DOCSLIB.ORG

Wisconsin, Et Al

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wisconsin, Et Al No. 15-214 In the Supreme Court of the United States JOSEPH P. MURR, ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. STATE OF WISCONSIN, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS BRIEF FOR RESPONDENT STATE OF WISCONSIN BRAD D. SCHIMEL MISHA TSEYTLIN Attorney General Solicitor General Counsel of Record STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DANIEL P. LENNINGTON 17 West Main Street LUKE N. BERG Madison, WI 53703 Deputy Solicitors General [email protected] (608) 267-9323 Attorneys for the State of Wisconsin QUESTION PRESENTED Whether land lots that were created and defined under state law, which merged pursuant to a preex- isting state law merger provision, are a single “parcel” for regulatory takings purposes. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page QUESTION PRESENTED ......................................... i INTRODUCTION .......................................................1 STATEMENT ..............................................................2 A. Land Lots Are Creatures Of State Law ..........2 B. Lot Merger Is A Commonly-Used Tool For Phasing Out Substandard Lots .......................8 C. Factual Background ....................................... 13 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................... 23 ARGUMENT ............................................................. 27 I. As This Court Suggested In Lucas, The Relevant Land “Parcel” Should Be Defined By Objectively “Reasonable Expectations,” As “Shaped By The States’ Law Of Property” ......................................................... 27 II. Contiguous, Commonly Owned Land Lots Are One “Parcel” Under The Approach Suggested By Lucas Where—As Here—The Lots Are Merged Under State Law ................ 37 III. Even If This Court Decides That A Multifactor Analysis Is Warranted, The Lots Here Are Still One “Parcel” ................... 43 CONCLUSION .......................................................... 47 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Appolo Fuels, Inc. v. United States, 381 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ........................... 44 Ariz. State Legislature v. Ariz. Indep. Redistricting Comm’n, 135 S.Ct. 2652 (2015) .......................................... 35 Armstrong v. United States, 364 U.S. 40 (1960) ......................................... 25, 27 Bd. of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972) ....................................... 24, 30 Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897) ............................................. 27 City of Trenton v. New Jersey, 262 U.S. 182 (1923) ............................................... 3 Dist. Intown Props. Ltd. P’ship v. District of Columbia, 198 F.3d 874 (D.C. Cir. 1999) ...................... passim First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 482 U.S. 304 (1987) ............................................. 27 Forest Props., Inc. v. United States, 177 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ............... 43, 44, 46 iv Horne v. Dep’t of Agric., 135 S. Ct. 2419 (2015) ......................................... 29 In re Application for Vacation of Part of A.A. Carlson’s Plat, 699 N.W.2d 254 (Wis. Ct. App. 2005) ................ 41 Keystone Bituminous Coal Ass’n v. DeBenedictis, 480 U.S. 470 (1987) ................................. 31, 32, 34 Lingle v. Chevron USA Inc., 544 U.S. 528 (2005) ................................. 27, 28, 29 Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419 (1982) ............................................. 29 Lost Tree Village Corp. v. United States, 707 F.3d 1286 (Fed. Cir. 2013) ..................... 44, 46 Lucas v. S.C. Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (1992) .................................... passim Masko v. City of Madison, 665 N.W.2d 391 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003) ................ 17 McKeen v. Delancy’s Lessee, 9 U.S. (5 Cranch) 22 (1809) ............................ 3, 33 Murr v. St. Croix Cnty. Bd. of Adjust., 796 N.W. 2d 837 (Wis. Ct. App. 2011) ........ passim Or. ex rel. State Land Bd. v. Corvallis Sand & Gravel Co., 429 U.S. 363 (1977) ....................................... 33, 34 v Pa. Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (1922) ............................27, 28, 31, 32 Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, 533 U.S. 606 (2001) ...................................... passim Penn Cent. Transp. Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104 (1978) ...................................... passim Penn Cent. Transp. Co. v. New York City, 42 N.Y.2d 324 (1977) .......................................... 40 Phillips v. Wash. Legal Found., 524 U.S. 156 (1998) ............................................. 30 Preseault v. I.C.C., 494 U.S. 1 (1990) ................................................. 30 Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986 (1984) ............................................. 