52 ENCLOSURES OF THE FIFTEENTH III 



namely, NW. Essex, West Norfolk, E. Lincoln, Notts., 1 

 Derby, Stafford, Shropshire, Hereford, Gloucester, that is 

 where the percentage of enclosure is only from 2 per cent, 

 to 1 per cent., it would appear, in spite of some evidences of 

 early enclosure, that the movement had only just begun, 

 and this is certainly the ca?e with the next the fifth group, 

 namely, Hampshire, East Somerset, Cheshire and Yorkshire, 

 as well as those left white 



Wiltshire Cumberland 



2 Lancashire Northumberland 



Westmoreland Durham 



and parts of other counties. 



This is to be attributed partly to the character of these 

 districts, which, being ill suited to arable cultivation, were 

 always pastured, and also in the case of the Northern 

 Counties to their disturbed condition as lying on the 

 Border. Thus in Cumberland, Northumberland, and Dur- 

 ham there appears to have been comparatively little open- 

 field cultivation, and we know that enclosure of such common 

 fields as existed was not general till after the accession of 

 James I had put an end to the border raids, when in Durham 

 at least it proceeded with some rapidity. 3 Moreover, the 



1 In Notts, there was a larger area imparked for sport than else- 

 where. This looks as if there were more wealthy men in that county 

 or that the soil was poor, also the enclosures were of small areas, 

 because there were many small owners. There is also very little 

 complaint of engrossing but only of enclosing. Leadatn, Thoroton 

 Soc. Record, Series ii. 



a The date of the enclosure of Lancashire is uncertain. There are 

 no acts in the eighteenth century for enclosure of the Common Field 

 though many for the enclosure of the Waste. It was certainly nearly 

 complete by 1793. It seems that though the open field existed there 

 were no common rights. Hence enclosure was easier. Slater, En- 

 closures, p. 255. 



3 Cf. Hist, of Northumberland ; Victoria County Hist. : Durham, 

 238; Transactions Royal Hist. Soc., xix. 101 ; Slater, Enclosures, pp. 16, 

 255, 257 ; Aubrey, Nat. Hist, of Wilts., 1685 ; Transactions Royal Hist. ) 

 Soc., xviii. Durham appeal's to have been completely enclosed by 1 



