House of commons enquiry into fruit trade: evidence of George Langridge (1839)

Post date: Apr 02, 2013 2:54:47 PM

George Thomas Langridge was a land surveyor living at this date in The Beck opposite the Church in Wateringbury as a tenant of Matthias Lucas who gave evidence immediately before him on 20^th June 1839 to a House of Commons enquiry into the impact of the substantial reduction on the duty imposed on fruit imported into the UK. Although Langridge himself owned land only in Mereworth and not in Wateringbury his evidence is not just based on Mereworth but on his wider professional experience including Wateringbury and so is included. It is probable that there would have been some element of joint preparation with Matthias Lucas.

As well as Matthias Lucas and George Langridge, Charles Whitaker of Barming, William Harryman of Mereworth and Israel Lewis of East Farleigh also gave evidence, but this is not reproduced.

Mr. George Thomas Langridge, called in; and Examined.

1457. Mr. Hodges] ARE you a land agent and surveyor ?—Yes.

1458. Where do you reside?—At Warternbury [sic] now.

1459. In the county of Kent?—Yes.

1460. How long have you been in that occupation ?—More than 25 years.

1461. Has your experience been principally confined to that district and to West Kent?—Very much round that neighbourhood.

1462. Did you hire a farm, in 1822, in the parish of Mereworth?—I did; I re-hired it.

1463. As a tenant-at-will or on lease?—On lease, for the term of 21 years.

1464. Were there any conditions in that lease with reference to the planting of any quantity of hop ground and fruit?—I undertook to plant 20 acres. The whole land consisted of 140 acres.

1465. Did you fulfil the condition of planting 20 acres?—I have planted about 18, or rather more.

1466. When did you commence planting?—Immediately after I took my lease. I suppose I planted the 18 acres within three or four years of my taking the lease.

1467. In what state is that plantation now?—It is just coming into bearing.

1468. Do you occupy that land?—I do, in conjunction with my son. My son resides upon it, but I occupy it with him as partner.

1469. Is it in full bearing?—It is just coming into full bearing. I cannot say in full bearing; it has been planted from 13 to 16 years.

1470. What do you consider to be the expense incurred by the planter of an apple orchard, from the commencement of the planting to the time when it comes into full perfection, per acre?—My outlay has been made at various times; but I am afraid it has cost me £60 an acre up to the time of its beginning to yield a return.

1471. Where have you sent your apples to for sale?—I have sent them to the London market pretty much; I have sold some few at home, but the best to the London market.

1472. Those you sell at home are, generally speaking, inferior or damaged; what they call windfalls?—They are.

1473. The great bulk of your produce goes to the London market?—Yes.

1474. What would you consider to be, taking one year with another, a remunerating price for your apples, per bushel ?—I think we could not sell them under 4 s. 6d. to 5s. a bushel, not to have a remunerating price, taking in the blight we have had this last year.

1475. Mr. Ewart] Including the cost of sending to the London market?— Yes.

1476. Mr. Hodges] When you talk of from 4s. 6d. to 5s., you mean the head fruit ?—Yes, such as I send to London.

1477. Taking in the whole growth, should you require as a remunerating price the sum you have stated?—We could not send them under 4s. I think, taking the whole growth, but we have never tried that.

1478. Do not you, in keeping the account, take into calculation those that you sell at home, or that you have made use of, as well as those you send to market? —Yes.

1479. Taking the whole growth, the windfalls and the head fruit altogether, you should consider not less than 4s, taking one year with another, to be a remunerating price?—Yes.

1480. Can you inform the Committee how much hand labour an acre of fruit takes, as contrasted with an acre of arable land?—It is difficult to define the exact quantity of labour upon an acre of orchard ground, because it varies so much as to crop, but from the number of men I am keeping, I think my labour must cost me quite £10 an acre as to fruit.

1481. Mr. Hutt] How many men?—I have different numbers at different times; immediately after hopping I put on ten men, and it lasts them from a fortnight to three or four weeks; and then there is cider after that; I should say not less than £10 an acre, as near as I can tell.

1482. Mr. Ewart.] Do you include hopping in that?—No.

1483. Mr. Hodges] You live in Warternbury?—Yes; I know more as to Mereworth, because I do not use any land in Warternbury.

