Middlesex Sessions:
General Orders of the Court
SM | GO

11th January 1722 - 16th January 1725

About this document type

Currently Held: London Metropolitan Archives

LL ref: LMSMGO400010095

Image 95 of 2944th October 1722


than the Sum charged upon their parish by the legall rate and
they acknowledged that the Money by them raised over and above
what they had paid to the use of the Treasurer was still in their
hands. Your Committee had it in their intention to have caused
all the Original Collecting Books to have been cast up to see what has
been actually collected and consequently what remains in the
Collectors hands but that has not been yet done for want of an
opportunity of seeing those Books which they confest they had
destroyed In the course of this enquiry it appeared that severall
parishes to prevent any oppression upon them had ordered the just
Sum and no more to be paid out of the Land tax But this precaution
appears also to have been abused for upon view of the receipts
in some of those parishes Your Committee entertained a suspicion
that they had paid their proportion in a year wherein No trophy
money was ordered to be assessed Viz. the year from Midsummer
1720 to Midsummer 1721 and the annext receipt for St. Pancras is
expressly so and it appears also by the Originall Warrants annexed
that Warrants were filled up by the Clerk to the Lieutenancy and
signed and sealed by three Deputy Lieutenants and issued into
the parishes of St. Margaret Westmr. and St. Giles in the Fields
without any previous order of the Board to justify the same
The Clerk being examined hereupon alledged that the
Messenger had altered the Warrants after they were delivered
The Messenger as firmly denied it to that your Committee must
leave it to be decided by this Court observing only that between the
two the parishes have been drawn in to pay a year's rate in their
wrong. Your Committee therefore thought it necessary to require
of the Treasurer of the Trophy money to give them an account of
what money he had reced as Treasurer who after much pressing
was at last prevailed upon to send them the annexed account which
confirm'd their suspicion for he there charges himself to have reced
for the year 1720. the sum of £127:18s:7d: and for the year 1721. the
sum of £144:13s:6½d Now if by the years 1720 and 1721 is to be
understood the years beginning at Midsummer 1720 and
Midsummer 1721 then the first sum of £127:18s:7d: was
unwarrantably reced if by the years 1720 and 1721 is to be
understood the years ending Midsummer 1720 and Midsummer
1721 then the last sum of £144:13s:6½d was unwarrantably
reced and one or other of them ought to be charged to his Debet
which is not done in his account brought to be passed by this Court.
The Treasurer being summoned to solved this difficulty appeared




View as XML