1769.
October.
The Case about
Chertsey Bridge

The Inhabitants of the County of Middx and these of the County of
Surry maintain a Timber Bridge stretching over the River Thames
from a Village called Littleton in Middx to the opposite Shore which
is in the Parish of Chertsey in the County of Surry

To Secure the abutment at the Middx end of the Bridge and to resist
the Force of the Stream which bears very Strongly against it. it was long
age found necessary to form a Strong bank or Campshot extending
upwards from the Foot of the Bridge about 30 Feet

The Land lying next the River and above the Bridge is used a
Wharf for the Landing of Goods and belongs to Mr. W. a Gentleman in
the Parish of Littleton who receives a Toll or some other Consideration
in the nature of Wharfage for the Liberty of Landing of Goods thereon.
and the ancestors of this Gentleman have by piling campshoting and
other means kept the said Wharf in repair

But in the year 1724 for reasons which the new Justices of Middx
are not able to discover the then Justices thought fit not only to repair
the Campshoting or abutment which serves to defend the Middx end
of the Bridge but also the Wharf above mentioned to extent of 190
Feet upwards for the doing whereof it is conceived they had not the least
authority or Warrant by Law for the Statute of 22 H: 8. Chap. 5
which gives the Justices power over Bridge Sect 9th requires them
to repair the Highways next adjoining to the ends of Bridges for
the Space of 300 from such ends

From hence it appears that the power of Justices is limited to the
repair of Bridges and the Highways for 300 Foot from the Ends thereof
and that neither Wharfs nor Campshoting are under their Jurisdiction

The Statute of 1st Ann Stat. 1st. Capt. 18th S. 2. Which by the preamble
appears to have been made to prevent unnecessary Expence in the repairs
of Bridges requires that a presentment be previously made in Order
to the repair of Bridges and Highways at the ends thereof

12th Geo. 2. Chapt. 29. Sec. 13. lays a further Restriction on the
Justices and forbids the application of money for the repairs till
presentment made according to 1st. Ann.

From all which at least from the two first mentd. Statutes it should
Seem that the repair in 1724 was an unlawfull act

Mr. W: notwithstanding he still continues to claim and receive
Wharfage has long discontinued the repairs of his wharf and in
consequence thereof about three years ago the River made an increachmt.
on his Land and threatned the Demolition of the Middx end of the Bridge

Upon this the Bridge being very much decayed the Justices of Middx
in Conjunction with those of Surry made a General repair thereof and
by the advice of their Surveyor made also a new abutment about 30.
Feet above the Bridge expecting that Mr. W. for the preservation of