Home
The Camps: Irish Immigrants in Argentina
Hilda Sabato and Juan Carlos Korol
Translated by Edmundo Murray

Landscape without trees between St. Paul's Monastery and Carmen
de Areco |
Irish and Irish-Argentine Landowners in Buenos Aires
1778-1922
by E. Murray
This
list includes 1,113 landowners in the province of Buenos
Aires, with lands purchased between 1778 and 1922 in
80 departments. The sources for this list are: (i) surveys
filed in the topographic service of the provincial government
in La Plata, transcribed by José Pedro Thill from records
of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas, Departamento de
Investigación Histórica y Cartográfica, Dirección de
Geodesia (La Plata, Provincia de Buenos Aires, May 2002);
and (ii) landowners included in Lista de Propietarios
de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, by Estudio Edelberg
(Buenos Aires, 1922). Records were not deduplicated.
The complete database is available to IAHS members.
|
|
‘In
no part of the world is the Irishman
more estimated and respected than in the Province of Buenos
Aires,
and in no part of the world, in the same space of time,
have Irish settlers made such large fortunes.’
The
Southern Cross, January 6th, 1875 |
Introduction
They
began to arrive from Ireland as early as 1840. They were forced
by hunger, poverty and by their eagerness to try their luck. They
were seduced by a young country: an unknown but promising, distant
yet possible land. Only a few decades later, they had become an
affluent and prestigious community within the larger and complex
society that was taking shape in the Argentine. In the following
study, we will track the itinerary of these Irish immigrants, analyse
their incorporation into the productive structure of developing
Argentina, and consider their life and organisation.
Between
1830 and 1950, sixty five million people abandoned Europe to settle
in other regions of the world. The scale of this process was unprecedented.
The majority of that colossal mass of people chose as destinations
the newly created American countries and, to a lesser extent, the
British colonies (Australia, New Zealand and South Africa). Up to
the 1880s, they came largely from the North-eastern part of Europe;
after the 1880s, the demographic shifted to the Southern part of
the continent. Argentina was one of the destinations for those immigrants.
For
a young and relatively sparsely populated country as Argentina,
the inflow of this people had a significant effect. The percentage
of foreigners in the local population amounted to one of the highest
ratios in the world. In the first decades after the Independence
War in 1810s, immigrants from different parts of Europe had already
started arriving, with the peak being reached in the fifty years
between 1880 and 1930. While there are several essays on the history
of the massive immigration, however, studies about the early migrations
are comparatively neglected. We do not even have such statistics
on those immigrants, as would allow us to evaluate their impact
on a region that was accelerating its capitalist development and
its insertion in the international market.
Early
immigrants played a key role in the transformation of the country,
particularly in the pampas region. The River Plate was the final
destination for Basque, French, German, Scottish, English and Irish
immigrants. Each group followed a different path, but all of them
contributed to define the shape of the society in which they settled.
In the next fifty years, the country developed those enduring features
that defined its economic and social structure: Argentina became
a world exporter of raw materials and foodstuffs, and an importer
of capital, labor, and manufactured goods.
Within
this context, the Irish immigration distinguished itself from others
because of its early and definitive role within the configuration
and transformation of the agrarian structure, and the shaping of
the rural bourgeoisie in the Buenos Aires province. In a few years,
in spite of barriers erected because of their peculiar language,
customs and traditions, and their relatively small number and lack
of wealth many Irish immigrants advanced from menial positions as
shepherds and cow-hands to the ownership of estancias, or became
midsized landholders. The Irish also advanced to positions of political
influence or leadership in the richest and most important regions
of the country. In this way, names like Ham, Kavanagh, Casey, and
Duggan joined the circle of the most traditional families of the
Argentinean rural bourgeoisie. However, upward social mobility was
not invariably the fate of the Irish immigrant, and many who arrived
as workers remained workers during this whole period.
In
retracing the paths followed by these "new men," our goal
will be to show how some of them became part of the expanding agrarian
bourgeoisie, while others joined the provincial petit bourgeoisie,
and yet others remained among the ranks of the rural working classes.
