The Express.
London, England, 1853-11-30 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 30, 1853.

CITY CORPORATION COMM',

Yesterday the Coinagegoner. Mistimed the in-
quiry at the official residence of the Prime Minister. Mr.
Labonchere in the chair. Sir .1. Patteson was not present.
Captain Bullock examined I was employed by the
Admiralty to y the Port of London between 1830 end
1853. I re-surveyed the Medway, bat did not re-survey
the Thames. There are many sited. in the river Thames.
I cannot say whether the City of London has done its duty
in respect to the conservancy of the Thome, because I
' don't know what their duty is. The Navigation Commit-
tee also employed me to survey the river. I made my re-
port in 1842. The recommendations proposed in that re-
port have not been carried out. I understand that the City
presented a bill to parliament for the purpose of carrying
out those suggestions, but parliament rejected the bill. I
understand the City his not the power of removing
these shoals ; it is a matter of dispute between the Trinity
House, the Admiralty, and the Corporation. us to the
power of removing. The Trinity House claims the right
over these shoals for ballast. The Thames is embanked,
but the Medway is not. There are traces of the Medway
having been embanked, but the embankment. have given
way. The cost of repairing them would be enormous. The
river itself remains perfect, but the unprotected marsh lands
arc falling into the river. The marsh lands are private pro-
Perty.

