Mr. Elsee also pointed out to Mr. Driver, that no credit was given him for the dung he had already carted on to the farm; to which Mr. Driver replied, _he supposed_ it was left to set off against the wheat straw which had been carried away; and being told that there was an excess of 130 ton over what was necessary in return for the wheat straw, he _very significantly remarked_, _that the umpire had a different way of estimating dung to what he had ever seen before_; as he called 40 feet of spit dung a load, while he (the Surveyor) had never heard of a load being more than 27 feet. Mr. Elsee reminded him, the weight of dung, or the load, depended upon the weight of the hay or straw carried off; that if one horse was sent to market with 36 trusses of straw, which weighed 11 _cwt._ 2 _qrs._ 8 _lb._ then 16 feet of good spit dung, weighing 12 _cwt._ would be an equivalent load; and that if 54 trusses weighing 17 _cwt._ 1 _qr._ 12 _lb._ were taken away, 24 feet of dung, weighing 18 _cwt._ would be an equivalent, and the same for a load of hay. Or if 108 trusses of straw, or one ton of hay, were carried, 27 feet of spit dung was the fair return, as bringing back _weight for weight_ was all that could in justice be required, by any landlord, while not one in a hundred obtained anything like so much. To all this Mr. Driver could make no sort of reply, and Mr. Elsee left him, after censuring the conduct of the arbitrators, who, _after charging so much for their trouble_, had settled nothing, not even making a list of the fixtures, nor measuring the hay, nor crediting the amount of dung carried, nor giving him any opportunity of stating his own case. The award did not even state _the quantity of dung that remained to be brought_, or it would have been carted at once, being quite ready for that purpose. Mr. Elsee was therefore at a loss how to act, and imagined the only way left for him was to carry the hay, and let the quantity of dung to be brought in return, be assessed by a sheriff’s jury, before which he might prove the circumstances of the case;—but the servants of the crown are not to be bound by the ordinary forms of law. They have more effective instruments in their hands, and instead of being called before a sheriff’s jury, Mr. Elsee was served with an exchequer process by no less a personage than his Majesty’s attorney general; and an office copy of the process cost _eighteen pounds_! in which it was set forth a dozen times over, that he had taken from Havering Park farm 300 loads of hay, and had not brought back 600 loads of dung, for which the crown laid its damages at _six hundred pounds_.