Metayage: Difference between revisions

The '''metayage'''{{efn|{{IPAc-en|UK|ˌ|m|eɪ|t|eɪ|ˈ|(|j|)|ɑː|ʒ|,_|ˌ|m|ɛ|t|-}}, {{IPAc-en|US|-|t|ə|ˈ|j|-}};<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.collinsdictionary.com/amp/english/metayage|title=Metayage|work=[[Collins English Dictionary]]|publisher=[[HarperCollins]]|accessdate=March 23, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite Oxford Dictionaries|métayage|accessdate=March 23, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite Merriam-Webster|métayage|accessdate=March 23, 2019}}</ref> {{lang-fr|métayage}} {{IPA-fr|metɛjaʒ|}}; {{lang-es|mediería}} {{IPA-es|meðjeˈɾi.a|}}; {{lang-it|mezzadria}} {{IPA-it|meddzaˈdriːa|}}.}} system is the cultivation of land for a proprietor by one who receives a proportion of the produce, as a kind of [[sharecropping]]. Another class of land tenancy in France is named {{ill|fermage|lt=''fermage''|fr}}, whereby the rent is paid annually in banknotes. A farm operating under ''métayage'' was known as a ''métairie'', the origin of some place names in areas where the system was used, such as [[Metairie, Louisiana]].

Métayage was available under [[Roman law]], although it was not in widespread use.<ref>Cato, Marcus Porcius ''De Re Rustica'' Capitula CXXXVI - CXXXVII</ref><ref>Crook, J.A. (1967) ''Law and Life of Rome: 90 B.C. to A.D. 212'' Cornell Univ. Press: Ithaca, NY. p. 157</ref> It proved useful after the emancipation of Roman slaves as the newly freed peasants had no land or cash (the same phenomenon happened in Brazil and the USAUS when slavery was banned).

{{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>{{pageneededpage needed|date=December 2017}}

<ref> name="Cruveilhier, J. (1894) ''Étude sur le métayage'' Paris.<"/ref>