74 BERKHAUSTED COMMON. 



I860, sped its intricate and dilatory course of proceedings 

 for four long years, during which minute investigations 

 were made, at great expense, into the past history of the 

 Common, the origin and nature of the rights of the Com- 

 moners, and the number of persons so entitled. Every 

 possible objection was raised by the Defendant. It was 

 contended that the Manor was not a single one, but 

 that Berkhamsted and Northchurch were two distinct 

 manors : it was objected that Mr. Augustus Smith 

 could not sue on behalf of the freehold tenants of the 

 Manor ; it was asserted that the rights of common 

 were of a limited character; it was claimed that the in- 

 closure was justified under the Statute of Merton. Only 

 those, who are familiar with these Commons cases, can 

 have an adequate notion of the elaborate nature of 

 the documentary and oral evidence necessary for proof 

 or disproof. 



Finally, in January, 1870, Lord Romilly, then 

 Master of the Eolls, decided the case in favour of Mr. 

 Augustus Smith, on all the points raised by Lord 

 Brownlow. " I am of opinion," he said, " that the 

 objection that the Plaintiff cannot sue on behalf of the 

 freeholders fails, and that though these rights of com- 

 mon may not be co-extensive, yet as the Plaintiff has 

 proved, and indeed is admitted to be a copyholder, as 

 well as freeholder, in the Manor, he is entitled to sue on 

 behalf of both." He also affirmed that the rights of com- 

 mon of herbage, and pannage, of the cutting of turf and 

 gorse, were established. " It remains,'' he added, " for 

 the Lord of the Manor to show that he is entitled to 



