The Express.
London, England, 1867-10-05 00:00:00

LYCEUM.

Taro Emma, THE OF THE MILL.—THE
LADY OF LYONS. Mr. Yachter, Messrs. Jordan. Addison.
Calhaesk Melba, Dalton. Stuart, and Frances; Misses Us
worthy sad Carlotta Leclercq, Mrs. Marston.

STRMID.
Tins IviNnta, OUR Dcalßimai. Mmes. Poisons. Thhrne.
and James; Mesdames 'diastase sad Weethenby.—After which
WILLIAM TELL WITH A VENGEANCE. Maws. James and
Thorns ; MW Ada Swanborougb, dc.—And DRAY AS A INAhT.

HOLBORN.
THIS EVIHHNO, DANDELION'S DOWEL —And FOR LOW.
Mean. H. J. Montague, Price, Garden, Westland, and H. Wld•
dicumbe: Madames Htepbens. Henrade, Jenny Wlllmore, and
C. Baunders.—To conclude with A. 8.& Mr. J. W. Rey.

BRITANNIA.
THIS Barna°, BREAK BUT NOT BEND. Mrs. 9 Lane.—
The American Minstrels and Japanese Tommy; MM. Coutel
lier and El'l.e.—Willi LION LIMB ICING Ole THE SOUTH
SEA ISLAM DS.

NIGH WATER AT LONDON DRIDOIL
INis DAT —Nneeing. fib. Me.. —...titanseak lb. 43161.
Altosaow—Mornbg, 74 Ma—. —Angina" To. ota.

LONDON, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 6.

THE discussion which took place in the Court of
Common Council on Thursday, and the deputation
which, on the same day, visited the Pazainser of
the POOR-LAW BOARD, forcibly illustrate some of the
evils of our Poor-law administration. The system
of double government has often, in the history of
that administration, resulted in a deadlock of the
machinery, and disputes between the local and the
central authorities perpetually occur. The Poor-
law Board is sometimes arbitrary in its move-
ment:4, and the local Boards of Guardians are
generally obstinate in the preference of their own
way. Perhaps there is sometimes a little want of
consideration for local opinion in the action of the
Board, and there is very often a stout deter-
mination on the part of the Boards of Guardians
to resent any interference by the central authority
in what they conceive to be their own concerns.
We do not know that the present difficulty, which
Mr. CRAWFORD says "is exciting the strongest
" feeling throughout the whole of the City," can
be distinctly traced to either of these causes. So
long as the City proper is merely • small muni-
cipal Goshen in the wide Egypt of this unor-
ganized metropolis, the citizens do well to be
jealous of their privileges, and to preserve their
municipal immunities intact until the whole metro-
polis enters into their possession and enjoyment.
But it is difficult to see how far those privileges
are really endangered by that which is now pro-
posed. In no point does it directly and
immediately touch municipal interests, sad it
only bears upon those interests as it might indi-
cate, as the speakers of the Common Council sus-
pected, "an ulterior design" to break down the
distinction between the City and the rest of the
metropolis. But it is greatly beyond the power of
the Poor-law Board even to entertain such a
design. The City government may conquer and
annex the whole metropolis, but the metropolis
can have no desire to reduce the City to its own
half-governed condition. And certainly in the admi-
nistration of the Poor Law, which has no connection
with municipal affairs, the one thing to be desired is
that all local divisions should be swept away, and
all distinctions between various parts of one great
city should be broken down, and that the whole
of the wealth of London should be equally rated
to the support of the whole of the pauperism of
London.

The present difficulty has arisen from the partial
application of this principle by the Legislature,
and from the unwise exercise of their powers by
the Poor-law Board. The Metropolitan Poor
Act of this year, which was univers►lly accepted as
an instalment of a most beneficent reform, gave the
Board power to form Unions and outlying parishes
into districts for the purposes of the Act. In
the exercise of this power the Board proposes
to annex the parish of St. Luke to the East
London Union, and that of St. James, Clerken-
well, to the West London Union. The City pro-
per is divided into three Unions, of which the
Central Union is a rich one, and the Bast and
West are both poor. Instead of making the three
Unions of the City into one district, the Board
proposes to join a large poor parish to each of the
poor Unions, and to leave the Central Union as it
is. But the Earl of Davos distinctly told the
deputation which went to him on Thursday that
this arrangement was only " proposed," and it is
very probable that the opposition excited by it
may cause some better arrangement to be made.
The Board, like other Government departments.
seems to have no faculty for ascertaining local
opinion before it forms its schemes. It is not till
it has raised a storm that it becomes aware of
opposition, and even then it does not always bow
to it. Its powers are ill-defined, and the conflict
with local authority is almost incessant. It will
be observed, however, that in these cases the
difficulty arises out of the present imperfect'
system of rating. The purely parochial system
made it of but small importance with which pariah
any others were joined in union. Each parish
supported its own poor independently of the
others, and the rates might consequently be
rushing on one aide of a street, while on