The Beef Cattle Industry in Ohio
Prior to the Civil War
By ROBERT LESLIE JONES*
I. Introduction
The beef cattle industry in Ohio prior
to the Civil War could not
be described as the one most important
branch of agriculture in the
state as a whole, though it was
significant almost everywhere and
dominant in certain regions. Neither was
it to be regarded as
unique in its methods, for these were in
principle at least borrowed
from older parts of the country and were
found in the neighboring
western states as they too developed.
But Ohio was the first part
of the Old Northwest to be affected by
the advance of the frontier.
So too, as the nearest to eastern
markets, it was the first to be tied
in as a supplier to the Pennsylvania
fattening centers, and in due
course was the first to become a
finisher of the rough beeves of the
newer prairies farther west. As a
nursery of cattle kings, it became
a leader in the techniques of animal
husbandry. The activities of the
early Ohio cattlemen had, understandably
enough, a romantic nim-
bus in the eyes of contemporaries. Now
that this appeal has long
since faded, the industry can be
assessed on its merits as a microcosm
of one phase of midwest farming.
Ohio had several advantages in the
development of a cattle in-
dustry. It had even in the very
beginning a sufficiency of forage,
and soon had an abundance. It had a
reasonably favorable climate.
Throughout most of the state the winters
never were extreme
enough to cause extensive cattle losses,
however much a humani-
* Robert Leslie Jones is head of the
department of history and political science at
Marietta College. He is an authority on the
agricultural history of the Middle West
and eastern Canada.
168
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 169
tarian might lament the suffering
sometimes occasioned. Moreover,
as most of the state was originally
wooded, and the unglaciated
southern section was in addition highly
dissected, there was no lack
of windbreaks. Ohio was, as
developments were to prove, not un-
favorably located with reference to
markets. Again, cattle raising in
Ohio was not in any sense a novel
undertaking, for it was based
on practices which went back for
centuries or even millenia in
northern Europe and which had been
modified to meet American
conditions through almost two centuries
of experience. The his-
torian who has become familiar with the
cattle industry in the later
colonial period in the Cumberland and
Shenandoah valleys, or for
that matter in New England or the back
country of the Carolinas,
will find little to surprise him in its
subsequent evolution in early
Ohio. Even the almost universally
disparaged cattle brought into
Ohio from older regions were certainly
better adapted to the con-
ditions found in pioneer settlements
than any of the then popular
breeds obtainable from Europe, for they
did represent a kind of
survival of the hardiest. Finally, the
cattle industry attracted from
the beginning men of capital, or who
were shortly able to obtain
capital, as from land speculation or
merchandising. It was indeed
in the beef cattle industry that
agricultural fortunes were to be
made. There were no Ohio dairymen or
wheat farmers in the early
nineteenth century who could compare in
wealth with the leading
cattlemen of the Scioto Valley.
II. The Pioneer Phase
Cattle began to appear in the Ohio
Country in the third quarter
of the eighteenth century, or perhaps
slightly earlier. The Indians
obtained some by barter in the French
settlements at Detroit and
others by marauding expeditions against
the Virginia and Pennsyl-
vania frontiers; missionaries and
traders brought some with them;
and the squatters along the upper Ohio
and its tributaries during
and after the Revolutionary War drove
in enough for their needs.
After the establishment of organized
government in the Old North-
west in 1788, and still more after the
closing of the Indian War in
1795, the growth in the human
population was paralleled by that of
170 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
cattle. For two generations, whenever a
family flitted from York
State or New England, Pennsylvania or
Virginia, to a new home west
and north of the Ohio, it brought with
it a cow or two and perhaps a
few young cattle. When the original
stock died or was slaughtered, or
the time came when there was fodder
enough for a larger herd, the
pioneer easily obtained others, in the
beginning from the nearby
established settlements along the
Monongahela, around Pittsburgh,
and in Kentucky, and at a later period
from the surplus in his im-
mediate vicinity. The process continued
in any given community till
it began to take on the aspects of
"old settled country," by which
time cattle would be ordinarily on
balance an article of export.1
Cattle raising in the pioneer
settlements of Ohio was of a common
pattern with that prevailing in
contemporaneous Kentucky or, at a
comparative stage of their existence,
in the older communities in
the western parts of Pennsylvania and
Virginia. The animals were
fenced out of the corn patch, but were
otherwise allowed to wander
at will. The cows would return to be
milked, and sooner or later a
craving for salt would bring the others
back. In the meantime their
bells would give an indication of their
whereabouts. If they wand-
ered too far, perhaps a neighbor who
recognized their brands and
earmarks2 would drive them
home. It was rare for them to have any
shelter other than natural windbreaks,
which were of no avail in the
wet. They foraged for themselves,
according to season and locality,
on the white clover and bluegrass of
the glades and bottoms, the
wild rye and other rank grasses of the
prairies, and the sedges of the
swales. Along the Ohio River west of
the Kentucky-Virginia border,
they had brakes of cane, which were so
succulent that within a few
years they were pastured to extinction.3
When winter came, the
cattle would be fed corn blades and
stalks, straw, wild hay, and per-
haps even pumpkins, but the supply
seldom lasted till spring, and
1 For some details of the introduction
of cattle into early Ohio, see Robert L. Jones,
"The Dairy Industry in Ohio Prior
to the Civil War," Ohio State Archaeological and
Historical Quarterly, LVI (1947), 46-48.
2 Some of the first legislation of the
Northwest Territory provided for the marking
of livestock and the registration of
brands with the township clerk. Beverley W.
Bond, Jr., The Civilization of the
Old Northwest (New York, 1934), 328.
3 On the natural pasturage of Ohio, see Percy W. Bidwell and John I.
Falconer,
History of Agriculture in the
Northern United States, 1620-1860 (Washington,
1925),
157, 159-161.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 171
had to be supplemented by elm and beech
browse. Sometimes,
indeed, this was their sole winter feed.4
By the time the new vegeta-
tion appeared, all but the most
aggressive cattle were emaciated,
many of them were so weak as to be
"lifting," and a few of them
were almost certain to be the victims of
the barbarities which passed
as treatment for what their owners
diagnosed as "hollow horn" or
"wolf-in-the-tail."5 In
hard winters losses from exposure and mal-
nutrition ran high, but the pioneer
accepted them as inevitable, just
as he did those from attacks by wild
animals or poisonous snakes or
from milk sickness and bloody murrain
(anthrax). He anticipated,
reasonably enough, that within a few
years he would have shelter
for his livestock adequate for the
latitude, good pasture on the
meadows and aftergrass, and a supply of
corn fodder and tame hay
for the winter. Such was the pioneer
round, repeated endlessly till
the last vacant lands in northwestern
Ohio were occupied during
the 1850's.
Under ordinary conditions it was not
long till the pioneer com-
munity ceased to be a deficiency area
with respect to cattle, and
instead had a few animals to dispose of.
If land was still being
taken up in the vicinity, or if an
immigrant route passed near by,
there might be for a time a highly
profitable "settlers' market" at
hand. Under optimum circumstances, as
long as a shortage existed,
the price of a cow locally would be its cost
at the nearest community
with a surplus, plus a kind of natural
tariff in the form of the esti-
mated cost of driving it therefrom to
the point of sale. Unfortun-
ately, within a few years at most, newer
settlements would in their
4 James Flint, Letters from America (Edinburgh,
1822), 234; Narrative of John
S. Williams in the American Pioneer (Cincinnati),
II (1843), 451; Charles Whit-
tlesey, Early History of Cleveland,
Ohio (Cleveland, 1867), 264.
