The Argentine in the Twentieth Century

The economic and financial organisation of the Argentine being now assured, and peace without and within being established, while at the same time the revolutionary spirit of the bad old days has gradually disappeared, the great problems which the country has to face to-day are principally those dealing with the development of agricultural and industrial production and its outlets.

But among these problems none is more vital to the future of the Argentine than the problem of filling the vast gaps of empty territory with new elements of population.

Here, according to the last official data, are the figures relating to the distribution of the population in the Provinces and National Territories:—

The above figures prove more eloquently than any other argument that the supreme necessity of the Argentine people at the present time is an increase of population. The territory of the Republic has an area of more than 1,130,000 square miles, and its population amounts to no more than 5,792,807, which gives a density of 5·1 persons per square mile. One should also recollect, in order to grasp the true significance of these figures, that of those 5,792,807 inhabitants, 157,963 inhabit the 43,000 acres which form the site of Buenos Ayres; so that only 4,634,841 remain to people the rest of the country, a fact which still further lessens the density of the population.

This density varies in different regions and in different Provinces; thus the eastern or coastal region, formed by the Federal Capital and the Provinces of Buenos Ayres, Santa Fé, Entre Rios, and Corrientès, has 17·08 inhabitants to the square mile, while that of the centre, which comprises Córdoba, San Luis, and Santiago de l’Estero, has only 5·8. As we penetrate further inland the density grows still less, until in the western or Andean region, formed by the Provinces of Mendoza, San Juan, La Rioja, and Catamarca, the figure is barely 2·7. In the northern region, embracing the Provinces of Tucuman, Salta, and Jujuy, there are 5·23 inhabitants per square mile.

But it is in the National Territories—in one of which more than one important European people could find room to spare—that we find the lowest density. There the desert reigns in all its desolation. The Territory of El Pampa, whence so much wealth has been drawn of late years, and whose area is 56,200 square miles, contains barely 52,000 inhabitants; that of Rio Negro, whose area is 45,600 square miles, contains but 16,000, while in the Territory of Santa Cruz, situated on the shores of the Atlantic, in which there are important ranches, and which might contain a numerous pastoral and maritime population, there are only 1742 souls to its 58,890 square miles. All these figures prove that the Argentine is, without metaphor, a desert nation, and that for the present and for a long time to come, its peopling will constitute its great national need.

To this affirmation we must add another no less certain: that in the normal order of human events, and in accordance with the economic and sociological laws that govern European nations, there is no country in the world which assures the labourer who establishes himself upon its soil of such perspectives of wealth and welfare. All things compete to make it a paradise of immigration: the softness and variety of its climate, the richness of its soil, the extent of its territory, the enormous inland waterways which cross it, and the facilities of communication with the European consumers of its produce, with whom the Argentine is connected by one of the most reliable ocean traffic-ways in the world.[29]

The United States, which have hitherto been the objective and centre of attraction to which men of initiative have converged from all parts of the world, are beginning to experience all the troubles familiar to European nations as the result of an excessive population.[30] It is for this reason that they are striving, by all the means in their power, to restrain the stream of immigration that pours upon their shores.

Australia, which was also only recently one of the great centres of immigration, has during these last few years suffered terrible economic shocks, of which the effect has been to divert the stream of new arrivals.[31] Moreover, as a rival of the Argentine, Australia has two causes of inferiority: her rigorous climate, which exposes the country to violent extremes of temperature, passing from intolerable heat to a bitter cold, and, on the other hand, a distance from the European countries to which she exports her products double that between the banks of the Plata and Europe.

Having thus made it clear that the Argentine Republic is in an exceptional position to attract and to support a large European population, the time has come to measure the distance travelled, and to note the progress realised, so that we may see whether the results obtained are in proportion to the perfect adaptation of the soil to immigration.

Without being too pessimistic, we are forced to recognise that all efforts hitherto made by the Argentine to increase its population have hitherto remained without appreciable effect.[32]

Colonisation, that is, the peopling of the country, was inaugurated in the Argentine by the initiator of all true progress—Rivadavia—who founded the first colony of Santa Catalina. This work was intelligently and enthusiastically continued by Mitre and Rawson, in 1863: it was then vigorously pushed by Sarmiento during his extremely progressive administration; but as a matter of fact, in spite of all these efforts, colonisation has not given the results that were expected of it. To explain this lack of success, we must suppose that the work has not been promoted according to the indications of science and experience, and that a variety of events, uncontrollable by the human will, has thwarted the praiseworthy intentions of the Government. Otherwise it is impossible to account for the fact that the Republic contains less than 6 million inhabitants, whereas its soil would support 100 millions.

