In the past I espied a sign on the side of a house, "Ancient Lights", it read. Puzzled, I asked around (long before Google) and was told it was to denote the ancient "right to light" accorded to those who enjoyed continuous natural light through a window for 20 years. I now hear that this right is under threat from a government whose intent is to make it easier to build and disregard the wishes of neighbours who may object. The right to light is currently enshrined in law and can effectively kill off a planning application for a building which is likely to occult the adjacent one.
The law of Ancient Lights goes back to the Prescription Act of 1832 and relates to protections in place, should the said light have been enjoyed for a period of 20 years or more.
I can imagine that this was rather a crucial piece of legislation, for, as a wiseacre once said, if you have to have a law there is a problem. (For example, the law against sex with a porcupine, allegedly, in Florida)
Go back to the 1830s and you might easily imagine that the need for natural light was a matter of survival. If you were dependent on light to do your work, for example watch making and repairing or needlework, then I suspect that the removal of such light, due to the encroachment of another building, might be taken as very serious indeed.
So how about now? Surely there is no such fundamental need. We can have as much light as we need at the flick of a switch, even if the EU has decided it should be dim and inoffensive.
Well, I don't know about you, but I need natural daylight as sure as I need air and water.
******
Today I walked in the sunshine, alongside the river that runs by the bottom of my garden. I am lucky to be free to do this.
No comments:
Post a Comment