The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-07 00:00:00

IMPEFUAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Aucrsr 6.
CASE OF MARLBOROUGH.
- (Evidence of Mr. Thomas Merriman, continued from the
First Edition of The Sun of yesterday.)
By Mr. KmouT—ln the Commissioners' Report there is a
paper mentioned which was handed in by Mr. Woodman, and
which purported to have been written by Mr. Ward, and dated
Aug. 9,1783, stating that Lord Aylesbury nominated the persons
to be chosen for burgesses. I did not see any paper in the hand-
writing of Mr. Ward produced. He died in April, 182,9, and
I never heard of such a memorandum during his life time. In
November, 1830, Mr. Woodman said something about a paper
which was not precisely what is there stated. When he
produced the paper he said it was in tho handwriting
of the clerk. Mr. Woodman was not a witness ; he was
not sworn ;he sat by, interjecting observations. I never saw
the original paper. I heard nothing about it.
By the Duke of CUMBERLAND—The paper was in the
handwriting of Mr. Woodman's clerk, not of Mr. Ward's
clerk.

By Mr. KNIGHT-1n the year 1826, Mr. Woodman, by
virtue of the Speaker's warrant, . got access to the
Corporation papers, for the purposes of an Election
Committee. I have been Town clerk for eleven years,
and I never saw or heard of such a faaper as this. I did not
read the paper produced before the Commissioners.
By Lord BROUGHAM—I did not see in whose hand.
writing it was, but Mr. Woodman said it was a copy of another
paper taken by his clerk. lam sure of that. I saw no other
paper delivered to the Commissioners. I have known Mr.
Bingham some years. He goes the WeAern Circuit.
He writes She Reports of the Court of Common Pleas.
I am acouainted with most of the respectable inhabitants of
town of 'Marlborough. lam not acquainted with many of
those who arc against the Corporation. Their being against
the Corporation does not influence me in forming acquain-
tances, but naturally, I am more acquainted with those friendly
to the Corporation.
Samuel Benjamin Merriman, examined by Mr. KNIGHT-
-lam a law student, and brother of the last witness. I heard
his examination, and perfectly agree in everything he has
stated relative to the Corporation—the friendly feeling of the
inhabitants towards them. I was present during the investi-
gation before the Municipal Commissioners, with the excep-
tion of five or ten minutes. They adjourned about two o'clock,
and stated that they had finished the investigation, but would
sit the following day, and would be glad to hear any sug-
gestions that might be made. That statement was made by
Mr. Bingham, in answer to an observation of my father's,
who is mayor of the town. My father's observation was,
that he hoped they would not hear one side, without
bearing the other. The Commissioners held no other sit-
ting in Marlborough. I confirm the statements of my
brother as to certain information in the Commissioners' Report
which was not probably given them. I heard Mr. Bingham
say, in answer to an observation of my father's, relative to a
volunteer statement of Mr. Woodman, which he hoped
would not be received, except on oath, that he had
not found it necessary hitherto to take the evidence on
oatb, and he hoped he should not have to do so now. I be-
lieve the people are quite satisfied with the conduct of the Cor-
poration, and are not favourable to any change.
By Lord PLUNKETT—Many of the respectable inhabi-
tants are Members of the Corporation, but there arc of course
very many who have no share in it.
CASE OF NORWICH.
Frederick Goold, examined by Sir CHARLES WETHERELL--
I am an Alderman of Norwich, and have been so for
fourteen or fifteen years. The governing body is composed
of a Mayor, two Sheriffs, 24 Aldermen, of whom the Mayor is
one, and 60 Common Councilmen, a Recorder, and Steward.
The governing body consists of 86. The Corporation claims
a sisterhood or kin to that of London. In London the
Common Council are elected individually ; but in Nor-
wich three of the Common Counsel are elected by the
constituent body, and these elect the rest. It is con-
sidered a popular form of government. The institution
of the Corporation took place in the year 1729, and was
then regulated by the 3d Geo. 11., chap. 8. The number of
freemen was 2,6oo—the inlotbitants, 6,100. He had acted
as a Magistrate, of whom there were 20 or 21 in Norwich;
every Mayor was a Magistrate for life after passing the chair;
the Magistrates were appointed for life, the Sheriffs and
Council were electeda.nnually. The twenty Magistrates were
perfectly adequate For all the business which arose in their
jurisdiction, and he had never heard any complaint of their
non-attendar.e.o, The mayor sat in the Town-hall every day,
and was generally assisted by one or more of the magistrates.
The magistrates had always acted fairly and impartially in
the diseberge of their duties. He never knew of any informa-
tion laid against any of them for malveriation in their offices.
Never heard any complaint against them from either free-
Ine:n or inhabitants. There were 24 ward constables for a police,
and the Mayor appointed as many constables as were necessary.
These did their duty very well, and were perfectly adequate to
preserve the peace of the city, except in the warm time of an
election. That was proved from the smallness of crime
in the city, having only had one prisoner for trial at the late
Assizes, and the average of those tried at the Quarter Ses-
sions was eight or nine. He certainly did not believe the
statement made in the Report that the Purples, who were Sir
James Scarlett's voters, were engaged in burning their own
booths. There was a Court of Conscience and a Guildhall
Court in Norwich, which gave great satisfaction, as they were
much used. The Steward presided in the latter Court, and
he was appointed by the Aldermen and Council. The Re-
corder was appointed in the same way, and he knew there was
'no Wish in Norwich for having those officers appointed in a
different manner. The property of the Corporation, which
amounted to 2,2001., was perfectly, fairly, and well ma-
ssaged; the surplus was generally a few hundred pounds.
The Mayor had 3001. and a dinner; but it generally cost
him 1,0001. The Sheriffs got each 501. from the Corpo-
ration, and they generally spent 3001. a year each. It
has been the practice of the Corporation for several years
to print a statement of the receipts and expenditure of the
Corporation. One hundred of these books are printed; every
member of the Council has a copy. It is not difficult for a
stranger to procure a copy. These books contained accounts
not only of the property of the Corporation, but also of the
charitable funds. There are six or eight auditors—one half
,appointed by the Aldermen, the other half by the Commons.
Never knew one shilling belonging to the Corporation or Cha-
rities spent at contested elections. The mode of keeping the
accounts gave satisfaction to the freemen as far as he knew.
It would be very unreasonable if they did not. Was not
aware of any abuse existing in the Corporation. The Com-
mon Council are elected by the freemen. The Corporation
'in his judgment, notwithstanding the change of circumstances,
was a useful and efficient instrument of local government.
Could not suggest any improvement in any department. The
accounts of the charity funds are kept in separate books from
'those of the Corporation. There is a Committee appointed
for this purpose. The statement in the Report on the ques-
tion of the Charity trusts, as reposed in the Alderman, is a very
.unfair one, because it would cost a great sum of money to
have these Charities attended to by paid servants.
13 not this statement then a stone cast at the head of every
Alderman ?—lt is.
Lord PLUNKETT—Do you mean to swear to the cor-
rectness of the metaphor ?—( A laugh.)
Sir C. WETHERELL—Is it not intended as an unjust
censure ?
Lord BROUGHAM—No, no; that will not do, really.
Sir C. WETHERELL—SOMCtiMeS I put the question too
severely and sometimes too gently.
Lord BROUG 11A M—No, no; you know well encugh
how to put the questions. There is not one in 20 legal, but
I do not object to them.
Sir c. WETHERELL—My Lord, I wish to put the ques-
tions regularly.
Lord BROUGHAM—And you can do it very well ; but
how can the witness tell what was intended ?
Sir C. WETHERELL (to the witness)-13 that a fair or un-
fair statin'tio.n't ?—Unfair—very unfair. I was present at the
examination by the Commissioners. I recollect Mr., Long
vying that there was no occasion for the inquiry. -Mr.
Buckle admitted that the Charities were benefitted by the
present mode of management. The passage then referred
to is very unfair. There is a statement that a Charity left to
poor weavers had been diverted to improper objects, while
those entitled to it were rejected, but it is not true. The
ancient Companies have ceased above a century, and the ap-
pointments have fallen into the hands d the Aides_
men. This exercise of the appointments is nes in
usurpation upon, but in conformity to the charter.
The statement that the corporate and charitable funds were
made subservient to the uses of the Corporraiton
is untrue and unfair ; although in one i',stance the hospital
fund was laid out in paying for the rSpairs of a house inha-
bited by ono of the Aldermen, but the tenant was not liable
for the repairs. We are unsalaried and unpaid managers and
trustees of these charitable r.unds. I have not estimated what
the per centage would be if these funds were handed over to
salaried treasurers, agsnts, and collectors, but it would be
very considerable. We have in Norwich a hospital
called the Great hospital, which accommodates 176 men
or women. Of 85 men in it, 51 are freemen and 34
are not ; and of 81 women, 27 are the widows of freemen and
54 are not, The proportion of Whigs and Tories in the hos-
pital i s 'aertrly equal ; but it occasionally varies. The amount
of C sh property is about 2,200/. ,There are eleven oe
twolve livings, some of them in the town and others in the
neighbourhood, but all within the county. The appoint-
ments to the livings is with the Aldermen and Common,
Council. Unless there is a majority in both houses, the
nomination lapses to the Bishop, and this has oceurred.
There is a statement in the Municipal Commissioners' Re-
port relative to the son of an alderman be;eg appointed
Chaplain to the Hospital, and of the salary being then
increased from 501. to 2001. per annum. The person alluded
to is the Rev. Mr. Patteson, who is now Chaplain of the
great Hospital. The Hospital Church is also parish Church
of St. Helens. The Chaplain has to perform duty in it on
Sundays, to read prayers three times a week, and he is
frequently called upon to attend to the spiritual comforts
en the poor people in the Hospital whose ages average
seventy-three,,, and many arc considerably older. There
was no oy-law in Norwich preventing the appointment
of the son of an alderman, nor was it at all against the trust.
The restriction was put on for the purpose of leaving it at the
option of the Commons to give what they pleased to the
successor of the Rev. Gentleman. He considered that it was a
very unfair representation, for the Rev. Mr. Patteson was very
deserving of the sum he got, and he has never heard any com-
plaint of its being too large. They had also a Grammar School
to the patronage of the aldermen. Witness occasionally at-
tended the meetings of the Com Missioners, and their conduct
did not appear to him to be unfair in keeping the roam
quiet. They did all they could, but they did not always suc-
ceed. The officers of the Corporation had orders to afford
all the assistance and information in their power. After the

