The Press. — London, England, 1854-01-14 00:00:00

GENERAL LOPEZ. TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS." Sir, —Though I differ toto ado from you in politi cal opinions, I am persuaded you would not know ingly make mistatements. Therefore, cognisant of what did occur in this country, I assure you that the treaty concluded at Assuncion between England and Paraguay has been ratified, and, having been so, it has been published in the London Gazette for gene ral information. When General Lopez was in London the Court was: not in town ; and as the General only spoke Spanish, a language the Queen does not speak, a visit would have been inconvenient and unpleasant. Her Majesty, however, did receive the General, both in coming to, and in leaving, England—graciously, we may be sure. His Excellency saw Lord Clarendon whenever he had anything to communicate. That he was disap pointed in his communications I quite admit; not, however, from any discourtesy or neglect, but for reasons which the Examiner has correctly explained in its issue of to day. For the inattention of other foreign diplomatists, if any there were, the British Government was in no way responsible. But there obviously could be no great intercourse where there was no language spoken in common ; and I have heard one say that the general rather shrunk from than sought society. —I am, sir, your obedient servant, C. January 7. [Although the foregoing letter is not authenticated by the signature of the writer, we waive in its favour our usual rule and insert it, because it ap pears to come from one who has a right to speak with authority on the subject to which it refers. " C." first asserts what we have never denied, ' that the treaty has been ratified ; secondly, that Cleneral Lopez was only received by her Majesty on his arrival and at his departure, which we are surely justified in calling "a bare recognition of his diplo matic character;" and lastly, that the Foreign Minis ter of England Llmitted a foreign envoy to an inter view whenever "he had anything to communicate." Neither the letter of " C." nor the article in the Examiner to which he refers, appear to us to con flict with the statement we have made.—En. of PLtElis.] THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN. TO THE. EDITOR 01 " TH E mess." Sir,—l shall feel obliged by your inserting the enclosed in your valuable journal. A short time since a communication appeared in a weekly paper entitled " The Dangers of the North- West Passage." I beg to offer a few observations, showing that the writer has not overstated the perils we have to encounter, or the occasions whence they may arise. The great acceleration of speed of the trains on the North-Western Railway on this side Watford has of late been observed by many persons whose residences are in that neighbourhood, or whose business obliges them to use that part of the line in visiting town. I recently took a first-class ticket from the Watford station by the mail-train due at Watford at 10.23, and at Euston-square at 11 a.m. The train did not reach Watford till long after it was due, and the speed with which we dashed along to make up for lost time was fearful, and the oscillation of the carriage was so great as to render it difficult to keep our seats. When we reached the Euston-square terminus some observation WAS made by an official as to the lateness of the train, where upon the driver of the engine made answer, " And yet I went like the devil, too." In fact, the distance between Watford and London is become a kind of railway steeplechase. At a time when awful catastrophes occur, and the public, aghast, asks, "How can these things be ?" it surely requires no long scientific investigations, no heights, no depths of knowledge before a verdict can be given as to the possible cause of accidents. As long as there exists such great want of punctuality in the start ing and arrival of trains—as long as the welfare of pas • 'wagers is postponed to the interests derivable from increased traffic, or to any other arrangements in which the consideration of safety is excluded—so long will danger attend us on our great iron-ways. The object of those who direct and manage ought to be to save men's lives, not to destroy them ; whereas the results often point to culpable supineness and carelessness of their sacred trust. 1 have repeated the exclamation of the engine driver. Your readers will judge for themselves whether they will in future calmly recline in the corners of a railway-carriage should they have reason to suspect the mighty engine attached to the train is under the command of an imitator of the arch enemy. A safe conduct under such auspices is not very probable. The only thing we have to do is what a celebrated French writer has forcibly ex pressed thus :—" De remettre votre ante a Dieu et de contempler le paysage en attendant le Inert on un miraele."—l am sir, your obedient servant, A Ensquxxx M.MUS.& London, January, 104. 