« PreviousContinue »
would, if given in favour of the Cranborne, and that his deer defendant, most seriously affect were lawfully feeding there. the value of estates, not only in Mr. Sergeant Lens, in an elothe parish of Tisbury, but in quent address, explained to the every parish throughout the king- jury that the question upon these dom where a modus in lieu of pleadings involved the right of tithe was paid.
Lord Rivers to exercise the priVerdicts were found in favour vilege of his Chase, not only upon of the parishioners, and in sup- the land in which the defendants port of all the moduses except in this case were supposed to have that for heifers, which was not trespassed, but over a very eninsisted on, as being considered larged tract of country in the to be included in the modus for three counties of Dorset, Wilts,
and Southampton, in all of which,
during the lapse of many centuWilts Assizes, July.--Lord Rivers ries, far beyond the reach of v. Thomas King and two others. — memory or tradition, the noble This suit was instituted to ascer- lord, and all those from whom he tain the boundaries of the Chase claimed, had exercised those priof Cranborne; and involved, on vileges. He said, that the rights one side, the most extensive roy- of the forest and chase, now to be alty that was ever claimed by any exerted over this vast district, subject, or perhaps by any sove however obnoxious they might be reign prince; and on the other, to the feelings of those whone the independent enjoyment of they affected-however injurious their property by all the owners to the interests of individuals of the soil throughout the range were grounded in the ancient conof that wide domain.
stitution of England, and were The pleadings were shortly ex protected by that law which held plained by Mr. Baily, who stated, every right as sacred, and would that it was an action brought never permit the irritated feelings against the defendants for enter of men to justify the invasion of ing Cranborne-chase in a certain any right. He said, it was withpart, within that county, called out dispute that Lord Rivers was Trow-down, and with their dogs, entitled to the ancient royalty of against the will of Lord Rivers, the Chase of Cranborne, and that chasing and hunting his deer; within that Chase, however straitwhich trespass the defendants had ened or extended, his deer were justified, on the ground that entitled to run without molestaTrow-down was the freehold es tion; that the only question to be tate of the defendant King, that now determined
that of the deer were wrongfully eating boundary ; that all objections to his grass there, and that he and the oppressive nature of his right, the other defendants, bis servants, and all clamour respecting its with his dogs, drove them off his origin, or the detriment which land; to which plea the noble others sustained from its exercise, plaintiff had replied, that Trow. would be misapplied to the case. down was part of his Chase of The jury had nothing to determine
but a dry question of boundary; appurtenant might be, and its and he would undertake to define narrowest bounds were, in fact, the boundary now claimed by his admitted to be much more exnoble client, wide as it would ap- tensive. The boundary which pear, with as much certainty and he claimed had been defined by a precision as that of any parish in map made under the direction of the county. He should be able the King's Exchequer in the reign to define such boundary, not of James the First; a Court of merely by evidence of the exercise the Chase had always subsisted, of all the privileges incidental to and had always exercised its juthe Chase in various parts of that risdiction over persons residing extended district in times of high without the limits which the deantiquity, and in modern times fendants would endeavour to predown to the moment of his ad- scribe to the owner of the Chase; dressing the jury, but by ancient and chiminage, which was a toll decisions of courts of competent payable by persons entering the jurisdiction, in proceedings by Chase at a certain period of the which the exercise of such pri- year, had always been received at vileges was resisted and such the extreme point of the extended boundary disputed. The rights boundary. The rights of Lord were always deemed oppressive Rivers might seem doubtful, from by those whom they affected, and the moderation with which they many attempts had been made had been exercised ;, in