Progress in methods of agriculture (No. 4) and the movement towards enclosure and consolidation (Nos. 1-3 and 5-9) are the subjects illustrated in this section. Great advances were made in the science and practice of farming between the end of the Commonwealth and the repeal of the Corn Laws. But the controversial subject of enclosure overshadows everything else. And, as is shown by the extract from Arthur Young's account of the famous Norfolk farming, agricultural progress was closely connected with enclosure and consolidation (No. 4). Specimens are given of two stages of enclosure proceedings (No. 1 and No. 3), which suggest that voluntary agreements ratified in Chancery gradually merged in enclosure by Act, compulsory upon a dissatisfied minority. The Awards, on which the justice or injustice of the settlement would in some degree depend, are generally too long for quotation. But the General Act of 1801 (No. 8) was an attempt to codify the best existing practice, and gives a general view of the practice of the best Commissioners.
A mass of controversial literature on both sides deals with the reasons and effects of the enclosures. The advantages, from the point of view of a large landowner, are set out in a text book for land stewards (No. 2). The reverse side, as it appeared to the small holder, is given in a petition, which was fruitless, against the enclosure of a Northamptonshire village (No. 5). Arthur Young's criticism of the way in which the process was carried out is of great importance, because he had been the most strenuous advocate of enclosing and because he had had unrivalled opportunities of judging the change, both as an independent traveller and as secretary of the Board of Agriculture (No. 7). The best printed material for an independent judgment is to be found in the surveys made by this, a semi-official Society of Agriculture, whose agents, with easily recognisable degrees of impartiality, describe the objects, methods and results of the enclosing movement in different counties. Extracts are given from their reports (No. 6), together with the first real reform of procedure, made when the nineteenth century was far advanced, so as to safeguard the interests of the peasantry (No. 9).
AUTHORITIES
The most important modern books on the subject are:—Hammond, The Village Labourer; Gonner, Common Land and Inclosure; Prothero, English Farming Past and Present; Hasbach, The English Agricultural Labourer; Levy, Large and Small Holdings; Johnson, The Disappearance of the Small Landowner; Slater, The English Peasantry and the Enclosure of the Common Fields; Ashby, One Hundred Years of Poor Law Administration in a Warwickshire village in Oxford Studies in Social and Legal History, Vol. III; Leonard in Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 3rd Series, Vol. XIX.
Bibliographies in Hasbach, Hammond, Levy, and Cunningham, English Industry and Commerce, Modern Times, Part II.
Contemporary (1).—Records of late seventeenth century enclosures may be found in Chancery Enrolled Decrees, and Enclosures Awards in Proceedings in Chancery (Public Record Office, and some copies in Durham Court of Chancery). Eighteenth century material includes petitions in Journals of the House of Commons; proceedings in Parliament, ditto; Awards, in custody of Clerks of the Peace and of County Councils—a Return of Commons (Inclosure Awards) to the House of Commons, 1904, shows where they are to be found. There are reports of Committees on Cultivation of Waste, etc., 1795 (IX), ditto, 1797 (IX), ditto, 1800 (IX); on Inclosure, 1844 (V), on Allotments, 1843 (VII).
Contemporary (2) Literary Authorities.—The best descriptions of agriculture are to be found in Arthur Young's various Tours (1768-71) in The Annals of Agriculture (1784-1815), and in the Reports made to the Board of Agriculture; Reports on individual counties (partial list in Hasbach's bibliography), a General Report (1808), and Reviews of Reports for different sections of the country (by William Marshall, 1808-17). Cobbett's Rural Rides are more literary and political and less official (1830). For agricultural progress, see J. Tull, The New Horse-hoeing Husbandry (1731), and Young passim; for the legal aspect, The Law of Commons (1698); for contemporary opinion, D. Davies, The Case of Labourers in Husbandry (1795), Young, An Enquiry into the Propriety of Applying Wastes, etc. (1802), and a long list of pamphlets (bibliography in Hasbach).
1. Enclosure Proceedings in the Court of Chancery [Entry Book on the Division of Commons, etc., in the Durham Court of Chancery, Book M, No. 482, 1671-1676 (Original in Public Record Office)], 1671.
Division of the Town Fields of Bishop Auckland, October, 1671
Forasmuch as heretofore by order and decree of this Court bearing date the fifteenth day of September last past, made between the parties above named, for the reasons then appearing to this Court it was then ordered and decreed by the consent of all the said parties ... that all the lands and grounds lying and being in the three common fields called the Hitherfield, Midlefield and Fairfield lying at Bishop Auckland, therein mentioned should ... be forthwith measured and divided according to the agreements and consents of the said parties, ... and also that every of the said parties should have his and their particular shares, parts, and proportions therein particularly allotted and set forth in severalty unto him and them, to be by them respectively hedged, fenced, enclosed and enjoyed in severalty for ever thenafter for the better husbandry and improvement thereof.... And now upon the motion of Mr. William Brabart ... alleging that since the making of the said decree several of the parties thereunto, perceiving that some of the defendants, formerly being the chief opposers of the said intended division, have obtained their shares in the premisses to be in such part thereof as themselves desired, their said parts being small and inconsiderable, they have therefore of late descended from their shares and parts of the premisses formerly by them desired or consented unto and do now endeavour to have their proportionate parts to lie in other parts and places of the premisses, to the great decay, hindrance, and obstruction of the said division, notwithstanding their former consents thereunto. It was therefore humbly prayed by the said Counsel that a Commission might be awarded out of this Court to indifferent Commissioners ... as well for the hearing of all the said objections ... as also to view and divide all the said premisses and to appoint and set forth to every of the said parties their proportionable parts therein.