5 The real cause of "hollow
horn" was simply malnutrition combined with ex-
cessive exposure, as was sometimes
recognized (for example in the Marietta Gazette,
November 8, 1834), and the preventive
was therefore better feed and shelter. Few
pioneers ever thought of this
explanation, and accordingly resorted to "cures." A
common method, as practiced in New York
in the early part of the century, and, it
would seem, throughout Ohio and the
other midwestern states, was thus described:
"For the hollow horn, we always
used from one to two tablespoonfuls of spirits of
turpentine, poured into the hollow on
top of the head, between the horns; and cutting
off enough of the end of the tail to
bleed, which may be done by turning the long
hair upwards, and cutting off a quarter
of an inch or less. I have known some persons
to split the tail, put in salt, and bind
it up." Prairie Farmer (Chicago), quoted in the
Western Farmer and Gardener (Cincinnati), IV (1843-44), 136.
172
THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
turn enjoy the accident of favorable
location. The value of a cow
would thereupon tend to fall to that at
the nearest market minus
the estimated cost of driving it there.
The possible alternatives to the
vanishing settlers' market were usually
likewise disappointing. It
is true that whenever a village began to
form, butchers appeared,
but because most of the inhabitants kept
a cow and a few young
cattle of their own, the number of
imported beeves slaughtered
would be only two or three a week. With
a demand thus easily
satisfied, the butchers often enough
were able to buy at distress
prices from the unfortunate farmer who
had brought a drove a
considerable distance.6 If
there were military activities going on or
in prospect, there would be for an
interval an overwhelming de-
mand, as occurred in the Miami Valley
(and northern Kentucky)
during the Indian War of 1791-95, and
again in central Ohio during
the War of 1812.7 In peace
time the western garrisons were small
and remote, and to drive cattle through
an Ohio wilderness to them
was just as troublesome as to drive them
over the mountains to the
eastward, as James B. Finley and his
three partners found in 1800
when they managed somehow or other to
take a herd from Chilli-
cothe to an army contractor at Detroit.8
For the reasons suggested,
markets for cattle ordinarily had to be
sought outside the Ohio
Country, which meant in the eastern
states. It is not too much to say
that the Ohio cattle industry, in so far
as it was a commercial one,
was to evolve primarily in response to
this situation.
The idea of disposing of western cattle
in the eastern states was
an old one by the time the Ohio Country
was settled. It had been
an inducement to the pioneers of western
Pennsylvania in taking
6 Notice the following advertisement:
"John Clark, Butcher in Marietta, advertises
that he will give a generous price
for fat cattle--We beg leave to state, for the in-
terest of those who live at a distance
from Marietta, and would drive cattle to him
by virtue of his advertisement--that he
does not give a 'generous' price nor pay cash
for fat cattle, and that his
advertisement is wholly unworthy of notice." American
Friend, (Marietta),
August 29, 1817.
7 Beverley W. Bond, Jr., ed.,
"Memoirs of Benjamin Van Cleve," Historical and
Philosophical Society of Ohio
Quarterly Publications, XVII (1922),
52-53; Randolph
C. Downes, "Trade in Frontier
Ohio," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XVI
(1929-30), 474-475; Samuel Williams, Expedition
of Captain Henry Brush, with
Supplies for General Hull, 1812 (Cincinnati, 1871), 17-18.
8 Autobiography of Rev. James B.
Finley, or Pioneer Life in the West, edited
by
W. P. Strickland (Cincinnati, 1872),
115-116.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 173
up land in the preceding generation,
but one productive of disil-
lusionment when it was found they could
scarcely compete with
those driven up the valleys from the
then back country of Virginia
and North Carolina. In spite of this
experience, the idea was a
staple one among promoters, speculators
in Ohio lands, and pam-
phleteers.9 "In a few
years," wrote Imlay, "when grazing forms
the principal object of those settlers,
they will always find a market
for their cattle at Philadelphia,
Baltimore, and Alexandria."10 If
settlers discounted land-agent advice
on account of its source, they
would nevertheless normally look on the
exporting of cattle as a
reasonable speculation, as it had
proved to be on earlier frontiers.
By the end of the Indian War it was
moreover in all likelihood
common western knowledge that
unfinished, or "stock," cattle were
being driven from Kentucky to fattening
areas like that around
Winchester, Virginia, for there is
mention of such activity as
early as 1793.11
When cattle reared in Ohio were first
driven to an eastern market
cannot be determined with precision, at
least if we are to count such
animals as were driven to farming areas
in western Pennsylvania,
western Virginia, or Kentucky, and
there kept for some time before
being sold on the other side of the
mountains. In view of the fact
mentioned below that an early phase of
the cattle industry in the
Scioto Valley was the pasturing there
on a seasonal basis of animals
brought in from Kentucky, it is
reasonable enough to infer that a
few local steers may well have been
acquired by the cattlemen before
their departure in the autumn, and
consequently have found their
way East as of Kentucky origin. If, as
is the ordinary and reasonable
procedure, we are to count only those
animals which were driven
direct from Ohio to some place in the
East, then the date is 1800.
In that year Ephraim Cutler, a merchant
and land speculator of
Amesville in Athens County, began to
export eastward the cattle
9 Downes, "Trade in Frontier Ohio," 493-494.
10 Gilbert Imlay, A Topographical
Description of the Western Territory of North
America (3d ed., London, 1797), 61.
11 Harry Toulmin, The Western Country
in 1793; Reports on Kentucky and Vir-
ginia, edited
by Marion Tinling and Godfrey Davis (San Marino, Calif., 1948),
111-112.
174 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
which he received on store bills or in
exchange for land. Two years
later, likewise according to his own
account, he took a drove to be
fattened on the South Branch of the
Potomac. Jonathan Fowler of
Poland, near Youngstown, drove the
first cattle from the Western
Reserve in the fall of 1804, taking
them to Philadelphia, and George
Renick the first corn-fattened ones
from the Scioto Valley in the
spring of 1805 to Baltimore.12 The
author hazards the opinion that
at this date there already existed, and
perhaps had for some time,
what may have been a worthwhile trade
in stock cattle from the
Scioto Valley to the South Branch of
the Potomac. This idea is not
founded on direct evidence, of which there
is apparently none. It
is rather an inference drawn from a
consideration of two facts, one
of these being that the Scioto Valley
was only a few days' cattle
drive farther west than Athens County,
and the other that there
was an intimate relationship between
the early cattlemen of the
Scioto and those of the South Branch,
as described more fully below.
Within a few years the cattle trade
became general. Wherever the
traveler Melish went in the Western
Reserve and the rest of eastern
Ohio in 1811, he found fat or stock
cattle being exported.13 Some
of the southeastern Ohio dealers even
had regular connections with
graziers or feeders along the South
Branch of the Potomac. Prior
to the War of 1812, Ephraim Cutler, for
example, had an agreement
with one of these Virginia graziers
whereby he was to drive stock
cattle to the Glades in Allegany
County, Maryland, near Cumber-
land, where they were to be grass
fattened, and the supplier and the
grazier were to divide the profits when
the animals were marketed.l4
The War of 1812, with its increased
local military demand for
foodstuffs, reduced temporarily the
number of cattle exported, but
within a few years of its ending, the
mention of large droves on
12 Julia P. Cutler, Life and Times of Epbraim Cutler
Prepared from His Journals
and Correspondence (Cincinnati, 1890), 69, 87; Memoirs, Correspondence
and Rem-
iniscences of William Renick (Circleville, 1880),100; Ohio State Board of
Agriculture,
Annual Report for the Year 1860 (Columbus, 1861), Part II, 466. Hereafter this
serial is cited as Ohio Agricultural
Report.
13 John Melish, Travels Through the
United States of America in the Years 1806 &
1807, and 1809, 1810 & 1811 (Philadelphia, 1816), 441, 443, 446, 459, 464-465,
481.
14Cutler, Life and Times of Ephraim Cutler, 103.
