[List-Cumbria] Carlisle Patriot, 07 Sep 1816 - Cumberland Assizes (27)

[Petra Mitchinson]

Saturday 07 Sep 1816   (p. 3, col. 4 – p. 4, col. 6)

 

Cumberland Assizes. 

[Continued from our last paper.] 

========== 

MANAGEMENT OF A FARM.—SPECIAL JURY. 

 

WALKER v. HARRIS.—This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Miss Ann WALKER, to recover damages from Mr. HARRIS, the defendant,
he having mismanaged a farm, at Loweswater, in this county, the property of the plaintiff. 

 

 

 

        Special Jurors.                |             Talesmen. 

Wm. BLAMIRE, Esq.           | 

Thos. BROUGHAM, Esq.     |   John WATSON, Gent. 

Isaac PARKER, Esq.             |   Christ. BORROWDALE, Gent. 

John HODGSON, Esq.          |   Benj. WILSON, Gent. 

Richard LOWRY, Esq.          |   John STAMPER, Gent. 

John LOWRY, Esq.               |   Paul NIXON, Gent. 

John HINDSON, Esq.           | 

 

Mr. SCARLETT for the plaintiff addressed the Jury. He said the farm in question is situate at Loweswater. It was purchased by Miss
Ann WALKER, the plaintiff at a time when the defendant held it in possession the third year out of seven for which period he had
taken it. Mr. HARRIS being an excellent farmer had at this time brought the farm up to the highest possible pitch of perfection,
which made it very agreeable to the eye; hence Miss WALKER, or rather those who acted for her, were induced to give £6000 for it,
though consisting of only 140 acres, and let for £193 per annum. Those who are acquainted with farming, observed Mr. SCARLETT, know
well that it is in the power of a farmer to cultivate a farm well during the first three years of a term, and neglect or exhaust it
in the course of the last four. This was the case in the present instant, for Mr. HARRIS had completely drained the farm, and having
a consummate knowledge of agriculture, he was enabled to do it more effectually than an ordinary farmer. Mr. HARRIS's knowledge and
experience were so great that he had obtained a prize from an Agricultural Society for the management of his farm.—  

 

Mr. RAINE, for the defendant, here interposed. He thought the matter in question could be better settled by some persons in the
neighbourhood, who knew both parties, and who would go on the spot and form a more accurate judgement than could be done in Court,
and justice would be better insured to both parties. This was his Lordship's opinion also; he observed there were eight or ten
different subjects of complaint; they could not possibly gone into in Court in the same manner they could on the property, and he
recommended a settlement in the manner proposed by Mr. RAINE. A short consultation took place, but the plaintiff wished to have the
decision of the Jury, and Mr. SCARLETT resumed:— 

 

The question to be tried was, observed the Learned Gentleman, whether the defendant had mismanaged the farm or not. A farmer
possessing an estate of 142 acres, containing 96 acres of arable land, ought not to have more than one-third of his arable under the
plough at one time. Now, Mr. HARRIS, in the last year of his tenancy, out of 96 acres of arable, had 59 in white crops. The system
of cultivation prevented Mr. HARRIS from keeping a sufficient stock on the farm during the latter part of his time, and in
consequence, a complaint was made, when Mr. HARRIS turned on the estate a few young cattle; Mr. H. had taken another farm, and it
was his interest to heap every thing on that, while he impoverished the one he was soon to quit.—According to law, every tenant who
occupies a farm with hedges and buildings, is bound when he quits, to leave them in a state of repair. During the last year Mr.
HARRIS left the dwelling-house unoccupied; there were no fires in it; the roof was neglected and rotten; the floors were decayed;
and one of the rooms used as a granary had been eaten through by rats. There was a garden with folding gates; they were let sink and
hang on the ground till they became perfectly useless. The incoming tenant was obliged to lay out £45 to make the property
tenantable. The barn doors were rotten, and having fallen off, had been taken away. The hedges had been barely cropped and the
croppings carried away to the other farm.—If the estate had been left in a proper manner, it would have let for £50 more rent, per
annum, for a term of 7 years. Miss WALKER when she purchased it expected to let it for £250 a-year, and perhaps would have done so
had it not been so ill used. The damages were laid at £50 per annum, for seven years, the time which Mr. HARRIS held the estate.—Mr.
SCARLETT called the following evidence. 

