PKOTECTION AISD TITHES 167 



the landed interests. Fifty years ago agricultural depres- 

 sion raised an agitation against tithes. It was said, with 

 great force, that tithes upon produce discouraged and 

 retarded agricultural progress at a moment when the 

 rapid growth of population rendered it necessary to de- 

 velope to the full all the resources of the soil. One 

 among many of its evil effects was to prevent the plough- 

 ing up of pasture land. A Parliament of landlords 

 listened favourably to the cry. The gross tenth of the 

 annual produce of titheable land on the average, taken 

 from 1829 to 1835, was 6,756,105Z. But the sum at 

 which it was commuted was 4,053,663?. In other words, 

 40 per cent, of the gross tenth went at once into the 

 pockets of the landlords. Besides this, they also received 

 all that portion of the increased value of the produce of 

 the land which, prior to 1836, would have fallen to the 

 Church, and which Sir J. Caird, in 1877, estimated, at 

 two million pounds a year. Tithe rent-charge stood still 

 while rentals rose ; it was in 1836 as 4 millions to 

 33 millions (or more probably 28 millions); in 1877 it 

 was 4^ millions to 51 millions. Thus the gain which 

 landowners received from the Tithe Commutation Act 

 of 1836 must be measured by many millions. 



In 1887, as in 1836, under the pressure of agricul- 

 tural distress, the cry against tithe rent-charge is 

 renewed. But times and tempers are entirely changed. 

 Landed interests no longer rale supreme in Parliament, 

 and it cannot now be said that the charge retards and 

 discourages agricultural progress, for it falls on the land 

 and not on the produce. The agitation takes the shape 

 of a demand for its revaluation, that is to say, its reduc- 

 tion. It is said that tithe rent-charge has become a 

 disproportionate burden, and must be readjusted, or, 



