Class 
 Book. 
 
/ 
 
 A 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 FOREST OR CHACE, 
 
 KNOWN BY THE NAME OF 
 
 CRANBORN CHACE, 
 
 COLLECTED FROM AUTHENTIC, EARLY RECORDS, 
 
 AND j J] 
 
 CONTINUED TO A LATE PERIOD: 
 
 WITH 
 
 A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF ITS PRESENT STATE. 
 
 BY WILLIAM WEST. 
 
 Gillinoham; Printed by E: NeaVe; .' 
 AND SOLD BY 
 
 I. HATCHARD, PICCADILLY, AND J. ASPERNE, CORNHILL, LONDON; 
 ALSO, BY BRODIE AND DOWDING, SALISBURY J J. SHIPPj BLAND- 
 FORD J AND T. ADAMS, SHAFTESBURY, 
 
 1816. 
 
 ^J & «Le»> 
 

 'DV 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 " A Forest, " in the general acceptation of 
 the word, is denned to be " a wild uncultivated 
 " tract of ground, covered with wood ; " but 
 in law is described to be, ' f a certain territory 
 fe of woody grounds and fruitful pastures, pri- 
 " vileg-ed for wild beasts and fowls of forest, 
 < c chace, and warren, to rest and abide in, un- 
 f* der the protection of the king, for his plea- 
 " sure; " &c. — " iox preservation and continu- 
 " ance whereof, with the vert and venison, 
 *f there are certain laws, privileges, and offi- 
 * ces. " * 
 
 fe A chace generally signifies a pursuit, or the 
 " act of hunting; but more particularly, open 
 ec ground, stored with such beasts as are hunt- 
 
 c< ed " f 
 
 cc A forest, in the hands of a subject, is fre- 
 " quently the same thing as a chace; but is li- 
 ■' able only to the provisions of the common 
 <e law, and not to the forest laws/' A man may 
 iC have a chace in another man's ground, as well 
 ■ c as in his own ; his liberty being that of keep- 
 (f ing beasts of chace or royal game therein, 
 f* protected even from the owner of the land, 
 
 * Johnson, Manwood. f Ibid. 
 
IV INTkODUCTlON. 
 
 {( and with a power of hunting 1 them thereon."* 
 
 The chace which bears the name of Cran- 
 born, partakes most of the nature of a forest. 
 
 Its extent is not easily to be defined ; as two 
 boundaries are assigned to it. Within what 
 are termed the small or inner bounds, it eon* 
 tains a space about 10 miles in length, and 3 
 or 4 in breadth, comprising about 43,000 acres, 
 on the north-east side of Dorsetshire. This 
 space does not include the detached " walk " 
 or tract of Chettered, a few miles more south- 
 w ard, which appears to have been formerly d, 
 separate chace, Within those called the large 
 or outer bounds, the length is from 20 to 25 
 miles, and the breadth from 15 to 20; contain- 
 ing between 7 and 800,000 acres. The circuit 
 of the chace, by the former, is about 27 miles: 
 it commences on the hill, 4 miles south-east of 
 Shaftesbury, and extends eastward to the edge 
 of Wiltshire, 9 miles south-west of Salisbury. 
 
 The circuit of the large bounds is supposed 
 to be nearly 100 miles; extending from Harn- 
 ham bridge near Salisbury, by the edge of Wil- 
 ton, westward by the small river Noddre, and 
 thence southward to Shaftesbury, and to the 
 banks of the Stour not far from Sturminster; 
 thence by Blandford, and near Winborn, to 
 Ring-wood bridge, Fordingbridge, and Down- 
 ton, to Harnham bridge. 
 
 The 
 
 » Johnson, Man wood; 
 
INTRODUCTION. V 
 
 The deer of the chace, of the fallow kind, sup- 
 posed to be in number from 5 to 8,000, occu- 
 py the woodlands and open pastures, more or 
 less, within the small bounds, and also some ad- 
 joining in Wiltshire, and south-westward in 
 Dorsetshire. As the sole right to these animals 
 is vested in the proprietor of the chace, or in 
 such persons as he appoints, the injury to the 
 cultivated lands may in part be conceived The 
 deer are in general excluded from them by high 
 and expensive hedges ; but as these consist 
 chiefly of dead wood; requiring frequent renew- 
 al, and are subject to occasional damage, the 
 depredations on the lands are very considerable. 
 The woodlands or copses are fenced during 
 three years after each cutting, only by high 
 hedges, in general, as ditches are forbidden by 
 the custom of the chace; and at the end of 
 that time are opened to the deer, by the keepers 
 making gaps called " leaps and creeps. " 
 
 The lands subject to damage from the deer 
 are supposed to amount nearly to 32,000 acres; 
 viz. about 7,000 of woodlands, 10,000 of sheep- 
 downs and commons, and 15,000 of cultivated 
 lands. The soil in general is thin, on a chalky or 
 rubbly bottom, but in some parts it is of greater 
 depth ; much of the woodland and commons is 
 capable of tillage, and could be spared for that 
 purpose, were not the conversion forbidden by 
 
 b the 
 
Vr INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the chace-laws. The cultivation of turnips 
 is almost impracticable, unless in very small 
 proportion; which is subject to great damage 
 from the deer. The corn suffers much at times. 
 In the woodlands, though the soil is favorable 
 for ash, and produces a little oak, the quantity 
 of timber is very small. The young saplings 
 are generally broken or damaged by the deer, 
 find the underwood consists chiefly of hazel. 
 
 In addition to the injury accruing to the 
 landholders, and to the community, by the da- 
 mage done to some of the lands, and by the 
 prevention of cultivation in the others, — the 
 morals of the inhabitants suffer exceedingly 
 from the system of the chace. The practice of 
 night hunting, and other clandestine killing 
 of deer, is still continued ; notwithstanding the 
 vigilance of the keepers, and the occasional con- 
 
 viction of offenders. Several' contests have 
 sometimes ensued ; they were formerly more fre- 
 quent than at present, and persons have been 
 killed on both sides. Several persons are now 
 suffering under transportation or imprisonment, 
 for their violent behaviour; and others have 
 recently been fined for hunting deer by night. 
 
 It seems needless here to relate the parti- 
 cular customs of the chace, as they will appear 
 in some measure, in the following pages. The 
 
 chace 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 VII 
 
 chace is divided into five " walks, " or parts; 
 each of which has a lodge, with a certain num- 
 ber of keepers, who reside there for the con- 
 venience of taking and guarding the deer. The 
 principal of these now is Rushmore, in Wilt- 
 shire; Cobley, Bursey-stool, West lodge, and 
 Staplefoot, in Dorsetshire. To these may be 
 added Chettered, which has from an early pe- 
 riod been held with the others. 
 
 The chace has at present no connection with 
 Cranborn, unless that the latter is included with- 
 in the larger bounds ; and does not appear to 
 have originally belonged to it. In former times 
 Richard de Clare, and after him his son Gilbert, 
 endeavoured to form a kind of sovereignty, if 
 it may be so termed, by uniting the chace with 
 the manor and hundred of Cranborn; and 
 though that project was defeated, the name of 
 Cranborn-chace remains in use. 
 
 To account for the claim of the outer bounds, 
 — to relate and explain the various transac- 
 tions concerning the chace, — and to cite all the 
 records that have been produced on the subject 
 to a late period, — is the design of the present 
 history. The enquiry which produced it was 
 commenced in the year 1813, with a view only 
 to agricultural purposes, after reading the very 
 short and inaccurate account of the chace in 
 
 th<i 
 
Till. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the survey of Dorsetshire; but the writer being 
 indulged with the inspection of a number of au- 
 thenticated papers, he was induced to form 
 them into regular connection, for the infor- 
 mation of the public, on the still contested ques- 
 tion of the bounds of the chace. This being a 
 work of much difficulty, and requiring illustra- 
 tion from other sources, the accomplishment 
 has been so long retarded that he has not 
 been able to give the work such a revision as 
 was desirable, whilst several circumstances for- 
 bid a farther delay. His principal attention 
 also being directed to the investigation of facts, 
 has perhaps rendered him less observant of the 
 strict rules of composition ; though some dis_ 
 cordance of style may be imputed to the diver- 
 sity of the authorities from which he has drawn 
 his information. 
 
 The references to records, in the notes, are 
 taken from the manuscripts. 
 
 In page 11 the account of the disafForestation 
 6f Blakemore forest is unstated ; being taken 
 from Hutchins's History of Dorset. It appears 
 that a part was disafforested in the 7th of 
 Edward I. and the other part remained until 
 the time of Henry VHL 
 
A HISTORY OF 
 
 CRANBORN CHACE. 
 
 The oldest account of Cranborne, which ap- 
 pears, is found in monastic records, relating* to 
 the time of the later Saxon kings of England. 
 *lt is said to have been famous for its lord Ail- 
 ward or Hay 1 ward de Meau, who founded a 
 small monastery at Cranborn ; to which his son 
 Algar, and grandson Brictric, were afterwards 
 great benefactors. Brictric is also described 
 as being lord of the honour or barony of Glou- 
 cester. 
 
 In those times, it is related, that there were 
 no exclusive appropriations of wild animals, 
 or of the woody tracts which harboured them, 
 Hunting, says a historian, f had always been 
 a favorite diversion with the Britons and Sax- 
 ons; who were careful of preserving every 
 thing that promoted their sport. The whole 
 country was originally full of game ; which as 
 it had afforded a great share of subsistence to 
 
 * Hutchins's History of Dorset, from Dugdales Monasticon, ex Chroni- 
 con de Tewkesbury. 
 
 f Riders History of England, and others, 
 
 c 
 
2 
 
 the first inhabitants, became a source of recre- 
 ation to those who succeeded them. In their 
 times were no inclosures ; but every one enjoyed 
 the liberty of hunting, in common. When the 
 Saxons began to improve the fertile lands by 
 agriculture, and to inclose them for the pre- 
 servation of the produce, the wild beasts took 
 refuge in the woody tracts, where they found 
 shelter and met with less disturbance. These 
 places being in process of time, well stocked 
 with game, and having never been appropri- 
 ated to any person, in the distribution of lands 
 among the Saxons, they were deemed to belong 
 to the crown. Though this right was never 
 disputed, the Saxon sovereigns made use of it 
 purely for their pleasure, never laying any re- 
 straint on the nobility and gentry to debar 
 them of the pleasure of hunting. 
 
 * Another modern writer says, that at first the 
 beasts of chace had the whole island for their 
 range &c. but when the Saxons had established 
 themselves in the heptarchy, these animals 
 were reserved by each sovereign for his own 
 diversion, and that of his nobles. Hunting and 
 war, in those uncivilised ages were the only 
 employments of the great: their active, but un- 
 cultivated minds being susceptible of no plea- 
 sures 
 
 ♦ Pennant, 
 
sures, but those of a violent kind ; such as gave 
 exercise to their bodies, and prevented the 
 pain of thinking. But as the Saxon kings only 
 appropriated to that use, such lands as were 
 unoccupied, so no individuals received any in- 
 jury. Another writer says, that in the time 
 of the Saxon kings, all noblemen without dis- 
 tinction had a right to enjoy the pleasure of 
 hunting. 
 
 To account for the prohibition of this diver- 
 sion to the nobles and others, and for the estab- 
 lishment of forests by the princes of the Norman 
 race, under which, the chace since known by 
 the name of Cranborn, doubtless originated, 
 it is requisite to refer to the period of English 
 History subsequent to the conquest. 
 
 The accession of William, duke of Norman- 
 dy, to the English throne, by the defeat and 
 death of Harold II. does not appear to have 
 made any material alteration respecting the 
 liberty of hunting. The families of the English 
 and Norman sovereigns had been allied by 
 marriage; and the predecessor of Harold, Ed- 
 ward III. surnamed the Confessor, was the son 
 of a princess of Normandy, and had been bred 
 up in that country. William had paid a visit 
 to that king, by whom he was courteously re- 
 ceived 
 C2 
 
ceived. The reign of Harold had been of short 
 duration; he was indeed a favorite with the 
 English, and the troops of William were chief- 
 ly Normans; yet, as the contest between the 
 two,, was that of rival candidates for the throne, 
 the latter met with no opposition after the death 
 of Harold, but received the crown by general 
 consent. Thus, as William was well known to 
 the English, and his title established by succes- 
 sion and election, rather than by conquest, there 
 appeared no occasion for setting aside the estab- 
 lished laws, or for introducing the customs of 
 another nation. 
 
 The moderation of the king towards the Eng- 
 lish, in the beginning of his reign, gave them 
 room to hope for happiness, under his govern- 
 ment; but, after some time, his cautious pro- 
 ceedings having procured him an universal sub- 
 mission, he went into Normandy, for the pur- 
 pose, as is supposed, of displaying his new 
 grandeur. On his arrival, the rejoicings were 
 carried to a great height. An ambassador from 
 the king of France came to congratulate William 
 on his new dignity; on which occassion he af- 
 fected to appear with all possible magnificence. 
 In short, he passed the winter in Normandy, 
 where he seemed to have forgotten his new sub- 
 jects., amidst the acclamations of the others. 
 
 la 
 
5 
 
 In the mean time his absence was injurious 
 to England. His brother, Odo bishop of Bay- 
 eux, and William Fitz Osborn, to whom he 
 had entrusted the government of the kingdom, 
 abused their authority, not only by suffering 
 the English to be harrassed by the Norman 
 nobles and others, but also themselves oppress- 
 ing the people by continual acts of tyranny, for 
 the sake of filling their owncoifers: complaints 
 being of no avail, and the English being unac- 
 customed to such treatment, disturbances soon 
 arose. The Kenti:shmen led the way, having 
 some foreign assistance; but the attempt did not 
 succeed, and they were severely treated by the 
 regents. In another part, the insurrection was 
 fatal to the Normans ; as its leader, an English 
 Lord, Edric surnamed the Forester, barba- 
 rously treated all of that nation that fell into 
 his hands. On the kings return, his rigid and 
 mistrustful temper, led him to severe measures. 
 The debts he had contracted by his expedi- 
 tion to England, and by his late display of 
 magnificence, and the obligation he lay under 
 of rewarding the officers and others, who had 
 engaged in his service, all rendered large sup- 
 plies necessary, and the turbulent resistance of 
 the people, afforded him the more plausible 
 
 pretences to plunder them, by revival of the 
 
 odious 
 
6 
 
 odious tax called Danegelt. That tax had first 
 been levied, to replace the money paid to the 
 Danish invaders, to induce them to quit the 
 kingdom ; and the payment of it was particular- 
 ly odious to the English, by reminding them 
 of their weakness, and of the calamities which 
 they had suffered under a foreign power. 
 
 This proceeding met with some oppossition. 
 Aldred, Archbishop of York, sent a person to 
 remonstrate with William, on the injustice and 
 impolicy of the renewal of the law; but that 
 honest prelate dying soon after, the king was 
 freed from his interposition, and Danegelt was 
 levied with rigour. Murmurs and complaints 
 ensued on one side, and, on the other, the 
 kings disposition was soured by resistance; he 
 began to consider the English as rebels, and, in 
 return, they looked upon him as a conqueror 
 and a tyrant. William wanting more money 
 for the payment of debts, had recourse to ano- 
 ther arbitrary method of raising it; this was 
 by confiscating the estates of those who had 
 sided with his opponent, Harold. Repeated in- 
 surrections ensued at the instigation of some of 
 the English nobles, particularly in the northern 
 part of the kingdom ; in quelling which, the 
 king committed great havock not only on the 
 
 lands 
 
lands of the insurgents,, but throughout all 
 that country; destroying not only houses and 
 villages, but also considerable towns, and 
 scarcely sparing either man or beast. These 
 insurrections having failed of procuring relief 
 from the oppressions of William, and only 
 weakened the hands of the people, he took far- 
 ther measures to break down the power of the 
 English nobility, by depriving them of their 
 offices, and of their possessions, which he con- 
 verted to his own use, or distributed among 
 his Norman attendants and other foreigners. 
 
 It is not intended to continue here the re- 
 lation of the violent proceedings of the king, 
 any farther than to account for the submission 
 of the English, to the formation of the forests, 
 and to the severe laws which soon followed. 
 May it suffice to say, that the lands being di- 
 vided among Williams followers, to be held by 
 the feudal system of military tenure, and of 
 other services, the ancient laws being removed, 
 and those of the intruders established, the Nor- 
 man language being introduced into the courts 
 of justice, and the redress of grievances, ren- 
 dered by that means, more impracticable to 
 the English, the latter could no longer resist, 
 but were compelled to submit to every new act 
 
 of oppression. 
 
 The 
 
8 
 
 The oflly check which the mind of the king 
 appears to have received, was from the remons- 
 trances of Lan franc a Norman, whom he had 
 made Archbishop of Canterbury, This virtu- 
 ous ecclesiastic had been noticed by William, 
 in Normandy, on account of his merit, and 
 afterwards promoted for the same reason. His 
 advice, of treating the English more gently, 
 bad some effect for a time, but did not produce 
 a general reformation. The clergy, in several 
 instances, by their intreaties had softened the 
 kings vengeance ; but that body did not then 
 possess the influence which enabled them, in 
 later reigns, to interpose their good offices 
 between the kings and the nobility; and, in 
 some cases, to add their weight to that of the 
 latter, to procure a general redress of griev- 
 ances. 
 
 These events may appear to have little con- 
 nection with the subject of the history of the 
 chace; but, unless they are taken into con- 
 sideration, it may appear impossible to account 
 for the establishment of the unnatural and op- 
 pressive system of the forest laws, from which 
 the privileges of the chace originated. 
 
 William as has been seen, had reduced the 
 'people to entire submission under his rod. He 
 
 ordered 
 
9 
 
 ordered a survey of the landed and moveable 
 property in the kingdom to be taken, and the 
 result to be entered, in due order, in the book 
 called Domesday book. By means of this, he 
 had an opportunity of levying taxes, with some 
 proportion to ability of payment ; and as the 
 new proprietors depended on him, for the re- 
 tention of their possessions, they were the 
 more disposed to comply with the incumbrance. 
 Having thus settled his revenues, as well as 
 quieted all the insurrections, the king had lit- 
 tle to hinder him, from giving way to an ardent 
 passion for the diversion of hunting, 
 
 It does not appear at what time this disposi- 
 tion had commenced, but, we read that William 
 broke through the liberty which the Saxon no- 
 bility had enjoyed, of pursuing the deer, and 
 other animals, in their woody retreats, and that 
 he claimed an absolute right and property in 
 those lands: to them he gave the name of for- 
 ests, and reserved to himself all privilege of 
 hunting and sporting therein. 
 
 The manner of making a forest, or in other 
 words, of seizing a tract of land for the kings 
 use in hunting, is said to have been this. The 
 king issued his commission, directed to certain 
 persons, for viewing, perambulating, and 
 
 D 
 
 bounding 
 
10 
 
 bounding, the place which he chose to affor- 
 est; which being' returned into chancery, procla- 
 mation was made, that none should hunt any 
 wild beasts, within that precinct, without li- 
 cence; after which, he appointed ordinances, 
 laws, and officers, for the preservation of vert 
 or feed, and of venison or deer, &c. and thus 
 the place became, a forest by matter of record. 
 The properties of a forest are said to be these : 
 it cannot properly be in the hands of any per- 
 son but the king; it has its courts, its officers, 
 as justices of the forests, warden or keepers, 
 verdurers, foresters, assisters, regarders, bai- 
 liffs, and beadles. The chief distinction of a 
 forest is said to be swainmote, or court com- 
 posed of freeholders within its limits, to deter- 
 mine matters concerning it. 
 
 Whether William made use of this mode, or 
 practised a more summary method, by sending 
 persons to take possession of such lands as he 
 or they thought fit, is of but little consequence 
 to know. It is evident from accounts of the 
 firm establishment of his power, that he ultimate- 
 ly met with little check, to his measures of any 
 kind. It is said that there are in England 68 
 fjrests, 13 chaces, and more than 700 parks. 
 Doubtless many of the latter were originally 
 
 forests. It appears probable that there was a 
 
 chain 
 
11 
 
 chain or succession of small forests through 
 Hampshire and Dorsetshire; and in that case., 
 the formation of a forest now called the chaee, 
 may be easily accounted for. 
 
 In various record s, we find mention of a for- 
 est of Winborn, a forest of Holt, a forest of 
 Cranborn, a forest of Chetterden, a king's 
 chace, and a chace of Geoffrey de Mandeville. 
 Some of these are said to have been different 
 denominations of the same forest, but the ac- 
 counts imply, that at one time there were seve- 
 ral distinct forests, on the north-eastern side of 
 Dorsetshire ; viz. the forest of Holt, the forest of 
 Chetterden, and the chace, distinguished at one 
 time as the property of Geoffrey de Mande- 
 ville ; which latter, in situation, appears to ac- 
 cord with the description of the present chace, 
 according to what is termed the smaller bounds. 
 
 Farther westward, were the forests of Gil- 
 lingham, Blakemore, and Poorstock. That of 
 Blakemore, seems to have been afforested in a 
 later reign, as it was for the greater part dis- 
 afforested in the time of Henry II. and the 
 other part soon after, apparently under the pro- 
 visions of the statute de foresta. 
 
 This was a considerable forest, extending 
 westward, from the vicinity of Shaftesbury. 
 
 The 
 D2 
 
12 
 
 The forest of Poorstock, towards the -western 
 end of the county, was of older date, though 
 some additions were afterwards made to it by 
 king John. That of Gillingham, remained a 
 forest until the reign of Charles I. and a part 
 of it continued longer as a park. 
 
 The formation of a forest on the north-east- 
 ern side of Dorsetshire, may easily be conceiv- 
 ed. It was a tract of woody land, commencing 
 nearly at one of the extremities of a moun- 
 tainous country, though in itself rather a plain, 
 or declining gradually to the eastward, nearly 
 of a regular oblong form, bounded on one side 
 by natural limits, and on the other by the ad- 
 joining county of Wilts, being the resort of 
 deer &c. such a tract might readily offer itself 
 to the view of the king, or his deputies; and, 
 if the commission was directed only to one 
 county, the afforestation might meet with no 
 difficulty. 
 
 It is not so easy to account for an afforest- 
 ation of a very large space of country, com- 
 prising a considerable quantity of fertile land, 
 extending nearly to Sarum, Wilton, Ringwood^ 
 Winborn, Shaftesbury and Sturminster, and in- 
 cluding Blandford, Fordingbridge, Downton, 
 and other towns; or, at least., such of them as 
 
 were 
 
13 
 
 were then in existence. As no accounts appear 
 of the formation of a forest of either extent, the 
 transactions of later times must be referred to, 
 for evidence on this still contested question. 
 
