SOME ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF FARM OWNERSHIP 5 
TABLE 3.—Summary of rent items, selected farms, Cass County, N. Dak., 
1896-1920 
[Totals for 25 years as shown on landowners’ books J] 
DEBITS TO TENANTS’? ACCOUNTS CREDITS TO TENANTS’ ACCOUNTS 
Overhead___~ Sy Nd 2 ie a SI $215, 466 | Crops delivered ____ $1, 070, 059 
Supervision and Wheat) cae $713, 463 
general expense_ $147, 885 Barley} ls. =25¢ — 102, 527 
REC DaInS tS 66, 079 MX eee. eee Be 101, 902 
Insurance ______~ 1, 502 Ontst sae ort 95, 423 
Sphenraenlise- seer Lee: | oe 372, 869 Obi feted aes Set 34, 910 
necd= a oe 250, Lil Epa ye et eee 10, 906 
Leo eee 54, 680 IRV .C ji 2 ee aE . 10,928 
Phreshing, 22s 54, 141 Other (ereditg 29 ara ee | 17, 386 
Summer fallow- j Pasture rent___ 5, O47 
TS Se 5, 650 Miscellaneous__ 12, 339 ———_—_———_ 
Miscellaneous____ 5, 227 ———_—_ Totals. Seb worries 1, O87, 445 
Loy) een Se ee 588, 335 : 
Primary) net rents; (tenants’ credit balance). =.____ 8 ee $499, 110 
Reales veal Ong. taxes. =. eo cynee te ee Te ee oe 64. 169 
mecondaryrmeiarents--! osal see fot 2 TS i eS te 434, 941 
PAGEC VEATS) ya eeee Sete FTES 7 eC PONT. ei ee byl eppen _ ar ae 237, 440 
Net rents per acre-year: 
EATEN AUER ee renee cae SPE ERA he MSL) EET VEE CRON! eb $2.10 
SCCONGARY: pam a. sk Weve «vel ee bey oie See pe ce pe oe Bd ee 1. 90 
1 The acreage of the 16 selected farms was 9,600 during the period 1900-1920. Of this 
area, 9,280 acres were in farms included in 1898—99, and 8,640 in farms included in 
1896-97. 
It is worth noting, however, that although this land was rented on 
a basis affording the owners an apparent gross return of 50 per 
cent of the crop values, the ratio of net rent to the value of divided 
crops was 23 per cent when computed without deduction of taxes 
and but a little more than 20 per cent when full deduction is made for 
all real-estate and road tax paid on this land. If account is taken 
of crops which the tenants were excused from sharing in drought 
years and of products raised without obligation at any time to share 
them, it is safe to say that less than a fifth of the gross production 
of the farms came to the landowners as primary net rent, and little 
more than a sixth can be attributed to this land as secondary het rent. 
The difference between primary net rent and secondary net rent 
is the full amount of real-estate and road taxes, regardless of whether 
paid in either the first or the last instance by owners or by tenants. 
Over the 25 years it appears that the amount of real-estate and road 
taxes was 25 cents an acre in an average year. As a consequence of 
these taxes, secondary net rents were one-eighth less than primary 
net rents, GROSS v. NET INCREMENTS 
The valuation of this farm real estate in 1896 was $18.50 per acre, 
and probably 10 to 12 per cent of this was in buildings. In 1920, 
however, the valuation of farm real estate per acre was $110, of 
which between 6 and 7 per cent represented buildings. About $6 per 
acre of the increment in realty valuation was in buildings. This, of 
course, is only a portion, though possibly the major portion, of the 
investment made by the owners in building equipment on these farms 
between 1896 and 1920.5 For lack of any other definite figure on the 
5 Although appreciation may have exceeded depreciation during a few years preceding 
1920, the reverse was doubtless true during the greater part of the 25-year period. The 
owners should not be assumed to have invested new capital to the amount of the in- 
creased valuations in the war and early postwar periods, but it may be said with 
assurance that during the prewar period they invested large sums in replacing and 
enlarging building equipment which had depreciated heavily before July 1, 1921, when 
the valuation was made showing $7.90 per acre. 
