Ar/ricuhural Capabilities of the New Forest. 261 
of questions on which his opinions were solicited. The fust of 
these questions relates to the dimensions of dilTerent portions, 
and has been replied to elsewhere. 
" 2. I do not consider the poorest land of the Forest adapted to the growth of 
larch, hut I think it would grow Scotch fir, and pay well for so doina;; and 
after the crop of fir was removed, it would become useful for other purposes. 
T have known land equally poor, and of similar character to the worst in the 
Forest, return 40/. per acre for Scotch fir of 40 years' growth. Larch would 
thrive well on the more staply lands of the Forest. 
" 3. All the best lands of the Forest are under plantation (enclosed), young 
growing timber unenclosed, or old matured timber ; if this is excepted, a very 
small proportion of the residue would be of sufficient quality to jiay for culti- 
vation as corn-land. I should think not more than one-tenth part. 
"4. 1 do not think any great good will accrue to the country through an 
enclosure of the New Forest unless the Crown sells the whole (that is all that 
remains to it after the rights of the commoners and others are satisfied). If 
the Crown retains those portions now growing timber, it will be impossible to 
dispose of the remainder to the best advantage, whether as building sites, or 
for agricultural or other purposes. Before the Forest generally can he made 
habitable, it must be drained. To do this effectually, outfalls and main 
channels for the discharge of such drainage must be provided ; these main 
channels will be required through the length and breadth of the Forest, 
lloads will have to be formed for the accommodation of different properties 
and districts. In setting out the several lots of land, they should be so 
arranged as to embrace portions of the high poor lands with some of the good 
stapled lands, including also some young plantations and older timber, with a 
good building site. If this plan were adopted, properties of various extents 
would be the result, which I consider would be very desirable. Although I 
consider so small a portion of the Forest would pay for cultivation as corn- 
lands, I am not prepared to say what would be the condition of such lands, 
or what their powers would be, after large amounts of capital had been 
expended on them. They may be made fruitful, but possibly " the toll 
might be heavier than the grist." Hence it appears to me the owner should 
be a man who could afi'ord to sink capital, having other objects than agri- 
culture, such as making what is termed a desirable residential projiei'ty. 
In carrying out this object he must improve the land, render it more or less 
productive, and the country at large would be benefited. I need not point 
out the beneficial change we, in the immediate neighbourhood of the Forest, 
would experience through having this large tract of land respectably inha- 
bited ; it would simply be the difference of living in a good neighbourhood 
instead of a bad one. The great help towards the staple improvement of 
forest-land is marl, of which unlimited quantities are to be obtained. Chalk 
is also quite witliin reach by the aid of railways, and at a cost within range. 
Quite as much timber, equally good, and much cheaper, would be produced 
if the Forest were in private proi^erties instead of the property of the Crown. 
You have only to look at the timber growing on private properties within 
the Forest boundary to be assured of this. 
" It may be right to apportion recreation-grounds in the neighbourhood of 
towns and villages, but as to pasturage for the same I apprehend the rights 
of the commoners would be considered, and compensation given either in land 
or money before enclosure could proceed. The commoners would be the 
greatest, and I thinic the only sufferers through au enclosure ; thert fore in 
considering their rights they should be dealt with liberallj- ; and when com- 
pensation is made in land, it should be allotted as near as may be to the 
freehold, through which they obtain their common rights. By commoners I 
