Star.
London, England, 1827-07-24 00:00:00

POOLE QUARTER SESS.IOfi3
INPontANT ID elle silt tito „
ems PARISE 0•.10 14XIS. aril' • not an osilia&
The querion lit tOis cause aroidlOiNereestuzitillint—
,of the several Statutii cOnretitingAbe Pont Rain. Souse-
lime since the parish iniposed rates on the shipowncrs
of Poole, and in •so ratlnk thetb rated the eowresidetfit:

as well as the resident otihtts of each ship.••so a. tine
to rate upon the full viloU'of thethip,- The Sessions,
upon appeal, confirmed- thls.rite, subject to a case fat'
the opinion of the Coast of King's Bench.. and t'4l-
- upon argunsvnt, decided, ihit this mode firming •
could. not be allowed, and that nO tate could be dr Ide,
upon the non-resident part owners; After this decision-0
the parish, under the advice of their Counsel, made* a%
new rate, in which they only rated t! e resident miner
by name, but rated bins to the fell ♦alue of each ships
contending, that as he was the visible and anstrentlt
the sold legal owner of tl e property, thus situated its
the parish, the whole property could ►e reached through%
him. The Sessions, upon apy sal, confirmed this sate,.
also subject, as before, to a case for the opinion of ther•-
Court of King's Bench. The Cotarr, opouargumento
decided, that this rate also was objectionable, Waving,
that to allow it would be to allow that to be done
A'-
directly, which could not legally be dons diteCtly.—
They, therefore, ordered the rate to be emended, by
apportioning its amount according to the actual interest,
of the resident owner in each ship.
The Sessions now held were the first since the late
decision of the Court of King's Bench ; and Mr. Kura .
stow appeared fur the parish, and Mr. Jeremy for arse

shipowners.
Mr. Jaaeur put in the Rule of the Court of King's
Bench, and called upon the Court to amend the rate, in:
obedience to that Rule. To this no obj-ction was offered.
Mr. Jimmy then moved, that in this case his client
should be allowed his costs. The rate now .lecistred to be
erroneous, had been actually paid, and he, therefore,
contended, that according to 41 Geo. 111. cap.*. 8, the
Court were bound to allots the cogs, as well as to order
the money paid to be refunded. The words of the section'
were, .4 and if it should be made appear that such per-
son had, previously to the hearing of such appeal, paid
any sum or sums of money io consequence of such rate,
which he ought not to have paid, or been charged with,
then the said Court should order all and every such sum
land sums of money to be repaid and tettnned by the
churchwardens and overseers of the poor, to the person
baying paid the same, together with all reasonable
costs, charges, and expenses, occasioned by such per-
sons having paid, or been required to pay, the same."
Upon this Statute, the Learned Gentleman con.
tended, that the Court were bound to allow some
costs, although they had reasonable d scretion Is to
the amount. His client had been put to an enor-
mous expense in resisting a claim which the higher
Court had declared to be unfounded ; and it was, these-
fore, but just, that those who had made the unsuccessful
experiment should bear the costs. He by no means
charged the parish officers with having don: more than
their duty. The case was one.of conidera.ble difficulty,
and had called for a display of much talent from the
present Solicitor-General, Mr. B.oujham, and Mr.
Bayley; yet the Court of Kng's Bench were so satisfied
that the rate was unfounded in Frinci, le, that they chd
not think it necessary to hear the Attoriity•Getleral, or
'the other Counsel of the appellant. Although the ex-
penses incurred by his client had been very considera-
ble. he did not expect the Court to allow the whole of
them. He had, for instance, iacutieJ the- expense of
bringing Counsel from London on a special retainer.
He did nut ask for the heavy fees paid on that occasion;
but he hoped the Court would take it into account, and
award a liberal portion.
Mr. Bausvow, for the parish, contended that it was
not imperative on the Court to allow any Cogs. The
Statutes cited by his Learned Fiend applied only to
such costs as were occasioned by the a cast enforcing of
the rate. lf, for is.stance, the appell ant had been dis-
trained upon, it would be imperative upon the CO.lll to
allow him the costs of that distress, and the same obser.
ration would apply to any costs which came within that
description; but the costs of the appeal were provided
foe by a different Statute, 31 Geo. 11. by which it was
enacted that the Court of Quarter S 'stuns upon the
heating of any appeal against a poor-rate, may" give
costs to the successful party. This skewed that the coal
of the appeal wept altogether discretionary. If it were
held otherwise, this absutdity would be il.e consequence,
that if the man had been called 91 to pay the rate, the
Court would have no discretion; uhlle if he had not
paid the rate, the discretionary power would remain,
and thus an espies' statutory provision would depend
in its application upon an accidental immaterial fact,
baying oo tele:vice to the mesits of tie tate itself; as-
suming then, that the Court had a discretionary power,
be proceeded. to contend that this was not a case in which
the Conic would exercise it. He did not blame the
ap-
pellsnt for availing himself of his legal exemption, but it
did not follow as a consequence that he was to be allowed
to throw upon the parish the expense of maintaining that
exemption. The rate had not been venaciuusly made,
nor venatiously persisted in, and in the ordinary practice,
under the statute which gave the discretionary power,
Courts-in general did not allow any costs, unless the
unsuccessful party had been guilty of some venatious
conduct. Here there was not only no venatious pro.
ceeding, but the parish had been advised that the appel-
lant was liable; that Court 'winch he was then addresoi.
ing, had confirmed the liability, and they weir not to be
called upon to pay the expenses of cortectingrahat judg-
ment. They had a tight to endeavour to maintain the
judgment of the higher Court: it would have been
unwise, as well as disrepecttul, to the Court, not to have
done so, and this application, therefore, was equivalent
to asking the Cow t to stultify themselves, and to declare
that the parish officers ought not to have paid any atten-
tion to. or placed the least reliance on their judgmeot.
Mr. shimmy replied, contending that it was not ne.
cessary to make out a case of venation against the palish,
in order to establish his case for costs.
Mr. Parr. the appellant's attorney, was called, and
proved that the costs attending the different appeals
amoun:ed to nearly four hundred p tooth. On cross-
examination, he admitted, that this expense was to be
divided, not among the appellants, but among them
and other shipowners.
The Cover, atter some deliberation, awarded only
40s. costs.

Seven other appeals were, by eonissut, similarly dig•
posed of. These cases have attracted the almost undi-
vided legal attention of the merchants and parish uffi.
cers of Poole, as well as shipownets get.erally, for a
long tme past. The arguments of Counsel occupied
nearly the whole day ; and as a proof of the great im-
portance attached to the questions, it may 's* stated, that
Mr. Jemmy and Mr. Barstow werrbtought from town,
specially 1 and at very heavy fees.

I
~ ~ ~
I
I
I ~
t
9
b
1
I
t
r
I
1i
~~

,