■,'i'l. il'D" '*' I N.' 1 wo CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE Cornell University Library HD595 .B86 English land and Enallsh '3"% 4m. CAVLORO ^RINTCO INU.5.A The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032429767 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. EI^&LISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. An Enquiry into the Origin and Character of the English Land System, with Proposals for its Reform. WITH. AN INDEX. The Hon. GEORGE C. BRODRICK. PUBLISHED FOK THE COBDEN CLUB BY CA8SELL, PETTER, GALPIN &. CO.: LONDON, PASIS ^ NEW YOUK. 1881. S0^ (»^2^ PREFACE. The present volume treats of the historical growth, the distinctive features, and the prospective develop- ment, of the English Land System. It does not pur- port to deal with the Scotch or Irish land systems, in so far as they differ from the English, except where these differences may be significant, for purposes of illustration. Nor does it purport to describe fully the land systems of foreign countries, though I have thought it well to introduce a concise review of the more im- portant among these, in order to exhibit in stronger relief the unique character of the agrarian constitution established in England by the joint operation of Law and Custom. The peculiar essence of that constitu- tion is to be found in the marked separation of the agricultural community into three classes — landlords, farmers, and labourers. Of these classes, the first is at once the most powerful, and the most typical product of the English Land System. I have, there- fore, associated " English Land " with " English Landlords," in the title of a. work chiefly designed to set forth the reciprocal influence of social and agricul- tural relations in the past, the present, and the future. It has been my endeavour to bring the broader and iv PBUFAGE. more characteristic aspects of the English Land System within the comprehension of unlearned, and even of foreign, readers. With this view, I have avoided legal and agricultural details, as far as possible, and have abstained from discussing questions outside the main line of the enquiry. For example, while I have indicated the extent of landed property held by cor- porations or trustees of charities, I have not touched upon various schemes for its better management or re -appropriation. Other topics connected with land tenure in England have been omitted for similar reasons ; but I have not consciously shrunk from grap- pling with any difficulties involved in the elucidation or reform of the English Land System. Though I have freely consulted other works, and have derived much information from those of Mr. Caird, in particular, I have adopted no conclusion as my own without careful and independent research. Since it would have been impossible to marshal the whole evidence on which each statement is founded, I have seldom cited authorities, unless for the sake of acknowledging an obligation, or of noting an im- portant conflict of opinion. To many personal friends I am indebted for kind advice and criticism; but my grateful thanks are specially due to Mr. John Bateman, author of the " Grreat Landowners of the United Kingdom," for his generous and valuable assis- tance in preparing the classification of landowners for each county of England and Wales, appended to the third chapter of Part II. I venture to believe that so PBBFAOE. V instructive an analysis of the official returns has never before appeared, and that a careful study of it will throw new light on the distribution of landed property in this country. In the first chapter of Part II., as well as in other chapters of the same Part, I have not scrupled to borrow liberally from Essays of my own, on the "Law and Custom of Primogeniture," and "Local Grovemment in England," originally published by the Cobden Club, and re-published in my " Political Stildies" (1879). In laying before the public a comprehensive sur- vey of the EngHsh Land System, with proposals for its amendment, I am conscious of exposing myself to a double charge of presumption. It may be thought, on the one hand, that everything which can be said on that system must abeady have been said in the numerous books, pamphlets, and articles, which have lately been put forth on the so-called Land Question. It may be doubted, on the other hand, whether so vast and complicated a theme can be adequately handled within the compass of a single volume, or, perhaps, by any writer who does not possess a very rare combination of attainments. In reply to both these objections, I can only plead that my task has not been under- taken without a full sense of its gravity, or without a sincere desire to execute it impartially. It would not have been undertaken at all, if any treatise already published had appeared to supply the want of a compendious work, at once historical, descriptive, and VI PREFACE. suggestive, neither controversial in its spirit nor technical in its style. In prospect of early legisla- tion on subjects closely affecting the Landed Interest, I have been induced and encouraged to attempt such a work. No one can be so conscious of its imperfections as the author, but if it shall in any degree serve to mark out the true course of constructive statesmanship by the light of past experience, I shall be amply rewarded. GEOEGE C. BEODEICK. November, 1880. i CONTENTS. Part I. HISTOBICAL SKETCH OF THE ENGLISH LAND SYSTEM. CHAPTER I. Land Tenure and Agricnlture in England from the Earliest Period to the middle of the Pourteentli Century II. Land Tenure and Agriculture in England from the middle of the Fourteenth to the end of the Sixteenth Century... III. Land Tenure and Agriculture in England during the Seven teenth and Eighteenth Centuries IV. Recent History of Land Tenure in England V. Recent Progress of Agriculture in England 15. 42' '■< 65 79 part II. DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OP THE ENGLISH LAND SYSTEM. I. The Law and Custom of Primogeniture II. Family Settlements and Limited Ownership III. . Distribution of Landed Property among a Small and Decreasing Number of Families IV. Dependent Condition of Farmers under a System of Yearly Tenancy V. Dependent Condition of Agricultural Labourers Part III. OTHER ASPECTS OF THE ENGLISH LAND SYSTEM. I. The Peculiar Burdens and Privileges of Landed Property in England II. The Agricultural Depression of 1879-80, and the Prospects of American Competition 273 III. Foreign Systems of Land Tenure 303 8'> 129 152 198 211 241 Tiii CONTENTS. Pact IV. PEOPOSBD KEPOKM OF THE ENGLISH LAND SYSTEM. -CHAPTER PACK I. Reforms to be effected in the English System of Land Tenure 331 II. Reforms to be effected in the Agricultural System of England 365 III. Reforms to be effected in the English System of Rural Government 408 rv. Probable Effect of these Reforms on Rural Economy and Rural Society in England ... ... 420 V. This Effect to be wrought out by way of gradual Evolution, and not of sudden Revolution ... ... 446 APPENDIX I. The Abolition of Feudal Tenures and the Land Tax... ... 465 II. Liability of Personalty to Poor Rate 4V1 III. Agricultural Holdings Act Amendment and Tenants' Com- pensation '474 IV. Imports and Exports of Farm Produce 477 V. Gazette Prices of Wheat, Barley, and Oats 491 VI. Statement respecting the Ownership of Land in England and Wales 493 VII. Vested Interests in Settled Estates 4?4 VIII. Amount of Poor Rate levied in Agricultural Counties iu 1852, 1868, and 1878 496 IX. Average extent of Land held by Small Proprietors 497 X. Extracts from the Agricultural Returns of Great Britain, 1880 498 Index ., 503 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS, part I. HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE ENGLISH LAND SYSTEM. OHAPTEE I. Land Tenure and Agriculture in England from the Earliest Period to the Middle of the Fom-teenth Century. The soil of England, though renowned for its fertility under the Eomans, had been little disturbed by the plough before the invasion of Csesar. Corn was abeady raised by settlers of Belgic race in the maritime dis- tricts which lay nearest to Gaul) but the interior was peopled by wild tribes, all but ignorant of hus- bandry, wandering from pasturage to pasturage with their stunted flocks or herds, and living chiefly on milk and flesh. Vast forests, parts of which have since been submerged, then overspread large tracts of the southern, western, and northern counties, serving as a bulwark aarainst hostile incursions and as a natural division between different tribes. Pens and marshes of unknown extent covered much of the best wheat-growing land in the eastern counties, and many places now surrounded by waving corn-fields were then islands not yet made accessible by 'causeways. Half the roots and vegetables 2 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. now consumed as human food or as forage were un- known to the ancient Britons ; even the beech-tree, on whose fruit the Saxons fed their swine, had not been introduced from the Continent, and no roads or means of transport existed whereby the failure of a crop in one district could be supplied by the plenty of another. In such a state of society, the very idea of agriculture was entirely wanting, and the only agrarian relation that could exist was that of master and slave. If the British chiefs possessed any separate property apart from the hunting-grounds and clearings of their re- spective tribes, it was doubtless tilled by their families and menials ; but no rudiments of a land-system can be discovered in the scanty and shadowy records of pre-Eoman Britain. Though England was never fully subdued' by the Eomans, and though, in the main, the rural districts were governed by the conquerors from towns and mili- tary stations, yet the permanence of Eoman influences is truly remarkable. It was doubtless aided by the paucity of the British population, which is estimated to have been less than one million, while that of the Eoman settlers has been estimated at one hundred thousand. The great roads which still remain after seventeen or eighteen centuries as monuments of Eoman foresight ; the sites of Eoman camps which crown so many commanding heights ; the ruins of Eoman towns, with their walls and gateways, their amphitheatres and public buildings ; the basements of Eoman villas, with their baths and tesselated pavements ; the enormous relics of Eoman potteries, ironworks, and mines— these are the most familiar evidences of imperial rule and ANGLO-SAXON LAND-SYSTEM. 3 domestic life among the Eomans in Britain. But there are also some traces of Eoman agriculture on land which afterwards relapsed into waste, and we have the positive statement of the Emperor Julian that, in the middle of the fourth century, a famine was averted on the banks of the Rhine by the importation of corn from Britain. The practice of agriculture was, indeed, an instinct and a tradition among the bodies of settlers who formed Roman colonies, nine of which at least were established in Britain. How far they cultivated the land with their own hands, and how far they em- ployed the native population as bondmen, we have no means of ascertaining. The condition of Roman "coloni" is, indeed, involved in great obscurity, and even Savigny could discover no historical connection between them and the villeins of a later age ; but it is at least pro- bable that a servile class grew up under Roman do- minion, which the Saxon invaders afterwards converted into predial slaves. It is, however, from the Anglo-Saxon age that we must date the origin of that land-system, characteristic of all Teutonic nations, which has been developed so differently by England and by Germany. The organi- zation of the German " Mark " has of late been so elaborately analyzed and described that its leading features now stand ont in clear relief. It cannot be asserted with confidence that it prevailed over the whole of England, but there is good reason to believe that it prevailed very widely, and furnished the primi- tive type upon which mediaeval agriculture was moulded in this country. The village-community thus consti- tuted was a society of free proprietors, representing B 2 4 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISS LANDLORDS. either the first conquerors or their descendants. This society usually consisted of a clan or group of kindred families, each head of which is supposed to have received an allotment, though not perhaps an allotment of equal size with those of the chief or the more powerfal mem- bers of the clan. Part of the district held by the village-community was owned jointly by the whole, and occupied as common pasturage, or common wood- land ; another part, near the inhabited " township " of the community, was divided into separate lots belonging to individual owners, but tilled, or reserved as meadow land, according to a fixed order of common husbandry, and thrown open for common pasturage after har- vest ; a third part, immediately surrounding the home- steads of the " township," comprised a number of little enclosures, in the nature of paddocks, gardens, or farm-yards, appropriated absolute].y to different households. Careful ' research has gone far to prove that until the end of the last century, land in many English parishes was still cultivated on a system manifestly derived from that of the old village-com- munities ; that " Lammas-fields " are nothing but fields which have remained subject to the old rights of joint pasturage over the fallows and stubbles of the arable "mark"; that enclosure of commons, mainly for the benefit of great landowners, is but the continua- tion of the process whereby demesne-land encroached upon the common pasture or " folkland " ; and that lords of manors are legally, if not lineally, descended from the stronger members of Saxon townships, whose " properties " ultimately swallowed up the shares of their poorer neighbours in the affer publicus of the village. riLLAOE-OOMMUNITIES. 6 In this antique form of agrarian partnership, there was no room for a tripartite division of burdens and profits between landlords, tenant-farmers, and farm- labourers. Every freeman was, in theory, his own landlord, his own farmer, and his own labourer, though we can hardly doubt that a simple form of co-operative agriculture had already been invented under the stress of necessity. The swine roaming the woods, or the sheep and cattle turned into the pasture of the village- community, would naturally be under the charge of common herdsmen or shepherds ; the rude imple- ments and vehicles then employed for ploughing and harrowing, getting in and housing the crops, would often be used in turn by more than one family; and the help still rendered to each other by French peasants and Irish farmers cannot have been wanting in the communistic infancy of husbandry. But it has yet to be shown that no man could own land in England without being a member of some village-community,^ and analogy would lead us to suspect the concurrent existence of at least two systems which are conven- tionally treated as distinct stages in the history of land tenure. The manor, which fills so large a space in later jurisprudence, may have existed, and probably did exist, side by side with the "mark," or village- community. The homestead of a powerful chief must needs have overshadowed those of- humbler freemen; and his share in the common field, even if originally the same, would soon become larger. Such a pro- gressive inequality in the size of separate holdings would coincide with inequality in the skill of different 1 Stuljbs' " Constitutional History," vol. I., chap. t. 6 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. farmers, while both would tend directly to favour a progressive creation of separate ownership and the territorial aggrandizement of the chief. The first step would be the severance of his allotment from the common land, next would follow its enclosure ; first, he would claim the lion's share of the waste, then he would acquire the power of treating it as his own property, subject to rights of pasturage and turf-cutting. The exact course of this remarkable transition has never been traced out, but it is toler- ably certain that it was accomplished in most parts of England before the Norman Conquest. Whether by the solemn act of " commendation," ^ or by less regular methods of submission, the peasant proprietors of Anglo-Saxon villages gradually transformed them- selves into tenants of manors ; and the greatest land- owner of the village-community emerged into a lord of the manor, in everything but the name, which he did not acquire tiU a later period. ' The former were still freeholders, cultivating their lots of arable land as private estates more or less in accordance with the old rules of common husbandry, exercising the old common rights of wood and pasture over what now began to be called the lord's waste, and attending local courts for regulating common interests, such as the repair of cross-roads, the cleansing of streams, the preserva- tion of fences, the removal of nuisances, and the decision of endless questions regarding stray cattle. But these courts were soon to be recognized, under various 1 So highly was the protection of a superior prized by landholders, that an instance is given in wliich a man who had actually bought his land of the king commended himself, for greater security, to a lord. MANORIAL LAND-SYSTEM. 7 names, as the lord's courts; for all who had "com- mended" themselves to a lord thereby placed themselves under his jurisdiction; and still ampler powers of jurisdiction over the lesser freeholders were often attached by express words to royal grants of land. Thus manorial influences waxed more and more para- mount in these little village republics ; and so generally had their inhabitants accepted or acquiesced in a state of vassalage that agrarian relations in most parts of England apparently underwent no violent change upon the introduction of feudal tenures.^ More than two centuries have elapsed since feudal tenures were abolished ; yet the manorial land- system, which supplied the basis of them, is not yet extinct. However it may have been developed, and whether or not it embraced the whole country, that system was assuredly the germ of the modern English land-system, and resembled this_in some respects more closely thaa it resembled certain phases of rural economy which intervened between the Norman times and our own. Through all the intricacies of tenure and custom which perplex legal antiquaries, we can still discern the simple features of village societies in England under the Henrys and the Edwards. The most central object was the parish church, next to which in dignity, and often closely a.djoining it, rose the manor-house of the lord, with its great hall, in which Manor Courts were held, fines imposed,^ homage received, and, perhaps, criminal ^ See Maine's "Village Communities," pp. 140 — 6. " Sucli petty offences as fraudulent adulteration, and tke use of dis - lionest weights, seem to have been within the cognizance of the Manor Court. 8 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. justice administered under a special grant of jurisdiction. The best part of the cultivated land, ranging from one- quarter to one-half, formed the lord's private demesne, and was tilled under the bailiff either by villeins per- forming forced labour, or by free labourers working for hire. The rest of the cultivated land was divided between free tenants and villeins, each possessing the rights of pasturage, and often of turbary, over the waste. The 1,400 tenants-in-chief, and 7,871 sud- feudaru, who owned all the manors in England under the Conqueror, are the prototypes of the two or three thousand noblemen and squires who now own full half of England and Wales. The free tenants and higher orders of villeins are the proto- types of the modern tenant-farmer, being more depen- dent on the landlord for protection, though always enjoying fixity of tenure, when they did not hold under lease. The lower orders of villeins are the proto- types of the modern farm labourer, to whom they were inferior in so far as they were attached to the soil, but superior in so far as they had a proprietary interest in the soil, and could look down upon a slave class which still existed beneath them. The survival of this slave class from the earliest ages is clearly established, though little is known of its actual condition. To diminish and mitigate slavery was among the most beneficent efforts of the Anglo-Saxon Church ; yet we hear of English nobles breeding slaves for the market in the eleventh century, and of the Bristol slave trade being finally suppressed in the Conqueror's reign. More than 25,000 servi are registered in the Domesday census ; and these, afterwards called " villeins in gross," FREEMEN AND VILLEINS. 9 were regarded as part of the live stock on a farm, witli no riglit to migrate from it, yet with no interest in the soil, and liable to be transferred from one lord to another. It is no longer possible to interpret the exact distinctions between the various subdivisions of the class intermediate between slaves and freeholders — the 82,000 hordarii, the 7,000 cotarii, and the 110,000 villani of Domesday Book. Professor Stubbs identifies the villani with those free- holders of the old township or village-community who had degenerated into the customary tenants of the lord, and were the predecessors of the later copyholders. No doubt, this may have been the origin of many villani, but we cannot doubt that many others must have risen from the ranks of those landless serfs or slaves employed to cultivate the larger Anglo-Saxon domains, while many freeholders of the village-community are repre- sented in Domesday not as villani, but as socmanni. The cotarii and bordarii are generally admitted to have been practically serfs holding cottages and small plots of land on condition of rendering compulsory services. The amount of these services became gradually defined by custom, and custom soon coupled with their due performance the enjoyment of such privileges as turning out a few cattle on the waste. The higher class of villani were only bound to aid in certain kinds of farm labour, and at certain seasons ; the lower class, with the serfs, were bound to work on the home farm throughout the year ; and the measure of their respective obligations was generally entered on the Court EolL^ As slavery became extinguished, and the condition of villeinage, in ' See Green's " History of the Englisli People," chap. v. ; Nasse's " Agricultural Community of the Middle Ages," pp. 35—42. 10 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISS LANDLORDS. all its forms, became elevated, the free peasant proprietor was proportionately depressed in his relation to the feudal hierarchy above him. The higher class of villeins and the lower class of freeholders insensibly passed into each other, so that by the end of Henry III.'s reign the best part of the rural population in England was assimilated and absorbed into a new class of tenant- farmers — a class which had begun to grow up much earlier, but was then chiefly to be found upon ecclesias- tical land.^ Some of these old English tenant-farmers paid rent in money, some in kind, some in agricultural services ; but their rents were fixed, and their social posi- tion was that of yeomen rather than of villeins. At the same time, their legal status was materially strengthened by a new writ, introduced in the reign of Henry III., whereby a farmer holding under an ordinary lease, even though not embodied in a deed, acquired a right of property which could be enforced at law against strangers, and even against his own lord. There is no reason to believe that any material progress was made in the art of agriculture between the Roman age and the agrarian revolution of the fourteenth century. The actual extent of land under cultivation in England during the Middle Ages was pro- bably greater than is commonly supposed, for it is certain that many thousands of acres then under the plough were afterwards converted into parks and pas- turages, or covered by the spread of towns. But the old " three-field husbandry " of the Anglo-Saxon village-community, which has been perpetuated in the midland counties down to our own times, seems to ' Rogers' " History of Prices," p. 3. AGBICULTUBE IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 11 have prevailed generally during the whoje of this period. Under that system, a crop of barley, oats, or beans, regularly followed a crop of wheat, and the field was left fallow every third year. The price of iron was so high as to make the wear and tear of agricultural implements a very serious consideration for the farmer, especially in dry weather. Manure was supplied, if at all, by turning out flocks of sheep on the fallow ; ordinary farmyard manure was very scarce ; stall feeding was little practised, and artificial manure was of course wholly unknown. The land was usually ploughed over twice, and, since the horses and oxen of those days were both underbred and underfed, a team consisted, as a rule, of eight draught cattle.^ Yet the ploughing was, after all, but shallow, and two bushels of seed per acre yielded a return of no more than eight bushels, or one quarter, of wheat. During the century preceding the Black Death, the average price of a quarter was six shillings — equivalent to at least 120s. of our money — and the average corn wage paid to each labourer was about five quarters a year, on which he must be assumed to have kept his family.^ Hay was produced exclusively from natural ^ Nasse's " Agricultural Commumty of the Middle Ages," pp. 43, 44. Rogers speaks of four horses being attached to each plough. (" History of Prices," vol. I., p. 15.) ^ In the rare tract of Bishop Fleetwood, entitled " Chronicon Pretiosum," and first published in 1705 or 1706, a, large body of evidence is collected bearing on the cost of wheat and other commodities in the Middle Ages. Prom this it would appear that extremely violent fluctua- tions occurred in the market price of wheat during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. In 1125, it is stated to have reached £1 per quarter, an almost incredible quotation, since it would be equivalent to about £20 of our present money. In 1270, however, a famine price of no less than 12 HNQLI8E. LAND AND ENGLISH LANDL0BD8. meadows, which, in the absence of artificial grasses and winter roots, were extremely valuable.^ Peas and vetches, however, were grown in some parts of the country. Agricultural improvement was then confined to very simple operations, such as hedging and ditching, rough draining, marling, and liming.^ Dairy produce of all kinds was doubtless more abundant in country villages than it now is ; for the poorest serf was seldom denied his " cow's grass," as it is still called in the North, and there were no dealers to buy up milk for great towns. Cheese and butter were made in the out- buildings of manor-houses, and were cheap relatively to bread of wheaten flour, which seems to have been mainly consumed by the higher orders, as rye-bread and oat-bread were by the poor. Butchers' meat was then sold for about one farthing a pound, mutton being somewhat cheaper than beef, notwithstanding the want of winter food, which compelled farmers to kill off a great part of their flocks at the end of the autumn. Low as the price of mutton was, sheep- farming was found to be very profitable, and for this reason was generally retained in the lord's own hands. Though a fleece of wool seldom weighed more than £4 16s. per quarter is reported to have prevailed ; whereas in years of plenty, such as 1243, 1244, and 1288, wheat is said to have been sold for 2s. or even Is. 6d. per quarter. In 1316 — 17 the price seems to have risen again up to £2 and upwards per quarter. Some of these figures are so astonishing as to suggest the suspicion that they represent maximum and minimum prices in local markets, some taken just before, and some just after, the harvest. 1 Rogers' " History of Prices," vol. I., p. 17. " Rogers' " History of Prices," vol. I., p. 19. PBI0E8 IN TEE MIDDLE AGES. 13 two pounds, and though enormous losses of sheep, as well as of cattle, were caused by frequent " murrains," yet the supply of wool seems to have been large enough, not only to meet the home demand, in days when clothes were chiefly woollen, but to leave a considerable and constant surplus for exportation. Thus, in 1354, the export of 32,000 sacks of wool, valued at £190,000, constituted nine-tenths of the whole export for the year, and this despite a duty of £80,000, or rather more than 40 per cent. A little later the exports are said by Robert of Avesbury to have amounted to 100,000 sacks. It would appear, indeed, that in ordinary years the supply of most necessaries was abundant. If we read of local scarcity and famines, they may often be ex- plained by the want of communication between dijfferent parts of the country. " Brewers in cities may well afford," says the statute of 1266, " to sell two gallons of ale for a penny, and out of cities three or four gallons for a penny." From these and similar facts we may gather that competition in production had not yet been followed by competition in transit throughout England ; otherwise country brewers might surely have undersold their urban rivals. The violent fluctuations of price between different localities, and different seasons of the year, were probably aggravated by the very measures designed to remedy them. The statutes against " forestallers," and against " kidders or carriers of corn," purported to check the practice of keeping back grain with a view to enhance its price. But they really operated to suppress the trade of corn, thus com- pelling farmers to keep a great part of their produce 14 ENGLISH ZAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. locked up in granaries and stack-yards, instead of selling it off as quickly as possible, and letting it find its way to markets where it was most in demand.^ Later researches have confirmed the statement of Hume that neither carrots nor turnips nor other edible roots were cultivated in England before the sixteenth century, when they were introduced from Holland. The potato is known to have been imported from America in the reign of Elizabeth. Most of our kitchen vegetables were introduced at about the same date from HoUand and Flanders, though onions and leeks, mustard and cresses, green peas and cabbage, were grown in English gardens long before the close of the Middle Ages. Apples and other fruits, which ripen easily without shelter in the open air, were more plentiful than vegetables ; and there is reason to believe that some of the vineyards planted by the Eomans were still cultivated with success, especially in the vale of Gloucester. ,1 See "Wealth of Nations," book IT., diap. v. CHAPTER II. Land Tenure and Agriculture in England from the Middle of the Fourteenth to the End of the Sixteenth Century. Such was the general condition of agriculture and the rural population, when England was visited by themost awful pestilence recorded in history. Advancing from the East by way of Cyprus, Italy, and France, the Black Death 'appeared in Dorsetshire on the 1st of August, 1348, and reached London by N'ovember. Its ravages, however, were greatest in the following year, and swept away, on the lowest computation, one-third of the two or three millions who then inhabited Grreat Britain. The great towns, with their crowded streets, naturally suffered most ; but the country villages, with their squalid huts, and utter neglect of sanitary pre- cautions, were scourged almost as fiercely. In the words of a living historian •} " The whole organization of labour was thrown out of gear. The scarcity of hands produced by the terrible mortality made it difficult for villeins to perform the services due for their lands, and only a temporary abandonment of half the rent by the landowners induced the farmers of their demesnes to refrain from the abandonment of their farms. For a time cultivation became impossible. The sheep and cattle strayed through the fields and com, says a con- temporary, and there were none left who could drive them.. Even when the first burst of panic was over, 1 Green's " History of the English People," vol. I., p. 429. 16 BNGLI8S LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOUDS. the sudden rise of wages, consequent on the enormous diminution in the supply of labour, though accompanied by a corresponding diminution in the supply of food, rudely disturbed the course of industrial employments. Harvests rotted on the ground, and fields were left untilled, not merely from scarcity of hands, but from the strife which now for the first time revealed itself between capital and labour." In spite of a Eoyal Ordinance for- bidding peasants to go about begging in , idleness, and requiring such persons to work at the rate of wages current before the Plague, labourers exacted a famine price for their services, and rents went d(5wn in propor- tion. To remedy this state of things, the Statute of Labourers was passed at the close of 1349, and, as this statute was the direct result of the Black Death, so the Peasant Eevolt of 1381 was the direct, though remoter, consequence of this statute. Had the policy of the Legislature prevailed, the effect would have been not merely to keep wages down while the price of food was going up, but to revive serfdom, which had already well-nigh died out. While the landless man was required to work for any employer willing to pay him the old rate of wages, villeins were forbidden to leave their parishes, and stewards of manors soon discovered flaws in the agreements whereby they had commuted forced service for money-payments. Such demands were more intolerable when pressed on men who had lately served in the French war, or who had sought a refuge from the burdens of serfdom in the rising industry of corporate towns. ^ The struggle ^ It is difficult to reconcile the misery alleged to haye been in existence at this period with the statement of "William Longland in " Piers the STATUTES OF LABOUBEBS. 17 lasted for a whole generation, inflamed by religious excitement and political discontent, till it reached a head in the communistic rebellion which has derived its name from Wat Tyler. This rebellion was sternly crushed, the promises made to the insurgent peasants were violated. Parliament declared its resolution to up- hold serfdom, and even petitioned the King to restrain villeins from sending their children to school in order to advance them in the world. A statute passed in 1388 forbade the labourer to migrate from the place of his settlement without a passport. Other statutes were passed to prevent villeins from seeking enfranchisement by becoming artisans, or to put down the growing practice of mendicancy. But these statutes were clear] y ineffective against the operation of tendencies beyond the control of law. The growth of towns constantly increased the market for agricultural produce, and gave the owners of land the means of paying money wages to farm labourers. The same cause, as well as the depopu- lation of the country during the Plague, rendered farm labour scarce. The scarcity of farm labour paved the way for the general introduction of leases, inasmuch as the lords of manors could no longer rely on compulsory service. The system of leasing had already been adopted on college estates before the Peasant Eevolt, in a form resembling the metairie of south-western Europe, the landlord providing the farm stock as well as undertaking every kind of permanent improvement. But it now received a very marked impulse ; and in the Plougliman : " — " Labourers that have no land to live on but their hands disdain to live on penny ale or bacon, but demand fresh flesh or fish, fried or bake, and that hot or hotter for chilling of their maw." C 18 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. fifteenth century a very large part of England was apparently farmed on lease, in small lots of five or ten acres, several of which were often held by the same tenant. Despite all legal obstacles, parcels of land often came into the market under the influence of the same causes, and the famous Election statute of 1430, limiting the county franchise to 40s. freeholders, and excluding those of less substance, is a sufficient proof of the importance attained by this great middle class in the fifteenth century. That century may, indeed, be regarded as the golden age of the old English yeomanry, which then included the great body of tenant-farmers holding their lands on lease. ^ Never, perhaps, was the land- scape of England so picturesque as it must have been during the Wars of the Roses, when inhabited castles still crowned many a rocky mound, when abbeys still nestled in many a secluded hollow by the banks of rivers, when forests still divided one district from another, when the beauties of cultivation were begin- ning to enliven desolate tracts of fen and moor, and when the snug homesteads of men farming their own lands were still thickly scattered over the country. It is a memorable remark of Philip de Comines that in England the miseries wrought by civil war fell solely upon its authors, and this remark might be extended to other social evils of the fifteenth century. While the great barons were fortifying their old ramparts ^ Speaking of this century, Professor Thorold Rogers says : — " Crops were plentiful, prices were low, labour was relatively well paid, and the value of land rose rapidly, though rents were on the whole stationary." (" History of Rent in England," Gontemporary Review, April, 1880.) YEOMEN IN THE FIFTEENTH OENTUBY. 19 afresh, wasting their means on vast retinues with a barbarous profusion of entertainment, and ultimately- destroying each other in a bootless war of succession, trade was steadily prospering in the boroughs, and the fragments of great estates were constantly passing into the hands of industrious yeomen. Many of the knights and squires, possessed by the military spirit, shared the fortunes and followed the example of the nobility, maintaining extravagant households, taking an active part in the politics of those perilous times, fighting under the Yorkist or Lancastrian banner for a cause which in no degree concerned the people of England, and paying the penalty of forfeiture when they chanced to be upon the losing side. It was the small proprietors and leasehold farmers, and especially the fortunate life-tenants of monastic lands, generally let at low rents, who profited most by the unthrifti- ness and ruin of the classes above them. In the reign of Henry VI., Fortescue was able to boast that in no country of Europe were small proprietors so numerous as in England. For many descendants of the old villeins had by this time become copyholders, and entered the ranks of the yeomanry, which now furnished the bone and sinew of the English com- monalty. The course of legislation was favourable to both classes. By statutes of 1449 and 1469 leaseholders were protected against disturbance by purchasers or creditors of the lord's estate ; by a judgment delivered in 1468 it was decided that a tenant in villeinage had a right to maintain an action of trespass against his lord. Meanwhile, taxation was c 2 20 ENGLISR LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. more evenly distributed than it had been in the pre- vious century, and the growing power of the Com- mons had mitigated the more intolerable abuses of royal " purveyance," which had formerly been extended from the compulsory purchase of goods at arbitrary prices to the compulsory impressment of workmen at arbitrary wages. The general result was a degree of social equality such as has never since been witnessed, and a rural economy resembling that of modern Switzerland or Germany far more closely than that of modern England. The necessaries of life were cheap and plentiful, the habits of life were simple ; all the members of a yeoman's family were labourers on the farm ; the women milked the cows, span the wool, and made up the garments ; almost every article con ■ sumed was of home growth or home manufacture ; and, if banking accounts were unknown, the practice of saving money and leaving it by will seems to have been habitual in this class. Nor did the labourer, roused to a sense of independence by the democratic spirit of LoUardism, fail to partake in the general prosperity of the agricultural community. The rate of wages, as compared with the price of food, was then so high that no man was cut off from the pro- spect of at least renting a plot of land ; for pestilence and war had proved but too complete a check on over- population, and the rise of craft guilds in towns offered an attractive outlet for surplus labour from country districts. Under such conditions, it is reasonable to believe that subdivision of property would have been carried much further than it actually proceeded, but for the GROWTH OF PRIMOGENITURE. 21 restrictions deliberately imposed upon it by law. During the four centuries whicli intervened between the Conquest and the accession of" Henry VII., feudal rules of succession governed the descent of landed property, and feudal ideas of policy fostered the system of entailing. Under the Saxon laws, the freeholder had a full right to alienate his land by sale or gift, and to dispose of it by will,^ in default of which it was equally- divided among his children by the national custom of Gavelkind. 'This custom, which still prevails in Kent, is shown to be there co-extensive with socage tenure, and its maintenance in that county has been explained with much probability by the number and independence of the Kentish freeholders, by the vast possessions of the Church in Kent, and by its geographical position.^ It is impossible to fix the precise year, or even the precise reign, in which Primogeniture was substituted for Gavelkind in the Common Law of England. Blackstone regards this feature of mature feudalism as introduced by the Conqueror ; yet the Conqueror himself sanctions descent by Gavelkind in the charter which he granted to the City of London. Under the so-called Laws of Henry I., the eldest son had no pre-eminence beyond the right of appropriating the " capital fee," held by military tenure ; ^ and, so late as the reign of Henry III., socage fees, the relic of the old 1 It is said that in the wills of great nobles before the Conquest some preference for eldest sons was manifested. (Kenny's "Essay on Primo- geniture.") 2 See Elton on " Tenures of Kent," and Kenny's " Essay on Primo- geniture." 3 The current interpretation of this passage is disputed by Mr. Kenny. ("Essay on Primogeniture,'' p. 167.) 22 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. Saxon boc-land, continued to be partible among the male children. Grianville, writing in 1187 — 9, speaks of Primogeniture as if it were fully established on estates held by knight service, and were spreading, though only as a local custom, on socage estates. By the year 1200, however, the general presumption was held to be in favour of Primogeniture ; and this rule of descent had become almost universal, except in Kent, by the end of the thirteenth century, by which time also the custom of entailing, in its most ancient form, was already established. Entails created in this form conferred no indefeasible right of inheritance. When a fee was granted to a man " and the heirs male of his body," it was held that, upon the birth of a son, the grantee might sell the land, or chal-ge it with incumbrances, or forfeit it by treason, so as to bar the interest of his own issue. If he did none of these acts, however, it would descend according to the express terms of the grant, for he could not devise it by will. It has been doubted whether tenants of the Crown ever possessed the full liberty of selling, though others have considered this liberty as characteristic of true feudalism, which denied the son any vested right in the estate so acquired by the father. According to this view, the famous statute De Bonis (13 Edward I., cap. 1), by which the succession of the issue, and the ultimate reversion of the donor on failure of issue, were secured against the risk of being defeated by alienation, was a legislative encroach- ment on feudal principles, and a part of the same policy which afterwards carried the statute Quia Emptores. The entails made under De Bonis created, in fact, a perpetual series of life estates, and are stigmatised DEVELOPMENT OF ENTAILS, 23 in a well-known passage of "Blackstone's Commen- taries:" — " Children grew disobedient "when they knew they could not be set aside ; farmers were ousted of their leases made by tenants-in- tail . . . creditors were defrauded of their debts . . . innumerable latent entails were produced to deprive purchasers of lands which they had fairly bought . . . and treasons were encouraged, as estates- tail ^ere not liable to forfeiture longer than for the tenant's life." The fact of such consequences having resulted from indefeasible entails has never been disputed. It is significant that, when the absurd technical device of a " common recovery " was invented to break them, in the reign of Edward IV., Parliament took no steps to counteract it, and even expressly legalized disentailing by " fines." ^ Nevertheless, there is good reason to doubt whether the greater part of England was ever subject to entails under De Donis, and whether that system ever came into general use before the Civil Wars of the seventeenth century, soon after which the lawyers found means to defeat it. We must re- member that wills of land, by which modern entails are often created, were not then permitted by Common Law, and that even devises of land, by means of "uses," which held good in equity, are beheved to date from the early part of the fifteenth century. Entails must, 1 " Taltarum's case," establishing the right of breaking an entail by a collusive action, was decided in 1472. By the statute 4 Henry YII., cap. 24, the alternative method of terminating entails by " fines " was legally sanctioned. By the statute 26 Hen. VIII., cap. 18, estates-tail were de- prived of their immunity from forfeiture, on conviction for treason ; by 32 Hen. VIII., cap. 18, tenants for life were enabled to grant leases, on reasonable terms, which would bind their issue-in-tail ; by 33 Hen. VIII., cap. 39, all estates-tail were made liable to Crown-debts, secured by record or special contract. 24 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. therefore, have been created during the fourteenth century by deed, and, as the device of successive life estates followed by remainders in tail had not been invented, there was no recognised method whereby a landowner could entail an estate, and yet reserve to himself the possession of it. Indeed, the frequency of lawsuits concerning land in the fifteenth century is some proof of its frequently coming into the market. On the other hand, in days when per- sonalty was extremely scarce, wills of land very rare, and settlements unknown, the law of Primogeniture, causing fee simple estates to descend like entailed estates, must have operated to an extent, and with a severity, which is happily difficult to conceive in the present age. Many events concurred to make the sixteenth century a memorable era in the history of English land tenure, as well as of English agriculture. The destruction of the old feudal baronage in the Wars of the Roses, the invention of printing, the revival of letters, the opening of a New World to commerce, and the re^ ligious movement which gave birth to the Eeforma- tion, such were some of the great changes which marked the close of the Middle Ages in this country, ind ushered in a new state of society. The im- pulse thus imparted to national energy soon made itself felt in rural economy, and it was here inten- sified by the action of special causes. The revival of trade with the Continent stimulated the production of wool and hides for exportation. The growth of a new plutocracy on the ruins of the old English nobility largely increased the application of capital to LANB TENURE IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 25 land, while it strengthened the operation of that commercial spirit which had early penetrated into the relations between English landlords and tenants. With the progress of settled government and the development of modern artillery, castles were replaced by castellated mansions, and these hy Elizabethan dwelling-houses, while a multitude of armed retainers soon became an encumbrance. No longer requiring the military services of his free tenants, and having almost lost the customary services of his tenants in villeinage, the lord of the manor ceased to have a motive for encouraging small occupations, and began to consolidate his farms. Having gradually appro- priated large tracts of the waste since the first sanc- tion was given to encroachment by the Statute of Merton, he now realised that grazing land yields a larger rent to its proprietor than arable, though it may support a smaller population and contribute less to the national food supply. Already, in the reign of Henry VII., com- plaints had been recorded in the preambles of statutes that country districts were being depopu- lated, that farm buildings were being pulled down, and that sheep or cattle were driving out Christian labourers. In the fourth year of that reign an Act was passed forbidding the demolition of any farm- house having as much as twenty acres of tillage land annexed to it, whence it may be inferred that such was regarded as the minimum size of a yeoman's occupation. A striking passage in Bacon's " History of Henry VII." contains an epitome of the objections 26 ENGLI8E LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. urged against the pasturage enclosures of this period : — " Inclosures at that time began to be more frequent, whereby arable lands, which could not be manured without people and families, were turned into pasture, which was easily rid by a few herdsmen; and tenancies for years, lives, and at will, whereupon much of the yeomanry lived, were turned into demesnes. This bred a decay of people, and by consequence a decay of towns, churches, tithes, and the Uke. The King like- wise knew full well, and in no wise forgot, that there ensued withall upon this a decay and diminution of subsidies and taxes ; for the more gentlemen, ever the lower book of subsidies." He justifies the wisdom of the King and Par- liament in legislating against this evil, and particu- larly describes the method adopted : — " Enclosures they would not forbid, for that had been to forbid the improvement of the patrimony of the kingdom ; nor tillage they would nob compel, for that was to strive with nature and utility; but they took a course to take away depopulating enclosures, and de- populating pasturage," indirectly, by ordaining that all farm-houses with twenty acres attached should be kept up with " a competent proportion of land." The houses must needs be inhabited, and " the pro- portion of land being kept up did of necessity en- force the dweller not to be a beggar or cottager, but a man of some substance, that might keep hinds and servants, and set the plough on going. This did wonderfully concern the might and mannerhood of the kingdom, to have farms as it were of a standard suf- ficient to maintain an able body out of penury, and did in effect amortise a great part of the lands ol BNCLOSUBES AND DEPOPULATION. 27 the kingdom unto the hold and occupation of the yeomanry or middle people, of a condition between gentlemen and cottagers or peasants." He proceeds to observe that, whereas the strength of armies con- sists in their infantry, "if a State run most to noblemen and gentlemen, and that the husbandmen and ploughmen be but as their workfolks and labourers, you may have a good cavalry, but never good stable bands of foot ; like to coppice woods, that if you leave in them staddles too thick, they will run to bushes and briers, and h%ve little clean underwood." Hence was it, in his opinion, that England, with a much smaller territory, produced more good soldiers than France or Italy. In Henry VIII. 's reign, however, complaints against pasturage enclosures were redoubled, and statutable re- medies were again provided. One Act (34 Hen. VIII., c. 24) directed that all farm-houses demolished since the fourth year of Henry VII. should be rebuilt, and that, in general, a dwelling-house in which a respectable man could live should be maintained on every plot of from thirty to fifty acres of land. An Act of the next year fixed 2,000 as the highest number of sheep that any man could possess, except on his own property, so as to check the practice of sheep-farming on a large scale.-^ The same policy dictated the provision in the Act granting monastic lands to the King, that each grantee of such lands should " keep on them an honest house and house- hold," and plough the same number of acres which had been ploughed on an average of the last twenty years. Bishop Latimer, preaching before the Court of Edward ' See Nasse, " Agricultuval Community of the Middle Ages," pp. 74-81. 2S ENOLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. VI., denounced the nobles as " enclosers, graziers, and rent-raisers." Other patriots of the same period raised equally indignant protests against the expulsion and impoverishment of the peasantry,^ and evidence laid be- fore a Commission appointed by the Protector Somerset fully confirms their allegations. Yet nothing resulted from the enquiry except a petition against throwing farms together and in favour of settling households on abbey lands. The abortive insurrection of 1549 in the eastern counties of England was directed, like that of the Irish Whiteboys, against the new fences and enclo- sures. This same grievance continued to be a fruitful source of agitation throughout the reign of Ehzabeth, but no effectual attempt was made to redress it. Prices and wages appear to have remained at nearly the same relative level, though subject to variation with the depreciation of coinage," so that a labourer fortunate enough to get work may have been nearly as well off as before. But the repeated statutes against vagrancy are a conclusive proof that hundreds of thousands were ' Mr. OlifEe Leslie has colleetod several important passages on this subject from the works of Sir Thomas More, Bishop Gilpin, and Harrison. More complains that noblemen, gentlemen, and even abbots, in their eager- ness to swell their revenues, " leave no ground for tillage ; they enclose all into pasture ; they throw down houses, they pluck down towns, and leave nothing standing." He declares that tenants were " got rid of by force or fraud, or tired out by repeated injuries into parting with their pro- perty." Mr. Cliff e Leslie shows that, in losing their rights of common, the peasantry often incurred the ultimate loss of their separate fields, since their husbandry was dependent on their stock. (" Land Systems of Ireland, England, and the Continent," p. 215.) ^ Professor Rogers states, but without giving any authority, that prices were generally trebled in the course of about thirty years, 1530 — 1560. (" History of Eent in England," Contemporary Review, AprU, 1880.) DISSOLUTION OP MONASTERIES. 29 entirely thrown out of work, and even those in full employment must have felt the growing restrictions upon the old rights of common. Advocates of the new agriculture strove to show that enclosure was remunera- tive from an economical point of view, " that more was to be gained by ten acres in grass than by twenty under grain cultivation," and that "a poor man who possessed two acres of enclosed land was better off than if he had twenty in an unenclosed state." ^ All this might be true, but it brought little comfort to a poor man who lost his share in the open field or pasture, while his rich neighbour profited by the enclosure. Scarcely less profound was the effect produced by the dissolution of monasteries on the whole rural economy of England. It has been estimated that about one-fifth of the soil was in the hands of the monastic societies, but that it brought in no more than one- tenth of the whole national rental, since it was usually let on beneficial leases with periodical fines on renewal.^ The leasehold tenants of abbey lands were, in fact, the most enviable members of the agricultural class in the Middle Ages, and the monks set an example of agricul- tural improvement to all other landlords. Hospitality 1 See authors quoted in Nasse's " Land Community of the Middle Ages," pp. 81 — 3. The enclosures of the Sixteenth century do not appear to have been always made with a view of increasing the landlord's rental. Harrison complains that a vast number of parks had been formed only to be stocked with useless wild animals, and mentions that 100 parks were to be found in Essex alone. 2 Mr. Pearson, in his " History of England during the Early and Middle Ages," gives reasons for estimating the whole annual value of Church property at three -tenths of the rental of the kingdom in the reign of William the Conqueror, and from one-third to one-half in the thirteentli century — ^the golden age of the mediaeval Church in England. 30 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. and charity were practised on a vast scale, and some historians regard the regular distribution of alms at the convent door, or the dinner open to all comers in the refectory, as the mediseval substitute for the poor- law system. Considering how unequally the monas- teries were scattered over the surface of the country, such direct relief can only have been accessible to a small proportion of the rural poor, even where it was not capriciously bestowed ; but the civilizing influences of monasteries doubtless extended far more widely, and were specially valuable in the North of England, where private estates were of enormous size, and where resi- dent landowners were therefore few and far between. When merchants with a shrewd eye to business, and often living in London or other towns, succeeded the benevolent monks, as they were succeeding the free- handed nobles and knights, it must have fared ill at first with the weaker members of the labouring class. The dissolution of monasteries thus became a secondary cause of the great agrarian revolution which marked the sixteenth century, and which laid the foundations of the present English Land-system.^ This revolution was further aided by the constant migration of labourers from towns into the country, attested by contemporary writers, and due to several distinct tendencies. As life and property became more secure under the strong hand of Tudor government, boroughs ceased to be so necessary as an asylum for ' The Nortli of England, where the monasteries .had been almost the only centres of culture and improTement, appears to have suffered most by their dissolution, as the Soiith gained most by the growth of London and the extension of intercourse with the Continent. THE ENGLISH PEASANTRY. 31 the oppressed, while the craft guilds were less and less willing to welcome strangers. Again, merchants and traders settling in the country sometimes located their own labourers in cottages around them, thus intro- ducing an innovation upon the old system under which farm servants not holding land were generally lodged in the houses of their employers. Moreover, certain branches of industry hitherto confined to boroughs now began to spread into country districts, and ultimately gave birth to new country towns. Worcestershire now shared that woollen manufacture which derived its name from the city of Worcester ; cloth-making sprang up in, the villages of Somersetshire and Yorkshire ; iron- smelting was carried on in many a woodland hamlet of the Sussex Weald, till Parliament interfered to check the wholesale destruction of the natural forests. All these disturbing agencies, though signs of social pro- gress, helped to undermine the ancient status of the English peasant, and paved the way for the new order of things recognised, if not established, by the Poor Law of Elizabeth. But the gradual divorce of the English peasant from the soil, which degraded him into the day-labourer, and was the manifest origin of pauperism, coincided "with unabated and perhaps increasing prosperity in the higher orders of the agricultural community. The practice of breaking entails by means of " common recoveries " had already become well established, and must have brought many estates into the market. The same object was deliberately facilitated by the statute passed in the reign of Henry VII., which authorised a tenant-in-tail to bar his own issue by a simpler 32 ENGLISS LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. proceeding known as a "fine." It has not been suffi- ciently realised that, during the period between the introduction of these methods for disentailing and the institution of family settlements in the seventeenth century, the ownership of landed property in this country was practically more absolute and the disposi- tion of it less restricted than it had been for two centuries before, or than it has since become. Each successive tenant-in-tail, by levying a fine or suffering a common recovery, was able to convert his estate into a fee simple, and, as the use of life estates in tying up land had not been discovered, the head of a family was usually in this position. It is impossible not to con- nect the rapid growth and singular independence of the English gentry under the Tudors and Stuarts with the limitation of entails and freedom of alienation which characterised this remarkable period. Many of the humbler yeomen may have been crushed out or bought out in the process of forming parks or turning arable into pasture farms, and may ultimately have sunk into the condition of the labourer. But the yeoman class, as a whole, assuredly occupied a very much larger space in country life, as country life was a far more important element in national life than it is easy for the present generation of Englishmen to conceive. This class practically included a very large body of copyholders, whom Coke describes as occupying a third part of England at the beginning of the next century, as well as the smaller freeholders of manors. A popular description of yeomen is given in Harrison's description of England under Elizabeth, prefixed to Holinshed's " Chronicle ":— YEOMEN IN THE SIXTEENTH OENTUBY. 33 " Yeomen are those wlio by our law are called legates homines, freemen born Englisli, and may dispend of their own free land in yearly revenue to the sum of forty shillings, or six pounds as money goeth in our times." He proceeds to describe tlieir mode of life : — ?' These commonly live wealthily, keep good houses, and travail to get riches. They are also, for the most part, farmers to gentlemen, or at the least, wise artificers, and with grazing, frequenting of markets, and keeping of servants — not idle servants, as the gentle- men do, but such as get both their own and part of their master's living — do come to great wealth, insomuch that many are able and do buy the lands of unthrifty gentlemen, and often setting of their sons to the schools, to the universities, and to the Inns of Court, or otherwise leaving them suflB.cient lands whereby they may live without labour, do make by those means to become gentlemen. TJiese were they that in times past made all France afraid."^ This passage is very interesting as exhibiting the exact process whereby a peasant, or at least a peasant's son, might rise through farming into the ranks of the landed gentry, and even into the Commission of the Peace, if he could improve his estate up to a value of £20 a year. In those days capital was extremely scarce, and, though land did not command a fancy price, there were very few who could afford either to buy or to stock a large arable farm. The hereditary owners of large estates were attracted to London by the increasing influence of metropolitan excitement and Court society, or carried off into foreign enterprise by the restless spirit of that adventurous age. As tenancy-at-will had scarcely been invented, they were glad to let their lands 1 See OUffe Leshe's " Land Systems of Ireland, Bngland,>nd the Con- tinent," p. 164. D 34 ENGLISH LAND AND ENOLISE LANDLORDS. on lease ^ in farms of that moderate size which, under like conditions, is still characteristic of Ireland. Mean- while, the yeomen, born and bred in the country, were reinforced by a large influx of town manufacturers, who built what might now be called villas, but with large plots of land around them. These new-comers, with the other freeholders, copyholders, and leaseholders, were separated by no impassable barrier of caste either from the landed aristocracy or from the labourer. " County society " had not yet become an exclusive circle of families rich enough to frequent the London season ; social prejudices had not yet been inflamed by sectarian jealousies; and the rural population was not yet stratified into the horizontal layers too famihar to modern observers. Whether or not England was ever the "merry England" of poets and chroniclers, it is certain that in the Elizabethan age the various classes of Englishmen had far more interests, ideas, sympathies, habits, and amusements, in common, than in the nine- teenth century. It is extremely diflicult to compare the profits of farming in the Tudor period with any modem standard, not only because they were realised under whoUy dif- ferent conditions, but also because they were subject to more violent fluctuations. It is certain, however, that all classes of farmers must have profited by the general prosperity of the country and the immense demand, not only for English wool, but for Enghsh woollen 1 It wonld appear, from a passage in Harrison, that it was usual to pay a premium on the renewal of farming leases. He says that a farmer would be iU content with his property if he had not saved up six or seven years' rent by the end of his lease to purchase a new one. HUSBANBBY IN THB SIXTEENTH OENTUBY. 35 manufactures, on the Continent. Moreover, agriculture was rapidly becoming more scientific. Fitzherbert's treatises on Husbandry and Surveying, published in Henry VIII. 's reign, exhibit a thorough knowledge of practical farming, and prescribe a standard of industry, especially for the wives of farmers, which is not un- worthy of study in the present day. They show that the value of manuring was even then fully appreciated, that draining was already common, and that artificial irrigation was occasionally employed. Fitzherbert points out that " an housbande cannot well thrive by his corne, without he have other cattell, or by his cattell without corne." He gives special directions for conducting each farming operation at the proper season, and he advises that, if ricks cannot be under cover, they should at least be raised by a scaffolding above the ground. EoUers were used to " role their barley grounds after a shower of rayne, to make ground even to mowe." Ploughs of various kinds were known ; some adapted to hilly ground, which "wyU. tourn the sheld bredith at every landsende, and plough all one way." In May the sheepfolds were set out, in June corn was weeded and meadows mown; the fallow, after three ploughings, was sown at Michaelmas ; and, if the preparations against winter were inadequate, this may be referred to the absence of cultivated herbage and edible root crops rather than to any lack of foresight. Despite the tendency of the sixteenth century towards pasture farms, the advantage of keeping cattle on arable farms was beginning to be understood; and we learn from the "Book of Surveying" that the value set upon manure was such as to raise the D 2 36 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. price of enclosed land to eightpence, where it had been held at sixpence per acre before enclosure, " by reason of the compostying and dongying of the cattell that shall go and lie upon it both day and nighte." If, in the face of these facts, the return of corn was but four times the amount of seed sown,^ it must be remem- bered that the proportion in Germany, Poland, and' Eussia, has been no higher during the present century. Perhaps the rent of land is one of the most stable elements in any calculation of farming profits ; but during the sixteenth century rent bore no definite rela- tion to annual value, though it may have averaged from sixpence to a shilling per acre.^ "We have the positive statement of Latimer that, whereas his own father had paid three or four pounds a year at most for a farm which maintained six men out of its produce, besides pasturage for 100 sheep and 30 milch kine, the suc- ceeding tenant had to pay for the same farm sixteen pounds a year or more. If we look to the rate of wages, so constantly regulated by law, we find less evi- dence of a progressive rise than we might expect. By a statute passed in the reign of Henry VI. (23 Hen. VI., cap. 12), the wages of a chief hind, carter, or shepherd, had been fixed at twenty shillings a 1 Holinshed states the average produce of wheat or rye as ranging from 16 to 20 bushels ; that of barley he stales at 36 bushels. It is impossible not to doubt the accuracy of these estimates, unless they are considered as applying to soils of exceptional fertility. - According to Professor Rogers, " the modern farmer's rent, that is, the rent which rises and falls by competition between intending occupiers of land, is first discovered in the reign of James I." He considers that in the fifteenth century the rental of land did not yield above five per cent, on the purchase-money. (" History of Rent in England," Con- temporary Review, April, 1880.) BENT AND WAGES. 37 year, with four shillings for clothing, and those of a common farm labourer at fifteen shillings a year, with three shillings and fourpence for clothing, besides meat and drink. This gives a mean rate of about twenty- one shillings a year, or about fivepence a week, ex- clusive of rations, being more than double the rate prescribed for yearly wages by a statute of Eichard II. passed in 1388. The same policy of regulating the maximum rate of wages in husbandry was carried out by later statutes, especially by the 11th of Henry VII., cap. 3, and the 6th of Henry YIII., cap. 3. Upon a comparison of the rates fixed by these statutes, passed respectively in 1495 and 1514, with those fixed by the Act of Henry VI., passed in 1444, we find that no material change had taken place in the maximum wages of agricultural labour. The Acts of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. allow common day labourers four- pence a day during the summer half of the year, and threepence during the winter half, with extra wages for harvest. About the same time, sixpence a day was the regular soldier's pay, being a little above the statutable wages of skilled artificers.^ If a penny was then worth as much as a shilling now, even the com- mon labourer's wages must be taken as at least equivalent to one pound a week ; yet they did not re- present the whole income of the labourer. It is tolerably certain that most labourers had at least the ' The regulation of wages by statute in the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries is fully discussed by Sii- G. MchoU in his " History of the English Poor Law," vol. I., part i., chaps, ii and iii. See idso Bright's " English Histoiy," vol. II., p. 468 ; and the First Report of the Royal Commission on the Employment of Women and Children in Agriculture, sees. 2i5 — 7. 38 ENGLiaH LAND AND ENGLISH LANLLOBDS. right of turning out a cow on the waste, and, as a statute passed in the 31st year of Elizabeth pro- hibited the erection of any cottage without an allot- ment of four acres, we may suppose that many of them increased their earnings or partially maintained their families by peasant-farming or market gardening. It is less easy to understand how farmers can have afforded to pay so high wages at a time when prices were comparatively so low except in years of famine. The Duke of Buckingham's Household Book shows that at the beginning of the century a calf sometimes fetched but half-a-crown, and a carcase of mutton little more than a shilling. The Duke of Northumberland's Household Book gives twentypence as the price of a sheep, eight shillings apiece as that of lean cattle, twopence as that of a lean capon, and threepence or fourpence as that of a pig. Tet Latimer, in Edward VI. 's reign, complained bitterly that all kinds of victuals had become exorbitantly dear, specially naming pigs, geese, fowls, and eggs, and predicting that before long pigs might be sold for a pound apiece. This rise in tlie price of butcher's meat was apparently maintained, for by a statute passed in the 24th year of Henry VIII. it was enacted that beef and pork should be sold for a halfpenny, and mutton for three- farthings, a pound. There is some ground for sur- mising that these were far above the fair market prices, and that in London itself meat was to be had for the poor at a much lower rate.^ But even the maximum ' Froude's "History of England," vol. I., p. 21. Stowe tells us that " the butchers of London sold penny pieces of beef for the relief of the poor ; every piece two pounds and a half ; sometimes three pounds for a FBIGE8 IN TEE mXTEENTH OENTUBY. 39' of three-farthings a pound is only equivalent to nine- pence of our money ; so that meat was then cheaper than it now is, while the labourer's wages were higher. It is the price of wheat, however, which has always been considered as the chief measure of the farmer's gross receipts, since it is the crop to which he too often sacrifices other sources of profit, as it is also the main subsistence of the population. The price of wheat at various periods between 1350 and 1750 is fully discussed by Adam Smith in his elaborate " Digression concerning the Variations in the Value of Silver." His conclusion, which is adopted by more recent enquirers, is that " from the 25th of Edward III. to the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth, during the space of more than 200 years, six shillings and eight- pence had continued to be considered as what is called the moderate and reasonable — that is, the ordinary or average — price of wheat." ^ It was, in fact, enacted by repeated statutes of the fifteenth and sixteenth cen- turies that, whenever the quarter of wheat should reach this price, importation should be lawful, and that whenever it should fall below this price, exporta- tion should be lawful. But, as the weight of silver in the shilling was constantly decreasing, the real value of this nominal sum was falling in proportion ; and in the year 1562 the exportation of wheat from certain ports was allowed whenever the price of the quarter penny.'' He adds, what may perhaps help to explain this apparent gene- rosity, that at this time " foreign '■'■ butchers were first permitted to sell their meat in London. ' Bishop Fleetwood, in his " Chronicon Pretiosum " above cited, states that, although wheat rose to £1 per quarter in 1440, it never stood above 8s. for twenty years afterwards. 40 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. should not exceed ten shillings, which, according to Adam Smith, contained nearly as much silver as ten shillings of our present money. Supposing ten shillings to have heen the average price of wheat at a period when the purchasing power of coin was twelve times as great as now, this price was equivalent to 120s. of our present money. The discovery of the American silver mines soon afterwards caused a prodigious depre- ciation of silver, and it appears from the accounts of Eton College that at the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth centuries wheat ranged in the Windsor market from thirty to fifty shillings a quarter.^ Even the prices of 1562, being double the present average, appear at first sight highly remunera- tive ; but we must remember not only how very high was the cost of labour, but how small was the average crop per acre, and how vastly greater must have been the difficulty and expense of carrying farm produce to market in days when not only railways but turnpike roads were unknown, and when parish roads were often impassable except to foot-passengers and pack-horses. That com should have been exported at all from England under such conditions, while a population estimated at 4,000,000 or 5,000,000 was supported in a remarkable degree of physical vigour and comfort, 1 Sir W. Raleigli, opposing the legislative encouragement of exporta- tion in the House of Commous, is reported to have stated " that France had offered to serve Ireland with corn for 16s. a quarter." It appears from Bishop Fleetwood's " Ohronicon Pretiosum '' that violent fluctuations of price were still common. Stowe mentions that in 1557 wheat stood at £2 13s. 4d. per quarter before harvest and 5s. after harvest. In the twenty years beginning with 1574, it thrice rose above £'J per quarter, and in 1596 touched £4. OBOWTH OF TEE LANDED INTEREST. 41 may fairly be cited as a striking proof of what English farmers can do under a system little resembling that of yearly tenancy without security for improvements. Upon the whole, farming was probably a more lucrative occupation in the England of Elizabeth than in the previous century ; and the landed interest, as distinct from the feudal aristocracy, had never been so power- ful, especially as many provincial towns had decayed, and a manufacturing population was beginning to spring up in many agricultural districts. CHAPTER III. Land Tenure and Agriculture in England during tlie Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. The most important events in the history of the English Land-system during the seventeenth century were the introduction of modern family settlements and the aboUtion of military tenures. We have seen how, by the operation of recoveries and fines, the inde- feasible entails of an earlier age had been rendered liable to be readily set aside, and the owner of land thus disentailed soon afterwards acquired the power of devising it freely under the Statute of Wills. In course of time, however, family pride, aided by lawyers, contrived new expedients for checking alienation by sale or subdivision by will, and placing the right of Primogeniture on a secure basis. The first of these expedients in logical, if not in chronological, order was the mere substitution of such words as " first son " or "eldest son" for "heir of his body" in entailing deeds. The legal efiect of this was that, instead of the father taking an estate -tail under the settlement, which he might have forthwith converted into a fee simple, he took only a life-estate, and had no control over the remainder (whether for life or in tail) given by the same instrument to his eldest son. This idea was developed by conferring, as far as possible, life-estates instead of estates-tail on the whole first generation of persons included in a family settlement ; so that, INVENTION OF FAMILY SETTLEMENTS. 43 whereas a tenant-in-tail once in possession could not be deprived of his power to become master of the property, the acquisition of this power might be deferred to a second or even to a later generation. But, for reasons known to lawyers, that object could not have been accomplished eiFectually without a further expedient devised by Sir Orlando Bridgman and Sir Geoffrey Palmer during the Civil Wars, and generally adopted after the Eestoration. This was the notable contrivance of " trustees to preserve contingent re- mainders," of which it is enough to say that it protected the interests of tenants -iu- tail against the risk of being defeated by the wrongful act of preceding life-tenants. From this epoch, rather than from " Chudleigh's case" (1588), which is cited by Bacon, must be dated the modern type of settlement. Still, the principle was maintained that an entail might be cut oflf by a tenant-in-tail of full age, though it was technically necessary for him, unless in possession, to obtain the concurrence of the person (generally his own father) in whom the immediate freehold was vested. The abolition of military tenures was finally effected by one of the first Acts passed by Charles II. 's first Parliament. Up to this period all tenures, except socage and copyhold tenures, were tenures " in chivalry," of which " knight service " was by far the commonest form. In theory, every person holding a knight's fee, the minimum value of which in the Norman era is stated to have been twenty pounds a year, was bound to serve in person, or to provide a fully-armed horseman, during forty days in the year. This service was due to the king, not only where the knight's fee was held imme- 44 UNGLISE LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. diately from tlie Crown, but also where it was held from a mesne lord, himself an immediate tenant of the Crown. In the reign of Henry II., personal liability to mili- tary service was commuted into a liability to pay scutage, and it is well known that the English armies which invaded France under Edward III. and Henry V. received military pay. Still the obligation remained in theory, and many of those who fought around the great nobles in the Wars of the Eoses were animated by a sense of feudal duty as tenants by knight service. But the most onerous and practical burdens of tenure by knight service were the incidents of " wardship " and " marriage ;" and the profits of these were directly reaped by the lord. The right of " wardship " accrued when a tenant by knight service happened to be a minor, and consisted in an absolute control over the revenues of his lands during his minority, without the necessity of rendering an account to him on his coming of age. The right of " marriage " consisted in a like control over the matrimonial alliances of heirs and heiresses, being under age, of whose lands the lord might dispose as his own property, either by negotiating an eligible match for them in his own interest or by exacting a heavy penalty for a marriage contracted with- out his consent. By the end of Henry VIII. 's reign the king had acquired these rights as immediate lord over a very large proportion of English estates, together with certain other special perquisites which belonged to no other lord. Probably they were seldom fully exercised, but the deplorable picture which Black- stone draws^ of the burdens legally imposed on a tenant ' Vol. II., p. 76. ABOLITION OF MILITARY TENURES. 45 in capite by kniglit service deserves to be kept in remem- brance : — "The lieir, on. the death of his ancestor, if of full age, was plun- dered of the first emoluments arising from his inheritance by way of relief and primer seisin ; and, if under age, of the whole of his estate during infancy. And then, as Sir Thomas Smith very feelingly com- plains, when he came to his own after he was out of wardship, his woods decayed, houses fallen down, stock wasted and gone, lands let forth and plotighed to be barren; to reduce him still farther, he was to pay half a year's profits as a fine for suing out livery, and also the price or value of his marriage. Add to this the untimely and expen- sive honour of knighthood, to make his poverty more completely splendid ; and when by these deductions his fortune was so shattered and ruined that perhaps he was obliged to sell his patrimony, he had not even that poor privilege allowed him without paying an exorbitant fine for a license of alienation." At all events, the grievance was felt to be so real that, after an abortive attempt had been made to redress it in the reign of James I., it was swept away by an Act of the Long Parliament passed in 1656, and solemnly re-enacted after the Restoration. ■ The famous statute, 12 Charles II., cap. 24, operating retrospectively, turned all military tenures into "free and common socage " from the 24th of February, 1645. Thenceforth freehold tenancy has been virtually equivalent to owner- ship, and the only restrictions to which it is subject are those which may be created by will or deed.-^ More than a century elapsed before land was emancipated from its feudal burdens in France, and this great reform was not accomplished in Prussia, Austria, Italy, or Eussia, until a period within living memory. It is at least possible ' See Appendix I. and Digby's " History of the Law of Real Property," chap. ix. 46 BNOLISE LAND AND ENGLISH LANBL0BB8. that England may thus have obtained an advantage in agriculture over her foreign rivals which has not yet been fully exhausted. The graphic pen of Macaulay has delineated the state of rural England at the close of the seventeenth century, and it seems to have differed but little from that which prevailed in the reign of Elizabeth. It has been com- puted that nearly 4,000,000, out of a population amount- ing to about 6,250,000, then lived in the country.-^ Adopting the result of Grregory King's and Davenant's statistical enquiries, Macaulay states that not less than 160,000 proprietors, representing, with their families, more than a seventh of the whole population, derived their subsistence from little freehold estates, and pos- sessed an average income of between £60 and £70 apiece.^ These yeomen, mostly of Puritan leanings, had constituted the strength of the Parliamentary cause during the Civil Wars, and are believed to have still outnumbered the body of tenant-farmers. Probably many of these yeomen were children of townspeople whose trade -earnings had been invested in land. Fynes Moryson, writing in the reign of James I., remarks that English gentlemen, disdaining traffic and thinking it proper to live in idleness on their revenues, " doe in this course daily sell their patrimonies, and the buyers (excepting lawyers) are for the most part citizens and vulgar men."^ The progress of agriculture during the seventeenth i| Macaulay's " History of England," vol. I., chap. iii. 2 Professor Rogers states that in the last year of Qneen Anne nearly 4,000 freeholders voted in a contested election for the county of Sussex. 3 Moryson's " Itinerary," part III., bk. iii., chap. iii. HUSBANDRY IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. 47 century appears to have been slow, and the chief im- provement was the introduction of regular clover and turnip cultivation soon after the close of the Civil War. The whole annual yield of wheat, rye, barley, oats, and beans was estimated by Grregory King, in 1696, at somewhat less than 10,000,000 quarters ; and that of wheat alone at less than 2,000,000 quarters.^ As the consumption of grain per head of population may be roughly taken at nearly one quarter a year, it follows that less than one-half of the people then lived on wheaten bread. The price of wheat is computed by Arthur Young to have averaged Q 38s. 2d. for the whole century, ^ and this price must be considered very high if compared with the current rate of wages. ^ Nevertheless, so little did the crop then depend on the skill of the farmer, and so much on the caprice of the seasons, that violent fluctuations of price were constantly occurring. Pepys records a conversation at Lord Crewe's table on January 1, 1668, when " they did talk much of the present cheapness of come, even to a miracle; so as their farmers can pay no rent, but do fling up 1 Macanlay's " History," vol. I.,' chap. iii. 2 Adam Smith's calculation, founded on the receipts of Eton College, gives nearly the same result. ' Arthur Toung reckons the average rate of agricultural wages in the seventeenth century at lOid. a day. It follows, as Malthus points out, that a labourer would be able to purchase with Ms day's earnings three-quarters of a peck of wheat; "whilst, during the first half of the eighteenth cen- tury, wages having risen and com fallen, he would be able to purchase a whole peck ; " and it may be added that, at the present average rate of wages and prices, he would be able to purchase nearly one peck and a quarter. (See Sir G.^NichoU's J' History of the Poor Laws," vol. II., chap, xi.) 48 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISS LANBLOBBS. their lands, and would pay in corne." The excess in this year's production was such that Pepys thought it could only be relieved by exportation, for he con- tinues : " But (which I did observe to my lord, and he liked well of it) our gentry are grown so igno- rant in everything of good husbandry that they know not how to bestowe this corne ; which, did they understand but a little trade, they would be able to joine together, and know what markets there are abroad, and send it thither, and thereby ease their tenants, and be able to pay themselves." A month later he speaks of so great a depreciation in land that estates with good titles, and houses upon them, might be had for sixteen years' purchase. It is the less easy to understand the complaints recorded by Pepys because it appears from the " Eton Tables," preserved in the " Wealth of Nations," that in the previous year (1667) the price of the best wheat in the Windsor market was above three-fourths of the average price for the whole century. Twenty years later, however, it was little more than one-half of this average price, and, in the meantime, the Legislature, doubtless actuated by the same views as Pepys, virtually removed all checks on its exportation. In 1688 a further step was taken, and a bounty was actually granted on the exportation of corn, while that of wool remained prohibited. This bounty was to be payable until wheat should rise to 48s. a quarter, and was fre- quently renewed during the earlier part of the next century. It is stated by Adam Smith that no less than a million and a half was paid for bounty on PBI0E8 IN TRB SEVENTEENTH OENTUBY. 49 more than eight million quarters of corn exported be- tween 1741 and 1750 ; yet he also observes that, in spite of the bounty, the price of wheat ranged lower during the first sixty-four years of the eighteenth cen- tury than during the last sixty-four years of the seven- teenth century.-^ The price of meat in the seventeenth century appears to have been uniformly high;^ and, but for the difficulty ^ Fleetwood appends to his " Otromcon Pretiosum" am " Acoouat of the true market-price of wheat and malt for sixty years last past " — ^that is, from 1646 to 1705. It hence appears that, during the first twenty years of this period, the " common price of wheat in London," heing the mean be- tween the Lady-day and Michaelmas prices, was £2 17s. SJd. ; that, during the second twenty years, it was £2 6s. Sjd.; and that, during the last twenty years, it was £2 5s. 9Jd. Allowing, however, for the probable excess of London over country prices, the author estimates that 40s. was the common price of wheat for the whole sixty years. The extraordinary inflation of prices in certain of the earlier years is a marked feature of these tables. For instance, wheat sold for £4 5s. per quarter in 1648, and £4 in 1649, and often ranged above £3 before 1675. Several curious entries, throwing light upon the price of agricultural produce in Wiltshire, are preserved in a manuscript notebook kept by NevUl Maskelyne, of Purton, and now in the possession of N. S. Maskelyne, Esq., M.P. for Oricklade. It hence appears that, in 1639, four and a half acres were sown with ten bushels and one peck of wheat, at 6s. per bushel ; three acres were sown with twelve and a half bushels and half a peck of barley, at 3s. 6d. per bushel ; and seven acres were sown with twenty-four bushels and three pecks of beans, at 4s. per bushel. In 1640, however, seed-barley and seed-beans seem to have doubled in price. From another entry it appears that a breast of mutton then cost lOd. ; a hind-quarter of lamb, Is. 6d. ; a shoulder of mutton, Is. ; and twenty- eight pounds of beef, 5s. 3d. But these were country prices, and it may be well to remember that in the same district mUk is even now sold for little more than one-third of its London price. This subject is fully discussed by Adam Smith in the "Wealth of Nations," book I., chap. xi. He arrives at the conclusion, largely based on statistics appended to Birch's " Life of Prince Henry," that at the beginning of the seventeenth century meat was dearer than it was a century later. These statistics are contained in an "Order for the E 60 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. of maintaining cattle in the winter before root-crops were generally cultivated, the farmer ought to have realised large profits from this source. One important form which Protection then assumed was that of re- strictions on the importation of cattle and beef from Ireland, and an Act passed with this object in 1664 is strongly condemned by Sir William Petty. But some deduction must be made from the ostensible profitableness of cattle-breeding, as measured by the market price of butcher's meat in London. In that age an ordinary ox or sheep weighed much less than half of the present average, and the cost of transporting beasts, as well as other farm produce, to a good market was proportionably far greater than it now is, not only because there were no railways and few tolerable roads, but also because towns with a large population of consumers were very thinly scattered over the country. Sheep-farming, which had been strongly recommended by Fitzherbert in the previous century, probably con- tinued to be the most remunerative employment of farm-capital, and the repetition of statutes against the exportation of wool shows at least that it commanded what the Legislature thought an excessive price in the home market. Yet even in the middle of the seven- teenth century Agricultural Free Trade was not without Management of the Prince's Household," supposed to have been issued in December, 1610, and are here transcribed : — " The prices of flesh, as the Prince payeth, and the weight, as they are agreed for with the purveyors : An ox should weigh 600 lbs. the four quarters ; and com- monly £9 10s., or thereabouts. A mutton should weigh 46 lbs., or •44 lbs., and they cost by the stone 2s. 3d., the stone being 8 lbs. Veals go not by weight, but by goodness only : their price is commonly 17s., or thereabouts. Lambs at 6s. 8d. the piece." FARMER'S PROFIT IN TEE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. its advocates, for a treatise published in 1650 ^ contains the startling doctrine that England might be none the worse if no land were ploughed at all, so long as enough wool were produced to buy the requisite amount of corn grown abroad. It is needless to say that no such doctrine was likely to find acceptance with the Long Parliament. England was then, and for nearly two centuries later, a self- supporting country. If the imports of agricultural produce did not always balance the exports, decade by decade, under the old sliding-scale by which they were so long regulated, the difference never amounted to more than a small proportion of the national consump- tion. It may, therefore, be interesting to compare the productive capacity of the soil two centuries ago with its capacity in the present day. The whole area of England and Wales under crops or in pasture was then stated by Gregory King at 21,000,000 acres, of which he supposed 9,000,000 acres to be arable land, as distinct from meadow.^ This area then 1 Hartlib's " Legacy." Similar views were maintaiiied. by Davenant, who adrocated the breeding and keeping of cattle as more profitable for the national interest than raising crops of corn. " Maoaulay probably relies on the authority of Gregory King in esti- mating the cultivated area as " not much more than haM the kingdom." (" Hist, of Eng.," vol. I., ch. iii.) Such estimates, made by statisticians of the seventeenth century, must be received with some degree of caution. Gregory King reckoned the whole area of England and Wales at 39,000,000, whereas it is reaUy 37,319,221 acres. Sir William Petty, in his "Political Arithmetic," reckoned the whole area of England and Wales, together with the lowlands of Scotland, at no more than 36,000,000 acres. It is curious that he also understates the area of Ireland by 4,000,000 acres. Even Arthur Young speaks of various estimates respecting the acreage of England (exclusive of Wales) as current in his own time. He adopts that of Harte, according to which England contained 34,000,000 e2 ' 62 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLI8S LANDLOBDS. maintained an estimated population of 5,260,000 souls. In 1879 tlie whole area under crops or in pasture was about 27,000,000 acres, and the estimated popu- lation was about 25,000,000 ; but, since more than one-fourth of aU the agricultural produce required by the population of the United Kingdom, including one- half the wheat, is now imported from abroad, we may reckon the number of persons in England and Wales fed on the agricultural produce of home growth at about 18,000,000. Since this number is maintained by an acreage less than one-third greater than that which is supposed to have maintained 5,250,000 in the seventeenth cent\iry, we must conclude that the soil of England and Wales is between twice and thrice as productive as it then was ; unless, indeed, it be assumed that the average consumption per head of the population is now much lower than in a ruder state of society.^ The advance of agricultural improvement in the eighteenth century appears to have been steadily progressive. This advance was not so much due to any scientific discovery or legislative reform as to a constant and healthy growth both of population and of national prosperity. The more settled and constitu- tional government which prevailed under William III. and his successors, the long peace secured to England by the sober policy of Sir Eobert Walpole, and the acres in all, 2,000,000 of which he supposed to he covered by roads, rivers, sites of towns, royal forests, woods, commons, &c. He allotted, roughly, 16,000,000 acres to arable land, and 16,000,000 to grass. The total area of England alone, as stated in the Agricultural Returns, is 32,697,398 acres. ^ See " Agricultural Returns for Great Britain," Tables 1 and 29 ; and Oaird's " Landed Interest," p. 14. AGRIGULTUBE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 53 consequent development of commerce and manu- facturing industry, were the chief agencies which raised the landed interest of England from the state rapidly sketched % Macaulay to that minutely de- scribed by Arthur Young and Adam Smith. At the beginning of the century, the arable land still lay for the most part in open fields, at least throughout all the more backward districts.^ It was still the custpm to sow corn crops for several years in succession, and then to fallow the exhausted land till it had recovered fertility. Peas were often used as intermediate crops; but clover and turnips, though recommended for this purpose in the middle of the previous century,^ were but seldom cultivated in fields ; and regular " alternate husbandry," much more the rotation of crops, was still regarded as an agricultural experiment. Never- theless, the production of wheat, stimulated by the bounty system, by the increasing facilities of locomo- tion, and by the immense increase of town markets, received a prodigious impulse in the reigns of Anne 1 lu Laurence's " New System of Agriculture " (1V26) — one of several elaborate treatises on the subject produced in tbe first balf of tbe eighteenth century — the question of enclosures is fully discussed. " It is believed," he says, " that almost one half part of the kingdom ai'e commons ; " and he proceeds to state with confidence that " a third of all the kingdom is what we call common-fields." Strongly recom- mending enclosure, he maintains that enclosed land will yield "seven, eight, or ten years crops successively, when the other has them but two years or three ; " and that enclosed land will " produce more than twenty bushels to the acre.'' (Book I., chap, iv.) The common field-lands remaining open in 1879 were estimated at 264,000 acres. 2 Blythe's " Improver Improved " (third edition, 1652). The first experiments in clover and turnip cultivation are attributed to Sir Richard Weston. Professor Rogers states that clover, saintfoin, and rye-grass were introduced from Holland in the early part of the eighteenth century. 54 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. and the first two Georges. In the year 1760 it was estimated by Charles Smith, author of the " Corn Law Tracts," that 3,750,000 o£ people in England and Wales then consumed wheaten bread, while about 2,250,000 lived on bread made of barley, rye, or oats. Though no less than 820,000 quarters were exported in 1763-4, it was then calculated that 4,000,000 quarters were consumed in England and Wales, the price being then 37s. 6d., or about 5s. above the average for the previous years of the cen- tury.-^ To meet this ever-growing demand, the practice of enclosure was revived, but the enclosures of the eighteenth century were very different in their character and objects from the enclosures of the sixteenth cen- tury. Then, arable land was converted into pasture ; now, waste land was to be reclaimed and brought under cultivation.^ Many local Acts had been passed for this purpose since the reign of Elizabeth, in cases where the unanimous consent of all the parties interested in common rights could not be obtained.* ^ M. de Lavergne, in Ms " Economie Rurale de rAngleterre," makes the astounding statement that England, having doubled her population since the Stuart period, nevertheless became, in the last half of the last century, the granary of Europe. He adds : — " On a calculi que, dans la demifere moitie du dix-liuiti6me siecle, elle veudit a ses voisins, et notam- ment a la France, pour un milliard de francs de cereales." 2 Some of these enclosures were made for the purpose of planting. Bradley, whose treatise on " Planting and Gardening " appeared in 1731, proposes to show by statistics that an acre planted with oak " may produce the sum of £250 10s. 6d. in the space of twenty-five years, clear of all expenses of planting, and value of the land," with the prospect of a larger profit in future. (Part I., chap, v.) ^ Elton " On the Law of Commons and Waste Lands," chap. ix. Under the Statute of Merton (2 Henry III., cap. 1) the lords of manors PB0GBE8S OF ENOLOSUBB. 55 Under such Acts large tracts of land in Bedfordshire and the West Eiding of Yorkshire had been trans- formed from marshes or moors into fertile corn-fields. These improvements became more common under Greorge II. ; but it was not until the reign of Greorge III. that enclosure became the settled policy of landed proprietors. Forty-seven Enclosure Bills were passed on the average in each year between 1760 and 1765; about 2,000, in all, had been passed before the General Enclosure Act of 1801, and about 2,000 more were passed between that Act and the Greneral Enclosure Act of 1845. Macaulay, writing two or three years later, surmises th^it, since the accession of Greorge II., a new area of more than 10,000 square miles, or 6,400,000 acres, had been added to the cultivated soil ot England. Sir Greorge Nicholls states more posi- tively that an area of more than 2,500,000 acres was enclosed in thirty years, between 1769 and 1799. The estimate of Macaulay is remarkably confirmed by the authorities cited in the first "Eeport of the Eoyal Commission on the Employment of Women and Children in Agriculture," dated 1869. It is there stated that — " According to the estimate made by the Select Com- mittee of the House of Commons on Emigration in 1827, and the calculations of Mr. Porter in 1843, 7,175,520 statute acres had been enclosed in England and Wales since the first first acquired the right of "approving," or improving, for their own benefit, by enclosing woods and pastures subject to common rights, so long as enough was left to satisfy the recLuirements of the commoners— a question left to be decided by a suit before the Judges of assize. 56 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Enclosure Bill in the year 1710 up to the year 1843. To these^ since 1843^ have been added 484^893 acres, as appears by the ' Annual Report of the Enclosure Commissioners , for 1867/ making together 7,660,413 statute acres added to the cultivated area of England 'and Wales since 1810, or about one-third part of the total of 25,451,626 acres in cultivation in 1867." 1 But, as the more fertile parts of the island were doubtless the first occupied, and many enclosed plots are more suitable for timber than for crops, it cannot be inferred that a proportionate gain has accrued to English agriculture. Nor must it be supposed that the number of landed proprietors was in any way increased by this process of enclosure. The area enclosed was divided among those, and those only, who already possessed common rights by virtue of their holding freeholds or copyholds, and the very idea of recognizing any public interest in open wastes or forests is entirely modern.^ The lion's share was always reserved for the lord of the manor, and immense accessions of territory were thus secured by powerful landowners in days when the landed interest was paramount in the Legislature no less than in local administration. The chief sufferers 1 See ClifEe Leslie's "Land Systems of Ireland, England, and the Continent," p. 214. Tlie Commissioners proceed to remark that such enclosures, often made without any compensation to the smaller com- moners, have deprived agricultural labourers of ancient rights over the waste, and disabled the occupants of new cottages from acquiring new rights. ^ In St. John's treatise on the " Land Revenues of the Crown " (1787), the enclosure and cultivation of Royal forests is strongly recommended. The author treats enclosures of open land as pure gain, and the only serious opposition which he apprehends is on the part of great lords unwUling to lose their sporting rights. EXTINCTION OF 00MM0N-BIGHT8. 