"That all farm-houses belonging to suppressed monasteries should be kept up, and that all lands which had been in tillage for four years successively at any time since the 20th Henry VIII., should be kept in tillage under a penalty of 10s. per acre, which was payable to the heir in reversion, or in case he did not levy it, to the Crown."
31 Elizabeth, cap. 7, went further; and in order to provide allotments for the cottagers, many of whom were dispossessed from their land, it provided:
"For avoiding the great inconvenience which is found by experience to grow by the erecting and building of great number of cottages, which daily more and more increased in many parts of the realm, it was enacted that no person should build a cottage for habitation or dwelling, nor convert any building into a cottage, without a.s.signing and laying thereto four acres of land, being his own freehold and inheritance, lying near the cottage, under a penalty of L10; and for upholding any such cottages, there was a penalty imposed of 40s. a month, exception being made as to any city, town, corporation, ancient borough, or market town; and no person was permitted to allow more than one family to reside in each cottage, under a penalty of 10s. per month."
The 39th Elizabeth, cap. 2, was pa.s.sed to enforce the observance of these conditions. It provides:
"That all lands which had been in tillage shall be restored thereto within three years, except in cases where they were worn out by too much tillage, in which case they might be grazed with sheep; but in order to prevent the deterioriation of the land, it was enacted that the quant.i.ty of beeves or muttons sold off the land should not exceed that which was consumed in the mansion-house."
In these various enactments of the Tudor monarchs we may trace the anxious desire of these sovereigns to repair the mistake of Henry VII., and to prevent the depopulation of England. A similar mistake has been made in Ireland since 1846, under which the homes of the peasantry have been prostrated, the land thrown out of tillage, and the people driven from their native land. Mr. Froude has the following remarks upon this legislation:
"Statesmen (temp. Elizabeth) did not care for the acc.u.mulation of capital. They desired to see the physical well-being of all cla.s.ses of the commonwealth maintained in the highest degree which the producing power of the country admitted. This was their object, and they were supported in it by a powerful and efficient majority of the nation. At one time Parliament interfered to protect employers against laborers, but it was equally determined that employers should not be allowed to abuse their opportunities; and this directly appears from the 4th and 5th Elizabeth, by which, on the most trifling appearance of a diminution of the currency, it was declared that the laboring man could no longer live on the wages a.s.signed to him by the Act of Henry VIII.; and a sliding scale was inst.i.tuted, by which, for the future, wages should be adjusted to the price of food. The same conclusion may be gathered also indirectly fom the acts interfering imperiously with the rights of property where a disposition showed itself to exercise them selfishly.
"The city merchants, as I have said, were becoming landowners, and some of them attempted to apply their rules of trade to the management of landed estates. While wages were rated so high, it answered better as a speculation to convert arable land into pasture, but the law immediately stepped in to prevent a proceeding which it regarded as petty treason to the state. Self-protection is the first law of life, and the country, relying for its defence on an able-bodied population, evenly distributed, ready at any moment to be called into action, either against foreign invasion or civil disturbance, it could not permit the owners of land to pursue, for their own benefit, a course of action which threatened to weaken its garrisons. It is not often that we are able to test the wisdom of legislation by specific results so clearly as in the present instance. The first attempts of the kind which I have described were made in the Isle of Wight early in the reign of Henry VII. Lying so directly exposed to attacks by France, the Isle of Wight was a place which it was peculiarly important to keep in a state of defence, and the 4th Henry VII., cap. 16, was pa.s.sed to prevent the depopulation of the Isle of Wight, occasioned by the system of large farms."
The city merchants alluded to by Froude seem to have remembered that from the times of Athelwolf, the possession of a certain quant.i.ty of land, with gatehouse, church, and kitchen, converted the ceorl (churl) into a thane.
It is difficult to estimate the effect which the Tudor policy had upon the landholding of England. Under the feudal system, the land was held in trust and burdened with the support of the soldiery. Henry VII., in order to weaken the power of the n.o.bles, put an end to their maintaining independent soldiery. Thus landlords" incomes increased, though their material power was curtailed. It would not have been difficult at this time to have loaded these properties with annual payments equal to the cost of the soldiers which they were bound to maintain, or to have given each of them a farm under the Crown, and strict justice would have prevented the landowners from putting into their pockets those revenues which, according to the grants and patents of the Conqueror and his successors, were specially devoted to the maintenance of the army.
Land was released from the conditions with which it was burdened when granted. This was not done by direct legislation but by its being the policy of the Crown to prevent "king-makers" arising from among the n.o.bility. The dread of Warwick influenced Henry. He inaugurated a policy which transferred the support of the army from the lands, which should solely have borne it, to the general revenue of the country. Thus he relieved one cla.s.s at the expense of the nation. Yet, when Henry was about to wage war on the Continent, he called all his subjects to accompany him, under pain of forfeiture of their lands; and he did not omit levying the accustomed feudal charge for knighting his eldest son and for marrying his eldest daughter. The acts to prevent the landholder from oppressing the occupier, and those for the encouragement of tillage, failed. The new idea of property in land, which then obtained, proved too powerful to be altered by legislation.
