The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-02-19 00:00:00

THE PROTECTOR SOCIETY.

We have been favoured with a copy of the second edition
of Mr. Bretherton's " Letter to Robert 'Wharton, Esq."
on this question, and are thereby induced to recur to a sub-
ject which we have not recently had occasion to advert to.
There are forty-eight goodly pages to this pamphlet; but as
we may suppose, they are not all strictly confined to the
material issue. We 'have rather admired, indeed, how the
learned author could write so much, and say so little to the
purpose, or to that which we, in our simplicity perhaps, con-
sider such. In this respect your men who have studied in
special pleaders' offices enjoy a vast superiority over the rest
of the community, the only drawback from which is, that
having become habituated to dealing largely in words, they
are sometimes apt to mistake the sign for the thing
signified, and lose sight of the substance, while they
set an excessive value upon the mere letter of an argument.
We have followed Mr. Bretherton in all his meanderings on
the question before us ; but we cannot give him credit for
having done the slightest damage to the judgment of the re-
vising barristers—so far from it that we protest we are now
more fully convinced of the soundness and perfect correctness
of that decision, and we impute this to the palpable deficiency
and unsoundness of the case.

The judgment of the Revision Court is supported, in our
view, by the plain intendment of the Reform Act, and by legal
decisions, so far as there are legal decisions applicable to the
point. The case of the Queen v. Bridgnorth is a strong one.
In that case the mayor of Bridgnorth had refused to insert
the names of seventy-eight persons in the burgess list on the
ground that they had not paid their rates, or that their rates
had not been paid with money drawn from their own re-
sources. Twenty-six out of the seventy-eight had on former
occasions been excused payment of rates on account of po-
verty, and many had been in receipt of parish relief. Other
parties came forward and paid the rates of these paupers,
but the mayor rejected them, and the Court of Queen's Bench
decided that the mayor did right. This caw was relied upon
by the revising barristers in ruling cases analogous, or very
pearly so here, and the objectors have not been able to get
over it ; nor will they whilst there is a concurrence between
common sense and law in settling the question.
It is a maxim of our old law-writers that he who sticks at
the letter, sticks at the mere rind—qui heret in lilera, heret
in certice—in performinng the office of a legal interpreter.
Let us abide by the maxim here, and looking at the true in-
tent and spirit of the Reform Act, we shall see that the deci-
sion of the Revision Court is completely in harmony with it.
The requirements of the 27th section are fourfold—occu-
pancy, residency, rating, and paying of rates—and these re-
quirements, we suppose it will be granted, it was meant
should be fairly and bona fide satisfied. They are obviously,
taken altogether, a property qualification, and nothing more
or less. It is required that the person claiming the tranchise
shall occupy premises of not less than £lO yearly value, and
that he shall have paid the rates due in respect thereof. Let
him fail to substantiate either or both of these principal con-
ditions, and his claim to registration falls instantly to the
ground. It is not enough that he should show a sufficiency
of value in his holding; he must also prove that he is him-
self in a condition to occupy it, by having discharged its
.rated liabilities. If the legislature make property the test
of qualification, as it has done here, we have a right to see
that the condition of each individual claimant is answerable
thereto. Occupation of premises of the required value does
not in itself suffice ; for the occupier, if unable to pay the
rates chargeable in respect thereof, is clearly deficient in
property with reference to the statutory standard. The suf-
ficiency of the individual is the point mainly sought to be
determined, and this is the mode of ascertaining it which
the statute prescribes.
The foregoing propositions are obvious and indisputable,
and being conceded, enable us to make short work with the
doctrines propounded. The proposition which he under-
takes to maintain is—" that the payment of rates by the party
himself with borrowed money, whether repaid or not, is such
a payment, supposing all other qualifications to he possessed,
as to entitle a party so paying to be registered under the 27th
sec. of the Reform Act, and consequently entitles him to a
vote." Now we appeal to common sense if this proposition
be • not manifestly and grossly inconsistent with the obvious
intent of the act ? This is an attempt completely to NULLIFY
that part of it which refers to the payment of rates—to set it
aside altogether, and to extend the elective franchise to a
class of claimants not contemplated by the legislature—
namely, those who occupy merely, but may not be asked as
to their ability fairly to do so. We submit, however, that
this is not law, but the violation of it—not the statute,
2d Wm. IV. ch. 45; but a new act, agreed to by parties of
Whose legislative authority we have yet to be made cognizant.
• Mr. Bretherton cites the following rules laid down by the
revising barristers on the subject of rates and their payment,
and states that he dissents from the two last, " so far as to
the requiring payment, or the payment being in any way
affected by the borrowing money for the purpose." The rules
are as follow :

Ist. " That if money was given to a party to pay his rates,
it was a good payment."
2d. " That if a third party paid without having any com-
munication with the party claiming a vote it was a bad pay-
ment."

