Hide Articles List

10 articles on this Page








CHURCH-RATES. On Thursday, last week, a parish meeting was held at St. Mary's vestry-room, for the purpose of examining and passing the accounts of the churchwardens—Mr. Berrow, ironmonger, and Mr. David Roberts, builder. The attendance was tolerably numerous, and the interest felt in the proceedings of the meeting, which lasted upwards of three hours, was intense. Loud complaints were again made against the practice persisted in by the Vicar, as chairman, of not entering the minutes of proceeding in the parish-book at the time, ^vriting them on scraps of paper, and then taking the book home to transcribe them into it. The subject was discussed at some length, during which it was shown that the practice of taking the books from the vestry was illegal and liable to heavy penalties, and that the resolutions passed were thus liable to be altered or per- verted to answer the purpose of the writer. The Vicar said that he could not at the time write down the resolutions in the book, and take the part he should in the meeting as chairman, and he wished the vestry to appoint a clerk to write the minutes of the meetings. In the course of the proceedings, it was proposed by Mr. Vaughan, seconded, and carried, that in future the resolutions be entered in the book, without any observa- tions, notes, or comments connected with them. In going through the various items of the expenditure of the churchwardens several were objected to as not being in their estimate. Mr. George proposed, and Mr. Meredith seconded, that L3 for bell-ringing be disallowed. The motion was carried. A sum of <63 for visitation fees was also disallowed. After the items in the accounts of the churchwardens had, seriatim, been examined and compared with vouchers, Mr Meredith proposed that as the ohurchwardens had not furnished the meeting with lists of the vacant houses, of the names of defaulters, and the sums they owed, the meeting be adjourned in order that such lists might be produced, and that the parishioners might know who were the defaulters, how much each owed, how much the sum which amounted fro;u vacant houses, and thereby have some data before them, and some check on the churchwardens, instead of their bare word. He con- tended that it was impossible that the accounts could be balanced without such lists, and that otherwise the pass- ing of them would be a mere sham, reflecting no real honour on the churchwardens. Mr. Skynner seconded the resolution, remarking that such lists were indispensable in order to account for the sums said to be uncollected. A very long and sometimes rather angry discussion now ensued, in which part was taken by Mr. George, Mr. Vaughan, the Rev. Mr. Watherston, Mr. P. Williams, and a great many others. The Rev. Mr. Watherston proposed as an amendment that the accounts there and then be passed. On a division it was found that, several persons now having left the vestry, 12 were for the amendment, and 12 for the original resolution. The Vicar did not vote, but after he saw th it the mem- bers on each side were equal, he contended that he had a casting votl', and said he would vote for passing the accounts. But the meeting decided that as he had not voted before, he could not regularly now give a casting vote-which would not be a casting vote in the ordin- ary acceptation of the term, and therefore no vote at all. The meeting now came to a dead lock. The church- wardens positively refused to promise to furnish the parishioners at a future meeting with a list of the sums uncollected. They were repeatedly told even by their own party, that this would be greatly to their honour, but they were unbending. At last, how- ever, they yielded, and promised to produce the re- quired lists at the adjourned meeting, which was fixed for that day fortnight. The meeting then adjourned. It is expected that very shortly the new church- wardens will call a meeting to get a new church-rate, and it is said it will be opposed even to the polling of the parish: -Dissenters and others who do not attend church complain that as they do not see notices of vestry meetings, they are held unknown to them. Those, however, in the parish, who are opposed to church-rates, will have an opportunity in less than a month to oppose a rate. ———— DIVISIONAL PETTY SESSIONS.—SATURDAY. [Before GEORGE CAVE, T. WAKEMAN, and J. DAVIES, Esqrs.] A CHARGE OF ILLEGAL FISHING.—James Jones, a boy of about 18 years old, was charged with having placed night lines in the river Wye, with a view to c-tteh eels.—Mr. J. E. Powles appeared for the prosecutrix, who nominally was Mr. Mills, of the Angel Hotel, who rents the river and Mr. T. J. A. Williams appeared for the defendant.