logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

3 Pages123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#1 Posted : 18 December 2010 11:58:55(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

I see from the Buxton Advertiser this week that the Mass Trespass Heritage Centre has been approved.
 
This, of course, refers to the Kinder trespass which involved about 400 trespassers; but we have had our own mass trespass in Whaley Bridge and that one involved between 2 and 3 thousand people.
 
This will be of interest to Buggyite, Jon the Whaley One, the Whaley Water organisers and probably nobody else.
 
I haven’t the time just now but either later today I’ll summarise the events of the trespass and then follow it up with the relevant newspaper articles if I can find them.
 
It’s quite a violent story so probably best if you don’t read it, Fedup.
 
R. S-S
 
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#2 Posted : 18 December 2010 15:25:28(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

For years people had brought water for domestic use from Bings Wood Well. To get to the wood they had to cross the old Cromford and High Peak railway line; in addition the employees of the print works also crossed the lines.
The Railway Company used to close the passage over the line for a period of 24 hours each year to maintain its privacy.
 
The Railway Company stated that it had sole rights since 1830 to the line and the incline which was a regular crossing point and a way down into Whaley.
 
Matters came to a head in 1887 when the Railway Company decided to flex its muscles and brought in 200 men to enforce its rights.
But they had not banked on men coming together from Furness, Bugsworth, Bridgemont, Kettleshulme and so on; the protestors numbered in the thousands.
 
Local tradesmen offered their carts to bring reinforcements from New Mills and Burbage and there was talk of red hot pokers and iron bars being made available.
The people of Whaley Bridge were not about to give up their right to the Wood Well water without a fight.
 
Some 2 years later after the disputes a local businessman decided to ‘take on’ the Railway and this time it would be tested in the High Court.
 
And, of course, the famed Lord of the Manor, Colonel Hall, had to put in his two penneth; along with a variety of witnesses. (I like Colonel Hall by the way).
You should all recognise many familiar Whaley Bridge names.
 
I won’t go into the judgement just now but will show that in newspaper reported form as usual.
 
 
Maybe this topic is another for your website Well Known Norm?
 
R. S-S
 
 
Fedup  
#3 Posted : 18 December 2010 16:35:46(UTC)
Fedup
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 20/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 478

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 2 post(s)

Red hot pokers??? Hmmm.........I'll get the Bells out in readiness!

Edited by user 18 December 2010 16:36:24(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#4 Posted : 19 December 2010 14:30:04(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

The first report of the dispute is from my favourite newspaper: The High Peak News.
Nothing like the rags of today.
 
 
High Peak News
 
9 July 1887
 
the london and north west railway company and the print works employees
 
Much amusement, and in some cases not altogether unattended with strong feeling, was caused on Monday.    The print works hands are in the habit of using, as a near cut to their work, a portion of the High Peak Railway belonging to the London and North Western Railway Company, and on Monday at 12 o’clock, a large body of men placed themselves at various points on the line and prevented anyone crossing except by the bridge near the works.    It appears the Company exercise their right to the line once a year by preventing, for 24 hours, the workpeople or others passing either up, down or over it.    The workpeople object to going round by way of Market Street, and think they can claim a right of road on the line as it has been used for many years.    Bodies of men, women, girls and boys amused themselves nearly the whole of Monday evening by chaffing the “protectors of the road” as they were dubbed.    Some of the men armed themselves with sticks and as they unsuccessfully chased the more daring of the youngsters found food for enjoyment for those who had nothing else to do but watch the manoeuvring.  
At Whaley Bridge the sturdy printers who fetch water from Bing’s Wood for domestic purposes were not to be denied the right of passage though they were commanded not to cross.   
In two instances but little more was wanted in the way of harangue to have created a breach of the peace.   
The proceedings were taken as a joke by a majority of the employees who are in the habit of crossing the line.
 
So first reports seem to suggest nothing more than a little banter between the two sides but soon things were to get a lot more serious.
 
R. S-S
 
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#5 Posted : 20 December 2010 13:40:31(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

And now it is further on in the year and the Railway people really mean business but they hadn’t reckoned on the determination of the Whaleyites.
 
I have 2 newspaper reports of this next event and I’ll post one today and the other one tomorrow.
 
Don’t worry this topic will not take up as much room as ‘Explosions in the Goyt Valley’.
 
By the way someone on the forum asked about the smithy on Old Road; well there is mention of it in these reports.
 
R. S-S
 
The Reporter
 
5 November 1887
 
exciting battle for a right of way
 
whaley bridge v. the railway company
 
Never within the memory of the proverbial oldest inhabitant was a more exciting fracas witnessed in Whaley Bridge than that which took place on Monday night.   
Some months ago we reported the fact of the officials of the London and North Western Railway Company ordering the attempt to prevent the public from passing over a length of the old Cromford and High Peak Railway, which leads from the Buxton and Sheffield highway at Horwich to the “Wood Well” and down to the old “Whaley bridge.”   
This length of road is very extensively used by the workpeople employed at Goyt Mills and at the Printworks, and a length of over 100 yards is claimed as a right of way to the well named above. The attempt made during the summer, as our readers will remember, failed as the people very speedily forced a way, and so the endeavours for the time being were abandoned.
 
