ll»l.'0] RURAL KCONOMICS. 101 



MS farms are grouped by hmd values to deleruiine the average rent per acre 

 paid uuder the different systems on land of the same value and the percentage 

 of land value received as rent hy owners. Four crops — corn, whciit, oats, and 

 hay — were studied from the standpoint of the particular rate of rent charged 

 for land for each, and the results are tabulated under the heads of rent paid 

 under different rent systems, land value and cost of ground at different share- 

 rent rates, yields on land renting at different rates, and relation between land 

 values, yields, and rent paid, in bushels. Some similar data are given with 

 reference to pasture land. 



The conclusions arrived at from this comparative study are that the share 

 tenant has less capital and the cash teiumt nrost, and that the share tenant 

 as a rule gets the more fertile^ land, his crop index being 03 per cent, while 

 that of the cash tenant is 90.0 per cent. The share tenant is a better feeder 

 of stock, makes $138 more labor income than does the cash t(uiant, and pays 

 the landlord nearly twice the interest on the investment that the cash tenant 

 pays. On the same grade of land cash rent in Missouri is in general cheaper 

 than share rent where crop failures are not more frequent than two years in 

 live. It is indicated that cash renting necessitates more of a live-stock type 

 of farming. Some of the advantages attributed to share renting are that th" 

 owner realizes on the average a higher return and has fairly close supervision 

 over his farm, and the tenant usvmlly gets a better farm and does not take 

 the chance of having to pay a fixed rent even if crops fail. The two main dis- 

 advantages are that the owner must undertake the resixmsibillty of deciding 

 what land shall be cropped, and the tenant will be paying very high rent if 

 he is a good farmer and will not be so free in his management as a cash 

 tenant. 



The conditions are about the same for the share-cash tenant as for the share 

 tenant. 



Pre.sent methods of leasing land involve uncertainty as to the length of time 

 the ti'nant can remain on the land, insuthcient h'gal protection of any improve- 

 ments he may make on his own initiative, and protection to the owner against 

 worthless tenants. It is urged that a system of leasing should be worked out 

 which would allow a fair return on his investment to the landlord and on his 

 labor to the tenant, with full protection to both, while at the same time 

 assuring the tenant's realizatiim of hLs ambition to own a farm and strengthen- 

 ing his position as a social force in the comnumity. It is said als(» that some 

 check on speculation in land is needed. Principles which should be i-mbodied 

 In lease contracts are reviewed from the standpoint of good agriculture, noting 

 particularly the duration of lease, reservations, the rent to be paid, manner of 

 paying cash rent, partnership, and twenty definite articles of agreement. 

 Suggestive lease forms for the three systems are given. 



An open letter to bankers, investors, and to experienced farmers, W. H. 

 Cbawford (Salem: Oreg. Land. Settlement Comn., 1920, pp. Ji, figs. 4). — ^This 

 leaflet describes the Farm Home Business Unit planned, equipped with build- 

 ings, live §tock, and machinery, and sold on an easy payment plan to an ex- 

 perienced farmer by the Oregon Land Settlement Connnission in order to estab- 

 lish the feasibility of State financing of land settlement. 



Land settlement, H. A. Smith (2V. 8. Wales Statis. Register, 1917-18, pt. 

 9, pp. SOlSJi'i. — Detailed information is given as to alieuatfon and occupation 

 of land by land divisions and land board districts as well as to rural holdings 

 by divisions and counties of New South Wales. 



American farmers' need for capital, E. H. Thomson {Ann. Amer. Aead. 

 Polit. and Soc. Sci., 87 (1920), No. 176, pp. 89-94).— The author reviews data 



I 



