Archived decisions

    Hampshire County Council Item 5

    Regulatory Committee

    20 July 2005

    Application to add to the definitive map a bridleway between Frenches Lodge and Stoke Hill Farm, in the parish of St Mary Bourne

    Report of the Director of Recreation and Heritage

    Contact: Alex Lewis, extn. 6044; [email protected]

    WILDLIFE AND COUNTRYSIDE ACT 1981

    53. Duty to keep definitive map and statement under continuous review

    (2) As regards every definitive map and statement, the surveying authority shall keep the map and statement under continuous review and as soon as reasonable practicable after the occurrence .... of any of [the events specified in sub-section (3)] by order make such modifications to the map and statement as appear to them to be requisite in consequence of the occurrence of that event

    (3) The events referred to in sub-section (2) are as follows -

    (c) the discovery by the authority of evidence which (when considered with all other relevant evidence available to them) shows:-

      (i) that a right of way not shown in the map and statement subsists or is reasonably alleged to subsist over land in the area to which the map relates, being a right of way to which this Part applies

      (ii) that a highway shown in the map and statement as a highway of a particular description ought to be there shown as a highway of a different description

      (iii) that there is no public right of way over land shown in the map and statement as a highway of any description, or any other particulars contained in the map and statement require modification

    Presumed dedication at Common Law

      Use of a way by the public without secrecy, force or permission of the landowner may give rise to an inference that the landowner intended to dedicate that way as a highway appropriate to that use. Unlike dedication under s.31 Highways Act 1980, there is no automatic presumption of dedication after 20 years of public use and the burden of proving that the inference arises lies on the claimant. There is not minimum period of use and the amount of user which is sufficient to imply the intention to dedicate will vary according to the particular circumstances of the case. Any inference rests of the assumption that the landowner knew of and acquiesced in public use.

1. Summary

1.1 This report concerns an application for the addition to the definitive map of a bridleway between Frenches Lodge, Little London and Stoke Hill Farm, in St, Mary Bourne (Points A - B - C on the attached map). Two sections of the route are recorded on the definitive map as public footpaths, but the remainder is not recorded.

1.2 The evidence shows that the claimed route is a public road, dating from at least 1785. Members are recommended to make an order recording the route on the definitive map as a byway open to all traffic, from its junction with Frenches Farm Lane (point A) through to C and eastwards, over a county unclassified road to Stoke Road.

2. The Applicant and the application

    The application was made by Mrs Margaret Henstock of Little London, Andover. The application was made in 1999 and was accompanied by a number of witness evidence forms and letters, a copy of the tithe map of 1841 and a list of landowners and tenants of the same date.

3 The Landowners

3.1 The owner of the claimed bridleway is not known. Five landowners or adjoining landowners, who might be affected by the application have been identified and consulted.

3.2 Dr Hay, of Stoke Hill Farm, also owns land on either side of the claimed route. He recalls that in his childhood the track between his property (point A) and Stoke Road was a compacted chalk and grass track and that it was tarmaced in the 1940s at his parents' cost. He does not want the claimed route to be made more accessible to motorbikes as they have used it in the past and caused difficulties to livestock in the adjoining fields. He has no objection to the use of the claimed route by walkers and horseriders, but "detests the idea of the internal combustion engine".

3.3 Mr White of Frenches Farm, owns land on either side of the track, although not the track itself. He uses the northern part of the claimed route with vehicles in order to access parts of the farm. He regards the track as a `council road' and that it has always been used as such, but does not consider that the route is suitable for use by the public with any type of vehicle.

4. The Claimed Route

4.1 The claimed route commences at a junction with Frenches Farm Road, and runs eastwards along a track within woodland, which is also part of Smannell Footpath No. 5. At the Smannell/St Mary Bourne parish boundary the claimed route turns northeastwards to follow a track, enclosed between hedges, for approximately 1390 metres to point C at the entrance to Stoke Hill Farm. The track is unsurfaced, but in generally good condition, the northern part being used as a farm access track. A public footpath (St Mary Bourne Footpath No. 20 and part of the Test Way) runs along approximately 70 metres of the claimed route, immediately south of point C. Beyond point C is a farm access track, Stoke Hill Farm Lane currently not recorded on the definitive map but which is, and for some years has been, recorded as a publicly maintainable carriage road.

