Part 1

Transcribed from the 1826 Wooler edition by David Price, email [email protected]

Statement of Facts, ON THE _INJURIOUS TREATMENT_ OF J. ELSEE, ESQ.

_Late Tenant of a considerable Portion of Havering Park Farm_, _in the Forest of Hainault_,

IN CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS WITH THE Commissioners of Woods and Forests, AND THEIR AGENTS.

* * * * *

_Compiled in support of_ A RENEWED MEMORIAL TO THE COMMISSIONERS, AND PETITIONS TO PARLIAMENT.

* * * * *

TO WHICH ARE ADDED _NOTES_, _In Illustration of the Gross Abuses of the Forest Laws_.

* * * * *

WOOLER, PRINTER, GOUGH SQUARE.

1826.

* * * * *

STATEMENT, &c.

THE statements which will be found in this pamphlet, will probably startle the minds of most persons who may give them a perusal; reflecting as they do upon the administration of justice, and the conduct of an official board, which is invested with the power of transacting certain business in the name of the crown, and on behalf of the nation. In such cases, the highest degree of liberality might reasonably be expected. Those petty interests that sow dissentions between individuals _ought not_ to exist in transactions between individuals and the representatives of the national authority; and, certainly, no _prejudiced motives_, or _personal feeling_, should be permitted to operate to the prejudice of the weaker party. Unfortunately, however, persons who ought to rise infinitely superior to all paltry hostility, and mean jealousies, do not always separate their prejudices from their duties; and they are also often led by the nose by impertinent and interested servants, who, in reality, become the masters of their nominal superiors, and dictators to those whom it is their business to obey.

Much injustice is frequently occasioned in such manner; but after a perusal of our narrative, we think we may fairly challenge the production of any instance in which so much pecuniary injury has been sustained, accompanied by so much outrage to the feelings of a respectable, unoffending, and highly meritorious individual;—upon one, who, during a long and active life, in public and private, has conducted himself in the most exemplary manner; against whose reputation no one has ever dared to point the finger of reproach, and who having gained a considerable fortune by his own unaided exertions, the most persevering industry, and the most scrupulous integrity in his dealings, had an undoubted right to expect the protection of his interests by persons who were acting as trustees for the nation; instead of being insulted, and entrapped into legal difficulties by their agents, and plundered of a large sum of money, without the slightest pretence for, or justice in, such an outrageous attack upon the sacred right of private property.

And when, in addition to this, the reader shall reflect, that these occurrences took place within a very few miles of the metropolis, and were directed against an individual well-known and highly respected, both in his own neighbourhood and the metropolis itself, the scene of his prosperous exertions for so many years, the astonishment will be proportionately encreased; for if the rapacity and insolence of the servants of a public board can be audaciously exhibited towards an individual so situated in life, what misery and ruin may they not have entailed upon the poor and defenceless, who are prostrate at the feet of such oppressors. Mr. Elsee, to whom our narrative relates, has fortunately escaped the _total ruin_, with which he was unblushingly threatened—but the sacrifices which he has been compelled to make, might have _broken the hearts_, and _exhausted the means_, of hundreds who would have thought themselves possessed of a competency for the wants of a respectable subsistence. {8}

With these requisite preliminary observations, we shall proceed with our narrative, premising also, that these pages are written in illustration and support of _memorials to both the houses of parliament_, as well as to the commissioners of woods and forests, for such redress as Mr. Elsee has yet a just right to expect will be afforded to him, if the honest attention of the principals in the latter office can be drawn to the subject; for the agents of government can have no true or lasting interest in the injury of any one of his majesty’s subjects; and the liberal principles lately adopted by some of the most influential of his majesty’s advisers, encourage a hope that their liberality may be extended to the actual administration of impartial justice, and not be confined to empty parliamentary professions.

