Lorenzo Carter Biography

from the Ohio Historical Society

Lorenzo Carter was the first permanent white settler of Cleveland, Ohio.

Carter was born in 1767 (sometimes reported as 1766) in Rutland, Vermont. In 1797, hoping to lead a more profitable life in the Connecticut Western Reserve, Carter relocated his family, including his wife, Rebecca Fuller, to Cleveland. The Carters arrived in Cleveland on May 2. They were the only white family in Cleveland until April 1800. Several other families settled near Cleveland before this date, but they preferred the higher elevations of land around this community, rather than the swampier terrain of Cleveland.

Carter and his family did succeed on the frontier. They built a sizable log-cabin home, which also served as an inn and, for a time, as a jail. Carter eventually became a sizable landholder in the area, owning several dozen acres of land on both the east and west sides of the Cuyahoga River. Carter built the first log warehouse in Cleveland in 1810, as well as the first ship, the Zephyr, capable of trading sizable amounts of goods on Lake Erie in 1808. The Carters also owned the first frame house in Cleveland, although it burned shortly before completion. Carter also served as a constable and as a major in the Ohio Militia.

Carter died on February 7, 1814

Cleveland Public Library

From the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History

The link is here

 

The CLEVELAND PUBLIC LIBRARY, the third largest research library in the United States, has provided free public access to books and information since 1869. A school district library, it is governed by a seven-member Board of Trustees appointed for seven-year terms by the Cleveland Board of Education.

Although earlier library service had been offered through the Cleveland Municipal School District’s CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL, the present library system opened for business on February 17, 1869 in rented quarters located in the Harrington Block on the southwest corner of PUBLIC SQUARE. Luther M. Oviatt was the first librarian.

The Cleveland Public Library’s innovative, service-oriented philosophy was established by the third and fourth librarians, WILLIAM HOWARD BRETT† and LINDA ANNE EASTMAN†, with the support of long-time Library Board president, lawyer JOHN G. WHITE†. Beginning with Brett, the library worked to bring books to the entire community. It offered open access to bookstacks, services to children and youth, extension work in neighborhood branches and school libraries, and library stations in businesses, factories, and hospitals. Through Brett’s persuasion, Andrew Carnegie donated $590,000 for the construction of 15 branch libraries. Service to the blind began in 1903 with a collection of books in Braille. Specialized reference services to business were developed, leading to the establishment of the Business Information Bureau under ROSE VORMELKER† in 1926.

The Main Library occupied several downtown locations prior to the opening of its landmark building at 325 Superior on May 6, 1925. Bond issues financed the building in 1912 and 1921. Cleveland architects WALKER AND WEEKS were selected in a national competition for the Library, which was to conform to the design of the other civic buildings in Daniel Burnham’s group plan for the MALL.

During the Depression, the Library set all-time attendance records with intensive use of all its resources by Cleveland’s unemployed population. The continuous growth of the Main Library reference and research collections filled the building by the late 1940s. In an effort to alleviate space problems, in 1959 the trustees acquired the adjacent PLAIN DEALER building to house the Business and Science Departments. The area between the two buildings, named Eastman Park in 1937 in honor of Linda A. Eastman, was landscaped as an outdoor reading garden under the leadership of board president Marjorie Jamison in 1960.

By the late 1970s, library use had declined and revenues from the state intangibles tax were no longer sufficient to support the extensive network of neighborhood branches. Branch buildings and their collections deteriorated. In 1974 ERVIN J. GAINES† was appointed the eleventh director; he began a reorganization and revitalization of the Library system. Additional funding was secured through a successful city tax levy in 1975, which supported a $20 million building program to upgrade the branches. Eighteen new or remodeled facilities with attractive new book collections opened.

Gaines oversaw the installation of a computerized on-line bibliographic database to replace the card catalog in 1981. Internal systems and procedures were streamlined and an automated circulation system was introduced. This technology was made available to other local libraries. Cleveland Heights-University Heights was the first to join the CLEVNET system. By 2004 more than 31 libraries from nine Ohio counties, as well as 28 Cuyahoga County Public Libraries were members of the network.

Gaines deferred a major renovation of the Main Library building in favor of the branches, but by the late 1980s the physical deterioration of the older Plain Dealer building placed the collections that it housed at risk. In Sept. 1986, Marilyn Gell Mason was named director and immediately began to plan for a complete modernization of the Main Library complex. In 1991 a $90 million bond issue was approved by Cleveland voters for the renovation of the Walker and Weeks building and for the construction of a new annex to be called the East Wing. In an international architectural competition, the New York firm of Hardy Holzman Pfeiffer was selected to design the replacement for the Business and Science building. The former Plain Dealer structure was demolished in May and June of 1994. The completed Louis Stokes Wing, named in honor of Ohio’s first African-American U.S. Congressperson, was dedicated on April 12, 1997, and included 11 floors totalling 267,000 square feet and more than 30 miles of book shelves for a capacity of 1.3 million books.

