[53]See warrant from Charles II. to the Lord Treasurer Southampton, that “Winefred Wells may take and receive for her own use” King’s Coppice at Fawley, and New Coppice and Iron’s Hill Coppice at Brockenhurst. Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 96, April 1st, 1664, f. 16. Three years before this there had been a petition from a Frances Wells “to bestowe upon her and her children for twenty-one yeares the Moorefall trees in three walks in the New Forest, ... and seven or eight acres of ground, and ten or twelve timber trees, to build a habitation.” The petition was referred to Southampton, who wrote on the margin, “I conceive this an unfit way to gratify this petitioner, for under pretence of such Moorefall trees much waste is often committed.” Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 34, April 2nd, 1661, f. 14. Hence the reason of Charles’s warrant in the case of Winefred Wells, as he knew that the Lord Treasurer was so strongly opposed to any such grants. [54]See the report of Peter Pett, one of the King’s master shipwrights, “Touching the fforests of Shottover and Stowood.” Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 216, f. 56. i. May 10th, 1632. The New Forest, however, seems from this report to have been much better in this respect. [55]See “Necessarie Remembrances concerning the preservation of timber, &c.” Record Office. Domestic Series. Charles I., No. 229, f. 114. Without date, but some time in 1632. [56]9th and 10th of William III., chap. xxxvi, 1693. An abstract of the Act may be found in the _Journals of the House of Commons_, vol. xliv., appendix, pp. 576-578. [57]To show how for years the Forest was neglected and robbed, we find, from a survey made in James I.’s reign, 1608, that there were no less than 123,927 growing trees fit for felling, and decaying trees which would yield 118,000 loads of timber; whilst in Queen Anne’s reign, in 1707, only 12,476 are reported as serviceable. See Fifth Report of the Land Revenue Commissioners, _Journals of the House of Commons_, vol. xliv. p. 563. The waste in James I.’s and Charles I.’s time must have been enormous, for from the “Necessarie Remembrances” before quoted we find that there were not in 1632 much above 2,000 serviceable trees in the whole Forest. [58]See, as before, Fifth Report of the Land Revenue Commissioners, pp. 561, 562, and especially the evidence of the under-steward, Appendix, 583. As far back as February 20th, 1619, we find that James I. gave the Earl of Southampton 1,200_l._ a year as compensation for the damage which the enormous quantity of deer in the Forest caused to his land. Letter from Gerrard to Carleton, Feb. 20, 1618/1619, Record Office. Domestic Series, No. 105, f. 120. Gilpin (vol. ii. pp. 32, 33, third edition) states that in his day two keepers alone robbed the Forest to the value of 50,000_l._