As far as we have been able to ascertain, previous attempts have been made by the Company to keep the road closed for twenty-four hours, which, if done, it is asserted will give the Company a right to prosecute trespassers which it does not now possess.   
The old Cromford and High Peak line was opened somewhere about 1830, and from then to the present the public claimed to have used the road down the incline and also to the well. There seems to be something very peculiar about the dispute, and some of the old residents say that the company have no legal right to the land in question, and it is certain that disputes have before time arisen between the company and at least one adjoining landlord as to the ownership of the land adjoining the line.   
It certainly is strange that if the company have a right of preventing the people from using the road they do not take legal proceedings against some one and have the question settled in a court of law. There is also something very remarkable if a right not now possessed by the company can be gained by such means as are being resorted to.   
 
At twelve o’clock on Monday no little commotion was caused by a large number of platelayers and other workmen in the service of the company taking possession of the length of line used, and when the works stopped for dinner the workpeople who wanted to use the road were turned back and laughed at for the attempt they made. The platelayers for the time being were masters of the situation, but they were reminded that the people had not the time then to bother with them, but they would see what could be done when night came. It was said that certain officials laughingly boasted that they would “manage it this time,” and during the whole of the afternoon it appeared as thought they were determined to do so.   
Wagons were placed upon both lines of rails, at each end of the length disputed, and near to J. Proctor’s smithy iron palings were erected. Rails, ropes, timber, chains, &c., were used to barricade the space between the wagons, everything that ingenuity could suggest being done to block the way.    Near the smithy end a brake-van was placed, and the brake was fully secured to prevent the van from being removed.   
The weather was very rough, and the rain descended for hours, but the men stuck to their posts, and fires were lighted and temporary places of shelter erected, so as to make the situation as comfortable as they could, the men no doubt anticipating that they would have to spend the night in keeping watch and ward. During the time that most of the inhabitants were at work and business, the women and children tantalised the men at intervals, but it was not until the works closed that anything serious threatened.   
Between six and seven o’clock the bellman was sent round the district calling upon the people to assemble for the assertion of their rights, and right willingly did they respond to the invitation. Furness Vale, Bridge Mont, Bugsworth, Fernilee, and even Kettleshulme, were largely represented, and when the fracas was at its height the crowd was placed as high in number as being between 2,000 and 3,000.   
The servants of the company had arrived by successive trains, and the number was computed at between 200 and 300 men. When the excitement had got to fever heat, it is said that one of the residents affirmed his belief that the Lord would help them to maintain their rights as the company wanted to take their water, and that they would take their bread if they could. Another invitation having been given, a tremendous rush was made and a regular mêlée ensued. The space between the wagons near the smithy was extremely narrow and some of both sides were subjected to something like a squeezing. One of the Whaleyites was pinned by a stalwart platelayer against the embankment, but another man went to the rescue and the man must have thought that his head was being lifted from his shoulders, as he instantly put up both arms in token of defeat, and shouted “enough.”    Another of the platelayers was lifted bodily and placed on one side, being told calmly that that was his place.    
It was utterly impossible to describe what afterwards took place, every moment the public gained ground, and the instant that a free passage was made past the wagons victory was assured. Like an avalanche, the people rushed down the incline, and the body of men placed midway gave way like a bundle of sticks. At the bottom of the plane nothing could withstand the crowd.    Barriers, chains, ropes, &c., were removed as though they had been cobwebs, and very speedily a ringing shout of triumph was raised that the battle was at an end.   
As speedily as could be the men, having lost the day, packed up their basses, bags and cans, and as many as could reach home the same night, wended their way to the station and caught the eight o’clock train.   
There were three policemen on the ground and something like a scene was nearly occurring, as it was asserted that one of them used his stick.   
At the close of the contest it was found that some persons had been roughly handled. A platelayer named R. Beard had been struck on the head by a stone, which, it was said, was accidentally rolled down the embankment.    Torn garments were seen upon every hand, and more than one had become bespotted with mud. Many of the platelayers treated the whole affair good humouredly, and they affirmed that they did not care how soon they had to come to Whaley Bridge again.
 
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#6 Posted : 21 December 2010 13:01:04(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

I hope Barry Walker and Barry Rudd are reading this stuff; they may be able to make use of it at the next Whaley water weekend.
I don’t mean they should organise a mass brawl or anything like that but they may be able to show visitors how the village fought for the water rights all those years ago.
 
 
This next bit is a report of the same incident but this time from High Peak News. It gives a bit more of the history of the Wood Well and even suggests that a new road should have been constructed.
 