Director Mason accelerated the library’s technological innovations with the introduction in 1988 of remote access to the library’s catalog through the Cleveland Public Electronic Library from personal computers in homes and offices.

After 12 years, Mason left her post in 1999. Andrew A. Venable, Jr., who had served as deputy director under Mason for three years, became director in June of the same year. Venable remained committed to technology, making the Cleveland Public Library a national leader in web-based services. In addition to on-line resources such as KnowItNow24X7 and Seniors Connect, the institution was the first public library in the United States to offer eBooks, which are electronic books that can be downloaded on to a laptop or PDA for a set period of time. Venable also remained committed to giving people access to the printed word; in 2001, after a 15-year hiatus, the Library re-launched mobile services with a new, high-tech, handicapped accessible mobile library unit. By 2004, the Mobile Library served 43 different locations, including The City Mission, Cleveland Clinic Children’s Hospital for Rehabilitation, Karamu House, and the Miles Avenue YMCA after-school program.


Cramer, C. H. Open Shelves and Open Minds: A History of the Cleveland Public Library (1972).

Wood, James M. One Hundred and Twenty-Five, 1869-1994: A Celebration of the Cleveland Public Library (1994).

Cleveland Public Library. Annual Reports (2001, 2002, 2003)

 

www.cpl.org

 

History of Regional Government in NE Ohio

From the Encyclopedia of Cleveland

The link is here

REGIONAL GOVERNMENT. The regional government movement was an effort by civic reformers to solve by means of a broader-based government metropolitan problems arising from the dispersion of urban populations from central cities to adjacent suburbs. When suburban growth accelerated after WORLD WAR II, reform coalitions proposed various governing options, with mixed results. In the 1950s approximately 45 proposals calling for a substantial degree of government integration were put on the ballot. However, supporters failed to make a compelling case for change in areas where diverse political interests had to be accommodated, and less than one in four won acceptance. The most successful efforts to create regional government occurred in smaller, more homogeneous urban areas such as Davidson County (Nashville), Tennessee (1962), and Marion County (Indianapolis), Indiana (1969).

Cleveland was Cuyahoga County’s most populous city by the mid-19th century, and as it continued to grow adjacent communities petitioned for annexation in order to obtain its superior municipal services. As Cleveland’s territorial growth slowed after the turn of the century, a movement was launched by the CITIZENS LEAGUE OF GREATER CLEVELAND to install countywide metropolitan government “while 85% of the area’s population still live in Cleveland and before the problems of urban growth engulf us,” as the League put it in 1917. These reformers believed that the conflicting interests present in the city’s diverse population encouraged political separatism and helped create a corrupt and inefficient government controlled by political bosses. They argued that consolidating numerous jurisdictions into a scientifically managed regional government would improve municipal services, lower taxes, and reconcile the differences within urban society under the aegis of a politically influential middle class. In essence, their proposals were designed to remedy the abuses of democratic government by separating the political process from the administrative function.

Local reformers were unable to achieve their goals by enlarging the city through annexation. The lure of better city services was not an incentive to those prosperous SUBURBS which could afford to provide comparable benefits to their residents and which preferred to distance themselves from the city’s burgeoning immigrant population, machine politics, and the pollution generated by its industries. Cleveland’s good-government groups focused on restructuring CUYAHOGA COUNTY GOVERNMENT either by city-county consolidation or by a federative arrangement whereby county government assumed authority over metropolitan problems, while the city retained its local responsibilities.

Originally, county government in Ohio had been organized as an administrative arm of the state, with three county commissioners exercising only those powers granted to them by the state legislature. To obtain the metropolitan government these progressive reformers envisioned, a state constitutional amendment was needed to increase the authority of these administrative units to a municipal level. The Citizens League submitted such an amendment to the Ohio legislature in 1917, allowing city-county consolidation in counties of more than 100,000 population. It was turned down, but was resubmitted at each biennial session until it became clear that opposition from the rural-dominated legislature required a new approach. Regional advocates then proposed a limited grant of power under a county home-rule charter allowing it to administer municipal functions with metropolitan service areas, establish a county legislature to enact ordinances, and reorganize its administrative structure. Despite backing from civic, commercial and farm organizations, Ohio’s General Assembly still refused to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot, but its backers secured enough signatures on initiative petitions to submit it directly to the voters, who approved it in 1933.

