HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0151 and id is 1 raw text is: 2 EL. & EL 143. PETO 11. THE OVERSEERS OF WEST HAM
The question which we have to determine in this case is whether the defendant
has been duly elected by the University of London a member of the General Council
of Medical Education of the United Kingdom, under stat. 21 & 22 Vict. c. 90. This
statute enacts that this General Council shall consist of one person chosen from time
to time by each of certain specified bodies politic, amongst whom is the University of
London. On 3d November, 1858, the defendant was elected a member of this General
Council by the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor and Fellows of the University of London,
as the Senate of the said University, and he has since acted as a member of the Council.
On the part of the relator it is contended that the election of a member of this Council
by the University of London cannot be made by the Senate, but must be made by all
the persons enumerated in sect. 3 of the last charter granted to the University, com-
prehending all the Graduates of the University. As the right of election is by the
statute given to The University of London ;,and as the charter, by sect. 3, constitutes
certain individuals therein designated, and all the persons on whom the University
had conferred degrees, and all the persons on whom the University shall thereafter
confer degrees, one body politic and corporate, by the name of 'The University of
London;' and as sect. 4 of the charter ordains, that the said body politic and
corporate shall consist of a Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, Fellows and Graduates ; if
nothing to the contrary appeared in the charter, there would seem strong ground for
contending that the election in ques-[143]-tion should be made by all those who are
ordained by the charter to constitute the University, and therefore that all Graduates
of the University ought to have a voice in the election. But regard must be had to
sect. 8, which ordains that the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor and Fellows for the time
being shall constitute the Senate of the University, and to sect. 18, which ordains
that the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor and Fellows for the time being shall have the
entire management of, and superintendence over, the affairs, concerns and property of
the said University ; and in all cases unprovided for by the charter it shall be lawful
for the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor and Fellows to act in such manner as shall appear
to them best calculated to promote the purposes intended by the University. Now,
this election of a member of the Medical Council is a case unprovided for by the
charter, and it seems to come within the scope of the affairs and concerns of the
University, of and over which it is ordained that the Senate shall have the entire
management and superintendence. If so, the members of the Senate ought to choose
the member of the Medical Board; acting in such manner as shall appear to them best
calculated to promote the object in view. However it might have been if an Act of
Parliament had conferred upon the University of London the right of electing a
member of the House of Commons, without more distinctly defining the franchise, it
can hardly be supposed that it was the intention of the Legislature that all the Doctors
of Laws, Doctors of Medicine, Masters of Arts, Bachelors of Laws, Bachelors of
Medicine, and Bachelors of Arts, who may be Graduates of the University of London,
should be assembled to choose this member of the Medical Board ; a choice in which
the great bulk of [144] them are likely to take no interest, and which must be made
more conveniently and more discreetly by the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor and Fellows,
constituting the Senate. For these reasons, we think that the election in question by
the Senate was valid, and that we are bound to give judgment for the defendant.
Judgment for the defendant.
PETO AND OTHERS, Appellants, against THE CHURCHWARDENS AND OVERSEERS OF
THE PARISH OF WEST HAI, Respondents. Wednesday, June 15th, 1859. By
The General Lighting and Watching Act, 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 90, s. 33, owners and
occupiers of houses, buildings, and property (other than land) rateable to the
relief of the poor in any parish, are to be rated at a rate in the pound three
times greater than that at which the owners and occupiers of land shall be rated.
By sect. 34, every court-yard, yard, or garden (such garden not being a market
garden or nursery ground) shall be included in and make part of the assessment
to be made on the house, buildings, or other property to which they may be
respectively attached.-The Victoria London Docks cover an area of 165 acres,
95 of which form a wet dock, tidal basin and canal, all covered with water; the
remaining area consists of jetties which intersect the wet dock and basin, and of
warehouses and buildings on the jetties. The whole forms one enclosure, occupied](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0151&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)