The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-24 00:00:00

But these proceedings destroy all equality in the rating of pro-
perty for the first time assessed ; because the two surveyors
must, when put into the jury-box, support that which they
have sworn to, and admit that these alterations by the Jury,
and the Court itself, have destroyed the principle upon which
they proceeded, and also destroyed the equality of the rate.
There is one more fatal objection to this Court signing this
decree, and that is, the Commissioners have had the
fact upon oath presented to them, that in rating churches
and Dissenting chapels of equal plots of ground, in
equally eligible situations, the erection of which costs the
same sum, the principle which guided them in form-
ing a rateable value was, that as the Church property was ina-
lienable, and the Dissenting property alienable, they took one
third off their rateable value of churches ; thus upon oath,
declaring that a taxation in presenti shall be laid upon a pro-
perty valued in futuro. And if the Court should be so ill-ad-
vised as to sign the decree, they sanction this monstrous absur-
dity in rating.
Mr. WILLOUGHBY said the distinction was not between Dis•
senting Chapels and Established Churches, but between Dis-
senting Chapels and Parochial Churches.—( Hear.)
Mr. LESLIE proceeded. My last proposition is, that if the er-
roneous advice given to the Commissioners be still further acted
upon to the signing of the decree, such prooeeding will bring
her Majesty's Commissioners of Sewers into contempt, as being
a final judgment of a Court of Record which cannot be carried
into effect, either as to a distress upon, or sale of, premises
charged by such decree. The absurdity of this doctrine has
been carried so fsr, that pew-openers of chapels are charged in
the presentment ; that Richard Hall, the labourer in trust, or
clerk of the works, a servant, not of Chelsea Hospital, but of
the Office of Woods and Forests, stands in the presentment as
liable for a rate upon the chapels and wards of the Hospital,
ar.d 57 acres of land. I need not repeat what. I have urged
upon the consideration of this Court, but I ask this Court se-
riously to consider whether they dare issue a warrant of dis-
tress upon consecrated buildings or ground, or attempt
to sell under the statute of Sewers, 23 Henry VIII., c 6,
the consecrated land upon which a church stands, or violate
the sanctity of that ground wherein repose the ashes of the
dead? Then I ask if you sign this decree do you not affirm my
proposition, and bring her Majesty's Commission into con-
tempt ? Then I ask, dare this Court attempt to sell Chelsea
Hospital because Richard Hall refuses or neglects the cess or
tax you may choose by this decree to charge him with ? No
land can be sold without a person is expressly charged. What
says Callis after quoting the statute, " Provided always that if
any person or persons being assessed or taxed to any lot, or
charge for any lands," &c. And he says page 205, "if an as-
sess or charge of payment be laid . upon certain lands
without mentioning the owner, the lands cannot be decreed
from him by this law ; for the words of the statute be,
that if any person or persons assessed to any lot or
charge do not pay.' So that I shall take it that no decree
for the sale of land can be made but where there is a person
certainly assessed by name." Let me call the attention of the
Court to the definition of the Decree given by Callis, p. 285.
He says, " A decree is neither a 'law nor ordinance in proper
definition, but is only a sentence of judgment in a course of
justice, delivered or declared by the Judges, thereby and
through the power and strength of a general form, for deer a-
turn est sententia lota super lege= So, that a law is a gene-
ral direction for a multitude. An ordinance is a subordinate
direction, proceeding out of a more general power. And -a
decree is a sentence delivered for or against a particular.
person, grounded upon the said laws and ordinances."
If this decree should be signed, this Court would be neglecting
a most important point, which arises, in the 23d Henry VIII.,
on the words "inhabitant or dwelling thereabouts by the said
said walls, ditches, banks, gutters, goles, sewers, trenches, and
other the said impediments and annoyances, and all those per-
sons and every of them to tax, assess, charge, distrain, and
punish." This being a penal clause must be construed lite-
