The Sun.
London, England, 1829-06-25 00:00:00

ELECTION OF SHERIFFS, AND STATE

OF CITY ACCOUNTS.

Yesterday a Common Hall was held, for the elec.
Lion of She' iffs to serve in the ensuing year, and lot
'lie appoitement of other city officers. There seemed
to be a general expectation that it was the intentior
of sortie liverymen to propose Mr. Hunt for the office
of Sheriff, one of the gentlemen nominated for tha
office having intimated his intention to decline serving
in the ensuing year, but
Mr. TICKNER (the Common Councilman) in-
formed the Hall, that there would be no hesitation
upon the part of the gentlemau alluded to, and Mr.
Richardson, citizen and vintner, and Mr. Ward, ci-
tizen and wheelwiig,ht, were then elected. Thos;
who stood next in numbers were Mr. John Scott
and Mr. Ellis. The name of Mr. Hunt was not put
up. The other city officers who are annually elected
by the livery having been duly chosen, and the City
Chamberlain, the Bridgemasters, and the Auditors,
being of the number,
Mr. HUNT stood forward, as one of the late Au-
ditors, whose labours had just terminated, to address
the livery. He was received warmly. He then
proceeded to read the report, and interspersed some
comments, which gave rise to a good deal of merri-
ment. The first thing the auditors complained of
(the Report was signed but by three auditors, Mr.
Hall having declined to sanction it) was, that there
were no vouchers in the offices of the Chamberlain,
or of the Bridge-masters, for several large sums,
amongst which was 1,0301. to the Committee
of City Lands, and several other sums to other Com-
mittees; for them there appeared no bills of par-
ticulars ; nothing, in fact, but a warrant to the
Chamberlain to pay them. The amount of accounts
in this condition was considerable, and the answer
given by the Chamberlain was, that they were
audited by the Court of Aldermen, or by the Com-
mittees to which they were paid.—(Laughter, and
cries of " That's a gross falsehood.") It was odd
enough that it; the accounts of monies received by
principals, no particulars were at all stated, while
deputies who received comparatively little or nothing
rendered up the items accurately. Of this the
Water-bailiff and his deputy were quoted as instances.
It had been thought necessary for the dignity of the
City to have the office of the Lord Mayor splendidly
supported, and it accordingly cost the City a total
for the past year of 13,6321. Os. 10d.—(Cries of
" No." from several on the hustings.)—He (Mr.
Hunt) had no objection to sustaining the character
of the city ; but he would just hint, that the Presi-
dent of the United States was paid no more than
half the sum to support the dignity of that exalted
situation. He next adverted to the salaries of the
Recorder, the City Solicitor, the Remembrancer,
and the Common Serjeant. He had observed in
one of the bills that the Recorder had received five
guineas as a retaining fee, and lie begged to know
whether the salary of that office, amounting as it did
to 2,550/., besides briefs and fees, was not sufficient
for a retainer.—(Laughter.) He regretted to be
obliged to allude to the Common-Serjeant, for whom
every one had a respect, but he perceived an item of
31. 13s. 6(1., as a fee to that officer for the part he
took in the prosecution of a person committed to
prison by Sir Peter Laurie. That worthy Alderman
had some doubts as to the propriety of sending the
man in question for trial, and submitted the case to
the City Solicitor, the last person in the world to
whom a case of the kind ought to be submitted, in-
asmuch as a bill of 301. or 40/. must inevitably grow
out of a prosecution. The City Solicitor decided
in the way expected, and the Common-Seijeant was
employed to prosecute at the Old Bailey, the place
in which that officer was in the habit of sitting as
Judge. Now it was most preposterous to fee a
lawyer to prosecute a man upon whom he might sit
in judgment.—(Cries of " 'Tis false.") He wished
to have the thing explained. He then proceeded
with the statement of the salaries of the several
officers of the city, and said that the Chamber.
lain had constantly in his hands, without pay-
ing interest for it, the sum of 60,0001. or 80,0001.
Of a piece with this general mismanagement was
(he said) the arrangement about minor affairs. The
auditors, of whom he was one, had determined to
eat and drink none of the 100/. voted to them for
feasting. They proposed to give that sum in cha-
rity, but no—not a farthing would be handed to them
for that ptirpose. 'I he Hall-keeper was ready to
pay any tavern-bill contracted by them to that
amount, but not a halfpenny in charity. At length
they resolved to invite 400 widows of poor freemen,
to dine at White Conduit Gardens, to give the poor
souls roast beef and plum-pudding, and a cup of tea.
(Laughter and cheers.)—And he hoped that as
many as could attend from that hull, would coun-
tenance the entertainment by being present at it.—
He concluded by moving that the Chamberlain and
Bridge-masters be directed riot to pay any accounts
without receiving the particulars, and that they sup-
ply the auditors with the city accounts at least one
year sooner than was customary.
Sir C. S. HUNTER (locate tenens for the Lord
Mayor) here interposed. He assured Mr. Hunt
that a great deal of inconvenience would arise from
pressing the motion.
Mr. HUNT then altered the resolution as he had
promised.
Mr. NicHoLsoN seconded the resolution.
The COMMON•SERJEANT stood forward amidst
loud cheers. He said that his name had been un-
expectedly brought forward upon this day's busi-
ness; but he trusted that no imputation would be
drawn upon him from what had been just repre-
sented.—(Applause.)—lf any thing appeared to the
Auditors in the accounts placed before them which
seemed to require explanation, he was most ready to
give any, so far as he was himself concerned, and he
thanked Mr. Hunt for having stated the objection
publicly, and in his presence. It was true, it ap-
peared in the City Solicitor's accounts that a brief
had been delivered to him, with a fee, but the case
was not one over which it was possible for him to
preside as a Judge. It was a case for trial at the
Quarter Sessions at Guildhall, %%here he never acted
as a Judge ; and it appeared as if it was for trial at
the Old Bailey; but, in fact, it only came on there
in the form of a bill (as frequently was the case)
before the Grand Jury. He constantly presided in
the Old Bailey as a Judge; but lie never appeared,
and never would appear, under circumstances such
as had been stated.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. BARRETT (another of the Auditors) addressed
the Livery upon the necessity of narrowly looking
into their accounts, and watching the expenditure
with a most jealous eye.
Mr. STEVENS, of Bishopsgate, would be far from
defending the misapplication of the public money,
but thought it detestable and base to libel bodies of
men or individuals without being able to supply a
ground for reprehension.—(Applause.)
After a few words from Mr. HUNT and Mr.
STEVENS, in explanation to each other, the resolu-
tions were agreed to, as were votes of thanks to
Mr. Hunt and Sir C. S. Hunter.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Our Contemporary, the Globe, observed last
night:—