The amendment required four separate majorities to adopt a home rule charter which involved transfer of municipal functions to the county: in the county as a whole, in the largest municipality in the county, in the total county area outside the largest municipality, and in each of a majority of the total number of municipalities and townships in the county. The fourth majority allowed small communities to veto a reform desired by the urban majority. Ostensibly designed to ensure a broad consensus of voters if the central city was to lose any of its municipal functions, this added barrier satisfied Ohio’s rural interests, a majority of whom were unwilling to open the door for a megagovernment on the shores of Lake Erie.

Metropolitan home rule proved to be a durable issue in Cuyahoga County; between 1935 and 1980 voters had 6 opportunities to approve some form of county reorganization. When an elected commission wrote the first Cuyahoga County Home Rule Charter in 1935, the central problem was how much and what kind of authority the county government should have. Fervent reformers within the commission, led by MAYO FESLER†, head of the Citizens League, wanted a strong regional authority and sharply restricted municipal powers. Consequently, they presented a borough plan that was close to city-county consolidation. The proposal crystallized opposition from political realists on the commission who advocated a simple county reorganization which needed approval from Cleveland and a majority of the county’s voters. Any transfer of municipal functions required agreement by the four majorities specified in the constitutional amendment. The moderates prevailed, and a carefully worded county home rule charter was submitted to the voters in 1935, calling for a county reorganization with a 9-man council elected at large which could pass ordinances. The council also appointed a county director, a chief executive officer with the authority to manage the county’s administrative functions and select the department heads, eliminating the need for most of the elected county officials. HAROLD H. BURTON†, chairman of the Charter Commission, and popular Republican candidate for mayor, promoted his candidacy and passage of the home rule charter as a cost-cutting measure. Both Burton and the charter received a substantial majority in Cleveland, and the charter was also approved by a 52.9% majority countywide, supported by the eastern suburbs adjacent to Cleveland and outlying enclaves of wealth such as HUNTING VALLEY and GATES MILLS. Opposition came from voters in the semi-developed communities east of the city, together with all the southern and western municipalities in the county. The countywide majority was sufficient for a simple reorganization, but before the charter could be implemented its validity was contested in the case of Howland v. Krause, which reached the Ohio Supreme Court in 1936. The court ruled that the organization of a 9-man council represented a transfer of authority, and all four majorities were required–effectively nullifying the charter, since 47 of the 59 municipalities outside Cleveland had turned it down.

A county home rule charter continued to be an elusive goal. After World War II the accelerated dispersion of Cleveland’s population to the suburbs encouraged reformers to try again. When the voters overwhelmingly approved the formation of a Home Rule Charter commission in 1949 and again in 1958, it was viewed as another projected improvement in municipal life: an improvement comparable to the construction of a downtown airport; the expansion of Cleveland’s public transportation system; and the creation of integrated freeways. Metropolitan reformers agreed. They were concerned about the growing fragmentation of government service units and decision-making powers in the suburbs and the unequal revenue sources available to them. This made the need for regional government even more urgent. In addition, Cleveland was hard pressed to expand its water and sewage disposal systems to meet suburban demands for service, making those municipal functions prime candidates for regionalization.

Democratic mayors THOMAS BURKE† and Anthony Celebrezze counseled a gradual approach to the reform efforts. The elected charter commissions, however, pursued their own political agenda, unwilling to compromise their views on regional government to suit the city’s ethnic-based government. The commissioners, a coalition of good government groups and politicians from both parties, wrote strong metropolitan charters calling for a wholesale reorganization of Cuyahoga County which would expand its political control. Two key provisions in each charter demonstrated the sweeping changes in authority that would occur. An elected legislature would be chosen either at-large (1950) or in combination with district representatives (1959), isolating ward politics from the governing process and ensuring that the growing suburbs would acquire more influence over regional concerns. The reorganized county would have exclusive authority over all the listed municipal functions with regional service areas and the right to determine compensation due Cleveland for the transfer without its consent (1950), or in conjunction with the Common Pleas Court (1959). If approved, these charters could significantly change the political balance of political power within Cuyahoga County.

Charter advocates, led by the Citizens League and the LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS (LWV) OF CLEVELAND, argued that a streamlined county government with efficient management could act on a score of regional improvements which would benefit the entire area. However, they were unable to articulate the genuine sense of crisis needed for such a change. The majority of voters who had elected the charter commissions approved county home rule in theory; but, faced with specific charters, they found the arguments for county reorganization unconvincing. Cleveland officials successfully appealed to city voters, forecasting that the charters would raise their taxes and “rip up” the city’s assets. Many suburbs also were skeptical, viewing comprehensive metropolitan government as a threat to their municipal independence. As a result, the 1950 and 1959 charters failed to receive a majority. Three more attempts were made by the same good-government groups. An alternate form of county government establishing only a legislature and an elected county administrator was turned down by voters in 1969, 1970, and again in 1980 with opposition from a growing number of AFRICAN AMERICANS, unwilling to dilute their newly acquired political authority by participating in a broader based government. In 1980 only 43.7% approved the change, and there were no further attempts to reorganize Cuyahoga County government. It was clear that a majority of voters cared little about overlapping authorities within the county, they were not persuaded that adding a countywide legislature would produce more efficient management or save money, and most importantly, they wanted to retain their access to and control of local government.