30 Sierra Club N. Star. Chapter v. Pena, 1 F. Supp. 2d 971 (D. Minn. 1998) ..................... 14 Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 560 U.S. 702 (2010) ................................... 2, 24, 30 Town of Sun Prairie v. Storms, 327 N.W.2d 642 (Wis. 1983) ................................. 7 Wis. Pub. Serv. Corp. v. Arby Const., Inc., 818 N.W.2d 863 (Wis. 2012) ............................... 17 vi Wisconsin’s Envt’l Decade, Inc. v. Dep’t of Nat. Res., 271 N.W.2d 69 (Wis. 1978) ................................. 14 Zealy v. City of Waukesha, 548 N.W.2d 528 (Wis. 1996) ................... 21, 22, 38 Constitutional Provisions U.S. Const. amend. V ............................................... 27 U.S. Const. amend. XIV ........................................... 27 Wis. Const. art I, § 13 .............................................. 20 Statutes 16 U.S.C. § 1271 ....................................................... 14 16 U.S.C. § 1283 ....................................................... 15 Cal. Gov. Code § 66451.11 ....................................... 11 Cal. Gov. Code § 66451.13 ....................................... 12 Cal. Gov. Code § 66451.22 ....................................... 13 Colo. Rev. Stat. § 30-28-139 ..................................... 12 Minn. Stat. § 394.36 ........................................... 12, 13 Minn. Stat. § 462.357 ............................................... 13 N.H. Rev. Stat. § 674:39-a ....................................... 12 N.H. Rev. Stat. § 674:39-aa ..................................... 12 vii N.M. Stat. § 47-6-9.1 ................................................ 12 R.I. Gen. Laws § 45-24-38 ........................................ 12 St. Croix County, Wis., Code of Ordinances § 17.36 (2005) ...................................................... 16 Vt. Stat. tit. 24, § 4412 ............................................. 12 Wis. Laws of 1849, ch. 41 ........................................... 7 Wis. Laws of 1955, ch. 570 ....................................... 10 Wis. Laws of 1961, ch. 214 ....................................... 10 Wis. Stat. § 236.02 ................................................. 7, 8 Wis. Stat. § 236.03 ..................................................... 7 Wis. Stat. § 236.10 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 236.13 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 236.20 ..................................................... 7 Wis. Stat. § 236.25 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 236.335 ................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 236.34 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 236.36 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 236.45 ................................................. 7, 8 Wis. Stat. § 30.27 ............................................... 14, 16 viii Wis. Stat. § 32.10 ..................................................... 20 Wis. Stat. § 706.01 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 706.02 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 706.05 ..................................................... 8 Wis. Stat. § 893.52 ................................................... 42 Regulations Wis. Admin. Code § NR 118.03 ................................ 15 Wis. Admin. Code § NR 118.04 ................................ 15 Wis. Admin. Code § NR 118.06 ................................ 15 Wis. Admin. Code § NR 118.08 .......................... 15, 18 Wis. Admin. Reg., Aug. 1986, No. 368..................... 17 Wis. Admin. Reg., Dec. 1975, No. 240 ..................... 17 Wis. Admin. Reg., June 1980, No. 294 .................... 17 Wis. Admin. Reg., Oct. 2004, No. 586 ..................... 17 Treatises American Law of Property (Casner ed. 1952) ........... 6 Arden H. Rathkopf, et al., Rathkopf’s The Law of Zoning and Planning (4th ed. 2016) ............ 10, 11 ix Bruce A. Ackerman, Private Property and the Constitution (1977) ............................................. 35 Julius L. Sackman, et al., Nichols on Eminent Domain (3d ed. 1997) ............................................ 4 Patricia E. Salkin, American Law of Zoning (5th ed. 2016) .......................................................... 9, 11 Patrick J. Rohan, Zoning and Land Use Controls (Eric Damian Kelly ed., 1997) ........................ 9, 11 Richard R. Powell, Powell on Real Property (Michael Allan Wolf ed., 2013) ......................... 5, 9 Rodger A. Cunningham, William B. Stoebuck, & Dale A. Whitman, The Law of Property (Lawyer’s ed. 1984) ........................................... 5, 6 Thompson on Real Property (David A. Thomas ed., 2d ed. 2009) .......................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Copyrighted Material