Mr. John Elsee, at the period to which this narrative refers, was a gentleman residing on his own freehold estate, at Chigwell Row. He had been many years in business as a wholesale stationer, in Queen-hithe, in the premises now occupied by the Lord Mayor, and this part of the city became the market for paper by the exertions of Mr. Elsee. Having realized a considerable property, he retired from business, and having spent the earlier portion of his life in agricultural business, he purchased a freehold in the neighbourhood before mentioned, and became also the lessee of part of Havering Park farm. This farm, containing altogether about 1000 acres, was held under the crown, by a lease granted in the time of King William and Queen Mary, to John Hampden, and Thomas Lovell, at a nominal rent; it afterwards became the property of the Ladbrook family, and was divided into two farms, one being let by Ladbrook to a Mr. Thomas Hall, and the other to Mr. Elsee, whose lease expired in 1815, and he continued as _tenant at will_ to Miss Ladbrook, three of the family which had granted his lease having died during its continuance; and Miss Ladbrook told Mr. Elsee that she did not intend to apply for a new lease. Mr. Elsee, therefore sent in a memorial in the usual way, having been told at the office that Miss Ladbrook’s lease would expire at Lady-day, 1818, _but to such memorial Mr. Elsee never received any answer_; though _it had been the usual practise_, _for many years_, _on the part of the commissioners of woods and forests_, _and land revenues_, _to signify by printed papers_, _affixed in their public offices_, _and in other ways to make it publically known_, _that if no application was made __by the tenants holding under lease of the crown_, _two years before the expiration of their old leases_, _to renew their holding_, _the commissioners would consider themselves open to receive proposals from any other persons_, _to treat for a lease or leases of such premises_.

In the summer of 1817, Mr. Edward Driver, the surveyor to the land revenue department, informed Mr. Elsee that he was not to pay any more rent to Miss Ladbrook’s executors, that her lease had expired at Lady-day _then last past_, and that in future the rent must be paid to the crown. From this Mr. Elsee conceived the hope of obtaining the lease himself, the more especially as Mr. William Masterman, _had been in a situation precisely similar_, _on the expiration of his landlord’s lease_, and the commissioners had granted him a new lease for 31 years, charging him for the interval between the expiration of the old lease, and the day of his entering upon the new one, _only the same rent which his former landlord had paid to the crown_.

At this time, Mr. Driver said he was going to seize the other part of the land comprized in the lease of Miss Ladbrook, and held by Mr. Hall, for dilapidations. Mr. Driver subsequently _made this seizure_; and then _requested Mr. Elsee to take Mr. Hall’s farm into his hands_, until the final decision of the commissioners respecting the disposal of the land was made known, it being then uncertain whether it would be let or sold. Mr. Elsee declined this proposal, being every year a considerable loser by the part he held, and only retaining it in the expectation of having _his rent reduced_, and obtaining a lease _on such terms as might warrant him in the outlay necessary to afford a prospect of an adequate return_; and in the intention of becoming a purchaser, if the commissioners should decide upon the sale of the land.

Besides this, Mr. Elsee felt that he had strong personal claims to fair dealing, if not to liberal treatment, from the commissioners; as, at their request, he had exerted himself in the protection of crown rights in the forest, which were grossly infringed by their own servants. He had assisted to detect and bring to justice the _under-keeper_, the _king’s woodward_, and others, _for stealing timber from the forest_, a practice then carried on to a great extent. {15}

Under all the circumstances, therefore, Mr. Elsee had a right to expect something like _justice_, if not liberality, on the part of the commissioners; and if he had been in their hands, instead of _the hands of their servants_, he probably might have obtained it.

