Carlisle Patriot, 11 Mar 1826 - Westmorland Spring Assizes (4)

[petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk]

Saturday 11 Mar 1826   (p. 4, col. 3-6)

 

WEST MORLAND SPRING ASSIZES, 1826.

 

BURROW v. HEELIS.—S. J.

 

[continued]

 

Thomas WILSON.—I am four score and six, and lived near the place in dispute 60 years. I recollect an old bakehouse about two yards off the spot. Joe BAINBRIDGE occupied it. He was town bellman. Scavengers laid much on the disputed ground. I have heard the Corporation officers command the carpenters to remove their wood from the spot, and they did so. When I first recollected it, a hedge composed of a few evolting stones and some burtree bushes were at the bottom of the garth behind the disputed ground. The fence is now forwarder than it was. The place in question was always said to belong to the Corporation: I never saw it railed; if it had, it must have been done in the night and taken away in the morning. Cold Keld was also in an open state since I knew it. There was a narrow road between the place in dispute and the bakehouse, through which whins were carried.

 

George WATSON gave nearly similar evidence; and said that children played at marbles on the spot.

 

Thomas WHARTON.—I am in my 80th year, and was born at Colby, and used to come by the spot before I was 10 years old. I used to be a laker (Anglice, player) at at [sic] marbles, ye see; and I have laked on it many a time. I have known it upwards of 70 years. The scavengers placed their muck there, until they could get some body to buy it. I never saw it inclosed.

 

Edward WILSON.—I have known the place in question between 60 and 70 years. It was always open to the road, and never closed.—Cross-examined: My brother, Bob WILSON, was a scavenger.

 

Robert WILSON.—I have known the place in question 60 years: it was always waste ground.

 

George PROUD.—I have known the place sixty years, and it was always open to the road. I was employed by the Corporation to cover in the drain which has been poken [sic] of.—Cross-examined: I never saw any building on the place in dispute.

 

Joseph TODD.—I have known the spot 60 years. There was a narrow road leading between the place in dispute and a bakehouse occupied by a man called BAINBRIDGE. The ground in question was never closed in to my knowledge. We built a skin-house, and paid a yearly rent to the Corporation for it.

 

Cross-examined.—We pay a penny a year to the Corporation for the projection of a pair of stairs. Jack BAINBRIDGE's bakehouse stood where the saw-pit now is. There were two bakehouses, one of which was behind the carpenter's shop. It was once a school, too.

 

Hugh TAYLOR called.—Counsel: How old are you? Witness: I was baptised on the 2d Feb. 1741. Judge: He is about the place, I believe. (A laugh.) Witness: I first came from Northumberland; I am a Northumbrian Scot, and have lived at Appleby 57½ years. I have known the spot in question all that time. I know it as well as I do my milk-dish that I sup my porridge out of. (A laugh.) The bakehouse stood about a yard and a half from the place in dispute. There is a wall now where the bakehouse was. The wall I am speaking about is the wall of the house pulled down. There is nothing but a saw-pit where the bakehouse was. I pay five groats a year for an improvement-rent of my own premises.

 

Cross-examined.—I dare say Jack BAINBRIDGE was a Corporation officer: he wore a greet cocked-up hat, and had lace upon his shoulders. I never was in the bakehouse. When I first recollect the spot, nothing troubled it. I never saw the white galloway—ye surely wadn't have me to speak what is'nt true—I've one foot in the grave and the other out.

 

Robert THOMPSON.—I am 69, and have known the place since a boy. I never knew it put to any use or inclosed.—Cross-examined: I have been a good deal away; but have been backwards and forwards.

 

Thomas LAWSON.—I lived about 20 years with STORROW. Wood was put on both sides of the road, and upon the spot in question. I have seen Annas LING put ashes there.

 

Charlotte NOBLE.—I lived formerly in the house occupied by Mrs. WINDER. It is near the place in question. I paid improvement-rent to the Corporation. The place in dispute was open, and people laid what they liked upon it.

 

John PROUD and John THOMPSON spoke to the same effect as the former witnesses.

