Jeffery Þ1. Taylor 1988

DO}IINANT AND POPULAR IDEOLOGIES IN THE MAKING OF RURAT ttANITOBANS, 1890-1925

by Jeffery H. Taylor

Thesls submltted ln conformlty wlth the regulrements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Unlversity of l{anltoba

O Jeffery Þ1. Taylor 1988 Permissíon tras been Eranted Luautorisatíon a êtê accordêe t.o Èhe titrational Líbrary of å I-a Biblíothèque nationale Canada to microfílm thís du Canada de nicrofílmer thesís and t.o l-end or seI1 cet.te thèse et de prêter ou copíes of the fíl-m. de vendre des exempl-aires du fílm. The author (copyríEht owner) Loauteur (títutaire du droit has reserved oÈ,her d u auteur ) se rêserve tr-es publícatíon rights, and autres droíts de publ-ícatíoni ne í ther the thes i s nor ni la thèse ni de Longs extensíve extracts from it. ext.raíts de celle-el ne may be print,ed or otherwise doívent être im¡rrímêe ou reproduced without, his/her autrement reprodults sana son wrítten perníssíon. autorlsation êcriteo

rsBN 0-315-47959-0 DOHINANT AND POPUÁR IDEOI¡GIES IN TEE UAKING OF

RUR,ÀL }IANITOBANS,

1890 - 1925

JEFFERY U. TAYI,OR

A thesis sublltitted to tlrc Factrlty of Gradr¡ate Studics of' the Universiry of Manitoba ilr partial fulfillnre¡lt of the require!rìerìts of tlrc degree of

DOCTOIì OF PI-II LOSOPHY @ 1988

Permissio¡r has been grarrted to rhe LIBRARy OF THE UNIVER- SiTY OF MANITOBA to le¡rd or sell copies of rl:is rhesis. ro thc NATIONAL LIBRARY OF CANADÂ to rnicrofilnr rhis tl:esis arrd to le¡ld or scll copies oi ths film, and UNIVERSITy MICROFILMS to prrblish an absrract of this rhesis.

Thc author reserves other publication righfs, anrJ neither thc thesis nor extensive extracts from it may be printeC or otherwise reproduced wjthout the author's writte¡l peirnissior:. TAåL_E* OF CONTENTS

I ntroduc t ion

One A Theory of ldeology and the Agrarian Labour Process

Two The Historical Context of Ideologies, State Structures, and the Agrarian Movement in Manitoba 57

Three An Institutional History of Dominant Agrarian ldeolo9y, L890-1925 \ 107

Four The Theoretical Constitution of Dominant Agrarian fdeology 168

Five The Practical Constitution of Dominant Agrarian ïdeology 223

Six the Language of Manitoba Agrarianism, l_890 -1925 275

Conclus ion 344

Bibl iography 355 ABSTBACT

Thls dissertatlon Is a study of the educatlonar state structure that developed in Hanitoba agricul.ture before Lg25' the dominant ideorogtes that reslded there, ãDd the lnpact of those ideologres on the agrarian movement. There are six stages in our enquiry. First, the tt¡eoretical argument in chapter one establlshes a conceptual frames¡ork for anaryslng the prace of ideol.ogy in slmpre commodity agriculture. second, the theoreticar discussion is praced in hlstorical context through a survey of ldeologies, state structures, and agrarian movements in North America during tt¡e rate nlneteenth and early t¡ventleth centurles. Third, discussion moves from the generar to ttre speciftc wlth an out,I lne of the educatf onaL state structure in llanitoba agriculture during the period. rn chapters four and five the theoretlcar and practicar components of domlnant ideology are analysed. rn chapter four the theoreticar categories of rural soclar science are drscussed, whire ln chapter flve vre asseas the practlcal. ranguage used to address l{anltoba farm peopre tn thfs ideorogy. Having estabrished tbe tnstltutional, theoretlcar, and practicat components of domlnant ldeologyr ouF focus shlfts ln chapter sfx to the language used In the Manitoba agrarlan movement at the time. rn the conclusion, we summarise how the various theoretical, historical, dominant, and popular elements interacted in the Manitoba experience. INTRODUCTION

Popular, academlc, corporate, and governmental analyses of western canadlan agrlcurture are aLr conducted wlthln hlstorlcalry sonstructed systems of thought. The twentieth century, ln fact, has been marked by three dlstfnct perlods of agrlcurtural drscourse. As the state became lncreastngly interventionlst after Horld Har II, attempttng to stablrlse worklng crass and agrarlan consumption whire resrstlng challenges from the left, the contours of current soslaL democratl"c and bourgeois perspectives on agrlcurture erere put in pLace. rn the preceding two decades, bourgeols and soclal democratlc anaryses of the counÈryslde struggled wlth sociarj.st, communlst, and social credit ones for popular acceptance. And the essentiar foundations for discussion throughout the century eere estabrfshed betneen the 1g90s and the 1920s as a dominant vlew of ruraL economy and soclety was consoridated and popular conceptfons of the prevalllng order were transformed. This dlssertatlon is a study of the educationar state structure that developed ln Hanltoba agrlculture before 1925, the do¡ninant ldeologies that resided there, and the impact of those ideologles on the agrarlan movement. The generar poritical and theoretical questions that govern our lnvestigation are: how and through what process have the linits on public debate come into existence, and wt¡at are the condltions for transcending those llrnits? t{ore -2- speclflcally, how ls lt that certaln guestlons are asked and not others? How is it that sone sets of assumptions guide political debate while others are absent? flhy are agriculturar constituencres moblllsed on the basis of certain languages but not others? Are there speclfic ldentltles that elther account for or support the rlmits which exlst? Can these ldentlties be changed? Our analysis, while conducted in terms of these larger guestlons, has a more rlmlted objectlve. By focusing on the formative period, ere suggest how a dominant vLew of rurar economy and society eras consolÍdated in Manitoba, and how thls affected exlstlng popurar ranguages whlch were crltlcal of the prevalling order of thlngs. There are slx stages ln our enqulry. First, the theoretlcal argument ln chapter one estabrlshes a conceptual framework for analysing the place of ideology in slnple commodlty agriculture. By focusing on the notion of rabour process, tfê suggest that the relationablp between sfmpl-e commodlty productlon (in both goods and labour power) and capltartst productlon ie best understood ln terms of the subordlnatlon of rabour to capitaL. Then various accounts of ideology and conscLousness, ranging from Gransci and culturarlst hfstoriography to Althusser and discourse ttreory, are assessed in arrlvlng at a tentat,lve theory of rrldeology and the agrarlan Labour processn. -3-

Second, the theoretlcaL dlscusslon ls placed in historlcal context through a survey of ideologies, state structures, and agrarlan movements in North AmerLca durlng the late nlneteenth and early twentleth centurLes. Hestern Canadars agrlculturaL expansion ls Jurtaposed with central Canadian lndustriallsatlon and the transformation of world wheat productlon ln order to llrustrate that these phenomena were integrally Iinked processes of capltallst development. An account Is then given of the growth of bureaucratlc state structures--particularly educational systems--which accompanied these materlal changes. Fina1ly, the general contours of the agrarian, working c1ass, èrrd woments movements are sketcÌ¡ed to lllustrate the ldeologicaL cross- fertllisation that occurred among these movements in the nlneteenth century, and the dlvlslons that deveroped wlthin and between them In the twentleth century. thlrd, diseussion moves from tl¡e general to the speciflc wlth an outLine of the edusational state structure ln l,lani toba agr lcul ture dur lng the per lod. From the nineteenth century, but l-ncreasfngly after the turn of the twentieth century, a provlncfal apparatus eras estabLlshed for the production and transmisslon of agriculturaL knowledge. In the 1890s thts terraln Ìras lnhabfted by agricultural societies and farmersr institutes, but the opening of Hanitoba Agrtcultural College ln 1905 made that lnstitution its centrepiese. Chapter three is a hlstory of -4- the lnternal evolution of HAC, the relevant acadenic disciplines, ãgFicuÌtural education for childreri and youth, and ruraL adult education before and after the formatlon of an extenslon service. In chapters four and five t,he theoretical and practical- components of dominant ideology are analysed. Thie distinction, which comes from Althusser and is discussed in greater detail in chapter one (pp. 45-46), separates tt¡ose aspects of ideology that form part of abstract, conceptual systems and those that are actualLy addressed to subJects ln practical, everyday language. In chapter four the theoretlcal categories of a broadly conceived rural socLal science are discussed. Agrtcultural economLcs emerged in the context of the transition to marginalism ln the parent dlscourse of bourgeois economlcs; home economlcs, too, nas part, of the marglnal revolutlon, whlle also belng influenced by scientific management. Rural soclology ¡ras a chlLd of the new soclology of the Late nineteentl¡ century that rejected Socia1 Darwinlst .natural laws in favour of an lnvestlgatory and lnterventlonlst approacb to the soclal world. And rural edúcatlon, ac part of a reform in school currlcula and the rtinvention of adolescencer,, granted young people and tbe educatlonal system a special place in the constitutlon and resolution of socf.ology t s rrrural social problemrf, After assesslng the ways in whlch these fields of knowledge constructed a theoretlcal understandlng of -5- agrlculture and rural soclety, our attentlon turns in chapter flve to tt¡e practical language used to address Manitoba farn people ln this ideoLogy. Here we dellneate the various ele¡nents ln ma1e, female, and youtb ldentlty as they were constructed in and through l.lAC, the extensi.on servlce, and the publlc educational system. Having established the lnstltutlonal, theoretlcal, ãrd practlcal components of domlnant tdeology, our focus sblfts ln chapter slx to the language used ln the Manltoba agrarlan movement at the tlme. He begin by reconstructing the world view of the Patrons of Industry ln the 1890s, showing that the Patrons employed a ilradlcalrt anal.ysls whlch they shared wÍth many otber nineteenth century movements. Se then move to an account of popular ideology in tt¡e main, or ment s, section of the Hanltoba Grain Growers, AseocLatlon and the Unfted Farmerst of Hanitoba, paying particular attention to the lncrasing authority of domLnant categories on tbe one hand, and the declinlng presence of radlcal categorLes on the other. And finalLy, ln an assesgment of the l.anguage used in the Homenfs Grain Growerst Assoclatlon and the United Farn Homen of llanltoba, eê note both a radical influence from the ilmainil agrarLan movement and a domlnant lnfluence from the hegemonlc ldeology. In the conclusion, we summarise how the varlous theoretlcal, historical, domlnant, and popular elements interacted ln the Manitoba experience, ãDd we briefly -6- sltuate this study against an lmportant analytfcal perspect,lve ln rural prairle scholarshlp. PROCESS

Abstractlon ls required in order'to pro_pe-rry anaryse the prace of fdeology in llanitoba agriculture. Although it is anathema to most historfans, for whom truth is immediately apparent ln historical experience, abstraction is an essential exercise in lsorating the forces determtning experience. In this chapter, thereforer ê number of theoretical questions are posed and discussed. shat is the rerationship between household production and capitarist productlon? tûhy rs the reproduction of labour power organised as it is in class societies, and how is it specificarly organlsed fn farm households? How ls knowredge in the production process rerated to the production of neaning? How are gender and class identities formed?

The fundamental probrem in analysing Testern canadian rurar soclety ls the sinultaneous reproduction of a non- capltarfst form of agrlcurtural production with a dominant capitarist mode of production.(1) This is not pecuriar to Canada or North America, of course, it is common to aII sociar formatlons at the periphery of capitallsm and to most agriculturar regions of industrial capital-ist societies. Most historical materiallst explanatlons of this phenomenon, the earl iest of which forms part of l,{arx t s anarysis of -8-

capitalism' use one of three approaches. The first, the crassical approach of Marx, Lenin and Kautsky, ls based upon Marxts analysis of the extraction and dlstribution of

surprus value in a purery capitalist economy. (2) The second' the dependency or world-systems approach practised by Gunder-Frank and otherse üsES the concept of unequal exchange. And the third, the modes of production or articurationist approach, expands Althusser I s notion of articulation to lnclude the relation bet¡¡een two or more modes of production in a singre social formation. (3)

currentry' another perspective is developing which moves beyond these three approaches to specify the way in which househord próduction persists in capitarist societies whire becomlng effectively integrated lnto capltalist productlon and reproductlon. The classical position is based upon llarxrs anarysis of agricurture in vorume rrr of capital. rn the earlier volumes, Marx posfted a generar pattern of capltarlst development--primitive accumulatl.on, worklng class formatlon and so forth--through a study of the Engrish economy. rn assessing the place of agriculture in thls development, l{arx assumed a fully capitalist agriculture, with capital flowing freely between lndustry and agrlcurture. He arso assumed (rlke Rlcardo and the other crassrcal economlsts) a trlad of agrlcultural classes, namely Iandowners, capltallsts, ðDd workers. Based as lt was on the apparent rearity of mid- -9- nineteenth century England, Marx I s anal_ysis seemed to predict the gradual but progressive dissorution of non- capitalist forms of agricurtural production as capitarism developed and expanded. Kautsky and Lenin, who took up the specific question of agriculture at the turn of the twentieth century, used Marxts general perspective to argue that capitar in agricurture was becoming concentrated and was fostering the development of an agrarlan bourgeotsie and a rural proletariat. (4) The world system or dependency approach is a critique of bourgeois development theory and the evolutionary stage tbeory of crassical llarxism, both of which are considered (northern) European-centred. Hhat Frank, Hallerstein and others propose is an expanded conception of capitarism whlch shlfts analysis from specific modes of produetion ( forces and relations of productlon) to a singLe capitalist world system. They reject the original t{arxist view that the centrar process of capftallst exproltation occurs at the point of productlon. Instead, they argue that western deveropment and third worrd underdeveropment shourd be understood in terms of worrd-wide accumulation through unequaL exchange in the capitalÍst market. Every form of production that intersects with the worrd market--whether s1ave, feudal or household--is deemed to be capitalist in that it yierds a surplus (through exchange) to the process of grobal accumulation. rtFor Frank, as more recently for -10 -

Sallerstein,rt Aidan Foster-Carter has wrftten, ttthere is but a single 'wor1d system?; and it is capitalist through and through. 'f (5) As part of Althusserts broader impact on historical materialism over the past twenty yearsr ã critique of dependency theory noÌd exists that shtfts attentlon back to modes of productlon, while consciously addresslng the evolutionist bias of the classics. Known as the articulationist school, this group has expanded Althusserts original concept of articuLation (which applied to the relationship betneen the ideological, economic, and poritical revels in a mode of production) to include the ways in which the capitalist mode of productlon reLates to non-capitalist forms and modes of production that it domlnates. They criticise the world systems approach for locating capitalist contradiction ln the sphere of circuLation, negrecting production rerations, treating developed countries as monoLithic entities, and generarry subordinating class struggle to reLatlons between hinterland and metropore. By moving mode of production back to centre stage, articulationists suggest that production relations and, most importantly, the co-existence of more than one set of production rerations in a particular social formation should form the core of analysis. And contrary to more classlcal approaches, where transltton to a new mode ls vlewed in terms of the systematlc drssorutlon of older forms -11 - of production, articulatÍon sonceives of capitarism co- existing with, buttressing, and sometimes creating non- capitalist forms. P.P Rey, one of the foremost proponents of articuratlon, drstingulshes three stages ln thls process: an initial link in the sphere of exchangê, where interaction with capltalism reinforces the non-capltarist form; capitalism iltakes rootft, subordinating the non-capitarist form but still making use of it; and the total disappearance of non-capitalist forms, even in agriculture. He concludes: Capitalism san never immediately and totally eliminate the preceding modes of production, nor above aIl the relations of exploitation which characterise these modes of production. On the contrary during an entire period it must reinforce these relations of exploitation, since it is only this development which permits its own provisioning ¡vith goods coming from these modes of production, or with men driven from these modes of production and therefore compell.ed to sell their rabour poerer to capitalism in order to survive. (6) Hhile articurationists have focused on production rerations, they agree with dependency theorists that the medium through whÍch capitar extracts surplus product from producers is exchange and circuLation rather than production. capital, it is argued, onry gains control of production when labour becomes a commodity. But, is it possible to expand the concept of capitalist production to include production that is formalry non-capitaList but is dependent upon capitalism for its reproduction? rn the case of North American agriculture, capitarism has become entrenched wlthout having transformed the -L2- rerations of production into fully capltalist ones. The maintenance and persistence of household production in most areas of North American agrlculture in the t¡rentieth century can be accounted for in terms of the obstacles to complete capitalist transformation in those sectors. capital always chooses a safe investment and the quick turnover of capital in its search for the highest possibre rate of profit. But most aspects of agriculturar production, notably livestock and grain, are relatlvely risky ventures which do not provide an immediate return. these spheres are characterised by lengthy production cycles during which labour is only sporadically appl ied, making them unattractive to capitaList penetration since capital realises its profit through the consistent and intensive exploitatlon of labour poner. Hence, capitar finds it difficult to compete with households that, not being governed by production for profit, only requlre that the rearised varue of commodities sord meet their costs of production. capitarist producers fn tt¡e Late nineteenth century, for example, withdrew from ¡vheat production in the face of conpetltlon from famtly households.(7) As Harriet Friedmann has argued, hoyrever, there are two types of household production in agriculture: peasant productlon and slmple commodlty productlon. peasants, vrhlre they may purchase and selI some products in the capitalfst market, do not depend on the market for their liverihood. -1 3-

Such things as food, clothing, labour, credit, ãRd production toors are obtained through ktn and community ties that are unaffected by the market. simple commodity producers, meanwhire, depend on the capitallst market for the disposition of their produce and the purchase of alr of their inputs other than Labour. Labour, although it may be purchased occasionally, is normally supplied on a kin basis in simple commodity production, and this distinguishes it from capitarist productlon where arr inputs, includlng Iaboure âFê supplied through the market. (B) There is a continuum, then, from peasant subsistence through simple commodity production to capitarism. shile peasants engage sorel.y or primariry in subsistence, slmpre commodity producers and capitarists engage solely or primariry in commodity production. using these distinctions as a guide, wê will propose berow that simpre commodity production can become subjected to capitaList control without labour becoming a commodity. (9) First, though, rùê must consider Marxrs concept of the subordination of labour in capitalist production. In his analysis of capitalist production, ltarx distinguished two processes whereby labour is subordinated to capital. The first, what he called the formal subordination of l-abour, istrthe takeover of a mode of labour developed before the emergence of capitalist relationsr' ln nhlch frhandicraftsmen who prevlousry worked on -L4- their olrn account, or as apprentices of a master. ...become Iabourers under the direct control of the capitalist.,' This entails the dispossession of workers from the means of production and the means of subsistence such that they are forced to exchange thefr labour power for money in the capitaList l-abour market in order to survive. This form of appropriation does not inslude control of the Labour process, however. Through ownership of the means of production, capital is abLe to combine the work of labourers in order to increase productivity, but the technical basis of production remains handicraft. And, once production is centralised, the only way the capitalist may extract more surplus vaIue, without transforming the labour process, is to increase the duration of labour ( for l{arx, Lengthening the working day). Surplus value extracted in this fashíon is called absolute surplus value. The second process, the real subordination of labour, occurs when capital extends its control- over the labour process by dissoLving handicraft production through the displacement of manual tools by machine tools. A social as well as e technical process, handÍcraft workers are stripped of their skiLls to the extent that they become mere extensions of tools, tending machines rather than applying knowledge to the production process. Real subordÍnation opens a new terrain for the extractlon of surplus value by capital. It becomes posslble to increase value within a given unit of time by increasing -15-

the intensity of labour This is called relative surplus

value. ( i.0 ) But how does this relate to farm households? Is it possible for capital to control production without exchanging money for Labour poerer and without dispossessing

the direct producers? In Marxist economlc theory, a commodity contains both use-value (satisfying a specific need) and exchange varue (a measure of exchangeabLe weal-th). since exchange value refers to potentia1 exchangeabitity rather than the actual act of exchange, it is possibLe that the exchange value of a comrnodity wilr not be realised through monetised exchange. Labour porrer in farm households, for exampler cëtn be treated as a commodity without ever entering the sphere of rear market transactions. This occurs when its value is transferred to other products sord in the market. chevalier offers the following example of how this works in practice: SeIf-employed workers may buy their own Iabour- poner from themselves and be abLe to evaLuate its approximate worth (or exchange value) thus treating it as a commodified condition of production. this may be done by caì.culating the market value of those commodities which are necessary for personal consumption (some of which may be bought from their own reproduction) or the equivalent sum of money which goes into reproduction of their labour-poerer. The resulting amount may be part of an overalL budget that must be minimaLly balanced if the workerIs 'enterpriser is to survive. -l-6-

The value of Labour power ls thus determlned through mechanisms other than exchange, but for reasons that pertain to its exchangeabllity. ( 11)

Furthermore, it is possible that a farm househord may own some means of production without having effective control over them. rt is necessary to draw a distinction here between strict legal ownership and the ability to exchange the commodities thus produced at their value. rn other words, êffective dispossession may occur if capital is able to extract surplus value without taking actual regal control of the means of production. Molrard argues that, in the case of French farm househol-ds, surplus value is appropriated by capital (or, more specifically, capltal in contact wlth agriculture: what he calls the agro-industriaL complex) whenever producers enter the sphere of capitatist circulatlon. He identifies three mechanisms of appropriation: the rental or purchase of 1and; the purchase of production inputs; and the sale of "grtcurtural products. Hence, ãlthough means of production are formally owned, a farmerts sociar position is equivalent to that of a worker rather than a capitarist¡ at best, the varue reaLised is sufficlent for the reproduction of rabour power, but not for the retention of any surprus created through production. ( 1z ) once we assume the formar subordination of farm households through effective dispossession and the indlrect transformation of labour into a commodity, can we rocate a -L7 - process of real subordination? Real subordination and the extraction of rerative surprus value are contingent upon capital's success in intensifying work effort and maintaining pre-existing levels of work performance during and following the introduction of neer technologies ( in order to reap the surprus created by the increased productivity). Hithin the generar context of Morrard I s mechanisms of appropriation, the goal of agro-industrial capital is to subordinate farm households so as to systematically extract the surplus. This occurs through the development of rarge scale and speciarised production, innovations in chemical and mechanicaL technologies, and a divisÍon between mental and manuar l"abour. rncreases in productlvtty resurt, meaning a greater surprus is avatrabre to be appropriated by capital, and farm households must continuarry modernlse their means of production to increase their productivity further and maintain tt¡eir incomes. The continuar appropriation of rerative surplus varue forces farm households to maintain and increase their work intenslty, whire becoming further integrated into capitarlst exchange and product ion. ( l.3 ) The basic economic existence of aLL producers--workers, peasants, farmers and so forth--is governed by the pursuit of acceptable, historical-1y determined standards of living. rn the case of farmers, this is achieved through the househord based production of commoditles for the capttarlst -l_8- market. They pursue use-values in order to reproduce their livelihood but, given their market participation, any and arr use-varues they might potentiarly consume are treated as objects containing measurable exchange varue. By combining 1and, labour porrer and instruments of production, farmers employ ongoing strategies whereby they seek to achieve, maintain and possibry expand their incomes and enterprises. In this sense they seem to act tike capitalists. Vet, whereas the capitarist is engaged in capitar accumulation through the extraction of surplus value, the farmer is merely attempting to sustain hinself within a production process effectively controlLed by capital. ( 14) Since capitar is able to appropriate the surprus from farmers, even the most euccessfuL strategies wil_I produce oni-y a modest expansion of their incomes and enterprises. Hence, any expansion that does take place is more akin to a workerrs wage increase than a capitaListts enhanced profit. one side of the social struggle in agricurture is rooted here in the subordination of producers to capltal.

But this takes us onLy haLf way in understanding the material basis of farm househol-ds. there are two sides to aI1 production, namely the productlon of goods and the production of labour power. Whereas the theory outlined above illuminates the marsharring of productive forces and -1 9-

the ordering of social relations in goods production, it Ís sirent with respect to the same processes in the constÍtution of rabour power. Yet, while some people (normally the male heads of househords) are engaged in the production of agricultural commodities, other peopre (normally wives and female kin of the household heads) are

engaged in the work of providing subsistence for those men and the other members of the household. Hence, the framework must be expanded to include an anarysis of domestic labour in the farm household. The participants in the domestic labour debate of the L970s drew attention to this neglected aspect of the capitarist mode of production. rn situating the source of working cLass eromenIs oppression in the family, they related women's dependent status in the househord to her reriance on the male erage and her rore in reproducing labour poerer on a daily and generationar basis. This framework, and especiarly seccombers expansion of its analytical scope to encompass a comparison of the reproduction of labour poerer in the capitalist, slave, and feudal modes of production, provides a departure point for theorising this aspect of household production.(1s) Before discussing farm households, thoughr sotrìê concepts at the general level of class modes of production should be clarified. Human rabour poÌrer is one of the productive forces in any mode of production. By combining with the means of -20- production--raw materials and the instruments of labour--in definite relations of production, goods are produced. Practicar knowredge and energy are the two components that constitute labour power. of theser practical knowledge is the most important. Seccomber paraphrasing G.A. Cohen, ¡rrites tf I i ] f a community were to have its basic tools destroyed, it is possible that it rê}¡r with a IittLe good fortune in natural materials, recover. If its practical knowredge were lost, however, tools t}¡emserves r¡ould be useless, êDd the community wouLd certainty be doomed. f, But labour power is never reducible to knowledge; rather, it arways consists of the conscious direction of human energy to planned ends. Furthermore, this unique productive force must be reproduced on a daily and generationar basis. rt is replenished daily through the provision of food, clothing, and shelter, and it is replenished generationalry through ,procreation and the socialisation of the young. At the heart of generationar reproduction r ies the biorogicar reality that nomen, and not men, bear chil_dren and l_actate. Although its significance varies historicalty, this sexual difference prays a central rore in the overall organisation of rabour powerts reproduction in arL class societies. (16) In class societies, the total_ social product is divided between that which is necessary for the subsistence of direct producers (subsistence product) and the surplus which is appropriated by the exproiting class (surprus product). -2L-

The subsistence product is used to purchase the means of subsistence, and domestic labour ( food preparation, housecreaning, childcare ) is expended to produce labour poerer. (L7 ) Domestic rerations (the relatlons of rabour powerrs production) are characteristicarly constituted in some variation of a family or kin based household unit. A househord is a S.iving space that is regularl.y inhabited by one or more members of a donestic group. A family is a kin related group living together and forrning the core of a household. And kin refers to a network of genealogical identity defined by birth and extending beyond a co-resident famiry. some form of a famiry household exists in alr human societies to provide a mechanism for the reguration of the domestie rife cycle. Fertility must be regulated, legitimate paternlty must be established, a stable household must be maintained during the period of infant and chirdhood dependency, resources must be transmftted between generations in an orderly fashion, and care must be provided for the dependent erderry. As an institution, the family estabrishes a minimaL social requirement for l_egitimate co- residency. ( 18) But what accounts for the widespread subordination of women in the family househord? This phenomenon arises out of the rerationship between the biologicaÌ rore of Tromen in production and the subordination of subsistense production to surprus production in crass socíeties. pregnancy and -22-

Iactation result in a period of reduced work capacity for a childbearing woman during which time she is unable to supply her own means of subsistence. Normarly this problem is resolved through relations of kin and sexuality, with the biorogicar father ordinarily taking on the responsibility. In the process, this individual acquires the specific social

rore of supporting the woman bearing those children for whom he shares biologicaL responsibility. Now there is no biologicar rationare for this rimtted sexuar divislon of labour to extend beyond the period of pregnancy and ractation. ( 19) Hhether women are dlrectry engaged in surplus production or sorery fnvolved in producing subsistence, hordever, chil-dbearing interferes with the extraction of surplus product by the dominant crass. But over the long term, chirdbeartng is a systemic requirement if the labour force is to be repraced through generational reproduction. Hence a contradiction exists that needs to be resolved if the optimum amount of surprus product is to be extracted from the producing class. This resoLution, which entails minimising the amount of subsistence product granted to producers whlle ensuring that ongoing reproduction occurs, takes prace in the famity. Through a variable process of class struggle and negotiation, the dominant class grants more subsistence product to men than is necessary for their own reproduction, thereby creating the materiar basis for extended femare -23- dependency. rn turn, and with a certain degree of sexual struggle' women are increasingly given the major or sore responsibility for all facets of domestic labour, while men take the major or sore responsibirity for providing the means of subsistence through participation in surplus product ion. Hhat emerges from this process is a family househord arrangement in which the father/husband dominates the mother /wLfe and the resident children. A number of mare privileges flo¡¡ from this rerationship. The househead has the right to socially represent the family groüpr the right to possess and dispose of family property, the right of sexual access to his spouse, custodial rights over chtldren, and supervisory authority over famiry labour. The specific character of these rights vary historically across both production and household forms, but they are materially embedded in the subordination of subsistence production to surplus production in alI class socleties . (ZO)

How does this work at tt¡e level of the capitalist mode of production? capitalism inherited a sexuar division of labour from earlier class societies which has been exacerbated and strengthened by the capitalist social division of labour. Goods production nas increasingry removed from households to workshops and factories prior to and during the industriar phase, rendering famiry households speclallsed units for the production of rabour power that -24- were beyond the sphere of capitalist exchange. Hence, an added structurar compulsion was created (the effect of which varied historicarly due to crass and sexual struggre) for women to be relegated to domestic labour in househords controlled by men. ( 21 ) But why does the production of labour power remain in households, beyond the sphere of capitalist exchange, when most other areas of production are capitalist with aLl their productive forses, including labour povrer, in the form of commodities? Actually, capital, in the pursuit of greater surplus value, does attempt to transform donestic rabour. But, in many ways, domestic labour is resistant to capitarist transformation. rndeed, domestic production shares many characteristics with those areas of agricultural production that have remained in a househord form, notably lengthy production timeso the sporadic application of labour, and, especially in the case of child care, a high intensity of labour. Not surprisingly, then, working class househords and farm househords have a simirar relationship to the capitalist mode of production. (22) As sellers of labour power, working crass househords compete with each other in the labour market as individual units. seeking to secure the optimum vaLue of their commodity, they must accept the dictates of the market and adjust their subsistence production in $rays necessary to enhance their competitiveness. In this erè$r the market -25- operates in working class households to influence the form, duration, and intensity of domestic labouri in other words, they subordinate their production to the sphere of capitalist exchange. Producers are compelled to organise their productive forces in response to the perceived value of their product on the market. Market carcurations are employed in order to minimise costs in combining the various means of production, thereby treating unexchanged factors of production as commodities. Domestlc labour ltself is treated as a commodity, and the domestic labour process falls under the indirect sontrol of capitat. The working class household, then, be seen ":r as a form of simple commodity production in ¡vhich labour is organised independent of the commodity market (although really controlled by it), and all other production factors are integrated--with varying degrees of intensity--into capitalist exchange and production. (23)

But what of domestic labour in farm households? A sinilar though even more indirect process takes place. As in all other class based forms of production, the appropriation, distribution, and consumption of the means of subsistence is subordinated to the production of surplus. Furthermore, the effective subordlnation of the agricultural Labour process leads to the effective subordination of the domestic Labour process. Hence, the domestic rabourer (woman) 1n the househord unit engages in strategles to best -26- maximise and employ the means of subsistence. She is compelled to make calcuratfons, arter the intensity or organisation of her labour, åDd generally manage the domestic sphere of the household in conformity with the market. The other side of the sociar struggle in agriculture is materially rooted here, in the subordination of the domestic labour process (women) to agricurtural production (men) and to capital. (the bourgeoisie).

III

The farm househol-d, then, is a doubLe sided production unit in which agricurturar commodities and rabour power are produced. Although the organisation of the tno productions is non-capitalist, they are both compeLred, through their subordination to capitalist production, to obey the rar¡s of the market. the overriding imperative of surprus extractlon estabrishes a hierarchy within the househord itserf. The subordination of subsistence to the production of surplus provides the materiaL basis for the subordination of women to men. This can take a particurarly oppresslve form in the case of farm househords, where the mare position of househord head of the two productions is strengthened by the effects of the capitalist social division of labour. But how do we move from the labour process to ideology? The question of being and consciousness, ot base and superstructure, is a source of ongoing dÍfficulties, and _27 _ Marxists from Lukacs and critics Gramsci to Ar.thusser have been concerned and his ?he with it in one putative debate form or other. fr(English) between ,,(French culturalis¡n,, ) structural is¡¡ø in partieular, and important nhich has for recent historiography, been so overcoming is econonic really about determinism in and consciousness. our analysis of Às ideorogy however' secco¡nbe"':=]ttt"ttt the probr€rì "ott, suggested, of determinism ,.n::. ;::";. J":.;#:", Ï-r: """",,..;, ï":"tr,,t;:*ersrandins or rhe base. consciousness the and importance of knowledge at aontt"" before movlng centre of production to a theory of capirarist ideology. fn and capitalisr ttrhe sase or conrrorr"a-:",::,._-:"--:'=t appreciating production' this the -vuJ'drsociar nature,,=*,,-- neàns labour of the rear subordination ,(24) of Real subordination in capitalist two processes. production consists The first is of which the application creates the potentlal of technol0gy, for enhanced embodying human productivity skilt in more predictable by human form and reliable ' since rrorkers non_ production, do not this own the means involves an of producers appropri¡opFiàtion of f:rom non_producers. knowredge by intensification ",,_^_lt"¡ The second of work effort. is the Lazonick ?he intensity of suggests, is rabour, as the essence of be tween the Èrarx,s distinction capacr ty to work ( rabour pof{er ) and work -28- actually performed (labour). In order for productivity to increase with the introduction of new technoJ-ogy, workers must at reast maintain their previous pace of work. since benefits do not accrue to workers, there is no immediate incentive for them to do so. Hanageriar supervision is required to compel workers to accept new technology and work as close to their capacity as possible. Capital thus attempts to extend contror over the labour process tbrough the appropriation of knowredge and the supervision of srork. Horkers, meanwhile, attempt to retain control by setting their orrn work pace, controrring the introduction of new technology, or claiming a share in the productivity gains by demanding higher nages. The point of production, then, is a site of ongoing struggle in capitalism. (ZS)

rn the two productions of the farm househord the same processes are at work, but the conditions are more complex. Arthough the rabour processes are effectiveLy controrred by capital, the situation Ís different in t¡vo crucial nays: contror is exercised by capital-in-general (or, more precisely, agro-industrial capital in general ) rather than a specific firm, and formal, legal controL of the means of production resides in the household unit (with the household head). Neither the possibirity nor the necessity exists for direct contror and transformation of the labour process. Nonetheress, lndirect control must be exerted to ensure that work effort approximate work capacity, neÍ¡ technologies are -29- introduced, productivity gains associated with the introduction of new technoLogies accrue to capital, and the infrastructure of the labour process remains as much as possible under capitalts control-. The technical mechanisms of surprus extraetion are located in the sphere of exchange (as expressed in the concept of the cost-price squeeze).

But' given that control ls indirect, the state plays a significant manageriaL rore here. rt guides the production process in general, ¡rhich, broadly conceived, extends from the immediate point of production to those sites beyond the home and farm srhere productive labour is apptied. struggre in the agrarian labour process, then, is situated prirnarily in the realm of exchange and the state. Now it is crucial that Marxrs original conceptuar distinction between being and consciousness, ërs ¡re}l. as the notlon that social being determines sociar consclousness, be retained. The antagonism in production ls more than a struggre over control of knowredge as a component of labour pohrer. rt is aLso a struggle over the production of knowledge itself, or the constitution of meaning. oners class and gender identities are anshored in this struggre, forming one t s sense of place in the labour process, forming onets perception of changes in the labour process, and, ultimately, determining oners understanding of aLl social reality. The primary element in the distinction between being and consciousness is located in'these two components -30 - of human knowledge. On the one hand, knowledge is material, giving labour power its unigueness as a productive force. On the other hand, knowledge is the region of ideology, which is not material in any sense, where meaning is produced. The two components should be kept analytically distinct, while recognising that ln any given historical context they are very much interconnected. The problem, of course, ls assessing the nays in which this interconnectedness works, and this requires a theory of ideology.

Any historical materialist discussion of ideology must begin with Gramsci. In his attempt to transcend the determinist moders of second rnternatlonal l{arxism in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution, Gramsci developed an epistemology that owed much to Hegelts version of totality and Croce rs conception of the unity of subject and object. (26 ) In so doing, he rejected the rigid base/superstructure metaphor in favour of the notion of a single essence imbuing the social whole, and, more importantly, a vision of the sociaL world in which reality is deemed to be indivisible from human consciousness and action. Scientific theories have no truth value independent of their circumstances in th_is view. Hence, their epistemological status is derived, not from their ability to -31- explain reality, but from their role in the formation of the worrd view of particuLar crasses. The existence of a rearity beyond immediate social practice is denled, and the formation of ideologies is rerated directl.y to crass interest. According to Gramsci, every crass position in production carries with it an impLicit conception of the world, and the clash of these conceptions is an important area of class struggle. rn order to secure its contror, the dominant class must make its world view explicit. This ideological hegernony is imposed through a variety of institutions and is produced by intellectuals, ¡rho form a distinct social group. But this ideology must be frexibre in that its task is to incorporate and defeat the arternative conceptions emanating from the experience of subordinate classes. rn the case of. the proletariat, an incipient sociarist consciousness exists in the daÍly activity of workers, and the task of working class intelrectuars and working crass political partles is to make this consciousness expricit. Hence, both crass domination and popular resistance have to be constantì.y organised at the ideologlcal and political level.(ZT1 Arthusser, in seeking to construct a scientific Marxism' rejected Gramsci ?s phirosophy as Hegerian and humanist . (28) Indeed, he took issue with the concept of totarity employed in both second rnternational and fthlstorlclst" Marxlsm, part,lcularIy the unlty of subject and -32- object common to the episternology of Lukacs, Gramsci, and many of their contemporaries (the historicists).(zg) He identified and rejected an'texpressive'totarity in which the sociar ¡¡hole possesses a sore (economy) or essence that is then reflected as epiphenomena in the other elements of society. Bhile retaining the concept of totality, he proposed a theory of multipricity and difference in which a prural.ity of instances, none of which is reducibre to another' characterise every sociar structure. Every social formation is constituted by a specific organisation of the social practices composing it (economic, poLitical, ideorogical, theoreticaL) such that one may play è dominant rore at a particurar conjuncture, but the economy is arways determinant in the last instance. Hence, ideorogicaL and political relati.ons are not mere reflections of economic relations, nor are they indivisibLe from class relations, but foLrow their own dynamic in a rfreratively autonomousfr fashion. Furthermore, he rejected ttre notion. that history is the manifestation of a subject, be it an Absotute ldea (as in HegeJ. ) or the proletariat (as in historicist Þlarxism). Rather, he maintained that an historicaL reallty exists independent of collective consciousness. That rearity is composed of and determined by the objective, antagonistic structures known as modes of production, which are propelled by class struggle, and human beings are constituted as subjects through ideologicar practice, which -33-

is an integral instance of the social formation. This differs from Gramsci ts notion of hegemony in that, by rejecting the unity of subject and object, Althusser pointed to the epistemoLogical space between being and consciousness. ( 30 ) It is significant that one of the most fruitful applications of Gramsci rs interpretation of popular consciousness and resistance has been in England.(31.) There it met with an historiography of the working and popular classes that shared many of Gramscl fs philosophlcal premises. This historiographyr ãssoGiated with names such as Hirr, Thompson, Hobsbawm, Hil.ton, and Rude, took form Ín the communist Party of Great Britaints Historiansr Group during the L940s and 1950s and emerged as a distinctive genre after '1956t. rn light of Later deveropments, the most significant text of the Historians t Group was Dona I Torr s lejû_Xilln_-ancl_Hls Times . Published in 1956, this book was a schematic outLine of a peoplefs history of the transition to capitaLism ln Engrand, emphasising the history of popular democracy and the struggles of smaLl producers as they lost contror over their means of production. Taking the classicar economlc processes as given, Torr anarysed the constitution of popular consciousness and the rore of popurar initiative in the form and process of capitatist deveropment. Her book belonged to a popurar-democratic tradition of history writing that flourished in the cpGB -34 - between the L92Os and the L950s, and was inspired by the nineteenth century Romantic-cum-Marxist critique of capital ism personif ied by HiIl iam l,lorris. As such, it proved to be a valuable point of departure for the post-1955 historians who were then turnlng to the younger (and more Hegel ian) l.larx for a non-determinist historical materialism. (32) the epistemology that characterises this confLuence of the young Marx, Romanticism, and historles of popular consciousness retains an expressive conception of totality and the unity of subject and object. Rude, for example, makes explicit use of Gramsci in devising his theory of the fusion of !tinherenttt and "derivedil elements in popular ideology. According to Rude, the popular classes possess an inherent trmother I s milktt ideology based on direct experience, oral tradition, or folk memory, which fuses with a more structured system of ideas to become the popular Ídeology of a given time and place. In actual history, there is considerabLe overlap between these, with derived elements gradually becoming incorporated as inherent ones. The t'Norman Yoke ft or rf moral economy rr , descr ibed by Christopher HitI and Edward Thompson respectlvely, are examples of this fusion in practice. Thompson himseLf would no doubt reject such a typology as an unwarranted abstraction. His approach is in fact the most radlcal in this genre. He refuses to draw a distinction between base -35 - and superstructure or social being and consciousness. there is no reality independent of subjective experience in this view, and the fulcrum of class struggle and (therefore) historical change is the sreation of a politicaL class consciousness out of everyday experience. (33) The richness of this approach should not be underestimated. Especially when combined wlth Raymond Williamst reworking of the concept of culture from a similar theoretical perspective, it has produced a magnificent historiography which both illuminates past struggles and reveals the ways in which popular classes have been, can be, and must be active agents in the creation of tÌ¡eir own history. Thompsonrs The Hakino of the Encr1 ish Eork lno CIass., in particular, illustrates how the popuLar classes forged a political movement and a distinctive working class culture between L798 and L830 that are not reducible to the development of productive forces and, lndeed, were as important as economic changes in the formation of the working class. He should not allow the attractiveness of the categories to bl-ind us to the epistemological difficulties, however. ( 34 ) The refusal to aLlow any conceptual distance between belng and consciousness presumes that there is a direct reLationship between thought and reality. On the one hand, the notion of the working class as Subject is retained, composed of individual, autonomous subjects. On the other, experlence and culture replace the -36 - economy as the expressive essence of the totality. (Rude, seeking to understand the ideology of peasants as werr as the working c1ass, ilâkes use of Gramsci rs distinctton between organic and traditional classes to highright the division and diversity among the exploited. yet, the ideologies produced are interpreted as expressive of a popular subject, or subjects, albelt more diverse and comprex than the working class.) These difficurties are significant. The approach does not arlow one to ask questions about the ideological constitution of historical subjects or the material determination of ideorogies; that is to say, there is no nåy to analyse the intermediate forms in which sociar identities are shaped. To do so requires admitting the existence of conceptual. dlstance between being and consciousness, subject and object, nhich this approach denies. ( 35 )

This inevitably leads into discourse theory. The charlenge posed to materiartst epistemorogies by post- saussurian linguistics has been profound. rt is no longer po6sibl-e--as empirically trained historians are especiarry nont to do--to treat language as the neutral medium through which experience is expressed. Rather, wê must recognise that language itself is constitutive of reality; we cannot read past language to an underLying source, but we must analyse how language itself forms reality. -37 -

Saussure rs concept of language, which informs the analytical approaches of Lacan, DeIeuze, Derrida, Foucault and others, can be a slippery and dangerous slope, however. Hithout getting hopelessJ.y mlred in the intricacies of linguistic theory, it shourd be noted that, in thls approach, language is deemed to be constantly in fIux, communication is necessarily ambiguous, and there is no rearity beyond discourse. since a given word in oners vocabulary does not have a definite referenee point. in an anterior real ity, a nerr meaning is assigned to tt¡e word whenever lt is used to construct a nover sentence. rn turn, rearity itself (which is constituted through ranguage) is fragmentary and incoherent. Indeed, any attempt to impose order on this frux is an exercise in domination. rn Foucaultts work, discourse and its practices are forms of power/knowredge that inevitabry organise and control. The history of sexuarity is reaJ.ry the history of dominating discourses on sexuality. DeIeuze, going further, suggests that Language itserf is an arttficial imposltion on the frux of the unconscious. (3G)

Historicar materialists and other reaLists shourd be vrary of such approaches. All discourses, incruding Marxism, are. deemed to be apparatuses of domination in this view. The poritical position that logicarry frows from such an anarysis is an extreme and immobilising anarchism. Nevertheless, by retaining a materialist stancer Set -38 - incorporating some of the post-Saussurian insights, it is possibre to accord ranguage and discourse a certain determining ro1e. ( 37 ) Gareth stedman Jones t analysis of chartlst ranguage is one example of how this might work in practice. Rejecting previous trsocialtf analyses of chartlsm, in whf ch the poritical language of the movement was deemed to be expressive of an underlying sosial reality, he focuses on the language itself, interpreting its form rather than its putative content. rtHhat is proposed,rf he wrltes, is an approach which attempts to identify and situate the place of language and form, and which resists the temptation to colrapse questions posed by the form of Chartism into questions of tts assumed substance. It is argued that, if the interpretation of language and polltlcs is freed from a priori sociaL inferences, it then becomes possible to establish a far closer and more precise relationship between ideology and activity than is conveyed in the standard picture of the movement.

The conclusion he reaches is that chartist ranguage wag continuous with an older ranguage of radicarism that predated the emergence of a working class. rt was more than a vehicre for the expression of working crass discontent, however, for it prayed a signiflcant rore Ín estabrishing the premises and parameters of chartism. But the movement uLtimately colrapsed, stedman Jones suggests, due to the failure of the chartist readership to persuade its constituency to lnterpret distress and dlscontent within the terms of the inherited language.(39) -39-

rf we accept that ranguage should be anarysed at some distance from social references and, indeed, that language

plays a significant role in constituting society, how do ere theorise its relation to other sociaL practfces? Foucault is useful- here. His rrarchaeology of knowLedgerf is a theory of the development of forms of knowledge and the rules governing the emergence of particurar discourses. rn this theory' discourse refers to a ringuistic unity or group of statements that constitutes or delimlts a particurar area of concern. The patterns regulating a discourse are discursive practices, Ín which the rimits and sociar relations of legitimate dissussion are estabLished. sociaL power operates through knowledge, and discourse is the medium connecting knowredge and poerer. Foucaultrs project, based upon the berief that power is inherent in arr social rerationships, is the anarysis of the social mechanisms through whlch power is practiced. The hlstorianrs (or tfarchaeologistrstr) role, in his view, is to deconstruct the myriad of sociar apparatuses and discourses through which knowredge is constructed in the exercise of power.(39) Arthough Foucault directs us to the rore of specific apparatuses ln the productlon of knowledge, his concept of a murtipLicity of micro-powers operating throughout society suggests that all power 1s of equar significance. Thile this perspective is usefuL in moving beyond crass reductlonlsm to analyse other oppresslons, it does not arlow -40 - us to analyse a hierarchy of poerers. ( 40 ) The poerer of a parent over a child is theoretically equivarent to the poç{er of capital over a norker in this view. As Jeffrey Heeks has noted' the poriticar ramifications of this are ominous: tr. . . if power is everywhere it is difficult to understand how it can be resisted or broken out of .tt(41.) But this merery means t,hat Foucaurt cannot be relled upon as a generar guide to historical analysis. once rre appreciate his rimitations, aspects of his schema may be incorporated into an historical materialist account. Feminists and others interested in sexuality have found Foucault and the structurarist tradition to be particurarry suggestive. Seeks, for example, makes creatlve use of Fousault, Lacan and others in mapping the construction of modern sexuar identities. He shows how dlscourses on sexuality, produced in sociar institutions and connected by political and economic processes, have determined the domain of the sexuar in the t¡rentieth century. Rather than this simply being a process of regulation and subjection, however, the sexualry oppressed have used tt¡e dominant definitÍons to construct their oern identity and build movements of resistance. He writes: The construction of categories defining ¡rhat is appropriate sexual behavour. . . , or what eonstitutes the essential gender being. . .; or where we are placed along the cont,inuum of sexual possibitities. . .; this endeavour is no neutral, scientific discovery of what eras already there. Social lnstitutions which embody these definitions...are constitutlve of the sexual Iives -41-

of individuals. Struggles around sexualÍty are, therefore, struggles over meanings--over what is appropriate or not appropriate--meanings which call on the resources of the body and the flux of desire, but are not dictated by them , (42) In 6ome cases, however, the dangers of a structuralist approach have outweighed its positive effects. Homen writing in the English journal mlf, for example, have concruded that it is impossible to have knowredge of any phenomenon prior to its expression in diseourse. Hence, there is no underlying social rearity tt¡at conditions and unifies the struggles of women, only a series of discourses organised around specific sites of oppression (domestÍcity, work' psychology, sexuaLity), which have no unity. Homenrs resistance, therefore, can only be specific and discursive. ( 43 ) m/fts ideal-ist position forms part of the whole post- structuralist rejection of epistemological realism ( including Marxism), but it aLso has specfficalJ.y feminist origins. Marxist feminismrs initiaL encounters with structurarism and other theories of identity formation were in reaction to the purportedry ,,sex br ind, categories of

Marxisn. Tt¡e probrem ls that they, rike the many others who have turned to theories of ideology in rejecting Marxismrs economism, assume (on the basis of Second International categories) a narrow productive base tt¡at cannot possibly provide a materiatist account of womenrs subordination. Hence they concrude that elther oppression takes prace -42- soIeIy at the ideological level or a separate t'mode of reproductionrt must be theorised. (44) In either case the result is a form of conceptual dualism in ryhich class and sexual oppression are deemed autonomous. Hhen the concept of mode of production is expanded to incLude the reproduction of labour power, however, woments oppression can be clearly understood in material and class terms. this does not render ideology epiphenomenal, of course, but it does suggest that the constitution of gender identity is deternined by the domestic relations betweeen women and men in family households. Þlichel-e Barrett and llary Macintosh stress the relative autonomy o f ttfamil ia1 rt ideology in the ir account o f how gender identity is formed in twentieth century industrial capital ist societies. In so doing, they ct¡alIenge functionalist analyses, which posit particul.ar family forms and gender relations as required by capitarism, and duarist analyses, which vlew ¡roments oppression es belng ideologicalLy or biorogicaLry determined. rn this ideology, a particurar househord form is deemed the most appropriate arrangement f'or the organisation of do¡nestic r ife. This arrangement, drawn generally from the domestic organisation of class societies, and specifically from the historical experience of the industrial bourgeoisie, is the nucrear famlry of male head, dependent wlfe, and dependent chirdren. The nuclear family becomes an ideal ln famitiar ideorogy, -43- providing the general context in which mascurinity and femininity are constituted. In turn, these identities affect the sexual division of labour within both the househol.d and society, the state regulation of the family and sexuality, and the regitimate bounds of sexual morarity, househord arrangements, and gender behaviour. rrrhe 'family t, tr Barrett wrltes, provides the nexus for the various themes-- romantlc Love; feminine nurturance; maternalism, serf-sacrifice; masculine protection and financial support--that characterise our conception of gender and sexuality. It is, however; ârr ideologicar nexus rather than any concrete fanily system wbich is invorved here and there are many connections between these processes within and outside the locus of the family home.(4S)

The primary components of a theory of ideorogy shouLd now be visibre. rdeorogy refers to the production and transformation of meaning, which occurs in the realm of ideas. Although it moves far beyond lt, ldeorogy beglns and ends with the production prosess, but it is neither a refrection of a materiar base nor in any sense materiar. As Marxist feminists have argued, there are two sldes to production: the production of goods and the production of labour power. rn turn, tr+o components of the ideological rearm are connected directly to production: gender and class.(45) But how does the materlal relate to the idear?

To begln wlth, followlng Gramscl, ideology should be seen as -44- a contested sociar terrain, demanding constant organisation and intervention by both dominant and subordinate social groups. Furthermore, ås culturalist historiograpby has shown, resistance to the forces of domination is constructed in popular ideology and politics by subordinate subjects s¡ho pray an active, determining rore in the historlcar process. But, taking aceount of Arthusserrs critique of Hegerian and second rnternationar l.larxism, the epistemologicar distance bet¡reen subject and object must be recognised. There is no direct relation between social being and sociar identity; rather, ês discourse theory suggests, identity is shaped through intermediate languages and discourses. rt is here that ideologies are formed. But how are they formed?

Dominant ideologies subject peopre to their prace in a mode or form of production and qualify them to take up and perform productive roles. At its most basic leverr å dominant ideoLogy renders tt¡e inherent antagonisms in productlon as functional difference¡ women and men, workers and employers, have different rores to perform. rn post- manufactory capitalist societies, the state, particurarry in its educative capacity, is the primary sÍte for the organisation and construction of dominant ideorogies. (42) From the formar process of schooring to the ress formal issuance of ad¡ninistrative decisions or the conduct of studies, the state and state supported institutions play a significant rore in the distirlation and refractlon of -45 - knowledge. But these apparatuses are not simple refrections of the mode or form of production they seek to reproduce. Rather, the production of meaning forrows its own particurar form at some distance from materiar production. specifically, there are two proce6ses--one practical, the other theoretical--by which ideologies are constructed in instltutions. (48) Practical ideology operates in the realm of peoplers everyday experiences, addressing them as individuals and members of social collectivities. This is the process that Althusser describes as interperration, whereby human subjectivity is consti-tuted. centraL to the concept of interpellatfon is the notion that ideologies are not received as something externar by a fixed and unified subjest. Rather, with the reception of an interperlation, the reeeiver is participating in an ongoing sociar process of constftution and reconstitution. rt is here that we acquire our sociar identities, notabry crass and gender identities, and become subjected to a system or systems of representation. But in order to be effectively interperrative, practical ideorogy must be strustured in such a way as to have resonance for those receiving it. rt needs to connect with the experience of the receivers, ordering their nrorld in a ¡ray that is meaningful.. rt prays on the contradictions in society, and opentngs and 1apses in -46- various ideologies, to coax and shape identity in a particular dlrection. Theoretical ideology is the conceptuar terrain upon ¡rhich objects of knowledge are defined: it provides the epistemological. space in ¡rhich practical ideology may operate. Abstraction occurs here, in that the ordinary language of practical ideorogy is organised fn terms of a specific theoreticar discourse at this leveL. First, a domain of knowl.edge is defined in relation to other discourses on the theoretical terrain. Second, a problematic--!tthe objective internar reference system of... [a theorytsl particuLar themes, the system of questions commanding the answers givenft--is established. (49) Third, organisational practices are generated to shierd tt¡e discourse in question from other discourses. Fourth, restrictions are pLaced on who may speak and what may be discussed. And, fifth, analytlcal categories are constructed that are solely referential ¡¡ithin the specific discourse itserf or the dlssursive order of ¡rhich it forms a part. (50 ) But, beyond this discursive jockeying, the operation of any dominant theoretlcal ideology is urtimately limited by practical ideology, oF, more preciseLy, practical ideologyts lnteraction with ideorogies of resistance. But how do ideologies of resistance--what ¡re wirr calr popular ldeorogies--deverop? First, tt¡e production process is the materiar basis for the constructlon of popular -47 - ideologies. The antagonisms inherent in production are viewed as inequality or exploitation in popular ideology, although their source or form may be interpret,ed as residing outside of production. Second, the constitution of a popular identity follows the same formative rules as does the constitution of a dominated identity. Subordinate individuals are addressed as exploited and as potential agents of resistance and social change. A welL articulated popular ideology, such as Marxism, has as sophisticated a discursive structure as the most fulIy developed dominant ideology. This includes a theoretical ideology, a practical ideology, and, if it has any hope of success, ân institutional apparatus--such as a party--in vrhich analysis may be conducted, ideology may be generated, and the various leveIs may be linked. Less clearly articluated popuS.ar ideologies, such as populism, tend to exist more exclusively in the realm of practicai. ideology, drawing upon a range of dominant and popular theoretical ideologies for categories of analysis. Nevertheless, these popular ideologies can and do form coherent critiques, fruitful languages for the constitution of identlties, and effective institutional structures. (51 ) A popular ideology is, first and foremost, a linguistic unity, what Stedman Jones calls rta complex rhetoric binding together, in a systematic tlège shared premises, analytical routines, strategic options and programmatic demands. tt(52) -48 -

The specific rerationship between words and sentences in the language structures reality in a way which has resonance for the audience in question. rt is thereby able to mobirise a constituency by constructing a personar and collectlve identity in opposition to dominant ideologies. But its coherent structure notwithstanding, aIl ideology exists in history. rn the face of changing rear ities and the emergence of neer constituencies, the maLleabiritv of language is tested. The popurar ideorogy must continue to inÈerpret rearity in a meaningfur r{ay or lose its abitity to create identities and mobirise peop].e. New or different sociar groups may appropriate aspects of the ideorogy, giving it ner{ intonations. (53) More ominously, the categories and inferences of the popurar ideoLogy may be incorporated into the dominant ideology, transforming the formerfs meaning in the process. And the categories of dominant ideoLogy ñê}¡r in effect, infiltrate the popular ideorogy' constructing a new unity in which the previousry resistant Loses its criticar edge and besomes accommodationist.

rn the strictest sense, reproduction refers to the rene¡rar of the social and technical elements of production' and of the rerations between them, from one round of production to another; more generally, it refers to the renewal over time of a mode of production or sociar formation in all of, its economice poritical, and ideological aspects. For discussionsr s€€, for exanple, H. Friedmann, ItHousehold production and the Nationar Economy:rr concepts for the Anarysis of Agrarian Formatiorrs, Journal of Peasant ,studies T (zl ( Jånuary, -49 -

l-980 ) , p. L62; H. Barrett, Hgmen I s Oopression Tgdav: Problems in Mar:list Feminist _AnaIvsis ( London, j.980 ) , pp. 19-29; and T. Bottomore, Ed., À Dictiona_ry o_f Marxist Thought (London, 1983), pp. 4L7-4L9. 2. The extraction of surplus value is Itthe specific y¡ay exploitation takes place under capitalism. . . in whlch the surplus takes the form of profit, and exploitation results from the working class producing a net product srhich can be sold for more than they receive in wages. . . . The amount of surplus val-ue a worker produces is the difference bet¡reen the value he or she produces and the value of his or her labour power.t, Bottomore, €d., A Dictionary, pp. 472-473. 3. In Althusser I s writing articulation means ff to join together tt or t,give expression to tr ! it is used as an anatomical metaphor to indicate relations of Iinkage between two or more levels of various phenomena. See A. Foster-Carter, ttThe !!odes of Produstion Controverst, tt New Left Review 107 (L978), pp. 53-54. K. Marx, CapitaI, vo1. III (Hoscow, L97Bl, part VI; H. Denis, rrCapitaL and Agriculture: A Review of Marxian Problematics,rt Studies in Political Economv, Number 7 (9linter, L982), pp. 128-133; D. Goodman and M. Redctift, Agrarian Transitions (Oxford, Lg8L ), chapter 1; for Lenin on American agricuLture see V. I. Lenin, f'Capitalism and Agriculture in the USA,', Selected Torks Lz (Moscor¡, 1943), pp. L9Û-Z9Z; for an application of Kautskyrs anarysis to North America see A.M. simons, The Am-erican Farmer (New York, t90z). A recent study which ill"ustrates the importance and persistence of househord agriculture in the supposedly rrpurely capitalistrl England of the nineteenth century is H. Reed, rrThe Peasantry of Nineteenth century Engrand: À Negrected Class?,t, Historv Horkshop Journal 1B (Autumn, L9g4 ) . Two important studies of Hestern canadian agrarianism are situated within this classical approach: John Conwayts f,'To Seek A Good1y Heritage t: The prairie Populist Resistance to the National policy, rt phD dissertation, Simon Fraser University, LgTg, whlch utilises Lenint s anal-ysis of Russian populism to argue that the agrarian movement was a trpetit bourgeols response to capitalist industrializationfr, and C.B. Macphersonts Dg¡mocracv in Arberta: social credit and the party system (Toronto, L962), which should be understood in the context of the author t s mailn interest, the anarysis of early modern bourgeois democratic theory in terms of a cLassical understanding of capitalist trans i t ion. 5. Foster-Carter, ff The Modes of Production,tr p. 49t Goodman and Redclift, From Peasant to_ Proletariên, chapter 2t R. Brenner, t'The Or igins o f Capital ist Development: A -50 -

Critique of Neo-smithian Marxism,,, New Lef t Review j-04 (L977), The so-called ."Ieft-fnnisián" position in canadian poriticar economy is generalry cast in terms of dependency and/or unegual exchange ¡ f:or applications to Hestern canadian agrlcurture see D. Hitcherr, The PoLitics of Food (Toronto, Lg?5 ) and R. T. Naylor, ,,Th. rdeorogical Foundations of social Democracy ånd sociar Credit, rr in Gary Teep1e, êd., CapiLalilm and the (Toronto, -igzzi. 6. P.P. Rey' Les Ar.riances de classes (paris, LgTg), pp. L4-15: quoted in Foster-Carter, illlodes of productio¡,rr p. pp. 56' 50-54; J. laylor, From l{odeLnization- to Modes Derelop*"nt and UDderdeveiã L979) ¡ J. Chevalier, t,There is Nothing Simp1ã About simpre commodity Production,, studies in political Economy, Number 7 (Hinter, lggZl, pp. tOZ-103. 7. s.A. l{ann and J.r,t. Dickinson, ,robstacles to the Development of a Capital ist Agriculture, ,, Journal o_f Studies (July, PeesantI'The 5(4) L9ZB), ltann and Dickinson, State and Agriculture,r, in H. Newby and F. Buttel, ( Montclair, N. J . , 1.980 ) ; H. fr ieamanr¡, uWoriã- ll state and Faniry Farm: The sociaL Basis of Household Produetion in the Era of Hage Labour, rr comparative studies in society and Hrstory zo(4) (october, tgzg). 8. H. Friedmann, "Household production and the National Economytr; Friedmann, ,tSimp1e Commodity production and Hage Labour ln the American plains, r, ùgurnal of peasan_t S-Ègdi-es. 6(L) (october, L97B)¡ see àrso--M;--T;ãLey, rfrndependent commodity production and the Tradition,,, Dynamics of a$thropoloqv r.3(4) (November, "Reproduction and Evorving patterns -t97CJl----Eãi.y,of co-operatfon and Resource Transfer Among Domestic producerj, rr .IournaL Canadian f'Rerationsof An-throoorogy L(z) (Hinter, lgg0); Ft"dL"y, of Production of the .FamiLy Farmr: canadian f¡airies," Journal of peasant studies 9(1) (october, 1981 ) . 9. Peasant production and simpre commodity production are abstractions. An 'actuarly existing agriculturaL household ¡rill exist somes¡here along the continuum from absorute subsistence to compLete market participation (not incruding labour). prairie agriculturãt housäholds are and have been primarily at the market end of this continuum; therefore, the concept of simple commodity production best describes their sociar position. rn the rest of the text ne sharl use the term,farm householdsrr and ttfarmersf' nhen referring to frsimpre commodity producti.onrt and trsimple commodity producers,r. L0 _l{arx, Capital, volume I, pp. l0?i., 645: quoted in H. Lazonick, trcrass Relatf ons and the capltar ist -51-

Enterprise: A critical Assessment of Marxian Economic Theory,!' unpublished paper, Harvard University, 1993, p. 2]-t G. stedman Jones, r'class struggle and the rndustrial RevoLution, fr in Lanwrases of crass: studies in Enol ish. sorkinq crass Histqry. tB32-1982 (cambridge, L983); pp. 47 -48 . 1_L J. Chevalier, rtThere is Nothing Simpl_e, rf pp. 94-99. L2 J. Chevalier, tfThere is Nothing Simple,il pp. 100-j.1,0; H. Denis, t'CapitaI and Agriculture,,' pp. L36-146; A. Morlard, Les paysans exploites (Grenoble, Lgrr ) is discussed by both Chevalier and Denis. L3 Chevalier, ttThere Is Nothing Simple,rf pp. lL0-L13; t'Cap rt Denis, i taI and Agr icul ture, pp . l4 l -146 . L4 Chevalier, I'There Is Nothing Simpl-e, t, pp. ll4-11g. l_5 For the domestic Iabour debate see H. Seccombe, r,The Housewife and Her Labour under capltarism,'r New .Left- Review 83 (1974), and subsequent criticiJms and rejoinder in the same journalt R. Fox, €d., Hidden in (Toronto, L980); M. Barrett, Homenrs OppiesGion Toaay, pp. L72-L86, L, Vogel, Marxism-ihããii- and the Oporesiion of Homen: Toward a unitarv (6-Brunswick, N .iî 1983), Part Four. rf 16 W. Seccombe, The Reproduction of Labour power: A Comparative Study, t' PhD dissertation, Universlty of Toronto (OISE), L983, pp. 33, 52, 69-7?; G.A. Cãhen, Karl llarx's Thegry of Historv: A Defence (princeton, 1978), p. 41. L7 Seccombe, ftThe Reproduction of Labour power,rrpp. g4-g5. ¡.8 Seccombe, ftThe Reproduction of Labour power,rr pp. g9-96. L9 There ls no biological need for any sexuar division of labour. 20 vogel' Marxism and the oppression of Homen, pp. L44-L50; Seccombe, rtThe Reproduction of Labour power,,r pp. 9g- 103; M. Goderier, ttrhe origins of llale Domination, u New Left Review r27 ( 1981 ); a recent correction whlch explores these issues is s. coontz and p. Henderson, eds., Womenrs Work. Henfs propertv: The Origins of Gender and Class (London, 1986). 2L one aspect of this crass and sexuar struggre was the estabrishment of the family erage in the regions of advanced capitaLism during the nineteenth century. see l.f . Barrett and l't. llclntosh, r,The .FamiLy Hage î : Some Problems for Socialists and Feminists, rf Capitat aA¿ Cl.ass Number L1 ( 1930 ); Seccombe, r'The nepioauction of Labour Posrer, rr trPatriarchy pp. 4Zg-439, 46L-466; Seccombe, stabir ized: the construction of the mare breadwinner norm in nineteenth century Britain, rf Social History LL( 1) (January, l9B6). 22 Seccombe, ttThe Reproduction of Labour Poner,r, chapter 6¡ seccombe, 'rrhe Expanded Reproduction cycre of Labour Power in Twentleth century capltarism,rr in Hidden in tbe -52-