R. S-S
 
High Peak News
 
5 November 1887
 
feud between the london and north-western railway company and the inhabitants
 
What might have resulted in a hand to hand encounter between a large body of men in the service of the London and North-Western Railway Company and the inhabitants of Whaley Bridge was fortunately averted on Monday evening.   
The London and North-Western Railway Company reserve to themselves once a year the right to stop the residents of Whaley Bridge from crossing over the High Peak Railway to fetch water from Wood Well. Six months ago a batch of men was placed along the line for this purpose, but their presence excited rather than awed the villagers, who are not to be easily denied what they firmly believe belongs to them by usage. Then they fetched their water, and the Company’s men were unable to offer much resistance. Not so on Monday, however, for about 200 stalwart fellows filed into the place, and took up positions on the rails which it has been the custom to cross for many years in order to get at the well. The line was barricaded with railway trucks, behind which the men stood in a row and stopped any single individual from crossing.    Towards seven o’clock at night crowds of people from all parts of the parish began to assemble, and at first jokes were freely indulged in, but the aspect of affairs became more serious, as rumours were heard that the crowd, which did not number less than 1000, intended to force their way through the Company’s men and on to Wood Well.   
Hustling was practised, some few stones were thrown, by, it is thought, the juveniles, and in two instances sticks were freely used. The barricade was forced, and a good many of the people walked across the line. Many of them crossed for no other purpose than to fetch water for domestic purposes. A number of police were on the spot, but took no further action than keeping their eyes on those they thought inclined to commit a breach of the peace.    Two men named Jno. Brookes and Beard received cuts on the head.   
Beard was acting for the Company.   
It was seen that the odds in favour of the villagers were too great, and the 200 acted discreetly in making a move rather than stay all night, as was originally intended.   
In the earlier part of the evening a bellman went round the village calling upon all persons interested in the Wood Well to assemble at J. Proctor’s smithy, and from this spot it appears the main body of the crowd proceeded before the barricade was broken.   
 
The facts of the case are simply these:  
In 1830 the High Peak Railway was opened. During its construction the High Peak Railway Company destroyed a well which was situate on the line of route taken by them. The inhabitants got their water supply from that well, and as soon as it was destroyed made another, the one over the approach to which the present disturbance has been caused being the same. For over 50 years no objection to crossing the line has been offered.   
Before the railway was built the road leading to the well was part of a public footpath leading to Bugsworth, and this is one of the reasons why the inhabitants of Whaley Bridge will not give up an old custom without a struggle.    Another and more forcible contention is that Wood Well is the only water supply in the place.   
Whether there was any agreement between the High Peak Company and the local authority about 1830 with respect to this crossing is not known, but it is generally believed that the Company gave the inhabitants permission to cross the line for having destroyed their well.    
We believe the High Peak railway was purchased by the London and North-Western Railway Company about a year ago.  
The difficulty could be removed by making a road to run under the line, and not only would it be more conducive to public safety, but it would be an improvement the inhabitants would appreciate, for the condition of the vicinity to the spot used as a crossing is always disgraceful.   
The cost of sending and keeping 200 or 300 men at Whaley Bridge every year for 24 hours must be something far in excess of what a decent road for such a short distance could be made. 
 
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#7 Posted : 23 December 2010 15:10:00(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

Here are 2 reports from the following week reflecting back on the events of the week.
 
Things are about to get a bit more heavy and involved from now on.
 
R. S-S
 
 
High Peak News
 
12 November 1887
 
last week’s fracas.   
 
To use a well-known and common expression the right claimed by the London and North Western Railway to prevent the inhabitants from crossing their line to fetch water “sticks in the craw” of Whaley Bridge people to such an extent that they have expressed their determination not to be “outdone.”   
Aid has been proffered by Burbage, Horwich End, New Mills, and other places by men who are more or less interested in the action recently taken by the company.   
On Monday night it was expected that the company intended to send a stronger body of men to enforce their rights, and had this been carried into effect there would have been a free fight; for preparations on an extensive scale had been devised.   
Several tradesmen offered to lend their conveyances for the purpose of fetching “reinforcements, and in fact they were as ready to do this as men from the district were willing to come. As matters stand the action taken so far has not gone beyond a joke, but if repeated there is every probability of something more serious being the issue.
 
 
 
The Reporter
 
12 November 1887
 
the right of way case.   
 
On Monday somehow or other rumours got abroad to the effect that the battle for the right of way was about to be renewed, as the company were sending a large contingent of men.   
Nothing, however, came of the report, and it is not known when operations will be renewed. There can hardly be a doubt that if the company persist in their attempt to block the way serious results will accrue, as the public seem as determined as ever to maintain the right of way.    Some people say that red hot iron bars, firebrands, &c., will be used, and that the whole district for miles around will be requested to assist the public.
 
 
davethescope  
#8 Posted : 23 December 2010 21:49:47(UTC)
davethescope
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 15/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 475
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Whaley Bridge

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 17 post(s)
R. Stephenson-Smythe wrote:

 

I hope Barry Walker and Barry Rudd are reading this stuff; they may be able to make use of it at the next Whaley water weekend.
I don’t mean they should organise a mass brawl or anything like that but they may be able to show visitors how the village fought for the water rights all those years ago.

A re-enactment of the struggle would be a interesting addition to the water weekend. :-)

Edited by user 23 December 2010 21:50:36(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

The optimist believes that Whaley Bridge is the best place in the world to live. The pessimist fears he might be correct.
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#9 Posted : 24 December 2010 16:40:21(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

High Peak News
 
9 March 1889
 
the right of way case.   
 
Last week, Mr Adam Morten, barytes manufacturer, of this place, engaged the services of a surveyor, in order to measure the disputed road, with a view to ascertaining the precise distance from the smithy down to the weaving place.    The London and North-Western Railway Company have employed their surveyor in a similar capacity.
 
 
 
At this time Adam Morten was in occupation of The Old Corn Mill on Bridge Street and was a barytes producer.
 
Barytes was produced from limestone for using in the manufacturing of paint
 
 
Slater’s Directory of Cheshire 1888
 
Exors of George Wilkson Heginbotham, sulphate of barytes manufacturer, Shallcross and Cadster Mills.
 