For mention of another Ohioan
dealing around 1807 with the South
Branch of the Potomac, see F. Cuming, Sketches
of a Tour to the Western Country (Pittsburgh, 1810), 117.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 175
their way from Ohio to Baltimore or
Philadelphia became a com-
monplace item in travel narratives.15
By this time the cattle industry in
Ohio had ceased to be the
primitive one characteristic of the
backwoods, and had actually
evolved into several distinct branches,
each with the peculiar fea-
tures which were to last with little
change till mid-century. These
branches were not completely separate,
and were indeed interde-
pendent. Nevertheless, it was rare to
find one man combining the
functions of grazing cattle as carried
on in Madison County
with those of feeding them as carried
on in the Scioto Valley.16 Even
William Renick of Circleville, the
foremost authority on the feed-
ing industry of the Scioto Valley,
admitted that he knew little or
nothing of the grazing industry.17
The graziers and feeders who
circulated among the small farmers to
buy up cattle unquestionably
were well informed about their methods,
but the small farmers out-
side the immediate vicinity of the
grazing and feeding country knew
as little of what went on there as the
graziers and feeders knew of
dairying as it was conducted on the
Western Reserve. In any case,
because the branches were commonly
thought of and discussed as
if they were separate, the historian
must almost of necessity thus
deal with them. The divisions, then,
were: (1) the range or grass-
fattening one which came to be more or
less centered in Clark and
Madison counties, (2) the
corn-fattening one of the lower Scioto
Valley, and (3) the one carried on as a
by-industry with the dairy-
ing of the Western Reserve or in
connection with grain growing or
general farming in other parts of the
state.
III. The Grazing Industry "West of Scioto"
The first of these important branches
of the cattle industry in
Ohio, that of raising animals on the
open range, traces its origin,
through Kentucky, to the southern back
country of the late colonial
15 For example, in David Thomas, Travels
Through the Western Country in the
Summer of 1816 (Auburn, N. Y., 1819), 90, and Silas Chesebrough,
"Journal of a
Journey to the Westward" (P. S.
McGuire, ed.), American Historical Review,
XXXVII (1931-32), 76.
16 Cincinnati Atlas, quoted in the Spirit of the Times, XIX (1849-50), 316.
17 William Renick, "On the Cattle Trade of the Scioto Valley,"
in Ohio Agricul-
tural Report for 1848, 164.
176 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
and early national periods. On the
frontier from Pennsylvania to
Georgia, cattle (and other livestock)
ran in the woods the year
round. There were annual roundups to
brand the calves, drives of
several hundred miles to market at
tidewater, attendants on the herds
called "cowboys," and a
considerable degree of lawlessness, so that
the industry sometimes differed little
from that later found west of
the Mississippi. The system in the
"Old West" tended to disappear
with the advance of settlement, or
rather, to keep moving along on its
westerly fringe.18
Settlers from Virginia naturally
brought the techniques of the
industry into Kentucky, and from there
extended them into southern
Ohio. Precisely when they first did so
is not known, but it is not
likely to have been much, if at all,
before the end of the Indian
War, and it was certainly before 1800,
by which time some of them
were in the practice of clubbing
together to send herdsmen with
the cattle for which they lacked grass
at home to pasture them on
the bluegrass of the Darby Bottoms near
Circleville from spring to
fall.19 Once started, the
range industry in this region expanded so
rapidly that by 1811 it could be stated
of the Pickaway and Walnut
plains that cattle "are here
raised in such numbers as would be
almost incredible, could we tell
them."20 Moreover, it was spreading
out over the large prairie extending
from the Scioto to the Little
Miami. Jervis Cutler, writing in 1812,
mentioned the fact that big
droves were being brought from Kentucky
to pasture on the
"barrens" of Clark and
Madison counties, and Drake three years
later estimated the annual sales of
grass-fattened cattle from Cham-
paign County to be about $100,000.21
A variety of factors contributed to the
rapid expansion of the
grazing industry. One was that the land
in the Virginia Military
18 Lyman Carrier, Beginnings of Agriculture in America (New
York, 1923), 215;
Lewis C. Gray and Esther K. Thompson, History
of Agriculture in the Southern
United States to 1860 (Washington, 1933), I, 147-151; James W. Thompson, A
History of Livestock Raising in the United States, 1607-1860 (Washington,
1942),
62-63.
19 Memoirs of William Renick, 45-46.
20 Western Intelligencer (Worthington), September 11, 1811.
21 Jervis Cutler, A Topographical Description of the State of Ohio,
Indiana Ter-
ritory, and Louisiana (Boston, 1812), 38-39; Daniel Drake, Natural and
Statistical
View, or Picture of Cincinnati and the
Miami Country (Cincinnati, 1815), 56.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 177
District, in which was comprised a large
portion of the early graz-
ing area, was originally to be obtained
for military-bounty war-
rants, and so almost inevitably came to
be purchased by speculators
who could afford large blocks. The
result was that the farms in
Madison County, for example, were as
late as mid-century much
larger--and so more efficient for stock
raising--than those in the
parts of Ohio outside the Virginia
Military District, many being
upwards of a thousand acres.22 A
second factor was that, at the
time of settlement, there were not only
some small prairies, of which
that known as the Pickaway Plains was
the most famous, but one
very large one already mentioned, which
ran north and south for
about a hundred miles roughly between
the Scioto and the Little
Miami. Actually, this prairie comprised
a diversity of oak openings,
wet prairies, and dry prairies, or
"barrens."23 Covered though they
were with vegetation, the barrens with
their scattered clumps of
trees repelled wheat-growing and
corn-growing pioneers almost as
thoroughly as did the sandy wastes and
the water-logged lands, so
that they, like the others, were left to
the cattlemen, who were
therefore able to obtain them for a
relatively small outlay. For
their purpose the natural forage could
scarcely have been better.
It comprised, as was stated of the
prairies of Marion County, "a
continuation of the most nutritious
grasses from early spring until
the setting in of hard winter,"
including "Blue grass, June grass,
Timothy [?], Red and White Clover, Red
top, &c., &c."24 A third
factor was that the Virginia and
Kentucky cattlemen who predom-
inated in the early settlement were, as
a group, not only experienced
in the range industry, but some were
fairly wealthy according to the
standards of the time, and so it seems
reasonable to assume that
most of them had to some degree access
to sources of credit in the
22 Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland and Erie Railroad Guide (Columbus, 1854), 44.
As late as 1918 there were forty-eight
farms in Madison County of 2,000 acres or
more. Country Gentleman, LXXXIII,
April 13, 1918, 13.
23 Cutler, Topographical Description,
38-39; Samuel P. Hildreth, "Ten Days in
Ohio: From the Diary of a Naturalist," American
Journal of Arts and Sciences, XXV
(1834), 247-248; Paul B. Sears,
"The Natural Vegetation of Ohio," Ohio Journal
of Science, XXVI (1926), 128-131.
24 Documents, Including Messages and
Other Communications Made to the General
Assembly of the State of Ohio (Columbus), XVII (1853), Part II, No. 5, p. 393.
Hereafter this authority is cited as Ohio Executive
Documents.
178
THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
communities from which they came. At a
later period the cattlemen
were financed by the banks between Xenia
and Columbus, which
found their business very profitable.25
The cattlemen were thus able
to operate on a large scale, and so to
accentuate their speculative
profits. Finally, the Ohio grazing
industry soon ceased to be a mere
peripheral supplier of the eastern
feeding regions. It gained a stra-
tegic marketing location adjacent to the
corn-fattening counties of
the Scioto Valley and a favorable
purchasing one astride the normal
eastward lines of stock-cattle movement
from the newer western
states. At the same time, improvements
in communications, notably
the Cumberland, or National, Road, made it
possible for the Ohio
graziers to maintain and extend their
sales of stock cattle and even
of grass-fattened beeves across the
mountains.