conclusion of the proceedings there were two Protests deli-
vered to the Commissioners. He did not think that a Council
elected under the Bill, and governing under its provisions,
would give much satisfaction : there would then he more con-
trove7sy and less satisfaction. Some of the Charities are given
in terms to be enjoyed by Church of England men exclusively.
By the Earl of R t'CDNOR.—IIe did consider the Rev.
Mr. Patteson a very meritorious man, deserving the 2001. His
nredecessor was a very inefficient man, and did not give sa-
tisfaction, but he could not say what was the reason why his
application for an advance was refused.
By the Earl of R A DNOR—Tlie
dtion were trus-
teessund, which had been lost
of a fund called the
many years.
Jolut.. earner examined by Sir C. -WETHEIZEI.I.— Has
been an Alderman bf Norwich for upwards of half a century
—has heard the whole of the examination of Alderman
Rooth, hnd entirely concurs in his statemtnts and opinions
respecting the general administration of the affairs of the Cor-
Nration—never knew of any malversation of justice, whether
the mayor was of one party or the other.
Mr. Preston examined—ls Recorder of Norwich, and has
been so for between four and five years. Never exercised a
capital jurisdiction, though the Judges had decided that the
office possesses it. The commission of crime has very much
diminished within these seven or eight years. There were
from 70 to 80 prisoners tried in the course of a year. The
appointment of Recorder is by charter. Ile is named by the
whole assembled Corporation. Was satisfied that the adminis-
tration of justice had given satisfaction. Was very anxious on this
point, as otherwise he would not go on in the discharge of his
duty—the Court was constantly attended by a crowd of per-
sons—reporters attended and took down all that was said, and
published it so that he dared not, and lie believed no one in
his situation would dare, to swerve either to the right or to the
left. I believe the Petty Juries of all towns are more intelli-
gent than those of counties. I have found it so at Norwich,
Lynn, and Great Yarmouth. lam resident at Norwich. I
can safely and conscientiously say, that, during my own
time, or that of my predecessor, Mr. Alderson, who was
a different politics to mine, I never recollect a verdict given
under political influence. I was present at the examination by
the Commissioners. I waited on them as soon as they arrived,
and attended the whole examination. I recollect the conduct
of Mr. Alderman Ruckham being called in question, and, in
consequence of what was said, I stept into his house and found
he was in London, which I told the Commissioners, and re-
quested that they would adjourn it until Mr. Rackham could
attend to vindicate his character, but they would not. I
remonstrated, and Mr. Long told me he would not suffer such
a discussion, and I came away. Mr. Alderman Newton vin-
dicated the character of a deceased Alderman which had been
attacked. The case of Alderman Turner was once brought
before me. He was a schoolmaster and a man of property.
He was indicted for perjury, but I refused to try it. No, it
was not perjury, it was bribery at a local election. Four
other persons had been indicted for bribery, and the Grand
Jury having discovered that Mr. Turner was mixed up
with the case, I adjourned the Grand Jury, and directed the
clerk to frame a bill against Mr. Turner, although he was a
particular friend of mine. He claimed as an alder-
man to be tried at once, and I being new in office
objected to try the case. A great deal is said in the Report
about the unfairness and partiality of the Magistrates on that
occasion, not one word of which is true. No one attempted
to influence me at all.

