The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-07-31 00:00:00

THE EPPING FOREST HUNT.

The Epping Forest Commissioners held a sitting
Monday at the Guildhall, Broad Sanctuary, West.'
minster. Mr. Nelson (City Solicitor) and Mr. Hunter,
of the firm of Horne and Hunter, represented the Cor-
poration of the City of London ; and Mr. H. Cowie
the trustees of the late Earl of Mornington.
Mr. Nelson said, on behalf of the City of London,
he claimed the right of hunting vert and venison in
the forest of Waltham and of Epping. The Corpora-
tion from time immemorial had exercised the right,
and in former times the City officers kept a huntsman.
hounds, &c., and hunted in the Forest attended by
large retinue. They claimed the right by charter an
by prescription. The earliest charter on the subject
was one by the Conqueror, which conferred the right
upon the citizens of London. At the commencenient of
the present century the hunt fell into disuse, audit had
now degenerated into what was known as the Epping
Hunt on Easter Monday. InlBo7 the Corporation abo-
lished the office of common huntsman, and broke up the
establishment of bounds, &c., but that was their own
act, and the City by its officers had not hunted since.
The hunt had not been done away with, as deer had
been hunted every Easter Monday in the Forest, and
altbough the Corporation had not exercised the right
of bunting for years, they had not lost the franchise.
A charter of Edward 111. and of other Kings set forth
that the City should not lose any of its rights and
privileges by reason of the non-user of them. The
charters were confirmed by an Act of Parliament of
the first year of the reign of Charles 11. The rolls of
the Forest Courts contained frequent entries as to the
rights of the Corporation. The right of hunting was
part of the ancient privileges of the City, and in former
times a valuable one. He now claimed the right on
their behalf. In the event of the abolition of the right
it was not his intention to claim compensation for its
loss.

ended by a I
charter and

Mr. Riley then handed in translations of the
charters and documents referred to. The originals
of the charter by the Conqueror, Henry 1., Henry
IL, Richard 1., John, Edward 111., the rolls of the
Court of Swainmote, commencing in 1489, were pro-
duced, and inspected with some interest by the Com-
missioners and counsel engaged in the case.

Mr. John Hills was then examined. He said he was
76 years of age, and had lived at High Beechall all his
life. In his early days he recollected the Forest hunt.
It was held on Easter Monday, and was commonly
called the Ladies' Hunt, because a number of ladies
generally followed the deer. He could recollect the
hunt more than 60 years ago. The deer before the hunt
was caught in the Forest by the head Crown officer
and taken to the "Horse and Groom," at Woodford
Wells. It was hunted with dogs from several piblic-
houses in the Forest. He saw the hunt on Easter
Monday, 1874, but he did not know who supplied the
buck then, or whether it was got up for the benefit of
the publicans. He had heard of his father and grand-
father going to the hunt
Colonel Palmer said his family had been for cen-
turies connected with the Forest, and since 1842 he
had been chief verderer of the Forest. As verderer
he had charge of the rights of the Crown and of the
Commons, and he never interfered with the Epping
Hunt. On one occasion the late Lord Brougham was
present at the hunt and was mueh amused with it. Of
late years the publicans purchased the deer. He had
never seen the Lord Mayor and Corporation present at
the hunt, but Mr. Alderman Copeland, who was a
Forest officer, took an active part in the hunt. He
believed the right of hunting was conferred on the City
by charter of Henry 11., and be was of opinion that
the Corporation had a right to hunt every day in the
Forest, but they only exercised the light on Easter
Monday.
Another witness said he saw the hunt seventy-three
years ago.

The Epping Forest Commissioners resumed their
proceedings at the Guildhall, Broad Sanctuary, West-
xninster, on Tuesday morning.

Mr. Nelson, the City solicitor, in the conclusion-of
his address in support of the claim of the Corporation
to hunt in the forest, and to receive out of the forest
every year certain bucks, &c., said the commissioners
had before them the fact that the officers of the
Crown had actually procured the deer to be hunted.
In former times the deer was hunted with bows
and arrows, but of recent years the deer was
first caught, put into a cart, turned out, and
hunted. Although it was true the deer was only
hunted once a year to keep up the custom, it was
a matter of common knowledge that in order to keep
up a right of way places were closed once a year ; and
in the City of London the Temple was always kept
closed to strangers on Ascension Day. He could not
call the men of past centuries, but the records and
charter of the City remained, showing distinctly that
they had this right. It was too serious a right for the
City to claim against the Crown unless it had a legal
foundation, because if there was one thing inure than
another that the early sovereigns would have objected
to, it was the right of chase, and they would not have
allowed the citizens to enjoy the chase unless they had
that right.
Mr. Nelson, in answer to a question, nallttlii'City -
could, if they liked, appoint a common hunt the fol-
lowing day. No question of the statute of limitations
could pqssibly arise or interfere with the forestal
rights of the City. ,
Mr. H. Cowie said, on the part of several lords of
manors, he resisted the claim of the City of London
to unlimited right of hunting in the forest. He con-
tended that the claim was utterly without foundation
or fact. He must say that, looking at the importance
of the case, he was astonished that the Crown
had not instructed counsel to appear on this occasion
before the Commission. The Crown by its absence
tacitly admitted the claim of the City to hunt. The
early documentary evidence—the Charter of the
Conqueror—appeared to be an injunction against the
citizens hunting on the lands of the Archbishop of Can-
terbury at Harrow. The Charter of Henry 1., in 1101,
contained the following clause, "And the citizens
of London shall have their chases to hunt in Chiltre
and in Middlesex and §,urrey." Subsequent charters
appeared to contain similar clauses. there being no
mention of Waltham or Epping, in Essex. He could
not End any trace of the Corporation hunting till
1275, when the City officers hunted on the lands of
1 the Abbot of Stratford-le-Bow. The City records

contained reference to hunting in the forest, but they
could not be taken as legal evidence. 'The oath ad-
ministered in the time of Henry VIII. to the Com-
mon Hunt, on taking office, set forth that the hunts-
man should, to the best of his power,_ maintain the
citizens' franchise of Jaunting', in Surrey, Middlesex,
and Chiltre ; but nothing was said about Waltham,. in
EsJex. In conclusion he denied that the City had
established a claim to hunt and take deer off the forest.
The chairman said the CominissiOner's would reserve
their decision.
Mr. Hunter presented a number of claims for
" pannage," or pasture for pigs in the forest at allitimes
of the year except during the deer fence month. A
number of aged residents of the forest proved that they
had turned pigs on to the forest and they were not
interfered with
The Commission then adjourned.

rITAPII ON THE INNOCENTS.
" WHom the Gods love die young
"Gone to a better place !"
As the keeper said, when he hung
O'er the dead outang's face!
Bleep, slaughtered Babes, in peace!
From troubles and woes and ills;
Why mouna such blest release?
Rest ye, poor little Bills!
On the tomb of one or two
" Resurgam " we may write;
"Death, Life's gate" passilg through,

Again to see the light.
Innocents, pure of wrong!
As doth the name express,
Had your lives been more long,
We might have mourned yo d less.—Punch.