The Sun.
London, England, 1863-05-15 00:00:00

PETITIONS.

By Mr. NORRIS Against the amalgamation of the metro-
politan city police; Mr. HENLEY against the sale of intoxi-
cating "Litton; on the Sabbath; Mr. HEADLAM, to the same
effect; l'ar. WHALLF.Y against the Prison Ministers
Bill.

SIR WM. WISEMAN, R.N., AND HIS DISTANT

COMMAND.

Sir. F. SMITH asked the Secretary to the Admiralty,
whether there was any truth in the report that Captain
Sir William Wiseman, R.N., who was lately Vice-Presi-
dent of the Ordnance Select Committee, was about to be
sent to a distant command. He had no desire, in asking
the question, to cast any imputation on the gallant officer
He confessed, however, he was surprised that he should
have
,been appointed to so distant a command, looking at
the position he had recently held.
Lord C. PAGET replied that Sir W. Wiseman had been
offered and accepted the commodoreship on the Australian
station. He was a very able and gallant officer, and he
could assure his hon. and gallant friend that the Admiralty
had no intention, in offering him the appointment, of shelv-
ing him, because, strictly speaking, he had not yet served
his full time.

THE LOSS OF THE ANGLO. SAXON.
Mr. DAWSON asked the President of the Board of
Trade whether any detailed report had been made to that
department of the loss of the Anglo-Saxon steam ship from
Londonderry to Quebec, on the 27th April, and whether
the circumstances of that lamentable event were correctly
stated in the public press; also, whether the Government
had ever refused permission for the use of Daboll's fog
trumpet upon Cape Race in Newfoundland ; and, if so,
what were the grounds for such refusal ? He desired to re-
mind the right hon. gentleman that three wrecks had
already taken place on that coast,
Mr. M. GIBSO SI replied that no detailed statements or
reports had yet reached the Board of Trade with respect to
the wreck of the Anglo Saxon. The official paiticulars with
respect to that melancholy event would not arrive until the
next mail. It appeared that last year the Associated Press
of New York put forth a proposal to erect a fog signal on
Cape Race, but neither the colonial authorities nor the
Home Government deemed it well to entrust the work to the
execution of foreigners. But the Board of Trade had urged
upon the steam ship owners interested in th. navigation of
the waters off Cape Race the propriety of erecting some
adequate fog signals upon that important beach. The
Board of Trade had the power of erecting fog sig-
nals on points that appeared to required them,
and of taxing ships passing for the cost of
maintaining them. It appeared, however, with respect to
Cape Race, that the shipowners had not cared to incur the
expense of erecting the suggested light. It was usual to
communicate to shipowners the intention of the Board of
Trade to erect lights. It was not, however, quite certain
that the fog signal specified was a good one. The United
States had reported that it promised well, but they
did not go the length of saying that it was sufficiently good
to be erected on an important point like Cape Race. It
Was also under the consideration of the Trinity House.
At Holyhead, on one of the adjacent hills, a gun was
fired at intervals in foggy weather which could be heard at
four milei distance, and it was a gun that the Board of
Trade had proposed to erect at Cape Race. The subject
was, however, under the consideration of the Trinity
House.

Mr. DAWSON inquired if there would be an official
inquiry ilito the causes of the disaster ?
Mr. M. GIBSON could not reply to the question until
the subject came officially before his department.

PRISON MINISTERS BILL.
This bill, as amended, was considered and agreed to,
with the addition of an amendment by Mr. HENLEY, and
the bill ordered to be read a third time.

VOLUNTEERS BILL.
The Marquis of HARTINGTON moved the second
reading of this bill, and explained its provisions. The bill
Was based upon the recommendation of the late Volunteer
Commission. In the recent estimates, £198,000 was
unanimously voted without any opposition in aid of
the volunteer force, testifying that Parliament and the
public considered that some additional aid ought to be given
to this important service. The noble lord explained
the qualifications that would be requisite in order
to entitle corps to a share in the grant so voted by Parlia-
ment. It was proposed in the future to allow 20s. a yeas
to each volunteer, and 10s. extra for proficiency in ball
practice. This year it was proposed to allot 15s. to each
foot, and 20s. for each mounted rifleman. He paid a high
complement to the efficiency and equipment of the
volunteers, which now numbered 150,000 well trained men,
who in the event of the country being in danger would
coratitute an efficient body for its defence. The Govern-
ment claimed no credit for the present condition of the vo-
lunteers, as it had spontaneously risen out of the chivalrous
feeling of the people. It owed most of its success to
the unwearied exertions of Lord Elcho. (Hear, hear.)
All the Government had done was to foster the movement,
and to give it all the legitimate assistance in its power.
Major EDWARDS said the bill would be generally ac-
ceptable to the volunteers.

