The Sun.
London, England, 1835-10-09 00:00:00

ST. CATHERINE CREE.

Tory objections

ST. BOTOLPH, BISHOPSGATE.

Tory objections

ALL HALLOWS, LOMBARD-STREET.
Liberal objections I Sustained

ST. DUNSTAN'S IN THE WEST.

Tory objections
The Liberal objections were strangled under circum-
stances that occasioned several curious expressions of opi-
nion on the subject.
ST. DUNSTAN'S IN THE EAST.
Tory objections
Liberal ditto 4 I Sustained
(Before Mr. MARTIN and Mr. CovinvTair.)
Thirteen persons claimed as freeholders, by right of their
being almsmen of Robert Hewish's charity.
They were opposed by Mr. Coppock, on the ground that
they could not, according to their own claim, be registered
as freeholders, because they could not be said to have any
freehold interest in the funds of the charity.
Both Barristers were of opinion that the claimants were
disqualified by the Act.
Mr. Hunter, parish-clerk of St. Lawrence Jewry, claimed
by reason of certain tithes which were stated to be payable
to him by right of his office. This case had been partially
investigated by Mr. Martin, and was reserved for the pur-
pose of ascertaining whether the dues which the parish-
clerk received were in the nature of tithes or " wages."
Some old parish books were produced, in which were
inserted in one column the Vicar's tithes, al:1. in another
the Clerk's " wages."
Mr. MARTIN observed that a claim of this kind for tithes
in one of the parishes of the city of London, involveci
question of great nicety and considerable difficulty. If the
present claimant derived his title from the payments, whicli
he received as tithes, he would be possesse4 of teal pro-
perty which would unqnestionably give hir4 I,ote. If it

The list submitted to the Barrister's consideration con-
tained 214 names. An objection was made by the steward
to 13, in consequence of insufficient occupancy, including
the name of Mr. Craig, the Revising Barrister for the
City of London.
Mr.---MEttival,E, under the circumstatios, admitted the
right, and the objections were allowed.
Mr. S. B. Biggs, of Six Clerks'-office, had sent in a claim
to be registered for the borough.
Mr. MERIVALE decided that the claim was bad.
LIBERTY OF GLASSHOUSE-YARD, AND PARISH
OF ST. BOTOLPH WITHOUT, ALDERSGATE.
In the above no case came before the Barrister requiring
notice.
ALIENS.
Mr. MERIVALE having reserved his decision as regarded
13 claimants reported to be aliens, the question was gone
into, and the following evidence given :--
Caesar Tagliabue sworn—Antoine Tagliabue is my ne-
phew. He was born within two miles of Palavachino, in
Italy. I do not remember the name of the place. His
father and mother were never in England, and I first
saw my nephew when he was about three or four years
old ; that was at Palavachino, and he at that time had
never been out of Italy ; he has many times, in conver-
sation with me, admitted that he was an alien, and that
he was born near Palavachino. I never served on a fo-
reign jury with him.
Mr. Sharp, the Vestry Clerk, who appeared in support
of tiro Overseers' list, said that the evidence adduced was
not sufgeielit to establish that the parties objected to were
aliens ; and Mr. Murilyon having been heard on the part of
the objectors,
Mr. MERIVALE decided, thai it having been proved that
two out of the number had served as foreigners on a jury,
they could not be retained on the list of voters ; and as it
was also proved that Antoine Tagliabue was born near
Palavachino, the list stands thus :
Objected to, 13 ; Sustained, 10 ; Disallowed, 3.
LIBERTY OF SAFFRON-HILL, HATTON-GAR-
DEN, AND ELY-RENTS, IN THE PARISH OF
ST. ANDREW, HOLBORN.
Elyplace having claimed to be extra-parochial, and the
Revising Barristers not wishing to take on themselves the
decision of it, for the last three years, gave each year a
certificate requesting the parish not to give evidence of the
parochiality, and such evidence was accordingly withheld
on the Barrister certifying that neither party should be
prejudiced thereby ; and, accordingly, the inhabitants of
Ely-place were, on such certificate, admitted to the elec-
tive franchise. The action that was depending to try the
question of the extra-parochiality, was now at an end,
upon an agreement come to between Mr. Sharp, the Vestry
Clerk of the parish, and the solicitors for the landlords,
by which the parish have obtained judgment in that action
upon payment of a sum of money in discharge of arrears
of, rates and costs ; but inasmuch as all the leases of the
houses in Ely-place contain covenants prohibiting the lessees
from acknowledging the parochiality of the place without
the written consent of the landlord, and such consent not
having been yet obtained, the lessees, in order to preserve
their leases, which are valuable, entered into an arrange-
ment with the parish, by which they retained their franchise
and preserved their leases ; and accordingly the parish au-
thorities consented to admit them to be placed on the list of
voters for the borough, and the Revising Barrister gave a
certificate.
The Barristers having gone through the whole of the
lists in the parishes of this borough, the Court adjourned.

