20 
BULLETIN 1068, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
practices are quite well known and there is less friction due to mis- 
understanding between landlords and tenants than one would ex- 
pect. 
The principal objection to this method of renting is that it does not 
induce changes in the rent contract as the tenant develops and as 
he and his landlord learn to appreciate each other better through 
experience. 21 Written contracts would probably induce a greater 
care in working out the details to fit changed conditions. 
Data on the details of the rent contracts of 259 tenants are given 
in Table 12. Of those reporting on the question, only 13.5 per cent 
had written contracts. Only 1 share cropper out of 61 reporting had 
a written contract. Only 4 contracts out of a total of 239 ran for 
more than a year. 
Table 12. — Provision of rent contracts on 259 rented farms. 1 
Nature of contract. Duration of contract. 
Subrenting privi- 
leges. 
Tenure class. 
Verbal. 
Written. 
One year. 
More than 
one year. 
Num- 
ber 
who 
were 
al- 
lowed 
to 
sub- 
rent. 
Num- 
ber 
who 
were 
not al- 
lowed 
to 
sub- 
rent. 
Num- 
Per 
IT SS? 
Der - report- 
ing. 
1 
! Per 
x-^tv, cent of 
XT' those 
Der - report- 
ing. 
Num- 
ber. 
Per 
cent of 
those 
report- 
ing. 
Per 
-v-„™ cent of 
XT those 
Der - report- 
: ing. 
ber 
not 
report- 
ing. 
Share croppers 
60 j 96.8 
155 82.4 
2 20.0 
1 1 1.6 
25 13.3 
8 80.0 
59 
168 
8 
98.3 
98.8 
88.9 
1 | 1. 7 
2 1.2 
1 11.1 
10 
67 
5 
19 
41 
2 
36 
Share tenants 
85 
Owners additional 
13 
1 Frequently no dependable information on certain points could be obtained, hence the number of opera- 
tors on which the data in this table are based varies considerably. 
The privilege of subrenting is not usually allowed, and frequently 
is not mentioned in contracts, since a provision in the landlord's lien 
law makes it illegal to subrent land without the landlord's consent. 
It will be seen, however, that a greater proportion of share tenants 
than of share croppers are allowed to subrent. 
Thirty-six farms were found where the landlord had agreed to 
pay the tenant for improvements put on the place, provided the land- 
lord gave his permission to have the improvements put on the farm. 
Usually it was agreed that when the tenant left the farm the land- 
lord would buy the improvements himself or require the tenant fol- 
lowing to buy them. This provision would unquestionably be de- 
sirable for most rent contracts. Landlords frequently complain 
that they can not repair old improvements or put new ones on the 
21 Many cases were found where absolutely nothing as to details of rent contracts was 
said for years, the tenant simply asking his landlord, some time in the fall, if it were 
agreeable to remain on the farm another year. 
