The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1882-11-07 00:00:00

COUNTY PETTY BEBBIONB.

SATURDAY.
Uwe M. B. Middleton, F,sq. (in the chair), W. A.
&hakes, Esq., and G. Floyer, Esq.

CAT= MAT' PG.
Selina Barnes, who did not appear, was summoned
for allowing cattle to stray, on October 27tb. —P.C.
Taylor said on the Saturday evening in question be
found two horses straying on the highway in the parish
of Bradford PeverelL Defendant was in a van about
• quarter of • mile from the horses. He knocked at
the no door, and defendant said she was not aware
the horses were straying. On the 23rd witness went
to the van, and asked the defendant if she received
the summons ; she maid she had not seen it—her children
had torn it up. He then read the doplicate.—Fined
bs. and costs.

ASSAULT.

Walter But, Arthur Best, Andrew Norman, and
James Bowering appeared to answer a theree of
emu% in which Henry Gill and Frederick Whittle
were rout:armed Crow-summonses had been issued,
and the cam generally wag a complicated one.--Mr.
Howard appeared for the origioal complainants,
and Hr. Weston for dot endautc—The alleged
111110111111 t took place at Portesbam, on the 25th Out.
The eoildtora put their heads together, and ultimately
an arrangement was come to, and, all the parties
'having openly promised net to annoy eaoh ether in
the fitma, the Beach commuted to the n-.---,.
bang withdraws.

IMPORTANT VESTRY MEETING.