67 were poor labourers, holding cottages at the wiU of their landlords, who lost the privilege of turning out pigs, geese, and fowls on the common, and for whom, of course, no compensation was provided. The decay of another class, little known to history, dates from the same period. On the wild heaths which still cover the borders of Surrey, Hampshire, and Sussex, as well Sis in the great woods of the southern and midland counties, there abode a race of " squatters," or "hutmen," which has since almost retired before advancing civilization. Some few of them may have established by prescription a claim to property in their little tenements, and become peasant-farmers, but the great majority were ousted as trespassers, with the progress of enclosure, and must have passed into the ranks as mere labourers, if they did not swell those of poachers and other semi-criminal vagrants. On the other hand, the Act of Elizabeth against the multiplication of cottages was deliberately repealed in 1775,^ as tending to check population, and as press- ing hardly on the industrious poor. It is worthy of observation that, while these Enclosure Acts were applicable to " common fields," separate Acts were passed about the same period to extinguish the primitive system of village husbandry then still prevailing in many parts of England.^ One of these, passed in 1773, facilitated the division and enclosure of these open fields. At the same time, it gave a majority in number and value of the several owners the power of regulating the course of husbandry in fields which might remain unenclosed, notwithstand- ^ 31 Elizabeth, cap. 7. ^ See note 1, p. 53. 58 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. ing any custom to the contrary. From a purely agri- cultural point of view, such legislation was doubtless wise ; but, since the weaker commoners are seldom able to pay, or to assert their own claims before Committees on Enclosure Bills, it is highly probable that enclosure of common fields, like that of common pastures and woods, helped to crush out the struggling peasant- farmer. The "Wealth of Nations" appeared in 1776, and the various treatises of Arthur Young on British agriculture were published at intervals between 1767 and 1808. A careful digest of these treatises would present a more complete picture of the English land- system, in its practical working at the close of the last century, than could be obtained from any other source. Even in their present form, interpreted and sup- plemented by the contemporary work of the first great English economist, they contain an invaluable repertory of materials for the student of agrarian history.-^ ' Some of Artliur Young's general conclusions are of great interest, iu default of tmstworthy statistics resting on official authority. He estimates the whole population of England and Wales at 9,000,000 ; and of these he supposes 2,800,000 to be immediately dependent on agricul- ture, exclusive of the landlords, the clergy, and the poor in receipt of parish relief. He values the rental of agricultural land at £16,000,000, allowing £5,000,000 in addition for the rental of houses ; and he states the capital-value of glands and houses, respectively, at £536,000,000 and £100^000,000. He estimates the " stock in husbandry," or farmers' capital, at £110,000,000 ; the " product of the soil in husbandry," exclusive of parks, woods, ehaces, &c., at £83,237,691 ; the " expenditure of hus- bandry," including rent and wages, at £65,000,000; the farmers' profit, at £18,237,691, or about two mUlions and a quarter above the landlords' rental ; and the labourers' wages, at about £14,500,000. He supposes about 3,000,000 acres to be laid down in wheat, producing about three-quarters per acre, worth 38s. a quarter ; about 2,900,000 acres to be laid down in barley, producing fabout four quarters per acre, worth BENT AND FARM CAPITAL. 59 In the first place, it is clear that, despite the recent improvements in agriculture, which appeared marvellous to Arthur Young and Adam Smith, the business of farming was carried on with far less capital, and that. land yielded a far smaller rent, than is now the case, after the lapse of a century.^ Arthur Young thinks it necessary to combat the common notion that' a capital of thrice the rent will properly stock a farm, and com- plains that a great many farmers will take up land with a capital of only twice the rent, though such, tenants must be ruined by a bad year, and cannot effect improvements in a good year. After ranging over 4,000 miles in three successive years, he states the average rent at thirteen shillings per acre; the 17s. a quarter ; and about 2,300,000 acres to be laid down in oats, pro-, ducing about four and a half quarters per acre, worth 15s. a quarter. He assigns above 4,000,000 acres to peas, beans, turnips, and clover ; but lie remarks that, although clover is a better prepax-ation for wheat than fallow, the practice of growing it had not spread into all the English counties. The annual " product of cows " for dairy purposes he reckons as worth £5 6s. 3d. on the average ; the '' profit on sheep " as averaging 10s, each ; that on " fatting beasts " as averaging £7 each. He thinks a farmer should make a profit of £1 apiece on his young cattle, of 15s. on pigs, and of cent, per cent, on his poultry. ^ Arthur Young often intimates the opinion that English farms are, for the most part, under-rented, that low rents make bad farmers, and that high rents are an undoubted spur to good husbandry. He considers the short-sighted ambition of farmers " not to farm well but much " as the chief weakness of English husbandry. " Mne out of ten," he observes, " had rather cultivate 500 acres in a slovenly manner, though constantly cramped for money, than 250 acres completely, though they would always have money in their pockets." (Compare " Northern Tour," vol. IV., pp. 344, 375, with " Farmer's Guide," book I., chap, xiv.) Professor Eogers disputes Arthur Young's statement that rents did not greatly increase in the first three-quarters of the eighteenth century, and believes them to have doubled within this period. 60 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. rents paid in the corn-growing eastern counties being, on the whole, the highest. Nevertheless, he is of opinion that, where the soil is rich, grass-land is more profitable than arable land, requiring as it does less buildings and labour. He remarks elsewhere that, although corn always fetches a higher price in Dorset- shire and Somersetshire than in the eastern counties, farmers never break up grass-land in the former, as they are eager to do in the latter ; and he shrewdly points out that such eagerness only proves that a large profit may be reaped in the first years of cultivation by drawing unfairly on the permanent resources of the soil. On the other hand, Adam Smith contends that, even after allowing for labour, an acre of arable land returns a larger surplus profit than an acre of grass- land; and this view soon became generally prevalent when tillage received an unhealthy impulse from the continuance of war prices. The highest rents men- tioned by Arthur Young are those paid on land specially adapted for growing carrots — a root-crop for which he exhibits a notable partiality. He speaks of the very best carrot-growing soils as yielding a rent of £3 or £4 an acre, and yet returning an enormous profit to a tenant with plenty of capital.^ If the cultivation of carrots is now less remunerative, the explanation must be sought in the simple fact that, since Arthur Young's time, the supply has overtaken the demand, and that cattle are now fattened more rapidly on artificial food. 1 He states that ten acres of carrots will produce a crop of 180 tons, worth about £180, and will keep eight horses, sixty sheep, and twelve oxen for a whole winter. In other parts of his works he estimates the annual profit of carrot-growing still higher. (Compare " Tour in the Eastern Counties," pp. 93, 105, with " Farmer's Guide," pp. 106—7.) ABTEUB YOUNG ON FARMING. 61 It is somewhat curious that a similar partiality for potatoes is evinced by Adam Smith in several passages of his great work. After observing that potatoes yield per acre six times as large a return as wheat, he goes on to predict that, if they should ever supersede wheat as the staple food of the people, in any part of Europe, population would increase, and rents would rise far above their former level — words destined to receive a disastrous verification in Ireland. He even compares potatoes very favourably with oatmeal, in respect of nutritive value, and adduces the superiority of Irishmen to Scotchmen in support of this marvellous paradox.^ The comparative advantages of large and small farms, as well as the reasons why gentlemen farmers rarely succeed, are discussed by Arthur Young with a practical sagacity which is by no means obsolete. No writer on agriculture has ever shown more clearly the supreme importance of personal attention to detail in the art of farming. According to him, the grand ad- vantage which the small farmer has in competition with the large farmer, and, stiU more, the professional farmer with the gentleman, is that he brings the master's eye, and even the master's hand, to bear upon every department of his business. A farmer ploughing with his men will get 26 per cent, more work done in the day ; a farmer who knows exactly what horses can do will get a fuU number of journeys performed by his team in the course of a week ; a farmer who takes his meals with his men wUl feed them at half the cost that he must otherwise allow for their board, not to speak of the numberless ways in which his constant 1 " Wealth of Nations," book I., chap. li." 62 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. supervision will check waste. On tlie other hand, the small farmer has generally to pay a higher rent pro- portionably, because there are more applications for small farms ; he is apt to have a smaller capital pro- portionably, and he is seldom able or willing to carry out improvements. The disadvantages of small farm- ing become greater the lower we descend in the scale ; for upon the smallest farm, as distinct from a market garden, two horses must be kept for ploughing, and the expense of keeping two horses will leave no margin for manures or other remunerative outgoings. The peasant- farmer of course possesses no sheep, which can only be reared profitably on a large acreage, and, having little or no stock, he grows little or no clover, but fallows his land, and exhausts it by too frequent wheat-crops. Meanwhile, he works harder, fares harder, and is really poorer than a day-labourer earning regular wages. In short, the management of very small farms, as practised in Prance, is simply British agriculture stripped of all the improvements which have caused it to flourish in Britain.^ Such are the main objections to small farming sug- gested to Ajthar Young by a review of British agri- culture a century ago. His conclusion is that, on the whole, farms of moderate extent — ^that is, from 100 to 200 acres — are most to be commended, and employ more labour than very large or very small holdings. It is singular that, in treating of the latter, he assumes that cultivation will be chiefly directed to produce grain, and takes little account of the petite culture to which labourers' allotments are best suited. He even observes 1 " Notes in France," p. 410. SMALL FARMING IN THE EIGHTEENTH OENTUBY. 63 that the general public has little interest in the price of poultry, which the smallest Irish farmers breed and rear with so much success. Adam Smith appears to have shared these opinions, for he maintains that little profit can be made by market gardening, inasmuch as most of those who ought to be the best customers of market gardeners supply themselves with fruit and vegetables from gardens of their own. A?, for dairy- farming, Adam Smith regards it as " a business which, like the feeding of hogs and of poultry, is originally carried on as a save-all."^ He adds that, in most parts of England, though not in Scotland, it had been gene- rally stimulated by the rise of price, until some of the best lands in the country were appropriated to it ; " and when the price has got to this height it cannot well go higher;" yet even in England "the dairy is not reckoned a more profitable employment of land than the raising of corn or the fattening of cattle." It is not surprising that neither Adam Smith nor Arthur Young was able to foresee the unlimited demand of modern London and other great towns for milk, butter, eggs, and other perishable kinds of farm produce, or the unlimited facility of locomotion about to result from the development of steam power. Both, however, refer to the influence of the London market on the price of meat even in remote counties, and record the opposition of provincial towns to an extension of turn- pike roads ; but, while the one describes it as a protest of local consumers against the increasing dearness of ^ The same contempt for poultry-breeding is exhibited in several pas- sages of Marshall's " Eeview of the Reports to the Board of Agriculture," 1808 ; a work full of valuable information on the agriculture of that period. 64 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. provisions, the otlier describes it as a protest of land- lords against a probable fall in the London price of grass and com, to be followed by a fall in rents. The former apprehension, as Adam Smith points out, was amply verified by the experience of Scotland, where a pound of meat had been as cheap as a pound of oat- meal, but trebled in price after the Union opened the English markets to Highland cattle. CHAPTEE IV. Eecent History of Land Tenure in England. The century wliicli lias elapsed since the appearance of the " Wealth of Nations," though fruitful in agricul- tural reforms, has not been an eventful period in the history of English land-tenure. The system of family settlements has remained practically unchanged since the reign of Charles II., and the only material amend- ments introduced into it have been the creation of a simple machinery for barring entails, by the Act of William IV., for the abolition of Fines and Eecoveries,^ and the facilities given by later statutes for the sale and improvement of settled estates. The Act of William IV. is chiefly important as having set aside the old principle that an entail might be absolutely cut off by a tenant- in-tail of full age. This power was of no real value, inasmuch as, for technical reasons, it could not be exercised by a tenant-in-tail in reversion without the consent of the tenant-for-life in possession. StiU, the principle was recognised by the law, until it was annulled by the Legislature by the statute which created, for the first time, a "protector of the settlement." Thence- forward it became a positive rule of law, and no longer a mere technical necessity, that when a tenant-in-tail under a settlement (not being in possession) wishes to bar the entail completely, he must obtain the consent of 1 3 and 4 Wm. lY. c. 74. 66 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. the " protector," that is, in legal phrase, of the person who has the first estate of freehold prior to his own estate-tail. We are now, therefore, in a position to examine the mode whereby the objects of those perpetual entails which had been swept away four centuries ago are still practically secured in ordinary settlements of landed property, or, less frequently, in the wills of landed proprietors who have enjoyed an absolute power of disposition. This mode is thus explained in the standard work of Mr. Joshua Williams on the " Law of Eeal Property : " — " In families where the estates are kept up from one generation to another, settlements are made every few years for this purpose ; thus, in the event of a marriage, a life-estate merely is given to the husband ; the wife has an allowance for pin-money during the marriage, and a rent-charge or annuity by way of jointure for her life, in case she should survive her husband. Subject to this jointure, and to the payment of such sums as may be agreed on for the portions of the daughters and younger sons of the marriage, the eldest son who may he horn of the marriage is made hy the settlement tenant-in-tail. In case of his decease without issue, it is provided that the second son, and then the third, should in like manner be tenant-in-taU ; and so on to the others ; and in default of sons, the estate is usually given to the daughters ; not successively, however, but as ' tenants in common in tail,' with 'cross remainders' in tail. By this means the estate is tied up till some tenant-in-tail attains the age of twenty-one years ; when he is able, with the consent of his father, who is tenant for life, to bar the entail with all the remainders. Dominion is thus again acquired over the property, which dominion is usually exercised in a re-settlement on the next generation ; and thus the property is preserved in the family. Primogeniture, there- fore, as it obtains among the landed gentry of England, is a custom only, and not a right, though there can be no doubt that the custom has originated in the right which was enjoyed by the eldest son, as SETTLEMENTS AND LIFE ESTATES. 67 heir to his father, in those days when estates-tail could not be barred." It should be remarked that a settlement of the kind described by Mr. Joshua Williams implies that full control has been acquired over the land before it is , executed. For this purpose, most family properties are disentailed in each generation with a view to re-settle- ment by the joint act of the life-owner for the time being as " protector," and of his eldest son as tenant-in- tail in reversion. The former is actuated by a desire to perpetuate the entail by fresh limitations to a period as distant as the law permits j and often gains, in the process of re-settlement, the means of discharging his own debts, or making provision for those who have claims upon him. The son, on the other hand, taking a life-estate in lieu of his estate-tail, forfeits the prospect of becoming master of the property on his father's death ; but, in consideration of this sacrifice, he usually receives an immediate rent-charge by way of allowance, and is placed in a position to marry early. To complete this explanation, it should be added that almost all modern settlements contain a power of sale, enabling the trustees, with the consent of the tenant in possession, to sell portions or even the whole of the property, and to re-invest the purchase-money in other land, or to apply it in paying off mortgages and other charges on the property. Under these powers out-lying estates, or estates which may have come into the family collaterally, are very commonly sold off, and the produce is either applied in rounding off the central domain, or held upon trust for the same persons as F 2 68 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. would have received tlie income of the land, till it is sooner or later absorbed in paying charges which must otherwise have been raised upon the entire property.-^ In default of such powers being inserted in the settle- ment, the Court of Chancery may direct sales, with the consent of the parties interested, for the purpose of paying off charges, or of buying other landed property to be held on the same trusts as that sold.^ It may, therefore, be asserted that, with the exception of a very few domains inalienably settled, like Blenheim, on a particular family, no estate in England is literally unsaleable. But the Settled Estates Act of 1856, as well as the amending Acts of 1858 and 1864, while they purport to render all settled property capable of sale, are encumbered by elaborate precautions for the protection of every interest, both actual and contingent. Moreover, the powers which they confer are not to be exercised, even by the Court of Chancery, " in any case where an express declaration or manifest intention that they shall not be exercised is contained in the settle- ment, or may reasonably be inferred therefrom, or from extrinsic circumstances or evidence." These Acts, there- fore, are doubly permissive, and can seldom operate except where powers of sale have been omitted in a settlement out of pure inadvertence. By the same Act of 1856, life-tenants, who had pre- 1 It is stated by Mr. Greorge Shaw Lefevre, M.P., in an interesting paper on the " Limitation of Entails and Settlements," that old settlements, or settlements made under wills, or those drawn by country practitioners, seldom contain these powers, and that very few settlements authorise the investment of money realised by sales in the permanent improvement of the rent of the property. 2 19 & 20 Vict., c. 120. P0WEB8 OF SALE AND LEASING. 69 vionsly been disabled from granting leases which would hold good against a reversioner, were empowered to grant binding leases for twenty-one years. The Act also enables the Court of Chancery to authorise build- ing and mining, as well as agricultural, leases, on settled estates ; but here, again, the powers conferred on the life tenant and the Court may be defeated by express words in the settlement, or even by an inferential construction of it. In the meantime, special powers of borrowing money for agricultural improvements were conceded to landowners, under the control of the Enclosure Commissioners. This system originated in State loans granted for purposes of drainage and reclamation, after the repeal of the Com Laws and the Irish famine. After the sums thus voted by Parliament were ex- hausted. Land Improvement Companies were formed to advance money for the same objects, as well as for the erection of farm houses and labourers' cottages. Such loans are secured by a first charge on the in- heritance, sanctioned by the certificate of the Enclosure Commissioners, which is willingly accepted by the prior creditors as an adequate safeguard for their claims. We learn from the Eeport of the House of Lords Committee on the Improvement of Land (1873) that "the interest at which the land companies lend is usually 4J per cent. The sinking fund calculated to repay the loan in twenty-five years, together with the interest and sinking fund on the preHminary expenses,^ ■ 1 Evidence was given before the Committee, showing that the pre- liminary expenses for small loans sometimes amounted to upwards of 15 per cent, on the capital borrowed, the average being 7 per cent. (Report, paragraph 9, subsection 3.) 70 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. bring up the average payment on the efEective outlay to a little more than 7 per cent." It was stated by Mr. James Caird, one of the Enclosure Commissioners, in 1878, that some £12,000,000 had then been charged on the land of Great Britain, besides £3,000,000 on the land of Ireland, during the previous thirty years, part of it having been advanced by the State and part by private companies. The principle adopted is that of periodical redemption within twenty-five or at most thirty years, so that each generation may, as a rule, bear the charge of its own improvements. This principle has been vigorously impugned in the interest of agriculture, on the ground that landowners will not readily undertake so heavy a charge as 7 per cent, and upwards, and that a tenant-for-life should be enabled to create a permanent mortgage for the benefit of the property on the same terms as a proprietor in fee simple. The question here involved really turns upon the policy of family settlements, the object of which would evidently be defeated if successive tenants-for-life could burden the estate for ever. For the present, however, we must regard guaranteed loans for agricultural improvement, even though subject to redemption within twenty-five or thirty years, as an important extension of limited ownership. It is satis- factory to know that about two-thirds of the whole amount borrowed has been spent on drainage, the most remunerative of all investments on land. It is still more satisfactory to learn, on high authority, that a much larger sum has been laid out by landowners on improvements out of their own resources, for which purpose statutory powers of charging the inheritance IMPBOVEHLENT LOANS. 71 have been provided by the Act of 1864.^ This policy has been carried still further by the Agricultural Hold- ings Act of 1875. Under that Act, hereafter to be noticed, tenants are encouraged to make improvements of a permanent character by the assurance of legal compensation on a prescribed scale, with the previous consent in writing of the landlord or his agent. But it is to be observed that an important distinction is drawn between tenants of absolute owners and tenants of "limited" owners under . settlements. The former are entitled to receive back, at any time within a period of twenty years, the cost of the improvement, subject to a deduction for every year in which they have enjoyed the benefit of it. The latter are only entitled to receive compensation at the expiration of their tenancy, if and so far as the letting value has been increased by the improvement. The amount to be received under these different principles of com- pensation respectively may or may not be the same, but the fact of different principles having been adopted shows how deeply the system of family settlements is rooted in the English law of Eeal Property. It would be easy to enumerate secondary reforms in that law, and especially in the practice of conveyancing, which have been founded directly or indirectly on the exhaustive Reports of the Eeal Property Commissioners (1829-33). Such are the abolition of antiquated suits for the recovery of rights in land ; the extended liability of real estates to debts, and especially to mortgage debts, which used, by a most iniquitous rule, to be charged on personalty ; the statutable importation of 1 Caird's " Landed Interest," p. 87. 72 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. certain powers into settlements, mortgages, and wills ; and the facilities provided for effecting exchanges through the Enclosure Commissioners without deeds or investigation of title.^ But all these amendments, however useful, leave untouched the organic framework of Eeal Property law, and avail but little to encourage or to cheapen the ordinary transfer of land, which, though effected by means of secret deeds, is often as expensive and troublesome as a lawsuit in open court.^ It would be no less vain than wearisome to dwell minutely on the all but fruitless attempts to simplify -Land Transfer without simplifying the law of Eeal Property which have been made within living memory. This question is far older than is generally supposed. IS'ot only has the mystery and the expense attending all dealings with land in England been recognised by the greatest English lawyers, but more than one treatise in favour of registration as a remedy for these evils was published at the beginning of the last century. In 1857, when the Commission on Eegistra- tion of Title published its Eeport, it was stated that no less than twenty Bills dealing with the subject had been introduced within twenty years. In 1859 a Bill for the Eegistration of Title was introduced by Lord Cairns, then Sir Hugh Cairns, on behalf ' For a more complete enumeration of sucli measures, see the Address of Mr. N. Tertius Lawrence to the Incorporated Law Society at Cambridge, on October 7, 1879. ^ It has been well pointed out by Mr. Wren-Hoskyns, in his Essay on the English Land-System, that the Statute of Uses, passed in the 27th year of Henry VIII., and five years before the Statute of WUls, first legalised the system of conveying land by secret deed, without publicity or registration. LANB TRANSFER AND REGISTRATION: 73 of the Government, but was defeated by the opposition of the legal profession. In 1862 Lord Westbury's Transfer of Land Act actually became law. Under this Act, provision was made for the registration of fee- simple estates, with an indefeasible title. Such registration was only to be obtained after a full official investigation of all the interests affect- ing the estate, which interests were to be duly recorded in the register. The register was thenceforward to contain a complete and conclusive history of all trans- fers, charges, and incumbrances to which the estate might be subjected, no unregistered conveyance or mortgage being allowed to prevail against a registered interest. The object, of course, 'was to create a new starting-point beyond which it would be needless for an intending purchaser or mortgagee to carry back his enquiries ; but the necessity of registering all future interests that might affect the estate, whether equit- able or legal, was found to involve a considerable increase of expense, with little increase of security. In fact. Lord Westbury's Act virtually established an optional registration of deeds, similar to the compulsory registration of deeds which had existed in Middlesex and Yorkshire since the reign of Queen Anne. Now, the Middlesex and Yorkshire system of registration had been emphatically condemned by a Eoyal Commission, which reported in 1857, because it did not and could not operate by itself to simplify either title or the forms of conveyancing. The Commissioners pointed out that retrospective investigations and abstracts of title would not be curtailed, however they might be facilitated, by a mere registration of deeds, while " the technicalities 74 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. and anomalies of the law of Eeal Property would be confirmed ratlier than lessened or relieved." The same view was adopted by another Eoyal Commission, appointed eleven years later, and was, on the whole, justified by experience. The number of titles registered under Lord Westbury's Act gradually dwindled, and had not reached 400 in all within a period of twelve years. In the year 1875, after Lord Selborne had vainly attempted to effect a more com- prehensive reform, a second Land Transfer Act, based on a different principle, was introduced and carried by Lord Cairns. -"^ Unlike Lord Westbury's Transfer of Land Act, Lord Cairns' Act pro- vided for a registration of title alone, and not for a registration of assurances. Its object was not to pre- serve a record of all the interests affecting an estate; on the contrary, " it recognised for the purposes of actual registration only the proprietors of certain de- fined interests in the land,"^ leaving ail other interests to be protected by caveats and inhibitions. Moreover, it authorised the registration not only of " absolute " and " quahfied " titles, but even of mere " possessory " titles, which it was hoped might ultimately ripen, in the ajbsence of hostile claims, into indefeasible titles. It is the less necessary to describe further the distinctions between Lord Westbury's and Lord Cairns' Act, because the latter, being equally per- missive, proved still more abortive in its, operation- 1 In the meantime, important reforms had been initiated by the Vendor* and Purchasers Act, and the Real Property Limitations Act of 1874. 2 " Report of the Select Committee on Land Titles and Transfer," 1879. FAILURE OF BE GISTS. ATIOX ACTS. T5 The Select Committee o£ the House of Commons which reported in June, 1879, found that, down to the date of the last return, only forty-eight titles had been registered under it, of which but a small pro- portion were possessory titles. Various causes were assigned by Lord Cairns and other witnesses for this deplorable failure, such as the reluctance of English landowners to part with their title-deeds and to incur immediate trouble and expense for the sake of a remote benefit, the inveterate prejudice of the legal profession against a new course of procedure, and the discredit reflected on any scheme of registration by the ill success of Lord Westbury's experiment. The Committee, however, without ignoring these ad- verse influences, were driven to conclude that, prac- tically, the main obstacle to an effectual registration of title is the hopeless difficulty of reconciling that system with the complexities of the English law of E-eal Property. They forcibly observe ■ that, " Prom the very moment that the ownership of any given plot of land is split up amongst different persons, every scheme for the registration of title necessitates one of two things ; either the interests carved out of the original fee must be themselves placed on the Register — a process which would defeat the first ob- ject of such a registration, simplicity of title for the purpose of disposition — or an owner, pro hac vice, so to speak, must be created for the purpose of regis- tration, while all remaining interests, being kept off the register, must (as in the analogous case of copy- holds) become the subject of a second record of title outside the register. But this is not all. In exact 76 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. proportion as the registered^ owner is left free and unfettered to deal with, the land, the owners of un- registered property are exposed to the risk of having their property dealt with behind their backs, and are left to protect themselves as best they can by a system of cautions and inhibitions." Upon these and like grounds, the Committee re- ported unfavourably upon the system of registering titles, and recommended, in effect, a recurrence to the alternative principle of registering deeds. At the same time, they suggested ^various improvements in the machinery provided by Lord Westbury's Act, the compulsory use of brief statutory forms, the reduction of mortgages to a simple charge upon land, the ex- tension to real property of the control already en- trusted to executors over personal property, the repeal of the Statute of Uses, and other salutary amendments in the procedure of land-transfer. What they could not advocate, without exceeding their powers, was such a reform of English land tenure as would make the difference between registration of deeds and registration of title a matter of little moment. Nor did they venture to advocate, in express terms, com- pulsory registration in this country. In Australia, as they pointed out, registration works smoothly and regularly enough, because there " every landowner has a perfect root of title to his property, and a trust- worthy key to its identity." Therefore, although registration is only compulsory in the case of Crown grants, there is every inducement for its general adoption. Why it should be hopeless for land- owners in the mother country to realise the same MB. LOCKE KING'S INTESTACY BILL. 77 advantages is by no means self-evident, and is not explained in the Eeport of the Committee.^ In the meantime, a series of attempts has been made to assimilate the devolution of real to personal property on intestacy, and thus to abolish the law, as distinct from the custom, of Primogeniture. In 1836, and again in 1837, Mr. Ewart moved for leave to intro- duce a bill with this object, whereby undevised realty would have vested, like personalty, in the executor or administrator ; but was defeated on both occasions.^ The struggle was renewed again and again by Mr. Locke King from 1850 to 1869, in which year he actually obtained a majority in favour of a bill pro- viding that where any person beneficially entitled to any real estate shall die without a will, that estate shall pass to his executor or administrator, and shall be either divided or sold, exactly as if it were per- ' This point is fully discussed in an able pamphlet on "Land Law Keform in England," by Mr. G. Osborne Morgan, M.P., Chairman of the Select Committee. Mr. Morgan combats the notion that land can be made as transferable as stock, on the ground " that land is a concrete and stock an abstraction ; that stock possesses no boundaries, conceals no minerals, supports no game, pays no tithes, admits of no easements, is let to no tenant, and hampered with no adjoining owner ; " moreover, that, since one £1 of stock is as good as another, no difficulty can arise in its par- tition. He compares the registry established under Lord Westbury's Act to " an old palimpsest, in which a dozen different titles met and inter- sected each other at every turn." He maintains that Lord Cairns' Act failed, because it imported the South Australian system into English law, without clearing the ground for it ; because it was " an attempt to trans- plant into a sou choked by the weedy and tangled growth of centuries of feudalism and pedantry, the product of a democratic community, without a history, without ancestors, and without lawyers." His conclusion is " that the first step towards making a register of titles practicable is to make a clean sweep of our present Real Property Laws." 2 See Kenny's "Essay on Primogeniture," p. 66, and Laurence's "Essay on Primogeniture," pp. 146 — 9. 78 ENGLISS LAND AND ENGLISS LANDLORDS. sonalty, for the benefit of creditors and the next of kin. A " Eeal Estate Succession Bill " of the same general character was announced in the Speech from the Throne, and introduced by the Government in the Session of 1870 ; but that bill, unlike Mr. Locke King's, was intended to cover legal as well as equit- able estates, while it included various saving clauses more or less open to criticism. It was not pressed beyond the first stage, and the promise given to re- introduce it was not redeemed. Another bill, intro- duced by Mr. Locke King and Mr. Hinde Palmer in the Session of 1873, after providing against certain technical difficulties, embraced Avithin its definition of real estate every kind of property which is not personal estate. This bill never even came on for discussion. The Eeal Estate Intestacy Bill, introduced by Mr. T. B. Potter in 1876, and rejected on the second reading by 210 to 175, was based on the original bill of Mr. Locke King. Not one of these bills went the length of vesting in any legal representative of the intestate realty passing by devise, in the same manner as personalty, including leaseholds passing by bequest, vests in the executor under the existing law. Nor did any provide that real estate passing by descent or devise, shall cease to be exempt from the probate duty imposed on personalty. Still less did any interfere with the rule under which a person succeeding to real estate, though he may inherit in fee simple, is charged with succession duty on his life interest only, and is permitted to pay this duty by instalments — a rule which amounts to a legislative protection of landed property against a salutary liability to dispersion. CHAPTER V. Eeoent Progress of Agriculture in England. The progress of agriculture in the present century has probably been more rapid than during any similar period. Ithas been shown by Mr. Porter^ that, while thepopulation of the United Kingdom increased by 10,700,000 between 1801 and 1841, and while the number of persons employed in agriculture began to decline relatively to other classes after 1811, the production of corn almost kept pace with the growing consumption, until shortly before the repeal of the Corn Laws. , In the first forty years of the century, only 25,000,000 quarters of wheat were imported, so that the home supply fell short of the demand by little more than half a million of quarters annually. This result was due to a constant extension of enclosure and drainage, as well as to successive improvements in the practice of agriculture. Not the least important of such improvements was the demoli- tion of useless fences and straggling hedgerows, the multiplication and irregular outlines of which had long characterised old-fashioned English farming. Under the impulse of temporary war prices, many an ancient pasture was recklessly broken up, and though once more covered with greensward, has never recovered its original fertility. Happily, the use of crushed bones 1 "Progress of the Nation," sect. II., chap. i. 80 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOBDS. for manure was introduced in 1800, and has been followed by a far more general application of chemical science to raising crops. Still more remarkable has been the effect of mechanical science in the develop- ment of new agricultural implements, such as reap- ing, mowing, and threshing machines, steam ploughs, and other inventions, which not only economise labour but enable the farmer to save precious time at the most critical seasons o£ the year. The encouragement given by the Eoyal Agricultural Society, and provincial insti- tutions founded on the same principle, has produced a like revolution in the breeding of stock, with especial regard to early maturity. But for the advantage thus obtained, it would have been impossible for the soil of England to have so nearly maintained its population before the ports were freely thrown open to foreign com- petition, and, even with this advantage, it ultimately failed to do so. It is often assumed that, under the influence of Pro- tection, wheat commanded something like a famine price, even in ordinary years. This assumption is not fully borne out by statistics, nor was the importance of cheapening the food of the people altogether neglected by Parliament during the French war. So far back as the year 1793, a Select Committee of the House of Commons was appointed to take into consideration "the present high price of corn," and in 1794 a Select Committee of the Privy Council took evidence on the harvest of that year, the stock of grain then existing in the country, and the means of obtaining supplies from abroad. It is true that little resulted from the labours of these Committees, and in the PRICE OF WHEAT IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 81 year 1812 the price of wheat reached its maximum of 126s. 6d. per quarter.^ In 1815 the British farmer was practically guaranteed a monopoly of the home market so long as the price did not exceed 80s. per quarter, but, in fact, it never reached that standard except twice (in 1817 and 1818) during the next twenty years.^ In 1833, and again in 1836, Committees of the House of Commons were appointed to enquire into the state of Agriculture and the causes of the distress affecting the farming interest. Strange to say, the immediate occasion for the second enquiry was the occurrence of three magnificent harvests in succession, which brought down the average price of wheat in 1833 to 52s. lid., in 1834 to 46s. 2d., and in 1835 to 39s. 4d.=* It was stated before the Committee of 1836, by the Comptroller of Corn Eeturns, that in the period between 1814 and 1834 the quantity of home-grown wheat fell short of the consumption, on the average, by about a million of quarters a year, of which at least half was 1 See the tables given in McCulloch's " Essay on the Corn Laws and Com Trade," appended to Adam Smith's " Wealth of Nations," note 10, Part II. The price here given (126s. 6d.) was the "average price" of British wheat for that year, as ascertained by the Receiver of Corn Returns. The price of middling wheat in Windsor market was 128s. for the same jear. In Appendix V. will be found tables showing the average Gazette prices of British wheat, barley, and oats, from 1790 to 1879. From these tables it appears that, during the period 1800 to 1848, the average price of British wheat was £3 10s. 3d., and that during the period 1849 to 1879 it was £2 lis. lOd. The corresponding decrease in the price of barley and oats has scarcely exceeded 2s. ^ It is said toharve touched 120s. in 1817. (" Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee of 1836," paragraph 8494.) 3 " First Report of the Select Committee on the State of Agriculture." 1836, appendix 1.] 82 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. contributed by Ireland. The average price for this period was about 60s. a quarter ; but, as we have seen, iin excess of production in the years 1833-5 had tbe immediate effect of reducing tbe average to about 46s. In default of agricultural statistics, which were first officially collected in 1867, it is impossible to say wbat area was then devoted to growing wheat. Inasmuch, however, as that area almost sufl&ced to feed an estimated population of fourteen millions and a half, wliereas the area now devoted to wheat crops, witb a larger yield per acre, certainly feeds a smaller population, it may safely be inferred that . far more land was then under wheat crops than at present.^ Since the year 1836, when the Committee on Agricultural Distress published its evi- dence vsdthout making a report, the average price of wheat has been about 54s. a quarter, and since 1849, when the Repeal of the Corn Laws took full effect, the average has been 51s. lOd. In the first six years of this period it averaged 4Ss. 3d.; in the second, 56s. lO^d.; in the third, 47s. lid. ; in the fourth, 56s. 2d. ; and in the last seven, 50s. 5d. But it is important to observe how little can be learned from these figures without taking into account the average produce per acre in each year, how sensible an effect this last element exer- cised upon the price for many years after the free ^ Mr. Caird estimates tlie yield per acre at 26i bushels in 1850, and at 28 bushels in 1878. The poptlation maintained by home-grown or foreign wheat cannot be estimated accurately, since the diet of the Scotch and Irish peasantry mainly consists of oatmeal. But, if Mr. Caird's estimate of the acreable yield be accepted, the Agricultural Statistics for 1879 clearly show that, of the wheat now consumed in the United Kingdom, little more than two-fifths is of homo growth. EFFEGT OF BAD HARVESTS. 83 a-dmission of foreign competition, and liow trifling an effect it now exercises.^ Tor instance, it has been calculated that in 1863, when the harvest was far above the average standard, but the price fell below 41s. a quarter, the farmer would not have realised more than £10 Os. 6d. per acre upon his wheat crop, exclusive of the straw. On the other hand, after the harvest of 1867, which proved the worst in the whole period, the farmer was partially compensated by a rise of price, and might have realised above £8 per acre. Whereas in 1873 "we observe a marked change in this relation between quantity and price." In that year, and the ' five which followed it, the harvests were 18 per cent, below the average; yet the average price of wheat, instead of rising to meet the deficiency, fell to 51s. 6d. a quarter, or nearly five shillings below the average of the six jj-ears 1867-72. The result is that for the years 1873-8 the farmer would only realise about £7 12s. per acre, and his average receipts iox the last four years of the six must have been even lower. " In the naemory of Hving men there has been no such concurrence of bad seasons," that of 1879 being probably the most disas- ^ See an able review of the facts relating to home-grown wheat during the period 1849 — 1878, in the address of Mr. George Shaw Lefevre, M.P., to the Statistical Section of the British Association in 1879. The average produce per acre is calculated by Mr. Shaw Lefevre from a table in Mr. Caird's " Landed Interest," which exhibits the comparative yield of wheat crops in the United Kingdom for each of the last thirty years. The average prices for .1863, 1867, and 1873, given in Mr. Shaw Lefevre's address, differ considerably from the average Gazette prices given on official authority in the Appendix and followed in the text, but not sufficiently to affect the value of the argument G 2 8t ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. trous of all, and prices ceased to move upwards witli a deficiency of home produce. ^ The steady rise in the value, and even in the rental, of agricultural land, under such conditions, needs some explanation. About thirty years ago Mr. Porter esti- mated that, " whh scarcely any exception, the revenue ' A Pavliamentaiy Return, issued on August 13, 1879, contains valu- able statistics on the importation of grain and flour between 1820 and 1878, as well as on the average prices of corn, butcher's meat, and other agricultural produce, during this period. From this return it appears that until 1849 the importation of foreign wheat had never exceeded 12,000,000 cwt., but that from that date it increased rapidly until it reached 54,000,000 cwt. in 1877, and nearly 50,000,000 cwt. in 1878. The price of wheat is shown to have fluctuated between 40s. and 102s. per quarter (in 1847), but was on the whole as high in the later years of the period as in the earlier. The price of meat, on the contrary, ranged upwards at the Metropolitan Cattle Market, from 2s. per stone in the earlier years to 6s. per stone in the later; though in 1827 that of beef reached 58. 4d. More complete Tables, showing the relative amounts of Farm Produce imported into, and exported from, the United Kingdom during the present century, will be found in Appendix IV. Table I. A gives the quantity of wheat, barley, and oals imported from 1800 onwards. The import returns of other articles included in that Table, as well as the import returns of live animals, and other provisions included in Table I. B, commence with 1820. The export returns of com and similar articles raised in the United Kingdom and included in Table II. A commence with 1828 ; those of animals and other provisions raised in the United Kingdom and included in Table II. B, commence at various periods from 1827 onwards. The export returns of corn and similar articles of Foreign and Colonial Farm Produce included in Table III. A, commence at various periods from 1800 onwards ; those of Foreign and Colonial " provisions " commence at various periods from 1820 onwards. Table IV., giving approximately the percentage of agricultural Exports to Imports from 1828 onwards, exhibits, as might be expected, a continuous decrease in the former. Thus, if we compare the twenty years before 1848 with the decennial period 1869 — 1878, we find that the percentage of exported to imported wheat had declined from 6'4 to 3'3, that of wheat flour from 126 to 3'8 ; that of barley from 5-O^to 0'8 ; that of oats from 23'6 to 3'0 ; and that of butter and cheese from 18'3 to 4'4. RISE IN THE BENT OF LAND. 85 drawn in the form of rent lias been at least doubled in every part of Great Britain since 1790." According to Mr. Caird's estimate, which purports to be founded on " authentic sources and parliamentary returns," the rent of cultivated land per acre, which in 1770 had averaged but 13s., reached an average of 27s. in 1850, and of 30s. in 1878. We are led to a similar conclu- sion by the income-tax returns for the fifteen years 1863-77, which distinguish the gross annual value of "land" from that of houses, mines, ironworks, railways, and similar kinds of property. From these it appears that, whereas the "land" of England and "Wales had been assessed at £44,611,281 in 1863, it was assessed at £51,811,324 in 1877.^ Some allowance must doubtless be made for possible variations in the official standard of assessment, but it is well known that income tax returns are more trustworthy, because framed on more uniform principles, than local estimates of rateable value. Upon the whole, it may be taken as certain that a pro- gressive and continuous rise in the rental of land has taken, place within the last twenty or thirty years, though it was checked in 1878-9 by the effect of bad seasons. This rise may be dated, approximately, from the Crimean War (1854-56), when the price of wheat 1 " Statistical Abstract" for 1864-78 (Table 12). It appears from the Appendix to Mr. Goschen's "Report on Local Taxation" (Part II., Table 2) that the aggregate annual value of real property in England and "Wales under the old Schedule A of the Income Tax Assessment, which in- cluded railways, canals, mines, gasworks, waterworks, &c., rose from £53,495,000 in 1815 to £143,872,000 in 1868. In 1877, the assessed value of land and houses alone amounted to £142,388,539, and that of all real property formerly included in Schedule A to about £190,000,000. The annual value of lands alone is stated in Table 11 of the same Appendix (Part II.) to have been £37,063,152 in 1814, and £47,766,763 in 1868. 86 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. averaged above 72s. per quarter, and much land destined by nature for sbeepwalks was again brought under the plough, as it had been fifty years earlier. On many estates all the farms were revalued, and the growing prosperity, of landowners showed itself in the growing luxury of metropolitan society. In Scotland, where rents have long been more directly regulated by competition, and where the national rental had almost trebled itself in twenty years between 1795 and 1815,^ the recent increase has been still greater proportionably than in any other part of the United'Kingdom. But the capital value of the increase in England and Wales alone between 1857 and 1875 is stated by Mr. Caird at £268,440,000, being thirty years' purchase of £8,948,000 increase on gross annual value in the income tax returns. Mr. Caird accounts for this extraordinary result partly by the enormous expenditure on agricultural improvements out of public loans and private capital, but mainly by the great advance in the consumption and value of meat and dairy pro- duce. Whatever increase of rental may be due to improvements carried out at the landlord's cost is, of course, in the nature of interest on a commercial investment, the benefit of which is shared by the rest of the community. It is otherwise with that increase of rental which may be due to a rise in the general value of agricultural produce, notwithstanding the late fall in the price of wheat. This increment may pro- perly be called "unearned," since it has been won by • " Report of the Highland Society on the Agriculture of Scotland," 1878, p. 26. SELLING VALUE OF LAND. 87 no foresight or skill on the landlord's part, but springs naturally out of the growing numbers and prosperity of the community, each member of which indirectly helps to swell the landlord's rental by paying more for almost every article of food produced by the farmer. Still more emphatically is this true of the increase in the selling value of land, which, though it cannot be exactly ascertained, must have been relatively far greater than any increase in the letting value for pur- poses of agriculture. Land is bought not only to be let out in farms, but also to be covered with buildings, with railways, with docks, or with reservoirs. More- over, it is bought with a view not only to immediate, but also to future gain, and experience has more than justified the speculative enhancement of its ostensible value. The landed interest of England is estimated to have received a sum exceeding the national revenue from railway companies alone over and above the market price of the land thus sold. But this extra price by no means represents the whole profit of the landowners on such a sale. We must add to it the increased value of the land adjoining the line, and the increased facilities of transport afforded to aU the farms within reach of a station — an advantage sure to make itself felt, sooner or later, in an increased rent. The extension of towns, with their water-works, gas- works, and public institutions spreading far into the country, the development of mines, the opening of quarries — in short, each successive expansion of popu- lation or industry — inevitably contributes to raise the seUinff value of land. One nobleman is known to have received three-quarters of a million sterling for the 88 ENGLISH LAND AND UNGLISR LANDLORDS. mere site of docks constructed by tlie enterprise of others. The soil of England may have little more than doubled its agricultural rental in a century, but it must assuredly be worth many times its value in the days of our great-grandfathers, if we include in the calculation all the land which then sold by the acre and now sells by the yard. Moreover, a very large proportion of the purely agricultural land now possesses a value entirely independent of its rent-pro- ducing capacity. It has been purchased at a fancy price, not for the sake of the interest which it may yield, but for the sake of the social position, ter- ritorial influence, and legal privileges, which attach to ownership of land in this country, and the competi- tion for which seems to be ever on the increase. When all this is considered, it will cease to be thought mar- vellous that money should be invested in land at two or three per cent., and that its price should be scarcely affected by a temporary diminution of rental. ^iart II. DISTINCTIVE FEATUEES OF THE ENGLISH LAND-SYSTEM. CHAPTER I. The Law and Custom of Primogeniture. ^ The most distinctive features of the English Land- system, as it now exists, are, the Law and Custom of Primogeniture governing the ownership of land; the peculiar character of family settlements, which con- vert the nominal owner of land into a tenant-for- life, -with very limited power over the estate ; the consequent distribution of landed property and ter- ritorial influence among a comparatively small and con- stantly decreasing number of families ; the direction of cultivation by a class of tenant farmers usually holding from year to year without the security of a lease ; and the dependent condition of the agricultural labourers, who are mostly hired by the day or week, and have seldom any interest in the soil. This Land- system has been described by an eminent authority " as the gradual growth of experience in a country of moderate extent where land is all occupied, where capital is abundant and constantly seeking investment in land ; and where other industries than agriculture are always demanding recruits from the children of the agricultural labourer, who find, besides, a ready 90 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. outlet in those British, colonies where the soil and climate are not much different from that which they leave, and where their own language is spoken."^ Yet the same writer justly characterizes it as wholly excep- tional in Europe, and we have already seen reason to douht whether artificial restrictions have not contributed more than natural tendencies or economical experience to establish it in Great Britain. We know that Primo- geniture was introduced with feudal tenures by Norman lawyers ; that landed property was far more subdivided than it now is during the two centuries when the operation of entails was suspended ; that family settle- ments were a contrivance of lawyers under the Com- monwealth and Restored Monarchy; that leasehold occupancy was once the rule in England, as it still is in Scotland, but was discouraged by the inability of life-owners to grant leases binding on their successors ; and that agricultural labourers were too often ousted of their little tenements by Enclosure, as well as pau- perised by the operation of the old Poor Law. We also know that, not merely in America and our own colonies, but in countries of smaller extent, and with a more crowded population than our own, where the price of land is equally high, and where towns compete quite as actively with the country for laboui-, a Land- system of an entirely different type is maintained with equal tenacity and an equally firm belief in its beneficial effects. With these facts before us, we cannot regard the agrarian constitution of England as a spontaneous or necessary development of our soil, our climate, our geographical position, or our national character. In ' Caird's " Landed Interest," chap. v. | LAW AND CUSTOM OF PBIMOGENITUBE. 91 studying its distinctive features, we shall find mucli to admire as well as something to condemn, but we shall not be justified in assuming that it is impossible to eliminate the one without sacrificing the other. The Law of Primogeniture, in its strictest form, has now determined the descent of land oh intestacy in this country for more than six centuries. It has been shown that not long after the iNorman Conquest the right of an eldest son to inherit his father's estate, if held by knight service, was fully recognised, and had been e.x;tended by the end of the thirteenth century to socage tenures. It has also been shown how this right has survived all recent attempts to abolish it, so that, while all personalty is divided, on the death of an intestate, between his widow and children, all realty stiU devolves, by common law, on the eldest male de- scendant of the eldest line. The Custom of Primo- geniture, under which landed property is usually settled by deed or will upon the eldest male descendant of the eldest line, is of less ancient origin, as we have seen, but has prevailed with little variation for the last two centuries. It will be remembered that, since the modern system of family settlement was completed by the invention of " trustees to preserve contingent re- mainders," in the reign of Charles II., an additional refinement has been imported into it. This is the institution of the " protector," ^ who is nearly always the life-tenant in possession, and whose consent must be obtained by the first tenant-in-tail in order to cut off the entail and to bar all the remainders efiectually. This is usually done with a view to resettle the pro- ^ By the statute of 3 and 4 William IV., cap. 74 92 HNGLI8H LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. perty in the manner already described/ failing which, it would descend, under the settlement, upyn the first tenant-in-tail, who may instantly transform himself, on acquiring possession, into an owner in fee simple. The possible duration of such a family settlement is limited, it is true, by the legal doctrine long since established, that no entail can be made on the unborn child of an unborn child. But since an unborn child may be made, as he usually is, the first tenant-in-tail, and since any number of life-estates may be interposed to precede his interest, it is not impossible that some eighty years, or nearly three generations, may elapse before he attains his majority — in other words, before any one becomes free to dispose of the property, or deal with it as an owner.^ In reviewing the actual operation of Primogeniture in this country, whether by virtue of the law prescrib- ing the course of descent or intestacy, or under the express terms of settlements or wUls, we encounter a difficulty but too characteristic of the English Land- system. Among our Anglo-Saxon forefather.-^, the practice was to enrol all transfers of lai5'] in. tii3 shire- book, after proclamation openly made in the shire-mote, or county court^ — a primitive but eti'ective substitute ^ See aboTe, pp. 65 — 67. 2 In Kenny's " Essay on Primogeniture," chap. iiL, a succinct review is given of the " successive safeguards of primogeniture," showing histori- cally how the heir's expectancy was protected by restrictions on alienation, in the form of laws for the direct benefit of the heir, of laws for the direct benefit of the lord, of entails, and of settlements preserving contingent remainders. * Gurdon " On Courts-Baron," quoted by Wren Hoskyns, in " Systems of Land Tenure.'' NO PUBLIC BECORD OF LAND TENURE. 93 for a modern registry of title or assurances. For cen- turies after tlie Conquest, the publicity of " feoffments," and tlie " inquisitiones post mortem" taken on the death of all tenants holding by knight service from the Grown, kept alive evidence of conveyances or succes- sion for a very large proportion of English properties, which might have been embodied in periodical revisions of Domesday Book.-*- It was not until private and unregis- tered deeds, couched in the jargon of legal pedantry, had, finally superseded the old simplicity of land-transfer and land-succession, that "real property" became the stronghold of conveyancing mystery, and transactions relating to land ceased to be the subject of public notoriety or interest. At this moment the statistical materials requisite for a record of English land tenure, as affected by the Law and Custom oB Primogeniture, are still very imperfect. No register of settlements, conveyances, or mortgages, exists as yet for any part of England, except Middlesex and Yorkshhe, though such a register has existed in Scotland a century and a half, and is admitted to answer its purpose admirably. Accordingly, very conflicting estimates have been formed of the proportion which settled bears to unsettled estates, though many settlements, and those not the least unjust or capricious, are made by will. Wills, it is true, are preserved, but they do not show the extent ■ of land devised by them; nor is there any means of ascertaining, with any approach to accuracy, how far they are employed to aggravate, and how far to miti- gate, the inequality arising from the custom of settUng 1 The compilation of Domesday Book itself is supposed to hare been iacilitated by reference to the books of the Anglo-Saxon county courts. 94 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLI8S LANDLOBDS. landed estates upon eldest sons. It might have been expected, however, that a complete record of the land devolving annually under the Common Law rule of descent would be kept for State purposes and public information. Instead of this, no distinction appears to be drawn between land which passes by will and land which passes by settlement, being equally charge- able with succession duty; while, for a like reason, no separate account is published of land transmitted to heirs by the law of intestate succession. We are, therefore, thrown back on secondary evidence, such as the facts and professional opinions collected by Eoyal Commissions or Parliamentary Committees, for the means of estimating the dominion of Primogeniture over the land-system and social life of England. It has frequently been asserted, and is widely believed, that a mere fraction of the land which yearly changes hands on death is governed by the law of intestate succession. There are no adequate means of verifying or disproving this assertion, but there are good reasons for distrusting it. There is scarcely a wealthy or noble family of any considerable antiquity in which the estates have not at some time descended to an heir or coparceners by the effect of this law. Such an event, however, is far more likely to happen in families less habitually guided by the advice 'of solicitors, and accustomed to dispense with marriage- settlements. The savings of shopkeepers in country towns are very often invested in the purchase of villas or small plots of land, and such persons very often omit to make a will, being perfectly satisfied with the distribution of personalty on intestacy, and BESOENT OF LAND ON INTESTACY. 95 never having realised the responsibihties of a land- owner. What is really true is that landowners con- scious of these responsibilities seldom deliberately intend to die intestate, and that most descents by operation of law are the result of negligence or misadventure. It is not every layman who can be expected to know that, whilst most shai'es in railways and canals are per- sonalty in the eye . of the law, New Eiver shares are invested with the character of real property ; or that, while a lease for 999 years is personalty, a lease for life, though it be the life of another, is realty. ^ But it is not only through ignorance of the Common Law rule that land is left to descend upon a single legal "heir." A man, perhaps, makes several contradictor}- wills, all of which prove to be void for want of proper attestation, or by reason of his incompetence ; or he makes a good will so worded that it does not cover the whole of his real property, including that which . he may have contracted to buy; or, having recently purchased a small freehold, he is just about to devise it, when he is suddenly cut ofE. Moreover, intestacies may easily escape public pbservation, even when they occur in wealthy families. The known wishes of an intestate may be carried into effect by arrange- ment within the family, or an amicable suit in equity, without the public becoming aware of the fact, especially if those wishes should nearly coincide with the course of descent at common law. Several notable examples of the contrary kind, where the known wishes of the intestate, and the plain requirements of justice, ^ See Laurence's " Essay on Primogeniture,'' sect. vi. 96 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. were flagrantly violated by tlie law of intestate suc- cession, have been cited by Mr. Locke King and others in Parliamentary debates.^ Upon the whole, then, we may conclude, with Mr. Joshua Williams,^ that "the property which descends to heirs under intestacies, though large in the aggregate, is generally small in individual cases," where, however, it often works grievous hardship. Those who suffer by it are usually persons for whom no other provision has been made, and members of a class to which the idea of making an eldest son, and beggaring the rest of the family, would be utterly repulsive. The direct effect of the Law of Primogeniture in keeping together' great estates, and aggrandising the heads of great families, is probably not very considerable. Its indirect effect on the minds of testators and settlors cannot be measured by any definite test, but reason and analogy would certainly lead us to believe that it has been a most powerful agent in moulding the sentiment of the class by which the Custom of Primogeniture is main- tained. From this point of view, it is certainly a sig- nificant fact that no sooner was the Law of Primo- geniture swept away in the United States than equal partibility became the almost universal custom, not- withstanding that American landowners are by no means destitute of family pride, and enjoy very nearly 1 In one of these cases, a man in humble circumstances, haTing no children, had employed the fortune of his wife, with her f uU concurrence, to buy the house iu which they lived ; after which he died intestate, a ■nephew claimed and obtained the property, and his widow, left destitute, was "reduced to work as a menial servant. - " Personal Property," p. 402. INFLUENOE OF LAW OF PBIMOGFNITUBE. 97 the same liberty of devising or settling their estates as an English proprietor.^ It is still more instructive to observe that per- sonal property in this country, being exempt from the Law of Primogeniture, is little affected by the Custom, save when it is thought necessary to accumu- late the lion's share of it on the eldest son, that he may the better keep up the dignity of a family place. On the contrary, ordinary wills of personalty closely follow the Statutes of Distributions, under which the "next of kin" are placed in the same position as " the heir " under the Law of Primogeni- ture. Rich capitalists, who do not invest in land, or aspire to found a county family, seldom make an eldest son, and of those who do indulge in this ambition, some prefer to buy a moderate estate for each of their sons. Still more habitually is equal division recognized as the dictate of natural equity by the great body of merchants, tradespeople, and professional men, as well as by the labouring classes throughout Grreat Britain and Ireland; in short, by the middle and lower orders of society, divorced from the soil in this country, and by the landless members of the upper orders. Nor must it be forgotten that, by English law, ordinary leaseholds, whether they consist of lands or houses, count as personalty, and are distributed as such on intestacy ; whereas money in trust for investment in land counts as realty, and falls under the same rule of inheritance. Yast lease- 1 See Kenny's " Essay on Primogeniture," pp. 64-5 ; and Mr. Ford's " Report on Land Tenure in tlie United States," presented to Parliament, with similar reports from other countries, in 1869-70. H 98 ENGLISH LANB AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. hold interests are constantly included in settlements of personalty; and few of these settlements, whether made on the marriage of a duke's younger son or on the marriage of a shopkeeper, exhibit any bias towards Primogeniture. In most instances, the funds are directed to be invested for the benefit of all the sons and daughters of the marriage equally, though a power is usually ' reserved to the parents of modify- ing this distribution by " appointment," at their own discretion. The same course is generally followed by testators possessed of small landed estates purchased with their own earnings, who, for the most part, devise their land to trustees for sale, and direct the proceeds to be divided among their children. In families of the yeoman class, the ordinary practice appears to be that hereditary property should go to the eldest son, but that, in accordance with the Scotch rule of legitim, younger children should be compensated, so far as possible, for their disinherison, and that, if burdened with mortgages, the land should be sold for the equal benefit of all. Even the rude wills and settlements drawn up by priests or schoolmasters for Irish peasant-farmers, among whom the instincts of proprietorship are cherished in their intensest form, embody the principle of Gravelkind and not of 'Primo- geniture. Though often destitute of any legal validity, and purporting to dispose of an interest which has no existence in law, they usually disclose a clear intention to place the younger children on a tolerably equal footing with the eldest son, either by the subdivisions ■of which Irish landlords complain so much, or by heavy charges on the tenant-right. EXTENT OF LAND UNDER ENTAIL. 99 It may, therefore, be safely affirmed that Primo- geniture, as it prevails in England, has not its root in popular sentiment, or in the sentiment of any large class, except the landed aristocracy and those who are struggling to enter its ranks. By the great majority of this class, embracing the- whole nobility, the squires of England, the lairds of Scotland, and the Irish gentry of every degree. Primogeniture is accepted almost as a fundamental law of nature, to which the practice of entails only gives a convenient and effectual expres- sion. Adam Smith remarks that " in Scotland more than one-fifth, perhaps more than one-third, part of the whole lands of the country are at present sup- posed to be under strict entail"— that is, entailed under a system, introduced in 1685, which barred alienation far more inexorably than was permitted by the Enghsh rule against perpetuities. Mr. McCuUoch, writing m 1847, calculated that at least half Scotland was then entailed; but an Act passed in the foUowing year facilitated disentailing by provisions borrowed from the English law.^ In England, where so much land is in the hands of corporations or trustees for public objects, and where almost all deeds relating to land 1 See Laurence's " Essay on Primogeniture, pp. 67-8." By the Act of 1848 (11 and 12 Vict., cap. 36) tenants in possession were enabled to bar entails with the consent of ail the remaindermen, if less th^ three or o the three remaindermen next in succession. Under a -^-J^* f «* (38 a^d 39 Tict., cap. 61, sec. 5), on an application to the S-teh Cou.t to disentail an estate held by tailzie, dated prior to August 1- 1848, the Court may dispense with any consent thus required by the * ~/J^ except that of the immediate heir, or first -7-^^^"^=^- , ^;^*,; J^ prodded that the Talue in money of their expectancies or -*-;*; -t^; Lailed estate should be ascertained, and paid into Court or duly secured. See Appendix Til. h2 100 ENGLISH LANB AND ENQLI8E LANDLORDS. are in private custody, we cannot venture to speak with, so much confidence on this point. Considering, however, that in most counties large estates predominate over small, and that large estates, by the general testi- mony of the legal profession, are almost always entailed either by will or settlement, while small estates, if hereditary, are very often entailed, there is no rash- ness in concluding, in accordance with the evidence given before Mr. Pusey's Committee, that a much larger area is under settlement than at the free disposal of individual landlords.^ It is well known that in families which maintain the practice of entailing, the disparity of fortune be- tween the eldest son and younger children is almost invariably prodigious. The charge for the portions of younger children, when created by a marriage settle- ment, is created at a time when it is quite uncertain how many such children there will be. It is rarely double of the annual rental, and often does not exceed the annual rental ; indeed, in the case of very large estates, it may fall very far short of it. In other words, supposing there to be six children, the income of each younger brother or sister from a family property of £5,000 a year will consist of the interest on a sum of £1,000, or, at the utmost, of £2,000 ; and, even if there were but one such younger child, his income from the pro- perty would probably not be more than one-twentieth or one-thirtieth of his elder brother's rental. Nor does this represent the whole difference between their respec- 1 The estimates given before that Committee represented the estates then under settlement as exceeding two-thirds of the kingdom. Others have stated the proportion at three-fourths and upwards. ELDEST SON AND TOUNGEB CHILDREN. 101 tive shares of the family endowment ; for the eldest son, who pays no probate duty, finds a residence and garden at his disposal, which he may either occupy rent-free or let for his own private advantage. Of com-se, where a father possesses a large amount of personalty, he may partially redress the balance ; and there are exceptionally conscientious landowners who feel it a duty to save out of their own life incomes for younger children. But it is to be feared that accumulations ia the Funds are too often employed, not exclusively nor mainly to increase the pittances allotted for portions, but on the principle of "To him that hath shall be given," to relieve the land of some outstanding incumbrance, and to aid the eldest son in conforming to a conventional standard of dignity. It is, indeed, wholly delusive to contrast the Law with the Custom of Primogeniture, as if the harsh operation of the former were habitually mitigated by the latter. The contrary tendency is assuredly far more prevalent in the higher ranks of the landed aristocracy ; and the younger members of families in this class would generally have reason to congratulate themselves if the law alone were allowed free scope, instead of being aggravated by the effects of the custom. For instance, in the case last supposed, if a family estate of £5,000 a year were charged with no portions for younger children, but left to descend under the law of intestate succession, each of five younger children would lose £1,000, or, at the utmost, £2,000. But then, if the last owner were possessed of £90,000 in personalty, and this also were left to be divided among the children under the Statute of Distributions, each child would 102 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOBBS. receive a share of ^15,000. Suppose, however — and it is no improbable supposition — ^that portions have been charged for younger children, but that one-third of the personalty, or £30,000, is bequeathed to the head of the family to keep up the place, the fortune of each younger child will be reduced to £12,000, so that he would lose £3,000, and would gain no more than £1,000 or £2,000. But it is not very often that a landowner with a rental of £5,000 a year has £90,000 to leave among his children. The same imaginary obligation to pre- serve that degree of state and luxury which is expected of country gentlemen with a certain status and acreage offers an obstacle to saving which the majority find insuperable. Besides, nine out of ten men who inherit their estates burdened with charges for their father's widow and younger children would think it Quixotic to lay by out of their available income, as men of business would do, for the benefit of their own younger children. Hence the proverbial slenderness of a younger son's fortune in families which have a " place," and especially in those which have a title, to be kept up. As for the daughters, their rank is apt to be reckoned as a sub- stantive part of their fortunes ; and not only are their marriage portions infinitelj'' smaller than would be considered proper in families of equal affluence in the mercantile class, but it is not unfrequently provided that, unless they have children, their property shall ultimately revert to their eldest brother. It remains to consider how far the institution of Primogeniture, which has so profoundly influenced the land system and social life of England, deserves to be upheld in future, whether by virtue of its intrinsic POPULAB ARGUMENTS AGAINST PBIMOGENITUSE. 103 merits or by reason of its having become incorporated into our national character. That it was not inherited from our Saxon forefathers, that it was gradually in- troduced under the pressure of military expediency and Norman jurisprudence, that it was perpetuated and stereotyped into its present form by legal ingenuity rather than by legislative policy, are historical facts which cannot be altogether overlooked in an enquiry of this nature. A review of foreign laws and customs regulating the devolution and settlement of land strongly confirms the conclusion that it is, in fact, an unique survival of English feudalism, modified by the exigencies of a commercial age. As such, it must be studied by itself ; and we must beware of con- founding its direct and inevitable effects with other features of the English Land system indirectly con- nected with it, such as the prevalence of limited ownership and tenancy at will. In approaching this study, we must resolutely put aside two lines of reasoning which have done much to obscure it. The first of these is that which starts from the idea that younger sons have certain natural rights of which they are deprived by the Law and Custom of Primogeniture. N'ow, it is impossible to form any definite conception of rights in this sense, except as arising from the personal exertions of those who claim them ; or, at least, from expectations fos- tered by the law, or the parent, as the case may be. If the Code IsTapoleon had been introduced into England, and if the existing rule of descent by Primogeniture were afterwards substituted for it, the generation of younger sons affected by the change 104 ENGLISH LAND AND BNGLISH LANDLORDS. would have good cause for complaint unless their interests were expressly reserved. Again, if a father had led his children to count upon an equal division of his property, and were then to accumulate all upon the eldest son, a palpable wrong would be done to aU the rest. But the supposed grievance of exist- ing younger sons who receive the small fortunes to which they were bom, and have always looked for- ward, will not bear a very close investigation. It is not, in its essence, more real than the grievance of those who are born to no fortune at all, and look wistfully at the inherited wealth of the richer classes. Indeed, the cadets of territorial families who are disposed to regard themselves as the victims of injustice may well reflect that, but for the institution of Primogeniture, those families might perhaps have little or no terri- tory in their possession, but might long since have been merged in the mass of the community. Except where the law steps in, on intestacy, to defeat the known intentions of a father, or a father disappoints the hopes encouraged by himself to aggrandise an eldest son, it can hardly be said that Primogeniture involves personal injustice to younger children. What- ever injustice it may involve is sustained by society at large ; and, though society consists of individual mem- bers, those of its members who ultimately suffer most by the operation of Primogeniture are certainly not to be found in families which owe their social existence to it. Still more irrelevant are the attacks which have recently been made on Primogeniture from a com- munistic point of view. Communistic theories of J PROPOSAL TO NATIONALISE LAND. 105 property, if valid at all, are valid not against any particular rule of succession, but against individual proprietorship as such, or against the ample and peculiar rights of English landlords — rights of which no proprietary class is more tenacious than new pur- chasers. No doubt, it is a perfectly intelligible pro- position that all the land in the kingdom ought to be "nationalised" and placed under public management, because individual owners cannot be trusted with full dominion over that part of the earth's surface by which and upon which all natives of England must live, unless they choose to emigrate. It is evident that, apart from all other objections, this doctrine is the very negation of the belief in peasant-proprietorship and " the magic of property," being, in fact, an essen- tially urban sentiment, and inevitably destructive to , all independence of rural life. Nor can it be said that our experience of corporate administration, in the case of lands held by collegiate, ecclesiastical, and municipal bodies, as well as by trustees of charities, is such as to recommend the substitution of public for private ownership on a much grander scale. At the same time, it is incontestable that land has actually been treated by all governments, not excluding our own, as more within State control, for many purposes, than other kinds of property; and it is possible to conceive cir- cumstances under which it might be expedient to ex- tend State control much further over the soil of these islands. But what has all this to do with the right of Primogeniture ? and what consistency is there in a programme which couples the abolition of that right and the adoption of Free Trade in Land with provisions 106 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. designed to withdraw from the market and consolidate into large municipal domains more and more of the pro- perties which are already supposed to be too few ? Tliis is not the place to discuss the moral or economical aspects of these provisions ; suflBce it to point out that, except so far as they are aimed at overgrown private estates, they have nothing in common with the policy of reforming the Law and Custom of Primogeniture. This policy assumes the maintenance of private pro- perty, and is directed to its more equitable distribution among individuals, without contemplating a return to a communal system of ownership, which, if accepted, would supersede all laws of inheritance and powers of disposition. It is the more necessary to insist on this point, because the cause of Primogeniture has been strengthened, and the efforts of its opponents weakened, by the unfounded impression that it cannot be touched without reconstructing our whole law of property, whereas no more is demanded or required than an amendment of one single ghapter. The most familiar as well as the strongest argu- ments in favour of Primogeniture, as it exists in England, are derived from considerations which must be called, in the largest sense, political. It was as a powerful bulwark of our landed aristocracy that Burke defended it in his " Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs," emphatically declaring that " without question it has a tendency (I think a most happy tendency) to pre- serve a character of consequence, weight and prevalent influence over others, in the whole body of the landed interest." The Real Property Commissioners appointed in 1828 fully endorsed this opinion in their first Eeport, ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF FEIMOGENITUBE. 107 which contains a laudation of the settlements then in use as the hest means of " preserving i'amilies," and as investing the ostensible lord of the soil " with exactly the dominion and the power of disposition over it re- quired for the pubhc good." The English law of intestacy is regarded by the Commissioners with equal approbation, since it "appears far better adapted to the constitution and habits of this kingdom than the opposite law of equal partibility, which, in a few generations, would break down the aristocracy of the .country, and, by the endless subdivision of the soil, must ultimately be unfavourable to agriculture, and injurious to the best interests of the State." Very similar opinions are expressed by Mr'. McCulloch, in combating the well-known dicium of Adam Smith, that " nothing can be more contrary to the real interest of a numerous family than a right which, in order to enrich one, beggars all the rest of the family." Mr. McCulloch indeed, though he condemns the old inde- structible Scotch entails, since abolished by law, treats it as a characteristic merit of English Primogeniture that it sustains a high standard of luxury among country gentlemen of which the example is not lost upon the mercantile classes. If we analyse this plea for Primogeniture somewhat more closely, it will be found to resolve itself into several distinct lines of reasoning. In the first place, it is alleged, or rather suggested, that without Primo- geniture it would be impossible to maintain an here- ditary peerage. This argument will hardly be accepted as conclusive by those who regard the principle of an hereditary peerage as not less vulnerable than Primo- 108 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. geniture itself. From an opposite point of view, it is, perhaps, a sufi&cient reply that an hereditary peerage may be kept up, and is kept up in some Continental States, either by means of majorats specially created, or by making certain estates " run " with the titles derived from them, without any general Law or Custom of Primogeniture.^ Moreover, unless Primogeniture be defensible on other grounds, as beneficial to the whole community, it would surely be monstrous that it should be imposed, in case of intestacy, on the families of some hundred thousand free- holders — not to speak of those who may be ren- dered landless by its indirect operation — for the sake of the few hundred families composing the hereditary nobility. In fact, Barke himself, with all his aristo- cratic bias, was careful not to rest the case on so narrow a ground ; and few admirers of Primogeniture would now venture to advocate it in the interest of the Upper House as distinct from that of the nation at large. It may be granted that a peer of the realm has a stronger motive than an ordinary landowner for making an eldest son, inasmuch as that son, if he survives him, will succeed to a seat in the House of Lords, and will be the more capable of rendering public service in 1 Mr. Kenny, in his " Essay on Primogenitm-e," advocates " a distinct law of inheritance " for all estates, " which otherwise would descend un- fievered, to support the rank of independence of a peer of England." Mr. Laurence argues that, even if the English Peerage were deprived of their legislative power, the custom of primogeniture would still be necessary to maintain the dignity and influence properly belonging to patents of nobility. But he proceeds to admit that it would probably work more harm than good if " devoted to the maintenance of a wealthy and unprivileged class, without political power and devoid of all conception of social duties corre- lative to their rights." IDEAL OF PBIMOGENITUBE. lO^ that capacity, if he is a man of independent fortune. But an exclusive law of intestate succession, and a privilege of forming a settlement to last for two or three generations, are not required to give him this power, of which nothing but a law of compulsory partition could deprive him. But, secondly, it is urged, and not without great force, that Primogeniture is actually productive of greater benefits, political and social, to English society as a whole than could be expected from a system of more equal partibility. It is better, we are told, for rural England, at least, to be paternally governed by a comparatively limited hierarchy of eldest sons, whose successors are usually designated long beforehand, than for estates to become subject to division once in each generation, with the risk of passing into the hands of new purchasers having no ancestral connection with land. The ideal owner of an hereditary property, having been thoroughly instructed in all the manifold duties of property during his father's lifetime, and conscious that a large body of tenants and dependents look to him for guidance and example, enters upon the manage- ment of his estate in a spirit altogether superior to commercial self-interest, prepared to do for it what no mere land speculator would think of doing, and no small proprietor could afford to do. If he is a religious man, he builds churches in neglected hamlets ; if he is an agriculturist, he sinks more in drainage and farm buildings than he will ever live to receive back in rent ; if he is a social reformer, he erects model cottages, carries out sanitary improvements, patronises schools, or devotes himself to bringing forward the most pro- 110 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. raising youths in the parishes of which he is lord. In all these enterprises, as well as in the unpaid services which he renders on the magisterial bench, on local boards, and in the varied spheres of influence open to resident landlords, he is actuated by no hope of pecu- niary reward or even of personal gratification, but rather by that peculiar sense of honour, compounded of public spirit and family pride, which has played so large a part in the history of England. His character, thus developed, exhibits a marked individuality, but it is by no means a one-sided individuality. With education enough to understand the economical and legal ques- tions which he is daily called upon to settle in practice; with leisure enough to follow the course of affairs both at home and abroad ; with refinement enough to appre- ciate art and literature ; with energy enough to enjoy a life of constant activity, in which " county business" is relieved by field sports and a laborious summer holi- day; with independence enough to smile at official favours or displeasure : the model Enghsh country gen- tleman represents a species which has never been deve- loped in any other country, and the absence of which goes far to account for the failure of local self-govern- ment in France. Is it, we are asked, a legitimate object of State policy to promote the gradual extinction of this class, and meanwhile to disorganise the whole structure of family life within it, for the sake of any doubtful advantage that may be gained by a wider distribution of proprietary rights ? Such a landlord as has been described may be taken as the embodiment of the English landed aristocracy, See an article by Mr. J. Boyd Kinnear, ou " Tlie Coming Land Question," in the Fortnightly Review of September, 1879. Mr. Kinnear advocates the entire abolition of the mortgaging power, on the ground that land should not be permitted to be specially pledged for one particular debt, but should be equally liable with the rest of a debtor's pi-operty for all his liabilities. Whatever may be thought of this doctrine, the simple calculation in the text is entirely independent of it. ENCUMBBANGE8 ON SETTLED ESTATES. ISl capital by mortgaging them, and it must be admitted that a mortgaged estate is not likely to be well managed. The landlord, with a curtailed income, has to meet all the risk of bad seasons, insolvent tenants, and other losses, while the mortgagee, like the incum- brancers, pockets a fixed share of the rental without feeling the least responsibility or making the smallest return. CHAPTEE III. Distribution of Landed Property among a Small and Decreasing Number of Families. To say tliat a land system founded on tlie Law of Primogeniture and guarded by strict family settlements has a direct tendencj^ to prevent the dispersion of land, is only to say that it fulfils the purpose for which it was instituted. It is hardly less evident that it must have the further effect of promoting the aggregation of land in a small and constantly decreasing number of hands. The periodical renewal of entails is intended to secure, and does secure, ancestral properties against the risk of being broken up ; and, practically, they very seldom come into tbe market, except as a consequence of scan- dalous waste or gambling on the part of successive life-owners. The typical English family estate is that which, like Sir Roger de Coverley's, neither waxes nor wanes in the course of generations, and there are still many sucb estates in counties remote from London. But there is nothing to check the cumulative augmen- tation of ancestral properties by new purchases of land, which is the darling passion of so many proprietors. There is always some angulus iste to be annexed and brought within the park palings or the ring-fence on the first good opportunity ; and scarcely a day passes DECREASING NUMBER OF LANDOWNERS. 153 Avitliout some yeoman of ancient lineage being erased from the roll of landowners by the competition of his more powerful neighbour. Not that any tyranny or unfair dealing is involved in this process of aggrandise- ment, which is the consequence of economical laws quite as simple as that of natural selection in the animal creation. The yeoman sells his patrimony either be- cause he has ruined himself by drinking or improvi- dence, or because he finds that by turning it into money he can largely improve his income and the future expectations of his family. The nobleman or squire buys it at a price which is not commercially remunerative, either to prevent its being covered with buildings, or because it lies conveniently for his own agricultural designs, or because he wants to extend his influence in the county ; for one or all of which reasons, it is worth more to him than to any one else. It is known in some parts of the country that it is utterly vain to bid against the great territorial lord of the district, whose agent is instructed to buy up all properties for sal«, regardless of expense. In other parts of the country, men who have made their fortunes in trade are equally covetous of land, which for them is the one sure passport to social consideration, and equally anxious to keep it together by entails. Thus by the normal operation of supply and demand large estates are perpetually swallowing up small estates, while, by a suspension of that operation through the Law and Custom of Primogeniture, they are themselves preserved, to a great extent, from dis- solution. On the other hand, it must not be forgotten that a counter-tendency, no less natural and legitimate, 154 ENGLISir LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. partly neutralizes this gravitation o£ smaller towards larger aggregates of land. The enormous rise in the value of all sites within easy reach of great towns or railway stations sometimes offers to great landowners an inducement to sell which they cannot resist. In this way, under the powers of sales already ^lentioned, distant and detached portions of great estates are frequently passing in large blocks into the hands of new landlords, generally of the mercantile class, or are bought up by land-jobbers and sold in petty blocks to retired tradesmen. The villa-residences of such immigrants from towns, fronting the road in unsightly rows, with an acre or two of freehold land at the back of each, are a characteristic feature of many country villages, and have been too much overlooked in popular descriptions of rural England. They may be regarded as the modern counterpart of the ruder but more picturesque village homesteads in which, as we have seen, thousands of townspeople invested their savings and sometimes carried on their handicrafts in the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries. But this class, though of great importance to election agents, fills a very small place in the agricultural economy, or even in the social life of an English county, since the members of it seldom regard their villas as a home, or take an active part in county interests, while their sons are generally absorbed into the urban population. At the same time, the acquisition of minute plots by the working classes has been facilitated of late by the agency of freehold land societies originally estabUshed for pohtical objects. It would doubtless prevail to a much greater extent but for the exorbitance of law charges on small purchases SUBDIVISION UNDER ENCLOSURE COMMISSION. 155 of land/ and may hereafter be developed into a modified form of peasant proprietorship. In the meantime, a considerable impulse has been given to subdivision of landed property by the opera- tions of the Enclosure Commissioners. It appears by their Thirty-Second Annual Eeport that, between 1845, when the General Enclosure Act was passed, and 1877, nearly 600,000 acres of common and commonable land had been partitioned among 26,000 separate owners, in an average proportion of forty -four and a half 'acres to each lord of the manor, twenty-four acres to each owner of common rights, and ten acres to each purchaser of lands sold to cover part of the expenses, where they were not wholly raised by rates. Of course, the allot- ments received by lords of manors, 620 in number, mostly contributed to swell the acreage of large estates, and even those received by commoners would often form appendages to existing freeholds. But it may fairly be presumed that, of the 3,500 purchasers among whom the residue of 35,450 acres was distributed, chiefly in small lots, a large proportion became landowners for the first time, and this presumption is confirmed by the 1 Mr. "Wren Hoskyns, in liis Essay on the English Land-System, pub- lished in " Systems of Land-Tenure," cites Tables laid before the Regis- tration of Titles Commission, which show that a x^iu'chaser's expenses, irrespective of stamp duty, and also irrespective of aU expenses incujrred by the vendor, average about six per cent, on properties under £1,000 in value, or twelve times the ad valorem stamp duty, while on properties of larger value they average about 2| per cent. The disadvantage to which the owners of small properties are subjected in borrowing for pur- poses of improvement are still more prohibitive. It appears from the evidence taken before the House of Lords' Committee on the Improvement of Land that, in such cases, the preliminary charges for loans under the Acts may practically amount to fifteen per cent. 156 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. classification of allottees and purchasers wHch the Commissioners subjoin as approximately accurate. This classification is as follows : — "Yeomen and farmers^ 4,736; shopkeepers and tradesmen, 3,456; labourers and miners, 3,168; esquires, 2,624; widows, 2,016; gentlemen, 1,984; clergymen, 1,280; artizans, 1,067; spin- sters, 800 ; chaiity trustees, 704 ; peers, baronets, and sons of peers, 576; professional men, 512; besides about 3,000 others comprising nearly every quality of calling, from the Crown to the mechanic, quarryman, and domestic servant." The words in which the Commissioners sum up the results of this process of morcellement deserve to be quoted in full : — " Thus, in the course of one generation, an extent of land equal to that of a county has been redeemed from common and waste, and has been divided among a far larger and more varied body of land- owners than that of any county in England. Valuable public roads of great extent have been constructed, opening tip fof business and pleasure many otherwise inaccessible localities, and at no cost to the jjublic. The area of production and employment has been increased, and in the same proportion that of public and local taxation has been extended. A great number of small landed properties have been created, and labourers' field-gardens in the rural districts have been afforded in larger proportion to the extent of the land than appear by the Agricultural Returns to exist elsewhere in England." In default of authoritative statistics, the loosest conjectures were long current respecting the distri- bution of ownership caused by these divergent tenden- cies towards aggregation and subdivision. It was confidently stated, for instance, that, whereas in the latter part of the last century this country was divided among. 200,000 landowners, it had come to be divided NEW DOMESDAY BOOK. 157 among no more than 30,000. No proof was thouglit necessary to support the former assertion ; the latter was supported by a proof, which, on examination, turned out to be perfectly worthless. In the Occupation Eeturns of the Census for 1861, only 30,766 persons described themselves as land-proprietors, and these figures were most persistently quoted as official evidence on the subject, in the face of the patent fact that above half of the whole number were females. The probable expla- nation of this circumstance is that women owning land feel a pride in recording their ownership ; whereas thou- sands of male landowners returned themselves as peers, members of Parliament, bankers, merchants, or private gentlemen. At all events, the mere existence of so pal- pable a flaw in the return utterly destroyed its value for the purposes of statistical argument. Equally reck- less assertions were made in support of the contrar}'' opinion, and until the year 1875 it was regarded as open to doubt whether the whole body of English landowners, properly so called, amounted to 30,000 or 300,000. The appearance of the " New Domesday Beok," as it was called, was the first step towards a thorough inves- tigation of this question, which it ought to have set finally at rest. It purported to show that England and Wales, exclusive of the metropolis, were divided in 1874-5 among 972,836 proprietors in all, owning 33,013,514 acres, with a " gross estimated rental " of £99,352,301. Of these proprietors, however, no less than 703,289, owning 151,171 acres, with a gross esti- mated rental of £29,127,679, were returned as possessors of less than one acre each. The aggregate acreage and 158 ENGLISH LAND AND UNOLISH LANDLORDS. gross estimated rental of the 269,547 proprietors owning one acre and upwards were stated as follows : No. Extent of Lands, Gross Esti- mated Bental. Total No. of Owners 3f A. B. p. £ s. 1 acre and under 10 acres .. . 