434 
of the Common Pueas delivered their 
reafons and opinions feriatim. ~ 
Lord Loughborough, C. J. againft the 
claim, and for the plaintiff, in which alfo 
Wilfon-and Heath, J. J. concurred; and 
Gould, for the defendant ; in fupport of 
the claim. 
Tie claim was confequently determined 
to be ILLEGAL, and that the a€tion againft 
the gleaners was well brought. ; 
Neither of thefe decifions was removed 
by any wrir of error. They, therefore, 
fiand as legal authority, from which there 
has been 20 appeal. 
The decifion goes farther than your 
correfpondent’s queftion. For that fup- 
pofes the corn, though reaped, to be yet 
remaining in fhocks upon the field; bur, 
on account of the inconvenience and dan- 
gerto property, if g/eaners were to come 
in //// the crop had been reaped and fhock- 
ed, and aken off the land, the defendants 
refted their juftification on the entry after 
the crop was carried, . 
“And the judgment of the Common 
Pleas, in the latter cafe, amounts to this ; 
——that the fettled poor of a parifh are not 
entitled to enter a wheat or barley field 
afier the crop carried for the purpofe of 
gleaning. - 
Therefore any gleaning, even of the 
{malieft quantity, or coming upon Jand 
with that intent, without leave of the 
owner, 1s forbidden, and puntihed by aétion 
of trefpafs. 
~ And hence it follows, that the owner js 
juftified in law, to require gleaners to quit 
the field; and that, if they will not quit 
at, he is juftifedin putting them our, ufing 
no more force than is neceffary for that 
purpofe. And, of courfe, the law difal- 
Jows any refiftance on their part, to his 
fo doing ; which, if they fhould unadvif- 
edly be fo rafh as to make, they would 
fubjeé themfelves to an indidiment, vary- 
ing according to’ the circumftances and de- 
gree of the refiftance: 
Ido not mean here to fate the argu- 
ments for or againft the claim, farther'than 
to fay, thar thofe by whom it was brought 
forward io difcuffion, apprehending ir to 
be fupported by the opinions of Sir Mat- 
thew Hale, Ch. Baron Gilbert, and Sir 
William Blackftone, and ftruck with what 
appeared to them of the antiquity, ex- 
tent, and ground of the ufage, were ac- 
cordingly anxious to affert ir. Some of 
them had read the SEASONS ; and brought, 
pethaps, from thé reading of that admi- 
rable poem, -an imagination and feelings 
the more alive to the claim. Moft, or 
Laws refpetting Gleaning. 
* [Dee.. 
all, had read or heard fomething of a very 
ancient venerable book, from which they 
had derived opinions ftrongly on the fide 
of the ufages. | 
The queftion, however, now ftands 
fettled 5 and it is but juftice to the FAR- 
MERS of the county where it originated, 
and to the PoorR, to fay,that fince the deci- 
fion, the farmers rarely have refufed their 
confent ro the poor parifhioners to glean 
after the crop carried ; and the poor, when 
there has been a refufal, and they have ' 
been informed of the decifion againft the 
laim, have almoft conftantly acquiefced in 
At with propriety. 
I remain, 
Your’s,. with great efteem, 
| _C. Lost. 
P.S, If the query meant, whether an indict- 
ment of /arceny would lie for fimply gleaning ; 
I apprehend it would not. At leaft, I think, 
on trial, the evidence would not fupport the 
indictment. For /arceny muft be a taking of 
the property of another without apprehenfon of 
any legal right to it on the part of the taker. 
A taking under an apprehended, though er- 
roneoufly apprehended, legat right, would be not 
larceny, and could only amount to trefpafs. 
Taking corn from the fheaf or facck is not glean- 
ing, but fealing, as has been long fettled. And 
it was with a view of avoiding this action, and 
of réfting the cuftom on what. was fuppofed to be 
the fair and fafe exercife of it, that in. the 
fleadings, which were drawn by the late very 
eminent Mr. Bowyer, the cuftom was laid as 
above ftated, to glean after the crop carried. 
To the Editor of the Monibly Mogazine. 
SIR, 
A MONTH or two back there was ar 
article in your Magazine relative to 
the death and charaéter of Dr. Farmer, 
the late mafter of Emanuel Coliege, Cam- 
bridge. In fome circles it has. been af- 
cribed, I underftand, to mes but I with 
it to be known, that I had not the leaft 
concern in that article. MWLly mame occa- 
fionally appears in your Magazine, and 
I was formerly of the college of which 
Dr. Farmer was mafter: thence, I fup- 
pofe, rofe the mittake. A 
I do not mean, fir, to impugn the judg- 
ment of your correfpondent, but to {tate a 
truth, as it regerds myfelf, It is my in- 
tention, at my own time, and in my owa 
way, to make fome obfervations on Dr. 
Farmer’s character ; ‘and, without ap- 
proving his Tory principles, or admiring 
his foibles, to pay a proper tribute of re- 
{pet to the qualities of his mind and 
Heart.) <1 oR ir, cis . 
efpeétfully your’s, 
ve 1". D¥ER. 
ae 3 

