There are no Acts specifically for enclosing common arable fields in Wales, nor any in which the phraseology of the preamble clearly indicates the existence in Wales of land possessing all three of the essential characteristics of English common field: (1) intermixed ownership or occupation, (2) absence of adequate hedges or other obstacles to the passage of men and animals from one holding to another, (3) common rights exercisable over the tilled land. But there were[105] in Wales open tilled fields in which properties and holdings were intermixed--that is, land possessing the first two characteristics. Several Welsh Acts for enclosing commonable waste also enclose “intermixed lands,” and one (1843, c. 14) is for the enclosure in Llandudno and three neighbouring villages, of “Divers Commons, commonable lands and waste grounds, Heaths, open and Common and other Fields and Waste lands, and other Common lands and Waste grounds, which lie intermixed in small parcels, and are inconveniently situated for the use and enjoyment of the several proprietors.” [105] Many townships in North Wales still contain “quilleted” areas, _i.e._, enclosed fields containing unenclosed strips of land belonging to a different owner or owners from that of the rest of the field. Such scattered “quillets” are, as in Berkshire, frequently glebe land. The following are the reports on the subject by the Board of Agriculture reporters in 1793 and 1794:-- “Open or Common Fields are rarely met with in South Wales. It is a mode of cultivation only practised in a few instances, where ecclesiastical and private property are blended.” (John Fox, “Agriculture of Glamorgan,” p. 41.) “The only tract like a common field is an extent of very productive barley land, reaching on the coast from Aberavon to Llanrhysted. This quarter is much intermixed, and chiefly in small holdings.” (Thomas Lloyd, “Agriculture of Cardigan,” p. 29.) _Carmarthen._ “I do not know of any considerable extent of open common field in the county.” (Charles Hassell, “Agriculture of Carmarthen,” p. 21.) _Pembroke._ “In the neighbourhood of St. David’s considerable tracts of open field lands are still remaining which is chiefly owing to the possessions of the church being intermixed with private property.” (Charles Hassell, “Agriculture of Pembroke,” p. 20.) _Radnor._ “Here are no Common Fields.” (John Clark, “Agriculture of Radnor,” p. 21.) _Flint._ “There are no common fields, or fields in run-rig, in this county, except between Flint and St. Asaph, and it is in intention to divide and inclose them.” (George Kay, “Agriculture of Flint,” p. 4.) _Cærnarvon._ “Run-rig. There are no lands of this description that I could hear of, but there is a good deal of mixed property that might be exchanged.” (George Kay, “Agriculture of Cærnarvon.”)