FARMING IN YAZOO—MISSISSIPPI DELTA. 1h 
er cent made less than $100; but only a little more than one-half 
(53 per cent) had labor incomes of between $100 and $499, and 37 per 
cent made $500 or more, as many as 25, or 8.4 per cent, being in the 
$1,000 and over class. Thus the share croppers run a smaller risk of 
losses or of incomes below $100, but on the other hand only one-tenth 
of them rise above $500 and almost none above $1,000. In the case 
of the share renters there are more failures, more very small incomes, 
but also more incomes of over $500; while of the cash renters about 
- one-tenth make less than $100, a little more than one-haif make 
between $100 and $499, and more than one-third make $500 or more. 
Table VII brings out the differences between the earnings of the 
three classes of tenants in a different manner. This table shows what 
SHARE G3 CROPPERS SHARE 233 RENTERS CASH ==] RENTERS 
LABOR DEFICIT UNDER #10 oT S S200 eee SrGaiomitecaToNsoaoIo eon Labor} 
INCOME, $100 S109. $599 8699 $799 $899 $999 OVER _ INCOME} 
Fia. 2.—Percentage of tenants in each labor income group. 
proportion of each class of tenants made labor incomes of not less 
than $100, not less than $200, etc. Of the share croppers 84.3 per cent 
_ made at least $200, as compared with 77.3 per cent of the share renters 
and 80.8 per cent of the cash renters, but of the share croppers only 
24.6 per cent made as much as $400, of the share renters 43.5 per cent 
and of the cash renters 50.1 per cent; so that cash renters had twice 
as good a chance of making not less than $400 for their labor as did 
share croppers. The difference in favor of the cash renters becomes 
even greater in the higher income groups, the share renters always 
occupying an intermediate position between the other two classes. 
Por instance, only one share cropper in a hundred made as much as 
$800, as compared with 7 share renters and 15 cash renters; only one 
share cropper in 200 made a labor income of as much as $1,000, as 
