Statement of Facts, on the Injurious Treatment of J. Elsee, Esq.: Late Tenant of a Considerable Portion of Havering Park Farm, in the Forest of Hainault, in Certain Transactions with the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, and Their Agents; To Which Are Added Notes in Illustration of the Gross Abuses of the Forest Laws.Elsee, John
History
Statement of Facts, on the Injurious Treatment of J. Elsee, Esq.: Late Tenant of a Considerable Portion of Havering Park Farm, in the Forest of Hainault, in Certain Transactions with the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, and Their Agents; To Which Are Added Notes in Illustration of the Gross Abuses of the Forest Laws.
Elsee, John
Elsee, John -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Land tenure -- Great Britain
Mr. Elsee is further charged with being the cause of the suit about the
dung, as he refused to abide by an agreement made between him and Mr.
Ellis in February, 1821, when it was agreed at Mr. Ellis’s house, in the
presence of Mr. W. Masterman, that each should name a friend; _but it was
particularly mentioned that neither Mr. Mee_, _nor Mr. Driver_, _should
have any concern in the business_. Mr. Benton, of Hornchurch, and Mr.
Carter of Chigwell were named, and the White Horse, Romford, fixed as a
place to meet at when convenient. Mr. Ellis wrote a paper, and read it
to Mr. Elsee; it was signed, and put into Mr. Masterman’s hands; in a
short time the meeting was appointed, and the parties, with Mr. Carter
and Mr. Benton, met in Romford market, and were about to go to business,
but Mr. Ellis declined till a friend came whom he expected every minute.
The parties waited more than an hour, _when who should arrive_, _but_ Mr.
Mee _and his Son_! An altercation took place, and the business was not
proceeded in, but no one was to blame for this, except Mr. Ellis, for
introducing Mr. Mee contrary to the stipulation that he was to have
nothing to do in the affair. Mr. Carter and Mr. Elsee were ready to meet
Mr. Benton, but refused to admit Mr. Mee and his Son. Mr. Masterman then
gave the paper they had signed to Mr. Elsee, who handed it to Mr. Ellis,
but the latter handed it back to Mr. Elsee, as his nephew Smith had taken
a copy.
In conclusion we shall merely exhibit at one view the sum total of the
pecuniary injury that Mr. Elsee has sustained directly and indirectly in
these transactions.
The award for Rent was 2066 3 10½
Fixtures, &c. 930 8 0
Loss on Dung only, with Law Expences 1191 10 0
Half of Appraisement, paid Mr. Ellis 14 16 6
£4202 18 4
Received from Mr. Ellis 349 11 0
TOTAL LOSS £3853 7 4½
Such a result requires no comment; but in addition to this plunder of
property, there is the mental torture, and its consequent bodily
suffering, which cannot be expressed.
These circumstances would have been long since laid before the public,
but from various perplexities, and the very disastrous events that arose
out of this ruinous litigation. For some time Mr. Elsee had hopes of
being able to defend himself, as an eminent counsel told him he had a
cause that would triumph in any tribunal besides the chancery side of the
exchequer. And, on the reference, he was assured that nothing could
destroy the decisive proof in his favor. But all this was fallacious!
and only helped to involve him deeper and deeper in expensive
consequences.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account