3. Atkeson, T. C. — Semi-Centennial History of the 



Patrons of Husbandry (1916). 



4. Bemis, E. W. — The Discontent of the Farmer, 



in The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. I 

 (1893), pp. 193-213. 



5. Buck, S. J.- — The Granger Movement, in Har- 



vard Historical Studies, Vol. XIX (1913). 

 The best treatment of this subject. 



6. Butterfield, K. L. — Farmers' Social Organisa- 



tions, in Bailey's Cyclopedia of American 

 Agriculture, Vol. IV, pp. 289-297. 

 The Grange, in The Forum, Vol. XXXI (1901), 

 pp. 231-24-2. 



7. Detrick. C. R. — Effects of the Granger Acts, in 



The Journal of Political Economy, Vol, II 

 (1903), pp. 237-256. 



8. Emerick, C. Y.—An Analysis of Agricultural 



Discontent in the United States, in The Po- 

 litical Science Quarterly, Vol. XI (1896), pp. 

 433-463, 601-639; XII (1897), pp. 93-127. 

 Reprinted in Carver's Selected Readings in 

 Rural Economics, pp. 699-763. 



9. Martin, E. W. — History of the Grange Move- 



ment (1874). 



10. Periam, Jonathan. — The Groundsicell (1874). 



11. Pierson, C. W. — The Rise of the Granger Move- 



ment, in Popidar Science Monthly. Vol. 

 XXXII (1897), pp. 199-208. Reprinted in 

 Carver's Selected Readings in Rural Eco- 

 nomics, pp. 645-657. 

 The Outcome of the Granger Movement, in 

 Popular Science Monthly, Vol, XXXII 

 (1888), pp. 368-373. Reprinted in Carver's 

 Selected Readings in Rural Economics, pp. 

 658-665. 



12. Condition of Agriculture in the Cotton States, in 



Annual Report of the United States Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture (1874), pp. 215-238. 

 80 



