Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

16 July, 1924.]

Mr. ALEXANDER SLATER.

[Continued.

92. He is an official. i: he?-Yes, but not a paid official. We have the late Hayward here.

66

93. You have a reference here to men like Mr. Rodgman are robbing them of their pasturage "?-He is here as a witness; he is one of the objectors, I believe.

94. We will call him later on?-If it is allowed to go like this-I do not want to say much about this-if one man has plenty of money to go and buy a lot of sheep in the market and turn them on to the Hills he is depriving the poor commoners of their rights, and I contend that this Old Hills right is the right of the smallholder; it had always been known, long before I went to the Estate, as the " poor man's bite."

95. Is Mr. Rodgman a farmer?-A landowner as well as a farmer.

Mr. Rodgman.] I am not a farmer.

Chairman.

96. We will hear you later on?-He holds about 53 acres, some his own.

97. So there is no rule as to the number of animals that could be turned on to the Common?-We have got no rule at present; the whole thing is in abeyance. Court Leets, as you most probably know, have not been held lately.

98. Was not the old Common Law rule three sheep to the acre?-About three sheep to an acre. Men have had four acres of land and they had about twelve sheep which they could keep on the Common in the Summer. Cows have not been turned on until lately.

99. You make a statement here that it has never been usual for any farmer that had a holding of more than 50 acres to turn animals on the Common at all?-He was not allowed to turn on; since I have been there one of our ow own tenants turned a large quantity of cattle on, and he was asked to take them off, by the Steward of the Manor, and he did so. told to take them back to his own place, and was never allowed to put them on again. It is not recognised as a Common Law right that a tenant farmer should turn cattle on; it has never been recognised-or sheep; he was not allowed to turn anything on.

He was

100. He was prevented by the landlord? -And by the commoners themselves too, more or less.

101. They would be the tenants of the landlord?-No, all the commoners are not.

102. May I take it that it is the rule enforced by the commoners that nobody with more than 50 acres of land has a right of Common?-That has been the rule all through: no farmer. It was not for the use of what I call a farmer-a better-class man.

103. I never heard of that before?-It is the rule. I have not heard of it in other Commons, but it has been the rule with this Common since time immemorial, I think.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

106. At the top of the second page there is a paragraph which says: "A good many of those claiming and using Common rights are working men who are generally at work during the day." Do they hold land? Yes, some of them hold land. A good many.

107. Not all of them?-Not all of them. 108. In this case?-They may have a small orchard, as I said before.

109. Have they all orchards? I do not think there is any one turns on now but that have somewhere to keep the sheep during the winter, and take them off the Hills. In the case of foot-and-mouth disease they cannot be kept on common land; there is a public road running through it, and all that hill has to be cleared as soon as the Order is out; so they must have somewhere else to keep their sheep in the case of any disease.

110. As a matter of fact, are there any cottagers who have no land who still turn their sheep on to the common?-Not at present, to my idea; not one that I know of, unless it may be one; that is all I am aware of.

111. Do you know whether it has been the custom in the past?-No, it has not.

16 July, 1924.]

Mr. ALEXANDER SLATER.

They have always had to have some land adjoining the house, or occupied in another place, in another part of the parish

112. You say up to the last few years you had not noticed cattle being turned on? No, not until the last few years for the past 70 years.

113. Only sheep and horses?-Only sheep and horses.

114. You say that Lord Beauchamp has set up some strong seats for the public? -Yes, we have put up a lot at one time or another, and planted trees too.

115. You say, since the advent of motorcars a great many more visitors make use of the Hills, especially coming from the City of Worcester?-Yes, more so now than ever. I think they have got well advertised lately, and we have a tremendous lot of people coming from Worcester. There will have to be some regulations made about motor-cars.

Mr. Forestier-Walker.

116. Are the trees protected?—Not so far; in the case of fire that costs a lot.

117. Are there any rabbits?-No; on Common land there is very seldom any rabbits, and a good job too.

Captain Bullock.

118. There is one question I should like to ask with regard to games; is anybody

[ocr errors]

[Continued.

allowed to play cricket and football there? --Yes. If anyone comes from Worcester, no one interferes with them; very often a picnic from a Sunday-school comes from Worcester, and we have never interfered with them so long as they conduct themselves properly; they come and pitch a wicket there where they like.

119. Any golf ?-There are places where they can golf, but there is no golf now. We have had golf on the course, but nobody undertakes to play golf now; it is not a recognised golf course; and it would be dangerous to do so when you have so many of the public there. It is getting a place of public resort from Worcester.

120. There would be nothing to stop anyone playing golf ?-It would be terrible if they had anybody playing there, because there are people all over the hill. It is not a good place for golf, at any rate.

[blocks in formation]

(The Witness withdrew.)

WILLIAM HENRY STEVENS BRICKELL, called in; and examined.

Chairman.