While the future of county home rule was being debated during the postwar period, other means were found to solve regional problems. Cuyahoga County quietly expanded its ability to provide significant services in the fields of public health and welfare by agreeing to take over Cleveland’s City Hospital, Hudson School for Boys, and BLOSSOM HILL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS in 1957. Independent single function districts were established in the 1960s and 1970s to manage municipal services such as water pollution control, tax collection, and mass transit–services that existing local governments were unable or unwilling to undertake. These districts had substantial administrative and fiscal autonomy and were usually governed by policymaking boards or commissions, many of them appointed by elected government officials. Most were funded by federal, state, and county grants or from taxes, and several had multicounty authority. These inconspicuous governments solved many of the area’s problems, but their increasing use also added to the complexity of local governance. Critics maintained that districts, using assets created with public funds, were run by virtually independent professional managers, making decisions outside public scrutiny with no accountability to the electorate. Nevertheless, in Cuyahoga County the limited authority granted to them was an acceptable alternative to comprehensive metropolitan reform–one that did not threaten existing political relationships.

The comprehensive charters written in 1950 and 1959 represented the apogee of the regional government movement in Cleveland. However, the elitist reformers who wrote them eschewed substantive negotiations with the city’s cosmopolitan administrations and failed to appease the political sensibilities of county voters who preferred a “grassroots” pattern of dispersed political power. Carrying on the progressive spirit of the failed CITY MANAGER PLAN, they attempted to impose regional solutions that would significantly change political relationships in the area–a single-minded approach that constituted a formidable obstacle to any realistic metropolitan integration.

Mary B. Stavish

Case Western Reserve University

 

Agriculture from the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History

Agriculture from the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History

The link is here

AGRICULTURE. The first settlers in Cuyahoga County followed the usual pioneer routine. They made clearances, planted corn, buckwheat, and rye, fenced in garden patches, and kept oxen, cows, and swine. When the soil had been “tamed” by other crops, they sowed wheat. They carried on their activities in spite of malaria, the ravaging of crops by multitudes of squirrels, and attacks on their livestock by wolves. Many were really professional land clearers who, after a few years, moved on to repeat the farm-making process elsewhere. The remainder, like the incomers who bought partially cleared holdings, became “regular farmers.”

The first settlers in a community under clearance had the advantage of a “newcomers’ market” because later immigrants often had few or no livestock and before long exhausted the food supplies they brought with them, so that they had to buy locally. In parts of Cuyahoga County, the newcomers’ market lasted until ca. 1810. During the WAR OF 1812 Cleveland became an accumulating point for army supplies, and after the war, Cuyahoga County shared the general agricultural depression afflicting the western country.

The depression continued until 1825, when the opening of the Erie Canal allowed shipments of wheat to markets in the east. Later, when the OHIO AND ERIE CANAL opened, there was a ready demand in the adjacent territory for wheat and other farm products, and Cleveland changed from a village to a bustling urban center. At the same time, Cuyahoga County became a region of old cleared farms where most of the occupants engaged in a mixed agriculture, relying on an income from the sale of wheat, wool, and cattle.

The most important local farm specialization was dairying; butter was manufactured for sale to peddlers and storekeepers, but cheese was also made on some farms in Cuyahoga County from the early 1830s. While the county was much less important in cheesemaking than the Western Reserve counties to the east, its output of butter and cheese together in 1839 was valued at $96,083. In 1859 the county’s production of butter was put at 1,162,665 pounds and of cheese at 1,433,727 pounds. During the 1840s, many farmers just outside Cleveland delivered milk to urban residents–some sold at a market or by peddling through the streets, others to milkmen with routes. The Western Reserve dairy farmers bought their cows from drovers in the spring and sold them off in the fall, congratulating themselves on their good judgment when they found a few good milkers among the nondescripts.

A second type of specialization was the commercial growing of orchard fruits by farmers along Lake Erie. By mid-century the fruit, mainly cherries and peaches, was shipped by boat and rail to eastern and western markets. The value of the orchard output in the county in 1839 was placed at $18,179, and in 1859 at $67,437. During the 1840s, grapes were grown in Cleveland and the northernmost townships, primarily as a garden crop, and by 1855 there were about 200 acres of vineyards near EUCLID. There was only a small production of wine; most of the crop was sent by rail as table grapes to eastern and midwestern cities.

