Sharecropping Essay

There has been many historians and theorists who have tackled colonial slavery. One of them is Ira Berlin whose book Many Thousands Gone is his take on slavery diversity in American history and how slavery is at the epicenter of economic production, amongst other things. He separates the book into three generations: charter, plantation and revolutionary, across four geographic areas: Chesapeake, New England, the Lower country and the lower Mississippi valley. In this paper, I will discuss the differences between the charter and plantation generations, the changes in work and living conditions, resistance, free blacks and changes in manumission.

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

As we already noted – in the 1800s expediency of slavery was disputed. While industrial North almost abandoned bondage, by the early 19th century, slavery was almost exclusively confined to the South, home to more than 90 percent of American blacks (Barney W., p. 61). Agrarian South needed free labor force in order to stimulate economic growth. In particular, whites exploited blacks in textile production. This conditioned the differences in economic and social development of the North and South, and opposing viewpoints on the social structure. “Northerners now saw slavery as a barbaric relic from the past, a barrier to secular and Christian progress that contradicted the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and degraded the free-labor aspirations of Northern society” (Barney W., p. 63).

     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.

The author also explores the profitability of slavery as an institution, as while the tendency of slave owners to keep their capital invested in slaves rather than industry resulted in a lack of economic diversification in the South, it also resulted in great profits during times of high demand for agricultural products. Phillips states that more research is required in this area.

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.

When, Moody first got to Madison County in Mississippi she was surprised to see that the Black community vastly outnumbers the white community and many Black people in the county owned large plots of land. She was at first under the impression that this would mean there was less poverty than what she saw in her hometown, however she soon learned that land did not directly relate to prosperity. “I just didn’t see how the Negros in Madison County could be so badly off…as Mrs. Chinn explained that night, the federal government controls cotton by giving each state a certain allotment. Each state decides how much each county gets and each county distributes the allotments to the farmers. It always ends up with the white people getting most of the allotments” (313). Though the action of the state, the opportunity for Black farmers to accumulate was non-existent. Economic prosperity would always favor white people because with economic freedom came power and influence, neither of which Black people were allowed to have in the Jim Crow south.

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

“Planter not only held the majority of slaves, but they controlled the most fertile land, enjoyed the highest incomes, and dominated the state and local offices and the leadership of both political parties” (Foner 411). There were fewer than forty-thousand families that possessed about twenty or more slaves that qualified them as planters. There were also fewer than two-thousand families owned about a hundred slaves or more. The ownership of slaves provided the route to wealth, status, and influence. Slavery was the profit-making system, and slave-owners kept a close watch on world priced for their products to invested in enterprises such as railroads and canals.

Coates states that the exploitation of blacks for cheap labor in the form of slavery “constituted 59 percent of the country’s exports,” which created an economic basis for America (Coates, 2014). The sale of slaves, which allowed for loans, interests, and insurances to be used, also helped fuel American wealth. In the process, the sale of slaves dismantled and destroyed black families. After slavery ended, blacks were forced into sharecropping, which left many blacks indebted to their former slave owners. As a result, Clyde Ross’ family, as well as many other African-Americans, had their land and other possessions taken away to pay for their debts (Coates,

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

The harsh treatment placed upon slaves, contributed to the decrease of development, exposed to poor conditions that fueled working resistance. Along with the immoral practice, Genovese reiterates that soil exhaustion is crucial, limiting crop diversification, and that due to the lack of skills their source labor possessed, adopting advanced farming techniques could be rather costly. Since the South failed to consider as industrialism as a possible solution to their issues and the idea of achieve agricultural reform was completely delusional, the economy plummeted. This problem called for change, but the South was not willing to take the risk of improving their productivity and output if it meant sacrificing their power structure. The South wanted to keep their classes as they were, with the slave holders at the top of the pyramid and the slaves at the bottom. Slavery shape their civilization, so when they were asked to transform and submit to the North’s social system and structure, implied by the laws which prevented Slavery to continue, the South viewed their cry for independence as rational to keep their society

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