2i8 History of the English Landed Interest. 



larcenies, that the distresses of the poor will reduce them to ; and ■which 

 is and must always be experienced where the poor have not commons- 

 and wood lands to assist them. And in short we cannot see anj' benefit 

 to the nation in general, nor to any individual will arise by enclosing 

 the said common, except to the landowners, who may thereby be enabled 

 to raise their rents at the expense and detriment of the parish at large. 



" And in respect to the inclosing of corn fields which lie in common,, 

 we apprehend that any person who has travelled much over England 

 and has made his observations on the subject, must give the preference 

 in general to the crops of com in common fields to those in inclosures in 

 point of clearness from weeds and quality of grain. And this we appre- 

 hend to be owing, in a great measure, to the enclosed farmer having it 

 more in his power to be a sloven than those who hold lands in common 

 fields mixed with their neighbours ; and also that hedges and trees are 

 great enemies to the growth of corn. 



18f/i October, 1784." 



"In consequence of this paper being delivered to the various Free- 

 holders, Copyholders, and other Inhabitants of that parish, previously 

 to the parochial convention held for the purpose of considering upon the 

 propriety of inclosing the waste lands and common fields in the said 

 parish, which was announced in a jjompous manner by printed notifica- 

 tions published b^" a set of people who fancied they might be benefited 

 thereby, the most numerous vestry was assembled, consisting of gentry, 

 farmers, cottagers, and other inhabitants, etc., that ever was known in 

 that parish within the memory of man ; everj^thing (notwithstanding 

 the multitude assembled) was conducted in the most peaceable and quiet 

 manner, and after the pei'son who moved for the meeting had delivered 

 his opinions respecting the inclosure, and a little conversation being 

 held upon the subject ; the question was put, ' Whether it would be 

 proper to inclose the waste ground of that parish? ' There was but one 

 hand held up for the inclosure, which was the person who proposed the 

 question. 



" Another que.stion being afterwards proposed, ' Whether it be the 

 opinion of the vestry that the waste lands should remain uninclosed ? ' 

 there was a universal holding up of hands, except bj^ the person who 

 moved for the inclosure, with an almost universal huzza of triumph, 

 frequently repeated." 



It was all very well for champions of the commercial in- 

 terests to point out how the widening of the cultivable surface 

 of British soil would benefit society and lower prices. Farmers 

 did not care in the least for philosophical reasoning, and were 

 strongly opposed to a reduction in prices. The objections 

 raised in the aliovo petition prove how firmly they were con- 