A third specialization was market gardening, which involved growing a variety of vegetables, plus strawberries and other small fruits. Limited to the thinly populated parts of Cleveland and its environs, it was carried on almost exclusively by European immigrants and their families, as native-born Americans had no relish for the incessant spading, hoeing, and weeding required. The value of production in 1839 was given as $4,554 (which was probably understated), and in 1859 as $61,192.

In general, Cuyahoga County farmers prospered during the 3 decades preceding the Civil War, and consequently they were able to improve their buildings and buy new types of implements as they became available. Like other Ohio counties, Cuyahoga in the pre-Civil War era had agricultural societies. The first society, organized in 1823, held a few fairs or “cattle shows” but attracted little general support among farmers, disappearing about the 1830s. A second short-lived society was organized in 1834; a third came into being in 1839, held fairs from 1839-41, then suspended operations in 1842. The fourth, established in 1846 under a new state law that provided for a subsidy from the county treasury, was successful mostly because it featured horse trotting at its fairs. This society is still (1995) in existence, but its fairs have long since ceased to be essentially agricultural and have become primarily community homecomings.

In the half-century or so after the Civil War, Cuyahoga County farming became more specialized as increasing urban demand led to a considerable expansion in dairy buttermaking. Dairy cheesemaking was superseded by the factory system, introduced ca. 1863. In 1875 there were 16 of the new factories in operation, and in 1880 about 20, all of which made butter as a sideline. Those west of the CUYAHOGA RIVER were operated by proprietors (“Cheese kings”), and those east of it by cooperatives. The most significant development, however, was the supplying of milk to the Cleveland market, which began in 1868 when the first milk train began operating into Cleveland from Willoughby in Lake County. Originally, passenger trains took on milk cans as an express item at a special rate, but later they might be local freights running on a schedule. As the railroads carried milk cans at a flat rate, the milk suppliers near the city were at a disadvantage, compared to remoter farmers with cheaper land where new dairying country developed ribbon-fashion along the railroads. With dependable transportation available, some dairymen engaged in “winter dairying” (i.e., year-round production), which introduced silage to feed the milking cows through the winter. Although the first silo in Ohio was built at NEWBURGH in 1880, there were few others in Cuyahoga County till after the famous Silo Convention at Cleveland in 1889, when silo construction flourished. By the mid-1890s, Cuyahoga reputedly had more silos than any other Ohio county.

As soon as the milk-train system was established, dairymen ceased to sell milk directly to consumers but marketed it through middlemen in the city, some of whom established depots near the stations for buying and shipping the product. In a subsequent variation, they set up “creameries”–skimming stations with machinery to separate cream from milk. As the milk depots and creameries operated throughout the year and paid better for their supplies than did the cheese factories, the factories began to shut down or sold their facilities to their rivals; by the mid-1890s none remained in the county.

Farmers involved in the milk industry found that the returns were regular and dependable; however, the economic security they gained was offset by an erosion of their independence. They had to comply with the increasingly strict regulations of the CLEVELAND BOARD OF HEALTH, and to be competitive with other suppliers; they had to replace their ordinary cows with those of popular dairy breeds. When they shipped directly to dealers, they had to adjust their workday to the milk-train schedules, which were usually arranged so that milk would arrive in the city by 8 A.M. Perhaps worst of all, they were disposing of a perishable product to buyers who were interested in keeping prices low and who found ways of having the suppliers assume all the hazards of the market.

In response to the unsatisfactory dealer-farmer relationship, some suppliers in the Cleveland milkshed organized the Northern Ohio Milk Producers’ Assn. in 1901 to establish a fair price for milk. Although the group had some success in public relations, its members tended to make individual contracts with dealers whenever it was to their advantage to do so. However, when the Cleveland milk dealers refused to raise prices to reflect the increasing costs of labor and feed in 1916, the association suddenly revived and provided leadership in a short strike, culminating in a settlement which recognized the association as a contracting agent. Soon it began to function as the Ohio Farmers’ Cooperative Milk Co., one of several such organizations in Ohio.

After the Civil War, commercial orchard production declined; cherries, peaches, pears, and plums became uncertain crops because of insect and fungus problems, and many of the orchardists turned wholly or partially to viticulture. By 1890 there were 5,000 acres of vineyards in the county, stretching somewhat intermittently from the Lake County line westward to the market gardens on the outskirts of Cleveland, with a smaller development west of the city. At least during the 1870s, more table grapes were being shipped from COLLAMER(southwest of Euclid) than from any other railroad station in the county; its only near rival was Dover (now WESTLAKE). Grape production in the county reached its maximum in 1899 at 11,591 tons, declining to 3,753 tons in 1919.

