JB/117/115/003

Click Here To Edit

Case relative to the Tothill Fields Bill

accidental Interests just spoken of, would be more compleatly and irremediably
sacrificed, than upon the Plan here proposed. Those to whom it
is now of the most value would have no greater share than any one of
the thousands to whom, in its present state it is of no value at all.

Another Impediment, which of itself might be sufficient to prevent
any future and different division or Improvement of the Waste, is the
uncertainty that prevails (as already stated) with regard to the proportionable
quantities of Interest, as between the Dean and Chapter as
Lords on the one hand, and the Inhabitants aforesaid as Commoners
on the other — this uncertainty will be continually increasing, while
by encroachments (a practice of which the spot in question affords not
a few examples) the very subject matter itself will be as continually
crumbling away — The benefit reaped by the Dean and Chapter being
nothing and the benefit to the Commoners being in the instance of a
vast majority of them next to nothing, neither party has ever found
any adequate inducement for engaging in that tedious and expensive
course of Litigation, without which, in the ordinary mode
of proceeding, the Uncertainty could not be removed; particularly
the Dean and Chapter, a body composed of Individuals mostly
advanced in life, and whose Interest in the Premises does
not survive to their natural Representatives: and as the subject
matter of Investigation grows less and less, so would the
inducement to engage in it. The present Bill, while for the first
time it gives a value to these Interests, provides a summary
mode of procedure for establishing their relative amount, an
assistance which (it has been already shewn could not with
any degree of consistency be afforded by the Legislature on any
future occasion, if on the present occasion it were to be refused.

Upon the whole therefore the following points will it is
supposed be found sufficiently established.

1. That the Plan itself would, in the opinion of the Legislature
be

say 40: Number of Inhabitants, in St. Margarets 12,000 in St. Johns
8000: (St. Johns appointing 20 out of the 50 joint Vestrymen to 30 of
St. Margarets). Total 20,000 divided by 5 to obtain the number of Householders
4,000.

Identifier: | JB/117/115/003 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 117.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	117	Main Headings	panopticon
Folio number	115	Info in main headings field	case relative to the tothill fields bill
Image	003	Titles
Category	collectanea	Number of Pages	4
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	f13 / f14 / f15 / f16
Penner		Watermarks	g & ep 1794
Marginals		Paper Producer	fr3
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year	1794
Notes public		ID Number	38732
Box Contents