 The history of Cranborn, at that period, 
 affords no light on the subject of the chace. 
 By the chronicle of the monastery of Tewkes- 
 bury, it appears that Brictric, beforementioned 
 as the possessor of the honour of Gloucester, 
 and of lands in Cranborn, was seized by the or- 
 der of the king, after the return of the latter 
 from his ostentatious journey to Normandy, 
 which has been related. The reason assigned 
 for this procedure, is, that Brictric, when for- 
 merly on an embassy, from Edward the confes- 
 sor to the Norman court, had refused to marry 
 Maud or Matilda, who, was afterwards queen 
 to William the conqueror ; and that she retain- 
 ed such a sense of the affront, that, on her re- 
 turn with the king, she prevailed on the latter 
 to seize Brictric, at his castle of Hanly in Wor- 
 cestershire, and to confiscate his possessions. 
 Historians differ respecting the place where 
 Brictric was confined. One relates that he 
 was carried from Hanly, in Worcestershire, to 
 Winchester; where he died without issue, and 
 was buried : another says that he was confined 
 in the castle of Hanley, near Salisbury, where he 
 
 died. 
 
14 
 
 tlied. The similarity of the names of Hanly, 
 Hanlege or Hanleigh, probably led to this con- 
 fusion concerning the place. As Ilanley in 
 Dorsetshire, appears in Domesday book, to have 
 belonged to the Abbey of Shaftesbury, without 
 any mention of former possessors, it has been 
 doubted -whether Brictric had any concern 
 there: but as his name is equally wanting in 
 the account of Cranborn, concerning his pos- 
 session of which, there is no doubt, the infer- 
 ence is not conclusive, and he may have also 
 held Hanley in Dorsetshire. 
 
 The account of the disposal of Brictric's pos- 
 sessions do not appear very clear. In one, it 
 is said that Alan, earl of Britany, who had 
 come over with William the conqueror, re- 
 ceived from him the honour of Gloucester, and 
 very large possessions in several counties : in 
 all 440 manors. In another, it is stated that 
 queen Maud had that honour, and the manor 
 of Cranborn. Hence it is probable that the 
 property of Brictric was divided, and that Alan 
 had only a part. According to Domesday book, 
 the queen had held lands in several places, but 
 they then belonged to the king. Among these 
 were Little-frome, Cranborn, Ashmore, Medes- 
 ham, Ham, (Preston or Chamberlayne,) Witch- 
 ampton, and Winborn. In that book, so far 
 
 as 
 
15 
 
 as relates to Dorsetshire, the name of Brietrie 
 occurs only in Ashmore, ( manor and lands, ) 
 Winborn, Tarente, Loder, Devenish, and Al- 
 frington. As the survey recorded in Domesday 
 book, is stated to have been taken in 1078, 
 and the Queen did not die until 1084, it ap- 
 pears that the lands which she had once held, 
 had been some time in possession of the king. 
 
 In the former part of the reign of William, 
 he had been much engaged, in suppressing the 
 numerous insurrections which the misconduct 
 of his deputies, his own arbitrary disposition, 
 and the impatience of his English subjects, had 
 occasioned; but after these had been quelled, 
 and his revenues settled, he found means to 
 gratify another passion. He had been prevent- 
 ed from going into Normandy, by an epidemic- 
 fever in that country, which raged some time; 
 in which interval he indulged himself in hunt- 
 ing. The Norman princes were descended 
 from an adventurer, or chieftain, who, having 
 been repulsed in an attempt upon England, 
 had landed in the north-western part of France, 
 and established himself with his followers, in 
 that country. These having come from a more 
 northern part of Europe, i. e. from Germany or, 
 Denmark, were thence called Northmen, or 
 
 Normans, and the country, Normandy. As 
 
 war 
 
16 
 
 war and rapine was their trade, they had in 
 general, sufficient employment of that kind, 
 and William had his share. The transition 
 from thence, to the pursuit of deer and other 
 beasts, was not so great, but that it gratified 
 the violence and activity of the king's disposi- 
 tion ; aud it soon shewed him the means of far- 
 ther oppressing his subjects, and of gratifying 
 his avarice. It is said, that he was fond of the 
 diversion to a degree of fury, and took such 
 measures to indulge it, as are at this time as- 
 tonishing. He is said to have depopulated the 
 country in Hampshire, to an extent of thirty 
 miles, turning out the inhabitants, destroying 
 houses, gardens, and even churches, to render 
 it more fit for the maintenance of deer and 
 other wild beasts. This account may, how- 
 ever, be too extravagant. A forest does not 
 imply full possession of the land, but a privi- 
 lege of keeping those animals upon it; for 
 which it might be sufficient to keep the woods 
 and pastures in an open state, and to prevent 
 the inhabitants from protecting the cultivated 
 grounds, otherwise than by hedges. In this, 
 they were doubtless subject to great disqui- 
 et and oppression, from the king's servants; 
 and the effect would be, in some measure, the 
 depopulation of the country. It is said that this 
 tract had been called Ytene, but it acquired the 
 name of the new forest, which it still retains. 
 
17 
 
 The violent proceedings of the king occasion- 
 ed great murmurs,, The English had been re- 
 duced to so low a state, that it was useless for 
 them to complain; but the Normans could not 
 tacitly bear the privation of the diversion of 
 hunting. Their murmurs, however, had but 
 little effect upon William, who strengthened his 
 exclusive claim by a set of forest laws, which., 
 at the same time preserved the deer, and afford- 
 ed him frequent opportunities of farther extor- 
 tion, by levying heavy penalties on the trans- 
 gressors. The new nobility, who held their 
 lands from the king, and were detested by the 
 English, were obliged, for their own security., 
 to comply with his measures ; and it was not un- 
 til many years afterwards, when the two nations 
 were moulded into one people, and more favor- 
 able opportunities offered for resistance, that 
 the rage of the sovereigns for afforestation was 
 effectually opposed. 
 
 In all this time, nothing appears concerning 
 any forest in connection with Cranborn; and, 
 in fact, history is silent respecting any sepa- 
 rate establishment of thatkind in its neighbour- 
 hood. After the formation of the New-fofest, 
 lesser tracts would be held in lower estimation, 
 and the one under our notice may have been 
 granted to a subject: but this was probably 
 
 done in the succeeding reign. 
 
 An 
 E 
 
18 
 
 An old history mentions William as the author 
 of the cruel penalty for killing a deer. It states 
 that " he formed many forests of wild beasts, 
 if and guarded them by laws, that whoever kill- 
 " ed a stag or hind, should be deprived of sight. 
 <c As he forbade the killing of deer, so also of 
 (( wild boars. He likew ise ordered, concerning 
 " the hares, that they should be free from moles- 
 t{ tation. The chief men complained much of 
 " this, and the poor bore it hardly ; but he was 
 <( so rigid that he cared not for the hatred of 
 Si them all ; as it was necessary for them to be 
 tc entirely obedient to the king's will, if they 
 " would live, or enjoy their lands, their goods, 
 "and his friendship. Alas! that any mortal 
 f should swell with such ostentation, as to ex- 
 " alt himself and despise all others." * 
 
 William had overcome all obstacles to his ar- 
 bitrary power. As the Normans took care how 
 they opposed his will, for fear of losing their 
 estates, so the English were in no condition to 
 throw off the yoke. There was scarcely a lord, 
 of that nation, whom he had not imprisoned or 
 banished. If there were any persons who still 
 preserved their liberty, they were watched so 
 narrowly, that the least opposition, or ground 
 of suspicion, was sufficient to cause their ruin. 
 This tyranny of the king, however, was not suf- 
 fered 
 
 * Chronlcum Saxomcum» 
 
19 
 
 fered to continue long. He hastily engaged in 
 a war with the king of Prance, and, in revenge 
 for a jest on his corpulency, he ravaged a part 
 of the territory of that king, in a terrible man- 
 ner, destroying and burning all before him, un- 
 til he came to Mantes. He ordered the corn 
 around it to be burnt, and the vines to be de- 
 stroyed. He then laid siege to that town, took 
 it, and set it on fire; the heat of which, brought 
 upon him a fever. To this was added, an in- 
 jury received from the pummel of his saddle, 
 either, as some relate, by leaping over a ditch, 
 or, according to others, by the plunging of his 
 horse, from treading on hot ashes, as tiie king 
 was riding in triumph through the ruins. He 
 did not long survive this accident ; but, as it is 
 related, when he found himself near his end, 
 he began seriously to look back on the past ac- 
 tions of his life, and to view them in a new 
 light. He ordered large sums to be given to 
 the poor and to the churches, particularly to 
 those which he had burnt at Mantes. He also 
 ordered that all his prisoners should be set at 
 liberty, both in England and Normandy. 
 
 It has appeared necessary to place this king's 
 
 arbitrary measures in open view, to shew the 
 
 disposition of his mind, under which he formed 
 
 the forests. 
 
 The 
 E2 
 
20 
 
 The death of William I. occurred in 1087. 
 As on coining to England, he had claimed the 
 crown by virtue of a will of Edward the Confess- 
 or, so he chose to leave it in the same manner 
 to his son William, surnamed Rufus, to the 
 prejudice of the birth right of Robert, the eldest 
 son. On this account, a conspiracy being form- 
 ed against the new king, he was advised to con- 
 ciliate the affections of (he English, and amuse 
 them by promises of lessening their taxes, and 
 of allowing them free liberty of hunting; but, 
 after the suppression of the insurrection, Wil- 
 liam, instead of performing his promises to his 
 subjects, oppressed them still more cruelly. He 
 increased the rigour of the forest laws, inflict- 
 ing the punishment of death for killing a deer, 
 and introduced the custom of cc lawing, " or 
 maiming the dogs kept by the gentry, whereby 
 the latter were more effectually deprived of their 
 favorite diversion. 
 
 The remonstrances of Archbishop Lanfranc, 
 concerning this breach of the king's promises, 
 had little effect. William was so offended, that 
 he asked him with great warmth, whether he 
 thought it possible for a king to keep all his 
 promises? The freedom which the good pre- 
 late had used, occasioned the loss of the king's 
 favour ; but he did not long survive his disgrace, 
 
 dying 
 
21 
 
 dying in 1088, lamented by both nations, as one 
 of the worthiest prelates that had ever filled the 
 see of Canterbury. After his death, the king, 
 being freed from the restraint which he had suf- 
 fered from the presence of so venerable a man, 
 gave a loose to his inclinations, and exceeded 
 his father in extortion and rigour. He had a si- 
 milar passion for the diversion of hunting, and 
 retained the forests in their exclusive state. 
 
 The honour of Gloucester, with the manor 
 or lands of Cranborn, and other appendages, 
 had descended to William the II. who gave 
 it to Robert Pitz-Hamon, lord of Astramaville, 
 or Corbeil, in Normandy, nephew to William I. 
 This nobleman had accompanied his uncle on 
 the expedition to England, and after the death 
 of the latter, was in great favor with his suc- 
 cessor. It is related that he conquered the 
 county of Glamorgan, in Wales, from Jestyn, 
 its lord, who had refused to fulfil certain con- 
 ditions, after Fitz-Hamon had defended him 
 from Rees, king of Wales. About this time the 
 king granted the abovementioned honour and 
 manors to Fitz-Hamon, and, with them, the for- 
 est afterwards known by the name of Cranborn; 
 which, by this transfer to a subject, acquired 
 the denomination of a chace. The monastery 
 of Cranborn had been much favored by its Sax- 
 on 
 
22 
 
 on patrons; but this Fitz-Hamon transferred 
 his affections to a monastery at Tewkesbury, 
 in Gloucestershire, leaving* only a few monks 
 at Cranborn, which he made a cell to the Ab- 
 bey of Tewkesbury. 
 
 " The government of William Rufus, " it is 
 related, cc had become the exertion of the most 
 " despotic power, manifested in every shape of 
 " violence and extortion. Justice was banished 
 " from the tribunals, which were filled with ve- 
 " nal and corrupt judges, who pursued no other 
 " end than that of enriching themselves with 
 " the spoils of the people. All persons in office 
 fC seemed to have been appointed for plunder- 
 fc ing, not for protecting the subject; all hon- 
 <e ours and rewards were engrossed by panders,, 
 cc parasites, and informers."* 
 
 Among these grievances, the rigorous execu- 
 tion of the forest laws was not the least promi- 
 nent. By these laws, it is said, cc the receivers 
 cc of deer &c. which had been clandestinely kill- 
 ce ed, if they knew them to be the king's pro- 
 (c perty, were declared to be principal trespass- 
 rc ers. Likewise if a trespass was committed 
 fC in a forest, and the trespassser died, it might 
 cc be punished in the person of his heir; though 
 t( this was contrary to common law. " It is 
 stated also, that " the Norman kings punished 
 
 the 
 
 * Rider. 
 
23 
 
 * e the killers of deer, in any of the forests,, with 
 (< great severity, and in various manners ; such 
 " as by hanging, loss of limbs, putting out of 
 <c eyes, and other mutilation ; A * and in the en- 
 forcement of those punishments, William Rufus 
 is said to have gone the farthest of any of that 
 family. 
 
 War and hunting were alternately the occu- 
 pations of these kings. William Rufus was 
 hunting in the New-forest when he received an 
 account of some disasters to his dominions in 
 France. He hastened thither, and obtained 
 some advantages ; but, on the attack of a town, 
 he received a severe blow with a stone. In re- 
 venge, after the example of his father, he rava- 
 ged the country, before he returned to England. 
 We again hear of him in the New-forest ; where 
 he was killed by an arrow from Walter Tyrel, 
 as is generally known. Thus died William 
 the II. amidst the scene of his own oppressions, 
 and of his father's. Two others of the royal 
 family are said to have perished In the same 
 forest, each named Richard ; the one being son 
 of William the I. and the other his nephew. 
 
 The passion for hunting prevailed to excess 
 among the princes of this family. At the time 
 of the accident to William, his brother Henry 
 was pursuing that diversion in another part of 
 
 the 
 
 f Encyclopedia JJritannica, 
 
 \j 
 
24 
 
 the forest. The latter hastened to Winchester, 
 to secure the late king's treasures, and to ascend 
 the throne, in opposition to the right of his el- 
 der brother, Robert, who was in Normandy. 
 On this occasion, Henry endeavoured to pro- 
 cure the affections of his new subjects, by a 
 confirmation of their privileges, and redress of 
 their grievances ; for which purpose he publish- 
 ed a charter, on the day of his coronation and 
 pursued other means of acquiring popularity. 
 This favorable beginning, like that of his late 
 brother, soon gave way to a different conduct. 
 Under pretence of some grievances in Nor- 
 mandy, he heavily taxed his subjects in Eng- 
 land, for the maintenance of a war with his 
 brother Robert. The latter was defeated and 
 committed to prison ; where he remained until 
 his death. After these purposes were attained,, 
 Henry took little care of observing his own 
 charter, whenever his own interest was con- 
 cerned ; and, by his extortions, greatly impo- 
 verished the people. These calamities were 
 aggravated by the severity of his justiciaries, 
 who are said to have cc exercised every degree 
 cc of tyranny, inhumanity, and cruelty. One of 
 cc them, Ralph Rassett, made himself infamous 
 ee by the execution, at one time, of forty-four 
 <c persons, some of whom were supposed to be 
 
 re innocent.'' * 
 
 In 
 
 # Rider* 
 
25 
 
 In the year 1107, Robert Fitz-Hamon, before- 
 mentioned, was killed at Falaise, in Norman- 
 dy. The preference given by him to Tewkes- 
 bury, for the situation of an abbey, and other 
 circumstances, imply that he did not pay much 
 attention to Cranborn. On this account, it ap- 
 pears more probable, that the chace had been 
 granted to him, before the removal of the 
 monks to Tewkesbury, during the reign of 
 William II. Robert Fitz-Hamon left four 
 daughters; one of whom was afterwards mar- 
 ried to Henry's illegitimate son Robert, who 
 was created earl of Gloucester, and put in pos- 
 session of the estates of his wife's late father. 
 
 We have seen that several of the family of 
 William I. met with untimely deaths. Hen- 
 ry had to mourn the loss of his only son by 
 another means. This young prince perished. 
 at sea, with many of the nobility, through some 
 imprudence and mismanagement. 
 
 The English people had reason to dread from 
 him a greater degree of suffering than they had 
 before experienced. He had frequeu tly threaten- 
 ed them with abject slavery, and his common 
 expression was, that if he came to the crown, 
 he would make them draw the plow like oxen. 
 
 Henry felt so much grief for the disaster, that 
 
 he 
 P 
 
 \ 
 
26 
 
 lie is said to have never afterwards smiled. 
 Still, however, his passion for hunting con- 
 tinued. We read that he had one day been 
 engaged in that favorite diversion ; after which, 
 being fatigued and hungry, he surfeited him- 
 self with eating lampreys, and w r as seised with 
 a fever which soon put an end to his life. 
 
 On the death of Henry I. Stephen, son of 
 the Earl of Blois, by Adela daughter of William 
 I. ascended the throne. The superior claim 
 of Matilda, or Maude, daughter of the late 
 king, rendered it prudent for Stephen to gain 
 the affections of the nobility, and he relaxed 
 the severity of the forest laws in considerable 
 degree. It is related, that <c the many trials 
 cc about hunting in the royal forests and in 
 #f other places, was a grievance that had pre- 
 " vailed ever since the conquest. No person's 
 ^property was secure against the informations 
 (C of the king's officers. If a gentleman was 
 " found hunting, even in his own woods,-if 
 " he cut them down, or grubbed them for his 
 (C own private use, he was immediately repre- 
 ec sented as a waster, and was obliged to com- 
 C( promise the matter by paying a large fine 
 <c to the crown. These unjust and trouble- 
 (C some prosecutions were fully provided for by 
 
 *' an article of Stephen's coronation oath, im- 
 porting 
 
m 
 
 ™ porting that he would not disturb the clergy 
 (( or laity in the enjoyment of their own woods, 
 " as his predecessors had done, nor sue any 
 * persons for taking the diversion of hunting 
 " in the royal forests, but that he would restore 
 xc the forests taken in by the late king, and re- 
 t( tain none but such as had been possessed 
 « by William I. and II. * 
 
 The actions of this prince agreed with his 
 promises, He was much engaged in war with 
 Matilda; but the haughty behaviour of the 
 latter, during some temporary advantage, by 
 refusing to mitigate the severity of the Norman 
 laws, so disgusted the people, that the party of 
 Stephen gained strength, and by agreement he 
 retained the crown during his life. He em- 
 ployed the short interval of quiet in redres- 
 sing the grievances of his subjects, and reform- 
 ing the laws of the nation. He died in the 
 year 1154, and was succeeded by Henry II. 
 son of Matilda. 
 
 In the war of succession abovementioned, 
 Robert, Earl of Gloucester, had taken a great 
 share, being the principal supporter of the claim 
 of his half sister Matilda. He died in 1147, 
 when his son William succeeded to the Earl 
 dom and the other possessions of Robert. In 
 
 the 
 
 * Rider. 
 
 F 2 
 
2S 
 
 the accounts of those times, no mention is made 
 of the chace; and little is said respecting 
 Cranborn, excepting a charter of Henry I. 
 in 1 100, and another of Roger, bishop of 
 Sarum, in 1109, both confirming the gifts of 
 Robert Fitz-Hamon and others to the abbey of 
 Tewkesbury. 
 
 The reign of Stephen had given the English 
 a respite, of nearly twenty years, from the griev- 
 ous oppression of the forest-laws. Henry II. 
 who succeeded to the throne, bein^ son to 
 the Earl of Anjou, by Matilda, and bred in that 
 country, had not acquired the propensity 
 to the diversion of hunting, which distinguish- 
 ed his ancestors in England; and the pru^ 
 dence of his uncle, Robert Earl of Gloucester, 
 with the misfortunes of the family, had taught 
 him more moderation and discretion. Being 
 surrounded by able counsellors, he consented 
 that the laws of Edward the Confessor should 
 be restored, and he confirmed the charter of 
 Henry I. Throughout his reign little ap- 
 pears respecting the forests; the English had 
 long submitted to the occupancy of former 
 afforestations, and Henry does not seem to 
 have given much occasion of complaint by 
 new seisures. He reformed some of the abu- 
 ses, and appointed commissioners to ascertain 
 
 the 
 
 
29 
 
 the rights of the crown, &c. In a later part of 
 this king's reign, his conduct was more severe* 
 In the commotions of his own reign, and of his 
 predecessors, the forest-laws had been much 
 violated, and he resolved to restore them to 
 their full vigour. Accordingly, whilst he was 
 on a journey northward, at Woodstock, four 
 knights, with their accomplices, were tried and 
 executed, for killing a forester ; and at Not- 
 tingham, he punished all transgressors upon 
 the royal forests. In other respects, he pro- 
 vided better for the liberty of the subjects: 
 he appointed an eminent lawyer, Canulph (or 
 Ralph) de Glanville to be chief justiciary; 
 and the courts of justice began to proceed by- 
 forms favorable to the people, without being 
 inconvenient to the government. * 
 
 During the reign of Henry II. William 
 Earl of Gloucester, son of Robert beforemen- 
 tioned, had died; viz. in 1173. He had mar- 
 ried Hawise, or Avisa, the daughter of the 
 Earl of Leicester, and left three daughters; 
 Mabel, married to the Earl of Evreux, Amicia, 
 to Richard de Clare, Earl of Hertford,-and 
 Isabel. In the last year of Henry, his young- 
 est son John married Isabel, and with her had 
 the honour of Gloucester with its appendages, 
 among which was the one now known by the 
 
 name of Cranborn chace. 
 
 Among 
 
 * Riders 
 
30 
 
 Among the troubles of Henry II. were 
 those of the rebellions of his sons. Henry, 
 the eldest, had died in a state of repentance 
 for his unnatural conduct: Geoffrey had been 
 killed in a tournament, at Paris. Richard had 
 been engaged with his brothers; and, after 
 their decease > was in league with the king of 
 France ; and lastly John, the youngest, was 
 discovered to have had a share in the plots to 
 dethrone his father. This was too much for 
 Henry to bear : he cursed the day of his birth, 
 and uttered imprecations against his sons; soon 
 after which, he fell sick, and died at Chinon 
 in France, in the year 1189. 
 