Another change in the system of landholding took place in those reigns.
Lord Cromwell, who succeeded Cardinal Wolsey as minister to Henry VIII., had land in Kent, and he obtained the pa.s.sing of an act (31 Henry VIII., cap. 2) which took his land and that of other owners therein named, out of the custom of gavelkind (gave-all-kind), which had existed in Kent from before the Norman Conquest, and enacted that they should descend according to common law in like manner as lands held by knight"s service.
The suppression of the RELIGIOUS HOUSES gave the Crown the control of a vast quant.i.ty of land. It had, with the consent of the Crown, been devoted to religion by former owners. The descendants of the donors were equitably ent.i.tled to the land, as it ceased to be applied to the trust for which it was given, but the power of the Crown was too great, and their claims were refused. Had these estates been applied to purposes of religion or education they would have formed a valuable fund for the improvement of the people; but the land itself, as well as the portion of t.i.thes belonging to the religious houses, was conferred upon favorites, and some of the wealthiest n.o.bles of the present day trace their rise and importance to the rewards obtained by their ancestors out of the spoils of these charities.
The importance of the measures of the Tudors upon the system of land-holding can hardly be exaggerated. An impulse of self-defence led them to lessen the physical force of the oligarchy by relieving the land from the support of the army, and enabling them to convert to their own use the income previously applied to the defence of the realm. This was a bribe, but it brought its own punishment. The eviction of the working farmers, the demolition of their dwellings, the depopulation of the country, were evils of most serious magnitude; and the supplement of the measures which produced such deplorable results was found in the permanent establishment of a taxation for the SUPPORT of the POOR. Yet the nation reeled under the depletion produced by previous mistaken legislation, and all cla.s.ses have been injured by the transfer of the support of the army from the land held by the n.o.bles to the income of the people.
Side by side, with the measures pa.s.sed, to prevent the Clearing of the Land, arose the system of POOR LAWS. Previous to the Reformation the poor were princ.i.p.ally relieved at the religious houses. The destruction of small farms, and the eviction of such ma.s.ses of the people, which commenced in the reign of Henry VII., overpowered the resources of these establishments; their suppression in the reigns of Henry VIII.
and Elizabeth aggravated the evil. The indiscriminate and wholesale execution of the poor vagrants by the former monarch only partially removed the evil, and the statute-book is loaded with acts for the relief of the dest.i.tute poor. The first efforts were collections in the churches; but voluntary alms proving insufficient, the powers of the churchwardens were extended, and they were directed and authorized to a.s.sess the parishioners according to their means, and thus arose a system which, though benevolent in its object, is a slur upon our social arrangements. Land, the only source of food, is rightly charged with the support of the dest.i.tute. The necessity for such aid arose originally from their being evicted therefrom. The charge should fall exclusively upon the rent receivers, and in no case should the tiller of the soil have to pay this charge either directly or indirectly. It is continued by the inadequacy of wages, and the improvidence engendered by a social system which arose out of injustice, and produced its own penalty.
Legislation with regard to the poor commenced contemporaneous with the laws against the eviction of the small farmers. I have already recited some of the laws to preserve small holdings; I now pa.s.s to the acts meant to compel landholders to provide for those whom they had dispossessed. In 1530 the act 22 Henry VIII., cap. 12, was pa.s.sed; it recites:
"Whereas in all places through the realm of England, vagabonds and beggars have of long time increased, and daily do increase, in great and excessive numbers by THE OCCASION OF IDLENESS, THE MOTHER AND ROOT OF ALL VICES, [Footnote: See 4 Henry VII., cap, 19, ante, p. 27, where the same expression occurs, showing that it was throwing the land out of tilth that occasioned pauperism.] whereby hath insurged and sprung, and daily insurgeth and springeth, continual thefts, murders, and other heinous offences and great enormities, to the high displeasure of G.o.d, the inquietation and damage of the king and people, and to the marvellous disturbance of the commonweal of the realm."
It enacts that justices may give license to impotent persons to beg within certain limits, and, if found begging out of their limits, they shall be set in the stocks. Beggars without license to be whipped or set in the stocks. All persons able to labor, who shall beg or be vagrant, shall be whipped and sent to the place of their birth. Parishes to be fined for neglect of the constables.
37 Henry VIII., cap. 23, continued this act to the end of the ensuing Parliament.
1 Edward VI., cap. 3, recites the increase of idle vagabonds, and enacts that all persons loitering or wandering shall be marked with a V, and adjudged a slave for two years, and afterward running away shall become a felon. Impotent persons were to be removed to the place where they had resided for three years, and allowed to beg. A weekly collection was to be made in the churches every Sunday and holiday after reading the gospel of the day, the amount to be applied to the relief of bedridden poor.
5 and 6 Edward VI., cap. 2, directs the parson, vicar, curate, and church-wardens, to appoint two collectors to distribute weekly to the poor. The people were exhorted by the clergy to contribute; and, if they refuse, then, upon the certificate of the parson, vicar, or curate, to the bishop of the diocese, he shall send for them and induce him or them to charitable ways.