111.1. THE PRESS. THE CITY COMMISSION—DEFENCE OF THE CORPORATION. THE City Corporation Commission resumed its meet ings on Wednesday, after the Christmas recess. Con siderable interest attached to the proceedings of the day, and the I'rivy Council Chamber in Downing street was thronged with civic dignitaries, headed by the Lord Mayor, as it was known that a formal and elaborate defence would be presented on behalf of the corporation against the manifold charges adduced in previous sittings, or ventilated through the press, against their administration. This defence accord ingly appeared in the shape of a voluminous " Re port," signed by the Town Clerk, Mr. Sergeant Mere wether, and read by the Recorder, the Hon. Stuart Wortley. This document extends over six or seven columns of close print in the daily journals. We, of course, can Lind space but for a bare abstract of its principal allegations. Preluding with some observations upon the parties by whom the City corporation is assailed, and who, says the report, "have constituted themselves at once accusers, witnesses, and prosecutors," and upon the statements whereon the assault is based, in which " are mixed offensive misrepresentations, exaggerations of assumed facts, spurious arguments, groundless opinions, and speculative projects," the document proceeds to answer seriatim the charges brought under six several heads of accusation. I. That the revenue of the corporation is exces sive. This they declare is not the case : " The proper income of the corporation averages about 2(X),0001. per annum, of which a little less than one - half is derived from freehold and leasehold rents, and a little more than the other half is derived from tolls, offices, and casual sources of revenue. This sum represents the grass receipts of the corporation in respect of its corporate pro perty. Besides the proper revenue of the corporation, the Police Committee of the Common Council and the Commissioners of Sewers, consisting of members of that body, have the raising and expenditure of an average amount of about 111,0001. per anutun by rates upon pro perty in the City—namely, fi4,0001. for paving, lighting, and sewers, and about 27,0001. fur police." 11. That the City income, or part of it, is derived from objectionable sources. These sources too examined separately : " The RENTAL, amounting to nearly 100,0001. per annum, is chiefly derived from houses in the City, from the perpe tuity lessee and occasional fines of the Conduit Mead Estate, and from the rents of the Finsbury property, which is held upon lease. The entire amount of rental derived from embankments made, not for the sake of revenue, but for the improvement of the river and the convenience of commerce, did not exceed 1,100/. per annum. On this head the report alludes to the steps taken by the coiporation in reference to the conservancy of the river, and justifies the resistance they offered to the proceedings of the Crown in respect to the bed of the river. With respect to the revenue derived font TOLLS, (fellers, and tares, the corporation, while contending that they were derived from prescriptive or recognised legal title, were willing to make those modifications which the interests of trade and commerce required. The first of these revenues to which objection had been made was the charge upon the admissions to freedom. This charge, which, until within the last twenty years, was 271. (is. Md., and produced some thousands a year, is now reduced to the ancient fee of'.:!. tis. Sd., yielding very little more than one-tenth of its previous amount; and was obviously too small to deserve a single comment, except from the mis representations which had been made as to the proceedings taken within the last few years to compel persons to be come free, not for the purpose of increasing the amount of the funds of the corporation, but to increase the number of the municipal constituency. They denied that the pro ceedings to compel the retail traders to take up their freedom were conducted in a harsh and vexatious split ; and in all the cases but one the costs of the proceedings were remitted to the recusant patties. With respect to the COAL DUTIES, the annual amount of which was 70,01X.d. a year, they say, that, if public improvements are to be effected, it appears difficult to devise means by which the amount required can be raised in a manner so little inju rious to the public, and falling so equally upon the persons for whose use the improvements are required. The avenues of the city of London are sufficient for the inha bitants of the city of London ; and the necessity for their improvement and enlargement arises from the immense concourse of people who daily frequent the City from miles around it. What, then-fore, can be more equitable than that the persons residing within twenty miles round the metropolis should contribute to the improvements required for their comfort and convenience ? Ult.!' respect to the alleged extension of the area of the limits of taxation by the act 14th and lath Vict., cap. 140, the opinion of the 16w officers of the Crown is conclusive that the area of taxation was not extended by that act. The revenue de rived from the METAOS or cons amounts to about 10,0001. a year, subject to the cost. of collection and management. In reference to this the corporation have for several years been irupressed with the opinion that the time was approaching when the interests of the commerce of the port would require a considerable modification of the ancient customs of Loudon, as far as both metage and por terage were concerned, but those motliticatious could not be effected without an act of Parliament." That the expenditure of the corporation is excessive in amount and useless as to its purposes. " To support this allegation," the report observes, " it is aaid that the costs of the mayoralty are excessive, anti that the inaugurat'en banquet and its attendant SATURDAY, pageantry are expensive, useless, and absurd. To this we reply, that the allowance to the Lord Mayor to maintain the state and hospitality of his office (including his propor• tion of the banquet and pageantry) does not exceed a sum between 8,00(1. and 9,0001. per annum. The casual sources of income, such as the tines for the admission of Jew brokers, grants of freedoms, &c., referred to by some of the witnesses, which were formerly perquisites of