Steel against Houghton et Uxor
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1788 |
| Date | 01 January 1788 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 126 E.R. 32
IN THE COURTS OF COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
Dictum approved, Neill v. Devonshire, 1882, 8 App. Cas. 156; Smith v. Andrews, [1891] 2 Ch. 703; Hanbury v. Jenkins, [1901] 2 Ch. 420; Simpson v. Attorney-General, [1904] A. C. 491.
steel against houghton et uxor. 1788. [Dictum approved, Neill v. Devonshire, 1882, 8 App. Gas. 156; Smith v. Andrews, [1891] 2 Ch. 703 ; Haribwy v. Jenkins, [1901] 2 Ch. 420; Simpson v. Attorney-General, {1904] A. C. 491.] No person has, at common law, a right to glean in the harvest field. Neither have the poor of a parish legally settled (as such) any such right. Treipais for breaking and entering the closes of the plaintiff, at Timworth in the county of Suffolk, treading down grass and corn, &c. and taking and carrying away corn, barley in the straw, &c. done by the1 wife. Flea.-Justification, that the premises had been sown with barley, and the crop lately reaped, and carried off the land ; " Wherefore the defendants, being parishioners and inhabitants of the said parish of Tim worth, legally settled therein, and being poor and necessitous, and indigent persons, after the crop growing in the year aforesaid, in and upon the said close, in whicb, &c. had been reaped, cut down, taken and carried away by the said plaintiff from and off the said close, iu which, &o. to wit, at the said times when, &c. the said Mary (the defendant) entered into the said close, in (a) [Dub, Vincent v. Holt, 4 Taunt. 452. Where it was held that a solicitor of the Equity aide of the Exchequer is not entitled to practise in Chancery.] 1RBL.BI. STEEL t'. HOUGHTON 33 which, &c. to glean and gather the straw containing ears of barley, remaining and being dispersed and scattered abroad in the aaid close, in which &c. after the said crop had been so reaped, cut down, taken and carried away as aforesaid, being the gleanings of the said crop so remaining dispersed and scattered abroad in and upon the said closej in which, &c." To this there was a general demurrer. This cause was argued in Easter term 1787, by Le Blanc, Serjt., for tbe plaintiff, and Lawrence, Serjt., for the defendants; [52] and on a second argument in Trinity term 1787, by Bolton, Serjt., for the plaintiff, and Eooke, Serjt., for the defendants. These arguments were fully entered into by the Court, who in this term gave judgement as follows: lord loughborough :-When the claim of a right to glean was first brought before the Court, it waa laid indefinitely to be in poor, necessitous, and indigent persons, I was then of opinion against the claim. 1st, I thought it inconsistent with the nature of property which imports exclusive enjoyment. 2dly, Destructive of the peace and good order of society, and amounting to a general vagrancy. 3dly, Incapable of enjoyment, since nothing which is not inexhaustible, like a perennial stream, can be capable of universal promiscuous enjoyment. This right is now claimed by poor persons legally settled; but in this form also it is equally liable to objection. There can be no right of this sort enjoyed in common, except where there is no cultivation, or where that right is supported by joint labour; but here neither of those criteria will apply. The farmer is the sole cultivator of the land, and the gleaners gather each for himself, without any regard either to joint labour or public advantage. If this custom were part of the common law of the realm, it would prevail in every part of the kingdom, and be of general and uniform practice; but in some districts it is wholly unknown, and in others variously modified and enjoyed. Although the division of parishes ia of very high antiquity, yet a right to a maintenance by settlement was first introduced by the statute of the 43 of Eliz. In ancieril times tithes were divided into three parts-the first for the maintenance of religion, the second for the church, and the third for the poor; but the third