The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-05 00:00:00

CLTILDIIALL.

Yesterday se'nnight Mr. Bagster, an inhabitant of the
parish of St. Bartholomew the Great, attended !Before Mr.
Alderman WINCHESTER (Mr. Alderman Aueuty, the
sitting Magistrate for the day, having retired to make way
for the worthy Alderman just before the case was called
on), to show cause why he refused to pay the paving and
lighting rate.
Mr. Dougall attended as the defendant's professional
adviser, and urged several objections, the principal of which
was that the ra►e had been amended under the authority of
the Metropolitan Paving Act, which, however, only gave
power to amend a rate for paving alone, and not where it
was applied to lighting or other objects jointly.
Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER ruled that any objections,
save that the defendant was not liable to be rated at all,
must be made by appeal to the Sessions; and that, as the
rate appeared upon the face of it to be good, he was bound
to enforce r.yment.
Nine other inhabitants had been summoned at the same
time for the same rate ; but, as the decision in the first
case governed the whole, Mr. Adolphus and Mr. Dougall
agreed that the other summonses should stand adjourned
till yesterday, the overseers anticipating that, in the in-
terim, all the parties would pay the money. Seven only,
however, did co pay, and, yesterday, the rest of the defen-
dants came with Mr. AP.Dougall to coatest the question.

About two o'clock, while PrrEa LAURIE was dis-
posing of some routine business, Mr. Alderman WIN..
CUE3TER came into the private room, and was joined by
the parish officers, and the defendants were requested to
attend them there; but Mr. Dougall refused, insisting
that the business ought to be public.

Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER then came forward and
requested Sir PETER LAURIE to allow him to dispose of
these summonses, as he had already decided the cases.
Mr. Dougall denied that these cases had been heard at
all. The case of Bagster only had been decided before.
Sir PETER said, if the cases had not been heard before,
he was ready to hear them.
Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER repeated that they bad
been decided before, and called for the clerk's minutes.

From these minutes it appeared the case of Baxter only
was decided, and the rest adjourned for one week, to give
the parties time to pay, and by that to prevent the war-
rants issuing.
. .

Mr. Alderman Wprcnasrxx said the single ease settled
the whole question.
Sir PETER replied it did not necessarily do so. Mr.
Dougell had new objections to make. Every man's case
stood on its own foundation.

Here some confusion arose from Mr. Dougall charging
the Overseers with trickery, in keeping the defendants
waitinc, two hours at the office, while they (the Overseers)
were hunting. after Mr. Alderman. Winchester.
Mr. Midge, one of the trustees, or select vestrymen,
admitted he had fetched the Alderman, and he thought he
was justified in doing so by the breach, on the part of the
defendants, of the tacit agreement to pay, implied by the
adjournment.
Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER still urged, that he should
be permitted to finish the cases, they having commenced
before him.

This was contradicted and re-asserted clamorously by
the several parties, till
Sir PETER cried out that he had yet heard nothing but
noise. He scarcely knew what they were about to do.
In the performance of his public dutic3 he knew not par-
tie on the right band or the left, and, as the regular
way of commencing business, be should now call for the
complainant.
Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER instantly clapped on his bat,
and was hurrying away unceremoniously, when
Sir PETER called him back, to assure him he did not
intend to hear any case he had decided a second time.

Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER remained at the desk for
a few moments, while the controversy was warmly re-
newed as to what was understood to be meant by ad-
journing the -hearing for a week ; but when Sir Peter
again attempted to go into one of the cases, Mr. Alderman
Winchester and the select vestrymen withdrew from the
room.

Upon this Mr. Dougall exclaimed, " Let the Alderman
beware who signs the warrant upon these cases," and he
invited the Magistrate, to dismiss the summonses se-
riatim, for the absence of the complaining parties.

Sir PETER seemed to be about to do this, but one of
the select returned with the vestry clerk, who declined
entering into the subject at all before Sir Peter, but noti-
fied that he should apply for warrants to the Alderma❑
who had heard the matter and determined o❑ it.

All the parties concerned then retired.
EOW-STREET.

Yesterday James Stowe and William Douyley, the
one a well-dressed fellow, and the other having the ap-
pearance of a mechanic, were brought before Sir RICHARD
Blamt, charged with having been in the crowd, at the
pit entrance into Covent-garden Theatre, on Monday night,
with intent to commit felony.
Dreyer, the police constable, on duty at the theatre,
strted, that observing the prisoners backing out of the
crowd at a moment when there seemed no occasion for
doing so, he suspected their design, and accordingly took
them into custody. On one of the prisoners he found a
crimson and white purse, containing 12 sovereigns ; and
on the other a pair of very sh.irp scissors, evidently for this
purpose of cutting watch-ribbons and pockets.
The prisoners protested their innocence, and assured the
Magistrates that they were persons of respectability.
Sir RICHARD asked Stowe whether he had not lately
visited Union Hall ?. Stowe—Oh dear, no, your Worship ;
I wrs never in no such place in my life.
. .

Freyer—What, do you forget the transaction of the
snuff-box, and Lambeth-street Stowe (after some hesi-
tation)—Well, but I was honourably acquitted.
Freyer—llad'itt you a solicitor employed ; and did'nt
you refuse to pay him ?
Sir RICHARD-What, I wonder, did an innocent man
want with a solicitor? Stowe—The solicitor was em-
ployed by another party, and not by me.
Freyer—But did not that other party put an execution
into your house for your share of the solicitor's costs ?
Sir RtetrAtty —I see how it is very well, you are inti-
mate with this man's afftirs. I strongly suspect the purse
to have been stolen, and I shall not part with the prisoner.
Dougley—l bought the purse, your Worship, I can prove
that. _

Sir RICHARD-Well, do so; but when did you buy it?
Dougley—l think it was on the day of Sir Thomas Law-
rence's funeral, at a shop in Fleet-street.
Sir Ric:Hann—A very awkward day truly. It is said
that mony purses changed owners on that day ; but how
did you come by the money ? Dougley—l earned it at
my business.
Sir RICHARD—You must bring your master forward to
prove that fact.
Dougley said that his master could not speak as to his
having so much money, but that he could bring another
party, who had seen him with it, forward.
Sir RICHARD observed that he might do so on another
day, and a'..cordin,gly remanded him, in order that inquiries
might he made after the supposed owner of the purse and
money.