1484. What is the population of Mereworth?—Nearly 1,000; when I came in, in 1808, it was 400, and I have used the farm ever since.

1485. What is the acreage of Mereworth?—We have not had the parish measured; we call it 2,000 acres, and 1,000 of that is wood.

1486. You have 1,000 people?—Yes.

1487. Was that the return in 1831?—It was drawing towards 1,000; I think there are now about 1,000, few over or under.

1488. How many acres of fruit have you in the parish?—From 150 to 175 acres, I should think. We are just having the parish surveyed; we do not know exactly.

1489. Supposing that circumstances should compel you to destroy one-half or two-thirds of that fruit plantation, how many of your 1,000 people would you throw out of employment?—The amount paid for the labour would be very greatly reduced, if the fruit was grubbed up. I could only take it at the broad data that £9 or £10 an acre would be thrown off for the fruit.

1490. Then if you displanted 100 acres ?—That would be £1,000; I should think it would be that.

1491. What are the earnings of a labourer employed upon a plantation?— The head-man I keep in my fruit plantation receives, all the year round, 2s. 6d. a day, and beer; and the labourers under him receive 2s. a. day, and then there are boys employed.

1492. Then, do you consider that the best labourers in the fruit plantations are earning £150 a year?—With their families, they would earn quite that; in cutting filberts, when my head-man is at work, he earns more, 2s. 6d. per day.

1493. Then, you would consider that those best labourers, with their families, earn £150 a year?—Yes.

1494. And in the event of your losing your fruit plantation you would have 20 families destitute of employment?—They would earn less.

1495. Would there be so much employment as you have now, if the land were converted into corn?—No, certainly not; the team would manage it if it was corn; there would be only the reaping, and other little items.

1496. You are aware of the alteration in the Customs Act of last year?— Yes.

1497. What effect, in your opinion, will that have upon the fruit plantations in Kent?—I think it will throw a great deal out.

1498. Mr. Eicart] How much ?—I should say that it would bring the value of fruit plantation upon a par with the arable land round it.

1499. Mr. Hodges] Then, if that were so, you could not afford to keep up any orchards for the supply of the markets ?—I think not.

1500. Mr. Villiers] At the present rents ?—We could not pay the present rents, certainly not.

1.501. Mr. Hodges.] If you had no rent to pay for the fruit land, could you pay the expense of £10 an acre, and carry your fruit to market?—Certainly not; the expense would overwhelm us.

1.502. Mr. Ewart. Then you would destroy all your fruit plantations?— , They would go out by degrees.

1503. Mr. Hutt.] What do you pay per acre?—About 36s. an acre, all round; but the fruit plantations I set at much more; I value those from 40s. to £6. an acre, according to the state they are in; some more than that, £8.

1504. Does it require a particularly fine soil ?—No, a dry soil, not a very deep one; any land that is dry and firm will grow fruit, thin land rather than thick; Mereworth is well adapted for fruit.

1505. Mr. Hodges.] Is not the soil of Mereworth limestone?—Yes.

1506. Do not the trees penetrate into the rock ?—Yes, they seem to like that very much.

1507. And that constitutes the peculiar value of that district?—Yes.

1508. Have you had much experience of the value of estates for sale in your neighbourhood ?—I have valued a good many, at times.

1509. Without naming any particular estate, or any particular parish, what is your opinion generally upon the diminution of the value of land of the description that is adapted to fruit, which has taken place, or which will henceforth take place, if no alteration of the present duty is made ?—In my opinion, it will go down quite half; in estimating the fruit land, I should say it would go down quite half, that is, the fee-simple of the land.

1510- Then, in those cases where money has been advanced on mortgage upon land of that description, in what proportion would the supposed value, which has hitherto been considered to be a security for the money advanced, be diminished?—I consider the fee-simple value would go down one-half, and consequently the security would be lessened one-half.

1511. In that case, would the mortgagee expect any interest?—I do not know how it would be paid if it were deeply mortgaged; and we have some small occupiers that depend entirely upon fruit; I could name many.

1512. Without naming any, is it within your knowledge that many persons having a small quantity of land now under fruit cultivation have borrowed money upon mortgage?—Yes; I have valued fruit plantations for those purposes many times.

1513. What must be the inevitable fate of those persons under this alteration of duty?—they must resign the property into the hands of the mortgagee.