rally. Who is an " inhabitant" in a legal sense ? Coke,
Inst. 2, 702—" Inhabitants of a vill are the householders of a
vill." And so construed the Legislature when, by " the 52d Geo.
111., c. 48, local and personal," the powers of the Commissioners
of Sewers for Westminster and parts of Middlesex were enlarged.
" And whereas great difficulty has arisen to the Commissioners
of Sewers for the limits aforesaid in laying an equal rate
from time to time upon the several inhabitants within the limits
of the said Commissions, occasioned by their not being autho-
rised by any of the statutes now in force concerning sewers to
call for and inspect the poor's-rates of the several pin-isles
within the limits aforesaid ; be it therefore enacted that it
shall be lawful for the said Commissioners of Sewers for the
limits aforesaid, from time to time, as the said Commissioners
shall see occasion, by an order in writing, to direct the clerk
for the time being of the said Commissioners, or any other per-
son
on their behalf, to inspect and take a copy of the last rate
or assessment for the relief of the poor of any parish or parishes
within the jurisdiction of the said Commissioners of Sewers,
&c. &c. In order to enab!e the said Commissioners of Sewers
to lay an equal rate or assessment on the several inhabitants
within the limits of the said Commissions or any portion
thereof." And there has been a judicial decision on this
Act of Parliament, and Lord Denman, in the case of
Soady and Wi!son, 3 Adolphus and Ellis, 248, thus spoke :
This is an action for trying the validity of a Sewers-rate, im-
pose 1 on the plaintiff as occupier of the Audit-office, in the
caste n wing of Somerset House. The plaintiff contended
that such rate was improperly imposed on him as the occupier,
even if it could be imposed at all in respect of that building,
but that he also denied. A case was agreed upon, stating the
particulars from which the pla,ntifF's occupation was inferred
by the defendant. On the effect of them we do not find it ne-
cessary to give any opinion, because the 52d George 1II„ c.
48, gives the power to rate those persons as occupiers, who arc
de facto assessed to the Poor's-rate ; and the plaintiff filling
the latter character with respect to the premisses, is clothed
with the former by the statute referred to. I submit, sir, that
as we have thus the power by statute, and by the judicial deci-
sion just quoted we have, &:,t as these inhabitants do willingly
and cheerfully contribute all the expenses for the repairing of
the sewers,and the necessary expense of the Commission, that it
is a duty which this Court owes to them, not to be embarking
in surveys and valuations of property which has neither owner
nor occupier in law chargeable, however advantageous such a
course may be to the two professions thereby benefited ; for these
reasons, I submit the amendment of which I have given notice
" That the Commissioners do not sign the Decree for a Rate
on the Counters Creek and Ranclagli Presentments ; because
the proceedings of the Court which have led to the said Pre-
sentments, and the Presentments, are void, being contrary to
the Statutes, to the Commission, and the Oath taken by the
Commissioners : because the doctrine laid down to the Jurors,
That the Commissioners impose the tax on the land, and arc
not bound to inquire whose property it is, or to regard any
-question of Ownership or Occupation,' is contrary to the Sta-
tutes: because the necessary consequence of such erroneous
doctrine is another ; that haling made a Sewers Rate without
any regard to ownership or occupation, a legal distress for the
same can be taken upon the premises so rated, and any person's
goods found thereon may be sold for such tax : because, during
these proceedings, the Commissioners have been made aware
that the opinions of the Attorney and Solicitor-General and.
Sir Frederick Pollock are against them : because if the erro-
neous advice given to the Commissioners be still further acted
upon to the signing of the decree, such proceeding will bring
her Majesty's Commission of Sewers into contempt, as being a
final judgment of a Court of Record which cannot be carried
into effect, either as to a distress upon or sale of premises
charged by such decree."
Mr. EDWARD MULLINGS seconded the amendment and
briefly supported it.
Sir GEORGE FARRANT and Captain BAGUE moved that the
Court do now adjourn, which was carried by Bto 4. Thus,
throwing the whole question overboard by a side wind.

FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE

WHITEHALL, FEB. 22, 1841.
The Queen has been pleased to nominate, constitute, and
appoint the Right Honourable the Earl of Chichester, the
Right Honourable Viscount Duncannon, and the Right Ho-
nourable Sir George Grey, Bart., to be three of the Ecclesi-
astical Commissioners for England.

bOWNING-STREET,
.FEB. 23.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint Willoughby Short-
land, Esq., to be Colonial Secretary at New Zealand.
DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY.

WILLIAM EDMONDSON, tailor, Liverpool.
EDWIN SPARROW, iron-dealer, Rushal, Walsall.
BAirKRUPTCIEa SUPERSEDED.

HENRY 410 WE, wine-merchant, Great Tower-street.
EDWARD WOOD, iron-merchant, Nottingham.
BANKRUPTS.

JOHN 'MORGAN KNOTT, stationer, Camphill, War-
wickshire, to surrender March 9 and April 6, at two, at the
New Royal Hotel, Birmingham. Chaplin, Gray's Inn-square,
London ; Ingleby and Wragge, or Arnold and Haines, Bir-
mingham.

EbWARD YOUNG, scrivener, Newcastle-upon-Tyne,
March 18, at eleven, and April 6, at two, at the Bankrupt
Commission-room, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Bell, Brodrick,
and Bell, Bow Church-yard, London ; Seymour, Newcastle-
_

ARBUTHNOT EMERSON, THOMAS TRIPP, and
JAMES BENN, distillers, Brookfield county Antrim, Ireland,
March 16, at two, and April 6, at twelve, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Belcher, official assignee ; Loaden, Great
James-street, Bedford-row.
_ _

PE 13LACKBUBN, builder, Salford, Lancashire,
March 4, and April 6, at eleven, at the Commissioners'-rooms,
Manchester. Higginbotham, Buckley, and Lord, Ashton-
under-Lyne ; hickards and Walker, Lincoln's Inn• fields,
London.

JAMES GAWEN, Irish provision merchant, Lower Shad-
well, March 5, at twelve, and April 6, at eleven, at the Court
of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee, 13asinghall-street ;
Jordeson, St. Mary-at-Hill, London.
WILLIAM GEORGE, musical instrument maker, Fleet-
street, March 3, at one, and April 6, at twelve, at the Court
of Bankruptcy. Graham, offic►al assignee, Basinghall-street ;
starling, :ackville-street.

ROLVERT APGREGOR, grocer, Chester, March 5, and
April 6, at eleven, at—the Green Dragon Inn, Chester. Phipps,
Sise-lane, London ; Roberts, Chester.

EDWARD BENNETT, builder, Cambri&,e, March 5, and
April 6, at eleven, at the Hoop Hotel, Cambridge. Nicholls
and Son, Cook's-court, Lincoln's Inn, London ; Fetch, Cam-
bridge.
JOSEPH DUCKHA S 11, carpet dealer, Piccadilly, March 3,
at twelve, and April 6, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Graham, official assignee, Basingliall-street; Rush, Austin-
friars.

JOHN STEPHENS VIRET and THOMAS RECKITT
KITCHING, linendrapers, Ludgate-hill, March 5, at half-
past twelve' and April 6, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Fasinghall-street ; Reed
and Shaw, Friday-street, Cheapside.
THuMAS BARNETT LOADER, map publisher, Wal-
worth-road, March 2, at twelve, and April 6, at eleven, at the
Court of Bankruptcy. Gibson, official assignee, Basinghall-
street ; Lewis, Church-court, Clement's-inn, Lombard-street.

WILLIAM MASON, cotton spinner, Heywood, near Bury,
Lancashire, March 16, and April 6, at eleven, at the Swan
Hotel, Bolton-le-Moors, Lancashire. Clarke and Medcalf,
Lincoln's Inn-fields, London ; Grundy, Bury.
STEPHEN GRAINGER WHI FELIOUSE, coal-mer-
chant, Northampton, March 19, and April 6, at eleven, at
the Peacock Inn, Northampton. Vincent and Sherwood,
Inner Temple, London. _ _ _

JOHN PROFFITT, jun., buckle-manufacturer, Dar-
laston, Staffordshire, ..larch 5, and April 6, at eleven, at the
Swan Hotel, Wolverhampton. Rushwor:hs, Staple Inn, Lou-
don; Watts, Wednesbury.
• JONATHAN GUNTON, butcher, Cambridge, March 5,
and April 6, at one, at the Hoop Hotel, Cambridge. Ravens-
croft, Guildford-street, Russell-square, London; Cooper, Cam-
bridge.

COURT OF ALDERMEN.—Yesterday a Court
was hold for the dispatch of business; Alderman Copeland
presided as locum tentilS for the Lord Mayor, who is in-
disposed. A petition was presented from Mr. Coast
and Mr. Taylor, two inhabitant how ehelders of Coleman-
street Ward, against the return of Mr. Cousins, t,n the
ground of non-residence, and not having paid scot nor
served lot. The petition was ordered to be taken into
consideration at the next Court. Alderman Humphery
presented a petition signed by a great number of the in-
habitants of the borough of Southwark for the restitution
of the Union-hall Police-office. The petition was or-
dered to be taken into consideration when that relative
to tie Borough Compter should be brought up. A
petition against the return of Mr. Wells, for the Ward of
Farringdon Without, excited a lengthened discussion,
which was adjourned to a future day, and the Court
broke up.