Back to Cambridgeshire’s publications
STEEPLE
MORDEN,CAMBS.
Coprolites,
phosphatic nodules which were in great demand in the 1850‘s and 1860‘s for the
manufacture of artificial manures, had been found in large quantities in the
nearby parishes of Hinxworth and Ashwell when, after enclosure, drainage work
exposed them just below the surface. Where the deposit was found on only a
small scale the landowner often had them raised by the tenants who would have
used their own farm labourers but where they were found on large estates then,
either the land was sold to a coprolite contractor or, more common, tenders
were invited from contractors whose capital allowed them to purchase the
tramways, washmills, pumps and other plant, tools and machinery necessary for a
large undertaking.
As
the men working the nodule bed on Ashwell Northfield gradually progressed north
and northeastwards, and the workings in Abington
Pigotts to the east expanded it became apparant to
one of the major landowners in the parish, St.John‘s
College, Cambridge, that the deposit was also to be found running under their
estate in Steeple Morden. Suspecting an adjoining landowner of having sold
coprolite land on November 16th 1863 the bursar, Mr Reyner,
wrote to Rev. G. Pigotts of Abington Pigotts regarding North Brook End.
”If
I‘m correctly informed you have sold some in an adjoining field. If so would
you kindly inform me
1.
What royalty you receive per acre?
2.
Whether in addition the purchaser compensates your tenant and if so what amount
per acre?.
3.
At what time the agreement was made?• (St.John‘s Mun.Box.162)
An
afterthought led the bursar to add a second letter in that day‘s post asking
Pigott how many tons per annum were obtained and what royalty was paid to the
landowner. Perhaps the impersonal tone of the communication led to Rev. Pigotts
replying the next day that he was unable to supply the information as, •...your
informant is wrong in supposing I have sold any land in North Brook End.• (St.John‘s Estate Box 162) News of the college‘s interest in
having the coprolites raised and their apparant
ignorance of the procedure and terms, resulted a week later in Reyner receiving a letter from Herbert Fordham, an Ashwell
landowner writing from, ”Odsey Mills, Manure and
Coprolite Works.•
”I
understand your College has some coprolite ground for sale at Little Morden and
as I have some large works adjoining I should be glad of the offer of it.• (St.John‘s Coll.Mun.Box.162)
This
was declined as a week or so later Reyner was
approached by Swann Jepps Wallis, a Duxford coprolite
merchant who had workings in many of the villages on the coprolite belt. He
offered them £80 per acre and gave the bursar of King‘s College as a reference
which seemed to clinch the deal over Mr Fordham. Where his adjoining works were
is uncertain as no further documentation of them has emerged. A formal
agreement was written up and on 6th January 1864 Wallis was given permission to
raise them from the 7a.3r.11p. field shown on the map
on page .. Wallis engaged a foreman, Abraham Pearman,
who took on a gang of men and got started at Michaelmas but the college was concerned about their slow progress as, apparantly, they had only worked 1a.2r.0p. by January 1869.
One
of the Fordham family, Henry George Fordham, was a fellow of the Geological
Society and made a collection of local fossils on which he wrote a paper in the Proceeding of the
Geological Association. An extract is included below.
"The
position of the Greensand in the pits made to obtain the nodules, viz. at the
bottom, makes it almost impossible to collect from the bed in situ, and, as the
marl when thrown up is generally immediately removed to the washing mill,
almost the only way to obtain fossils is to search the heaps of washed nodules;
this mode of collecting is in many respects unsatisfactory, as the fragile
shells are broken and destroyed in the washing mill, and all the specimens
suffer attrition. It must also be born in mind that the proportionate quantity
of fossils must be greater when compared with the heaps of nodules (which
themselves form perhaps 1/20th or less of the whole deposit), when compared
with the entire mass of the bed itself. I have had, however, on one occasion,
when some of the marl was dug up and left for some months exposed to the
atmosphere, an opportunity of obtaining some of the more fragile specimens, and
of getting more accurate idea of the comparative rarity of different species.
LIST OF FOSSILS FROM THE UPPER GREENSAND, MORDEN AND ASHWELL.
REPTILIA- PISCES -
Ichthyosaurus
campylodon - Saurocephalus lanciformis-
Teeth, vertebrae, and fragements of Teeth,
Rare.
other bones. Not very common. Edaphon-
Polyptychodon- Fragments.
