The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-09-24 00:00:00

REVISION OF THE BOROUGH LIST.—TuzeDAY

Mr. Temple and Mr. Wilde took their seats this morning,
in the Nisi Prius Court, and proceeded with the freemen's
list. Comparatively few attended, those objected to being
mostly deceased parties. The list is not to be called over

again.
At one o'clock Mr. Temple presided in the Nisi Prins
Court, and Mr. Wilde proceeded to take a certain portion
of the cases in the Grand Jury Room. The list was called
over in alphabetical order as far as the letter M. Very few
of the individuals called, answered ; and, in most instances,
those who answered had the objections against their names
withdrawn immediately.
Several of the individuals who had been objected to by the
conservatives, when questioned by Mr. 'Wright as to the
amount of rent which they paid, replied £lO Bs. This ap
peared to be a very usual rent charged to a certain class of
voters, natives of the sister isle. In the parish books, how-
ever, they appeared assessed at only £B. In allusion to one
of these cases, the party objected to having stated that his
rent was £lO Bs. per annum, and Mr. Hart having shown
that the assessment was £8 per annum, Mr. Temple ob-
served that if Mr. Wright could produce testimony that the
house was over-rented, he would not anow the vote.
Mr. Wright said the only ground of objection in this and
other cases was the assessment, which was under £lO Bs.,
which led to a belief that the rent might be so too. They
did not, however, wish to take frivolous objections, and were
willing, in all cases, to take the actual rent paid as sufficient
evidence that the fair value was given by the tenant.
Mr. Temple hid, in the absence of any other evidence, lie
thought the fact of the assessment being below the rent was
a good ground on which to found an objection, and such
objections were therefore very properly served.

WEDNESDAY.
The court opened at ten o'clock. Mr. Wilde took his seat
in the grand jury room, for the purpose of hearing the cases
in the wards 8 and upwards. Mr. Temple took his seat in
the Nisi Prius Court, when the cases in wards 1 to 7 inclu-
sive, were-called over in their alphebetical order. In many

of the cases called the objections were at once withdrawn ; in

others they were established after a few questions. In two
of the cases which were brought forward, Mr. Fairclough,
who attended in the room of Mr. Wright, raised objections
on the ground of the parties having had their rates paid last
year by the Protector Society. The first case re-opened the
question, whether such a payment, so far as the voter was
concerned, was a good payment. Mr. Fairclough cited the
case of the " Queen v. Bridgnorth," to show that the pay-
ment was bad, and that although the rates had been paid by
the society in question, the voter was still liable for the ar-
rears. Mr. Snowball contended that the present case was
distinguishable from that of the " Queen v. Bridgnorth,"
and, after a long argument, the vote was allowed, upon the
ground that no proof had been given that the Protector So-
ciety was a political society, or that the money had been ad-
vanced for political and particular purposes, and that there
had been fraud, and fraud sufficient to vitiate the transac-
tion. Mr. Temple, in giving his decision, said he enter-
tained not a particle of doubt that a bona fide honest loan of
money by one party to another made a payment with that
money a payment by the borrower and not by the lender.
Shortly after the decision in this case, another of a similar
kind occurred, when Mr. Fairclough went stringently into it,
in order to show the real constitution of the society, that it
was a political one, and had been established for political and
particular purposes. The claimant was a man of the name Of
Patrick Toole, and it appeared that he had himself paid his
rates this year, but last year they were paid by the Protector
Society, and he was struck off. He appeared properly rated
on the books of the parish.
Mr. Fairclough grounded his objection as before, and
examined the witness, a very shrewd, acute fellow, touching
the properties of the society. The answers were briefly as
follow :—The Protector Society is a society for benefit.
It was for a man to draw out money, and pay it in by instal-
ments. No prospectus was issued that I am aware of. I
learned its purposes from a neighbour. lam not aware that
there were any rules. I paid 2s. 6d. when I entered. It
was to remain there till I thought proper to draw it out. 1
expected that I should get it back when I wanted it. I dont
know whether there was any conservative in the society ; I
naturally think not. I first paid taxes in 1840. I paid
£1 Ils. 4d. I got that from the Protector Society. I had,
previous to that payment, which was made in July, 1840,
paid in Bs. 6d. About four or six months afterwards, I got
notice that I was in arrears. I had then been struck off.
The arrears were demanded, and I went and paid them. I
had expected to, have to pay them back, but I did not pro-
mise to pay them at any particular time. I dont know, but I
naturally think that the society was composed exclusively of
reformers. I dont know that any but poor people beionged
to it. I naturally think it was for the purpose of enabling
poor people to pay their rates.
By Mr. Snowball.—The society was one wherein the
money was raised by subscription ; it was to pay by instal-
ments what was drawn out at once. When I became in
arrear they applied for the money.
Mr. Fairclough thought they had got the fact of it being a
political society. With regard to his having retnrned the
money as he was struck off the list, they might have de-
manded it, because he had not fulfilled the condition on which
it was given to him. He thought there was sufficient evidence
to prove that it was for a political purpose, and that it came
within the Queen v. the Mayor of Bridgenorth.
Mr. Temple said, it appeared that a certain number of
parties had clubbed together to raise a certain fund.
Mr. Fairclough.—Entirely for a political purpose.
Mr. Temple.—They were all of one political party it ap-
pears certainly. Does it make any alteration that they con-
fine the society entirely to one side in politics ?
Mr. Fairclough.—Yes. When it is for paying the rates of
poor people who could not otherwise pay them, and who thus
got votes to give to that party.
Mr. Temple.—lt seems, as the case stands, that this is a
political society, of one side in politics, formed for the
purpose of collecting a fund to pay poor people's rates to
enable them to vote.
The witness, in reply to a question, said, he had known
instances where persons in distress had received sums of
•.