 Richard, on his accession to the throne, be- 
 ing in France, gave an order to his mother, 
 Eleanor, to publish an act of grace in favor of 
 transgressors of the forest-laws, and of other 
 criminals. This was a popular measure; but 
 the people, who had suffered much under those 
 laws, took advantage of the indulgence, and 
 renewed their trespasses. This led the king 
 to severer measures; and his want of mo- 
 ney, for an expedition to the Holy-land, indu- 
 ced him, among other extortions, to expose to 
 Sale the office of high-sheriffs, keepers of for- 
 ests, and other posts and dignities. He receiv- 
 ed sums of money from the barons of Bedford- 
 shire, and from the knights of Surrey, for dis- 
 foresting 
 
31 
 
 foresting some part of those counties, which 
 had been converted into forest by Henry I. 
 Ralph de Glanville, the justiciary, finding 
 Richard deaf to all his remonstrances, had re* 
 signed his office, and his successor gave a 
 thousand marks for the employment. In con- 
 sequence of these extortions, and of other ra- 
 pacity, after Richard's return, it is said that "all 
 :c England was reduced to extreme poverty. 
 ' c yet the extortions did not stop here ; for 
 " Hugh de Nevile, chief justice, with Hugh 
 € * Wal, and Ermine de Nevile, justices of the 
 " forests, brought inexpressible trouble upon 
 <c the subjects, by the severe execution of the 
 y forest laws. " * 
 
 The first transaction which we find related, 
 concerning the chace, is of a tour or perambu- 
 lation made by John Earl of Morton, young- 
 est son to Henry II. and afterwards king of 
 England. As no record of this act appears, ex- 
 cept in later times, and no date is assigned, it 
 may have taken place, either soon after his 
 marriage with Isabella of Gloucester, or, more 
 probably, during the reign of Richard I. at a 
 time when the severity of the forest laws had 
 been renewed. It is not mentioned whether 
 the purport of this tour was to perambulate an 
 old boundary, or to add an additional territory 
 
 to 
 
 , * Rider* 
 
32 
 
 to A former chace, and no legal procedure is 
 described,, as accompanying it. No traces ap- 
 pear of any use being made by prince John of 
 this tour; on the contrary, we find, that in his 
 reign an enquiry was instituted, respecting se- 
 veral distinct forests and chaces, within the line 
 of his perambulation, as afterwards described ; 
 which was nearly according to what are now 
 termed the outer bounds of the chace. It may 
 be presumed, therefore, that this was an attempt 
 of a new afforestation, inconclusive in itself, 
 though made a precedent for claims in succeed- 
 ing times. A tradition, indeed, exists, that 
 John resided at Tollard, and held his court 
 there, when king; but this is unsupported by 
 records, and, if true, would rather imply that 
 the chace was not connected with Cranborn, 
 and that it was held only by the smallei 1 
 bounds, to which Tollard was adjoining. 
 
 On the death of Richard I. by an arrow shot 
 from a cross bow, at the siege of the castle of 
 Chaluz in France, in 1199, his brother John 
 succeeded to the crown. The latter had shewn 
 his violence of disposition, in various ways: he 
 had been in rebellion, or, at least, in a plot, 
 against his father, and he had taken advantage 
 of his brothers absence and misfortunes, by en- 
 deavouring to gain possession of his dominions; 
 
 though 
 
 
S3 
 
 though in this scheme he had been disapointed 
 by the sudden return of Richard. His assump- 
 tion of the throne was in prejudice to the right 
 of his nephew, Arthur, son to his late elder 
 brother, Godfrey ; though, indeed, this was in 
 some measure sanctioned by the will of Rich- 
 ard L 
 
 In the second year of John's reign, he divor- 
 ced his wife Isabella ( or, as she is called by 
 some, Hawisa or Avisa, ) on pretence of kindred; 
 though that objection had been set aside, on 
 his marriage with her. No account appears of 
 the Chace, at this time; and, if we may judge 
 from later circumstances, his pretensions to 
 the larger tract had been laid aside. 
 
 The actions of this king open too wide a 
 field for detail. His injudicious conduct in 
 France, the murder of his nephew Arthur, the 
 loss of all his dominions in Normandy and Bri- 
 tany, his impositions on his subjects in Eng- 
 land, his differences with the clergy, and his 
 lewdness, brought upon him the contempt of all 
 classes. He had not fulfilled his engagements, 
 by restoring to the nobles and people their pri- 
 vileges, as he had promised ; he had exacted 
 large sums from the northern counties, on pre- 
 tence of damage done to his forests ; and far 
 
 from relieving his subjects, he was disposed to 
 
 exceed 
 G 
 
34 
 
 exceed all his predecessors, in violence and ex- 
 ortion. The Normans and English, now 
 moulded into one nation, were no longer the 
 passive people they had been under the sub* 
 jection of the two Williams: they had tast- 
 ed some of the sweets of liberty under Stephen, 
 and had benefited by the regulations of the 
 courts of justice, under Henry II. one language 
 had been formed, by the engrafting of Nor- 
 man words and termination!*, on the basis of the 
 Saxon, and national distinctions were not re- 
 tained. All were desirous of English liberty, 
 and of reviving the laws of Edward the con- 
 fessor, the memory of which had been faintly 
 preserved. Accordingly, the barons began to 
 combine, in opposition to the kings attempts at 
 absolute power, and, at length, after many vi- 
 cissitudes, the king was compelled to sign the 
 Magna Charta, or Great Charter of Liber ties> 
 and the Charter de Foresta, or Charta for regu- 
 lating the Forests. 
 
 The provisions of Magna Charta need not to 
 be described in this place. The purpose of 
 Charta de Foresta was, to disforest all lands 
 which had been taken in previous to the reign 
 of Henry I. except such as belonged to the 
 demesnes of the crown ; to prevent the extor- 
 tions of foresters, to regulate the forest courts, 
 
 to 
 
35 
 
 to reverse former outlawries,, to abolish the 
 penalty of loss of life or limb for taking' deer, 
 and to order a fine, or imprisonment, in its 
 stead ; with other regulations, tending to re- 
 move or mitigate the severity of the forest laws. 
 
 These provisions were the more necessary, 
 as the frequency of afforestations tended to 
 convert the whole kingdom into one vast for- 
 est ; and of John, it is said, that " he had or- 
 " dered the mounds in the forests to be levelled, 
 (e the hedges to be cut down, and the ditches 
 " to be filled up ; that his deer might have li- 
 " berty to range at large, consume the corn., 
 " and destroy the produce of the neig hbour- 
 " ing lands. " * 
 
 To carry these regulations into effect, it was 
 provided, that such forests as had been made in 
 later times, should be viewed by honest and 
 lawful men : but the king', though he had is- 
 sued out letters patent for the observance of 
 the charters, soon employed every art to set 
 them aside. He raised an army of foreigners, 
 appealed to the Pope, and renewed the war, 
 with various success; at times destroying the 
 property of the barons in a barbarous manner. 
 On an expedition northward, his foreign sol- 
 diers made terrible havock ; (: he caused all the 
 [ ( seats, farms, villages and towns, to be plun- 
 dered 
 
 * Rider. 
 
 G 2 
 
36 
 
 fe dered and burned, till, at last, the whole 
 " country became one dreary, dismal, horrid 
 " waste. *' Several large towns were reduced 
 1o ashes; "John, himself, beginning the in- 
 " glorious work, and like a true ruffian, setting 
 (C fire, with his own hands, to every house in 
 " which he had lodged. " * 
 
 The deplorable state of the kingdom, the 
 low condition of the barons, the offer of the 
 crown to Lewis, son of the king of France, and 
 his acceptance, need not be related at length. 
 John, however, after laying waste the barons' 
 lands in Norfolk, advanced towards Lincoln- 
 shire, threatening utter, destruction to his op- 
 ponents; but attempting to cross the Washes, 
 or wide shallow rivers, whilst the tide was ri- 
 sing, the greater part of his troops, with all his 
 treasure, baggage, and regalia, were swept 
 away by the water : himself narrowly escaping. 
 Scon after this, he was seized by a violent fe- 
 ver, which combining with vexation, soon put 
 an end to his life, in 1216; or, according to some 
 writers, he was poisoned by a monk, who had 
 heard his threats of devastation to the whole 
 kingdom. 
 
 Before this, viz. in the 16th of John, Isabel- 
 la, who had been divorced from him, was mar- 
 ried to Geoffrey de Mandeville ; f and a writ 
 
 appears 
 
 * Rider. f Madox, History of the Exchequer. 
 
37 
 
 appears, of the 17th of John, directed to Hugh 
 de Nevil, to make a perambulation, to know 
 what was the kings chace, there, ( ifl Dorset, ) 
 and what was the chace of Geoffrey de Maude- 
 ville ; to wit, the chace which William, Earl of 
 Gloucester, formerly held : also to make a like 
 perambulation of the forest of Cranborn and 
 Chetterden, between the king's chace and the 
 chace which the earl of Gloucester had held; 
 according to which perambulations, they should 
 cause the said Geoffrey to have, without delay, 
 the chace which the aforesaid earl had held. 
 
 Dated at Running Mead, 23rd of June. 
 17th of John. 
 
 The above implies that there were several 
 small chaces or forests on the north-eastern side 
 of Dorsetshire, and is silent respecting the lar- 
 ger bounds of the perambulation of John, 
 when earl of Morton. 
 
 On the death of king John, his eldest son, 
 then very young, was proclaimed, by the name 
 of Henry III. His party soon increased, and 
 Lewis, after some time, quitted the Island. 
 The earl of Pembroke, being regent, pursued 
 a wise conduct ; assuring the people that the 
 charters should be faithfully executed, he or- 
 dered writs to be issued, enjoyning the sheriffs 
 
 to 
 
to proclaim them in the county courts; &c. 
 He also sent justices itinerant, or justices in 
 eyre, into the counties, to cause the charters 
 to be strictly observed. * 
 
 Among" other proceedings, it appears that 
 in the 4th year of Henry III. a commission 
 was issued to the sheriffs of Dorset, Somerset 
 and Wilts, reciting that the king had em- 
 powered the bishops of Sarum and Bath, the 
 earl of Salisbury or his deputy, and William 
 Briwere, to enquire what forests had been 
 made by the late king, and to disafforest them ; 
 to enquire what woods had been placed by 
 him within the regard, which before were out 
 of the regard, and to place all such forests 
 again without the regard ; to enquire what 
 woods were put by him within defence, and to 
 put all such woods out of defence; &c. also 
 to enquire what forests were made by king 
 Henry II. in the time of Alan de Nevil, or in 
 the time of others, his foresters, at the will of 
 the king, or of Alan; &c. that inquisition being 
 thence made, and shewn to Hubert de Burg, 
 the king's justiciary, and to the king's council, 
 if the inquisition should please them, the 
 woods of that kind should be immediately dis- 
 afforested by the said justiciary and council. 
 
 It 
 
 * Rapiii' 
 
39 
 
 It is said that neither any return to this com- 
 mission/ nor order of disafforestation has .been 
 found; but it appears by some records of the 
 
 following reign, that such a perambulation or 
 
 enquiry was made. * 
 
 The earl of Pembroke had died, in 1219, 
 much regretted. His successor, in the regency, 
 the bishop of Winchester, had at first followed 
 his plan of reformation, as appears by the above 
 commission ; but the court soon adopted new 
 maxims. Hubert de Burg had married the 
 daughter of the king of Scotland, and became 
 intoxicated with rank and power. In punish- 
 ing some riotous proceedings in London, in 
 1222, he ordered the ringleader to be hang- 
 ed, without trial, and the noses and ears of 
 others to be cut off, in the same summary man- 
 ner; directly contrary to the tenor of the great 
 charter, which directed the trial by jury. 
 
 These arbitrary proceedings occassioned an 
 address to the king, from a great council or par- 
 liament, consisting of the prelates and nobility^ 
 requesting him to confirm the rights and privi- 
 leges of the people, according to his former 
 oath. This request was far from being relish- 
 ed at the court; and in his privy council, 
 William Briwere remarked that it was unrea- 
 sonable 
 
 * Presentments of juries, 3rd, of Edward I. which see. 
 
40 
 
 sonable to desire the execution of charters 
 which had been extorted by violence ; but the 
 archbishop of Canterbury severely reprimand- 
 ed Briwere, adding that if he really loved the 
 king, he would not endeavour to involve the 
 kingdom in fresh troubles. On this, Henry 
 approving of the archbishop's conduct, declar- 
 ed his resolution that the charters should be 
 observed ; and orders were soon sent to the 
 sheriffs, to see them executed. 
 
 In the year 1225, the king had need of great 
 sums to carry on a war with France. The par- 
 liament demanding the observance of the char- 
 ters, on their grant of a subsidy, Henry ac- 
 ceded to their request; and a new act was pas- 
 sed to that purport, 9th of H. III. which then 
 became the date of the charters, instead of 
 that of 15th of king John. 
 
 It would be tedious to relate the frequent 
 confirmations of the charters, by Henry III. and 
 the little care taken for their execution. When 
 much in want of money, which frequently 
 happened, through his profuseness and im- 
 providence, the grant of a subsidy from the 
 parliament was generally accompanied by a 
 promise that the charters should be observed. 
 Though this was sometimes followed by orders 
 to the sheriffs, and by commissions of enquiry 
 
 issued 
 
41 
 
 issued, the effect was of short continuance ; and 
 at length, by the advice of Hubert de Burgh, 
 among other arbitrary measures, the king, in 
 1227, suddenly annulled the two charters of 
 his father, on pretence that an act of his minor- 
 ity was not binding. 
 
 Isabella, wife of Geoffrey de Mandeville, had 
 died in the early part of this reign, and Almaric 
 de Evreux, her nephew, son of her sister Mabel, 
 had not long survived; on which the earldom of 
 Gloucester, with its appendages, had come into 
 the hands of Gilbert de Clare, son of Richard 
 earl of Hertford, and of Amicia, sister to Isabella 
 and Mabel. Gilbert had been engaged on the 
 side of the barons, and had been taken prisoner, 
 at Lincoln, in the early part of this reign, by 
 the earl of Pembroke ; whose daughter he after- 
 wards married. 
 
 No transaction appears of this Gilbert, earl 
 of Gloucester, respecting the chace. He united 
 with the earl of Pembroke, and other noble- 
 men, who took up arms to compel the king to 
 restore the charters ; but by the contrivance of 
 Hubert de Burgh, the confederacy was dissolved. 
 Gilbert did not live long after this; but dying 
 in 1229, he was succeeded in his possession, 
 by his son, Richard de Clare, then a minor. 
 
 Among 
 H 
 
Among the odious actions of Hubert dc Burgh, 
 he had been suspected of poisoning William 
 Longspey, earl of Salisbury, at a banquet : he 
 had persuaded the king to extort money from 
 corporations and monasteries, on frivolous pre- 
 tences. He now seised the castle of Tun- 
 bridge, belonging to the earl of Gloucester; 
 but was strongly opposed, in this instance, by 
 the archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 In 1232, the power of Hubert was at an end. 
 He was disgraced, and it was with some diffi- 
 culty that his life was preserved from the an- 
 ger of the king, and the rage of the people. 
 
 The long reign of Henry III. was one con- 
 tinued scene of caprice and inconstancy. He by 
 turns quarrelled with the pope, or countenanced 
 the exactions of the legates, on the English 
 clergy ; to the great impoverishment of the lat- 
 ter. In 1240, he sent justices in eyre, through 
 the counties, under pretence of redressing grie- 
 vances, and easing the people; but, in fact, 
 to raise money by fines and confiscations. He 
 had frequently required money, and, had some- 
 times obtained it from the parliament, by pro- 
 mises of fulfilling the charters: but, in 1244, he 
 found the nobility and clergy strongly united 
 against his demands. At length, however, a 
 
 subsidy was granted; and the king not only en- 
 gaged 
 
43 
 
 gaged himself by oath, but consented that tlie 
 bishops should excommunicate him, in case he 
 did not execute the charters ; this concession, 
 however, was no more binding than the pre- 
 ceding, and the charters remained unexecuted. 
 Richard de Clare, having arrived at manhood, 
 doubtless found the state of public affairs fa- 
 vorable for the revival of the claim on the lar- 
 ger bouiids of the chace, according to the for- 
 mer perambulation of prince John. This earl 
 is the first, under whom the chace is mentioned, 
 as being connected with Cranborn ; and it 
 seems most probable that he was the first pro- 
 prietor of the manor of Cranborn, who resided 
 at that place, after the removal of the monas- 
 tery to Tewkesbury, by Robert Fitzhamon, as 
 before related. 
 
 No record of this date appears of the earl's 
 proceedings : but in one of the succeeding 
 reign, * it is said, that an account of an inqui- 
 sition, at New Sarum, 29th of Henry III. stat- 
 ing the larger bounds, was found at another in- 
 quisition made by Geoffrey de Lanleigh and 
 Richard de Worthing, justices; but at what 
 time or place is not related. This affair will 
 appear more fully hereafter. 
 
 The first transactions that we find recorded 
 
 after this time^ respecting the chace, are dated 
 
 34th 
 
 * 8th of Edward, I. 
 
 H 2 
 
44 
 
 34th of Henry III. ( 1249) as appear on the 
 roll of pleas held at Westminster, in Trinity 
 term, before the justices of the bench, Roger 
 de Thurkelby and his companions;* to the 
 following purport. 
 
 Wilts, set. 
 
 The abbess of Wilton, ( by her attorney 
 William Coke, ) complained against Richard, 
 earl of Gloucester, why he suffered her not to 
 take reasonable estover, in her own woods 
 of Fernditch and Chettell, within the percur- 
 sus of the earl's chace of Cranborn ; and why 
 he permitted not her men to take housebote, 
 and haybote, without the view of the keepers 
 of the chace, as they had been wont, and 
 ought to take, and had been accustomed to 
 take in the time of the earl's predecessors ? 
 But the earl came not; and the sheriff decla- 
 ' red that the earl had no land in his county, 
 where he could take him, but it was testified 
 that the earl had land in the county of Dorset, 
 where he could ; and therefore the sheriff 
 was commanded that he should take the earl, 
 so that he should appear, within eight days 
 of St. Michael, &c. 
 
 The next presentation was for Dorsetshire, en- 
 titled " pleas at Westminster/' before the same 
 justices, in Michaelmas term, in the same yeaF. 
 
 Dorset 
 
 * Record in the Charter house. 
 
45 
 
 Dorset, set. 
 
 The abbess of Wilton complains, &c. 
 ( as above.) But the earl came not; and it 
 was adjudged that he should appear within 
 fifteen days of St. Hilary, &c. 
 
 At the same time and place, the abbess of 
 Tarent by her attorney, complained of the earl, 
 why he exacted fealty of the keepers of her 
 woods at Chettell, within the percursus of his 
 chace of Cranborn ; and why he permitted her 
 not to take reasonable estover, &c. ( as above.) 
 But the earl came not ; and it was adjudged 
 that he should appear, &c. 
 
 At the same time and place, the abbess of 
 Shaftesbury by her attorney, complained &c. 
 ( in the same manner as the abbess of Tarent. ) 
 
 The situation of Chettell abovementioned, is 
 on the edge of Wiltshire, adjoining the eastern 
 side of Dorsetshire. Fernditch is near it, in 
 Wiltshire. Estoyer is a general term of wood 
 for furniture, &c. housebote, of wood for repairs 
 or fuel, and haybote, for hedges or other fences. 
 
 The word C( percursus, " used in the above 
 record, is not of common occurrence. It lite- 
 rally signifies " a course through, or hasty run- 
 ning over; " and seems to imply a liberty, either 
 allowed or assumed, of riding through those 
 woods and lands, in pursuit of the deer, or for 
 
 other 
 
46 
 
 other transitory purposes. From the silence of 
 records respecting other proceedings of the earl, 
 and from the mention of a later period for the 
 commencement of his incursions, it may be in- 
 ferred that he relinquished his claim to the feal- 
 ty of the abbesses woodmen, and to the con- 
 troul of their supply of wood, in Chettell and 
 Fernditch. 
 
 An agreement was made in the following 
 year, 35th of Henry III. between Richard, earl 
 of Gloucester, and the abbess of Shaftesbury, 
 that the woodwards of her woods of Hanley, 
 Iwerne, and Fontmell ( all in the county of 
 Dorset, ) should, without evasion, or cavil, 
 ( sine calwnpnia, ) at once, or once for all, 
 ( semel ) on their first appointment, ( in prima 
 creacione,) come to the earls court at Cranborn^ 
 and there swear that they would behave faith- 
 fully concerning the venison of the earl within 
 the chace, and would give notice of offenders 
 therein; but that after the said oath, they 
 should not be compelled to come to the earl's 
 court of Cranborn, for any attachment to give 
 evidence against any person, or to do any thing 
 else. The record contains other provisions, 
 for mutual accommodations ; and farther de- 
 clares that the abbess and her successors 
 should be free from every kind of suit at his 
 
 hundreds 
 
47 
 
 hundreds of Pimperne, Martin,, and Rough- 
 borough, &c. 
 
 The woods abovementioned, or the greater 
 part of them, being within the smaller or un- 
 disputed bounds of the chace, can have little 
 or no concern with the claim of the larger 
 bounds : being also a mere agreement between, 
 two individuals, and, consequently, only bind- 
 ing on themselves and their successors. 
 
 Richard de Clare was one of the barons, who, in 
 the 31st of Henry III. by a letter to the pope, had 
 exclaimed against the exactions of the latter, 
 though countenanced by the king;* but, in the 
 next year, " he ( the earl ) first brought the Au- 
 " gustine friars into this realm, and joined with 
 <c the aliens against the natives, much to his dis- 
 " honour." f The aliens were chiefly Italian 
 ecclesiastics, whom the pope, by the connivance 
 of the king, appointed to benefices in England ; 
 but there were also the king's three half-bro- 
 thers, with their followers, who came over from 
 France, about that time, and were immediate- 
 ly promoted to various offices, to the detriment 
 of the English. We find that in the 34th of 
 Henry III. the earl of Gloucester travelled with 
 Richard, earl of Cornwall, the king's brother, 
 and visited the pope at Lyons ; and that at the 
 installation of the archbishop of Canterbury, he 
 
 had 
 
 * Peerage of Englaod; f Peerage of England, 
 
48 
 
 had the offices of steward and butler.* With 
 such connections, doubtless, he had no fear of 
 obstruction from the king or the court, con- 
 cerning his claim of the extended bounds of lite 
 chace, to which the name of Cranborn was now 
 annexed. 
 
