Prof t' Sharing in Agricultm-e. 
791 
instead of receiving a total, including bonus and wage, of 
53i. 17s. 2d., would have received Bit. lis. Od. — an addition 
of lG.s\ lOd. That is to say, the aforesaid hind paid the local 
rates a sum of IG*-. lOd.. equal to about id. in the pound. 
Supposing the local rates had been as high during the year 
ending May 12, 1891, as they were the first year after I entered 
East Learmouth farm, we should have been called upon to pay 
to the rate collector ibl. more than we have actually paid. In 
that case the hind in question would have paid an additional 
lis. lid., or 1/. lis. 9d. in all, to the local rates, equal to 7d. 
per pound upon his wage of bil. lis. 
I have now brought forward sufficient evidence of the success 
which has attended past and present experiments in the applica- 
tion of the profit-sharing principle to agriculture to induce some 
landowners, I trust, to make further experiments on their own 
estates. It is for them to give the lead. There is nothing to 
prevent tenant-farmei's from applying the principle with equal 
success to their own farms, but it is unreasonable to expect that 
they will be the first to show the way. Tlie principle requires 
extremely accurate bookkeeping, and I regret to think that the 
practice of scientific and accurate bookkeeping is among them 
the exception and not the rule. I am glad, however, to believe 
that the number of farmers who keep careful accounts of all 
their farming operations is growing steadily year by year. It 
is to be hoped that some of them, when a few more experiments 
have proved that the profit-sharing system is as beneficial to 
the employer as to the labourer, will be tempted to put the 
principle into operation on their own holdings : but at present 
they regard, and for some little time to come we must expect 
that they will regard, a profit-sharing plan as something which 
is not for them. Even if they felt so inclined, they might be 
deterred from adopting it by the not unnatural dread that their 
landlords, knowing what profit they make, might be tempted to 
increase the rent. 
Apart from this consideration, however, the tenant-farmer 
argues that he is in a position of disadvantage compared with 
the landowner in applying this principle. The landowner 
who farms his owii land can easily obtain what capital is 
required at 3^ per cent, to 4 per cent., because in his case the 
interest on the borrowed capital is a first charge on the profits 
of the farm — e.j/., at East Learmouth the rent paid annually is 
1,180/., while the charge for interest on the capital invested at 
4 per cent, amounts to only 200?. The security is obviously 
first rate : it would not be easy to find a better. Money can 
