BERKHAMSTED COMMON. 75 
approve, and that sufficient is left for the commonable 
rights. This he has failed to do; and, in fact, 
the attempt made by the late Earl is only a renewal 
of theattempts made, in 1638, and 1642, and which 
did not end till 1659, to inclose exactly the same 
land, and for which there appears to me to be as little 
justification now, as there was in the seventeenth 
century.” * 
There could not be a more complete vindication for 
the action of Mr. Augustus Smith. After this it may 
confidently be expected that the Common will remain 
open and uninclosed for all time to come, and safe from 
any further attacks by any future Lords of the Manor. 
It is pleasant to be able to add that the relations 
between Lord Brownlow and the people of the district 
have not been disturbed by these events. Ashridge 
Park has continued to be opened freely and generously to 
the public, as in past times. 
It will be seen that the suit did not raise the ques- 
tion whether the inhabitants of Berkhamsted have 
rights over the Common, independent of the ownership 
of land. The investigations, however, brought out the 
fact that the town was incorporated by Charter in 
1619, and it is probable that this was the renewal of an 
earlier charter. It is true that the Corporation has ceased 
to exist ; but it is only dormant, and may be revived at 
any time. The better opinion appears to be that the 
inhabitants are sufficiently incorporated to satisfy the 
rule of law as to prescription, and to enable them to 
* Smith v. Brownlow.—L. R. 9 Eq., 241. 
