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.
The consideration of this proceeding carries us back to another part of the conduct of the arbitrators and the umpire, namely the agreement with Mr. Ellis. In this instance, there could hardly have been any occasion for an umpire. There was but little to do, and of the commonest description of the business of valuation, and part of the business, as the valuation of the fixtures, and the stack of hay, was settled; but these arbitrators were determined to have things done regularly, and as Mr. Mee had been made umpire in the other affair, he was also made umpire in this business, and made his award one month after the time that Mr. Elsee ought to have been paid for the property. As there are some remarks to be made upon this document, it is inserted.
Made this 29th of October, 1819, by me, the undersigned, being appointed by Mr. John Elsee and Mr. James Ellis, under an agreement dated the 14th day of July last, as umpire between Mr. Edward Driver, of New Bridge Street, Blackfriars, London, and Mr. Robert Peake, of Waltham Abbey, Essex, who had been appointed by Mr. Elsee as out-going tenant, and Mr. James Ellis as in-coming tenant, on a farm called Havering Park farm, at Havering, in Essex, to value the following property, viz.
All the straw, and half the chaff that arises from 196 acres of land, except the straw used for thatching, which is to be left when taken off the stacks.
The straw at a foddering price on the premises.
Three stacks of hay, in the stack yard, at a foddering price.
The fixtures in the house.
The straw to be bound by Mr. Elsee’s men, when thrashed, and to be paid for binding the customary price of one shilling per load, by Mr. Ellis, if he chooses to have it bound.
The above property is valued by me at the sum of Three Hundred and Eighty-four pounds, Eighteen shillings, ready money.
EDWARD MEE.
South Hall, Raynham, Essex.£384 18s. 0d.
To this decision there came appended, as if by afterthought, the annexed addition, viz.
The dung is to be brought back for all other hay carried off, according to the agreement. [56]
EDWARD MEE,
South Hall, Raynham, Essex.
And then came the subjoined bill of costs, duly made out in the name and on behalf of the firm.
Messrs. Ellis and Elsee,
To Messrs. Driver, Peake, and Mee.
1819.
| Oct. 29, To valuation of property, as per inventory, at 2½ per cent. each | 28 | 17 | 6 |
| Stamp | 15 | 6 | |
| £29 | 13 | 0 |
Half to be paid by each party.
This award, it will be seen by a reference to the original agreement, page [35] and [36], is founded on the principle of charging the hay and straw at a foddering price, a thing never contemplated by Mr. Elsee, and to which he would not have agreed under any circumstances, but that the award was delayed until Mr. Ellis was in possession of the farm, and a great portion of the property; and though he did for a long time refuse to take the money from Mr. Ellis, and insisted upon the crown’s paying him for what its Surveyor had bought, he was ultimately obliged to take what he could get from the new tenant. [57]