§ MR. CHANNING (Northampton, E.)I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he has considered the complaints of some of the commoners of the parishes of Castor and Ailesworth, in Northamptonshire, who have had grazing rights, as to the inadequacy and unsuitability of the land allotted to them in the award under the enclosure made his year; whether he is aware that it is alleged that the money equivalent of a grazing right would be fairly estimated at £16 10s. an acre, whereas the land allotted as an equivalent to the right has been at the rate of 1 1–3 acre, at an outside value of 30s. an acre, and that the small commoners who formerly had the right of grazing on the best lands near the villages have now had lands allotted to them remote from the villages, and of inferior quality; whether tile Commissioner has acted consistently with the regulations of the Department in assigning land to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners and other large landowners who were entitled to common rights on the same scale as to the poorer commoners whose livelihood depends on these rights; and whether, having regard to the representations of these commoners, the Board of Agriculture will take the necessary steps to re-open the award, and assign further land to the common right owners so aggrieved?
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. W. H. LONG,) Liverpool, W. DerbyThe reply to the three 335 first paragraphs of the honourable Member's Question is in the affirmative; but after careful consideration of the Reports made by the Valuer and the Assistant Commissioner, by both of whom the matter was investigated locally, I came to the conclusion that the value of the common rights in question had not in any way been under-estimated by those officers. I regret, therefore, that it is not possible for me, in justice to the other interests concerned, to re-open the award made in the matter.
§ MR. CHANNINGI should like to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether it is not a fact that better land has been assigned to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in lieu of their rights under the award, and would it not be possible to readjust this matter by communication with the Commissioners?
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURENo, Sir. The award is one which was made after most careful consideration, first by the Valuer, then by the Commissioner of my Department, and, finally, by the head of the Land Division of the Board of Agriculture. I have every reason to believe that the dissatisfaction is extremely limited in extent, and that, on the whole, the award is a fair one.
§ MR. CHANNINGI will draw attention to this matter on the Estimates.