~IEI‘IMCY fiN MICHEG RN ”1995 for Degree of M. S. Oscar \‘Kr’ifliam Hebrews I 9 2 :3 :3 . III I .I si II. II.- It: I» D. » P L . ‘. ,. .. 4-‘...x....r.._1 Dix. r. . . 7.. H. .511 .. u ‘. in. .3 _ .y. ,4 . :10 Au. 2.03..“1... .13.. Ring». 1...“... ‘AL‘ Eli...)1:)...‘3DytLir; I.I&A.V\.I..h,..- Viv. E'ir uVILM...L-Hh!v.‘r~.¥4 Cd LLIfi. 3.. k.~kw~w~.~.:..v:. :v 7... L f1.¥‘\Loh.hrnVJv.n.K‘vMM..¥\l.KAI“. 1 Kim-3.1..ux. \ . V . A ‘ MAN! IN HIOHIGAI A hula for the Degree of ms. 0am ulna Bohrou 1925 THFSFF INIRQDUOTION. 93893 1130000110! {he decision.tc nake a study ‘of fonanoy first received its in- pulse on an Inglish Railway train speeding over the green fields of southern hgland on a day in June of 1918. An English gentleman occupied the ccnpartnent with the writer and proved to be an amiable capanion. Be belonged to that group of people who own large tracts of land that is operated by tenants. Conversation soon drifted fron load Supply to Land fonuro. and the Journey ended all too soon for the ' story of Land Tenure was a long one and exceedingly interesting. A portion of tho renaining smer was spent in visiting typical English Dar-steeds and some of the great estates. l‘ho ecntontnont of tho people. their apparent satisfaction with the systen. and the efficiency and order exsnplified by tho fan hone .naturally led to conparison with herican fenaney. It was then resolved to look into our own syste- of tenancy and satisfy sons of the questions that naturally arose. This opportunity did not come until 1920. l'onaney in the United States has.within recent years. sons to the forefront as an Agricultural Economic Problem. It was the original intention of the writer to incorporate the result of the general study in this thesis. but under the advise of those who directed the study. that plan has been abandoned and the lhesis has been confined to the state of niehigan. the objective has been primarily to satisfy the interest of the writer in those questions that arose after the war. A certain spirit of unrest and dissatisfaetion on the part of Far-ore of Michigan. that bordered on rebellion against the present order. left the inpression that here was a systen threatening the welfare of the state. The questions then asked were about as follows. 1.Is tenaney in Michigan developing as to endanger the future of Agriculture? 2. Is fonanoy bad. socially. Economically or Politically! 1: 3.2:???32‘33‘32‘3‘3113 21.321133335323315 $2.3? “"m‘m .Ihat shall be the future policy in regard to Agricultural Land? ose and nany other questions have arisen and an attonpt has been lode to answer then. Bone questions have been found irrelevant. Others nerit nore study. At the outset it was discovered that statistical data . . 4 1 f . .. ' r v 0 ‘y u ._ . l . L :x r r . - 1. . »\ ' . a v . . . X. r ,a r . I u ‘ \ r e . '\ . rk . t - r . u A . .I. t A I . Ia , .. .. ‘ ‘ - . v e f 1 r. « l . c .. I u r e c . _ c o . , . . Q A 1 . s r J u . a r . . \ . n - . Ix. . I Ix I. v 4 r. e D. » v ‘ . ta 1 . O . a 0 I C . ,. v u . . . Q . . . p . r e n ‘L .. . r C. e . was exceedingly neager. Bone was decidedly incomplete. and some was hard to secure. Icons will appreciate the incompleteness of this study sore than the one who has nade it. lore work should be done to determine sons of the social relationships of tenants to their Commities. the future dove lopnent of Out-over land and nsrkot possibilities for agricultural prcduets bears further examination. Studies should be nade of the Industrial trend and surely a nore definite policy for Agricultural Land should be adopted by the State. Groteful acknowledgment is here expressed to Professor W.0.Hedrick and Professor J .l'.Horner of the Department of Economics. to Professor lbon luford of the Department of Sociology. to Mr. Verne Church of the Moral Drop Reporting Service for Miohigsn.and all who so generously assisted by helpful criticism. and by providing naterial and direction in the study. The Author OUTLINE THING! I! MICHIGAN WEI-Ill INTRODUCTIOI SPKHAL AREAS ”AIM. BERRIEN. BATONe mm: LEKAWEEe OGMW AHD TUSOOLA (1) lhy Chosen. (2) Description of Areas (3) types of Agriculture. ‘ 00301381088 WMOIS BIBLIWRAPHY AND 8001102 MATERIAL MAPS " ‘ ‘ \ - AR? 1‘, ‘ ' 5‘, ' : yuclnmm " “F “E" I” STUDY l I ' I | !_‘«U.1CT_ ks ". '- u {.39}: "a”: /’ / -~.‘ I i , .rf. __ L i. I l I a, L 3. " l a ~ ~ \ - | - e . . . — — N.-- -4 l l . ’I ‘V. ,' {4‘- ih'V‘ln’afi -‘ 7 “Vs 1v ‘.. . .- " 97'1"“. 'I \v I; Y, :4 iIL} ‘Ih x." ’ Fifi-"7'1 - ‘ a A-t‘. - ‘ 31‘ “ L§V,7.;' nu AGFW if"; ' ,7": V 33-,_ —’ 1" 125 s 1/ ‘ :‘ 970.9. 1""? K ‘ 65.5 4’ ,4: :54! j , ~~~ ‘ z I, '1 x g 4'14 | “ ~U 4 4.? /, 5’1 ' L " ' -7 I . .. .( ‘4‘ 4 2.- O)- L ‘50 a, ‘ '3', 4 156-5”; «4‘1 7‘ . L , 3: 4294 _ J 7 4 4,7 - 3‘7 --—-‘ l f, 343' ’ "‘ lbf ,9 , ‘4 ‘ \ "\g . : 2/ ~ - - k- ,4) - / r (‘44 \-. , _,/,I ,4 1, Z‘ Ob /‘ .' 1 I} / 2 -\ n \ 1 '1 - .1 ' 1 ‘ 12:25 -... .90 4" ‘ .,. _ .4 . l1 5‘.) \‘-._,..\ f '\ . .. ~. .' . \_’ . .. ' . 1 / » ” g‘ ‘ 2.0 0°9\ "J -2 ,' r ‘ 4 4 ' .\- I 500 ’6‘ ‘5 l 7 ,‘ 2'1. 1 1121 1274‘ \ *' ‘2’ «:7 1416 ,.75 ~-‘ -l"x2 6 /' z :15” ' ”P -17 22 ‘¢\i .' j ‘ ' I f 9/351713‘ 790 2’1 2Z5 9.52, . A i g52 32 . 20 15, 20 715 / 121991983 1559 167 .251 947 : Q / 1.9 '4 20_ 27 15 .50 2.3 U ‘T ”201-1 70.6 2519 1.2451462 . . (D K‘ . .31.; \1 r— . 7’ ,4 577 2355 2676 553.5 215: 5b 44 /' 4? ‘ :3 55 ’ ' " ~. 4698 Z" 1 ’/ '< 205/ 1' \ i o z ‘r' , 4 (I. 7 4 v’IDr— 42- x ‘36 560: 45 78 401 4 g 4% 3225' 5.523 3359 5059 '7 4'4 ”141395 ’ 4:4 1 51> \ ‘4 55 58 67 625 66 3579' = :752 5515 5719 522:4 2.52 4‘95? .1991. 92. 41 58 ;593 50 21662. 5152, 5.54;: 3.544 5550 .5856 " , ‘-"‘ (\1' ' . 55 1:18} é ,‘ 55 . 55 46 46 \1 #32572 2:66 62224025” 5050 410.3 35 55 , 381361-82 v6.53], 1 - /‘ / T’Ti TRIBUT (71: HF WE'RE? OF FARE: TVA)! TF3 WW". AT1 74.? nxrm VALUbs. .. CUer 0? A6 070322? F. S r>URCE Ut:T.? STATES 02:31? 10': rQICULTURAL CLITAEF I V Il’l'\}*‘7 1 at d ‘ r .1 ’As‘ fia'l’. TTT M ICHIGA TA... _‘ 3 . ‘ . yAflJ i IAKE SUPERIOR 7457‘;' / \‘O~ " 1 l‘ 1 1‘ , .L'.r“‘-‘ ‘. . . 72:2: A. K. A ,— v ‘ 'J ‘1 Lévrfifi' '1..'[_' ”VK‘V': ".'. -,. . ‘5 kg, zfgmgxla . fibfl/fl/fl/M‘ 7 In ,. 6W AREA OF LAND IN FARMS T W UNDER 26’. 25$ To 50$ .~.;;.;o;o3‘2’2 OVER 504 UNDFR 50‘ CULTIVATED ‘1‘ 1 . Q 31212120330331 u.s.cmsus or 1920 “3“;"1311. (7.4/2; 12‘"- ,4 - 1:5. :77 1 77M”) IV .‘viICHIGAN 1 A KE .W I; m; l¥ L ._1 __-_ 4_—....__ \ ‘1~h -———_A EFL- ‘ \ “——T: ' f————-—o—~r,. - , r. u "3 H" H ‘ v m ' . ——-——— t s . x. I: “— ’ g ,4 - —— I ’1’ L ~ r.- FRUIT PRODUCTION AREA See Table on {ext Page V NUMBER or was :1 I to 999 PVlICHIGAN E 1000 to 11599 1500 to I999 2000 to 2999 m 3000 to 3999 I000 to £999 m I$000 to 6000 \IVII”.V I (1"; I " I a I \Q ’:'o'0;c0$: Z/fiII“ H I. I {Mi/W ITIIIIIIII u 1'“? . m v .m. ‘ 7.} . o I' IE’f //\'.’,.'H III 'I:IIIII ‘I'IIII III/ I . "I'I'I' 9;;\0:: I III II I I' kIIfiJ ‘- “‘3'“ /IIII ‘ N, LII . ’. N 'o‘o'ou‘sV/o. :TIIE II III IIIIIIK\ I\\\\/fl /" FTT, ITIIm'IIIII III //’//’I‘IM:J “:13":quAICIIlIIrnIIII'II III .'.:.'.°/ \\\\\\\\I,I " ' 7V ///" - LLP- L_/,...x. .\ \\\\ \\\\“!:!: ////IW DISMUTA\:I 11F NIII'IIFR OP PARIS f?“ f: In I“),- 4- ‘!~ I- \ '.. V‘ “ ‘ ‘a I ‘ ,7ilk'l}(’* r 40" V '. 51‘4" ti ’A‘ ”R? 1 5'” . .".~"/' - _ fl‘l“ A?“ “,5 ,, q: sl/y -’ ‘ " ‘ i1", .' . a .n .f.‘Ti'l-I1Ill1‘J/'/I":;1}‘1i'[1.rt .q .‘I..\~ i .I/. " . "‘7" WWII}; ; ”'1' 3,1‘ ' m- rm": f ('5/117 _/,’,',t[],|:l"'| .7; A. flHHr-l!” Q": -~ 1/ 1.1.I. ,-"I] M 3,1f ‘ . . .. ._»\.\ 7'; ‘ IW/ I “VIP/5* ‘ E" H‘rix‘d‘i'fl'm .31 "w( //./,/.f//-'/.i"="1:'lz I111: 1'? ‘1‘ H' i “Hist?! \ J" " . I I 1" I l/f‘ I [1- / "11.1! :!*‘1'EHH‘!5?|“'-f _ «x H _'//':1 .«. 3- “I L'll' ‘ ’/ \W‘l'W'J“it'gv‘Il:b'-’ 1:13 .EHW WM ‘- Hi 5 ‘ l 11‘ _ - i Mi , l p} '\‘ L .'l l fifi‘l‘ “\ I: m ‘ L.” _' k I . '.,. .- \‘ :' h 1; .\. .3 rm“ \ _- § _ . um ‘. ,» z‘ -}:! " ' :I L/ 4“ 1: 1|” ~ , '1}, q. ‘ ' '! 1 ‘I' - . 4. ’ ’I- W H‘ Hill, .// ‘_ //, I ',! : ’ I r I ' .11 ' L // Il/r /Il‘ i.i l ‘ . I & ’ , ,‘.. I 1 y I {I / \ /.//: ' 7.. ' I/// H] IH: f _\‘ '1 v‘u . 5 {‘4 f‘k’ V“ ‘x' I/ :'I \\. .,V.1 K J,A \ "r7‘7‘r ' I ['71 , / {(1in [I III/[7‘ 1.’ ,/’. ‘ ./.--,' -—I— l-LLIL‘ F’j /l’.)’7[1, gy/I‘ //~ I. / , A 1 ' 43//// III _ - If], I: r { ://‘// l4 / ’I‘CI/l/ 514/, -1' .’/‘ '. 7/ l// /// /./ /' / '///1 '/ ,1// - _ /-'I‘ . -///"// f ' 1// ~/' // ’/, r7, I - /// / / I /////”'///I //////r//, 'l/ /// If //’1//_// /;/, // /// ///'///I - / ‘Wu” ’ I/ I 4/ I '/ // _._ / “ /// /'/// / I f‘ I; I/ // /,. /' . /[‘ //; f , -I / [I {l i ,- I/// ’// 't‘ /. // /.".1':/ l/ / // I I ' I/I ’// / \.