 The disposition of the king, himself at this 
 time, respecting the forests, was very unfavor- 
 able to his subjects in the country. It is re- 
 lated that <c Henry III. not daring to demand 
 tf money of the parliament, put in practice 
 (c other methods to raise it. One of his most 
 <c effectual ways, was, to commission a judge 
 ec entirely devoted to him, ( Geoffrey de Lang- 
 (( ley, ) to go and make inquisition in the 
 <( counties, concerning trespasses committed 
 " in the royal forests. This commission was 
 (C in itself very odious, since it included all 
 <c the cases excepted in king John's charter; 
 <c but the manner, in which the inquisitor 
 " executed it, rendered it still more intolerable ; 
 " for he punished the least fault, by exces- 
 cc sive fine, or by confiscation of estate. By 
 " these violent proceedings he got together 
 " prodigious sums, which served to fill the 
 " king's coffers ; but, at the same time, they 
 (< drew on the king the hatred and curses of 
 
 " the people, f 
 
 About 
 
 f Peerage of England, f Rapin, 
 
49 
 
 About the 36th or 37th of Henry III. the earl 
 of Gloucester appears to have renewed his claim 
 in Wiltshire, as is stated in a subsequent re- 
 cord ; * but the opportunity was not favorable 
 for its continuance at that time. In the 38th of 
 llenry III. ( 1253 ) the king being greatly in 
 Want of money, for the preservation of his do- 
 minions in France, the laity and clergy agreed 
 to supply him, but complained of the grievances 
 under which they laboured ; on which, Henry 
 made some acknowledgement of the justice of 
 the complaint, and promised redress. To con- 
 firm this, he convened the barons and prelates, 
 in Westminster-hall, where, each having a 
 lighted taper in his hand, the archbishop of 
 Canterbury denounced a dreadful imprecation, 
 against those that should oppose the obser- 
 
 "O 
 
 oppose 
 
 vance of the charters, or in any way violate the 
 laws and constitution of the kingdom. After 
 this, the charters were read aloud, and were 
 confirmed by the king, with his hand on his 
 breast ; which being done, each threw his taper 
 on the ground, and wished that those who vio- 
 lated the charters might thus smoke in futurity. 
 
 It was probably in consequence of this en- 
 gagement, that in the next year 1254, the 39th 
 ©f Henry III. an inquisition was taken before 
 
 Roger 
 
 * 39 Henry III, 
 
 I 
 
50 
 
 Roger de Thurkelby and Robert de Shotenden, 
 justices in eyre, at Wilton; wherein the jury 
 presented, inter alia, concerning the hundred 
 of Cad worth, that Richard de Clare, earl of 
 Gloucester, held the manor of Cranborn, in the 
 county of Dorset, where he had his free chace, 
 and from the said chace in Dorset had his 
 course, ( habet cur sum suum, ) into the county 
 of Wilts, where he had no tenement, but only 
 a percursus, ( nisi tantum percursum, J to the 
 banks of the Noddre, and to the bridge of 
 Ayleswade on Avon, wheuce, they say, that 
 by occasion of the said foreign or outward 
 percursus, ( percursus forinseci, ) he made all 
 the country a forest; and his bailiffs took 
 toll, ehiminagium, by seisure, ( namio, ) of 
 men in the county of Wilts, in the hundred 
 of Cadworth ; and took their cattle, and drove 
 them to Cranborn, in the county of Dorset; 
 against the liberties of their lord the king ; and 
 took from some men twenty marks or more 
 money, at their own will. And this he had 
 done already during two years and a half, 
 past. * 
 
 The above presentment, may have checked 
 the earl, but not decided his claims; though 
 no records appear, concerning the chace, for a 
 term of eighteen years. Richard de Clare 
 
 soon 
 
 * Record in the Chapter housa 
 
51 
 
 soon had other employment : we read that he 
 was sent by the king into Scotland in the same 
 year, 1254; and into Germany in 1256; that 
 he was almost poisoned in 1257,, and after- 
 wards summoned to attend the king, at Ches- 
 ter, to oppose the Welsh ; that he was sent 
 by the barons into France; and that he joined 
 the earl of Leicester and other barons, in op- 
 position to the king's measures, in 1258. * 
 The conduct of Henry HI. had again dri- 
 ven his subjects to desperation: the barons 
 assembled their dependants, and with the earl 
 of Leicester at their head, compelled the king 
 to sign a set of articles, in favor of the liberties 
 of the people. Richard earl of Gloucester 
 was one of the principals in this association ; 
 but dying in 1261, his son Gilbert succeeded to 
 the earldom and its appendages. 
 
 This earl, Gilbert de Clare, seconded the earl 
 of Leicester, in the opposition to the king; and 
 they, with the other barons, gained a complete 
 victory, at the battle of Lewes ; taking the king 
 and his brother, prisoners, and getting the king's 
 son, Edward, into their hands. The earl of 
 Gloucester afterwards joining with Edward, 
 withdrew from the earl of Leicester, and the 
 latter was killed in battle, in 1265; but the con- 
 duct 
 
 # Peerage of England, 
 
 I 2 
 
b2 
 
 duet of prince Edward was more moderate thau 
 that of his father had been, and peace was at 
 length restored. King Henry died in 1272, the 
 57th year of his reign, and was succeeded by 
 his son Edward. I. 
 
 The conduct of Henry III. had been so ex- 
 ceedingly fickle, that it is difficult to ascertain 
 the state of the forests at this period. He is 
 said to have sworn no less than twelve times to 
 the observance of the two charters ; but ge- 
 nerally with little attention to the performance 
 of such engagements, and sometimes with a 
 speedy retraction of them. Nevertheless, the 
 renewed charters took their date from the 9th 
 year of his reign, with some alteration from 
 those of king John; particularly the disafTores- 
 tations were to be those that had been made 
 after the coronation of Henry II. instead of 
 Henry I. as stated in the charters of John. 
 
 The following record appears, on a roll of 
 claims of divers liberties in the county of Dorset, 
 1st. of Edward I. 
 
 Gilbert de Clare claimed to have, in Cran- 
 born, free hundred, and free chace, pertain- 
 ing to the said manor, according to a peram- 
 bulation formerly made, and warren in his 
 demesnes within the said hundred, ( with 
 
 sundry 
 
 
bS 
 
 sundry privileges of the manor,, as market, 
 fair, &c, and of the hundred, as punishment of 
 offenders assise of bread and ale ( cerevicie,) 
 &e. On which, the jury found that he had 
 not free hundred and free chace within the 
 bounds under written ;( per metas subscriptas;) 
 viz. because that when earl Richard, father to 
 the then earl, Gilbert, came first to the coun- 
 try, C ad terram, ) these were the bounds ; 
 to wit, from Chettlesden, or Chettlehead, 
 to Grimesditch, thence to Dean, thence to 
 Gussage St. Andrew, thence to Horn dean, 
 thence to the head of Stubhampton, and by 
 the midway of Stubhampton to Rothersdean, 
 thence to the highway which leads from 
 Blandford to Shaftesbury, and by that way to 
 Tenner's ditch, thence to Westwood, from 
 the head of Westwood to the Ridgeway 
 which extends itself towards Sarum, to the 
 borders of Wiltshire, which extend them- 
 selves between Ashmore and Ashgrove, to 
 Standen, thence to Martersgore, thence to 
 Stichingore, or Stichingoak, by the road ( Chy~ 
 pyniumj to Sandpit, thence to the head of 
 Longcroft, thence to Lavermer, thence to 
 Longdean, and thence by the borders which 
 divide Dorset and Wilts, to Chettleshead. 
 
 Afterwards, in the time of the said Richard, 
 
 were 
 
 Mn^M^M 
 
o4 
 
 were stewards of the same, Peter de Rissans, 
 and Adam de Bokesgatc, who made attach- 
 ments without the aforesaid bounds : to wit, 
 from Kingsettle to Sleybourn gate, thence to 
 the church of St. Rombald ( or Cann by 
 Shaftesbury, ) thence to the Golden oak, 
 thence to the head of Sturkell, ( in Cann, ) 
 and by that water to the bank of the Stour, 
 by that bank ( by Hay ford bridge, and Bland- 
 ford bridge,) to Crawford bridge, thence to 
 Aldwyn's bridge, thence by the water of Win- 
 terborne, to Waltford, thence to the Stone- 
 bridge, thence to the Longhay, thence to 
 Milesditch and to King's, thence by the road 
 ( chiminium ) which leads to Lestford, thence 
 by the water of Cranborn to the Hoarwithy, 
 thence to Aldlake, thence to Horeston, thence 
 to the borders of Hampshire. And these 
 bounds he used, but they knew not by what 
 warrant. 
 
 They said also that he had warren in his de- 
 mesne lands of Cranborn, and chace and war- 
 ren in all his demesne lands * * * * *, like- 
 wise they said that he had free hundred, and 
 market, &c. time out of mind, &c. They 
 said that he held a court of vert and venison, 
 and of all his attachments, at a certain time 
 of the year ; and he did not permit any 
 
 to 
 
&3 
 
 to course or run ( currere ) with dogs, at 
 hares, foxes, eats, &c. * 
 
 The above record being for Dorset, de- 
 scribes the earl's claim according to the larger 
 boundary in that county only: and the non- 
 appearance of any such proceedings for Wilts, 
 agrees with the supposition that the claim on 
 that side had been in some measure suspended 
 39th of Henry III. as before mentioned. The 
 new kino; bein£ in Palestine at the time of his 
 father's decease, Walter de Merton, who was 
 made chancellor, took some effectual methods 
 to establish tranquillity in the kingdom; among 
 which was the more impartial administration of 
 justice as in the case abovemeiitioned. The 
 king after his return to England, in 1274, pur- 
 sued a similar course, and appointed com- 
 missioners to go through the counties, to take 
 information respecting the lands of the crown; 
 also, to enquire into the conduct of sheriffs and 
 other officers, who had abused their authority, 
 and oppressed their fellow subjects. The fol- 
 lowing presentments to the justices in eyre, 
 III. of Edward I. f appear to have formed a 
 part of these proceedings. 
 
 Verdict for the hundred of Dun worth, 
 given at Wilton, before William de Brayboef, 
 
 and 
 
 * Record in the Chapter tyrose, f Record in the Chapterhouse, 
 
56 
 
 and William Gyrdberd, at an inquisition, 
 in the county of Wilts, by John de Nipred 
 and others, ( twelve jurors,) who thus said, &c. 
 
 De his qui habent libertates, per feged 
 Anglise cohcessas, et eis aliter usi sunt. i. e* 
 Concerning those who had liberties granted 
 them by the kings of England, and used 
 them otherwise. They said, that as the earl 
 of Gloucester had a certain liberty granted by 
 kings, of a chace in the county of Dorcester, 
 the earl, and his bailiffs, of Cranborn, used 
 the liberty otherwise than they ought; by at- 
 taching the persons, {corpora) and the cat- 
 tle, or beasts of draught, &c. ( averia, ) of 
 men dwelling in the king's hundred of Dun- 
 worth, in the county of Wilts, and there hold- 
 ing them, until the men paid a fine, at the 
 will of the earl, or of his bailiffs. 
 
 Under the title Qui de novo appropriaverunt 
 sibi liberas chaceas vel warrenas j Concerning 
 those who have newly appropriated to them- 
 selves free chaces, or warrens, &c. they say, 
 that whereas the earl of Gloucester had free* 
 chaces in the manor of Cranborn, in the 
 county of Dorset, the same earl exceeded the 
 metes and bounds of his liberty, in appro- 
 priating, by his power, to the said chace, the 
 lands and woods, as well of knights as of free 
 
 tenants, 
 
57 
 
 tenants., in the county of Wilts, in making 
 attachments of vert and of venison, to the 
 banks of the Noddre. And he held the fence 
 month, and plea of vert, contrary to the assise 
 of the forest, inasmuch as he had not ver- 
 durers nor regarders. 
 
 On an inquisition, by twelve jurors, for the 
 hundred of Downton, Wilts, at New Sarum, be- 
 fore the same justices, 3rd of Edward I. &c. 
 under the title "Qui de novo, &c." they said, 
 That the earl of Gloucester, ( Gilbert ) had 
 afforested, by force and power, all the lands, 
 woods, and pastures, which were from the 
 town of Shaston ( Shaftesbury ) to the bridge 
 of Ayleswade, by the banks of the water of 
 Noddre. And whatever was in Wilts, from the 
 borders of the county of Dorset, to the water 
 of Noddre, he claimed to be his forest ; by 
 putting there his seven foresters, to make at- 
 tachment of vert and venison; and compelled 
 » the people in the county of Wilts to come to 
 Cranborn, in the county of Dorset, contrary 
 to the law and custom of the realm, and the 
 assise of the forest, whereas he had not ver- 
 durers and regarders. They took, also, chi- 
 minage, every where, within the aforesaid 
 metes and bounds; doing all these things 
 contrary to the perambulation of the forests, 
 
 made 
 K 
 
58 
 
 made by Richard, bishop of Sarum, the 
 bishop of Bath, William Longspee, earl of 
 Sarum, and William Briwere, in the 4th year 
 of Henry III. And that the said earl did 
 these things contrary to the dignity of the 
 king's crown, not permitting any one to take 
 of his woods, within the aforesaid places> 
 without the View or delivery of his foresters; 
 whereas he had not verdurers, and regarders, 
 and so, by right, ought not to have foresters. 
 They also said that the earl had not any fee, 
 nor free tenement, within the aforesaid 
 bounds, by pretence of which he might claim 
 forest. Neither was there any one, within the 
 said bounds, who held or claimed to hold of 
 the said earl ; but some held by barony, of 
 the king, in capite, as freely as the said 
 earl held his manor of Cranborn, &c. 
 
 They farther complained of similar proceed- 
 ings, of the foresters, within the liberty of the 
 bishop of Winchester, at Dinton ; as going be* 
 yond their bounds, taking fees or gifts (munera) 
 and oppressing the people much, making at- 
 tachments of cattle, in the same manner as the 
 bailiffs of the New forest, taking chiminage, 
 and toll, ( tolneliun ) &c. And that thus 
 "he (the earl;) exceeded the bounds and 
 f m^tes of the said chace, by ten miles 
 
 f< per 
 
 
59 
 
 <x ( per decern leucas ) to the damage of the 
 ec whole country &c. " 
 
 Presentments to the same purport,, were 
 made, at the same time and place, by the ju- 
 ries of the hundreds of Damerham, Candon, 
 and Cadworth, with some specific instances of 
 seisures and fines; and in Damerham, of put- 
 ting a man to tleath, without any cause., after 
 taking him to Cranborn. 
 
 For the Hundred of Chalk, the jury said 
 that Richard, earl of Gloucester, father of Gil- 
 bert, encroached ( purprestavit J and afforest- 
 ed to himself, the wood of Chettel and Fern- 
 ditch, and all the country towards the north, 
 from Shaston to Ayleswade, along the Nod- 
 dre, placing seven foresters, <&c. amercing 
 such as inclosed their own woods, laying 
 hands unjustly, at their will, on men dwell- 
 ing in Wilts, under pretence of taking ven- 
 ison, obliging them to go to Cranborn, and 
 there amercing them, without proof. Also 
 that the foresters took sheaves, ( colligunt 
 garbas J in the harvest, within the said 
 bounds, in Wilts; with other grievances. 
 
 At Wilton, before the same justices, the 
 jury presented that the earl's bailiffs made 
 attachments of vert&c. to Bulbridge; enter- 
 ing 
 K 2 
 
60 
 
 ing that borough, on account of free chace, 
 which he claimed to have in his manor of 
 Cranborn, in Dorset. 
 
 In Dorset, for the hundred of Gillingham, 
 the jury said that Richard earl of Gloucester, 
 in the time of Henry III. exceeded the 
 bounds of his chace of Cranborn, between 
 the road from Shaftesbury to Blandford, and 
 the banks of the Stour, and made attach- 
 ments there; where before the said time, 
 they never used to be made, nor ought to be 
 made; and so it was done to that time. 
 
 For the hundred of Lousbergh, in Dorset, 
 the jury said that the then earl, Gilbert, ex- 
 ceeded the bounds, &c. of his chace of Cran- 
 born, from the road of Shaftesbury and 
 Blandford, to the banks of the Stour; and 
 made attachments where he never used to 
 make, nor ought to make, &c. 
 
 It is observable, that some of the above pre- 
 sentments state the excesses as taking place 
 under Richard, and others mention only Gil- 
 bert de Clare. This implies that Richard had 
 neither wholly pursued, nor receded from his 
 claim on the larger bounds, and that Gilbert 
 had enforced it more generally; which the slack- 
 ness of Henry III. concerning the charters, 
 
 and 
 
 .v 
 
61 
 
 and the influence of the earl, had enabled the ,V 
 latter to effect. 
 
 The king, Edward I. was engaged on an ex- 
 pedition into Wales, in 1277, in which time the 
 statute of Gloucester had been enacted ; being 
 r^ompendium of some excellent laws, securing 
 the rights and liberties of the people, and pro- 
 viding for the better administration of justice. 
 This, was confirmed in parliament, in 1278: 
 and one of the proceedings of that time, 7th of 
 Edward L was, a commission issued to William 
 Scammell, dean of Sarum, and M. de Colum- 
 baire, stating that 
 
 Whereas the king willed that his char- 
 ter of the forest, in all its articles, should 
 be inviolably observed, according as he 
 had caused to be published in his coun- 
 cil, ( or parliament, ) at Westminster, he 
 ordered them to chuse twelve discreet and 
 lawful men, knights and others, in each of 
 the under written counties, (eighteen iii 
 number, including Wilts, Dorset, Somer- 
 set, and Southampton, ) with the foresters and 
 verdurers in the said counties, that by their 
 view, a right perambulation should be made ; 
 to wit, that which had been made in the time 
 of Henry III. and was not yet completed; 
 and that other articles, contained in the said 
 
 charter, should fee completed. The sheriff 
 
 wa£ 
 
6$ 
 
 Svas ordered to meet them, &c. so that the 
 perambulation should be made, and other ar- 
 ticles, contained in that charter, should be 
 performed according to the tenor thereof: 
 yet so that nothing should be committed in 
 execution of it, until report was made, distinct- 
 ly and openly, and without evasion, concern- 
 ing it, to the king, under the hands and seals 
 of the said knights; &c. when he would 
 command that to be done, which by his coun- 
 cil he should provide &c. * 
 
 In consequence of this commission, the jury 
 in Wilts, on their oath, said, inter alia, 
 
 That the wood of Chettle, to wit, what- 
 ever was contained in Wilts, and the grove 
 of Fernditch, and all the hill which was in 
 Wilts, to the Avon, ought to be dissafforest- 
 ed of vert and venison • because that some 
 woods, among these woods, were afforested 
 in the time of king Henry III. and some in 
 the time of king John, and ought to be disaf- 
 forested. The jurors said also, on their oath, 
 that the foresters of Chettle, and of thechace 
 of Cranborn, of the earl of Gloucester, took 
 chiminage at the bridge of Ayleswade, and 
 at Bulbridge, and in other places, where, ac- 
 cording to the tenor of the charter, they ought 
 not to do it ; and attached men in the county 
 
 of 
 
 * Record in the Tower. 
 
63 
 
 of Dorset, to the great damage of the king, 
 and to the grievance of the whole country.* 
 
 Some similar proceedings appear to have 
 taken place at Sherborne, in Dorset, in the fol- 
 lowing year, before John de Ryegate and his 
 companions, justices in eyre, for the hundred 
 of Badbury, on some complaints against the 
 earl of Gloucester. 
 
 Notwithstanding these determinations, the* 
 earl did not cease his endeavours to establish a 
 possession of the larger bounds of the chace, 
 in connection with Cranborn. For this pur- 
 pose, measures were taken by him, to set aside 
 all the late decisions, and to produce a fresh ti- 
 tle to the chace, founded on some former pro- 
 ceedings. 
 
 We have seen that the earl of Gloucester had 
 withdrawn himself from the party of the earl of 
 Leicester, in the late reign, and joined with, 
 prince Edward. He had been one of the fore- 
 most to proclaim that prince, when absent, and 
 had entertained him at Tunbridge, on his arri- 
 val from Palestine. He continued in favour 
 with Edward, as appears by his employment 
 in the Welsh wars, and by his marriage, some 
 years later, with that king's daughter. The 
 §tate of affairs was favorable, in other respects, 
 
 to 
 
 •J Record in the;. Chapter h^us.e; 
 
to his pretensions on the chace. Notwithstand- 
 ing the orders given, at various times, to exe- 
 cute the provisions of the statute deforesta, the 
 fulfilment of them took place very slowly ; as 
 appears by the complaints which continued to 
 the two succeeding reigns. This indifference 
 respecting the disafTorestations, combining with 
 the earl's influence, we may, therefore, be the 
 less surprised at a measure ensuing, which was 
 intended, doubtless, to give an appearance of 
 legality to the earl's claim of the larger bound* 
 of Cranborn chace. This was, by the issue of 
 a Quo warranto, or enquiry by what authority 
 the earl held the chace. 
 
 The account of this proceeding being taken 
 from a record of the county of Hants, quoting 
 one of Dorset, the time does not appear. The 
 following is, \nter alia, from another record, 
 entitled 
 
 Dorset sc. 
 
 Placita de Juratis, &c. i, e. Pleas, &c. be- 
 fore John de Ryegate, and his companions, 
 justices in eyre, at Sherborne, in the county 
 of Dorset, in Hilary term, 8th of Edward I. 
 containing a claim, by the earl of Gloucester, 
 of free hundred, and free chace, in his manor 
 of Cranborn, according to a perambulation 
 formerly made., and warren in his demesne 
 
 lands\ 
 
65 
 
 lands, in the said hundred, &c. ( with vari- 
 ous privileges of the manor and hundred ; as 
 market, fair, assise of bread and ale, punish- 
 ment of offenders, &c. ) salvis libertatibus quas 
 alii clamant, §c. i. e. saving the liberties which 
 others claim in the said hundred. He claim- 
 ed also a free court of the chace, and to im- 
 plead therein concerning vert and venison, 
 with attachment of offenders. On which it 
 was found by the jury, that the earl and his 
 ancestors had enjoyed those liberties, beyond 
 the memory of man; &c. Saving to the king 
 and his heirs their actions, when they should 
 chuse to plead. * 
 
 On this claim, it may be remarked, that i^ 
 was the endeavour of Richard and Gilbert de 
 Clare, to unite the chace with the manor of 
 Cranborn, by confounding the privileges of 
 the former, with those of the manor and hun- 
 dred. As nothing of this connection appears 
 to have existed in the time of their predeces- 
 sors, there is reason to believe that the several 
 liberties had before been entirely distinct. In 
 the above record, the claim of free hundred 
 and free chace is confined to the manor of 
 Cranborn, in the county of Dorset, and does 
 not express any bounds, but refers to a former 
 
 unspecified perambulation. It is said that no 
 
 claim 
 
 Re«or4 in the Chapter howwi 
 
 HHB 
 
66 
 
 claim was made in Wilts, at the eyre held about 
 the same time ; but the proceedings at that eyre 
 had not been found. * 
 
 The following contains the account of the 
 Quo warranto. 
 
 Placita dejuratis &c. Pleas, &c. before 
 Solomon de Rosse, and his companions, jus- 
 tices in eyre, at Winton in the county of 
 Southampton, in eight days of St. Martin, 
 8th of Edward I. and commencement of 9th, 
 ( incipiente nono ) containing, 
 
 Dorset, sc. 
 
