Richmond park

[Joviale]

A bit of history, found on a very good magazine called The Land (from a group previously known as The land is ours, based in and round Oxford):

DOWN WITH THE FENCES
Battles For the Commons In South London*
Many if not most of the open spaces of any size that remain today in South London exist because they were preserved from development by a combination of legal tactics and direct action.
Michael Bradley describes how some of them were saved.

Between the 16th and the 19th centuries, much of the open land, commons or woods in South London was enclosed for development, usually by rich landowners, or sold off for house building. In many of the commons, local people had traditionally benefited from customary rights of use, mostly grazing of animals and wood for fuel, but also planting small plots on the fringes of commons for market gardens or feeding themselves.
Despite its name, common land was rarely land held in common: it was almost always land owned by the Lord of the Manor, on which other local people had come to exercise some rights. But these rights often had no legal weight, they were part of an unwritten social contract. As time went on the commoners, those with acknowledged customary rights, could become wealthy individuals themselves. Thus later struggles sometimes developed into struggles between different local rich people.
Enclosures were often opposed by a section of the establishment. In the 17th century, the king and certain sections of the nobility sought allies among the rural population against the rising merchant and improving classes. In this power struggle, pressure could sometimes be put on the authorities, to stop enclosures. There was also an ideological motive: the paternalist state was opposed to over-extreme exploitation and ruthless destruction of social ties that could lead to mass upheaval. For example, when, in 1614 a new owner enclosed the whole of Barnes common, digging ditches and removing cattle, 100 villagers marched to petition the king, and a court hearing eventually reversed the enclosure.
Richmond Park
However, the king's opposition to enclosures by lesser mortals didn't stop him from trying his hand at it himself. Charles I, always short of cash, not only attempted to raise money through agricultural improvement, but was also fond of cre¬ating new hunting parks. In the 1620s, he established Richmond Park by carving out common land from surrounding parishes and annexing property from wealthy landowners. Locals lost access to wood and other fuels, to water supplies and grazing land. Even the king's supporters advised him that such behavior was likely to bring about rebellion, which of course it did. After Charles' execution, Richmond Park was seized by the Commonwealth, but the Restoration led to it being enclosed again.
This grievance smoldered locally for over 100 years. In the 18th century, the Park was farmed out to rich politicians and royals, who took on the post of "Park Ranger", which carried with it a large income. Prime Minister Robert Walpole (whose son was officially the Ranger), refused the public access to the park, and turned it into a resort of the nobility and royalty, let in on a ticket or key system: commoners were excluded, and ladders over the walls were replaced by man-traps.
But the park was also full of deer, rabbits and hares. Between 1723 and 1725 there was a mini-war between deer-stealers and gamekeepers, involving arson of keepers' houses, and "diverse outrages and disorders". At least two poachers were executed. John Huntridge, landlord of the Halfway House Inn on the wall of the Park, was charged with harboring deer-stealers, but he was acquitted, to popular acclaim.
The next Ranger was Princess Amelia, a particularly snotty royal. Under her Rangership, simmering local hostility broke into the open. On May 16th 1751, a crowd of parishioners broke into the park, claiming they were beating the bounds of the parish (the old ceremony for marking out the bounda¬ries). This was tantamount to asserting their rights of access to the old commons. Further break-ins followed. The agita¬tion of the 1750s was led by one John Lewis, a local brewer and printer, and a stroppy character, who declared himself "unwilling to leave the world in a worse state than he found it." In 1755, Lewis forced his way though the gate, was kicked out, and brought a case against Princess Amelia. By 1758, he had obtained a verdict opening up the park's paths as rights of way, but folk start to wander round the whole park, treating it as common. Lewis' printing business went broke due to his legal campaign, but Richmond residents had a whip-round to provide a small annual grant for him.

* Extract of The Land 7 Summer 2009 "Dismantling the commons, a history of enclosure in britain". (http://www.tlio.org.uk/TheLand/index.html)

[Weed]

"...a group previously known as The land is ours, based in and round Oxford)"

The Land Is Ours (TLIO) still appears to be an active national organisation, but there may also be regional groups -- (they used to have an Oxford contact address, but the current contact address is in Somerset) -

http://www.tlio.org.uk

i remember working at Bushy Park with Steve B and Chris J in 1972-73 -- like Richmond Park it is also a "Royal Park" -- the gates were closed for half a day once a year, which apparently was something to do with maintaining the rights of the Crown over the land -- (i think even the gates to the busy road that ran through the middle of the park were closed) -- presumably the custom continues?

[Joviale]

Would be interesting to know! In fact an awful lot of the british land is owned by the crown or aristocrats, people don't know about it but when one talks about farmers (as apposed to peasants) one talks about someone working the lad but not owning it.