Water Rights to Kerrocruin Mill

William Henry Corjeag

John Haddon Corjeag + wife last miller at the mill

The Isle of Man Times, carried three reports on successive Saturdays starting 26th February 1938 entitled "WATER RIGHTS AT GLEN WYLLIN" the first

Perpetuation of Testimony.

A most unusual case come before Deemster Farrant in the Chancery Division of the High Court, at Douglas, yesterday, when there was a petition for the perpetuation of the testimony of Edward Henry Corkill. Mr Corkill, who is 80 years of age, owned Glen Wyllin from 1907 up till 1935, when he sold to the Isle of Man Railway Co. At the lower end of the glen is some land round Kerrowcruin Mill which formerly belonged to the Corjeags. The land has now been left to Mr John Haddon Corjeag's daughter, Norah Isabel Cannell, and on her death to her children. The glen is now owned by the Isle of Man Railway Co. and the Isle of Man Road Services Co., and, in order to preserve the water rights to the mill, Mr Kermode's evidence was taken so that it should be ready in case a cause of action ever arises. A note of the evidence was taken and filed in the Rolls Office. This procedure is unique in the Island, being the first (as far as can be ascertained) of its kind.

The second and main installment followed on the 5th March 1938

Was Railway Company Deceived?

Deemster Reserves Judgment on Costs Problem.

A most unusual case came before Deemster Farrant in the Chancery Division of the High Court, at Douglas, last week and again on Tuesday, when there was an action for the perpetuation of the testimony of Edward Henry Corkill. Mr Corkill, who is 80 years of age, owned Glen Wyllin from 1907 up till 1935. when he sold to the Isle of Man Railway Company. At the lower end of the glen is some land round Kerrowcruin Mill which formerly belonged to the Corjeags. The land has now been left to Mr John Haddon Corjeag's daughter, Norah Isabel Cannell, and on her death to her children. The glen is now owned by the Isle of Man Railway Co. and the Isle of Man Road Services Co., and, in order to preserve the water rights to the mill, Mr Kermode's evidence was taken so that it should be ready in case a cause of action ever arises. This procedure is unique in the Island, being the first (as far as can be ascertained) of its kind. Mr Eason appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr S. A. Kneale for the defendant companies.

Mr Corkill, who gave evidence on the first day was in the witness box for three hours.

Edward Henry Corkill, Lyndale, Kirk Michael, deposed that he was 80 years old. In 1907 he purchased from Alfred Ernest Grundy the premises known as Glen Wyllin, and sold to the Railway Company in 1935. He had been the owner of the Balacreggar portion of the glen since November, 1889, and had lived in Michael since he was 25. He had known the glen all his days. He knew the land belonging to the Corjeags at the foot of the glen. It consisted of one field and a brow, and up to recently other fields. The land belonged to John Haddon Corjeag and his father, William, before him. Some years ago they sold one field to William Crow. He knew the stream running through the glen. The plaintiff's land did not adjoin the stream.

Just under the railway bridge a portion of the waters of the stream was diverted into an artificial course. This new course carried the water for 100 yards down the glen, then into the field they sold to Crow, and after that on to Corjeag's through which it flowed to the shore. He knew William Corjeag and remembered him using the water for his mill. When the water was low he used to come up to the sluice and scrape the mud up to stop the water going down the main stream so as to get all the water he could for his millrace. The sluice was put there to keep too much water from going through the millrace. On many occasions Mr Corjeag took all he could get because it was little enough for him to run his mill. He had seen him and his son at times working at the sluice. Asked how he got to the sluice, witness said he walked up along the side of the stream on his own land and at Crow's field got over the hedge into the glen. There was a path up to the sluice. All the time witness had the property, Corjeag was doing this, and previous to that, too. The Corjeags owned the land called Kerrowcruin, and the Kerrowcruin mill. The mill had been there all witness's time and was an ancient corn mill. In the first place the water was used for the cattle on Crow's field, and was then carried down through Corjeag's field past the stables and cowhouses where the water was used for the cattle. There was a dam in Corjeag's field and in a dry summer he used to retain the water there for the mill, and for the irrigation of the land. No one ever interfered with the Corjeag's use of the water. It was never wanted by anyone else, because if there were cattle or horses in the glen there was plenty of water for them higher up. The owners of the lower fields all his time came and took the water for any use they had. He never interfered with them. There had been a lake in the glen before he bought it, but it was full of gravel and was dry most of the summer. Cross-examined: He did not tell Mr Sheard or Mr Chapman that the only claim for water was confined to the mill. The mill ran for some years after John Haddon Corjeag died, in 1931. He remembered Mr Sheard, when they were examining the glen, asking where the water had gone, and witness said "into the gravel." It did not run over the shore. Mr Chapman and Mr Hogg were with Mr Sheard. On the way back they came to the place where the water went into the millrace, and he told them then that Mr Corjeag had a right to the stream. Mr Sheard asked would they sell the field and he said that he could not tell

NO LICENCE.