 Placita forinseca, de quo warranto, fyc. a fo- 
 reign plea, by what warrant, &c. 
 
 Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester and 
 Hertford, before the justices in eyre, at Sher- 
 borne, in the county of Dorset, was summon- 
 ed to shew by what warrant he appropriated 
 to himself free chace, from the king's high- 
 way which leads between Shaston and Bland- 
 ford, on the hill, from the western part of 
 that way, to the water of Stour, ascending by 
 the water of Stour to the water of Sturkel, 
 and from the water of Stour ascending by 
 the water of Sturkel to Shaston, within the 
 precinct of which appropriation are con- 
 tained t}ie villages of Melbury, Compton, 
 
 Fontmell 
 
 * Manuscript 
 
67 
 
 t'ontmell, Iwerne-Minster, Hanford, Child- 
 Oakford, Iwerne-Courtney, Ranston, Steple- 
 ton, Laterton-Ash, Stour-Payne, Nutford- 
 Locks, and Biandford. And thence, William 
 de Gysecham, ( attorney for the king) said as 
 follows; That the earl had his chace by 
 certain bounds and divisions : to wit; from 
 Chettleshead to Grimsditch, thence to Han- 
 ley, thence to Dean, thence to Gussage St. 
 Andrew, thence to Brandon ( or Horndean, ) 
 thence to Stubhampton, and by the middle of 
 the village of Stubhampton, to the head of 
 Richersdene, ( or Rothersdean, ) thence to 
 the king's highway, which leads from Bland- 
 ford to Shaston, and by that way to Teners- 
 dene, or Tennersditch, thence to the head of 
 Westwood, by the way which is called Ridg- 
 way, which leads towards Salisbury, as far as 
 the bounds of Wilts, which extend between 
 Ashmore and Ashgrove, and so to Standen, 
 thence to Martersgore, thence to Singoak, 
 ( or Stichingore, ) and Sandpit 3 thence to 
 the head of Longcroft, and so to Larmer, 
 thence to Longden by the metes and bounds 
 which divide Dorset and Wilts; to Chettles- 
 head aforesaid. 
 
 That the earl had appropriated to him- 
 self, beyond those bounds, to the said chace, 
 
 the 
 L 2 
 
68 
 
 the villages of Melbury, Compton, &c. (as 
 before ) which were without the chace, mak- 
 ing attachment of vert and venison : to the 
 prejudice of the king and of his dignity. 
 
 But the earl came, and said that formerly 
 a certain perambulation was made of the 
 metes and bounds of the said chace of Cran- 
 born, in the time that king John was earl of 
 Gloucester ; and that afterwards, in the time 
 of king Henry III. an inquisition was made 
 by Geoffrey de Langley and Richard de 
 Worthing, justiciaries, assignatis de metis, 
 bundis et divisis, perambulationis predicte, ap- 
 pointed concerning the bounds, divisions, 
 and perambulation aforesaid, who found an 
 inquisition at New Sarum, in the 29th year of 
 the said king, by the oath of the underwrit- 
 ten, to wit, of Thomas de Hinton and others 
 ( twenty four persons, ) who all unanimous- 
 ly said quod hccc sunt metce et bundce per quas 
 perambulatio facta fuit chackz, that these 
 were the metes and bounds, by which a per- 
 ambulation was made of the chace of Rich- 
 ard, earl of Gloucester and Hartford; to wit: 
 from Bulbridge, in Wilton, to Hurdecote ; 
 by the water of Noddre to the mill of Dining- 
 ton or Dinton, thence to the mill of Tisbury, 
 and to Wickham, by the water of Noddre, 
 
 to 
 
69 
 
 to where Semene falls into Noddre, and so 
 by the water of Semene to Semene head; 
 thence to Kingsettle near Shaston, thence to 
 Shaston, that is, to Sleybrondesgate, and to 
 the church of St. Rombald, thence to Gilden- 
 oak, thence to the water of Sturkell, and by 
 that water to the bank of Stour, and by that 
 bank to the bridge of Hayford, the bridge of 
 Blandford, and the bridge of Crauford, thence 
 to Aldwyns bridge, towards Winborn, and 
 by the water of Winborn to Waltford, thence 
 to Wiehampton, thence to Stonebridge, 
 thence to Longhay which leads to Mule- 
 ditch, and to Kings, thence to the way which 
 leads to Eastford by the middle of Eastwood, 
 thence by the water of Cranbprn to Hoar- 
 withy, thence to Aldlake, thence to Hores- 
 tone, thence to the great road of Ringwood, 
 thence to the bridge of Ford, thence to the 
 bridge of Downton, thence to Aylwards 
 bridge, and thence to Bulbridge in Wilton. 
 
 And he said that within those metes and 
 bounds aforesaid, were contained the villages 
 ( or parishes ) which he ought to appropriate 
 to his chace aforesaid ; whence, he said, that 
 he had appropriated nothing to his chace of 
 Cranborn, beyond the metes and bounds for- 
 merly thence made, and the inquisitions for- 
 merly 
 
70 
 
 vnerly thereon taken by the said Geoffrey and 
 Richard, &c. And likewise, that the afore- 
 said inquisition, taken on this, by the said 
 justices returned into the king's chancery, 
 was called thence, to warrant the inquisition 
 aforesaid, which was in the king's treasury. 
 Therefore the treasurer and barons of the ex- 
 chequer were commanded to certify to the 
 justices last in eyre, in the county of South- 
 ampton, concerning the said inquisition, and 
 the metes and bounds contained therein. Af- 
 terwards, on that day, the treasurer and ba- 
 rons ordered, under the exchequer seal, a 
 transcript of the said inquisition, &c. ( reci- 
 ting the proceedings and the larger bounds, 
 as above, ) afterwards a day was given him; 
 at which the earl appeared, and asked record 
 and his judgment. And because by the said 
 inquisition it w as found, that the said peram- 
 bulation was made of the chace at the time 
 aforesaid, when king John was earl of Glou- 
 cester, by the metes and bounds by which 
 the said earl ( Gilbert, ) then held them, 
 and likewise the inquisition taken by the 
 aforesaid Geoffrey and Richard, the king- 
 granted to the earl that he should hold his 
 said chace by the metes, bounds, and divisions 
 contained in the said inquisition. Saving 
 
 always 
 
71 
 
 always the right of the king, and of others 
 whomsoever, when at another time or (place) 
 from thence they should chuse to speak, 
 ( Salvo semper jure domini regis, et aliorurn, 
 quorumcunqiie, cum alias inde loqui voluerint.) 
 And the sheriff of Dorset was ordered to 
 permit the earl to hold his chace of Cran- 
 born, by the metes bounds and divisions con- 
 tained in the inquisition. * 
 
 The recital in the foregoing record, being of 
 several transactions, it is difficult to understand 
 some part of them, unless other records can be 
 found to explain it. The inquisition by Geof- 
 frey de Langley and Richard de Worthing, was 
 respecting the bounds of the perambulation of 
 prince John ; and they are said to have found 
 an inquisition at New Sarum 29th of Henry III. 
 which declared that such were the bounds of 
 the chace of Richard earl of Gloucester. From 
 the confused manner of expression, it may 
 seem that the inquisition of de Langley was 
 that of 29th of Henry III. but as it is afterwards 
 said that the inquisition returned into chan- 
 cery was called thence, to warrant the inquisi- 
 tion aforesaid, which was in the treasury, it im- 
 plies that there two ; in which case the one 
 has no date assigned, and neither of them has 
 the sanction of legal authority but merely of a 
 
 commission 
 
 * Record in the Chapter house. 
 
72 
 
 commission from the king. The character of 
 Geoffrey de Langley has been already given, 
 as has that of Henry III. each of them was ca- 
 pable of an act of injustice; and the whole 
 proceeding* was contrary to the provisions of 
 the statute de for est a. 
 
 It has been remarked, that "the proceedings 
 tc on the quo warranto could affect no party 
 c but the crown; " and that as it was not a 
 <( judgment, no persons could be bound by it, 
 " even if the salvo jure aliorum had been omit- 
 u ted ; ** also, that Ci the earl would not put 
 <c himself upon his country, (i.e. upon a trial 
 " by jury, ) but upon a record ; " and that the 
 <c voucher produced, of 29th of Henry III. was 
 " not an inquisition taken of the bounds of 
 <c the chace, but an enquiry concerning the 
 " bounds of the aforesaid perambulation, ( of 
 <e John, ) which was not by virtue of any com- 
 <c mission from the king, but at the pleasure of 
 <e the prince only, f * 
 
 Besides the informality of the record, the ob- 
 servations made by a great legal authority, on 
 another transaction of Edward I. maybe ap- 
 plicable here : viz. " This ordinance being 
 <c made by the king only, without authority of 
 " parliament, albeit it was in affirmance of the 
 
 law, 
 
 * Manuscript, 
 
ff law, did not bind, and therefore was not ex- 
 ce ecuted. " * And farther, "It is very ob- 
 cc servable, that if any act of parliament hath 
 '[ been made, against any of the articles of the 
 " statute of Charta de Foresta, by the act of 
 <c parliament of 42nd of Edward III. the same 
 <c is made void; and by the statutes of Confirm 
 tc mationes Chartarum, all judgments given 
 <c against any of the points of Charta de Foresta 
 <c shall be hold en for void. " f The first ar- 
 ticle of that charter commences as follows: viz. 
 <c Imprimis oinnes foresice quas Henricus avus nos- 
 fC ter afforestavit videantur per bonos et legales 
 cc homines et si boscum aliquem alium quam suum 
 cx dominicum afforestaverit ad damnum illius cujus 
 cc boscus illefuerit statim deafforestetur . fyc. ' 
 (c First, all the forests made by our grandfa- 
 " ther king Henry, shall be viewed by honest 
 ce and lawful men; and if he afforested any other 
 " wood than his own demesne, to the damage 
 ee of him whose wood it may have been, forth - 
 <c with it shall be disafforested, " &c. The 
 same writer says, cc to the same effect is the 
 ce third chapter. Neither could Henry II. or 
 <e any other king, have made or raised a free 
 te chace, park, or warren, for himself, in any of 
 tx the grounds of the subjects ; for it is truly 
 !f said in PI. Com. that the common law hath 
 
 so 
 
 * Cake's ftistitfltej, part 4. Chap. 73, of As Forests: f Ibid. 
 
 M 
 
74 
 
 c< so admeasured the king's prerogatives, that 
 " they should not take away nor prejudice the 
 (( inheritance of any. * Exception is made, of 
 ancient kings, i. e. previous to Henry II. re- 
 specting cc great desarts, waste and woody 
 " grounds, [where,] for want of habitations, 
 " they might make what forests it pleased 
 " them " therein ; &c. and therefore C( a forest 
 " may be, by prescription, good in law over 
 " other men's grounds. " f 
 
 The decision on the quo warranto, though 
 with the sanction of the king's name, does not 
 appear to have had the effect- of establishing 
 the earl's title to the chace by the larger 
 bounds, as may be seen hereafter. 
 
 The king's conduct, about this time, was not 
 free from the imputation of injustice. In 1280, 
 under the act of quo warranto, made to enquire 
 into undue usurpation of lands, it is said, the 
 king being misled by ill advice, and for the 
 gratification of his avarice, "J made use of it to 
 oppress his subjects, by obliging them to pay 
 large sums of money, for the renewal of the ti- 
 tles lost during the preceding troubles; until 
 the progress of the grievance was stopped by 
 the spirited conduct of the earl of Warenne. 
 
 The next transaction that occurs, respecting 
 
 the chace, is of a claim of the king, the 9th of 
 
 Edw. 
 
 * Coke. f Ibid. % Rar Ia « 
 
75 
 
 Edw. I. at Wilton, of the hundred of Chalk, 
 which the abbess of Wilton held. On this, the 
 jury found that <( the abbess and her predeees- 
 " sors had held the same, from time, of which 
 " no memory remained. " * This decision, of 
 course, contradicts the earl's claim into that 
 part of Wiltshire, from his manor and hundred 
 of Cranborn before mentioned ; f the hundred 
 of Chalk being within the larger bounds. 
 
 In the same year, an agreement was made 
 between Gilbert de Clare and the abbot of 
 Glastonbury, that the latter and his successors 
 should make of their wood of Haywood, in the 
 manor of Damerham, such advantage as they 
 should chuse, without impediment, from the 
 earl, &c. and might ditch their lands against 
 his wild beasts; also, that a forester of Blake- 
 don, on foot, appointed by the earl, should 
 take charge of those beasts, &c. % This im- 
 plies that the earl desisted from any pretensions 
 to the right of view in the abbot's woods, and 
 that the latter submitted that a forester should 
 take charge of the deer that happened to be 
 there; but says nothing of Cranborn chace. 
 
 Soon after this the earl was engaged with 
 the king in the Welsh wars; and we hear no 
 more, respecting the chace, until the I6th of 
 
 Edw. 
 
 * Record in Chapter house, f See page 36. % Reeord In British Massum.- 
 
 M2 
 
76 
 
 Edw. I. at which time, before the justices in 
 eyre, at Sherborne, concerning the hundred of 
 Badbury, inter alia, De novis consuetudinibus ; 
 concerning new customs, the jurors said that 
 Gilbert de Cors and others, 4he earl's foresters, 
 in his free chace of Blakedon and Chettell, 
 levied a new custom, by attaching carts, &c. 
 leading them to Cranborn, and extorting amer- 
 ciaments, &c. ( with other complaints, similar 
 to former presentments. ) On this, the jury 
 found that one was not a forester, and he was 
 committed to gaol; others, being convicted, 
 were taken into custody, and afterwards fined ; 
 *md one was acquitted. * This account shews 
 that these practices were considered as jiew in 
 that part of the country, though within the 
 bounds of prince John's perambulation, and 
 comprehended in the aHedged inquisition of 
 Geoffrey de Langley . The mention of a chace, 
 in that situation, is also inconsistent with the 
 larger bounds; as, in that case, there would 
 have been one chace within another, f 
 
 The king being in France, the earl commen- 
 ced depredations of another kind, 17. Edw. I' 
 by invading in hostile manner the lands of 
 the earl ©f Hereford, near Brecknock ; % " Gil- 
 " bert had lately erected a castle, on the lands 
 <c belonging to Humphrey Bohun^ earl of Here- 
 ford : 
 
 * Rested in Chapter Jiouse, j Manuscript, J Peerage of England. 
 
77 
 
 rr foi*d: on whose complaint of the injury, in 
 " the king's court, Edward reserved the cogni- 
 f< sance of the cause to himself, and forbade 
 (i the parties to violate the peace of the coun- 
 Ci try. Notwithstanding this injunction, Gil- 
 t( berths vassals invaded Humphrey's territories, 
 (c and ravaged the country. " * These violen- 
 ces being retorted, abundance of bloodshed en- 
 sued ; and the dispute was not settled until 
 some time after the king's return. 
 
 Edward had spent much money, and exhaust- 
 ed his finances. The earl of Gloucester, in the 
 name of the barons, had refused to grant a sub- 
 sidy, whilst the king was absent; but on the re- 
 turn of the latter, in 1289, the nobility and cler- 
 gy made liberal contributions. The influence 
 of the earl was, doubtless, requisite to the pro- 
 motion of the king's measures; and the policy 
 of Edward led him ta engage the former more 
 closely in his interest, by allowing him to form 
 an engagement of marriage with Joan, the 
 king's daughter. 
 
 Of Edward, it is related, that his first care, 
 after his return, was to reform several abuses 
 which had been introduced, particularly in the 
 administration of justice. Upon complaints 
 made to him, from all hands, that the judges 
 had suffered themselves to be corrupted with 
 
 bribes^ 
 
78 
 
 bribes, he strictly examined into their conduct, 
 and severely punished the guilty. * This shews 
 that the laws had been very imperfectly admi- 
 nistered, notwithstanding the improvements 
 which had been introduced. Some authors 
 state that all the judges, except two, were 
 found guilty of these corrupt practices. 
 
 The marriage of the earl of Gloucester with 
 Joan of Acres, daughter of Edward, was solem- 
 nised in April 1290, (C after that powerful no- 
 <c bleman had engaged himself, by oath, to 
 C( maintain the lineal succession of the crown 
 " of England. ' ' f Previously to this, or at 
 the same time, the earl surrendered to the king 
 his possessions in several counties, including 
 Maneria de Cranbom cum chacea ejusdem infra 
 comitatum Dorset per metas et bundas tempor- 
 alis justlciarorum itinerantium in eodem comi- 
 tatu hucusque facias; &c. cc The manor of 
 >" Cranborn, with the chace of the same, within 
 # the county of Dorset, by the metes and 
 *' bounds, in the times of the justices in eyre, 
 u in the same county, hitherto made ; and the 
 " manors of Pimpern and Tarente Gunville, 
 " within the said county " &c. given at Win- 
 ton, 20, April. 18 of Edw. I. J 
 
 Soon after this, the king regranted to the 
 
 earl, 
 
 * Rapin. f Smollett. $ Record in the Tower: 
 
79 
 
 earl, and to his wife Joan, "all the aforesaid 
 " lands, &c. ( which had been surrendered, ) 
 <c to be held by them and their heirs, " Sicul 
 idem comes omnia predicta tenuit die quo ea iri' 
 manum nostrum reddidit sine ullo retenemento, 
 &c. " As the said earl held all ( the posses* 
 " sions ) aforesaid, on the day that he resign* 
 tc ed them into the king's hands, without any 
 " exception, " &c. Given at Westminster, 
 27th, May, 18, of Edw. I. * 
 
 This regrant is understood to have become 
 thenceforward the title to the chace. It specifi- 
 ed no bounds, but restored the lands and other 
 possessions to the earl, in statu quo, as he had 
 held them on the day of surrender. The mo- 
 tives to this indefinite mode of expression may 
 be variously conjectured. On the one hand, 
 this transaction has been considered as a con- 
 trivance between the king and the earl, that 
 the latter, * by receiving the entire chace in 
 <( general and unspecified terms, might avail 
 fC himself of any boundaries which had ever 
 (C been assigned to it. * f In another point of 
 view, it appears to have been a mode adopted 
 for the purpose of quietly discontinuing the 
 claim to the larger bounds; which latter opin- 
 ion is confirmed by the cessation of complaints 
 against the earl or his successors, and by the 
 
 general 
 
 * Record is the Tower. % Manuscript, 
 
90 
 
 general evidence of later records, which are si * 
 lent respecting the larger bounds, and iri some 
 degree disprove their existence. 
 
 After this, we find no more of Gilbert de Clare, 
 atCranborn. We hear of him again 19th of Edw, 
 I. in his Welsh possessions, whence it is relat- 
 ed, <c he encroached upon the territories of God- 
 " frey, bishop of Worcester; which [offence] 
 cc was accorded for by an annual gift of a brace 
 C{ of bucks, which belongs to the bishop and 
 ce chapter of Worcester. " * In the 20, of Edw. I. 
 the dispute between Gilbert de Clare and 
 Humphry Bohun was brought to a termination. 
 The king had instituted an enquiry into their 
 conduct, and both earls being found guilty, 
 were taken into custody, and their possessions 
 seised. Again, cc the cause being tried before 
 (C the council, the king pronounced sentence, 
 fc by which the liberties, ( or lordships, ) of Gla- 
 <c morgan and Brecknock, were forfeited du- 
 (< ring the lives of the earls ; who were sent to 
 " prison till ransomed at the king's pleasure. 
 i( Hereford compounded for athousand marks; 
 f( but Gloucester, having been found the ag*- 
 <c gressor, was obliged to give security for pay- 
 *' ing ten times that sum, before he could pro- 
 *' cure his liberty. " f 
 
 We 
 
 * Peerage of England . f Smolletft? 
 
81 
 
 We find other complaints against Gilbert de 
 Clare. In 1294, the natives of Wales, driven to 
 despair by the heavy taxes with which they were 
 saddled, ran to arms, and massacred all the 
 English who fell in their way. The revolters in 
 South Wales were headed by one Morgan, who 
 drove the earl of Gloucester out of the country. 
 After most of the insurgent leaders had submit- 
 ted, in 1295, "Morgan still continued in arms in 
 (c the county of Glamorgan, which held of the 
 cc earl of Gloucester; who had rendered himself 
 ce so odious to the natives by his pride and ty- 
 " ranny, that the Welch noblemen refused to 
 (C obey his superiority. V * On being indulged 
 with holding their lands of the crown, accor- 
 ding to their offer, they submitted, and laid 
 down their arms. This was the last transaction 
 related of Gilbert; who died in the same year, 
 24th of Edw. I. leaving a son named Gilbert, 
 only five years of age. After this, there is no 
 more mention of disputes concerning the chace^ 
 during a very long period. 
 
 Respecting the forests in general, we find a 
 continuance of complaints, in a manifesto by 
 the earls of Hereford and Norfolk, alledging 
 inter alia the neglect of Magna Charta, and of 
 the assise of the forest. In 1299 the king 
 again confirmed the two charters, and the 
 
 * Smollett, 
 
 N 
 
 sheriffs^ 
 
82 
 
 sheriffs were ordered to publish them in the 
 county courts. In 1301, it is related, the pe- 
 rambulation of the forests had been made in 
 every county by the king's commissioners, all 
 exceptions discussed, the inquests approved 
 in parliament, and confirmed by the king. It 
 appears nevertheless that something remain- 
 ed to be done in the succeeding reign ; as in 
 1315, we again hear of the confirmation of the 
 charters, by Edward II. and the appointment of 
 commissioners to make perambulations through 
 the forest. This, as usual, was the accompani- 
 ment to a subsidy from the parliament; and 
 in the next year, previous to receiving ano- 
 ther supply, the king issued writs, enjoining 
 the strict observance of the ordinances and 
 perambulations. Notwithstanding all these or- 
 ders, the business yet remained incomplete ; 
 the popes legates in 1318, " advised the king 
 <f to appease the discontents of the people, by 
 cc confirming the ordinances and the two char- 
 (< ters, without those salvos for the prerogative, 
 Ci which were found to destroy the effect of these 
 " salutary institutions" * This advice, though 
 enforced by a combination of the barons, was 
 reluctantly acceded to by the king; yet we find 
 the subject continued to the next reign, and 
 it was not until 1341, that the maintenance 
 
 of 
 
 * Smollett* 
 
$8 
 
 of the charters, and the privileges of the people, 
 were stated to be sufficiently secured by the 
 Jaws already in force. 
 
 To return to Edward I. He was at Carlisle,, 
 in 1307, waiting for reinforcements to proceed 
 against Scotland, which he had before repeat- 
 edly invaded, but was seised by a distemper 
 which soon put an end to his life. 
 
