The Sun.
London, England, 1847-10-20 00:00:00

THAMES.-(THIS DAY.)

On Mr. YARDLEY taking his seat on the bench
this morning, he observed to Mr. Symons, the chief
clerk, that he had received a letter, signed by a num-
ber of the inhabitants of White Horse-street and
Palmer-street, Stepney, calling his attention to the
existence of a nuisance in that locality, arising from
an accoamulated deposit of filth, which now Railed
an exte ,nt that rendered it perfectly intolerable, con-
cluding by a request that he would be pleased to in-
terfere in the matter, and adopt some measures to
secure it s removal. The nuisance complained of was
at ti se ez itrance of a court called Barton's-entry.
A_ Er. Symons observed that the whole of White
Hor le.street, Palmer-street, Ste., were thehamlet in

of Ratcliffe, and that the churchwarden of that hamlet,
Mr Buchanan, was a f_rPn+llfln ~f

(.:;pericrice,

sanitary impnry, „!

(too t

doubt ft' tb.;..t
result would be the removal of the nuisance.

Mr. YARDLEY accordingly directed Mackenzie, one
of the officers of the court, to go to liatcliffe-eross,
to the residence of Mr. Buchanan, and request his
attendance at the court, as it was imperative that the
parish officers should interfere.

REGISTRATIONS.—(THIS DAY.)
CITY OF LONDON.
(Before Mr. T. Y. M'CnarsTlE.)
The Co-art met this morning at twelve o'clock, for
the purpose of confirming and passing the accounts of
the overseers of the respective parishes.
The REVISING BARRISTER, on taking his seat, said
that he had gone through the various accounts, and
had found that some of the charges made in them
were perfectly preposterous.
The following is the summary of the revision :
IN THE LIVERY.
Liberal claims allowed
Liberal objections sustained
Conservative claims allowed
Conservative objections sustained .. 98
Double objections
Liberal claims disallowed ... 1
Liberal objections failed.. 43
Conservative claims disallowed .... 4
Conservative objections failed lll
Double objections failed

Number of cases ......
HOUSEHOLDERS.

455

Liberal claims allowed
Liberal objections sustained
Conservative claims allowed
Conservative objections sustained
Double objections sustained
Liberal claims disallowed
Liberal objections failed or withdrawn 353
Conservative claims disallowed
Conservative objections withdrawn
Double objections withdrawn

Household cases .