121,983 478,679 2 27 6,438,324 16 10 acres , 50 „ .. . 72,640 1,760,079 3 38 6,509,289 18 60 „ , 100 „ . 25,839 1,791,605 2 23 4,302,002 12 100 „ 500 „ .. . 32,S17 6,827,346 3 11, 13,680,759 16 500 „ , 1,000 „ . 4,799 3,317,678 11 6,427,552 4 1,000 „ , 2,000 „ . 2,719 3,799,307 28 7,914,371 10 2,000 „ , 5,000 „ 1,815 5,529,190 13 9,579,311 13 5,000 „ , 10,000 „ 581 3,974,724 3 24 5,522,610 6 10,000 „ , 20,000 „ 223 3,098,674 2 30 4,337,023 4 20,000 „ , 50,000 „ 66 1,917,076 1 31 2,331,302 12 50,000 ,, ,100,000 „ 3 194,938 3 36 188,746 12 100,000 „ andi ipwards 1 181,616 2 38 161,874 9 No areas 6,448 2,831,452 13 No rentals ... 113 1,423 2 28 This Eeturn, prepared by the Local Government Board, was represented as no more than " proximately accurate," and a very cursory inspection suflB.ced to dis- close errors of detail so numerous and important as to cast suspicion even upon its proximate accuracy. Fur- ther analysis of its contents has amply confirmed this suspicion, and although the New Domesday Book con- tains a mine of precious materials for an exhaustive treatise on the distribution of landed property in England and Wales, the actual figures given in it cannot be accepted, without large corrections, as the basis of any sound conclusions on that subject. In the first place, it is evident on the face of the Eeturn itself, and we are expressly informed in the Ex- planatory Statement prefixed to it, that it does not include any property except that assessed to rates. Now, at the date of its compilation (1874-5) all woods, except saleable underwoods, were exempt from rates, and are NEW DOMESDAY BOOK. 159 therefore excluded from the return. Waste and common lands, being equally exempt from rates, were equally ignored in the rate-books from which these statistics are borrowed, although a very rough and untrustworthy estimate of the area covered by them was appended~in a separate column. The result is that whereas the whole , area of England and Wales amounts to 37,319,221 acres, only 34,588,158 acres are recognised at all in the New Domesday Book. Of these, 33,013,514 acres are as- signed to landowners great and small, while the " esti- mated extent of commons and waste lands " accounts for 1,524,648 acres. The remaining 2,781,063 acres com- prehend " waste lands the area of which could not be ascertained, woods other than saleable underwoods, rivers and roads. Crown property not let, and church- yards and other lands not rateable." A very large proportion of these woods and plantations — not to speak of manorial rights over commons — must belong to great landowners, the real extent of whose estates is therefore very much understated, by virtue of this omission alone. In the second place, the exclusion of the whole metropolis, vast districts of which are owned by wealthy peers and commoners, makes the rental of such " ground- landlords " appear much smaller than it really is, as com- pared with that of less fortunate proprietors. The gross estimated rental of the metropolis, according to a Eeturn of 1873, was nearly £25,000,000, and if to this be added the profits derived by the landlords of England and Wales as a body, from docks, harbours, bridges, and other forms of property ignored in the New Domesday Book, it will easily be understood how largely their gross income exceeds the £99,352,301 with which they are 160 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. credited. Again, no distinction is drawn between house property and agricultural land, or between copyholds and freeholds, or even between either of these and property held on lease for terms of above 99 years. The effect of this indiscriminate classification is of course mainly felt in the illusory multiplication of small estates, the vast majority of persons returned as " owners of less than one acre " were probably the possessors — and, most of them, mere leaseholders — of house-property in towns or suburbs of towns. If proof were needed of this infer- ence, it is supplied by the fact that whereas the average rental of these petty estates, as stated in the Eeturn, is nearly £200 per acre, the average rental of all the estates ranging from one acre upwards does not greatly exceed £2 per acre. A very considerable deduction should be made, on this account, even from the 121,983 estates ranging between one and ten acres, among which must be included a large number of business premises, gardens, and pleasure grounds, destitute of any agricultural value or character. The absurdity of reckoning among land- owners the purchasers of such little plots is sufficiently manifest, but, as Mr. Kay has shown,^ it is scarcely less misleading to dignify the greater leaseholders with such a title. It is not only that leaseholds are ultimately returned into the hands of the ground-landlords -vvith all the improvements resulting from the lessee's expenditure, but also that they are subject to an infinite variety of covenants, wholly inconsistent with the sense or reality of proprietorship. No rate-books or parochial returns, however, could effectually distinguish between leaseholds and freeholds. As the overseers and rate-collectors " Fi-ce Trade iu Land," p. 123. NEW DOME SB AY BOOK. 161 were often compelled to act on hearsay evidence, and as neither owners nor occupiers of land are apt to be com- municative respecting the nature of their interest, the probability is that many lessees are improperly entered as owners, especially in the East of England, where leases are more common. But far graver and more prolific sources of error remain to be considered. We are warned in the official preface that glebe lands and estates tnown to be the property of corporations or charities are printed in italics ; but that names of individuals have often been inserted, by miistake, instead of the public bodies or offices which they represent. Now, there are 14,367 entries of estates belonging to church benefices, charities, and other public autho- rities in England and Wales, comprising in all 1,449,008 acres. The further deduction to be made from the number of apparent landowners, by reason of the official blunders thus acknowledged, is far greater than might be supposed at first sight. Mr. Arthur Arnold's estimate of 10,000 parcels of glebe land in the 15,000 parishes of England and Wales may probably be excessive, but he certainljr quotes very significant facts in support of his conclusion that parochial clergymen own, virtute officii, a much larger acreage than is indicated in the New Donfi^day Book. Having selected casually, by way of sample, the Domesday Eeturns for the counties of Buck- ingham, Hertford, and Lancaster, he found, in the first, only five parcels of glebe land marked in italics, but 235 "owners" with the prefix of "Eeverend;" in the second, only three parcels of glebe land so marked, but 159 " owners " with that prefix ; and in the third, only seven parcels of glebe land, but 186 " owners" with the clerical L 162 ENGLISH LAND AND BNGLISE LANDLORDS. title.-^ The inference is irresistible that most of these 680 " reverend " gentlemen should be deducted from the list of individual " owners " as being merely in official possession of Church property. But it is also important to observe that most bearers of a clerical title figure in the Returns as " owners " of small estates, and thus swell the apparent number of yeomen and petty squires, as distinct from great land- owners. Let us take, for the sake of illustration, the seven English counties which stand first in alphabetical order. In Bedfordshire there are 15 clergymen returned as " owners " of estates between 300 and 1,000 acres ; and 28 clergymen returned as owners of between 100 and 300 acres. In Berkshire there are 19 clergymen returned in the former class, and 21 in the latter; in Buckinghamshire 28 and 54, respectively; in Cam- bridgeshire 28 and 48, respectively; in Cheshire 11 and 12, respectively; in Cornwall 22 and 52, respectively; and in Cumberland 19 and 33, respectively.^ It follows that not only the original enumeration of English land- owners, but also the official classification subsequently founded on it,^ is vitiated, to a serious extent, by the intrusion of heterogeneous elements. It is at least doubt- ful whether official representatives of the Church, as^well as trustees of charities, hospitals, colleges, and iWiway companies, ought to be included in a list of " owners " at all ; but it is self-evident that, if included, they should be properly identified, and placed in a separate category'. 1 Arthur Arnold's " Free Land," pp. 8, 9. " For these figures I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. John Bateman, F.R.G.S., author of " Great Landowners of Great Britain and Ireland." ' " Summary of Returns of Owners of Land in England and Wales," ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 4th July, 1876. NEW DOMESDAY BOOK. 163 The effect of double entries on the apparent number of landed proprietors is still more deceptive. No attempt, indeed, was made to group together all the estates owned by the same proprietor in different coun- ties, and it seems to have depended on the efficiency of the local compilers whether the estates of one proprietor in one county were entered under one name or several. The consequence of this slovenly and hap-hazard regis- tration is that, instead of being a perfect record of "owners," the N'ew Domesday Book is, at best, an imperfect record of estates, many of which, as we have seen, belong to public bodies, and many others of which are mere fragments of great properties owned by a single individual. It has been ascertained by Mr. Arthur Arnold that twenty-eight dukes own 158 separate estates within the United Kingdom, compre- hending 3,991,811 acres ; that thirty-three marquises own 121 separate estates, comprehending 1,567,227 acres; that 194 earls own 634 separate estates, com- prehending 5,862,118 acres; and that 270 viscounts and barons own 680 separate estates, comprehending 3,780,009 acres. In other words, the names of dukes are repeated 5'6 times, those of marquises 3'7 times, those of earls 3 '3 times, and those of viscounts and barons 2" 5 times. The Duke of Buccleuch alone counts as fourteen landowners, in respect of as many separate estates in England and Scotland, and four other peers are multiplied in like manner by eleven, figuring, perhaps, as small yeomen in counties where they happen to owm but a few acres. Altogether, the 525 members of the peerage stand for upwards of 1,500 "owners" in the New Domesday Book. Mr. Arnold calculates L 2 164, ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. that if all the landed gentry have been multiplied in the same ratio, four-fifths of the soil of the whole United Kingdom must be in the possession of less than 4,000 persons. But, allowing for the fact that few of the lesser gentry can have estates scattered over more than one county, he arrives at the conclusion that four- fifths of the United Kingdom belongs to a body of owners numbering about 7,000. Before we can accept this conclusion as a safe guide to the distribution of landed property in England and Wales, we are bound to remember how much greater is the average size of properties in the other parts of the United Kingdom. Even if our present inquiry embraced the whole United Kingdom, it might well be contended that, from an agricultural point of view, the vast moors of the Highlands, with the desolate bogs of Ireland, may as legitimately be excluded from the account as the few acres of ornamental ground sur- rounding a suburban villa. However this may be, we possess sounder, as well as far more instructive, evidence of the proportion in which England and Wales are divided between various classes of landowners, in the Parliamentary return of 1876, and Mr. Bateman's ad- mirable analysis of the New Domesday Book. From the former it would appear that 5,408 persons are entered as owning estates of 1,000 acres and upwards in England and Wales, ".without reference to the fact that some of such owners hold property in more counties than one." From Mr. Batenan's revised list of English Landowners it would appear that the New Domes- day Book contains entries of some 1,688 individuals in England and Wales owning estates of 3,000 acres NEW DOMESDAY BOOK. 165 and upwards, with a rental of at least £3,000 a year ; and of some 2,529 individuals owning between 1,000 and 3,000 acres each, or deriving a rental of less than £3,000 from estates exceeding 3,000 acres. It follows that the New Domesday Book exaggerates the number of owners above 1,000 acres, at least in the proportion of 5,408 to 4,017. The result of an independent analysis shows that owners of 2,000 acres and upwards are there repeated about l"? times, by reason of their having estates in more counties than one. There is good reason to believe that a further deduction of at least 8 per cent, should be made for the names of persons entered twice in the same English county, and a much larger deduction for the names of persons entered twice in the same Welsh county.^ At all events, it is certain that not more than 4,000 persons, and probable that considerably less than 4,000 persons, owning estates of 1,000 acres and upwards, possess in the aggregate an extent of nearly 19,000,000 acres, or about four- sevenths of the whole area included in the Domesday Book Returns. If we now subtract the owners of between 1,000 and 2,000 acres, who ostensibly number 2,719, and must really number as much as 1,750, we find that a landed aristocracy consisting of about 2,250 persons own together nearly half the enclosed land in England and Wales. ^ The residue of owners between one acre and 2,000 ostensibly ' See the tables and explanatory note which conclude this chapter, by- Mr. John Bateman, author of the " Great Landowners." See also the Statement in Appendix VI. ^ Mr. Kay, in his " Free Trade in Land " (Letter I.), states that " a body of men which does not probably exceed 4,500 own more than 17,498,000 acres, or more than one-half of all England and Wales." He ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. number 249,996, but may be reduced by a propor- tionate allowance for double entries to 147,657.'^ This would give a net total of about 150,000 owners above one acre in England and Wales, or less tban tto of the population — a result whicb corresponds some- what closely with Mr. Shaw-Lefevre's conclusion that the whole number of landowners, properly so called, in England and Wales, certainl}^ does not exceed 166,000. But since about 15,000,000 acres out of 33,000,000 are owned by about 2,250 proprietors, it may be truly affirmed that nearly half the enclosed land in England and Wales belongs to a body numbering but 1^ per cent, of all the landowners, even excluding those below one acre. A close investigation of the returns for single coun- ties fully bears out these inferences, and places the inequalities of landed proprietorship in a still more striking light. Take, for instance, Northumberland and Nottinghamshire, which stand next to each other in alphabetical order, but diflPer widely from each other both in agricultural features and in the character of their population. According to the official returns, which are subject, as we know, to a large discount, the number of owners below one acre in Northumberland is 10,036 ; but they own no more than 1,424 acres adds ttat 710 persons own more than one-fourtli, that 523 persons own one-fifth, and that less than 280 persons own nearly one-sixth; that 100 persons own 3,917,641 acres, and that sixty-six persons own 1,917,076. These estimates probably err on the side of moderation, no allowance being apparently made for double entries. ' It is true that comparatively few owners of very small estates would appear as owners in more than one county, but, on the other hand, a greater proportion of such owners would probably be entered more than once in the same county. NEW DOMESDAY BOOK. 167 between them, so that each possesses, on an average, less than one- seventh of an acre. In Nottinghamshire 9,891 petty landowners rule over 1,266 acres between them, possessing, on an average, one-eighth of an acre apiece. Little more than a fourth of Northumberland, and much less than half of Nottinghamshire, is in the hands of owners possessing less than 2,000 acres. If we now look at the higher end of the scale the contrast is striking. Above three-fifths of Northumberland is in the hands of forty -four proprietors, nearly half is in the hands of twenty-six, and far more than one-seventh is in the hands of one proprietor, the Duke of Northum- berland, who has also landed estates in other counties. In Nottinghamshire two-fifths of the whole acreage belongs to fifteen proprietors, and one-fourth to five proprietors. If the division of landed property over England and Wales corresponded with the division of landed property in Northumberland and Nottingham- shire, one-half of the whole country would be in the hands of about 1,000 proprietors; and these proprietors, by virtue of their family connections and social ascen- dancy, would exercise a power far more than commen- surate with their acreage. It would be highly interesting, were it possible, to extract from the New Domesday Book the exact amount of land held by the various classes of society, and, in particular, the amount held by the class of yeomen whose gradual extinction is so often de- plored. Unfortunately, the returns furnish no adequate material for an exhaustive classification of this kind, and the apparent owner of a "yeoman's" estate may be either a mere leaseholder or the lord 168 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. of a great territory in some other county. The careful researches of Mr. John Bateman, however, enable us to apportion the area of each county, with at least " proximate accuracy," among various orders of landowners, if not among various classes of society. For this purpose he distributes the landowning hierarchy into eight divisions, the first and last of which — Peers and Public Bodies — are defined sufficiently by their mere designation, without reference to acreage. The second division consists of " great landowners " owning above 3,000 acres ; the third, of " squires," owning between 1,000 and 3,000 acres ; the fourth, of "greater yeomen," owning between 300 and 1,000 acres; the fifth, of "lesser yeomen," owning between 100 and 300 acres; the sixth, of "small proprietors," owning between 1 and 100 acres ; the seventh, of " cottagers," owning less than one acre. Of course these descriptions must be accepted in the most general sense, and with many qualifications ; but they may serve to denote roughly the several grades of land- ownership, and to afford an useful basis for a comparison of one county with another. For instance, if we take, as before, the seven counties which stand first alphabetically — Bedfordshire, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Cheshire, Cornwall, and Cumberland — we find very marked differences in the proportionate acreage held by the various divisions of landowners. More than one-fourth of Cheshire, and nearly one-fifth of Bedfordshire, is owned by peers ; whereas only one-ninth of Cambridgeshire, and little more than one-tenth of Cornwall, belongs to members of the same class. Less than one-hundredth part of Corn- NEW DOMESDAY BOOK. 169 wall, and little more than one-fortieth of Cumherland, is assigned to public bodies, while nearly one-eighth of Cambridgeshire is corporate, and much of this collegiate, property. Coupling together both classes of yeomen, we observe that one-third of all Cumberland, and some- thing like two-fifths of air Cambridgeshire, are in the hands of this class, which, in Cheshire, owns but from one-fifth to one- sixth only of the entire area. Cambridgeshire, again, stands first in the number of its " small proprietors," between one and 100 acres ; but Cheshire far surpasses all the other six counties in the number of its cottagers, who represent nearly three-fourths of its whole pro- prietary, though possessing less than -rh of its total acreage. The pre-eminence of Cambridgeshire and Cumberland in the proportion of " yeoman " pro- perties might have been anticipated, since the former county offered little attraction to great landowners in early times, and the latter, with the bordering districts of Westmoreland and Yorkshire, is well known as the last stronghold of the primitive statesmen. But it is a significant fact that even in Cambridgeshire estates of all kinds below 1,000 acres occupy but 59'4 per cent, of the whole returned acreage, and in Cumberland but 57 '2. It may be added that in Essex they occupy 55 "1 per cent., in Somersetshire about 53', in Lincolnshire 45 "8, and in Cornwall 45' 1. But the most extreme diversity in the percentage of estates below 1,000 acres is presented by the counties of Middlesex (exclusive of the metropolis) and ^Northumberland. In the former of these counties, no less than 114,439 out of 143,013 acres are occupied by estates of this class ; in the latter, no 170 ENGLISH LAMB AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. more tlian 196,000 acres out of 1,190,043. Such figures speak for themselves, and sufficiently indicate the nature of the causes which promote or prevent the multiplica- tion of small properties in modern times. One of these causes has already been fully considered. It has been shown that Primogeniture, operating for many genera- tions, has directly contributed to reduce the landed aristocracy of England and Wales to a body even smaller than had been commonly supposed, but that in those classes which do not maintain the custom of Primogeni- ture landed property is naturally broken up into a mul- titude of small parcels. The owners of such parcels are, for the most part, not yeomen, but shopkeepers and artisans, too humble, and too dependent for their HveU- hood on urban trade and industry, to fill any perceptible place in the rural economy of this country. It may perhaps surprise many to discover that less than one million and a half of acres in England and Wales belong to " Public Bodies," in the very widest sense of that elastic term, which includes the Crown itself with the pettiest mercantile company. If we had equally trustworthy statistics of lands held in mortmain during the Middle Ages, the contrast would be most startling, and it is certainly a remarkable proof of the extent to which individual ownership has since established its predominance, that little more than 5 per cent, of English soil now remains imder corporate or public management. It would be still more in- structive if we had the means of .comparing this management with that of individual owners, in its effect upon agriculture, and the welfare of the classes dependent upon the land. Probably it might be found that, while Crown property is managed with a strict ORIGINAL DOMESDAY BOOK. 171 regard to economy, the lessees and tenants of College property enjoy more independence, and are usually treated witli more indulgence, than if they rented under a resident landlord. Whether agricultural labourers derive equal benefit from absenteeism is more than doubtful, and, since Colleges have adopted the system of running out beneficial leases, the semi-proprietary interests which in some degree compensated for absenteeism are, of course, in process of extinction. Upon the whole it must be evident that a threefold agricultural community of landlords, farmers, and labourers can hardly reach its highest ideal where the landlord is so nearly a dormant partner. The sale of corporate estates may be open to grave objections on grounds of general pohcy, and would be the exact antithesis to a "nationalisation of land." But it could not fail to be ultimately beneficial, in an agricultural sense, especially if it were so conducted as to give improving tenants a fair opportunity of purchasing their own farms. It is extremely difficult to compare the distribution of ownership disclosed by these returns with that recorded in the original Domesday Book. This mar- vellous survey includes neither the Welsh Counties nor the Northern Counties of Northumberland, Cumber- land, Westmoreland, and Durham, the collective area of which is about one-fifth of all England and Wales ; nor is ' it possible to identify with certainty those who can properly be called landowners among the various classes of landJwlders therein enumerated. According to the analysis of Sir Henry Ellis, which is adopted by the compilers of the New Domesday Book, the whole number of genuine freeholders, registered under various 172 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. titles, amounted to 54,813, including 1,000 preshyteTi. After making a moderate deduction for ecclesiastical estates, as well as for the omitted counties, we may conclude that about two-thirds of England and Wales was then shared between upwards of 63,000 lay freeholders, together with 7,968 burgenses, and 108,407 villani. Both these classes, however, had an essentially proprietary interest in the lands which they occupied, and the greater part of them may fairly be taken as corresponding with the owners of between one and ten acres registered in the New Domesday Book. If this be granted, it follows that in the reign of William the Conqueror the soil of England was divided among a larger body of land- owners than it is at present. The force of this inference is prodigiously strengthened by the fact that forests, wastes, and fens then covered the greater part of whole counties. Were these excluded from the calculation, and nothing taken into account but cultivated land, the proportion of landowners to acreage would of course be vastly increased, and the average extent of each landowner's rateable property in the eleventh century would be equally reduced. But even sup- posing the number of landowners to have been then no larger, and the area of cultivation no less, than it now is, the distribution' of ownership relatively to popula- tion might well startle admirers of the existing English land-system. For England is estimated to have con- tained little more than 2,000,000 inhabitants at the Conquest, so that if the actual number of landowners was the same then as now, the proportion of land- owning to landless heads of families must have been at least tenfold greater. COUNTY TABLES OF LANDOWNERS. 173 TABLES SHOWING the Landownees divided into eight classes ACCORDING TO ACREAGE WITH NUMBER OF OwNERS IN EACH CLASS ; AND EXTENT OF THEIR LaNDS. " Peers " include Peeresses and Peers' eldest sons. " Great Landowners " include all estates held by commoners owning at least 3,000 acres, if tlie rental reaches £3,000 per annum. " Squires " include estates of between 1,000 acres and 3,000, and such estates as would be included in the previous class if their rental reached £3,000, averaged at 1,700 acres. "Greater Yeomen" include estates of between. 300 acres and 1,000, averaged at 500 acres. "Lesser Yeomen " include estates of between 100 acres and 300, averaged at 170 acres. " Small Proprietors" include lands of over 1 acre and under 100 acres. " Cottagers " include aU holdings of under 1 acre. " Public Bodies " include aR holdings printed in italics in the " Government Eeturn of Landowners, 1876," and a few more that should have been so printed, being obviously Public properties. "Peers" and " Great Landowners" are assigned to those counties in which their principal estates are situated, and are never entered in more than one county. The column recording their numbers in each county must be taken with this qualification, but the acreage of all the "Peers" or "Great Land- owners " in each county is correctly given, and their aggregate number, as well as their aggregate acreage, may be learned from the summary. ENGLISH COUNTIES. BEDFORD. BERKS. No. of Owners. Class. ! Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 3 Peers , 53,789 *6 Peers 48,849 14 Great Landowners , 60,127 20 Great Landowners 119,604 27 Squires 45,900 40 Squires 68,000 i 74 Greater Yeomen 37,000 153 Greater Yeomen 76,500 195 Lesser Yeomen . . . 33,150 244 Lesser Yeomen . . . 41,480 1,S2.3 Small Proprietors 38,906 2,315 Small Proprietors 42,376 5,302 Cottagers 824 4,172 Cottagers 1,000 244 Public Bodies ... 16,380 290 Public Bodies . . . 33,940 Waste 1,127 Waste 2,114 7,684— Total. 287,203 7,240— Total. 433,863 Inclusive of tlie t{w^ 174 I1NGLI83 LAND AND ENGLISS LANBLOBDS. BUCKS. CAMBEIDGB. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 5 17 29" 132 357 2,672 6,420 276 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 87,954 118,036 49,300 66,000 60,690 49,339 1,153 23,737 2,942 1 13 39 216 505 5,373 6,677 350 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 57,783 70,097 *57,000 +99,360 85,850 86,793 1,193 63,851 2,554 9,708— Total. 459,151 13,174— Total. 524,481 CHESTER. CORNWALL. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 13 27 39 122 309 6,296 17,691 223 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 160,655 157,451 66,300 61,000 52,530 77,922 4,664 21,696 6,707 6 29 48 224 699 4,028 8,717 115 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 85,549 246,216 81,600 112,000 118,830 105,295 1,186 8,285 70,968 23,720— Total. 608,922 13,866— Total. 829,929 • Actual extent. + Average only 460 acres. COUNTY TABLES OF LAND0WNEB8. 175 CUMBERLAND. DERBY. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 4 Peers 97,027 6 Peers 182,337 18 Great Landowners 120,418 21 Great Landowners 120,640 51 Squires 86,700 38 Squires 64,600 242 Greater Yeomen 121,000 144 Greater Yeomen 72,000 943 Lesser Yeomen ... 160,310 384 Lesser Yeomen . . . 65,280 4,497 Small Proprietors 120,903 6,017 Small Proprietors 96,240 9,617 Cottagers 1,957 12,874 Cottagers 1,597 141 PubUo Bodies ... 22,496 382 Public Bodies . . . 19,262 Waste 114,025 Waste 11,655 15,513— Total. 844,836 19,866— Total 632,611 DEVON. DORSET. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 17 Peers 217,088 10 Peers 122,625 50 Great Landowners 364,566 24 Great Landowners 192,847 108 Squires 183,600 59 Squires 100,300 496 Greater Yeomen 248,000 131 Greater Yeomen 65,500 1,557 Lesser Yeomen ... 264,690 229 Lesser Yeomen ... 38,930 7,509 SmaU Proprietors 204,687 2,794 Small Proprietors 39,179 21,647 Cottagers 2,981 7,694 Cottagers 1,631 425 Public Bodies ... 31,372 162 Public Bodies ... 12,377 "Waste 77,868 Waste 13,751 31,809— Total. 1,594,852 10,903— Total. 587,140 176 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. DURHAM. ESSEX. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 5 Peers 129,659 5 Peers 68,328 11 Great Landowners 83,670 39 Great Landowners 202,445 33 Squires 56,100 j 87 Squires 147,900 141 Greater Yeomen 70,600 387 Greater Yeomen 193,500 351 Lesser Yeomen . . . 59,670 953 Lesser Yeomen . . . 162,010 2,376 Small Proprietors 58,566 5,476 Small Proprietors 96,172 31,205 Cottagers 4,773 , 14,833 Cottagers 4,033 195 Public Bodies . , . 57,582 ; 525 Public Bodies ... 76,046 Waste 47,388 Waste 6,896 34,317— Total. 567,908 22,305— Total. 957,330 GLOUCESTER. HEREFORD. No. of Owners. Class. ^--1(^1 Class. Acres. 7 Peers 110,125 i Peers 26,454 34 Great Landowners 1 165,068 26 Great Landowners 158,918 55 Squires 93,500 49 Squires 83,300 251 Greater Yeomen 125,600 177 Greater Yeomen 8 597 Lesser Yeomen . . . 101,490 448 Lesser Yeomen ... 76,160 ,7,107 Small Proprietors 97,482 3,781 Small Proprietors 50,615 29,280 Cottagers 6,030 9,085 Cottagers 1,301 374 Public Bodies . . . 34,446 161 Public Bodies ... 21,312 Waste 7,429 Waste 10,073 37,705— Total. 741,070 73,731— Total. 516,633 GOUNTY TABLES OF LANDOWNERS. 177 TTEETS. HITNTINGDON. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 10 15 39 138 237 2,184 9,556 208 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 82,682 74,862 66,300 69,000 40,290 34,196 2,339 15,139 6,302 6 11 8 64 179 1,612 1,816 207 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 38,214 61,797 13,600 32,000 30,430 27,400 399 21,323 795 12,387— Total. 390,110 3,903— Total. 225,958 KENT.* LANCASTER. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 18 36 75 356 788 6,062 26,925 423 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... * Waste 122,571 193,741 127,500 178,000 133,160 119,790 8,128 67,717 5,302 10 36 79 257 692 10,845 76,177 639 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 135,322 218,570 134,300 128,500 117,640 168,100 14,811 30,221 64,305 34,683— Total. 955,909 88,735— Total. 1,011,769 M * Exoluaire ol what lies wltlim the Metropolitan area. 178 UNGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. LEICESTER. LINCOLN. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 7 17 38 164 487 3,823 8,921 391 Peers GreatLandowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 98,132 99,398 64,600 82,000 82,790 71,730 1,742 18,834 298 12 56 91 497 1,205 14,118 13,768 750 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 253,606 418,886 154,700 248,500 204,860 222,586 2,824 100,591 5,762 13,848— Total. 519,524 30,497— Total. 1,612,305 MIDDT,EREX.* MONMOUTH. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of ! ™ Owners. ' ^^''■ Acres. 5 4 5 41 168 2,433 9,006 219 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 13,789 9,640 8,500 20,500 28,560 34,296 6,574 21,156 2,591 5 8 14 71 256 2,366 4,970 121 Peers Great Tiandowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 61,632 62,417 23,800 35,500 43,520 46,963 1,082 14,283 7,694 11,881— Total. 145,605 7,811— Total. 296,791 • Exclusive of London. . COUNTY TABLES OF LANDOWNERS. 179 NORFOLK. NORTHAMPTON. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 15 55 113 341 824 7,936 16,552 812 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 194,331 322,939 192,100 170,500 140,080 152,446 2,468 60,020 12,869 13 23 31 156 444 3,287 10,010 501 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 148,236 132,120 52,700 78,000 75,480 67,053 3,022 36,161 254 26,648— Total. 1,247,753 14,465— Total. 593,026 NOETHUMBEKLAND. NOTTS. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 9 53 84 181 289 1,531 10,036 76 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 322,722 471,523 1*173,000 90,500 49,130 42,456 1,424 39,288 30,286 9 21 25 109 282 3,838 9,891 344 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 156,754 123,313 42,500 54,500 47,940 61,108 1,266 19,956 1,449 12,257— Total. 1,220,329 14,519— Total. 508,786 * The Squire class in this county averages ahout 2,055 acres instead of 1,700. M 2 180, HNGLI8E LAND AND BN0LI8H LANDLORDS. OXFOED. EXTTLAND. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 9 17 40 126 342 2,493 6,833 317 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 82,503 84,057 68,000 63,000 58,140 45,876 876 46,831 2,949 1 5 *5 10 32 458 861 63 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 42,500 23,794 7,471 4,577 5,440 6,782 132 2,392 401 10,177— Total. 452,232 1,425— Total. 93,479 SALOP. SOMERSET. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 8 44 65 222 447 3,841 7,281 211 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 195,276 223,429 110,500 111,000 75,990 67,738 4,544 13,464 19,674 10 31 67 270 882 10,831 20,370 304 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 120,519 217,352 113,900 135,000 149,940 173,918 5,227 24,627 31,246 12,119— Total. 811,615 32,765— Total. 971,729 ^ This and the two following classes are g-iven the actual extent of tlieir holdings Rutland being too small to average fairly. COUNTY TABLES OF LANJD0WNEB8. 181 SOUTHAMPTON. STAFPOED. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 13 55 78 281 462 5,102 21,236 255 Peers Great La-n downers Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 122,091 279,286 132,600 140,500 76,840 80,756 5,749 46,827 78,843 10 23 37 137 414 8,617 33,672 641 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 164,506 148,100 67,400* 68,500 65,412+ 105,283 4,287 24,695 7,808 27,472— Total. 963,492 43,371— Total. 645,893 SUFFOLK. SUEKEY. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 10 36 65 297 798 4,965 12,511 594 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 132,385 233,263 110,500 148,500 135,660 102,770 3,673 45,686 7,831 12 11 41 174 318 3,813 12,712 212 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 47,946 60,290 69,700 87,000 54,060 49,569 2,860 27,322 40,036 19,276— Total. 920,268 17,293— Total. 438,783 * As worked out. See Preface, t At what is the real average for Staffs., viz., 158 acres instead of 170. 182 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLI8S LANDLORDS. SUSSEX. WAEWICK. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Ovmers. Class. Acres. 111,223 19 Peers 195,016 9 Peers 40 Great Landowners 185,374 19 Great Landowners 119,043 86 Squires 146,200 32 Squires 54,400 280 Greater Yeomen 140,000 143 Greater Yeomen 71,500 537 Lesser Yeomen ... 91,290 507 Lesser Yeomen... 86,190 3,915 Small Proprietors 82,024 3,519 Small Proprietors 62,191 14,675 Cottagers 3,950 46,894 Cottagers 5,883 182 PubUc Bodies ... 25,569 393 Putlic Bodies ... 30,592 Waste 23,738 Waste 1,833 19,734- Total. 893,161 51,516— Total. 542,855 WKSTMOEELAND. WILTS. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 2 Peers 54,366 16 Peers 239,708 11 Great Landowners 74,064 28 Great Landowners 225,893 20 Squires 34,000 61 Squires 103,700 109 Greater Yeomen 54,500 209 Greater Yeomen 104,500 352 Lesser Yeomen... 59,840 335 Lesser Yeomen . . . 56,950 2,055 Small Proprietors 53,205 3,485 Small Proprietors 54,759 1,714 Cottagers 326 9,635 Cottagers 1,519 113 PubUo Bodies ... 4,849 244 Public Bodies ... 41,920 "Waste 114,282 Waste 1,930 4,376— T [■otal. 449,442 14,013—1 Cotal. 830,879 COUNTY TABLES OF LANDOWNERS. 183 ■WORCESTER. YORK, N.E. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 7 18 25 130 475 4,803 16,008 338 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 77,480 87,753 42,500 65,000 80,750 65,265 4,733 17,580 3,415 11 39 80 230 618 4,991 10,115 229 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... "Waste 200,656 302,319 136,000 115,000 105,060 133,340 2,113 36,988 247,408 21,804— Total. 444,476 16,313— Total. 1,278,884 YORK, E.R. YORK, "W.R. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 6 27 44 183 486 3,602 15,012 216 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... "Waste 134,619 221,635 74,800 91,500 82,620 60,601 5,398 35,511 4,049 19 66 101 366 1,119 14,735 59,496 1,011 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 236,181 442,031 171,700 183,000 190,230 228,025 13,226 67,953 99,912 19,576— Total. 710,733 76,913— Total. 1,632,258 184 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. WELSH COUNTIES. ANGLESEA. BEECON. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 3 8 •6 31 86 956 3,015 37 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 31,339 66,175 10,200 15,500 14,620 20,421 234 3,447 5,678 1 10 +34 97 237 796 1,196 44 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 21,722 106,029 67,800 48,500 40,290 25,001 248 2,648 115,106 4,141— Total. 167,614 2,414— Total. 417,344 CARDIGAN. CARMARTHEN. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 1 8 148 110 304 1,563 1,278 14 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 42,890 96,909 81,600 55,000 51,680 61,290 287 2,030 6,971 2 13 §50 198 497 2,093 6,168 45 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 48,745 124,830 86,000 99,000 84,490 62,689 2,286 3,534 18,077 3,316— Total. 398,667 8,066— Total. 528,661 • Inclusive of two Tirtaal yeomen whose rents are respectively under £1,000 p. a and under £200. t Inclusive of twenty-five persons whose rentals axe under £1,000, one having as little as £83 for 1,255 acres, J Nineteen of these have less than £1,000 rental, one with 1,443 acres having hut £15 p. b. § Inclusive of sixteen rentals under £1,000. COUNTY TABLES OF LANDOWNUBS. 185 CAENARVON. DENBIGH. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 4 10 •19 42 96 1,407 4,610 52 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ... Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 102,470 100,861 32,300 21,000 16,320 23,527 373 4,382 14,563 16 t38 106 254 1,773 3,436 85 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 20,812 130,165 64,600 63,000 43,180 31,436 721 4,503 18,812 6,240 -Total. 315,796 5,708— Total. 367,229 FLINT. GLAMORGAN. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 3 5 9 44 111 1,225 2,048 65 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 25,416 39,1 13J 15,300 22,000 18,870 15,179 562 5,847 4,312 6 19 §36 106 210 1,373 6,570 106 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... Waste 84,549 149,830 61,200 53,000 35,700 29,184 685 14,238 47,018 3,510— Total. 146,599 8,426— Total. 475,404 ' Only six of these have over £1,000 rental. t Sixteen of these have less than £1,000 p. ; t Over a quarter of these beh.ng 1o Mr. Glaastone. § Nine have under £1,000 rental. 186 ENGLIBE LAND AND- ENGLISH LANDLORDS. MERIONETH. MONTGOMERY. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 12 •37 96 135 346 1,044 25 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen ...' Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... "Waste 16,684 128,593 t68,800 48,000 22,950 14,244 212 3,174 416 2 9 J42 128 280 1,418 1,314 48 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... "Waste 61,070 86,587 71,400 64,000 47,600 43,956 262 5,510 6,956 1,695— Total. 303,073 3,241— Total. 387,341 PEMBEOKE. RADNOR. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. No. of Owners. Class. Acres. 2 19 130 263 1,134 492 40 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Leaser Yeomen . . . SmaU Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies ... "Waste..; 24,522 109,495 69,700 65,000 44,710 29,483 278 12,511 12,260 2 11 ||18 65 203 850 452 41 Peers Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen . . . Small Proprietors Cottagers Public Bodies . . . Waste 15,572 62,119 30,600 32,500 34,510 28,446 90 3,557 77,799 3,121— Total. 367,95 1,642— Total. 285,193 * Including 28 rentals under £1,000. t Average 1,860 acres instead of 1,700. X iDcladin^ 16 rentals under £1,000 p. a. § Including 11 rentals under £1,00>). !| Including 12 rentals under £1,000. SUMMARY OF COUNTY TABLES. 187 SUMMARY TABLE OF ENGLAND AND WALES. No. of Owners. 400 1,288 2,529 9,585 24,412 217,049 703,289 14,459 Class. Peers and Peeresses Great Landowners Squires Greater Yeomen Lesser Yeomen Small Proprietors , Cottagers fThe Crown, Barracks, Convict Prisons,'" S Lighthouses, &c J o ^ ■{ Eeligious, Educational, Philanthropic, ^ I &o J ^ Commercial and Miscellaneous Waste 973,011— Total. Extent in Acres. 5,728,979 8,497,699 4,319,271 4,782,627 4,144,272 3,931,806 151,148 165,427 947,655 330,466 1,524,624 34,523,974 These figures are compiled from those at the foot of each County in tlie Eetum of 1873. They do not harmonise exactly with the summary at the hegianing of the Blue Book, hut that summary itseU varies from the County summaries in many instances— in Durham, for instance, by some 2,800 acres. NOTES ON THE FOREG-OING- TABLES BY THE COMPILEE. " 'The Grovernment Eeturn of Landowners, 1873/ dis- pelled the absurd illusion that some 30,000 persons owned all England and Wales, and raised the aggregate number of English and Welsh landowners to something like a million. Still, it was evident that useful as this compilation might be, it was marred by several serious blots : such as the non-entry of the metropolitan area, the omission, in some counties at least, of the woods, which in 1873 were stiU unrated, and the occasional double entry of one and the same man ; specially where he was blessed with a double-barrelled name, such as KnatchbuU-Hugessen or Cowper-Temple, to say nothing of grosser cases, where some four surnames are strung together, rope of onion fashion, like Butler-Clarke- South well- Wandesforde. A study of the blue-book con- vinced me that something like 2 per cent., if not more, of the landowners thus appeared more than once, and, when compiling ' The Great Landowners of Grreat Britain,' I wrote to every large owner, begging a correc- tion. The answers proved that my surmise was per- fectly right. Two instances may be given, in each of which cases the landowner is one and the same man. NOTES ON COUNTY TABLES. 189 Case op Capt. Edwards-Heathoote, copied verbatim prom the Return (his real initials being J. H.). Staffs. 19, line 19 27 „ 42 -i ., 44 - „ 45 Name of Owner. Edwards, H. T. H. Heathoote, Capt. E. Heathoote, J. E. Heatolicote, J. H. E. Address of Owner. Apedale HaU Audley Newcastle, Stafford Apedale Hall Extent of Lauds. Gross estimated Rental. A. R. p, 962 3 44 20 1,587 12 9,703 16 154 1,097 Capt._ Heathcote's real acreage is mucli over the amount with which the return creditB him. The property Hes in at least four parishes, principally in Audley, in which I helieve Apedale Hall stands ; and Newcastle is his post town. Case op Mr. Robert Chichester of Hall. (Copied verbatim.) Devon. Name of Owner. Address of Owner. Extent of Lands. Gross estimated Rental. 12, line 38 - „ 37 Cornwall. Page 6, line 25 — „ 26 „ 27 Chichester, Robert Chichester, Richard Chichester, R. Chichester, R. Chichester, Rohert Bishop's Tawton Drewsteignton Bishop's Tawton Hall, Barnstaple St. Day, „ A. R. P. 3,906 3 20 440 1 30 402 2 9 846 30 24 3 24 £ s. 4,153 12 374 188 15 223 15 525 10 Bishop's Tawton, Drewsteignton, and St. Day are places in which Mr. Chichester has property/" Ha]l " being his seat, and Barnstaple his post town. " Having considerably weeded out these double, treble, and multiple entries before compiling tbe ' Great Landowners,' I Have used that work as well as the Government returns in compiling the foregoing tables, adopting such corrections as had been sent up to Christ- mas, 1877, but none of later date. Curiously enough, a few corrections more or less scarcely alter the totals in each column ; because the cases of over-estimation in the Eeturn are very nearly balanced by others which tell in an opposite way. 190 ENGLISH LAND AND EN0LI8H LAyDWliPS. " The third ehvss (squires), and tlio fourth and lifth (greater and lesser yeomen) are averaged ou the scales of 1,700, 500, tmd 170 acres, in all cases but Cambridge, Northumberland, Rutland, Stafford, and ]\Ieriouetli. In these counties, if the usual averages had been strietl_y adhered to, the result would have been misleading. For instance, I worked out the actual extent of the lands held by the ' squires ' on Tyneside, which proved them to hold 355 acres apiece more than their iellow squires nearer the metropolis. " As to Staffordshire, a county very familiar to me, the staggering fact came out, after totalising the lands proper to each class, that the sixth-class Luidowner in Staffordshire was the lowest specimen of his race, being a holder of only 11 acres, while a semi-Cockney of the same class in Surrc}-, which county most nearly approached him, held 13 acres of the soil. The explanation of this fact api)ears to be that Stafford- shire is pre-eminently a land of colliers, and that among the Staffordshire colliers, as among the small farmers of Cheshire, a man's worth and respectability are apt to be gauged by the number of cows which he milks. To my certain knowledge there are hundreds, nay thousands, of colliers who hold from Inj to 7A acres, milk two or at most three cows (a msxi-k of high rank), and will actually slave in tlie pits or ironworks to provide the rent, in case they ai'e tenants, or tlu' interest on the mortgage, which is nearly inevitable, in cas(> they are freeholders. " The prevalence of this mania for cow-milking as the badge of respectability in Mercia, as contrasted with the counter-mania for the sa-mc badge in tlu^ form NOTES ON OOUNIY TABLES. 191 of keeping a servant-girl or one-horse chaise in Middle- sex, leads to the large number and small extent of the Mercian sixth- class holdings. " Eutlandshire supplies a tempting text for statisti- cal sermons on the distribution of landed property in England^and the more so, as the Grovernment return of Eutlandshire landowners is but 4^ pages long, as compared with 185 pages allotted to Yorkshire. Un- fortunately for the preachers, this little county signally illustrates the proverbial fallacy of statistics. It so happens that thousands upon thousands of its glorious fields, the delight of fox-hunters, belong to proprietors residing in other counties. For instance, among foreigners owning their soil are the following : — Adderley, Sir Charles (now Lord Norton, a Warwickshire man). Aveland, Lord (who is classed as a Lincolnshire Peer, his principal property being there). Belgrave, Mr., of Maydwell, in Northamptonshire. Brooke, Sir W. de C, Bart., also of Northamptonshire. Hankey, Mr., of Balcombe, Sussex. Lonsdale, Lord, from the North Country. Northwick, Lord, a Worcestershire Peer. Pdchards, Mr. Westley, of Birmingham. Exeter, Lord (who is classed as a Northamptonshire Peer). Pochin, Mr., of Edmondthorpe, Leicestershire. PieiTcpoint, Mr., of Chippenham, Wilts. Rutland, Duke of, a, Leicestershire Peer. Kennedy, Mr., " of London " (a somewhat vague address). De Stafford, Mr., a Northamptonshire man. Blake, Mr., of Welwyn, in Herts. Laxton, Mr., from Huntingdonshire. " These sixteen persons among them own nearly 37,000 acres, or two-fifths of the whole county. 192 ENGLISH LAND ANB ENGLISH LANDLORDS. " Again, the unwary statistician who can only succeed in finding five persons ranging from 1,000 acres to 5,000 might be misled by supposing that ' Mr. Fludyer,' who figures for 1,100 acres, and 'Mr. Hudyer,' wbo owns 1,500, are two separate persons; whereas Sir John Fludyer tells me that he is the person aimed at in the returns of 1873, under both the letters F and H. " Where landowners only reach 5 in the third class, a mistake of one is serious, and any generalisation there- fore based on Rutlandshire alone would affect England as judged thereby to the extent of 6ne-fifth at the least. " Merioneth deserves special distinction as exempli- fying class six in its highest stage of ownership ; yet a walk through two counties would bring a traveller from this paradise of small proprietors into Staffordshire, its lowest type of degradation. A glimpse at the column devoted to ' waste,' wiU show the reason why — a reason in itself sufficient to prove that the parochial authorities who compiled the crude materials for the return had many curious eccentricities. ' Waste ' figures for only 416 acres in Merionethshire, certainly a most bucolic part of the Queen's dominions, if not exactly (as may be said of Connaught or Ross-shire) ' west of the law.' I have no doubt that I could pick a dozen spots on its wild mountain ranges where no policeman could be found within haH-a-dozen miles. Contrast this with tbe neighbouring counties of Brecon, Denbigh, Mont- gomery, and Radnor, where thfe waste reaches a total of 215,000 acres, or say 53,000 acres each. Yet Merioneth is a wilder county than any of the four. The obvious moral is that in Merioneth all joint lands have been equally divided in the rate-books among the participants, NOTES ON COUNTY TABLES. 193 wliile in the four neiglibouring counties they figure not as joint, but as waste lands. As to waste, though no uniform system of excision from other lands has been adopted in the Return, it may be roughly taken as a fact, that generally (but by no means always) they in- clude, in the southern counties, heaths, charts, unfenced land, and, in some cases, salt marshes ; and, in the northern ones, all such land as is entered in the valuable agricultural returns published of late years annually as ' Mountain Pasture ' and ' Barren Heath.' But on what principle can one reconcile figures like the following : — Kent — ^waste, five thousand odd acres. Surrey — forty thousand ? Kent is more than twice the size of Surrey, and as a fact contains, though perhaps in smaller pro- portion to its area, quite as much ' heath,' ' common,' and ' chart ' as Surrey. We must guess that in the rate-books of Kent these wastes swell the estates of the local Lords of the Manor. " The northern counties contain vast areas of ' waste.' Much of this is ' waste ' only in name, being unfenced, heathery-furzy-ferny-swampy-rocky pasture, much of it at a level of some 1,000 to 2,000 feet over sea-level, and affording fair pasturage to the hardy local sheep and cattle, though useless as nourishment to a 3,000 guinea shorthorn. These ' wastes ' are locally divided into what are called cattle-gates, each gate representing sufii- cient summer feed for one beast. In Kendal, Hexham, or Carhsle such cattle-gates are as saleable as an ' eligible building plot ' is in Kennington, Highgate, or Clapham ; in no sense are they waste, but a rough sur- vival of the Russian Communal land system. Let the south-country agrarian - agitator try the experiment of 194 ENGLISH LAND ANB ENGLISH LANDLORDS. settling himself as a -virtuous and contented agriculturist on a five-acre plot, carved out of the braes of Skiddaw, treeless, undrained, exposed to all the winds, and hand- somely fenced with rough posts and rotten colliery-rope. I fear the contentment would vanish, whether or not the virtue should remain. Meanwhile, let him bear in mind a few simple facts : that in the northern counties he may have to rear his family without such aids to digestion as onions, gooseberries, strawberries, rasp- berries, or other berries, apples, cherries, cabbages, and peas, none of which flourish in Northumbria over the 1,000 feet level, besides combining aU trades in his own proper person — such as stonemason, waller, butcher, plasterer, shoemaker, painter, glazier, and possibly accou- cheur. The case of the southern wastes is equally un- promising in a money-making or self-supporting point of view. Many a Kentish 'chart,' if parcelled out into fifteen-acre freeholds, would hardly support a full- grown man with a healthy appetite on each of them. Their only advantage over the northern moors is their much larger allowance of bright sunshine, a commodity of which the supply is now regularly registered in the daily weather reports. " The climate of these islands, I fear, is not suitable for what the French call ' the small culture.' No man on an average British plot of 2^ acres can raise and support a healthy family. I would put the smallest desirable peasant-holding at from 4|- to 6 acres, and these only in the eastern — i.e., the drier — half of Eng- land. In the western counties, where the bulk of the land is under permanent pasture, and corn-growing is a secondary interest, the minimum should be raised to NOTES ON COUNTY TABLES. 195 what would keep four cows ; and this minimum wotdd vary much in different counties, say from 9 acres in the vale of Evesham, to 45 or 50 in north-western Devon- shire. Desirable as it is in every way to encourage the subdivision of the soil on political grounds, specially from the moderate Tory point of view, it cannot be too strongly urged that if a man buys a small freehold (as we all hope he may one day be able to do), that man should have some other trade or means of livehhood than the tillage of the soil. 217,000 of these men are a,lready in our midst — ' small proprietors,' who own some twenty acres apiece — and it will be well for England when the number is quadrupled. Beyond that point it would so far do harm as to (I believe) materially reduce the amount of food grown on the fair face of Old England. In face of the terrible competition of American produce, large capital, open-handed use of all manures, close- fistedness in bargaining, and money enough to avoid having to sell at bad prices, combined with a largish area to work on, and much knowledge of his ^business, are the only conditions under which the British farmer ■can hold his own. Men of this stamp are far too wise to aspire to the ownership of the lands they tUl. " When divided by the number of small proprietors in Class VI., the four million acres they hold shows the following approximate average size of holding in each •county : — Staffs., 121 Dorset, 14 York (W.E.), 15| Hint, 121 Middlesex, 14^^ Herts, lof Surrey, 13 Ohesidre, 14f Wilts, 15f Hereford, 13i Rutland, 14| Tiinoolnj 15f Worcester, 13f Salop, 15 Hampshire, 15^ ■Crloucester, 13-f Lancashire, 15 J Derby, 15| N 2 196 ENGLI8E LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Somerset, 16 Cambs., 16i Carnarvon^ 16f Notts., 16f York (E.E.), 16| Huntingdon, 17 Essex, 17|- Warwick, 17§ Denbigh, 17| Oxon, 18^ Berks, 18| Leicester, 18| Norfolk, 19| Kent, 19| Monmouth, 19| Bucks, 20 Sussex, 20J^ Northampton, 20^ Glamorgan, 21^ Anglesea, 21 J Beds., 21^ Suffolk, 22f Durham, 24| Westmoreland, 25|^ Pembroke, 26 Cornwall, 26^ York (N.R.), 26| Devon, 27^ Northumberland, 27f Cumberland, 29 Carmarthen, 29^^ Montgomery, Sl-jS^ Brecon, 31-| Radnor, 33|^ Cardigan, 39|- Merioneth, 41^ It may be noted how closely the averages of many neighbouring counties run — the four northern counties and tl).eir neighbour the North Eiding ; the three cider- making counties of Gloucester, Hereford, and Worcester; Lancaster and the West Eiding ; Kent and Sussex ; and, though divided by the 'sUvery Thames,' it is hard to raise a distinction between a small holding in Oxon and its fellow in Berks. ^ " The two classes of yeomen show also a few curious facts ; notably, the very large proportion of them who have the prefix ' Eev.' to their names. Of course, it may so happen that in some parts of the country the rate-collectors, following the example of high ecclesias- tical authorities, refuse this prefix to our nonconforming clerics, and thus simplify my labour of ' cleric extrac- tion ' from the ranks of the yeomen ; but I take it that, as a rule, not only ' Church parsons/ but their noncon- forming, and even their Eoman Catholic, brethren are entered as 'Eev.' Their total number is 3,185, out of a total landed yeomanry of 33,998 ; in other words, not 1 Appendix IX. shows the average extent of land held by "small proprietors," between 1 and 100 acres, in groups of counties, arranged geographically. NOTES ON COUNTY TABLES. 197 far short of ten per cent. Names with the clerical prefix are thickest in Northampton, Leicester, and Eut- land, where about one in five of my yeomen is a cleric. This, of course, means that the glebe-land has not been entered as the Local Grovernment Board directed, as the property of ' The vicar of Blank,' but in the vicar's name, as 'Eev. J. Smith.' " After all, ' yeomen ' is but a makeshift title for the holders of between 100 and 1,000 acres. If we could imagine all the members of this class to be called out for a yeomanry drill, we must be prepared to see an Ambassador, an ex-Cabinet Minister, a popular Dean, and a well-known Leicestershire M. P. H. dressed in line with the Poet Laureate ; for all these swell the numbers of the ' yeomen ' in the preceding tables. Yet it would not be easy to suggest a better designation for the great majority of the class. " It is much to be hoped that, if ever a revision of the Grreat Eeturn of 1873 is made, a separate volume will be given to all town properties ; as it is essentially absurd to mix the rental (say £10,000) derived from a row of warehouses in Bristol, covering three acres, with £50 more derived from fifty acres of Grloucestershire clay. This is always done in the present Eeturn ; thus — Hxtent, 63 acres; Mental, £10,050. Let us hope that ere another edition is produced our rulers, eschewing revolutionary legislation, will go so far as to shatter the hopeless legal bonds which fetter and prevent the free sale of land ; and the extension thereby of Class VI., a class which, multiplied fourfold, would greatly add stability to our country and its institutions. " John Bateman. " Carlton Club, Oct., 1880." CHAPTEE IV. Dependent Condition of Farmers under a System of Yearly Tenancy, "The great bulk of the land in the United Kingdom is not cultivated by the owner, but by tenant-occupiers. Of these there are 561,000 in Great Britain^ and 600,000 in Ireland," the average of cultivated land in each farm being fifty-six acresi in Great Britain and only twenty-five acres in Ire- land.^ Such is Mr. Caird's succinct account^ of a feature in the English land system not less singular in Europe than the Law and Custom of Primogeni- ture. In the great majority of European countries, and especially in the most highly civilized, the land is chiefly tilled by the owners, who thus constitute a real peasantry of a class well nigh extinct in ' 1 It is curious tliat Arthur Toung (in Ms " Northern Tour ") estimates the number of farms in England at no more than 111,498. ^ ^ On a Tery extensive property, scattered over several counties, and distributed into 278 farms, 140 of these farms (or more than one-half) are between 100 and 300 acres, 62 farms are between 50 and 100 acres, and 69 are between 300 and 500 acres, while three only exceed 1,000 acres. It is hardly possible to ascertain the average size of farms in other countries of Europe, owing to a frequent confusion between holdings and properties. Much valuable information on the subject is, however, col- lected in Mr. James Howard's " Treatise on Continental Earming aid Peasantry." The report of the Indian Famine Commission shows that in the Punjaub the average holding of a tenant is about 6 acres ; in the North- West Provinces, about 4 J ; in Oude and Bengal, little more than 3 acres. In the Central Provinces the holdings appear to range from 14 to 20 acres. ' " Landed Interest," pp. 46, 47. According to the Agricultural Statistics of 1880, there are 553,739 " holdings " in Great Britain. TYPICAL SIZE OF ENGLI8H FARMS. 199 England, tliougli represented in Ireland by small farmers holding under the custom of tenant-right. In France, it is true, the number of tenant-farmers is no less than 830,000, exceeding by nearly one-half the number in Grreat Britain. The cultivated area of France, however, is thrice as great as the cul- tivated area of Grreat Britain ; more than half of this is cultivated by the owner himself on the Faire- valoir-direct system ; and, since the farms so culti- vated are on the average much smaller, seventy per cent, of the farmers in France are peasant-owners. Even in Ireland it was found in 1870 that 20,000 holdings were then occupied by owners in fee, and a considerable number of farms have since been pur- chased by their occupiers under the Irish Church Act. In this country, there are no trustworthy statis- tics enabling us to compare the number of proprietor- farmers with that of tenant-farmers, though it is certain that the former is quite insignificant. The most important part of the former class is composed, not of yeomen, but of country gentlemen, who re- tain a home farm nominally under their own manage- ment, but really under that of a bailifE, for the purpose of breeding pedigree-stock, conducting agricultural ex- periments, or otherwise setting a good example to their neighbours. It may surprise many people to learn that fifty-eight acres is the average size of a farm in Great Britain, and that, owing to the pre- ponderance of small farms in Ireland, seventy per cent, of the holdings in the whole United Kingdom are of less extent than fifty acres. But, of the small farms in Great Britain, a very large number 200 ENGLISH LAND AND ENOLISE LANDLORDS. are mere appendages to villa-residences, or little plots tenanted by persons wlio have otlier means of liveli- hood, the result being that less than one-sixth of the land in Great Britain is occupied by farms of less than fifteen acres each. The most important and typical class of English farms ranges from 100 to 400 acres ; and though farms on a much grander scale are associated with most foreign conceptions of English agriculture, since they figure more prominently in agricultural exhibitions, the fact is that in England alone there were in 1880 but 4,095 farms between 500 and 1,000 acres, and 500 only exceeding 1,000 acres.-' The causes which have divorced rights of property from the cultivation of the soil, and created a separate - class of tenant-farmers, are common to England and Scotland; but the prevalence of yearly tenancy, with- out the security of lease, is specially characteristic of England. The origin of leasehold temire is not easily traced. Adam Smith explains the gradual introduc- tion of long agricultural leases in the latter part of the Middle Ages by the increase of personal extravagance among the great proprietors. In earlier times, he thinks, a baron was content to maintain an army of retainers in coarse plenty on the produce of his own demesnes ; but when his successors acquired more luxurious tastes and habits, they were driven to ex- tract a full rent from their lands, which could only be done by letting them on lease. On the other hand, the inability of individual landowners, under the old system of strict entails, to grant leases binding on their ^ Agricultural Statistics for 1880. Table 8. See Appendix X. FARMING LEASES. 201 successors, drove the most enterprising farmers to seek tenancies under monastic houses ; and it was to im- provement-leases granted by monastic houses that England owed the first great experiments in drainage. For ecclesiastical corporations and colleges, like the great barons, found it too burdensome to superintend personally the cultivation of their enormous estates, and their members were seldom unwilling to profit by the fines taken on the creation and renewal of a bene- ficial lease. The practice of letting on lease must also have been encouraged by the Statute Quia Mnptores, which rendered it impossible to create a subordinate tenure in fee simple. Ah&c this statute, if a lord desired to retain all the feudal rights of a seigniory over the estate, and yet to relieve himself of its agricultural management, his simplest course was to demise it for his own life at least, and perhaps for that of his tenant. The Act of Henry VI. which created the 40s. county franchise introduced a new motive for letting farms on lease which has not received sufficient attention. It was held that a lease for life constituted a freehold, which, if above the value of 40s., carried with it a vote for the county. As English tenants have always been wont to follow the politics of their landlords, the multiplication of such freeholds because a ready source of poHtical infiuence. We have the emphatic assurance of Adam Smith that a great part of the " yeomanry," under which term he expressly includes tenant-farmers, had freeholds of this kind in his time. ; and he adds that, by virtue of the independence thus secured to so many, "the whole order become respectable to their landlords." An exact 202 UNGLWH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. parallel is supplied by the contemporary history of Ireland, where similar leases were granted with reckless profusion to middlemen, with similar objects, after the 40s. franchise was extended to Eoman Catholics in 1793. In some counties, and notably in the West of England,, the custom of granting leases for lives became firmly established, and a few of these leases, constantly re- newed, are stiU in force on Devonshire and Somerset- shire estates. But the greater certainty of occupation under leases for definite periods must always have rendered this a more eligible form of tenure for a prudent farmer. The recent investigations of Professor Thorold Eogers have shown that short . leases, extending from seven to ten years, were not uncommon in the fourteenth century, and that, under such leases, the stock, both live and dead, was usually let with the land, at an additional rent, while all the repairs were executed by the land- lord. From the general prevalence of farming leases- for terms of years in the fifteenth century, he justly infers that entails of great estates must have been rare. For, as we have seen, a lease granted by a tenant-in- taU would not have been valid against his successor until the statute of 32 Henry VIII., c. 28, which par- tially removed this disability. The frequent legislation on the subject of leases in the succeeding age clearly proves how large a space they occupied in the agricul- tural economy of our Elizabethan ancestors,^ and how ' The earliest statutes of importance on the subject of leases are the statute of, 32 Henry VIII., cap. 27, regulating the leasing powers of ecclesiastical corporations and the incumhents of benefices, and that of 32 Henry VIII., cap. 28, enabling tenants in tail to demise lands which LEA8E8 IN THE EIGETEENTH OENTUBT. 203 strange it would then have been thought that English yeomen should he generally displaced, not by lease- holders, but by tenants-at-will, or tenants from year to year. It has been confidently asserted that English farms were commonly held under lease until the period of the French war at the end of the eighteenth century. No positive evidence exists by which such an assertion can be established, but the presumption is certainly in its favour, and it is supported by the indirect testimony of Adam Smith and Arthur Young. The prevalence of leases for terms of years may probably be one reason why no other form of security for unexhausted improve- ments was then demanded by tenants, and Arthur Young, complaining that " some landlords wiU not grant leases at all," evidently regards them as a per- verse minority. " If a man really means to be a good farmer," he says, "it can never answer to him to enter a farm with a shorter lease than twenty- one years; nor can it ever be for the advantage of the landlord to let his farms on shorter. I am now speaking of rich soils. As to poor ones, to be inclosed, or marled, or chalked, &c. &c., it is at once apparent that no man will hire without a long lease} Still more significant is his statement that landlords spend much less money than tenants in agricultural im- provements -^ for, whatever may have been the practice in Ireland, it is absurd to suppose that English farmers had been usnally let for agricultural purposes, but not so as to bind remaindermen or reTersioners. 1 " Farmer's Guide," Book I., chap. xii. 2 " Northern Tour," Yol. IV., p. 370. 204 ENOLISE LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOBBS. would lay out large sums without the security of a lease. At the same time, he admits " that farms are often very well managed hy men that have no leases," where tenancies have virtually become hereditary on hereditary estates ; and Adam Smith remarks that England is the only country in which a tenant will build on his land, without a lease, relying on the landlord's honour.-^ We may safely assume that tenancy-at-will existed in every stage of our agricultural history, but it doubt- less became more and more prevalent with the gradual extinction of serfdom. Those vUleius whose right of occupancy was not sufficiently well estabHshed to be developed into copyhold, and those free labourers who ultimately superseded villeins, must have formed a class of tenants-at-wUl paying a fixed rent for their cottages and plots of ground, but liable to be turned out at the pleasure of the lord. At a very early period, however, the common law gave a tenant-at-will, under the name of " emblements," the property in crops actually sown by him, but not yet reaped, when he might be thus evicted. In the sixteenth century this right was so far extended by the courts of law that a tenant-at-wiU, having entered and paid rent, was held to be in effect a tenant from year to year, and entitled to a six months' notice to quit. The qualified security thereby obtained, and fortified in some counties by local customs of tenant-right protecting unexhausted improvements, gradually developed into a tenancy from year to year, so long as both parties should please, and this form of ' " Wealth of Nations," Book II., chap. iii. YEARLY TENANCY. 205 tenancy gradually superseded the older and sounder practice of leasehold tenure. Two causes largely contributed to accelerate this transition within the last hundred years. The ex- traordinary rise of agricultural prices during the Great War rendered most landlords very unwilling to part with the immediate control of their properties, except in consideration of an exorbitant rent. On the other hand, the extraordinary fluctuation of these prices may well have deterred prudent tenants from " hanging a lease round their necks," as the saying is, and under- taking to pay an exorbitant rent for a long term of years. After the war came to an end, these motives ceased to operate, but a new and powerful motive for refusing leases was created by the Eeform Act of 1832. Under the so-called " Chandos clause," or section 20, of that Act, every tenant of a farm, paying a rent of £50 or upwards, for the first time acquired the county franchise. Thenceforward the poHtical in- fluence of landlords was multiplied by the votes of their farm tenants, and, in order to maintain that influence, it was thought necessary to keep farm-tenants in a state of dependence by letting farms only from year to year. Doubtless, the confidence inspired by the liberal management of many great hereditary properties, as weU as a wholesome dread of periodical valuations incident to a system of leases, have done much to make English farmers content with a tenure under which Adam Smith declares that it would be absurd to expect an occupier to improve, and which Scotch farmers have long since declined. The importance attached to rights of sporting in England often induces landlords to accept. 206 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. low rents from non-improving tenants, who can be turned out at short notice if they meddle with the game ; and the power of distress enables them to dis- pense with too strict inquiries into a tenant's skill and capital. By the operation of these and other causes, it is tolerably certain that yearly tenancy has become the rule, and leasehold tenure the exception, in most English counties.-^ The recent agricultural depression has aggravated this retrograde tendency by inclining landlords to keep farms at their own disposal rather than let them for a considerable period at a minimum rent, and by inclining farmers to rely on the forbearance of landlords under a yearly tenancy rather than accept the onerous responsibilities of a lease. Even the Agri- cultural Holdings Act of 1875, "though it indirectly discouraged mere verbal agreements and honourable understandings, did not, like the Irish Land Act, o£fer any premium to landlords for granting leases, and does not seem to have produced any appreciable effect in promoting their adoption. This Act, which has been said to mark a new point of departure in English agriculture, is really little more than a statutory recognition of tenant- right, already estabhshed in many parts of the country, and closely bound up with the system of yearly tenancy. It, in fact, presupposes the general prevalence of that system, and proceeds to lay down ^ See the article on the English Land Law in the Memoir prepared by the Royal Agricultural Society of England for the Paris Exhibition of 1878. See also the Appendix to Mr. B. Samuelson's speech on the Agri- cultural Holdings Act (March 25, 1879), printed by Cassell, Fetter, & Galpin. From the evidence there given, it would appear that leases do not prevail widely in one-fourth of the English counties. AOBIGULTUBAL HOLDINGS AGT. 207 rules which, under a system of leasehold tenure, would be for the most part superfluous. It divides improve- ments made by tenants into three classes, assigning to each a distinct standard of compensation. Drainage and other permanent improvements of the first class are presumed to continue for a maximum period of twenty years. For such improvements an outgoing tenant, if he be fortunate enough to hold under an absolute owner, is entitled to compensation upon the basis of their cost price minus a proportionate deduc- tion for each year already expired since the improve- ment was made. But he must always have obtained beforehand the wiitten consent of 'the landlord or his agent, and the landlord may always limit the sum to be spent or the period over which compensation may be claimed, and the amount of compensation will, after a.11, be dependent not merely on the efflux of time, but also on the unexhausted value of the improvement, as ascertained by valuers. Moreover, as we have already seen, the compensation to be paid by a limited owner will depend, further, on the degree in which the letting value of the holding shall have been increased by the improvement. Chalking, liming, and other durable improvements of the second class are presumed to con- tinue for a maximum period of seven years, subject to like conditions with improvements of the first class. They may be made, however, vdthout the previous written consent of the landlord ; but, on the other hand, notice must be given to the landlord, who may inspect the work, and dispute the claim to compensa- tion for any sum not proved to have been "properly laid out." The application of purchased manures and 208 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. other temporary improvements are presumed to con- tinue for two years, subject to special conditions of a technical character, and the amount of compensation will not exceed such proportion of the sum "properly laid out " by the outgoing tenant as " fairly repre- sents " the value of the improvement to an incoming tenant. In all cases of improvements, the landlord is entitled to make a counter claim for rates, taxes, and tithe rent-charge, for rent, for allowances made in consideration of the improvement, for waste, or for breach of covenant. A like principle governs the clauses of the Act relating to " fixtures," the sole property in which had formerly been vested in the landlord by the old rule of Quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit. This maxim was established by the Statute of Grloucester in the sixth year of Edward I., and has ever since had a grievous effect in discouraging tenants' improvements. Engines, machinery, and some other fixtures erected by an out- going tenant, may now in general be removed by him, after one month's previous notice to the landlord, to whom is reserved the right of purchasing them, and subject to his claim for rent, as well to an obligation of making good any damage caused by the removal. But, whereas other engines may be put up without the landlord's consent, steam-engines are expressly excluded from this provision, and the landlord's objection will bar the tenant's right to remove such engines under the Act. Nor does the Act go so far as to reverse the old maxim, in the tenant's favour. A barn erected by a tenant would still belong, in law, to his landlord ; fruit- trees planted by a tenant could neither be transplanted AGBIGULTUBAL HOLDINGS ACT. 209 nor cut down without express permission ; and the broad recognition of tenant-right in fixtures intro- duced into the Irish Land Act has been studiously- excluded. It would be absurd to regard a statute guarded by so many exceptions and limitations as calculated to work a revolution in the English land-system, even had its operation been compulsory. But its operation, as is well known, is strictly permissive. Not only may a landlord and tenant " contract themselves out of it " by entering into a special agreement providing for the same objects, but it may be set aside by a mere stroke of the pen in any agreement, however contrary to its spirit. The consequence is that, with a very few excep- tions, the whole body of English landlords have negatived its application to their own estates, both in respect of pre-existing tenancies and in respect of tenancies afterwards created.-^ So far, it is almost a dead letter; but there is reason to believe that its principles, if not its express terms of compensation, have been imported into many agreements between landlord and tenant, while the salutary clause substi- tuting twelve months' for six months' notice to quit has been very widely adopted. Indirectly, therefore, it may be said to have exercised a considerable influence on agricultural relations, and to have supplied a statutory definition of tenant-right which may gra- dually mature itself into an universal custom of which 1 See the abstract of answers returned to circulars issued by the Farmer's Club, in the article on the English Land Law, "Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society," 1878. See also the Appendix to Mr. Samuel- son's speech on the Agricultural Holdings' Act, March 25th, 1879. 210 ENGLISH LAND AM) ENQLISH LANDLORDS. courts of law must take cognizance. In the mean- time, it cannot be regarded as a step towards a restora- tion of leasehold tenure in English agriculture, but rather as an expedient for stereotyping, in a more liberal form, the unstable system of yearly tenancy. CHAPTER V. Dependent Condition of Agricultural Latourers. The Poor Law of Elizabeth, may be regarded as the grand turning-point in the history of the English pea- santry, and as the proximate origia of the English agri- cultural labourer. In the rude times immediately before or immediately after the Norman Conquest, the actual cultivators of the soil were for the most part serfs or villeins, indeed, but still peasants, with the security, and not without the pride, of proprietorship.^ In their personal relation to their lords they were little removed from predial ,bondsmen ; yet they were free- men in relation to all others, occupied homesteads of their own, an4 enjoyed imperfect rights of property which ultimately elevated many of their descendants into copyholders. The class of free labourers which gradually succeeded them possessed greater indepen- dence with, less fixity of tenure, working for hire ' Professor Thorold Rogers, in an article on the History of JRent in England {Gontempora/ry Bemew, April, 1880), thus states the result of his researches into original documents of the mediaeval period : — " I have never seen any single instance, even in the earliest times, of the slave proper — i.e., of a person whose services could be demanded at the pleasure of his owner, and who received a bare subsistence as the equivalent of his labour." He points out that a serf could not be ejected from his land, except by the judgment of the manor-court, in which the freeholders sat as jurymen. He elsewhere states that, in studying many thousands of medisBval accounts, he never found any evidence of villeins, or even of their services, being transferred to third parties. o 2 212 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. instead of rendering forced services, and holding their little plots of land at will, instead of by a customary title, when they were not, as they often were, boarded and lodged by their employers. The steady rise of wages originally caused by the Black Death was hardly checked by the various Statutes of Labourers ; and the Peasant Eevolt, though quenched for the moment in blood, ushered in a century of prosperity for the masses in country districts, only terminated by the pasturage- enclosures of the Tudor period. The growth of a large export trade in wool, the revolution in rural life which followed on the demolition of feudal castles, the encroachments of commercial upon patriarchal land- lordism, the final suppression of monasteries, the con- traction of common rights over woods and wastes, and the sudden rise of prices in the middle of the sixteenth century, produced or fostered that destitution and vagrancy which a long series of cruel enactments inevit- ably failed to extinguish. This failure, at last recog- nised by the Legislature, had prepared the way, by the end of the sixteenth century, for the Poor Law of Elizabeth, passed in 1601. Another cause, hitherto little recognised, contributed to strengthen the neces- sity for such legislation. However ineffective may have been the earlier statutes fixing a maximum rate of wages, that of Elizabeth, placing the regulation of wages in the hands of the justices, seems to have been stringently carried out, thus artificially restricting the wage-fund out of which the whole body of labourers had to be maintained. By mitigating the consequences, otherwise intolerable, of this restriction, the first Poor Law was an indirect method of cheapening labour, and POOR LAW OF ELIZABETH. 213 its operation in keeping down the rate of agricultural wages has been sensibly felt ever since.^ Compared with the older Statutes of Labourers, how- ever, it was a humane and even statesmanlike enact- ment. The extreme severity which had prevented the execution of those laws was now wisely avoided ; it was provided that able-bodied paupers should be set to work, and the impotent properly relieved; while a parochial assessment of all inhabitants was substituted for the precarious humanity of relations and the volun- tary alms of religious houses or charitable neighbours. Power was also given to erect houses for the poor on waste lands, and this power was extended to parochial town lands by a later statute of Charles II. Whatever may be the defects of the first Poor Law from an economical point of view, it had certainly more effect in restoring order than scourging or branding sturdy beggars, and all the other penalties of earlier legislation. We hear no more of bands of lawless men, who defied the inefficient constabulary of those days, and who formed the nucleus of every local rebellion. Bobbers were no longer hung up by the score, and life in the country was comparatively secure, notwithstanding the survival of highwaymen on the great roads up to a much later age. Since unemployed labourers were now entitled to faU back on the rates in the last resort, it became the interest of all ratepayers to find work for those willing to serve ; and the same object was pro- moted by the law which restricted monastic lands ^ The Statute of Elizabeth, requiring four acres of land to be attached to each new cottage, may be regarded as another attempt to mitigate the consequences resulting from an effective regulation of wages. 214 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. from being turned into pasture by tbeir new pro- prietors. As a measure of police, therefore, and as a means of organising a regular system of agricultural labour, tbe first Poor Law was bigbly successful. At the same time it was this law, with the disastrous amendments engrafted upon it, which accustomed the peasantry of England, no longet worthy of the name, to rely for their support entirely upon daily wages, supplemented by public relief in old age or times of scarcity ; render- ing it easy to live without the possession of land, and utterly extinguishing the very desire of acquiring pro- perty. The pauperising effects of this important change did not make themselves seriously felt until nearly two centuries later. Population increased very slowly under the Stuart dynasty, and, notwithstanding the depreciation of silver, the experiment was conducted under very favourable conditions. Improvements in the manufacture of hnen and woollen cloth enabled a labourer to clothe himself better and more cheaply than at any former period. The development of trade, care- fully excluded from Ireland and the colonies, opened a vast amount of industrial employment in manufacturing towns, while the more enterprising members of the working classes were learning to better themselves by emigration to America. It was not until the last forty years of the eighteenth century that the home demand for labour was overtaken by the supply, or that the burden of poor-relief began to press heavily on the ratepayers. Malthus estimated that, in 1720, the wages of a labourer commanded more than at any previous or subsequent time ; but from that date until LAB0UBEB8 IN THE EIGHTEENTH OENTUBY. 215 1770 they continued to rise ia nominal amount, if not in purchasing power.^ In the Eeport of a recent Com- mission, the advantages of his position during that period are forcibly summed up: — "Previous to 1775, the agricultural labourer was in a most prosperous condition. His wages gave him a great command over the necessaries of life : his rent was lower, his weariag apparel cheaper, his shoes cheaper, his living cheaper, than formerly ; and he had on the common and wastes liberty of cutting furze for fuel, with the chance of getting a little land, and, in time, a small farm." ^ But if the lot of agricultural labourers in the eighteenth century was in many respects enviable, their social habits and their standard of civilisation were de- plorably low.. The Legislature, which showed a sort of barbaric generosity in its treatment of questions affecting the physical comfort of the masses, did not even attempt to diffuse education among them. Accordingly, agricul- tural labourers were then sunk in an ignorance hardly to be equalled by that of the French peasants groaning under the corv^es — an ignorance extending to the simplest rules of decency, cleanliness, and the nurture ' Arthur Toung estimated the aTerage wages of labourers in the seventeenth century at lOid. a day, and for the first sixty-six years of the eighteenth century at Is. a day. The last occasion on which the justices seem to have fixed wages under the old statutes was in 1725, when the magistrates of Lancashire established a scale, under which a labourer working by the week was to receive from 9d. to Is. a day, without meat and drink. The average price of wheat for that year in Windsor market was 4:3s. per quarter, whence Sir George MchoU infers that Malthus' estimate of the agricultural labourer's condition at that period was too favourable. (" History of the English Poor Law," Vol. XL, chap, xi.) But the value of a labourer's wages is not to be measured by the price of bread alone. 2 First Report of the Women and Children's Employment Commission (1868), paragraph 251. 216 BNQLIBE LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. of cliildren. The mortality of English labourers' children in the last century is known to have been enormous, as it continued to be in Scotland until a very recent period, and in both cases the overcrowding of cottages was doubtless one of its principal causes. The hard-drinking squires who then ruled the country villages naturally despised and discouraged a book- learning in which they were themselves too often de- ficient ; the clergy were generally retainers of the squire, and far less alive to their responsibilities than in the present day ; neither philanthropists nor educa- tionists had yet arisen to study the condition of the people ; the Press was almost silent on such topics ; and Parliament regarded them a,s matters of local concern. There was, therefore, no quarter from which a higher civilisation might proceed, and village-life in England was probably little more refined than it had been in the Middle Ages. In "the meantime the stringency of the Poor Law was gradually becoming relaxed. Though a high average rate of wages prevailed, it did not rise, as it naturally should, with the price of provisions, and in bad years the labourer found it hard to support his family. On such occasions the magistrates forbore to enforce the Poor Law strictly, and gave a premium to idleness and improvidence by making labourers allow- ances out of the poor rate in proportion to the size of their families. This practice, which is said to have begun about 1763, especially in the metropolitan dis- tricts, shortly bore the fruit that might have been expected. The population increased by 2,000,000 between 1760 and 1800,^ and before 1782 the number ^ Arthur Toung estimated it at 9,000,000 in 1771, but tMs estimate -was certainly too high, since it had only reached 9,172,931 in 1800. POOB-BELIUF IN TEE EIGHTEENTE GENTUBY. 317 of able-bodied paupers had become so large that it was thought necessary to provide afresh for their employ- ment. By Gilbert's Act of that year, under which Poor Law Unions and guardians of the poor were first established, the wasteful and demoralising system of out-door relief was directly sanctioned. Hitherto the workhouse-test, introduced in 1723, had operated as a powerful check upon pauperism, and the labour exacted in return for maintenance had been irksome enough to be more or less deterrent. It was now enacted that guardians should find work for applicants near their own homes, and might eke out insufficient wages by money payments out of the rates. The spirit of inde- pendence was thus efEectually sapped among English labourers, and the least respectable of them, re- lieved of the necessity to procure and keep work by good conduct, were virtually guaranteed short intervals of debauchery between spells of enforced labour. The consequence of this short-sighted policy fell heavily on the farmers, who, however, were only too willing parties to it — failing to see that, in the end, the competition of the parish must be ruinous to indi- vidual employers, unless the parish be made the harder taskmaster and worse paymaster of the two. This is exactly what Grilbert's Act omitted to secure, and the evil which it engendered propagated itself, under various forms, in various parts of the country. In the decade between 1785 and 1795 we find traces of a system, long since forgotten, under which labourers out of work were hired out, as it were, under the name of "roundsmen," to one farmer after another, who gave sixpence a day 218 ENGLI8E LANB AND ENGLISH LANDLOBJDS. in wages, besides victuals, while tlie parish added a subsidy of fourpence.^ In the following year (1786) Pitt delivered a remarkable speech against the abuses of the old Poor Law, showing a comprehensive grasp of the whole question far in advance of the opinions then current ; but the bill which he soon afterwards intro- duced was conceived in a less enlightened spirit, and failed to effect its object. The poor-rates, which are not supposed to have exceeded £1,000,000 at the be- ginning of the eighteenth century, had risen to upwards of £2,000,000 at the end of the American War, and to upwards of £4,000,000 in 1801. By the census of that year, the population of England and "Wales was ascer- tained to^be 9,172,980, and the price of corn, which had reached 134s. per quarter in the previous June, mounted up to 156s. 2d. in the spring of 1801, though it feU to 75s. 6d. by the end of the year.^ Still the disease contiaued to be aggravated by remedies unskilfully applied. Three-quarters of a century had elapsed since wages had been regularly fixed by justices of the peace, bat the magistrates of Berkshire and some other southern coimties now issued tables defining the normal rate of wages, according to a sliding scale vary- ing with the size of a labourer's family, and the price of bread. They further directed the parish officers, where the wages should- fall short of this standard, to make up the deficit out of the rates.^ At last, in 1815, > Sir G. Nicholl's "History of the Poor Law," Vol. II., p. 123. ^ Nicholl's "History of the Poor Law," Vol. II., p. 135. The ayerage gazette price of wheat, in 1800, was 113s. lOd., and, in 1801, 119s. 6d. ^ McCuUoch's Essay on the Poor Laws. Note XXII. to his edition of " The Wealth of Nations." PABOOSIAL FARMS. 219 justices of the peace were expressly empowered by tlie Legislature to give out-door relief, even to able-bodied paupers, not merely during a time of temporary desti- tution, but for a period varying from three to nine months. A less demoralising, but still mischievous, form of parish relief was introduced by the institution of paro- chial farms. In the year 1817, Sturges Bourne's Committee reported in favour of this plan for giving employment to labourers out of work, and the Select Vestry Act (59 Greorge III., cap. 12) regulated its adoption. By sect. 12 of that Act, churchwardens and overseers were authorised, with the consent of the vestry, to purchase or hire, on account of the parish, "any suitable portion or portions of land, within or near to such parish, not exceeding twenty acres on the whole," and to employ thereupon, at reasonable wages, any person who might be set to work, under the poor laws. By a later statute (1 and 2 Wm. IV., cap. 42) this power was extended to purchasing, hiring, or en- closing, out of common land, as much as fifty acres for the same purpose. The discretion thus given was largely used, and parochial farms became common in most parts of England, being treated, like the public works during the Irish famine, as a convenient refuge for the destitute in the winter months. The practice, however, was condemned by the Poor Law Inquiry Commissioners a year or two later, and has since fallen into general disuse.-^ It was the crushing weight of poor rates resulting 1 See " Nioholl's " History of the Poor Laws," Yol. II., pp. 186 and 216-7. 220 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. from this ruinous policy, coupled with, the violent fluctuations of price resulting from the Corn Laws, which depressed agriculture during the half century preceding the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834. No wonder that at this period the small farmer is said to have " lived harder, worked longer, and fared worse " than the labourers in his employ. The condition of these would, indeed, have been comparatively pros- perous but for their unduly rapid multiplication. The researches of Arthur Young disclose much less striking variations in the standard of wages than in that of rents. Possibly the levelling effect of poor-law allow- ances may have contributed, with other causes, to maintain a tolerably uniform rate of wages in all parts of the kingdom, although considerable variations in the mode of payment were established by local custom. In 1780 it would probably have been impossible to find cases, such as Mr. Caird noted in 1850, in which the wages paid by Northern farmers were double those paid by Southern farmers for the same hours of work ; but the amount of work expected of the labourer dif- fered greatly in different localities. Thus, in Dorset- shire, less than one shilling a day was paid for about six hours' work indifferently performed ; while, in the North, labourers earned nine shillings a week by work- ing about eight hours a day. In 1796 the Dorsetshire wages had so far advanced, that Sir Francis Eden quotes them as ranging about Bs. a week, and fifty years later Mr. Caird found exactly the same rate still prevailing.^ As a general rule, the highest wages, as ' See . Mr. Little's Treatise on " The Agricultural Labourer," in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society for 1878. WAGES OF AGBIGULTUBAL LABOURERS. 221 well as the higtest rents, seem to have been paid upon the best lands; perhaps because the worst lands had usually been on the verge of the waste, and the wages there paid had originally been supplemented by common- rights now extinguished in the process of enclosure. The average rate in Arthur Young's time may be taken at 7s. or 8s. a week, and this, with extra wages at harvest tim«, he considered to be ample for the support of a family, with bread at 2d. a pound, butter at 6^d., cheese at 3^d., and meat at 4d.-' In reviewing these prices, he significantly remarks that " if bread were to be 6d. a pound, meat Is., and cheese 9d., labour must rise greatly, or the poor starve ; but cases which can have no existence ought not to occasion such arguments." Yet in some parts of the country, and notably in Wiltshire, prices were much higher in 1850 than in 1770, while the rate of wages had actually receded. It is no less curious to study, by the light of modern experience, his comment on the fact that, within a radius of fifty miles round London, wages averaged almost 9s. a week. " The vast population of London and its neighbourhood ought to lower the price of labour, and, did not the debauched life of its inhabitants occasion them to be more idle than in the country, it would have that efiect." The Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 was among the greatest achievements of the reformed Parliament, and, though irregularly carried out, has worked a gra- dual improvement in the character and prospects of the ^ Adam Smith remarks that in almost every part of Great Britain one pound of the best butchers' meat costs somewhat more than two pounds of the best white bread. 222 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. agricultural labourer. The startling rise of poor rates until they reached a total of between £8,000,000 and £9,000,000,-' the gross abuses of out-door relief in aid of wages, the notorious prevalence of jobbery in the management of poor-houses, and the entire lack of uniformity in Poor Law administration for want of guidance from a central office, had been forced upon public attention by the report of the Poor Law Inquiry Commission, until the conscience of the nation was thoroughly roused. It was at last realised how utterly the virtues of prudence, thrift, and self-respect had been undermined among the labouring classes by indiscri- minate relief. In some cases rent had actually been paid by the parish ; in others, the whole rateable income of the parish was absorbed in grants of " bread money '" to half-paid labourers, or in pensions to sturdy vaga- bonds, as they would have been called in earlier days, who never worked at all. It was proved that duriag the year 1832, out of £7,000,000 collected for poor 1 This was in 1830. The following Table, abridged from that given in MchoU's " History of the Poor Law," Vol. 11., p. 303, shows the pressure of poor rates, relatively to population and the price of wheat, at various epochs withiu a period of forty years : — Estimated Popu- lation. Tears ending Lady Day. Price of Wlieat. Amount Expended on Relief and Maintenance of Poor. Bate per Head of Population. 10,505,800 1813 108/9 £6,656,106 12/8 11,876,200 1818 84/1 7,870,801 13/3 12,517,900 1824 62/- 5,736,900 9/2 14,106,600 1832 68/4 7,036,969 10/- 14,372,000 1834 51/11 6,317,255 8/9i 17,504,000 1848 64/6 6,180,765 7/l| 17,928,000 1852 39/4 4,897,685 6/5i The prices here given differ considerably from the " Average Gazette Prices *' given in Appendix V. FOOB LAW OF 1834. 223 rates, only about £350,000, or one-twentietli, was paid for actual work performed. Tet so uneven was the distribution pf this wholesale relief, that paupers might be pampered in one parish and harshly stinted in the next. For instance, it was found that in ninety -three parishes, with a population of 113,000, the expenditure was at the rate of 14s. 5d. a head ; whereas in eighty neighbouring parishes, with nearly the same popula- tion, the expenditure was at the rate of only 5s. 9d. a head. Nevertheless, the law of " settlement," though denounced by Pitt, continued to prohibit migration from parish to parish. The new Poor Law re-organised the entire adminis- trative machinery on a sound footing, and gave the central Board a power of checking out-door relief, which, on the whole, has been wisely and firmly exercised. Thenceforward, wages ceased to be paid in part out of the rates ; each labourer depended for his earnings on his own industry ; pauper-marriages, and even bastardy, were no longer encouraged by parochial authority ; crime was sensibly diminished ; and the impotent poor were in every respect the gainers. But it was impos- sible for any administrative reform to provide adequately for the surplus population which the old system had brought into the world. Every influence had been recklessly employed to stimulate improvident marriages, and to place the childless labourer at a disadvantage as compared with the father of a family. After the first two children, the sum of half-a-crown, or one-third of a labourer's whole earnings, was allowed for each addi- tional child, with a further allowance during pregnancy. A labourer marrying at eighteen might thus find him- 224 ENOLISH LAND AND EN0LI8E LANBL0BB8. self at twenty-three with, his income doubled, and, being comparatively independent of wages, might shift from one employment to another out of pure caprice. The single labourer, though forced to subsist on his own earnings, was liable to be dismissed in favour of a married neighbour, whose family might otherwise be- come " chargeable." All these superfluous hands were now thrown upon the open labour-market, and the agricultural interest profited directly by the change. For the first time, farms were now worked up to some- thing like their full value, with an unlimited supply of cheap labour. Not merely was the rate of wages for able-bodied labourers fully one-third lower than at present, but half the work of a farm was then done by those whose labour could be had for little more than the bare cost of their subsistence. As compulsory education was then unknown, boys could be obtained in any number for 2s. 6d. or 3s. a week, with a dinner, the amount of work performed by them varying more or less with the quality of their food. Indoor servants in farm-houses at the same period were content with £3 or £4 a year and their board. It appears from the books of a Norfolk farmer, whose experience extends over nearly half a century, that, for some years after 1835, he employed a dairymaid, housemaid, and groom, at money-wages amounting altogether to no more than £10 yearly. In several other respects the expenses of a farmer were then singularly low. Cart-horses, in particular, were so cheap, that in many districts £100 would buy two serviceable teams.-^ ^ Arthur Young, in reckoning up the expenses of stocking a farm of •sixteen acres, assumes that two horses might be bought for £16. DEGBADED GONBITION OF LABOURERS. 