A jury of 130 John Clare experts attended a specially arranged session of the Court of the Nassaburgh Hundred (the medieval court that governed our area) on Saturday 11 July to hear the case of Clare v Enclosure. The trial had been brought by the famous poet in light of his accusation that:
Inclosure like a Bonaparte let not a thing remain
Inclosure like a Bonaparte let not a thing remain
It levelled every bush and tree and levelled every hill
And hung the moles for traitors – though the brook is running still, It runs a naked brook, cold and chill
The Reverend Ron Ingamells presided as judge, with Dr Richard Keymer making the case for the prosecution in the unfortunate absence of Mr John Clare. Mr Richard Astle made the case for the defence.
Dr Keymer, quoting extensively from Clare’s poetry, read by the expert witness, Mr Peter Moyse, sought to demonstrate that enclosure had destroyed the local landscape; ruined the natural wildlife of the countryside and most importantly impoverished the rural peasantry, stripping them without adequate compensation of their rights to graze and use the local common land.
Mr Astle, drawing on historical documents of the time, sought to show that enclosure was absolutely in the national interest and that anyone who enjoyed a Lincolnshire sausage should support, not condemn, enclosure. Indeed he argued that we should be celebrating enclosure as the source of our prosperity and the means by which we fed our country. On several occasions he moved, unsuccessfully, to have the case dismissed.
After heated exchanges, the jury was asked to reach a verdict. A show of hands failed to determine the case and a count was ordered.
Controversially enclosure was condemned and found guilty by 69 vote to 60. Speaking afterwards, Mr Astle said: ‘I am shocked and disgusted. Enclosure got rid of an out-of-date system which couldn’t feed the growing population of the country. The jury has voted with its heart, not its head.’ He was immediately censured for contempt of court. The debate continues.
The Reverend Ron Ingamells presided as judge, with Dr Richard Keymer making the case for the prosecution in the unfortunate absence of Mr John Clare. Mr Richard Astle made the case for the defence.
Dr Keymer, quoting extensively from Clare’s poetry, read by the expert witness, Mr Peter Moyse, sought to demonstrate that enclosure had destroyed the local landscape; ruined the natural wildlife of the countryside and most importantly impoverished the rural peasantry, stripping them without adequate compensation of their rights to graze and use the local common land.
Mr Astle, drawing on historical documents of the time, sought to show that enclosure was absolutely in the national interest and that anyone who enjoyed a Lincolnshire sausage should support, not condemn, enclosure. Indeed he argued that we should be celebrating enclosure as the source of our prosperity and the means by which we fed our country. On several occasions he moved, unsuccessfully, to have the case dismissed.
After heated exchanges, the jury was asked to reach a verdict. A show of hands failed to determine the case and a count was ordered.
Controversially enclosure was condemned and found guilty by 69 vote to 60. Speaking afterwards, Mr Astle said: ‘I am shocked and disgusted. Enclosure got rid of an out-of-date system which couldn’t feed the growing population of the country. The jury has voted with its heart, not its head.’ He was immediately censured for contempt of court. The debate continues.
No comments:
Post a Comment