MOTION FOR PAPERS. (Hansard, 21 July 1868)

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH
, in moving an Address to Her Majesty for Copies of certain privately printed Papers relating to Foreshores, said, the subject was one of very great importance, and one in which the interests of the public were largely concerned; but it involved ft more intimate knowledge of the law than he could pretend to possess. Of late many claims had been put forward on behalf of the Crown to the Foreshores, which proceeded on the assumption that the shores and bed of the sea formed part of the proprietary rights of the Crown. He was informed, however, this was an entire misconception of the law, and that by usage they belonged to the owners of the adjoining lands. He was informed that the cases in which the Court of Exchequer had decided in favour of the Crown were always cases in which the Crown was the owner of the land on which the Foreshores abutted. There were important Papers now in the possession of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, relating to this subject, which had been transferred to them from the Treasury. These Papers had already been printed, because, being very voluminous, the expense of multiplying them in manuscript 1551 would have been very great. But, as they were in print, he thought they might be usefully produced. Moved, "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty to request that Her Majesty will be graciously pleased to order that there be laid before this House by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, Copy of each of the following privately printed Papers: namely, Report on the Right to Foreshores and the legal Decisions affecting the River Thames and the Rights of the Citizens of London from the Time of Henry III.; by J. W. Pycroft, F.S.A., M.R.A.S.; Reg. Sept. Antiq. Reg. Soc, pp. 161: Also, Arguments relating to Sea Lands and Salt Shores: Objections thereto and Answers to such Objections (now first printed from MSS. in the Landsdown Collection [British Museum], London 1855, pp. 61.), disclosing that the Foreshore is the Property of the adjacent Proprietor, and not belonging to the Crown by virtue of its Prerogative, and that the latter has no primâ facie Rights therein or thereto, and of a certain Résumé of the 5th August filed on the 21st of May last: As also a Copy of the Shorthand Writer's Notes in the Case of the Attorney-General v. Jones, in the Exchequer, in which Her Majesty's Barons of that Court declared that the Foreshore belonged to the Subject by Usage; as also a Copy of all the Correspondence had in reference to such Case previous to the Commencement of these legal Proceedings or subsequent thereto; as also of the Writ upon which Issue was afterwards joined, and all Proceedings subsequent thereto, including the final Decision of the Barons of the Exchequer declaring the Law of England to be that Foreshore belonged to the Subject by Usage: Also, Copy of the Defendant's Bill of Costs (previous to Taxation), as also a Statement of the Amount which has been paid to him: And also, Statement of the Reasons why the History of the Result of this and Seven other adverse Cases in which the Attorney-General and the Lord Advocate were defeated was omitted to be stated in their Annual Reports addressed to Her Majesty, and presented by Royal Command (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper No. 185., Session 1867.)"—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)

§ THE DUKE OF RICHMOND
regretted that he was not able to acquiesce in the Motion of the noble Duke. If all the Papers moved for by the noble Duke were ordered to be printed they would amount to something like four or five folio volumes, and the subject was not such as to warrant the large expenditure of public money that they would cost. Moreover part of these Papers were no more than private statements and arguments addressed to one side of the case. The matter was, in fact, a private and not a public affair—the public had nothing to do with it, and be objected to the outlay of public money in printing private documents. He had no objection to grant certain Returns in continuation of 1552 what had been moved for by Mr. Augustus Smith in the House of Commons between 1863 and 1866.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, he saw no good reason why the Government should object to lay on the table a copy of the judgment in the case of the "Attorney General v. Jones."

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
said, that if the judgment in question decided any important principle it was to be found in the authorized Report in their Lordships' Library. There would therefore be no public good in printing it. To print at the public expenses the pamphlet of an enter-prizing and somewhat eccentric gentleman like Mr. Pycroft would, he thought, be a somewhat unjustifiable use to make of the public money.

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH
then moved an Address for— Statement of all legal Proceedings which have been instituted by the Law Officers at their Instance in the Name of the Crown, or in the Behalf of Her Majesty, with respect to the alleged Title claimed by the Crown to the Bed or Shores of the Sea or the Foreshores or Beds of Navigable Rivers against Corporate Bodies or Private Individuals from the 1st Day of Jauuary 1843 to the present Time:" [and other Particulars.]