ENCLOSURE AND THE LABOURERS 711 
efforts of public spirited and philanthropic men to remove all AD Je 
obstacles to the increase of the area of tillage. } 
261. There were improvers who saw with alarm that the With the 
readiness to rely on imported corn was a hindrance to the To Sey 
development of our own agriculture to its highest capacity, bok: 
and viewed this trade with regret!; and a general consensus of %/ 
opinion had been reached as to the necessity of doing away 
with the wasteful methods of cultivation in common fields, and 
facilitating the enclosure of land. The Board of Agriculture, 
under the presidency of Sir John Sinclair, moved earnestly in 
the matter, and it was fully discussed by Committees of the 
House of Commons in 1795, 1797 and 1800. The chief 
obstacle to carrying out this improvement lay in the heavy 
expenses, parliamentary and legal, which had to be borne, as 
well as the costs of obtaining surveys and erecting fences. 
It appeared that if a General Enclosure Act were passed, it Cri 3 
would cause a considerable saving in the outlay involved”. on. 
This would be an encouragement to proprietors to proceed 
with schemes of the kind; while it was also believed that, if 
she expenses were reduced, the real gain, which sometimes 
accrued to the cottagers®, would be more generally realised. 
1 The Committee of 1797 on the Cultivation of Waste lands endorsed the view 
shat “nothing can more clearly exemplify the advantages resulting from agri- 
sultural industry, than the flourishing state of this country, for many years 
sosterior to the Revolution; during which period, with but few exceptions, con- 
siderable quantities of Corn were annually exported. By means of that exporta- 
jon, large sums were brought into the kingdom, yet the price was steady and 
iniform, and in general rather low than otherwise. The farmer, however, was 
satisfied, because he considered himself under the special protection of the 
egislature, and had a reasonable prospect of having his industry rewarded. But 
since importation has been relied on, the consequences have been of a very 
spposite nature. The prices have been often high, and always unsteady. High 
orices occasion public discontent. With unsteady prices, it is impossible for the 
andlord to know what he ought to demand, nor the tenant what rent he ought to 
say. To persons of small or even moderate incomes, also, such a circumstance is 
sxtremely injurious, When prices are high, they can scarcely procure for them- 
selves and their families a sufficient supply of wholesome provisions; when low, 
;hey are too apt to run into a system of expence, which it is not easy afterwards 
:0 relinquish ; whereas, when the price is steady and uniform, they can make their 
sxpenditure tally with their income. The system therefore of encouraging agri- 
sulture, and promoting the exportation of a surplus on ordinary occasions, which 
in unfavourable seasons can be retained at home, is the only mode of securing the 
somfortable subsistence of the great body of the people.” Reports, Ix. pp. 224-5. 
? Reports, IX. 230. 
3 Davis, Oxford Report, quoted in Reports, 1X. 204 n.