Introduction:

            The era known as the postbellum era in America resulted in rapid industrialization and technological innovation (entrepreneurship), which affected the nation’s economic status. The two central economic sectors involved the traditionalist agricultural sect of the economy, and the emerging manufacturing sect. By examining historical census statistics spanning 1870 to 1900, one can compare the economic growth of the emerging manufacturing sector vis-à-vis the more established and developed agricultural sector of the United States economy. Upon comparing the two sides, one can notice the invaluable nature in both the newer one reshaping the economy, and the already-established one continuing to contribute to the economy.

 Research Methodology:

          The comparison will utilize a quantitative research methodology to examine economic growth following the Civil War. Employing the United States Census as obtained from the National Historical Geographic Information System, the study will compare and measure differences in employment rates, output figures, and economic productivity. A comparative approach will be used via the advantages of a quantitative approach vis-à-vis the qualitative approach. The discrepancy between quantitative numbers and qualitative empiricism is found in the regression models, as outlined by David A. Freedman’s article “Statistical Models and Shoe Leather.” Good arguments are made for both sides: statistical data (or the quantitative approach) is almost always linked to causal coefficient variables, and empirical regression (or the qualitative approach) accounts for adjustments when pursued data is not obtained. Freedman argues for regression in epidemiology, when equations seem too rigid and when tangible data is sought to prevent diseases from being contracted. While the quantitative approach seems more sensitized to people who contract viruses and sicknesses, the technical (or empirical) fixes are usually not necessary (given the coefficients that are proved to yield positive results). Therefore, this article is pertinent to the discussion because it supports the idea that statistical figures—for example, the Census data—are an accurate depiction of how much growth (or progress) the United States economy retains. Another scholarly article of value is Alfred D. Chandler’s “Organizational Capabilities and the Economic History of the Industrial Enterprise;” it is the epitome of the manufacturing sector. It values managerial enterprise (organizational capabilities) and delineates the value of coordinated production and distribution—both of which are only applicable to the manufacturing sector of the economy. Lastly, a speech by popular Georgia newspaper editor Henry Grady, exemplifies the importance of and necessity of change needed in the agricultural realm. In his speech, he advocated that agriculture was a staple of republican democracy and capitalist enterprise in America, but still thought variety in crop cultivation was necessary

Analysis: 

            Census data listing economic conditions (such as employment and gross domestic product) affirms that both agricultural and manufacturing sectors of the economy expanded. Starting with the agrarian sector of the economy, people were very much still committed to the source of revenue, employment, and output production of staple crops. According to the census, the value of such agrarian establishments like farms and field estates were presented to be around 7.5 billion dollars following the Civil War, and increased to over 16.5 billion dollars in 1900. Though the numbers itself are remarkable, more remarkable is the fact that it grew in such an exorbitant amount despite the emergence of a more “trendy” or innovative manufacturing sector. Still, it did not always translate into economic prosperity. According to Grady, the problem was the result of commitment to cotton; he is quoted in a speech that “agriculture alone cannot establish or maintain a people’s prosperity.”[1] The point of this quote is to stipulate that, as important as agriculture was to setting a tradition for the United States economic foundation, it could not sustain economic production with the conjunction of agriculture with an increasingly industrialized society.

      Manufacturing census data provides information that supports the sector’s growing importance; it varied from valuing at approximately 4.2 billion dollars in 1870 to 13 billion dollar dollars in 1900. While many different factors contributed to this explosive increase in value in this economic sector, industrial investment (entrepreneurship) was potentially the principal contributor.

       Alfred Chandler’s aforementioned article emphasizes managerial and organizational capabilities, which represents speed and efficacy of production. While the article does not relate itself to the agricultural tradition explicitly, it should be noted that raw foods are the basis for some manufacturing business firms, thus linking the two economic sectors. They are not interchangeable but they are also not completely independent entities. Both sectors have the aforementioned organizational capabilities and economies of scale that Chandler emphasizes. As he states, “organizational capabilities, honed by oligopolistic competition, provides the dynamic not only for the continuing growth of such firms.”[2]

        David Freedman has a stake in the interconnection as well. Aside from numbers and data—which are recognized by Freedman as valid factors—others like innovations and inventions of such realms as railroad tracks are also indicative of economic growth (or, a step further, progress). Still, as much as qualitative juxtapositions are useful, the numbers in the census polling are cold, hard, non-empirical facts. And, Freedman is quoted to have said that he “does not think that regression can carry much of the burden in a causal argument.”[3]

Conclusion:

              Hence, the United States economy in the postbellum era was marked by a continuing influence of agricultural enterprises enjoined with a newer and quicker acceleration of the manufacturing sector, paving the road for a century of interconnectedness between the two.

       [1] Henry W. Grady, “The South and Her Problems,” speech delivered at the Texas State Fair, Dallas, October 26, 1887, in Life of Henry W. Grady, Including His Writings and Speeches, by Joel Chandler Harris (New York: Cassell Publishing Company, 1890), 112.

      [2] . Alfred D. Chandler Jr., “Organizational Capabilities and the Economic History of the Industrial Enterprise,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 6, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 84 https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.6.3.79

      [3] . David A. Freedman, “Statistical Models and Shoe Leather,” Sociological Methodology 21 (1991): 29 https://doi.org/10.2307/270939