-._ ,/ ,///, I .‘ ,l l ’ I ’I/ l/ \ / / 'I ’/I // I ’/".’1 ’1/1",.",11,-r. ’ ’/// I’/ " " . . / 'I1"/:/// I (/I/L/lc/H’W ’ , //’,-'/"/ //’ Iff/ ‘ l/II. ///,//,,/////I'/// OI/II’LIJR III/r2 /I,I I/ //// . -l/./, , .'I,- // . -, I. ,I/I, N/w/ /’/ .' ~ I’,1/'/ I ///1 1”- I‘/ ,1 I I. )‘ I/ll’. / ' 'I, /1"/' I'm / ( 1’ / II, [.1 ,1. / /I/ / / / 11’1,’ ///,1'// l I I', / \ I, ,1/ I/’ /////I ’ ' . i, ' /’/ / // ’/_//,// I 3' HI 1’ ’ -‘~_ AV.- /" /" LA/ft' I/l, " //I/,'1 y {///I///='/ /// / , "Am/,2 :’/// II I. . ,//'/ /’,//-1 1.1" z I]; /,/1//// ' '.. I /// /./1//”J/ a . . , If] .//// 11/, 1 / A I II./_/ I ’[I’ ,//l’ 1'/ I. /,, l I / f‘I//r// ' ” _. I, I f I, [I] // I”// 1’ // /’,//’, /- It, /, I. [I }/'/11///////’l .1’” /,//, III'I/l/llI/I/I’IIIII/lI/II I/I, I' f‘ ’Y" n , .g t ’v .’I 0‘, 1 * t‘ "...‘ ‘ ‘I o- 1 ‘f'\ ‘ I I ' ‘7. i .‘ x . " vm I MICHIGAN 55533:.) o... w / -J L“ j)??’ I” mow: . i ”(V L. “I 1_ :— “any. i“ n. /,-'1~/" “‘ j ' ' H. ”77'“ i ' KI) ' 1 I 1,. ‘ W I ‘_ . ¢ \ ‘~ 1mm _7 1,1,1“ “r ,. ..-111'»m.~. \ l ‘ .' ‘ _. .-...J. "\_ . 1.- I- V‘ 1 \ B F- _. -. ~\ 'L‘w. ”-th : -|’.".1 ! . ,‘JAQFIM-{K __‘ k ' “ :— 0 h ' f VRM a --‘ L ' M (K, I " ' 1. N 7‘ W' " \" g I J, '. I. , " ,:\ . I ‘1‘. R‘\ ~\\ \ \ \/ (. /"" /' 4,7 II. t ‘{"-' . "t 1~-.\" I . ’ '1 Q I ‘t ' x . . l . ‘ . ‘I _ ‘ 1 1 ' -\ ‘ ’ \. WR'L‘Ju DISTRIBUTION OF FARM OPERATumz 1N PERCENT OF ALL FARMS BY:(1) owuvns. (2)TENANTS U.s.onnnus UP 1020 ______‘, UNDER 151 rmmcy 1/15. 1.0 w mun TEN ANCY Lucmmx . -_ 7‘ v-.. 7:,“ ’11, .3134: SUPERIOR . '/ , I? ///‘,/// / Wm/ / / / ' /// ’9” / /. I .,, / / // M ’/ I ' f: ‘, ’0 H: . / 4/7 DIftrRIRmnm or SHARE" mm a“! mum _ ".mcwrvs 1020 1 In arriving _ at any conclusions on the relationship that tenancy bears to Agriculture in Michigan. it nust be borne in mind that data fron which such conclusions are to be drawn is exceedingly meager. Some of the data cannot be relied upon for a fine degree of accuracy. Since statistical conclusions are only as valuable as the accuracy of the source. there is a disinclination on the part of the writer to place undue emphasis on such conclusions for Michigan. In choosing the Census Schedules of 1922 ‘ used in the study for separate areas. only those were accepted that contained omnplete data as recorded by the Supervisors. The areas were chosen in typical counties in which the various types of Agriculture prevailed. Berrien county was selected. first because the Schedules for the townships included were fairly complete. Second. because these townships predominated in intensive fruit culture. Third. because of the typical soil for that area. lourth. because of the apparent eccncnic independence of the people and the very low percentage of tenancy. and fifth because of the high average land value. Antrin county was chosen because of its geographical location. It is above the ‘6 Degree Mean Temperature curve. is an area devoted to intensive potato culture. and land values are low. the land has been recently cleared and sole of it is still covered by the original forest. latcn County was chosen because it represents a general type of farning. is below the lean temperature curve. has good facilities in the way of transportation and ccmxnication and was settled early in the history of Michigan. Land values have been staballised and Agri- cultural activities have settled down to a more permanent type than found in new country. Tenancy is fairly high. Kin-on and Qusccla Counties were taken together partly. because they were settled about the cane tins and the type of farning is approxinately the sans. the areas chosen for special study lie in close proximity and the factors affecting one affect the other. Data frcn these townships was well recorded and see-ed to be reliable. 2 Lenawee County is an old county. in which Live Stock raising is one of the chief Agricultural enterprises. It is in the southern tier of counties and land values are high. Tenancy is correspondingly high. lduoationally it has a fair degree of advancement and therefore affords fair'conparison with some of the others. Ogenaw'County was chosen because it represents typical cut over land. It was settled more recently and contains much land that 1. of little ' 'value agriculturally. Communication and transportation is limited because of poor railroad facilities. though in recent years roads have been in- proved affording fairly convenient opportunity for intercourse with other areas. Pcpulation is spares and sons of the land has been exploited. the entire group of counties if taken together will represent a fair cross section ofJMiohigan Agricultural Life. flap Number I will show these areas in outline. AUIRIM COUNT! nu. county had in 192. a total number of 1.1m far-s. 165 fans were operated by tenants. 99 of these were far-ed on shares. the in- crease in tenancy over a ten year period was from 7.‘§Eh 1910 to 11.f7?h 1929. Antrin county still contains such land owned by large lumber inter- ests and sons of this land is still undergoing the process of clearing. The soil according to Surveys aade by the Geological Survey Division in cooperation with the U.S.Ceologioal Survey. describes it as being hilly in the last portion. of clay and clay loam character. and having been laid down on the border of the Ice sheet. the western portion is of an enp tirely different character.‘ Portions of it were laid down under the ice sheet and are described as Till.Plsins. Bordering these areas are the reaains of ancient lake beds nade up of thin sandy soils nearly level except for low wind drifted ridges. This portion of the county is of little value agriculturally. As an exanple of exports from this area. a study node under the direction of the Michigan Land Econoaic Survey for the year 1922-} indicates the Car Lot shipments from the various shipping points. See next page. (a Potatoes (Ruin Ihoot Ire mmtwheat lumns Ecol CAR LOT EXPORIB Central Lake lenselcna - 31k 1d! :2 8?? si -s mus“ *‘ ‘01 Sugar Beets Phflmls mummd.Goodl Mmfles Hue Stock 1 Pmfltry' ELM» humor nuns .a \009. \N \l \l‘lflfi- Ang-‘rod. Emumhcld Goods NW -s Kthzlbod 1 Excelci er Bolts thtiood 10:- Huts flungle‘Bolts fies Cedar Posts sumpwood 01o liscellaneias 3 ’.1 1 total 107 135 19: total Exports for Entire County 5‘7 0 CAR LOT IMPORTS Coal and Coke (Dc-estic)20# Gas and Oil 100 Live Stock 8% B Ogler Beads 56 Squash (Canning) 16 Groceries 27 Miscel. Agr. Products 2 Buaber 17 3 3.1;21r. 1 d d . dO‘V MN 13 20 167 14 278‘ If Portable Houses Elmira -Alden Alba 1‘3 1-'§9 55 111 1 5 s 16 23 1749 L052. '9” Shingles fies Barrels Boxes Building Material tertiliser Miscel. Total Ellsworth Potatoes Grain Wheat Rye Buckwheat Beans Seed Sugar Beets Piokels Canned Goods A plea Ave Stock Poultry liscel. Agri. Prod. HeHeGOO‘B Lumber lerns Kiln‘wood lxceloier Bolts Pulp Ibcd Logs‘ Posts Shingle Bolts Ties Cedar Posts Slab wood Clay Miscellaneious Total 8km oxd - 1. Here then is described a portion of the exports and imports of this geographic area. It is not couplets as will be understood when less than car lot ship-eats are not recorded. and when autoacbiles and trucks play suoh a large part in presenttnethcds of transportation. That a.considerably larger amount of goods and produce pass in and out by these conveyances must be recognised. However the factpo be noted in this particular group of colncdities is that the County is still very new 4 and far fro-.a,pernanent agriculture. In other words the building of a permanent agriculture here is still in process and will continue to be for'scae tine. Ccaparing the preceding tables with the table fro- Census of 1922 and it will be noted that nuch uni-proved land reaains and the di- versification in crops and livestock particularly characteristic of new Agricultural land is indicated. Here we find the tenant enterprise in alaost every phase of Agricultural practice larger than that of the owner. tenancy represents slightly acre than S 1 of the total land area. townships not developed agriculturally being left out of this estimate. if included would bring the average to a still lower percentage. See next page for Summary of 1922 Census 5 8mm 01 “TRIM COURT! :1: ”WISHES . 0 SEAR. women. HILTON. TORCH LAKE AND BANKS total for Owners total for zotal for Per Per And tenants 94 tenants 43 Owners tenant Owner Supervisors Census 1922 tOtAL IBIS 99.999 4971 99384 84.8 89.8 In Crops of _ Corn, 4372 366 Aoc7 6.7 6.2 .1315.” Wheat 99 72 921 1e} 1e‘ Sp lheat 4 Cats or Grain 27£7 171 267 3.1 4.2 Barley 2 2:. 