them to keep their poor. The farmers of Shottesbrook called a vestry; summoned all the parishioners to attend, and solicited one cottager to accept from the parish a relief of 3s. per week, because he had nine children to support. His reply was- On no account; thank God, I keep my family very well, and would not, on any consideration, be beholden to the parish.' Another was then importuned to accept relief, on the ground that his wife was lame and sickly; he also begged to be excused; and a similar refusal was experienced from all the other cottagers in succession. When driven to the verge of despair by the want of a pauper, they had at last the good luck to overcome the scruples of a venerable dame, nearly one hundred years old, and usually employed in weeding the garden of the lord of the manor; and by this clever contrivance they managed to escape. The condition of Shottesbrook soon experienced a disastrous change the old owner died, and in 1717, his property, constituting the whole of the parish, passed into the hands of a purchaser, who, either ignorant or regardless of the interests of the poor, took away all their orchards, and converted them into a garden for his own accommodation. Several of the smaller farm-houses and many of the cottages he also demolished, and the land originally attached to the others was taken away and added to the adjoining farms. In the time of the old proprietor, there were thirty houses in the parish; by the new purchaser the number was reduced to twelve. The effect was instantly seen those who were allowed to remain in their cottages, having now neither orchard nor land, soon became paupers dependant upon the parish for relief; and before one generation had passed away, the rates bad advanced to three shillings in the pound.*

In the year 1798, the poor-rates of North Creek, near Burnham, in Norfolk, did not exceed one shilling and nine-pence in the pound down to that time a great number of cows were kept by the cottagers upon broad commonable roads in the summer, and furnished with food in the winter by the farmers in their strawyards; and none of those who kept cows had ever been known to apply to the parish for relief. About this period the farmers began to plough up these commonable roads; and as this species of tillage constantly gained ground, the number of cows was necessarily reduced. It appears by the parish-books that the rates increased in the same proportion that the cows diminished. In the course of seven years they had advanced to three shillings in the pound-at that period a few cows only being still kept by the poor people: a few years afterwards it was found necessary to sell these, and the rates forthwith increased to six

* Gentleman's Magazine for 1795.

shillings

shillings in the pound. In 1818, two labourers still managed to keep one cow each; for this purpose they hired about two acres of land at 30s. per acre; it was cultivated and weeded by the women and children, assisted now and then by the men at extra hours; and this accommodation, in addition to their weekly wages, enabled them to bring up-one man five children, and the other six children, without ever receiving one farthing from the parish. Other labourers, having no cows, received regularly a weekly allowance of two shillings for each child.*

In the county of Bedford the consolidation of farms has not taken place to the extent in which it has been practised in several districts; but notwithstanding the number of persons occupying land has been diminished within the last seventy years to a very considerable amount. By an assessment made for the relief of the poor in Lidlington, in the year 1758, it appears that the parish contained fifty-eight occupiers of land. Of this number the occupations of twenty-two were inconsiderable in extent, as they were assessed on the average at something less than three pounds per annum each; they were, in fact, the occupiers of cottages having small crofts and common rights appendant to them; but still, although their tenements were thus limited, they were so far from being burdensome to the parish, that they were actual contributors to the rates. The number of occupiers, who might with some propriety be called farmers, did not therefore exceed thirtysix. Such was the state of things in 1758. By the beginning of the year 1801, twelve cottagers had lost their crofts and common rights, and become wholly dependent upon the wages of daily labour; and eleven of the lesser farmers had been, by consolidation, deprived of their farms and reduced to the same condition. Twenty-three cottagers, forming, together with their wives and children, a body of at least one hundred and thirty persons, had thus been added to that portion of the population which was already liable to fall upon the poor-rates; and mark the result. The rise in the assessment kept pace with the increase in the chances of pauperism. In 1758,† the cost of supporting the poor did not exceed sixpence in the pound-in 1801, the rates had risen to four shillings in the pound-since which period they have been annually increasing.

In the parish where I reside,' says Mr. Hobman, 'the money collected for poor-rates, about 1780, was 50l., and for the year ending Lady-day 1820, the rates amounted to upwards of 600l. It will

Labourer's Friend, vol. i., p. 4.

+ The assessment did not exceed one shilling in the pound; and a moiety of the sum thus raised was expended on various parochial purposes not connected with the poor.

naturally

naturally be inquired what is the reason of this difference. The first and chief reason I apprehend is, that at the former period labourers in general had land attached to their cottages at reasonable rent. Some had sufficient to keep a cow all the year round; and when this was the case, a man lived in no danger of poverty, for where a cow was kept, there was milk for the children, and a good pig was yearly brought up and killed for the use of the family; and nothing looks better in a poor man's house than a pig hung up in the chimney corner. But some had not so much land, having only from a rood to an acre; and even this small parcel was sufficient to keep a man from craving relief from parish officers, for he contrived to manage his ground in such a manner as to live at least rent free. It was no uncommon thing to see a man cultivate his garden after the work of the day was done for his master; his wife and children all happy in lending a helping hand. So far is land attached to cottages from making labourers idle and careless, that I know of no greater stimulus to exertion and industry than it is. I am as certain the poor-rates would be lowered by letting to every labourer an acre of land with his house, as I am of my own existence.'*

