Posted by Robert Dilley on November 26, 2002 at 21:22:17 from 65.39.15.64 user rdilley.
In Reply to: Beckfoot questions posted by Duncan on November 26, 2002 at 15:51:26:
As I pointed out in a post some time ago, much of the higher land (like High Topps and quite likely Kanchenjunga) would have been common land (I have all the common lands in the former county of Cumberland mapped, but not -- unfortunately -- Lancashire). This does not mean it was free-for-all, and is not like Crown Land in Canada or Public Domain Land in the US. Certain people -- from two to hundreds -- would have been entitled to graze sheep, dig peats etc. It is unlikely anyone would have objected -- or even thought of objecting -- to anyone camping on common land (done it lots of times myself). Mining, however, is a different matter. Mineral rights were usually reserved to the original Lord of the Manor and are not shared by the common-right holders. Captain Flint must have come to an agreement (probably involving royalties) with the owner of the mineral rights to the copper mine Roger discovered. Finally, Mrs Tyson's objections to the SADs camping on the edge of High Topps is probably more a function of her fear of fire than exercise of her property rights. She would have felt, as an adult, well within her right to object to a bunch of kids camping where they might burn her out, regardless of who if anyone owned the property.