Join our Winter Solstice Blog Hop! Thirty writers throw light on a dazzling range of topics. Follow the links at the end of this article to be enlightened and brightened by our blogs...
“Inclosure came and trampled on the grave
Of labours rights and left the poor a
slave
And memorys pride ere want to wealth did
bow
Is both the shadow and the substance
now.”
John
Clare, The Mores
On
1 May 1794, the writer Hester (Thrale) Piozzi of Streatham Park recorded in her
diary that the furze on the common had been set on fire in protest at the
enclosure of land “which really & of just Right belonged to the poor of the
Parish”. Yet even while she acknowledged that the protesters had justice on
their side, she criticised them for not “going to Law like wise fellows” and concluded:
“So senseless are Le Peuple, & so
unfitted to be souverain”.
The
senseless poor of Streatham were not unique. During the eighteenth century,
enclosure resisters throughout the country tore down fences, damaged gardens,
greenhouses and orchards, destroyed trees, broke windows, fired guns at
enclosers, attacked land surveyors, sabotaged farm equipment and blocked roads.
Most sensationally of all, they torched houses, barns and hayricks.
What
possessed them to commit arson – a capital crime – instead of “going to Law”?
Le Peuple
Picture
a farm labourer in the eighteenth century: we’ll call him Jack Straw. Not only
is Jack’s work hard, it’s also seasonal. If he had to rely on his wages alone, his
family would have starved long ago. Luckily his village has some common land
where Jack and his family gather fuel for heating and cooking. They keep a cow
and a pig which they graze on the common. They forage for food: berries, mushrooms,
nuts and herbs. Sometimes they sell some of the produce they’ve harvested in
local markets to bring in a bit of extra income. They gather rushes to make
tallow candles and thatch their cottage.
Jack
isn’t the only villager who depends on the common. Local tradesmen such as
blacksmiths or bakers use it to supplement their incomes during slack periods. Smallholders
pasture their livestock on it. Part of the land is set aside to provide income
for charitable purposes so even the poorest in the parish benefit.
No-one
owns the common, but that doesn’t mean it’s first grab, first served. The village
has appointed officers to regulate the way the land is used. They make sure no
one takes more than he’s entitled to, that the land isn’t over-grazed, that
ditches are cleared and animal carcasses are removed, that ponds are kept
clean. Jack knows he will be fined if he breaks the rules.
So
there’s Jack Straw, working hard but getting by, keeping his family off the
parish poor relief or out of the workhouse. Then one day a notice appears on
the church door: the common is going to be enclosed by Act of Parliament. There’ll
be no more wood for the fire or rushes for the thatch, and Jack will have to
get rid of his cow and pig because he can’t afford to buy feed. Jack Straw and
his family are going to be a lot worse off in the days to come.
Of just Right belonged to the poor of
the Parish
The
effect of an Enclosure Act was to eradicate commons rights, leaving the
no-man’s-land that remained available for distribution amongst the landowners. In
order to obtain an Enclosure Act, the promoters had to secure the consent of
the majority of land owners in the parish. Since consent was weighted by how
much land each signatory owned, it was possible for one large landowner to give
consent.
A
solicitor was employed to draw up a Bill. When the Bill reached Parliament it
was referred to a committee for consideration. The committee looked at matters
such as the compensation to be paid for loss of commons rights, the
distribution of the land, and provision for payment of tithes.
It
looks like due process, but in fact it was heavily weighted in favour of the enclosers.
There was only one stage at which objections could be lodged, and that was when
the Bill reached committee. So when Hester Piozzi wondered why the poor of the
parish didn’t go to Law, she’s wondering why they didn’t employ a solicitor to draw
up their petition in the due form and present it to the committee. (Petitions
which were not in due form were ignored.)
Going to law like wise fellows
Well,
why didn’t they?
Mrs
Piozzi herself provides the clue.
They
were the poor of the parish. They couldn’t pay a solicitor to draft their petition,
or retain counsel to represent them in committee. They could not afford to go
to London and lobby MPs, and even if they could how could they negotiate a
system from which they were completely excluded? Most of them couldn’t even write.
It
is no wonder, then, that so few petitions were presented to enclosure committees.
In Nottinghamshire, for example, of 171 enclosures, only nine were the subject
of counter-petitions, and the petitioners included an earl, land owners and “gentlemen”.
What’s
more, the land owners had more than legal technicalities on their side. They
had force. They could get away with including clauses in Enclosure Bills
imposing the death penalty on resisters. They could call on the army to help
them enforce enclosure – as they did in Bedfordshire, Northamptonshire and
Cambridgeshire.
A mist of flames
Jack
Straw and his neighbours have no connection with the great men of Parliament,
or the enclosure committees which are packed with land owners and their
friends. What can they do to make their objections known?
They
can light up the night sky with protest. Arson, or the threat of arson, is one
of their most potent weapons. They can promise farmers who deprive them of
their rights that “As soon as your corn is in the barn we will have a fire”
(anonymous letter sent to an Essex farmer, 1773). They can warn those who
“intend of incloseing our Commond fields” that they will wake in their beds in
a “mist of flames” (anonymous letter sent to Oliver Cromwell of Cheshunt Park,
1799).
So
Jack Straw is going to go out one night with a tinder box in his pocket. He’s
going to set fire to a hay rick. If he’s caught, he’ll hang.
Senseless
Jack Straw.
I am currently working on a novel set during the eighteenth-century enclosures. Murder, riot - and arson!