3d.
," That if a voter borrowed money and with it paid his
rates; and on or before the 20th of July, repaid the money so
borrowed, it was also a good payment."
• 4th. " That if a party borrowed money for the express
purpose of paying his rates, and did not on or before the 20th
of July; repay such money, it was a bad payment for the pur-
pose of obtaining the franchise."
These four rules might be reduced to one ; but all of them
are good and proper, because they harmonise with the spirit
of the 27th section of the act; they are illustrations of
eases when a party does, and when he does not, give evidence
of sufficiency such as that section contemplated. They are
ounded in common sense, and require no aids of commen-
ary or paraphrase to defend them. The object of Mr.
Bretherton, and the party for whom he acts, is to enfranchise
paupers—men who though in possession of £lO holdings,
are unable to pay their rates. That is their simple object,
and if they could make the statute bend to their purpose, it
would, no doubt, be vastly agreeable, but they have found it
a little too tough for their powers ; and their advocate has
not in the least improved their case by this publication.
We have all heard of the Irish feat of driving a coach and

six through an Act of Parliament ; but if Mr. Bretherton, or
any other champion of the Protector Society, should esta-
blish, that where the Reform Act declares that a man shall
pay his rates—it does not mean that he shall be able to do
so, and that he may discharge the amount with money not
his own—money borrowed for the occasion, and which he is
not in a condition to repay—or money stolen (!) Why then
we should say that Mr. Bretherton, or any other such
champion, had far exceeded that feat.
We have much more to say on this subject ; but we for-
bear for the present.

TOWN

MISSION

The annual meeting of the Town Mission was held at the
Music Hall, Bold-street, at half-past six o'clock, on Tues-
day evening, and was very numerously attended—John Crop-
per, Esq., in the chair.
Mr. JONES, the secretary, read the report. It was of a
satisfactory character. It stated that the number of agents
had been increased, within the year, to nineteen, and, al-
though the state of the funds, at the commencement of the
previous year, was such as to give rise to apprehension that
the society might be seriously limited in its operations, yet
that the appeals to the Christian public had produced so
large a sum as to leave a balance in the treasurer's hands of
£177 Ils. The income of the year had amounted to £l5OO,
and the total expenditure to £1361. in the course of the
next six months a sum of £l5O would be required to pay the
salaries of the agents. It was, therefore, hoped that the
prosperity of the society would not induce the public to sup-
pose that it was in immediate want of money. The report
proceeded, at considerable length, to detail the beneficial
operations of the society in rescuing the spiritually destitute
from the error of their ways, and in contributing to the tem-
poral necessities of the poor.
The Rev. JAMES LISTER moved, and the Rev. WILLIAM
BEVAN seconded, the adoption of the report.
The Rev. Dr. BTRTII proposed the second resolution. " His
address was almost entirely devoted to a defence of himself,
as a minister of the Church of England, in appearing upon
the platform and advocating the interests of the society. Ile
said he had received an anonymous letter, in which the writer
charged him with inconsistency in coming forward with
ranters, methodists, and dissenters belonging to several de-
nominations, to uphold such a society as the present, inas-
much as he had, on a former occasion, called dissent a
"monstrous evil," and must be aware of the fact that when
dissenters visited the houses of members of the Church of
England, they did so for the purpose of prevailing on them
to embrace the form of worship in use among one or other
of their own sects. In reply to the charge of inconsistency,
the Doctor stated it to be his firm conviction that there was
no pure church on earth—that he doubted much whether
there ever would, and that, as he looked upon the several
classes of sectarians to be his brethren in the ministry, he was
free from the charge of inconsistency in aiding them, to ad-
vance the religion of their divine Lord and Master upon
earth. He had been himself born and bred a dissenter, but
from conviction he had embraced the doctrines of the Churchi
of England, and that conviction had grown with his growth
and strengthened with his strength. He admitted baying
called dissent a "monstrous evil, and he doubted not but
his friend Mr. Lister, who was as sturdy a dissenter as could be
found, would call the Church of England a " monstrous evil,"
but that he would hesitate before he called the Christianity of
the Church of England by such an appellation. He had
no objection to the dissenters endeavouring to make Chris-
tians of such members of the Church of England as the
ministers of that church found it impossible to do, by
preaching and exhortation ; and he could only say that if the
methodists, as was asserted by his correspondent, made it
their practice to prevail upon church protestants to go to their
places of worship, it was an example to ministers of the
church of England to "go and do likewise. This anony-
mous correspondent, whose education appeared to he of no
ordinary character, had further informed him by way of
threat, that if he (Dr. Byrth) came to the present meeting,
he would run the risk of losing his popularity in Liverpool ;
but if this should so turn out, he could only say, so much the
worse for Liverpool—so much the worse that such a fell spirit
of bigotry should be found to exist among any portion of her
inhabitants: He admitted that he was not indifferent to public
opinion, because his profession had a right to value, and if
possible, to correct it when wrong ; but he greatly feared
that the motives which had actuated him to appear at the
meeting would be misunderstood by some, and misrepre-
sented by more. lie regretted to see such an illiberal spirit
manifested by his correspondent, who, like many other pro-
testants, were unknowingly papists in principle. After some
further remarks on this head, he concluded by saving that he
felt it an.honour to be solicited to take apart in the proceed-
in
ougs of the meeting, and that he should feel it an equal hon-
r • to
course
0M:1e amongst them on future occasions. In the
The his
observations he was warmly applauded.
Dr. Byrth. Mr. HAY-seconded the resolution proposed by
The Rev. C. M• BIRRELL proposed, and the Rev. Mr.
BEAumoNT seconded, the third resolution.
EDWARD
seconded the Esq. proposed, and Dr. RAFFLES
four"
was appointed for tt1212
Er;esolution ; after which a committee
to the chairman, ancf ensuing year, thanks were returned
the meeting separated.