Rare
Teeth. Rare. Gryodus-
Plesiosaurus- Palatal
teeth.
Very rare.
Vertebrae. Rare Lamma-
Teeth. Common
Otodus appendiculatus-
Teeth. Common.
Vertebrae. Rather rare.
MOLLUSCA- MOLLUSCA-
Cephalopoda- Lamellibranchiata-
Ammonites rostratus. Rather common. Avicula gryphaeoides. Very
common.
A. cratus.
Rather Common. Pecten quinque-costatus. Very rare.
A.caelonotus. Rather common. MOLLUSCOIDA-
A. pachys.
Rare. Brachiopoda-
Hamites. Rare. Terebratula biplicata. Very common.
Baculites. Rare. T. obtusa. Rare.
Belemnites minimus. Common. T. semiglobosa.(?) Rather rare.
B. ultimus.
Rather common. T. ovata. Rather rare.
Gasteropoda- Terebratulina gracilis. Common.
Pleurotomaria (?rodani, D'Orb.)
Terebratella. (kingena) lima. Rare.
Rather common Rhynchonella.
sulcate. Rare.
P. Brongniartianum.
Rare. R. lineolata
var. Carteri. Very rare.
P. semiconcava.
Very rare. CRUSTACEA-
P. Gibbsii (?) Very rare. Hoploparia -
Fragments. Very rare.
P.
Rouxii (?) D'Orb. Rare. ANNELIDA-
Solarium ornqtum. Rare. Serpula. Rather common.
Dentalium elliptium. Rather common. ECHINIDERMATA-
Lamellibranchiata- Spines. Rather rare.
Ostrea vesicularis, Lam. Very common. COELENTERATA
O. frons.
Common. Smilotrochus elongatus. (Duncan)
O. macroptera.
Very Rare. Rare.
Exogyra. sp. Very rare. PROTOZOA-
Plicatula sigillina. Very
common. Ventriculites.
P. pectinoides
var. inflata. Sow. Common. Chenendopora. rather common.
Spondylus truncatus. Rather rare. Parkeria. Rather rare.
Nucula simplex. Very rare. DRIFT WOOD, perforated.
Inoceramus. Rare.
Radiolites Mortoni. Rare.
Taking
this collection as affording a fair representation of the fauna of the Upper
Greensand in this locality, and comparing it with the collection in the
Woodward Museum at Cambridge, the almost entire absence of Echini (except the
spines), the great rarity of Crustacea, the general
absence of di-myrarian Lamellibranchiata,
gasteropoda (except Pleurotomaria
and Solarium, Dentalium) and Nautilus, and the
commonness of Belemnites, are perhaps worthy of note. The specimens are also
much less perfect than at Cambridge, and are gerally
very badly preserved."
(Fordham,
H. F.G.S. 'On a Collection of Fossils from the Upper Greensand, of Morden,
Cambridgeshire.' Proc. Geol. Assoc. Vol. IV)
Where
Flecks Lane meets North Brook End a public house called ”The
Diggings• was put up for the coprolite diggers, possibly by the Fordhams who
also had interests in the brewing business. (CambRO. R60/7/1,p33; 296/SP
1163; Royston Crow 10th July 1885.) This should not necessarily explain the
men‘s lack of progress; it was more likely that the seam was a poor one or at
such a depth that it incurred greater operating costs, making it less
profitable at the time. Other agreements were actually written up including a
specification as to how many acres were to be worked a year but St.John‘s had omitted this.
The
first geological map actually showed workings about one and a half miles north
of the village on both sides of the road near North Brook Farm and these can be
seen marked on the map on page . (I• Geol.46NE) They
were clearly all over a low ridge of chalk marl which overlay the nodule bed in
the greensand which in turn lay over the gault clay.
Unfortunately, the only documentation for this has been from the college
archives but it does seem other landowners had similarly given leases to either
their farmers or outside contractors.
One
byproduct raised from the pits, unwanted by the
manure manufacturers, was gravel and it appeared that Wallis‘
foreman, Abraham Pearman, had sold 100 tons to
the Surveyor of the Highways without getting full permission from the college.
Concerned about such impropriety, Reyner visited the
workings but, on seeing great heaps of sifted gravel that had been brought up
by the workmen, he conceded that its sale should go ahead - but for the benefit
of the college. In May, David Greig, of the Arrington
and Caxton Highways Board in Melbourn wrote to Reyner offering 1/- per cubic yard of gravel.