223 Yet the complaints o£ agricultural distress so constantly renewed between the Poor Law Amend- ment Act and the repeal of the Corn Laws, pro- ceeded from the farmers, and not from the labourers, whose interests, it must be confessed, were little regarded by the Legislature. Probably their con- dition had never been so low, relatively to other classes and the general progress of civilisation, since the close of the Middle Ages. The old Poor Law, concurring with other causes, had crushed out within them all the instincts of property and of home, attach- ing them indeed to the soil, but giving them no interest in it, and offering them, in lieu thereof, a claim to parish doles, with a final refuge in the workhouse — a fit asylum for worn-out slaves.^ The new Poor Law emancipated them, it is true, from a servile reliance on out-door relief, but it could not restore their manhood or elevate them once more into free peasantry. Having once "got off the rates," the, most vigorous and intelli- gent of the rural labourers soon became eager to " get off the land," either by migrating into the manufac- turing districts, or by emigrating to America and Australia. Those who remained behind were, for the most part, men of inferior physique or energy, and it is certain that, notwithstanding the improvement of his diet and lodging, the agricultural labourer of the present day is too often a degenerate sp,ecimen of his ancestral type. The growing scarcity of agricultural labour after the repeal of the Corn Laws, and the extension of the ' See an article on " Pauperism and Territorialism," by the Eev. F. Barham Zincke, in the Fortmghtly Review of June, 1879. 226 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. railway system, naturally produced a rise of wages. We have seen that in the North, where agricul- ture had long competed with manufactures, and the labourers were virtually a picked class, the rate of wages had already been almost doubled between 1790 and 1850. In the South, where it had scarcely risen at all on the average during that period, it rose about 2s. a week between 1850 and 1870 — seldom, however, exceeding 12s. or 13s. Such a disparity, in days when locomotion was easy and knowledge widely diffused, is an economical paradox which needs some explanation. In the first place, it must be remembered that good labourers in the southern counties were always able to increase their ordinary earnings very largely by harvest wages and piecework. Some very interesting statistics on this subject were recently pub- lished by the Eoyal Agricultural Society,^ from which it appears that on a farm in the east of England nearly £30 was earned by one family, consisting of six persons (four below seventeen years' of age), in the five harvest weeks of 1877. These earnings were realised by reaping and tying, carting, thatching, gleaning, and so forth, in spite, or rather in consequence, of the use of machinery. The same family was found to have earned aboA'^e £97 in the year, though only the father and one boy of fourteen were constantly at work. In the second place, it must not be forgotten that, as low wages had long been supplemented by parish allowances, so they have since been often supplemented by a variety of perqui- sites and privileges which, in the aggregate, amount to ^ See Mr. Little's Treatise on " The Agricultural Labourer " in the Journal of the Royal Agricultwral Society for 1878. WAGES IN TUB NINETEENTH CENTURY. 227 a considerable sum. A man who pays but a shilling a week for a cottage, with a garden of half an acre, may- be really better off, with twelve shillings a week, than his fellow whose actual wages are four shillings higher, but who pays a full rent of three or four shillings for a cot- tage without land. Many a labourer, too, gets an allow- ance of cider, or presents of firewood, or "the grass of a cow," or the free use of potato-ground ready ploughed and manured, over and above his regular wages, as part of an unwritten agreement between him and his em- ployer. Wliere the highest wages are paid, such in- dulgences are, of course, less common. Labourers' cot- tages are built to pay; the roadside strip on which a stray cow or pig might feed is carefully enclosed, and fields are cut too close for the encroachment of a cottage-garden. Moreover, what may be called " out- side" wages are paid only during a labourer's best years. If he fall sick, he must recover speedily, on pain of losing his place ; when he grows old, he must fall back upon savings or the bounty of relations, or, in the last resort, upon the workhouse. The kindly attempts of an old-world farmer to find employment for decrepit or incompetent labourers cannot be imi- tated, if they are not ridiculed, by men cultivating 800 acres, at a rent of 46s. an acre, and paying wages of 18s. or 20s. a week. Nor must it be concealed that a stricter administration of the Poor Law has inevitably impaired, in some degree, the domestic relations of the labourer. The system of out- door relief, with all its abuses, had the advantage of maintaining the concen- tration of a family round its head up to the very last. The present system, coupled with the more general p 2 228 ENamSE LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. scattering of families in search of work, has perhaps diminished the aged labourer's enjoyment of Hfe. A man past work, living upon the surplus earnings of his children, is too apt to be treated as a burden ; and, if he is driven to enter the workhouse, he may too pro- bably be left to die without the consolations of family affection. In fact, the very provision which compels a pauper's family to contribute towards his maintenance affords a pretext for withholding all other proofs of family interest, and is often treated as a discharge in full of all fihal obligations. It was not to be expected that education, facility of transit, and other influences resulting from tbe great social movement of our age, should fail to disturb the simplicity of the old semi-feudal association between farmers and labourers. But these influences doubtless received a powerful impulse from the formation of the Agricultural Labourers' Union in 1871 — four years after householders in country villages had been deh- berately excluded from the franchise conferred on house- holders in towns, solely because their political education was not considered to be sufficiently advanced. Since that period, strikes and lock-outs have ceased to be unknown evils in agricultural districts, and wages have been raised by one or two shillings a week in most parts of the country.-^ On the other hand, labour-saving machines have been largely introduced, and greater efforts have been made by farmers to reduce the number ' Professor Rogers estimates that the money-wages of agricultural labourers may have risen about forty per cent, in the last forty years. Mr. Oaird, -writing in 1850, estimated the rise in money-wages since Arthur Toung's time to have been no move than fourteen per cent. Probably the purchasing power of a given sura paid in wages is on the whole as great as RISE IN WAGES OF LABOUBEBS. 229 of their labourers to a minimum. The average rate of wages for common day-labourers was stated in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society for 1878 to vary from about 13s. in the South, to 18s. in the North- east, and even 20s. or 21s. in the extreme North.^ Such differences in the price of labour correspond nearly to differences in its efficiency. It is well known that a given quantity of agricultural piecework costs about the same in the North as in the South, though it may require more labourers to do it in Hampshire than in Northumberland. It is also well known that labourers assisted to migrate northwards in quest of higher wages have frequently been compelled to return from inability to give the day's work required to earn those wages. But violent fluctuations in the rate of wages paid in it was forty years ago. The rent of cottages, as well as the price of fresh meat and butter, has doubtless increased, but, on the other hand, the price of bread, cheese, bacon, and clothing has been considerably reduced, especially within the last few years. 1 In some parts of the Scottish Lowlands wages have been doubled within the last thirty years. Mr. Bailey Denton, writing in 1869, esti- mated the mean nominal money-wages of able-bodied men throughout England at 12s. 6d. a week, and the mean time-wages at nearly £1 a week for the whole year. The difEerence he considers to be made up by the extra earnings of hay and com harvest, allowances of beer and cider, profits of occasional piecework, and value of cottages and gardens above the rent paid for them. This rent is seldom regulated by the law of supply and demand, or by the ordinary rate of interest on capital, except where cot- tages are built by speculators! In some counties,' and in many parishes, it is as high as 4s. a week, or above £10 a year. In others, it is as low as Is. a week, or £2 12s. a year. On Lord ToUemache's estates, in Cheshire and Suffolk, the rent of each cottage, with three bedrooms, and a small flower-garden, is £3 10s. a year ; and this may be taken as a fair specimen of the rent charged by very benevolent landlords. As such cottages now cost £150 to build, a rent of £3 10s. cei-tainly does not represent above half their real value. 230 ENGLISH LAND ANB ENGLISH LANDLORDS. the same part of tlie country, or under like conditions, are no longer possible, and a fall of 2s. or 3s. a week could not occur in one county, if tlie demand for labour remained steady in another. If we exclude from view bis absolute dependence on a landlord and an employer, the present lot of an Englisb agricultural labourer is by no means an unattractive one. Bred in a cottage wbicb, humble as it is, might well excite the envy of a town artisan, he is protected by the Legislature against premature labour on the farm, and gets his schooling for a fraction of the cost price at the joint expense of taxpayers and ratepayers, or perhaps volun- tary subscribers. During boyhood, he easily finds leisure for the manly amusements which his class — happily for England — shares freely with the gentry.-^ As a young farm-labourer, he can have no difficulty in living within his income, either under his parent's roof or in lodgings, which he can procure for less than 2s. a week. In some parishes the excellent practice of attaching sleeping accommodation to the village-club enables unattached labourers to live decently and cheaply without being driven by sheer discomfort into early marriage. If he will delay this step for some five or six years after he begins to earn man's wages, he ought to have a small deposit in the savings' bank, and may yet save more 1 The English day-labourer enjoys a great advantage over those of some other countries, in drawing wages regularly for six working days in the week, instead of having his work interrupted and his wages sus- pended by the irregular occurrence of holidays. This was noticed, three centuries ago, as one reason why Protestant farms prospered better than Roman Catholic farms in Ireland. PBE8ENT OONBITION OF LABOURERS. 231 against the period of heaviest strain. This will come upon him if he should have three or four children of school age at the same time, with others too young for school — neither his wife nor any member of his family being able to supplement his earnings. Soon after passing this stage, a good labourer will probably have attaiaed promotion from the lowest agricultural ranks. As a shepherd, a herdsman, a carter, or a foreman superintending the work of others, he may be occupy- ing a cottage and garden rent-free, with some extra allowances, even if he cannot aspire to fill the higher post of farm-bailiff. The butcher's cart will now be seen offcener at his door, while he will be planting out his children in some business which, though it may bring in little at first, will enable them to rise in the world. With good health, a good character, and moderately good fortune, he may hope to retain his place up to an advanced age, and to become dependent on his club or the contributions of his children for a very few years only. Such a career and such prospects may excite the compassion of those who imagine that every man is capable of winning a prize in life, but they do not compare unfavourably with the lot of other industrial classes, at home or abroad, so far as physical comfort is concerned. The clever artisan has a better chance of raising himself by his skill, and ultimately becoming a capitalist, but he pays a heavy price for it in health and in the quiet enjoyment of existence. The Trench peasant-farmer has more self-respect and independence, but his life is one of unceasing toil and anxiety; he is liable to conscription in youth, he is heavily taxed, and his ambition, no less than his ideas, 232 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANBL0BV8. is generally confined witliin the bounds of his own commune or arrondissement. The English agricultural labourer has much to learn from the one in culture and intelligence, as well as from the other in thrift and courtesy; but it may well be doubted whether he is not, in his own way, a happier being than either.^ Still, the fact remains that he scarcely ever becomes the owner of land, and seldom rents enough to call forth his full energies, or to serve as a stepping-stone from the occupation of a cottage to the occupation of a farm. The want of such a link between the two working orders of the agricultural community has long been recognised as a radical defect in our rural economy. In many parishes, an useful but very inadequate substitute for it has been provided by the allotment system, the extension of which has been constantly recommended by Parliamentary Committees, and even encouraged by the Legislature, within the last hundred years. As early as 1795, a Select Committee of the House of Commons took evidence on the subject, and reported very favour- ably of the system. It was shown that, in 1770, the lord of a manor near Tewkesbury, remarking the exception- ally good character of families holding plots of reclaimed land, set apart some twenty-five acres for cottagers' allot- ments, and had the satisfaction of seeing the poor-rates reduced in two years to fourpence in the pound, while they stood at 2s. 6d. in the surrounding parishes. The Select Vestry Act of 1819, which authorised the institu- tion of parish farms, also encouraged the formation of ^ The Essay of Mr. Little, already cited above, contains an admirable and graphic picture of the early life, daily work, recreation, and last years, of a typical agricultural labourer in the midland or southern counties. ALLOTMENT SYSTEM. 233 parish allotments. By section 13, the churchwardens and overseers were empowered, " for the promotion of industry among the poor," to let any portion of parish land "to any poor or industrious inhabitant of the parish," to be cultivated by him, on his own account, at a reasonable rent, and for a term to be fixed by the vestry. The later Act of 1 and 2 William IV., cap. 42, enabled the parish authorities to hire, purchase, or enclose out of common land as much as fifty acres for poor-allotments, in lieu of a parochial farm, if they should think proper; and another Act of the same year (1 & 2 William IV., cap. 59) facilitated the enclo- sure of Crown land for the same purpose. An Act of the following year (2 William IV., cap. 42) provided for the letting of allotments in parishes enclosed under Acts of Parliament, and the application of the rents to a dis- tribution of fuel among the poor.^ It does not appear how far these powers were exercised by the parish authorities ; but occasional experiments of the same kind were tried by individual proprietors, with marked success, in the dark age preceding the Poor Law Amendment Act. In one instance, cited in the First Eeport of the Women and Children's Employ- ment Commission,^ the largest occupier in a parish of 650 inhabitants had been driven to give up his farm by the pressure of rates amounting to nearly sixteen shillings in the pound. A considerable part of it was then let out to labourers, in parcels vary- ing from one to five or even ten acres, and this division was followed by a very sensible reduction > NichoU's " History of the English Poor Law," Vol. II. ^ Page 141. 234 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANLLOBBS. of rates, wliicli, however, was partly attributable to other causes. Meanwhile, the Board of Agri- culture, so prematurely dissolved, had offered a medal for the best cottages with a plot of land attached to each sufficient to maintain a cow and a hog. The utility of such allotments was, again, emphatically recognised by a Select Committee of the House of Commons in 1843. In the report of this Committee it was urged that " the tenancy of land under the garden allotment system is a powerful means of bettering the condition of those classes who depend for their livelihood on manual labour, and the benefits are obtained without corresponding disadvantages." Notwithstanding aU this weight of testimony in favour of allotments, the Women and Children's Em- ployment Commission of 1868 found that a very sparing use had been made of the facilities granted by the Legislature, and that only 2,119 acres out of more than 7,000,000 enclosed since 1760 were be- lieved to have been thus appropriated.^ Of course, a very much larger area is covered by cottage-gardens or other allotments, held of individual landlords, or, not unfrequently, carved out of glebe-land by parochial incumbents. Still, the Commissioners felt themselves bound to advocate a more general adoption of the system, and to lay down the main conditions of its success, as tested by experience. One of these was, in their opinion, that no allotment should be too large for a man to cultivate with his family in spare hours, so that labourers should not become " catch- 1 First Eeport, paragraph 196. ALLOTMENT SYSTEM. 235 men." If the allotment was near home, they con- sidered half an acre to be a proper limit. But, even where the allotment was no more than a quarter of an acre, its value was estimated by one witness at £4 a year on bad land, and £5 on good land ; by another, at thirteen weeks' consumption of a large family; and by a third, at two shillings a week. Evidence ■was also given that allotment rents were paid with almost invariable punctuality, and that allotment- tenants would put on the land a quantity of manure, averaging from fourteen to seventeen cartloads per acre.^ With such data before them, the Commis- sioners proceeded to indicate the amount of land which ought to be set apart for labourers' allot- ments. JSTow, the whole number of agricultural labourers, above 20, as enumerated under the Census of 1861, was 746,000. Beckoning one-fourth ot these as capable of cultivating half-acre allotments, and assigning quarfcer-acre allotments to the re- mainder, they found that some 233,117 acres would be required to provide for all. Assuming, further, on the authority of competent witnesses, that allot- ments were actually worth £16 an acre to cottagers, over and above the ordinary farm rent, they arrived at the startling conclusion that " the total net annual value given to those 233,117 acres, in gar- dens and allotments would be (233,117 x 16 =) £3,729,872." 2 1 First Report, paragraphs 162, 188, 190-1, 200. The evidence to whicli the Oommissioners here refer was taken before the Allotments Com- mittee of 1843. ^ Report, page xliii. According to the Census of 1871, there were then hut 620,000 agricultural labourers above the'age of 20 in England 236 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. It is now generally acknowledged that allotments of moderate extent liave a beneficial effect on the character of the labourer, and this principle has lately been sanctioned by the Legislature. A special pro- vision in the Agricultural Holdings' Act enables the landlord to resume possession of land occupied by a tenant,' for the purpose of granting labourers' allot- ments, as well as for the erection of cottages, and other objects of public importance. Nevertheless it cannot be said that allotments are accessible to most English labourers, even at accommodation-rents; and peasant- farms of the class so common in Ireland are still extremely rare in England. The owners of a few acres who occupy a very large space in the New Domesday Book are for the most part not agricultural owners at all. They are occupants of freehold villas within reach of London or other great towns, and " their land is bestowed in lawns, in gardens, in shrubberies, in pad- docks, producing nothing but perhaps a portion of the fodder required for saddle and carriage horses." ^ The few peasant-farmers scattered among them are generally to be found in the northern counties, and are more often men who have accumulated a little capital in and Wales. The Registrar-General states the number of allotment gardens below a quarter of an acre at 250,000, and that of allotments between a quarter of an acre and five acres at 160,000. Too much stress must not be laid on these figures, since the General Eeport on the Census admits the diificulty of distinguishing farm labourers from other labourers, while the difficulty of distinguishing their allotments from those of other classes must be almost, insuperable. The migration of labourers from the agricultural counties is clearly shown by the census returns to have been general, and not confined to districts in which low wages prevailed. ' See Mr. Arthur Arnold's "Free Land," Chapter I. GRADUATED FABM8. 237 business, than labourers wbo bave saved enougb out of tbeir wages to stock and rent a farm. Here and there, however, the experiment of gradu- ating farms down to a size not altogether beyond the ambition of a thrifty labourer has been tried with very encouraging results. Some forty years ago. a system of this kind was established on the Annandale estate, in Dumfries-shire, and continued for many years, under the care of an admirable factor, to bear remarkable fruits. Leases of twenty-one years were offered, at ordinary farm-rents, to deserving labourers, carefully selected for their character, who built their own cottages at a cost to themselves varying from £21 to £40, ex- clusive of labour, while the landlord supplied timber, stone, and so forth, at a cost of about £22. These houses were not grouped in villages, but chiefly situated along roads, with plots of from two to six acres attached to each, or the addition of grass for a cow. All the work on these little farms was done at by-hours, and by members of the family, the cottager buying roots from the farmer, and producing in return milk, butter, and pork, besides rearing calves. Among such peasant-farmers pauperism soon ceased to exist, and many of them soon bettered themselves in life. It was also particularly observed that habits of marketing, and the constant demands on thrift and forethought, brought out new virtues and powers in the wives. In fact, the moral effects of the system in fostering in- dustry, sobriety, and contentment, were described as no less satisfactory than its economical success. On the same estate there was a regular graduation of larger farms, ranging from those of "one plough," or some 238 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. sixty acres, up to holdings of £400 a year. When a farm of £100 a year fell vacant, out of eleven eligible offers for it, four came from promoted labourers.^ Unhappily, the deplorable failure of the cotter- system in Ireland, under wholly different conditions, has brought discredit on peasant-farming in all parts of the United Kingdom. Because a swarming population of Celtic race, and of the Roman Catholic rehgion, de- pending for their subsistence on potato-gardens, and mainly holding under middlemen, without security of tenure yet without the kindly supervision of a resident landlord, perished by thousands in the worst European famine of modern times, it has been far too hastily assumed that even the most exemplary Scotch or English labourers are unworthy of being elevated into peasant-farmers ; or, if so elevated, would be unable to maintain themselves in that position. Capitalist-farmers are perhaps naturally jealous of such competition ; land-agents studiously discourage a multiplication of small tenancies which might increase their own trouble ; and landlords are easily persuaded that, although pea- sant-farmers would undertake to pay a comparatively high rent, they would be constantly behindhand, and liable to break down in bad seasons. Thus it is that a rigid division between the status of a farmer and that of a labourer has come to be a distinctive feature of ^ See a remarkable article in the North British Review, Vol. XXXIV. (February, 1861), entitled "Large rarms and tbe Peasantry of tbe Soottisb Lowlands." The result of more or less similar experiments in other parts of Great Britain shows how much depends on the selection of the peasant farmers, and on the intelligent supervision of the land- lord. PBEJUBIGE AGAINST PEAS ANT -FARMING. 239 Bnglisli agriculture, and is defended by many English economists as if its necessity were a self-evident axiom of rural economy. In vain is it demonstrated that in the most progressive countries of Europe, in France, Grermany, Holland, Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland, and Lombardy — not to speak of America and the Colonies — no such division prevails, and the great majority of agricxiltural labourers are occupiers of land at least, if they are not landowners. In vain is history invoked to show that England herself flourished during many ages under a wholly different agrarian constitu- tion, or that a landless and homeless class of agricultural labourers has been the slow growth of three centuries, dating from the earliest Poor Laws. All such appeals to foreign experience or ancient custom are supposed to be silenced by the allegation that a free labourer at high wages can earn more in the year than he could make by farming without capital ; that, if he were a proprietor, he might lose the whole of his savings in one or two bad seasons ; that he would therefore do wisely to prefer any other form of investment ; and that, after all, English agriculture is able to yield larger returns, vnth fewer labourers, from a given surface of land, than any system of husbandry conducted by peasant-farmers or peasant-owners. It is admitted, indeed, by many admirers of the English system that an opposite system might work very well if the spirit necessary to make it succeed existed among English labourers; and it is even admitted that such a spirit has actually taken root in Ireland. But they do not seem to perceive that a spirit of proprietorship can only be called forth in any class by enabling it to obtain 240 ENGLI8S LAND ANB BNQLISS LANBLOBDS. property; and that, if English labourers no longer regarded it as hopeless to get possession of a small farm, they might possibly develop, like their fellows in other countries, the qualifications for cultivating it efficiently. \un Ml. OTHER ASPECTS OP THE ENaLISH LAND SYSTEM. CHAPTER I. The Peculiar Burdens and Privileges of Landed Property in England. The incidence of Taxation, as affecting the agricul- tural interest, has long been a favourite battle-ground of political and financial controversy. It is alleged, on the one hand, that land, and especially agricultural land, has been unjustly relieved from its fair share of the national burdens by the paramount influence of the landlord party in the State ; and, moreover, that if emancipated from the disabilities which now oppress the soil, it could well bear an additional charge of several millions. It is alleged, on the other hand, that landlords and farm-tenants are far more highly taxed upon their real incomes than other members of the upper and middle classes, and that charges now exclu- sively thrown upon land ought to be spread over other forms of property. In the discussion of such questions a remarkable confusion of thought may often be de- tected, and the economical issue is apt to be obscured by the introduction of perfectly irrelevant considera- tions. For instance, it is one thing to show that in the Middle Ages, when the possession of land was the sole foundation of civil rights as weU as the grand Q 242 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANLLOBBS. source of wealth, the whole pressure of Imperial and local taxation rested upon land ; it is another thing to show that a similar principle should be maintained in the present day, when incomes derived from personalty are sevenfold greater than incomes derived from land, and a landless capitalist may outweigh a duke in poli- tical influence. Again, it does not follow that because a past generation of landowners may have selfishly abused their power by undertaxing themselves, their sins are to be visited on their descendants in the form of excessive rates, whether or not it be for the interest of the nation at large. Equally absurd were it to personify "the land," as if it cotdd possibly be the subject of any claims or liabilities apart from those of the persons connected with it, as owners, farmers, labourers, or otherwise ; and as if a rational statesman could possibly entertain sentiments of tenderness or hostility towards Eeal Property in itself, as distinct from personalty, or towards agricultural land, as dis- tinct from house property. Taxes are paid, not by property, but by persons in respect of property. If it so happened that all the members of a State derived their incomes, however unequal in amount, from land, or trade, or professional industry, or all together in equal proportions, there could be no inequality in lay- ing taxation exclusively on one of these sources. It might be more convenient to take the money out of one pocket than out of another, but, as between classes or individuals, it could make no difference which pocket might be selected. Nor can much light be thrown upon the best modes of adjusting taxation between various kinds FALLACIES OONCEBNING TAXATION OF LAND. 243 of property, by proving that landowners are now con- tributing more or less to Imperial or local taxation than when they purchased or inherited their estates. Every man who purchases or inherits an estate takes it for better or worse, and it would be just as reason- able to mulct him of the additional value which may be imparted to it by a possible reduction of rates, as to guarantee him against a possible increase of rates. At the same time, any sudden or violent disturbance in the distribution of taxation between different classes of society would inevitably cause great hardship to individuals, as well as a general sense of insecurity; and, from this point of view, it is highly important to distinguish between taxes of old standing and those of recent origin. When land has been inherited or pur- chased subject to certain taxes, its owner is virtually trustee for the locality or the State of a rent-charge sufficient to satisfy this liability. When new taxes are imposed, he may fairly ask why other classes should not contribute equally with himself. Bearing these distinctions in mind, let us consider simply whether the agricultural interest is actually taxed more heavily, for Imperial or local purposes, than other sections of the community ; and, if so, how far this inequality is to be justified by sound reasons of financial policy. It is scarcely contended by those who condemn the "peculiar burdens" on landed property, that it bears, on the whole, a disproportionate share of Imperial taxa- tion ; but it is often stated, and still more often imphes, that both Tithes and Land-tax form an integral part of this share. If this notion be true at all, it is true only in a sense which has no bearing on the present inquiry. Q 2 244 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Tithes represent a reservation from the landed rental of the country made a thousand years ago for ecclesias- tical purposes. Such a reservation might have been made by an equivalent allotment of land in every parish, and its character ' is in no degree altered by the fact of its having been made out of the produce, and not out of the soil itself. Formerly the tenant was the pay- master, and since the amount payable fluctuated year by year, he was led to imagine that tithes were an addition to his rent. Now the landlord pays tithes, in the form of a rent-charge, but they do not, therefore, come, in reality, out of the landlord's pocket, or constitute a deduction, by way of tax, from the income of the landed interest. On the contrary, tithe-owners are themselves members of the landed interest and partners with the landlords, many of them, indeed, being laymen, and holding their own lands tithe-free. If there be any grievance in respect of tithes, it is certainly not that modern landlords are too heavily charged for the benefit of the Church, but rather that, under the Act for the commutation of tithes, passed in the reign of WiUiam IV., the Church has received far less than its due. The reason of this is that, whereas a tithe was formerly a tenth of the gross produce, and far more than a tenth of the rent, in the case of arable land, it is now assessed yearly by reference to septennial averages of agricultural prices, without regard to any increase of gross produce or of rental upon the valuation fixed in 1 836. " Up to that time," says Mr. Caird, " the income of the Church in- creased with the increased value yielded by the land, the original object, that the Church should progress in TITHES AND LAND TAX. 245 material resources in equal proportion with the land, heing thus maintained.. From 1836 that increment was stopped. Since that time the land rental of Eng- land has risen fifty per cent., and all that portion of the increase which, previous to 1836, would have gone to the Church, has gone to the landowners." Indeed, Mr. Caird estimates that, but for this measure, aggra- vated by changes in the mode of assessment, the annual income of the Church would now have been two mil- lions greater than it is, and points out that " under the operation of a law intended simply to encourage agri- cultural improvement, the community, represented by the Church, are gradually losing a part of their natural inheritance."^ Of coixrse, this process is occasionally checked in years of agricultural depression, when tithe- rent charges, calculated on the average receipts of the preceding seven years, are high in proportion to land- lords' rental ; but such checks are temporary, and, unless there should be a permanent diminution in gross produce or fall in rental, the advantage will still remain with land-owners as against tithe-owners. The case of the Land Tax obviously stands on a different footing.^ It was originally introduced into the fiscal system of this country in lieu of the ancient " subsidies," and established as a regular source of revenue by an Act passed in 1692. Though landed property had always been the chief subject of taxation, 1 Caird's " Landed Interest," chap. x. 2 In Appendix I. will be found a Memorandum on the abolition of Feudal Tenures and the Land Tax. The substance of this memorandum has been contributed by Mr. A. C. Humphreys-Owen, of GlanseTem, Montgomeryshire. 246 ENGLISH LAND AJSTD ENGLISH LANBLOBDS. yet personalty, too, was liable to contribution under votes of " subsidies," and this liability was maintained under the first Land Tax Act, which, in fact, purported to impose a general property or income tax. It set out by lajdng a duty of four shillings in the pound on the assumed yearly interest of ready money and other per- sonal estate, as well as on the salaries of offices and other profitable employments ; after which it charged landed property of all descriptions with a like duty upon its " full yearly value." The original liability of personalty, or " stock," to Land Tax is fully recognised by Adam Smith, who remarks that " if the greater part of the lands of England are not rated to the Land Tax at half their actual value, the greater part of the stock of England is, perhaps, scarce rated at the fiftieth part of its actual value." (" Wealth of Nations," Book Y., chap, ii.) Personalty may or may not have been sub- jected under the new Land Tax to a larger proportion of the national burdens than it had theretofore borne under the old votes of subsidies, and it may or may not have been just to substitute excise duties, mostly paid by the people, for the feudal dues", entirely paid by that class of landlords who held in chivalry. But the fact that personalty was originally liable to Land Tax cannot be ignored in an historical review of the question, nor must we forget that, if land now contributes but a fractional part of the quota then assigned to it, personalty was formally exempted from the operation of the Land Tax in 1833. It would appear, indeed, from the language of the Assess- ments Act passed in 1697, that in that year it was the intention of the Legislature to obtain as much as pos- ASSESSMENT OF LAND TAX. 247 sible by taxation of personalty, leaving real property to make up any deficiency in the required supply. But it is equally clear that in 1692 the Legislature intended land to be assessed, " according to the full true yearly value thereof," upon the basis of a rack-rent valuation, which of course would naturally rise with every increase of rental. This intention was notoriously defeated just as the pressure of " subsidies " had been evaded, by continuing for centuries to assess them upon a valua- tion made in the reign of Edward I. For a century after its first imposition, the Land Tax was renewed, by annual Acts, at various rates in the pound, " though not always without murmurs from the country gentle- men,"^ notwithstanding that it was invariably assessed upon the original valuation. At last Mr. Pitt, in 1798, fixed it at a perpetual charge of 4s. in the pound, and gave a power of redemption, under which more than £800,000 has already been cleared off, leaving the present yield no more than £1,100,000. The land- owners of the present day, therefore, pay infinitely less under this head than their predecessors in the early part of the last century ; " the constancy of the valua- tion," as Adam Smith observed, being "advantageous to the landlord and hurtful to the sovereign." They also pay infinitely less than land-owners in most foreign countries; and what they do pay, having been prac- tically fixed nearly two centuries ago, has long ceased to be felt as a burden, though its remission might be welcomed as an unearned bonus of nearly £30,000,000 by the landowners of England. The Land Tax, there- fore, is not in the nature of an income-tax on land- 1 Macaiilay's " History of England," Vol. lY., chap. xix. 248 ENGL18E LAND AND ENGLISH LANVLOBBS. owners. It cannot, however, be said witli strict accuracy of the Land Tax, as of Tithes, that it is not a tax upon land at all, but a mere reservation of income from land ; nor should the landowners, who have escaped so lightly from this impost, be invidiously compared with owners of personal estate, who have escaped from it altogether. The Inhabited House Duty may doubtless be re- garded as a special charge on Eeal Property, since, in theory, it should come out of rent, and not out of the occupier's income. In fact, however, the increasing demand for house accommodation, owing to the growth of population, has been such as to raise the rent of houses far more than any house-duty or window-tax could sink them, and economists have found good reason to doubt whether, in the metropolis and other populous towns at least, the house-duty, as well as the local rates, is not really paid by the occupying tenant. It is not unworthy of remark that farm-houses are placed in the same category of " inhabited houses " with shops, and charged with a lower rate of duty. There are very few other branches of Imperial taxation which can be supposed to press either too lightly or too heavily on Eeal Property in general, or on agricultural land in particular, as compared with per- sonal estate of all kinds. No inequality is alleged to exist in respect of Stamp Duties, the receipts from which must obviously depend on the number and nature of the deeds executed. The Eailway Duty, though some- times loosely included among taxes on land, is really a tax on locomotion, and assuredly comes, in the long run, out of the pockets of passengers and shareholders, who are not usually classed with landowners. Indirect INCOME TAX. 211) taxes on articles of consumption, whether in the form of Customs Duties or Excise Duties, afEect all classes equally, and vary only with the amount of expenditure. It is otherwise with Income Tax, Probate Duty, and Succession Duty, in respect of which important dis- tinctions have been drawn between Eealty and Per- sonalty, which deserve separate examination. Though incomes derived from landed property are nominally charged at the same poundage rate with professional and trade incomes, there can be little doubt that, in reality, they contribute a much larger quota proportionally. Not merely is it certain that profits made in business are often fraudulently understated, and seldom very strictly assessed, but deductions are allowed in the one case which are not allowed in the other. The exact acreage of an estate is a matter of public notoriety, and it is easy to ascertain the gross rent, upon which the Income Tax is assessed under Schedule A, without abatement for necessary outgoings, such as agency and the repair of farm-buildings. Trade- incomes, on the contrary, are debited with " the average repairs of all premises, implements, and utensils em- ployed in business, for bad and even doubtful debts, for parochial rates, for wages, clerks, shopmen or assistants, for stationery and the other petty outlays." ^ It has been estimated that, in consequence of this difference in the mode of assessment, the net income which pays Income Tax under Schedule A is at least ten per cent, below the gross income upon which the poundage rate is charged. The incomes of tenant-farmers, however, ' 1 See the article by Captain Craigie on " Taxation as affecting the Agi-i- ■CJiltnral Interest," in the Jonrnal of the Boyal Agricultural Society, 1878. 250 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. are treated with, far greater leniency, being taken at one-half the rental, and subjected to exemptions and abatements, which practically reduce tbe aggregate pro- duce of Schedule B for the whole United Kingdom to little more than one-tenth, of the sum produced hj Schedule A. The history of the Succession Duty has been de- scribed, not without some reason, as " a scandal of class legislation." It is certainly impossible to justify the partiality for landed property, which left the inheritance of it untaxed for seventy-three years after Pitt's Legacy Act of 1780 had imposed a duty upon the inheritance of personalty. Even under Mr. Gladstone's Act of 1853, whereby successions to landed property were first made liable to duty, a notable deviation from the rule applicable to personalty was made in their favour. When legacies of money are given by way of annuity, the value of the annuity is calculated by certain official tables, and duty paid upon that value, instead of upon the capital fund ; but when they are given in the form of a capital fund, the whole fund is of course subject to duty. Yet it is expressly enacted that the interest of every successor to land — though he may succeed in fee simple — is to be reckoned as representing, not the capital value of the land, bht an annuity equal in amount to its nett annual value, after making certain allowances for necessary outgoings. This annuity is to be valued, with reference to age, by the same rules as an annuity of money, and the duty on it is to be paid, not at once, but in eight half-yearly instalments.^ ' As it is the custom on many properties for rents to be paid some months after they are legally due, and as rents legally due fall into the 8U0GE8SI0N DUTY ON LAND. 251 By the same Act, successions to personalty under settle- ments, which had formerly been exempt from duty, were deprived of this exemption ; but a person thus becoming absolutely entitled to a sum of money, unlike a person becoming absolutely entitled to a landed estate, must pay duty on the whole capital value, and not only on his life-interest. This inequality is greatly aggravated by the entire exemption of landed property from Probate Duty, which is exclusively, levied on personalty, and brings in a revenue exceeding two milhons and a quarter annually. It is the less necessary to dwell minutely on other items of Imperial taxation, as affecting Eeal Property and "land" respectively, because the general result, ascer- tained by different methods of investigation, admits of little dispute. The official tables appended to Mr. Goschen's Eeport on Local Taxation (1870) show that, in the previous year, the proportion of Imperial taxa- tion falling on Eeal Property in England and Wales was £5,677,000 out of ^£46,652,949, or 12-17 per cent. ; while the proportion falhng on land only was £2,537,529, or 5-44 per cent.^ The calculations made on behalf of the Eoyal Agricultural Society in 1878 give £3,315,000 as the share of Imperial taxes on property or income "specially affecting agricultural incomes " in the whole United Kingdom,^ while the amount of Imperial taxation on " lands " in the whole personal estate, the first instalment may sometimes have to be paid out of borrowed money. ^ See Appendix to Mr. Goschen's Report on Local Taxation, Part III., Tables XIIL— XVII. ^ See Captain Oraigie's article on " Taxation as ajEEecting the Agricul- tural Interest " in the Journal of the Boyal Agricultural Society, 1878. 252 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. United Kingdom was roundly stated by Mr. Goschen, in 1870, as £3,000,000. These estimates do not materially differ, when the minor items which they include or exclude respectively are set off against each other ; and little is to be gained by any further attempt to apportion the pressure of Im- perial taxation between the several classes engaged in agriculture or other employments. It matters little, for instance, whether agricultural labourers, drinking less spirits than artisans in towns, but perhaps smoking more tobacco, contribute equally towards customs and excise duties. The broad fact appears to be that about one-eighth of the total Imperial taxation falls upon owners of lands, houses, and other "hereditaments," while farmers contribute somewhat less than trades- people with equal incomes. Considering that capital in every form is more heavily taxed for Imperial purposes than earnings, the proportion charged upon landowners corresponds nearly with that charged upon other owners of realised property.^ It is well known that in other 1 Tte instructive article of Captain Craigie, already cited, on " Taxation as affecting the Agricultural Interest," is too largely founded on conjec- tural data to be accepted as a conclusive statement. According to his computation, " upper and middle class incomes " generally contribute at the rate of somewhat less than three per cent., and " agricultural incomes " at the rate of somewhat more than three per cent., towards Imperial taxation. But the aggregate of upper and middle class incomes is com- posed, to a great extent, of trade profits and professional receipts. Captain Craigie accepts the Income-tax valuation of the landlord's rental for the United Kingdom (£67,000,000), and the Income-tax estimate of tenant's income at half the landlord's rental (£33,500,000), though Scotch and Irish farmers enjoy the privilege of being assessed at one- third only of the rental. Adding an estimated labourer's income of £58,000,000, he states the aggregate income of the agricultural classes in the United Kingdom at about £158,000,000, or about one-seventh of the IMPERIAL BUBBEN8 ON LAND. countries land bears a far larger per-centage of tlie whole Imperial taxation. Speaking of Imperial burdens in 1871, Mr. Goschen stated that "the amount paid by land alone in England is 5^ per cent. ; in Holland, land alone pays 9^ per cent. ; in Austria, 17^ per cent. ; in Trance, 18^ per cent.; in Belgium, 20^ per cent.; and in Hungary, 32i per cent." But these statistics are not, in themselves, sufficient to prove that land is far more hghtly burdened in England than in any other European State, for purposes of Imperial taxation. In order to justify that conclusion, we must further ascer- tain the value of land relatively to other kinds of realised property in the various States compared with each other ; and though in Belgium the relative value might not be very different from that ascertained for England, it is certain that in Hungary it must be very much higher. But the real stress of the argument respecting the alleged over-taxation of the agricultural interest turns upon the incidence, not of Imperial, but of local imposts. In approaching this part of the subject, it is specially necessary to guard against a frequent source of misap- prehension, indicated by Mr. Groschen. When it is found that a very large proportion of local taxation falls on Real Property, it is often loosely assumed that it falls wliole national income. Half of this agricultural income of £158,000,000 he reckons to be derived from capital, and to be in the nature of interest, and half to be derived from earnings, in return for labour and superin- tendence. After comparing the estimated amount of capital invested in land with that of capital invested in other enterprises, he concludes that " the income returned by the combined capital of the landowner and the farmer (say £80,000,000) is no more than SJ per cent., in contrast with th& average of 4J per cent, yielded by all descriptions of British capital." 254 ENGLISH LAKD AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. on the class popularly known as "land-owners." This assumption is doubly erroneous. " Eeal Property " includes not only land but houses, and not only houses but railways, canals, and other works, legally classed with realty only because they must needs be planted on the soil. Again, rates on Eeal Property are not exclusively paid by the owners thereof, but in many cases are mainly, if not wholly, paid by the occupiers. As Mr. Goschen has well remarked,^ " If a comparison were drawn between persons deriving an income from Eeal Property and persons deriving income from other sources, the case would be by no means identical with that which is made out when ' taxes on Eeal Property ' are spoken of generally, instead of taxes on income from Eeal Property." This quahfication, which applies also to Imperial taxation, is of the greater importance in proportion as houses contribute more to rates than lands, because the proportion of rates paid by the occupiers of houses greatly exceeds that paid by farm- tenants. It is also of peculiar importance in relation to England, because the relative aggregate value of houses, as compared with lands, is infinitely greater in England than in foreign countries.^ Supposing a new rate to be imposed on a country district, it is probable that, in the long run, it would come out of rent, for the profits of farming are already so low that a tenant might either seek a farm elsewhere, or betake himself to another employment, rather than submit to an abatement of income. But supposing a new rate to be imposed on the metropolis or any other growing 1 Report on Local Taxation, pages 37-38. 2 Report on Local Taxation, ib. INGIBENGE OF BATES. 255 town, it would probably come, in the long run, out of tbe bousebolder's pocket. The artisan must lodge within reach of his work, and will pay a famine-price for house-room, though he may put up with less of it, if rates be oppressive. The fallacy of assuming that rates are exclusively paid by ground-landlords was ably exposed by Mr. John Stuart Mill in the debate on Local Taxation in May, 1868. He pointed out that "part of our local taxation was proportionate to the rent of land, and that fell upon real property; but part was pro- portionate to house-rent, was equivalent to house- tax, fell on the occupier, was one of the fairest of all taxes, and resembled the Income Tax — a house being probably a better measure of what a man could afford to spend than his actual income. The land-rent was a very small portion of the rent of a house, and the constant tendency of land to rise in value made its rent a kind of income which might with great justice be made a basis of taxation." The same distinction had been indicated long ago .by Adam Smith and Eicardo, and it is one that has a material bearing upon the local, taxation of London. The "building-rent," as Adam Smith called it, forms a much larger element ia the gross rental of the metropolis than the ground-rent, enormous as this is ; and so far as rates fall on building rents, they are paid by the occupants of the building, whether or not they be entered on the parish books as ratepayers. In other words, a great part of the local taxation supposed to fall on landlords really falls on tenants — and not only on ratepaying tenants, but on families, down to the very poorest, who rent lodgings. 256 ENGLISH LAND AND BNGLISE LANDLORDS. The exhaustive re burns procured by the Poor Law Board in 1870 showed that Eeal Property, in its most comprehensive sense, then contributed 79 per cent, of the whole sum raised by Local Taxation, as against 21 per cent, levied indirectly in the form of toUs, dues, and fees on shipping, and other descriptions of property. The aggregate produce of Local Taxation in England, including these items, was found to have increased from £11,235,700 in 1826 to £20,640,000 in 1868— an in- crease which is described in Mr. Goschen's report as "less than in other countries, but nevertheless so con- siderable as to justify the especial attention which it has aroused." It was found that during the same period the amount of direct local taxes levied on Real Property had increased, in round numbers, by 100 per cent.; that is, from £8,000,000 to £16,000,000. The greater part of this increase, however, amounting to at least £6,500,000, had fallen upon urban and not upon rural districts, and the whole evidence pointed to the conclusion that house property in England bore an exceptionally large proportion of Local Taxation.^ Of the whole £8,000,000, it was shown that £2,000,000 represented an increase in the Poor rates, £5,000,000 was due to Town-improvement rates, and £1,000,000 to Police rates and miscellaneous purposes. The burden ^ It was shown by a Parliamentary Return of 1870 that in the 512 Rural Unions of England and Wales, the " gross estimated rental " was, in the year 1S68, £64,045,322, the rateable value £55,024,624, and the amount levied for rates £7,705,260 ; that is, 2s. 9Jd. in the pound. In the 155 Town Unions of England and Wales, the " gross estimated rental " was £54,339,377, the " rateable value " £45,001,968, and the amount levied for rates £9,023,588 ; that is, 4s. in the pound. Thus the rate in the Town Unions exceeded that in the Rural Unions by Is. 2f d. in the pound, or 44 BATES IN URBAN AND BUBAL DISTBIGT8. 257 on " lands " in respect of Poor Eate was found to have increased very slightly in 'the aggregate over the whole coiintr}^ and the poundage rate had not increased at aU ; the rural district sin which the Poor Eate was very high heing mostly those in which it had never heen otherwise than very high. On the other hand, the large increase in urban Poor Eates had followed a more remarkable increase in rateable value, and appeared to have been caused not so much by an increase in pauperism, as by a more humane and liberal treatment of the helpless, the sick, and the insane. The £5,000,000 increase of urban rates for municipal expenditure repre- sented " the lighting and paving of the streets, sanitary improvements of every kind, and public works of various descriptions, from vast enterprises like the Thames Embankment, the main drainage of the metropolis, and the many important works undertaken at a large outlay by Liverpool, Manchester, and the other large growing towns of the north of England, to the smaller but in- numerable operations which have been instituted by the 700 Local Boards established during the last ten years " preceding 1869. Of course, much of the outlay on these purposes must be regarded as a more or less remunerative investment rather than as a burden on local resources. Even the comparatively insignificant per cent. ; and the contrast would have been still more remarkable but for the fact that, whenever a Union contained a town within it, it was classed with the Rural Unions. The same Return showed an increase of £594,753 in the expenditure of Rural Unions for Poor Relief between 1861 and 1869, and an increase of £1,299,404 in the expenditure of Town Unions for Poor- Relief during the ' same period ; so that " in ratio of increase the Town Unions exceeded the Rural by 38-8 per cent"— Parliamentary Paper (437) of 1870. R 258 ENGLISH LAND AND UNGLISE LANDLORDS. increase on county rates must be subjected to some deductions of the same kind, for the maintenance of a county police, for the cost of Vaccination and Burial Boards, cannot be treated, like the Poor Eate, as a dead weight on the ratepayers, from which they receive no benefit themselves. The Returns issued in 1879, and covering the decade ending with 1877-8, exhibit, as might be expected, a further increase in Local Taxation. The aggregate amount raised in England and Wales by rates fall- ing on rateable property !in 1877-8 was £26,375,600, of which sum £2,023,163 is classed as having been raised for Imperial purposes, being met by an equal sum from the Exchequer for the maintenance of county police and asylums. More than £4,715,000 was raised by tolls, dues, and rates falling on traffic,^ and about £450,000 by duties falling on consumable articles, such as wine and coals. If we exclude these items, and compare the aggregate amount raised by rates on rate- able property in 1877-8 with the amount raised in 1867-8, we find an increase of about £6,000,000, or 30 per cent. In the meantime, the increase in " gross estimated rental" exceeded £32,000,000, and that in "rateable value" exceeded 27,000,000, or about 27 per cent., respectively. The average rate in the pound, stated by Mr. Groschen in 1868 at 3s. 4d.,^ seems to have remained almost stationary ever since, notwithstanding the steady growth of School Boards and the progressive 1 Under this head are included Burial Board fees, School Board fees, and payments to " Urban Sanitary Authority." ^ It is remarkable that Arthur Toung estimated the average rate at 3s. 6d. in the pound. FALL IN BUBAL POOB BATES. 259 outlay on sanitary improvements. This result is doubt- less largely due to a diminution of pauperism and a better administration of the Poor Law, as well as to a large increase of Treasury subventions. Here and there Sanitary and Education rates have pressed hardly on farmers, but, on the whole, the country has continued to be more lightly rated than urban unions.^ Lord Beaconsfield, replying to a memorial from Wiltshire landlords and tenants in February, 1880, was able to show a small decrease in the rates levied from the rural portion of that county during the six years ending 1878, especially since the increase of Imperial subsidies. Similar results are exhibited by a detailed Eeturn for the County of Oxfordshire, compiled in 1880 from the Eeports of the Local Government Board and of the Union Assessment Committees. It appears from this Eeturn, covering the period from 1868 to 1879 inclusive, that in six out of the nine unions within the county - the " Total Expenditure " had been considerably reduced within this period. In the remaining three, it had been very slightly in- 1 A statement drawn up by an experienced statistician exhibits the amount of Poor Eato (including all other rates connected therewith), raised at various periods in various counties of England and Wales, selected as fair representatives of the agricultural districts. In these counties, the rateable value of land exceeds that of houses and other kinds of property in the proportion of about 27 to 33 ; and in order to show more correctly the amount of Poor Rate contributed by the land, the amount levied in the chief Town Unions has been subtracted. It appears that after the marked fall in the Poor Rate between 1833 and 1852, it rose in these agricultural districts by 37 per cent, between 1852 and 1868, but fell again by 4 per cent, in the decade 1868-78. The burden of the increase, of course, fell to some extent on houses, railways, and mines, but chiefly upon land. See Appendix VIII. R 3 260 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. creased; but, for the whole county, it had declined from £130,519 to £122,800. Of course, if the Rural Unions had been distingxiished from the Town Unions, this decline would have been found to be pro- portionably greater. Moreover, as the rateable value of property had somewhat risen in every Union, the rate in the pound had been diminished even more appreciably than the total expenditure. Yet in most cases, the Payments for Police Eate, Highway Eate, Vaccination Pees, and Eegistration Costs, had become heavier since 1 868, while new rates had been imposed for Sanitary purposes and Education. On the other hand, the expenditure for Poor Eelief had been still more largely reduced in every Union except one, doubt- less owing, in part, to a simultaneous rise in agricul- tural wages. Such being the present amount and distribution of Local Taxation, we have next to inquire whether the agricultural interest actually bears an undue proportion of these burdens. Here again we must resolutely put aside several irrelevant considerations which have been imported into the discussion. One of these is the amazing suggestion that by the inordinate pressure of rates the price of land has been forced up, and smaU landowners have been crushed out of rural society.^ It is obvious that if all the rates were taken ofE land to-morrow, existing landowners would gain a very large and undeserved windfall; but a purchaser would find himself in the same position as before, and a yeoman would have exactly the same inducement for selling his 1 This argument was employed by more than one speaker in the debate on Local Taxation in the House of Commons, May, 1869. LOCAL BURDENS ON LAND. 261 property. What prevents money laid out in land from yielding more than two or three per cent., unless under special conditions, is the fancy price which land com- mands : what causes land to command a fancy price is the extraordinary desire for the possession of it which now prevails : what gives rise to that desire is a com- bination of social and political motives beyond the province of economy ; and the relief of land from rates would only increase its selling value. The best proof that landowners are not oppressed by exorbitant local taxation is, that so many shrewd men are anxious to become landowners. The indolent yeoman is not extirpated by the growth of rates; he is tempted to part with his patrimony by the agreeable discovery that he can make a larger income, and lead an easier life, on the interest of the purchase -money than on the profits of farming. He would make the same discovery, if there were no rates at all, for rate-free land would be all the more saleable. But the insatiable land-hunger which enables him to obtain a fancy price from some neigh- bouring proprietor or retired manufacturer does not seem to have been checked in any appreciable degree by the increase of rates ; and, for aught that appears, rich men would continue to covet land, as they covet titles, even though its possession were absolutely unre- munerative. It does not follow, however, that it would be right or politic for the State to raise the utmost possible amount of revenue out of this national passion. Other people, whose ambition takes a different — perhaps a less innocent — turn, and who spend their accumula- tions upon luxuries of which the enjoyment entails no public duties, have no moral claim to exemption from 262 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. local taxation, whatever difficulties there may be in reaching them, or assessing their proper quota of con- tribution. It is not only because land (including houses) was by far the most important kind of property in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, that it became the main, if not the sole, basis of assessment for Poor Law relief.^ It was also because the feudal conception of peculiar obligations incident to its tenure still exercised a great influence ; because very important powers and privileges were confided to its possessors ; and because it, no doubt, invited taxation by its very quality of immobility. Of these reasons, the last two are by no means obsolete. Riches of many sorts may take to themselves wings and fly away, especially in these days, when capital has no abiding home; but land and houses are always there, and no vigilance can ever conceal them from the eye of the rate-collector. Now, we have already seen that, if every citizen were pos- sessed of land or houses, and if his allotment of them always bore a definite proportion to his whole property, it would be perfectly fair, as well as highly convenient, to levy taxes, as well as rates, upon these alone. We have also seen, however, that any class of ratepayers would have reason to complain if their sense of security were disturbed by the sudden imposition of new burdens, and it is possible that farmers, having already to struggle with the uncertainty of seasons, may have ' In Appendix II., drawn up by Mr. A. C. Humplireys-Owen, some reasons are given for believing tliat personalty was intended to be charged with poor-rate, but that, in practice, it gradually ceased to be rated, until it was formally exempted by an Act of 1840. GRIEVANCE OF THE LANDEB INTEREST. 263 suffered more from tliis real grievance tlian other classes of ratepayers. But this is not the ostensible grievance of the landed interest. Their ostensible grievance consists in the comparative immunity from local rates of thousands upon thousands of villa-residents in rural districts and of lodgers in towns, whose territorial stake and rateable income in the localities for which they are assessed represent but an infinitesimal part of their real fortunes. Let us examine this ostensible grievance somewhat more closely. Let us suppose A to be a squire of limited means, with an estate rated at £2,000 a year, and B to be a neighbour living near the railway- station in a small house rated at £200 a year, but with a real income of £20,000 a year. At first sight it seems a monstrous injustice that A should pay, directly or in- directly, upwards of £300 a year in rates, while B escapes with a contribution of little more than £30 a year. But whence is B's income derived ? It may be entirely derived from large business premises in the City or suburbs of London, on which he pays a far higher rate in the pound than A and himself are required to pay in a country parish. It may be entirely derived from shares in gas companies, or water companies, or railway companies, or mines, or from some other form of pro- perty, bearing its full share of rates, in other parts of the country. In either of these cases, and in many other cases that might be suggested, B is not enjoying •fihe enviable immunity from local taxation which is so readily imputed to him, but contributing largely to it in the localities where his property is really situated. He is not a man of £20,000 a year in the parish of his 264 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. residence, but only perhaps of a few hundreds a year, and it would be palpably inequitable that he should pay on the rest of his income twice over. No doubt B's income may be wholly or partially derived from investments in the funds or in foreign loans, and in this case he will so far evade the burden of local rates, though not of the income tax. But even in this case, is his advantage over A absolutely unjust ? and would it be absolutely just, on the other hand, to charge him with a liability to local rates on £20,000 a year ? Surely not. If this rule were to be adopted, the settlement of a millionaire in a country parish would reduce the rates of all the other inhabitants to zero, and his departure would cause widespread distress, by virtually raising the rents of all the farms and cot- tages. Apart from . all other questions respecting the basis of local taxation, it must be admitted that a rate- payer's hability should bear some proportion to the benefit which he may receive from the expenditure of rates.^ If B, owning or renting a house and garden valued at £200 a year, used as many carriages and carts as A and his tenants, this would be a reason for his contributing as much towards a Highway rate ; and it is certain that many brewers, millers, and others, oc- cupying comparatively small premises, but employing ^ Upon this principle, the expense of arterial works for Agricultural Drainage is charged on the landowners of the district in proportion to the advantage which they may receive. The same principle has been carried a step further in Ireland, by Acts such as that which authorises the Midland Great Western Railway to borrow £500,000 from the Public Works Loan Commissioners, and to charge the ratepayers of certain baronies with IJ per cent, interest upon it, until they shall be repaid out of the profits upon a portion of the line. PBOPOSAL TO BATE PERSONALTY. 265 numerous teams of horses, escape their fair share of this rate. Such persons, however, mostly live in towns, and if it be unreasonable that inhabitants of towns should wear down country roads to which they contribute nothing, it is not less unreasonable that country folk driving in to market should profit by the well-paved and well-lighted streets, bridges, and police, maintained exclusively out of town-rates. Again, if B's property required as much pro- tection against contagious diseases and other nui- sances, he could not complain of paying as heavy a Sanitary rate; while, if he employed as much low- priced labour, to be ultimately supplemented by parish relief, he might well be content to bear an equal share of the Poor Rates. On the other hand, if he gets no more benefit from the rates, under these and other heads, than any ordinary occupant of premises worth £200 a year, then, so far as rates are payment for value re- ceived, it is by no means self-evident that he should be rated on a higher scale by reason of his extrinsic wealth. It must be remembered that B, as a tax-payer, already contributes largely, by means of Treasury subventions, to the cost of the County Police and County Lunatic Asylums, besides having to bear the whole cost of County Prisons ; and it is quite pos- sible that additional demands of the same kind may be made, and justly made, upon him. For instance, the Education rate may properly be con- sidered a tax for national purposes, and it is some- what hard that landowners and farmers, in common with other employers, should bear so large a pro- 266 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLI8E LANBLOBBS. portion of it, while they are prohibited from em- ploying the cheap labour of children, and compelled to pay a higher scale of wages to adults. But such demands cannot fairly be adjusted to B's income by strict arithmetical rules ; still less would it be fair to shift upon his shoulders a great part of A's burdens, without regard for vested interests. For it must not be forgotten that men's rights are to be measured, to some extent, by the expectations which the law has encouraged. A and B may have started in life with equal fortunes, but with different ambitions. The former, preferring the dignity of a landowner to a large income, may have bought a country place with a full appreciation of the privileges and liabilities attaching to it. The latter, preferring the consolations of wealth to a county position, may have gone into business and be satisfied to live in a villa, with the pleasing assurance that his gains will scarcely be touched by the rate- collector. The ambition of A may be the nobler and more generous, but that ' is no reason why, having realised the object of it, he should call upon B to share with him the pecuniary sacrifices which it entails. This consideration brings into view that which is, in fact, one main justification for the " peculiar burdens of land." These burdens are, in reality, the price re- quired by the nation, and willingly paid by the would- be proprietor, for its peculiar privileges — never, perhaps, more extensive or more eagerly coveted than at present. As English landlords, though released from many of their ancient liabilities, have been saddled with many new liabilities which do not fall on fundholders, so, PBiriLEGES OF LANDED PBOPEBTY. 267 having lost many of their ancient powers, they have been invested vpith many new powers, to which the mere fundholder, however wealthy, cannot aspire. To under- stand this, we must picture to ourselves the leading features of that rxiral government which is so familiar to us that we can hardly imagine it otherwise, yet which foreigners recognise as unique in modern Europe. To an Englishman born and bred in the country, it appears the natural order of things, if not the fixed ordinance of Providence, that " in each parish there should be a dominant resident landowner, called a squire, .unless he should chance to be a peer, in- vested with an authority over its inhabitants, which neither the Saxon chief, nor the Norman lord, in the fulness of his power, ever had the right of exercising. This potentate, who, luckily for his dependants, is usually a kind-hearted and tolerably educated gentleman, concentrates in him- self a variety of rights and prerogatives which, in the aggregate, amount to little short of patriarchal sovereignty. The clergyman, who is by far the greatest man in the parish next to himself, is usually his nominee, and often his kinsman. The farmers, who are almost the only employers of labour besides himself, are his tenants-at-will, and, possibly, his debtors. The petty tradespeople of the village community rent under him, and, if they did not, might be crushed by his displeasure at any moment. The labourers, of course, live in his cottages, unless, before the Union Chargeability Act, he should have managed to keep them on his neighbour's estate; but this is by no means his only hold upon them. They are 268 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. absolutely at his mercy for the privilege of hiring allotments, generally at an " accommodation " rent ; they sometimes work on the home farm, and are glad to get jobs from his bailiff, especially in the winter ; they look to him for advice in worldly matters as they would consult the parson in spiritual matters ; they believe that his good word could procure them any favour or advancement for their children on which they may set their hearts, and they know that his frown may bring ruin upon them and theirs. Nothing passes in the parish without being reported to him. If a girl should go wrong, or a young man should consort with poachers, or a stranger of doubtful repute should be admitted as a lodger, the squire is sure to hear of it, and his decree, so far as his labourers and cottage-tenants are concerned, is as good as law. He is, in fact, the local representative of the law itself, and, as a magistrate, has often the means of legally enforcing the policy which, as landlord, he may have adopted. Add to all this the influence which he may and ought to acquire as the leading supporter and manager of the parish school, as the most liberal subscriber to parochial charities, as the patron of village games and the dispenser of village treats, not to speak of the motherly services which may be rendered by his wife, or the boyish fellowship which may grow up between the youth of the village and the young gentle- men at the Hall ; and it is difficult to imagine a position of greater real power and responsibility. Yet even this does not exhaust the special advan- tages and prerogatives attached to the position of an English country gentleman. Until very lately, he alone FOWEB OF RESIDENT SQUIBES. 269 was lawfully eligible to a seat in Parliament ; and even now his class, wbicli maj^ be said to engross the Upper House, predominates conspicuously in the Lower. By this class the whole machinery of county taxation, county government, and county judicature, is regulated and worked. In those of them who may be magistrates is vested ex-officio a right of taking part in Poor Law administration ; in their gift is a great variety of lucrative county offices, and the wealthiest magnate of the greatest manufacturing town is "nobody in the county " until he shall have secured their good opinion. That powers so vast and so arbitrary have not been more frequently abused is an honour to our national character ; nor can we reflect without some feeling of pride on the admirable manner in which the "duties of property" are acknowledged and discharged on thousands of English estates. But this must not lead us to idealise this form of rural economy as our fore- fathers idealised the British Constitution, to ignore the grave defects and anomalies inherent in it, or lightly to dismiss the experience of other nations as inapplicable to our social condition. It is, indeed, impossible to survey county adminis- tration in its entirety without being struck by the extraordinary absence of self-government in rural com- munities. We are wont to look back on Saxon times as barbarous, and on the feudal system as oppressive ; but the simple truth is, that nine-tenths of the popula- tion in an English country parish have at this moment less share in local government than belonged to all classes of freemen for centuries before and for centuries after the Norman Conquest Again, they have not 270 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. only less sliare in local government than belongs to French, peasants in the present day, but less than belonged to French peasants under the eighteenth- century monarchy — ^i£ not, than belonged to their own ancestors of the same age, as described by Fielding. For it must be observed that modern reforms of local administration, however beneficial in other respects, have tended, by the very enlargement of the adminis- trative area, to destroy the old idea of the village commune. There was a time within living memory when each country village was still an unit of local administration, with no authority interposed between itself and Quarter Sessions — that non-elective body which has gradually absorbed so many powers formerly exercised by elective officers. The vestry meeting still represented those primitive gatherings of village elders on the banks of the Indus or the forests of Germany, to which representative government itself owed its origin. > Its petty jurisdiction embraced not only the maintenance of the church fabric, but the parochial management of poor relief, and the repair of parish roads, as well as the appointment of a parish constable. The first of these functions is now superseded by volun- tary assessment, and the last by the institution of County PoHce ; the second and third are practically vested in Union authorities or Highway Boards. The sanitary control of villages has also been placed in the hands of Union authorities, and a host of in- spectors, surveyors, registrars, and other officers (mostly appointed by the County, the Union, or the State), have relieved the parish householder of his time- honoured responsibilities. BUBAL GOVEBNMENT STILL ABI8T00BATIG. 271 But all these changes have by no means weakened the power of the squire, who, on the contrary, is a greater man than ever, relatively to other classes in the village community, since he is no longer jostled by independent yeomen, but surrounded by obsequious tenants and labourers. The Lord Lieutenant of the county, always ■ a great landowner, seldom places any but landowners in the commission of the peace ; in- deed, until lately, the possession of, or reversion to, landed property of considerable value was the necessary qualification of a magistrate ; and though persons who have paid inhabited house duty to the amount of £100 for two years are now legally eligible, few of them are actually appointed. If a squire is also a magistrate, he not only helps to conduct the driving-wheel of county administration at Quarter Sessions, and of Union adminis- tration at the Board of Gruardians, but is charged indivi- dually with multifarious public duties which, burdensome as they are, greatly enhance his personal influence. Even if he is not a magistrate, he can scarcely fail to be vir- tually the " headman " of the village, as lord of aU the farms, cottages, and allotments round his own domain, as the chief employer of labour in the locality, and as the main supporter of all the village charities ; so that, if the old " town-moot," or village assembly, could be revived, its unanimous resolutions would be outweighed by the expression of his own individual will. AU this enters into the calculations of those who purchase country places, and might well reconcile those who inherit country places to " peculiar burdens on land " as heavy as are alleged to exist, and far heaviei than actually exist. In short, the questions of Local Taxa- 272 HNGLI8H LAND AND EN0LI8H LANDLORDS. tion, of Local Grovernment, and of Land Tenure, must be treated, if at all, as a whole. There is much to be said for transferring certain sources of Imperial revenue, such as the house-duty, to the disposition of local authori- ties ; and something to be said for the principle, though little for the feasibility, of a local income-tax/ But the proposal to distribute rates uniformly over all the schedules of the existing income-tax is a proposal, by a few lines in an Act of Parliament, to confiscate so much income of the general taxpayers for the benefit of landowners, and to relieve the rental of eldest sons out of the scanty annuities of younger children.^ Such a proposal will never be entertained seriously by the Legislature, and we may safely predict that any com- prehensive redistribution of local taxation in rural districts will be accompanied by a comprehensive re- distribution of rural government and territorial power. t^i It is remarked by M. Lavergne, in his " Economie Rurale de I'Angle- terre," that, whereas in France two-thirds at least of the taxes raised locally are spent in Paris and the great towns, in England three- fourths are spent in the localities from which they are raised. - See Mr. GifEen's Essays in Finance — " Taxes on Land," p. 247-8. CHAPTEE II. The Agricultural Depression of 1879-80, and the Prospects of American Competition. The Agricultural Distress of the year 1879-80 will long be memorable in the economical records of the country, and may probably be remembered as marking a crisis in the history of the English Land System. Its most obvious and principal cause was the occurrence of several bad seasons in succession, culminating in the coldest, wettest, and least genial spring and summer that had been known within living memory. But this calamity was greatly aggravated, as regards the interest of farmers, though mitigated, as regards those of the public, by a singularly low range of agricultural prices, as well as by a general sense of insecurity, due to a vast expansion of foreign competition. It is only by a separate examination of all these conditions that we can fully realise the gravity of the question now press- ing upon the agricultural interest. Of the six years beginning with the year 1873, two only yielded more than an average crop of wheat per acre, while four yielded a crop far below the average.^ ^ Mr. Bear, reviewing the G-rain-Orop Returns for ten years ending with 1878, points out that only one (1874) yielded an exceptionally good wheat crop, only three a good barley crop, and only two a good oat crop, while the crops of peas and beans were almost uniformly poor.— " Agri- cultural Depression," Fortnightly Beview, February, 1879. Messrs. Lawes and Gilbert, in an elaborate paper on the " Home Produce, Imports, Con- 274 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. But tte wheat crop of 1879 was not only worse than any in this series, but the worst that has been harvested since 1816. Such is the conclusion of Mr. Lawes/ whose authority is second to none on the subject of wheat-growing, and whose opinion is amply supported by that of other competent witnesses.^ He calculated that, allowing for deficiency of weight, as well as for scantiness of quantity, the wheat crop of 1879 on his own land at Eothamsted fell short of the average for the last twenty-seven years in the proportion of 45-^ to 100, and fell short of the average for the first seven- teen years of that period, in the proportion of 43^ to 100. Though he believed the deficiency to be some- what less on lighter soils, he estimated the acreable produce for the whole United Kingdom at little more than half the average, and the whole produce as no more than 5,000,000 quarters, out of about 23,650,000 quarters required to feed the population. The loss was naturally heaviest on highly farmed land, since the additional capital expended on it was almost thrown away. Thus, whereas three artificially manured plots at Eothamsted had yielded, in 1863, 55 bushels per acre, at an average weight of 62f lbs. to a bushel, the same plots under the same manures yielded, in BTunption, and Price of Wheat, over the harvest years 1852-3 to 1879-80 inclusive," supply abundant evidence leading to a like conclusion. They show that, during the last eleven years of the period, the average produce of wheat per acre was but 27f bushels, against an average of 28^ bushels during the previous sixteen years. v'The Wheat Crop of 1879." By J. B. Lawee.— Journal of the Bath and West of England Society, 1879. ' See the opening address of Mr. Wm. Sturge, at the general meeting of the Institution of Surveyors, Nov. 10th, 1879. DEFICIENCY IN WHEAT AND OTHEB CROPS. 275 1879, only 19^ busliels per acre, at 53f lbs. per bushel, equal to only 16f bushels at the same weight per bushel as in 1863. This consideration helps to explain the fact that some of the best and most scientific farmers were among the greatest sufferers ; for the profits of scientific farming are only to be obtained by a large outlay, and such is the levelling effect of bad seasons that he who has laid out most reaps the smallest proportionate return. If A, farming 300 acres, has £4,000 invested in his land, and B, with the same acreage, has but £2,000, A ought to obtain a profit of £100 in excess of B, in order to keep down the extra interest on his capital, whereas, in a bad season, his crops may be little, if at all, heavier. Happily, the whole area under wheat in the United Kingdom had decreased from 3,982,000 acres in 1869 to 3,056,428 in 1879, of which Scotland contributed but 76,613 acres, and Ireland but 157,508. Still a deficiency of nearly half the wheat crop on 3,000,000 acres, amounting to nearly 5,000,000 quarters, would represent a deduction of £10,000,000 or £12,000,000 from the profits of farmers, without allowing for the inferiority of quality. This deduction was not, as in ordinary years, re- deemed by a corresponding abundance in other crops. All cereals, except oats, are known to have been damaged, though in a less degree, by the excessive rainfall. In many low-lying districts the hay crop was carried away, or utterly spoiled, by floods, and, even on higher ground, the grass was found to be rank and almost void of "heart," or nutritive properties. Even root crops were injuriously affected by the same causes, both in quantity and in quality, so that it was impossible s2 276 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. to keep an average Itead of stock during the winter, and store cattle purchased a few months before had to be sold off at a considerable loss. In the meantime the disease known as sheep-rot, engendered by the continuous saturation of pastures, devastated the flocks " not only in parts of the country which are liable to periodical outbreaks of the malady, but also in districts which are usually free."^ The live stock on farms, there- fore, fully shared the disasters which fell upon agricul- ture in all its branches, and no resource was left whereby farmers could recoup themselves for the poverty of the harvest. The aggregate deficiency in all kinds of agricultural produce was estimated at 25 per cent., that is, one-fourth of the materials out of which rent, wages, subsistence, and profit must be provided. In former periods, however, bad harvests had gene- rally brought with them an equivalent, and sometimes a more than equivalent, rise in prices. This natural law of compensation, as it once seemed to be, has ceased to operate of late, and a bad harvest now yields even a smaller return per quarter to an English farmer than a good one, inasmuch as the quality of the wheat is inferior, and fails to command the full price of foreign wheat in the market. It has been calculated that if the price of home-grown wheat during the six years beginning with 1873, had varied inversely with the deficiency of product, as of old, it would have fetched on the average 62s. 6d. per quarter ; whereas it actually fetched, on the average, but 49s. 6d. per quarter.^ It. ' Professor Brown on the " Effects of Excessive Rainfall." — Journal of the Bath and West of England Society, 1879. 2 Address by Mr. Q. Shaw-Lefevre, M.P., to the Statistical Section of the British Association, August, 1879. LOW RANGE OF PBIGES, 1873-9. 277 has been calculated, further, that if the wheat crop of 1879 had been only equal in quantity to those of the bad years 1871 and 1872, and sold at the same price, it would have realised above £9 an acre ; whereas it pro- bably realised little more than £5 ] Os. per acre. But this is not all. Though barley and oats had felt, to some extent, the effect of several bad seasons preceding 1878, the price of these crops had been well maintained up to the beginning of 1879.^ During the year 1878 the mean price of barley was 40s. 2d. per quarter, or 25 per cent, above the tithe commutation average ; and that of oats 24s. 4d., or 10 per cent, above the average. This great increase in the price of barley doubtless explains the fact, shown by the Agricultural Eeturns of 1879, that " barley has partly taken the place of wheat, being this year sown on 2,932,000 acres, an increase of 209,000 acres, and nearly 8 per cent., over 1878, and the largest area sown with that crop since the Agricultural Ee- turns were first obtained in 1867." But in the course of 1879 the fall in prices extended itself more or less to all kinds of agricultural produce. " Wheat fell to 40s. per quarter, barley to 28s. or 30s., oats to 18s. or 20s., whUst the fall in the price of cheese was extraordinary — 20 or 30 per cent. — and for some months the price ruled lower than has been known for upwards of fifty years. "^ The price of meat, which had increased by 1 The Tables given in Appendix Y. show that during the period 1849 — 1879 the average price of barley was 2s. 2d., and that of oats 2s. lower than it had been in the period 1800 — 1848, including many years of war. ^ Address of Mr. "Williani Sturge to the Institution of Surveyors, November 10th, 1879. This extraordinary fall in the price of cheese, however, produced a no less extraordinary effect in stimulating consump- tion, which, again, re-acted upon price. Prime American cheese soon rose 5^78 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. nearly one-lialf in the previous thirty years, at last fell about one penny a pound, and that of prime butter twopence per pound, while the price of English wool, which had exceeded 2s. in 1865, and reached Is. lid. in 1873,^ was reduced to 9^d. or lOd. Two causes are amply sufficient to account for this general fall in agricultural prices. The first is the depression of trade which prevailed throughout the year 1879, compelling the working classes to curtail their purchases of aU articles, except the bare neces- saries of lif«, and manifesting itseK most remarkably in the diminished consumption of alcoholic liquors. The second is the enormous increase in the impor- tation of wheat and other provisions from abroad. Since this cause must be regarded as permanent, while depressions of trade are naturally followed by corre- sponding revivals, it may be well to consider it more particularly. The vast extension of the railway system in the United States, dating from the year 1869, brought the great corn-growing area of Central and Western America within easy reach of the EngKsh markets. The effect of this new supply first made itself felt on the price of wheat in England about the year 1873, but the increase of production in America had been truly extraordinary at a much earlier period. It was greatly stimulated by the westward emigration of the surplus population from the Eastern States, after 1873 ; by the from 36s. to 56s. per cwt., and the best qualities of Cheddar and Cheshire reached a much higher maximum, fully maintaining their superiority in the English market. 1 "Agricultural Eetums for 1879," Table 26. W3EAT-GB0WING IN TEE UNITED STATES. 279 adoption of minimum trafl&c-rates on the railways and of minimum freights on the Atlantic steamers ; and by a cycle of abundant harvests in America coinciding with a cycle of deficient harvests in this country. It appears from official tables that whereas the quantity of wheat grown on the Atlantic coast had risen but slightly, from about 6,500,000 quarters in 1849 to about 8,000,000 quarters in 1877, the quantity of wheat grown in the Central Belt had risen in the same period from about 5,500,000 quarters to about 18,500,000 quarters ; and the quantity of wheat grown in the Trans-Mississippi States from about 660,000 quarters to upwards of 19,000,000 quarters. In 1868 a further increase of nearly 8,000,000. quarters took place in the production of the Western States ; and the whole area under wheat in the United States was then stated at 30,000,000 quarters, and had reached 32,836,000 acres in 1879, being more than tenfold as great as the wheat-growing area of the whole United Kingdom.^ But even this immense area is but a small part of that now in process of development for wheat growing on the American Continent. It is supposed that less than one-third of the cultivable land in the United States is already cultivated, and every year fresh districts, as large as English counties, are being allotted to settlers, on the " alternate block system," along the lines of railways. It is stated that in the three months ending with November 30, 1877, above 1,000,000 acres were thus appropriated in Minnesota and Dakotah by Gro- 1 See the Addresses of Mr. William Sturge and Mr. Gr. Shaw-Lefevre, M.P., already cited. 280 ENGLISH LAND AND ENOLISS LANDLORDS. vernment land offices and railway companies, wliile in tlie first three months of 1879 nearly 500,000 additional acres were sold in "Western Minnesota alone. In the meantime, no less than 3,000,000 acres of land suitahle for wheat growing were taken up during 1877 by actual settlers in the adjoining province of Manitoba, belonging to Canada. The area drained by the two Saskatchewan rivers, and stretching north-west for 300 miles, is estimated at 90,000,000 acres, all capable of growing the finest wheat, and the whole " fertile belt of the North-West," stretching on both sides of the frontier between Canada and the United States, is said to embrace " at least 200,000,000 acres.''^ The average production of American and Canadian wheatfields per acre is, of course, far below that of arable land in Great Britain. But the first crops obtained from the virgin prairie or pasture are often so prodigious as to cover, and more than cover, the small cost of purchase, and return the whole capital invested. We read of 40 and 50 bushels per acre being sometimes produced by land newly broken up in the north-western provinces of Canada, and of the farmer realising £2 or £3 per acre over and above his entire original outlay and working expenses.^ A continuous succession of ^ See a suggestive paper on " Our New "Wheatfields in the North- West," by Mr. T. T. Veniou Smith [Nineteenth Century, 1879). See also an article by Mr. Atkinson, of Boston, on the Effects of Railways and the Development of the West on the Agriculture of New England, in the Fortnightly Revieiv of July, 1880. ^ In the article by Mr. T. T. Yernon Smith, above cited, a case is men- tioned in which a great proprietor in Minnesota realised a clear profit of £24,000 on 8,000 acres under wheat in the year 1877, since each acre cost him less than £2 for seed, cultivation, harvesting, and threshing, and pro- duced 25 bushels, valued at £5. YIELD AND PBIOE OF AMEBIGAN WHEAT. 281 wliite crops, without a liberal application of manure, im- poverishes even the fertility of virgin soil in the course of a few years, and the average wheat crop over the whole United States territory does not exceed 13 or 14 bushels, or If quarters, per acre.^ Now, the average cost of growing wheat in the Western States has been reckoned at about £1 per quarter, and the average cost of exportation to England through New York, with insurance and all other extra charges, has been reckoned at about 17s. 6d.^ It follows that each quarter of wheat imported by England from the Far West by this route has cost, on the average, 37s. 6d. out of pocket, exclusive of the grower's profit, which, if it be taken at 4s. Gd. per quarter, would raise the entire cost to 42s.° ^ The acreable yield of wheat in the United States was officially stated at less than 11 bushels for 1875, 10 bushels for 1876, 13i bushels for 1877, and rather less than 13 bushels for 1878. — Agricultural Returns for 1879. According to Messrs. Read and Pell's report on " American Agriculture," the yield for 1879 was 13'1 bushels, and the average yield over a long series of years has just exceeded 12 bushels. They estimate the whole cost of growing wheat on prairie-land at about £2 2s. per acre. On the famous Dalrymple farm, twenty-five miles west of Fargo, Dakota, which is probably the largest cultivated farm in the world, the estimated yield of 24,000 acres under wheat, in 1880, was 18 bushels per acre. In 1879, it averaged 20 bushels. The cost of production in that year was esti- mated at about 31s. per acre, or Is. 9d. per bushel, while the wheat could be sold at the nearest railway station for at least 3s. per bushel. ^ According to another estimate, the cost of freight may be taken at about 12s. per quarter, nearly representing the rent paid by an English farmer. But it is probable that in this estimate no account is taken of insurance and other charges. ^ The sea-freight of Calif omian wheat from San Francisco to England was about 12s. per quarter in 1879. But, notwithstanding the vast increase in cultivation, its price at San Francisco was about 38s. per quarter, so that it could not be delivered at Liverpool under 50s. per quarter. The reason why the export price of wheat grown in California so greatly exceeds the average for the Western States is that most of the older farms near the 282 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. If this be so, and if the expense of carriage should not be increased — still more, if it should be diminished — it is difficult to see how English farmers can long con- tinue to compete with their Western rivals in the culti- vation of wheat, unless, indeed, the consumption of the • Americans themselves should ever be large enough to overtake their production. Considering that enough wheat is already produced in the United States to feed at least 20,000,000 of people beyond their existing population of 50,000,000, that some two-thirds of their cultivable area remains to be reclaimed, and that of that already reclaimed but a small proportion is tho- roughly cultivated, such a contingency as the exhaustion of Transatlantic corn-supplies is beyond the [region of reasonable speculation. On the contrary, when the com- munications between Lake Winnipeg and Hudson's Bay have been completed, we may fairly expect a large increase of these supplies at a price which cannot yield a profit to English farmers.^ These conclusions are substantially confirmed by the official "Eeport of Messrs. Read and Pell on American Agriculture." After discussing the various factors which determine the cost of American wheat grown within 300 or 400 miles of Chicago in the English market, they give the following general esti- mate : — Califoruian sea-coast have been already exhausted by over-cropping. This involves a heavy outlay in artificial manures, balancing the greater cost of carriage from the new farms in the interior. ' Mr. Gr. Shaw-Lefevre, M.P., in the Address already cited, arrives at a different conclusion, mainly relying on the probable increase of traffic rates, and on the fact that " every year the central line of wheat production is being carried further to the westward." ME8SB8. BEAD AND PELL'S REPOBT. 283 £ a. d. Cost of growing a quarter of wheat (480 lbs.), in the West, including delivery to local depot 180 Freight to Chicago 6 8 Thence to New York 5 2 New York to Liverpool 4 9J Handling in America (which may be avoided on through rates) ... 1 1 Liverpool charges 2 1 £2 7 9i To bring the estimate up to English weight of five centals the quarter, one twenty-fourth, or nearly 2s., would have to be added. The estimate may possibly ere long be affected by a reduction in the freights from the farms to Chicago to the extent of one-half, and special " through " contracts are said to defy any precise calculations. Allowing a deduction on this head of 3s. 9d., or about 6d. a bushel, the estimate would be brought down to 44s., or, without Liverpool charges, to 42s. the quarter. At the same time Messrs. Eead and Pell point out many circumstances which, may help to redress the balance in favour of English agriculture. The Western farmer, it is true, has a virgin soil, which he buys at a nominal price and cultivates without manure, a level surface, clear of stones though not always of stumps, and abundance of unbroken sunshine. These are ob- viously great advantages, but the effect of them must not be overstated. Eent, formerly supposed to repre- sent one-third of a farmer's expenditure, is now sup- posed to represent no more than one-fourth or one- fifth, so that a Western farmer does not gain more than 20 or 25 per cent, as compared with his English rival, by occupying land rent-free. His mode of husbandry is wonderfully simple and cheap, it is true, but, after all, his soil does not produce more per acre than Mr. Lawes has obtained at Eothamsted /ro?n land con- 284 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Unuously unmanured upon an average of twenty-six years .^ Moreover, he must contend against severe w^inters, suspending agricultural operations, frequent droughts, the ravages of destructive insects, and the scarcity of good water on the prairies. He uses labour- saving machinery, it is true, to an extent barely con- ceivable in the old country, so that, in one instance, we hear of only two labourers regularly employed on a farm of 5,000 acres, l^or does the labour which he employs probably cost him more than would be paid for the same amount of human toil in England, for labourers are there expected to be at work from sunrise to sunset, and are discharged without scruple after harvest. But the Western farmer himself, aided by the members of his family, is his own chief labourer, and, for this reason, he is usually content with a farm of one-quarter section, or 160 acres. "He adds to all the mental cares of ownership the physical stress of manual labour of the severest description. No other class of men toil so unceasingly, enduring the life of savages for a while in order to conquer the backwood or civilise the prairie. Save in the harvest, certainly no agricultural labourer in England expends anything like the same time and strength in his day's work." Again, his present system of tillage is one which depends mainly for its economical success on the power of a natural seed-bed, never fallowed or manured, to produce successive crops of wheat. Even the accumu- ^ It appears from Mr. Lawes' memoranda on his field experiments that on plots unmanured continuously from 1852 to 1877, the average produce of wheat was 13J bushels per acre. FB08PE0TS OF AMERICAN WHEAT-OBOWING. 