In this paper I picked out Hiraga county in Akita prefecture and analyzed tenancy disputes about the rent managed by the Tenancy Mediation Law in Tohoku district. The analysis include tenancy disputes about the land restitution which are related to "the requirement of the rent reduction" or "the rent in arrears". The results are as follows. The first period (Syowa3(1928)-6(1931)): The movement of the tenant union was active in Akita prefecture during the Showa Crisis when the rice price fell. Many tenants performed "the requirement of the rent reduction" under the support of the union to maintain the fixed expenses for the reproduction. On the contrary, landlords coped with "the mediation of the rent claim". The second period (Syowa7(1932)-12(1937)): Tenants were faced with financial difficulties by the dissociation of the commodity price and the rice price from the first period and the yearly poor harvest. However, they could not perform "the requirement of the rent reduction" due to the declining union movement. Thus, tenants who operated less than 2 hectares could not help performing "the rent in arrears". On the contrary, landlords coped with "the mediation of the land restitution" if they could easily find the substitute tenant and coped with "the mediation of the rent claim" if not. The third period (Syowal3(1938)-15(1940)): Tenants continued to perform "the rent in arrears" as in the previous period. On the other hand, many upper-middle class tenants, who managed 2-3 hectares, performed "the requirement of the rent reduction" as well as "the mediation of the rent reduction by tenants themselves". They responded to the high price as their agricultural production cost .was higher than that of any other class and performed "the requirement of the rent reduction" to maintain self-wages which corresponded to the agricultural day laborer's wages. The outcome of the mediation was the highest in "the reduction of the rent in arrears" during every period and it was advantageous to tenants. But, it remained merely "the reduction of the rent in arrears". Unlike many collective tenancy disputes about the rent in Kinki district, collective tenancy contracts could not be realized at all. The degree of the scale and the depth of tenancy disputes brought about the difference between Kinki district and Tohoku district.

View full abstract

The case study of the urban development in Osaka city, which was brought by the progress of national products and the change of national industrial structure after World War I, shows us two aspects. The one is expanding in suburb, and the other is accumulating in the center. In view of the urban industrial structure, it means that the factories were constructed in suburb and marchant section developed in the center. At the same time, it means the appearance of the division between the industrial area and the housing area. Among these changes, the most important one is that the weight of the marchant section developed by accumulating. Though the restruction of the urban geographical structure gave the inhabitor further distance to go to job, there were some difficulties for them. Therefore, especially in the center where the marchant section developed acumulately, the housing problems like the shortage of the houses and too expensive rent occurred from 1916 to 1927. The analysis of the house renting market tells us that the demand was much more in the center than in the suburb, although much houses were constructed in the suburb those days. And the people who had small income wanted to get their houses in the center. On the other hand, it was hard for them to pay expensive rent and go to job too far because of small income. And the chances for the income by the members of the family were important for them. So, many chances to get jobs in the center caused the mismatch between supply and demand in the house renting market. By the analysis of the housing problem in 1920's, we can conclude that today's urban structure got to appear after World War I, and it resulted to give a big shock to the society and people those days.

View full abstract

The characters of social relations in the village communities of eighteenth-century Prussia east of the Elbe are analyzed in terms of the conflicts on "equalization (Egalisierung)" of landed properties that arised between large and small peasants (Bauern and Kossaten) in the royal demesne Amt Alt-Ruppin in Brandenburg. The equalization was demanded by villagers having smaller landholdings, who needed to earn their bread or wanted to improve their management, from those having larger landholdings in the following two cases. Firstly, such claims occurred when the communal obligations which schould be determined according to the landed properties of villagers were excessively assigned to the smallholders. Another situation was when some members belonging to a group whose members were given the same amount of obligations acquired additional fields, e.g., by clearing forests. These demands were addressed to the feudal lords and in most cases led to conflicts in the villages, which were settled by the lords. The equalization occurred especially in the "disadvantaged" villages where the natural and possessive conditions of the farms, the latter including feudal dues and landholding rights, were unfavorable. In such villages, a trend toward overall economic distress drived the groups of different landholdings to cooperate in the course of the equalization. This is because the largeholders were released from heavy burdens by transferring a part of their farms to the smallholders, which in turn helped to relieve their serious poverty due to lack of fields. The lack of landownership by the villagers, which corresponds to the usufructary holding of land (LaBbesitz), was the other factor in the occurrence of the equal distribution of land stemming from the mercy of the lords. On the other hand, in the "advantaged" villages where the natural and possessive conditions of the farms, the latter controlled by the agrarian policies of the Prussian state, were more favorable, the equalization broke down. The largeholders had no need to liberate themselves from feudal dues and hence resisted the claims of the smallholders. Furthermore, the largeholders owned their farms and thereby protected their rights from the smallholders who intended to realize the equalization depending on the mercy of the lords.

View full abstract