[List-Cumbria] Carlisle Journal, 03 Sep 1814 - Cumberland Assizes (9)

[Petra Mitchinson]

Saturday 03 Sep 1814   (p. 4, col. 1-5)

 

CUMBERLAND ASSIZES. 

----- 

NISI PRIUS. 

 

(Continued from the JOURNAL of last Week.) 

 

*** In our last we gave a short narrative of a trial of great interest to the parties concerned, viz. The Earl of Egremont v. Sir
Frederick FLETCHER VANE, Bart. respecting the ownership of Wythop manor, within the barony of Egremont; wherein a verdict was given
in favour of Sir Frederick. Those who may be curious to know the ancient history of this place, and the proprietors thereof, will be
highly gratified by consulting HUTCHINSON's History of Cumberland, vol. II. p. 124.-We now proceed to give a short account of
another trial of a similar nature- 

 

SIR F. F. VANE v. MACARATH AND OTHERS (NOMINAL DEFENDANTS). 

 

This action, the real defendant in which was the Earl of Egremont, was brought to try the right of fishing in Derwent, on the estate
of Sir F. F. VANE in the manor of Isel and Setmurthy. It appeared, that 12 years ago the plaintiff put down a number of stakes in
the river, opposite to his mansion-house of Armathwaite, in order to prevent poachers from fishing in the water and trespassing upon
his pleasure-grounds. The fact of the ground on both sides of, and a small island in, the river, being his own freehold, was proved
by an old tenant cutting and using the brush-wood that grew upon them, and wearing the banks to prevent the soil from being washed
away. Sir Frederick also proved, in a most satisfactory manner, that the fishery of Derwent, immediately below his estate, belonged
to the LAWSON family, as inheriting Isel Hall estate,-as also the manorial rights to the bed of the river, by taking from it immense
quantities of sand, gravel, and stones, at various times, and fishing the river from time immemorial between Ouse bridge and Isel
bridge, without interruption. 

 

The defence set up was, that the Earl of Egremont had the superior right of fishing in those waters, as held from the crown. It was
admitted that the LAWSON family had a right under his Lordship so far as the land extended; but it was contended that the plaintiff
had no right of fishery at all.-The ancient title deeds were produced, proving the grants of all royalties in fishing, &c. 

 

Jane WANE, widow, stated that her husband rented Bassenthwaite Lake fishery 35 years ago, and remembered getting leave from Mr.
PEAT, who had Lord Lonsdale's fishery at Workington (he holding it under the Earl of Egremont) to fish in the river opposite
Armathwaite, and that her husband and her father drew their nets two or three times there, and also on a little island in the river.
This was in June; was done for only one day; and witness did not know whether Mr. CLARKE, who then farmed the ground, was acquainted
with the proceeding. 

 

Mrs. WILSON (the next evidence) and her father were at Cockermouth castle 15 years ago; when her father was asked by Mr. BENSON,
steward to the Earl of Egremont, if he had drawn the river: on the former replying in the negative, Mr. BENSON said-"you must do it,
to keep up his Lordship's rights." He accordingly did draw it five or six times on the Isel side, at a place called Meadow foot, and
obtained some trout. This was done five or six different days, and all in the same year, except in one instance. 

 

Thomas HUDSON said, that he had been 20 years employed by Mr. PEAT, who lived at Salmon Hall, to watch the river in close time, for
the preservation of the breed of fish: he proved his having detected a number of poachers and getting them convicted. At one time he
pursued a number of poachers, and on their taking refuge in Sir F. F. VANE's premises, he complained to him on the subject; when Sir
F. said that he would not allow his men to kill the fish, and that he would protect the fishery for Mr. PEAT.-Witness further said,
that he never heard any person, except Mr. PEAT, claim the right of fishing. 

 

Another person proved his being employed to watch the river in close time; and Mr. SATTERTHWAITE, a magistrate, explained the mode
of conviction of persons guilty of killing kipper or young fry. 

 

The learned Judge (BAYLEY), in summing up to the Jury, observed that it was clear the freehold belonged to Sir F. F. VANE, and that
he had a right to put stakes in the river. It did not however appear that the LAWSON family fished there; nor had the plaintiff
proved the enjoyment by him of any right. With respect to the merits of the case as it applied to the Earl of Egremont,-the
occasional act of Mr. BENSON merely shewed his anxiety to give his Lordship a right; but the person who continued the occupation of
the fishery had the best right. 

 

After a few minutes consultation, the Jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff-"That as both sides of the river were his, he had a
right to put down stakes where he pleased." 

 

This cause lasted nearly a whole day. 

 

IRWIN v. MESSENGER. 

 

This was an action to compel MESSENGER to pay his admittance rent for a property he held under the heirs of the late John TOMLINSON,
Esq. Lord of the Manor of Allonby, which he refused to pay till the heir at law, a minor, was of age. From the stupidity of LUCOCK,
the steward, who held the court, it was with difficulty the regular proceedings of the court against the defendant could be proved.
A verdict was given for the plaintiff. 

 

IRWIN v. THOMPSON. 

 

This cause was similar to the last, and attended with a similar result. 

 

WILKINSON v. LITTLE. 

 

This concerned an ejectment of a property in the parish of Sowerby, of tenant right mortgaged. Wm. ADAMSON, steward for the Court of
the Manor, proved the admittance of Thomas WILKINSON to the estate of Low Close, in Basto-beck-bound; but, from some circumstances
which we could not collect, the plaintiff was non-suited. 

 

SARGINSON v. GLENDINNING. 

 

This cause related to an unsettled account between the parties; but neither of them being able to write, they could not produce any
account-book: the Judge recommended the dispute to be settled by arbitration, which was acceded to. 

 

 

[to be continued] 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.cumbriafhs.com/mailman/private/list-cumbria/attachments/20201022/7a9d2877/attachment.htm>