The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-04-01 00:00:00

posing to continue him. However respectal
might be,• -or however adequate

churchwarden, still, Mr. Birkett having

particular business, which was not yetlni
reason for wishing to continue him in offic
Other officers were then re-appointed.
name being called over,
.. . .

Mr. WALKER gave it as his opinion that the offices of trea-
surer and rate-book-clerk were incompatible. When Mr.
Dixon was treasurer, the rate-book-clerk had been appointed
as a check uport him. The two officers were
.afterwards
joined together to save expense. It was doubtful to him
whether sixpence had been saved, or whether, indeed, the
parish had not paid more since they were united than it had
done before. Be that as it might, the offices were incompa-
tible one with the other. He, therefore, moved that the
offices be divided. He had no one to bring forward to fill
either one or the other, but he objected to their being com-
bined in one individual.

The proposition v

s seconded by Mr. TOULMIN

Mr. -llAnnonn said, hawing been the person by whom the
amalgamation had been proposed, for the express purpose of
doing away with an office created in consequence of the ina-
bility of Mr. Dixon to perform his duties, he might be per-
►nitted to enter into a little explanation to show that Mr.
Walker had no grounds for his opposition to Mr. Hart's re-
appointment. The rate-book-clerk had been created in con-
sequence of Mr. Dixon's inaccuracies. Prior to the appoint-
ment Mr. Dixon had had the whole of the duties to perform,
as Mr. Hart had at present. He did not say that Mr. Dixon
performed those duties with the same satisfaction to the pub-
lic. The term rate-book-clerk, as applied to Mr. Hart, was
a mere nominal one. He was neither more nor less than the
treasurer, and the system had fallen back to the old form, as
far as the law, as it now stood, would -

Mr. HENSHAW would mention, as a proof how the two
offices worked together, that the arrears of assessed taxes, in
the spring of 1838, when Mr. Hart was appointed, amounted
to £27,978 ; now they were £7495%, notwithstanding the assess-
ment had increased, by the augmentation of the assessed
taxes, by £6OOO or £7OOO per annum• (Hear.) Their liabi-
bility to government had been reduced upwards of £20,000.

Mr. WALKER. wished to know what the expenses of the
treasurer's office were at the date of Mr. Hart's appointment,
and what they were now.
Mr. BIRKETT said, since Mr. Hart took the situation a
new thing had come up, which had caused great expense and
trouble. He alluded to the change in municipal affairs. A
large number- of paupers—and he did not mean one party
more than another—but a large number of persons, little bet-
ter than paupers, had claimed to be registered. In one year
the registry had been lifted up from 8000 to 13,000. Some
paid taxes for eleven years, and an enormous quantity of work
had been the consequence, in order to make as perfect a re-
gister as possible. The books. as an inevitable result, had
got behind, and the clerks and officers of the department were
working often till four and five o'clock !n the morning, from
two or three days previous to the 29th of July till the Ist of
November.

Mr. WALKER said he wanted to know what the cost of the
establishment was, and what difference in that respect had
taken place. _ _

Mr. BIRKETT replied, that the question was one which
could not be easily answered, for the reason he had stated,
that a great deal of extra work had been created, which had
necessitated the employment of a number of temporary clerks.
A discussion then arose as to whether, under the new act,
the vestry had the power of appointing new officers.
The VESTRY-CLERK said the poor-law act enabled the
poor-law commissioners to supetsede any paid officer; but
until they did so the right of appointment continued. Whe-
ther the vestry had authority to appoint any new officer was
a doubtful point. If there were any department of the
parish which, in the opinion of the parishioners, would be
better divided, it seemed to him that it was strictly within
the scope of their powers to make the alteration.
Mr. BIRKETT hoped the parishioners, under the circum-
stances in which the honorary officers were placed, would
not consent to the motion. Matters were embroiled enough
without any other cause of vexation being given till some
approach had been made to a settlement. If Mr. Walker's
proposition were adopted, they would require two sets of
books, and there was already so much to do that the hands
were quite short enough. As the Rector had stated, they
were before parliament, by the authority and direction of the
parishioners, for a new bill, by which their affairs would be
entrusted to a board somewhat similar to the present board
of guardians, to do what they might think best, without
having to go to any commissioner in London to ask what
they were to do with the money which they had raised them-
selves. • Parties whom they should choose, and in whom
they could place confidence, would have the direction. He
hoped this motion would not be persevered in. He did not
see how it was to be carried out.
Mr. WALKER submitted that there need not be much ad-
ditional expense. There would be new books to purchase,
but what was that compared-with the control over £60,000,
which was annually collected in the. parish ?
The question having been put from the chair, the original
motion was carried.
Mr. WALKER demanded a poll. (Shame, shame !)
A church-rate of 2d. in the pound, being a 4d. more than
last year, was proposed and agreed to. The addition, it was
explained, was occasioned by an expense of £7OO attending
the draining of St. Martin's Cemetery. It had been found
impossible to dig more than three feet without coming to
water. Now the ground was dry for eleven or twelve feet ;
so that, besides obviating a cause of just complaint, the
alteration, by the soil gained, would more than pay for itself.
Mr. limismAw would take that oortunity of calling
pp
the attention of the vestry to the state of St. Mary's Ceme-
tery. The ground had been filled up, and was now being
gone over a second time ; and the nuisance which had con-
sequently been created, and the way in which the ashes of
the dead were disturbed, was a great disgrace to the parish.
(Hear, hear.) This was especially deserving of attention,