a killing frost too late in the spring, or one too early in the fall. A PLANTATION EXPERIMENT 281 The transactions between the planter and tenant are fre- quently utterly devoid of any approach to a proper busi- ness basis. This is largely on account of the character of the labor, and rests partly on established custom and partly on the competition for hands. At all events, out of the combination of causes the negro manages to realize in much too large measure for his own good the gratification of his whims and pleasures. I have yet to know of one so deeply in debt or so far behind with his crop as to cause the least hesitation in the matter of demands for cash for the circus or excursion. But of all plantation customs the most pernicious, in my judgment, is that of advancing "Christmas money." This is just exactly what its desig- nation implies. It is never asked for under any pretext of being devoted to some legitimate or substantial use. It is drawn for the sole and express purpose of promoting the pleasures of the holiday season, which begins, according to the recognized plantation calendar, several days before the 25th of December, and terminates several days after the 1st of January. I have never heard of a dollar of such money being diverted from its destined aim. It is spent in various and sundry ways, according to the individual estimate of what constitutes "a good time." A good part goes for railroad fare, — for "riding the train"; the saloon and the crap table receive more than their share; some goes for cheap finery and pinchbeck jewelry. We tried the experiment of putting this matter on a business basis in 1899. In consequence there was no "Christmas money," but we have put out our share since. The figures show the aggregate amount on this account to have been $3,034.70. This may seem small, but it should be considered in conjunc- tion with the accompanying figures, showing the cash bal- ances and advances during this same month each year. They show that in December during the five years there was advanced a total of $7,990.63 in addition to Christmas money. The items are placed in juxtaposition, so that the significance of the latter annual draft and waste may be the more readily appreciated. To illustrate further the 282 QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS amount of cash handled by the negroes, the table also shows the cash balances and advances to them during the ginning season. This usually begins in September, and runs to January, February, or March, according to conditions. During these months there was paid our negroes, exclusive of advances while the crop was being grown, cash to the amount of $44,727.05, an average of $8,945.41 each year. In concluding my earlier paper, to which in some sense this may be considered a second and final chapter, I said that it was impossible for me to judge fairly the effect upon our negro labor of the showing at that time exhibited. I may quote this statement: "To arrive at a just conclusion on this point, at least five years would be required, and only such tenants as removed to other places to continue the tenant relation could be considered in enumerating the re- movals. It would be manifestly unfair, in considering the extent and influence of a migratory, restless habit, to attrib- ute to it such as were actuated by opportunity and desire to purchase land." ' We have before us an exhibit of the transactions of a somewhat longer period than the one suggested. As far as possible, it is confined to a bare statement of fact. It is entirely competent for any one interested in the subject to study the data presented and reason to his own conclu- sions. In judging how far it might be safe to generalize from a single plantation, the following suggestions may with some possible profit be borne in mind. The opera- tions cover a period practically of six years, though all the crop data for the last year are not available. The number of families covered is 154, and of individuals affected more than 1,600. The negroes composing these families came from nearly every section of the South, every Southern State contributing, with the exception of Texas and Florida. The operations extend through years characterized by extremes both of yield and price, with an excellent general average of each. The plantation management was strongly biased in favor of the rent system at the beginning of 1899: 1 I'n pert and Proceedings , pp. 271, 272. A PLANTATION EXPERIMENT 283 it leans as strongly towards the share system at the close of 1904. The relations between management and tenants have been uniformly kindly and necessarily most intimate. In the main the families have been of good class, orderly, and well behaved, but one homicide having occurred among them during the six years. No one of the 103 families that have removed has undertaken the purchase of land. The average age of the heads of families has been about forty years. Of the 8 who have remained on the place during six years, 4 are over sixty-five, 1 over sixty, 2 over and 1 under forty. To my mind, the most suggestive fact which these opera- tions would seem to establish is, stated conservatively, that the attainment of a prosperous condition by the plan- tation negro does not influence him sufficiently to create an attachment for the local environment which accom- plishes his material betterment. This seems to me true, unless the removals from such environment are at least in some considerable measure influenced by stronger appeals to intelligent self-interest than are offered by the condi- tions surrounding the initial improvement. This, of course, presumes the persistence of normal and friendly relations between tenant and management. I take it that in the case before us we are