THE PRESENT COTTON SYSTEM 185 



products shows that the smaller the percentage of farms 

 in the state growing cotton the higher the value of these 

 products, except in Oklahoma and Texas. 



When we come to account for the lack of diversification 

 we are faced with a vicious circle. Lack of home sup- 

 plies, raised on the farm, increases the need of consump- 

 tion credit. On the other hand, the credit system calls for 

 the production of cotton more or less to the exclusion of 

 other crops. To begin stock raising, fruit farming, or 

 dairying not only requires a larger initial outlay for 

 capital, but the returns are regarded as less immediate 

 and less certain. There exists the question of equipment 

 needed in diversified farming. Fences and barns in the 

 South are often too poor for the farmer to be able to 

 care for live stock or crops of grain. For the small owner 

 such outlays call for more credit. Landlords do not want 

 to go to the expense of building good barns and fences, 

 and the tenant cannot afford to make repairs that will 

 revert to the landlord as soon as his tenure is up. Cotton 

 culture, moreover, is comparatively simple in that poor 

 methods will grow some kind of crop. There is a saying 

 that any fool can grow cotton. On the other hand, the 

 duties of management in dairy farming or stock raising 

 are complex and require constant supervision. Whether 

 equitable or not, a system of division of the product by 

 shares between landlord and tenant has been worked out 

 by custom and law for cotton and tobacco. No generally 

 accepted system of share cropping has been worked out 

 for more complex forms of farming. 



Not only would it take a wise landlord to supervise a 

 dairy or poultry farm, but he would start without pre- 

 cedent as to the system of tenancy. The question leads 

 again to the human elements. The landlord and supply 



