The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-04 00:00:00

FOREST RIGHTS AND ENCLOSURES.

Mr. TORRENS called attention to the reports of the
Commissioners of Woods and Forests, reporting the sale of
rights of the Crown in Waltham, Epping, and other forests in
Essex, and to the fact that in consequence of those sales
numerous inclosures have been made in the forests by
the purchasers of Crown rights : and to move for a
select committee to inquire into the legality of those
and other recent inclosures; also to ascertain what steps
ought to be taken to preserve the rights of the public, or
the poorer foresters, and the inhabitants of the metropolis,
within the forests, as well as to inquire into their general
management. _ _ _

Mr. COX seconded the motion. He only wished to pre-
serve the rights of the public, and not to interfere with the
rights of others. He claimed upon behalf of the inhabitants
of the metropolis the right of going on these lands when-
ever they pleased. If the committee of inquiry were granted
he would undertake to show that the public had enjoyed
that right for nearly 300 years without any objection. The
only right which those who wished to enclose the lands had
was, that of turning cattle upon them to graze. The people
had an undoubted right to go there for the purpose of dis-
porting themselves and enjoying the fresh air. The public
claimed that right, and what harm could possibly result
from granting a committee, so that the whole question
might be at once and for ever set at rest.
Mr. P. WATLINOTON protested against the assump-

tion on which the motion was founded, namely, that the
public had any legal right over these waste lands. The
question being one of legal right, it seemed to him more
fittting to be tried by a court of law than a committee of the
house. Indeed, the question was the subject of judicial
investigation last year before Mr. Justice Wightman.
when a jury found that the public had no right to wander
over these waste lands. The Infant Orphan Asylum and
the Merchant Seamen's Institution were built on those
grounds, and surely it could not be the intention of the hon.
mover to deprive those institutions of possession. Surely
it was not right that thousands of acres of ground should
be allowed to lie waste because the public wanted recreation,
which a comparatively small number of acres would ade-
quately supply. Chigwell parish had been put to great ex-
pense under a pretence of this kind, and deprived of 150
acres. Much had been said of the enjoyments which thou-
sands had derived from Sunday excursions to Epping, but
no notice had been taken of the thousands of religious
people who had been scandalised by the Sabbath desecra-
tion resulting from such excursions. (Hear, hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the motion, accord-
ing to the terms of it, would erect a committee of that
house into a court of judicature to try the rights of indivi-
duals as opposed to the rights of the Crown, which would
be a dangerous precedent. The proper forum was a
court of law, which could enforce its judgment. He would
suggest that, in lieu of the hon. member's motion, the house
should agree to appoint a committee to inquire into the
condition and management of the royal forests in Waltham,
Epping, and Essex, and their enclosures, and consider
whether it was necessary to take any steps for the preser-
vation of the open space. (Hear, hear.) He hoped the
hon. gentleman would accede to this proposition. (Agreed,
agreed.)

Mr. TORRENS expressed his assent, and having ob-
tained leave to withdraw his motion, that of the Attorney-
General was adopted.

METROPOLITAN TURNPIKE ROADS.

Mr. G. HARDY, in the absence of the right hon. baronet

the member for Petersfield (Sir W. Jolliffe), the cause of
whose absence they all deplored, rose to move for leave to
introduce a bill to amend the acts relating to the turnpike
roads in the neighbourhood of the metropolis north of the
river Thames. The hon. member said metropolitan roads
had been under the charge of commissioners, of whom the
right hon. Bart. the member for Petersfield was one, and
upon former occasions turnpikes had been removed, and the
charge of the roads transferred to the parishes. A commis-
sion which sat in 1859 recommended a large extension of
that arrangement, and this bill proposed to relieve 51 miles
of road within the district governed by the Metropolis Local
Management Act, by removing 26 turnpike gates—(hear,
hear),—and 46 side gates, which were now serious impedi-
ments to traffic. In order that any parishes which might
be affected by the bill should have an opportunity of stating
their objections ho proposed to take the second reading
before Easter, and afterwards to refer the bill to a Select

Committee, where all parties could be heard. Being a
hybrid bill, it would afterwards come before a committee of
the whole house, so that there would be ampleopportunities
for the parisehs to state their views. The hon. member
concluded by moving for leave to introduce the bill.
Sir G. GREY said he had been in eommunication with
the right hon. member for Petersfield, whom he had assured
of his cordial support in carrying out the object in view.
The reference to a select committee would, he thought, meet
all the objections that could be raised.

Lord ENFIELD thought the subject was in very good
hands, and was glad to find it was intended to send the bill
to a select committee, but he wished to know whether it
would be a committee of 13 or 15 members, or one of five

members.
Mr. HARDY—Of five members.
Lord ENFIELD said that would meet all objection, as it
would enable parishes, some of which were grievously bur.
dened, to appear and state their cases.
Leave was given, and the bill was subsequently brought
in and read a first time.
BRAZIL.

Mr. BRAMLEY•MOORE said he had been requested,
in consequence of tho incompleteness of the papers, to post-
pone the motion of which he had given notice until Friday
next.