    CHAPTER 1 HISTORY AND CONCEPT OF BOUNDARIES 1.1 INTRODUCTION The history and location of boundaries are steeped in the history of the world from prerecorded times to today. These boundaries are a result of actions and law. Boundar- ies can be related to the areas of history, politics, surveying, and law. Both boundaries of an international nature as well as between individuals have caused problems to have been fought, are being fought, and will be fought, in the future over the location of boundaries between nations, states, and individual parcels of land within “ Happy Acres ” subdivision. Wars have been fought on both an international basis and in local neighborhoods, and people have been killed over boundary disputes of an inconsequential nature that have ranged from hundreds of miles to a fraction of a foot or meter. Boundaries are personal in nature, and people have been and will continue to be protective over the misidentification or misalignment of a known or perceived boundary infringement. The surveyor may become the common denominator in a boundary problem, from preparing an erroneous map showing the boundary between two or more nations to the erroneous depictionCOPYRIGHTED of a single line between twoMATERIAL landowners. In the primeval forest, particularly in the plant kingdom, there are no known boundaries between living things. Although some horticulturists dispute the fact, we accept the fact that plants do not create boundaries to separate themselves. Animals — especially humans — create boundaries. Although we like to think that only humans create and appreciate boundaries, it has been recorded in nature that most mammals, some reptiles, and a few fish create, identify, mark, and defend boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Pitchforks and Perambulation: Borders, Violence, and Mapping in 17Th-Century New England
    Braccio 1 Pitchforks and Perambulation: Borders, Violence, and Mapping in 17th-Century New England Disputes over boundaries and deeds dominated the records colonists produced in New England between 1630 and 1700. When these disputes were particularly contentious, they became punctuated by rare and dramatic acts: mapping, violence, and indigenous testimony. These infrequent moments in generally mundane records reveal several important points, First, mapping, violence, and English reliance on indigenous knowledge were all powerful tools that colonists only employed out of desperation. The English population in the colonies was rapidly growing and land had become scarce. When they looked at a few acres of land, they saw farms for their children, future divisions of the town, and prosperity. It was this feeling of necessity and desperation that began a serious colonial engagement with mapping. Amongst the colonists, employed mapping far less frequently than violence and it should be understood as an extraordinary act. Second, the mundane land records concealed a greater project. By establishing written legal records, maps, memories of perambulation, and tales of violence over the landscape, colonists replaced the Algonquian spatial epistemology, that they had initially relied on, with an English way of understanding the landscape. Despite colonists’ project to silence them, indigenous people continuously occupied important roles in clashes over the land. For the first twenty-years of English occupation of the New England coastline, they had been utterly reliant on indigenous spatial knowledge. Mapping and land disputes were part of a process of replacing dependence on the indigenous with English knowledge and an anglicized landscape. Nothing could be more English than squabbling over the boundary between two Englishmen, ignoring any indigenous claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Beating the Bounds: Property and Perambulation in Early New England
    Beating the Bounds: Property and Perambulation in Early New England Allegra di Bonaventura INTRODUCTION In 1654, lay historian Edward Johnson wrote of the colonial project in New England in flushed, sanguine terms: "Thus hath the Lord been pleased to turn one of the most hideous, boundless, and unknown wilder- nesses in the world in an instant, as 'twere, .[..] to a well-ordered com- monwealth."' Colonists who came from England in the seventeenth- century, arriving on New England's soil, cultivated an array of evolving aspirations from economic opportunity and political consensus to religious reform and even toleration. Their claims to any higher purpose, however, rested first and foremost on establishing a firm hold on the ground below. For colonists, imposing order on this "most hideous, boundless"2 land usually meant clearing trees, planting crops and constructing buildings, but it also required them to impose their thinking onto the earth, reworking and rewording the land from "wilderness" into a Western idea of "prop- erty."3 Ordinary New Englanders compelled this legal and symbolic transformation,4 not simply by writing it into statutes or deeds, pleading it before magistrates at court or even in idle musings over rum or a neighbor's fence. They enacted the change, scoring it deeply into trees and stumps, heaving it onto mounds of native stones and, of course, by stamping out its lines with the soles of their feet. During the period of the Protestant Reformation, Europeans' view of the * John M. Olin Fellow in Law and Economics at Yale Law School and Ph.D. candidate in History at Yale University.
