same, the natural inference is that these increases must
have been brought about, on the one hand, by a process of
concentration under a single owner, of some of the plots
which formerly formed parts of the holding in lower fre-
quency groups, and, on the other, by a further splitting up
of the large fields which has now increased the number in
the lowest frequency group. Thus an important two-fold
tendency of a consolidation at one end, and a subdivision
at the other, is found in operation during the last decade.
The other important changes that have taken place in the
distribution of land during the last 26 years may be indi-
cated briefly as under :

YEAR
Total No. of holdings
Total area owned. Acres
Average size of a holding. Acres

1900-01
219
3071
14-02

1917-18
404*
3148
7-73

1926-27
431
99
7-3

The obvious conclusions from this table are :—
(1) There is a progressive increase in the number of
owned holdings, and
(2) there is consequently a progressive decrease in
the average size of the owned holding.
Subdivision of holdings : This decrease in the average
size of the holding does not matter if the size of the hold-
ing has not gone below that of an economic holding.
What is an economic holding, and as judged by that stand-
ard, are these 431 holdings economic ? This is the funda-
mental question. It is recognised by all that small farms
do not necessarily mean undesirable farms from the stand-
point of agricultural production. On the contrary it will
not be wrong to say that they are better than large ones
in so far that they can be managed by the individual farmer
with greater care and efficiency. What is, however, un-
desirable is the existence of farms which being too small
for profitable cultivation, are uneconomic.