122. You are a baker by trade?—Yes.

123. And also a smallholder?—Yes. 124. What land do you hold ?-16 acres. 125. You have lived in the Parish of Powick all your life?-Practically all my life.

126. 56 years?-56 years.

127. You are Chairman of the Commons Committee appointed by the Court Leet of Lord Coventry?—Yes.

128. Does the Court Leet exercise any power over this particular Common?Not over the Common that is now the subject of this Inquiry.

129. It is another one?-Yes, it is another one; there are lands with commonable rights.

130. In the fourth paragraph of your evidence you talk of the commonable rights which have always been exercised

and enjoyed by the residents of that portion of Powick known as Callow Eud. What did you mean by 66 residents"?— Well, the Old Hills has always been cousidered a waste of the Manor, and it has been the general idea that the pasture was what they call the "poorman's bite " regardless of the Common rights. There always has been a tendency, for the sake of encouraging thrift, not in any way to dispute that question, but to allow the cottagers to common in a small way; and the same wide interpretation of that idea prevails on the Powick Common meadows. I am Chairman of the Committee, and, although we know the law, we do give a courtesy right there to anyone who would want to keep a few sheep, to encourage them to get on and be thrifty.

131. To take this Common in particular, do the cottagers exercise rights?-They

16 July, 1924.]

Mr. WILLIAM HENRY STEVENS BRICKELL.

[Continued.

have, but not so much of late years. At one time a great many did.

132. You mean people who merely occupy a cottage but hold no land there? -They may have had a little land.

133. Did they, as a matter of fact? It is a very, very important point, if I may put it to you. You speak about "residents," and I marked your evidence the moment I got hold of it?—There certainly has never been any attempt to prevent a cottager.

134. In other words would it be correct to say that cottagers who hold no land have been turning sheep or horses on to the Common within your knowledge?Yes, a few years ago, but latterly they have not turned on so much; because, of course, owing to misuse of the Common it is impossible for them to put their sheep on there, because there are a few commoners who so misuse the Common and put so many things on there that they really are squeezed out.

Mr. Forestier-Walker.

135. You mean there are not enough bites for the small man?-No.

136. I suppose the small man's sheep can bite as much as the big one's?-Yes.

Mr. Gibbins.

137. I suppose there are cottagers who do not keep sheep, and therefore do not put them on?-Very few of them have

(The Witness

[blocks in formation]

138. Your next paragraph is this, "Until very recent years I have not known or heard of commonable rights in the Old Hills being exercised by the commoners of Powick as a whole." What did you mean by "commoners of Powick "?-Powick is a very large parish; it is seven miles across.

139. May I put my question another way. Did you mean the whole body, the population of the parish, or did you mean generally?-It has only been exercised by the people within what they call the Callow End area.

140. Within a portion of the parish, not the whole of it?-Yes.

141. Your suggestion really is that the grazing rights are monopolised by a few to the detriment of the smaller and poorer commoners?-That has been my assertion.

142. And that is really the basis for the application for a Regulation Order?—Yes, and the public interest generally.

143. Would it be within your wish that the cottager, as such, should be excluded from a right of common?-No, if a Valuer was appointed it would be my particular wish that he should take a very wide interpretation of the rights of common, because there is plenty there for all the cottagers if they are properly defined. withdrew.)

CHARLES EDWARD BOURNE, called in; and examined.

Chairman.

144. You are 69 years of age?—Yes. 145. You live at Callow End and you have occupied a cottage on the Old Hills for the last 42 years?-Yes.

146. During those years you have exercised your rights as a commoner by turning on a few sheep every year and occasionally a horse?-Yes.

147. Do you hold any land?-No. 148. No land at all?-No.

Mr. Forestier-Walker.

149. Not even an orchard?-No. 150. A garden?—Yes.

151. How much?-About a quarter of

an acre.

Chairman.

152. Would it be a fair question to ask you how many sheep you turn on. I do

not want you to answer unless you like, but you do turn on sheep?—Yes.

153. More than one or two?-I have seven ewes and lambs.

154. And occasionally a horse?—I have done.

155. You never turn on any cattle?No.

156. So far as you know, there has been no right to pasture cattle claimed by anybody, have there?-No, no rights.

157. You never heard that Lord Coventry claimed any right as Lord of the Manor?-I never heard of it.

158. When Mr. Lakin was agent to Lord Beauchamp you say he would not allow any cattle to be turned on to the common? That is so.

159. But since 1915 one or two commoners have turned out a few cattle? -Yes.

16 July, 1924.]

Mr. CHARLES EDWARD BOURNE.

[Continued.

[ocr errors]

160. Then you suggest that nobody residing north of Carey's Brook have turned out any sheep or horses except in famish year, which was every third year. Why call the third year the famish year? -Because most of the common lands are closed that year; most of the common meadows the north side of the parish are closed.

161. The common meadows have nothing to do with this common?-No.

162. You still have got the old method of farming by having common lands; is that the meaning of the common meadows?-Yes.

