The Express.
London, England, 1867-01-10 00:00:00

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

Mr. Bentinck, M.P., and Mr. P. Doyle attended at the
court to learn the decision of Mr. Tyrwhitt on their appli-
cation for a summons against the vestry of St. George,
Hanover-square, for neglecting to remove the snow in their
parish.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said be was sorry the two gentlemen had
been at the trouble of co gto the court with books
for the purpose of su • their application for a sum-
mons, as he conside they ad mainly been induced to
do so through a letter which had recently appeared in the
Times. Magistrates were not such Dogberries as they were
supposed to be. and being also barristers, and provided
with legal books were generally pretty well acquainted
with the law and with acts of parliament of all sorts.
Mr. Tyrwhitt then said—l havo attentively considered
the Local Management Act, is and 19 Vic., cap. 120, sec-
tions 125 and *.C.34, with 25 and 26 Vic., rap. 102,sec. 65, and
in passing I may observe on the letter cited on the last
occasion by Mr. Bentinck from the Tintu of the 4th inst.,
, that a Person dativg from Lincoln's Inn, and terming the
authonties " local Dogberries," has overlooked the fact
that section 2:14 is repealed by the 25 and 26 Vic., cap.
102, sec. 105. I merely mention this to show how these
letters are sometimes concocted. However, the question
for the magistrate is whether he has summary Jurisdic-
tion to inflict a penalty on the vestry of St. George for sot
sweeping the streets in their parish during the late snow.
It is well settled that without express words inflicting a
penalty and making it recoverable before a magistrate, he
has no such power, and I hod no such words. Section
125 of the Local Management Act is the only section
bearing on the subject ; it requires the vestry to appoint
and employ a sufficient number of persons, or to contract
with any company or perven for such sweeping, but no
penalty is attached on the vestry for not so doing,
but a penalty of 5/. is inflicted on the scavenger who
after such contract shall fail properly to perform the work.
Supposing the vestry not to have employed a sufficient
number of persons to sweep the streets, or not to have
contracted for doing that work, the teniedy against the
vestry would be by indictment for disobedience of the
statute, or, had the snow lasted, by mandamus. It may
be that the legislature was content with requiring vestries
to employ scavengers, and took it for granted that they
would do so ; but with that the magistrate has nothing to
do. I am, therefore, of opinion that I should do wrong
in issuing a summons against the vestry.

Mr. Bentinck wished to assure the magistrate that
bringing books to the court it was from no feeling of 4,1
respe. '. He was himself a barrister, and his
bringing the books to the court was for the
,purd di
assisting the court, and he could assure the
that in wining forward he was not influenced by the Idler
to which reference had been made, as he wa., use,
that the writer was in error. His only view in cote.
sag forward was that the public 9uestioa might be relay
Ho quite agreed with the decision just given, and yr,'
pleased to hod that the ratepayers had no remedy
the vestry, as the legislature must be looked to beg
session to provide a remedy.
Mr. Doyle said it was not the contractor who bad
fused to send out the horses, as reported on the tire 4.
plication, but the surveyor, who declined to reed wk.
out on account of the inclemency of the weather. H.
wished to make an assertion, that it might be contrsdiri.l
if wrong, that the vestry had made no application to
Conservators of the Thames for permission to shoot
snow into the river, that being the practice in Russia, ,
more especially wished to make the assertion, as be kart
that in the neighbourhood of Gray's-inn-lane carte v,.
seen bringing quantities of snow, which were shot into ti.
man-holes in the street, ind if the snow could nut Ln,
the sewers it surely could not injure the Thames. He
aware dirt could not be shot there, but with mow
matter was different

The two gentlemen, having thanked the magiatrak
retired.

George Stephenson, • servant out of place, 'irk;
Mason's•yani, Duke-street, St. James's,was charged
Mr. Tyrwhitt with stealing three 5/. Rank note, au
shirt, the property of John Ward, • servant, ludgm,
the same house.

The prosecutor said that he lodged in Mason's-yard,
the prisoner occupied the next room. On Thursday L
be placed a t./. note along with two others which ait
his pocket-book, and be put the pocket-book into his , -
man tea u , leaving it unlocked, and on going on Tuesaq •
take out aid. note he missed the three notes.

Mr. Tyrwhitt asked the prosecutor what caused hin,
suspect the prisoner!
The prosecutor said that the prisoner had been lai
with the rheumatics for a fortnight, and had notbecno::
the house during that time, and had been borrowing tr.,c,
having none of his own ; but on Friday last he
he was going into the City to cash a cheque for 91.,
went out. On hie return he paid for his board and led; •
Thinking the prisoner's conduct very suspicions he Out
polioe-constable on the previous day, and then asked the p
miner to let him search his room, and on doing so founds.
drawer a shirt belonging to him, and which had been tali'
off the top of the clothes in the portmanteau from Ida.
the notes bad been taken. The prisoner said he km
nothing of the shirt, and that be had not placed it wh,
it was found. The prisoner said that he received t
cheque from Mr. Baring, and that he cashed it at (Ass
in Lombard-street ; but he (prosecutor) had ascertain.
that no such cheque had been cashed at that bank,
when the prisoner was searched nearly 131. was kwt
upon him.
Sergeant Stevens, 24 C, said that on taking the prinr
into custody, he said he received the cheque for 9/. fro:
Mr. Haring, of Berkeley.square, and that he changed it ..
Glyn's hank, in Lombard-street. On searching the prl
goner, who denied putting the shirt where it was found
the drawer of a washstand), he found upon him •
gold and 11.. in silver. On making inquiries at
Boring's he was informed that the prisoner was a semi:
to Mr. Baring some time ego, that no such cheque hi
been given for six months, and that Mr. Baring banked ,
Farquhar's. Subsequently the prisoner said that he 1.1
not cash the cheque at Glyn's, but at Farquhar's.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said it was an excessively suspicion. n-
and it was made more so by the story the prisoner L.
told about the cheque. He world remind the prism:lei.