The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-04-21 00:00:00

big that Me, Whitty wsa moon:Ale far the mod in ques.
tion ; nevertheless, as Mr. W hitty bad stated that he had no knowledge, and was not responsible for the reports entered
in the report book, he (Mr. Procter) had no hesitation at all
in withdrawing that part. of his observations which charged
him with putting forward Cunningham to make a report to
the Watch Committee in preference to Dutton. This he
thought but justice to Mr. Whitty, as well as due to his own
character; but he could not withdraw the facts he had
brought before the council, which were recorded in that
book, upon evidence. The hooks were there to be read. He
said he could not withdraw the facts he had brought before
the council, which Mr. Whitty had been pleased to charac-
terise as " exactly the reverse." The simple facts were be-
fore the council and the public, for their judgment. He had
made no charge against Mr. Whitty of bringing forward
Cunningham to lay an information in preference to Dutton,
for the purpose of securing a conviction at all risks ; he had
made no charge against Mr. Whitty of encouraging perjury
and subornation, by bringing forward one man to establish
a conviction when it should have been another, though that
was put forward by Mr. Rushton, countenanced by Mr.
Whitty, and circulated in many of the papers. The case to
which he (Mr. Procter) had referred, came before the Watch
Committee, where the witnesses were not examined upon
oath, and it was not at all before the magistrates, as the
public had been led to believe. He thought, therefore, that
the imputation put forward by Mr. Rushton was not well
founded ; and he called upon the council either to approve
or disapprove of this, as foul an imputation, according to his
way of thinking, short of perjury itself, ever conceived by
any man. That was his feeling with regard to the imputa-
tion. Ever since he had had" a seat in the council he had
endeavoured to do his duty honestly and impartially, and he
challenged all the council assembled, or the head constable,
to produce one single instance where he had neglected his
duty, where he had. exhibited either favour or partiality, or
where he had not discharged his duty, both in efficiency and
attendance. If he had spoken evil, let them bear witness of
the evil, but do not let his character be publicly aspersed by
the officers of the corporation. He thought a courteous
sense of duty ought to have prompted Mr. Rushton to have
taken a different course to that which he had thought proper
to adopt; the council, however, would judge whether he was
worthy of the imputation cast upon him. Ile thought be was
not ; he felt he was not ; the council must be the judge. He
had now only to thank that part of the press which had sus-
pended its judgment till the whole case was before it, and the
council, for the courtesy which they had heard him ; and
with this remark he left the matter entirely in their hands.
Mr. PLATT begged to make a few observations upon this
business. As a member of the Watch Committee, he begged
to say that the power to send officers in plain clothes to en-
trap publicans was an error. That power, he always thought,
should emanate from the Watch Committee. (No, no.)
The MAYOR said that was a subject which must not be
entered into now. The opportunity had been afforded only
to Mr. Procter, to enable him to make an explanation.
Mr. PLATT, in confiation, said he' was present at the
Watch Committee when' part of the enquiry alluded to was
made; and he begged to say that thesofficers—
. Mr. HORNET said that the subject which Mr. Platt men-
tioned was quite out of order.
Mr. ISAAC HOLMES considered the credit of the officer
Dutton affected by the statement that out of nine informa-
tions he had supported only four or five. lie had seen
Dutton, who himself had told him he was not aware of hav-
ing failed in a single case. In one case; however, he had laid
an information against a publican, a widow, who had a child
lying dead in the house at the time the offence was com-
mitted, and—
The MAYOR. said it was his duty to interrupt Mr. Holmes.
Mr. ISAAC Ilor.stEs said there hadibeen an aspersion on
the character of Dutton, who was a poor man—
The MAvott could not allow Mr. Holmes to take his duty
from him, nor would he. He (the Mayor) hoped he should
'not asperse the character of a poor man or a rich man either ;
but now they were getting into the discussion of this man's
character, which was not the subject before the council.
saidr. IsA HoLuEs.—l merely wished to tate it was
Mhe hadAc failed in three or four informations sand he says
he—

The MAYOR.—Yon are now gOing on with the same thir
again.

Mr. ISAAC HOLMES.—He only failed in one case, where
a poor widow had a child dead in the house, and the stipen-
diary magistrate in consequence set it aside.
