he had purchased the same, and in fitting it up had expended £22 12s. 9d., which sum he hoped would be refunded by the Council. The matter was resolved to be referred to the original subscribers. [The said boat had been lying for a long time, dilapidated and uncared for, on the disinhabited Priory Ground.]
Recovery of Ground. Moved by Mr. Ross and seconded by Mr. Burfield, “That the Government be memorialised not to dispose of the ground belonging to them, near the parade to individuals, but to surrender it to the Corporation, from whom they took it for public purposes in 1759”. The Mayor said, last year, a committee was formed to select a site for a new Town Hall, and they thought of the property in possession of Government. Having heard that persons had applied for a portion of such property, he instantly communicated with the Board of Ordnance, wishing them to transfer it to the Corporation, from whom they originally redeemed it at a nominal charge of £5. It was surrendered to the Government, for the protection of the country; but, seeing that it is no longer wanted [except for a coastguard station, it might have been said], — a proof of which they now had in the Battery being removed — and the [town] original possessors being in want of it, he thought it was only reasonable to expect it to be again surrendered to them. They were greatly in want of a large Town Hall, and as the town was increasing to the westward, he thought it advisable to look to the future. [Few persons outside of the Town Council would suppose that the avowed object in obtaining the site of “Government House” was anything more than a pretence. To recover the ground, even without the building, would have been an advantage to the town in some other respect, and if sold for the erection of better houses, would unquestionably have led to the greater value of Mr. Ross’s adjoining property. But to build “a large Town Hall” in so confined a space and close to the narrow entrance of George street, where vehicular traffic was and still is so often congested, would have been an absurd project. The fact, however, that Government still uses the site at the time I write — nearly half a century later — is a proof that no practical heed was given to the memorial.]
At their meeting on Feb. 1st, the Council received the certified costs of prosecutions and maintenance of prisoners, amounting to £110 12s. 10d. The Council also resolved to give notice to Messrs. F. Smith and _ Dunn to give up the ground at Denmark place held by them, it being intended to throw the ground open. Also that a communication be made to the Woods and Forests Commissioners to compel Mr. Dunn to remove the stone and other materials from the road to the Priory culvert.
Chancery Money. The Clerk reported that in the cause ”Attorney-General v. Hastings", the Vice-Chancellor had made an order to pay the money which had lain in Chancery since 1834 to the Town Clerk of Hastings, subject to deductions of costs to the Attorney-General in the first instance. The expenses were much heavier than anticipated, and some difficulty had been -