285 lated vegetable deposits of centuries must one day be exhausted by such a process, and the central valley of North America will ultimately lose its agricultural supremacy unless recuperative crops be introduced to renew its fertility. In this case, the cost of cultivation will be greater, while, if the corn-growing area should be advanced still further westward, the cost of transit will be greater. In the meantime, the inevitable de- velopment of American manufactures, stimulating afresh the marvellous growth of American population, yet withdrawing more and more hands from agriculture, cannot fail to increase the home consumption and raise the price of American wheat. The combined effect of these and other conflicting tendencies cannot, of course, be foreseen with certainty ; but the presumption must be that, for many generations at least, the Western States 'of America will be the chief granary of Great Britain. With at least equal energy and skill, with a climate and soil better adapted to wheat-growing, with an ever-increasing supply of labour, and with ever- multiplying channels of transport. Western farmers of English race can scarcely fail, ere long, to maintain the same lead in the markets of Europe, which English manufacturers, but for a protective tariff, would be able to maintain in those of America. The report of Messrs. Eead and Pell does not supply equally complete materials for an estimate of the extent to which American competition may be expected to affect the meat supply of Great Britain. It would appear from the facts stated in one part of this report that fat cattle, of 3| or 4 years old, reared on the vast plains about Cheyenne, in the Wyoming 286 ENGLISH LAND AND JSNGLI8E LANDLORDS. territory, can be delivered and sold in the Chicago market, at a large profit, for about £7 a bead. On the other hand, according to the official return of the sales of live stock in that market during 1879, the average price of a bullock weighing 1,200 lbs., and sold in the usual way by the 100 lbs. of live weight, would be nearly £10. The carriage from Chicago to New York, including food, water, and attendance, is calculated by Messrs. Eead and Pell at £1 2s., and the freight to England at not less than £6, exclusive of 30s. for attendance, food, and insurance, and exclusive also of dock charges, landing charges, and other dues incident to delivery. This would raise the value of a beast worth £7 at Chicago to near £15 at Liverpool, and that of a beast worth £10 at Chicago to near £18 at Liver- pool. As the cost of transit from Texas to Chicago is greater by some 18s. or 19s. than from Wyoming, the profit of fattening cattle in that State for the English market ought to be proportionately less ; but, in fact, cattle bred in Texas are mostly driven up to be fat- tened in the corn-growing Middle States. Happily for the British grazier, " the great mass of the bullocks from the West, however well they are grazed, are not good enough to export alive, especially as a beast of inferior weight costs nearly as much for transport as a prize animal." It appears that none but the primest American oxen find their way to England, and the condition of these is sensibly injured by the voyage. It is well known, however, that sea-freights of cattle have often been much lower than £5, which is here assumed as the natural standard, or even than £4, which Mr. Caird, writing in 1878, had assumed to be the AMERICAN CATTLE AND MEAT TRADE. 287 natural standard. In the latter part of 1879, beasts were actually being conveyed from Boston to Liverpool for £2 10s. a head, and an appendix to Messrs. Eead and Pell's report shows that during the first seven months of 1879 the average freight of cattle from New York to Liverpool was £3 10s. a head. Moreover, if we may trust this report, " it is generally acknow- ledged that the average profit of the stockowner (in the central plains) has been for years fully 33 per cent.," so that a considerable margin remains for a reduction upon the original selling price of American cattle. It is to be regretted that Messrs. Eead and Pell studiously forbear to draw inferences from the evidence which they have collected. While they recognise the " singular advantages " enjoyed by the American stock- man in the Western States — "land for nothing and abundance of it " — they point out some countervailing disadvantages which are likely to enhance the price of American stock. The difficulty arising from a want of water must of course increase with the increase of stock, and especially of highly-bred stock. The appropria- tion of land and the loss of " free ranges," which must result from the progress of settlement, will raise the cost of rearing stock, and the demands of a growing population will enable the breeder to make a good profit at home, without incurring the manifold risks of exportation. On the whole, Messrs. Eead and Pell do not seem to anticipate any very large expansion of the American trade in fat cattle, even when more effective precautions against pleuro-pneumonia in the United States may justify the British Government in removing all restrictions upon it. The cost of carrying a bullock 288 ENGLI8R LAND AND DNGLISS LANDL0BB8. over some 4,000 miles by land and sea is a deduction from the profit of the American grazier, which may fairly be set off against the rent of land sufficient to rear and fatten a bullock for some three years, which he escapes, but which the English grazier must pay. All other conditions are in favour of the latter, and rent is more easily reduced than railway or ocean freights. Let us now glance at the official returns, which show the extent to which Grreat Britain has become dependent on foreign countries for other articles of food within a period of twenty years. ^ In 1859 the number of live cattle imported was 85,677 ; in 1878 it was 253,463. Within the same period the number of sheep imported had increased from 250,580 to 892,125, and that of pigs from 11,086 to 55,911. The aggregate value of imported salt beef and pork, bacon and hams, fish, butter, eggs, cheese, &c., had mounted up, in the meantime, from £5,182,426 to very nearly £34,000,000. The number of eggs imported had risen from 148,631,000 to the astonish- ing total of 783,714,720 ; the importation of cheese had increasedfrom 406,547 cwts. to 1,968,859 cwts.; and that of vegetables from a value of £189,870 to a value of £3,064,732. Altogether, the aggregate value of agricul- tural imports, as distinct from groceries, liquors, and luxuries for the table, had been quadrupled in twenty years, rising from £24,359,598 in 1859 to £95,996,249 r 1 In Appendix IV. will be found Tables showing the quantities of the principal articles of food imported into the United Kingdom in each year since 1820. These Tables have been compiled from official sources, and in the case of wheat, barley, and oats, the statistics of yearly importation have been given from 1800 onwards. In other cases, the yearly importa- tion could not be traced further back than 1820. IMPOBTATION OF PROVISIONS. 28* in 1878, while the value per head of population had been more than trebled, rising from 17s. to £2 16s. lOd. Nor is there any ground to anticipate such an inflation of prices abroad as could alone check the development of this vast import trade. It may be true,' perhaps, that American exporters half ruined themselves during 1878 in the desperate attempt to obtain command of foreign markets, and that when American cheese was sold at less than a third of what it had fetched a few years before, it was sold far below the cost price. But it is equally certain that machines for milking cows, and the extension of the co-operative principle to cheese-making, have enabled American dairymen to compete at an advantage with those of Cheshire and Somersetshire in the manufacture of all but the finest qualities of cheese. It is still more certain that scientific appliances and the acceleration of transit wiU facihtate more and more the importation of fresh meat, either " chitted " or " canned," from the vast pastures of America, and that it may become a common article of diet in Lancashire and Yorkshire. Tor the present, however, the British grazier or she^p farmer has . no right to complain. Though beef and mutton have declined in price from the maximum which they reached a few years ago,, they are stiU. much dearer than they were thirty years ago, and the price of good beef at New York during 1879 was much the same as it was in England before the Eepeal of the Corn Laws. Nevertheless, in the winter of that year, American beef of excellent quality was sold retail by London butchers for a penny a pound less than English beef. It has been confidently predicted that in the course 290 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOZBS. of a few years it will be delivered to English con- sumers at less than 6d. a lb., which is considerably below the current price of English beef forty years ago. This prediction can hardly be realised unless the cost of ice, upon which the whole American meat trade so largely depends, should be very much reduced in this country, and the elaborate arrangements for the convey- ance of meat on American railways should be here carried out with equal perfection. Nor can it be realised, in the opinion of Messrs. Eead and Pell, unless the rate of transit-charges be kept down to an unre- munerative level. For instance, though money is said to have been made by exporters in 1878, when freights were low, money is said to have been lost in 1879, when freights were high. "After balancing the various opinions of the meat exporters, it appears that really prime beef can be delivered in England and sold at a fair profit at 6^d. per pound ; that 7d. gave a margin for a most lucra- tive trade ; but that 6d. per pound was barely sufficient to pay the risks and outgoings, and would leave little or no profit to the exporter." But it is probable that in this computation a minimum allowance is made for the cost of distribution in England, which makes so great a difference between the wholesale and retail price of English meat. Let the price of American meat at the port of delivery be compared with the price of English meat as sold by the grazier, or let an equal allowance be made for the profits of middlemen on both, and English farmers, with the prospect of a constantly-increasing consumption, will find no reason to despair of the future. FB0SPECT8 OF FARMING IN ENGLAND. 291 But, in the face of such, facts, the conclusion appears inevitable that English farmers must in future study to reduce the price of those commodities which can easily be procured from abroad, and to meet the ever-growing demand for other commodities of which they ought to have an almost complete monopoly. "Nature," says Mr. Caird, " has given us a chmate more favour- able to the production of meat and milk, vegetables and grass, than that of any other European State. These, in proportion to their value, are the least costly in labour, and therefore the least aflPected by the rise of wages." This rise of wages, aggravated as it too often is by diminished efficiency in farm-labour, is often alleged as a principal cause of the agricultural dis- tress. But it is largely compensated already, and might be far more largely compensated, by the use of steam-power and labour-saving machines, while the conversion of arable land into pasture reduces the effect of it to a minimum. On many farms the labour- bill is less, and the cost of working the land not greater, in the aggregate, than it was a generation ago, though fewer labourers are employed to do the same work, by the aid of machiner3^ IsTor must it be forgotten that machinery gives the modern farmer an advantage beyond the mere economy of labour, for it greatly economises time, and enables him to seize on those golden moments the loss of which so often spoiled the harvest in olden times. It may well be asked, indeed, why the farmer of 1879 or 1880, apart from bad seasons, is more to be pitied than his father or grandfather, after the decline of war prices. The price of wheat, it is true, has T 2 292 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. ranged on the average about 7s. 6d. per quarter lower during the ten years 1870-79 than during the ten years 1840-49. On the other hand, barley has ranged above 5s. per quarter higher, and oats above 3s. per quarter higher. Meat costs the consumer nearly twice as much as it did forty years ago ; poultry more than twice as much ; wool, butter, eggs, vegetables, and every kind of fancy-product supplied in old times by farmers, have become much dearer within living memory. When the Corn Laws were repealed, it was never anticipated that agricultural prices could ever rise to their present level, and many rents were then fixed upon the assumption that wheat, in future, would command an average price of 40s. per quarter ; barley, 30s. ; oats, 20s. ; wool. Is. per pound ; and butter, lOd. or Is. per pound; no account being taken of milk, for which the demand in great towns was then infinitely less than it now is. Eents, it is true, were very generally raised during and after the Crimean War, and the remissions lately granted have probably not more than compensated for that increase. Had they remained stationary for the last thirty or forty years, it would be extremely difficult for the farmer to show in what respect his position has been altered for the worse during this period. If the benefit of machinery be set off against the higher price and diminished efficiency of labour, the decrease in the poor- rate against the addition of new rates, and the rise in meat against the rise in tradesmen's bills, the profits of farming ought to be quite as great as they were before the Crimean War, especially as every improvement in the breeds of cattle or sheep means earher maturity, and PROFITS ANB HABITS OF FNGLISH FABMEB8. 293 earlier maturity brings quicker returns. But then it is notorious that farmers are no longer content with the homely style of living common in the last generation, and this change of habits means far more than an ambitious and wasteful scale of household expenditure. It means, too often, aversion to manual labour on the part of the farmer himself, neglect of petty farm indus- tries on the part of his wife and daughters, the purchase of hunters and pianos, the sacrifice of valuable days in unprofitable attendances at markets, and clandestine visits to bankers in the hope of procuring further accommodation. It is impossible, from the nature of the case, to ascertain the extent to which farming is now conducted on borrowed capital; still less can we compare the liabilities of modern farmers with those of their predecessors. But there is good reason to fear that a very large proportion of them have been living far more on credit than used to be possible, having indulged the passion for taking farms too large for their means, which Arthur Young so emphatically con- demns, and never shaking ofE the load of debt. This is one explanation of the fact that so many tenants of the most respectable class proved unable to withstand one or two bad seasons. It is just such tenants who find it easiest to borrow money, and it is in bad seasons, when most landlords are willing to abate their strict rights, that less indulgent creditors not only refuse to make fresh advances, but also call in those already made. Then it turns out that a great part of the farm-stock really belongs to some one else, and that, after all, the British farmer may be as heavily indebted as the small French proprietor. 294 ENGLISH LAND AND ENQLI8E LANDLORDS. It must be admitted, moreover, tliat h.e is slow to discern tlie signs of the times, and to modify Hs old routine in accordance with new circumstances. Herein consists the elasticity of American agriculture, even in those Eastern States which have felt the pressure of Western competition almost as much as Great Britain. As the more important crops formerly grown in Mas- sachusetts were gradually displaced by the influx of grain from more favoured districts, some estates were altogether deserted, and large numbers passed into the hands of new owners, while most of the few rented by tenants were purchased by the occupiers. The general result was that farmers were driven to a more thorough but more varied system of cultivation, leading to a reduction in the size of holdings, and to a considerable increase in the aggregate value of farm-produce in the State, as well as in the average yield of each acre. Thus, although only half as much barley was grown by Massachusetts farmers in 1875 as in 1865, and only qne-third as much as in 1855, the " acreable yield " rose during this period from 19;| to 25|^ bushels, and a similar increase was realised in the acreable yield of wheat, oats, Indian corn, beet-root, and potatoes. In the meantime, the production of milk was far more than trebled, and, upon the whole, more was extracted from the soil under the new method of farming, whether or not the farmer's profit was as great as before. Indeed, the aggregate value of the farm- products of Massachusetts in 1875 exceede'd their aggregate value in 1865 by 8,000,000 dollars, notwith- standing the stress of Western competition, and the general reduction of currency prices. INFLUENCE OF ROUTINE ON FARMING. 295 It can hardly be said that an equal power of adap- tation has been exhibited by English agriculturists, and it may well be doubted whether it could have been exhibited by rent-paying farmers, especially if encumbered by restrictive covenants.^ But it is not only the dependence of tenancy or the conditions of restrictive covenants, dear to lawyers, which keep English rent-paying farmers in bondage to old routine. For instance, it has yet to be explained why the continuous rise in the price of milk for the last twenty years, and the steady growih of population at the rate of 1,000 a day, has not led to a corresponding extension of dairy farming. The dairy farmers of the Midland Counties, even when they live at some distance from a station, can well afford to deliver milk carriage-paid at a London terminus for 8d. or 9d. a gallon ia summer, and lOd. or lid. in vdnter. The same milk is sold to London consumers at a tolerably uniform price of 5d. a quart, or 20d. a gallon, so that the cost of distri- bution within the metropolis actually exceeds the joint cost of production and transit. It is truly marvellous that dairy farmers and town consumers should will- ingly submit to a system which robs both for the sole advantage of retail dealers, but it is no less marvellous that dairy farmers should be unwilling to sell milk to country neighbours, even at a profit of 40 or 50 per cent., until at last the very demand for it has died oat in some districts, to the great injury of the rising generation. We are informed by eminent agri- cultural authorities that the consumption of milk in ■" In Massachusetts, out of 44,549 separate farms 43,495 were culti- vated by their owners in 1875. 296 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISJS LANDLORDS. England might well be multiplied tenfold/ and that where it is now sold by the spoonful it might be sold by the pint, if the mass of the people should recover the habit of drinking it, and could rely on obtaining a regular supply at a moderate price. Yet, notwith- standing the fall in the price of cheese, there are many villages in which labourers cannot buy fresh milk for their children at any price, though it is often given to pigs, and Mr. Bear states that "even on farm- house tables it is not uncommon to see condensed milk all the way from Switzerland." Here, then, is one branch of farming which seems capable of a very remunerative development, even though no changes should be made in the present English system of land- tenure or land-tenancy. The London milk supply is, in fact, largely derived from dairy-farms conducted on a grand scale by joint-stock companies, or by enter- prising ' farmers who supply the companies, and it is difficult to understand why far more farming ' capital should not be invested in so lucrative a business. Unfortunately, the attractions of speculation combine with the influence of prejudice to fix the attention of English farmers on corn-growing, and to divert it from safer and more promising openings for his skiU. In the autumn of 1879 this besetting temptation of Enghsh agriculture received a fresh impulse from the publication of returns purporting to show the marvellous success of Mr. Prout's experiments in " continuous corn-growing" ^ See the compreliensive speecli of Mr. Clare Read on the appointment of an Agricultural Commission in July, 1879. Mr. Read says that " if yon could only get 6d. a gallon for the milk that can be produced on a farm in the summer, or 8d. a gallon in the winter, that would pay ihe farmer better than grazing bullocks." G0NTINU0U8 COBN-GBOWING. 297 on a farm owned by himself near Sawbridgeworth. It was stated that on this farm, consisting of 450 acres, about six-sevenths of the whole acreage had been kept under white crops, and only one-seventh under clover or sainfoin hay, for a period of fourteen years from 1866 to 1879, all the crops — grain, straw, and^hay — being sold off the farm by public auction. The loss of all this straw and hay, which ought naturally to have been consumed by cattle and to have found its way back into the soil, was compensated by wholesale purchases of artificial manures, averaging 50s. an acre annually. It was alleged, however, that selling off the straw was not an essential feature of the system, and that an equally good profit might have been obtained by feeding cattle, and using farmyard manure to some extent in the place of bones, guano, and nitrate of soda. The balance-sheet of receipts and expenditure for the fourteen years exhibited an average yearly profit of £600, after allowing 3J per cent, on £16,000 purchase-money, and interest at 5 per cent, on landlord's and tenant's improvements. But it was explained that during the five years 1874-8, in which the seasons had been generally unfavourable, a still higher average profit had been realised,, amounting to about £900, in consequence of the outlay for manures being smaller, and the return from produce greater. The inferences suggested by these startling figures were vigorously challenged by Mr. Lawes, from whose example Mr. Prout had borrowed the idea of his system, as well as by Mr. Caird, whose researches into the con- ditions of British agriculture pointed to very different conclusions.^ Mr. Lawes gave strong reasons forbeliev- ^ See their letters in the Times of Aug. 27 and Sept. 1, 1879. '298 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. ing that Mr. Prout's system could not be permanently adopted with success, even if all the soil-ingredients removed by his crops were replaced by artificial manures, but that in fact, while certain of these ingredients were thus replaced, he was " drawing upon his soil-capital for both nitrogen and potash ;" in other words, that he must have been gradually exhausting his soil, though its natural richness, aided by deep and skilful tillage, might disguise this efiect for a considerable period. He warned landlords and farmers that greater freedom in the growth and sale of crops, though desirable in itself, would pro- bably involve larger demands on the latent soil-capital, and declared his conviction, based on his own experi- ments, that although corn, and especially barley, might be grown with profit more frequently than is permitted by the received theory of rotation, farmers must learn to depend more and more on meat and other products derived from stock.^ Mr. Caird, fully concurring with these views, earnestly deprecated the extension of a system which, if generally followed, would convert six- sevenths of the cultivated land in England into one vast corn-field. "Without denying that, under favourable conditions, handsome (though not extraordinary) profits could be realised for a while on that system, he insisted 1 In a pampUet entitled " Is Higher farming a Remedy for Lower Wages ? " Mr. Lawes states, as the general and uniform result of the Rothamsted experiments, " that, beyond a certain limit, the increase of crop is not in proportion to the amount of manure supplied," or the increased cost of cultivation. " Whether we go from high to still higher farming, with an ordinary rotation of crops, with large amounts of farm- yard manure applied year after year for the growth of corn, or with artificial manures in gradually increasing amounts, less increase of produce is obtained for a given amount of manure applied, the greater the excess of it over what may be termed moderately high farming." CONTINUOUS GOBN-OBOWING. 299 upon the impolicy of extending the wheat-growing area at home, at the very moment when the English markets are threatened with a glut of cheaper and better wheat from abroad. This argument appears to admit of no answer. If a progressive rise in the price of wheat and barley were to be expected, it might be wise to defy Mr. Lawes' warnings, and to ascertain how far the system of continuous cropping is really capable of being pushed without breaking down. It is asserted, on credible tes- timony, that land in Portugal, of no abnormal fertility, but abundantly manured every year in the old-fashioned manner, has regularly borne corn crops summer after summer for several generations.^ Facts of this kind, however inconsistent with received doctrines of scientific rotation, are not unworthy of serious investigation ; but the lesson which they appear to convey is one of far greater importance to American than it is to English farmers. It may possibly be shown that, even without the use of artificial manures, the soil-capital of land may go on reproducing itself under the operation of laws hitherto imperfectly understood. But it never will be shown that, so long as free trade prevails, the highly- rented land and uncertain climate of Great Britain can produce wheat to compete in quality and cheapness with that grown on the boundless prairies of Western America. ^ See an interesting letter from Mr. Oswald Craufurd, Her Majesty's Consul at Oporto, in the Times of Aug. 27, 1879. Mr. Craufurd attributes these results to the practice of stall-feeding large numbers of cattle on artificial grasses, mixed with the straw of wheat, barley, and oats, none of which is used for litter. The litter is composed of gorse, heather, ferns, and mosses, which are afterwards spread on the fields with the manure, and greatly increase its chemical _value. 300 UNGLISS LANB ANB UNQLI8H LANDLOBBS. There is, however, one very obvious source of waste and loss in the economy of modern English farming which admits of being indefinitely reduced. In the olden times, however low might be the price of farm produce, the farmer got the whole, or nearly the whole, of it. The corn-dealer, no doubt, in spite of statutes, bought up most of his grain, and made an ample profit upon it, but there was scarcely any other inter- mediary between the agricultural producer and the •consumer. The country being then more thicHy peopled, and the whole organisation of trade far simpler than it now is, the farmer virtually undertook the entire cost of distribution, and received the full value of his commodities, buying and selling without the intervention of middlemen. He usually bred and often slaughtered his own cattle, thereby appropriating the breeder's, dealer's, and butcher's profit, as well as that •of the grazier. His wife carried her own turkeys, poultry, butter, cheese, and eggs, to market, not without •a considerable expenditure of time and trouble, but with the prospect of realising their retail, instead of their wholesale, price. All this is now changed: a whole army of middlemen has sprung up, and a toll is exacted at every stage in the process whereby the national food supplies are brought within the con- sumer's reach. The aggregate effect of these various tolls in lowering the farmer's profit on meat greatly •exceeds the loss caused by American competition, and, in the case of butter, the deduction is still more inordinate. It is stated that butter produced, in the pastures of Cork usually pays no less than six or seven profits before it is placed on a London house- FB0FIT8 ABSORBED BY MIDDLEMEN: 301 holder's table/ and a like subdivision of tbe gains wbicb might conceivably be reaped by the farmer alone might be found in other branches of agricultural manufacture.^ Of course this subdivision of profit may possibly be more than compensated by a saving in labour or some other form of outlay, or it may possibly be inevitable under the circumstances actually existing. But these propositions cannot be taken for granted. It may be that, with a little effort, the farmers of one or more villages might combine to employ a salesman to dispose of their produce in London at the best market price, and thus increase their profit by a very large percentage, as it is certain that parties of fishermen on the coast might protect themselves by a like method against scandalous extortions on the part of middlemen. In short, an extensive application of the co-operative prin- 1 I am indebted for this statement to Mr. W. Bence Jones, a land- owner and practical farmer of great experience in the county of Cork. He thus enumerates the recipients of the sereral profits : (1) the dairy farmer, (2) the local dealer in the nearest country town, (3) the Cork butter buyer, (4) the Cork export merchant, (6) the English import merchant or factor, (6) the wholesale cheesemonger, (7) the retail shop- keeper. Where one person combines two of these capacities he incurs a double risk, and takes a double profit. 2 In the graphic description of agricultural Ufe, by Mr. Richard Jeffieries, entitled " Hodge and his Masters," an old-fashioned farmer is introduced, who declares, as the result of his life-long experience, that a modem farmer submits to eight or nine tolls instead of the single rent paid by his grandfather. The receivers of these several toUs are his landlord, the lawyer who advanced half of his original farm-capital, the banker to whom he is indebted for short loans under the seal of secrecy, the auctioneer through whom he sells his cattle and sheep, and who often keeps a depot for horses, the railway company, the seedsman, the manure merchant, the manufacturer of agricultural implements, and the school- master who educates the farmer's own children, while he is rated to educate those of his labourers. 302 ENGLISH LAND AND UNGLISH LANJDLOBDS. ciple to the distribution of farm produce, if not to agriculture itself, may prove to be one solution of the agricultural problem. Before the English farmer is driven by foreigners out of English markets, he wiU certainly strain every nerve to utilise all the advan- tage which proximity to English markets ought to secure for him.-^ 1 Mr. Lawes, in reviewing " the Wheat-crop of 1880," furnishes some interesting statistics respecting the comparative yield of that and the previous year. He regards the wheat crop of 1879 as the worst of the present century, since it averaged only about 16 bushels per acre, of miserable quality. He estimates the wheat-crop of 1880 at about 30 bushels per acre, or slightly above the average. At this rate of production, the 3,067,784 acres harvested in 1880 would yield 11,466,690 quarters, which, after proper deductions for seed, would leave a little over 10,500,000 quarters available for consumption. The result is, that about 43 per cent, of the population would be fed on home-grown wheat in 1880 — 81, whereas it is probable that not 25 per cent, were fed on home-grown wheat in 1879—80. On Mr. Lawes' own experimental farm at Rothamsted, the yield of a plot continuously unmanured for 40 years was above the average of the last 10 years, though below that of the previous 18 years. A second plot, treated continuously with farm-yard manure, produced a crop some- what above the average of previous years, while three other plots, treated continuously with various kinds of artificial manure, produced crops nearly corresponding with the average. CHAPTEE III. Foreign Systems of Land Tenure. No survey of the English Land System would be complete whicli should take no cognisance of the land systems inherited or adopted by other civilised nations. Since the famous inquiry of Arthur Young into the agrarian institutions and agricultural state of France, increasing attention has been paid by English econo- mists to foreign customs of land-tenure and land- tenancy. The reports drawn up for the Foreign Office in the years 1869-70, by Her Majesty's Secretaries of Legation in the principal countries of Europe and the United States of America, contain a mine of precious materials on both these subjects. Though specially directed to points bearing immediately on the objects of the Irish Land Bill, they include a large mass of evidence on such questions as the descent of land on intestacy,, and the general tendency of various codes to favour the accumulation or dispersion of landed property. Some extracts from the results thus ob- tained, supplemented by the testimony of independent authorities, may help us to appreciate the unique character of the English Land System, and to fore- cast the course of its future development. 1. In France, as is well known, "the land is chiefly occupied by small proprietors, who form the great majority throughout the country," so that of some 7,500,000 pro- 304 JENGLI8R LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. prietors, about 5,000,000 are estimated to average six acres each, while only 50,000 average 600 acres. ^ This morcellement is the direct and foreseen consequence of the partible succession enforced by the Code Napoleon, under which all children inherit the bulk of their father's property equally, without distinction of age or sex, a testator with one child being allowed to dispose of half, a testator with two children of one-third only, and a testator with three children of one-quarter.^ The dismemberment of estates thus produced is stated to be progressive. " With some rare exceptions, all the great properties have been gradually broken up, and even the first and second classes" (averaging 600 and 60 acres respectively) "are fast merging into the third."* This statement, however, must be taken with some qualification. In France, as in England, the ostensible 1 The distribution of landed property in France is somewhat dif- ferently stated by M. Lavergne. Writing before the loss of Alsace and Lorraine, he estimated that 5,000,000 proprietors owned on the average 3 hectares, or 7 J acres, each ; that 600,000 proprietors of a higher class owned on the average 30 hectares, or 75 acres, each ; and that 50,000 great proprietors owned on the average 300 hectares, or 750 acres, each. This classification is followed in the text as the more trustworthy. - Under a salutary provision of the French Code, prodigals can be placed under an interdict, and trustees appointed to manage their estates. ^ According to Mr. G. Gibson Richardson, " the estates that are dis- appearing are the medium-sized ones, of from 50 to 100 acres ; they are eaten into on both sides. A large landowner is glad to add to his estate a small adjoining one ; and small owners will give almost any money to put another small bit to what they already possess." He entirely denies that small French landowners must needs become poorer and poorer in each generation, as contrary to experience. " The men make money and buy back land which has been divided, or they do so with the dowry of their wives ; the law of succession divides, accumulated wealth unites ; small properties increase a little at the expense of large ones, but very much at the expense of middle-sized ones." (" Corn and Cattle-Pro- ducing Districts of Franco," pp. 40, 41). SUBDIVISION OF LAND IN FRANCE. 305 number of very small properties is magnified by tbe inclusion of little plots surrounding dwelling-houses, of market-gardens, and of fields in which a cow or horse may be kept by persons either mainly supported by wages or engaged in non-agricultural callings. The number of proprietors is certainly not so great as the number of properties, several of which may belong to one owner; and many of the smaller proprietors are engaged in the cultivation of the vine — a very excep- tional branch of agricultural industry, requiring minute attention and incessant manual labour. After aU, only one-third of France, exclusive of State domains and communal property, is owned by peasants, with an average of 7J acres each, and a very much smaller proportion is cultivated by this class, who appear to let their lands freely. Another third part is owned, and apparently cultivated for the most part, by yeomen proprietors averaging some 75 acres each. The re- maining third is owned by landlords averaging some 750 acres — some, perhaps, descended from ancient seigneurs — whose estates are chiefly farmed by others, and sometimes approach in extent those of great English noblemen.^ The average price of agricultural land in 1 These conclusions have lately received a strong confirmation from the exhaustive researches of M. Gimel, Directmr des Contributions Directes, the chief results of which have been ably summarised by Mr. Barham Zincke. According to M. Gimel's estimate, founded on the communal assessment lists, the actual number of proprietors in Prance- including those below one-quarter of an acre — was, in the year 1858, no less than 8,264,795 ; and the increase .between 1835 and 1858 had been 20'37 per cent. A more detailed examination of the statistics relative to four typical departments shows this increase to have been largely con- tributed by purchasers of sites for houses, with or without gardens, and proves that only one-twentieth of the soil passes into these minute parcels. 306 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. France is no less than forty years' purchase, and small capitalists on the whole outbid larger capitalists in the competition for it. Indeed, such is the passion for landed property, that French peasant-owners, like English farmers, will often spend capital which they can ill spare, or borrow from usurers, to extend their little domains. Yet the mortgages on the small pro- perties of France, as stated by M. Lavergne, amount to no more than 10 per cent, on their aggregate value. It is a very delusive, though very common, error to interpret the statistics which show the distribution of landed property in France as if they implied that nearly the whole of the soil is cultivated by peasant-owners. This error is apparently confirmed by the fact that, out of every hundred farms in France, seventy are cultivated on the " faire-valoir direct " system, against twenty-one on the " fermage " or tenancy system, and eight only on the " metayage " or co-operative system. But if we look at the acreage over which these systems prevail respectively, we find that more than one-third of France is cultivated under the system of tenancy, thirteen per cent, under that of co-operation, and about half on the farmer-proprietary system, which includes cultivation by yeomen as well About one-third of these four departments is possessed by owners of less than 20 acres, one-third by owners of 20 to 100 aci-es, and one-third by owners of more than 100 acres. It is observed that in one district adapted to cattle-breeding, there is a tendency for peasant-properties to rise to, and stop at, about 25 acres, that being the extent of land most conveniently worked by a single family. It is curious that Arthur Toung, so far back as 1787, supposed one- third of France to be occupied by " small properties,'' which, however, he does not define. TENANCY AND WHEAT-GBOWING IN FBANOE. 307 as cultivation by peasants.^ It is interesting to observe that, as might be expected, most of the corn sent to market in France is produced under the system of tenancy, or metayage, and not under that of farmer- proprietorship. The late Mr. G. Gibson Eichardson, one of the highest authorities on this subject, esti- mating the entire wheat-growing area of France at about 17,000,000 acres, explained why the acreable produce of this area should appear to be so far below the English standard, and so far below what it really is. This result arises from a strange in- accuracy in the official method of computation, whereby all the 87 departments, whatever their wheat-growing acreage, and whatever their acreable produce, are treated as units of equal value, and the general acreage is very unduly depressed by the shortcomings of districts wholly unsuitable for wheat. For instance, four departments, with 134,000 acres under wheat, yielding only eleven bushels per acre, count the same as four others with 1,213,000 acres, yielding twenty-five bushels per acre ; so that, whereas the average yield of the eight is twenty-three bushels per acre, it is reckoned at only eighteen. Mr. Eichardson states that, in the great wheat-growing districts of France — Flanders,. Artois, Picardy, Beaune, Brie, and Poitou — the average produce per acre probably exceeds that for the United 1 Mr. G. Gibson Richardson gives the following statistics of farm occupations in France : — " The cultivated land is occupied by 3,225,877 farms, each under separate management ; more than half the number, 56 per cent., are under 12i acres; a fifth, from 121 to 25 acres; so that three-fourths of them are less than 25 acres." ("Corn and Cattle Pro- ducing Districts of France," p. 30.) V 2 308 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISS LANBLOBDS. Kingdom, and on some farms reaches forty bushels.^ There is, however, no doubt that on the whole the acreable produce of wheat in England is greater than in France ; only it must be remembered that France has brought under cultivation a much larger extent of its whole area than England, that of this area it devotes iive or six times as large an acreage to wheat-growing as England, and that, if this acreage is less productive than it might be made, the fault lies with French tenant-farmers, and not with French peasant-owners. Volumes of controversy have not exhausted the arguments either for or against the French law of inherit- ance, but it is instructive to remark how entirely its opponents have shifted their ground. Mr. McCuUoch, writing in 1823, predicted that, under its operation, France must certainly become, within fifty years, " the greatest pauper warren in the world," and share with Ireland the honour of furnishing hewers of wood and drawers of water to other countries. Arthur Young, writing in 1787, had condemned the voluntary sub- division of property on the same ground, and it was long a received opinion that compulsory subdivision of property stimulated the increase of population to a frightful extent. The same law is now attacked, with at least equal justice, as directly contributing to keep the population almost stationary. However this may be, it is a very significant fact that neither under the First Empire nor under the restored dynasty of the ' See Ms letters to the Times of September 15th and October 20th, 1879, elucidating the statistics furnished in Mr. G. Baden Powell's letter «f September 6th. FRENCH LAW OF INHERITANCE. 309 Bourbons, nor under the Orleanist monarcliy, nor under the Second Empire, nor under the new Repubhc, has any serious attempt been made to repeal this law, bequeathed to France by the authors of the Eevolu- tion. For, as we are truly informed in the report of Mr. Sackville West, drawn up shortly before the Franco-Grerman War, "the prevalent public opinion as to the advantages of the tenure of land by small proprietors is that it has been advantageous to the production of the soil, and has tended to the improve- ment of the material condition of the agricultural population." It is believed, he continues, that sub- division " conduces to political as well as social order, because, the greater the number of the proprietors, the greater is the guarantee for the respect of property, and the less likely are the masses to nourish revolutionary and subversive designs." That it conduces to industry and thrift, is too well known to admit of argument; indeed, the proverbial reproach of the French peasantry is that, in their miserly frugality, they sacrifice all that makes life worth having. But, if they starve them- selves, they do not starve the land. M. Lavergne, though fully alive to the possible evils of excessive sub- division, bore witness that, on the whole, the best cul- tivation in France was that of the peasant proprietors, and assuredly the richest provinces of France are those in which this class of landowners predominates.^ 1 Much valuable information on the effects of the French land laws has been collected by Mr. Kay, in his " Free Trade in Land," chap. x. See also an article on "La Situation Agricole de'la France," in the Revue des Deux Mondes, Jan. 15, 1880, and Mr. James Howard's treatise on " Continental Farming." Mr. Howard's opinion is not favourable to small farms, the owners of which, he says, " work from sunrise to sunset. 310 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. 2. The elaborate report on land tenure in Prussia and the North German Confederation, by Mr. Harriss Grastrell, attests the same preponderance of public opinion in favour of small proprietorship, which is encouraged by the law. " In cases of intestacy the law divides all property, including land, in certain proportions, among widow and children; or equally amongst the children, if there be no widow," and no disposition can deprive the " natural heirs " of their claim to a fixed allotment, sometimes amounting to as much as two- thirds of the whole. Though subject to these limitations, "the custom of making a will is almost universal:" but "the restrictions on land by settle- ments and the like are much less than in England." Entails are not absolutely prohibited, but the extent of land affected by them in Prussia is said not to exceed one-thirteenth of the whole kingdom, the rest of which is held in absolute ownership, with the amplest facili- ties of mortgage and sale. The consequence is that in Prussia, exclusive of the Ehine provinces and West- phalia, there were in 1858^ 1,300,000 proprietors, of whom 108 only had estates large enough to be rated over £1,500, and only about 16,000 had estates of more than 400 acres, while about 350,000 had estates vary- ing from 20 to 400 acres, and the rest, some 925,000 in number, owned less than 20 acres.^ Of the smallest doing double the work for themselves they would for an employer, and live far harder than the English peasants." He observes that " the size of farm considered necessary to support a family is about four hectares (ten acres)." ^ The report of Mr. Harriss GastreU was based on the Returns for that year. ^ Mr. James Howard states that " in Prussia there are 900,000 farms under four acres in extent.'' Probably this estimate includes the Rhine Provinces and Westphalia. PBU88IAN LAND SYSTEM. 311 proprietors, a large proportion vere day-labourers, working occasionally for wages; and the minimum extent of land sufficient to support a man and Ms family was estimated at from 7 to 20 acres or more, according to fertility of soil and other local advantages. Many of these peasant proprietors, living wholly on the fruits of their own soil, have raised themselves from the rank of day-labourers into the class of yeomanry which, in modern Prussia, as in old England, constitutes the bone and sinew of the nation. Even the greatest proprietors seldom delegate the work of cultivation to mere tenants, but either farm themselves or manage their estates through bailiffs.-^ In the Ehine provinces and Westphalia, where the French laws were introduced at the beginning of the century, the subdivision of landed property is carried so far that each proprietor has but 10 acres on the average. The result is that, as we are told in the report of Mr. E. D. Morier, "the Palatinate peasant cultivates his land more with the passion of an artist than in the plodding spirit of a mere bread-winner." The Prussian land system, established by a series of legislative acts extending over half a century, and ex- pressly designed to favour the elevation of the peasantry into a body of independent proprietors, has been copied by other States of North Germany. Its eifects on the agriculture of Saxony have been graphically described, from personal observation, by Mr. Barham Zincke, whose intimate acquaintance with the agriculture of Switzerland, Central Prance, and the Channel Islands, 1 See Mr. Staw-Lefevre's " Freedom of Land," chap, vi., and Mr. Kay's " Free Trade in Land," chap. xv. 312 ENGLISH LAND AND BNGLISR LANDLORDS. gives an additional weight to his remarks. He found the district west and north of Dresden cultivated, for the most part, by yeomen owning farms of about 50 acres each. According to him, the land is kept infinitely cleaner than it is in England, since there are no hedges or ditches sheltering weeds or harbouring vennin. 'No space is wasted, for the heart of the owner is in the soil, tending every plant with parental care, and regard- ing every weed as an enemy. Comparatively little is expended in hired labour, and such labour is more efficient than in England, because the labourer works side by side with his employer, and is separated from him by no class distinction. The enormous influx of grain from the Western States of America having reduced the demand for German corn in the English market, the Saxon farmer, like the farmer of New England, has adapted himself to circum- stances, and raises a far greater variety of produce than English farmers' attempt to raise on a far better soil. Potatoes and other vegetables, poultry, milk, and butter, are exported in large quantities from these sandy plains ; where agricultural plants could not live, forest-trees are skilfully planted, and fruit-trees, without the slightest protection, line the roads and footpaths, as they do in Switzerland and other parts of the Continent in which the ownership of land is widely diffused.^ 3. " Wurtemberg is remarkable as the country where subdivision of land is carried to the greatest extreme," containing as it does some 280,000 peasant ^ See an excellent letter on " Agriculture in Germany," by the Rey. F. Barham Zincke, published in the Times of August 27, 1879. LAND SYSTEM OF WUBTEMBEBG. 313 owners, with less than five acres each, and about 160,000 proprietors of estates above five acres. Upon intestacy, the land is equally divided among aU the children, male and female. The father, however, seems to be allowed full liberty of disposition over the pro- perty, so long as a certaiu moderate portion, defined by law {pjlic/it-t/ieil), is reserved for each child. On the smaller peasant farms, " when, in accordance with the will of the father, one child becomes owner of all the paternal land, an estimate is formed on a footing rather favourable to him, and he compensates the brothers and sisters by equal sums of money. The daughters, how- ever, are more frequently on their marriage allotted an equal share of land ; and, as the husband is probably the proprietor of a piece of land elsewhere in the com- mune, the intersection and subdivision of the land goes on increasing." On the largest farms the custom of Primogeniture has encroached still further on that of equal division. Here the eldest son commonly suc- ceeds to the whole property, "often in the father's lifetime. When the parent is incapacitated by age from managing his farm, he retires to a small cottage, generally on the property, and receives from the son in possession contributions towards his support both in money and kind. The other children receive a sum o money calculated according to the size of the property and the number of children, but which, in any case, falls far short of the sum which they would receive, if the property were equally liivided, or even were the law of pflicU-theil acted on. They have, however, their home there until they establish themselves independently or take service on another property." Mr. Phipps, who ^14 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. gives this account of the Wurtemberg land system, a,dds that political economists of that country are now " of opinion that small proprietors, who complete their means of livelihood by industrial pursuits, are the most desirable class to encourage, whereas formerly agricul- ture on a large scale was considered the most profit- able." Precisely the same opinion is recorded by Mr. Bailie, writing on the " Land System of Baden," where property is much subdivided. He states that owners of small freeholds do not differ from the larger pro- prietors in respect of dwellings, clothing, mode of living, or education ; that they realise better returns from the same number of acres ; and that, in conse- quence, large estates and large farms are giving place to small estates and holdings. This change, he adds, is there regarded as tending " to promote the greater economical and moral prosperity of the people, to raise the average standard of education, and to increase the national standard of defence and taxation." 4. In Bavaria, where the land is very much sub- divided, Mr. Fenton attests the general prevalence of a custom very similar to that which characterises the larger peasant farms in Wurtemberg. Except in the Bavarian Palatinate, where the Code Napoleon is in force, the descent and inheritance of land are governed throughout Bavaria by the principles, though not everywhere by the express provisions, of the common law. " A proprietor is bound to bequeath at his death a certain defined portion of his property, to be divided in equal shares among all his legitimate children. That portion must not be less than one-half, if the number of children be five, or more than five ; and not less than LANB SYSTEM OF BAVABIA. 315 one-third, if there be four, or less than four, children." Where the property consists of land, and especially if it he a peasant property, the eldest son may, and usually does, retain the whole, paying the rest a pecu- niary indemnity for their shares, if the father has not already installed him in possession, as sometimes happens, during his own lifetime. " Amongst that class the almost invariable custom is for the testator to leave the whole of the real property — farmhouse, farm buildings, and land — in the possession of one member of the family, commonly the widow or the eldest son, and that person then becomes responsible to the children for the payment to them of a sum of money corre- sponding to the value (as ascertained by ofl&cial appraise- ment) of their share of the property, the children's share being generally fixed at one-half of the whole, real as well as personal. It is further a universally- understood condition of an arrangement of the nature above described, that the person who remains in pos- session of the property and becomes its owner, is bound during a certain number of years (after the payment of their shares to all the children) to provide any one or all of them with board and lodging at the homestead, in the event of their falling into distress from sickness, want of employment, &c." In short, the peasant proprietors of Bavaria, who are admitted to be a thriving class, appear to keep up their family estates with as much tenacity as our own landed gentry, but with a jealousy for the rights of younger children which reminds us of the Irish peasant farmers. 5. In the Austrian Empire, on the contrary, the devo- lution of all property, real and personal, is regulated 316 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. by the Civil Code of 1869, by which, "no preference is accorded to eldest sons," nor have sons any advantage over daughters ; but " an exception exists in the case of family entails {majorats)." Of course, these entails are mainly created on large properties. Whatever be the instrument which constitutes such an entail, Mr. Lytton remarks that it has no legal validity without the special consent of the legislative power. Mr. James Howard notices the existence of a furbher exception applicable to " peasant-farms," the maximum size of which is GO acres, and the minimum 15 acres; which exception, however, is no longer sanctioned by law in the Archduchy of Austria itself, though maintained in other parts of the Empire. "In the case of such farms, when a proprietor dies, his eldest son takes the land ;. and an assessor is called in, who fixes the amount to be paid to the other children." The result of Mr. Howard's inquiries showed that in the Austrian dominions " no class of tenant-farmers exists ; all are proprietors, ex- cept in a few districts, and rare instances." Neverthe- less, a larger amount of agricultural machinery had been exported from England to Austria and Hungary than to any other part of Europe, and it was estimated that in ten years, I860 — 70, nearly 2,000 steam threshing- machines had been introduced into the Empire, chiefly for use in Hungary. 6. It is almost superfluous to state that Switzerland is a land of small proprietors, the law of equal division being heartily supported by custom. According to Mr. Mackenzie's report, " the quantity of land usually held, by each varies from six to twelve acres, small lots held together, and the larger intersected by other properties,"" SWI88 AND BELGIAN LAND SYSTEMS. 317 yet, instead of being pauperised by subdivision, the Swiss are proverbial for successful enterprise in trade both at home and abroad. It is, indeed, difficult to say whether the purely agricultural peasantry of Switzerland, and the operative classes living on their own little free- holds in the manufacturing districts, offer the more remarkable example of industry and thrift, intelligence and comfort, widely diffused through a whole com- munity. The evidence of this is too overwhelming and too patent to escape the attention even of ordinary travellers, and it may safely be affirmed that if Swiss habits and institutions could be transplanted into England, agricultural distress would almost cease to be possible. 7. In Belgium, morcellement has notoriously been carried, under the Code Napoleon, to a greater extreme than in France itself ; so that, according to official statistics and estimates cited in the Foreign Office Eeports, the average size of estates, deducting wood- lands and wastes, might be stated at seven acres ; and four - fifths of them did not exceed twelve acres. " The dispersion of land is increased by the system which generally prevails at public sales of dividing real estate into small parcels or lots;" otherwise the properties of small families, sold for the purpose of effecting a more convenient distribution among chil- dren, would be constantly passing into the hands of rich families. The works of M. de Laveleye and others have so familiarised the minds of English economists with the effects of the Belgian land system on Bel- gian agriculture that it would be superfluous to re- capitulate them. It is admitted that Belgian tenant- 318 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. farmers are ground down by rack-rents, and tliat even the small Belgian proprietors lead a harder life than many an English farm-labourer. Nevertheless, the fact remains that, under this land system, one of the poorest soils in Europe, fertilised by ten centuries of laborious husbandry, fetches a higher price, acre for acre, if it does not yield a larger produce in grain, vegetables, and meat, than any but the most favoured districts of Great Britain.^ 8. In Holland, as we learn from the same Keports, " the law of succession requires the division in equal portions, amongst the children or next of kin, of a major part of every inheritance without regard to its nature or origin, and this is naturally calculated to favour to a great extent the division of landed property. But, on the other hand, there exists a very prevalent desire with individuals to avoid unnecessarily splitting up the paternal estates. It is a common thing for a farmer, whether proprietor or tenant, to have accumu- lated before his death sufficient movable property, frequently in the funds, to enable him to assign a ^ See M. de Laveleye's Essay on the Land System of Belgium and Holland, in " Systems of Laud Tenure," 1876 ; Mr. Kay's " Free Trade in Land," Mr. Shaw-Lefevre's " Freedom of Land," and Mr. Thornton's " Peasant Proprietors." See also the Report of Dr. Augustus Voelcker and Mr. H. M. Jenkins on Belgian agriculture, in which its alleged supe- riority in productiveness is combated. Mr. James Howard, in his treatise on " Continental Farming," adopts the same view. He observes that, in com- paring the English with the Belgian stock of cattle, it is often forgotten that many of the Belgian oxen are employed for draught purposes, instead of horses, and that most of the rest are inferior in weight and size to English oxen. Even if draught-oxen be included, he reckons the total quantity of meat raised per acre to be only 98 lbs. in Belgium, against 148 lbs. in England and Wales. DUTCH LAND SYSTEM. 319^ portion therefrom to one or another of his children." The policy of the law, however, is rather against family arrangements whereby the eldest son may retain all the land and the younger children may be compensated in money, since it imposes an increased tax on successions thus modified by agreement. A very attractive picture of rural life under the Dutch land system is drawn by M. de Laveleye : — " The farmers of Holland lead a comfortable, well-to-do, and cheerful life. They are well housed and excellently clothed. They have china- ware and plate on their sideboards, tons of gold at their notaries', public securities in their safes, and in their stables excellent horses. Their wives are bedecked with splendid corals and gold. . They do not work themselves to death. On the ice in winter, at the Kermesses in summer, they enjoy themselves with the zest of men whose minds are free from care." The chief reason assigned by M. de Laveleye for the superior prosperity of Dutch, as compared with Belgian, farmers, is that in Holland landed property has remained almost entirely in the hands of peasants, the savings of townspeople being invested in public securities; whereas in Belgium there is an eager competition of capitalists for estates, forcing up the price and rent of land to an abnormal extent. But M. de Laveleye's ideal of agricultural felicity in Holland is to be found in the province of Grroningen, where much of the land is cultivated under a species of hereditary lease, known as Beklem-regt, at a moderate and invariable rent. " This system," he says, " derived from the Middle Ages, has created a class of semi- proprietors, independent, proud, simple, but withal 320 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. eager for enligliteiiment, appreciating the advantages of education, practising husbandry not by blind routine and as a mean occupation, but as a noble profession by which they may acquire wealth, influence, and the consideration of their fellow-men." This description of Dutch rural economy cannot be accepted without some qualification. No doubt the national habit of accumulation, with the aid of lucra- tive marriages, enables peasant-owners in Holland to keep their properties together. But the competition of capitaUsts is not wanting, and the passion for pro- prietorship often tempts the peasant-owner to invest on new purchases of land, at a ruinous price, capital which might be far more profitably invested in improving that which he already possesses. The leaseholders under the Beklem-regt system are practically owners, subject to a quit-rent, and, though usually excellent farmers, do not appear to enjoy any special advantage, in respect of tenure, over semi-proprietors, holding at fee-farm rents, in various parts of the United Kingdom, and especially in Scotland. 9. The same de- feudalising movement, dating from the French Revolution, and deriving a fresh impulse from the democratic revival of 1848, has profoundly modified the land systems of most other European countries. In Sweden and Denmark the creation of new entails has been prohibited, though some old entails survive, as in Prussia. In Norway the French law prevails, being in harmony with the ancient custom of the country. Yet subdivision has not yet been carried to extremes, very few estates being under 40 acres, and very many above 300 acres, besides a large OTHER EUROPEAN LAND SYSTEMS. 321 tract of mountain pasture.^ In the Hanse Towns, as well as in Schleswig-Holstein, primogeniture is more coimtenanced by law ; but even where, as in Bremen, the real estate goes to the eldest son on intestacy, the " co-heirs," or younger children, are entitled to be portioned out of it. In Italy, says Mr. Bonham, " the laws in force tend in every way to favour the dispersion of land," and equal division, without distinction of sex, is the rule of inheritance on intestacy j but a landowner, having children, may leave one-half of his property by will ; the other half — leffitima portio — " cannot be bur- dened with any conditions by the testator." But the political union of Italy has not yet brought about an assimilation of its various provincial land systems, and it will probably be long before the peasant-ownership of Lombardy displaces the old territorial economy of Sicily. In Grreece and Portugal the law of intestacy and the restrictions on testamentary disposition are, in all essential respects, the same as in Italy, producing in both countries a large and increasing subdivision of landed property. Mr. Finlay, speaking of the sta- tionary condition of Greek agriculture, observes : — " It is the almost universal rule that each small proprietor possesses a zevgari " (or plot requiring two pair of oxen to plough it), " and that each cultivator of national land occupies no more." Mr. Merlin, in his report on ■ Greece, mentions the curious fact that " it is extremely rare for the sons to marry till their sisters are provided for ; and this feeling pervades all classes." The active jealousy of primogeniture and partiality for subdivision '■ Mr. Thornton's " Peasant Proprietors," second edition, p. 82 ; quoted by Mr. Kay, " Free Trade in Land," chap. xi. V 322 ENGLISH LANB AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. exhibited in the recent legislation of Portugal contrasts strangely witli the survival of great ancestral properties in Spain. It has, indeed, been carried further than even M. de Laveleye approves in the abolition of a father's right to designate one child as his heir, under the ancient form of Portuguese land-tenure known as the Aforamento, which resembles the Beklem-regt of Gro- ningen. In Eussia, where the land system has been complicated by political and social distinctions between classes, by serfdom, and by the communal organisation, Mr. Michell reports that local usage regulates the descent of peasant properties. The law of intestacy for the rest of the community is based on equal division, giving males a preference over females. " There is no general law of primogeniture, although, in a few great families, estates have been entailed under a special law passed in the reign of the Emperor Nicholas. In 1713 Peter the Great attempted to introduce a general inheritance in fee of the eldest son ; but this was so much opposed to the spirit of the Eussian landowners, that one of the first acts of Peter II. was to cancel the Ukase of 1713." 10. Under the land laws of most States in the American Union, an owner in fee-simple has nearly the same power of disposition as he would possess in this country, but the rule of equal division prevails in case of intestacy. The results of this system, and the reason why they difier so widely from those produced by our own, are succinctly described in the following passages of Mr. Ford's report : " The system of land occupation in the United States of America may be generally described as by small pro- LAND SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES. 323 prietors. The proprietary class throughout the country is, moreover, rapidly on the increase, whilst that of the tenancy is diminishing, and is principally supplied by immigration. The theory and practice of the country is for every man to own land as soon as possible. The term of landlord is an obnoxious one. The American people are very averse to being tenants, and are more anxious to be masters of the soil, and are content to own, if nothing else, a small homestead, a mechanic's home, a comfortable dwelling-house in compact towns, with a lot of land of from 50 feet by 100 feet alaout it. In the sparsely-peopled portions of the country, a tenancy for a term of years may be said to exist only in exceptional cases. Land is so cheap there that every provident man may own land in fee. The possession of land of itself does not bestow on a man, as it does in Europe, a title to consideration ; indeed, its possession in large quanti- ties frequently reacts prejudicially to his interests, as attaching to him a taint of aristocracy which is dis- tasteful to the masses of the American people. " The landowner in the United States has entire free- dom to devise his property at will. He can leave it to one or more of his children, or he may leave it to a perfect stranger. In the event of his dying intestate, Iiis real estate is equally divided amongst his children without distinction as to sex, subject, however, to a right of dower to his widow, should there be one. If there are no children or lineal descendants, the property goes io other relatives of the deceased. If the intestate leaves no kindred, his estate escheats to the State in which it is situated. The laws of the different States of the Union regulating the descent and division of landed property V 2 324 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. on deatli of owner harmonise to a great extent with, each other. " It may be asserted that the system of land-tenure by small proprietors is regarded in this country with great favour, and that the prevailing public opinion is that the possession of land should be within the reach of the most modest means. A proprietor of land, how- ever small, acquires a stake in the country, and assumes responsibilities which guarantee his discharging faithfully his duties as a citizen. Whilst practically any one man may acquire as much land as he can pay for, yet the whole tendency and effect of the laws of this country are con- ducive to dispersion and multitudinous ownership of land. The several States and the Government of the United States grant their lands in limited quantities ; and under the laws of descent lands descend to the children, irrespective of sex, in equal shares ; and the laws of partition provide for a division of the lands into as many parts as there are interests, where it can be done without prejudice. In many European countries the sale and transfer of land are so hampered by legal complications, and entail such heavy expenses, as fre- quently to discourage such operations. In the United States, on the contrary, the sale and transfer of land are conducted with about the same ease as would be the sale of a watch. Very large quantities of land are seldom held in this country, undivided, by one family for more than one or two generations. It is worthy of remark that in this country the same reluctance is not felt, as in Europe, to parting with family lands. "^ ^ For a general account of the land laws of the United States, and specimens of State legislation on the descent and distribution of land, see LAND 8YSTJHM OF THE CHANNEL ISLANDS. 325 11. No foreign land system, however, is so interest- ing or instructive to an Englisli economist as the land system of the Channel Islands.^ This land system, founded on ancient custom, is the same as that of France in its essential features, but modified by certain reserva- tions in favour of Primogeniture. In Jersey, upon the death of a landowner, leaving a widow and children, the widow has an indefeasible right to one-third of the income during her life, while the eldest son is entitled to the dwelling-house and curtilage, with about two English acres of his own selection, and one-tenth of the remaining land. Where the estate is less than one acre and a half, the eldest son inherits the whole. In other cases, the residue is divided among all the children, including the eldest, the sons taking equal shares of two-thirds, and the daughters equal shares of one-third, but so that no daughter shall take a greater share than a younger son. In Gruernsey the eldest son's right is more restricted, but the other rules of division are similar. Entails were unknown in Jersey, until they were partially legalized by the Crown in 1635, and the practice of entailing has ceased for the last thirty years. Devises of land are only permitted where there are no children. In fact, subdivision is generally prevented by the eldest son buying out the rest, who go into business, sometimes retaining a rent-charge on the family estate. Mr. Fisher's article on the American land system in " Systems of Land Tenure." ^ See the Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the laws of Jersey, 1861 ; Mr. Kay's " Free Trade in Land," chapter xii. ; Mr. A. Arnold's " Free Land," chapter xvii. ; and Mr. Shaw-Lefevre's article on the Channel Islands in the Fortnightly Review of Oct., 1879. 32G ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLIBH LANDLOBDS. The total area of all tlie Channel Islands is about 50,000 acres, but the area capable o£ cultivation scarcely exceeds 37,000 acres, of which more than one-half is in Jersey. The population of all the islands is about 90,000, andof Jersey about 56,000, being nearly thrice as dense, relatively to acreage, as that of England and Wales. The proportion of the population employed in agriculture is still larger, being estimated at one culti- vator to every four acres in Jersey and Guernsey. The number of landowners in Jersey has been variously stated ■at 2,500 and 2,300, and the average size of properties is eight or nine acres, but many of the smallest, as in France and England, are martet-gardens, or belongiag to persons having other means of livelihood. The largest properties rarely exceed one hundred acres in Jersey and fifty acres in Gruemsey. Most farms are cultivated by their owners, with an industry and skill which owes less than is supposed to special advantages of soU or climate. Whatever test be applied to it, the agri- culture of the Channel Islands must rank above that of almost any country in Europe. If we take the price of land as a measure of its agricultural value, we find that £200 an acre is as commonly given in Jersey as £50 an acre in England — not for residential sites, but for ordinary farms. If we refer to average rent, we find that it ranges from £4 per acre for poor land to £10 or £12 for good land, being four times as high as in England. If we look to expenditure of capital in manure, we find that Jersey farmers do not grudge £20 or £30, or even £40, per acre, in preparing their little plots for crops of early potatoes, some £300,000 worth of which have been exported to London from this island LAND SYSTEM OF THE CHANNEL ISLANDS. 327 alone in one year. If we judge of success in cultivation by the produce, we find that a much larger quantity of human food is raised in Jersey than is raised on an equal area, by the same mrniber of cultivators, in any part of the United Kingdom. Not only does it support its own crowded population in much greater comfort than is enjoyed by the mass of Englishmen, but it supplies the London market, out of its surplus produc- tion, with shiploads of vegetables, fruit, butter, and cattle for breeding. Even wheat, for the growth of which the climate is not very suitable, is so cultivated that it yields much heavier crops per acre than in England ; and the number of live stock kept on a given area astonishes travellers accustomed only to EngHsh farming. Nor are these only the results of spade husbandry, for machinery is largely employed by the yeomen and peasant-pro- prietors of the Channel Islands, who have no difl&culty in arranging among themselves to hire it by turns. Considering all these facts, and the absence of any special conditions, such as the close proximity of lucrative markets, to account for the marvellous agricul- tural prosperity of these islands, we cannot greatly err in attributing it mainly to their cherished land system. The price of land is three or four times as high as in England, not because it is a " luxury" for the possession of which the great nobleman or capitalist will outbid all competitors, but, on the contrary, because it is more valuable agriculturally to small proprietors than it could be to any other class of purchasers, because there are many such bidders for every lot that is sold, and because the cost of transfer is small. It pays a rent at least four times as high as English land, because those who 328 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. hire it are themselves small proprietors, cultivate it with their own hands, and apply to it a much larger capital per acre than an English tenant-farmer would think remunerative. It yields an amount and variety of produce which seems fabulous to persons conversant only with tenant-farming on the grand scale, not merely because it is more liberally manured, but also because it is studded with orchards, vineries, and other profitable /tors d'ceuvres of agriculture, which nothing but the magic of property will call into existence. The same lesson is taught by the abundance of the markets, the substantial character of the dwellings even down to the humblest cottages, the magnitude of the public works, the dress and diet of the labouring class, the comparative rarity of pauperism, and other signs which betoken a happy and thriving community. It would be interesting, were it possible, to compare the 37,000 cultivated acres of the Channel Islands with the best specimen that could be selected of an equal area owned by a single proprietor in Great Britain. If the advantage should prove to be on the side of the former, morally and socially as well as economically, it would be for the advocates of the English land system to reconcile this result with their belief in a threefold agricultural hierarchy of landlords, tenant-farmers, and labourers. Perhaps it might come to be perceived that whatever benefit is thus derived from a division of duties is more than compensated by a separation of interests ; that a farmer who is his own landlord and his own labourer can dispense with the incessant trouble of supervision and fear of an in- creased rent ; that, upon the whole, three profits fructify most abundantly in one pocket; and that BEVimr OF FOREIGN LAND SYSTEMS. 329 freedom of agriculture, like freedom of trade, must needs promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number. The conclusions to be drawn from a comprehensive review of foreign land systems may be expressed in a few sentences. No other nation has adopted in its entirety the BngHsh right of Primogeniture — a right which could only have grown up in a thoroughly feu- dalised society, and vrhich could only have been per- petuated in a country where the feudal structure of society has never undergone any violent disturbance. In those States which have remodelled their jurisprudence on the principles of the Code ISTapoleon, the eldest son is effectually debarred from engrossing the whole landed property of the family. In other States, which have developed their law of succession independently, parents are allowed to " make eldest sons," under greater or less restrictions. In no considerable State but our own does the law itself, in default of a vsrill or settlement, constitute the eldest son the sole heir to all the realty, and in no other is the exclusive preference of the first- born, thus consecrated by law, carried to such extreme lengths in family government. No highly civilised people but the English tolerate the dominion of a by- gone generation over the greater part of the national soil, under settlements and entails designed to limit the ownership and control the action of living owners. In no other part of Europe, nor in the United States of America, nor in the British colonies, is the division of landed property so unequal, or the predominance of a landed aristocracy so firmly rooted. In no other is the free transfer of land, or the power of mortgaging. 330 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. obstructed by so many legal impediments, by so great a, risk of delay, or by the certainty of so exorbitant a cost. Nowbere else is the land habitually occupied by a class of tenants who hold only from year to year, and culti- vated by a class of labourers divorced from the soil and working for weekly wages. It is hardly too much to say that the rural economy of Norway and that of Italy, that of Germany and that of the United States, that of France and that of Australia or New Zealand, differ less from each other than any one of them differs from the rural economy of Grreat Britain. For every one of these countries — however diverse in respect of their soil, their climate, their history, their population, or their political constitution — has cast off the old shell of feudal land laws, has adopted the principles of Free Trade in Land, and has practically fostered the creation of a farmer-proprietary superseding, more or less, the rela- tion of landlord and tenant. Bearing these facts in mind, we are brought face to face with the question, whether the group of institutions and customs which form the unique land system of England deserve to be upheld by English statesmen and economists, either by virtue of their intrinsic merits, or by reason of their having become incorporated into our national character ; and, if not, in what manner it may be proper to modify them by legislative enactrdent. ^art IV. PROPOSED REFORM OF THE ENGLISH LAND SYSTEM. CHAPTEE I. Reforms to be Effected in the English System of Land Tenure. It now becomes our duty to consider what modifica- tions of the English Land System are necessary or expedient, either in the special interest of agriculture, or in the general interest of social and political well- being. In discussing this question, it may be convenient to recall the five distinctive features already described as characterising that system — the law and custom of Primogeniture, the prevalence of strict family entails, the consequent aggregation of landed property in the hands of a comparatively small territorial aristocracy, the prevalence of strict family entails, the dependence of farmers on landlords, and the dependence of labourers on both these classes. We have already discussed the considerations which prove the expediency — not to say the necessity — of reforming the institution of Primogeniture, so far as it depends on law, and of limiting the dominion exercised over land through family settlements. Upon one principle to be embraced in any such reform public opinion has long pronounced itself so decisively that it may be taken as already conceded. This principle is the assimilation of real to personal property in 332 UNGLISE LAND AND ENGLISH LANDL0BD8. respect of distribution on intestacy. Even the stoutest adherents of Primogeniture, as a custom, are beginning to allow that, in default of a will or settle- ment, the law should inchne to equality, especially as intestacies are more likely to occur in poor than in wealthy families. To what extent a change in the law of succession on intestacy would affect the practice of testators and settlors, is a matter of mere speculation on which it would be rash to speak confidently. Many are of opinion that no legal presumption in favour of equal partition would avail in the least to counteract the rooted propensity of Englishmen, once possessed of land, to found and keep up a family, but that, on the contrary, people who are now content to die intestate would forth- with make wills disinheriting all their children but one. This opinion appears to derive some little weight from the history of landed property in Kent, where the pre- sumption in favour of gavelkind still prevails, notwith- standing arbitrary and statutory disgavelments, but where it is not found that wills are more favourable to younger sons than in the rest of the island. It has been well observed, however, that if Kentish settlors and testators fail to adopt the principle of partibility, it is not because law does not mould opinion, but rather because all local rules are powerless against the influence of a general law, believed to represent the collective will of the State. ^ Others believe that a deliberate reversal of the policy hitherto sanctioned by the Legislature would exert a powerful influence on popular sentiment, and, coupled with the direct operation of the new law, would leave a very sensible impression on the ' Kenny's " Essay on Primogeniture," p. 64. LAW OF PBIMOGENITUBE TO BE BEPEALBB. 333 rural economy of England within two or tliree genera- tions. In support of this belief, it may be urged that, in a vast number of cases, the form of settlements and wills is practically dictated by the solicitors who frame them, and who themselves foUow, more or less exactly and more or less consciously, the course prescribed by the law on intestacy. A man informs his solicitor that he knows little of legal phrases, but that he wishes to settle his property strictly in the usual and right manner ; upon which the solicitor makes a will, giving all the land to his eldest son, and dividing the personalty, if any, among his widow and children, nearly in accordance with the Statute of Distributions. So close is the correspondence of the custom with the law, that, whereas in default of sons the law vests the land in all the daughters and not in the eldest daughter only, the same rule is adopted, with very slight variation, in most wills and settlements of realty. "Were the law altered, how- ever, and especially were it altered after a thorough dis- cussion of the whole question, the uniformity of these usages would be effectually broken. Solicitors would feel bound to ask for more precise instructions from their clients ; testators and settlors would more fully realise their responsibility ; and the dispositions of landed pro- perty hitherto embodied in the common forms of con- veyances would have to be reconsidered by the light of modem ideas. Here and there an old property would devolve to several children under the law of intestacy, and yet would be kept in the family by means of such fraternal arrangements as are made every day on the Continent.-' A few instances of this kind would go far 1 Many examples of these are given in the Foreign Office Reports of 1870. 334 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. to dispel prejudices against equal partition, while, in the case of properties to which no family sentiment attaches, directions to sell and divide the proceeds in specified proportions could hardly fail to supersede, by their superior convenience, the plan of devising to one child and charging portions for aU the rest. Indirectly, therefore, the mere assimilation of real to personal estate, on intestacy, would jirobably effect a considerable though gradual revolution in the English land system, even though not supplemented by anyother enactment. A far more serious and difficult issue arises upon the various proposals for amending the existing law of entail and settlement. These proposals usually assume one of two general forms, widely differing, in principle, from each other. Either they contemplate a reconstruction of our land system on the model of the Code !N"apoleon, or they are directed to a simple restriction of the power whereby estates can be tied up for a life or lives in being, and a period of twenty-one years afterwards. Both of these schemes purport to promote Free Trade , in land, and to check its aggregation in the hands of an exclusive aristocracy : the former, by constantly and forcibly breaking up properties into fragments, easily saleable ; the latter, by prohibiting or curtailing the limitations which prevent their coming into the market. Thus, both involve an abridgment of the liberty now enjoyed by English settlors and testators, but with this important difference, that whereas the one scheme would only abridge the liberty of a bygone generation to control the action of the living generation, the other is directly at variance with full individual proprietorship. Under the French system of enforced partible succession. FRENCH LAW NOT TO BE ABOPTEB. 335 the property of each citizen is rigidly settled, with the exception of a fixed disposable portion, but the settle- ment is made by the State, instead of by himself, and therefore without regard to peculiar family circumstances. The causes which facilitated the introduction of this great legal revolution into France have been explained by MM. de Tocqueville and Lavergne, and Mr. CHffe Leshe has done much to repel the objections, both social and agricultural, which have been persistently urged against it in this country. We must give due weight to the fact, already noticed, that no French Grovernment, whether Legitimist, Orleanist, Imperial, or Republican, has ever attempted to reverse it; nor can we fail to be struck by the opinion so generally expressed in the Foreign Office Eeports of 1870 that in countries which have borrowed this article of the Code !Napoleon it is believed to work beneficially. On the other hand, it is not less significant that no practical English statesman has ever advocated its adoption, and that even those English theorists who have least sympathy with the rights of property have apparently no great partiality for the agrarian constitu- tion of France and Belgium. Their ideal is not the infinite disintegration of landed property among peasant owners, which they would regard as a retrograde measure, but, on the contrary, its concentration in the hands of one national land commission, or a number of municipal land commissions, under whom private individuals, if allowed to call any land their own, must be content to hold leases. With that far larger and more important class who are engaged in amassing wealth in the assured hope of leaving it as they please, enforced partible 336 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. succession would assuredly find as little favour as with the landed aristocracy ; and if there be a leaning in this class towards any foreign land law, it is not towards that of France, but towards those of the United States and our own colonies. As for the great mass of English- men, it may be taken as certain that a law placing the State in loco parentis, and declaring that a father who has made his own fortune shall not be free to deal with it by wiU, or to disinherit a child, however worthless and ungrateful, would be in the highest degree unpopular. Upon these grounds, apart from all economical considera- tions, we must dismiss this proposal as an impossible solution of the problem, before us — ^impossible because it would satisfy no class or school of thought in England, because it has no foundation to support it in the organic framework of English society, and because the very ideas necessary to lay such a foundation are entirely wanting. It would be rash to assert that so direct an interference with personal rights will never be accepted by this country, but we may safely assert that if the only alternative to English Primogeniture were indefeasible equal succession, that institution would probably fulfil the prediction of Adam Smith, and survive for genera- tions longer. For different, but equally cogent, reasons, we must reject as impracticable the bold suggestion of Mr. J. S. Mill, who condemns both the English and French rules of succession, that it would be expedient to restrict, " not what any one may bequeath, but what any one should be permitted to acquire by bequest or inherit- ance," so that it should not exceed a maximum " suffi- ciently high to afford the means of a comfortable ENTAILS UPON JJNBOEN CHILDBEN 337 independence." A little reflection upon the practical application of this suggestion ought surely to convince us that, even if it were possible to make it the basis of a testamentary code, it would be hopeless to carry it out with any approach to real equity. A difierent rule would be required for the rich and for the poor ; for men with small families, and for men with large families. But we may spare ourselves any detailed criticism of a plan, not so much designed to check the abuses of Primogeniture, as to realise a favourite idea of Bentham, by diverting the surplus of private accumu- lations into the public treasury — an object which may or may not be desirable in itself, but which is beyond the legitimate scope of our present inquiry. By what means, then, can the vices inherent in the English system of entail and settlement be remedied, without impeaching the essential rights of proprietor- ship and disposition ? According to some law reformers, nothing more is required for this purpose than a simple legislative prohibition of entails upon unborn children. There can be no doubt that such a measure, if so framed as to exclude the evasion of its principle by the creation of " powers " or otherwise, might reduce by twenty- one years the period for which land can be lawfull}'- kept extra commercium by the force of a single instru- ment. But it would leave the mischief of limited ownership and contingent incumbrances wholly un- touched within the allotted circle of a life or lives in being ; or rather, it would stimulate family pride and legal ingenuity to devise new modes of settlement which should make up by their greater complexity for the brevity of their restrictive operation. Indeed, if w 338 ENGLISH LAND AND BNGLI8H LANDLOUDS. the power of entailing were maintained, subject only to a prohibition of entails upon unborn children, and with- out any further change in the law, the actual effect would probably be much less than might be expected at first sight. There would be nothing to prevent the creation of any number of successive life-estates pre- ceding the first estate-tail. The practice of making the first and other unborn sons of a marriage tenants-ki-tail by an ante-nuptial settlement must, of course, be abandoned, but the same objects might be effected with tolerable certainty after the birth of one or more sons. Provision might be made that, in the event of a tenant-in-tail dying childless, without having barred the entail, the property should revert to the settlor, or vest in some other living person, and all the sons might thus be designated, in succession, as heirs-in-tail. If the eldest son, or any other heir-in-tail, should. marry and have sons, without barring the entail, the property would practically descend, fer formam doni, to an unborn heir in the second generation, upon whom it had never been, and could not be, expressly entailed. For these and other reasons, sound policy seems to require the entire abolition of entails, in the legal sense, and not merely the abolition of entails upon unborn children. This reform, however important, would not involve the abolition of family settlements, for the power of entailing is one thing, the power of settling is another. If the legal creation known as an " estate- tail " were finally swept away, it would still be possible to settle property before a marriage so that it should vest in the first son attaining his majority — not as heir- in-tail, but as heir-for-life or in fee-simple, as the case ESTATES-TAIL TO BE ABOLISEEB. 339 might be. Whether a landowner should be allowed to control his own future liberty of action even to this extent, is a different question, to be decided on its own merits. If it should be decided in the affirmative, a valid distinction might still be drawn between the power of settling upon the unborn children of the settlor himself, and the power of settling upon the unborn children of some other person. It may possibly be reasonable to allow a man in possession of his pro- perty, and about to marry, the right oE providing for his own unborn children by an ante-nuptial settlement, and yet quite unreasonable to entrust the same power to a stranger, perhaps animated with the senseless ambition of immortalising an ignoble name. A further distinction may properly be drawn be- tween settlements made by will and settlements made by deed inter vivos, especially upon mai-riage. Post- humous dispositions of all kinds are watched in these days, on very sufficient grounds, with increasing jealousy, and posthumous entails are liable to peculiar objections which do not attach to others. When they are derived from wiUs executed in prospect of death, they are far more likely to be capricious and self- defeating than if they had originated from the same mind in the fuU vigour of life ; if the will has been executed long before the testator's death, from which it, nevertheless, " speaks," it may not represent his final intention, owing to circumstances which have occurred since the date of its execution. In any case, the power of entailing by will is exercised secretly, and with much less security for deliberation than is afforded by the negotiations that usually precede a marriage w 2 340 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISS LANDLORDS. settlement, whicli is manifestly, of all settlements, the one entitled to most indulgence. But it may well be doubted whether it can serve any good end that a bachelor should be enabled to designate as his heir a child which may never be born, so irrevo- cably as to defeat his own power of choosing among his children, when they are born, or rather when their characters are sufficiently formed. This grand abuse, peculiar to modem settlements of land, is, of course, greatly aggravated when the settlor is not the expectant father of the unborn heir, but the grandfather, or great- uncle, or some more distant relative. Yet it might be rectified by a very simple enactment, founded on a principle already adopted in ordinary marriage settle- ments of personalty. These settlements usually provide that, after the death of the parents, the money shall be divided among the children in such proportions as the parents, or the surviving parent, shall appoint ; faihng which, it shall be divided equally. Let such a pro- vision, reserving to each father his natural right of selection among his own children, be imported into every settlement by implication of law, and half the evils incident to the present system would vanish at once. The effect would be that a settled property might be preserved, as now, in the direct line of hereditary descent, so that none but the children (if any) of the intended marriage could inherit it; and the eldest son might still, if the settlor desired, be designated as heir. But that designation would not be indefeasible, for the father in each generation would be armed with a power of ap- pointment, enabhng him to set it aside, and devolve the inheritance, whole and undivided, upon some other child. SETTLEMENTS TO BE CONTBOLLED BY LAW. 341 or divide it among all the children. This enactment might properly be extended to personalty also, and, being there in strict accordance with the prevailing custom, would involve no violent encroachment on the liberty now enjoyed — a liberty, be it remembered, which, so far as it is exercised, is exercised by grandfathers to override the free action of fathers. It might also be provided that every tenant for life of landed property under an ordinary family settlement should have the power, by a like implication of law, to charge the estate for the benefit of his wife or any of his children, to an amount bearing a stated proportion to its annual value.^ The proportion so fixed would thenceforth constitute, so to speak, a legal standard of family justice. Though its adoption would be permissive, and not compulsory, the consciences of many would thus be awakened to a sense of their parental obligations, till it should come to be thought a disgraceful thing for a nobleman with £50,000 a year to cut off his daughters, either married or single, with portions of £5,000 or £10,000. A more effective blow might, however, be dealt at the social and economical evils arising from settlements of land, by a simple abolition of life-tenancy. Supposing this to be done, it would signify little whether tenancy- in-tail were or were not retained ; for the artfully-devised mechanism whereby family properties are now kept out of the market, and protected against the claims of 1 By the Irish statute 2 Anne, cap. 6, s. 10, it was enacted that where the eldest son of a Papist should become entitled to his real estate as a, conforming Protestant, the property should be chargeable, at the discretion of the Court of Chancery, with portions for younger children, not exceeding one-third of its annual value. 342 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. creditors, entirely depends on the interposition of life- estates before and between the various estates-tail limited in the settlement. If there were no snch thing as a life- estate, either in law or in equity, a landowner wishing to settle his property on his eldest son, without giving up the possession of it during his own life, must leave it to him by will either in fee-simple or in tail. Even in the latter case, the eldest son, if of full age at his father's death, would become absolute master of the property, since an estate-tail is convertible into an estate in fee- simple at the will of its possessor. In other words, the settlement would be virtually no settlement, but a simple gift or devise. If the eldest son were a minor at his father's death, and died without issue before executing a disentaihng deed, the property might of course be made to vest in the next brother, or some other person, but under Hke conditions. No doubt the ingenuity of lawyers might possibly contrive fresh methods of tying up property by means of trustees, but, if the Legislature were resolved to sweep away life-estates, these methods would be declared null and void. The consequence would be that, however persistently the custom of entaihng might be maintained, each successive head of a family would be, or might become, the real owner, instead of a mere life-tenant, of the family property. The chief difference, from the family point of view, would be, that eldest sons, being entirely in the power of their fathers, who might exercise the right of disen- tailing at any moment, would be, as it were, bound over in heavy recognizances to good behaviour. The chief difference, from the economical point of view, would be, that by virtue of the same right, the ostensible owner of LIFE-TENANOY ANB MABBIAGE-8ETTLEMENT8. 343 a property roight charge it for his debts to its full value, instead of only to the value of his life-interest. It is, however, incredible that under such a law the passion for making eldest sons would remain unabated. Since younger children would be consigned to beggary, where the father's property consisted solely or mainly of land, unless they were given shares of it or charges upon it, a general custom of breaking entails for this purpose would probably spring up, and apportionments so made out of a fee-simple estate would almost inevitably be far less influenced by the spirit of Primogeniture than re-settle- ments of the prevailing type. The manifest objection to such legislation is that it would strike at the root of all marriage settlements. The object of ante-nuptial settlements is mainly to secure the future wife against the risk of the joint capital being dissipated by the future husband, and the expected children against the risk of that capital, ulti- mately destined for their fortunes, being dissipated by either of their parents. If the settled funds or lands were always, or almost always, in possession of the future husband and wife before marriage, there might be little hardship in denying them a power of taking security, as it were, against their own improvidence. But, in nine cases out of ten, the settlors are the future husband's father and the future wife's father. It may be urged that if they were compelled to place the joint capital — whether personal or real — at the absolute dis- posal of the future husband or at the joint disposal of him and his wife, they might. well decline to advance that capital at all, or might limit its amount to a minimum. In the United States, it is true, these 344 jENGLISE land AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. difficulties are not found insuperable, and it is usual for parents to give their married cldldren an allowance during their own lives, making a further provision for them by will. It is by no means self-evident that society would suffer in this country if a similar prac- tice were to prevail, and if English marriage settlements were henceforth to assume a much simpler form. There are very strong reasons for restricting comphcated re- servations of future interests even in personalty, and for doubting whether the efforts of the dead to regulate the enjoyment of wealth by the living for the sake of the unborn are sufficiently repressed by the rule against perpetuities and the Thelusson Act. But it is important to realise that life estates in land rest on the same principle as trusts for the preservation of settled funds, during the lifetime of husband and wife, in settlements of personalty. Now, for the present, it must be assumed that public opinion is not prepared to suppress a custom so widespread as that of settling personalty for the benefit of a second generation. Upon this assumption, we cannot decline to grapple with the broad question whether a valid distinction can be drawn between realty and personalty as regards the power of settlement, or whether every rule laid down for the one must needs be applied to the other. To such a question a controversialist might reply that personalty and realty have never been treated by the law on a footing of equality. Not only have they been subjected to a different course of descent on in- testacy, and to different scales of taxation on inheri- tance, but very invidious liabilities were in times past cast upon owners of personalty in the interest of DISTINCTION BETWEEN PERSONALTY AND REALTY. 