EASTERN DIVISION OF SURREY.
(Before Mr. KNox.)
In the parish of Putney there were 48 new claimants,
and 16 objections.
A number of individuals claimed as shareholders in Put-
ney-bridge, but no party having objected to them, the Bar-
rister did not examine the validity of the qualification, and
the claims were accordingly allowed.
The next case was that of Mr. Parsons; who claimed in
respect of a leasehold, value 15/.
The I3arrister said, that there had been no qualification
described, and in consequence of this he must strike out
the claimant's name from the list, unless the omission was
supplied.
The next claim was in respect of two properties gtuated
in different parishes, the value of neither being 501., but
amounting together to 60/. per annum.
The case was postponed for judgment.
After the list had been gone through, it was found on re-
ference to it that it had not been headed according to the
usual form, " situate within the parish of Putney," accord-
ing to the provision made in the schedule of the Act H,
section 3.
The Barrister said that the omission was one of the
greatest importance, as it might have the effect of disfran-
chising the entire parish ; he, however, did not consider
himself justified under all circumstances in striking out all
the voters, amounting to 120, and he should therefore re-
medy the defect by making a special entry upon the list.
The next list taken was that of the parish of Wands-
worth, but the objections to it were few. Amongst them
was—
The case of George Phillips, who had claimed origi-
nally as a leaseholder for lives ; he had, however, subse-
quently purchased the freehold right of the property, but
within the six months provided under the Act. It was
urged that he, therefore, could not claim as a leaseholder
this year, because he had not held under that tenure for
twelve months ; nor could he claim as a freeholder, as he
had not held for six months in that capacity.
The BARRISTER observed that the point was one of very
considerable delicacy, and he would therefore defer his de-
cision until his next sitting.
The next case was that of the Rev. John Richards, the
Inclij.;)endent Minister of Wandsworth chapel, who claimed
as the sor of a freehold interest in the rents of the
pews in the chapj•
It was shown that tht: claimant had been appointed for
pos„,sion of the funds derivable
life, and that he was in
from those rents.—Judgment was deferred, to allow time
for the production of the trust-deed.
(Before Mr. LENNARD.)
The lists of voters for the parishes of Mortlake, Toot-
ing, Barnes, Merton, Wimbledon, and Battersea and Tot4;P:
were revised. With the exception of the subjoined case,
nothing of interest occurred.
John Squire claimed as licensed parish clerk of Mortlake,
and possessing a salary of above 40s. a year arising out of
land. The claimant was appointed by the Bishop, part of
his salary came out of the church rates, the other part ac-
crued from some land left in trust to the churchwardens
" for the use and benefit of the Church."
It was argued that the appointment being for life, and
part of the salary arising from this endowment, though the
name of the parish clerk was not included in the bequest, it
was in fact comprehended in the general term " for the use
and benefit of the Church ;" and that therefore he had really
a freehold interest in land above the requisite amount.
Mr. LENNARD said there was some doubt as to the
claimant's life interest, and the deed must be produced next
sitting.—The Courts adjourned at three o'clock.

WEST KENT.
The list for the parish of Charlton was gone through
without any objection being made by either side. After
which the Woolwich list was proceeded with.
(Before Mr. BitocKmAN.)
The first case objected to was that of Mr. Brice, but his
claim was granted.
Upon the name of William Elborough being called, Mr.
Thomas Tame appeared to substantiate his claim. A lease
of Sixty-one years had been granted to himself and Elbo-
rougi,l•at a ground-rent of 5/. per annum, upon which they
had b ,
ui:lt a chapel, the seats in which let for about 151.
per anntu.'l.
Mr. 1346scKmAN decided that this was only a borough
qualiticatvl