the outto confine their applications to ward parts of his franchise they narrower limits, but such at- had, during a long period, hardly tempts had led to those judicial been felt, and might almost be confirmations of th extended forgotten; indeed, they remained claim of the Chase; and unless to the noble Lord, not as a source those proceedings were of no of profit—not as a means of pracavail-unless the public records tical injury to any onembut as a of them which remained as the mere honour, and that of great land-marks of property could be expense to him—as a feather of reversed-he rested upon them high estimation—which, however with confident assurance that he lightly it might be regarded, should succeed in behalf of his would, if established as a right, client. The manor of Cranborne be entitled to protection; and he was indeed in the county of Dor- had no doubt, if so established, set, but not within the narrow would be considered by the jury limits which the defendants would as weightier in the scale of justice assign to the Chase, claimed as than all the eloquence and all the appurtenant to that manor. He clamour with which it might be admitted that in some ancient questioned. documents, the Chase was describ The proof of the plaintiff's title, ed as situate in the county of Dor by ancient documents, consisted set, but that was because the of grants in the 15th year of manor to which it appertains was
James 1st to Lord Salisbury, in in that county; still the Chase so tail, and subsequent conveyances
through several families down to Sergeant Best entered upon the the family of Lord Rivers. They defendant's case. He desired the produced also several very an jury to consider what it was for cient proceedings in the reigns of which the plaintiff contended, our earliest kings, in which agree-namely, a right to feed his beasts ments were made between the of the chase over 500,000 acres proprietors of the Chase and vari- of land in three counties, which ous persons, granting them pri- included an extent of country vileges in Wiltshire and in Dor more than 100 miles in circumfe. set, within the Chase.--In the rence. He claimed that in that Sth Edward 1st, 1280, a writ of wide range no man should plough quo warranto had issued into Dor the land to the detriment of the setshire, respecting the Chase, deer ; and no man should raise against Gilbert de Clare, Earl of a fence to the exclusion of the Gloucester, in which it was alleg- deer ; that the growth of wood ed by the King's Attorney-Gene- should be protected only for the ral, that, by a perambulation benefit of the deer ; that if any made while King John was Earl man turned his sheep into his of Gloucester, the Chase had been own woods, they should be immarked out by certain known pounded by the owner of the bounds, (viz. the bounds this deer; that the growth of timber day claimed), and those bounds should for ever be prevented by were then adjudged to Gilbert de the browsing of the deer ; that Clare. In the 15th James 1st, a the rights of the chase should in decree of the King's Court of Ex- all things be preferred to the inchequer assigned to the Earl of terests of man ; that all cultivaSalisbury the bounds now con tion should be subservient to tended for in Dorsetshire, Wilt- those rights, and that the benefit shire, and Hampshire. In the of the deer of Lord Rivers should 8th Charles 1st, a similar decree be paramount to all the rights of passed in the Exchequer. The property, and make the industry rolls of the Chase Court were of the husbandman of no avail. produced, by which persons were He contended, that this claim was fined for offences in Wiltshire; in its nature so oppressive, that the accounts of the stewards of it could hardly be consistent with the Chase proved that such fines any law : that the King of Engwere paid, and that chiminage had land, putting all his forests toanciently been levied.
gether, could not exercise such proved that these courts were held privileges over an extent of soil at Cranborne and at Wimborne nearly so great, that it was six St. Giles, in Dorsetshire, far times as large as the New Forest ; without the narrower limits of that it was not crediblc, nay, he the Chase, and at Rushmore, in contended that it was not posWiltshire ; and that recoveries of sible, that such a right could ever the Chase had at various times have been given by the worst of been suffered in Hampshire and our kings to any subject whatsoin Wiltshire.