21 23 1s a A.g 2. Buckwheat 6 7 9%} 1. . Potatoes 34 3 278 2% 9.1 4.9 01070? I“ tin.Hay Q78 ‘ ?. e. 1.2 Alfalfa Bay 1 27 2.7 .2 Other 3" Craps 72. 10 71: e15 1e1 21.12 Beans 1197 112 1032 2.1 1.6 Soy Beans 2C 14 8 ar Beets 20 2O bage Onions Root and truck 11s 10 13s Mint 7 loodlots 4:26 2 3994 7. 7.2 Uni-proved Land 1 1 1297 2. 2.6 Pasture or Idle 7087 26 64 8. 8. Clover for Seed 199 13 . . timothy for Seed t 331 4 26 16s 56 A 7 1. T”... e. e $§E.h 2r... 1122 3.2 31m .;6 51.6 Pear trees Q6? .8 6282 2.7 Cherry trees 7 846 11.0 .2 crqp. Vines 2677 zoo 267 .7 4.1 Hives of Boss 312 2 310 Live Stock . horses 1411 96 1.7 2.0 Dairy Cows 216 4.0 go; g‘gher Cattle 1832 9? 2:711.7 . O o Swizz 61s 66 5 32 1.2 .g Silos 209 18 .5 .5 BERRIEI COURT! the Census of 1920 taken by the United States indicates that this county contains 9.443 fans 80} of which are occupied by tenants, 949 are rented on a share basis. In comparing the figures for tenant farms with those of the study aade fru the 1922 Supervisors census it must be borne in mind that the territory for the 1920 census is inclusive of all types of farms and the lumber for the areas studied in 1922 are inclusive only of intensive fruit areas. therefore the percentage of 1920 given as 14.8 and for 1910 as 19.6 included general fans of the county in which other craps than fruit were produced. the caparisons in the special study of the township areas included in the summary are intended to show that tenancy in the highly specialised crop centers is of little significance. More will be s'aid in this re- gard when the general summary is made for the entire State. Berrien County Soil is not unlike that of Antrin County. Each type is contained in about the cane prcportion. the difference however is in latitude and in th. division nade by the lean temperature Curve of 46 Degrees. Berrien County lies well below this curve and thus enjoys a considerably acre favorable temperature for fruit production. It is also more favorably located in the way of large aarkets for its products. Having water. rail and truck transportation developed to its fullest ex- tent it can take advantage of nany markets within its reach to dispose of the crops to advantage. Land values in Berrien County as is shown in Map II show the average as 890. per acre. this stands as fourth highest in the state. Other land values being as follows. Wayne .148. Maconb 899. and Oakland .92. In all of these counties special factors nuke for increased land value other than value as Agricultural Land. A peculiar and yet natural observation made frca a special School study of the Rural Schools in the townships. showed anong other looncmio advantages an overwhelaing number of fisdic sets as compared with the other counties. the number was in almost exact proportion to land values. g ,1.-. ,in V .11?qu at! so! stall-ma egos; to vsw ode at b93300! g! . fig; .3; , baht sumo «an. ed: a: :eedghi zit-um! a. m can ‘ .m TI'IUOC MIR”!!! shit 33d: ashmthui eefsta he: km: 9d.) 33:! new user to . ~54 f one 1338 .at'rszm’l.‘ vo‘ hotvr'ooo en's «faith- 20 FOB ems? {Mi - '. ‘7 .f ‘. .skssd wads I: .," I 1 {£1132 ed: '30 eaon’t n’ii‘v‘ Hurts? same: no? se'mait ed: 3011.“ . ed: Jed! 5:12;: a} t-(x’fi‘n? sad Jam 3i ensues anonkwequa 399! cl" ad: but: 29m? 'M enqvt £51: ‘10 evjoulon.‘ 22 susnuc QSQf ed: to} ~ Q eevasmd'nt 'Io vine eviar;£~‘~n" one 39"! at bslbuts sse'ls c- oo? has 39.3.! as ucvfin FGQI’ ‘1‘“ ’9'j‘xtl160'18q ad: state-rod! . ago-1o 'zerLfo def-1w n? effflrftlo ed: ‘t-t Elfin" {moo-13 hebni‘cnt Bee“ " v' . ’ J , hebuIenl teem qtdsmo: ed.+ 'to «(been In iesqs ed: at snoshsqoo ' ’9 .bcoubo-xq «raw besttoeqa mutate ed: at vonsnet em: weds :13 behnetst one no“. ~01 HHA r-r 5: bids ed Ilkw s-zoI/ .ecmscl'impia 9133!): to at .93338 coitus 91:13 so? shah st {mama Incas; ed) . I 9mg: dosS-t .wcd'ouoo ~321an 'io term siting ion 8.1; “:08 1535000 as a}: a}: nevewor! mnemonic!) sd’: .nofhoqozq mus ed: mode at N to ma!) cutaneous? some ed: {(1 ohm wiczvib exit at has a atoms and: has emu out? voted [low soil 1.9121100 no t-rxel cats 5431 ammuboua em out cults-reg.” sidmova! nos ‘1 *%m in o: beqoleveb nomad-1mm: ion-z: has [ts-x as}? #5 ;_ esoqskb or doses at: 1:!th uni-tea gas. to sasinsvba sis: use if *: fin” _ ‘ - .egamevbs or am 4: nhffiihnova ad: weds 11 gel! at mode at as 2:}an corned n]: 1 r: - Z' w satin? hunt besse'xoni: so? sis- awo:cet Istoeqa acumen coca fig -‘- ' .hoa! {swiiocth as W Iooflea {steeqs .s 501?: «has nous-Fresco £311,131!“ icy has mauve” & ‘5 cinnamon! wedfio gnome bewoda .sqtflumm: ed: at “001108 rem cit 33" “5 of” (£3211 bower-Do as nice at” to nedrnm 3111.19de as ‘“'*'-"-”' W 0: misnomer doaxc taunts at saw «ed-tn ad! .. ' I? 7 _ Owner farmers in Berrien County seem to carry on the enterprise of Grape production to a far greater extent than tenant farmers. According to the 1922 Census Summary the average owner farmer has 1391 vinps per farm while the tenant farmers has but 246.9 vines per farm. this is probably a nomal condition. A strange cuparison that may be questioned is in the number of Cherry trees per tenant farmer as compared with owner farms. the small number of tenant farms may introduce the variation. Since only 36. tenants are compared with 1376 owners the probable error is no doubt raised. lo other unusual factors are brought out by these various comparisons that cannot be accounted for in the ordinary process of analysis. See next page for 1922 Census Sum-1m. 8 O! DERRIEN 00011?! e tOWNSHIPB OP DUTCH. 81' JOSEPH. NEW BUFFALO. LIIOOLI IND OOLOMA total for Owners total for total for For Per And tenants 34 tenants 1376 Owners tenant Owner imam 49.837 2400 47.437 70.6 34.3 In crop of ' ‘ o , corn ' 41198 2 1 3947 7.4 2.9 Iinter wheet 1 17 ' ;2 1863 1.3 1. Sprin Wheat 13 3 1‘ get: or Grain 2102 148 1992 4.4 1.4 or 0 ml. 3? u :2 0 ohm: 632 41 £21 1 .2 .4 01”.? m Tineliay ‘007 80 7 2.4 2e; Other Bay Crops 38? 13 372 .4 . Field Pass 1 Yield Beans 17 17 Soy Beans 27 4 23 (81 115.32.“. 10 10 a Oni 2 2 :poiflnd trufl Crops 943 98 889 1.4 .6 n 1 Woodlcts 3490 82 408 .8 2. Unimprcved Land 310 183 327 5.4 2. Pasture or lee Clover for Seed 11110111! for Seed A 1 "tre 26 o 2 . 6 .6 .23.; tn: 22%4 80462 29042; 2 7.? 188.6 Pear trees 19 11 2121 1 2293 2.4 140.3 Cherry trees 3 289 7091 36 80 208.6 26.8 crepe. 19 2 3 18339 1813878 243.9 1391.0 Hives of s... 266 6 260 .2 .2 Liv Stock ‘ ' f . Ezrses 1274 69 190 1. 1.4 227 an. ' 2 g '3; 3' 1-1 01‘ ‘ . e c Sb 1. .2 311:3 113% 63 10;? 1.? .8 Silos 94 3 91 e Supervisors Census of 1922 (a 9 Prods-dusting soilgugfiflhgtggnghunty are Sandy and Olay Loans with considerable proportions of sands and gravely sands: sole being quite stony with subsoil of clay. this county is situated well below the lean te-perature Curve of 46 Degrees and well reacved fro- the m. shores. Location being alnost in the center ‘of the lower half of the Lower Peninsula.has node it subject to condkions particularly applicable to general fir-ing. n1. Oensus o: 1920 gives 1.11. total 1111.11.1- of fsrns in Baton County as 3.323 and the nunber as fhrnid by tenants as 842. the nunber farming on shares is give as 663 and the percentage of tenancy for 1920 as 22.6 as against 1910 when it was 23.2. this slight decrease lust have been of a temporary nature as the study of the 1922 Oensus and the inquiry into the special townships indicates a.sonewhat larger percentage. However. since there are inaccuracies in both the latter it is not in our province to state here the trend.. It night better be accepted at present as stationary. y Intcn County is not greatly influenced by the proxinity of large cities. except in the ease of Lansing. Bone ferns have been left un- worked for periods of tine cr'haye been only partially worked: occupants of'these being eaployed in the industries of the city., the tendency now see-s to be for scale of this land again to be placed under cultivation acre extensively. Eaton Oounty ranks third in land value of the counties studied; having in 1920 an average land value of .36. per acre. this 1111111. 111 11.11111 1.11. state average 111111111 1. 073.48 ' In.conparison with this it will be noted that tenancy is generally more prevalent in the northern states and in areas of less specialis- ation in Agriculture. General farn.prectices not demanding as high a degree of technical knowledge offer inducenent to those with less training and who can carry on their enterprise without Inch ct a.handicap. Baton.Oounty has been unusually happy in the type of catension work carried on.within its bounds. the old classic that 'the noarer a far- area is to an Agricultural.0°llege the less efficient the agriculture' does not hold in this instance. Agriculture is carried on scientifically and the tenant operates on a larger scale than the owner. 