Adam Morten, sulphate of barytes manufacturer and corn miller, Whaley Bridge.
 
 
An earlier example of a barytes manufacturer:
 
Pigot’s Directory of Derbyshire 1835
 
John Higginbottom, white paint manufacturer, Horridge End.
 
 
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#10 Posted : 27 December 2010 12:24:14(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

High Peak News
 
16 March 1889
 
the whaley bridge right of way case
 
london & north-western railway company  v. morten
 
trial and verdict
 
At the Derby Spring Assizes, on Thursday, the case of The London and North-Western Railway Company v. Mr Adam Morten was heard before Mr Justice Stephen and a special jury.    The action had been entered in the High Court of Justice and had been returned for trial at this Court.    Mr J.C. Lawrence, Q.C., M.P., and Mr Graham, Q.C., instructed by Messrs Bennett, Boycott, and Orme of Chapel-en-le-Frith and Buxton, were for the defendant, and Mr Dugdale, with Mr Sharman, acted for the plaintiffs.
 
statement of claim
 
The statement of claim was set forth as follows:
 
(1) The plaintiffs were on the 7th day of January, 1889, and still are the owners and in possession of the land and lines of the railway known as the Cromford and High Peak Railway, in the County of Derby.   
(2) There is a level crossing leading over the said railway and land to the premises in the occupation of the Goyt Mill Co. (hereinafter called the first level crossing), and there is another level crossing leading over the said railway and land to the premises in the occupation of the Buxton Lime Co. (hereinafter called the second level crossing).   
(3) Upon various occasions prior to the 7th day of January 1888, the defendant had wrongfully entered and passed over the said land and railway to the plaintiffs’ between the first and second level crossings.   
(4) On the 7th day of January 1888, the defendant wrongfully entered and passed over the plaintiff’s said land between the first and second level crossings, and the plaintiffs thereupon, by their servant and agent, warned the defendant against continuing the said wrongful act, but the defendant, notwithstanding such warning, repeated the said wrongful act upon the same day, and threatens and intends to continue to enter and pass over the plaintiffs’ said land in the manner aforesaid.   
The plaintiffs claim:
(1) Damages for the wrongful acts complained of.
(2) An injunction restraining the defendant, his servants and agents from a continuance and repetition of the said wrongful act.
 
(1)   The plaintiffs say that they join issue with the defendant upon his defence save in so far as the same consists of admissions.   
(2)   The plaintiffs further say that the land and railway which the defendant wrongfully entered and passed over as alleged in paragraphs (3) and (6) of the statement of claim is land which was acquired by the plaintiffs and their predecessors in title for the general use in purposes of a railway, and for no other purposes, and was at the time of the said trespass and still is used for such purposes and as common and public highway as alleged in the defence or at all can subsist over the said land and railway.
 
the defence
 
The defendant says:
(1) That long before and at the time of the alleged trespass there was, and of right ought to be and still is, a common and public highway on and over the land referred to in paragraph 1 of the statement of claim, for all persons to go and return on foot at all times of the year at their free-will and pleasure, and the alleged trespasses were a use by the defendant of the said highway.
Mr Lawrence Q.C., M.P., said the facts were briefly these: 
In 1825 a railway was laid from the canal possessed by the Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway Company to a canal some 30 miles away.    Plans were put in showing the crossings and positions of the streets and buildings.   
The line was constructed in 1830.   
In 1862 that line was leased to the plaintiffs in this case, and in 1877 there was an amalgamation, and the tramway became the property of the London and North-Western Company.   
There was a path across the line leading to a number of houses on the west side, and going to a well in a wood. This well was used because it never failed. After describing the path he said no efforts had been taken to put an end to this alleged trespassing. He might say the road had been used for hundreds of years. People had crossed the line, and there was nothing to prevent them. There was no other place to get the water. Latterly an attempt had been made by the plaintiffs to prevent the use of the road, and the defendant was chosen as the representative of the parishioners.
If the railway were being made now the company would have to put in a road in the place of the one in dispute. Since the rich company had taken possession of the line a change had been brought about. They seemed to think they had the right to put up a notice, and stop the path for ever. Some notices were put up, but whatever was intended, they did not have the effect of preventing people from going and using the path.  Powerful navvies were got together for the purpose of catching little children in the village that ran on the line. The public was never stopped. He would call before them people who had used the road for very many years. The people of Whaley Bridge still insisted upon using the tramway. He had to succeed in showing this path had been used for years, and the public having a right, did not feel disposed to relinquish it.
 
Witnesses were then called:
 
Charles Wesley Johnson, architect and surveyor, Whaley Bridge, said he had made plans of the locality.    Starting from the north was the terminus of the Manchester and Lincolnshire Canal.    This canal went to Cromford, about 30 miles and was then connected with another waterway.    There was a bridge over the river, and ran into the old turnpike road to Manchester and Chapel-en-le-Frith.    One branch of this road went to Bugsworth and the other to some printworks.   Passing from this path along the tramway there was an incline, one in thirteen.    Before arriving at the top of the incline there were two footpaths.    People could either cross the line, and get into the street, or turn along the line.    He had resided in the district all his life.    The Wood well was celebrated for its supply when other sources had failed.    The line was open to it.    Another crossing was the old coach road to Chapel-en-le-Frith.    Towards Cromford the line was crossed by a bridge which was not high enough for a railway engine to get under.    Witness had lived there all his life, and could say locomotives had never been used in his day.
 
