The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-10-13 00:00:00

MUNICIPAL REVISION.

TUESDAY

The business of the court commenced at 9 o'clock, and the
mayor and assessors resumed the revision of the list for Scot-
land Ward.

Tbos. Murphy, of Back Portland-street, was objected to
by the conservatives. He stated, that he had lived in Arley-
street, whence he removed in September, 1839. He had
lived there seven years, and had regularly paid his rates. On
examination by Mr. Wilkins, it appeared that the rates had
until recently been paid by Mrs. Winifred Murph
Mr. WILKINS.—WIIO is Winifred Murphy
Witness.—My mother.
Mr. JAMES.—Oh, I suppose she's dead
mother die ?

Witness
yet. _ _

When did your

—She never died at all—(laughter)—slic's alive

Mr. '4l,ir.xiss.—Well, sir, you may go ; you'll not have
a vote yet. _ The name was struck off. __ _ _ _ _

Martin Murphy, Woodstock-street, and Martin Murphy,
Carlton-street, were objected to by the conservatives. They
stated that they had paid their rates, but the money was bor-
rowed from the Protector Society. The money was paid by
themselves, and no person accompanied either of them. The
votes were allowed. Several similar cases occurred, the votes
being allowed where the parties proved the payment of the
rates in propria persona, without the intervention of another
party. A very large majority of the individuals called did
not answer, and these were allowed to stand over to appear
when the lists are again gone over, the proofs of service of
notice being given so as to save time in future. Many cases
were heard, in which the claims were immediately allowed on
both sides, and others in which the names were struck out.
The majority of these, however, were destitute of any point
or circumstanee either of interest or importance. Such cases
as seemed to excite most amusement and interest in the court,
we shall record briefly ; the others would only occupy space,
without affording either gratification or instruction.
Robert Naylor, Collingwood-street, was objected to by the
reformers, but did not appear. The person who served the
notice of objection was called upon to prove the service. An
individual, evidently an Irishman, started up and exclaimed,
Robert Naylor, is it ? Och, I noticed him ! (Laughter.)
Mr. JAMES.—You noticed him ! What do you mean, did
you look at him
Witness.—Oh, I did !

Mr. WmicrNs.—Did you serve him, sir ?
Witness.—l did ! I served him out. The notice server
was rebuked by the court, and proceeded to prove the notice
regularly. The_case stood over.
Peter Nelson, Burlington-street, was objected to by the
reformers. A. friend appeared for him, who proved that he
had resided in the house for which he claimed his qualification
four or five years, and it was shown that his rates had been
replarly raid. _ _ _

Slr. fAitzs.—What is Mr. Nelson ?
Witness.—He is a dealer in Irish provisions,

Mr. JAMES.—Is he not a foreigner ?
Witness.—l should think he was an Irishman, and they
are aliens in the opinion of some people, sir. The vote was
allowed. _ _

Richard Williams, Green-street, was objected to by the
reformers. Mr. Williams appeared for her husband. In
reply to the questions put to her, she stated that she paid three
years' taxes at once. She did not borrow the money any-
where, but received it from her husband, and her husband
worked hard for it. Vote allowed.
James Waring, Rose-place, objected to by the reformers,
stated, that he had paid two years rates at once. He paid
them himself on the 31st August, at the parish office, in Fen-
wick-street. He paid them with his own money, and did not
get any money from any one for the purpose. Vote allowed.

