In one of the states of the South Atlantic division the average price of farm labor, without board, was $12 per month, while in one of the states of the western division the price on the same date was $31. Why? Because in the latter case a mans labor was more productive. In the South Atlantic division, in producing the chief crops cotton and maize, a man uses one mule in preparing and cultivating the soil. In the western division plowing and harrowing with six-horse teams is common and nine-horse teams are not unusual. The cotton picker in one day will be able to gather not to exceed 300 pounds of seed cotton, worth not more than $15. The western wheat will be harvested by a machine drawn by 28 horses. In the same time four men with this outfit will cut and thresh 700 bushels of wheat, worth $500.
When the threshing machine was first introduced in Ohio, it was stubbornly opposed by all farm laborers. They claimed it, says Bateman, as a right to thresh with a flail, and regarded the introduction of machinery to effect the same object in a few days which would require their individual exertion during the whole winter, not only as an invasion of a time-honored custom, but as absolutely depriving them of the means of obtaining an honest livelihood. At a later date, when a reaper had been introduced into a field of ripe wheat as a matter of experiment only, every one of the harvest hands deliberately marched out of the field and told the proprietor that he might secure his crop as best he could, that the threshing machine had deprived them of their regular winter work twenty years ago and now the reaper would deprive them of the pittance they otherwise could earn during harvest. How short-sighted they were! No class gained so much from the introduction of labor-saving machinery as did those who did the labor. The reason for the increase in well-being, the reason society enjoys luxuries and comforts beyond the fondest dreams of former generations, is due to the fact that the labor of each man has been made so much more effective through these labor-saving devices. The humblest citizen shares in this improvement. Not all share alike and not all share equitably, but each generation sees its members sharing more equitably than those of any generation which preceded it.
The proposition is an extremely simple one. If a man produces just enough food for himself and family, he will have nothing for clothing, shelter, or education. If, however, a man produces four times as much food as he and his family consume, he may exchange one-fourth for shelter, one-fourth for clothing and have remaining a fourth for education, and recreation or savings. This is only another way of saying that the greater the amount of any useful commodity produced by a single days labor the larger will be the laborers income or wages.
Although the increase in intensive agriculture and the diversification in farming tend to increase the need of farm laborers, the introduction of farm machinery has much more than offset this demand. The tendency of farm laborers to become farm tenants; or, to state it in other words, the tendency of landowners to rent their land rather than to continue to operate it themselves, is not without its influence upon the labor problem.
The invention and introduction of farm machinery has accentuated the difficulty of keeping the farm laborer continuously employed. The decrease in the demand for farm labor and the increasing lack of uniformity in the amount required have caused a gradual depletion of the smaller villages and hamlets which were a source of labor supply during harvest and other busy seasons.
The problem of keeping labor continuously employed has always been a difficult one on the farm, because of the change of seasons and because of the variations in the weather from day to day. There is a wide difference between those industries which are carried on within doors and farming, which is subject to the caprices of the weather. Natural causes produce tremendous variations in the return for labor. For example, in 1901 there were produced in the aggregate 3,006 million bushels of wheat, maize and oats, while in 1902 there were harvested 4,180 million bushels. Here is an increase of over a thousand million bushels. The same farmers tilled the same soil in the same way as far as natural causes would allow, and yet there was a difference in result amounting to 39 per cent. A variation of one hundred million bushels of wheat from year to year, due to climatic conditions solely, is not at all unusual.
The manufacturer also has far greater control of his labor. When it rains, he has a roof over his workmen, and hence the work is not interrupted. When it grows dark, he turns on the light and the work continues. If it gets cold, he lights the fire and still the work continues comfortably. It is not so in agriculture. There is a great variation in the working efficiency of men employed in farming. In a certain locality there were twenty-one days of rain in the thirty-one days of May. The next year between June 5 and September 5 in the same locality there was not half an inch of rainfall at any one time.
What is true of labor is also true of machinery. The farmer must purchase machinery which he can use only a few days in the year, while the manufacturer, for the most part, employs his machinery continuously, sometimes day and night. While natural causes prevent the farmer from using the same business methods, or from being able to calculate his profits with the same precision as is possible by those following manufacturing and mercantile pursuits, it is nevertheless important that farming should be planned to avoid, as far as possible, the influence of natural causes. Certain kinds of farming are less dependent upon natural causes than others. Wisdom and foresight can do much to avoid, in all farming, untoward influences. The clever farmer seldom complains about the weather.
Farm machinery has made unnecessary, and hence unprofitable, some of the labor at which children were formerly employed. In the not distant past many, perhaps most farmers, owed their prosperity in large measure to the labor of their children. A large family, especially of boys, was a valuable asset. Even a generation ago conditions were not far different, and two generations ago were quite the same as those described by Homer: