{ 8 )• 



remained in liis possession for more than a year or a 

 couple of years, the various plots and patches being 

 re-divided each year by lot. It was of course the 

 interest and duty of proprietors to put an end to this 

 system, and by no other agency than proprietary power 

 and right could it have been abolished. Like all ancient 

 and barbarous customs it was clung to most tena- 

 ciously, although after a little experience of separate 

 possessions the tenants generally soon acknowledged 

 Runrig system of the superiority of the new system. Accordingly, it 



nbl^ilhtd." *^''" ^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^'^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ foremost of the new 



conditions that '* runrig " possession of " corn farms '* 



(arable land) were to be entirely abolished, and 



every tenant was to occupy (by himself or servants, 



without subletting) a distinct separate possession, 



Crofts not to be more or less extensive, according to his ability, not 



"" in.'^ d "^"^ Z>e/oiy the extent of a four mail land, 



extent. '\l\\i^ last condition is especially interesting, as 



showing again, in a definite form, the opinion then 



entertained by the proprietor and his advisers as to 



the minimum size of farm which would constitute a 



j Meaning of ''mail comfortable living for a tenant. A '' mail land" was 



• a division which included four of the smaller divisions 



called a " soum," and each " soum" represented the 



grass of one cow, or of two two-year-old cattle, or of 



five sheep, so that each tenant was to have at least a 



farm capable of holding i6 cows, or 32 young cattle, 



I or 80 sheep. This is, indeed, a very comfortable little 



farm, and would generally be rented now at more 



than ;^30. In other words, they would not be crofts 



at all, but would belong to the class of small farms. 



Selection of tenants Another important fact we learn from this paper is 



made by public ^:^^^ ^1^^ Selection of persons to fill the new farms or 



