FAMILY LIVING FROM THE FARM 27 
that there was not enough left from the farm receipts after paying 
the farm expenses to allow the interest rate on the farm capital. 
Of course, the farmer had his family living from the farm. 
The value of the family living from the farm averaged less than 
the labor income in 1918 and 1919, but more in 1920, 1921, and 1922. 
In 1918 and 1919 the labor income exceeded the value of the family 
living from the farm on more than one-half of the farms; but in 
1920, 1921, and 1922 the labor income was less than the value of the 
family living from the farm on most of the farms. (See Table 11.) 
VALUE OF THE FARMER'S LABOR 
To those accustomed to buying their entire family living from 
their wage the value at which farmers estimated the worth of their 
labor, as shown in Table 6, may seem low. This figure, however, is 
not intended to represent the entire value of the farmer's labor, but 
only that above the perquisites furnished by the farm. (See defini- 
tion of farmer's labor, p. 14.) The value of the farmer's labor 
above perquisites averaged about one-half more than the value of the 
family living from the farm, which may be understood to mean that 
farmers were cognizant of the important part which the family living 
from the farm played in the compensation for their labors. 
TENURE 
Tenants operated 24 per cent of all the farms included herein; 
owners who rented additional land operated 18 per cent; and owners 
who did not rent additional land, 58 per cent. In some of the 
localities there were but few tenants and in some others they oper- 
ated as many or more than one-half of all the farms. They often 
operated larger farms than owners, the average size of the tenant 
farms being 257 acres and those of owners 190 acres. Tenant and 
owner families each averaged 4.1 adult units. The value of the 
family living from the farm was a little less for tenants than for 
owner families — the value of the food furnished by the farm was 
practically the same, but that of the house rent was less. 
That the farm receipts, the farm income, etc., from the farms 
operated by tenants are divided between tenant and landlord, must 
receive consideration in any application of the data on the preceding 
pages to tenant families. On the tenant farms in this study the 
divisions between tenant and landlord were: 
Tenant 
Landlord 
Receipts 
Farm income 
Family living from the farm. 
Per cent 
48 
kki 
Per cent 
32 
52 
The value of the family living from the farm of tenant families 
was, therefore, much larger in proportion to the tenant's receipts, 
farm income, family income, etc., than indicated by the preceding 
f>ages. This only emphasizes the vital importance of the family 
iving from the farm to the well-being of many tenant farmers, and 
especial encouragement should be extended to tenant farmers to 