.
William Winstanley, voting for a house and warehouse in I
Regent-road, was objected to by the reformers. It appeared
that he had resided on the premises, for which he claimea,
twenty-one years, and had paid his rates regularly.
The MAYOR said he thought a case of this sort certainly
showed the necessity for some al rangement for getting rid of
frivolous objections.
Mr. WILKINS said he was sure that 'he had no objection
to such an arrangement.
Mr. JAMES said he bad no authority to enter into such an
arrangement.
The list for Scotland Ward having been entirely called
over, the court requested that those residing in that ward,
who happened to be in court, would step forward. Several
cases were thus disposed of.
Many cases were disposed of, involving points similar to
those already given. Much discussion took place occasion-
ally respecting the rules that had already been laid down.
At length Mr. HARVEY stood up, and produced a written
paper, in which, he said, he had laid down the principles on
which he thought they ought to act, drawn from the decisions
given. Mr. HARVEY read the first paragraph of his rules,
to which Mr. WRIGIIT responded, ' I dissent from that; I
won't be bound by those rules." This was followed by loud
applause from the body of the court. Mr. H ARVEY said he
had then no more to say.
Mr. WRIGHT said there had not been proper courtesy
shown to him. If the paper had been read to him first, per-
haps that would not have happened. They had tried before
to get rid of him by a side wind; but they should not get rid
of him, he promised them. He would sit there and decide.
(Loud applause.)
The MAYOR said he must have misunderstood the words
uttered by Mr. Wright. Mr. WRIGHT said " they had en-
deavoured to get rid of him by a side wind." Did Mr.
Wright mean to imply that he (the Mayor) had been a party
to any such attempt?
Mr. WRIGHT said he did not mean the words to apply to
the Mayor at all.
Here the conversation was continued between Mr. Wright
and Mr. Harvey, and Mr. Wright, in a low tone, and shortly
after the business was resumed.
Mr. John Coglan, one of the Protector Society, was brought
under examination, and, as in the course of his testimony,
he displayed some knowledge of that body. Mr. ILtuvav,
as he was leaving the witness-box, said he should like, as
much as had arisen about this society, to know something
more about it. The witness was therefore, recalled, and in
reply to Mr. Harvey stated, that the members paid weekly
sums of money as they could afford. It was like a benefit
society. It was founded about twelve months ago. If the
poor people who belonged to it were short of money, they
could borrow it from this society. It was just the same as
a benefit society.

Mr. PINNINGTON.—IS it for the relief of the siek ?
Mr. WILKINS said he should like, if the intont;im were to
gain information, to ask a great many question of this wit-

Mr. HARNEY said, he should certainly wish it himself.
The court permitted Mr. Wilkins to examine. The wit-
ness said, the society had no printed rules. He could not
say whether it was enrolled according to law. It was under
the management of different secretaries. Its objects were to

enable poor man to pay their rates, and become burgesses,
He (witness) had taken out about £7 for different people,
He had himself paid in about £2 75., out of his own pocket

He had no vouchers for his money

but the books would

show his payments. There was a fund belonging to the
society. He had known his neighbours to pay small dona-
tions to it. He did not know of any gentleman having con-
tributed to it. Had seen Mr. Ronson at the meeting, and
believed he was a barrister. .

Mr. WlLKlNs.—Suppose I, as a tory, were to subscribe,
would the society allow me, as a tory, to draw money to pay
my rates, if I could not pay them myself?
Witness.—l won't answer any more questions.
Here ensued a great uproar of cheering, hissing, and cla-
mour. The mayor had done his utmost to suppress their
demonstrations, having absolutely forbidden them as unbe-
coming ; having also requested the counsel on both sides not
, e
1 ..-e.y to excite party feeling, to say anythingand the consta-
bles to put out of court any one who should be seen infring-
ing the rule which he had laid down. His worship now
ordered a person to he put out who had uttered a loud cry
upon hearing the reply above recorded.
Mr. Coglan was about to retire, when Mr. JAN es requested
that he might be allowed to ask him a few questions. Ile
elicited nothing material, except that the parties who " bor-
rowed money" from Ihe society undertook to repay it, and
that when they had money advanced to them they were
required to become members.
Mr. BRETIIERTON said, if Mr. Wilkins wished to put any
questions relative to the Protector Society, he knew all about
that association, and was ready to answer.
Mr. WirAcrNs said, he would rather continue his examina-
tion of that witness.
This was acceded to, and the witness was told that lie must
answer the learned gentleman's question. He believed a
poor man would not be admitted to the society if he were a
conservative. He did not know what the funds of the so-
ciety were. The payments were made either weekly or
monthly. He did not know of any collections being made
on Sundays, "at present." He had known them to be
made. Not at the Catholic Chapel, but at the neighbours'
houses. He did not know that Mr. O'Connell subscribed.
By Mr. Harvey—The society was not confined to Irish-
men, but it was confined to reformers.

