The headline case in the Hampshire Summer Assizes of 1845 lay in a unique civil action in which two aristocrats fought over the ownership of land, following the abandonment of the proposed Southampton and Salisbury canal.

The waterway, first mooted in 1768, was intended to be 13 miles in length, stretching from Redbridge at the head of Southampton Water to Salisbury connecting with the Andover canal at a junction near Mottisfont in the heart of the Hampshire countryside.

A spur under Southampton would have linked it to the River Itchen.

But what appeared simple on paper was throughout beset with financial difficulties and the original concept foundered within four years.

However, the project was resurrected in 1793 which secured Parliament's approval with an estimated cost of £50,000. West country merchants were fully supportive of the scheme which they visualised as an integral link to Bristol but shareholders did not share their vision.

Though initially poorly designed, the Southampton-River Itchen canal fared better and by 1803, it was in use from the western end of the tunnel to Redbridge where it met the Andover canal and diverted at Kimbridge, near Romsey, to stretch as far as East Grimstead about five miles from Salisbury.

But the proposal was again struggling for investment and the construction company eventually conceded defeat. Through a lack of maintenance and malicious damage, the dream finally folded in 1806.

Gradually, the Salisbury section gave way to nature reducing it to a small stream and the Southampton arm resembled a stagnant ditch. Following the tragic death of a woman through drowning, councillors took decisive action and had it filled in.

And that in due course led to a simmering row between The Dowager Lady Hewitt who sued Sir John Barker Mill for trespass on land on the southern side of Redbridge Park.

The plaintiff, who lived at Freemantle Lodge, claimed the area on the grounds of 20 years undisturbed possession.

He in turn was adamant the land was waste and was therefore entitled to it through his rights as the Lord of the Manor of Millbrook.

The action began with Mr Crowder QC detailing Lady Hewitt's case before she informed Mr Justice Erle of her intention to call several witnesses to prove the possession by various acts of ownership and use, but suddenly the defence asked for a short adjournment which was granted. When the parties re-assembled, it was announced Sir John had withdrawn and the verdict was given in favour of Lady Hewitt.

Redbridge

In comparison, the criminal list was mundane with most of the cases appropriately dismissed in a few lines, but one highlighted the incompetence of a burglar who left a trial of footprints from the scene and resulted in his banishment to the colonies.

Before dawn broke on a late winter's morning, Arnold White came downstairs to find his kitchen a mess, with his larder window removed to enable an intruder to crawl through the gap and steal bacon, bread and other foodstuffs.

Within minutes, a police officer was at the scene in the hamlet of Eling and with the house owner, searched the premises for clues - but it was outside they found their lead.

By the side of the pantry window, they found in the rain softened ground footmarks which they followed for almost a mile until they petered out in the garden of Charles Humby. Inside the house, the officer found a pair of grubby boots and told Humby they exactly corresponded with the prints.

For reasons never explained to the public, he gave them back to Humby and left the premises.

However, if Humby believed he had been reprieved, he could not have been more wrong.

Shortly afterwards, the officer returned to the house and re-examining the boots, noticed they had deliberately been altered, commenting: "Charles, you have drawn several of the nails and removed one of the tips."

Humby made no reply, simply watching as the bobby continued his thorough search of his home which quickly revealed most of the stolen items.

Finally, he came across a coat with a shoulder smothered in grease that indicated a chunk of bacon had been carried against it for some distance.

Humby could offer no defence and after Mr Justice Coleridge was told of a similar conviction, he was ordered to be transported overseas for 10 years.