Vegetable growing also expanded after the Civil War. Potatoes, always important for farm consumption, developed commercial significance–partly because of market availability. The crop also fit into whatever rotation was being used, left the soil in good tilth, and did not demand excessive labor when farmers bought the available planters, sprayers, and diggers. Although in 1909 Cuyahoga was the leading potato producing county in Ohio, with 1,141,469 bushels, the industry fell off rapidly, with 1919 production only 35.4% of what it had been 10 years before. The decline was attributable to the increasing prevalence of fungus diseases and to soil depletion. Continued lack of profitability in later years reduced its commercial production further.

The market-garden specialty (now usually called truck farming) grew in the Cleveland area in proportion to the increasing population. Of particular importance was the forcing industry, the growing of vegetables under glass for the out-of-season market. In 1900 truck growers had about 21 acres in hotbeds or cold frames and 4 acres in greenhouses, the latter concentrated in the Brooklyn area.

Cuyahoga County agriculture in the years after World War I was in some respects simply part of the national pattern, with a general increase in mechanization. Fundamentally, however, the course of its development was determined by the continued expansion of metropolitan Cleveland. The table shows the decline in farmland acreage and the dwindling number of farms from 1900 on. The reversion to farmland in the 1930s was attributable to the fact that many failed real estate promotions were sold or rented to farmers.

Concurrently, there was a change in the concept of what was meant by a farm. Ca. 1920, with the exception of a few “showplaces” belonging to wealthy Clevelanders, the farms were still operated in conventional fashion by either owner or tenant. Farms of under 10 acres constituted about 10% of the total, but these were usually in intensively cultivated truck crops. With the advent of the automobile, country dwellers could work in the urban sector, and city wage earners could move miles beyond the suburbs. As a result, subdivisions appeared along the roads to the metropolis, with landlords selling off lots on their frontage. Though these parcels were classified as farms, in some cases they served as sites for antique stores, beauty parlors, dog kennels, and other small enterprises, and in many instances the occupants used them primarily as dormitories. Thus, in 1949 (the first year for which such figures are available) there were 136 farms in the county reporting no sales whatever of agricultural produce, and 563 “part-time farms” that reported sales of less than $400. The areas cultivated on the low output farms were so small that there were 404 farms in the county without a tractor, a horse, or a mule.

Changing times made for important developments in the market-milk industry. Beginning in 1917, owners of heavy trucks competed in milk hauling with the railroads and trolley lines, offering the advantages of charging $.04 a can less, picking up the cans from stands at the farmers’ gates, and returning them later in the day. As early as 1919, wherever there were hardtop roads the system of taking cans to rail stations or milk depots was almost a thing of the past. By 1925 some of the trucking lines collecting milk for the Cleveland market reached as far as Ashtabula and Trumbull counties, and during subsequent years, Cuyahoga County milk producers, like other dairymen, suffered from the perennial surplus-milk problem. Perhaps their worst problem was that the rising price of land made dairying uneconomical. The average value of Cuyahoga County farmland per acre (with buildings) was $359 in 1945, $747 in 1950, $1,064 in 1954, and $1,650 in 1959. For these reasons, market-milk production declined sharply after World War II. In 1944, 236 farms sold a total of 9,094,182 lbs. of milk; in 1954, 47 farms sold a total of 4,508,254 lbs.; and in 1959, 10 farms sold a total of 124,190 lbs. In 1964 there were only 100 milk cows reported, on only 7 farms; the industry was gone.

The expansion of the metropolis steadily nibbled away at the fruit-growing areas. From the 1920s on, the only orchard product worth mention was apples, and by 1959 their average value per farm reporting was only about $75. In 1978 there were still orchards on 25 farms, but collectively they comprised only 136 rundown acres. Viticulture also was declining. The production of grapes in the county was 2,849 tons in 1939, and 213 tons in 1978 from the 17 farms still in the business.

While the market-milk and the horticultural industries were disappearing, the truck-farming business continued to expand. Some truck farmers acquired vehicles, enabling them to extend the sphere of market gardening 15 mi. or so into the rural areas, where they often resorted to direct marketing, erecting roadside stands. Even though expenses in the industry were high, operators increased their yields as a consequence of better cultural practices and more mechanization, and often benefited from appreciating land values. As roads improved, they extended their marketing area to include urban centers other than Cleveland, and by selling through cooperative associations they got a larger share of the consumer’s dollar. After World War II, there was a steady decline in open-air vegetable growing as holding after holding was swallowed up by the advance of the metropolis. Truck-farming production, however, continued to increase because many of the open-air growers added to their facilities and entered the forcing business.

