The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1868-03-21 00:00:00

DAMAGE AND TRESPASS IN A
COAL MINE.
BROOKE, ROBINSON, FLETcrus, AND OTHERS
v. MILLS.

At the Stafford A,4i2PS (Nisi Prius Court) on Seturday
last, before the Chief Baron, this wee an action tried
before a Special Jury. in which the plaintiff sought to
recover damages at £lll,OOO for trespass, or as the decla-
ration stated it, "for that the defendant on divers ores-
dons since the 30th of August, 1566, broke and entered
certain mines and strata of the plainW's' being under
the surface of certain lands of the plaintiffs, situated at
Old Hill, in the parish of Rowley Regis. and then and
there dug and made levels and dug and got out the same
to his own one, and for that the defendant by such
breakings and entering caused great damage to the pro-
perty of the plaintiffs, by reason of large quantities of
water having flooded the said mince."
Mr. Powoil, (IC , with Mr. H. James, were for the
plaintiffs, and Mr. Gray, Q.C., with Mr. Griffits, were for
the defendants.
Mr. Powell, in opening the ease, mild the facts were
short and simple, and at the outset he had no hesitation
in saying that it wee a totally undefended avtion. The
plaintiffs ie the ease were four in °milli, : Once of them
—Emily Fletcher, Thomas Bell Eleock Fletcher, and
John Aston—were devisees and executors of the late Mr.
Thomas Badger, and the fourth plaintiff is Mrs. Eliaa
Green, sister of Mr. Lau Badger, who formerly carried
on business as mine owners in that county. Some years
ago Thomas and Isaac Badger were possessed of the
mines in question, which were called the Old Hill Col-
liery, and were situated in the parish of Rowley Regis,
and when they were purahased they were divided into
thirty-two shares, of which twenty-one belonged to
Thomas Badger and eleven to Isaac Badger, and which
had now come into the possession of the present plain-
tiff*. Next tn the mines in question (as marked on the
plans), were isituated some others belonging to Medina
Hall. Holeroft, and Co.; and astne time previous to the
lad Assizes they found out that the present defendant
had been trespassing and taking coal on their land, and
an action was brought and set down for hearing at the
last Assizes. That was, however, disposed of without
going to the jury; but from certain information that
reached the present plaintiffs they were led to believe
that their land had alas been trespassed upon, and they
made an application to the defendant ter an inspection
of Ida mines. That application was refused : an appeal
was made t a Judge in London to compel Mills to pro•
dace plans; certain iacorrect plans were then produce],
and ou an inspection of the mines being made every ob-
stacle was placed lathe way of the plaintiffs to prevent
them making a pr,oper icvestigation ; but it was ultim-
ately foiled out that defendant had drawn a large span-
tity of the best coal from the plaintiffs' land, and it Villa
in consequence of that trespass, together with damage
done to other mines and property, that the present action
Was brought.
Mr. TIMMASI Millership was then called, and stated
that Ile was mine fm,stit and surveyor for the defendant.
The plans produced were those of defendant's workings,
and showed a trespass into the plaintiff's mine into the
thick coal. The seam wan about sit yards thick and
was of superior quality. He had often warned the de-
fendant of the trespass. The first trespass took place on
the 7th of dime, letia. Twenty yards waist that time
driven into Messed. Hull and Coo mimes, and the work-
into were continued through Messrs. Itch's land until
Nevomber, when they load passed through over the
plaintiffs' boundary. Ile had many converaations with
the defendant in reference to it and made inemmundutos
of these conversations at the time. In June, IMtH, the
doggy of the pit canoe to his (witnesord house and said
that Mr. Mills had ordered him to drive square with a
certain rib of coal iii the new bide of the pit as far as
the coal extended and then down towards " the lane."
Witt:esti replied, however, that he should have nothing to
a,, with it. When lie was making out the plans the de-
fendant told hiss not to show teo much on them, and to
leave out the gate-read. Witness replied that he should
not but should make them out correctly. On tlmt the
defendant replied, "04 very well but don't for God's
sake let anyone see them." Witness told bins that none
would have sued to the place but himself, but strongly
recommended him again not t.s run such a risk, as if
found out it would be a very had job for him, Ile had
told him the saute Litany times. but his answer was, "Olt
it never will be totted out." Witness told him he should
Inane nothing to do with the trespass in any way what-
ever, and defendant replied, "I want to make the pit last
as long as I can." After trespassing for some time, the
defendant told witness that he should not go any farther
in the root he had been going, but should fetch out the
reniaining portion of the coal another way, as the opera-
tions were b !ginning to show on the surf tee. Between
the time he last saw the pit and June, 1,47, a gate-road
Was put up by the spot where the trespass had com-
menced. .