3i5 landowners. For instance, the heir, taking all the land on intestacy, was specially exempted from the rule that sums advanced to sons in their father's life- time should be deducted from their shares at his death ; while, by a monstrous perversion of justice, a mortgage debt, contracted on the security and for the benefit of the land, was primarily chargeable on the personal estate, until Mr. Locke King's Act was passed in 1854. Nothing, however, could be gained by multiplying proofs of the partiality formerly shown to land by a Legislature principally composed of landowners, nor could it now be redressed by showing an equally irrational partiality to personalty. The policy of prohibiting life-estates in land, with- out prohibiting the corresponding life-interests in per- sonalty, must stand or fall by the peculiar nature, claims, and obligations of Eeal Property. Not a Session elapses in which Parliament does not affirm the principle that land is a thing sui generis, over which the State may and ought to assume a control far more stringent than it would be politic to assume, but not than it might rightfully assume, over other kinds of property. Whether it be for the construction of railways, canals, and waterworks, for the requirements of public health, or for any other legitimate purpose of local improve- ment, the Legislature freely confiscates land, though it usually gives its owners an exorbitant compensation. The familiar arguments in support of this interference are derived from the fact that land is strictly Hmited in quantity, at least within the borders of each kingdom, and that its resources in a virgin state are not the production of human industry. These arguments are 346 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. SO far valid as to rebut what does not need to be rebutted — ^tbe presumption of any binding analogy between land and money. If an additional argument were needed, it might be found in the consideration that landed property is a specific and concrete thing, carrying with it manifold privileges and duties, whereas personalty, for the most part, consists in an abstract right to receive dividends, which may belong to one man as well as to another. It may be an evil, in itself, that a perfectly worthless person should have a large fortune settled upon him by an ancestor quite ignorant of his future character, but this evil is far less, both in kind and degree, if the fortune consists of money, than if it consists of land. In short, the one decisive justi- fication for treating land as an entirely exceptional subject of property is to be found in the entirely exceptional power which the possession of it confers. If we contemplate the supreme influence wielded by landowners collectively over the condition and especially over the dwellings of the people ; if we remember that upon their estate-management depend the productive- ness of the soil and the internal food-supplies of the country ; if we realise that not only is the land in a physical sense "the leaf we feed on," but in a political sense the substratum of our whole administrative machinery ; we shall not faU. to perceive the full absurdity of postulating that it should be exactly as- similated to stock in ' plasticity for the purposes of settlement — but not, forsooth, in facility of transfer, in the course of devolution on intestacy, or in liability to probate and succession duties. The abolition of life estates in land is, therefore. ABOLITION OF LIMITED OWNERSHIP. 347 perfectly consistent witli the maintenance or toleration of life-interests in personalty, if public opinion is not yet ripe for a radical alteration in the form of ordinary marriage settlements. It is also perfectly consistent with, the practice of vesting a family property, whole and undivided, in the eldest son, and charging it for the benefit of a widow or younger children. It would even be consistent with the practice of directing a family-property to be sold, and settling the proceeds as personalty, yet allowing the sale to be postponed, so long as all the parties interested should be willing to accept interest out of the undivided property, in lieu of capital sums out of the proceeds. This practice would carry out the principle and purposes of family-settle- ments quite as faithfully as the alternative, and not less radical, plan of maintaining life-estates in land, but enabling tenants-for-life to convert the land into money, to be held on the same trusts. For, in that case, the heir of a great ancestral property might improve his own life-income at his own pleasure, and yet relieve himself of all family claims and territorial respon- sibilities, thus cutting away the main ground upon which the institution of Primogeniture is supposed to rest. Nothing short of prohibiting "limited ownership," in the sense of life-tenancy followed by estates-tail, will fally effect the object of establishing Free Trade in land. The more thoroughly we appreciate the almost insuperable difl&culty of partially reforming an institution so deeply rooted and widely ramified as the custom of entail and settlement, the more irresistible will appear the conclusion that it is better to reform it 348 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. altogether, by abolishing all kinds of ownership except ownership in fee -simple, with all customary and copy- hold tenures, and by imposing proper restrictions on the length o£ leases. The conception of such a measure would demand an effort of constructive statesmanship quite as bold as the solution of the Irish Land Question, while its execution would affect still vaster interests, and must be spread over a longer period of time. Once carried, however, it would cut half the knots which together make up the English Land Question. One of these knots consists in the difficulty, expense, and delay attending the transfer of land, especially in small lots, and it is sometimes assumed, too hastily, that all this could be rectified by a good system of registration, such as exists in most Continental States, where a public court does what is here done by conveyancers. It should be remembered that, even where a transfer o£ stock is effected by a mere stroke of the pen, a long and costly investigation must often be previously imdertaken on behalf of the trustees who authorise the sale. No system of registration could bring about Free Trade in land under settlement, but a register would become invaluable both to vendors and purchasers when every name in it would be that of an owner in fee. Trusts of land, with all their vexatious incidents, would soon be obsolete, when there were no reversionary interests to be pro- tected. Mortgages on old family properties would be rarer and more easily cleared off, when every acre of land could be turned into ready money at the owner's pleasure. They would, however, be more frequently contracted on new purchases by capitalist farmers, when it was discovered that it might be cheaper, in the long UNITY OF PBOPBIETOBSEIP. 349 run, to pay interest to a mortgagee than rent to a landlord. Other advantages might be secured by the gentler method, already suggested, of reserving a power of appointment among children, by force of law, to every life tenant in possession of a family property. "What cannot be secured by that method, or by any other method consistent with the principle of modern entails, guarded by life estates, is, in one word, unity of pro- prietorship. A settled estate is an estate which has not, and may never have, a real proprietor. For the common family settlement is a contrivance whereby the land itself may be saved from morcellement at the expense of the proprietary interest, which is dissected, split up, and parcelled out into more shares than a French lawyer would think possible. This process is repeated, as we have seen, in each generation, by a family compact between father and eldest son, in which no other member of the family has any voice, yet neither of the parties is truly a free agent, or in a position to reverse the self- renewing dispensation of which they are little more than instruments, and no single person can be identified as the author. Now let us assume that, due provision being made for vested interests,' all this ingenious net- work of particular estates, as they are technically called, were swept away by law, and that every acre of English soil belonged absolutely to some assignable owner. Let us, further, picture to ourselves a case in which the operation of the change would be most severely tested — the case of an heir succeeding to a family property strictly entailed by its original purchaser and held ^ See Appendix VII. on "Tested Interests in Settled Estates." ;!.v) i:\i;iL<:ii i.Axn .(,v/» i:\(U.isii i,.\MUA>in>s. togvtluM- Tor conturios by sottlonitMits in tlio oMosI nuiK> lino, hilt. Ihuliiii;- hiinsoU" nt porlVot lilxM-ty to st>ll it or tloviso it us ho ploasos. This is ;> caso, W it rtMnarkinl. whirh. hvit I'or the pnu-tioo of n'-si^ttlonuMil, wouUl ocour tlaily iiikUm' tho prosoni systoni, iiiul dot^s invnir soino- tinios, wlicu th(> t>lilosl sou ohstinutoly n'i'usos to oomiuvito liis t>sta(('-f!iil for a liio-ostato. II will hnnlly ho disputtnl that a laiulowiuM' so cirouinstanoi'd has a nioi-o tMiviahIo lot, with i;'r(Mvtor iiuhicomouts ami i;Toator po\vi>r to tlo his cstato and all conncH'tiHl with it I'ull jusliro. than if ho wt>n> th(> ni(>ro oroaturo of a. S(>ttlonionl, hut it u\ay 1h< inuig'inod that his Li'ain is niotv than oouutt>rhalauoo(l liy sonu> loss olsowIuMV. \\nioro. tln>n, is this loss, and who is it that snll'ors by Iho sid^stitntion of ownorship Tor lil'o- tonanoy in tho oaso snppos(>(l ? Not, suroly, his anot'sturs, who. liavint;- hron<^'ht nothini;' into tht> world, oould not carry anythiny,' out, and wliosi' nuMiiory it. would bo superstitious to jiorsonil'y. Not his wili> or youiiL;'(M' ohildrou, whom ho is now ouablinl to (>ndow ncoordiu'T to his own ot)nviot.ions of jiislioo, inst(>a(l ol' acoordinij^ to a standard, dotvrminod by tho ])aranu)unti olaiins ol' lh-imo<;'onitur<\ hol'oro his nuvrriai;'(\ if not lu-lbn* his birth.' Noti bis oldosli son, who, by tlu> bypothosis, ' Mr. (!. (>Hlii>nio Mdi-jfim, M.l'., in lii« iiiuupliliil on " Imml lunv l{.('l'(inii ill Eiiglaml," lir^fcH lliiil. if iihiki liiil r('i>-Miiii|ilo i'mIiiIivh in liiiiil \vii|'i> licnnilliMl, II liimlnwiH'i' nuiltl nod ({ivi> n liri'-iiiliircHl. tin jninlun' In liln widdW, 111" iiiiiKo Nuiliilili> iiiMviHiiiiiH Cor UIn I'luiiily, lliil. (lii" iilinlilioii nl' limiloil iiwiioi'Hlii]) (liM'H iidl, iiivolvii tlio nlinlitinii ol' llio rl^lil. lo clmrni' liuiil i wliilo MM iiliMoliito owiUM- would iilwiiyM '"' "'''i' Ion(>1I llio wliolo or ii porliim (if lii.^ chIiiIo (o proviilo for IiIn willow or iiiiy ollior iMoinln'r ol' lii« runiily. Mr. Mor^'nii liiiiiHoll' woiilil coiiror lliin |iowi'r on n Ihulloil owiirr, I'liiililiiiK liini " 111 Holl llio liuill out. iinil onl>, milijorl> only In I wo roniliUoiiH : liruii, lliali I'IiohmIo Iii< iin Iioiio.mIi ono ; mill Nn'oiiilly, Hint, ilio ]iiii'rliiiHi<.nionipliiiil I'or l.lio liiMiolH of nil |M'r,Moim iiitoroNloil in Ilio liinil ilHiOr," PLBA FOB ENTAILH INVALID. 351 must have come into the world, or at least emerged from, childhood, after the alteration in the law, and would have been educated in the full knowledge that his birth- right, if any, was at the disposal of his father. Not any more distant relatives, whose interest in family estates, unless vested, is usually most shadowy and delu- sive. Not unborn descendants, who might possibly inherit if the entail were perpetually renewed, under the present law, but who are equally with the dead beyond the reach of appreciable injury. In short, we strive in vain to discover any specific individual, either in esse or in posse, who could be aggrieved by the legal extinc- tion of life-estates and estates-tail, under proper condi- tions of time. Still it may be said that " families," that is, tei'ritorial families, would sooner or later cease to exist without the artificial safeguard of complex settlements, and that such a result would prejudice not only the happiness of their members in all succeeding generations, but the welfare of all the rural communities grouped around them, and even of the nation at large. And thus we are led back to a point of view from which the actual results of family settlements have already been estimated, and from which it may now be useful to forecast the probable results of the alternative system. The first, and not the least salutary, of these would be the strengthening of parental authority in those families where it is most needed. The father is, upon the whole, a wiser lawgiver and a more impartial judge within his own domestic circle than any providence of human institution, whether it be embodied in a lifeless deed or in a lifeless statute ; and, as Mr. Locke King 352 UNGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. justly remarks, " if such a disposer of property did not exist, we should only be too happy to discover such a being." Invested with full dominion over his landed estate, the head of each family would no longer have any cause to be jealous of his eldest son, or feel bound to maintain him in idleness during the best years of his life. Doubtless there would still be a strong disposition in most representatives of old hereditary properties to leave the eldest son, if not unworthy, the principal family domain, with the bulk of the land ; but since he would depend, like his younger brothers, upon his father's award, and could not raise money upon his expectations, he would, like them, betake himself to some profession or business, and endeavour to increase, instead of diminishing, his future patrimony. In such cases, the position of the younger children would be very much what it is under the present system, during the parent's life ; but even in such cases, and still more in cases where hereditary traditions were less powerful, the father would seldom think himself justified in leaving them a mere fraction of the property at his disposal, and would often direct his outlying estates to be divided among them or sold for their benefit. In these ways land would be constantly " passing out of the family," and though some might be left back to it by childless uncles, the unity of family properties would be greatly and progressively impaired. Moreover, now and then a spendthrift who ought to have been disinherited would be allowed to succeed by a too indulgent father, and might gamble away in a year the purchases and im- provements of many generations. This being the contingency which settlements on the eldest son are REASONS FOB ABOLISHING ENTAILS. 353; specially designed to prevent, and the occurrence of whicli is represented by the friends of Primogeniture as an unmitigated calamity, it may be well to pause for a moment, and observe both what it does and what it does not involve. That it does not involve any destruction or even any " dissipation " of the land itself, is so obvious that no- thing but the persistent use of confused metaphors could have obscured it. Money, or money's worth, cah be eaten, drunk, thrown into the sea, or otherwise literally consumed in unproductive expenditure ; but a fortune consisting of land can only be squandered in the sense of being transferred from the dominion of on& man into that of another or several others, which may happen to be the best thing which can befall the soil and all who live upon it. Considering the enormous- injury done to any estate by the life incumbency of one insolvent — not to say one absentee — proprietor, as well as the well-known tendency of families to degenerate after one such disgraceful interregnum, the burden of proof certainly lies upon those who hold that, in such an event, the greatest happiness of the greatest number is promoted by keeping it undivided and inalienable, lest an ancient feudal name should perish out of the county. Mr. Arthur Arnold has drawn a striking picture of the public evils which may result from the financial difficulties of great landlords, whose estates cannot be sold : — " The nominal owners of several of the finest properties in England are now adjudicated bankrupts ; their lands are racked and impoverished, but those broad acres cannot be made free without co-opera- tion of the tenant-for-life with the next tenant-in-tail. 354 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. who in some cases is a minor, and in others is unborn, and may never be called into existence. But for every- one of the landed gentry who is bankrupt, there are scores who are hopelessly embarrassed. . . . The cottages upon many estates are fever-nests, and are few and far between ; the homesteads are insufficient, inconvenient, and in many cases in ruins ; the land is undrained, and there is no one with the interest of a proprietor to look to the estate. The ostensible owner, the lord or the squire of the district, who is harassed for subscriptions, and supposed to contemplate with the benign interest of a seignioral lord the welfare of all around, who is the great man in the church and in the village, is in the dull reality of his own home merely a poor annuitant, with his eyes fixed, not upon the many fields and farms which in the rate-book bear his name, but upon the slender remnant of income which is all that charges or settlements have left him for the daily and hourly labour of providing for a family, for whom ten times his means would seem insufficient. He and his eldest son have but one pleasure in the world, and as it appears to cost nothing, they think themselves meri- torious in that they are content with the sporting, which the estate and the neighbourhood affiord. The younger children languish at home, well knowing that upon their father's death they must find a new shelter, with very small fortunes." Such cases are by no means rare in those parts of the country which are least affected by the stir of commercial activity, and it is precisely in such cases that Free Trade in land would come into beneficial operation. It is not the best landlords, but the worst, that would be eliminated by natural selection REASONS FOB ABOLISHING ENTAILS. 355 from the roll of county families, if they were not dis- abled from selling by settlements, and the capitalists likely to succeed them would not be those Avith least aptitude, but those with most aptitude, for the duties of pro- prietorship. But this, as we have seen, is a very inadequate view of the question. We must also take into account the probable effect of abolishing life-estates and entails upon the heirs-presumptive — for there could then be no heirs- apparent — of family estates. Might it not be expected that if each successive eldest son of an illustrious house were actuated at once by ancestral pride and the fear of forfeiting his birthright through misconduct or incom- petency, a healthy kind of atavism would develop itself in the landed aristocracy, and the virtues manifested by the founders of families would be more frequently reproduced in their descendants? Nay, more, does not our knowledge of human nature, confirmed by the experience of Germany, America, and the Colonies, encourage us to hope that, in terminating all indefeasible rights of succession, we should be unlockiug hidden springs of energy and genius, calling into action the mettle of that " lounging class " which is the reproach of English Primogeniture, infusing unwonted indus- try into our aristocratic public schools and universities, and making henceforth the antiquity of a family a true mark of hereditary strength ? If so — if the sub- stitution of free ownership for life-estates and entails would help to banish the idea of privileged idleness from English society, and to introduce the condition of personal merit into the unwritten code of family inheritance in England — the moral influence of so X 2 356 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOBBS. wholesome a reform would outweigli in value its economical effects. Since the law of Primogeniture and the right of creating strict family entails are the keystone of the English Land System, we may properly treat other needful amendments of that system as natural results of the measures already contemplated. But for the exigencies of complicated settlements, designed to keep landed property tied up for generations, the abuses of English conveyancing must have been abated long ago,, and the worst of them will assuredly not survive the- abolition of limited ownership. When trusts for pre- serving contingent remainders, outstanding terms, and. other incidents of entailing deeds, have become obsolete- mysteries it will be discovered that English titles do not require to be enshrined in "a mausoleum of' parchment," and that English soil can be transferred or mortgaged quite as easily and cheaply as that of' France, America, or Australia. Most of the diffi- culties supposed to beset registration will then vanish of themselves, and the difference between an official record of title and an official record of assurances will be reduced to much smaller proportions. The- object of the former is to register only absolute ownership and simple mortgages, leaving unregistered all equitable and partial interests. But if limited ownership, with all the equitable interests grafted upon it, were swept away, absolute ownership and simple mortgages would practically be the only important rights over land which could be put upon the register, and a record of title would be, in effect, a record of' assurances. For the same reason, these assurances. SEFOBMS OF 00N7EYANGING ANB BEGI8TBATI0N. 357 might be indefinitely simplified in form, and, even if transcribed in full, would occupy much less space on a register. But they would also be indefinitely increased in number, because, if land once became as saleable as ships or shares in companies, it would constantly be ■changing hands, in small lots, and generally passing from an embarrassed to a more afiluent owner. It is needless to point out that any method of land registration worthy of the name must be made com- pulsory, by means of an enactment that no instrument shall be valid without being registered, and that every instrument shall rank in priority according to the date of its registration. It is equally clear that, being com- pulsory, registration must be made as convenient and safe as possible. In securing this object, many questions of practical detail will of course have to be solved in this country, as they have been solved elsewhere. Such is the question whether many district "registries should be preferred to one central registry, whether there shall be a staff of official searchers and whether their certificates shall be made legally conclusive, whether a cadastral map shall be made an integral part of the register for the purpose of governing the identification of disputed boundaries, and in what manner a compensation-fund should be provided to indemnify persons who may suffer from official errors. Much stress has been laid on these questions of detail by those who have little sympathy with the abolition of limited ownership, and the principle of Eree Trade in land. But it would be idle to discuss them as if they could seriously affect the policy of emancipating the English Land System from its feudal servitude, or as if English statesmanship were unequal 358 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBBS. to an administrative reform which, has been accomplished by most other civiHsed nations. Even the question of cost would prove far less formidable than might appear at first sight. The preposterous charges which are now made for the simplest conveyancing operation, and which amount to a prohibitive duty on small transactions in land, would then undergo a sweeping revision, and the saving thereby effected would amply cover the expense of working the new machinery. But in order to clear the soil of England from past encumbrances, and to give the present generation of vendors the means of granting an indefeasible title, it would be necessary to establish a Landed Estates Court, upon the basis advocated by Lord Cairns so far back as the year 1859, but tacitly rejected as inconsistent with the unreformed English land system. The equal division of land upon intestacy, the aboli- tion of limited ownership, and the encouragement of Free Trade in land by perfect facility of transfer, could not fail to produce a profound and cumulative effect upon the distribution of landed property in this country. Where the law of intestacy operated, the shares of younger children would often find their way into the market. Where the whole property was left to, or settled upon, the eldest son absolutely, but charged with portions, he would often find it profitable to sell off parts of it, so as to retain the rest unencumbered. Since there would be no tenants for life, and no power of preserving the integrity of a family property beyond one life-time, landowners would often raise money in the same way for purposes of improvement, rather than borrow it on mortgage. Similar causes and motives would diminish the anxiety of neighbouring great proprietors to annex BEKEFIOIAL EFFECTS OF FREE OWNEESHIP. 359 these parcels of land at a fancy price, and would increase the competition for them among professional men and tradespeople, if not among prosperous tenant-farmers. The gravitation of landed property, so to speak, would thus he gradually altered, and set towards a rural bour- geoide, instead of towards a territorial aristocracy. This process of transition, once commenced, would he vastly promoted and accelerated hy the assimilation of land to personalty in respect of transfer. What deters so many people from investing their savings in land is not merely the cost, trouble, and risk of employing a solicitor to complete the purchase of it, hut also the knowledge that, before it can be mortgaged or sold, the same cost, trouble, and risk must be incurred over again, as well as a wholesome dread of the risk attending the custody of title-deeds. Hence the prevalent idea that land- owning is the privilege of the few, except in the immediate suburbs of towns, and that it is safer to hire a country residence than to buy it — an idea which it may take some years to eradicate from the minds of the English middle-classes. But it must ultimately give way before the disintegrating influences of abso- lute ownership and Pree Trade in land. These influences will be further strengthened by reforms of a different character, some of which are already in progress, while others must inevitably accompany or follow a reconstruction of the English land system. One of these reforms, and not the least important in its probable results, is the relaxation of the Game Laws. It is true, no doubt, that undue obloquy has been heaped upon the Grarae Laws as destructive to agriculture, and embittering the relation between 360 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. landlords and tenants. It is true, also, that very strict laws against trespassing in pursuit of game are enforced in France, America, and other countries, where land- lordism cannot be said to rule.^ Nevertheless, it is certain that the English Game Laws, coupled with the English practice of yearly tenancy, have powerfully contributed — not merely to discourage agricultural improvement, but to favour the maintenance of great estates. In the first place, the love of game-preserving attaches to his ancestral domain many a nobleman and squire for whom it has no other attraction, who never resides there except during the sporting season, and who is quite unfitted to discharge the duties of pro- prietorship or local government. In the next place, the desire to keep a large tract of country undisturbed for game, with continuous or contiguous belts of covert well distributed among the arable fields, often renders the lord of many acres averse to letting in a stranger, and even impels him to rectify his frontier by fresh acquisitions. On the other hand, the would-be pur- chaser of a small farm or plot is unwilling to find himself surrounded by the well-stocked preserves of a powerful neighbour, dreading the ravages of hares and rabbits on his crops, and knowing that disputes are sure to arise with the gamekeeper. The custom of game-preserving is, therefore, a reason why the great proprietor is less ready to sell or more ready to buy, and, moreover, why the capitalist wishing to settle in the country is not disposed to invest in land intersected by the woods of the great proprietor. It is this, ' See the evidence on this subject collected in Mr. James Howard's treatise on " Continental Farming." BE8TBIGTI0N OF GAME LAWS. 361 .amongst other considerations of the same kind, which frequently induces a great proprietor to outbid all competitors when land is sold by auction. To others the land is only worth its agricultural or residential value, apart from its possible bearing on social position. To him it is worth all this, and, besides all this, it may enable him to boast of having some of the finest shooting in the whole county. But this is not all. The com.munity of sporting tastes fostered by the custom of game-preserving in itself typifies, and does something to keep up, that exclusive freemasonry of county society which repels the intrusion of urban new-comers, too probably- of plebeian extraction. When the self- extinction of yeomen had once commenced, owing to economical causes, it ■could not fail to proceed with progressive rapidity. Those who remained found themselves more and more isolated, occupying a rank appreciably above that of ordinary tenant-farmers, yet far below that of country gentlemen in the commission of the peace. Persons •of the same class disposed to settle in the country are jDerfectly aware of this, and think many times before placing themselves in a position where they would find hardly any neighbours to associate with them upon terms of equality. But let us now assume that, with the repeal of the laws consecrating Primogeniture and Entail, and the introduction of Free Trade in land, the order of landed proprietors will yearly become less .and less of a caste, since the properties of decayed families will be constantly breaking up, and the line hetween the privileged and the unprivileged landowner will almost cease to be perceptible. Let us further 362 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISS LANDLORDS. assume that reforms in the whole system of parochial and county administration, reviving the self-governing capacity of Saxon times, will redistribute the civil functions of Quarter Sessions among elective Boards, and open a new career to active and public-spirited men with a territorial status in the county, though still beneath the dignity of squires. Can we doubt that, released from the artificial bondage which has too long repressed it, and quickened afresh by social ambition, the instinctive passion of Englishmen for a home in the country would reassert itself, as it did at the close of the Middle Ages, when orderly government succeeded the organised barbarism of feudal society? Is it impossible that certain branches of manufacture, now concentrated in unhealthy towns, would then flourish among green fields, as they do in New England, and that the " pit- villages " of earlier times would be revived in settlements of operatives clustered round new mills in convenient proximity to railway stations ? Might not a new communal life, half urban and half rural, spring up in districts thus repeopled, as it has in other lands, breaking up the ancient stagnation of rustic parishes, but purged from the vice and squalor of populous towns ? These, however, are speculations which concern the next generation. In the meantime, we may rest assured that no sudden or startling change would be wrought by so moderate a reform of the land system in the characteristic features of English country life. There would still be a squire occupying the great house in most of our villages, and this squire would generally be the eldest son of the last squire ; though he would GBADUAL OPERATION OF SUCH REFORMS. 363 sometimes be a younger son of superior merit or capa- city, and sometimes a wealtty and enterprising pur- cliaser from tlie manufacturing districts. Only here and there would a noble park be deserted or neglected for want of means to keep it up and want of resolution ttx part with it ; but it is not impossible that deer might often be replaced by equally picturesque herds of cattle ; that landscape gardening and ornamental building might be car%-ied on with less contempt for expense ; that hunt- ing and shooting might be reduced within the limits which satisfied our sporting forefathers ; that some country gentlemen would be compelled to contract their speculations on the turf, and that others would have less to spare for yachting or for amusement at Continental watering-places. Indeed, it would not be surprising if greater simplicity of manners, and less exclusive notions of their own dignity, should come to prevail even among the higher landed gentry, leading to a revival of that free and kindly social intercourse which made rural neighbourhoods what they were in olden times. The peculiar agricultural system of England might remain intact, with its three-fold division of labour between the landlord charged with the public duties attaching to property, the farmer contributing most of the capital and all the skill, and the labourer relieved by the assurance of continuous wages from all risks except that of illness. But the landlords would be a larger body, containing fewer grandees and more practical agriculturists, living at their country homes all the year round, and putting their savings into land, instead of wasting them in the social com- petition of the metropoHs. The majority of them would 364 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. '.still be eldest sons, many of whom, liowever, would have learned to work hard till middle life, for the support of their families ; and besides these, there would be not a few younger sons who had retired to pass the evening of their days on little properties near the place of their birth, either left them by will or bought out of their own acquisitions. With these would be mingled other elements in far larger measure and greater variety than at present — wealthy capitalists eager to enter the ranks ■of the landed gentry, merchants, traders, and profes- sional men content with a country villa and a hundred freehold acres around it, yeomen farmers, who had pur- chased the fee simple of their holdings from embarrassed landlords, and even labourers of rare intelligence, who had seized favourable chances of investing in land. Under such conditions, it is not too much to expect that some links, now missing, between rich and poor, gentle and simple, might be supplied in country dis- tricts ; that " plain living and high thinkiag " might again find a home in some of our ancient manor houses, once the abode of landowners, but now tenanted by mere occupiers ; that, with less of dependence and subordina- tion to a dominant will, there would be more of true neighbourly feeling, and even of clanship ; and that posterity, reaping the beneficent fruits of greater social equality, would marvel, and not without cause, how the main obstacle to greater social equality — the Law and Custom of Primogeniture — escaped revision for more than two centuries after the final abolition of feudal tenures. CHAPTEE II. Reforms to te Effected in tlie Agricultural System of England^ In considering the defects of tlie English Land Systems in its agricultural aspect, with a view to its amendment, we must not shut our eyes to its characteristic merits, or faU into the error of comparing it with a mere ideal. When, for instance, we are told on the authority of Lord Derby or Lord Leicester that, if full justice were done to the soil, the agricultural produce of England might be doubled, we are bound to ask several preliminary questions. In the first pla'ce, can any country be mentioned, under any land system whatever, in which the utmost amount of produce which the soil could yield is actually extracted from it ? In the next place, is not the average capital per acre applied to agriculture- in England greater than in France, or than in any other considerable European State ? ^ Thirdly, even in those cases where English landlords are absolute owners, and cultivate their own lands without either set- tlements or restrictive covenants to impede their free action, does experience show that their success in agriculture vastly exceeds that of their neighbours ?■ Fourthly, though it be granted that an unlimited investment of capital and labour might double the yield of a given farm, does it follow that such an investment >■ In tlie Channel Islands, and in certain provinces of Belgium, stiU larger quantities of manure are purchased by farmers, and the rate of production is higher. 366 ENGLISH LAND AND UNGLISR LANDLORDS. would be remunerative ? and, if not, would any reform of the English Land System induce a sensible farmer to make it? These are questions which must be fairly met and answered, before we can be justified in asserting that no Continental nation has suffered from war or revolution losses at all comparable with those inflicted upon England by its land laws, and that, had British agriculture been developed as it might have been, " unborn millions would have lived upon the good so created." ^ We may go further, and admit that, with all its faults, the agricultural system of England is founded on what appears, at first sight, a beneficial division of labour between three classes. A great English landlord of the best type brings to bear, not merely on agriculture, but on the whole rural economy of his neighbourhood, a higher intelligence, larger views of estate-management, a more enlightened public spirit, and a deeper sense of responsibility, than could be expected of peasant-farmers, or even of yeomen. He performs the unpaid public services which demand independence, leisure, and educa- tion ; duties, which in France are very imperfectly performed, and which in the United States are mainly performed by salaried officials. He spends money in agricultural experiments which professional farmers could ill afford." He sets on foot measures of local 1 " Free Land," by Mr. Arthur Arnold, M.P., chapter -riii. - Adam Smith observes that " after small proprietors, rich and great farmers are in all countries the principal improvers. There are more such, perhaps, in England than in any other European monarchy. In the Repub- lican Governments of Holland, and of Berne, in Switzerland, the farmers are said to be not inferior to those of England." It is remarkable that he does not contemplate the case of costly agricultural improvements LANDLORDS, FABMEBS, AND LAB0UBEB8. 367 improvement wliicli in most foreign countries would have to be initiated and carried out by the State. Moreover, it may be urged with some force that it is the prestige and privileges attached to land- lordism which, in this country, attract towards land the inexhaustible wealth accumulated in trade or commerce. Were our agricultural society composed of yeomen and peasant-proprietors, the land might, or might not, employ a greater amount of labour, but it would not be subsidised out of surplus capital derived from banking profits, or from the ground rents of metropolitan property, which has been so liberally ex- pended in developing some of the finest estates in England. Again, it has often been pointed out, and it cannot be denied, that a farmer with a given capital, say of £10,000, can make a far better profit out of it by hiring and stocking land belonging to another man than by purchasing land for himself. In the one case, he may cultivate 1,000 acres and derive from them a net yearly income of some £800 ; in the other case, he will be lord of 200 or 250 acres, and will be fortunate if he derives from them a net yearly income of £400. More- over, it is natural to expect that farming in the hands of trained and skilled men, reheved by their landlords of the cares and duties incident to ownership, should be treated more as a business, and less as a dignified in- heritance or profession. It has not been the enterprise being made by great landlords. Burke, writing in 1780, observed : " Agriculture will not attain any perfection till commercial principles be applied to it, or, in otlici- words, till country gentlemen be convinced that tbe expenditure of a small portion of tbeir capital upon land is the true secret of securing a large capital by ensuring increased returns." 368 UNGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDL0BD8. of farmer-proprietors, but of tenant-farmers, which, has brought to perfection the shorthorn breed of cattle, or the Leicester and South Down breeds of sheep ; and, notwithstanding the extraordinarj"- advantages of France in soil and climate, the superiority of the English agricultural system in productive capacity is fully ac- knowledged by French economists.-* The advocates of that system may further allege that, in bad seasons, the landlord's capital serves as a kind of reserve fund on which tenant-farmers may fall back, and that a farmer- proprietor owing rent to himself could not grant a large remission of it without the risk of ruin. The condition of agricultural labourers, as such, would not appear to depend materially on the rela- tions of the orders above them in the agricultural hierarchy. The demand for labour being equal, the wages of labour ought to be equal, whether the em- ployers be gentlemen-farmers, leaseholders, or tenants- at-will. But it is contended that agricultural labourers in England are, in fact, protected against being ground down, by the influence of a landlord class, superior to purely commercial motives, and with a more benevolent regard for the poor than is to be found among strug- ghng farmer-proprietors. The English labourer, in general, " is not his landlord's workman, and he is not his employer's tenant ; the man who employs cannot house, and the man who could house does not employ him."^ But this double relation of labourers to landlords 1 See an article on "La Situation Agricole de la France," in the Bevue des Deux Mondes of January 15tli, 1880, and Lavergne's " Economie Eurale de I'Angleterre." 2 See Mr. Wren Hoskyn's " Essay on tlie English Land System." TOO FIIW BESIBENT LANDLORDS. 369 and employers, wHch is alleged as a disadvantage of the English agricultural system, may be regarded, with at least equal justice, as one of its redeeming features. The labourer holding a cottage directly from a good landlord, at a rent far below its value, is far more independent, and has far more security of tenure, than if he rented it from his employer. He is bound over to good behaviour, it is true, by the simple fact of having much to lose, but so long as he behaves well, he may regard his cottage as a home, and dispose of his labour as he pleases. Without disparaging the weight of such arguments in favour of a tripartite system of agriculture, we are bound to recognise the very powerful considerations which may be adduced on the other side. It is self- evident that, in order to play the beneficent part attri- buted to him in the agricultural partnership between himself and his tenants, a landlord must own a con- siderable estate, and be constantly or generally resident. ISTow, there are some 15,000 parishes in England and Wales, and the number of landlords owning 1,000 acres and upwards, who may for this purpose be described as squires, is probably about 3,500.-^ It follows that, even if every one of these lived on his estate, above three -fourths of the parishes in England and Wales must needs dispense with the presence of a resident squire, and this inference corresponds with the result of a local enquiry respecting the eastern division of Nottinghamshire, whence it appeared that, out of 245 ^ It is nominally 5,408. But it has been shown above, in the chapter on the Distribution of Landed Property, that, owing to double entries and other errors, the real number has been vastly overstated. Y 370 ENGLI83 LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. parislies, only 65 had resident squires.-' But it is notorious that many squires and noblemen seldom reside for long in any one of the parishes in which they have property, spending much of the year in London, on the Continent, or at some watering- place. Nor must it be assumed that every resi- dent landowner is an active and public-spirited man, ever ready to sacrifice his own ease and amusements to serious work. In the home-counties, especially, a landowner steadily devoting himself to estate manage- ment and public duties in his own locality is an object of respect, rather than of envy, to his more indolent neighbours. The number of county magistrates, it is true, exceeds that of landowners with more than 1,000 acres, but it is to be feared that if a public record were kept of their average attendance at Petty Sessions, Quarter Sessions, and Boards of Guardians, the illusion that English landlordism represents actual value received would be rudely dispelled. If the unpaid services of squires were compared with those rendered by clergymen, over and above their official functions, as school managers, as guardians of the poor, as representatives of authority in their respective parishes, we might perhaps find reason to doubt whether, after all, territorial influences are a more powerful agent than clerical influences in the civilisation of rural com- munities. Why should it be imagined that if land- lordism were suppressed or weakened by a radical change in the agrarian constitution of England, its place could not be supplied by the rise or revival of other social forces ? If there were fewer great landlords, there might be, ' Mr. Sliaw-Lefevre's " Freedom of Land," p. 79. UriLS OF LANDLOBDISM AND TENANCY. 371 and probably would be, a more vigorous and indepen- dent middle class to play the leading part in rural government, and sustain a corporate life in villages of the same kind as that which exists in towns. If farmers, could no longer rely on the indulgence of their landlords- for help in bad seasons, it is at least possible that agri- cultural education would receive a new impulse, and that an unremitting attention to details, which charac- terises the peasant owner of France, Belgium, and the- Channel Islands, would be more generally practised in: England. For, whatever may be said for a system of tenancy,, as an instrument of agricultural production, there arc obvious disadvantages inseparable from it. Tenant farmers without leases may have very adequate motives; for improving breeds of cattle and sheep, from which they may confidently expect a profit ; but they have nO' motive for permanently improving the soil, and their landlords, if limited owners, are in a like position. Tenant-farmers holding on lease have more inducement to study a far-sighted cultivation at the beginning of their terms, but are inevitably tempted to exhaust the' soil at the end of them. If we could ascertain the pure waste of capital involved in letting the land run down before the expiration of a lease, and restoring its fer- tility during the early years of the next term, we should perceive how far even the leasehold tenancy of Scotland falls short of a perfect agricultural tenure. The yearly tenancy which prevails in England is^ perhaps, open to less objection on this ground, but is even less conducive to agricultural enterprise. A modern English farmer, even more than a Scotch T 2 372 ENOLmH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. farmer, is essentially a middleman, having neither the instincts of an owner, nor those of a husbandman. If that be the most profitable form of agricultural occu- pation "which most resembles ownership," that must surely be the least profitable which least resembles ownership, yet relieves the occupier from the obligation of personal industry ; and such is the condition of the English , tenant-farmer, holding from year to year. Whether or not he is bound down by unduly restrictive covenants, and whatever confidence he may have in the honour of his landlord, he never can feel that he is his own master, or free to follow out his own plans for the development of his business. His rent may be some- what lower than might be obtained by competition, but this is no real equivalent for the uncertain ravages of game preserved to excess, for the constant apprehension of the agents' interference, for the risk involved in putting up fixtures, and for the sense of dependence under which he never ceases to labour. In these respects, the condition of the English farmer holding from year to year compares unfavourably not only with that of Scotch farmers, holding under leases, but also with that of Irish farmers holding under the Ulster tenant-right now recognised by the Irish Land Act. A man liable to be turned out without compensation, at six months' or a year's notice, but relying on the custom of an ancestral estate, may feel as secure in his own mind as if he enjoyed a freehold tenure, or the right to claim heavy damages for disturbance. Indeed, his sense of security may even be strengthened by the very difiicul- ties, in themselves to be condemned, which now impede the alienation of family properties. But he does not NO ABmUATE SEOUBITY OF TBNUBE. 373 practically act on this inward assurance ; still less can he induce others to do so. The difference between an imaginary and a legal security of tenure becomes appa- rent the very moment that it is necessary to borrow money for improvements. This is why farmers in Scot- land and the North of Ireland find it so much easier to obtain advances from the banks, and though such facili- ties are often abused, it is impossible not to see how much they have conduced to promote the development of agriculture in both countries.^ The further question now arises, whether it is not for the interest of the State that security of tenure ' The form of lease adopted on tie Norfolk farms of the Earl of Leicester is justly recommended by Mr. Caird as supplying the great defect of most leases, and gi'N'ing the farmer entire freedom of cultivation up to four years preceding its termination. " The tenancy is for 20 years, from the 11th day of October. It is to be terminable at the end of 16 years, at the request of the tenant and with the consent of the landlord ; the intention being that, if both parties desire it, a new lease may be granted from the end of the 16th year for another term of 20 years," at the old rent for the four remaining years of the original term, and thenceforth at a rent to be fixed by agreement. During the first sixteen years, the tenant may cultivate according to his own judgment ; during the last four, if he should fail to renew, he must cultivate on the four course system. (Caird's " Landed Interest," p. 153.) A very liberal modification of yearly tenancy is adopted on the estates of Lord ToUemache, of Helmingham, in the shape of a " Lease-note," binding the landlord to allow the tenant xmdisturbed possession of his farm, without any increase of rent, for twenty-one years, upon condition of his keeping the land in a good state of cultivation, and draining or boning a certain number of acres. Under such a lease-note, while the tenant remains free to throw up his farm, the landlord resigns the power of giving him notice to quit, unless upon a breach of the conditions. These agreements may be taken as representing the most favourable types of leasehold and yearly tenancy, respectively. If the principle of either had been imported, by general custom, into contracts between landlords and tenants throughout England, i^ is probable that no wide- spread demand for indefeasible tenant-right would have arisen. 374 ENGLISH LAND AND ENOLISR LANDLORDS. sTiould be legally guaranteed to English, farmers, at least to the extent of compulsory indemnity for " unex- hausted improvements." This question is essentially distinct from those of the succession to land, of settle- ments, and of land-transfer, and would call for solution, even though no other reform of the English Land system were attempted. It is not a question to be decided, either by the precedent of the Irish Land Act, or by analogies drawn from legislative intervention in cases to which freedom of contract is inapplicable. The Irish Land Act was justified by the existence of agrarian relations, due to historical causes, which have no place in the English land system. It was chiefly designed for the protection of tenants who, though nominally holding at will, had virtually inherited their land, had erected homesteads upon it, had been per- mitted to deal with it, for many purposes, as if they were part owners, and held a position in some respects like that of copyholders. The compulsory intervention of the Legislature in favour of children is justified on the ground that, by reason of their tender age, they are not free to contract for themselves. Its compulsory intervention in favour of miners or sailors rests upon the assumption that, although men are free to make their own bargains for wages, they are not free to barter away the safety of their own lives. Its com- pulsory intervention, in a variety of other instances, may be warranted by paramount considerations of public health or morality. Compulsory tenant-right, if defensible at all, must be defended on widely different principles, and it is these principles which now demand a dispassionate examination. COMPULSORY TENANT-RIGHT. 375 One plea often advanced in support of compulsory tenant-right must at once be dismissed as untenable. It cannot be alleged, with any justice, that by virtue of their having "a monopoly of land," or of their superior w^ealth, or of their social ascendency, the land- lords have the power to force extortionate agreements upon tenants. No doubt landed property is a monopoly in the sense that the surface of the soil is limited in extent, and such a monopoly is, of course, far more valuable in a small and crowded island, overflowing with spare capital, than on a vast and thinly-peopled continent, where capital is far scarcer than land. This fact constitutes a sound argument for claiming and exercising a dormant right on the part of the State to control the action of landowners, so far as public interests may be concerned. But it does not constitute an argument for treating the whole class of English tenant-farmers, numbering some hundreds of thousands, like infants, lunatics, or persons under duress, as personally incompetent to make contracts with their landlords on equal terms. No one is compelled to hire land at all, and very recent experience shows that, when agricultural depression sets in, tenants become masters of the market, as landlords are during periods of agricultural prosperity. As between landlord and tenant, landed property in England is not a mo- nopoly, for it is barely possible to conceive any combination among landlords whereby persons de- siring to hire land can be deprived of an ample choice, or even subjected to oppressive covenants, on pain of having to go without farms or seek them in the Colonies. 376 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. But there is another view of the qiiestion.. It is quite possible to conceive that under a land system so highly artificial as that of England inveterate customs may have grown up, inconsistent with the real interests of landlords and tenants no less than with the public welfare, and only to be counteracted by the superior force of law. If this were so, it would be perfectly legitimate to prohibit the operation of these customs, just as contracts in restraint of trade are declared to be null and void, not because they benefit one party unduly at the expense of another, but simply because they contravene an established rule of national policy. In that case, too, it might be urged, and with equal force, that what is for the interest of the com- munity is also, in the long run, for the interest of the contracting parties, who might therefore be safely left to follow their own inclinations without legal inter- ference. But the sufiicient answer in that case is one which is equally applicable to contracts which may be justly described as " in restraint of agriculture." It is that society cannot always afford to wait until economical principles have vindicated themselves, per- haps at a ruinous cost to consumers, in the course of generations. Many instances may be cited in which freedom of contract has been deliberately postponed to considerations of public interest. Such is the Act which sets aside any agreements between consignors and railway companies whereby the statutable liabilities of the latter may be evaded, the Act which compels the landlord to pay half the Cattle Plague Eate, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary, and that which invalidates any agreement under which a OONTBAOTS IN BESTBAINT OF AGBIGULTUBE. 377 tenant may be made liable for tbe Property Tax> Nor is it unworthy of notice that by sects. 55 and 56 of Lord Cairns' Settled Land Bill of 1880, any contract by a tenant-for-life not to exercise the powers thereby con- ferred, and any provision in a settlement purporting to forbid or restrain his exercise of those powers, was declared to be absolutely void. The sufficient justifica- tion of this provision was that the State cannot give efiect to a family law at direct variance with a national law, and this justification applies, in principle, to contracts in restraint of agriculture. In this case, too, where the immediate effect of a long-established and prevalent custom is plainly mischievous, it is the right and may be the duty of the Legislature to break the spell of it by a prohibitory, and not merely per- missive, enactment, for which all parties may well be grateful. How, then, should the law deal with the farmer's claim of a statutable tenant-right, in the sense of a right to compensation for unexhausted improvements ? Before we can settle this question, we must ask ourselves first whether a positive security for such compensation, as > For other instances of legislative interference "with the right of contract, see Mr. James Howard's pamphlet on "The Tenant Farmer, Land Laws, and Landlords." Mr. 0. S. Read, arguing before the Game Laws Committee of 1872-3, submitted that the law already interferes with freedom of contract between parent and child, master and servant, solicitor and client, debtor and creditor, guardian and ward, agent and principal, carrier and consignor, doctor and patient, innkeeper and tippler, pawn- broker and pledger, patron and presentee, captain and seamen, sailors and shipowners, mortgagor and mortgagee, and even landlord and tenant, under the Irish Land Act. In some of these instances, however, the disabilities imposed by law cannot be properly described as an interference with freedom of contract. 378 ENGLISH LAND AND ENOLISH LANDLORDS. distinct from " reasonable expectations," is essential to good agriculture. Here tlie eyidence appears conclusive, and our reply cannot be doubtful. The best agriculture is found on farms whose tenants are protected by leases ; the next best, on farms whose tenants are protected by the Lincolnshire or other customs ; the worst of all, on farms whose tenants are not protected at all, but rely on the honour of their landlords.^ And the reason is self-evident. The farmer who holds without a lease or legal security knows that a model landlord may at any moment be succeeded by a heartless spendthrift, or a liberal agent by one whose pride consists in rack-renting every farm on the estate. He is, therefore, deterred by a traditional instinct from incurring expenditure which may lead to a re-valuation, with an advance of rent, if not to an appropriation of his invested capital. StiU, we must further ask ourselves whether the enlightened self-interest of landlords and tenants may not be trusted to provide an adequate system of tenant-right by means of voluntary agreements. Here again experience returns a decisive answer. It was precisely because enlightened self-interest, crippled by life-ownership, had failed to supply the want of a statutable tenant-right, that a statutable, but permissive, tenant-right was introduced and defined by the Agricultural Holdings Act. Had the majority of English landlords hastened to adopt these pro- visions of the Act, or even to make equivalent agreements with their tenants, it would have been a presumption that ^ So far back as 1848, Mr. Pusey's "Agricultural Customs Committee " reported " that this wider system of compensation to the outgoing tenant seems to be highly beneficial to agriculture, to the landlord, and to the farmer, to lead to a great increase in ^the productiveness of the soil, and to extended employment of the rural population." AGBICULTUBE A NATIONAL INTBBEST. 379 now, at least, tlie value of a positive security for tenant- right was generally appreciated. Unliappily, the reverse was the fact. The same motives which had brought about the disuse of leases caused a general anxiety to negative the operation of the Act, and we cannot venture to hope that, for many years to come, any adequate system of tenant-right will be substituted for it by voluntary agreement. Under these circumstances, we have to ask ourselves, lastly, whether the development of agriculture is a national object of such importance as to justify the imposition of tenant-right upon unwilling landlords and indifferent tenants by legislative authority, and, if so, in what form it should be imposed. If these islands were now compelled by war, as they once were by a selfish and fatuous policy, to maintain their own population for several years in succession, the paramount necessity of stimulating home production to the utmost would be self-evident. The most stringent laws for encouraging the application of capital to land, and annulling every contract which could impede the development of agriculture, would then be cheerfully accepted as essential to national existence. Of course, such a condition is almost impossible to conceive, even in the event of a long war, and in time of peace Free Trade, followed by the marvellous acceleration of transit by land and sea, renders Great Britain comparatively independent of her own home-production. But this independence is only comparative. Even if wheat- growing should be abandoned in England, as it has so nearly been abandoned in Scotland and Ireland, our main supply of most other articles of food, and our whole ' .supply of the most perishable, must still be drawn from 380 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDL0BD8. our own soil. The whole community, therefore, has a far more direct interest in agriculture than in any other branch of national industry, unless it be the production of coal. A deficient home supply of meat or milk or vegetables, like a deficient home supply of coal, would be far more severely felt by the mass of the people than a deficient home supply of cotton or hardware, since these commodities are less necessary, and might be pro- cured at a slightly increased price from abroad. It follows that, if the home supply of agricultural produce is materially limited by the want of an indefeasible tenant-right, it is an object of high national importance to apply the appropriate remedy. But would this involve injustice or injury to any individual or class ? On the contrary, the evidence shows that a good tenant would be glad to pay a higher rent for a holding protected by tenant-right, and, the higher the rent, the more skilful and productive the farming is likely to be. All parties,, then, would apparently be the gainers by the general adoption of tenant-right, which can only be enforced by legislative authority, erecting into a national custom that which is now a local custom in the best-farmed counties. No doubt freedom of contract is preferable, on principle, to legislative regulation ; but freedom of contract has been tried for many ages, and has failed to effect the object which almost all admit to be desirable. Moreover, freedom of contract, even if it operated in favour of tenant-right, could not give that universal sense of security which is here of paramount value, and which the law alone can guarantee. Once established on a sound and reasonable basis, an indefeasible tenant- right would soon cease to be felt as an obligation imposed BSASONABLE LIMITS OF TENANT-BIGHT. 381 by an external power, and would be accepted, like otber salutary restrictions of individual liberty, as a rule of natural justice, working for the common benefit of all. But, in order that it should have this effect, it must needs rest upon a sound and reasonable basis. Now, it is obvious that no law establishing indefeasible tenant- right could be sound or reasonable which should make no distinction between various classes of improvements. Those which are recognised as improvements of the " first-class " under the Agricultural Holdings Act are, for the most part, of a durable character, and, for that reason, have been commonly executed by the landlord in this country. Thorough drainage, the erection of buildings, the conversion of arable land into permanent pasture, the construction of fences, the reclamation of waste land, and so forth, are agricultural operations beyond the sphere of ordinary husbandry, which ought not to be executed by a tenant without the express consent of his landlord, and to which the rule of indefeasible tenant-right could not justly be applied. A poor landlord might be ruined by the cost of drain- age or reclamation, however profitable they might be to his successors, and even a rich landlord might fairly object to pay for buildings or fences, which might become worse than useless in the event of his choosing to subdivide or consolidate his ■ farms. Many such improvements have been executed at the cost of tenants in Scotland and Ireland, with great advantage to land- lords, and it may sometimes be convenient to adopt the same practice in England, where the tenant happens to be a man of large capital and energy. But this should be a matter of voluntary arrangement ; otherwise the 382 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. farmer would become the landlord, or, at least, the landlord would lose all eflfective control over his own property. Even improvements of the " second class,"^ such as boning, chalking, claying, liming, and marling, are scarcely fit subjects for compensation under a rule of indefeasible tenant-right, however proper it may be that a tenant should be compensated for them, where they have been carried out after notice to the landlord, and without objection on his part. In this respect the provisions of the present Agricultural Holdings Act appear to require little amendment, being chiefly directed to promote the investment of tenants' capital in far-sighted ameliorations of the soil, under the landlord's supervision. On the other hand, it is essen- tial to good husbandry, under the conditions of modern farming, that artificial manures should be applied t& land, that purchased feeding-stufis should be consumed by stock, especially on those holdings from which straw- is allowed to be sold off", and that foul land should be well broken up by the steam- cultivator. It would be absurd to require any preliminary consent, or to en- courage any preliminary objection, to outlay of this kind. If the farm should be thrown up, the full benefit of it will be reaped by the succeeding occupier, from whom the landlord may recover it in the form of an advanced rent, and the cases in which there could be any valid objection to it are too rare to be worthy of legal recognition. There can be httle doubt that a. new spirit would be infused into British agriculture by the certainty that no risk could be incurred by a good farmer through following a liberal system of ordinary husbandry, but that he might always look either TENANT'S CLAIM FOB IMPROVEMENTS. 38S to realising the profit of it, or to receiving the value of it. Such, being the true grounds and limits of inde- feasible tenant-right, we have yet to determine the mode in which it should be secured. The Agricultural Holdings Act contains various restrictions upon claims for compensation in respect of " third-class improve- ments," which include the consumption of purchased feeding-stuffs and the use of purchased manures. For instance, no such claim holds good if an exhausting crop has been taken off the land since the manure was applied to it, or the stock fed upon it. It would obviously be impossible to embody these, or any other special reservations, in a general law establishing inde- feasible tenant-right. As part of a permissive Act, they may serve an useful purpose in formulating a standard of agricultural equity to which voluntary agreements may approximate more or less closely. But in a compulsory Act they would be wholly out of place, for the Legislature cannot absolutely pre- scribe the proper system even of ordinary husbandry for all parts of the kingdom. The utmost that can be done is to lay down a broad principle, and enact either that it shall be imported by implication of law into all contracts of tenancy, or that all contracts whereby it may be contravened shall be null and void.^ It would not be difficult to frame a positive clause defining the ordinary acts of good husbandry for which a tenant 1 A Bill of this cliaracter was introduced by Sir Thomas D. Acland, Mr. Duckham (a tenant-farmer), and other members, in the Session of 1880, nnder the name of the Agricultural Tenant's Compensation Bill. A full explanation of its objects and limitations, drawn up by Sir Thomas Acland, is subjoined in Appendix III. 384 BNGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. should have an indefeasible right to compensation on the determination of his tenancy, subject only to a landlord's right of pleading a set-off, or other sufficient answer in derogation of the claim. Nor would it be difficult to frame a negative clause invalidating every contract which should purport to set aside the right so defined. Either method would be effectual to defeat .attempts on the part of landlords to contract them- selves out of the legal principle, which might well be •extended so as to give landlords an indefeasible right to •compensation for waste and exhaustion of the soil. For tenant-right and landlord-right are reciprocal. Both must be justified, if at all, by the interests of the com- munity, and these consist, not in a one-sided protection ■of a single agricultural class, but in a vigorous develop- ment of agriculture by aU classes entrusted with the land. Such reciprocity was conspicuously wanting under the old Common Law, which empowered landlords to sue tenants for dilapidation, and to recover their rent by distress, independently of any express covenant, without enabling tenants to obtain compensation for improvements. The statutable regulation of sporting rights over land is open to the same patent objections as indefeasible tenant-right, and must be justified, if at all, by the same arguments. It may be said that farmers are perfectly able to recoup themselves for the loss incident to game -preserving by insisting upon a "game-rent," or may decline altogether agreements of tenancy wherein the game is reserved to the landlord. It may be said that consumers have ceased to have much practical interest in the ravages of game, since the price of corn REGULATION OF SPOUTING BIGHTS. 385 is mainly governed by the foreign supplies ; and it may be asked whether, apart from the interest of consumers, the suppression of these ravages can be an object of such importance as to warrant legislative interference with freedom of contract. The fallacy latent in objec- tions of this kind has already been exposed. The interest of the public in good husbandry is more than co-extensive with the joint interests of producers and consumers, and is not to be measured by a merely pecuniary standard. Let it be granted that an English tenant has no claim to be treated by the law as so hopelessly the weaker party that he cannot be trusted to make his own bargain for himself. The question for the public is not what he can do, but what he does and will do, under the constant pressure of custom ; not whether he can be trusted to make his own bargain for himself, but whether he can be trusted to make it for the benefit of agriculture, and of interests stiU broader and higher than agricultural interests. For instance, if excessive game-preserving, under the ordinary covenants, has a palpably injurious effect on the relations between landlords and tenants, or discourages men of indepen- dence and public spirit from undertaking the business of farming, or perpetuates other evils of the existing land system, it may be perfectly legitimate to revise the Game Laws in a sense adverse to absolute freedom of contract. The case is obviously much stronger, if it can be shown, as it assuredly may be shown, that excessive game-preserving directly fosters poaching, and indirectly contributes to multiply other crimes. But there are special reasons for a statutable regu- lation of sporting rights over land which do not equally z 386 ENGLiaS LAND AND UNOLISH LANDLORDS. apply to indefeasible tenant-right. Sporting rights, as understood in England, are essentially the creation of statute, and could not exist for a day without legal protection. The semi-wild, but semi-domestic, animals known as "game" have been well described as "privileged vermin," and would soon become extinct in many parts of the country but for the maintenance of the Game Laws. , Even the Game Laws do not countenance, but only recognise, the peculiar custom which is so mis- chievous to good husbandry. The separation of sport- ing rights from the occupation of land is in itself an anomaly, at variance with the presumption of Common Law, no less than with that provision in the Game Act of 1831 which expressly vested the game in the tenant, and made the right of sporting run with the land, unless it should be reserved by deed or agreement. Under this last clause most BngUsh landlords took care to keep the game in their own hands, and prohibited their tenants from keeping it down, while many let the right thus reserved to strangers, who had no motive for exercising it with any regard for the interests of farmers or the public. The Game Laws Committee of 1872-3 unanimously declared their opinion that no tenant ought to enter upon his farm without due protection against over-preserving, and that no protection would be so efficient as the concession of the power to kill ground game on his own farm, either exclusively or con- currently with the landlord. The fact that such protec- tion was practically seldom conceded, and that great in- jury was thereby caused to national interests, was a sound reason for re- considering the Act of 1831. It could not be contended for a moment that it would be a violation GROUND GAME ACT, 1880. 387 of individual liberty for tlie Legislature to sweep away this and other Game Laws altogether, to convert game into property, or to relegate it into the class of un- privileged vermin. If so, it is absurd to contend that it is inconsistent with individual liberty for the Legis- lature to impose strict conditions on the exclusive rights which have grown up under its patronage. Supposing these rights to conflict with the good of the com- munity, they must either be abolished or regulated, and the regulation of them must needs involve some inter- ference with freedom of contract. Such a regulation has practically been effected by the Ground Game Act, 1880. This Act renders the presumptive right of an occupier to kill game on his land an inseparable incident of his occupation, so far as hares and rabbits are concerned. It confines the exercise of that right, however, to the occupier himself and one other person, to be duly authorised by him in writing. A concurrent right to kill ground-game on the land may be vested in the landlord, or any other pei'son, but the occupier cannot whoUy divest himself of his own right, nor can it be defeated by contract. Henceforth, therefore, it wiU be entirely the fault of English tenant-farmers, i£ their crops are annually decimated by ground-game, though it is probable that sporting instincts, common to most classes of English society, will preserve even hares and rabbits from wholesale extermination. One thing is clear, and that is that, so far as inde- feasible tenant-right may have the effect of modifying the present agricultural system, it will probably tend, at least, to reduce the average size of holdings. Instead of z 2 388 ENGLI8R LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. spreading his capital thinly over too large an acreage, the British farmer will naturally be induced to concentrate it on a smaller area. Now, whatever theoretical supe- riority may belong to agriculture on a grand scale entirely depends on capital being duly proportioned to acreage, and superintendence being effectively maintained. Where these conditions are actually realised, there must needs be great economy in the management of farms extend- ing over thousands of acres, though it may be doubted whether they are equally conducive to social well-being in rural communities. But experience shows how seldom these conditions are actually realised, while it attests the remarkable success of working farmers occupying hold- ings which can be cultivated by the members of one family, with one team of horses. Those who press the analogy between agriculture and manufactures to extremes, and believe that small farmers are doomed to retire before civilisation, are bound to explain how it comes to pass that small farmers manfully hold their own in the present struggle for existence, both at home and abroad. The authority of M. Lavergne is often cited in support of the allegation that English agriculture surpasses that of France as a whole, and that more pro- duce is extracted from the land by the British capitalist farmer than by the French peasant. But though M. Lavergne, writing many years ago, makes this admission in emphatic terms,^ he adds that no similar area in England is cultivated as well as the Departement du 1 He says that, notwithstanding the great superiority of France iu soil and climate, it would be impossible to select any French departments con- taining an equal area with the cultivated portion of England, which could be favourably compared with it in respect of agriculturaJ condition. {Economie Rwrale de I'Angleterre, p. 3.) FOREIGN AND ENGLISH AGBIGULTUBE. 389 Nord, which, is essentially a district of small farms ; and there is overwhelming evidence to prove that scientific English agriculturists have yet many lessons to learn from the small farms of Belgium, Switzerland, the Channel Islands, and Germany. In comparing one agricultural system with another, it is not enough to ascertain which of them employs the greater amount of capital per acre, or yields the greater amount of gross produce. In both these respects Eng- land is outstripped by the Channel Islands, and certain provinces of Belgium, and several other special districts of Europe, but it still ranks exceptionally high. There is so vast an accumulation of spare capital in England, that under any agricultural system, however bad, the land would absorb more of it than would be possible in a new or very poor country. So, again, however bad an agri- cultural system may be, a lavish application of capital will ensure a return of gross produce absolutely large, though perhaps relatively small. The more important question to solve is, what agricultural system yields the best return of produce to a given amount of capital ; in other words, what system calls forth most effectively the energy of the labourer as well as the skill of the farmer ? The answer to this question may be such as to disturb many preconceived opinions founded on the assumption, too common among doctrinaire economists, that human industry is exclusively regulated by strict laws of supply and demand, whereas it is largely influenced by habits and sentiments beyond the province of economy. The English tenant-farmer has as strong a pecuniary in- ducement to work like a slave as the yeoman-farmer of Belgium and the Channel Islands, but he is not 390 BNGLISS LAND AND ENQLISE LANDLORDS. prompted to do so by the same traditional spirit of thrift, the same pride of ownership, or the same ambition to vie in money-making with the mercantile society of his neighbourhood. Such feelings and motives are the growth of many generations, and cannot be suddenly transfused into English, much less into Irish, tenants, by any legislative process. On the other hand, we learn from history that England was once the land of yeomen farmers, and that English agriculture once flourished under a land system very similar to that which still prevails in the best-cultivated portions of Europe and America. If, then, a revival of this system, under altered conditions, and in a modified form, should here- after appear to open the best prospect of regenerating British agriculture, there is no reason for rejecting it as radically incompatible with the national character. But this prospect, like that of an industrial migra- tion from towns into country districts, is too remote to be practically entertained by the legislator. Eor the present, it must be taken for granted that British agriculture will be mainly conducted on the old footing of a partnership between landlord and tenant, whether the landlord be a large or a smaU proprietor, and whether the tenant's capital be measured by hundreds or thou- sands of pounds. If the experiment of yeoman farming is again to receive a fair and full trial in this country, it AviU probably be tried, in the first instance, by persons who have made little fortunes in business, who have a shrewd eye for buying cheap and selling dear, and who are not fettered by the orthodox rules of regular agricul- ture. The ordinary English tenant, accustomed to farm on the four-course system, and too old-fashioned to PROBABLE SUBDIVISION OF LABGE FARMS. 391 adopt the petty shifts and resources familiar to Conti- nental peasant-farmers, ha,s no wish to become his own landlord, and will often even refuse a lease on favourable terms. But he already appreciates the advantage of indefeasible tenant-right, and, having obtained it, he must needs perceive the advantage of spreading his capital over a smaller number of acres, if by so doing he can make it yield nearly the same rate of interest, besides reducing his rent and labour-bill. Hence, increased security of tenure will constantly operate to promote the subdivision of very large holdings, except so far as it may attract new capital from business into farming, or encourage the development of joint-stock agriculture on a grand scale. The process of subdivision, however, is likely to be very gradual. Like the landowner who measures his dignity by acreage rather than by income, the farmer will at first be unwilling to ride over a smaller number of fields or to superintend a smaller /number of labourers. Moreover, farm buildings are not so easily subdivided as farms, and the many thousands of expen- sive steadings erected during the last thirty or forty years will long continue as a material guarantee for the policy of consolidation to which they owe their origin. In the meantime, acute observers have already been led to dispute the wisdom of this policy, even under the favourable conditions which so long prevailed after the Eepeal of the Corn Laws. This was not the least suggestive of the many agricultural questions forced upon public attention by the agricultural distress of 1878-9. Though almost all farms suffered more or less from the combined effects of a bad season and low prices, farms of moderate size were often found to bear the 392 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. strain better than farms of the first class. Several reasons may be suggested to explain this difierence, which is the more remarkable when it is remembered that farms of moderate size usually pay a somewhat higher rent per acre, since there is greater competition for them. We learn from the Eegistrar-Greneral's Eeport on the Census of 1871 that 152 acres is the average size of a farm in seventeen representative counties, and that more than half of all the farms in those counties were under 100 acres. Now, the occupier of such a farm is likely to possess less scientific knowledge, and certain to possess less aggregate capital, than a farmer occupying 1,000 acres and upwards.^ But it does not follow that he possesses less practical capacity, or less capital in proportion to acreage. On the contrary, like his ancestors in Adam Smith's time, he is usually content to be his own overseer and foreman, knowing the value of the master's eye in all manual work, and will not be above occasionally putting his own hand to the plough. He may perhaps be too liable to err on the side of penny wisdom, but he thus avoids the risk of sinking money in costly experiments and the breeding of prize animals. His wife is not too fine a lady to look after the fowl-yard, or to superintend, at least, the making of cheese and butter. His farm- buildings and fences may not be as neatly kept as they might be, and many things which offend the eye of a gentleman farmer are tolerated on his land, but, at aU. events, he takes care to get money's worth for money, and is not ashamed to drive a hard bargain at the end of a market day. He does not allow middlemen to run ' There were 582 such farjners iu the seventeen counties in 1871. ADVANTAGES OF SMALL FARMS. 393 away with the lion's share of his legitimate profits, by paying an exorbitant price for store-cattle, and selling fat beasts to a butcher for a sum far below the retail value of their meat. He keeps neither hunter nor dog- cart ; if there is a piano in his parlour, it is a cheap one, and seldom used ; his scale of household expenditure is niggardly; and it is to be feared that his charitable subscriptions come to very little in the course of the year. In short, he is a keen man of business, with the same turn for petty economies as a grocer or draper of equal income. And thus, although he never realises the handsome profits on corn-crops which in good years may reward the grande agriculture, he never incurs the crushing losses incident to a lavish outlay of capital in bad seasons, and is better able than his scientific neighbour to contract his working expenses according to circumstances. Apart, therefore, from the possible effect of inde- feasible tenant-right, or any other organic change in the agricultural system of England, it is by no means improbable that subdivision rather than consolidation of holdings may hereafter be dictated by the mutual in- terests of landlords and tenants. Nor will this change always involve any considerable outlay in buildings, for, in many cases, the homesteads of extinct farms remain in good repair, surrounded by yards and sheds, though now tenanted by farm-labourers. But the impulse thus given towards subdivision of holdings will naturally be accelerated by the subdivision of ownership already anticipated. It is a trite saying that large farms always go with large properties, but the reason of this conjunction does not lie on the surface. There is 394 BNOLISB LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. apparently nothing to prevent the owner of a few hundred acres from letting the whole of it to a single tenant, or the Owner of many thousand acres from parcelling them out, as was the practice in Ireland, into a multitude of peasant-farms. In reality, however, the owner of many thousand acres is actuated, consciously or unconsciously, by many other motives besides that of increasing his rental, which lead him to prefer a few substantial tenants, and to eschew small holdings. He is almost sure to be more or less in the hands of his agent, and his agent is almost sure to be an advocate of consolidation, because it is much easier and pleasanter to deal with half-a-dozen men of capital and indepen- dence, than to be always receiving petty complaints and requisitions from struggling occupiers of farmhouses out of repair. The aggregate rent paid by the former may be smaller, but this is the landlord's affair, and the agent, who collects it with far less trouble, assures him that it is far less precarious than if it depended on the solvency of many small tenants. The proprietor of a few hundred acres does not come within the sphere of these influences. Having no agent, he acts for himself, and thereby saves not only a large percentage on his gross-rental, but the manifold risks of loss into which owners are led by persons who lose nothing by the un- productive expenditure on grand improvement schemes which they recommend. He is not, therefore, in a hurry to throw farms together, or to spend money in bricks and mortar, so as to satisfy any ideal of scientific agriculture. On the contrary, if he is resident and pos- sesses the instincts of proprietorship, he would rather be lord of several tenants than of one, and will very TDNBENGIES IN FAVOUR OF SMALL FARMS. 395 soon discover that subdivision of holdings is more profitable to a landowner than consolidation, if the necessary farm buildings exist or can be put up cheaply. The prevailing objections to small holdings will be further mitigated, though insensibly, by that moderate reform of the Grame Laws, which has restored to occu- piers the control of ground-game on their own farms. Small farmers, and still more squatters and cottagers with cultivated patches of land, have always been sus- pected of poaching or complicity with poachers. It is they, more, than any other class, who have been tempted to snare hares and rabbits devouring their little crops or plots of vegetables, and it has been the settled policy of landlordism to discourage them in neighbourhoods devoted to game preserving. Now that all tenants have an equal and inalienable right to kill and take ground-game, the motive for this policy will be weakened, and if the " game " landlord should ultimately disappear, it will almost cease to operate. So far as game is concerned, it will then become a matter of comparative indifference whether the holdings on an estate are large or small, and whether labourers' allotments be near the coverts or not, while the fact that a higher rent can generally be obtained from petty occupiers will be more fully appreciated. Other tendencies, moving in the same direction, will gradually force upon the Enghsh farmer a mode of cul- ture more suitable to small holdings. When it is once realised that the whole value of the home wheat-crop is greatly exceeded by the value of live cattle, dead meat, butter, cheese, eggs and potatoes, brought in annually 396 ENGLI8H LAND AND ENOLISE LANDLORDS. from America and tlie Continent,^ it may cease to be regarded as an axiom of English agriculture that a certain proportion of each arable farm must needs be laid down in wheat. It is, indeed, marvellous that such a doctrine should have been maintained with such persistence, not- withstanding the fact that only Ath part of Wales, only yioth part of Ireland, and only a+oth part of Scotland, was ^ under wheat crops in the year 1879. As the growth of wheat becomes less and less profitable, the English farmer will be compelled to study new sources of profit, hitherto neglected as beneath the notice of a scientific agri- culturist. It will then be discovered that it is precisely these minor branches of agricultural industry which depend most for their success on a degree of minute personal attention which it is vain to expect from the refined and well-dressed tenant of 1,000 acres, even if he possessed the capital necessary to practise the arts of th.e_petite culture over so vast an area. We have already noticed the inadequate supply and inordinate cost of fresh milk both in towns and country districts as offering the strongest inducement to an increase of dairy-farming. There is no reason, however, why dairy-farming, conducted with a view to the sale of milk alone, should not flourish on large as well as on small holdings. It is otherwise when dairy-farming is conducted with a view to the sale of cheese or butter. Experience had long ago shown that cheese and butter were made of the best quality, and with the greatest ' The home production of wheat may be taken at about 11,000,000 quarters, which, at 50s. a quai-ter, would be worth £27,500,000, and, at 55s. a quarter, would be worth £30,250,000. But the value of imported Hve stock, dead meat and provisions (exclusive of com), amounts to nearly £37,000,000. (Agricultural Returns for 1S79, Tal)le 29.) DAIRY FASUING. 397 economy, where the delicate processes of their manu- facture, requiring ahove all the utmost cleanliness, were superintended early and late hy a skilful mistress, who had the whole dairy, so to speak, under her own eye. It is notorious that very few wives of wealthy farmers are now either trained or disposed to undertake the inces- sant toil of dairy-management. Cheese-making is, there- fore, carried on for the most part either on farms of moderate size, where the farmer's wife is her own dairy- maid, or in great factories, to which the neighbouring dairy farmers can dispatch all their milk to be worked up under skilled direction, and with the best aids of machinery.-' The same may be said of poultry-keeping and the production of eggs. Seeing that fowls now sell (1880) for about double what they fetched thirty or forty years ago, while the expense of breeding and fat- tening them has in no respect increased, it may well be asked why every farmer, with a capable wife, and a proper soil for the purpose, should not bestow far more care than he usually does on this most profitable accessory of agricultural industry. The reply must be that poultry- ^ On the Cheshire estate of Lord Tollemache of Helmingham, the cheese-making farms, fifty-two in number, range between 150 and 250 acres, the average size being about 200 acres. , It is found by experience, in Somersetshire no less than in Cheshire, that farms of this size yield the best results, since the farmer has enough milk to make a whole cheese with proper dispatch at the proper time, while his wife is not too fine a lady to superintend the process in person. On some farms of this class no hired labour whatever is employed, all the necessary work being done by the farmer's own family. In such an establishment it is easier to practise economy than in a great cheese-factory, supplied with milk by contributions from several distant farms. Cows are also kept on Lord ToUemache's Cheshire estate by no less than 267 cottagers, each of whom holds an allotment of two and a-half or three acres at an ordinary farm- rent. Butter is made on these little cottage farms, but not cheese. 398 ENGLISH LAND AND E^GLISS LANDLORDS. rearing, like cheese-making and butter-making, requires infinite pains and study of details. It prospers in tlie hands of French peasant-farmers, among whom thrift is the highest of family virtues, and it prospers in great establishments where artificial egg-hatching and the rapid nutrition of chickens is reduced to a scientific manufacture. But it is little fancied by English tenant- farmers of the higher class, whose wives never go to market, and who profess to believe that no price which they are likely to receive from the dealers will cover the cost of the corn which the fowls consume. A like explanation must be sought for the remarkable decline in the home supply of eggs. Since eggs are a specially brittle commodity, and depend for their value mainly upon their freshness, it is truly marvellous that English farmers should be content to see nearly 800,000,000 of them, worth above two millions and a-half sterling, imported from the Continent every year, instead of imi- tating the French method of egg-culture and egg-pre- servation. But then egg-culture and egg-preservation are as tiresome kinds of drudgery as watching and rearing chickens for the market, and so i\ej are neglected as unworthy of attention by tenants occupying several hundred acres.^ 1 The following account of extra-produce, sold in one year by a farmer's wife, on a holding of 30 acres, appeared, under the signature of H. T. P., in the Times of Aug. 20, 1879 :— £ s 5 reared calves 25 32 pigs at 16s 20 cade lambs ^less cost at Ss. each) 18 turkeys at 10s. 6d. 220 couples of fowls and ducks, at 4s. 25 12 43 9 9 44 Total £147 'AU this besides the ordinary produce of the land, and with only the POULTRY AND MABKET-GABBENING. 399 There is another branch of agricultural industry which is perhaps capable of still grfeater development in England, but which is still more specially adapted to small holdings. Seeing that London, with a popula- tion of nearly 4,000,000, is so miserably supplied with vegetables, which, moreover, are so dear that manj^ hundred thousands of its inhabitants seldom taste any green food but water-cresses, it remains to be explained why market-gardening should be confined to an area of 36,610 acres in all England,^ and why £3,000,000 worth of vegetables, mostly potatoes, should be annually im- ported from abroad. Here, again, we light upon the besetting weakness of farming on the grand scale. The farmer himseK is a mere overseer, with no idea beyond that of conducting the great operations of agriculture, and with a rooted aversion to everything which savours of horticulture, while his labourers have neither the skill nor the heart for the patient work of a gardener. But there is an additional reason, applicable also to hop cultivation, why market-gardening in all forms should be practised most successfully on small holdings. The capital required to make a hop-ground or market-garden thoroughly productive is infinitely greater, in proportion to acreage, than is demanded by the most scientific tillage of arable land. It has been computed that, for drawback of a few quarters of maize, and a few bushels of linseed. I do not mention the produce of two cows, wMcli nearly met the house expenses.'' It is difiScult, however, .to belieye that a few quarters of maize, and a few bushels of linseed, would have sufficed to fatten so many animals, unless largely supplemented by "the ordinary produce of the land." 1 Agricultural Returns for 1879, Table 3. It is stated by Mr. G. Gibson Richardson that about 1,250,000 acres in France are devoted to growing green vegetables. 400 BNOLISH LAND AND ENGLISS LANDLORDS. each acre of h.op-land, £45 of working capital is essen- tial upon an average of all the districts; that the actual expenses of cultivation — inclusive of a rent which sometimes rises to £10 an acre — amount to at least £22 ; and that, if packing, drying, and other incidental expenses be added, the whole annual, cost of hop-culture amounts, on the average, to £35 per acre. In the neighbourhood of Farnham, even this standard of rent and expenses is sometimes exceeded, but the risks are so great that, although the pi'oduce of a single acre may occasionally realise £100, the average profit upon each acre of English hop-land during thirty years ending- with 1878 was found to have little ex- ceeded £10. The natural consequence is that few tenants are wealthy enough to rent any very large extent of hop-land, and that the 70,000 acres devoted to this crop in England are very much subdivided among small occupiers. A hop-farm of 300 acres near Maidstone is mentioned as an exceptional curiosity ; a few planters in Mid and East Kent are said to hold 100 or 200 acres, but the average even there is but 50 acres ; in the Weald of Kent and Sussex it is stated at 20 acres, and in the hop-growing district of Surrey it is probably still lower.^ The cost of growing vegetables for town markets is not less enormous, though it is repaid by corresponding profits. The rents of market-gardens and market-farms within twenty miles of London are said to range from £4 to £9 per acre. The expenses of labour come to from ^ See the article on the Cultivation of Hops, Fruit, and Vegetables, by Mr. Charles "Whitehead, in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society for 1878. Part II. G08T AND PROFIT OF MABKET-GABBENING. 401 £6 to £9 per acre, and the whole annual outlay per acre averages considerably more than £20.^ The same lavish scale of expenditure on vegetable -growing is maintained in France, where the capital d' exploitation supposed to be needed by a market-gardener is a hundredfold greater in proportion to acreage than would there satisfy an ordinary farmer. In order to produce a constant succession of crops, at the rate of two a year, 40 or 50 tons of farmyard manure are often applied, and nearly 100 tons are sometimes applied annually to a single acre by the market-gardeners in the neighbourhood of London. It is well known that broccoli and other vegetables are forced into early maturity in Corn- wall by the same unsparing use of manure. Much of this produce is still raised by spade husbandry in the inner circle round London, whence it is conveyed to Covent Grarden in carts, which come back loaded with the litter of stables and cow-houses. For the field- cultivation of vegetables a migratory class of labourers is largely employed, who are often hired as hop-pickers at a later period of the year. But the business of market-gardening and vegetable -farining is mainly con- ducted on small holdings of less than fifty acres, doubt- less because each acre so worked demands a concentration of capital, labour, and individual supervision, which very few tenant-farmers would be capable of bringing to bear on a much larger area. Yet many a skilful agriculturist, barely able to pay his rent on a farm covering a quarter ^ See Mr. Wliitelaeacl's article, above cited, in the Journal of the Boyal Agricultural Society for 1878. Mr. G. Gibson Richardson states that the rent paid for market gardens round Paris varies from £36 to £48 per acre, according to situation. / A A 402 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. of a parish, might well envy a humbler neighbour who may realise £40, £50, or even £100 and upwards per acre in one lucky year by the growth of onions, early potatoes, celery, or cauliflower. There can be little doubt that, as population and wages advance, the con- sumption of vegetables will be vastly increased. Some which are now considered luxuries will come to be regarded almost as necessaries even by the working classes, and others, too little known in England at present, but highly valuable as articles of diet, will come into common use. It is stated in Mr. Giffen's report on the Agricultural Eeturns for 1879 that many farmers have lately been induced by the improved facilities of railway- carriage to devote a small portion of their land to vege- tables and bush fruits. But the production of vegetables and fruit is a special art — the fancy-work of agriculture — which must always be most profitable when it is practised by a special class of farmers. If it should be largely extended, it will inevitably be extended on the system which has been heretofore found most successful, and win, so far, contribute to promote the subdivision of holdings.^ ' In the able articles of Mr. Charles Whitehead on " Market Gardening for Farmers," reprinted from the MarTc Lane Express of Aug. 9, 1880, this subject is fully discussed. Mr. Whitehead points out that vegetable culture has been somewhat discredited among farmers by the occurrence of occasional gluts in the market, involving heavy losses, but that such gluts are mainly due to a defective organisation of distribution. Vegetables may be extremely cheap in the heart of the metropolis, yet extremely dear in the subiirbs, or at watering-places. He says "there are too many middlemen in the trade," under the form of salesmen, greengrocers, and costermongers. He suggests the formation of emporium-markets, in which each grower's vegetables should be kept distinct, and which might also serve for the sale of milk, butter, eggs, fowls, cheese, fruit, and even hay, straw, and oats. His conclusion is that while the chief wheat AGBIOULTUBAL EBUCATION. 403 There is one boon, titlierto denied to British farmers, whi6h it is in the power of the Legislature to bestow upon them, and which may exercise no slight effect on the agriculture of the future. The want of a cheap and good agricultural education has never been felt as a farmer's grievance in this country, yet it is a more substantial grievance than many which have become the subjects of vehement agitation. There is probably no business requiring so great a combination of theoretical with practical knowledge as that of farming, or, at least, of high farming, yet it is habitually practised by men who have never received the most rudimentary scientific training, or even served a regular apprenticeship. A farmer's son, destined to be a farmer, is usually educated in much the same fashion as the son of a shopkeeper, learning nothing at school that has any bearing on agriculture, and hardly anything at home which might not be picked up by any intelligent farm-labourer. He may, of course, glean much information by degrees from the practical advice of others and the use of his own senses, especially in regard to the management of sheep or cattle, and the various capacities of the various fields on a particular farm. But the science of breeding is probably an occult mystery to him : he chooses beasts simply by the eye and not by weight, and even in the art of fattening them for the market he seldom has any better guide supplies of Great Britain will continue to be derived from America and other foreign countries, " all we who cultivate land must endeavour to obtain as much as possible of those funds which are spent upon delicacies, luxuries, and additions to diet, and to stimulate expenditure in this direction by placing them before the public cheaply, and well grown, or well prepared." A A 2 404 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. than routine. Being ignorant of agricultural chemistry, he must buy his own experience, when he comes to deal with a new soil, perhaps requiring a treatment wholly different from any to which he has been accustomed. If he dabbles with artificial manures, he may easily throw away money, for he probably " cannot tell the difference between soluble and insoluble phosphate, or between ammonia and nitrate of soda." He must be much above the level of his fellows, if he even appre- ciates the value of precious materials supplied by his own farm-yard, and does not allow the greater part of its liquid manure to drain away into ditches, instead of collecting it in tanks. Being equally ignorant of agri- cultural botany, he is at the mercy of the seedsman for the proper varieties of artificial grass, and sometimes finds himself cheated in this respect to a serious extent. As for the engines or other machines which he employs, he does not profess to understand their construction, and is therefore dependent on experts for checking the mode and cost of working them. In short, he is not only not a scientific agriculturist, but has a wholesome contempt for scientific agriculture, never having realised that in agriculture, as in other branches of industry, science means economy of power, and ignorance of science means waste of power. He is content to know that a scientific theorist, without practical experience, cannot be a successful farmer, and does not care to ask himself whether a farmer, with practical experience, could possibly be the worse for a competent knowledge of science. It would be idle to argue against the notion that agriculture, alone of human arts, can be learned by rule AOBIGULTUBAL EBTJOATION. 