The greenhouse sector of truck farming, at least in its concentration in the BROOKLYN (Old Brooklyn) community, was not displaced by urban development. Nevertheless, the rising price of land meant that new facilities tended to be in other areas, especially aroundOLMSTED FALLS. In the mid-1920s Cuyahoga was supposed to have about 160 acres under glass–more than any other American county. The maximum area under glass appears to have been reached ca. 1959, when the census reported 236 acres. Although some of the greenhouses specialized in flowers for the florist trade, most were devoted to lettuce, tomatoes, and cucumbers. By 1982 most of the greenhouse operators were corporations or partnerships; that year there were 16 farms (greenhouse establishments) having sales of over $250,000 each, with an average of $542,813. The county then had 122.5 acres under glass and an output of “nursery and greenhouse products” valued at $11,673,000, or 89.5% of the stated agricultural sales ($13,039,000) of the county.

Until well into the 20th century, living conditions among Cuyahoga County farmers were similar to those in other parts of Ohio. Much of the old isolation had disappeared with the advent of organizations such as the Grange in the 1870s, Farmers’ Institutes in the 1880s, and the introduction of the telephone and free mail delivery. After World War I there was a great improvement in amenities throughout the rural area. In 1930 almost half the farm dwellings had water piped in. Of the 1,589 farms enumerated in the 1950 census, 1,380 had telephones, 1,531 had electricity from power lines, and 1,490 were on hardtop roads. During the 1920s, nearly every farm had an automobile or a pickup truck or both, and practically all had radios, as they would later have televisions. The few one-room schools left in the early 1920s were soon replaced by consolidated ones. There were new organizations, some involved in cooperative marketing, and others education and social, such as the 4-H clubs; many, however, became victims of advancing urbanization.

The steady encroachment of metropolitan Cleveland meant that in 1982 the agricultural census classified only 8,854 acres (13.8 sq. mi.) in the county as “land in farms,” much of it fragmented by limited-access roads, parkways, airports, golf courses, parks, reservoirs, and wasteland. While the agriculture was concentrated in greenhouse operation and other truck farming, there were perhaps still a dozen farms engaged in general husbandry, selling soybeans, shelled corn, melons, sweet corn, and some livestock. Of the 8,854 acres of farmland, 2,364 were in woods. Of the remaining area–classified as “cropland”–336 acres were used only as pasture, and 959 acres were lying idle, which suggested that the land was unprofitable for agricultural purposes or that it was being held for speculation, or both.

Although the 1982 census showed that Cuyahoga County had 193 farms, only 135 had any “harvested cropland.” As had been the pattern since the 1920s, many of the operators engaged in agriculture only part-time or not at all. No doubt some commuted throughout the week to factory or other jobs in the Cleveland or Akron area. All in all, outside the truck-farming sector, Cuyahoga County agriculture in the 1980s had become a marginal operation. As in other old rural complexes surrounding a megalopolis, the prospects were for a gradual further decline.

Robert L. Jones

 

Howard Metzenbaum from the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History

The link is here

METZENBAUM, HOWARD MORTON (4 June 1917 – 12 March 2008), a staunchly liberal U.S. Senator during an era of conservative political ascendency associated with the presidency of Ronald Reagan. Born in Cleveland to Anna and Charles Metzenbaum, Howard balanced school work with business by fetching his neighbors’ groceries for tips. After graduating from Glenville High School, Metzenbaum attended The Ohio State University, where he would earn both bachelors (1939) and law degree (1941). Metzenbaum was able to pay his way through college by selling flowers outside of Ohio Stadium and along High Street, the University’s main thoroughfare. He would use his time off school in the summers to travel the state selling personal hygiene goods.

Although he received his law degree in 1941, Metzenbaum found his Jewish faith prevented potential law firms from hiring him. Facing bitter anti-Semitism, Metzenbaum returned to Cleveland and found employment representing more open minded labor union. Metzenbaum represented and filed tax returns for the Communications Workers of America and the International Association of Machinists before entering politics in 1943 by winning a seat in the Ohio House as a Democrat. Metzenbaum married Shirley Turoff on August 8, 1946. Metzenbaum used his success to catapult him into the Ohio Senate in 1947, but left politics in 1950 to pursue wealth in private enterprise.

Metzenbaum and lifelong friend Alva T. (Ted) Bonda founded Airport Parking Company of America (APCOA) in 1949. In 1951 they secured a contract to operate at CLEVELAND-HOPKINS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, inaugurating the airport parking industry. Metzenbaum earned his fortune through APCOA, eventually selling the business to International Telephone & Telegraph (ITT) in 1966. His business success allowed Mezenbaum to settle in the Shaker Heights suburban community with his wife. Shirley gave birth to four daughters during these years: Barbara, Susan, Shelley, and Amy.

The world of politics, however, always beckoned. In 1958, Metzenbaum earned political capital as the campaign manager for Stephen M. Young’s successful challenge to Republican Senator and former Vice-Presidential candidate (1944) John Bricker. Metzenbaum returned as Young’s campaign manager, successfully earning his candidate re-election in 1964. When Young announced he would not seek a third term, Metzenbaum readied his own candidacy for the 1970 election. Metzenbaum, however, faced a stiff challenge in the Democratic primary when astronaut John H. Glenn, Jr. announced his desire to seek the office as a Democrat. Although he narrowly defeated Glenn in the primary (49%-51%), Metzenbaum lost the general election to Republican candidate Robert Taft, Jr., heir to the Taft political family.