4.2 The total length between Frenches Farm Lane and Stoke Road is approximately 1730 metres.

5. Consultation

    The following persons and bodies have been consulted about the application, namely the Director of Environment, Ramblers Association, British Horse Society, Councillor Maxwell the local member, Trail Riders Fellowship, Cyclists Touring Club, LARA, Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council and St Mary Bourne and Smannell Parish Councils. The following responses have been received: the remaining consultees are presumed to have no evidence to offer.

5.1 Ramblers' Association - supports the application but has no evidence to offer.

5.2 LARA (Land Access and Recreation Association) - believes that it should be a byway open to all traffic and will therefore object to an order for bridleway.

5.3 St Mary Bourne Parish Council - confirms that land has been in use in recent years by riders and walkers and supports it being recorded as a bridleway.

5.4 Cllr J. Maxwell, the local member - has no comment other than that it seems sensible to regularise the position.

6. The issue to be decided

6.1 This Committee is required to decide whether or not the evidence described in this report shows that a public right of way subsists, or is reasonably alleged to subsist, over the claimed route. If so, the Committee should also consider whether the status of any other, connecting, rights of way are correctly recorded on the definitive map or whether the map requires amendment to show those routes as having a the same or a higher status than the claimed route.

6.2 Any changes to the definitive map must be based on evidence of the history and past use of the path(s) in question and must reflect public rights that already exist. It follows that the map must not be amended simply because such a change would be desirable, or instrumental in achieving another objective. Neither should such a change be avoided for the opposite reason. If Members are satisfied that a public right of way of a particular description exists over the claimed route and/or that any path shown on the map ought to be recorded with a different status, then a map modification order should be made.

6.3 Any public rights of way found to exist from an examination of the evidence are not lost merely through disuse. Unless stopped up by due process of law any rights previously dedicated will still exist, even if they are now neither used nor needed. This evidence must be looked at as a whole, it being unlikely that a single document or map will provide sufficiently cogent evidence to justify a change to the definitive map and statement. This type of evidence may disclose rights other than those claimed by the applicant, for example in this case they may show that the claimed route is a public footpath or an old road for vehicles, rather than a bridleway. The County Council is under a duty to record such rights as are found to exist, even if they are not claimed by the applicant.

6.4 The burden of proof in these matters is `on the balance of probabilities', so it is not necessary for evidence to be conclusive before a change to the definitive map can be made. If there is genuine conflict in the evidence, for example between the evidence of users on the one hand and landowners on the other, Members should make an order so that the evidence can be tested at a public inquiry. However, this is appropriate only if an order could otherwise properly be made and it is not a step which should be taken simply to avoid making a difficult decision. Officers do not consider that there is such a conflict of evidence in this case.

6.5 The originals of many of the documents referred to in this report are only available in public record offices, but copies, transcripts or tracings of most documents are available for inspection in the Rights of Way office, Mottisfont Court, as are witness evidence forms and statements. Members are urged to inspect these, or the originals, when considering this report.

7. Historic and documentary evidence

7.1.1 1759 - Taylor's map

    This is a small scale map which is one of the earliest commercially produced maps which show roads. It has moderate evidential weight, but its value is limited by the comparatively primitive mapping techniques employed in the production of the map and the fact that it is not direct evidence of the status of the routes shown on it.

7.1.2 This map shows Stoke and Little London, but there is no evidence of the claimed path. There is a track or roadway to the west of the claimed path, between Little London and Hurstbourne Tarrant, which does not appear in its entirety on later maps, although part of which is now known as Frenches Farm Lane and forms the access road to Frenches Farm.

7.2.1 1784 and 1785 - Map and Survey of the Estate of George Dewar Esq

    This is a private estate map which is typical of its type, showing land in the ownership and/or occupation of the person who commissioned the map. Generally made for private or estate management purposes, these maps often pre-empted, or followed, a change in land ownership or management. In the present case the map may well have been intended to record the effect on George Dewar's estate of the recent inclosure of land in Andover (see para 7.5.1 below). Being privately commissioned, estate maps do not carry as much evidential weight as maps which were open to public scrutiny, although they are very useful snapshots of landscape and use at the time of the survey.

