TITHES IN KIND 341 



that the payment robbed them of any part of the rents to which 

 they were justly entitled. For centuries, in every transfer of land, 

 whether by purchase or inheritance, the estimated value of tithes 

 had been previously deducted from the value of the estate so bought 

 or inherited. Nor could any tenant honestly complain that tithes 

 increased the burden of his rent. Land only commands what it is 

 worth. If 100 acres of land fetched 1 per acre, it made no pecuniary 

 difference to the farmer whether he paid 100 to the landowner or 

 90 to the landowner and 10 to the tithe-owner. But the real prac- 

 tical grievance was the incidence of the charge upon the produce of 

 the land. In this way tithes become a charge which was increased by 

 good farming, or diminished by bad, a tax on every additional outlay 

 of money and labour, a check upon enterprise and improvement. 



Tithes in kind were admittedly out of date. Though rents and 

 wages had long been placed on a money basis, a tithe-owner could 

 still exact payment in the ancient fashion. As a fact, however, 

 the Reports to the Board of Agriculture (1793-1815) prove that, at 

 the close of the eighteenth century, comparatively little tithe was 

 collected in kind. Especially was this the case when the tithe was 

 in the hands of clerical owners. For this change of practice there 

 were many reasons. Collection in kind was extremely unpopular. 

 Where it prevailed, farmers showed their dislike to the system in 

 various ways. Many tenants so greatly resented putting money 

 into the pockets of tithe-owners that they preferred to lose it them- 

 selves, and refused to plough up pastures which would have been 

 more profitable under tillage. Sometimes the tenant left his tith- 

 able land unmanured. A Hertfordshire farmer, for instance, 

 occupied land in two parishes, in one of which a reasonable composi- 

 tion was paid, while, in the other, tithe was collected in kind. The 

 result was that he farmed one part of his occupation with spirit on 

 improved methods, and that the dung-cart never reached the other 

 portion of his land. Sometimes the tenants made the collection as 

 inconvenient as possible. Thus a Hampshire farmer gave notice 

 to the tithe-owner that he was about to draw a field of turnips. 

 When the tithe-owner's servants, horses and waggons had come on 

 the land, the farmer drew ten turnips, gave one to the tithing-man, 

 and said that he would let his master know when he drew any more. 

 In a wet season the collection was often the cause of heavy loss. 

 Notice had to be given to the tithe-owner to set out the tithe. 

 Farmers risked a lawsuit, if they carried their crops before the 



