Sarah
Hawkins Genealogy Site
Newspaper
Articles
Taunton Courier and Western Advertiser. Wednesday 28 Jan 1846
Page 7 Column 3
RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH HUNT'S COURT. - The trial of the question, as to the right of way for carriages through Hunt's Court, in this town, came on at the Somerset Sessions, held at Wells, on the 7th inst. C. A. MOODY, Esq., presided as Chairman. The case stood as that of “The Queen, on the prosecution of William BEADON, jun. Esq., against Sarah CHORLEY, and Robert ENGLAND, for a nuisance.” Mr. FITZHERBERT, stated the case for the prosecution. The defendants are malsters, millers, and bakers, carrying on a considerable business, and have been in the habit, for many years, of bringing up flour through the Court, in carts and waggons, and while such vehicles were there, it was impossible for anyone to pass them, the road-way being so narrow. The learned counsel stated, that accidents were continually occurring. Between fifty and sixty years ago, there were posts to prevent any one from driving down a cart; but these had been long removed. The nuisance being considered by the prosecutor intolerable, had led to the present action, with a view to its abatement. On a previous prosecution, the defendants had consented to pay £50 towards the costs, and to sell such a width of their land, as would make a sufficient way, but they had since run from their agreement. After the examination of several witnesses, Mr. STONE addressed the jury for the defendants, and denounced the prosecution in the strongest terms. He said the defendants were to have £400 for the end of an old house, which overhung the Court, and they were also to have a better and wider road to their premises, and until these terms were complied with, they were not to be required to surrender a tittle of their property or rights. The evidence of the prosecutor himself, would show that he had not performed his part of the agreement. The prosecutor however intimated, that an adjoining house, belonging to the defendant's relative (Miss CHORLEY,) was included in that agreement, as part of the property purchased. The agreement had been produced – it spoke for itself, and the opinion of the Court was clearly in favour of the defendants, who had ever been ready to abide by it to the very letter, and had, for the sake of peace, publicly consented to give up the house in dispute for £60, only one third of its value. The learned counsel very humorously addressed the Court, in reference to the alleged nuisance, and stated that no accident within the memory of man, had occurred on the road used by the defendants. Mr. STONE most energetically addressed the jury for three hours, after which the learned Chairman summed up, and the jury returned a Verdict for the Defendants. This case occupied the Court from Wednesday until Friday.