We will also describe the formation of an Irish "community"
and its transformation during the second half of the nineteenth
century.
Our
first chapter narrates the experiences of the first Irish who arrived
to the shores of the River Plate. These pioneers attracted other
countrymen to join them in the new land, and thus initiated in the
1840s the first wave of immigration from Ireland. Precisely in those
years, emigration increased sharply in that country due to a complex
combination of factors. Chapter III surveys some of the problems
experienced in Ireland at the time, exploring their effects on the
demographic dimensions of the Irish immigration to Argentina. Where
did these men and women come from in Ireland, how many were they,
were did they go once in their country of destination and what was
the demographic structure of the settlers are some of the main questions
addressed in that section. Chapter IV, in turn, focuses on the economic
and social conditions of the River Plate, where the largest number
of Irish settled, and pays particular attention to sheep breeding.
In
Chapters V and VI, we tackle the core subjects of our research,
that is the study of Irish assimilation into the productive sphere,
and its effect upon the stages of Irish community development. Here
we examine the socio-economic context within which the Irish community
became relatively successful in terms of the biographies of
men and women whose everyday struggles were crowned by success.
Finally,
we must add that many of the problems arising from this research
cannot be elucidated within the strict context of one immigrant
group, and that these problems should be resolved within the broader
study of the social structure in the Buenos Aires province during
the second half of the nineteenth century, and of the role played
there by the early immigrants. Furthermore, additional studies about
similar groups may enrich the discussion with regard to the internal
organisation of the total Argentine community. In this way, our
research must be considered only as a case study indicating a set
of problems and solutions historically enacted in one community
within a broader problem area.
Chapter
V
Joining the Productive Structure
Towards
Sheep Breeding
For
the Irish who arrived in the River Plate, the only way out was hard
work. When arriving in the country, they easily managed to obtain
situations as servants, cooks, governesses, nursemaids, or labourers
to lay foundations or to wire fences. Since their objective was
to settle the countryside and to purchase land, most of them looked
for positions that could take them to the countryside and they quickly
established in the interior of the province. Few of them stayed
in the city, and usually only for a limited period of time. There,
they represented a group constantly augmented by those who arrived
from Ireland, but reduced by those who passed through to the hinterland
areas.
Sources
agree on the relatively high salaries obtained by the early waves
of immigrants. This allowed them to save some money, sometimes to
settle the debt incurred for the passage from Ireland, and sometimes
to start a small capital that would be extremely useful in the country
(1). However, these jobs were always temporary
in the case of male workers (or at least that was the aspiration
of those workers), but it was quite possible that some of them kept
working all their lives in that condition. Women, who generally
aspired to marriages with more prosperous, landowning fellow nationals
than they could hope for in Ireland, also became temporary workers.
As a matter of fact, women had a high chance of marriage because
the number of men arriving (at least during the first two decades
of immigration) much higher than the women, and Irish men seldom
mixed with the ‘native’ girls.
The
country was the final destination for many of these Irish immigrants.
They were attracted by sheep breeding rather than cattle, as it
required less start up capital, it could be organised on a family
level, and it began to yield earnings almost immediately. The Irish
made up for their shortness of financial capital by exploiting their
advantages in training and experience in this field in order to
become independent producers.
Through
contacts established by the community and its leaders (i.e., the
Catholic priests) with local cattle breeding groups, the newcomers
immediately got jobs in sheep breeding. This was, as we have already
seen, undermanned. In addition to the shortage of hands, the existing
native workers specialised in traditional cattle-related occupations,
and were lacking in the specific skills and knowledge required for
sheep breeding. The Irish farmers could take advantage of the opportunities
opened up by the emerging wool market, having been trained in farm
work and being willing to perform any task to acquire the means
necessary for economic independence. In this way, the Irish who
arrived during the first twenty years rapidly obtained jobs in those
Argentinean ranches which were experimenting in sheep breeding.
