The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-22 00:00:00

MONDAY EVENING,

COURT OF COMMoN COUNCIL.
On Thursday a Court was held for the dispatch of
public business.
A letter was read from Dr. Letheby, signifying his
acceptance of the appointment of chemist to test the
quality of the gas supplied by the City gas companies.
A letter from the City of London Gas Company upon
the same subject was also read. It merely stated that
the matter should be taken into consideration.
Ordered to be printed in the minutes of the Court.
THE FLEET VALLEY IMPROVEMENT.
Mr. Deputy CORNET expressed an anxious desire to
bring forward the motion of which he had given notice,
to rescind the proposition of Mr. Deputy Harrison,
agreed to at the last Court, authorising the committee to
confer with the railway companies, as to the execution of
the worka of the railway terminus.
Mr. Deputy HOLT opposed the suggestion to allow the
consideration of it to take precedence of the other busi-
ness marked down in the list.
Mr. NORRIS wished to know from Mr. Deputy Hard •
son, the chairman of the committee, whether any further
expense would be likely to be incurred if the motion for
rescinding the proposition were postponed?—(Hear.)
Mr. DepOty HARRISON said, that as chairman ot the
committee he had called the members together the day
after the last Court, agreeably to the order issued to
proceed to communicate with the railway authorities.
Plans and doeumenrary matter had been sent to the
companies. In fact. ail that had been ordered by the
Court to be done had been done, and no additional ex-
pense could be incurred without the sanction of the
Court, to which application must be previously made by
the committee. He concluded by moving the previous
question.
Mr. ANDERTON said, the motion to rescind the pro-
position was the moat outrageous motion be had ever
heard of.
Mr. H. L. TAILOR thought the opportunity ought as
soon as possible to be afforded to the members, who were
aware that they had done wrong in voting for the motion,
to correct their mistake.—(Laughter.)
Mr. BENNOCSI said, the objectors to the motion which
had been carried ought to be satisfied with the know-
ledge that not one farthing of expense could be incurred
without the consent of the Court, and he hoped the
motion of Mr. Deputy Corney would be discharged alto-
gether.
The previous question was carried by a majority of
four to one.
NEPOTISM IN THE COMMON COUNCIL.
Mr. T. H. HALL rose to move—•' That it be a stand-
ing order of the Court that. no son of any member of the
court be admitted a candidate for any office or situation
in the gift or appointment of the Court, or any committee
or commission of the Court; the order, however, not to
apply to any person who has already served the corpo-
ration in any-
office or situation." He hoped that many
observations would not be . necessary to recommend
a motion which was known to be looked upon
with great interest by the public to the appro-
bation of the Court.—(Hear, hear.) He had been
asked whether it vies his intention to include any officers
at present holding places and subject to annual election,
and of course to disapproval, in his proposition to the
Court. To that question he answered most distintely in
the negative.—(Rear, hear.) But he hoped the motion
would be the precursor of other important improvements
which would tend to raise the character of the Corpora-
tion in the opinion of their constituency.
The motion having been seconded,
Mr. Geysers did not consider that the Corporation had
about it any of the impurity to which Mr. T. H. Hall
had alluded. He had never seen an instance of impurity
in the election of the son of a member, and he could not
see why a gentleman who had long and honourably
served his fellow-citizens should be debarred from intro•
ducing a son to a situation adapted to his capacity. He
would move the previous question.
Mr. I'. HALL seconded the amendment.
Mr. Deputy LOTT counselled the adoption of the pre-
fe nt motion as leading to an important change, calcu-
lated to affect both collateral and immAiate degrees of
relationship. lie was sure the integrity and independ-
ence of the Court would be more readily acknowledged
by the public if the Court would decide unequivocally
in its favour.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. a/09E1Na could not agree with those gentlemen
who supposed that a member of the Court who distin-
guished himself by the honourable discharge of his du-
ties ought to be prevented from advancing the interests
of a relation, in the manner alluded to, by the legitimate
exercise of his influence.—([Tear.)
Mr. BENNOCH said, the motion was nothing less than
a substantial vote ot censure upon the Court itself, and
he ridiculed the project of heepiug it in a state of posi-
tive purity by such means.
Mr. Bnoox admired the gentlemen of the Corpora-
tion, who, with reform, and disinterestedness, and inde
pendence upon their lips, showed how little they were
guided by such feelings when brought to the test.—([Tear.)
He would insist upon it that the practice of thrusting
suns and other relations into offices of the Corporation
damaged the independence of the Court, and he could
not help expressing his disgust at the conduct of some
of the Hon. Gentlemen round him who, after advocating
great principles in a high tone and large language,
slipped their sons into situations on the sly.—(Laughter.)
Mr. BOWER could not see why the Court should pass
a self-denying ordinance.
Mr. ANDERTON said, that in 1837 be had brought
forward a motion respecting members of the Court whose
sons were candidates for any offices in the gift of the Cor-
poration, but he was supported by no more than 32
members, while there were 45 against him.—(liear.)
What chance, be would ask, had an individual, however
great his talents and capabilities, in comparison with the
son of a Common Councilmen of influence?
Mr. GILPIN had hoped that the motion would have been
carried without discussion, and regretted to see that a
mover and seconder of an amendment were to be found.
(Hear, hear.) He called upon the Court to remember that
toe foundations of all the other corporations of the
kingdom bad been sapped by the infamous jobbery which
prevailed in them.
Mr. PEWTRESS thought the discussion was rather toe
personal, and wished it to be adjourned in order that a
more deliberate consideration might be rendered to it.
Mr. Deputy EAGLETON thought the motion did not go
far enough, but he believed it would be a stepping-stone
to further and still more essential improvements.
L. JONES implored the Court to carry the
original motion.
blr. DePutY
STEVENS was of opinion that if a member's
son were eligible to a situation under the Corporation by
his talents and character, he had as good a right to ex-
ercise his influence as any other candidate.
Mr.
Mr. Du
JERSEY on atslispzoirwaerisofully supportedac advocated
at ed
the the
originaloriginal
motion. m oti o .
Mr. T. H. HALL replied in a few forcible observations,
and
The previous question was negatived by a vast ma-
jority.
The original question was then put, and
The LORD MAYOR announced, amid great cheering,
that it was carried unanimously.