The Statesman.
London, England, 1815-12-08 00:00:00

1 •~

Bening should treat such expenditure as a matter of
levity. The Committees under whose direction this
expenditure -hid' been incurred, had, he maintained,
sgiossly einlatml a Standing Order of the Court. Yet
the Bon.: Alderman ,(Curtis) who had presided in the
Comnsittee, seemed to think, that he had incurred no
degree of responsibility; that lion. Alderman had,
instead of vindicating the Committee, endeavoured to
condemn him (Ms. W.). But that Hon. Alderman's
r.tuirks, if they had any operation, .rather operated
against himself. Such indeed was their effect; that
V be Were the friend of tie lion. Alderman, he should
be rather sorry that he had so egregiously committed
himself; for although the [lon. Alderman :had pro-
mised the Court, that he would keep 'his•teraper, be
completely violated his promise by the perrnel.at-
tick which he thought proper to make upon hiss
(Mr. %V.). It seemed, according to tile Alderman's
judgment, that that Court should not object to any
'wince, however inconsistent with the financial re-
sources of the City, prOvided that ezpetsce was iss.
owed for the accommodation of certain individuals.
lean'!]—But the quesrion was,. whether
aay individuals whatever should be entertained at the
expence of the City contrary to a Standing Order of
that Court. -The Commiltee, at which the Him
Alderman presided: was appointed for a specific pur-
pose, without authority or allowance to spend any
money whatever but for that purpose. Yet this
Committee underto.ok to order the expendiiure of no
less a sum than 51)01: for mere entertainments. Be
appealed then to the Court, whether.sock an expen-
diture could be tolerated, while its regular ".commit-.
tees were distinctly restrained to a certain ellisrance.
When the erection of his Majesty's statue. was first
aosed

The Court divided—
For the.Ametolment 57
Aimisiat it 68
Majority —Il •
So the original motion was adopted.
The Report of- the Committee in relation to the
office of Clerk .of the City's Works, was considered,
recommending sundry alterations in the mode of
conducting that office • and after a long discussion
the RepOrt was referred back for re.consideration.
A Purse of fifty guineas was unanimously voted to
the Rev. Samnel Birch, Chaplain to the late Lord
Mayor, in testimony of the esteem and approbation
of the Coati.
The Committee for General Purposes presented a
Report for new works and furniture at the Mansion.
house, find for granting gratuities, which were agreed
to, and ordered.

POLICE.

• . .
I . HATTON-GA RD EN.—YlNterday James and William
IYeang were charged on the following complaint,
• made against them by Mr. W. 'Tyler, watchmaker,
! of Wildertresq.row, Clerkenwell :
The complainant stated, that on the preceding
Mitring as his bOy was coming home from his father's,
wh.o worked for lam, with some watch dMls in a tin
him, he was stopped in 'the street by the Prisoners,
who took'the box from,him, . and after examining its
contents, returned them to the boy, mid 'hen accom-
panied him to Complainant's house, where, after
,knocieitig at the door, and the boy going in, the
:-Prrsoisers• insisted on following him,in order, as they
said, to search the house, saying they were Officers.
They uttemtfted to force their 'entrance, nn which
t.k7

.• . •
THE STA'rEASJAN.

77er7

14* itroLustacg.
ratio,: OF CH !MEAT', Dec. 7.
This wow, V. Glitrilltil•
~„ ini WAS an application by Sir SAMUEL Itowir.ror
in behalf of Sir Mark Wood, to lisie removed from
the file a petition'which had been.presented by
Griffith, for the purpose of obstructing an Order
which had previously been made by the Master of the
Rolls for the sale of a certain estate, called
.the Ernst
hiarr Estate, once the joint property of the Plain.
, tiff and the Defendant. it appeared, from the state-
ment of the Learned Counsel, that Sir Mark Wood
and Mr. Griffith had formerly been engaged in bu.
sloe's together, but a difference arising between
them, it was mutually agreed forger the matter to a
Master in Chancery,, and to abide by his decision.
'Tile queition came of course before one of the
Masters, whose judgment therein was followed by an
Order of the Master of the Rolls for the sale of the
estate atirive.named. That Order was made in May,
1813, trail with the consent of Mr. Griffith; yet,
by a most extraordinary procedure, Mr. Griffith, in
March, 1814, presented a„Petition, for the purpose
of contravening his own measure, introducing, at
the same time)lie great variety of circumatances which
had never been mentioned before, aid which' were
wholly irrelevant to the matter as it. stood at the time
of the Order being granted. Upon that plain view
of the transaction, the Learned Counsel presumed
the Court would have no hesitation in ordering the
Petition of 1814 to be taken off the file.
Mr. Croce followed Sir S..ltommor on the same
side. .
After hearing Mr. HART and Mr. STRANGER on