 The character of this prince is much superior 
 to that of his predecessors, in general, but has 
 many blemishes. In his reign many excellent 
 statutes were made, and some abuses reformed, 
 l>ut his own conduct was not always consistent 
 with justice. In the affair of the quo warranto y 
 und in that of the surrender and regrant of the 
 chace, his duplicity or indecision left an open- 
 ing for disputes and litigation, the consequen- 
 ces of which are felt to this time. 
 
 Gilbert cle Clare, the son of Gilbert, does not 
 appear to have interfered respecting the lar- 
 ger bounds of the chace. He was killed at the 
 battle of Bannockburn, in Scotland, in 131& 
 and on his decease his possessions were inhe- 
 rited by his three sisters; viz. Eleanor, mar- 
 ried to Hugh Despencer, the younger; Mar- 
 garet, to Pier de Gavestone; and Elizabeth, 
 to John de Burgh, earl of Ulster. Elizabeth, 
 
 daughter 
 
 N 2 
 
84 
 
 daughter of the latter, was married to Lionel, 
 duke of Clarence; whose daughter, Philippa, 
 married Edmund Mortimer, earl of March, to 
 whom succeeded his son, Roger, whose daugh- 
 ter, Ann married Richard of York, grandfather 
 to Edward, afterwards king Edward IV. The 
 manor and chace of Cranbprn, and other pos- 
 sessions, had come to the share of Elizabeth de 
 Burgh, whence they came, in succession, to Ed- 
 ward IV. and continued to be held with the 
 crown, (excepting some temporary alienations 
 to individuals during life, ) until the reign of 
 James I : being a period of upwards of 140 
 years. 
 
 The records during the above time being nu? 
 merous, will be noticed only in a summary 
 manner. In the first place, the inquisitions 
 taken of the lands and liberties of the posses- 
 sions of the chace, or of the manor of Cran- 
 born, on their decease, were to the following 
 purport. 
 
 24th of Edward I. on the death of Gilbert 
 de Clare, it was found that the manor of Tar- 
 rant Gunville was held by him of the king, in 
 capite ; and that in a park, there were forty 
 acres of land and under-wood. 
 
 Same date at Cranborn, inter alia, that the per- 
 quisites and pleas of the chace were worth 60 
 
 shillings 
 
85 
 
 shillings per annum,, and that the earl held the 
 manor of Cranborn, with the appurtenances ,. 
 of the king. 
 
 35th of Edward I. That the former earl had 
 held the manor of Cranborn, and that there was 
 a foreign hundred, worth 20s. per annum, and 
 a court within the manor, 28s. Sd. per annum; 
 and a certain chace, which was worth nothing 
 per annum beyond the sustenance of the beasts. 
 
 8th of Edward II. That the late earl held of 
 the king, in capite, in the county of Dorset, the 
 manor of Cranborn ; and that there were in the 
 park of Alderholt 154 acres, in the wood of 
 IJowrewood 56, in Blakedon wood and pasture 
 300, at the hill with west park 161 acres, pleas 
 and perquisites of chace worth per annum 
 13s. 4d. 
 
 34th of Edward III. That Elizabeth de Burgh 
 died seised, (i. e. in possession) of the manors of 
 Cranborn, Tarent Gunyille, Pimpern, Stupel, 
 ( or Stepel, ) and Wick ; and of the boroughs of 
 Wareham, Portland, and Weymouth. 
 
 43rd of Edward III. That the late Lionel, 
 
 duke of Clarence, held, for the term of his life, 
 
 of the king, in capite, by knights service, the 
 
 manors of Cranborn, Tarent Gunville, Pimpern, 
 
 &nd Stupel &c. 
 
 2gnd 
 
86 
 
 22nd of Richard II. At Dorchester. Thattha 
 late Roger Mortimer, earl of March, held iu 
 his demesne, as of fee of the king in chief, by 
 knights service, the manor of Cranborn, with 
 the appurtenances, in the county aforesaid, 
 ( Dorset) &c. 
 
 I. of Henry the V. At Sherborne, That 
 William Stourton was seised of the manor of 
 Cranborn &c. 
 
 9th of Henry V. At Shaston. That John 
 Arundel, of Chichester, chevalier, was seised of 
 the manors of Cranborn, Upwinborne, &c. 
 
 The originals of all the above records are 
 said to be in the Tower. 
 
 2nd of Edward IV. At Cranborn. That 
 within the lordship of Cranborn there were a 
 capital messuage, and sundry fields, ( as enu- 
 merated, ) and the king had a park there, with 
 wild beasts, called Blakedon park, also woods 
 called Alderholt park, Rowerwood, Castle- 
 wood, and Pita ere, and a fine chace called 
 •Cranborn chace, with many wild beasts, &c. * 
 
 All these have been formerly cited, to shew 
 that the chace were in those times confin- 
 ed to the county of Dorset, and within the 
 smaller bounds. Blakedon is mentioned in some 
 
 Accounts as separate from Cranborn., and in 
 
 others 
 
 N * Manuscript." 
 
87 
 
 ethers as being part of it. In fact, being un- 
 der the same possessor, it might easily be taken 
 as such. 
 
 A claim appears of the earl of Gloucester; 
 41 of Edward III. (inter Brevia Regum, Dor- 
 set ) ( in the Tower, ) in his manor of Cran- 
 bom, of free hundred and free chace, belonging 
 to the said manor, according to the perambula- 
 tion formerly made, and warren in his demesne 
 lands. Probably Lionel, duke of Clarence, 
 had assumed the title, on the death of Hugh? 
 Audley, second husband of Margaret de Clare. 
 
 Sundry grants of free warren are also cited; 
 viz. 22nd of Edward I. To the abbess and 
 convent of Shaftesbury, in all her demesne 
 lands of Donhead, Tisbury, &c. in the county 
 of Wilts : provided the lands were not within 
 the king's chace. * 
 
 In similar terms are the following. 
 
 31st of Edward I. To John Huse and his 
 heirs at Bridmere. 
 
 39th of Edward I. To John de Berwick 
 Northington &c. f 
 
 A writ of allowance of this was granted 1st 
 of Richard II. % 
 
 4th of Edward III. To the abbot and con- 
 vent 
 
 .* In the Tower; f Ibid, % Manuscript, 
 
S8 
 
 vent of Glastonbury of free warren in ilieir de- 
 mesnes, inter alia, at Damerham. 
 
 These places are all in Wilts, within the lar- 
 ger bounds ; and it is understood that no free 
 warren can exist within a chace, except to the 
 proprietor of the chace. 
 
 6th of Edward VI. To Lord Clinton and 
 Say, and Henry Hordson, and their heirs, the 
 manor of Tarerit Gunville, Dorset, with all 
 such free warren &c. as queen Katharine had 
 enjoyed. * 
 
 Licence was granted to alienate this to 
 Thomas Devenish, 1st of Mary, and to John 
 Swain, 4th of Elizabeth, f 
 
 The temporary grants of the chace were as 
 follows ; 
 
 The king granted to Richard Lowell, the 
 manor df Cranborn, with the chace and other 
 appurtenances, in the county of Dorset, and 
 the manors of Pimpern, Tarrant Gunville, Stu- 
 pel, &c. to hold at the king's pleasure. J 
 
 1st of Henry VIII. The king granted Cran- 
 born and the chace &c, to Katharine princess 
 of Wales. * * 
 
 32nd of Henry VIII. The king made a join- 
 ture to Queen Katharine Howard, including 
 the forest of Gillingham and Cranborn, and the 
 
 parks 
 
 * In Augment, office f Hutchinsi $ Manuscript, ** Ibid. 
 
89 
 
 parks of Gillingham and Blagdon, in the coun- 
 ty of Dorset. * 
 
 1st of Edward VI. The king granted to 
 Edward duke of Somerset, that part of Cran- 
 born chace called Chettered, the woods called 
 Queens coppice, and the liberties of the king's 
 forest and chace in Gussage Michael, Kynes- 
 ton, Rushton, Monkton, Lanston^ and Long 
 Critchell. 
 
 4th of Edward VI. To Sir William Herbert, 
 for 21 years, the manor, hundred, and chace 
 of Cranborn, in the county of Dorset, f 
 
 Edward VI. To the earl of Pembroke, inter 
 tolia, the chace of Cranborn, with its rights &c. 
 in the county of Dorset. \ 
 
 The foregoing mention the chace only in 
 Dorset. 
 
 Other grants of lands &c. are as follows viz, 1 
 14th of Edw. IV. by the king to his brother, 
 the duke of Clarence, the manor and lordship 
 of Iwerne Courtney, ( or Shroton, ) with all 
 parks, chaces, warrens, liberties &c. thereto 
 belonging. * * 
 
 These were within the larger bounds. 
 36th of Henry VIII. The king in consider- 
 ation of £320. 7s. 6d. paid to the treasurer of 
 
 the 
 
 * Record in the Tower, f Ibid. % Manuscript. ** Record in the Tower; 
 
 o 
 
90 
 
 the court of augmentations, granted to Henry 
 Longford the lordships of Woodyates and Gus- 
 sage St. Andrew, in Dorset. 
 
 1st of Edw. VI. The king granted to Thomas, 
 earl of Southampton, inter alia, the manor of 
 Iweme, in Dorset, late belonging to the mon- 
 astery of Shaston. A small part of Ivverne- 
 Minster, consisting of coppice adjoining other 
 chace woods, and at a considerable distance 
 from the village, is within the smaller bounds : 
 the rest being within the larger bounds. In the 
 11th of Eliz. the earl had licence to alienate 
 Iwerne to Ralph Henslaw. 
 
 In several requisitions relating to purchase 
 of monastery lands, is certified by the auditors, 
 the distance from any of the king's forests, cha- 
 ces, parks, or houses. For instance, 37th of 
 Henry VIII. respecting the manor of Fontmell, 
 it was added by the auditor, that "it lay near 
 <c none of the king's parks, forests, chaces or 
 ec mansion places, whereto the king had access. " 
 
 Concerning the manor of Barton, ( or Cann,) 
 "forest, &c. of the king, there is none adjoin- 
 (< ing. " 
 
 Burdehurst ( or Bedcester, ) from any, &c. 
 six miles. 
 
 Donhead St. Mary, and St. Andrew, lands in 
 
 Charlton 
 
91 
 
 Charlton and Combe, cc not near to any king's 
 fe house, &c. saving to the park of W ardour - " 
 
 Melbury and Cann, "king's park, forest, 
 " ehace &c. none adjoining. " 
 
 The above were parcels late belonging to 
 the monastery of Shaftesbury, and granted to 
 Sir Thomas Arundel. * 
 
 35th of Henry VIII. To Sir John Rogers, 
 lands in Pimperne, " two miles from Cranborn 
 " chace. " In Blandford St. Mary and Charl- 
 ton, " 8 miles. " f 
 
 36th of Henry VIII. To Henry Longford, 
 the manors of Woodyates and Gussage St. 
 Andrew, &c <c 2 miles," and a tenement in 
 Hanley, ce 1 mile " % 
 
 To Thomas Macham, The manor of Up-* 
 •winborn, "3 or 4 miles. " ** 
 
 To John and Robert Bartlett, lands &c. in 
 Estworth, "4 miles " f $ 
 
 7th of Edw. VI. To John Coke, &c. a farm 
 in Ebbesborne Wake and Girardeston, " 1 
 or 2 miles. " J J i 
 
 3rd of Eliz. 1561. To Edw. Twinhow, the 
 manor of Tarrant Monachiorum, or ( Monk- 
 ton, ) f 2 miles, '? ) *f The foregoing distan- 
 ces 
 
 * Record at the Rolls. \ In Augment, office. J Ibid; ** Ibid, ff Ibid. 
 £+ Ibid. *} Ibid. 
 
 O 2 
 
92 
 
 ces are from the chace of Crauborn, as speci- 
 fied by the auditors. The following are stated 
 to be not near any king's forest, chace &c. 
 
 To John Pope, lands &c. in Hurdecote, and 
 Compton Bassett. * 
 
 38th of Henry VIII. To George Strange- 
 way, the Rectory of Tarente. f 
 
 36th of Henry VIII. To J. Bartlett &c. 
 lands &c. in Tarent Antyoceston, or Rawston. 
 
 Also the city of New Sarum. X 
 
 38th of Henry VIII. To John Bellow, &c. a 
 farm called Lopeshall, in Da me rh am. * * 
 
 Edw. VI. To lord Wriothesley, the town 
 and borough of Shaston f f 
 
 Other returns vary in expression, viz. 
 
 1st of Edw. VI. To James Tutt &c. Land, 
 &c. in Sutton Parva, Wilts. "Mem. How near 
 the same do adjoin" &c. "the auditor knows 
 < ( not. » X % 
 
 35th of Henry VIII. To Sir J. Rogers, 
 the manor of Estwick in Purbeck, and lands in 
 Blandford Forum and St. Mary, as the auditor 
 (e had learned, were from any of the king's 
 * c houses 12 miles, and from any of his forests 
 5* or chaces, 6 miles. " * f 
 
 37th of Henry VIJI. To W. Hodges &c. 
 
 lands 
 
 • J* Augment, office, f Ibid. J Ibid, fn Ibid, ft Ibid. %% Ibid. *flbid. 
 
93 
 
 lands &c. in Abbotstreet, 4 miles from thq 
 king's forest of Purbeck, and 9 from Corfe 
 eastle. * 
 
 36th of Henry VIII. To George Rolle &c. 
 a farm &c. in Shapwick, 10 miles from any of 
 the king's houses, and 2 from any of his parks, 
 forests, or chaces. f 
 
 The distances from the chace, as mention- 
 ed, agree in general with those from the inner 
 bounds. The places are all nearly either with- 
 in the larger boundary, or at a small distance 
 from it. Some of the last mentioned are incor- 
 rectly expressed; and of others, where the dis- 
 tances are not given, the auditors probably 
 were not aware that the chace was near. The 
 records have been heretofore cited, to shew that 
 only the smaller bounds were at that time ge- 
 nerally acknowledged. 
 
 Other records, were to the following purport. 
 
 6th of Henry IV. In an extent and custom- 
 ary of the manor of Tollard Govitz, ( part of 
 the manor of Tollard Royal, ) was included, 
 inter alia, "Item est ibidem unus parens separ- 
 " atus equali porcione per metas et bundas circum- 
 " fossataSy aparco vocato Lucie' spark, &c. "Also 
 " there is one park separated, in equal portion, 
 " by metes and bounds dug around, from the 
 
 (c park called Lucy's park/' &c. which part 
 
 contained 
 
 + In Augmentation office, f Ibid. 
 
94 
 
 contained by estimation 24 acres. On this it 
 is stated, that there were also within the lar- 
 ger bounds, in Wiltshire, the parks of Wardour, 
 Wilton, and Falston ; in Hants, Breamer, 
 Burgate, and Rockborn; in Dorset, Blagdon, 
 Gunville, and Alderholt; but none within the 
 smaller bounds; as a park would not be allow- 
 ed within a chace. * 
 
 In 20th of Edw. III. John Upton of Berwick 
 had entered the free chace of Eliz. de Burg, 
 at Cranborn, Pentridge, Ashmore, Gussage, 
 Chettel, and Gunville, without licence, and ta- 
 ken several deer; which offence he repeated 
 for eleven years, to the damage of forty marks. 
 For this, in the king's bench, in 33rd of Edw. 
 III. he was put in custody until he paid the 
 amount, f Some of these places are within 
 the smaller bounds, and others were the de- 
 mesne lands of Eliz. de Burg, to which cases the 
 provisions of the statute de forcsta did not ex- 
 tend. No complaint appears of any place in 
 Wiltshire. 
 
 On a writ to the sheriff of Dorset, to enquire 
 whether Roger Darner might, without preju* 
 dice to the king, inclose and make park of 
 his wood of Blagdon, within the chace of Cran- 
 born, the jury found that it would not be to the 
 prejudice, &c. % In 19th of Eliz. Blagdon, 
 
 alias 
 
 * Manuscript; \ See grant of free warren 31st of Edw. I. 
 £ Record in British Museum, 
 
m 
 
 alias Cranborn park,, with free warren there, 
 was granted to John Scudamore. * The vici- 
 nity of Blagdon to Cranborn may account for 
 the confusion of names: the several forests and 
 chaces are sometimes mentioned as one, and 
 at other times as separate and distinct tenures. 
 
 Some records from the abbey book of Wil- 
 ton have been cited, to shew that Rushmore 
 formerly belonged to the abbey of Wilton. At 
 the abbess's court, held at Berwick, 14th of 
 Edw. III. it was found that Robert Salesman 
 had a right of pasture, as the lady's wood- 
 ward, and as holding some lands, subject to a 
 payment of fowls and eggs: 48 of Edw. III. 
 that his son John held the same: and that John 
 Coke, Rector of Chalk, might take a cart load 
 of wood daily, &c. but with only one horse; 
 and 10th of Henry V. that Robert Salesman 
 should make satisfaction for the fowls and 
 eggs, which he had omitted to bring, f 
 
 1 of Edw. IV. The king granted to Wal- 
 ter Harding, the office of ranger of the chace 
 of Cranborn, in Dorset, and on his decease, 
 24th of Edw. IV. the king granted to Thomas 
 Dakham valet of the chamber, the same office, 
 and the office of keeper of Rushmore lodge. £ 
 It is conjectured that this latter, which is in 
 Wiltshire, had been purchased for the use of 
 
 the 
 
 ♦ Hutchins. f Abbey Book; J Record in the Tower, 
 
96 
 
 the chace, it being but a small distance from 
 the inner bounds. * 
 
 On a trial hereafter to be mentioned, 15th of 
 James I. one witness stated that there was 
 only one ancient lodge ; ( West lodge, ) and 
 a dwelling house., used as a lodge, on Lord 
 Pembroke's manor of Berwick, f 
 
 The possession of this house may account 
 for the mention of Wiltshire, in a record dated 
 4th of Henry VIII. entitled a Computus of 
 Christopher Power, receiver to Queen Kalherine^ 
 containing, inter alia, a recital of the appoint- 
 ment of Sir Edward Darell, adofficiumseneschalli 
 dominii sive manerii nostri de Cranborn, in com. 
 Dorset, ac qfficium guardiani ma gist ri et custo- 
 dis chacea nostrce de Cranborne in dicto comitatu 
 Dorset, ac in com. Wiltes, &c. % f ^o the office of 
 " steward of her demesne or manor of Cranborn, 
 ec in Dorset, and to the office of warden, master, 
 tc and keeper of her chace of Cranborn, in the 
 • f said county of Dorset, and in the county of 
 ec Wilts, and of all the wild beasts; " &c. fc and 
 ' f of keeper of her park of Blagdon, in the 
 <f said counties of Wilts and Dorset. " &c. The 
 computus was for Cranborn with its members, 
 and Ditchainpton; comprising Cranborn manor, 
 Cranborn borough, Cranborn Holwel, Cranborn 
 ^lderholt, Wilkesworth, Cranborn hundred, 
 
 Cranborn 
 
 * Manuscript f Ibid. J In Augmentation office.. 
 
9T 
 
 Cranborn chace, Cranborn fee, ( or copyhold ) 
 and Ditchaniptoii. This also may account for 
 the insertion of "Wilts," as Ditchampton is in 
 that county, near the outer line of boundary; 
 but not connected with Cranborn, otherwise 
 than that Christopher Power was also receiver 
 for the manor of Ditchampton. Hampshire 
 is not mentioned ; wherefore this does not ap- 
 pear to refer to the larger bounds. It is ob- 
 servable, that the park of Blagdon is de- 
 scribed as being in both counties ; though it was 
 only in Dorsetshire, and within the manor of 
 Cranborn, as appears in the following record, 
 and others. 
 
 12th. of Eliz. The queen granted to Henry 
 earl of Pembroke, inter alia, officium capitalis 
 seneschalli man. nostri de Craneburn, in com. 
 Dorset ac offic. guard, et custod. chacece nostrce 
 de Crdnebourne in eodern com. nro. Dorset, cum 
 omnibus et singulis juribus, &;c. offic. rangea- 
 toris ejusdem chacece, Necnon offic. custod. par- 
 ci nri de Blagedon infra man. de Craneburne 
 p. diet. fyc. Ac offic. balliv. et messor. de Cran- 
 born p. diet. &c. The office of chief stew- 
 ard of her manor, in the county of Dor- 
 set, warden and keeper of her chace of Cran- 
 born, in her same county of Dorset, and ran- 
 ger of the same chace; also keeper of her 
 
 park 
 
98 
 
 park of Blagdon, within the manor of Cran- 
 born aforesaid, &c. and bailiff and hayward of 
 Cranborn. 
 
 In 22nd of Eliz. an action of trespass was 
 brought in the court of common pleas, by 
 Thomas Toppe, farmer of Bridmore, against 
 William Wearl, one of the keepers of the chace, 
 for chacing and rechacing the deer in Brid- 
 more field and destroying his corn thereby. The 
 defendant alledged that the place was within the 
 liberty ofthechace of Cranborn, and that he 
 entered it as one of the keepers of that chace : 
 the plaintiff replied that it was not within the 
 chace. Thereupon issue being joined, judg- 
 ment was given in favour of the plaintiff. 
 