Household; E. Blumenfeld and S . Mann, r,Domestic Labour and the Reproduction of Labour power: Towards an Analysis of women, the Famiry and class,r, in Hidden in the HousehoLd; Vogel, Harxism and the Oppression of Homen_, chapter 11. 23 See l{. Luxton, More Than A Labour of Love: Threg Generations of Uomen.rs Hork in the Home- (Toronto, l_tgO) for a discussion of the working crass househoLd in Flin Flon. 24 P. Anderson, considerations on sestern Ìlarxism (London, L976); P. Anderson, In the Tracks of Historical. Mater ial ism ( London, i.98 3 ) ; for the ,debate' at its height see E.P. Thompson, The poverty of rheorv (London, L978) and P. Anderson, Arquments within EnoLish Marxism ( London' 1-980 ) ; seccombe, tf rhe Reproduction of Labour Power,il pp. 60-63. 25 Lazonick, t,Class Relations in the Capital ist Enterpriseff . 26 Totarity refers to the determining domination of the whole over its constituent parts. rfsociaL totarity in Marxist theory is a structured and historically determÍned overall complex. rt exists in and through those manifold mediations and transitions through which its specific parts or complexes...are linked to each other in a constantly shiftlng and changing, dynamic set of interrelations and reciprocal determinations.!l Bottomore, êd., A_Dictionarv, p. 480. Bendetto Croce rras a leading idearist phirosopher in earry twentieth century Ital-y. C. Boggs, Gramscirs Marxi.sm (London, L9761, pp. 2l-22. 27 A. Gramsci, Selections From The Prison Notebooks; Boggs, Çramscits Marxism; R. Hiliband, Marxism and politicå (London, L9771, pp. 48-49, 5Z-62, l{iIiband, The State in Capital ist Soci_ety ( London, L969 ) , chapter g, A. CaIlinicos, llarxism and Philosophv (Oxford, Lggg), pp. 61-80, 150-153; Callinicos, Althusserrs Harxism (London, L9761, pp. L6-29. 28 In rejecting humanísm Althusser naa denying othat the human essense is the subject of history and that it determines its direction according to a predestined drama of arienatlon and reconciliation., ca1rinicos, Althusserrs Marxlsm, pp. 69-70, 29 rn t¡istoricism a theory 'tpossesses a cLaim to cognitive validity to the extent that it is appropriate to the historicar needs of a particular crass in a particurar epoch.f' Callinicos, Althusserfs [larxislB, pp. lZ-19. 30 L. Althusser, t,Ideology and fdeological State Apparatuses' ft in Lenin and Philosoohv and other Essavs ( London, L97Ll ¡ CaI I lnlcos, Al thusser . s MarXism; CaIlinicos, llarxism and PhiLosophy, pp. g9-98; T. Benton, The Rlse and Fal1 of structural Harxism (London, 1984 ) . -5 3-

31. see' for example, s. Harr and r. Jefferson, eds., Resistance Through Rituals- (London, Lg76). 32, B. Schwarz,tt'The peopler in history: the Communist Party Historians t Group, Lg46-S6, il in Centre for contemporary culturar studies, Making Histories: studies in histofv-writing and politics tf.onAon, fgettt R. samuel' ItBritish l{arxist Historians T,,, New Left Review L?o (1980); R. Johnson, ,culture and the t¡isto;ians," and ttrhree problematics: r, erements of a theory of working class culture, in J. Clarke, C. Crltcher and R: Johnson, êds., Torkinq class Culture: strrdics in triernrrr and theory (London, L979) ¡ Torr, Tom l,lann and His Tlmes (London, 1956). 33. G. Rude, fdeoloqy and Popular protest (New York, 1980 ); Rude, The Crowd in Historv (Ner¡ york, L964): E. P. Thompson, the Makinq of the Enql ish H ( London, 1963 ) ; Thornpson, r,The M English crowd in the Eighteenth century,, past and Present number 50 (Lg7Lt¡ c. Hitl, rrrhe Noiman yoL"J, in J. Saville, êd., Democracy and the Labour=-_-- Movement¡ Essavs in Honour of Dona Torr (London, 1gS+. 34. Thompson, The Povertv of Theory; see also G. ücLennan, rrE. P. Thompson and the discipL ine of historical context, tt and t,PhiI_osophy and history ! some issues in recent marxist theory,rr in centre for contemporary Cultural Studies, Makinq Histories. 35. The best exampre of the use of this approach in the anarysis of rurar North American populår politics is Lawrence Goodwynts Democratic promiêe: The populist Moment in America (New york, lgtá). fùls Uoolc coufA easiry be retitred rhe Making of the Amerlcan Farmerr ès it orres much to Thompson (atthough the infruence of c. vann Hoodward is also evident). rt is rich fn curtural analysis: the concept of movement culture; the identification of a sequentiar process of agrarian insurgency; curture and experience ás determining forces in history. Vet, Goodwyn refuses to abstract. He denies the existence of a mode of productlon or soclar formation conceptuarry dlstinct from experience. Hence, his populists--the mid-roaders at Least--are presented as pure subjects. They are tt¡e bearers of dåmocracy, resisting tt¡e forces of corporate hegemony. see aLso Goodwynts crÍtique of James Green in ÍThe -.co-operative Commonwealth I and Other Abstractions,,r l,tarxist EqfepegtJgeg L0 (Summer, L980 ) and Green's repiy tf Popul lsm' socialism and the promise of Democracy, i Radical History Review 24 (FaIl, Lgg0 ). Although I agree with most of Greenrs criticisms of Goodwyn, his orrn analysis is quite orthodoxe positing a IinËar and evolutionary transition to capitálism as the material context of t'populismrt and rf sociarismr,. A similar, though conservative, materiallst eplstemology guides the -54-

American trne¡r rural history,t. In this approach, modernisation theoryr ênvironmentar determinism, and guantification are combined to assess ho¡r rural America adjusted to the deveropment of urban, industriar society. See, for example, R.P. Swierenga, ,,Theoretical Perspectives on the New Rural. History¡ From Environmentalism to tlodernlzation, !t Agricultural History 56(1) (January, L982). For critiques of the conservatism of the trne¡r social historytt--the elder sibling of f,new rural historytr--see T. Judt, rfA C1own ln Regar PurpLe ¡ social History and the Historians, rr History sorkshop Jgurnal. 7 (spring, Lg?g) and E. Fox- Genovese and E. D. Genovese, ,rrhe poriticar tt crisis of Social History, Journal of Social History L0 ( 2 ) (t{inter , 1,976) , 36. A. CaLlinicos, Þlarlism and Philosophy, chapters S and 6t caLlinicos, rs There A Future For l{arxism? (London, L982); M. Foucault, The Historv of sexuality. vorume r: An rntroduction (New York, l9B0); J. Heeks, sexualiti Sexualities (London, 1985), pp. 170-18L ; t'Language and History,tr Hietorv Horkshop Journal 10 (Autumn, 1980 ), pp. 1-5. 37. See P. Dews, trThe 'Nouvelle Philosophier and Foucault,rt Economy and society 8(2) il,lay, LgTg) and Dews, ,rrhe .new phiLosophers t and the end of Leftism, rf RadicaL Phil"osophv number 24 (Spring, 1gB0) for ana}yses of the poritics of structurarism. carrinicos suggests that post-Fregean Ianguage philosophy provides a more fruitful guide to a materiarist assount of discourse. rn this tradition words have a stable meaning with reference to a co-existing reality, and it is the yray in which words combine in novel sentences which accounts for Lingulstic creativity in a gfven discursive system. Unfortunately, I know of no historians who have adopted this line of enquiry, and r am too uncomfortable wlth the intricacies of the distinctions to pursue it myserf. Hence r will follow the better traverred, yet nore dangerous path of structuralism. Catlinicos, Marxism and Philosophv, chapter 6. 38. G. Stedman Jones, ItRethinking Chartism,rr in Lanquaqes of Class, pp. 94-95t for a cLassical Marxist critique see J. Foster, t,The Declassing of tanguè9€,t New Left Revlew 150 ( 1985 ) ; for a sympathetic appreciation see G. craeys, rfl,anguä9r, class and historicar consciousness in nineteenth century Engrand,'f Economv and societv L4(zl (1985); for an analysis of French popular politics that ls similar, though more social, E¡ee H. Sonencsher, ,rÎhe sans-culottes of the Year rr: rethtnklng the ranguage of labour in revolutionary France,rf sociar Histoly -g(3) (October, 1984). -55-

39. tl. FoucauLt, The Archaeology of Knowledoe (Ner¡ York, 1972) ¡ Foucaul t, The HisÈory of Sexuality; J. Weeks, 'rFoucault for Historians, rt [LiEtorv Horkshop Lournal L4 ( Autumn' L9821 ¡ D. Lecourt, r'On Archaeology and Knowledge," ln Harxism and Epistemolooy (London, 1925); A. Sherldan, Michel FoucauLt: The Í1111 to Tru th (London, 1980 ) . 40. Reductionism refers to the reduction of ideoLogical phenomena to their putatíve economic and social determinants. 41. J. Heeks, Sex, 4olitics and Societv¡ the regulation of sexuaLitv since 1800 (London, L981), p. 8. 42. lleeks, Sexual itv and lts Discontents, p. 178. 43. See, for example, R. Coward, t,Rethinking Marxism,, ml,L number 2 (L978). 44. On Marxismrs sex bllnd categories see, for exampl.e, H. Hartmann, Itrhe unhappy Marrlage of Þlarxism and Feminism: Towards a More Progressive Union,tt in L. Sargent, êd., marriaqe of Marxism and Feminism il{ontreal, l9g1), on mode of reproduction llcDono ffPatriarchy see R. ugh and R. Harrison, and ReLations of Product ion, ,f ln A . Kuhn and A.M. Holpe, €ds., Feminism and l{aterial ism ( London, 1978); on the autonomy of ideology see R. Coward and J. EIlis, Language and Materiallsm (London, Lg77l, 45. Barrett, Homenfs Oppression. Todayr p. ZO5¡ U. Barrett and M. Macintosh, The Anti-SociaL FamiLy (London, lgg?)¡ for a discussion of mascul_inity from a similar perspectlve, see A. Torson, The Limits of t{ascuL inity (London, L977), 46. crass and gender ideorogies intersect with other ideologies (religious, ethnic, Fê9ional, natlonal and so forth) in a given society, but the overall ideological ensemble is patterned by gender and class. In Althusserlan termlnology, gender and class are overdetermining or deter¡ninant in the last instance. G. Therborn, The ldeology of Power and the power of Ideologv (London, 1.980), especially pp. ZL-?2. In the rest of the text, the term ideology shall mean class and gender ideology. 47. l{y understanding of the state and education is drawn primariLy from the foll.owing: MiI iband, The State in Capital is_t Soclety, especlally chapter B¡ ÈliI tband, Mqrxism and Poritics-, chapters 3 and 4¡ Gramsci, The, Prison Notebooks; H. Entwistre, Antonio Gramsci ¡ conservative schooling For Radical- poritics (London, t979) ¡ G. l{ardle, r,Potrer, tradition and change: educationar impllcations of the thought of Antonio Gramsci,r, in D. Gleeson, êd., Identitv and Structure: issues ln the socioloqv of education (Driffield, L9?71¡ L. Panitch, The Canadian State: Political Economv and PolltIcaI Power (Toronto, 19771¡ L. Althusser, illdeoIogy -56-

and ldeological State Apparatusesil; Centre for contemporary cultura} studies, on rdeorogy (London, L978); S. HalI, rf schooling, state and society, t, in R. Dale et.aL., eds., EdBcation and the State, VoIume I¡ Schooling and the Nationat Interest (Sussex, l98ilJ p. Bourdieu and J.C. Passeron, Reproduction in Education_ society and cul-ture ( London, L977 ) ; p. wiir i.s, r.eergi¡g

( Farnborough, L977 ) ¡ H . Barre tt, g"r"n i i oppr"sr igr-, Today' chapters 4 and 7, M. t{crntosh, ',tne-stãtã-ffitr¡e Oppression of Women,il in Kuhn and Holpe, êds., Feminisn and Mater ial ism; A . M. Tolpe, rrEducation and thà sexuar Division of Labour,il in Kuhn and Ho1pe, êds., Feminlsm and Materialism; Holpe, ilThe Official faeofogy of Edusation for GirIs, ,t in Dale et. aI . , eds. , UAuóãtion Practice (Sussex, 198L); R. Johnson, uEdu@ and social control in early-VÍctorian Eng1and, r, paät anã Present 49 (1920); see T. Eagreton,- criticiËm-an¿ Ideoloov (London, LgZ6) for his notion of á titer-ry mode of productlon. 48. on theoretical and practicaL ideology see L. Arthussern For Marx (London, 196E), p. Z3L: D. Lecourt, r,On Archaelogy and Knowl_edge,,f pp. 209-213; S. Dentith, rf Pol itical economy, f ietion and the Ianguage of practicar ideology in nineteenth century -Eng1and,,t SociaL History B(A) (May, 1993). 49, Althusser, For Þlarx, p 6Zn. 50. See Therborn, The Ideoloqv of power, especialJ.y pp. gL- 84 51. see, for exampre , E. Lacr.au, 'Towards a Theory of Populism, It in poLitics_ and rdeorogy in Marxist rheory (London, Lgz9 ) and LacLau, ,,poñlist nupture and Discourse,t, Screen Education (Spiing, r,Rethinking 34 19gOi. 52, Stedman Jones, Charttsm,t, [. LO?. 53. on th-e appropriation and transformatlon of ranguage see R. Gray, t'The Deconstru-ctlng of the English- Tórking Class, 'r Socia1 History LL ( 3 ) (October, igeg l; for añ example of how feminists appropriated the ranguage radicarism of in earry nineteenth century- Engrand 6ee B. Taylor, Eve and the New _Je.f usalem ( Loñdon, ¡.9g3 ) , especially chapter IV. tùO: THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF SILUCTURES, AND THE AGRARIA¡¡ HOVEHENT IN HANTÎOBA

fn any society, the particular shape that forms of production, institutions, èDd ideologies assume is determined by specific historicar experiences. rn rate nineteenth and early twentieth century North Amerj-cè, industrial capitalism matured in concert with the expansion of family farming. thusr societies were created that, while dominated and defined by capitalism, were not purely capitalist. More precisely, household wheat production grew withln economies increasingly controrred by corporate capital' bureaucratic states emerged to assume responsibil lty for a range of reproductive tasksr èDd popular poritics was transformed. rn this chapter ere survey these broader areas of canadian and American history to establish e context for understanding the deveropment of dominant and popular ideorogies in Manitoba agricuLture.

Between L87o and 1g3o a rsorrd market in wheat emerged and eras consolldated, the geographic frontiers of globaL wheat production expanded, and farm households disptaced both capitarist and peasant enterprises as the primary form of wheat productÍon in all reglons of the world market. This new worrd wheat market faciritated the emergence of farm households, but their expansion was dependent upon -58 - individual and varied state initiatives. The interaction of the market r¡ith state policÍes affecting the movement of Iabour and capital provided the basis for the transformation of production. Hhen a world price for wheat came into existence, it combined with the actions of national policy makers to undermlne capitalist and peasant production ln the face of the rise of farm households. (1) The world market in nrheat emerged between L873 and

1896. Before 1873 there erere various markets, notábly a European market and an American market, which, whfle connected by trade, erere separate structures. After LB7j, however, improvements in ocean and land transportation allowed the emergence of a market in which a single world price set the maximum cost of production in every exporting nation. The European price feLl and the American (chicago) price rose until they converged in 1882. But both prices fell sharply after L882 due to declining inLand (railroad expansion) and ocean (steamship overproduction) shipping costs, the new European requirement for hard wheat, and, most importantly, a growth in the number of producers. Thls fall marked the beginning of a single world price. The price recovered between 1896 and Horld War I. After the war, however, there vras a glut, followed by a period of high prices and, after L925, a complete price collapse. ( 2) whereas the falr of world prices before lBgG affected onry European producers for the most part, the post-1928 crlsis -59- affected arl wheat groners as even farmers v¡ere unable to meet their modest costs of productlon. Arthough fifty million peopre reft Europe between the 1870s and the L930s, this did not constitute the formation of an internationar labour market. unlike the situation in wheat' where a world price emerged, migratÍon resulted from wage differentials among labour narkets, oF differences in standards of living between areas that did not have labour markets' ãDd these differences were not reduced during the period. Rather, European emigration was organised through states and corporations seeking to colonise neer lands with farmers. The territorial expansions in the unlted states, Austral ia, Canada, ând, to a lesser extent, Argentina utirised farm settLement to effectively incorporate neï areas into existing state structures. wheat farming required the least financing and organisation of any alternatlves (other commodities; peasant, capital ist or other production) for incorporating neer territory and governing it adequatel.y. As farmers began to produce wheat for the market, the price fell. Any producers who lrere paying rent or sages, were tendlng too small a plot, or were unabre to improve production techniques were put under pressure. Hence, peasant and capitalist producers became the victims of a worrd price that continued to farr as settrers worked themselves and their famiries as hard as possible in order to avoid proretarlanisatton. Those -60-

peasants and agricultural workers who were forced off the land either pursued farming opportunities in the new l_ands. sought empJ.oyment locaIly where wages yÍere under a certain degree of upward pressure due to farm competition, or migrated to jobs in the new rands where wages were under even greater upward pressure from the farming alternative. Nor ylas there an internationar market in capital during this period. capital markets and rates of profit remained national phenomena. capita} did not move freely from one sector to another across state boundaries, but e¡as induced by state guarantees that returns woutd be high and risks wourd be Iow. rn L9L3 Engrand accounted for 40.9t of total foreign investments, with France and Germany controrring 20.4% and 13.2+ respectivery. The three countries held credits of $32.8 billion out of a worrd total of $44 billion. The bulk of French and German investments erere in Europe' while half of Engrish investments were within the Empire. Overall-, the majority of investments were in the areas of new settrement where they had been attracted by local states for the buirding of expansionist infrastructure. rndeed, the largest portion of these ratter investments were in the form of interest-bearing securities such as government and railroad bonds. rn the areas of recent European settrement, then, states used wheat farming to expand into new territories. t{heat acreage in the united states prains grew steadily -61-

throughout the period. Argentine growth began in the 1990s and stabilised from 1905 onwards. 190s arso marked the beginning of significant acreage expansion in canada and Australia, with Austrarian acreage decl-ining during the post-war period and into the Depression srhire canada maintained growth we1r into the Depression. The fact that acreage expanded despite price movements stemmed from state poricies of expansion whereby peopre who would otherwise have sord their labour power were given the opportunity to farm. (rn Argentina, where private capital played a comparatively larger roIe, acreage responded more to price.) This nerd class became an important force in the various societies of which it was a part. rt was much rarger than the food requirements of the individuar countries justified, producing for a world market which it had hetped create. Most importantly though, by the end of the first quarter of the twentieth century, each society contained a class that, whil-e brought into existence by capital ist expansion, rras neither bourgeois nor proletarian.

Friedmannfs analysis illustrates that, contrary to many accounts, Canadian expansion eras not unique; it was merel_y the largest in a gtobal series of territorial incorporations into existing state and economic structures. But canadars Nationar Policy, which incruded the transfer of Rupertfs Land, the pacification of the metis and native inhabitants, railway construction, settlement, and tariffs, rras -62- noteerorthy because of the scare of the project, and the speed and efficiency with which the preconditions of settrement erere achieved. The absence of a settlement frontier between upper canada and the [{estern rnterior, coupled with tt¡e beginning of wheat farming on the American prains in the l-860s and the existing commercial links between Red River and St" Paul, presented a major challenge for the newry created state. rronicalry, given the threat from the south, previous American experience in railroad engineerlng and the large scale mobirisation of capital made canadian expansion a viabre undertaking. Nonetheless, incorporation of this ner¡ territory was a major accomplishment because the canadian government had to overcome geographic obstacles, metis and native resistance, and the north-south movement of commerce. The project onry susceeded through subsidies and land grants, the protective tariff, special freight rates, èrrd an initial cpR monopoly.

By 1-885 an extensive infrastructure yras in place, but it was only a shelL of what was needed for a viabre economy and society. some settrement had begun, primarily along the woodlands at the edge of the prairies, but there eras no intensive network of branch rines and town sites to attract migrants such as had accompanied the piecemear expansion of settlement south of the border. The massj.ve immigration that did fill the prairies in the earry twentieth century (a five-fold increase Ín prairie popuration and a twerve-ford -63- increase in improved prairie rand between L901 and 1931), after the exhaustion of cheap American landr leès composed of peopl-e induced by state and corporate coaxing, and rargely displaced by globat transformations in agricurture. (3) The canadian wheat market that deveroped in the context of this structure was marked by a series of contractions and expansions that generally reflected the changes at the world Ievel. Prices declined from about sl.30 a busher in lgg2 to about s0.65 a bushel in 1896, whire canada r s production increased from 32,3 milrion to 42.L mill-ion bushers between the censuses of L881 and 1891. t{ith the boom that began in 1896, wheat prices rose to $0.2b-$0.80 a busher in ]-gor and $1.20 a busheL in L9L2. Produetion, which l¡as s6 milLion bushels in 1901, expanded to 23o mirlion in 1911. By 1913, however, with mortgage and other interest rates increasing as credit tightened in the London money markets, the price dropped to below a dolLar a busherr rêcovêring srfghtly to a dol-Iar the following year. Andr Fêflecting a Z5s6 drop in average yierd per acre, production dropped substantiarl.y to l-60 million bushers in 1914. with heightened wartime and post-war demand, price increased from $L.zg in 19L5 to an incredibre peak price of $3.1b per busher in the summer of 1920. Furthermore, wheat acreage increased by g0%, and the varue of wheat and flour exports doubled, between l9L3 and i.9l-9. Beginnlng in 1920, however, serious depression threatened as the price dropped to a row of $1.02 in Lgzl, -64- placing extreme pressure on those producers who had incurred debt in purchasing land and machinery to take advantage of wartime and post-war prices. Perhaps because of this pressure, production continued to increase as it moved from 300 million to 395 milrion bushels between ]-gzL and Lgzs. The last period of comparative prosperity, before serious depression did become a reality, began with a sharp price increase to $1.68 in 1"925, followed by a slow decline to $1.20 in 1929. Although prices were farling in the rater twenties' costs erere low and crops were good, especialry the record harvest of 567 million bushers in Lgzg which increased canadats share of the wortd market to s0rL. The effects of drought began to be felt in LgZg, hoyyever, as productlon fe11 to 305 million bushels, recovering to 4ZO million in 1930, but falring again to 3z]- mirrion bushers in 193L. And price, final1y, began its dramatic decrine in 1.930' dropping slowry to $1.00 during the year, dipping to S0.65 in 1931, and hitting bottom at $0.25 per bushel in 1932. (4) These prices--terminal or ttspot,, prices at the Lakehead--erere not, of course, the prices a prairie producer actuarly received for his grain. The spread between these prices and the rfstreettt or tttrack,' prices at the rocal erevator or siding was determined by an el-aborate marketing structure variously presided over by capitalist, state, ãDd co-operative intermediaries in the rate nineteenth and early -65- twentieth centuries. At the Lakehead, grain vras mixed, cleaned, loaded, and, after lglT, federalJ_y inspected at terminals owned by railway companies, grain companies, farmer or¡ned co-operatives, and the federal government. The product moved by rail from country elevator through Winnipeg, where it was inspected (after 1gg6 ), to the Lakehead, with freight charges paid by the farmer at government regurated rates after Lggz. At the locar shipping point, normally a country elevator, the producer either sold his grain outright to a buyer, commissioned the selling' or stored the grain for later sale. Hhichever option he chose, ãDd it was usually the first one, he entered into a commercial relationship r¡ith one of a number of elevator owners (or terminal owners if he had enough grain to load a car ) who, for the most part, were grain and milling companies prior to 19L0. By 1930, however, almost 40% of all country drevators were producer owned or controlled, with all transactions regulated by the canada Grain Act (191.2). The central institution in the grain trade eras the sinnipeg Grain Exchange, formed in Lggz. Comprised of elevator companies, cash grain commission merchants and brokers, mil_lers and maltsters, shippers, and exporters, the exchange set the various street, track and spot prices through both cash and (after j.904) futures markets. with the exception of the years rg1,z to Lgzo, during which time exchange trading was suspended in order to -66- halt an upward price movement and to ensure rrstabre' suppries to Britain and France, the open market system was freely operative until 1938. ( 5 ) As the grain trade became established and the wheat economy expanded, farmers faced an increasingly corporate organised industrial structure protected by tariff barriers and, after the initial homestead acquisition and preemption period, a ful1y capitarist market in land. production inputs and items of personal consumption, ranging from land and lumber for dweLlings, barns, and granaries through seed and machinery for seed bed preparation, seeding, haying, summerfallowing, and threshing to househol-d furnishings, clothing' off-farm foodstuffs, fencing materiars, and hand tools, had to be purchased in the market. t{ith the flurry of mergers around 19L0, which incruded fifty-eight amalgamations involving two hundred and seventy-five firms in all areas of industrial activity from food and cotton processing to agriculturar imprements and iron and steel, the foundation for the price system of corporate capitalism was established. At the levet of the farm economy itself, the total- market value of land, buildings, implements, and livestock increased from s23r. mirLion in L901 to $z,z billion in l-931-, peaking at $3. z birlion in rgzL. Land (approximatery 60% of the totar) increased in totar varue from s1-29 million to $1.7 bilrion, or, on a per farm basis, from $3343 in L901 to $8026 in LgzL and $s95b in 1931. The -67 - actuar price of land in the twentiesr nì€ðrrwhile, ranged generalry between $L0.00 and $30. o0 an acre, depending upon quality, location and the price of wheat. Total buiJ_ding and implement values increased from ç46,2 million to $296.s mirrion in the thirty year period. per farm varues increased f rom $850 in 190 j. to $3100 in J.921, falI ing back to $2800 by L931. FinalIy, the total value of livestock increased very modestly from $54.3 million to $19s million in 1931' with per farm value Íncreasing from sggz to $1g64 between 1901 and 1916, but actuatry decrining berow the LgoL

1evel by S300 in i.931. ( 6 ) From the initial settlement years, but especiarry after the expansion beginning in the nineties, credit in one form or other was cruciar to the operation of farm households. Land companies, trust companies, mortgage firms, àDd private investors financed land transfers and purchases during the period. rnterest rates ranged from 6t in periods when centrar canadian and overseas capital was readiry avairabre to 15+ to 2oe6 in periods of contraction. Furthermore, western rates tended to be higher than eastern rates, and urban rates erere generally lower than rúral ones. According to the Saskatcheetan AgriculturaL Credit Commission, over g0% of Saskatchewan farms nere mortgaged in L9L3, with an average mortgage indebtedness of $Ls00 per farm or $8.00 an acre (when wheat production was returning $20 to $zs an acre per annum). In L931, when the census began collecting -68-

information on farm mortgages, the data reveared that 35%- 40% of al1 farms erere mortgaged, with an average mortgage per farm of s3L00 (about the price of a representative quarter section in the late trrenties when average farm size eras two guarters ) . The financing of other instruments of production and consumption, including seasonal operations, was normarly done through machinery manufacturers, implement dealers, wholesale houses, èDd 1ocal retailers. These entities, in turn, were financed by commerciar banks. Through a combination of banker induced statutory limits on securities (neither farm real estate nor grain could be accepted as corlateral) and a desire to invest in the safer, more liquid commercial and industriar fierds, direct bank loans to farmers were rare. where they did exist they Írere limited to three or four month terms, which were generarly too short for either operating roans (since they felr due just before harvest) or machinery purchases (which required a number of years to pay off). since it was unsecured, the credit farmers did receive through manufacturers and retailers eras undoubtedty more expensive than mortgage money. Farm surveys from the late twenties suggest that non-mortgage debt accounted for about Z5t-30% of a farmers total debt load. State intervention, although it was sorely needed during this period simply to create a farm credit system, was minimal and, from the perspective of producers, lneffectual. The Dominion government amended the Bank Act -69- in 1913 and 1915 to alrow grain to be accepted as security, but banks nere loath to significantry expand their involvement in the western farm economy. provincially, e¡ar induced ventures such as Manitoba t s Rural Credit Societies were dependent on loans from the chartered banks who, after a f ew years o f participati.on, demanded higher rates o f interest and thereby scuttled the pran. By the end of the twenties, prairie farmers had a total debt road of over sg00 million' owed to a variety of institutions, and a ratio of debt to equity ranging anywhere from 3& on large farms to 1L0% on small operations. (Z)

ÏI

canada experienced its rndustrial Revorution and, consequently, its full transition to capitalist relations of production in the four decades after Lgso. rn the earry nineteenth century primitive accumulation had been fostered through proto-industriaLisation around peasant production in the countryside and incipient manufacturing connected to merchant capital- and the entrepot trade in the towns. rn the 1850s canal buirding began to give way to rail_way construction for the transport of staple products from the continental interior. Hith this impetus, coupled with a greater agrarian emphasis on market production, a home market emerged for both producer and consumer goods. on the basis of a labour market composed of skirled workers from -70-

Britain and the United States, and unskilled labourers from rrerand and the farms of Quebec and ontario, both master artisans and former merchant capitalists expanded into }arge scal-e industrial production. After the ross of the American market in the 1850s, central Canadian capitatists with links to Britain presided over the creation of a national economic and political entity that, it was envisioned, would be based upon industrial deveropment protected by tariff serving an expanding agricul-tural population. Atthough the strategy was not successful as a nationar development poricy until the end of the century, the j_880s witnessed respectable growth in the manufacture of producer and consumer goods. This growth helped expand the domestic market which, in turn, induced heightened competition and price decrines. capitar, however, was rimited in its abirity to reduce costs since its control over the labour process was circumscribed. Although production was increasingly centralised in this period' control of the pace and rhythm of work remained with the workers through their retention of artisanar methods. To be sure, a degree of division of labour took place in some industries, but generally r¡orkers continued to possess total knowledge of the production process. (g) The second rndustriar Revolution, which transformed the metropolitan regions of gJ.obal capitalism and spawned a new wave of imperiar ism in the rate nineteenth and earry twentieth centuries, vras based in canada upon wheat exports, -7 L-

new chemical and electricar processes, and mtning operatlons

for minerars associated with the neeJ processes. New industries employing these processes, such as autos, chemicars and erectricaL goods, devetoped rapidty during the period. These industries were largely controlled by the branch plants of giant American firms, which joined the nerr canadian corporations, formed by indigenous mergers in areas such as agricultural impl-ements and steel, in dominating the canadian economy. The firms that succeeded in the merger movements of both the united states and canada did so by cutting costs through the creation of internat economies. At one level' the simple application of rarge scale technology produced these savings. More crucially, though, successfuL corporations were able to increase their economies of throughput; that is, they were abre to maximise their output per unit of time. But this innovation was an organisational rather than a technical accomplishment. The flow of productive inputs and the distribution of production to increasingry extensive markets required co-ordination if economies were to be achieved. Hence a managerial structure was developed to control and co-ordinate factor markets, output markets, and the production process. of course, the most significant production factor that needed to be controlled yras rabour. Economies of throughput required the standardisation and intensification of work processes. The nen technologies embodied human skirls in -7 2-

machines' and the professional engineers who designed and understood them became the neyJ controllers of the production process. A nen type of worker--the rrsemi-skilledff machine operative--was required to operate the new machine technology. These workers needed less skilr and knowledge than the old craft workers who had controlled the pace of work and the resolution of production probrems, but more skill than nineteenth century labourers who sold Iittle more than their physical capabil ities. The newry devised personnel departments sought reIiable, attentive and toyal employees who would obey management orders and not disrupt production. Managers, forlowing F.t{. Taylorrs direction but not necessarily his precise method, devised various forms of hierarchial management systems to appropriate shop froor knowredge, make work more time and less task oriented, and generally speed up production. Arthough workers resisted these lncursions in various erays, their ability to charlenge the intensification of labour v¡as Limited by the expanding supply of immigrant labour which accompanied the expansion of wheat production. (9) For domestic workers, the capitalist transformation of goods production after l-850 had an indirect though equally profound effect. The simple removar of goods production from the househord during early industrialisation

intensified the sexual division of rabour by confining women more strlctry to the domestic sphere. some domestic -7 3- processes, like textile manufacturing and shoemaking, were removed to the factory but, for the most part, eromen continued to produce goods and services for the home. Foodstuffs, clothing, medicines, meals, laundry, and health care lrere produced and prepared in the home using trad i t ionar me thods . Dur ing indus tr iar isat ion ' s second phase' however, the domestic labour process began to be transformed. Between l-890 and L930 mass production and mass distribution brought neer products and services, notably 9ès, electricity, running water, prepared foods, ready made clothes, and factory made furniture and utens.ils, to many homes. standardised, uniform goods began to replace the production and maintenance work which filled y¡omenfs days in the nineteenth century. The drudgery of ¡¡omen r s work rdas beginning to disappear to some extenÈ, but so was contror of the work process. Through the medium of the neer technologies, the foundation nas raid for the contror of women by industrial capitaL through product design and advertising, while the increased productivity of domestic labour had an isorating effect since the labour of one person was generally sufficient to reproduce a nucLear household. Moreover, while the amount of work required to maintain the family at nineteenth century standards declined in the twentieth, the nevr emphasis on consumption, social anxieties around childhood and adolescence, and, beginning in the twenties, the individualisation of transportation -7 4-

through the automobile erere expanding responsibilities and producing a domestic form of speed-up.(L0)

III

since there were two significant processes of capitarist development in canada during the period 1g7o- 1930, it follows that an important consideration for Canadian historiography is, or should be, the way in which the one related to the other. Unfortunately, for the classically inspired working class historians and politicar economists of industrialisation, the issue does not exist. ( 1L ) Household agriculturar production is only relevant in their schema in terms of primitive accumulation and the creation and maintenance of a home market; hence the expansion of wheat production is important merery in terms of the impetus it provided canada r s rf second rndustrial Revolutionrr. It must be conceded, of course, that this stance eras at least partiarry adopted in response to the extreme position advanced by the stapre-cum-dependency tradition, which craimed that the canadian social formation was dominated by commercial capital in the National poticy period. Paul PhiLlips, in his refreshing intervention in this debate, argues that, in fact, both industrial capital ( in a wage relation with rabour ) and commercial capital ( in an exchange reration with farmers and industriaL capitaL ) played an integral part ln the countryrs formative years. -75-

He suggests that an adequate understanding of the period must make sense of a range of conflicts and arliances trbetween industr ial capital and labour , .. . between commercial capitar and the independent commodity producer;

between indêpendent commodity producers and rabour; and between industriar and commerciar capitar. ,r As important as this resolution may be for the current state of canadian political economy, hotrever, it remains unsatisfying as a guide to the problem at hand. Hhile philrips has the bourgeoisie t,speaking with one voicerr, he continues to draw an analytical distinction between industrial and commercial capitar, with commercial capÍtal being the class fraction which relates to farm households. Moreover, the relation is viewed as being simpJ.y one of unequal exchange, whereby commercial capital (railways, grain companies and financial institutions) developed nechanisms of monopoly contror in the price system in order to appropriate part or alr of the economic rent and agricurtural surplus from farmers. (12) Articurationist studies of American capitalist expansion in the nineteenth century suggest that the relation between agrículture and industrialisation in North America was more complex than either a crassicar or dependency approach is abte to revear. According to charres Post' household agricultural production was primarily market oriented and, therefore, dependent on commodity circulation by the L840s. This subordination of farming to capitarist -76- exchange set in motion a process of increasing labour productivity and technical innovation in agriculture (the introduction of the seed dril1, mechanical reaper and the steel plough, for exampre ) . Furthermore, the westr¡ard expansion of household agricurturar production in tandem with industrial capitalism meant that the rfvanguardfr sector of American industriarisation ( in contrast with the classical English pattern), both before and after the civil [{ar' was the t'agro-industrial complextt producing farm machinery, tools and supplies, and processing agricultural rav¡ materiars. ttrhese branches of production, rr post writes, frwere characterised by both technicar innovation in their labour process and either constituted or stimulated transformations in key branches of Department r t the department of social production producing objects and instruments of productionl . " ( 13 ) And, Michel Agl ietta adds, farm househords were fully integrated into capitalist production by the end of the Lg73-97 depression: This integration created a permanent tendency for labour productivity to rise in agriculture, êDd induced a major expansion in the output of agricultural equipment. There developed a strong tendency for farm prices to faII, settling at the minimum lever required to provide sufficient money to maintain a farming family, plus the valorization of the capitaL Ient by marketing firms and banks. The downturn in agricultural prices eras in turn decisive in bringing about a faIl in erages. rt not only favoured accumuration in the department producing means of production; competition in agriculture also permitted the development of a powerful foodstuffs Industry.(14) -77 -

By the beginning of the twentieth century, in other words, American agricultural productÍon r¡as effectiveJ.y under the control of capital through mechanisation, the use of credit, the supply of inputs, and the development and concentration of upstream infrastructure (entrepot and processing firms). The intensification of accumulation in the twentieth century ( the extraction of rerative surprus value ), meanwhire, affected farmers by continuarly revolutionising the instruments of production, maintaining and deepening their participation in the capitalist market, and, along with working class househords, transforming the domestic labour process. We would suggest, then, that in both the United States and Canada farm households erere transformed in tandem with capitalist production. Beginning in the 'Lg40s and Lg50s, but greatry accererating with western expansion and the launching of intensive capital accumulation marked by new technologies and corporate concentration, farmers became subordinated to capital-in-general through the operation of credit and price in factor, goods and money markets. Equally important, and folrowing the experience of working class households, farm households were further subordinated to capital-ist production and exchange through the revolution in personal consumption. Combined, these two processes determined the material conditions of farming in the twentleth century -78-

coincident with the extension of capitalist rerations and the transition to industrial capitalism in nineteenth century North America, institutional and bureaucratic states emerged to gradually appropriate responsibirity for various aspects o f social and ideol-ogical- reproduction f rom voruntary and familial agents. From early to mid-century formal and speciarised organisations with reformist purposes nere created for the treatment of crime, poverty, ignorance, disease' mentar illness, ãDd juvenire derinquency. Mental hospitals' school systems, Fêformatories, and penitentiaries characteristically evolved through a two stage process from private corporations controlled by wealthy citizens and staffed by generarists to publicly controlled bodies based upon expert and specialised administration. By the end of the century incipient bureaucratic state structures Írere in pLace in North America which, whire smalt by rate twentieth standards, rrere quaJ.itativety different from the customary and informal methods of dealing with social and personal problems which existed prior to 1800.

The most significant erement in this new apparatus rras the development of state supported primary and secondary education. As the revisionist historiography of the past fifteen years has shown, by the j.8B0s bourgeois and middle class elements in ontarro and other lndustrlallsing areas of North America had fashioned pubric, and ultimatery -79- compursory, school systems out of the private and haphazard educationar practices they inherited from the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Faced with the perseived probrems of crime and poverty, ethnic diversity through inmigration, promoting ttuseful knowledge r, unruly prebian/working crass and idre bourgeois youth, and training a proIetariat in the rhythms of factory work, education rras seen as a meèns of encouraging and regurating the social changes associated with the development of capitarism. Not surprisingly, given the interaction between their size and purposes, these systems came to be structured and governed as large scale bureaucracies. Educationarists and their supporters' faced with comprex administrative probrems on the one hand and the nepotism and uncertainties of the political process on the other, drew upon the capitalist moder of work organisation to rationarise, co-ordinate, ãrrd make their schoors function as effectivery as possible. Like the factory, these systems were hierarchicar and differentiated, combining an extensive division of labour with an authoritarian command structure. At the bottom erere the legions of teachers, increasingry women at the primary level as the century progressed, who used onry approved instructionar materiars in their classroom work and y¡ere trained in the appropriate pedagogies at Normar schoors. rmmediately above the teachers, åt the board revel, were principars and superintendents who managed the locar system -80- and maintained contact with the elected board officials. At the state and provincial level, finarly, departmental officials produced and dispensed curricular and administrative policy, whire teams of inspectors ensured that centrar decisions nere impremented and forlowed IocalIy. ( 15) One effect of state funding and the bureaucratisation of education was the creation of conditions for the professionaLisation of teaching and, hence, the creation of a contradiction in the social identity of teachers. while bureaucracy undoubtedly involved a loss of control over the work process and a heightened exproitation of teachers as crorkers, it nas accompanied by the establishment of special ist training, êDtrance requiremenÈsr åDd an occupationaL association marking teachers as professionals. As a group, therefore, they seemed to straddre the boundary between proretarian and professionar existence. This development eras, in fact, part of a Iarger change in the latter half of the nineteenth century as the term "professionaltr came to be appLied to a Larger group of vocations than the traditional trio of doctors, lawyers, and clergy. Rooted in, and based upon, the bourgeois values of achievement, abil ity, and equal ity of opportunity, professionarism was a type of status acquired through the mas-tery of a specif ic area of knowledge. rt was, at its core, âD lndividualist philosophy focusing on personal -81- deveJ.opment and enhancement through the pursuit of a career.

Beginning in this period, various areas of knowledge e¡ere ttprofessionarisedrr in North America when, characteristical-1y, their readers established educational qualifications requiring academic training, formed associations to shield the elect from the non-elect, started journals, fashioned specialist vocabulariesr ãnd, in the case of academic professions, initiated the career oriented production of endless publications. The central institution in the 'rcurture of professionar ism, rras the rnodern university. Higher education in the later nineteenth century r¡as in the earry stages of a transition from correges dispensing religious and ethicar instruction for the erite to large institutions reproducing the whore range of sociai. and technical knowredge for use in a bourgeois society. rndeed the university nas becoming a microcosm of that society, characterised as it was by ,rcareerism, competition, the standardization of rules and the organization of hierarchies, Iand] the obsession with growth and expansion. tt( 16 ) The professionarisation of sociar knowledge, and its cloistering in universities, represented a demarcation of legitimate enquiry in the name of objectivity. As the histories of the American Social Science Association and the new professional organisations Iike the American Economics Association .clearly reveal, êrr older tradition of general -82- and reformist investigation gave way to specialised discipl ines engaged in purportedl_y neutral, scientific research and teaching that was not tied in any way to a particular political or social project. lùhat professionalism and objectivity meant in this context was a severing of any intelrectual links with social forces-- notably working crass and farm movements--that chaLlenged, however mildly, the ascendancy of capital and its values. American academics such as Richard Ery and Edward Ross quickly Learned that their careers depended upon accepting and championing the dominant view of the social world. By the turn of the century it was clear to al-1 aspiring American intellectuars that an academic career in social science meant that certain questions could not be asked and certain connections could not be made. professional social scj.ence was slower to develop in Canada, but a similar though less dramatic pattern prevaiied. rn organisations such as the civic rmprovement League, estabrished in l_9L5, social. scientists worked with other academics, traditional professionals, and businessmen in investigating social conditions. But the formation of the canadian poritical science Association (cPsA) in 1913 hinted at a break with this general. and reformist approach. rt was not untir the twenties, however, with an expansion of sociar science education in the countryts universities and the reorganisation of the cPsA in Lgzg, that a professional -83- orientation r{as firmry secured. By the thirties, social scientists had established their authority as expert advisers to a liberal state. Although some intell_ectuals-- such as those in the League for social Reconstruction-- arigned themselves with subordinate sociar groups, the limits of legitimate academic activism did not extend leftward beyond riberalism. tühen Frank underhiLl tested Èhose limits at the University of Toronto, f.or example, he was strongly rebuked by capital and the state.(12) rn engineering and the natural sciences the link between the university, capital, and science and technology was secured through the birth of the corporate capitalist form and the apprication of neer technologies to the production process. The expansion of engineering education and the emergence of the professional engineer, in particular, proceeded in concert with the growth of national firms and, most importantly, the real subordination of labour in production. Engineers, as Ìras noted earlier, filled many of the manageriar posts in the corporate bureaucracies, êDd they were trained in the nev, universities. ( 18) state funding and organisation of agriculturat education accompanied the expansion of public schooi_ing and the transformation of higher education. privately organised agricurtural societies flourished in early nineteenth century North America as the primary method for the -84 -

dissemination of agricultural knowledge, giving yray to government directed agricultural colleges and farmers I and eromenf s institutes in the latter part of the century. North American higher education in agricul.ture effectively dates from the formation of Michigan Agricurtural colrege in 1g5s. But it was not until after the passage of the Morrirl Act in L862, which provided federar funding through rand grants for agricultural and mechanicar training, that a system of

American agricultural corleges began to be estabrished. The pattern that evolved was for funds to be applied either to private colleges (Rutgers in New Jersey) orr rrìorê commonly, state universities (wisconsin) or state agricultural colleges (Iowa, North Dakota). In Canada, Ontario Agricurtural coltege was established in LggO as a publicly funded and, at Ieast initiatly, unaffiliated institution. Arthough correge growth was srow in the earry years,

systematic investigation in the agricuJ.tural sciences eras established Ín the Iate nineteenth century, especially after the creation of a system of experimental stations in both countr ies in L886 . rn the per lod af t,er Lggo r ðrld especial ly after the turn of the century, state funded agricultural corleges expanded and flourished across the continent, following the model of the ney¡ universities ¡rith which they were often arigned. rntelrectuars working within the institutions became increasingly professional, while administrators--most often members of the Association of -85 -

American Agriculturar colreges and Experimentar stations-- increasingry applied business models to correge organisation. ( L9 ) Farmers t institutes emerged in the late 1gz0s and earry L880s to supplement the efforts of agricultural societies in disseminating agricultural knowredge to farmers. rnstitutes expanded throughout North America during the 1gg0s and 1g90s under the direction of agricultural_ col_leges or boards/departments of agriculture. rn these bodies both professionar staff and working farmers conducted recture programmes in rurar communities. with the expansion of colreges after the turn of the century, and the passage of the smith-Lever Act in the united states and the Agricultural rnstruction Act in canada during L}LA, systematic, fulIy staffed government extension services overtook farmers I institutes and agricultural societies as the primary forms of outreach and aduLt education. rn both countries the groundwork for state sponsored extension was Laid by agro-industrial capital. The North Dakota example etas representative. Railroad companies promoted agricultural improvements by providing funds for experimental stations and sponsoring ilBetter Farming Trainsrf to tour the state. Through its extension department, rnternationar Harvester established a three hundred acre experimental farm at Grand Forks which passed to state control in L914. And, in 19L0, Minneapolis and St. paul -86-

business interests--implement manufacturers, bankers,

railway owners, proc€ssors, àßd lumber dealers--formed a ItBetter Farming Associationtt through which county agents were employed and boys camps were organised. This apparatus eventually passed to the state extension service, âDd the

Better Farming Association provided a model for the state r s Farm Bureau which developed later. -By the r9zos, in states and provinces throughout North America, wÍde ranging extension services employing county agents, home demonstration agents and speciarj-sts in various topics erere offering instruction and service to farm women and men. ( 20 )

Horking crass and agrarian critiques of capitar and the state in the nineteenth century were part of a tradition of popurar analysis that dated from the eighteenth century. The source of this tradition--at least in its plebian and democratic form--was the English and American radicarism that emerged in the 1770s, becoming coherent in the l790s folrowing the revol-utionary successes in America, rrerand and France. As stedman Jones has shown, radicalism--with its focus on politicar oppression and corruption--remained the determining mode of popurar thought in Engrand until at least the mid-nineteenth century. The misuse of political poerer e¡as the cause of economic misery in this analysis. similarly' early nineteenth century North American popurar -87 - politics was guided by a radicar ideorogy of anti-monopoly, equal rights, and a labour theory of varue. The working Men t s parties and working class rocofocoism of the Jacksonian era employed a political anarysis directed against the monopoly power of the monied interests. Furthermore, agrarian critiques of the FamiIy Compact in Upper Canada nere cast in terms of the deLeterious effects of political corruption on the producing crasses. The succession of popular movements that crossed the historical stage in the latter hatf of the nineteenth century stretched the radical, anti-monopolist categories in an attempt to comprehend the rear ity of industrial capitat ism. The Nationar Labor union in tt¡e 1g60s, the Grange and Greenbackism in the L870s, and the Single Tax and Nationar ism in the l-BB0s arr denounced pol itical and economic oppression in similar terms, sharing a vision of socÍety in which the toirers--workers and farmers--vrere exproited through the swindLes and chicanery of the rich, particurarLy the tparasitesrtr contror of the state. (zt) The impressive agrarian and working class mobilisations at the end of the nineteenth century rrere the rast, and the most important, movements to employ radicalism in a coherent vray. Eschewing a distinctivery economic analysis of production relations, the Knights of Labor in the Lgg0s reacted to their ross of contror over the pace and rhythm of work, and their increasingry subordinate prace in their -88 -

communities, by invoking the radical tradition in their demand for the aboLition of the erage system. And North American agrarians in the Farmersr Al.Iiance, the peoplers patrons Party and the of rndustry shared with the Knights an understanding of capitalist deveJ_opment that made sense of their common experience of exproitation. These movements began with a notion of equar rights and opposition to speciar privilege that fuelred their producerism, anti- monopolism and co-operative vision. According to Knights and agrarians' monopoly power, through its manipuLation of the state' operated in the fields of rairroads and communications' the tariff, the land, and money and banking, and a producer dirested government wourd bring coercive monopolies under popular control. Equally important, co- operation was the crucial corollary to state intervention in the radical project. In the agrarian vision the co_ operative commonereatth courd be estabrished and sustained through producer and consumer organisations. For Knights, the extent to which they opposed strikes was in faet an expression of their rejection of a conflict-ridden system foisted upon prodúcers by non-producers. Àt the heart of late nineteenth century radicalism, however, stood the three elements in the concept of producerism¡ labour was the source of all value; the wealth which labour created belonged to labour alone; and farmers and workers shared -89- common cause in their struggle against non-producers entrenched in the corporations and the state , (ZZ) rn both the working crass and agrarian movements, radicarism gave way to divergent ideorogical strains during the twentieth century. Between 1B9b and lgLg an evorutionary and reformist wing deveroped in canadian working class poritics based upon the independent labour candidacies-.: of the 1880s and rooted in craft unionism. Known to historians as l-abourism, and represented by such figures as A.W. Puttee of Winnipeg, it involved supporting candidates who endorsed poricies that trade unionists demanded or who r¡ere simpry from the ranks of the working class themserves. A programme centred in the Trades and Labor congress, and finding partisan expression in local Labor parties, included free compursory education, the eight hour day, a minimum nage, extension of the franchise, and public ownership of utilities among its proposars. with a commitment to the politics of the ballot box as a supplement to trade union struggle over wages and working conditions, labourism laid the ideologicar foundations for the working cl-ass erement in the social democracy of the ccF. Meanwhile, two revolutionary perspectives deveLoped to the left of rabourism during the same period. on the one hand, workers applied an explicitly Marxist analysis to their experience in poritica] parties such as the sociarist party of canada (sPc) and the sociar Democratic party (sDp), -90 -

concluding that the overthrow of capitalism through the capture of the bourgeois state was both necessary and inevitabre. rn syndicarist organisations such as the Industrial Horkers of the HorLd, on the other hand, political strategies focusing on the state were rejected in favour of strike action and struggre at the point of production as the key to capitarts demise. After the defeat of L919 many revolutionaries, particularly from the spc and sDP' moved into the newry formed communist party , (23) A somewhat different and comparativery conservative configuration developed in the North American farm movements. Between the demise of populism and the organisation of the American Farm Bureau Federation in the united states, and between the decrine of patronism and the formation of the Progressive Party in canada, a ctearly pro- bourgeois perspective was forged in North American agrarianism. rn both countries, as rurar social science erected boundaries delineating the various regions of social life and radicalism was ress able to offer a convincing challenge, the economic and poritical became discrete "r""" of endeavour defined from above. Across the continent farm organisations turned their attention to the business of marketing with, for example, the incorporation of the EquÍty co-operatÍve Exchange of st. paul in j.gl_l_ and the launching of the Grain Growers t Grain company of sinnipeg in 1907. Although capital perceived these chalrenges as a threat, and -91- farmers used radical ranguage to justify them, the marketing agencies nevertheless represented an adjustment to the apparently permanent reality of the capital_ist economy. PoIitically, the elements which came together as the American Farm Bureau in 1919, out of a network mobilised by the newly created county agent system, championed farmer co_ operation with capitar in the interests of making the economy work more ef f iciently for f'al1 businessrr ( farm and otherwise ) . rn canada the group around united Grain Growers' êDd in the mainstream of the progressive party, sought an alliance with capitalrs reform wing in order to secure fair treatment for the agricurturar sector in a political economy increasingly dominated by industry and finance. By the i.920s this tendency effectively controlred farm politics and economics across North America, but not without having had to confront a significant challenge from the left . (24) whire this conservative ideorogy nas being constructed in the first three decades of the century, proto-socialist and sociarist agrarian movements were sustaining, deepening, and transforming the oppositionar potentiar of radicalism. Indeed in many areas, such as the American southwest, parts of the American midwest, Alberta. and Saskatchewan, this criticar perspective was firmry entrenched on the poriticat terrain. rn the southwest the socialist party rras able to create a substantial folrowing among poorer farmers, -92-

sharecroppers, tenants and agricultural workers by buitding upon the Arriance and populist inheritance and sharpening the producerist critique of monopoly to stress capitalist exproitation. The party also won significant support in the midwest. rt had a particularJ.y strong fotlowing in North Dakota, but here the educational foundation raid by party activists was appropriated by the Nonpartisan League whichn by reverting to a more explicitly radical 1anguager Hërs able to form a proto-socialist movement within the sherr of the Democratic Party and erect a progressive government in the state. Although the government e¡as shortlived--defeated by a coalition of regional capital, urban middle class elements, and the state Farm Bureau--it was the most significant sociarist success in the early twentieth century united states. Furthermore, by keeping the tradition arive, it ensured substantiat support for the communist party among midwestern farmers in the 20s and 30s. Left agrarianism in Canada, meanwhile, emerged as an identifiable entity in the L920s out of the progressive wing of the farm movement. rn the ontario and prairie movements a radicaL critique had been kept alive while the mainstream moved into atignment with capital. After the war this critique became increasingly socialist, gaining organisational expression in the Farmers I union of canada during the campaign for compulsory pools. By the tate twenties and early thirties I the Farmers unlon had spawned two soclal rst perspectlves on -93- canadian agriculture. on the one hand, the communist party, through the Farmerst unity League, was applying a Marxist analysis that, despite sreative attempts by some to adapt historical materialism to the rearities of rural North America' was rigid and doctrinaire. on the other hand, the ccF vras evolving a more ftexibre approach ¡vhich eventually succumbed to the accommodationist dynamics of sociar democracy. ( 25 )

The independent womanrä movement that emerged in the last three decades of the nineteenth century in North America created organisational and ideorogical space for women separate from both dominant and subordinate male institutions. A distinctive gender identity was formed in the period which, while never completely transcending the boundaries of cIass, cannot be understood by simply referring to the putative class rocation of the eromen involved. Urban ¡romen, asserting their right to work outside the home, created autonomous crubs and societies in ¡rhich to share experiences and ray the foundation for expanding their opportunities in the pubLic sphere. with an underlying commitment to a womanrs right to engage in extra- domestic' rrproductive, rabour, crubs such as the Toronto woments Literary society were theoretically open to arL women although, practically speaking, they tended to be the -94 -

preserve of individuars from middre class backgrounds. rn ventures such as the womenfs Educational and rndustrial

Union in the United States, however, important efforts erere

made to span the crass divide. Among rural women, meanwhile, an autonomous sisterhood was constructed through the temperance crusade. After its founding in 1g24, the Homenf s christian Temperance union became the vehicle through which e¡omen mobirised their power in hopes of changing an immoral mascurine worrd. The most mititant supporters' who erere concentrated in the countryside, viewed the ban on drink as the centrepiece of a larger reform project that extended to the suffrage, labour and agrarian movements. rndeed there was significant continuity between the womants movement generarly and the radical movements of the period. rn groups ranging from Betramyite NationalÍst Clubs to the Knights of Labor and populism, feminists combined an image of woman as productive worker and social purifier with the radical philosophy of producerism and anti-monopolism to produce a powerfur critigue of the mare capitalist order. rn various speeches and tracts from the period a social transformation was envisaged in which eromen constructed pan-class sisterhood, and then used their collective power to defeat corrupted monopoly and buird the co-operative commonvJealth of producers. rn this eray radicalism nas fused with the feminist critique, whire the rlberatlng potential of the womanrs movement Ì{as firmry -95- grounded in the radical analysis of politics and society. ( 25 )

For the most part, however, the Canadian womants movement went in an opposite direction. The image of the t'new f,roman,t was a contradictory one that had both a progressive and a conservative edge. Homen were questioning their privatised sexuar subordination and demanding equa3. status in the pubì-ic sphere, but the challenge was cast in terms of motherry duties and sociar housekeeping. suffrêgê, which became the primary focus for nomen activists by the early twentieth century, changed from its initial association ¡vith progressive reform in the Canadian Homenrs suffrage Association to a predominantry conservative cause by the time the first successes erere recorded during sorrd hlar r. The movement became control_red by professionarising etomen (and men) at a time when, as was noted earLier, the limits of legitimate professionar activity were becoming circumscribed. Professionat rdomen, drawing upon both erements in the neer womanhood, constructed ê place for themserves as experts in those areas, such as teaching, nursing, and social work, for which they were berieved to be best suited. The suffrage movement, under their tutelage, became constrained ¡uithin a l irnited reform agenda def ined by, and connected to, their professional work. Their reform initiatives and suffrage aspirations were tegitimised, in turn' with reference to woments maternal responsibilities in -96- the public sphere. whereas some eromen rinked the purifying and moral crusade of feminism to the radical language of popular movements, then, others used it as a vehicle to enter and boLster the ideology of professionalism. (22) canadian working crass organisations remained rargely aloof from the suffrage movement during the early twentieth century. Labourlte women and men supported enfranchisement, but as part of their Iarger, electorally focused reform project. From this perspective, femare suffraþe rras a means of substantially increasing the prospects of electing working class representatives, âDd thereby enhancing the possibirity of having t.he rabour programme implemented. And in labourite groups such as the Homenrs Labour League, which advocated union organisation among working ¡romen, suffrage e¡as promoted as a means of achieving equal pay for equal work and as a useful organising tool in raising politicar consciousness. GeneralIy speaking, then, Iabour gromen viewed their experience in class rather than gender terms, and were scepticar of suffragist aspirations to speak for arl nomen. They preferred to work in their oern class organisations in pursuit of primarily class objectives that did not challenge prevairing gender identities other than to affirm a sromanf s rights to fair wages and working conditions if, and when' she found herself in paid emproyment. similarry, gender vras ress important than class to soclarist women for whom the struggre agalnst capltalism was -97 -

the fundamentaL issue. rn the socialist party of canada, with its aversion to any and arr'reformist,, tendencies which dre¡¡ working class attention array from the class struggle, the necessity and desirability of even minimar organisational or ideorogicar auÈonomy for women was denied. The more ftexibl-e social Democratic party arlowed space for the formation of woments groups and the discussion of reforms of particular interest to eromen, but a gender analysis never emerged to comprement class analysis. rn fact throughout the socialist movement, and in common with working class potitics as a ¡vhole, the trwoman questionrf gras cast in terms which assumed the primacy of domestic rores and femare subordination within the family. somen might fight for sociarism alongside men, and a socialist future might promise women an end to wage exproitation, but it also

contained a domestic vision--which most sociarist women embraced--of an idealised working crass famiry saved from

capiÈaIist erosion. ( 2B ) fn Canadian agrarian organisations, too, the suffrage movement eras perceived as a distant force which did not address the class realities of farm women. Like the Iabourites, the prairie grain grower associations were early supporters of womenrs enfranchisement. There iyas, however, little formal contact between the farm movement and suffrage societies. The saskatcheeran Homenrs Grain Growers t Association (formed in L9L3) played an earry readership -98 -

role in the movement for suffrage in the province, but the momentum soon shifted to middle class professionals in the cities and towns who gained control of the saskatcheeran Provincial Equal Franchise Board. rn fact, two provincial farm woments sections $¡ere not formed until after the real

battles for the vote had been fought. The united Farm lùomen

of ontario and the Manitoba Homer¡?s Grain Growers t Association came into existence in a politicar atmosphere in which eromen erere able to furly participate in erections, and these groups felt that a significant part of their work consisted of educating women to use the ballot effectivery. For arl farm movement women in the earry twentieth century effective use of the bal-l-ot meant, first and foremost, supporting the agrarian reform agenda. Echoing the sentiments of labour- and sociaList women, class rùas more

important to them than gender. They did feet that women had special concerns and sensibilities, but they beLieved more strongry that they and their men were engaged in a comnon struggre which overrode any apparent inter-cLass bonds of sisterhood. Hhile the organisation of womenrs groups in farm organisations cannot be understood wiÈhout reference to the late nineteenth and earry twentieth century autonomous womants movement, then, female agrarianism orres more to the history of popurar insurgency than it does to feminism.(?,g) -99-

This broader historical context suggests that capitalist expansion, the development of a bureaucratic state, and the experience of social movements in Manitoba shourd be understood as part of one piece. rt is especiarry important, it seems, to analyse the political economy of agricurture and rural social movements as integrarly rinked to industrialisation and urban organisations. capitalist production came to dominate farm househords in this period even as household production expanded; furthermore, the state structures whish accompanied capitarist development were adapted for the subordination of farm houset¡olds and farm peopre. our detailed investigation of aspects of this process begins in the next chapter with an institutional survey of the educationaL state structure in Manitoba agriculture between 1890 and L925.

l_. This analysis of the globar context of the wheat economy is drawn from H. Friedmann, rf rhe Transformation of [rlheat Production in the Era of the sorl-d Market, L873-r.93b: A Global Analysis of Production and Exchange, il phD dissertation, Harvard University, L9TG, 2. Hhire the chicago price recovered somewhat in rgzg, the British import price felI continuously from L9ZS to 1934. Friedmann, ttThe Transformation of Wheat Production,rr p. 85. .) Friedmann, ItThe Transformation of Sheat Productiorr, It chapter \l; V.C. Fowke, The National Po1icv and the úJheat Econo¡rty ( Toronto , !957 ) , cf,apieiJ { 4 Jnd 5; c. A. Friesen' The canadian Prairies: A Historv ( Toronto, 1984 ), chapùer 8. 4. Nineteenth century prices are basis l{ontreat; aIl others are Number L Northern, cash basis Lakehead. Fowke, The National_PoIicv and the Hheat Economy; W.T. Easterbrook and H.G.J. Aitken, Canadian Economic History (Toronto, 1956), chapter 20; J. Mavor, "Agricultural Development in the North-hlest of Canada, L905-3.909,tt Repoft of !he. -100-

5-çÅencg (London, 191-0), p. 223; G. BritnelI, The Wheat Economv (Toronto, L939), p. 50; canada. statistical Abstract and Record for the Year 18_86 (Ottawa, lgg7), p. ]-64t canada. statistical Abstract and Record for tñe Year 1896 (Ottawa, 1897'), p. 189; Canada. Statistical Abstract and Record for the year L90L (ottawa, Lgoz), p. 89. 5. Fowke, The National Policy and the Wheat Economv, parts 2 and 3, D.A. MacGibbon, The Canadian Grain Trarle (Toronto, 1932), part II. 6. Fowke' The National policv and the llheat Economy, chapter 5: R.T. Naylor, Historv of Canadian Businèss. Volume II, ( Toronto, ]-gZS) , chapter 14; R. ¡{. Uuiàtrie, Aoricultural Prooress on the prairie Fron_tier (Toronto, 1936 ), chapter 6. 7. W.T. Easterbrook, Farm Credit in Canada (Toronto, !939), part T, Naylor, Historv of Canadian Business. VoLume I., pp. 104-l-07,Lu+-LU'/ , L99-2O9L99-zag ¡i w.W. A. Mackintosh, Economic probremÞ_ of the Ðrairie Provinces (Toronto, Lg3b),35), cr¡ápterchapter rz;]-2; Murch ie, pp. 76-83; T. D. Regehr, ,f Bankers and Farmers in Hestern Canada, l-900-L939,,, in J.E. Foster, eð., The De!¡elopins Hest: Essavs in Honor of Lewis H. Thomas (Edmonton, 1983 ) . 8. H.C. Pentland, ( Toronto, 198L ), chapter V; G. Kea1ey, Toronto Wor¡

significantly, it does not include Aglietta r s articulationist premises (see Gordon, et. al. pp. ZZ4_ 225n and p. 226n), 9. Naylor, Tbe History of canadian Business, vorume rr; A. chandrer, Th" viribr" H".tdt Th" !,t"r.o"ri"r R"rorutior it American Business (Cambridge, Mass., LSTT); W. iãzonick, 'rclass Relations and the capitat ist Enterprise: A critical Assessment of Marxian Economic Theory, rl unpublished paper, Harvard university (March, 1993), pp. 30-47; G. Kolko, Main Currents in Modern Americàn Historv (Ne¡r York, 19T6), chapter L; C. Heron and R. storey' r'Hork and struggre in the canadian steel Industry, 1900-1"950,rt in Heron and Storey, eds., On th_e- Job. L0. S. Strasser, Never Done¡ A Historv of American Houses¡orl! (New Vork, L982), prologue and passim.; R. Schwartã cowan, More Hork For Mother t The rronies of Household T""hnorogy fro* th. open H.-rth to the Migro*ãr" (ñet York, l-983 ) , chapter 4¡ V. Strong Boag, ',Keeping House in Godrs country: canadian somen at Hork in the Home,rl in Heron and Storey, eds., On the Job. 11. Note, for exampre, the absence of any serious mention of farming in the essay colrections canada r s Age of. rndustry, 1849-189G and rhe consoridation of capitátijm. 1895-1-929, which form part of the series Readingi in Canadian Social Historv edited by Gregory KeaIey anã Michael Cross. L2, P. Phi11ips, ,,Staples, Surplus and Exchange: The Commercial-fndustrial euestion in the National policy Per iod, ti in D. Cameron, êd. , Explor_ations in Canadian ( Ottawa, l-985 ) , pp. 32-33, gg, 4O; see also P. PhiIIips, ff Manitoba in the Agrar ian per iod, Lg70-1940, rr unpublished paper, University of ltanitobar ènd p. Phitrips, f'The Hinterrand perspective: The poriticar Economy of vernon Fowke, t canadian JournaL of political and Socia_l Theory Z(Z) (Spring, lgZB). L3. C. Post, ttThe American Road to Capital.ism,n New Left Review L33 (L982), p. 48. L4. M. Aglietta, A Theorv of capitalist Requration: The u.s. Experience (London, LgZg), pp. 7g-Zg, 15. s. Houston, r'The rmpetus to Reform¡ urban crime, Poverty, and lgnorance in Ontario, lg50 -Lg7S,,t phD dissertation, University of Toronto (Of SE), ),974; A. Prentice, Th" s"hool pro*ot"r"r Edo"atior so"i"l_ crass in Mid-Ninetee¡th gentury upper canààa".d ( Torrcr¡to,, 1977)¡ M.B. Katz, M. Doucet and M. stern, The social Orqanization of Earlv Industrial Caoitalism (Cámb¡idge, llass., 1982), chapter 9¡ B. Curtis, ,rpreconditions of the canadian state: Educationat Reform and the Construction of a Pubtic in Upper Canada, Lg37-l_g46, '' St_ud.ies in PoI itical Economy L0 ( Spring, l9g3 ) ; B. -L02-

curtis' "schoolbooks and the Myth of curricurar Republicanism: The state and curriculum in canada west, 1820-1850, tt 15(31) (November, 1983); B. Curtis, tt.Littery Merritr, .Useful Knowledge', and the Organization of Township Libraries in Canada Hest, 1840-L860, " Ontario Historv Tg(4) (December, 1986); M. Danylewycz, B. Light, and A. Prentice, trThe Evolution of the Sexual Division of Labour in Teaching: A Nineteenth century ontario and Quebec case study, tt His_to ire sociale/sociar History l-6(30) (May, 1983); R. Gidney and D.A. Lawr, vs. Bureaucracy?¡ The origins of Bureaucratic "Cãmmunityprocedure in the upper canadian schoor system,'r Journar of social History l-3(3) (1980). l-6. B. Bledstein, (New York, L976), p. 288; M. Danylewycz and A. Þ;entic€, frreacherst Hork: changing patterns and perceptions in the Emerging school systems of Nineteenth ånd Earry Twentieth Century Central Canada,,r bbour/Le Travail lT (Spring, L986); D. Owram, The Government Generation: (Toronto,1986), chapters 3 and 5; J. pitsgfa, "tte Emergence of Social Hork in Toronto, rr Journal of Canadian Studies L4(L) (Spring, 1979); V. StionÇ:ãõ"g, rrrntruders in the Nursery: childcare profesãionals Reshape the Years One to Five,r, in J. parr, êd., ( Toronto, L9.82); L. Veysey, The Emergence of the American Univers i tv ( Chicago, L955 ); P. Axelrod, Scholars and

