A Short History of English Agriculture Part 17

Sledds Rakes

_For the barn and stable._

Flails Pannels (pillions) Pails Winnowing fan Pack-saddles Mane combs Sieves Cart lines Goads Sacks Ladders Yokes Bins Corn measures Wanteyes[351]

Curry combs Brooms Suffingles (surcingles?) Whips Skeps (baskets) Screens for corn.

Harness

_For the meadows and pastures._

Scythes Pitchforks Cutting spade for hayrick Rakes Fetters and clogs Horse-locks.

Besides many tools.

A considerable variety of manures were in use, chalk, lime, marl, fuller's earth, clay, sand, sea-weed, river-weed, oyster sh.e.l.ls, fish, dung, ashes, soot, salt, rags, hair, malt dust, bones, horns, and the bark of trees. Of the oyster sh.e.l.ls Worlidge says, 'I am credibly informed that an ingenious gentleman living near the seaside laid on his lands great quant.i.ties, which made his neighbours laugh at him (as usually they do at anything besides their own clownish road or custom of ignorance),' and after a year or two's exposure to the weather 'they exceedingly enriched his land for many years after.' The bones then used were marrow-bones and fish bones, or 'whatever hath any oiliness or fatness in it', but the bones of horses and other animals were also used, burnt before being applied to the land, crus.h.i.+ng not being thought of till many years after.

In 1688 Gregory King,[352] who was much more accurate than most statisticians of his time, gave the following estimate of the land of England and Wales:--

Acres. Per acre.

Arable 9,000,000 worth to rent 5s. 6d.

Pasture and meadow 12,000,000 " " 8s. 8d.

Woods and coppices 3,000,000 " " 5s.

Forests and parks 3,000,000 " " 3s. 8d.

Barren land 10,000,000 " " 1s.

Houses, gardens, churches, &c. 1,000,000 Water and roads 1,000,000 ---------- Total: 39,000,000

He valued the live stock of England and Wales at 18-1/4 millions, and estimated the produce of the arable land in England at:

Million Value bushels. per bushel.

Wheat 14 3s. 6d.

Rye 10 2s. 6d.

Barley 27 2s. 0d.

Oats 16 1s. 6d.

Peas 7 2s. 6d.

Beans 4 2s. 6d.

Vetches 1 2s. 6d.

The same statistician drew up a scheme of the income and expenditure of the 'several families' in England in 1688, the population being 5-1/2 millions[353]:--

No. of families Cla.s.s. Income.

in cla.s.s.

160 Temporal lords 3,200 0 0 800 Baronets 880 0 0 600 Knights 650 0 0 3,000 Esquires 450 0 0 11,000 Gentlemen 280 0 0 2,000 Eminent merchants 400 0 0 8,000 Lesser merchants 198 0 0 10,000 Lawyers 154 0 0 2,000 Eminent clergy 72 0 0 8,000 Lesser clergy 50 0 0 Yeoman: 40,000 Freeholders of the better sort 91 0 0 120,000 Freeholders of the lesser sort 55 0 0 120,000 (Tenant) farmers 42 10 0 50,000 Shopkeepers and tradesmen 45 0 0 60,000 Artisans 38 0 0 364,000 Labouring people and outservants 15 0 0 400,000 Cottagers and paupers 6 10 0

He calculated that the freeholder of the better sort saved on an average 8 15s. 0d. a year per family of 7; and the lesser sort 2 15s. 0d. a year with a family of 5-1/2. The tenant farmer with a family of 5, only saved 25s. a year, while labouring families who, he said, averaged 3-1/2 (certainly an under estimate), lost annually 7s., and cottagers and paupers with families of 3-1/4 (also an under estimate) lost 16s. 3d. a year. It will thus be seen that the tenant farmers, labourers, and cottagers, the bulk of those who worked on the land, were very badly off; the tenant farmer saved considerably less than the artisan. It will also be noticed that the rural population of England was about three-quarters of the whole.[354]