ever, and that, if given, it was On the following morning Mr. contrary to the great Charter of
the Forest, and could not subsist. of a jury had just then overturn. He pointed out, that this odioused the rights; Lord Salisbury claim, so destructive to agricul- was then tenant in fee of the ture and the best rights of the Chase ; he was High Treasurer community, was made not for the of England, and the minion of profit of any one; it was admitted the reigning sovereign; the to be an expensive honour; it judges were dependent upon his was a mere feather, of no value will; he surrendered his estate to its owner. He was confident in fee, and took back his estate that that feather would now be in tail; the Barons of the Explucked from the wing of Lord chequer, then pretending to mainRivers ; and he doubted not that tain the rights of the Crown, the noble Lord would soon re gave to him that infamous decree nounce the last portion of that without the verdict of a jury, which was now claimed for him, which, he trusted, the verdict of and abandon altogether a right a jury would this day overturn. which could never be of benefit to The evidence for the defendhim or to his family, and must be ants proved, that the decree in always in its exercise most hateful question was so obtained, and and most oppressive to those who contrary to a previous verdict of were subject to it. The judicial a jury. It proved, that in many decisions on which the claim of very ancient documents, the Chase the plaintiff rested were not the was uniformly described as locally verdicts of juries: but the deci- situate in Dorsetshire ; that in sions of Courts in the worst times Wiltshire it had very often been of our history, which had dared resisted with success, and had to proceed in defiance of the ver never been confirmed by a jury. dicts of juries : no proprietor of At a very late hour, Mr. Ser. the Chase had in former times geant Lens replied to the defendventured to submit his claim to ants' case, and maintained, that, the decision of a Wiltshire jury. to be rightly determined by the He had no respect for such judg. jury, it should be considered ments, obtained in earlier times, merely as a question of bounto establish such odious rights : dary, and that the feelings excited they were void from the begin- by Mr. Sergeant Best were only ning, as being contrary to the calculated to mislead the judggreat Charter of the Forest, and ment. the ancient rights of Englishmen. The learned Judge recapitulat They were among the grievances ed all the evidence, and under his which had prepared the way for direction, at nearly 2 o'clock on the glorious revolution of King Friday morning, a verdict was William. He doubted not that found for the defendants. this day the verdict of a jury of Mr. Sergeant Lens was ably Wiltshire would set them all aside. assisted by Mr. Gifford and Mr. The decision in favour of Lord Baily, for the plaintiff; and Mr. Salisbury, upon which the plain- Sergeant Best, by Mr. Casberd tiff's claim mainly depended, was and Mr. Gunning, for the defraudulently obtained; the verdict fendants.
Court of Exchequer, July 3.- fancy, according to what is said Rer v. Ha!l.-This was a motion on this subject elsewhere, that it to set aside an extent in aid which is highly immoral for an active had been obtained by Messrs. Old creditor to gain a preference beacre and Co. of Worcester, who, fore other creditors. The law alas sub-distributors of stamps, had lows this. Any man may gain a given a bond to account for stamps preference by suing a fieri fucias. in their possession when called A crown debtor can do no more upon. It was sworn in support than others, only he can do it of the motion, that it was believ quicker : and it is reasonable, for ed that Oldacre and Co. had giren he is liable to be called on by the this bond for the very purpose of crown on a sudden; and he ought obtaining extents in aid against therefore to have a speedy process their debtors.
against his debtor. If the legisThe Solicitor-General said, that lature thought proper to take he attended on the part of the away this right, he should have crown, notice having been given no objection ; but while the law to the solicitor of stamps. This remained unchanged, the court extent in aid had issued without would continue to do what it had the knowledge of the crown offi ever done. cers, and he therefore should not Serjeant Copley endeavoured interfere between the parties in- to show, from the form of the terested. He would only state, bond, that the crown creditor had that he was informed that this no right, because he was bound bond had never been required on not to pay money due, but to acthe part of the head distributor of count, and he had never been stamps, but had been volunteered called on to account; but the by Messrs. Oldacre and Co.: and court held that, being a bondhe thought such bonds should be debtor, he possessed the right of given under the sanction of some other bond-debtors. The rule erown officer, and, when given, was discharged. deposited with those who were to In another case of extent which make use of them if necessary. had been decided the same mornThis bond had not been so depo ing, the court held that it is not sited. He left it to the Court, necessary for a party applying for and retired.
an extent to swear to what amount Mr. Dauncey, in support of the he is indebted to the crown, in extent, said he would not deny order that the court may see that that this extent was issued, not the debt to the crown is equal to for the benefit of the crown, but the sum for which the extent in of the individual. This is, said aid issues. he, notoriously the case in almost every instance of extents in aid. MISCELLANEOUS, CRIMINAL. No one in this court will deny it for a moment. In another place, Court of Exchequer, Saturday, this has been the subject of much Feb. 17.-Smuggling on board Inanimadversion. It is said this is dia Ships.-- The King v. Creswell.-a great abuse; and que might This was an information against VOL. LVIII.