第7章

WehaveasidelightonthevigilanceoftheHouseofCommons，whenan

EnclosureBillcamedownfromacommittee，inaspeechofWindham’sindefence

ofbull-baiting。Windhamattackedthepoliticianswhohadintroducedthe

Billtoabolishbull-baiting，forraisingsuchaquestionatatimeofnational

crisiswhenParliamentoughttobethinkingofotherthings。Hethenwent

ontocomparethesubjecttolocalsubjectsthat’containednothingofpublic

orgeneralinterest。Toprocurethediscussionofsuchsubjectsitwasnecessary

toresorttocanvassandintrigue。Memberswhoseattendancewasinducedby

localconsiderationsinmostcasesofthisdescription，werepresent：the

discussion，ifanytookplace，wasmanagedbythefriendsofthemeasure：

andthedecisionoftheHousewasultimately，perhaps，amatterofmerechance。’

FromSheridan’sspeechinanswer，welearnthatthisisadescriptionof

thepassingofEnclosureBills。’Anotherhonourablegentlemanwhohadopposed

thisBillwithpeculiarvehemence，considereditasoneofthoselightand

trivialsubjects，whichwasnotworthytooccupythedeliberationsofParliament：

andhecomparedittocertainothersubjectsofBills：thatistosay，bills

ofalocalnature，respectinginclosuresandotherdisposalofproperty，

whichmerelypassedbychance，asMemberscouldnotbegottoattendtheir

progressbydintofcanvassing，’(33*)DoubtlessmostMembersoftheHouse

ofCommonssharedthesentimentsofLordSandwich，whotoldtheHouseof

Lordsthathewassosatisfied’thatthemoreinclosuresthebetter，that

asfarashispoorabilitieswouldenablehim，hewouldsupporteveryinclosure

billthatshouldbebroughtintotheHouse。’(34*)