justified in eliminating at the outset, as one legitimate occasion of removal, if I may use the expression, the desire to become a land-owner, inasmuch as no attempt was made in such direction. In running down the list of recorded causes of removal, I find one, and but one, that can be placed in the class of appeals to self- interest, and then only by not insisting that such self-interest be intelligent. This was the case of several well-to-do renters who left us in 1902 because they were offered a reduction of land rent of one dollar per acre elsewhere. Upon its face such action cannot be criticised. As a matter of fact, it emphasized the operation of an unfortunate racial trait, — the thoughtless failure to distinguish between the simplest forms of real and fictitious advantage, the heedless pursuit of the shadow for the substance. The property 284 QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS to which these people removed was run down, its houses were scarcely habitable, its drainage was poor, and there was not another family on it at the time. The reduced rent was a concession to necessity, yet the bait was seized as eagerly as though the hook were not visible to the foresight even of a child. Within a few weeks, whether prompted by characteristic vacillation or by the operation of returning common sense, I do not undertake to say, some of these families wanted to return to us. It would be well-nigh impossible to enumerate the various causes, real and imaginary, behind the change of abode of the hundred and odd families who left us during these years. In several instances, hands left because we were unwilling to advance the amount of "Christmas money" to which they felt themselves entitled. Some departed with the rare frankness of a declaration that they "just wanted a change." Family troubles, the separation of husbands and wives, also account for their share. Still others went because of alleged dissatisfaction with the contract under which they had successfully been brought to a state of in- dependence. 1 In saying that I have long since abandoned the hope of fathoming the processes of the plantation negro's mind, I have "a conscience void of offence" toward these people, to whom I have never knowingly been guilty of an unjust act or word. I mean simply to give expression to the con- viction, speaking of the average, of course, and not of the rare exception, that their actions have no logical or rea- sonable basis, that they are notional and whimsical, and that they are controlled far more by their fancies than by their common sense. Not that the negro is to be called upon to render to the world a reason for his every act, — to account to his critics for the motives behind his comings and his goings upon the earth. But the student of sociology and economics is interested to discover if it be true, as is 1 In wiling btoclt, our contract had required the renter to plant enough corn to provide sufficient feed. After a number had paid for their mules, they ob- jected to this beoauHe corn is not a cash crop. One of the changes incident to the iilmndonmont of our experiment was the discontinuance of our comprehensive contract, and the substitution of one of a dozen lines in the simplest possible form and terms. .4 PLANTATION EXPERIMENT 285 so generally stated, that a certain large and distinct class of the world's laboring poulation is characterized by a restless, migratory tendency. This interest attaches to the general subject, whether the concrete illustration be drawn from the fields of the Southern States, from the diamond mines of Kimberley, or from the gold workings of the Rand. The matters and results treated in this paper merely offer cumu- lative evidence to the correctness of a largely entertained conviction. It is not maintained that they are a demon- stration. But the fact does stand out that, in the matter of building up a group of reasonably permanent tenants, these negroes signally failed to respond to the influence of the most favorable economic conditions with which it was possible for a plantation to surround them. This much is demonstrated, and I account for it in two ways: first, on the hypothesis of a migratory instinct; second, on that of a characteristic easy-going indolence, which seeks freedom to assert itself, and chafes under restraints which measur- ably restrict its enjoyment. The negro race, in the mass, is charged with numerous faults and weaknesses. It is no purpose of mine to discover new ones or to magnify the old. I but give utterance to a sincerely entertained opin- ion, based upon many years of close personal observation, when I say that these traits to-day present the greatest obstacle to the real, general, permanent advancement of the race, whether in this country, Africa, or the West Indies. I have read a great deal about the negro's "love of home," and have heard much of the strength of his "local attach- ment," but in a not unkindly search I have been able to discover neither the one nor the other among the masses of the race. To my mind they are a restless people. Ever seeking change, they sometimes wander far afield, and trav- erse the boundaries of States in its pursuit. Again, like one lost in a forest, they move but in a narrow circle, yet always in the same vain, aimless quest. They have been wanderers since emancipation gave free play to native in- stinct, and I do not see how a love of heme, in the real sense, could characterize a people who in the mass know so little of such an abode. Certainly, the plantation negro changes 286 QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS his residence far too often for his children to form local attachments or to develop anything akin to such a senti- ment. I have often been impressed with