The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-09 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

B 01V- S TREE T.
On Saturday Mr. Roe, the cabriolet proprietor,
came to this office to exhibit an information against
Mr. George Shilibeer, owner of the omnibus
No. 4,535, for plying for hire in the streets on
Friday, 6th instant, the day on which the New
Hackney Carriage Act came into operation.
Mr. Shilibeer expressed his readiness to meet the
information, and said that all the omnibus proprie-
tors, except himself, were afraid to run their vehicles
for short fares in the streets ; but, for his own part,
he felt no such fear, as he had a perfect reliance on
the new Act of Parliament, which, by throwing
open the trade, had effectually secured to the public
a very great accommodation.
Mr. Roe was here requested to attend Mr. MIN•
SHULL in another room, where, we understand, the
bearings of the new Act of Parliament on the ques-
tion at issue were discussed at some length, and its
several enactments explained by Mr. Timms, solici-
tor to the Stamp Commissioners. It was soon after
announced that Mr. MlNsltuLt. felt so satisfied that
the previously existing Statutes prohibiting stage-
coachmen to take up passengers in the streets, were
repealed by the new Act, that he declined to receive
Mr. Roe's information ; upon which that gently man,
after stating that he meant no disrespect whatever
to the Magistrate, gave notice of his intention of
applying to the Court of King's Bench for a man-
damus against him to compel him to receive the in-
formation. . .

Mr. Shilibeer, in order to show that he had not
acted upon slight grounds in his construction of the
new Act, produced the opinion of the Solicitor-
General in his favour, which is as follows :

________
" I am of opinion that the Act of the Ist of George 1.,
cap. 57, so far as respects the present question, must be
considered as founded upon and being inseparably con-
nected with the 9th of Anne, relating to hackney co idles ;
and looking at the various subsequent Acts which have
been passed for continuing and giving effect to the original
l it
is 2 2, enactmentsin
od
effect
eteshc ret
e9ptaetahkl
repealedi
taking
gf all Anneu:phy eprseae
spAseaeanncl dtgi
Acts, and
trhsateihnne dl sot
pthnueol
ytfstAarGeorgestreets
ttsse un.
dnadlnte.
dor,
I am of opinion that the Act of the Ist and 2d of William
them, as far as any question can be raised of the liability
of y,
stare-coachmenc.
that although section 13 of .
the 3d George IV , c. 9'5, is
riot in terms repealed by the Act of the Ist and 2d William
i v.,
nillvdi bi
tesivieartsh alsoa opfr
tohdeu c
se do
Solicitor-General.
cli
iet
or-G opinion
eneor
af
1. Edward
Loyd Hall, Esq., o
which any penalty could be levied.
" Lincoln's-inn, Jan. 2. " WILLIAM HORNE."
f Figtree-court, Temple, which
authorities.
csuobil‘rjilecreid.t,Sedah
Mr. HALLS never had any but one opinion on the
111 r. Roe, however, appeared by no means satisfied,
gielasd. to find it backed by such re-
speciableand still expressed his determination to proceed, add-
ing that information had been received at Marl-
borough-street, from Byers the common informer,
under one of the Acts alleged to he repealed. He
then referred to that part of the new Act which states,
in express terms, that nothing in the Act should be
deemed and taken to refer to stage-coache..
It was here explained by the second clerk, that ac-
cording to the Act all coaches plying for hire on the
stones were to 'be considered as hackney-coaches,