The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-20 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Sittings in Banco before the Lord, Chief Justice Cockburn,
and Justices Wightman, Blackburn, and Mellon.)
EARL or COVENTRY AND OTHERS V. WILLES._

The plaintiffs in this case are members of the Jockey
Club, and the action is brought against the defendant, the
well .known sporting editor of the Morning Test," Argus,"
for trespass, in insisting on his right to go and remain on
the Newmarket Race Course, after having been warned off
by the Jockey Club. The case now came before the Court
on demurrer to a number of pleas by the defendant, which
set forth that there was an ancient law and custom for the
public, that all the subjects of the Queen, of their own free
right and pleasure may go and remain on a land known
as Newmarket Heath, at all times when horse races are
there usually held, that is in the months of April, July,
and October, and witness the horse races there, and to
return from such place, and that such ancient law and
custom had existed trom time immemorial. Some of the
pleas varied the terms of the right, and asserted that New.
market Heath was a common highway, and open to all the
subjects to go and remain there of their own free right and
pleasure, to go and remain at all reasonable times to witness
and see the horse races there, there being also in such right
an exception as against persons who by reason of their mis-
conduct had ben warned off ihe heath by the Jockey Club.

Mr. Mellish, Q.C., with Mr. Harman, appeared on the
part of the plaintiffs, in support of the demurrer, and in-'
sisted that the general right and custom, as set up by the
fleas to all the subjects of the Queen to go and remain of
their own free will and pleasure to witness horse races was
untenable. He relied chiefly on the case of " Fitch and
Rawlings" in 2d Henry Blackstone. Any person might
dedicate a piece of land for such purposes as the halding of
horse races or a fair, and that the public might go and re-
main there to see such horse races or fair, but that did not
give a common right of highway, or give all the subjects of
the Queen the right to go and remain at all times of their
own free will and pleasure, on the land.
Mr. Quain, on the part of the defendant, argued at great
length in support of the pleas. The custom existed from
time immemorial. Horne races were spoken of as being held
at Newmarket in the time of Henry VIII., and then it was
spoken of as being a place where horse races had been
hitherto held.
Mr. Justice Blackburn asked whether the owner of the
soil would not have the right to put an end to such right?
The Lord Chief Justice said there must be cases of ex-
ception from a general common law right. For instance,
it was well known that at Goodwood the public were ad •
mitted, but that did not do away with the legal rights of the
Duke of Richmond.

Mr, Quain said that was no doubt an exceptional in-
stance, but in such cases as at Newmarket and Chester,
which was the oldest race-course known to exist, there had
been from time immemorial a general common right to the
public, that is, all the subjects to go and remain at such
time as races were held. The learned counsel then pro-
ceeded to cite a number of authorities in support of his
views.

The Lord Chief Justice, without calling on Mr. Mellish
to reply, said he was of opinon that the custom and right
set up by the pleas were too general, he did not
think there could be a customary right to all the subjects
of the Queen, to be pres-mt, and to go and remain
on the land. A customary right only applied to the inhabi.
tants of the district whero the custom existed, and not to the
general public by right at common law, lie was of
opinion that the authority of Fitch and Rawlings in 2d st.
of Blackstone, was binding on them, and that for those
reasons the demurrer must be allowed, and judgment en-
tered for the plaintiff.
The other Judges concurred.—Demurrer allowed.
There are other pleas raising issues of fact which remain
for trial.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goulbura.)
RE COLONEL WAUGH.

This morning was appointed for last examination and
discharge of Colonel Waugh, who was, it will be remem-
bered, connected with the London and Eastern Banking
Company. There was also a notice for renewed application
for the release of the bankrupt from custody.
Messrs. C. Brown and Dubois, who had been specially
appointed by the Court to prepare the accounts, reported
that they were of such an extensive and complicated
character that they had not been able to prepare them,
and would not be able to complete them in less than
three months.

An adjournment was accordingly taken for that time.
Mr. Roxburgh then said that he had to apply under the
112th section of the Bankruptcy Law Consolidation Act
for the release of the bankrupt from custody. He would
briefly state the circumstances under which Colonel Waugh '
before
rien
hceu shtaodd y.
urr d ehraed been
waadsj
surrendered udtagkeednbainntkerupent,atobduyt
on a capias at the suit of the official managers of the
eLfoxnsdoo,notjaon, do
nEtahset esinnp
pßoas nitkioinngthCatorhpeor7aastion, for a sum of
about to quit the
country. The claim was on a promissory note
for which the plaintiffs sought to proveunderoverdue,
for
the bank,
ruptcy, but which had been rejected by Mr. Commissioner-
Evans, or they would not have had the right to apply for
the copies. The bankrupt was taken into custody so far
back as March last, but the plaintiffs had not
steps to proceed with tho action, not even
having
The a decla-
ration. The reason for which was clear.
knew that they would be met by plea under plaintiffs
a pa
statute of limitations, the note havinge under the
been
overdue more than six years before the writ was
as issued.
The learned commissioner urged that there was not the
slightest evidence that a debt was due, and the bankrupt
was certainly not in custody for any offences under the act.
His Honour asked how he could be called upon to alter
' or reverse the order of Mr. Commissioner Holroyd, who had
refused to grant the release unless the bankrupt gave bail
himself for £l,OOO, and two securities in £2,000 each.
Mr. Roxburgh said that he did not ask the learned com-
missioner to alter or rescind the order of Mr. Commissioner
Holroyd, but under an altered statement of circumstances,
and on a question touching the liberty of the subject the
party interested could apply at any time to any competent
court. He then stated that the unfortunate gentleman
was now almost totally blind, and confined in a dark room
and unable to come into court. He had affidavits from
gr, Brown (Brown and poeio) that they would h