enclosure

The agrarian revolution saw enclosure of farmland by hedges. Enclosure made crop rotation possible and also allowed room for the use of new farm machinery that was being developed. Enclosure revolutionized the farming system and although a number of farmers profited by the system, many lost their rights to land, particularly with the restrictions to common grazing lands.

In Britain, seizure of common land and change to private property, or the changing of open-field systems (farming in strips apportioned over two or three large fields) to enclosed fields owned by individual farmers. The enclosed fields were often used for sheep. This process began in the 14th century and became widespread in the 15th and 16th centuries. It caused poverty, homelessness, and rural depopulation, and resulted in revolts in 1549 and 1607. A further wave of enclosures occurred between about 1760 and 1820 during the agrarian revolution.

Enclosure in the 18th century Pioneering landowners in the 1830s, such as Charles ‘Turnip’ Townshend, had demonstrated that enclosing land into compact blocks, rather than farming in strips scattered among different fields, saved time and avoided the waste of land between strips. It was argued that the enclosure of common lands given over to the old strip system would increase productivity and profit. The new larger farming machinery could be used, such as the seed drill, and experimental methods such as four-field crop rotation could be adopted; both of which were impractical in an open-field system. The necessity to improve yields became increasingly important after 1760 with the steady growth in population, and after 1793 when war with France disrupted food imports. Rising prices and the opportunity to increase profits also encouraged the movement towards enclosure.

On some estates landowners, such as Townshend, were able to get the tenants to agree to exchange strips for a compact enclosed farm. If this was not possible, enclosure could be forced by a special Act of Parliament for the price of £6,000. The starting point for enclosure was a meeting of village landowners. Three-quarters of the landowners had to be in agreement and notice given on the church door for three successive Sundays, an event often leading to riot. The larger landowners had more ‘votes’ in the process, and it was possible for a small number of landowners in a village to force enclosure on the majority who owned little land. The petition to enclose was considered by Parliamentary committee in London, which in practice prevented evidence being submitted from those unable to afford the journey. After an Enclosure Act had been passed, three commissioners appointed by Parliament were despatched to divide the land between those with legal right to it, and settle any disagreement over ownership. Between 1760 and 1815 nearly 3,300 individual Acts were passed, and in 1801 a General Enclosure Act enabled thousands of enclosures to take place. The Enclosure Acts applied to about 2 million ha/4.5 million acres, or a quarter of England. Some 7 million ha/17 million acres were enclosed without any parliamentary act.

Effects of enclosure in the 18th century It used to be thought that enclosure greatly harmed the poor, and turned the smallholders into landless labourers, or drove them off the land altogether. Contemporary writers such as Arthur Young and William Cobbett certainly believed so. However, this view is now questioned. Many farmers gained from enclosure. The more enterprising were able to develop their property, cut costs, introduce improved farming methods, and increase yields and profits. Their original holdings were often increased as smaller unprofitable farms came onto the market. For the landless, regular labouring work became available. The general increase in food quality and productivity improved the health of the population, particularly those who lived in the towns and cities.

It is true that some people lost their living through enclosure. Those who had held land by custom and were unable to provide a legally documented claim to the commissioners, including the cottars (squatters) who had previously lived on the edges of the commons, cultivating meagre plots, lost their land. Traditional access to the common land for firewood, fruit, nuts, and pig fodder was also lost. Other landowners with a right to a compact farm were unable to afford their share of the legal costs of an Enclosure Act or the financial burden of hedging or fencing, and either sold or left their land. Small farms often found it hard to compete with the larger, more profitable holdings and were also forced to sell up. Nevertheless, it is believed that the economic dislocation was far less than used to be thought. Far greater was the social dislocation caused by enclosure, the loss of the former communal, mutually-supportive way of life, and its replacement by capitalist farming.

Those groups forced to move following enclosure, such as the cottars (squatters on the edge of the common land) and smallholders, migrated to the newly forming cities of the Industrial Revolution. There was a steady supply of rural migrants requiring work, and the new factories were able to offer it. Without the push of enclosure on the rural population, the supply of labour to the factories and mills of the Industrial Revolution would possibly have been less sizeable. Enclosure brought British farming into the capitalist age, and led to increased production as the inefficiencies of the open-field system and common lands were ended. More food production and profits increased the nation's wealth and enabled the growing population of the mid-18th century onwards to be fed. The urban population could be supplied with cheap and plentiful food, so the cities could continue to grow as more workers found jobs in factories. The Industrial Revolution and enclosure were linked processes in the modernization of the UK.