42 
BULLETIN 1068, U. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 
Table 23. — Operators classified .by tenure and by average amount accumulated 
from earnings annually. 
Share croppers. 
Share tenants. 
Owners. 
All operators. 
Operators whose net 
annual accumula- 
tion has heen — 
Per cent 
Number of accu- 
of oper- mulation 
ators. of all 
croppers. 
Number 
of oper- 
ators. 
Per cent 
of aceu- 
mu'ation 
of all 
share 
tenants. 
Number 
of oper- 
ators. 
Per cent 
of accu- 
mulation 
of all 
owners. 
Number 
of oper- 
ators. 
Per cent 
of accu- 
mulation 
of all 
oper- 
ators. 
Less than $200... < 
$200 to $400 
58 | 49.2 
6 j 34. 8 
108 
45 
27 
4 
3 
4 
19.0 
27.4 
28.8 
6.0 
5.7 
13.2 
19 
29 
29 
14 
- 0.5 
15.3 
24.5 
ifi s 
185 
80 
56 
19 
11 
14 
10.0 
21.3 
$400 to $630 
25.3 
$600 to $830 
1 16.0 
12. 1 
-$800 to $1,000 
8 | 12. 6 
10 
9.1 
$1,000 or more 
22.2 
! 
It will be noted, furthermore, that 136 of the operators fall within 
the groups of farmers who saved $200 and less than $600. These 
operators, who are 37.1 per cent of all operators, and who save 46.6 
per cent of the aggregate annual accumulation of all operators, are, 
in the main, what might be called consistent accumulators of wealth. 
They are not outstanding accumulators, on the other hand, nor are 
they failures. 
From Figure 5 it is evident that there is a very great range between 
the two extremes, that of the few high accumulators, and that of the 
large number of low accumulators. This point is illustrated con- 
cretely by the fact that the best 14 accumulators, whose average an- 
nual accumulation from earnings was $1,000 or more, saved annually 
$23,940, as compared with an annual accumulation of $24,105 by 238 
who were the poorest accumulators. In other words, 14, or 3.8 per 
cent of all operators, accumulated annually about as much as 238, or 
64.8 per cent of the 367 operators. The former saved 22.2 per cent of 
the aggregate annual accumulation of all operators; the latter, 22.4 
per cent. 
These facts concerning the extent to which men differ in ability to 
accumulate wealth from their earnings are fundamental in the 
tenure problem. The most important thing brought out by them is 
the dual function of the different stages of tenancy. Not only do 
these different stages function as stepping-stones to the rising oper- 
ator, but they function also as selective agencies, often reversing the 
operator of inferior ability into the lower stages, or else keeping him 
there, where he is subject to the supervision of an operator of proved 
efficiency and capacity. 
This dual functioning of the different stages of tenancy is strik- 
ingly shown in Figure 5. The best accumulators of the two tenant 
classes are the men who have worked for themselves the shortest time ; 
while the poorest accumulators are those who have worked for them- 
