The Sun.
London, England, 1864-01-22 00:00:00

THE SIIN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARV 22, 1864.

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

A Court of Common Council was holden yesterday in the
Council Chamber, Guildhall. The Lord Mayor presided.
The Remembrancer read a long list of bills, railway and
others, to be brought forward in the approaching session of
Parliament that were likely to affect the city of London.
He at the same time said that, with regard to some of them,
if the Corporation should feel it expedient to oppose them,
it was necessary that proceedings should be speedily
taken. _ _ _ _

The whole of the bills were referred to the Law and Par-
liamentary Committee, in order that they might take them
into consideration and report forthwith.

THE LONDON FIRE BRIGADE,
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR asked the permission of the Court to
mention a subject which he said was of considerable im-
portance, not only to the citizens of London, but also to
the inhabitants of the metropolis at large. He said
that he had reason to believe that a communication had
been made to the Metropolitan Board of Works by
the Home Secretary to the effect that it was intended to
raise a fire brigade in the metropolis, and although he was
not in a position to inform the Court the precise nature of
the step that was intended to be taken, it was one that would
undoubtedly very materially affect the rates of the inhabi-
tants of the metropolis, and also those of the city of London,
and he therefore asked the Court to consent to allow the
matter to go before a committee, in order that they might
make the necessary inquiries, and collect the requisite in-
formation, and report thereupon to the Court. (Hear, hear.)
He should therefore propose that the subject be referred to
the General Purposes Committee.
Mr. RtiDKIN supported the motion, and said that from
what he had heard, he believed that if the scheme in con-
templation by the Government was carried out it would
cost the citizens of London a very large sum of money.
(Hear, hear.)
The LORD MAYOR observed that he had reason to know
that communications had for some time been going on be-
tween the Metropolitan Board of Works and the Home
Secretary with a view to place in the hands of the former
the creation of a fire brigade for the metropolis, and that if
the plan was carried out it would entail a very heavy charge
upon the ratepayers. He might also state that he believed
that one portion of the proposed scheme was to relieve the
different fire offices from the payment of the amount Row
contributed by them towards the support of the present fire
brigade. (Hear, hear.)
The motion of Mr. Taylor was then agreed to.
RAISING OF HOLBORN VALLEY.

Mr.F. MAYNARD presented a petition from Mr.Marrable,
one of the unsuccessful candidates for designs for effecting
the above important improvemeat, praying the Court to re-
consider the decision they had arrived at in reference to the
matter.
It will be remembered that Mr. blarrable was one of the
three candidates selected as having sent in the best designs
for raising the Holborn Valley, the other two being Mr.
Bell and Mr. Sorby, to whom the first premium of £250
and the second of £l5O were awarded. Mr. Marrable, in his
petition, pointed out various difficulties in the way of carry-
ing out either of the accepted plans, and he prayed the Court
to allow the subject to be referred back to the Improvement
Committee, and also that his own plans and designs shouldbe
submitted to some independent gentlemen of high eminence
in the profession, that they might give an unbiassed opinion
upon those designs.
Mr. Marrable attended at the bar in support of his petition,
and in answer to the questions that were put to him by
various members of the Court, he stated what ho conceived
to be serious objections to the designs that had been adopted
by the committee, and he also appeared specially to complain
that Mr. Haywood, the engineer to the Corporation, should
have been permitted to use his influence in reference to the
acceptance of the designs by the Improvement Committee.
Mr. MAYNARD, having addressed the Court in support
of the petition, moved that the prayer of the petition be
complied with, and that the matter should be referred back
to the Improvement Committee for further consideration.
Mr. RowE opposed the motion, and said that if the Court
were to adopt such a course as the one proposed upon every
application made to it by every disappointed competitor,
they should never be able to get through with the business
of the Corporation. (Hear, hear.) The Improvement
Committee had considered the subject most attentively, and
had made their report, and now it was sought to open
the whole question again, (Hear, hear.) He was most
strenuously opposed to such a proceeding, and should, there-
fore, move that the petition do lie on the table,
Deputy PERKINS seconded the amendment.
Deputy FRY, the chairman of the Improvement Com-
mittee, expressed his opinion that it would be exceedingly'
inconvenient and inadvisable to open the question after
the whole subject had been fully discussed and decided
upon, He would state at the same time that it was
impossible for a more honourable or independent decision
to have been arrived at than the one agreed to by the
committee. (Hear, hear.) He would also add that no
officer of the Corporation had anything to do with, or
had in any way influerced that decision. (Hear, hear.)
lie would also state that although the committee had ac-
cepted the designs of Mr. Bell and Mr. Sorby, neither of
these plans was perfect, but would require a great deal of
alteration. The committee, however, had no alternative but
to decide in favour of those plans, because they were plans
that most embodied the principles upon which the committee
had resolved to act in carrying out this important improve-
ment. With regard to the present petition he would only
observe that if the Court were to entertain it, every other
disappointed candidate might take a similar step, and he
did not know where the matter would end. (Hear.)
Mr. HorGooD said that although he concurred with the
committee in the decision, he thought it rather unfortunate
that Me. Haywood, one of the Corporation officers, should
have been allowed to interfere in any manner with reference
to the acception or rejection of the plans and designs that
were sent in by the different competitors.
Deputy DE JERSEY raid that what was suggested by the
hon. member was not the fact. Mr. Haywood had nothing
whatever to do with the decision of the committee relating
to the designs that were sent in to them.
Mr. MAYNARD said if Mr, Haywood had had nothing to
do with the decision of the committee, he should like to
know what he was paid £l,OOO for by them? (Hear.)
Mr. GLOVER wished to know whether it was the fact
that the committee paid Mr. Haywood £l,OOO for his ser-
vices to them in reference to this matter. Probably the
chairman of the Improvement Committee would not object
to answer the question.
Deputy FRY said it was true that Mr. Haywood had been
paid £l,OOO by the committee for his services in reference
to this matter, and he begged to inform this Court that the
committee prepared a resolution to this effect, and that it
was carried unanimously. If he was asked what the £l,OOO
was paid for, he could inform them that it was for his as-
sistance in examining and repining upon more than a
hundred plans that were submitted to the committee, and
for also preparing the plans to bo submitted to Parliament,
which, but for his assistance, could not have been prepared
in time. (Hear, hear.) He could also inform the Court
that if any other engineer or surveyor had been employed,
the expense would have been unavoidably greater: (Hear.)
Mr. EDMONDS said he should like to be informed whether
any committee had the power to expend £l,OOO in this man-
ner without the consent of the Court of Common Council.
Deputy FRY said that the money did not come out of the
corporation funds, but out of a fund created by Act by Par-
liament. for the purpose of carrying out these improve-
ments.
Alderman DAXIN said that he should wish to know whe-
ther a portion of such a fund as the one alluded to, which
belonged to the City, could be expended without the consent
of the Court.
The CRAMBERLAIN, who was subsequently appealed to,
stated that the money was paid out of the fourpenny City
coal dues, which were levied under the Act of Parliament
for the purpose of carrying out these improvements. He at
the same time said that it was always considered competent
for a committee having the powers granted to the Improve-
ment Committee, to order similar sums of money to be paid.
(Hear.)
After a few words from Mr. MAYNARD in reply, the
amendment and the motion were put to the Court, when
the former was declared to be carried.
A division was demanded, upon which the numbers ap-
peared to be—

