Press translations [Japan]. Economic Series 0087, 1945-12-20.
Date20 December, 1945
translation numbereconomic-0422
call numberDS801 .S81
Persistent Identifier
ECONOMIC SERIES: 87
ITEM 1 Details Concerning the Areas to be Held by Landlords - Asahi Shinbun - 17 Dec 45. Translator: K. Sato.
Full Translation:
The committee meeting of the House of Peers on the amendment bill for the Farm Land
Adjustment Law was opened on l6 December.
INADA, Masaue, acted as chairman, and the interpellation followed. Agriculture and
Forestry Minister MATSUMURA made the
following reply concerning areas to be held by landlords:
"The standard will he set by each To (city), Do (province), Fu, and Ken (prefecture).
Prefectural governors will make out the
details according to the circumstances peculiar to their areas on this basis."
Minister MATSUMURA also made some explanations concerning the buying of farms:
"The area expected to be established as owner-cultivator farms is 1,500,000 Chobu.
Of this, 500,000 chobu will be bought by
the agricultural associations. The remaining 1,000,000 chobu will be disposed of by
a contract to be made between landlords
and tenants through the mediation of the agricultural committee.
ITEM 2 Commentary on Agrarian Reform Bill. The Bill is a Touchetone for Emancipation of Peasants. - The Tokyo Shimbun - 17 Dec 45. Translator: J. Okamura.
Summary:
On 9 December Supreme Headquarters issued a directive ordering the Japanese Government
to initiate a sweeping program of
agrarian reform to destroy the economic bondage which had enslaved the Japanese farmers
for centuries. The directive pointed
out (l) intense overcrowding on land, (2) conditions highly unfavorable to tenants,
(3) a heavy burden of indebtedness, (4)
government discrimination against farmers, (5) authoritative government control over
farmers, and ordered the Japanese
Government to enforce drastic agrarian reform by 15 March 1946.
The objectives of the Agrarian Reform Bill, which is now being deliberated at the
current session of the Diet, are
redistribution of arable land, and the fixing of farm rent at moderate prices. Consequently
the bill coincidently agrees with
the Supreme Command's directive in their common ideal to democratize Japanese agriculture.
As the directive of the Supreme
Commander points out, it is well known that Japanese farmlands are overcrowded. Of
the total 5,500,000 farm households,
3,500,000 cultivate land measuring less than one chobu. This figure applies to 64
per cent of the total farmsteads. Over half
of these 3,500,000 are the so-called "five tan farmers" (TN: Ten tan equals one chobu),
indicating the poor living conditions
of the peasant class.
ECONOMIC SERIES: 87 (Continued)
ITEM 2 (Continued)
The area of arable lend to be cultivated by these minor farmers covers l,70,000 chobu,
which is 30 per cent of the total
arable land. Thus, the size of the average farm 9.8 tan, a conspicuous difference
when compared with those in the UNTITED
STATES and CANADA, which are four chobu and 33 chobu respectively.
The finnictive tenure system of Japanese agriculture together with the high rate
of farm rent, results in poor production. The
major cause of this poor production is the unfair and unreasonable system of ownership
of land by landlords.
This fact can he easily understood if we consider the high percentage of tenant farms.
About 2,610,000 chobu of arable land
consists of tenant farms. Farm rent is very high, for it was inherited from feudal
times. Japanese farmers are compelled to
offer more than half of their harvests to their landlords as farm rent. With the remaining
half crop, they support their
families and plant next year's crop. The high rate of farm rent is clearly shown in
investigations conducted by the Minister
of Agriculture and Forestry.
According to these investigations farm rents of two-crop and one-crop paddle fields
respectively, average 49 per cent and 45
per cent of the harvest. Compare this with 10 to 20 per cent of the total harvest
as farm rent in major agrarian countries. In
the economy of Japanese tenant farming farm rent ranks too among all expenditures
with and average of 40 per cent.
Consequently, when such costly farm rent is paid, farmers get a very small income
for their daily labor. On the other hand,
income of landlords gained through farm rent is not consumed for agricultural production,
but it is usually spent in big
cities for other purposes. This system has been the main hindrance to the development
of sound agriculture in our
country.
