The Sun.
London, England, 1823-09-04 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

PREROGATIVE COURT, SEPTEMBER $.
Thisrourt sat to-clay for the dispatch of business in the
Registry.
Dr. DAUBENY presided in the absence of Sir John Nicholl.
Dr. DODSON (who, with one other advoCate, was the only
Counsel in Court) submitted a few motions in the usual course,
for the grant of letters of administration to the effects of several
parties,,deceased and intestate. Nate of these motions were
opposed, or possessed of the slightest public interest but, it
may be proper to observe, that in one case, where a party had
died in the East Indies, this Court granted probate to en exe-
cutor who produced an authepticated and formal copy of the
deceased's will, the original being in the hands of an otileer iri
Colombo (island of Ceylon), the period of whose return to
England was altogether matter of uncertainty.--The Court sat
about half an hour.

SURREY SESSIONS, 13trp.r. 8.
Jeremiah Sinekrby was indicted for uttering a counterfeit
halt crown on the Oth of August last. The prisoner, it appear-
ed, had tendered the base coin in payment for a quart of cur-
rants, at the shop of Mr. Bontall, a fruiterer, in.the Black-
friars-road. The half-crown was reflised, and the conduct of
the prisoner induced the shopman to search him, when more
bad money was found on his person.
The Jury found the prisoner guilty, and the Court sentenced
him to six months' imprisonment in the coupty gaol.
Three young girls, named Marfa Murray, 'Eleanor Hart-
nett, and Ann Hawes, were. tried and convicted on a charge of
stealing a small bronze ornament, the property of Henry Per.
ring, a pawnbroker, in the parish of Christchurch. The pri-
soners had gone into the prosecutor's shop under the pretence
of buying a gold ring, and took the opportunity of stealing the
property in question, which was missed after the prisoners left
the shop, and was found upon the persnn of Hawes. Upon
being searched, no money was found upon them. The Court
sentenced them to be imprisoned in the Brixton House of Cor.
rection, and there kept to hard labour for six months.
George Davis and Sarah Davis (his wife) were indicted for
stealing a coat, value Aos., the,property of Thomas ?Ottani:
It appeared from the evidence, that the prosecutor missed bii •
coat from a chaise which he bad left standing at the door of a
public-house. The male prisoner was shortly after seen carry-
ing it across some fields, wrapped up in a piece of cloth. His
wife was with him.. _ _ • _

The Jury found the man guilty, but acquitted- the woman.
Upon hearing the verdict .the woman began to cry, upon which
her spouse admonishediihwthus—" What the h—l 'are you
crying for, you d—d old,fooloieyou have got off.".
The Court sentenced Dirviti to be transported for seven yeari.
"May you all sit here till I come back, and be tl—d to yoti,"
said the prisoner, who then attempted to strike the officer who
had apprehended him, but being prevented, he threw his hat
in his face with great violence, and was carried away by three
or four men.

Elizabeth Galloway was indicted for stealing ten table-cloths
and eleven sheets, the property of Mary James.
It was given in evidence, that the prisoner was the servant
of the prosecutrix:, who resided in Bermondsey. The prisoner
quitted her service on the 24th of July, without previous
notice, and shortly after her departure, the property was
missed, and it wits ascertained that she had pledged it at a
pawnbroker's.
The Jury declared the prisoner Guilty; but the Court, in
consequence of her having received a good character, sentenced
her only to eighteen months' imprisonment. By a recent act
of Parliament the Court is empowered to award the punish-
ment of transportation for fourteen years, upon conviction for
an.offence similar to that which the prisoner committed.
A ruffian, named Robert Thomas; aged 23, was charged with
assaulting his father, an aged and infirm man.
The old man stated, that upon hearing his son abusing his
mother in the grossest terms, he proceeded to the spot, and
asked the cause; upon which the unnatural son threw off his
coat and attacked his father with the most savage fury. The
injuries which the father received from the assault were swelled
eyes a cut cheek, broken nose, and the loss of two teeth.
The prisoner was found Guilty, and sentenced to be im-
prisoned for one month, and at the expiration of that period to
find securities for his good behaviour. The Sessions ended
this day.

Yesterday being the day appointed to hear
appeals at Hicks's Hall, a number of respectable
licensed victuallers attended to claim the excep.
tion of three windows, under the provisions of an
Act'passed in the last Session for the relief of
shops, warehouses, and other places, " where
goods, wares, and merchandize, are sold 'or
offered for sale," when, after a long and de.
termined effort on the part of the victuallers, the
commissioners were of opinion that they were
included in the Act, and.they were all relieved.