. 3,253

Mr. M'CRRISTIE, before proceeding to dissect
the overseers' accounts said—With respect to the
payments which I am allowed to certify shall
be made to overseers, the 56th section of the Reform
Act enacts, that the expenses of the overseers, "in
making out, printing, and publishing the several lists
and notices directed by this Act, and all other ex-
penses incurred by them in carrying into effect the
provision of this Act, shall be defrayed out of the
money collected, or to be collected, for the relief of
the poor." And the 57th section of the Registration
Act requires (which was not required by the Reform
Act) that an account of the expenses incurred by
the overseers, in carrying into effect the provisions of
the Act, shall be laid before the revising barrister ;
and he " shall sign and give to the said overseers a cer-
tificate of the sum which he shall allow to be due to
them in respect of the said expenses :" and which sum
they are to receive out of the poor rates. I think it is
to be regretted that there is not some sort of scale given
for the revising barrister's government in the allowance
which he shall certify for, but I do not find any such
guide given in express words by the Act. It has been
stated to me that Mr. Arnold considered it would be
right to allow the overseers at the rate of ls. (to include
all expenses) for every name that might be on a list.
Probably that occurred to Mr. Arnold, from the Re-
form Act enacting that every person whose name was
on the register should yearly pay a shilling, which
payment was to go towards defraying the expenses of
the registration ; but that enactment has been done
away with by the Registration Act, which is part of
the Reform Act, and in many cases, as it appears to
me, it would be difficult to proceed upon such a scale.
It is quite clear that the Legislature, by the Regis-
tration Act, required the overseers to submit
their accounts to the revising barrister for
the purpose of checking or guarding against
extravagance and abuse, which it was pos-
sible some overseers might have indulged in,
when, as under the Reform Act, they themselves
having the custody, or at any rate the disposal of
the money collected for the relief of the poor, they
were at liberty to pay over to themselves just what-
ever sums they might have thought proper to put
down, not only for making out, printing, and pub-
lishing the several lists and notices, but also " all
other expenses incurred by them," in carrying into
effect the provisions of the Act: a very sweeping
authority to them fully to indemnify themselves,
certainly ; and it it is perfectly evident, from
what has come before me, that the protection
subsequently introduced against abuse under
that license, was imperatively called for. In
the accounts that have been laid before me,
there are the highest charges made for print-
ing that any respectable printers could venture to
make ; still, where the lists have been made, and
printed with reasonable care, I do not know that I
can object to the allowance of those printers' charges.
Also, with respect to reasonable expenses incurred by
the overseers in making out the lists to put into
the printers' hands, I am unwilling to say a word
against them. I understand that overseers are
not salaried officers, but I believe that in all
parishes they have salaried officers, generally
known under the character of vestry clerks; and I
believe that all these vestry clerks are legal men,
and employed and paid by the different parishes for
the express purpose of giving their advice and assist-
ance to the overseers and parish authorities in all
matters relating to parish affairs ; and there can be
no doubt that it is their duty to render those services
for the salaries they receive. When I have adverted
to that fact before, the vestry-clerks have said, yes,
all that is very true, but we are appointed for life by the
parishioners, and as we had our appointments before
the Reform Act was passed, it is very hard that the
additional labour which that Act, and the Registration
Act, threw upon the overseers should be handed over
to us to execute, and that we should not be at lis
berty to make a distinct and additional charge for it.
It strikes me forcibly that if it were
broadly laid down, that not one farthing
should be allowed for the new or extra work which
the Registration Act imposes on overseers, and the
overseers were still to require their vestry -clerks to
do that work, instead of doing it themselves, we
should hear of very: few resignations of vestry-
clerks, and see but very few advertisements for
candidates to fill their places. But be that as it
may, it is utterly impossible that I can allow all
the sums that are put down in the accounts that
are presented to me. Parliament has required
overseers to do certain duties, and they must do
them. They are to be allowed the reasonable ex-
penses incurred in discharging those duties, but that
is all; 3/. 35., and Si. 55., and 71. 75., and so on, put
down for consultations with vestry-clerks, and for
those gentlemen (already paid parish officers for
doing the parish work) being called in to settle the lists,
and for attending this court, are preposterous. But it
does not end there. In numberless cases I have long
regular attorneys' bills handed up to me, in which there
are strings of charges "for perusing Secondaries pre-
cept, 10s." ; " perusing the Act of Parliament, 10s."—
they perused it to very little effect I think;
"attendance upon collectors, Cs. Bd. ;" " attendance
on several parties to make inquiries as to their places
of abode, 13s. 4d. ;" engrossing original list for sig-
nature of overseers, 10s. ;" "attending overseers for
their signature, 6s. Bd. ;" attending printers, giving
instructions for proofs," and many other similar mon-
strosities. I shall not allow Gd. of these. I cannot
possibly in law do it. In innumerable cases these
charges amount to far more than double the expense
of printing the list-, and all the legitimate expenses
the overseers can possibly be entitled to. In one bill
that I have glanced my eye at, there is this charge—
" Paid for a cart and horse going round the parish
with notices and lists, 11s.! " Really, if the over-
seers had called in Fleet-street to inquire what items
of charge they ought to put down, I do not think
that, with all the talent for which Punch is so uni-
versally distinguished, he could have suggested one
that could have beaten that. Then, in the same ac-
count there is—" paid coach hire to the returning-
officer, with the lists, &c., and back, 13s. 6d. I ,
Can people think that I am mad ? Could they
think that I was in a sane state if I consented
to be a party to such profligacy by allowing such
charges ? The expense of the registration to the
country is enormous, and yet people have nit
their franchise as the Legislature intended they should
have it ; and from the samples that have come
under my notice, of how the bulk of that expense is
made up, no one can longer wonder at the expense,
but only be astounded to think bow that enormity
can have been suffered to go on. It is not for me to
cast a reflection upon any one (I may be under
a mistake myself), nor do I presume to do so, but if
overseers are to discharge any unpaid for duty, at all
affecting the registration, I verily believe, according
to their system of charging, the expense of the
registration must have been in many instances
double, if not more than double, of what it
ought to have been. The work is not
only not done unpaid for, but in some in •
stances the very same work is actually charged
for twice over. In one bill (and I have no doubt
there were many others of the same description,
which we shall see as we get en), there are these
items :—" Clerk making out list of voters, Si. 55.!
attendance of collectors making out lists of voters,
4/. 45." Now, what is that but actually charging
more than twice over for making out the self-same
small list before it goes into the printer's hands ? It is
called lists in both instances in the account, to give it
a colouring. There is but one small list of voters in
that case ; and though any man of the commonest share
of knowledge of what such work costs must be per-
slid that the 41, 4s. is a most liberal and ample