Ontario. 1945-1980 ( Toronto, L982) , chapter s. E. D. Shortt, !¡.e¡-sil-ion. 1890-1930 (Toronto, !976), èt¡-apter e; A.g. HcKillop'tirhe Research rdear and the university of Toronto, " in McKiIlop, Contours of Canadian Thõuqþt ( Toronto , L987 ) . 17. M. Furner,

1905 (Lexington, L975) ¡ HaskeLL, The Emerqence of

Author itg ( Urbana, L977) ¡ Owram, The GovernmenÈ Generation, pp. 52-68, LZL-LZ5; R.D. Francis, Frank H. ( Toronto, 1986 ) , chapters 9 and 10; C. Berger, The Hriting of Canadian Histo_rv (Toronto, LgZ6), pp. 79-94 l_8. D. Noble' Ameriça By Design: science. Technorogv and the ( New York, LïZT ) . 19. E.D. Eddy, Grant 'Idea in American Education (New York, L957); A.C. -10 3-

True, StaLe-.i;_- 1785- j-928 ( Washington, 1929); W. C. Hunter, I College (Fargo, 1961); Lawr, ,The@ Agriculturar Education, , chapter rrr; J. r: snell, 1904 to 1_95ä ( l,lontreal, 1963); A.S. Morton, ( Toronto, L959L:,.v ) , chapter IX; M. Hayden, gg.gkjSeekinq a Balance: Thc Uni-ueLs.i (Vancouver, 1983 ); tJ.H. Johns, A Historv of the ttnirri l-908-1.959 ( Edmonton, Lg8L ) ; D. lonãs, ,,ãgriãuf turãI tne Land, and Education: British CoIumbia, lg14-1gïg,u pfrO dissertatS_on, University of British Co1umbia, lg7g, pp. 45-46; M. Rossiter, frThe Organization of the Agricultural Sciences,il in A. Oleson and J. Voss, êds., l-920 (BaItimore, L9Z9). Six nèw CanaAlan-iãf including the privatel-y funded Macdonard college at McGill university, were formed bet¡reen 1g0b and 19ib. 20 R. Scott, Reluctant Farmer: g$e.ns-ro¡_le_l_9:g ( Urbana, L9TO ), e;pffi D. A. Lawr, ,tThe Development of Agriculturát Edücation, l-870-l-91-0, It PhD dissertation, University of Toronto, L972, pp. 32-45, S0-60. 2L, G. Stedman Jones, ttRethinking Chartism,r, in Langqages ñì=ooo êt..,1 ¡^^ :- F--r !-L of

19.9a (cambridge, 1983); p. Hòrris-r¡," paupài pr"==, À ( Oxford, 1970) ¡ E. Pessen, (AIbany, L967), chapter 10; A. DawIey, cIa.sl ana commuriity ¡ Tt¡g (càmur.iase, MáÉ:;- 1e76t especiarly chapters 2 and g; s. Ryersoñ, unequal union:

D-----r ffi york, ;186JrJl=872 JN:*- L96Z_); _G. c, tlovement, te65-19m (chicago, t'Bestern r96tm Destler, Radicar iJm, r.g6s-r.901 : boncepts and origins'tt in American Radicar.ism, rg6s-r-901 {Chicago, 1946); R. Hann' Farmers coniiãnt rtraustrierismr snma

(Toronto. L975) ¡ L.A. Wood, A History of Farmers I (T" 1975), part I. 22. On the Knights of Labor, see Grob, Horkers and Utopia, chapter rrr; M. Dubofsky, rndustriatiËm-ãna-IIãlmái-ican Horker. l_86j-1920 (New york, j.9Zbi, pp. b4-G1, Ke-l"y and Palmer, Dreaminq of Hhat Might -B.g; L. Fink, -104-

American Politics (Chicago, frBrainworkers L9B3). chapter It R. Hann, and the Knights of Labor: E. E. sheppard, PhiIIips Thompson, and the Toronto News, l-883-1BBZ,,r in G. Kealey and P. Harrian, eds., EEsavs in Canadiqn Sorking Class History (Toronto, J,976), The Xnighti, while they may have represented the North Ameiican working crass fully ttmade" as cutturarist historiography suggests, employed a language which predated proletarianisation and, more importantly, àxtended beyond the world of the waged worker. On agrarianism, see B. Palmer, Man Over Monev: The ( chaper Hil I, l-980 ) ; L. Goodwyn, Democratic promise : Thà Popurist Moment in America (New york, ItWestern r976)¡ c. DesLrer, Radical ism, L865-l_90 Ltt; N . pol lack, êd . , The Populist Mind (Ne¡¡ York, 196T); polrack, The pooulili Response tq__Industrial America (Cambridge, MasJ ., -Lg6Z]D R. cook, ttrirrers and roirers: The Rise and Farr of Populism in canada in the 1890s,, cHA Reports (19g4); s. E. D. shortt, rrsocial change and poritical crisis in Rural Ontario: the Patrons of Industry, LBBg-1996,r in D. Swainson, êd,, OIiver Mowatrs Ontario (Toronto, L972) . 23. Palmer, , chapter-CIass, 4¡ C. Heron, tf Labourism and the Canadian Horking rrtt Labour /Le. Travail L3 (Spring, L984); G. Friesen, r,.youiJ in Revoltt¡ Regionalism, Socialism and the Hestern Canadian þlovement, Labour 'r Labour /Le Travair. reur I (L976) ; A . R . McCormack, Reformers, Rebels and Rerrol r:t ì oner i r¡e. Tlrc ( Toronto, L977); N. Penner, The canadian Left: A critical Analvsis ( Toronto , 1977 ) , chapter 3. 24. T. saloutos and J. Hicks, Aqricurtural Diseontent in the Hiddte ttest. 1900-1939 iuãa-ison, r9s1) ; c. Fite:Fite, Annerican Farmers: The Ner¡ Minoritv (Broomington, 19g1); S.L. Morton, (Toronto, 1950 ) ; H. s. Patton, Grain Growers t colãperation in He!;tern Canada (Ca¡nbridge, Mass. , IgZg) t t. Uacpner.=on, Enqtish Canada, 1900-L94S (toronto, fgZg),ffi 90; J. Thompson with A. Seager, canadå- lg22-ige9: Decades of Discord ( Toronto, Lggb ) , pp. Zg-3? , D. Laycock, ttPopul ism and Democratic Th-ought in the Canadian Prairies, L9L0-L94S, n phD dissertation, University of Toronto, 1985, chapter II; G. panting, r,A study of the united Farmers' oi Manitoba to L9z6z An Agriculturar Association During a period of rransition,,f t'ÍA thesis, University of Manitõba, 1954. 25. J. Green, Gra""root= soci"li"*t Mor"*"nt" i.t th" Southwest- L895-1943 (Baton Rouge,-R"di"-l LgTg)¡ G. gurba;È, Hhqn Farmers voted Red (Greenwood, L9761¡ R. Morlan, -105-

Poriticar Prairie (Minneaporis, t'The Fire 1955); J.K. putman, Socialist Party of North Dakota, 1902-l_919, rt M. A. Thesis, University of North Dakota, 1956; L. K. Dyson, ( Lincoln , ).982) : D. S. Spafford,'tThe Left-Wing, LgZ]-- L 9 3l-, I' in N . Ward and D.S. politics gêskËi_Lç¡evrèn Spafford, êds., in ( Toronto, L968 ); Spaf ford, tf The t tt Origin of the Farmers Union of Canada, in D. Swainson, ed. , ( Toronto, I970); D. Monod, Communism,tr 1S(35) ( May, L985 ) ; Macpherson, Each for AII, pp; 6g-77; Thompson and Seager, Canada 1922-1939, pp. ZZg-ZgZ¡ S. l.l. Lipset,

( Berkeley, Socioloovt'Populism l_9b0; iã and Democratic Thought,rf chapters III and fV. This anarysis runs counter to the traaition r¡hich sees western canadian agrarianism as a popul_ist ,expression' of petit bourgeois t,Class experience. See, for example, p. Sinclair, Structure and popul ist protest: The case of $Jestern canada,,r canadian Journal of sociorogv 1 (L975-76) ¡ J. conway, rrpopul i;m in the united states, Russia' and canada: Explaining the Roots of canadars Third Parties, tt Canadian Journal o l-l- ( 1) ( L978 ); Conway, ,,The eraiiie noput iãt- RËsisGnce to the National Poticy: some Reconsiderations, r Journal of canaaian studieq 14 ( Fatt . L9T9) ¡ and J. RichaiãJand L. Pratt' Prairi-e capital ism: Po¡rer and Tnf l rronna i n +ìâã New---lLet! (Toronto, LgZg), pp. meanwhile, seeks to avoid the problem of class reductionism by abandoning materiátism to embrace discourse theory. He isorates four systems of populist thought which seem to operate at their own ¿istinct level, unencumbered by interactions ¡yith other discursive systems or material determinations. 26. M. J. BuhIe, Homen and Àmerican soni ¡.t i cn 1a?n_ ( urbana, 198l- ) , pp. 53-90; H. t{it"hir"n, ,,The t|'cTU, irË God' Home and Native Landr: A study of Nineteenth Century Feminism, r in L. Kealey, c-,d,, A Not Unreasonable ( Toronto, 1979), pp. L5T-L67; N. Sheehan, ttThe WCTU and Educational Strategies on the Canadian Prairies, r in Sheehan, J.D. FJilson and D. Jones, eds., Schools in the ( Calgary, 1986 ) ; G. Decarie, r'something Old, Something New...: Aspects of Prohibitionism in Ontario in the L890s,,t in D. Swainson, êd., OIiver Mowatr ( Toronto, 1972), pp. I67-I7L; Kealey and Pal-mer, Dreaming of Hhê! Might Be, pp. L0ï-i-OT, 356. 27. C. Bacchi, .) ( Toronto, 1983 ) ; -105-

tt'Rocking W. Roberts, the Cradle for the Worldr: The New Woman and Haternal Feminism, Toronto L9TT-Lg!A,, in Kealey, êd., A Not Unreasonable CIaim; R. Cook, ,rFrancis Marion Beynon and the crisis of christian Reformism, r, in c.Berger and R.cook, eds., The sest and the Nationi Essays in Honour of H.L. ïtorton (Toronto, lgZøf; D. Gorham' ttFrora llcDonard Denison¡ canadian Feminist,rr in Kealey, €d., A Not Unreasonable Claim. 28, Bacchi, Liþeration Deferred?, pp. l.1g-123; L. Kealey, 'tCanadian Socialism and the Soman Ouestion, 1900-l91a,rr Laþq@ L3 (Spring, 1984); A. Klein and w. Roberts, rf Besieged rnnocence: The 'probremf and probrerns of Working Somen--Toronto, 1896-19L4,,r in J. Acton, p. Goldsmith and B. Shepard, eds., tr ( Toronto . L97 4) . 29. Bacchi, ttThe Liberation Deferred?, pp. L23-L32¡ M. Kechnie, United Farm Homen of Ontario: Developing a Political Consciousness,tr Ontario Historv 78(4') (December, L985 ) ; J. Menzies, rrVotes for SJäatchewan Somen, rr in N. úJard, êd. , pol itics in Saskatchewan; S. Mahood, ItThe Woments Suffrage Movement in CánaAa and Saskatchee¡an, It in J . Acton et. êl . , eds. , Somen Unite !- an-anthology of the canadian somen's Movement itoronto, L97 2) i V . Strong-Boag, r,Pu}1 ing in Doubiàlarness or Hauling a Double Load: þJomen, t, Hork and Feminism on the Canadian Prairie, Journal of Canadian Studies 21 ( 3 ) (Farl' 1986). For the rerationship betweeá suttrage and the Nonpartisan League in North Dakota see G. Beitõ, r'.r am a Farmerts Wife, Dot a Farmeretter: Letters to the Nonpartisan Leader, !9]-Z-L9ZO,,r plainswoman: Antholoqy of Rur An popul anA Forks, 1"983 ) i for ism and suiirage .see J . s. Bl-ocker' t'The poLitics of Reform: popurists, Prohibition, and Homan Suffrage, 189L-L892,u Historian 34(4) (t972). IDEOLOGY. 1890-1 925

the educational state structure that deveroped in Manitoba agriculture before LgzS was part of the broader North American process. This chapter surveys that development. rt consists of a generar overview of the

infrastructure of agriculturar education in Manitobar ärr institutional history of the Manitoba Agricurtural correge (MAc) administration and facurty, a more specific account of the emergence of the three rer.evant disciprines in the

col1êgê, a brief history of rurar adurt education, and ä survey of departmental and corlege programmes designed for rural children and youth.

At confederation the control and direction of agriculture was divided between the dominion and provincial govern¡nents. Before 1862 all aspects of agriculture had fa1len under the jurisdiction of the various British North American provinces. Each of the provinces had developed centraL boards to supervise agricutÈural societies and administer annual grants-in-aid. The canadas, however, had also formed a bureau of agricuJ-ture in 1g5z which, in Lg6z, became a separate department of agriculture. Arthough the statutory purpose of the department e¡as to create a croser connection between agricurtural activities and the -L0I-

legislature, its main function became the promotion of immigration and coronisation. rn this the department proved to be a model for the post-Confederation Dominion Department of Agricul ture.

rn the divis ion o f povrers at 186z the Do¡ninion Department of Agriculture, ãs part of a central state apparatus designed to promote commercial activity, was given responsibil ity for agriculture and immigration. purery local affairs were left to the provinciar governments. rn practice this meant that the Dominion was engaged in the promotion of ,tagricul-tural commerce and finance, ... Iandl opportunities for the profitable servicing of a rapidly expanding agricultural frontier. "(1) Although the British North Amerisa Act gave the provinces the pohrer to promote immigration and settlement within their own jurisdictions, in effect their activity was increasingry confined to the supervision of boards and societies and the promotion of agricurturar improvement through various forms of agricultural education. The artificiality of the distinction between commercial and rocal activity, Ers expressed in the division of powers, was reflected in various federal government interventions in the area of agricurtural improvement and education. The first of these eras the experimental farm system, launched in the context of the North-sest's failure to attract immigrants and stimurate national economic activity. A -109-

House of commons select committee was appointed in 1884 to enquire into the ensouragement and development of agriculture in canada. convinced that wastefur farming methods nere hindrances to agricultural progress, the committee recommended the establishment of a Bureau -of rnformation and a system of experimental farms. Although various forms of experinental, modeI, demonstration, ã¡rd school farms had been proposed by committees throughout the nineteenth century without result, the government eras prepared to establish some type of system in the rgg0s in order to stimulate western development. rn l.BB6 An Act Respecting Experimental Farm stations presented to Parliament to facilitate the establishment of a central experimental farm in Ottaç¡a and four branch farms ( including one in Brandon) that would conduct agricultural experiments and make the results of experimentation available through publications. With this significant gesture, then, the Dominion government first intervened in the area of agrlcultural research and education. ( 2) Over the next twenty-five years the Dominionrs edusational activities erere confined to experimentar farm work, conducting dairy schools, and establ ishing model creameries. rn the second decade of the twentieth century, however, the central government made a major financial contribution to agricultural education. The immediate poriticar impetus to action Íras the conjuncture of two -110- social forces. The farm movement, âlthough defeated on the issue of reciprocity, sras sufficiently powerful in 1911 to extract two campaign promises from prime Minister R.L. Borden which he subsequently fulfilred: action on grain marketing (canada Grain Act, LgLz) and assistance to the provinces for agricultural education. More importantry, though, capitaLts increasing demand for state intervention in technicar education, coupled with demands from various sociar groups for rurar improvement through education had, in 19L0, resurted in the appointment of the Royal commission on rndustriar rraining and rechnical Education. As a result of its recommendations, Bordenrs government introduced the Agrlcultural Ald Act (L912) and the AgriculÈural fnstruction Act (1913). The former act provided s5oo,0o0 and the ratter one $10 million over ten years for the provinces to use in the improvement of rural. economÍc, social and educational conditions. These funds, af r¡hich Manitoba received approximately $850,000, formed the financial basis for the rapid expansion of rural education between 19L3 and 1923. (3) Prior to Manitobars entry into confederation in Lgz0 there were scattered attempts to promote agriculturar knowledge at Red River. Hay Flerd Farm was established near Fort Douglas in L817 as a site for agricultural experiments, r¡hile the Hudsonrs Bay company initiated experimentar farms at the settlement in L830 and again in lg3g. Agricultural fairs r{ere heLd in the settlement as early as j-g32. rt rras -111- not until Hanitoba v¡as granted provinciaL status within canada' however, that a more systematic promotion of agricurturar improvement and knowledge was undertaken. Following the example of Ontario, the government passed Legislation in r872 establishing a provincial Agricurtural and rndustrial society and enabling the formation of Local agricultural societies. societies erere charged with the responsibil-ty of encouraging agriculture through the importation of improved seed and rivestock, awarding prizes for crop and livestoek J-mprovement, and generally pursuing excellence in agricultural work. The structure of agricurturar societies remained essentiaLly unchanged between 1872 and 1900, while their practlcal functlon during the period was al-most exclusively the sponsorship of agricultural fairs. (4) Farmers t institutes, which proved to be more important than agricurtural societies in the deveLopment of agriculturar education, were introduced to llanitoba Ín 1890. under the terms of the Farmers I rnstltute Act of that year' twenty-five persons courd petition the ttinister of Agricurture requesting the formation of a farmers r institute, which entitled the institute to a provincial grant of fifty cents per memberr ãccêss to municipal grants, and the use of provinciall-y funded speakers. Loca1 institutes undertook to hord meetings and hear and discuss lectures on agricurturar topics. Farmers I institutes -LL2- existed as separate entities until 1900 when they were

integrated with agriculturaL societies. After L90o institutes operated sorely under the auspices of locar agricultural societies, al.though provislon was made for the formation of institutes in areas where agrlcurturaL societies were not organised. (S) rn the early years of the new century the domain of agricurturar knowledge in Manitoba hras transformed by the estabrishment of Manitoba Agricurtural correge. rn l9o4 the l'lanitoba Agricultural col-Iege Act was passed creating the college and aLlocating one-hundred thousand dollars for construction. From 1904 untiL Lgz4 the agricurtural college functioned essentially as an institution separate from the university. Between L905 and L9l2 MAc was affiriated ¡¡ith the university to the extent that degrees ¡rere granted by the university and the university council appointed members to the l'lAc Board of Directors. rn Lg]-z, however, MAc compreteLy severed its ties with the university. The college operated as a separate degree granting institution until. 1916 when it re-affiriated with the university under essentially the same terms as the pre-193.2 arrangement. From 1916 to L924 HAC continued what vras basicarly a nominar connection with the university: it was a creature of the Department of Agriculture rather than the Department of Education, with its own presldent and its oyrn advisory board. rn L924, however, as a result of economlc condrtions -L 1.3- and the recommendations of the Murray Commission, l{AC ceased to exist as a separate entity. It was incorporated into the University of Manitoba in that year as the Faculty of Agriculture and Home Economi.cs, although lt did retain its os¡n advisory council. (6) Building upon the agricultural societies and farmers I institutes, MAC and the Agricultural Instruction Act became the institutionar and financial lnfrastructure for the construction of a rural extension service in the second decade of the century. Between 19i.0 and 1913 the l.lAc administration and staff estabrished the parameters of future -¡york by initiating activities for women, men, and youth. In 1910 the organlsatlon of Home Economlcs Socteties was begun under the authority of the Home Economics societies Act. A year later the coll.ege and the rairways instituted Better Farming Trains to take scientific agriculture to the countryside. And, in 1913, the college and the Department of Education introduced Boyst and Gir1s. cLubs to llanitoba and to canada. rn the decade after 1913, as a direct resurt of the Dominion grants, the extension service grew from a part-tlme activlty of the l.lAc facutty to a branch of the Department of Àgriculture with a director, assistant director and staff. (7) -1L4-

MAc eras the central institution in this educational state structure. The main constÍtuent dlsclpr ines of theoreticar ideorogy rrere situated there, with agricurtural economics, home economics, and rural_ socioLogy aII emerging as distinct areas of enquiry and study in the coì.regers first deeade. The components of practicat ideorogy were organised at MAc as welI, and the extension service nas either managed through the colrege or hras crosery connected with it. Finally, it was the professionar schoor in which not only agriculturaL and home economics intellectuals vrere trained, but also the farm women and men who would serve as rol-e moder s and social leaders in individuar ruraL communities. Throughout the rast quarter of the nineteenth century, ontario settrers in llanitoba who sought agricurturaL guidance and advice had been content to rery upon the ontarlo Agriculturar correge ln Guerph. rncreaslngly in the 1890s' however' Ers it became apparent that ontario agriculture eras not the aame as Manitoba agriculture, local agitation deveLoped for a similar institution there. Hence, ln 1901, the RobIin government appointed a commission to enquire into the question of agriculturar education in the province. The seven man commission eras empowered to investigate the advisability of forming an agricultural college, its probable cost, and the best methods of -115- operating such an institution. The commissioners studied agricultural education in Britain, Europe, and other parts of North America, with excursions to Guelph, North Dakota, Þlinnesota, Iowa, Hisconsin, and Hichigan. This process yierded a serles of recommendatlons affecting every revel of the educational system. With respect to post-secondary education, the commission recomnended the establishment of an agricultural college to offer instruction in agriculture and domestic science. rndeed, the commissioners fett that it eras important that domestic science and agricultural instruction bb I inked. Men would be trained in the practical subjects of agriculture, including the production and distribution of wealth, whlle Í{omen would recelve training in the various aspects of domestic science, enabling them to take their rightful prace as herpmates for farm men. (8) Upon submission of the report the Roblin government passed legisration and voted funds for the construction of l,lAC. On 28 l.lay, 1904 the Board of Dlrectors met for the first time. That meeting and the five others herd that year erere J.argeLy concerned with problems of construction. rt was not until the followfng year that the board turned its attention to questions of staffing and curricurum. rn tt¡e spring of 1905 the first appointments were made with H.J. Brack as principal and professor of animal husbandry and

H.J. Carson as professor of dalrylng. Durlng 1906 five more -116- appointments were made.(9) Although a couple of short courses in dairying erere held during 1905-06, l{AC formally opened on 6 November 1906 with an enrolment of eighty-two in the two year diploma course. By the following academfc year' 1907-08, tlAC was firmly established as a teaching institution with a total attendance of zzo and a teaching staff consisting of the principal., six professors, four lecturers, demonstrators in cheese and buttermaking, an instructor ln mechanics, a matron, è farm foreman, a stenographer, a bursar, ãrr assistant engineer, a carpenter, a gardener, and a number of labourers.(10) Throughout ÌlACts life the Board of Directors operated as an advisory body to the Minister of Àgricurture. Arthough no independent authority was vested in the board, it did have a slgnificant role to pray in colrege governanee. FoLlowing the initial activlty of construction and estabLishing a facuLty, the board settred into the regular matters of maintaining the physleal. prant, maintaining and poLicing the staff, adopting and approving programmes and courses, and conducting relations with other agriculturar and educatíonal organisations in the province. In the mundane matters of routine college ad¡ninistration, which accounted for the bul-k of their work, the boardrs advice nas accepted and they effectively ran the corlege. on ott¡er issues, however, such as staffing and the site change, the board felt ignored from tíne to time. rn 1910, -117-

for example, the board requested a meeting ¡vith the mÍnister in order to crarify its duties, passing a motÍon expressing rrdÍsappointment and regret that they r{ere in no eray consulted by the government as to the change of site of the agricurturar coJ.l-ege and that no intimatton even of the purchase of a new site had been made to them. rr ( l-1) Similarly, a lengthy discussion took place in a 1919 board meeting regarding the powers of the board to make appointments and fix salaries. According to the mlnutes of the meeting, t'much dissatisfaction was expressed by individual members of the board with the action of the Department of AgricuLture in repeatedry vetoing the boardrs appointments and ignoring fts recommendations. rr( 12) Boards under various governments, then, felt a certain amount of frustration ln deating with the Minister of Agriculture. The board eras constituted as a mixture of government appointees and representatives from other bodies. The first board contained four government appointees ( inctuding Premier Robrin as an ex-officlo member), two representatives from the university Board of Governors, and four 'practical farmers" elected by the agricurtural societies. ( 13) rn L9L2' when the coLlege gained its autonomy, the MAc board suggested that the two representatives previousry appointed by the university noer be appointed by the agricurtural eocieties. The government rejected this advice, hoerever, and the L913-14 board eontained six government appointees -1 18-

(including J.A.tl. Àikins who had previousry been appointed by the university board ) and four agricurturaL society representatives. ( 14 ) gith the eLection of the reformist LiberaL government in 1915 the board went through another change. The 1915 board retained its six government appointees (although the faces erere different), but the farmer members were changed from representatives of the agricurtural societies to representatives of the grarn groners and livestock associations. ltoreover, for the first time the board of ten peopre contained two femare members. (L5) This structure remained vlrtually lntact unttl L924 when the Board of Directors was transformed into a Facurty of Àgricurture and Home EconomÍcs Advisory councir. By this time the board-cum-eouncil included five government members (of whom one was the onry noman member) and one representative each from the livestock association, the agricultural societies, the tlAC alumni association, and the united Farmers. rn the transition from board to counclr, hor¡ever' the bodyts power was seriously curtailed, arthough its mere existence in the university vras somethlng of a consession. The council t s advice eras given to the universityrs Board of Governors rather than the Minister of Agriculture (who ceased to have responsibility for agriculturar education in any event), and it appears its effective authority rras 1i¡nited to the field of ruraL extension. ( 16 ) -1 19-

The daily administration of the corl-ege was conducted by the president, and the informal line of authority and communication was between the president and the Minister of Agricurture. tlAc had five presidents durÍng its existence: W.J. Black, 1905-19L5; J.B. Reynolds, lgtS-1920; John Bracken, l92o-L922¡ c.H. Lee (acting president), L9z2-L924; and H.H. McKllllcan who, in rgz4, nas the rast president of MAC and the first Dean of Agrlcurture and Home Economics. H. J. Brack eras a graduate of oÀc who came to the presidency from The Farmerst Advocate. An ambitious man, he was no doubt responsible for MACts transformation into an independent institutÍon in 1919. Hls initiar appointment nas due to his Conservatlve party connections, and this inevitabry led to his dismissar by the Liberars in 191.5. ( Lz ) J.B. Reynoldfs 'appointment as Blackfs repracement represented something of a transition in the way the HAc presfdency nas perceived and the way HAc presidents erere appointed. Reynords and his three successors were arl career agricultural scientists or agricuJ.tural academics.

Reynords eras on the facurty of oAc prior to coming to I,lAc, and returned to the presidency there in ]-gzo; Bracken was employed as a Dominion government crop scientlst and the saskatchewan government director of Farmers r rnstitutes before his ttAc appointment; c. H. Lee had been on the l,lAc facurty as professor of botany and bacteriorogy since 1909; and [f.c. t{cKirLican came from the superintendency of the -120-

Brandon Experimental Farm. Arthough Black ertrployed the Ianguage of scientific agriculture, and Ìras connected with the American Association of Agriculturar colJ.eges and Farmers t Institutes, he represented an older voluntarist

approach to agricultural knowredge: not only eras he politically partisan, but he nas formed as an educator more by practical farming and agricultural Journalism than by academic training. Reynolds and his suecessors, meanwhile, were commltted agricultural scientlsts ¡rho trained, ¡¡orked, and made their careers in the neÞr educattonal

institutions. ( 18 ) The various boards and presidents yrere faced with the recurring problem of llACrs relationship with the university of Manitoba. rn the history of North Àmerican agricurtural colleges there rvas a strong tradition of independence from other post-secondary institutions. colreges such as oAc, Iona Agricultural ColLeger èrrd North Dakota Agricultural

college had become strong schools without affirlating wlth a university. rnterested commentators and peopl.e associated with l'lAc looked to these exampres when arguing for an independent agricuLturar colrege. Two fnterrelated arguments vrere proffered. First, it was feLt that the university represented an urban infruence which would be unhealthy for yotrng farm women and men. second, there was a desire to estabrish a special-ised and technical curricurum, and it eras felt this would be jeopardised by association -L2L-

e¡ith the university t s more classical curriculum. ( 19 ) t{Ac, of course, achieved comprete autonomy in LgLz and maintained that status for four years. Reaffiliation in 1916, however, marked the beginning of ÞlÀCts journey to facuLty status in the university of Manitoba. As noted above, independence in 1912-16 had as much to do with Blackrs careerism and his pol itics as it had to do with the ideol-ogy of autonomy. Hence, with a new government and à new corlege president, the question of af f lliatlon was raised agaln. ReynoS.ds made the case for affitiation in his first report, arguing that MAc araduates wanted the increased prestÍge of a university degree and that affiliation would assist the universÍty by bringing it into association ¡ríth technÍcal instruction in agriculture. He had one reservation, however. rt e¡as important to him that the Board of Directors not rose any contror over the course of studies or the conditlons of admission to the corlege. The finar arrangement allowed the board to retain its control, while gÍving l{AC representation on the university counciL. ( 20 ) Esonomic imperatives caused the eventual amargamation in Lgz4.. rn these new circumstances the advisory councir was indeed purely advisory, wÍth the unlversityts Board of Governors belng the finar authority. The council-ts function was essentiarly one of keeplng the urban based universlty board sensitive to the needs of farm people , (ZL) -L22-

Between 1905 and L924 the MAc teaching staff grew from three men ( lncluding the principar ) to about forty women and men. During that twenty year period approximateLy 139 peopre taught in the colrege for various rengths of time. Although there eras something of an expansion in hiring ln the middre years, with as many as 14 being hired in 19L5, the annual rate of hiring eras falrry constant throughout the period' averaging about 7. To the extent that the period from' say' L913 to L918 or l9L9 represented something of a buoyant rabour market for agricuJ.turar and home economic academics, there are three probable causes for the phenomenon. First, the impact of the erar on MAc Tras such that positions (often temporary ones) became vacant as mare faculty joined the military. second, monies avairabre through the federal Agricultural Instructlon Act allowed the college to hire additionat facul-ty to serve as extension lecturers. Third, the sustained growth of the home economics division really dates from 1913, êIthough the programme commenced in 19L0 s¡hen three academl_c staff were hlred. of the 138 facurty who were employed at the correge, something is known about the background of gs of the¡n. using information curled from new staff announcements pubr ished in Þlanaqra ( the ttAc student publ ication) , the geographic origin, educational background, previous employment, and initial academic rank at MAC of these people can be determined in varying degrees.(22) -L23-

The information on geographic origin suggests that,

especial Iy in the early years ( 1905-1910 ) , MAC rel ied heaviLy on ontario and the united states for its academic staff and, after 1910, Manitoba supplied a surprisingry hlgh

proportion of the male teaching staff. (Zg) The home economics division (alL female ) relied most heavily on Ontario and the United States, r¡ith t¡ro-thirds of the faculty coming from those areas (5 of 14 from the former and

4 of 1.4 from the latter). onry 2 (of L4) ManÍtoba eromen

were hired in the whole period. The remaining three women came from rrerand, Nova scotia, and saskatchewan. rn the case of the agricurture division, nearry 40t of the forty- five men came from Ontario, while 16eÉ were from the Unlted states. Hhat is more remarkabLe about agricurture, though, ls that one-third of the total staff were Hanitobans or, to put it in more dramatic terms, B0* of the thirty men hired between L91l- (rshen the first two l{anitobans were hired) and L923 trere either born or raised in Manitoba. The remaining faculty came from Scotland (3), England (Z), and euebec (1).(24) The educational background of the t{Ac facurty is significant for three reasons: it confirms the pattern suggested by geographic origin; it shows that the majority of those hired erere themselves agricurtural. colrege graduates; and it revears that onry a smarr percentage of the staff had graduate training. (25) on the first point, -L24-

27e6 of those hired etere llAC graduates, 22% erere trained in American institutions, and 46!L were graduates of ontario colleges and universities. of the ontario graduates, armost two-third had been students at Guelph (oAc and ltacdonald rnstit,ute ) , one-third of the American graduates (one-ha} f of the male American graduates) yrere from the rowa state correge of Agriculture at Ames, and arr but one of the Manitoba graduates erere tlAc aLumni. on the second point, three-quarters of the faculty were themselves graduates of home economics or agricul-turar co].leges. This is hardry surprising since, especially in the case of agriculture, the required training was armost sorely avaiLabLe in the specialist, technical coLleges. As weII, UAC faculty and administration tended to idealise oAc and rowa state, attempting to moder their coLLege on these order institutions. Fhat is perhaps more reveal-ing on this point is tt¡e glaring imbalance in llanitoba itself. Twenty HAc graduates nere hired as compared to onry one Manitoba College graduate, who happened to have a first degree from the university of Edinburgh (R.H. l{urchie). A graduate of Brandon corlege ¡¡ho went on to Dlacdonal.d rnstitute, and a sesley college alumnus who did graduate work at Harvard, arso managed to find employment at uAc. something of the rurar antipathy towards the university of Flanitoba is no doubt reflected in these data. on the final point, more than 80% of MAc faculty had onry one degree when they rrere -125-

first hired or ( in the case of some of the engineering facurty) no degree at alr. Those ¡¡ho did second degrees or certificates tended to be from a teaching background, whire those who did graduate ¡vork nere nostl.y in veterinary science or more purely academic subjects such as chenistry or English. Those teaching the new agricul_tural and home economics subjects ( including rural sociology and agricultural economics) began their careers having only recelved the general degree. The information on previous work experience indicates that a large proportion of the t{Ac faculty had previous teaching experience, v¡hile very few of the men had actually operated a farm, (26 ) 40t of the facuLty had taught at some level of the educationaL system, with the largest number of these having previous universlty or coLrege experlence. The next largest group consisted of recent graduates (zOt) whose f irst employment was at MAC: hal f of these were l,fAc graduates' a number appear to have been sessional appointments, and most, but not a1t of them, were appointed as lecturers or instructors. Homen and men with experience ln government departments (district representatives, experimental farms, etc. ) were next, accounting for 19å. The men ¡vho taught agriculturaL engineering and farm mechanics, meanwhiJ-e' were hired more on the basis of practical experience than asademic nerit. Hence, five of the eight engineering faculty hired between LgOs and 1913 -L26-

had experience in factory production. of the remaining faculty, one had solely farming experience, while two others had farming experience as well as some other previous empl.oyment, two had backgrounds in agricuLturar journarism, tç¡o had served in the armed services during the war, and two had experience in farm management or agro-industry. Most of the people who found themselves teaching at HAC, then, vrere either career educators or career agricurturarists. A surprisingry smalr number had farm' operation experience, experience in agro-industry, or a background in agriculturar j ournal ism.

The coLLective experÍence of HAc facurty indicates an increasing consciousness of their oern identity and a growlng sense that they possessed certain rights within the institution. Especially in the L9zos, an era of post-war inflation and fiscal conservatism, issues of sal.ary and college governance became important points of contention ¡uith the administration. rn 1909, the earrfest year for which a comprete sarary scaLe exists, the salary range was as foLlows: principal, $2500; Professors, S2000-S2250; Lecturers, $1000-$1500; and support staff sal-aries ranging from $840.00 for the farm foreman and the gardener to $300.00 for the librarian.(22) This structure remained more or l-ess intact for a number of years. The Board of Directors announced in LgLz that the sararies for department heads had been raised to S2400.00 -L27 - per year and that it r¡as their wish to have professors t saLaries t'raised to $3000 per annum in the very near future. rt ( 28 ) As it turned out, the tf very near futurerr was 1916 f.or, in that year, a permanent salary structure eras put in place for male and femare staff. The schedule for men yras $2600-S3000 for professors, $2100-SZ5O0 for associate professors, S1600-$2000 for Iecturers, and $1OOO-$1S00 for assistants, ûJith annual increases after one year of service. The woments schedule nas $1200-$2400 for departnent heads, and $900-$1600 for assistants, with annual increases of $lOO from the minimum to the maximun, (Zg') By 191-9' honever' the president eras reporting to the government that, in the face of a drop ln enrorment from 360 to 200 over four years, the college Íras having difficulty maintaining its staff and justifying its existence. Notwithstanding the fact that rabour costs had increased in all departments from 30tL to SOt of the total budget, and the staff erere receiving their annuar increases according to the 1916 schedure, staff sararies srere not keeping pace with the cost of living. Hense it was necessary to offer sararies above the schedule to neer facul ty. ( 30 ) r t hras in this context that the facuLty made their first organised representation to the Board of Directors in the form of a petition presented in october, 1919. They presented their case as follows:

There ls at present a great deal of unrest and dissatlsfactlon among the members of the -r28-

Agricurtural coÌlege staff which is detrimental to the best interests of the CoIIege. tùe feel that this is largely due to the unsatisfactory salary schedures which have not been revised since L916, although the cost of Iiving has gone up approximately 1.00t. It is conceded that the salaries of those engaged in the teaching profession in general are inadequate havlng regard to years of training required, tÌ¡e value of the service rendered and particurarly having regard to the present high cost of tiving. fn addition ere find that the salaries paid at the Agricultural col-lege are low in comparison with the sararies in the teaching profession in general r àrÌd in particuLar when compared with other institutions in the Hest doing similar work. llembers of our staf f have l-ef t the institution for the above reason and others are contemplating doing so. He have feLt, however, that it is our duty to endeavour to remedy the situation rather than either abandon the teachÍng profession or take positions in other institutions. (31) This was not the trade unionist rhetorfc of the Generar strike , of course. within the deferentiar contours of educational discourse, however, lt must be seen as a }anguage of rights, identity and chall.enge. For the facuJ.ty to suggest, for example, that the situation must either be remedied or they wourd be forced to reave tt¡e coLlege, ãDd perhaps the profession, rras to cha1l.enge the administration with the onry legitimate sense of corrective identity availabre to them. The resolution ¡ras accompanied by a proposed new schedule, including comparative data from other institutions. The faculty requested the following sarary range: instructors (maLe ), $1800-$2400; instructors ( female ), $1500-$1800; lecturers (male ), $2000-$2600; lecturers ( female), SlB00-$2L00; associate professors (male), $2?00-sgdroo; associate professors (femare), $zLo0- -L29-

$2500; professors (male ), $3000-$3600; and directors ( female ), $2600-$3000. The board was actually quite forthcoming in its response to the faculty. Although a motion was passed at the october, 1919 meeting affirming that the facurty request had to be considered in the context of the financial conditions of the college, a neer schedule was adopted early in L920 which, whire not meeting the faculty requests, did include substantial increases under the circumstances. under the ne¡r schedule the ranges were instructor (mare), $1500-$2000; instructor /librarian ( female ), $1200-s1500; lecturer (male), s2000-$2400; lecturer (femare), $1b00- $1800; associate professor (male ), $2400-$2900; associate professor ( female ), $L800-$2400i professor (ma1e ), $2900- S3500; and director (female), S2200-$2800 .(32) The MAC faculty's first, and on1y, attempt at coLlective bargaining rras a relative sucèess in that they erere abre to initiate a general pay increase in the college. By 1922' honever, the board instituted a pay freeze, ali.owing onLy a rimited number of sarary increases. Hhen l.lAc became the Facurty of Agriculture and Home Economics in 1925' college sararies were generalry lower than those in the rest of the university. A report from president l.taclean and Dean McKillican recommended an equal-isation of salaries, but Premier Bracken eras not prepared to increase the budget. ( 33 ) -1 30-

III

rt was within this general structure that ideorogies were constituted within the college, but the speclfic structures that devel-oped in the relevant disciplines should be understood in the context of the broader North American pattern. Home economics, agriculturar economics, and rurar sociology emerged in the Late nineteenth century and were maturing as areas of special isation in North American schorarship during the second decade of the new century. At about. the same tirne, in the years foLlowing 19L0, they were also becoming estabrished at MAc, with distinctive discipLines, boundaries, courses, and programmes of research. Hount Holyoke seminary instituted a form of domestic education in 1837, but it was rearly the rand grant corleges that established American home economics instruction after the ÈtorrirL Land Grant Act of 1862. rndeed the subject flourished in these agriculturar and mechanicar corleges rather than the rvy League e¡omenrs colleges where it eras viewed as being too narrowry focused for the education of cuLtured women. By the 1890sr âDd coneurrent with professionalising initiatives in other areas of knowl.edge, home economics nas becoming organised as a disciprine. The most significant aspect of this endeavour was the series of Lake Placid conferences which began in lB99 and culminated in 1-908 with the formation of the American Home Economics -131-

Association (AHEA). During this decade home economists established their claim to have their domain considered a legitimate area of expertise. The first conference abandoned the name tthouset¡old arts rr in favour o f home economics, hoping that a linguistic identification with economics might be a first step in easing the way into college and university curricura. And a conference committee rater recommended a number of strategies for entering various curricular areas: househord management in economics; family studies in sociology; nutrition and the chemistry of foods in natural_ science; and family history and the history of the home in history. At the tenth conference, besides formally estabLishing the AHEA, resolutions were adopted to broaden the organisation and estabLish the paraphernalia of professionalism. Delegates decided to publish a journal, form state organisations, . establish a dues structure, and encourage secondary and primary teachers to join the association. (34) Home economics instruction commenced at MAc shortly after the organisation of the AHEA. rn the summer of 1910 twenty-one women took the first course offered by the neúry formed Department of Household science. rt eras the farl of l-91L' hoe¡ever, before a regurar two-year course of study was implemented for which students received a diproma. rn 1914 the diproma programme was supplemented by a speciaL course for teachers and a professionar course for diproma graduates -132- seeking employment in institutions. One year later a three- year course, for which the diploma r¡as a prerequisiter wãs added to provide degree level training which, in 1-g2Û, became a separate five-year programme.(35) Between 1911 and 191-9, and chiefly as a result of the introduction of the degree programme in L915, the home economics curricuLum greer from ten to approximateLy forty courses offering instruction in the social, medical, and natural sciences. the original. ten incLuded ttNursingtt and rfPhysiology and Hygienettso women could properly care for family members, ttMillineryrf and ItSewing and Dressmakingt, to provide garment making skiIls, a range of courses (Home Sanitation, Laundry, Home Furnishing, Household Handicraft and cookery) teaching the scientific basis and fundamental- skills of home maintenance,ttEnglishtrto add a touch of gentility to what eras basically a vocational education, and ttHousehold Managementrf . Af ter 1915 courses such, as cookery etere expanded to include ICookingtt, rtFoodstt and ttDieteticsrt. partiaLLy transforming a simple food preparation course into embryonic food science courses. Furthermore, ItHouse Planningtt, ttBacteriologyt, and ttArithmeti.crr vrere added to suppl-ement the work in other courses. And instruction in ftHorticulturet', rf Dairy Husbandrytf and trPoultryt, eras begun in order to train farm women for productive roles ( in market terms). In the degree programme, courses trere organised into household science and household arts departments, and -133-

some purely scientific courses (taught by the agricultural faculty) were added. Household management, foods, the history of home 1ife, and book reviews erere incorporated into household science, while househoLd arts included

dressmaking, millinery, costume design, textiles, home planning, and embroidery. Degree students also took other courses ranging from chemistry to music. (36) [{ith the overall reorganisation of the MAc curriculum in 1919-1g2o, there nas a realignment of home economics

courses towards more precise disciplinary boundaries. Gone erere the ord categories of household arts and household science' replaced by nine course groupings having the appearance of departments without, as yet, possessing departmental- apparatus. Hence, in 1919 home economics students encountered a curricular structure that included cookery, foods and nutrition, clothing, housing, textiles, physiology and hygiene, househoLd management, pedagogy, and institutional management. rn the 1920s the curriculum became more streamlined as the number of reguLar courses dropped from forty-two to forty, and the number of general areas shrank from nlne to seven.(37) Unlike the MAC presidency, which underwent a transition to professionalism in the teens, the home economics division had a professionar orientation from its inception in 19L0. A.B. Juniper, the ffrst directorr rrâs attracted to l{Ae from the deanship of household science at Macdonard college -134-

(llcGi11 ), and later went on to the principalship of a

domestic science coJ-lege in England. Her successor eras E. Charlton-SaLisbury, trained at Rochester polytechnic and formerly employed at woments union Domestic science coS.lege in Buffalo, New York. And, from tg15 to L9ZZ, there $rere three more directors, all with good academic backgrounds. These were E.H. Eadie (from Mount Al-l-ison and university of Toronto)' Mary Kelso (trained at oAc), ã¡rd Mary Hiltz (a Columbia University graduate). [lore significantly, though, MAc faculty (especially Juniper) v¡ere instrumentar in the formation of the llanitoba Home Economics Association in 19LL. Àrr three tIAc home economists $rere present, along with four other nomen, at the inaugural meeting in January of that year. The aims of the association incLuded contact with the AHEA (MHEA members regularry attended AHEA conventions, although formar affiriation did not take prace until l-9L5 ), provincial agitation for a home economics experimental station, and general liaison between the women of Manitoba and the manufacturers of household products. Membership yras l imited to rromen actualry emp]-oyed in the profession, although associate memberships rdere availabLe and the formation of a ttHousewives Leaguerr h¡as discussed in lgLz as a kind of housekeeperts auxiriary. Association activities, beyond regular meetings, consisted mainly of trips to commerciaL establ-ishments in the food sector. During 1911 and L9LZ members visited ìÍilton Bakery, Crescent -1 35-

Creamery. Paul in Chambers, and the restaurant at I Eaton s. ( 38 ) The discipline of agriculturar economics took form in North Amerlca between the 1890s and the 1920s. Tsro distinct groups--agronomists studying farm management in agricultural corleges and economists anal.ysing the broader agricultural economy in universities--were involved in its creation. Farm management emerged out of the general agriculturar courses, taught in nineteenth century agricultural co1leges,

that treated the whole range of agricuLtural practice as a single areà of study. As other specialisations such as field husbandry and animal husbandry developed, - courses in tfagronomyr "agricultureft and were narrowed to topics of farm organisation and the business of farming. By the turn of the century agronomists were borrowing economists t techniques in order to study management practices on individual farms. In L|OZ, for example, the Minnesota Agricultural Experimental- station, under the direction of Àndrew Boss' began a series of cost of production studies whereby farmers, working with speciarists, kept detailed records of actual farm costs. At about tt¡e same time, George Harren of Cornell initiated survey methods, involving personal interviews with farmers to ascertain their incomes and expenses. rn 1913 [darren pubrished Farm Management as a corlege text which systematised the work that he, Bossr ând others had been doing over the previous ten to fifteen -1 36- years.(39) Moreover, in 19L0 these and other agronomists, who were all concentrating on farm management, formed the American Farm Management Association as an expression of their disciprinary and professional aspirations. Durlng the same period academic economists such as Henry Taylor and thomas Nixon Carver nere focusing on what they called rrural economicsfr or ttfarm economicst,, attempting to establish a space for agriculture within economic discourse.(40,) They tried to form a Farm Economics section in the American Economic Association, but when this proposa]. was rejected by the AEA they establ ished the NationaL Association of Farm Economists in 1910. Through joint research projects and friendly overtures over the following decade a common space was created between the two groups and, Ín 1919, the American Farm Management Association and tl¡e National Association of Farm Economists nerged to form the American

Farm Economics Association. Agricurturar economiss, aE a unified dlscipline, may be dated from this merger. (41) AgricuS. turar economics eras taught in various forms at t'lAC between L9O7 and 19L9. In 1919, horrever, the courses were brought together in a rural economics department which, in 1926' merged with rural socioLogy. prior to 1916 there was no distinct farm management course. Rather, farm management nas covered in agronomy of, more often, as part of field husbandry. Rural economics was first taught in 19L0-1911, and continued until 1916 when it r{as lncorporated -r37 - e¡ith farm management for most levels of instruction. Between 1915 and 1919, courses varied among farm management, agriculturaL economics, and rural economics. Then, in 19L9, the general curricular reoþranisation produced a distinct department containing courses in farm business and accounting, farm management, economics, agricultural ecor¡omics, and agricultural Iegislation. This structure remained relatively unchanged untiL LgzS when two marketing courses, tgro courses on farm movements and co-operation, and a course each on the economic aeography of agriculture, finance, and statistics were added. Then, the following year' the Department of Economics and sociology was born . ( 42) The emergence of agriculturaL economics as a disciprine at MAc ç{as refrected in the increaslng speciartsation of the faculty who taught the subject between LgO? and LgZ6. Agronomy in 1907-L908, and rural economics between 1908 and 191-0, were taught by Principar H.J. Brack. Black, êlthough trained at OAC, eras a former agricu}tural Journallst with no specialist training in agricurtural economics. similarly, the field husbandry instructors r¡ho taught farm managemnent in the early years were naturar scientists rather than economists. The L9l-4 appointment of George white as MACIs first professor of farm management refLected both a move towards specialisation and the retention of ol.der attitudes to farm management instruction. white spent six months of -138-

the year at MAc and the other six months on his one thousand acre farm near LaSalle wherer âccoFding to president Reynolds, he acquired ttthe practícaL experience and the scientific data special-ly necessary in farm management instructiontr. rndeed Reynolds noted three components in

Hhitets suitability for his job at MAC: his training at OAC; his business experience with the Grain Grosers r Grain

company (GGGC); and his work as a practical farmer. ülhen he died in 1916 his work was divided, not among ferrow facul.ty members, but between c.B. Piper of the Empire Erevator company and rhomas crerar of the GGGC. Hhiters eventuar replacement, however, was AIva Benton, a trained agricultural economist. Benton, appointed in L9lg, compreted a doctorate in farm credit for the university of Hisconsin in 192I. He, in turn, was supplemented and eventually replaced by H.C. Grant, the first person to receive graduate training in agricultural economics in Manitoba. (43)

Like agriculturar economics, rural sociorogy emerged as a disciprinary domain in the 1890s. rn LBgz and 1995, amid economic depression and agrarian insurgency, the American

Economics AssociatÍon held sessions on trrhe Farmers r Movementftandttrhe Agricultural Questiont,in which social scientists such as Richard Ely, John Commons and Frankl_in Giddings participated. And, in 18g3, Reverend Josiah Strong pubrished a book carling attention to the exodus of peopre -139-

from the country to the city. rt was during the forrowing decade, however, that the notion of a ilrural problemrr developed to focus and define rurar sociorogy. Kenyon Butterfield (at the university of Michigan) and John Girrette (at the university of North Dakota) began teaching f'rural sociol-ogytt earry in the decade, while the protestant Interchurch [JorId l{ovement conducted surveys of thousands of rural churches during those same years. l{ost importantly, though' significant state initiatives were undertaken around the end of the decade which contributed to the growing legitimacy of rurar sosiology. rn the united states Roosevelt appointed the country Life co¡nmission to enquire into the f'problemf' of country tife, while in Canada both the Royar commission on rndustrial Training and rechnical Edusation and the commission of conservation focused attention on this newly found prob}em. (44) Forrowing closely upon the reLease of the country Life Commission report, the American SocÍological Association ftRuraL chose Lifetf as the theme of its LgLz convention and, during those meetings, tt¡e RuraI SocioLogical Society was formed to provide rural sociologists with an institutional identity. By the time of the pubLicatlon of John GiLtettefs synthetic Constructive Rura1 Sociologi' and John McDougall rs Rurar Life in canada: rts Trends and rasks in L913, then, rural sociology had become firmly estabLished as an area of research and anarysrs. (45) And paralretlng agricurtural -140- economics, the characteristic area of study tras the individual community and the characteristic methodorogy was the rural survey. rn the most energetic research project of the teen years, the rnterchurch Horrd Movement undertook a survey of rural life in the United States which covered 2400 counties and involved 8000 people working as researchers. ( 46 ) The first tlAc rurar sociorogy courses erere offered in the immediate context of the Presbyterian Churchrs community surveys of rurtre Mountain and s¡van River in L913. rn 19L4 and 19L5 an extra-curricurar ttrural problemsr crass met at the college on Thursday evenings, discussing such topics as the country church, the country school, and boys and girrs clubs. This class entered the curriculum as ,,Rural Sociologytt in L915, absorbing the trGeneraL Historyrr course which had been taught from L913. Henceforth, rural sociology courses for both diploma and degree students, using GlLlette rs constructive Rural sociology and G. w. Fiske's charrenge of the country as texts, became permanent fixtures in the college. rn lg19 a range of history courses re-entered the curricuÌum, including nHistory of Agricurturert and rrcanadian History and civicsr. Then, in L921, the history/civics and rurar sociology offerings erere combined to create a Department of RuraL sociorogy and civics. By this time rural sociorogy incLuded courses in rural leadership, sociology, rural sociorogy, and methods of -141- rural survey erork. rn 1,926, when rurar sociology was absorbed by agricultural economics, the department also incruded courses in statistics and industrial history,(47\

sociological research and instruction at MAc eras dominated by R.H. llurchie. A native of scotland, Murchie e¡as trained there and at Sesley Coltege before joining the MAc faculty in 19L5. rmmediatery prior to his appointment he worked on the lurtle l{ountain and swan River surveys. over the following fifteen years Murchie taught virtually all of the rural sociology courses, engaged in various research projects, êDd completed a University of !linnesota doctorate. with the assistance of the newly appointed district representatives, he surveyed rural home conditions in Kill-arney, Portage and rrthe Ruthenian districtsfr in 1g16. He arso conducted rural J-eadership courses during this period, especially for ministers and ministersr wives. rn the twenties Murchie e¡as increasingly calred upon to do work for the UFM government. From a study of the sociaL and economic conditions of closed school districts for the Murray commission in 1923, through the unused Lands survey of L924 (which became his doctoraL dissertation), to his L927 chairmanship of the committee enquiring tnto seasonal unemployment, Murchie Ídas the most important social scientist working for Bracken during this period. Àlthough he left Hanitoba in 1930 to succeed c.c. zimmerman as professor of rural sociorogy at the university of Minnesota, -t42-

t l,lurchie s major contribution to Canadian social science was his senior authorship of Aqricultural Prooress on fhe

Pra ir ie Frontier ( 1936 ) for the Canadian Frontiers of Settlement Series. (4S)

Rural adul-t education in Manitoba underwent an important transition in the early twentieth century. Between 1890 and L925 the infrastructure expanded from a few semi-autonomous and losal agricurturar societies and t farmers institutes, catering to a male eLite, to a central ised apparatus buiL t around t'lAc, ostensibly serving all farm women and men. Prior to Lg07 the fierd eras defined by the agriculturar societies and farmers r institutes. After that an extension service was established, becoming firmry entrenched during the decade of funding under the Agricultural Instruction Act. Manitoba institutes rrere co-ordinated by the Manitoba central Farmers I rnstitute (t{cFr ) untir LggT when the Department of Agricurture assumed direct contror over the work. The McFrr consisting of delegates from l_ocal institutes, ¡nêt annuall.y in convention throughout the nineties. These meetings consisted of two sorts of activities. First, papers $rere presented by speakers ranging from OAC people to Manitoba educators and Þlanitoba farmers. Second, delegates engaged in nonpartisan -143- discussion of various pubric poricy questions (partisan discussion was forbidden). The 1-894 convention, for example, passed resolutions urging the teaching of agriculture in schools, the appointment of a royal commission on freight rates, and tariff reform. The officers and directors of the central, from various parts of the province, met a number of times during the year. The president for many years was James Elder of virden, forrowed by A.P. Stevenson of Morden (who nas later instrumental in having the Morden experimentar farm estabLished), and the honorary president in the 1890s rras s.A. Bedford of the Brandon Experimental Farm. (49) Local institutes rrere held during the s¡inter months, with two speakers normally attending each meeting. Afternoons were devoted to the presentation and discussion of papers, while evenings were reserved for sociarising. rn l-895 the nine institute lecturers delivered a totaL of ninety-six lectures to institutes throughout the province. Not all institute meetings invoLved a visiting recturer, however. The ideal, in fact, yras to develop Iocal discussion and debate around questions of agriculturar improvement. In 1895, for example, the HeIita institute produced a paper, discussion, and successful resoLution characterising agriculturar socíeties as eLitist, and proposing that society monies be diverted to the establishment of creamerles and cheese factories. (50) -r44-

The institutes erere only a sJ.ight improvement over the agricultural societies, however. Institute secretaries claimed that those presenting papers tended to be a small group of older farmers and that they had a difficutt time attracting younger farmers to the meetings. The general pattern seemed to be that the order men attended the afternoon sessions while the younger men did chores. The young men then came out for the evening sociar event.(s1)

And male excrusiveness was a probrem. A farm eroman suggested in L897 that women shourd attend the regu1ar meetings as well as the social events, since they rrere engaged in many productive activities on the farn.(s2) As a resuLt of criticism directed at both the institutes and agricultural societies, the two educational methods were amal-gamated in 1900. At the rocar lever, institute work continued essentiatly as it had before, but under the control of agricultural society directors rather than institute secretaries. provincially, ho$ever, the amalgamation marked the beginning of a transltion from nineteenth century voluntarism to the state direction of the later extension service. rn the early years of the decade the farm press iras urging the provinciar government to forrow ontario I s read and appoint a superintendent of institute nork. The 1g0b appointment of tü.J. BLack as Deputy Minister of Agriculture, with a mandate to deverop -145-

agricultural education, suggests the advice was being heeded. (53) Black immediatery took responsibility for agricultural societies and farmerst institutes. After HAc opened (with BIack as president), these activities became integrated into the work of the college. IÙith faculty members to act as judges, the societies expanded their role beyond the sponsorship of falr and summer fairs. sinter seed fairs nere added' as were standing grain crop and good farming competitions. Prowing matches, which had been herd sporadically prior to Blackts appointment, became a regular feature of many society programmes. rnstitutes erere made more systematic and regurar wÍth a pool of faculty to draw upon as speakers. short courses rrere initiated both in the country and at the college, campus, which eventually repraced the institute meeting and lecture as the forum for discussions of agricultural improvement. (54) rnstitutes for women began in 19i.0 with the organisation of the first home economics societies. t{ith the commencement of household science instruction Ín the coLlege, Black instructed A.B. Juniper and M. Kennedy to tour the province estabt ishing societies. Between rb November and 13 December of 1910 these two eromen visited fifteen towns' trording meetings under the auspices of the local agricurturat society, in which they were able to organise fourteen new groups. There rrere, in fact, two -146- local woments organisations arready in existence prior to this initiative. At Valley Riverr Dêã¡. Dauphin, a tf Ladies Mutual Benefit society'f had been formed in 1910. This group, which met at the same time as the rocar (exclusively male ) Grain Growers | Àssociation, discussed the problems of homemaking (papers were presented onrtHousecreaning, and

'?The Dish cloth and rts care, at the first meeting). women in Morris, meanwhire, organised a ttwoments Institute, in

August of 1910, and erere subsequentry issued the first home economics society charter by MAc. Delegates from these t¡¡o groups joined representatives from the newry formed societies at the first provincial Househord science Association convention earry in the forrowing year. (ss) Although Black was submitting a report entitred 'tDepartment of Agricultural societies and colLege Extension

Tlorktf to the minister during MAcr s earriest years, it was not until- L9l-1 that an extension branch eras actuaLly formed with the appointment of E. [{ard Jones as Brackrs assistant. Jones assumed control of extension work as of that date. one of his first responsibirities nas to organise the ItBetter Farming Trainstr that toured the province during the summers of l-91-L to 19L4. A special dairy train ran in June of 191-0' based upon a simirar programme in North Dakota. one year later the concept was genera1ised to include arl aspects of college instruction. JointLy sponsored by the Canadian Pacific Railwâ$r the Canadian Northern Railway and -L47 -

MAc. these trains ran for about one month each summer, making as many stops as possible. fn lglZ, for example, tno trains (one cN, one cP) vrere equipped with refrigerator, l-ivestock, baggage, field crops, dairy, home economics, sleeping, and dairy cars. They traveLred the province on the respective company lines, visiting one hundred and forty six stations and reaching approximately 3s000 people through lectures and demonstrations. ( b6 ) In 1913 Jones was joined by Hattie GowseIl, appointed as a home economics extension worker. A year l_ater rural extension entered a neeJ phase with the commencement of Dominion funding. s. T. Newton Ì{as appointed superintendent of extension services in lgL5, continuing in that rore untir r92L. During his tenure the Extension service became a s.eparate branch of the Department of Agriculture ( 1912- 1923). By the time the Dominion grant Í¡as withdrawn in 1'923' the then director (N.c. MacKay) had a staff of over thirty ful1 and part-time lecturers and demonstrators. Ítith no new funds forthcoming, the staff r{as cut to six and the office was moved back to MAc. (57) Between lgLb and Lgz3, ho¡vever' a number of important structures and services were establ ished. Probably the most significant initiative undertaken in this period elas the appointment of district representatives and home demonstration agents. The district representative programme was begun in 19L5. seven recent MAc agriculture -148-

graduates, with practical farming experiencer w€trê assigned to various points in the province. As local extension workers' these men erere expected to judge at fairs, conduct short courses and extension schools, organise Boys I and t Girrs clubs, and generally serve as agricultural resource people. They erere often instrumental in organising farmers

into local agriculturar improvement associations. T. A. Johnson, district representative at DeroraÍne from 191_9 to J.923, for example, helped organise the Southwest Manitoba Co-operative Poultry Association, the Ètanitoba Sweet Clover t Growers Association ( thereby introducing sweet crover to southwestern Manitoba), a regional farm bureau bringing locaI businessmen and farmers togetherr êDd agricultural chautauquas. He, and other district representativesr wÊrê arso closely invorved in the formation of rurar credit soci.eties, which the Norris government eras promoting. (Eg) Home demonstration agents vrere not introduced untiL some time later. Esther Thompson, a MAC student, tras hired for the summer of 19tz and r.9rg to work in the whitemouth district east of winnipeg. under the direction of Robert ttcommunity Murchie' she did work' in the schooLs and homes of the district, teaching mill inery, personal hygtene, cooking' and manuar training. This proved to be a short term experiment for the extension branch, however. Although there yrere monies available, and there was a desire to establish home demonstration agents, the department found it -149-

difficult to recruit quarified personner. s.T. Newton wrote in his 'J,92L report that ttthere is a great scarcity of young

Íromen having the required training I for home demonstration agents I ' which is five years in the home economics department at an agricultural colJ-ege, ãs werl" as three or four years of acceptable prior experience. rr conseguently agents were j ust becoming estabr ished r¡hen funding yras curtailed. The first permanent appointment, in fact, y¡as not made until March 1923 when T. Thordason, a MAC graduate,

was assigned to the Rorand/Miami area. Both the home demonstration agent and district representative programmes were abandoned in 1924 when Dominion funds nere no longer forthcoming. (59)

And' finally, an extensive media programme eras establ ished through the Extension service and the PublÍcations Branch of the department. The publications Branch yras formed in 1913, primarily to co-ordinate the printing and publishing of immigration material, crop bulletins, and the proceedings of provinciaLly chartered

agricultural associations. After L9L3 this work vras extended to the production and distribution of bulletins and cj-rculars, v¡ritten by MAC faculty, on a range of

agricultural problems. within the Extension service a number of media initiatives were undertaken between L9i.5 and ),923. A library service allowed organisations either to participate in a circulating library system or establish -t_50 -

their own library with financial and technical assistance from the department. rndividuals could arso borrow books and other material through this system. Between rgzj, and 1924 an extension newsletter was pubrished containing information from the various branches of the Department of Agriculture. And, beginning about 1g1g or L}ZO, lantern slides, and then motion pictures, erere produced on various

topics and particular aspects of the department r s activities. These films and slides, with titles ranging ttDairy from cattleft to 'our Ruthenian citizens", r¡ere availabre for viewing by rurar and agricultural groups. (60)

Educationar institutions for rurar Manitoba chirdren and youth were also transformed in the early twentieth century. Throughout North America nature study, school gardening, school district consolidation, and vocational courses in agricuLture and home economics were changing rurar schooling. glith publications such as Tf; Nature studv Idea (1903) and (1905), for example, L.H. Bailey of cornelr university included schoors in the American country rife movementrs analysis of rurar society. rn the commission on country Life, which Bailey chaired, the rural school eras identified as an institution both in need of reform and crucial to the revitarisation of rurar tife. similar canadian anxieties about ruraL education were best -151- typified by the activities of James Robertson and tJilliam Macdonald. Robertson, a Dominion Department of Agriculture bureaucrat, and Macdonald, a bourgeois Montreal_ philanthropist, joined forces in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to promote educational reform. Between 1890 and 1905 Macdonald contributed $14 mirlion to educational projects in Canada. Most of this went to McGiIl university (and Macdonald colrege was born), but s1 mirrion of it was used in the public schoors of canada. Hacdonard and Robertsonts most important project in the area of pubric schooL ing eras the establishment of four robject Iessonrt consolidated schools (in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, prince Edward rsrand, and ontario) for the practical application of reform programmes. Robertson subsequentl_y chaired the Royal commission on Technical Education and Industriar Training which' in tbre area of erementary and secondary rurar schooling, recommended consolidation, more school gardening, and more agricultural and home economics training. This activity was accompanied by an outpouring of literature on rural education. Albert H. Leake's The tteans and Methods ol

Aqricultural Education ( 1915 ) , for exampi.e, ¡ras a synthetic assessment of the topic in Canada and the United States, and was published in the same series as GiIl-etters Constructive

Rural Sociologv. ( 61 )

Rural education for Manitoba chirdren and youth can rearly be dated from the introduction of nature study to the -L52-

provincets schools in the mid-Lg9Os. At a meeting of the Advisory Board of Education on 30 May 1gg4 a report on the teaching of agriculture in schools was presented. rt recommended that nature study be taught in the middre and upper leveIs of instruction, accompanied by comparable

training in the province r s normal schools. The recommendations were adopted, and put into practice the following year. rdeally, nature study nas to entail the observation of common plants and flowers and, in the upper grades, systematic training in prant structure. According to rural school inspectors, however, the subject was often negrected or, if covered, nas Limited to stories about

animals or flowers rather than actuar observation. A. Mclntyre reported in 1999, for example, that many teachers

in his inspectorar division viewed nature study as a pleasant pastine for chirdren rather than an integral component of a nen approach to pedagogy. They had failed, he concruded' to grasp the serious nature of the work. Arthough inspectors lamented the fairure of teachers to integrate nature study into the curriculum, for years it remained a peripheral subject with Iittle meaning for students . (62) By the middle of the following decade school gardening and consol idation erere dispracing nature study as the central media for rural education. As early as 1904 at l-east one rural teacher was practising school gardening at -153-

his school by curtivating the school firebreak. over the next harf dozen years or so school gardening, because of its practical orientation, supplanted nature study in the school curriculum. At about the time that school gardening was being introduced, Manitobars first school consolidation

took place at virden, in 1905. Although there e¡ere no Macdonald-Robertsonttobject lesson,rschools in any of the western provinces, consolidation proved to be quite successful in Manitoba. rndeed, Manitoba educators were inspired as much by consolidation experiments in North Dakota, where similar conditions existed, âs they erere by Macdonald and Robertson. prompted by concerns about conditions in the hundreds of one-room country schools in the province' the movement gained momentum after 1g0b, and especially after 1g0g when charres Newcombe was appointed the specÍaI inspector in charge of consolidation. By LgzL, Ll.0 consol idated school districts had been formed in Manitoba. (63) with school gardening ¡relr established in elementary education by 191-0, attention shifted to the secondary lever. A Department of Education study in !g07, the royal commission report on the university in 1909, åDd an internal MAc eommÍttee study in L9L1 arL recommended some form of secondary agriculturar instruction. ûJhite the Department of Education suggested that agricurture courses become part of the regular high schoor curriculum, the commission and the -154 -