Cross-examined : It did not follow that the g ite-read
was put up for the purpose of preventing anybody from
inspecting the trespass portion of tire mine ; but there
was no necessity for any gate-road at the time, lie was
aware that the coal Was being taken from other people's
land by the defendant, but be kept it secret, as he had
led him to believe he was about to purchase it, suit that
at the time he was already in possemion of a portion of

Mr. Johnson, a mine aurveyor, of Dudley, stated that
he visited the defendant's colliery in November, 1867, in
company with two other surveyors, for the purpose of
inspecting the trespass that was alleged against hint ;
but it was hiund impossible to carry out their intentiott
consequence of the roof haviue been broken down. This
had been done, he should think, the night before.
There were some cottages on the sauce, under which the
coal was taken, and they were drawn as much as sixteen
inches out of the loyal in 21 feet. The mining opera-
tions had been recent, and appeared to have been g,,i.. '4
on then. A portion of the roadway bad also sunk. The
top coal only wan taken ; and of the superficial area
16,509 square yards hod been taken away. This would
prottnce 5,278 tons, which, at to a ton, would amount to
£1,319 101. The injury to the bottom part of the thick
coal—and the injury was so great that there wan a ques-
tion whether they should ever be able to get it—was es.
timated at £l6O l 0.; and the injury to the cottage,
UM. The total amount of damages was 41.691 The
plans now produced were not those shown him by the
defendant at the time he examined them. The cottages
that had bees damaged were leaning vertically and later.
ally towards the place of trespass and from his experl.
cues he could safely any that the damage to theta Waa
caused by the subsidence of the surface caused by the
mining aperationa beneath, Only the top teal was taken
by the defendant.
Mr. 0 rry, in defence laid be had tin witness to toll;
but at the saint time as ha was instructed, the defendant
did not adroit Lasing any knowledge of the trespass while
it was going on. He would however ask the j ary to take
the question as to the amount of damages into consider.
&lieu, remembering that in all eases where a plaintiff
estimated his own damages he was generally tumid to
over-stretch the mark.
His Lordship, in summing up, said the case was one of
this most extraordittary and must lamentable that could
possibly be brought in • civil—and note criminal—court,
and as the learned Counsel for the plaintiff had stated it
WU one in which there wan really no defence whatever.
The only question therefore for the jury to consider was
the amount of damages to be awarded. In doing so how-
ev. r they must not allow any indignation w hail, they
aright natarally feel against the defendant to induce
them to increase one shilling the amount of damages
they may think proper to give. If they thought Mr.
Johnson's estimate was a just and reasonable one they
would give their verdict for the full amount ; hot if on
the other hand they saw reasons for making any deduc-
tion they would of course make the deduction.
At the request of the jury Mr Millership was afterwards
re-called, and in reply to the Judge lie said he did not
think, with the means at hand, the quantity of coal said
to be drawn from the defendant's pit was excessive. A
thousand tons of coal per week had sometimes been
raised from the defendant's pit and a forty.horse power
engine was in operation for the purpose of drawing the
coal.
In reply to other questions from the jury, his Lordship
remarked, that it seemed from the evidence of experienced
men that the amount asked for was just awl reasouable,
and if the jury gave one farthing less than the full
amount they would do the plaintitra a very great in-
justice.
The jury were then locked up, and after a long consul-
tatioa is their room they returned a verdict fur the
plaintiffs, damages .E 1,665 15s.
Mr. Powell applied to the Court to order an immediate
execution, and his Lordship, after perusing a letter
handed to him, granted the application.