286 HISTORY OF AGRICULTURE 



ioo%, the average wheat crop 14 %, while the price of bread 

 had decreased 16%. But meat had increased 70 %, wool 

 over 100 %, butter 100 %. The chief benefit to the farmer 

 therefore lay in the increased value of live stock and its pro- 

 ducts, and it was found then, as in the present depression, 

 that the holders of strong wheat land suffered most, which 

 was further illustrated by the fact that the rent of the corn- 

 growing counties of the east coast averaged 23J. 8d. per acre ; 

 that of the mixed corn and grass counties in the midlands 

 and west, 31J. ^d. 



Writing in 1847, Porter said rents had doubled since 1790.1 

 In Essex farms could be pointed out which were let in 1790 

 at less than ics. an acre, but during the war at from 45J. to 

 50J. In 1818 the rent went down to ^^., and in 1847 was 20s. 



In Berks, and Wilts, farms let at 14s. per acre in 1790, rose 

 by 1810 to 70i-., or fivefold ; sank in 1820 to 50J.. and in 1847 

 to 30J. In Staffordshire farms on one estate let for Ss. an 

 acre in 1790, rose during the war to $5s., and at the peace 

 were lowered to 20^-., at which price they remained. Owing 

 to better farming light soils had been applied to uses for 

 which heavy lands alone had formerly been considered fit, 

 with a considerable increase of rent. 



On the Duke of Rutland's ^ Belvoir estate, of from 18,000 to 

 20,000 acres of above average quality, rents were in — 



1799 • • • I9-J"- 3f^. an acre. 

 1812 . . . 25J. 8|</. „ 



1830 . . . 2SS. lid. „ 



1850 . . . 36J. 8^. „ 



But the Dukes of Rutland were indulgent landlords and 

 evidently took no undue advantage of the high prices during 

 the war, a policy whose wisdom was fully justified afterwards. 

 It was the opinion of most competent judges, even after the 

 abolition of the Corn Laws, that English land would continue 



^ Progress of the Nation, p. 151. 



^ Thorold Rogers, History 0/ Agriculture and Prices, v. 29. 



