W.E.A.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVI, Issue 173, 23 June 1926, Page 3

W.E.A.

WEEKLY LECTURE. “THIS FREEDOM! HOW IT CAME.” TIIO weekly W.E.A. lecture Inst evening was delivered by Mr A. C. T. Brotherton, M.A., who spoke on “This Freedom 1 How it came.” In the course of his address he said: “In the last lecture we saw how the manor was a society based upon service in return for protection. The tenants paid for their land with labour, rents, and such as were personally free had various “base works” to perform. In summary we see that the villeins’ services on the lord’s demesne were an essential part of the system, and upon their removal a breakdown was inevitable. When, as was ultimately the case, these labour rents were commuted for money payments, the lords’ position soon became impossible. These rents were fixed, and as the cost of living rose—as it always has done —tho lord soon found that he could not live on his rents and found it necessary to lease out the demesne, as with the money at his disposal it was uneconomic to hire free labour. “The new system was undoubtedly preferable to tho old, as free labour worked with less fraud than villein labour, and it was possible to economise many officials while above all it made progressive methods more possible. The demesne was usually let as a single farm, on a lease that usually included stock and implements, as the tenants would not otherwise have had capital to take up these farms and tuo lords were anxious to obtain men capable of working profitably. It will be seen that lease farming followed as a direct result of tho commutation of base services for money, but the reasons leading to this commutation are not so obvious and until recently have been generally misinterpreted. “The usual theory was that the peasants had been gradually getting commutation, and that by tho Black Death (1348-9) the process was fairly complete. This plague, by halving the population, caused a great shortage of labour, and tho lords endeavoured to exact services instead of money, as owing to tho rapid rise in wages their position was otherwise uneconomic. This reactionary behaviour is said to have caused the unrest that culminated in the peasants’ revolt of 1381. It is only in recent years that research has shown how completely unfounded this is. “Tho oid theory is based on the assumption that commutation had taken place before tho Black Death, but this is not the case, and being so the theory automatically breaks down. Dr. Page, one of the most recent workers on this problem, shows, by a review taken of sopie 80 to 100 manors in different parts of England that first of all in 1350, immediately after the plague, over 50 per cent, of the manors exacted all or almost all tho base services; while they were only actually abolished in about 8 per cent. In 1380, on the eve of the revolt, the services were abolished or were insignificant in 65 v per cent, of the cases examined, while the places where they were mainly exacted amounted to 15 per cent. only. These figures, therefore, show a rapid movement towards commutation after the plaguo, and show further that by no means all services had been abolished previously as was held by the old school.

“With a rapid movement towards commutation and progress it hardly seems that the peasants’ revolt can be ascribed simply to tho reactionary behaviour of the landowners, though Dr. Page’s figures have to be regarded ,as a gauge rather than a definite statement as he himself admits that there was reaction following the Black Death.

“The true cause is probably to bo found in a modification rather than a reversal of tho old theory. The plague swept away nearly half tho population of England in 14 months. There was still the same quantity of money, which was increased by plunder from tho French wars, and there wore far fewer people to use it. This to a great extent brought in a money instead of a natural economy, which added to tho general disorganisation of the old system, already sorely strained by the shortage of labour to work the demesne. The plague gave an undoubted impetus to commutation by making a monetary economy a possibility, but it is a mistake to suppose that prior to the plague commutation was completed—in fact, in many cases it was not even desired, and we find examples of the richer tenants bribing the reeve to allot the money payments to the poorer tenants, as they themselves preferred to discharge their obligations by actual work on the lord’s farm. “This seems to establish the fact that commutation was not nearly completed beforo the plague, but the old theory arose from the fact that tho tenants’ services were, very early, assessed in terms of money, although they were discharged by labour. Wliat really happened was that, owing to tho huge mortality from the plague, there would be far fewer members in the villein’s family, and the old services pressed much more hardly than they had done when there were more to perform them. Tho lords were in a difficult position; their rents were fixed by the custom of the manor, and their value hod in actual fact decreased, owing to the increased wages demanded by those who cultivated the demesne. Consequently, either the actual services were demanded, or else they tried to enforce the old rate of wages. This produced an impossible position, both sides feeling themselves wronged, and the consequent unrest caused the peasants’ revolt of 1381. “It should here be noted that wages had been rising steadily from tho beginning of tho 14th century, and that this was accelerated by the plague, which gave labour a scarcity value. Consequently, in spite of unsuccessful attempts to keep down wages by Act of Parliament, tho peasants were better off than they were before, and having bettered their position somewhat by peaceful means tried to improve it still more by force. The French Revolution is a parallel case. I have dealt at length with this question because I wish to show that the personal freedom, of which tho English are justly proud, was won as the result of economic forces and not of revolution. The peasants revolted, and were defeated, and the Government passed laws against the raising of wages—but tho econbmic -situation was such that wages continued to rise, and once they reached a point at which it wps profitable for a villein to desert his lord and abandon his holding the entire manorial system of base services was doomed.

“In conclusion, a few points should be noticed. Base services were still the rule at the end of the 14th century, but owing to tho death or desertion of many tenants a large amount of .land had fallen into the lord’s hands and had been kt out at a money

rent, and by tho reign of Henry V. money rents were fairly general. “Although the Statute of Labourers, 1351, may be regarded as a misuse of political powers as fixing a maximum without a minimum wage, it must be remembered that the craft guilds had long fixed the wages of artisans, and this was merely an extension to the agricultural labourer of an already accepted principle. Villeinage was never abolished by statute, but it gradually died out, Serfdom as a status virtually ended with base services, but there is a technical case recorded in 1586, when the Privy Council intervened in favour of the Mayor of Bristol, who was held by his feudal lord as a bondman. This was, of course, purely a technical case where the lord hoped to extract money in payment of the various feudal dues, but tlie Privy Council decided against this. “Unlike the last lecture, which described a fairly definite stage of economic development, this lecture is in itself incomplete. It contains the seeds of many later problems, notably the enclosure movement which became prominent in the 16th and 18th centuries. “It also shows the profound influence of economics upon history. If the 1 peasants’ revolt—an economic movement —is compared with the great rebellion against Charles 1., it will be seen that the difference is roughly that of struggling against a man and fighting forces that are well nigh beyond tho control of man. “Economic ‘laws,’ we are told, .are tendencies that will inevitably develop unless prevented, and that prevention is sometimes impossible except at an early stage before the necessity of action is realised. History may bo described as a study of human nature through tho ages, and in such a study the importance of economic conditions and forces can hardly be over-estimated.”