experienced. In February 1849, they first took steps in the matter, and in May they obtained the consent of Mr. Clark to have the money applied to the Charity, provided that it was no expense to him. In June they presented a memorial to the Attorney-General, and then appeared by counsel at his chambers; but the Attorney-General was engaged at Westminster. They subsequently met Mr. Wray, counsel for the Attorney-General, who insisted that they should go before the Master of the Rolls. The Corporation's counsel pressed to have it taken in the Vice-Chancellor's Court. He (the Clerk) afterwards waited on Mr. Wray, to induce him to alter his opinion, but he was obstinate, and would not. On Dec. 20th, they met before the Master of the Rolls, who cut the matter short by saying they should have gone to the Vice-Chancellor. The case went before the Vice-Chancellor, on Jan. 25th. All this increased the expenses, as they had to change counsel every time. — At the next meeting of the Council, on March the 8th, the Clerk reported that he had at last got the money out of Chancery, which, after paying all expenses, except his own, amounted to £18. Some amusing remarks were here made on the rapacity of lawyers, who had thus proved true to their reputation of devouring the oyster and leaving the shell. [See also, May 3rd.]
Reply to Memorial. To the memorial re the site of Government House, the Board of Ordnance had made objections, which the committee reported the Council would have to meet with a stronger representation of their case. The Board chiefly objected to giving up to the town, the Government buildings, as in case of necessity, they might be wanted for a magazine.
Court of Chancery again. At the Council meeting on May 3rd, Mr. Ross thought it very desirable that there should be a reform in the practice of the Court of Chancery, seeing that, only a short time since, it cost the Council £185 17s. 9d. to recover possession of £139 then lying in the Court, to which they had a legitimate right, the Council having to pay £45 more than they received. Ald. Clift condemned the expense as a shameful imposition; and Ald. Mackness reminded them that all law reforms were of slow working. Forty years ago, he said, the Court of Equity was called the Court of Iniquity. A motion was here passed “That the provisions of the Bill for the Court of Chancery in Ireland be extended to England” — that is to say, a memorial to that effect.
Removal of Rocks. Mrs. Cobby, proprietor of bathing-machines, applied to have certain rocks removed, which had been laid bare by the late tides, and which prevented bathing operations. Her sons, she said, had at an expense of £3, and great personal labour, cleared away sufficient space for 5 machines, but more space was wanted. — Application referred to Stonebeach Committee.
The Great Banquet. The Clerk laid on the table the report of the late banquet to the Lord-Mayor of London. The expenses were shown to have been £294 6s. 8d., which had been all settled. Mr. Ross thought that their thanks to their Clerk should be embodied and recorded with the report, great credit being due to him for his exertions. A resolution to that effect was -