division was a matter of charity rather than of right. When by the second Lateran Council, in the 12th century (a.d. 1139), tithes were appropriated to particular parishes, they were not conaidered as making in any part a provision for the poor, which might be claimed as a right Although the law of Moses has been cited for a foundation for this claim, the political institutions of the Jews cannot be obligatory on us, since even under the Christian dispensation the relief of the poor is not a legal obligation, but a religious duty. [63J The authority in our law upon which the right to glean is supported, ia a dictum of Sir Matthew Hale, in the Trials per Pais; but though I entertain the highest respect for the authority and character of that great Judge, yet it would be doing injustice to bia memory, to take every hasty expression of his at Nisi Prius as a serious and deliberate opinion. In truth, that dictum imports no more than that the question could not be raised without being put upon the record. The consequences which would arise from this custom being established as a right, would be injurious to the poor themselves. Their sustenance can only arise from the surplus of productive industry ; whatever is a charge on industry, is a very improvident diminution of the fund for that sustenance; for the profits of the farmer being lessened, he would be the less able to contribute his share to the rates of the parish ; and thns the poor, from the exercise of this supposed right in the autumn, would be liable to starve in the spring. gould, J.-Supposing a general right of leasing (lesing) in England, I think it must be in the case stated in these pleadings, which is after the crop is reaped and carried away, and for the poor and indigent parishioners. If there be such a general right, it must De by the common law of the land; and though it should be admitted that in certain places there may be particular regulations of its exercise by custom, that will not derogate from the general right, any more than special modes of descent C. P. iv.-2 84 STEEL I'. HOOGHTON 1 H. BL. M. in aertain districts will derogate from the course of descent by the common law, which will be intended to prevail, unless a custom is shewn to the contrary. In the case of Worlledge v. Manning (a)1, in this Court, it was well observed by my brother Walker (a very learned and accurate...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Le Roux v Minister van Bantoe-Administrasie en - Ontwikkeling
...ontslag is egter nie sondermeer 'n injuria of contumelia nie. Sien Jockie v Meyer, 1945 AD 354; McKerron, The Law of Delict, 6de uitg., bl. 51 e.v. 'n Wederregtelike ontslag gaan nie G noodwendig gepaard met injuria nie. 'n Eis gebaseer op injuria kan in dieselfde aksie met 'n eis vir skade......
-
Smit v Van Niekerk, NO en 'n Ander
...van het Nederlands Burgerlijk Recht, 5de deel, bl. 272; Van Bemmelen, Strafvordering, 6de uitg., bl. 172; R. v Parker, 1965 (4) SA te bl. 51; C. v C., (1946) 1 All E.R 562; Enoch Totten v United States, 90 - 93 U.S. Supreme Court Reports, bl. 605; Wigmore, Evidence G (McNaughton se hersiene......
-
Mkwanazi v Van der Merwe and Another
...W.L.D. 6 op bl. 23; Arendse v Maher, 1936 T.P.D. 162 op bl. 165; Lazarus v Rand Steam Laundries (1946) (Pty.) A Ltd., 1952 (3) SA 49 (T) op bl. 51; Enslin v Meyer, 1960 (4) SA 520 (T) op bl. 523. 'n Dergelike voorbehoud is in hierdie Hof gehuldig. Kyk bv. Versfeld v South African Citrus Far......
-
S v Burger
...his wrongdoing by conspiracy with others, is just as much guilty of an offence as if he waits until after proceedings are actually pending" (bl. 51). In R. v Field and Others, (1964) 3 All E. R. 270, vind ons 'n tweede geval van die aflê van valse verklarings aan die polisie. Dit het plaasg......
-
Table of Cases
...Food and Rural Affairs [2018] EWHC 1963 (Admin) 26 Stacey v Sherrin (1913) 29 TLR 555, KBD 10, 58 Steel v Houghton (1788) 1 Hy Bl 51, 126 ER 32 26 Steel v Prickett (1819) 2 Stark 463, 171 ER 706, [1814-23] All ER Rep 537, Ct of KB 46 Stevens v Dorset County Council (16 March 1999) Co/2149/9......