526 



JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



horticultural investigation was to a great extent neglected until the 

 foundation of the Woburn Experimental Fruit Farm only ten years ago. 



27. The Committee are aware that in making these recommendations 

 they are largely following the proposals made in a Bill brought before the 

 House of Commons by Sir James Rankin in 1903, at the instance of the 

 Herefordshire County Council. It was further proposed in this Bill to 

 make the spraying of nursery stock in some cases compulsory, and various 

 drastic powers for the purpose of eradicating disease were to be employed. 

 The Committee feel that such powers may become necessary, but that, in 

 the present insufficient state of knowledge, the country is not ripe for 

 them. After the new sub-Department and the experimental fruit station 

 have been established some years, and our knowledge has thereby been 

 increased, they are of opinion that the subject might be dealt with. 



Land Tenure. 



28. The questions of land tenure and the effect of the present state of 

 the law upon the fruit industry have been prominently brought before us 

 throughout the inquiry. It is alleged by many witnesses, of whom some 

 were themselves tenants, that the provisions of the Market Gardeners' 

 Compensation Acts (since incorporated in the Agricultural Holdings Act 

 of 1900) — whereby a tenant of a holding which it is agreed in writing shall 

 be let or treated as a market garden may plant fruit and erect the 

 necessary buildings, without having first to obtain the consent of his 

 landlord, and at the end of his tenancy is then entitled to compensation, 

 which often amounts to a very large sum an acre — act as a deterrent, land- 

 lords refusing to let land for the purpose of the cultivation of fruit. 

 This point was especially insisted upon by Mr. Wheler, President of the 

 Land Agents' Society, and late Commissioner to the Duke of Northumber- 

 land. Another objection to the Acts frequently urged was the alleged 

 obscurity of many of their provisions, especially that relating to holdings 

 created before the commencement of the Acts. On the other hand, it was 

 pointed out that, in the case of a fruit plantation, the tenant increases 

 immensely the value of the land by his skill, his enterprise, and the 

 expenditure of large sums of money, all of which would become the 

 property of the landlord unless there were a proper scheme of compen- 

 sation ; while, if his consent to each separate improvement had to be 

 obtained, the tenant would be seriously hampered in the extension of his 

 business. The supporters of the Acts, indeed, complain that they do not 

 go far enough, as, although it would seem to have been the intention of 

 Parliament that the Acts should be retrospective, i.e. that the landlord 

 should be liable to pay compensation for all tenants' improvements 

 effected in market gardens before the passing of the J^cts, the House of 

 Lords has held (in the case of Callander v. Smith) that this, in a market 

 garden which existed before the Acts were passed, only refers to improve- 

 ments made since the passing of the Acts, and this, especially in the 

 Evesham district, is felt to be a great grievance. The Evesham witnesses 

 strongly insisted that the Acts should be made retrospective. 



29. With regard to the position of the landlords various suggestions 

 have been made with the object of limiting their liability. Mr. Poupart, 