The reason why the Government submitted such a drastic Agrarian Reform Bill to the
current session of the Diet is that the
present situation compels prompt solution of the land problems. The newly drafted
bill provided for the creation of peasant
proprietors (JISAKU NO), which is assumed to be a moderate method of land distribution.
There are many better ways to divide
agricultural land, as we see in the cases of GERMANY and BULGARIA, where land is to
be owned by the state.
The Bill provides that the arable land will be owned by peasant proprietors upon
completion of installment payments over a
period of 24 years. This measure is understood to meet the typical agrarian conditions
and customs of JAPAN. This is also a
manifestation of the policy to which Minister of Agriculture and Forestry MATSUMURA
adheres. The chief characteristic of the
new bill is the provision regulating that disposal of land by land owners. This provision
is subject to authorization by
prefectural governors or agrarian land committees to be organized in every prefecture.
Another characteristic is disapproval
of the ownership of more than five chobu of land, regardless of absentee landlords,
in order to turn over 1,500,000 chobu to
peasant proprietors in five years.
In order to realize the 100 per cent democratization of all Japanese farming villages,
the area of five chobu will be too
large, and we are of the opinion that three chobu will be good enough. The amendment
for the authorization to own land from
three to five chobu seems to have last its significance. By such an amendment, the
land owned by landlords to which the
provisions of the bill are to be applied, declines by 500,000 chobu. But we are not
reluctant to admit the great achievements
which the enforcement of the new bill will attain to realize 60 per cent felf cultivation
of the total tenant farm land of
3,610,000 chobu.
- 2 -
ECONOMIC SERIES: 87 (Continued)
ITEM 2 (Continued)
The payment in kind as farm-rent has been prohibited, and payment in cash has been
introduced. The pay rate has also been
fixed at 55 yen, which is the land owners' purchasing price of rice, for the current
crop year. This payment amendment will be
welcomed by the peasant classes for tenants used to pay in kind at the rate of one
koku of rice for an area of one tan. With
the gradual soaring of the price of rice, tenants had to pay high farm rent in kind.
With the aggravation of inflation, the
burdens of the tenant classes mill be lightened, if the payment is to be made in cash.
In case the price of rice falls, the
liabilities of tenants become heavier, but such fluctuation will be adequately readjusted
by prefectural governors or agrarian
land committees.
Thus, the fundamental basis for eliminating feudalistic elements in Japanese agriculture
has been established. But it is still
a problem of the future whether or not agriculture in this country will make steady
progress. It is still doubted whether the
stability of peasant proprietors can he maintained when reaction occurs, or to what
extent tenants will show their zeal in
production after their situation has been improved. The management of the agrarian
land committee will be another vital factor
in realizing land, reform.
The epoch making agrarian land reform bill, which will play a large part in deciding
the success or failure of the
democratization of Japanese agriculture, was formally submitted on 5 December to the
plenary session of the House of
Representatives. The Bill was keenly discussed at the session on two successive days
of 5 and 6 December, Further deliberate
were made at the committee meetings which were from 7 December to 12 December,
Interpellation focussed upon the bill throughout the five day committee meetings
were diversified, but they were mostly
conciliatory opinions representing the ideas of the landowner classes. Questions were
concentrated on three vital points: (l)
the extent of acreage of land to be possessed by the landlords; (2) prices of land
to be sold by land, lords, and (3) payment
of farm, rent in cash.
The following is the gist of queries and replies made at the committee meetings:
In connection with the amount of land to be owned by individual landlords, there
wasn't a single member who vigorously
demanded that the limit be in excess of five chobu. However, most of the interpellators
tried in vain to let the Government
admit the possession of land over five chobu as "exceptional cases," These interpellators
seem to have lacked the knowledge of
the impending democratization, and to be trying to adhere to the feudalistic ideals.
In this connection, Mr. TSTUCHIYA, Hiroshi, of the Progressive Party, said, "To turn
tenants into proprietors will result in
an increase of minor farmers; and. I would like to suggest that the amount of land
to be possessed by landlords be fixed at
five chobu at least, and possession of an area over five chobu be approved in accordance
with the rural conditions."
To this Minister MATSUBMURA replied, "I cannot agree with the opinion of Mr. TSUCHIYA
to raise the limit over five chobu. This
assignment is based on the fundamental policy of sending absentee landowners to their
own fields to cultivate them themselves.