They were especially valued by English and German stockbreeders,
who at that time were promoting this industry in the country. The
Irish played a key role in the preliminary formation of the sheep
industry before 1840. By the mid-nineteenth century, the Irish themselves
became important ‘estancieros’ (2) dedicated mainly
to sheep, and they used their influence within the developing community
to lead the arriving labour towards this activity. Likewise, they
became employers of the new Irish immigrants.
For
the newcomer Irish immigrants who embarked on sheep breeding, there
were three forms of incorporation: as wage labourers, sharecroppers
or tenants. Labourers were employed as puesteros and shepherds,
who were assigned the responsibility of a sheep flock (1,200 to
2,000 head) in return for a monthly salary paid partly in cash and
partly in kind (food and housing). Different writers of the period
provide vivid and detailed accounts of the lives of these men: McCann
and Vicuña MacKenna during the 1840s and 50s, Latham for the early
1860s, Gibson and Daireaux for the 1880s and Bulfin, specifically
for the Irish (3).
During
the first two decades of the sheep breeding growth, the Irish got
relatively high salaries. There was a considerable demand for specialised
labour, and the foreign worker was preferred to the native because
he was not subject to military levies (very frequent during those
times). In this way, the Irish hired during this time as wage-earning
‘puesteros’ and shepherds were able to save some money on their
wages. During the expansion of the demand for labour, these savings
reached significant levels (4). However, during
the periodical crises of the sector, wages declined, as in the crisis
of 1864, for example, when the estancieros asked for a reduction
of wages (5). Furthermore, as the century moved
forward, the increase in supply of immigrant foreign labour reduced
demand for Irish labour, and their earnings tended to decrease to
the same level as that of the other rural workers.
The
second kind of agrarian activity preferred by Irish immigrants and
their descendants was sharecropping. Whether after working for a
period of time as wage labourer, or directly when arriving in the
River Plate, the Irish worker heading to the camp (6)
frequently contracted to sharecrop for landowners. This was the
predominant form taken by the Irish started sheep breeding business.
A contract would be drawn up between a capitalist-worker (who brought
his workforce and a share of the necessary assets to undertake the
business), and a capitalist-landowner (who brought his lands and
the remaining share of assets required to undertake the business)
that gave the landowner a half share of the results at the end of
the contract term, and allotted the worker the other half.
However,
we need to distinguish between two types of contracts. Frequently,
during the first two decades of immigration, most of the Irish shepherds
going into sharecropping contracts only provided their work to tend
a sheep flock. In some few cases, they also contributed a small
amount of capital to pay for a share of the operating expenses during
the contract period (frequently, this capital was deducted from
the results when the contract was due, i.e., the contribution was
realised at the end of term). In his turn, the landowner contributed
the stock and the operating expenses. Additionally, in most cases
the landowner provided the shepherd with working tools and housing
during the contract term. When the contract was due, the shepherd
retained a proportional share of the results (7),
whether they were wool, skins and tallow produced by the flock,
or the new head born during this period. The landowner or capitalist
got the remaining share of the yield.
This
type of sharecropping differed from the typical sharecropping arrangements
developed in Europe (8), which could also be found
among the Irish settlers in the Buenos Aires province. In this case,
the shepherd contributed not only his labour and a small capital
to cover a share of the operating expenses, but also a portion of
the flock. In this way, he participated almost as a minority partner
in the business. The proprietor supplied the land (the shepherd
did not own land), and provided the assets necessary for the business
(head and cash). In the first case, the situation of the shepherd
was closer to that of the wage-earning worker, because he sold his
labour to the capitalist in return for a share in the profits. Conversely,
in the second case, the shepherd played the role of acting as ‘his
own capitalist’ by owning a part of the means of production. We
will study these circumstances in more detail when analysing the
production units.
closer to that of the wage-earning worker, because he sold his
labour to the capitalist in return for a share in the profits. Conversely,
in the second case, the shepherd played the role of acting as ‘his
own capitalist’ by owning a part of the means of production. We
will study these circumstances in more detail when analysing the
production units.
