irbr Bctrpalt.
Messrs. Tamlyn and Craig, the Revising Barristers for the city of London, opened their Court on Tuesday, at the Guildhall. Mr. Tamlyn undertook to revise the lists of the Liverymen in the Court of King's Bench ; while Mr. Craig in the Common Pleas attended to the new constituency of the 10/. householders. There was some diffi- culty at starting in Mr. Tamlyn's Court, in consequence of the Over- seers of several parishes handing in printed copies of the lists of Live- rymen, instead of the original lists, as required by the Act. After some demur, Mr. Tamlyn said, that the Overseers must do their best to recover the original documents, but as the refusal of the printed lists would occasion the disfranchisement of large numbers, he should con- sider what course he should take, in case it was found impossible to get them from the various printing-houses. Nothing else that requires especial notice passed in either of the courts that day.
On Wednesday, a question arose before Mr. Tamlyn as to the right of Mr. Sheriff Salomons to he placed on the voters' list, as he had pur- chased his freedom subsequent to the 1st of March 1831. It was con- tended on his behalf, that although freemen generally could not vote who were admitted after that day, yet that the Act made a . special ex- ception in favour of the Livery of London. The decision of this question was postponed. In Mr. Craig's Court the decision on several claims was also postponed, in consequence of the neglect of the Over- seers to bring their rate-books.
On Thursday, many claims were struck out, owing to the neglect of the parties making them to attend the Court and prove that the requi- site notice had been given to the Overseers. Mr. Rowcroft, the Tory agent, complained bitterly of this inattention, as he was prepared to defend many of the claims on his side. No case of especial interest was decided. The Barristers appeared to act generally on the prin- ciple of not straining the law against claimants. Thus they admitted Sir John Gurney, who was objected to as a Baron of ;he Exchequer, because, though an officer of that court, he had no control over its monies.
Yesterday the claim of Mr. De Mole, clerk to the Merchant Tailors' Company, was objected to before Mr. Coventry, on the ground of his having taken up his freedom subsequently to March 1E431. The deci- sion on this case with other similar ones was postponed. The claim of Mr. Telford, of Allhallows parish, was objected to by Mr. Rowcroft, on the ground that there was no particular description of his property on the rate-book ; but as it appeared that he actually paid the rates, the Barrister placed him on the list. A point was then raised as to whether it was necessary for an objector to prove the alleged fact of a claimant being an alien, or whether the onus of proving himself not an alien lay upon the claimant. The decision on this case was deferred, as was also the point whether the partners in a house included in the word " Co." and rated as " Co." were rated according to the meaning of the Act. Mr. Rowcroft contended that they were not.
Previous page
