The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-03-10 00:00:00

LIGHTING AND WATCHING COMMITTEE

The proceedings of this committee were read, from which
it appeared that the magistrates nad fined four men in the
service of the Gas Company for dragging some heavy gas

pillars over the toot-paths, ss. each aiid costs; and that in
the commissioners' books only ten shillings was acknow-
ledged as having been received. The committee, therefore,
intimated their wish to be informed whether the commis-
sioners were not entitled to the whole.

Mr. Wm. JACKSON after entering into the circumstances,
asked the law clerk whether the commissioners were not
entitled to the whole fine?

MALLABY referred to the act ; and stated that the
whole fines paid by parties convicted were, by law, to be paid
to the treasurer of the commissioners, to be applied for the
general purposes of the township. If the commissioners
themselves were parties in the case, one moiety of the tine
would go to the overseers of the poor.

Mr. \-Vm. JaelisON asked whether the police had a right
to any part of the fines i❑ the cases which they brought before
the Magistrates?

The CHAIRMAN, in reply, stated, that no part of the fines
levied under the Improvement Act had ever been received by
the constables. They were paid over to the treasurer—at
least they ought to be, and were so ordered by the magistrates.

Mr. Wm:J ACKSON said that might be (but, with all de-
ference to the chairman, the practise had not been so, for in
all cases where the police or informers were concerned, they
received a portion.
The CHAIRMAN declared that it was quite absurd and ridi-
culous to suppose that the magistrates would, for one mo-
ment, listen to any such proposal as that. They would not
recognise such a right in any policeman, unless the Act of
Parliament recognised it.
Mr. Wrs. JACKSON repeated, that in the instance which
had been discovered the commissioners only received 10s. in-
stead of 20s.

The CaninmAN was not aware of it, but he would inquire
into the matter.

Mr. BENTHAM said there was another question, whether
Mr. Palmer; the Special High Constable of the Hundred,
might not consider himself the constable of the township,
so that a portion of the penalty might go to him ?

The CliAlßMAN.—Certainly not

Mr. MALLABY.—The fact is, the whole fine belongs to the
Commissioners.

After some conversation the appropriation of the 103. in
question stood over for further inquiry.
Mr. WM. JACKSON said the next question he bad to ask
was this, in what situation Mr. Booth, the constable, stood
in relation to the commissioners? There were three sets of
policemen, the court-leet officers, the county constabulary,
and their own ; and he wished to know whether the commis-
sioners or the magistrates had controul over Booth ?
Mr. MALLABY replied that the controul was with the
magistrates and the commissioners.
Mr. Wm. JACKSON next inquired whether the constables
of Birkenhead, when once sworn in, had jurisdiction beyond
the township?
Mr. MALLABY replied that it was for the constables to
exercise their own discretion in going beyond the township.
They should only do so in case of emergency, when the con-
stables of the adjoining township could not act.
Mr. WM. JACKSON then asked what power the Commis-
sioners had over the gaol ? Mr. Case had exerted himself
successfully in obtaining a grant of £3OO from the county for
the gaol ; and he now wished to know whether it was the
property of the Commissioners?
Mr. MALLABY and the CHAIRMAN entered into some ex-
planations ; and it appeared that the Commissioners have
the control cf the gaol. There was some difficulty, however,
in the question, owing to the grant made by the county ; but
the circumstance of that grant did not supersede the autho-
rity of the commissioners.
Mr. Wm. JACKSON observed, that, such being the case,
there was no reason why the gaol should not be made com-
fortahle to the occupants and creditable to the township.
But if the £3OO deprived the commissioners of its control, he
would at once give notice of a motion that it be returned to
the county.

Mr. J. S. JACKSON asked at whose expense the prisoners
in the gaol were ►maintained? _

Mr. MALLABY.—At the expense of the county

Mr. WILLIAM JACKSON wished, also, to know whether
Booth and the other officers were bound to convey commit•
ted prisoners to Chester, or whether it was the duty of the
special high constable?
The CHAIRMAN, in reply, said the question was not yet
entirely settled. It was under the consideration of a special
committee of the county magistrates, of which he had the
hononr to be one ; and he thought it was likely to end in the
special high constables of all the hundreds so conveying
prisoners.
Mr. WILLIAM JACKSON next asked, whether it was the
duty of the special high constable, or of the commissioner's
own constables, to serve magistrates' summonses?
Mr. MALLABY replied, that all the constables of the town-
ship were bound to execute any precept delivered to them.
Mr. WILLIAM JACKSON said the question then came
whether, under the police act, the constables had power to
apprehend poachers in the Birkenhead boats ?
Mr. MALLABY thought they had.
The CHAIRMAN.—It is a question, how is the constable
to know whether a man is a poacher or not?
Mr. MALLABY added that he did not mean to say the con-
stables were allowed to take a man into custody because they
were informed he was a poacher, or even if they knew them-
selves that he was, if he was not then in the act of pursuing
game. Poaching was not one of the offences for which a
man could be so taken.
Mr. WAS. JACKSON.—Tben, supposing that one of our
constables commits an act not legal, are we liable?
Mr. MALLABY.—Certainly not; he is liable himself.

Mr. Was. JACKSON inquired, in the next place, how far
Mr. Palmer's authority extended over the township—whether
the local act interfered with the general act under which the
special high constable was appointed—and whether he had
the same power to act in Birkenhead as in other town-
ships ?
Mr. MALLABV thought that as special high constable of
the hundred of Wirral, Mr. Palmer had a right to act in
Birkenhead the same as in other townships, but he had no
right to interfere with the jurisdiction of the commissioners.
Every constable of the hundrei might act within the pre-
cincts of the township if he knew of a felon being there, and
might seize him.
Mr. Wm. JACKSON.—But can our constables go into the
adjoining townships?
Mr. MALLABY said yes; because they were constables of
the county.
Mr. Wm. JACKSON wished the Law-clerk would give his
attention to the subject of the out-townships contributing
towards the expenses of the gaol, as they sent offenders

there.
The CHAIRMAN then entered into some details respecting
the gaol ; and promised, again. that inquiry should be made
concerning the division of fines.
Mr. BENTHAM suggested that the inquiry should be ex-
tended further back than the case brought forward by Mr.
Jackson.
The conversation then terminated, and the proceedings of
the committee were confirmed.