At
the beginning of the period of the expansion of the sheep breeding
activity, Irish immigrants were frequently signed to ‘mediería’
o ‘tercería’ contracts with the owner of lands or flocks. In this
way, after a year, they could build up capital (which was the product
of selling their quota of wool, skins and tallow), and they increased
their stock from their share of the lambs born during that year.
This was a fast way to build their own capital, and at the same
time to reach the ownership of the means of production, i.e., sheep.
In three to four years, a flock of 1,200-2,000 sheep could double
its size, enabling a ‘mediero’ (9) to own his
own flock and sign on to the second type of contract, and maybe
even lease a piece of land. This possibility tended to wither as
the century moved forward. Sharecropping arrangements of this sort
gave way to other forms of production less favourable for the worker.
Forms like ‘medieria’ gave way to ‘tercieria’ and ‘cuarteria’ whereby
only a third or a fourth of the produce went to the sharecropper,
and also to wage labour (10). However, old forms
endured and the sharecropping contracts may be found throughout
the Buenos Aires province even up to the beginning of the 20th
century.
The
third entryway for the Irish immigrants into the sheep industry
was to lease a piece of land using their own small capital, frequently
obtained from previous jobs as cattle-hands, ‘puesteros’ or sharecroppers.
In this case, as with sharecropping arrangements, many authors and
sources agree in pointing out that the possibilities of obtaining
high profits in the short term were quite good for sheep breeding
(11).
Notwithstanding
the generalisations and contradictions found among those sources,
their calculations confirm a reality observed by them and other
authors of this period, namely the high potential earnings available
to the immigrants through sheep breeding, whether as sharecroppers
and tenants, or as landowners (see below). In this way, for the
period just before the 1864 crisis, Olivera estimates for the sheep
breeding business an annual return on investment of 21% (12),
versus 7% interest rate for bank premium deposits and 9% for rediscount
interest rates. In the same period (beginning of 1863), the annual
return expected from lands varied from 5 to 10% (13).
Indeed, during the crisis this situation reversed, and profits fell
to 8-10.5% p.a. (14), bank interest and rediscount
rates to 12% and 15% respectively (January, 1865), and interest
on private loans reached 24% (15). When the crisis
ended, cattle raisers recovered and they managed to survive the
1873 crisis in a much better fashion than other industries. During
the 1880s, sheep breeding returns were still high, and in 1885 they
were estimated between 11% and 20% p.a. (16) Furthermore,
sharecroppers and tenants profited from the currency devaluations,
which were more frequent during the second half of the 19th
century than monetary stability or upward currency trends.
Tenants
managed their production units in a similar way to those owned by
small and medium-sized landowners, i.e., the ‘farmers.’ (17)
(see below). Most of these tenants rented areas of less than a square
league (2,500 hectares or 6,178 acres), they produced for the market
and basically used family labour, although sometimes they hired
wage labour for the shearing season.
During
the second half of the 19th century, in spite of the
generally favourable conditions of both national and international
markets for the sheep-breeding industry, the situation varied considerably
through the years for the Irish settlers, whether engaged as employees,
sharecroppers or tenants. The period between the 1840s and 1860s
proved decisive for them. As a matter of fact, they had not only
the possibility of saving money earned through their work, but of
transforming it into capital, investing in means of production,
namely sheep and land. Later on in the century, although sheep business
profits continued to be relatively high, and wages were kept at
a reasonable level, other economic conditions developed, hindering
the access of the worker to these resources.
During
the 1850s and 1860s, it was not difficult for an immigrant to have
access to a sheep flock, either by buying it with his savings or
by acquiring it through sharecropping contracts. Nevertheless, in
a short period of time, prices of stock soon went up abruptly and
despite fluctuations due to many factors, they never returned to
the low levels of the 50s. In addition to this, as we have seen,
sharecropping gradually developed toward less favourable labour
contracts, whereby the worker did not receive a share of the new-born
stock. Sheep then had to be bought in the market, paid in cash or
on credit.