After the minutes of the last Court were read,
Sir C. MARSHALL considered it his duty to address the
Court upon the subject of the sudden manner in which the
proceedings on the occasion of the last meeting of the mem-
bers were terminated. At half-past four o'clock there were
in Court no more than 34 commoners (40 are required),
and he considered it incumbent upon him, as a member of
the Court of Aldermen, to represent the necessity of an
adjournment. In justice to the Lord Mayor, upon whom
the imputation of having broken up the Court was cast, he
had to state that his Lordship was not at all to be blamed
for the abrupt close put to the proceedings.—(Hear, hear.)
He (Sir Chapman Marshall) had moved the adjournment,
and it would have been a breach of privilege in him if,
knowing that there was not present a sufficient number of
members to constitute a Court, he had not acted in that
manner. He regretted that the Lord Mayor had been
attacked in such a manner upon leaving the Court, and he
again declared that his Lordship had nothing whatever to
do with the adjournment, except that which his duty im-
posed upon him, on finding that the number of members
necessary was not in attendance.—{Hear.)
It is necessary to mention, in order to explain the mean-
ing of the foregoing observations, that at the last Court the
Lord Mayor was, upon leaving it, hissed by some of the
members, one of whom cried out, " There he goes, worse
than ever."
The LORD MAYOR should not be long with those whom
he addressed, but he should, up to the last moment, main-
tain the dignity of the office he had the honour to hold,
so that he might give it up to his successor as he' had re-
ceived it. He was sorry to say that some members of that
Court, and he could name them if he pleased, had so far
forgotten themselves as to act upon the occasion alluded to
with great indignity to the Chief Magistrate, while en.
gagedin the performance of his duty.—( Hear, hear.) The
circumstances which led to the breaking up of the Court,
had been just heard from Sir Chapman Marshall. That
gentleman had stated, upon looking round the Court, that
there was no Court. It became the bounden duty of the
Lord Mayor, upon such information, to direct the officer
to count the members ; and upon learning that the number
was deficient, to announce the fact to the Court. That,
and simply that, he had done ; and upon his leaving the
Court, some of the members thought proper to direct to-
wards him the most unkind and ungentlemanlike observa-
tions. In whatever respect he might differ in opinion upon
certain matters with those who had thus insulted him, he
was certainly eptitled to respectful treatment as Lord
Mayor of the City of London, and while in the perform-
ance of his duty in upholding the privileges of his fellow-
citizens, and maintaining the constitution of the City of
London.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped that his successor
would not be subjected to such treatment. He trusted, and
he believed, that his successor would not endure anything
of the kind.--(Hear, hear.)
Mr. FIGGINS had heard no person say to the Lord Mayor
that there was no Court. He had heard no officer called
upon to count the Court, as was customary when any ob-
jection was made. He had heard nothing of the kind. No.
The language the Lord Mayor used as he passed along with
his officers was " Pray, gentlemen, keep your seats ; I am
going."—( A laugh, and cries of " Hear.") Such an address
to the members was not surely calculated to support the
dignity of the Chief Magistrate. Quite the reverse. There
was not a member of the Court who was not disposed to
assist the Lord Mayor in supporting the dignity of the
office ; but his Lordship did not at all point out the way.
The LORD MAYOR said that Mr. Figgins had stated
what was not at all the fact. The circumstances were ac-
curately these :—Sir Chapman Marshall said, in an audible
tone, that there was no Court. He (the Lord Mayor)
called to the mace-bearer to count the members, and the
efficer confirmed the statement ; and when he said " Keep
your seats, gentlemen," he addressed himself to those who
had iippertinently asked the Town Clerk whether, when the
Lord gayOr rose, they also ought to rise, and not to any
others.
Mr. Criaatxt: PEARSON would not contend that the
Lord Mayor wos t.ot bound to dissolve the Court under the
circumstances me :Ai() ned ; but it appeared that Sir Chap-
man Marshall took uk'on himself the whole merit of the
transaction. He knew ps-rfectly well why the interruption
to the business of the Co:irt took place--half-past four
o'clock, Sir Chapman' Mars.!ia.ll's hour for dining, had ar-
rived—(A laugh)—and he happtned to know also that Sir
Chapman Marshall was under saif At the moment to dine
with the Navigation Committee.—
.(Laughter.) They
could not, then, be surprised at what had occurred. What I
a dinner ready and to be neglected by the worthy Alder-
man ! They might as well bait a mousetrap with toasted
cheese, and wonder that a mouse should run into it.—
( Great laughter.)
The practice of giving Committee dinners on days on
which Courts of Common Council are held is certainly the
cause of great inconvenience, procrastination, and disorder
amongst the members. It is laughable to see what a. rush
they make to the door at the delightful summons, however
heavy the business on the paper may be.
THE FREEDOM OF THE CITY.
Sir J. SIIAW (the Chamberlain of the city of London)
presented a list of the applicants for the freedom of the
city under the order of the Court of the Ist instant. It
consisted of ten householders of the city and three who are
not householders.
Mr. C. PEARSON moved that the following resolutions of
the Court of the 17th of March should be extended to the
cases of the first ten applicants, viz., " That persons should
be admitted to the freedom of the City without the inter-
vention of the trading companies." " That the sum of
money to be paid for admission to the freedom of the City
by redemption, by persons occupying premises, or carrying
on any trade, busine.:s, or profession, within the City and its
liberties, should be five i;ounds, exclusive of the present fine
and the usual fees, instead of twenty-five pounds, heretofore
paid."—Agreed to.
Mr. C. PEARSON then moved, ,t That the three persons
who applied for the freedom of the City, without being in-
habitants, should be admitted without the iotervention of
the trading companies, upon the payment of twenty-five
pounds."—Agreed to.
RESTORATION OF THE UPPER MARSHAL.
Mr. WIRE rose to make the following motion :—" That
the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor be requested to lay before
the Court. of Aldermen the Report of the Committee for
General Purposes, agreed to by this Court on the 2d day of
July last, relative to Neville Brown, Upper Marshal, with
the request of this Court, that Neville Browne be restored
to the full possession and execution of his place or office of
Marshal, and that he be admitted an extra constable, and
sworn in the Outer Court for the due execution of
.his du-
ties."—( Hoar, hear.) He quoted the precedent of Mar-
shal Bradley, in 1801, and expressed a confident expecta-
tion that the Court of Aldermen would act upon the pre-
sent as they had acted upon that occasion, and swear in
Marshal Neville Browne.
Mr. GALLOWAY warmly seconded the motion, which was
agreed to without a dissentient.
The COURT, after the transaction of some business of r o
public interest, adjourned,