Mr. BRETRERTON repeated his offer.
Mr. WRIGHT said they had nothing to do with the sub-
ject of the Protector Society.
Mr. WILKINs said he should wish very much to get what
information he could from Mr. Bretherton, but he should
take a great deal of time if he did so.
The MAYOR thought it would be best if Mr. Wilkins
wished to question Mr. Bretherton, to go on then with the
regular business, and take that after eight o'clock.
Mr. WILRINS.—No ? upon my word I will not.
Here the subject dropped. Subsequently a Mr. Pickering
was called to speak to the nature of some premises, in respect
to which, a person claimed a qualification.
Mr. JAMES—In the cross-examination of this person, who
is a publican in Vauxhall-road, elicited from him, that he had
furnished Robert Jackson, a tenant of his, with money to
pay his rates. Much applause and uproar followed this an-
nouncement, upon which the Mayor declared, that he would
dismiss every officer in the court upon the spot, if they did
not do their duty, and remove those who were guilty of such
unseemly demonstrations in a court of deliberation. Mr.

- -
Superintendent Tyrrell went to a person whom he had seen
clapping his hands, and wished to remove him. Some alter-
cation ensued, and the Mayor, on hearing that the superin-
tendent had seen the gentlemen clap his hands, requested
that the latter might be removed. The gentleman denied
that he had acted as stated, but he immediately withdrew.
Mr. James continued his examination of Mr. Pickering, who,
on being pressed with some severity, became much heated.
Mr. Wilkins interposed, on what he presumed were severe
araignments of the veracity of the witness, and some warm
words passed between the learned gentlemen, which, as is
usual in such cases, appeared to be forgotten as soon as ut-
tered. We have not space for the whole of Mr. Pickering's
cross-examination, hut the facts elicited were, in substance,
as follows :
Witness had gone round the town and collected money to
pay the taxes of poor men. He gave the money to his Wife.
He did not give any of it to any one else. He did not know
what had become of it. He could not say she had it now.
He inferred that it had been used for the payment of rates,
for he had seen that the rates of persons were paid who could
not pay them for themselves.
Mr. JAMES.—Who did you collect it from ?
Witness.—From different people.
Mr. JAMES.—How much did you collect?
Witness.—l won't tell you.
Here there was another hubbub, which however quickly
subsided.
Mr. JAMES said he would have an tiswer, and the witness
protested that he would not tell, saying, " You won't get it
out of me if you question me from this time till to-morrow
uight. This Mr. James deemed impertinent which the wit-
ness took in high dudgeon. In reply to another question,
Mr. Pickering said he got the money from different gentle-
men. Mr. James wished to know their names, to which the
witness replied flatly, " I won't tell you!"
Mr. Wil.K.INs said, after this he should ask from any wit-
ness whatever questions he pleased ; and instead of the list
being concluded in fourteen days, it would not be finished in
twice fourteen days.
The court adjourned at eight o'clock to nine this morning.
The MAYOR said, he hoped some arrangement would be
come to by the opposing parties for abbreviating the business,
otherwise they were merely losing labour, for the whole list
would be disfranchised..

WEDNESDAY.
AN OBSTINATE PRECURSOR.
James M'Amley, housekeeper, Chisenhale_street, was ob-
jected to by the conservatives. The voter was a labourer
subject to the payment of rates. Borrowed, the money to pay
his rates from a person named ,1%1 Intee, who lived in Rich-
mond-row. Did not know M lntee ; got the money from
him on the 31st August; could not tell what M'lntee did;
went along with a neighbour ; paid some of the money last
night to the man who gave it to him on the 31st August.
Mr. WILKINS.—Upon your oath did you pay the money
to Mr. M'lntee ?
Witness.—l paid it on the same table I got it from.
Mr. HARvtv.—You inu“ be aware that in former cases