The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-15 00:00:00

Hyde Park and the Reform League.

Mr. Beales has addressed the following letter to
the editor of the Times :

Sir,—Permit me to say a few words in reference
to your remarks on Monday as to the claim made
by the Reform League to the use of Hyde-park, if
it be but to thank you for the calm and courteous
tone in which your remarks are expressed, and
which is not a little refreshing after the mere vulgar
and personal abuse and ribaldry, as regards myself
and others, with which the subject has been treated
in other quarters.

You come to the conclusion that I and my friends
were offenders, though our offence was only tres
pass;. but how are we shown to be offenders in the
shape of trespass, or in any other shllpe ? You com-
plain of my giving no authurity or testimony for
my view of the law ; but does not the same objec-
tion apply to the views put forth by, lat once ad-
mit, the very eminent law officers of twn successive
Governments, to whose opinions you refer ? In
neither of those opinions is there a single decided
case or other authority in any text book or other-
wise quoted or referred to in support of the opi-
nions. While, then, they are nothing but a mere
expression of opinion, the first of them, that given
in 1856—and the subsequent opinion is open to the
same objections—draws no distinction whatever be-
tween Crown lands and the private estates of a
Sovereign, or between the parks so far as they are
Crown lands and other Crown lands, takes no no-
tice whatever of the contract entered into between
the Crown and Parliament at the commencement
of every reign, ignores for the most part, any dedi-
cation of the parks to public use, and proceeds on
the assumption that the authority to close and ex-
clude the public from the parks is that which every
landowner has to prevent the public from trespas-
sing on his lands. With all deference, 1 demur to
this analogy between the Crown, or the Government
as representing the Crown in the matter of the
parks, and an ordinary landowner. The numerous
acts of Parliament which have been passed in refe-
rence to the parks are destructive of any such analogy.
The parks can neither be leased nor sold, nor, as I
contend, be in any other way diverted horn the use to
which they have been dedicated, and that, too, for
a valuable consideration.

I am happy to have your own support in ques-
tioning this analogy in the able observations upon
it contained in the Times of the 6th of May. It is
there remarked that if a private proprietor were to
suffer for a series of years the community of a neigh-
bouring town to take the management of his park
and lay out large sums on it upon an express or im-
plied understanding that they should have the enjoy-
ment of it at reasonable hours, he clearly could not
suddenly terminate that right of user, if, indeed, he
could terminate it at all. The writer then refers to
the abolition of the nulluin tempts occurrit regi doc-
trine by 9 George 111., c. 16, making 60 years' pos-
session or enjoyment good against the Crown, at
the same time observing that the doctrine itself
never applied to cases of supposed or implied dedi-
cation or grant. To this I may add 2 and 3 Wil-
liam IV., c. 71, making 40 years, or even 20 years'
enjoyment of any way or other easement good
against the Crown. The opinion in question, that
of 1856, also assumes that the Crown hag given
only a conditional permission or licence to the pub-
lie to enjoy the park, which it is competent at any
time to the Crown, or those acting in the manage-
ment of the park, to revoke, and upon a similar
assumption the subsequent opinion of the law offi-
cers of last year, who do not appear disposed to go
so far as their predecessors, was entirely based. But
where is the evidence of any such conditional
license or permission ? If there be no such evi-
dence, as I believe to be the fact, what is the ground
upon which such conditional licence or permission
is implied ? What is the implication upon the
faith of which a notice could be issued supposing
that notice not to have been in other respects in-
valid, which could have the effect of converting me
into a trespasser upon the very property of which I
had the enjoyment ? •
There are many other questions, including those
referred to by Lord Romilly, affecting the matter,
not the least of them being the actual present posi-
tion of the legal estate, upon which I cannot now
enter, and with which I have nooclaim to encumber
your columns. Considering the expense and delay
attendant upon the litigation of such a matter, it is
hardly fairly to make it a charge against me that I
did not bring the question to an issue by legal pro-
ceedings against the Government, or others, who
excluded us from the park last year. This was a
course more within the means and power of the Go-
vernment; at all events, it is open to them now, if
they consider their view of the law to be right.
You call upon me and my friends to remember
that all classes of society have claims to considera-
tion. Several days back I publicly stated in writing
that we did not wish to offend even the prejudices
of others, if we could avoid doing so, in insisting on
what we considered an important constitutional
right. I am prepared to do anything in my power
towards an arrangement of the dispute, which shall
be reasonable and fair towards all classes, and espe-
cially which may tend to remove all class rivalry or
animosity. • •

