2i6 History of the English Landed Interest. 



Bracton, Fleta, and Britton ^ knew nothing about tliem, and 

 from their point of view common could be acquired only in 

 two ways, viz. by seignorial grants or long usage amounting 

 to seignorial grants and caused by constant seignorial suffer- 

 ance.^ Henceforth, however, every freeholder of the manorial 

 arable ground had his common appendant on the waste, and 

 every copyholder his common appurtenant ; but whatever the 

 speciality of common rights might be, whether common of 

 vicinage, or of estovers, or turbary, or piscary, etc, there was, as 

 we shall now show, practically no difference in the old rights 

 of the villeinage. When a portion of the tenant's in capite 

 lands was separated off to form the smaller manor of a sub- 

 feudarius, the inhabitants of the severed district changed 

 seignorial ownership, and seconded any attempts of their new 

 master to extend his and their common rights over the waste. 

 Too poor to possess much personalty in live stock, the limita- 

 tion of the district's pasturage rights to a certain fixed head of 

 live stock did not affect their few wants in this respect. The 

 large freeholders with great possessions in flocks and herds 

 alone felt the change, and the dispute was thus limited to the 

 upper class of the landed interest. Differences between the 

 villeinage and their individual lords were avoided by a wise 

 compromise which did not call in the services of the national 

 legislature. The lord recognised the popular claims on the 

 waste, and the people for their part were ready to recognise 

 that occasion might arise when it would be to the advantage 

 of both sides to cede their rights.^ Whenever the supply of 

 manorial labour began to exceed that of cultivable soil it was 

 for the good of the villeinage as well as of the lord to enclose 

 portions of the waste. In many manors, therefore, a custom 

 prevailed whereby the consent of the homage became the only 

 obstacle before the lord could take this necessary step. 



But the lawyers of this period were too astute not to detect 

 an incongruity between the lord's fresh attitude with regard to 

 the land, and the time-honoured rights never consciously ceded 



' Vino^radofP, Villcinacje in Kiujl., Essay ii., p. 2G6. 

 ^ Id., Rights of Common, cliap. ii., p. 274. 

 ' Seebolun, Engl. Vill. Commun., p. 447. 



