Did the Union mean that the vestry of the Old Artillery Ground - its Trustees - cease in all their functions, or did it continue to exist as a separate Civil Parish under the Union?
The following Court Case throws some light onto the nature of the Union, and would suggest that the members of the Union continued in their respective corporate existences, under previous Acts of Parliament governing the respective parishes (or extra-parochial districts, to be precise about the Old Artillery Ground).
The most pertinent section of the discussion is on page 147:
Preferred Name:
WHITECHAPEL
Unit Type:
Poor Law Union/Reg. District
Status:
Poor Law Union (until 1921)
Poor Law Parish (after 1921)
Registration District
Date created:
Date abolished:
1925
Unit ID:
10174661
Authorities:
F. Youngs, Local Administrative Units: Southern England (London: Royal Historical Society, 1979), p. 644.
The Local Government Act 1929 abolished the old Unions.
" Where a board of guardians is a board constituted or acting under a local Act, the functions transferred to the council of the county or county borough under this Part of this Act shall be the functions of a board of guardians under the Poor Law Act, 1927, and not the functions of the board under the local Act."
Thus the functions of the Board of Guardians of the Old Artillery Ground not covered by the Poor Law Act of 1927, presumably were not affected.....
Also, as the Old Artillery was governed by a separate Act, independent of its status as a Liberty of the Tower of London, when the Liberty of the Tower was abolished, did this affect the original Act governing the Old Artillery Ground? Or was the Old Artillery Ground 'forgotten about'? Is it still in statute a 'civil parish'? it seems clear from the progression of events after the Whitechapel Union, that the civil parish of the Old Artillery Ground was perhaps not abolished per se, and still exists, at least it appears to exist, at least on a ceremonial level?
.png)
Or did the London Government Act 1899 (62 & 63 Vict. c. 14) abolish the Old Artillery Ground Parish in toto?
Section 4 (1) provided that every elected vestry and district board in the county of London would cease to exist, with the powers, properties and liabilities of the abolished authorities transferring to the metropolitan boroughs.
The question is, did the Old Artillery Ground fall into this category? Was it an elective vestry under the Metropolis Management Act 1855 (18 & 19 Vict. c.120) ?
As this act abolished the previous vestry of the overseers of the poor, in the following terms:
The Act of the Session hoi den in the First and Second Years of King William the Fourth, Chapter Sixty, "For the better Regulation of Vestries, and for the Appointment of Auditors of Accounts " in certain Parishes of England and Wales," shall be repealed, from and after the passing of this Act, so far as regards any Parish mentioned in either of the Schedules (A.) and (B.) to this Act: Provided always, that the Vestry and Auditors already elected for any such Parish under the said Act shall continue, to be such Vestry and Auditors until the First Election of Vestrymen and Auditors for such Parish under this Act has taken place, but no longer; and the Provisions of the said Act of King William the Fourth shall continue applicable to every such Vestry and to their Proceedings, and the Books in which, the same are entered, and to such Auditors and their Proceedings accordingly.
However, the question is, was the Vestry of the Old Artillery Ground elected under the said act, or under its own Local Act? It was elected under the new Act, and the subsequent Metropolis Local Management Act - although the Local Act continues to exist, but hollowed out in its entirety.
This Local Act was not repealed, as is made clear in the legislation. When the Liberty of the Tower was abolished, circa 1900, the local act for the Artillery seems to have not been affected either.
As we can see in the text below from the MMA 1855, it appears clear that the original Local Acts were not repealed: This paragraph re-appears in the MLMA cited above.
Upon the Petition of the Metropolitan Board of Works, or of any District Board or Vestry, representing to Her Majesty in Council that by reason of the Provisions of any Local Act of Parliament relating to any District or Parish, or any Part thereof respectively, Difficulties have arisen in the Execution of this Act and of such Local Act or either of them, and praying for a Suspension or Alteration of all or any of the Provisions of such Local Act, or for the Establishment of other Provisions in lieu thereof under this Enactment, it shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by Order in Council, to suspend or alter all or any of the Provisions of such Local Act, and to make other Provisions in relation to the Matters thereof as Her Majesty, with the Advice of Her Privy Council, may think necessary under the Circumstances of the Case; and every such Order in Council shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament within One Month after the making thereof, if Parliament be then sitting, or, if Parliament be hot sitting, then Within One Month after the next Meeting of Parliament, and shall be published in the London Gazette: Provided always, that no such Order in Council shall remain in force beyond the Term of One Year from the making thereof.