    [Show full text]
  • 360 Years of Perambulation | New Hampshire Municipal Association 360 Years of Perambulation
    4/12/2020 360 Years of Perambulation | New Hampshire Municipal Association 360 Years of Perambulation By Christopher J. Porter What comes to mind when you hear the word perambulation? 1. Arcane, archaic state statutes? 2. Au-pairs pushing prams though Hyde Park? 3. Beating the bounds? 4. PERambulation? I thought it was PREambulation! 5. Selectmen tramping though the woods in search of "a certain large maple tree" mentioned in the town's charter that probably died back in 1783? 6. Pre-meditated amputation? If you said "some of the above" (numbers 1, 3 and 5) you are clearly a keen student of perambulation, the subject of which was the focus of a survey conducted this past summer by the New Hampshire Municipal Association (NHMA). Before diving into the study's findings, a bit of background on perambulation may be useful. By definition, according to Merriam-Webster, to perambulate is to: (1) travel over or through, especially on foot; or (2) make an official inspection of (a boundary) on foot. Although the etymology is Latin, the "modern" form and usage of perambulate dates to 1568. Perambulation was a colonial import, as described in the following piece on the custom's British traditions, "Selectmen on the Trail!" by James W. Baker, published at Jabez Corner: Years ago, one of the more practical festivals of the Christian Year was Rogation. A moveable holiday that occurred the Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday before Ascension Thursday, Rogation was when each town organized a procession to trace the parish or borough boundaries. Civic and religious leaders led a perambulation which stopped at each boundary marker where a prayer was given (in part to prevent evil spirits from spreading diseases and spoiling the harvest) before returning to the church for cakebread and ale.
    [Show full text]
  • The Feast of Corpus Christi in the West Country
    Early Theatre 6.1(2003) . The Feast of Corpus Christi in the West Country The feast of Corpus Christi, a late addition to the medieval calendar of festivals, was established in the thirteenth century as a response to the new eucharistic doctrine of transubstantiation. As Miri Rubin has shown in her rich study of the eucharist in late medieval culture, the energy for the establishment of the feast came, not from the hierarchy, but from the laity and the clergy who served them. It was the Beguines of Liege, inspired by the eucharistic visions of Juliana of Cornillon, who first sought to establish a special feast to honour the real presence of Christ in the sacrament.1 But the local bishop showed little interest in the feast and it was the Dominicans who spread the new celebration beyond Liege.2 It was not until Pope Urban IV championed the feast in his bull Transiturus in 1264, arguing that the day of the institution of the sacrament should be celebrated ‘not in sorrow in the Passion week, but on another, joyful, occasion’,3 that the feast gained real recognition. It reached England in the early fourteenth century, with the earliest references to its celebration coming from the west country, first in the dioceses of Bath and Wells and Gloucester in 1318 and in the diocese of Exeter in 1320.4 Dioceses across the country soon enthusiastically adopted Corpus Christi, adding a new festival to the progression of spring and summer events that began with Easter and ended with Midsummer or the feast of St John the Baptist, 24 June.
