The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1860-07-31 00:00:00

" Atmorsist-RY.

" Daum:. —The inhabitants of this district are
"unusually excited at the present time respecting the
" finhing in the Fleet or Backwater. For a number of
"yearn past no finhing has been allowed in connemence
"of the Earl of Ilelienter claiming the Fleet an lain pri-
vate property, but thin winter, finherusen from Lang-
"ton. Chickerell, and other places have visited it daily
"—weather permitting—to the great annoyance of the
" Earl's officials, and the steward sent notices to all the
" parties, warning them that if they persisted in fol.
" lowing their avocation in the forbidden waters they
" would render themselves liable to a pronecntion. The
"notices, however, proved of no avail. Last Satunlay
"more than twenty boatn were up at the went end of
"time water, and they were again warned away with a
"threat of having their boata taken from them. Some
"of the men have caught am many as 200 lbs. weight of
"eels a day, and Mr. Bartlett, of Chickerell, has, we

"understand, purchased nearly' nine tons from thew
"for the London markets. Some of the eels are of
"Liege size, weighing seven and eight pounds each."
- • - -• • •

--- • _ .
Another pragraph appeared the following week
referring to the subject, and concluding thus :

"it would seem that if Lord Beholder had a legal
"claim to the Backwater he could long before this have
"put an end to the fishing in a legal manner."
It was not, therefore, until the Earl of Ilchaster
had been driven to the vindication of his rights that
he adopted these proceedings. As to the question of
damages, he might observe that his Lordship did
not press for heavy or vindictive damages in this
the first case submitted to a legal tribunal in very
recent times, but fur such fair damages as may pre-
vent his Lordship's property being interfered with
in future.
Corlict Pitman was then sworn and examined: Is
in Lord Ilchestor's employ ; looks after the swans
and fishery. . His instructions were to forbid people
fishing. People did not conic until about a twelve-
month since; told them that they would be fined,
but they came afterwards. Has seen Christopher
Bartlett, the defendant, there twice this year; thinks
it was in January. Bartlett's son was with him the
first time; forbade him; told him he was taking
Lord lichester's fish, and he would be lined.
Defendant tried after that, but did not see him
catch any, lie tried with a spear. Saw him again
the following week and forbade hint; he had two
men with him. Saw him on another occasion alone
in a boat ; he forbade hint, but ho did not go away.
The defendant essayed to address the jury, and
being about to make sonic statement, was by his
own desire, sworn. Be began with a rambling
accuuut of his being in a boat on one occasion, and
was about to introduce much irrelevant matter,
when the Under-sherd infi.nued him that he could
only be heard on the question of damages, where-
upon he resumed his seat, it having been elicited
from him in cross-examination that he had purchased
fish frequently.
• . _

The jury, having consulted for a few minutes,
assessed the damages at 410.

The Earl of Rebutter r. Henry Vivian
Same r. Thomas Hese
Same r. William Rash Leigh
Same r. John Rendall
These were four actions arising out of the circum-
stances already detailed, but the defendants were
not charged with selling fish. The jury suet:seed the
damages at 40s. in the first three cases, and £3 in
the last, the defendant having repeated the trespass
after notice.