The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-26 00:00:00

ally attempted to cut hPr throat, and inflicted a wound
on her throat which still remain.d unhealed. On ►hat
mlrning he locked her out of 11,-r hnuso, and from the
violence of his manner she very much reared that if he
caught her alone ho would carry out his threats, and
murder her,

Mr. NORTON—Ia this the same young ram who some
time ago had beet, charged with you at this court?—
Mrs Linfield—Yes, Sir, the same.
Mr. Noaroti—lt I mistake not, there was some mys-
tery connected with his history. Have you any objec-
tion to state what it was? Mrs. L.nfield—N,it all all,
Sir. The f7cts are that I had been called in to attend
a female in her confinement, and it was the intention of
the mother to have thrown the child into the canal, and
no clothes were provided for it. It was suco a fine child
that I undertook to bring him np as my own. I ac-
cordingly toi,k him, and sent him to nurse, hut, after
some years, the mother found out where he was,
took away the poor child. Instead of taking ctr,
little fellow, she nearly starved the po n
this I had her punished at the Utii,o 11-%;1 F.
and have not since ,wen her. The tvai odice the
boy is Davis, ties he has always g tie by the n • as,.
Willi,tri ld

Vir. NORTON h:iught the case was one which the
ffi •ers ttlt parish .of Newington should take cogni-
z4nce of, and have the young man taken proper care Of,
and directed Loekyer, one of the summoning officers,
to accompany the applicant to Newington Worknome,
and request one of the relieving officers to attend to it.

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL
Oa Thursday a court was held for the dispatch of
business.

THE NEW CORPORATION BILL.

Alderman SIDNEY rose to call he trt,nzion of tht.
court to what he consider+Al to h. a breach of o e of Eh
most important of the privileges of the co, poristion.
was well known that the new municipal Btll, which it
was agreed upon all sides was calculated to operate
beneficially for the citizens of London, bad been in•
troduced to Parliament, after having undergone
the most grave deliberation and discussion, had
passed through certain stages in the House of Commons
without opposition, bat had been sudlenly ad-
journed from the 6th to the 29th instant.—(Hear, hear.)
For that postponement, which looked very much like
the result of a confederacy between the clerks of the
companies, to which some of the clauses referred, and
those to whom the office of superintending the passing
of the Bill -was -committed, no cause was assigned; but
he considered that such a delay was likely to be
fatal to the measure during the present session—an
event which would be greatly to be deplored. He thought
the corporation ought to defend their own course of
proceeding in the most determined wanner. They had,
"after having re-argued the clauses aff oting the City
companies, resolved to prosecute the bill in its entire
condition, and referred it to the freedoms committee.
with perfectly intelligible directions. In the House of
Commons Selection Committee, of which Mr. Bernal was
chairman, however, he found that the long postponem, nt
had taken place notwithstanding the anxiety flo unequi-
vocally expressed that the necessary measure should, as
soon as possible, become the law of the land. As a
member of the Corporation, and of the House of Com-
mons, he considered it to be his duty to write to Mr.
Bernal upon the occasion, and the following was the
answer he had received from that gentleman :
" 93, Enron-square, April 12.
" My dear Alderman Sieney,—l am not able to
you the information you wish for. I am not aware f
the cause of the postponement of the Lend n Corpora
tion Bill. When I sat lately in my tribunal the party in
charge of the Bill mentioned that he was not ready tai
proceed, and he applied for and obtained a postpone-
ment as a matter of course.—Believe me yours very
truly, " R. BERNAL."
He then wrote to the City Remembrancer, who had the
charge of the bill, on the subject, stating his apprehen-
sion that the delay would be, in all probability, fatal to
the accomplishment of the great object of the corpora-
tion in the present session of Parliament. To that com-
munication he received the following reply:—
" Guildhall, 13th A pril, 1852.
"My dear Sir,—ln cons.- quence of the Court of Com
mon Council not having determined upon the form of
the bill until the 2d instant, I was unable to settle the
bill with Lord Redesdale by the 6th instant, and It was
in consequence postponed. I particulary requested M-.
Bernal to fix the earliest day he could after the Easier
recess for the committee on the bill, which I haves no
doubt he has done.

"If Parliament continue long enough to pass the -
neral privatt• businsss, I see no reason why the Corpo-
ration Bill should not pass.—l am, dear sir, yours truly,
" E. TYRRELL.
_ _

