The Express.
London, England, 1851-02-19 00:00:00

WORSHIP-STREET,

IMPORTANT DECISION. - Mr. Arnold pronounced his
judgment in a cue of considerable importance to the con-
gregations attending the numerous district churches and
chapels erected under the provisions of the Church Building
Act, arising out of a summons obtained at the instance of
the commissioners of paving fur the parish of St. Luke,
against Messrs. Sowter and 'Lydon, churchwardens of the
district church of St. Matthew, City-road, for the recovery
of 161. 17s. 9d., arrears of rates alleged to be due by them
in respect of that edifice. Mr. Kiplin, who was accom-
panied by several of the trustees, appeared for the commis
*loners, and Mr. Vann was retained for the defence.
Mr. Arnold said—The defendants in this ease arc ap-
pointed and elected under the 6th and 7th of Victoria, chap.
37, sec. 17, which empowers them, in the capacity of
churchwardens, to do all things pertaining to that office in
relation to ecclesiastical matters, and the question here is,
whether the liability to pay rates of this description de-
volves upon them. It was contended by Mr. Kipling that
the defendants were liable under the 100th section
of the local paving act, .30th George 111., cap. 149, and
also under the 30th section of the General Metropolitan
Paving Act, by the first of which the trustees are
authonsed, the parish church and parochial and other
chapels, tee., and to enforce the rate from the church or
chapel wardens for the time being. But I am of opinion
that under this section the trustees have no authority to
rate the church in question, the then existing parish church
itself being the only one they have the power to rate ' • and
the subsequent words iu the clause, " such churches or
chapels," are an obvious misprint or inadvertency. It was
argued that the new district churches would be included
under the term plaices of religious worship ;" but lam
clearly of opinion that that is not en, inasmuch as those
words, coming after the mention of parochial and other
chapels and meeting-houses, must be taken to mean places
of public worship not of the established church, but which
places could not fall either under the denomination of
chapels or meeting-houses. Under the 30th section of the
General Metropolitan Act, however, tho trustees arc em-
powered to rate any cathedral, collegiate, or other church
or churches, parochial or other chapels, &e., within such
district, that there was or hereafter might be built, and the
rates in respect of churches or parochial chapels are also
directed to he paid by the churchwardens. 1 do not see
how the defendants can escape from the provisions of this
enactment. I was a good deal struck with the alleged hard-
ship of the defendants' position, as it was stated that
if they were compelled to pay this rate there arc no
funds out of which they can reimburse themselves; but, as
far as legislative enactments go, they are in this respect
precisely in the same position as the churchwardens of the
mother church, the local act under which the latter are
certainly liable to pay the rate, being quite silent as to the
funds out of which such rates are to be paid. lam in-
formed, indeed, that the rate is usually paid out of the
poor-rate, it is presumed under the local act for the regula-
. tion of the parish. That method is certainly not open to
the churchwardens of a district church, as it does out ap-
• pear that any poor-rate is, or can be, raised for such
trict singly, and the 17th see. of 6th and 7th Viet., chap.
. 37, expressly declares that the churchwardens shall not act
. in any was- as overseers of the poor. Possibly the paving
rate tor the district church might be a burden on the poor-
, rate laid upon the whole parish, as these districts appear to
be' matte parishes for ecclesiastical purposes only, or it may
, be that the paving rate would be paid out of the funds,
from whatever source they are derived, by which the fabric
of the church is kept in repair, and the stipend of the
curate and other officials connected therewith are pro-
; vided for; but, however that may be, I am decidedly of
opinion that the liability to pay is clearly cast upon the de-
fendants as the existing churchwardens.
The judgment appeared to excite much surprise nn the
; part of the defendants and their friends, in whose favour,
; under their peculiar position, it was generally anticipated
that the decision would be given.