RECENT exchanges in this paper between Mick Holder and Roger Horsfield deserves some comment. It's no surprise that Roger is using the Magna Carta event to peddle his anti-Commoning arguments; and equally no surprise that Mick Holder is retaliating with, dare I say, far greater vigour since he and Henry announced a few years ago they had discovered 'the Forest Charter'. In both cases self-notoriety stands out a mile, Roger extolling his academic know-all and Mick eager to straighten the record of events concerning the BBC programme. But with so much information freely available on the internet is there really need? Here's what I found with one click; – most of its probably common knowledge among interested Foresters anyway; but for Rogers sake perhaps more authoritative put this way than coming directly from my hip? According to Wikipedia 'The Charter of the Forest of 1217 (Carta de Foresta) is a charter originally sealed in England by the young King Henry III, acting under the regency of William Marshall, 1st Earl of Pembroke. A companion document to the Magna Carta, redressing some applications of the Anglo-Norman Forest Law that had been extended and abused by William Rufus, the charter re-established rights of access to the royal forest for free men that had been eroded by the Conqueror and his heirs. 'It was reissued in 1225 with a number of minor changes to wording, and then was joined with Magna Carta in the Confirmation of Charters in 1297. 'In contrast to Magna Carta, which dealt with the rights of barons, it provided some real rights, privileges and protections for the common man against the abuses of the encroaching aristocracy at a time when the royal forests were the most important potential source of fuel for cooking, heating and industries such as charcoal burning, and such hotly defended rights as pannage (pasture for pigs), estover (collecting firewood), agistment (grazing), or turbary (cutting of turf for fuel).' The Carta de Foresta became the foundation of Forest law which was not abrogated until the Wild Creatures and Forest Laws Act 1971 but still preserved the functions of Verderers Courts and the Right of Common at the same time freeing up the restriction of the fence month and winter heyning. Of far greater importance than the language of these Charters and Acts is the record of how it has operated, particularly since the Dean and New Forest Act 1808 which is still in force and known better here as The Enclosures Act, much of it recorded by Cyril Hart, particularly in his Verderers and Commoners but also supported by other very important snippets that have tended to go unnoticed. One is the front cover of a two day Commissioner of Woods Auction in July 1818 of some 44 lots totaling1340 acres surplus from its acquisition of Highmeadow Estate where it states: 'All claiming right of common in the adjacent Forest of Dean' – The Right of Common obviously being seen as an important selling feature at that point in time; but more importantly now is that it was a public statement coming directly from the 'horse's mouth' so to speak. Another instance is the Verderers' Court minutes where it is recorded that: Mr Joslin (then Deputy Surveyor) and the Senior Verderer (then Cyril Hart) explained that 'the legal view now was that a vast number of Commoners had acquired prescriptive rights in the Forest and that any 'call' against their so running would almost certainly fail' (two horses mouths in one go). There can be little doubt whatsoever that call meant legal action. No amount of academic posturing can alter this – it's the best legal tender possible. This is those in charge publicly spelling out the situation; and as Mick intimated in his letter last week and Tony Joslin and Cyril Hart confirmed over 40 years ago, any legal challenge would no doubt be doomed to failure. That's why it will likely never go to court because the opposers, the Forestry Commission included, already know what the result would be. So perhaps Roger Horsfield's efforts would be far better concentrated on promoting harmony and put this misguided nonsense to bed. Actually a far more worthy cause for Roger to have occupied his mind with would have been to have had a go at the BBC for their recent injustice to Sir William Winter (and to the Forest of Dean) in their Armada series. Sir William of White Cross is entombed in Lydney Church – he was the main architect and strategist of the defeat of the Spanish Armada; not Drake. But in typical BBC fashion the man who deservedly ought to have the respect of all of us never got as much as a mention!! One would have thought that ought to be of far greater importance and right up Roger's alley? But of course it's likely he's so full of himself it didn't even register. – Vurrister.