allowance for the performance of the work—aye, and
a it nn rht t 6 he &no. too—vet thrr, is this rider of
and
t)lber
&D'. it 1, I, ~; a clu cr Still
allow suchwild extravagances in the disposal of
money drawn out of the pockets of the public, and in
cases where there can be no investigation into the
justice or injustice of it, except before me, they will
find themselves egregiously mistaken. Then there arsi
hundreds and hundreds of pounds put down as pt
to collectors of poor rates for their attendance;
and tees of three guineas and so on, to this, that, and
the other assessed tax collector, amounting again to
many hundreds of pounds, for allt}wing their books
to be looked at by overseers, and furnishing thou
with extracts as they are required by the Act to do,
and for attending the Court, not one shilling of which
will I allow. These are all parish paid officers ; they
are either paid by salaries or by per centages on the
moneys they collect, and in some instances by bor,h•
The Act of Parliament requires them to do certaiS
duties—the assessed tax collectors to furnish
lists of defaulters to the overseers, and s
of them to attend this Court ; and if they
don't, they are liable to be fined. They knoll'
they must assist in the duties of the registrir
tion, and if they think they are not sufficiently Paid
they can resign their office at any hour. The°,
again, there are pounds upon pounds charged for the
employment of parish beadles to post the notices'
Why, those are paid officers also, and the overseers
are bound either to go themselves and affix the
notices as required of them by the Act of Parliament'
or to order them already paid, at the expense of the
parish beadle, to do it for them. And as to,large
sums put down for coach hire to this court,
and refreshments, all these are quite out of
the question, and cannot be allowed. In some
cases every farthing of the large sums which
have been incurred as expenses, have, through the
gross negligence of the overseers, their vestry clerks
and collectors, as shown in the defective manner ill
which they have made their lists, been worse ev
pended than if it had been thrown into the Thatric°'
I have some little doubt whether I am at liberty
under the Act to reject all claims for expenses
reference to those lists, but to avoid the difficulty,
shall allow something—a precious small something
for some of them ; it will be merely nominal, para'
cularly where I have been obliged to fine the over:
seers • and these are the general views under which
I shall proceed to deal with the accounts, however
painful to me it is so to have to discharge my duty.
The REVISING BARRISTER then proceeded, in con'
formity with the principles as above laid down, to DV
off a large number of the professional charges, not"
withstanding the loud remonstrances of the vestry
clerks and overseers who were present.
Tile following is an average specimen of the rocclar
in which the Revising Barrister dealt with some °
the Bills :

for

" ST. BOTOLPH, ALDGATB.-REGISTRATION BXPEIqSIt
1847. £ 5 7,
Preparing list of voters (740)
Paid printer -
List of claims (71) 1
2 18 0
List of objections (217) I
,---":1
£27 6 v

" I allow 20s. for the above.
" T. Y. APCHRISTIE, Revising Barrister'
" Oct. 20, 1847."
The lists of this parish, it will be remembered'
were very inaccurate; hence the refusal of the Re'
vising Barrister to alow even the costs of printing
the lists.
There appears to be a slight discrepancy in the rie;
suit of the revision as given by the two parties. 1.
statement as above is that of the Liberal party. 0
The following is the result of the revision as shoN
by the numbers of the Conservative agent Ott
Brown) :
Conservative objections heard. 1,826 Slu,sot6d6. F'"..17,1659°
Radical objections heard ... 762 403 "ig
Objections by both parties ... 368 350
13/
2,956 1,819 1 1,4. b,
The objections in the Tower Ward were v"'
drawn, and were as follows :
Objections by Conservatives ... 75
Objections by Radicals ... 37
Double objections ••• ••• 12

CLAIMS.

Sustd. Fs'lle'
By Conservatives ... ... 64 6 58
By Radicals •• ... 565 173 393
•
Majority upon objections in favour of Con-
servatives .. ••• •• ••• ••• 663
Majority upon claims in favour of Radicals 167
~.

Majority in favour of Conservatives upon
the entire revision ••• ••• ••• 496
the
Of the large number of names thus erased from he
lists on objections it appears on examination that t"
majority is composed of names appearing as nevi', ti—
he
numbers being as under :
ELiberals. Tories. 13bj.
Of
fased on objections
names
on
npretisoenns by
present
reg
register 263 295 go
2 0
Of new names ... ... 147 755 -6_,
__ ---

--,,.50
Total erased ... 410 1,050 i..
The success of either party may be thus condense
Tory:es.
Liberals. 7
Claims allowed . . ... 164
disallowed (Tory) 67 (Liberal) 369
050
Objections sustained ... 410
1,35°
971 „ by both parties 350
Objections failed (Tory) 864 (Liberal) 3391
1) „by both parties 31
-----:'.

1,8862,263
369
Deduct claims disallowed 67
1 834
1,819
The large number of claims disallowed to el hi
party may be in some measure accounted f° ~, r
claims being made anticipatory of an objection 00
erroneous description in the list, which, 00E111,00
objection be made, becomes unnecessary, and illt",„e
cases where an objection has been made and ol
tained, and the claim also allowed, the claim.
been counted as disallowed and the objection 15
fe
If the claims disallowed are deducted from the 91,,, /
oe.
result the numbers will stand as in the above last the
There appears to be a slight discrepancy iLrel
actual results of the revision as given by the lAried
and Conservative agents. The above list is furnis
by the Liberals, and shows a majority in favour
the Conservatives upon the whole revision of 317'