[The following is the Draft Report referred to in the proceedings of the Committee (page xiii). It was circulated among the several Members of the Committee in March, 1858, and sent to every Member of the Council previously to the Council Meeting of the 26th February, 1859. It has received very careful revision, and considerable modification in consequence of various suggestions: it may therefore be taken as embodying the views of a certain number of individuals who have given their attention to the subject of the Resolutions which constitute the actual Report of the Collective Committee as agreed to on the 22nd January.]

DRAFT REPORT

PREPARED BY MR. ACLAND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDER OF THE COMMITTEE AT ITS SECOND MEETING, AND

AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME SUBSEQUENTLY.

THE Committee understand it to be assumed in the Resolution under which they were instructed to act, that many farms in the West of England are held on terms unsuited to the present state of agriculture. They have accordingly deemed it unnecessary to collect evidence to establish a fact which may be dealt with as notorious.

They have obtained from Members of the Committee and from other sources suggestions as to the points which, in the opinion of some of the best farmers, ought to be provided for; and have been furnished with forms of agreement already adopted on some estates which have the reputation of being well managed, and of being occupied by men of respectability and capital.

The Committee are unanimously of opinion that the Council may render great public service by publishing some suggestions as to the principles on which the owners and occupiers may best protect their respective interests, with a view to encourage the expenditure of capital on land, and to prevent litigation.

The Council is composed in a manner which gives it peculiar advantages for the task which, by the appointment of this Commitee, it has undertaken. In addition to a large number of vicepresidents, who are summoned only when they specially desire

it,

☐e Members of Council who regularly or frequently attend at

the monthly meetings are not fewer than forty,* including, in not very different proportions, owners or representatives of large properties, owners of estates of moderate size farmed in some cases by the owners themselves, tenant-farmers, and professional agents. They have had the advantage of acting harmoniously together for several years, and of enjoying, as they believe, the confidence of a large body of Members; they have great facilities for knowing what is wanted in different quarters, and for taking a dispassionate view of the various interests involved.

The Committee think, nevertheless, that the Council in offering its suggestions should avoid even the appearance of a disposition to dictate a form of lease or other agreement, and confine itself to recommendations of general principles, to be worked out in detail by others. Such recommendations, having been carefully framed on a full consideration of the real interests of the several parties concerned, may safely be committed to the calm and patient judgment of landlords and tenants. The discussion of the advice given cannot fail to produce a gradual and beneficial effect on public opinion.

It may not be too much to anticipate that courts of law, which have gradually adapted their decisions, so far as the law permits, to the expanding wants of the community, may in time recognise in the recommendations of this and similar societies a safer guide to the interpretation of the term "good husbandry" than is afforded by what is called, though most fallaciously, the "custom of the country." Without discussing here the question how far it is reasonable to apply to any progressive art the restrictions of legal custom-even in the qualified sense in which that term is construed with reference to agriculture-it may safely be asserted that efforts are now needed to establish a standard of husbandry more in accordance with the best farming of the present day. As matters now stand, injustice on one side, and slovenly farming on the other, are sheltered under obsolete traditions, and tend to uphold by obstinate persistency arrangements suited only to a bygone state of things.

Your Committee recommend, as the first step towards a better

arrangement between landlord and tenant, having for its object to encourage good farming, and to discourage bad farming, "that every arrangement for letting land should be reduced to writing."

Some of the reasons for this first recommendation are forcibly stated by G. Wingrove Cooke, Esq., in the following extract from a work on 'Agricultural Tenancies,' to which the Committee have been indebted for much valuable information: *

"Written contracts, whether in the form of agreements or leases, are grown into more general, but still not into very general use throughout the kingdom. The ordinary class of farmer-with not too much capital, no exuberant enterprise, and little confidence in new systems, but with considerable shrewdness and great talent for bargaining-prefers the elasticity of a parole contract. Reductions of rent, allowances for improvements, and the lax culture obligations of the custom of the country, are all opportunities for constant haggling; and, unless the agent be a very shrewd, hard man, for constant petty victories. No wonder that a simple verbal tenancy is preferred by this class to security for improvements they never intend to make, and covenants for good husbandry precisely defined.