An ordinary meeting of this society was held on
Monday evening at Burlington House. The presi-
dent, Sir Roderick Murchison, before the com-
mencement of the business, male sole observa-
tions on the proposed arrangements for a tenta-
tive search for Dr. Livingstoue. lie said the Go-
vernment had been induced, on the representation
of the Geographical Society, to fit out an expedition
for the purpose, and that a boat had been ordered
to be constructed of thin steel plates and iron, espe-
cially adapted for navigation in shallow water,
which might be taken to pieces and carried and put
together again without much trouble. The expedi-
tion would be under the command of Mr. Young,
who had accompanied Dr. Livingstone on his former
explorations in command of the Pioneer._ The ob-
ject of the expedition would be to ascertain whether
Dr. Livingstone had actually been killed at the place
mentioned by his runaway porters, or whether he
had passed ou into the interior. If the latter were
the cage there would be great hope that he vas safe,
for he:would have entered a part of the country
where the natives were known to be friendly, audit
might be expected that he would accomplish the
object of ascertaining the level and direction of the
Lake of Tanganeka, and whether it flowed north-
wards to the other lakes which were supposed to be
the sources of the Nile. Sir Roderick expressed the
hope that Dr. Livingstone is alive, Lind Mt he
yet return in triumph to receive the congratulations
of the society. This hope, he said, was strengthened
by a letter just received from Dr. Kirke, who stated
that a merchant at Zanzibar had reported he had
seen a white man at the Lake of Tanganeka, and if
so, that white man could be no other than Dr.
Livingstone. Dr. Kirke had not, however, been
able to meet with the merchant who brought that
report to make more particular inquiries.
si-
nters(uel
ca Ca. SHARD
rbtyarEhyßi a
flar
from
gn
eB
tOmhi te:p
bestt
of
nar
whichueatdi
oartpaper
arnoynci Ceohnt
pre-
sentedm
to the society, was exhibited. He explained
at some length the geographical features of the
country which lies between Russia and our Indian
possessions. The Himalayan mountains bound it
on the south and a lofty range of mountains en-
close it on the north and west, in which only a few
passes afford accessible approach to the interior.
Along the centre of the territory, from west to
east, there is a desert more or less barren which
is a continuation of the desert range from
Africa. Capt. Osborn pointed out the boundary of
the Russian empire, which had been gradually en-
croaching on Chinese Tartary, and he expressed the
hope that the Russians would ere long occupy the
whole of that country, and introduce civilisation and
Christianity, where there was at present only bar-
barism of the most savage kind. He said he did not
apprehend anydanger to our Indian possessions front
the proximity of the Russians.
_ _

Sir H. RAWLINSON dissented from the opinion
that it would be desirable to have the Russians close
neighbours in India, and he thought it desirable to
have an intervening mountainous and desert space
to act as a " political buffer." Heprotested, however,
against the restrictive policy which discourages com-
munication with thenativesbeyond our Indian fron-
tiers, for he considered that by entering into com-
mercial relations with the people, and making set-
tlements among them in the manner the Russians
were accustomed to do, we would greatly strengthen
our position.
Sir R. MURCIIISON said he had been accused of

Russian proclivities, but his good opinion of the
people was founded on personal experience ; and he
agreed with Capt. Osborn that there was no clangor
to be apprehended from their occupation of Chinese
Tartary. AU the Russians wanted was to improve
their trade with China, and it could not endanger

our possessions in the south by allowing them to
have free access to China on the east. He said he
had much satisfaction in stating that the council of
the society had that day given their gold medal to
a Russian admiral for his important additions to
geographical science in Eastern Asia.
Mr. Ley and Mr. Saunders also made some obser-
vations on the subject, and the meeting adjourned
to the 27th inst., when the anniversary meeting of
the society will be held.