470.5 acres in 1860 to 83.3 acres in 1920. This great change was caused in the main by the disappearance of farms of 100 acres or more. Farms of 1,000 acres or more decreased during this period from 2.5 per cent of the total number of farms to 0.3 per cent in 1920. Farms of 500 to 999 acres decreased from 6.7 per cent of the total number of farms to 1.3 per cent during this period; and farms of from 100 to 499 acres decreased from 55.6 per cent of the total number of farms to 24.4 in 1920. The percentage of the total number of farms of 100 acres or more in the county between these two dates decreased from 64.8 per cent to 26 per cent.

Farms of from 20 to 49 acres increased from 1.11 per cent of all farms in 1860 to 39.3 per cent in 1920. The total increase of farms of 99 acres or less was from 35.2 per cent of the total number of farms in 1860 to 74 per cent in 1920.

CHANGES IN VALUE OF FARM REAL ESTATE

Until recent years the per acre value of farm real estate in Southampton County was comparatively low (Table 2), a condition that probably was favorable to the considerable progress of negroes in farm ownership shown in a later part of this bulletin. As late as 1900 the average value of farm real estate was only $7.07 per acre, having increased from $4.16 per acre in 1870. During the decade 1900-1910 the value per acre more than doubled, and it increased nearly 250 per cent in the following decade. The large decrease in the average size of farms considerably influenced the average valuation of farms, which declined from $3,235 in 1860 to $1,046 in 1900. From that date a striking increase in the average valuation of farms has occurred, although there has been some decrease in the average size of farms. In 1920 the average valuation per farm was $5,377, including machinery and livestock, or an increase of 152 per cent during the decade. TABLE 2.-Total value of the average farm in Southampton County, Va., proportion of this value represented by different classes of farm capital, and average value per acre of each class, 1860-1920

CHANGES IN VALUE OF OTHER KINDS OF FARM PROPERTY

The average value of machinery and implements per acre of improved land is slightly higher than for the United States as a whole. The same is true of livestock. The proportion of the total value of farm property invested in machinery and implements has increased somewhat since 1860, because of the large relative increase from 1910 to 1920, but the relative investment in livestock has largely decreased since 1860.

CHANGES IN FARM TENURE IN THE SECTION

Figures on tenure are obtainable for the first time in 1880 in census data. At that time 45 per cent of all farms in Southampton County were operated by tenants. (Table 3.) A decrease in the percentage of farms operated by tenants occurred between that date and the census of 1890, at which time 31 per cent of all farms in the county were operated by tenants. It will be recalled that this was a decade in which the total number of farms in the county decreased, and when apparently the process of subdivision which had developed rapidly from 1870 to 1880, was temporarily suspended. Approximately 56 per cent of all farms were operated by tenants in both of the following census years, and in 1920 the percentage had increased to 59.2.

Thus, in 1920 nearly 60 per cent of the farms of Southampton County were operated by tenants, as compared with 31 per cent in 1890, the increase having occurred in the decade 1890-1900 and to a less extent in the decade 1910-1920. The percentage of tenancy was much higher than in the United States as a whole or the State of Virginia as a whole. The percentage of tenancy in Southampton County, however, is somewhat less than the percentage of tenancy in most parts of the South, where there are large numbers of negroes. TABLE 3.-Number and percentage of all farms operated by tenants and owners in Southampton County, Va., since 1880 and comparative figures on percentage of tenancy in Virginia and the United States, 1880–1920

The colored population of Southampton County has been larger, each decade since 1790, than the white population. In 1790 the total population of the county was 12,864, of which 5,993 were slaves and 559 free colored. There was a gradual increase from 12.864 in 1790 to 16.074 in 1830, followed by a decline during the following 40 years to 12.285 in 1870. This date marks a distinct period in the change of population in Southampton County. From that date with each successive census year to 1920 the population gained rapidly until there were 27,555 inhabitants in the county in 1920, of which 16,919 were negroes and 10,635 white.

Practically all of the increase in population between 1790 and 1830 was caused by an increase in the negro population of the county. Almost all of the decrease between 1830 and 1870 was due to a decline in the negro population of the county. Again, since 1870 the increased negro population of the county has been the principal source of the total increase.

1

TABLE 4.-Changes in number of white and colored farmers classified by tenure, Southampton County, 1900-1920

The numbers of owner operators and tenants for the two races are available on the county basis for the three census dates since 1900. (Table 4.) In 1900, negro farmers constituted 47.6 per cent of the total farmers in the county. By 1920 this percentage had increased to 56.6 per cent of all farmers in the county, the figures being calculated by excluding manager-operated farms. During the same period the percentage of all negroes who were owners increased from 24 to 28.2 per cent. On the other hand, not only did the whites decrease in proportion to all farmers in the county, but the proportion of all white farmers who owned the farms they operated decreased from 60.3 per cent to 56.8 per cent. Between 1910 and 1920, however, the proportion of owner farmers decreased both for colored and for whites.