While in this state of suspense respecting a new lease, Mr. Driver repeatedly informed Mr. Elsee, that he had received offers for the farm previously occupied by Mr. Hall, at three times the rent which Mr. Elsee considered it to be worth, and three times as much as it was afterwards let for to a Mr. Ellis. This statement, whether true, or otherwise, had the effect of preventing Mr. Elsee from making any further offers, _particularly as his previous application for a lease remained unanswered_; and he urged Mr. Driver to get the amount of the rent fixed which he was to pay to the crown, for the time after the expiration of Miss Ladbrook’s lease, _and to name any period when the crown wished to take possession of the land_. Mr. Driver replied, that _if Mr. Elsee would continue to hold the farm until Michaelmas_, 1819, (that was another year) _he trusted that all would be settled by that period_, and he would very shortly let Mr. Elsee know the amount of rent that he was to pay, _but which was never done_.

Some time elapsed without an arrangement and from the harsh conduct of Mr. Driver to Mr. Hall, and other crown tenants, when circumstances had placed them in his power, Mr. Elsee became uneasy, and _wrote to request positive information as to how_, _and when_, _he was to settle with the crown_, _and surrender possession of the farm_. In answer to this letter, Mr. Driver referred Mr. Elsee to Mr. Pillar, the chief clerk; and on application to that gentleman, he said, _he was surprized that Mr. Driver sent to him_, _as he did not think that the commissioners would object to any arrangement that Mr. Driver might think proper to make_; from which it may be inferred, that the affair was left entirely to that gentleman, from whom, in a few days, Mr. Elsee received the following letter.

New Bridge-street, Oct. 12, 1818.

Dear Sir,

I have been out of town the whole of last week, or I intended to have written to you, on the subject of the farms at Havering. I now beg to inform you the Commissioners have not come to any determination as to the time of letting either of the farms, only they are to be let, and not sold; and have desired me to obtain offers from any person desirous of treating with me for a lease of either of the farms. I shall therefore feel myself happy to receive in writing any proposal that you may be disposed to make, and it shall be forwarded in the proper way, in the same manner as some other offers already made will be forwarded. I shall be prepared very shortly to make some agreement with you, as to your present holding, and, for your continuing until Michaelmas next, before which time I hope and trust the whole of those farms will be disposed of in some way or other.

I am yours, most truly, E. DRIVER.

The farms not being to be sold, as Mr. Elsee had been induced to hope they would be, and the conditions in some printed particulars forwarded to him by Mr. Driver, not appearing to leave room for any advantageous holding under the crown, he declined making any proposals, and was only anxious to get extricated as speedily as possible from the farm, _which he had continued to hold at the earnest request of_ Mr. Driver, _and with a view to facilitate any arrangements on the part of the crown_; _as every day’s holding was injurious to_ Mr. Elsee, _when he ceased to have the prospect of being either the purchaser or lessee_. {19}

The farms, however, were let before the Christmas of 1818; and Mr. Elsee requested Mr. Driver to inform the gentleman who had taken them, and had entered upon that of Hall, that Mr. Elsee was desirous of letting him have possession of the other, and to sell him any thing upon the premises, whenever it would suit him. Mr. Driver promised to communicate this offer to the new tenant, and then, for the first time, said, “_he had not yet done with Miss Ladbrook’s executors_; _that he meant to make them pay_, _double the rent that Mr. Elsee had paid them_, _for the time he had held the_ _farm_, _since her lease expired_, _as she had never __given the crown possession of that part of the land_.”

Mr. Elsee thought it impossible the Surveyor could be in earnest, in such a monstrous and ridiculous proposition; and replied, “_surely_, _you obtained possession_, _when you entered on Hall’s part_; _for at the time you surveyed Hall’s part of the farm_, _and took possession of that_, _you also went over and surveyed the part held by me_; _and you know very well that possession has been offered to you again and again_. _You have also given me directions to get boards painted and fixed up at different parts_, of both farms, _to warn people from sporting and shooting_, _and you have afterwards paid me for these things_, _while I have done every thing in my power to accommodate you_, _by staying on the farm at your own particular request_.”

