§ SIR J. BRUNNER (Cheshire, Northwich)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty under what authority and for what purposes a piece of Hayling Beach Common, Hampshire, 100 feet square, has been enclosed by the Admiralty; whether any, and, if so, how much compensation has been paid to the commoners for the extinction of their rights over the land enclosed; and whether, seeing that the local authority is opposed to the enclosure and in view of the action taken by Parliament in 1886 in preventing the proposed enclosure of portions of this common, due regard has been taken to the interests of the public by the substitution of land equal in area and value to that now enclosed, or otherwise?
§ THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. A. CHAMBERLAIN,) Worcestershire, E.The land in question has been leased from the Lord of the Manor for a term of 21 years for coastguard purposes, one of the conditions of the lease being that the Admiralty should fence in the site. My information is to the effect that there has been no encroachment upon the rights of the commoners and no compensation has been made to them in money or land. But if there is any dispute upon this question, it should be settled between the commoners and the Lord of the Manor. The Admiralty are only tenant, and are bound by the conditions of the lease.
§ SIR J. BRUNNERThen has the Crown come to the conclusion it is not common land?
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINThe conclusion is that there is no encroachment on the rights of commoners.
§ SIR J. BRUNNERThat it is not, in fact, common land?
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINI presume that may be the inference, but it is rather a legal question.