405 of tliiimb, when all otlier European nations, except one or two of the most backward, have recognised the necessity of teaching it methodically. In Prance, Grermany, Austro-Hungary, Belgium, Holland, Sweden and Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, and Italy, a more or less complete system of agricultural education has been established, and it is impossible not to connect this fact with the progress lately made by foreign agriculture. In Grermany there are said to be seventeen high schools or institutes of agriculture, thirty middle schools, and forty -four lower schools, besides " winter agricultural schools," " meadow schools," and other cognate institutions. Many of these schools have experimental stations attached to them, being partly supported by the Government, and partly by the pro- vinces in which they are situated. The principles of agriculture are also taught in rural primary schools. In England, on the contrary, State aid to agricultural education is represented by the lectures and examina- tions of the Science and Art Department, and a subsidy little exceeding £400 annually. A few prizes and scholarships are awarded by the Royal Agricultural Society, and there are now two self-supporting Agricul- tural Colleges, accessible to students who can afford to pay for a collegiate training. But it may be said that nothing has really been done to bring agricultural education within the reach of ordinary tenant-farmers in England, though a sum of several thousand pounds is annually granted to Ireland for this pm-pose, and above 15,000 candidates passed the Government examination in agriculture during the year 1879. It may be true that, in Great Britain, other subjects of Technical 406 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISR LANDLORDS. Education are equally neglected, but the concentration of manufactures in towns, favouring the constant dis- covery and rapid communication of improved processes, makes this neglect less harmful in the case of such industries than in the case of agriculture. The same may be said, with little variation, of horticulture. Gardeners seldom receive a regular horticultural educa- tion, but they form a comparatively small and compact profession, and their invention is stimulated by eager competition, no less than by the assured prospect of quick returns for every successful experiment. The consequence is that English gardeners are as progressive as English farmers are stationary, and that, in the very practice of agriculture itself, the latter have much to learn from the former, as well as from their Continental rivals. When the elementary principles and facts of agricultural science are commonly taught in country schools, and a cheap agricultural education has been provided in State-aided Colleges, tenant-farmers in England will for the first time reap the fuU advan- tage of their superiority in capital over peasant-farmers in foreign countries. But, even if State-aid should be withheld, it is not too much to expect that private enterprise will prove equal to supplying a demand none the less imperative because it is seldom publicly recognised. Every thou- sand pounds judiciously expended in extending a scien- tific knowledge of agriculture would assuredly repay itself tenfold in the increase of agricultural produce. Nor is it only farmers who might be expected to avail themselves of it. Land-agents, as a body, are lament- ably deficient in tliis qualification, and the difB.culty of AGBIGULTUBAL BBUOATION. 407 finding skilled agriculturists to accept the position of agent too often throws the management of great estates into the hands of lawyers. If tenant-farmers could regard the agent as a wise adviser, rather than as an instrument for enforcing the landlord's rights, many heartburnings would be avoided, and a fresh impulse would be given to good farming. Some attempt has already been made in Scotland, both to afford students of farming the means of attending agricultural classes, and to aid practical farmers by the employment of public analysts. An extension of this system under the best scientific guidance may go far to make up for the want of a special training in agricultural schools, and to remove the standing reproach of our tripartite agricul- tural economy. For, since this form of agricultural economy requires nothing but general intelligence from the landlord, and nothing but manual skill from the labourer, it is above all things necessary that a scientific knowledge of agriculture should be secured in the class of farmers.^ ' See a paper by Mr. J. Maodonald Cameron, on the relative position of Agricultural Education in this country and on the Continent, read before the British Association for the Advancement of Science, in 1880. An interesting report has lately been published on the very complete system of Agricultural Education established in Sweden, under the general direction of the Minister of the Interior, but under the immediate super- vision of the Royal Academy of Agriculture at Stoctholm. It appears that, besides an experimental farm and four agriculturo-chemical colleges, there are two higher-grade agricultural institutes, and twenty-seven school- farms, in which theoretical and practical instruction was given, in 1876, to 565 students. There is also a staff of agricultural engineers, and travelling professors, employed by the State to advise and assist farmers in their improvements. CHAPTEE III. (Reforms to te Effected in the English. System of Eural Government. One more aspect of the future English land system remains to be considered. So profound a change as we have seen reason to anticipate in the rural economy of England could not fail to involve an equally profound change in Eural Grovernment. The present organisation of power in counties and country parishes, chaotic as it is, bears little trace of its historical connection with those local institutions, the precious legacy of primitive self-government in the forests of Grermany, which our forefathers cherished so fondly and idealised so per- sistently, as the " Laws of Edward the Confessor." It is essentially a modern superstructure raised upon a feudal basis. As manors gradually extinguished town- ships, and freeholders passed into free tenants, both administration and jurisdiction became less and less democratic. The ancient town-moot of the village republic was transformed into the lord's court-baron ; the hundred-court lost its authority,, as the court-leet usurped its most important function ; the county- com-ts themselves ceased, at last, to be \he forum plebeice justitim et theatrum comitivce potestatis. The Curia Eegis alone was able to settle the disputes of great barons, and before the circuits of Eoyal Judges checked the worst abuses of baronial jurisdiction, this jurisdiction had been so extended by Saxon grants of sac and soc, or the . BUBAL QOVEBNMENT IN OLDEN TIMES. 409 creation of Norman " liberties " and " honours/' that large tracts of country were practically outside the sphere of the ancient popular courts. The Royal forests were under a separate local government, more or less popular, indeed, in its theoretical constitution, but highly tyrannical in its actual operation. With the decay of feudalism and the growth of constitutional freedom, Eural Grovernment in England entered upon a new phase, but it never recovered the spirit, or even the form, of its Anglo-Saxon original. A regular Commission of the Peace was established in every county, and was doubtless a powerful safeguard of law and order, but the justices were appointed by the Crown, and not elected by the people. The Court of Quarter Sessions was gradually invested with a judicial and administrative control from which no estate was exempt, and which no private individual could defy, but it completed the destruction of the county court, for which no substitute was provided. The independent spirit of the English yeomanry, it is true, was vigor- ously displayed for centuries after the old habit and capacity of self-government had well-nigh perished in rural districts. But the mass of the people were fast sinking into day-labourers, excluded from the Parlia- mentary franchise, divorced from the soil, and encouraged to rely on parochial relief. It is only since the Eeform Act of 1832 that attempts have been made to revive the lost art of popular administration, by the formation of Poor Law Unions, Highway Districts, and School Dis- tricts, whose affairs are managed wholly or partially by representatives of the ratepayers. These measures have not been without their effect in awakening the farmers 410 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. and shopkeepers in county parishes to a sense of public responsibility. But they have fallen very far short o,f restoring the old political life of village-communities in Anglo-Saxon times, long since undermined by feudal- ism. The law of Primogeniture, the custom of Entail, and other causes favouring the accumulation of land in the hands of a temtorial aristocracy, have constituted a permanent influence far too powerful to be counteracted by the legislative creation of a few elective boards with very limited duties. Until this influence is weakened by a thorough reform of the English land system, it is vain to attempt a thorough reform of Local Government in English counties. No foreigner, and no Englishman who is not familiar with the interior working of county institutions, can pos- sibly conceive the real ascendancy of " property" in this country, or the extent to which that ascendancy depends on the mere possession of a broad acreage. True it is that a parvenu settling in a good neighbourhood must pass through a certain period of probation before he and his family are received into the inner circle of county society, even though he ma}- have purchased a princely estate. True it is also that an ancient title is a passport to county society, and may secure for its bearer a con- siderable amount of authority, even though his estate be small by comparison with those of other county potent- ates. But it is certain that no ability and no force of character, without the aid of a title, will place a small freeholder, or even a squire who owns but a few hundred acres, on a par with the members of the county oligarchy, / either in the estimation of his neighbours or in actual j power. If he be a magistrate at all, and should have INFLUENCE OF PBOPFBTY IN COUNTIES. 411 the advantage of a legal training, it is possible that he may be invited to act as Chairman of Quarter Sessions, but more probable that he will be postponed to a neigh- bour of inferior age, capacity, and industry, but with a larger "stake" in the county and a more numerous tenantry. Perhaps he may fill the less dignified but more laborious ofiice of Chairman at the Board of Gruar- dians of his own Union, and earn respect by his discharge of the various unpaid services which mainly devolve upon those English country gentlemen who are not too rich to reside at their country places for most of the year. But he would scarcely be considered eligible for the representation of his county, not only because he could not afford to pay several thousand pounds for the honour of a seat in Parliament, but also because some youth of shallower brains and far less inclination for poHtics, if not of frivolous tastes and dissipated habits, would receive a heartier support from the leading county gentry, and would appear to party agents a " stronger candidate," if recommended by the qualification of a far more imposing rental. As for his being made Lord Lieutenant under any circumstances whatever, such an idea could never enter into the wildest dreams of his ambition; for a Lord Lieutenant without a park, as Mr. Arthur Arnold says, is a being of whom a country-bred Englishman can barely form a conception. Nor is the overweening pre- ponderance of great landowners in their own counties to be measured by any political or official test which can be applied. At every public meeting, at every agricultural dinner, at every county -ball, on the race-ground, in the hunting-field, and at every social gathering of county people, the small landowner is made to feel that he is 412 ENGLI8S LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. essentially a small man by the side of those whose acres are counted by thousands, however inferior they may be in all other respects. One very simple reason is almost sufficient to explain this curious trait of English county life. The law of Primogeniture and the custom of Entail have erected great landowners into a privileged caste, admission to which is the highest aspiration of the English plutocracy, while the disappearance of a true middle class from English counties has removed the main counterpoise to their undue weight. They hold in their gift that social promotion which is the most seductive of bribes to English minds of the common order, and they are treated with a deference out of all proportion to their merit by men, and still more by women, eagerly struggling for this promotion. This inordinate respect for great landowners, as such, was not equally characteristic of rural England in earlier times, and would probably not long survive the modern- ised feudal land system to which it owes its origin. It is wholly distinct from the spirit of clanship and military allegiance which attached the feudal retainer to his lord, and enabled the most powerful barons to impose their will on vast tracts of country. Even in those days, a sturdy undergrowth of independent yeomanry and freeholders continued to flourish under the vast shadow of baronial suzerainty. The greatest landowners of all were greater than any now to be found in the roll of the Peerage ; but great landowners, as a class, did not tower, as they now do, above the smaller gentry, then a far more numerous body. So long as the old popular courts maintained their activity, all landowners would there meet their brother freeholders on equal terms, to INGBEASEB POWER OF GREAT LANDOWNERS. 413 administer justice, to settle local claims and disputes, to enforce the abatement of nuisances, to assess local taxes, and to regulate all matters of common interest, sucli as rights of pasturage, rights of way, and repairs of roads or bridges. A few nobles of the very first rank, living in fortified castles, might perhaps afford to hold aloof from these assemblies, and disregard their decisions. But other landlords were bound to personal attendance by the necessity of protecting their own rights against encroachment, and, in doing so, might often encounter stubborn opposition from men of very inferior degree and acreage. Even after the institution of the unpaid magistracy had withered the spirit of self-government, and consolidated the power of the landed aristocrac}^ within each county, it is clear that rural society in England presented a much greater equality of fortunes and conditions, with a much greater community of habits and tastes, than it does in the present day. This comparative equality within the landowning class is reflected in the pictures drawn by Addison, Fielding, and Groldsmith, as well as in the constitutional history of the two last centuries. It was rapidly impaired, as the English Land System matured itself under modern conditions, and for the last hundred years the landed aristocracy has approached more nearly to a social oligarchy than it ever did before. In considering how far rural government would be modified by a thorough reform of this Land System, it may be well to fix our attention on one or two of its existing anomalies. Perhaps it would be difficult to find a better illustration of the almost despotic power confided to landowners, in their capacity of magistrates, 414 ENGLISH LAND ANB ENGLISS LANDLOBBS. than is fumislied by their absolute control over licenses for the sale of intoxicating liquors. In days when cottage brewing was common, and spirits unknown in country parishes, this control was of less importance; but cottage brewing has almost died out with cottage farming, and the village public-house is practically the only place where a farm labourer can obtain a supply of beer, or some less wholesome stimulant, whether he choose to drink it on or off the premises. In Saxon times we cannot doubt that, if public-houses had been recognised at all, the regulation of them would have been vested in the court of the township, the hundred, or the county, and " local option " would have been fully established. It is certainly a striking proof of the change which has passed over the system of local government in England that licenses should be granted and renewed at the peremptoiy discretion of non-repre- sentative lawgivers, and that so little discontent should be excited by the exercise of this prerogative. For it must be remembered that landowners, acting as magis- trates, not only determine whether there shaU be any public-house in a given locality, but also whether that public-house shall enjoy a local monopoly, or shall be subjected to indefinite depreciation by the competition of new public-houses within a short distance of it. Indeed, a landowner who happens to own a whole parish, thence called a " close parish," may entirely suppress the sale of liquor within it by simply refusing to let any house for that purpose, thereby assuming exactly the same control over the liberty of all the inhabitants which is claimed, under the Permissive Bill, for a majority of the ratepayers. INOBEASED POWER OF GREAT LANDOWNERS. 415 No doubt, this power is incident to the right of property, and is sometimes used for the benefit of the people, as, for instance, when the proprietor of a village allows no public-house within it, but lets a house for the sale of liquor to be drunk off the premises, and institutes a village club and reading- room as a place of social resort. Still, the fact remains that such a proprietor is virtually armed with the authority of a dictator over the conduct of a whole village community, and the smaller the number of land- owners becomes, the more close parishes there must be. It follows that a more equal division of property would liberate many parishes, for good or for evil, from a paternal despotism of this kind, as it would manifestly facilitate the constitution of new Licensing Boards out of more popular elements. The reason why the juris- diction of county magistrates over the licensing system has been accepted, almost as a matter of course, is that no other body, competent to deal judicially with a question so vitally affecting- the interests of the people, has existed in rural districts for many genera- tions. If there were more freeholders and more leasehold farmers within each Union or petty sessional area, if land- lord influence counted for less, and the sense of citizen ship were aroused in the labouring-class by an extension of education and a diminution of pauperism, this dif- ficulty would be speedily overcome. The regulation of the drink-traffic, as well as many other matters now super- intended by Parliament or Quarter Sessions, would then be naturally entrusted to local courts or councils, more or less democratic in their constitution, and intimately acquainted with the wants of their respective localities. 416 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. A still more glaring anomaly in the rural govern- ment of England, and one still more directly resulting from the anomalies of the English Land System, is the exclusive management . of county finance by the magistrates at Quarter Sessions. It may be granted that, with few exceptions — such as the practice of rating splendid mansions at a preposterously low valuation — ■ the financial administration of county magistrates deserves the credit of impartiality and economy. Whatever may be their faults, there is more intelligence and public spirit among English country gentlemen willing to undertake such duties than is usually to be found among the elective delegates of ratepayers, and they rarely lay themselves open even to a suspicion of jobbery. It may be granted also that, whereas the County Eate is now of trifling amount, as compared with the Poor Eate, it is difficult to make a County Board, elected to dispose of the smaller revenue, superior in power or dignity to the Union Board, which habitually disposes of the larger. Nevertheless, it is con- trary to every principle of self-government that persons nominated by the Lord Lieutenant or the Lord Chancellor to serve on the Commission of Peace should, by virtue of that commission, become at once a Committee of Ways and Means or a Committee of Supply for the whole county, especially as local rates are assessed, for the most part, not upon owners, but upon occupiers. So palpable an encroachment on popular rights would never have been tolerated by our Saxon forefathers, and is only tolerated by their descendants because the heads of county families with a certain acreage, created and protected by Primogeniture and Entail, have come to be COUNTY FINANCIAL BOARDS. 417 regarded almost as the hereditary rulers of counties. They are not irresponsible, it is true; but it is the Local Grovernment Board, and not the ratepayers of the county, to whom they must render an account ; as it is the Home Office, or the House of Commons, and not any local assembly, to which any abuse of magis- terial justice must be referred for redress. The ignorant notions which prevail among farmers about county taxation are, to a great extent, the consequence of their exclusion from all discussion of the county budget. From this point of view, the formation of County Financial Boards is much to be desired, as an instru- ment of political education ; but County Financial Boards, on a representative basis, will not be easy to reconcile with an aristocratic land system. Here, again, the elements of which the new boards ought to be composed have been well-nigh crushed out by causes already described, and their place cannot be adequately supplied by agricultural tenants and shop- keepers. It is the independence of their position which gives weight to the decisions of magistrates at Quarter Sessions, and it is only men of equally independent position who can hold their own in association with them. The erection of a real communal government in parishes, or a real county ParHament with extended legislative powers, must needs be preceded by a real agrarian reform, and will then be accomplished in Old England as easily as it was accomplished two centuries ago in the New England States. In the meantime, the way might be paved for representative institutions in counties by a revival of B B 418 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. communal government in villages. The. . autonomy of townships and parishes, it is true, has passed away, never to return, and no parochial authority can hence- forth be exempt from the. control of the Union, the County, or the Imperial Executive. But this is no reason why there should be no parochial authority at all, and why all the local affairs of villages should prac- tically be administered, or neglected, as is too often the case, by an Union Board, acting through inspectors, relieving-officers, vaccination-officers, and school attend- ance officers, besides a host of superior officials ap- pointed by the Quarter Sessions or some Department of State. What is wanted is a simple power of initiation, supervision, and regulation on the spot, and such a power might be entrusted to a ViUage-Council, whose Chairman, as proposed by Mr. Groschen in the BUI of 1871, should represent the parish at the Union Board. To this Board the Village-Council would of course be responsible, being constituted, for many pur- poses, a local Committee of the Union, and exercising, in this capacity, much of the jurisdiction now vested in municipal corporations over lighting, drainage, public recreation-grounds, and all other matters of purely local concern.^ Probably, in the first instance, a ViUage- Council of this kind would be mainly guided by the will ' For a fuller discussion of the reforms necessary to revive self-govern- ment in countries, see Brodrick's Essay on Local Government in England, published by the Oobden Club. See also an article on the " Decay of Self -Government in Villages," by the Rev. T. W. Eowle, in the Fortnightly Beview of August, 1879. The obvious objection to any system of Local Government, strictly founded on parochial representation, is that many parishes are too minute to supply even one qualified representative. The besetting weakness of elective Boards is a tendency to local jobbery, and. VILLAGE-COUNCILS. 419 of the squire, notified througli Hs agent, and the counsels of the parish clergyman. With the gradual infusion of new elements into rural life, it would acquire greater independence, and in the course of a generation EngHsh country-parishes might recover a great part of the communal spirit which made them, in bygone ages, the very nurseries and schools of self-government. the smaller the unit of representation, the stronger will such a tendency become. To meet this objection, it has been suggested that each electoral district shall contain, at least, an area of nine square miles, or a population of 2,000, or rateable property to the value of £10,000 a year. B B 2 CHAPTEE IV. Probable efEect of these Eeforms on Eural Economy and Eural Society in England. In calculating the probable operation of sucb causes, favouring botb a subdivision of properties and a sub- division of holdings, we must ever bear in mind their reciprocal action and progressive tendency. We have already considered the social changes which might be expected to result, in process of time, from the simple abolition of Primogeniture and Entail. These changes would, of course, be hastened and aided by simultaneous reforms in the system of land- transfer, of mortgaging, and of improvement loans, as well as by the speedy completion of cadastral maps under the Ordnance Survey. In proportion as land should thus be rendered more easily saleable, and more available for the purpose of borrowing, great estates would be more liable to dis- integration, and their fragments would pass, iu many cases, into the hands of a new class, largely composed of retired tradespeople and men of business. This class, not being animated by aristocratic traditions, or allied with county families, would not only form the nucleus of a new rural society, but would carry new principles into the management of land. Many of them, perhaps, would live in farmhouses a little enlarged and embel- lished, and practise agriculture for amusement or profit. Others, not finding suitable residences or a congenial SUBDIVISION AND LANDLORDISM. 421 neigliboiirhood around them, would take up their abode in country towns, a revival of which, could hardly fail to follow closely on Free Trade in Land. Landowners of this order, like their prototypes of the Tudor period, would associate with the provincial bourgeoisie, and they would be reinforced by a contingent of tenant farmers who had bought the fee simple of their own holdings when rents were at the lowest. By degrees, the old middle-class life of rural England, as described in the " Vicar of Wakefield," might cease to be represented exclusively by the humbler country parsons and a few surviving families of hereditary yeomen. For, as each hereditary yeoman who sells his patrimony to a great proprietor helps to isolate those who remain, and to deter others from joining their ranks, so each new purchaser settling on a small property, or in the adjoining town, helps to increase the attractions of small proprietorship. It is needless to point out the connection between measures facilitating the subdivision of properties and measures restricting the exceptional powers or privileges of proprietorship. , The adoption of the Ballot, for instance, has already rescued tenants from political dependence, and thereby materially weakened both the motive for enlarging estates unprofitably, and the motive for refusing leases. The political influence of the landlord is no longer measured, even in England, by the extent of his territory, and in Ireland it has been almost extinguished by secret voting. There are no longer any reasons, unless they be economical reasons, why he should not grant leases, and a lease- holding tenant is a comparatively independent man, 422 ENGLI8B LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOUDS. with a position and credit of his own. It is not impossible that as the evils of life-ownership sink into oblivion, the advantages of leases for life, as compared with leases for terms of years, may receive fresh consideration, and that a new kind of freehold interest in the soil may thus be introduced, resembling in some respects the most ancient form of agricultural tenancy, but without the abuses of fines on renewal. On the other hand, it is possible that indefeasible tenant-right, with an extended notice to quit, may prove more acceptable to modern farmers than a lease, which in olden times was the only effectual safeguard against capricious eviction. It is equally possible, however, that leases may prove more acceptable to landlords than compulsory tenant-right, without the power of summary eviction ; especiaUy, as the heavy expenses of agency might be thereby materially reduced.^ But, in any case, it is clear that, since tenants have ceased to owe their landlords political service, landlords have less temptation either to mul- tiply them or to' refuse them due security. The effect of abolishing the right of Distress is more doubtful, though it could hardly fail to further the rise of a more independent tenantry. "Whatever may be said in favour of this right, from other points of view, it is evident that it must needs encourage landlords to accept as tenants men of whose solvency and capacity ^ These expenses are extremely variable. Upon one very large and well-managed property in the Midland Counties they do not greatly exceed 4 per cent, on the gross rental. Upon another property of stiU greater extent, and comprising estates in the metropolis and various southern and eastern counties, they exceed 20 per cent. MINOR BEF0BM8 OF LANB LAWS. 423 they have no sufficient evidence. Were landlords deprived of their preferential claim, and placed on the footing of other creditors, they might he expected to become less indulgent, indeed; but tenants would be men of more substance in proportion to acreage, would have less occasion , to be obsequious, and would obtain advances more readily upon their crops or stock. The statutory reservation to occupiers of an inalienable right to shoot hares and rabbits on their farms must operate in the same way, for good or for evil, as a solvent of landlordism. At first, perhaps, it may render many landlords more unwilling than ever to grant leases, inasmuch as they may rely on threats of eviction to deter churlish tenants from a wholesale destruction of ground game. But in the end it will be found to promote more business-like agreements between the two parties, as well as to remove one inveterate objection to small holdings. It is even possible to conceive that, with the progressive subdivision of properties and holdings, another description of privileged vermin would cease to be regarded with superstitious venera- tion. In those hunting counties where the fox is pre- served as a sacred animal, it is idle to expect that poultry, ducks,, or geese, will be reared to reward his depredations, and there can be little doubt as to what his fate would : be, if his influential patrons among great landlords and farmers were succeeded by " smaller " men, with more taste for profit than for sport. Such minor reforms of the English Land Laws, and of the customs blended with them, would insensibly help to modify the semi-feudal relation between English 424 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLI8S LANDLORDS. landlords and tenants, and would accelerate the move- ment already setting towards a subdivision of properties and of holdings. As the race of embarrassed life- owners, burdened with estates too large for their capital, and family mansions too large for their estates, should gradually become an extinct species, their places would be filled by new comers probably twice or thrice as nume- rous, with much less pride but much greater aggregate wealth and enterprise. The least worthy representatives of the remaining landed gentry would most resent the intrusion of this plebeian element, and would be most disposed to part with their game-preserves and fox- coverts, after the right of sporting had been curtailed. The consequence would be a fresh immigration of new men into the old acres, and a fresh depreciation of landed property as a passport to county influence and social consideration. After a while, it would no longer command a fancy price on this ground, and would be sold, more and more profitably, in small lots. The " residential " estates of a few score or a few hundred acres characteristic of the home counties, and of the districts round great manufacturing toTvns, would now propagate themselves in the heart of the country. And thus, by the operation of new causes and conditions, the rural economy of England might come to assume an aspect very different from that which it has presented during the last two centuries, yet not so unlike that which it must have presented in still earlier times. One marked feature of this new rural economy would probably be a great extension both of population and of trade in agricultural counties. The West End of London is largely peopled during tbe season by FEATURES OF NEW BUBAL ECONOMY. 425 many thousand families of landed proprietors, wlio there lay out a great part of the rents which they derive from their country estates, and attract thither myriads of tradespeople and dependents who might otherwise make their living in the country. The withdrawal of all this wealth and custom from rural parishes is the direct consequence of a system which severs the ownership from the cultivation of land, and creates a landed aristocracy. The substitution of several middle-class households in a rural parish for one splendid mansion, too often empty, would, in most cases, largely increase the niunber of mouths to be fed, but it would have other and far more important effects.. The heads of these households would be more constantly resident, because they would have less spare cash to spend in the metropolis or on the Continent, and less inducement to spend it. They would also be far more disposed to welcome the spread of manufactures upon their domains, because they would be more eager to increase their incomes by selling or letting sites for mills, and less jealous of admitting millowners and artisans into their immediate neighbourhood. For similar reasons, they would usually keep their accounts at the nearest town, if not at village shops, instead of importing all their stores from London. By such means, while their own rental would inevitably be raised, local trade would inevitably be stimulated. As secluded hamlets expanded into populous villages, or even into market towns, farmers would buy their implements, tiles, and manures at a lower cost, and find a ready sale for such farm produce as meat, fowls, eggs, milk, butter, vegetables, and fruit. The production of these commodities would 426 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. tlius be encouraged, and, as we have seen, would be carried on with the greatest success on small holdings, if not by peasant-owners. Hence the reaction in favour of small holdings and subdivision of ownership would derive fresh energy from the very advent of new settlers in rural districts — ^themselves the creatures of Tree Trade in Land. The hierarchy of middle-men, who now live off the land without contributing to its cultivation, would have no place in thriving village communities of this kind, where the producer and consumer would be in close and daily contact with each other, and the spectacle of homely farmers' wives con- veying their own baskets to market inight again enliven our rural highways. For it would then be discovered that a farmer's best labourers are not hirelings, but himself and the rdembers of his own family, and that his best customers are not dealers or contractors, but his own next-door neighbours. By degrees he would realise that it pays far better to deliver milk at 4d., or even 3d. a quart, within half a mile or a mile of his dairy, than to sell it wholesale at 2d. a quart, to be retailed in London at 5d. ; and that by clubbing together with a few others to employ a salesman for his poultry, instead of supplying a poulterer, he might pocket at least 50 per cent, extra on the price of each couple. No doubt, as these elementary truths obtained currency, some economical theories might be rudely disturbed, and some important changes might ensue in the modern system of distribution, which now relieves the farmer of a little trouble and much profit. But, if the general result were to check the unhealthy centralisation, which is the bane of modern industry, to OOTTAGE-FABMma. 427 arrest that over-population of great towns wHcli lias caused a degeneracy in tte national pki/sique, if not in tlie national character, to bridge over the chasm and mitigate the social contrasts between urban and rural communities, to restore in some degree the independent spirit of the ancient English yeomanry, and at the same time to invigorate the most promising branches of modern English agriculture, the country would have no reason to deplore so beneficial a transition. But, whatever form the rural economy of England may assume in future years, we cannot doubt that room will be found in it for a considerable extension of cottage-farming. To justify such an extension, it is superfluous to invoke Continental experience, and the arguments in its favour are too strong to require the aid of legislative intervention. For many years past the diflSculty of retaining the best class of labom-ers in rural districts, and that of building cottages to pay a fair percentage on their cost price, have been among the standing complaints of landlords and farmers. Now, it is plain that both these difficulties may be mitigated, if not overcome, by a return towards the ancient practice of attaching plots of lands to labourers' dwellings. As the want of security discourages good farming, so the husbandman is reduced to a mere hireling by the want of stability in his relation to his employer on the one side, and his landlord on the other. It has long been observed that improvidence and pauperism are most prevalent among those classes of labourers who are engaged by the day, and least prevalent among those who are engaged by the year. When this is more fully realised by farmers, 428 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. the advantage of giving labourers a more permanent and valuable stake in their native parishes will come to be more fully realised by landlords. We have seen that the value of good allotment ground to a cottager is estimated at no less than £16 an acre, above the ordinary farm rent, by the Commission on the Employment of Women and Children in Agricul- ture. Mr. Bailey Denton, in his treatise on the Agri- cultural Labourer, forms the same estimate. He states that a labourer, having a rood of land, " may grow vegetables suilicient to yield him a return, after payment of rent and purchase of seed, of at least £4 a year." If so, it would be more than worth a labourer's while to pay £8 rent for a cottage-garden of half an acre. Let us suppose, however, that he pays no more than £4, in addition to £4 a year for his cottage, the real value of which is perhaps £6 a year. Now, since no farmer would pay above £1 a year for half an acre of, land, the landlord will gain more by the extra rent of the land than he loses by the under rent of the cottage, and will find that cottage property, with large gardens attached, is by no means an unremunerative invest- ment.^ Another form of allotments, peculiarly suitable to pastoral districts, has been tried with admirable results on some estates in Cheshire and other parts of the country. Plots of land, sufficient to maintain one cow, ' On Lord ToUemache's estate at Helmingham, in Suffolk, it has long been the practice to attach an allotment garden of half an acre to each cottage. As these allotments are let at an ordinary farm-rent, the privilege of holding them is of course highly valued, and the effect of the system on the conduct of the labouring population is described as most salutai-y. GOW-KEEPING BY FARM LABOUBEBS. 429 and ranging from two and a-half to three and a-half acres, according to tlie quality of the soil, are let with, each cottage, at an ordinary farm-rent. This practice, after all, is but the revival of a custom once almost niliversal among the peasantry of England, and it is found to be fraught with manifold advantages. The most obvious of these is an abundant supply of milk for the farm-labourer's children, who in many districts grow up without tasting the natural diet of childhood. But the habits of thrift and forethought encouraged by cow-keeping and dairying, on however small a scale, constitute a moral advantage of great importance. The possession of a cow-pasture is at once a reward of good behaviour, a stimulus to exertion, and a source of profit, which sometimes enables the industrious labourer to rise into a small farmer, and prevents his drifting into the great towns. On Lord ToUemache's estate in Cheshire, where the system has been long esta- blished, and carefully managed, its results have been eminently beneficial, and attended by none of the drawbacks so often magnified into insuperable diffi- culties by the opponents of cottage-farming. The butter made by the cottagers' wives is collected and marketed by small dealers, themselves cowkeepers, and residing generally on the estate. Petitions for sub- scriptions from labourers who have lost a cow, though common elsewhere, are there unknown, since regular " cow-clubs," for purposes of mutual insurance, have been properly organised and are in full operation. Not less satisfactory has been the experience of other landlords who have given the system a fair trial, and the Second Eeport of the Women and Children's 430 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Employment Commission is full of evidence in its favour. Yet sucli is the conservatism of agriculture that it continues to be a rare feature of English rural economy, and it is quite possible that generations will elapse before it is widely extended/ Let us now go a step further, and suppose that in an ordinary village of some 2,000 acres, containing some seventy or eighty labourers (including boys), 100 acres were assigned as arable cottage-farms to ten labourers carefully selected for' their skill, thrift, and sobriety.^ These cottage-farms of ten acres each would, of course, be far above the scale of allotments, and, if cultivated with the spade, would demand the whole labour of the occupiers, with their families, as well as a good deal of occasional assistance from neighbours or strangers. Assuming the rent to be £30 a-year for each, or double that which an ordinary farmer would give, the landlord's rental would be increased by £150 a-year. But, even if the entire plot of ten acres were treated as a farm, and not as a market garden, its produce under spade- cultivation would amply sufB.ce to pay this rent, with all incidental expenses, and to leave the holder a margin of profit far beyond the average wages of a farm la- bourer. If a simple alternation of wheat and potatoes ' See an interesting paper on " Cowkeeping by Farm Labourers," by Mr. Henry Evershed, republished from the Royal Agricultural Society's Journal of 1879. I am indebted to Lord Tollemache of Helmingham for personal confirmation of the facts there stated in reference to his own estate. 2 Mr. Howard states, in his treatise on " Continental Farming,'' that in France a farm of ten acres is considered sufficient to support a family, and that little is grown on such farms except wheat, rye, oats, clover, and potatoes. Two cows, however, are commonly kept upon them. INGOME OF A GOTTAGE-FARMEB. 431 were adopted, the land being equally divided between these crops, the five acres of potatoes ought to be worth £200, and the five acres of wheat, including straw, about £70 on a moderate computation.^ Eeserving to himself £120 a-year for the maintenance of himself and his household, which is certainly much above the average earnings of a farm-labourer's family, he would stiU have £150, or £15 an acre, to cover his rent and rates, wear and tear of tools, extra wages, and pur- chased manure, of which he would requii-e aU the less if he should keep a considerable stock of pigs. His risk would be materially diminished, though his average profit would not be so great, if five out of the ten acres should consist of good pasturage, capable of feeding two cows. The milk of these cows would be worth some £40 a-year, with a very small drawback for wages, and he might then be able to cultivate the remaining five acres without recourse to hired labour, and with a pro- portionate reduction of other expenses. No account is here taken of the many little shifts and resources by which a clever man, under favourable conditions, might eke out the profits of a cottage farm. If he could afford to buy a horse, for instance, he might earn a considerable sum by hauling and carrying for his neighbours, in spare hours, and there are many parts of the country where a poor man's horse may pick up a good deal of his own fodder by the roadside or on a common. By looking after gardens, rough carpentering, and executing small jobs for others, many an honest * It is here assumed that the yield of potatoes is about 8 tons per acre, and the price.about £6 per ton. The yield of wheat is taken at 4 quarters per acre, and the price at 50s. per quarter. 432 ENGLISH LANB AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. penny may be earned by the cottage-farmer who is not above turning his hand to anything which brings in money. Some cottagers already pay their rent with the proceeds of their beehives or flower-gardens ; others deal in fowls, eggs, or pork, and all these petty indus- tries could be practised more successfully by the cottage- farmer than by a mere day labourer. Sometimes he might find it worth his while to go out for a week's harvesting at high wages, paying for help in getting in his own crops. But such expedients would not be open to every cottage-farmer, nor is it every cottage-farmer who could be trusted to avail himself of them, without neglecting his own proper business. It is, therefore, safer to exclude them from the calculation, and to regard the cottage-farm simply as an ordinary farm in miniature. On the other hand, it is not unreasonable to believe that the habits of thrift encouraged by cottage- farming would bear additional fruit in an extension of those domestic industries, such as glove-making, straw- plaiting, lace-making, and stocking-knitting, which can be carried on by the daughters of cottagers in spare hours. In old times, a working farmer had few dealings with shopkeepers, and the clothing, as well as the food, of the whole family was mostly produced at home. It may now be cheaper to buy cloth or linen than to weave them with a hand-loom, but only upon condition that a more profitable use is made of the hands that might otherwise be employed in weaving. This ob- vious truth seems to have been forgotten by modern housevdves, and in many parts of the country, where girls do not work in the fields, they earn nothing for themselves until they marry or go into domestic service. SOCIAL BENEFITS OF GOTTAGE-FARMING. 433 But the cottage farmer would be essentially a crofter or peasant, such as peopled English villages before the Poor Law of Elizabeth, and, if experience proves any- thing, it proves that a peasant's household is a far better school of economy than a tenant-farmer's or day- labourer's household. The benefits to be derived from a few such cottage- farms in an English village cannot be measured by the direct pecuniary return that might be shared be- tween the landlord and the occupiers. The successful example of a deserving labourer thus promoted to be a small farmer would tell upon the character of other labourers, and inspire many with the ambition to rise from the lower into the higher ranks of agricultural industry. It is often said that an irresistible attraction draws off the true descendants of the old English peasantry into manufacturing towns, and that a growing aversion to manual labour has been fostered by the spread of popular education. If this be so, and if no counteracting forces should manifest themselves, it bodes ill for the vigour, the happiness, and the virtue of coming generations. But it has yet to be seen whether the prosperity of English manufactures will long be maintained at such a pitch as to command the labour market, and whether the lot of an English hus- bandman must needs compare unfavourably with that of an English artisan. Not "antil the agricultural labourer is, offered the prospect of bettering himself by toil and thrift, without deserting his own handicraft, will the industrial competition between town and country be conducted upon equal terms. Let the cottager, working for weekly wages, realise that he may c c 434 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. earn the position of a cottage-fanner, and the flower of onr village youth may cease to look for advancement everywhere except at home. It may be said, however, that cottage-farming of this kind, even without cattle, machinery, or farm im- plements of any sort, would require a certain amount of capital, for the cottage-farmer must at least feed himself and those working under him until he can get in his crops. This is true, and therefore no sensible landlord would let a cottage-farm to any labourer who had not qualified himself by exceptional industry, and laid by money enough to subsist for a year without realising anything from the land. But it does not follow that if the cottage-farming system were extended beyond the proper sphere of spade-husbandry, as, for instance, to holdings of twenty or thirty acres, it would be necessary for the farmer to own a farm-capital of £200 or £300. It is quite possible, and by no means improbable, that if other circumstances should favour the growth of this system, and bring the landlord into immediate contact with a class of peasant-farmers, the old metayage tenure may be revived in a modified shape, and under new conditions. The essence of this ancient tenure, which seems to have once prevailed in many parts of England,^ does not consist in the payment of rent in kind ; still less, in an equal division of the profit between landlord and tenant. It consists in the provision of farming capital by the landlord, instead of ■^ Professor Rogers states that, in the leases granted by Merton College during the latter part of the fourteenth century, the stock was generally let with the land, in whole or in com, the rents being made payable either in money or in com. (" History of Prices," Vol. I., p. 24.) NEW FORMS OF TENANCY. 435 by the tenant, whatever be the mode in which the rent is paid, or the share of profit allotted to the landlord. On the other hand, the admitted abuses of metayage as it exists in Lombardy and elsewhere arise from a want of security for the tenant's share of profit, which it is within the province of law to supply. At all events, this principle affords one solution of the agricultural question which has lately perplexed so many thoughtful minds — the question whether a continued fall of prices may not render it impossible to maintain a landed interest, consisting of three classes, on the less fertile soils of England. It is not all land that will yield rent to a landlord, profit to a farmer, and wages to labourers, but it is not to be assumed that land which cannot support a threefold burden will cease to be cultivated. One of these classes may be altogether merged in another. Here and there an active and capable landlord may take his farms permanently into his own hands, thus becoming his own farmer. Here and there a farmer may buy up the fee-simple of a depreciated farm, thus becoming his own landlord. But a still more promising experiment would be the occasional conver- sion of labourers into farmers, and this process would be greatly facilitated by the adoption of something like a metayage tenure. The stock objection to this or any other system of cottage-farming is that a single bad season would ruin any but a capitalist farmer. But there is no reason why the landlord, before accepting any appH- cant as tenant of a cottage-farm, should not take security for his possessing the means to weather at least one bad season, or insist upon his crops being c c 2 436 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOBBS. duly insured. It has been suggested that village- committees might be formed to make themselves responsible for the original rent, and re-let the land at an increased rent sufficient to cover risks, accumu- lating the surplus for the purpose of enabling the cottage-tenant, after reaching a certain age, to occupy his farm rent-free during the rest of his life. A similar machinery might be adapted to purposes of insurance, but the same object might be attained in many other ways, as it is practically attained in many parts of the Continent, by the simple practice of individual saving. To speak of cottage-farming as a chimerical ideal, and to regard with complacency the absolute dependence of English farm-labourers on weekly wages and Poor Law relief, as if it were an ordinance of Nature or Providence, is to ignore the lessons of foreign experience, no less than of our own agricultural history. In the production of corn and meat, indeed, the cottage-farmer is never likely to supersede the capitalist who can bring science and economy of labour to bear on a large acreage. But for the minor operations of agriculture he possesses many advantages over his wealthier rival, and, if the pressure of agricultural distress should be prolonged, he may find a niche ready-made to receive him in the rural economy of a no remote fature. The future transition from cottage-farming to peasant-ownership appears so natural and simple that many economists speak with confidence of it as the certain result of Free Trade in Land. There is much to be said for this belief, and many of the presumptions opposed to it are PEASANT-OWNERSHIP IN ENGLAND. 437 demonstrably fallacious. It may be conceded that Primogeniture and Entail are constant obstacles to peasant-ownership, not only because they pro- mote the aggregation and prevent the dispersion of land, but also because they maintain an organi- sation of rural society in which the peasant-owner is altogether out of place. It may be conceded that peasant-ownership would be tried under far more favourable conditions, if there were more properties of moderate extent and more small holdings, if greater social equality should come to prevail in country districts, and if the law should cease to impose an almost prohibitory tax on buying, selling, mort- gaging, or improving estates of a few acres. It has been proved, over and over again, that in countries where these impediments do not exist such estates command the best price and the best rent, yield the best return on a given amount of capital, and are the best scbool of agricultural co-operation, as well as of domestic thrift. It has been weU pointed out that no contrary inference can fairly be drawn from instances in which squatters of irregular habits, and ■without capital or previous training, having cleared patches of barren land and imitated the routine of agriculture on the grand scale, have barely succeeded in making a livelihood, and perhaps sunk into a con- dition below that of farm-labourers. It should also be remembered that, in proportion as cottage-farmers are able to pay a higher rent for land than capitalist farmers, the difference between the selling and letting value of land loses its cogency as an argument against peasant-ownership. A capitalist farmer who can hire 438 JENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. land at thirty shillings an acre may be unwise to purchase it at £60 an acre, since he could make a better use of his capital by laying it out upon the farm, but a cottage-farmer paying £3 an acre might do wisely to relieve himself of rent altogether, if he could obtain the fee-simple at twenty years' purchase. Nor must it be taken for granted that cottagers are incapable of appreciating, or unwilling to pay for the " residential," as distinct from the agricultural, value of land. Even an Irish peasant-farmer, though he may be a mere tenant at will in the eye of the law, clings to his ancestral mud cabin as fondly as if it were a family mansion, and no less than 5,000 Irish tenants of this class eagerly seized the opportunity to buy up the fee-simple of their holdings under the provisions of the Irish Church Act. The same passionate desire for a home, strengthened by the pride of proprietorship, inspires the peasant-farmers of the Continent with the " slavish industry " of which they are so often accused, by way of re- proach, and induces them to offer a fancy price for land, which defeats the competition of wealthier bidders. All this is true, and yet it affords no adequate ground for anticipating that peasant-ownership will become a prevalent feature of rural economy in England within any appreciable time. The well-known passages in which Adam Smith describes the advantage of peasant-owners over tenant-farmers rests on the assumption that peasant-owners have either inherited their properties, or, at least, possess them unencum- bered by debt.' The pictures of peasant-ownership ' " Wealth of Nations," Book III., ch. ii. He compares the farmer to one who trades with borrowed money, and the proprietor to one who FEASANT-OWNEBSHIP AND EMIGRATION. 439 drawn by those who liave studied it in France, Belgium, Switzerland, or the Channel Islands, re- present the ripe fruit of social habits and moral sentiment cultivated for centuries in village commu- nities bearing little resemblance to an English country parish. Before an English farm-labourer can be converted into a small freeholder, he must find a plot of land suitable for his purpose, and a landowner willing to seU it for that purpose. He must have shaken off the hereditary taint of pauperism, and, instead of looking to parochial relief as the natural provision for sickness and old age, he must have accumulated a small fortune of £400 or £500, equal to some ten years' earnings. There is no imprudence in his resolving to invest this money in land, for land, at all events, yields as good a return as the Savings Bank, but, having made up his mind to invest in land, he may well pause before investing in a few acres of English soil. For £100, he and his family might be conveyed to Upper Canada, or the Western States of America, where a quarter section, or 160 acres of land, may be had at the cost of a few pounds, the payment for it being spread, under the Homestead Law, over a period of five years. Hereia consists, perhaps, the most serious obstacle to a system of peasant-ownership in England. The English farm- labourer with thrift enough to save the price of a small freehold, and with energy enough to break the spell of custom, which binds him to lifelong dependence, trades witli his own; and proceeds to argue ' that while, in the former case, a large share of the produce will be consumed by the rent, in the latter the whole produce will be at the disposal of the cultivator. 440 ENGLISH LAND AND JENGLISH LANDLORDS. with tlie workhouse for his final resting-place, is not likely to rest content with the prospect of owning a ten-acre farm. His weaker and less intelligent fellows, indeed, shrink from the discomforts of a new settler's life, and prefer to work for others under the shadow of the parish church, within reach of the village charities, and in the midst of a thousand cherished associations. But these are not the people to lay hy money for many years in the hope of living under their own vines or fig-trees. The English labourer who does this must be a man of more than ordinary educa- tion and character. The effort required to carry him so far will generally suflB.ce to carry him further, and his territorial ambition, if roused at all, will take a wider range than that of a French or Belgian peasant. Once emancipated from the spirit of predial serfdom, he will aspire to be a landowner among landowners, breathing the free air of social independence, and this ambition he can scarcely hope to satisfy in his native country. Upon these and like grounds, while it is highly probable that cottage-farming may be widely ex- tended within the next generation, it is highly im- probable that peasant-ownership, in its true sense, wiU be evolved out of it on a considerable scale. At the same time, we may confidently predict that if the sale of land should ever become easy and simple, a new race of small freeholders will rapidly spring up, possessing estates of five, ten, or twenty acres, and representing, so far, the peasant-owners of the Continent. These freeholders would not, in most instances, be derived from the class of farm-labourers, but rather from that miscellaneous class of tradespeople NEW 0LA88 OF SMALL FBEEHOLBEIiS. 441 and petty capitalists who form so large an element in county constituencies. The village carrier, wanting a paddock for a horse or two, and employment for himself at odd times — ^the village bricklayer, carpenter, and blacksmith, now beginning to rise in the world, to employ several journeymen, and even to undertake contracts at some little distance — the village innkeeper, wishing to supply himself with milk and butter, eggs and bacon — the village butcher, already a judge of sheep and cattle, enriched with the enormous profits of his own trade, and thinking to increase them by turn- ing grazier — ^the village greengrocer, with visions of market-gardening on his own account — the retired postmaster, schoolmaster, or shopkeeper from the nearest market town — such are the materials out of which a peasantry proprietary, if it be created at all in England, is probably destined to be first built up. The idea of buying their own homesteads is far more familiar to people who have lived in the suburbs of towns, where tempting chances often present themselves, and many of them would fully appre- ciate the dignity of a petty rural landlord, with a tenant under him. Instances are not wanting in which miners and other artisans working at high wages have purchased small freeholds, or obtained plots of wild land at nominal rents, erected their own houses, and exhibited a remarkable aptitude for agricultural improvement.^ Similar examples of the " slavish industry " supposed to be peculiar to con- tinental peasant-owners may be found among Scotch ' A little settlement of this kind is to be found on the property of Sir Thomas Acland, in Cornwall. 442 ENGLISH LAND AND ENOLISE LANDLORDS. orofters, most of wliom earn a part of their live- liliood by fishing or some other non-agricultural labour, and few of whom are actually proprietors of the plots which they, nevertheless, treat as their own. The speculative and hopeful temper necessary for such enterprises has yet to be developed among English farm-labourers. It may be developed with the progress of education, and land may ulti- mately come to supersede the Post Office Savings Bank as the favourite depository of surplus weekly earnings in English rural villages. But this revolution in habit and sentiment wiU take long to accomplish, and before it is accomplished the English farm-'labourer may have learned to regard emigration to America or Australia with as little repugnance as emigration to a neighbouring parish. At the same time, it is quite within the bounds of possibility that a new method of combination may be adopted, under the stress of agricultural necessity, among landowners of a higher order. Whatever be the merits of the English agricultural system, it certainly involves very heavy outgoings for superintendence. As the profits of a lucrative commercial business may be weU-nigh absorbed by unduly high salaries and exces- sive office expenses, so the profits of farming may be eaten up, if they are made to bear the charge of main- taining too many farmers' households. So long as farmers worked in their own fields, with their own hands, and were assisted by their wives and daughters in all the minor industries of the farm homestead, a great part of their income represented the wages of very efficient labour rendered by themselves and their OO-OPEItATim AGBIGULTUBE. U3 families, and another part represented interest on capital, leaving a comparatively small residue for the cost of superintendence. Now that a farmer occupying 200 ■or 300 acres is content to act as an overseer, while his wife too often disdains all out-door work, and his daughters know more of music than of poultry-keeping or dairy-management, the whole expense of his estab- lishment, far higher than it would have been in former ■days, must be charged against the value of his superin- iendence, except so far as it represents interest on .capital. Let us suppose this expense to be no more than £300 for each farm of 300 acres, the agricultural superintendence of 3,000 acres (including interest on capital) will then cost £3,000, and that of 10,000 acres wiU cost £10,000, besides all that may be spent on agency. But it may well be doubted whether one highly -trained agent-manager, at a salary of £1,000 ,a year, aided by a proper staff of ten foremen, at a salary of £100 each, would not superintend the tillage of 10,000 acres more effectively than thirty- three farmers of the modern school, especially as they would be able to employ machinery, buy wholesale, and execute large ■orders from London, far more economically. A further sum of some £4,000 must of course be set aside for interest on the farm-capital required to work 10,000 acres. But upon these assumptions, at least £4,000 might well be well saved out of £10,000, on the mere ■cost of superintendence. No doubt the "master's eye" is usually more searching than that of a paid manager, but, on the other hand, a paid manager of 10,000 acres ought to possess a much higher degree of agricultural skiU. 444 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Whether English country gentlemen would be disposed to enter into such a joint-stock partnership with each other, and to substitute a quasi-mercantile organisation for the familiar relations between landlord and tenant, is a wholly different question. Probably few would entertain the idea, unless many farms were thrown on their hands, and they were driven, as a last resource, into cultivating these farms through bailiffs. This was the very practice which prevailed, not only on demesne- lands, but on ecclesiastical and college-property in the Middle Ages, and the revival of it in a- modified form, under modem conditions, would be a strange instance of reversion to an ancient type in the development of English agriculture. It was gradually superseded four or five centuries ago by the introduction of farming leases, but these leases were held by men who ploughed, their own lands, in days when machinery was unknown, and the farmer was anything rather than a manu- facturer of food-supplies for great towns. Now that crop-raising and cattle-breeding are a science, that hand- labour is fast giving place to machine -labour, and that one large capital has prodigious advantages over many small capitals, it is at least possible that a reaction may set in towards landlord-farming, on the one side, as it may set in, under the operation of different causes, towards peasant-farming, on the other side. If this should come, to pass, it is equally possible that several landlords with contiguous estate^ may find it profitable to employ the same agent to superintend the cultivation of all. The management of Crown property, Greenwich Hospital property, and other property belonging to pubHc bodies, might probably furnish some instructive lessons, if not CO-OFEEATIVB AGBIGULTUBE. 445 actual precedents, for tlie working of such, a system, which, is, at least, one conceivable mode of relieving the land from the burden of supporting three agrarian classes.^ ^ An emment practical farmer lias lately pubUslied a calculation, showing that in his own parish, containing 2,600 acres (2,000 arable), and nine farms, a saving of nearly £2,000 a year might be effected on the working expenses of farming, by throwing all the nine farms into one, and organising all the labour of men, horses, and machinery, on co-operative principles. CHAPTEE V. This Effect to be wrought out by way of gradual Evolution, and not of sudden Eevolution. So comprehensive a reform of the English. Land System as we have been led to contemplate, will assuredly not be fully accomplished within one generation. Nor is it to be desired that measures seriously affecting the Eural Economy and Eural Grovernment of such a country as England should be carried out with the haste of revolu- tionary legislation. Time must be given, not" merely to exhaust vested interests, and to overcome selfish oppo- sition, but also to convince many enlightened minds that whatever is. admirable in English character, or noble in English society, is not vitally connected with the maintenance of the English Land System in its distinctive features. Very few of such persons would venture to, uphold Primogeniture, and EntaU, with the social and agricultural conditions which naturally result from them, as the perfect ideal of an agrarian constitu- tion. But there is a very prevalent belief among English economists and practical statesmen that, how- ever anomalous, this agrarian constitution, like the political constitution of which it forms an outwork, has grown with the growth and strengthened with the strength of the English people, until it would be highly perilous to disturb it. They admit that for other countries a more numerous proprietary, a more inde- pendent body of occupiers, and a peasantry worthy of NO AGBABIAN REVOLUTION NE0E88ARY. 447 the name may be preferable to Englisli landlordism, yearly tenancy, and a semi-pauperised class of day- labourers. But for England they would deprecate any material change, regarding this organisation, with all its faults, as the best security for a high standard of culture in the landowning class, as well as for agri- cultural improvement and civilisation in rural districts. Whatever else may be said in favour of this opinion,, it is not recommended by any historical presumptions. We- have seen that, in Saxon times, the agrarian con- stitution of England was essentially democratic ; that, in Norman tinies, ecclesiastics rather than barons were the pioneers of agricultural improvement, and the models of territorial benevolence ; that, in the England of Elizabeth, and for two centuries after the Eefor- mation, the lesser gentry and yeomanry were the bone and sinew of the landed interest ; that the dependent condition of English labourers dates from the Poor Law, and that of English farmers from a far more recent period ; that, in fact, the English Land System is not a spontaneous growth, but an artificial creation of feudal lawyers, improved by their successors in the evil days after the Eestoration, largely modified by such tem- porary causes as the high prices current during the Great War, and afterwards strengthened by a constant, flow of population towards great towns, partly conse- quent on the operation of the Land System itself We have observed the intimate connection between English landlordism and English pauperism, as well as the influence of the County Franchise, the Grame Laws, the Law of Distress, the Law of Fixtures, and other legis- lative or judicial rules on the natural relations between. 448 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. landlord and tenant. We find that the existing agrarian constitution of England is out of harmony, not only with the rural economy of the most civilised and progressive countries in Europe, but with that of the great American nation, and of all the more flourishing British Colonies. No doubt it may, nevertheless, be the best possible agrarian constitution for the people of these islands, but this must not be accepted as a self- evident truth. Why should it be supposed that rural society in England has at last settled down into its most perfect and ultimate form — ^that, having assiipi- lated and adapted itself to so many diverse conditions, it has lost the power of further assimilation or adapta- tion? Why should not law undo that which law has done? and why should custom, hitherto governed or guided by law, be stereotyped in the nineteenth century into an immutable ordinance of nature ? Equally untenable is the notion that a territorial aristocracy, and a tripartite system of agriculture, are the legitimate results of economical tendencies which cannot be reversed. It is a pure confusion of ideas to imagine that because organisation on a grand scale, with a minute subdivision of labour, are conducive to efficiency and profit in manufactures, they must needs be the one thing needful for agriculture. The experience of mankind encourages the belief that a sense of proprietorship is the most potent of all forces in extracting produce from the soil, and that no con- centration of management is so fruitful of economy as the absolute unity of management and execution secured by the fusion of landlord, farmer, and labourer into one and the same person. Because the various AGBIOULTUBAL GUST0M8 NOT IMMUTABLE. 449 parts of a complicated machine are best constructed by a number of separate artisans, or because an extensive commercial business is best divided into many separate departments, it does not follow that husbandry, the ■oldest and simplest of human arts, should be conducted on a like principle. As a matter of fact, indeed, it is not so conducted even in England, and nothing can less resemble the administration of a great manufac- tory than the administration of a great estate. The nominal owner of it is seldom the real owner, and hardly ever takes an active part in the every-day supervision of it ; the agent who fills his place is not personally interested in it ; the farmer who directs the labourer is seldom trained for his duties ; and the labourer, upon whose skill everything depends, is barely animated at all by the effective hope of pro- motion. May it not be that economical tendencies, deeper and more universal than are dreamed of in the philosophy of English landlordism, are ignored or counteracted under this peculiar system, that co-oper- ation may be destined to replace subordination as a motive power in agriculture, and that, in the end, that method of cultivation will prove to be most productive into which the cultivator puts the greatest amount of heart and thought and energy ? Be this as it may, let it be remembered, again and again, that no legislative interference with free agency, in its true sense, is involved in the proposed reform of the English Land System. If this reform should take effect, the new law of Gavelkind suc- cession on intestacy will be as permissive as the existing law of Primogenitary succession. The living -150 EXOLISn LAXI) AXn EXGLISH LANDLORDS. liead of the family in each generation, instead of being- fettered by the will of a dead ancestor, will be froo, as he is not free at present, to deal with his own property, and to regulate the inheritance of liis own children. His power of mortgaging or of selling will be unrestricted, and these processes will be vastly simplified and cheapened by a proper system of land registration and land transfer, long since adopted by less advanced nations. Even his power of settling, though limited, will not be illusory ; for not only will he be enabled to charge the estate for a widow, or younger children, but he will always have the option of directing it to be sold, and converted into monej'^ to be held on any trusts permitted in a settlement of personalty ; in which case, Avith the consent of the parties interested, it may remain undivided in the hands of one, and subject only to rent charges for the benefit of others. The courts of law, it is true, wiU no longer enforce contracts which may prejudice good agriculture, or deprive a tenant of his presumptive right to keep down ground-game, but landlords and tenants will be perfectly free to make any agreement for their mutual benefit, and only debari'ed from claiming a legal guarantee of that which the law condemns. If the result should be that landed property is more frequently divided on death than heretofore, and that fathers do not always choose to aggrandise the eldest son exclusively, but sometimes leave an out- 13'ing estate to a younger son or even to a daughter — if attachment to family-places sometimes gives way to pecuniary exigencies — if small capitalists occasionall)'' outbid noblemen and squires in the land-market, with FREEDOM OF CONTIUGT TO BE HE8PECTEI). 451 tlie advantage of cheap transfer and secure titles — if large farms come to be usually let on lease, and cottage- farms, in the hands of industrious occupiers, should here and there be transformed into cottage properties ; all this will prove, not that the rural economy of England is being forced into a strange and unnatural mould, but, on the contrary, that it has been too long left in a strange and unnatural mould, and is at last feeling the life-giving atmosphere of freedom. Such legislation has nothing in common with the ignorant prejudice against landlords, as such, fomented by demagogues in Ireland, or with schemes of which the object is to limit the amount of landed property which any individual may own. To proscribe land- lordism, in the abstract, is to proscribe tenancy ; and to extirpate the greater landlords, were that possible, without extirpating the smaller, would be to inflict a grievous injury on the whole class of tenants. In all states of rural society, it will often be found expedient for a man who owns land but has not the leisure, or the skill, or the means, or the inclination, for culti- vating it, to let it on hire to another, who perhaps could not afford to buy it. The relation of landlord and tenant is common among the small proprietors of France, Belgium, and other countries under the Code Napoleon itself, and, so far as the great English land- lords differ from these, they assuredly differ for the better, since they are in comparatively easy circum- stances, and are impelled by higher than commer- cial motives towards a generous treatment of their tenantry. These motives have probably never operated with so great force as at present, and, D D 3 452 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. though great English landlords may reside less con- stantly on their estates than in former generations, they interpret their duties, on the whole, more liberally, and give more personal attention to estate-management. As for laying down a hard and fast maximum of acreage which no landlord shall be permitted to exceed, the slightest consideration mil reveal its absurdity. The ground rental of a few score or hundred acres in London is not only far more valuable, but confers far more real power, than an absolute dominion over all Sutherlandshire. Cases might arise in which it might be necessary to check an inordinate thirst for terri- torial annexation, or an oppressive exercise of territorial rights. But these cases must be met by exceptional measures, and in the meantime, there is much less to be said against large tracts of barren soil being owned by a few great proprietors, than against the expansion of populous towns being absolutely at the mercy of "ground landlords," whether they be great or small. The rights of property, as well as the course of its descent on intestacy, are entirely within the control of the State, and if these be regulated by sound rules of policy, the extent of private estates may well be left to regulate itself. Nor would the proposed reform of the English Land System tend, in the smallest degree, to weaken the idea of property, which is the birthright of civilised society. That idea is most liable to be weakened by causes which Eree Trade in Land, with the aboli- tion of Primogeniture and Entail, would go far to remove. Communistic sentiments are most readily propagated when the social contrast between the owner lUGIITS OF rnOFEBTY ^lOT THEEATEXED. 453 and cultivator o£ the soil is too flagrrant, and when the former, enriched by the foresight and industry of others, is content to be a mere drone or absentee. Property which has been inherited excites far more jealousy than property which has been purchased, especially if it has been purchased by the hard earnings of labour. If the effect of Primogeniture were to create a complete monopoly of land, instead of merely to promote its aggregation, there would assuredly be a communistic agitation against landlordism, and the best safeguard for the universal recognition of proprietary rights is to make landed property savour of monopoly as little as possible by making it universally marketable. There is no room for agrarian communism where land is within reach of all who have saved enough to buy it, and nothing strengthens the idea of property so much as facility and frequency of transfer. For the act of selling is in itself the most direct assertion 'of ownership, and title by purchase is acknowledged to be the strongest of all possible titles. On the other hand, it is evident that ownership in fee-simple is the most perfect, as the " limited ownership " of English settlements is the least perfect type of ownership. To place a man in the ostensible position of an owner, and yet to deny him the ordinary powers of an owner, is not to uphold the rights of property, but to derogate from them, and to give occasion for questions which seldom arise in com- munities where land is held in fee-simple and much subdivided. Foreign experience teaches us that the instincts of proprietorship are cherished with the utmost intensity by peasant-owners, who show a mutual respect for the rights of property far beyond that which prevails 454 EXGLISJI LAXD AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. in England. This is not merely true of Eepublican France and Switzerland, but of Imperial Eu-ssia and Austria — not merely of Latin races, but of Teutonic and Sclavonic races — not merely of Europe, but of America and the Colonies — not of civilised races only, but of barbarous tribes, once emancipated from com- munal ownership. That property is robbery, is an idea which has never taken root in any society of peasant- owners, nor indeed did the suggestion of it originate in the country. It is essentially the crude and wild conceit of a Parisian theorist, caught up as the watchword of a crusade against capital, rather than against property in land, which in France excites less envy than any other form of property. No doubt, it may be truly said that "no man made the land," and this principle applies, more or less, to cultivated land, as well as to land in its natural state, inasmuch as even cultivated land depends largely for its value upon elements which no human industry employed upon that land has called into existence — such as the construc- tion of towns, roads, bridges, harbours, and railways, on adjoining land, without the co-operation, or even against the will, of the fortunate landowner. Upon this ground, as well as upon others, the State has in all ages claimed a paramount dominion over land which has never been claimed over personalty. According to feudal law in England, the very highest order of landowners were but tenants of the Crown, and could not dispose of their estates by will for centuries -after wills of personalty acquired legal validity. But, although landed property has always been regarded as peculiarly subject to State- regulation, there is no other kind of property so conse- BIGHTS OF PBOPEBTY NOT THREATENED. 455 crated and protected by the common opinion of mankind. The right to reap what a man has sown, and the right to profit by what he had reclaimed, were amply recog- nised and enforced when the right of trading was crippled by innumerable extortions, and that of lending money on usury was placed under the bail of the law. Whatever heresies respecting the rights incident to landed property may now be afloat in England are chiefly encouraged by the severance of interest between the landlord, the farmer, and the labourer. Landlord- right and tenant-right are thus brought into occasional conflict with each other, and the modern champions of a landless peasantry are sometimes led to echo the language of John Ball and Jack Cade. Nothing would do so much to dissipate such chimeras as a relaxation of the caste-like barrier which now separates the three great agricultural classes. If more landlords were farmers, and more farmers were landlords, and more labourers had the prospect of becoming farmers or landlords, or landlord-farmers, there' wo aid be less disposition to challenge the rights of landed property, though it is to be feared that its duties might not be so liberally interpreted.^ This consideration naturally suggests a wholly dif- ferent question, and one which the advocates of agrarian reform in England are bound to entertain impartially. It may fairly be urged that English landlords, with all their faults, possess the characteristic virtues of English ' In M. de Laveleyo's Essay on the " Land System of Belgium and Holland," published in " Systems of Land-Tennre," will be found some interesting remarks on the effect of peasant-ownership in averting social- istic dangers. He points out that, although Flemish tenants are far more ground down than Irish tenants, agrarian outrage is unknown in Belgium. 456 ENGLISH LAXD AND EXGLI8E LANDLORDS. gentlemen, and that a more democratic system of rural economy would involve a lower standard o£ public responsibility, as well as of culture and manners, in the most influential classes of rural society. Now, in esti- mating the force of this objection, it is material to bear in mind that, however admirable may be the ideal character of an English country gentleman, it is a character of recent growth. The«rural civilisation of the Middle Ages was a civilisation not of castles but of monasteries, and more true refinement was to be found among the mercantile communities of towns than among the barons and knights, who looked down upon them. Even after feudalism gave way to a new order of social relations, and for at least two centuries after the Eeformation itself, English noblemen and squires, with a few bright exceptions, seemed to have employed their leisure in rough sports and pastimes, rather than in literary and artistic pursuits, in agricultural experi- ments, or in the benevolent supervision of their depen- dents. Doubtless there were sometimes Falklands and Hampdens, as there were always Eoger de Coverleys and Squire Allworthys, among the landed gentry of England, but the slow progress of social improvement in the six- teenth and seventeenth centuries is sufficient to show how little the " duties of property " were understood by the great mass of proprietors. The utter neglect of popular education, to which the Eeformation had given a temporary impulse, and the gradual degradation of the agricultural labourer, into the condition from which he was partially rescued by the new Poor Law, are con- clusive proofs of indifference or incapaciby on the part of the class which exercised an almost despotic control SHOBTGOMINGS OF ENGLISH LANDLOBBISM. 457 over rural districts, until a period within living memory. It was tlie Nonconformist bodies, and notably the Methodists, who first roused among the masses that sentiment of self-respect and spiritual brotherhood which is closely allied to a belief in the natural equality of man. It was the parochial clergy who mainly established schools for the people in the country, and who long bore the main burden of their maintenance out of their scanty incomes, while the squire too often grudged a niggardly subscription. Happily, the last and present generations have witnessed a wonderful change for the better in the fulfilment of territorial obligations. Few country gentlemen now look upon themselves as mere receivers of rent ; most are anxious to make their cottagers and tenants comfortable ; yet how many reside long enough on their properties, or devote themselves earnestly enough to estate manage- ment, local government, or county business to be greatly missed, if they should give place to strangers ? Certainly the allegation that a partial restriction of the Game Laws will drive away the landed aristocracy from their country houses would, if true, constitute the most damaging condemnation of the institution, and the mere fact of its being frequently made proves how lightly the more serious ties of property are regarded by its most eager partisans. But this allegation is not true. The best repre- sentatives of the landed aristocracy would be retained, by a process of natural selection, under the new Eng- lish Land System ; it is only the worse that would be eliminated. The love of power will always be gratified by the possessioji of land. The man with a 458 EXGLISII LANB AXD ENGLItSII LAXBLOEDS. real taste for county business, local government, and estate management will cling to liis paternal acres, and Avill not be ashamed to economise for a while until his brothers' and sisters' portions are paid off. Country life will always have its attractions for those who love agriculture and those who love nature, for those who aspire to play a leading part in the little world of the parish or the county, and for those who seek a refuge from the feverish excitement of commercial, professional, and social competition, for the scholar, and the gentleman, no less than for the retired statesman or colonist. The landlords who use their family -places as mere sporting villas, or pleasure-grounds for London friends, seldom inviting their country neighbours, or troubling themselves to attend the Board of Gruardiaiis and the Bench, may possibly find their position less enviable under the new Land System ; but, if they would part with their estates, they are the very land- lords who can best be spared, and the loss of whose influence would be least regretted. Even if Free Trade in Land should uproot far more of the existing landed gentry than is at all probable, the social effect of such a change would be little perceived. The " landed aristocracy " of England is no longer an exclusive noblesse of ancient lineage, but rather a terri- torial plutocracy, largely recruited from the wealthiest class of traders; and this profound, though insen- sible, modification in its character appears to shock no ardent admirer of the existing Land System. Bankers, stockbrokers, and brewers, millowners, shipowners, Manchester warehousemen, and merchants of every degree, are already naturalised within the magic circle XEW CLASS OF LAXDED GEXTRT. 459 of county society, and even admitted freely to matri- monial alliances. In some counties near London, the number of long-settled families is extremely small, and parvenus are not only to be found among the most active county magistrates, but also among the most popular county members. The fact that such parvenus fall so easily into the duties of their new position is surely encom-aging, for it shows that blood and breeding are not the only qualities that make a countiy gentleman. It may even be doubted whether men of this class are inferior in real culture to the beads of old families around them, and whether, in particular, as large a proportion of the former as of the latter have not received a University education. Now, the extension of University education has done far more for national refinement, in England as in Ger- many, than any traditions of aristocratic breeding ; and if modern English squires compare favourably with their hard-drinking ancestors, it is partly because more of them come under the spell of that humanisiug disci- pline. At all events, country gentlemen, as a body, are certainly more cultivated than at any former period, and if Tree Trade in Land should introduce into their ranks a larger infusion of men with a varied experience of the world, it would not tend to deaden, but to quicken, the intellectual life of counties. The days are past, however, when the inhabitants of rural districts were entirely dependent for their civili- sation upon the influence of the hall or the parsonage. TTe may confidently expect that with the spread of popular education, and the steady growth of indepen- dence among farm -labourers under a less antiquated 460 EXGLISR LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Land System, tlie necessity for a patronising superin- tendence will become less and less, while gentleness and courtesy of manners will gradually penetrate, as it has in France, into rustic cottages. There are already many villages in the north of England where a considerable degree of social equality prevails, and where the wage-earning classes have learned to act and think for themselves, with little guidance from their betters. As village-clubs are substituted for public-houses, as voluntary schools pass under the management of School Boards, as the spirit of co-oper- ative association gains strength, as household suffrage encourages a sense of personal dignity, and, above all, as the ever-increasing facilities of travelling promote emigration from one part of England to another, the patriarchal rule of country parishes must inevitably give way to a more democratic poHty. It is this last condition, more than any other, which distinguishes American from English villages, banishing the verj- idea of stagnation or repose, and compelling every citizen to rely on self-help rather than on charity. It would be vain indeed, even if it were not unwise, to desire that Old England should assimilate her rural economy to that of New England, which, again, differs widely from that of the Western States ; but it is not vain to regard the English farm-labourer as capable of being elevated to a far higher status than he now occupies. Those who are best acquainted with country life know that every callage already contains farm- labourers of high character and shrewd intelligence, who may be safely trusted with great responsibility on behalf of their employers. If this be so, why should THE PAST AND THE FUTURE LAND SYSTEM. 461 they be incapable of the duties attaching to citizenship and land-holding, and why should not the whole class to which they belong reach the same level, under far more favourable circumstances? Doubtless, before this ideal can be realised, new habits and traditions must be matured in minds eminently conservative by nature, but these habits and traditions have been matured among the peasantry of other countries, and were once the inheritance of the English peasantry. Once more, let us ever bear in mind that no legis- lative reform of the English Land System can be either beneficial or lasting, if it be not wrought out in accord- ance with natural laws of evolution. We cannot revive the agrarian institutions of our ancestors, or borrow directly those of foreign nations. Nevermore, iq these days of rapid locomotion and keen competition, shall the freeholders of a township, bound together by mani- fold family ties, be united in a political and agrarian partnership, wielding the powers of lawgivers and judges in their petty town-moots, with little thought of interference from the King's of&cers or Council. Never- more shall we see, except in fancy, the Eoyal forests or the manorial wastes, the rude husbandry of the common fields, the indiscriminate hospitality of the feudal castle, or the distribution of alms at the Abbey gate, which formed such marked features in the rural life of mediaeval England. The easy routine and im- memorial customs of pre-scientific agriculture have been disturbed by causes of which the effects cannot be reversed, and little is to be learned by modern farmers, except thrift and simplicity of manners, from the prac- tice of their predecessors before the beginning of the 462 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLOBDS. present century. Even from the experience of the Continent, the United States, and the Colonies, though much can be learned, nothing can be copied without the most careful adaptation. The new rural economy of England must, above all, be essentially English. It cannot be modelled upon that of France, where the ground for a new Land System had been cleared and levelled by a Eevolution ; nor upon that of North Grermany, where the omnipotence of the Crown trans- formed feudal tenures into free ownership by a series of Eoyal edicts ; nor upon that of Eussia, where the same means were employed to develop a pre-existing system of communal property upon the ruins of serfdom ; nor upon that of Switzerland, which Nature has subdivided by mountain barriers into little village-republics ; nor upon that of Belgium, where methods of agriculture are largely determined by the density of population massed together in its numerous towns. Still less can it be made to resemble that of India, where agrarian institutions of pre-historic antiquity have been re- moulded into a land-settlement imposed by a conquer- ing, though beneficent, Power. Even that of the United States can furnish no precedent for its con- struction, for no Act of Parliament can divest an English landscape of its historical features, or infuse the spirit of new settlers into the inhabitants of an old country, or endow England with the boundless prairies of Western America. Whatever be the nature and degree of the changes hereafter to be wrought out in the English Land System, they will assuredly be governed and moderated by the same happy peculiarities of English national life which have enabled this country FOUECAST OF THE FUTUItE LAND SYSTEM. 