8 BULLETIN 1224, U. S, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
1 shows that the average rent in group 7 was $7.43 and in group 10, 
$7.03, or $0.40 higher in the former area. The average value of 
land was $158 in group 7, but in group 10, which had the lower aver- 
age cash rent, it was $213, or $55 per acre higher than in group 7. 
Again, compare group 10, which is the heart of the Corn Belt, 
with group 37 in the Cotton Belt. The average rent in the latter is 
$9.20 per acre, or $2.17 per acre higher than in group 10; but the 
value per acre in group 37 is only $92 per acre, or $121 less than in 
group 10. Thus it is at once evident that lands which are capable 
of earning the same gross annual income do not necessarily sell for 
the same amount. 
While these two maps and the data on which they are based afford 
a basis for such rough comparisons, they do not give definite infor- 
mation as to what the relationship of rent to value is in any single 
area. They enable us to say that this relationship is different in 
one region than in another without giving any precise information 
on which to make quantitatively accurate comparisons. 
The significant relationship between land income and land value 
is the one which shows the ratio of income to value, or the one which 
shows the per cent of return on the value. If land incomes 
were constant throughout all time this percentage relationship would 
show the long-time rate of return on investments in land. In fact, 
it would be the rate of capitalization. But since land incomes are not 
constant this percentage relationship can not be interpreted in this 
way. It shows only the rate of return on the valuation in a given 
year. This, however, is important. It gives specific information 
for each area and makes accurate comparisons between different 
areas possible. It does not furnish a complete basis for action on 
the part of prospective purchasers of land or of farm mortgages, 
but it furnishes a partial basis. 
The accompanying map (fig. 3) shows the ratio of cash rent to 
land value by counties. It is based upon the rents and the values 
on the one-year tenant farms after all cases of kinship between 
landlord and tenant had been eliminated. 5 The cash rents are 
gross rents, that is, the landlords' expenses — taxation, deprecia- 
tion, and upkeep — have not been deducted. 
The most striking thing about this map is the great variability in 
these ratios. There are large variations between the groups and 
small variations from county to county within each group. The 
groups showing the highest ratios are found in the South and in the 
irrigated regions of the West; those showing the lowest ratios are 
in the Corn Belt. 
Ratio of rent to value by counties is shown in Table 1 in the 
Appendix. In Table 1 on page 7 the group-average ratios are 
given. From this table it will be seen that groups 10 and 14 have 
the lowest ratios and groups 28, 36, and 37 the highest. Not only 
is the variation between the southern groups and the northern 
groups very large, but there is considerable difference between the 
groups within these two areas. Consider the eastern and western 
part of the Corn Belt. Group 7, including the western part of Ohio 
and central Indiana, has an average ratio of 4.7 per cent, while 
group 10 has an average ratio of only 3.3 per cent, or a difference of 
5 A full discussion of the reasons for selecting this group of cash-rented farms will be found on pp. 
55- f>3. 