Adam Morton said: “I live at Whaley Bridge, and am a manufacturer.    I know these crossings.    My works are close to the river Goyt.    I have lived on the place 18 years the last time.    In 1858 I lived there.    I have been in the habit of using the crossing over the bridge, and have used the incline for 30 years.    I have seen other people use it every day for this period.   Until lately I have not been warned from using the railway.    I have not heard of anyone else being stopped.    On the 7th of January I was stopped by Inspector Gould, who said to me, “You are a traveller upon this line.”    I replied “Yes, like other people.”    I did not knock him down.”
 
Cross-examined: “The Inspector did not tell me I had no right to go there.  I told him if the Company wanted to summon anyone to summon me, and not poor people.    The action was brought against me to try the case of the right of road.    My memory goes back to 1861.    I did not see notices posted as far as I can recollect.    I can remember this particular spot 30 years ago.    There are notice boards now, put up recently.    I don’t know that they replaced others.    I do not recollect when the present Company took to the line.    Attempts have been made to stop the line.    I don’t know Cooper and Booth, who have been convicted by the Wirksworth Justices.”
 
John Bonsall said: “I am 74 years of age, and live at Parwich.    I have known this place all my life.    This line was opened in 1830.    I know the country the line passes over, and there was a footpath at the time to Bugsworth, Silkhill, and Byng.    I know the Wood well where the water comes from.    There is no water fit to eat but that.   (Laughter.)    As a boy I led a horse backwards and forwards, and the path was used whilst the line was being made.    When I got a little bigger I went courting. (Laughter.)    The lady lived near Morten’s mill, and I resided some distance away.    We used to walk about this road sometimes (Laughter.)    This road has always been used, as I have heard my wife’s father talk of it.    Pack-horses stayed there all night, hence we get “We-lay,” or Whaley.    When the line was opened at first horses dragged the trucks.    There are notice boards up now, I think.    When I did travel it frequently there were none.    There were only 19 houses in Whaley when I was a lad.    I have seen within the last fortnight people on the line.    Workpeople have used the road, and I have seen great droves of them come up.   (Laughter)    A child was killed on one occasion.    With that exception I have heard of no accident.”
 
Cross-examined: “There was almost a riot in 1877 when the company wanted to stop the line.”
 
Mr Sleigh, Whaley Bridge, had lived there about 15 years.    In and near Whaley Bridge he had lived all his life.    He was 73 years of age.    He had traveled on the Wood well Road from his young days.    There were no gates or fences at the crossing.    Had seen whole droves of people come from the works up the incline.
Cross-examined: “I recollect notice boards being put up about nine years ago”.
 
Martha Ward, a widow, 78 years of age, said she lived near Whaley Bridge.    She was born there, and remembered the place before the railway was made.    There was a footpath where the line ran now, which led to the Bings Farm, which was occupied by her grandfather.    She often used the road or path.    She remembered the railway being opened.    The path was not stopped.    She did not recollect packhorses at all.    As the population increased, the path was more frequented.    The road to the Wood well was used largely.
In cross-examination the witness answered one or two questions, and then declined to further answer Mr Dugdale.
 
Mary Hayes said she was 80 years old in June.    She lived near Whaley Bridge.    Had resided at Horwich End for 50 years.    She remembered the path before the railway was made, and had to use it to go and see her relatives.    She always used the path, and had done since the line was constructed.    She had fetched water from the Wood well for years.    After 1836 she passed on the line.
Cross examined: Never saw horses or carriages on the path.    She did not use the turnpike road much, but did so occasionally.
 
Rebecca Southern said she was 77 years of age.    She remembered the line being made.    She went to the Wesleyan School, and passed along a footpath which was now occupied by the railway.    She had never been stopped.    She had been on the line when wagons had passed.
 
Mr Abel Wain, farmer, 73 years of age, said he had resided at Silkhill Farm 49 years.    Going to the Smithy, he should use the line, which was called the old road.    He had used the railway 49 years.
Cross-examined: By hearsay he had heard of people being warned.
 
Mr Jonathan Proctor, blacksmith, 72 years of age, recollected the railway being open.    There was a footpath before the line was open.    The railway destroyed the path, but people used it as they had done before the line was made.    Notice about trespassing had only been put up for 10 or 12 years.    He did not know of anyone being stopped.   He had worked at the mill for 1sd. 6d. per week.   (Laughter)    He used the railway to go to work.
 
George Lomas, farmer, 69 years of age, recollected the line being made.    He had worked for the company and nearly all the time was employed between the two crossings.    People used to walk up and down it.    Anyone who wanted to go did.    He had never received instructions to stop people.    The officers of the company had been present when persons were on the line, and no orders were given to prevent them using it.    He had no book of rules before the London and North-Western Company took the line.
 
Colonel Hall, Horwich Hall, said he had used the footpath between his house and the works, of which he was a director.    He had known the line since 1843, and had used it as a public way to the village.    Other people had used it for fetching water.    Had never been stopped or interfered with.
Cross-examined: Had not been warned by the company’s servants.
 