MAc committee preferred the concept of a separate agricultural high school, eguivalent to an urban vosational or technical high schoor. The latter approach eras favoured, at least initÍarry. By the end of the l_912-l_9j_3 schoor year five secondary schools of agriculture had been established, running from November to May and catering mainly to young men aged 14 to 22 who had not been in school for a number of years. In 19L5, however, some secondary schools did offer agriculture as part of the regu1ar curriculum, and the Department of Education bureaucrats were urging others to follow their example. There e¡as some expansion over the next decade but, by Lgz4.-Lgzs most agriculturaÌ training for youth had been transferred to in" Boys r and Girrs' CIubs. (64) Home economics instruction had a limited prace in Manitobats rural schools. It is true that, within the neyJ education movement, home economics rras viewed as the feminine component of vocationar training, but in Manitoba its influence vras onty felt in city and town schoors. There h¡as no domestic equivalent of nature study or school gardening: 'indeed, these activities were designed as much for rural girls as for rurar boys. Home esonomics rras taught at the secondary lever in towns such as serkirk, virden, and Dauphin af ter r.9l-5 or so though, âDd this no doubt affected some young farm women. For the most part however' Boysr and Girlsr clubs were the most important -1_ 55 -

media for training rural young people in domestic

science. ( 65 )

Although nature study eras made a component of Normal School instruction in 1995, systematic teacher training in agriculture was not undertaken until after the formation of MAC. Beginning in 1909-1910, and continuing in subsequent academic years, Normal school students took a one month course at the agr icul tural col J.ege as part o f the ir

training. rn i-gi-3 the agricurturar component rras supplemented by instruction in home economics. Furthermore, after the introduction of agriculturar high schoors in l_91_b, MAC agriculture graduates rvere in demand to staff them. MAc did not control the whole terrain of rurar teacher training, however. Robert Fletcher, Deputy Minister of Education, reported in his l-913 report that a nen NormaL school had been opened in Brandon, designed to give special attention ttrural to the school. probremrr. rrts geographicar rocation, its ample grounds, êDd the equipment generaIry,,, Fretcher r¡rote' "çvi11 aid greatly in deating with that problem.,,(66) As significant as these interventions in the public school system were, bv the twenties Boys ? and Girls r crubs

had become the most important agricultural and home economics programmes for young people. Boysr and Girlsl clubs originated at various points in the united states in the opening years of the century. Two rurar schoor superintendents, Arbert Graham in ohio and o.J. Kerr in -156 -

ï11inois, are credited with forming the first two clubs, quite independently of each other, in 1g02. over the next few years state extension services incorporated crub work into their programmes. And, by LgO6, thousands of American boys and girls rrere engaged in agricurturar and domestic

competitions , (G7 )

The f irst l,lanitoba ( and canadian ) Boys ' and Girr s , clubs were formed in L9l-3. Two events marked the launching of the club movement in the province. First, the ÍJinnipeg Exhibition Association organised a Farm Boys club for the L9L3 canadian rndustrial Exhibition. one hundred farm boys

erere guests of the association during the exhibition. The purpose of their visit to Winnipeg, nhich was supervised by MAc facurty, eras "to receive a practicar demonstration of the benefits derived by the use of modern farm

equipment.t'(58) second, the Extension service initiated a potato and fodder corn growing contest and a pourtry raising contest in the spring of 1913, making grants available to individuals and groups to organise the contests in their communities. Eight rocal clubs (with a total membership of 460 ) were formed that year, and they each held a faII fair for the exhibition and judging of the produce. More clubs e¡ere formed the following year, and by l_g19 30,000 boys and girls were involved in the movement in Manitoba. (69) Although organised through the Department of AgricuJ-ture' Boys t and Girl-s I clubs erere crosely connected -L57 -

with the Department of Education. The typical crub was organised by a local businessman (quite often a banker) at the instigation of a school inspector or a district representative. Other business people, teachers, and

farmers were then recruited as sponsors and leaders. The local organisation rdas expected to provide half the funds for organisational" sosts and prizes, with the Extension service supplying the rest. Both MAc faculty and the extension staff were availabre as judges for the crub fairs, which eJere organised on the basis of Department of Education inspectorar divisions. rüith the expansion of the Extension service after lgl7, staff were hired to special_ise in the direction of crub work. Three MAc araduates were appointed in 191-9. H. E. wood became co-ordinator of Boys, and Girrs, club work, whil-e EL izabeth tchitwelr and Margaret speechly took responsibility for team demonstration work and junior home economics. Arthough the cessation of funding under the Agricultural rnstruction Àct had a certain detrimentar effect on club work, the connection with the Department of Education did al-low it to survive. cash grants to clubs were discontinued, Hhitwell and speechly were Laid off, and responsibÍlity for club direction passed to the Department of Educationts recentry formed rechnicar Education Branch (a creature of the Dominion governmentrs Technicar Education Act of 1919).(70) -158-

rn the early years crub programmes consisted simpry of the competitive display of produce at crub fairs, with cash prizes allotted to the winners. over the years, the contests greer from the corn, potatoes, and chickens of 19L3 to incrude, by l-gl'2, twelve categories ranging from rrNoxious tt ttEssay Weeds and Wr i t ing tt to lCookery r and ff Garment Makingtt. By the later teens, however, the concept of team demonstration competitions was expanding and changing the focus of club activity. rn Lg]-z two Hinnipeg mirring companies offered speciar prizes in breadmaking competitions. This prompted the formation of teams at the 1ocal crub level demonstrating a variety of domestic and agricultural techniques. then, in 1920, Eatonrs, Lake of the woods Mill ing company, ånd Hestern canada Milr ing company began sponsoring provincial team demonstration competitions. Local teams were chosen to compete in ütinnipeg against other teams. The rosal production competitions continued during this period, åIthough they Èoo were undergoing a transition. As a result of both the emergence of team demonstrations and the crithdrawal of staff support by the Extension service, specialised clubs led by local volunteers vrere organised at the rocal Iever. rn an ironic departure from the growth of professionalism, local peopre with a specific expertise (in farm mechanics, sewing or gardening, for exampre ) became leaders of these specialised clubs . (TI) -l_ 5 9-

During this period. but especially in the decade from 191-3 to L923, àrl educational state structure yras establ ished in Manitoba agriculture. The agricultural societies and t farmers institutes of the nineteenth century were supplemented and systematised with the organisation of the government extension service in the first decade of the twentieth century. More importantly, though, the Manitoba Agricultural college sras the centrepiece of this structure, as it trained young farm men and women in home economics and agriculture and served as a vital source of agricultural and domestic information. rt was in this state structure, that is ' that a dominant ideology f or rurar. peopl-e was constructed and conveyed. As theorised in chapter one, ideologies consist of a theoretical and a practical component. The first step in anarysing the system of meaning being constructed and conveyed is to assess the internar dynamics of the various discourses on the terrain of theoreticaL ideology. This is the purpose of the next chapter.

l-. V.C. Fowke, e-aaadian Aqricultural Þolir:r¡r Petjeru (Toronto, :-9ZB), p. LE6; ffi Development of Agricultural Eàucation in Ontario, Lg70_ l-910, " PhD dissertation, university of roronto , tgzz, chapter II; Statutes of Canada,, 3L31 Vic.,Vic. ch. 53, L858; ( Ottawa, L967 ) , part I; T. H. Ans tey, ¡rrraele. ( Ottawa, 1986 ), chapter 1. -160-

a Fo wke' Çe¡.e-d--i-anls.-q-!sgl-t-u-Lrd-l_p9"1¿qy, chap te r 9 ; Lawr, 'tThe Development of Agricultural EduËation,, chapter II; $lgtutes of Canada. 49 Vic., ch . SZ, 1gg6 Fowke, Canadian policy, f'The Agricultural pp. 246-247; Lawr, Development of Agricultural Èãucåtion, pp. 7 3-74: N. Sutherland, " -ry 1880-1_920ttvocational ( Toronto , L976) , pp. t8B; f se:f SÞl- n.-Tîã*p, objectives in canadian Education: An Historical Overvien, tt in S. Ostry, êd., Canadian Hisher $CUeê3fOa in the Seventies (Ottawa, L7TZ¡,-pp. Zel:ZSZ; D. Jones, tfAgriculture, the Land, and Educatiän: British Columbia, ]-gL4-i_gZg,u phD dissertation, British University' of Columbia , L9TB, pp . Z-4; V. C. Fowke,-!g5z Th. National Pol i-cy and the wheat Economv ( Toronto , l , pp. L62-L64; R.C Brown and R. Cook, Nation Transformed (Toronto, Lg74), pp. rss-rse. ^ J. Ell is, L97O (Winnipeg, L97O), pp. 4I-46, 66¡ Statutes of Mani toba ( SM.) , 35 Vic., ch. 15, L872. 5 5ü, 53 Vic., ch. 35, 1890; SM, 53-64 Vic., c.h. Z, 1900. 6 [Ù.L. Morton, One Universitv: À of Manitoba, 1877-19S2 (Toronto; Lg57), pp. SZ_eO, eS_ 88' L17-118, L3z-137 ¡ Ellis, The Ministry of Education, pp. Lgt-lBc; sM, 3 Ed. 6. ch. L, Lgo4t-ffi"¡. !, !9L2; SM, 6 Geo. V, ch. !, 1gL6; Sl,l, L4 Geo. V, ch. 7L, L924. 7 Ellis, ItReportThe Ministry of Education, -coJ-legepp. L96-19g. B of the Agricultural commission,rl (MSp) Number L7 ( 1 903 ) . hl. J . Rutherford in agriculture, F. Torrance in veterinary scj_ence, F. W. Broderick in hortisulture and forestry, G.A. sproule in Engrish and mathematics, and l. R. Greig in_engineering and mechanics. rrReport of the UAC Board of Directors,r' MSp Number L4 (lg05l, pp. 4LO_ 411; MSP Number 16 (1905). L0 MSP Number 18-_(1902), pp. bt9-520; MSp Number 1t (L90B), pp. 5L6-5L7 ¡ MSp Number 8 ( 1909 ), p[-e OS_606. L1_ _ University of Manitoba (Ul,l) Archives, Manitoba Agricultural ÇçlIegc. (MAe) papers, r'Board of DirecEãrs,,, 11 October, 1910. L2 UM Archives, MAC Papers, ff Board of Directors, r Lg February L919. 1.3 of the MAC Board of Directors, rf (1905).'fReport MSp Number L4 ttReport l4 of the MAC Board of Directors, il MSp Number 19 ( r.9r.4 . f'Report) i_5 of the MAC Board of Dj.rectors, rr MSp Number L4 ( r.9r.6 ) . 16 ttBoard UM Archives, MAC Papers, of Directors, rr ZO September 19L8; MAC Pêpers , tlAdvisory CounciI.fr LL November 1924. -t 6L-

T7 MAC Gazette 5(5) (March, r.9r3) and z(L) (october, 1913). See the letter from Rebecca Dayton, president, Home Economics Societies, to Valentine ûJinkler in nhich Black is described as patronising and overbearing towards eJomen in his roLe as Director o f Home Esonomics societies. Provinciar Archives of Manitoba (pAM), VêIe.ntine Winkler paoers, Box L, t6 September 1915. 18 A. J. MadilI, Historv of Aoricu l f ul¡l Rrìrrn¡rinn i n Ontario (Toronto, ]-g3Z). pp. fZZ:l ( Toronto , LgZg), cnaffi 2t Ellis, f¡e_tri¡istry of Aericu , pp. 1BB,633; UM lrchives, MAC papers 'staff Minutes,ii 24 November l91l_; UÄ!__gepe¡e ,,Board of Directors,rr Zg September l_9Lb, I June L920; on oÈher North ttrhe American agricùlturaL corleges see Lawr' Development of Agriculturar Education, rf chapter ffI; W.C. Hunter, Beacon Across the prairie: ttJames (Fargo, L96I) ¡ S. Murray, Power: The Second President of North Dakota Agricultural ColLege, tt North Dakota Ouarterly 42 ( Autumn, 1,97 4) t E. D. Eddy, Time: The Land GranÈ_ Idea in American Èãucatiõã ( New York, 1957 ) . 19 Ehe farmers' AAvocate 10 May 19Obt p, 6g7; UM Arch ive s, MAC Papers tfBoard "Staf f Minutes,,, Ll Februãry 19L1; MAC Papers of Directors,,r ZZ December :]gOg, 15 February 1911 . rtlt{AC 20 President t s Report, LgLS, HSp Number ( 2t 'r l4 19f 6 ) . UM Archives, MAC Papers, ',BoãFã of Directors,l, 24 January 1924,28 March IgZ4; HAC papers, ilAdvisory council"' l-1 November rgz4, zL .larru-ary Lgzs, rL November L925. 22 Managra and MAC Gazette, l_90 5-.J,924, The amount of information avairable on each individuar varies. I{e !1ow the geographic origin and initial academic rank of 59 (43%)' the educational background of 74 (84*), and the previous employment of T{ (51%) of the faculty members. nã As e¡e noted in footnote zz, we know the geographic origin of only 59, or 43t, of the MAC faculty. 24 unfortunately' most of the information on geographic origin is no more specific than province or state. of the 17 ontarians for whom more specific information is available, onry 6 of them yrere raised on a farm while Ij_ were from cities. simirarly, of the lz Manitobans for whom specific information is available, g were from towns and only 4 came from farms. z5 As rde noted in footnote ZZ, we have educational information on 74. or s4s6, of the MAc facurty. 26 As we noted in footnote ZZ, we have pieviouÉ empj_oyment information on 7L, or sLt, of MAC faculty. 27 frBoard UM Archives, MAC Papers, of Directors,,r 1,6 February 1909. -r62-

28. UM Archives, MAC P_apef E, ItBoard of Directors, ,r January L912, L1 29. UM Archives, MAC Papers., rrBoard of Directors,l ZZ March L9 t_6 . rrMAC 30. Report for L9L9: The president,rf MSp (lgZO), p.3. 3l-. UM Archives, MAC Papers, "Board of DiràãEors," g October L91_9 . 32. Ul'l Archives, MAC Papers, t?Board of Directors, January 1920. " 13 Al1 sixty-one people employed-new in MAc in 1.9L9-l-920 received a pay rai je under the schedule. For exampre' the presidentrs sarary went from $4000 to $4500; his secretaryrs salary went from $L020 to $1140; a professor in field husbandry, $3000 to $3300; an assistant professor in animal husbandry, $Lg00 to $2400; a lecturer in dairying, Slg00 to $2000; a demonstrator in biology, $900 to $1200; the director of home economics, S2000 to S2300; a professor in home economics, $1800 to $l-g00; a l-ecturer in home economics, $1600 to $r700; an instructor in home economics, srz00 to S1400; and the telephone operator, $ZgO to $960. 33. UM Archives, MAC Papers, ,f Advisory Council, rr L1 November L925. 34. S. Strasser, lI:: J::I,__tjsz)., pp:. zoz-zoqr u.s. rurisffi Have Been Euthenics: The Lake pracid confLrJnces and the Home Economics Movement, rr American Ouarterly 26 (March, I974), pp. 79-96; W. D. Jeffiifery and Motherhood: The Ouestion of RoIe Change i; the Era " jr Kelley, êd . , Womãn , s Be ins ï:l:::"iy:r c Ì)l -^^. _M_. - H:L_-rstorv (Bosto_n, j,979) , pp. i45-1aA; n. C. Ro*I"s, Home Pto-g-r-a¡mes" (saskatoon, l-966), chapters r and rr. 35. 9M Archives' 44Ç-P=pers, ltAc careirdars, 19i.1-Lg:-z, 1914- 1915, I9L5-L9l_6, L9ZO-L9ZL; for an overview economics of home education in llanitoba see J.G. wirson, a ( 1966 tJinnipeg, L969) t see also E. C. RowIes, Home Economics in Canada for the experience at other Canadian col leges 36. UM Archiv_es, MAC papers, ,tOutI llAC Calendar , Lgl1_1912, ine o f Courses : Household Science rr; MAC Calendar, L9L5-19L6, pp. B6-96; ,rMAC Report: Report of Household Science Department, Report of Household Art Department, L MSP Number Li. (t9L7). 37. UM Archiv_es_, UÀ!_:epefs, MAC Calendar, lgL9_LgZO, pp. 47-56; MÀC Calendar, l925-LgZ6, pp. 60_65. 38. Staff announcements in Manaqra 1gfO,19L0, L912,Lg].Z, Lg15.1915, 1gl_9,IgI 1922; E]1is, TÌ¡e _Miqi_s_try oi Ágriculture, p, 634; pAH, (Ugf) PèPefg' S"-" l-3, l'EarlY Institute Flistorytt FiIe, Lettèr trom A. B. Juniper to Esther Thompson, S February. !925¡ UM Archivei, MAC -163- t'Board rr Papers' of Directors, 13 January, !g20; uM Archives, Faclrltv of Aoriculture fnventory, rrMAC Report to Education Box 4, trHome Commission, teacfring Staf f,r and Economics Reporttt in rrMAc Annuar R-eport, n 1926- J'927; PAM' MaAitoba Home Economi cs Àsq¡r¡-ri ¡r i nn D=¡a-o -A 191-2, 18 May l9l.?, g October 191S; HiIson,ffií Historv of Home Economics, p. lZg, 39. G.F. Warren, Farm_Management (Corne1l, 191L) 40. T. N. carver' Principres of Rural Economics (Boston, L91L ) ; H. C. Taylor, an f fttroAuction to tf¡e Stuqy of Agricultural Economics (Madison, i90b). 4I, H.C. Taylor A.D. "l_d Taylor, The Story of Aqricultural r,The (Ames. 1952); G. F. [,Jarren, Origin and Devãiopment of Farm Economics in the United States, il Joürnal of Farm Economics XIV (January, I93Z); H.C. McDean, trProfessional- ism in the Rurar social sciences, l'919''' 1g9G- [Farm agråcultuLal Historv sg(3) (r.9g4)r c.L. Holmes. Managemerrt, ,, E¡cvclopaedia of the sor.:i ¡.t e¡i an^oo L930-1935, VI, pp. tr t1l-L1Sj-g.c. Nou;;e, "ãrri""1t;r"î Economics, l_930_ 1935, I, pp. b34-536. agricufTuraf economics tas part of a continentar history during this period. At the university of llanitoba poJ-iticaÍ economy was taught as early as LSBZ ènd, in 1909, A.B. Clark was appointãa the f irst university professor of poJ- itical when the canadian Politicar science Association""orro*y. was formed in 1913 pol itical economy, encompassing al1 of socÍal science and characterised by ãn his-torical approach, became institutionalry estãutished as an area of enquiry. It r{as not until the j.930s and l_940s, however, nith the influence of Keynesianism and neo-cl_assicism, that canadian economics emerged as a distinct discipl ine . C. D. [J. Goodwin, Canaãian Economic Thouqht:_ ( Durham, N. C., t_961 ) ; Owram, The Government ( l-945 Toronto, L9B6 ) . 42. UM Archives, llAC papers, MAC Calendars, I907_L925. 43. uM Archives, MAC papers, Examination papers, ttMAC rr 1g0g-r.9r.0; Annual Report, 1916, MSp Number ll (lrgL7 ) , p. G34; gg, 1 861 _Lg72 ( Ann Arbor, 1,973), p. 3i6; MAC Þapers; of Directors,,, 2 April 1919. 'rBoard 44 commission ' _on. country Life, Bc!-ort of the con¡rissi Çe-t¿tr!ry-hfe (New !¿oik, 191t tffimission on rndustrial Traininq and rechnical ( Education. Report 1913-1914) ; canada. cämmission or con".ruátiãí.' Rep-orË_e ( 19 L L-IeL7 ) . -164-

45. J. Giltette, cqnstructive Rural sociologv (New york, :-913); J. ùtacDouga11, Rural Life in ca_naàã: rts Trends êB-d- Taslgs ( Toronto, 1913 ) . 46. This discussion of rurar sociology is based upon L. Nelson' Rural sociology: rts orioin and _Grotsth_in the_ United States (Minneapolis, lg69); NeIson, "Th" Risà Rural Sociology: The Pre-purnelI period, rr Ruraå"f Sg-ç-r-q1g-gJ 30 ( 4 ) (December, L965 rf I' ); NeIson, Constru"ti"g Rural Sociology, RuraL Sociology 9 ( September , Ig44); E. des. Brunner, The Grovrth of a science: A Half-century Rural So"iol"gic _of -Ag.,(ñà; York, L957); O. Duncan, "Rural Sociology Coming of u Rural sociologv L9(1) (March, 19s4). Rural in Manitoba during this period was, l_ike agricultural"o"iotog! economics, part of a continental history. Canadian sociology did not emerge as a distinct discipl_ine until much later. Although sociology courses erere taught in various canadian universities as early as 191_5 and McGill established a sociotogy departmeñt between l-gzj and L925' social analysis in Canada eras generally viewed as being the purview of political economy. At the University of Toronto, for exampLe, sociol_ogy remained within the department of politicar economy untir 1963. H. Hiller' society and change: s.D. crark and thq Development of Canadian Sociolo-gy (Toronto, lggZ) arrd M. Shore, Lhe Science of Social Redemntion: Canada (Toronto, ]-ggT ), 47. MAC Gazette 9(3) (January, !gl-6), p. 32¡ uM Archives, MAÇ_ j.epe_Es., MAC Calendars, l9L3-1928. 48. MAC Gazette (November, 191s); "Report of Rural sociology and Rural Economics, Manitoba Agricultural CoIIege,Ir MSÞ Number l_L (L9J.Z), p. TO5; UM Archives, facüttv ot_ agg.iculture. rrìve ., Box 3, r'Rural sociology File: Department of Economics and sociology special Räport on Research, 2L September L9Z7t, ¡ Comprehensive Dissertation Index, 36, l-861-L972 (Ann Arbor, LgT3), ;. 213, Murchie, ( Toronto , )-936 ); NeIson, nuraf Sàtffi ( incidentally, Nelson succeeded Uurct¡ie at Mirinesota fol lowing the latter t s death in Lg3z ) . t{urchie r s career suggests that he had a North Ameriean rather than a Canadian orientation. 49 t . The Farmers Advocate. ( TFA_) zo July Lg93 , p. 263¡ 5 August 1984, p 301; 5 August Lggs, p. 30L; ZO November 1896, p. 450; 5 August l_896r p. 300; b April tïg7, p. l-48; MSP Number 26 (1895). 50. TFA 20 October L894, p. 410; S March lggS. p. 89; b April 1895, p. 139; 5 December 1995, p. 46:-; MËp Number 20 (L897)¡ MSP Number LL (1900). 5l-. TFA 5 Novembeq L897, p. 478¡ S January l_900, p. L4; MSp_ Number 1L (i.900). -165_

52 IFA 5 January 1894, p. 3. 53 LEA 20 November 1900, p. 638; 5 February I}OZ, p.79,1 March L905, p. 298; ( ttrhe !{gp Number t0 190 Z ) . 54 Renaissance of Manitoba Farmers r rnstitutes is Approaching,ftTFA. l_ March 190b, p. Z9g¡ UM Archives, MAC P-qpg-r-s.' trDepartment of Agricultural societies College Extension and rrDepartment [ùork, " MAC Calendar , 190g_1909; of Co1-1ege Extension Work, rr MAC Calendar, 1909-1910; EI1is, The Ministry of Agriculture, pp. 20t. 200_ 55 PAM, LtJl-¿epsrs.' Box 13, 'tEarly rnstitute History File"; Ul[I-lepe¡e' Box !4, 'tParticu]-ars Re. Formation of womenfs rnstitutes in Manitoba: Meeting undertaken by Household Science, MAC L9L0,'; MSp (Ig1L ttHousehold Number Z ), pp. L67-L68; Science Convention, rf MÀC Gazette- l(T) (March, ]-9LL ) , p. 67 i Manitoba Ágricultural Representatives Association, triSlg_@ Ag¡i-c-sll-¡ge-1-Exle- ( wi""ip"r, 1,7 4) , p. 22, 56 UËg Number 23 ( l_911 ) , p. l_69; UM Archives, MAC papers., "staf f Minutes, L December l-91-L, 4 May LgLzr.lsp-ñ;mber ( peper.s, 9 19rz) ' pp. 170 -t7 t; uèÇ- ',Facul ty Miãõtes, " g April 19L4; MAC Papers, ttCollege Extension, Calendar , L913-1914. '' MAC 57 EIl is, , pp , 223-226 . 5B Manitoba Agriculturar Representitives Association, History gf_MeqÍtoba Agricultural Extgnsion Staff, pp. L0-11, l-6-19; "The appoirrtment of field Representatives,tt MAC Gazette g( 1) (November, j-9l-4); il "The District Representative, MAC Gazetie g ( 1 ) (November, 1915), pp. 8-LL i t,Wtra@ltural Representatives Are Doing, rr Manito.ba AgrÍcurtural Estension News 1 ( z ) (December, rgzo l; usp N"*b., L1 (L9L7), pp. 7L9-720¡ Manitoba Department ãFAgri;"iture (MDA)' Annual Reports lg2l-22, tbzz-?g, Lg23-24; EI1is, T_he Ministrv of Aqriculture, pp. ZZ4-225. 59 UM Archives, l,tAC Papers, ti'Board of Directors,rr 14 December 1916, 5 April L9LT, 26 November I}LT, Z April L918; Esther Thompson, rf community-Ànnual work,rr Manasra r'o r z I (Decenber, ]-9L7), p. 1B; MDA, Report ( L}Z1), 'tAnnual Report of Manitoba womeniã ri;titutes, rgz3,, l{aai.!.Qba Agriç-gltural Extension News g(T) (July-Àugust, 1'923), p. 6¡ wilson' Home gconomics uducation, pp. 1zs- L76. 60, ïSending r? the Col lege to the Country, MDA,- B-_g_I_lel*iln, Number I ( l-916 ); MDA, Annuat rrRepor Report- tgZL, -lispppl--7ÊSO, 10 l- -1-0 5; t o f the pubr icátJons granch, u Number L4 ( l-916 ); publications tr "Report of the Agricultural Branch, MDA, Annual Report ( 19L9 ) . 61, !.. cremin, The Transformation of the school. (New york, 1961- ), pp. 75-85; Sutherland, ChifOren in nnqfisr, Ca.¡aËian Societv, chapter Lzt Lawral@ of _1 66_

Agricultural Education, rr p. ZJ,Z; L.H. Bailey, The Nature Stgd:Y--J-ds-ê ( New York, L9o 3 ) ; Bailey, The Outlook of Nelq¡-e ( New York, 1905 ) ; A. H. Leake, The Means and Me!h_A_{s*_9llgg__i.cu I tura I Educa t ion (New York,1915); J.C. Miller, Rural Schools in cen¡¿ì; (New Í"ilr, rgrgtt E.p. cubberly' Rgral Life and Education (Boston, r9L4); H.w. Foght, ( york, 62. ilTeaching ñew 1910 ) . Agriculture,'f rFA âo June r.g94, p. 246; TFA 5 January LB95' p. z, various inspectorrs reþorts between 1895 and L905, f.or example, Manitoba Department of Education (MDE), AJrnual Reoort ( r-999 pp qz-qg; (1902) ), AnnuaL Report , p. 523; W ( t_903 ), pp 581, 585, 5BZ , 595; A¿nUeI_ tepor.l f i-gOq j,--pp . q,g_ÃSi Annual Report_ (190S), p. 33. 63. ^tlDE, Annual Repo_rt (1905), p. 49¡ Annual Report (l_90g), p. 475¡ Annual Report ( l_909 ), pp. 54, Ze, ga, gg. 109_ 110; Annu_aJ__Leeg.r! ( 1910 ), pp; 53-S4 , 69-z!-, IZI_IZZ; Annual Report ( l-9r.3 ) , p. i.L6; "consol idation of schoors, ,, HDE' A¡n_C_al_Repol¡[ l-909, pp. LZL-l2gr K. [dilson, Development of Education in Manitoba,,' phD dissertation,"The Michigan State University, 1967, p. 3j,6; Sutherland, _ Children in_ Enqlish Canadian Society., p. 195. 64. MDE, Annual Report (r.909); pp. 4g9-egg; Annual Report (191-4), pp. 59, 148; Annual _Report (1915), p. 197; A¡-agsL*neggr! (t923-24), pp. 8i-83; tReport of the Royaí commission to Enquire t' rnto and Räport ulon the university' MSp Number 9 ( r.9r-0 ) , p. 4&3; uM ,, Arcnives, MAC Paper-s , Staf f Minutes, rr l_ December 191_1; K. [ù. Gordon' "Agricultural Education in Manitoba High schoors"' MAC Gazette T(4) (January, LgL4), p. zz4, 65. MDE, Anngal_ Report ( 1920 -ZI) , ;. 1a8; M. -peechly, ttScience Puts on an Apron,,r February 1923, p. lg5; Wif" l_4 Econornics EducatioJr_, chapter VII. Sã; Wi1=on, chapter ïr; R. stamp' t'Teaching Girls prace | Their'God Given in Life : The rntroduction of Home Economics in the schools, Atrantis z(z) part ( " trMadonnas r spring, ),972 ) ; and r. crowley, before Magdarenås: Adelaide Hoodress and the Making of the Canadian Gibson GirI,rr Canadian Historicar Review 67 (4) (December, 19g6 ) for eastern canadian background on home economics education. 66. MDE, Annu*el--R.ep_oi! (191-3), p. 13; UM Papers, r'Board Archives, MAc of Directors,ri r,7 Februrary r_90g; MAC_ Papers*"rcourse in Agricutture for Teachersrrin MAc Calendar , I90 9-L910, p. 56, ItTeachers r Short Course il in MAC Calendar , I91Z-1,9L3, p. gZ, rf Normal Teachers I Cours€,tr in MAC Calendar, LïZS-L}Zí. 67 Rec[, ' t. - rhe-4.:tl-stoty: A Historv of- 4-H crub r¡rotE (Ames. 1951), chapter z, cremin, Th_e iaansfoqmatloir:, oJ the Schogl, p. 29, -167 -

68. PAM, å:H_lPCpg-fS., Box 4, rf Boys t and Girls I Clubs, r' b June 19 l- 3 manuscr ipt . 69. PAM, 4-H Papers, Box 4,rrLetter to G. Ross, Reeve of Rorand Municiparity from E.lü. Jones, Extension Secretary, MAC, t, 23 Apri1, I9L3 and IrHandbook of Manitoba Boys t and ttExtension GirIs, CIubs , ]-glg-1919'r; E. W. Jones, Section,tt MÀC Gazette Z (Z) (November, L913 ), p. 90. rrBoys I 70 and Girls I Clubs,rr MDE, Annual Report ( L920_ L92I), "Boys' and Girls ? Clubsr' ánd ,neport of the Director of rechnicar Education of Manitoba,', MDE, Annual Report (]-gz3-19 24) ¡ ,rMAc Report: Extension Sgrvice,,f Mg! Number 11 (L9L7), pp. 7L6-7LT. 71. 'fBoyst and Girlsf Cl_ubs'r in MDE , A¡gBèl__gepgr.E (L}ZL), p. 137; Annual_ Report (Ig]-Tl, p. (L922-1.923) Z4g; e""""t n"p"rt , p. 119; Annual Repoft t rsze-rsãs I , pp.* zs- 26. on the origin of the demonstration mett¡-oa in agr icul tural educat ion, see Scott, ReluctanÈ F_armer, chapters VIII and IX. The theoreticar terrain of North American agrarian ideology was formulated and inhabited by subdisciplines or offshoots of broader areas of social knowledge. categories drawn from parent disciplines erere adapted to interpret family farming and rural society. Bourgeois economlcs spawned agricultural economics, while home economics combined early marginar util ity theory with scientific management. Rurar sociorogy developed as a subdiscipline of post-spencerian sociology. Rural education, meanwhile, eras a hybrid of finew educationrr and rural sociology. Together, these four emergent areas of enquiry determined dorninant understanding of social rearity in earry twentieth century rural Manitoba.

Agriculturar economics eras sonstituted as a distinct area of study at that point in the history of American economics when the marginal utirity theory of John Bates crark and others was resolving the confrict between classicaL economists and rrne¡r schoorrr political eeonomÍsts. Richard EIy' who taught economics to agricultural economists at lrlisconsin and whose texte were used at the ]lanitoba

AgriculturaL college (MAc), was a leading proponent of nerr politlcal economy. Thomas Nlxon Carver, who was influenced -169-

by J.B. clark, was the author of one of the first texts in agricultural economics and, Iater in his career, contributed to a modification of marginalism. Texts produced by Ely, carver and Henry Taylor, a university of ttisconsiin agricultural economist taught by Ely, defined the theoreticat domain of agriculturar economics as it was understood and taught in Manitoba between Lgog and Lgzl. while a discussion of the meaning and significance of the emergence of marginalism in the òontext of the ostensibly conflicting visions of classical and historical economics is beyond the scope of this analysis, it is important to note the fundamentar points of agreement among these approaches, and the characteristics which distinguished them. These three forms of esonomic enquiry were variants of bourgeois economics and, as such, accepted certain characteristics of a capitalist economy as given: commodity production; private property; a distinction between Labour and capital; and, central to the whole enterprise, the market. r,New sshoolrr poriticar economists challenged the extreme abstraction of the market in the crassicar schema by undertaking historicar and statlsticat t,real,t studies of ( i. e. historical ) economies, arguing ln the process there was a role for the state (and thereby economists as advisers to the state ) in regulating the market in the interests of a smoothry reproducing capitalism. Marginalistsr tn€ânwhile, had a different view -170 -

of the market t s operation than either the crassical economists or the negr political economists. For them, both the factors of production market and the finaÌ goods market nere interrelated and unified by consumer preference: the free consumer market of individual utitity maximisers determined the realm of the economic. This emphasis on consumption dÍstinguished marginarists from both crassical and new-school economists who, employing Ricardian moders, differentiated between fnput and output markets. For the latter' extra-market forces in the form of sociar classes limited market determination on the factor, or input, side. Harginalism, then, extended the determining povrer of the market' shifting focus from production to consumption, from supply to demand, and, most importantly, from retations between classes of people to rerations between peopre and goods. rn the process a new raw of value was defined, based upon subjective consumer preference, to disprace the labour theory of value. ( l) Richard Elyts , first

published in L904 and used as an economics text at MAc, eras informed by marginarism whire retainlng a resldual historicaL perspective. Theory was centrar to Ele$enlery. Principles., but Ery prefaced the theoretlcal with an historisal account intended to irrustrate the hÍstorical basis of contemporary conditions and institutions. He argued that fundamentar ideas and institutions such as -L7 T- private property' the right to establish business enterprises' êDd personal freedom, considered by some to be virtually natural phenomena, needed to be understood a6 historical c¡'eations. The purpose of economics for Ely was t'to study analyticalry the process by which he I manJ gets his J.iving to-day, remembering that the process depends on certain fundamental conditions, and that these conditions have their roots far in the past.n(Z)

The anaLysis began with consumption, whÍch, governed by diminishing utility, marginal utility and demand, furnished the motive for production. A utir ity Ì{as anything ryhich satisf ied human s¡ant, marginar util ity was the r¡tir ity of the rast good acquired or consumed before shifting consumption to some otl¡cr good or commodity, and the raw of diminishing utirity stated that decreasing a stock of goods meant decreasing the utllity per unit of the stock. Demand governed this process in that consumer choices were determined by the amount of the surplus of utirÍty over cost; that is to sê!r, indlvidual consumers in the market attempted to maximise their utitities relative to price. rt eras market demand, then, that caused people to produce, âDd production elas nothing more nor Less than the creation of utilities through the applicatÍon of mental and physicat power to the physical universe. (3)

This apprication of power e¡as caLled Labour. Labour constituted one of the factors of production, while rand -L7 2-

( the physical universe ) and capital ( those intermediate products of the combination of land and Labour which were used for further production) eere the t¡¡o other fastors. Land and labour were primary and originar factors of production, while capital was secondary or derived. capitar accumuration resuLted from production over and above what was necessary in the present, postponement of consumption, and saving surplus product to emproy in future production. The application of capital resurted in a more efficient combination of land and labour.(4) consumption guided production through utirity preference, then' and production was sustained by the apprication of rabour to l-and through the medium of capttal. But it was the mechanism of exchange which was at the heart of Ely's economic theory: it was exchange which constituÈed the market' bringing suppry into contact with demand, and it etas exchange ¡rhich constituted value. The term nvaruer had two meanings: subjective varue and objective (or exchange)

varue. The former referred to the economic importance of a commodity unit to the one valuing it; the latter eras a value ratio determined by comparing various subjective values with one another. In practice, exchange took place (and exchange values were established) in the market, which was simpry the meetÍng of two or more minds entertaining different subjective values. price eras exchange value expressed in terms of money. rt Íras flxed at the equlrlbrium between the -L7 3- subjective varuations of buyers and serrers. what e¡as carred market varue nas the price in any market at a given time' whiLe normal value was an ideaL towards s¡hich market varues tended' standlng at the point where marginar cost (the cost of production of the marginal producer) equalled marginal utility. (b) VaIue and price, then, were constituted in a freely competitive market, governed by consumer demand for commodities. Income r ,nê.nwhile, ¡ras distributed among the three factors of productlon, and the entrepreneur who brought them togetherr êccording to both marginalist and non-marglnalist processes. (6) FoIlowing Ricardo, Ely stated that rent (the return to land) was determined differentially "by the extent to which the glven natural agent or the given use of the agent surpasses in productiveness the poorest naturar agent of the same sort or the least profitable use of such a naturar agent that society requires to meet its demands for the product.r,(Z) In other wordsr rênt was the difference in productivity betcreen the most marginar rand in production and a given plece of Iand, assuming the nost efficient production possible in the particular circumstance. rnterest--the reward for the use of capitar-- was determined by the relation between the suppry of capital and the demand for lt. The demand for capltal depended upon its marginar productivity: capital received in interest an amount equal to the value lt produced at the mar.gin. The -L7 4-

suppry of capitar was dependent upon its cost of production; that is' the sacrifice the marginal saver or investor must undergo in postponing consumption. rn a departure from marginarist categories Ery maintained that wages--the return to labour--were determined by bargaining, but within timits fixed by the product of rabour and the costs of subslstence. The product of rabour referred to the product of industry minus rent, interest, and profits. Finalry, proflt referred to the differenttar return due to the ability or efficiency of the entrepreneur. rt was the surprus Left after the payment of rdagesr Fêrrtz and lnterest, but not including trextra personal gains, which arose from monopoly or from chance. Ely ventured that profit, in fact, eras slmrlar to rent in the way it $ras constituted and determined. Both profit and rent nere determined by differentiars between marginal and superior land (in the case of rent) and entrepreneuriar abirÍty (in the case of profft). Hence it eras posslble to state that neither rent nor profit were price determÍninq but, rather, both were price determlned. consequently, neither rent nor profit accounted for high commodity prices. (g) The emergence of agrlculturar esonomics as a disciprine represented the subordination of farm management and agronomy to economics in North American post-secondary education. rt arso marked the triumph of bourgeois economrcs ln the anarysrs of family farmtng. Drawing on classicar -175 -

economi.cs' North American agricultural economists described the production and distribution of agriculturar wearth in terms of a theory which assumed a triad of crasses, namery randrord, capltarlst, and rabourer. The relevant factors of production--Iand, labour, capital (and management)__eere

ldentified, and the division of agriculturar income was described in terns of rent, erages, interest, and profit. Furthermore' the historicar approach in American esonomics produced a context within which a state regul.atory role in

the area of prices and marketing couLd be discussed. And marginal uti3.ity theory completeLy shffted the anarytlcar focus from production to consumption and exchange, thereby giving the commodity producing household an equal standing with the capltarist flrm ln the economy. The early agricultural economists followed economists such as Ery in the theoretical categorles they emproyed. They differed in the extent to which the ana].ysis of agrl.cuLtural economics required a greater emphasÍs on management and market regulatlon. "val.ue' " wrote Henry Taylor in prlncipr.es of Agricultural Economlcs, ,rls at the bottom of arr our considerations in agricurtural economlcs.... Hhat we are needing as farmers is to 1earn how to adjust ourselves to price forces."(9) And what constituted value? According to rtvalue,t T. N. Carver meant exchange valuer ã¡rd it was determined on the basis of consumer want ! rrA concrete -L76-

individual articre. . . has varue onry because it is wanted; and the more it is wanted in comparison with other things, the more value it wirr have."(10) Furthermorer êvêr$ untt of a Large suppty of a given commodity waa ress wanted than each unft of a smarl suppry because of the satiablrlty of

wants. As carver said, this simpry meant that lf you gave a man all he wanted of a certain thing he wourd not want any more; the more his wants were satisfied, the Less intense his desire would become. price, which nas regul.ated by the forces determining demand and the conditions affecting supply, nas simpry the monetary standard through which value was expressed. (Lt.) the ímpact of demand and price in agriculture is iLrustrated in Robert Murchie and Henry Grantfs unused Lands ín Manltoba. (lz) They noted that a favourable agricultural price level between L9l6 and L'ZO brought marginar rands lnto productfon, but nith the price defration of the early twentfes a considerable amount of marginal rand was abandoned. rn order for these f,unused lands'r to be resettLed, according to lturchie and Grant, farmers had to buitd a buf,fer against the lnrpact of the market by becomlng more self-sufflclent: ,,Itlhe farmer needs to know a bit of gardening, fruit growing, dalrying, stock raising, etc., if he is to perform the tasks lnvorved in seI f and famlly malntenance. r,( 13 ) Conrad Hanmar, meanÍ{hiIe, in a background paper for unused Lands, invoked the concepts ffelast,lclty,tand of ttinelasticityil to argue that narket -L77 -

demand could solery guide resettlement if production eras adjusted accordingly!

The demand for wheat. . . is inelastlc and the amount taken from the market varies within comparativery narror{ limfts under ordinary condltions ät supply_- The price of such productl, however, vary very r¡idery' a shortage inducrng a great- rise in prices and a s_urprus a great farr.. For producti, the demand for whlch is erastlc, on the other hand, the pri_ce changes due to changes in quantity suppl ied, are much less wide. ( L4 ) rn order to counter the effects of the dramatic price fluctuations associated ¡rith products such as wheat, then, commodities for whfch there nas an er.astlc demand had to be produced on marginal land. As Carver and Tay1or revealedr ãgticultural productlon took place withln this context of varue and prlce. carver began his analysis of the proper co¡nbinatlon of the factors of agricultural production by positing the raw of dimlnishing returns, whereby that nhich was produced on a frdoes glven plece of rand not vary ln the same proportion as the labor and capitar, increasing in proportion as they lncrease and decreaslng in proportlon as they decrease, but rather...the product increases and decreases Less rapldry than these factors of production ¡yhen the quantfty of the factor, land' r'emains constant. . rr ( 15 ) on this basis he argued that labour and capital shourd be applied to land until the product of the last increment Just covers the additional cost of capÍtal and rabour. Taylor, however, found this approach to be ml.sconceived. He suggested -178-

carverIs method rras misreading rfor the simple reason that

maximum profits per aere is inconsistent wlth maximum profits per unit of nanageriar activity in arL cases except

tÌ¡at of the marginal entrepreneur who is assumed to make no n(¡.5) prof it. That ls to sêy, it took no account of the fact that the application of extra capitar and Labour required extra managerlal actlvlty, whfch meant tt dld not sufficlently account for the differentiaL profits which accrued to the more efflclent farm nanagers. According to Taylor, the apprication of capitar and Labour to rand operated accordtng to a la¡¡ of increasing returns ,,until a point of constant returns has been reached, after which the law of diminishing returns per succeedlng untt commences to operate ,n (L7 ) The opttmum proportlonar comblnatron of factors varied from farm to farm and from season to season. But with the aid of cost accountlng, farm managers were able to determine the most profitabre use of rabour and capital throughout the year: ThÍs principre, when appried to the apprlcation labor and of capitar to rand, wirr aoubiress resurt-but in apprylng sometlmes more and sometlmes Less, usuarly less to a given area than is carled for by Professor carverrs rure of apprytng more and more until the product attributabr.e to the tast lncrement is just enough to pay the cost of the increment of Labor and capftaf.tfAl rt foLlo¡red' then, that the farm manager was crucial for an efflclent agricultural productlon. rn their analysis of lnco¡ne dlstribution in agriculture both carver and rayror forrowed the broad model of crasslcar -t79-

economics, erith raylor favouring a historical. approach and carver tending more to a marginalist method. rn accountlng for sage levels in agrlculture carver again invoked the lar¡ of diminishfng returns, arguJ.ng that the demand and prlce for labour dimintshed as the number of unfts íncreased rerative to the other factors of product,ion. sucsessful rtbe farmers woutd hiring as many men as will r on the averager oo€ season with another, produce a marglnal product approximately equar to their nages. To hire ror" o, fewer

men would be to lose profits. rr Taylor, meanwhfle, in a chapter entitled the,Human Factorrr(whict¡ also contalned hls discussion of management), suggested that the differing physicar, interrectuar and morar quarities of men accounted for wage dlfferentlats.(19) There vraE more agreement on the questJ.on of interest, with raylor invoklng supply and demand to defend the rates charged by financiar Ínstitutrons and carver explaf ning that interest accrued to tt¡e oerner of capltar equipment because of the service rendered by foregoing conaumer goods in favour of capitar fnvestment. slmllarly, in thelr respectlve dlscusslons of rent, although carver recorded 6ome concern wtth Ricardors dtfferential theory' both agreed that rent was based upon narglnal productivity. This meant the efficlent farmer nourd apply labour and capltar to rand in such a nay that the results of his superior abtrity would not be appropriated by the -180 - landl.ord in the form of rent, but vrould accrue to the farmer in the form of profit. (20) The category profit, and its companion category management, provided the fundamental link between agriculturar economics and farm management as theoretical practices. trFarm managemerrt, rf wrote George Sarren, r,...may be deffned as the scrence of the organlzatlon and management of a farm enterprise for the purpose of securing the greatest contlnuous proflt. r, Farm management specialfsts, however' had a somewhat different interpretatlon of proflt than did the agriculturar economlsts. Although they arrlved at baslcally the same conclusions, they took different routes. Agrlculturar economists, cJ.osery forrowing classical-cum-neo-classlcal economics, deflned proflt as the difference between a farmerrs gross income and the totar of rent' interestr ê''d nagesr €êch accrulng to the respectlve factors according to deffnfte economÍc raws. rn farm management, profft hras determlned tbrough a slmple cost aecountlng process. More lmportantly, though, it waa considered to be part of rabour income. By calcuratfng the difference between farm expenses and farm recelpts a farmer arrived at net farm income. His labour lncome was then determlned by deducttng from net farm income an amount egual to the fnterest on capítar invested in the farm and an amount for unpaid fauriry rabour. This constituted his return for labour and for managenent. rn some analyses -18 ¡. -

there vras no further dístÍnction drawn between erage6 and profits. rn others, ãD amount egual to a hired manrs vrages ¡ras deducted' representing the farmerrs return for labour, while the remalnder was interpreted as net farm profit.(zl) The carcuratfon of profit on the basts of farm management surveys provided the space to dissuss cost of production formulae and state intervention as means to regulate the market and stabfrise farm insome, tbereby linking discussions of individual enterprises wlth broader economlc structures. Both farm management speclarlsts and agrlculturar economists addressed this questlon. Henry Grant rejected prlce fixing by reguratory bodies in favour of the adaptation of producer practice to market forces. "The producer, r wrote Grant, rmust learn to curtall production at the proper tlme and...contror it in the face of advancing prices' to guard against overproduction. Furthermore, commodity based producer organLsat.lons could bring suppry into a sloser relation cith demand: r,[sJuch a¡r organisation whlch extends lts control to both the marketlng of the product and the amount produced fs in a posltion to obtain the facts of demand, fandl tt can aecertain Just how much the market wlll absorb at a given price and advlse the producers accordlngly. t. (22) Henry Taylor, meanwhile, endorsed price regulatlon. He rejected a cost of production formura calculated according to cost accounts, however, proposing lnstead a programme. based upon the arternative -¡.8 2 -

narket choices of farmers. rn so dolng Tayror admitted tt¡at the market nas a less than adequate determinant of varue in North American agrrculture. commÍsefons and regulatory bodies were useful, then, in redressing nthe unequal bargalnlng power of great distributing corporations on the one hand and. . . the isolated unorganized producers oD the other. tt ( 23 )

subtre differences in the conception of profit shourd be understood in terms of the bierarchy of rurar soclal ssience. Farm management was ress theoreticar. than agricultural economlcs. Thls is evldent ln the organlsatton of texts. Arthough carverrs princloles waa not purery theoretisal-, containing aE it did chapters on hlstoricaL development and sociar context, the book eras organfsed in terms of ?'tt¡e factors of agricultural productLonn and f,the distrlbution of agriculturar ineomer. Harrenr s Farm Hanagenent, meanwhile, had a much more practtcal and lnterpellative tone, with chapter titles such as dshall r Be a Farmertr, t'Types of Farmingt', ,Farm Records and Accountsr, ftchoosing and and Buylng a Farmr!. Hhire contalning the agrlcultural economists I general categories, the far¡n management literature na6 addressed to farmers and their immediate probrems. The distinctive factors of production nere subordinated to the subjective unity of labour, management and capitar in indivtdual farmers. Tt¡e task of agrlcurtural economlcs waa to deconstruct thts unlty to -183-

reveaL the economic unlty beneath its surface. The task of farm management was to use this rearity to mediate the reconstltutlon of the unity for individuar farmers on individual farms. rI

The hlstorles of bourgeols economics and of home economics are lnextricabry linked. Both areas of knowredge emerged from the same aource during the transttion to ttdomestfc capitalism; that is, economytt or rrruraL economyrf . This poritícar and economlc discourse took househord productLon, which wa6 the main form of production in the early capitallst period, as its object of analysis. Stth the generalisation of the capltallst market, however, the production of wearth shifted to specialised work sites, and househords became increaslngry rimtted to prlvate,

reproductlve units excruslveLy controrted by women. The ideology giving lntellectual coherence to these practices changed in the process. on the one hand, by the nlneteenth century a distinct body of porftical economy riterature exlsted which focused on frthe wearth of natlonsrf --capltarrst production and market exchange. on the other l¡and, and by the same period, do¡nestic economy had become linlted to the non-produstLver norr-market management of domestic formatrons, which nere by then vlewed as being separate from the ff economyn. (24, -184-

Establtshing the contours of what would later become home economics, mid-nineteenth century American household lnstruction manuaLs eere constructed wlthln this inheritance' and the more generar fdeorogicar context of separate spheres. rn the Amerlcan Tomanrs Hone (Lg69), for example, Harrlet Beecher Stowe and Catharine Beecher offered an encycl0paedia of advlce on ho¡r rromen could flnd meanf.ng and furfirln¡ent through the management of thelr allotted sphere. Paradoxfcally, however, fulflllment could only be achieved by adapting the prÍvate world of ¡romen to the publlc ¡¡orrd of men. Arthough the spheres erere separate, a systematic economy reguired a systematic houeehord: men had

to be welr fed, wert rested, and at thelr prace of cork at a specif ied tlne each day. An honourab!.e and ¡rorthwhtle housewrfery, then, requrred a certain time discrprrne, orderly habits, and the general organisation of the househoLd in accordance with the de¡nands of the outsrde world. Although dlstlnct from polttlcal economy, nlneteenth century do¡nestlc economy wa5 nevertheless responslve to and dependent upon lt. (ZS) Hhen it emerged aa a distlnct dlsclptine at the end of the nineteenth century, home economics turned expltcltly to politicar economy for its organising categories. rt ironically combLned marginallsm (whÍch denled the slgnif lcance of productlon rn the formurat,ion of value) wlth sclentlflc management (whlch focused on the production -185 -

process). The various conponents of marginar utirity

theory--t'¿tt emphasis on demand rather than suppry, a subjective theory of value to supplant rabour-cost theorles, an extension of the maximizatfon prlnclple from ftrns to t¡ousehords, IandJ an interpretation of the consumer rather

than tbe entrepreneur a6 the epfÈome of rational action, rf among others-- pointed to the consuming houseerife as the archetypical economic actor . (26) Indeed, ln philtp Hisksteedts crassic exposLtion of narglnalfsm, co¡nmon sense , the l¡omemaker Ìrat lnvoked to lrlustrate the unlversaltty of marginarlst exchange: Hhether our hoúsewife is apportlontng the stufflng of a goose at a tabrer or her housekeeplng ror"y in the market, or her tlme and attentiàn Éet¡seen schemes for getting boarders and the more dr.rect cultivation and furthering of the generar tastes and lnterests of her llfe; and whethãr her husband is conduc.ting family prayers, or postlng up hfs books at the office, or wétghtng the aavaãtajes or dlsadvantages of a partiat retlrement from business. . . they and atr the peopre they -are concerned cfth are all_ke engaged in- admlnisierlng resource'i, ln deveroplng opportunltles and choosfng between alternativés. (27\ Home economlsts embraced the marglnallst model of Èhe economy' recasting the househord as a businesg flrm defrned by lts consumptlon and demand functlon tn the market. They then turned to sclentlfic management to rethlnk the internal management of the househoLd. Christine Frederick, the most important theorlst of earry home economlcs, appropriated a set of ftve prlnclples from the tfefficiency englneersrf to frame her analysis of -186- domestic work and management. The first of theee prlnciples' ldeals, eras the gulding pran behlnd any buslness (profft in the capitarist enterprise). The second, standardlsed operatlons, condttlons, and practlcesr F€!ferred to the establlshment of standardised and definlte conditlons for workers to follow. The thlrd, despatchlng and scheduring, hras an extenslon of standardisatLon, whereby the when, bow, and best order of work were determlned. Tl¡e fourth, retlable resordsr êncompassed the malntenance of accurate lnformatlon, budgets, and accounts. And the flfth, efficiency reward, referred to the beneflts workers on the shop floor derlved from scientific management (some of the monetary gains resurtlng from efftcient work methods lrere shared with the workers,. and the workers were happier when worklng efflcientry). Efficiency engineers used these prlnctpres to guide thelr anaLysis and transformatlon of industrial workplaces. Frederlck, and the home economists she influenced, belteved the Eame prlnclples could transtorm the domestic workplace as well.. Hhat, then, werc these domestlc categortes? To begin with, tbe home eraa concelved of as a buslness enterprlse in this schema. As a buslness enterprlse in a narglnallst economy, the consumlng household Íras the eentral determinant of varue. varue and price, tl¡e cost of distribution, the marketing and advertlslng of products-- Lndeed alr econonlc activlty--were ultlnatery declded by -187-

demand strategies in individual households. The economic system eras composed of a range of firms naking rational declslons ln response to market signars. And, rf the system tras to funstion efflclently, lt eaa imperative that households act ratfonarry in creatrng demand. As Frederlck argued wlth respect to clothing material, Lrrational demand was the central lmpediment to an orderry textire market: The reason shy crothing materfar.s are so htgh rs not because of tarlff or high cost of manufaciure- -but because $romen are capiicfous and do not buy uniformly, and are swayed by hestic appeals ¡rhims- rf every or - manufacturãr this mo¡nänt knec within 15 percent Just what and how, every woman would buy of the marn suppries each year eo-r three years' prJ.ces wourd come down with a thud, as much as 40 percent.(Zg)

Tithin the household firm, meanwhire, the varfous work area6 were egulvalent to the nork environment of any artisanal or factory enterprise. In a chapter entitled ilTf¡e Household LaboratoFytt' for exampre, Hartha Foote crow wrote, frthe kitchen should be a combination of 1aboratory, machlne shop and studio. The work done there ls Just as complex as thatt... The kitchen is not to be a place to chtch the housewife is conden¡ned;. . . it is a laboratory where scLence t' has sway. But ttre farn househord was even more of a buslness enterprlse than other househords since rt was actuarry a slte of market productlon. rn non-farming occupatlons,

the making and the keeplng of the homer ãFê a thing apart.... But witt¡ t-he wife of the farmer, the womants laboratory-macblne shop-studlo is not a llttre room by rtself; tt is a dynamo from whlch -188-

goes out the power for the whole machinery; lt ls itseLf a piece of elaborate machinery - wlthout whlch the rest of the cogs and bands ana phÌanges woul.d all go anry and break into pieces, aoing damage to the whole farm-f,actory . (Zgi rn both its externar reratlons with the market and its lnternal organLsatLon, then, the domestic household was the equivalent of a capltallst flrm. But whereas the capitalist flrm had proflt as its goal, the household firn pursued speclfic famiLiar idears. These ideals varied between famities, but generaLry they tnc}uded the particul.ar aims, tasteer ârrd strlvings of the fanily fn questlon. one of the most rmportant rdears rn all families, of courser $ès the raising of chirdren. rrrt should indeed be part of the ideal. cherlshed in the depths of every country girlts heart,rr wrote Foote Crow in the Amerlcan, ,,that Country Glrl, she wilI, lf, posslble, make Èo the norld a contribution of chLldren. r, rf To present a completed, full grown, thoroughry ef f lclent man or woman to the ¡rorrd, r, she ,ls continued' a contrlbution to the worldfs storehouse of power.r'(30) let even such an apparentry non-economic fdeal as chlldren had to be conceptuallsed uslng the categortes of the firm and the narket. Forr ðE Frederlck noted, chirdren returned thelr own forn of divtdends¡ ...chlldren can be looked on a6 frsavrngsfr or investment, and not as an expense. HCaIthy, efficlent chlrdren represent a sentlmental investment to thelr individual fanilies; tút--are also tl¡e greatest eociar investment ¡rhich cån ue made to the state and natlon. le are Just beginning to take this vie¡r aa a communf.ty, tf¡at -189-

better babiesr nor€ sturdy and intelligent chlldrenr åF€ investments to sãciety. (3t

Raising chirdrenr ånd pursuing other famiry idears, imposed a disciprine on the enterprise wbich requlred the application of efflcient management tecbnlgues. rn the organisatlon of hougehold rabour, standardisation orlented work towards time rather than the task' resurting in greater efficlency. Through the use of tlme-motlon studies ln cooklng, cleanlng, laundry and so on, both wasted trne and the nervous fatigue caused by unsystematicarly Jumprng from one kind of work to another eras erlminated. Furthermore, è standard practlce for particular tasks could be devised, consistlng of wrltten instructions as to method and tools employed, the Length of time the task should taker èDd the reratlonshlp of speclfic nork ,processes to particurar toor.s. Kltchen work, for examprer Hëì6 a series of interrelated procesaes lnvolvJ.ng, first, food preparation (cot lecting, preparing, cooklng, and serving), and second, crearlng aeay of dishes (removal, scraplng' washing, and putttng aray). These procesaes courd be standardised fn such a Hay that each one ras done exactry the såme at each mear., with toors arranged to correspond wlth each step, taking e mlnlmum amount of tlme and requlrlng minimal mentar acttvtty , (32) one of the main accomprishments of the factory paa the breakdo¡rn of artlsanal task orientation and its replacement by tlme -190 -

discipríne; home economists were convfnced a sirniLar transformatlon could occur in the home. Hith specific tasks standardised, atI houset¡oId rork could be pranned. Thls was the problem nhich despatching and rhow scheduring addressed: to pran and work out a schedure of all tasksi how to relate work and apportlon it so that it shalr progress smoothr.y wtth as rittre f, lnterruption as possible. The order of work was determlned, and then the tlme at which parÈicular tasks were done nas deeided. ìrental rabour preceded manuar r.abour rn that, flrst, the absolute condltlons around whlch the schedule must centre--meals, for erample__were determLned, and second, tt¡e order of reguLar daíly tasks sas decided on the basis of what worked best in a partfcurar home. one possible morning schedule was to rwash alI the breakfast dishes, straighten the kltchen, èDd start aome cooking for Lunch before golng upstaJ.rs to make the beds..., twhlte another wasl to mereLy put away food and scrape the dlshes, proceed to maklng the beds, dolng ttght cleanlng, and return to start runch rater, dolng breakfast and lunch dishes r together. The best pran for a partlcular househord depended upon which was most time efficlent, ln a given situation. Once a daily routlne was established, weekly and special tasks courd be fltted lnto a schedule. The purpose of the schedule was to prevent the rrpil lng upr of tasks whlch resulted from poor plannlng. rr$lthout a schedule lt -191-

too frequentry happens that the worker arlows an unexpected

piece of sork to interrupt and confuse her entíre day. r, Tith pranning' the unexpected courd be easiry fitted into the schedule. And flnalry, the schedurrng of tasks had to lnclude the scheduring of regurar rest perlods. As ln other labour' the househord schedule rrshould provide a short .rest periodt in the forenoon and a ronger oDe ln the afternoon. fi ( 33)

The househord flrm vras r.inked wfth the external worrd through tt¡e purchases it made, and, according to Frederlck, the key to efficient purchasing was knowredge. r,rt took manual labour and skill to supply...tfamity needsl flfty ft yeara ago; ghe wrote, r'but it takes more thought and interrJ.gence to purchase...by wlse expenditure at the t, present day. In the case of food, for exampler oDê needed to kno¡r how much varue different foods posaessed. rn The cost of Food, Erren Richards showed that a variety of factors entered into the determination of cost. seed, rand rent' fertilizer, labour, machl.nery, intereet on lnvested capitarr eåst€ due to rainy or dry seasot¡s, narket preparatÍon, and the tlnre and rabour cost Lnvorved ln table preparation arl affected the eventuar cost of food. An efficlent consumption of any commodity, then, requlred a thorough knowredge of production and marketing costs. But efflclent consumptlon was based upon knowredge of the dffference betneen vaLue and prlce. ilprlces may fluctuate -19 2- because of economic condltfotrs, il clai¡ned Frederick, rf but the varue of an articre can be flxed onry in the consumerfs mlnd.tr rhe distlnction was cruclar because on lt hinged the health of the rnarketplece. By purchasing on the basis of value rather than pricer connumers told manufacturers that they were wtlrlng to pay a standard price for quarity merchandiser ånd they wouLd not support unethfcar manufacturers who peddted an inferior product. rrrt is the Iargest manufacturers of standarde w€II advertlsed articles, It Frederick suggested,

¡rho are on the right side of the food fence, and who are workrng wlth the houserlfe for better f,ood condition'.... The hguserrfe must support the best manufactur€rs rÊ she wants to -encourage reliability, honesty, and purity ln manufactured food products. ( 34) Budgets and accounts both conpreted and co-ordlnated the overarL management systen of the househord. r'rt ls r, necessery, wrote Frederick, r,at the outset of runnlng any business--to keep records of income rec€ived and income expended. n Accountlng stripped the emotlonal, unartlcul.ated veneer off family rerations to revear and to eraborate the rear carcuratlons upon chlch they eere based. After discussing one partlcluar budgetary scheme, whLct¡ rncluded three separate accounts--f,The Manrs personal Accountr,, drhe Homan I s PersonaL Accountfr, and f,The Famlly Account,r--Foote crow ruggested that such an arrangement aLlo¡sed famlly menbers to vlew ar1 budgetary questfons rrln the abstract, pure from svery selfish impulse..., freed from preludice, -19 3- and in the dry light of rea6on. rf For Frederick, though, any system which etas based upon an aLlowance for the household mênager wès unacceptable:

I regard running the home a6 I regard runnl.ng any bueinees--nith the wage earner aJ senior paitn"r and the homemaker as Junlor partner.... tButl I cannot imagine any buslness in whlch the senLor partner would hand the Junlor partner (sj.c) and aêSr frHere, John, f s aome money; get solne wlth It.t'(35) togs

An accounting problem peculiar to the domestl.c flrm was Itplace how to a value upon the labor of the house f' administrator. As much as one wanted ,the mother fn the home to be the final unmerchantable thlng th€re,r, her labour had to be valorised if accurate accounts were to be kept: ...where work is done by the woman adninlstrator that a house servant, lf one were empJ.oyed,-the roul.d be dolng and would be pald for doing, woman admlnlstrator, the mother tn her funotlon of housekeep€r, should be paid ln money at commerclal rates for those services; and tt¡rs should be accurately recorded day by day and week by week and taken futl account of in the budget

And furthermore, ín the caae of farm househol.ds, lt was desirabre that produce and goods rhich came from the farm rather than the market be entered in the accounts rat market pricesr ë16 if they...tcamel frorn butcher and grocêr.rf trThis, n Foote Crow said, rriË the normal, systematic and ef f lcient thlng to do. rt ( 36 ) For domeEtic rabour, greater efficiency resulted in more leisure time; indeed, it ¡neant the creation of refsure rn the home. Just -as the appr lcation of industrlal proceEaes to artisanal productlon ln factorfes produced a -194 - divislon between work and reisure, a pararl.el apprication in the household yielded simllar resuLts. Furthermore, Just as mare worklng class reisure tras a problem for bourgeols socLety, the newly found 1eisure of homemakers represented ne¡r ldeologlcal terraLn. Sslentific management aeparated the manuar or physical area of homemakfng lnto e discrete domain (the ,tmechanics of Ilvl.ngil, accordfng to Frederick), reaving Itthree other and far more important ends of homemakingt': provfdlng a home atmosphere for husband and chirdreni the t¡omemakerts own physical, mental and splrltual deveropment as a womani and sharlng in the rarger hone of community and nation.(37) By paylng more attention to a husbandts businessr €hhancing a ct¡il.drs cultural opportunities, taking onefs varues into the communlty, or developing and continutng curtural interests of oners orn, women made effectlve uge of their leieure time. But domestic Iabour, unLike lndustrlal 1abour whlch dtd not sontrol the work proceaE, had both the power to construet a dlvision betreen cork and reieure and the responsibtrity to use Ìelsure trme wlsely. The constructlon of that, dlvlslorr, in tt¡e pursuit of a famiry ideal, was lnherent in the definltlon of the t¡ousehord as a busf.ness enterprLse. The wise use of that tlme lnvolved crose attentlon to the non- manualr Don-physlcal. aspects of the reproduction of the famlly both wtthin the household and ln soclety. -195-

III

The ideological role of rural sociorogy sas determlned by both the prace of soclorogy ln North American soclal science and the reratlonshlp of rurar soclorogy to soclorogy and agricultural economlcs. The speclflc form that sociology took as an academic dlscipllne was determined by the earlier craim of economlcs to an area of soclar knowredge and tt¡e disagreement among socforogfsts aa to how extensive their cralm to expertlse should be. As academic socfology took form in the lg90s, there eere tco visions of Its place ln soclal sclence. one foresaw soclorogy becomlng a coordinating disclpllne which wouLd synthesise the ftndlngs of economics, polftlcs and jurisprudence to dev!.se general raws in the tradÍtfon of comte and spencer. The other approach proposed that soclology organise bastc soclar data and identify initiat social principles whlch the speclallsed disciprLnes courd then deverop. Not surprlslngly, soclologists cene under attack, especialLy from economists, for thelr ctatm to be engaged ln efther a tundamentar or syntbetic exerclse. Throughout the decade or so after 1895' socÍologlsts, in reaction to this crLtLcl.sm, srowly refined thelr approach to focus on the sociar group and ideological community, and to rely less on grand evoLutlonary schemes. ( 38 ) Rural sociology ¡ras constltuted a6 part of the socioLoglcal reJection of classicar poritlcar economy and -196-

the socioJ.ogy that had been built upon it. paralleling Elyts work in economics, sociologists such as Lester Hard, Arbion smalL and Edward Ross constructed an arternatlve vision of society to rlval the organl.cist, evorutfonary and laissez-farre approach of Herbert spencer rs soclal Darwinism. This nen sociology accepted spencerrs naturalistic method--the observatory technique and the amasslng of data in the tradition of Darwin--but turned it ln a different dlrection. Thereas spencer and the spencerians perceived the social world as natural, governed

by ldentlftable 1awsr êDd therefore beyond human interventlon, ll|ard and his corleaguer considered socfety to be unnaturar and requlrrng human guldance. rn thts new vlew of the social world, e naturaristic methodology courd be used' not to identify sociar laws, but to ldentffy social problems which courd be addressed through sociar poricy. The centraL socfat probrem (expressed through gtudfes of crime, dellnquency, poverty, and lmmigratfon) waa the discovery, study, and maintenance of morar or ldeoroglcal communlty. ( 39) Charles ELlwoodIs

