The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-05-18 00:00:00

THE NEW REGISTRATION HMI

The resolutions of the special committee were considered
separately. Those passed at the meeting of the 9th March
were first submitted.

The first resolution was for confining objectors to the
grounds put forward by them as the grouns of objection. It
was agreed to.
The second resolution gave a discretionary power to the
court to award costs and compensation to an amount not ex-
ceeding .£lO for loss of time, against any party whose ground
of objection, or grounds of objection, or any of them, should
be deemed frivolous or vexatious : the costs to be recovered
by distress or sale.
Mr. BtaxErr moved, that the words " ground of objec-

on," and the words " or any of them," be omitted
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE seconded the motion.

The council divided, when there appeared for Mr. Bir-
kett's motion 17, against it 29, majority 12.
Mr. H. HORNBY expressed a strong opinion that the sum
of £lO was too much. He moved that it be 40s.
Mr. COOPER seconded the motion.

Mr. EVANS proposed that the sum be £5.
On going to the vote, the proposition of Mr. Hornby was
st, and that of Mr. Evans carried.

Mr. ROBINSON proposed that any person whose objection
was found frivolous and vexatious, and who was unable to
pay the costs, should be disfranchised, and Mr. JOHN SAIITH
moved, that in lieu of that the offender should be subjected
to seven days' imprisonment; but, on the representation by
the TOWN-CLERK, that Parliament would not be likely to
sanction such introductions, both motions were ultimately
withdrawn.

Mr. ButKarr objected to the Mayor sitting in the court
for the revision of the lists, as it might happen that he might
revise the very lists under which he would seek to be re-
elected. He moved, therefore, that it should be a recom-
mendation to the promoters of the bill to introduce a clause,
enacting that, in future, the presiding officer of the Revision
Court be a barrister of not less than seven years' standing,
and not being a resident in or within 20 miles of the town.
Mr. HODGSON seconded the resolution. As Coming events
cast their shadows before, it was easy to see that his party
would soon be in power, and, therefore, they might give him
credit for perfect disinterestedness in wishing to remove the
power from the Mayor. He must be blind who did not per-
ceive, that what he mentioned was coming to pass, and_ he

must be doubly blind who did not see how those who bad
been in power had acted.
Mr. EARLE wondered that persons who were filled with

such expectations should so anxiously desire this alteration,
for it certainly looked as if they were afraid that some of
those who were coming in would not act honestly.
Mr. EVANS would be no party to casting such a slur as
_

hat which was attempted to be cast upon the whole corn-
nunity. The election of a gentleman to be Mayor was a
est of his honour, and if they were to carry out the principle
sere introduced, they ought not to have one of their maris-
rates a Liverpool man. The Mayor was the proper person
of all others to preside in the Revison Court. All eyes were
tpon him ; he was acquainted with the community; and it
vas most likely that the same frauds would not be attempted
tpon him that would upon a barrister. Mr. Hodgson seemed
o be occupied with nothing but party considerations.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE said he had no excessive confi-
lence in barristers of seven years' standing, and he wished
he Council to do its own business as much as possible. He
bought the Mayor was the most proper person.
Mr. BLACKBURN expressed an opinion, that the Mayor,
If whatever party, would do his duty honestly. He chal-
enged the party to produce a single instance of a Mayor
been suspected of acting unfairly, which was more

ban could be said of revising barristers;ior they had acted
nost unfairly.
Mr, HENRY_LAWRENCE defended the barristers, but

agreed that the Mayor was the most proper person to preside.
Several members having spoken against Mr. Birkett's
motion,

The Council divided, when there appeared for Mr. Bir-
kett's motion, 5 ; against it, 39 ; majority, 34.
The third resolution was then read, to the effect, that
every person objecting to more than six persons shall de-
posit for each case, beginning with the first, the sum of 405.,
to abide the event of any order of the court as to costs and
compensation.

Mr. CASE, seconded by Mr. BENN, moved, that the
•esolution be passed.
Mr. COOPER, seconded by Mr. H. LAWRENCE, moved,
hat, in every case, the person deposit the sum of ss.
Mr. CASE objected to the alteration. He thought the

sum named was by no means too much, as the resolution
wasintended to stop the evil so much complained of, which
was that of single individuals objecting to masses.
Mr. HORNBY said, the resolution was intended to super-
sede the provision in the 7th section of the general bill for

requiring a deposit of 2s. 6d, for each objection. '
Mr. BLACKBURN moved, that the resolution should be
altered to a provision, that any one objecting to more than
two persons in the list should deposit 20s. for each.
Mr. H. LAWRENCE said, he felt inclined to agree to Mr.
Blackburn's proposal as better than that which he had
seconded.

Mr. Cooper withdrew his motion, and that of Mr. Black-
burn was agreed to.

The fourth resolution, for applying costs to frivolous and
vexatious claims to go to the Borough Fund, and the fifth,
for declaring any objection or claim not supported by the
appearance of the party or his agent frivolous and vexatious,
were agreed to.

Some formal resolutions for further amendtnents, passed
at a meeting of the committee held on the 20th April, were
agreed to. The Town-clerk altered the resolution in the
19th section of the bill, so as to ensure that no quibble
could arise as to the meaning of the clause, which some
members feared might be construed as giving power to out-
going aldermen to vote for their successors.
PAYMENTS OF PAROCHIAL RATES.

Mr. EARLE wished to know if something could not be in-
troduced into the bill to prevent the clerks in the Parish-
offices from receiving rates from persons without the know-
ledge of the parties owing such rates. He had sat, as a
magistrate, hearing appeals, and he found that many of the
poor people who appealed cnew nothing of the rates of the
preceding year having been paid.
Mr. SHIEL said, he objected to any new subject being en-
tered upon. The business upon which they had met was
closed._ (" No, no !" from Mr. Birkett.)
_ -

The TOWN-CLERK said, that no clause to remedy what Mr.
Earle complained of could be introduced. It was impossible
to say that a clerk should not receive money that was owing
when it was tendered.