Forthelastactofanenclosuredramathesceneshiftsbacktotheparish。

Thecommissionersarrive，receiveanddetermineclaims，andpublishanaward，

mappingoutthenewvillage。Thelifeandbusinessofthevillagearenow

insuspense，andthecommissionersareoftenauthorisedtoprescribethe

courseofhusbandryduringthetransition。(35*)TheActwhichtheyadminister

providesthatacertainproportionofthelandistobeassignedtothelord

ofthemanor，invirtueofhisrights，andacertainproportiontotheowner

ofthetithes。AnoccasionalActprovidesthatsomesmallallotmentshall

bemadetothepoor：otherwisethecommissionershaveafreehand：their

powersarevirtuallyabsolute。Thisistheimpressionleftbyallcontemporary

writers。ArthurYoung，forexample，writesemphaticallyinthissense。’Thus

isthepropertyofproprietors，andespeciallyofthepoorones，entirely

attheirmercy：everypassionofresentmentandprejudicemaybegratified

withoutcontrol，fortheyarevestedwithadespoticpowerknowninnoother

branchofbusinessinthisfreecountry。’(36*)Similartestimonyisfound

intheReportoftheSelectCommittee(1800)ontheExpenseandModeofObtaining

BillsofEnclosure：’theexpediencyofdespatch，withouttheadditionalexpense

ofmultipliedlitigation，hassuggestedthenecessityofinvestingthemwith

asummary，andinmostcasesuncontrollablejurisdiction。’(37*)IntheGeneral

ReportoftheBoardofAgricultureonEnclosures，publishedin1808，though

anymorecarefulprocedureisdeprecatedaslikelytocausedelay，itis

statedthattheadjustingofpropertyworth£；50，000waslefttothe

arbitrationofamajorityoffive，’oftenpersonsofmeaneducation。’The

authorofAnInquiryintotheAdvantagesanddisadvantagesresultingfrom

BillsofInclosure，publishedin1781，writesasifitwasthepractice

toallowanappealtoQuarterSessions；suchanappealhecharacterisedas

uselesstoapoorman，andwecanwellbelievethatmostofthesquireswho

satonsuchatribunaltopunishvagrantsorpoachershadhadahandinan

enclosureinthepastorhadtheireyesonanenclosureinthefuture。Thurlow

consideredsuchanappealquiteinadequate，givingthemorepolitereason

thatQuarterSessionshadnotthenecessarytime。(38*)TheActof1801is

silentonthesubject，butSinclair’sdraftofaGeneralInclosureBill，

publishedintheAnnalsofAgriculturein1796，(39*)providedfor

anappealtoQuarterSessions。Inthecaseoffiveenclosuresmentionedin

thesechapters(HauteHuntre，Simpson，Stanwell，WakefieldandWinfrithNewburgh)，

thedecisionofthecommissionersonclaimswasfinal，exceptthatatWakefield

anobjectormightobligethecommissionerstotaketheopinionofacounsel

chosenbythemselves。Infivecases(Ashelworth，Croydon，Cheshunt，Laleham

andLouth)，adisappointedclaimantmightbringasuitonafeignedissue

againstaproprietor。AtArmleyandKnaresboroughthefinaldecisionwas

lefttoarbitrators，butwhereasatArmleythearbitratorwastobechosen

byaneutralauthority，theRecorderofLeeds，thearbitratorsatKnaresborough

werenamedintheAct，andwerepresumablyasmuchthenomineesofthepromoters

asthecommissionersthemselves。

Thestatementsofcontemporariesalreadyquotedgotoshowthatnoneof

thesearrangementswereregardedasseriouslyfetteringthepowerofthe

commissioners，anditiseasytounderstandthatalawsuit，whichmightof

courseoverwhelmhim，wasnotaremedyfortheuseofasmallproprietor

oracottager，thoughitmightbeofsomeadvantagetoalargeproprietor

whohadnotbeenfortunateenoughtosecureadequaterepresentationofhis

interestsontheBoardofCommissioners。Butthedecisionastoclaimswas

onlypartofthebusiness。Aman’sclaimmightbeallowed，andyetgross

injusticemightbedonehimintheredistribution。Hemightbegiveninferior

land，orlandinaninconvenientposition。Inmostofthecasescitedin

thischaptertheawardofthecommissionersisstatedtobefinal，andthere

isnoappealfromit。TwoexceptionsareKnaresboroughandArmley。TheKnaresborough

Actissilentonthepoint，andtheArmleyActallowsanappealtotheRecorder

ofLeeds。Sofarthereforeastheclaimsandallotmentsofthepoorwere

concerned，thecommissionerswereinnodangerofbeingoverruled。Their

freedominotherwayswasrestrictedbytheStandingOrdersof1774，which

obligedthemtogiveanaccountoftheirexpenses。

Itwouldseemtobeobviousthatanysocietywhichhadanelementarynotion

ofthemeaningandimportanceofjusticewouldhavetakentheutmostpains

toseethatthemenappointedtothisextraordinaryofficehadnomotive

forshowingpartiality。Thismightnotreasonablyhavebeenexpectedofthe

societyaboutwhichPittdeclaredintheHouseofCommons，thatitwasthe

boastofthelawofEnglandthatitaffordedequalsecurityandprotection

tothehighandlow，therichandpoor。(40*)Howwerethesecommissioners

appointedatthetimethatPittwasPrimeMinister？Theywereappointedin

eachcasebeforetheBillwaspresentedtoParliament，andgenerally，as

Youngtellsus，theywereappointedbythepromotersoftheenclosurebefore

thepetitionwassubmittedforlocalsignatures，sothatinfacttheywere

nominatedbythepersonsofinfluencewhoagreedonthemeasure。Inonecase

(MoretonCorbetinShropshire；1950acresenclosedin1797)theActappointed

onecommissioneronly，andhewastonamehissuccessor。Sometimes，asin

thecaseofOtmoor，(41*)itmighthappenthatthecommissionerswerechanged

whiletheBillwaspassingthroughCommittee，ifsomepowerfulpersonswere

abletosecurebetterrepresentationoftheirowninterests。Inthecase

ofWakefieldagain，theHouseofCommonsCommitteeplacatedLordStrafford

bygivinghimacommissioner。

Now，whowassupposedtohaveavoiceintheappointmentofthecommissioners？

ThereistobefoundintheAnnalsofAgriculture(42*)anextremely