10 111 Supervisors Oensus of 1922 811mm! 0’ mm 001.111!!! 2 townshi of urea. CARMEL. 0 AND ROIAND. total for Owners total for total for For Per And. tenants 211 tenants 938 Owners tenant Owner roux. ACRES 83.906 20.701 63.203 ' 98.1 68.1 In . of * ' ‘ 4 ‘ 02:3!) 1019‘ 2559 7835 1192 See 11111.1- 1nm11». 9047 2323 6324 12.0 6.8 Sprin Wheat . _ . Oats or Grain 7287 2170 520 10.3 3.4 ”"1” 1 is: 112% 21 .- £32.11... 5 g 2 ‘ 46 :1 :03 Potatoes 50 1 gag . .? 011111.1- and tin. Ray 141 347 10 16.3 11. 1121112. Bay 2 20 277 1. .3 Harsh Bay 10 8 Other Hay crops 72 31 41 .1 .01 Field Peas 1g 1 Field Beans 390 123 2673 5.8 2.8 80y Beans 62 5 e2 31! gr 3001.0 1% 18 102 . .1 0:11.35" - s 1 5? Root and truck Orops lint 1 22 113 ‘lloodlotsfll 1 ‘ 1329 35;? 1S.; 13.3 111‘er Land e e Pasture or Idle 1 87 g 12 1137 115. 11.2 Glover for Seed 982 S3 7 .3 . timothy for Seed . ‘"1 11- 1’4 2 ' 1222 137 128 O .0. e e 33.11 trees 10 g 173 12 2 6.8 1. Pear trees 1 7 2 1274 1. 1.3 cherry trees 1826 3 1318 1. 1. Grapc Vines 14 4 2 1176 1.2 1.2 Hives of Bees 411 11 400 .4 111;. Stock 277 . 22 .2 2' 2’ 4 are e 0.14.0.1. 406g 1; 113 4. 3: 01.11.1- 0.111. 284 1 77 26 7. 1. Sheep 17:? 4067 12740 19. 14. 811111. 92 2438 808 11. 7. Silos 238 39 179 . .2 11 EURO! AND tUSOOLA COUNTIES he areas studied in these two counties are adjoining areas and the soil and type of Agriculture is similar. See Map 1 showing location of the two areas. - the soil is mostly the remains of an old lake bed. It is described as Glacial Olay overlaid with soil of water origin. It is of flat conn- tcrmation. somewhat covered with boulder and rubble material and is rather poorly drained. the recession of the lake frm this area in previous ages has left a deposit of salt marsh land and low lying plains that in time became covered with ferestscf pine and some forms of hard wood. the forest covering retarded evaporation of moisture. and since little drainage was possible most of this area has been reclaimed from what was early termed an impenetrable swamp. After the timber had been removed and drainage provided‘the land rapidly came under culti- vation and was found to be rich in the fertility necessary for boot and bean production. these have been the principle crops of this area. he population has been largely of foreign extraction. mostly of German and Polish origin. the German element was first to enter this area and only in recent years have Polish immigrants settled in what is called the thumb. the German element soon undertook to subdue the land and came into ownership early in the history of the state. flames of towns. villages. schools and churches are of German origin, me con- tinned to retain many of the German habits and customs. _ _ the census of 1920 records the number of farms in Huron Oounty as 4.604. the number as farmed by tenants is 348 and the number of Share 1.1111111. 11. 261. 2.211.111“. of tenancy 111 1920 was 11.9 11111 111 1910 was 7.4 percent. the percent of tenancy in 1922 of the special areas studied was slightly over 8 per cent. As long as the population continues to be strongly of the type it now is. tenancy will probably not increase to any extent. Should the economic conditions change due perhaps to trans- portaticn changes. market developments or otherwise. or should the population change. tenanpy might increase. 2.11.11.11.11... the German and Polo both prefer ownership to tenancy the latter will not increase much. t4 I ' I l- 1 . t ' .1 ‘ ' 4 ‘ 1 1, . f r 1 v ' | '0 I C . . 1 1 4 v . . v ' l - 1 ‘ l a ' I . 1. 1 1 I \' O u ' ' 1 ( D 1 f‘, 12 tuscola county had 111 1920 4.638 211111111 of 11111.11 818 11.11. 211111.. by tenants. 326 were farmedionl Share basis. In 1920 tenancy was 17.6 percent of the total and in 1910 only 13.3 per cent. this is slightly larger than Enron and is due to a somewhat different soil and population in the southwestern part of tuscola. Land values in tuscola are giten as $33. per acre and in.Huron as .47. {lflggguAggflggt e _ tOWNSHIPS 0P ‘ BROOKFIELD. SIDEWAING.‘WINBOR. FAIRBAYEI total for Owners total for total for Per Per 4 Supervisors Oensus of 1922 See next page for Summary of tuscola Obunty And enants 7g tenants 873 Owners tenant Owner com were 75. 21 783 68.836 88.1 78.8 In Drop of , ’ 0.1111 ' 762 717 6908 9.3 7.; Winter 1111.111 671 406 6333 3. 7. Sp lheat 11 2 , Oats or Grain 863 800 60 10. 9.2 Barley 223 223 2323 3.3 2.? gonna.“ 8o 14 66 :1; 3 Potatoes . 306 28 278 . .3 - 112.12.11.11 171 13 132 .19 .2 '63:: 5:: 1.... 3 1 2 1d 4 3:111 £331. 91 870 8268 11.2 9.3 Sov loans 3 1 32%” am. 4222 347 367 7.1 4.2 onibage :3 1 1 one loot and truck Drops 30 41 263 .3 .3 1112311111. 29 2 26 ‘2 30 0 _e e 01111111111011“ 1.11111 4 50 E? 446; 6.8 3.0 2.111.112. or 1111. 13 4 1 4 12910 13.6 1 .8 01111.1 for Seed 0 34 366 . .6 mtimt thy for Seed 2 2 , 1. tree 1 261 17278 4.0 1 .8 1953.11 tree: 9316 14 ' 2 3 .2 9.2 1:" 21.... 184‘ 1' 19 11 :3 11.31;" 11111.. 42336 155; 40663 20.2 46. 311.. of a... 407 13 394 .2 '.3 Live Stock Horses 2103 22 2874 2.2 2. ggher Battle 3079 2:3 2;: .27 3. 81113 66318 600 6288 7.8 7. 811.. 227 10 217 e1 e2 »And tenants 167 tenants 1061 Owners tenant Owner 10:11. foals 92.712 13.383 77.329 92.1 71.3 In Crops of -- - 1 - 14 1 1 S. I13... 111:... 191' 4g 10 4 79 376 6.7 7 7.3 Spring lheat 4 10 .17.04 3::gegor10rain 11 1g 2g0 ' Z§§g 1§.0 3.3 8 4O . . £311.11.“ _ E36 126 22 .§ .1 Potatoes 1o 6 3 . . 011237;; 11311 tindlay 10%;? 1836 7 03 11.0 6.3 ‘ C e e 31:3 3.... . ' .2 .2. . 0 H . . 11.35 szs {6 2 14 '3 11.1.1 Beans 10400 1933 8463 11.6 7.8 :oy Beans 7O 9 32%.. Beets 634% 1601 4 9.6 4.6 83.3.? 22 .3 1 Root and truck Grape 3 1 1S 3 .1 .3 lint 1 Woodlots 60 4 74 $2 4. 4.2 roved Land 3218 5E2; £393 1.; 2. Pasture and Idle 20077 1 1 21. 13.1 Glover for Seed 312 g 68 . . tinoth for Seed 3 3 trait 1. 1'... 1 26 21" ' 24. -$E:oh tree: 30:39 5638 22? i? .2 as? "1.... 2;; :13: 1° 1°; Gra;:’V1ness 9ig§ 203 97 2 1.2 9.0 Hives of'nees 37 ‘383 .2 .4 L1 t at $3.36 1.1 2328 :44 2784 2.7 2% t , . . 3:053 0:ttl: 2 ;9 2%3 gééé ?.§ 2.1 .53 6689 62 6061 327 32% Silos 362 327 .2 .3 13 SUMMARI OF tUBOOLA 000!!! a IOWNSHIP 0P OILFORD. FAIRGIOVI. DEEHARK AND AKRON total for Owners total for 35 a Supervisors Oensus of 1922 total for Per Per 1‘ LEIAWEE om. Lenawee County belongs to the famous southern tier of counties in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. It was chosen because of the fact that in 1920 the percentage of tenancy in Lenawee was the highest of any county in the state. The 1920 Census indicates that at the the the Census was taken 50.7 per cent of theagrioultursl land was occupied by tenants. this was an increase of 3.8. percent over 1910. In 1910 St Joseph county shared honors with Lenawee in having the sane percentage of tenancy i.e. 26.9. St Joseph County in 1920 had 30.4 percent Tenancy. Lenawee having a stall margin of .3 of 1 percent. Lenawee was chosen rather than St Joseph because of the type of Agricultural enterprise. In the last decade it has become a livestock County. During the past year many thousands of sheep have been brought in fro- other areas and fed until prine for the mksts of the east. Swine feeding is a great enterprise and one in which tenants have the lions share. the Census of 1922 reveals the fact that femnts in Lenawee fed an average of 22.7 swine per tenant to 5.9 swine per owner farmer. Nearly every other Agricultural Activity is engaged in to a greater ex.- tent by tenants than by owners. Acreage of renant farms is 88.5 to Owners 50.4; Lenawee had in 1920 5.080 farms. 1561 were far-ed by tenants of which 1.0‘0 were on a share basis. Lenawee Soil is described in a Special Bulletin published by the Michigan State College. on I‘m Land adjacent to Detroit. the territory studied is composed of Sandy Lake Bed formation. and Lake Clay. i'he Drainage is fairly good and the area including Lenawee County is of almost exact similarity to the hub area. except that it is drained in a more satisfactory nanner. Geographical], it is also located lore favorably since it is on the Iain highways and in reach of splendid markets for its produce. Rail roads also are favorably distributed over its entire area and furnish an outlet as wellas a means of bringing in supplies. Icing one of the first counties to be developed it has long since emerged from the constructive period of Agriculture and has settled down to a a l . . \ l I k u f r" I I l -‘ “ n x. I | I . I . .70 Q [ ' . . . .