第20章 《佃農理論》英語原著 (14)

Thus,Smithisinerror.Whilehisclaimthat"slave"cultivationisgrosslywastefulmayormaynotbetrue,hisviewthat,historically,foreconomicreasonssharecroppershavebeengraduallyreplacedbyfixed-rentfarmers,iswrong.Oneneedonlypointoutthatsharetenancyhasnotbeenreplacedbyfixedrent,andthatintheUnitedStatessimilarsharecontractspredominateamongleasesofretailstores,beautysalons,gasolinestations,amusementparkrentals,andeventhemuchregulatedoilandfisheryindustries.Indeed,therarityofsharecroppinginEnglandasobservedbySmithandlaterbyMillandMarshallmightverywellbetheresultofthefreehold,underwhichaleaseforlifewasenforcedbylaw.Underaperpetuallease,thecostofenforcingasharecontractmaybesohighastomakeitundesirable,sincetenancydismissalisoneeffectivedevicetoinsureagainstpoorperformancebysharecroppers.

Itis,ofcourse,difficulttoevaluateSmith'sinfluenceoverlaterwritersonsharetenancy.Thetax-equivalentargumentaside,whatappearstohavepermeatedthemindsofsubsequentEnglishwritersistheconvictionthattheBritish（fixedrent）systemwasmoreadvancedandefficientthanrentalarrangementselsewhere.ThisconvictionwasreinforcedbythefamousTravelsofArthurYoung.

YoungwasthesecretarytotheHonorableBoardofAgricultureandFellowoftheRoyalSociety.EsteemedasanagriculturalexpertinEngland,hecondemnedthemetayersalmosteverytimetheywerementionedinhisTravelsinFranceduringtheYears1787,1788,and1789.[11]Ofthemetayagesystem,Youngwrote:

Thereisnotonewordtobesaidinfavorofthepractice,andathousandargumentsthatmightbeusedagainstit……Inthismostmiserableofallthemodesoflettingland,thedefraudedlandlordreceivesacontemptiblerent;thefarmerisintheloweststateofpoverty;thelandismiserablycultivated;andthenationsuffersasseverelyasthepartiesthemselves……Whereverthissystemprevails,itmaybetakenforgrantedthatauselessandmiserablepopulationisfound.[12]

Onehundredyearslaterin1892,however,averydifferenteditionofYoung'sTravelsappeared.Theeditor,MissBetham-Edwards,authorandofficerofpublicinformationofFrance,tooklibertytodeletemostofYoung'scondemnationsofthemetayers.[13]AndtotheonlyremainingstatementthatIcouldfind-inwhichYoungclaimedthatthemetayagesystem"perpetuatespovertyandexcludesinstruction"—Betham-Edwardsaddedafootnote:"Complexassuchanarrangementmayappearatfirstsight,metayagemustbecountedasafactorofgreatimportanceintheagriculturalprosperityofFrance."[14]

Betham-EdwardsisnottheonlyeditorwhochallengedYoung'sjudgment.ConstantiaMaxwell,whoeditedtheTravelsin1929,madenumerouscorrectionsonYoung'sviewsinthelengthy"Editor'sNotes."[15]Maxwellpointedout,withthesupportofmanysources,thatatYoung'stimeinFrancethereweregovern-mentregulationsonvinegrowing,heavytaxes,theaftermathofthewarsofLouisXIV,andvariouspoliticaldisturbancesontheeveoftheFrenchRevolution.Certainly,Youngwasnotignorantofallthis,and-evenifweaccepthisviewthatFrenchagriculturewas"miserable"—itisdifficulttounderstandwhyheblamedthemetayersasthesolesourceoftrouble.[16]

Young'scondemnationofmetayagenotwithstanding,wefindinhisworkonepieceofevidencewhichseeminglyisconsistentwithinefficientlanduseundersharecropping;namelythelowrentoflandinFranceasparedwithEngland.[17]Accordingtothetaxapproach,nonlandinputsmittedtolandundersharerentarelessthanunderfixedrent,andthusgiventhesameareaoflandtherentalpaymenttothelandlordwillbelower.Accordingtostandardeconomictheory,ceterisparibus,rentwillbelowerif（a）thelandislessfertile（whichYoungdiscussedambiguously）,or（b）thecostoftenantinputs（orthewagerate）ishigher（whichYoungwoulddenysincethemetayerswere"miserablypoor"）.Butotherthingswere,infact,notequal.Inadditiontothepoliticalinstabilityandregulationsonfarmingatthattime,whichmightwellhavediscouragedinvestmentinlandandthusledtolowerrents,amoresignificantfactor,perhaps,isthereportedlyheavytaxesimposedonthemetayers.[18]Giventhemetayers'alternativeearnings,howevertrivial,ahighertaximposedontheoccupationwillrequirethatthelandownerschargealowerrentalpercentageinordertokeepthemetayersatwork.Andthisimpliesalowerrentperacreofland.

WhereasYoungmighthaveallowedhisemotiontorunawaywithhisjudgment,someofhisobservationscouldhavehintedtolaterwritersthatfixedandsharerentsyieldthesameintensityofnonlandinputsshouldtheconstraintsofpetitionbeequal.Inparticular,Youngobservedthatthesharepercentagesvariedfromplacetoplace,andthatthedivisionoffarmsizewasrelatedtopopulationpressure.[19]YettomyknowledgetheonlysubsequenteconomistswhoelaboratedfurtheronthedivisionoffarmsundersharetenancyareRichardJonesandJohnStuartMill.

Writingin1831,JonesduplicatednotonlySmith'sthesisofthedevelopmentofleasingarrangements,butalsoSmith'sconclusions.[20]Jones,however,elaboratedontheadjustmentoflaborinputthroughlandsizedivisions.Withmoreinformationathand,andacknowledgingYoung'sobservations,Joneswrote:

Whilethemetayertenantpaysnominallythesame[rentalpercentage],hisownshareoftheproducemaybediminishedintwomodes:byhisbeingsubjectedtoagreaterquantityofthepublicburthens:orbythesizeofhismetairiebeingreduced.Bythissecondmodeofreduction,IamnotawarethattheFrenchmetayersufferedmuch……[21]

AndhecontinuedfurtherwhenhecametothemetayersinItaly: