Renter, Tenant Farmer, or Sharecropper?

My grandparents, Peter and Maude Linn, didn’t own their farm south of Dayton, Iowa. But what was the nature of their lease? Were they cash renters, tenant farmers, or sharecroppers? From the time they married in 1920 until they moved in the late 1940’s, they farmed the 160 acres and lived in a house that had no running water or reliable electricity.

In 1948, Peter and Maude Linn, along with their 3 youngest boys, moved from the farm near Dayton to 1615 Arlington Avenue, in Des Moines. A large, stately house set on a large lot, this part of Des Moines had been the area in which the rich and well-connected professionals had lived in previous decades. They rented rooms to lodgers, and the 1950 US Federal Census shows Peter, Maude, sons Ellis, Ivan, and Merlyn, and NINE lodgers.

So, what became of the farm 2 miles south of Dayton? As a Litchfield Farm, another renter/sharecropper was needed. That’s when my family moved in and started to farm. But were we renters, tenant farmers, or sharecroppers?

At the bottom of this post is a lease agreement link for the Litchfield farm made between my parents and Litchfield. You may not be able to read all of the details, but let’s look more closely at a few important parts to this 1956-57 agreement. The property consisted of 160 acres, some of it forested, some pasture, and some cultivated land.

You may see the words “Crop Share” under RENTAL toward the top of the page. Before reading on, let’s learn about the differences among share croppers, renters, and tenant farmers:

In Iowa, many of the farmers were tenant farmers, meaning they likely paid part of the rent in cash and part to the owner in crops; and they sometimes were called “share croppers”. While the words tenant farmer and share cropper were used interchangeably, there were differences, depending on the contract that was written. A true sharecropper was considered to be the “poorest of the poor” in that they provided ONLY labor for the owner of the property. They were unlikely to ever be able to move up or out, never be able to buy their own land or make any real money. They had to use the seeds and equipment provided by the owner, plant what the owner demanded, and pay for their living arrangements with a percentage of the crops.

A cash renter was just that. The rent agreement was paid solely in cash. The crops, and money for those crops, were those of the renter, whether it was a good year or a bad year.

By contrast, a tenant farmer's contract usually contained provisions for both cash rent plus a share of the crops with the landlord. A good year was good for both; a bad crop year (caused by disease, drought, early winter, or other reasons) was bad for both. In even the best of situations, sharecropping families lived in a house and on land that was not their own and, without any notice, they could be evicted by their landlord. In addition, like the "company store" of Tennessee Ernie Ford's song, sharecroppers could be forced to pay elevated prices for seed or pasture land and split any profits in an unfair way. On the other hand, a tenant farmer's agreement normally called for notice to the farmer to vacate the land; and the same was true for a cash renter. 

Often we see in an obituary or in a life sketch that a person was the son or grandson of sharecroppers. You may think, as I did, that sharecroppers were only, or primarily, black? However, approximately two-thirds of all sharecroppers in the United States were white, and one third were black. However, both groups were at the bottom of the economic ladder.

By the 1940s—with increased mechanization and better-paying jobs in urban areas—sharecropping began to disappear in the United States, though some form of it still exists in a handful of areas. Sharecropping, however, is routinely practiced today in a few countries such as Bangladesh, Ghana, Zimbabwe, India and Pakistan. 

Of all acres in Iowa as of July 1, 2022, 7 percent were said to be under a crop sharing agreement which represented 12 percent of all leased land in Iowa. 

So, what happened to these renters or sharecroppers during the Great Depression? 

My mother always said that her family and her other relatives fared well during the Great Depression. They had plenty of food and animals and were able to keep their economic heads above water. But they actually OWNED their farms.

But for those who had high mortgages or didn’t own, including Peter and Maude Linn, what happened to them during the Great Depression? In general, farmers did struggle with lower prices, and, at some point, may not have been able to pay the rent on their farm or hire laborers for various jobs around the farm. I learned that Peter Linn (my grandfather) found that he couldn’t make any money by selling the pigs he had raised and was ready to just slaughter them all to have the meat and to stop the cost of their feed and upkeep. He was talked out of that at the time. But many farmers were making desperate decisions IF they were not able to keep up with the rent and other costs.

Some farmers in Iowa became so angry that they blockaded the transfer of milk to cities and towns, hoping that might drive the price up. In some cases, the price for a bushel of corn fell to just 7 or 8 cents. And during this time, some farmers declared bankruptcy.

Peter Linn, as a renter, and other farmers in our family who rented, felt the pressures of the Great Depression.

Farmers Grow Angry and Desperate:

The Great Depression Hits Farms and Cities in the 1930s | Iowa PBS

The Great Depression Hits Farms and Cities:

https://www.iowapbs.org/iowapathways/mypath/2591/great-depression-hits-farms-and-cities-1930s

Continuing the look at the agreement between Litchfield and my family in 1956, there is a section covering “who pays for what”. In our case, the following were included:

Tenant is to deliver at the Dayton or Wolf Station free of charge, in elevator, crib, or car, one-half of all corn, two-fifths of all oats and soy beans, and one-half of all other grain raised on the leased premises as lessor may direct. [We were paying in crops.]

Tenant pays one-half of cost of hybrid seed corn. Tenant furnishes all seed other than corn. [Somewhat of a split on corn seed.]