" Mr. Alderman Sidney."
He subsequently wrote again to the Rembrancer, repre-
senting that there was a mistake as to the twos'
condition of the Bill, the principle of which had been
agreed upon in October, and had never been disturbed
since, notwithstanding the efforts made to exclude
the companies from its operation. It however ap
peered that the proceedings of the court were to be
disregarded; and he had been just informed that it
would be an act of policy to give the exemption to the
companies, in order to secure the success of au important
measure, the most important part of which tenders to the
diminution of the power which those companies bad
usurped.—(Hear, hear.) Ho had given notice of a mu
tion upon the subject to the Town Clerk, but that officer
had not complied with his request to place the motion
upon the paper of business. Now he would seriously
ask the court whether they would surrender their Bill
in consequence of the machinations of what he might
a little conspiracy within doors? whether they would al-
low their proceedings, calculated as these proceedings
were, to extend to their fellow citizens generally the
right to vote for the highest municipal office,,, to be tam-
pered with and rendered of no avail?—(Hear, hear.)
Alderman Sidney concluded by moving th© following re-
solution :
" That this court having been informed that the
Corporation Election Bill has bath introduced into
Parliament, and was on the 15th of March last read a
second time in the House of Commons, and committed
and referred to the Committee of Selection without op-
position; that the time fixed for its further consideration
by that Committee was the 6i.h of April, but at the
express instigation of Mr. Remembraucer was post
poned, and is now fixed for the 29th instant; that this
delay in the consideration of the Bill endangers its pass-
ing through Parliament during the present session, and
thereby defeats the intention of this honourable court in
seeking to rectify the acknowledged evils of the present
state of the municipality; that the conduct of Mr. Re-
membrancer, as the Parliamentary officer of the corpo.
rad n, in delaying the passing of this measure into a
,
and is in contravention to the de-
law, is unauthorised,
cisions of this court."
(Strong expressions of disapprobation, and loud cries
of Withdraw. withdraw.")
Mr. BENNOCEI seconded the resolution.
The TowN-CLERK—The principle upon which I acted
in not putting
Alderman Sidney's notice of motion upiin
the paper of business is that upon which it has been the
invariable practice of the Court to act. The question
was a question of privilege, which, by right, takes pro.
cedeuce of all other matters, and without any notice
whatever, and if I had placed the notice upon the paper
el business, such act would have been an unwarrantable
interference wi'h the rule and practice.—(Hear, hear.)
The REMEMBRANCER described, in a manner which
called forth the loud and unanimous approbation of the
proceedings adopted by him Court, the whole of the
for the purpose of facilitating the progress of the wets
sure in Parliament. He showed that he bad acted,
not hastily nor negligently, but deliberwely, cautiou•ly,
and energetically, iu the performance of his duty; that
the delay which had taken place was unavoid-ble, and
that everything had been done to carry out the inten-
tions of the Court—an object which could not be accom-
plished without a very close and judicious attention to
the several stages of the bill.
Mr. ANDERTON said it was quite evident that the re
flection upon the conduct of the R-,memeranoer was quite
an error, and Mr. Alderman Sidney w aid 0,4 hestrare
to withdraw that part at least of his motion.—(Cheers,)
Alderman SIDNEY nodded assent.
Mr. WILLIAM JONES said if the complaint had been
made by auy ono except a member of Parliament he
would look upon it as being too ridiculous to be noticed.-
-(Loud laughter.) He was quite satisfied that the
Remembrancer had acted upon the important occasion
with the judgment whisk that gentleman never failed to
exhibit in the performance of his duties, and he believed
that in Parliamentary proceedings of the nature to
which their attention had been drawn, policy was the
better part of valour.—(Hear.)
Mr. Gcpsort said he thought the delay which had
taken place would be of advantage to the Bill, which
would, no doubt, come out of Parliament somewhat

altered in shape and condition.
Mr. R. TAYLOR said he saw from the Remembrancer's
statement that the Bill had been taken to Lord Bodes
-
dale, and he wished to know why that course had been
pursued, when the Bill had not as yet passed the Com-
mons.
The REMEMBRANCES said it was the invariable prac-
tice of Parliamentary agents to apply to have Bills
settled in the House of Lords before the passing of such
Bills in the House of Commons.
Mr. STAGY said it was obvious that the Remem.
brancer had acted by the direction of the committee,
that there was a difference of opinion between the Court
and the committee, and if the Court attached blame to
the Remembrancer for the act of the committee, it would
have been more reasonable not to have appointed a com.
mittee at all.—(Elear, hear.)
Mr. HENRY BLAKE said the fault lay with the COM.
mittee, whose duty it was to advocate the Bill in its in-
tegrity; instead of doing which, they had taken out its
essence.
Mr. Deputy BOWER pleaded guilty to the charge of
having agitated the necessity of altering
the Bill to meet
(
the difficulties which presented themselves •
threatened opposition of the companies.—lle, hear.)
la the
He was oonvinodd that the corporation would,ar
backed
by such a power as the new Bill would
layve
gi
ittheen3; way
soon enabled to carry the clauses which
of success.
Mr. B. PHILLIPS and Mr. To
whole proceedings of the Tie urn approved of the
and looked to the event with• mee,brancer upon the Bill,
cohfidenop.
Mr. Deputy HARRISON defended
the attack which he considered
the committee from
made upon 'hem, through thpAlderman Sidney had
against the Recline brae medium .4 the insinumtiodiu
cer, and moved as an anie9 -
went that the exp I
factory.—(fLa. anaeon of that officer was most saus-
hear )
Mr. Deputy S
TEVENS seconded the amendment.
Alderman SIDNEY laid he bad sought several epPor-
tunities of
withdrawing his motion, but such bad beef.
the excited state of the court that he could not make
himself understood.
Toere was some objection to the offer of Alderman
Sidney to withdraw the resolution, but, itliimately the
court agreed to a motion to that. eff:Ttl