463 to support a most unequal division of landed property, and a most precarious form of agricultural tenancy, with less injury or conflict of interests than foreigners are able to conceive. The distinctive virtues of the national character will assuredly not be undermined by the extension of Tree Trade to land, the abolition of limited ownership, or the restoration of Gavelkind suc- cession. The love of home, manifested now even by cottage-tenants holding at the will of a landlord, can hardly fail to be strengthened by security of tenure — still more by the pride of ownership. The respect for territorial families will not be diminished, when the hereditary possession of laad for several generations has become a true sign of hereditary merit. Public spirit will not be abated, nor constitutional instincts quenched, when a greater activit}' of municipal self-government, with greater social equality, has found its way into country parishes. The sense of national unity will not be enfeebled, when the chasm between landlordism and pauperism has been narrowed from both sides, and when the distinctions between class and class no longer turn upon their relative positions in a three-fold agrarian hierarchy. The population of an English village- community will be less stationary and more fluctuating than heretofore, for the new race of English landlords ' will not be so deeply rooted in the soil, while tenants will transfer their capital more readily from one farm to another, and enterprising labourers will be constantly draughted ofi" by emigration. But the motives for remaining, and for settling, in the country will also be stronger than ever, and England, already the Grarden of Europe, will more fully deserve that title, if the chEfrms 464 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. of its picturesque scenery, and the supervision o£ its varied agriculture, shall come to be shared by a more numerous proprietary. Land will not cease to be a luxury, when it becomes a luxury accessible to every rank of Englishmen ; nor will the new order of English landlords be less enviable or less powerful, because it will embrace within itself a larger and more composite section of the English people. APPENDIX I. {Contributed !)i/ A. C. HUMPHREYS-OWES, Esq.) THE ABOLITION OF FEUDAL TENURES AND THE LAND TAX. The following statement may be taken as embodying a preva- lent misconception respecting the origin and nature of tie Land Tax in connection with the abolition of feudal tenures : — " The landed interest . . . find it convenient to ignore such facts as the following : — That in the reign of Charles II. their ancestors in Parliament invented Excise Duties on the people, only as substitutes for their own Rents previously paid to the State ; that the Land Tax of four shillings in the pound, devised as a remedy for that gross legislative iniquity, has been frittered away to one of that amount on the value as it stood in 1692." — FinaTicial Reformers' Almanac for 1880, p. 145. The excise seems to have been an iavention of the Long Par- liament. It first occurs in 1643. The 14th Ordinance of that year (Scobell's Acts and Ordinance) is entitled " A new Impost on Several Commodities mentioned in a Schedule," and the 26th Ordi- nance of the same year is entitled " Additional Articles to the Ordinance of Excise.'' The names of the commodities are not printed in either case, but no doubt might be found on searching the original records. In 1643 (Ord. 29) an excise was imposed on flesh, victuals, and salt. By Ord. 41 of 1644 an excise was im- posed on alum, copperas, hats, caps, &c. By Ord. 43 of the same year the excise of strong waters was mitigated. By Ords. 39 and 40 of 1649 moneys borrowed for the Commonwealth were charged on the excise. Ord. 50 of the same year contains elaborate provisions with regard both to public and private brewers. By Ord, 3 of 1650 an alteration was made in the way of collecting the excise on private brewing. In 1656 the whole system seems to have been re-aiTanged and regulated |by the 19th Ordinance of that year, which is pi-inted in full in Scobell. E E 466 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. It is clear, therefore, that the excise was, in its origin, a popular, not a reactionary tax. The history of the abolition of feudal tenures is admirably stated in Digby's History of the Law of Real Property, ch. IX. As early as Magna Oharta the burden of the incidents of these tenures had been matter of bargain between the owner and the tenants. See extracts in Digby, ch. III., sec. 1. As the military organisation of society passed into the industrial, their irksomeness increased, though to some extent it was relieved by the operation of the old law of Uses. But the legislation of Henry VIII., and especially the creation of the Court of Wards, 32 Henry VIII. c. 46, greatly intensified their pressure and unpopularity. A proposal was made in the 18th James I., for their commutation into a perpetual rent to be paid to the Crown (Coke, 4th Inst., p. 303, para. 6), but this fell through, though much approved by Lord Coke. The Court of Wards, however, and all feudal incidents, were abolished by both houses in February, 1645-6, and all tenures in chivalry and in capita of the king turned into free and common socage. The resolutions effecting this are not printed in Scobell, but are stated by Digby, ubi sup., to be entered in viii. Lords Journals p. 183. Their provisions, however, were repeated by the Parliament of 1656, chap. 4, and made retrospective to the 24th of February, 1645-6. The statute 12 Car. II. c. 24, is little more than an amplifica- tion of the Act of 1656, and the customs and excise imports of 1660 are in like manner substantially the same as those of 1656. The suggestion, therefore, that the abolition of the tenures in chivalry was part of the retrograde legislation of the Restoration Parliament is absolutely groundless. Whatever the merits of the measure may be, they are imijutable solely to the Long Parliament and the Lord Protector Cromwell. All that the Restoration Parliament (servile as it was) did was to confirm against the Crown rights which the subject had possessed for more than four- teen years. With regard to the more substantial part of the allegation, viz., that burdens which had formerly been borne by landowners only, were transferred to the nation at large, it is not possible to speak with such perfect certainty. Several points, however, are overlooked by those who take the view adopted by the compilers of the Financial Reformers' Almanac. APPENDIX L 467 First. — A considerable part of the national soil was never held in chivalry bvit in socage, or some analogous tenure, or in frankalraoigne. Whatever pretence of equity there may be against the present owners of land formerly held in chivalry, cannot obviously extend to these lands. Secondly. — The extent of the burdens imposed on tenants in chivalry, though somewhat variable, only varied within limits strictly defined. Clearly the nation at large cannot even pretend to claim anything but a contribution bearing the same proportion to the present national income as the revenue from the Court of Wards bore to the national income (say) in 1645. Thirdly. — The idea that the excise was substituted for the profits of the feudal tenures in the way suggested is shown to be erroneous from the fact that these duties were levied as early as 1643, while the feudal tenures were not abolished until 1645-6. The courtly flourishes of the Act of Charles II. ought not to disguise the fact that a mode of raising revenue originated by the Long Parliament and continued through the Commonwealth was adopted under the Restoration. The " assessments " of the Long Parliament and of the Commonwealth and the Land Tax Act of William and Mary were probably an efiective substitute in the seventeenth century for the profits of the Feudal Tenures. At any rate, it is not an unfair inference that measures which approved themselves to Roundheads and Cavaliers in one generation, and to the Whig Parliament of the next, were in the circumstances equitable and politic, even though they may have lacked the complete precision which we expect in the financial legislation of our own day. THE LAND TAX. The statements on this subject at p. 145 of the Almanac are utterly misleading. The act referred to (4 W. and M. c. 1) is entitled " An Act for granting an Aid of four shillings in the pound." It enacts (sec. 2) " That their Majesties shall have and receive the rates and assessments hereinafter mentioned of and from every person . . . For every £100 of ready money and debts (due to him) and for every £100 worth of goods, wares, merchandises, or other chattels or other personal estate, the sum of 24s." Sec. 3 imposes what we should call an income tax of four E E 2 468 ENOLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. shillings in the £ on the salaries, &c., of all servants of the Crown, except officers of the army and navy on actual service. Sec. 4 imposes a similar tax on the yearly value of manors, lands, &c. The charge on the capitalised value of personalty imposed by the 2nd section is arrived at by assuming the interest of money to be £6 per cent, per annum. Four shillings in the £ on that assumed income is of course 2 is. The Act of 1692 was, in fact, an Income Tax Act with three modifications. (1.) The charge on incomes arising from mercantile capital was levied not on the actual income, but on that which it was assumed the capital would produce. (2.) All personalty, whether productive or not, was taxed. Thus, if a man had a picture worth i£l,000, he would pay 4s. in the £ on £60, i.e., £12 per annum. (3.) Professional earnings were not taxed at all. Throughout the Long Parliament and under the Commonwealth " assessments/' as they were called, were levied. These consisted of fixed sums payable monthly or at other short periods. No full text of any ordinance relating to these assessments is printed in Scobell until the 12th Ordinance of 1656. That Act provided for the raising in three monthly instalments of £180,000, to which every county (including counties of towns and cities) was to contribute a sum fixed by the Act. This contribution was to be levied from each district by com- missioners (whose names are given in the Act), " By a pound rate on the several divisions, &c., aforesaid, for all and every their lands, tenements, hereditary annuities, rents, profits, parks, warrens, goods, chattels, stock, merchandise, offices, and other real or personal estate whatsoever, according to the value thereof, that is to say, so much upon every twenty shillings rent or yearly value of land and real estate, and so much upon money, stock, or other personal estate, by an equal rate (wherein every twenty pounds in money, stock, or other personal estate, shall bear the like charge as shall be laid upon every twenty shillings yearly rent or yearly value of land "). The chief difierence between these Commonwealth assessments and the " aid " of 4 W. and M. was that in the former case the interest on capital was assumed to be £5 per cent., not £6, and that the sum payable was decided on and apportioned between the different counties, &c., leaving the counties themselves to fix the rate of APPENDIX I. 469 contribution of their inhabitants, while in the latter the rate at which contribution should be made was fixed without reference to the amount required. In both cases, however, personalty was taxed equally with land, and on the same principle, viz., that of taking its capital value and charging the rate on the income which that sum would produce at the legal rate of interest. In fact, the statute of 1692 was the skUful development, by a seventeenth century Chancellor of the Exchequer, of the archaic subsidy and assessment into something closely resembling the modern income tax, affecting real and personal property alike. To recapitulate. The excise was imposed by the Long Parlia- ment, in 1643. The tenures in chivalry were abolished in 1645-6, two and a half years later. There can, therefore, be no question as to the two having been originally independent of each other. No doubt the excise was granted to Charles 11. by the Act which confirms the abolition of the tenures in chivalry, and is stated to be a recompense for the profits arising from them. But both the abolition of these tenures, and the levying of the excise duties, were early Acts of the Long Parliament, and were confirmed under Cromwell. What- ever may now be thought of them, both measures were obviously then acceptable to the people. Again, the tenures in chivalry only affected a portion of the soil of England. The loss of revenue from their abolition cannot, there- fore, be alleged as a reason for taxing the whole of the land. Further, the so-called Land Tax was not, nor were the earlier forms of taxation from which it was evolved, solely charged on land. On the contrary, they were universal charges on land and personalty ; and it may be remarked that it taxed a variety of the latter (move- able chattels not used for p\irposes of commerce), which nowadays only pay through the Probate and Legacy Duties. Lastly.- — The whole contention of the Almanac (p. 26), that landowners of the present day, even if they have acquired their property by purchase, may be charged with the same, or the like obligations as (it is a,lleged) were borne by their predecessors centuries ago, is one which ought not to enter into practical poKtics. For more than 230 years, land in England has been bought, sold, mortgaged, settled, and dealt with in every possible way, on the faith that it shall bear certain burdens of rates, &c., variable in their 470 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANBLOBDS. amount, but applicable only to fixed objects, and that beyond those, all taxes which the exigencies of the State require, shall be borne by all the property of the country as equally as may be. To impose a special tax on land at the present day, would disturb that sense of security upon which all property depends for its value. The working of such legislation may be realised best by a single example. Ten years ago, a self-made man invested the savings of his lifetime on mortgage of a farm on wheat land; shortly after, he died, leaving the mortgage money as the sole provision for his widow and children. The farming panic of 1878-9 came. The mortgagor is bankrupt. The rents of the property just pay the interest on the mortgage. Could it be proposed, with any show of justice, that in 1880 a tax of 20 per cent, should be levied on this, upon what is at the best a dubious assumption, that in 1646 the predecessors in title of the mortgagor got rid unfairly of some liabilities to the State ? The foregoing remarks have not been prompted by any hostility to the principle of direct taxation, supported with so much earnest- ness and ability by the Financial Reform Almanac. They are in- tended solely to remove some misconceptions which, while they exist, must necessarily make it difficult, if not impossible, for a considerable number of Reformers to accept the Almanac as an exponent of their APPENDIX II. {Contribuied Si/ A. C. HUMFHBETS-OWEN, Esq.) LIABILITY OF PERSONALTY TO POOR RATE. It is usually supposed that Poor Rates are, historically, a charge exclusively imposed on land, in consequence of the secularisation of Church lands at the Reformation ; but this supposition is at least doubtful, if not positively erroneous. The obligation rests on 43 Eliz. c. 2, sec. 1, enacting {int. al.) that certain persons therein mentioned shall " raise weekly, or other- wise (by taxation of every inhabitant, parson, vicar, and other, and of every occupier of lands, houses, tithe-impropriate, propriations of tithes, coal mines, or saleable underwoods, in the said parish, in such competent sum or sums of money as they shall think fit), a convenient stock of flax, hemp, wool, thread, iron, and other ware and stuff, to set the poor on work," 1 1 1 1 I I S 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 o o Ph « CO ^_, C55 - l-H CD CO CO U3 CO «5 CO OCN»OOIr-(M^CO ■<*< oo (M CO oo t— o CD cs r- CM P^ CO O^ o Oi Ttl t^ CO co^co_^o^cq^ ^ -* t^ o vO t— oo CO O tJ^ CO ^ ■tH l-H -"^ ^CO W im" -^ rH t- «0 CO t^ 05 CO rH OS OS CO CM t^ WIS W ^- C^ CD OS OS (M ■^ lO # cq o 00 (M CO vO (M ■-H CO t— CO o CO IC CO Th o t— ■«J< CO CI o »£3 t-^ ^ c<> COCDOOOOOI>-t-- CO CD^ CM CD^ CO OS CO 00 t^ "<3< oi ■+^ lo" lo GS CO Ol l-H 00 o r* CO o 00 CO CO t>^Cs w^ 00 CO cd cq CO « CD ■-H r-l oo rH OS I>- O CO CO VO vc OS CO cs CO t— 1>- to o -^ vO CD CD C^ t- -^ r-J^ 1^- CO .-i CO CO CM^tO^vC^GO CJ >-* ■"^ l-H i-H '~* i-h" (N '"' ■"• F-( \ §13 t o I--(M CO ,-( OS OS O rH CSI (N CO rH CO O (M rt* ,_, O 'sf* CO l-H « CO ^§ O CO »o CD OOO-^COCNt-OOCO CO C3S lO «3 CO •^ w:s ■* us (M lO COOiCOeDC3it^OOOiOi^-t~- 1^-00 «3 OS o <^ s°° CD CO f> )c4 «3t^0lC0l--C0-GOC7SO r-i CM CO ^ ^ CD t-00 OS o (M o o o o o o o O O O rH l-H rH fSi ro f^^ COaOOOOOCOSOCOOOQOQOCOCOOOCOOOCOOOaO 00 00 00 CO CO H ""* '"' ^~* '"' l-H r-H 1-i ■"* ■"" '"' F-H l-t 478 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. o o o t3 a S w B . o t~ Eh 00 M a g e go H 2 S « w J fa "^ l-i O S ■a I o ^ fc ^ H () ;> H O M ^ w is n H Em O 1^ ^ C8 (X, » (V, >« s c':Dt^cf:>a'-^c-'icO'^i'n':Dt^coaiO'-<'>ico-^^oiDt^ s (M(MC-l'>l 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 -' I cs IT- c-1 -*< o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 co^r-n" CO COi— (CMCO.-('«t-.-l.=^ 1 o ^ "-I i-H (M ■^C0Q0'*CSGiC0(M-'+<>0»'^OCCS0C0CD-*C0CS''iHCS(MOCirM o 0«>CS>^OC5eO'«:t*0-t;^Ci^Ot--j_C&c^_^iC^«^l~O_00C^I_»Crcq^OC0O_CS^I>--^ S & -)h'"co"-h I— I o'co'iM^'M co"e£rco"i-- CI ccTira l>-iMCOO0Di— <'-t-1^COCOCOi~--t— lpHrHClCOrMr-IC0CNiO-rJH'*i«5'^"^mi>->C COOCOTt^i-H^t^o^i-H_co_cs^cq^co^oq_e>^c30_o co ^oo co oo -^ '^'^ 2 s QcT co^ cT t-H^ gT co" cT -rtT QtT i-T w^ i-H^ o ^CO^t-HOit^Oi-cCSO'^Ciirai— l:^«':?vt5-*fOOCSCSO «f5OC0r-( WrH CI^COT*<(M-otoc3<©vot^or-iO'^eDCir-oOi— -i-(voC0C0C^«>O«C0Q0 I <0 O ■tJ^^C o" 'kd' i< cT .-T > ra" crT C'f o" --^r cT co" ocT oo J^ (d' i>^ co" cT Ph o C<]l--Cs»0«eDVCC001l^OO».r5 0COCO.-H<0--(^OOr-iOO Oli-'CJi— Ir-((M COi-HCO«3i-HCDr^CD-^(MTi-CO'rJ^ CO'T-OtM^OiMCSOCOvOi— iTjfCOOOO J CO .-1 <0 QO ^ 1 1 1 [ 1 1 oic^t^t^r^t^Oit-^'ncioo-^^-^ '''''''■'' rHn-IW5CSr-HtO »0-*<(MCO rH ^ C^ O Tj^^ CO »t^ « Gl"*t--C?SvoOCO(MC3S(MOClCOCOWS'*COtr-COi-HCOCOOC> CO'CC3COCOO'-«OOCOCOCOCOCM»OCOCOOOOS^OO^»i3COQG 1 '^'^'"i.'^'*!'^'^^'^-^"^'^'"!,^'^'^^"^'"!.^'^ ^^ ^^^*^'^ V r-t ■^i— ccotMoicocoTHMMH ccTci'" oo"co^t^creo"ws"i--rcrcru'5''.^cr OSfMOi>*OOi-(TjH'*Oi— i-*Oi.-( COCO"-l>-t^tDC00SfMU3OQ0>- '"*'^COcOi-H^t-.COC0(M"«t<(Nr^ # OOiOOl'Mi— icOOi-OCOiOCOOOCOOCO-^CqiMr-iOSOOOCOCXJOS -2 OOCSCOCOCOr-tfMCOCOr-ti— i0i'i#^C-MI:^tOC».-iCOCOOO l>-"*<:001CO»OOSCSf-Ct>.<:OOOi-<0'#T*4'<#(OOCOiMCO-C5 C0vr3Ot^Ttt'«!* ea i-H -^ c J ca to 00 c ) lO CO o> f CO '^■^C D»n(MOSCDt^COOSOCOCSCOCOCO'NCOvOif-OCOCOTt-'^CO(N^O 500OOQ0C0C0CS00(MI>-OQ0>— tOOCOCOCO'^O -(i-Hi>.COTtiC#COCD.-l C0*^V0C0i^00jCSOi— i'MCO-rHvt5COl>-C0010^HMCO->*(U3C01^ (M'M(MiM'MCM(MeOCOCOeOCOCOCOCOCOCO"t*<-^-^"d<">*<"^"«*f^ oooooooooooocoGoajcocooooooocococoooooooooooaoooco APPENDIX IV. 4.79 <»ooi-Hc^icO"4ico-^voor-coa>0'-HMcO'rt<*ooi-^coc:i -^ "**i »0 »ra 10 ^O ^O iQ k.*^ lO vO 'O 50 CO CO QD CO O O to 5D «D 1^ l^ t— 1-^ 1^ 1^ t^ 1-— l~- 1"- COCOt»CO0OCOC»C»<»(»0O00COCOCOCOCOC»COODOSCOC»0OCOCC00COCOCO0O00 »0 10 Oi (M OS -^ O M t- i-( O O'OO CDi— ii— i500ar^l>-0*OCOTt-C5CO>Dl-^00r-i(Mi— (>f5COCO(MOi"^COCOCOCO CO'M"*Tt-(MCO"^Oi-Ht— vOQOCOCir— CItJICOOOOI:^ -t^i— lCOCOO"»*COC0 1-— I— (O-#C0C0>0iOi— (CO-«*HCOCOCO>^OCOI^-CO»CitOCO(Ni-HCOCOCOTt4COr^ I>-COCOt^COCO"*(MOOOG3Cit^"tti50COt--l— Of-H-^i— (COOO-^COCOf— (GSCOGO>— I Ot^COCDCOCOCOQOOiiOi-HOOO io'>* Ci t-^ iS t^ ^ 1-^ --^C0 1^-^C0OC00iC^C0-*»ra OSTt.001>-C0OCDl--0DCs^0CiC0Oa5t— -co fH »— I f^ rH i-H .—I .— I CJ i-H >0 X-^CO "^ " cO l>- CO Oi MiO.-HI--C0C5C000i-H'-+Ci-H.-HVO-rJHOCOC^COr-II>.C5COOe-"lCO COrH'-jfiCOOOCDt^'-HOi-HOOiracOi— iC-lCOCOCSl-^Oi.CDTti'^COCOt-OO'-'COOCO •as" cd" vt5^ th^ r-^ "-iT c^ CO* c4^ cr otT k.o^ o^ OSi--QO-^QOO'^COOSCOGi»^OCOOi— it^COCOC01r^r-(i-Hl--COCO"*^i— iCOi-HOvro CSCit^t~-Ci«5CO'J.-^C*50>OOiOOt-"*50i— ICO o rH ■-< C-l CO CO CO ^ . ■COCOCOCOr-i(MC-c•^0(^^co»oooco»^0':o-t^>o^^^o».o(^^co C-t^i-HC"tf3-rtHOOvO >-i^»O^CS 00^ CO (M CO CO t~- -^ CO_C*3^0^0^i-H^ro (N CO --^^CD CO-CsOOI>-»OCOFHl-- i-T cq" c^" co^ oT QtT c-f co' CO** cT > d^ ccT 10^ c^r i>^ i>r oT ocT -^^ c^" r^ r^ c^cO(»ococ^>Q^--'-^^-lcol>-ciOOcol>.o»o(^^co^o:i005■^cocD»ooco^~-■^— I c?ioocovo-T^cD-^vocoi^Tf050iCicoi*icou:icoco :3 -H.— ica.-(rHiMfMC-1COC<)C>CO»!OvOCS01>.TtCiCOCOCOOCOif5-^r-(T-H OeDCO!Mt~-I>-(MCOCO vO_CO^'-( O^O^i-^CO^O >— I GO "-J^M CO^CO^CO^.— ( CO^CO_^r-i (M CO f-l as M'T^Ti-Tb- ocr-*">-H cTi^os oc-icoos-s*!— i-t^Tcoi— t(oco^Gs>-Hco"oio »o" F-T i-T -^ c^ t^iOi— •"^t'-vOCi.-iCO'— (--HOi-HOSC-lCOT-HCOi— iCO>-Hi.OCli— (ClOiNi-Hr-iC^lcqcO 0JOQ0"^-<*<"*-^u0C0 1-^Jr-t— ■^l;^OC0'-Hl>.CC0G5 coco— It— tCr-«OsvOt-->-H^COCOU5CriOCO"r*— ICOO>— iCOOcOCO-^OSCOCOOS(M^r^COiCtMCO(M05COCOI>-i>--<*< i--v0-*l>-C0CDt^(MC00i>0C0Ci(NC01>-iMOC0traTf-ht— lesii— i^HtNcoco-^eo ■^C^lCOCir-iOOC-V0fMlr^OOCSIG0t---rJ^.-iC0C0O(MQ0I^-C<1^0 05C0C0i— iCOCDCni— ■^(Mi-I.-I ''-C0t~--«»0"* t-CiCOCStMOiOlCNCOOCli— IK0OC0C005C0 "rt<^ CO^ "<*^^ O N U5 O M CO 0_Jr~ C5 r-i >t5 Tft— <'-lvoaiiOOClW(MCOCO'OCO'^'f5GSOCOCOCOOOcO»-0(MOOCOCS»000 O ■^'O lOCOiM.— i-rt1CO iT*<»ococ5»rsi-(.-ii~-cocot^coi— ICO £?i^»c> Ci_o_i-H_io^co_co^i-H^co^i-- r- co^o o ■* co (-J' ^" ^ io" cT ocf i-T c101-^vraOO'— lOr- IC^CSCOi— i"*Of-(f— icOt-icOOGOCO^Hi— It--!-- 5D^r-iC.QO'<*-OC3(MO'^CMC-C0C0C^»-0OC0C0t^-^00'MOr-v0 ■e*QO"*^'-'W3»-'3C^'— '"—''— "COtNCii—iOSCO ^-^-«t>C— 1>— iOt--CSC3001~-GOi— (COCO>Ot»(M(N t^cooocooocococsGsi— 'Gocoo^-lc^c<^vooiOiw^o>*^QOCscolMc-^^-HGicoco^>- ^ cd" cd" io" cd" 'fjT CO* r-T cd" l^^ cd" cd" »d" cd^ t^ >o" "^ cd" "*" cd" cd" to" ■*" cd" ^ CD lO (M » *© O •— I < f-H CO CO^l -riTcd'c'rc CO CD O f .— < CD iM ^ H »-- O C<« > C5 10 ■* 4 .-^^CD^O_ h" o* cd' cT c ) O CO CO ' I CO 00 »o c .—iCOoCOCOi— i-^i— It^"* CO-^(NOii— iMCOi— i-Tj-t~-OTt<».r3 ■"^1— iCO(MuOCOOt~-.-(eDCMCOCD(N»MO(M05CO.-iU30GOOS OiOOi:— COr-lW3w:3r-lt--03COlQt^GOC^C0 1--OCO«3COCOTtOTHCOC3iOGO(MCDC^I>-W5COOOS COCO"*050COt-iG5>-«i©COi-Hi-i^coi>-oooiOi— ic^coM^i-racot^coos ■iiH-^»oicira»ovo>ou3vra».o«scococococo-Dcocococot^r-^-i>-i^i-^t--i>-t-t^ QOODOOOOCOQOQQCOCOOOCOOOOOCOCOCOCOOOQOCOCOOOCOOOCOCOCOCOCOOOCOOO 480 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. IS o R o a H a W ^oi o t~ H 00 (5 ■-1 gg g tM 22 s^ ^a a o u w t> ^ fi . M S'3 o d s OrHC<100-^»0CDI--00eiOi-H(MCC-rH'0Ol:^Q00sgi~-COOS>*k0Mr-Q0rHC0OC0C0C0'tH"^'--t^ r-t{N.-lrH«iHi-IWi-lr-l.-HpHtN(NN«C-COTH01 jcoocot— t—iocooooTticouar—ius-eHT^o **;.°o,'^'' T 'tit' ^ CO Ci" CO cS" Gi" W -r^ CO "^ <^ W CO -^ d CO Oi ft Oi )"<:t<-^t— C<)O"<^o cft^o^t^t^c^i-n rcrcToTr^'Ttrc^'eirviD'co'cf ocTi-rt^rcrarci ^ co «» o O CO 00 "* CO \a 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I i:;- r-u^'^osi-Hcouauai-^ 1 11 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I M I 1 I OOlOlCOOCOCMfMWSUSCqOCOt-OSOlN Tj->-iOOOi-l(N>--OsO « 3 "rfc COCOOCOOCli-HCSli— lOfS-^COWSt— "^OSOCOCSi-H-^vO . -Ho':ot^coc:iOf-HC>ico-^iooi>-cooi O0COCOQO0OOOQOCZ3CO0OCOO0COO00OCOQ0(»<»QOCOCO(»COCCC»a)O0COC»QO00CC0O00O^ C0t^Oai0iOC0Ti0 o^co "^""i,^^^^ cD^orOC»T*OC-IOOCDTtHTtiIr~.-IOOCOOiOC^C^Oi_CO^t^ OS CO t~- i-H Tt< i-TcTt^oo'os^cd^co'TirtD'c'rTjrcd^co'cD'co'o'-^o^c^^in^co'ort— 1 >eDu:3J>-i— tcococs l>-i-HCOT*— ICOUSiOt— asO100t^OS'*CDC^CDCOCOC"t— I— fCQOlOiOCOf-iCOQOOtMCOt^O CS.-HC.Mi-H-T:HCSUit---^-OiO °o^°'^'^'*,"^'^ kOOO»O^OrHG3COCOincOOCOT^i-H"<*'COC^-<*QCOCOI--i--i':0«3C001-^ i-HrHC— COI>- o^ ,-7 w" rn" rn" rn" r-T i-T i-T r-T r-T r-T r-T r-T f-n" t-h" r-T C^ .-It— NClt— 10GSO>J^COCO»-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC)0000 C0CD>COOt^-«*it--Oit^iO(NC— (O ■stfir:>COC^-^OJ>-OvOC^^OiI>-C4COCOCO^COCOCiC^t~^ o"t^ \a' c^ t^ CO t^ yii ^ CO CO <—t a>t^'^-^cot^cooi<^\£:> -<:tHQot^co— looi— tcoi— - IWS-rflQOi-H^iOO^OTtHCOcOOSCOCOCOI^-OCOMiraOi— l^t>-tDCOOi(MOCOCOCSr-H -COwaTHi-HvraOivOOOiOCOQDCDt— CO(Mt^!i< USO'^WSCOi— l-^W30-^COCOCjSQO-*OCOC3SC3iCOOOOCOOt-- lOOiCOIr^iOCOCOCflt— lt--CO>— lCO>— li— (COCOCN^Cllr-^OOOt^ I I I 1 1 I c^co'^S rHVSoi c4^ i-T co" M*^ ij:^ o" c^ cT "t*r cT cT ift" r-T CO*' oTaTr-r CI I— IC-Q0OC0O C-00-*T-HeO-^COCO>— (-ej< 001>-C^C0aiOOCilr^t— 00C<1>— tTt.acnar^c^-i-HTjHOacO-^«3 ^•Or-tt^OOOSlSt-HCOcSSOOt-w^COt-waMOCOOONCO^i^OC^C^jJfr^Z^jSP^,^ c^cc^l>^^>^l>^r-^c^^c"^^■^ *^ ws #s ^v is ^ ^^■nOC0C0TH-^C0-<*<-'tlC<(rH.-HCqCOC^CNC-l(M"*CO t^w5^Soo^o^co(^^co^^ococo;-IC3t^oo^I>■cor-^.o;^ot-c^ Moao-^TJioocq ^^'O c^^'=^„■*^^^'^„■-l,«3^•^'-l'=S-^-.^^'^«'~I.'^^'^- iS^SMS^OMuacoS^t-M'OM^mcoGi^aico-^ocD^oioioco^t-m^ '^^;iJ^^;iiSwSSSS--Hr!; ^f:'^<^J^Oi-Hcot-i>-cooM»cqo«cor-.>-(cor- F F 482 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. w s o t» Q EH o X H W n o =5 PM 1 ?* pq ■i =a 1— 1 H E4 la M di m S O pq fi H 1 5 iJ - 00 OS (N(MCOCOCGCOCOCOCOCOCOCO'*rH'* ^ ■* t*< Tt^ -<*<-<*< tH COOOCOGOCOOOCOCOOOOOODCOQOCOCO 30 CO QO 00 00 CO CO W^^^^^^r-IWrtrHWi-HT-lr-l M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O fc 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 w o lO o 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 1 ^ % 1 M 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 -s o Ph -tS 1 — 1 oi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 as M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S c? TJ CD -4^ (3 c3 % 1 ^ :; :; pq o ■g C^COCOCOt~(MOOOOi-ii>-QO(MO CO t>.OC0t->O"*C0Tj-iO'C s CB •e & "S Ph o ■+3 (Di— Ir-tOiiOCOO'— iOaOOCOU3.-ICO-*5 ^ ^ 1 "<*4CSliM0OC<)tCivOMCOT-iTt<(Nr-(CO^ r^ *^'~1,'^^'^'^*^°° "^"^*^^^"^'^"^ " ,-r^^"c^ M^ CO^ Oi^ OS^ CO^ O^ ^ CO^ ^ l>^ ^ 1 O CD <:D<0<0 tr^a:> fS CO ZD CO eS t^ ^o c^ <" Q CqrHrHr-(,-HWrtrHr-<.-HCCOCOr-(M^OCDCOWSt^(Mi— 1 o u:^ to o c» (N W3 PHlS OOCDCOi— ii— iC-OJaiO"^QO-rt5DeOCCiOOO— iTj-COOSO^(M CO -^ W3 CD t^ CO OS (MCJ3CO.t-i>-t-i>- CO CO CO COGOCOQOCOCOCOCOCOCO c» 00 QO CO 00 00 tSO 00 QOCOOOOOOOOOCOOOCO Jrt >— 1 rH CD 1 .= «DCOTtOCOOCO CDCOOC31vO':DC3iC01>.T»< CO CO ■-< CD «.t3 CM CO CM Or-<010T*<00(MU3 0(N05r^CMi-HCO»000 CO^ O^ CD^ 00^ O^ rH^ I^ -^^ CSJ^ (M^ 00^ O^ ^ CO^ «3^ »0^ >-H_ OU3COCMCqi>-OiO-et*>.0 l-^ t^ i-T (n" cm" ocT co" t^ cTi-Tco'crco'crco CM t^ o r-l f-H CO t-H t^ f-t rH Ol CM i-f ^ i-H ^ I— 1 CO CO 1-H (M 1-H pH ;?! ^ ^CqrJ^CMIr-rHCOt^ a> ^ - -^i ^ ^ cD^ xo^ eo^ co^ so^ -4t0CjSC01~- en i>- ic r- CO cs o CO CivOOOiiOCDcOCnO Ml t^ O CO t^ O O CO^ o^ CD <31 OO '^. ■ rri.-icocoascooovoo -JSeooos'^oooi-ioooi ^CDi-HCOCOCii— lO^OsO .• ■* CO Oi r- .-H ">*4 c£> CO CDOit— COt^uSt-CMOO CO mCO -^ O -^ -^ --H 05 o;OOQOOSCD>0(M05W30 £ :: s 1 -eTt-t^co en co^cD rS -^ Cr ^ Co" Co" '-'iM(MCMCOCOTjH-<*( ,^ cm" ocT otT oT to" CO* t-^ cm" us" 0(M r-l CO i-( i-H rH e: COCOur)t~-Qt-OC-r-ICO RcOi-iOCMCOOOOi-raMOO a ■jS CJiOCNl— eDl--C^ cOi~iocoir^i:^.-«coco -iS CO O CO OCJ^ ^_^ 00^ os^ co^ t^ ^^ co" CO* (m" t^ cd' oo' oo' c^Tt■ i-rt T— IO01C0C»i— iCOO-^i— 1 lO vO 'jH r- «5 CD 05 CO t-tOCOCO^CD(MtOO •— ( t^ -^ I>-C31C»C^VOIO.-(CM.-(>JD o CO GO CS J>- CO CO -<*< oaco.— i>-H-^i— COOI-- - t^i-H"cr r^ari-f 1— 1 o oi o m rH ■T*< rjT t:S^cS'^Sm vc O i^t— cotocor-aiasto CN T-H <:o CO tr^ oa !>• (Mi-HO.— 1 1-H I— 1 ■— 1 1— 1 (M .-( O tOCO-^OS(M(M(MCOCO T-1 CD t^ M O COC»CD>iDOiCOt^Q0THm> ira M to "* vra CO rw CO CDl>-cocoi>-aiOioco CO O t^ l-rCOCO.— ICSl»OrT(CO"^C3i -^ O CM CSi CO '^ T*< to Ot^C^ICDi— (COCOVOVO (M ■* CO J>^o>^co_cq^'-i^io__'-j^ vra" to" oT cq' oT j>r co" (m" of ccT T*< C3S CO CO CD lO CJS to"i— ( O C5 CD O CO tJh^ ^c;rco' ■tJ< cm »OCDi0-<*.r^i?-^-.r^i>.i--i>. CO 00 CO rr* r^ i-H ODCOOOCOCOCOCOOOCOGO GO 00 CO 00 CO OO CO 00 ,-( r-( f-l i-H rH r-( .-< OOCOOOOOCOCOCOCOOO iP F 2 TABLE II. B. Quantities op the undermentioned Articles of British and Irish Farm Produce exported prom the United Kingdom, as par, as can be GIVEN, in each Year, prom 182'7 to 1879. B.— PROviaioua, &o. Animals. Bacon and Hams. Beef and Pork. Butter. Cheese. Tears. Oxen, Bulls, Cows, and Calves. Slieep and Lambs. Tears. No. Not stated No. Not stated Cwta. 11,072 Cwta. 107,037 , Cwts. Cwta. . 1827 84,300 1827 1828 )j 8,333 58,540 94,623 1828 1829 J) 10,039 98,127 89,875 1829 1830 J) 12,197 108,178 73,124 1830 1831 jj 7,564 72,176 63,260 1831 1832 J) 5,972 45,764 72,349 1832 1833 )) 11,114 86,752 76,106 1833 1834 )j 18,583 108,668 88,396 1834 1835 12,434 106,667 88,508 1835 1836 77 14,536 86,466 75,243 1836 1837 12,312 86,057 60,054 1837 1838 ,, 17,009 60,281 69,554 1838 1839 ,, 31,519 115,889 73,760 1839 1840 » 27,172 102,352 52,972 11,653 1840 1841 77 14,787 38,298 46,460 9,256 1841 1842 J) 16,446 31,941 53,077 8,626 1842 1843 J> 18,140 26,698 61,042 10,088 1843 1844 )) 14,998 18,744 46,142 9,535 1844 1845 )» 15,509 20,193 46,592 7,113 1845 1846 )) 10,694 19,503 46,601 6,466 1846 1847 ,, 11,164 10,865 35,844 7,509 1847 1848 ,, 6,586 9,209 45,649 5,646 1848 1849 7,926 15,216 64,831 6,759 1849 1850 „ 9,962 16,759 60,639 8,643 1850 1851 )? 12,727 26,081 67,028 9,493 1851 1852 )) 14,646 20,140 95,039 17,164 1852 1853 >» 33,368 26,789 93,724 32,650 1853 1854 )) 23,935 52,745 92,269 16,987 1854 1855 410 2,030 40,012 75,587 120,098 22,318 1855 1856 694 2,689 51,023 49,040 139,548 39,545 1866 1867 357 1,497 68,351 44,910 110,974 28,278 1857 1858 812 1,499 45,089 32,802 112,296 23,488 1868 1859 323 1,199 66,266 57,999 139,768 34,428 1859 1860 662 2,755 69,993 40,360 125,352 28,700 1860 1861 490 6,470 40,708 16,917 96,969 31,724 1861 1862 636 5,554 64,710 20,097 80,594 32,320 1862 1863 541 2,876 73,679 24,606 102,607 41,031 1863 1864 437 2,627 67,292 28,908 67,634 36,663 1864 1865 303 2,340 26,861 18,621 64,333 27,190 1865 1866 3 318 52,824 20,644 67,015 38,028 1866 1867 31 1,095 41,873 9,523 55,414 29,798 1867 1868 558 5,004 31,661 13,566 63,259 25,264 1868 1869 664 4,767 19,743 8,801 51,130 25,684 1869 1870 1,443 7,452 74,578 42,066 57,528 25,194 1870 1871 1,631 7,533 Not stated Not stated 56,322 22,441 1871 1872 569 4,138 >j 54,464 19,440 1872 1873 651 4,812 J, 44,961 18,786 1873 1874 431 4,271 )) 42,688 18,689 1874 1875 332 3,026 )) 39,266 21,332 1875 1876 313 1,974 J) 33,749 17,411 1876 1877 106 1,119 )j 37,385 16,756 1877 1878 642 3,117 36,766 16,530 1878 1879 987 3,852 » 36,677 14,231 1879 APPENDIX IT. 485 a ^ H » n Oi »< J- W 00 H i-H H O H n n n 14 00 S i-H ,«! g ^ t>H -1 i 1 i>^ n H ii Q H 5 iz; 6 s ^ w g ^ ^ tn n H ^ i Q 02 W < K s H ^ n P4 !§ 12; PH § M izi H K H !zi H P § r/j H M g ^ H B! iS N p o- K &:j 1) Oi-<(NCOTH«a'©J>-COOiOr-'C.C0050i-l(N OOOOOOOOOOi-lr-(i-(.-l,-HWr-(rHW,-H{NC<|lM QOOOCOCOCOCOOOOOCOQOCOOOQOOOOOQOCOOOCOQOOOOOCO ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 ! I 1 1 M 1 M 1 5 I I 1 I ! i 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M 5 I I I I i I I I I CO OS O O -sh O •^ (N CD I I g § S I I I I I I M M I I I I M I I I I ! I I I 1 I I I J I I I I i I M I I I I I to -g o g- •a a 3 ^ I ! I M ! M I I I I I I I I I M I I I W I— lOOiCOOCSi— (t^OOOiCD ■r I "4— oo^'-^C'l CD co^-i— CO co^Oi^co^co^ I t-CDi— ilDCiC1>#iOi-H ici-i*<.— icococotrei— CO 00^0 C<) CI ■+--^ I>^t^CO I— I -^"^co" 7-^ CO <^ c^ CO ^— >-H ^ I— I CO I-H m CM CD CO Oi t- '*~CN"l>^-<:jrr-r WaCO-^CO-^ r-HtN-^O-^OOSt— !"«*< COCDCD-C7i(Mt-t— CO lOii— ICD>OCO iTfHCOiO '^^^— UD CO t^ O ' (M^^i-Tco'co'* J c^r^—^^^i-T \s£ ■ J^^-^^-ocO"^I-H'^:Hcooicoc^^vr^ >TH"^WDOSvOCD-t^OO'*W3»aTj4 r cT ciT go" co" t-^ i>r co" cd" r-T ■*" oT CO^ . *COW5CSICOCOCOCCit*' iO G<) I-H CM -CDCiOCOCDCO"<*HCD tC cd" (n" ^ TdT ■^'^ otT r-T cfl" OSCO0000t^OJCD--tCSI (N T-4 CO QO CD Oi— IC-COC?SO'— iCSICOTfiiOCDI>-COaJOt— ICM OOOOOOOOOOi— ii-H.— (.-Hi-H.— irHi-f.— (.— (- 00 M I— t m o H u fio o o « Ob PM "-I S g m o y P5 Ph fH b3 pf <) -«! !^ ^H i-i o H O ^ P a s- o 3 =« ^ oS^ a5' O I^-GIUS-^ tQvOCiu5C0005DCsI'rH00r-HC0TjiQ0C-HO00».0C- f^ r *.o i--cicDcDOrHOi^coo(Mt CD (N ir-r-o CN CO CO CO ws CT) in fO t— CD O »0 Ir- CO on rN xt* Ol CO r-u:3 -^ KO CO 00 CD CC on o CO cc CO t^ o »o CO CO CN cw -^ CO O cn t- O CO t-- t- m t- CO CO on o CO CD on c^ O ir-i>- CD CD 1- on O j3co t— cooaOi— icNco-'^^vracor^coajOf— iMco-^iTioi-- CMCNOIC^ (N(N(NCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO'»tOiO-*t--asCOOQOOO 1-1 CO CM CN (M .-i'>!tH-T*i iOCOCOCOC500COTi- i-H t— i-H 00 ca co^cTocTcrro' 1— I OS T*4 OS ira (M — ltOi-H|>-O30OTtH t-THc^cOi— ir^oor-(o wrs" '^ ^^ cT vo" oT Ko" co^ c^^ (n" (MOOOSiOCivOt-C^l^- ';DG0t^OCM.-«T-i.-it--Ci— il-^COt— CN cococ• r- 1^ CO rN CO 3i CO I— 1 o fN 1 1 1 to CD t- i-H CO xO t^ O 1 lO h* vo -<*< " CN .i-H TjHt^-^cot— >.ra(N i200(N':*-C0C0lOrHO-OCNCO(Nf-HOSCO-**(-Tf< Oi^"-*^ Erf'5'5'^^52^'^'^'^S2 .OC0OS.-'C0'0i--'::ti-rhOon.c3c/31r-r^COOn-l».Ci<:OOt^-^CO-^-^vc:iTt< ti o_r-H^i~*^-^_^GO^-^^co^-ri4^co_^'--^^-g oq^csi^i--^^^^^ o (N^^^co i-H "-i, o I>^ 3 -^ t— VO CD ;^ t- (M CO Crc»"(M"o"M"cru5 C^^ ,C^CO-^COOSi-li-' .-Hi-H'-'cM.-H ^■THiOtM.-tOiiM'tjHvOO-* ■-• .-( (N CO CO !>■ O" -O00e00STHCi05Tt^ I— iCOl— .— tC— 'Oi— I OSOOSiOf-Hi— iTfr" CMvOCOCO 01** TfHt— CO ■ I— iC0— (CO.— Ii— ICDvraN i5'*i^o>— (-^oi>-Hi:ot^coco-<*coTj--<" co" »o" ccT co"^ r-T o" u^ oT vti^ co" vra' o" rn" co" o" .-(CN nH(M CSCOi— itNiOTtHi-lTt^QOTH CO CO .-I -a CO CM CO 00 OS t— ■«*< --^ O CO 00 tH -^ -^ CO t^t--coi>-00CDir-t^OSi-( cocDcocoi>-r— "^cooir^ r^ooocoioco— -cOr-(vo '^y3CMnHCrs-^C0CjSOt~-0S0S-*O.-((M0S t— COi— (COVOlOvn-^COi-nmcTSOi— (COCOQO lor-r— co^Oi— "oscooseoi>- cjT -t^T cf c^T co" cT OCO(M-^(MC3SCDCSCO>— ((Ml— It— (M(MvOO rH CSC-1 OCD(MOt- O0OS00U3 C»CfSOi— (CM COTH»-OCDt~-00050i— I(M ■-:HTt(vC»rakCS iCiOi^tOtOVOiOCOCOCO OOODCOCOCO ODQOCOCOCOCOOOCOOOCO COTtHiOCDt—CJOOSOrHCMCOTHUSeOt—OOOS CDCDCDCOCDCDCO^-t-t— t— l>-t— t— t—t—t— QOCOQOCOCOQOOOOOOOCOCOCO 00 00 00 CO 00 CO CO CO CO 00 CO 00 00 COQOCOCOOOCOCOQOCOCO ki i-H T— 1 i-H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 M Hi ' oi -t* <£> ^__, (M - '^ »0 kO CD C<1 yD T+i r- OOCOr-UISCOi-H-et^lMC-IC^) o s 1- l^ co_ 0^ CN^ tD^l^- tC CO CO 00 t-^ CO_^ .-H_ (N_ 00^ CO CO^ CO_ ^ 6 '"' cq" c. lO ■^M CO cqoco-^jHco-e^co^coco :g •is 1 1 1 r-( 0^ I>- CO r-o -^ CO t^cot-co_o^^«5^co_co_50_ d ttH (N'l-r Cqcq(Mr-iCq-- m 000000 Tt< 0^ CD^CN^O^O^OO^"^ 60 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 e^ 1 co'ccT-^co'i-rcf bo fq 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 H i-Hi-ICqOOrHOOr--^ i COCNt-COOOOCOCOCD 1 ) j I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '^^'^'^'^'^'"1'^^°^ o 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 i ' CO CO CO Ci \a r^ CO di n PM " w ^ CO cq (N M ij ai ui ;i3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M M 1 1 1 1 M iS^ ^ ■s-S-s" i 1 r 1 r I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 11 O) Q) (D % I 1 1 1 1 1 1 [ j 1 1 1 j ^^;S 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II D3 r~- r-H i>-GO i-O ~ (M csicooooO'-<>-iococq (N <£> ^ c:i r-co "* OO-^COCO-^COtOCOOO g -2 I 1 1 1 1 i (N 0^ o_ CO CO i-i ir~ CJ3 CO W2 CO otxco oi_ 1 -^'" TtTc^i 1— 1 •Tirco"r-r-^'~i>- CI >-( en £M CO i-( I-H CO I-H Bacon and Hams. CO CO as Cl -M ^ CO ^ cq T^ ClCOCOOCO(NOCOr-(CDCO^' if? TfH CM lO CO ■^ U3 N CO ^ Ci OiiNcOCO-^tHt-fMOt-CO ■e CO CO CO ^ 00 Gi^ cq aj_i-- ^_ o_ 00 CO^ i-H_ CO^ 00^ 0_ CO^ CO^ 0^ -ti*^ 00_ "' "' CN co" '""' 3 1 m 1 d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S3 Q 1^ 1 1 ' ' ' 1 ' ' I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t5 1 m •M CO -^ iC CO t— CO en 1-H Ci *"• ■"* *"* '~* t-H I— 1 '"' i-H i-H '"' r-H APPENDIX IV. 489 OOMcaajCOOOOOOOOOCCCOCOTOOOOOOOCOCOCOOOOOCOCOCOCOODOOCOCOCOCOCOQOCOCOQOCO I I I I i.OCOGOCOO*OCOCO-*-^CO-^OiCO'MCOTt-OiMCOCOCOtOOO«3MCDt-CT.COCOt--C<(CNi— iW5CO>---OOt-HCOCO -3ST-HOIr^0S-^COe£it~--^-(-<:J'i— I i>r t-T -^^ c C0CC::f< O CO .-H ^o"ocrt t^i-nr^T^i— (1— lOOOS»rtCOCiCOOC5COO-*tOOOCO-^l>-C-tOCqp-HC^"^ -^OO■^Tt^C0V00a>OI^-"^J^I— lii3asi--iCDC-5'^OOTjH-i*Hi— iiOCiCiCOCAi— i».racot--Tt^co>— i'»*icot^ COOI>-US.-li-HOii— I Ol^t^i— I CO "^"^ '^'^ >— ICNCOCOCICOVOCO^ ^^O^O *0 00^ CO tJh --J^ "^^ ■*„ ""i, c^„ vo" crT OcT CO" C^ >!:fr -i^r u^ CcT CO^ vo" l>r T!fr cT C^ c6^ rH^ 1— ICOCO i-( ■^iCOlr-H.-H i-l(MCO —i — H I I I II I II I l--Oi-(000-^'^CS'— lOi.CiCOiOi-fCOlr^CDtM-^CDMT-HCO'iJi >-IOiO(Mt-CO .— (t-HCNOOCOCOCOCSir^^-^-^COCafMCOC^ICO ca-"^ >-((M .— ( (MCOr~C?aCn»OC:iClCO(MCJ5cocoi>>covc:>(Mir— coco I icococicJiocoo5i-^cD>-Ht--tf5i— ICO .— ( 1— I (M i-H c^cnoosco"^o^c•l(^^o OCOGS-^CjSCO{MCOC!i (M- J:^ r-i t^ 00 CO O "— ICOMO COCICMCO.— l(MtraC-( COCDCOCOW3-7f— (Ot— iOCOOCOCOCOCNt-COi— c COGS.-HCOin'^r-t-COCOC^CD'— (CDOOI>-CDOU3-^aivC>asOOiCOCOCNiOOOiCDcOOCi-^TH COCOCOCOGiTjHCOOOOOt— Jr— C-IMCOCOt^Oi— lv^dCOCOCDCOCjiOivOCO>— lir^COCiiOCO-^CO -^t--asOi-H(McsJr^(M>— icovocococoo-<^vomco-^i.otor— COCO"— lOscMco «3^ "^ ^ -^ o -^ t~- i-HC^COtiS cfco'co'i-T co'oro'"-*"-^'"cD"cerc»D"io"c4'co"TH t- CM "* CO O ■— I I— I (N COCOI>- COi— I C«COOiGl ,-(C^ 1— (TtHCOMfMCO-^'^iiCO f— ( T-H nH 1-H CO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IS" r I 11 ISS I CO"*U5CDi>*QOCiOf— iC'00CJOr-lc*t--t--l^-l>-I--t^ CXJCOOOODODOOCOCOCOQOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOODCOCOCOCOOOCOCOOOCOGOGOCO 490 ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANLLOBBS. TABLE IV. Table showing the percentage op the Exports as compared WITH the Imports of the undermentioned Articles, in THE period from 1828 to 1848, and in each decennial period from 1849 to 1878. (Note. — Britisli and Irish produce is included in tlie Exports as well as Foreign and Colonial.) 1828 1849 1859 1869 to to to to 1848. 1858. 1868. 1878. Wheat 6-4 2-4 1-7 3-3 Wheat Flour 12-6 2-9 1-6 3-8 Barley ts-o Not known Not known *0-8 Oats t23-6 ;> J) *3-0 Maize Not known „ )? *0-8 Peas and Beans t2-7 )) J) *0-9 Rice 47-2 36-7 51-6 50-3 Oxen — — 0-2 0-3 Sheep — — 0-6 0'5 Bacon and Hams 82-7 12-5 14-6 Not known Beef and Pork 69-8 14-0 11-5 )) Butter and Cheese 18-3 16-3 8-1 4-4 * For a period of 8 or 9 years only. t For tJie period from 1S28 to 1841 only. APPENDIX V. Aterase Q-azette Prices of British Wheat, Barley, and Oats, per Imperial Quarter, in each Year prom 1790 to 1879. Tears. MTieat. Barley. Oats. Years. Wheat. Barley. Oats. a. d. B. a. B. d. s. d. ». d. B. d. 1790 54 9 26 3 19 5 1835 39 4 29 11 22 1791 48 7 26 10 18 1 1836 48 6 32 10 23 1 1792 43 26 9 16 9 1837 55 10 30 4 23 1 1793 49 3 31 1 20 6 1838 64 7 31 6 22 5 1794 52 3 31 9 .21 3 1839 70 8 39 6 25 11 1796 75 2 37 5 24 5 1840 66 4 36 5 25 8 1796 78 7 36 4 21 10 1841 64 4 32 10 22 5 1797 53 9 27 2 16 3 1842 57 3 27 6 19 3 1798 51 10 29 19 5 1843 60 1 29 6 18 4 1799 69 36 2 27 6 1844 61 3 33 8 20 7 1800 113 10 59 10 39 4 1846 50 10 31 8 22 6 1801 119 6 68 6 37 1846 54 8 32 8 23 8 1802 69 10 33 4 20 4 1847 69 9 44 2 28 8 1803 68 10 25 4 21 6 1848 60 6 31 6 20 6 1804 62 3 31 24 3 1849 44 3 27 9 17 6 1805 89 9 44 6 28 4 1850 40 3 23 5 16 5 1806 79 1 38 8 27 7 1851 38 6 24 9 18 7 1807 75 4 39 4 28 4 1852 40 10 28 6 19 1 1808 81 4 43 5 33 4 1853 53 3 33 2 21 1809 97 4 47 31 5 1864 72 5 36 27 11 1810 106 5 48 1 28 7 1856 74 8 34 9 27 5 1811 95 3 42 3 27 7 1856 69 2 41 1 25 2 1812 126 6 66 9 44 6 1867 56 4 42 1 25 1813 109 9 68 6 38 6 1858 44 2 34 8 24 6 1814 74 4 37 4 25 8 1859 43 9 33 6 23 2 1815 . 65 7 30 3 23 7 1860 53 3 36 7 24 5 1816 78 6 33 11 27 2 1861 55 4 36 1 23 9 1817 96 11 49 4 32 6 1862 56 6 35 1 22 7 1818 86 3 63 10 32 5 1863 44 9 33 11 21 2 1819 74 6 45 9 28 2 1864 40 2 29 11 20 1 1820 67 10 33 10 24 2 1865 41 10 29 9 21 10 1821 66 1 26 19 6 1866 49 11 37 5 24 7 1822 44 7 21 10 18 1 1867 64 5 40 26 1823 63 4 31 6 22 11 1868 63 9 43 28 1 1824 63 11 36 4 24 10 1869 48 2 39 6 26 1825 68 6 40 26 8 1870 46 10 34 7 22 11 1826 58 8 34 4 26 8 1871 56 8 36 2 26 2 1827 58 6 37 7 28 2 1872 57 37 5 23 2 1828 60 5 32 10 22 6 1873 58 8 40 5 25 5 1829 66 3 32 6 22 9 1874 56 8 44 11 28 10 1830 64 3 32 7 24 5 1875 45 2 38 5 28 8 1831 66 4 38 25 4 1876 46 2 35 2 26 3 1832 68 8 33 1 20 5 1877 56 9 39 8 25 11 1833 52 11 27 6 18 5 1878 46 5 40 2 24 4 1834 46 2 29 20 11 1879 43 11 34 21 10 492 ENGLI8S LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. Average Gazette Prices of British Wheat, Barley, and Oats PER Imperial Quarter, in the Period from 1800 to 1848, AND IN the Period from 1849 to 1879. Periods. Wheat. Decrease. Barley. Decrease. Oats. Decrease. 1800" ». d. B. d. s. d. d. 8. d. ». d. to >- 70 3 37 8 26 9 1848. 1849- i 18 5 2 2 2 to 51 10 35 6 23 9 1879 APPENDIX VI. Statement respecting the Ownership of Land in England and Walks (exclusive of the Metropolis). NuiuTjer of Entries in the Domesday Book. Extent of Lands held. Gross annual valne at which the land is Owners of land (Total) according to the Domesday Book Owners of land of less than 1 acre in ex- tent, according to the Domesday Book Owners of land of more than 1 acre in extent, according to the Domesday Book Owners of more than 3,000 acres of land assessed at more that £3,000 gross annual value, according to Bateman,* (1,704 persons) Owners of land of between 2,000 and 3,000 acres in extent, assessed at not less than £2,000 gross annual value, and of more than 3,000 acres in extent, hut assessed at between £2,000 and £3,000 gross annual value Public Authorities, Trustees of Charities, &c. &c. (which entries are printed in italics in the Domesday Book) Owners of more than 1 acre of land and of less than 2,000 acres assessed at less than £2,000 gross annual value ... [A few owners of estates of more than 2,000 acres may be included, but in all such cases the land must have been assessed on an average at less than £1 per acre.] 972,836 703,289 269,547 t 3,873 (estimated.) 1 1,311 (estimated.) 14,367 249,996 Acres. 33,013,515 151,172 32,862,343 14,287,373 2,018,952 1,449,008 1.5,107,010 99,352,301 29,127,679 70,224,622 17,144,848 (estimated.) 2,858,638 3,622,520 (estimated.)i 46,598,616 (estimated.) * In Bateman's " Great Landowners," all persons axe included whose estates in the TJnitud Kingdom exceed 2,000 acres in extent, and £2,000 in gross annual value. But as the above table refers to England and Wales only, a few persons may he included whose estates in that division of the Kingdom are below the limits mentioned. t These estimates are founded on the figures in Bateman's " Great Landowners," with due allowance for those proprietors whose estates in England and Wales alone would fall below the standard indicated, AccordiJig to Mr. Arthur Arnold — 28 Dukes on an average own in the United Kingdom 143,500 acres each, and are repeated 5'6 times in the Domesday Book. 33 Marquesses on an average own in the United Kingdom 47,500 acres each, and are repeated 3'7 times in the Domesday Book. 194 Earls on an average own in the United Kingdom 30,200 acres each, and are repeated 3'3 times in the Domesday Book. 270 Viscounts and Barons on an average own in the United Kingdom 14,300 acres each, and are repeated 2*5 times in the Domesday Book. And as the owners of between 2,000 and 3,000 acres in England and Wales on an average own 2 549 acres each, and are repeated 1-7 times in the Domesday Book, the number of owners of the 249,996 estates of above 1 acre and less than 2,000 acres given in the Table, assuming that they have been repeated as often, will be 147,657, and the total number of persona owning more than one acre of land in England and "Wales will be about 150,153. APPENDIX VII. VESTED INTEEESTS IN SETTLED ESTATES. An impoitant precedent for dealing with Vested Interests in Settled Estates is supplied by the Scotch Entail Amendment Act (Rilther- furd's Act) of 1848, and the subsequent Entail Amendment Acts. By the Act of 1848, an heir of entail born after the date of any entail made on or after the 1st of August, 1848, was enabled to disentail on majority ; and heii-s of entail born before that date were enabled to disentail, with the consent of the heir-apparent born after the entail, and being twenty-five years of age. An heir of full age in possession of an estate entailed prior to that date, having been himself born after that date, was enabled to disentail at his own discretion ; if born before that date, he was enabled to disentail with the consent of the heir-apparent born after that date, and being twenty-five years of age. An heir of full age in possession of an estate entailed prior to that date, whatever the date of his own birth, was enabled to disentail, if he were the only heir in existence and unmarried ; otherwise, with the consent of the three next heirs in succession, the nearest being twenty-five years of age. By the subsequent Act of 1875, the Court was enabled to dis- pense with any consents required in the last case except that of the heir next in succession, whose consent in all cases might be given at the age of twenty-one instead of twenty-five. The expectancies of the heirs thus passed over were directed to be valued, and the amount ascertained to be secured for their benefit. Moreover, in the event of the heir in possession being the sole heir of entail the disqualifica- tion of marriage was removed. It will be observed that in these Acts no provision is made for protecting the interests of unborn children, though it has been held that " the emergence of a nearer heir" before the completion of the proceedings must put an end to the application. Subject to this risk, a Scotch tenant for life, as he would be called in English law, with APPENDIX VII. 495 tlie consent of his next brother, may disentail a famUy estate for Hs own benefit, compensating two other living heirs if they should object, bnt cutting off the contingent iiiterests of his own unborn children. Probably the principle of this legislation would be adopted in any English statute for the reform or abolition of entail, so far as the interests of unborn persons are concerned. Whether living re- mainder-men, having interests subsequent to those of unborn persons, are entitled to compensation, or whether no interest but that of an heir-apparent should be treated, for this purpose, as a vested interest, is a more difficult question. However it might be decided, a single generation would suffice to extinguish a large proportion of the interests arising under existing entails, and very remote expectations may usually be satisfied by the offer of a very moderate composition. It is not unworthy of notice that Scotch Entail of the rigid type which has been reformed by the Acts of 1848 and 1875 is, after all, less than two centuries old. It was introduced by the Entail Act of 1685, a monument of the same degenerate period which produced the latest form of English family settlements. APPENDIX VIII. Amount of Poor Eatb levied in the undermentioned Union Counties in each of the Years ended Lady Day, 1852, 1868, AND 1878. Poor Eate Levied (Years ended Lady Day). Union Counties \^ J-l ^\JJ,\ ^^\J V iLl X ^ JJUb 1852. 1868. 1878. £ £ £ Bucks 82,968 101,010 84,727 Northampton 100,635 175,428 176,431 Huntingdon 29,573 43,135 40,313 Cambridge 101,412 123,126 114,857 Norfolk 203,681 246,169 220,864 Wilts 147,816 189,948 174,793 Dorset 83,258 128,212 112,099 Cornwall 84,146 162,753 163,900 Hereford 51,854 78,209 112,523 Salop 76,402 124,040 124,108 Rutland 9,655 15,823 14,006 Lincoln 157,644 212,928 203,181 York, N.E 67,848 96,125 158,471 Westmoreland 16,186 23,307 25,281 Wales, North 166,772 241,940 250,170 Less for large town Unions, \ 1,380,840 1,962,153 1,975,724 and corrections for change > 245,252 403,073 464,667 of areas ) 1,135,688 1,559,080 1,511,057 Increase over 1852 — 37 per cent. 33 per cent. APPENDIX IX. Average Extent of Land held by Small Proprietors between 1 AND 100 Acres in groups of Counties. Mid-Wales. Montgomery . . . Brecon Eadnor Cardigan Merioneth Average atout 35 Extreme Northern, Cumterland ... Nortlium'berland Westmoreland Durham N.York 29 \ 272. 25? Ij. Average 24f I 26f ; ahoutSOJ Pembroke Glamorgan Carmarthen Devon . . Cornwall Cambs Essex Norfolk . Suffolk , Hants Kent Sussex South Wales. ,.. 26 1 ... 21i \ about 29 Western. 27i Eastern. 16i 174 m 22f Southern. 16| 19i 20. To 1 Average J about 26^ Average about 19 Average about 18 J North Wales. Flintshire 12^ 1 (A Colliery County) I ^^erage Carnarvon 1°;? )■ o-hmit 17 Denbigh ITf I ^''°''* '^ Anglesea 21 J / South Midland. Huntingdon Oxon Berks Bucks Northants Beds Acres. 17 m 20 21* Average about 16J North Midland Stafiordshire Derby . . Notts .. Lincoln .. Leicester Rutland .. Warwick E. York'... W. York... Lancashire Cheshire . . . 12^ 15| 16| 15^ 18| Mf m I Average about 16 Northern. ...' ... 16f 15i 15* (aboutl5J Dorset . . Wilts .. Somerset. . South Western. 14 15f ... 16 e about 15 Salop Worcester Hereford Gloucester Monmouth Surrey . . . Middlesex Herts West Midland. 15 1 131 I K jgl ! Average , „f [ about 1 5 19i ) Home. 13 14i 15f Average about 14 G G APPENDIX X. EXTRACTS FROM THE AGRICULTURAL RETURNS OF GREAT BRITAIN, 1880. Table I. — Total Area and Acreage under each kind op Crop, Bare Fallow, ajjd Grass ; and Number of Cattle, Horses, Sheep, and Pigs, as returned upon the 4th op June, 1880, and 1879, IN England and Wales. ENGLAND. WALES. 1880. TOTAI 1879. 180. 1,879. Akea and Acrease under Corn Crops, Green Crops, Bare Fallow, Grass ,&c. Acres. Acres. Acres. Acres. Total Akea 32,597,398 32,597,398 4,721,823 4,721,823 Total Acbeaoe under Crops, • Bare Fallow, and Grass ... 24,596,266 24,503,882 2,767,516 2,758,743 Corn Crops : Wheat 2,745,733 2,718,992 89,729 94,639 Barley or Bere 2,060,807 2,236,101 142,514 152,491 Oats 1,520,125 1,425,126 239,526 226,967 Eye 31,683 39,808 1,765 1,464 Beans 404,071 419,504 2,619 3,031 Peas 231,280 273,591 1,963 2,985 Total of Corn Crops ... 6,993,699 7,113,126 478,116 481,577 Green Crops : Potatoes 324,931 323,992 38,940 42,609 Tiixmps and Swedes 1,473,030 1,457,762 65,190 67,349 Mangold 333,609 352,671 7,685 8,4'10 Carrots 15,186 13,992 503 469 Cabbage, Kohl-Eabi, and Eape 155,001 162,296 1,096 1,237 Vetches and other Green Crops, except Clover or Grass 357,377 425,775 6,659 6,877 Total op Green Crops... 2,659,134 2,736,488 120,073 126,951 Clover, Sainfoin, and Grasses UNDER Rotation 2,646,241 2,674,949 332,353 347,473 Permanent Pasture ok Grass not broken up in Eotation (exclusive of Heath or Moun- tain Land) 11,461,856 11,233,526 1,805,750 1,773,811 Flax 8,788 6,970 15 12 Hops 66,703 67,671 2 — Bare Fallow or Uncropped Arable Land 759,845 671,156 31,207 28,919 APPENDIX X. 499 TABLE I. — continueii. ENGT,A"NX). WALES. 1880. 1879. 1880. 1879. Number op Live Stock, as betuened UPON the 4th June, 1880, and 1879. HoKSES (including Ponies), as returned by occupiebs of Land : Used solely for purpose of Agriculture, &c Unbroken Horses and Mares kept solely for Breeding . . . Acres. 766,527 325,745 Acres. 769,590 331,117 Acres. 72,605 62,290 Acres. 73,130 63,261 Total of Hokses ... 1,092,272 1,100,707 134,895 136,391 Cattle : Ciows and Heifers in Milk or in Calf Other Cattle : 2 Years of Age and above Under 2 Years of Age . . . 1,593,157 1,075,871 1,489,018 1,604,550 1,032,961 1,491,429 261,356 125,888 267,470 262,000 112,064 269,751 Total of Cattle ... 4,158,046 4,128,940 654,714 643,815 Sheep : 1 Year old and above Under 1 Year old 10,629,783 6,198,863 11,520,802 6,924,720 1,905,112 813,204 2,012,012 861,448 Total op Sheep 16,828,646 18,445,522 2,718,316 2,873,460 Pios 1,697,914 1,771,081 182,003 192,757 It is stated in the Prefatory Report tliat *' in Great Britain the Area returned as under cultivation has increased by 126,000 acres since 1879, and the total increase in the ten years since 1870 is no leas than 1,694!,0Q0 acres, or a greater Area than the whole of Devonshire. Of this increase about two-thirds or 1,187,000 acres were in England, 220,000 acres in Wales, and 287,000 acres in Scotland. As has been remarked several times in previous reports, a large share of this increased Acreage must be credited to the more correct Returns of late years, when errors from the use of local Acres, such as * Scotch * or * Lancashire ' Acres, and also the omission of out of the way farms, have been discovered." It appears from Table III. of the Agricultural Statistics that the acreage of orchards, &c., was 175,200 acres in England, and 2,834 in Wales; that of market gardens, 40,289 acres in England, and 596 in Wales ; that of nursery grounds, 9,891 acres in England, and 316 in Wales ; that of woods and plantations, l,435,434^acres in Eng- land, and 162,135 in Wales. From Table IV. it appears that the percentage of total cultivated acreage under various kinds of crops was as follows : — SOO ENGLISH LAND AND ENGLISH LANDLORDS. ENGLAND. WALES. 1880. 1879. 1880. 1879. Peroentagi OP Total. Com Crops (including Beans and Peas) Green Crops Bare Fallow Grass : — Clover, &c. , under rotation Permanent Pasture Other Crops 28-4 10-8 31 10-8 46-6 0-3 29-0 11-2 2-7 10-9 45-9 0-3 17-3 4-3 1-1 12-0 p5-3 0-0 17-5 4-6 1-0 12-6 64-4 0-0 TOTAX 100-0 100-0 100-0 100-0 Table YI. contains tlie following : — Statement of the Number op Agricultural Holdings of VARIOUS Sizes,, and of the Acreage of each Glass of Holdings, in England and Wales, in each of the Years 1880 AND 1875. Classipication ENGTiAND. WALES. Holdings. 1880. 1875. 1880. 1875. NUMBEK OP Agkicultuhal Holdings OP EACH Class. 60 Acres and under Erom 50 to 100 „ 100 to 300 „ 300 to 500 „ 600 to 1,000 Atove 1,000 296,313 44,602 58,677 11,617 4,095 500 293,469 44,842 58,450 11,245 3,871 463 40,836 9,767 7,696 454 75 6 40,161 9,656 7,316 433 84 10 Total 414,804 412,340 68,834 57,660 ACHEAGI OP Holdings op eaci I Class. 50 Acres and under Erom 60 to 100 „ 100 to 300 „ 300 to 500 „ 600 to 1,000 Above 1,000 3,528,840 3,233,063 10,197,913 4,359,794 2,664,360 637,311 3,660,405 3,259,110 10,042,162 4,202,402 2,513,903 571,994 647,587 707,743 1,202,098 155,993 47,378 7,176 631,941 698,879 1,141,456 157,725 54,207 12,941 Total 24,611,271 24,139,976 2,767,975 2,697,149 APPENDIX X. 501 The following explanation of the foregoing Table is given in the Prefatory Report : — " On comparing the principal results with the figures of 1875, when the last Return of this kind was obtained, the proportionate Acreage of the large and small Holdings seems to have undergone little change. Thus for Great Britain the Area held in occupations of 50 acres and under is still 15 per cent, of the total ; that between 50 and 100 acres also 15 per cent. ; between 100 and 300, 42 per cent. ; from 300 to 500, 16 per cent. ; from 500 to 1,000, 10 per cent. ; and in farms over 1,000 acres, 2 per cent. " In England alone a tendency to larger occupations may be noticed, the small farms of 50 acres and under being now 14 instead of 15 per cent, of the whole Acreage, and the moderate sized ones, between 50 and 300 acres, 54 per cent, against 56 per cent, in 1875, while farms over 300 acres amount to 32 per cent., or nearly a third of the cultivated area, as compared with 29 per cent, in 1875. " In Scotland, however, the tendency is rather to an increase in occupations between 50 and 300 ^acres, which are now 59 per cent, against 58 per cent, in 1875, and the moderate sized farms in Wales have also somewhat increased ; so that, as before stated, the propor- tionate Acreage for the whole of Great Britain is almost the same." INDEX. A. Abbey Lands, Tenants of, 29. Absenteeism, 123, 171, 353. Agent : Expenses of Agency, 422, 442, 443, 444. Agrarian Revolution of the Fourteenth Century, 10, 16, 17. Agricultural Depression : The Distress of 1879-80, 273 ; Successive bad Harvests, 273 ; Low Eange of Agricultural Prices, 276 ; Causes of Depression of Trade, and Enormous Increase in the Importa- tion of Wheat and other Provisions from Abroad, 278 ; Prospects of the British Grazier or Sheep Farmer, 289. Agricultural Education, Want of, 371, 403 ; In Germany, 405 ; In Sweden, 407, n. Agricultural Holdings, Statement of Sizes of, 1875 and 1880, 500. Agricultural Holdings Act, 1875, 135, 206, 209, 378; Operation of. Per- missive, 209 ; First, Second, and Third Class Improvements, 381 — 383 ; Agricultural Holdings Act Amendment and Tenants' Com- pensation, 474. Agricultural Implements, 11 ; In the Sixteenth Century, 35 ; Improve- ment in, 80, 291. Agricultural Improvements, 203 ; In the Middle Ages, 12; Borrowing Money for, 69 ; Repayment of Loans, 70 ; Compensation for, 207, 377. Agricultural Labourers' Union, 1871, 228. Agricultural Leases in the Fourteenth Century, 17 ; Long Leases of the Middle Ages, 200 ; Adam Smith's Explanation of, 200 ; Ecclesiastical Leases, 201 ; Farms commonly held under Lease until the end of the Eighteenth Century, 203 ; Leases for Years, 203; Grant of, by Limited Owner, 136 ; Favourable Types of, 373, n. See also Leases. Agricultural Machinery, 291. Agricultural Returns of 1880, Extracts from, 498. Agricultural System of England, Reforms to be Effected in, 366 ; The Tripartite System, 369 ; Disadvan- tages of a System of Tenancy, 371 ; Security of Tenure, 373 ; Customs, 376 ; Compensation for Unexhausted Improvements, 377 ; Development ' of Agriculture during a State of War, 379 ; Tenant-right, 380, 391 ; Failure of Freedom of Contract, 380 ; First, Second, and Third Classes of Agricultural Improve- ments, 381 — 383; Indefeasible right of Tenant to Compensation, 384 ; Sporting Rights, and Game Preserving, 384, 385, 395 ; Reduc- tion of Average Size of Holdings under Tenant-right, 387, 391 ; What System yields the best Return for Capital, 389; Probable Sab- division rather than Consolidation of Holdings, 393 ; Mode of Culture suitable to Small Holdings, 395 ; Dairy Farming, 396 ; Cheese- maMng and Poultry-keeping, 397 ; Market Gardening, 399, 400 ; Hop Grounds, 399 ; Agricultural Educa- tion, 371, 403. Agriculture, State of, in pre-Roman Britain, 1 ; Under the Anglo- Saxons, 3 ; Between the Roman Age and the Fourteenth Century, 10; From the Middle of the Fourteenth to the End of the Sixteenth Century, 15 ; Improve- ments in, in the Sixteenth Century, 35 ; Extent of Land under Cultiva- tion during the !Middle Ages, 10 ; 604 INDEX. During the Seventeentli and Eighteenth Centuries, 42 ; Slow Progress during the Seventeenth Century, 47 ; Comparative produc- tive capacity of the Soil in the Seventeenth and Nineteenth Centuries, 51 ; The Area under Crops, 51 ; Steady Progress of Im- provement in the Eighteenth Cen- tury, 62 ; Eapid Progress of, in the Nineteenth Century, 79 ; Hela- tive Decline of Number of Persons employed in, after 1811, 79 ; Imports of Wheat, 1800—1840, 79 ; Committees of the House of Conunons to enquire into the State of Agriculture ^and the Causes of the Distress affecting the Farming Interest, 1833 and 1836, 81, 82; Corn-growing Area, 82; Diminished Farming Profits in bad Seasons, 83 ; Explanation of the Eise in the Value and Rental of Agricultural Land, 84 — 88; Importance of the Interest, 380 ; Treatises on, between 1767 and 1808, 58; Arthur Young's Conclusions, 58, n. ; Area and Acreage under Crop, &c., 1879-80, 498. Ale, Price of, in 1266, 13. Allotment, Cottager's, 38, 233, 234, 236, 427, 428. Arable Land, Profit of. Compared with Grass Land, 00. Aristocracy, EngUsh Territorial, 147, 448, 458. Artisans, Statutes forbidding VOleins becoming, 17. Assessments Act, 1697, 246, 468. Australia, Registration in, 76. Austrian Empire, Land System, 315 ; Devolution of Property, 316 ; No Class of Tenant-farmers exists, all are Proprietors, with rare excep- tions, 316. B. Baden, Laud System, 314. Ballot, 421. Bateman, Mr. John — His Tables and Explanatory Notes, showing the Distribution of Landed Property between various Classes of Pro- prietors in every County of England and Wales, 173—197. Bavaria, Land System, 314 ; Descent and Inheritance of Land, 314. Beggars, Sturdy, 213. Belgic Settlers, the earliest Agricul- turists in England, 1. Belgium, Land System, 317 ; MorcelU- ment, 317. " Black Death," 1348, 11, 15, 212., Bordarii, 9. Bounty, Com, 48. Bremen, Land System, 321. Brewers, 13. Brewing, Cottage, 414. Britain, Agriculture in pre-Eoman Britain, 1 ; Under the Anglo- Saxons, 3 ; Permanence of Eoman Influences in, 2. See also England. Building Leases, Grant of, by Life- tenant, 69 ; Court of Chancery may authorise, 69. Burdens, On Landed Property : see Landed Property. Cairns, Earl — His Settled Land BUI, and other Bills introduced in 1880, 138—141. Canada, Wheat Production, 280. Capital, Farming, 59. Carrot-growing, 60. Cattle, Ordinary Weight of, in Seventeenth Century, 50 ; Eestric- tions in Importation from Ireland in 1664, 50. Chancery, Court of : In Default of Powers of Sale, Court may direct Sales, 68 ; May authorise Building and other Leases, 69 ; May autho- rise Tenant-for-Ufe to grant Mining and other Leases, 135 ; May direct Settled Estates to be Sold, 136 ; Cumbrous and Dilatory Nature of the Proceedings, 137. Channel Islands : Land System, 325 ; Favours Primogeniture, 325 ; Number of Landowners and average size of Properties, 326 ; High Eents in, 326, 327 ; Great Agricultural Prosperitv of, 327, 328 ; Price of Land, 327. Cheese, Price of, in 1879, 277, n. (2) ; Cheese-making, 397. Children, Unborn, 92 ; Entails upon, 337 Chudleigh's Case, 1588, 43. INDEX. 505 Clim-ch, Parish, 7. "Close Parish," 414. Clover, 47, 53. Club, ViUage, 415. Code Napoleon, 334. Coloni, Koman, 3. Colonies, British, 90. " Commeadation," 6, 7. Common Fields, Inclosure of, 57. Common EeooverieSi 23, 31. Common, Eights of, 55, n., 56, n. (1), 57 ; Loss of, in the Sixteenth Century, 28. Commune, Parish and Village, 417, 418. Commumsm, 452 ; Communistic Theo- ries of Propei-ty, 104. Compensation, 345, 378, n. ; for Agri- cultural Improvements, 207 ; for Unexhausted Improvements, 377 ; Indefeasible Eight to, on Determi- nation of Tenancy, 384 ; Agricul- tural Holding's Act Amendment and Tenants' Compensation, 474. Contingent Eemainders, Trustees to Preserve, 43. " Continuous Corn Growiug," 53, 296. Contract, Failure of Freedom of, 380. Conveyancing, Secret Deeds Legalised by the Statute of Uses, 27 Henry VIII., 72, n. (2), 93 ; Abuses of, 356, 358 ; Eeforms in, 71 ; Lord Cairns's BiU, 1880, 138, 140. Copyhold Tenure, 43. Com: Imported from Britain to the banks of the Ehine in the Fourth Century, 3 ; Holinshed's Statement of the Average Produce of Wheat or Eye, 36, n. ; the Eetum yielded for Seed in the Middle Ages, 11, 36 ; Annual Yield in 1696, 47; Con- sumption of, per head, 47 ; Average Price in the Seventeenth Century, 47, 48, 49, n. ; in the Eighteenth Century, 54 ; Bounty on Exporta- tion in 1688, 48 ; Exportations, 1763-4, 64; 1800-1879, 482, 485; Average Gazette Prices of British Wheat, &c., from 1790 to 1879, 81, n. (1), 83, n., 491 ; per Imperial Quarter, from 1800 to 1848, and from 1849 to 1879, 492. See also Wheat. Com Crops, Successive, 53, 296, 299. Corporation Lands, 99 ; Small Extent of, in Nineteenth Century, 170; Number of Proprietors in 1874, 173. Cotarii, 9. . Cottage Farming, 427 — ^435. Cottagers : Number of Proprietors in 1874, 173. Cottages, Labourers', 213, n., 354 ; Allotment of Four Acres for, 38 ; Act Against Multiplication of, Ee- pealed in 1775, 57 ; Loans for Erection' of, 69; Built to Pay, 227. Counties : Tables Showing Distribu- tion of Land between Various Classes of Landowners, 173 — 187. County Administration, 362. County Courts, 408, 412. County Finance, 417. County Society, 34, 410, 459. Court Baron, 408. Court Leet, 408. Courts, Local, 6. Cow Clubs, 429. Cow Pasture, 429. "Cow's Grass," 12. Cropping, Continuous, 53, 296, 299. Crops, Eotation of, 53. Cross-Eemainders, 66. Crown Lands, Small Extent of, in Nineteenth Century, 170. Curia Regis, 408. Customs, Agricultural, 376. D. Dairy Farming, 59, n., 63, 295, 396. Dairy Produce in the Middle Ages, 12. Democracy, Landed, 111. Denmark, Land System of, 320. Depopulation of Country Districts in the Sixteenth Century, 25, 26. Depression. See Agricultural Depres- sion. Distress . See Agricultural Depression. Distress, Eight of, 422. Distribution of Landed Property, 152, 173. See also Landed Property. Distributions, Statute of, 97, 101. Ditching, 12. Domesday Book, The Original, 93, 171 ; Number of Genuine Free- holders, 171. Domesday Book, The New, 1874-5, 157 ; Errors and Defects of Details, 158- 171, 188—197 ; Exclusion of the MetropoHs from, 159 ; Bearers of Clerical Title entered as Owners, 506 INDEX. 162; Deceptive Effect of Double Entries, 163, 188. Donis, J)e, Statute, 22, 23. Drainage, 12, 79 ; Loans for, 69, 70. E. Ecclesiastical Lands, 10, 172. Ecclesiastical Leasee, 201, 202, n. Education, Agricultural, Want _of, 371, 403; In Germany, 405. "Eldest Sons," 108, 130, 342, 343, 352, 364; In Foreign Countries, 329. Election Statute, 1430, 18. Emblements, 204. Emigration, 225, 439, 442. Enclosure, 4, 63, 79, 90 ; Lord Bacon on, 26 ; Insurrection in 1549, Against, 28 ; Productiveness of Enclosed Lands, 53, n. (1) ; En- closure Acts, 54, 55 ; Area of En- closure, 56 ; " Common Fields," 57 ; Destructive Effect of Enclo- sures on Privileges of Poor Com- moners, 57, 58. Enclosure Commissioners, 69, 72, 135, 143, 146 ; Sutdivision ty Operation of the'Commissioners, 155. England: Agriculture in pre-Eoman , Britain, 1 ; Under the Anglo- Saxons, 3 ; Agriculture from the IVIiddle of the Fourteenth to the End of the Sixteenth Century, 15 ; Prosperity in the Fifteenth Century, 18 ; State of Rural England at the Close of the Seventeenth Century, 46 : The Rural Population, 46 ; Inequahty in Division of Landed Property, 329 ; Whether the Pre- sent Land System deserves to be Upheld, 330 ; Reforms to he Effected in the System of Land Tenure, 331. Entails, 66, 100, 416, 420, 437, 446, 462 ; Barring, 65 ; Breaking, 23, 31 ; Entailing Deeds, 42 ; Aboli- tion of, 338 ; Reforms to be Effected in the English System of, 334. See also Settlements, Family. Estate TaU, 42, 338. See also Entails. " Eton Tables," 48. Eviction, 422. Exports : Bounty on Exportation of Corn in 1688, 48 ; Exports of Com, 1763-4, 54; Quantities of Articles of British and Irish Farm Pro- duce Exported from 1828 to 1879 : Com, 482; from 1827 to 1879: Provisions, &c., 484 ; Quantities of Articles of Foreign and Colonial Farm Produce Exported from the UnitedKingdom from 1800 to 1879 : Com, &c., 485 ; from 1820 to 1879: Provisions, &c., 488 ; Table Show- ing the Percentage that the Ex- ports were of the Imports of Farm Produce from 1828 to 1848, and in Each Decennial Period from 1849 to 1878, 84, n., 490. F. Fallow, 53. Famines, 13. Farm Houses, Demolition of, 26 ; Or- dered to be Re-built by 24 Henry VIII. (c. 24), 27; Loans for Erection of, 69. Farm Labourers, 8. See also La- bourers. Farm Produce, Imports and Exports of. See Exports ; Imports. Farm Rents. See Rents. Farmer : Habits in Olden Times, 300 ; Lucrative Position of, in the Sixteenth Oeiitury, 41 ; Dependent Condition of, under Yearly Tenancy, 198 ; Condition of Small Farmers in 1834,220; Expenses of, in 1835, 224 ; Present Position of, 291 ; Comparative Position of, under Lease and Ownership, 367 ; Future Policy of English Fanners, 291 ; Gentlemen Farmers, 199. Farms : Consolidation of, 25, 445, n. ; Average Acreage of, 198, 199, 200, 392 ; Reduction of Average Size of Holdings, 387 ; Comparative advan- tages of Large and Small Farms, 61 ; Culture suitable to Small Holdings, 395; Cottage Farming, 427, 440 ; Parochial Farms, 219 ; Reduction of Price of Produce by Subdivision of Gains, 300 ; Diminished Profits in Bad Seasons, 83 ; Distribution of Produce, 302. Fee-simple, 350, n. ; Position of Owner of the Fee compared with that of Limited Owner, 134, 142; Mort- gage by Owner of the Fee, 149. Fences, Demolition of, 79. Feoffments, 93. INDEX. 507 Feudal Tenures, 7, 408, 412 ; Abolition of, 245, n. (2) ; AboUtion of, and the Land Tax, 465. Fines, 23, n., 32, 42. Fines and Recovery Act, 65. Fitzherbert's Treatises on Husbandry and Surveying, 35. Fixtures, Agricultural, 208. Folkland, 4. Forced Labour, 3, 8, 9, 17, 20. Foreign Countries, Land in, chiefly Tilled by Owners, 198; Taxation of Land in, 253 ; Descent of Land, in Intestacy, 303. Foreign Systems of Land Tenure : France, 303 ; Prussia and the North German Confederation, 310 ; Wurtemberg, 312 ; Bavaria, 314 ; Austrian Empire, 315 ; Switzerland, 316 ; Belguim, 317 ; Holland, 318 ; Sweden, Denmark, Norway, 320 ; Hanse Towns, 321 ; Schleswig- Holstein, 321 ; Italy, Lombardy, Sicily, 321 ; Greece, Portugal, 321 ; Russia, 322 ; United States of America, 322 ; Channel Islands — Guernsey and Jersey, 325 ; Con- clusions to be drawn from a Review of Foreign Land Systems, 329. ForestaUers, 13. Forests, Royal, 409. France : Land System, 303 ; Peasant Farmer, 231 ; Small Proprietors, 303 ; Number of Tenant Farmers in, 199 ; Partible Succession in, 304, 334; Effect of the French System of Inheritance, 308 ; Dis- tribution of Landed Property, 304 ; Extent of "Wheat-growing Area, 199, 307. Franchise, County, 201, 205 ; In 1430, 18; Lease for Life, 201. Freehold Land Societies, 154. Freeholders, 10, 171. Free Trade, Agricultural, advocated in the Seventeenth Century, 51. Free Trade in Land, 77, n., 105, 138, 148, 330, 334, 347, 348, 354, 357, 361, 379, 426, 452, 458, 463. Freight of "Wheat, Cost of, from United States, 281, n., 282. Fruits, 14. Fundholders, 266. G. Game and the Game Laws, 359, 372, 384, 396 ; Injurious Effect of Excessive Preserving, 385, 386 ; Ground Game Act, 1880, 387, 423. Gavelkind, 21, 98, 332, 449. Gentlemen Farmers, 199. Germany, Agricultural Education in, 405. Government. See Rural Government. Grazier, 289. Great Landowners, Number of, in 1874, 173. See also Landowners. Greece, Land System of, 321. Ground Game Act, 1880, 387, 423. Guernsey. See Channel Islands. H. Hanse Towns, Land System, 321. Harvest of 1833, 1834, and 1835, 81. Harvest "Wages, 226. Harvests, Bad, 273. Hay, 11. Hedge-rows, Demolition of, 79. Hedging, 12. Heir, Unborn, 340. Heirs Presumptive, Effect of Abolish- ing Life-Estates and Entails on, 355. Hereditary Property, the Ideal Owner of, 109, 110, 118, 123. High Farming, not remunerative beyond a certain limit, 298. Holland, Land System of, 318; The Law of Succession favours Division of Landed Property, 318 ; Descrip- tion of Dutch Rural Life, 319 ; Hereditary Leases ; Beklem-iegt, 319. Homestead Law, 439. Hop Grounds, 399. Hungary. See Austrian Empire. Implements. See Agricultural Imple- ments. Imports: Farm Produce, 1800-1879, 84, n., 477 ; "WTieat, &c., from 1800, 84, n. ; Grain and Flour, 1820-79, 84, n. ; Official Returns of Food, 1859-69, 288; 1820-79, 480, 488 ; Quantities of Articles of Farm Produce Imported into the United Kingdom from 1800 to 1879: Com, &c., 477; from 1820 to 1879: Provisions, &c., 480; Table Showing the Percentage that the Exports are of the Imports of 508 INDEX. Farm Produce, from 1828 to 1848, and in each Decennial Period from 1849 to 1878, 490. Impressment of Workmen, 20. Improvements : Compensation for Un- exhausted Improvements, 377 ; First, Second, and Third Class Improvements of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 381—383. See also Agricultural Improvements. Inclosure. iSee Enclosure. Income Tax, 249 ; Assessment of Real Troperty, 111; Incomes derived from Landed Property, 249 ; Pro- fessional and Trade Incomes, 249 ; Incomes of Tenant Farmers, 250. Incumhrances, Paying off, 131. Ihhahited House Duty, 248. " Inquisitiones Post-Mortem," 93. Insurrection in the Eastern Coimties in 1549, 28. Intestacy, 94, 95, 96, 97, 107, 333, 345, 368, 452 ; Attempts to Assimulate the Devolution of Heal to Personal Property, 1836-1876, 77; Real Estate Intestacy Bill, 1876, 78. Investments in Land, 112; Of Pro- ceeds of Sale of Settled Estate, 137. Ireland : Restrictions on the Importa- tion of Cattle from, in 1664, 50 ; Purchase of Farms under the Irish Church Act, 199 ; Number of Tenant Occupiers in, 198 ; Tenant Right, 199; Peasant Farms, 236. Irish Land Act, 374. Italy, Land System of, 321. Jersey. See Channel Islands. Jointure, 66, 117, 131. K. " Kidders or Carriers of Com," 13. Knight Service, 43 ; Onerous Burdens of the Tenure, 44, 45. L. Labour : Forced Labour, 3, 8, 9 ; Scarcity of Labour in 1349, 16 ; Scarcity of, in 1388, 17 ; Failure of Compulsory Labour in 1388, 17. Labourers, Agricultural, 90, 171, 409, 427, 429, 436, 439, 447; Statute of La- bourers, 1349,16, 212, 213; William Longland's Account of the De- mands of Labourers in 1381, 16, n.; Com Wages of, in the Middle Ages, 11; Money Wages, 17; Prejudicial Effect of Inclosures to, 57, 58 ; Dependent Condition of, 89, 211, 447 ; Origin of, 211 ; Free Labourers, 211; Wages, 214, 216, 218, 220, 221 ; Low Standard of Habits and Civilisation in Eighteenth Century, 215 ; Mor- tality of their Children, 215 ; Poor Law Allowances to, 216, 220, 223; " Roundsmen," 217 ; Out-door Re- lief to, 218; Abuses of, 222, 223; Parish Employment for Labourers out of Work, 219 ; Average Wages round London, 221 ; The Labourer dependent on his Earn- ings after the New Poor Law, 223 ; Fall in Wages, 224 ; Low Condi- tion of, 225 ; Rise of Wages, 226, . 227 ; Harvest Wages and Piece- work, 226 ; Wages supplemented by Perquisites and Privileges, 226 ; Employment and Maintenance of Decrepit Labourers, 227, 228 ; Agricultural Labourers' Union, 228 ; Wages, Average Rate of, 229 ; Present Condition of the Labourer tolerably attractive, 230 ; Rarely becomes the Owner of Land, 232 ; Leases to Labourers, 237 ; Discredit of Peasant Farming, 238, 435 ; Position of, 368 ; Eleva- tion of Condition of, 460. Lammas Fields, 4. Land : Increased Application; of Capi- tal to Land in the Sixteenth Century, 24 ; Depreciation of, in 1668, 48 ; Increase in the Selling Value of, 87 ; As an " Article of Luxury," 112; Fancy Price of, 424 ; Communistic Theories, 104, 450 ; State Control, 105, 171, 452 ; Free Trade in, 77, n., 105, 138, 148, 330, 334, 347, 348, 354, 357, 361, 379, 426, 452, 458, 463 ; Evils of Sub- division of, 107 ; Small Number of ■ LargeOwners, 89, 90, 111, 123, 173, 188 ; Reform to be wrought out by Gradual Evolution, and not by Sudden Revolution, 446, 461 ; More frequent Division of Landed Property on Death, 450 ; Cheap Transfer and Secure Titles, 451 ; INDEX. 509 Agricultural Leases, 451 ; Atoli- tiou of Piimogeniture and Entail, 452 ; Ownership and " Limited Ownership," 453; Elevation of the Condition of the Lahourer, 460. Land-hunger, 261. Land Improvement Companies, 69. Landlords, 449; Preferential Claims of, 423 ; Character of English Landlords, 455. See also Land- owners. Landowners, 370 ; Social Position of, 112, 267 ; Privileges of, 112, 267, 412 ; Best Type of, 366, 369, 370 ; Antagonism of, with Commercial Classes, 113; Small Number of Large Owners, 89, 90, 111, 123,173 ; Numherin 1874, 157, 173 ; Number of Large Owners, 1874, 165, 173, 188; Small Owners, 166, 195; Average Extent of Land held by SmaU Proprietors, 497 ; Area owned by various Orders of, 168 — 197 ; Number of Genuine Owners in the Original Domesday Book, 171 ; Number of Great Landowners, 1874, 173 ; Financial Difficulties of Landowner, whose Estates cannot beSold,353 ; Agency Expenses, 422, 442, 444, 449 ; Statement respect- ing the Ownership of Land in England and Wales (exclusive of the Metropolis), 493. See also Landlords. Land Tax, Origin and Nature of, in Connection with the Abolition of Feudal Tenures, 245, 465. Laud Tenure : No Land System in pre-Eoman Britain, 2 ; Under the Anglo-Saxons, 3 ; From the Earliest Period to the Middle of the Four- teenth Century, 1 ; From the Mid- dle of the Fourteenth to the End of the Fifteenth Century, ;15; In the Sixteenth Century, 24 ; During the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, 42 ; Family Settlements, Introduction of, 42 ; Abolition of solitary Tenures, 43, 45 ; Reforms to be efEected in the English System of Land Tenure, 331; Primogeniture, 331 ; EntaU and Settlements, 334; Moderate Re- form would work no Startling Change in the Characteristic Fea- ' tures of English Country Life, 362 ; Foreign Systems of, 303. Landed Aristocracy developed by Primogeniture, 121, 122, 152, 170. Landed Democracy, 111. Landed Property, Distribution of, among a Small and Decreasing Number of Families, 152 ; Tendency of Primogeniture to prevent Dis- persion of Land, 152 ; Augmenta- tion of Ancestral Properties by new Purchases, 152 ; A Counter JTendency partly Neutralises this Gravitation, 154 ; Operation of Freehold Land Societies, 154 ; Sub- division by the Operation of the Enclosure- Commissioners, 155; Results of the Process, 156 ; Former loose Conjectures respect- ing Distribution of Ownership, 156 ; The "New Domesday Book," 1874-5, 157; Errors and Defects of Details,158— 171,188— 197; Exclu- sion of the Metropolis from, 159 ; Bearers of Clerical Title entered as Owners, 162 ; Deceptive Effect of Double Entries, 163 ; Number of Large Landowners, 165; of Smaller Landowners, 166; Inequalities of Landed Proprietorship, Illustra- tions of, 166 ; Area owned by various Orders of Landowners, 168 — 170; Small Area owned by PubKc Bodies, 99, 170, 173 ; The Original Domesday Book, 171 ; Number of Genuine Freeholders, ' 171 ; Dis- tribution of Landed Property between various Classes of Pro- prietors in each County of_Bngland and "Wales (Tables), 173—187; Explanatory Notes on the Fore- going Tables, 188 — 197 ; Peculiar Burdens and Privileges of Zanded Property in England, 241 ; Tithes, 244; Land Tax, 245; Inhabited House Duty, 248 ; Income Tax, 249 ; Succession Duty, 250 ; Local Taxation, 261 ; Poor-rate, 257 ; the Burdens willingly Paid, 266 ; Privi- leges of Landowners, 112, 267. Leaseholders, Importance of, in the Fifteenth Century, 18 ; Protection to, by Statutes 1449 and 1469, 19. Leases, Agricultural, 451 ; Introduc- tion of, 1388, 17; Origin of the Tenure, 200; Metairie, 17,435; Pre- valence of, in Fifteenth Century, 18 ; Leasehold Occupancy, 90 ; Grant of Agricultural Leases by 510 INDEX. Limited Owner, 135; Ecclesiastical Leases, 201, 202, n. ; to Labourers, 237 ; Favourable Types of Leases, 373, n. ; Best Agriculture found on Leasehold Farms, 378 ; Advan- tages of, 422. Leases and Sales of Settled Estates Acts, 68 ; Cumbrous and Dilatory Nature of the Proceedings, 137. Legacy Act of 1780, 250. Licences, Control over, 414, 415. Life Estates, 42 ; Blackstone on, 23. See also Limited Ownership. Limited Ownership, 71, 103, 129, 453 Nature and Operation of, 130 Paying, ofE existing Charges, 131 Position of Limited Owner com- pared with that of Absolute Owner, 134, 142 ; Attempt to reconcile the 'Eight of Settling with Free Trade in Land, 138 ; Settled Land Bill, 1880, 138; the Position of a Tenant-for-Ufe, 141 ; EUustration of the Position of a "Limited Owner " as compared with that of a Fee-simple Owner, 144, 149 ; Vices of Limited Ownership inherent to it, 147 ; Power of Limited Owner to Mortgage, 149. Loans for Agricultural Improve- ments, 69. Local Grovernment. See Rural Govern- ment. liocal Option, 414. Local Taxation, Mr. Goschen's Report on, 251, 256 ; Rates mainly Paid by Occupiers, 254, 255 ; Contribu- tion of Real Property to, 256 ; Aggregate Produce of, 256, 258 ; Country more lightly rated than Urban tTnions, 259 ; Whether Agricultural Interests bear an Un- due Proportion, 260 ; Large Por- tion of, spent locally, 272, n. Lock-outs, 228. Lollardism, 20. Lombardy, Land System of, 321. Lord of Manor, 4, 5. See also Manors. M. Magistracy, Unpaid, 413, 414, 416. Manors, 5 ; Tenants of Manors, 6 ; The Lord's Courts, 7 ; Manorial System the Germ of the Modem English Land System, 7 ; Manor- house, 7 ; The Lord's Private Demesne, 8 ; Tenants-in-ohief, 8. Manufactures, Rise of, in the Sixteenth Century, 31. Manufacturing Industry, Exclusion of, from Suitable Sites, 112, 113. Manure, 11, 35, 80, 207 ; Artificial, 298. Maps, Cadastral, 420. "Mark " System, The German, 3, 5. Market Gardening, 63, 399. " Marriage," 44. Marriage Settlement, 340, 343, 344. Meat, Price of Butchers' Meat in the Middle Ages, 12, 38 ; Price in the Seventeenth Century, 49, 50 ; Aver- age Prices, 1820-78, 84, n. ; Price of, in 1879, 277 ; Influence of the London Market on the Price of Meat, 63 ; Competition of American Supply, 285, 289. Mendicancy, 17. Metayage Tenure, 17, 435. Middlemen, 300, 301. Middlesex Registry, 73, 93. Military Tenures, Abolition of, 43, 45 ; Onerous Burdens of, 44, 45. Monasteries, Extent of the Soil in the Hands of Monastic Societies, 29 ; Hospitality and Charity of, 30 ; Civilising Influences of, 36 ; Effect of the Dissolution of, on Rural Economj', 29. Mortality of Labourers' Children, 215. Mortgage, 348 ; by Limited Owner, 149 ; by Owner of the Fee, 149. Mortmain, 170. Murrains, 13. Necessaries of Life, Abundance of, in the Middle Ages, 13 ; in the Fifteenth Century, 20 ; in the Six- teenth Century, 39. North German Confederation. See Prussia. Norway, Land System of, 320. 0. Ownership, 451 ; of Landed Property in the Sixteenth Century, Absolute Character of, 32. See also Limited Ownership. Oxfordshire, Return of Local Taxa- tion in, 259. INDEX. 511 Pariah Church, 7. Parish Commune, 418. Parks, 10, 32. Parliament, County Representatives, 411. Parochial Administration, 362. Parochial Farms, 219, 233. Panenu, Rural, 410, 459. Peas, 12, S3. Peasant Farming, 236 ; Discredit of, 238, 435. Peasant Proprietors, 6, 10, 105, 436, 438; In Belgium, -455, n. Peasant Revolt, 1381, 10, 16, 17. Peasantry, 211; Impoverishment of, in the Sixteenth Century, 28 ; Divorce of the Peasant from the Son, 31. Peerage, Hereditary, 107 ; Continental, 108, 120. Peers : Number of Landowners, 1874, 173. Perpetuities, 344. Personal Property, Exempt from the Law of Primogeniture, 97 ; Lease- holds count as Personalty, 97 ; Liability of, to Poor-rate, 246, 262, n., 471. Pestilence of 1348. See "Black Death." Petite Culture, 194, 396. Piecework, 226, 229. Pin-money, 66. " Pit Villages," 362. Plague of 1340. &e " Black Death." Plough, Steam, 80. Ploughing, In the Middle Ages, 11. Poaching, 395. Poor-aUotments, 38, 233, 234, 236, 427, 428. Poor Law, Prejudicial Effect of Indis- criminate ReHef, 222 ; Pauperising Effect of, on Labourers, 214, 447. See also Labourers, Agricultural. Gilbert's Act, 1782, 216, 217; Sturges Bourne's Committee, 219 ; Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834, 221. Poor-rate, 257, 416; In 1701 and 1801, 218; Rise of, 222; Liability of Personalty to, 246, 262, u., 471|; Amount of Rate levied in certain Union Counties, 1852-78, 496. Population between 1760 and 1800, 216; In 1801, 218. Portions, 358 ; Of Younger Children, 132, n. Portugal, Land System, 321. Post-obit Bonds, 116. Potatoes, 61. Poultry Breeding and Keeping, 63, 397. Predial Bondsmen, 3, 211. Presumptive Heirs, 355. Prices, Fluctuations of, 13 ; Average Price of Wheat in the Middle Ages, 11 ; In the Sixteenth Century, 38 ; Of "Wheat between 1350 and 1750, 39; Of Wheat under the Influences of Protection, 80 ; Agricultural Produce in Wilt- shire, in Seventeenth Century, 49, n. See also Wheat. Primogeniture, 21, 24, 42, 66, 89, 129, 198, 331, 336, 350, 353, 361, 410, 412, 416, 420, 437, 446, 449, 462; Introduction of, 90, 103 ; The Law of Primogeniture, 91 ; The Gmtom of, 91 ; Difficulty of Reviewing the Actual Operation of Primogeniture in England, 92; Effect of the Abolition of, in the United States, 96 ; Personalty Exempt from the Law, and little affected by the Custom, 97 ; Prevalence of Primo- geniture among the Landed Aris- tocracy, 99, 101 ; Disparity of Fortune between the Eldest Son « and Younger Children arising from the Practice of Entailuig, 100 ; The Law and the Custom, Operation of, 101 ; Attempts to Abolish the Law as distinct from the Custom, 77 ; Considerations how far the Institu- tion should be Upheld, 102—104 ; Primogeniture involves little Per- sonal Injustice to Yoimger Children, 104 ; Irrelevance of Communistic Attacks on, 104 ; Arguments in Favour of Primogeniture, 106 ; Opinion of the Real Property Com- missioners, 1828, 106 ; Analysis of the Plea for, 107— 128; Successive Safeguards of, 92, u. (2) ; Tendency of, to prevent Dispersion of Land, 121, 122, 152, 170 ; Not Adopted in its Entirety by Foreign Nations, 329 ; Considerations on the Expe- diency of Reforming the Institu- tion, 331 ; Opinion of Adam Smith, 336. Probate'Duty, 251. ' 612 INDEX. Profits of Farming in the Sixteenth Century, 34. Property, Subdivision of, in the Middle Ages, 20 : Eights of, 452 ; Duties of, 456. Protection, Price of Wheat under the Influence of, 80. "Protector of the Settlement," 65, 66, 67, 91. Prussia and the North German Con- federation, Land System of, 310 ; Small Proprietors, 310 ; Division of Property on Intestacy, 310 ; Entails not Prohibited, 310. Public Bodies. See Corporation. PubHc Houses, 415. "Purveyance," Eoyal, Mitigation of the Abuse of, 20. Q. Quarter Session, 409, 416. Quia Umptores, Statute, 22, 201. E. Eailway Duty, 258. Eajik, Inheritance ''of, by Younger Children, 120. Eeal Estate Succession BOl, 1870, 78. Eeal Property, Aggregate Value in 1815 and 1868, 85, n. ; Eeforms Founded on the Eeports of the Eeal Property Commissioners, 1829-33, 1 71 ; AssimUatiou of Eealty to Per- sonalty on Intestacy, 334, 344, 347. RebeDion, Wat Tyler's EebeDion, 10, 16, 17. Eecoveries, Common, 31, 42. Eeforms : to be Effected in the EugUsh System of Laud Tenure, 331 ; In the System of Family Settlements, 334 ; In the Agricultural System of England, 366 ; In the System of Eural Government, 408 ; Effect of Eeforms on Eural Economy and Eural Society, 420 ; Eeforms to be Wrought out by Gradual Evolu- tion, and not by Sudden Eevolu- tion, 446, 461. Registration of Title, 366 ; Eeport of the Commission, 1857, 72 ; Lord Gairns's Bill, 1859, 72; Lord West- bury' s Transfer of Land Act, 1862, 73 ; Lord Cairns's Land Transfer Act, 1875, 74 ; Distinction between the Acts of 1862 and 1871, 74 ; Re- port of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, 1879, 75 ; Recommendations of the Com- mittee, 76 ; Compulsory, 357 ; Dis- trict or Central, 357 ; In Australia, 76. Rents, Agricultural, 292 ; Of Land in the Sixteenth Century, 36 ; First Instances of the Modern Farmers' Eent, 36, n. ; In the Eighteenth Century, 69 ; Rise in Rental of Land, 84, 85, 88 ; Rise in Rental of Land in Scotland, 86 ; Capital Value of Increase in England and Wales between 1857 and 1875, 86; Explanation of this Result, 86; Seldom Excessive on Settled , Estates, 147 ; Of Market Gardens, 400 ; Farm Rents in United States, 283 ; Arthur Young's Opinion as to Farming Rents, 59, n. (1), 60. Re-settlement, 67, 130, 131 ; Attempts by Eldest Sons to Set Aside, 134, n. Revolution, Agrarian, of the Four- teenth Century, 10, 16 ,17. Rights of Common, 65, n., 56, 'n. (1), 57 ; Loss of, in the Sixteenth Cen- tury, 28. Roads : No Eoads in Ancient Britain, 2 ; Eoman Eoads in England, 2. Eomans : Permanence of Eoman In- fluence in Britain, 2. Roots, Edible, but little known to the Ancient Britons, 2 ; not Cultivated in England before the Sixteenth Century, 14 ; Winter Roots, 12. "Roundsmen," 217. Eural Government, Seforms to be Effected in the System of, 408 ; The Present Organisation a Modern Superstructure raised upon a Feudal Basis, 408 ; Attempts to Eevive the Lost Art of Popular Administra- tion, 409 ; The Old Popular Courts, 412; Control over Licences for the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors, 414 ; Management of County Finance, 416 ; County Financial Boards, 417; Communal Government of Parishes and Tillages, 417 ; Leases, Advantages of granting, 422_; Eight of Distress, 422 ; Game Laws, 423 ; Modification of the semi - feudal Eelations between Landlords and Tenants, 423 ; Ex- INDEX. 513 tension of Trade and Population in Agricultural Counties, 424 ; Cot- tage Farming, 427, 440. Eussia, Land System of, 322. Sale of Settled Estate, 13G, 137; In- vestment of Proceeds, 67, 137. Sale, Power of, in Settlements, 67. Savings in the Fifteenth Century, 20. Saxony, Land System of, 311. Sohleswig-Holstein, Land System of, 321. Scotland, Vested Interests in Settled Estates, 99, 494; Registiy Oface, 93 ; Increase of Labourers' Wages in, 229, n. Soutage, 44. Seed, The Return yielded in the Mid- dle Ages, 11, 36. Serfdom, 17. See also Slavery. Settled Estates, Vested Interests in, 90, 494 ; Court of Chancery may Direct Sale, 136 ; Cumbrous and Dilatory Nature of the Proceed- ings, 137 ; Settled Estates Acts, 68. Settled Land BiU, 1880, 138. Settlement, Poor Law, 223. Settlements, Family, 65, 89, 90, 91, 115, 129; Introduction of, 42; Extent of Estates Under Settle- ment, 100, n. ; Barring Entails by the Abohtion of Fines and Re- coveries Act, 65 ; " Protector of the Settlement," 65, 66, 67, 91; Consent of the "Protector," 65; Mode Whereby the Objects of Perpetual Entails are stiU Secured, 66 ; Re-settlements, 67 ; Power of Sale, 67, 68, n. ; Re-investment of Purchase-Money, 67 ; In Default of Power of Sale Court of Chan- cery may Direct Sales, 68 ; But Few Estates in England Literally Unsaleable, 68; Settled Estates Acts, 68 ; Grant of Building Lease by Life-Tenant, 69 ; Court _ of Chancery may Authorise Building and Other Leases, 69 ; Power to Borrow Money for Agricultural Improvements, 69 ; Ee-payment of Loans, 70 ; Reforms to be. Effected in the System of, 334; Con- siderations on the Forms of the Proposals, 334; Abolition of En- tails, 338; Distiaotion between H H Settlements made by Will and Settlements made by Deed inter vivos, 339 ; Unborn Heir, 340 ; Life-Tenancy, 341 ; Objections to Abolition of, 343 ; Assimilation of Personalty to Realty, 344 ; Aboli- . tion of Life Estates in Land con- sistent with the Maintenance of Life Interests in Personalty, 347 ; Prohibition of " Limited Owner- ship" would EstabUsh Free Trade in Land, 347 ; Reserving Power of Appointment Among Children to Every Life-Tenant ia Possession, 349 ; Probable Effect of Abolishing Life-Estates and Entails upon Heirs-Presumptive, 365. Shares, 95, 263. Sheep Farmiug, 27, 50, 289 ; In the Middle Ages, 12. Sheep Rot, 276. Silver, Depreciation of, in the Six- teenth Century, 40. Slavery : Predial Bondsmen, 3, 211; Slave Class under the Anglo- Saxons, 8 ; Bristol Slave Trade Suppressed by the Conqueror, 8 ; Servi Registered in the Domesday Census, 8 ; Extinction of Slavery, 9. Small Proprietors, Number of, 1874, 173 ; Average Extent of Land held by, 497. Socage Tenure, 21, 43, 45 ; " Soe- inanniy^ 9. Solicitors, Family, 332. Solicitors' Remuneration BUI, 1880, 140. Spain, Land System, 322. Sporting Eights, 205, 384—386. " Squatters," 57, 437. "Squires:" Number of Landowners, 1874, 173, 190. Stamp Duties, 248. State Control of Property, 171, 345, 454. Stock, Breeding of, 80. Strikes, 228. " Subsidies," 245, 246, 247. Succession Duty, 250. Sweden, Land System of, 320 ; Agri- cultural Education in, 407, n. Switzerland, Land System of, 316 ; Small Proprietors, 316. T. Taltarum's Case, 23, n. Taxation, Equality of, in the Fifteenth 514 INDEX. Century, 20 ; Incidence of, as Afiecting the Agricultural Interest, 241, 248 ; Pressure of, formerly on Land, 242 ; Proportion of Imperial Taxation Falling on Eeal Property and Income, 251, 252 ; Capital more Heavily Taxed than Earn- ings, 252; Of Land in Foreign Countries, 253 ; As Affecting Agri- cultural Interest, 252, ii. Tenancy, Disadvantages of the Sys- tem, 371. Tenant-at-Will, 33, 103. See also Yearly Tenancy. Tenant Farmers, 10, 18; Number of, in Great Britain, Ireland, and France, 198, 199. Tenant for Life," Position of, 141, 141, n. (2). See also Limited Owner- ship. Tenant in capite hy Knight Service, 44 ; Onerous Burdens Imposed on, 45. Tenant-Eight, 206, 422 ; Compulsory, 374, 377, 380, 387, 391, 422 ; Would Promote Suhdi vision of LargeHold- ings, 391, 393 ; In Ireland, 199. Tenants' Compensation: Agricultural Holdings Act Amendment and Tenants' Compensation, 474. See also Compensation. Tenants in Common in Tail, 66. Tenure, Security of, 373 ; Tenure in Chivalry, 43. /See afeo Land Tenure ; Tenant-Eight. Thelusson Act, 344. "Three-Field Hushandry," 10. Tithes, 244. Title. See Eegistration. Title Deeds, Covenants for Production of, 140. Title, Indefeasible, 358. Titles, Security of, 451. Town Moot, 408. Township, 4. Transfer of Land, Anglo-Saxon Transfer, 92; Lord Cairns' s Bill, 1859, 72 ; Lord "Westbury's Act, 1862, 73 ; Lord Caims's Act, 1876, 74 ; Distinction between the Acts of 1862 and 1875, 74 ; Eeport of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, 1879, 75; Eecommen- dations of the Committee, 76 ; Legal Impediments to, in England, 329 ; Mr. G. 0. Morgan on the Notion that Land can be made as Transferable as Stock, 77, n. ; Expenses of, 155, n. ; Cheap Transfer, 451. Trusts of Land, 348. Turnip Cultivation, 47, 53. Tyler's, Wat, Eebellion, 10, 16, 17. V. Ulster Tenant-Eight, 372. Unborn Child, 92 ; Entails upon, 337. Unborn Heirs, 119, 340. Unexhausted Improvements, 204 ; Compensation for, 377. Union Chargeability Act, 267. United States, Enormous Increase in the Production of Wheat, 279 ; Area under Wheat, 279 ; Further Development of Wheat Growing, 279 ; Average Production per Acre, 280 ; Cost of Growing, and Export, 281, . 283 ; Probable large Increase of Exports, 282 ; Circum- stances which may help to Eedress the Balance in Favour of English Agricultiire, 283 ; Competition with •Meat Supply of Great Britain, 285, 289 ; Elastic Character of American Agriculture, 294 ; Profits of Wheat Growing in Minnesota, 280, n. (2) ; Acreable yield of Wheat, 281, n. (1); Farm Eents, 283; Habits of Western Farmer, 283, 284; Land System, 322 ; Division of Land in case of Intestacy, 322, 323 ; Small Proprietors, 323 ; Freedom to Devise Property, 323. Uses, 23. Uses, Statute of, 72, n. (2). V. Vagrancy, 28. Vegetable Farming, 401 ; Edible Boots but little known to the Ancient Britons, 2 ; Kitchen Vegetables not Cultivated in England before the Sixteenth Century, 14. See also Market Gardening. Vested Interests, 349 ; In Settled Estates, 90; How far Entitled to Protection, 494. Vetches, 12. ViUage Club, 415. Village Commune, 5, 270, 418; Under the Anglo-Saxons, 3. Village Life in the Middle Ages, 216. INDHX. 515 Villeins, 8, 9, 172 ; Statutes Fortidding them to become Artisans, 17 ; Elevation of their Condition, 9 ; "Villeins in Gross," 8. Vineyards, Roman, 14. W. Wages, Ag-ricultural, 214, 216, 218, 220, 221, 224, 291 ; Com Wage of Labourers in tbe Middle Ages, 11 Wages in the Fifteenth Century, 20 In the Sixteenth Century, 36, 38 In the Seventeenth Century, 47. n. (3), 218 ; In 1720, 214 ; Money- Wages of Labourers, 17 ; Eegula- tion of Agricultural Wages by Statute, 37; Tables of, 218; Average Wages round London in Arthur Young's Time, 221 ; Else of Wages after Eepeal of the Com Laws, 226, 227 ; Wages Supplemented by Perquisites and Privileges, 226 ; Low Wages formerly Supplemented by Parish AUowance, 226 ; Else in, 228, n. ; Average Rate of Day Labourers' Wages, 229 ; Increase of, in Scot- land, 229, n. ; English Labourer draws Wages for six Working Days, 230, n. War, Development of Agriculture during, 379. " Wardship," 44. Wars of the Eoses, England during, 18. Waste : The Lords' Waste, 6 ; Extent of Waste Land in 1874, 173, 193. Wheat, Average Price of, in the Mid- dle Ages, 11 ; Average Price be- tween 1350 and 1750, 39 ; Importa- tions in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries, 39 ; Exportations, 39, 40, n. ; Maximum Price of, in 1812, 81 ; Harvests of 1833, 1834, 1835, 81 ; Average Price in 1833 and 1835, 81 ; Average Price between 1814 and 1835, 82; Corn-growing Area, 82 ; Imports, 1800-1840, 79 Average Price since 1836, 82 Average Price since 1849, 82 Average Prices, 1820-78, 84, n. Facts relating to Home-grown Wheat, 1849-78, 83 ; Price in 1879, 277 ; Price of Wheat under the Influence of Protection, 80 ; Wheat Growing in the United States, 279 ; Glut of, from Abroad, 299 ; Average Gazette Prices of British Wheat, &c., from 1790 to 1879, 491 ; Average Gazette Prices of British Wheat per Imperial Quarter from 1800 to 1848, and from 1849 to 1879, 492. Widows, Jointures for, 6, 117, 131. WiUs, Contradictory, 95. Wills, Eegistry of, 93. Wills, Statute of, 42. Wool, 212 ; Supply of, in the Middle Ages, 13 ; Exports of, 13, 50 ; English Wool and Woollen Manu- factures, 35. Wurtemburg, Land System of, 312 ; Subdivision of Land, 312 ; Peasant Owners, 313 ; Partition of Land on Intestacy, 313 ; On Large Farms Eldest Son commonly Succeeds to the whole Property, 313. Y. Yearly Tenancy, Dependent Condition, of Farmers under a System of, 198 ; Prevalence of, in England, 200, 204, 205, ; Causes Contributing to, 205 ; Tenant-Eight, 206 ; Agri- cultural Holdings Act, 1875,206; Operation of. Permissive, 209 ; Parity of, in Foreign Countries, 330. Yeomen, 10, 18, 19, 46, 196, 201, 203, 361, 409, 412, 421, 427 ; Habits of Family, and Mode of Life, 20, 33 j Harrison's Description of, under Elizabeth, 32 ; Number of Yeomen Landowners in 1874, 173, 190. Yorkshire Eegistry, 73, 93. Younger Children, 98, 101, 102, 132, 148, 272, 343, 352 ; Disparity of Fortune between Eldest Son and Younger Children, 100,; Portions of, 100, 116, 132, n. ; Little Per- sonal Injustice to, by Primogeni- ture, 104, 126 ; Inheritance of Rank by, 120. CASSELL, PEITEE, GALPIN & CO., 'SELLS SAUVAOE WOIIKS, LONDON, E.G. 1180 SELECTIONS PROM VOLUMES Published by Cassell, Petter, Galpin & Co. Young Ireland : A Fragment of Irish History. By the Hon. Sir Charles Gavan Duffy,, K.C.M.G. Demy 8vo, cloth, 2 IS. *#* This book is a memoir of the few stormy years in Ireland during which O'Connell was tried and convicted of conspiracy, and Smith O'Brien tried and convicted of high treason, written by one who was in succession the fellow-prisoner of each of them, and has since seen a remarkable career in Australia. The book is founded on the private correspondence of the leading men of the period, and purports to throw a searching light on the Irish politics of the present day. A History of Modern Europe. By C. A. Fyffe, M.A., Fellow of University College, Oxford. Vol. I. with Two Maps. Demy 8vo, I2s. *»* This New and Original Work will consist of three volumes, which will contain a history of Europe from the time of the French Revolution down to the present date. It will be written in a popular and attractive style, describing the general course of European History, and the most noteworthy events between the dates indicated, and showing the social, political, and com- mercial growth or decline of the various nations of Europe. The first volume extends from the outbreak of the Revolutionary War in 1792, to the accession of Louis XVIII. in 1814. Memories of My Exile. By Louis Kossuth. Relating to the Period when the Italian Kingdom was being established, and giving the Secret Treaties and details of the understanding between England, the Emperor Napoleon, and Count Cavour. One Vol., los. 6d. The Life of the Rt. Hon. W. E. Gladstone. By George Barnett Smith, Author of " Poets and Novelists," " Shelley : A Critical Biography," &c. With Two Steel Portraits. Cheap Edition, in One Vol.; cloth, 5s. England : Its People, Polity, and Pursuits. By T. H. S. ESCOTT. Two Vols., demy Svo, cloth, 24s. The English Army : Its Past History, Present Condition, and Future Prospects. By Major Arthur Griffiths. Demy Svo, cloth, 21s. The British Army. Vol. in . By Sir Sibbald Scott, B art. Demy Sv o, cloth, 21s. Russia. By D. Mackenzie Wallace, M.A. Cheap Edition, m One Vol., with Two Maps, los. 6d. Library Edition, Two Vols., 24s. Cassell, Petttr, Galpin 6^ Co. : Ludgate Hill, London; Paris; and New York. , 6r-i.£o Selections from Cassell, Fetter, Galpin &' Go's Volumes {jContinuett). English Land and English Landlords. An Inquiry into the Origin and Character of the English Land System, with Proposals for its Reform. By the Hon. George C. Brodrick. Price 12s. 6d. Published for the Cobden Club. A Ride to Khiva^ By Major Fred Burnaby. Cheap Edition. With Maps, 7s. 6d. The Great Thirst Land. A Ride through Natal, Orange Free State, Transvaal, Kalahari. By Parker Gillmore (" Ubique "). Cheap Edition, with Map, 7s. 6d. With the Armies of the Balkans and at Gallipoli, 1877-8. By Lieut.-Col. Fife COOKSON. Illustrated. 53. Imperial England. By Professor Montagu Burrows, M.A., R.N. Price 6s. England, Cassell's History of. With about 2,000 Illustrations. Nine Vols., cloth, 9s. each. Or in library binding, £,/^ los. complete. United States, Cassell's History of the. With 600 Illustrations and Maps. 1,950 pages, extra crown 4to. Complete in Three Vols., cloth, ^i 7s.; or in library binding, £\ los. India, Cassell's History of. With about 400 Maps, Plans, and Illustrations. Extra crown 4to, Two Vols., cloth, i8s. ; or in library binding, ;^i. The War between France and Germany, Cassell's History of. With 500 Engravings. Two Vols. Extra crown 4to, cloth, 1 8s. ; or bound in half-calf, 30s. The Russo-Turkish War, Cassell's History of. Complete in Two Volumes. With about 500 Illustrations. Extra crown 4to, cloth, 9s. each. British Battles on Land and Sea. By James Grant, Author of the " Romance of War," &c. With about 600 Illustrations. Three Vols., cloth, £\ 7s.; or in library binding, £\ los. Old and New London. With about 1,200 Illustrations and Maps. Six Vols., 9s. each ; or in library binding, the set of Six Vols., £,},. Cassell, Petter, Galpin &' Co. : Ludgate Hill, London; Paris; and New York, Selections from Cassell, Petter, Galpitt &• Co.'s Volumes {Continued). The Life and Work of St. Paul. By the Rev. F. W. Farrar, D.D., F.R.S., Canon of Westminster, and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen, i^th Thousand. Two Vols., demy 8vo, cloth, 24s.; morocco, £7, 2s. The Life of Christ. By the Rev. F. W. Farrar, D.D., F.R.S., Canon of Westminster, and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. Library Edition. Twenty-eighth Edition. Two Vols., cloth, 24s. ; grained calf, 353. ; morocco, £2 2s. Illustrated Edition. With about 300 Illustrations. Extra crown 4to, cloth, gilt edges, 21s.; calf or morocco, £2 2s. THE NEW BIBLE COMMENTARY. New Testament Commentary for English Readers. Edited by C. J. Ellicott, D.D., Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. Three Vols., cloth, £2, 3s. ; or in half- morocco, £\ 14s. 6d. Vol. I. contains THE FOUR GOSPELS, price £z is. Vol. IL contains THE ACTS to GALATIANS. ;^i is. Vol. ni. contains the EPHESIANS to the REVELATION. £1 is. The Half-Guinea Illustrated Bible. Containing 900 Original Illustrations. Crown 4to, cloth, los. 6d. The Bible Educator. Edited by the Rev. E. H. Plumptre, D.D. With about 400 Illustrations and Maps. Four Vols., 6s. each ; also in Two Vols., cloth, 2is. ; or in library binding, ^l 4s. The History of Protestantism. By the Rev. J. A. Wylie, LL.D. With 600 Original Illustrations. Three Vols., 4to, cloth, £1 7s. ; or in library binding, £1 los. Heroes of Britain in Peace and War. By Edwin Hodder. With about 300 Illustrations. Two Vols, extra crown 4to, cloth, 7s. 6d. each. Decisive Events in History. Fifth Thousand. By THOMAS Archer. With Sixteen Original Illustrations. Extr a fcap. 4to, cloth gilt, gs. Through the Light Continent; or, The United States in 1877-8. By William Saunders, ids. 6d. Remedies for War, Political and Legal. By Professor Sheldon Amos, M.A., Barrister-at-Law. Price 6s. Cassell, Petter, Galpin &• Co.: Ludgate Hill, London; Paris; and New York. 3 Selections from Cassell, Fetter, Galpin &• Co.'s Volumes {Continued). Picturesque Europe. "^ Complete in Five Vols. Each containing Thirteen Exquisite Steel Plates from Original Drawings, and nearly 200 Original Illus- trations. With Descriptive Letterpress. Royal 410, cloth, gilt edges, £2 2s. ; morocco, £s Ss. each. Vols. I. and IJ. of PICTURESQUE EUROPE contain Great Britain and Ireland complete. Vols. III., IV., and V. describe the Continent. The Magazine of Art. Vol. III. With an Etching for Frontispiece, and about 300 Illus- trations by the best Artists. Extra crown 4to, los. 6d. Character Sketches from Dickens. Consisting of Six facsimile reproductions, large folio size, of Drawings by Fred Barnard. In Portfolio, 21s. Morocco : Its People and Places. By Edmondo de Amicis. Translated by C. Rollin-Tilton With about 200 Illustrations. Extra crown 4to, cloth, 21s. American Painters. With Eighty-three Examples of their Works Engraved on Wood By G. W. Sheldon. Demy 4to, cloth, 21s. Pleasant Spots Around Oxford. By Alfred Rimmer. With numerous Original Woodcuts. Extra fcap. 4to, cloth gilt, 21s. The Great Painters of Christendom, from Cimabue to WiLKiE. By John Forbes-Robertson. Illustrated throughout. Cheap Edition. Royal 4to, cloth, gilt edges, ;£ I is. Illustrated Travels. Edited by H. W. Bates, Assistant-Secretary of the Royal Geo- graphical Society. Complete in Six Vols., each containing about 200 Illustrations. Cloth, 15s. each ; cloth gilt, gilt edges, i8s. each. The Dord Fine Art Volumes, Published by Cassell, Petter, Galpin & Co., comprise— £ s.d. Purgatorio and Paradiso . 2 10 o £ s. d. The DorS Scripture Gallery 5 10 o The Dore Gallery . • S S o The Dor6 Bible . . .440 Milton's Paradise Lost . 2 10 o Dante's Inferno . . . 2 10 o La Fontaine's Fables . i 10 o Don Quixote . . o 13 o Fairy Tales Told Again .0 50 *#* Also kept in morocco bindings suitable for Presentation. Cassell, Petter, Galpin &> Co. : Ludgate Hill, London ; Paris ; and New York. Selections from Cassell, Fetter, Galpin Sr* Co.'s Volumes {Continued). The Wild White Cattle of Great Britain. An Account of their Origin, History, and Present State. By the late Rev. John Storer, M.A. With Illustrations. Cheap Edition, 7s. 6d. Animal Life Described and Illustrated. By Prof. E. Perceval Wright, M.D., F.L.S. Cloth, 15s. Natural History of the Ancients, Gleanings from the. By the Rev. W. Houghton, M.A. Illustrated. Cloth, 7s. 6d. The World of the Sea. Translated by Rev. H. Martyn-Hart, M.A. Illustrated. los. 6d, Transformations of Insects. By Prof. Duncan, F.R.S. With 240 Engravings. Cloth, 7s. 6d. Cassell's New Natural History. Edited by Prof. Duncan, M.D., F.R.S., assisted by Eminent Writers. Illustrated throughout. Vols. I., II., III., and IV., 9s. each. The Book of the Horse. By S. Sidney. With Twenty-five Coloured Plates, and 100 Wood Engravings. Demy 4to, cloth, 31s. 6d. ; half-morocco, £2 2s. The Illustrated Book of Poultry. By L. Wright. With 50 Coloured Plates, and numerous Wood Engravings. Demy 4to, cloth, 31s. 6d.; half-morocco, £2 2s. The Illustrated Book of Pigeons. By R. Fulton. Edited by L. Wright. With Fifty Coloured Plates, and numerous Engravings. Demy 4to, cloth, 31s. 6d. ; half-morocco, £2 2s. Canaries and Cage-Birds, The Illustrated Book of. With Fifty-six Coloured Plates, and numerous Illustrations. Demy 4to, cloth, 353. ; half-morocco, £2 5s. Louis Figuier's Popular Scientific Works. New and Cheaper Editions. Containing all the Original Illustra- tions, the Text Revised and Corrected, price 7s. 6d. each : — The Human Race. Revised by Robert Wilson. Mammalia. Revised by Professor E. Perceval Wright, M.D. The World Before the Deluge. Revised by W. H. Bristowt, F.R.S. The Ocean World. Revised by Prof. E. Perceval Wright, M.D. Reptiles and Birds. Revised by Captain Parker Gillmore. The Insect World. Revised by Professor Duncan, M. D., F.R.S. The Vegetable World. Revised by an Eminent Botanist. Cassell, Fetter, Galpin &" Co. : Ludgate Hill, London ; Paris ; and New York. Selections from Cassell, Petter, Galpin &» Co!s Volumes {Continued). The Encyclopaedic Dictionary. By Robert Hunter, M.A., F.G.S., Mem. Bibl. Archaeol. Soc, &c. A New and Original Work of Reference to all the Words in the English Language, with a Full Account of their Origin, Meaning, Pronunciation, and Use. Vols. I. and 11., extra crown 4to, cloth, I OS. 6d. each. Library of English Literature. Edited by Prof. HENRY Morley. With Illustrations taken from Original MSS., &c. Each Vol. complete in itself. Vol. I. SHORTER ENGLISH POEMS. 12s. 6d. Vol. II. ILLUSTRATIONS OF ENGLISH RELIGION. lis. 6d. Vol. III. ENGLISH PLAYS. lis. 6d. Vol. IV. SHORTER WORKS IN ENGLISH PROSE. lis. 6d. Dictionary of English Literature. Being a Comprehensive Guide to English Authors and their Works. ByW. Davenport Adams. 72opages, extra fcap.4to, cloth, ios.6d. A First Sketch of English Literature. By Professor Henry Morley. Crown 8vo, 912 pages, cloth, 7s. 6d. Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. Giving the Derivation, Source, or Origin of 20,000 Words that have a Tale to Tell. By Rev. Dr. Brewer. Enlarged and Cheaper Edition, cloth, 3s. 6d. The Leopold Shakspere. The Poet's Works in Chronological Order, and an Introduction by F. J. Furnivall. With about 400 Illustrations. Small 4to, los. 6d. ; cloth, gilt edges, 12s. 6d.; tree calf, 25s. Dedicated by permission to H.R.H. Prince Leopold. Cassell's Illustrated Shakespeare, Edited by Charles and Mary Cowden Clarke. With 600 Illustrations by H. C. Selous. Three Vols., cloth gilt, £1 3s. The Practical Dictionary of Mechanics. Containing 15,000 Drawings, with Comprehensive and TECHNICAL Description of each Subject. Three Volumes, cloth, £-i 3s. Sketching from Nature in Water-Colours. By Aaron Penley. With Illustrations in Chromo-Lithography, after Original Water-Colour Drawings. Super-royal 4to, cloth, 15s. Principles of Ornamental Art, By F. E. HULME, F.L.S., F.S.A. With over 400 Designs. 25s. Studies in Design, By Christopher Dresser, Ph.D., F.L.S., &c. Consisting of Sixty Original Designs. Demy folio, cloth, £2> 3s. Cassell, PMer, Oalpm &= Co. : Ludgate Hill, London ; Paris ; and New York. Selections from Cassell, Petter, Galpin &* Co.'s Volumes {Continued). Our Own Country. An Illustrated Geographical and Historical Description of the Chief Places of Interest in Great Britain. Vols. I. & II., with upwards of 200 Illustrations in each, 7s. 6d. each. The International Portrait Gallery. Complete in Two Volumes, each containing 20 Portraits in Colours of the Distinguished Celebrities of our Colonies and Foreign Nations, with Biographies. Demy 4to, cloth gilt, 12s. 6d. each. The National Portrait Gallery. Complete in Four Volumes. Each containing 20 Portraits, printed in the best style of Chromo- Lithography, of our most Distinguished Celebrities, with Biographies. Demy 4to, 12s. 6d. each. European Ferns. Their Form, Habit, and Culture. By James Britten, F.L.S. With 30 Fac-simile Coloured Plates, painted from Nature by D. Blair, F.L.S. Demy 4to, cloth gilt, gilt edges, 21s. Familiar Wild Flowers. First and Second Series. By F. E. Hulme, F.L.S., F.S.A. With Forty Coloured Plates and Descriptive Text. 12s. 6d. each.j Familiar Garden Flowers. First Series. By Shirley Hibberd. With Forty Full-page Coloured Plates by F. E. Hulme, F.L.S. 12s. 6d. Science for All. Vols. I., II., and III. Edited by Dr. Robert Brown, F.L.S., &c. Each containing about 350 Illustrations. 4to, 9s. each. The Field Naturalist's Handbook. By the Rev. J. G. Wood and Theodore Wood. Cloth, 5s. The Races of Mankind. By Dr. ROBERT Brown, F.R.G.S. Complete in Four Vols., with joo Illustrations. 4to, 6s. each. The Countries of the World. By Robert Brown, M.A., Ph.D., F.L.S., F.R.G.S. Vols. I., II., III., IV., and v., with 130 Illustrations in each. 4to, 7s. 6d. each. The Sea : Its Stirring Story of Adventure, Peril, and Heroism. By F. Whymper. Complete in Four Vols., each containing 100 Original Illustrations. 4to, 7s. 6d. each. Great Industries of Great Britain. Complete in Three Vols., each with about 130 Illustrations. Extra crown 4to, 320 pages, cloth, 7s. 6d. each. Cassell, Pet^, GaJpin if Co. : Ludgate Hill, London ; Paris ; and New York. Selections from Cassell, Fetter, Galpin Ss^ Co.'s Volumes (Continued). j The Family Physician, A Modern Manual of Domestic Medicine. By Physicians and Surgeons of the Principal London Hospitals. Royal 8vo, cloth, 21s. The Domestic Dictionary. An Encyclopaedia for the Household. 1,280 pages, royal 8vo, half-roan, 15s. Cassell's Household Guide. New and Revised Edition. With Illustrations on nearly every page, and COLOURED PLATES. Complete in Four Vols., 6s. each. Cassell's Dictionary of Cookery. With Numerous Engravings and Full-page Coloured Plates. Con- taining about 9,000 Recipes. 1,280 pages, royal 8vo, half-roan, 155. A Year's Cookery. Giving Dishes for Breakfast, Luncheon, and Dinner for Every Day in the Year, with Practical Instructions for their Preparation, By Phillis Browne. Cloth gilt, ss. The Ladies' Physician, A Guide for Women in the Treatment of their Ailments. Cloth, 6s. A Handbook of Nursing, for the Home and for the Hospital. By Catherine J. Wood, Lady Superintend- ent of the Children's Hospital, Gt. Ormond Street. Cloth, 3s. 6d. Common Sense Cookery. By A. G. Payne. 256 pages, extra fcap. 8vo, cloth, 2s. 6d. Common Sense Housekeeping. By Phillis Browne. 256 pages, extra fcap. 8vo, cloth, 2s. 6d. The Etiquette of Good Society. A Comprehensive and Practical Work on the Etiquette of the Present Day. Cheap Edition. Stiff boards, is. ; cloth, is. 6d. What Girls Can Do. A Book for JMothers and Daughters. By Phillis Browne Author of " A Year's Cookery," &c. Crown 8vo, cloth, 5s. How Women may Earn a Living. By Mercy Grogan. Cloth, is. 6d. HW Cassell, Fetter, Galpin & Co.'s Complete Catalogue, containing a List of Several Hundred Volumes, including Bibles and Religiom Works, Mne-Art Volumes, Children's Books, Dictionaries. Educational Works, Handbooks and Guides, History, Natural History, Household and Domestic Treatises, Science, Serials, Travels, 6»c. ifc, sent fast free on application. Cassell, Pater, Galpin Sy Co. : Ludgate Hill, London ; Paris ; and New York, 8