money by way of relief from the society.
Mr. Temple then examined the witness at some length.
He stated, amongst other things, that when he went to Mr.
Bretherton's office for the money, the clerk told him that
I Is. Gd. was the sum due by him to the parish. The
vote was struck off by the Revising Barrister. He then left
t,:e society and had not belonged to it since. He did not
know that it was in existence, but be naturally believed that
it was not.
Mr. Temple said the facts which he found were, that a
certain number of political persons had associated themselves
together for a political purpose and they called themselves a
protector society. They invited poor people to become mem-
bers, and to pay small sums into their fund, which it was
plain were mere colourable payments. The principal object
of the society was to enable poor persons to pay their rates,
in order that they might be entitled to a vote. The amount
of their rates, it appeared, were known to the clerks of this
society when theyi were not known to the people themselves.
These clerks informed the poor people of the amount of
money due by them to the parish, and that amount was paid
over to them out of the funds of the society. They were
never called upon to repay this money till there existed a
reason, a political reason for such repayment. The name
was struck off and then there was a ground that they should
repay it, in order that they might qualify at the next revision.
There was no political object till after the revision. As soon as
the name was struck off they called upon him to repay, though
if he had fulfilled the condition on which he received the
money, in all probability he would not have been called upon.
But then there was the fact of the money having really been
paid back ; weie they to consider that as a sufficient purgation
of bribery ?
Mr. Snowball contended that the man having paid the
money back, had now in all respects paid all his rates and
fulfilled the act of parliament.
Mr. Temple believed that the money was given if the party
voted right, and was to be claimed back if he voted wrong.
Still, however, there certainly was the point that he had paid
it back again.
Mr. Fairclough thought that the repayment would not
purge the bribery, any more than if he had stolen the money
and paid it back again, it would have purged the felony.
Mr. Temple said there could not be a doubt that this
money was 4dvandcd for the express purpose of enabling the
party to obtain a vote, He was called upon to repay it, iu
order that he might not again lose his vote. The point which
remained to be settled was, whether it was illegal in the par-
ties to buy him a vote. He would reserve the point for con-
sideration

