The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-10-06 00:00:00

MUNICIPAL REVISION,

FRIDAY

At nine o'clock on FridWini;ning, the assessors took their
seats on the bench, and proceeded with the list of objec-
tions :
Elliott Bayley, radical, Prince Edward-lane, was first called.
The service of the notice was personal. The server asked him
if his name was Elliott Bayley, he replied that it was, and then
he delivered the notice into his hand.
Mr. JAMES submitted that the service was not sufficient.
Mr. lIARvEr ruled that it was.
James Alderny was then sworn.—Knows Mr. Bayley ; he
resided in Prince Edward-land for the last few years, and
paid his rates. On his cross-examination, the witness said
lie believed Mr. Bayley was not in any business, but that he
was independent ; was not aware that he was a journeyman
upholsterer; did not see him pay his rates.
Mr. \%ILKINS submitted that the case had failed, inas-
much as it should be distinctly proved that the party's rates
had been paid by himself. They had heard of such associa-
tions as protector societies, the object of which might be to
pay rates for other people without their privity and know-
ledge, and such a payment would not answer in law.
Mr. JAMES replied. If the rates were not paid, it was
open to his learned friend on the other side to show that fact.
Mr. 'WILKINS said that the onus probandi of proving a
fact always lay upon the affirming party, and that the counsel
upon the opposite side were never yet required to disprove.—
Vote allowed.

The MAYOR, alter the decision in the last case, hoped the
public would see that it was absolutely necessary the party
objected to should attend or give some sufficient reason for
absenting himself.

Henry- Brownrigg, conservative, of Clarence-street, was
next called. The service was personal.
Mr. Brownrigg sworn—Married a Miss Blair, of Mill-
street, in January last. She paid her rates punctually.
Cross-examined.—Slept one night in Mill-street, and the
next day went to reside with his wife in Clarence-street.—
Vote allowed.

Frank Bunnell, conservative, of Clifton-street, called.—
Vote allowed.

Joseph Butler, conservative, of Howarth-street, called.—
Vote allowed.

Daniel Bentley, conservative, of Bude-street, called, but
did not appear. The notice was served at a Mrs. Elliott's
house, at which the server was told the elector lived a short
time before.

Mr. WILKINS contended that the service was invalid, in-
asmuch as it was not proved that the premises, where the
notice was served, were those for which the man was rated.
—Ordered to stand over.

Moses Bullock, conservative, of Poplar-street, called. The
notice was served upon his wife.—Vote allowed.

William Brindley, conservative, Hygeia-street, called.
Notice served on his wife. The rates of the party were paid
up to August last, not by himself, but, he believed, by his
wife.—Vote disallowed.

William Brooks, conservative, of Netherfield-road South
called, but did not appear—Notice proved—Vote stands

Thomas Baldwin, conservative, of Prince Edwin-street
called. The notice was served on the house, at which the
server was told the party resided. The notice was folded up,
and pushed under the door.

Mr. WILKINS contended that the service was invalid, for
the same reason as the assessors decided the day before, that
service of the notice through the keyhole was insufficient.
Mr. fIASVEY could certainly draw no distinction between
service through the key-hole, and service under the door,-
provided every other means of making a personal service had
been exhausted before such expedients were resorted to.
The two other assessors believed that the service was good,
inasmuch as the server knocked at the door several times, and
received no answer—Vote allowed.

The MAYOR here announced that it was the intention of
the assessors to adjourn that day at one o'clock, and to sit
until eight that evening.

Mr. JAMES thought that an adjournment of a quarter of an
hour at one o'clock would be scarcely sufficient for refresh-
ment purposes ; besides, arrangements had been made in St.
Peter's Ward between the parties on both sides, so that such
extraordinary expedition was rendered partly unnecessary.

Mr. `VILIiINS said that the first two days of the sessions
would necessarily occupy more time in hearing the objections
than would be occupied on any subsequent days, because he
could say for himself, and he believed he might say the same
for his learned friend on the otherlside, that when the asses-
sors made their several decisions in the cases, most of which
would be perfectly nnderstood that evening, they would not
afterwards be required to alter them. In fact such decisions
would act as precedents throughout the remainder of the ses-
sions.

The MAyou. said it depended more upon the counsel than
on the assessors to expedite the proceedings, for if long
speeches were made, considerable time would be consumed.
Mr. WILKINS observed that hitherto every objection he
had urged was taken, because he believed it was a good and
valid one ; and he made it the rule of his life never to quarrel
with a decision of a court once that it was pronounced. The
moment that a decision was come to, he would not argue the
objection again ; therefore, after the first two days, the en-
quiry would be shortened ; and if they were to sit there until
eight o'clock at night, lie thought they might discharge their
duties expeditiously, but whether they would do so efficati-
ously was another question.
The MAYOR said he had proposed to the assessors to sit
until 12 o'clock at night. (Laughter.)
Mr. WILKINS could assure his worship that he would not
find such late sittings to be very easy play, and that after a
night or two, he would find that he was not as well able to
discharge his onerous duties as when he commenced proceed-
ings in the morning.
The MAYOR could assure Mr. Wilkins that he was so
much accustomed to hard work, that he could afford to work
similarly on the present occasion.

The Conversation here dropped, and the proceedings were
resumed.

The name of Frederick Clibborn (reformer) being called,
it was objected that the person who appeared for him, his
landlord, who spoke to his tenancy, &c., was not by him duly
authorised to do so. A long argument arose on this point,
in the course of which—

Mr. JAMES contended that under the 18th section of the
act, the evidence of the witness from his knowledge of the
facts was strictly legal, and could not in justice be rejected by
the court ; who, however, were competent to give to that
evidence the weight which they conceived it deserved.
Mr. Wimuss, on the other hand, did not deny that his
opponents might call as witnesses whom they thought fit ;
but that the evidence he had given of the right of the party
to be on the register was not, hesubmitted, satisfactory. He
took occasion to compliment the Mayor at the close of his
address, for his judicious, and impartial conduct throughout
the previous proceedings. The question was not of the legal
competency of the witness, which he admitted ; but as it ap-
peared to him that the evidence was insufficient, he requested
that the case might be put oft' till another day, so that the
man might appear himself.

Mr. WRIGHT thought that to admit of the vote on such
evidences alone, would open the door to future abuses.
The vote was, however, finally allowed, with a protest from
Mr. Wright.

A. number of objections were then disposed of by the votes
being allowed. Amongst them were Thos. Crook, Henry
Corlett, John and Henry Holmes, Thos. Carter, Peter
Dudgeon, Daniel Ellis, John Davies, David Evans, Thomas
Morris, Wm. Franklin, C. Fleetwood, and Richard For-
shaw. Several others were adjudged to stand over, the par-
ties not being present.