To attain the primordial object of peopling the country, the Argentine has had at its disposal, among others, one very important means—the public lands—a means which other nations in similar circumstances have employed with excellent results, but which in this case has unhappily not produced the same happy effect, being manipulated by inexperienced or thoughtless hands.

Various laws have been voted in the Argentine, tending to augment the population by means of colonisation. All systems have been tried successively, and one and all have failed. “This failure,” says M. Eleodore Lobos, in an extremely instructive volume published under the modest title, “Notes on the Land Laws” (Annotations sur la législation des terres), “is an incontestable fact, and must be attributed not only to economic, administrative, and political conditions, but also to the freedom with which the soil has been divided into lots of enormous area, and the obstacles opposed to the easy and secure acquisition of small properties. In other terms, our politicians have effected the very reverse of a rational colonisation, and have established a system of large properties instead of subdividing the land between the colonists according to their productive capacities.”

This error was recognised by the Government more than fifteen years ago; but the influence of speculators, who profit from this short-sighted policy, has been more powerful than all attempts at reform.

“To understand the matter,” says the same author, “we have only to see with what indifference to the public weal the executive, during the last twenty-five years, has disposed of 67,817,000 acres of uncultivated soil, which formed part of the national domain. The laws voted were impotent to prevent the disposal of these public lands in large parcels, so that the disposal of these lands failed to draw the population which these vast domains could support.”

The real beginning of Argentine immigration was when the tyranny of Rozas was overthrown on the 3rd of February, 1852, and a regular Government established, which voted a fundamental law of which the object was “to cherish the general welfare, and to secure the advantages of liberty to every citizen, to posterity, and to all people of the earth who desire to live on Argentine soil.” From this moment a powerful current of European immigration set in; turned aside from time to time by financial crises, plagues,[33] and war; but never completely arrested. Industry, commerce, and agriculture, which had so far slumbered, received a considerable stimulus from this new source. In a single year more immigrants entered by the port of Buenos Ayres than had for many years entered the whole country.

The public administration did not take the trouble to keep an exact record of the number of immigrants before the year 1853; and between 1854 and 1870 we have simply the number of new arrivals, without any further details. Only since 1870 have the official statistics classed the immigrants according to nationality, and only since 1881 have they recorded other details, such as sex, age, profession, education, etc.

During the last six months of 1854, 2524 persons entered the country; in 1855, 5912; in 1856, 4672; in 1857, 4951, in 1858, 4658; and in 1859, 4735; or 27,452 in six years: that is, far more than had entered during two centuries of colonial life.

In the decade formed by the years 1860-1869, the number of immigrants increased to 134,325; in the years 1870-1879, to 264,869; but the highest figures, no less than 1,020,907, were reached between 1880 and 1889. But we must confess that during this decade certain artificial means were employed to recruit the population in Europe; such means as gratuitous passages, which brought to the Argentine a number of useless people, unfitted for any productive task whatever.

During the following decade, 1890-1899, which saw the terrible banking smash and the loss of public credit, as a result of every kind of excess, the immigration diminished slightly—to 928,000 persons—and at certain moments emigration also made itself felt, in such proportions that it amounted to a veritable exodus. The departure of those who failed to make money in the Argentine or find the work they sought amounted to 552,172, the largest figures that have so far been recorded.

Unhappily this double stream of immigration and emigration has continued up to the present. Thus, in 1900-1904, 601,682 immigrants entered the country; but, on the other hand, 384,000 emigrants left it. Such figures as these denote a grave disorder in the assimilative faculty of a nation. Matters were no better in the three years 1905-1907, since although 781,796 immigrants entered from Europe and from Montevideo, 324,687 emigrants left during the same period, leaving a total of only 457,108 in three years.

In the previous period, from 1900-1904, the diminution of the current of immigration was explained by various causes: in the first place, by bad harvests, the suspension of important public and private undertakings, the fear of war over the frontier question, the dearness of living, the difficulties experienced by the immigrant in settling in the national or private colonies: the excessive price of land and the high rents in the more promising agricultural districts, the insecurity of life for man and beast, the abuses of the authorities, especially in districts remote from the centres of population, and the tardy, costly, and faulty nature of justice.

