FARMINC IN YAZOO-MISSISSIPPI DELTA. 



13 



n his investment. In case of the share renters the landlord in no 

 roup averaged loss than 7.1 per cent and his rate of interest rose as 

 igh as 16.6 per cent where the tenant had a lahor income as high as 

 1,000. In the case of cash renters the landlord's rate of interest 

 aried within much narrower limits, the lowest being 5.7 per cent, 

 diero the tenants made less than $100, and the highest, 8 per cent, 

 diere the tenants reported a deficit. 



The variations in the rates of the landlords' interest are somewhat 

 •regular owing to the small numbers involved, but in general it is clear 

 tiat the landlord takes the greatest chances and, when successful, 

 saps the highest rewards from share croppers; with share renters the 



IMTOEm 



share: croppers 



SHARE RENTERS 



CASH RENTERS 



*RAT*?r 



25% 

 20% 



10% 



5% 









25% 

 20% 

 15% 

 10% 

 5% 









.ll 







H ■ JL_ 



^ -■■J 





111 



1 11 1 



■ III 



.III 



_H| _ AVEBA86t.t*.^«__ 



mil II III IN IIIIIIIMM 





TENANTS t <n S £ £ £ +■ 

 LABOR - J? „« „■? „? „<!> ° 

 INCOME y o g o o § O 



£ o> °> 5 2 S! i 

 ° °> »}* «►. </>? *>? ° 



U. J A O O o ° 



u p g o o o o 



o _ to in rs Jy> — 



- a $ S 8 S + TENANTS 



C «? *»? "A *>? ♦''P § LABOR 



u - JL o o o o ° 



o ° § 8 ° ° INC0ME 



Fig. 3. — Rate of interest on landlords' investments in relation to tenants' labor income. 



isks are less, and so are the possible rewards; while with cash renters 

 he landlord takes a minimum risk and is assured of a return of 6 or 7 

 er cent on his investment, which is less than he would ordinarily 

 eceive for money loaned in this locality with land as security. 



ENANT'S LABOR INCOME AND LANDLORD'S PROFITS IN RELATION 

 TO ACREAGE IN COTTON AND YIELD PER ACRE. 



It has been seen (page 7) that the share croppers averaged 17 acres 

 a cotton, as compared with 20.9 acres for share renters and 22.6 acres 

 or cash renters. Table IX shows the actual number and the per- 

 entage of each class of tenants that had a cotton acreage within 

 iach specified size group. A derivative table showing the percentage 

 Laving not less than each acreage in cotton is also presented (Table X) . 



