Farming of Oxfordshh'C. 261 
fourth of the rent. The vicarial tithes are often very light, not 
more than Gd. or Is. per acre. It is becoming a general plan with 
landlords to pay the tithes and let their land free of all rent 
charges. The Tithe Commutation Act does not apply to more 
than half the parishes in Oxfordshire. When parishes were 
enclosed there was generally an allotment of land to the tithe- 
owner in lieu of his rights. In some cases there was a certain 
annual p<ayment, or corn-rent, awarded in lieu of tithes, the 
amount of which is regulated by the prices of corn in the county, 
on an average of f^e 7 or 14 years last preceding. The unfair- 
ness of these corn-rents, and indeed of all commuted tithes is, 
that heavy clay lands pay a larger sum per acre than stock farms. 
When wheat averaged 80s. per quarter and mutton 4c?. per lb., 
the present charges might have been just ; but now these pro- 
portions are reversed, the strong lands have much the worst 
of it. 
From the last annual return it appears that the poor-rates of 
Oxfordshire amounted to 81,725/. bs. The following are the 
sums collected for the poor's rate in each Union : — 
Banbury £15,925 8 0 
Bicester 7,372 19 0 
Chippiny: Norton 8,214 3 0 
Ilcadington 5,572 5 0 
Ilonley 11,444 6 0 
Oxtonl (city) 4,988 8 0 
Tluuiie . . . . , 11,579 19 0 
Witney 10,660 3 0 
Woodstock 8,068 1 0 
£83,825 10 0 
Several parishes comprised in these Unions are not in the 
county ; so, after deducting them from this total, the sum first 
recorded represents the rate in Oxfordshire in 1852. 
It will be seen by the following comparison that the amount 
of poor-rate has recently been very considerably diminished : — 
In 1803, Arthur Young states the rates to be . . £103,559 
In 1834, the last year of the old law, they were . 150,335 
^ In 1852, the date of tlic last return 81,725 
Whatever may be the defects of the New Poor Law, it is 
certainly a great improvement on the old one, for the amount of 
pauperism and imposition under the old system was something 
fearful. Every labourer, whose family exceeded a certain num- 
ber, had a loaf of bread allowed weekly for each extra child. 
The surplus labourers were employed in turns by tlie farmers, 
each occupier keeping the men a certain number of days 
according to the size of the farm : these odd hands were called 