the peculiar sig- nificance which long usage has attached to the very word "home" among these people. It has come to mean no more than "house," and the two are synonymous terms. When the plantation negro starts out in quest of an abiding place for another year, he goes in search of another "home." On November 26 last the principal of Tuskegee Insti- tute gave to the press a statement which has been very widely reproduced and commented upon. It recited "the main complaints of the colored people," given to him "time and time again," as explaining their preference for the "uncertain existence" of cities and towns to "comparative prosperity upon a farm." I give them in full: "Poor dwelling-houses, loss of earnings each year because of un- scrupulous employers, high-priced provisions, poor school- houses, short school terms, poor school-teachers, bad treat- ment generally, lynchings and whitecapping, fear of the practice of peonage, a general lack of police protection, and want of encouragement." There is no intimation here of any possible fault or fail- ing on the negro's part. Whether or not the really effective causes behind the urban drift observed by Mr. Washington in Georgia are essentially different from those behind mi- grations from place to place in the Mississippi Delta, we need not stop to inquire. My only suggestion is that not one charge in this comprehensive catalogue was ever laid at our door, yet somehow the fact of local drift and restless movement still remains with us an ever-present reality. And what I say for ourselves I can say likewise for scores of others. I do not say that the complaints recited are not real in some counties of the South. I do assert, however, that they fail to cover the ground. When the friend of the negro masses would know the whole truth behind the forces which to-day most militate against the material progress of the race, he must go deep below the surface of troubles which the white man can remove or rectify. Dcnleith, Miss. Alfred Holt Stone. .4 PLANTATION EXPERIMENT 287 PLANTATION STATISTICS. Year. 1899. 1900. 1901. 1902. 1903. Number of Families. 58 59 61 69 75 Number families leaving and per cent, of total . 26 44.8% 13 22% 16 26.2% 17 24.6% 31 41.3% Cotton acreage .... 1,064 1,048 1,348 1,341 1,392 Bales (500 lbs. average) . 459 817 1,270 1,131 741 Lint per acre .... 215 3891 471 421 266 Bales per family . . . 7.9 13.8 20.8 16.4 9.8 Average price, cents . . 7.50 9.94 7.90 8.08 11.77 Value of cotton and seed . $21,663.88 $47,541.66 $60,742.04 $54,593.26 $53,527.73 Value per acre .... $20.36 $45.36 $45.06 $40.71 $38.45 Value per family . . . $373.51 $805.79 $995.77 $791.20 $713.70 Stock of renters and per cent, of total on place . 73 94.8% 76 85.3% 89 78.7% 77 64.7% 60 47.6% Cash advanced for work in tenants' crops . $465.40 $513.90 $856.90 $741.40 $161.80 Cash for picking .... $759.80 $1,536.10 $3,859.55 $4,376.40 $1,977.65 Cash for work and picking per bale $2.66 $2.50 $3.71 $4.52 $2.88 Work and picking per $21.12 $34.40 $77.32 $74.17 $28.52 Christmas money . . . none $375.00 $1,735.35 $473.85 $450.50 Additional cash advanced during December . . $641.59 $2,378.58 $1,871.00 $1,163.95 $1,935.51 Total cash balances and advances during gin- ning season .... $3,077.22 $12,747.14 $13,899.96 $7,436.39 $7,566.34 Average per family dur- ing ginning season . . $53.05 $216.05 $227.86 $107.77 $100.88 Number families renting and per cent, of total . 58 100% 59 100% 53 86.8% 45 65.2% 36 48% Rented cotton acreage and per cent, of total . 1.064 100% 1,048 100% 1,200 89.02% 884 65.9% 761 54.6% 1 In a former paper the yield for this year was stated to have been 450 pounds. An error was made in the cotton acreage used as the basis of the calculation. The above is the corrected figure. The former was an isolated statement, and did not affect the accuracy of any other figures given at the time. THE INHERITANCE TAX IN THE AMERICAN COMMONWEALTHS. In the number of this Journal for August, 1904, Mr. Huebner published an article on the Inheritance Tax in the American Commonwealths. 1 At the time the article ap- peared the writer of this note was just completing a similar study. Mr. Huebner's work is so well done that little is left for another. However, it has seemed worth the while to supplement his published results at two points. A tab- ular statement of the inheritance tax legislation as it now stands will make it possible to ascertain all the important provisions of a given law without inconvenience, and a fuller examination of the financial significance of the tax may be desirable. This note is designed to supplement Mr. Huebner's excellent review of the development of the State inheritance taxes at these points. In the accompanying tables, la and 16, the classes of heirs, taxable property, exemptions and rates — these being the provisions of most importance — have been indi- cated. The object is not to summarize the development of the inheritance tax legislation, but to state the important provisions of the inheritance tax laws as they now stand. To show these provisions conveniently, it has been nec- essary to divide the States into two groups. In the first group (la) the heirs are divided into two classes, known as "direct" and "collateral," and treated accordingly. In the second group (16) are five States which discrimi- nate between three classes of heirs and apply rates to their shares graduated according to class. To these are added two States — North Carolina and Wisconsin — where the heirs are divided into five classes. Inheritance taxes are now being collected in thirty of our commonwealths. In but one State — Alabama — has 1 "The Inheritance Tax in the American Commonwealths," by Solomon Hueb- ner, Quarterly Journal o[ Economic*, August, 1904, pp. 529-550.