PARLIAMENT'ARY'
.PAPER

POOR RATE RETURNS.
REPORT -FROM TUE SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE
HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The Select Committee appointed to consider of
the several Returns made to the Orders of this House in 1822
and 1823, relative to the Sums Assessed, Levied And-Expend-
ed, on account of the Poor in England And '.Wales;. andao.re.
text an Abstract of the same,--together with their Observations
thereon, to the House;—Have, pursuant to the Order of the
abuse, considered the Matteis to them referred, and have agreed
to the following Report :
your Committee find that although the defaulting parishes
are rather more numerous thtin in the preceding year, the Re-
turns for the year ending 25th March, 1322, are nearly complete.
The Abstract which your Committee present, in continuation
of the first Table appended to the Report of last year, still ex-
hibits a declension in the pecuniary amount of the rates and ex..
penditure.
This declension, which. has been progressive since 1817-18,
was greater in 1821-22 than in any preceding year. The
amount in 1821-22 fell share of that of 1820-21 by 650,4521,,
and of the amount of 1817-18 by 1,553,9991. ; and if the
compailson be made not of the total levies, but of the sums
expended for the Poor only, the declension is equally appa-
rent, being 599,742/. as compared with 1820.21, and 1,531,445/.
as compared with 1817-18.
The subjoined statement will show that the expenditure in
the year 1821-22 exceeds by only 236,a251. the rate at which
it stood in the first of the three triennial periods stated by the
Committee of 1822 ; namely, the period ending in March 1815,
which may be considered as the concluding-period of the war.
The average of three years ending
In March, 1815, is - - - £6,123,178
March, 1818 - - 6,844;290
March, 1821 . ' - 7,273,229
The Expenditure in the year ending March
1822, is - . - 6,358,703
This Expenditure is lower than in any year of the preced-
ing six. ,
The general:ate of diminution between 1820-21 and 1821-22
Is about nine per cent. If the comparison be made with
1817.18, which in England and Wales generally, and in most
of the Counties, was the year of the greatest expenditure, the
declension is about nineteen per cent.
The former Report has shown that the diminution which
oacurred in England generally, was not apparent in every sepa.
rate County. It is now to be observed, that Huntingdon fttr.
nishes the only exception la the statement, that the expendi-
ture of 1821-22 is less than that of 1820.21, and that in Hunt.'
ingdon the excess only '2371. The rate of diminution no
doubt differs materially in the several counties. It varies from
one per cent. in Bedford to seventeen per cent. in the West
Riding of Yorkshire. It is less than five per cent. in' Cam-
bridge, Lincoln Norfolk, Suffolk, Westmorland, and the East
Riding of Yorkshire; and more than, ten percent. in Derby,
Devon, Dorset, Essex, Hereford, Lancashire, Leicester, Mon-
mouth, Nottingham, Oxford, Somerset, Statilrd, Surrey, War.
wick, Worcester, Brecon, Flint, Pembroke, and Radnor.
Between 1817.18 and IM-22, the rate of diminution was,
in eight counties thirty per cent. and upwards; namely, in
Berke, Hereford, Lancaster, Salop, Southampton, Wilts, Wor-
ceater and Glatnorgan ; and. in eighteen other counties twenty
per cent. and upwards;. namely, in Buckingham, Derby, Dor-
set, Essex, Monmouth, Norfolk, Nottingham, Oxford, Rut-
land, Somerset, Stafford, Sussex, Warwick,. Brecon, Cardigan,
Carmarthen, Denbigh and Radnor. It was under ten per cent.
in seven counties only, namely, Bedford, Cumberland, Hunt-
ingdon, Kent, Lincoln, Middlesex and Westmorland.
The fall in the price of a' feat since 1817-18 'has been very
considerably greater than the reduction of the Poor Rates. The
fall in 1821.22, as compared with the preceding year, also
exceeds, but by no means so considerably, the rate of, reduction.
The further fall in the price of wheat, which occurred in 1822-23,
and has been followed by a considerable rise. will give peculiar
interest to an investigation of the charge of 1822-3 and 1829-4.
It has occurred to your Committee, that a calculation of the
Expenditure upon the poor of each county, as compared wirh
the pdpulation, might suggest valuable topics of investigation.
They have therefore prepared a table, in which this comparison
is made for the year 18k2-13, and for the year 1821.22, the
earliest and latest of the nine Years which they have had under
consideration. It will be seen that the Counties where the.pro-
portion was the greatest, were, in the first period, Barks,
Mackingham,Enex, Oxford, Sussex, and \Tilts, in all which it
exceeded I/. per head ; in the second period the proportion was
the greatest In Bedfoo, Buckingham, Essex, Huntingdon,
Kent, Northampton, Okford
oex alone exhibits' wrate eo high'as 14 per head.
The difference of rate per head between 1812-13 and 1821.22
,Suffolk and Sussex, of which Sus.
is greatest in Berkshire where there is a diminution of Ile. per
head, and in Sussex where the diminution is 105.,. 'Bat in thir-
teen Counties, namely, Cumberland, DuritannHertford, Hun.
tingdon, Leicester, Middlesex, Northumberland, Stafibrd, East
and North Ridings of York, Cardigan,' Carmarthen, earner-
von,And Merioneth, there home variation; and in four Coun-
ties namely, namely,
Kent, Lincoln, Nrestinceland, and Angle.
sey, there is an increase of Is. The table will also spew at one
view-the several Counties ranked according to the largeness of
the expenditure in 1821.22, with reference to the population.
The House has now before them (in the Supplemental Ap-
pendix to the Report of last You/ the Account of the Expen-
ditura in each Parish during the period of the Returns, . This
Parochial Account shows that while there has been in the whole.
of England and Wales, and in each County, asliminution of
charge, there has been in many parishes in all parts of the
kingdom,an increase more or less considerable: The Returns
1821-22, .f...tred to your Committee, also. exhibit on an increase of the expenditure of many parishes. •
To pursue Witit'utility a detailed investigation of' the pro-
gress of the POO' Rate in the different parishes would require
more of laborious attention and of' local knowledge than can
be expected from your Committee: For former years the
printed. Reports give to the Members of the House the means
of pursuing this Investigation, as to , the particular districts
with which they are severally most acquainted; and though it
may not be right to incur the 'expense of printing the Paro-
chial Returns for a single year, those Returns can now be
easily referred to by Members ; and they may conveniently be
printed, when a fourth triennial period, which for reasons al-
ready given will be a- peculiar °Wert of interest, shall be
completed.
the • •
At present it may be only observed, that nninutton of
charge is•more,stnkingly apparent in the larger parishes ;
whether this. circumstance indicates the successful operation of
Select Vestries, which are more prevalent in such places, or
is to be attributed to the better condition of the parishee which
are less purely agricnltural, or to what other cense, is a ques-
tion well, worthy of attention. The Committee have inserted
in the Appendix an AbStract of the more remarkable observa-
tions which accompanied the returns frorn several parishes.
The House having referred to your Committee the Report of
last year,.which contained a recommendation of a form of
keeping and passing parochial 'accounts, it may he right to
make a few remarks on that subject.

