The Sun.
London, England, 1842-09-23 00:00:00

-

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, SEPTEMBER 23, 1812.

THE REGISTRATIONS.
CITY OF LONDON.

Mr. IN.PChristie, the Revising Barrister, took his
seat in the Court of CoMmon Pleas, Guildhall, at ten
o'clock yesterday morning.
The lists of the Liverymen were proceedetlvith.
It appeared that throughout these lists the numbers
of the houses in which the different claimants resided
were not stated, and considerable inconvenience and
discussion were thus created. One party was de-
scribed as residing in, BishopSgate•street, • rinothvr as
residing in South Lambeth, 'so that whole streets, or
even districts, had to be searched in order to learn
a claimant's abode. This practice, it was stated, had
been adopted on the recommendation of a former
Revising Barrister.

Mr. SlCHnisriE said that the practice appeared to
him to be calculated to lead to great inconvenience.
Indeed, it could hardly be said to fulfil the spirit of
the Act. He hoped it would be discontinued infuture.

The parties objected to were allowed-to appear
on Saturday next to defend their claims.

No other cases of interest arose during the day.

WESTMIN STER.

The parish of St. Clement Danes was proceeded with.
RATE-BOOK ERASURES.--IMPORTANT DECISION.—
Henry Gray Holmes who was registered in respect
of a house in New Inn-buildings, was objected to by
Mr. Score, on the ground that his name was not pro-
perly entered in the rate-book.

It appeared from the evidence of Mr. Holmes, that
he had been in possession since June, last year, and
paid rates, &c. _

- Mr. Schervin, the collector of the poor's-rates, who
was called by Mr. Score, produced the rate-book, in
which it appeared that the name of Elizabeth Down
had been originally entered ; a pencil mark had,
however, been drawn through the name of Down, and
the name of Holmes had been written above in pencil.
The witness proved that the name of Holmes was in
his handwriting, and that he had made the correction
when he was collecting the rate—after the rate had
been made, allowed, and published.

Mr. SCORE addressed the Court at some length.
lie, contended that after a rate had been made, al•
lowed, and published, the collector had no authority
to alter that rate and introduce a name, so as that that
name should be considered as the one originally in
the rate.

cir
el
it iNr.
ov
the
. evidence
cißtieTsT f
ti,
question
contrary
ta
as
the vote, Nit'loootwea,nfysaarird that
atthe,eacsoi:uirattph poceuoatureldgdobirneeg:
fore the Court, he apprehended that it was enough
that they found the name of Holmes in the rate.
Under the Reform Act, a party might claim to be
rated, and the overseers, in that case, must put the
name in the rate; and inasmuch as the name did ap-
pear in the rate-book, he denied the power of the
Court to do otherwise than to assume that a claim to
be rated was made in some way or other.
The REVISING BARRISTER said that this case was
not without considerable importance, as it affected a
large class of cases. He had, however, a very clear
and decided opinion upon the point. le very much
doubted whether a rate being produced with a name
on it, he Lad any authority to inquire how it came
there. It appeared to be enough for him to find that
the party was rated to the relief of the poor. If he
should ever find that the name got there improperly,
he did net see what jurisdiction he should have to re-
ject the rate which was produced as a valid rate. But,_
waiving that point, he clearly agreed with Mr. Trott
that the onus rested with the other side to show the
absence of a claim to be rated. The name should,
therefore, be retained on the register.