| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:The 1871 Act is Law | |
| Posted by: | Nicholas Evans | |
| Date/Time: | 29/04/18 09:24:00 |
| I think it is useful to look at the actual wording in the Act, which I don’t think could be clearer: 34. The Conservators shall at all times keep the common open, uninclosed, and unbuilt on, except as regards such parts thereof as are at the passing of this Act inclosed or built on, and except as otherwise in this act expressed, and shall by all lawful means prevent, resist, and abate all encroachments and attempted encroachments on the commons, and protect the commons and preserve them as open spaces, and resist all proceedings tending to the inclosure or appropriation for any purpose of any part thereof. 35. It shall not be lawful for the Conservators, except in this Act expressed, to sell, lease, grant, or in any manner dispose of any part thereof. 36. The Conservators shall at all times preserve, as far as may be, the natural aspect and state of the common, and to that end shall protect the turf, gorse, heather, timber, and other trees, shrubs and brushwood thereon. As an aside, you may wonder how the Conservators were allowed to build the tarmac access road for the new school. The High Court said they could do so, citing a paragraph in Clause 39 that reads as follows: (The Conservators shall have the right) 39. - To make and maintain such roads and ways as may be in their judgement necessary or proper. I never thought it was “necessary or proper” to build a tarmac road to facilitate a development adjacent but not actually on the Common, but obviously the Judge and the then Conservators did. I respect but do not agree with that decision. I also think it is quite clear that the act does not allow the granting of a lease and planning permission to the Spencer for their beer garden, however popular that might be. Nick |