On Thursday !Doming lad a vestry meeting was
hold in St. Peter s Church for the purpose of consider- '
ing the encroachment on the Churchyard, caused by
the side door of the new County Museum, and to
decide thereon. The Rev. T. W. Knipe (Rector),
presided, and there were Ms preen—Mr. W.
Dunien and Mr. G. Pouncy (church war lens), Mr.
Giles Symonds. Mr. T. Coombe, Mr. It. Darden. Mr.
.1. Foster, Nlr. B. A. Hogg, Mr. J. Pearce, Mr. T.
Pouncy, Mr. M. Lock, and Mr. T. A. Pearce (verity
clerk.)
The Recron, in his opening remsrks to the vestry,
said as a member of the Mu•eum Committee, he dad
of coulee loosed something of this question. He had
been wired if he should object to the sail door, but he
presumed he had no absolute power in the matter. He
sail, however, and he repeated now, that personally
he had no objection. He loaded the opinion of the
vestry on the matter.
Mr. \V. Duence said in passing up High-street
some time since a parishioner called his attention to
the doorway, and asked him if be had noticed it or
knew anything of it. He replied he knew nothing
whatever of it, and consulted his co-ohurchwarden,
Mr. Ponncy, and they thought it w,uld be beet to
call • vendry I. decide upon it. Of c surge, a roe,'
deal of reeporisibility rested upon the churchwardens,
and he felt the onus of this encroachment ought not
to fall on th. ir shoulders, but that it should be brotight
before the part •h. They knew the law stated owners
of property adj lining the churchyard had no right of
approach through the churchyard. He wished it,
however, to be understood they did not briny this
matter forward from any antsg 'Mem to the Mumum,
but they desired to ascert iin the rights of the parish,
and if an error had been committed to endear our to
rvair it. He should like to hear gentlemen speak on
the subject before moving a resolution.
Mr. GILES SYMONDS said the only thirl he knew
about it was that a fortnight ago his attention was
drawn to it by a parishioner. and he at once sold of
course no p-rem co rid open a doorway upon another
person's prop•rty, and, situated as the churchyard
was, to open a dune moon it was a trespass, an
encroachment, that nob .dy could justify or sanction.
He had sine turned the matter over lo his own mini,
and, speaking from • recollection of the parish of St.
Peter's of oem-riO years, he remembered when • boy at
school they used to enter the church from the western
entrance, and he knew at that time the boundary line
between the churohysed and the George Inn pr petty
was always a strairht line, which it oer:iiinly was not
no
• . He knew, t 0.., in those days the George Premises
het no doorway into the churchyer.l at all. There
were windows overlooking the eloirehyerd, end he
need not sat, the opening of windows upon another
pro rty wiss an esscroachment per sc. But,
In▪ this CAW, did not know thee. would he may great
objection to windows, because there could be no
trespass from them on the prop•rty of the churchyard
and no damage to it, beoause, he sup,osed, though it
was not an impossible thing. that the churchyard was not
likely to be converted into building ground, although
such things did happen in some places. Referring to
another point, he mentioned be remembered gravestones
used to stand against the wall opposite the entranoe,
and be asked the other day what had beams of them,
and nobody could tell him. The day before yesterday
he asked Mr. Guy the same question, and he replied
" Oh! they have been 0003Uve I." Then, said he (the
speaker), there comes another question "Ate you sure
you are not encroaching ?" and Mr. Gay then drew
an saginary line upon paper, by which he showed the
boundary was originally straight. It was now
crooked. He (tie Symonds) had • plan drawn some 50
years ago which would show what the fixed boundaries
were then, and they would see trom that sassily what
was then the width between the corner of the tower
and the boundary line. That could be ascertained by
measurement, but his impression was, and he spoke
after consideration, the oriel window even was an
encroachment. But he thought rioters was no question
as to that being permitted, but he, for one, 0100Uld
strongly object to the doorway being allowed. It was
clearly laid down by the law that nobody could
alienate any property of the Church, and it would
be an alienation if any person were allowed to have a
right over the churchyard. No doubt the nominal
freehold was in the rector but the rector only had the
freehold subject to the ris of the parish, and he
could not alienate or sanction any encroachment on it.
If the committee wanted to maks any alteration he
(the speaker) thought they should fine have considered
whether such alteration could be carried out. Now
he bad the fortune, perhaps the misfortune, of
geeing the original plan, and it did not contemplate
an entrance there at all, because when the original
plan was prepared it was not cootemplated to tales
dosed the George at all, am, there ...old be no
entrance from the churchyard thought of. As he
understood, this was to be a private entrance for the
curator, and if this do o•way was tolerated the church-
yard most be open all night; but the law laid it down
ta lie the duty of the churchwardens to close the
churchyard. It could not be. Of course, the effect
would be to have it open at all timer for the aocom.
modation of the curator. Why could he not go in at
the other door? As curator of this institution he
must naturally be in contact with members and others,
so it was • pity he should be exclusive. Let him go to
the other door. Here was a private entrance, con-
nected with the main hall, but • private door which
no other person had a right to use ,• that we, he
could go into the hall but Persons could not go into
hie part of the building. He objected to it on prin-
ciple. lie .hould be the more disinclined, the more
sorry, to object to it if he thought it would incon-
venience the arrangements of the oonernittee at all.
But he did not think it would, and on this ground,
independently of any other consideration,he thought the I
thing ought not to be permitted and that the church-
wardeus should be authorised to call upon the parties
to atop the door. There was no difficulty. The
c,estor could go through the grand ball and up his
own staircase. These were Ms views, and he should
Ire ready to support them by resolution if necessary'
Mr. Symonds concluded by reeding portion of the
Acts referring to the matter at issue, and said he
apprehended on the question of law there could be no
doubt.
The RICTOR mentioned a larger scheme and a greater
encroachment that was passing through his own mind.
He intended to make it known in every possible way
he could, but he was under the impression he could
carry it out with the consent of Bishop and patron—
the Lord Chancellor. He proposed utilising the bare
wall of the museum proper and building against it a
room simply for parish purposes—Sunday school and
uses of that kind. He wrote to a gentleman who took
a large interest in the MUSORM—a gentleman of
influence in the coursty--and that morning he had
replied he thought it would be a good thing if they
could carry it out. His intention, if Mr. Symonds bad
not said what be had dons, was to write that very day
to the Bishop and ask whether he would consent to a
faculty for anything of this kind, and then, by notice
on the church door and in every possible way, ascer-
taining he was not hurting the feeling of any
parishioners, exercising what he beievel was within
his rights with the consent of the parishioner., the
patron, and the diocesan.
Mr. SYMONDS gave it as his opinion the parish
the right of building a vestry or any room
or ecclesiastical parishes in the churchyard. But be
thought the law would not allow the rector to build a
schoolroom.
The Rscroe sail in no way would be do it against
the wish of the ratepayers or of the minority if it was
strongly expressed, but he thought it was • common
thing for the clergyman and churchwardens to do any-
thing of this sort for the good of the pariah, having
applied to the Mahon for his consent.
MT. SYMONDS : There are plenty of schoolrooms in
Dorchester.

