The Queen against the Inhabitants of the Isle of Ely
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1850 |
| Date | 01 January 1850 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 117 E.R. 671
QUEEN'S BENCH.
S. C. 4 New Sess. Cas. 222; 19 L. J. M. C. 223; 14 Jur. 956. Referred to, R. v. Kitchener, 1873, L. R. 2 C. C. 93. Applied R. v. Southampton County, 1886, 17 Q. B. D. 435. Not applied, Attorney General v. Oxford Canal Navigation, 1903, 1 L. G. R. 289. Considered and applied, Hertfordshire County Council v. New River Company, [1904] 2 Ch. 520.
the queen against the inhabitants of the isle of ely. (cases of old bedfobd bridge and new bedford bridge.) 1850. Indictment against the inhabitants of the Isle of Ely, for non-repair of a public bridge in the Isle of Ely and county of Cambridge; averring that they were liable, but stating no specific reason. Plea: that the bridge was in a public highway over an artificial cut made in the highway by the adventurers for draining the Bedford Level; that the bridge was rendered necessary by the cut, for the purpose of the highway; that the cut was made for the benefit of the lands of the adventurers, and was maintained by the adventurers until stat. 15 Car. 2, c. 17, when the property in the cut and its banks, and in the bridge, and in the lands benefited by the cut, which lands had previously been vested in the adventurers, became vested in the Corporation of Conservators of the Fens; and the cut was, from that time, maintained by the corporation for their own benefit; and they have repaired arid been liable to repair the bridge. On demurrer, Held : 1. That the count was good, as the Court must take judicial notice that the Isle of Ely was a division of a county in the nature of a riding, and, as such, primft facie liable to repair bridges within It. 2. That the plea was good, as it sufficiently shewed that the corporation were bound to repair the bridge rendered necessary by the cut maintained for their benefit. [S. C. 4 New Sess. Caa. 222; 19 L. J. M. C. 223 ; 14 Jur. 956. Referred to, It. v. Kitchener, 1873, L. R. 2 C. C. 93. Applied, R. v. Southampton County, 1886, 17 Q. B. D. 435. Not applied, Attorney General v. Oxford Canal Navigation, 1903* 1 L. G. R. 289. Considered and applied, Hertfordshire County Council v. New River Company, [1904] 2 Ch. 520.] Two indictments were preferred against the inhabitants of the Isle of Ely. The pleadings on the first were as follows. First count: that a certain [828] common and public bridge, situate in the parish of Mepal, in the Isle of Ely and county of Cambridge, over a river there called the Old Bedford River, and on a common Queen's highway there for all the liege subjects, &c., was in great decay, &c.; against the form of tha statute, &c ; and that the said bridge is not within any city or town corporate; and that the inhabitants of the Isle of Ely the said bridge ought to repair, &c. when^ &c., according to the form of the statute, &c. Tbe second count described the bridge as "a certain other public bridge over a certain other river called the Old Bedford River," the said bridge being situate, &c., "and now being a caramon Queen's highway," &c.; and did not differ in any other material respect from the first count. Plea: to 1st count, by two of the inhabitants of the Isle of Ely, on behalf of themselves and the rest of the inhabitants, except the Corporation of the Governor, Bailiffs, and Commonalty of the Company of Conservators of the Great Level of the Fens: that the said Old Bedford River is situated within the Great Level of the Fens, now commonly called the Bedford Level, and is an artificial drain or river; and that the same was long heretofore, to wit on, &c., cut and made by certain persons, to wit one Francis Earl of Bedford and certain others, adventurers for the purpose of draining the Great Level of the Fens, since deceased, then being the owners of divers large (a) Reported by C. Blackburn, Esq. 672 THE QUEEN V. THE TSLE OF ELY is Q. B. 829. quantities of land within the said Great Level then requiring to be drained of water, for the purpose of draining the said Great Level and the said quantities of land, parcel thereof, so vested in them as aforesaid, and for their own use, benefit, profit and convenience, and for the furthering of the purposes of the said adventurers, and under [829] and by virtue of certain powers and authorities vested in them by and under certain commissions of aewers theretofore granted, and certain other powers and authorities in them vested ; and that the said earl and the said adventurers, under the powers and authorities aforesaid, long heretofore, to wit on, &c., constructed and erected the said bridge upon and over the said drain or river so before then made by hem in manner and for the purposes aforesaid, and nob upon the ancient course or channel of any stream or river, no bridge being there before or required there until the making of the said drain or river by the said earl and the said adventurers as aforesaid ; but the said drain or river having, at the time of the making of tha same, intersected and interrupted and rendered wholly impassable a certain public highway existing, at the time of the making of the said drain or river, in and along the line of the said bridge, and on which highway, from time whereof, &c. until the making of the said drain or river, all the subjects, &c. (averring right of way with cattle and carriages): and, it having thereupon and thereby become the duty of the said earl and the said adventurers to construct and erect a bridge over the said drain or river, the bridge in the first count mentioned was by them erected and constructed aa aforesaid, in the same place where the said highway before the making of the said drain or river was and had been for all the time last aforesaid, and as a convenient, fit and usual means of passage for the subjects, &c. along the portion of the highway so intersected and interrupted by the said drain or river as aforesaid, and to enable them to pass, &c. as they otherwise might, would or ought of right [830] to have done. And that, from and after the alteration of the said highway in manner and to the extent as aforesaid continually hitherto, the said highway has been carried and has gone, and is now carried and now goes, unto and over the said bridge : and that, after the making of the said drain or river, and construction of the said bridge, as aforesaid, stat. 15 Car. 2, c. 17, was passed, entitled an "Act for Settling the Draining of the Great Level of the Fens called Bedford Level:" and by the said Act the said Corporation of the Governor, &c. of the Company of Conservators of the Great Level, &c. became and was incorporated, and the said drain or river, and the banks thereof, and the said bridge, and divers large quantities of land, parcel of the said Great Level, being the same lands of which the said Francis Earl of Bedford and the said other adventurers are hereinbefore mentioned to have been the owners, and for the purpose of draining which the said drain or river was so made as aforesaid, then became and were vested in the said corporation according to the provisions of the said Act. The plea then set forth several of the enactments of stat. 15 Car. 2, c. 17 (printed in the ordinary collections of the statutes). Those enactments, so far as they are material, are sufficiently stated in the judgment. The plea averred the identity of the 83,000 acres by that Act vested in the corporation and the lands in the plea mentioned as belonging to the adventurers, and for the purpose of draining which the Old Bedford River, was made; and then proceeded to aver : That, before and at the time of the making and passing of the Act, the bridge, having been rendered necessary and erected as aforesaid, eristed over the Old [831]...
To continue reading
Request your trial