346 STATUTE OF MERTON. 
were attempted to be perpetrated, were greatly 
strengthened ; and from time to time the question was 
raised in the House of Commons, at the instance of 
the Commons Society. Thus, in the year 1871, in 
the Select Committee on the Commons Bill which I 
had introduced, Mr. Cowper Temple moved an amend- 
ment for the repeal of the Statute of Merton. He 
was defeated by a majority of ten to four, in spite of 
the fact that a majority of the members of the Com- 
mittee were Liberals. Again, in the discussions in 
Committee on Lord Cross’s measure in 1876, the 
same question was raised in various forms. I proposed 
myself a new clause to secure that no Commons 
should thenceforward be inclosed without. the sanction 
of Parliament. The Minister in charge of the Bill had 
said on this that “he hoped no British Parliament would 
ever consent to a scheme of pure confiscation, such as 
was involved in the proposal.” The clause, at his 
instance, was rejected by a majority of 206 to 82. 
Lord Edmund Fitzmaurice, at a later stage, renewed 
the proposal by moving a new clause for the repeal 
of the Statute of Merton. It was negatived by a 
majority of 79 to 28. Lastly, Sir William Harcourt 
proposed a clause providing that the “unlawful in- 
closure of any Common, or part of a Common, should 
be deemed to be a public nuisance.” This would 
have made it possible for any outsider to raise a ques- 
tion as to the legality of an inclosure, quite irrespective 
of whether he had any right of common or not, and 
would have enabled the local authorities of a district 