( 1910 ) ' used ln socioLogy courses at HAc, was a representative text of the neer sociorogy. socioLoov and llodern social problems was theoreticalty structured aceording to five categories: the orlgin of soclety; the process of soclar deveropment; a theory of soclal order; a -L97 -

theory of social progressi and tt¡e nature of society. In reiecting both contractuar and organlc lnterpretatrons, Erlwood argued that society originated spontaneousry out of the fundamental necessr.ties of the rlfe process, namery reproduction and the procurement of food. sexual reproduction and parental care gave rise to the famiLy nhich' in turn, was the basis of alr reguratory and morar institutions. rndeed the fanlry l¡ad a centraL rore ln societyts institutiona1 apparatus. Errwood dichotomised human collectivities in terms of voluntary and involuntary groupa, where the former were purposive (parties, trade unlonse Gorporations ) whire tt¡e !.atter ïere what he calred naturaL, community groupings (famlIy, nelghbourhood, the clty, the natlon); prlmary (lntl¡nate, personaÌ, face-to_face relatÍonships: famiJ.y, neighbourhood) and secondary (not necessariry face-t,o-face reratlonshlps: stater porittcar party) groups; and, finalry, lnstitutlonal (sanctloned by the Larger community: famll.y, property, church, scbool) and non-institutional (unsanctfoned, vol.untarist formations for which no exanples ¡rere glven). rn this consterration the famlly $as unlgue ln belng both a prlmary, lnvoluntary group and an institutlon. l{oreover, it eåE the chief primary group slnce it controlred the blrth and rearlng of chlrdren, and it. was the most important institution becauee, by lnvorvtng a crose associatlon of both sexes and alr ages, lt was a microcosm of the probren of human rerations--the -198- rrsocial problemt'. Furthermore, the faniry represented the rlnk between the blologlcal and the soslar in human society: it was through the famiry tÌ¡at the urtinate sontroL of natural processes by mental procesaes was exerclsed. (40) socíar deveropment and soctar change proceeded via adaptation and readaptation in relations betr¡een indivlduals. Soctal order entatled a settled and harmonlous relationship among individuars or groups in soctety, and the problem of soeial order hras the problem of malntaining this harmony. order was maintalned through the conscious exertlon of sociar eontror. rnstttutlons of control lncluded government, 1aw, religLon, morallty, and educatlon. rn comprex societies, however, tt¡e most lmportant of these were the latter three. Government and raw, belng represslve mechanisms trnot of control., did go deep enough to secure a type of soclal order whict¡ ls adeguate for modern soctal life. rt (41) And of rerlgion, morarity and education, education waE the most effectlve mechanism of control because ft controLred the formation of habtt and character in indlviduals. lloreover, êducatlon waa best sufted to securrng å progressive socLal order because it adapted the young to society before they fully partlcipated in ft. And

¡rhat constituted progress? Those changes rrwhlch secure a more harmonious adjustment of tndlvlduars to one another and a better adaptation of soeiar groups to the requirements of their exl,stenceft were progresslve. rn thls text, then, -199-

rra social rife ¡ras ultimatery psychicar- process, r¡ot, to be sure, in the sense that it ts purely subjective, but in the 6ense that lts signlficant and controrltng elements are nental .n (42, rt nas as a subdiscipline of the new sociorogy that rurar soclology ¡raa constituted as a distlnct area of enquiry. Tt¡e theoreticar structure whlch governed the analysis of rurar society ln this approach contatned three erements or procedures: estabrishing a specifically ruraL domaln in soeiology; defining the problems in the domain; and identffying the mechanisms through which the problems courd be solved and rurar peopre could enter the ideological community. A close reading of John Glllettets Constructlve_ Rurar soeioroqy and some of Robert Hurchle r s t{anttoba studies revears how this structure operated in actuar texts. The domaln of rurar soclorogy was establrshed primarlly through the crassiflcation of communities. rn his delineation of associationat forns, Erlwood suggested that those natural grouplngs (famlly, neighbourhood, cIty, state) which he ter¡ned involuntary groups ¡rere usuarry calred communities and, more inportantly, sociol.ogy ¡ras tbe study of community problems. (43) rn estabrishing a cralm for an area of study, rural sociologlsts dfstinguished the distinctive characterfstlcs of rurar communities. Gtrtette drew a distlnctlon bet¡reen urban and rurar communitfes on the basls of factors such as populatlon, function, -200 -

tf assocl-ational life, and the density of group living',. He then crasstf ied four types of rurar comnunitles: a frpure agrlculturaltt type, based upon establlshed, speclallsed agricultural production; a f,mixed agricultural,, type based upon establlst¡ed, generalieed production; frontier communltles; and backward communltles. rt r{as noted, however, that all rural communities were prlmarily or completely agrlcultural, close to naturer spËrrsely populated, and socially homogeneoua. (44) l,lurchle, following GlLletter usêd the survey method to deflne the rural domain and to establish the parameters of community. rn the Turtle l{ountain and swan River Eurveys, geographic community was determined on the basls of municipal borders. (45) Beyond thls, various guestiortna1res specifled the social phenomena under scrutlny, whlch erere popuration, reLigious organisatLon, schoorg, and the attitudes of farm peopLe to rural institutlons. And in the Unused Lands survey, populatlon, natlonal typesr Frrrêl organisatLons, and soeial services wctre identified ln consti.tutlng an area of study. (46) Defining the probrems fn rurar soclety ¡neant concelving of it as an area of human interventlon anenable to change through social organisation, and identifying the soclally integrative and dlsintegratfve elements in å community. Gillette preeented the social donain as an fnterdependent network ln whlch the condltlons of farm peopre eere -201-

determined by fastors beyond their immediate contror, but which courd be affected through organlsation. Thus soclat analysts (and farm folk themselves) had to recognise and cul.tivate the rurar capacity for sociar actlon. rndeed, GiIlette understood thls ln class terms¡

He are comlng to a recognition that the farmers as such are a dfstinct and organic class ln the natlonaL and internatlonar social mechanism, occupying a dlstinct prace, havlng specific functlons, nith rights to obÈarn aäa ãefend, possesslng charasteriEtics by whlch they may be deflned, and holdlng certain interests in common which constitutes (sfc) a basls on whlch they may rlse to cLass consclousness,(42, But the pnrpose of this crass agency wa6 to ensure rural. participatlon in the broader conmunlty, rather than to transform social relations. Agency presupposed an lmpetus to astfon, ho¡rever" The impetus in this instance was the necessity of lntegrating rural eocÍety into an harmonfous socfaL order. Hhat Here deemed to be probrems, then, Tere those lnstrtutlons which wer€ fatlrng to perform thle important task. rn Gillettets soclology peopre entered ldeoroglcar communlty, and institutions faciritated that entry, through soclarisation. tf rhe soclalrsatton of a communlty,n he wrote, rrinvorves revorutionising its cltlzens | ¡ntnds to itg lnstitutions and utilities.,r(4g) To sociatise an instltutlon was to reconstruet, it and make it amenabre to tt¡e uEeE society demanded. The specific subordinatlon of the lndlvldual and the local to the sociar proceeded through -202,- a number of avenues. schools became soefal centres for the communlty and they became relevant to sclentific agriculÈure and scientlfic homemaking. churches began to act as eoslal sentres and as stimuri for rurar improvements. Transportatlon and co¡nnunicatlon were improved to overcome rurar isoLatlon and put the country ln touch wtth urban centres. Homents clubs herped keep the hone ln contact wlth the rarger society so that pomen--,rthe great socl.ar factorr,- -¡rere abre to institute the reforms necessary fór a better community and social rife. (49) Through tt¡ese avenues and othersr FuFErl peopre became more conscious of thelr soclabllíty, became more amenabre to sociar contror, åDd, crucially, became active and wilt tng participants in their adaptatlon to a broader soclaL mllleu. In l{urchiets work, probtens }rere deflned and solutions eere proffered through an assessment of educationar, econornic, religiousr ånd soclal condLtions. In the case of the Turtle l{ountain and ss¡an Rlver survoys, the posltlve and negative features of the comnunlty eêre dellneated.. communlty leadership wa6 consldered a problem ln Turtre l{ountaln in that, altlrough there Baa leadershfp ln apeclflc areas, there was llttle wlder communlty leadershlp nwhich ls of sucb varue in unitfng the people in movements for rural betterment. t, ( 50 ) Local is¡n, parochlal Lsm, and opposition to reform peere deemed to be problems. Activities whlch buirt communlty spirrt and contrlbuted to a sense of soclal unlty -203-

nere deemed sociarly progressíve. co-operative activity was progressive' and hence an ideorogicarry cohesive factor, when lt waa broadry based. rn Turtre Mountain co-operation sas etlll Largely economic, whereas in Swan River (and n¡oet other areas of rural t{anitoba) tt had moved beyond economics, fosterlng communlty splrlt: Tt¡e most strf king thtng, perhaps, ln rural llanitoba for the student of sociology ls the growing feering of Eorrdarlty.... nspãLrarry is swan Rlver remarkabre ln thts regard: co-oper.iru" enterprises...take the form ...of beef rings, livestock assoclations, farmersr elevators, co_ operative stores, Boys and GirLs r clubs, Home Economics socleLles, consolldated schools, and union sunday sehools.... These co-operative endeavors are the best index to the socLal mind. (EI) rn unused tands, marginar ereas of the provlnce rhich had not been lntegrated tnto the rarger soctety were ldentlfled. Those Lands wt¡ich were adjacent to settled and stable regions were deemed to be the best areas for the for¡natlon of stabLe communltles. ttThe In P}ace of PLay in the Countryrr, whlch appeared ln the Graln Gro¡rersr Gulde ln LgZg, t{urchle showed hor a probrem naa identlfied and a sorutlon was posed ln one speclflc issue affecting rural communities. rn thls piece llurchie identified both an lmmedlate and a more general problem. The lmmedfate probLen eås the preaence of professlonar players on communlty sports teams. The general probrem was the development of tt¡e social instinct, the creatlon of communlty splrlt, and the makLng of good -204-

citizens. The first probrem was a manlfestation of the second ln that properry dtrected recreatlon was essentlal tn building good citizenship, community spirit, and the soclaL rfPlay lnstinct. in man and anlmals,r Hurst¡ie wrote, ris an instinct that has served and does serve the purpoae of education. By play se learn the businesg of Life. rr(sz) rt was necessary, then, for rurar aommunlties to ensure there was ampre opportunity for their members to participate in sports and recreation. Especial.!_y ¡yith the pasgege of tt¡e proneer stage and the loss of the nelghbourry splrit, it Íras argued' the recreationar side of llfe needed to be

organlsed, and the most important aspect of organlsatlon was the deveropment of competent J.eadershlp and dfrection. there hras a rore for the professlonar or expert here (ln the form of a school teacher, school inspector, or other such ocommunity leaderfr, nOt the professional sportsman), rfbut bis role is to demonstrate and teach, to organfze and to supervLse' not to ptay our gamea for us while we roast or freeze on the sldellnes. rr(S3) To lllustrate, l{urchle referred to varioug community basebaLl reagues organised throughout llanitoba and to an rnterlake schoor Lnspectorfs use of organlsed PIay to asslnilate Ukralnfan children and youth. Recreation, in this text, eras an integral part of the rurar probrem and its resolution. Hith the deveropnrent of a more market oriented agriculture, lt was implied, a divlslon between work and relsure had emerged and, Hith lt, -205-

the growth of a sports players r.abour market. Arthough neither of these market incursions rras deemed to be a fundamentar charrenge to rurar communrtres rn thrs analysls, both created problerns because ttrey af fected a community r s ablrtty to reproduce itserf under changing conditrons.

As a theoreticaL ldeology, then, rural socloJ.ogy was an investigatory dl.scÍprine that conceived of rural society as a flerd requfrrng actrve rnterventron. probrems eere identlfied and sorutions were offered in order to ensure that rural people were part of the ideological communrty.

rn definlng therr terrain, rural socJ.ologlsts rncluded ,trural the schoor probrem, as an r.ssue that required soclar intervention. Given the nature of their enterprlse--to identify problems in every area of rurar. society--this ¡ras hardly surprising. In reality, however, this particular aspect of rurar sociorogyrs domain cas formed as much by educational. aa by socloroglcal dLscourse. For at the same time that post-spencerian eociorogy eas deveroplng tn North AmerLca' what has varÍousry been described aE social educatlon' progresslve educatlon, and new education was becoming estabrished in edusational theory and pedagoglcal. practice across North America and Europe. Associated wfth pestalozzi names sush as and Froebel fn Europe, Derey and Hal1 ln the United States, and (pedagoglcally, ff not -206-

theoreticarry) MacDonald and Robertson in canada, thls t'movementtt had a substantlaL impact on the organisatlon of knowledge ín school systems in generar and rurar schoors ln partlcular.

New edueation nas composcd of two essentiar components: a shtft Ln focus from formal. curricurum to the child and adorescent, and a curricular shift from crasslcal to practlcar and scientffic training. Both of these rrere the resurt of devéropments ln educational theory tt¡at ranged from late elghteenth century European thought through to the emerging discipline of psychorogy in Amerfca at the turn of the twentleth century. Johann PestalozzL (LT46-LgZ7) viewed the child an a unity of morar, physlcal and interLectual powers' believing that educatLon should invorve arl of a chíLd I s fasulties. Teashers, he felt, shoul.d adapt I'nstruction to the individual. chird so tt¡at these natural powers could be arrowed free expression. rn its actuaL practlce, instruction invorved the observation of actuar items and natural objects rather than books and readLng. Frledrlch Froebel (working in the mid-nineteenth century) accepted PestalozzLts conception of, and respect for, the child' arguing that chirdren shourd be arrored to develop through free serf and group activity. rn fornrulating hls notlon of klndergarten and posttlng the slgnlflcance of pray ln child development, Froeber argued that teachers sbourd act as surrogate mothers, seeklng to reproduce a feminlne, -207 -

famlliar atmosphere within the cLassroom. And G. stanrey HaII, rrriting at the end of the century, drew on Dar¡yin and evorutlonism in proposlng his general psychonomr.c Law as a means 0f theorising child devel0pment and, thereby, constructlng the new psychoLogicar category of adorescence.

This Iaw, also known aE recapltulation, heLd that human beings, in their individual deveLopment, recapitulated the evoLutlonary devel.opment of the species; tt¡is meant that physical rife and indivldual behaviour went through clearry identífiable stages with each requiring speciar attention. That was especiarry neer ¡rlth Hatr, ln hrs three volume sÈudy AdoLescence, ¡re6 his identiffcatlon (now vlered aa part of an t¡lstorical inventlon) of particular characterlstlcs of youth shich requLred speclal care, protection and, most importantry, their removal from adult rife. For pedagogy, arr of this meant that educationar systems needed to be judged oD the basls of thelr adjustnent to the percelved natural growth of indrvlduars through the llfe-Etages. (s4) If Pestalozzi, Froebelr êfid HaIt (among others) establrshed the foundat,ions of new educatio., Ít was John Dewey who systematised thought in the area and gave tt philosophical coherence. Deweyrs primary contribution rra6 to discuss education in terms of pragmatlsm and post- spencerian soclar science. Htth Èhe latter, Dewey developed a sociar conception of the nlnd and a view that education was essentlally a soclal procegs. He attacked both idealtsm -208- and reariam for their indfviduarism, arguing ínstead that ¡¡ind and thought nere the result of an active self lnteractfng with an active social environment. Edusation had to recognise and refrect thls relattonship by vlewing the chlld aa an active being with impurses to communlcate, create and lnvestlgate. The Echool, ultlmately, had to be a sociar lnstitution providing optlmar conditlons for the rearlsation of sociar goars ln thfs view. pragmatlsm alLowed Dewey to conceive ot thinking as essentlaLry an exercfse in problem solving. Rather than nlnd disciprine (crassicar hu¡nanism) or the reception of pre-estabrished truths (rationarfsm), thought lnvolved the applicatlon of the scientific method to problems in hls phlrosophy. Education, therefore, had to invorve students ln situations where they sorved problems of intrlnsic interest to them.

Students, that is, had to be both thinktng and doing, Gtr, more accurately, thinking Þg dolng. (55)

The new rural education eraa part of new educatron anq the rural socfal discourse whlch llnked agrlcurturaL economics, rural socl.ology, and home economics. rnstitutionatry tt connected educatfonar departments nlth agricultural colregesr provincial and state extensLon serviees, and ttre federal departments of agriculture. llore importantly' though, it strustured the circuratlon of educational ideology among rural people and rural ideorogy among chiLdren and youth. How, then, ¡ra6 the new rural -209-

education constltuted? First, it was continuous with the rest of rural sociar science. The problenatic of rural sociology vra6 adapted to the educatlonal milieu, and the categories of agrl-curturar economfcs and bome economlcs informed f ts construction. Second, tt¡e categorl.es of nee, education and rural sociar science were combined to produce an understanding of rurar society in which the educational played a significant rore and rural shildren and youth acquired identities through these categorres. There Here three erements in the constitution of rurar educatfon: establishing education as part of the rural social domaini identtfylng the probrems of rurar educatlon; and sorvlng the rural school. problem.

The frrst element conarsted of three stages: establlshing the existence of a sosial domaln; concelvlng education as part of itt and declaring an independence for education in that domaln. Through this process education and educationar systems nere rendered areas of enquiry, and It became posslbte to generate and dtcuss soctal facts about education. The flrst stage merery involved an appropriation of soeial sclentlfic categorLes, rhire ln the aecond stage these categories were appried to education. The growth of riterature on rural education fn the first two desades of the twentleth century ïas ltself an lndication of efforts to consLder the prace of education in rural society. But how dld it actually proceed? rn Albert Leakers. ThJs*,ueans, and -210-

l'lethods of Agricurtgral Education (lgls), the need to train the young 'in the scl-ence and art of modern industrfes and professionsrt eras the departure point for a text organlsed ln terms of education as a socfal phenomenon. one chapter on the historical deveropment of agrlcurtural. educatlon, and another on the condltions of rural rlfe, introduced a more detalled survey of speciftc area6 and fssues in rurar educatlon. !'rom a discussion of varlous revels ln the system (elenentary to colrege) through consolidation and rural school extension (clubs and short courges) to teacher tralnlng and the speciar needs of womenr FüFërr echooring and agricurtural education were cast as social. questfons demanding social answers. (86) In ( 1913 ) ' mean¡rhf le, J. C. t{ilrer assessed the relatlon of canadian educationar systems to rurar. education in ter¡ns of administration and financing, teachers, courses of study, attendance' and the rore of agricurturar departments and agriculturar corteges. He arso anarysed the inspection and supervlsion of rurar echool systems, uttrlslng extengLve questionnaires sent to lnspectors acrosa the country to survey workrng condlÈrons, professlonal lmprovement, inspection methods, dutles, and patterns of appolntment. Anarytical nethods and Eurvey techniques gleaned from the soclal sclences framed Hllrerfs lnvestlgatlon. (sz) rn the third stage of this process tt¡e signtficance of speclflcarry educatlonal lssues nere noted. rn James -211-

Robertsonts Royar commlssion on rndustriar rraining and Technical Educatlon, for example, the forms of soclal analysls were gtven a contenÈ derlved from the new pedagogy: the special needs and importance of chirdren and youth ln sociarisation; the role of practicar trainlng in the socialisation of the youngi and the signlfisance of educatfonal institutlons in tha wider soctalleatlon of rural people. (58) Form and content gtere then linked in the second and third elements of rural educatlon. (89) The second erement was pracÍng the probrems of education in the context of the broader rurar soclal problen. nThe probLem to be consider€d, r Leake proclalmed- r,is ln his introductlon, how the agrlculturar land may be made to produce an adequate food supply for the rapidry growlng populatfon, whlle at the same tl¡ne provfslon ls made for such soeial and educationar advantages as ¡rlll induce the best of our country people to renar.n in the open country. n Hlthin thege general contours, flve subordlnate probl.ems Here speclfied: deveroplng a system of educatLon eufted to Local condl,tlons and to the everyday erperiences of, country children; adaptlng the education of boys and glrrs, fourteen to nineteen, to product!.ve ef f iciency in agrfculture and homemaking; givlng serious consideration to the farm home; teachrng sound business methods and scientifis principres of farm management; and revitarising and redlrectlng country rlfe. These problems, ln turn, were -2L2- siÈuated ¡rithin the ,conditions of rural rifef,, namery the shift in popuration to the city caused by the introduction of machinery and the rack of opportunities in the country.(50) Rurar educatlon, tt¡en, as a dlstlnct Lggue, was deemed to be in need of reform as part of ttre larger problem of rural soctety. llett¡odologicalLy, srgnif icant faots were generated in identifying the emplrJ-cal vartdity of a rurar schoor problemr ând judgements nere made on the basis of these t,factsrf fasts. The of declinlng enro}ment, poorly paid and poorly qualified teachers, inadequate management, curricula unsuited to the needs of rural peopLe, and a generally poorer quality of educatlon in the country than ln the city were produced. These facts were then interpreted using the categories of rurar sociar science and educational theory. In the Royal Commission report, for example, the fact of rural populatlon Ioss waa presented, accompanled by four I'undisputedn causar factors: the u6e of fmproved machLnery; better education opportunltíes in townsi the freer circuratlon of money ln the tocns; and the attractiveness to young people of the amusements and excl.tement of tocn rife. Thls was forlowed by four reasons why poputatton shourd stay in the country: rural rife created raclal viriltty; agriculture created wealth without causLng soil exhaustlon; farmlng was a basls for natlonal prosperity; and the cost of r tvlng ln clties was a pressl.ng problen. rt hraa then -2L3- poslted that, whatever the movement of populatlon, rural communitles 'fare entitled to and must have edusation sulted to the needs of all thelr members.n(61) The third and finat erement in rurar education ras the actual soLution of the ruraL schoo1 problem. rt was argued that education should and must perform å sociarising and social contror function, easing rurar peopLe--especiaLly chirdren and youth--lnto the ldeological community. once identifled, then, the rural school probl.en required human lnt,ervention on a variety of fronts. rn the analysis offered by Robertson and the other commisslonerse peF[ìânent teachers were needed in rural schoors so they could be integral parts of the communlty, and the idear agriculturar teacher waa a farmer wlth htgh community status. The practicar coursea tn agricurture and homemaking, while important in transmltting needed sklrls, performed the usefur function of preparing people for llfe in a rural communfty and deveroplng good cltrzensbip: ,,Itbe spirlt and habit of good citizenshipi may best tbel accompllshed by the student partlcipatlng tn forms of activity which are part of the social ttfe of the community and of the social and interLectuar t.ife of the schoor aE an f' institutlon. The idear school wourd become a6 much of a totaL institution for chirdren and adorescents as posslbre. Their recreation wourd be brought increasingly under controf informed by an appreclatlon for rurar lffe as both -2t4- a buffer against the lure of the city and a further promotion of rurar citizenship. At the specific revel of practicar pedagogy, chil.dren and adorescents wourd be tralned ln scientlflc reasonlng and tt,s apprlcation in thetr dairy affairs. They wourd learn, said the commissioners, hablts of observation, practrcar abirities from triar and experlence, the habit of seeking emplrlcal lnformati.on, and ffhablts of forrntng reasoned Judgements and oplnions upon situatlons, conditions, tt¡eories, prLnciples and methods of t, farm work and management. ( 62 )

J.c. Mfrrer oonsidered organisationar and administrative reforms to be necessary in solving tbe rural sct¡oor probrem. He used hÍs detaired study to recommend cbanges which would improve the productfon and derlvery of educatfon in rurar areas. rn a chapter entitled frAgricultural Departments and Agricurturar collegesr, for exampre' Hiller described and anarysed the rerationships among agricuJ.tural colLeges, agricultural departments, â¡d departments of education. rn so dolng he prescrrbed an ideal articuratlon betreen the agriculturar and the educationar. rn his mind these three areas, each of whlch contrfbuted in its oïn way to rural .educatlon, needed to be more closely co-ordlnated. MilIer noted tþat, hlstorically, agricurtural departments ¡rere soreLy concerned with the commerclaL aspects of the agriculturar lndustry, but departmental worh in agriculturar educatron was becomfng -zL5-

more extensive (aid to Farmersf and somenrs rnstitutes, for example). The most signfflcant govern¡nental work in the area of agrlculturar educatlon tras belng done ln the agriculturar correges, however. The organlsation, extension, and diffusion of agriculturar knorredge were undertaken ln these lnstltutlons. Provtncial departments of education' mean¡vhire, were connected to agrlculturaL departments and agrlcultural colreges through programmes to train rurar teachers rn agrlculture. rntelrectuals in these various institutions were improred to co-operate in devising

new publicatfons and other media to 6erve tÌ¡ose people who

Here no r.onger in school.. rt eaa especiarry Lmportant, he felt' to reach those young peopre who hrere between trerve and eighteen years of age through the adaptation of instltutlons and curricura to their special needs.(63) According to Leake, the flrst step in solvtng tt¡e problem was irnproving the condltions of the rurar school. Increased fundlng wås necessaryi thus, communlty members had to see the school as a profitable Lnvestment, efficiently creatlng a valuable product. Htghly gualtfied (especlaLly írale) teachers were needed, and they courd onry be attracted by better salaries and other Lnducements. Material equlpment had to be lmproved, ãDd one nrethod of doing this was to arrange community buildings in an educationar brock or communLty centre. ilHere,rr he wrote, could be grouped tbe schoo!., surrounded by ample grounds and gardens, the residence tõr ine -2L6-

shoolmaster and his family, the cburch, the publÍc assembly and music hall, the park, the athletÍc grounds, the skatlng rink, the co-operatlve crea¡nery, the cheese factory, the bakery like. and the Most importantly, though, the size of the administrative

unit had to be enrarged through consoridation. The consorldation of schoors--the baslc erement ln the acomprete reorganization of country lffen--meant, ultimately, the consolidation of neighbourhoods: f,what before consoridatlon were two or three separate neighborhoods become one strong organized community.... rr community nas then relnforced through vocational trainlng in agrlcurture and home economics. Practlcal education furfirled the goars of both the new pedagogy and the new sociar anarysls. pedagoglcarty it connected the school with real life, trained student,s to acguire information for themselves, and cultlvated active rather than refrective instincts. soclatry it created a dutlful regard for nlndustry ln generèIñ, fostered a respect for farm and home occupatfons, and served as a means of keeptng boys and gtrls on the farm. (64)

As an object of knowredge, rurar socr.ar rearity was structured accordlng to these areas of anarysis. Arthough related, the economic, do¡nestic, the soclal, BDd the educational were defined as discrete domarns, each emproytng srightry different anarytical categorles. Between them, a composite problematlc of rurar society was deflned. rt was -2L7 -

in practlcal ideology, however, that these theoretical ideologies connected with actual human subjects to form soclar identttles. At tt¡e practlcal level, the drseiplinary boundaries dissolved into tt¡e subjective unity of indlvidual farm men, romen and young people.

1. This account ls based upon E. Rolr, @ ncgnomlc Thouoht, chapters ùII,vIII,IX; ¡. oãitmãìF,tne Role of the German Hlstorlcal school ln Amerlcan Economic Thought, r, American Economic Association, Eroægi¡gg ( 1.955 ); J. B. crark, The Distrlþution of learth (New York, Lgzlr. ,,prefaceF and 'Table of contents"i tt. Furner, Advocacy and obiectivity¡ ã crisfq (Lexington, Lg7Sl. passin.; C. gtr"rUorn;@ Sqcietv (London, êndtfHeo-cLassiclsm, ]-976r, chapter Z; B. Rowthorn, Neo-Rrcardranlsm änd üarxlsm, rf New [.eft Review 86 (July-August, L9T4l: B. ffne, ldeologv (tondon, Economic Theorv. endItMarglnalism 1980), chapter 7¡ C.D.H. Goodwin, Moves to the New Horld,, in R. Brack, A. H. Coats and C.D.S. Good¡rin, The Harolnal Revotution Economlcs (Durham, l9Z3). in 2. _R. Ely and G.R. fllcker, Eletne-ntary prlnciol,es of Economlcs (New york, 1904), p.-1õ71- 3. EIy and Wicker, , part I. 4. Ely and Hlcker, , part II. 5. Ely and Htcker, , part III. 6. Ety made a point of di;tiúuis[i;g between income accrulng to indlviduars and lncome accru!.ng to the factors of production, arguing that the taek of economics eas to expS.ain thè tãtter. The fact that individuar capitaLists or indfvlduar workers receLve particular incomes eas the subject of consÍderatlons beyond economlcs, and therefore of llttle concern economist. EIy and Hicker, to the 356. r p. 7. Ely and Bicker, nle¡nentary princlæ t p, 3?S. 8. Ely and Hicker, 433. 9. , ir. _H. . Taylor, (New York, 1919), p. 31. 10. T.N. Carv^e^r-, (Boston, 1911 ), p. Z9O . 11. PrÍnciples, chapter III; Carver, principles, Tiylgt,290-292. pp. L2. rn May of L9z6 premier ffan John Bracken asked R.s. lturchie to prepare inventory of the unueed Lands withrn the -218 -

Province, with a view to deveJ.oping a more ef fective programme for the settrlng of such of these lands as are suitable f,or agriculture. r, Bracken envisioned, and Murchie produced (with the assistance of Henry Grant and others)' a survey of the acreage of unused-Iands, the sultabtrrty of the land for farmlng purposes, the locatlon of different parceLs of lanã, 'thË typbs of farming best suited to the various dlstricts, ãna the economic and social conditions in the respective areas. Bracken arso asked that the ftmore report contain recommendatlons for economlcal productlon and more efflcient marketlng of farm productêr â6 werl as the further development of ruraL community rLfe. r, rn this chapter ere anaryse the economic and Joctal sections of in order to illustrate hon l{anltoba rurar soclar sclentlsts emproyed- the categorles of thelr disclprÍnes in thelr eñpiricat stüales. Provinciat Àrchives of l{anitoba (pAú), ¡ohn giãcken Pêpeqs, Box 130, FiIe L449, rrBracken to Uuffi 926tt; John Bracken papers, Box g, Fire 93, ,,r{urchie to Bracken, L4 Jury Lgzífr and nunoccupf ed Land surveyr,; R.T. Hurchie and H.c.' Grant, unused Lands of Hanito_bq (Hinnipeg, L9261, 13. l{urchie and Gran_t, unused Lands of }lanltoba, p. 34. 14. C. H. Hammar, ,,Economic RecommenOatf ons, pp. Z_3, in PÀll, Jo-hn Bracken paoers, Box 130, Fire 1449. rn his marglnal notes to Hammarrs manuscrlpt, Murchte descrtbed this approach as betraying Hammàr rs American bl,as, perhaps because Hammar cl¡ose oranges as his exampre of an elastie commodity. rt is probabre tÌ¡al the soclologlst Murchte actually mfstrusted Hammar I s economic bias. No doubt Henry Grant had ress difficul.ty ¡¡ith the analysis. 1.5. Carver, Prinçloles, p. LZg, 16. Taylorts revlew of carver, princloles_, in AmericaÃ Economic nevtes 2 (September, ltlãl,i; 622, L7. Taylor, Prln-clples, pp. 153-154. 18. Taylorts revfew of carver, prfnciples, pp. 6zg-62a. 19. Carver, Princiolesr Þ. 295; f"if chapter x. , 20. TayLor' Principles' pp. zLg, 244-z4gi carver, Prlncloles, pp. 314, zg6-io]- frOne special dtfftculty with the dlfferentiaL theory of rent. . . rs that the sanË piece of land is worth different sums to different men.... trlhe 6ame acre of rand is worth a great deal more to å highLy skirred sclentiftc farmer thal it is to a shiftless, unbusinesslike farmer.tt Carver, p.300. 2L. Henry Grant argued that a 'management chargei should be included fn farm expenses. Henðe hls defiãitton ot net far¡n profit was any income reft after deducting from receipts all expenses (tncrudlng management), interest on capiÈalr ån amount for unpald f,amily labour, êDd a -2L9-

return for the operatorrs labour. profit, therefore, became a compretery residuar category bearing no drrect reratÍon to nanagement or other fáctãrs of p-roduction. : universlty of r{anitoba (uM) Archives, Facur.tv qf. AgrlcuLture lJrventory, Box 3, H. c. Grant, Detai].ed study of the Economlc Factors Affectrng the productlvtËy''A of crops and Livestock in Thirty Þranitõba Farms,r' p. 62¡ Farm HElraqementr p. 15; Caruer, prtnciptåer !lft"l: H.J. spilrman, trThs r, p. !15, rtProf Farmerrs rncone, and E.H. Thomson, tts That Farmers Recelve-rfvê,'t ln T. N. Carver, êd. r (New York, 1916 ) . 22 Grant, ttA Detalled study of the Economic Factors, r, 94. p. 23 TayLor, Prl.nqip1es, p. 4gg. 24 E. Fox-Genoveae, rrhe rdeorogicar Basis of Domestic I:"i:llll_1"^g:,I"IÍ3"ove_se. anã e. cenàvese, rhe Frutrs ( Nec_ tork ana-oriã;ã, -t;áaiffiäËd W11; K. Tribe, ( London, L9781 , chapters 3 and ¡1. 25 S. Strasser, (New York, Lgg?r, chapter i0; K. Ktsh Sklar, Catharine (New 1973). Haven, 26 Therborn, Science. C}ass and Society, p. 99. 27 P. 5þorn, Hlcksteed, ( L,ondon, 1933),3t, v. r,I, p. ls9: quotedffi r1o. 28 C. Frederick, tl lomÈ.ttanaqement (Nec r"ik, l91z), p. zz5, see atsoîî Richards, The Cqst_.of l+ivinq (New lorL, 1g99), Richards, tþe=cost ot rooa (Nen yoiÈlgOt), Rtcirards, it¡" co"i or, Shelter (New York, lgOS). 29 H. Foote Crow-, The Ameri_c_an. _Cguntry GirL (New lork, 1915; repr lnt LgT 4l , pp. li? ,- ZlZ* 30 foote Crow, f r p. Z!4. 31 Frederlck, H_qusehold Enoine..inor -CFr-i+rrr¡ lrsaqa^*^_r ln the Home (Chicago. L91S), p. ZBz 32, Frederick, Household Enqlneering, pp. L9-21, 155, L76. 96, lS0_ 33. Frederick, Ho.usehgLd EBqtneerlng, pp. GS_6g; Frederick, T_he -New Housekeeplng, chapter S. 34. !¡e!erl"k' The Neg .House-keçplng, pp. -to9-104, 110-ltl; Rlehards, Thg Cqst of-- FãóE ñ , 7_Bi Frederfck, Household Enqlneerins, p. 3lg.- 35. ,Foote Crow, _ o p, ZZ3; Frederl"k, fne Uew HouseÈ , tZg. 36. Foote Crow, The Ameçícan Countrv ðirt, Þp, 224_226. 37. Frederlck, Ob. 38. lurngr, , chapter 12. 39. S. Fine, LaÍssez Faire inA thc êanlr=l rral Gs-^ o&-!- (Ann Àrbor, 1964), chaptei VúI, H. and J. Scheendlnger, (New ïork, 1974); A. -220-

oberschalr, rfrhe rnstitutionarlzation of American Sociology, tt ln OberschalL, êd., The EstAÞIishment of Emplrlcal socioloqy (New york, Lgzzt. The drrcrprrne ot sociorogty, aË Therborn has suggested, became commttted to the strengthenlng of ldeorogtcal cohesion: fr. . . tl¡e central sociologlcal contribution to a scienttfic discourse on soclety (whatever its value)...has communlty values normE-- Ii_ t\ praetlcal". ap_p_Iisa_tion ài has characteristical-ly demanded a commitment to "gVthe stregthening of some such sort of ideoroglcal conmunlty. originating as a successor to traditional porltical phirosophy, soclology thus became ln many $rays scelntiffcally a modern, oriented equival.ent to theoroöy-ã and moral phllosophy--an tnvestlgatory rather than dognratic vr¡c¡rguardian rr¡cr¡¡ ofclr therne ideotogicalt qeoroglcal' community. fr Therborn, Sçlence Class and Socfety, pp, origlnal. ZZ4-ZZ5: emphaslsls ln the 40 c. Erlwood, s-ociproqy and r{odern sociar problems ( New York, 1910 ) , chapter iV, pp.--ã98-391. 41 EIlwood, Sociologv, p. gg7. 42 Ellwood, Soclology, pp. 400, 406. 43 EIlwood, Soclologv, p. 26, 44 J. Gillette, CqBstructl_ve Rura1 _Sociolo<¡v ( Ne¡r york, 1913), chapters II and III. 45 The Turtle l{ountafn and s¡yan Rfver surveysr condücted by the social service councir of the Methodist and Presbyterian churchesr w€Fê part of a larger programme-rura1 of church sponsored sociar Jurveys of urbãn ånd areas. This social gosper commltment to the resolution of sociaL probLerns sas an example of the lnfruence of soclologicar thinking among piogressive churchpeople. Here we anaryse the surveyJ in oider to irrusbåte ho¡r l{urchie, a5 the main author of the surveys and a Manltoba rural social sclentist, enpLoyed soðrorojlcaL categories in his emprricar rork. R.- Ailen, The sõclal (Toronto, Lg7gr, pp. lZ-13. 46 : j rinnrpeg, te14);_ Tr¡ gAuttionat*++9 - Soct+. "r Èlurchie and Grant, unusea.a LanãË-ãf-E-nitoua,'p;: Gillette, conslrJrctive ae_Sg; rrThe Rural soãfol0gy,-- ctap[år xvrrr, RuraI Soclal. Surveyrf . 47 J. GlIlette, ,f Nature of the Rr¡ral Social Problem, tr 2 (ApriI, LgLZl, p. 256. 48 GllIette, ConstructLve Rural. Socioloqvr p. 1gS. 49 GlIIette, ConsqrUg!,lve nurat Soctol.ogyr p . ZO4 and chapters NIII and XIV generallt;--- -22L-

50. Turtle Hountaln, p. 24. 51. Swan River, p. L?. 52. R. l{urchie, I'The P1ace of play in the Country, il Grain G!:owersf Gulde 9 May LgZ3, p, SgZ, 53. Murchle, rrThe Place of PIay, t, p. 6lg. 54. !. cremin, Th-e -T-tansformaiion of the sehool (New ïork, 1961), pp. 101-105; R.F. eutt;m, A History gf Education in American Culture (New york, fõ6ãf-pp. ff . 380-38 2; c. steedman, The uoit¡er l{ade conscious , : The Hlstorlcal Developnent of a primary schooL pedagogy, r, Historv Horkshop Jffi ZO (Autumã,19gS), J. Kett, (New Present york, tgTZ), ne:-ZL,?-ZZl-:. D. ff Tt¡e Development -Education Lawr, t' of Agricultural ln Ontario, 1870- 1.910, PhD dissertatf on, Untverslty of Toronto, L972, pp. 207-22L. 55. Butts "ttq C-emin, A Hlstory of EÈucatfon, pp. 3g2_3g6; Cremin, The Transformatlon óf-thã sãhããI, "pp.- tlb_I26. 56. A. Leake, The ìreans .ina-- HãthããsJf Aqiicutturat Education ( New lork, l.9t s ) , p. xv and nrable of Contentstf . 57. J.C. I'tftler, Rgr.a1 Schools ÍD Canada: The ir (New York, 1913 ) . 58. the Royal commission on rndustrial Training and Technlcal Educatlon was establlshed by Hllfrtd [,aurierf s government in 1910 to enquire lnto the frneeds and present equlpment of ...canada respect!.ng industriar training and technfcar educatl_on,, and into the systems and methods rf of technicar instruction obtalning in other countrl-es. James Robertson, the chaf ¡- of the commission' had been actlve in the nee education movement for many years prior to his appointment, most notably in hls actlvitles with HftIlam Macdonald between 1899 and 1910. As Neir sutl¡erland has sugtestea, the report which Robertson and hls corleagues wrà1e rwas far more than a narrow study of industrial trainÍng and technicaL educatlon.... tltts comments and recommendatlons nade the report tnto a blueprint f,or the implementation ln canada of the .nen r edu-catlon. rr rn our analysis' therefore, rf€ treat the royal comnlssÍon report aa a signlffcant and repreaentativl text ln the ne¡r (and rurar ) educatlonal movement and the new (and rural) educational discourse. N. SuÈberland, Chlldren ln Çonsensus (Toronto, LgZ6r, pp. tgg-20f. 59. (CSp) (t9r.3). , Number tgLd 99. !93k", The lteans and l,tethods, p. xxii. 61. CSP, Number 19ld tigfs), pp. gb-CO. 62. csp, Number tgtd (1913), óô. 43_44. 63. lliller, Rural Schoots fn êånêda, chapÈer IN. -222-

64. Leake, ThF l{eans and }leËhods, pp. 5g, g4, 95, g2_g3. AGRARTAN IDEOLOGY

The dominant gender and crass identities of early twentieth century l{anitoba .farm peopre Ì{ere forged withln the categories of theoreticaL ideorogy described in the previous chapter. rn the practicar ideorogy of the period ideal images of farm qromen, men, and young people rrere constructed. By the L9zos, when the rurar social sciences were firmly established at úeC ana the Extension Service was in prace, a coherent ranguage exlsted to address farm peopte as economic and social subjects. rn the case of women and men, composite images Írere created around their economic activities in the farm enterprise and their social activities in the famiry and in the rural communfty. The farm man eras' first of al-r, an efflcient producer apprying scientific methods learned, for the most part, through formal educational processes. Second, he eras a market participant who adjusted his production and organised his enterprise according to the market. Thlrd, he was a farnity head and community member who buirt a stable environment for hfs farm and home. The farm woman was a consumer and part- time market producer, a household manager and workerr âDd a subordinate business partner in her family and in the farm enterprise. rn the rurar community, meanshire, she rùas a sociar housekeeper who had a duty to protect the farm family by co-operatlng wlth other women to sorve social problems. -224-

For both women and men these various components produced professÍonal identities: the professionar farm homemaker on the one hand' and the professfonar farmer on the other. rmages of farm youth aa economic and sociar subjects astive in the market and communities $ere constltuted ln this ldeology as cretl, but young peopre erere arso viewed as being special agents in the general soclarisation and revitarisation of rural life. This chapter sketches the contours of these images, suggesting what the various agrarian identities were in thls dÍscourse.

rn L92o the Grain@ published an advertisement for Seager HheeLerrs and John Brackenfs ,g., presenting the two authors as the agrlcultural equlvarent of efficiency engineers in industry. suggestlng that t he ttmust engineer combine the latest sclence and the most workabLe practice and apply them to sorve the probrems he meetstt, the advertisement offered the farmers of Hestern canada the hire of Hheerer and Bracken for $3.00 for life. (1) Although expriclt use of the language of industrlal efficiency eras pecurlar to the post-war years, the knowledge/productron equation was common throughout the rate nlneteenth and earry twentleth centurles. speakers and participants ln the farmers r institute neetlngs of the i.g90s -225-

drew the connection crosery, particularry in discussions of

the depression in the early year6 of the decade.(2) The "Better FarmLng Trainstf in LgLz-LA, sponsored by the railways and conducted by the agricurtural corleger wêFê designed to introduce farmers to better agricurtural technique in the interests of increasing production. ( 3) And' generally' dlscusslons of agriculturar educatlon from the late nlneties through the ¡rar years began wtth the premise that the most important factor in an enhanced productivity was for llanitoba farmers to have greater access to agricultural advice. (4) A particurar type of farmer was most successfur in transLating agricurturar. knowledge into a more producttve and efficient farm. This speciar type $ras practicarly oriented, accepting the limits of nature whlre becoming a generar expert in the various fierds which bore upon agrarian rife. He approached his work systematicarty, drawing upon scientiflc innovations while retaining past wlsdom. Scientif ic farming, according to The Far¡ners,r- !'simpry Advocater r{ërs farmlng ln harmony wlth the raws whlch the great Architect...has impranted rn the soir, the arr, the plants, êDd animals.... !r Hithln thls cosmlc context, the successfur farmer was a botanist in his knowledge of prant 1lfe, ån archltect or englneer in constructlng a barn, an entomologist in combatting insects, and ao forth across the many flerds of agrlcurtural knowredge. (s) simirarly, -226-

the central Farmers' rnstltute ln the 1990s conceived of the progressive farmer as one not brirliant but possessing common sense and good judgement, not highly educated but welr informed, and not having great esteem but serf- confidence. (6) Tith the systematisation of knowledge in the agricuttural college, this image of the producer became more tightLy organised, yet the basic elements remained. In the curricular reorganisation of l_gLg-20, the notion of the general expert was invoked to justify and explain the diversified programme Diploma in Agricurture. "The typical Itis farmer,r' it said, his onrr engineer, his o*n manager and worker, his own carpenterr ênd sometimes his own veterinary surgeon,n(7)

while a systematic and generar expertise courd be partially built through received wisdom, the truLy successful farmer was responslve to literature and thereby accepted the importance of formar education. Farmers had to accept the leadership of the corleges, institutes, ãDd extension service by reading and utirlslng thefr produets.

The editor of told the l.lAC constltuency ln l91s that farm prosperity was based upon brainwork' meaning t,the study of every avalLabre pubrication...dealing with agrlculture, the sorting out of lnformation sultable for the farm and utirizing it in a definite system of farming.rt(g) This, ln fact, was otd advice which had been offered for the previous twenty-five -227 - years in Þlanitoba. rn the institute approach, ãs yre have seen, farmers presented papers using bulletins, booksr êDd agriculturar newspapers as source materiar.(9) That method etas never truly effective in reaching the ff less progresslven farmer' however. The Extension servlce was designed to overcome this problem, but even a well organised lecturerfs programme faced many of the dlffrcurties of the institute approach. rn 1913 E. sard Jones of uAc tamented that many Hanitoba farmers did not take advantage of the educational materiaL available to them, suggesting [these men...do not often attend agricultural meetingse èDd7 if they do attend, they make f.ittle effort to grasp the material being presented. t' For Jones the sorution ray in the ,up-to-date farmert" who attended meetings, carrying the message to his less progressive neighbours by example. (10) Two years rater this rore was targery appropriated with the initlal appointment of district representatives wt¡o wourd s¡ork directly nith farmers, combining scientific education wlth practlcal training. ( ll ) conpetition ¡ras an important element in the construction of an efficient agricuttural producer. rn the nineteenth century the agricultural society falr (basicarry a livestock show) and plowing matches rrere the main media of producer competltion. But after the turn of the century, with the expërnsion of grain growing and the establlshment of the Extenslon service, Manitoba farners were abre to -228-

participate in various competltions, rangfng from the

traditional ones to summerfarlow competttions and seed fairs. And alL the competitions had a common purpo6e: to improve agrlculturaL technique and increase effieiency through friendry rivarry and the raislng of community production standards. rn the case of the pLowlng match, the model for other field competltlons, the language used to l.egitimise it invoked science; through sclence, people r s lives were improved in theÍr home and community. By a simple enhancement of agriculturar technique the plowing match produced better profitsr èn enthusiasm for farm 1ife, and a happier home. on a less modest though no ress important scale, the seed grain and rivestock fairs reproduced the market by serving as a meeting prace for buyers and sellers , (LZ)

For his place in the market, the farmer acqulred a sense of himself as an agriculturaL buslnessman. The categories generated in economics and agrlcurturar economics--profit, demand' suppry, production, consumptlon and so forth--were used here Èo address producers as economic actors. Farm men were identified first as producers in the market and second as businessmen of the market. the producer in the market had to understand fts mechanisms and adjust his production to its demands. More lmportantry' though, the producer had to become part of the market as a manager and an entrepreneur. As an entrepreneur -229-

he particlpated ln the wider economic nortd; as a manager he organised his enterprise in conformity with that worrd. the first and most generar erement in a producerrs market identity ¡ras a recognitlon of the dynamics of capitarism as an internationar system. rn a representative text which appeared in the Guide during LgZ4, f,or example, Henry Grant sought to correct certain misconceptions concerning the economic situation of the day. He wanted to show farmers that the depression through which they were sufferlng was not peculiar to their own country nor was it a unlque historfcal event. ''rt seems hardry creditabre,,, wrote Grant, t'that we should be so tgnorant of worrd affalrs as to believe that present conditions are the result of some inherent ¡reakness in our own country. fr Rather, farmers rrshourd rearize that periods of depression and progress have an inevitable babit of recurring, and that from now on, the advent of good times shourd breed sane conservatism, and the arrÍval of depression bring fortitude and faith.,, And Grant went so far as to suggest that the farm man trury became a business man through his entry Ínto the ¡rorrd market: The western farmer now realizes that he must produce for the world. He is no ronger the slave of pioneer restrictions and rustic conventions. rt exalts a man to be made a part of a worrd system, and the whoresomeness of great rerations is meaning that the indolent, pass-ive, vegetaiive farner is giving prace to thä vlrire man. ( 13 ) "Éi"ñooo"

More speclflcally, the various components of the economy were conveyed in the agrfcurtural economics courses taught -230 -

at MAc. colrege examinatlon papers suggested that such things as the rore of supply and demand in agriculture(14), the importance of the gold standard(ls), the advantages of the North American method of marketing grain crops (and the frmiddlemen'r rore of in Èhat systen) ( l6 ), the poslttve features of banking in a community(rz), and the place of capital and rabour in the economy(1g) were important themes. The farmer of the market was a manager pursuing profit in his combination of land, labour, ãDd capital, and an entrepreneur maximising returns through different marketing strategies. The idear farm manager viewed his farm as a firm functioning in a competitive marketplace. rn the 19og ftAgronomyt' examination at MAC students ¡rere presented nith the following question:

Supposing Vorl, on ApriI lst l90g assumed the management of a farm of 640 acres that had not been managed previousry at a profit, but which was considered to have the necessary equipment to make it pay. Hhat important featureË wourä you at orr"" considerr èrld why? ( 19 ) Hhen farm management became a distlnct offering in the ÈrAc agricultural economics surricuLum in 1913, Harrenrs Far$ Manaqement (1911) nas the text. rn that and subsequent years ( 1913-L917) farm management students studied the organisation and management of a farm buslness, the various types of farming, farm size and the investment of capitar in the enterprise, and the organisatlon of rabour on the farm. ( 20 ) rn examinations during that period students rrere asked' for exampre, to ,rtelxprain furry how you determine -23L- tt¡ere any relation given farm' a) Is Incomer of a of the'Labor or b) the amount farm and Labor Income; between sLze of CapitalinvestedintheFarmandLaborlncome'il(2L)Inby farmstead topics were supplemented later years these planning.and,moreimportantly,assessmentsoffarmof survey and interpretations management surveys (221 resul ts , -r^-nror foulfour, played as ele noted in chapter The survey nethod'

asignificantpartinthedevelopmentofcostaccountlnginmanagers used farm management' Farm North American farm managementsurveystodeterminefarmprofitability.l'ItIn 1-9L9' AIva Benton wrote should be recognlzed"' rhe ch ie r *¡ar so much--,,"11"uJf.,"*rtî',ä î1îT"",ååîl,":iäfä ries not lil"?î-*t"n a_l.=r;"u. the arnount or rarmerrs Iti"'=årãiri.t¡ ."-r."ru locariry "?îå"tarmeis make i'loo"'tt'ãlsiven :}tiÏ"åilå-;;;i tå.t;iiti: "ton-^''t"-tu" v"r i"I-- i'o' ve?T. rnï;i";"t"n.tt:l: ;::"J:î:: *r":: ::::iii some farmers!.t iill"5:'"'ö;-'H" "l'"' fånËi' * iiål t'ä' :::l:'""åx":i' """' ##r"* AccountingwaspartoftllACtgfarmmanagementcoursesfromstudents during llarch of 1914 In examinatlons the 191'3 onward' p3'an for keeping to give rra concise were asked' first' farmrecordsandaccountsrrand'second'n1¡lowwouldyou proceedtointroduceasystemofcostaccountinglnorderto By of dlfferent enterprises?tt(24) determine the standing tncluded a economics curriculum 1916' the agricultural- separatef|FarmBusinessandAccountingl|courseinwhichthe -232-

frgeneral principles of business, the use of commercial paper. . . Iandl systems of cost accounting and recordsr, erere taught. (25) students who wrote the ,Farm Accountsf, examination in L919 were asked rrIw]hat records are necessary to find the profit or ross on a certain crop or rivestock enterprise?tt rhey rrere also asked to calcurate ilthe Labor rncome of a farmer from the fortowing data: Average inventory' $2s'000; Totar receipts, $3,000; Totar expenses, 91,000; rate of interest, 5*,u(26) The entrepreneurial farmer actlveLy participated in the market, pursuing various marketing strategies for his grain and rlvestock. llarketing courses at Mqc taught agricurtural students hos¡ to understand the market and participate furry in it. The first specificatly marketing course offered at the corlege, in LgLz-l3, incruded the forrowing topics: How the prrce is affected by suppry and demand, by communication, transportation, competition, exportation and visible supply. The inspäction of grain in accordance with the Manitoba ðrain Act. Sample markets; systems of markettng grain. t'This tt course, it tras noted, r,will fnclude a visit to the Grain Exchange, the grain inspectorrs office and the frour, oatmeal and linseed oir mirls. fr 'principJ.es of }larketingr, offered in L925-26, involved !,analyses of market functlons, marketing channels and marketing agencies with speclar reference to storitg, grading and market financing of farm products , n (27 ) rn the exanlnatlons set for marketrng -233-

courses, students erere asked to identify the components of the grain trade, ès in thts example from L9t5: a) Define the forrowing terms as appried to the speculatlve wheat market: r,BulI Speculatorf,; ilBear Speculatortt trLongtt ttshorttti ,rputrf ,fCallfr; i and and and b) Hhat is meant by tfcashfr or ilspotil wheat. or, they rrere asked to sorve marketing problems like those contained in the following scenario: Mr. J.R. Dutton of Girbert prains shipped to his own order at port Arthur one car of wt¡eit weighing 60'000 pounds, nhlch graded No. I Northern *íir, a dockage of lt. The car arrived at Fort wirllam on september lsth and the grain was stored in the terminal erevator untir oótober 30th, when he sold it through the Grain Growers r Grain company for $1.00 per bust¡er. The frerght rate from GiLbert Prains to Fort Htrliam is 15 cents per 100 pounds. Interest rate is 68. a) Hhat amount did he pay for storage? b) Bhat amount did he pay the CNR? c) on the form provided make out the account sares rendered to Mr. Dutton by the Grain Gro¡rersr Grain Company. (Zg)

As the reference to the Grain Gro¡rersr Grain company tn the above quote suggestse co-operation eras an important marketing option for farmers. By lgj.4_L5r co_operative marketing was being taught as a component of agricultural economics and, in the rrRurar Economics r course' of fered after 1916' the subject of agricultural co-operation (',its history t co-operative leglslation, formation of co-operative organisationsr scopê of agriculturar. co-operationlr ) accounted for about one-thlrd of the subject matter.(29) By L925-26' tbere eras a separate rrprinciples of co-operationff course involving an ,rlntensive study of motlves, methods of -234- organisatlon and business management of co-operative associ.ations. rn examinations during the fatl of Lgzl. students were asked to rrlsltate and explain the two general groups of co-operative organfzation from the standpoint of form of organization followedrr and to frtdliscuss the results of overenthusiastic and extravagant craims.,r(30) As a L925 extension buLletin illustrates, however, the subject of co-operative marketing was constrained within acceptabre rimits in this discourse. rn his introduction to the bulletin, John Bracken wrote: To those who are starting in co-operative enterprise, it should be emphasized ti¡at co- operation of itserf carries with it no miracurous sorution for our problems of marketing: rre must produce what the market demands and pioduce more efficientry than our competrtors. producer organizations, whether co-operative or otherwise, cannot evade the laws of economics and business. They can do a great rleal, hosrever, towards standardizing production, eliminating wastes in marketing, and providing new markets. In the main text of the bulletin, Henry Grant enumerated the beneftts which wourd accrue from adoptlng co-operatlve methods, notabLy efficient action in the market and the construction of a market mentallty. The four rposslblltttes of co-operative Harketingrr that he listed were r,1. standardizing and improving education, z, Regurating the flow to market, 3. rmproving the dfstrlbution between markets , 4. Developing ne$r markets. rr Much less important was the development of co-operative ideals. The seventh and last item in a list entitled ilHhat should a co-operative -235-

rfDevelop member do?rt was an inteLligent understanding of the meaning of co-operation,f, well below rrEliminate excess varieties and improve his products, and,Make intelrigent use of market information.,,(3L) Hence, co-operation was a marketing option which the market-wise farmer courd use in pursuit of a better return on his investment. But the farm was something more than a capitarist firm;

it was arso the material foundation of famity and home. The farmer had to operate his farm as a business whire using it to construct a family environment. The task of providlng

materiar support for Lhe famiry was accomprished by being a good farmer. so the farmer nho produced efficientry, and managed his farm as a businessr nås serving his famlly welr. But the creation and maintenance of a sotid farniry environment nas a more difficult process. physicarry, it meant organising an attraetive farmstead. An ldeal farmstead incruded a treerined avenue from the main road directly to the house, a shelterbelt on the north and erest, a rawn inside the sherterbert and around the house, beds of f,for flowers' and a space such enjoyabre summer games as tennis, croquet, and rike pastrmes.r' such a comfortable and preasant environment provided a context for rrfather and mother, sisters and brothers ttol gather together.,r By tfmagnetic making the home and attractive' in this eêlr the farm man did his duty to famil.y and community. (32) rn his domestlc relattonshlp, meanwhlle, he treated his wife as a -236- partner in the farm, leaving her alone to manage her orrn department in the enterprise. The fronly nay that seems to work out in terms of cash proflt for both of them,r'Margaret phitlips argued in 1923, f,is ¡rhen certain departments of the farm are cari.ed John t s and Èlary r s and each carries the responsibil. ity of seeing that work is accompl ished. ,, rn this vision, the traditionar patrlarch gave ¡ray to the benevolent patriarch. He eras stirr firmry in contror but in a managerial rather than a paternal sense. on the ,fJohn traditlonal farm, pLans and bosses everything and Mary just does the jobs he assigns herr,, but on the properly managed farm:

the independent Mary wilr telr John that whire he can boss all the broad àcres and prant them to his oern Joy and wisdom' she craves a few square feet to Aig and delve alL her own erãtr and, it she so desifes, plant acorns and peanuts without inter ference. Just Like horses in a tandem team, ,,John may Lead the load, but Mary surely does her share of the putllng.,'(33) To complement his private face aE a benevoLent patriarch, the first component of a farm manrs public face eras service to the communlty through actlve partlcipation in community organisations. community servise meant breaking down lndividual, famirrar, êDd rurar lsoratlon in the interests of a broader community and rurar stabtrity. so, the farm man, in the interests of non-sectarlantsm and community wide endeavour, became active in agricultural -237 -

societies, farmerst institutes, grrain groerersr associations, UFM c1ubs, and similar groups. Descriptions of two community novements which developed in the rate teens and earry twenties convey this vision of service. The first, consisting of community clubs, took form in the immediate post-war period under the auspices of the social servlce council of Manitoba. rts purpose was to organise whoLe communltles--graln growers, associations, business groups' churches--r,to put on a program of community activities through which rife in the country may become more wholesome, more attractive, and more complete.,r(34) The second, called the district builder movement, was formed in the face of southwestern l.lanitoba crop fairures in the twenties. Those involved in the movement 6ahr the solution to the "unprofitabirity, of farming as residing in pan- community activity. The organisational method used rras to form committees of farmer-experts ( farmers s¡ho had made a financial success of their own farms) who then shared thelr expertise with the ir nelghbours . f n t,his wât, solutions rfere forged in the community, ,,directed toward community bettermentfr and drawing upon ,the inspirational forces nhlch every community possesses,r, while simptistic analyses which blamed the banks, the tariff, the grain trade or the railerays for peoplers woes were rejected.(35) The man who participated in these organisations, in whatever capacity, was performing a servlce to his communfty. -2 38-

The ideal farm man played a ]_eadership role in hls community. The MAC graduate, in particular, bore a great dear of responsibirlty for rurar readershlp. To begin with, he nas specificatly trained for tt¡is task through the lrural readershiprt courses which nere part of the rural- sociorogy currisulum by 19L9. fn these courses, he studled ?rsome of the practical. problems of rural life in Testern canada... Iand the] methods of redirecting rural soclal t' L ife. . . . ( 35 ) After graduation, if he chose to farm, he returned to his own or another rural district prepared to socialise the community (tn the sociological sense dlscussed ln chapter four ) : By his words and deeds he shourd splrltuarry, morarry and economicarly herp hls resi fortunate brother.... An agricultural student, having studied rural sociology,,,. can and should perform a great work in his rural district by. the organization of boys I and girJ.s r LLubr, agricultural meetings, dramatfc and other social organizations . (j7 I He and other farm men were taught how to estabtlsh rural varues and better farming through the l,lAc short courses. ( 3g ) rf he did not choose farming as his vocation, there were many other opportunities in rural leadership open to the

"col lege manrf . These included : . . . teaching or supervising the teaching of agriculture; scientific investigationJ. . . in government stationsi rural J_andscape improvement; agricultural experts or county agenÈs; agrlcultural polfce duty, tncluding iÃspectõrs of all sorts; organization of co-operative êocieties; agricurtural advisers in emproy of rairways, chambers of commerce t êtc.; representatlve of commercial organizatÍons, i.e., farm machinery, -?,39-

canning industries, dairy suppl.y houses; rural YMCA work; Iand] rura] civic improvement. (39) The enlightened rural man cou}d, through effective readership' faciritate the construction of community. Effective rurar. teadership yierded the co-operative rurar citizen. The ,redirection of sociar riferr or the tf social ization of rural communities rf meant lmbuing rural areas with a spirit of co-operation. As rural peopre erere drawn out of their isoration and into associations, they learned to be co-operative. ,Associationar lffe, rr John Gillette wrote, rris desirabre for sociar soridarity: rocar pride and community devotion must be to smalL communities what patriotism is to nations. tt And, G.H. Fiske added, rf the greatest need of the rural community is co-operation.... success in business co-operation san Lead to prans for social co-operatlon. . . in home, church, Iand] school. r,(40) According to the author of a HAc extension burLetln that addressed the issue of Boys I and Girls r Clubs, rthe best results will be accomplished onry ¡rhen the whole community, including the churches, homes and the varíous farmersr and woments organizations, co-operate with the school ln lending dignity and sympathy to the movement.,,(4L) And, professor T.J. Harrison of MAC claimed, the solution to rural social probrems rr depended upon two things: . . . co-operative or community movements among farmers, and...the co-operation of the community with the government and rural readers.n(4zl -240-

1o co-operate $ras to overcome sociar divisiveness in the interests of a wider harmony The image of professlonarism was constantly invoked in this ideology. rt eras used to eonstruct a status for farmers in which they identified themseLves as equal to traditional middle class professi.onals, notably doctors and lawyers. The professional farmer lras a perfect combination of efficient producer and manager, the skir fur market pLayer, and the solid family and community man. The first and major aspect of any profession was a body of exclusive knowledge that was acquired through specialised training. tfACr €specially in the Agriculture Diploma Programme, e¡as tbe training ground for HanÍtoba farmers. Just like other professional students, the agricurture student studied a varied curricurum of speciaLised courses. He learned the precrse detalls of crop and livestock production' proper methods of farm management and marketing, and a systematic approach to rurar leadership and community betterment. upon graduation, students sere ,practicar, interligent successfur farmers, and good citizensrf with the skills required to make a positive contribution to rural rífe; furthermore, they had acguired the scientific knowredge and the business ability to engäge in the increasingly complex ,,business of farmingrr. (43) The farmer yras who to succeed needed this training, and the farmer who lacked it was something ress than a professlonal. The -24L-

proponents and defenders of agricultural education, who were often faced with a scepticar farming population, invoked

professionaLism in their defense. rn addressing the uFM

conventlon in 1925, for example, professor C. Hopper of l,lAC made the following argument:

. . . farming is an important business and is a difficu}t business. r think you wilr admit that in both these respects tt wirL measure up wlth the business of the lawyer, the banker or the teacher.... Theory and practlcar experience arike point to the same conslusion, such a life business as farming requires and abundantly repays special training besto¡red upon it. The man who coltends that a good education is not herpfur in farming is hurting his own profession. (44) If, on the one hand, farmÍng was to prove its social worth or. on the other, farmers were to weather the vagaries of uncertain markets and an uncaring nature, the farm man had to embark upon a programme of special training and, in the process, become professionalised. The true professionar had the best livestock, crops, machinery and seed, kept a well maintalned farmstead, made regurar improvements to roads and fences, and forrowed an enlightened yet cost effective management pran. Professionalism meant ilgood farmingr,, tt¡at is, and the good farmlng competitlon was designed to reward farmers who set a professional standard in their community. Based upon the assumptlon that agriculture eras a permanent profession, the competition judged and assessed the various components of an operation wtth a view to rewarding the farmer who transcended the mere acquisitlon of wearth, exudlng an alr -242-

of stability and rongevity.(45) Furthermore, the fact that

farmers had to master so many areas of endeavour was an

indication of their professional status. rrrt should be evident to all, r' nrote Frske in charrenge of the countrv, that agricurture today is thoroughl.y scientific when rightry practiced, ¡rhich is simply sayrng that the practice of the new agricurture i; a profession. rt is among the most difficult and highly technical of aIl professions. No profession' with the possible exception of medicine, has a broader scientific basis.... tqgl

Moreover' a faiture to acquire scientific knowledge was deemed by some to be tantamount t,o unprofesslonal behaviour. rr[{hat would ¡re think of a doctor, rr D. F. t{ilson asked rhetorically in an 1993 plea for greater agricultural rfr¡ho knowredge, kno¡gs as rittre of his profession as e¡e do of ours?n (47)

The idear , farm man, then, identified with the professionar and bourgeois elements in society. As an economic actor he nas the same as any other businessman or entrepreneur with whom he shared the market, and as a social actor he had a status equar to that of any other man Ín the local or national community.