But since this period many of these causes have disappeared, thanks to the splendid harvests of the last few years, and to the period of rapid economic expansion upon which the Republic has entered. It is difficult, under these conditions, to explain the still existing lack of immigration, which denotes a disorder of the assimilative faculties of the country.

Among the causes likely to prevent immigration there is one which must not be too closely insisted upon: the increasing cost of living. But it is the European mode of life that is dear, while in the country districts existence costs next to nothing, as the colonist himself produces practically every alimentary necessity.

We must also note that every year numbers of harvesters arrive from Europe, earn good wages, save money, and return to their native countries directly after the harvest.

In 1905, 1906 and 1907 the migratory movement was represented, as we have seen, by 781,795 immigrants and 324,687 emigrants. If we allow that each of these latter took away with him a sum of £30, as the Department of Immigration has calculated, it follows that from this cause alone nearly £10,000,000 left the country during this period of three years.

Here are some figures taken from an official publication dealing with the migratory movement, which relate both to immigration and emigration, and show which European countries have chiefly contributed to the current of immigration. Italy and Spain, as will be seen, furnish the greatest number of immigrants.

As we have already observed, one of the causes which impede emigration is to be found in the faulty distribution of the soil, the obstacles which the agricultural immigrant has to surmount before he can become the proprietor of even a scrap of ground; and in the lack of serious attempts at colonisation, which would provide the cultivator with the means of working his holding and finally of becoming its proprietor. “How many immigrants,” says Señor Girola, “coming to this country with the idea of buying a little piece of land, have been forced to abandon their dream, on account of the difficulties put in the way of their obtaining the desired holding!”[34]

Far from encouraging the promotion of a class of small land-owners, the State has assisted in the establishment of enormous holdings, which are the chief obstacle to the peopling of the country. In place of dividing into small allotments, accessible to modest fortunes, the great stretches of land near the railways or the ports, and offering them for sale at low prices in the European communities from which a number of immigrants come each year, as is done by the United States, Australia, and Canada, the Argentine administration has subjected all the operations of purchase to long and wearisome formalities which quickly exhaust both the savings and the patience of the purchaser.

Argentina, then, if she wishes to solve this vital problem of colonisation, which is for her the problem of immigration, must give careful thought to the adoption of some well-devised scheme, with the object of subdividing the present great parcels of land, and of attaching the agriculturalist to the land he tills, by allowing him to become its owner. Without this necessary reform, the country will continue to experience the phenomenon of temporary immigration; the immigration of men who return to their own countries as soon as they have been able to save a little money: a process exceedingly prejudicial to the best interests of the country.

PART II

CHAPTER I

Natural Conditions—The Constitution of Property

The Argentine Republic, which we are now about to consider from the geological and hydrographical point of view, offers, by the mere fact of its physical constitution, an immense future for agriculture on the largest possible scale, and at the same time for stock-raising and the rural industries.

We find that the country contains three principal agricultural regions: (1) the region to the north of the provinces of Santa Fé and Entre Rios; (2) the central region which runs southward from the limits of the northern, as far as the south of the Province of Buenos Ayres and the Territory of La Pampa, including a portion of the Territories of Rio Negro and Neuquen; (3) the southern region, which runs southward from the limits of the central region, down to Tierra del Fuego.

The first region is characterised by a hot climate, with regular rains in the eastern parts; in the west the rainfall is less frequent. The central region enjoys a temperate climate; there, as in the northern region, the rains are regularly distributed in the eastern parts, but are very rare in the west, which is subject to long periods of drought. In the southern region the rains are less frequent and the climate is more severe, with the exception of the west and the extreme south, which are also in a rainy belt.

After long experience a kind of natural selection has come into operation with regard to agriculture; the various crops are to-day distributed nearly as follows: Cereals, such as wheat, barley, oats, maize, and millet,[35] are cultivated more especially in the region formed by the Provinces of Buenos Ayres, Santa Fé, Entre Rios, Córdoba, and the Territory of the Pampa, which latter is par excellence the cereal-growing district. Maize, however, is grown over a still wider region; it is cultivated with success in the whole of the central and northern regions of the Republic. Rice can also be grown in these regions; its culture is being developed in the Provinces of Tucuman, San Juan, Mendoza, Salta, La Rioja, and Jujuy, and also in Corrientès, Formosa, Chaco and Misionès. The Provinces of Santa Fé, Entre Rios, and Buenos Ayres are also capable of producing rice.[36]

Oleaginous plants, such as the castor-oil plant, sesame, and the poppy, find favourable conditions of growth in the north, while linseed,[37] colza, and rape prosper in the cereal districts.

