Debating Farm Power: Draft Animals, Tractors, and the United States Department of Agriculture

Agricultural History

Volumn 74, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 545-568

  Ellenberg, George B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WEST FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347573948     PISSN: 00021482     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. This debate was treated in an earlier issue of this journal, but the authors did not examine the attempt to court the USDA. See Alan L. Olmstead and Paul W. Rhode, "The Agricultural Mechanization Controversy of the Interwar Years," Agricultural History 68 (Summer 1994): 35-53.
2. Fourteenth Census of the United States, 1920, Agriculture, 514.
3. P. S. Rose to Willet M. Hays, 13 May 1910, Records of the Office of the Secretary of Agriculture, General Correspondence of the Office of the Secretary, 1906-1970, Record Group 16, National Archives, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as ROSA-GC).
4. Proposed Farm Power Studies, USDA, Circular no. 149, March 1920, 7; Farm Power Conference letter, 16 September 1919, ROSA-GC .
5. Proposed Farm Power Studies, USDA, Circular no. 149, March 1920, 7; Farm Power Conference letter, 16 September 1919, ROSA-GC .
6. The Horse Association of America was incorporated on 15 January 1920. In its first eight months, it collected over $70,000, mainly due to the efforts of its directors. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting, 1920 (Chicago: Horse Association of America, 1921), 12-13, 35; Olmstead and Rhode, "Agricultural Mechanization Controversy," 39, n. 8. During the 1930s the association changed its name to the Horse and Mule Association of America but changed back to its original name in 1948 when the focus shifted away from draft animals to pleasure horses. For the sake of clarity, the organization will be referred to as the Horse Association of America (HAA) throughout this paper. The largest collection of HAA materials is located at the National Agricultural Library in Beltsville, Maryland.
7. The Horse Association of America was incorporated on 15 January 1920. In its first eight months, it collected over $70,000, mainly due to the efforts of its directors. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting, 1920 (Chicago: Horse Association of America, 1921), 12-13, 35; Olmstead and Rhode, "Agricultural Mechanization Controversy," 39, n. 8. During the 1930s the association changed its name to the Horse and Mule Association of America but changed back to its original name in 1948 when the focus shifted away from draft animals to pleasure horses. For the sake of clarity, the organization will be referred to as the Horse Association of America (HAA) throughout this paper. The largest collection of HAA materials is located at the National Agricultural Library in Beltsville, Maryland.
8. Horse Association of America, Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting, 1920, 15.
9. Fred M. Williams to Henry C. Wallace, 14 July 1921, ROSA-GC. The HAA officially recognized the worth of the automobile. For example, in 1925 the organization's secretary praised the automobile because it had "contributed greatly to equestrian sports, [by] making riding clubs, polo fields and hunt clubs easy of access." Wayne Dinsmore to William Jardine, 21 March 1925, ROSA-GC; Fred M. Williams, "Save the Horse Industry and Help Save the Nation," Horse Association of America, ca. 1921, ROSA-GC. This pamphlet, while harshly critical of the motor interests for their methods, did not echo the Luddites. "Anyone who isn't blind or a fool," Williams insisted, "will acknowledge the value of the motor vehicle and grant it a permanent place in its proper place" [original emphasis].
10. Henry C. Wallace to Wayne Dinsmore, 6 June 1921, ROSA-GC; Milton S. Eisenhower, "How to Get Agricultural Information," Southern Agriculturist 67 (April 1937): 10, 15.
11. Henry C. Wallace to Wayne Dinsmore, 6 June 1921, ROSA-GC; Milton S. Eisenhower, "How to Get Agricultural Information," Southern Agriculturist 67 (April 1937): 10, 15.
12. H. C. Taylor to F. J. Wright, 3 April 1920, ROSA-GC.
13. Dinsmore to Henry C. Wallace, 17 December 1923, ROSA-GC.
14. Edwin T. Meredith to George Massey, 23 April 1920, ROSA-GC.
15. "Three to One in Favor of the Mule: Story of the Tractor Demise from the Miller Bros. 101 Ranch Trust, Oklahoma, The Largest Diversified Farm and Ranch in the United States," Horse Association of America, Leaflet no. 69, ca. 1920.
