www.fgks.org   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Metayage: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
→‎Localities: unnecessary caps
→‎Criticism: rmv pov tag, definitely stale, probably resolved
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 26:
 
==Criticism==
 
{{POV check|date=October 2008}}
British writers were unanimous in condemning the métayage system, until [[John Stuart Mill]] adopted a different tone. They judged it by its appearance in France, where under the ''[[ancien régime]]'' all direct [[tax]]es were paid by the métayer with the noble landowner being exempt. With the taxes being assessed according to the visible produce of the soil, they operated as penalties upon productiveness. Under this system, a métayer could fancy that his interest lay less in exerting himself to augment the total share to be divided between himself and his landlord and instead be encouraged to defraud the latter part of his rightful share. This was partly due to the métayer's relative state of destitution and with the fixed duration of his tenure - without which the metayage could not prosper. French metayers, in [[Arthur Young (writer)|Arthur Young]]'s time, were "removable at pleasure, and obliged to conform in all things to the will of their landlords," and so in general they so remained.<ref name="Cruveilhier, J. 1894">Cruveilhier, J. (1894) ''Étude sur le métayage'' Paris.</ref>
 
In 1600, the landlord [[Olivier de Serres]] wrote 'Le théâtre de l'agriculture' which recommends Métayage as cash tenants took all the risks so would demand lower rent while hired labour was expensive to manage.<ref>The Economic Theory of Sharecropping in Early Modern France, Philip Hoffman, The Journal of Economic History 1984, page 312</ref> [[Jean Charles Leonard de Sismondi|Simonde de Sismondi]] expressed dissatisfaction in 1819 with the institution of métayage because it reinforced the poverty of the peasants and prevented any social or cultural development.<ref>[[Jean Charles Leonard de Sismondi|de Sismondi, Simonde]] (1819) ''Nouveaux principes d'economie politique, ou de la Richesse dans ses rapports avec la population'' translated as ''New Principles of Political Economy of Wealth in Its Relation to Population '' by Richard Hyse, Transaction Publishers: London (1991). {{ISBN|0-88738-336-X}}</ref>{{page needed|date=December 2017}}
 
Yet even in France, althoughAlthough métayage and extreme rural poverty usually coincided, there were provinces wherein theFrance contrary was the case, as it also was inand Italy, (especially on the plains of [[Lombardy]].) Métayage, in order to be in any measure worthy of commendation, must be a genuine partnership, one in which there is no sleeping partner, but inwhere the affairscontrary of whichwas the landlord,case.<ref as well as the tenantname="Cruveilhier, takes an active partJ. Wherever this applied, the results of métayage appeared to be as eminently satisfactory, as they were decidedly the reverse wherever the landlords held themselves aloof.1894"/>
<ref name="Cruveilhier, J. 1894"/>
 
==See also==
*[[:fr:Fermage]]
*[[Sharecropping]]
*[[Sharefarming]]