Corn-laiv Period 53 



no need for an allotment system as a means of keeping labourers on 

 the land, where they were obliged to stay whatever happened. On 

 the other hand the farmers held that labourers' allotments were 

 against their interests, since the labourers might prefer working on 

 their own land to working for an employer 1 . 



The landlords, whose main interest was in the well-being of their 

 larger tenants, found in the farmers' dislike of allotments sufficient 

 reason for not favouring the movement. They had no economic 

 advantage to expect if they took it up. A very impartial Parlia- 

 mentary report of 1843 stated that land let in allotments paid the 

 same rent per acre as land of the same quality let to a large farmer 2 . 

 If so, the landlord had obviously small inducement to form allotments 

 on economic grounds. For while they paid no higher rents than 

 did the large farms, they cost more in buildings, repairs and 

 administration. 



It was very natural that the allotment-holders ^should not be able 

 to pay more_per acre, or even should pay less, than the farmer. 

 Except in the neighbourhood of towns, where there was a demand 

 for fresh vegetables, eggs and poultry, they could not make any 

 considerable income out of their allotments. Elsewhere, corn was 

 the most profitable agricultural product. Enthusiasts for the 

 allotment system, like Thornton 3 , did indeed maintain that spade- 

 cultivation could make corn-growing profitable even on the smallest 

 holding. But experience soon showed that the cottager did not 

 succeed on such lines. If he held two or three acres, to cultivate 

 them by the spade took up far too much time. On the other hand 

 the area was too small to give full employment to a horse and 

 plough : both would have to be borrowed from neighbouring larger 

 holders 4 . 



Thus the socio-political agitation, aiming at the extension of 

 allotments as a means of improving the miserable position of the 

 labourer, found an unconquerable obstacle in the economic circum- 



1 A land-surveyor, Mr Driver, told the Select Committee on Agriculture in 1833 (qu. 1 1,760) 

 that "In some instances I have found that the farmers have been dissatisfied, because they 

 found that the labourers if employed on their own grounds were more fatigued and less able to 

 perform their labour to their employers." A land-agent, Mr Joseph Lee, told the same 

 Committee (qu. 6099) that " We do not wish to give them so much (land) as to take away 

 their attention from the farmers." A little book called Practical Directions for the Cultivation 

 of Cottage Gardens, by Charles Lawrence, 1831, is also characteristic. The writer warns the 

 labourers not to neglect their wage-earning for the sake of their own land. 



2 Report on Women and Children in Agrictilture, 1843, P* I 5- 



3 W. T. Thornton, Over-population and its Remedy, 1846, p. 346. 



4 Report on Agriculture, 1833, <l u - 10,849. 



