AGRICULTURE IN WILTSHIRE IN THE FIRST WORLD WAR 



75 



The large body of soldiers, said to be 252,000 

 plus their horses in late 1914, had to be fed and it 

 was expected that most of their needs would be 

 met from local supplies. In October 1914 a Farm 

 Produce County Committee was established to 

 make such local purchases and to fix the prices to 

 be paid. Allan Young, the Chairman, wrote to the 

 local press to try to gain the support of local farmers. 

 He said they needed each day 70 tons of hay, 500 

 bags of potatoes and quantities of straw, oats and 

 vegetables. By May 1915 they had bought 20,735 

 tons of hay, 5,118 tons of straw and 960 tons of 

 bran. They would, in particular, need large 

 quantities of palliasse straw shortly. 32 The evidence 

 suggests that this arrangement worked well and the 

 threat of requisitioning supplies was not resorted 

 to although there was at least an informal embargo 

 on sending hay out of the county. The main problem 

 was the late payment from the army and in July 

 1915 some £17,000 was said to be overdue. 33 



The camps with their horses produced masses 

 of manure and this was used by local farmers on 

 their arable fields. The arrangements both for 

 payment and carriage seems to have been left to 

 local agreements between the farmers and their 

 nearest camps. In May 1916, in giving evidence to 

 the military tribunal on behalf of one of his 

 employees, Henry Young of Bulford said he had 

 during the previous year taken 20,000 tons of army 

 manure. 34 



There were many other problems associated 

 with the army presence. Some of these are related 

 in Arthur Street's The Gentleman of the Party which 

 chronicles the development of the fictional (but 

 closely based on real life) 'Sutton Manor farm' from 

 the 1870s to the 1920s. There were also difficulties 

 in obtaining compensation from the Army for the 

 damage they did to crops and to livestock. The 

 Salisbury Journal in 1 9 1 7- 1 8 reported a number of 

 cases involving claims before the Defence of the 

 Realm Losses Committee. In November 1917 Mr. 

 C. E. Notley of Manor House, Upton Lovell 

 claimed £2,400 in compensation for the military 

 occupation of part of his farm, 287 acres arable 

 and 1 24 acres down between Michaelmas 1914 and 

 Michaelmas 1916. He estimated the land as having 

 a rentable value of £450 but the military were 

 prepared to offer only £150 a year for the arable 

 and £30 for the down. There was also discussion 

 about loss of profit from 204 ewes which Notley 

 had had to sell. The Commission eventually 

 awarded Notley £1,044 13s. plus £12 12s. towards 

 costs. 35 At Boscombe, Mr. W. C.Thomas claimed 



£433 6s. 6d. for loss and damage through the 

 military occupation of part of his farm plus £120 a 

 year on account of rent. He was tenant of a farm of 

 1,637 acres, largely hill land, of which the War Office 

 had previously taken 590 acres. The present claim 

 concerned a further 176 acres (126 acres pasture 

 and 50 acres down). Thomas had become the tenant 

 at Michaelmas 1916 and the army moved in during 

 December 191 6. There was a particular dispute over 

 16 acres of turnips for which he had paid, on 

 valuation, £6 3s. 6d. an acre but which had largely 

 gone rotten because the army had not allowed him 

 to crop them. The Commission awarded the 

 claimant £250 16s. 6d. in damages plus £120 a 

 year in rent exclusive of rates. Mr. Targett of 

 Birdlymes Farm, Porton claimed for a list of items 

 including £50 for the lessened number of rabbits 

 killed in the year to Michaelmas 1917 - 1,000 rabbits 

 at Is. each. He received his claim in full. 36 



PLOUGH CAMPAIGN 



From the beginning of the war farmers were being 

 encouraged to plough more land and to grow more 

 wheat. However, there was very little economic 

 incentive for them to do this and the amount of 

 arable in Wiltshire changed very little between 1914 

 and 1917. One of the problems was that many 

 tenanted farms had a clause in their lease which 

 prevented the break up of pasture. Some patriotic 

 owners were prepared to waive this restriction. For 

 example, Lord Lansdowne's agent wrote to his 

 tenants in September 1915: 



There is general agreement as to the undesirability 

 of ploughing up valuable old pasture but there is 

 probably in most parts of the country a certain 

 amount of inferior land that has either been badly 

 laid down or has 'thrown itself down' to grass and 

 which might be with advantage broken up in present 

 circumstances. 



Lord Lansdowne desires me to inform you that 

 if you consider that you have any land on your farm 

 that can be used more profitably for national purposes 

 than at present used, he will be quite willing to waive 

 any restrictive covenants in your agreement which 

 might stand in the way. 



I shall be pleased to look into the matter with 

 you if you will communicate with me at your 

 convenience." 



The failure of a voluntary attempt to increase the 

 amount of arable land led to the government 