”The
getting of it will be considerable therefore cannot give more and do hope that
you take into consideration the excessive traffic on these roads caused by the
digging of coprolites and that you will acceed to the
above proposals.• (St.John‘s Mun.
Box.Steeple Morden)
The
number of tumbrils laden with fossils trundling the
four and a half miles down to Odsey and Ashwell
station must have done considerable damage to these and other roads in the area
but would have provided a much welcome extra source of income for the carters.
(See Bassingbourn) The extra income from both the coprolite and the gravel
would have been welcome for any landowner, especially since farm rents were
only between 20s. and 30s. per
acre. Interestingly, the college‘s 209a.1r.9p. Kirkby Manor Farm in Ashwell was
valued in July 1865 at 386 with a rental of 27/- an acre.
Wallis‘ workmen had dug a lot more over the winter of 1870 and by
April had dug 3a.0r.16p. ”We have been rapidly pushing them on as our trade is
better.• By early January 1871 Wallis approached the
college wanting permission to dig the gardens in front of the cottages, ”as the
coprolites under the garden are good and at about 8‘ to 8‘6• depth instead of
13‘ to 13‘6• as in the field.• It was agreed he work them to within 60 poles or
so of the cottages and to have it finished in six or eight weeks. The
cottagers, apparantly, were happy enough with the
compensation; their major concern was that they had somewhere to plant their
vegetables. The college arranged for a survey to be done which revealed his men
had dug 5a.2r.27p., not including the cottage garden, so the Bursar gave
permission on the following terms:-
1.
You do not approach the cottage walls nearer than say 10 feet.
2.
That in consideration of the coprolites being comparatively near the surface in
the garden the compensation to the college be
increased from 80 to 100.
3.
That the cottagers be allowed by you every facility for growing potatoes on the
land already dug but not filled up.
(St.John‘s Mun. Box.Steeple Morden)
Wallis
had dug over 1a.2r.27p. of the garden by August,
paying the college £153 10s.0d. In fact by 1872, when all the work had finished
on their land, they had realised £387, the equivalent value of a small estate.
Although there was only one reference to Henry Fordham‘s workings in the area
there may well have been other workings on their estate but no evidence of them
has emerged. Another large landowner, the Earl of Hardwick, owned considerable
areas of land in the parish and the fact that he reputedly made 5000 per year
from leasing land for coprolites, suggests that his Steeple Morden Estate would
certainly have been worked, but again no documentation has emerged apart from
the extent of the workings shown on the geological map.
This
was confirmed by the 1871 census which showed a far larger number of men were
employed in the diggings than would have been needed on Wallis‘s small field.
In fact, it revealed that the number of dwellings in the village had doubled to
over 200 which must have been directly related to the growing affluence of the
inhabitants due to the better wages of the diggers than farm labourers.
(V.C.H.Cambs.,vol.8 p112.) Whilst there were 96 farm
labourers, there were three gravel diggers and 54 fossil diggers. William
Parish was the 30 year old ”Fossil Foreman• living on Hay Street and also
involved was a fossil washer, three fossil carters and three engine drivers who
may well also have been employed hauling truckloads of the washed and sorted
fossils to Odsey station where Fordham‘s had their
coprolite mill. Here there were two millers, Edward Jarman
and William Whitehead, a ”labourer in mill• and a
miller‘s carter. All told 69 men were involved with ages ranging from 14 to 65
which, and considering only 96 men were working on the farms, it showed the
importance of the work for the village economy. (CambRO.RG 10/1359; Rep.Com.Univ.
Income.p379.) The table on page .. shows how it was
predominantly older man‘s work with an average age of 29.9 and, unlike in many
other coprolite villages, most of the men were locals with only a few born
outside the parish.
There
had been an incident at coprolite works in the area which must have directly
influenced the diggers in this parish. The early 1870s saw a general rise in
wages for many sections of society and in in early
summer that year the men found a successful means of convincing their employers
of their claim.