The sugar-cane is cultivated in the northern region, but especially in Tucuman, in part of Santiago de l’Estero, Salta, Jujuy, and Corrientès, and in the north of Santa Fé, Formosa, Chaco and Misionès.

The vine is cultivated chiefly in Mendoza and San Juan, where the conditions of soil and climate are favourable, and where it is methodically irrigated by the canals which water the whole of the vine-growing districts; but the wine and the dessert grape can be grown in the whole of the central region. It also prospers in La Rioja, Catamarca, Salta, and Entre Rios.

Stock-raising is followed especially in the Provinces of Buenos Ayres, Santa Fé, and Entre Rios, and in the south of the Province of Córdoba; and in a great part of the Pampa Central.

The principal characteristics of Argentine agriculture having been considered, we must now inquire how rural property is constituted; that is, among how many proprietors or tenants the 35,000,000 acres under cultivation at the end of 1908 are shared.

In the United States, for example, we know by the census of 1900 that the 840,000,000 acres given over to agriculture are divided into 5,739,657 distinct holdings, giving an average of about 142 acres per holding. In France, according to the statistics for 1892, 11,250,000 acres were divided into 5,702,000 holdings, the average extent being about 21 acres.

Is it possible to obtain similar figures for the Argentine? The national census of 1895 gives us certain data respecting the division of rural property in this country. The 172,000 holdings, agricultural or pastoral, which were included in this census, had an area of 20,295,000 acres, according to the declarations of the owners; and comparing this figure with the area actually under cultivation, amounting to 12,800,000 acres, we find that only about the half of these holdings is tilled and sown, the rest being left as pasture.

This census also took note of the area of each agricultural holding, and although the result of this inquiry has not been published, a simple division of the number of acres by that of the holdings gives us an average of 118 to 123 acres per holding; a figure that would be satisfactory enough, if it came anywhere near the reality.[38]

The national inventory gives only these data in respect of this subject. As we see, they are far from complete; but even if they were, the progress of agriculture during the last few years has been so great that to-day they would only possess a purely historical interest.

Happily the agricultural census (including a census of stock), which was taken during the first half of May 1908 throughout the whole Republic, gives us some valuable information on this head.

This inquiry affected 222,174 holdings, agricultural or pastoral, which had a total area of 450,000 square miles, the area of the Republic being 1,134,700 square miles. This is how these 222,174 holdings are divided:—

There are 53,954 holdings measuring from 27·2 to 123·4 acres; 48,323 of less than 25 acres; 46,553 of from 250 to 740 acres; 29,624 of from 125 to 247 acres; 12,992 of from 743.5 to 1234 acres; 11,104 of from 1236 to 2470 acres; 2968 of from 2970 to 9260 acres; 2052 of from 9260 to 12,350 acres; 1157 of from 12,350 to 24,680 acres. Holdings of more than 24,680 acres are relatively rare, in comparison with the rest; 423 have an area of from 24,680 to 30,870 acres; 781 of from 30,870 to 61,750 acres; 168 of from 61,750 to 114,250 acres; 65 of from 114,250 to 123,440 acres, and finally there are 104 holdings of more than 123,440 acres.

These figures, compared with those of the census of 1895, reveal the fact that in thirteen years the number of rural holdings has increased by 50,174, and that the area given over to the two forms of usage, which lie at the base of the wealth of the Republic, has increased by 276,760,000 acres.

But in spite of this extraordinary development during the last few years, from the point of view of the distribution of the soil, the Argentine is still in a primitive, indeed, almost in a feudal state, by reason of the enormous tracts of lands which are monopolised by a small number of owners. These owners utilise their enormous properties in raising cattle on the great ranches known as “estancias,” or employ them for agricultural purposes, when they do not prefer to leave them in a waste and unproductive condition, waiting until time and economic progress shall give them a value which their own efforts are incapable of giving them.

