Large and Small Holdings. 
17 
and in England 92 per cent. ; a proportion so similar that, 
were it not for the largely non-agricultural character of many 
of the English properties, it would excite the wonderment of 
many. 
The late Secretary of the Royal Agricultural Society, in his 
exhaustive reports on the farming of France, Belgium, Holland 
and Denmark,* stated that the good cultivation of small parcels of 
land was impossible, and that in parts of France there was not 
a strip of holding above 2 or 3 acres in extent. He mentions 
one field of 50 acres owned by 19 proprietors and farmed by 
one tenant, and a commune, 2000 acres in extent, is recorded as 
having 270 owners, and 5348 " parcels " of land. The nuisance 
of the numerous different allotments, which were so common in 
\)ur " open fields" throughout England, prevented the land from 
being properly farmed. Inclosures and consolidations altered 
the whole face of the country ; but such improvements seem im- 
possible in France. 
It appears necessary to repeat that Mr. Jenkins's report 
established the fact that our acreage production is much greater 
than that of the Continent, the nearest approach to English crops 
being the rich alluvial soil of Holland. Two English acres grow 
as much food as three French, but the latter certainly utilize their 
produce much better. The French peasant makes from 20Z. to 
'2bl. a year out of the fresh butter from a single cow (although 
the cow is often worked on the land), and sitting hens lay on an 
average 80 eggs a year, which is much in excess of our poultry, 
though possibly climate has much to do with this prolific yield 
■of eggs. Large farms in France produce more than small 
holdings, and this is general throughout the Continent, save in 
East Flanders. Sheep-farming decreases generally, but especially 
in France. The whole of Mr. Jenkins's remarks confirm the 
old story told by M. Lavergne more than 30 years ago, that the 
British Isles produced more food for cattle than the whole of 
France with twice the extent, and that England produces four 
times as much meat, milk and wool as France, and this is 
not attributable to better soil and climate, but to superior 
cultivation. 
Before leaving France it may be well to note the most recent 
testimony upon the condition of the peasantry. In the ' Edin- 
burgh Review ' already quoted we are told that : — 
" The French peasant is worse housed and worse fed than the English 
labourer. His cottage is generally a single room with a mud-floor, in which 
he and his family and his live-stock live, eat, sleep, work, and die. . . . 
" From morn till night his toil is excessive and prolonged, female lahour is 
* Reports to the Eoyal Commission on Agriculture, 1881 and 1832. 
VOL. XXIII. — S. S. C 