1514. Would, in that case, the mortgagee be repaid ?- He would not be able to sell it for the money.

1515. Mr. Ewart] It depends upon the debt?—Yes; but some I know are mortgaged to the extent of their value.

1516. Mr. Hodges] Are you of opinion that this frightful loss of property would be to any considerable extent in the western division of the county of Kent ?—I am afraid that it would in all the parishes that I go through; I could name a dozen parishes round me that would be affected.

1517. Mr. Villiers] If the present reduction of duty continues?—Yes.

1518. Will you be so good as to explain to the Committee the grounds of your opinion?—I think we cannot compete with the foreigner; it is impossible that we can sell apples at the price we should be called upon to do.

1519. Will you tell the Committee why?—I have understood that they can be bought on the Continent, and brought over here at 16d. or 18d. a bushel, which is a price we cannot sell them at.

1520. You have heard people say that?—Yes.

1521. But your opinion of all these consequences of deterioration in the value of land is founded upon the supposition, that the fruit coming from abroad will drive the fruit grown at home from the market ?—Yes.

1522. But you have no means of knowing at what price the foreign fruit will come into the market?— No; I have only seen what it has come in at.

1523. Then, for what you know, the English grower will be able to compete with the foreigner?—I believe not; our climate is different.

1524. Do you know any other advantage that the foreign grower has which prevents the English grower from competing with him?—I cannot speak of the advantages, but I know what they have sold their fruit for. I believe we have expenses to contend with that they have not.

1525. What expenses?—Perhaps in rent, and labour and taxes.

1526. Do you know what rent they pay abroad?—No.

1527. Mr. Hodges] Do not you know that they have no tithe?—Yes; and, I believe, very little poor-rate and no land-tax, and their climate is more genial.

1528. Mr. Villiers] Do I understand you to say that they pay no land-tax ? —I am not aware that they do; I have been informed so.

1529. Chairman] Have you considered the price of transit of the fruit?— Yes; I have understood that they can be brought to the market at from 16d. to 18d. per bushel.

1530. Do you mean during the last year, or during a course of years?—I believe during a course of years; I have been told so.

1531. Have you taken into account the probable rise of price abroad, from the increased demand here?—I think they would increase their cultivation, and meet it in that way.

1532. But, in the event of a rise in the immediate price, even if they do increase their cultivation, would not the English grower be able to compete ?— I am afraid not; they grow so many, that I think we should be soon overpowered. There is always plenty to be had, seemingly, on the Continent.

1533 Mr. Hutt] What is the quality of the French fruit, as compared with the English?—I do not know.

1534. Mr. Villiers.] You have, perhaps, heard that they are inferior?—I have heard that some are inferior, and I believe some are very fine.

1535. Have you ever heard that there is a quality of apple here that they never grow abroad?—I have heard that they grow apples as fine for the table as we do; but again I have heard that there is a sleepiness in some of the apples that they grow that ours do not partake of. Upon the whole, I suppose they grow them as well as ours.

1536. Mr. Hutt.] Would your land be good corn land?—No, not good corn land; the holdings are so small that it would be difficult to turn them into corn.

1537.What would the land let for as corn land ?—Corn land is about 35s. an acre, and the fruit land would be reduced to that level if it was found not to pay us.

1538. Mr. Hodges.] If those small holdings that now yield a profit and a comfortable subsistence to numbers of small holders were turned into corn land, must not all those small holdings be broken up and thrown into a large lot?— Yes; and then the amount of the poor-rate would be raised by that.

1539. When you talk of the difficulty of growing corn upon small holdings, you mean that you must have a farm of sufficient size to maintain a team?— Yes; and you cannot grow corn without sheep.

1540. What sized farm is necessary to grow corn with advantage?—You cannot do with a less quantity than from 200 to 300 acres; 400 would be better, because it is a thin dry soil the greater part of the parish.

1541. And there are now a great many small holdings of persons getting a comfortable subsistence by growing fruit ?—A great many.

1542. And all those persons, must be sacrificed?—Yes; I believe there are now only three or four farms in Mereworth that exceed 40 acres, the others are in small holdings.

1543. And all those persons are getting a living by sending their fruit to this market?—Yes, and they do the work themselves.