" We mentioned some days ago the case of Mr.
Wray and the Bishop of Lincoln, which has been
some time since the subject of discussion in Parlia-
have
ian;:iemapdtt,obitlriioesstligetti,o,
Seems
curacy ‘ve,e,n;crbi:ni,
taiati
material,
statementßjaovipo
b:l;iengte the
Parlia-
ment. Our readers who attend to these matters will
d
Mr. Wray, in his pamphlet, suppressed a fact which
aced
the vicarage of 60/., on which we were led to sup-
pose that, with the thirteen little Wrap-, he must
have been left in a starving condition, he held
Another living, of 4001. or 500/. a-year.
" We hear it alleged, however, for Mr. Wrav,
that the advowson of this last-mentioned
which was a family one, and which has descended
upon Mr. Wray, was so deeply mortgaged, that it
has been rather a loss than a benefit to him. Hot
still this, though very unfortunate for Mr. Wrav,
was scarcely a matter wide!' the Bishop could take
notice of in his favour; he can scarcely be expected
co be cognizant of the charges on livings, or, if cog-
nizant of them, to favour them."
We do not see with what justice it can !^
said that Mr. Wrav suppressed a fact w,f,icit
;eons very material, in publishing a correspon-
ilence between the Bishop of Lincoln, the Arch-
deacon of Lincoln, and himself, in the course of
which the living of Manby was never once al-
iuded to. The Bishop of Lincoln tells hint,
in the first Letter of the Correspondence,
that the parish of Bardney is sufficient to
occupy the whole attention of the clergyman,
nd that he shall desire the incumbent of
Horsington to nominate another Curate. In Mr.
Wray's answer, he tells the Bishop that his Vicar-
age seldom nets more than 60/.—that the sacrifice
of his Curacy to a man with a family of this teen
children was a sacrifice against which he would
forgive his repining. The Bishop, in reply,
persists in requiring him to give up the Curacy
of Horsington, on the ground that " a parish
containing nearly one thousand inhabitants cer-
tainly requires two services." The Bishop,
the various letters from him in the correspon-
dence, never once hinted at the living of Manby,
but confines himself to the necessity for a parish
of a certain population having two serticcs,
When Mr. Wray urged again and again to the.
Bishop and Archdeacon the hardship, in his par.,
titular situation and circumstances, of imposing.
the sacrifice on him, they never once thought of
stopping his mouth by the allegation that it ill
became him, the holder of a living of 1)0/.
to talk of his 601. a year and his thirteen ehil,
dren, because they well knew that this wonli
be adding mockery to rigour. It is very well;
now that the affair is ,before the public,
to talk of the living of 450/., because, though
the Bishop and Archdeacon knew very vtell tfta
circumstances under which it came into the pos.,
session of Mr. Wray, and that he does not re--
ceive one farthing from it, yet they also knetoi
that Mr. Wray will not lay the particulars before
the public. Supposing_ what our Contemporary
the (Globe) states to be the fact, that the living
is a family one, and that it is so deeply mort-
gaged that it yields nothing, we do not see how
this, " though very unfortunate for Mr. Wray,
was scarcely a matter which the Bishop could
take notice of in his favour—he can scarcely be
expected to be cognizant of the charges on taut
ings, or if cognizant of them to favour them."
There was no question as to the living of Manby,
for it was not alleged that the regular quantum(
of service was not performed in that parish, but
merely as to the holding the Vicarage of Bard-
ney and the Curacy of the adjoining parish of
Horsington ; and when both Bishop and Arch-
deacon knew that the poor Vicar had no income
which was not derived from these two parishes,
they might with as much propriety have referred
to his castle in Spain as an additional income as
to Manby. We repeat, that the question was
not pluralism of livings—for this very Bishop of
Lincoln has conferred, and will, no doubt, again
confer, valuable livings on those who already
possessed valuable livings—but the requisition
of double service. If the question had been that
no man should hold two, three, four, five, or
even a dozen of livings, then Manby might have
been an argument so conclusive as to supersede
all discussion ; but the Bishop being a pluralist
himself, may be supposed to look with a fa-
vourable eye on pluracies, and to have no objec-
tion to a clergyman holding as many livings as
he can obtain by favour or purchase. The
beauty of the Bishop's rule of double service is,
that it leaves untouched pluralism in the rich
Rectors, and merely prevents pluralisms in
starving Vicars and Curates ; because a Rector
may hold six livings, and through his Curates
have double service regularly performed in each ;
but a Curate, without he could divide himself,
cannot perform double service in two churches
in one day. The argument of Mr. Wray
to the Bishop was ad misericordianz ; it
was only such an argument as a poor mat'
would have thought of using to another
man who was cognizant of the fact of his
being what he represented himself to be. Mr.
Wray did not impeach the Bishop's right, but
he stated what might have moved the Bishop's
pity. It may be right, or may be wrong, to buy
Livings; but it is a fact that they are openly
bought and sold, and it is also a fact that the
purchasers are always in such abundance in the
market that there is not an annuity office in
London which will not give a larger return for a
given sum than the same sum would yield in the
purchase of livings. The last blow to the ob-
solete doctrine of Simony was given by the
Bishops themselves, when they supported the
Bill introduced into the House of Lords by the
late Archbishop of Canterbury, a little before
his death, to make bonds to resign legal, the
effect of which is to give the holder of an ad-
vowson as complete a power over it, by ousting
the holder of the living, whenever circumstances
' render it advisable, as any man has over his
manor or farm. The Bishops know, therefore,
that every thing in the Church is bought and
sold like cattle at a fair, to use the well-known
expression. They have no hatred towards these
things ; but, like all other men, they hate po-
verty ; and consider no indulgence due to those
who have the misfortune to be under its rule, as
Vicars with large families, and Curates without
interest. So much with regard to the suppres-
sion of the fact of the Living of Manby, which
yields nothing. We have already said that the
son of Mr. Wray did not owe the Curacy of
Horsington to the Bishop of Lincoln, and that
the Bishop could not have prevented his receiving

