The Mayor and Burgesses of Lyme Regis against-Henley, Esquire
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1832 |
| Date | 01 January 1832 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 110 E.R. 29
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
S. C. in Common Pleas, 5 Bing. 91; 3 Moo. & P. 278; L. J. C. P. O. S. 222: in House of Lords, 2 Cl. & F. 331; 8 Bli. N. S. 690; 1 Bing. N. C. 222; 1 Scott, 29. See the note, 5 E. R. 1097; 6 E. R. 1180, to which add Bathurst Borough v. Macpherson, 1879, 4 App. Cas. 267; Simpson v. Attorney-General, [1904] A. C. 491.
the mayor and burgesses of lyme regis against henley, esquire (a). (In Error.) 1832. By letters patent, the King granted to the Mayor and Burgesses of Lyme Eegis, the borough or town so called, and also the pier, quay, or cob, with all liberties and profits, &c. belonging to the same, and remitted also twenty-seven marks of their ancient rent, payable to the King; and he willed, that the mayor and burgesses and their successors, all and singular the buildings, banks, sea snores, &c. within the said borough, or thereto belonging, or situate between the same and the sea, and also the said pier, &c. at their own costs and charges thenceforth for ever, should repair, maintain, and support, as often as it should be necessary. Held, first, that the Mayor and Burgesses of Lyme having accepted the charter became legally bound to repair the buildings, banks, sea shores, and mounds. Secondly, that this obligation being one which concerned the public, an indictment would lie, in case of non-repair, against the mayor and burgesses for their general default, and an action on the case for a direct and particular damage sustained in consequence by an individual. [S. C. in Common Pleas, 5 Bing. 91; 3 Moo. & P. 278; 6 L. J. C. P. 0. S. 222: in House of Lords, 2 Cl. & F. 331; 8 Bli. N. S. 690; 1 Bing. N. C. 222 ; 1 Scott, 29. See the note, 5 E. E. 1097; 6 E. E. 1180, to which add Bathurst Borough v. Macpherson, 1879, 4 App. Cas. 267; Simpson v. Attorney-General, [1904] A. C. 491.] Declaration stated that on the 20th of June, 10 Car. 1, to wit, at, &c., that King by his letters patent did (amongst other things) give, grant, and confirm to the Mayor and Burgesses of Lyme Eegis, and their successors, the borough or town of Lyme Eegis, and also all that the building called the pier, quay, or cob of Lyme Eegis, with all and singular the liberties, privileges, profits, franchises, and immunities, to the same town or to the said quay or cob in any wise belonging, to have, hold, &c. to the said mayor and burgesses, and their successors, to the only and proper use and behoof of them and their successors in fee farm for ever; yielding of fee farm to our said late King Charles the First, his heirs and successors, of and for the aforesaid borough or town, with its liberties and [78] franchises, as in the said letters patent was in that behalf mentioned; and our said late King did further, pardon, remise and release to the mayor and burgesses, and their successors for ever, twenty-seven marks, parcel of thirty-two marks of the farm of the same borough, and the liberties thereof, anciently by letters patent, or in any other manner due; our said lord the King, willing not that the same mayor and burgesses, or their successors, should be charged (a) This ease was decided in last Michaelmas term. 30 MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF LYME REGIS V. HENLEY 3 B. & AD. 79. of the further portion of the aforesaid farm besides the said five marks, but that they should be acquitted and for ever discharged of the twenty-seven ; and that the mayor and burgesses, or their successors, all and singular the buildings, banks, sea shores, and all other mounds and ditches within the aforesaid borough of Lyme, or in any wise belonging or appertaining, or situate between the same borough and the sea, and also the said building there called the pier quay or the cob, at their own costs and expenses thenceforth from time to time for ever should well and sufficiently repair, maintain, and support as often as it should be necessary or expedient: and the King then granted that the mayor should be clerk of the market, and that the mayor and burgesses should have the fines and amerciaments forfeited before the clerk of the market, and should have full power and authority, and