RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Press, Volume VII, Issue 794, 16 May 1865, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Chbistchitbch—May 15. Jane Glass was charged with stealing from the person of John Robinson, in Coker's hotel. The evidence being taken, prisoner was committed for trial at next session of Supreme Court. William Monk was fined £1 for being drunk and disorderly. John O'Brien was charged with being drunk and disorderly ; case dismissed with a caution.

BEVISIOS OF THE BATEPi.TEK3* BOLL. [Before C. C. Bowen, Esq., R.M.; J. OixrvrEß, Esq., and A. Back, Esq., J.P's.]

Dr. Foster attended on behalf of the City Conncil, and stated that the objection raised at a former sitting by Mr. Wynn Williams was one that would clearly result in a very inequitable rate in case the Justices proceeded with the assessment, as it wa3 clear that those persons only who had objected could be heard in opposition to the assessment, while the remainder, being left as assessed by the present list, would have to pay rates on a valuation made of the rents of property let at seven years. He had that morning had a rery important communication made to him by the members of the Council, which, for the present, it. was considered advisable he should retain within his own breast, and the result was that they had decided upon asking the Bench to adjourn the hear-1 ing until the 26th of June.

After a consultation, the Bench agreed to this course, and adjourned the meeting until that day. Mr. Wynn "Williams said that, as a ratepayer, ho wished to point out to the Justices the impossibility of the City Council proceeding with the list, as the meeting to-day was in reality a continuation of the meeting held pursuant to first notice given. He submitted that as that meeting had not been ad-

journed pursuant to the provisions of tho Act, the present meeting was illegal. The Resident Magistrate said that they had nothing to do with that. The Bench, on the list occasion, had ruled that the meeting was legally held, and the meeting to-day was an adjournment of it. Mr. Williams said that tho decision of the Justice on the former occasion amounted to nothing; the Bench could not have jurisdiction to decide such a question.

The Resident Magistrate said that was a question which must be decided by another Court. Mr. Williams said ho wished to prevent the necessity of taking such a course, and begged of the Bench to let him show how it was that the Magistrates could not legally hold a meeting to-day. He said that tbe Act required the list to be complete at the first meeting, and the Bench were bound to go on with the hearing and determination of objections at that meeting, or at some adjournment thereof. He then quoted the following case in support of this j view : —" Reg. v. tho Coroner of Margate."—Rule ' nisi to quash the inquisition, on the ground that the verdict was given by the jury, at a meeting which was not an adjournment of the first sitting. Cockburn, Chief Justice—Here the jury were summoned for a particular inquest, and the moment they were allowed to disperse, and the Court was broken up and not adjourned, their duty and functions were gone. The inquest must have begun de novo. The rule was made absolute to quash the inquisition. The Resident Magistrate said they had nothing to do with that question, as that must now be raised in another Court.

It appears that the reasons so carefully confided to the breast of Dr. Foster are these:—The Council intend applying at the next sitting of the Provincial Council to obtain a fresh Act, and it is clear that such is the only and best course they could adopt.