It transpired during the cross-examination that Mr Kermode wished to include a clause in the deed of sale that the glen should be closed on Sundays, and another that no intoxicating drinks should be sold there. He at first refused to sell unless these clauses were included in the deed of sale, but later agreed to sell it "as he got it." On the second day a question arose as to whether evidence could be given by the defendants. The Deemster pointed out that it was necessary to take the evidence of Mr Kermode, who was 80 years old, and whose evidence would not be available when the life tenants grew up. Mr Kneale suggested that the difficulty could be got over by the evidence he wished to call being taken by mutual consent and this was agreed to.

RAILWAY MANAGER'S EVIDENCE.

Allan Mychrest Sheard, secretary and manager of the defending companies, deposed that he made an appointment to meet Mr Corkill on 28th August, at Glen Wyllan, with Mr Chapman. They proceeded down the glen and when they got to the entrance of the millrace, near the railway bridge, he asked Mr Corkill what about the millrace. His attention had been drawn to it by Mr Corkill's agent, who had pointed out how the glen could be developed by a lake or bathing pool, so that the question of water was of the greatest importance. In reply to the question, Mr Corkill said "What do you want to worry about that for, the mill is not working and not likely to be worked again."

Mr Kneale: Did he say what the water was used for?

Witness: For the mill.

Mr. Corkill assured him that there was plenty of water for a lake. They then walked to the mill, the object being to show how dilapidated it was, and that it would never be used again. There was a wheel and machinery in the mill which had since been taken away. The millrace was stopped up for about 30 yards and the water was flowing back into the stream. They returned and witness said "All right, Mr Corkill, in view of your assurance that the millrace is only for working the mill, we will purchase at the amended figure." After that Mr Corkill asked for an assurence that they would not apply for a liquor licence. He told Mr Corkill it would not be part of their policy to apply for a licence, but they could not enter into a covenant. It was not correct that Mr Corkill told him that the water was used for any other purpose than the mill. Cross-examined: He appreciated that whatever Mr Corkill said, it would not effect other people's rights. He had no personal knowledge of the facts other than Mr Corkill's assurance. When they purchased, they were under the impression that there was no right in the water except to the old mill which was closed. The question of water arose with Mrs Corjeag in the first summer. He was told that she had come to the junction of the millrace and the stream and diverted more water into the mill stream. He saw her, and told her she must not trespass in the river. She admitted that she had no use for water except one morning a week to drive a generator which gave her electric current for ironing. If she was assured of that, they could have all the water, as far as she was concerned, during the remainder of the week. An agreement was come to in writing. Until he got the statement of case, he had no idea that there was any claim for water. When Mrs Corjeag had the stream diverted, he wrote her a very strong letter threatening her with proceedings for trespass. Mrs Corjeag immediately called to see him. They agreed to allow her the use of sufficient water to drive the dynamo. They put barbed wire along the fence where Mrs Corjeag got over. She cut it down again. She wrote and stated that she would cut it down. In March, 1937, he made a written agreement with Mrs Corjeag in which they agreed to let sufficient water go down the millrace every day in the week to water the cattle, irrigate the field; and work an electric light plant. On Fridays, from nine o'clock until noon, all the water would go down the race. The water supplied was only such as the defendant companies considered sufficient. He knew that Mrs Corjeag only had a life interest, but did not get in touch with anyone else. The clause with regard to water for the fields and cattle was put in at Mrs Corjeag's request.

Wm. Herbert Chapman, estate agent, said that in 1935 Mr Corkill placed in his hands the sale of Glen Wyllin. Witness corroborated Mr Sheard's evidence as to what took place at the interview in the glen. Dealing with the question of costs, Mr Kneale submitted that the plaintiffs should pay the costs, as the evidence was taken purely for the benefit of the plaintiffs. The defendants had only called evidence to rebut what Mr Corkill had suggested. Mr Eason said the defendant had put himself out of court as far as claiming costs were concerned, because he had called evidence. Had he had any idea that the defendant was going to ask for his costs he would have objected to his giving the evidence. The Deemster said the case was an unusual one and he would look up what the procedure as to costs was.

The final follow up on Saturday, 12th March 1938

Judgment as to Costs.

In the Chancery Division of the High Court at Douglas on Wednesday Deemster Farrant gave judgment as to costs in the action of John Corjeag Cannell and Nora Isabel Cannell, minors, by their father, against the Isle of Man Railway Co. and the Isle of Man Road Services Co. The action was for the perpetuation of the testimony of Edward Henry Corkill, a man of 80, a former owner of Glen Wyllin. The glen is now owned by the defendant companies, and the plaintiffs claim certain water rights for a mill at the foot of the glen. An application had been made by the defendants for their costs.

His Honour held that in cases of this nature, if the defendants contented themselves with cross-examining the witnesses called by the plaintiffs they were entitled to costs, but when they had called evidence, as they had in this case, they were not entitled to costs. There would therefore be no order as to costs.

		Water powered Mills etc
Any comments, errors or omissions gratefully received The Editor © F.Coakley , 2024