7.2.2 This map shows that at point A (on the map annexed to this report) there is a gate across the roadway leading to Frenches Farm, and an enclosed, hedge or tree-lined track running northeastwards to point B (it follows what is now Footpath 5). At point B there is a gap in the hedge, suggesting that there is a point of access to the claimed route. There is also some (very faint) lettering at this point, which might read `Stoke', although it is difficult to be sure. The remainder of the claimed route lies outside the area covered by the map.

7.2.3 This is the earliest map to show the claimed route and supports the existence of a thoroughfare running between Frenches Farm Lane and the claimed route.

7.3.1 1785 Survey of the St. Mary Bourne estate of the Rt. Honourable Earl of Portsmouth

    This is a similar survey, of land to the north of the St Mary Bourne parish boundary, and consists of two maps, one of which covers the area of the claimed route. The track is shown, coloured brown like other public and private roads in the area. The roads are not numbered, although every plot surrounding the claimed track is. The written survey which would originally have accompanied the maps has not survived.

7.3.2 This provides evidence that the entirety of the claimed route was in existence by 1785 at the latest.

7.4.1 1785 - Inclosure of land in Andover

    Inclosure is the name given to the process whereby land was taken out of a communal, or common farming system and allotted to individuals who subsequently retained sole ownership of their individual parts of it. It had a major impact on the landscape, as large open fields previously cultivated in strips or blocks were divided by hedges into separate units, and waste or common land was similarly fenced or hedged and improved by its new owners.

7.4.2 During this process account had to be taken of the public roads and other highways crossing the land being inclosed. As a consequence, inclosure evidence is one of the few historic sources that can prove the exact status and location of highways.

7.4.3 An inclosure of common land and waste in Andover took place in 1785. Land immediately to the south of the claimed route was part of the land being inclosed and the Commissioners had to consider the status of the road south of point A, leading towards Little London. The route is listed in the section of the inclosure award headed `Public Carriage and Drift Roads over Enham Heath and Finckley Down' as `One other publick road from the end of a lane leading from Woodhouse by certain houses called Little London and leading between Little Ridges Coppice and Long Coppice towards the parish of St Mary Bourne'. After listing several roads, the award goes on to say `...all of which public carriage and drift roads are to be and remain of their proper and sufficient width as now staked and set out and are to be taken deemed and used as public carriage and drift roads by all persons whomsoever'. There is no surviving inclosure map, but Dewars map (paragraph 7.3.1.above) assists in identifying the features referred to.

7.4.4 Other roads listed in the same section of the award are referred to as `public carriage and drift roads' (as opposed merely to `public road'), but nothing is thought to hang on this: the heading and final note of the section make it clear that the intention of the Commissioner in this part of the award was to set out public carriage roads.

7.4.5 It is less clear whether the awarded road included that part of the route which lies between points A and B on the attached plan. The road (i.e. what is now Frenches Farm Lane) is mentioned as forming part of the western boundary of Great Ridges Copse, but no mention is made of any road on the north (or northeastern) boundaries of that plot. The wording in the description of the road (`towards St. Mary Bourne') as opposed to `to St Mary Bourne' suggests that the awarded road might stop short of the destination mentioned. Nonetheless, it is clear that the Commissioners considered that there was a through route to St. Mary Bourne in this location and that it was of carriageway status. Whilst not directly relating to the claimed route, it is certainly suggestive that the whole route was an old road between Little London and St. Mary Bourne.

7.5.1 1792 - Milne's map

    Similar in weight and providence to Taylor's map, this is another commercially produced map, printed at the scale of one inch to the mile. Owing to the small scale and nature of this map, it is likely that any paths shown on it were of some physical or strategic importance.

7.5.2 This map shows a track, which is almost certainly the claimed route, leading from point A eastwards along the parish boundary and then northeastwards and eastwards to join Stoke Road.

7.6.1 1816 - Ordnance Survey one inch map and drawing

    This map reflects the greatly improved mapping techniques that were practised by the Ordnance Survey and, as a result, much more reliance can be placed on it as an accurate representation of the topographical features present at the time of the survey. The one-inch map was reduced from the original drawing at two-inches to the mile.

7.6.2 This map shows the claimed route, linking at its southern end with Frenches Farm Lane (Point A) and at its northern end with Stoke Road. It is enclosed throughout its length and is clearly a significant feature in the landscape.

