868 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 



Professor Seligman, in selection 281, analyzes these various sources 

 of profits and groups them under four heads, from "ordinary" profits, 

 through chance and speculative profits, to the extraordinary gains 

 exacted by monopolistic force. In the selection which follows, 

 Professor Fetter makes the point that, whatever the precise source 

 of profits, their benefits accrue only to the one who has assumed the 

 direction, and with it the risks, of the business. From this he argues 

 an identity between control of capital and that opportunity which 

 leads on to fortune. 



How well do these theories of profits fit the concrete circumstances 

 of agriculture ? Do the figures seem to indicate that there is an ordi- 

 nary rate of profit which remains to self-directing farmers over and 

 above rent, wages, and interest ? And do the highest labor incomes 

 exceed the earning power of the farm manager on a salary basis? 

 In order to answer the necessary questions touching profits, it is 

 evident that we must keep within our view not merely such material 

 as is presented in this chapter but also the data for farm wages, 

 agricultural rent, and rural interest rates. For even though there is a 

 nominal differentiation between landlord, capitalist, laborer, and 

 entrepreneur, their functions are in diverse ways commingled. Thus, 

 the so-called landlord, under one of the many forms of lease in which 

 he retains a considerable share in the direction of the farm operation 

 and receives a share of its product, is an active entrepreneur and 

 adds a slice of profits to the share of the farm income which he 

 receives as economic rent. Likewise, the capitalist who ventures 

 his capital in farm operations in which he knows there is a consider- 

 able element of risk makes his contracts in such a way that his 

 return will be more than mere interest upon safe investments. He 

 is virtually a partner in the business; shall we not call this super- 

 interest profits ? 



In both these cases, access to profits has come through the posses- 

 sion of capital, whether invested in land or other goods, and indicates 

 ways in which the cream of the returns which come from farming 

 may be diverted from the farmer himself to the landowner, banker, 

 storekeeper, or whoever furnishes the financial assistance by which 

 alone he can put his operations through. This suggests a further 

 question: To what extent is it also true that the lack of capital on 

 the farmer's part is responsible for the passing of control of his product 

 into the hands of others who derive all such profits as come by luck, 

 by speculation, or by monopoly control ? In the long run, do farmers 