Mr. Forestier-Walker.] That is, the surrounding people can put their cattle there; do you mean that?

Chairman.

163. No, I think they are not fenced, are they. The common meadows are not fenced?-Oh yes.

164. They are?—Yes.

165. For each farmer?-No, they are meadows with common rights and they are closed certain years for mowing; then when they are cleared they are turned on again.

166. That is what I thought. Then you take objection to Mr. Rodgman's right to use the Hills in the manner that he is doing now. That is the point of your objection?-Yes, I think he is overdoing

it.

167. Do you agree with the last witness that no one holding more than 50 acres of land was entitled to a right of common?-No, I have never heard of it.

168. You do not agree? Mr. Slater said no one holding more than 50 acres of land had a right of common; but you do not agree. The suggestion, I take it, is this: that the large farmer has right of common; that is the way it is being put. You have never heard of that? -Yes, that is so; the farmer has no right.

no

169. The farmer has no right; no one holding more than 50 acres?-Only what is called a smallholder.

170. You agree with him that only the smallholders have been exercising the right of common here; is that it? That is so.

Mr. Forestier-Walker.

171. Is there any definition of what a smallholder is, in that part?-No; of

[blocks in formation]

175. How many acres has the gentleman against whom you allege an objection; has he over 50?-It is difficult to say.

176. It says here he has over 100 sheep and lambs and several horses turned on the common?—Yes.

for

177. Then he must be a fairly big farmer, must not he?-I should think so, according to the quantity of land he holds. 178. Would be you content, instance, if it was an understanding-not that the Committee is going to grant it by any manner of means-but supposing someone was to come to you as a smallholder and say, We will limit the use of this common for bite purposes to farmers having only 50 acres and no more, would you agree to that?-Yes. 179. You would?—Yes.

Chairman.

180. You would object to the valuer finding that you, being the owner of a cottage with no land, had no right of common? I have enjoyed that privilege now for over 50 years and would object.

Captain O'Grady.

181. Do not you think a man with 50 acres of land, putting his beasts on this common, would just squeeze you out?I did not quite catch your question.

182. Would not you think a farmer having 50 acres of land, putting the beasts he would own on this common, would squeeze you off the common as a smallholder? It would depend upon what he turns on it.

183. He would turn a fairly good number on from 50 acres?-If several smallholders with 50 acres turn on there. there would be no room at all for the small ones.

(The Witness withdrew.)

16 July, 1924.]

Mr. CHARLES DEVEREUX.

[Continued.

CHARLES DEVEREUX, called in; and examined.
Chairman.

184. You reside at Kents Green, in the parish of Powick ?-Yes.

185. You have lived there for 50 years? -Yes.

186. Do you hold any land?—Yes. 187. How much?-About 32 acres. 188. Have you always held land there? -I have occupied 32 acres.

as a

189. You exercise your right commoner?-I have done. When I did so before I had land of my own.

190. Have you done so at any time when you had no land?-I have always had a small quantity.

191. You have had some trouble in moving the gypsies off the common?—Yes. 192. Have stopped you Mr. Macnamara using the hill as a training ground for his race horses?—Yes.

a

193. On the ground that you were a commoner? Yes, exercising his horses. 194. You were sworn in as Hayward of the other common, 66 and you say: As my position as Hayward was not a paid one, I have latterly taken little or no interest in the common."--Yes.

195. 66 Under the old rule, only sheep, horse, ass, goats, geese, were allowed to be turned on the common "?-That is quite right.

196. And no stoned or horned animal was allowed to be turned out?-No. 197. Have you anything else to say? -No.

Mr. Forestier-Walker.

198. You are pasturing animals now, are you not?-I do not pasture any on the common.

Chairman.

199. But you have the right, you think? -Yes, a perfect right.

200. Is there any rule as to the limit of the number?-No, unless you get up to a big flock; we are not supposed to put a big flock on.

201. I see that you say Lord Coventry's agent was at the Court Leet in 1907. Does Lord Coventry claim any right over this common?-I have always heard from old people that he claimed a frontage to his land across the one side.

202. A frontage?—Yes.

203. What good would that be to him? -I suppose if his land fronts on it he can claim a frontage so far back.

[blocks in formation]

(The Witness withdrew.)

EDWARD LEE ROWCLIFFE called in; and examined.
Chairman.

210. You are a member of the firm of Rawle, Johnstone & Co., Solicitors, of Bedford Row ?-Yes.

211. What have you to say? We act for the Croome Estates Trustees, that is to say, the three trustees of what were Lord Coventry's Estates; they were

appointed in September, 1921. Previously to that Lord Coventry was the owner of the Manor of Powick with the Manor of the Rectory of Powick, and, if 1 may explain, that Manor lies generally to the north of Old Hills Common, and is bounded on the east side by the River Severn.

« ZurückWeiter »