Areas ascertained from the tithe documents 163,823 Estimated additional areas 9,229 ─────── Total 173,052 ═══════ No probable error in the additional estimate in this calculation would have an appreciable effect on the total. Next, as we have noticed above, the “areas ascertained” require correction. This it is much more difficult to supply satisfactorily; all that we can do is to determine--(1) whether the number given is likely to err by excess or by defect; (2) whether the error is likely to be large. The main purpose of the return was to establish the total amount of waste land subject to common rights, and the proportion of such land likely to be capable of cultivation. This part of the work was done with great care, and particularly with great care not to include any land which was not certainly subject to common rights. The final figure arrived at was certainly considerably in defect through the documents on which it was based failing to mention common rights in all cases where they existed. The part of the return relating to common field lands, on the other hand, was considered of less importance; the explanatory letter says with regard to them:-- “The common field lands are generally distinguishable by the particular manner in which they are marked on the tithe maps, and their extent has been estimated by these maps.” This means that areas on the tithe maps subdivided by dotted lines were assumed to be common field lands. This method had the advantage of comprehensiveness--it is probable that scarcely any common field land escaped notice, if there were a tithe map for the parish in which it existed. I have only detected one error of omission. The common fields of Eakring were very considerably in excess of the 54 acres at which they were estimated. But on the other hand it has the disadvantage of including with common field lands numerous cases of properties or holdings which were inadequately divided from one another by fences or hedges, but which were not common fields. But it is very hard to say precisely what percentage ought to be deducted to allow for this error. Generalising from all the cases in which I have been able to put estimates for particular parishes to a test, I should say that more than one-sixth, but less than one-third of the total should be deducted. Taking the larger fraction, so as to leave the remainder under-estimated, rather than over-estimated, we have-- Acres. Area of common field lands, by estimate above 173,052 Less one-third 57,684 ─────── 115,368