The following Court Case throws some light onto the nature of the Union, and would suggest that the members of the Union continued in their respective corporate existences, under previous Acts of Parliament governing the respective parishes (or extra-parochial districts, to be precise about the Old Artillery Ground).
The most pertinent section of the discussion is on page 147:
It is quite clear from this that the Union was just that - a Union, with separate 'States' so to speak contained within it.
Annual Report of the Poor Commissioners discusses the original Local Acts, such as that regulating the Old Artillery Ground.
Note:
Poor Law Parish (after 1921)
Registration District
The Local Government Act 1929 abolished the old Unions.
" Where a board of guardians is a board constituted or acting under a local Act, the functions transferred to the council of the county or county borough under this Part of this Act shall be the functions of a board of guardians under the Poor Law Act, 1927, and not the functions of the board under the local Act."
Thus the functions of the Board of Guardians of the Old Artillery Ground not covered by the Poor Law Act of 1927, presumably were not affected.....
Also, as the Old Artillery was governed by a separate Act, independent of its status as a Liberty of the Tower of London, when the Liberty of the Tower was abolished, did this affect the original Act governing the Old Artillery Ground? Or was the Old Artillery Ground 'forgotten about'? Is it still in statute a 'civil parish'? it seems clear from the progression of events after the Whitechapel Union, that the civil parish of the Old Artillery Ground was perhaps not abolished per se, and still exists, at least it appears to exist, at least on a ceremonial level?
Or did the London Government Act 1899 (62 & 63 Vict. c. 14) abolish the Old Artillery Ground Parish in toto?
Section 4 (1) provided that every elected vestry and district board in the county of London would cease to exist, with the powers, properties and liabilities of the abolished authorities transferring to the metropolitan boroughs.
The question is, did the Old Artillery Ground fall into this category? Was it an elective vestry under the Metropolis Management Act 1855 (18 & 19 Vict. c.120) ?
As this act abolished the previous vestry of the overseers of the poor, in the following terms:
The Act of the Session hoi den in the First and Second Years of King William the Fourth, Chapter Sixty, "For the better Regulation of Vestries, and for the Appointment of Auditors of Accounts " in certain Parishes of England and Wales," shall be repealed, from and after the passing of this Act, so far as regards any Parish mentioned in either of the Schedules (A.) and (B.) to this Act: Provided always, that the Vestry and Auditors already elected for any such Parish under the said Act shall continue, to be such Vestry and Auditors until the First Election of Vestrymen and Auditors for such Parish under this Act has taken place, but no longer; and the Provisions of the said Act of King William the Fourth shall continue applicable to every such Vestry and to their Proceedings, and the Books in which, the same are entered, and to such Auditors and their Proceedings accordingly.
However, the question is, was the Vestry of the Old Artillery Ground elected under the said act, or under its own Local Act? It was elected under the new Act, and the subsequent Metropolis Local Management Act - although the Local Act continues to exist, but hollowed out in its entirety.
This Local Act was not repealed, as is made clear in the legislation. When the Liberty of the Tower was abolished, circa 1900, the local act for the Artillery seems to have not been affected either.
As we can see in the text below from the MMA 1855, it appears clear that the original Local Acts were not repealed: This paragraph re-appears in the MLMA cited above.
Upon the Petition of the Metropolitan Board of Works, or of any District Board or Vestry, representing to Her Majesty in Council that by reason of the Provisions of any Local Act of Parliament relating to any District or Parish, or any Part thereof respectively, Difficulties have arisen in the Execution of this Act and of such Local Act or either of them, and praying for a Suspension or Alteration of all or any of the Provisions of such Local Act, or for the Establishment of other Provisions in lieu thereof under this Enactment, it shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by Order in Council, to suspend or alter all or any of the Provisions of such Local Act, and to make other Provisions in relation to the Matters thereof as Her Majesty, with the Advice of Her Privy Council, may think necessary under the Circumstances of the Case; and every such Order in Council shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament within One Month after the making thereof, if Parliament be then sitting, or, if Parliament be hot sitting, then Within One Month after the next Meeting of Parliament, and shall be published in the London Gazette: Provided always, that no such Order in Council shall remain in force beyond the Term of One Year from the making thereof.
No comments:
Post a Comment