363 
Metayage and its Applicability to England. 
what the landlord advanced to him.” Such an argument has no 
bearing upon tenures which require the parties to advance capital 
in equal shares. At present the metayer has no difficulty in per- 
suading his landlord to share in the purchase of additional stock. 
The metayer , less able to sustain a loss, is the more cautious of the 
two, and when he has persuaded himself that such an outlay would 
be remunerative, there is rarely any need for the landlord to hesi- 
tate about embarking capital with his own little venture. 
On the other hand, the metayer is said to be more disposed than 
the ordinary farmer to the adoption of improvements. The example 
of a landlord farming his own land has comparatively little local 
influence. He is credited with ability to indulge his fancy in 
experiments, and his neighbours have little opportunity of judging 
whether or not his “ improvements ” pay. But if he lets his land to 
a metayer , any reclamation of the soil, draining, levelling, &c., must 
still be done at his own charges under the eyes of his tenant ; and 
he is often spirited enough to introduce improvements in cattle, 
manures, implements, &c., by the persuasion of experiment, at his 
own expense when he is not otherwise abffi to convince the tenant 
of their advantages. The gradual extension of the use of lime and 
the crossing of cattle with Shorthorns in the department of 
Mayenne are attributed to the example of the metayers , influenced 
by the precepts and experiments of their landlords, and followed 
slowly by farmers at money-rents when the success of the changes 
had been established beyond a doubt. 
Since the establishment of the Republic in France, the public 
service has to a great extent been a closed career to the old aristo- 
cracy, which has taken refuge in its landed property, and brought 
to the service of metayers a knowledge of agriculture, chemistry, 
and scientific farming of the greatest value. The necessity of keep- 
ing accounts on both sides amply repays the trouble which it in- 
volves, and the metayer is fortunate in having at his side a moneyed 
partner without whose help certain improvements are strangled. 
With reference to this point it is recalled that Thorold Rogers in his 
Economic Interpretation of History (p. 171) says : — “When land- 
lord cultivation ceased, marling was abandoned, it was too costly 
for the risk, and sheep-breeding suffered at least some deterioration.” 
The honesty of the metayers is admitted to be irreproachable. 
Probity is, indeed, part of their capital, and any breach of it would 
be fatal to their position and to their prospects of finding another 
farm. It is sometimes argued, that having regard to the metayer’s 
personal consumption, and to the payment of half his produce in 
kind, his margin of saleable produce is so small that he cannot gain 
much by a rise of prices, and is likely to become indifferent and 
sleepy as a cultivator. There is no danger of this kind where 
prices are stationary or declining ; and even when prices rise, an 
increase in the product is almost entirely pure profit, of which a 
half is a sufficiently powerful inducement to vigorous industry, 
while the farmer is liable to have his rent raised, and thus gains 
little more — perhaps even less — than the metayer. 