”ASHWELL
- We understand there has been a strike at the coprolite works in this
neighbourhood and that now labourers are in demand at the increased rate of
wages. It is an opportunity for many to improve their position.• (Potton Journal, 17th June 1871)
In
September 1871, Abraham Pearman, who was living in
one of the cottages on St.John‘s estate, was
concerned about extracting the remaining coprolites at North Brook End. It
appeared they lay beneath some old buildings in front of the cottages and,
through Wallis, suggested to the college their replacement with the fossils
extracted in the meantime. The college agreed that the costs should come from
their coprolite fund and once the coprolites were worked new ones were erected, ”comprising a potatoe and coal
place for each cottage with an oven in common.•
By
the autumn of 1872 Wallis wrote to the college,
”We
have finished at Morden with the exception of the mound where we washed the
coprolites and one or two small pieces that my foreman does not consider
sufficiently dry to put the mound on to.•
(St.John‘s Mun. Box.Steeple Morden)
The
surveyor‘s map on page shows the men had dug 6a.3r.31p in total, thereby him
having paid 589 to the college. (SJC Archives SB21.162 coprolite papers) As
royalties were by this time over 100 per acre, the prosperity of those involved
naturally attracted the attention of the local Income Tax assessor, William Warboys. He wrote to Reyner in
August that year asking how much the college had realised for the purpose of
assessing the tax but Reyner argued that, only
receiving royalties, it ought to be Wallis who was the one to be taxed so he
sent him form 11B, Schedule D. Warboys wrote back
informing him that, ”all parties who have sold any coprolite land are charged
the royalty they receive from the purchaser during the year.• Deciding not to
implicate the college in financial wrangling, the next day he sent a cheque for
42 6s. 0d. being 20% of the Property Tax. (St. John‘s Mun.
Box. Steeple Morden; Rep.Univ.Income,
St.John‘s College 1871)
In
early summer the next year, another of the Cambridge college‘s who owned
adjacent land in the parish had their farm valued when the previous tenant‘s 21
year lease had run out. The new tenant, James Hunt, moved in to Jesus College
Farm and, probably as they had expected, their surveyor, Charles Bidwell,
reported that,
”Nos.
1 - 12, about 40 acres, contain coprolites. Some of
the adjoining land has been dug and they would readily let at a high price per
acre as they are within easy distance of the surface and adjoining good roads.• (CambRO.Bidwell 28 p256)
They
duly had an extensive survey done by Edward Long whose sketch can be seen on page .. The fact that the Earl of Hardwick owned the
intervening land and the extent of the workings shown on the geological map,
leads one to suspect it would almost certainly have been dug, as would that
owned by Mr Lilley. It was not until April 1877, however, that the bursar was
ready to do anything about it. Luke Griffin, a Cambridge coprolite merchant,
ran a number of works for the Lawes Artificial Manure Company which had been
set up to produce the superphosphate back in the early 1840‘s and he reminded
the bursar,
12
Brunswick Place, Cambridge. Jesus College, Dear Mr.Corrie,
I made some time ago a personal application on behalf of Mr J.B. Lawes of 29
Mincing Lane, London about some land containing coprolites at Morden in the
occupation of Mr Hunt. At that time I think you were given to believe there was
only a small portion which contained coprolites. From further enquiries I
believe there are from 25 - 30 acres. Mr. Lawes is quite willing to pay 1,000 -
1,200 and further sums as the work advances...• Luke Griffin
(Jesus College Mun. Steeple Morden)
Lawes‘ company had been working the coprolites in Ashwell,
Hinxworth, Astwick, Dunton and many of the villages
westwards towards Shitlington, as it was known as
then. It seemed that extensive deposits remained to be worked in the area and
as one of their major competitors, the Ipswich based manure company, Colchester
and Co., had workings in Abington Pigotts and Bassingbourn, they wanted a
footing in the area. Their offer of only 40 per acre was far below the current
royalties, so, presumably aware of this, Colchester made an offer the college
couldn‘t really refuse. Jesus College‘s surveyor reported to Corrie, hinting
that there may well have been problems over other similar agreements in the past.