The extent to which not only the occupation, but also the proprietorship, of land was carried in ancient times cannot be conceived by those who confine their attention to the present arrangements of society. In the parish of Clapham in Sussex there is a farm called Holt: it contains one hundred and sixty acres, and is now in the occupation of one tenant. During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, it seems to have been a hamlet in which there were at least twenty-one proprietors of land: we have now lying before us twenty-one distinct conveyances of land in fee, described to be parcels of this hamlet. These documents are in a state of perfect preservation, and bear various dates between the years 1200 and 1400. In 1400 the number of proprietors began to decrease; by the year 1520 it had been reduced to six; in the reign of James I. the six were reduced to two; and soon after the restoration of Charles II. the whole became the property of one owner, who let it as one farm to one occupier. The population resident on this farm, and subsisting upon its produce, between 1200 and 1400, could not have been much less than one hundred persons: the number of persons immediately connected with the tillage of this farm, at the present time, does not probably amount to forty; and-supposing ten of them to belong to the farmer's family, there are thirty persons deriving no part of their subsistence from the land-except as wages of daily labour. Taking the history of property in this parish as an illustration of the changes which took place contemporaneously in other

Labourer's Friend,-Letter, dated 'Banks of the Humber, 1820.'

districts,

districts, we are led to the conclusion that the system of consolidating landed property began to come into operation about the close of the fourteenth century; and that it has proceeded gradually and steadily on its course until it has at length reached a point which is not to be considered without the most serious reflections. It is also matter of history that complaints against vagrancy and idleness, and the difficulty of providing for the poor, began for the first time to be heard in this country about the commencement of the fifteenth century; and that these burdens and complaints have, from that period down to the present time, regularly kept pace with the progress of the system of consolidating farms, and abstracting his crofts, curtilages, and common rights from the English cottager.

If we turn to Scotland, we shall perceive that the same causes have there also been followed by similar results. Towards the close of the seventeenth century the system of consolidating small farms was very extensively carried into effect in the counties which border on the Firth of Forth: the ejected peasantry formed a body of wandering mendicants, so numerous and formidable as to threaten the peace of the district; and the celebrated Andrew Fletcher, of Saltoun, formally proposed their reduction to a state of personal slavery as a remedy for the alarming and pressing evil which the change had occasioned.-In the northern counties, which have been recently reorganised-where the peasantry have been dispossessed, and their farms consolidated and converted into sheep-walks, the landlords are almost annually called upon to make large advances, in some form or other, for the maintenance of the poor; and there is no room for doubt that the burden will become gradually heavier as the population continues to increase, until regular assessments upon the land shall at length be found indispensable. The landlords will no doubt struggle to put off the evil day as long as they can; but, in defiance of all opposition, it will come at last. They can no more prevent this inevitable result of the new system which they have adopted-of dissevering the peasantry from the land-than they can prevent the waters of the Tay from making their way to the ocean. In the southern counties of Scotland, where the system of consolidating farms has been longer in operation, this consequence has, in a great degree, taken place already: in many parishes, regular assessments for the support of the poor have been found unavoidable, and the practice is daily gaining ground. To place the peasant in a situation which will make him depend for a certain portion of his subsistence on the produce of the land which he cultivates, is the only guard against the introduction as well as increase of poor-rates.

We

We have, we are certain, proved to the satisfaction of every reasonable mind, that these rates originated in this country when the people were driven from the cultivation of land on their own account, and left without any share in the produce of the soil, except as labourers hired by others; and it is at this hour universally found in Scotland, that people occupying land, however limited the extent or scanty the produce, never apply for charity -except in extreme cases. In those parts of Scotland where the ancient system of occupying land still continues in full vigour, no regular provision for the poor is requisite.

'Wherever the inhabitants still hold their lands,' says General Stewart in his admirable Sketches of the Highlands, the funds for the relief of the poor have been stationary. In the Highlands of Perthshire, even in 1816 and 1817, years of unprecedented pressure on the poor-when great sums were subscribed for their support in the south-there was no increased demand beyond what private benevolence supplied.'-(vol. i. App. p. 57.) The districts of Athole and Breadalbane,' says the same authority, are divided into eleven parishes, and contain a population of 26,480 persons; of which number not more than 364 (taking the average of five years previous to 1819) require relief from the public funds. The extent

*

of this relief cannot be great, as the funds for the support of the poor are supplied by voluntary donations and the interest of a few trifling legacies. Accordingly, the annual sum allotted for the above number, on the same average of five years, amounted to 5221., or about twenty-eight shillings to each individual. * The continuance of small farms allows to a very great proportion of the people a share in the produce of the earth: hence they feel no abject poverty, although subjected, of course, like other parts of the kingdom, to the difficulties arising from bad crops, depreciated produce, and other causes. So great a proportion of the people having a permanent support, they are able to assist the destitute without the smallest call upon landlords.'vol. i. p. 188. (3d edition.)

We beg not to be misunderstood:-we are far from imputing the evil consequences which we have detailed to the measure itself, but to the manner in which it has been carried into effect. If, on every inclosure, an allotment of land in severalty had been laid to every cottage, and strictly preserved from subsequent alienation, we feel convinced that the change would have proved no less beneficial to the labourer, than to the public. The idle and negligent habits which a residence near extensive commons sometimes encouraged among the peasantry, would have been repressed; the roving disposition of the possessor of common rights would have been exchanged for the regular industry of the crofter; and the wastes and commons of the country would have been brought into tillage without detriment to any class of society.