The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-06-12 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS.

The adjourned meeting of the town council was held on
Wednesday, for the purpose of despatching the business left
undisposed of at the previous meeting on 'Wednesday week.
There was a rather limited attendance of members. The
mayor presided.

The proceedings of the several committees were read by
the deputy town-clerk, and approved without observation.

MEMORIALS, &C.
The MAYOR read a letter from Messrs. Jordan and Pen-
kett, which had been- given to Mtn by Mr. Isaac Holmes,
complaining of the want of a police-officer on the Bootle-
road, during the night, in consequence of which an attempt
at robbery had recently taken place in that neighbourhood.
Mr. ISAAC HOLMES, who alluded to his having previously
brought this subject before the council, said that it did
appear to him very strange, almost stupid, that a policeman
should be stationed on that road, about the Sandhills and the
neighbourhood, when he was scarcely wanted—that is, in the
day time—and that he should be taken off during the night,
when he was wanted particularly. Indeed, the circumstance
was so very strange, that it would'althost appear Eli if the
Watch Committee had made a compact with the thieves. He
moved that the letter should be referred to the Watch
Committee.

Mr. RATIIBONE inquired whether any complaint 'on this
subject had in the first place been laid before the committee ?
Mr. THORIVHILL replied in the negative, and said that the
policeman who had been stationed on the Bootle-road bad
been put there to protect the people as they returned home
in the course of the afternoon and evening. There were only
one or two houses in the neighbourhood, and that made it
unnecessary to have an officer to watch during the night.
Mr. COGLAN observed that this was the first instance of a
case of this nature having come before the council, without
having primarily been before the committee. He felt con-
vinced that a portion of the allegations were not correct ;
but, if they were, justice would have been done on an appli-
cation to the Watch Committee.
The MAYOR here read a letter from Mr. Isaac Holmes
(that accompanied the one which was the subject of conver-
sation), in which the writer acknowledged the irregularity of
the course pursued by him in first bringing the matter before
the council, but stating as his reason that he and four other
members had been excluded from every committee, and
therefore, under those circumstances, he objected to hold
communication with any committee.
The letter was ultimately referred to the Watch Com-
mittee.
COMPLAINT AGAINST THE LATE BILLET-MASTER.
The MAYOR next presented a letter from the keeper of a
beer-house, named Timothy, who complained that Mr. Dar-
lington, the late billet-master, had illegally sent to his house
a billet, which had been received by the wife of the memo-
rialist during his absence, she being ignorant of the law upon
the subject, and that, notwithstanding he had repeatedly ap-
plied for justice, in every likely quarter, amongst others to
the magistrates and to the late mayor, he bad hitherto been
unsuccessful, and now, therefore, came before the council
itself. The justice he sought was a remuneration for the
outlay he had illegally been put to, -which, as the town-clerk
had informed the mayor, would probably amount to 20s.
Mr. ISAAC HOLMES, by whom the letter had been pre-
sented to the mayor, stated that he had done so merely in
consequence of a request from Timothy, who said be had
applied without success to several other members. He (Mr.
Holmes) should always consider himself at liberty to present
a memorial from any individual who thought himself
aggrieved. He moved that the letter should be referred to
the Finance Committee.

Mr. COOPER would second the motion, believing that the
man had been injured, and that the money wrongly taken
from him should be restored.

Mr.-H. HORNBY, haVinil3een personally alluded to in the
letter, wished to say a few words. It was true that Mr.
Timothy applied to him, in the interval that elapsed between
the absence of Mr. Hall and the coming of Mr. Rushton.
His (Timothy's) complaint was, that a soldier had illegally
brought a billet to his house from the late billet-master, who,
as was well known, was a very irregular man in his office.
The case was brought before him (Mr. Hornby) as a magis-
trate, and he found that the only notice which could be taken
of it was to fine the billet-master, if he had intentionally
billeted a soldier upon an exempted person, and not to give
redress to Timothy. The Town-clerk and he stated to the
complainant the clause in the mutiny act, of the nature just
referred to, but still he was dissatisfied. He (Mr. Timothy)
had sent several letters to him (Mr. Hornby,) one of which
he would read, as it afforded an insight into the man's cha-
racter. Amongst other things, he declared that as the re-
form party would not do him justice, he would go over to-the
other. (Laughter.) Mr. Hamby read the letter referred
to, and, as might be expected, it was a very curious compo-
sition; it was, however, as remarkable for its matter as its
manner ;