Undaunted, Metzenbaum returned to private business in Cleveland, where he and David Skylar purchased the suburban Cleveland chainSUN NEWSPAPERS. Fate handed Metzenbaum a US Senate seat in 1974, when Ohio’s Democratic Governor, Jack Gilligan, appointed Metzenbaum to fill the seat vacated by Senator William B. Saxbe, who had accepted Richard Nixon’s offer to serve as US Attorney General. The turn of events proved a mixed blessing, for Metzenbaum was forced to immediately defend the expiring seat in the 1974 Democratic primary. Again he faced John Glenn, but after a grueling campaign that lead to a permanent rift between the two men Glenn prevailed and went on to win the general election.

Two years later Metzenbaum successfully challenged Robert Taft in a rematch of the close 1970 campaign, winning the general election. Although three decades removed from his first stint in politics, Metzenbaum championed issues familiar to aging New Deal Democrats. Metzenbaum played a prominent role in the passage of legislation requiring advance notice of plant closing, known as the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, various gun control laws, pension protection, safety standards for infant formula, and nutrition labels on food products. Metzenbaum’s staunchly liberal agenda attracted the ire of Republicans and even some fellow Democrats, but his fierce opposition to conservative legislation earned him a reputation as “Senator No.”

Metzenbaum was a master of the filibuster, often employing it to disrupt legislation he dubbed “Christmas tree bills,” decorated with pet projects or corporate loopholes. When his filibusters failed, Metzenbaum invented a new stalling tactic. When a two week filibuster against a bill to lift price controls on natural gas was broken, Metzenbaum loaded the bill with hundreds of amendments and demanded a roll-call vote on each one, effectively killing the legislation. Metzenbaum’s tactics earned him both respect and scorn from his colleagues on the Hill. While Senator Bob Dole referred to Metzenbaum as “the commissioner,” Senator Ted Stevens called him a “pain in the ass.”

Metzenbaum also attempted to bring a measure of culture to Washington, D.C. during his years in the Senate. His office was decorated with modern art and he often held mixers there where artists such as painter Robert Rauschenberg and folk singer Mary Travis were guests of honor for assembled lawmakers, lobbyists, and reporters. His frayed relationship with John Glenn soon thawed, too, when in 1983 Metzenbaum endorsed Glenn in his unsuccessful run for the Presidency. Glenn returned the favor, publicly defending Metzenbaum after Cleveland Mayor George Voinovich accused the Senator of being soft on child pornography during the 1988 election.

Metzenbaum continued to endure anti-Semitic remarks throughout his career. Metzenbaum?s fierce opposition to newly-elected President Regan’s nominees raised tensions on the Capital. Senator Ernest Hollings of South Carolina called Metzenbaum the “senator from B’nai Brith” on the Senate floor during the 1981 session, an astonishing insult in the otherwise sober , chamber. This and other events pushed Metzenbaum to advocate for anti-discrimination policy, such as the Howard M. Metzenbaum Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994, which prohibits federally-funded adoption agencies from delaying or denying child placement on the grounds of race or ethnicity.

Metzenbaum announced he would not seek a fourth term, making way for a run by his son-in-law, Joel Hyatt, who lost the general election to Republican Mike DeWine. Metzenbaum remained active during his retirement from elected office, serving as a part-time president of the non-profit Consumer Federation of America. He also served as a board member of the American Cancer Society, Northern Ohio Children’s Performing Music Foundation, Inc., and acted as a fellow at Brandeis University. He also spent much of his retirement with his family playing tennis, swimming, and travelling. He and his wife Shirley celebrated their 60th wedding anniversary in 2006, before his health began to decline.

He died at his family home in Aventury, Florida, on March 12, 2008. He was interred in Mayfield Cemetery in Cleveland Heights, Ohio.


Diemer, Tom, Fighting the Unbeatable Foe: Howard Metzenbaum of Ohio, the Washington Years (Kent: Kent State University Press, 2008)


 

Last Modified: 24 Jul 2012 10:40:15 AM

Playhouse Square Documentaries

Documentary #1

More Than Just a Show – a Playhouse Square story

A mini-documentary about the history and community impact of the not-for-profit PlayhouseSquare, plus a glimpse behind the scenes at its places and people.

The link is here

 

Documentary #2

Playhouse Square Documentary

A short charming documentary made by Cleveland State students about the Playhouse Square theaters

The link is here

 

 

Teaching Cleveland Digital