The heart of the grazing region of Ohio
in the first half of the
nineteenth century was in Clark and
Madison counties, but the
industry was little less important in
the nearby parts of Greene
and Fayette counties to the southward
and in Champaign, Union,
and Marion counties to the northward. By
the 1840's the territory
reached into Crawford and Hardin
counties, that is, to the borders
of the Black Swamp.26 It has
been asserted recently that the village
of South Charleston in the southeastern
corner of Clark County had
a good claim to consideration as the
leading "cow town" of the
grazing country, indeed that it ranked
(with a population of 413
in 1850) "second only to
Chillicothe as the best known cattle town
of Ohio,"27 but the present author
knows of no contemporary evi-
dence to support such a statement, and
for his part is convinced that
Springfield, Xenia, Columbus, London
(beginning in the 1850's),
and perhaps even Marion were much more
significant. As time
passed, the tendency of the grazing area
was to shrink in size as the
value of land rose. In the lower Scioto
Valley, for example, cattle-
grazing was early displaced either by
wheat-growing or by corn-
growing for the swine and cattle
fatteners. Again, by mid-century
25 Cincinnati Atlas, quoted in the Spirit of the Times, XIX (1849-50), 316.
26 Ohio Agricultural Report
for 1846, 50-51; Ohio Agricultural Report for 1849,
72; Ohio Agricultural Report for
1859, 74; Ohio Cultivator (Columbus), I (1845),
117.
27 Paul C. Henlein,
"Cattle Driving from the Ohio Country, 1800-1850," Agricul-
tural History, XXVIII (1954), 90.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 179
the grain growers were encroaching on
the cattlemen in all of Clark
County except the eastern part.28 Moreover,
reports from the secre-
taries of the early agricultural
societies and the returns of the census
and the township assessors make it plain
that throughout most of
the grazing region the industry was not
the sole branch of agricul-
ture, that in some sections it was
confined to seasonally wet or
otherwise non-arable land, and that,
even where it was dominant,
there might be a sharing of the
pasturage with other kinds of live-
stock.
One aspect of the early grazing industry
was the employment of
herdsmen, or, if one prefers,
"cowboys." They appeared, as already
indicated, with the first herds sent in
from Kentucky for seasonal
pasturing, and they did not disappear
till the range began to be
enclosed. Sometimes, as was mentioned in
the case of early Ross
County, a man did no more than visit the
cattle twice a week to
give them salt.29 On the
barrens of Madison County, however, there
were regular herdsmen who attended the
cattle from spring to fall.
The owners of the cattle, it was
observed, "have boys on horse back
with their basket of provisions on their
arms after them all day to
keep them together, and [at] knight pen
them up."30 As another
writer put it, "Here then, might be
seen immense numbers of cattle
feeding on these plains, in herds of
one, two and three hundred
under the charge of three or four
shepherds; reminding him of those
remote pastoral ages which are so
beautifully described by
GOLDSMITH and COLLINS."31 Towards the end
of the 1820's the
herdsmen tended to disappear from
Madison County, because, on the
advance of settlement, the cattlemen
began to enclose their grazing
lands, but they were still found in 1835
on the wet prairies of Craw-
ford County.32 After this
date there appears to be no further men-
tion of them in Ohio, but it is worth
noting that precisely this kind
28 Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland
and Erie Railroad Guide, 43; Memorandums
of
a Tour Made by Josiah Espy in the States of Ohio and
Kentucky and Indiana Territory
in 1805 (Cincinnati,
1870), 19; Ohio Cultivator, VIII (1852), 221.
29 Henry B. Fearon, Sketches of
America (2d ed., London, 1818), 217.
30 "Diary of Aaron
Miller," Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly,
XXXIII (1924), 72.
31 Scioto Gazette (Chillicothe),
August 5, 1829.
32 Ibid.; Hildreth, "Ten
Days in Ohio," 248; George H. Twiss, "Journal of Cyrus
P. Bradley," Ohio State
Archaeological and Historical Quarterly, XV (1906), 246.
180 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
of herding was still being practiced on
the prairies of Indiana,
Illinois, and Missouri down to the
early 1850's.33
A single reference to "herds of
one, two and three hundred"
might be discounted as an example of
poetic license, but there is
other evidence that the grazing
industry, whether in the Clark-
Madison heartland or along the upper
reaches of the Scioto and the
Olentangy, was often conducted on a
large-scale basis. In 1832 a
Mr. Gwynne had several fields along the
Darby Bottoms, compris-
ing in all 4,000 or 5,000 acres, on
which he had about 1,200 cattle.
Others in the vicinity had from 200 to
800 head grazing, and lands
adequate to support them.34 Four
years later the Ohio Farmer
stated that there were in Ohio
fifty-eight graziers who owned in all
11,802 cattle. The abridged version of
the Ohio Farmer account
printed in the Cultivator gives
the names of only eight individuals
and partnerships. Seven of the eight,
perhaps all of them, belonged,
as it happens, to Marion County. They
were as follows, with the
addresses being the names of townships:
C. Bradley & Co., Marion,
1,550 head; C. Halderman, Big Island,
700; Bushby & Welch, Grand
Prairie, 650; Messrs. Kirby, Grand
Prairie, 600; John Halderman,
Big Island, 460; Messrs. Drake,
Claridon, 450; Dan Fickle, Marion,
400; Ballantine & Baudelch, no
address, 350.35
The grazing industry of Madison, Clark,
and adjacent counties
depended on outside sources for its
supply of stock cattle, for the
cattlemen raised few calves. "Why
don't you breed your cattle?"
an inquisitive individual asked one of
them, as he reported long
afterwards. "He says, that don't
pertain to my business. He says,
that is done by small farmers."36
Some stock cattle were obtained
from such nearby areas as predominantly
swine-raising Warren
33 Mrs. Mary V. Harris, ed.,
"The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin Harris,"
Transactions of the Illinois State
Historical Society for the Year 1923 (Springfield,
1923), 77; Report of the Commissioner of
Patents for the Year 1853, Part II, Senate
Executive Documents, 33 cong., 1 sess., No. 27, pp. 6, 11. Hereafter this
authority is
cited as Patent Office Report.
34 Hildreth, "Ten Days in
Ohio," 257.
5 Cultivator (Albany,
N.Y.), III (1836), 32.
36 Ohio
Agricultural Report for 1890, 143.
There were some graziers, however,
who actually did keep a considerable
number of cows, not for the dairy but merely to
produce calves. The same was true of
some of the Scioto Valley feeders. Memoirs of
William Renick, 23.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 181
County on the southwest37 and
many from the more accessible of
the grain-growing counties north of the
National Road, but from an
early period most of them probably were
driven in from beyond the
limits of the state. In reality this
stocker movement began with the
driving of the first Kentucky cattle
into the Virginia Military District.
Within a few years cheap cattle were
obviously no longer readily
found immediately south of the Ohio, for
in 1810 Thomas Worthing-
ton purchased 420 head and Felix Renick
at least 100 from the Chick-
asaws in the western extremity of
Tennessee to drive to the Scioto
Valley.38 By 1816 stock
cattle were being driven from as far west
as the Missouri Territory through Kentucky
and Ohio to the eastern
markets,39 from which fact it is fair to
deduce that many were
bought by the Ohio graziers along the
route and pastured a year or
two. By 1850 Clark County alone was
supposed to have 5,000 or
6,000 head of western cattle at grass.40
About the same time a
visitor at Yellow Springs was informed
that about 25,000 head of
western cattle passed through the
village each year on their way
(from a turning-off point on the nearby
National Road) "to the
grazing lands of Madison and
Fayette."41 Probably most of the out-
of-state animals purchased by the
graziers during the second quarter
of the century came via the National
Road from the prairies of
Indiana and Illinois, but some
originated in Iowa and Wisconsin, and
a considerable number in Missouri.42
In 1846 a thousand head were
driven from Texas to Ohio, but the
experiment was apparently not
successful, for it was not repeated.43
The graziers commonly bought steers at
two or three years, but
37 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1850 (Scott ed.), 398.
38 Charles S. Plumb, "Felix Renick,
Pioneer," Ohio State Archaeological and His-
torical Quarterly, XXXIII (1924), 10; William T. Utter, The Frontier State, 1803-
1825 (History of the State of Ohio, edited by Carl Wittke, II, Columbus, 1942), 158.