But if the Government intended to hold to the self-cultivation principle. it would
not be necessary to limit the acreage to a
minimum of five chobu because three chobu, as originally planned, would be enough.
The smaller the land, the better will be
the results. On this point, therefore, we may assume that the answer made by the Minister
lacks concrete foundation and
reveals the conciliatory nature of the bill."
- 3 -
ECONOMIC SERIES: 87 (Continued)
ITEM 2(Continued)
Mr. AKAGI, a Progressive, asked why the extent of acreage is not clearly mentioned
in the bill; however, it is provided that
this is to be settled by Imperial ordinance. Clause Four of Article Four provides,
"agricultural land which does not exceed
the area provided by an Imperial ordinance", but it does not give figures. This is
attributed to the fact that is impossible
to give specific figures in many cases, though the average land, throughout the country
may be fixed at five chobu.
SELLING PRICES OF FARM LAND
Selling prices of farm land provided another difficult problem. According to the
rate fixed by the Government, paddy and other
fields of the "medium class" cost, respectively, 757.60 yen and 446.98 yen, while
landlords prices are 978.53 yen and 577.33
yen. These are differences of 220 yen and 131 yen. The Government has set its subsidies
at 150 yen and 90 yen to cover such
differences, and has been strongly urged to increase these subsidies to cover the
actual differences of 220 yen and 131 yen.
The Agricultural Minister, in this connection, replied that he would agree to the
revision of these amounts.
Major representatives of the Diet are worried about the exoritant black market prices
of rice. Rice is being sold at over
1,000 yen per bale at black market prices. The price of land sufficient to raise this
amount of rice is less than 1,000 yen.
The situation is very irrational representatives pointed out. However, selling prices
of fields are no small burden for minor
tenant classes. To make matters worse, general high prices of commodities are providing
an extra burden for these
tenants.
Mr. YAMAGUCHI, a Progressive, pointed out that landowners must pay more yen for rice
than its selling price, since the
landlords' prices and consumers' prices are set at different levels. He points out
that it is not fair to decide the prices of
fields without considering the differences in the price of rice. Government authorities
did not give a definite answer on this
point.
PAYMENT OF FARM RENT IN CASH
The third and most discussed problem was the payment of farm rent in cash. The opposing
attitude of the committee members, who
are regarded as being representatives of the landlords, toward the cash payment system
is attributed to the decline of the
value of currency. This tendency was manifested in the following opinions expressed
by Mr. MORI, Hajime, a Progressive, and
several other members.
"When the payment of farm rent in cash instead of in kind is enforced, tenants will
not be guaranteed a reduction in rent when
crops are poor. Those who suffer most by the sharp decline in prices of domestic rice
due to the importation of foreign rice
must be the tenants. There is not much possibility for newly-created, independent
farmers to sustain severe blows on such
occasions."
In this respect, Director WADA of the Agricultural administrative Bureau declared
that it was not always necessary to discount
rice prices when cash payments were properly managed. The Government, he said, could
continue the control of staple foods even
if rice were imported from abroad. He also assured the economic stability of independent
peasants by saying, "such peasants
are expected to adjust themselves to the situation created by economic instability,
and get along."
It is, however, doubted whether the Government will maintain rice prices, as it says
it will, in case the agrarian classes
meet depression through the international market, after the cash payment.
- 4 -
ECONOMIC SERIES: 87 (Continued)
ITEM 2 (Continued)
Against interpellations put by Mesars. TAKADA, Kohei, and YOSHIUE, Shryo, concerning
the anticipated decline of the amount of
rice to be offered for sale at the enforcement of the cash payment system, Government
authorities replied, "The Government
expects an increase in the amount of rice to be offered when measures to encourage
the offering of rice among the peasant
classes are taken and redistribution of rice among producers is conducted properly."
It was also pointed out by committee members that landlords who are compelled to
turn themselves into independent farmers and
beginning to request their tenants to return their land. It is not too much to say
that most of the committee members
intertained a rather negative attitude toward the revolutionary land reform bill,
as can be seen form their opinions revealed
at a series of meetings. The reason for the bill's passage is due, mainly, to the
directive issued on 10 December by the
Supreme. Commander in connection with agrarian reform.
DISTRIBUTION "X"
- 5 -
Loading...