View report page

17
Your Committee, therefore, recommend that the Vestry
do instruct the Solicitor to consent on their behalf to judgement
in the several actions brought against them in the
terms asked in the respective statements of claim.
That the question of Lammas Rights be further referred
to your Committee to consider and report:
This case came on for hearing in the Royal Courts of Justice,
before Mr. Justice Kekewick, on the 17th, 22nd and 23rd February,
1893, when the Vestry were represented by Mr. Marten, Q.C., and
Mr. Macaakie of Counsel, instructed by Mr. T. Blanco White, and
Harwood's Trustees were represented by Mr. Warmington, Q.C.,
M.P., and Mr. Swinfen Lady, instructed by Mr. Sherry, when, after
hearing the evidence of a large number of witnesses and the arguments
of Counsel on both sides, the learned Judge gave his verdict
against the Vestry, with 40s. damages, and costs, on High Court
scale, to be taxed. At the meeting of the Vestry held on the 1st
March, 1893, the following report from the Solicitor was read:—
HAKWOOD v. THE VESTRY.
On Friday, the 17th February last, Mr. Marten, Q.C., and
Mr. Macaskie moved the Court on behalf of the Vestry, that
the Vestry being advised that they were not at the time of the
trespass alleged in the Statement of Claim the owners or occupiers
within the Manor of Fulham of any commonable lands upon
which commonable beasts, levant and couchant, could be, an
injunction might be granted restraining them, their servants or
agents, from wrongfully entering upon the plaintiff's land in the
Statement of Claim mentioned, or from wrongfully pulling
down or damaging any fences thereon, or from wrongfully
depasturing any horses, cows or other animals upon such lands,
or any part thereof, with costs to be taxed. The Court ordered
that the Vestry by their Counsel admitting that notwithstanding
the allegations in the Statement of Defence, they were not at
the time of the acts of trespass complained of by the plaintiffs
seised of any lands, the seisin whereof might justify such alleged
acts of trespass, and that the acts complained of by the plaintiff
were done in respect of such a seisin then alleged, the action to
proceed to trial on the question of damages only, and that the
counter-claim pleaded by the Vestry be withdrawn.
On Wednesday, the 22nd February last, the action came on
for trial before Mr. Justice Kekewick, and after hearing the
evidence submitted by Mr. Warmington, Q.C., and Mr. Swinfen
Eady on behalf of the plaintiffs, and Mr. Marten, Q.C., and Mr.
Macaskie on behalf of the Vestry, directed the Vestry to pay the
sum of Forty Shillings damages, with costs to be taxed.
Fulham Vestry ats. Lowenfeid. On the 1st March, 1893, the Vestry in-
,, ,, John Health. structed their Solicitor to stay these actions
,, ,,To Heately.
Metrpolitan
Asyums Board. on the same terms as the action Fulham
Vestry ats. Harwood.