CONTRACTS USED IN RENTING FARMS ON SHARES. 35 
While the central point upon which the various stipulations in 
farm leases for share renting are focused is the idea of providing.a _ 
just basis for a partnership in which the proceeds shall be shared 
equally, the first attempts to provide such a basis were naturally only 
approximations to justice. The various items of expense and equip- 
ment were borne by the landowner or tenant in such a manner as 
to balance one another as nearly equally as might be. In cases where 
it was not convenient for landowner and tenant to share these items 
equally an adjustment was reached by dividing the proceeds un- 
equally. Even in such cases, however, the idea of equal sharing was 
apparently the point of departure, and the unequal sharing of pro- 
ceeds was an adjustment to the fact that the two parties had con- 
tributed unequally to the business. 
At least two apparent exceptions to the fundamental half-and-half 
principle of tenant farming are widely prevalent. One of these is 
the share-cropping method of operating cotton farms. The area 
operated by a share cropper is usually too small to yield a living for 
his family and pay a reasonable interest on one-half of the working 
capital required for the operation of the farm. ‘The share cropper 
is therefore required to furnish no working capital. In fact, he is 
virtually a hired laborer rather than a tenant. ec 
The other exception is typified by a form of lease contract used 
in renting general crop farms throughout the country. Where there 
is actual competition among tenants for the opportunity to operate 
farms, landowners commonly exact a bonus in the form of a require- 
ment that the tenant furnish most or all of the working capital. 
The assumption underlying this practice is, as explained above, that 
the tenant’s own labor alone is not equal in value to the use of the 
land, but that labor plus working capital equals land in productive 
value. 
Many recent farm leases indicate the possibility of using more 
flexible and, at the same time, more precise methods of adjusting 
the division of proceeds to the relative contribution of landowner 
and tenant to the partnership. These recent methods, which are 
gradually coming into vogue, involve in all cases the equal sharing 
of proceeds. Both landowner and tenant receive one-half of the 
net farm income. If equipment and other working capital are fur- 
nished in equal shares and all expenses are shared equally, one-half | 
of the farm income naturally goes to each party without further 
adjustment. If the working capital is furnished in unequal shares, 
expenses and interest on each one’s share of the working capital are 
taken from the gross returns, after which the net farm income is 
shared equally. 
Underlying the lease contract in such cases is the assumption that 
the tenant’s labor is equal in value to the use of the land. For 