 It is supposed to have been soon after this 
 time that Sir Henry Ashely, being ranger of the 
 chace, took a lease from the lord of the manor of 
 Bridmore, of his free warren there ; and that 
 Sir Mathew Arundell, proprietor of Tollard, be- 
 ing deputy ranger, employed men at that place 
 to look after the deer; but on his dismissal, 
 prohibited the keepers from coming on the 
 grounds at Tollard ; as was stated in the depo- 
 sitions on a subsequent trial, 15th of James I. * 
 
 23rd of Eliz. Exemplification. Thomas earl 
 of Sussex, chief justice in eyre, certified respect- 
 ing 
 
 * Manuscript; 
 
99 
 
 ing the queen's chace ofCranborn, that John 
 Swayne of Blandford had been summoned be- 
 fore him, "and charged to have used his pur- 
 " lieu, within his manor of Tarrant Gunville, 
 (C and the demesne of Raudleneston, next ad- 
 ft joining the chace of Cranborn, in the county 
 " of Dorset, contrary to the laws and ordinau- 
 tc ces of the forest; that is to say, in not per- 
 ec mitting the keepers to rechace the deer in 
 e< the said John Swaynes purlieu, into the 
 " chace, as theretofore the said keepers had us- 
 ? ed, and of right ought to do : and also in fore- 
 <c stalling the deer in his said purlieu, and kill- 
 " ing of unseasonable deer, contrary to the laws 
 r f &c. of the forest; and also for cutting and 
 e< inclosing his coppices by the space of 7 
 c< years, " to the prejudice of the game within 
 the chace, &c. By confession of the plaintiff 
 ( the earl of Pembroke, ) and of the defendant, 
 John Swayne had, time out of mind, a park of 
 purlieu in the said manor &c. On which it was 
 ordered, by assent of the parties, that he might 
 cut down and inclose his woods, &c. within 
 the purlieu, without licence; and that he should 
 suffer the keepers to hunt and rechace the game 
 out of his purlieu, &c. also that John and 
 Robert Swayne should, without disturbance of 
 the keepers, use, hunt, and have the purlieu, as 
 
 by 
 
 LofC. p 2 
 
100 
 
 by the laws of the forest &c. and customs of 
 the said chace, they ought to do, and in no other 
 sort; also that John Swayne might inclose his 
 park, to keep out the deer, but not make any 
 deer-leap to let in the deer from the chace. * 
 
 It is said by chief justice Coke, that ff purlieu 
 " contains such grounds which Henry II. Rich- 
 " ard I. or king John added to their ancient 
 " forests, over other mens grounds, and which 
 " were disafforested by force of the statute of 
 * c Charta deforesta, cap. 1st and cap. 3rd and 
 <c the perambulations and grants thereup^ 
 " on. *' &c. e( By this it appeareth that chaces 
 rf tli at never were any forests, cannot have any 
 (C purlieu, ■* &c. c< The owners of grounds 
 " within the purlieu, may fell, grub, &c. their 
 " woods &c. convert their pastures &c. to ara- 
 <e ble, inclose them,/' &c. fr and so dispose and 
 " use the same, or any part thereof, as if they 
 ec never had been afforested. H And further 
 fC we proceed and do hold, that in any purlieu 
 " a man may as lawfully hunt to all intents and 
 tc purposes within the purlieu within his own 
 " grounds, as any other owner may in his 
 <c grounds that never were afforested at all. *• f 
 But it appears that the king, &c. retains a 
 right to the deer in the purlieu, against all men 
 except the owner of the land ; and that the lat 
 
 ter 
 
 * Manuscript. f Coke's Institutes. 
 
101 
 
 ter may not unfairly impede them in return to 
 the forest. * The foregoing case of John 
 Swayne confirms the opinion that the chace 
 had been esteemed a forest, and that the lands 
 between the smaller and larger boundary were 
 duly disafforested. 
 
 <c It is alledged in favour of the larger 
 cc bounds, that in the ancient court rolls of the 
 *' chace, are great variety of presentments and 
 ff punishments, for facts commited in the coun- 
 * ty of Wilts, in Alderholt and Chettered 
 %e walks, Gunville, Ranston, and Iwerne Min- 
 " ster, all without the short bounds. " f One 
 roll dated 1st of Edw. VI. is said to contain 
 " presentments, which relate to the following 
 ic places ; West Buckden, East Buckden, 
 (( Chittered, Alderholt, Blakeden, Ashe (or Ash- 
 u more ) and Burchalke; ,J £ most of these 
 being between the inner and outer bounds. 
 Another is cited of 2nd of Edw. VI. The 
 foregoing quotations respecting purlieu may 
 explain this, to which the following may be 
 added, from the same writer ; viz. Albeit these 
 purlieus be absolutely disafforested, and have 
 no liberty of forest there, yet, for conveniency, 
 it hath been permitted that the rangers of 
 c< the forests should, as often as the wild beasts 
 " range into the purlieu, with his hound re- 
 
 chace 
 
 f Coke's Institutes, see Burn, article Came, f Hutchins. % la Augment. offics„ 
 
102 
 
 •( chace the same. And these rangers have 
 €f used to present unlawful hunting, and hunt- 
 " ers of the king's deer within the purlieu, as in 
 " the night, or of unseasonable deer, or killing 
 <e of the king's deer, in purlieu, by no purlieu 
 fc men, but unlawful hunters, or the like ; such 
 <c as should not take advantage of their own 
 u wrong both to the king and the purlieu men ; 
 fC and they are known to be deer belonging to 
 " the king's forest, because there are no others 
 * c within the purlieu. " To illustrate this the 
 form of the rangers oath, as antiently taken, is 
 added; viz. " You shall truly execute the office 
 <c of a ranger in the purlieu of P. upon the bor- 
 te der of the king's forest of P. you shall rechace 
 €C with your hound and drive the wild beasts of 
 €t the forest, as often as they shall range out of 
 " the forest into the purlieus, and you shall truly 
 €i present all unlawful hunting and hunters of 
 " wild beasts of venary and chace, as well within 
 " the purlieus as the forest, and those and all 
 €t other offences you shall present at the king's next 
 cc court of attachments, or swainmote, ivhich shall 
 fc first happen, " &c. The writer adds, "And 
 KC it is to be noted, that in such forests as have 
 €e no purlieus, there is no ranger. " * 
 
 Though it is said that cc Chacea est ad com- 
 <f munem legem, " ( Chace is subject to the 
 
 common 
 
 * 
 
 Coke's Institutes. 
 
103 
 
 common law, ) cc and is not" to be guided by the 
 cc forest laws;" yet there are exceptions. It 
 appears that Cranborn chace has at various 
 times been considered as a forest, with which, 
 the foregoing mention of purlieu coincides. 
 
 Thus the general tenor of the records, from 
 the 18th of Edw. I. to the 22nd of Eliz. im- 
 plies the existence of the chace in the county of 
 Dorset only, and within the smaller bounds; 
 except one slight mention of Wilts, and ano- 
 ther of Rushmore lodge; which exceptions are 
 acounted for, by the casual possession of a 
 house at Rushmore as a lodge to the chace &c. 
 The computus of Christopher Power was a 
 mere act of queen Katherine, or of her servants, 
 and was in no respect binding on other persons. 
 A custom, however, had been established, 
 which tended to preserve the recollection of the 
 larger claim ; this was the collection of chimi- 
 nage, or toll for passing through the forest in 
 the fence ( i. e. defence) month, at the usual 
 time of the does producing their young; viz. 
 from 15 days before Midsummer day, to 15 
 days after it: This payment appears to have 
 been claimed in later times, only at Harnham 
 bridge near Salisbury, and Bulbridge by Wil- 
 ton. The submission to this imposition is not 
 a proof of its legality; and it is remarkable 
 
 that 
 
104 
 
 that a payment of a more serious nature, called 
 White Hart Silver, continues attached to part 
 of the ancient forest of Blakemore, although 
 the lands on which it arose, were disafforested 
 under the statute de foresta. The relation is 
 that a beautiful white hart had its life spared 
 by Henry III. when he was hunting in this 
 forest; but being afterwards hunted and kil- 
 led by Thomas de la Lind and his compa- 
 nions, at a bridge since called Kingstag bridge* 
 in the parish of Pulham, these gentlemen were 
 fined and imprisoned, and a heavy tax was 
 laid on the lands over which the hart had passed, 
 which tax is still annually paid, although Pul- 
 ham was disafforested long ago. 
 
 This appears by a record of a perambulation 
 of the forest of Blakemore by Gilbert de Kno- 
 vil, &c. 28th of Edw. I. On which, after re- 
 citing the bounds by which they proceeded 
 viz. from Treherne &c. the jurors said,, 
 
 That the woods within the said bounds were 
 contained in the lordships of king John, and 
 afforested in his time. And that sundry vills, 
 with their woods, ( as specified ) including 
 West Pulham, East Pulham, and Mapoudre, 
 with the woods, were afforested after the co- 
 ronation of king Henry II. viz. in the time of 
 king John, The jurors also said that the said 
 
 villates 
 
105 
 
 villates, hamlets, and woods, were deafforested 
 by a perambulation made by Walter de Scamel, 
 and Matthew de Colombaire, by the king's writ, 
 7th of Edw. I. "so that whatever by these per- 
 (C ambulations was placed out of the forest re- 
 if mained out of it, and the residue remains in. 
 (C the forest for ever, according to the aforesaid 
 '< bounds. '* {* . 
 
 Tims, the lands, and Woods first mention- 
 ed in the verdict, viz. from Treherne &c. be- 
 ing the demesne lands of king John, were al- 
 lowed td remain ; but the others, including Pul- 
 ham, &c. were completely disafforested, and 
 have so continued, notwithstanding that the im- 
 position of White Hart Silver still remained. 
 
 The foregoing account is a farther proof of 
 the extent and injustice of king John's afforest- 
 ations ; About thirty villages and hamlets, with 
 their woods, being included in the disforest- 
 ation. It is rather remarkable that the affor- 
 estation of these lands and woods, which had 
 been effected by king John, has been wholly 
 set aside ; but that the afforestation in Dorset, 
 Wilts, and Hants, which he ineffectually at- 
 tempted, remains a subject of claim to this day. 
 The record also affords additional proof of the 
 legality of the proceedings of W. Scamel and 
 M. de Colombaire ; as related in former pages, f 
 
 The 
 
 * Hutchins's Dorset. f See page 6n 
 
 Q 
 
106 
 
 The claim to the larger bounds had in great 
 measure, if not entirely lain dormant, during 
 the latter part of the time of Edw. I. and 
 through the reigns of Edw. II. and III. Rich. 
 II. Henry IV. V. and VI. whilst the chace 
 was in private hands ; and whilst it was united 
 to the crown, under Edw. IV. and V. Rich- 
 ard III. Henry VII. and VIII. Edw. VI. and 
 Mary to Elizabeth ; in whose reign the at- 
 tempt of William Wearl, the keeper, had been 
 made at Bridmore, and defeated. Under the next 
 sovereign a new era commenced to the chace. In 
 the 9th of James I. " the hundred, lordship, 
 tc and manor of Cranborn, the chace and free 
 <c warren, the site and capital messuage of the 
 (f manor and demesne lands, the profits of the 
 " fairs, Castle-hill and Borewood coppice, w ere 
 " granted to Robert earl of Salisbury in fee. "*' 
 
 In the same year the manor was granted to 
 George Whitmore; f from which it may be 
 supposed that the earl had not at that time an 
 intention of asserting a right to the larger 
 bounds; but it is related, that "soon after this 
 • f earl came into the possession thereof, he be- 
 " gan to extend the bounds into Wilts, which 
 u occasioned disputes. " J 
 
 In 13fh of James I. " The earl began by 
 
 "filing 
 
 * Hutchins; f Ibid; J Manuscript, 
 
107 
 
 c< filing a bill in chancery, against the earl of 
 <c Pembroke, lord Arundell, and others, for 
 * c establishing the larger bounds. The defen- 
 <e dants answered ; and two commissions for ex- 
 <c amining witnesses were executed, and re- 
 " turned into court. '" * 
 
 €t Before the above suit could be brought to 
 (C a hearing, William Bowden, one of the earl 
 cc of Salisbury's keepers, was found hunting on 
 <( lord Arund ell's land in Tollard Royal, in the 
 (t county of Wilts, in the occupation of Edw. 
 (C Wood, his tenant, who thereupon brought 
 €( his action; and in the 14th of James I. the 
 " cause was tried in the court of common 
 u pleas before a special jury. *' The action was 
 for breaking down the fences, and treading the 
 herbage; which the defendant justified by 
 pleading the earl's possession of Cranborn chace 
 in the county of Wilts, which chace extended 
 itself as well over the particular lands set forth 
 in the pleadings, as over all the rest of the vil- 
 lage of Tollard Royal. The plaintiff denied 
 that the keepers had been accustomed to enter 
 the premises, and contended that the chace did 
 riot extend so far; whereupon issue was joined, 
 and judgment was given in favour of the plain- 
 tiff, f 
 
 It 
 
 • Manuscript, j Record in common Dleas Treasury; 
 
 Q 2 
 
108 
 
 It is related that on the foot of the record it 
 was stated that a Writ of error was brought ; 
 but on search through the four subsequent 
 terms, it does not appear to have been pro- 
 ceeded in. * 
 
 After this decision, the earl surrendered his 
 grant to the king"; who thereupon made to him 
 a new grant of the chace, describing it to be 
 situate in the counties of Wilts, Dorset, and 
 Hants, but without any specification of bounds, 
 under a yearly rent of 20s. to be held by the 
 earl and his heirs : with remainder to the king 
 and his heirs, ( on failure of issue to the earl, ) 
 " as amply as the king or his predecessors had 
 ** held them. * f 
 
 This transaction has evidently the appear- 
 ance of a mere collusion between the king and 
 the earl, to enable the latter to remove the 
 cause into another court, by pretending to 
 give to the crown an interest in the chace. 
 
 Accordingly, in 15th of James I. the earl 
 of Salisbury filed his bill in the court of Ex- 
 chequer, against William earl of Pembroke^ 
 Thomas lord Arundell, Edw. Wood, Thomas 
 Gawen, Robert Topp, and others, whereby he 
 claimed the large bounds of Cranborn chace, 
 beginning at Bulbridge in Wilton, thence to 
 
 Shaston, 
 
 * Manuscript, + Record at the Rolls. 
 
109 
 
 Shaston, to the Stour, toBlandford, to Ring- 
 wood,, to Salisbury, and to Bulbridge, including 
 a great part of Wilts, and Dorset, and a part of 
 Hants ; in compass about a hundred miles. 
 
 He charged the earl of Pembroke, and othersjk 
 with interruptions, and killing of deer in King- 
 stone coppice, Plowmans grove coppice, &c. 
 
 He charged lord Arundell and Edw. Wood 
 with interruptions in Tollard ; viz. in Tollard 
 park, Honeybag coppice, Wiltshire coppice, 
 and Park coppice. 
 
 He charged Edmund Uvedale and Robert 
 Topp with disturbances and interruptions in 
 several grounds and coppices in Bridmpre ; but 
 in this charge he did not proceed. 
 
 He charged not Katharine and Thomas 
 Gawen with any offence or interruptions in Nor- 
 pington or Manwood, but only prayed process 
 against them, as against the other defendants. 
 
 All the above are on the outside of the small- 
 er bounds. 
 
 The plaintiff pleaded that these were to his 
 disherison of his estate in tail, and to the king 
 of his reversion, 
 
 Lord Arundell and Edw. Wood filed their de- 
 fnurrer to the bill, stating the decision in the 
 
 common 
 
no 
 
 common pleas in favour of Edw, Wood, and 
 the exhibition of the bill in chancery, where all 
 the matters in question had been examined, 
 and yet remained undetermined. They state 
 also, that after the above verdict, the plaintiif 
 " upon pretence of money paid him, when in 
 (C truth none was, did grant the chace to the 
 " king, and took it again with tail, &c. reser- 
 f * ving 20s to the king ; which was done on 
 <c purpose, and by the policy of the plaintiff, to 
 <c molest the defendants, under pretence of the 
 (C king's reversion, " &c, The several defen- 
 dants stated the right and custom of killing 
 deer, in the premises, these being out of the 
 bounds of the chace, the free warren at Norring- 
 ton, the making of high hedges, that the keep- 
 ers only walked by permission to shake off the 
 hounds and fetch in the straying deer, and 
 that action had been brought against the keep- 
 ers, for coming to Bridmore. 
 
 The plaintiff produced the following records; 
 viz. of 34th and 35th of Henry III. the 
 agreement with the abbess of Shaston 35th of 
 Henry III. the quo icarranto, 8th of Edw. 1. 
 the proceedings at Sherborne in the same year, 
 and the conviction of John de Upton, 32nd of 
 Edw. III. He also proved some court rolls, 
 arm 1 examined witnesses, 
 
 The 
 
 
Ill 
 
 The defendants produced the following; \\t, 
 the rolls of Wilton,, containing claims of the earl 
 of Gloucester, in the hundreds of Altaworth, 
 ( or High worth,) Sterkel, and Kynaston, 17th of 
 Edw. I. the commission of perambulation, 
 4th of Henry III. the presentments in 3rd of 
 Edw. I. the perambulation 7th of Edw. I. the 
 resignation and regrant of 18th of Edw. I. the 
 grant of 1st of Edw IV. and 25th of Henry 
 VIII. the demise, 4th of Edw. VI. the grant 
 of 12th of Eliz. three grants of free warren, 
 in the time of Edw. I. the extent and custom- 
 ary, 6th of Henry IV. the five records in the 
 abbey book of Wilton, respecting Rushmore 
 lodge, of 14th and 48th of Edw. III. 34th of 
 Edw. 111. and of 10th of Henry V. the 
 judgments, 22nd of Eliz. and 14th of James I. 
 They also examined a number of witnesses. * 
 
 It is remarkable that the conduct of this 
 trial, on the part of the defendants, appears to 
 have been confided to persons unacquainted 
 with the local situation of places in the county 
 of Wilts. For instance, the hundreds of High- 
 worth, Sterkel, and Kynaston are in the north- 
 eastern part of the county, far from the chace, 
 and were not at all implicated in the claim. In 
 latter times, similar mistakes have been made ; 
 for instance, a grant of free warren in Winter- 
 born 
 
 I Maauscriptgf depositions, fcc;. 
 
113 
 
 born Stepleton lias been cited, though that 
 place is in the southwestern part of Dorsetshire ; 
 and a grant of Over Compton, and Nether 
 Compton, though on the northwestern side of 
 that county ; all being at a great distance from 
 the contested bounds. 
 
 On the part of the plaintiff, sundry witnesses 
 deposed that the chace was reputed to extend 
 into Wilts ; that deer had depastured, and the 
 keepers had walked, hunted, and killed in sun- 
 dry places, all beyond the inner bounds ; though 
 they admitted that the deer had been chased 
 out of the corn fields, and that frequent squab* 
 bles had taken place between the farmers and 
 the keepers. They deposed that the lords of 
 Tollard hunted there only at the annual court ; 
 that Rushmore walk was part of the chace, and 
 that owners of copses there gave notice of fell- 
 ing them; that Rushmore lodge was a quarter 
 of a mile in Wilts, and had been used as an 
 ancient lodge; that the woods in Wilts were 
 as much stocked with deer as those in Dorset, 
 and were alil^e treated as chace ; that persons 
 had been taken up in Wiltshire, and obliged 
 to make their peace ; that fee wood had been 
 taken by the officers of the chace in several 
 places; that the chace if stinted by the short 
 bounds would be poor, and the walks unfit for 
 
 the 
 
113 
 
 the keepers, and that the rangers had appoint- 
 ed persons to take chiminage at Harnham 
 bridge, in the fence month, and were appointed 
 to the profits of the annual game there. 
 
 On the cross examination of these witnesses, 
 some of them admitted that several of the pla- 
 ces in question were denied to be in the chace; 
 that the farmers drove the deer out of the chief 
 pastures, and quarrelled about them with the 
 keepers ; that Sir Matthew Arundell, when de- 
 puty ranger, had suffered his own estate at 
 Tollard to be walked, but after being displaced, 
 had asserted its exemption ; and that a lodge 
 which had stood in Tollard during his ranker- 
 ship, was removed to Bussy Stool, on his de- 
 privation; One allowed that certain grounds 
 in Bridmore were not in the chace; for that 
 when he was a keeper, he only walked there to 
 fetch in the stray deen One admitted to have 
 heard that Man woods copses, in Norrington, 
 were purlieu, and not chace ; another, that high 
 hedges, and ditches were used in Tollard, to 
 keep out the deer* 
 
 On the behalf of the defendants, of many an- 
 cient witnesses, some, who had been keepers 
 deposed to the reputation of the small bounds ; 
 to the existence of free warren in several pla- 
 ces, 
 R 
 
114 
 
 ces, and of nine parks, between the greater and 
 less bounds; others deposed to there being- 
 only one ancient lodge ; that Rushinore lodge 
 had been a dwelling house, on the earl of 
 Pembroke's inheritance, part of his manor of 
 Berwick St. John, but used as a lodge when 
 that nobleman was ranger of the chace, and 
 that it had been a tenement, for which rent was 
 paid ; that the earl of Salisbury had purchased 
 of Sir Edw. Uvedale the herdsman's lodge at 
 Tarrant Monkton, where there had been nei- 
 ther deer nor keepers,, twelve years before ; that 
 new lodges had been built; that the earl of 
 Salisbury had become owner of some woods, 
 &c. in Berwick, also of Rushmore lodge, and of 
 the ground oil which it stood ; and that no lodge 
 was known between the inner and outer bounds, 
 except in later times : &c. 
 
 Several deposed, inter alia, that Sir Henry- 
 Ashley being ranger of the chace, took a lease 
 of the lord of Bridmore of the free warren, with 
 liberty to hunt there. 
 
 The evidence shewed that the following pla- 
 ces, ( between the larger and smaller bounds, ) 
 were reputed out of the chace: viz. Tollard, 
 Bridmore, Norrington, Ebbesborn, Alvedeston, 
 Fernditch, Burchalk, Ashcombe, Charlton- 
 
 down. 
 
115 
 
 down, and the earl of Pembroke's woods, all 
 in Wiltshire; and Gunville, Ranston, part of 
 Chettle, Teners ditch, and the down of Mel- 
 bury, north of the ridge way, all in Dorsetshire ; 
 that the keepers had been forbidden to walk in 
 Tollard, Bridmore, Norrington, Charlton, Gun- 
 ville, Ranston, Chettle, Melbury, Stepington* 
 &c. from several of which the keepers had ac- 
 cordingly refrained. Some deposed that they 
 knew of no forbiddals at Tollard, Ashgrove, 
 and other places, for that the keepers did not 
 usually come there. Some, that the owners 
 and farmers hunted and killed deer for their 
 own use, in Tollard, Rridmore, Norrington, 
 Ebbesborn, Alvedestone, Charlton, Ashcombe,, 
 Ashgrove, Melbury, Gunville, Ranston, Iwerne, 
 Stepington, Fontmel, Sutton, part of Chettle, 
 &c. in most of which, the killing was stated 
 to be publicly, within the keeper's view, and in 
 some, with their acquiescence. The keepers 
 asking leave at some places, to kill deer, was 
 proved, and that on forbiddal they used only to 
 cast off their hounds to drive out the deer. 
 
 It was stated that the chace in Dorsetshire 
 was sufficient for the maintenance of 2000 deer. 
 