office, have been for some years abolished or commuted for money payments included in this sum. We con tend that the inauguration banquet is not profuse either in its character or cost, and that it is conducted as becomes a state banquet. given to the Ministers of the Crown, the representatives of foreign powers the elite of the learned professions. and the great commercial and name. tary establishments of the City, by the corporation of the first city of the first country in the world. There are about 1,101) guests entertained—the expense, defrayed by the Lord Mayor and by the Sheriffs in equal moieties, amounts togs. then to about 2,2001., of which sum the cost of the pageant and procession by land and by water does not, on an ave. rage, exceed 2001. Besides this sum, the corporation de fray the cost of lighting and fitting up the hall. We like. wise contend that the pageant, being in continuation of an ancient cui'dom, ought not to be abolished without stronger reasons than have yet been assigned for its aboli. tion. Previous to the last 9th of November, the Lord Mayor took the opinion of the bankers in Lombard. street, of the brokers in Mincing-lane, and of the market traders in Thames-street. They did not feel that it would occasion any such inconvenience to their pursuits as would render it improper for the procession to pass along those streets in its progress. Great economy had taken place in the administration of the different City committees since the beginning of the present century, and their great efficiency had been admitted by the former commissioners. With respect to the salaries, the same commissioners stated that though they were framed on a liberal scale the question of their amount might be safely left to a civic legislature, fairly chosen. The duties of the officers had greatly increased since then, in consequence of the increase of the City property • notwithstanding which their net in. come was less now than it was at the period of their report (1882)." IV. As to the City police. In answer to charges under this head the corporation observe that " the general interests of the metropolis could not in any degree suffer from the independent exertion of two co operative forces, acting as they did in harmony with each other for all purposes, when co-operation was required, and acting separately only in the instances where special cir cumstances require a special treatment. The objection to an independent commission for the lighting, paving, and sewerage of the City is founded upon the same arguments, and is to be met by the same reply as in the ease of the police force." V. That the City accounts are intentionally kept in an unintelligible form. This allegation the report meets by a peremptory denial both of the stated fact and the imputed motive : " The chamberlain kept the requisite set of books for the conduct of the business of his office, in which the general transactions of all the various funds in his depart. went were daily posted and balanced. He kept in addition a separate set of books for each of the distinct accounts or trusts in respect of which he was treasurer, the entries of which were regularly balanced with the general cash books. Thus separation of funds (without which incl. trieable confusion would result) was provided for at the same time that an efficient check was furnished by the re duplication of entries. These accounts were again arranged for audit, according to the system known as ' Charge and Discharge,' which had been iu operation more than a century. This system affords proof of accuracy, and has called forth expressions of satisfaction from all who had made themselves acquainted with its working. This branch of administration would not be found unworthy of comparison with that of other public departments, wing cilial or even imperial, and was undeserving of the censure bestowed upon it." 'VI. That the personnel of the corporation was de rived from the lower ranks of City trade—the Mayor, the Aldermen, and Common Council having during the present century been shopkeepers, greatly in ferior to corporators of former times, in station, respectability, intelligence, and public spirit, unfit for their positions, and unrespected by their fellow citizens. Replying to this personal charge, the re port states : " That of the existing Court, of Aldermen, eleven of its members graduated to their present position through the Common Council. The personal honour and respecta bility of the iddermen, and the perfect honesq and inde pendence with which they discharged the duties of their office, hail not been impugned by any witness. There existed amongst the citizens of London a very strong pre possession in favour of the retention of aldermen as magistrates, instead of having justice administered in the City by stipendiaries, and in their opinion there existed well-founded reasons for this prepossession. Of the twenty six, eight of them were, or had been, members of the House of Commons, five of them for large metropolitan consti tuencies. Fifteen of the aldermen, as well as several members of the Common Conne“, were county magis trates, some of them for two or three counties. One of the aldermen was and had been for many years a Bank director, and was the chairman of the Society of Merchants trailing to the Continent ; another is chairman of the Committee of the Joint Stock Banks of London ; two ' others were directors of the London and Westminster Bank ; two were directors of the London Joint Stock Bank, and two more of the Union Bank ; and most of , them who have leisure and inclination, like many o f the i Common Council, wore dilutor* Of insurance cewpanicli I I 28 limm... "Mom