39 Thomas, Travels Through the
Western Country in the Summer of 1816, 120.
40 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1850 (Scott ed.), 96.
41 Cincinnati Atlas, quoted in the Spirit of the Times, XIX
(1849-50), 316.
42 Salt River Journal (Bowling
Green, Mo.), 1834, quoted in Clifford D. Car-
penter, "The Early Cattle Industry
in Missouri," Missouri Historical Review, XLVII
(1952-53), 200; Ohio Agricultural
Report for 1849, 196; Patent Office Report for
1853, pp. 6, 12; Remarks on the
Western States of America or Valley of the Mississippi
(London, 1839), 22; Renick, "On the
Cattle Trade of the Scioto Valley," 163.
43 Clarence W. Gordon, "Report on Cattle, Sheep and Swine
Supplementary to
Enumeration of Live Stock on Farms in
1880," in U.S. Census, 1880, Vol. III:
Agriculture, 11.
182 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
sometimes as yearlings.44 In
Crawford County, probably because
there was a good deal of land too wet
for other than summer pastur-
age, it was the practice as late as
mid-century to drive western cattle
in during the spring and away the same
fall.45 Elsewhere the graziers
held their stock animals a year or two
(a "year" being really from
the spring of one year to the fall of
the next) and then sold them,
of course not on the basis of age
entirely but of condition and
weight. During the summer the cattle in
Madison County and its
neighbors were pastured on prairies,
dry swamp land, oak openings,
and even seeded-down woodlands from
which the underbrush had
been cleared, and in the fall sometimes
on the stubble and aftergrass
of cleared fields. In the winter they
were permitted to take advantage
of woods and other natural shelters,
but were ordinarily kept on
what was left of the natural pasture.
As a matter of fact, in this
region there was usually adequate herbage
even when the northern
parts of the state were snow blanketed.
Moreover, in Marion County
-and very likely in the others-some
graziers had "winter pasture,"
that is, tracts from which the cattle
were excluded from the first
of September to the first of December.
Even when allowance was
made for the effects of occasional
storms of snow or freezing rain,
it was calculated that it would not be
necessary to provide more than
half a ton of hay for each steer as
supplemental rations throughout
the average winter.46 Losses
from exposure were regarded as in-
significant. "Most growers
[graziers]," it was said, "agree that
cattle thus tended thrive and appear
better than when housed in
sheds and with straw yards to run
in."47 At the same time, losses
from other causes were sometimes heavy.
Milk sickness, or "trem-
bles," a form of plant poisoning
attributable to eating white snake-
root, was long prevalent, especially in
the autumn, throughout the
grazing country.48 Bloody
murrain was much worse, for it was
44 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1850 (Scott
ed.), 398.
45Ibid., 120; Ohio
Executive Documents, XVI (1852), Part II, No. 2, p. 415.
46 Cultivator, VIII (1841), 22; Ohio Executive Documents, XVII
(1853), Part II,
No. 5, p. 393.
47 Cultivator, VIII (1841), 22.
48 "Diary of Aaron
Miller," 72; Mad River Courant (Urbana), quoted in the
Farmer's Reporter (Cincinnati), I (1830-31), 55; Western Farmer and
Gardener, II
(1840-41), 167.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 183
customary to expect that it might carry
off up to three or even five
percent of the stock.49
However large the incidental losses in
the industry, there is no
doubt that the profits tended to be
substantial. The graziers of
Madison County, noted the shrewd Aaron
Miller in 1832, "make
money fast at the business, from what I
can learn they make about
fifty percent clear on their money
annually."50 This estimate, based
as it perhaps was on local tavern
gossip, was probably high, but
nevertheless not as inflated as it
might at first glance appear to be.
A Marion County stockman gave it as his
opinion twenty years later
that profits could be around
twenty-five to thirty-three percent.51
By piecing together scattered items of
information, one gets the
impression that he was not far from the
mark. In 1849 and 1850
common-run two-year-old and
three-year-old stock cattle could be
purchased in or adjacent to the grazing
region for about $10
to $12 a head.52 It was
commonly estimated that the cost of grazing
a steer at this time would be between
$5 and $6 a calendar year.53 If
a steer, therefore, was bought at $10,
and grazed for a "year," that
is, fifteen or sixteen months, he would
really have cost his owner
an additional $6 or more, and to return
a profit of twenty-five per-
cent would have to sell for around $20.
Similarly, one kept two
"years" would have cost
around $21 and would have to sell for
over $26. At the time referred to, the
cattle in the grazing region
bought a year or two earlier, and now
ready for market, were bring-
ing from $20 to $30 or even $35, the
precise amount being deter-
49 Memoirs of William Renick, 56.
50 "Diary of Aaron Miller," 72.
51 Ohio Executive Documents, XVII (1853), Part II, No. 5, p. 395.
52Crawford County (1849), about $10;
Mercer County (1849), $10; Paulding
County (1849), $9 to $12; Van Wert
County (1849), $10 average; Hardin County
(1850), $12; Richland County (1850),
$11.50 average; Van Wert County (1850),
$12.50 average. Ohio Agricultural
Report for 1849, 74, 169, 187, 212; Ohio Agri-
cultural Report for 1850 (Scott ed.), 199, 355. Ten dollars had been a more or
less
conventional price for stock cattle as
far back as 1830. New York Farmer (New
York), III (1830), quoted in Bidwell and
Falconer, History of Agriculture in the
Northern United States, 179.
53 Memoirs of
William Renick, 27-28; Patent Office
Report for 1849, Part II, Senate
Executive Documents, 31 cong., 1 sess., No. 20, p. 179; Patent Office Report
for
1852, Part II, Senate Executive
Documents, 32 cong., 2 sess., No. 55, pp. 260, 263.
184 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
mined by their weight.54 It
is evident that there is nothing in these
selling figures to discredit the idea
that profits of twenty-five percent
and upwards were possible, but the
validity of the exercise depends
on the worth of the estimate of the
cost of production, and this was
nothing more than informed guesswork.
An idea of the magnitude of the grazing
industry at mid-century
may be gained from a few scattered
statements. A Madison County
resident reported in 1848 that he had
"ascertained from reliable
sources from every township in the
county, there have been near
20,000 head of cattle, three years old
and upwards sold and driven
from this county in the last seven
months, at an average price of $20
per head, making in all $400,000."55
This estimate may be taken as
reasonably accurate, for the practice
in Madison County and its
neighbors was to sell cattle by weight,56
from which we may infer
that there were weighing stations at
various points for the conveni-
ence of drovers and graziers57 which
would serve the convenience
of the gatherers of statistics. A
"citizens' committee" put the number
of cattle driven from Marion County in
1845 at 7,000. In 1849, so
it was said, Marion County exported
about 10,000, and Crawford
County 12,000 to 13,000.58
Since much of the grazing district was
less than a hundred miles
from Cincinnati, the "Queen City
of the West" absorbed some of
its fully grass-fattened cattle.59
On account of the competition there,
two other outlets the graziers had were
much more significant. They
disposed of a large proportion of their
steers to the Scioto Valley
feeders to be corn-fattened in the
manner hereafter to be described.
Drovers took the rest to the East,
where they sold some in the
metropolitan markets as grass-fattened
cattle, and the rest, ordinarily
54 Champaign County (1849), average $20,
maximum $25; Clark County (1849),
average $3 per hundred, gross weight;
Fayette County (1849), average $26, or $2.50
a hundred; Marion County (1849), average
$23; Clark County (1850), $35; Craw-
ford County (1850), maximum $35. Ohio
Agricultural Report for 1849, 63, 65, 93,
165; Ohio Agricultural Report for
1850 (Scott ed.), 96, 120.
55 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1848,
92.
56 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1850 (Scott ed.), 263. See also footnote 54, above.
57 This in spite of the fact that a few graziers had their own cattle
scales. Madison
Reveille (London),
November 15, 1851.