"Gradually, however, cunning must give place to wisdom; and this class of farmers must surrender to strangers, or must be succeeded by sons, who have learned the necessity of an exact demarcation of their rights and obligations. Little advantages given, small reductions, occasional allowances, are as nothing when compared with the vast yearly difference of produce raised from the same land by a farmer who drains and highly manures and a farmer who does not. Yet he must be too improvident a man to be a good farmer who should invest in the land capital sufficient for high cultivation, without some security that a change in the ownership of the estate (whatever well-founded confidence he may have in the present landlord) may not at any moment bring a notice to give up farm, improvements, and capital, and leave it all, uncompensated, to a stranger. If the modern system of husbandry is to progress until it becomes universal, precise written contracts must extend over the land with an equal pace."

It is not desirable, in the opinion of your Committee, that the Council should enter upon the comparative merits of leases for a term of years and of leases from year to year, but it appears

quite within their province to point out the evil consequences of reducing to writing the arrangement between landlord and tenant in the form of an unstamped agreement for a lease. This form of agreement gives up the freedom of tenancy-at-will, without securing to either party the advantages of a well-drawn written document. It is not generally known that (owing in great measure to the representations made by a member of this Committee to a member of the Government, himself a Westcountryman) a great reduction took place in 1850* in the stamp duty on leases, so that the stamp on a lease for less than 35 years for a farm of 100l. a-year is now only 10s. The Committee do not scruple to call the attention of landlords to the great importance of adopting the form of a stamped lease, whether for a term or from year to year. If this be not done it would be better to rely on a verbal agreement, and to have no written form at all.

With regard to the conditions to be inserted in leases when granted, your Committee do not recommend the Council to publish any model clauses or common forms. The legal questions involved in covenants having for their objects the reservation and protection of the rights of ownership may be safely left to professional men. The Committee, however, would advise that, in any written instrument for the letting of land, the purely agricultural covenants should be expressed in the shortest and plainest possible language; and that a schedule of the buildings and various parcels of lands should be added, specifying the agricultural description of each field, whether pasture, tillage, or other, at the time the agreement is signed.

Your Committee have confined themselves as far as possible to matters within their province as members of a society for the encouragement of agriculture, and especially to the two following questions:—

1st. On what principle should covenants be drawn with a view to promote good cultivation during the occupation of a farm? 2nd. What are the mutual obligations of a Landlord and a Tenant on the expiration of a Tenant's Term?

Covenants to be observed during Occupation. Under this head arises the question, "Which is the best time

of entry?" On this subject opinions are now divided, as they have, in past times, been modified by the course of agricultural improvement. From one of their informants your Committee learn that, in early times, a desire for lands suitable for the growth of rye and wheat led to the adoption of a Michaelmas entry as most convenient for the sowing of those crops, and for the abandonment of other lands which have yielded their return. This view is supported by the prevalence of autumn entries in the oldest wheat-growing districts.

The same informant states that, with the introduction of the turnip-crop, a new era sprang up; that the desire on the part of tenants to prepare their own fallows led to an increased demand for Spring entries. Some strong arguments are also urged in favour of Spring entry, as most suited to lands in which dairy business, grass, or apples form an important element in the farmer's returns.

On the other hand, it is contended by a writer in the last number of the Royal Agricultural Journal' that, on farms of an ordinary mixed character, the recent extension of autumn cultivation has introduced elements into British farming which should outweigh other considerations, and he consequently gives a decided preference to autumnal entry as the rule which ought to prevail under present circumstances.

The Committee therefore think that it is undesirable for the Council to recommend any period of entry, as no one time can be generally suitable for farms in the West of England; but the successive changes of opinion just referred to afford a striking illustration of the inexpediency of imposing shackles on the progress of agriculture by adherence to antiquated forms.

With regard to cultivation-clauses, your Committee recommend that, in all cases where the tenant is presumed to be a man of capital, it is desirable that more discretion as to the cropping of arable land should be vested in his hands than appears to be usual in existing agreements.

It is well known that in many leases the exact rotation of crops to be followed year by year is minutely laid down and surrounded by restrictions rendering it impossible for a tenant to adopt the best farming of his neighbourhood without involving himself in the risks attendant on a breach of covenant.

The Committee do not think that the Council would advance