    [Show full text]
  • The Forgotten History of Metes and Bounds Abstract
    MAUREEN E. BRADY The Forgotten History of Metes and Bounds abstract. Since long before the settling of the American colonies, property boundaries were described by the “metes and bounds” method, a system of demarcation dependent on localized knowledge of movable stones, impermanent trees, and transient neighbors. Metes and bounds systems have long been the subject of ridicule among scholars, and a recent wave of law-and-eco- nomics scholarship has argued that land boundaries must be easily standardized to facilitate mar- ket transactions and yield economic development. However, historians have not yet explored the social and legal context surrounding earlier metes and bounds systems—obscuring the important role that nonstandardized property can play in stimulating growth. Using new archival research from the American colonial period, this Article reconstructs the forgotten history of metes and bounds within recording practice. Importantly, the benefits of metes and bounds were greater, and the associated costs lower, than an ahistorical examination of these records would indicate. The rich descriptions of the metes and bounds of colonial properties were customized to the preferences of American settlers and could be tailored to different types of property interests, permitting simple compliance with recording laws. While standardization is critical for enabling property to be understood by a larger and more distant set of buyers and cred- itors, customized property practices built upon localized knowledge serve other important social functions
    [Show full text]
  • Metes and Bounds
    THE FORGOTTEN HISTORY OF METES AND BOUNDS Maureen E. Brady Since long before the settling of the American colonies, property boundaries were described by the “metes and bounds” method, a system of demarcation dependent on localized knowledge of movable stones, impermanent trees, and transient neighbors. Metes and bounds systems have long been the subject of ridicule among scholars, and a recent wave of law- and-economics scholarship has argued that land boundaries must be easily standardized to facilitate market transactions and yield economic development. However, historians have not yet explored the social and legal context surrounding earlier metes and bounds systems—obscuring the important role that nonstandardized property can play in stimulating growth. Using new archival research from the American colonial period, this Article reconstructs the forgotten history of metes and bounds within recording practice. Importantly, the benefits of metes and bounds were greater—and the associated costs lower—than ahistorical examination of these records would indicate. The rich descriptions of the metes and bounds of colonial properties were customized to the preferences of American settlers and could be tailored to different types of property interests, permitting simple compliance with recording laws. While standardization is critical for enabling property to be understood by a larger and more distant set of buyers and creditors, customized property practices built upon localized knowledge serve other important social functions that likewise
    [Show full text]
  • Atrocity, Entitlement, and Personhood in Property Daniel J
    Vanderbilt University Law School Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 2012 Atrocity, Entitlement, and Personhood in Property Daniel J. Sharfstein Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Daniel J. Sharfstein, Atrocity, Entitlement, and Personhood in Property, 98 Virginia Law Review. 635 (2012) Available at: http://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/385 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ATROCITY, ENTITLEMENT, AND PERSONHOOD IN PROPERTY Daniel J. Sharfstein* INTROD U CTION ................................................................................... 636 I. INTUITIONS OF PERSONHOOD: MAKING SENSE OF THE A TROCITY V ALUE ....................................................................... 645 A. The Progressive Valence and Legacy of Personhood........ 646 B. Understandingthe Atrocity Value in Property ................... 648 1. InitialIntuitions ............................................................... 648 2. The Social Psychology of Atrocity and Personhood... 650 3. Atrocity, Personhood,and the CulturalDynamics of Violen ce ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EWELL PARISH NEWS the Monthly Newspaper of St Mary the Virgin Ewell No
    EWELL PARISH NEWS The monthly newspaper of St Mary the Virgin Ewell No. 556 May 2019 60p Sharing the Love of Christ, the Light of the World, with the people of Ewell CONTENTS SPRING MARKET The Vicar writes .........2 & 3 In and around our parish....4 Money Matters...................4 Plants, books, bric-a-brac, cakes, raffle, refreshments Suggested prayers.............5 Fun Day Wednesday...........5 Spring Market.....................6 More Creatures Great and Small..................................6 From the Parish Registers..6 Coffee Mornings.................6 Nuts in May........................6 March Organ recital report.7 Quiz night report................7 Fellowship for our Vicar.....8 Have you seen them?.........8 SATURDAY 18 MAY Garden Party......................8 Grand Draw tickets.............8 St Mary’s Church Hall (London Rd) Children’s pages........9 & 10 Bereavement Café............11 10-12 noon May Organ Recital............11 (Please bring donations from 8.30 am) Beating the Bounds..........12 Calendar for May..............12 COPY FOR THE NEXT EDITION: Please email EPN copy to: [email protected]. Handwritten or typed copy will only be accepted by prior agreement (call 020 8393 4804). Please do not embed photos in WORD files, but send the images separately. Copy date for the June edition is noon on Monday 13 May. Page 2 May 2019 Ewell Parish News The Vicar writes Website: www.stmarysewell.com The modern world makes decisions by the ballot and the market. In both of these systems, differences are accentuated. Registered Charity Number 1128409 Political parties emphasize their differences, and the media CLERGY only magnify that. In the market, producers try to distinguish Vicar: The Reverend Russell Dewhurst MPhys BTh LLM; themselves from their competitor, by price, branding, quality 020 8393 1297; Email: [email protected] or some other means.
