to those that obtained here immediately after the Great: War. In the 16th and 17th centuries as in the 20th, th rich merchants and speculators hurried to buy Englis land; then, as in our time, successive Governments trie to return the pasture to the plough. Our Elizabetha houses in their mellow beauty testify to the value our flocks. Wool dictated foreign policy, created th Poor Law, and led Sir Walter Raleigh to hold, as th Manchester School does to-day, that this country migh well be fed on foreign corn. New landlords acceptthe tradition of the land when the wealth won fro commerce carried them from the towns.

in

car

lief

Through the earlier times, from the passing of t Manor down to the years of the Dissolution of Mon teries, the land had been strongly held. It was not l entirely to the mercy of absentee warriors, or of the simple folk who farmed in common, strip by strip, whe methods were primitive, the bulk of whose cattle a sheep must be killed in autumn or starve in winter, w had neither clover nor roots. The monks appear have mastered all agricultural knowledge. They pr tised continental methods, they cultivated fishponds a flower gardens, they were herbalists, they took the le in raising the fruits of the earth. They maintained best farming tradition, and it is clear that agricult needed their wise guidance. This contention may supported by reference to the times of the Civil W and the Commonwealth when the monasteries wer memory and the landowning classes, not yet accuston to take the latter-day view of their responsibilities the country-side, betook themselves to the more genial occupation of fighting one another. Then farm suffered, and we find that our complaints are more than an echo of those older ones. For exam

mi uch

The

brin :Et Er That

side

r ec

there is in the second half of the 17th century a cryon

Peter st

payment for the leaseholder's improvements, for m intensive methods of cultivation, for extension drainage and extinction of vermin. The wheat prob was already serious; an import duty of 2s. a qual was imposed on foreign wheat in 1660 and was sta ing at 16s. ten years later. In 1688 there was a bou on exported wheat, payable when the home price wa or under 24s. a sack. The farmer had animal dise

i

contend against, slaughter became compulsory, and oderate compensation was paid. Without guidance ad support agriculture must have remained ineffective. pparently the landowning class returned to work at e end of the 17th century, and from that time we ad that the condition of husbandry, if not always the husbandman, improved steadily. But then, as fore and since, agricultural prosperity depended on leap labour.

The 18th century paved the way to industrial enterise in England and strengthened the landowners. In at period upwards of two million acres were brought ader cultivation. Jethro Tull invented a drilling achine and taught the first principles of economical eding. Lord Townshend, retiring from the distinished practice of diplomacy, applied Tull to turnips. popularised the four-course rotation, which had only en followed in a few agricultural districts; he created e agricultural wealth of Lincolnshire; he insisted on e value of carbonate of lime, bringing fresh authority an old belief. To realise the importance of drilling, rnip cultivation, and soil renovation we must endeavour understand the state of English land in the years en these improvements were first essayed. A wasteful tem of farming had not availed to tithe possibilities to do much more than feed a small population. ansport was in its infancy; the rural community selftained. The mere creation of a food surplus was ficient to bring about a demand for roads good enough carry it: England owes many of her roads to the mer. What the country-side was doing and could do 8 becoming of the first importance to the towns. Side by side with progress there was suffering. The essity for enclosing land was grievous to those who la traditional knowledge of and interest in the baulk strip system which, though forgotten in England lay, may still be studied in all its pristine absurdity the continent. But, after the Civil War, when farming sed from incompetent hands, estates were strongly 1, and men of means and intelligence strove to make at they could of the first source of national wealth. n and roots were not alone in receiving attention, bert Bakewell in the mid-18th century improved the ol. 242.-No. 480.

H

breed of cart-horses, sheep, and oxen. He followed the purpose that breeders set before themselves to-day, to turn money into joints in the shortest possible time He had pedigree sires, and received stud fees that appear tempting even now; he left the English dinner-table better equipped than he found it. Once the start wa given there were plenty to follow, and before Bakewel died the average weight of market cattle had more tha doubled; that of calves, sheep, and lambs had treble Yet we may doubt whether Turnip Townshend' an Robert Bakewell could have effected their peaceful an profitable revolution without wealthy landowner an poverty-stricken labourer; we recognise the bitter truf D Ba that, while the beast was cultivated, the man w neglected. In the latter part of the 18th century the farm labourer earned 7s. a week.

