A HISTORY OF BEDFORDSHIRE 



away, the duty of ' suit of court ' was habitually ignored by large numbers of 

 tenants, so that in 1660 there were as many as eighty-eight defaulters from 

 the court of Ampthill,"" and the rolls are mainly concerned to record changes 

 of tenancy, and offences connected with the commons. 



Evidence for any early inclosures of common lands in Bedfordshire 

 appears to be lacking, and it may safely be presumed that very little inclosure 

 did take place during the i6th and 17th centuries."^ In 161 8 Lord Chief 

 Justice Montague reported to the Council "* a case of dispute as to rights of 

 common and fuel in Bedfordshire, which deserves special notice here as he 

 adds that the petitioners were stirred up by others, ' as were the levellers in 

 Northamptonshire. ' 



This will be the most convenient point at which to introduce the 

 subject of inclosures of commons and commonable lands. For definite 

 information upon this subject we are indebted to Arthur Young's Annals of 

 Agriculture^ vol. xlii, and to the two General Views of the Agriculture of the 

 County of Bedford ^r2iwn up for the Board of Agriculture, the former in 1794 

 by Mr. Stone, and the latter in 1807 by Mr. Batchelor. Mr. Stone esti- 

 mated, apparently without having any exact statistics to rely upon, that, when 

 he published his report, 217,200 acres, or three-fourths of the county, were 

 still in the state ' of open or common fields, common meadows, commons, and 

 waste lands.' There had been inclosures in about forty parishes previous to 

 that date, and it appears from Mr. Batchelor 's report that between 1794 and 

 1807 inclosures in forty-one more parishes had been made. Thus by 1807 

 there had been inclosures in over eighty parishes out of the 125 returned as 

 chargeable with the maintenance of the poor in 1802. The inclosures in 

 ten parishes — Bletsoe, Bromham, Battlesden, Cockayne Hatley, Holcot, 

 Knotting, Potsgrove, PuUoxhill, Woburn, and Warden — are described in 

 1807 as 'old' ; while those of Astwick, Bedford, Cople, Dean, Everton, and 

 Willington are described as ' new,' but are not dated."' The earliest date 

 given is that of Sutton, 1742 ; the next is Aspley, in 1759. Six are entered 

 for the decade 1760-9 ; seven for 1770—9 ; none for 1780-9 ; 23 for 

 1790-9 ; and 21 for 1800-7. ^^^ ^^^ neither dated nor described as ' old' 

 or ' new.' 



In some cases several parishes combined to get an Inclosure Act, and in 

 other cases parishes were divided without an Act. The results of inclosure 

 were various, depending largely upon the way in which the inclosures were 

 carried out. The produce of the land was generally increased ; but the 

 incidence of the benefit was in many cases disadvantageous to the poor. 

 Alienation of common rights had, however, in some cases begun before the 

 inclosures ; and the privileges of the cottagers were not always preserved. 

 In 1737, at Kempston, more than sixty years before inclosure was made, a 

 man was indicted for building two cottages without laying four acres of land 

 to each. Of Aspley Guise, Arthur Young says that ' there were only four 

 cow commons left at the time of enclosing, the rights having been alienated 

 from the cottages.' On the other hand, while the commissioners' valuation 

 of the rent of the parish (in 1759) was only ;^5oi, half a century later the 



"°Ct. R. bdle. 153, no. 3. 



'" Slater, The Engl. Peaiantry and the Inclosure of Common Fields, 193-6. 



'" Cal. S.P. Dom. i6i 1-18, p. 532. '" For dates and extents of inclosures see Slater, op. cit. 268-9. 



96 