As the crucial actor ln the economy, purchasing approximately three-quarters of arl products bought for the home, the farm noman needed to be a trained and efficlent consumer. she was the rrpurchasing agentrr for her f irm. -243-

Hhereas in the nineteenth century she had been a manufacturer, producing goods for her family, in the twentieth century she was the rrdirector of consumptionrf who, according to one t'lAC araduate, f,must select. . . from among goods made under the supervision of those more deepry

interested in profits than in quality or usefurness. rf Hence' she had to be knowredgeabre. The changes in modern industry had not relieved the housewife of the burden of supplying the needs of her family; rather, r,in becoming the purchasing agent of her famity and society she has rarger responsibilities Ithan in the past] calling for trained interrigence, knowledge and constant vigilance. r,(4g) As the folrowing examination questions ir-rustrate, that responsibility was great indeed. rn the HAc course ilEconomics of the Householdrr (19L8) students r{ere asked, rIn what ways may it be true that the housewife is responsibre for the high cost of J.iving?r, while in the Èame course the following year they were asked, rfrn how far (sic) can an intelligent demand control the market?rr(49) Hence, farm r{omen learned the terraln of the marginal tst economy, incruding the role of consumption, the effect of demand, and the relative value and merrts of various nanufactured products (trademarks, labels, etc.: r,Ielvery householder shourd remember that when companies...spend huge sums in advertising these goods, tbey are practically guaranteeing thelr quallty.,t)(50) Furthermorer ês a consumer she had a -244-

responsibil-ity for the werr being of her community. rf

women sent their money out of the community rto bufld up Iarge centresft, as many dld, it meant frdeserted townsr,, f'vacated farmsrt, and å loss to the community of thousands of dollars. To neglect her responsibility and training was to be a poor mother, a poor wife, and a poor citizen.(Sl) Farm women erere not simpty consumers, however. They al-so had a productive Link to the market. Homen continued to peÉform production functions on Hanitoba farms well into the twentieth century, and many continue to perform some of the traditional functions to this day. But ¡rith the institutionar expression of home economics in the first two decades of the century, this work became overlaid with the language of the new discfprines. From the mid-nineteenth century, a pubric forum for womenrs production existed in the form of horticutturar shows at the agriculturar society fairs' where eromen competltivery displayed fruit, vegetables' canned and pickl.ed products, and frowers. But, in a move that contributed to Èhe formatlon of home economics societies around 1.910, fairs came under attack as being out of touch ¡¡ith the needs of women. tùhat eventuarly emerged was e system of fairs integrated with the extension service, in which production for domestic use was linked to production for market exchange.(bz) rn the home economics programme at MAC, courses erere given instructing women in those aspects of the market that e¡ere of direct relevance to -245- them in their rore as goods producers. rn rpoultry,,, for example, home economics students heard rectures on the following subjects! ". . . artificial and natural incubation and brooding, feeding and rearing chickensi feed and care of duckse gêêsê and turkeys; poultry diseases; market eggs;

tt marketing poultry products. ( 53 ) As a manager, the idear farm woman applled the rures of capitalist efficiency and scientific management to her househord. she foLlowed a business model ín co-ordfnating and combining her consumer and producer activities. rn the area of budgets and accounts, f:or exampLe, the l{anitoba

Department of Agricurture burlettn rFinancing the Farm Homerl addressed the eroman in the home as a financiaL manager and household accountant. The text began by estabtishing the l-egitimacy of a womanf s control over the area of househoLrl management. via a discussion of various prans for disbursing the famiry Íncome (dra¡rn from christine

Frederlck), f{omen fdere described as equal partners wlth men. ttHhen a nan can trust hfs wife with his name, his honorr âDd to be tt¡e mother of his chirdren, surely he can trust her to be an equal partner in the business of the home, rr proclaimed. the bulretlnr s authors. The overall pranning of the househord budget ferl to eromen and, as the househord accountants, they, Iike accountants in other businesses, t'keep a careful record of ar.r. money spent and al-r received, thfs being their onry way of knowing whether the company is -246-

running at a gain or a loss.tt rhe farm accountant had to carculate nore than just monies spent and received; she arso had to incrude in her accounts the exchange varue of food and clothing used for domestic use, and the exchange value of the farm familyts tiving accommodation:

To arrive at an estimate of the cost of running a farm homer on€ must charge oneIs self with this produce. shen the potatoes are put in the celrar in the faIl' the whote quantíty nay be charged at one time. rn the same wãtr when animaú are klrled for h<¡rne consumptloñ, record of their weight and varue should be entered in the accounts. rt is somewhat more difficutt to dear r¡ith the milk and vegetables, but their value may be estimated and chãrged. . . . rn tÌ¡e receipts corumn one should enter any cash received for produce sold and any received otherwise, and the value of home products consumed, and an estimated amount for rent.

Then' in her role as financiaL manager, the homemaker used her accounts from one year to budget for the next. But here she entered into discussions ¡vith the frsenior partner, of the firm, planning a budgeL which he, Ehe, and the other

family members erere able to fotrory. ( s4 ) Arr women experienced their activity as an extension of exchange relations in this ideorogy. Adopting a management system, of which househord accounts v¡ere a significant part, meant applying a buslness perspective to the home and its place ln the economy. And, in the specific case of farm eromen, the non-market goods production in which they nere engaged was subordinated to exchange through their identity as accountants and managers. -247 -

In her relation to housework, the homemaker eras addressed as the manager of the domestic labour process. According to l,lartha Foote Crorc,

the woman in the heart of the farmstead is her orrn route-clerk, and order-of-r¡ork clerk; she is her own instruction-card clerk, time-and_cost cIerk, gang boss, speed boss, repair boss and inspector. A1-1 these and much more she must be in oid", to gain the effects of scientific management in that factory which is her home realm. The household manager was responsibre for transforming the traditional household, which had existed unchanged for centuries, into a home in step with the times. rrrf the wife of Jurius caesar courd step into the home of the farm tt today, Mrs R. Hhiteside crote in Lgzz, r,she ¡rourd f ind nothing to confuse her, but if Ju1ius Caesar were to come to the modern farm he wourd not be abre to operate any one of the labor saving machines which have repraced ord methods of farming.,, fn one important area, for example, the manager -Freder could use ick t s technigues to change the old, roomy, nultipurpose farm kitchen into a small compact workspace wlth logically arranged equipnent. Thfteside advlsed homemakers truse to the same interligence in running the home tÌ¡at is necessary to make other great enterprises a success. saving steps means savlng time, strength, energy and hearth. ft means comfort and enjoyment, thus Iifting housework above t, drudgery. ( 55 )

Equally important, though, the homemaker was addressed as a worker--speclflcalry the efficlent, dlsciprined, and -248- happy worker ideally created by scientific management-- through her relation to housework and motherhood. The trBetter Babies Movementrrof the teens and twenties, for example, sought to create efficient and expert mothers through the organisation of conferences and baby shows in which women rearned the correct proeesses of chird care.(55) rt was the t'tAc trained mother and housewife, however, $rho Í{as the archetyptcal rurar domestic worker. Her experiences were both a confirmation of the varidity of household management and an example to other women. one college graduate pointed to her training in rHouse pLanning,ras having been invaluabre in faciritating her domestic rabour: The house crerr. pranned is the f irst thing to rlghten housekeeping duties, and our tittre hðuse, although smaLI, has been planned to save steps, make the work easier, êDd there is no waste spaäe. Had r embarked upon the adventure of marriage and housekeeping without some knowledge of house planning r shourd probably be workiãg fn a very unhandy, poorLy planned house. For another graduate, the college experience of ,,working in a werr equipped kitchen or raundry ¡vlth porcerain top tables and sinks, hot and cold water on tap, hardwood floors to clean' nice refrigerators, gas or erectricity with whÍch to cook, and stools to sit on at much of our workrr gave her t'higher ldeals in life and a broader outlookfr:

I have just been married three years.... f have a good sized house to keep, two men besides my husband to cook for, a little girl two years old and a baby five months. He have a rot of visitors and go out quite a bit ourserves. r do arr. the sewing for myself and my children so r never feel time dragging' but can keep up with each seasonrs -249-

erork, and am not often very tired mentaLly or phys icaì_ Iy.

Echoing these sentÍments, Hrs. R. clark suggested that the most valuable aspect of her training had to do with ff the attitude of the worker in her home to her r¡ork. The student at the colLege is made to feel and understand that the work of making and keeping a home reguires system, art, business ability' energy' perception for detairs, that it neecr not seem to be just a haphazard congromeratron of Jobs,n(52) Hhile her specific domain tras in the home, the farm eroman nas part of a larger enterprise. Her work, and the approach she adopted to her work, contributed to the success or failure of the farm. Hhereas it was required of men that they provide an environment for home building, a cruclal component of the farm womanrs identity was a clear understanding of her rore as an interrigent and capabre, though subordinate, partner in the farm. partnershlp entaiLed managing her domain not simply as a small capitarist firm' but as the important department of a large gith firm. the eroman in her department and the man in his, both being as ef f lcient as possibte, frhappiness and sel f_ respect spur them on to greater rabors and accomplishments, and love and sympathy...make a fine harness to herp purr the load with joy."(58) The phirosophy underrying tIAc as an institution eras in fact based upon this notion of partnershlp. Home economlcs compremented agricurture tn Èhe constitution of the symmetrical farm family. ,'With the -250 -

advance of agricurturar training in any community,rr wrote the MAC administrators in L9ZO, comes tt¡e demand for scientific and practical education in the chief of arl industries for women--that of homemaking.... tTlo ftt young rfomen of the canadian Hest for the great work which devorves upon them in the development of the country' and to give them an interrigent working knowledge of those things which are vitar in thelr work in the home, the course in Home Economics been planned. has In this programme, instruction was given: .. . in the fundamentar principles and practice of domestic science, incLuding the study of foods and cooking, the interior and exterior surroundings of the heaLthful home and l.Ls management; tt¡e hõa1th and general weLl being of its inmatesl the study of textires and fabrlcs; the making of womenfs and childrents clothing and miltinery; and also instruction in dairying, horticuLture and poultry raising. (59) The woman thus trained courd take her place as a scientific homemaker alongside a scientlfic farmer, building a rrbetter ttbetter home' and a farmf, . rrÀ real man r s ¡rlfe, rr wrote Esther Thompson in L919, ffmust be something more than his housekeeper and mother of his chirdren. she must be his conpanion--one who understands him and can fulJ.y enter into his life' giving sympathy and inspiration. rr Her nurturing, carlng quarities had the effect of domesticating the pure pursuit of wealth in agricurture, transforming the farm from an economic to a famitial and social unit.(G0) The farm eromanIs sosiaL identity was based upon her homemaking role and eras expressed through maLe language and lnstitutionaL moders. As the custodian of the farm famiry, -251-

she was propelled into community activity. But her exper ience in the home did not equip her for pubr ic discourse. she therefore reLied upon the language and institutions used by men and designed for their purposes. The image of women in this ideorogy was constituted through the same categories as men--social co-operators and community leaders--but it was expressed through the ideology of homemaking. The ideal farm rroman became a forceful and serf-confident public actor, but within the limiting and subordinate roles of community homemaker and soclal housekeeper.

tlAC trained farm women, and those farm women who participated in extension lectures and short coursesr wêrê expected to play community readership rol_es. Both home economics and agriculture students were given lnstructlon in rural leadership at the correge, but for women this was supplemented by courses in the rrHistory of Home Life,, and rrsociaL Historytt which taught the fundamental signif icance of family and home in historicar deveropment. r,Homen who have had the advantage of speciar training, r, wrote Nerlie Mcclung ln 1916, t'have a heavy responsibirlty.... They must lead in nee, avenues, puttlng higher value on womanrs work.rt As community leaders, farm women organised and facilitated various femare and youth activities in their district, ensuring that stabre famir les and homes erere integral elements in an uprlfted social rffe and a new rurar -252-

civilisation. voluntary readership provided a link between state lnstitutlons and speclfic communities, espectalry

prior to the introduction (and in the absence) of home demonstration agents. (61)

By participatlng in Home Economics societies and Homenfs Institutesr womêo not only 1earned household skilts, but ttrey also acquired a social identity. rn the discussion following the presentation of papers at institute meetings, for example, Is]olutions would be found for many difficult problems now confronting many timid ana shrinking women. Encouragement and sympathy would rerieve the stress of many lonely situations. À better and therefore a higher knowredge of her sister- women would be gained, reflecting a erarmer friendliness and deeper kinship with mankind. Participants thus deveroped sociaL skilrs ',that were dormant, and as a resurt--they are better fitted for homemaking, motherhood and citizenship. rr And a social identity gave the homemaker tbe abirity to create a trury home atmosphere for her family: There is more than manuaL rabour to be done if there is to be a real home. The mother must radiate cheerfulness, hope, faithr êDd again faith. she must generate energy and emuratlon and perseverance. She must lead and yet aÞÞearappe to trail behind. her_sfgle"Es? (621 social co-operation for r{omen meant working together to protect and enhance the home, while contributing womanly skills to the generar stability of the community. Llke mare co-operation, it was dlrected towards breaking down -253-

isolation and sectarianism in the interests of a wider community. Hhen llary Speechry arrived in piLot Mound from England in L902, for example, she encountered a sociar rife which eras organised around the churches, with Itttle contact beyond oners church group and l.ittle contact between farm women and women in town. After it was raunched in 1911, the Home Economics society set about to overcome sectarian and partisan barriers, freeing peopre from therrpetty ideasft separating neighbours, tonnsr èDd rural districts by frencouraging sociabir ity among its members and . . . r{ork t ing I for the social, moral and educational betterment of the home, the community and the nation.r,(63) rn the Home Economics Societles and Toments Institutes, ra fine spirit of co-operation [was] arousedrr as town women and farm rromen met and worked together. Furthermore, êxtension leeturers and home demonstration agents not onry instructed girrs and nomen Itin dressmaking, millinery, cooking, etc.,,r but they arso assisted them 'fin deveroptng co-operative effort in connection wfth the Boyst and Girrsr crubs, $omenrs Institutes, United Farm Tomen, etc. f, Through thelr corlective endeavours and the guidance of tbe extension service, eromen buirt tbetter homes, better schooLs, better health, better roads, better farms, and better rawsrf in the societies and institutes. (64) The co-operative astivities of society and institute women ranged from communlty through provlncial to national -254- concerns. rn the rocal community, they sought improved school conditions, Boys r and Gir1s r Clubs, town rest rooms for farm women, community Iibrarles, medical lnspections and improved medical facirities generarl.y. Money raised through teas, dinners, and catering communlty events such as prowing matches supported these activities. At the provincial lever, rural women agitated for better condltions for ilworking girLstt, the Canadianisation of foreigners, support of the juvenile court (especially the appointment of female judges), film censorshlp, reformed dowry Iaws, and suffrage. Funds from community projects supported the Social Service councir, the Red cross, the prohibttion Art iance, the childrents Aid and other charitable organisations. Farm women f{ere most active natlonarry during the sfar years. The Home Economics societies and sister organisations worked in the home to conserve food and in the community to raise funds for patriottc purposes in aid of the war effort. Rurar rromen thereby came together as sosial housekeepers, submerging other conflicting and overrapptng identÍtles rn a common womanhood seeking a common comnunity. As the 1923 president of the l,fanitoba Homen r s rnstitutes expressed it, ftIi]n the world there are atl classes of women; in our woments rnstitutes there is onry. one. There is no dividing line. He meet together that we may grow as citizens into f lner womanhood. tt ( 65 ) -255-

The professional farm woman was the composite consumer, domestic producer, household manager/worker, and community participant. Professionarism brought these individuar, mundane components together, elevating their status. rrHo¡r can a eroman expect to be a proficient housekeeper or homemaker, " Edith Charlton asked in LgO7, ffif she had no training along those rines which the profession insrudes?,'

The Home Economics programme at MAc served to train eromen professionaLly, transforming farm girls into farm homemakers: Housekeeping has been given a prace among the professions, åDd to fit young eomen of the canadian west for the great work whfch devoLves upon them in the development of the country, and to give them an intelrigent working knowreáge of those things which are vitar in their work i; the home,...Ithe course in Home Economics is offeredl. Thus woments work--the most important in society in this view--was given a scientific and professional standing. Academic and semi-academic training eneouraged eromen to think of themselves as professionals, allowing them to confidently and energeticalry assume their prlvate and pubric roles. Às an integral. part of the idear farm, the farm noman required a professlonal identity to conplement I her husband s professlonar status. rf Farming, rr it r{as argued, is norr recognized as a profession. somen are fast realizing that housekeeping, also, is a profession. Þlen find study necessary to feed stock properly or to prepare the soil for seed. Surely, then, women need to know how to feed thetr -256-

famiries properly or how to study and train their children. The domestic equivalent of a rrpermanent, stabLe agriculturert was a ,rpermanent, good home,f . Together, the progressi.ve, professionaL farmer and the progressive, professional homemaker constructed a farm, a homer êDd a community, which all fitted neatLy into a larger, society-wide community.(ee)

III

The new rural educators did not make a fundamental distinction between girls and boys in the nay they addressed children (as opposed to adolescents) in the schoor.s, nor did they ( for the most part) address farm children as specifically rura1. Nature study, which had become a generic term for school gardening, elementary agricul_ture, and agricurtural education by the time the Dominion Royal commission on rndustriar rraining and rechnical_ Edueation ¡tas published in L9L3r $ês a pedagogy applicabre to all children. rt eras not deslgned to be technical instruction, but rather a means of giving chirdren a practicaL orientation through interaction with the physical environment. Thts operated in two erays: children were treated as unique lndividuars and they were viewed as active sociar participants. rn speaking generarly of the new education in 1901, the principal of the Þlanitoba Normal School wrote: -257 -

IE]ducation has been defined as the process whereby 'The individual is eLevated Èo the speciest. This implies that no individuar shourd be free to follow, wlthout restrictions, the Leadings of his nature, but it does not necessaril.y impLy that atl pupils should be moulded after a single pattern.(6Zl Education, that is to sãge had to adapt to the pecul_iaritles of individuals. Nature study was chird centred in that it placed the individuar chird in a naturar context, teaching the child her place in the natural domain and alrowing the chiLd to freery interact with nature ¡rithin fairLy broad parameters established by the teacher. Accordlng to rnspector A.s. Rose of Brandon, the best resurts in nature study eeere achieved when the teacher nas incidentar to instruction. He felt that the introduction of system destroyed student interest, transforming nature study into science. (68) This semÍ-autonomy also promoted practical actlvlty. through natural actlvitles, å childfs senses were disciprined and a bond of sympathy nas estabrished between the chlld and nature. (69) Especiatry after the introduction of the school garden programme around LIOZ, children erere abLe to actually work with other students rearning the processeE of food production, including the condition of seeds and prants, a knowledge of the soil, tbe destruction of weedsr êDd so forth. (70) Beyond the narroer parameters of a specific item on the curriculum, nature study nas also meant to be a method of teaching, lnformlng alr subjects by glvlng them a practicar -258 -

orientation. fn 1913, f,or exampLe, it eras suggested that

the whore curricurum courd be revised to become more

rerevant to farm rife and practical endeavour. Hence composition wourd invorve writing descriptions of agrarian processes and Letters related to farm business, history and geography would become the geography of rocar communities and the history of imports and exports, arithmetis would apply to farm probl.ems, bookkeeping vrould deal with farm accounts' and the reading curriculum would include lHow ton books for the farm. (21) Adolescents, meanwhile, erere addressed as future consumers, producers, and social parttcipants ln rural communities. Through agriculturaL practice taught in the

classroom' competition in school and club fairs, èDd participatlon in team demonstrations, farm boys were formed as agricultural producers and farm managers oriented to market demand and profit maximisation. To the extent farm women were producers, farm girls aLso studied agricul.ture and participated in the various production contests associated with school and club fairs. For the most part, however, they were trained for domestic work, specificalry as household managers and market-wise conaumers. Both boys and gi.rls, in other words, Iearned the business skiIIs relevant to their respective domains. For, as the MAC Boysl , and Girls Club Bul1et-in noted, rr I b]usiness methods are being followed now by all successful farmers, and Boys r and -259-

Girrst clubs afford the best possibre prace to begin the practice of busfness methods.,,(zz) Furthermore, exprained an American club ploneer, f,club work trains the young people to become managers of their own businessr èrld proprietors of farm land, animals, machinery, crops...and hetps them understand the supremacy of thls posltlon over that of being always a nage earner.r,(23) But demonstrations and elubs also created social service and leadership identities through which boys and girrs could perform community functions. Horking together on a project taught young people the values of community co_operation, ¡rhiLe presenting their work in demonstrations and fairs trained them in skitls such as publ ic speaking. rrlhe Boys' and Girrs' crub'tt e¡rote Margaret speechl.y (referring to farm girrs ) , t' . . .9ives her trainíng which both attaches t¡er to homemaking and makes her an efficlent reader in the community... Iready to take] her part as a citizen, nith por{er to use her influence in the affalrs of the state,n(24} The team demonstratlon cornpeÈitions of tt¡e early twenties were particurarry important in giving this training . In these events r coÍrÍu.lnity organised cLub teams demonstrated the various components of a production process or a domestic activity in competition with teams from other communities. The form the competitions took constructed an identity of interest between young homemakers and farmers on the one hand' and the capltarrs't market on the other. The -260 -

Junior Livestock Breeders Heek in r9zr., for exampre, brought farm boys to Hinnipeg under the joint auspices of the loca1 agricultural, educational, ãDd corporate apparatuses. Sponsored by the Canadian Bankers Association, Untted Grain Growers' Errrd the Hanitoba Department of Agricurture, the itinerary included a visit to rrsome modern banking establishmentst, (the Canadian Bank of Commerce, the Herchantts Bank, and the unlon Bank), a vislt to Eatonrs, an inspection of grain marketing methods at the Hinnipeg Grain Exchange, "a motor trip through the business and residential districts and beauty spots of Tinnipegr, a visit to the Guide_ and the United Grain Growers, a 1uncheon and tour of t'a modern packing pLantrf (swiftf s), and a visit to ,fa modern manufacturing companyr, (vurcan rron Horks). rnterspersed with these activities and the competitions were speeches from governmentar authorities and other figures, notably Bracken from t'fAc (president), Thornton from the Ministry of Education ( minister ) , Hal.eolm from the Ministry of Agricurture (minister), and E. cora Hind fron the Free

Press. ( 75 )

More interesting than this state/corporate sponsorship, honever r rrêls the ranguage used in the demonstrations themserves. At the Lgzr provinciaL girlsr competition, for example' a team of three from Minnedosa demonstrated a food chopper. The demonstration began with one student discussing its manufacture: -26L-

we have discovered that every manufacturing prant is a reaL university and yre are gtad to t aú" an opportunity to get acquainted with one branch of this great industry. The great iron and steer industry comes second in providing human wants. Agriculture is, of course, first. Patenting, blueprintingr êDd moulding were explained: f'[m]ore than one plece of hardware can be made at once twith mouLdsI..., and this is the reason they serl things at a lower rate than if they made but one at a time.rr rhe demonstrator then . displayed the various parts of the chopper' noting they t'pass through the stage of manufacture and commerce, finally randing in the home or other praces of industry. tt rhe second student dissussed the retailing of the chopper, arguing there were two main factors involved: first, consumer lnterest, and second, the creatlon of desire

for products, which invorved showing the chopper to be labour-saving, time-saving, or food-saving. she noted that every manufacturer had a catarogue listÍng their products for sare' which meant that rrthrough mafl and parcer post homes are supplied ¡uith household eonveniences of hardware and farm tools which might not lotherwise] be posslble since they could not be obtained at locar stores.,r Finarry, the third student discussed the home care and use of the chopper' suggesting that before 'the days of the food chopper the housewife was compelled to use the chopping bowr and knife. It was wearisome, noisy and slo¡r. rr But, she t'Inlotlce continued, how thts food chopper prepares the food easily' quickly and in better condition for cooking.n(z6l -262-

rn the minds of these young women, tben, the homemaker and the manufacturing enterprise were integrarly linked through the market. From the L890s and 1900s ln l{anitoba, but with increasing intensity after the Royar commission on rndustrial Training and rechnical Education report, the connection Ì{as drawn between the education of the young and

the future of rurar life. The first systematic rinkage was made in commentary on the l-lAc conmisslon at the turn of the century. S.E. Lang, a school inspector, simply lamented in Lgoz that the rurar school rfdoes not offer to the majority of country boys and girrs getting into thelr teens a bilr of fare sufficientry attractive under present economic conditions to secure their serlous attention to Ll.u(Tz) But H.s. Haclean, Assistant principat of tbe lrinnipeg Normar

schoor in 1899, offered a more sophisticated analysls. To llacl-ean, the shift of popuration was an inevÍtabre outcome of the appllcation of science to industry and the consequent division of rabour. The problem for rurar socrety, and rural education in particuLar, ray with frthe perverted sentimentt' whlch ldentified farming sorery with manuar tasks in the division of labour. Arthough the r,rure of the cityrr had an economic cause, it could be counterbalanced by challenging the false assumption about mental and manuaL labour in agriculture. Education, he argued, revealed that there rras a great dear of scope for the exercise of mental -263- labour in farming. ( 78 ) Af ter 19 j.0, ãDd especial_ly af ter 1913, articres and commentary were increasingly produced in which the probrem of youth leavlng the country for the city htas posed' and the sorution posited nas to build a more positive inage of the countryside. From discussions of school consoLidation through agrlcut tural short courses for teachers to the boosting of club ¡¡ork, farm Iife was simurtaneousLy portrayed as being worthy of the young and in need o f improvement to keep the young . frCl ub work, r, l,largaret Speechl.y suggested in 1919, ffdemonstrates how to make farming and homemaking a practical business and give the rural young people an argument to herp them refuse positions in the clty,u(29t l,lore specif ically, the fè:S_U__d.:e.!le of the rural school system rras defined by the rurar problem. At one level' the probrem provided the general context fn which teachers were tralned. The Brandon Normal schoor, opened ln LgLzr wès explicitly described within its terms: there are two large classrooms, Iibrary, ¡nanual training roomsr ÇSmnaslum, etc. r èDd the school is expected to give special attention to the rural school problem. Its geographical location, its ample grounds, and the equipnent generaLly, wilL aid greatly in dealing with tt¡at proUlem. (Bi) At another leveL, the purpose of the rural school curricuLum' especially after the appointment of a Director of Elementary Agricutture and Nature, nas to facilltate frthe great movement for the improvement of country homes and country Iife.t' rndeed, educators such as Robert Fretcher -264-

went so far as to suggest that schools should take the lead in improving agriculture and rural- communities through the complete appropriation of the educative function. He wrote¡ If agriculture is to be improved, the community must take agricurturar education in hand. rt has too long been reft to the home to provide that instruction. But the method and outlook of home instruction in agricurture is traditionaL, non- scientific and non-progresslve. ( gl ) Hhile it may have been too ambitious for educators to think they could gain such comprete contror over the young, it r{as generalry accepted among proponents and supporters of rural education that the schoors courd be used to reach into the farms and homes to educate and transform the practice of adults. Hencer orrê commentator noted in L}LZ that ilone great advantage of the pubric schoor is that the pupits are abre to be home every night and so appry the new knowredge that they acquire daily.rr(ga) rt nas the fairs and cLubs, however' that performed this task most effectivery. Boys and girls carried on their projects at the home farm, under the distant but effective direction of a teacher or extension worker. This expertlse, although mediated through the student, did reach the farm noman or man. rn fact, agrarian intellectuars considered this mediated education, and its social effects, to be among the main purposes of crub work. of eight tfobjects and aims of crub workfl enumerated in L918, the first three erere! 1. To bring home and sshoor closer together in understanding, sympathye âDd co-operative efforts. 2, To make the school the centre for the -265-

acquisition and dissemination of information of direct practicaL value to the community and to make the home and the home farm, wittr its implements, its Iivestock, its fields and farm buiLdings, the laboratory where aIl this knowledge wirr be appried under actuar farming conditions. 3. ?o arouse a spirit of royarty to the schoor, Èhe community, and the province by a more complete realization and appreciation of the assisiance which members may be abre to render each other. (83)

Furthermore, and ffna1l.y, the young and the school system were used to conceptualise and buird rural communities. cLub work nas described as being useful in

bridging the gap between local businessmen and farmersr èDd

townswomen and farmwomen. Bankers in particular, it was sald, gained a better understanding of the farm economy

through their participation in the crubs. (g4) But ft was the school consolidation movement that was particurarly important in community formation. proponents of schooL consolldation viewed the demise of rural schoors and the rise of centra}ised (in to¡rns and virrages) consoLidated schoors as an important contribuÈlon to community identity. country chÍldren courd enjoy alr the advantages of a f,city schooltt under consolidation, and escape the nlure of the citytr. lloreover, the eonsolidated school could become a genuine community centrer providing an instftutional focus for the community. rt coutd draw the isolated farm famiry under its influence, and overcome the parochialism and divisiveness of country rife.(gs) The Hingham consoridated schoolr ãs described by Margaret speechry in Lgzz, for -266-

example' tvas centrar to the deveropment of a ,rnew community era" in the singham distrlct near ELm creek. prior to the construction of the schoolr ¡nânt of the younger adults erere

planning to move to the city for the winter because of a Iack of social activity, and older people rrere also suffering from the absence of a community centre. But with the new consolidated school, teaching was available for young and old: IA]fter school hours the prant is used by the older members of the community. on sunday everybody turns out to attend church in the auditorium, with sunday school following the service--in fact, even a wedding eras held there recently. The UFHI{, the Community Club, the school Board, the young peopre,s Àssãciation and other organlzations have their regular meetings in the basement of the school, which seats Z5O people. Dances, debates, concerts and such events are well attended for everyone in the dietrict feers right at home in a place which belongs to the whole communlty. . . . t'Hh!, tr speechry asked rhetoricarly, r,do ne l¡ear so much about the cityward drift, the Iack of rural 1eaders, the drabness of country rife? Because in many cases the peopre ln rurar districts have not had tÌ¡e vision of the Hinghan rdea or the means to put it into practice.rr(g6) rdeal male and femar.e identitiea were constructed for young peopLe, then, that were designed to prepare them for farming and homemaking. But young peopler êDd the institutions created for them, had a speciar place in thiE ideorogy slnce it was berteved that the fdentities of alI rural people could be moulded through the young. -267 -

The texts sonsidered in this chapterr êrld the broader discourse in which they operated, addressed farm people a6 indivldual and collective subjects participatlng in market_ oriented agriculture and stabre rurar communities. rt rras reasonable to expect that farm peopler occupylng a contradictory position ln capitalist society, would identify with these images since the images were at least a partial refleetion of peoprers everyday work experiences. Farm men were producers' and farm women were household workers and managers, participating in a ¡narket economy. They were arl_ members of rural communlties. As has been suggested throughout this chapter, however, these ¡rere ideal visions. Below tt¡em there was a competing vision at work which attempted to comprehend and exprain the reality of simpre commodi.ty agriculture in different terms. This alternative offered a chaLrenge to the discursive unity of the dominant system' appropriating and transforming some of its elements whire refusing to be rimited by its boundaries. But, failing to generate its own theoreticar categories, it ultimateLy succumbed, reaving a populist residue. The rise and fall of thls challenge is the subject of chapter six.

1. 1920t p. 546;; s ! I! Gres.l¡g t ¡linttip i rl WesÈern Canadè (Hinnipeg, 19ZO). 2. fne farmerst eavoc (TFA), ZO January 1893, p. 24:' 20 December 1893, p. Lt 5 December lg95, p-. 1. -268-

ttlc*--caze.!te. (February, 1912), p. 13; Manitoba sessional Pege¡s. (UgP), Number 19 (19141, p. Aø2. Guide, 18 February L9ZS, p. L96i MAC Gazette (March, 1908 ), p.42-43. E TFA, 20 July 1893, p. ZZ4. 5. TFA, 20 June 1893, p. ZZ3. 7. - University of l{anitoba ( Ut{ ) Archives, l{anitoba Argicultural Colleqe (MAC) papers, tfAC CalenAat-E19_ 20. pp. 34-35. 8. ttOur ReaI Probl_ems, r, UAC Gazette (December, 4-5. LgLS ), pp. ttFarming 9. J. Orr, as a Specialist,r, TFA, S April 1g93, p. L23; J. Elder, "The Institute Campaign, r, TFÀ, L January 1893, p. 9. 10. llAC Gazette (Ilarch, 1913), p. 364. l-1. Hanitoba Agricultural Representatives Àssociation, ?0 Hinnipeg, J,92 4) , pp. i 1913),_( p.354. t' L2. Matches, TFA, 20 June 1900r p. rf convention_rrPlowing 326; Annual of Manitoba Agricurturar societíes, r, !8A., 30 January L907' pp. i.5B-1s9; ur.r Archlves, papere, calendar, 19L3-14,,fcorJ.ege lrAC lrAc rt Extensionrf;- ggñ"ultural Fairs, Þlanitoba Department of Agriculture (t,lDA ), Bul letin, Number 3G ( J.919 ) ; ttDA, Annual Report (rgz1, p. 72. , 13 H . ttrhree I ' Grant' o clock in the Èrorning, r, Guide. , L7 December 1924. p. 1437; N. Cameron, Hlnister of Agriculture in Lgzz, used slmirar language in his assessment of the year: N. Cameron, ,,Seasãn, s Stock Tgkittg, ' ( December, L922) . 14. Hon 'f may a farmer be guided in estimating the extent of future demands for farn products, so thát he may have for sale those for which the f,Díscuss most profitable pri""" can be obtained?r,; tÌ¡e Law of Supply and Dåmand in reration to the prrce of farm produce.li utt PaÞers, Examination papers, ffAgriculturalArchives, r,rAc 1908,t ttAgricultural Eàonomics, t'a) and Economics] 1910r,. 15. shon the importance of the ¡rorrdrs gord supply upon the general Level of prices, pointlng three important qualifications to this quantity "üitheory of money; b) Explain $hy practicarry àrr coüntries have adoopted the gold standard. ,r MAi papers, Papers, t'Economics, Exarnination t'Hhat Lg]-4tt. L6. are the methods adopted by various countries for marketing grain crops? state the advantages of the North American method. fr; rf To what extent is the 'middlemanr a producer? rs there any use of tarking about el iminating the middleman?,,; frþiscuss the middlemen and their services under the following headings: a) Hhey they exist; b) poputar view concerning -269_

them; c) Helpful remedies for improving middreman services. It Papers, papers, r,Rural HAC ,rAgriculturalExamination Economics, L_g?It, | Economics, LgZ3u, trPrlnciples of Marketlng, 1g25rt. L7 'ra) Hhat are the ct¡ief advantages of a good bank to any community?; b) Phat are the features of our canadian banking system that safeguard holders of banknotes and depositors?tt HAC Papers, Examination papers, r,Economics, 1912''. f'Define 1.8 capital and capitat goods and wearth. How does capital originate and why do ere encourage its increase?...a) Give three stiong arguments in faïour of trade unions; b) Give three wearinessãs of trade unions.f, UAC-Pê Ê.E€, Examination Papers, t'Economics , LgZOn. L9 Ul'f Archives, MAC Papers, Examination papers, rfAgronoßSe L90gr,. 20 Ut'f Archives, HAC Paoers, IAC Calendar, 19l Z-LA, ,rFarm Þtanagement rnvestigations,'r p. 59; t.rAc car.endar , LILA- 15' ftFarm Managemerrt, fr gs; frFarm p. HAc carendar , L}L6-LT , Management, tt p. 4l . 2t Ut'l Archives,^ _ EAC Papers, Examination papers, IrFarm Management, 1914tt. 22 papers, ul'l Archives, MAC l{Ac caLendar , Lgz4-25, rf Farm l.lanagement, 'r pp. 51-SZ. 23 A. ttThe H. Benton, Business End of Farming, rr GUide , L9 February 19L9 t p. 349; Benton, r,Far-n flaffiment Su-rveys, tt Gu ide, ZO November 191g, p . Z43g . 24 UH Archives,_ _ ÞlÀC-_Papgrs., Examinãtion papers, rrFarm Management, 1914 tt . 25 UM Archives, MAC _ Papers, llAC Calendar , LIL6-LT, r,Farm Business and Accounting,,. 26 UM Archives,_ MAC Papers, Examination papers, rrFarm Accounts, L919tr. 27 UM Archives, _ MA.C Papers_, HAC Calendar , LgLZ-Lg, ilThe Marketing of Grain aná Èr¡e Factors of Þrice,,, p, iz, l{Ac Ca1endar, 1925-26, t,Principles of l{arketing,rr p. Sg: 28 Ut'l Archives, !{4e_ Papetg, Èxamination papeis, i,l{arketing of Grain, 1915,t. 29 Utf paoers, ttAgriculturalArchives,_ HAC . ÈlAC Calendar , L914_IS, ftRural Economics,ii p. 59¡ l,lAC CaLendar, L}L6_LZ, Economics,rt p. 47; UeC Ca1endar, LgL?-Lg, r,Rural Economics,It p. 30; HAc calendar, 1g1g-1g, r,Agricultural Economics, ,t p. 35. 30 UM Archives_, _ l{AC papers, }lAC Calendar, LSZS_26, ttPrinclpres of co-operationJr p. sg; Examination papers, 'tAdvanced Co-operative Marketiàg, l.gZbrr. 31 --t'Co-operative-_llarketing in Maïitoba,,r HDA, BuIIetin, Number 80 (L9ZS') , pp. 3; t 5-16 32 A. ItHome H. Matheson, Magnetism, rr MAC Gazette 1( L ) ( Itlarch, 1908 ) , pp. ZL-ZZ, 33. M. Phirlips, 'lpurling Doubre in the llarriage Harness, r, ÇUide 1.3 June 1923, p. ?32, -270-

t'l.lanrtobaf 34 F. Hlddleton, s community Movement in city and Country,rf Managra (November, f91g); p. 10. 35 r'The P. Macdonar.d' DÍstrlct-- Bu_irdärs, r' zr Hay L924, p. 649; aee also Uacaãnãf al- ,¡¡[E-Dt-Jtrict_.Qgi-de._ Builders, ,t Guid_e rfÀn 22 ApriL lg2b t p. Bt6 and C. Hopper, Agricultural Education,rf Guide 1g February p. zLO. LIZE: 35 UH Archives, MAC, Papers, ltAC Calendar I'Rural Leadershiptt. , L}ZI-ZZ, 37 ftCollege Man, t, (February, ttPresident ts Manaqra ]-}LT), p. g. 38 Annual Report of ttÁC, 1916, r- HSp, Number (L9L7l, p. 637, 1l 39 G.H. Fiske, Thg__ChaIlenge of the Country (New york, 1916), chapter VIII 40 J . Gil.lette, ( New lork, L9L3 ), p. 195; Fiske, chapter VIII. 41 "Sending the College to the Country, r, l.tDA, BuIIetin, Number 8 (1916), p. ZO, 42 T. J . Harr ison, ,tHelping problems, _ SoIve Farm !r Guide g March 1916, p. 309. 43 UH Archives, MA.Ç paoers, l{AC Calendar, Lglg_Z0, p. 44 ttAn - 35. _c. Hopper, AgricuLtural Education, r, Cüia,e ¡.g February 1925, pp. 196, Zl,O. 45. H. E. Halker, ,tGood Farmin-g rr (Deeember, Competition, llAC Gazette tgog ), p. lt; UM Rrclivei, úac F"p.Fã,- f,fec calendar' r-909-r0, rrDepartment of b"riãg"-extension Horkr,. 46. Fiske, PP. 108-1.09 (emphasis in the original ) . ' 47. D. F. HÍlson, r,Horr Best to Overcome the present Agricultural Depressi.on,rr Z0 January 1.g93, p. 48. C. Frederick, TF¡ ZA. Uênage$¡entttrhe in the Home affi p. 31s; !1.c.R., Function of the Graduãte in Home Economics, rf 16 ) (.Febrpary, pp HÈ*as¡3 __ Í,1 _L??s t , . 10 -1 1 ; Freder ick, tlenagcænË (New york, lffi-Loz. 49. Ut'l Archives,- l{ÂÇ Paoers, Examinatl.on papers, rrEconomics of the Household, tglg,, and n'conomlcs of the Household, igtgu. - 50. f,Protecting the Housewife, r, Guide 10 January 47. ].g7,3r p. trHome 51. Economics Soeietie_s, rf Guide ZZ February Lglgr p. 444; f'Farm Homen I s congrãsËF uec Gazãtte 5 ( I ) (November, lg'Zl, p. 86, T. C. GuiId, ilfs Horthwhlle?, tt Thrift I ( 10 ) (December, L92L), p. Z, 52. Fairs, il t'AgricuLturarl'Agrlcultural l,lDA, BuIletin, Number 30 ( L919 ) ; societies ana corïegle Extension Hork,r, in llitPA Report, ', r,rsp Number 4 ( 191ã ) , pp. 7gz-zgg; pAM, , Box L, pp. SAg_Sgq, E.C. Hlnd -27L-

to V. Hinkter, LS September 1915, re. programme for women at MÀC; Ul{ Archives, l,larv Soeechly Collection, Mary Speech1y, ttMy Interests in Practicáf gAucatlonrij 53. UM Archives, MAC papers, MAC Calendar L9L6_LT, ff , poul tryr,, pp. gg . t'Financing 54. the Farm Home,rf !tDA, Bulletin, Number 5T (1921), pp. g, 9, 11. 55. ll. Foote crow, The American country GirL (New york, 1915; reprint L974), p. ghiteJtAe, uUsing r' 150; R. System in the Home, Guide ls November Lgzz t p , t2ga¡ L. Duncan, ttKitchen of roday,r, Manitoba Aqricultural Extens ion News z ( I ( September, _ tt}laklng) tg¿tt-il- Bl-- 56. t{. P. }lccalrum, l{otherhood Ef f iiient, ', Guide 31 October L9l7 r p. L745; E. S. Martin, rf Roland BelieveG fn Better Babies,r Guide 14 June ]-9ZZ, p. 7ZO, 57. ',From College to llatrimony, il Guidg 3 llarch 1920, pp. 493, 531. 58. l'PuJ.ling Double in the llarriage Harness,r, Guide 13 June L923, p. 732. 59. UtÍ Archives, ìlAC papers, l{AC Calendar , L}ZO_2L, ffDivision of Home Economics,rr p. 53; see al_so üanitoba. Royar commission on the Estabrlshment of the Agricurturar college (r903) and J. cochrane snith, r,The Necessity of a Domestic Ssience Course, r llAC Gazette- L(1) (March, 1.908), pp.30-31. 60. H. E. Harker, rtrhe Future of Hestern Agricurture, rf Gazette 1(8) (February, pp. ÞlAç ttEducation rr L9o9), zg-zg; E. Thompsõil for Tomen, Þlanaqra ri t s ) ( llarch, 19Lg i, p. L6r A. ff r, H. Matheson, Home Mágnetism, MAC Gazette L ( i ) (Þlarch, 1908), pp. ZL-ZZ; UM Arctriv@, Examination Papers, ItHome Furnlshlng, 191gr,. -- 61. UM Archives, ÞlAC Paoers, l{AC Calendar, r,Rural Sociology rt |tHistory 11ZL-ZZ, ftSocial and Civics, of Home Life, il and History,t; N. McClung, rúomenrs place,,, l{anagra 10(2) (December, LglG), p. 7; nsummer Months wlth the lùomenrs Instltutes,rf News 1(9) (November, lgZl). 62. ItHomen t rr s Institutês, Guide 16 November 1910 t p. ZO ( emphasis added ) ; t,Rural somen r s fr rrHome , short course in Economics Extens Lon, l.fDA, Annual Report (Lgzs-26) , Leglslative Library of t{anitobá att}l). 63. uM Archive_s, Ma.ry speechry colrection, cl_ipplng fro¡r Institute News (March, t96O); pAH; UgI_gèærË, gã* 13, tfconstitution for Locar Home Economics societies'in nEarly t,Home Institute Filett; Economics Handbook,n MDA, Bulletin' Number G ( 1916 ) ; E. Thompson, rrGl_ impses of Possibirities of Extension Hork,' Maäaqra 1g(s) -(March, L9251, p. 35. 64. "AgriculturaLrf societies and colrege Extension Hork: 1915 Report, t'tSP Number 14 ( 19L6 ) ; pp. 7gg-7ggi f'Home Economics Extension Hork,rr HDA, Annuar Rgport (l9zl), LLl.f , p. 95 . -27 2-

ttAnnuar 55 see Report of Home Economics socleties, LgL4,n MSP Number 13 ( Lglb), p. 64I; rf Money Earned and Spent by the rnstitutestr in ,tHome Economics Extension,-,r HDA, Annual Report (L925-zG), LLr,r; rf Manltoba Home Economlcs, rl Guide 2L February LgL? t g, 329; frHome Economics Societies, tf nLgZl ttGq_ide 27 February 1919 i Conventlon Resolutions, llanitoba Agriculturar Extension News (l{areh, L92]-), p. B; rtsummer uon[t¡s witr¡ tt¡e gomen's rnstitut€s,tf Hanitoba Agrfcurturar Extension News (November, L92O), p. 8: ttlwelfth gnnuaf Conventfon of Manitoba Homen t s Institutês, rr Þlanitoba Aqricultural Extension News (February, L9ZZ,, Èp. t5-l6,. rr LgZ3 Homen I s rnstitute convention nesorulions, rr !!anitoÞa 3e) (July-Augusr, Lñlr; D. Hatt, tf Presidential Address: Hlmenr s rnstitute Conventi-on, June LgZg,n Ha¡ftoba Agricultural Extensiorl News 3(7) (July-August, Itscientif LgZ3l. p. 6. 56 E. Charlton, ic Housekãeping,t, TFA 3 JuIy L1OT, p. 1023, UM Archives, MAC papers, MAC t'Home Calendar, Lâ14_tb, pp. 97-98; Economics societies, n l{AC -Gazette 6(4) ( February, 1913 !tBetter ) , p. 297 ; Farm Homes, " l,fDA, Bulletin, Number 2L ( 19lB); R. H. llurchie, rrThe Home of the Husbandmên,fr Guide 9 July 1919, p. 14G6. 67 T. A. l{clntyre, Principal of NormaL School, rf Reportff in Ilanitoba Department of Edusation (MDE), Annuai RepoEt (1901), p. 472. 68 A. S. Rose, Brandon Division, ttf nspector I s Reportn in MDE, Annual Report (1903), p. 597. 69 À. McIntyre, North-East Division, ftlnspector rs Reportr in HDE, Annua1 Renort ( LB99 ) , pp. 42-43¡ t{. J. ôr"m, ttlnspector t South-Central Division, s Reportl in MDE, Annua1 Report (1904), p. 43. 70 IDE' Annual Reoort (Lgorr, p. 30; Royar commisslon on rndustrial rraining and rechnical Education, in Dominion of canada sessionar. papers (csp), Number 19ld (1-913)' p. 154; A.J. lladll.l, Htstòrv of Aortculrrrrar tn Ontario (Toronto, E¡lqcatlon ItProvlnciat Lg3ti, pp. lZ3-124. 7L U. A. l{clntyre, Normal SchooI Report, r, MDE, Annual Report (19t3). 72 I and GirIs r CIubs, ü l,lAC, (1e16)."Boys BulIetin, Number ls 73 guoted in À. J. Roe, tf organizing citizens of romorrow, rf G-Uj.-de. 20 August 1919. ttAnchoring 74 _tl. Speechty, Tomorro¡r r s Somen, rr Guide Lz October LSZL, p. LZT6; Speechly, rrlnvestments in louth,rf 9uidç 9 Aprit L924, p. 4b6; "sending the College to the Country,It MDA, Bulletin, Number g ( 19L6r, pp. L7-Lg; l{adi1I, AqriculturaL Education trDeputy in Ontario, pp.- LZ3-L24¡ R. Fretcher, l{lnisterrs Rèport, and C. Newcombe, üllanitoba"Superintendent, s Reportrr in l.lDE, Annua1 RepoCE ( 191.8 ); Boys t and Girls t Cf oU",T- H"."SEè-JDecember l-916 ) , pp. 8-9 . -273-

75. PAM, 4H Papers, Box 4, rrJunÍor Livestosk Breedersr Week Programme, October 10-L5 , Lgz]-n . See also ,'The Extension service, ' llAC Gazette ( March, 1.916 ) , p. 7 on study clubs for teens; trReport rf of Extensfon Servicefr in ''MAC Reports, HSP ( L917 ) on bankers in club ¡¡ork; S. E. Lang' f'secondary school Reportsfrin MDE, Annual Reoort ( 1913 ) and ( 1914 ) and ,'Report of the noyãi- cãmmIãsion Appointed to Enquire into and Report upon the university, " Msp ( l-910 ), p. 493 on agricurtuial high schoors; "Demonstration Teams to be Guests of Mirling companies, t' Uanitoba Agricurtural Extension News (May, L92L) and PAM, 4H P_apers, Box 4, r,!lenu, CNn Sanquet for Boysf and Girrs, swine and cattle crubsf, on the ålrian"" bet¡reen the educationaL and the corporate, the Latter being of particuLar interest because it involves t{.J. Black, f irst president of l,lAc, presenting the H.J. Brack Trophy in his capacity as a CNR functionary; and the various Boys' and GirLsr ctub reports in thL üanitoba Department of Agriculture, Annual Reoorts. in Manltoba Sessional papers. the 76, tf Demonstration Teams,,t News (February, UaDg,¡ pÀt{æ f'Îhe LgZZ't, p. 4, Story of a Pleasant Trip,t, Manito[ã-õ$ãîtmeni of Agriculture Panphlet ( 1921); H. SpeechJ.y, rrAnchoring I r, - Tomorrow s Homen, Çuide. LZ october LgZL, p , nia , On domestic science in the schoors see ú. speechry, ttScience Puts- on an_ Apron,r, I'Brandon Guide 14 February igZlr p. L85; B. J. Hales, ¡¡ornàl Schoo1 Repärt, u fuOg, AJrnual Regort-_ ( 19]-G ), p. zL and ( rgrz ), pp.-LgL2-13; 234-zg1; utt Archives, MAC PIE¡ers, l{Ac carendar, RoyaL commission on rndustriar rraining and rechnical Education (191_3), in CSp, Nu¡nber fgLd (1913), pp. 143_ L44; J.G. Hilson, A Historv of Home Economir.:s Ertrrn=*ran in ùlanitoba. 1826-1966 ( Htnnipeg, 1969 ) , pp. iSt_rU6. 77. S. E. Lang, ,tlnspector t il -e.""""t (L903); s nepof t, l,lDE, n"".rt see arso "Hhy Edueaté the FarmerrJTñJ, TFA zo August 1898, p. 363. 78. H. s. l{acrean, t,AgriculturaL Education, r, TFA zo December L899, pp. 639-640. trorganizing 79. 19.: Citizens of Tomorrow,rf Gufde ZO August 1919¿ p. L744. ì ItDeputy 80 . R. Fletcher, Minister t s Report, r, MDE, Annu,al Report ( 1913) . 81. Fletcher, ffDeputy Ministerrs Report,il (1913). MDE, Annua1 Report t,Agr 82 . _J . Rayner, icul tural Education in the publ_ ic Schools,tt MAC Gazette (February, LILZ), p. 31. 83. _p¡M_, -4H= lapef s., Box 4. "Handbook: Manitoba Boys r and Girls I Clubs, It February, 1gLg. 84. PAH' 4H Papers, Box 4. rrorganlzation ItAn clrcurar , LgL9,t i see arso Arl Year Boys I and Girrs I crub, rr ManiËo_ba êoricultqral Extension News (June, lgZL), p. S. -27 4-

ttConsol 85. C. Newcombe, idation of Schools, r, MDE, A¿nuel Report ( 1909 ); M. Harl Jones, ',consolidation oi Schools,', l.lDE, AnnuaI Report (1912); N. Suthertand, children -in Enql ish cêBadian societv ( Toronto Lgz6,) pp. 193-197. , , 86. M. Speechry,'The Hingham rdea,r, Guide g March Lg22, pp. 273. 279, During the last decade of the nineteenth century and the first quarter of the twentieth century, the 1anguage of

the Manitoba agrarian movement was characterised by a discursive tension bet¡veen the dominant ideology outlined in the previous two chapters and popular ideoLogies that chalrenged the official conceptions. The radicalism of the Patrons of rndustry (patronism) imparted à significant oppositional tone to the tanguage of the Manitoba Graln Growers' Association (I{GGA) and the united Farmers' of Manitoba (uFl.l). The trmainil (menrs) movement continued to employ something of a crass analysis that ft inherited from Èhe nineteenth century, whire the Homenfs section, after its formation fn 1918, combined this inheritance wlth a mild form of gender analysis ¡rhich had been firtered through middre class feminism. By the time of the farm movementrs reentry into electoral poLitics in the 1920s, however, the popurar nas effectivery constrained by the dominant. This chapter traces the contours and usage of thls popurar ranguager ãrrd its subordination to dominant sociar and economlc discourse, between lg90 and 1925.(t)

Although a Grange Locar nas founded at High Bruff in the 1870s, slgnlficant agrarian insurgency in Manitoba realry dates from the early 1gg0s. The farl of j.gg3 -276-

witnessed the formation of two organisations, one in Manitou

and the other ln Brandon, dedicated to agrarian reform. The western group, the Manitoba and Northwest Farmers r union, adopted a pratform calring for tariff modifications, l{anitoba r s right to charter railways, the settl.emenÈ of public lands, lower freight ratese ãrrd an end to elevator monopoly. The southern organisation, the Manitoba and Northwest Farmers t protectlve Union, meanwhile, sought the general repeal of laws which favoureâ monopol ists and oppressed farmers. ( 2 ) The protective union eÍas a more purely farmers t organisation than the Farmers t Union because the latter incruded grain dealers within its ranks. Although both movements failed within three years, they left a legacy of political agitation and a system of co-operative enterprises' notably a number of farmer owned elevators around the provincer üpon which future activists could build. ( 3 )

After e period in the rater rgg0s during which the tlberar party dominated agrarian discontent, the decade of the nineties opened with the formation of the Rockwood Farmersf Alliance, the organisation of the Farmers, League of Manitoba at cartwright, and the estabrishment of new farmer owned elevator companies at Carman, Carberry, Neepawa, Crystal- City, and Morden.(4) In retrospect, these activities simpry presaged the emergence of the patrons of rndustry in the winter of 1991-92. An Ímmediate outgrowth -277 -

of the Ontario Patrons, formed in Lggg, this latest expression of insurgency nas, like the Grange, the Farmerst

ALliance, êDd the Farmersr League before it, part of a broader North American movement. The first Manitoba locars were' in fact' initiated by an American organrser. subassociations then gren quickry throughout the settred areas of Manitoba and into the Northwest during Lgga. constituted as fraternar brotherhoods, with the acconpanylng paraphernalia and ritual, the patrons ¡rere arso heaviry engaged in various aspects of co-operative buying and serring throughout their existence. By tgg4, however, their primary energies etere shifting in the direction of electoral politics. (5) The first elen¡ent in patronism eras a rabour theory of value in which farmers and workers shared common interests as the creators of wealth. rn a retter to The patronst Advocate in 1895, ftPro Patriatt wrote that frthe greatest misfortune of a country is poor farmers. r, He then eraborated ln terms of a rabour theory of worth: Every man should be secured in his labor and in his homestead; he shourd work for hlnserf and not for others, DO one should share in the proflts who does not share in the production. Laboi must have the exclusive right to the produce, if we are ever to achieve permanency and stability in agriculture,... Laws must be passed to secure the excrusive right of the occupièr of the ground to the fruits of hts labor. (6) Besides succinctry stating this radicar conception of wearth as it applfed to agrlcurture, thfs statement is stgnificant -278-

for its use of the phrase ,permanency and stabirity in agricultureff . As e¡as noted in the previous chapter, permanency and stabirity were integral components of the ideology of market agricurture. But here permanency and stabirity wourd be achieved only by removing the "tyranny of capitalistsft.

The passage is al-so noteworthy for its use of the term t'labort'' although the specif ic focus is agricurture. An excrusively agrarian theory of varue was sometines employed in Patronism, but this ,,physiocraticfr sentiment was rare. (7) ttwithout wasting space by needr.ess demonstration, ret us assume that society rests upon the l-abor of farmers, rr wrote Henry cray in an editorial plea for patron co-operation with 'Labor unionstf and tf rrade organizationsff . on the fundamental basis of food production, he argued, carpenters and masons provide shelter, tailors provide cLothing, the merchant comes into existence, and factories and mills arise to supply the merchant. But, ,,It]he whor.e procession is

headed by the farmer.r,(g) More commonly, no distinctlon was drawn between the labour of farmers and workers. For example, Spender Percival of Glenora, an occasionaL contributer to the Advocater Fêferred to nthe farmer and working crasses--the producers as the source of wealth to

the countrytt in an L89S letter. (9) CIay, meanwhile, in a late L894 articre entitred frrndirect raxation and Agriculturetr, used the term ftlaborersr,, and then added the -279-

following clarif ication: rr. . .úrhen I say laborers, f include the farmer, for whilst in theory he is a capitarist, in practice he is a Iaborer and producerr èDd is 1argely dependent on capital in our complex soclety. rr(L0) A radlcal producerism is paramount here, but the apparent tenslon between the dominant agrarian identity ( farmer as capitalist) and the radical inherftance (farmer as worker) reflects the emergence of a pattern which became increasingry evident after the turn of the century. rt fol-lowed' of course, that farmers should rearn from

the experiences of workers. Trade union organisation eras vie¡red as a useful model for agrarian mobilisation in the Patron analysis. Emproying the radicar terms of poritical power and privllege, the Advocate drew attention to the r{ays in which workers banded together in unions to counteract the overpowering influence rrwearth exerts nhen used by unscrupulous handsrf. Trade unions improved sociaL conditions for their members and, more lmportantly, challenged "the right of the poriticar and moneyed crasses to frame laws by which Labor has onty to contribute and the rr capitarist but to enjoy. rhe patrons of rndustry, it was concruded' courd be to farners what unions were to the wage (11) earner. In more forceful 1anguage, Henry Clay wrote on the first day of 1996 that farmers, in comparison to workers' were complacent. shereas workers had revolted in strlkes and riots, galnlng concessions from,rmonopolfstsfrn -280 -

farmers patiently had endured the smallest rewards. 'fHad ere united--refused to produce as workmen strike--wourd the

railroad companies, ,, he asked rhetor ica1 Iy, rf contemptuously disdain our petitions for redress? uould ¡yheat buying syndicates sgueeze us?tt Sorkers, facing the loss of their homes and their means of subsistencer pêFSêvered and conquered. But farmers, often in a better position than workers to resist because they had food enough to survive and ho¡nes free of rent, patiently suffered. The lesson, if it needed to be stated, eras that rlr¡le must connect the farming community into a powerfur organisation with which we can confront our oppressive monopolists, êDd make each farmer feel a brotherry interest in his nelghbors welfare.tt(12)

Furthermore, the necessity and desirability of worker_ farmer co-operation was stressed in this analysis. rn an Advocate piece entitled tr!!assing for Attackfr, for example, the Patron poricy of excluding non-farmers from the organlsation was critlclsed by cray. rt e¡as becoming crear, he argued' that the Patrons should incrude in their fold Itevery honest man who earns his bread by raborrf . Hence, ¡rith a view to ultinately joining with labour, âlL patron sub-associations were urged to discuss the question of co- operation with trade unions.(13) Moreover, the leadership of the movement addressed a constituency which extended beyond the farm and the countryside. At the lggs convention -28I- in Brandon' Grand president Braithwaite focused on the pubric debt and the tariff as means of discussing the probrems producers erere facing. r,?hink of Èhese things,, he urged in his speech to delegates, ranalyze them for yourselves and see if it is not the time ere farmers and laborers cast aside our ol_d prejudicesr èrrd nithout bias, fear or favor take a common sense view of the situation.,, It eras time, he continued, rto Iift our craft and calling out of debt, indifference and apparent serfdom. " ( l4) Patroni-sm, as a form of anti-monopoly radicalism, in fact demanded the mobiLisation of alr wearth producers. But there erere organisational and ecorogical impediments which had to be overcome¡ there lras tittle or no daily interaction between farmers and workers, and farmers found it dlfficult to sustain the sort of solidarity which, for workersr grêw out of shared ¡rork experiences. Although the wirr existed at one level, then, a successfuL aLliance required a high degree of organisation, At another 1evel, however, the will did not exist; a focus on politics as the source of oppressl0n could not sustaln the required mobll.isation around economic and social issues. But who were the oppressors in this anarysis? outside the producers, and pitted against them, stood the monopol ists, combinesters and parasites ¡uho manipurated politics and the state in order to rob the producers and enrlch themserves. The most sígnrffcant actors here erere -282- the railway corporations, mortgage companies, financiers, and manufacturers, but the analysis also included lawyers and other professionals, especiatry in their roles as politicians and ftparty wire-purrersf,. rn one particularl_y vlvid rendition of this perspective, an Advocate. correspondent appealed for potentiar members to join the Patrons:

FELLOIû HORKERS: ...canada does not berong to the peopre of canada who by their rabour Jna toir produce its wealth. Not canada does not even belong to the British Crown, but to a handful of financiers, capitalists and bondholders in England and some other countries who have for frr"i, agents...a gang of titled and decorated snobs and boodLers to whom the peopte of canada have unfortunately too long entrusted their affairs. He went on to charge that every year ttre tariff and other forms of taxation took miLrions out of the unpaid Labour of ftthe workers and depreciated produce of the toirers of the soil. . . . Look at the unemployed in cities and towns, the laborer without rvork, the farmer toiring without hope, èrd arL the time the sararies and incomes of the drones and parasites who Live at our expense remain the same.rr(15) Hhite weaving el.ements of an otder with a nerrer anarysis ( the image of aristocratic privilege alongside a working class sarutation), this passage touched a number of the bases in Patronism. In this analysis, tt¡e oppressors constituted a discrete social group who nere defined negativety as those who díd not produce. In some cases, ê distinctlon rJas drawn between -283-

frcrasses the It and the tf masses,r . For spender percival, the masses had been divided between two politicat parties, whire the classes--ftCapitalists, Hanufacturers, Combinesters, Directors of Railroads, Loan Companies, and Lawyersr,--were united in sucking the people dry.(16) rn other patron statements, a dominant and a subordinate class were r'Are identi f ied . mortgages and t the I cpR, , asked an Advocat-e correspondent in 1994, oppressive to this great Hestern country, and to the liberty and fraternar. bonds cementing confederation? Are they not the mourdering branches that prevent us from making our rittre ones as comfortable as sir John Thompson? Hhy arl the injustice and sociar inequality between' the two cl_asses of society, miLlionare (sic) and pauper , , ,? He appealed to Patrons to trcombine against the misrule that has given the country the piJ.e of mortgages and its pire of miLlionaires't, and he invoked a distant radical heritage in conclusion by demanding ilsocial revolution ttol give us back the liberty of free men. tt(L7 ) For Manitoba and Northr¡estern farmers, according to this analysis, class exploltation felt particurarry acute given the conditions under s¡hich they arrlved in the Test. one patrons of rndustry subassociation, in passing a resolution urging the government to take action against the rrgrain combi.ne fr, produced a settl_erts image of class relations: . . . this Association views with alarm the action of the grain combine in this country, and we call upon all farmers, especially patrons, to rise en masse and press upon our governments the urgent necessity of freeing us once and forever irom -284-

these manipurators of our prosperity in this Ífestern land. The Dominion government brought us here and gave us free homes. Now they arrow railroads and combines to rob us (by raw) of the products of our industry obtained from our rand which makes the gift worse than nothing. (3.g) trmanipurators The of prosperityu achieved and maintained their dominance through potitical ilchicaneryr in this ideology. Lawyers and politicians, serving the combinesters and monopolists, both created and manipulated laws in order to rob the producers. Everything from the tariff' freight rates, and government expenditure to wheat grades, Royar commissions, and even agricurtural education eras understood in these terms. The denunciation of this poriticar immorality is what urtimately deflned patronism.

Government expenditure, taxation, ãDd the tariff erere manifestations of the regalised robbery facing producers. The rf oppressor tf rather than the froppressêd,r, it was sald, should be taxed. corporations received mirtions of dollars worth of land grants and timbpr rimits for which producers ultimatery paid.(L9) public debt was the resuLt of the wealthy enriching themserves at tt¡e expense of the people. The 1895 Dominion deficit, for exampler projected to be five million doll-ars, nas denounced at a Killarney patrons meeting as an unjust burden foisted upon labourers and t'Hhere farmers. did the money go?' Brother Hossack asked rhetoricalty in addressing the assembled crowd:

. . . spent on harbor works and Curran bridgesr ãDd thrown broadcast amongst wirepulrers anã -Ueparty heelers. . . . Now has patience ceased to a -285-

virtue, Iet us rise up as one man against such red tapeism and be not deceived by their sweet speeches while they sit at banquets, raughing and mocking the clodhoppers and hayseeds. ( 20 ) The burden courd onry be reduced by eliminating pubric expenditure on those items which benefitted the wealthy.

One Patron tlLA recommended, therefore, that monies be diverted from the Lieutenant Governorrs office to clothe peopre who could not afford proper clothing and from the university of Manitoba to be used to support common schools.(2L) Another patron, in the context of a sall to shift the tariff burden from necessities to ruxuries, made a sinilar proposal. The reduced revenue from a reformed tariff could be offset, he said, by abolishing the Senate, Lieutenant Governorships, High Commissionerships and pensions. Then additionaL revenue, for more worthwhile endeavours to aid farmers and workers, courd be raised by taxing concentrated capital . (ZZ) The tariff, the major source of public revenue in nineteenth century canada, was frequently the focus of producer wrath. rndeed, to many it eras the penultimate symbol of plutocracy. A composite image existed in Patronism (and other radical analyses) of the parasitic crass' protected behind a legar barrier, growing rich through the rabour of others. rn a survey of the situation in which farmers were forced to exist in the 1g90s, for exampre, John Fotherlngham of Grenferl, Assintboia wrote: -286-

They found themselves toiling with rittre resurts in comfort--small returns and heavy outray for the necessaries of Iife and labor. Merchants, lawyers and others' especiarry manufacturers¿ e{€r€ serving themseLves unmercifurly out of their toirs. such classes had come inlo the possession of legal advantages by which they coulá rine their pockets out of yours.... Good men rabor and rabor änd can scarcely make any preparation for sickness or old age . t{hy shour.d this be so in a good land r_ ike ours? It comes largely or máinty through political causes. Favored industries parties are protected and become wearthy at our"na and use their wearth in maintaining and ,oppå.ting"ip"rrse, this unhappy situation. ( 23 ) And for some' the fight against the tariff was nothing ress than the historic struggle of free-born Engtishmen: From Runnymede to the time the stuart lost his head and the family the dynasty, the Anglo Saxon has been struggling to be free,. from the time of the Tudors tó the present the struggre has gone orr, and we are more in earnest than ever. Fr"" trade is the cure for a great many of the evirs from which ere suf fer , (24) rn protesting the inequities of the tariff, then, farmers fdere not simply or carculatively seeking fairer ascess to markets. Rather, they were seektng the erimination of their oppressor. Political manipuration extended throughout the state apparatus in the Patron view. Aecording to Henry cray, the statutory regulation of wheat grades was foisted on the farmers in the interests of middremen. rn the rg90s, the Act specified that Number 1 Manrtoba hard wheat shourd be at least 60 1b./¡u. and z/3 Red Fyfe. But the Act also constituted a tfBoard of standards, to fix a yearly standard which could vary upward from the minimum. Hence, in Lgg5_ -287 -

96. the standard for Number L hard eras 63 rb. /bu. and 75s6 Red Fyfe. I'411 through the paragraphs of this crazy law,rl trrre cray wrote' find the same variation, the Act states so much, the standard so much more. There are many kinds of harm this foorish arrangement causes. ,r specif icaJ_ly, he maintained' the speculator was permitted to ship from Fort HllLiam on the Act and noÈ the standard, thereby robbing the producer of the differense. rrrn no other country that the Advocate is acquainted with, I the editorial concluded, tf would such of f icial assistance to rascar ity be even t' attempted. ( 25 ) A more explicitly ideol-ogicar forum for the operation ff tt of rassar ity was the pubr ic investigatory body . rn reporting a rumour in 1894 that a Royar commission might be appointed to enquire into the probrem of cpR freight rates, cray urged farmers to mobirise and be on their guard against the deceit of the rich and powerful:

The task of fighting the mighty company is an enormous one. Every big city in the East...wlrl array themselves against us. the examiners witr be met with chicane--wiÈh hunbug--wlth threats and open lies- by the legar rascaldom that rays itserf out for hire on such occasion. . . . tTÍtle whole brigade of managers and grain mÍxers wirr be ready to testify to anything that van Horne may desire. our examiners wiLl have to wring -reructant ev ldence f rom the creatu*es o f tt¡ãt power f ul company by every means in their power, åDd as their means are not very extensive in the confused present state of the law, they must have èn overpovrering--over¡rherming--f100d of angry publlc opinion behind them to back them up.(26) -288-

The state, in this instancee r{âs seen as being potentially

neutral, assuming a high degree of popular pressure could be maintained upon the government. Poritical manipuration even extended to schoor texts in this analysis. One Advocate reader, in submitting a poem in reaction to à retter from a farmer who yras being hounded off his land by a mortgage company, anticipated that agricurturaL education in a corrupted state would be ideorogicarry skewed against a producerist perspective. Prefacing his rewritten mortgage deed by suggesting it ftshourd be put in our proposed agricultural schoor books to teach the boys how to rent a farmrf , he nrote: Hhereas cute rawyers always use Hhereas at each line end, The Lord has failed the last few years enough good wheat to send Wherewith to Equare your nine percent, llour farm is pawned my friend. Beyond redeem' so pray give heed and close to me attend.

