Thus,”slave”cultivationisgrosslywastefulmayormaynotbetrue,hisviewthat,historically,foreconomicreasonssharecroppershavebeengraduallyreplacedbyfixed-rentfarmers,t,andthatintheUnitedStatessimilarsharecontractspredominateamongleasesofretailstores,beautysalons,gasolinestations,amusementparkrentals,,therarityofsharecroppinginEnglandasobservedbySmithandlaterbyMillandMarshallmightverywellbetheresultofthefreehold,,thecostofenforcingasharecontractmaybesohighastomakeitundesirable,sincetenancydismissalisoneeffectivedevicetoinsureagainstpoorperformancebysharecroppers.

Itis,ofcourse,d,whatappearstohavepermeatedthemindsofsubsequentEnglishwritersistheconvictionthattheBritish（fixedrent）s

Youngwasthesecr,hecondemnedthemetayersalmosteverytimetheywerementionedinhisTravelsinFranceduringtheYears1787,1788,and1789.[11]Ofthemetayagesystem,Youngwrote:

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

Onehundredyearslaterin1892,however,,MissBetham-Edwards,authorandofficerofpublicinformationofFrance,tooklibertytodeletemostofYoungscondemnationsofthemetayers.[13]AndtotheonlyremainingstatementthatIcouldfind-inwhichYoungclaimedthatthemetayagesystem”perpetuatespovertyandexcludesinstruction”—Betham-Edwardsaddedafootnote:”Complexassuchanarrangementmayappearatfirstsight,metayagemustbecountedasafactorofgreatimportanceintheagriculturalprosperityofFrance.”[14]

,whoeditedtheTravelsin1929,madenumerouscorrectionsonYoungsviewsinthelengthy”EditorsNotes.”[15]Maxwellpointedout,withthesupportofmanysources,thatatYoungstimeinFrancethereweregovern-mentregulationsonvinegrowing,heavytaxes,theaftermathofthewarsofLouisXIV,,Youngwasnotignorantofallthis,and-evenifweaccepthisviewthatFrenchagriculturewas”miserable”—itisdifficulttounderstandwhyheblamedthemetayersasthesolesourceoftrouble.[16]

Youngscondemnationofmetayagenotwithstanding,wefindinhisworkonepieceofevidencewhichseeminglyisconsistentwithinefficientlanduseundersharecropping;namelythelowrentoflandinFranceasparedwithEngland.[17]Accordingtothetaxapproach,nonlandinputsmittedtolandundersharerentarelessthanunderfixedrent,andthu,ceterisparibus,rentwillbelowerif（a）thelandislessfertile（whichYoungdiscussedambiguously）,or（b）thecostoftenantinputs（orthewagerate）ishigher（whichYoungwoulddenysincethemetayerswere”miserablypoor”）.Butotherthingswere,infact,ttime,whichmightwellhavediscouragedinvestmentinlandandthusledtolowerrents,amoresignificantfactor,perhaps,isthereportedlyheavytaxesimposedonthemetayers.[18]Giventhemetayersalternativeearnings,howevertrivial,ahighertaximposedontheoccupationwillrequirethatthelando

WhereasYoungmighthaveallowedhisemotiontorunawaywithhisjudgment,someofhisobservationscouldhavehintedtolaterwritersthatfixedandsharerentsyieldthesa,Youngobservedthatthesharepercentagesvariedfromplacetoplace,andthatthedivisionoffarmsizewasrelatedtopopulationpressure.[19]YettomyknowledgetheonlysubsequenteconomistswhoelaboratedfurtheronthedivisionoffarmsundersharetenancyareRichardJonesandJohnStuartMill.

Writingin1831,JonesduplicatednotonlySmithsthesisofthedevelopmentofleasingarrangements,butalsoSmithsconclusions.[20]Jones,however,,andacknowledgingYoungsobservations,Joneswrote:

Whilethemetayertenantpaysnominallythesame[rentalpercentage],hisownshareoftheproducemaybediminishedintwomodes:byhisbeingsubjectedtoagreaterquantityofthepublicburthens:,IamnotawarethattheFrenchmetayersufferedmuch……[21]

AndhecontinuedfurtherwhenhecametothemetayersinItaly: