The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Acacsr 4.
CASE OF COVENTRY.
Mr. Carter, Town Clerk of Coventry's Evidence concluded from
The Sun of yesterday and which was given in our Secend Edition
last night.
Did they strike out his evidence 2—l should think not.
Were the Commissioners two Barristers?—l believe so. I have
seen Mr. Whitcombe in the King's Bench—Mr. Cockburn I never
saw before or since.
Had Mr. Marriott ever been concerned in the elections at Co.
ventry ?—Yes, at a great many.
For whom did he appear ; for what party did he act ?—For Mr.
Bulwer and Mr. Ellice.
Was he there for Bulwer only ? They were so mixed up toge-
ther, that I believe he acted for both. They both came together,
and canvassed together.
Have you taken the trouble of going through Mr. Cockburn's
Report to see how often Mr. Marriott's evidence is alluded to under
an anonymous title ?—I have; it is eight or nine times.
From your own knowledge, do you know that the evidence was
the same ?—I do. I was present and heard it given ?
Does he figure as a solicitor well-known and respected 7—Yes.
Does he figure as a solicitor much engaged in the elections of
Coventry ?—Yes.
Does he figure as a solicitor much engaged in defending the peo-
ple from the Corporation ?—Yes.
When did Mr. Marriott leave your office ?—Fourteen or fifteen
years ago.
Did he leave it by his own wish, or how?—By my directions.
Under what circumstances ?—A magistrate of Warwick told me
that Marriott, my clerk, had been heard to say quite publicly that
the Churches of England would make excellent materials for the
roads, and he did not care how soon they were so used.—(A laugh.)
Did you, for that, discharge him ?—I spoke of the matter to him,
and he resigned.
Did there appear to be a more close intimacy between him and
Mr. Cockburn, the Commissioner, than between a judge and a wit-
ness ?—Yes, much more so. They were frequently walking out
together, and Mr. Marriott was a frequent visitor at the inn where
the Commissioners resided.
In Mr. Cockburn's Report, I see he states that the school was
taken no notice of by the Corporation, except by speaking some-
times to the master. Is that true?—No, it is not.
Do you know whether that evidence was given by Marriott?—l
cannot say.
Was there a dispute between the Corporation and the under
master 2—There was ; and a suit of Chancery was the consequence.
He resisted the right of the Corporation to interfere with the
school. They resisted the Charity Commissioners also ; no one
could be so much insulted as they were, by a son of the under
master.

I see a passage in the report of Mr. Cockburn—an extract from
the Charity Report; have you seen it ?—Yes.
There is a passage in the Charity Report very favourable to the
Corporation—is that given in Mr. Cockburn's Report 2—No, it
s not.
Is the part to which I allude a continuation of the passage
quoted ?—I believe it is.
I see a list of the receivers of the Charity as given to the Com-
missioners, in which the freemen aear to be a majority. Was
any list given in, to your knowledge?—There was.
These two statements or separate lists were given in—they pro-
ducing different results ; one, however is stated in the Report, and
the other is not even alluded to ?—lt is so.
Does the Mayor receive an annual salary ?—Yes, he receives a
certain sum to defray the official expenses to which he is subjected.
If he carries on the business in a gentlemanly way, he must incur
very considerable expense.
then if the Mayor sees no one, goes to no expense, never puts on
decent clothes, the expense would be very little?—Yes.
Do you consider the allowance of 1001. a-year unreasonable, or
do you think it fair and proper ?—I consider it only fair and
proper.
I find it stated in the Commissioners' report, that the books were
burnt in the school, and this was given on the authority of one of
the scholars ?—I was very much surprised to see that statement.
It would appear in the report of the evidence taken before the Com-
missioners, as if the Magistrates had been charged with improvi-
dent conduct, when, in fact, the only person charged was the
under master.
The Report at page 1,8.32, states that it became a leading object of
the Corporation to secure the nomination of Members of Parlia-
ment for the city. You have already stated, but I forget—perhars
you will state again the relative situation and preponderance of the
two political parties ?—At one time the Whigs preponderated—.at
another the Tories. Now the balance is in favour of the Tories.
Lord LYNDHURST—Do you think that is confined to the City
of Coventry ?—( A laugh.) I suppose the Gentlemen composing
the Corporation, being men of education, property, and station, en-
tertain opinions of some sort or other ?—leo doubt.
I find at page 4'336 of the Report a statement charging the Al-
dermen as Magistrates, with neglecting the public interests for their
private advantage. Did this charge arise from their making a cer-
tain appointment, and was this appointment the cause of a collision
between them and the Directors of the Poor ?—Yes.
Who made this charge ?—Some of the Directors of the poor
called upon the Magistrates, after Presser had been recommended
by Lord Melbourne as Chief Constable. The Magistiates were de-
sirous of having an officer competent to the performance of the du-
ties that would devolve upon hies, but the Directors of the Poer
wished their own servant to be made Chief Constable ; the Magis-
trates consulted together, and told the Directors of the Poor that it
was not in their power to elect a constable—that he must be elected
at a meeting (so we understood).
Lord PLUNKETT—When did you first expect to beexamined?
—Yesterday.
Sir C:IA kt.LES WF.TilEaELL—Yesterday, or this day, which ?en.
I mean this day at 4 o'clock.
Mr. K xia HT—According to your observation of Cue eehlen C f_.
is this the instance (that of the appointment of constable)
on which the report preeeale in stating that the Magistrates were
charged with a neglect of the public interests to promote the ad-
vantages of their own party ?—I should say so.
Have you any doubt that this is the instance to whiels the Ile-
port refers?—l have no doubt. The Magistrates were extremely
anxious to oblige the Directors of the Poor, and took the opinion
of Mr. Ellice as to whether they had the power.
Lord PLUNK Err—Did you attend on Friday evening when
Sir C. Wetherell concluded his address ?—I did ; but I understood
that some others were to be examined antecedent to myself.
Musser was no servant of the Corporation?—No; he was sent
to them from the Home Department.
Then according to ::our belief, does this charge proceed from
the fact of the Magistrate not appointing ao chief constable the moo
whom the directors of the poor wished them to appoint 2—Ex-
actly—the man whom the directors of the poor recommended was
subsequently appointed constable. The Corporation told them at
the time that they had not the power to appoint him chief consta-
ble, but they subsequently elected him as constable.
The appointment of Prosser at 1401. was a waver of the patronage
of the Corporation in favour of the Government appointment ?
Yes.

And this was the cause of the collision between them and the di-
rectors cf the poor ?-1 have no doubt of it ; it was the subject of
newspaper paragraphs and advertisements.
Was the rule respecting the police ever departed from by the
Corporation ?—Not to my knowledge.
Do you believe that they have always acted conformably to the
charter ?-1 (10.
In common language, do von believe that the city of Coventry
then, and now is, a well and efficiently governed city ?—I should
say it is a well-governed city.
Is it a city in which the government and administration of their
concerns is not infected with partiality, corruption, cr inefficient
governing persons ?—I have never seen any.
Do you consider that the charter, as acted upon in practice, and
the system that prevails in practice, to be sufficient for the useful,
efficient, quiet, and good government of the City ?—I should say s,s.
According to your observations as a professional man, and an in-
habitant, is this your oyinion upon oath ?—Yes.
Lord SALISBURN —Do you recollect vhen the Protest was
delivered to the Commissioners?—No, Ido not. It was in the
middle of the evening.
Lord SALISBURY—To whom was this protest delivered ?
I read it to both of the Commissioners, and delivered it to one
of them. . .
Lord SALISBURY—By whom was the protest drawn up ?—I
am inclined to think it was by Messrs. Eld and Osbourne con-
jointly.
Did you sign it?—No, I did not.
That was considered b them as a protest coming from the Cor-
poration ; was it not?—!t vas.
Have you read the Report of the Commissioners with regard to
this ?—I have.
Is that protest mentioned in it ?—To the best of my recollection,
it is in no way adverted to.
Mr. George Eld, the Mayor of Coventry, was then called in,
and examined by Sir Charles Wetherell.
You are the Mayor of Coventry ?—I am.
Are you the individual mentioned in the Report of the Charity
Commissioners ?—I am.
Have you read the Report of the Municipal Commissioners?—l
have.

Does the Report contain the whole that is favourable to the
Corporation?—lt does not.
The whole passage to that effect is omitted ?—lt is.
Can you state any reason why the omission was made ?—No.
Allow me to ask what business do you carry on in Coventry .
A miller.
You cannot put men, can you, into your mill and grind them into
seven ?—( Great laughter.) I think not—(Laughter. )
Have you paid particular attention to the charities in the town of
Coventry ?-1 have.
Do you recollect the period when the Charity Commissioners
left Coventry ?—I think it was the latter end of October.
In 1833?—1t was in October, but what year I cannot state.
Is there any thing in the Report—is there any direction given
to correct what was amiss in the school, except verbally ?—No.
Had you in the year 1832, and before the Municipal Commis-
sioners came, preparedrules for the regulation of the school ?—I had.
In connexion with what other persoi s ?—.With the council. I
prepared the rules on the 17th of January, 1832.
How many council attended ? Ido not recollect. The Mtn:-
cipal Commissioners did not come till October, 1833.
Were those rules prepared a year and a half before that time
—Yes.

Were those rules served upon the master of the school ?—The
head master of the school was in bad health, and the publication of
the rules was suspended for half a year.
Were those rules published in any Coventry paper ?—I gave a
copy of them to the Coventry Herold.
Were those rules stuck np any where, or circulated in any other
way ?—I gave one of them to Mr. Whitcombe, one of the two
Municipal Commissioners, at the time he examined me.
Do you recollect the election of Ellice and Bulwer at Coventry ?
—Yes, I do.
Was Mr. Whitcombe their counsel at that time ?—I don't know.
I saw him walking arm in arm with Mr. Bulwer. I hare very
little doubt that lie was the acting counsel of Mr. Bulwer and
Mr. Ellice.
What were the politics of those gentlemen ; were they for or
against the Corporations ? I don't know of my own knowledge,
and therefore I wish you to inform me.—They were against the
Corporation, I believe.
In point of fact, at the time mentioned in the Report of the
Charity Commissioners, had the Council given particular attention
to the school was examined by them, and the Municipal Com-
missioners also.
You did not observe my question. Had the Council, before the
Commissioners came, given particular attention to the school ?
Certainly; I had been examined by the Council as to the best mode
of procuring the resignation of the then Head Master.
Wu there a question between the schoolmaster and Corporation
whether the schoolmaster could exercise the office of a visitor ?
There was.
Do you happen to know whether any thing had occurred in the
Vice-Chancellor's Court upon that subject ?—Yes, proceedings
were commenced there, and there was a question pending which, I
believe, is pending still, whether or not we were legally the visitors
of the school.
Lord L YNDH URST,Was all this before the Commissioners?
myLord.

Sir C. WETHERELL—Is anything of this in the Report?--
It is not.

Do you think it was fairly omitted ?—I should say that it was not.
Do you think it was omitted by error or design ?—I cannot tell
whether it was by error ordesign—all I know is that it is omitted.
Lord BROUGHAM—.Good God! how can the witness tell

whether it was committed by error or design ? The fact is, that
there is not one question in ten that has been pi 4 that has any
relevancy whatever to the matter in question !
Sir eIIARLES WETHERELL to witness—Are you in pos-
session of any letter of the Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry,
approving what had been done with respect to the school ?—I am.
(Mr. Eld here read the letter expressing the satisfaction of the
Bishop at the oou.rse that had been pursued with respect to the
school. )

Did you make any communication to Mr. Whitcombe upon the sub-
ject of any of the charitable trusts, before the Report was made ?—I did.
Be so good as to state what communication you made ?—lmmediately
after the visit of the Municipal Commissioners, the head master died.
The rules were then revised, and some alterations were made in them ;
and the regulation was agreed to regulating the appointment of the head
master. I wrote to Mr. Whitcombe, stating the reasons for this.
What answer did Mr. Whitcombe send you ?—He sent me an answer
stating his wish and readiness to aid in so laudable an object.
Do you recollect the story about the burning of the books in the Li.
brary ?—I do. During the time the Charity Commissioners were in
Coventry I was told by a person, named Robinson,that before that period
the school-books had been used to light the fire.
Did you make a representation of this to the Charity Commissioners,
in order to get it corrected ?—I did ; but the head-master and the usher
disputed the authority of the Corporation to interfere.
Lord MELBOURNE—You attended before the Charity Commis.
sioners?—l did.
Lord MELBOURNE—And it was considered that it had been esta.
blished before them that this had taken place ?—lt was.
Sir C. WETHERELL-You were the person who made the charge with
a view to correct it ?—I was.
Have the Corporation any particular mode of auditing the various
accounts of the money belonging to the different charities under their
control ?—They have the accounts of all charities kept separate.
Have you a fellowship in your gift at St. John's, Cambridge ?—Yes.
Have you a fellowship at St. John's, Oxford ?—Yes ; we have two
there. We have also four exhibitions founded by a person named
Thomas Lane.
Is the amount of the rents of land and interest of money belonging to
charities in Coventry considerable ?—Yes.
With respect to Sir Thomas Whyte's charity, what is the income ?
About 2,2001. per annum.
Is that derived from land?—Yes, principally from land. There is an
investment of about 9,000/. in the funds.
Among whom are the funds divisible ?—Twenty.four seventieths are
appropriated for alms to the freemen of Coventry.
By freemen, then, I suppose allusion is made to those persons de-
scribed by the last witness, who constituted the Burgesses?—Yes.
Is it devoted to theirown use altogether, or is it lent them ?—lt is di.
vided amongst them in sums of four pounds.
They share the benefaction among themselves annually P—Yes ; but
by a rule of the Corporation the same person has the 'benefit only once
in ten years.
In fact it is a benefaction, shared by them as money ?—Yes.
Who are the persons who direct the division of those sums P—The
Corporation.
Is that sum fairly divided ? It is.
Could you state the amount of the different sums in the public stocks
of which the Corporation are trustees for charities ?—I could not with-
out reference to the books of the Corporation.
Will you state the amount of the other Land Revenue of these chari-
ties P—No, I cannot, without making a calculation.
How long would that take you !—I could make it out in the course
of the afternoon.
Have you been present at the bar of the House while Mr. Carter
gave his evidence ?-1 was.
Did you attend to what he stated with respect to the administration
of justice ?—Yes.

Da you concur with him in the statement ?—I do most perfectly.
In your judgment, are the magisterial duties—the duties of the police
and the local government of the city, fairly and strictly performed ?—lti
my judgment they are.
Is the charter at all defective ?—I think not.

Are there any other charities of which- the freemen partnke P—Sir
Thorns, Whyte's and Collihs's--that is for the eons of freemen ?
—Yes.

HOW much does that charity produce ?—About 2001. to 3001. e.year.
How is it distributed amongst them ?--It is for th• purpose of eppren•
ticing the sons of poor freemen.

Do you recollect any other c',arities exclusively for freemen ?—There
are some of the smaller ones, but I do not remember whet they are.
Then I suppose you do not want a new kingdom in the City of Co-
ventry P—(A laugh.;—No, we are contented.
By Viscount MELBOURNE—Are you aware of the passage in the
Ite;:ort, where it is stated that these practices are very much in disuse—
that a great improvement has taken place since 1831 am.
I)o you think it is correct P—l do.
Then you admit that there wt.-re such things before?—The answer
was drowned in the laughter which followed.

By Lord BROUGHAM.—You think there are no defects in your
charter for Corentry—you think it perfect ?—I do not say so.
Where and what is the defect then ?—I cannot point out any.
Thc.n you don't think ti.ere is any ?—I do not know of any, either in
the Charter itself, or in its administration.
Then you do not consider it as a perfect one; point out the defect ? It
is not for rat. to do so.

The witness teen withdrew, and Charles Woodcock was called in and
examined by Mr. KNIGHT.

Y are a scLcitor in Coven Try P—l am

Are you, or have you, ever been in any may connected with the Cor.
peration ?—I neither am, n•:r have I ever been, in any way connected
with it.

You have heard the evidence which has been given today, relative to
the administration of justice, the police, and the local government of the
town ?-1 have heard the evidence of Mr. Carter, whi;ll, in my oponion
is perfectly correct.
Were }ot. at Coventry when the Commissioners arrived there ?
I was.

Did you go into the hall to see how the business was conducted ?-
I ..td on thc! second day.
F: ':n what motive did you go mere curiosity.

Did you observe any thing pi,,,icular discovered that th- exa-
minAion was being token against the Corporation, relative to the elec-
tion of 1326. I heard it stated that the Corporation had paid money
for votes in favour of their candidate.
Had you any means of furnishing information upon that point ?
Yes.

Did you inform the Commissioners that you ha I such evidence ?
I did.
What was the answer you received P—l was told, not in the most
courteous manner, -that I should be heard by-and-bye.
What p:,rticularly struck you on that occasion P—l saw the whole
parties present were hostile to the Corporation, and I attended volun.
tarily on the other side.
Did you suggest any questions to the Commissioners to be put to the
witnesses ?-0n several occasions.
Were they always put ?—On some occasions, but not always.
Do you remember R. Marriot being under examination do.
Duke of WELLINGTON—Was lie on oath ?—I was, and he upon
his affirmation.

Was ne evidence taken down ?—The Cothmissioner sat above us in
the Judge's seat—he had pens, ink, and paper, and appeared to be taking
down the evidence.

Mr. KNlctrr—Was a Mr. Brewitt, a Quaker, under examination
while you were there ?—Yes.
What opinions does he hold ? He is a most decided opponent to the
Corporation.

Did you ever hear either Mr. Marriott or Mr. Brewitt say anything
with respect to their having given any advice to non-freemen P—Yes ; I
have.

State what it was ? —They both said they had frequently advised non_
freemen to go up and claim their freedom by what they called a "ruse."
Were they allowed, in fact, to make speeches during the examina-
tion ?—Throughout the whole time.
\Vete those persons hostile to the Corporation P--invariably. I saw
no one give evidence but those who were hostile to the Corporation.
You were allowed to put questions to Mr. Brewitt. Did you then ask
him whether he was aware that the people were obliged to swear to the
seven years' apprenticeship ?—He said he was aware of it.
Did the Commissioners direct hie' instantly to stand down, or did they
proceed with his examination P—They proceeded with the examination.
What! proceed with his examination after his admitting that he had
been guilty of aubornation of perjury ?—Yes ; his examination was pro-
ceeded twit'.

Did not you r.:monstrate against his es•idence being received ?—I did
but was told to sit down.

Are there any facts in the report which, to your knowledge, arc taken
from, or founded upon, Brewitt's evidence ?--There are many such.
Did Ilrewitt say anything before the Commissioners, charging the
Mayor of Coventry with heading a riot P—Yes. I did hoar him state
that, in the year 1827, the Magistrates were waiting to know the result
of a petition that had been presented against the return of Messrs. Heath_
cote and Fyler. Some rioting took place, and he told the Commissioners
that he saw the Mayor heading the mob; while the fact was, that at the
very moment the Mayor was charged with having committed such a
gross breach of his duty, he was dining with me.
Did you state to the Commissioners that such was the fact, and that
you were ready to prove that the accusation was false P—No, I did not;
I left the place, and when I went back, next day, to contradict it, I
found that Brewitt, being convinced of his mistake, had been there
before me and retracted his statement.

Yet, I see in this report that the statement is still kept in ; how can
you account for that ?—I do not know, I cannot.
Have you ever seen anything approaching to riots, in which any of
the aldermen took part ?—I have seen them take part in a procession ;
an election procession ; but I could not consider them mobs. Thero
was no rioting at all, there was merely that which I see at all elections.
When you read the Report, did you know to whom the Commissioners
alluded as having given their evidence upon particular subjects P—Yes.
Are you well acquainted with the freemen of Coventry ?—tio man
more so.

Do they value the rights they are now possef,etl of, of pasturage and
commonage ?—Very much.
Do t:lcy COl-15: ler it a. valuable property 10.

Do you think they would like to be obliged to sell that property, say
by the Lords of the Treasury, or by other parties ?—Quite the reverse.
Or be obliged to submit to a decision of a Jury with respect to its
value, and to be obliged to part with it for such value p—There have
been many attempts made to enclose these commons, but they have
invariably and with success oppoied them. They are very careful of
those privileges.
The Marquis of SALISBURY—You have been agent at many elec.
tions at Coventry 2—Yes, I have.
On what side have you been engaged P--Always upon the Conserve.
Live side.

You have seen Mr. Marriutt engaged in the same way ?—Yes : ire.
quently.

On what side was he engaged ?—Always upon that which was called
the Liberal side.

The witness proceeded to read from the report of the Cornmissioners,
which stated that "all persons who attempted to vote were ill treated—
their clothes were torn, they were severely beaten and kicked, and suf-
fered great injury." That they were beaten and kicked, I (witness)
firmly believe, but whether they received injury or not I do not know.—
( A laugh.)

Lord SALISBURY—Did you hear the evidence given heard a
great deal of it.
By whom was it given P—By Mr. Marriott.

By Mr KNIGHT—How many contested elections were there at Co.
rentry since the Reform Act? Two; one in 1833, and the other in
1634.

Were the polling booths divided at these elections P—Yes.
Did this division of the booths produce peace and quietness P--Yes.
Did the statements in the report refer to the time anterior to the
Reform Act ?—Yes.

Did the Report of the Commissioners mention any thing of the state
of the elections subsequent to the division of the booths ?—tio. ,
Ihis witness was then ordered to withdraw.

CASE OF OXFORD.

Mr. Robinson examined by Sir C. WETABRILL—Is town clerk of
Oxford, and has sited that situation for ten years.

What does the Corporation consist of P—Of a mayor, four aldermen,
eight assistants, a recorder, a deputy recorder, two bailiff), two chain.
berlains, a city counsel, a city solicitor, and one hundred common
councilmen.

How rn iny fromen are there ?—Fourteep hundred resident free-
ing)), and seven hundred non-t egident.

Hew are then °filters elected, awl from ym; ?...Ezoni the flee.

men, with the exception of the eight assistants, who are elected from
the Council at large; the four aldermen are elected by the freemen,
lout they must have been assistants.
Who was Recorder at present?—Mr. Wason.
Who filled the office before him ?—Mr Justice Taunton, and before
him, Lord Colchester.

Is the Court held by the Recorder carried on justly, and calculated
for the inhabitants at large ?—Most decidedly.
Was there ever any complaint of the practice in this Court ?—Never.
About the once of magistrate, is it executed under the charter or
under the King's commission ?—Under the King's commission.
Is the magistracy of the city under the King's commission carried on
justly and satisfactorily to the inhabitants ?—Perfectly so.
Have you ever heard any complaint against them never heard a
single one. I never heard their judgment called in question.
Do you recollect any information in the King's Bench either against
the Corporation or against any member of it ?—No, I do not.
Has the City property of its own as contrasted with the charity pro.
perty ?—lt has very considerable property. •
Are the accounts respecting this property periodically made out
Yes, they are regularly audited.
Do those auditors attend and personally audit these accounts ?
Most decidedly.
Is the Corporation possessed of considerable funds in trust for charity.
ble purposes ?—Very considerable.

Is the audit of these accounts carried on by the auditors of the pro.
petty of the city ?—No. They had thought it expedient to make a
distinction between the charitable and corporate funds; they had dia.
tinct bankers for bath, and they were thus kept distinct.
Who were the auditors of these charitable accounts ?—They were
submitted to the same auditors.

Respecting the general executive magistracy, has it given satisfaction
to the inhabitants never heard a complaint in that respect.
Have you ever heard any complaint of them, either in their judicial,
magisterial, or general executive departments P—Never.
Were you present when the Commissioners came down P—l was.
Did you give them the Town Hall for their accommodation I)—We
gave them the Council Chamber.

Did you produce before them everything they desired respecting the
audit of the Corporation property, and that of which they are trustees ?
—Before the arrival of the Commissioners we were prepared to answer all
their inquiries.

Did you answer all their inquiries clearly, and fairly, and fully ?
We did.

What was the amount of the property belonging to the Corporation ?
—The Corporate revenue amounted to 1,5001. a year, exclusive of a large
tract of land belonging to the freemen, and also the charity funds.
Is the Mayor put to any expense in the discharge of his official duties?
—He is.

What allowance was made to the Mayor for these expenses ?—About
30/. a year.

Is that all that is allowed P—No, there are some small fees upon the
admission of freemen, making in the whole about 501. a year.
What is the usual amount of these expenses I.—They are very consi.
derable.

Do they exceed 501. ?—I have known the Mayor to expend from 6001.
to 7001. a year.

Are there any expenses from these fund for feasts 2—No; with the
exception of two dinners, which are provided at an expense of from 101.
to 151. At the election of Mayor there aas an annual dinner at which
the nobility of the county, and the heads of the College, were present,
and the expenses of which were paid out of the corporate funds.
Were the accounts after audit entered in a book kept for that pur.
pose?—Yes ; and I read them over to the whole Council afterwards.

You said there was a tract of land belonging to the freemen ; what
was the value of that land 7—That would depend upon the number of
cattle put in.

But if it were let what do you think it would let for P—l should
think it would produce 1,0001. a year.
'With respect to the Charities, can you state to the House the amount
of the interest of the personal property belonging to them, and the rent
of the land P—l cannot, but I can make it out.
By what time P—By to.morrow.
Is the sum considerable P—Very considerable.
Have these funds been fairly and satisfactorily administered P—Very
much so. I never heard any complaint.
NVhat do you think is the amount of the donation for the support of
poor creatures which is distributed in the church 7—About 5401

Who are appointed the Trustees of these Charitees ?—The Aldermen

Do you think that a Common Council, elected as it is proposed to elect
them, could fulfil this trust under the will of the donors ?—No. They
never contemplated any such thing—it was impossible.
Are not the freemen of Oxford as independent as these of any town or
borough in England ?—I believe so. •

1)0 you know of the Corporation taking credit, or expending any mo-
ney on contested elections ?—I never knew of a penny being devoted to
such purposes. lam now alluding to what took place before any Acts
of Parliament existed referring to these Corporations, or before the late
Act of Parliament.

Was there before that period any money applied by the Corporation to
such purposes ?—I never knew nor heard of it.
The tide of public opinion shifts to and fro in Oxford ?—Yes.

Have you got under your Charter a power to raise money for the im.
provement of the town, and the benefit of the inhabitants ?—Certainly
not; I never heard of it.
There is no power of taxation under Vie Charter ?—No.
And there is no rate levied under the Charter?--I am wel acquainted
with the town, and should say there is no 6i:eh thing.
Is there not a division of jurisdiction relative to the Commission of
the Peace between the town and the University of Oxford ?—Yes, the
University has the ward of the town at night, and by day the city con-
stables preserve the peace.

Has that division of jurisdiction been managed so as to give satin.
faction to the University ?—lt has.
Are you aware of any defect in the charter of the town of Oxford as
respects the judicial, magisterial, or executive department ?-1 know
of none.

Have you read the Report of the Charity Commissioners ?—I have.
Will you read the statement therein relative to the words in which
the accounts are kept by the Corporation of Oxford ?—{Thewitness
here read an extract from the Report of the Charity Commissioners,
wi:ich stated that the accounts had been made out with great care, and
were kept with great ctearncss and simplicity.]

. -
Have the Municipal Commissioners in their Report copied the praise
bestowed upon these account. delivered to them a copy of it, and
they thought propel ri be perfectly silent with respect to it.
Did you deliver it to them in writing ?—I did.
Did they express themselves satisfied with the information given to
them ?—They

Can you state the number of houses, and the proportion of rating on
those houses in the town ?—The number of houses rated at Oxford is
3,914.

how many of those are rated at over 101., and how many under that
aura ?

Five hundred and ten are rated at 101. and upwards-1,425 are rated
under 101. end ever 31.—and 1,950 under 51.

Supposin3 the council were elected on the principle of this Bill, what
proportion would those rated over 101. bear to the others ?—As 310 to
3,014, or as about five or six to one.

Did the Municipal Commissioners express their approbation of
everything submitted to them 7—They did.
Did they inspect your charters ?—They did—copies of them.
Was there a statement made to them publicly at the Town.hall rela-
tive to an action instituted by the Corporation against a man for not
taking out his freedom 7—Yes, there was a statement made relative to a
person who had been guilty of an infraction of the charter.
Did the Commissioners express themselves satisfied with the state.
melt ? When the complaint was first made, it did appear " prima
facie,' that the proceedings need not have been carried so far, but the
Commissioner, desired an investigation on the subject, and the solicitor
of the Corporation attended, and they then expressed themselves satin.
fled, and expressed that satisfaction publicly before the people.
Have you read the Report that alludes to it 2-1 have.
Are not your charters of considerable antiquity, so as to put you in
the same position as the city of London 7—Yes, our charters are very
ancient, and one is so early as Henry 11., similar in most respects to
those of the city of London. There was also a charter of Edward 111.
'Whether will the plan of election proposed by the present Bill as it
respects the administration of public justice, and the interests of the
town of Oxford, be in your judgment an amelioration or improvement
on the present system ?—ln my opinion it will be ruinous.

The next witness called, whose name did not transpire, being asked
for in an under tone by the clerk of the house, who swore him, described
himself as one of the late assistants of the Corporation. In consequence
of the very low tone in which the witness answered the questions at
first we could not learn the import of his information. The first
facts that became audible were that the Corporation had expended
1,300/. on the city charities ; '2,000/. on bridges ; given to dis-
tressed manufacturers 1001; rebuilding and repairing churches 125/. ;
to the Cholera Beard of health 3001.; advanced to supply the city
with water, 1,7731. ; besides a reserved fund which is kept for the repair
and rebuilding of the city buildings, which may be in a state of
pidation.

By Sir CfiARLES WurnEnELL—There are voluntary gifts made by
you out (lithe surpluo fund ?—Witness : Yes.

What suns has the Corporation spent in feasting ?—From actual
knowledge, having been 15 years a member of the Corporation, the Cor-
poration has not during that time spent 1001. in feasting.
Is the surplus, then always laid out in charities and public improve-
ments F.—Always.

Have you looked to the clauses of the new Act, so ae to judge of their
effect upon the Corporation funds—l have, and consider the result will
be a deficiency instead of a surplus.
Do you apprehend a deficit instead of a surplus 2-1 do.
Do the freemen enjoy a right of meadow, which they consider valua.
Lie ?—They do, and consider it extremely valuable.

From your observation, would such a system as this Bill proposes be
advantageous, or the cuntrary, to the city of Oxford, and with respect
to a just, fair, and proper municipal government ?—lt is not a system
expected by a single man in the city I should say. It must depose and
turn to the right about every member of the Corporation, and I think
there are about ninety ; and it will lead to the election of men who,
from their want of education, information. and experience, are unfit for
the duties.