YESTERDAN
The Revising Barristers opened their respective courts this
morning at a few minutes after ten o'clock. It was expected
that they would deliver their decision on the cases of parties
who had, last year, paid their parish rates (many of them in
arrear for some years) with money received from, or alleged
to be lent by, the Protector Society, but, as will hereafter
appear, the learned barristers had not fully made up their
minds on the subject.
Mr. Temple, on taking his seat on the bench in the Ses-
sions-house, addressed himself to the ease of a Hugh Burns.
He stated the question hinged on the fact of the payment of
the parish rates of that individual by his landlord. He
(Burns) had stated that an agreement had been made be-
tween them that the landlord should pay the poor rates, and
the question therefore arose whether any rates were due
by the tenant? It was thought, that the act Geo. 111.
chap. 12, would bear out the construction, that no rates were
due from him ; but he, Mr. Temple, was of a different
opinion. That act allowed the overseers to assess landlords
of houses renting between £6 and £2O ; but required, before
they could do so, that they should call a general meeting of
the inhabitants in vestry, and obtain their sanction by a re-
solution being passed to empower them to do so. It was not
until a resolution so assessing the landlord, that the parish
officers could demand the rate from the landlord. No such
fleeting had in this case been held, and the name of the
;enant only appeared on the books as the person assessed.
Lie (Mr. Temple) was therefore of opinion that Burns was
sot entitled to vote, and his name must be struck'out.
As to the other cases (involving the legitimacy of rates
being paid out of funds supplied by the Protector Society,)
he and his colleague were not yet prepared to give their
opinion. There was on record a case of an outgoing tenant
agreeing with the incoming tenant, that the latter should
take certain fixtures, and pay the amount asked for them to
the landlord in liquidation of rent due ; but it was held that
this was not a sufficient compliance with the tenor of the sta-
tute to entitle the former tenant to a vote. It had also been
ruled, that it was equally insufficient that rent should be paid
out of the proceeds of a distraint by the landlord. He should,
therefore, defer deciding on the cases alluded to till a future
day. As, however, great interest had been excited respect-
ing them, not only amongst the public, but also amongst the
profession, it would be exceedingly convenient for him and
his colleague if the solicitors for the respective parties would,
by mutual agreement, draw out a ease for their decision. If
so, he would furnish them with copies of the notes he had
taken of each case bearing on the question. This was the
more desirable, inasmuch as some portions of the evidence
were merely circumstantial, and from which inferences alone
could be drawn.
Mr. Wright and Mr. Snowball agreed to the course re-
commended ; Mr. Wright to draw out the case, subject to
Mr. Snowball's revision.
Mr. Temple then said that he should adjourn the court,
at its rising, to Saturday morning, when he hoped he and
Mr. Wilde would be enabled to give their decision on the
case prepared as proposed, and delivered to him that night,
or in the morning.
The Liverpool list was then proceeded within the respec-
tive rooms, each barrister, as before, proceeding from letter
A. upwards, in the wards they had previously been going on
with:, No ease of interest took place through the day.
Mr. Temple said, that as it had been agreed that the ob-
jections in the out townships should be heard on Saturday,
and the parties interested had had such intimation, he was
unwilling to disturb that arrangement. The claims should
be commenced with on Monday morning.
Both courts closed early, and stand adjourned to Saturday.

Faviarausmsn.mr=sam.bamsfistaaferOMt.,_!_,

On Tuesday the London and Brighton railway was opened
to the public for the first time. We understand that the fine
is in a highly satisfactory state.
An agonising affair, which has placed in jeopardy the life
of a fine boy, took place near Bishop's Castle, on Wednes-
day. The infant son of Mr. G. Rhodes, of that place, had
gone into a meadow, nut gathering, when he was suddenly
assailed by a sow, which pulled him down, and, before he
could rescue himself, had torn and lacerated his flesh in a
fearful manner. The-little fellow contrived to raise himself,
and ran off, when he was again seized by the brute in at-
tempting to scramble over a gate, his clothes torn from his
body, and his thighs and face severely torn. Fortunately his
screams were heard in time for assistance to arrive to save
him from being eaten piecemeal by the ravenous brute ; but
he is so dreadfully injured as to
give slight hopes of recovery.
—Shrewsbury Chronicle.