Yourl1 promise, wo'ft you honor bright to rive on straw, Do chaff, And like a stupid donkey toil, And nothing do by harf. Don,t murmur though your children starve, lour iif" should need a shroud Donrt let your chicken heart reber, poor men should nerer be proud.

whereas youtrr promise eronrt you now next year to pay three rents Though it be far from human ken, To (sic) know our God t s intents And be prepared within a week to guit your hearth and home And oefr (sÍc) the storm swept prairie in search of shelter roam.

Dontt talk of rightsr louF (sic) but a serf, A fool, a lazy hog -289-

Go to your kennel or r rrl kick As (sic) if you erere a dog Yet hold' should you to death succumb, Just (sic) witl your son and heir To send the money from the farm As (sic) though you still were there , (ZZ) No area of the state, then, from the tariff to textbooks, was free from the pervasive infruense of oppressive manipulation. It is hardly surprising, given this analysis, that politicar organising was centrar to patronism. poritical oppression, after all, required a political response. The politics of Patronism was based upon the assumption that not only the state, but inherited poritical practice as werr, was corrupted by the influence of capitalists, Iawyers, and various other undesirables. producersr notabty farmers, had to create a new poritics to take control of their own and the country's affairs. The key to this eras nonpartisanship. From a twentieth century perspective--specificaLry the experience of Brackenism--nonpartisanstrip has a businesslike, apoliticar meaning. But the patrons, ês they proclaimed in their rarlying crlr were rf non-partisan, but intensely political.,,(Zg) To them, nonpartisanship meant rejecting parties which were merery media through which nonproducers milked producers. rrExtreme partizanship,,, according to the Patrons t Sent ì n¡'l

robs lþ" poor. Extreme partizanship is a means for the rich to become wealthy. Extreme partizanship causes the strife and struggle amongst the few for supremacy and causes deadrock -290-

and chaos in the House of commons at the present time and the peopte foot the bill . (Zg) or' as expressed in the Declaration of the rndependent rndustrial Association which succeeded the patrons in i.g9g: Rearizing. . .that the partisan spirit predominating has resulted in enabling combines, trusts and other monopolies to procure regisration and privileges to the detriment of the great mass of the peop1er...erê, the Associated Ináependents of Manitoba, deem it necessary that aLl men of free spirit shouLd unite, to arouse and inform public opinion' to terrninate the practice of goveinment by party dictators, to frustrate thã ominoup designs of predatory corporations, to free the community from present exactions which rob the people of the fruits of their labor, ãnd¡ generally, to take such independent poI itical action as the pubric advantage may indicate. (30)

The Patrons wanted to transform regislative and parliamentary representation by repracing the rawyers and other professionals with farmer and worker deLegates. And the Liberar party, since it appropriated much of the radicat rhetoric while renaining under the control of nonproducers, was the object of most patron wrath. The secretary of the Boissevain Patrons association suggested, for example, that Liberal policy directives came from above, whiLe in the Patrons they came from berow. rf the patrons were like the Liberals, he maintained, the foLrowing is the type of sircuLar the Grand Association would send to the subassociations: Dear Brethren--He consider it our duty to inform you that we have been laboring under a mistake in belleving that the protective Þoticy has worked to our disadvantage, that it is only rigfrt and just that the cPR shourd charge such freight ratei as will enabre them to decrare a satisfactory -291-

dividend to the shareholders, and that owing to the superior knowredge and understanding of the learned professions they are best quarified to act as parliamentary representatives. this is our conclusion and we hope you will govern yourserves accordingry. He are sorry you have been misred in the past, and advise you to seek for future relief' onLy in diversified farming and the practice of economy in the home. rn the Patrons of rndustry such arrogance would cause uproar because Patrons erere attached to principre rather than

party. ( 31 )

The various aspects of patron poritical practice were conducted witl¡in the terms of nonpartisanship and a broader radicar discourse. patron election pratforms were cast within the assumptions of the radical inheritancer €vêfr though they appear to be moderater rêformist documents from

the perspective of the later twentieth century. The Dominion platform demanded that pubric rands be reserved and preserved for actual settlers, that the tariff exist only to raise revenue, and that legislation be passed to protect farmers and labourers from the undue price increases of monopolies and combines. Furthermore, it sought rigid economy in the public service, simplification of laws, the abolition of the Senate, the disfranchisement of the civil service, ërnd a generar reduction in the machinery of government. The provincial programme repeated the calr for economy in the public service, while also demanding the trpurity and independence of parr iamentrr ¡rhich meant, in practlce, that no MLA should recerve a free rairroad pass or -292-

a fee beyond his sessionar indemnity. Formulated as it rras in the L890s' the rocar. pratform arso had to address the issue of public schooLs. On this question, patrons stood "unalterabry opposed to any appropriation of public monies for sectarian purposes.il Hence, their position eras Iittte different from that of the Liberals, and a significant factor in their demise. For patrons, however, the provlsion of public funds for religious schools was a species of special privilege fundamentally at odds wlth thelr vision of an uncorrupted state . (3Zl The Independent Industrial Association incLuded most of the Patron demands in its pratform. They Ídere suppremented, however' by carrs for the public ownership of railroads and frnaturar other monopolies,,, reflecting the influence of both labourite trsocial Ísmf, and new school economics. ( 33 ) Patronism was' in fact, quite friendry to the sociarism it encountered in the Hanitoba of the lg90s. rn answering the objections many people had to socialism, bowever, the Advocate simpS.y appJ.ied the categories of radicalism, interpreting socialism within its terms: socialism' pure and simprer rrìêê*s equarity before the law.... sociarism does not -controlpropose tã divide existing wealth, but assume of al1 monopolies and sources of ¡rearth and utilize them to put it beyond the poerer of any man to become a mirlionare (siq) r åDd insists every citizen wirl have equal rights with other citlzens. (34) The Advocate response to the specifics of the Labor party platform, meanwhile, eras rather sceptical, although aIt the -293-

objectives hrere viewed as being desirabre. But those proposals that involved rerations between capitar and rabour, unmediated by the stater wêrê seen as being difficuLt to attain. For exampre, the Labor party sought rrequal remuneration for equal services rendered, irrespective of sex.,r The Advocate, though supportive in principle, felt the proposal did not belong in a ',po1iticalrt

programme. ( 35 )

The erectoral erement in patron politicat practice was sustained, to a certain extent, by a utopian undercurrent, r¡hich suggests that it had more substance tt¡an twentieth century reformism and a sor id connection with earr ier utopian variants of radicarism, notabry owenism. The Harmony rndustriar Associatíon formed in Assiniboia in the mid-ninetiesr wãs a utopian experiment based upon radicar_ premlses. The vlce president of the Association, writing in the Advocate in l8gb, told patrons that he and his comrades were laying the foundation of a ne¡{ social system. ,fNow the economic development of the present system Icornpetition] ,t produces co-operation, h¡. C. paynter argued, rf which is compelled by monopoly, Í.which uLtimately results inl government ownership of monopories. This in turn reads to the 'co-operative commonwealthr. il The Harmony settlement +Jas modeLled on combines, but unlike monopolies and combines where "alL the profits accrue to the sharehorders, and none to the men who actually are the producers, rf the means of -294-

production were hel-d in common, each farmer eras an employee of the Association, and annuar income was divided according to Labour performed. (36)

A more specificarry patronist vision of utopia was contained in the fÍctional story'Home Rule in Manitobarr, which appeared in the Advocate in 199s. presented as an l-899 recollection of the insurrectlon that established frhome rul-efr' the narrative began at an auction in Merita. Farmers interrupted the auction, burning machinery and implernents so that capitarists courd not reclaim them. They then proceeded to Hinnipeg, arrested the poLicee ¡nåtor and ardermen, cut the electricity, took over communications, êDd issued a declaration:

To the citizens of lranitoba: r{ost of us have found it impossibre to make the barest of living in Manitoba. This is not the faur.t of the country, but of the laws, the raiLway freight rates, ãDd the protective tariff.... Let us manage things in future that we get some return for our money and our labor.

Residents of the city erere then asked to send delegates to a convention. This assembly of rural foLks and urbanites decided to cease sending parriamentary representatives to otta¡ra and to no ronger receive the federar subsidy nor pay the tariff. Free trade was decLared with the rest of the world. After reaching these decisions and others, the assembled producers dispersed to sack the customs House, the Land ritles office, and rawyers r offices. Then, upon hearing that the NHMP $rere moving in fro¡n Regina, the rairs -295- were torn up at oak Lake , (gz ) Although the story ends there' one presumes the associated producers of Hanitoba, freed from plutocratic oppression, Iived happily ever after. Patrons constructed an image of the¡nselves, their constituency, and their social world based upon a set of assumptions that had existed as a more or less coherent discourse, in one form or other, throughout the nineteenth century, The image eras one of producers creating arr wealth within the context of a political system in which they rrere controlled, oppressed, and robbed by nonproducers. The Patron response to this polÍtical manipulation was a theory of nonpartisanship in whieh traditionar por.iticse Fejected as inherentry corrupt, would be repraced by a ner¡ morality based upon crass rather than party loyalty. Hith the collapse of the Patrons, this form of analysis began to fade as a unified system of thought. Not onry erere its categories being stretched to the limit in an attempt to comprehend new economis and social realities, but it was being charrenged, in a systematic though indirect Håtr by the nen academic disciprines. rt did not die, however. Many of the categories, and the concepts which linked them together, Lived on into the twentleth century, giving oppositional substance and form to critiques deveroped in the tr+entieth century farm movement. -296-

The turn of the century did not mark a sudden shift from radicarlsm to a ress oppositionaL anarysis. But by the L920s there nas a ne¡r, and more conservative, discursive system at the heart of llanitoba agrarianism. rn the period from L904 to roughly 19l_6, a more or less coherent radical analysis continued to exist in the mainstream of the movement. From about 19j.0 onwards, however, dominant categories began to disprace radical categories and, by the post-war period, the mainstream discourse of Manitoba agrarianism was subordinate to the dominant rural ideoJ.ogy. This section first looks at the nes¡ discursive system (which ne will call the neer anaLysis or tt¡e new ideotogy ) that became systematised in the later teens and the twenties ( from about 1916 to ),925); it then traces some of the radical- language that did survive in the history of the movement (from about Lg03 to lgZS).

The economic discussion that characterised the nevr anarysis r{as conducted squarely within the context of market production and consumption. Most importantly, co_operative marketing and purchasing, which erere central to the grain grower vision of agriculture, erere understood simply as strategic interventions in a neutrar market in which middlemen, interspersed between producer and consumer, had developed an unfair advantage. The capitalist market was the given terrain upon ¡¡hich co-operation worked. The -297 -

appeal of co-operation etas that it reduced inefficiencies whire craiming a rarger proportion of the surplus (profit) for agricultural producers. rfone of our biggest problems at

the present time,', president BurnelL told the L}ZA UFM convention,

is to bring the price of tt¡ose commodities r¡hich ere have to buy and which have to do with our cost of production, down to the rever of the products of our farms. one factor in the price õt these commodities is the costry system of dlstribution-- this can be remedied by co-operation Furthermore, it was noted the forrowing yearr co-operation would return ttto the producer all the profits accrued over the cost of the operations in marketing his product."(3g) Besides these immediate commerciar objectives, farmers learned from the ÞIGGA r s Rurar citizenship that co-operative organisation arso drew isolated farmers together in a community of interest, restored agriculture to its proper place of. dignity ,which- has been lost through bad business methodstt, and repraced bad business methods with good ones.

And at a higher leveI, Hopkins Hoorhouse argued in Deep_ Furrows, the various actors in agriculture ( farmers, merchants, railways, etc. ) could co-operate to create a truly efficient economy.(39) urtimatery, the sheat poor was the archetypical co-operative marketing organisation in this new analysis. It eras voluntarist, based upon the individual wills and decisions of producers (as opposed to the rtstate compuJ.sory social istrf Hheat Board ) . rt eras completely equitable, basing lts price offered for grain on -298-

ftrealt, values in the ¡vorld market. And, f inaIJ_y, it operated on the basis of managerial expertise, hiring the best and most market-wise grain trade managers available. rn other ¡rords, the pool combined an efficient management and market sensitivity with democratic producer control. (40) rn a L92L statement on trade, c.H. Burnelr maintained that I'the law of suppty and demand can only be temporarily abrogated. ultimatery it makes itser.f fer.t and adjustments are made in harmony with that la¡¡.'r rhe uFH president went on to argue in his convention address that the solution to agr icul tural depress ion ray in rradopting a trade por icy based on sound economic principles--a policy that will discard the farracious principle that trade is necessariry war' and will recognise that trade is a matter of mutual advantage to buyer and selIer.rr Hence, the emphasis in discussions of the tariff and protection t¡ad shifted over twenty-five years from the poritics of monoporist oppression to the economics of market distortions and trade impediments. fn this neer analysis, farmers required wider markets for their productive output and a freer market in the inputs and consumer items they purchased. protectionisn t,essentially continued to be inequitable, immoral and vicioust, in this ideology, but marketing and trade considerations nere paramount:

1. rt I the tariff ] artificialry restricts and hampers tt¡e exchange of products---exchange which is natural' legitimate and of mutuar advan-tage.... -299-

2, rt takes rarge sums of money from consumers generarly without any possibirity of their knowing how much is taken, into whose hands it passes, or for what purpose it is expended. . .. 3. rt reads business and manufacturing interests to depend upon arbitrary enactment ana not upon natural economic conditions and necessities for thelr indusÈriaI progress. . . . 4, rt is a system so vicious in its fundamental essence that through aI_l its history, in this country and in other countries, it has invariably been found rending itself to frequent manlpulation by crass interests for their âdvantage at the expense of others. (41) The concepts of productive technique and farm management were part of the movementrs economic vocabulary as weli.' but these were subordinate to issues such as marketing and transportation. The main initiatives of the movement affected management and production in two erays. on the one hand' better farming and better farm business methods erere seen to resurt inevitably from the movement. The Pool contributed to better farming, for example, by arrowing farmers to market their crops ln an orderry fashion throughout the year, which, it tras said, meant'farmers were better abLe to properly husband their land. And, according to the üGGA:

Beside helping you to better farmi4g, the movement is designed to herp you to better business success. . . . The Grain Growers r movement has already done mush to improve the business of farming both as regards distribution of supplies and as regards disposing of products.... ñow is your opportunity of getting into the movement for the opportunity it affofds of bettering your business . (42) on the other hand, the movement had to be careful not to negrect farm management as it took on the larger questions. -300 -

The Guide' while focusing most of its attention on marketing strategies and poritics, editoriarised from time to time on the need for farmers to engage in ,reducation, organization and co-operati.onttin order to conduct theirrrbusiness on economic Iines'r. Similarly, the UFU president often alluded to the importance of farm management as an area of organisational involvement. fn L9ZS, for example, president A.J.M. Poole imptored united Farmers not to overrook "the importance of efficiency in farm management and operationrr as ttthe profit determining factor in agricurtural production. f, Hence, whereas farm management, production, and individual entrepreneurship tended to receive primary emphasis in the dominant ideol.ogy, erithin the new movement ideology these erere subordinated to the larger profit determinants of market manipul.ation and countervaiting action. (43) Rurar society consisted of a series of problems requiring resolution in the new ideology. The executive of the MGGA urged in l9l9 that a department be estabrisbed at ttin t'tAc order that the var ied problems o f rural r i fe rr be given careful study, the country life report and philosophy figured prominently in the MGGA,s Rurar citizenship, and the central question in the uFMfs 19zg membership questionnaire eras ftfs There a Farm probLemfr. The central sociar erement in the solution was the notion of cornmunity. rn a LgL8 Ì'IGGA pamphret, the question -301-

'tHhat has the movement done, r¡as posed. The second recorded accomplishment (in a list of ten) r{as that it had ilherped to educate toward rear knowredge of pubric issues and real community consciousness and efficiency.,r And, in a L1ZL Managra article, H.R. Hood (UFM Secretary) suggested that one of the primary achievements of the UFM eras that it had helped farmers learn the lesson of community life, nhich eras that their l-ives were interrelated.(44) But the concept of community had variable intonations. There were essentiaLJ.y two types of community. On the one hand, there was the broad national community comprised of different interest groups. On the other hand, there was the rural community inhabited by famil ies and individuars. Hithin this discourse' the farm movement increasingly saÌ{ itserf as an instrument for constructing locar community cohesion and participating in the pursuit of nationar community harmony. At the national level, êgFiculture and the farm popuration sought to co-operate with other classes or groups. The sense of farmers being part of a constituency of producers receded, âDd was repraced by the image of grain groners as one of a series of interest groups on the social terrain. This perspective rras present in the MGGA es early as L904 but, at that time, it tras still cast in terms of radical analysis. rtThis, il president J.W. ScaIIion proclaimed in justifying the organising efforts of grain 9rowers, -302-

is an age of huge organizations, combinations and trusts. Every manufacturing industrye profession êver$ is thoroughly united for the -purpose of promoting its oern special. interest uy procuring favorable J.egislation and otherwis.; -"nd nearly arL LegÍsration is but a compromise between contending interests. Twerve years later the councir of commerce and Agricurture (consisting of businessmen and farmers) was launched to provide t'a medium whereby interests that have very often appeared antagonistic may be brought into closer touch r¡ith each other and given an opportunity of rooking at things from each others viewpoint.rr And, in an MGGA pamphlet, it eras noted that the organisation had won rrrespectful

recognition among the organised interests of the nation, and a furrer chance for a square deal.rr rhis co-operation and reeognition ¡í-"èi n".sued in the name of community. The first two objects of the MGGA constitution, for example, sought: a) The arl around deveropment of rurar rife with a view to making it as satisfying and as effective in the commonwealth as possiblee àDd the estabrishment of right rerationships between rural and urban communities; b) To forward in every honorabLe and Legitinate rray the interests of the ruraL population,- Dot in antagonism to other erements of our population, but in cordial co-operation with atI.teál-

At the LocaL, rurar settrement lever, the movement ¡ras actively engaged in the construction of a pan-community identity. rn the ascent from individuar Lhrough familial to community self-consciousness, the authors of the lrUFM Handbook of Practlcal Horktt ¡naintained, UFtf activists should play a prominent role: -30 3-

The human individual only gradualry comes to furl serf-consciousness. The human community comes much more slowry to its fulr sel-f-consciõusness. Family seLf-consciousness is reached sooner, but rre cannot be satisfied untir the community realizes itserf and begins to rive its corporate rife.... Just as a famiry has its conferencäs and consultations, so the community must talk over its interests and prospects. rf there is a .weakness or a difficurty that may be overcome by concerted effort' the community ought to ¡rork together on it. . . . The r-ocar board of tbe united Farmersf Association ought to be leading in the work.... HeIp your community to fu1l self_ consciousness. ( 46 ) Hencer å 1918 convention resorution urged rocal organisations to: unify and inspire the r.ocar community for its fulLest serf-consciousness and its most efficient activity; Enlist the sympattretic co-operation of all the best eLements, the finest moral spirit, the best trained interlect in the community for the cause; . . . Encourage the devel_opmerri of effective community workers and Ieaders,(qZl Through organisations such as the Bureau of social Research, the Grain Growers and united Farmers were linked with other organisationsr süch as the ehurches, schoors, and agricul turar societies, in breaking do¡rn frpartisan and sectarian wallstt and encouraging community enterprises. The most significant change in the politicar language of túe l{anitoba farm movement between the lg90s and the 1920s rras the t¡'ansformation of the patrons r version of nonpartisanship into the citizenship of the uFH. citizenship rras the politicar equivaLent of economic co- operation and social community in the new anarysis. -304-

Hhat eras rurar citizenship, and r¡hat was its prace in agrarian poritical practice? rn LgzL the uFM president tord his convention audience that:

every citizen...must set himself to rive for a citizenship of interJ.igent and conscientious participation in pubric rife, and every group must devote itself to co-operative and - investigation of conditions and discusiion"!rnp"itetic of principles and methods by which evils may be averted and the peoprers true werr-being pro*ãt"d. And' his predecessor cr.aimed, the farm movement trained women and men in citizenship rrin order to fit them, when the occasion should arise, to be the mouthpiece of their class in farming (sic) such regisration as would tend to prace our economic burdens more equitabry upon the shourders of alr classes of the peopre."(49) This resrduar ranguage of crass

was somewhat at odds with a language of citizenship. More appropriate eras the suggestion in an organisational pamphret from the early twenties that the rrfarmers of this country are not a crassi they are the majority of the canadian peopLe... landJ they are awakening to a furler sonsciousness of their responsibility in alr that makes for citizenship.,l Essentially this responsibitity meant co-operating and seeking sommon ground with other groups. R.c. Henders, addressing the l9L6 Joint committee on commerce and Agriculture' cast agrarian rerations with bankers and manufacturers in these terms. He explained that farmers, in seeking to influence legislation, rfwelcomed the co_operation -305- of other interests, and fert sure that aLl interests only ,t des ired a square deal . ( 49 )

With its entry into electoral potitics, the UFM had the opportunity to put this notion of citizenship tnto practice. There were five fundamentaL principles enunciated in the 1922 political platform: the ,tspirit of Good Itilrr,, which held that democratic citizenship was f,practicarJ.y co- operative goodwilltt; the trf deal of Common Goodfr, through which the seeking of cLass advantage eras repudiated in favour of the well being of the whole people; the,,co- operative Method", which meant working ¡sith those who had Itl.aw common objectives; the of progress,,, to rfmaintain and promote the forward l.ooking attitude; and rrCitizenship the Basic Problemr', whereby the fundamental task of government eras to provide al-r with education for citizenship. The platform also noted that, since the UFM tùas much more than sirnply a poI itlcal organi".tiorr, the association should retain its independence from any and arl governments. This, of course, extended to a rruFM, government as welr. rndeed, as George chipman argued immediatery after the Lgzz election:

the farmers have problems tt¡at simply cannot be reduced to questions of politics afone...and, to compl_ete the work accompl ished on Jul_y 1g, the farmers of Manitoba shourd set themselveË the task of making the UFM a thoroughly representative organization, covering the whore iieta- ot nays and means of improving t-he conditionì of rurar' l ife and developlng a creative citizenship. (SO) -306-

A sense of the distance and autonomy between movement and administrationr ês part of the ideology of citizenship, was conveyed in a memorandum submitted by the uFM board to the uFtf government in the falL of Lgzz. urging certain reforms, the board prefaced Íts suggestions by stressing tfthat these recommendations are made with no thought or intention of any attempt at dictation, but with cordial goodwill and the desire to be of practical assistance in promoting the well being of the province and the true efficiency of public administration. r,(Sl) The real ity, of courser wês tÌ¡at the sort of

nonpartisanship that became known as Brackenism was a practicaL rendering of this ideorogy. rn a ,legislative reviewt' at the 1926 UFM convention, Bracken presented his poritical philosophy through a recorrection of the situation that gave rise to the formation of the farmer government. trThere had been, It he began, r,a clash of partisan and class interests in which manufacturer, artisan, farmer, manual labourer' merchant, salaried employeer professional man and others of arl crasses had sought the advancement of their own interests as opposed to those of other crasses.rf This divisiveness, he continued, coupred nlth the partisanship of the tf historic poI itical partiÊs!r, produced a situation in which rf a businessr ike and economicar administration of Provincial affairs, with very considerable retrenchment in expenditure, nas absolutely necessary to save the province -307- from disaster. tt Hence, f,the UFl,l decided to take action politicarly." The Premier concruded by telring his audience that the aim of his government had been to give the province honest, progressive, efficient, and patriotic administration, which meant the following: honest' because that is an índispensabre quatity which any Government shourd possess as trustees for the people--progressive, so that its whore outlook shall be forward looking and advanced, ...efficient, because the finnancial condition of the province then as never before demanded a businessrike and economicar administration. . ., and patriotic because it eras bound to regard the best interests of aIt the peopl-e and not soleIy any particular class of peopLe. (S2) The citizenship and service that constituted UFll political practice in both the government and the association, thereforer *'ès subordinate to the broader economic and social imperatives of co-operation and community. But, precisely because they were sociar phenomena, co- operation, community, and citizenshp had to be consciousry constructed. Hence' the most important aspect of organlsational work ln the new anarysls eras the education of members and potential. members. Àccording to w. R. [ùood, generar secretary during the rater teens and early twenties, a shift had taken prace in the movementrs history: In the early days of our organization, our tine and thoughts were prlnciparly concerned in dearing with the grievances and disabirities in connectioñ with the marketing and Èransportation of our produce, but norr, while we do not neglect these things' nÊ recognize our obligations i; r"gard to developing a fully efficient citizenship on the part of our people, and much of the energy of our rocal assosiations is being directed toward -308-

educational development and efficiency in rural leadership. (S3)

I Under Hood s impressive direction, numerous loca1 and provinciar educational programmes were organised. rrAs rural People,tt one pamphJ.et noted, sre must be in touch with what is happening in the world. He must know about our reráLionrrrip with other interests and other groups of citizenË. He must understand the tendencies of trade and industryr ãrrd be prepared to take our rightful place in working out equitable adjustments. This process was calledt,education for citizenshipr,, whish meant:

lknowingl not onry how to gro¡r ¡vheat, but how to market it. .., lknowingl how to act as a member or an officer of an agricurturat society or a schoor board. . ., . Ibeingl acquainted by practice with working in association with neigirUors. . . Iand knowing and feeJ-ing that onel exists to serve his community.... In a word, Education in our democracy must practicarly prepare for co- operative participation in the ordinary service of the community l_ife. Therefore the uFl,t poritical pratform called for the rrhole educational process to be imbued with ff the idear of preparing for co-operative service and civfc duty,r, with rurar schools working toward rrthe unifying of our population, the deveropment of conmunity efficiency and the raising of the standard of citizenship.rr(54) Education, then' eras the úray in which individuals erere moulded into social- beings. By first awakening people to the fact they were sociar, then training them to act socially, the movement would' it was hoped, produce an economically. politlcalIy, and socially conscious collectivity. -30 9-

In the end, these various level_s produced a reformed publ ic persona for farm men. rn Deep Elrrrows ( 19 j.9 ) , ¡rhich might be described as an t,officialrr association history of the farm movement, Hopkins Moorhouse contrasted the frNerv organised Farmert' v¡ith the pre-sintaluta ilHayseedr. To the farmer of old, he wrote, it appeared that he had no business r He merery greer the grain. Apparently the farmer eras a pair of pants, a shirt and a slouch hat that sat on a wagon Load of wheat, drove it up the incline into the elevator and rattred aeray again for another load t

But this began to change with the Manitoba Grain Act and the sintaruta case. For the raiLways, the court declsion on car distribution meant Itthat the time had come to recognize the fact that there rùas a man inside the soil-grimed shirt. r' ttbegan Farmersr mêànrrhile, to appreciate. . . the task which faced these energetic men in successfurry íandring the giant organization for which they assumed responsibirity.,r rhey both, therefore, Itbegan to entertain for the other a greaber respect. " Ten years rater, during the rrsiege of ottawar,, the Grain Growers were popurarry referred to as frsod- Busters,' ttlt tras rather startJ.ing to find them,r, Hoorhouse rrmerely noted, a new type of Business Farmer.... rr rt hras, rta he concluded, far-seeing, cLear thinking New Farmer who has come forward in the last decade. Through his associations, his marketing experiences, his contact with railways and banks and manufacturers and governments, he has become a student of economics. rr(SS) -310-

The ignorant, biased' â''d individuaristic sodbuster and hayseed gave way to the knowledgeable, respectful, ård organised rurar businessman in Moorhousers account. rn the

IIGGA and UFU organisational Literature, the businessman rras arso a community citizen. Through improvements in business organisation and community 1ife, it was said, r,ere have raised the whole social status of farm life until today, the farmer is no longer termed a moss-back, or hayseed, but is recognised as a citizen equally competent and efficient with all others in the community.,t And, more forcefully: He knows the prace of agricurture among national industries. His range of thought is enrarged. His views are ristened to by members of oÍh", groups. He is, in the fullest sense of the word, a man among men. (86) He eras' simply, the uttimate product and personification of the movement. The movement, after aII, had become more concerned with sociaLising and raising the status of farm people than with faciritating radicar sociar change. The farm ¡nan, given an apparentry eguar standing with corporate officiars on the economic terrain or a regitimate craim to democratic citizenship on the politicar terrain, rras a worthy and fulfilled man. fronically, however, the ideal uFl{ man seased to be recognisable as a farmer in any meaningful sense; he simply became another citizen, community participant, and businessman, aLbeit a rural and agricultural one. -3L1-

Although the dominant categories had mostry displaced radicar categories in popurar agrarian ideology by the twenties, a radicar anal-ysis continued to be evident in the Manitoba farm movement throughout the first quarter of the tr¡entieth century. To be sure, it was stronger earl_ier in the century and ¡veaker later, but it was present nevertheless. rt is possibre to discern a pattern of post- Patronist radicar discourse that, while ress overtry poriticar, utopian, and resijtant than its nineteenth century predecessor, e¡as a significant, though increasingly subordinate, component of Manitoba agrarianism. rn proposing a resolution in favour of government ownership of erevators at the 1909 MGGA convention, the mover declared that ',It]he time has come for farmers to assume the control of their own storage facirities and derive for their labor its fuII returns.rf r¡vo years Later, H.D. Lamb of P1umas (llanitoba) provided this statement with some anarytical depth in a Letter to the Guide. To answer the question ttHill government erevators pèy?,,, ¡rhich wds frequently posed in those years, Lamb responded by asking rhetorically't[{ho pays for the erevators?r' rt eras farmers and norkers, of course. An elevator, he maintained, was a product of human labour. Labour produced the rumber, nails and paint' and put the buirding together. ,'rt is not capital that erects elevators, rr then, rrbut labor. CapitaL itserf is a rabor product and could never have existed if -312 -

labor had not first existed. The capitalists are men with money' the stored up rabor of other peopre., Furthermore, the labour of farmers produced the crops, without which the elevators (and railways and implement companies) would have no business. rf But farmers .own r none of these things, although it is their labor that produces them.... r' Hence, he concluded, government elevators would ,,payil in the sense that farmers wouLd finaLIy own and control, through the government' the ¡realth they had created . (52 ) A rabour theory of vaLue continued to be emproyed in the movement, then' although with a slightLy more agrarian tone than had existed in the 1890s. rn a broader indictment later in 19L0' the President of the Girbert prains Grain Growers, Association asked the rhetorical question r,lÍhy is canada prosperous?rtr ãod answered using expl icitry producerist language: Your government had $l0O,OO0,0O0 of a revenue last year. Hhere did the money come from? your manufacturers are milrionairés. Hhere did their money come from? Irour railroad magnates and charter mongers are rolling in wealth, .rnrn your merchants are prosperous. rs it because Libeiars or conservatives rule? or is it because of the mirlions of toirers ¡rho are producing the wealth from mother earth? The minerJ, tthel lumberjacks, the mossbacks are producing the wearth of Canada. (EB)

This oppressive and exproitative class e¡as defined, for the most part, in terms of monopory, ârthough, by the century t s second decade , u interestrr rras beginning to f'¡nonopolytt disprace in many speeches and texts that were -313 - otherwise governed by radicar premises. Earty MGGA convention discussions and resolutions, for exampler wêF€ often framed in terms of monopoly, ês in a 1910 speech by J.D. Hunt on the background to the el-evator question: ftrailroad monopory has some in a great many di f ferent disguises. rts Latest and sweetest form rras a great bfg wooLy Erevator combine.tt(s9) The single tax, meanwhile, a popular cause in the farm movementr úrès an important medium for discussing monopoly in the early twentieth century. J.H. Richards of chater argued in 19i.4 that monopoly and combination, but especially the land monopoly, ilis the power that ensraves our peopLe and fitls the land with poverty and want.tf But, he claimed, rfwhen the Single Tax is fully and conpletery adopted...the toirer will then receive the just reward f.or his toil, êDd his rimbs witl no ronger bear the fetters of industrial sravery., And, as late as Lgzo, the UFM page of the Guide contalned a song entitled ,,Big rnterests" which was crearly radical in inspiration¡ He have in this country a wonderful thing, Though scarcery a topic of which one shoùra sing; The fact is, though strange ho¡¡ it e rer came to pass, He live tneath the sway of a Governing Class. They werenrt set up by the B.N.A. Act, But that they nos¡ rule is the surest of fact; Theyrve no place by right in the ship of the rea1m, But sureJ.y as sure they preside at the helm. . . . And so from the toilers from poor and from r ich, From labor, from farmer, erith never a hitch, They draw them a tribute to pile in their banks, -3L4-

And never a soul who contributes get thanks. t'uho ... are they?rr the Barons of High rariff rown, By an ancient N.p. made the 1ords of renosni First they ruLe through the Tories and then through the Grits TiI1 the H.c. of L. thigh cost of rivingl drives us out of our wits. (60)

ìlore significant than these scattered references were the persistenl radicar definitions of oppressors and oppression in MGGA presidentiar addresses. At the 191L, meeting R.c. Henders drew attention to 'a lack of Ínterest and sympathy that seems to exist between the governments of our country and the great wealth producing crass of our popuration' while on the other hand capitalistic and combination interests seem to experience very few if any of these disabilities and inconveniences., The folrowing year, reverting to the language of monopoly, he made the connection between poLitical poerer and economic domination more explicit: - oppression by an aristocracy of industrial monopolists is as bad as oppression by an aristocracy of poriticar monopoiists.... wÃ are governed by an eLective aristocracy which in its turn is rargely controrred by an ãristocracy of wealth. Behind the governments and the regisratures are the corporations and trusts. Behind the machines, the ringsr åDd the bosses are the business monoporists, the industriar combinationse ãDd the plutocrats; behind the political monopolists are the industrial monopol ists. Later in the decade, Henders analysed the causes of the high cost of living. crass regislation and economic injustice, he claimed, began with the acquisition of Land. Land ferl -3 1.5 -

into the hands of a fesr, and its rising varue created fortunes. since the creation of wearth was social, however, some people suffered when others took more than their share out of the common product. He concluded, therefore, that the rrpower to extort surplus and unearned insrement is at the root of every economrc and social wrong because...it not only creates poverty in one class, but it 1essens the total

weal th o f the community. ', ( 6l )

The tariff, whire increasingly viewed as simpry a market impediment in the tr¡entieth century, did continue to be viewed r¡ithin the llanitoba far¡n movement, by some and at times, ãs a political instrument of class expl.oitation. frThe protective system,r, the HGGA leadership told Laurier in 19L0 ' trcreates a class whose interests are essentiall_y different from the people at largerr, and, J.W. Scal-lion added, it eras 'a breeding ground and sherter for combines and trusts which prey upon the individuar rife of the n people . (62') This class, created by pol itical means, secured and enforced raws to protect its economic interests. rtTherefore,It Grain Grower delegates were told in 19L3, r,if we have a class which owns a J.arge part of the national wealth Í{e may expect that that class wirr see to it that the vast power exerted by the machinery of government is exerted in its interests'r, and most notably by means of the tariff. Farmers and workers rfere comperled,to contribute a large percentage of the products of their rabor to the privireged -316- and protected crasses" through the tariff. This method of rrcollecting taxesr', which put rthe burden on the backs of working peopreft and exempted the rich, resurted in a concentration of wearth that had rrbecome the mightiest undercurrent in national rife.' According to one grain ftpower groerer' this to taxt, nas rrthe poerer to destroy one class to buird up and enrich other classes. r' And the tariffts significanse in economic and social rife, the MGGA President said in lgj.3r eràs that, ,,i_n short, rre cannot enjoy economic equal ity without pol itical equal ity. r' ( 6 3 ) The tariff, therefore, symbolised and was the most significant manifestation of a corrupted state.

A corrupted state, of courser erâs accompanied by corrupted political practice, êDd a radical sense of both inherited pol-itics and the possibirities of a new producerist poritics Lived on in the HGGA as weLL. J.B. Parker, in his 1910 account of 'rrhe Farmer in pol_itics and commercett, sketched a portrait of the ord styre poritical farmer:

At Grandview r saw one of our farrner candidates on his o¡rn poritÍcal platform, with a muzzre orr, and two corporation lawyers were pleading his case for him. one of these rawyers...said that when he read Sam Hughes $ras elected, we would hear him cheering aIr the way from winnipeg. The Love of these corporation rawyers for the farmers t candidate is very touching.

J.H. scalrion, in addressing the LgLz HGGA convention as honourary president, decried the Iingering party divisions among farmers. t,411 other crasses can unite for their -317-

tr ,, common bene f it, he lamented , t but I farmers alone are divided and conquered by the predatory interests and their political tools, and just as long as farmers are more concerned for the success of a politicar party than for their common good, present economic conditions wiII rrrhe continue, interests,t, on the other hand, supported any party or government they courd use as a business asset and opposed those they could not use.(64) But this sort of partyism wourd be transcended by the peopre--farmers and workers--uniting to create a nerr potitics. The radicar variant of this vision persisted through the post-war period and into the twenties. So, in l9Lg, a Çuidg contributer could write:

...}et us get crose to rabor.... se are the same peopler rrê aLl work for a riving.... Legisration that is bad for one is bad for the other; and what is more important, if farmers remain as a cLass by themserves and rrage earners in another crass bt themselves, neither caring for the others interests, neither wirr be abre ever to combat the porrer of the big interests. (65) More importantly, ln the uFtt 'Farm problemrt questionnaire of LgZg, while most of the ansÌrers were structured in terms of market economics and social co- operation, some of the responses to the question frHhat is the solutiontt (to the agriculturaL depression) revear that the dominant categories did not compretely control agrarian discourse in the twenties. One locaL, invoking Bellamyrs Lookinq Backward, suggested frthe onry sorution to the probrem is...state sociarism and the abolition of money as -318- ere have it. . . . It Another Local advocated ,revision of the banking system making it work for the good of the peopre and not to make profit. The uLtimate sorution is the establishment of a Co-operative Commonwealth, production for use and not for profit. The capitaristic system ries at the bottom of all our troubres. rr ( 66 ) This presaged ne$rer pol iticar organisations and anaLyses that moved beyond radicarism to proto-socialist and socialist forms. The analysis that eras pre-eminent in the post-war l'lanitoba Grain Growers Association and the United Farmers of Manitoba subordinated inherited patronist elements to categories drawn from the dominant ideology. By the !9zos, market' community, and citizenship displaced cLass, politics' and producerism as the main organising principres I of Manitoba s mare agrarianism. patronism had been characterised by the determining unity of the poritical. rn thå twentieth century this unity eras deconstructed, and then reconstructed around the discrete elements of econorngr society, politics, and edueation, in which the economic and sociar were determinant. The market and co-operation defined the economic, the sociar rras viewed in terms of community and cohesiveness, citizenship and service defined the political, ãDd the educationar encompassed the subjectÍve acquisition of these various aspects of knowledge. The new unity, personified by the ideaL HGGA/UFM man' subordinated the popurar movement to practices that -319-

supported råther than challenged the structures of power. Radicalism, while subdued, was not defeated, hor+ever. It lived on as a subtext of the movement, laying the linguistic foundation for the reft insurgencies of the thirties and forties.

III

The formation of the çromenrs section of the MGGA at the 191'8 convention marked the first organisationaL expression of female agrarianism in Manitoba. Although nomen may have been involved individually in the patrons and earl ier formations--as they were in the MGGA from lglz--they did not exist as distinct entities in those pioneering groups. rn contrast with their urban, middte class sisters who struggled for suffrage, then, Manitoba farm Ìfomen were rather slos¡ to organise. Indeed, organised female agrarianism vras a post-suffrage phenomenon, becoming a force onl-y after eromen had eron the vote in the province. rt y¡as against a popular background of male agrarian and middle class feminist agitation that the vocaburary of the womenrs agrarian movernent was constructed. on the one hand, feminism created a space for discussion of the poritical, economic' and social status of women. The womenrs section of the farm press, often staffed by suffrage feminists, kept farm women informed about the struggres and actions of middle class hromen. Hore importantly, though, these -320-

publications provided. a forum for readers to discuss and assess their own experiences as farm wives and daughters. on the other hand, the radical ranguage of the menrs movement' arthough somewhat ress resistant by the later teens' imparted a criticar and cLass tone to the analysis which deveroped. Like the menrs movement in the same time period, however, this analysis eras constrained by the dominant ideology.

The ideological space created by middre crass feminism allowed farm women to contemplate their domestic existence as a probrem r¡ith identifiabre causes and possibre solutions. The central questions then, as no[r, revolved around whether or not men were responsible for the difficulties and oppressions nomen faced. Here rromen to blame for their oern predicament? Here men rearry the probrem? or ' erere men merely the victimised intermediaries in a larger system? Two series of letters from 3.he_IèEmels, Advocate of L897 and l90s illustrate this debate. Both series began with a criticism of men. one correspondent in L897 cited the case of a southern l{anitoba farmer who, attempting to buiLd a kitchen onto his house as cheaply as possibre, Têfused to accede to his wifers request to incrude a cellar for storing mirk. "The good wife got angry,tf readers were told, r,and threatened to make a public exposure of the disadvantages of a farmerrs wife, telring these dairy lecturers lwho happened to be visiting the farm -3 21-

at the time I that it was not knowJ.edge ere wanted so much as a chance to put what we know into practice. ff She concluded that, i f every eroman nas to strke for better accommodation and reasonabre house improvements it would be the beginning of better times. until an improved lot of men herp their struggling wives and daughters by providing better taciritles for carrying on their part of the work there cannot be anything but discontent . (62 )

Eight years tater, and with more forceful language, farm men r{ere indicted for treating their wives with contempt. There were many ltomen' this writer claimed, ¡cho had to build their own henhouses and garden fences because men wourd not, crean up after men when they tracked manure and mud into the house' êDd endure menrs curses when they requested things. This, she said, is realry a true picture of by far the greater number of farmerts homes in some vicinitiãs, and it is the lack of arr. that constitutes a rear. home that makes women detest the farm.... How would the same conduct appear in the eyes of the pubric, if it nere acted between man and man? The ürorp", would be justly caLled a plain thief. Does it make the action nobre or honest because it groman is onry a herpress he is defrauding? . . . rt remains in the hands of the farmer to remedy evil. (69) this other retters pointed to a doubre standard existing on most farms whereby men enjoyed fine horses, fine barns, åDd every form of farm technology while the eromen--r,the hardest ¡rorked and poorest used of anyone in the countryrr--were struggling with meagre resources to make the hone comfortabre and attractive. ItFarmers should appreciate everything their -322-

ttand wives do,tt one said, not look upon them as if they erere a machine or a football; they are human beings and want to be treated as such. tt(69) There were two types of responses to these criticisms. one was to blame hromen for their predicament. Hence, one vroman wrote in 1905 proclaiming that she had just married an oAC graduate who eras trur-y a gentl.eman. rn her mind, it rras a womants oern fault if she eras a slave. There were brutish men who enjoyed submitting women to drudgery, st¡e conceded, but she fert a eroman shourd simpry refuse to do such workl(70) In a somewhat similar, though far less strident vein, a more experienced hroman rerated how she had been married to a farmer for fourteen years. with a household ranging ln size from six to ten, she did all her own sevring, housework' and quirting, miLked the cons, churned, picked apples and dried them, and always had time for fancy work and reading. she concluded that tife nas what one made it, and it disgusted her to hear peopre talk of the drudgery of farm work in an age of cheese factories, creameries, and other conveniences . (7L) The other response, vrhich later besame the dominant ethos in the farm womenrs movement, was to defend men while críticising the Larger system that exproited both women and men. Men were too busy r¡ith their own work to improve domestic arrangements, the argument went in one letter, and the fundamental probrem eras a rack of capitar on the farm. rf the government reduced freight -323- rates and the burden of taxation, farmers would have the money to improve their own, and their wives r, working conditions, (,72)

Hhen a systematic anal-ysis emerged after 191g, farm movement women adopted the mare ranguage of radicarism to link the position of women in the home to the political struggles of farm men. within the women Grain Growers and the united Farm women, the tariff, as Lhe symbol of agrarian poriticar oppression, was viewed as a mechanism that specifically exploited women as well as men. Farm women, according to this view, had an equal status with men in the producing class. ,,Agriculturists in Canada, and that term must include also the farmerrs wife,,, Mary t{cCallum wrote in ttproduce L9L9, a ¡rearth equar to arl othersr fet there is no class which uses and enjoys smarler returns for its rabor.r, And, since it eras estimated that one-fifth of farm income vras extracted by the tariff, she lost one-fifth of the varue of the eggs' butter, and cream she produced. frHow long, ,, it was asked' ttwirr women be content to give one-fifth of all their time, their rabor, and their produce to the enrichment of the few pLutocrats who benefit by the tari Í-t?n Furthermore' the farm wife arso fert the exproitative effects of the tariff in her roLe as chief consumer for the home. rt eràs especially oppressive in the kitchen, 'f the housekeeperts workshop,'. Mccalrum clained that the farm r{oman' r'!each yearr orr things she buys for use in her kltchen -324-

alone' pays more Ín taxes than is revied directLy on an

entire half-section farm for all purposes. fr Hence, erhen these various aspects of the tariff I s operation were combinedr r{omêfi were found to suffer more than men: Homen and chirdren have been the special victi¡ns of the tariff ever since there was a tariff. Homes have been robbed and famiLies reduced to penury because of the tariff. From the time a woman is born untir she dies she is fraudurentry though legai-Iy bereft of the returns of her labor through the tariff.... rt is an unseen, unsuspected presence, closer than a brother, nearer than mother or father, but exerting an influence that is fiendishly sinister absorbing. and

It hras little wonder, then, that so many farm homes lacked the simplest labour-saving devices or the smarrest comforts. on the one hand' the price of househord items was infrated because of the tariff and, on the other, there eras littLe money available in any event because virtuarry arl. of the farm income went into the purchase of farm machinery and farm supplies. And to add insult to injury, it r{as noted in passing, the tariff favoured rich eromen at the expense of poor women by invariabry taxing neeessitles at a higher rate than luxuries. (73)

rt lras within this discursive context that the UFHM made a submission to the Tariff commission in october of 1920. rrrn presenting my paper putting forth craims for redress of rariff oppressions for an oppressed people, the agricurturist, tt Mrs. James Erriot of the uFt{ü saÍd in r,I introduction, offer no apologies. AII my statements are -325-

facts gleaned from actuar toiring agriculturists (men and tt women). The submission, in fact, was based on a survey undertaken by the UFHM to ascertain the conditions under which farm eromen rrere working. This popular appropriation of the survey method reveared famil_ies t iving under difficurt conditions in which r{omen nere forced to work long hours with little technorogical or human assistance. of the forty-eight women surveyed, for example, ãl_L rose betr¡een 4:30 and 7:00 in the morning, and aIl but five ended their working day bet¡reen 9:00 and 11:00 in the evening. None of the househol-ds had water in the kitchen, two had cistern pumps¿ rronê had hard water without hauling or carrying, none had a bath, and only seven had an indoor winter toilet. Although every home had a sewing machine, f,in order to get the greatest possible results out of the womenr,, the only other labour saving devices were egg beaters, dust and floor mops, potato parers, and a fe¡r power churns. Every one of these items, it tras noted, bore à tariff. Sewing machines

had a rate of $14. 00, crhich neant that a total of $570 . 00 eras extracted from the forty-eight households through sewing machines alone. But it rras the cost of clothing that rras particularly repulsive to the UF¡IM because it nas this that caused children to suffer the most. rt was pointed out to the commissioners that woorren garments--a necessity for the Þlanitoba winter--were simply too expensive for most peopre

to buy. 'f rhe brutarity of it all, rr Þlrs. Erriot protested, -326-

tris the manufacturers rearize the labouring people, which

includes farmers, cannot pay the price, hence few, very few woollen articles are secured by our country stores.' ttWhy,n she asked, t,must such brutaLity be exp].oited on the I ittre children?tt ttrn the face of such conditions, rr she rrcan concluded, anyone deny the reasonableness o f the request to rower the tariff restrictions on the needs of the home makers of our tand.il(74) But this use of the tariff symbor represented more than an appropriation of radical terms. rt also reveared that eromen viewed their oppression as being a part of the exproitation of atl farm people. As women grain gror{ers were reminded in 19L9, during a review of tt¡eir varied activities, f it is well not to lose sight of the purpose of the organization, that it nas established primarily to'herp the farm peopre by educating them to understand the economic and poLitical infruences that affect the agricultural crass.tt(75) Furthermore, the first crause of the womenfs constitution ( r'women shall have the same standing in the asociation as menrr) ¡vas understood to excrude the notion of I t distinct e¡omen s and men s sections. Rather, the l,fGGA eras perceived as an association of women and men in which the women also had an autonomous section. Homen, then, erere members of their locar grain growers r association first and ¡nembers of the womenf s section second. Two separate bodies, it was argued, nould mean separation and weakness, whereas -327 -

an association nith a women r s section co-operating rdas rra demonstration of the fact that the farm men and the farm women are in the organization for the promotion of their common interests, and that after alL, most of the problems which concern either men or nomen concern both,n(26) The strength of this class identity was most strongry felt around the issue of the ilWomenrs partyil in L91g. This imperiarist, militarist, high tariff, and anti-worker party, organised by prominent roronto feminists crose to the National Council of iùomen, was soundly criticised and rejected by farm movement rromen. And, in the process, the discussion herped crystarlise women's thoughts about their

relation to women from other classes and men of their own cIass. trrt is possibLe for slasses to unite on nationat policies, tf one farm vroman concluded, but utterly impossible for sexes. A womanrs party makes womenrs voice and opinion on pubric afiairs as innaccessibre (sic) ès if they resided on Mars. Let us be done for ever with sex enterprises. t They can t work. Let the farm people, ,ñ.r, and r{omen, make up the voice of ture. Let industrial or other workers, men"gii"uf and women, up the voice of labor,(77) make

With this image of themsel_ves, farm movement women concentrated their energies on a range of activities born of the traditionar domestic responsibilities. By Lgzs there were seven committees in the UFIùM to co-ordinate the various lines of endeavour. Emphasising education, sociar r¡erfare, and legisration af fecting eromen and chir.dren, the organisation strove to lmprove sociar conditions and deverop -328-

rocal tastes for the rtf iner things of I iferr. rn the area of legislation' for exampre, movement eeomen monitored and sought changes in the fierds of child werfare, divorce,

marital property rights, naturalisation for married women, and education. At the Iocal community l_evelr rnêêrurhile, they complemented the work of the womenrs rnstitutes by engaging in Red Cross and patriotic work, maintaining rest rooms and libraries, or organising musical, Iiterary, and educational evenings. (zB) The very fact that movement and institute e¡omen were able to co-operate in the rray they did indicates the extent to which the dominant ideorogy provided the vocabulary and defined the goals of the movement. For, while movement r{omen employed the rhetoric of radicalism and

rrere inf luenced by middte class feminism, they erere constrained by the categories of market, consumption, rural problem' community, and education for citizenship. rn a eJay which paralrered the neer anarysis in the mare mainstream of

the farm movement, then,. the 1anguage used by movement $romen

was ultimately defined by economic, social, political, and educationar categories draçrn from rurar sociar science. For farm movement women, the economic ¡ras the terr.ain upon which they produced commodities for the market, consumed items from the market, and experienced the injustice of their situation most acutery. rt was, in the end' the most significant factor in the deternination of rural conditions. rrshould the stress of economic -329- conditions," Mrs. James EIliot of Cardale (UFWM president) asked in 1923, ftnot be the one fastor to bind the rural people together in this Association? Lgzz gave a bountifut harvest but the cost of production and garnering was out of aIl proportion to the meagre pittance received for the grain. tf And, she continued two years later, rrfarm people must rearize for themselves a greater share of the wealth which they produce that they may have the purchasing power necessary to establish...homes, rr and achieve the edusationaL, sociaL and pol itical goals of the organisation. (79 ) llore specif icaIIy, and ¡vith reference to a particularly offensive economic problem in the eyes of the farm movement' Mary Mccarrum made a connection between rand specuration and the condition of eromen. Because of the impossibility of finding reasonabry priced rand in the settled areas of the province, she argued, farm people were forced to homestead in unsettled regions. rn a trip to such a district she found housing of the most basic, pioneering sort and' therefore, housekeeping rrof the most dif f icurt and discouraging kindt,. There were no terephones nor was there mail delivery. More shocking was the fact that the nearest doctor was forty miles anay; hence many women bore children without the aid of a doctor or a nurse. The profiteering of the land speculators, she concluded, r,directly acts disastrously on our farm women, r, making this aspect of the economlc very much a womanrs problem.(gO) -330-

The central concept in uFrüM discussions of domestic production was co-operative marketing. The marketing committee noted in LgzL that a general decLine in agricultural prices meant farm hromen were receiving less for their butter, eggs and pourtry. This made the co-operative method o f marketing ttan intensery woman , s probremrr . r,our own one-hundred per-cent organized resistance, with intelligent co-operatÍon, tt yromen srere tord later, r,is the one thing that is needed to bring about better marketing conditionst,(8L) And, of course, women were connected to and affected by ments co-operative endeavours. The pool_, Tracy Patrick suggested in her t,poor womanrf corumn in Lgz:., can make her burden lighter--enable her to possibly see that tittle debt which ¡vorried her more than anyone knew, cleared up; make it possible for her to have certain Little comforts for her home. .. ; And, iust as the Hheat pool has been instituted to help the eJoman on the farm, so the Pool wants and needs the help of that woman. . ., willing to cheerfully make temporary sacrifices and suffer certain temþorary inconveniences in order that she, her famiLy, and her neighbors may ultimately benefit. (92) As much as the economic rearm rnight determine conditions for farm women fn this analysis, the most significant change occurred in the sociar realm. Hore precisely' the rural problem and its resolution were the categories through which society eras most frequently contemplated in the movement. At their first convention in 1918' rrene Parlby of the united Farm Homen of Alberta tord Grain Grower eromen,tthat a common attltude of the otd farmer -3 31- was to consider that there is no rural problem, that things wiIl adjust themselves if only teft alone.tf She maintained, however, that there eras a problem,fand that a share of it is uniquery womenf s work.rr During the following decade the farm eroments movement concentrated a goodry portion of its efforts on identifying and sot ving tbis putative probrem. 'l'925, rn f.or example, it was exprained in a uF[{l,l document that rural $romen had discovered that the improvement,rof rural r ife can best be accompl-ished by systematÍcalIy following a carefuJ_Iy prepared program. r, Hence, the UFIùM board e¡as divided into seven committees, ,reach responsible for undertaking research along rines vitar to the weLfare of the rural home."(83) This probrem identification approach to rural society was cLearly evident in the three rural surveys of farm wonen conducted between L920 and rgz3. The survey method' of course, e¡as an integrar part of the sociological definition of a sosiar probrem. rn the first survey, done in preparation for the presentation to the Tariff commission, movement nomen essentiarly appropriated the method for their own poriticar purposes, using it to generate facts for a criticism of the tariff. The other two surveys' however' were not tied to an expricit politicat project. rn these instances the sociar problem that rras revealed was linked more closery to a purely social solution. -332-

This social solution, as one might guess, rdas defined by the notion of community. community existed along that continuum from individual to nation which constituted social life. And the farm r¡omenrs movement, activists claimed, served individual, community, and nationar purposes. rt served the farm woman herself by bringing her into social contact with the women and men of the organisation and the community, it served the community by awakening interest in community conditions, and it served the nation--the community of communities--by creating a higher standard of social life. ( 84 ) Moreover, women hrere crucial, if not central actors in community organising. rrNo body of people has any real craim to calt itserf a community organisation,rl the UFM Handbook advised, rfso long as it has not enrolred the women of the community in its ranks. For effective service along the rines of entertainment, sociar deveropment and educati.on, the help of the eromen must be enlisted. rr And what made nomen effective? one opinion, proffered by Mrs. J.s. $ood of the womenfs auxiliary of the oakville grain groererst association (and subsequently first president of the Í{oments section of the MGGA), eras that frwith that innate desire to please, they are just the right sort to put forth that community spirit that is so necessary to the uplift of t'( farm peopre. 85 ) whire women r s traditionar rore as servants was no doubt important, a more significant factor e¡as the prace of the home in socialisation and the -333- construction of community. The ÞIGGArs Rural citizenship placed the home firmly in the context of the rurar problem rtwhat when it asked is the farm home accomplishing? Hhat are its needs? Hhat are its possibilitles? How can they be real It ised? I t answered that the rural home eras a contradiction. On the one hand, the rrsturdy manhood, wholesome womanliness, Iandl high mora]- standardsrf of the rural home represented the highest deveropment of home rife, whiler on the othef, the rural home was plagued by ttmonotony, drudgery, petty jealousy, Iand] sonservatism. fl

The farm movement, ãDd movement yromen in particurar, had a responsibility to overcome this contradiction by alrowing the positive to frourish at the expense of the negative. rndeed' ês Mrs s.H. Engrish argued in 1916, the home ff is the testing prace [of the movement], and if s¡e do our best there ere are sure of trying to extend our infruence to those around us. rt is not enough to strive after .Better Farms r and 'Better stockr--we must extend it to our homes.,,(g6) llost importantly, a number of y¡omen noted over the years, co-operation--the foundation of community for the farm movement--needed to begin at home. This might mean women co-operating with men by appreciating that improved farm technorogy had a higher prioriÈy than domestic Labour saving devices t ot r lllofê progressively, men assisting with donestic work to reciprocate for women helping with outside chores. "The problem of getting better sociar life in many of our -334-

communitiestt courd be solved, Mary Mccallum concluded, if farm women made their homes centres of rrhigh idears, true

neighborl iness and tolerance. tr( g7 ) Educational endeavours ¡rere especially important for farm movement .romen since they, r ike other *romen, were deemed to have responsibirity for educating the young. At one 1eve1' this concern vras expressed by monitoring rurar education. One of the main objectives of the HGGA Somen,s SectÍon I,T better rural schools, which ¡ras pursued by studying the rural schoor problem at both a rocar and provincial lever. rn a LgzL uFwM Education committee report on rural education, for example, consolidation and a Larger administrative unit were offered as solutions to the problems of rurar school attendance and the conpetency and turnover of rural teachers. (gg) At another leveI, farm movement women experienced the broader sociar anxiety over adoLescence which had spawned the Boysf and Girlsr cIubs.

The Junior uFM, nhich operated under the direction of a uFHtt committee' sought to bring youth into the purposes of the

organisation and the deveropment of rural 1ife. rt $ras berieved that young peopre, especiarJ.y those around school leaving ã9ê, were in danger of being rost to the rlure of city lightstt or 'narrow indivldualismr if a speciar effort eras not made to t'take the drudgery out of farm life'by offering themttsociar inducement and recreationrrin the movement. this eras especialry criticar because other youth -335-

organisations were failing to train the young. They were falling short of movement ideals, one report argued, in the same way "our public school system of textbooks farr short of properly training our rural- boys and girrs.rr Hence, the uFwM took on the responsibility of having the young people

of their communities,rcome to know eacl¡ other better, êDd

thus learn to co-operate more effectiveLy in all that makes for community betterment and nationar progress. rr A special effort eras needed, then, to bring youth into the social rrLike world. ourserves our boys and girls need deveropment. They need the spirit of co-operation both in work and play.,, And this could be accompr ished by moving beyond 'rbook Iearning and general school work,, to il [r ]eal intrinsic education Iwhichl comes when our young people grapple with the economic' sociar and fiscar problems of the day. r, so the uFútM approached youth work by organising around educationar' economic, social, and vocationar themes. EssentiarLy, this involved citizenship and readership training' granting young peopre some economic autonomy (giving them their oern Iivestock, for example), emphasising farming t s professionaL statusr êrrd, most importantly, drawing youth into socially co-operative systems. (gg) gJomen Por themselves, education meant adequate and proper training for the responsibirities of political citizenship. Through papers and lectures with tittes such tf rrHomen as rhe eJomanf s Partt or and servi.cer,, movement women -3 36-

and intel-rectuars in the post-suffrage period prepared the new voters for their new public rores. The franchise,

coupred with their formal entry into the MGGA, provided a great opportunity for women according to this analysis. They could begin to change some of the laws that were so unjust to women and chiLdren, èDd, ãs welL, Iead the tray into nonpartisan poJ. iticar. behaviour. I,lore importantly, though' this marked their entry into true community membership. ftNo community can accomplish its best purpose,rl Mrs Arbert McGregor told the winchester MGGA in 1916, unless ttthe it has loyal, devoted service of its whole citizenship." Hith nomenrs poriticar and organisational participation, this woul-d be the sase. Furthermore, there Írere ways in which women brought speciaL quarities to citizenship. Through service in the home, Mabel Finch argued in 1918, ttwoments best qualities and highest poerers are developed. " Through service to the state, womenrs influence and experience in the home could be extended to the community and nation. FinaLly, with the acquisition of citizenship' eromen took their rightfuL prace alongside men in the movement and in the affairs of state. After suffrage and I'IGGA membership, l{cGregor promised, ,,ere do not expect to talk any more of the rights of women. lde have our rights, and it wirr be a case of men and vromen working together....' And' giving the radicar inheritance a novel inversion, she concruded 'rwoman. . .wilt take her prace by his side neither -337 - as parasite nor competitor, but as mate. rr so, through meetings, discussions, rectures, and courses, movement vromen erere t'educated for citizenshiprf ; that is, they were trained to ¡rork potitically alongside men, but with special responsÍbrity for issues in their orrn sphere,' in constructing stabre rural and national communities. (90) Female agrarianism never emerged as an autonomous force in Manitoba. rnfruenced to a certain extent by independent woments organisations, it was primarily a product of the main body of the agrarian movement. The oppositionar tone that did exist in the ideology of the movement was derived from those radicar strains that survived in the mare agrarianÍsm of the rater teens and twenties. Þtore importantly, though, the dominant ideology tt¡at eras being systematically produced and disseminated by the post-war years provided the main vocabuLary of the movement. lùhire the movement ts rerative autonomy ensured that dominant issues and categories were not simpry reproduced in the woments section of the MGGA and in the UFWM, the weakness of the radical arternative and the sociar distance of urban feminism meant that movement wómen nonetheLess accepted the central concepts in the dominant view as meaningful renditions of their social and economic existence.

By the ).92os, the radicar potential of patronism had been constrained and displaced in the Manitoba farm movement -3 38- by the emerging ideorogy of Brackenism. pol itical nonpartisanship gave way to business nonpartisanship as the oppositionar erements in radicalism became less resistant and even accommodationist. After the erection of rgzz, the UFM moved slowly, but surely, into ideorogicar alignment with the conservative mainstream of the provinciar bourgeoisie. But the route trom radicalism to conservatism was a complex one in which the movementrs language was trans formed.