These “estancias”—that is to say, the most usual system of utilising the soil—vary in area from 12,000 to 180,000 or 200,000 acres; some are even over 330,000 acres in extent. Many of them are only a few hours distant from the city of Buenos Ayres, or border on the outskirts of important urban centres.

Such tracts of land given over to stock-raising and owned by private individuals would be inconceivable in most European countries, where private holdings are small; nor are they much more usual in a new country of vast area, like the United States, where more than half the cultivated lands are divided into farms of less than 100 acres each, and where holdings of more than 1000 acres, whether under seed or in pasture, are the exception, the average of all properties and holdings being 143 acres.

It is easy to understand, without a lengthy demonstration, how far this state of affairs goes to retard the general development of the country. It is equally easy to understand that in order to stimulate this development it is necessary before all else to secure an increased foreign population, by attracting it through the powerful bait of landed property.

The great obstacle in the way of the agricultural development of the Argentine arises essentially from the faulty property system; from the fact that enormous tracts of land are held by a few men; from the establishment, in short, of the most odious system of latifundia ever known. This trouble arises from the lack of foresight with which the State has parted with enormous tracts of land, which have passed into the hands of speculators or large land-owners, who have left them untouched, while waiting for the value of their holdings to rise.

In the national territories, according to the deputy Joachim Castellanos, who is busily lighting the system of latifundia, there are belts of land, now private property, which are divided in the following proportions: 2,470,000 acres into holdings of from 25 to 99,000 acres each; 7,400,000 acres into holdings of from 99,000 to 198,000 acres each; and 7,934,000 acres into properties of 190,000 or 200,000, and over. This means that there are 17,280,000 acres of useful and cultivable land, in the hands of unenterprising capitalists remaining, unproductive, used to increase neither the population nor the production of the country.[39]

The principal author of this deep-rooted evil is incontestably the Argentine State, which has squandered its rich inheritance, by allowing it to pass into the hands of speculators, instead of dividing it equitably among the new colonists. The subdivision of these great tracts of land, now concentrated in the hands of a few large proprietors, is, to-day, one of the necessary conditions of the development of the country, and it is with reason that influential voices are raising themselves, in Parliament and in the Press, to proclaim this economic truth.

The great “estancias” of 180 square miles in area, covered by immense herds of cattle, must finally, says M. F. Segni, author of an Investigacion agricola, be divided into small concerns of from 4000 to 12,000 acres, which would, with fewer animals but a better system, yield a greater profit both to the owner and to the country. The old system of large ranching must gradually give way to an intensive system, when stock-raising, combined with agriculture, will employ a larger population, attract more capital, and realise better results.

There is happily no need to be greatly pessimistic on this point, as we can already perceive a tendency to the subdivision of property, which comes from the powers of the State as well as from land-owners or commercial companies. Thus the land law of 1907 was passed solely with the object of preventing large monopolies; it prohibits the acquisition for the benefit of a single person of any portion of the national domains of greater area than 6170 acres. The importance of this step will be understood, when we remember that the State has still to dispose of 212 millions of acres of desert land, suitable for agriculture, and situated in territories which are rapidly becoming peopled.

On the other hand, there are certain business concerns which, as owners of enormous tracts of land, are dividing them into small lots, which they are offering freehold to prospective farmers at fairly moderate prices, and facilities of payment are offered at the same time. Among these firms we may mention the “Sociedad Anonima la Curumalan,” owning some 600,000 acres of land in the southern portion of the Province of Buenos Ayres, suitable both for cattle-raising and for agriculture, which is selling land at from £2, 2s. to £3 per acre, according to the quality and the situation, payable in three or four years; the payment by instalments being increased by an interest varying from 7 to 9 percent. yearly. The “Stroeder Colonisation Society,” which has exploited a large belt of agricultural country; the “Compañia de Colonisation del Rio de la Plata;” the “Estancia y Colonia Trenel,” founded by the great Argentine land-owner, Antonio Devoto, and a large number of other companies and syndicates are working on the basis of enabling the colonist to acquire his own land, and are doing successful business.

