The Sun.
London, England, 1864-12-09 00:00:00

Court of Common- Council,

A Court of Common Council was held yesterday at
Guildhall. The Lord Mayor presided.

THE TRAFFIC OVER SOUTHWARK-I3RIDGE.

Mr LONODEN inquired of the Chairman of the Bridge
House Estates Committee whether any steps had been taken
to ascertain the amount of increase of traffic over South-
wark-bridge consequent upon the abolition of the toll,
Mr WEBBER, the Chairman of the Bridge House Com-
mittee, said that a return had been furnished to him, by
which it appeared that on the first day of the opening of the
bridge 12,000 foot passengers passed over it, and on the
sixth that number was increased to 15,900. For the same
period the number of cabs was respectively 931, and 1,615 ;
of single-horse carts 411 and 850 ; and of two-horse carts,
60 and 134. These numbers, he was informed, had, since
that period, considerably increased; but he thought it right
to inform the Court that the returns were supplied to him
by persons employed by the bridge company, and he consi-
dered it would be as well that persons should be employed
by the Corporation to check the future returns.
In answer to a question put by another hon. member, as
to the amount of heavy traffic that passed over the bridge,
Mr WEBBER said that only five four-horse waggons
passed over the bridge on the first day, and six on the
sixth.

THE PROPOSED:NEW COURTS OF JUSTICE.
The REMEMBRANCER reported to the Court that ho had
received from the Government the drafts of two bills in-
tended to be introduced into Parliament in reference to the

erection of new courts of law, and as to the mode of raising
the means to defray the cost thereof. The Government

were very anxious to proceed with the reatter,and the drafts

of the bills had been sent thus early in order that the Cor•

poration might have an opportunity of expressing their

opinion upon the subject.
The matter was referred to the City Lands Committee.
INSURANCE OF CORPORATION PROPERTY.
Mr R. J. CHAPLIN broght forward a motion that it

should be submitted to the City Lands Committee to take
into consideration whether it would not be advisable that the

valuable property comprised in the Guildhall and the sur-

rounding buildings should be adequately insured against

any loss by fire.

Deputy BONE said that the Corporation had hitherto

always been their own insurers, and he doubted the pro,.

priety of altering that system. If they insured the Guild-
hall they must insure all the other properly belonging to
the Corporation, and thus a very large outt.7 would :he
incurred. He suggested, therefore, that the matter should

be referred to the C ity Lands Committee for them to con.

sider whether it would be advisable that any alteration

should be made.

Mr CHAPLIN said he had no objection to this being done,

His only object was to let it be known that the whole of the
valuable property in the Guildhall, and the still more valu-
able property contained in the Mansion-house were en-
tirely unprotected by an insurance against fire, and the

Court would deal with the matter as it thought best.

THE RAILWAY INVASION OF THE CITY.
Deputy LOTT, the chairman of the Special Railway Com

mittee appointed to consider the different railway schemes

submitted to Parliament last session, affecting the city of
London, brought up a report of their proceedings, and ask-
ing to.be allowed to continue to act in watching any new

schemes that might be iatroduced. There was also a report
from the same committee of the amount of money they had
expended. By this last mentioned report it appeared that
the gross amount expended in opposing the ten schemes
that had„been introduced into Parliament during last ses.,
sion, the whole of which znore or less affected the City of
London, was close upon £4,000, of which sum £750 was

paid in fees to the Itecor4e-r, about £9OO to the Common

Serjeant, and the total anlcuni of fees paid to counsel was

considerably more than £2.100, Mr Haywood, the engineer
to the Commissioners of Sewers, had, it appeared, also sent
in a claim for £2lO, which was included in the £l,OOO. The
rest was made up of parlitroentary fees and other expenses.

These reports gave rise :o rather a warm discussion.
Deputy LOTT, in movivg that they should be agreed to,
adverted to the alarm that vas created among the citizens of
London by the mode in vhich the projectors of different

railways proposed to deal with property in the City, and
said that the schemes, as originally proposed, would have
interfered with no less than 130 streets in different parts of
the City, and a vast amotnt of valuable property would

have been destroyed. Thtse proposals, as the Court would
recollect, were received wth very great alarm, not only by
the bankers and merchant, of the City, but by all classes ;

and the committee were 63ply impressed with the impor-
tance of the duty which hzd been confi led to them, and the
result of their operations Wore the Select Committee of the
House of Commons, was that some of the projects were re-
jected, and others were nodified in some most important

respects, and the result he believed was one on which the
City might congratulate iself. He at the same time said he
could not deny that the opense that had been incurred was
considerable, but the comuittee felt itself bound to procure
the services of the most cninent counsel, and to take all the
steps in their power to arry out the object they had in
view, and he trusted the Court would consider that the corn.
mittee had done its duty it the proceedings they had carried
out. (Hear, hear.)
Mr DE JERSEY said bethought the Court ought not to