But
landownership was the decisive factor for a sheep-owner in the Argentine
of the second half of the 19th century. Owning land meant
that the producer would not only obtain the profit expected in the
business, but also keep the rent of the land, and particularly the
differential rent. This rent was the main source of the rapid capitalisation
process experienced by the Buenos Aires province during this period.
We need therefore to analyse the land ownership patterns among immigrants
and their descendents].
The Path to Landownership
During the first
decades of the nineteenth century, land was a plentiful resource,
which generally belonged to the State. Land occupation by private
settlers was performed occasionally, with Indian attacks as its
sole hindrance (18). However, the situation changed
swiftly after the State devised new policies in matters of land
in order to secure the development of the cattle-raising industry,
followed by sheep-breeding. It was necessary to secure the appropriation
and incorporation for productive use of millions of hectares that
until that time had been effectively squandered. The new strategy
towards the public lands revolved around the consolidation of private
property, the systematic transfers of those lands to private owners,
and the expansion of the frontier due to the extermination of Indians.
By 1880, the process was completed.
What was the situation of the Irish
in this context? It is not easy to estimate the amount of Irish
settlers who owned land, but a significant quantity of landowners
of Irish origin were to be found in many ‘partidos’ (19)
of the Northern and North-western Buenos Aires province. We have
selected twenty ‘partidos’ of the province, where according to E.
Coghlan (20), Irish immigration was both larger
and more stable throughout the period under consideration. For these
counties, in order to study the structure of property in Irish hands,
we have analysed the Cadastral maps of 1864, 1890 and 1904. Since
some of the smaller holdings are not registered or have no name
assigned to them on these maps, these calculations probably underestimate
the number of holdings in Irish hands. Nevertheless, in 1890 the
proportion of land belonging to the Irish families in the twenty
‘partidos’ averages 17.34%, exceeding 25% in the case of seven of
these counties. Altogether, 300 (Irish) families owned 610,415 hectares.
How did the Irish immigrants and their descendants
come to own so much land?
To answer this question we shall now describe
the characteristics of the operations of land purchasing by the
Irish and their descendants, and the structure of the property on
their hands. To do this, besides the bibliography and sources used
in general for this study, we have examined a sample of 90 title
deeds (21) whereby persons with Irish names bought
land between 1850 and 1880, the above-mentioned Cadastral maps of
1864, 1890 and 1904 for twenty ‘partidos’ where the Irish have a
significant presence, the Tax on Property Registry (22),
mainly land and livestock for the Buenos Aires province for 1845,
1850, 1855, 1860, 1865 and 1867, and the Records of National Census
(23) of 1869 and 1895 for a sample of five ‘partidos.’
In examining this material, we observe the following:
-
Most
Irish immigrants and their descendants purchased land from
private individuals, who in their turn had either inherited
it, or bought it from other private individuals or from the
State. Only on an exceptional basis, we find Irish surnames
among the tenants of State-owned land, who afterwards purchased
it thanks to the favourable laws on public land sales. In
most of the cases, buyers acquired only a portion of the local
landowner’s land, i.e., the landowner decided to sell a part
of his holding to the new proprietor, and he kept the remainder
to himself or divided it among many buyers.
-
Most
of the families of Irish origin purchased their land between
1860 and 1875. Although we find some Irish landowners before
1850, they were generally early settlers established in the
River Plate before 1840. Those who arrived from the 1840s
on, in a first stage generally went southwards, where the
sheep-breeding industry was more developed. They settled there
as sharecroppers and tenant farmers, in counties such as Ranchos,
Cañuelas and Chascomús. But it was not easy to buy land in
this area, where prices were relatively high. Thus, the Irish
turn westwards looking for more inexpensive land, to Monte,
Lobos, Navarro, Las Heras, Chivilcoy, Mercedes and Suipacha.
