The Victorian landowners of Preston

In 1873 the government produced a report listing all the landowners of England and Wales, defining a landowner as anyone owning a plot of an acre or more. Its official title was the Return of Owners of Land 1, but it soon became more popularly known as the Second Domesday Book.

Of course, it did not match the earlier Domesday survey in the details it included, merely listing the name and place of residence of the owner, the county in which the land was held, its acreage and annual rental value. But for present day historians, even those meagre details can be extremely revealing and useful. The results of the ‘Second Domesday’ were published in two volumes. The scope of the undertaking can be gauged by the fact that between them they totalled some two thousand pages, with each page containing up to 162 entries.

The first page of the entries for Lancashire

Combing through the volumes to extract all those whose place of residence was given as Preston or one of its surrounding townships yielded 467 entries, of which 336 related to land holdings in Lancashire, with the rest spread throughout the rest of England Wales.

The results were loaded into a spreadsheet. The acreage, which in the original was given in acres, roods and perches, was converted to acres expressed as a decimal, and the rental value was converted from pounds, shillings and pence into decimal currency. These conversions allowed the results to be ranked in terms of size and value. Columns were also added to the spreadsheet indicating the gender of the land owner, and whether the land was held by a company or institution rather than an individual.

There were 384 male landowners and 64 female (it is possible there may be more where no gender is specified by title and only the initial of the first name is given, but I suspect not). The 19 company and institutional holdings would probably have been in the hands of men. In the tables below, it is instructive to compare the vast difference in value between the holdings of the men and women represented.

Find the spreadsheet here:

The limitations of the returns are obvious. It would be good to have more information about the address of the landowner than simply ‘Preston’ and more than simply the county for the location of the land. But given these limitations, the results are still useful and revealing, given the importance attached to the ownership of land and property rights in Victorian Britain. It was only in 1872 that the Ballot Act was passed introducing the secret ballot for local and government elections. Prior to its passing, tenants had to be wary of voting against their landlords’ favoured candidates.

Thomas Picketty 2 has demonstrated the use of such data to measure the inequality that existed in society in the nineteenth century (and continues today) and Guy Shrubshole 3 has shown the way the rich have preserved their estates in present-day Britain. Inequality was certainly a feature of life in Victorian Preston, as the writer Edwin Waugh noted when he visited the town during the Cotton Famine (Edwin Waugh’s portrait of Preston). A good example of the vast disparity in wealth in Victorian Preston is shown here: Poverty and privilege in Victorian Preston. And many of the great landowners of Lancashire who wielded considerable influence over their tenants in the nineteenth century still retain impressive estates today (their holdings have been listed and considered here: The Great Landowners of Lancashire) .

Two examples of Preston families which proved adept at preserving the privileges were those of the Preston cotton lord Thomas Miller and the Preston bankers, the Pedders of Preston.

Members of the property-owning class in England have skilfully preserved their privileges, in ways that were described by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, and made use of by Sam Friedman and Daniel Laurison in their The Class Ceiling: Why It Pays to Be Privileged 4:

‘At root a Bourdieusian lens insists that our class background is defined by our parents’ stocks of three primary forms of capital: economic capital (wealth and income), cultural capital (educational credentials and the possession of legitimate knowledge, skills and tastes) and social capital (valuable social connections and friendships).’

The land holdings listed in the Return of Lands is one of the ways this idea of preserved privilege can be tested, for if the inherited wealth does pass down the generations it should be possible to track family land ownership through earlier surveys. In Preston, these include the Poor Tax Survey of 1732 transcribed and put on line on this website, George Lang’s survey of 1774 (again transcribed and available on this website) and the tithe schedules transcribed by the Lancashire Place Name Survey volunteers (Who owned 19th-century Preston?).

One problem of such an exercise is that it is very difficult to pin down family connections from the bare lists of owners alone, since inheritance does not necessarily preserve surnames, and many of the wealthier members of the Preston nouveau riche chose to establish themselves on country estates. As usual, more research needed.

Below are a number of extracts from the spreadsheet to illustrate the sort of information it yields. The interesting thing about the entries is the way they raise questions, such as why did the Preston and Wyre Railway Company come to have the most valuable holding? And where was the plot of one acre that was earning a Mr C. Yates £225 a year in rent?

(According to the National Archive’s currency converter, a pound in 1870 was worth approximately £62.61 at 2017 prices. A better guide to relative values is that the National Archives reckons that sum equated to five days wages for a skilled tradesman.)

The ten largest land holdings in acres

The ten largest land holdings in value

The ten land holdings with the highest per acre rental value

The ten land holdings with the highest value owned by women

———————-

  1. … Return of Owners of Land, 1873: … Presented to Both Houses of Parliment by Command of Her Majesty. United Kingdom: H.M. Stationery Office, 1875.
    https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Return_of_Owners_of_Land_1873/-RJPAAAAYAAJ?hl=en
    … Return of Owners of Land, 1873: … Presented to Both Houses of Parliment by Command of Her Majesty. United Kingdom: H.M. Stationery Office, 1875.https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Return_of_Owners_of_Land_1873/0BRPAAAAYAAJ?hl=en
  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Piketty ↩︎
  3. https://whoownsengland.org/ ↩︎
  4. Friedman, Sam, and Daniel Laurison. 2019. The Class Ceiling : Why It Pays to Be Privileged. Bristol, UK: Policy Press

———————-

For background: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_of_Owners_of_Land,_1873

Leave a comment