(* . d ' l d -I. 4‘. _ 15 - . system of farming that can be described as. fairly permanent. Land values are hiya. and therefore less likely to be farmed extensively by owner farmers. me gradual incease in fenanoy in this region indicates acne speculation in land and also a change in population. It has not yet been touched by the influence of the great city of Detroit. It lust for sons tine retain as a purely agricultural area. Tenancy will probably increase for ease time though not to any alarming extent. Its papulaticn is nade up largely of early Alriosn stock of English descent and a sprink’ling of those other northern European peoples who use-me tc Aaerica in it. early history. The type of people must normally be classified as lordie if one uses the latest tern of the Ethnologist.‘ , ‘ social organisations have undergone a great change within recent years. Religious life as indicated by Church activity is aarked by de- cadence. Many Church organisations are abandoned and these structures are scattered about the County and stand as moments to a changing order and in a aeasure to the decadence of the early religious life. Cc-unieaticns , and aethcds .of travel have wrought their change and in turn may be partially responsible for the change. Young people are aoving cityward. and farming is carried on in neasure by older ass. or younger tenants. nae end of the present trend is not yet. Predictions ventured on the basis of present facts would be hassrdous. loo aany factors are entering in today to life in Michigan to make for hard and fast rules. /‘ . SW 16 OF LEIAIIIOOUITIs {OWNSHIPS OP ILIIBFIILDe OGDEN: 0mm. AID PAINT!“ fatal for Owners fatal for 261 tenants And tenants fetal Am. 76.127 In Crop- : or Corn 2131 ‘linter lheat .6013 8p lheat Oats or Grain 13018 Barley 1 01 Rye Buckwheat 21‘ Potatoes Clover and lllhhay 6E3? Alfalfh.Hll’ 3 28 “1:“ a" 1: 0 er 5 1| Field Pzzsorop 18 Fielg Deans 7 8 cans quar Beets 1148 Ca bage K Onions loot and Truck Crops 98% Mint l’oodlotsed Land 211; Unimprav Pasture or lee 72‘2 Clover fer Seed 4 limothy for Beed Fruit Apple frees 20‘96 Peach frees 3016 Pear lrees 8 Cherry trees 4 ; Grape Vines 7 Hives of Bees 5 Live Stock Horses 28 Dairy Cattle ; Other Cattle Sheep 7 Swine 131 2 Silos 169 23e102 13;: 2129 14 8 1 4 20 91: 1O 1 ‘33 1 2‘0 2 114 3335 21‘ 32% 112; 881 1187 .223 5922 46 total for 1051 Owners 53.025 16.686 4906 23 890 2,22 :53 12 8 6 66; 4 7 2 1 £11. 0 52. 1 16 2.71 2181 1 3%: :22; a? 7220 1 23 a Supervisors Census of 1922 cacao- e e e - (Db-’- 0.....‘ -&~» Charmkxgg MN VNWW N-‘NJIMF N e to WOW was-swa- . d 17 OCEAN COM. .5 «gamma-ommam._ 2:.35u22azmmiiazf studied lies in a basin that might be described as till plain. and of moraine and sandy lake beach origin. Some ten years ago it was cleared of forest and partially develOped agriculturally. Climatically it 1. unfavorably located for Agricultural purposes. Seasons are short. soil as a rule is poor and thin and communication and transportation is handicapped by lack of railroads and roadways. its sparse population makes difficulfihc provision of adequate school facilities. or the building of a social structure of any great significance. 1111s area is typical of much of the land north of the Mean lemperature Curve of #6 degrees and will be discussed further in the general summary. Papulation is of mixed origin. Many of the pioneer settlers are still in the county and occupy the same land they developed. A certain love for the picturesque hills and valleys of this area seems to impress the people ~ and hold them there regardless of meager econoaic rewards. Most of the pepulation is what might be described as Anor- icsn stock. Some signs of degeneration were noted on the writers visit through this section. Ccmnunities in which too frequent intermarriage has taken place seem! to have evolved a few degenerate individuals. In the little village of Lupton this condition was particularly observed. Luptm is an old lumber village. The railroad has ceased to entice cunercs and the people down in the pocket of the hills have experienced a period of isolation that no doubt has tended to produce the conditions mentioned above. fenancy is not a great factor. The Census of 1920 gives the nuaber of farms as 1231 and the nunber of tenants as 162 of which 69 were share tenants. i'he percentage 1. given for 1920 as 12.6 and in 1910 as 7.1 percent. i'his again is not an alarming increase when ccnpared with the . small pepulation of the county and the relatively meager possibilities for future development. Educational facilities are limited because of the Econmic limitations. What is true of Ogenaw. county is also true of a great nany other counties of this northern area. More will be said regarding (l 18 this in the final sulmary. Looking back over the description of these various counties it can becseen that types of soil. agriculture. peoples and geographic dis- tribution is varied in sufficient degree for generalisation. while the data secured is not all of equal weight and importance it is of sufficient value for ccnparative study to provide a basis for the conclusions to follow. SUMMARY OGMAW COUNTY :12 TOWNSHIPS OF LOGANeWEST BRANOHe HILLe RICHMOND total for Owners otal for otal for For Per and Tenants 3263mm“ 600 Owners fenant Owner rota-l: Acreage 71.422 6159 83.5 110.3 In Crepe of Corn 5 6 2 1 e e Winter Wheat 528: 3135 266 5.3 ‘ei 32.. £321. 51% .92 “1’ '2: g Barley ; 19 3236 7:3 5: Buckwheat 253 19 22‘ a .3 . ' 5333:1111 fincth a H22 66(1) 92% 12'; 1' .Alfalfa Hay y ay 1% 31 3&7 3. 5:2 [”811 Bay . 73 1‘ 52 e2 e1. Other Hay Craps '~‘ 1111 27 .4 .2 Field Peas 604 81 52 1. .9 Field Beans ’ 1368 202 1166 3.2 1.9 S Beans . 12 12 .2 one ‘ 2 2 Root and truck Crops 18 2 16 .t . Woodlots 2 2 1 7 eg e3 Unimproved Land 39 6% 12;; 28;” 36. t . Pasture or Idle 8‘0 0 7801 9.6 13.0 Clover for Seed 350 9 341 .1 .6 filtxothy for Seed le 21- . .' £55.... 2.3: 9°Zr° 93‘ "33 “ ‘ ".‘1‘ Pear frees 47 32 I12 .8 . Grape Vines 2 7 1 226 .Z Hives of Bees 1 2 p 7 1 5 .1 .3 MB. Stock ‘33 1‘ 1 4C cross 2 c e Dairy Cattle 217; 1g; 1 3.3 2.3 (83:2? Cattle 28028 278 2 1 e 3.2 Swing 1645‘ 17? 157; 2.; 2:6 e Supervisors Census of 1922 19 GENERAL COIOLUSIOIS All!) SMABI Questions involved. 1. “lat is the trend of tenancy in Michigan? Will it continue to develop in the future as it has in the past? 2. (a) Is tenancy in Michigan Harmful1 (b) Is the present increase .of tenancy a menace to Agriculture. and the looncnic and Social welfare of the state? 3. Is tenancy more cannon among certain types of peeples than . among others. 1.. Is tenancy more cannon among certain types of agriculture than among others! 3. that forms of tenancy are most comes! 6. shot shall be the future policy toward Agricultural Land? Bhall tenancy be discouraged! Can anything be done to retard or increase tenancy in Michigan? 1. that is the trend of tenancy in Michigan? Will it continue to develop in the future as it has in the past? the trend of tenancy has been to increase slightly in the areas where general farming practices prevail and where land values at the same time are high. A slight increase is also noticed in the central portion of the Upper Peninsula and a few counties in the northern portion of the Lower Peninsula. See Map VII AND tABLE page 23, It is the belief of the writer that tenancy in Michigan will not increase greatly except in a few counties where land values continue to rise and where general farming will continue to be practiced. 2. Is tenancy in Michigan harmful1 It would be unfair to facts of the ease to venture an unconditional IO. Its increase. while by no means rapid. is fairly constant. In the vicinities of large cities such as Detroit. flint. Pontiac. Grandrapids. Lansing and other in- dustrial centers the rapid subdivision. for residential purposes. has removed much land from the field of agricultural practice. re (a v . I a 1.‘ ' I '. . r. . ' " 1 , \ , ‘ l < o r; \ N __ _. — . ' . I t . \ 1 I r r' r ‘ \r d . D O s , .-. \- . l. f . 