66 LAND TENURE 



land is already being turned back to the ownership of the men who cultivate 

 the soil but at the expense of a state subsidy costing the treasury of the 

 United Kingdom millions of pounds. New Zealand and Australia have been 

 legislating for many years to break up large land holdings and prevent the 

 growth of landlordism. 



"The State of Wisconsin cannot afford to permit the growth of a landed 

 aristocracy or the creating of a permanent class of tenant-farmers. World- 

 wide experience warns against the social and economic dangers in allowing 

 such conditions. The question is what preventative measure shall the state 

 adopt? ... It is a serious question, as urged by Dr. Richard T. Ely, whether 

 or not a state could maintain a system of state landlordism in the face of the 

 united opposition of the majority of its tenants. 



"There are four ways of attacking the farm tenant problem," said the 

 Board: "(1) Assume farm tenancy to be inevitable. Make provisions to im- 

 prove the conditions of tenancy, such as long-time leases, legal regulation of 

 rights and duties of landlord and tenant. (2) Assume farm tenancy to be 

 inevitable. Make the state itself the landlord. (3) Assume tenancy to be 

 undesirable and unnecessary. The State may adopt a taxing system to break 

 up landlordism and land speculation. (4) Assume tenancy to be undesirable 

 and unnecessary. The State may use state-aided land purchase, on long time 

 farm mortgage loans at low rates of interest, thus enabling tenants to become 

 land owners. The fourth method is recommended by the Wisconsin Board as 

 the "only adequate method of attacking the problem which is capable of 

 immediate adaption to conditions in Wisconsin." 



Corporation Farming. Corporation farming has long been 

 known in all parts of the United States. No records are available 

 showing what per cent of such corporations fail and what per cent 

 succeed. An increasing number of railroad and industrial corpora- 

 tions are now operating large farms largely for experimental pur- 

 poses. The International Harvester Company is conspicuous for 

 its work in this line. The Portland Cement Company owns large 

 tracts of land all over the United States, not originally purchased 

 for agricultural purposes, but now being used for crop production. 

 A general manager supervises these farms, using up-to-date busi- 

 ness methods in developing farm properties, including cost account 

 keeping. A New York financial editor in speaking of this situation 

 expresses himself thus hopefully: 



"If one company can operate farms all over the country under a central 

 office, using the most modern business methods of development and marketing, 

 the example is likely to be followed. Just why a big company could not buy 

 extensive land and work it in the same way is hard to understand. It might 

 be a relief to many struggling farmers whose incomes often become less and 

 less each year, to join the payroll of a Farm Corporation and be sure of a 

 salary every two weeks . . . The economic advantages are obvious, but the 

 social advantages would be equally great. An intelligently conducted farming 

 corporation would out of self interest finda way to make rural lifemore attractive 

 for its employees, and by both example and practice would be able to reverse 

 the city- ward tendency of our population, which is one of the great evils of 

 the present day in America. The picture of a great farm scientifically and 

 sympathetically conducted by a wise and progressive corporation is in fact 



