Once the agreement between tithe and land owners had been made, the chairman of the meeting sent it to the Tithe Commission in London “and the commissioners, by themselves or by some assistant commissioner shall cause inquiry to be made…whether the agreement has been made without fraud or collusion and whether or not it ought to be confirmed.” This necessitated a visit to the parish by a local agent or assistant tithe commissioner and some mention of their roles is worth making. “Although both assistant commissioners and local agents worked locally in the parishes and townships, local agents were only required to visit places where tithe-owners and landowners had agreed the rent-charge to be paid in lieu of tithes, and to report on the fairness of this agreement. An assistant commissioner’s duties were more diverse. Part of his time was spent reporting on agreements which had been reached, but from 1840 a significant proportion of it was in parishes where an agreement could not be reached, and consisted of hearing evidence from both parties and deciding upon the sum to be paid in lieu of tithes, i.e. making an award. Later he might also have to hear appeals against awards, or against the apportionment of rent-charge amongst the landowners” [1].

The man who came to Child Okeford was not an assistant tithe commissioner but a local agent, George Bolls, from the neighbouring parish of Fontmell Magna.[2] Bolls was an experienced agent, he was himself a land surveyor from the neighbouring village of Fontmell Magna and took part in three hundred and twenty seven commutations. One hundred and sixteen of these were in Dorset with the rest in Wiltshire and Gloucestershire. He certainly got around a bit! A local agent “did not require the skill in arbitration which was essential for an assistant commissioner. He did, however, need to be fairly familiar with local tithing customs of the parishes he visited and understand their influence on agricultural practice. He had also to be able to assess the quality and value of land, sometimes several thousand acres of it, in the course of a few hours’ visit. The tithe commissioners, recognizing the importance of local knowledge, chose as local agents men with this type of expertise.”[3] Bolls was an experienced agent, he was himself a land surveyor from the neighbouring village of Fontmell Magna and took part in three hundred and twenty seven commutations. One hundred and sixteen of these were in Dorset with the rest in Wiltshire and Gloucestershire. He certainly got around a bit! A local agent “did not require the skill in arbitration which was essential for an assistant commissioner. He did, however, need to be fairly familiar with local tithing customs of the parishes he visited and understand their influence on agricultural practice. He had also to be able to assess the quality and value of land, sometimes several thousand acres of it, in the course of a few hours’ visit. The tithe commissioners, recognizing the importance of local knowledge, chose as local agents men with this type of expertise.”[4]

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Letter from George Bolls to the Tithe Commission dated April 1839. Photographed by National Archives for a fee paid by author.

The local agent attending a parish had two tasks. The first was to report on the fairness of the agreement and the second was to review the state of agriculture in the parish. The report on the agreement was undertaken promptly as the letter to the Tithe Commission shows -original formatting removed.

In undertaking his second task Bolls was not the most informative of the agents. Although he completed 2/3rds of Dorset’s reports he is not very forthcoming about any local agricultural practices. He was not alone. Altogether there were two hundred and eighty three tithe districts [5] in Dorset and the agents in the other parishes were not much better with the result that “In combination these factors mean that the body of Dorset tithe files is flawed as a source of reconstructing agriculture and farming practices. The entire returns for Dorset…are amongst the fewest for a county of this size”.[6]

The survey of the parishes was an integral part of the commutation process although given its very general and cursory nature it is difficult to see what purpose it actually served or indeed why it was needed in the first place.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The report prepared by George Bolls on the state of agriculture in the parish of Child Okeford. Photographed by National Archives for a fee paid by author.

At the end of the report Bolls are two sets of figures that I have laid out in tabular form.

Valuation

It is not clear what this first set of figures actually means but the second set [below] shows how the rent-charge was to be divided amongst the different qualities of land.

In his report to the commission Bolls ends with a set of data that has tabulated below and is titled, “Remarks, stating the peculiar circumstances of the Parish, which may affect the value of the tithe.”

In the spirit of the act the landowner had great freedom of action “They may select what valuers they please, and what number of valuers; they may give those valuers specific instructions, or leave them to apportion by their own discretion, guided only by the general words of the act. They may, by means of those specific instructions, apportion the rent-charge, field by field, or on their gross estates; or partly field by field, and partly on estates; or, with the assent of the tithe owners, they may charge it on certain portions of their estates, leaving the other portions tithe free…. Amidst all this liberty, there is only one restraint: they must take care to be impartial—to oppress no one of the minority; and every individual of the minority has always an appeal to the commissioners.”

In the table we see how the landowners wanted to apportion the rent-charge according to the differing land types. The £20 rent-charge due on the glebe land is not included in this calculation as it applied to the whole of the glebe regardless of its state of cultivation.

The bulk of the apportionment was to fall on the meadow and pasture land which, was the most valuable land in the parish to hold. The first line is slightly odd as the ‘At’ column should be at ¼ rather than 5/, but otherwise the figures listed in the report are in reasonably close accord with the amounts allocated in the final apportionment. For Down land the final apportionment for the 400 acres was £5.12s 0d for the Coppice £2 3s 9d and the arable £54 19s 7d. The Meadow and pasture have not been checked. The agreement was confirmed on the 4th May 1839.

Next          A Valuer calls

Previous  The Agreement