The Sun.
London, England, 1829-07-02 00:00:00

BOW-STREET.

On Tuesday Mr. Fenn, the bookseller of Char
ing-cross, who has so repeatedly endeavoured to
overthrow the Select Vestry of the parish of Saint
Martin-in-the-Fields, appeared before Mr. Ms-
snuu., the sitting Magistrate, and Mr. Rosissos, a
Magistrate of Middlespx, for the purpose of obtain-
ing a summons to call upon the overseers of Saint

Martin's to prgtiuce the vouchers of certain accounts
which he found included in the parish expenditure.
Mr. Fenn went on to state, that being called upon
to pay his rates, he refused to do so, unless the ac-
counts in question were submitted to his inspection,
and be conceived, that as an inhabitant of the pa-
rish, paying rates and taxes, he had a right to know
how the overseers had fulfilled their trust in dispos-
ing of the public money.
Mr. MINSHULL thought that Mr. Fenn, or any
other inhabitant of the parish, was entitled to an in-
spection of the overseer's accounts, and asked Mr.
Fenn if he had applied to the parish-officers upon
the subject.
Mr. Fenn had waited upon Mr. Rawlinson, clerk
to the overseers, who told him that he was at liberty
to inspect the books of the parish containing the
gross amount of the various sums expended on ac-
count of the parish, and he might also see any par-
ticular account to which these sums referred : but
was to consider this concession not as a matter of
right, but of courtesy. Mr. Fenn added, that he
would not accept of the offer upon these condi-
tions, as he conceived that he had a clear right to an
inspection of the parish accounts. There was one
item in the parish books which he conceived demanded
explanation. The item was entered in this general
way, viz. " Mr. Braithwaite paid 241. to Mr. Cuff."
Now Mr. Cuff was the proprietor of the Freemasons'
Tavern, and he (Mr. Fenn) supposed that this sum
was paid for a feast, but how was the fact to be
ascertained, if the overseer had the power to ►withhold
from the parishioners the particulars of this bill ?
As it appeared upon the book, the money might
have been paid to Mr. Cuff fur a horse or for any
thing else.

Arr. ROBINSON observed that if he was one of the
Magistrates to whom such an account was offered to
be passed, he certainly should not have allowed it at
all, if it came in the shape of a tavern bill.
Mr. MINSHULL was as willing as any one to set
his face against the abuse of parish feasts, but he
could not go the length of saying that be should re-
fuse to pass a tavern bill under any circumstances.
There might be occasions, although they certainly
ought to be very rare, when such an expenditure
would he allowable.

Mr. ROBINSON said, that in his opinion it was
highly improper to appropriate any portion of pa-
rish funds, which were chiefly raised for the main-
tenance of the poor, in defraying the expence of
tavern dinners. He could never mction such a
system.

Mr. MlNstitiu, told Mr. Fenn that he would send
for Mr. Rawlings, in orkr that he might explain
the grounds upon which he had refused to show the
parish vouchers.
Mr. Rawlings was soon after in attendance, and
after statimg that he had offered to allow Mr. Fenn
to inspect the vouchers in question as 'a matter of
courtesy and not of right, it was finally arranged that
the matter should stand over until Tuesday next,
when the overseers would be prepared to give a de-
finitive answer to the demand of Mr. Fenn.

Yesterday, however, Mr. Fenn, accompanied by
Mr. Purse, the silversmith, and another respectable
parishioner, again waited upon Mr. MINSHULL for
the purpose of obtaining a summons, calling upon
the overseers to show cauFe why they should not
be fined 5/. for having refused a parishioner his right
to inspect the parish accounts.
Mr. Fenn, after reading the clause in the Act of
Parliament upon which he founded his present ap-
plication, proceeded at some length to argue in sup-
port. of it. . .

Mr. Mrssnuu, asked if the accounts which Mr.
Fenn wished now to inspect had been passed by the
Magistrates in Petty Session? Mr. Fenn replied
in the affirmative.

Mr. MINsIiULL, as that was the ca;e, was afraid
he could net grant the summons which Mr. Fenn
applied for.

Mr. ROBINsON concurred in the opinion.
Mr. Fenn was aware that the Magistrates had no
power under this Act of Parliament to compel the
overseers to deliver their accounts. lie thought,
however, that they could enforce the fine which the
Act inflicted.

A gentleman stated that a case bad been recently
decided, in which an overseer of a parish was fined
1001. for having supplied the parish in which he
served office with some article of food. The over-
seer, in that instance, had paid himself the amount
of his bill, so that the account must have been regu-
lady passed.
Mr. MlNsitum, remembered the case, which cer-
tainly bore upon the present question, and if Mr.
Fenn would throw his application into the form of
an information, he (Mr. Minshull) might feel dis-
posed to entertain it.
Mr. Fenn had made some extracts of sums which
he found entered in the parish books, and asked the
Magistrates if they thought such entries as the fol-
lowing ought to be passed over without some ex-
planation :—" To walking the boundaries, .534
Christmas-boxes, 30/. Besides which he found two
entries for buns for the parish children, when they
were paraded to church on a particular occasion;
one entry was 20/., and the other 101.
Mr. MINStIULL said, that certainly Mr. Fenn had
a right to press for the inspection of the accounts.
Mr. Fenn and the gentlemen by whom he was
accompanied then left the office, we believe with the
intention of appealing to the Sessions.