§ Mr. Harveysaid that, seeing the Attorney-General in his place, he would take that opportunity to present a Petition of which he had given that learned Gentleman notice. The petition in question was an appeal to that House—it was an appeal from the poor to the rich against a scourge which the rich alone could inflict on them. The petition was signed by seventy persons, all of them, with five exceptions, of the labouring class in the county of Radnor, in South Wales. The county of Radnor, it was well known, was extremely mountainous, and, until lately, a great portion of it had been the property of the Crown. However, in the year 1826, the Commissioners of Woods and Forests sold a great portion of the Crown manors there, and that, too, he regretted to observe, by private contract. In that year one of these manors had been sold by the Commissioners to Mr. Watt, of Birmingham. It had long been the custom for the poor of the district—a custom which had not been interdicted by the Government — to enclose small portions of waste grounds on the slopes of the hills and vallies there, and to build cottages upon them. Some of these cottages had been occupied upwards of thirty years. It suited the purposes of the purchaser of the manor, on obtaining possession of it, to institute an action at law to recover one of these cottages, and a small portion of ground attached to it, with a view to the assertion of his dominion over the whole of them. The action was tried, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, subject to a special case, to be argued and determined in the Court of Common Pleas. It was fully argued there, and the unanimous decision of the court was, that the Crown had not the power to sell the waste; that if it had the power which, it claimed, that power did 505 not pass with the deed to the purchaser, and the Chief Justice observed, that not only the law, but the justice of the case was with the defendant. A rule was accordingly entered for the defendant, and so the matter at that time terminated. Since then his Majesty's Attorney-General, at the instance of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests; had instituted proceedings for the purpose of establishing the right of the Crown, and to do so he had recourse to the ancient prerogative writ of intrusion, a writ that had been employed in the very worst periods of English history. It was attempted by this most tyrannical proceeding to deprive those poor people of little properties that they had possessed from a period sufficiently long to consecrate their right to them. Though such a proceeding might be agreeable to law, it was repugnant to the principles of justice; and the very Act of Parliament, passed only a few years since, empowering the Commissioners to sell manors of this description, declared, that encroachments of twenty years' duration and upwards, should be excepted; that where there were such, the Commissioners should give the parties leases for thirty-one years, or come to agreements with them upon equitable terms. The petitioners felt, that if the Government succeeded in this case, their small holdings would be swept away from them, and they would be driven to the workhouse. He trusted that the House would manifest such a feeling as would induce the Government to desist from further proceedings in this matter.
§ The Attorney-Generalsaid, that he had attended in consequence of the hon. Gentleman having given him notice of his intention to present the petition. He had made it his duty to inquire into the facts of the case, and having derived his information from a quarter on which he could place implicit confidence, he would lay the real facts before the House. It would then be seen that nothing had been done by the Government which could give just cause for complaint. The Crown possessed extensive manors in the county of Radnor, and large portions of the public property therein had been encroached upon by private individuals. In the year 1826, a number of these manors were sold. Mr. Watt, of Birmingham purchased one of them, and as might be expected from such a man, he had treated the persons who had made encroachments there with the greatest kindness and liberality. He allowed them to remain in possession, on condition of their 506 paying him a nominal rent of 2d. or 3d., and to those who wished to purchase the fee simple of their encroachments he sold it considerably under its value. All of them acknowledged the title of Mr. Watt, except a Mr. Parsons, an attorney at Presteign, who had taken advantage of the matter to stir up dissension in the county; an action was brought against him, and a verdict was had for the plaintiff, subject to a special case to be argued in the Court of Common Pleas. The title of the Crown was clearly proved, and if the action had been brought in the name of the Crown, no defence could have been set up by the defendant. The Court of Common Pleas, however, ruled for the defendant upon a technical point of law—namely, that the Crown being out of possession, it could not transfer the legal estate in those wastes by the deed. Mr. Parsons having thus succeeded upon a technical point, he not only refused to acknowledge the title of Mr. Watt, but he stirred up these poor persons, who had already acknowledged it, to resist it. Mr. Watt, under these circumstances, called on the Woods and Forests to complete his title. It was for that purpose that the present proceeding had been instituted against Mr. Parsons. The hon. Member would persuade the House, that the proceeding in question was a renewal of those oppressive measures which had been resorted to by Empson and Dudley, and for which those eminent individuals had suffered a penalty that no one regretted. Now, what was the course taken against Mr. Parsons, the author of all this mischief? A writ of intrusion had been filed, the only course open to the Government, and he should have neglected his duty if he had not afforded a remedy to enable the Woods and Forests to complete Mr. Watfs title. The action would be tried at the approaching assizes for Herefordshire, when he had no doubt there would be a verdict for the Government, and then he was quite sure that harmony would be restored between Mr. Watt and these poor people, and that having vindicated his title, Mr. Watt would, with his well-known kindness and liberality, allow them to remain in their holdings.
Mr. 0'Connellcontended, that there was no liberality in compelling these poor people to acknowledge his title by paying him 2d. or 3d. rent, and thereby giving him the power to turn them out when he pleased. The merits of the case would not be tried by the action that was brought. The overruling prerogative of the Crown would 507 override on that occasion all justice and equity. If the facts were as they had been represented to the hon. Member for South-wark, that hon. Member ought to move for a Committee of Inquiry on the subject, and if such facts were proved before it, it would be the bounden duty of the House to address the Crown to stop such oppressive proceedings.
§ Mr. Ormsby Gorebegged to assure the hon. Member for Kilkenny that quite as strong cases had occurred in North Wales. The most vexatious and oppressive proceedings had been adopted there by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests—proceedings that had surprised the whole principality.
§ Mr. Jervisvindicated the conduct of the Commissioners, and contended that the proceedings which they had adopted had been necessary for the purpose of asserting the rights of the Crown, or rather of the public.
§ Petition laid on the table.