TOLLARD FARNHAM. 213 
persisted in exercising what they considered their rights, 
according to ancient custom, and had continued to cut 
their wood in spite of the inclosure. The Society 
was unwilling that these poor men should lose, from 
want of means, and from lack of proper legal assistance, 
what they believed to be, and what there was strong 
prima facie evidence to believe was, their right, and 
therefore resolved to give its support to them. 
Before the case came on for trial at the Assizes, 
an order was obtained from the Court, directing that 
the issues in the three actions should be ascertained 
by an arbitrator, in the form of a special case, for the 
opinion of the Court of Exchequer. Numerous meetings 
were held by the arbitrator, Sir A. H. Miller, Q.C., and 
eventually acase was drawn up by him, and laid before 
the Court. 
It appeared that the Manor of Tollard Farnham 
was in very ancient times dependent on, or carved 
out of, the Manor of Cranbourne, which was part of the 
Chase of Cranbourne, extending over a yet wider district, 
and differing only from a Forest in that it was held 
by a private owner, and not by the Crown, and did 
not possess distinctive Courts. The Manor and Honour 
of Cranbourne are mentioned in Domesday Book as 
the property of the King. In the time of William 
Rufus the Manor and Chase appear to have been given 
to Fitz-Hamon, Lord of Corboile, in Normandy, 
together with numerous other Manors, constituting the 
Honour of Gloucester. They were escheated for want 
of heirs to Henry IJ. in 1175. They remained in the 