20 In these areas tenancy is no longer a factor. Along the shores of the Great Lakes and the areas surrounding the inland lakes the useof land for Resort purposes has also removed much land frm use for growing crops. In the intensive areas of highly specialised crops. tenancy will never be a great factor as it scene to be a rule within this itatc. that farms denanding highly specialised training for operators. are not in the tenant class. the reasons for this are so obvious that space will not be given to a discussion of them. Land in the Upper Peninsula and the upper part of the Lower Peninsula. particularly that portion lying above the Mean temperature Curve of ‘6 degrees. contains a very small percentage of tenancy. (See Maps IV V VI VIII for Comparison). the reason is not primarily due to temperature and short seasons but also because of distance from potential markets and a soil not generally adapt- ed to a large farming program. the upper part of the lower Peninsula and the Upper Peninsula contain lands that average not more than ‘30 . (See Map II.) It has been stated elsewhere that low land values and high tenancy do not go tcgcther. Whore land can be obtained so cheaply. owner- ship is- made easy and tenancy as a stepping stone is only nominal. In the lower portion of the Lower Peninsula where land values are higher there is found a correspondingly high rate of tenancy. (See Map 1111) but not in the measure to constitute a menace to the welfare of the state. 3. Is tenancy more co-lon among certain types of people thul among others! the situation was examined to determine the facts relating to the case and it was found that no correlations could be developed along this line. A general impression that really is not fully substantiated is that immigrants seek ownership more sealously than native Americans. meaning by native Americans. those descendants of our early pioneers. who came to this country to escape from so called Old World tyranny. tenancy is not apparently confined to any particular race or group in the state. It does not seem to be related in any way to races. or nationalities. national'd‘g’hch as the German. tinnish. Polish and Scandinavian seem to have deep seated desires for ownership and in the areas where these people settle the tendensy has been for then to acquire land as soon as possiblee 21 t. Is tenancy more common among certain types of agriculture than among others1 . from the study of the Supervisors Census of 1922. the various Census of the Udted States. and special inquiry of each County studied. it is very apparent that tenancy is not very ccssncn dncthe areas devoted to Fruit Farming. Potato growing and other highly specialised crops requiring unusual skill and manapent. be reason is no doubt simple enough. In these forms of Agriculture a minimum of land is required and success in the enterprise depends more upon the skill and technique of the operator than upon the land itself. Skill and high development of ability in producing the specialised crops are largely a matter of education and since education requires an outlay of capital. the individual ' who would ordinarily be found in the classification of tenant would not be able to reach this degree of preparation. General Parsing ,whioh will inohtgzmehgock. grains. hay and products common in our general farming areas, naturally tends to have a higher percentage of tenancy. he agri cultural ladder. a phrase that has become common in recent years. when speaking of the way toward ownership. has in it this rung called tenancy. which a large proportion of farmers must experience who wish to obtain ownership without capital. Since general farming can be learned thru a rather short period of apprent- iceship. as a farm hand. and requires no great financial outlay. it natur- ally follcws that this type of farming has the greatest percentage of tcnancylin the northern states. this is amply demonstrated in Michigan. Both lston and Lenawee Counties have yielded data pointing to this tendency very emphatically. So it may be said without uncertainty that tenancy in Michigan has naturally followed this path. It has been largely confined to the general farming areas. these areas are indicated in Map lumber VIII 3. list forms of tenancy are most cannon! Share tenancy is most cc-on in Michigan amounting. according to the 1920 Census to 12.1 percent. Cash tenancy icludes about 5.6 percent.of all farms. Preportion of tenancy has been about the same over the period in which we have records. . 22 . the Supervisors Census of 1922 made no inquiry into this subject and thereforcsuppies us with no data for couparisons. the Census of 1925 has revealed an increase in Cash tenancy in some parts of the state but since the final.statistics on this are not available a conclusion can not be advanced as to the trend at present. . there must inevitably be a correlation between the Economic and Social conditions of a people and there is no doubt a correlation of these conditions as related to tenancy. the tables summarising the Census data for the Counties studied show quite generally a larger enter- prise per tenant than owner. Crap averages are larger per tenant. as are agessges for live stock and work animals. Acreages too are generally larger for-tenants than for owners. the question that cannot be answered here is that of the relation socially. Is the tenant as well off socially as he is economically? Inquiry made of approximately 100 eo-operative managers in the full of 192A brought forth the impression that tenant farmers did not take the vital interest in co-cperative marketing organisations that owner farmers did. In the fruit areas so few tenants were encountered that the inquiry in that section was of no value. In.the general farming districts the tenant farmer took little interest in the cocperative grain elevators or in the livestock shipping associations. the writer was informed that the reason for this was without question the short time lease. and often the lack of’desire to invest money in an enterprise that might not be of use the following year. In the dairy sections and centers about diiry enterprises,tenants took an active part in the cooperative creamery or station. the reason being that no great economic outlay was required and there seemed no period of waiting. and furthenbstcck could generally be disposed of at a profit should the holder find it necessary to move to another community. Special inquiry in the form of 130 questionaires sent to the rural teachers elicited the general opinion that the tenant did not take as much interest in the schools as did the owner farmer. Less interest was taken by the tenant in the churches of the community. and a general inference was that the tenant was indifferent toward community enterprises. F's 23 yuan AND FARM AOREAGE. WITH Panosnraos or pass LAND INPROVED asp AOREAGE PER 323M. 3! tENURE 022606 or 1920 MICHIGAN Number All In roved Percent Average acreage Land in Farm er Fan: of [arms in Land prov Barns . (Acres) ., yams Improged 9294. HE‘. 3'“?”'m " ' :159.‘06 1t.541.t61 9.6‘6.641 67.7 91.2 61.6 tire arm Hiring .d_ ,‘59'37‘ 12,126,967 6,163,636 67.3 66.7 56.; d1t1°n‘1 ' ' 19,532 2.412.51t 1.663.005 69.6 123.5 66.2 "'““°’ ' 2.319 567.691 272. 352 #6.} 253.5 117.4 tenants - 8h”. - ' 34.722 3. 90 .609 2.606. 326 71.2 112.. 60.6 2 .260 2.6 2 2 0 2. 122. 6 .1 Share-Oash1 521261i:6;g .égégg 32.: ‘2 .; i-i 2 1’ F; Os s e gnap°°1f1°d 9 m; 176:922 122.679 66.7 104. 71.9 Entire stato196.ht7 19,032,961 12,925,521 67.9 96.9 65.6 uuunEa or FARMS BY rmnuas. wwma PER CENT DISTRIBUTION .33. .. I232. Michigan 1920 1910 1900 ‘ 1690 1660 1920 1910 1900 1690 1660 g:::; 196.At7 206.960 203.261 172.344 156.006 30030 100.0 000.0 130.0100.o Manager 161.725 174.271 171.0A6 146,206 136,597 62.3 64.7 6t.o 66.0 90.0 tenant 33.722 32.669 32.213 24.136 15.411 17.7 15.6 15.6 1A.o 10.0 Share and Sharecaah 23.702 21.2k6 22.662 15.924 10.396 12.1 10.3 11.1 9.2 6.6 Cash and 11.020‘ 11.441 9.731 6,212 5.015 5.6 5.5 4.6 A.6 3.3 Unspecified . A , unit“ StItOI 36e1 57 e0 35s} 25.‘ 2506 FARM OPERATORS. BY AGE AND mas. WIN PERCENTAGE OF MAINS I! BAG! AG! GROUP. 1920 1910 T E I A E T S W M m1. .. Ai§°3§u22m 192061910 1920 1910 1220 1910 2313232363333 33%?333 33:33 33:32 31:33 33:23 : 13:: Under 25 5.77 W; 2.974 a. .266 .431 52.5 5 .1 25- -22 27, 521 25, 59 2;.123 23.522 1 .5101 5.71; 20.1 12.6 2%:. 2 47:223 §:%§g Zl'g9 96 #61745 3% §Zo‘ 5. 4§g1 1%.; I9 2"6... 3122§o 23:61? 20:4;9 3313§§11.051%6? #29 ' $33.22; 2.370 6521.667 564 452 65 19.1 10.0 ”-7 . . 