Mr. F. WHISTLER war examined, and said—l am con-
nected with the wine trade. Oar house is in Bucklenbury.
I have been there for 46 years. I am a liveryman, and a
member of the Mercer's Company. I war asked to become
a common councilman and an alderman. There are orphans
dues taken which amount to 2s. 4d. a pipe on wine. I do
not complain of that. I think the City requires reform,
but that it would be unjust to sweep away the corporation
with all its privileges and inuannities. The City is slow in
making improvements, but still they do improve. I paid
formerly 101. for the pollee, and I now pay but 61. The
shoals in the river ere not very injurious. The Steam
Navigation Company I know ran their heavy ships some-
times at low water. With regard to the lights, I think the
regulations of the corporation are mast wise, sad I regret
that the corporation have not enforced their orders in that
respect. lam not a shipowner, but I have had a goad
deal to do with shipping. There are 6,000 licensed water-
men on the river, and it is necessary that there should be
persons on the river who are acquainted with all the turns and
points. With regard to thcilmagistrates of the city, I think they
perform their duty most admirably. I scarcely ever knew
a complaint to be urged against the mode in which the
aldermen perform their magisterial duties. I think the
freedom of the City should be thrown open. This would, I
think, give a better class of councilmen, and I think
'they ought to be compelled to serve if elected. Some
greater control than at present exists should be established
over the finances of the corporation. With regard to the
supply of water, though it is good, it is insufficient. The
state of the markets is a disgrace to the City. I think the
companies should undergo a great change.
Mr. Thos. Rogers said—l am a solicitor, and have raided
lis the City for 30 years. In 1839 I was elected a common
councilman, but I served only one year. lam a member of
the Spectacle Makers' Company. With respect to the
working of the common council, I think its proceedings are
as much as possible like those of the House of Commons. I
was a member of the coal, corn and finauce committee, and
the general purposes committee. The committee have the
power of getting most precise information from the
' various ofileen of the corporation. Strangers are
excluded from the proceedings of the committees.
There is ns publication of the proceedings. The minutes
of proceedings are laid Define the Lord Mayor and court.
We do not bask to any spend atom in the members of
the committees for the business that comes before thin. but
can call persons who are well acquainted with the various
subjects. These committees did net receive a penny for
for their services. The general purposes committee in the
year in which I served spent 2001. in dinners, and the
cod, earn, and finance committee 2001. also. That money
is'expended to induce the members to be punctual in their
attendance. If a member is not present et the meetings
within five minutes after the hour appointed he loses his
right to dine with the committee. I certainly think that
the system of dinaen is a good one, because it tends to
bring men of various minds to the consideration
of the questions brought before the committees.
Besides, the members leave their own private
business, and their own 'Bonn hour has generally
passed by while attending the committee. The meet-
ings of which I am now speaking are monthly meetings.
The chairmen hes the right of inviting two of his friecds
from the ward:in which he resides. There is a greater
mundane* on tho mouthy meetings than at the intermedi-
ate meetings. The intermediate meetings are meetings of
sub-committees. They are *temerity smaller than the
monthly meetings. The wards are under the aldermen,
sad their liberality and charity is very great. I am sure
that if Alderman Copeland has given 11. he has given
10,0001 in private charity in his ward. I should be very sorry
to see the aldermen abolished. They sit as silent judges in
the Central Criminal Court, under the superior judges, and
it is impossible to be in a better school. The magisterial
duties of the aldermen are admirably performed. The
aldermen are judges of oyer and terminer under charter of
Edward IV., that being so it would be hard to decide
that they ate unfit to be magistrates. They take no active
part in the administration of justice at the Central
Criminal Court, but I think their presence does good.
The corporation hes very ancient privileges, and I think
they ought not to be taken away. Some other corporations
had charters, but only since the time of Charles 11. They
are of a modern date as compared with the charters of the
City of London.
Mr. W. E. Hickson said I have given great attention to
the subject of corporations. I published various articles in
the iVestatiouter Review on the subject, which have since
been published in separate pamphlets. I was formerly con-
nected with the city as a merchant, and have still an lute-
rest in the City. lam a rate-payer of St. Dunstan's parish.
I connoted the Weshnissier Review for eleven years, and
made it principally subservient to the promotion of admi-
nistrative reform. My object is not so much to make out a
case against the City of London as to make a case for the
consolidation of the City of London generally, and for the
whole metropolis in connexion with the City. I don't
think that the governing bodies of the City are individually
liable to the charge of corruption. I think they may be
taken as fair samples of the middleclames generally
throughout Ragland and Ireland. The gist of the
matter is that in the City we suffer from a
system of extravagant expenditure sad conflicting
jurisdiction brought to a reio ad abeswituns. There
is no city anywhere when the local burdens ought
to be so light, and where they are so heavy as in the City of
London. I speak both a twee direct and Indirect taxes.
At the time of the last emni of inquiry it was stated
that the revenues of the City athatabd to 160,0004 that
that was theism width they were answerable for in their
corporate capacity. They mile a Moduli= between their
corporate estates sad OM hods they eheisieter under arts
of parUameat,enheeelthiely, they impossed bat too
well on the Wads et the miethithithein id that time that
the inquiry at that pedal led eillateethe 4* to the *ape-
rate property, but these est of Meek mho leek an interest
is the matter, immidered that the Ompsration were finan-
cially responsible he 600,0001., hefted of 160,0001. That
fact was stated seen time atter web by Lord Brougham in
the Reuse of Lerro, bet the eteptrelkee mewed to the re-
port of the lest emmiedee, i wed& it was set
dews at 160,0101., sad our shim that time we
lie under the tageeedes of beihit grossly exagge-
rated the uwmMture for whit* the corporation
are directly or indirectly responsible. However, the
fact is as I have stated. But the eagesditure is em-
braced in fifty or sixty different aseasses, which are kept
in the Chamberlain's Office • and the sunk is, that the
members of the Common &WWI daiRMOMIS know very
little about them. A person looking at these accounts en-
perficially would suppose that the a lowanee to the Lord
Mayor war 6,0001., as set down, but it is perfectly well
known that be receives 2,0001. in bee at the Mansion
House which does not appear in the acoaunts. It is noto-
rious that the City tradesmen receive 1,0001., but it does
net appear, in the City accounts because the items are
broken up into small amounts, such as SI. and like emu.
It would appear that 55,000/. is the whole amount of
the fixed ensue! salaries of the two courts of MO City, the
Court of Common Council end Court of Aldermen ; but the
salaries and the fees of the Lord Mayor, of the
commissioner of police, of than district surveyon,
are omitted. In fact, salaries and officers in the
City ate omitted in this account to the extent of 50,0001.
Here is a statement of the oat to the public, in the year
1833, of the officers and clerks of the London oorporation,
in salaries, fees, and office allowances, from returns signed
by the officers themselves, and presented by them to the
revenue committee of the Court of Common Council, in
1836 :—Legal staff (consisting of appointments held by soli-
citor+, barristers, proctors, sad attorneys' clerks),
38,0671.195. 64. ; state officers (the Lord Mayor, chamber-
lain, sheriffs, yeoman, trumpeters, ste.), 24,1871.2 a. 94.;
officers of nista= end market dues, 29,3381. 12s. Bd. ;
officers of City gaols, 4,3301. 7s. 2d. ; officers of public
works, 6,4031. 12e. 6d. ; miscellaneous officers (including
bell-keepers, beadles, Irish Society, Port of London, ate.),
9,6531 ss. 3d. ; total, 110,9801. 19.. 10d. An impression
has prevailed that, since 1436, an improvement has taken
plan in the administration of the City funds, and Mr.
Dillon hes given evidence to that effect before the Com-
missioners. I inquired into that, and I find that whilst
there has been a reduction in offices, fen, and expenditure
on one side, there has been an increase on the other. I
believe, in point of fact, that the expenditure is consider-
ably more at the present time than it was in 1835, though
I cannot take upon me to say how much. I should
say that 120,0001. for fees, salaries, and emolu-
ments at the present time is within the mark.
In some cues the fees go into the hands of the Chamber-
lain, but that is not a general role. The commissioner
should not merely call for a return of the salaries of offi-
cers, but also a return of the expense of the offices. For
instance, the salary of the Chamberlain is 2,6001., but the
cost of the office is 4,600/. The rainy and fees of the town
clerk amounts to 1,8921. ; but the office outs 4,6741. This
is the ease with City offices generally. I think it will be
desirable to give a comparison of the expenditure in other
places. Leeds hu a population of 172,270, or 60,000 more