LAND ALLOTMENTS TO THE POOR.

HC Deb 14 March 1843 vol 67 cc870-4

Mr. Stanton

, in rising to move a resolution on the subject of setting apart portions of the common lands, when inclosed, to be let out in allotments to the labouring population, observed that the subject had already been so favourably entertained by the House, that he did not consider it necessary to occupy any great portion of their time in recommending his motion in substitution for the present standing order, No. 89, upon the same subject. It must be the wish of every one to afford the means of employment to the increasing working population of this country. The system of inclosing common lands, without apportioning a part of them not merely for the exercise and recreation of the poor, but for the profitable employment of the labouring population, was one which he had long regretted. Nothing was more desirable than to furnish the half-employed labourer with a resource of healthful occupation, by which he would be enabled to bear up against the calamities that otherwise pressed upon him. For this reason he very much wished to assign to the parish-officers certain portions of the land, not for the purpose of giving it to the poor, but of letting it out to them in allotments. It was far from his wish to interfere in any way with vested rights, but he was fully convinced that the improved condition of the people, which must follow the adoption of the system he now suggested, would amply repay the land-owners for any sacrifice of property they might make on their behalf. He wished the Government of the country would pass some general measure for inclosing land, at the same time enabling the officers of the parish in which the land was situate to set apart certain portions of it to the purposes be had mentioned, without the necessity and expense of an act of Parliament. It would be the means of very considerably reducing the poor-rates. In the borough he had the honour to represent there were 800 acres of land unenclosed, and left in a state that produced no advantage whatever to the landed proprietor. If this were enclosed upon the plan he suggested, the poor-rates, instead of being 10s. an acre, would not be more than 5s. The appeal he now made to the House was on behalf of the working classes of the country, whose privations at this moment were admitted by all parties. It was from their labours that the other classes of society derived all their comforts, and he hoped, in return, that those who owed so much to them would do what was in their power to relieve the necessities and increase the comforts of the distressed, but industrious, population. He could mention many instances illustrative of the extreme facility with which this could be accomplished, to the great benefit of all. He would take the single case of the Littleton Private Inclosure Bill. The parish contained a population of 135 souls, and there were 244 acres of common land; now if only ten acres were appropriated in allotments to the labouring poor, the whole population of the parish might be made comfortable. He would now move that the standing order, No. 89, be rescinded, with a view to substitute the following resolution in its stead:— That in every bill for inclosing lands, provision be made for reserving a portion of the land to be inclosed to be let in allotments, not exceeding a quarter of an acre each, to the labouring population of the district, and for leaving an open space in the most appropriate situation, sufficient for purposes of exercise and recreation of the neighbouring population; and that the committee on the bill have before them the number of acres proposed to be in. closed, as also of the population in the parishes or places in which the land to be inclosed is situate; and that they then fix the quantity to be reserved; and also do see that provision is made for the efficient fencing and draining of the allotments, for the investment of the same in the churchwardens and overseers of the parish in which such allotments and open spaces are reserved, who shall be empowered to let the allotments so reserved, at rents not exceeding the average rent at which the adjoining lands are let, and to receive the rents for the purpose of applying the same in aid of the parish rates, and for the efficient making and permanent maintenance of the fences in such parish; and that in any case where the information hereby required is not given, and the required provisions are not made in the bill, the committee on the same do report specially to the House the reasons for not complying with such order. The question was put that the standing order 89 be repealed.

Lord Granville Somerset

hoped that in opposing the proposition of the hon. Gentleman he should not be considered as being inimical to the adoption of any plan that would give healthy and profitable employment to the labouring poor. On the contrary, he thought that nothing could be better than the adoption of some judicious plan by which the labouring poor should have certain portions of land to cultivate. But he did not think any advantage would be derived from the proposition of the hon. Gentleman, because he was afraid that if it were to be carried out universally in the manner proposed, the result would be, that the poor would be entirely under the control of the parish officers, who would substitute these allotments for relief that should properly come out of the poor-rates. The form of the motion of the hon. Gentleman induced him to hope that he would not press it upon the House. The present standing order was at the time of its being passed much considered. If the system proposed by the hon. Gentleman should be carried out, he could conceive various instances where the rights of parties would be very considerably infringed upon. The churchwardens would avail themselves of it to relieve the poor-rates without any benefit to the poor themselves.