2t 6. mm. 1. the 32.1.. Land Policy! mm. shall be the future policy ‘toward Agricultural Land? Shall fenanoy be discouraged? Can any- thing be done to retard or increase tenancy inJMiohiganI Michigan is still a new state so far as Agricultural Development is -concerned. IDefinite policies have not been possible that would compre- hend the whole state so long as pepulation was in flux. so long as industries made such rapid inroads in absorbing country papulation and land. and so long as the persistent policy of cutting off the timber continued. low that the lunbering stage has passed and vast areas are denuded of virgin forest. some effort is being manifest toward a partial restoration of stripped land. A forestry program has begun to shape itself. though at this writing it is of so little significance that the farmer is hardly aware of it. POpulation is still in transit. Specup lation in cut-over land. over development of certain areas unadapted to agricultural practices has led to such unrest and shifting of population. Mentioning again the Mean temperature Curve as a dividing line: much of the land to the north of it must inevitably be unprofitable for general agriculture. A study of the auditor generals report for the year 1924 reveals the fact that many of the northern counties are failing to pay expenses. In order to meet costs of providing schools. roads and salaries for county officials. is well as other county expenses. other portions of the state lust bear the additional expense. Much of the land while fertile and capable of producing good crops. is climatically handicapped. and geographically removed from good market centers. Auany studies are being made by the State Department of Conservation. under the Geological Survey. these studies are valuable in that not only the resources of the upper portion of the state are being determined but the economic and social conditions are being defined. Obviously today too Inch land is being used for agricultural purposes that should be dcvoted to a reforestration progrma. Cost of county government in cutover land areas is continually increasing and inooae is decreasing. Land continues to revert to the state. this land should be planted to trees as soon as possible. Counties should be consolidated in order to reduce cost of government. The geographical 25 boundaries of a county today are out of tune with our modern aethods of travel and ccamunicatioa. Distances do not mean what they did before the autonobile. l'our counties today could be consolidated and one set of officials accomplish what it now takes four to do. nu. change is inevitable or otherwise the land in aany counties will revert to the 9 state because of excessive taxes. 0. Furthernore the people of the group that met shoulder the tax burden will become increasingly opposed to ‘ such wasteful practices. Ihile this statement is not a specific reference to fenancy it nust be borne in nind that the poopl. now shouldering the greater burden of taxation live where 12...} value. are highest and "in the tn... where a 111.11 percentage of tenancy prevails. It is inevitable that tenancy will increase in these sections as long as such a cendition exists. ' ‘ ' l ‘ In a certain measure tenancy can be discouraged. but only as it is made easier for the young farner to acquire ownership of land. Anerican people are so constituted that they will prefer ownership with hardship to “saucy and prosperity. As taxes increase and other costs nount proportionately. ownership of land becomes less possible for those with limited means. the mg of lenancy in the Agricultural ladder lust be- cuc of increasing length. As it increases in length the number of tenants will increase. At least this will be true in the sections where general farming is practiced and where land values renain high. Tenancy in Michigan however. is not yet an alarming condition. Generally speaking. the systen as followed in this state has led to ownership. It is however on the. increase. American people will for many years to come look upon it with nisgiving. A certain percent of tenants will remain so. not of choice but of necessity. Inability on their part. shiftlcssness. poor nanagsent. and aisfortune will keep then in the ranks of the tenant. The better fitted individuals will climb the ladder and reach the top of ownership. tenancy is as bad as the bad tenant and the bad landlord. Both can function in a way to destroy the best and the finest in the social fabric of country life. fititutions created for the upbuilding of the social (1 26 and moral structures of Country Life die from want of vital interest of the people concerned. The picture of vacant and weather worn churches all over the state of lichigan is not so much that great institutions have died. for some of then probably never did render much of a service. but that they are I momen‘lnto failure. Each year of ravage of sun. wind)and storm makes them more fitting examples of failures Failing, on the part of the people to put then to some use. and too often examples of the passing of an interest when owner farners left the land to a disinterested tenant. fhose who have devoted much time to studies of the best forms of tenancy have declared unanimously in favor of the Share type of tenancy. the long time lease as used in Ragland does not seem to be practical in this country. but written agreements with clear undem‘th‘e part of both owner and tenant are absolutely essential. Under these conditions opportunity for financial advancement is afforded the tenant. and a fair return frcn the investment 3; the owner. If conditions are not ideal. and frequently they are not. it becomes a wasteful practice. resulting in land robbery. in a poorer social comunity,and a lack of interest on the part of the tenant in those common enterprises and associations that make for the best of a people living together. Michigan should have a land policy comprehensive enough to en- brace the whole realm of Agricultural life. At present the multiplicity of bureaus and agencies have a wealth of material in vaults and storage that tell a wonderful story. m. should be used. A Council of all these agencies should establish a policy that aimed to solve the problems stated above. Many years of splendid work have been done by faithful servants of the state. iheir services should merit the reward that comes in using constructively the lessons they have learned. r“ fame 12:1 in“: '20 3.22: :-. "t 929 2.12.; Tamra!) in aerfr'w'io mow vein-av bm: tun-:nv ‘t'v e~uic2q ed! .M a" 391.1‘39rni' :14":- ‘sr': tic-n.- 1m. ”.1 a? ”3mm” “I , 4, t,_ ' ' ' ..:~'::: 13.23?! Lb ~- v5.1 1:16:26an 16:13 to -0 » .Qc?'l'Y-a r f .111: " 933v”: '5: first: 11':st .e'trv'ia? c.‘vr:cnnmom\ens ”_ r- .re'nL'ZaF. fc'm' 3r" ”-1 uric ‘ 'z c 311 £333} 910. need: ‘01- M -'.-.'1.;:re traffic 90° a.» .eau - iL‘r. .‘ cad: 32:1; 1.: 0120.1 O!“ h‘ f 2- .: wt“; (.1‘ :22)? men-:2“: tam: saris see-”r3631 as in _- .inane: 5.. _ .2 arm“. fan: $3.: to net? :‘z -t- ,11' “can Lamar-ab end 0* f > \ .{cnknet 3'; ect‘ «"25". 0:1: 1': new} at Vince's—Clam WOOD «at :1? 120‘“an ed 0.? was ton 594.5 ‘zuigrs at bmm as easel can .1301! 2c 9121:; $1.3: .fxeirm: music tiff! unease-:33 nsfilfl M g .. .1 aaohtl‘jmoo seed! new: .Ls't Macao [lamit ed: on M ‘3; tie“: a bus unmet ed} beho‘l‘ia a.‘ hwr-eonavns Islam 10’ fit has .Laebi eon ems enoifilnzoc 11' memo ed! 30 tat-mam ed: Ila-a: - n! matinee-x .eclica'xq Ithaca” a 39910an #2 .601: m ted: . so Jae-zeta} ‘20 test a bma‘zthwme [since eecccq a at .u - 3nd? enofiaioosss has sesi’nq‘z‘sdae some cacti: at issue: ed: 10 ‘ assuage: galvfl chocq a in seed efl fl ,1 _ -ns.es Mose cvksaedemcc tattoo that a eved hired. nag - " ' tau-u. a. .e'iti Winnings 'tc alas-1 sloth as: We fl. “‘0' at lamen- to ashes a "an astoneaa has . V g , ‘ Us to [moi A .besu ed Hoods std?- .z-zc:s Ir‘hahnow a 11* 3“; ed? evIea 0: beats .2ch rennet; 3 4.214122..- bIUods salons. ad snob need and tees blind” is m vial .evodc hem 3. “assigned: each-tee «tort? .e:ai‘e ed: to ems-I k, .- M end-gee encssci ed: YIOVI’OMMO galls n3 some taut-A i - BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY rm WANG! Bulletins - - - Bars tenancy and Lenses --- A.H.Benton lumber 178 Dee.1918 University of Minnesota. . rar- tenancy in Missouri «0.3. Johnson and 3.1!.Green - [usher 167 Iissouri hperinent Station 30.19% Relation of types of lenanoy to types of larning In Iowa -- lunber 214 Iowa State College. Anes. Iowa file Ian Lease Contraot-- L.C.Gray & H.A.rnrner -- Far-era Bulletin 116‘ U.S.D.A. Relation of Land fame to Plantation Organisatioz - C.O.Brannen U.S.D.A. MO? 12 9 0015.18 192‘ he lebraska Mi - Sone Land tenure Phases - J.O.Bankin. Mar 18 Agrioultural xperinent Station. University of lehraska H.192 Ian tenancy- An Analysis of the Oooaanoy of 500 has. C..1.Calpin & Experiment Station. University of soonsin - Baily P.3oag Research Bulletin No“ Ieh 1919 lethod of Banting Land in Ohio- - JJJalooner lumber :3 Ohio Agricultural hperiusnt Station - - Wooster 0 Beport of the Comittee of the Rural llinisters' Conferenoe A.