The movement peculiar to interest-bearing capital between money capitalists and industrial capitalists is G-G-W-G'-G", and this first change of position of money, that is, G-G forms the point of departure in it. In this case, giving away money for a certain time from lender to borrower possesses the form of lending. Then, what concept is the form of lending? In other words, what distinction is there between the form of lending and that of selling as permanent transfer of ownership or transfer of possessory right of an object? This problem is of a great significance, since it touches the core of a question in clarifying the category of interest-bearing capital. On the basis of capitalist production, money acquires an additional use-value, namely that of serving as capital, aside from its use-value as money. In this capacity of potential capital, money becomes a singular commodity, or capital as such becomes a commodity. Accordingly, the form of lending peculiar to commodity as capital is originally the peculiar manner in which it is sold as a commodity. In the first place, the manner of sale forms the basis of the form of lending. So far as a commodity as such is sold at all, ownership of the sold article is always relinquished. Therefore, in this case, ownership of the sold money is transferred from lender to borrower in the same way as a commodity is sold. Here, from a view-point on the form of sale, the same principle as sale on credit in which a commodity is exchanged for title of payment applies to this case, and by transfer of ownership of the sold money, the borrower can place the loaned money on the market. In the second place, on the above-mentioned premise, the form of lending which is peculiar to commodity as capital is derived from the character that money is sold as capital. Here, the use-value of the sold money lies in its being able to serve as capital which produces the average profit. The average profit is determined not only by the organic composition of capital, but also by definite spans of time. Hence, under the circumstance that a commodity as capital which produces the average profit within definite spans of time is alienated, it must be sold with a time limit fixed, and the essential difference between the concept of lending and that of selling lies on this point. Consequently, the from of selling turns into the form of lending.

抄録全体を表示

The capitalist development of Hungarian agriculture followed in principle the "Prussian" way of the development, that is, the way leading from Gutsherrschaft to Junker-farming. This way was decisively promoted by the emancipation of serfs "from above", which was undertaken during the Revolution and the War of Independence of 1848-1849. This article intends to clarify the economic necessity of the emancipation of serfs. The article, in the first section, explains briefly how the landlords' farming spread over Alfold again after the retreat of the Turks in the first half of the 18th century, and how it brought about the decline of the peasantry : the Urbarium of Maria Teresia was intended to prevent this tendency of the impoverishment of the peasantry. The second section is devoted to the analysis of the process of the differentiation of peasantry which was brought about by the destruction of the land-community owing to the Urbarium. Here is analyzed the example of peasants' farming in Bihar-megye. The differentiation resulted in the development of the commodity prodution by a few well-to-do peasants as well as the impoverishment of the mass of the peasantry : the number of landless peasants zseller began to grow significantly. After the Napoleonic War, penetration of capitalism into Hungarian agriculture as well as industry brought the differentiation of peasantry to such a degree that the telkes jobbagy was already a smaller group of the peasantry, the zseller amounting more than half of it : in addition, the cseled also increased in number. The zseller provided the labour power of the well-to-do peasants who were producing for market as well as of the estates of aristocrats as day-workers and of rich middle-nobility as "ledolgozas". In this connection, significant pages are devoted to the analysis of the farming of Hunyadi estate and Schmidegg estate in Somogy-megye. Meanwhile, the majority of the nobility found it hard to modernize their farming through making use of wage-labours and machines. Thus the leaders of the Revolution of 1848-1849 came from nobility. They demanded the emancipation of serfs "from above" to get monetary fund and free labour force necessary for the modernization of their farms. Indeed, there appeared from the intellectuals originating from bunkrupted nobility and peasantry who insisted on a radical transformation "from below", but they proved too weak to realize it.

抄録全体を表示

About Japanese sericulture in its pre-war period, there is an orthodox theory which was built by Moritaro Yamada and his group. They say that Japanese sericulture was the subsidiary-occupation kept by owner farmers. Recently, an opposite view was propounded in reference to the tenantry disputes (Nihon-jinushi-sei no kosei to dankai, 1972). I'm of the opinion that both views are not based on data at local stage. In this paper I adopt data preserved in the village office at Katagiri-mura, Kamiina-district, Nagano-prefecture, and try to prove the fact that the sericulture production was kept by the tenants as the main-occupation instead of rice production. (I) 〜1902 : Rice production was main-occupation, and sericulture worked by the women and the old men was on a small scale. (II) 1903〜1911 : Rice fields were replaced rapidly by mulberry fields and great sericulturists came out. But most of them were the landlords who hired tenants for their management. (III) 1912〜1919 : Because of high price of cocoon, a large number of tenants were able to expand their sericulture production. But the landlords dominated their tenants by means of holding the circuration of rice and cocoon. For example, they bid high price of rents which were paid in rice, managed some filature factories in this village, and sold rice to their tenants who were lack of rice.

抄録全体を表示