PETTY SESSIONS.
Sir W. Heathcote, according to notice given, moved that, in compliance with an application signed by the major part of the Justices of the division of Winchester, ‟a fit and proper place may be provided, under the provisions of the I2th and 13th Vic., c. 18, for holding the Petty Sessions at Winchester, and that the expenses of cleaning, lighting, and warming thereof, and attendant thereon, be paid out of the County Rate.”
The motion was carried, and the Hon. Baronet then moved,‟That the rooms in the police stations of Fareham and Droxford now used by the magistrates, be provided for the same purpose in those divisions respectively, and that the like allowances be made in respect of the expenses from the county rate,” which was also carried.
Sir Jervoise C. Jervoise, Bart., said he did not suppose that any one would say that clerks of Justices ought to pay the expense of providing rooms for the dispensing of justice. The motion he had to make was a sort of supplement to a report presented to the Court at the last Sessions: ‟That, referring to the report of the Select Committee on Petty Sessions, presented at the Michaelmas Sessions, 1862, and considering that table of fees to be taken by the clerks to justices was made and approved the Justices at the General Quarter Sessions of the Peace holden at Winchester, October 18th, 1858, the clerks to the Justices should be immediately relieved from the expense of hiring, cleaning, warming, and lighting rooms in which Petty Sessions arc held.” There were only two points involved in the motion—first, whether clerks should pay the hire of rooms : and secondly, whether the question should be dealt with by abstract resolution.
The Hon. J. J. Carnegie seconded the motion.
Sir W. Heathcote argued that the motion could not be adopted in the form presented.
Sir J. C. Jervoise merely observed it was an improper charge for magistrates’ clerks to have to pay. At Petersfield, it was decided, and rightly, to change the place of meeting from an inn to the Town-hall. He presumed the innkeeper found the room for the custom it brought to the house; but how could the Court ask the clerk to the magistrates to light, clean, and warm a new room, because the magistrates chose to come there? Ought the magistrates to be driven to the alternative of looking out for another clerk—one who would light, warm, and clean the room for them? He insisted that any such thing was highly improper, and he had no appeal ad misericordiam to make in the matter.
Mr. R. Cole said be believed the application of the present practice was most unfair.
On a division, the motion, was carried by 9 to 5.