OFFICIAL REASONS FOR FAILURE 371 



seven villages, ' it has not been found necessary 

 in this county to take any steps under the Small 

 Holdings Act.' 



Derby. Very little done, * for the simple reason 

 that either they are not required, or there is no 

 difficulty in obtaining them.' 



Lancashire. Two applications, neither enter- 

 tained : ' one by a person who was unable to afford 

 to buy the land himself.' (This person may have 

 been unsuitable, but it is the person who cannot 

 buy that the Act was framed to help ; therefore the 

 remark seems rather superfluous.) 



Suffolk (East). Petitions received from four 

 parishes, but it ' was not considered necessary to 

 put the Act into force.' On one of these cases 

 the County Council minute is as follows : 



'The land required by the petitioners was part 

 of a farm belonging to a charity. The Committee 

 suggested to the trustees that they should meet 

 the wishes of the petitioners with certain modifica- 

 tions. The County Council adopted the report 

 of the Committee, a copy of which was sent to the 

 trustees of the Charity and to the Charity Commis- 

 sioners. No further action in the matter has been 

 taken by the County Council.' 



Dorset. Applications from ten men. ' The 

 petitioners appear to be labouring men, and the 

 Sub-Committee are of opinion that in case of 

 adverse circumstances they could not be answerable 

 for the rent. The Act does not provide for a 

 compulsory purchase of land by the County 



242 