Mr. Sharman Crawford

would give his most ardent support to the principle of the proposition. A system had long prevailed of depriving the poor of their rights to a share of the common and unenclosed lands. It was plain to him that there was no other mode of decreasing the demands of the poor rates, and of increasing the comforts of the labouring population, than by giving them a portion of land to cultivate.

Lord John Manners

thanked the hon. Member (Mr. Stanton) for bringing this subject before the House. If the Legislature devoted their attention rather more frequently to such questions as this, they would do more real benefit to the country than by debating matters of a merely party character. He had received a communication from Mr. Wills, the founder of the Labourers' Friend Society, in which he represented the allotment system as having been adopted with very great advantage to the agricultural population. He was convinced that by enabling the labouring poor to employ themselves in the cultivation of the land, and to resort to healthy recreations and manly out-of-door sports, they would do them more real good, and do more to improve their morals and promote their happiness, than by founding half a hundred philosophical institutions. The people never would or could avail themselves of those learned societies and Mechanics' institutions, unless they were also enabled to enjoy those health-promoting recreations which, he was happy to say, were encouraged in different parts of the country. In the committee on this subject Mr Monk said that:— Since the inclosure acts had become so frequent, he thought some places should be provided for the exercise and recreation of the working classes, and especially for their children. In his own parish the labourers had their cricket matches, their quoit playing, and their revels; the poor had been accused of ingratitude, but he had found them the most grateful people alive. He had received many communications upon the subject from all parties—from clergymen, merchants, and resident gentlemen—all tending to the same opinion, that the system of affording the labouring poor the opportunity of healthful out-of-door amusements would greatly improve both their physical and moral condition.

Mr. Darby

thought it would be a very bad plan indeed to assign any portion of land to the exclusive control of the overseers, to be allotted to the poor; for the inevitable result would be, that instead of the industrious man having the land it would be given to the worst men in the parish. As far as his experience went, he was satisfied that the best system to pursue would be, to let the land to the industrious labourer, in order that he might add something to his wages. He highly approved of apportioning spots of land for the exercise and recreation of the people; but as for the allotment system, that required the most careful supervision and strict regulation.

Mr. Ormsby Gore

thought the wishes of the noble Lord (Lord J. Manners) ad been already in some degree complied with; for there existed an act of Parliament by which no inclosure could take place without a portion of land being set apart for the use of the people.

Mr. Ferrand

tendered his sincere thanks to the hon. Gentleman for bringing this question forward. If Parliament would enclose the waste lands in the north, lands which merely wanted breaking up to make them equal to the best arable land, it would confer a great benefit upon the people. The working classes in the north of England were in a state of starvation for want of labour; but if the waste lands there were brought into cultivation, they should hear no more of the distress and discontent of the labouring population. He would take the present opportunity of stating that it was his intention to ask for leave to bring in a bill upon the subject.

Mr. Hume

said, that if the hon. Member was anxious to forward the object contemplated by the resolution of 1837, he would recommend him to look at the returns called for three years ago, and see how that resolution had been acted on. He would find that although in some cases one acre, two acres, three acres, or four acres had been set aside, yet very inadequate provision had been made for the poor. He recommended the hon. Member to withdraw the motion, and move for a committee to see how the order had been acted on.

Mr. Stanton

would adopt the suggestion of the hon. Member for Montrose, and withdraw his motion, trusting that some more experienced Member than himself would take it up; otherwise he must leave it in the hands of her Majesty's Government, whom he believed to be desirous of doing all in their power to promote the public welfare. His only object was to benefit the poor, and he trusted that this object would be attained.

Motion by leave withdrawn.