28 TRANSACTIONS OF ROYAL SCOTTISH ARBORICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
At the same time an inquiry was held, at the request of the 
commoners themselves, into the extent and nature of their rights, 
which lasted some two years; and ultimately, at the expense of 
the Crown, a register was compiled and issued, which has ever 
since been decisive as to all claims, and the extent to which 
they may lawfully be exercised. 
As this paper is written for those who live at a “‘far cry” from 
the New Forest, and are probably not conversant with the 
customs of that locality, it may be well to explain who and what 
are the “commoners,” who have exercised of late years so restrictive 
a power upon tree cultivation. They are simply the landowners 
of the district—the proprietors of that 27,000 acres of private 
land that was mentioned as existing within the total area of the 
Forest, and of a considerable quantity more that lies outside its 
boundaries within a short distance therefrom. As in most other 
parts of the country, this land is mainly in the hands of the larger 
owners, and these do not, as a rule, cultivate the land themselves, 
but farm it out in the usual way, charging an additional rent for the 
land or house to which are attached the rights over the Forest, for 
in every case the right attaches to the actual Jand or house, and 
not to the individual owner or occupier. It is therefore clear to all 
who grasp the position, that the agitations which are conducted 
on behalf of the “poor commoner” are simply movements in 
support of rents in the first place, which are the fixed income of 
“forest rights,” and, in the second place, of the less certain profit 
that is made by the exercise of them. No one, however, can 
blame anybody for firmly standing up for his rights, but a good 
deal of talk about the “preservation” of the noble old Forest is 
seriously discounted when the more sordid side of the question 
comes into view. 
But as I said above, all these agitations are conducted on 
behalf of the “poor commoner” solely ; the rich one who owns 
nearly all the rights being kept in the background, though very 
active on behalf of his poor neighbour. You may therefore be 
tempted to ask, ‘‘ Has the poor commoner no real existence, or is 
he nothing but an imaginary stalking horse?” By no means; 
he has a very real, though a limited, existence, and a most praise- 
worthy hard-working prosperous specimen of the “small owner” 
he generally is. Too sensible as a rule to take part in the frothy 
agitations in which he is made to occupy so prominent a place, he 
is by no means averse to take advantage of anything that may be 