1544. Then it follows, that if this market is closed against them, they must be thrown out of employment?—They must be worked out.

1545. Mr. Lascelles.] During the last few years has the value of fruit been steady?—We do not sell our fruit as we did 14 or 15 years ago; but the price has remained pretty steady, rather declining than going upwards, in consequence of the increased quantity; there is a great deal more sent up than there were 20 years ago; where I used to meet one cart, I now meet 20 or 30.

1546. Sir E. Knatchbull.] You stated that there were only four or five farms in your parish that exceed 40 acres, what is the extent of those four or five farms?—Lord Darlington uses 250 in Mereworth, Mr. Taylor uses 180, and I use myself about 145 acres; and then there is Mr. Fleming uses as much as I do. Then Mr. Harryman may use 40 acres; then beyond him I know none that use 40 acres. Then they go from 23 (there is one farm of 23 acres) down to two and three acres.

1547. The whole of the parish being 2,000 acres?—Yes; 1,000 in wood, and 1,000 in plantation.

1548. Chairman] If a person were to ask you your professional opinion, with a view to his own interest, as to the course that he had best take, supposing that he had 50 acres of orchard land, considering this reduction of duty, and that this is the first year of its operation, and that in this year you have had an excessively bad crop, how much should you recommend him to destroy?— I should recommend him to take up all his oldest orchards at once.

1549- But without putting it in that general point of view, can you form any general estimate of how much you should recommend him to throw out of cultivation?—No; I should require a little consideration; I should like to look at the ground.

1550- Would you not think it expedient for him to wait a few years to see what was the average supply at home ?—I am afraid he would be sinking in the meantime.

1551 But, professionally, would you not consider that the best course?—Not in all cases.

1552. Mr. Hodges.] From your knowledge of the circumstances of the persons in that county, should you say that they could afford to wait for the experience of a few years?—I should say not; I think the landlords should take the land.

1553. You have been asked as a professional man how you would advise a person under present circumstances to act; should you, under present circumstances, think of advising him to plant with the expectation of future remuneration?—No; I know that the progress of plantation is arrested this winter.

1554. In consequence of the alteration of duty?—Yes.

J555- Can you speak of your own knowledge of any land being displanted? —Yes; I have seen an orchard, half of which has been taken up.

15.56. Mr. Villiers] Has there been any planting within the last few years? —There has been considerable planting the last three or four years.

1557. But the value of fruit has been declining?—The price has kept pretty steady.

1558. Mr. Hutt] But the planting has been progressively increasing?— Yes.

1559. Sir E. Knatchbull] Up to what period ?—There has been no planting the last year.

1560. Mr. Hutt.] Is not the poor-rate very high in the parish of Mereworth ?—Not now; it has been as high as 18s. an acre.

1561. Mr. Filliers] Is that reduction owing to a greater number of the labourers being employed?—No, I do not think it is; our labourers have been well employed.

1562. Is it owing to better management?—I think matters are managed better.

1563. Is not that the effect of the new Poor Law, that persons go from your parish to seek work elsewhere?—We have not found it so. I think there is better management, and more employment has been found.

1564. Mr. Lascelles] Have wages remained the same ?—Yes; we have given none less than 2s. a day.

1565. Mr. Kinnaird] Is the workhouse in your union full at the present moment ?—I do not think it is.

1566. Mr. Lascelles.] Have the occupiers paid more in wages, though the rate of wages remains the same as it was before?—Yes ; since our fruit plantations have increased we have had more labour for them.

1567. Since the alteration of the Poor Law has there been an increase?—I do not think that there has; our work has been done about the same. I do not think there has been much increase upon that point.

1568. Mr. Hodges.] You have been employed to value many parishes under the tithe commutation?—Not many; I have valued some.

1569. In the average of fruit land what is the tithe rent that you have put upon fruit plantations as a permanent charge ?—I think the tithe upon fruit would average a guinea an acre, exclusive of the rates.

1570. How much more is that than the tithe upon land of ordinary cultivation?—It would be quite double; then, rates would bring it up to pretty nearly 30s. for the fruit land; in Mereworth we pay 22s. for the tithe and rates, which bring it up to 29 s. or 30 s.

1571. Then it would be a permanent charge of two-thirds more than for the arable land?—Yes.