Tenant pays cost of threshing or combining oats and soy beans. Each party pays one-half of all other threshing. [A shared cost.]

Tenant pays $35.00 for pasture rent, $5.50 for meadow rental per acre for one cutting and $10 per acre for two or more cuttings.

Tenant agrees that he shall not be entitled to any compensation for buildings, repairs or other improvements … unless expressly consented to by lessor beforehand in writing.

There is much more to learn about these farm arrangements, but based on what you have read and your look at the 1956-57 agreement between Litchfield and my family, what do you think? Were we renters, tenant farmers, or share croppers?

 

Death at Sea

 In the 1840’s and 1850’s, when our first Linn and Olofson ancestors immigrated to the United States, deaths from disease, accidents, and other means were not unheard of. While many studies have been done about mortality on slave ships, little has been done to document immigrant deaths from Europe to the United States.

I’ve known about a couple of deaths in our families aboard ship, but I wanted to know a bit more about how common this might have been and about the disposal of their bodies.

Estimates of ship mortality were reported in The Journal of Economic History, Raymond Cohn, Vol. 44, No. 2, pages 289-300. In that article, mortalities were summarized:

The years 1849 to 1853 certainly caught my attention. As I continued to read this article, it became clear that few studies were done and that the results reported varied a great deal. A report by the United States Senate Select Committee on the Sickness and Mortality Onboard Emigrant Ships, No. 386, 1854, stated that .80 percent perished on ships arrived in New York harbor during 1853; .63 percent in 1854; .21 percent in 1855; and .21 percent in 1856. However, many reports claimed that mortality onboard ships was at 2 percent or even higher.

Certainly, our ancestors were cramped in steerage for the long trip across the ocean. Disease, such as cholera, was prominent, and those who were vulnerable, such as the very young or very old, were susceptible to serious disease or dying.

Olof Olsson and Kristin Larsdotter (my 3^rd great grandparents) made the trip with their 6 children, including my second great grandfather Olof Olofsson,,sailing on 3 September 1850 on the Swedish Brig Maria from Gefle to New York. Olof Olofson, farmer, age 42; Christina, age 46; Lars, age 15; Olof, age 11; Anna, age 9; Margareta, age 7; Christina, age 5; and Karin, 10 months were listed on the ship manifest.

It is the baby, Karin who died, listed as dying in New York, but likely at sea and recorded when they disembarked. I have no additional records for this death. New York, as with most states of the time, was not keeping regular death and burial records.

Peter Linn (born Olaus Petter Olausson) and his wife Sophia and their children boarded the Preciosa to New York, arriving on 8 September 1851. They were listed as Olaus P. Olofson, age 28, a farmer; wife Sophia, age 28; son Johan E, age 2; and son Ol. Leon, age 4 months. They are listed as being in a cabin. Below them are people "between deck" which sounds horrible.

In this case, it was Johan Edward, age 2, who perished on the voyage on 1 August 1851. One son had already died in Sweden; Olof Leonard, the baby, died in 1852 in Iowa; and this family lost child after child of the 7 they had, with only one growing to adulthood.

Johan Edward passed on 1 August, yet the ship didn’t land in New York until 8 September. One would guess that his body would have been buried at sea with a simple ceremony done.

To lose a loved one is always difficult; to lose a young child is more than just heartbreaking. And then to know that child was not given a proper burial with a spot one could visit is hard to even comprehend.

This is just a short look at two deaths at sea, both young travelers from our family line. Somehow our ancestors were able to keep going until they reached their destinations. The Olssons in Wisconsin; the Linns in Iowa.

The Iowa Cow Wars

 No, that's not a joke. 

Before I tell the story, I want to thank the author of the Instagram account, notesoniowa and website https://www.notesoniowa.com/  for his daily history lessons on Iowa. While I spent the first 25 years of my life in Iowa and thought I knew most of what makes Iowa great, I have learned a great deal from his daily posts. Please follow him on either account to enjoy learning more about Iowa.

So, the Iowa Cow Wars was posted on notesoniowa on September 21 and, of course, piqued my interest. In 1929, just as our nation was approaching the Great Depression, Iowa passed a law requiring all farmers to have their cattle tested for tuberculosis. Veterinarians were sent to test all cows and eradicate those that tested positive for tuberculosis. You can imagine the economic hit that would take to some farmers. It was estimated that for every cow lost, the farmer lost $130, not a small amount at the time. During the fall of 1931, and, with the aid of inaccurate information being disbursed to foment farmers, many became unwilling to cooperate and staged protests.

In late September 1931, these protests reached a head in Cedar County. When protests and pleading with the State Legislature didn't work, the angry farmers headed to Tipton, Iowa, where testing was taking place. Pitchforks, rocks, and other crude weapons were used by the farmers to face off with the veterinarians and their security.

Governor Turner sent about 1,000 National Guardsmen with machine guns to calm the situation. The last of the Guardsmen left in late November and testing continued. 

When I look at the newpapers where our ancestors lived (Dayton Review, Fort Dodge Messenger, etc.), I see nothing about the Cow Wars. A few short articles appeared in Hamilton County newspapers which included the Stratford area. But this lack of news attention leads me to believe that the farmers in Webster and Hamilton counties probably cooperated with the TB testing of their cows. Still, it's an interesting look at an important issue in Iowa when our ancestors were farming. At the very least, they would have been aware of the law, the disagreements, and the impact on their livelihoods.