The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-20 00:00:00

IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY.

Deputy FRY, the chairman of the Improvement Com-
mittee, brought up the report from the committee relative
to the expenditure incurred by the Commissioners of Sewers
in effecting certain street improvements in the City during
the yeare 1862 and 1863, and recommending that it would
not be desirable for the Corporation to contribute towards
the cost of the said improvements. The ground upon which
the committee made the recommendation appeared to be
that the improvements had been paid for, and that the
accounts were all settled, and therefore it was not advisable
to reopen the matter.

Mr. SALNDERS proposed an amendment to the effect that
the improvements in question were of gre:t. public import-
ance, and that the Corporation ought to contribute towards
the cost of them, in order to relieve the ratepayers from a
portion of the burden, and that the subject should be re-
ferred back to the Improvement Committee for reconside-
ration. He referred to the various important improvements
that had been made in the City, and said that although
much had undoubtedly been done, the public convenience
and comfort required a great deal more, and it was impos-
sible that this could be effected if the Corporation cast the
whole burden upon the ratepayers of the City, and refused
to contribute towards such improvements. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Noltztrs, M.P., seconded the amendment.
A lengthened discussion took place upon the motion and
the amendment, during which

Mr. LAWLEY expressed his opinion that the raal question
at issue was whether the Corporation should conduct its
own business or whether it should be over-ridden by the
Commissioners of Sewers. (Dries of " Oh, oh.") He said
that the matter had been fully considered by the committee,
and they ought not to be asked to reconsider their decision,
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR expressed his opinion that the com-
mittee had not fully considered the question that was sub
milted to them, and that in their report they had entirely
given it the go-by. (Hear, hear.) All they were called
upon to consider was whether the improver,-,ents that had
been effected were of importance to the public, and whether
the Corporation ought to contribute towards the cost of
those improvements. He was ready to admit that this Court
had a right to control all the expenditure of the Corporation,
and that was the matter, (Laughter.) He always bowed
to the decision of the Court, although sometimes he did so
very unwillingly, but he had no hesitation in expressing his
opinion that the Corporation had not done anything like
what it ought to have done in reference to the public im-
provements in the City, and that it had neglected its duty
in this respect. Believing that the subject had not been
properly considered by the, committee, he should support
the amendment of Mr. Saunders, that the report be referred
back for further consideration.

Mr. RUDKIN said he was riot opposed to the principle of
the City's cash contributing towards the public improve-
ments in the City, but on the present occasion he thought
the Improvement Committee were justified in refusing to
contribute towards improvements that were made in 1862
and 1863 which were already paid tor. In his opinion, how-
ever, the proper course was not to leave the entire control
in the hands of the Commissioners of Sewers, but that this
body should put itself in communication with the Improve-
ment Committee, or some other committee, upon the sub-
ject of any improvements that were proposed to be carried
out, and that the two bodies should act jointly in the
matter.

Deputy DE JERSEY, the chairman of the Commissioners
of Sewers, addressed the Court at some length in support of
the amendment, and he expressed his opinion that the con-
clusion arrived at by the committee was not founded upon
the merits of the question, but upon the feeling and preju-
dice that existed in the breasts of some of the members,—
(Cries of " Oh, oh,") regretted to find that upon such
an important question feelings of thie description should
exist, and he could not help saying that in his opinion the
improvement of the streets and providing for the accommo-
dation of the public was a municipal duty, and the Corpora-
tion ought to perform that duty and not allow the ratepayers
to be saddled with the entire cost.

The Court then divided, when the amendment was carried
by a majority of 27.

Deputy DE JERSEY then proposed two motions having
reference to certain proposed improvements in the City, one
of which is the making a thoroughfare out of Newgate-
street through King Edward-street into Smithfield, both of
which were agreed to.

Mr. ThunKlN then proposed that the Improvement Com-
mittee be empowered to confer with the Commissioners of
Sewers with a view to facilitate the widening and improving
the streets and thoroughfares of this city, reporting to the
Court from time to time whether any and what amounts
should be contributed out of the City's cash towards such
objects.
The motion was agreed to, and the Court then ad-
journed.