The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-06-18 00:00:00

AN AGRICULTURAL LAW-CASE.
In the Vice-Chancellors Court, In London, the cause of
" llngllthv. Nottingham " has been heard before a special Jury,
lasting several dam

The suit was instituted by Mr. Eoglish who was the
owner of an estate in Warwickshire, and had, in April,
186.5, granted the defendant a lease for 2 yew of a
farm of 260 acres. By a contemporaneous agreement
Mr. English undertook first to give him a lease of
another 40 acres as soon BA they fell into possession ;
and secondly, after reciting that he was the owner of
certain woodlands in the parish of Snitterfield and
Bearley, containing about 130 acres, he further agreed
that he would " assert and clear them from timber
and underwood at the rate of 15 acres a year until the
whole were assarted and cleared," and would grant him
a lease of them when cleared at the rate of 255. an
acre. The word "aasart," on the construction of which
the case turned, is thus referred to in klanwcod's
Treatise of the Laws of ae Forest published in 1615, in
old English type, in a psasage which was read to the
jury.
"Free as a west ay the Lewes of the Forest Is accompted
one of the gresiest offences or trespasses that can be done to
he veil of the Forest, became the none Is • felting downs or
destroying of the thickets and couerts of the Forest, that is
to say, the rut. or greene hue, bee it greene wood or under.
wood, 111,11.5, thorns, or auy ccuert, the Learth green,e
leafe: to Ilkewhe an assert of the Forest is the greatest
offence or trespaste of all otter. And there Is none like
unto it that Mk bee done unto the vat of tin Forest. For
every assart of the F.tret.t ooth Colltahle Ile it a west and
.4141,10'493W lb V It tUtt .90eri of Ow Fore" ,1 4",

or wbere,s a

the hhhng or

down of the conerts which may grow again and become
couerts in thee, an smart is the plucking up of those woods
that are thickets or couerts to make the some a plaine or
arable land."

---
Shortly after the execution of the lease the plaintiff
began clearing the land. In the first instance he
cleared 25 acres, which after some demur were
accepted by the defendant. He then cleared two
further portions of 30 acres and 75 acres, in reference
to which the present proceedings were instituted, em-
ploying men for the purpose, who were directed, in
felling the trees, to cut the roots in ouch a manner as
to leave 10 inches of soil above them, which it W
admitted on both sides would have been amply suffi-
cient. The 30 acres were tendered to the defendant
in August, 1867, and on his refusal to accept them
some farther assarting was done, and the land was
ploughed over and again tendered. In September,
1868, the plaintiff having cleared the 75 acres, tendered
them to the defendant, and on his objecting to the
asserting, the plaintiff, who had offered to take
the 30 acres off his hands, an offer which was re-
fused, filed this bill to compel him to accept a lease.
From the evidence, which was extremely voluminous, 12
witnesses being called for the plaintiff and eighteen for
the defendant, it appeared that a number of stumps
slid roots had been overlooked and left in the land with
barely five inches of soil over them. The case resolved
itself ultimately into a question of degree, the plaintiff
contending that the land was aseart-d in the usual way,
and the defendant ineisting on a right to have it re-
duced to the condition of ordinary agricultural land.
When the cause came before the Court on the 14th of
March, 1870, the Vice-Chancellor said that he con-
sidered the question was one of fact, which ought to be
submitted to a jury, and a jury was accordingly im-
pannelled, five of whom, under a subsequent order of
the Court, went down to view the land, accompanied
by two viewers. Each party provided a plough and
team of horses. The plough provided by the plaintiff
was a plough of extra strength, manufactured for the
special purpose of ploughing euch woodlands, which
remained uninjured' but the defendant's plough.
being an iron plough of ordinary strength, with cast
iron shares, two of the shares were broken, and the
plough itself suffered damage through the stumps and
roots.

The Vice-Chancellor summed up the evidence, and
left the following three issues to the jury :-1,
Whether the 30 noses had been aaaartod and cleared in
accordance with the agreement; 2, whether the 75
acres had been so asserted and cleared; and 3, in case
the jury should find either or both these pieces of land
had not been properly assarted and cleared, what sum
the plaintiff ought to pay the defendant to enable him
to comple the assarting.
After a short deliberation the jury returned into
court with a verdict for the defendant; finding on
the first and second issues that the land had not been
sufficiently smarted, and awarding the defendant £465
on the third issue.
These issues having been found, the cause itself will
be heard next Term. Attention having been called to
the remuneration of the jury, both parties agreed to
leave it to the Vice-Chancellor, who directed them to
be paid at the rate of a guinea a day, instead of the
usual fee of one guinea for the whole attendance.