Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
Enfranchisement Of Farm Land
8 Answers
I am doing some research into the history of the area in which I live and frequently come across documents of `Enfranchisement` with regard to farmland. Am I correct in assuming this is a legal term for the conveyance of the freehold of the land from one party (eg Lord of The Manor) to another (eg a tenant farmer)?
If my assumption is correct why not simply use the term `Conveyance`?
Clarification would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
If my assumption is correct why not simply use the term `Conveyance`?
Clarification would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Sellergarth. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Found this information
Electoral system before 1832
The electoral system before 1832 was clearly corrupt. A borough member of Parliament (MP) had to own land worth £300 a year; a county MP £600. In the counties the voters had to possess land worth £2 a year; in the boroughs the right to vote varied, from all the freemen to burgage holders (people who paid rent to the lord of the manor), or scot-and-lot voters (who paid certain taxes). Bribery of voters was common, particularly in the rotten (or pocket) boroughs (constituencies which returned members to Parliament despite having small numbers of electors), where one man could have the patronage of two MPs. Other elections were marred by violence and intimidation; voting was open at the hustings, so voters could be held to account after the election. Most of all, the system was out of date – desolate boroughs like Old Sarum returned two MPs, whereas Birmingham, Leeds, and Manchester did not have the right to elect MPs to Parliament. As a result of the Industrial Revolution, the middle class were growing in power, and demanding political representation.
Electoral system before 1832
The electoral system before 1832 was clearly corrupt. A borough member of Parliament (MP) had to own land worth £300 a year; a county MP £600. In the counties the voters had to possess land worth £2 a year; in the boroughs the right to vote varied, from all the freemen to burgage holders (people who paid rent to the lord of the manor), or scot-and-lot voters (who paid certain taxes). Bribery of voters was common, particularly in the rotten (or pocket) boroughs (constituencies which returned members to Parliament despite having small numbers of electors), where one man could have the patronage of two MPs. Other elections were marred by violence and intimidation; voting was open at the hustings, so voters could be held to account after the election. Most of all, the system was out of date – desolate boroughs like Old Sarum returned two MPs, whereas Birmingham, Leeds, and Manchester did not have the right to elect MPs to Parliament. As a result of the Industrial Revolution, the middle class were growing in power, and demanding political representation.
Nowadays 'enfranchisement' normally refers to the purchase of the freehold by the holder of a long lease (leasehold enfranchisement) but historically it just meant freeing the land of any obligations which attached to it. What,in particular,the obligations were in your cases may be discernible from the context, perhaps. It may be that they were obligations to give a percentage of produce or to work the land.
Have a look at this. A blast from the past for law students of my generation who had to learn all this (and, as you see, had forgotten it)
http:// en.wiki pedia.o rg/wiki /Copyho ld
http://