50 



QUESTIONS OF PRINCIPLE 



the cost of cleaning the land for the next succession of crops. 

 As to the division of the cost between them, only an arbitrary 

 basis has been found possible hitherto. The charge may be 

 divided equally between the crops, that is to say, in a four 

 course rotation 75 per cent, of the cleaning cost would be 

 carried forward from the first crop, 50 per cent, from the 

 second, 25 per cent, from the third, and nothing from the 

 fourth. (See A.) Or it may be argued that the first crop 

 will derive a much larger benefit from the cleaning opera- 

 tions than the subsequent ones, and the basis of distribution 

 adopted by the author, and employed in the illustrations of 

 farming costs appended, is that of charging 50 per cent, 

 of the total cleaning cost to the first crop, 50 per cent, of 

 the remainder (i. e. 25 per cent, of the total) to the second 

 crop, and to divide the residue equally between the last 

 two crops (i. e. 12J per cent. each). (See B.) By experiment 

 upon the farm it would be a fairly simple matter to deter- 

 mine the actual respective shares of each crop in the rotation 

 in the cleaning benefit ; in the absence of this information 

 the second of the above principles may be preferred to 

 the first. 



DIVISION OF THE COST OP CLEANING LAND OVER THE CROPS IN A FOUR- 

 COURSE ROTATION 



It may be pointed out that the necessity for apportioning 

 the cost of this work is quite independent of its actual 

 advantage to the land. After a wet and difficult season, 

 which leaves the land almost as dirty as it was at the begin- 

 ning, a tenant-right valuer may well contend that nothing 

 is due to an outgoing tenant under this head, on the ground 

 that no benefit to the incomer has accrued from the work. 