James Shirt, Fairfield, chairman of the Fairfield Local Board, said he was 67 years old.    He had lived at Whaley Bridge many years.    Had used the path frequently, and drove up and down it on horseback.    He had never been stopped.    Never saw any notice boards there.
 
 John Kirk, 68 years of age, had lived at Whaley Bridge all his life.    He had used the line constantly, and until recently had not heard anything about the dispute to the right of the road.
Cross-examined: He had heard tell of the servants stopping people, but could not remember dates.
 
William Morten, 68 years of age, had travelled the line all his life, and had not been interfered with.
 
Charles Bottoms, engineer, Whaley Bridge, deposed that he had travelled for 50 years along the line, and had seen plenty of others.
Cross-examined: No more notice was taken of the notice boards than the force that was used.
 
Mr George Wild, farmer, had used the road for about fifty years, and had never been stopped.
 
John Hawley corroborated, and this concluded the case for the defendant.
Mr Dugdale opened the case for the company with out making any comment.
 
He at once called:
 
William Barton Worthington, divisional engineer to the London and North Western Railway Company, said this district came under his supervision.    He described the gradients, and gave his opinion that it was not safe that the path should be used.    It was not safe for persons to pass between the lines when there were waggons on the road.
No questions were asked by Mr Lawrence or Mr Graham.
 
Peter Gould, Whaley Bridge, permanent way inspector, gave evidence, and said he recollected notice boards being up in 1861.    There were boards up previously which looked old, and the words were “Persons trespassing will be prosecuted.”    In 1869 cast iron notices were put in their place.    In 1875 these were replaced with others.    The present boards were put up in 1886-87.    In 1869 he remembered warning a man named Turner.    He was on this incline at the time.    Watchmen were placed along the line now and again.    He was made responsible for stopping the path.    In October 1878-9, the line was watched again, and stopped for 24 hours.    People were turned back.    In 1887 another attempt was made during July, but people insisted on going through.    On another occasion 150 men were employed in 1887, but hundreds of people forced their way.
 
His Lordship said he could not see what these stoppages had to do with the case.
 
Cross-examined: There had only been one prosecution.   Children had been turned back when going to school.    Still the road was used every day.    People were prosecuted in other districts for going on the line.
 
William Brocklehurst, of Whaley Bridge, had seen notices at crossings.
 
This concluded the case for the plaintiff.
 
Mr Dugdale submitted that it had been proved there was danger in allowing the line to be used whilst waggons were passing each other.    Therefore in using the line it would be inconsistent for the people to be subject to insecurity.
 
His Lordship here suggested that he must either reserve his judgment or give it after questions had been put to the jury.    The opinion of the jury would have to be taken on the question of usage.
 
Mr Dugdale: “What are the questions your Lordship consider essential?”
 
His Lordship intimated that he could not give this information until the counsel had closed their arguments.
 
Mr Dugdale, assuming points submitted to the jury were decided against him, said he should have to argue the case.    It was a serious matter for the railway company.
 
His Lordship: “Suppose the jury should find that from 1815, or for many, many years the public have had a right of way upon this line?    There has been such usage and it can only be stopped by Act of Parliament.”
 
Mr Dugdale said the case might be taken to a higher court, as it was most important to the railway company.
 
His Lordship: “You can go as far as you like.    I want the jury to determine the amount of usage there was, and the need of it.”
 
Mr Lawrence submitted three points for consideration of the jury : “Is it a public path which existed before the line was made; if not, have the railway company dedicated a path to the public, and is the user inconsistent with the user of the railway, either as it exists or may be used by Act of Parliament?”
 
His Lordship: “I think these questions will about satisfy Mr Dugdale.”
 
Mr Dugdale said some very important questions of law were involved, and to a certain extent the safety of the public.    In order to save themselves going 100 yards further, the public contended they could use the tramway, but he hoped the jury would consider their safety, take a broad view of the case, and give a verdict for the company.
 
Mr Lawrence made a very humorous speech in reply to Mr Dugdale.    “Were they going to take away public rights which existed before the railway was made?”    He felt he had an unanswerable case, and asked the jury to distinguish between what was proved and what was suggested.    If they believed the witnesses it was no use the company attempting to answer the case.
His Lordship addressed the jury at length, and said the most important question they had to consider was the first one submitted by Mr Lawrence, whether there was a public path before the railway was made.    He was inclined to think that was the great point in the case.    If there was a path when the railway was open then that path existed now.    When once a public road was obtained it remained until taken away by special means, and another would have to be substituted.    There was a way of deviating a path by application to Quarter Sessions and going through certain formalities.    By this means a road could be diverted.    In his opinion, believing the witnesses’ statement, there was this path long before the line or tramway was constructed.    But the questions could not be limited to that one alone.    Speaking as a general rule, if there had been uninterrupted usage of a place for 20 years as matter of right by persons a public way was constituted.    For more than 20 years this had been a public road.    That was in evidence and had not been refuted.    There had been many witnesses of various ages, the youngest being Colonel Hall.    They all agreed to the long use of the road.    The one witness had spoken about his predecessors having told him the road was used by packhorses.    The point about the well was important, as showing the long existence of the road.    If the people used the road for a sufficient number of years the railway company had no right to interfere with it.    Any amounts of notice boards were posted, but they were not posted until 1860 or 1861.    It was not wise for the company to take measures to stop the road where the public had the right to go, or where they commonly thought they had the right to go.    To bring more than 100 navvies together and set them to prevent anyone from passing was a curious proceeding.    It made the people extremely angry by interfering with what they believed to be their rights.    Very unpleasant results had been raised by this course.    He did not think such a powerful corporation as the London and North-Western Railway Company would have done such a thing which might have led to a riot.   
Mr Dugdale thought further questions than that of the right of road ought to be submitted.    He did not think so, but he was agreeable to that course being taken.    The other questions did not really require answering if there was a right of way.    He would say this was almost unexampled as a right of way dispute.    All the evidence had been on one side.    Mr Dugdale did not call a single person who came to say that they had visited the place and they did not know that such a footpath existed as had been spoken of.    They did not even say there was not an accommodation road for the farmers.    The whole evidence was in favour of the right of road.    There was none against it.    On the other hand the London and North-Western Railway Company had not dedicated the road to the public, and the notice boards showed they had not.    Again no one had been summoned for trespassing, which was a very important fact, because the plaintiffs would be doing wrong.
 
