sign in sign up
<<
Home , Common land

Parliamentary in Nineteenth-Century - Some Perspectives on the Evaluation of Potential By A G PARTON HE study of Parliamentary Enclosure of an enigma, especially when one considers at national level has a long history Wrigley's evidence for the spread of T ranging in time from the early works metropolitan influences in South-East of Gonner and Slater to the more recent England by the seventeenth century. 4 Tate synthesis by Turner. I These countrywide confirmed the view that Surrey, in common perspectives have been matched by a great with Middlesex and Hertfordshire, was a variety of regional studies which have county where much of the open-field had stressed the physical changes enclosure been taken in by I7OO. s brought to open-field and common or to At the end of the eighteenth century heathland and . 2 A few "writers Surrey contained an estimated 73,94o acres have considered the process of enclosure of unenclosed land, including 8ooo acres of whilst others have examined the contentious open-field; by I87o about 41,8oo acres had issue of its effect upon the small landowner. 3 been the subject of Enclosure Acts. 6 The Understandably the focus for much of this agricultural value of this land was extremely work has been the wholly rural districts. varied, ranging from the fertile loams of the This paper examines the impact of Parlia- Thamesside districts set in an area of mentary Enclosure in a county and at a time intensive , to the relatively when rural and urban influences might be remote, barren heaths of the west and expected to be increasingly in competition south-west. for the use of land. The focus is particularly Court Rolls provide evidence of piece- upon the evaluation of land potential and the meal enclosure at this time, but this was little subsequent use to which the newly enclosed more than legalizing the nibbling at the land was put. waste by the cottagers who lived on the Most of the unenclosed areas at ~8oo were fringes of common and heath. 7 Enclosure by or heathlands. The survival of 4 E A Wrigley, 'A Sinaple ModelofLondon's Importance t65o-175o', patches of open-field arable at this date and at Past and Present, 37, 1967. s W E Tate, 'Enclosure Acts and Awards Relating to Lands in the no great distance from London, is something County of Surrey', Surrey Archaeological Collections, XLVIII, 1942-3 . E C K Gomaer, and Enclosure, 1912; G. Slater, The e, James Malcolm, A Compendium of Modern Husbandq, Principally Etlglish Peasantr), and the Enclosure of the Common Fields, 19o7; M E Written During a Survey of Surrey, 18o5; Tate, op cir. Turner, English Parliamentary Enclosure, its Historical Geography and 7 For example the Court Rolls of Horley Manor for 18o8 gave lieence Economic History, Folkestone, 198o; W E Tate, A Domesday ofEnglish to Thomas Blundell to enclose twenty rods on the south side of Endosl,re Acts and Awards, M E Turner, Ed, Reading, 1978. Horley Mill Road; eleven years later Thomas Marston was brought : For example: H G Hunt, 'The Chronology of Parlianlentary before the Court charged with illegal encroachment upon the waste Enclosure in Leicestershire', 2nd ser, X, 1957; M A (from 'Historical Notes', collected by the Horley Local History I Econ Hist Rev, Havinden, 'Agricultural Progress in Open-Field Oxfordshire', Ag Association, no date). Further evidence of piecemeal enclosure Hist Rev, 1X, 1961; M Williams, 'The Enclosure of Waste Lands in appears in the Court Rolls for Banstead, Surrey Record Office Somerset 17oo-19oo', Trans Inst Brit Geogr, 57, 1972;J Chapman, (SRO), 212/6/232 and 233/234 for 1716-1818, also in those for 'Parliamentary Enclosure in the Uplands: the case of~he North York Great Bookham. SRO, Ace 153, 1784-1839, and in a series of letters Moors', Ag Hist Rev, XXIV, 1976. written by Lord Onslow concerning his claims to the waste in 3 B Loughborough, 'AnAccountofa YorkshireEnclo~ure-Staxton Windelsham; 18o3', Ag Hist Rev, XIII, 1965; J M Martin, 'The Parliamentary • . . encroachments are perpetually taking place.., very many Enclosure Movement and Rural Society in Warwickshire', Ag Hist slips have been taken offthe Waste of which cottagers and others are Rev, XV, 1967;J V Beckett, 'The Decline of the Small Landowner in in possession. Eighteenth-and Nineteenth-Century England', Ag Hist Rev, XXX, SRO, 'Act for Inclosing lands in the Parish of Windelsham (and I982. related papers)'• 5I j~,;i I

52 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW

When known the dates of Enclosure Awards are shown{Aw}, otherwise the dates are those of the Enclosure ActslA) ,.,°,> v 4<

