The Forest of Salcey. 



Salcey Forest, iu the south-east part of ISTorthamptonshire and 

 on the borders of Buckinghamshire, appears to have been peram- 

 bulated as early as the reign of Henry III. and Edward I., and from 

 the official account given of the latter it appears that the limits of the 

 forest hiad been extended by King John, but that the woods and 

 lawns afforested by that king were disafforested by Edward. But 

 though the forest was thus brought back to its ancient bounds, and 

 though the limits thus established were brought to their original 

 extent and confirmed by usage for more than 300 years, an attempt 

 was made by Charles I. again to enlarge the forest, and a considerable 

 extent of country was added to it, but the Parliament of 1641 again 

 brought it back to its former dimensions. About the close of the 

 last century the lands considered as forest, over which the Crown was 

 possessed of timber and other valuable rights, extended in length 

 about two miles and a half, and in breadth about a mile and a half, 

 and contained 1,847a. Or. 23p., about 1,121 acres of which were under 

 timber. The Forest of Salcey was made part of the Honour of 

 Grafton, erected in the 33rd year of Henry VIII., and in the 17th 

 year of Charles II. ; this, together with the Forest of Whittlewood, 

 was settled on Queen Catherine for life, reserving all the timber trees 

 and saplings for the use of the Crown, and at her death the Grafton 

 family succeeded to her privileges. Among the papers collected by 

 Sir Julius Csesar (one of the ministers of James I.) is a survey of the 

 timber and wood belonging to the Crown in the county of ISrorth- 

 ampton, taken in the year 1608, from which it appears that there 

 were at that time growing in this forest 15,274 timber trees of oak, 

 then valued at £11,951, besides 440 decaying trees, valued at 

 £140 13s. 4d. The number of loads is not mentioned, but other 

 documents of the period state that the general price of oak timber 

 was then about lOs. per load, girth measure. The 15,274 oak trees, 

 which were valued at 16s. each, must have contained, one with 

 another, not less than a load and a half of timber, or about 22,911 

 loads girth measure, which is equal to 34,366 loads sq[uare measure. 

 In 1783 the Deputy Surveyor of Woods and Forests reported that 

 there were then in this forest only 2,918 oak trees fit for the navy 

 (including all trees down to 30 feet of timber), containing by com- 