This reply should have been conclusive, for if the crown were not in possession, the fault rested only with its own Surveyor. No wish to hold over was entertained either by the executors, or by the tenant at will; nor was there, in fact, any holding over, for Mr. Driver had taken actual possession, had directed the rent to be paid to the crown, and acted as the possessor of the property on behalf of the crown. It was therefore a paltry quibble, and a meanness of which any landlord should have been ashamed, to have taken advantage of a mere informality, if it had existed, which however does not appear to have been the case, _as the land had only been held at all at the Surveyor’s own particular request_.

Mr. Driver, however, for some purpose of his own, thought proper to disregard the justice of the case, and replied that “Mr. Elsee was not the tenant of the crown; that Miss Ladbrook’s executors had behaved very ill; that there was no complaint whatever against Mr. Elsee, who could come upon the executors for any injury that he might sustain; that he (Mr. Driver) was determined to bring an action of ejectment against the executors; that Mr. Elsee’s crops would be seized on the premises the next summer, and that he might sue the executors for the damages.” {23} Mr. Elsee, who saw in the consequent expence nothing but mischief to all parties, except Mr. Driver, if the threat were really carried into execution, waited upon the solicitors of the executors of Miss Ladbrook, informed them what had passed, and begged them to see Mr. Driver, and make an arrangement to prevent the seizure of the crops, and the unpleasant results of such a litigation.—These respectable solicitors, Messrs. Windus and Holtaway, were not to be frightened; they knew the man they had to deal with, and after some severe remarks on the Surveyor’s conduct, they declared that they would have nothing to say to him, that they had never held over, and that he might do his worst.

With this answer Mr. Elsee returned to Mr. Driver, who had left word that the report was to be made to Messrs. Jones and Green, the solicitors to the office of woods and forests, to whom Mr. Elsee repaired, and _was then informed by Mr. Jones that he did not_ think _the crown would require more rent than had been paid to_ Miss Ladbrook; but that he would see Mr. Pillar, and make enquiry at the office, and acquaint Mr. Elsee with the result; which, by the bye, he never did.

The Surveyor proceeded as he had threatened he would, with his action of ejectment; and during its progress, he forwarded a long agreement to Mr. Elsee for his signature, the effect of which was to put him in the place of the executors, when judgment should have been obtained against them, and leave him entirely at the mercy of the crown. This agreement, too, had been framed without any consultation with Mr. Elsee, upon its conditions, some of which were contrary to the custom of farming leases, and all of them framed in opposition to the situation and interest of a _tenant __at will_, which the Surveyor had declared him to be, _and not in any way a tenant of the crown_. This attempt to encrease the responsibility of Mr. Elsee was answered, of course, by a refusal to sign it; the agreement was returned, and Mr. Elsee waited upon the Surveyor, and pointed out to him that he was not liable to _any conditions_, and still less to the unreasonable ones attempted to be imposed upon him—that there was no legal claim upon him for dung {25}—that he had paid for it on his entrance upon the farm, and it would be his property when he should give up possession. To this the Surveyor replied, _that he had let the farm on such conditions_, _and the new tenant was to do the same during his lease_. It was then enquired by _what right_ the Surveyor made such conditions with respect to _this farm in particular_, since _he had not made them with respect to Heaton’s_? The Surveyor made answer, that they “_would be made to leave all their dung_,” which, however, _was not the case_, for in the following summer the crops of that farm, and _also the dung_, _were sold by the owner_. {26}

It was further remarked to the Surveyor in this conversation, that _spit dung_ was specified, and that it was not always to be procured; to which the Surveyor said it was so stated in all leases, meaning that, or an equivalent in other manure. Mr. Elsee again insisted that the dung was as much his property as the hay and corn; and further objected to the expence of the agreement as _unnecessary_, as the Surveyor _knew_ he was ready to quit the farm at any time. The Surveyor, notwithstanding all this, held to his purpose, {27} and pretended that the thing must be done _regularly_; that the whole of the expence would not be more than 60_l._ or 70_l._ that the crown would pay half, and would further give time from Michaelmas 1819, to the following Lady-day, to thrash out the corn, and otherwise dispose of the property to the best advantage—that the crown besides would pay for all _improvements_, _laying down ploughed fields to grass_, _&c._ In spite of these temptations Mr. Elsee refused to sign; had he remained firm in this refusal, and acted upon the advice of his friends, many of whom recommended him not to put himself in the power of the Surveyor by his signature, he might have saved himself some thousands of pounds, and a degree of personal and family anxiety even more to be deplored than his pecuniary loss. {28}