”The
price, upon seeing some of the coprolites raised, I think is a very fair one -
and the terms such as to avoid disputes... My own experience and recent
observations made upon works carried on by various Raisers have proved that the
yield or number of tons per acre in this district as in nearly all fleet work,
is much smaller in comparison with that of Central Cambridgeshire, as well as
the quality being inferior. The Royalty in no case
approaching that of the latter district...•
Quantity Approx.quantity containg cops. 11,12 Honey Hill 27.3.11
5.2. 0 16 Nut Grove Close 4.3.38 4.3.38 17,18 Great
Close, Calves Pightle 19,20 Hog yard, Cottages &
buildings 22.1.37 21.0. 0 55.1. 6
31.1.38
(Jesus College, Mun. Steeple Morden)
He
advised the college that, ”The offer of digging these portions (17 and 19) for
coprolites presenting a very favourable opportunity for so doing if properly
conducted.• The college agreed and in October 1877, Rev. Corrie, signed an
agreement allowing Edward Colchester to raise them at the same 100 an acre
Wallis had paid in 1872. He and William Colchester had worked many of the
parishes between here and Cambridge and at this time Edward was living in Down
Hall Farm whilst he was working the Abington Pigotts coprolites.
The
diggers themselves had a reputation locally for drunkenness, brawling and theft
and in January 1878, one of the local coprolite diggers, Samuel Wenham, was
sent for 21 days imprisonment hard labour after he admitted assaulting and
beating up another local labourer before Christmas. (Royston Crow,11th Jan.1878) Whether he was offered similar employment
when he came out was not recorded but in the Spring,
when the work got under way, a considerable number of oak trees had to be
felled and their roots raised in order to allow the fields to be worked. In the
meantime it appeared that the tenant farmer, James Hunt, had died and John
Hunt, probably his son, took over the 174a.0r.3p. Farm and
Homestead paying the sum of 284.1.3d. Colchester made a further
agreement for 7a.3r.2p. so that by Summer 1878 the
land in his occupation was 25 acres. By February 1879 he had dug 5a.1r.9p. using two mills, one horse-operated and the other steam
driven. Later, he made another request to get the coprolites from under the
gardens on the farm and Hunt was contacted with the request that he, ”be pleased to oblige the College by giving up the two
cottages from Michaelmas last by their deducting the rent of the same.•
The
continued availability of deposits encouraged Frederick King, who had taken
over the coprolite mill at Odsey, to purchase
2a.1r.8p in North Brooke End, a plot adjacent to Jesus College land, ”believed
to contain coprolites.• He paid 170 which showed that at that time prices had
dropped significantly. (CambRO.296B949.4; Royston Crow 29th May 1885) It would
appear most likely he arranged to raise the coprolites but no documentary
evidence for him has emerged. The final four years of the 1870‘s had been very
difficult for farmers with heavy rain, bad harvests and low prices resulting
from foreign competition of cheap meat and grain. So, to secure regular
coprolites royalties would have been a welcome source of income for farmers and
landowners alike. Free trade also allowed massive imports of foreign phosphate
supplies which forced prices down so low that many diggings came to a halt.
Tension
in the village was created when men were laid off. One instance was reported in
November 1878 when it appeared that David Hall, a local farmer, had just laid
off one of his labourers working a fossil pit on his land. It appeared that
David Covington had gone for a beer when he was supposed to be at work but was
seen and fired the next morning. In revenge he set alight to Hall‘s straw stack
and, when caught, shouted, ”Now take me - I‘d have seven
years for it; I‘ll never go into a coprolite pit any more.• Moses Chamberlain,
another coprolite digger from Bassingbourn, said he had met Covington in Sidney
Wilmott‘s beerhouse where,
although he did not go into details, he must have been aware of some greivance as he heard him say he was going to set it
alight. ”Prisoner had been in the fossil pit that week and had offered to sell
his books.• It seemed either the pressure of work or
some personal problem had arisen as Covington was reported to have added, ”I
don‘t mean to do any more stone digging.• He was sent for trial and whether he
did do any more diggings in not known but grievance seemed to be quite
widespread in the parish as there were at least three more cases of incendiarism in the village over that Christmas. (Royston
Crow, 13th November,1878)
It
seemed though that both King and Colchester were keen to secure cheaper
coprolite supplies for the local manure companies so they could compete with
the larger coastal manufacturers who were depending more and more on these
overseas supplies. This continued demand led to a slight change in the
employment structure of the diggers. The 1881 census showed the industry
employed less than half the 1871 figure with only 31 men and boys involved.