The jury considered their verdict.    They did not leave the box, and in a few minutes found, on the questions put to them, that there was a public path before the railway was made.
 
Mr Lawrence asked for a decision on the third question.
His Lordship directed the jury to consider the point, and, after a few moments, they found that the existence of the road was not inconsistent with the user of the railway as it existed, but they found it might be if the railway was used under the Act to the full extent.
This, of course, constituted a verdict for the defendant.
His lordship reserved judgement until he had considered some legal points.
 
G. Jackson  
#11 Posted : 28 December 2010 12:17:25(UTC)
G. Jackson
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 17/08/2009(UTC)
Posts: 694
Location: Whaley Bridge at heart

Bings Wood stretches from Bings Farm where the telephone box is on Bings Road all the way to the old church at the end of Bings Road on Old Turns near Cowards garage.The wood belongs Bings Farm where Geoff Morten and his wife Joan live. Geoff's dad Harry sold off the part where the well was to Harold Mycock a long time ago. Harold used to be the caretaker at the Mechanic's Institute and he wanted the area to be used as a bird sanctuary which it was for many years (about 40 years ago)

Edited by user 29 January 2011 13:09:03(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

davethescope  
#12 Posted : 28 December 2010 13:53:23(UTC)
davethescope
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 15/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 475
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Whaley Bridge

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 17 post(s)
A substantial portion of Bings Wood - North from the footpath linking Bings Road with the old CHP railway, almost to the farm - belongs to the Hutton-Watkins. Karl used to run the hardware shop, Carousel, on the corner of Old Road where Adiva is now. Carol keeps too Shetland ponies there though, due to shortage of grass, they are on my land at the moment. The field between the footpath and Spire House belongs to Paul Smith.
The optimist believes that Whaley Bridge is the best place in the world to live. The pessimist fears he might be correct.
R. Stephenson-Smythe  
#13 Posted : 28 December 2010 15:24:05(UTC)
R. Stephenson-Smythe
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 19/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,494

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

 

This is all very interesting, Gentlemen,
 
Dave are you agreeing or disagreeing with the alleged Madman, Jackson?
 
By the way Dave, I undertook a field trip to Wood Well the other day to investigate the state of it.
It was a bit of a precarious expedition with all the ice and snow but I felt it my duty to venture out and take a snap shot or two of the well.
 
I have one more contribution to make with regards to the trial outcome which I shall do later and then I will put the photo of the Wood Well on here for all trespass enthusiasts.
 
Incidentally whilst I was there I did happen to notice an odd pile of rubble close to the well and there did appear to be some water percolating from the rubble. I have no idea what it is/was.
But it wouldn’t surprise me if some comic cuts nipped out and took a photo of that claiming it to be the original Wood Well.
 
Next thing you know somebody will be on here claiming to have found the source of the Peckham Spring.
 
R. S-S
 
buggyite  
#14 Posted : 29 December 2010 11:25:29(UTC)
buggyite
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 28/09/2009(UTC)
Posts: 344
Man
Location: Bugsworth

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)

This is a most fascinating thread, as I'd never heard anything about this story before.

There appears to be some confusion about whether the LNWR were exercising their (assumed) rights to prevent people crossing the line at the level crossings or to stop them walking along the line between the 2 level crossings. I can understand the Railway Company's keenness to prevent a public right of way being established along the route of the railway.

To help people like me who are not totally familiar with the locations, I think it would be good for someone to post a map showing the locations of the level crossings, and the Wood well.

I assume the first level crossing referred to in R S-S's post of 27th December is the one at the bottom of Bridge Street, ie accessing Bingswood Road and Goyt Mills. I can only assume that the second one would be the one on Old Road, but I can't understand why that would be described as " leading over the said railway and land to the premises in the occupation of the Buxton Lime Co.  " , because clearly Old Road wasn't just to get to the pit that Buxton Lime Co. were operating.

Now, from my experience of the level crossings on the Hayfield branch, and how they were closed once a year - by padlocking the gates (both road and footpath) - this begs a question for the 2 contentious ones on the CHPR, and I'm hoping the older contributors here can help....   Were there ever gates protecting the 2 level crossings involved in this current thread??