58 Buckeye Eagle (Marion), January 14, 1846; Ohio
Agricultural Report for 1849,
74;0hio Agricultural Report for 1850 (Scott ed.), 301.
59 Ibid., 264; Ohio Executive Documents, XVI (1852), Part
II, No. 2, p. 438.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 185
a very much larger number, among the
feeders of eastern New York
and Pennsylvania.60
The golden age (as it seemed in
retrospect) of the cattle kingdom
of the graziers, characterized by an
abundance of cheap land, advant-
ages in marketing over competing areas
to the westward, and only a
relatively slow encroachment of other
types of agriculture, came to
an end shortly after mid-century. The
new problems which then
arose will be dealt with later.
IV. The Feeding Industry of the
Scioto Valley
The second main division of the cattle
industry in Ohio, the corn-
fattening one of the middle and lower
Scioto Valley, had, like the
grazing one just described, an origin
in the East. Specifically, it was
borrowed without change of technique
from practices prevailing
along the South Branch of the Potomac.
In this region, of which
Moorefield, (West) Virginia, might be
considered the center, cattle
were corn-fattened during the late
colonial and early national period
in a fashion characteristic of it and
no other.61 What it was will be
made clear shortly.
Many of the first settlers of the lower
Scioto Valley were from
the South Branch, and so had first-hand
knowledge of the cattle-
feeding method prevailing there. From
the time of their arrival
they appear to have discussed among
themselves the possibility
of transferring it to the West and
thereafter driving their cattle east-
ward as fatted beeves and not mere
stockers. The cautious ones
thought that such a project might be
merely a way of wasting corn,
for they believed that, on arrival at
Baltimore or Philadelphia, the
cattle would be so emaciated that they
could be sold only to feeders.
This, too, was the opinion of their
friends and relatives still living
along the South Branch. A few of the
arguers contended that some-
time in the future the idea might prove
successful. Only George
Renick, who had been engaged in
merchandising at Moorefield, and
60 Bidwell
and Falconer, History of Agriculture in the Northern United States,
394-395; Memoirs of William Renick, 14;
Ohio Agricultural Report for 1848, 92;
Patent Office Report for 1849, Part II, Senate
Executive Documents, 31 cong., 1 sess.,
No. 20, p. 179.
61 Renick, "On the Cattle Trade of
the Scioto Valley," 162.
186 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
who removed to Chillicothe in 1802,
where he opened a store, had
any confidence in its immediate
practicality. After his friends and
customers all rejected his efforts to
get them to invest their funds
in such a seemingly hazardous
enterprise, he bought a farm just
outside Chillicothe, and in the autumn
of 1804 began to fatten a
drove of cattle in the Virginia
fashion. The next spring he drove
sixty-eight fat cattle to Baltimore.62
According to tradition, they
made a poor impression on their
arrival. They showed the effects
of their long journey, and of their
dependence on the wild hay along
the route, for the butchers would not
buy them, even when the prices
were reduced. It was not till Renick
had two or three of the poorest
of the cattle slaughtered at his own
expense, with the butcher being
authorized to give the meat to his
customers if they would not buy
it, that any interest was shown. The
beef was found so satisfactory
on trial that Renick had no difficulty
in getting rid of the rest of the
cattle.63
The scoffers in the Scioto Valley would
no doubt have rushed
into the business opened by this
venture had it not been that they
were discouraged by the great Scioto
River flood of 1805, which
caused them to have second thoughts on
the wisdom of risking much
on bottom-land corn culture. As it was,
the corn-fattening industry
did not really begin to flourish till
after the War of 1812. In 1815
Felix Renick, brother of George, sold a
drove of corn-fattened cattle
in Philadelphia, and three years later
George Renick and Joseph
Harness one at New York. Others who
have left no record imitated
their example, so that within a few
years the cattle-feeding business
attained much of the extensive
proportions it was to have in the
1840's.64
There were several fairly obvious
reasons for the successful de-
velopment of the cattle-feeding
industry of the lower Scioto Valley
in addition to the knowledge brought
from the South Branch. One
was the abundance of corn. The
agricultural expert A. B. Allen of
Buffalo, New York, in 1840 climbed a
small hill near Lockbourne,
62 Ibid.; Memoirs of William Renick, 3, 99-100; Plumb, "Felix Renick, Pioneer,"
20.
63 Country Gentleman, quoted in
the Ohio Cultivator, IX (1853), 34.
64Henlein,
"Cattle Driving from the Ohio Country, 1800-1850," 91; Memoirs
of William Renick, 97, 100.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 187
south of Columbus, and saw, as he
wrote, "that in occasional bends
of the river, the views would extend
from four to seven miles, and
perhaps more in length, and one to
three in breadth, of almost un-
interrupted fields [of corn] as thick
as grass, and in stalks far above
the reach of the arm of the tallest
mountaineer."65 Though much of
the corn was actually grown by tenants,
this was on a share-cropping
basis,66 so that its
disposition could be controlled almost as thor-
oughly as that of the corn grown by the
owner himself. Again, the
lower Scioto Valley and the Kentucky
Bluegrass were closer to the
eastern cities than any other part of
the Corn Belt. Ninety per-
cent of the western corn-fattened cattle
sold in the East prior to the
railroad era were from these two
regions, with the Scioto Valley con-
tributing throughout the lion's share.67
Other factors were the avail-
ability of cattle for feeding and the
great efficiency, especially in
labor, of the fattening method used.
The cattle feeders of the Scioto
Valley, like the graziers of Mad-
ison County and its neighbors, depended
on outside sources for their
stock. This is not to state that they
bought none locally, for it was
their practice, then as later, to buy
from their small-farmer neigh-
bors the two or three or half-dozen
head each had available, 68 but
the supply was simply inadequate. The
consequence was that in the
early days of the feeding
industry-around 1825-the young Wil-
liam Renick was "picking up"
cattle for his father over a very wide
area in Ohio and Kentucky. He ranged
over the part of Ohio south
of the fortieth parallel, which is
slightly above the National Road,
from the western border of the grazing
country along the Little
Miami to the midst of the hill counties
between the Scioto Valley
and the Ohio River. In Kentucky he
bought not only in the Bluegrass,
but sometimes across it in the Green
River section, which would be
65 Cultivator, VII (1840), 192. Cf. also: "From Columbus, ninety
miles, to Ports-
mouth, on the bottom lands, a full mile
wide opposite Columbus, and alternating on
either side, as the bed of the stream
winds from the base of its general bluffs to the
other, lies almost one continuous Indian
cornfield. A field of a hundred acres is not
uncommon-one of three to five hundred is
not uncommon, and a single inclosure of a
thousand acres and upwards, all solid,
growing Indian corn, is sometimes seen."
New York World, quoted in Ohio Agricultural Report for 1859, 544.
66 Cultivator,
VIII (1841), 22; Thomas, Travels
Through the Western Country in
the Summer of 1816, 100; Twiss, "Journal of Cyrus P. Bradley,"
235.
