[list-cumbria] Carlisle Patriot, 06 Mar 1824 - Cumberland Spring Assizes (11)

[Petra Mitchinson]

Saturday 06 Mar 1824   (p. 2, col. 4 – p. 3, col. 5)

 

CUMBERLAND SPRING ASSIZES. 

 

NISI PRIUS. 

  

[continued] 

 

THE KING v. INHABITANTS OF CUMBERLAND. 

 

This was an indictment of the same kind, relating to Egremont High Bridge. 

 

Mr. COURTENAY said he appeared for the defendants; and the County having pleaded that others are liable to make the requisite
repairs, the onus of proof lay upon him. The short question to try was, whether the owners of Chapels and Chapelbrow Closes, situate
adjoining the bridge, were not liable; for though the law of the land made the County liable in the first instance, if they proved
that the repairs had been done by others from time immemorial, those persons must continue to keep the structure in proper order. 

 

Edward STAINTON called by Mr. ALDERSON.—I am 72. I never lived six months out of Egremont parish since I was born, and have known
Egremont High Bridge or Pearson Bridge, about 60 years—PEARSON repaired it while he had two closes that lay near the Bridge—nothing
but a little common land between, which was inclosed 45 years ago. A person named David SANDERSON had these closes after PEARSON.
This SANDERSON is dead, and his son now has the land. He (the old man) employed me to repair the bridge. I put the walls up at the
east end on both sides; and made the west-end wider, for which I was paid by him. Above 50 years ago, I heard it said that those who
had the land were obliged to repair; I never knew the County do any thing to the bridge. 

 

Cross-examined by Mr. ARMSTRONG.—I have not seen the fields in question for 30 years or more—they lie up out of the way—I don't know
whether there are two or three. The bridge was built before my time. I have heard old people say there used to be a wood-bridge
above it, where there is now a mill-dam. 

 

Wm. RENNIE, aged 62, had lived in Egremont 46 years, and known the bridge all that time.—It was old and wanted repair when I first
knew it. I knew nothing of the closes referred to—but in 1810, I repaired the bridge by order of William SANDERSON, part of the
stonework of the arch having been washed out. Never heard any old people talk as to who was liable to repair it. I have heard that
the PEARSONs were liable, and after SANDERSON got the land, he repaired and paid. 

 

James ROBERTS.—Aged 75, and lived in Egremont all his life; knows the High Bridge, but could not remember when it was built. PEARSON
had closes above the bridge, and afterwards added to them a little of the common when divided. Had heard it said that PEARSON ought
to repair the bridge, on account of land. He could not tell exactly how many closes there were though he had seen them a thousand
times (a laugh). 

 

John SANDERSON.—I am the brother of Wm. SANDERSON, and know that my brother has two closes, and that their names are Chapels, or
Chapel-fields—I think I never heard either of them called Chapel-brow-close. On your oath, have you not heard them so called? I
don't know that I have. I can swear (after much fencing) that I have not heard the fields called Chapel-brow. On your oath, have you
not yourself spoken of one of these closes, as Chapel-brow-close, to Mr. HODGSON, of Whitehaven?—I might, or I might not; I don’t
know that I did. (Further urged, he persisted in saying that he thought he had never said any such thing to Mr. HODGSON—he could not
say so to his knowledge.) I never saw any one repair the bridge. 

 

Cross-examined by Mr. PATTINSON. —One of the fields of the old inclosure went by the name of Broad-crofts, and the other by that of
Chapel-fields. Before the inclosure of the common, there was no hard road to the bridge. My age is turned 61. When I was a boy, the
bridge was not a new one—an old looking one—a fresh looking bridge! 

 

His Lordship thought the witnesses had not proved the name of the closes, as laid in the pleadings. 

 

Mr. COURTENAY called Wm. SANDERSON.—I am the son of David SANDERSON, and have two closes (in trust, he added), called Chapel-close,
or Chapels, near the bridge, which are now let to two persons named BOADEN. One of the fields is a broad field; but I cannot
describe them. I lodge with the BOADENs, and they pay the rent in that manner. The new inclosure has never been ploughed; it is
still in the ancient state in which the Almighty created it. The BOADENs pay no rent; I board with them in lieu of any. I do not
assist them but for my own pleasure or exercise; but I would not like to swear that I do nothing. 

 

Re-examined.—He said that Chapel-brow-close was a very proper name for one of them. 

 

By the Court.—They never paid me any money. We agreed at first for £20 a year, or my meat, washing, and lodging. They left this at
my own option. If I went to board at any other place, they were to pay me £20 a year. They cultivate the lands, go to expense of
management, and have the benefit. 

 

Mr. Justice HOLROYD.—Gentlemen of the Jury, in point of law there is an objection to the plea, which renders it necessary for you to
give a verdict for the defendant. 

 

Verdict accordingly. 

 

 

[to be continued] 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.cumbriafhs.com/pipermail/list-cumbria/attachments/20240708/7504b5c4/attachment-0001.htm>