The Sun.
London, England, 1850-11-20 00:00:00

'4r etSIC--i P P
Ottrtli )""44.:IttatOn

QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.)
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
THE QUEEN V. JOHN PRESTON AND OTHERS.
The Somcrrott-Creemuste. (with whom were Mr.
Cowling and Mr. Atherton) on a former day said
this was a case in which he had to show cause against
a rule for a certiorari to bring into this court a
certain order of the town council of Halifax
confirming a report of the finance committee
of that council relating to the payment
of a bill to the town-clerk. It appeared
that the borough of Halifax was incorporated in
March, 1845 ; and a Mr. Wayvil was appointed the
town-clerk in April, 1849, on the resignation of a
gentleman named Todd. On the occasion of Mr.
Wayvirs appointment a committee was formed by the
town-council for the purpose of ascertaining what
were the duties and what ought to be the salary
of the town-clerk, and a report was accordingly
made by them. At the . time when Mr. Wayvil
became town-clerk the corporation found them-
selves in pecuniary embarrassments, from the
difficulty of making a rate. I became necessary
to raise a sum of 2,0001. and upwards for certain
local purposes, and this they proceeded to do by a •
borough rate, founded upon a resolution of the town
council. Accordingly the Mayor of Halifax issued
his warrant to the overseers of Halifax to levy a rate,
and-also to the overseers of North and South Ancrum,
two outlying townships. The money was raised by the
overseers of the two outlying townships; but when the
warrant was served on the overseers of Halifax,
they consulted Mr. Holroyd, a solicitor, who
had been a rival candidate with Mr. Wayvil
for .the office of town-clerk. Mr. Holroyd told the
overseers that the warrant was defective in point of
form, and advised them not to comply with it. It
then became necessary to consult counsel on the part
of the corporation, and Mr. Wayvil was instructed to
take that step, and also to attend a conference which
waato be held in London between the counsel for
the corporation and the overseers of Halifax re-
spectively. By a resolution of the town council the
finance committee were empowered to take all
such measures as they should deem expedient for en-
forcing all arrears of the borough-rate. After that
came the general election under the Municipal Cora
poration Act in November, and immediately after
this, a new mayor having been elected, the council
rene.wed the resolution which , had been adopted by
their predecessors for empowering the finance com-
mittee to take measures to enforce payment of the
borough• rate. The finance committee thereupon gave
distinct instructions to Mr. Wayvil to submit the case
to counsel for their opinion and advice. Eventually, it
was arr•eeged that there should he a conference in
Ismidoe before the counsel on either side, and Mr.
Weevil was instructed to attend that conference on
the part of the corporation. The question now was,
whether Mr. Wayvil was entitled to claim his profes-
sidnal costs for coninctiog the case on behalf of the
corporation, and attenlinE.; the conference in London ?
11. (the Solicitor-General) contended that the busi-
ness transacted on this occasion by Mr. Wayvil did
not properly fall within the ordinary duties of a town-
clerk, and that he was entitled to claim from the
corporation his costs and expenses for acting as their
soeeitor.
Mr. PE .COCK thie morning appeared on behalf of
Mr. Wayvil, and fortified by a reference to several
cal -s in the books the argument of the Solicitor-

General.
Sir F. TBESIGEII, appmred on behalf of the rate-
payers cf Halifax, and contended, with the view to
gnash the order of the town council, that there
had been no appointment whatever of a
professional -adviser in . a legal, recogniise.d
way, so as to entitle the town council to charge for
the services of any solicitor at all ; and in the next
place, even supposing there should be such appoint-
ment, Mr. Wa2,vil's contract with the corporation
comprehended that business for which the charge hid
been mode. He (Sir Frederick Thesiger) asserted
on behalf of the ratepayers of Halifax that there
was nowhere to be found any appointment of Mr.
Way vil to be the solicitor of the corporation ; and he
contended that unless there was a retainer of Mr. Way-
vil under the common seal of the corporation as the
solicitor, and that although the town council might
have paid Mr. Wayvil the amount of his charges in
the character of a solicitor, they had no power what-
ever to charge the ratepayers with the amount of
those professional services, and if they attempted to
do so it was a misapplication of the borough fund.
Mr. HALL followed on the same side.
I4ord CAMPBELL said the Court was of opinion that
there were certain, items in Mr. Wayvil's bill that
Were very questionable, and others which might be
lawfully made a charge on the borough fund beyond
the 2501., the amount of the town-clerk's salary.
Upon that understanding be (Lord Campbell) was of
opinion that this rule ought to be discharged.
The other Judges concurred, and the rule wls dis-
charged accordingly.