67 Memoirs of William Renick, 14.
68 Cf. Ohio Agricultural Report for 1907, 333.
188 THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
all of three hundred miles by trail
from Pickaway County.69 Even
at this time, or shortly thereafter,
some of the Scioto feeders were
depending on Missouri and other western
cattle.70 In the 1840's a
few of the cattle fed had been raised
on dairy farms in the Western
Reserve, and reached the Scioto Valley
only after a year or two in
the possession of intermediaries in the
Backbone Counties and the
grazing region. Only in one year, 1845,
when there was a great
drought, were Western Reserve cattle
driven in large numbers direct
to the Scioto.71 Others came
from the small-farming borderlands
of the Scioto Valley-the wheat-growing
region to the north; Adams,
Highland, and other counties south of
the grazing country; and
Athens, Gallia, Hocking, Jackson, and
other hill counties of south-
eastern Ohio.72 Of these
last mentioned, Gallia was perhaps the
most important. It was said to be
"the great theatre for gathering
cattle, to be taken to the valley of
the Scioto,"73 no doubt because
it lay astride the cattle and hog
route-really mostly the latter-
which ran from Chillicothe to
Gallipolis and then along the Kana-
wha River, with an ultimate destination
in eastern Virginia. One
might venture the guess that Mason
County, (West) Virginia,
furnished some of the cattle credited
to Gallia County. It also seems
likely, even though there is no direct
mention, that the counties of
northeastern Kentucky nearest the mouth
of the Scioto, such as
Greenup and Lewis, always contributed a
quota to the feeders north
of them. "A considerable
portion" of the stock cattle was brought in
directly from Indiana, Illinois, and
Missouri,74 and would therefore
be identical in character with the
cattle going to the Ohio grazing
country. The rest were purchased in the
grazing country after a
"year" or two of the
conditioning already described. The large
droves available here, and the
consequent convenience to the feeders
69 Memoirs of William Renick, 55-57.
70 New York Farmer, III (1830), quoted in Bidwell and Falconer, History of Agri-
culture in the Northern United
States, 179.
71 Henry Howe, Historical
Collections of Ohio (Cincinnati, 1849), 189; Memoirs
of William Renick, 23.
72 Memoirs of William Renick, 55;
Ohio Agricultural Report for 1847, 26; Ohio
Agricultural Report for 1848, 52; Ohio Agricultural Report for 1850 (Scott
ed.), 213,
236.
73 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1848,
52.
74 Renick, "On the Cattle Trade of
the Scioto Valley," 163.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 189
in their purchasing, must have made this
the most important single
source of supply.75
The Scioto feeders held pronounced and
no doubt conflicting
opinions about the merits of the cattle
obtainable from these varied
sources. William Renick, for example,
thought the best native cattle
he ever purchased for feeding were from
Woodford and Jessamine
counties, just west of Lexington,
Kentucky. He shared with others a
respect for the "Brush Creek"
cattle of Adams and Highland
counties, which, though small, were
hardy, disease resistant, and
easily fattened, and disagreed with them
over the "hill," or "Hock-
ing," or "sassafras,"
cattle of the southeastern counties of Ohio. To
him, the latter were too small for
profitable feeding; to others among
the feeders, they had the merits of the
"Brush Creek" cattle. As a
young man Renick was prejudiced against
the "Barren" cattle of
the grazing region as being rangy, hard
to fatten, and disease prone;
later he admitted that, after a year of
seasoning by a grazier, they
could be profitably fattened, and that
they were actually preferred by
drovers to cattle of local origin
because they would lose less weight
on the journey east.76
While the Scioto Valley cattlemen made
intermittent purchases any
time from early spring on, they bought
or took delivery of most of
their prospective feeders in late summer
or early autumn, for they
paid for them in cash borrowed from the
Chillicothe and Columbus
banks on the basis of four-months notes
secured on the animals when
sold. As the banks were said to make a
profit in interest and ex-
change which might amount to ten or
twelve percent, it was to the
advantage of the cattlemen to cut costs
by keeping their period of
indebtedness as brief as possible.77
The actual method of feeding, which, it
will be recalled, was
borrowed without significant change from
that prevailing along the
South Branch of the Potomac, was in
general as follows, though
75 This seems to be implied in the Cincinnati
Atlas, quoted in the Spirit of the
Times, XIX (1849-50), 316.
76 Memoirs of William Renick, 55-57;
Ohio Agricultural Report for 1847, 26; Ohio
Agricultural Report for 1850 (Scott ed.), 236; Renick, "On the Cattle Trade of
the
Scioto Valley," 163.
77 Cincinnati Atlas, quoted in the Spirit of the Times, XIX (1849-50), 316.
190
THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
subject to variations in detail. After
the feeder cattle, usually four-
year-olds, were bought up, they were
kept for the time being on
whatever aftergrass or other good
pasturage was available. Neither
then nor at any other time were they
given any shelter except natural
windbreaks. During the feeding season,
which lasted from about
the first of November to the middle of
February for the first animals
driven and to the middle of April for
the last ones, the feeders, in
herds of about a hundred, were turned
into a succession of eight
or ten-acre feedlots, a
"fresh" one at each feeding, morning and
evening. Every day the hired men would
haul as much corn as would
be required on a big sled or low feed
wagon, drawn in either case
by perhaps three or four yoke of oxen,
and distribute it, not in feed
boxes which were a rarity till after the
Civil War, but in small heaps
over the field. This was, in accordance
with Virginia practice, un-
husked corn--not mere blades and
stalks--which had been standing
in the shock since harvest time. When
the feeders were put into their
next feedlot, their places in the first
would be taken by an equal
number of stock cattle, who would eat
what they could of what was
left on the ground. Then, when the
feeders were moved on to a
third lot, and the stock cattle to the
second, hogs would be turned
into the first, to consume what the
cattle had trampled into the mud,
mangled, or failed to digest. As there
were seldom many feedlots,
the first group of cattle would shortly
be back to the original one,
following the hogs. The number of hogs
would vary with the sever-
ity of the winter, their size, and
whether or not they were intended
for driving. A writer in the Cultivator
thought there would be or-
dinarily a hog to each feeder. William
Renick was of the opinion
that, on the average, there might be 135
hogs for each hundred
feeders. If there were no stock cattle,
there would be more hogs.
When a cattle feeder had plenty of
first-class pasture at his disposal,
he could buy three-year-olds, corn-feed
them as stockers following
feeders for one winter, graze them
throughout the next growing
season and into the fall, and then
fatten them in the feedlots. This
was how the best beef was produced.78
A variant of the foregoing
78 Cultivator, New
Series, IX (1852), 238; Ohio
Agricultural Report for 1907, 351;
Memoirs of William Renick, 11, 15, 23; Renick, "On the Cattle Trade of the
Scioto
Valley," 168.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 191
general technique of cattle feeding was
to turn the animals early
in the autumn into a field of standing
corn, where they would con-
sume as much as they could, and leave
the rest for the hogs which
would follow them.79 It may
be that this "hogging down" was con-
fined to corn growers in the Scioto
Valley who were primarily
interested in swine feeding. It is
significant that nowhere in his ex-
tensive writings on the cattle-feeding
industry does William Renick
as much as refer to it.
The usual Scioto Valley system had
obvious economic advantages.
The fixed investment in corn land was
high, and there was some
in fencing, but that in buildings was
next to nothing. Labor costs,
though high enough during the
corn-growing season, were low dur-
ing the feeding one. A few hired hands
could haul all the corn
needed, for they did not have to spend
any time on such chores as
carting out manure. The practice of
having hogs follow the cattle in
the feedlots meant that there was no
wastage of fodder, and that of
keeping the cattle and hogs out of a
conventional barnyard meant
that there was no wastage of manure.
There were, it is true, losses
from exposure and disease--"at
least three or four per cent. per
annum," according to William Renick80--but
these, like the interest
on the land and the use of borrowed
capital, were regarded as part
of the overhead expense inseparable from
the business.
It is difficult to estimate accurately
the profits in the Scioto Valley
cattle-feeding business, because, as in
the grazing industry, available
figures are fragmentary. An apparently
careful accounting was,
however, given by an early feeder with
150 acres of cultivable land
near Chillicothe. One fall, seemingly in
the late 1820's, he bought
400 stockers at $10 each and the next
spring sold them in the East
at $15, thus making a profit of $1,700
after allowing $300 for the
cost of labor. In 1829, again, he bought
480 at $10, and sold them,
also in the eastern market, at $30. He
put his profit that season
at $6,240, as it cost him $7 a head to
drive the cattle east. His
labor and other expenses he considered
were more than met by his
gains from his stock cattle and hogs.81
William Renick in 1848
79 Cultivator, VIII
(1841), 22; ibid., New Series, VIII (1851), 325.