For the amendment
Against it
Majority for the amendment —s3
THE NEW LUNATIC ASYLUM,

There were several petitions from different wards in the
City, praying the Court to take the necessary steps to pre-
vent the new lunatic asylum, on its completion, from
coming:under the control of the magistrates of the City of
London, who would have the power of levying a county rate
if they thought fit to do so for the support of tho inmates.
It was urged in same of the petitions that, if necessary, an
act of Parliament should bo obtained for this purpose.
Along and desultory conversation, unattended with any
result, took place upon this subject during which it was
stated that no doubt was entertained that the magistrates
would perform the duties that would devolve upon them in
reference to the establishment in the most satisfactory man-
ner ; and although it was believed that they were them-
selves opposed to the principle of making a county rate upon
the citizens for the support of the establishment, still it was
feared they might be compelled to do so. In order to avoid
all possibility of such a course, which is naturally most ob.
noxious to the ratepayers of the City of London, the peti-
tioners were desirous that the new asylum should not be
placed under their control, but should remain under that of
the Court of Common Council,
The matter was eventually postponed, upcn the under-
standing that a special court should Le convened, at which
the whole subject should be fully discussed. The vat ions
petitions and memorials were, however, in the meantime,
referred to the Special Lunatic Asylum Committee, to be
taken into consideration.
Mr. Deputy BOWER brought up a petition signed by the
merchants, housekeepers, Traders, and occupiers in the ward
of Billingsgate, in ward meeting assembled, praying the
Court to take such steps as they may consider necessary to
prevent the passing through Parliament of railway schemes
which contmiplato lines of railway through the said ward.
Mr. Deputy BOWER moved that it should bo referred to
the Law and Parliamentary Committee, to take such steps
as they thought fit, and to report to the court.
Mr. Deputy Lorr seconded the motion.
Mr, Alderman SIDNEY also ,upport-ed the motion, and

said that some of the inhabitants had already been served
with six notices respecting various railway schemes, which
if carried out, would virtually put a stop to the trade which
was carried on in that part of the City ; and those who at-
tended the meeting thought the Court of Common Council
was the proper place to present an address, and that it was
the duty of that body to approach Parliament against the
wild and destructive schemes which now threaten the City.
The motion was agreed to, and the Court adjourned.

any purpose of conquest or subjugation, or purpose of over-
throwing or interfering with the rights of established insti-
tutions in those States, but to defend and maintain the
supremacy of tha constitution, and to preserve the Union
with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several
States unimpaired ; and that as soon as those objects aro
accomplished the war ought to cease."
HORATIO SEYMOUR,