The Express.
London, England, 1861-01-16 00:00:00

(Stamped, id. Additional.) LT WOPENCE.

COURT OP ALDERMEN.

A court of aldermen was held yesterday at the
Guildhall ; the Right Hoe. the LORD MAY ou preside& The
minutes of the but court were, as usual, read and confirmed.
J. EvaNs, Esq., then irtrodoced T. Dukio, Esq., the
newly elected alderman for the ward of Candlewick, in the
place of the late Sir C. Carroll, and that gentleman took the
MOLL and was then introduced, with the usual formalities,
by Mr. Sewell, the sword-bearer, to his brother aldermen,
and took his seat among them.
Upon the motion of Mr. Alderman COPELAND, seconded
by Mr. Alderman WILSON, a resolution of condolence to
the widow of the late lamented Alderman Sir O. Carroll,
upon the loss she bad sustained, Ma unanimously carried,
as was also a motion that the resolution should be adver-
tised in the usual newspapers, and that a copy should be
sent to the widow of the deceased gentleman.
The next subject that MAY brought before the court was
one of a very important character, not only in referenoe to
the interests of the corporation, but generally to the mer-
cantile community of the City of London.
It may be recollected that at a recent court a petition was
presented by certain influential merchants of the City, com-
plaining of the conduct of one of the City brokers, named
lksorge Henry Darby Lwreuce, in the performance of his
duties. The usual course on such occasions is to give notice
to the party complained of, of the nature of the ouniplaint
made against him, and to call upon him to give an answer
in writing and to appear before the court and give any ex-
planation he may think necessary, and the matter then
stands over until the next court. This was done, andupon the
next occasion Mr. Sewell, a responsible officer of the cor-
poration, to whom these matters, are usually entrusted, re-
ported to the court that he had used every practicableexer-
tion in his power to serve the party complained of with the
notice or summons of the court, but had been unable to do
so. He stated that he found he had left the offices he bad
theretofore occupied, arid all that was known of him was that'll*
wee supposed to have gone to the Continent, but no one ap-
Mreto he able to give any definite information about
n. d Upon this statement being made the next proceeding
to be taken, according to the forms of the court, wee to give
notice to the sureties of the party complained of of the ap-
plication that had been made, and to call upon them to
produce their principol, or in default of doing so to appear
and answer for him ; and this course was adopted, and the
usual formal notices were placed in the lands of Mr.
&well to be served upon the parties, and the matter now
again came before the court.
The TOWN CLERK having road the notice upon the paper
of business, the court proceeded to dispose of it.
The LLZCORDER inquired of Mr. Sewell whether he had
served the notice upon the sureties of the parties cone
plainod of, requiring them to attend
Mr. Sewell replied that he bad not. This statement
evidently excited some surprise in the court, but be west
on to explain that he endeavoured to the best of his power ,
to serve them, but he found that one had been dead a con-
siderable
time; and with regard to the other, upon his going
to the place where be had resided, he found that his house
was pulled down, and no one knew anything about him, ,1
and persons of whom he made inquiry with regard to
the supposed " surety " had never heard of such a per-
son.
(A laugh.)
The Recorder inquired whether any of the petitioners
were present!
Mr. Sewell said they were not, but they were aware of
the circumstances.
The Recordefobserved that as this was so, they no doubt
thought it was unnecessary to be present. The only course
that now could be taken in the matter was to adjourn the
consideration of the petition sine die.
Yr. Alderman Casttris accordingly put that motion to
We court, and it was seconded by Mr. Alderman W. LAY!.
RINCR, and carried.
This question of "suretyship" is one of considerable im-
portance, not oily to the corporation of London but to these
intensted in the large amount of charitable funds which
they have at their disposal . Only a short time ago a case
occurred in which it appeared that 3001. had been advanced
by one of the City charities upon the security of three per-
sons, and in the result, the borrower went into the In-
solvent Court, two of his mimeties were bankrupt, or men
of straw, the third left the country, and the whole of the
money was lost.
Mr. Alderman CHALLIS, in the absence of Mr. Alderman
Sidney, brought before the court the subject of the crowded
state of some of the streets in Billingsgate ward from the
great amount of traffic, and he moved that the matter
should be referred to the General Purposes Committee.
Mr. Alderman Roos seconded the motion. _

Alderman FINNIR said he believed that any alteration*,
so fat as buildings were concerned, would be attended with
maontoas expense, and that all the difficulty would be
ovesoome by the appointment of extra ooludables. A few
eddirimed •sue Midler' employed ecassionany. mil it hod
had the effect of completely relieving the traffic.
The LORD 111.1YOR said that application had been made
to the Police Commiasionei upon the subject, and his
reply was that he could not find men enough to perform
the duty.
Alderman FINKIA observed that plenty of men could be
found, if they would only lower the standard height half
an inch.