 

The evidence for plaintiff having been gone through, Mr. ALDERSON replied, and contended that the Plaintiff had proved nothing in his favour. His learned friend had talked of scavenger's dirt, as if it were different from the dirt of others. He had the scavenger William in the box, but did not ask him a single question about the dirt. He would ask the Jury if there could be a question as to the right of the ground in dispute? The Corporation did not even repair the road there. He would show that Lord Thanet's tenants discharged Annas LING from putting ashes there—a better proof of adverse right than that he could hardly shew. They had talked of improvement rents—of pennies, twopences, and sixpences; but nothing of an improvement rent for the projection of the wall of Lord Thanet's garth. One of their own witnesses had said that it was brought forward, yet there was nothing paid for it. His learned friend had talked of political feeling; as if the political interests of Lord Thanet were not the interests of Appleby. "If he," said the learned gentleman, "possess some of the colours of the rainbow, he is not without the colours of the field." He, Mr. ALDERSON, fortunately happened to be present at the trial quoted by his learned friend. That case was different to the present; it related to copyhold property. Waste land joining such belonged to the lord of the manor. But in this case, the property adjoining the waste was freehold; and the waste therefore according to law belonged to the owner of the property adjoining it, and not to the lord of the manor. The Jury knew that there was a river in Macedon, and another in Nun. He would shew that the place was occupied by Jack WHARTON's premises and whins; and after Jack and his whins were gone, it was occupied by REED and STORROW. Some of the witnesses had made Jack WHARTON's house only a yard and a half broad, which was not much broader than the house he occupied. When STORROW had orders to remove his wood, it was lying upon the street, and he put it where it ought to be—namely, upon the waste. He would shew that the father of the present Mr. HEELIS discharged a man building a house on the spot in question; and that the present building was erected upon the ground-work of Jack WHARTON's tenement. The learned gentleman was sure the Jury would give it in his favour.

 

Richard ATKINSON.—I am 83, and have known the place since I was 7 years old. Jack BAINBRIDGE had a bakehouse near the place, and he put his whins on the spot in question. He had a stable hard against SALKELD's Garth on the south side. The walls of the new building encloses some part of BAINBRIDGE's house and stable. The place where Jack put his whins was bound round with rails wound with thorns.

 

Cross-examined.—The stable was made of posts and whins. The railing was for keeping the whins together. The railing is there yet; I saw it yesterday. The stable is there now.

 

Re-examined.—I believe the stable is not standing now, but the spans and beams are. The rails are there yet, and the building as formerly.

 

Thomas BIRBECK.—I am 83, and have known the place since a boy. It was railed in, and boys used to get over and play at marbles, and wood was thrown upon the spot, but not with peace, on account of the proprietor who lived in Mrs. WINDER's house.

 

Cross-examined.—The rails did not continue long. About a yard and a half of the old building is taken up by the new one. The new building stands upon the spot which the rails formerly enclosed. Miles STORROW and REED strewed their wood all about.

 

Richard THOMPSON.—I am 66 years old. Jack BAINBRIDGE's stable stood about two feet upon the place where the new building is. A person called DENT inclosed the spot with rails, which came from the gate of the garth to the paved road, then they turned and went towards Jack's house, and it was railed off at that end too.

 

Cross-examined.—The rails went to the whin house. I left Appleby 35 years ago.

 

Martha GLOVER.—I am 65, and reside in Kendal. Jack BAINBRIDGE was my grandfather. His house is down now. His stable was behind the house; we went to it by a narrow lane which led to the end of the house. The new building is about a yard and a half into where the old building stood. There was another bakehouse behind, which was approached through a passage.

 

Cross-examined.—The narrow road between the old building and the place in dispute is there now: the new building is on the right of it.

 

Re-examined.—The new building is a yard and a half within the old one.

 

Miles STORROW.—I have lived 45 years in the house next the place in question. Jack BAINBRIDGE's house was in ruins when I went. The saw-pit is upon the spot where the ruins were. I was ordered six years ago to shift my wood from the low side to the place in dispute. The Corporation Clerk ordered me: I did so, and put more to it. I had to ask leave of those who occupied Mrs. WINDER's house when I used that spot. Mrs. NOBLE once turned me off the place, and she sowed it with grass seeds. There was a stick laid at each end of it; and I did not come there for three quarters of a year. I repair and sweep the road opposite my house. The wall of the garth is in the same situation it was in 45 years ago. Matthew DENT once talked of building a house on the spot in dispute, but was prevented by old Mr. HEELIS. The threshold of Jack BAINBRIDGE's house is still to be seen; it is about three yards off the place in dispute.

 

Cross-examined.—It may be 36 years since I had the quarrel with Mrs. NOBLE. The grass grew, and there was a fine crop of ribbed grass and clover.

 

 

[to be continued]