le-Street, Tanfield, and Whickham; and in the county of Northumberland a very large area of steam coal, in several seams, extending from the river Blyth to the Coquet, awaits the increasing demand for that species of coal, which is already intersected by the Newcastle and Berwick railway, and is partially opened out by the harbour of Warkworth; and it is far from improbable that the magnitude of the supply from this district may in course of time bring into existence another coal-shipping harbour between that place and the Blyth.

The shipping ports at present for this extensive coal-field are, in the county of Durham,-the Tyne, Sunderland, Seaham, Hartlepool, and Stockton; for the Northumberland portion of the field, the Tyne, Hartley, Blyth, and the harbour of Warkworth.

Present State of the Trade.

The regulation of sales, which had continued for ten years, broke up in the beginning of the year 1845, since which period all has been reckless competition. The more expensive collieries have gone upon the principle of accomplishing large quantities of vend, in consequence of which the markets have become so depressed in price that the shipowners no longer buy, but let their vessels out to be freighted by the coal-owners, who thus become the merchants, consigning the cargoes to factors in London and elsewhere, and are thus necessarily made to stand by results the most unsatisfactory, great quantities of coals being sold at prices far below the remunerative point, and thus involving many of the owners in a losing trade. As a matter of course, many of the collieries are changing hands, many of them again are under heavy liabilities to the banks; therefore, generally speaking, the capital engaged in this trade, amounting to little less than ten millions sterling, may be said to be exhausting all this valuable mine at little or no return to the proprietors.

In consequence of the surcharged state of the markets, the freights to the shipowners are also necessarily very low; indeed, to such a degree of depression are these two branches of the trade reduced, that I estimate their deficiency below fairly remunerative prices, or not less than a million and a half sterling per

annum.

Many attempts have been made of inducing the trade again to return to regulation; but the collieries are now so numerous, and the efforts of the last four years, together with the great increase in the production of coke and steam coal, seem to have disjointed former accepted understandings and thrown far and wide the materials of reunion.

When the open competition first took place, it was confidently augured that many inferior collieries would be driven out of the trade; but experience proves that although many have changed

hands, yet the total number does not sensibly decline; on the contrary, every successive bargain is made under so much more advantageous terms than the founders of the collieries enjoyed, that there now seems little grounds for hoping that the trade will be materially relieved by any such process for many years to come, and that nothing remains but to struggle on in the patient hope that in the course of time the increasing demand will so far overtake the supply as to restore the trade to a tolerably remunerative state, or that some amended principle of regulation may again induce its re-enaction.

Conclusion.

Having in the foregoing pages explained the condition of this coal-field, with a computation of its probable duration, it brings to our reflection the important consideration, in a national point of view, viz., that if the condition of other coal-fields were scrutinized in a similar manner, how much to be regretted is the error committed by the legislature of this country in overlooking the wasteful and improvident manner in which many of them are conducted; and the incalculable national loss that will ere long attend such proceedings if unchecked; such as the leaving below ground the small coal, or of screening it out to be burnt at the top of the pit; the large proportions of the mine which are sacrificed to improvident working, &c. In short, the husbanding of our coal-fields ought to be made the subject of legislation, without which it is impossible to check or control the otherwise continual sacrifice of life and property; and in the handling of this subject, how dark and mysterious are the paths which the investigator has to tread in the absence of such documentary evidence as the governments of the continent provide under their legislative enactments; he has to calculate from uncertain data what might be reduced to matters of fact; and how important would it be to the legislature to be possessed of authentic documents showing the extent and consumption of the mineral resources of the kingdom, together with its population and wealth, whereupon measures might be devised for the education and better improvement of the vast numbers of people who are supported thereby, whilst the national wealth itself would be providentially husbanded for the benefit of generations to come.

ON THE CUSTOM OF TIN BOUNDS.

BY EDWARD SMIRKE, ESQ.

THE earliest recorded notice of any custom in Cornwall or Devon to work for tin on the land of another is to be found in the charters granted to the tinners in the reigns of John and of Edward I., by which the right is conferred, or confirmed to them, "fodere stannum in moris et feodis episcoporum, abbatum, &c., sicut solebant et consueverunt, et in terris moris et vastis nostris et aliorum quorumcunque in comitatu, et divertere aquas ad operationem eorum, &c., sicut de antiquâ consuetudine consueverunt." These charters, and the principal franchises contained in them, are evidently designed for the immediate benefit of those who are there described as "operantes in stannariis," and to them only "dum operantur in eisdem." (See the charters in 4 Inst. 233, &c., and Appendix to Vice v. Thomas, pp. 8, 14.) Nor are there wanting other proofs that the interest or property in tinworks could be claimed under the custom by those only who made it available by working, and that they became vacant or were forfeited by discontinuance.

In a register of the Black Prince, preserved among the public records, there is a writ, 25 Ed. 3, reciting that tinners, claiming any interest in tinworks, and refusing to work or contribute to the working, forfeit their shares by the ancient usages ("solonc les aunciens usages"); and the proper officer of the duchy is commanded to enforce compliance with the custom by seizure of the forfeited shares. (See Vice v. Thomas, Appendix, pp. 24, 25.)

In a Stannary court-roll, 4 Ric. 2, there is an entry of a plea of trespass, vi et armis, for breaking and entering a tinwork of the plaintiff and ejecting him from it; to which the defendants plead "quod dictum opus stann' fuit vacans die quo supponitur, &c., et per unum quart' anni ante, et petunt inde judicium. Et querens dicit quod non fuit vacans díe, &c., et hoc," &c. (Appendix, ibid. p. 64.).