7.7 1826 - Greenwood's map

    This map carries the same evidential weight as Taylor's and Milne's map, considered above and presents a similar picture to the Ordnance Survey map of 1816.

7.8.1 1843 - Tithe Map and Apportionment

    The Tithe Commutation Act of 1836 introduced a scheme whereby all tithes were converted from a payment from the produce of land to a money payment. The maps and awards prepared under this Act were prepared under statutory authority and were open to public scrutiny and are thus a reliable source of information about land use. They were not, however, produced with the intention of identifying public highways and there are, therefore, constraints upon the conclusions which can be drawn from them.

7.8.2 The tithe map of St. Mary Bourne shows the claimed route coloured ochre, in the same way that other roads and tracks (both public and private) are coloured. No conclusions as to status can be drawn from the colouring alone, other than that it would appear to reflect a thoroughfare of some sort. The number `456' appears on the track. This is recorded in the accompanying written documentation as `Road and Waste'. No owner is identified and the land is not subject to a tithe. This is consistent with the route being considered to be a public highway, although it is not proof that is, of necessity, so.

7.8.3 The map is in poor condition and is torn between the points B and C. The map does not provide any information about that part of the route.

7.8.4 The Andover Tithe map (the award was confirmed in 1851) is consistent with the St. Mary Bourne map. On the Andover tithe map, the roads are uncoloured, but the track A - B appears to be part of a road network numbered 1942 and described in the award as `Public Roads'. At point B are the words `To Stoke'.

7.9.1 circa 1870 - 1910 Ordnance Survey County Series Maps

    The Ordnance Survey undertook a survey of the county in the late 1860s and subsequently produced a very detailed series of maps at a scale of 25 inches to the mile. These maps would be expected to show matters of particular relevance to rights of way, such as footpaths, gates and signposts, as well as the more significant landscape features. The first edition of this map is particularly useful, in that it is accompanied by a book of Reference which identifies the use to which each parcel of land is put.

7.9.2 On each of the three editions available to us, the claimed route is shown as an enclosed track. The southern end (near point B and between A and B) has wide tree-lined margins. The track is described in the first edition Book of Reference as `Road', as are a number of other roads or tracks, some apparently leading to private land. There appears to be a gate or other barrier across the track at point A.

7.10.1 1862 - 1920s Highway Administration minutes

    St Mary Bourne Vestry Meeting, the Whitchurch Highway Board, Whitchurch Rural District Council and the St Mary Bourne Parish Council have all had a role to play in the administration of highways and rights of way in the St. Mary Bourne area. Extracts of relevant minutes from those meetings are annexed at Appendix 1. The earliest surviving minutes commence in 1862. They show that:

7.10.2 In 1862 St Mary Bourne Vestry considered a proposal to extinguish a footpath in Stoke. The path can be identified from the minutes, as running from Stoke Hill (the U5) to `the highway leading from Stoke to French's'. This is the claimed route, which was then clearly regarded as a `highway'. Implicit in this is that it was a public route of a high status.

7.10.3 In May 1863 the Vestry met to consider whether the Parish could be relieved of the expense of repairing certain roads in the area. The claimed route was not amongst the six routes considered.

7.10.4 In April 1863 the Whitchurch Highway Board directed their Surveyor to report on the names of all the highways that the Board was required to maintain and their lengths. The highways were to be divided into three classes, (1) roads of primary importance, (2) roads of secondary importance and (3) driftways which had never been formed into roads. A list was produced. This identified, within the tithing of Stoke, (inter alia) Chalk Hill leading to Andover (Road No. 2, believed to be part of the U5 Stoke Road and a second class road) and `Road leading from Little London' (Road No. 7, recorded as a class 3 road and believed to be the claimed route). Class 3 roads, although referred to in the original direction to the Surveyor as `driftways', are not believed to have been confined to bridleways. Instead the expression appears to have been a reference to the fact that the road was unmetalled, or a `green' lane.

7.10.5 In January 1864 the Surveyor to the Whitchurch Highway Board reported that Road No. 7 (the claimed route) was cut into ruts. He was directed to carry out temporary repairs until the road could be repaired properly.

7.10.6 In April 1907 the Parish Council called the attention of the District Council to the `Road leading from Stoke to Andover (via) Frenches Cottage and Little London' (the claimed route). The report is also noted in the District Council's minutes, although the District Council declined to carry out any repairs.

