Star.
London, England, 1827-01-26 00:00:00

LONDON ADM:100 SESSIONS, JAL 25.

resse-
yvsas plat ,
Sri. De. Owld/ O. Ifni PALM" Of Iv. SLAVS, EAST-
This was an appeal by the Rev. ppoctor 'gala two
rates for the relief of the poor of theabove parish, made
for two several periods, ere—from Midsummer to
Christmas, 1825, and from Christmas, 1825, to Mid-
summer, 1826. The rates were made on the 17th day
of March, 1826.
Mr. LAW spreared for the appellant, and stated to
the Court that Mr. Adolphus was with him; and was
anxious that the cam might stand over, in order that be
might be able to attend. •
The Meows said, he could have Do ekelapabil all the poi*.
consented.
Mr. Bottrop could Dot consent, for kw Ind ample eseeads
fbe
,maintaining the valWity of the rate.
Dr. Owen said, that if the case was allowed to stand
over, its all probability some amicable arrangement
might be come to, there appearing to be such a dispos
sition on the past of the parishioners.
Mr. Anoaews denied that anything of the bled had eves' Went
that time been intimated, nor any application made.
Dr. Owen stated, that the question was of so much importance;
that it required all the learnlog of Counsel to be brought is o •
to come to a proper decisiov.
Mr. Bou.ano—The question Is not of any such importance ; tie
Ilict is, you receive 1,8001,a year for tithes, and are rated at mole
',toot.
The Petition to the Lord Mayor and Court of A
awn, dated the 19th of June, 1826, was then
which was in substance, that the appellant, Henry tt
Owen, D.D. was. Rector of the parish; that he was is.
formed, and belieied, that the rates were infortnal, ie.
asmuch as they are retrospective and prospective; the‘
they are not impartial and equal rates of assessments"
but, on the contrary, are very unequal and oppressive
in very many instances. It then goes on to state the
rentals of a number of the inhabitants, and that they
were rated at one shilling in the pound upon suds rent
talc; that they were considerably underrated in respect
to the real rental, or annual value;" that the Petitioneg
is very considerably overrated, in comparison and pro-
portion to these. That he is informed, and believes,.
that certain occupiers of lands and premises, situate its
the said parish, are . not rated in respect of the sans
viz. the Corn Exchange, for profit of land and pram'
and several occupiers of offices therein enumerated k
that these are " nut rated or assessed in respect uf their
goods, stock in trade, personal effects, and other pro.:
party, convertible into profit, whereas the Petitioner it
rated and assessed in respect to his yearly income os.
value in tithe." The Petitioner conceiving hmtsejf
aggrieved,..prays the Court to quash tll2 two rates, oe
grant such other relief as they may deem meet.
Mr. Law was about to can evidence in support of the cep; cwt's
sage, when
Mr. BOLLAND and Mr. ANDRIMS took a preli
nary objection. They wished the entry in the book hes
by tie Clerk of the Atraigne to be read, frovs which it
appeared that there was only an catty of one apps
whereas they had received notice of appeal against twit
rates; that, they contended, was bad ; if there were owe
rates to be appealed against, there should hies bet.
two Petitions presented so the Lord Mayor and CAW
se Aldermen.
Mr. LAW contended, that the objection Wu similar
' gaits nature to a defence that had biren set tip in ano-
ther place to an action for assault. The declaratiee;
stated, that only owe head 117 d been broken, whereas it
was proved that two heads had been brokers.
Mr. Alderman Artists submitted that the party
etattpla'ning should at any rate select which of the rates
he would try. These could be no question but that
dm could only look at one of the rates at a time.
Mr. Law contended, that evidence might be given as to
miles, and the Court would have to ay which, if either, of the rates
win bad.
After a lengthened argument between the Counsel ea both Wes,
The Runtimes decided, that the objection raised
was good; that where two rates were appealed against,
two Petitions were neceuary. it being requited by law;1
and it woad be impesstbie for the Court to distinguish
between the two rates ens they were set fotth in the
Petition.