In the 1860s, the districts of the North, the West and the
Northwest were still beginning to be settled, and their land
prices were not high, thus becoming a favourite area for Irish
settlement. In this way, in 1865 Irish families preferred
to buy land in Luján, San Andrés de Giles, Carmen de Areco,
Pilar, Exaltación de la Cruz, San Antonio de Areco, Baradero,
Rojas and Salto. This process continued at least until 1875
in Exaltación de la Cruz, Carmen de Areco, Las Heras, Lobos,
Mercedes, Monte, Rojas and Salto, and expanded to Chacabuco,
25 de Mayo, Bragado, Pergamino, San Pedro and Saladillo. But
at that time, in the districts nearer to Buenos Aires city,
the process was already declining. Between 1875 and 1885,
the process slowed down, and the expansion of the Irish and
their descendants only continued in Arrecifes, Pergamino,
Salto, Chacabuco and 25 de Mayo, and at a lesser extent, in
9 de Julio, Junín and Lincoln, where we found relatively few
landowners with Irish surnames. The Irish landownership situation
was already consolidated in 1890. The maps of 1890 and 1904
show practically the same structure of property. Table XII
was developed for 1890, including number of Irish landowners,
amount of land on their hands, and the percentage of the holdings
in each county.
- Between
1850 and 1880, most families of Irish origin and their descendants
who purchased their land in the Buenos Aires province acquired
extensions under 2,500 hectares. We are now approaching the
problem of the size of the properties owned by Irish families,
subject that will become relevant when speaking about the
management of the holdings and the social relations that developed
herein.
Table
XII |
Land
in Irish hands in twenty counties of the Buenos Aires province
– Cadastral Map 1890 |
Department |
Number
of landowners with Irish names (a) |
Quantity
of hectares (b) |
%
on total of the department (c) |
Number
of English real estate owners – 1895 Census (d) |
Arrecifes |
20 |
39,420 |
23.17 |
40 |
Baradero |
10 |
17,713 |
18.30 |
3 |
Carmen
de Areco |
30 |
48,257 |
45.14 |
29 |
Chacabuco |
16 |
63,000 |
23.67 |
18 |
Exaltación
de la Cruz |
10 |
18,455 |
27.25 |
8 |
Las
Heras |
19 |
20,423 |
27.86 |
9 |
Lobos |
11 |
23,538 |
13.64 |
18 |
Luján |
6 |
8,104 |
10.30 |
7 |
Mercedes |
22 |
23,830 |
21.86 |
55 |
Monte |
22 |
54,110 |
28.98 |
7 |
Navarro |
18 |
34,368 |
21.20 |
22 |
Pergamino |
9 |
16,315 |
5.22 |
44 |
Rojas |
12 |
29,798 |
15.02 |
10 |
Saladillo |
6 |
19,324 |
4.71 |
14 |
Salto |
13 |
49,466 |
30.27 |
32 |
San
Andrés de Giles |
32 |
29,322 |
26.38 |
55 |
San
Antonio de Areco |
7 |
24,173 |
22.42 |
8 |
San
Pedro |
10 |
22,189 |
19.15 |
29 |
Suipacha |
15 |
29,832 |
31.94 |
25 |
25
de Mayo |
12 |
38,781 |
7.47 |
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
300 |
610,418 |
17.34 |
454 |
Notes
for Table XII:
- We have
included as landowners with Irish names all persons appearing
on the map with Irish surnames, although they had the same surname,
i.e., they may have belonged to the same family or be heirs
of the same original landowner. In all cases, to confirm the
Irish origin of the owner, we verified with sources such as
Mulhall, Murray and Coghlan.
- Calculations
have been made by measuring the areas in the Cadastral maps,
and therefore in all cases we might expect an error, the magnitude
of which depends on the scale of the map of the respective county,
but this is never expected to exceed 10%. Errors in design and
construction of the maps are also possible, but we cannot estimate
their magnitude.
- Total area
of the county according to the National Census of 1895, except
for San Pedro and Baradero, where the Delta of Paraná has been
deducted.
- Includes
all British-born real estate owners, both in the countryside
and towns, registered in the National Census of 1895.
