Unfortunately there are no accurate statistics available for Minnesota on the effect of the seasonal character of mining on wages or on unemployment. The 1910 Census indicates that in January 10,702 men less were employed in forestry than were working in October. If October is made the norm, then January would indicate an unemployment figure of almost 12%. It is possible of course, that those who lost their jobs earned their bread elsewhere, but this is not likely, since January was the slowest month in all areas of employment, with shipping via water come to a halt for the winter months, ore shipments by train stopping, and many hundreds of men in the harbors and on the railroads thus out of work.

The mines were not exclusively responsible for the seasonal unemployment. In the winter of 1914-15, the Duluth, Winnipeg and Pacific Railroad laid off 175 men at Virginia alone. One sawmill used to close down every winter, thus always putting 125 men out of work, while another, the biggest employer after the mines, used to reduce its force for November to April from 1250 men to 900. When it was forced to close down one part of its facilities altogether in 1915, the result was a complete stoppage of all lumber industry in International Falls for the entire winter. Although some communities tried to arrange relief work projects, such as street paving, these were more appropriate for summer, when they were not needed.

In 1914-15, when almost all work came to a standstill, except in a few deep mines, the pinch began to appear threatening. The owners of Virginia forests said they were willing to employ as many as wanted work - at $1 the day. Those who had jobs offered to go on working for mere subsistence to prevent being laid off. Employment offices were crowded with men who wanted work, on any terms whatsoever. "My husband is like a caged lion," said one woman in a WPA document, speaking of him who was without work from December 1915 to the following May: "He has strength and courage, but nowhere where he can use it."

All this occurred in an area with a great density of population, for while a metropolitan area like Minneapolis had a density of 9 per acre, in 1915 the density in Virginia was 66 per acre in the city proper, 22 per acre if the whole city area was considered. This density created housing conditions, reported a doctor who travelled extensively in the area (in an article in The Survey in 1916), which were the worst he had ever seen.

What factors had contributed to cause such appalling conditions? The seasonal nature of mining has already been mentioned,

260