In another court-roll of 21 Hen. 6 (Chagford Stannary), extant among the records of the Augmentation Office, Smith and Horn complain of a trespass by disseising them of two parts of a tinwork: the defendant pleads that at the time of disseisin the work was "opus alay," and so he entered according to the Stannary custom. Verification: Denial. Issue thereon, and award of venire. The term alay is well known to be applied to a neglected or deserted tinwork. (Pearce's Laws, &c. of the Stannaries, pp. 194, 201, 226, &c.)

So little did the custom contemplate the possession of tin bounds by any except working tinners, that at a Devonshire Stannary Parliament, held 10 Hen. 7, and ratified by Prince Arthur, it was provided that "no persone, neyther persones, having possession of landes and tenements above the yerely value of £10, nor noone other to theyr use, be owners of eny tynwork or parcell of eny tynworke," with the exception of persons claiming by inheritance or possessed of tinworks on their own freeholds. The original record is preserved in the Treasury of the Exchequer.

As late as the end of the 16th century, the obligation of working was not forgotten in Cornwall; for Carew says: "These bounds he" (the bounder)" is bound to renew once everie yeere, as also in most places to bestow some time in working the myne, otherwise he loseth this priviledge." (Survey of Cornwall, f. 13 b, ed. 1769.)

These authorities, which a more extended search would doubtless multiply, seem to confirm the conjecture of the Court (antè, p. 36), "that the unqualified right now claimed is but an abuse of the original limits of the custom."

But the custom of bounding, even with the reasonable qualification of working suggested in the above judgment, must be admitted to be open to very grave objections.

No parol or documentary evidence has ever been adduced that prescribes any limit to the area capable of being included in a pair of tin bounds. The want of some clear rule on this head strongly distinguishes the custom of bounding from any other known mining custom, English or foreign. According to the learned reporter of Rowe v. Brenton (3 Man. & Ry. 497, note a), it must be of "reasonable extent; " but the test of reasonableness is not pointed out. Carew, an author of some authority on this subject, who wrote in the reign of Elizabeth, says that, when a mine is found, "the first discoverer aymeth how farre it is likely to extend, and then at the foure corners of his limited proportion diggeth up three turfes," &c. (Survey, f. 13 b.) If this is the mode of fixing the limit of the bounds, it is one that must be founded on mere conjecture until the lode is opened, and its direction and dip ascertained, which cannot be done until the bounds have been made good by proclamation and possession. In other words, the limits of the bounded space can only be determined by a process which supposes them to be already fixed. Again if a large area is included, what extent of working within it will satisfy the custom, so as to protect the bounder in his enjoyment of the whole? Will inconsiderable workings in one part secure the exclusive right to all? The question is of some practical importance; for "a pair" (or party) of working tinners will make but slow progress in bringing to grass the mineral substrata of a large surface; and there is nothing in the

custom to show that the size of the bounds is to be proportioned to the capacity or capital of the bounder. In practice, tin bounds are said to be usually of small extent; yet one of the witnesses in the case above reported had himself assisted in cutting a pair which extended "a quarter of a mile each way," and must therefore have contained about 160 acres. In Devonshire, where the same custom has prevailed, the whole of Dartmoor, consisting probably of 50,000 acres at least, was, in the year 1786, included in a single pair of bounds by a person who intended by this ceremony to secure to his employer all the tin within that district.

Further, the right of the bounder is of no value without the use of running water; and this additional easement has therefore been constantly claimed as part of the custom. (Pearce, p. xiii., 190, &c.) It is recognised in the charters of John and Edward I., above cited (p. 41), and the roll of the Stannary Parliaments, and is often noticed in the entries of the "Opera Stannaria," or tin bounds, in the Stannary court-rolls. Yet it is evident that the enjoyment of this easement involves a claim of right both to divert streams of water flowing above the bounded district, and to discharge the water, with its acquired impurities, over all the lands below it. That such a claim is likely to experience little favour from the Courts may be conjectured from the case of Bastard v. Smith (2 Moo. & Rob. 129).

The custom asserts a right, not only to take tin, but "to search for" it. (3 Man. & Ry. 497, 498, note a.) Whether the search is to be justified only by the successful result of it, or the claimant is to dig at will for an unlimited time over the bounded area on the mere chance of success, is a matter on which the custom and its interpreters are silent. If the larger power exists (as it is usually assumed to do), it is one which may seriously affect titles; for all Cornwall is admitted to be stannary, and all Devon is claimed to be so. (See the Minute of the Privy Council 7 Car. 1; Appendix to Vice v. Thomas, pp. 36, 37.) The custom is indeed confined to wastrel; but enclosed land "that hath been anciently bounded and assured for wastrel," is included in this description (Convok. 12 C. 1, art. 3, antè, p. 4, note b); and all Duchy land belonging to the seventeen assessionable manors, whether waste or enclosed, is asserted by the tinners of the Convocation, 26 G. 2, to be subject to the custom. (See art. 8, antè, p. 6, note b.) Accordingly, it was stated by one of the witnesses in the present case, that the parish church and cemetery of Helston are now actually situate within tin bounds; and by another witness, that he "believed all the lands of the Duchy in Cornwall were bounded or boundable."

The custom nowhere provides for the occurrence of veins of mixed metals, but is evidently adapted only to the superficial tinworks, formerly very productive, called stream-works.