The Cannock Chase Examiner. — 1875-11-20 (Cannock, Staffordshire, England)

THE ALLEGED MURDER OF A CHILD NEAR WOLV MITA PTON. In the case of the alleged mauler of a girl by the boatman Musson and his paramour, near Wolverhampton; particulars of which appear in in another column, the Justices have committed the prisoners for trial for the capital offence, and the Coroner's jury after several adjouruniente returned a verdict of tuanslaugliter.  The Commissioners under the above Act slat at their offices in Darlington-street, on Thursday, Me 11th inst., and Saturday, the 13th inst., M hear appeals against the assessments made on the owners and occupiers of mines in respect of Mines Drainage :and general Drainage Rates for , the current financial year 1875-0. Mr. Rupert : Kettle presided as chairman of the Commissios. ers, and the law clerks, Messrs. H. Underhill ;intl 11. H. Fowler were present to advise the Couffinssioners. There were very numerous appeals, and the Commissioners offices were crowded with the appellants and their legal advisers. The Cout ruissioners heard the appqals in the Ho rd Room, and the proceedings were, for obvious relefilla strictly private, except during the argument of legal questions affecting the appeals Mr. Motteram, Q.C., conducted the appeal of E crl Dudley and others. Mr. Alfred Young, barrister, together with Mr. Thorne (of the firm of Thorne, Smith, and Thorne), Wolverhampton, Mr. J. W. Hall (Bilston), Mr. W. Shakespeare (Oldbury), Mr. Robert Willcock (Wolverhampton), and other solicitors were present on behalf of the different appellants. A long discussion ensued between the learned chairman.and the learned counsel and the ether professional gentlemen engaged on various points raised as to the powers of the Commissioners under the Act, one point being as to whether the appellants could appeal against the assessments, as they expended sums in pumping plant for which they had not received any compensation under the Act, or that they were not assisted in the same degree as others lay the operations of the Act. At the conclusion of the arguments on the various points raised, the room was cleared for the Commissioners to consider the various questions put before thew. In about half an hour after. wards those interested in the matter were re. admitted, and the learned Chairmandelivered the decision of the Commissioners at some length. He said the Counniseioners were of opinion that the animal, when confirmed and deposited, as re. quire(' by the 35th sec., became binding under that section, and was final as to the rating of mines. It could not be opened up again. He then read the award, and, in doing so, took at. cas,ion to express in public his opinion that the award was perfectly valid and binding. He mentioned this because a great deal of complaint had been made about the award, and it was frequently said to be defective :aid lvad in law. Now he (Mr. Kettle) held just the contrary, and had he been permitted to go into the matter be. fore, he thought he could have shown his view was correct, though he had the misfortune to disagree on that point with some learned counsel and legal gentlemen.. He then read section 31 of the Act, and staid that all the grounds of appeal now sought to be made use of against the assessments were in respect of matters embraced by that section but it was clear that nothing arising upon the 31st section could be made the ground of appeal, except under section 33 against the draft ;award. He also referred to sections 42 and 43, which he read, and said the Commissioners could now only tau. cute the award as it came front the ;white-atom This they would do by considering the asser events, and making allowances for exhausted mines or cessation of operations, which were set within the 31st section; but they were precluded from considering any of those circunastances of mines" referred to in detail by that section. He would remark on the 30th section that there was no rule of law which would admit of the review or reseision of an executed order. An executory order might be reviwed or rescinded, perhaps, but here they were dealing with an executed order, Ad the time for reviewing that order was passed by. They could only execute the terms of the award.  Mr. Motteraui But, with great respect,what are the terms of the award?  The learned Chairman: The award is perfectly intelligible on the face of it.  A dis'eussion then ensuefall;etween Mr. Mottenan, Q.C., Mr. Young (instructed by Mr. Shakespeare, of Oldbury), and the learned Chairman, Mr. Motteram again seeking to show that the mere execution of the award aid not decide the question as to whether, in executing the award, the