Property rights in The Woodlanders

[kev67]

Property inheritance in The Woodlanders seems as convoluted as in Wuthering Heights. It seems copy-holders had the right to pass on their cottages to their heirs in perpetuity, although they still had to pay rent to the landlord. Unfortunately, some of the villagers exchanged their copy-hold for some sort of lease-hold, which would expire after the current tenants' grandsons died. After that, control of the cottages would revert to the landlord, who could evict his tenants if he (in this case, she) wants. Apparently the deal was that the landlord paid for the properties to be repaired and in exchange his heir received the properties three generations later. (This seems similar to the situation in Tess with John Durbeyfield). The terms of the lease must have been quite confusing, especially for simple peasant folk. First, for some reason, the tenants were paying rent to Giles Winterbourne rather than the landlord, Mrs Charmond. Second, Giles Winterboune receives rents for several cottages, but the leasehold on all of them expires when Mr South dies. That is odd: you would think that the leasehold would expire on each property individually. Third, I think chapter 15 said that Giles Winterbourne received the rents for these leases because his mother was from the South family, but you would think the properties would be passed down the male line. Why wouldn't Mr South inherit them? I can only think that Mr South's father was the younger brother of Giles' grandfather (which would make Giles Winterbourne and Marty South second cousins). Lastly, the contract gave Winterbourne the option of extending his leasehold, but he did not get around to doing it until too late. That seems like an odd clause. Why wouldn't anyone in his position not want to extend his lease, although there was a cost associated. I have to give some credit to Giles Winterbourne because I doubt I could understand a contract like that. OTOH, it was remiss of him to leave it so late to check the lease.

[kiki1982]

ooo, that seems interesting. I'll have to read that one soon.

[kev67]

I was interested that Giles Winterbourne was referred to as a yeoman, so I looked up the definition. A yeoman was actually quite some way up the social scale. They were usually farmers who owned their own land. The definition seems to have been slightly out-dated by the time Hardy wrote The Woodlanders, but I suppose it still applied to rural folk. Wikipedia says that in archaic times there were eight main classes:

• Cottagers and labourers
• Husbandmen (or other trademen)
• Yeomen
• Gentry/gentlemen
• Knight
• Baronet
• Peer (noble/archbishop)
• Royal

Wikipedia also says that vagabonds, drifters and outcasts were a lower caste than cottagers, and that merchants could be placed between yeomen and gentry.

This is quite interesting, because at the start of the book, Winterbourne is not really poor. He works hard, but he receives rents from several tenants and has a retainer working for him, Robert Creedle. Mr Melbury, his wife and daughter Grace, are in the midway class between yeoman and gentry. Melbury aspires to join the the gentry, or at least for his daughter to marry into it. Previously, he had been happy for his daughter to marry Winterbourne. Mrs Charmond and Dr Fitzpiers are gentry. They don't have to do any manual work. If they work at all it is in the professions. The rustics defer to the likes of Charmond and Fitzpiers due to their family histories, as they would not for Mr Melbury, despite his wealth. Marty South's father was a tradesman, so I suppose she would be in the husbandman class. I think Robert Creedle would be in the cottager/labourer class.