By Lord BRO UG HA:Nl—After I had expressed an opi-
nion that I would not allow any of the magistrates to interfere
with me on the legal points, I believe they would not interfere.
If I had not expressed my determination not to allow them to
interfere, it is most likely they would have tried him
at once. I believe there is no jurisdiction in the Corpora-
tion, in point of fact, to try offences immediately. I think it
would be ousting the jurisdiction of the Court of King's
Bench. The person accused was not Alderman Turner at
the time.

By the Duke of CUM BE RL AND—Mr. Turner was not
in the Corporation at the time at all.
By the Duke of RICH NI ON D—.l still practice as a barrister
at the Norfolk assizes. My salary is 621. NM. per annum in
lieu of a field belonging to the Corporation. The City Grand
Juries are not better than the County Grand Juries. It is
desirable on the principle of justice that a man should be tried
by those who have no knowledge of the circumstances of his
case.

The Earl of SIIAFTESBURY observed that it was now
four o'clock, and, according to the arrangements made by their
Lordships, he thought they should now adjourn.
Sir C. WETHERELL said they had one witness whose evi-
dence would occupy but a very short time.
The question that their Lordships do adjourn the further
hearing of evidence to 6 o'clock was then put and agreed to.
REMOVAL OF ASSIZES BILL.

The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from
the Grand Jury of the county of Waterford, against
a Bill which had yesterday passed their Lordships for
the removal of Assizes in Ireland. Ile was not present when
the Bill had passed yesterday, or he should have taken that
opportunity of pointing out the mischievous tendency of the
measure.