94 THE ENCLOSURES IN ENGLAND [250 



the most innocent-looking _eDciQ.&ur£s, then, must have been 

 to deprive the poorer families of the means of livelihood, 

 even though they v^^ere not evicted from their worthless 

 holdings. Enclosures and depopulation were inseparably 

 linked in the minds of contemporaries, even when the great- 

 est care was taken by the enclosing authorities to safeguard 

 the rights of the tenants. 



These rights, however, seriously interfered with the most 

 advantageous use of land, and often were disregarded. Not 

 only did the small holders have rights of common over the 

 rest of the land, but their own strips were intermingled with 

 those of the lord and the large holders. The typical prob- 

 lem confronting the enclosing landlord is shown below : 



Holdings in Open Field, West Lexham, Norfolk, 1575 1 

 Strips in Furlong A Strips in Furlong B 



1. Will Yelverton, freeholder. i. Robert Clemente, freeholder. 



2. Demesne. 2. Demesne. 



3. Demesne. 3. Demesne. 



4. Will Yelverton. 4. Demesne. 



5. Demesne. 5. Demesne. 



6. Demesne. 6. Demesne. 



7. Demesne. 7. Demesne. 



8. Demesne. 8. Demesne. 



9. Demesne. 9. Will Lee, freeholder. 



10. Glebe. 10. Will Gell, copyholder. 



11. Demesne. 11. Demesne. 



12. Demesne. 12. Demesne. 



13. Glebe. 13. Demesne. 



If, as was probably the case, the product from these de- 

 mesne strips was so small that the land was fit only for* 

 conversion to pasture, the pecuniary interest of the lord was 

 to be served best by enclosing it and converting it. But 

 should he make three enclosures in furlong A, and two in 



1 Tawney, Agrarian Problem in the Sixteenth Century, pp. 254-255. 



