The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-14 00:00:00

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY,)

Nothing of the least public interest occurred in this
Court up to the time of our going to press.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH-(THIS DAY.)

IN THE MATTER Or MR. MICHAEL SCALES.

Sir JAMES SCABLETT moved for a rule, calling upon
the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London to
show cause why they refused to swear in Mr. Michae
Scales as Alderman of the Ward of Portsoken, to which he
bad been elected. The Learned Counsel referred to the
two elections, in both of which Mr. Scales had a consi-
derable majority of votes over his opponent, and that the
Court of Aldermen subsequent to the last election had
sworn in Mr. Hughes, who had a much less number of
votes. The object of Mr. Scales was to have all the cir-
cumstances fairly before the Court, with a view of enforc-
ing what he considered to be a just claim.
Their Loansturs granted a rule to show cause.
THE KING V. THE JUSTICES OF MIDDLESEX.

This was a rule which had been obtained on a former
day by the Attorney-General, requesting the Court to
grant a writ of mandamus directed to the Justices of the
county of Middlesex, commanding them to award com-
pensation to Sir John Richardson, Knight, and Thomas
Ward, Esq., late Sheriffs of Middlesex, in lieu of a cer-
tain fee of 4s. Bd., which had, before the 55th of Geo. 111.
chap. 50, been taken by the Sheriffs on the discharge of
each prisoner from their custody, but which fee was by
that Statute abolished, and in lieu thereof a power was vested
in the Justices at Quarter Sessions to award compensation to
the Sheriffs. The Justices of Middlesex having, however,
refused to award any compensation, the present applica-
tion was made.
Mr. CAMPBELL showed cause against the rule. The
statute of the 55th Geo. 111. abolished certain fees that
had been charged to prisoners, and among them was that of
4s. Bd. which bad been paid to the sheriffs for the dis-
charge of each prisoner ; and it also provided that in lieu
thereof, the Justices at Quarter Sessions, with the approval
of the Judges of Assize, might award such compensation as
they deemed proper, to be paid out of the county rate.
Now that statute could not apply to the county of Mid-
dlesex, because there were no Judge of Assizes in that
county. From the affidavit of Mr. Allen, deputy clerk
of the peace for the county, it appeared that Sir Thomas
Bell and Thomas Thorpe, Esq., at the conclusion
of their Shrievalty, in 1817, presented a memorial
to the Quarter Sessions, claiming a compensation in lieu
of this fee, but upon inquiry by a Select Committee the
application was rejected on certain grounds, two of which
were, that the office of Sheriff of Middlesex was
very distinct from that of any other county, and
that the legality of the fee had not been fully
proved. No application had been since made by
any subsequent Sheriffs, until the late Sheriffs, Sir John
Richardson and Mr. Ward presented a similar memorial in
October last, when it was refused on the grounds similar
to the former one. It further appeared that the present
claim was in respect of prisoners in White Cross-street
prison—a prison which was wholly supported at the cost
of the city of London, was divided into four parts, and only
one of those parts applied to the confinement of Middlesex
prisoners ; and that the Sheriffs received certain annual
allowances from the city funds for the discharge of their
duties as well as a poundage from the plaintiffs upon
the debts for which the prisoners were confined. On these
grounds, and also on the inexpediency of burthening
the county-rate with this additional charge, Mr.
Campbell submitted that the rule ought to be dis-
charged. The statute only left the question to the
discretion of the Justices, and the Justices had exercised
that discretion by refusing to compensate the Sheriffs.
Mr. BURCHELL, in the absence of the Attorney-General,
begged for the indulgence of the Court, while he endea•
voured to show that the rule ought to be made absolute.
As to the objection that the Act did not apply',
to the county of Middlesex, because there were no
Judges of Assize in that county, it was wholly groundless
for there were Judges of Assize in Middlesex.
CHIEF JUSTICE-4 apprehend not. There is a Special
Commission of Assize in every other county.
Mr. BURCHELL contended that their Lordships were
Judges of Assize without having a special commission ; the
meaning of a Judge of Assize was, a Judge commissioned to
try assizes ; they were Judges of Assize by virtue of their ap-
pointment as Judges. The assizes were so called, because
of the methods of trial called assizee, although now the no-
tion of assizes was one of the vulgar errors.
The LORD Curxr JUSTICE said his appointment as
Chief Judge, was by a writ—differing from the appoint-
ment of other Judges.
Mr. BURCHELL quoted several old statutes and law
books, with a view of showing that their Lordships were
in fact Judges of Assize, and that therefore the ob-
jection by Mr. Campbell was not supported. As to the
payment by the Corporation of London of various sums to
the Sheriffs, they were doubtless made only with a view
to uphold the splendour and dignity of the office. The
Sheriffs of Middlesex were appointed in a different way
from those of other counties, but their duties were the
same in all. The fee in question was wholly distinct from
the charge of supporting the prison ; it was for perform-
ing a very onerous and disagreeable duty, in seeing
that prisoners were detained or discharged legally,
from custody, in which, if they did not succeed, they
were liable to actions. The question was whether the fee
was equitable and just ; that it was so no one could
doubt, because fees of that description bad been men-
tioned in various statutes, which the Learned Counsel
quoted. Then the statute of the 55th Geo. 111., in abo-
lishing that fee, gave a power to Justices to award
compensation. They had rejected the application of the
Sheriffs without hearing them, and in doing so had exercised
a power which did not belong to them, for they were
bound to award such compensation as should appear to
them reasonable. The Learned Counsel concluded by
submitting that the mandamus must issue.
The LORD CHIEF Jusrica complimented Mr. Burchell
for the able manner in which he had argued the question,
and said he had furnished the Court with a good
deal of information which they did not know before.
It was undoubtedly true that the Judges of the
King's Bench and Common Pleas were Judges of Assize,
application,f
aptA hne end si
issue,
zt
a het
Justicesiau of
nonrlintimationeAsnsoiuoi thereforedlpwtvt(:he
inetree thrown
theertjsxhobuhl.
tunJr
The
bound
cuffedhos
ground
ue, i
ot Justices
ate
would
were wrong in rejecting the
dt
mand ke
hkwtchhaeoei
et hmre anelbset being
reasonabletnoaog fnhadoencpatoi
nnulJ
expenseiup ousondncmgtoehtmuhoaos
the
in
ch
theAwftreirt
twomoueldfubrethsepradreistussion, case t
it was agreed to let the
matter stand over for a few days, for the Justices to decide
whether they would act as stated by his Lordship.