The MAYOR.-1 will thank you to sit down, sir.
Mr. EARLE wished to rise itt explanation of something
which occurred at the last council. It had been stated that
those gentlemen engaged in a particular business ought not
to be allowed to sit upon the bench. liftwould request th Deputy Town-clerk to read two sections of die act of par-
e
liament, and a third, and then he would enter into a short
explanation upon the subject.
The MAYOR said, if it was the pleasure of the council Mr.
Earle's justification might be heard, but not otherwise.
Mr. ASPINALL remarked that if they were going to hear
one t'aey must hear the whole.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE.—It is quite beside the question.
Mr. BUSHELL did not think it was a matter that could
now be entered into, whether gentlemen were qualified for
the bench.
Mr. EARLE replied that if it was not done on this occa-
sion he would put a notice upon the books : he was resolved
of that. He considered that an act of Parliament which
would be read, showed in a very great measure the necessity
for the council preventing the gentleman he (Mr Earle) had
mentioned 'from sitting on the Watch Committee. It was
on that ground only that he took the matter up. He had
been accused of being personal on the last occasion: he at-
tacked nobody personally : he contended against that • but
who did use personalities? The Chairman of the Watch
Committee, and Mr. Parker.
The MAYOR said he really must interrupt Mr. Earle, for
he was out of order.
Mr. EARLE,.—Why, then, does he talk about my trade
and his trade, and such other stuff ? Who cares anything
about his trade, or anything else?
Mr. PARKER.—Mr. Mayor, I hope you'll allow me to re-
ply to the personal attack of the worthy alderman upon me ?
The MAYOR.—It is out of order ;if I allow one I must
allow all, and we shall be here all day.
Mr. 13LacKnun NE.—INIr. Mayor, will'you be kind enough
to state what is the question before the council?
The MAYO-IL—That is more than I can tell you ; the secret
has yet to come out, and I shall be glad to hear it.
Mr. PROCTER.—My statements are before the council;
and the question is, are the council satisfied that my state-
ments are correct, or that Mr. Rushton's imputations are
correct? That's the question.
The MAYOR.—The council have heard your explanation,
and it rests now with them; if they choose to let,the matter
rest where it is they have a right to do so, or to pursue any
other course.
Mr. PARKER..—I wish, Mr. Mayor, to say a few words in
reply to what has fallen from Mr. Earle.
The MAYOR.--I think you had better not, as Mr. Earle
says he will put a notice upon the books. The subject has
been fully discussed, and there is no imputation upon you.
Mr. PARKER,—None whatever. Of course if Mr. Earle
talks about attacking personally--
The MAYOR.—If Mr. Earle attacks you, you shall have
ample opportunity to defend yourself.
Mr. HORNET said there was only one observation which
he thought it necessary to make with regard to Mr. Procter's
statement. So far as he understood Mr. Rushton's proceed-
ings in relation to the subject, he thought that Mr. Rushton
bad only discharged a duty which he was bound to discharge
to the town. When be saw the report of the proceedings at
the last council he thought it his duty to send for the head
constable, merely to give him an opportunity of refuting the
grave charge made upon him in that report. With regard to
Mr. Procter's statement, the council ought to bear in mind
that the only subject they had properly laid before them was
that relating to the observations made by Mr. Procter at the
last council, in which he stated that a person named Cunning-
ham had been preferred by the head constable to bring a
charge when one of the name of Dalton was the proper per-
son to have done. It must strike every member of the
council, and it had struck him (Mr. Hornby) as most ex-
traordinary, that when this matter came to be investigated
the only constable against whom there could by any ingenuity
be found anything to say was Dutton, the man who had not
been preferred. Cunningham, who many had been led to
believe, had been unjustly preferred by the head constable,
was a man whose character stood as high as any officer in the
police force. The
,gravamen of Mr. Procter's charge was in
making use of the word because—
Mr. PROCTER.—I did not make use of that word.
Mr. HORNBY said, that so far as he could recollect, that
word was used. Still, that word was reported, and so far as'
Mr. Whitty's character was concerned it was
used.
Mr. PROCTER.—I never used it.
Mr. EARLE.—Refer to the reporters.