A striking example of progress in this matter of the subdivision of property is furnished by the statistics of the Province of Córdoba for the years between 1898-1899 and 1905-1906. During this period 3,193,600 acres of land, out of a total of 9,823,300 acres, which represent the colonies and settled land of the province, have been sold to farmers; that is, nearly a third. Thanks to this subdivision, the number of colonists in this province who have become the actual proprietors of larger or smaller holdings has risen to 4568. What is happening in Córdoba is also happening more or less rapidly in the other agricultural provinces; and it is by this method that the Argentine will one day succeed in abolishing the latifundia, whose progressive disappearance is a condition of further development.

We might multiply the instances of land-owners or commercial enterprises which are helping the labourer to buy land, for the system of dividing the land into small allotments, selling it at a cheap price, and allowing payment by instalments, is every day becoming more widespread. The journals are full of announcements of the sale by auction of lands which, until to-day, have never felt the ploughshare, and are now given over to colonisation. One also hears men speak, as of an accomplished fact, of the method initiated by several railway-companies which propose, by means of their own capital, to bring into the market and increase the value of the vast tracts of uncultivated land which they own on the outskirts of their systems.

Unhappily, in spite of this tendency to the subdivision of the soil, the most usual system of working the land is still that of letting it at a fixed rent, or for a certain proportion of the yield in place of rent, or by a profit-sharing system, under which the tenant receives 50, 40, or 30 per cent, of the harvest. The large land-owners, who are the most numerous, prefer the former method, and often impose on the farmer the obligation of leaving a crop of lucerne on the land in the last year of the tenancy.

The chief drawback of this system is that the labourer never becomes the owner of the soil he cultivates, so that he is not actuated by the powerful ties of property, which should attach him to the country and its destinies. On the other hand, too, the tenant tries to obtain from the soil the largest profit he can, without troubling to consider whether he is exhausting it or not; he leaves not even a tree behind him as a monument of his tenancy. But in spite of all these drawbacks this system does furnish the colonist with means to buy land cheaply later on, and in another district. Such is the history of many farmers, who began by humbly labouring under the conditions above described, and are to-day rich land-owners, possessing enormous tracts of land, which they work in the way that they find most profitable.

It is hardly necessary to say that the agricultural methods employed vary according to the situation of the farms, their fertility, and the means of communication. Agriculture, properly so called, establishes itself and spreads along the waterways or railways which facilitate the transport of the harvests. The crops principally grown cannot afford the cost of transport at a greater distance than 180 or 190 miles by railway from the nearest point of embarkation or consumption, and the nearest railway-station must not be further than 18 or 20 miles. There are only a few crops of greater value that can be profitably grown at greater distances, their higher prices covering the increased cost of transport.

The region consisting of the Provinces of Buenos Ayres, Santa Fé, Córdoba, and Entre Rios, which is the richest in cereals, is also that in which the greatest number of small farms are to be found. The statistics for 1901-1902 show that out of 37,434 farms 13,150, or about 36 per cent., were worked by their owners; 18,819, or 50 per cent., by tenants; and 5465, or 14 per cent., by métayers—that is, tenants who give up from half to two-thirds of the crops to the owner of the land. Other more recent statistics, relating to the Province of Santa Fé, give the number of farmers owning their land at the time of the harvest as 6747, or 32 per cent., and the number of tenants as 14,227, or 68 per cent.

The majority of the farms, especially those cultivated by the owners, says the Investigación agricola, have an area varying from 60 to 250 acres. Farms held on lease or by payment of part of the harvest are usually larger, especially in the former case, and the work is done with greater expedition, but as a rule less perfectly and without the same stimulus. Farms varying from 750 to 1500 acres and more which employ day-labourers are still less numerous, since as a general thing nothing is gained by employing them. On the other hand, however, there are large farms whose owners in reality only supervise matters of administration, and which are divided among tenant-farmers or métayers, paying so much per cent, of the harvest, or a rent in kind, according to the crops and the conditions agreed upon. In such a case the proprietor or colonist is not actually an agriculturalist, but a business man, who more often than not has not sufficient knowledge to assume the scientific or even the rational direction of the operations on his estate.

Agricultural Products

Having considered the physical conditions of the Argentine soil, the regions given over to particular forms of agriculture, and the disposition of rural property, the moment has now come to consider what areas are at present respectively producing crops of various kinds from seed, comparing them not only with the area of each province, but also with the statistics of previous years. In making this inquiry, we have a valuable starting-point in the Censo agropecuario, taken in the month of October 1888; the first serious undertaking of the kind ever attempted in the Republic under competent direction.[40]