S78 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1815. 



property in the neighbourhood of 

 the metropolis, where the soil was 

 ill suited to the purpose. The 

 Berkeley hunt and its trespasses 

 were net unknown to his Lord- 

 ship, as actions against some of 

 the members had been tried a few 

 years since before him at Heit- 

 ford, and it was hoped that no- 

 minal damages to settle the right 

 would have been sufficient. In 

 this expectation, however, the in- 

 jured party was disa})pointed, and 

 some proprietors of land were 

 under the necessity of instituting 

 new proceedings — against the 

 whipper-in, who was now in 

 confinement for the damages and 

 costs, though he would soon be 

 relieved by the operation of that 

 panacea for debtors of all kinds — 

 the insolvent act. This whipper- 

 in was the son of the present de- 

 fendant, who by this action would 

 probably be placed in the same 

 situation as his son ; but the in- 

 dividuals whose property had been 

 destroyed had no otiier remedy to 

 which they could resort. The 

 learned counsel therefore hoped 

 that the jury would give such da- 

 mages on the present occasion as 

 would give some more effectual 

 protection. To such an extent 

 had the destruction by the gen- 

 tlemen of the Berkeley hunt been 

 carried, tliat the noblemen and 

 others, proprietors of estates near 

 Jitanmore and Edgvvare, had been 

 compelled to associate themselves 

 for general defence, and the Eiarl 

 of Essex and the Marquis of 

 Abercorn had hem compelled to 

 put up extraordinary fences round 

 their property : the latter had ac- 

 tually put up ckevaux-de-frise, and 

 had dug trenches but in vain, 

 for these mighty hunters from 



town defied all obstacles but suoh 

 as were calculated to resist an in- 

 vading army. In tiuth, that part 

 of the country to which he had 

 referred was at present out of the 

 protection of the law; no rights 

 were held sjicred, and no property 

 was secure ; it was rather like a 

 border district betueen two hos- 

 tile countries, than the centre of 

 a land where the law restrained 

 wilful and repeated ai^gressions. 



A notice from many noblemen 

 and gentlemen, and among them 

 from the paintiff, dated in 1808, 

 warning the members of the 

 Berkeley lumt from their grounds, 

 was the first piece of evidence : 

 after which Thomas Shirley and 

 Joseph Carwood were called to 

 prove, that tiie defendant on the 

 4th of April, with about 30 sports- 

 men, rode over two lields belong- 

 ing to Mr. Hume, and destroyed 

 turnips to the value of 403. or 

 50s. Mr. Hume had become the 

 proprietor of the fields in question 

 about three years ago. 



Lord Ellenborough observed, 

 that the notice being dated in 

 1808, could not tipply to these 

 closes. 



Mr. Curncy, in addressing the 

 jury for the defendant, complaiiud 

 that the Attorney-General, in his 

 speech, had introduced statements 

 wliich had very little truth, much 

 exaggeration, and no relation to 

 the present cause. Like the 

 Berkeley hunt which he had de- 

 scribed, he had ridden over a 

 la!ge field without restraint, 

 trampling down all obstacles that 

 presented themselves to his ima- 

 ginative course. The fact how- 

 ever was, that the hunt at present 

 was confined to a few individuals 

 of great respectability in the 



country. 



