The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-05-08 00:00:00

FARMERS AND SMALL HOLDINGS.

A meeting of the Council of the Central and As-
sociated Chambers of Agriculture wee held ou Tues-
day, in the rooms of the Society of Arts, Mr.
Pickering Phipps in the chair.
The adjourned debate on large and small holdings
in connection with the Allotments and Small Hold-
ings Bill of Mr. Jesse Collings, Mr. Finch-Hatton's
Allotments Bill, the Cottagers' Allotments Gardens
Bill, and the Glebe Land Bill were resumed by Mr.
Little. The resolutions before the Chamber, intro-
duced at the instance of Mr. Lipscombe, dec'ared
"That this Council, whilst fully recognising the im-
portance of securing as largo a number as possible of
persons directly interested in the cultivation of the
soil, is of opinion that experience proves, where
mixed husbandry prevails, the size of holdings must
be regulated by the following circumstances : First,
large farms are most suitable where the con-
formation of the country allows of large,
evenly-shaped enclosures, and where the soil
and climate are especially adapted to the growth of
cereals and the rearing of sheep. Second, small sheep
farms are preferable in hilly or rugged districts, where
fields are necessarily small, and where the soil and
climate are especially favourable to permanent grass,
consequently where a large proportion of pasture pre-
vails, and dairy produce forms a main source of in-
come. Third, market gardens, as well as allotments
generally, can only be successfully established where
the soil is good and the situation closely adjoins the
houses of the cultivators, and where good roads afford
an easy access for the transport of manure and pro-
duce." Mr. Treadwoll said as they were all practically
agreed in endorsing the motion, any further discussion
seemed unnecessary. After a few observations from
a member, who drew attention to the omission of any
reference to the water supply, which often regulated
the size of holdings, the resolution was voted upon,
and adopted unanimously.
Mr. Bowen Jones moved, "That this Council,
while fully sympathising with any fair and practical
endeavour to facilitate the acquisition of small hold-
ings and allotments, disapproves of any measure that
will tend to further increase the charges upon the
already overburdened ratepayers; and is of opinion
that the bill of Mr. Jesse Collings is so framed that
if passed it would fail to benefit these in whose
special interest it is tkomoted." In seconding the
resolution, Lord Suffolk said it was ques-
tionable whether any legislation dealing with
the subject was necessary at all, though it seemed
to be assumed that a bill must be brought forward
by some one. He believed there was no demand
for these allotments, and if one arose the landlords
would be quite ready to give every facility for
their acquisition without legisla,ion. It was said
that the labourer wanted a tenure under which ho
would not be required to raise his hat to the squire or
landlord; but if that was considered a'grievance it could
be remedied without constructing all this machinery
to relieve him of the obligation. The proposed mort-
gage to the extent of three-quarters the value of the
land he considered one of the greatest absurdities
ever included in any bill. Mr. Tipper wished to add
to the resolution a clause approving Sir R. Cross's
Glebe Bill, except in respect to that portion enabling
guardians of the poor to purchase glebe land at the
expense of the ratepayers. Mr. Cropper thought
the supply of allotments already exceeded the de-
mand. Since 14 years ago they had been largely
given up. Mr. Scarf said he had offered half-acre
allotments at one-half the agricultural price without
receiving a single application. The resolution was
carried. Mr. Lipscombe next moved that the Council
express an opinion in favour of Mr. Finch Hatton's
ALotment Bill. The scheme possessed the great merit
that it put in motion voluntary action first of all. The
Chairman said he agreed entirely with giving some
public authority to secure and provide allotments
when other means failed. He was very much op-
posed to the Legislature setting up in business any
class of tradesmen, but the case of the agricultural
labourer was in a different category; and besides, the
bill of Mr. Finch Hatton did not deal with holdings.
The measure would become a bond of 'union between
landlord and labourer. Mr. Wells, Mr. Tipper, Mr.
Little, and other gentlemen opposed the motion, ob-
jecting on principle to local authorities being entrusted
with the power to purchase land for such purposes.
The resolution was lost by nine votes to four. Mr.
Tipper afterwards moved his resolution with regard
to Sir R. Cross's Bill, but it found no seconder.
The proceedings then terminated.