 

Mr. John DICKINSON sworn.—Is a farmer, to which business he has closely attended to all his life; is 58 years of age. On the 24th of
March 1815, he attended when the farm in question was given up; he went with others at the desire of Miss WALKER; they looked over
the farm, and were accompanied by some of Mr. HARRIS's family. In a field called above-house, he observed the fences, and there were
two gaps made up with thorns. Between a field called the Mill-close, and a plantation called Roger-wood, the fences were down and
otherwise in bad repair; the thorns at the upper end were in a bad state. He observed a piece of hedge near the old house at
Stock-beck, which was also in bad repair. The fence was down which divided Long-lands and Long-gains. The general state of the
fences on the farm, except those mentioned, were tenantable.—Witness looked over the land; the fields were pointed out to him, and
he observed what had been in tillage in the last year; Highclose, Lowclose, Killing-paddock, Main-close, Above-house, Mill-how,
Upperbanks, Tarnlittle dale, Mill-long-croft, Near-long-croft, Satterhowdale, Bridgedale, Far-long-croft, Longlands, a part of
Highgap, Pickle, Great Kirkthwaite, Towndale (part ploughed,) were in tillage in 1814. There was more ploughed than is generally
ploughed in one year, but witness knows of no particular custom; it is generally done according to agreement; but he does not think
so much as he has stated to be good management. He has known from 20s. to 30s. per acre paid for overploughing; if he had been
called on to decide in the present case, he should say 26s. or 28s. per acre; cannot be a particular judge. In his judgment the farm
had been hard ploughed, and was not in good condition. 

 

Cross-Examined.—Recollects that Mr. HARRIS said that, whatever fences were out of repair should be paid for. Mr. HARRIS agreed with
the in-coming tenant, Mr. SISSON, about the repairs of part of the fences. Mr. H. said if there was any thing of any kind amiss, he
was willing to rectify it, and refer it to two neighbours to settle it. Witness never saw the farm closely until Mr. HARRIS was
about to quit it, therefore he knew nothing of its state before 1815; cannot say to what amount it has sustained damage. The hard
ploughing he spoke of might have been, for what he knows, on land where there had been green crops the year before. With the
exception of those spots he had spoken of, he knows nothing of the crops. If the ploughed ground he saw had been in green crops the
preceding year, the management would have been very good. Witness farms his own estate, which is 900 acres, and is for the greatest
part a stock farm. He has sometimes 200 head of stock, and sometimes only 50; that is unavoidably the case with all farmers; there
can be no pretence to say that such variation is bad management. He never heard of any fault of Mr. HARRIS as a farmer; he has heard
that he got a prize at the Agricultural Society. 

 

Resumed.—Out of 69 acres it would be good management to have two-thirds of that quantity ploughed, and two-thirds of the land
ploughed in white crop. When he was on the farm he saw about 140 cart-loads of manure, as near as he could judge, but cannot say
what is a proper quantity to have been there; does not pretend to be a good judge. He estimated that the hedges could have been
repaired for two guineas. Mr. HARRIS agreed with SISSON to do a certain portion; some other in want of repair he said he had nothing
to do with. 

 

Questioned by the Judge.—Cannot say that there is a settled usage in his part of the country that there should be two-thirds of
white crop, and the other third in fallow and in grass. 

 

 

[to be continued] 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.cumbriafhs.com/mailman/private/list-cumbria/attachments/20221108/958c5ef2/attachment.htm>