MOTION FOR A RETURN. (Hansard, 22 February 1886)

THE EARL OF ONSLOW
, in rising to move for— Return (1.) of all agricultural holdings in England and Wales, both of arable and pasture land, occupied as allotments or field gardens, of one-eighth of an acre and not exceeding four acres; (2.) of all garden allotments exceeding one-eighth of an acre attached to cottages; (3.) of all charitable trusts in England and Wales the trustees of which are trustees within the meaning of the first and fourth clauses of the Allotments Extension Act, 1882, said, that he had noticed that in a speech delivered at Hull during the heat of the 844 General Election by the President of the Local Government Board that right hon. Gentleman said that many of the great landlords of England had occupied themselves in driving the labourers off their estates. When he read that statement, he almost, like the Pharisee of old, thanked God that he was not as other men were, or even as those landlords; and he supposed that most of their Lordships must have shared that feeling. He had thereupon turned his attention to a search of those documents to which their Lordships looked for information on all subjects of a nature likely to be dealt with by Parliament, and he had hoped to find in the Agricultural Reports statistics showing what was the state of allotments in this country; but he was sorry to say that there were absolutely no Returns whatever dealing with that question for the last 13 years—since 1873. In 1870 a commencement was made in that direction, and in that year there were 102,342 holdings under five acres. There was no Return for 1871; but in 1872 the total number of holdings of from a quarter of an acre to one acre, and from one acre to five acres, was 160,570, of which 49,652 were held by labourers. In 1873 the information went further, giving a Return of the allotments detached from the houses and cottages of labourers; that was to say, all those which did not include the best form of allotments—namely, cottage gardens. They found that even then there were as many as 242,500 allotments in England. If they added to that the number of small holdings of five acres and under which might, when consisting of pasture land, be described as allotments, the grand total was no less than 353,000. In that year there were 765,000 agricultural labourers—that was to say, there was very nearly one allotment or small holding for every two labourers. Since the Commons Act of 1876 was passed, 22,430 acres had been inclosed, and a portion set out in allotments. Under Clause 28 of that Act managers were to report every three or five years; but the Commissioners said there was no power to enforce that being done. In 1873, in 24 counties there were 122,000 allotments, and they ranged on an average from one-eighth to a quarter of an acre, while, in 18 counties, 120,000 allotments averaged a quarter to half- 845 an-acre. It was, he thought, only right that they should ask the Government to give them information which was more recent than the year 1873. There was reason to suppose that the supply of allotments was every day coming nearer to the demand, because the agricultural population was anything but increasing in the rural districts. In the decade between 1871 and 1881 our agricultural population decreased by 15.9 per cent, having in the previous decade decreased 17.6 per cent, while the number of allotments was increasing. There was hardly any matter on which there existed less information and more exaggeration than the subject of the land of this country. The noble Earl opposite (Earl Derby) moved in that House for a Return of the owners of land, observing that it had been stated that the owners of land in England and Wales were only 30,000 in number. In order to ascertain whether that was the case, the noble Earl moved for a Return which, when produced, proved that instead of there being only 30,000 owners in this country, there were, after correction for the holdings of the same persons in several counties, no less than 967,000 owners, of whom 700,000 owned less than one acre. The inquiries of the Land and Glebe Owners' Association, for the voluntary extension of the allotments system, which were not exhaustive, showed that the owners of 2,300,000 acres had in force on their estates the system of allotments, and were prepared to extend it to all the labourers on their estates; besides that, the Association had the support of the owners of 25,000 acres of glebe land, and the system was also in operation on the estates of the owners of a further 500,000 acres. Thus, very widespread voluntary efforts were going on all over the country to provide labourers with allotments; and ho trusted that no steps would be taken by Parliament which would throw any obstacle or check in the way of that most salutary system. He was willing to give the President and the Secretary of the Local Government Board credit for having drawn public attention to the question, although their startling proposals in reference to it had savoured somewhat of public plunder. He hoped, however, that their Lordships would not deal with the subject until they were possessed of all the facts connected with the case. If 846 they were to legislate in a compulsory manner it was possible that many of those who would otherwise speedily obtain allotments by voluntary agency might have to wait one or two years before the local authority in a district would put the machinery of that compulsory system in operation. An Act was passed in 1882 to provide allotments, the main principle of which was that every charity which owned land the profits of which were distributed in doles should be required to let allotments. But the great majority of the trustees of charity land were unaware of the existence of that Act; and he did not see how they could be expected to put it into operation unless their attention was called to it. He knew of no means by which that could be done except by calling upon the Charity Commissioners for such Returns as he moved for, giving the names of all those charities which came under the provisions of the Allotments Act of 1882. It was desirable that landowners should not only grant allotments, but in these days, when attacks were made upon them, that they should show their determination to do so by a public declaration on the point. Having shown what necessity there was for these Returns, he trusted their Lordships would see that it would be most unjust to landowners to propose any legislation dealing with their property when the data and the facts concerning allotments all over England were in no sense in possession of the public.