16. Williams, "Save the Horse Industry."
17. Harlan Smith to [?] Jump, memorandum, 9 February 1922, ROSA-GC. A survey of farming conditions in central Illinois came out in favor of draft animals as well. Among other points, the authors noted that on a farm growing fewer than 240 acres of crops, tractor use generally was not economically warranted. The study concluded that "little saving in man labor was effected by the use of the tractor." W. F. Handschin, J. B. Andrews, and E. Rauchenstein, "The Horse and Tractor: An Economic Study of Their Use on Farms in Central Illinois." University of Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin no. 231, February 1921, 222-23; Horse Association of America, press release, 7 December 1921, ROSA-GC.
18. Harlan Smith to [?] Jump, memorandum, 9 February 1922, ROSA-GC. A survey of farming conditions in central Illinois came out in favor of draft animals as well. Among other points, the authors noted that on a farm growing fewer than 240 acres of crops, tractor use generally was not economically warranted. The study concluded that "little saving in man labor was effected by the use of the tractor." W. F. Handschin, J. B. Andrews, and E. Rauchenstein, "The Horse and Tractor: An Economic Study of Their Use on Farms in Central Illinois." University of Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin no. 231, February 1921, 222-23; Horse Association of America, press release, 7 December 1921, ROSA-GC.
19. H. C. Taylor to Finley Mount, 5 January 1922, ROSA-GC; Finley Mount to H. C. Taylor, 25 January 1922. ROSA-GC; F. W. Heiskel to Finley Mount, 2 February 1922, attached to Finley Mount to Henry C. Wallace, 3 February 1922, ROSA-GC.
20. Mount to Henry C. Wallace, 14 February 1922, ROSA-GC.
21. Henry C. Wallace to St. Paul Pioneer Press, 27 January 1922, ROSA-GC; press release attached to Dinsmore to Henry C. Wallace, 6 March 1922, ROSA-GC.
22. Dinsmore to Henry C. Wallace, 6 March 1922, ROSA-GC; Henry C. Wallace to Dinsmore, 14 March 1922, ROSA-GC.
23. Dixon Merritt to [?] Jump, Memorandum, 26 April 1922, ROSA-GC.
24. Henry C. Wallace to H. C. Taylor, 15 August 1923, ROSA-GC.
25. Reprint of "Excerpts from the 1928 Annual Report of the Horse Association of America," Horse Association of America, ca. 1929, 2, 12-13.
26. Ibid.; reprint of "Excerpts from the 1929 Annual Report of the Horse Association of America," Horse Association of America, 1930, 8-9.
27. Ibid.; reprint of "Excerpts from the 1929 Annual Report of the Horse Association of America," Horse Association of America, 1930, 8-9.
28. Wayne Dinsmore to C. W. Warburton, 18 January 1929, ROSA-GC.
29. Ibid.
30. Warburton to Dinsmore, 28 March 1929, ROSA-GC; Dinsmore to Warburton, 2 April 1929, ROSA-GC.
31. Excerpts from the 1929 Annual Report, Horse Association of America, 6; W. R. Hauser to Wayne Dinsmore, 31 October 1927, ROSA-GC; J. O. Williams, "Horses Used in Big Teams Give Flexible Power and Cut Costs," 1927 Yearbook of Agriculture, 1928, 384-85.
32. Excerpts from the 1929 Annual Report, Horse Association of America, 6; W. R. Hauser to Wayne Dinsmore, 31 October 1927, ROSA-GC; J. O. Williams, "Horses Used in Big Teams Give Flexible Power and Cut Costs," 1927 Yearbook of Agriculture, 1928, 384-85.