2 and 3 Philip and Mary, cap. 5, re-enacts the former, and requires the collectors to account quarterly; and where the poor are too numerous for relief, they were licensed by a justice of the peace to beg.
5 Elizabeth, cap. 3, confirms and renews the former acts, and compels collectors to serve under a penalty of L10. Persons refusing to contribute their alms shall be exhorted, and, if they obstinately refuse, shall be bound by the bishop to appear at the next general quarter session, and they may be imprisoned if they refuse to be bound.
The 14th Elizabeth, cap. 5, requires the justices of the peace to register all aged and impotent poor born or for three years resident in the parish, and to settle them in convenient habitations, and ascertain the weekly charge, and a.s.sess the amount on the inhabitants, and yearly appoint collectors to receive and distribute the a.s.sessment, and also an overseer of the poor. This act was to continue for seven years.
The 18th Elizabeth, cap. 3, provides for the employment of the poor.
Stores of wool, hemp, flax, iron, etc., to be provided in cities and towns, and the poor set to work. It empowered persons possessed of land in free socage to give or devise same for the maintenance of the poor.
The 39th Elizabeth, cap. 3, and the 43d Elizabeth, cap. 2, extended these acts, and made the a.s.sessment compulsory.
I shall ask you to compare the date of these several laws for the relief of the dest.i.tute poor with the dates of the enactments against evictions. You will find they run side by side.
[Footnote: The following tables of the acts pa.s.sed against eviction, and enacting the support of the poor, show that they were contemporaneous:
Against Evictions.
4 Henry VII., Cap. 19.
7 Henry VIII, Cap. 1.
21 Henry VIII, 24 Henry VIII, Cap. 14.
25 Henry VIII, Cap. 13.
27 Henry VIII, Cap. 22.
5 Edward VI., Cap. 2.
2 and 3 Philip and Mary, Cap. 2.
2 and 3 Philip and Mary, Cap. 3.
2 Elizabeth, Cap. 2.
31 Elizabeth, Cap. 7.
39 Elizabeth, Cap. 2.
Enacting Poor Laws.
22 Henry VIII., Cap. 12.
37 Henry VIII., Cap. 23.
1 Edward VI., Cap. 3.
5 and 6 Edward VI., Cap. 2.
2 and 4 Philip and Mary, Cap. 5.
5 Elizabeth, Cap. 3.
14 Elizabeth, Cap. 5.
18 Elizabeth, Cap. 3.
39 Elizabeth, Cap. 3.
43 Elizabeth, Cap. 2.]
I have perhaps gone at too great length into detail; but I think I could not give a proper picture of the alteration in the system of landholding or its effects without tracing from the statute-book the black records of these important changes. The suppression of monasteries tended greatly to increase the sufferings of the poor, but I doubt if even these inst.i.tutions could have met the enormous pressure which arose from the wholesale evictions of the people. The laws of Henry VII and Henry VIII., enforcing the tillage of the land, preceded the suppression of religious houses, and the act of the latter monarch allowing the poor to beg was pa.s.sed before any steps were taken to close the convents. That measure was no doubt injurious to the poor, but the main evil arose from other causes. The lands of these houses, when no longer applicable to the purpose for which they were given, should have reverted to the heirs of the donors, or have been applied to other religious or educational purposes. The bestowal of them upon favorites, to the detriment alike of the State, the Church, the Poor, and the Ignorant, was an abuse of great magnitude, the effect of which is still felt. The reigns of the Tudors are marked with three events affecting the land--viz.:
1st. Relieving it of the support of the army;
2d. Burdening of it with the support of the poor;
3d. Applying the monastic lands to private uses.
The abolition of retainers, while it relieved the land of the n.o.bles from the princ.i.p.al charge thereon, did not entirely abolish knight"s service. The monarch was ent.i.tled to the care of all minors, to aids on the marriage or knighthood of the eldest son, to primerseizin or a year"s rent upon the death of each tenant of the Crown. These fees were considerable, and were under the care of the Court of Ward and Liveries.
The artisan cla.s.s had, however, grown in wealth, and they were greatly strengthened by the removal from France of large numbers of workmen in consequence of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. These prosperous tradespeople became landowners by purchase, and thus tended to replace the LIBERI HOMINES, or FREEMEN, who had been destroyed under the wars of the n.o.bles, which effaced the landmarks of English society. The liberated serfs attained the position of paid farm-laborers; had the policy of Elizabeth, who enacted that each of their cottages should have an allotment of four acres of land, been carried out, it would have been most beneficial to the state.
The reign of this family embraced one hundred and eighteen years, during which the increase of the population was about twenty-five per cent.
When Henry VII. ascended the throne in 1485 it was 4,000,000, and on the death of Queen Elizabeth in 1603 it had reached 5,000,000, the average increase being about 8000 per annum. The changes effected in the condition of the farmers" cla.s.s left the ma.s.s of the people in a far worse state at the close than at the commencement of their rule.