AwIB17 O

Aw1801 Aw1816 Aw181~ OAw18~2 ,18s, A:~III, ( Aw;.''L~°s ~,~ ~, AW1866

~AwI86S

Aw1826

AwlS00 Aw1905 Aw1817 AwIB86 Aw1858 @

Aw1811

km 0 100 250 1000 2000 mls Acres

FIGURE I Enclosure Awards for tile County of Surrey

Act of Parliament was the principal means by In common with other agricultural which residual areas of open-field and large districts, extra-Metropolitan Surrey ex- acreages of common and heath were perienced two main phases of Parliamentary eliminated during the nineteenth century in enclosure (Fig I). The first period from I796 Surrey. The majority of Enclosure Bills to 1839 applied to both subdivided arable and were inspired by a desire to effect improve- to commons and heath, followed by a second ment and increase revenue from agricultural from I846 to 187o , by which time little rents. At the suburban fringe two related but open-field remained. In some cases the delay r{ diametrically opposed forces were at work. between the first reading of a Bill, the receipt ] On the one hand income from building of the Royal Assent and the laying out of field development was sometimes seen as a more boundaries was such that agricultural certain and immediate return from newly prosperity had turned into depression. John H enclosed land than agricultural land-use Houghton had begun his attempts to could yield; at the same time the expansion of improve a part of Bagshot Heath before the suburban South London generated a desire low prices of the early 183os which curtailed to preserve open space as amenity areas. his activities; in evidence before the Select ¢

PARLIAMENTARY ENCLOSURE IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY SURREY 53

12-1 11q

7// ~, 8-1 i//j I/D Z/l/

till

3 ~////'"

IHJ

1-1 Ill; I/I *//J i[ll .... ;33; 'i/klll/I/[/. iii, 01i60 165 170 1"/5 100 105 190 195 118OOI05 II0 115 120 !5 130 135 Iz,o I/+5 50 155 160 165 170 175 IBo 185 190 195 I1~01

FIGURE 2 Time Profile of Surrey Enclosure Acts

Committee of I836 he stated, 'I am applied to very large tracts of country, and restrained from going on in nay improve- enclosure and land improvement were not ments in consequence of the low price of synonymous. By no means all of this land agricultural produce, or I should have gone was destined for tillage, for potential much further'. ~ At Effingham enclosure was on occasion taken into account. William took only one year, partly because six people Keen, a Godalming land agent, was clearly accounted for most of the open-field aware of the limitations of the Greensand enclosed, whereas the Acts for Kingston and heaths, for he considered that 'Some would Frimley were subject to delays of thirty and make very good and some very twenty-five years respectively. The distri- good land, and there might be some bution of open-field arable at 18oo represen- good meadow land, and some good ted an evaluation of land-use potential made , a great portion of it is only fit for at an early date; in most cases it was the better plantations. '9 The land which had already quality land in a parish which had been been enclosed by an Act of I8II was appropriated to these uses. The success of described in similar terms. The poorer enclosure, which made for more efficient use had been planted with softwoods which of these valuable soils, was almost assured. were yielding timber by I844. Keen This was in marked contrast to the enclosure distinguished between 'black sandy com- of common and heathland. Very often these mon' dominated by heather and 'ferny areas included the poorer lands of their common' which had greater agricultural respective parishes. It might be expected that value, the bracken probably being an enclosure would have not been attempted in indication of a less acid . ,o The value of such areas. Whilst the damp oakwood land affected by any one Enclosure Act commons of the clay with flints which caps reflected contrasts in its potential. When a the North Downs have remained unen- part of the newly enclosed land belonging to closed to this day, in the west and south-west the Ware Estate at Tilford was sold to offset of Surrey attempts were made to tame the the costs of enclosure the agent recorded that extensive heathlands developed on the Lower Greensand and Bagshot areas (Fig 2). s BPP, 1836, VIII, Q846. '~ BPP, 1844, V, Q69o. Many of the Enclosure Acts for these areas '° Ibid. 54 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW

, r ii' Alluvium Lower Greensand~ 'i Cloy with Flints Weald Cloy _ _ _

Bogshot Series

London Cloy

Chalk

;>5i:)% T":

I"l

t • t~'

¢ 0 8 16km I t I 0 5 lOmts

FIGURE 3 Surrey -- Simplified Geology

Acknowledgement: Based, m part, on Crown Copyright Geological Survey Maps by permission of the Director of the British Geological Survey