In this time the Surveyor had proceeded in his action of ejectment, and as the day for the service of the declaration approached, Mr. Elsee was applied to for his final decision as _to signing the agreement_; and he found himself compelled to submit, even as it was, with a reference to arbitration as to terms, &c. or to close the doors upon all reconciliation, and entail upon his property the disastrous consequences of _a law-suit_, _with the crown for an antagonist_. {29}

In this dilemma, the agreement, in an unfortunate moment, _was signed_, and the consequences proved still more mischievous than those which the signing was intended to prevent; Mr. Elsee being soon plunged into the legal embarrassments that it had been his earnest hope, and most anxious desire to avoid, by the very act that involved him. {31}

The leading articles of this fatal agreement, were, that Mr. Elsee, _against whom the action neither was_, _nor could have been brought_, should sign a Warrant of Attorney in ejectment, _he_, _moreover_, _having been throughout anxious to quit_; and for thus burthening himself with a responsibility apparently attempted to be saddled on the executors of Ladbrook, it was stipulated that he should have the land without rent from Michaelmas, 1819, to Lady-day, 1820—to be paid for seed sown upon not less than 40, nor more than 60 acres—to leave 60 load of hay, and all the fixtures in the house—to be paid for laying down ploughed land to grass, and his other improvements—to be accountable for dilapidations, if any, since the termination of Ladbrook’s lease—and arbitrators to be appointed to ascertain what rent should be paid for the 2½ years since the expiration of the lease: and out of this sum the agreement set forth, as under, the sums due to Mr. Elsee should be deducted, and allowed to him.

“And the said W. Huskisson, W. Dacres Adams, and Henry Dawkins, do hereby agree for and in behalf of his Majesty, to and with the said John Elsee, his executors, and administrators, to submit to, and abide by the decision and determination, so to be made as aforesaid, and that whatever sum or sums of money shall be so as aforesaid awarded to be paid by them to the said John Elsee, for the value of the said fixtures, seeds, and the hay to be left as aforesaid, and as a compensation for laying down any of the lands as aforesaid, shall be allowed to be retained by him, his executors, administrators, and assigns, out of any sum which shall be awarded to be paid by the said John Elsee to them, for the use and occupation of the said premises, or for any other of the matters aforesaid.”

Mr. Driver and Mr. R. Peake were the parties appointed as arbitrators, to settle the matters at issue, the former acting for the crown, and the latter for Mr. Elsee. On the 14th of July, 1819, they met, and rode over the farm, and took an account of the house fixtures. They next went into the stack-yard, and the Surveyor agreed to take for the crown, for the 60 load to be left by the agreement, a stack that the men were just finishing, and the first made that season, the price to be fixed by the arbitrators.

Mr. Elsee proceeded with these two gentlemen to Mr. Ellis, the new tenant, and Mr. Elsee offered to give up the farm at that time, and to sell the in-comer any thing upon it.—Mr. Ellis declined this offer, but wished to treat for some fields, which lay convenient to those he had entered upon. These were ten fields, containing 108 acres of unmowed grass, with the use of 17 acres of fallow in addition. The two arbitrators were to fix the value, and they left the room for that purpose, but returned without agreeing, as Mr. Driver would allow the fields _to be worth no more than ten shillings an acre_, _although the grass fields contained the whole years crop_. Yet this same gentleman, required from _these very fields_, _so valued by himself at ten shillings an acre_, a return in dung and rent of _about five pounds an acre_!—So different were his powers of appreciation, when employed for and against Mr. Elsee.