Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 3 - From Marx to Mao

134
V. I. LENIN
Notes to tables A and B
1. For Taurida Gubernia the returns for land leased out concern
only two uyezds: Berdyansk and Dnieper.
2. For the same gubernia the category of improved implements
includes mowers and reapers.
3. For the two uyezds of Samara Gubernia instead of the percentage
of land leased out the percentage of allotment-leasing nonfarming
households has been taken.
4. For Orel Gubernia the amount of land leased out (and consequently
of the total land in use) has been determined approximately.
The same applies to the four uyezds of Voronezh Gubernia.
5. For Orel Gubernia the returns for improved implements exist
for only Yelets Uyezd.
6. For Voronezh Gubernia, instead of the number of households
with employments we have taken (for three uyezds: Zadonsk, Korotoyak
and Nizhnedevitsk) the number of households providing farm
labourers.
7. For Voronezh Gubernia returns for improved implements exist
for only two uyezds: Zemlyansk and Zadonsk.
8. For Nizhni-Novgorod Gubernia, instead of households engaged
in “industries” in general, we have taken the households engaging in
outside employments.
9. For some of the uyezds, instead of the number of commercial
and industrial establishments, we have had to take the number of
households with commercial and industrial establishments.
10. Where the statistical returns give several columns of “employments”
we have tried to single out those “employments” which most
exactly indicate work for hire, the sale of labour-power.
11. All rented land, as far as possible, has been taken—allotment
and non-allotment, arable and meadow land.
12. We would remind the reader that for Novouzensk Uyezd farmstead
peasants and Germans are excluded, for Krasnoufimsk Uyezd
only the agricultural part of the uyezd has been taken for Ekaterinburg
Uyezd landless peasants and those possessing a share in meadow
land alone are excluded, for Trubchevsk Uyezd suburban village
communities are excluded, for Knyaginin Uyezd the industrial village
of Bolshoye Murashkino is excluded, etc. These exclusions are partly
ours, and are partly due to the nature of the material. Obviously,
therefore, the differentiation of the peasantry must actually be more
pronounced than appears in our table and chart.
To illustrate this combined table and to show clearly
the complete similarity, of the relationship of the top to the
bottom peasant groups in the most varied localities, we
have drawn the following chart on which are plotted the
percentages in the table. To the right of the column indicating
the percentages of total households, runs a curve showing
the positive indices of economic strength (enlargement of