 Single witnesses deposed as follow, viz. to the 
 discharge of Mr. Chafin and the witness, be- 
 fore 
 R 2 
 
116 
 
 fore the justice in eyre, for killing of deer in 
 Baron down, and that Mr. Chafin had recover- 
 ed damages against a keeper for hunting ; to 
 the repute of Fernditch being out of the 
 chace, and a deer ground of itself; to the wit- 
 nessed father, a keeper, asking leave to hunt 
 at Norrington, and promising venison; to the in- 
 treaty of lord Pembroke's officers to surcease 
 the suit at Bridmore, and another suit; that 
 the latter was thereupon dropped; another, 
 that Manwood's copses were purlieu, and that 
 the keepers might not hunt but cast off hounds 
 to rechace ; that the witness, a keeper, was 
 discountenanced by the deputy ranger for 
 hunting in Chettle; that the witness and his 
 master, on being sued, refrained from hunting 
 in Ashcombe, but cast off hdunds to rechace ; 
 that fee wood was taken from copses in Dorset- 
 shire, but none in Wiltshire. Several deposed 
 to seeing copies of the small bounds; one to 
 mapping them for the earl; another to being 
 shewn a copy of them, when a keeper, by one 
 with whom he was walking the bounds, who 
 said it was a copy of a record taken out of the 
 Tower; &c. * 
 
 On the hearing of this cause, in the exche- 
 quer chamber, by the chancellor and barons in 
 17th of James I. they decreed that the earl of 
 
 Salisbury 
 
 * Manuscript of depositions; 
 
117 
 
 Salisbury and his successors should have liber- 
 ty for feeding and preserving the deer of- the 
 chace, in Tollard green, Tollard park, Honey- 
 bags, Wilts copses, and Park copse, belong- 
 ing to lord Arundell, and in Man wood copse and 
 other the wood grounds and copses within the 
 manor of Norrington, in the tenure of Katha- 
 rine Gawen, and that the several keepers of the 
 chace should have liberty to look to the deer* 
 and to walk in the ground abovementioned, 
 without interruption; &c. 
 
 This decision appe ars far from determining 
 the general question of the boundaries of the 
 chace ; being nothing more than giving liberty 
 to feed and preserve the deer, and for the keep- 
 ers to look to them, in certain grounds specified. 
 The complaint had included the appointment 
 of keepers by the defendants, the making of 
 hedges, ditches, mounds &c. by them, to 
 hinder the keepers of the chace, and the killing 
 of several deer by Ed. Wood; but all these 
 circumstances seem to have passed unnoticed 
 in the decree. The removal of the cause into 
 the exchequer under the flimsy pretence of a 
 small rent, &c. was a stretch of arbitrary power, 
 under a prince who was remarkable for his 
 high ideas respecting prerogative, and for at- 
 tachment to favorites: who was extremlev fond 
 
 of 
 
118 
 
 of hunting, and who followed it in this chace. 
 The evidence for the earl is not of a complex- 
 ion to gain much credit: the pretensions of the 
 carls of Clare had long been superseded by the 
 operation of the statute dc forcsta; and the 
 plaintiff's witnesses were deer-keepers, depend- 
 ing on their employer for support, and liable 
 to a bias in his favour, sufficient to influence 
 their testimony, and to induce them to con- 
 sider permission and encroachment as custom 
 and right. On these considerations, the verdict, 
 limited as it is, and declaratory of little more 
 than a privilege of purlieu, might in these more 
 enlightened times be esteemed a mere nullity, 
 had it not since been acted upon as a sanction 
 to the claim of the larger bounds. 
 
 In fact, the legality of this transaction is very 
 questionable. It is said,, Jj escheker estun place 
 que solement est ordciuc pour leprou le roy 3 &c. * 
 t( The exchequer is a place which solely is 
 ff appointed for the profit of the king; " the 
 primary business of which is to call the king's 
 debtors to account, and to recover his lands,, 
 goods, &c. f It is said also Nul comun plea 
 ne soit desormes tenus en V eschequer encontcr 
 la forme de la Grand Charter j; "No common 
 " plea be henceforth held in the exchequer, 
 ci contrary to the form of the Great Charter. 5> 
 
 Whatever 
 
 * Coke's Institutes. f Blackstone. J Coke from Artie. Sup. Char- 
 tas, 2bt.li of Edw. I. 
 
m 
 
 Whatever changes have been introduced in the 
 courts of law, the general distinctions of right 
 and wrong, which are the principles of the com- 
 mon law, continue the same; and it remains 
 for professional men to decide whether they 
 have not been infringed by the proceedings 
 which have been related. Justice Coke is ex- 
 plicit on this subject: cc Out of this act ( 5th of 
 " Richard II. ) this general conclusion may be 
 <c justly collected; that such course of the ex- 
 e< chequer as tendeth to the disquietness, mis^ 
 cc chief, and delay of the subject, and no ad van - 
 fC tage to the king, is against law, and ought 
 '•' not to be allowed. " * 
 
 The bill in the exchequer was filed against 
 the earl of Pembroke with the others, but it 
 does not appear that the earl of Salisbury pro- 
 ceeded farther with him. It has been said that 
 cc Probably he wished to detach so powerful a 
 fC man as that earl, and quieted him with the 
 i( sale of Fernditch walk. " f 
 
 A commission had been assigned to four per- 
 sons, empowering them to employ a skilful sur- 
 veyor on each side, to survey and make a map 
 of the chace, according to both lines of boun_ 
 dary ; but the earPs counsel refusing to permit 
 his surveyor to obey some directions, it was 
 
 done 
 
 * Institutes? f Manuscript; 
 
120 
 
 clone by the other surveyor only, and a map 
 was made by him, which is still preserved. * 
 
 Two petitions had been presented, one from 
 Tisbury to the king*, against the improper use 
 of his name, the hindrance of justice; &c. and 
 the other to the house of commons, stating the 
 grievances of 20,000 inhabitants, in 70 parish- 
 es, by the decree given, f 
 
 This spirit of disapprobation shewn by the 
 people, or the consciousness of injustice proba- 
 bly prevented the barons from giving a more 
 decisive decree, and the earl from proceeding 
 farther in his claims. 
 
 In the succeeding reign, the earl of Salisbury 
 brought a bill into the exchequer against John 
 Cole, owner of the manor of Witchampton, 
 complaining of his killing deer and attempting 
 the keepers in a ground called Dean's leaze, in 
 Witchampton^ and of his claiming free warren 
 and free chace. The bill stated that a quo 
 warranto had been obtained against J. Cole. 
 18th of James I. and that it was adjudged 
 against his claim ; that the king, ( Charles I. ) 
 when he repaired to Cranborn chace, did chief- 
 ly delight to hunt in the said chace or walk, 
 called Chittered walk, as the late king (James 
 I. ) had done. The king's yearly rent, and 
 
 reversion 
 
 * Manuscript. f Ibid, 
 
121 
 
 reversion Mere again stated,, and some court 
 rolls of Cranborn, of the times of Henry V. 
 Edw. IV. and Henry VIII. containing pre- 
 sentments of offenders, were read,, &c. In con- 
 clusion., in 8th of Cha. I. the barons decreed 
 that Dean's leaze, Witchampton park,, and 
 Sley yates, were parcel of Chittered walk, and 
 that this was one of the walks of the chace ; and 
 it was ordered, that the injunction formerly 
 granted, for staying Cole's proceedings at com- 
 mon law, against Hickes an underkeeper, should 
 be continued. * 
 
 The civil wars, which continued about 18 
 years, from 1642 to 1660, doubtless prevented 
 any farther proceedings respecting the chace. 
 
 In 1671 the earl of Salisbury sold the chace, 
 as six walks, and the manor of Berwick, to the 
 earl of Shaftesbury, for £5300. In 1672, 23rd 
 of Charles II. the reversion in fee was grant- 
 ed to Thomas Stringer. Thus, the interest of 
 the king in the chace appears to have been a 
 mere pretence, which was soon laid aside. 
 
 In 1692, the earl of Shaftesbury surrendered 
 his estate to Anthony lord Ashley, his son, who, 
 reserving the manor of Berwick, sold the chace 
 and its lodges, in fee, for £3500, to Thomas 
 Freke esq. of Shroton. The latter, ( who died 
 in 1698,) left it by will to Thomas Pile esq. of 
 
 * Hutchins; 
 
 S 
 
122 
 
 Baverstock, Wills, and Eliz. Freke, for their 
 lives; (the former being the husband of his 
 niece Arundell Penruddock, and the latter 
 their daughter, ) with reversion to George Pitt 
 the younger, esq. of Stratfield Say, Hants, af- 
 terwards baron Rivers; to whom it came, m 
 1714. 
 
 About this time, and for ages before it, deer-* 
 hunting in Cranborn chace was practised at 
 times by gentlemen in the neigbourhood, as a 
 kind of diversion. They assembled in the even- 
 ing, and agreed whether to stand, or run from, 
 the keepers, according to their forces, &c. Fre- 
 quent battles took place, and persons have 
 sometimes been killed, on both sides. This 
 dangerous amusement soon after fell into disre- 
 pute, and has since been practised by people 
 of the lower class only, in general. * 
 
 The low prices at which the chace had been* 
 sold, implies that it was not of great extent, or 
 in high estimation. The unpopularity of the 
 earl of Salisbury's claims had doubtless led to 
 the opposition of the neighbouring inhabitants, 
 in deer-hunting; which the troubles of the king- 
 dom, and the prevalence of the popular party 
 encouraged. The earl finding his views disap- 
 pointed, probably took the first opportunity af- 
 terwards of parting with the chace. 
 
 It 
 
 * See I-JtitO'ms'i BctTset, 
 
123 
 
 It is said that the earl of Shaftesbury made no 
 attempts of claiming the larger bounds,* and 
 declared that his right extended only to the 
 smaller bounds; f that his successor did the 
 same, and lived during some years on terms 
 of intimacy with the neighbouring gentlemen; 
 that they frequently hunted with him and par- 
 took of the venison. J This system was prac- 
 ticable so long as the parties continued on an 
 amicable footing, but when disputes arose, and 
 the keepers were forbidden to come on the out- 
 grounds, that is on the purlieu, or lands for- 
 merly disafforested, the deer could not be dri- 
 ven from their settled haunts merely by the 
 laying on of a hound ; which was the only me- 
 thod allowed by the custom of purlieu, unless 
 hy leave of the landholders. § 
 
 In 1703, an action was brought against 
 some of the keepers, for hunting on the grounds 
 of Thomas Fovvnes esq. of Stepleton, and judg- 
 ment was given against them. After this, the 
 parties were reconciled, and continued amica- 
 ble 'till the decease of the last life-proprietor, 
 Elizabeth Freke, in 1714. 
 
 During several years after this, as in general 
 before, it is related that (S an intimacy and good 
 <c neighbourhood subsisted between the propri- 
 etor 
 
 * Manuscript f Depositions: % Manuscript. <S See page iqu 
 
124 
 
 " etor of the chace and the gentlemen around : 
 cc they had venison when they pleased, and they 
 <c frequently hunted together on their estates, 
 " called the out-grounds (or purlieu). The 
 cc keepers were connived at and allowed to do 
 " the same, (i. e. to hunt there, ) they taking 
 "■ care to rechace the deer, " &c. 
 
 <c In 1726, however the keepers took two 
 ec men killing a deer on the estate of Thomas 
 " Ryves esq. ( of Ranston, )on the out-grounds, 
 :e and had them convicted, notwithstanding 
 " the opposition of Mr. Ryves and Mr. Bower; 
 €< who, removed the convictions into the court 
 " of king's bench and had them quashed. " * 
 
 It must be owned that the conduct of some 
 of the gentlemen was irritating. In addition to 
 their protection of deer killers, they some- 
 times threatened and used violence to the 
 keepers, and insulted their employers by the 
 exhibition of the deer which they had kill- 
 ed. Thus, at length the proprietor of the 
 chace had no other choice than of relinquish- 
 ing the deer and claim of rechace on those 
 lands, or of commencing a suit at law. In the 
 latter he had considerable advantages: his con- 
 nections were extensive and highly respect- 
 able, and many persons held an opinion of his 
 right to the larger bounds. 
 
 In 
 
 * Manuscript. 
 
125 
 
 In 1727 some of the gentlemen of the neigh- 
 bourhood filed four bills in chancery, " to per- 
 ec petuate the testimony of ancient witnesses 
 " in support of the inner bounds; to which Mr. 
 " Pitt answered, and witnesses were examined 
 " on both sides. " * 
 
 In the mean time, an action was brought 
 against the two gentlemen before mentioned 
 and others for hunting and killing a deer. 
 " The killing being on the ground, for a tres- 
 <c pass on which, Mr. Fownes had formerly ob- 
 t€ tained judgment on Mr. Freke's keepers. " 
 
 On the trial a great number of witnesses were 
 examined ; but at length a verdict was given in 
 favour of the owner of the chace. 
 
 This transaction is variously related. The 
 history of Dorset states, that cc at the assi- 
 ee sesat Dorchester, July 29th 1732, after a full 
 u hearing before Mr. Justice Denton, which 
 t( lasted fourteen hours, the cause between 
 ec George Pitt jun. of Shroton, esq. owner of 
 " the chace, plaintiff, and Thomas Fownes and 
 " Henry Bovver esqrs. defendants, concerning 
 " the plaintiff's right of chace on the defendant's 
 " lands, in Stepleton and Iwerne Minster, was 
 <( determined. The jury, consisting entirely of 
 [ ( gentlemen, nine of whom had before taken a 
 
 view 
 
 * Manuscript. 
 
126 
 
 et view of the places in question, pursuant to a, 
 <c rule of court, gave a verdict for, the plain- 
 
 " tiff. \; * 
 
 On the other side it is stated " the jury had 
 fC an imperfect view of the premises, being 
 " shewn only the places where the supposed 
 e< trespass was committed, and some part of the 
 cc out-grounds, but never going into the chace ; 
 " ( within the inner bounds ; ) wherefore they 
 <c could not see the difference between the fen- 
 fC ces within the chace and those out of it, 
 <€ which is very obvious. '* f 
 
 It is said farther, that the chief stress was 
 laid on this view of the places ; the evidence on 
 each side being so contradictory, that the jury 
 could believe neither ; and that the records were 
 siot much regarded. J 
 
 It is related, cc that after this verdict, lord 
 " Arundell, Mr. Fownes, Mr. Ryves, Mr. Har- 
 t€ bin,, Mr. Bower, and others, determined to 
 *' try the bounds with Mr. Pitt, and filed a bill 
 '* in chancery for that purpose ; but before the 
 " cause was brought to an issue, Mr. Bower 
 " died. He being a gentleman at the bar, and 
 " the whole management of the cause having 
 <c been left to him, none of the parties under- 
 te took it, and the suit dropped, " § 
 
 A 
 
 * Hutchins. -f Manuscript. % Ibid; § Ibid. 
 
 MM 
 
m 
 
 A particular account of the evidence on file 
 trial and to the depositions would be too long 
 for insertion here; and is the less necessary, as 
 no instances appear therein of convictions of 
 land owners, for killing or hunting deer on their 
 grounds, Of those which were proved, those 
 of Watts and Harvey were quashed ; — thos^ of 
 Tucker aud Harding were for pursuing within 
 the smaller bounds, as were of Lemon, J. Hard- 
 ing, and Ralph; — of Feltham, for killing c: a 
 "hunted deer ;" — of King and Cook in Manwood 
 coppice, ( formerly declared to be in the chace ;) 
 — of Maidment and Crouch, in Chettered walk, 
 ( a separate chace by prescription;) — ofSoper 
 for having a deer in his house, and of Peters 
 for carrying nets. Only about half a dozen 
 more convictions are ascertained; viz. for kill- 
 ing in Gunville park, Hill coppice, or without 
 mention of place. Such was the slender evidence 
 of that kind produced in favour of "the larger 
 ' "bounds;" and these few prosecutions were 
 mostly of noted deer stealers. The rest of the 
 evidence of the plaintiffconsisted chiefly of the 
 opinions of individuals respecting the bounds, or 
 of hearsay evidence; except that some keepers 
 stated that they had ranged and killed on the 
 disputed grounds. To this is opposed the tes- 
 timony of many other persons, that the keep- 
 ers 
 
128 fr6«r>e 
 ers were not allowed or used there except by 
 permission, that deer were killed by land own- 
 ers and others, with impunity; and that the 
 earl of Shaftesbury and Mr . Preke had admit- 
 ted that they had no claim on those grounds, &c. 
 
 In fact, the evidence varied much, according to 
 the bias of the witnesses : but in several respects 
 there was a material difference between the 
 ec out-grounds" and the undisputed chace. It 
 was deposed that in the latter, the woodmen 
 were summoned to the chace courts;* — they were 
 not allowed to cut the vert and browse, — to cut 
 the wood on the borders of the copses,— to plash 
 the live wood,— or to make ditches to the copse 
 fences. The keepers admitted the deer to the 
 copses after three years growth;— they gave an 
 account at the courts, of the deer killed or dead 
 within the small bounds;— ff a promoter" (or hay- 
 ward ) pounded trespassing sheep ; — the mea- 
 sure of woodland was 18 feet to the rod,, except 
 in Chettered, a separate chace, &c. whereas on 
 the out-grounds these practices were omitted or 
 differently conducted, in general ; the measure 
 was only 16^ feet, and no pounding of sheep 
 was practised ; there being no such pound ex- 
 cept within the inner bounds. Fires also were 
 lighted at times on the downs, to prevent the 
 deer straying beyond those bounds on that side. 
 
 On 
 
129 
 
 On the trial, the evidence respecting the vio- 
 lent conduct of the land owners in " the out- 
 <c grounds/' had perhaps, a share in influencing 
 the jury, in addition to their first impressions 
 on the view : some check might be necessary ; 
 bat the verdict, so far as it went to deprive the 
 owners of lands of their right of pin lieu, was a 
 contradiction to the statute de foresta, and to 
 the proceedings thereupon, which had long ago 
 set aside the arbitrary pretensions^ of prince 
 John, and of Richard and Gilbert de Clare. 
 
 Later transactions afford nothing decisive re- 
 specting the question of the bounds. In 1749, 
 " Mr. Pitt by his agents made a forcible entry 
 fC upon the fences of Gunville park, belonging 
 ' c to Mr. Harbin, alledging that they were not 
 C{ proper, that the deer of the chace frequently 
 ir went in, and could not return. " * Some re- 
 spectable testimony confirms this account-, and 
 adds that Mr. Harbin found his mistake, f and 
 did not defend his cause, which therefore was 
 given against him by a verdict at Dorchester; 
 but other accounts alledge that the counsel on 
 the circuit were retained on the opposite side. J 
 
 fi In 1788 an action was brought by lprcL^Tv) 
 <c Rivers, to try the right of a general hunt du- 
 C( ring the sitting of a court ( of the manor ) 
 
 (i there 
 
 * Hutching, f See page ico. ^Letter of "a. Chapman Esq. 
 
 T 
 
130 
 
 "'there; and in 1789 a verdict was given in his 
 " favour. " * This privilege was claimed by 
 the lord of the manor for himself and tenants, 
 and to this extent was admitted by the owner 
 of the chace ; but one Roberts, who was not a 
 tenant, killing deer, the action was brought 
 against him; — and the hunt being renewed next 
 year, contrary to express prohibition, he was 
 not defended by lord Amndell, and \wu» %&&- 
 victcd. i#<x* if <y w^ris <* y**- **-** ' /ti**±s 
 
 In 1789 a negotiation was commenced for 
 the disfranchisement of the chace ; in which 
 lord Rivers consented that lord Temple should 
 open the business to his agents and the gentle- 
 men interested, f 
 
 A committee of proprietors was therefore ap- 
 pointed, of which Anthony Chapman esq. of 
 Gunville was chairman, and a correspondence 
 was held between him and lord Rivers; but 
 the proceedings of the committee were dilato- 
 ry, the overtures of the chairman inexplicit, 
 and his remarks in great measure irrelevant; 
 whilst the replies of the proprietors were 
 prompt, and constantly expressed a desire of 
 receiving a direct offer. At length, in Septem- 
 ber 1809, the chairman, by letter, intimated a 
 proposal of £200 a year, to lord Rivers; but 
 
 the 
 
 * Htitcfclns; f Authentic Acpunf. 
 
 
131 
 
 the lowness of this offer, and the illtimed obser- 
 vations which accompanied it, offended the lat- 
 ter, and the negotiation was broken off. It ap- 
 peared from lord Rivers' s steward, that no less 
 than a sum of £1000 a year, and a park round 
 Rushmore lodge, would be esteemed a sufficient 
 compensation for relinquishing the chace. 
 
 An account of this negotiation was published 
 by lord Rivers, entitled cc An Authentic Ac- 
 (C count, " &c. containing the correspondence, 
 with remarks; which was replied toby a publi- 
 cation entitled li A Letter to the Noblemen aud 
 <c Gentlemen, Proprietors, " &c. by the chair- 
 man of the committee. 
 
 In 1803 another treaty commenced. Some 
 overtures being made to lord Rivers, he renew- 
 ed the offer of parting with the chace, for £1000 
 per annum, and a park of the value of £250 
 per annum : but as he had purchased some 
 woods near Rushmore, he offered to accept a 
 park near West Lodge, The committee of pro- 
 prietors consented to treat on those terms ; but 
 on account of the difficulty of procuring the 
 lands required, the agreement was not effected. 
 
 Thus, the obstacles to the disfranchisement 
 are great. It is possible that the noble proprie- 
 tor, for the removal of the incitement afforded 
 by the chace to immorality and violence, and 
 
 for 
 
1st 
 
 for the benefit ef the public and 6£ the revenue,- 
 as well as to the owners of lands, by the increase 
 of produce, and the employment of a great num- 
 ber of additional hands in cultivation, &c. may 
 be induced to accept of other remuneration 
 than land to his parks: in such case, the land- 
 holders will scarcely allow the delay of so desi- 
 rable an agreement, from a comparatively small 
 difference in terms. The variety of tenure, and 
 number of persons and of parishes, may occa- 
 sion some difficulties; but not greater than have 
 been surmounted in other cases. In the mean 
 time it is desirable that the extent of the chace 
 and of its privileges should be ascertained, that 
 the chief motives for dispute and litigation may 
 be removed. Towards this, the object of the 
 present compilation is not so much to give a de- 
 cisive opinion, as to enable persons to judge for 
 themselves by a connected view of the subject, 
 instead of toiling through the mass of confusion 
 and contradiction that has heretofore appeared. 
 
 >-" Si quid novisti rectius istis, 
 
 '* Candid us imperii. " 
 
 F I N I S . 
 
 i'lintert by E. Neaye, Irjiilingfiaiu. 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 iPage 10, line 15, read its swainmote. 
 
 10, 25, read were in England. 
 
 34, 20, transpdse Charter and Charts. 
 
 46, *26, read accommodation. 
 
 93, 10, bead all excepting Purbeck. 
 
 117, last, read extremely. 
 1 30, 16, read proprietors of lands. 
 
 1 30, 23 , read p roprietor of the chace. 
 
 130, 26, read 1790. 
 
 ftote. Sir Wm. Blackstone states that there was only one charter 
 tffjohn: the forests being included. If so, the passages in 
 pages 34 and 52 respecting Henry I. require correction. 
 Doubtless the disforestations were of lands afforested by 
 Henry the sec0nds.n6.hh successors. 
 
 JJ«™» BDE5E2 L * 
 
LB/V(