The winter of 1683-4 was marked by one of the severest frosts that have ever visited England. Ice on the Thames is said to have been eleven inches thick; by Jan. 9 there were streets of booths on it; and by the 24th, the frost continuing more and more severe, all sorts of shops and trades flourished on the river, 'even to a printing press, where the people and ladies took a fancy to have their names printed and the day and year set down when printed on the Thames.' Coaches plied, there was bull-baiting, horse and coach races, puppet plays and interludes, tippling 'and other lewd places'--a regular carnival on the water.[355] Altogether the frost which began at Christmas lasted ninety-one days and did much damage on land, many of the trees were split as if struck by lightning, and men and cattle perished in some parts. Poultry and other birds and many plants and vegetables also perished. Wheat, however, was little affected, as the average price was under 40s. a quarter. In 1692 a series of very bad seasons commenced, lasting, with a break in 1694, until 1698, always known as the 'ill' or 'barren' seasons, and the cause was the usual one in England, excessive cold and wet. In 1693 wheat was over 60s. a quarter, and in Kent turnips were made into bread for the poor.[356]

The difference in the price of farm produce in various localities was striking, and an eloquent testimony to the wretched means of communication. At Newark, for instance, in 1692-3 wheat was from 36s.

to 40s. a quarter, while at Brentford it touched 76s.; next year in the same two places it was 32s. and 86s. respectively. In 1695-6 hay at Newark was 13s. 4d. a ton, at Northampton it was from 35s. to 40s.

In 1662 was pa.s.sed the famous statute of parochial settlement, 14 Car.

II, c. 12, which forged cruel fetters for the poor, and is said to have caused the iron of slavery to enter into the soul of the English labourer.[357] The Act states, that the reason for pa.s.sing it was the continual increase of the poor throughout the kingdom, which had become exceeding burdensome owing to the defects in the law. Poor people, moreover, wandered from one parish to another in order 'to settle where there is the best Stocke, the largest commons or wastes to build cotages, and the most woods for them to burn and destroy.'[358] It was therefore determined to stop these wanderings, and most effectually was it done. Two justices were empowered to remove any person who settled in any tenement under the yearly value of 10 within forty days to the place where he was last legally settled, unless he gave sufficient security for the discharge of the parish in case he became a pauper.

It is true that certain relaxations were subsequently made. The Act of 1691, 3 W. & M., c. 2, allowed derivative settlements on payment of taxes for one year, serving an annual office, hiring for a year, and apprentices.h.i.+p; while the Act of 1696, 8 & 9 Wm. III, c. 30, allowed the grant of a certificate of settlement, under which safeguard the holder could migrate to a district where his labour was required, the new parish being a.s.sured he would not become chargeable to it, and therefore not troubling to remove him till there was actual need: but the statute acted as an effectual check on migration and prevented the labourer carrying his work where it was wanted.[359] It became the object of parishes to have as few cottages and therefore as few poor as possible. In 'close' parishes, i.e. where all the land belonged to one owner, as distinguished from 'open' ones where it belonged to several, all the cottages were often pulled down so that labourers coming to work in it had to travel long distances in all weathers. We shall see further relaxation in the law in 1795, but it was not until modern times that this abominable system was destroyed. The agricultural labourer's difficulty in building a house was aggravated by the statute 31 Eliz., c. 7, before noticed, which in order to restrain the building of cottages enacted that none, except in towns and certain other places, were to be built unless 4 acres of land were attached to them, under a penalty of 10, and 40s. a month for continuing to maintain it. This Act was not repealed until the reign of George III. However, it seems to have been frequently winked at. In Shrops.h.i.+re, for instance, the fine often was only nominal; in the seventeenth century orders authorizing the building of cottages on the waste were freely given by the Court of Quarter Sessions, and orders were also made by the Court for the erection of cottages elsewhere.[360]