Notes:
(1)
This fact is pointed out by most contemporary observers, especially
MacCann (1853), Daireux (1888), Gibson (1893), Murray (1919), Nevin
(1946).
(2)
TN: in Argentina and Chile, an ‘estancia’ is a property dedicated
mainly to cattle raising, and ‘estanciero’ is its owner or principal.
Neither farmer nor rancher are accurate renderings
of the meaning of Spanish ‘estanciero,’ because they either imply
a smaller area of land (farm), or are used exclusively for cattle
raising (ranch) [cf. María Moliner, 1998]. This word will not be
translated throughout the text but it will be highlighted with quotation
marks.
(3)
MacCann (1853), especially p. 25, Latham (1868), especially pages
27-31, Daireaux (1888), especially pages 310-311, Bulfin in: Murray
(1919), pages 190-195.
(4)
Cf. MacCann (1853), Murray (1919), Mulhall (1875), Daireaux (1888),
Hutchinson (1860), Latham (1868).
(5)
Panettieri (1965), chapter IV
(6)
TN: Irish immigrants in Argentina (as well as in Australia
and New Zealand), used the term camp instead of other terms indicating
countryside and rural holding. In the Argentina case, it is a borrowed
word from the Spanish ‘campo,’ and it is widely recorded by many
Irish-Argentine writers and newspapers (Ussher, James M., ‘Father
Fahy’, 1951; The Hiberno Argentine Review, 1907; The Southern Cross
25-01-1935, P.J.R.’s ‘Jim Kelly’s Rancho. A Christmas Camp Story’;
Delaney, Juan José, ‘The Language and Literature of the Irish in
Argentina,’ 2000). We will use camp in the same way throughout
this text.
(7)
According to the type of contract, the shepherd’s share may have
been represented by a half (‘mediería’), a third (‘tercería’) or
a quarter (‘cuartería’) of the results.
(8)
Among others, cf. Beaufreton, M., ‘Share Tenancy in France,’ in:
International Review of Agricultural Economics, new series,
Vol. II, 1924, pp. 317-342; Marx, C., ‘El Capital,’ México, 1972,
vol. 3 p. 743; Sereni, E., ‘Il Capitalismo nelle campagne,’ 1860-1900,
Italia, 1947.
(9)
Shepherd engaged in a ‘mediería’ contract, viz., partnership with
the landowner to get half of the results.
(10)
Among others, cf. Latham (1868), Rodríguez Molas (1975), Gorostegui
de Torres (1972). For those immigrants arriving (especially from
Italy) during the last decades of the 19th Century, sharecropping
is also a regular form of incorporation into the rural production,
yet focused on agriculture and cattle raising. However, during this
second stage, the characteristics of sharecropping differ from the
above-mentioned features, and gradually disappear by the end of
the century.
(11)
Among others, cf. Hutchinson (1860), Daireaux (1888), Seguí (1895).
(12)
Olivera (1910), pp. 109-110.
(13)
Chiaramonte (1971), p. 49.
(14)
Olivera (1910), p. 110.
(15)
Chiaramonte (1971), p.49.
(16)
Gibson (1893), p. 126; Zeballos (1881-88); Mulhall (1875, 1885).
(17)
TN: In English in the original.
(18)
In 1830, whether as enfiteusis or as proprietorship, only 5,516
square leagues of land in the present Buenos Aires province were
registered as nominally owned. Hence, two thirds of the territory
was not legally occupied. Cf. Carretero, A., La propiedad de
la tierra en la época de Rosas (Buenos Aires, 1972).
(19)
TN: as the United States county is a political and administrative
unit of a state, ‘partido’ is a political and administrative division
of an Argentinean province. Throughout this translation, we will
use both county and ‘partido.’
(20)
Coghlan (1975).
(21)
TN: ‘escrituras de compra-venta’ in the original Spanish
version.
(22)
TN: ‘registros de Contribución Directa’ in the original Spanish
version.
(23)
TN: ‘Censos Nacionales de Población’ in the original Spanish
version.
|