7.10.7 The totality of this evidence suggests that between the mid-1800s and early 1900s the claimed route was a public highway maintained at public expense. Latterly, although no maintenance appears to have been carried out by the Rural District Council, there was at least a local expectation that it should be maintained at public expense. The reference to `ruts' in the minute of 1864 confirms that the route was in use by vehicles, and this is supported by use of the word `highway' and `road', both of which are suggestive, in this context, of an all-purpose highway. The minutes, where extant, do not provide any reference to the road in the 20 years after 1907.

7.11 1898 - 1900 - Documents relating to the sale of Straits Wood

      Land on the southeast side of the claimed route changed hands in 1898, and again in 1900. Neither of the conveyances include the claimed route, nor are any private rights of access granted over it. This suggests that the route was regarded as a public highway with sufficient rights of access to serve the land being sold (or that other rights of access were available to the purchaser. The plans on the conveyances are identical and show the claimed route coloured brown. Of itself, this does not prove that the track was regarded as a public road, because other tracks are also coloured brown, but it is marked `From Andover' at the southern end and `To Stoke' at the northern end, which would be unlikely and inappropriate were it a purely private access.

7.12.1 1909/10 - Records from the Finance Act

    The records can be used to prove the existence of a public right of way, because land that was public highway was often excluded from the taxable hereditaments shown on maps and plans prepared by the Inland Revenue.

7.12.2 In the present case, no firm conclusions can be drawn from the way the maps are coloured, but at least half of the claimed route is outside a taxable landholding, and the remaining part is likely to be, (as the map is not coloured throughout it is not possible to be sure). This map suggests, therefore that the claimed route (from Frenches Lodge to the U5 Stoke Hill) was public highway, possibly, although not incontrovertibly, a carriage road.

7.13.1 1929 and 1946 Highway Maintenance

      In 1930, responsibility for the maintenance of county roads passed from the rural district councils to the county council. A map was prepared by each district, showing highways that were considered by the district council to be highways maintainable at public expense. The map should carry strong evidential weight, because the District Surveyor ought to have known which were the publicly maintainable highways in his district. However, they should be treated with caution in those areas where the information on them is inconsistent with other evidence of use and status.

7.13.2 The roadway or track leading from Stoke Road to Stoke Hill Farm is shown on the 1929 map and the later maintenance map derived from it, but the claimed route A - B - C is shown on neither. This is surprising, given that the C19th minutes indicate that maintenance was locally expected and delivered.

7.13.3 The section of road between Stoke Hill Farm and Stoke Road is shown on Hampshire Highways list of streets as a publicly maintainable metalled carriage road.

7.14 1965 Sales Particulars of Frenches Farm

      These are of interest in that they show that the claimed route formed the major part of the southeastern boundary of the land being sold, and was not included as part of the land being sold. Even where land on both side of the lane was included in the sale, the lane itself was excluded. This lends support to the view of the current owner of Frenches Farm (see paragraph 3.3), that the lane is a public highway and not a private farm track. None of the post-1800 documents examined identify an owner of the lane.

7.15 Other relevant sources

    A number of other documents have been examined which have not contained any information which adds to our knowledge of the claimed path. These include:

      Deposited railway plans

      Index of Quarter Sessions highway orders

      1863 particular and valuation of Stoke Hill Farm

      The Victoria County History of Hampshire and A Parochial History of St. Mary Bourne

8. Analysis of the historic and documentary evidence

8.1 The claimed route (from A - B - C) and the farm road from C to the U5 at Stoke Hill has been in existence since at least 1785. It is not shown on the earliest map (Taylors, of 1759), but we do not know whether this was because it did not exist or because the map-maker just failed to record it (it might even have been a diversion of the route through Frenches Farm shown on Taylor's map). The Andover inclosure, whilst not covering the claimed route, suggests that by 1785 at the latest, the claimed route was a regarded as part of a carriageway between Little London and St Mary Bourne. The various minutes of the C19th and early C20th show that the claimed route was regarded as a public highway, probably of carriageway status (reference to it as a `highway' and to ruts in the roads would suggest this), and that it was publicly maintainable. The estate plans and private conveyancing documents are consistent with this, as are the Ordnance Survey County Series maps and Finance Act records. Were the picture totally consistent, one would expect the C20th maintenance maps to record the whole route as a maintainable `U' road. The fact that the 1929 `handover' map records only part of it as a maintainable road, tells us that it was not perceived by the Surveyor to be maintainable in its entirety, although this might simply be a reflection of the fact that no maintenance had been carried out for many years. The 1946 map would have been derived from the earlier map and repeats, rather than re-enforces, the earlier map.