'the lots near Abbots pond were sold for less of the land . Many small parcels of than £8 an acre, three lots next to it, not such waste in several places were eliminated good land for £3 an acre'." under the umbrella of one Act; for example The Weald Clay, with few areas of an award of I854 applied to 592 acres of common or waste and no open field, was common and waste in seven locations, only affected through the enclosure of some mostly roadside strips in the parishes of of the meadow which had been held in Betchworth, Leigh and . common and the roadside wastes. The Colonel Goulbourn of Betchworth was motive for enclosure was to make greater use concerned that roadside commons on the of areas spasmodically grazed and to more Weald clay were unenclosed and under- efficiently manage the which were used. During investigations to ascertain who subject to over-intensive use. In a district had rights to this land Goulbourn's solicitor where fodder was in short supply both types wrote: of enclosure constituted a more efficient use • . . with regard to , the question is what is waste, and what rights the Lord or copyholders have "SRO Ace 7o5, Ware Estate Records. on it, if there be a roadside slip the assumption is that

,/ PARLIAMENTARY ENCLOSURE IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY SURREY 55 the holder of the enclosed land is entitled to it and in fact scattered conifers growing within a land- to the land on his side of the middle of the road. It is said scape of enclosure fields, and was probably that in bad weather, when the roads were impassable unchanged since it was described by the you might travel by the sides. The roads being now made good, owners of adjoining land whenever they Board of Agriculture reporters at the can enclose up to the roadway.~2 beginning of the century. Although Lord Not that enclosures of this kind, involving Onslow bemoaned the large acreage of waste prior to enclosure, very small acreages, were always the subject of Enclosure Acts. In some instances you may well suppose it to be a neglected manor when enclosure was arranged between tenant or the waste is so extensive, landowner and the Lord of the Manor. At Ockham a tenant wrote to the Lord of the the costs of effectively improving the land Manor, were high. i4 Very often paring and burning and trenching to break up the iron pan I am cutting down the old hedge which is past mcnding commonly found at a depth of about twenty and propose planting a fresh hedge so as to take in this waste. ~3 inches was necessary if arable crops were to be grown. The land had then to be heavily These instances afford evidence of some dressed with lime and manure and a kind of land assessment prior to the preparatory crop of clover grown and presentation of a Bill to Parliament, but the ploughed in. After the heavy capital examination of the subsequent use to which investment that all of this involved it was not enclosed land was put suggests that evalu- certain that returns would be high enough to ation also followed enclosure and that justify the outlay, except in a few favoured reappraisals of land potential were made locations or during periods of exceptionally subsequently when changed economic high prices. At the turn of the century the conditions or improved accessibility might latter condition was met; Brayley, noting the give a new value to land. The heaths of the successes in reclamation in the Bagshot west and south-west included some of the region, ascribes them to the application of most marginal land in the county although stable dung from Bagshot, which lay on the paradoxically they occurred within the most heavily used coach route from London to the advanced agricultural district in terms of south-west. ,s Conditions may have seemed both the integration of stock and crop and the ripe for more extensive attempts at improve- application of farming methods designed to ment through Parliamentary Enclosure. increase productivity. The considerable However, a complex mesh of changes called though by no means always successful for less optimism and a more selective efforts made to improve the poorer lands approach to land improvement. William might be related to a concentration of Cobbett, admittedly a somewhat biased improving landlords and tenants in these observer, saw at first hand the attempts to districts. The Award for Windlesham was reclaim the western heaths; writing at a time made in