64 FAKfflXG FOB PROFIT 



It was eaSV for pftpibir jw.gliw ami pannjJiVilMii'p to 



popular passion against the "greedy gnlb" and "insatiable 

 wfao advocated and practised enclosures., and to 

 Ike mgfta^UuMl tfndrnrJrs of Tudor times as solely 

 guided by selfish graed. Bat there are practical and broader sides 

 to the question. When once land was ngpsdeA as an important 

 asset in the wealth of tfa. n+*rmi n*tifm*l interests ttt^n^ntl^ that 

 it should he utilised to the greatest possible advantage. Without 

 enclosures, the soil couH not be used for the purposes to which it 

 was beat adapted, or its reaooices fuuj developed- If money was 

 to be made out of land, or if its fufl productive power was to be 

 irafapd, it was individual enterprise alone that could make or 

 realise either. Under the open-field system tw** man's ^tUfstfa^ 

 iiiigmi, cripple the tnnnutry of twenty z uuly on enclosed farms, 

 sppatalHy occupied, could men secure the full fruit of their enter- 

 prise. This fact had slowly revealed itself during the last two 

 fn'jii||irif% To exchange intermixed lands, to consolidate compact 

 holdings, and fence them off in separate occupation, had long been 

 thf aim both of landlords and tuMij^f"tMmg Few practical 

 men would have disputed the truth of Fuller's statement : " The 

 poor man who is mo&azeh of but one enclosed acre wifl receive 

 moce profit fmn it than IMMH ma share of many acres in common 

 with others." 



Tudor agriculturists went further in their zeal for farming pro- 

 gress. They saw that a small enclosed plot of 15 acres could be 

 used with less advantage than a large enclosure of 150 acres which 

 enabled the tenant to invest money in the land, carry more stock, 

 provide his cattle with more winter food, and, if the climate per- 

 mitted, adopt convertible husbandry. This was recognised both 

 by landowners and farmers of the progressive school, and the 

 increased size even of arable farms continues to be a feature in 

 sixteenth cestory changes. For successful sheep-fanning, a large 

 stretch of lareL LeM in iiKiivxiaal occupation, was still more 

 essentiaJ. From lias point of view the anliiled common wastes 

 were unprofitable. Wltetlier land was enclosed for tillage or as sheep 

 runs. i"Le prodiaetiveiiess Tras k.crfea*ed by efic-losure. Finally, the 

 fertility of arabkr knd on open unenclosed farms was 

 iiig exLaartad. Tr.r .rvstem was one of taking much from 

 ijd pmtting little 3>5^k- The soiL. lightly ploughed, seldom 

 -;- ; TJ fo-jJ r was ia sonae districts worn-out. From 1349 



