The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-04-26 00:00:00

•
•

PENSNETT.

THR BROMLEY SURVEYOR'S ACCOUNTS. —At the
Brierley Hill Police Court, on Monday, before Messrs.
H. South, and L. Freer, Mr. William Hinton appeared
to ask the Bench to pass the Bromley Surveyor's accounts
for the year ending March 26th. 1873. Our readers will
recollect that the accounts were adjourned for 14 days,
for Mr. Hinton to give some explanation as to certain
items. Mr. Holberton appeared for Mr. Hinton, and
Mr. Homer on behalf of several ratepayers. Mr. Homer
said he appeared on behalf of several ratepayers of
Bromley and Pensui tt, to oppose the passiug of the
accounts. It had been elated that there was a party in
the parish opposed to Mr. Hinton, and he (Mr. Homer)
frankly admitted the truth of the statement. It showed
a very healthy state of things when they found two parties
in a parish ; one checked the other. %Yuen a man was
placed in a position of trust it vsas not to be considered
that he could deco he liked. His accounts should be
properly and regularly kept, and they should be open at
all times for the inspection of the ratepayers. His pay-
ments and receipts affected many poor persona, and
therefore it behoved him to be very careful. If his
accounts were challenged by any ratepayer it was only
right and fair that an opportunity should be afforded of
examining the Surveyor when he applied to the magis-
trates to pass his accounts. It was presumed that sur-
veyors of highways kept their accounts in a proper
manner, and were straightforward men. The Act of
Parliament dealt very leniently with persons who
I neglected to do their duty. He (Mr. Homer) did not
11 want to inquire whether Mr. Hinton had been guilty of
, any criminal act, but he did propose to put Mr. Hinton
in the witness box, and question him as to the way he
. had discharged his duties, and whether he had complied
with the Act of Parliament. It was pretty well known
that the parish matters at Peasant had been in a fer-
mented state for smile time pest, and Mr. Hinton's pre-
decessor in office had absconded with a certain sum of
money. He was quite sere that if his friend (Kr.
Holberton) would fallow him to question Mr. Hinton, he
should be able to prove very grievous charges against
that gentleman. He should prove that Mr. Hinton had
kept his accounts in a very irregular way ; and, further,
that he was entirely ignorant of the duties he undertook
to perform. After referring to the proceedings at the last
vestry meeting held in the Schoolroom, Pensnett, Mr.
Homer observed that Mr. Hinton hail received money
from various persons in the perish of Kingswinford,
which he had not accounted for. If permitted to do so,
he should prove that not only had .Mr. Hinton not
seconded for all the money he hi ad received, but that
there was something more serious beyond the present
objection to the passiug of his accounts. Mr. William
Hinton was then examined. He produced his accounts
for the year, 1872, signed by Fleury Hall and Joseph
Hughes. Cross-examiued by Mr. Homer : Was not sure
that the annual yeetry meeting woe called iu accordance
with the Act of Perlianient. He had never seen a copy
of the Act. Mr. Homer : I will tell you what the Act
says: The meeting must be called either by the vicar,
rector, curate, churcilwardeus, or overseers. Who called
the meeting in question P—Mr. Hinton. I did.—Ur.
Homer: Have you got your vouchers ?—Mr. Hinton :
Yes.—Mr. Hi mer : Look at Edward Partridge's. When
did you pay his bill ?-91r. Hinton: January 7, 1873.—
Mr. Homer: What is the &tuna= ?—Mr. Hinton : EDI
7s 41.—Mr. Homer: Did you pay that amount all at
once P—Mr. Hinton: No; 1 paid £lO on account. —Q.
When? A. I cannot tell. —Q. Two years ago? A. No ;
not one. I think it was last April —Q. The work was
done in 1870. Why didn't you pay the bill when it was
due ? A. Because I had no balance in hand. I have
paid as much as £55 out of my own pocket for repairs
done to the roads —Q. Did you employ Partridge to do
certain work in 1870:' A. Yee.—Q. Then how comes it
that for work dose in 1870 you charge £l9 odd in the
accouet• for 1872? A. l'erhaps I had not received the
bill before that year.—Q. Had you a balance in 1870 or
1871? A. I think not. —Q. Let me refresh your memory.
In 1871 did you receive something like £2O which you
forgot to place in your books P—Mr. Holberton objected.
—Mr. Homer: Just what I expected. It I am allowed
to proceed. I shall show that this man had money is
hand when he says he had not. I only want to get at
the tiuth. Hoye you brought forward any arrears ?
Mr. Hinton: Yes.—Q. How much? A. I don't know.
I can explain all if you will give me an opportunity.— Q
Then we can say this ; Some of the work done by Part•
tridge was executed in 1870 and 1871? A. Yes.—Mr.
Homer: Then I submit that the magistrates cannot sign
the accounts.—Mr. Smith (magistrate): YVe consider
that matter has been introduced into the accounts for
March ending 1879, which belonged to former years, an I
therefore we cannot pass the accounts. Mr. Holberton :
Do you hold that Mr. Hinton has paid this bill to Par.
triage ?—Mr. Smith: Tee, according to the books —Mr.
Holberton : I do not east it to go forth that my client
has done anything wrong.—Mr. Smith: He has paid the
according ti the books.-14. Homer said the next
queition for the consideration of the Bench was whether
the vestry meeting was legally convened. After quoting
the Act of Parliament. which says that the meeting
must be called by the vicar, curate, churchwardeus, or
overseers, Mr. Hinton was won placed in the witness
box„inid he admitted Dist the notice convening the
meeting was signed by himself alone.—lhe Bench held
that it was an illegal one, and tom the appointments of
surveyor and collector were invalid.—Mr. Homer thee
asked the Magistrates to appoint a surveyor. The
Magistrates Clerk explained that the appointment could
not be made until the next special sessiene, which will be
held on May 12.—The parties theu left the Court.