Economic Aspects \ \ 3 



uncritical reading of the facts could lead to any other conclusion. 

 The great majority of the allotment holders and small and medium 

 farmers, not being primarily interested in corn-production, suffered 

 much less than the large and very large farmers. 



When this is understood it becomes possible to state the economic 

 causes of the tendency to cease enlarging farms and to revive the 

 system of small holdings. Landowners were forced to recognise that 

 from about 1880, with the change in market conditions, the question 

 of the unit of holding had entered on a new phase. Small farms, 

 if devoted to the now profitable branches of agriculture (as they were 

 in most cases), offered higher returns than large farms. The demand 

 for them was stronger than that for large farms. Less was heard of 

 distress among the small farmers than among their larger competitors. 

 Their rents as a rule dropped less. All this is surely an adequate 

 explanation of the tendency in question. It is true that it was only 

 a tendency, and certain counteracting forces remain to be considered. 

 But at least it is clear that under these conditions landlords, so far as 

 they were moved by economic considerations, considered themselves 

 fortunate if their property mainly consisted of small farms, and 

 attempted no further consolidation or "engrossing." The economic 

 motive for division was provided by the fact that under modern 

 conditions the small holdings system had become economically 

 desirable. 



