Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 6.djvu/238

210 crease of population and the growing need for food-producing land made it the interest of the lord, and it may be considered of the public also, that much of the common ground should be brought under cultivation. Down to the year 1800 this was effected by private Inclosure Acts, of which there were as many as 1GOO or 1700. The provisions which it had been customary to insert in these special Acts were in 1801, after the manner of which we have so many examples, consolidated in Sir John Sinclair s Inclosure Act, 41 Geo. III. c. 109. At this time the inclosure and cultivation of common lands were looked forward to as a means of in creasing the national wealth. It is not till 1836 that we find any recognition of the desirability, on public grounds, of preventing inclosures under certain circumstances, viz., in the 6 and? Will. IV. c. 115, for facilitating the inclosure of open and arable fields (which applied to what have been called comnionable lands and not to manorial wastes). The 55th section forbids inclosures within ten miles of London, or within corresponding distances of smaller towns. Sub ject to the provisions of these Acts about 2000 private In closure Acts had been passed, when in 1845 came the General Inclosure Act, 8 and 9 Viet. c. 148. Its object is stated to be to facilitate the inclosure and improvement of commons and other lands, now subject to rights of property, which obstruct cultivation and the productive employment of labour, &c. Commissioners are to be appointed who shall judge of the expedience of ail inclosure and superin tend its execution. All common lands are brought within the scope of the Act, but manorial wastes are not to be in closed without the previous sanction of Parliament, which was also made necessary for inclosures within fifteen miles of L?!}^ on j or within two miles of any city of 10,000 inhabitants, or i^U two and a half miles of any city of 20,000 inhabitants, and so on. (A later Act, 15 and 16 Viet. c. 79, made the consent of parliament necessary in all cases under this Act.) Village greens are not to be inclosed, and by 30 the commissioners are authorized to require, as one of the conditions of the inclosure, the appropriation of an allotment for the exercise and recreation of the neigh bourhood on the following scale : In a parish of 10,000 inhabitants not more than 10 acres; between 5000 and 10,000 inhabitants not more than 8 acres ; between 2000 and 5000 not more than 5 acres ; and under 2000 not more than 4. Allotments might also be made for the labouring poor. Under this Act inclosures proceeded apace, and the commissioners have been accused of unduly favour ing inclosure, and neglecting the powers with which they were intrusted for the protection of the public. Alluding to this feeling the Home Secretary (Mr Cross), in propos ing the Bill which afterwards became the Act of 1876, stated that of 414, 000 acres which had been inclosed under the Act less than 4000 had been dedicated to purposes of recreation and exercise, and he admitted that, whereas in closures had formerly been treated as a private estate im provement to which the owner was entitled, agreat change of opinion had taken place as to the rights of the public. This feeling found expression in the Metropolitan Commons Act, 1866, vhich absolutely prohibits all further inclosure of metropolitan commons, and facilitates schemes for the management and improvement of such commons for the benefit of the public, due compensation being made for beneficial interests affected thereby. This, it will be observed, is a complete change of attitude. Whereas the lord was formerly treated as the teal owner, and allowed to buy off partial interests, the public is now placed in that position, and the lord becomes an encumbrancer, to be bought off like any other. The revival of public interest in commons led to resistance being offered in courts of law to the unauthorized inclosure of commons bv lords of the manor. One of the most im portant of these cases is that of Warrick v. Queen s College, Oxford (6 Chancery Appeals, 716), in which the plaintiff, as a freeholder of the manor of Plumsteud, obtained a decree against the defendants, who had inclosed a portio.i of the common of the manor. The judgment of the Lord Chancellor (Hatherley) on that occasion contains a state ment of the view now taken by the courts of claims to rights of common. In the Commissioners of Sewers v. Glasse, the Corporation of London defeated attempted in closures in Epping Forest. In 1869, a committee of the House of Commons presented a report on metropolitan commons, and many of their re commendations have been embodied in the Inclosure Act 1876, of which the following are the chief provisions. The preamble of the Commons Act 1876 states that, under the Inclosure Acts 1845 to 1868, the commissioners are empowered to authorize, by provisional orders subject to assent of Parliament, the inclosure of commons, provided the inclosure is made on such terms as may be necessary for the protection of public interests, and provided they are of opinion that such inclosure is expedient, having regard to the benefit of the neighbourhood; and that it is desirable that circumstances bearing on the expediency of the pro posed inclosure should be more fully brought under the notice of the commissioners, and that inclosure of commons in severally should not be made unless the commissioners are satisfied that it would be of benefit to the neighbour hood as well as to private interests, and that further effect ought to be given to the provisions relating to allotments for purposes of exercise and recreation. The commissioners may entertain applications either for (1) the regulation or (2) the inclosure of a common. The regulation includes the adjustment of rights and the improvement of a common ; and the latter comprises (1) draining, manuring, and levelling the common, (2) planting trees, or otherwise beautifying it, (3) making bye-laws, (4) general management, and (5) appointment of conservators. In case of " inclosure/ as well as " regulation, " the commissioners may insert pro visions for the benefit of the neighbourhood, e.g,, the secur ing free access to particular points of view, preserving trees or historical objects, reserving playing-grounds, making roads, &c. In the case of suburban commons (i.e., situated within six miles of any town) the sanitary authority shall be represented. The commissioners are directed to require evidence as to the benefit of the neighbourhood, and, in the case of inclosure, information as to the advantages of in closure as compared with regulation. Rules are provided for inspecting the common, holding meetings, lie. The pro visional order shall contain all the statutory provisions for the benefit of the neighbourhood that are applicable to the case, and, where the common to be inclosed is Avaste land of a manor, a description of the allotments for recreation ground, Compensation must be provided for private interests affected by the order. Two-thirds of the persons whose interests are affected must assent to the order, and in the case of a manorial waste the lord must consent, or his representative in interest, before the commissioners can certify the expediency of the order. When the freemen of a town have interests in the common, the consent of two- thirds of them must be obtained. The Inclosure Acts are amended by certain sections relating to field-gardens and recreation-grounds. Encroachments on or inclosure of village-greens are to be deemed a public nuisance. Illegal inclosures on commons settled under this Act are within the jurisdiction of the county court. Persons intending to inclose a common otherwise than under this Act must give three months notice of their intention by advertisement. The section of the Inclosure Act 1845 which fixes a limit to allotments for recreation-grounds is repealed. The Act

does not apply to metropolitan commons. (JK. K.)