§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Earl SPENCER)
said, he did not propose to follow the noble Earl in the interesting remarks which he had made on the subject of allotments. He would confine himself to answering the Question which had been put to him. He should be very happy to obtain and 847 furnish the information which the noble Earl asked for; but he did not think that it would be possible to give it in a special Return at this moment. A special Return would entail a very large expense, and it would be impossible to compile it without impeding other work and throwing difficulties in the way of collecting the Agricultural Returns which were made every year. He would, however, engage that immediately after the Agricultural Returns for this year were made, supplementary Returns would be given, which would, ho believed, contain all the information which the noble Lord required. He would also add a great deal more. In the information which he would give would be included "all agricultural holdings in England and Wales occupied as allotments or field gardens" of one-eighth of an acre and over. They did not propose, as the noble Earl suggested, to make the distinction between arable and pasture land below one acre, which would be exceedingly-difficult to get; and he did not think it would be of very great importance, as he presumed in these small allotments there was, as a rule, very little pasture. Under the second head they proposed to give all garden allotments exceeding one-eighth of an acre attached to cottages, although there was some difficulty in defining what a cottage really was. They also proposed to give particulars as to rent, tenure, and distance from dwellings on certain allotments. At first it was thought that this would be a difficult question; but the Government saw their way now to give the information, and he thought that information would be of considerable value and importance. In regard to the third Question, he would ask the noble Earl to be kind enough to repeat it another day. He admitted the great value of obtaining this information from the Charity Commissioners, and he had been in communication with them on the subject. He did not foresee any very great difficulty in the matter; but there were certain objections which he should like to discuss with the Commissioners before he could finally begin the Return. For the Return to be useful, it was, of course, desirable to be authentic and reliable; and there was some doubt whether the Charity Commissioners could give a Return of this description.

§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
How soon may we expect the Return? In the middle of the Session, or towards the end of it?

§ EARL SPENCER
It would be quite impossible to furnish it under three or four months. It will be begun immediately after the annual Agricultural Returns.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW
begged to thank the noble Earl for the answer which he had given. He had another suggestion to offer for the consideration of the noble Earl. It would be very valuable to know from each farmer how many labourers he had on his farm to whom he gave ground or potatoes; how many he had to whom he gave cow ground; and how many holdings there were between five and ten acres?

THE MARQUESS OF HUNTLY
said, there was another point to which he should like to call attention—namely, co-operative farming. It was desirable to have a Return of the number of labourers who shared in co-operative farming.

§ EARL SPENCER
said, he thought that this was a totally different subject, and he was not prepared to give Returns as to co-operative farming, however important they might be. With regard to the suggestion of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Onslow), he would consider the point brought under notice as to the cases where farmers gave land or potatoes, or otherwise to their labourers.

LORD ELLENBOROUGH
asked, whether there could not be included the manner in which the holdings were held; whether or not sub-let, or not used for the purpose originally granted?

§ EARL SPENCER
said, all these particulars would add enormously to the expense of the Return, besides involving tremendous labour. If they were to adopt all these suggestions, it might be years before they could possibly get the Return out.

§ EARL FORTESCUE
asked, whether the noble Earl could not add to the Return the number of places where allotments had been provided, and where for many years they had been given up as unlettable as allotments?