The Niteroi said he had no room for holding • Sun-
day school, and he bad to pay a heavy rental for the
use of Alington Hall. He wanted • pariah room. He
had no desire to set up • room in opposition to the
Town Hall or Alinston Hall, but he wanted • room for
purposes. He believed the Sunday school was
gaot: good, and he wanted it to have • was stendi In
the pariah. It so happened all the other clergy had
rooms, because the national schools were placed in
their parishes.
Mr. SIMONDS : The schoolrooms in other parishes
are built upon secular, not consecrated ground.
The hiOTOR : If I could get • site of secular ground
I would build it there.
Mr. M. Loci': If • schoolroom were built there the
boys would be all over the churchyard.
The RUMOR : It is only a Sunday school, and in the
scheme which I have in my mind the schoolroom would
be approached by the boys from the archway at the
corner of Mr. Marvin Lock's home and the girls from
the other way. The schoolroom would be at the north-
west corner of the churchyard.
With regard to the alleged encroachment, Mr.
SYMONDS, in answer to the Rwroa, said no faculty
could prevent the matter being called in question, and
he had no hesitation in saying he should be disposed
to do so, because he thought an encroachment ought
nnt 1., be ellovrect to any way. If the hlumum were
inconvenienoed, he should do it with regret; but he
did not now feel regret, because it war not necessary,
and it formed no port of the original scheme.
The Roma said In the first scheme it was planned
to pull down the George and place a doorway in Its
present position, but this plan was abandoned on the
ground of expanse, and another—the one Mr.
Symonds alluded to—was adopted, but afterwards
dropped again in favour of • third. He could see no
practical inoonvenience that would arise from this
doorway, and speaking as a parishioner, he should
support it all be could. As for the encroachment, it
seemed to him if they pail a nominal sum every year
as an acknowledgment it would be sufficient.
Mr. SYMONDS ; You can't do it in one way more
than in another.
Mr. G. POUNCI : The law will not allow it, so we
cannot do it.
Ultimately, in order to bring the matter to an issue,
Mr. W. Dimpor proposed "That the committee of
the Dorset County Museum be requested to replace
the tombstones lately standing in the churchyard of
this parish, but removed luring the erection of the new
Museum, and also to close substantially the door
recently constructed abutting and open.ng on such
churchyard, the pariah not admitting the right of
the owners of the Mureum property or any other
person to have an opening into the churchyard."
He was sorry to have to do this, because it would
appear as though they wished to inconvenience the
Museum Committee; but after what Mr. Symonds
had said it was clear this encroachment ought not to
be allowed, end they (the churchwardens) would not be
doing their duty did they not take steps to prevent it.
Mr. SIMONDS seconded the proposition. lie said he
should do eo with • good deal of regret if he had the
slightest impression their taking this step would
inconvenience the Museum Committee; but he did not
think it would. This door, this private entrance, was
nothing in the world but chit of what might be called
personal exclusiveness set up for the benefit of the
person, whoever he might be, who was curator. He
had no sympathy in the slightest degree with what
might be termed the hardship to the Museum people.
He thought they ought never to have bees put in the
position to have to raise tbe objection at all. It wee
an encroachment which must have suggested itself to
every one acquainted with anything in the shape of
business, and it ought never to have been made, and
the parish would not then have bad to oppose it. He
seconded the resolution with the feeling there was Co
necessity for the doorway, and that its bobs closed
would be no inconvenience to the Museum.
The proposition was carried. No stops were taken
with swiped to the Becotcw's proposed whew&