Catalogue description Content: Folios 49-50. Letter from John Read, Chediston, Blything Poor Law Union, to...

Ordering and viewing options

  • Free

  • Download format PDF
  • Approximate size 4 MB

Order up to 10 items per basket, and up to 100 in a 30 day period.

Details of MH 12/11732/28
Reference: MH 12/11732/28
Description:
Content: Folios 49-50. Letter from John Read, Chediston, Blything Poor Law Union, to Poor Law Commission. A dispute has arisen between the churchwardens and the overseers as to the purposes for which a poor rate is made and the misunderstanding that has prevented the making of a rate. For the year ending 31 March 1836, George Robinson and Charles Ingate were Churchwardens and Robert Balls and Samuel Blaxill were Overseers. The great tithes of the parish had not been assessed in any rate, several tithepayers having compounded their tithes with the tithe proprietor and the tithes had been left out of the rate. On 31 March 1836, several of the tithepayers were served a notice by the tithe proprietor to give their tithes in kind after 11 October 1836. William Booth and Harley Archer, two of the tithepayers, served notice on Robert Balls that should he assess the tithes in the next rate, they would appeal against it. Notwithstanding this notice, a rate was set without including any assessment of the tithes. This rate was put before the magistrates who directed the overseer to take it back to the parish and alter it by adding an assessment on the tithes. George Robinson refused to amend the rate and told the overseer to take it back to the magistrate. The magistrates advised Robinson to amend the rate but he did not do so. However, at his insistence, they signed and the rate was collected. Messrs Booth and Archer appealed against the rate and on 17 January the hearing was adjourned to the next sessions. This action forced the parish officers hands and, without calling a meeting of the parishioners, agreed to compromise. The attorneys agreed the appeal should be abandoned conditionally upon: the difference between the rate taken and the tithes being omitted, and the parish officers paying the appellants costs. Balls and Blaxill went out of office after this settlement was agreed and two new ones were appointed. Harley Archer was one of the new Overseers. When Archer applied to the auditor of the union as to the town stock, the auditor ordered it to be paid to Archer, it was refunded by the respondents attorneys. Messrs Robinson and Ingate are still Churchwardens and Robinson has applied to have the costs of the appeal taken out of the first rate set by Archer. Archer has objected saying that Robinson has no right to do this. The other parish officers refused to sign the rate and Archer alone signed a rate. This was signed off by the magistrates but then they refused to enforce it as it was not signed by a majority of parish officers. Archer was directed by the board of guardians to make a new rate, he called a fresh meeting and when no other parish officer attended, no rate was made. Read opines that it is immaterial what size rate is set, the only question is whether it is legal to apply any of the rate to the costs of the appeal. The auditor refused payment out of the rate because the costs were unnecessarily incurred and might have been avoided, but for the obstinacy of the parish officers. Harley Archer, the present Acting Overseer, is without a rate and without the means of raising one and cannot pay the quarterly rate of the workhouse. He is anxious to avoid being fined for non-payment of these dues or for not doing what he ought to be doing and is seeking help. He wants a quick reply. Annotated. 'Dr Kay for his opinion 7 Jun 1837' [James Philip Kay, Assistant Poor Law Commissioner]. Further annotated. 'Mr Coode 12 Jun 1837'. [George Coode, Assistant Secretary to the Poor Law Commission]. Further annotated. 'Dr Kay has knowledge of the facts excepting that Mr White, Clerk to the Union, is engaged in opposition to Mr Read, the writer of this letter and that the Board of Guardians are of the opinion that Mr Read acted with unwarranted harshness in serving Mr White. The legal question will be so much better considered [by Mr Coode]. Paper Number: 5095/A/1837. Poor Law Union Number 432. Counties: Suffolk.
Date: 6 June 1837
Held by: The National Archives, Kew
Legal status: Public Record(s)
Language: English
Closure status: Open Document, Open Description

Have you found an error with this catalogue description?

Help with your research