Mr. HORNBY, in continuation, m
said, it wasthat
Cunningham was preferred because he had oughtsb so any
informations and sustained them all, and the other constable
bad not sustained so many. What other inference could any
body draw, upon hearing this statement, except that the head
constable had selected a man who was ready to swear any-
thing ? He (Mr. Hornby) was exceedingly happy to hear
Mr. Procter state he had no such intention ertainly be
had been most unhappy in the use of his language; and no-
thing, he (Mr. Hornby) was sure, could be said against the
stipendiary magistrate for the course he had taken. He had
thought it necessary to make these observations, because,
when a charge was made against a public functionary in Mr.
Rushton's situation, it was important he should not be mis-
understood.
Mr. James LAWRENCE said, it would now probably be
thought requisite that he should give some explanation. of
what he had said at the last meeting with reference to these
men being proper characters. He certainly did consider
Dutton an improper person.--
The MAYOR said, he had already stopped Mr. Holmes on
the subject of Dutton's character, and he must stop Mr.
Lawrence.
Mr. JAMES LAWRENCE was merely explaining what he
had already said. With regard to Cunningham he would
admit his was an excellent character; but he had been led to
the observation he made that the other was an improper man
in consequence of his coming before the committee and dis-
tinctly stating, in the presence of seven gentlemen, that lie
asked the servant, who admitted him
into the house for
drink. When he was called in. or re-e
ch ,he
fold tlieni triat Tie litineVer titterfatiny suxamination expressionthen
The MAYOR.—DO I understand that you are complaining
of some mis-report of your speech ?
Mr. JAMES LAWRENCE.--No; lam justifying what I
then said.
The M axon.--Then that will not do now.
Mr. JAMES LAWRENCE.—Mr. Hornby was allowed to
say what he has, and I--
The MAYOR.-4 really cannot allow you. If you have a.
complaint to make' of the statements which have appeared
and gone forth of your speech, I think the council will pro-
bably afford you an opportunity of explaining ; but any •us-
tification of what you said then, should have been madej
at
the time, and not now.
Mr. BIRKETT.—The complaint is, Mr. Mayor, that you
allowed Mr. Hornby to make a statement.
The MAYOR.—Mr. Hornby was addressing himself to the
subject before the council, which is connected immediately
with the effect of Mr. Procter's speech. There is a marked
distinction between the two; and therefore I cannot all
any member of the council to justify what he has said beforeow
but with the permission of the council.
Mr. JAMES LAWRENCE.—It has gone forth to the public
that I have made a statement when I have not made it.
The MAYOR.—Then you must give notice. One member
of the council I have already stopped nn the same ds,
and he has given notice. Give notice, otherwise wegrsall be
kept here all day.
Mr. BLACKBURN said Mr. Procter bad explained the
whole business. What Was supposed at the last meeting,
and certainly what was his (Mr. Blackburn's) impression
was, that Mr. Procter had intimated that one man had been'
preferred before another by the head constable, because he
was a likely man to swear up to the mark--
Mr. PROCTER.—Certainly not.
Mr. BLACKBURN said that was the general impression.
Mr. Procter having stated he was mistaken, and Mr. Whitty
having stated he had nothing to do with the report, the
charge
m r . was
PROCTERwi t withdrawn raw
saidn atinked
pthueblaiffcaibrealitevaendentdhe.
charge
Was
preferred before the magistrates, from r. Rushton having
publicly mentioned it ; and this was what. he suffered from.
"Mr. BUSHELL asked whether it was intended to found any
resolution on this mt ahtet etreh?el
ed.inulgdf
tffighne,os.t.e, u
tlt
eulogized
dbwtahseafne
character
cot
ef
ri
ot
f;
and the public must
Mr. PARKER, at some
Mr. Procter, as an able and clHenecmonetmenderedo
thtateth‘iVeattch
the
eateh Committee on this subject were
contradictory, resoiuti Committee,ori resolutions
inasmuchoafldthoef
h i ats oneth
otherex p r expressed shsleadmevery i confidencenl for
ti
I int o
the
whether firstinstance.
h e
intended
se-
lectionthem 're.a
Bdh
uec
soh
nna it
LaLb madele
,kwoefd thels
Mr.o officer in ienr
had not yet done; but he in-
ied that he
movedNir.
pa zsKoEluatiroenpl.