SIZE AND VALUE OF FARMS AND OF FARM PROPERTY

Detailed statistics concerning systems of farming were taken for 261 farms in the section surveyed. Of these, 112 were tenant farms, and 149 were owned entirely or in part by the men who operated them.

TABLE 5.-Average size and valuation of farms and distribution of valuation of farm capital for different tenure classes

The average size of the farms surveyed, for both tenure classes, was 109.7 acres, with an average valuation of $5,194 per farm (Table 5), of which $757 was livestock and machinery. According to the census of 1920, the average size of all farms in the county was 83.3 acres, valued at $5,377, including $811 worth of livestock and machinery. Thus it will be seen that the farms for which the surveyed data were obtained are somewhat larger in acreage but had a smaller total value and a smaller equipment value than the averages for the county.

The average size of the tenant farms for which surveyed data were taken was 56.9 acres, with an average valuation of $2,092, of which $429 was in equipment. The average valuation of farm buildings other than dwellings on the tenant farms was $123. This seems comparatively small when the valuation of buildings in other sections of the country is considered. But the lumber for constructing these buildings is usually sawed locally, and the labor is that of the farm operator himself. For these reasons the buildings are probably valued at considerably less than their actual reproduction cost.

Farms operated by owners included in the survey averaged 149 acres, valued at $7,540. The average valuation of equipment was $1.004 and of buildings, other than dwellings, $262.

The average value of land and buildings per acre was $29.23 for tenant farms and $43.44 for owner farms. A considerable portion of this difference in value per acre is due to the fact that the dwelling on the average owner-operated farm is worth more than three times as much as the dwelling on tne average tenant farm. But this will not account for all the difference. The value of farm land per acre, exclusive of buildings, average $20.21 for tenant farms and $34.12 for owner farms.

Equipment on the tenant farms was worth $7.54 an acre and on the farms operated by owners $6.72. This may indicate that on the average the tenant farms surveyed were somewhat better equipped than those operated by owners. The difference between tenants and owners in this respect, however, does not appear when equipment value is given in terms of crop acreage. The tenant farms had an average of $12.80 worth of equipment per crop acre as compared with $20.55 per crop acre on the farms operated by owners.

CHANGES IN TENURE STATUS OF THE FARMERS SURVEYED

Tenure progress in this county is usually made by progressive steps through different tenure stages to complete ownership of farms. This progress, commonly known as "climbing the tenure ladder," consists of passing through some or all of the following tenure stages, usually in the order in which they are named:

1. Worker without wages on parents' farms.

2. Farm hand.

3. Cropper (this is a tenure stage common only in the South, which to a considerable extent takes the place of the farm-hand stage in other sections of the country).

4. Share tenant owning most or all of the farm equipment. 5. Cash tenant.

6. Owner operator with farm mortgaged or owner additional; that is, the stage in which the operator owns part of the land operated and rents the remainder.

7. Owner operator with farm free of mortgage.

All of these stages except the first two were represented by the tenure of the farmers interviewed at the time the survey was made, but the number of farmers involved in some of the stages does not warrant a study of the tenure history of these farmers on the basis of all of the several stages. Table 6 shows the stages and the length of time in each stage through which the owner farmers had passed before becoming owners, and similar information is given for the tenant farmers.

80641-26-2

More than 70 per cent of the owners had been both croppers and tenants before becoming owners, taking on the average six years in the cropper stage and eight years in the tenant stage. They had also been owner farmers an average of 12 years. Of 105 owners who had passed through both the cropper and the tenant stages prior to attaining ownership, only 8 had received wealth by inheritance, gift, or marriage. Of the 31 owners who had occupied only the tenant stage before becoming owners, 4 had been aided by one of these forms of gratuitous financial assistance. Only a few owner farmers had been farm hands working for wages and a few others had climbed into the ownership stage directly from the cropper stage. Over 85 per cent of the tenants had been croppers prior to becoming tenants, having spent nine years in each stage. Of those who were croppers at the time of the survey nearly half had been tenants at one time.

Of those who were owner farmers at the time of the survey only one case was reported where an owner farmer had suffered such severe financial fosses that he had been compelled to revert to the tenant stage. A considerable number had been forced to sell part of their land to meet their obligations. Personal comments of those interviewed indicated that such cases were generally due to buying too much land or attempting to purchase additional farms on too large a margin of credit. A considerable number of owner farmers were reported as hard pressed, having bought land during the World War at high prices. One owner, in an effort to help his mother financially, had lost 34 acres out of 54 originally inherited. Several owner farmers had suffered heavy losses by fire, but had not been forced to revert to a lower stage of tenure.

Three tenants and one cropper reported that they had at one time owned land, but one of the tenants had been unable to retain ownership. Comments of individuals indicate that a large proportion of the tenants were eager to become landowning farmers.

1 There were two other operators who should be reported with the owners, but years were not given. There was one schedule of a man who had been cropper, tenant, and owner, but had lost his farm and become a tenant.