Sharecroppers: Reconstruction Era of the United States and Field Hands

During reconstruction, blacks were no longer forced to work as slaves however they still needed to work to support themselves and their families. Not many blacks had skills outside of farming so most worked the lands of the wealthy white landowners but not as slaves. They had the right to do whatever they wanted and the landowners could do nothing about it. Wealthy landowners still needed work hands and blacks needed an income so former slaveholders established the sharecropping system. Land owned by a white person would be farmed by black families and they shared the crop yield. This often resulted in the white person taking more than their share and the black families struggled to support themselves. Sharecropping did little to help economic advancement for blacks and was a way the white man could prevent blacks from making enough money

Despite the flushed predictions of prosperity that had lured new settlers to the plains, the reality was more difficult. The farmers claimed that they did not have enough land, money, and transportation (Doc C). The farmers went into in a never ending cycle if they did not have a good harvest. As Booker Washington explains the farmers had no money so they had to borrow money from the banks which charged 12 to 30 percent interest. The interest the farmers were hit with was nearly impossible to repay so they had to mortgage everything and if the mortgage wasn’t paid the land was foreclosure which led the yeomen to become tenant farmers (Doc B). With periods of drought growing good crops was hard. Leading Economic Sectors shows how the farmers predicament of not being able to make a very

In the late nineteenth century, small farmers faced increasing economic insecurities. Millions of tenant farmers were stuck in poverty due to the sharecropping system in the South.Farmers in the south weren't the only ones facing difficult times; farmers in the west had to mortgage their property to purchase seeds, fertilizer, and equipment. Farmers who mortgaged their property faced the chances of losing their farms when they were unable to repay their bank loans. Farmers then sought out to find a solution for their condition by going through the Farmers’ Alliance and the

     After the devastation left from the Civil War, many field owners looked for new ways to replace their former slaves with field hands for farming and production use. From this need for new field hands came sharecroppers, a “response to the destitution and disorganized” agricultural results of the Civil War (Wilson 29). Sharecropping is the working of a piece of land by a tenant in exchange for a portion of the crops that they bring in for their landowners. These farmhands provided their labor, while the landowners provided living accommodations for the worker and his family, along with tools, seeds, fertilizers, and a portion of the crops that they had harvested that season. A sharecropper had “no entitlement

The sharecroppers paid "rent" with a share of the crops that they raised, with roughly one-half of all they produced belonged to the white owner (Ransom and Sutch, 1977). The landowner also advanced money to the farmer to purchase seed and other necessary farming equipment. The problem was the sharecroppers rarely, if ever, made enough money from the sale of their crops to pay back their debt. This often led to what some called "debt peonage," and it effectively bound sharecroppers to the land, and the landowner (Bowles, 2011). This was a veiled form of slavery, much like convict leasing was.

Sharecropping and tenant farming began during the end of the Civil war all through the great depression. Sharecropping is an agreement between a tenant and a landlord in which a tenant farmer is allowed to work and live on a piece of land for free, but in exchange for living there for free, they give the landlord a share of the crop they grow. Sharecropping was mainly big in the southern states where slavery was once legal. The pay for being a tenant farmer was very low and the living itself was not very desirable.

After the slaves were freed in 1863, the South had to make changes to supply labor for the farming. Many shady practices by the white man occurred because of this. Sharecropping and crop liens were developed to keep the black man somewhat under their control. Since freed slaves had no money and no place to live, land holders would allow a tenant to live on their property and worked the land in exchange for a share of the crop produced, also known as sharecropping. The crop lien system was a developed to allow farmers to receive goods such as food, supplies, and seeds to be paid for after the crop was produced. This kept the black man and poor white farmers in a constant form of debt.