to,
recominenudeoa.li
expenditure, which may
in expressing a concurrence. But
of Ikneetip7inogbsderisviasioicotnsococio'itiboatst Cociintroheitteexep upon the importance
may be preferable, at
.iltet 1;0
furnish the means of classifying the relief given to' the 'poor,
there can be little difficulty
your Committee are not 'prepared
principal
lcounty rates,
peremptorily prescribing a form of account exhibiting all the
purposes to which
details required by that Committeteh.e
least in the first instance, to require generally that the accounts
111.
404 n:
grhenodueldredb e tso
kt li e t Jaunsdtifcreasmutnat,ler
orsbstracted, as to show, upon
inspection, how much of the whole sum charged therein may
ttepbooeernroeteiptianadie,pdlifeoarbealec;litoLttheis
con-
stables' bills, expenccs at law, including charges t'or attending
the Bench of Justices, sa.; charge o.t removals. salaries Of
assistant overseers; expenses of erecting or repairing., work-
houses, expenses of, materials for s{etting the
_. poor on, Work,
charge of parish farms, anti
any oth 'r 11118011Atie011it expenees
riot consisting of
canerlief given to theppor. in money.
$0 far there be little or no ditticlit!Y t but rt is extremely
desirable that an attempt should be made to introduce a classi-
fication of the expenditure upon the
poor: They trust that it
will not be deemed unreasonable to requite that the amount •
paid to the poor shall be so stated as
,to distinguish, ~ so far as
the same may be found practicable,' how much of the 34:115:
may have been paid to the poor by reason of sickness or inabi-
lity to work ; how much by reason hf the niAtubir or aildren
which a poor person has to maintain; anAlitow natekby mason
of the want of employment, which alit amount shall 'tilto'be so
divided as to show how much has been paid as Wages toveisoris

set lit work by the parish, and how much given in money with-
out work. - • - -
The permanent and occasional relief -should also be distill.
guished.
The Justices should have the p6wer of appointing and pay--
ing an examiner of the accounts; and they should be autho-
rized and required to reject-accounts which shall, appear, to be
incorrectly stated, especially if the default appears to have
occurred through wilful negligence. ' • When it is considered, that relief. .cannot . now -lawfully be
given without a statement and entry of ehe " special cause"
or " occasion" which calls for it, it can hardly be thought that
the enactnient which- they recommend can be deemed to int:
pose upon Parish Officers, or Vestries...a degree of trouble be,
yond what they'may fairly be required to undertake, and the
diminution of the actual burthen of the Rates-themselves; which
Would follow from a strict attention to the rule which prohibits
the grant of relief, except for an undeniable and specified
cause; ought fully to compensate the parishes for the additional
attention required of them.