SECOND READING. (Hansard, 17 February 1873)

§ MR. AYRTON,
in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, reminded hon. Members that an Act was passed two Sessions ago for the purpose of authorising Commissioners to inquire into all the disputed rights in Epping Forest, with a view to preserving all the rights of the public. At the time it was thought that the Commissioners would be able to complete their labours within two years. It was now found that this anticipation was not quite correct. The Commissioners had been proceeding very actively with the discharge of their duties from the passing of the Act to the present time, but had by no means arrived at a conclusion. Their first duty was to obtain an accurate survey of the remains of Epping Forest. This was a difficult task, and it was not until one year had elapsed that the map was laid before them. They had then to make inquiries into its accuracy, and to perambulate the Forest. These duties occupied two or three months. Then there was a great number of inclosures necessary to be surveyed. After this was done it was necessary to inquire into the rights of parties who made claims. No fewer than 553 claims had to be brought on before them for inquiry, and in order to do justice to those claims and to the parties connected with them, considerably further time would be required, as well as to prepare a scheme in reference to them; and it was for that purpose that this Bill was brought in. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the second reading.

§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON
would remind the House that the proposed extension implied a great increase of expense and inconvenience to a large number of people. There were many holders of small interests in land in Epping Forest, land held of the Crown, and which had been in the hands of the present occupiers for many years, and everything in connection with those interests was now in abeyance, and would be until the Commissioners issued their Report. It therefore seemed to him that the House ought to be very careful before it consented to prolong for another 566 long term the present state of uncertainty as to the enclosures in this Forest. What they had already seen of the conduct of the Commissioners was not enough to convince them that this application might not at some future period be renewed. It was at first thought that the Commission need only sit two years; but that view was now altogether abandoned, and he himself believed that it was more likely to last for eight or ten years. Why, only the other clay they had had evidence of the extent to which the inquiry would be protracted, for at a recent meeting of the Commission it was asserted that there was no limit to the power of cross-examination of the witnesses, and in consequence the cross-examination of one was conducted at such length that the Court had to adjourn to consider the matter. Again, the lords of the manors would be most seriously affected by the extension of the time now proposed to be given to the inquiries of the Commission. He would also point out that if, as he believed, the Commission would report that only part of the Forest was proper for the purposes of public recreation, then by allowing this fresh delay to the Commissioners they would virtually be allowing all the remaining portion of the Forest to lie unproductive during the interval. His view was this—that the Commissioners ought to have already decided what portion of the Forest should be set aside for the public, and to have confined their inquiries to that part. It was a serious matter, considering the rise in prices at present, that 3,000 of these acres should be shut up for another two years, and debarred from the possibility of being brought under cultivation. The smaller proprietors were not only hung up from dealing with their land, but had to attend before the Commissioners and watch the proceedings at great loss to themselves. They had also to watch the suits going on in the Court of Chancery. [Mr. LOCKE: One suit.] The principal points to be arrived at were, whether the Metropolitan Board of Works or the City of London were the proper authorities in which the property to be set apart for the recreation of the people ought to be vested so as to free the rest of the property from litigation. The settlement of the question of Hainault Forest was carried 567 through in a short time without complaint, and at an expense not exceeding £3,000. If the right hon. Gentleman brought in an amended Bill to define the power of the Commissioners, and to bring certain points before them on which they should give judgment at once, the House would be better able to deal with the subject. He hoped the House would pause before granting the extension of time now asked for.

§ MR. LOCKE
said, that as one of the Commission, he ought not, perhaps, to address the House, but he desired to answer one or two of the points of the hon. Gentleman opposite. The Commissioners had narrowed their inquiry for the present into all those parts of the Forest that had been encroached upon by the lords within the last 20 years; they had in the first instance confined themselves to 20 years, because if they had enclosed within that time they could not make out a title. It was necessary that the Commissioners should have plans made as to all the property that had been so absorbed; and then these plans had to be examined and corrected, and for this purpose perambulations were made by the Commissioners, who compared these plans with the land, and alterations had to be made; and, in fact, the work was of a complicated character, and required much time to perform it, and had only been got through towards the end of last year. The Commissioners had now commenced upon the claims of different parties who had made use of the land for their own purposes within the period he had mentioned. Counsel appeared for the different parties and the witnesses who gave evidence for the lord of the manor were cross-examined by Mr. Manisty, who appeared for the Commissioners of Sewers, and likewise by counsel for the Metropolitan Board of Works, in addition to the counsel for the Crown. Parties who had the same interest as the lord of the manor were of course partially represented in the examination-in-chief. Yet now the hon. Baronet wanted to arrest the proceedings at the very moment when the Commission was about to commence the really practical part of their duty, to which all the rest had been little more than preliminary. One question, which ought to be decided before the Commission resolve on a scheme, was what were the privileges of 568 the commoners; whether the rights of individual commoners holding land in any part of the Forest, extended throughout the whole of it; and this was a question now before the Master of the Rolls, and would in all probability have to b o finally decided, not by the House of Commons, but by the House of Lords, or the new tribunal which was now in embryo in that House. The matter had now reached a certain stage when something could be done, and if the House stopped its further progress all that had been done would be useless.

§ MR. STRAIGHT
said, he concurred in the last remark of the hon. Member for Southwark (Mr. Locke), and hoped the hon. Baronet would not persevere in his opposition to the Bill, especially at a time when the Commissioners were approaching the practical part of the business committed to their care. The argument the hon. Baronet had advanced this evening ought to have been addressed to the House when the scheme for the appointment of Commissioners was first brought forward. Now that the Commissioners had been appointed, and were actually exercising the powers conferred on them by the Act, the opposition of the hon. Baronet would, if successful, render void all the important business on which they had been engaged during the last 18 months.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, the present Bill would continue all the powers conferred by the Bill of last Session.