It should be stressed that in this analysis, as we argued in chapter one, subjectivity is constituted through Language and ranguage is not ã vehicle for the expression of subjectivity. rn this chapter rre derineate a series of discursive structures rather the ideas of specific than t individuars or sociar groups. 2. "Farmers Grievances, r, Manitoba Free press 6 becember 1883, p. 4; B. McCutchããn, rftle gconomic and Soclal structure of poriticar Agrarianism in Manitoba, Lgz0- 1900,t' PhD dissertation, university of British corumbia, L974, pp. 98-11-5; L. A. Wood, A Historv of Farmers,. (Toronto, Lg24¡ reprint L975), pp. I23-L29. 3. McCutcheon, rtThe Economic and Social Structure,rr chapter IV, chapter V, p. ZZZ. 4. McCutcheon, Economic Ir ttsuccessfur"The and Social Structure, pp. 275-278; Farmers r Erevator companies, ,f The Larmersr Advocate (TFA) S ApriI 1g9g, p. 149. 5. R. cook' "TilIers and roirers: The Rise and Farr. of Populism in Canada in the 1g90s,rf CHA Reports (1994);1_984 ); G. Kealey and B. Palmer, ( Cambr idge, L982), pp. 387-39I: McCutcheon, "Thà Economic and SociaL Structure,', pp. 279-ZBg; Wood, À Historv, pp. 10 9_LZZ¡ s. E. D. shortt, 'f sociaL change ind poriticir crisis in Rural Ontario: the Patrons of Industry, l.gg9-lg96, r, in D. swainson, êd., oriver Mowatrs ontario (Toronto, L972)¡ s. Glazer, ff rhe patrons of rndustry in l.lichigan,il 24(2) (1937). During 1.894 the patrons won a piovi.nciaf bye-election in Beautiful Plains constituency, while in the provincial -339-

general election of 1896 patrons $rere nominated in seven constituencies and elested in two constituencies. rn the federal election of L896r ßêâDWhile, two patrons were nominated in Manitoba and one was nominated in the North Sest Territories, but none of the three yras successful. Hood, A History, pp. 129, L43, l45. 6 The Patronsr Advocate (Advocate) l3 March 1g9S. 7 Al though the term t'physiocraticf, is of ten used to describe this type of popular analysis, the term itself is probLematic. As a system of thought, physiocracy more accuratery belongs to the hÍstory of þo1itical economy. rt may have entered and influenced popular agrarian discourse, but this itself should be a suËject of investigation and analysis. on the history of physiocracy, see E. Fox Genovese, Ihe OriqinÃ of Physiocracy (New York, ]-976). Advocate 3 october r.894. Henry cray was the editor of The Patrons I Advocate from its formåtion in l}gz until 1.895 when he was forced to resign over an editorial policy dispute with the executive board of the patrons of Industry. 9 Advocate 10 April 189b. l_0 Advocate l-9 December L894. L1 Advocate 5 December L8g4. L2 Advocate. 1- January 1896. l_3 Advocate 5 December rfBrandon 1894. L4 Convention,r Advocate L6 January Lg9b. L5 ttWho Owns Canada?,tt Advocate 14 November lgg4. 16 Advocate 1-0 April j.B9S , LT April tB9b. L7 Advocate ItReport 4 December 1894. 18 from W.C paynter, SecretèFlr Beulah patrons of Industry,,, Ldg-e.gêlg. 1B September j.g9b. 19 Advocate 13 March 1895 , 27 June Lgg4. zo Advocate 9 January LBgS 2t Advocate 6 March 1g9S 22 Advocate 19 December LB94 23 Advocate I January 1896 24 Advocate 27 June Lg94 25 f'Hheat Grading, Advocate rrCommission " 9 October 1g9b. 26 on the Freight Rate,rr Àdvocate 24 October 1894. 27 Advocate 4 December L8g4 28 Advocate 20 February l89S 29 patronst Senti_net (Sentinel) I ApriI lg9G. 30 Hestern Canaaian Lj. March 1999. 3l_ F. Howel-1, t,What t s In A Name, r, Advocate 27 February l-895; Ad¡¿o_-çê!C_ b December 1893 32 TFA. 5 February L894; Advocate g January Lg96. 33 western canadian L8 November Lgg7, l1 úarch lg9g. 34 ilObjections to Socialism," rfOur Advocate 24 July lg95. 35 Labor Party AIIies,il Advocate 11 December 1gg5. -340 -

36 Advocate_ 18 December LggS; an update on the Harmony Industrial Association appeared in the Western Canadi¡n 28 July 1898. W.C. paynter was also the secretary of the Beu1ah Patrons of Industry. 37 Advocate JuIy 189S. 38 t'united presidentrs t Farmers of Manitoba Address,r Grain Gro¡¡ers Guide (Guide ) 1.6 January L}ZAt p. 60; Provinciar Archives of Manitoba (pAM), united Fafmers of Ue¡åleþs (UFM) Papers, Box 5, L?ZS Filel ilSome peiEÏãent Facts About the UFM,il p. 4. 39 J. S. Hoodsworth, rd. , Studies in Rural ei t i zençt-r i n (Winnipeg, L9L4), p. ?B; Moorhouse, ( Toronto , L918 ) , p. 248 . ttFor 40 UFll Papers, Box L, f nter-District Debate , !923n i The Scoop Shovel L(7) (January, L}ZS). stressed It should be f'co-operationttthat we are assessing the place of the ter.m (.and its variations ) in specif Ianguages ic t'truettor discoursesi ¡re are not cl.aiming to reveal the or ttrear " essence of co-operation in Manitoba. Hence, our theoretical focus is different from other analyses of agrarian co-operation in which the various strains of co-operative thought are delineated and the co-operative experience is delcribed. See, for example, f. Hacpherson, Eãch for All: A Historv L945 (Toronto, LgTg) 4I -QFM Papers, Box 15, UFM LgZ:- yearbook, f,president r s Address, tt pp. 2I-23¡ UFM Papers, Box lS, I'Canadian Financial Problems As seen gy The organized Farmers, Joint Committee of Commerce and Agriculture, Z March l_11_6,1' p. 51; see also Guide 9 Januaiy 19L8, p. St. 42 UFM PApers, uFor ftHanitoba Box L, Inter-District Debate , LgZ3,,; Grain Growers I Association, rr Guide n. August L918, p. L79L, 43 t'President9gjde 22 July 19L4, p. 886, ZL October L9t4, p, LLT4¡ Poole t s Address, il L4 January L}ZS, p. 45, Woodsworth, €d., RuraI Citizenship, pp. 31_32. 44 ugu- paærs' Box 18, Programs anð Hindbooks File, Pamphlet, 1918"; f,The Organized Farmers Educating''MGGA Themselves, 'r l{anaqra 14 ( 5 ) ( l{arch , L}ZL) , p. LZ, 45 UFM Papers, Box 15, MGGA Convention, L904] r,pro""edings and Resolutionstfj Box 18, HGGA Convention, trDirector I Lg16, s Report tt; Box 19, programs and Handbooks File, TTMGGA Pamphlet , Lgl_grr; Box l-S, MGGA yearbook, 1-918, p. 7L. 46 UFM Papers, Box 18, ,tuf.lt Handbook of practical (r.920-21_). llorkrt 47 UFM Papers, Box 15, I,IGGA yearbook, 1919, p. 63. 48 . --gèperg' Box 15' Presidentiar Addresses, Lgzr and 19 t_8 . 49 UEu--papere, Box 18, MGGA/UFM pamphlets, IrLet I s Get f t Together t,,; Box 18, Joint Commiitee on Commerce and -341-

Agriculture, I and 2 December 1916, ItMinutes of rt Conference . 50 UFM Papers, ilUFM platform, r'Îhe Box 18, Platform File, Draft L9ZLtt; Tentative Draf t Platform,rf Guide Lg May L92L, p. 815; Guide 23 August L9ZZ, p, 942, 51 UFM Papers, Box 5, 1922 FiIe, I,UFM Memorandum,r. 52 PAM, Bracken Papers, Box tlc 13 rr, Addresses and Radio Talks File, L926-44, r,A Legislative Review,,, pp. Z-4, 53 UFM Papers, Box 15, UFM Yearbook 1-gZL, i'bir"ctor rs Reportt'; see also tl.H. Stapleb, @ Àqricqlture, ( Toronto, rgzo) , p. 44 for ttrJ-signif icant role of education in the UFO, and UFM papersl ¡o* 1, letter from t{.R. wood to À.J.M. poole, lo ociòuer Lgzg, re. ff Fundamentals of the Farmer Movementrr. 54 UFM Papers, Box 18, L922-23 Pamphlets FiIe, r'Local EducationaL Programsft; ItEducation for Citizenship, rr Guidg 25 December L91g; UFM papers, t'UFM Box lS, LgZz Yearbook, Pol itical Platformrr . 55 Moorhouse, Deep Furrows, pp. 39-40, Sg , ZgZ, Z7Z. 55 UFM Papers, Box 5, rgzS File, "Some pertinent Facts About the UFM,,, p. LZt Box 18, rrUFM Handbook of Practical Horktt. 57 UFM Papers, Box 15, MGGA Convention, 1908, ttproceedings and Resolutions',i ttThe€g_i_de. 20 ApriI !.910, pp. 13-14. 58 J. B. Parker, Farmer in Politics and Commerce, rf Guide 3l August 1910, p. 10. 59 Guide 12 January l_9j.0; UFM papers, Box lS, MGGA Convention, 1908, ,'provincial Ownerátrip anA Operation of a System of Line Elevatorstt. 60 9g+de 8 JuIy 1914, p. 845; Gs_i-de. 21 July 1920, p. 1630. 61 UFM Papers, Box MGGA ttProceedings 15, Conventions, igff , LgiZ, L}LZ, and Resolutionstf . 62 f'The Grain Gro¡rerst Case,il Guide 27 July lgl0, pp, 7-g, 63 UFM Papers, Box 15, MGGA Convention, Lgtg, rrprãsident I s tr ttWanted Report ; : Government for the people, rr Guide g March 1910i t'Class Legislation,rf Guide 25 U"y 1910. ff 64 J.B. Parker, The Farmer in Politics and Commerce, rr Çuide 31 August 1910 t p. L0; UFM paLers, Box lS, MGGA Convention, LgL}, ItPresident I ttlmmediate s Addreslt, . 55 J. Kennedy, Action Necessary, r, Guide 30 October L918, p. 2288. 66 UFlt Papers, Box LZ, r,Farm problem euestionnaire Reportstr; also Box 18, l.tGGA Convention, 1g19, tf Pres ident t s Address,t; tf Immediate Action Necessary, ,t Guide 30 october L9Lg, pp. zzgg-zzg9; rfFuture of Organized Labor,', gUjje. 3 September L9L9, p. lg67. 67 TFA 20 l,larch L897 . 68 TFA 12 April 1905. 69 TFA 21 June L897¡ two letters. 70 TFA L2 April 1905. 7L TFA 29 March 1905. 72 TFA 20 April L897 -342-

t'Women 73 M. P. McCallum, and Special Privj.lege,rr Guide z iory L9l-9' pp. 1320, ).444; pAM, canadiari couñãir of Aqriculfure (CCA) Papers, Box 3, ¡lcffiiff Changes Hit Large Familíesr; rrManitoba Farm Homen Convene, rf Guide L5 January 19L9 t p. ILZ: rrÎhat rniquitous Tariff,,t'Guide 14 May L9L9r p. Lzos. lrlary Mccallum succeeded Francis Marion Beynon as the editor of the womenrs section of the Guide in ]-grr. rn lgzl' she left the Guide to become assistant secretary of the canadian council of Agricurture. llccalrun was ãctively invorved in the prairie farm womenrs movement. Guide 13 April 192L, p. 61L. 74 UFM_ Papers, Box 5, L9Z0 FiLe, ,'statement Submitted to the Tariff commission by a Member of the Executive of the UFWM, 13 October L920n. See also M. Kinnear, rr.Do yol¡ want your daughter to marry a farmer?r: Homenrs Hork on the Farm, L922,n in D.H. Akenson, êd., Canadian Papers in Rural History VI (Gananoque, Ont., Lggã't:* 75 UFM Paperg, Box 5, 19L9 File, ttThe ÍJomenrs Section of the MGGA''. 76 UFM Papers, Box 15, MGGA Yearbook 1919,r,The I{GGA and the somen I s section--The tfManitoba ir ttutual Relationship,,; Farm women convene,rr Guide Lb January 3.919, p. L27 . tfCl-ass 77 Party, Not Sex,,, Guide l3 November l9l_g, p. Z3g]¡; "The New Woman's Party," Guide 16 October 1g1g, b. 2L95¡ 'f 9Jomanf s Party Organ,tt G_uide ZZ November L9Lg, p. Z4Zg, 78 See, for example, UFM paoers, Box S, L9ZS FiIe, ,,Service Rendered by the UFWM"; yearbook ttWoments Box ls, MGGA l-919, Section Secretaryts Reportr; Box lb, MGGA convention l-918, ttconstitution of womenrs sectionr; Box 15, UFM Yearbook rgzL, ,tuF$rlt--Board o f Director I s Report'r. 79 UFM Papers, Box 5, L923 FiIe, |'UFHH president's Address r,Mrs to the L923 Annual convention"; . Et 1 iott , s Address,ttGuide_ 1.4 January LgZï, p,43. 80 ff Homen and the Land Problem, rf C-uiae L7 July 19lgr p. 1588. 8t_ gEü-P-epel5., Box 5, 't192,1 UFHM l{arketing Reportr; LgZ3 File, rruFwM Presidentrs Address to the tgzs cbnvention'r. 82. The Scoop ShoveL (January, rfManitoba L(7) LgZSl . 83. Farm Wome¡¡ Organize,rr Guide L6 January lgLg, p. 93; UFM Papers, Box s, L9z5 Firá; ',services RËndered by the UFhlMtt. 84. S. Richardson, ItCommunity Bettermerrt, il Guide 24 January 19L7, p. L59; UFM Papers, Box b, fgfg fife,rr$omenrs Section of the MGGA". 85. UFM Papers, Box 18, I'UFM Handbook of practical llork, r p. 9, Box 15, 191G Convention, Mrs. J. S. Bood, rrThe Responsibirities and privireges of Farmersr wives in the Development of the Grain Growersr Movementrf . -343-

86. ûJoodsworth, êd., Rural Citizenshipr p. g, UFI{ papers, Box 15, L916 Convention, Mrs. W. H. EngIish, rrThe Privireges and ftFarmers Responsibilities of Farmersr [Ùives,,. 87. Cantt Af ford Comforts,r, Guide 23 February 1916, p. 294; "co-operation at Home,', 3r. December tizqr p. L505; ttHomes as a sociaLizing Force,r, Guide zo Februaiy L924, p, 225. 88. UFM Paoers, Box 15, MGGA Convention 1918, ,rConstitution of the Homen t s Sectiontr; Box 5, L9ZL File , ,,UF[dIÍ Edusation Committee Reporttt; for a paraltel prairie experience see L. J. Wilson, rrEducational Role of the United Farm Women of Alberta,tr in D. Jones, N. Sheehan and R. stamp' eds., shaoinq the sqhools of the canadian We_€! (Calgary, L9T9), 89. UFM Paoers, Box 5, UF!ùH Reports on Voung people's Work, L920 and L92L, 90. Mrs. A. McGregor, rf The Womants Part,tr Guide tthlomen 5 JuIy 19L5, p. 1084; M. Finch, and Service,r and W. Wood, tf Homen in the frwanted: New Time,r, Guide ZZ November j.9Lg, p. 2450; A sense of Responsibir ity, ,, Guide 2s April- 19L7, p. 738; Politics and the Hoñe, November 'f " Ggide 30 t'uFü¡M ]-g?t-, p. L5LZ; UFM papers, Box S, L}ZC Fi1e, President t s Address to the Lgz3 Annual Convention, tr p. l. CONCLUSION

The institutions of agriculturar education that developed in Manitoba before ],gzs were part of a broader North American pattern in agricultural education, education generally, and state structures. rn a thirty-five year period the fierd of agricurtural and domestic knowl_edge was systematised and professionarised through the emergence of specific disciprines at the colrege lever, the tightening of central direction and cc¡ntrol at the extension revel e ârld the addition of agricultural and home economics subjects to school curricula. rn the area of social knowredge, which has been the particular concern of this study, disciptinary apparatuses emerged in Þlanitoba to paralrer broader North American deveropments, with agriculturar economics, rural sociology, and home economics employing the theoretical categorÍes and methodological approaches of rrAmericanrl domestic and rurar sociar science. Below this formal organisation of knowledge, the disciplinary boundaries receded as the practical interperlation of subjects proceeded and social identities were shaped.

There e¡ere two sides to the identities thus formed. As hre argued in chapter one, there are two components of human knowledge: knowredge as a part of rabour poner (material) and knowJ-edge as a region of ideorogy where meaning is constituted ( ideal ) . Productive knowredge in agricultural and domestic rabour e¡as organised in terms of the indirect

I -345- subordination of farm households to capital. The ¡¡hole range of scientific a¡rd technical knowredge necessary for sustained and efficient market production, whire not appropriated from producers according to the formal capitalist modelr iùãs nonetheless marshalled for the purposes of capitalist exchange. rf capital was to generate the largest possible surprus through its control of the factors market, the distribution market, êDd the system of credit, it had to ensure that agricuLtural rabour poerer rsãs being applied as intensivery as possibre. similarly, if r abour poerer e¡as to be e f f ic ientL y appr ied and, more importantry' if capitalts ability to extract surplus eras to extend as deeply into the household as possible, it had to ensure that domestic labour rfras appl ied intensively as well . To a large extent this proceeded through market mechanisms-- notably the price system--whereby farm househoLds became so entrapped in the circuits of capital that they had to continually reproduce their conditions of existence through capitarist institutions. But it eras reinforced through an educationar state structure in which the naturar and technical elements in agricultural and domestic production were linked to specific social relations. Meaning was constituted on the foundation of productive knowledge, and social identities were built upon the contradictory erements in the work experience of farm people. But sustainabre identities nere difficult to -346-

construct in farming since farmers owned their own instruments of production and controrled the production process, but erere nonetheless effectivery subordinated to capÍtal through the mechanism of exchange. rn one right they appeared to be workersi in another light they took on the characteristics of capitalists. The dominant ideorogy prayed on this vagueness to construct a bourgeois identity. Through marginal ist economics, for example, the farm household acgLrired an equal standing with the capitalist firm in the marketplace. Both the farm manager and the household manager participated as entrepreneurs in the market, co-ordinating factors of production and consumption in response to demand and suppJ.y. And the rural component of academic sociorogy envisioned an ideoJ.ogicar community linking farmers with other occupational groups (especially business groups) in defiance of factors which divided them. The radical vision of co-operation and community l_ost its cutting edge as it h¡as generalised to embrace the enemies of old in the pursuit of sociaL stability. this bourgeois identity was cemented with the ideorogy of professionarisn. Farm folk were encouraged to see themselves as possessing a status equal to that of a traditional professional such as a doctor or a new professional such as a teacher. Professionalism represented a claim on middle class identity, crose to the respectable elements in society and at a distance from the working -347 -

class. [{ith a professional status to complement their bourgeois identity, farm peopre became technicarry

proficient, socially integrated participants in a marginarist economy.(l) poritics and questions of poerer became a separate domain subordinate to this particular rendering of society and economy. By the L920s, with a state structure and a dominant ideology in pIace, the mainstream of the Manitoba farm movement Ìdas safely in agreement with capital as to the fundamental premises of the social and economic system. There was nothing inherentry inevitable about this, ho!Íever,

and one would have been foolhardy to have predicted such a development in the 1890s. The dominant ideology had to confront and transform a subordinate ideology buirt with radical categories. The radical ånheritance, which fuelled so many nineteenth century popular movements, contained an

anarysis of the prace of farming under capitarism which made sense of the comparable prace of farmers and workers in the order of things. The ernphasis on political corruption, political oppressi.on, and the poritical determination of sociar reality seemed an accurate depiction of l_ife for Manitoba farmers in the late nineteenth and earLy twentieth centuries. The Patrons of rndustry engaged in both freconomic" and "por itical fr activities, but, real1y, the economic did not exist as a discrete entity in their analysis; the politicat--the exercise of state poe¡er--was -348-

always paramount. Radicalism continued to have a strong presence in the early years of the MGGA, but the language of the organi-sation became more economic, and then sociar, as it increasingly incorporated the categories of rurar social science into its outrook. Ar: when the WGGA iras formed in the later teens there gras littre oppositional tradition for nomen to draw upon. The subordinate ideology available to them çras a radicalism sanitised by the dominant categories and a gender anal-ysis weakened by its appropriation and transformation by middre class vromen. By the time the MGGA/b¡GGA became the UFM/uFtcM and entered politics, the poritical vision of the organisation was defined primarily in terms of the economic, social, and educational categories of the dominant ideology. The profound sociaL and economic changes of the period severery tested the inherited explanations of power relationships, especiaLJ_y in the face of weIl reasoned, systematic anaryses which seemed better equipped to make sense of the changes. l,tore importantly perhaps, this nee, language gave farm peopre a comfortable vocabulary with ¡vhich to cl-aim a prace in the emerging order. crass oppression. while in many $rays more prevalent in the new century than in the ord one, was less comprehensibre in terms of poritical corruption. The market was an appar.ently permanent reality. The main activities in the Lives of men were better understood through economic categories. And, as -34 9-

the i-nstruments of domestic production were increasingly c-olloai*tiea and the private Ìdas connected to the publ ic ? realm' the lives of eromen made more sense in social and

economic terms. Furthermore, when a sosial approach was presented it was crear that rural life did have a social element, and there were identifiable probrems in rural society which required resorution. The young and the educational system, in particular, took on a new and at times disturbing significance when viewed in sociar terms. Politics became the means through which the conditions of ideolclgical community and full market participation were achieved. In this new world, it seemed reasonable to discard the notion of class domination and replace it with an image of discrete socio-economic aroups that, white having different interests, could unite to ensure the health of the market or the stability of the community. Radicarism, arthough it did have the porrer to mobirise massive constituencies in town and country, hras a rimited and doomed anarysis. while it is true that the disciplinary boundaries and ideological categories of bourgeois social science produced a distorted view of economy and society, they did identify areas of sosiar reality which required analysis, explanation, and intervention. With its overriding emphasis on the politicat, radicalism was discursivery quiet or derivative about these areas, thereby allowing the dominant anatysis to take hold and frourish. -350 -

The proto-socialist, post-radical analyses of agriculture, which developed in other areas of North America during the

same period' buirt upon radicalism by devising a specifically poLitico-economic analysis that rejected the dominant image of the economy. But these ideas had rittre impact in Manitoba at the time, primarily because there erere no sociarist or other working class based organisations doing work in the countryside. rn the absence of an alternative, institutional-ised analysis that moved beyond radicalismts political categories to assess rural political economy and society through the rens of confr ict and exploitation, then, the dominant view was destined to establish its hegemony in Manitoba.

There has been littre mentÍon of populism and the petite bourgeoisie in the preceding pages. unfortunately, these guiding categories in the recent anarysis of rural prairie society have become virtualry unredeemabre due to the reductionist use made of them over the past thirty years. In a sense, this study has been an extended plea for a break with that reductionism.(2) rn the onry test s¡hich ultimatery matters, such approaches reave littre room for the mobirisation of rural people as a constituency within mass movements or coalitions. Regardless of its other failings, radicalism eras abre to do that. rnterpreting the countryside with reductionist categories has the -351_- debilitating effect of rendering primary food production peripheral to progressive politics--at reast until such.time as agricurture is proletarianised. what often happens, since farmers have been and continue to be active in progressive movements, is that a disjuncture appears between theoretical and practical perspectives on agricurture. John conway I s popul ist-social ist por itical commentary in Briarpatch, for example, bears little relationship to his academic characterisation of al1 prairie farm politics--from the first Grange to current struggres--as petit bourgeois responses to capitalist industrialisation. But +¡hat is perhaps most disappointing in the recent history of prairie scholarship is that feminism, the most creative and significant challenge to crass reductionism in some time, has failed to transform or even engage with farm politics or the analysis of rural society in a meaningful way. one would have thought that the especially firm hord of familialism in the country would have attracted attention but, al-as, the received Marxist images have been strong enough to render such questions relativery insignificant for social ist feminists. rn formulating a theoretical- approach for this study, Ì{e tried to understand the construction of ideorogies as semi-autonomous activities not reducible to sociaL position. But such an exercise soon drew us into considerations of the social base. Besides being reductionist, previous analyses -352-

had not adequatery theorised the social reratior¡s of production in prairie farming. rt was necessary, then, to make some preriminary sense of agricultural production-- being careful to derineate both Íts sides--before attempting to discuss ideology. After a brief foray into political

economy and the domestic labour debate, vrê turned Èo culturalist historiography for guidance in assessing the

relationship between being and identity. But it too was l imited by reductionj-sm; cul_tural_ ist historians considered ideas and identity to be direct expressions of class culture and experience. rt soon became crear that such a perspective on prairie agriculture could not break substantially with the received interpretations. so we ventured into structuralism, but with a great deal of trepidation since the advice of E.p. Thompson and his many disciples hras being rejected. rt was apparent, hoyrever, that an adequate anarysis of ideology in agricurture had to be sufficientty structurar ist to hord social being in abeyance, resonstruct the various revers of ideology, and then connect those l-evels with an expanded conception of production relations.

This study is but a modest contribution to such an analysis. rts empirical component is rimited to a brief investigation of educational state structures and the language of the farm movement in Manitoba which tests the theoretical and historiographical approach deveroped in the -35 3- first two chapters. There are at reast three areas where future studies will undoubtedly modify some of our conclusions. While state structures were central to the organisation of productive knowledge and the constitution of class and gender identities, capital itself played a significant rore here through advertising and the encouragement of production. At a greater ideological distance, ethnicity and religion intersected with the dominant and popular identities constructed in and around the production process. rt is certainly significant, for example, that many intellectuals in the farm movement, ês well as academics such as Murchie, erere trained as crergy. Rather than religion providing the phirosophy of the farm movement as Richard Allen has argued, hoevever, it seems more reasonable to suggest that the religious--like the political in radicalism--was subsumed by the social scientific in the period.(3) Fina1ly, moving back to the sociar base, our musings on political economy, whiLe serving to clarify the place of farm households under capitalism, are mereLy a tentative introduction to a real post-dependency anarysis of Canadian agriculture. But, with that said, it is hoped that our reading of the interpray of theory, historiography, ärd empiricar real ity sheds some t ight on the history of ideologies in Manitoba agriculture. l_. For a discussion of marginalism, see pp. LG8-LZ0. 2. For a definition of reductionism, see p. E5n. -354-

3. R. AI 1en, The Social Passion: Religion and Soc_ial Reform. in Canada. L9,1,4-2,8_ (Toronto, LgT3). chapter LZ, BIFLTOGRAPHY

PRIMARY SOURCES

Manuscr iot Col lect-i ons Provinicial Archlves of Manitoba John Bracken Papers Canadian Council of Agricutture papers 4-H Papers Manitoba Home Economics Association papers Manitoba Woments Institute papers United Farmers of Manitoba papers Valentine [{inkler Papers University of Manitoba Archives Manitoba Agricuttural CoIIege papers Mary Speechl.y Collection university of Manitoba, Facurty of Agriculture rnventory

Government Documents canada. commission of conservation, r,Agricurturar Hork in Ontario, " by C. C. James ( Lg11 ) . Canada. Commission of Conservation, Reports (19LL-I}LT), canada. Royal commission on rndustrial rraining and Technical Education, Report (L9L3-1914). canada. Statistical Abstract and Record for the year lgg6 ( Ottawa, l_887 ) . canada. statistiqql Abstract and Record for th" year 1g95 ( Ottawa , L897 ) . canada. statistÍcar Abstract and Record for the year 1901 (Ottawa, 1902). -356-

Canada. Stat.utes, t'The Experimental (1886). Farm Station Actrr

Canada. Statutes, "The AgriculturaL Aid Act'f (:-g:-}), Canada. Statutes, ftThe Agricultural Instruction Act,, ( I9l3 ) . Manitoba. Manitoba Agricultural t t colrege, Burtetio Number ls, "Boys and Girls Clubsrr ( 19 j.6 ) . Manitoba. Department of Agricurture, Reports_ ( Lg90 -Lgzl) . Manitoba. Department of Agriculture, Bultetin Nurnber 6, trHome Economics Handbookrr (lgL6).

Manitoba. Department of Agriculture, Bul_letin Number B, 'f Sending the CoIlege to the Country, ( 1916) . Manitgba. Department of Agriculture, Bulretin Number 36, "Agricultural Fairsr, (L9j.9) . Manit?Þ". Department of Agriculture, Bulletin Number jg, ilBooks for Farm and Homerr (lg1g). Manitoþa. Department of Agricul_ture, BulLeti& Number 57. ( "Financing the Farm Home " 19Zl_ ) . Manitoba. Department of Agriculture, B_gllc_t:tn Number g0, "Co-operative Marketing in Manitoba" tigZS). Manitoba. Department of Education, Reports (1gg0-1925). Manitoba. Royal commission on the Estabtishment of the Agricultural ColIege, Report (1903).

Manitoba. Royar commission to Enquire rnto and Report upon the University, Report ( L9l0 ) . llanitoba. Statutes, ,tThe Agriculture (L872). and f mmigration Act,r Manitoba. t'The t Slelutes., Farmers Institutes Actr, ( Lgg0 ) . Manitoba. Statutes, "The Agricultural Societies Actf' ( Lgg0 ) . Manitoba. Statutes, Agriculture and (1890). "The Immigration Actrl

Manitoba. StatuÈe5_, "The Agricultural Societies Actrr ( 1900 ) . Manitoba. Statutes, "The Agricultural CoIlege Actfr (L904). -357-

Manitoba. Statutes, 'tHome Economics Societies Actff ( 1g10 ) . l'tanitoba. Statutes, ,tThe University Amendment Act', (L924).

NewsÞaÞers And Periodical s The Farmersf Advocate Grain Growerst Guide

MAC Gazette/ManaorA

Manitoba Free Press The Patrons t Advocate The Patrons I Sentínel The Scooo Shovel The tJestern Canadian

Contemporarv Books and Àrtir:lcs Bailey, L.H., The Nature Studv Trìc¡ (New York, 1903). The Outlook of Nature (New York, L905). Bevier , T.. and S. Usher, (Boston, 1906 ) . Bracken' J., crop.production in Hestern canada (winnipeg, 1920 ) .

Dry Farminq in Western Canada (t{innipeg, 1921) Bruere, M.B. and R.W. Bruere, (New York, 19lZ).

Commission on Country Life, Report of the Commission on çclleÈä¿Æfc. ( New York, 1911) . carver' T.N., Principres of Rural Economics (Boston, rgll_). crark' J.B. ' The Distribution of úIealth (New york, Lgz4'), Cubberly, E.P., Rural Life and EÉucation (Boston, l9L4). -358 -

Ellwood. C.A,', ( New York, l9l_0 ) . Ely, R. and G.R. Wicker, (New York, 1904).

Fiske, G. [ù. , (New york, 19 j.6 ) . Foght, H,vL, (New york, lgLo). Foote crowe, The American countrv Girl (New york, r9r.5; reprint LgZ4).!:: Frederick, C., H@ (New York, L9LZ) ,

in the Home (Chicago, 1915).

Galpin, C. J. , Rural Life ( Ne¡v york, i.9Lg ) . Gillette, J,, (New york, Lg13). ' "Nature of the Rurar sociar probrem, rf rsitv of North Dakota z (ApriL, l9L2). Grant, H.C., ',Review of D.A. McGibbon, 3.Le@ Trade, " Journar of Farm Economics t4(4) (october, L932t .

Hibbard, B. H. , (New York, 1923 ) . Leake, A,H., (New York, t 91S ) . MacDougaIl, J., ( Toronto, 1 913 ) . ttAgricultural Mavor, J,, Development in the North-west of canada, 1905-1909, tt

( London, l-9l-0 ) . MiIler, J,C., añ"* york, ttt 3 ) . Moorhouse, H., DeeÞ Furrows (Toronto, Lglg). -359-

Murchie' R.hl.' and H.c. Grant, unused Lands of Manitoba ( t{innipeg, L926) .

Nesbitt, F., Household Mana

Simons, A.Þ7., Lhe American Farmer (Ner¡ Vork, L}OZ). SpiIlman, W.J., r,The Farmerts Income, il in T.N. Carver, êd., selected Readinqs in Rurar Economics (Neçr york, 1916). M. stapres, , The chal-renge of Agriculture (Toronto, 19z0 ) .

([ùinnipeg, L914),

Taylor, H. C. , ( New York, 1919).

, ttRevieyr of T. N. Carver, principles of Rural Economics, " Amer ican Economic Review ã-- { sãþtãrnbËr, 1912 ) .

Thomson, 8.H., ttProfits That Farmers Receive,rr in T.N. Carver, Selected Readings in Rural Economics (New Vork, 1916 ) .

Life ( [ùinnipeg, 1914 ) . Harren, G.F., Farm Hanasement (Cornel1, 19L1). Idheeler , S. , Seager lJheeler r Growing ( 0Jinnipeg, L919 ) . Woodsworth, J. S. , êd. , Studies in RuraI Citizensh io (Winnipeg, 1914). -360 -

SECONDARY SOURCES

Books.

Àgl ietta , 14, , Experience (London, IgZg). A11en, R., gènêdê-- l-914:A-9. ( Toronto, L97L) . Althusser, L,, For Marx (London, 1969) Anderson, P,' egnsiderations on ltestern Marxism (London, L976t. Arguments Within Englísh Marxism (London, 1980).

Anstey, T. H., (Ottawa, 1986 i . Axelrod, P. . (Toronto, 1982). Bacchi , C.L. , Ç_a¿-_adian Suf fraqists, L877-1918 (Toronto, 1983). Barrett, M., Feminist Analvsis (London, 1gg0): and M. Mcrntosh' The Anti-social Famirv (London, 1982 ) . Benton' T.' The Rise and FaIl of Structurat ltarxism (London, 1984 ) .

Berger, C., (Toronto, Lg76), BLedstein, B.,

America_ (New York, LgT6l . Boggs, C,, Gramscits Marxism (London, 1976). Bottomore, T., êd., (London, 1_983). Bourdieu, P,, and J.C. passeron, Þoci.g.ty and Culture (London, L977). -361. -

Br G . itnel I, E. , The t{heel_Esoaglly ( Toronto, Lg39 ) . Browm, R. C. and R. Cook, Canada. 1g96-192L : A Nation ( lransformed Toronto , ]-g74l . Brunner, E. deS., AqricuLtural Extension ( New York, 1945 ) .

( New

Buhle, ll.J., (Urbana, 1981 ) .

Burbank, G., (Greenwood, Lg76). Butts, R.F. and L. Cremin, A Historv of Education. in ( Amer ican Cul tu_re New Vork, L933 ) .

Callinicos, A. , Althuss._er 1s llarxism (London, lg76) ,

( London" 1982 ) .

Marxism and Philosophv (Oxford, 19g3).

( Otta¡ra, L967 ) .

Centre for Contemporary CuItural Studies, On Ideol_oqv ( London, L978) .

studies MakiJrg Histories: in history-writino and poritics rro-ndon, 1982 ) . Chandler, A,, Lne,r ican Bus iness (Cambridge, Mass., Lg77), Cohen, G. A. , l (Princeton, 1973).

Comprehensive Dissertation lIrdex (Ann Arbor. ]-gTZ), Coontz, S. and p. Henderson, eds. , ( London, l_985 ) . Coward, R. and J. EIIis, L?nqgaqg and Materialism (London, L977 ) . -362-

Cremin, L., The Transformation of the School (New york, l_96 t_ ) .

Danbom, D., The Res isted Rerrol rrt i nn (Ames, L'979). Dawley, A., in Lvnn (Cambridge, Mass. , L976) , Dubofsky, M., 1920 (New York, L975) . Dyson, L. K., Ee¡rneE-€. (Lincoln, L982).

W. Easterbrook, T., E-a¡m-lredit in Canada ( To¡:onto, 1938 ) .

and H. J. C. Aitken, Canadian Economi ¡': HiS"Lo*ey. ( Toronto, 1956 ) . Eddy, E.D.' co11"o*" for oor Lard rim.r Th" L"nd Gt.rt Idea in American Education (New"*d york, LgSi). -El1is, J,H., Thq Miri"try of Agri"ortor" i. M"ritob-, lg70- 1970 (Winnipeg, L9Z0). Entwistre, H., Artorio Gr"*""it corr.tr"tir" s"hoorirg. fq, Radical Politics (London, LgTg), Fine, 8,, Economic Theorv and ldeoloov (London, lgg0).

Fine s. , bis*g-e-z Faire and the Gen fare state ( Ann ' Arbor, L964),

Fink, L, , Ie ñam^^--^". Amer_icàn Pol itics (Chicago, 1993 ) . Fite G,, Ameriçan Farmers: The Ne¡¡ Minority (Bloomington, ' 1981). Fletcher , 8., Hi"tory of th" l{"ritob" Ho^e¡j Irrtitgt",, 1919-1975 ( [tinnipeg, L9761 , " Foucault' M., The Archaeoroqy of Knowredge ([,ondon, Lgrz).

IntrodUction (New York, l98O). Fowke, v.c., Çêroàdian Agricultural poriqy: The Historical Patt-ern (Toronto, Lg47 ) .

The National PoI icy and the _lfheat_ Econqmv ( Toronto, 1957 ) . -36 3-

Fox-Genovese, 8,, The orioi@ (New York, L976) .

Francis, R. D. , ( Toronto, 1986 ) .

Friesen, G. A. , ( Toronto, 1984 ) .

Furner , þ7, ,

1905 (Lexington, 1975) . Gillis, J,, youth and History (New York, 1974), Goodman, D. and U. RedcLift, From Peasant to Proletarian: ,l|r¡ne ãh i {' i ^-- (Oxford, 1981 ) .

Goodwin, C. D. lÍ. , ( Durham, 1961 ) . Goodwyn, L., Americê (New York, LgZB). Gordon, D,, R. Edwards and H. Reich, seqmented sork. Divided. &lsrkers: The Historical Transfermation æ United States (Cambridge, Mass., lggZ). Gramsci, A,, selections from the prison Notebooks (London, L971 ) . Green, J., Southwest- 1895-1943 (Baton Rouge, L978r, Grob, G., ( Chicago, 1961 ). HaIl S. and T. Jefferson, eds., Resistance Through Rituals ( London, r976) . Hann, R., ( Toronto, L975 ) . Haskell, T., Nineteenth Century Crisis of AgËhority tùiU-an-, fgZZl. -364-

Hayden, M., See.E_igg A Balance: The Universitv of ( S-a.gk@ Vancouver, rgeg I . Hiller, H.H., Qggg,lspment of Canadian Socioloc¡v (Toronto, Lgg¿t', HoLIis, P. , Radicalism of the 1930s (Oxford, l9t0i. Hunter , H,C, , G¡eat-l-oÄLege. ( Fargo, 1961 ) .

Johns, W. H., 196_9" ( Edmonton, L9B1 ) . Katz, þ1., l{. Doucet and M. Stern, The Social Orqanization-gf. EarIv Industrial Caoitalism (Toronto, L982), Kealey, G., Capitalism, L867 -LA92 ( Toronto, 1980 ) .

Kealey' G. and B. Parmer, Dreaming of Hhat Might Be: The. ( Cambr idge, 1982 ) .

Kend1e, J., ( Toronto, r979) " Kett, J., the Present ( New York, L977 ) . Kish Sklar, K., A.o-!lest¿ç-ily. (New Haven, L973).

Kolko , G. , ( New York, 1976).

Lipset, S. M. , Political Socioloov (BerkeIey, L950; reprint l97Lt. Luxton, M., lÙomen I s úJork in the Homc ( Toronto, 1980 ) . Þ{acGibbon, D.4., The Canadian Grain Tradg (Toronto, L93Z),

Mackintosh, ûù. 4. , (Toronto, 1935). Macpherson, C.B., the Partv Svstem (Toronto. L962). -365-

Macpherson, I. , Movement in English canada. 1900-r945 (Toronto. rgTg), lladill, A. J. , History of Agricultuf*aL Education in Ontar-ig ( Toronto , L937 ) , Manitoba AgriculturaL Representatives Association, Historv of Mani.toba Agricurtural staff- l-913-1920 (stinnipe% t974). Flarx, K., Capital- Volum_es I and f f I (!!oscow, lg7g). McCormack, A. R., ( Toronto, L977 ) .

Miliband, R., ( London, 1969).

Marxism and Politics ( London, 1,977 ) ,

ÞlitcheII, D., The PoLitics of F'ood (Toronto, L975) . Montgomery, D., Republicans, 1867-t_822 (New york, l96tt. Morlan, R., political prairie Fire (Minneapolis, lgsb). Morton, A. S., ( Toronto, 1959 ) .

Morton, [ù . L. , The P_rogressive Party in Canada (Toronto, L950 ) .

Manitoba l-877-19b2 (Toronto, L9511 , Manitoba: A History (Toronto, L9SZ), Murchie, R.ÍJ., ( Toronto, 1936).

Naylor, R. T., The History of Canad.i*êB_ Bus_iness ( Toronto, 1975 ) . Nelson, L., ( LXnl"t€-d*g!ètes Minneapol is, t_969t . Noble, D., Rise of Corporate Caoitaltsm (New York, L9771, -366 -

Owram, D. , and the State- 190O-1946 ( Toronto, l-986 ) . Palmer , B, , of American Capitalism (ChapeI HiII, 1990).

Palmer, B. D. , tJorking CLass Experience: *--t_t¡e____BjSg____anO Reconstitution of ca4edian Labour, LgO0-l-9g0 rtoron[o, 1983 ) . Panitch, L., Ed., ( Pol_iticAl Power Toronto , L97Z ) , Patton, H. S., (Cambridge, Mass., L928) . Penner' N.' The canadian LeiE!: A critical Ànalvsis (Toronto, t977 ) .

Pentland, H. C. , (Toronto, L981). Pessen, 8., ( of the Earlv Labor Movem¡¡nt Albany , L967 ) . PoIlack, N., (Cambridge, Mass., L962r,

( , êd., The Populist Mind New York . 1967 ) . Prentice, A,, ( Toronto, t977 ) , Reaman, G. E. , A History of Ag-riculture in Ontario (Toronto, 1970 ) . Reck, F.M.' The 4-H story: A History of 4-H crub Hork (Ames, L951). Richards, J. and L. Pratt, Prairie Capital_ ism: power êfi_d ïnfluence in the Èle.u--Wc.e! ( Toronto , L979) , RoI1, E. ' MEconomic Thought (Englewood Cliffs, 1956 ) .

Row1es, E.C. , Six CoIleLe Proqrammes (Saskatoon, 1956). Rude, G,, The Crowd in History (Neç¡ york, Lg64). , I3þglogy and popular protest (Nes¡ york, l9g0). -367 -

Ryerson' s., uneqgal unio-u: confederation and the Roots. of Çpn_f_l-iqfin the Canadas_. 1815-l_873 (Toronto, L975). Saloutos, l, and J. Hicks, Agricul_tural Discontent in the MiddIe West- 1900-1939 (Madison, 19bl). Schwartz Cowan, R., More Work For Mother: The Ironies of Microwave (New York, 1983). Schwendinger, H, and J. Schwendinger, The Sociolooists of the Chair (New York, L974). scott' R. ' Ihe-*Beþctant Farmer: The Rise of AgricuLtural EXLension to 1914 (Urbana, 1970). sheridan, A., MicheL Foucault: The tdilr to Truth (London, 1980 ) . shore' M. ' The science of Sgciar Redemption: llcGill the

Canada (Toronto, L987 ) . snell' J., M""do*"ld coll"o" of M"Gilr utir"r"ityt A Hi"toJ:J¿ Ë.fom fgOA to fgSS (MontreaI, L963). Speechly, H.M., A __Storv qf th-e_ Wonenrs Institut-es of Ue¿_ilebè,_l_9"19*L9_3*g ( [üinnipeg, 1934 ) . Strasser, S., Never Done: A History of American Housework ( New York, L982) , Sutherland, N., Children in EnqLish Canadian Societv_ Lgg0- L92O (Toronto, L976). Taylor, H.c. and A.D. Taylor, The story of AgricuLturaL E*conqmics in the united states. 1840-l-932 (Ames, LgSzl ,

Taylor, 8,, Eve and the New Jerusalem: Socialism . qnd Feminism in the Nineteenth century (London, lgs3).

Taylor, J,, From Modernization to l.{odes of prqduction: A Llnde¡-de-veÀgpme.tr! ( Atlantic Highlands, L9T9), Therborn, G., Science. Class and Society (London, 19Z6). L fdeoloqv (London, L980 ) . -368-

Thompson, E. P. , (London, 1963). The Poverty of Theorv (London, 19Zg).

Thompson, J,H,, with A. Seager, Canada 1922-1939: Decades of_ Discord (Toronto, 19gS)

l-918 (Toronto, Lg78).

Tolson, 4., The Limits of Masculinity (London, IgTT) . Torr, D., feE_XèB_n and HLS Times_ (London, L9B6).

Tribe , K. . ( London, 1978 ) .

True, A. C. , Unltea States.. 1ZA5-1 (Washington, LSZSl, Veysey, L. , (Chicago, l-965 ) .

Vogel , L, , (New Unitarv Theorv Brunswick, L983 ) . Weeks, J,, ( åe"x-ucIr-t:---e¿nct-l-g-qq London, 198 I ) .

and Modern Sexualities (London, l9g5). Willis, P., Learninq to Labour: working class iobs (Farnborough, L9TZ), HiLson, J. G. , Manitoba 1826-1966 (Winnipeg, fgell . Wood, L. A. , 1,924 (Toronto, L924t reprinted 19t5i.

Articles and Paoers t,fdeology Althusser, L., and Ideological State Apparatuses, tr in Althusser, (London, I97L). -369-

Barrett, M. and M. McIntosh, trThe .Family blage t : Some probLems for sociar ists and Feminists, * çep-rÞf_*ang Ç¿_as_s. l-1 (1980). Brass, T., ItPermanent Transition or permanent Revolution: Peasants, Proletarians and politics,rf J._og-f-nêl*__gÉ Peasant Studies 1L( 3) (ApriI, 1984) . ttThe Brenner, R. , Origins of Capital ist Development ¡ A Critique of Neo-Smithian Marxism, rr New Left Revies¡ L04 (L977 ) .

tt'I t Beito , G,, am a Farmer s Hife, not a Farmerette t ¡ Letters to the Nonpartisan Leader, 1917-1 920 , n A¡:r i1 L983 (Grands Forks, 1983). Blocker, J. S. , 'fThe Politics of Reform: populists, Prohibi tion, and Homan Suf frage, 1B9I-J-892, n Historian 34(4) (1972).

Blumenfeld, E. and S. llann, rf Domestic Labour and the Reproduction of Labour power: Towards an Analysis of Women, the Family and Class,tf in B. Fox, êd., Hidden in

( Toronto, 1980 ) . Chevalier, J. , is Nothing Simple 'rThere tt About Simple Commodity Production, Studies in pol itical liconomy 7 ( Winter , L982) . Claeys, G,, Itlanguage, Class and Historical Consciousness in Nineteenth Century England, tt Economy and Societv 14(Z') ( t_985 ) . ttPopul conway, J . , ism in the united states, Russia, and canada: Expraining rs tt the Roots of canada Third Parties, Canadian Journal" of Pol itical ( L (1978). Science LL ) rf The Prairie Populist Resistance to the National Pol icy, tf Journal of Canadian Studies j.4 (FalL, 1979). trAgrarian Petit-Bourgeois Responses to capitalist rndustrialization¡ the case of canada,rf in F. Bechoffer and B. ElIiot, , eds.,eds. The petite. ( London, 1981- ) . ttFrancis cook, R. ' Marion Beynon and the crisis of christian Reformism,tr in C. Berger and R. Cook, eds., Lhg__ûfg-sL -370-

( Toronto, , ttTilIers and Toiters: The Rise and Fall of Populism in Canada in the IB90s,rr Canadian Historical Association Reports ( L9B4 ) . ttRethinking Coward, R. , Marxism,rr ml E, number Z (Lg7g) , Curtis , B, , ItPreconditions of the Canadian State: Educational Reform and the contruction of a pubric in upper canada, 1837-l-946,, studies in potit_isèl_*Esgngl[g. 10 ( Spr ing, 1983 ) .

?f school books and the Myth o f curr icular Repubricanism: t' The state and curriculum in canada Hest, ),820-1850, Håstoire Socia]_e¡Foc 16 ( 3L ) -.( November, l-98 3 ) . , tt'Littery Merritt, 'Useful Knowl-edge t, and the Organization of Township Libraries in Canada Hest, 1840-1860, " Ontario Historg 78(4) (December, L936). Crowley. T. , ItMadonnas Before Magdalenes: AdeLaide Hoodless and the Making of the Canadian Gibson Girl,rf Canadian Historical Revies¡ 67 (4) (December, 1996) . Danylevrycz, þ1,, B. Light and A. Prentice, ,rThe Evolution of the sexual Division of Labour in Teaching: A Nineteenth Century Ontario and euebec Case Study,', H;!-s-|ej"re. Sociale/Sociat History 16(30) (May, Lgg3). and A. Prentice, ttTeacherts Work: Changing Patterns and Perceptions in the Emerging School Systems of Nineteenth and Early T¡¡entieth Century Central Canada, It Labour/Le Travail L7 (Spring, 1986). ttImper Davin, A . , ial ism and Motherhood, tt Historv _Workshop Journal 5 (Spring lgZg). rnMind That You Do As you Are ToId' : Reading Books for Board School Girls, 1870 -I9OZ,n Feminist Rev iew 3 (1979). ttsomething Decarie' G., 01d, something New. . . : Aspects of Prohibitionism in Ontario in the Lgg0s, " in D. Swainson, €d., Oliver Mowatfs Ontario (Toronto, LgTZ). trcapital Denis' hl. ' and Agricurture: A Review of Marxian Probrematics, 'f studies in por Íticar .Econong T ( ûilinter, 1982 ) . -37 t-

Dentith, s. , ttPor iticar Economy, f iction and the ranguage of practical ideology in nineteenth century Englånd,'r gocial History B(2) (May, 1983). Destler , c., Radical r,'Hestern ism, r-965-190 r. ¡ concepts and Or igins, in Dest1er, Amer ican Redical_ ism, 1g65-l9Q L (Chicago, t946) .

Dews, P, , tf rhe 'Nouverle philosophie I and Foucault,,r Economy and Society B(Z) (May, 1929). ttrhe , 'neyr philosophers I and the End of Leftism, r, Radical Philoscphv Z4 (Spring, l_990 ) . Dorfman' J,, r'The Role of the German Historicar school in American Economic ThoughÈ,r, American Historical Association, Proceedings ( 1955 ) . Duncan'o.,'|Rura1SocioIogyComingofAge,''@ L9(1) (March, L9S4). Foster, J. ' "The Decrassing of Language, rr New Left Review 1s0 U_985 ) .

Foster carter' A. rtrhe Modes of production controversy, ,, New Left Review' LOZ (l97g). Fox Genovese, E. , and E. D. Genovese, r,The pol itical of Crisis sociar History,r, Journar of social History- l0 ( z ) ( [ùinter , I976) .

"Placing Woments History in History,'r Ne_¡¿ Left Review ' 1_33 (1982).

Friedmann, H., ttWorld Market, State, and FamiIy Farm: Social Basis of Household production in the Era of Tage Labour, tt 20(4) (Oetober, 19ZB).

'rSimple Commodity Production and lùage Labour in the American Plai.ns, rf Journal of *Peasant Studlej;- 6(L) (October, L978). ftHousehold Production and the National Economy: concepts for the Analysis of Agrarian Formatiorrs,tt Journlr1 of Peasant Studies Z (Z) (Jãnuary, 1980 ) . -Jt¿-

Friesen, G.4., t,'Yours in Revoltr: Regionalism, Socialism and the Western Canadian Labour Movement, rr Labour/I¿e Tr_e_VèLfjeur I ( I97 6) .

Gidney, R. and D. Lawr, trCommunity or Bureaucracy?: The origins of Bureaucratic procedure in the upper canadian School System,tt Journal of Social Historv fãfg) (19g0). patrons Grazer' s. ' "The of rndustry in Michigan, rl MågsisEipei Valtey Historl Z4(Z) (1937). rrThe Godel ier, 14, , Origins of MaIe Domination, ,r New Lef t Reviev¿ 127 (1981). ttMarginal Goodwin, C. D. W. , ism Hoves to the New [Corld,t, in R. 81ack, A. ûJ. Coats and C. D. ¡I. Goodwin, The l{arqinêl Revolution in Economics (Durham , ]-g73). Goodwyn, L, , r,The 'Co-operative Commonwealth r and Other Abstractions,tf Marxist perspectives 1O (Sumrner, 19g0). r'Fl-ora Gorham' D, ' Mcdonald Denison: canadian Feminist, rr in L. Kearey, êd., Not An unreasonable cl-aim: tJomen and Reform in Canada- l_880s-1920s (Toronto , Ltigj. Gray' R. , "The Deconstructing of the Engl ish tJorking Class,rl Social History lL ( 3 ) (October, j.gg5 ) . Green, J. , rtpopul ism, Social ism and the Promise of Democracy,,r Ba 24 (FaI1, l-980). r'Marxism Hal1, S. , and CuIture, It Radical lIi elnrt' Datri o'-' i.8 (Fall, 1978).

, "Some Problems with the Ideology/Subject Couplet, rl Ideology and Consciousness 3 ( 1g7g ) . ' r'schooi- ing, state and society, rr in R. Dal_e et. al.' eds.' Edo""tio. thç st"t", volo*" rt s"hooli.g and the NationaL lnterest"rd (Sussex, LggL). tfBrainworkers Hann' R. ' and the Knights of Labor: E.E. sheppard' Phillips Thompson, and the Toronto News, l-883-l_887,,' in G. Kealey and p. Warrian, _ EggèJå in Canadian Working Class History (Toronto,"¿= LgT6), Hartmann, H., ttrhe unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a More Progressive Union, rf in L. Sargent, €d., (Monriàáf teBl). -37 3-

Hedrey' M., r'rndependent commodity production and the Dynamics of rradition,tt Çanadian Revie_w of socioloov @ L3(4) (November, 1,976). "Reproduction and Evolving patterns of Co- operation and Resource Transfer Among Domestic Producers,rr Canadian Journal of Anthrepoloqy I(Z) ( Winter, 1980 ) . , t'Relations of Production of the 'Family Farmr: Canadian Prairies, tt 9(1) (October, 1981 ) . Heron, C, , ttLabourism and the Canadian Horking Class,rt Labour /Le Trava i 'l L3 (Spring, L9S4). and R. Storey, t,On the Job in Canada, il in Heron and storey, eds., on the Job in canada: confronting_th-e. Labour Process in CanadA (Montreal, L9g6i. -__- ttldork and Struggle in the Canadian Steel Industry, l_900-l_9S0,r, in Heron and Storey, eds. On the Job. ,

tt t, Hi 11 . C . , The Norman Yoke, in J . Saville, êd., Democracv. end thp T.rhnrrr Mntrano-* ' F^--. ( London, 1954 )

HoLmes , C,, ttFarm Manageme¡t, rt E-qr_e_n_ceE" I ( 1930-3b ) . ttlìlomen Jeffrey-, J. R., in the Southern Farmersr AIliance: A Reconstruction of the RoIe and Status of Homen in the Late Nineteenth Century South, tt Ee&i-u_i_El____Studies 3 ( Fal l, 1975 ) . trHousewifery Jenkins, W. D. , and Motherhood: The Question of RoLe Change in the Progressive Era,rr in M. Kelley, Bd., t q Ela i nn blam=¡ I tgoston, t9jgj, Johnson' R., t'Educational poricy and social contror in Early Victorian England," past and present 49 (1920). t,Cu1ture _r and the Historians,r, in J. Clarke, C. Critcher and R. Johnson, eds. , lùorking C1èss Culturq: studies in history and theory (London, lgZij . - tt'Real1y Useful Knowledge, : Radical Education and Working Class Culture , LTg}-l_949, rr in CIarke et. ä1. , eds. , lJorkinq Cte-ss CuIture. -37 4-

I'Three Problematics: Elements of a Theory of Working Class Culture,tf in Clarke et. â1., eds.' W.q::kino _elass CuI ture . Judt' 1 . , 'tA clown in Regal purple: social History and the Historians,rt Z (Spring, LgTg) Kealey, G. , r,The Structure of Canadian Working Class History, " in Id. J . C. Cherwinski and G. Kealey, eds. , (St. JohnIs, L985). Kealey , L,, ttCanadian Social ism and the Woman Question, 1900 tt -L9'J,4, Labour/Le Travial l3 ( Spring, L984 ) . ttThe Kechnie, þ7,, United Farm Women of Ontario: Developing a Political Consciousness,rt Ontario Histqrv 7B ( 4 ) (December, L985). rt'Do Kinnear, M,, you want your daughter to marry a rr I farmer? : [domen s Work on the Farm, lgZZ, n in D. H. Akenson' êd. , canadian papers in Rural His_tory vr (Gananoque, Ont. , lgBB ) .

KIein, A. , and ú,1. Roberts, ,rBesieged Innocence: The 'Problemt and problems of working women--Toronto, lg96- 19L4''' in J. Acton, p. Goldsmith and B. shepard, eds., Lo_men at ú'lork, lBS0-1.9_39 (Toronto, l.g74). Laclau, E. , ItTowards a Theory of Popul ism, r' in Laclau, Politics and fdeology in Marxist Theory (London, L979) , ttPopul ist Rupture and Discourse,,r Sgreen Education 34 (Spring, L9B0). flLanguage tr and History, Historv tJorkshoo Journa l 10 (Autumn, 1980 ) . Lazonick , lñ. , t,Class Relations and the Capital ist Enterprise: A critical Assessment of Þlarxian bconomic Theory,tr unpublished paper, Harvard University, 19g3. Lecourt, D,, ttOn Archaeotogy and Knowl_edge, rr in Lecourt, Marxism and Epistemoloqv (London, Lg75). Lecuyer' B. and A. oberscharl, "sociology: Earry History- of Social Research, il International Encyclogedia of the f,o-ciè-llc.ie¡ç-e-9" ( New York, 1968 ) . Lenin, V. I . , I'Capi_tal ism and Agriculture in the United States of America,,r in ee-l:Les!ed__[qdcg ZZ (Moscow, l_964 ) -375-

Lloyd' w. 4.,'rAgricut tural Extension [{ork, the Socia1 Sciences 6 (1930-35). " Lqçy-ç_I!.pe.d_i*è__gf.

Mahood, s., ttrhe Homents suffrage Movement in canada and saskatchewan,rt in J. Acton et. â1., eds., Homen unitet A¿-Sntholoqy of the canadian lrromenrs Movement aio¡onto, L972). Mann' A. R. , ttAgricurtural Education, rr EncJclopedia of the Social Science.s I (1930-3S). Mann, S.A. and J.M. Dickinson, ilObstacles to the Development of a Capital ist Agriculture, r, Journal_ of Peasant Studies_ 5(4) (July, L978).

""tå"'. . .t-r* r.lH' ^g::::lffi ";ä the Advanced Societies (Montc1air, N.J., lgg0i.-_-_--_ MardIe , G, , trPower, tradition and change: educational implications of the thought of Antonio Gramsci,,r in D. Gleeson' êd., rdentity and structure: issues in tbe sociology of education (Driffield, tilT Matthews , J . , t'Education for Femininity: Domestic Arts Education in South AustraLia,rr Labour Historv 4E (November, 1983).

McDean' H . c . , ttPro f ess ional ism, po1 icy and Farm Economists in the Early Bureau of Àgricurtural Economics, rr Aqricultural Historv 5Z (l) ( i.9g3) . tfProfessionalism ' in the Rurar social sciences, 1896-1919,t' Aqricultural Historv 5g(3) (lgg4). McDonough' R. and R. Harrison, rrpatriarchy rt and Relations of Production, in A. Kuhn and À. M. tùolpe, €ds. , Feminism and Materialism. (London, LgTg). ftThe Mcf ntosh , 14,, State and the Oppression of Women, rr in Kuhn and Wol_pe, eds. , Feminism and Material_ ism. McKilrop' A.B., t'The Research rdeaL and the university of Toronto,tr in McKi11op, C ( Toronto , 1987 ) . Mclennan, G., ttPhilosophy and history: some issues in recent marxist theory,, in centre foi contemporary cul_tural studies, Makinq Histories: st_udies i.n þistory-writing and politics (London, 198Z). -376_

ttE. P. Thompson and the discipline of historical context, tr in CCCS, M¡k i nrr Hi q.|- nr i øc

Menzies, J., ItVotes for Saskatcheh¡an Women, rt in N. Ward and D. Spafford, eds., Pol itics in Saskat-chêwãn ( Toronto, 1968 ) . ItThe I'titchinson, W. , üICTU: 'For God, Home and Native Land I ¡ A Study of Nineteenth Century FeminisÍt, rt in L. Kealey, ed., A Not UnreaEonabte CIaim. Monod' D., ttRethinking prairie communis¡'ì, rr Histoire Soc_iale /Soq:LàL History l8 ( 3b ) ( May, 19BS ) . Murray, S. M. , ttJames B. Power: The Second President of North Dakota Agricultural CoIlege, " North Dakota Quarterly 42 (Autumn, ]-974). Naylor, R. T. , rtThe Ideological Foundations of Social Democracy and SociaI Credit, il in Gary Teeple, €d., (Toronto, L972). Nerson' L., t'The Rise of Rurar sociology: The pre-purnerl Period," @ 30(4) (December, Lg6s). trConstructing RuraI Sociology, tt Bura1 Sociologv 9 (September, 1944).

Nourse ' E,G. , "Agricurtural Economics, " E¡gyçlgpe-d¿ê___qf_thc. Social Sciences i. ( 1930 -3b ) . Oberschall, A., ttThe Institutionalization of American Sociology,tt in Oberschall, êd., Tle Establishment of Empirical Sociol.ogy (New llork, LgTZ), r'The PhilI ips , p., Hinterland perspective ¡ The Pol itical Economy of Vernon Fowke,,r Canadian Journal of Þnl il-in¡l and Social Theory Z(Z) (Spring, LgZS).

tf Staples, Surpl us and Exchange: The Commercial- -Industr ÍaL Question in the National Policy Period, tt in D. Cameron, êd. , Explorations in Canadian

( Ottasra, 1985 ) .

ttManitoba in the Agrarian Period, LBZ0-1940, il unpubl ished paper, University of Manitoba, undated.

rf Pitsula, J,, The Emergence of Social tdork in Toronto, rt Je11u_!èl_o f Canad ian Stg-d.-!eS" t4 ( L ) ( Spr ing, 1929 ) . -377 -

trrhe Post, c,, American Road to capitaris[r, fr Ner¿_*L_e_ft Review 133 (]_982 ) . ttThe Reed, M., Peasantry of Nineteenth Century England: A Neglected Class?,t' History [ùorkshoo Journa] l-8 ( Autumn, 1984 ) . Regehr' T., ttBankers and Farmers in western canada, 1900- 1939,,r in J.E. Foster, êd., fhe Developino West: Esçays ( in Hooe-uE-_a_E_!c¡¿_ir._H. Thomas Edmonton, 1983 i . t''Rocking Roberts, W., the Cradle for the HorIdr: The New lüoman and Maternal Feminism, Toronto LgTT-Lg!A,n in Kea1ey, €d., Nel_ . Rossiter, þL, ftThe Organization of the Agricultural Sciences, ,r in A. Oleson and J. Voss, eds. , T.h-_e_ (Battimore, L979)

Rowthorn, 8., ,rNeo-Classicism, Neo-Ricardianism and Marxism, tt New Left Review 86 (1974). Samuel, R. , rtBritish Marxist Historians , Í, rr New Lef t Review 120 (1980). schwarz' 8., r"The peoplet in history: the communist party Historians, Group, Lg46-56, rr in CCCS, Makinq Histories. Seccombe , Íl . , ttThe Housewi fe and Her Labour Under Capitalism," New Left Review g3 (LgT4), I'The Expanded Reproduction Cycle of Labour Power in Twentieth Century Capital ism, tt in Fox, €d., Hidden in the Household. ttPatriarchy stabil ized: the construction of the male breadwinner norm in nineteenth century Br i ta in, tt Social Historv 11(1) (January, 19g6). ttrhe sheehan, N. ' wcru and Educational strategies on the Canadian Prairies,rt in Sheehan, J. D. t$il_son and D. Jones, eds. , Educational History (Calgary, l9g6). Shortt, S.E.D., ttsocial_ Change and political Crisis in Rural Ontario: the Patrons of Industry, 1889-1996,rr in D. Swainson, êd., Oliver Mo_watrs On_tário (Toronto, LgTZ)

Sincla j-r, P , , tf Class Structure and popul ist protest: The case of western canada,t, canadian .Igurnal of sociorocry 1 ( 1975-76) . -378-

Smith, C.4., ftForms of Production in Practice ¡ Fresh Approaches to Simple Commodity Production, rr Journal of Peaçant Studies 11(3) (April, l-984). smith, c. B. , ttrhe origins of Farm Economics Extension, rt Journal of !efm_E*C_o_ne-m-i-gç_ 14 (January, Lg32). Smith, T.L. , "Rural Sociology: A Trend Report, il Current Socioloov 6(L) (L957). sonenscher, M. , Itrhe sans-curottes of the year rr: rethinking the language of labour in pre-revolutionary tr France, $_egjêf-_Fl:El_of¡¿ 9 ( 3 ) (October, 1984 ) . t'The Spaf ford, D, , Lef t-Wing, I923.-'J,931, " in N. Ward and D. Spaf ford, eds. , Pol iticF in Saskatcheeran. , ttThe Origins of the Farmersr Union of Canada,rt in D. Swainson, êd., Higtoricaf Essays o fie_ P:ql¿l_Ase_s_. ( Toronto, L970 ) . stamp' R., ttEvolving Patterns of Education: English canada from the 1870s to L91-4,u in D. Wilson, R. Stamp and R. Audet, eds., Canadian Education: A History ( Scarborough, I970) , ff Vocational Objectives in Canadian rf Education: An Histor ical Overviesr, in S. Ostry , êð, , eg¡ediên _H¿gher_ Eaucation in tt¡e Sev (Ottawa, ],97Z).

, "Teaching Girls Their 'God Given Place in Life r : The Introduction of Home Economics in the Schools,rf All_ênlås_ 2(2), Part f (Spring, L9T7). Steedman , C., tt'The l{other Made Conscioust: The Historical Development of a Primary SchooI Pedagogy, " History $lorkshoo Journa l 20 (Autumn, l_985 ) . Stedman Jones, G, , ItClass Struggle and the Industrial Revolution, tt in Stedman Jones, Languages of Class: (Cambridge, 1983). frRethinking Chartisrì,,t in Stedman Jones, Lanqqaqes of Class. strong Boag, v., rrrntruders in the Nursery: chirdcare Professionals Reshape the Years One to Five,t' in J. Parr' €d. ' childhood and F-amiJ.y irr- cênadiè*n History ( loronto, 1982 ) . -379-

ttPul l ing in Double Harness or Hauling a Double Load: Women, Work and Feminism on the Canadian prairie,', J_egr¡af__gl- canadian studies 2L(3) (Fal1, r_986 ) .

ttKeeping House in God r s Country: Canadian Homen at Work in the Home,r in Heron and Stãrey, eds., On the Job

swierenga' R.P., ttrheoretical perspectives on the New Rural History: From Environmentalism to Modernization, ?f Aqr icul tural Historv B6 ( l ) ( January, L9g2 ) . Thompson. E. P., rf The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth century,rf past and prese_oC s0 (1971). trrhe warren, G.F., origin and Deveropment of Farm Economics in the united states,r, JournaL of Eêrrm Economics L4 (January, L932) .

weeks, J., ItFoucault for Historians, rr History t{orkshop Journal L4 (Autumn, LgSZ). ttEducational [{ilson' L.J., Role of the united Farm women of Alberta,rf in D. Jones, N. Sheehan and R. Stamp, eds., Shaping the Schg. ('Caf gary, L979). ttEducation ûJo1pe' A. M. , and the sexuar Division of Labour, rl in Kuhn and tJolpe, eds. , Feminism and Material ism. trThe , Of f icial Ideology of Education for Girls, rr tn R. DaIe et. â1 . , eds. , Education and the State, ( Sussex, t_98t ) .

Wrigley, E. S. , 'tIt Might Have Been Euthenics: The Lake Placid Conferences and the Home Economics Movement, rr American Ouarterly 26 (March, L974).

Zimmerman, C. C. , f,RuraL Society, rf Sciences_ t 3 ( 1930-35) .

The s e s A g_{_p_¿_s_ge rlè_tj-Ang. Conway, J., r^To Seek A Goodly Heritage r : The prairie Popul ist Resistance to thË Nationãl por icy, r' phD dissertation, Simon Fraser University, LgTg Frledmann, H. , ',The Transformation of llheat production in the Era of the worrd Market: A Global Anarysis of -380 -

Production and Exchange, il phD dissertation, Harvard University, L976. rtrhe Houston' s. ' rmpetus to Reform: urban crime, poverty, and Ignorance in Ontario, lgb0-LgT5,tt phD dissertatioñ, University of Toronto (OISE), L974. f'Agricurture, Jones ' D, ' the Land, and Education: British Columbia, I914-l_gZ9,tt phD dissertation, University of British CoIumbia, Lg7g, ttrhe Lawr, D, ' Deveropment of Agricurturar Education in Ontario, 1870-L910, '' phD dissertation, University of Toronto , L972, ttPopul Laycock , D, , ism and Democratic Thought in the Canadian Prairies, 1g1O -L945,n phD dissertation, University of Toronto, lgg5. McCutcheon, B. , rtThe Economic and Social Structure of PoI itical Agrarianism in Manitoba , Lg70-LgO0, r' phD dissertation, University of British Columbia, ]-g74, Panting, G.' ttA study of the united F'armers of Manitoba to ).928: An Agriculturar Association During a period of Transition,tt MA Thesis, University of Manitoba, LgS4, Putman, J,, party t' "The socialist of North Dakota, Lgoz_ l-918, MA Thesis, University of North Dakota, L956. Seccombe Íñ. ItThe , , Reproduction of Labour power: A comparative study, rr phD dissertation, university of Toronto (OISE), 1983. wirson, K., t'The Deveropment of Education in Manitoba, r, phD dissertation, Michigan State University, Lg6T.