Change in Unit 99 



5 50 acres to be actually on the increase without any indication 

 of the fact being found in the statistics. 



It is impossible here to avoid some criticism of the official 

 agricultural statistics. All this obscurity might have been avoided 

 by a better classification of holdings. The earlier statistics, which 

 did adopt this more detailed classification, show that between 1885 

 and 1895 holdings of 20 50 acres increased from 61,146 1062,446, 

 while in the same period holdings of 5 20 acres decreased from 

 109,285 to 108,145. That is to say that the decrease was precisely 

 among those smaller holdings which are common in the neighbour- 

 hood of the towns, and consequently are liable to be caught in their 

 grip. Very likely the same phenomenon might have appeared if some 

 similar distinction had been made in the period 1895 1905. 



So too the lumping together in the statistics of all holdings from 

 50 to 300 acres as medium-sized holdings gives quite a false im- 

 pression. Holdings of 50 to 100 acres really belong to the class of 

 small holdings. So far as the observation of the present writer goes, 

 the labour of the occupier and his family still plays the chief part, as 

 a rule, on holdings up to about 100 acres, though of course the branch 

 of production adopted makes some difference in the matter. The 

 latest expert evidence also shows that such holdings are as a rule 

 to be regarded as small holdings, and that in some counties, as e.g. in 

 Wiltshire, a holding of 80 to 100 acres is considered as a typical 

 small holding 1 . In 1885 the total number of holdings of 50 300 

 acres in England was 104,073, of which only 44,843 were holdings 

 of 50 to 100 acres. But the latter had increased by 1895 to 46,574. 

 It is certain that the number must have risen again between 1895 

 and 1905, in view of the great increase in the number of holdings 

 between 50 and 300 acres. But the extent of that rise it is impossible 

 to determine, owing to the forcing of small and medium holdings 

 into one class. 



On the whole, therefore, the statistics only give glimpses into this 

 matter of the development of the unit of holding. As regards the 

 smallest holdings the question is obscured because some of them are 

 absorbed for non-agricultural purposes, while many holdings properly 

 to be classed as small are not distinguished from those of medium 

 size. But at any rate the decrease in the class of large holdings, and 

 the considerable increase in that which includes small as well as 

 medium holdings, shows clearly what is the direction of development; 



1 Small Holdings Report, 1906, Minutes, qu. 3715. 



72 