Buggyite
I am a yellow factioner!
davethescope  
#15 Posted : 29 December 2010 12:40:37(UTC)
davethescope
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 15/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 475
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Whaley Bridge

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 17 post(s)
R. Stephenson-Smythe wrote:

 

Dave are you agreeing or disagreeing with the alleged Madman, Jackson?


Mr Jackson, who I have no reason to believe to be clinically insane, says all of Bings Wood belongs to Geoff Morton.
I say part of it belongs to the Watkins.
Apply your massive intellect to decide whether or not I am agreeing with him :-)

I agree with Jack that it would be useful to know where exactly the well is. I have been for a wander in Bings Wood and the only water feature I could find was the stream that emerges from under the rail track opposite the end of Beech Road. That I think is Randall Carr Brook, the feeder from Combs Reser to the canal. And do you know how RCB crosses the Goyt?


The optimist believes that Whaley Bridge is the best place in the world to live. The pessimist fears he might be correct.
davethescope  
#16 Posted : 29 December 2010 13:00:24(UTC)
davethescope
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 15/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 475
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Whaley Bridge

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 17 post(s)
Jack, you little thug. Gregory Foxes book about the Buxton line has a plan of Whaley railways in 1915. It does indeed show only the two crossings that you mention, the one across Old Road being called "Proctor's Crossing" But both of those crossings are across public highways and, today, nobody has the authority to close a public highway, other than briefly, without obtaining a Traffic Regulation Order.


I think the bone of contention was the path which starts at the end of Beech Road ( which starts on Old Road and runs alongside the old Coop - now a bike shop). That path crosses the railway then goes up through the wood swinging left and joining Bings Road opposite my South entrance. (Cobbles can be seen under the upper part that path leading me to think that it might be an old pack road, predating the hill on Bings Road)



Footpath law was not as clear in 1880 as it is today as there was no definitive map and rights of way were established by usage. Then, as now twenty years usage nec vi, nec clam, nec precario (that is without force, without secrecy and without permission) was sufficient to establish a right of way. That is what Mister Lawrence was trying to establish by calling all his witnesses.

Edited by user 29 December 2010 13:08:55(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

The optimist believes that Whaley Bridge is the best place in the world to live. The pessimist fears he might be correct.
buggyite  
#17 Posted : 29 December 2010 13:08:05(UTC)
buggyite
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 28/09/2009(UTC)
Posts: 344
Man
Location: Bugsworth

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)

I've posted a copy of part of a map from 1915 that shows a well in Bings Wood. Would this be the one? (I've helpfully added this question in red to the map)

I'm also intrigued by the footpath shown running east from the CHP incline, south of the well. How did this cross the line? Did it really connect to the back ginnel of the houses on Beech Road?

 

buggyite attached the following image(s):
map1c.jpg
Buggyite
I am a yellow factioner!
davethescope  
#18 Posted : 29 December 2010 13:33:28(UTC)
davethescope
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 15/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 475
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Whaley Bridge

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 17 post(s)
buggyite wrote:

I've posted a copy of part of a map from 1915 that shows a well in Bings Wood. Would this be the one? (I've helpfully added this question in red to the map)


Thanks, Jack, that agrees with my 1896 map which I have just remembered. I'll have look this afternoon.

Quote:

I'm also intrigued by the footpath shown running east from the CHP incline, south of the well. How did this cross the line? Did it really connect to the back ginnel of the houses on Beech Road?

 


Effectively. If you go to the cul de sac end of Beech Road you will, if you have machete, find a path which runs South parallel to the end wall of the last house then turns East up some steps. There is a stile on East side of the railway which lets you on to the path through Bings Wood which joins Bings Road by my drive. As I said, the remains of cobbles on the upper part leads me to speculate that this is the original route from Buggy to Whaley, pre-dating the mining. Your map reinforces my belief that this was the path which the railway company wanted to close. It is the shortest route from the village to the well without actually walking on the line (which would be illegal under the Railways Acts.)



Today there is another, less overgrown, path from the end of Beech Road heading north and joining the railway behind the Fire Station. Neither of the paths from Beech Road to the railway track are shown on the definitive map but I suspect that that was an error. The definitive maps were drawn up in the 1950s from information largely provided by the Parish Council and there is no reason to think that the PC in those days was any more effective than the current Whaley IX

Edited by user 29 December 2010 13:37:57(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

The optimist believes that Whaley Bridge is the best place in the world to live. The pessimist fears he might be correct.
buggyite  
#19 Posted : 29 December 2010 13:44:25(UTC)
buggyite
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 28/09/2009(UTC)
Posts: 344
Man
Location: Bugsworth

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)

Dave,

Do you fancy a joint expedition this afternoon to find the well, beginning and ending at the Sheps?

About 2pm at the Sheps shall we say?

Edited by user 29 December 2010 13:45:06(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Buggyite
I am a yellow factioner!
davethescope  
#20 Posted : 29 December 2010 13:51:25(UTC)
davethescope
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 15/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 475
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Whaley Bridge

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 17 post(s)
buggyite wrote:

Dave,

Do you fancy a joint expedition this afternoon to find the well, beginning and ending at the Sheps?

About 2pm at the Sheps shall we say?



Sheps doesn't open until 3. make it the White Hart
The optimist believes that Whaley Bridge is the best place in the world to live. The pessimist fears he might be correct.
Users browsing this topic
3 Pages123>
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.