interestingpaperbySirJohnSinclair，preliminarytoamemorandumofthe

GeneralEnclosureBillwhichhepromotedin1796。Sinclairexplainsthat

hehadhadeighteenhundredEnclosureActs(takenindiscriminately)examined

inordertoascertainwhatwastheusualprocedureandwhatstipulations

weremadewithregardtoparticularinterests；thiswiththeintentionof

incorporatingtherecognisedpracticeinhisGeneralBill。Inthecourse

oftheseremarkshesays，’theprobableresultwillbetheappointmentof

oneCommissionerbytheLordoftheManor，ofanotherbythetithe-owner，

andofathirdbythemajorpartinvalueoftheproprietors。’(43*)Itwill

beobservedthatthethirdcommissionerisnotappointedbyamajorityof

thecommoners，norevenbythemajorityoftheproprietors，butbythevotes

ofthosewhoownthegreaterpartofthevillage。Thisenablesustoassess

thevalueofwhatmighthaveseemedasafeguardtothepoor——theprovision

thatthenamesofthecommissionersshouldappearintheBillpresentedto

Parliament。Thelordofthemanor，theimpropriatoroftithes，andthemajority

invalueoftheownersareasmallminorityofthepersonsaffectedbyan

enclosure，andallthattheyhavetodoistomeetroundatableandname

thecommissionerswhoaretorepresentthem。(44*)Thuswefindthatthepowerful

personswhocarriedanenclosureagainstthewillofthepoornominatedthe

tribunalbeforewhichthepoorhadtomakegoodtheirseveralclaims。This

wasthewayinwhichtheconstitutionthatPittwasdefendingaffordedequal

securityandprotectiontotherichandtothepoor。

Itwillbenoticedfurtherthattwointerestsarechosenoutforspecial

representation。Theyarethelordofthemanorandtheimpropriatoroftithes：

inotherwords，theverypersonswhoareformallyassignedacertainminimum

inthedistributionbytheActofParliament。EveryActafter1774declares

thatthelordofthemanoristohaveacertainproportion，andthetithe-owner

acertainproportionofthelanddivided：scarcelyanyActstipulatesthat

anyshareatallistogotothecottagerorthesmallproprietor。Yetin

theappointmentofcommissionerstheintereststhatareprotectedbythe

Acthaveapreponderatingvoice，andtheintereststhatarelefttothecaprice

ofthecommissionershavenovoiceatall。Thurlow，speakingintheHouse

ofLordsin1781，(45*)saidthatitwasgrosslyunjusttotheparsonthat

hispropertyshouldbeatthedisposalofthesecommissioners，ofwhomhe

onlynominatedone。’HethankedGodthatthepropertyofanEnglishmandepended

notonsolooseatribunalinanyotherinstancewhatever。’What，then，was

thepositionofthepoorandthesmallfarmerswhowerenotrepresentedat

allamongthecommissioners？Inthepaperalreadyquoted，Sinclairmentions

thatin。somecasesthecommissionerswerepeers，gentlemenandclergymen，

residingintheneighbourhood，whoactedwithoutfeesoremolument。Hespoke

ofthisasundertakingausefulduty，anditdoesnotseemtohaveoccurred

tohimthattherewasanyobjectiontosuchapractice。’Tolaydownthe

principlethatmenaretoservefornothing，’saidCobbett，incriticising

thesystemofunpaidmagistrates，’putsmeinmindoftheservantwhowent

onhire，whobeingaskedwhatwageshedemanded，saidhewantednowages：

forthathealwaysfoundaboutthehouselittlethingstopickup。’

ThereisacuriouspassageintheGeneralReportoftheBoardofAgriculture(46*)

onthesubjectoftheappointmentofcommissioners。Thewriter，afterdwelling

ontheunexampledpowersthatthecommissionersenjoy，remarksthatthey

arenotlikelytobeabused，becauseacommissioner’sprospectoffuture

employmentinthisprofitablecapacitydependsonhischaracterforintegrity

andjustice。ThisisareassuringreJectionfortheclassesthatpromoted

enclosuresandappointedcommissioners，butitringswithaverydifferent

soundinotherears。Itwoulddearlyhavebeenmuchbetterforthepoorif

thecommissionershadnothadanyprospectoffutureemploymentatall。We

canobtainsomeideaofthekindofmenwhomthelandownersconsideredto

becompetentandsatisfactorycommissionersfromtheStandingOrdersof1801，

whichforbadetheemploymentinthiscapacityofthebailiffofthelord

ofthemanor。ItwouldbeinterestingtoknowhowmuchofEnglandwasappropriated

ontheinitiativeofthelordofthemanor，byhisbailiff，actingunder

theauthoritygiventohimbytheHighCourtofParliament。Itissignificant，

too，thatdownto1801acommissionerwasonlydebarredfrombuyingland

inaparishinwhichhehadactedinthiscapacity，untilhisawardwasmade，

TheActof1801debarredhimfrombuyinglandundersuchcircumstancesfor

thefollowingfiveyears。

Theshareofthesmallmaninthesetransactionsfromfirsttolastcan

beestimatedfromthelanguageofArthurYoungin1770。’Thesmallproprietor

whosepropertyinthetownshipisperhapshisall，haslittleornoweight

inregulatingtheclausesoftheActofParliament，hasseldom，ifever，

anopportunityofputtingasingleoneintheBillfavourabletohisrights，

andhasaslittleinfluenceinthechoiceofCommissioners。’(47*)Buteven

thisdescriptiondoeslessthanjusticetohishelplessness。Thereremains

tobeconsideredtheprocedurebeforethecommissionersthemselves。Most

EnclosureActsspecifiedadatebeforewhichallclaimshadtobepresented。

Itisobviousthattheremusthavebeenverymanysmallproprietorswhohad

neitherthecouragenortheknowledgenecessarytoputanddefendtheircase，

andthatvastnumbersofclaimsmusthavebeendisregardedbecausetheywere

notpresented，orbecausetheywerepresentedtoolate，orbecausetheywere

irregUlarinform。TheCroydonAct，forexample，prescribesthatclaimants

mustsendintheirclaims’inWritingundertheirHands，ortheHandsof

theirAgents，distinguishinginsuchClaimstheTenureoftheEstatesin

respectwhereofsuchClaimsaremade，andstatingthereinsuchfurtherParticulars