At the restoration of Charles II the corn laws had practically been unaltered since 1571,[361] when it had been enacted that corn might be exported from certain ports in certain s.h.i.+ps at all times when proclamation was not made to the contrary, on a payment of 12d. a quarter on wheat and 8d. a quarter on other grain. Now both export and import were subjected to heavy duties, but these caused such high prices in corn that they were reduced in 1663; yet high duties were again imposed in 1673, which continued until the revolution. Then, owing to good crops and low prices, which brought distress on the landed interest, a new policy was introduced: export duties were abolished and the other extreme resorted to, viz. a bounty on export of 5s. in the quarter as long as the home price did not exceed 48s. At the same time import duties remained high, and this system lasted till 1773. Never had the corn-growers of England been so thoroughly protected, yet, owing to causes over which the legislators had no control, namely bountiful seasons, the prices of wheat for the next seventy years was from 15 to 20 per cent. cheaper than in the previous forty. Modern economists have described this system as one of the worst instances of a cla.s.s using their legislative power to subsidize themselves at the expense of the community. As a matter of fact it was the firm conviction of the statesmen and economists of the time, that husbandry, being the main industry and prop of England, and the foundation on which the whole political power of the country was based, should receive every encouragement. At all events, in many ways the policy was successful.[362] It encouraged investment in land, and materially a.s.sisted the agricultural improvement for which the eighteenth century was noted, the export too employed English s.h.i.+pping, and thus aided industry. Arthur Young said it was the singular felicity of this country to have devised a plan which accomplished the strange paradox of at once lowering the price of corn and encouraging agriculture, for by the system in vogue till 1773 if corn was scarce it was imported, while if there was a glut at home export was a.s.sisted so that great fluctuations in price were prevented.[363] It seemed of the utmost importance to men of that time that England should be self-supporting and independent of possible adversaries for the necessaries of life; the wisdom of the policy was never questioned, and was accepted by statesmen of every party.[364]

To blame the landowners for adopting what seemed the wisest course to every sensible person is merely an instance of partisan spite.

At the Peace of Paris in 1763 the question as to whether England or France was to be the great colonizing country of the world was finally settled, and a great development of English trade ensued. It was accompanied by a great increase of population, exports of corn were largely reduced, and the balance began to incline the other way, so that the next Act of importance was that of 1773 which permitted the import of foreign wheat at a nominal duty of 6d. a quarter when it was over 48s., but prohibited export and the bounty on export when wheat was at or above 44s. This was the nearest approach to free trade before 1846.

The time, however, was not yet ripe for this, and the nominal duty on imports was too small for landlords and farmers, so that in 1791 the price when the same nominal duty was to come into force was raised to 54s., while between 50s. and 54s. a duty of 2s. 6d. was imposed, and under 50s. a duty of 24s. 3d.; and export was allowed without bounty when wheat was under 46s. Export of corn, however, by this time had become a matter of little moment, England having definitely ceased to be an exporting country after 1789.

Not only were English landowners after the Restoration anxious to protect their corn, but they also took alarm at the imports of Irish cattle which they said lowered English rents, so that in 1665 and 1680 (18 Car. II, c. 2, and 32 Car. II, c. 2) laws were framed absolutely prohibiting the import of Irish cattle, sheep, and swine, as well as of beef, pork, bacon, and mutton, and even b.u.t.ter and cheese. The statute 12 Car. II, c. 4, also virtually excluded Irish wool from England by duties amounting to prohibition. It was not until 1759 that free imports of cattle from Ireland were allowed for five years,[365]

a period prolonged by 5 Geo. III, c. 10, and a statute of 1772.

In 1699 wool was allowed to be s.h.i.+pped from six specified ports in Ireland to eight specified ports in England,[366] and by 16 Geo. II, c. 11, wool might be sent from Ireland to any port in England under certain restrictions.

FOOTNOTES:

[339] Worlidge, _Systema Agriculturae_ (ed. 1669), p. 10.

[340] Ibid. p. 124.

[341] Ibid. p. 124.

[342] _Pomona_ (ed. 1664), p. 1.

[343] Ed. 1635, Book i, p. 175.

[344] Markham, _op. cit._ i. 188.

[345] Worlidge, _Systema Agriculturae_, p. 38. Plot, however, in his _Natural History of Staffords.h.i.+re_, 1686, says hemp and flax were sown in small quant.i.ties all over the county, p. 109.

[346] _New System of Agriculture_ (ed. 1726), p. 113. Woad is still grown 'in some districts in England' (Morton, _Cyclopaedia of Agriculture_, ii. 1159), but in the Agricultural Returns of 1907 apparently occupies too small an acreage to ent.i.tle it to a separate mention.

[347] Worlidge, _Systema Agriculturae_, p. 43.

[348] Tull, in his _Horseshoeing Husbandry_ (p. 147), speaks of the drill as if already in use.

[349] Worlidge, _Systema Agriculturae_, p. 205.

[350] The seedlip was a long-shaped basket suspended from the sower's shoulder and was usually made of wood.

[351] Horse-girths for securing pack-saddles.

[352] Houghton, about the same time, said England contained 28 to 29 million acres, of which 12 millions lay waste (_Collections_, iv. II).

In 1907 the Board of Agriculture returned the total area of England and Wales, excluding water, at 37,130,344 acres.