[371] A Treatise of the Canker of England's Commonwealth (1601).
[372] The Commonweal of this Realm of England (Lamond), p. 100.
[373] This may seem inconsistent with the fact that in the statistics published by Mr. Leadam from the Inquisition of 1517 most enclosures in most counties are entered as made by lords of manors. I do not think, however, that this is necessarily so. When it is stated that a lord of a manor has enclosed and converted to pasture, it may very well be meant that his agent did so with his consent. I.e. the distinction would appear to be not between the lord and the lord’s farmer, but between the manorial authorities (lord and farmer) and the rest of the landholders. The phrase used in the Berkshire returns, “converti permisit,” indicates what I take to have been the most general, though not, of course, the invariable, course of events.
[374] e.g. at Acklington (Northumberland County History, vol. v.), of which Clarkson the surveyor writes: “Neither is there any demaine lands or demaine meadows, but all is occupied together in husbandry"; at Birling (ibid.): “There is no demaine land or meadow, with all their husbandlands and meadows appertaining to the same"; apparently also at High Buston. Compare Vinogradoff, Villainage in England, p. 316: “Villages without a manorial demesne ... are found ... where the power of the lord was more a political than an economical one" (Norfolk and Suffolk, Lincoln, Northumberland, Westmoreland, &c.). For a manor where the demesne is kept in the hand of the lord in 1568 for the reason given above, see Roxburghe Club, Surveys of Pembroke Manors, Manor of Washerne.
[375] Oxford Studies in Social and Legal History, pp. 153–154.
[376] Roxburghe Club, Surveys of Lands of William, First Earl of Pembroke.
[377] Historia et Cartularium Monasterii Gloucestriæ, vol. iii. App., pp. 291–295.
[378] Roxburghe Club, Surveys of Lands of William, First Earl of Pembroke.
[379] Ibid.
[380] R.O. Rentals and Surveys, Portf. 13, No. 34.