The motion was then put and carried.
Mr. Alderman CHAU'," then moved that the thanks of
thP court be presented to the Rev. James °ohms, M.A.,
late chaplain to the City Prison, Holloway, together with
the sum of fifty guineas, as a testimonial of their,apprecia-
lion of his faithful ministry during the seventeen years he
performed the duties of chaplain.
The motion was carried, and the court shortly afterwards
adjourned.

sM FRANCIS BARING ON PARLIAMANTARY

REFORM,

The followiug addreas hag been issued by tug
flight Roo. Sir Frauds Baring to the electors of the borough
of Portsmouth

The meeting of parliament is near at hand, and I am
anxious to communicate with you on the present state of
the reform question. I have adopted this mode as the
most direct and the moat convenient. With many others in
1859 I entertained a sanguine expectation that an effective
manure of reform would have passed last session. We all
know bow entirely these expectations have been disap-
pointed. The failure has not been occasioned by any your.
Lined or violent opposition. Far from it. Public men concur
in a remarkable degree as to the expediency of a consi-
derable alteration of the franchise. In 1848 Lord J. Russell
admitted the necessity of a change. The late Sir Robert
Peel, it is known, concurred in that view. The adenine.
nations of Lord John Russell, of Lcrd Aberdeen, of Lord
Derby, of Lord Palmerston, have, in turn, ploposed buy,
differing, indeed, the one from the other, but aU calculated
to effect a large increase in the number of electors. I do
not recollect a single leading member of the House of Com-
mons who has recorded has dissent from this view. But
though there was no active opposition, there appeared in
the majority of the house the greatest disinclination to face
the question—a determination to postpone any decision -
and doubts and hesitation which even party ties could not
overcome. This, I know, is attributed to the fear of the
dissolution which would follow the passing of arefoem bill
In all human affairs there will be an admixture of personal
considerations. lam not a disciple of the ached- which
attributes every actin) of public men to mean and selfish
motives. But were these feelings courgied to the House
of Commons! It is difficult to estimate correctly public
opinion, but, as Earl as my opportunities enable me to
judge, I believe the opinion out of doors' is not very lige.
rent from that ' within.' There exists, I should say, no
hostility to all reform—no unwrningnees to relax the pro
visions of the Reform Bill of Lord Grey, but union large
classes a strong disinclination to say sudden sad great
change--serious alarm at the effect of any sweeping mea-
sure. I recognise no general apprchation of any of the
plans proposed either by government or others ; and
believe the withdrawal of the bill last session was as
acceptable to the general public as it was to the majority
of the House of Commons. The public mind, I speak it
with regret, is not prepared for any extensive measure. I
shall gladly find that I am mistaken in this opinion ; for no
man is more persuaded that the change must ultimately
take place- -no man is more convinced of the risk of leaving
the settlement to a time of struggle and excitement. But
we have to deal with circurnstaaces u they are. The go-
vernment have the best means of ascertaining what pro-
spect there is of carrying a reform bill next menu. I am,
as you will suppose, utterly ignorant of their intentions. If
they expect to atoned and bring forward a measure I shall
give it, as before, a general support. But my hops of its
paring are not sanguine. The result of 1861 will,
I fear, be similar to that of 1860. If there is
DO fair prospect of success, I hope no proposal
will he made. A repetition of what pseud last year will
neither be creditable to the legislature, beneficial to the
general interests of the country, nor favourable to the
cause of reform itself. Is tt necessary, then, that all action
and improvement should canoe ? Are we to wait until pres-
sure in • moment of excitement shall force the question on
the decision of the house ! I thmk not, and shall be pre-
pared to support such partial extensions of the suffrage as
may not be inconsistent with a fair representation of the
different interests, net as a settlement, but as steps in the
right road, apparently slower, but lac likely to create
alarm. I may be told that this is ' bit by bit reform,'
and probably those who are most anxious for great
change will be most hostile to such a course. But a
nickname is not an argument,, and we must not be led
astray by the precedent of 1830. At that time a large
measure was absolutely necessary, and its boldness
contributed to its safety. It was wise, too, when the mea-
sure was to refuse for a time to re-open the question
by pertiari' alteration. But great changes are not in them-
selves good, and, looking back, I think the refusal to amend
wee enforced too long. It would have been more fortunate
if parliament had earlier cousented to extend the franchise,
and had done it gradually. 'lt were good that men, in
their itmovatsons, would follow the example of time itself,
which, indeed, innovateth *Testily, but quietly, and by
degrees scarcely to be perceived.' I will trouble you no
further. Had I seen among the numerous speeches dell-
vend sines tits close of the session any which took a view
in which I agreed, I should gladly have been silent ; but us
this has not been the case, I must ask you to bear with this
explanation, for yon have a right to 'know my opinions,
sad I am as anxious as ever to retain your confidence."