HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0676 and id is 1 raw text is: PARMETER V. A.-G. [1813] I DOW.
ENGLAND.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
PARMETER, and Others,-Apellants; ATTORNEY-GENERAL,- Respondent
[Feb. 13, 15, 1813].
[Mews' Dig. v. 20 ; S.C. 10 Price, 378, sub nom. A.-G. v. Parmeter. See A.-G. v.
Lonsdale, 1868, L. R. 7 Eq. 389.]
[The Appellants, claiming under a grant by Charles I., of the soil between
high and low water marks, along the coast of the county of Southampton,
erect a wharf, dock, etc. between high and low water marks in Portsmouth
harbour. Information to abate this as a nuisance. No possession of
this particular spot under the grant, till 1784. Court of Exchequer decree
a removal of the nuisance, and this decree affirmed by the Lords, solely
on the ground of non-user as to this particular place, without reference
to general validity of grant.]
This was an appeal from a decree of the Court of Exchequer, made'in a cause com-
mencing by [317] information filed by his Majesty's Attorney-General in Hilary
term, 1803, for the purpose of abating a nuisance in Portsmouth harbour. The in-
formation stated, that in 1784 the Defendants (Appellants) began to erect, and did
erect, and make on the Gosport side of Portsmouth harbour, and within the high
and low water marks there, and near to a place which had been commonly used for
the mooring his Majesty's ships, and called the King's Moorings, a certain wharf,
quay, or stage, (with a storehouse, etc. at the side,) connected with the shore by a
wooden bridge, and extending from the shore, or high water mark, toward the low
water mark, 336 feet, and in this wharf, quay, or stage, the Defendants had placed
the hull of a large ship, to serve as a dry dock ; and near the side of the wharf between
high and low water marks, they had placed another large ship for the same purpose,
embanking the intervening space with stones, soil, and rubbish, to form a communica-
tion between the last mentioned ship and the wharf ; and also that the Defendants
had inclosed a certain piece of mud-land in the said harbour, between high and low
water marks, for a timber-pound, etc.
The information then stated, that the said wharf, quay, or stage, dock, bridge, store-
house, and timber-pound, and other buildings, erections, and works, which had been
so erected, built, and made as aforesaid, were a nuisance and injury, and if continued,
would be a great nuisance and injury to the said harbour, and would prejudice
the aforesaid moorings, and would also be an obstruction to a quantity of water
proportionable to their [318] dimensions coming into and going out of the said
harbour on each flux and reflux of the tide, and thereby prevent a great scouring
and cleansing of the lower part of the channel of the said harbour of soilage there,
and greatly endanger the loss of the said harbour; and that if similar erections,
buildings, and works, should be made in all parts of the said harbour between high
and low water marks, the same would entirely destroy the said harbour, or render
the said harbour useless, so that his Majesty's ships and vessels, and other ships and
vessels of burthen, would not be able to come into or go out of the said harbour
as they had always been used to do ; or if such ships and vessels should be able to
come into or go out of the said harbour, the same would not be able to remain
long there, or ride with any safety.
The information then prayed, that the nuisance might be abated, and the Defend-
ants restrained from erecting any other works, etc. of the same description.
The Defendants in their answer insisted, that the erections in question, instead
of being a nuisance, were of great use to the harbour. They also stated their title
to the soil on which the erections were made, as derived from a grant by letters patent
of King Charles I., in 1631, at four-pence per acre, to certain persons therein named,
and their heirs, all and singular the lands and marshes surrounded and overflowed,
or subject to the overflowing of the sea in the county of Southampton, from the
H.L. 1I. 713 39*](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0676&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)