I814; fifty years later a few nursery when agricultural prices were depressed, he grounds occupying a small acreage and some considered that the investment in their coniferous plantations were the only signs of improvement was improvement. A relatively small proportion of the 4ooo acres described in the Award the misapplied capital which should be concentrating on the good lands, x6 showed evidence of any change in land-use. Most of the. vegetation was heath and ,4 SRO, 'Act for I,~closinglands in the Parish of Windelsham (and related papers)'. z:SRO, Acc 319, Goulboum IV/6, 14/I. ,5 W Brayley, A History of Surrey, t84I. ~JSRO, Acc 317, Box 45 (viii). '~W Cobbett, Rural Rides, 183o. il i'i 56 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW After the opening of the London and Several methods were being used to Southampton railway in I838, the cheap, reclaim the newly enclosed land; deep readily available supply of stable dung ploughing, double trenching with or became an increasingly rare as without burning the turf, first becking then stage coach traffic rapidly diminished, but burning the turf before double ploughing so whilst the railway made reclamation more that the first furrow was buried beneath the costly it also brought markets for agricul- second. The costs of these methods were tural produce within easy reach. The nursery from £3 IOS to £6 an acre. Whilst the larger /, and market gardens which developed in this part of the allotment was developed as part of region after I84o demonstrate how the the home farm, the remainder was allocated potential of an area can be changed in to the estate farms, the tenants paying a low response to altered economic and geo- rent to cover the cost of enclosure and graphical circumstances. The light sandy fencing for the first few years, after which the soils were well suited to the production of rents were increased, thus recognizing that market garden crops, especially early the tenant would expend some capital on carrots, peas, and nursery products such as improvement. Considerable tracts of the azaleas, rhododendrons and other lightest land were planted with trees; in 'American plants'. Before the development I85I-2 alone, I5o,ooo Scotch fir and 5o,ooo of the railway this district was too renqote to larch were sown. By 1860 the Agent could produce these crops; improved communica- write: tions brought London nearer, allowing it to There is a considerableextent of the enclosedcommon exert a greater economic influence than had now in plantations for future value which yields little hitherto been possible. Be that as it may the or no income, but on the other hand there are some landscape effects of these developments plantations yielding poles for sale . . . it is probable were negligible since these activities were that this part of the estate will be made to balance,''~ carried on in small units. Brayley mentions an 'extensive nursery for American plants, at For the arable land, were not Woking which had been enclosed from surprisingly seen as the best means of and heath', but this was only I2o acres in improvement allied to the production of area. ,7 root crops. The enthusiastic Agent wrote: In the i82os one could deem most attempts at improvement in this part of I repeat the old text all the sheep you can find and if you ask what this is I reply as the sailor who first asked for all Surrey failures, but by I87o, this judgement the tobacco in the world and on being asked, what would have to be qualified. In the south-west more? only said, I ask a little more tobacco, so say I a the acreage of the Ware Estate at Tilford on few more sheep if possible,a° the Lower Greensand was doubled as a result of an allotment made by the Tilford By the end of the century the judicious Enclosure Award. The Agent was well investment of capital had resulted in the aware of the varying potential of the land and integration of the enclosed common with the in recommending that parts of it could be rest of the estate. profitably used for either cultivation, grass The large number o fvariables .operatin .g in or coniferous plantation he was careful to time and space would call in question say, generalizations made about the success or failure of enclosure. The Report of the Select having laid before you this opinion I must add that I Committee of I844 records that land may be mistaken the land may disappoint us. 's enclosed at Godalming had doubled in