There was no one recorded as ”foreman• in the village and out of the 69
involved a decade earlier, surprisingly only three were still working, Thomas
Knott aged 39, William Ball, 45 and Samuel Wenham, 36. The work was still for
the older men as the average age was 26.8 with the eldest 45 and the youngest
12 but it is noticeable how much the 26 - 30 age group had declined. As only
58% were born locally and many were from other coprolite villages it suggests a
number had moved into the village to continue the work when it had finished in
their areas. The bulk of those employed earlier must have either gone back to
farm or other work or, like in many villages at this time,
they left to find work in the towns.
Age
Distribution of Steeple Morden‘s Coprolite Workers
Age
Group 1871 1881 11 - 14 1 2 15 - 19 5 5 20 - 25 11 10
26 - 30 16 3 Over 30 27 11
Locations
of the Coprolite Workers
1871
1881 Cheney St. 3 0 Church St. 13 6 Mill St. 3 0 Odsey
Way 4 0 Nr.Station 2 0 Gatley
End 4 0 Wet Bottom 2 0 Notts Bridge 8 0 The Green 6 2
Hay St. 11 4 North Brooke End 9 14 Bogs Gap 2 1 Brooke End 2 1 Flecks Lane 0 3
˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜- Total 69 31 ˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜-
Although
there was further mention of Mr. King, Colchester continued his workings in the
parish throughout the 1880‘s and 1890‘s. There have been suggestions that with
a poor economic situation many farmers were unwilling to pay high prices for
fertilisers and were actually processing ground coprolites on their farms.
These were mixed with sulphuric acid and once dried and the mixture spread on
the fields. This was much cheaper than the manufactured variety. Well over 30
acres were dug by Colchester who was also working the deposits in Abington
Pigotts, Bassingbourn and Litlington and it seems he would have arranged for
their transport by train to Burwell where he had his company‘s manure works.
Sometime
in the 1880‘s he, like many other entrepreneurs of the day, went into the
cement business, an activity developed on the chalk in this area of South West
Cambridgeshire but, even in 1891, he described himself as a ”Coprolite Raiser
employing 176 men.• (See Bassingbourn.) From the accounts of Jesus College his
men worked both cement and coprolites right through the 1890‘s finishing in
1905, the last evidence of diggings before the revival during the first World
War. (Kelly‘s Dir.1883, 1892,1896; Jesus Coll.Mun. estate papers 1877-86, Account books 1878 -1905)
Over
forty years of such an intriguing industry has left little mark on the village,
in fact, few residents even know about it. ”The Diggings• was converted to a
dwelling when the industry finally fell into decline and the brewer‘s influence
amongst the diggers seemed to have been counteracted by a determined
evangelical effort by the Methodists. They had great revival campaigns in 1859
and 1870 and were active among the coprolite diggers. By the mid 1870‘s they
had enlarged the chapel to provide a school, a library, and a vestry and were
said to have 400 adherents, almost half the population in 1873 and 500 by 1885.
(Cambs.Ind.Press,2nd September 1960 p9;
C.R.O.,R60/7/1,pp12-13,
The
only first-hand evidence of the work was from Fred Watts, of Cheyney Street, who left school at nine unable to write and
by 11 he ”earned 18/- (sic) a week sorting flints from coprolites.• (Mary Murfitt, CambR.O. R60/7/1) Today, little can be seen on the fields to show they were
once dug to over ten feet. The terms of the agreements compelled the
contractors, once the fossils were removed, to fill in the pits and replace the
topsoil over the slurry from the washmills. The field was then supposed to be
levelled for subsequent agricultural use but where white, chalky patches occur
on the fields this may well be evidence of poor workmanship.
There
are no records of any archaeological finds being made by the diggers as
happened in many parishes along the coprolite belt but that doesn‘t mean the
occasional artefact did not find its way into a digger‘s pocket.
Although
the numbers employed were not huge, their higher wages would have providing
many in the parish with a better standard of living than as agricultural
labourers. Certainly there were still may poor
families at the time but this new industry must have helped the parish escape
many of the effects of the Agricultural Revolution; emigration slowed down,
cottage industries expanded and diversified and a number of new skills were
learned, particularly in the use of machinery. When the industry died out,
however, in the 1880‘s, it came at a time of general agricultural depression
which had led to falling farm rents, a decline in the amount of pasture and
arable land and a change to vegetables and orchards. Along with the
introduction of farm machinery, this further reduced farmers‘
demand for labour and the village experienced considerable emigration
once more, with families leaving the parish to find alternative employment in
the towns.