Sharecropping gave farmers a place to live. The lack of the initial upfront payment is a disadvantage to the landowner, who had to wait for payment until the crops are harvested and sold. They both make

Between the late 1800s and mid-1900s, to help procure land, supplies, and workers, farmers turned to sharecropping. In mostly all instances of sharecropping the croppers would get a percentage of the crops they worked while the rest would go to the landowner. In most situations the croppers got a smaller percentage than the landowners. In this certain contract between a landowner and the Grimes family in North Carolina, there were some unfair condition. One of the unfair conditions was the results of not feeding his team. The cropper was required to feed his team every day in the morning, noon, and night, and if he didn’t he must pay the landowner five cents. The workers were also required to repair the fence if it was blown over or broken

America was in disarray following the events of the Civil War. Southern economy was in shambles while congress was struggling to find a middle ground between the radical republicans and Lincoln’s lenient policies. Many Southerners faced the aftermath of uprooting their society and their way of life while thousands of newly freed slaves struggled to find a way to support themselves. The country needed a strong leader, however on the 14th of April, 1865 President Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth in the Ford Theatre in Washington (Farmer). Without the man that had once held the nation together, the country now faced an enormous obstacle; reconstructing American economics, politics and social life.

After the civil war ended in 1865, the north declared the slaves to be free in the South. This took effect on December 18, 1865. The only thing was, slaves did not know how to read or write. This cased a decreases in the economy of the South. The white southerners took advantage to this and started sharecropping. Sharecropping is when the landowners proved the land, tools, home, and supplies. The African Americans had to work on the land though. African Americans had to pay almost like a rent, but a fine to live there. If the crops did not grow one year you got behind and had to work longer on the land. Also the place where you bought the seed were most likely owned by our landowner. The landowner would do this to keep you in debt, so you are

What the newly freed slaves did not realize is that landowners would always have them in debt. With this new system, economic independence blew away with the wind. Sharecropping was when a farmer rented from a landowner and promised to give a percentage of their crop to the landowner every season. Sharecropping dominated the South because the landowners didn't have to worry about feeding workers or caring for them. Sharecropping was very profitable for the landowners. Landowners had a very tight leash on the tenets. Sharecropping locked farmers into the cycle of poverty. No matter how hard they tried they never seem to get out of

After the Civil War, African Americans were free but with no place to live in or to work at, they settled with their former ‘masters’. African Americans were technically free, but no one wanted to hire a colored man, so they were put on crop lien work contracts. These contracts allowed African Americans to work and gain a ‘share’ of the harvest. Sounds like a deal right? Wrong. At the end of the harvest a black man would receive his share but the

The development of sharecropping was associated with the endless debt cycles that afflicted the entire South well into the twentieth century. The freedmen endured an economic status likened to peonage, (Bowles, 2011) in addition to having their hopes for political and social equality dashed. The entire South suffered, it was the freedmen who paid the highest price. Ignorant and impoverished, they were easy targets for exploitation by landlords (Bowles, 2011) and merchants alike; moreover, their options were limited by the overt racism in the South, legal restrictions and partiality. Sharecropping resulted from the intense explicit or implicit desire of white Southerners to keep blacks subservient to them. African Americans possessed few skills, and those they did possess related almost exclusively to agricultural production; they owned no property but the clothes on their backs; (Bowles, 2011) Many dreamed of "forty acres and a mule" with which to begin life anew as an integrated part of American society and the proprietor of one's own land. Inside of a year, however, a different reality became obvious to most. By 1868, land confiscation and redistribution was not in the realm of American political possibility. Desperation, familiarity with people and surroundings at the old places coupled with reunion of many lost loved ones, as well as the urgings of

Living standards as described by Blainey (2000) were bleak. Most people lived in one roomed, small stone houses, often with four or more sharing one bed. Homes often remained unheated due to scarcity of wood (Blainey 2000, p. 423). People were largely uneducated and knew little about healthcare. Sewerage was disposed of in the same rivers that were used to drink and wash from. These contaminated rivers were used to supply water to the growing crops. This had a huge impact on health, causing infection in around two out of every three people in rural areas (Blainey 2000, p. 415). Lack of hygiene and knowledge of healthcare led to shorter lifespans.