'VBrayley, op cir. '"Ibid. '"SRO, Acc 7o5, Ware Estate Records. "° 1bid. PARLIAMENTARY ENCLOSURE IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY SURREY 57 value ~ but it is certain that this was not I8IO when an Act to enclose and drain them always the case. Harvey Keen in his evidence was passed. ~6 to the same Committee, when pressed, st George's Fields are fields no more admitted that he was The trowel supersedes the plough; afraid that a great dealof land alreadyenclosed does not Swamps, huge and inundate of yore, pay for the cultivation of it. "-~" Are changed to civic villas now. 27 Nine years later Henry Evershed noted that Similarly, nearby Walworth Common Ioo acres of Bradley Common, Godalming had been enclosed in I77o and vested in was then being reclaimed, but he expressed Trustees for the Poor who were empowered doubt as to whether even the larch and to let it on ninety-nine-year building leases. Scotch fir being planted would survive. ~3 Most of the expected income was to go to For the promoters of enclosure in Surrey, poor relief. In fact little building took place proximity to London was generally of less here until after I8OO, because of the land's significance than variations in land quality liability to flooding. Whilst more suitable and the movements of season and price. areas were available the commons remained However, in the district bordering the urban as agricultural outliers amongst suburban area, the growth of the metropolis had a development. This was also the case with more profound effect. Prior to enclosure the Stockwell Green which was enclosed in 18 I4 commons were heavily utilized. Thus but it was not until 1874 that proposals were gravels were dug to repair the heavily used made to build upon it. By this time the roads which converged in North Surrey en movement to preserve open space had been route for the Thames bridges. Bakers and developing and an attempt was made to others cut timber for fuel and the cow return the land to its former 'common' keepers pastured their animals on the limited status. This venture in conservation failed amount of common land available. Soon because of a legal technicality and a year later after Kennington Common was opened in three-storey terrace dwellings were being May, it was poached and overgrazed to such constructed. an extent that it was of no further use until The awareness of the value of land in the autumn. -~4 Battersea and Clapham com- form of open space as an amenity for the mons drew a most unusual comment from inhabitants of new suburbia had been those staunch advocates of enclosure, the developing for some years. As early as I814 Board of Agriculture reporters, who the Egham Enclosure Act had provided a considered them to be as productive as if they green, were enclosed. :5 These often poorly drained clayland commons were not always im- open and uninclosedfor the pleasure of the inhabitants mediately attractive to the developer; easy and the adornment of their residenceson the said green access to London was evidently not enough. in such a manner as the commoners shall think fit.:8 Two new roads leading to Blackfriars Bridge were developed following an Act of A little later, in I835, a committee of 1769; they intersected in St George's Fields, residents of the then fashionable and an area of swampy common where some of growing suburb of Clapham obtained the London's street sweepings were deposited. leases of all the manorial rights to Clapham They were not developed for building until Common. They drained it, improved it and made the common into a public park. ~-9 :' BPP, 1844, V, Q668. 2~"Ibid. :e', Laws, Statutes, etc. Local Act, 49 Geo Ill, ch x83. :J H Evershed, 'On the Farming ofSurrey',JRASE, XIV, 1853. :v H and J Smith, The Spread of London, 18 x3, :4 W James andJ Malcohn, A General view of the Agric!dtun, qf Surre),, :, Great Britain. Laws, Statutes, etc, Egham Enclosure Act, 18 I4, 54. 1794. Geo Ill, ch 153. :SJames and Malcohn, op cit. :" E Malden, The Victoria County History of Surrey, IV, I912. 58 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW These were the forerunners of the main Lord Spencer, Lord of the Manors of phase of common preservations in the 186os, Battersea and Wimbledon, attempted to which found expression in the 'Commons enclose the land, but the local residents Open Spaces and Preservation formed a committee to oppose the plan and Society' of 1865, the principal body behind the Bill was subsequently withdrawn. the Metropolitan Commons Acts of i866 Determined to obtain some income from the and 1869, which gave some protection to the commons, Lord Spencer opened a brick- commons within the Metropolitan Police field, excavated for gravels and leased a part District. 3° Conflicts of interest between of the land for use as a sewage farm. Finally those who saw commons as amenities and the local residents began moves which others who saw them as commercial assets culminated in the Wimbledon and Putney occurred before and after the Metropolitan commons Act of I87I, which preserved the Commons Acts. The Vestry Minute Books commons for public use in the care of for Tooting in 1863 record the setting up of a conservators.34 committee, The bulk of the land enclosed in nineteenth-century Surrey was common or to s~tfeguard the rights of the parish in reference to the proposed enclosure of the common by the Lord of the heath; land which, it might be argued, earlier Manor. a' generations had placed beyond the limits of cultivation. The nineteenth century brought The common was subsequently preserved, new perceptions of land value which were as was Wandsworth Common, which was expressed in attempts to enclose some of this vested in the hands of conservators. 3-~ In land. The varying degrees of success which similar vein the Enclosure Act for Rush followed Parliamentary Enclosure were Common stipulated that testimony to the accuracy of these percep- tions and to the vagaries of season and price, no buildings or erections above the surface of the earth be erected upon Rush common within 150 feet of the the backcloth against which the protagonists London to Croydon turnpike. 33 of enclosure worked. Nearer to London earlier assessments of land quality were This common consisted of a narrow strip of sometimes confirmed by the reluctance of land which ran the length of Brixton Hill. developers to build upon the poorly drained Although enclosed, the open character of the commons. The growth of an awareness of land was preserved and the building line still the anaenity value of open space started a remains at the stipulated distance from the process of conservation which helped to roadway. The most notable instance of produce the character of the county today. conflict over the use of common land Although close to London, Surrey still concerned Wimbledon and Putney com- contains 26,ooo acres of preserved mons, which today constitute the largest 'wildscape'. 3s public open space in South London. In 1864,

3°Great Britain, Laws, Statutes, etc, Metropolitan Commons Acts, .~4j 1) Casswell, How Hqmbh'don and Putne), Ct,mmons were Saved, no _i 1866 and 1869, 29 and 30 Vict, eh 122; 32 and 33 Vict, ch IO7. date but e189o. Minet Library, Papers in comlection with the ~' W E Morden, A Hislory of Tooting Gravene},, 1897. proposed enclosure ofWimbledon Conlmons. Green, 0p cir. J~ G W R Green, The Story of Wandsworth and Putnel,, I925. J~W G Hoskins and L D Stamp, The Common Lands of England amt 3J LCC Survey of London, Parish of St MarI, Lambeth, XXV, 1951. IYah's, 1963 .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author would like to thank Mr H C Prince of the Department of Geography, University College London, for his comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

11

l