33. Excerpts from the 1929 Annual Report, Horse Association of America, 6; W. R. Hauser to Wayne Dinsmore, 31 October 1927, ROSA-GC; J. O. Williams, "Horses Used in Big Teams Give Flexible Power and Cut Costs," 1927 Yearbook of Agriculture, 1928, 384-85.
34. Wayne Dinsmore, "The Efficient Use of Animal Power," Agricultural Engineering 3 (February 1922): 23.
35. Pete Dyleshorn to Arthur Hyde, 26 November 1931, ROSA-GC.
36. R. M. Evertts to Arthur A. Shaefer, 13 December 1938, ROSA-GC; J. E. Schlottman to Franklin D. Roosevelt, 18 August 1933, ROSA-GC; John Ehresman Jr. to Franklin D. Roosevelt, 9 February 1934, ROSA-GC; Clarence E. Wiles to Henry A. Wallace, 3 January 1934, ROSA-GC.
37. Wayne Dinsmore to Henry A. Wallace, 16 September 1933, ROSA-GC; Charles F. Curtiss to Henry A. Wallace, 16 November 1938, ROSA-GC; Paul S. Taylor to Will Alexander, 3 June 1937, ROSA-GC.
38. C. B. Baldwin to George McGill, 3 July 1933, ROSA-GC; Claude R. Wickard to E. A. Trowbridge, 27 March 1941, ROSA-GC.
39. Charles E. Seitz, "Agricultural Engineering Development in Virginia," Agricultural Engineering 4 (April 1923): 59; R. W. Trullinger, "Research in Agricultural Engineering," Agricultural Engineering 4 (March 1923): 41.
40. Charles E. Seitz, "Agricultural Engineering Development in Virginia," Agricultural Engineering 4 (April 1923): 59; R. W. Trullinger, "Research in Agricultural Engineering," Agricultural Engineering 4 (March 1923): 41.
41. "Make the Tractor Do More of the Farm Work," Progressive Farmer 35 (27 March 1920), 724; Donation Account, West Implement Company Scrapbook, 1956, West Implement Company, Cleveland, Mississippi; West Implement Company, General Account Ledger, 1935-1940, Advertising Account, West Implement Company, Cleveland, Mississippi; Howard Perdue, interview by George B. Ellenberg, 5 June 1990, Special Collections, University Archives, University of Kentucky Libraries, Lexington, Kentucky. The author wishes to thank West Implement Company for allowing him to examine their early records.
42. Paul Appleby to P. C. Henderson, 24 March 1941, ROSA-GC; Mordecai Ezekiel to Morse Salisbury, 13 December 1938, ROSA-GC.
43. Wayne Dinsmore to Arthur M. Hyde, 30 April 1930, ROSA-GC; 1940 Annual Report of the Horse and Mule Association of America, Horse and Mule Association of America, 1940, 11.
44. Wayne Dinsmore to Arthur M. Hyde, 30 April 1930, ROSA-GC; 1940 Annual Report of the Horse and Mule Association of America, Horse and Mule Association of America, 1940, 11.
45. For a full and perceptive, although dated, discussion of the various currents of thought swirling within the USDA during the first half of the century, see Joe R. Motheral, "The Family Farm and the Three Traditions," Journal of Farm Economics 33 (November 1951): 514-29. Contrary to strong critics such as Pete Daniel and Wendell Berry who see the USDA as driven to embrace corporate agriculture, Motheral argued in this article that agricultural policy as of the 1950s was actually out of date. He concluded that connotations of the family farm and its role in the making and maintenance of the nation were anachronistic and that "the idealism associated with the family farm sorely needs updating and redirection." That is, Motheral believed that the USDA had not pushed a modernization agenda hard enough. At the same time, it is clear that there was room in the department for differing opinions on mechanization, at least in specific instances, until draft animals had all but disappeared. At that point, the old guard that saw both sides of the issue had either retired, been converted, or given up the fight.
46. Anthony J. Badger, The New Deal: The Depression Years, 1933-1940 (New York: Noonday Press, 1989), 149.