DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 325 



$7,20 ; that of implements and machinery from $0,89 to ^1.44 ; 

 and that of live stock from $3.67 to ^5.60. 



Another way to show the movement is to study the average 

 value of farm property per farm. This, however, is not as satisfac- 

 tory a basis as the average value per acre of land, because of the 

 double movement. Between 1900 and 19 10 the average size of 

 farms decreased from 146.2 acres to 138.1 acres. This decrease of 

 8.1 acres, or 5.5 per cent, in the average size of farms counter- 

 balanced in part the increase in the average value of all farm 

 property per farm. On the other hand, the average acreage of 

 improved land per farm increased 4,2 per cent, the decrease 

 being entirely in the unimproved land. The increases, however, 

 are not as large as they would have been had the farms remained 

 the same in size. The average value of all farm property per 

 farm for all farms in the United States was $3563 in 1900, 

 whereas in 19 10 it was $6444. The increase in the value of 

 land alone was from $2276 per farm to $4476 per farm ; that 

 of buildings was from ^620 to $994 ; that of implements and 

 machinery was from $131 to ^199; and that of live stock was 

 from $536 to $774. 



When all of these facts are brought together, it becomes clear 

 that during the first ten years of the new century the increase in 

 quantity of farm property was very small. I have already noted 

 that the increase in the acreage of land in farms was only 4.8 per 

 cent. Since the number of farms increased only 10.9 per cent, I 

 think we may safely assume that the number of sets of farm 

 buildings increased probably not more than 10.9 per cent. Doubt- 

 less during the decade there were many additional buildings 

 added to those already on farms ; but the number of new build- 

 ings erected was probably far short of the increase reported in 

 value of the farm buildings. The increase in the acreage of 

 improved land in farms was given as 15.4 per cent. We may 

 assume that the increase in the quantity of implements and ma- 

 chinery was at least 15.4 per cent, and since the use of imple- 

 ments and machinery is increasing in agriculture more or less 

 rapidly, we may assume that each farm has added to its supply of 