Mr. BißicErr said, he had called out " No, no !" when
Mr. Shiel was speaking of the business being finished, be-

cause he had something to bring forward. -
Mr. HARBORD said, the 15th clause of the bill, which
enacted, that persons having more than one qualification
should make their selection beforehand, affected him person-
ally, and he should wish to have it altered. He had a greater
number of qualifications than any man in Liverpool, and this
clause would deprive him of his privileges. All his qualifi-
cations except one might be struck off.
The MAYOR : That is only in default of your making a se-
lection for yourself. The bill provides, that those who do
not make such selection are to have it made for them by the
Mayor and revising assessors.

Mr. EARLE : I stand in a similar position to Mr. Har-
bord, and I say I shall be most happy to see the clause
carried.

The TOWN-CLERK : The bill will only have the effect of
compelling individuals to do that which, by the present act,
they were morally bound to do.

Mr. MELLOR said the clause was one of the ,very best i❑
the bill, for it would do away with all that finessing which
had been practised to such an extent at municipal elections.
Mr. HARBORD, seconded by Mr. JOHN SMITH, moved,
that the Town-clerk be instructed to endeavour to induce
the Legislature to alter or ex punge the clause alluded to.
Mr. BIRKETT, amid loud cries of " Adjourn !" moved,
that an endeavour should be made to insert a clause giving
the old freemen the right of voting at municipal elections.
There was great confusion at this moment. It being close
upon four o'clock, most of the members had risen and were
moving towards the door. The MAYOR begged them to
remain, and Mr. BIRKETT claimed a hearing. The MAYOR
said, he had received a notice to call a Special Council. Mr.
BIRKETT said, as his measure was very important, and as he
did not like to bring it before such a scanty council as that,
he would bring it before the Special Council.
RE-CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSITION FOR OPPOSING
THE INLAND WAREHOUSING BILL.
The MAYOR read the following, saying, it was the com-
munication to which he had alluded
" The undersigned request the Mayor to call a meeting of
the Council, to consider and determitie 25 to the proceedings
to be taken in opposition to the Inland bonding Bill, parti-
cularly in respect to the petition 'to the Legislature in
the
name Of the Council, and the expense to be incurreq_l4x.am
Corporatimi."—(Signed•Eyre Evans, Robert Ben n, :as
Thornhill, Daniel Mather, Thomas Morecroft, Thomas
Blackburn, and Sheil.)—Adjourned to Wednesday.

lie said, his intention to go at length into the origin of the
Seamen's Hospital Fund, but Sir Joshua having outstepped
him so ably in that respect, he should be pardoned from en-
tering upon the task. The speaker then referred to the
report, briefly commenting upon it as he proceeded, and sat
down amid_twplause.

Mr. T. M. GLADSTONE said the second resolution had
been confided to his care, in consequence, he was sorry to
say, of the absence of their respected townsman, Mr. Aikin,
whose advocacy of seamen's claims was so well known and
so justiyappreciated in Liverpool. (Hear, hear.) He could
wish to have seen the meeting more numerously attended,
but at the same time be was glad to have that opportunity
of advocating the good and well-being of those who were so
interesting a class of her majesty's subjects—the British sea-
men. (Cheers.) As it was the case of the sick, the widow,
and the children, be was sure there was no ground that a
public man of any kind, however humble he might be, could
occupy with greater satisfaction to himself and the commu-
nity than the present. It was not for him to go into details,
that, having been done by Sir Joshua Walmsley ; but taking
the groundwork of the report of the committee of the House
of Commons, he would say that they could not justly act on
that report unless they could bring forward better evidence
in favour of a change in the management of the funds, as re-
spected Liverpool, than they had hitherto done. It was ra-
ther surprising, after the present principle had been acted
upon for so long a period of time, and after Liverpool had
been taking care of itself, merely applying tothe central board
iin London n a ministerial capacity, that any change should
be thought advisable. Where the funds had been misapplied
or distributed wastefully, it was quite right some change
should be effected ; but where the system had been properly
worked, matters should not be disturbed. In London itself
the parties had exceeded their income to the extent of £25,000,
a fact which showed that that care was not evinced which
ought to have existed. He defied any one to charge the Li-
verpool trustees with indiscretion in the management of the
funds. Men better qualified to discharge the duty imposed
upon them it was impossible to find. (Hear, hear.) It ap-
peared by one of the last clauses in the report, that an im-
mediate bringing in of the bill No parliament was not re-

commended. It appeared, therefore, that the partieswere
afraid they should do more harm than good by effecting a
change, and that. it was a feeling of this kind had induced
them to tell the legislature to pause. Their whole report,
however, went to say, that London was to be the central
point to hold the reins, and that the provincial communities
were not to govern themselves

►e was a common say

ing in France that Paris was all France ; and according to
certain parties in England, London was to be all England.
(Hear, and laughter.)

Mr. CLINT seconded the resolution proposed by
Gladstone.

Mr. SPENCE proposed the third resolution. The question,
in his opinion, required no great argument, it being one of

common sense

Mr. JOHNSON seconded the third resolution.
Mr. YATES proposed the fourth resolution, and in doing
so addressed some cautionary observations to tl
Mr. MELLOR seconded the fourth resolution.
The two other resolutions were moved and seconded by
the gentlemen to which their names are attached, after
which thanks were voted to the mayor, and the meeting se-
parated at two o'clock

meetir