    [Show full text]
  • Beating the Bounds: Exploring Borders and Scale in Contemporary British Environmental Poetry
    Beating the Bounds: Exploring Borders and Scale in Contemporary British Environmental Poetry Submitted by Ben Oliver Sebastian Smith to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English (Creative Writing) in September 2012. This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. (Signature) ……………………………………………………………………………… 1 Abstract This work consists of a collection of poetry, Lessons in Augury, preceded by a thesis, ‘Beating the Bounds: Exploring Borders and Scale in Contemporary British Environmental Poetry’. This thesis examines the significance of borders that are both culturally and ecologically meaningful, asking how these borders function in contemporary environmental poetry. It argues that such borders provide sites in which environmental poets can explore the interconnection of anthropocentric and ecocentric systems of value and work towards an understanding of human concerns at more-than- human, ecological scales. The first chapter examines the significance of the borders of the ‘dwelling space’ in John Burnside’s poetry. The following chapters move on to investigate the significance of more specific borders: coastlines and mountain ranges in Thomas A. Clark’s recent collections, the river in Alice Oswald’s Dart and the border between day and night in Richard Caddel’s posthumously published Writing in the Dark.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bounds of the Liberty of Ipswich K Briggs
    19 THE BOUNDS OF THE LIBERTY OF IPSWICH by KEITH BRIGGS WHEN IN 1654 Nathaniel Bacon assembled his great manuscript volume of Ipswich documents, he opened it with a description of a perambulation of the Liberty of Ipswich which he claimed to be of the year 26 Edward III, which is 1352/3. 1 Bacon’s copy is the only surviving version of this perambulation, and it has long been taken as authentic. 2 However, the language of this text is modern English, certainly not much earlier than Bacon’s time, and it cannot be an accurate copy of a fourteenth-century original. At best, it is a translation from earlier English, or, more probably, French, by Bacon or someone else of an authentic early original. But it might also be entirely spurious, and the present study was motivated by a desire to answer the question of authenticity, which required an examination of all existing versions of the bounds. This revealed the fact that three of the most important manuscript versions are unpublished, so another aim of the work became the production of transcriptions of those documents; these appear below. This study concerns itself only with geography and topography, leaving aside political questions. There exist also documents describing the bounds of Ipswich by water, concerning the jurisdiction of the Orwell estuary; these documents are also not considered here. The specification of the boundaries of an estate by means of a perambulation between named landmarks has a very long tradition. At least 1500 Anglo-Saxon charters survive from the pre-Conquest period, many with such boundary descriptions, usually written in Old English even when the rest of the charter is in Latin.
    [Show full text]
  • Document Archive Part 2
    8 4 ) ' F r o m M r. F o x ' s N o t e s ' ( w i t h p r i n t s , e t c . a t t a c h e d ) 25) rn envelope addireased to'The Ciirattor and Archivist, Guildford Museom.* Prints, p.&.s etc* of St. Martha's. 26) En3velopie containing correspondence on the offioiaOi imme of t h e B c c l e s i a ® t i c a l P a r i s h o f S t . M a r t h a ' s a t C h i l w o r t h . 27) Paickage containing glsiss plate negatives of: Ta) Wm. Morgan (tomb; ("b) A church (unnamed) c) Sir Christopher Hatton d) St. Martha's Church, Chilworth 28) 'St. Martha^ea&the^KiMii THe *iUiti®aity of the Kame' hy P.G. Palffler (Re-printed from the Surrey A<$vcrt-iser, Nov. 21st 1923. (3 CEopies) 200 Booklet: 'St. Martha's om the Hill: A Poaa' 30) Ifotes and suMsary re correct nsone of Paci^. Si) Hiscellaneou® notes: Derivation of '^ilworth' (G.C. Williamson); D i t t o o f ' T y t i n g ) j d i t t o o f ' M a r t y r ' s H i l l ' . 3 2 . D l s c < ^ o £ r / L v o P I d I t - ' > s H u c J S u f i c e r ^ / 9 ? 3 J ' - S , J f ^ / s s t o ^ c - H u / i c H ( ^ ^ s e c f t .
    [Show full text]