TO STOP THE BACK DRIFT OF FARMING; TO CREATE SATISFYING RURAL LIFE CONDITIONS; TO INCREASE THE PURCHASING POWER OF THE FARMER-AN OBJECTIVE

By Hugh MacRae, of Wilmington, N. C.

Mr. Chairman, Doctor Mead, gentlemen, I, like all the rest, have been wonderfully inspired by this meeting. I have never heard addresses bearing so closely and so accurately on the purpose for which we have assembled. Doctor Mead did not limit me as to the subject of my talk, and I have designated it so that the title would, in a way, explain it to anybody that would not care to go any further. May I go directly to the heart of this subject by quoting four paragraphs from Dr. Elwood Mead's letter of invitation to this conference. This letter gives the picture of present conditions in the Southern States. It recommends an effective remedy. The subject can not have a better introduction. His statement is as follows:

The investigations of this bureau, under authority from Congress, into what is needed to create contented prosperous farming communities, on neglected lands of the South, have proceeded far enough to show that it is feasible and that great local and national benefits would result from such action.

Agriculture in the South is suffering from badly organized farming and a dreary rural life. Large areas are cultivated by negroes, or unskilled white farmers, who as tenants or hired laborers are unsuited to any but the most primitive farm practices. They do not succeed, without careful supervision, in dairying, truck farming, or the use of improved farm machinery. They have no knowledge of the science of soil fertility or more than one crop system. Slovenly cultivation and depletion of soil fertility are causing a decline and decay of rural prosperity and an exodus of farm workers.

To check these tendencies it is proposed to create a few farm communities organized to cooperate in business and in social affairs. The area of land on which a colony is founded should be large enough to give it an agriculture independent of that of the surrounding country. That would mean land enough for at least 100 farms-200 would be better. A development and crop program would be thought out in advance of settlement. An agricultural credit fund would be provided, from which advances would be made to supplement settlers' capital in improving farms and erecting community improvements. The land would be sold and advances repaid in long-time amortized payments. The advantages to settlers in this scheme would, it is believed, attract a superior type of farmers and create a permanent community of earnest, intelligent people, able to utilize the benefits of scientific knowledge, modern farm machinery, and teamwork in selection of crops to be grown and preparation and marketing of products. In other words, it would introduce in farming the benefits of mass production, which have done so much for other American industries in the last 50 years, and which would enable 100 families living on 10,000 acres to operate almost as effectively as a single owner of 10,000 acres.

The time has come when agriculture must change as other industries have changed. It must be done to make the country a stable and progressive part of our political life. It is a task which challenges the attention of our ablest minds. A successful demonstration of the character outlined will go far toward achieving that result. The opportunities and needs of the South make it an appropriate field for these demonstrations.

As a result of 20 years' intensive work in the South, having this general problem in mind, I agree, as I am sure we all do, with what Doctor Mead has so well said.

Either one

There are two divergent ideas about reclamation. alone, like positive or negative electricity, is useless. Both ideas relate to engineering, and engineering progresses only by making use of facts in logical sequence. The first idea invariably forms around great projects of engineering-dams, reservoirs, drainage ditches, canals. It is physical engineering constructive.

The second idea forms around social and economic conditions— homes, families, crops, markets. It is human engineering-creative. Under the policy of Doctor Mead the Bureau of Reclamation has developed the element of human engineering to its proper proportions. It may be well to add that the needed proportions vary for different sections of the country. In the West the need of physical engineering naturally predominates. In the South, to human engineering must be assigned the first place.

As side lights on this subject I would like to make certain statements and relate a few incidents with a view to emphasizing the importance of carrying forward, as a national obligation, this idea of re-creating country life.

First, we should emphasize and hold fast to the fact that a nation is built on its agriculture. When we investigate the ultimate effects of agricultural production, we feel safe in saying further that a nation is built by its agriculture. To reach this conclusion requires bearing in mind the great industries of the country which are directly dependent on or served by the farmer, dependent on him for their market, or dependent on the transportation or the use of his products; it requires also adding to these the industries and professions which are in turn dependent upon this primary group. Then, if we give weight to the fact that one-third of the entire population of the United States is engaged directly in farming, we will see that our best efforts must be given to the interests of agriculture if the national economic machinery is to function properly.

If we limit our point of view to the figures of the census and consider only acreage, tonnage, bushels, and dollars, we will form an erroneous estimate and will fail to recognize certain fundamental principles which have an important bearing on the national welfare. It is a fact that the area of land in crops, east of the Mississippi

River, has decreased more than 15,000,000 acres in the five years ending in 1924. It is also true that more than 3,000,000 persons have left the farms within a very short period of time. Further, we know that with our present facilities for marketing farm products, the primary markets appear at times to be saturated. For these conditions there are underlying causes, but analysis will reveal the fact that they do not directly touch, in the way of solution, the human problem we are here to consider.

In the early history of the United States the agriculture of the South was preponderant. It is interesting in this connection to follow the effect which the constant inflow of gold due to the production and exportation of cotton has had on the national economic structure. Its importance can hardly be exaggerated. Even to-day, with the Middle West and the far West well developed, and notwithstanding the retrogression which has taken place in southern farming conditions, that section produces, in value, more than onethird of the farm products of the entire country. The South should, therefore, be given proportionate consideration in any governmental program which contemplates the protection, the further development, or the extension of farming interests.