Here are some more blogs on the theme of "Casting Light Upon the Darkness"
(Note: Links will go live on 21 December 2013):-
Helen Hollick
Prue Batten - Casting Light...
Alison Morton - Shedding Light on the Roman Dusk Plus a Giveaway Prize!
Anna Belfrage - Let there be light!
Beth Elliott - Steering by the Stars: Stratford Canning in Constantinople, 1810-12
Melanie Spiller - Lux Aeterna, the chant of eternal light
Janet Reedman - The Winter Solstice Monuments
Petrea Burchard - Darkness - how did people of the past cope with the dark? Plus a Giveaway Prize!
Richard Denning - The Darkest Years of the Dark Ages: what do we really know? Plus a giveway prize!
Pauline Barclay - Shedding Light on a Traditional Pie
David Ebsworth - Propaganda in the Spanish Civil War
David Pilling - Greek Fire Plus a Giveaway Prize!
Debbie Young - Fear of the Dark
Derek Birks - Lies, Damned Lies and...Chronicles
Mark Patton - Casting Light on Saturnalia
Tim Hodkinson - Soltice@Newgrange
Wendy Percival - Ancestors in the Spotlight
Judy Ridgeley - Santa and his Elves Plus a Giveaway Prize
Suzanne McLeod - The Dark of the Moon
Katherine Bone - Admiral Nelson, A Light in Dark Times
Christina Courtney - The Darkest Night of the Year
Edward James - The secret life of Christopher Columbus; Which Way to Paradise?
Janis Pegrum Smith - Into the Light - A Short Story
Julian Stockwin - Ghost Ships - Plus a Giveaway Present!
Manda Scott - Dark into Light - Mithras, and the older gods
Pat Bracewell - Anglo-Saxon Art: Splendor in the Dark
Lucienne Boyce - 'We will have a fire' - 18th century protests against enclosure
Nicole Evelina - What Lurks Beneath Glastonbury Abbey?
Sky Purington - How the Celts Cast Light on Current American Christmas Traditions
Stuart MacAllister (Sir Read A Lot) - The Darkness of Depression
Fascinating, Lucienne! I never knew any of this.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Petrea. When I was at school enclosure was taught as a very dry, boring period of "social history" - when I think it was one of the greatest scandals of all time!
DeleteGreat post, Lucienne. I saw at first hand how "common land" is still appropriated by big companies and government this way in Colombia with campesino peasant farmers driven from their homes and into the slums of Bógota and elsewhere, or shot by death squads or the military when they protested. I heard some of those protests condemned as "senseless" too!
ReplyDeleteThanks Dave. History repeats itself...many of Britain's agricultural workers also ended up in city slums. Such a tragedy.
DeleteGreat inspiration for a novel, Lucienne! Good luck with it.
ReplyDeleteThanks Wendy, it's a fascinating period of history I think.
DeleteVery interesting and as anything been learnt over the centuries? Yes and no! Thank you for a superb post.
ReplyDeleteThanks. I fear little has been learned - which is one reason for making sure history isn't forgotten I think!
DeleteWhat a great inspiration for a novel, Lucienne! Good luck with it.
ReplyDeleteMy goodness, how did they get away with it?! Having read your clear and calm explanation, I can see now that on a scale of national scandal, it's practically up there with the slave trade - and of course reminiscent of the Highland Clearances north of the border. And how do they make it sound so dull in school history lessons when, as you have told it, it is such a human, interesting story - no-one could read your rational explanation without being incensed on the behalf of the poor. Looking forward to reading your novel now!
ReplyDeleteThanks Debbie! Working hard on the novel...I do feel very strongly about these land enclosures. Think how different things might be if we hadn't been robbed of our commons! Now there's a what if novel hoving into view...
DeleteYour account is definitely alive, unlike the version I remember from school. I've seen elderly peasant women grazing their one cow on a bit of common in Romanian villages. That reinforces how desperately poor folk need some extra means to help them survive.
ReplyDeleteI think your novel will paint a vivid picture of this sad period in our history.
Hallo Beth, thanks for your encouraging reply. I've seen the same in Turkey - people using roadsides etc to graze animals. Such things can be a vital part of people's survival.
DeleteVery interesting, Lucienne. A rather forceful reminder of just how deep the social divides were - and most of us would have been Straw babies, i.e. the "senseless Peuple".
ReplyDeleteHallo Anna, thank you for this. Yes, we would definitely have been lumped with the senseless. It's exactly what the suffragettes were called as well.
DeleteIt was definitely scandalous and makes you wonder how the landowners could be so short-sighted! They should have known the consequences and it must have made them feel very unsafe for quite a long time with all those threats being made. Fascinating post!
ReplyDeleteHallo Christina, thanks for your comment. Yes, it was a violent time, what with invasion threats and mutiny in the navy and army as well, not to mention the hounding of radicals...a very interesting time for a novel I think!
DeleteThanks for posting this. I knew little about this period of time, and you have brought it very much to life
ReplyDeleteThank you, Janet, I think it is a very lively period!
DeleteVery enjoyable, Lucienne - enclosure has a lot to answer for, and was the direct cause of my men ending up breaking their backs as navvies a few decades down the line.
ReplyDeleteThanks Janis, you are so right, thanks for making the connection. I loved your story.
DeleteThis has been such a fascination Blog Hop - such a variety of articles! Thanks for this one - most interesting!
ReplyDeleteThank you Helen, and thanks too for organising the blog hop. A fascinating day!
Delete