The Grain Trade in the Old Northwest (review)

BOOK REVIEWS73 return were intrasectoral radier dian intersectoral. Finally, whedier or not it was die social system associated widi plantation slavery on the economic dynamics inherent in the economy there is no a priori basis for rejecting the proposition that slavery and a viable high rate of growth for die southem economy were incompatible premises. There is much of interest in Professor Leiman's study and it is appropriate that it be issued at this time. Interest in the inner structure of southern economic development is at a high point and Cardozo's views and writings are worth reinvestigating even if only to reject them. Ralph Andreano University of Wisconsin The Grain Trade in the Old Northwest. By John G. Clark. (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1966. Pp. xi, 324. $7.50.) This prize-winning volume in die Agricultural History Society's book award competition for 1965 traces the development of die grain trade m Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin—the nation's granary in the antebellum decades. Based on statistics garnered largely from published federal census data, contemporary financial periodicals, local newspapers , and chamber of commerce reports, Clark describes the gradual westward migration of grain culture after 1815 and die subsequent shift m die market outlet in die 1850's from New Orleans via die Ohio-Mississippi river route to New York City via die Great Lakes ports, die Erie Canal, and the railroads. The study focuses on the impact of die transportation revolution, especially railroads, on die grain trade. Railroads, die autiior insists , were the key factor m the development of the trade m the Old Northwest and also die chief cause of die interregional diversion of die trade from river to lake ports. Clark's study supersedes and in places substantially revises the early pioneering work of Louis B. Schmidt, Herbert J. Wunderlich, A. L. Kohlmeier , and Archer C. Hulbert. Economic historians, however, will be disappointed with the basically descriptive approach and the failure to explore the quantitative dimensions of the grain trade. If grain was "die most important sector" of the economy of the Old Northwest from 1815 to 1860, as Clark notes, die fact is not demonstrated widi die analytical precision that one might expect, in view of such studies as Douglass North's on die cotton sector in this same period. Despite die tantalizing hint in die acknowledgments tiiat die autiior was introduced in die course of his research "to die world of computer science," die use of neidier die computer nor die tools and constructs of die econometricists is evident. Indeed, die pioneering work of Robert W. Fogel and Albert Fishlow on die question of railroads and American economic growth is entirely ignored. Fogel and Fishlow , of course, are interested in the national scene, not simply the Lake plains. The issues tiiey raise are similar to Clark's problems, however. (1) Did railroads cause regional reorganization of trade (m this case, grain) 74CIVIL WAR HISTORY and (2) were railroads indispensable to the development of that trade. Clark answers both questions affirmatively, taking the traditional position tiiat railroads "provided the essential catalytic action for growth" (p. 262). But rather than test this proposition empirically, he accepts it on the basis of the correlation between rail construction and increased grain production. Yet, as Fogel has observed in the larger context, die fact of the correlation does not prove that a causal relationship existed, nor does it prove that railroads were the sine qua non for the emergence of the Old Northwest as the granary of the nation. Quite likely, Fogel suggests, cheap wagon and water transportation could have provided "a relatively good substitute for the fabled iron horse." Fishlow's finding that railroads contributed less than 5 per cent to gross national product in 1860 similarly warns against overemphasizing the importance of railroads. Clark's contention that railroads were the ultimate key to success in the rivalry for the grain trade between lake and river ports also needs qualification . The method of conveyance was sometimes less important than the quality of related services and facilities offered to producers and shippers by the competing cities. Evidence in the book substantiates this. Both St. Louis and...