75 1 
On  the  Farming  of  Somerset. 
usual  way,  partly  in  money  and  partly  in  cider.  When  I first  began, 
which  was  11  or  12  years  ago,  I just  proposed  it  to  my  people,  who  said 
in  reply  that  they  could  not  work  without  cider.  Determined,  however, 
to  try  my  plan  with  them,  instead  of  requiring  them  to  work  without 
cider,  I said  they  should  have  their  wages  in  money,  and  if  they  chose 
to  have  cider  they  should  pay  me  for  it.  In  this  way  it  was  left  to  them- 
selves to  have  it  or  not.  Their  wages  were  raised  Is.  6 d.  per  week.  That 
is,  a man  whose  wages  were  9s.  6d.  per  week,  if  he  drank  3 pints  of 
cider  per  day,  took  home  with  him  on  the  Friday  8s.  Another  man,  who 
perhaps  was  satisfied  with  two  pints,  had  8s.  6 d.  ; and  the  man  who  had 
none  during  the  week  would  have  9s.  6r/.  When  left  to  their  own  choice, 
it  is  not  the  case  that  the  labourer  will  always  take  cider  instead  of 
money;  but  I believe  that  wdien  required  to  work  without  cider,  they 
generally  think  it  a hardship.  Whatever  others  may  say  on  the  subject, 
I have  found,  when  left  to  their  own  choice,  particularly  during  the 
winter  months,  the  labourer  prefers  money  to  cider.” 
Mr.  Paramore  lias  acted  upon  a plan  not  wholly  unlike  Mr. 
Danger’s  ; and  Mr.  Poole  found  it  answer  to  give  his  labourers  in 
harvest-time  money  to  buy  a hogshead  of  cider,  and  to  leave  them 
to  drink  it  as  they  pleased  ; they  drank  less,  worked  better,  and 
earned  more  than  on  the  usual  plan  ; and  paying,  as  he  does,  a 
high  rate  of  money-wages,  he  is  satisfied  that  his  corn  was 
harvested  cheaper  than  that  of  his  neighbours. 
There  is  a strong  and  just  feeling  among  many  tenants  that 
landlords  ought  to  do  more  to  provide  the  labourers  with  decent 
cottages  near  their  work,  instead  of  driving  them  into  towns  and 
villages,  where  they  must  pay  as  much  as  4 1.  for  a miserable  house 
without  a garden.  A very  distinguished  tenant  farmer  has  sent 
me  a calculation,  showing  that  the  time  lost  by  the  labourer 
walking  four  miles  daily  is  equal  to  several  years  of  his  life.  He 
says,  “ The  master  is  at  some  loss,  but  the  great  loss  is  to  the 
man  ; imagine  this  time  spent  in  his  garden,  what  comforts  would 
it  have  given  him.”  “ And  yet,”  he  says,  “at  this  time  landlords 
are  taking  down  cottages  on  their  estates.”  It  is  at  least  encou- 
raging that  the  desire  to  keep  the  labourer  and  his  family  at  arm's 
length,  which  I noticed  to  my  surprise  in  Lincolnshire,  is  not 
shared  by  tenants  in  Somersetshire. 
The  practice  of  clearing  off  cottages  in  close  parishes,  at  which 
my  correspondent  hints,  may,  I fear,  be  found  within  this  county  in 
several  instances;  it  is  difficult  to  come  at  the  exact  truth  and 
justice  of  such  cases  without  knowing  all  the  circumstances.  But 
if  proprietors  were  aware  of  the  deep  feelings  excited  by  any 
attempt  to  evade  the  fair  burden  of  providing  houses  for  those  who 
labour  on  their  land  and  relief  for  those  who  are  disabled,  the 
satisfaction  which  they  may  derive  from  the  skilful  management 
of  their  estates  would  be  much  diminished. 
Speaking  generally,  the  number  of  bad  cottages  with  one  room 
upstairs  is  diminishing,  and  several  landlords  have  improved  the 
