I0 4 ECONOMICS OF LAND TENURE IN GEORGIA [104 



The explanation of this apparent contradiction is to be 

 found in the fact that, in the cropping system, the land- 

 lord supplies not only land, but the other forms of capi- 

 tal as well. While from the static standpoint land and 

 other forms of capital yield the same income per unit, 

 nevertheless, in a dynamic view of the same matter two 

 opposite tendencies are to be seen superimposed upon 

 the fundamental static fact. On the one hand, it is the 

 tendency for land rent to rise per superficial unit; on the 

 other hand, it is the tendency for interest on other forms 

 of capital to fall. So the landlord in the cropping system 

 through the operation of these counterbalancing dy- 

 namic forces has been enabled to realize a return com- 

 mensurate with the economic importance of the produc- 

 tive factors which he has supplied. 



It is natural, therefore, that the "third and fourth" 

 system should have disappeared earlier and more rapidly 

 than the cropping system. It is not surprising, however, 

 to find that the latter has already begun to show evi- 

 dences of decline. But it would be surprising if the crop- 

 ping system should not continue gradually to disappear, 

 even aside from the influence of certain forces, yet to be 

 considered, which are tending to give considerable 

 impetus to the movement away from the system. So 

 much for the first count against the cropping system. 



In the second place, the fact that land is becoming 

 scarcer in relation to population means that greater wis- 

 dom must be brought to bear in its utilization than has 

 heretofore been necessary. In view of the characteristics 

 which were given above as inhering in the average crop- 

 per, it is safe to say that not much land improvement is 

 likely to come through his initiative. Even on the sup- 

 position that he possesses ability and is inclined to make 

 improvements, the fact that he possesses no permanency 