licence, from time to time for ever, to dig stones and rocks in auy places whatsoever within the borough and parish of the town aforesaid, out of the sea and on the sea-shore in the borough and parish aforesaid, adjoining to the said borough or town, for the reparation and amendment of the port and building aforesaid, called the pier quay or cob, and other necessary reparations and common works of the same town and borough, which said letters patent the mayor and [79] burgesses aforesaid duly accepted, and the same thence hitherto have been and still are one of the governing charters of the said borough ; and the said mayor and burgesses from thence hitherto have held and enjoyed all the benefits, profits, and advantages granted to them by the said letters patent. The declaration then stated that before and at the time of the committing of the grievances, &c. the plaintiff was lawfully possessed of certain messuages, closes, &e. in the borough aforesaid, and was the reversioner of certain other messuages, &c. there, all which were abutting on and near the sea-shore. That before and at the time of the sealing of the letters patent, and acceptance thereof as aforesaid, and at the time of the committing of the grievances, &c. divers, to wit, &c., buildings, banks, sea shores, and mounds had been and were respectively standing and being within the borough of Lyme Kegis aforesaid, and divers, to wit, &c. other buildings, banks, shores, and mounds had been and respectively were belonging and appertaining to the said borough, and divers, to wit, &c. other buildings, banks, sea shores, and mounds had been and were respectively standing, being, and situate between the said borough and the sea; all which said buildings, &c. were near to and then and there constituted and formed a protection and safeguard, and still of right ought to form and be a protection and safeguard to the messuages, cottages, buildings, and closes of land, with the appurtenances before mentioned, and then and there prevented and still of right ought to prevent the sea from running or flowing in, upon, against, or over the said messuages, &e., and all which buildings, banks, &c. the defendants at the times of committing of the said grievances were by virtue of the letters patent, and their acceptance thereof, [80] liable to repair, and ought at their own proper costs and charges, well and sufficiently to have repaired, maintained, and supported, and still are liable, &e. when necessary or expedient, so as to prevent damage or injury to the said messuages, &c. of the plaintiff by the sea. Breach, that the defendants knowing the premises, wrongfully suffered the said buildings, banks, sea shores, and mounds, to be and continue ruinous, prostrate, fallen down, out of repair, and in decay, for want of needful reparation, &c.; that by means of the banks and sea shores being...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Stoughton
...Lindsey. [2 M. & Gr. 175, Priestley v. Fmilds. 2 Scott, N. R. 265, S. C. 5 Bing. 91, Henley v. Mayor of Lyme Regw. 3 M. & P. 110, S. C. 3 B. & Ad. 77, Mayor of Lyme, Regis v. Henley. S. C. in error, 1 Bing. N. R. 222. 1 Scott, 29. 2 01. & F. 931, S. C. in Dom. Proc.l (I) [But the indictment......
-
Coe against Wise, Clerk to the Middle Level Drainage Commissioners
...61), Bex v. The Trustees of (he Weaver Navigation (Id. 70, note (c)), Rex v. Antrobus (2 A. & E. 788), The Mayor of Lyme Regis v. Henley (3 B. & Ad. 77), The Governor of the Bristol Pool- v. Wait (5 A. & E. 1), Beg. v. The Mayor of Liverpool (9 A. & E. 435), Reg. v. The Guardians of the Wal......
-
The Mayor and Burgesses of Lyme Regis, - Plaintiffs (in Error); Henry Hoste Henley, Esq., - Defendant (in Error)
...(in Error) Henry Hoste Henley, Esq.,-Defendant (in Error) Mews' Dig. iv. 577; xii. 672. S.C. 2 C1. & F. 331; and, in Courts below, 3 B. & Ad. 77; 5 Bing. 91; 3 Moo. & P. 278. Discussed in Gibson v. Preston (Mayor of), 1870, L. R. 5 Q. B. 221; Winch v. Thames Conservators, 1872, L. R. 7 C. P......
-
Gibbs and Others v The Trustees of The Liverpool Docks
...them, because they receive a reward for the doing of such duty: Henley v. The Magot and Burgesses of Lyme (5 Bing. 91 ; S. P. in error, 3 B. & Ad. 77). [Williams, J. Do you contend that an action would lie against the trustees of a turnpike road for an accideat arising from the non-repair o......