3
down—and I believe will faithfully carry out the suggestion—that all these
750 acres, of which this forms a part, should ultimately be restored to the
use of the commoners, whom they represent. The Master of the Rolls
decided a very short time ago, in the case of Chilton, who is one of these
parties, that I had a right to abate. In Messrs. Paul's case the abatement
consisted in my throwing down the gate of their inclosure, and giving some
servant of theirs a caution to remove their stock. Sir, I am a person who
does not wish to do anything like vandalism, or anything of an improper
nature. The principle of law was to be raised, and the Master of the
Rolls decided that in my favour. He certainly did upon one occasion call
me a reversioner, but as his decision now is entirely opposed to that, I
forgive him.
The ARBITRATOR: What was the hard term that he applied to
you ?
Mr. BURNEY: He called me a reversioner. It was utterly in-
applicable. Anyone having present rights cannot be a reversioner.
The ARBITRATOR: What was the suit in which the Master of the
Rolls decided that you had a right to abate ?
Mr. BURNEY: It came on in Chilton's case. You stayed a number
of other suits brought against me. This came on in Chilton's case.
Mr. HUNTER : Chilton v. Burney ?
Mr. BURNEY : Yes. The point to which I wish to call your
attention is this : if other people had possessed the same amount of vigour
—I do not know whether I am entitled to say patriotism or not, I do not
wish to say anything I am not firmly entitled to—but if others had
followed it up, although I was restrained from proceeding further in
the action, it is clear that others might have followed, and thrown open
Mr. Paul's grounds and all the other grounds in the same maimer as I
did. I have a very great admiration of Mr. Webster. It is a great
disadvantage to speak after these learned gentlemen who have addressed
you. But Mr. Webster stated to you a portion of the law which authorises
and appoints you, but he forgot to name to you that almost the first acting
portion of this very same Act says, on the 3rd or 4th page, " All rights
of common of pasture and of common of mast or pannage of swine on or
over Epping Forest shall continue as they exist at the passing of this Act."
I do not know how it escaped Sir William Harcourt that the pannage of
swine would be a much more serious matter to Mr. Paul than the feeding
of sheep and cattle, because swine would go and root up and do any
amount of damage. With that observation I shall pass from that point.
Now, Sir, it is an ascertained and positive fact, and it is laid down,
not only by the Epping Forest Commisioners in their Report, but it has
been alluded to by the Solicitor-General on a recent occasion before you,
that nine-tenths of the whole value of this common land belongs to the
commoners. That is the principle, I am happy to say, fully established,
and as to which there is no doubt, I think ; one-tenth for the lord, and
nine-tenths for the commoners.
The ARBITRATOR: You must not take me as accepting that;
but that is your view of it.