& ll. College of tens. August 1 1923. third Series Vol.9. Hm! Sosa Socially Significant Rural Coniitions- W.B.Garnett. Ph.D. A.&.H.College. College Station. fexas. Lease Contraots used in Bentigg Me on Shares - I.V.'iloox - l'eh 1918 UeSsDeAe 3111101313 ‘0. ” Barn Leasing Systems in Wisconsin B.H.Hibbard J.D.Blaok -Besearoh Bxperinent Station University of Wisconsin. Bulletin 47 Ienting Dairy Barns H.A. turner U.8.D.A. Bulletin 1272 Soils of the Detroit Area -- Speoial Bulletin lo 10‘ ”Cd-Ont Station 11.8.0. Social and Boonosio Survey of a Rural ll'ownship in Southern linnesota hapson and Warher University of Minnesota Studies in Boone-dos Huber 1 (1913) A aural Sooial Survey of Orange. Blaokhawk County. Iowa Mar 18‘ Deo.1918 Agricultural Bxperientn Station. Iowa State College. A Rural Sooial Survey of Lone Tree lownshig. Clay County. Iowa. Busber 193 Agrioultural Experiment Station. Iowa S to College march 1920 Sooial Survey of hree Rural fosnships in Iowa Paul S. Pieree University of Iowa. Iowa City. Iowa First Series lo. 12 1917 Land Tenure and Conveyanoes in Hissouri 11.0.Budson 0.0:? It. Bulletin 16 University of Hiesouri (1915) Illinois Legislative Referenoe Bureau- Constitutional Convention Bulletin Bod} 1919 f‘ A 2mm. scam I! mmon~ Warsen saunas Departne t of Church and Country Life. Presbyterian Church U.S.A. Fifth AVOmIC' 1.1. . Rural Prinary G J.H.Kolb Research Bulletin 91 Dec. 1921 Agricultural xperinent Station U. of Wis. and U.S.D.A. Madison. Wis. Social Surveys of Rural School Districts C.J.Calpin Circular 22 University of Wisconsin Land Contracts in ical Counties of the Wheat Belt B.A.Boeger U.S.D.A.Bu lctin 5’ Barn I cut Practice of Chester County Pa. U.S.D.A. Bulletin 5&1 '.J.Sp 11mm. 3.11.an I“ G.A.Billings. Relation of Land Income and Land Value C.R.Chanbers U.S.D.A. Bulletin Nuber 122‘ Practical Barn Economics U.S.D.A. Miscellaneous Circular No.32 HeOeMJ-Ol‘. HeReMll", J.R.1'app. m. Country ghurclgian Economic and Social Force Bulletin 278 Oe a“ 11 Agricultural Experinent Station U. of Wis. Madison. How the Federal hrs Loan Act Benefits the farmer. tar-era Bulletin No. 792 0.11.!hcnpscn U.S.D.A. Land Settlenent and Colonisation in the Great Lakes States. JOhD De Black. LeOeGl‘B’ UeSeDeA e '0 1295 Cash and Share Banting of Barns Alva 8. Benton. Bulletin No. 171 Agricultural lyerincnt Station North Dakota Agricultural College A Study of Barn Managnentp problems in Lenawee County. Michigan. S.D.A.Bulletin Number 6 ‘ H.M.Dizcn. Assistant Agriculturist and J.A.Drake. Agriculturist. Buying a Barn in an Undeveloped Region U.S.D.A. Bulletin 1385 Landlords of Nebraska Narss J.O.Rankin Bulletin 202 Nov. 1924 University of Nebraska. Agricultural Experiment Station. Lincoln. tenure and Bars Investnent in Nebraska J.O.Rankin Nmber 205 ”b.1929 BOOKS Darn Manapcnt Adana Chapters 23-24 Principles of Nural Economics 1'.N.Carver Chapter IV and '1 Agricultural Economics 3.0.1‘aylor Chapter xx Nara tenancy in the United States Yearbook of Depz. of Agriculture W.J.Spillnan and N.A.Gcldenweiser Fara tenancy in the United States W.B.Bissell Report of the National Country Life Association 1919 fleeting. Selected Beadings in Rural locncnics !.N.Carver lar- i'enancy in the United States- B.A.Gcldenweiser Leon N. i'ruesiell Census Icncgraph 192C Rural Michigan L.A.Chase lbs Social frond B.A.Ross A treatise on the Law of Landlord and tenant L.A.Jcnes Encyclcpfiia of Law and Practice Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture 1922 Yearbook of the. Departlent of Agriculture 1923 Cooperative Organisations Cooley. A. History of Public Land Policies B.H.Bibbard he Relation of a Permanent Agriculture to Social Welfare 1925 1'.!'.:yunt. University of California. Inc Place of Agriculture in Reconstruction Duttcn 1919 J .3 Mom Cha ter 1 Agricultural Economics B.C. curse U.of Chicago Press Chapter III ‘ fhe Real trouble With the Paners - Berbert Quick Outlines of Sociology - Blacknar and Cillin Our Rural Heritage - J .M.Willians PERMIOALB Institutional Review of Agricultural Economics October - Decenber 1925 Annals of Political and Social Science a January 1929 Vol 0111 No 206 Journal of Par. Boone-ice (Pars Qenaucy in 1920 B.B.Bibbard) October 1921 Recent Itendencies in Rural Life in the United States Intonation Service Jan. ‘32qu Department of Recent and Education. Federal Council Churches of Christ in Anerica Journal of Bern Economics Can Paras Pay for rho-selves. Vol.III No 5 Journal of Land aw Public Utility locuonics Nuber 1 Vol.1 January 1929 he Place of tenancy in a Systen of Pars Land fennre- Geo. S. Wehrwein the Christian Century - October 2 1924 Iditcrial Page 1299 he ”gmasine A33: 1923 Literary n13.»- Mar 4 1922 'n. Crapper' 2.3.1111»: Report of field Operations- Bureau of Soils Report Mar 6 1904 Institutional Review of Agricultural looncnics H.A.!urner Share Renting of Paris in the United States - Oct. Dec. 1925 berican Association of Agricultural Legislation Bulletin6 132 P 6—21 he Division of tar: Incone between Landlord and tenant J .0. lack Boards Mann 1101 59 (192s) No 3 p 105- he Landlord's and the tenants Share Share Leases for Dairy Paras P 108-9 thesis in Piles of University of Nebraska . Pan tenancy in Nebraska c with tars Ownership 8.31110 ‘2 P Illus Lincoln Nah. 1 18 Political 3.1.1:... Quarterly (1916) (Vol 51 No 1 p 55-65) 1 . Cent ' P 678-86 '2‘ 90*: Landugob en why not try neqtayage H.H.La thaugue Political Science Quarterly Dec 192‘ Perl- 92 81-8 July '1‘ Anerican Parnlandlord tenant problen R.JKellar Country 1.1:. 22 72-81 3 1.,‘12 Renting Versus Buying ep technical World 20 268 .71. Dec '1 “lat Chance has the tenan Earner ' R.R. ellar American tconcsics Review Sup. ’1 180-212 March 1919 tenancy in an Ideal Systen of Land Ownership R.t.Ely a C.JGalpin. unrest Opinion 67-196-7 Septenber @919 tenants Arsing to fight the biggest arn Landlord in Anerioa. Worlds Work May ' 23 Reuters and Croppers in the South Survey ril 3 1920 Rural Housing and e tenant Parser - W.B.Bissell “: 26-8 Rural herioa - October 192‘ to Hay 1929 the Country Gentle-an tenants Without Religion C.J.Gal in Au s2 99 192‘ Has a Rural tenant Am Rights ov.11 91 Giving the tenant a (finance - Charles Dil on Inch 10 1917 the Annals of the Anerican Aead of Political and Social Science January 1929 Vol 0111 No Journal of Perl Boone-ice Jan 1922 P 3‘ P Who Owns the Agricultural Land in the U.8. Geo. S.Wehrwein Industrial Relations Report Nusber 1O Aserioan Statistical Association P.15 _ Rural Life in the South R.C.Brsnson Chicago floral and haniner Nov.11 1918 he Scully tenant [anew-A Brisbane Getting a Para or Being a tenant Stcughtcn Cooley Dec 11 1916 Aaerican Sociological Society. tenant farting -W.0.Redrick 11s 9‘-96 Pacific Rural Press- Make it Sag: to Lease or Bw Parsing Land -R.E.Bcdges my Farmers of Pourty Centuries’Uapsn) 1911 P.H.Xing. Madison. Wisconsin. >111 the Nation Vol 112 257-8 n1. Seisureof the Land .in Sicily - Pressolini. GiUSOppO Anerican Economic Review - Supplement - March 1919 the Agricultural Ladder Countryside and Nation - Publications of the American Sociological Society 111 1-12 George E. Vincent Ram and Fireside January 1922; Rditorial- Para tenancy in O o. g! .33.... .9}, .' f. ..U ‘ , ‘M . r .1 .. p "I. Wiw‘ 1.1‘.- . — . . . u 6 .I a . , a ' . ‘ . n . ..s a . , ’Q 1 . 11‘1! . {In 11 1 u . 3.... . .. W191...?..-.§I1.,IL. yfl.v.§u.u.wfildd..d.:1nm 1» u.) 11 L4!!! . I «r 1.1-11.1! leased]... . ....J,1l.(.11. 3.321.}. :C ..II .. udlv 1144 £13.14. .n...- «.1. EL... ...FUI.J 4.2. .3 1.31.... : . .. a .. . : .H ......12 ....f. L ......r. (... 2.1.... ... . 1... If... .. 5.... ....p.“-h~....i»..dtlu.nu t 35:... ..., . . . .uu. ...._..:l;1._: .13 :w...:; ..1. . .v . . . . .. 9 .....EeI-‘(ve‘esti ..a‘s’a‘l‘Ivfif w. .. 11.5.11 . u 3. .. ...z, ...t;.*..i.t.f:.i .3: .11......t$.§:£» itflwncmi. V. ......n. 7 «J 112.5 ... ... .. ..- ,«un ..3. ...: .. n.¢..~..fi.u..fl.h....m.a{.1. 1a.." . . . . . ... 1. . .. . . I . . . .11 2.1.»; 1. “"111111111111111111111Es