48 HAMPSTEAD HEATH. 
Thomas, appears to have been advised that he was 
practically owner in fee of the Common. He denied 
that there were any Freehold tenants of the Manor. 
Of the numerous body of Copyholders of the Manor, 
he maintained that not more than three or four had 
any rights of common over the Heath. He claimed 
the right to inclose it without stint, under the Statute 
of Merton, and without regard to what he called the 
pretended rights of Commoners. He also asserted his 
unlimited right to dig and carry away sand from the 
Heath, to the extent of destroying its herbage and 
heather. This digging for sand was, in fact, being 
carried out to an extent that threatened to interfere 
with the natural features of Hampstead Hill. Dan- 
gerous pits appeared in all directions, and the surface 
.of the Heath was injured to a degree that it has not 
yet recovered, after twenty-five years of cessation of 
digging. Sir Thomas was not only Lord of the Manor, 
but was also owner of a considerable demesne in the 
neighbourhood of the Common, 260 acres in extent. 
He was, however, only the tenant for life of this pro- 
perty, and as he had no son, he could not obtain the 
legal concurrence of the next in the settlement, that 
was then necessary to enable him to grant building 
leases, and to avail himself of the great demand which 
was growing up for houses near the Heath. 
In 1829, he made application to Parliament, in a 
private Bill, fur powers to grant building leases, not 
merely in respect of his demesne lands, but over all 
the Jands mentioned in the Schedule, including “ such 