sanction the expenditure o: so large a sum as Xl,OOO without

some further inquiry, andat all events ascertaining whether
the money had been proprly expended. They should re,

member that tho Corpolition had no s)lieitor to pay, and
that tho whole of this lair sum consisted of costs out of

pocket. He should therefore propose, with a view to a fur-
ther investigation taking place, that those reports should
be referred to the Law asd Parliamentary Committee for
them to take into consideration and report to the Court as to
the propriety of the payments that had been made. (Hear.)
Mr M. GEORGE said tint although he was one of the
members of the select committee, he felt obliged to Mr De
Jersey for the observations he had made, and he could not
deny that the cost of the proceedings that had been taken
was extravagant. It appeared that £2,900 was paid in fees
to counsel, and of this sus, two of their own effacers, the
Recorder and the Common Sergeant, received, the one £750
and the other nearly £1,0(0. With regard to the sum of 200
guineas that was claimed by Mr Haywood, the committee
were certainly surprised that he should have made such a
claim, as they were acting in conjunction with the Com-
missioners of Sewers, and they supposed that he, as the en-
gineer of that body, was engaged in their behalf.
Mr DE JERSEY said tie Commissioners of Sewers were
not aware that such a claim as the one referred to had been
made by Mr Haywood.

Mr H. L. TAYLOR expressed his opinion that it was time
same time said that although one of its members had at-
tempted to make a great deal out of the fact of Mr Haywood
tthhies
engineercotomtmheittceoesymasisdsioonneeraswoafy with, and he at the
Sewers,
having set in
a claim for 200 guineas, he did not say anything about what
was paid to the two higher officers of the corporation—the
Recorder and Common Sergeant, He considered the fees
gaid to these gentlemen were very large, particularly when
it was remembered they received a large salary from the
corporation. He did not see, however, that anything could
be done with reference to this portion of the subject, nor
how
(A laugh.) He hoped that such a state of things would not
occur again,
committee was concerned he
thought that the soccer it W 53 disembodied the better.
Alderman Rosn, 141. P., supported the report, and said
t he fees
aenau d could
so be
far re
as duc ed
this. ['l voice—They are paid.]
that in his opinion it would be a very anomalous state of
things if one committee was to be allowed to sit in judgment
upon the proceedings of another. With regard to the fees to
counsel, there was a recognised scale of fees to be paid to
counsel who appeared before a committee of the House of
Commons, and nothing more than the usual fees had been
paid.

Mr HARTRIDGE argued that the sum of £4,000 was not
at all unreasonable for the work that had been done. (Hear
hear.) There were ten different bills to oppose, and the Cor
poration in opposing them had this additional difficulty
thrown in their way, that there was already a foregone con-
clusion arrived at by the Parliament, that there should be
an inner circle of railways in the metropolis. The utmost
exertions were required to oppose successfully the schemes
that were proposed, aid he could himself boar testimony to
the extreme zeal and ability with which the points had been
argued before the committee by the Common Serjoant and
the other learned counsel engaged.
Deputy ELLIOTT said it appeared to him that there was
nothing that could now be done except to pay the money--;
(hear, hear, and a laugh)—and that the debate that had
taken place was what might be called an indignation debate,
and he would add that he entirely concurred in it. He
thought—that the fees that-had been paid counsel were
enormous—more than £2,000 being given to three of their
own well-paid officers. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that such
a crying evil would be stopped for the future. (Hear, hear.)
Mr G. J. COCXERELL expressed his opinion that £4,000
was a very small sum when compared with the important
results that were obtained through the exertions of this
committee, and he said that every one who was acquainted
with the expense incurred in opposing bills in Parliament
must agree with him.
Deputy Fill said it appeared to him that the Court were
taking a most undignified course on the present occasion.
The select committee had, in his opinion, done a very great
public service-- (hear, hear)—and had done the City a very
important service, and it was objected to pay for that ser-
vice, (Hear, hear.)
Deputy Lort then briefly replied, and in the course of his
observations he reminded the Court that the Recorder and
the Common Serjeant had both accepted their offices upon
the understanding that they were to be paid for their ser-
vices when they were specially retained on behalf of the
earporatinn, and nothing more than the usual amount of
fees were paid to 'there.
Mr DE JERSEY :,aid that he was satisfi-d with the dis-
cussion which had taken place, and be should not press his
amendtarnt,
Mr 11, L. TdYLOR then said that ho should not offer any
further opposition to the reports, except with regard to the
continuance of the committee. In his opinion that was
quite unnecessary, as the Remembrances was bound to be
perfectly well aware of the nature of every bill which was
brought before Parliament, and the Law and Parliamentary
Committee, which was a large committee, and of which the
chairman of every one of the other committees was a mem-
ber, was perfectly competent to deal with the subject. He
should therefore move as an amendment that the portion