The Defence
Mr. Boville, for the defence, said the jury were in the position of having heard one side of the case, and, perhaps, it might appear pretty clear, but like many other cases, they had now to produce evidence of a very different character. Then, having read some letters in which Mr. Somers Clarke had agreed to take the result of one trial as satisfactory of the whole a proposition that had been declined on the other side - he complained that the defendant had been harassed by five actions. The fact was that Mr. Wyatt had conceded to the owner of Hole farm a privilege which all the others now claimed in consequence of that concession. The parties now claiming right had no such right. It would be necessary to touch upon the circumstances in a legal point of view in order to make the matter clear. The law was - and he thought a very proper one - that if a man had used a way without interruption, he became entitled to it. Well, he thought he could show that for twenty-eight years, there had been uninterrupted possession of this road on the part of his client. Even from the evidence given, it was not pretended that there had been any interruption from 1829 to 1837 and again from 1839 to 1854, the use of it was only sworn to three times; and then again down to the present time, there had been no proof of any user of the road. There had been the knocking down of some posts, but Mr. Wyatt had gained the victory; for as fast as they were knocked down he put them up again. He did not know whether he ought not to submit to his Lordship that no ground of use had been proved.
Mr. Lush "We don't rely on the Act of Parliament"
Mr. Bovill, in continuing, said, it was simply ridiculous to suppose, from the position of Blacklands that the occupier would be likely to make use of the road instead of the highway, as he would have to go down a very steep hill and up again a very much worse journey than going through the town. Mr. Bovill then stated the nature of the evidence he should call - that of relatives of the original owner who had lived on the farm, and could speak positively as to the roads and gates, and who would tell them there never was a road there at all until after the house was built, and that Mr. Tutt formerly lived in Hastings and came to the Fighting Cocks, and after hearing that evidence he thought they must come to the conclusion that the other witnesses were mistaken.
George Tutt, [carpenter] of East Hill, Hastings said he was about 70 years of age, and nephew of Charles Tutt, one of the witness's great grandfather. He lived with him in his boyhood. Continuing he said "I lived with him in my boyhood. He was owner of Mount Pleasant, and I know that there -