The Royal Filter for purifying and making of
a Chrystalline brilliancy the worst water even the Thames
is capable of supplying, is now in such high repute that
the Patentee (Mr. GEoaca Roams) finds it a task of
some difficulty to get them fitted up sufficiently fast in the
cisterns of the Metropolis. The Portable Filters and
Cisterns are in the same high request. It is really a
" God-send" to those who, beside preferring pure and
chrystal water, would avoid stomach complaints arising
from impurity. The Magazine, in full operation, is No.
69, Strand.

, numerous
Monday
list
of n e
thex t ,
fa‘e\h' iilol
babAlytbeHcoanrarorewgatePdarak
after the order to the father to abandon the
longt. Thearrangement was not contemplated even till
remaining in the great Metropolis, to Mr. GEORGE curacy. The Times says, " We should not think
ROBINS'S sale. The opportunity to view this happy fa.
voured mansion and park would alone suffice, but as the •
n pro-a
bi es i
that his Lordship would act with a weakness unbc-
cominu hischaracter if he were to advance one step
whole of the elegancies of the interior, (which include the : b '
handsome furniture, choice wines, carriages, pictures, '
it will be a magnet, next in point of attraction beyond his original intention, in the way of en-
library of books, and service of plate), are to be sold at the forcing residence or double duty, in consequence
same time, Wray,
to the Horticultural breakfast. This tar-famed seat of of this attack by Mr. to whom he owes
no account of his conduct." - He may owe no
Lord NORTHWICK is to be sold. It was purchased by
account of his conduct to Mr. Wray, as Vicar
General ALEXANDER MURRAY MACGREGGOR, and the I
approaching sale is in consequence of his lamented death. of Bardney ; hut he is unquestionably amenable,