In the South those of us who are not engaged in farming have for two generations been trying to tell the farmer what he should do, and yet at the present time we find farming on the down-grade. Without some change in plan of approach, the conditions of the average farmer in the South Atlantic States will remain serious-I am tempted to say hopeless. There are several conditions, either one of which would warrant this conclusion. One is disclosed in a statement recently issued by one of the large southern banks, as follows:

Georgia and Alabama might just as well face the economic fact that the production of cotton will soon cease to be their main staple erop. Inevitably, under competitive conditions, they will be forced to turn to a type of agriculture in which cotton will be subsidiary.

This refers to competition of Texas, Oklahoma, and the Western States. Then follows the expected typical advice:

The way out is (1) for the farmer to become a business man; (2) to adopt business methods; (3) to adapt himself to the same kind of conditions as the manufacturer; (4) to rely upon individual efficiency; (5) work for cooperative endeavor; (6) use every possible means to increase man-power output by the use of improved methods.

At a glance we see that this requires the farmer, of his own initiative, under heartbreaking conditions, to evolve into a superman. When we recollect that a large percentage of the farmers in the South are negroes, that the colored race supplies from two-thirds to three-fourths of the farm labor, that most of the southern farmers

have to be content with standards which result from this easily contented competition, you will begin to realize the difficulty of accomplishing much by giving perfectly good advice of the above description. The true answer seems to be: Give the farmer actual demonstrations of how these things can be done. Show the beneficial effects of accomplishment.

The South needs to be lifted out of the old system, which is a direct inheritance and a natural sequence from the institution of slavery. This requires new psychology. To introduce a new point of view assistance in the way of demonstration is essential. With a sound program actually being worked out, helpful publicity will come. The right principles, when demonstrated, will spread with rapidity, because leaders in the South are awake to the necessity of finding a solution.

There is already in the South a store of valuable information, based on good farming practice of progressive men, and, if this can be put into general usage, it will have a far-reaching influence in remedying present difficulties. Under proper encouragement this localized farm knowledge would quickly spring into full vigor and develop as points of inspiration. I would say here that. if the farm methods of five of the best farmers could be spread through the South, it would double the value of the South's agricultural production. If the plans of Mr. Coker, Mr. Leach, of Florida, and two or three others could be made known to the South, our problem would be solved; but we have no effective way of getting the message to the farmers except by actual demonstration.

We have conclusive proof as to the effectiveness of demonstration by results obtained in Denmark credited primarily to the Danish folk schools. The first folk school was a working model that worked. It accomplished in a comparatively short time more than could have been accomplished through a century of advice.

We are conversant with what Doctor Mead has accomplished in Durham, Calif., in New Zealand, and in Australia. We know what the new policy of reclamation is accomplishing to-day on the projects in the Western States. The Bureau of Reclamation is making successful demonstrations which will prove of great future importance. Its policies have gained the confidence of our Representatives in Congress to such an extent that they will, undoubtedly, be carried forward until people get a true perspective of what is meant by reclamation.

Some 20 years ago I became interested in the establishment of rural communities. To succeed it was necessary that these communities develop a profitable agriculture and a satisfying rural life. These objectives have been reached. Contented families have evolved a successful agriculture in a region previously typical of

the conditions throughout the Southern States. The success of these individuals and these communities has had a beneficial influence over a wide territory. This has been accomplished without adding to the "productive acreage " included in the census, and largely by developing new markets for high quality farm products.

During the past 12 months groups of farmers, business men, bankers, and professional men, have visited these communities. In order to get their reaction they were first asked if the following items were those which they wanted demonstrated. After seeing the farm settlements they were asked if they were satisfied that these points had been proven. The answers were, without exception, in the affirmative. The points were:

1. That the plan of group settlement provides conditions which are favorable to the success of the farm family.

2. That the farm families in a typical group settlement are successful and happy.

3. That the influence of such a successful group is beneficial to the general section in which it is located-adding to the economic welfare of that section.

4. That the expert farmers forming a certain percentage of the membership of a rural community become through their example— an inspiration to others.

5. That properly planned farm communities provide social advantages not possible to the isolated farmer, and thereby supply an element which is essential to the contentment of the farm family.

I think Doctor Mead, Mr. Kreutzer, and others familiar with land settlement will say that if you can prove those five points by one demonstration colony in each State you will revolutionize the agriculture of the South.

Because they are typical of southern conditions, over great areas, I would like to refer to two projects:

The colonial plantation, Castle Haynes, now a farm settlement, had gone through the process of deterioration incidental to farm tenancy, widely practiced since the Civil War, and was producing for its owners the remnants of an income, not exceeding $1,000 per year; an income which should have been subtracted from capital because it was taking the last bit of fertility from the soil. This plantation has provided farm homes for 50 prosperous families and the gross production runs at times as high as $500,000 per year. Following the best farm practice, the fertility and productivity of this land has been restored, so that recently part of it, a farm of 30 acres, which came under sale at auction, brought a cash price of $12,000 or $400 per acre.

At Invershiel (a combination of three colonial farms which in their day had the reputation of being the best in the State) the purpose