M.—AGRICULTURE. 901 
sary to maintain the property in a condition to produce the rent. The 
farmer, too, may have certain expenses to meet not covered by those 
deducted in arriving at the net output, and his share of this figure has 
also to cover some rate of interest on his working capital besides the 
reward due to him for the exercise of his managerial functions. Thus, 
in considering the distribution of the profits of agriculture between the 
three interests concerned, it is necessary to distinguish between net 
output as defined in the Census of Production and what may be termed 
the net returns. The net returis are ascertained by deducting from the 
net output any additional expenses of the business not already allowed 
for; a sum representing about 7 per cent. interest on the farmer’s capital 
(this figure being based on current rates for money), and one-third of 
the amount of the rent. 
This method for calculating net returns was applied in 1913 to six 
farms scattered all over the country and differing from each other in 
almost every way as to systems of management, soil, locality, and so 
forth, and it was found that the proportions accruing to each of the three 
interests varied hardly at all, and that it would be safe to say that 20 per 
cent. of the total was going to the landlord, 40 per cent. to the farmer, 
_and 40 per cent. to labour. Owing to the disorganisation of the work 
arising out of the War it was not possible to carry on the investigation 
on each of these six farms, but it was continued in connection with one 
of them down to the year 1920. This farm may fairly be described as 
typical of ‘ average to rather indifferent’ conditions. It was a tenant- 
_ farm, about a thousand acres in extent, commanding a rent of less than 
ll. per acre, about three-quarters arable, situated on light to medium 
land, seven miles from a station, and farmed mainly for production of 
corn and meat. Taking the above proportions, namely 40 per cent. 
each to farmer and labour and 20 per cent. to landlord as the pre-war 
rate of distribution, and calling each of these shares 100, the proportion 
of distribution between the three interests varied during the following 
six years as shown below :— 
DISTRIBUTION oF THE Nev RerurRNS FROM FARMING BETWEEN 
LANDLORD, FARMER, AND LABOUR DURING THE YEARS 1913-14—1919-20. 
Year Landlord Farmer Labour 
1913-14 ai gaa F 100 100 100 
1914-15 ; 97 104 99 
1915-16. f ‘ 94 108 98 
1916-17 . : . 91 115 94 
1917-18 . ; é 90 111 99 
1918-19 . ! F 87 115 98 
1919-20. z ; 89 109 102 
The figures are interesting in several ways. In the first place they 
seem to disprove the suggestion referred to above, that labour has been 
taking an undue share of the net returns from farming, for an examina- 
tion of the figures in the ‘ Labour’ column shows that until the 
1921 Q 
