12
immediately met that by saying what has now passed into law—that we
consented to exclude entirely any land whatever that had got buildings
upon it at all; and our friends of the City know that that is what they
acted upon when they did act, and they did exclude that portion. I only
mention that in order that it may be understood that it is not everyone
who is an aggressor, and that people who are aggressors should be careful
to have a right and a principle behind them—something different to their
own interest. I have read an endorsement on a very old brief—you may
be aware that I have had some connection with the law—it is a very old
case indeed, but the directions on the brief were : " No case; abuse the
" plaintiff's attorney." I am not exactly saying that our friends here have
no case, because I do consider that they have a case—but it is a bad case.
They do not abuse the plaintiff's attorney in the sense that I may consider
myself as acting, but they abuse the plaintiff, that is, the recreator.
I want to ask you this question, I know it occurs in the play of
" Shylock." I shall be very careful in mentioning names, if I can avoid it,
in the remarks I have to make to you. He says, "I thank thee, Jew; I
" thank thee for that word! " because Shylock used a word which was
a damaging admission. I refer now to the term " recreator." f think the
gentleman opposite who used the word " recreator," and coupled with it
the term " East End rough," made use of a most unfortunate expression
for his clients. Sir, I wish to ask you, why am I here ; why are the City
gentlemen here; and, sir, why are all those gentlemen here taking their
fees day by day ; and lastly, why are you yourself sitting here ? You are
sitting here for the recreator. It is a very unfortunate thing, perhaps, that
there are roughs in the East End of London. I do not think at all that
the monopoly of roughs is to be found at the East End of London. It
is a sad and desperate thing to know that there are roughs everywhere;
but to attempt to allege for a moment that they more than any other
section of the community frequent Epping Forest is, I think, most ridiculous
altogether, and utterly incapable of any sort of proof. The recreators
that I have found there are portions of two millions of people to whom
the use of that forest is the means of recreation, and for whom the Act
of Parliament says the forest shall be preserved. I can find school
gatherings there of many thousands. I can find aged paupers from
workhouses, both men and women, recreating there. It has been my
experience to be a recreator there very frequently myself, and very many
times of innocent enjoyment I have had there with my family. It has been
my fortune or misfortune there to have my horse run away and smash my
carriage to pieces and do all manner of harm; but I always met with most
kindly and genial assistance and sympathy from the recreators, who appeared
as if by magic. But we certainly never met with anything to complain of or
to be afraid of them. Now and then there was a skulking person about, as
there is in all places. There is on the Derby racecourse, as I dare say you
know very well. The recreators there are not always of the best and the
highest moral character, but I do think in all the time I have spent upon
that forest I have seen less harm and more to delight in than ever I did in
the whole course of my life. Therefore I think that that word should not
have been used. As regards one of their witnesses, Mr. Tewson, a gentle-
man whose advertisements and whose catalogues differ so entirely and
wonderfully from his experience, you see he dislikes the common people,
the recreators, to come between the wind and his nobility. It is pitiable,