,anassessmentoftheannualyieldofland(notlandvalue)wasmadetwoyearslater,butprimarilyattherequestofthelandowners,whoapparentlyde,intheexpectationthathighenoughassessments,fortheeventualofficialassessmentswereverymuchinthetenantsfavor.[7]Atanyrate,theseassessmentswereofficiallyadoptedinFebruary1952,andafterwardtherewaslittleevidenceoftheirbeingenforced.

Second,by”theorderdatedMarch29,1947”wasmeanttheorderofsh,graduallyfrom1948toearly1949,,therefore,thepromulgationandenforcementofthesharereductioninTaiw,itwaslargelyconfinedtotheprovincesofHupehandSzechwan,and”themethodadoptedfordeterminingtheamountofthetotalyieldofthemaincropswasbaseduponajointreportbythelandlordandtenant.”[8]ThismethodwasbasicallyunchangedaftertherestrictionwasintroducedtoTaiwanin1949,withsharedisputesinvestigatedandsettledbygovernmentofficials.

Andthird,”Thecropscustomarilyacceptedaspaymentofrent”obviouslymeansanycrop,”main”inthecitedarticleisapparentlyintendedtorestricttheformofpensatingpaymentinwhichthelandownermayshareinallcropsalikeunderthesharerestriction,sinceinsomesharecontractscertain”cereals”cultivatedbythetenanthadnotbeensharedbythelandowner.[9]”cereal”mightbe”main”,infarmsadoptingtwotosixyearsrotationswithfewrepetitionsofthesamecrop,allregularlyrotatedcropswere”customarilyacceptedaspaymentofrent.”[10]

Fromtheaboveitisclearthatthelandownerstotalrentalreceiptswerenotfixed,

ButtheconditionsofsharingarequitedifferentinthenewactpromulgatedinJune1951:[11]

www.youxs.org…Theterm”maincrops”shallmeanthecropsmostmonlygrownortherotationcropsactuallygrownaccordingtolocalfarmingpractices,and”principalproduct”shallmeanthechiefarticleforwhichthecropisgrown.

www.youxs.org.

Notethat(a),andevenin1951thefuturetense”shallbeappraised”wasused;and(b)theso-calledmaincropsinthisnewactareequallydifficult,ifnotimpossible,todefine,,noneoftheadditionalprovisionsinthisnewactwasputintoeffect,since,aswasnotedinchapter1,theenforcementrulesforthe1951actwerenotsetuntilFebruary1952,atwhichtimeanotherprogramoflandreformwasinthemaking.

Whatinredistributionofineinfavorofthetenant,whichwouldserveasapoliticalresponsetothe,underthesharerestriction,managedpartiallytorestoretheirinebyinducingmoreintensivefarming,,Chenhadcontemplatedprohibitingtheownersfromrequiringtenantstomitadditionalinputs,butthiswasneverputintothelaw.[12]Ithadbeenexpectedthen,thattheownerswouldrushtoselltheirholdingstotenantsatlowpricesbecauseofthesharerestriction,,o,inJune1951,furtherrestrictionswereputon,force,ants:topulsorilypurchaselandf,elaboratelydraftedin1952andenforcedin1953,underwhichnoprivatetransferoflandisallowed.

Theactof1951,thoughnotenforced,hassincebeenpublicizedasifithadstartedin1949,an,tenyearsafterhisownclaimthatthelandownersrentalineswerealmostashighasbeforethesharerestriction,owingtotheincreaseinoutputaftertherestriction,Chenchangedhistoneandassertedthattheredistributionofinehadbeenexactlyasintended—aclaimunderstandableaspoliticalpropaganda.[13]

Turningtolegalregulationsdirectlyrestrictingthelandownersinducingmoreintensivefarming,theonlyrelevantprovisionIcanfindintheregulationsasof1949reads:

Alimitationshallbesetonthetotalareaofboththeleasedfarmlandthatmaybetakenbackbythelessoraccordingtothelawandthefarmlandoriginallyownedandcultivatedbyhimself.[14]