80 Memoirs of William Renick, 28.
81 New York Farmer, III (1830), quoted in Bidwell and Falconer, History
of Agri-
culture in the Northern United States, 179.
192
THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
worked out a somewhat disingenuous
system of costs in a letter to
the editor of the American Courier, a
Philadelphia paper which had
charged that the western cattle feeders
and drovers were profiteering
at the expense of eastern consumers.
According to Renick, the feeder
would have to pay $24 for a good
four-year-old steer, which, as
shown above (page 183), was not an
unreasonable figure. In five
months of fattening--a very long
season--the steer would consume
the equivalent of at least seventy-five
bushels of corn worth, at
twenty cents a bushel, $15, and if he
was bought in the spring and
properly grazed through the growing
season, two acres of pasture
worth $6 in addition. This would mean
that, without making any
allowance for loss from disease or for
interest on capital, the feeder
could not even clear expenses unless he
got $39 or $45, as the case
might be, for his 900-pound beast at his
own gate.82 A year earlier,
and in an entirely different connection,
Renick stated that the 7,000
fat cattle driven each year from
Pickaway County were worth
$280,000 or $40 per head at the time of
sale; and $40 was also given
by another authority as the average
value of those driven from Ross
County from 1846 to 1850 inclusive.83
On the basis of Renick's
calculation, therefore, most of the
cattlemen were steadily losing
money, and this "when the business
of feeding cattle on the Scioto
river was at its height, say from 1840
to 1850."84 Renick carefully
failed to mention that the stock cattle
and the hogs which followed
the feeders got little or nothing except
part of the corn charged to
the latter, and so were, except for
their prime cost, almost clear
gain to their owner. Neither did he call
attention to the fact that
cattlemen who took their own cattle
eastward, or had agents do so,
sometimes made large profits, because
often at the time the drove
was sold, the New York market was bare
of competition. Perhaps
about all we can really say, then, is
what Renick in his old age ad-
mitted of his own experiences in the
feeding business--they were
"reasonably profitable."85
82 Memoirs of William Renick, 27-28.
83 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1847,
83; Ohio Agricultural Report for 1850
(Scott ed.), 356.
84 Memoirs of William Renick, 15.
85 Ibid., 98.
THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY 193
There are no reliable statistics of the
number of cattle corn-fed in
the Scioto Valley in the 1820's and
1830's. One estimate, made by
two large stock drovers, was that in
1828 there were 6,000 such
cattle. Another estimate, given at the
canal celebration at Chillicothe
in 1831, was that there were then about
10,000 in the valley. Two
years later 3,000 head were driven
eastward from Ross County
alone.86 Allen Trimble, first
president of the Ohio State Board of
Agriculture, reported second-hand in the
fall of 1846 that 25,000
were then being fattened along the
Scioto and its tributaries between
Columbus and Portsmouth. William Renick,
whose opinion should
carry more weight, put the number
fattened in an average year at
from 15,000 to 16,000.87 From the
reports of the agricultural societies
we get some additional figures, which
are not to be taken too ser-
iously, but which do emphasize the
concentration of the industry in
Pickaway and Ross counties. Pickaway
County in the late 1840's had
around 7,000 or 7,500 head
corn-fattening annually for the eastern
market and Ross County between 5,600 and
6,500 according to one
estimate and a minimum of 8,000
according to another, which figure
perhaps partook of local patriotism. As
far as the other counties of
the lower Scioto Valley were concerned,
it seems that the southern
part of Franklin County contributed
substantially to the industry, but
precisely how much we do not know; that the
western part of Fair-
field County had an apparent maximum of
2,000 head in its feedlots;
that Pike County had some, but not many,
cattle feeders; and that
Scioto County had very few.88 There
is reason to suspect that the
Pickaway County estimates, which were
made by William Renick or
his friends, were too low. In 1854, when
conditions had not greatly
changed, the Circleville Herald listed
the cattle feeders of Pickaway
86 R. Carlyle Buley, The Old
Northwest: Pioneer Period, 1815-1840 (Indianapolis,
1950), I, 528; Scioto Gazette (Chillicothe),
quoted in the Western Tiller (Cincin-
nati), [New Series], I (1828-29), 185; Journal
of the Senate of the State of Ohio,
32 general assembly, 1 sess., 1833-34,
417.
87 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1846,
6-7; Renick, "On the Cattle Trade of the
Scioto Valley," 162.
88 Ohio Agricultural Report for 1846,
60; Ohio Agricultural Report for 1847, 83;
Ohio Agricultural Report for 1848, 100-101; Ohio Agricultural Report for 1849,
95; Ohio Agricultural Report for 1850
(Scott ed.), 356, 449; Ohio Executive Docu-
ments, XVII (1853), Part II, No. 5, p. 301; ibid., XVIII
(1854), Part II, No. 21,
p. 640; Ohio Cultivator, XIII
(1857), 163.
194
THE OHIO HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
County with the number of cattle being
fattened by each. The total
came to more than 12,500 head, and this
without counting a con-
siderable number belonging to
small-scale feeders.89 If the figures
for Pickaway County are to be adjusted
upwards, then of course
Renick's overall estimate for the Scioto
Valley should be also.
Beginning in the middle 1840's a few
hundred corn-fed cattle were
slaughtered at Chillicothe and packed
for the British trade, but
otherwise the market was in the East.
William Renick asserted that
New York was so much more profitable as
an outlet than Philadel-
phia that seven-eighths of the Scioto
Valley corn-fattened cattle went
to the former. Though he attributed this
fact to the unwillingness
of the Philadelphia butchers to pay
adequate prices, it is obvious
that the real explanation was to be
found in the effective competition
of the feeders of eastern Pennsylvania.
Occasionally, when the New
York market was overstocked, a Scioto
Valley feeder might take his
drove the whole way to Boston, as Renick
did in 1842.90 Few of the
cattle, if any, were sold at Cincinnati,
which was apparently, as far
as corn-fed cattle were concerned, a
kind of preserve for the feeders
of the Kentucky Bluegrass, centering on
Bourbon County.9l
Developments in the Scioto Valley
feeding industry during the
1850's will be dealt with in the final
section.
89 Ohio Cultivator, X (1854),
248.
90 Memoirs of William Renick, 28-29, 58; Renick, "On the Cattle Trade of
the
Scioto Valley," 162.
91 Charles Cist, The Cincinnati Miscellany, or Antiquities of the West, II
(1845-
46), 140.
[The second and concluding part of
this article will appear in the July issue.]
The Beef Cattle Industry in Ohio
Prior to the Civil War
By ROBERT LESLIE JONES*
I. Introduction
The beef cattle industry in Ohio prior
to the Civil War could not
be described as the one most important
branch of agriculture in the
state as a whole, though it was
significant almost everywhere and
dominant in certain regions. Neither was
it to be regarded as
unique in its methods, for these were in
principle at least borrowed
from older parts of the country and were
found in the neighboring
western states as they too developed.
But Ohio was the first part
of the Old Northwest to be affected by
the advance of the frontier.
So too, as the nearest to eastern
markets, it was the first to be tied
in as a supplier to the Pennsylvania
fattening centers, and in due
course was the first to become a
finisher of the rough beeves of the
newer prairies farther west. As a
nursery of cattle kings, it became
a leader in the techniques of animal
husbandry. The activities of the
early Ohio cattlemen had, understandably
enough, a romantic nim-
bus in the eyes of contemporaries. Now
that this appeal has long
since faded, the industry can be
assessed on its merits as a microcosm
of one phase of midwest farming.
Ohio had several advantages in the
development of a cattle in-
dustry. It had even in the very
beginning a sufficiency of forage,
and soon had an abundance. It had a
reasonably favorable climate.
Throughout most of the state the winters
never were extreme
enough to cause extensive cattle losses,
however much a humani-
* Robert Leslie Jones is head of the
department of history and political science at
Marietta College. He is an authority on the
agricultural history of the Middle West
and eastern Canada.
168