mle

pro

New undertakings involved considerable outlay, an while they might deserve success could not command Arthur Young saw that in the work of the pionee there was a fulcrum for turning the whole of our agi cultural method to better ends. He praised the larg scale method, he knew that the small man working on limited acreage with insufficient means could not possibl turn his land to best advantage. He saw that th indigent farmer could not dress or drain meadow E improve stock, study or practise the latest acts husbandry; across his stimulating discourse falls t shadow of the factory farm. Already the dawn of tls manufacturing era was upon the land, together wit the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars. England had not been strongly held, if the country hand been given up to baulk farming by men who sought its surplus, it is hard to see how war could have be waged or our nascent industries cultivated. In the ear id 19th century, as in the early 20th, the agriculturalists Stat all classes helped to save England. Readers of Lowi Ernle's brilliant work, English Farming, Past a Th Present,' a book that appeals to students of history ave to practical farmers, cannot fail to realise that t I Napoleonic era not only gave agriculture in Englan its golden age but consolidated the position of the lan lords. Farmer George' was a keen breeder of sto and took a real interest in the developments that ea

E

ear brought; men like the Duke of Bedford at Woburn id Lord Egremont at Petworth were carrying out periments of high value. To the light and shifting il of Holkham, Coke of Norfolk' brought clay and arl. He replaced rye with wheat, introduced oil-cake r cattle, and fed so extensively that his stock ensured e quality of his corn, and in forty years his annual nt roll rose from 2,000l. to 20,000l. The old Board of griculture (1793-1822) came into being and the Farmers' ab with it. Smithfield Club dates from 1798 when the ath and West of England Society had already come of e. There were experimental farms in various parts England. Rents were rising, more waste land was ing reclaimed, more open land enclosed by Act of arliament, the Enclosure Acts of King George's reign n into thousands. Even poor soil could produce paying ops, new industrial centres clamoured for food and ere could be no imports, war and the poor harvests Europe forbade. Behind these efforts stood the landd, guiding, directing, financing, establishing his hold d the tradition of his class, justifying in some measure 3 claim to rule because he was proving that he could ve. I think that there was a minimum of altruism in is attitude. He felt that he stood for England, that was the property of the elect, and he sought to tify his stewardship to his peers. Of the agricultural ourer's needs he knew little and cared less.

The new industrialism demanded much money. There 8 a very generous note issue that led to financial crises; id panics and fluctuations only the land appeared to sess stability. Big landowners won profit from high ming and properties in first-class order; Coke of folk is said to have spent half a million on his estate Idings. Statesmen took a keen interest in agriculture ing that, without it, the new industrial centres must ppear. There was a tempting reward for the man > could invent a useful implement to speed up acts of bandry. Through a season of unprecedented prosity the landlords consolidated their position in the atry-side and the farmers were prosperous-for a 9. But agriculture is not the business of landowners big farmers alone. The small men, the yeomen 8, giving the term its widest acceptance, won nothing

to re

Corn

age b

hi

MO

oor

from war, and when prices fell and bills had to be met their ruin was complete. The labourers suffered all the time, even in the war years with employment plentifu it was found necessary to supply them with food at les than the ruling price. Wages, though they rose steadil from 1750 and suffered only slight fluctuations followin the reaction to Waterloo, did not keep pace with t rise in commodities. We can read, in the crisis throug which agriculture has passed of late, a twice-told ta After the war 'boom,' at the end of the 18th and t beginning of the 19th century, farmers sought to down expenses-they could not help themselves-a there was no relief for a poor man while he had a possessions. He must sell his cottage, his cow, his p before claiming the scanty relief of the pauper, and degradation set in. The country was suffering fro effects of the kind we experienced four years ago, a through twenty years, long after there had been industrial revival, agriculture declined. Lord Ernle b pointed out the solitary advantage that agriculturi enjoyed through those hard times. Money had be spent on their land. It had been limed, drained, manur as never before; they had better live-stock, better i plements, and a wider knowledge, so that although pric fell to a half of what they were, many contrived to far through the bleak years of George IV and William I But on scores of holdings the bailiffs replaced the farm and much land went out of cultivation. If the landlor failed in this crisis, let us remember that their weal was not very great and the tax-collector was urgent. The plight of agricultural labourers was even wo than that of farmers. Commodity prices had soar beyond their purchasing power; though they were ea ing half as much again as their fathers they were wo off. In their despair it was easy to persuade them th they owed their ruin to machinery. The riots of tre early 'thirties were the ripe fruit of this idea, but t political position of the landlords was not shaka When the revival came they were the pioneers w despite heavy taxation, mortgages, and reduced rents again financed agriculture and continued the work surveying new paths of progress.

em

and to d

There

Emer

Ain

part

olde solid

of

may

cal

and

There was considerable incentive for the farmer