— The evidence of Mrs. Mills, Mr. Morris, of Chapel Farm, opposite whose land the boy was found, and a keeper to T. Booker Blakemore, Esq., M.P., of the name of Jones, proved that the defendant had put down lines, which, however, was not denied on the part of the defence.—Mr. Williams rose two objections, namely, that the magistrates had no jurisdiction in the case, and that the statute under which the proceedings were taken did not apply to the case. He also contended that the defendant had, by prescription, perfect right to such mode of fishing. Mr. Wililams asked for an ad- journment, and in the interval to have the opinion of counsel on the points in dispute, each party to abide by the decision. He argued that this was a case just in point to settle a question which frequently arose here, but was never fairly sifted.—The Bench ultimately, re- fused the application.—Mr. Cave said that it was impos- sible that the defendant could establish a right to fish in Mr. Blakemore's water.—The Bench would fine him Is., and expenses. lls.-The Court during the h aring of the case was nearly full, owing to the interest felt in the de- cision of the case, it being well known that there is a strong disposition to preserve the river so far as to prevent people from angling unless by" permission. It is, however, also well known that from time im- memorial all have exercised their right of angling in this part of the river Wye, unmolested, and that such right has been fully established by custom. There are scores in this town who would liberally subscribe towards defending their rights on this point. COUNTY COURT.—-MONDAY. [Before J. M. HERBERT, Esq., Judge.] The cause list to-day, although rather long, contained n scarcely any cases but those in which disputed accounts in different shapes formed the subject of litigation. The following, however, is an exception Wore v. Constance.—Mr. Roberts, of Colefo-rd, appeared for the defendant.—The latter lived at Nuxon, near Cole- ford, and the former occupied an adjacent farm: The action was brought to recover the value of a sheep, the property of the plaintiff, alleged to have been killed by defendant's dogs. Plaintiff stated that when the ewe, which had a lamb, was founJ to have been worried by defendant's dogs, his brother, William Wore, brought two of these dogs to the house. He knew they were de- fendant's dogs.—Cross-examined The sheep died the following Sunday, two days after it bad been worried. On the next day he went to the de fendant's house to complaiD of his loss. Much of the wool and some of the skin about the sheep's neck were torn off when it died. This was not the first time he had bad sheep killed by gentlemen's dogs. For this sheep he was, however, de- termined to get paid, if he could. He did not believe the sheep died from rot. the ewe and lamb were worth 25s. He had left the lamb in the field in which the ewe died. —Robert Callow stated that he lived near the plaintiff, and had seen the defendant's dogs worry the sheep. He well knew the dogs. They were two, one a sheep-dog and the other a spaniel. When he came upon them, the sheep- log had the sheep down, and laid hold of it by its neck, and the spaniel was barking and running around it. The sheep had been badly torn, and had bled much.—The Judge asked plaintiff if he had ever told defendant before this occurrence that the dogs were dangerous, or if he had any evidence to show that defendant knew that the dogs were addicted to worrying sheep.—Plaintiff replied that he had never before complained to defendant about the dogs, and that he had no evidence to prove that he knew they were darigerous.-I-iis Honour then said that in law this was indispensable. The law requiredathat the defendant should be first cautioned that the dogs were dangerous to be at large, before any damage would be recovered for the mischief they did; and it regarded anything done previous to such a caution as a pure accident. The case, therefore, broke down.-Plaintiff said that he had brought the action merely in order to see whether one man could, with impunity, keep dogs to kill another man's sheep.—The Judge said that for the future defendant would be liable for any damage done by these dogs, for it now had come to his knowledge that they were mischievous animals, and he would advise him to kill them immediately.—Mr. Roberts applied for costs, but the Judge peremptorily refused the application. An unusually large number of persons had been sum- moned after judgment, for disobeying previous orders for payment made by the Court. Some of them were committed to prison, and others very narrowly escaped. A person named Adams, on the suit of Taylor, both from the Forest of Dean, was committed to Gloucester Gaol, for 21 days. A Court for he-'ring the petitions of insolvent debtors will be held next Monday.




[No title]