8.2 There remains among local residents and landowners (see paragraph 3 above) the view that the claimed route is a public highway, which is owned by the County Council as highway authority. Although the perception that, being a public highway, the claimed route is therefore owned by the highway authority is incorrect at law, it would appear to be a survival of the local understanding evidenced in the C19th minutes, namely that the lane was a carriageway maintainable at public expense.

9 Recent evidence of use

9.1 Evidence forms showing use by 19 people, were submitted with the application. These show that, despite not being recorded as a public right of way of any sort, there has, nonetheless, been fairly regular use of the track by local residents and adjoining owners in recent years. This use has been on foot, horseback and in vehicles, although evidence of the latter is limited and appears to be confined to the vehicles of adjoining landowners.

9.2 14 users claim to have used the track on foot. The earliest incident of use is in the early 1960s, but the majority of use has occurred between 1985 and 1999 when the claim was submitted.12 users claimed to have used the path on horseback, the earliest use, again, being in the 1960s and the most frequent use being made in the years prior to the claim. The user evidence forms are, in some cases, ambiguous and it is not always possible to tell how often the path has been used on foot or horseback. In so far as it is possible to tell without further inquiry, use varies between daily and twice a year.

9.3 The user evidence forms do not disclose any challenges to use by landowners or those purporting to act on the landowners' behalf, nor do they show any event that might be construed as bringing the right of the public to use the path into question (a necessary pre-requisite to use of s.31 Highways Act 1980). None of the users claim to have had the permission of the owner of the land to use the path.

    9.4 In the light of the historic evidence of dedication of this route as an all purpose highway, it has not been considered necessary to interview users, nor to consider whether recent evidence of use amount to a dedication of highway rights at common law or under s. 31 Highways Act 1980.

10. Width of the highway

10.1 The route is fairly consistently shown on the first, second and third editions of the County Series maps, which show it as a enclosed track (save at its triangular junction with Stoke Road). Measurements taken on site suggest that a minimum width of 4.5 metres would properly reflect the width between the boundaries, although some of this width is currently taken up by banks and overgrown verges and somewhat less than this is available for use. The banks, trees and hedges on either side of most parts of the lane are of some age. There is no direct evidence to prove that the boundaries were set out with reference to the highway, but it is difficult to imagine the land between the boundaries being capable of sustaining use for any other purpose. Pre-supposing that the full width between the boundaries is highway, it is proposed to stipulate a minimum width of 4.5 metres.

11. Comments from the Applicant and the Landowner

    The Applicant accepts the evidence that the track is an old highway linking Little London and Stoke, although the outcome is not what she had expected. She expresses concern that the track might become accessible to four wheeled drive and other unsuitable vehicles, which might destroy the rural beauty of the green lane that she has sought to preserve. Although she acknowledges that it is beyond the remit of this Committee, she urges that vehicular access be restricted to the vehicles of adjoining landowners and horse drawn vehicles.

12. Conclusions

    The historic and documentary evidence shows that the claimed route was an old road, dating from at least 1785. It remains in occasional use by the public today, on foot and on horseback. The roadway leading from Stoke Hill Farm, recorded as a county unclassified road and also part of the Test Way long distance footpath, sees public use that is primarily that of walkers and riders. The whole ought properly to be recorded on the definitive map as a byway open to all traffic.

RECOMMENDATION

That an order be made to add to the definitive map a byway open to all traffic and to upgrade part of Footpaths No. 20 in St. Mary Bourne and Footpath No. 5 in Smannell to byways open to all traffic, the whole being a route between Frenches Lodge and Stoke Road, St. Mary Bourne (GR SU3825 5058 to 3964 5119).

Section 100D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB The list excludes (1) published works and (2) documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

File CR655 - Rights of Way Office, Mottisfont Court, Winchester, including copies of some of the documents referred to above the originals of which can be inspected in Hampshire Record Office.