Carr Gate toll bar keeper taken to court

Barnsley Chronicle
Saturday 15 December 1860

ALLEGED ILLEGAL TAKING OF TOLL

Samuel Marshall, the keeper the Carr Gate toll-gate, was charged with illegally taking toll from James Pawson. Mr Gill defended. The complainant said that the 26th of November he engaged a thrashing machine; and in coming to do the work, the machine had to pass through the Carr Gate toll-bar. There was a little straw upon the machine; and when the gate was reached, the defendant claimed the toll. He was asked: “What, for the machine[?]”, and the answer was “no, for the straw.” As they could not thrash without having the straw placed under the sheet, the toll was paid, though the demand was illegal. No exemption was claimed.

Mr Gill, in reply, said: On the part of my client I say that he had a perfect right demand the toll. Prima facie every person passing through a toll-gate is called upon to pay toll, though there are certain exceptions provided by 3rd and 4th Geo. IV., cap. 126. These exceptions are manures for improving land conveyed in carts, and agricultural implements, when running on their own wheels. My objection to the summons, therefore, is, that as this machine did not run upon its own wheels, the cart which conveyed it was liable to the toll. In fact, I contend that the cart is only exempt when taking manures, and it is not intended that a cart shall be loaded with ploughs, barrows, and such things.

Mr Holdsworth (who, during the temporary absence of Mr Barff, presided) said: I am not clear on the point. I do not think agree with you.

Mr Gill: I think it is as I have said. I further object, however, that though hay and straw or other produce, when not sold or going to be carried for sale, and when only being removed from one part of a farmer’s premises to the other, is exempt, yet not otherwise, and further, I object that, as no exemption was claimed at the time, the case cannot now be hard.

Mr Holdsworth decided against the defendant; but, the same time, as he did not believe that he had acted wrongly wilfully, be only inflicted fine of 1s, with 18s expenses.