Col. FRENCH said he should in committee take the
sense of the house as to whether Ireland should not partici-
pate in the grant, and have a volunteer force of its own, as
in former times, when the body constituted a great support
to the regular army.
Sir J. SHELLEY hoped it would never be forgotten
that the force was thoroughly voluntary, and trusted no
rigid unalterable rules would be forced upon them. If so,
the existence of the volunteer force would be endangered.
Regimental orders should, in the first instance, emana.e
from the War-office, subject to the adaptation by the corps
to the particular circumstances of each. He should propose
a few amendments in committee.

Colonel DUNNE supported the bill, and suggested that
the proper time to enter upon a discussion of the details
Was when the bill was in committee.
The bill was then read a second time.
THAMES EMBANKMENT BILL.
Upon the motion to go into committee on this bill,
Mr. CRAWFORD wished to call the attention of the
house to some suggestions which had been put forward by
a committee, of which he was one, appointed by the corpo-
ration of the City of London to inquire into the subject of
Continuing those duties, The General Improvement Fund
was by the Act of 1862 declared to remain in existence until
1872. The wine duties were but small, but the coal metage
dues granted to the corporation in ancient times, and con.
firmed by the charter of James 1., was 4d. a ton. Then
there was another duty of 8d per ton levied under several
Acts of Parliament, and a further duty of Id per ton granted
for the purpose of erecting the Coal Exchange and for general
improvements in the neighbourhood. By the Act of 1862
the Improvement Fund was formed for the purpose of the
Thames embankment and for general improvements, and
the bill then before the house proposed to continue the
• duties forming that fund another 10 years beyond 1872.
By the Act of 1862 the 44 duty was reserved for improve-
ments in the City, such as at Holborn-hill, &c., and the
other 9d was to be held at the disposal of the Metropolitan
Board of Works, for the embankment of the Thames and
other improvements. Now, there was already appropriated
out of the dues for the next 10 years £2,330,000—viz.,
.£1,000,000 for the north embankment of the Thames,
£750,000 for a new street from Blackfriars, and £580,0.0
for the south embankment of the Thames. It was clear
ghat) unless the duties were continued, there could be very
few other improvements attempted out of the funds already
provided. In that state of things the City, feeling a very
natural jealousy of any introduction of the Board of Works
within their boundaries, proposed that the 4d duty should be
the continued for
to
opturpose of making the new street from
Gresham-street
sufficient the City who Bank ; and if the amount were n A
That was not accepted,d make it up out of their own funds.
bill to the house in th sand the committee reported the
point. Since then the coarraoerast?te with regard to that
coniroisPsionteironfhad made several pro-
posals to the Chief
`Yorks to construct,
out of the corporate resources, the street, which was to cost
£650,000, provided Government would c' £300,000
out of the 9d. duty; but the Chief Commissioner
an-
swered that if the corporation had se large a sumerahvaadil
for improvements in the City, there were plenty of otherable
places to which it could be applied. The offer of the City
was, in plain terms, to give £350,000 for the privilege
outilege of
f
making the street, If the whole expense was paid
the 9d. rate, it would stop City improvements for the next
20 years ; whereas the City offer was equal to £50,000 to
each of the metropolitan boroughs to be spent in improve..
ments—(hear, hear)—and he reminded the house there
was much to be done in thl
the t way, mid in building free
bridges • ee
bridges and throwing open
toll-freeHe had nop desire to toll-payingset the
bridges over the Thames.
City against the Metropolitan Board of Works, and,
without at all detracting from the latter, or of
exaggerating the merits of the other body, he appealed to
past experience, which showed that but with few exceptions
all the public improvements undertaken by the City had
been completed within the estimates, but in no one instance
had that been the case in any great works carried on by
the Metropolitan Board of Works, arising, in his opinion,
o
from the greater experience and kn)wledge Psessed by
s
the members of the corporation over that of the members of
the Metropolitan Board of Works. The latter had been
seven years engaged in the formation of a new street in the
Borough, and it was yet in an incomplete state ; and in the
thoroughfare from Covent-garden to St. Martin's-lane there
was yet much to he done. Public interests would be much
better served by comni-tting the formation of this street to
the City Corporation than tv the Metropolitan Board Of

Works. He concluded by moving the recommittal of this
bill.

Mr. J. T. NORRIS seconded the amendmen

Mr. COWPER said thearnenin;;;;;; f conside-
rable importance with regard to the practice that house,
and he considered it was undesirable that t should ten-
courage motions of the kind except upon eiet,nate grounds
—either that the committee to which the bill had been re-
ferred had not satisfactorily discharged their duties, or else
that facts had come to light since they had reported. The
Corporation of London and the City Commissioners of
Sewers were the only opponents of the bill, and no objec-
tion had been taken to the committee's proceedings. He
understood that the new fact to be brought before the com-
mittee was that the City was willing to make a present of
£350,000 for the honour of building this street out of their
corporate resources. Now, he had reason to complain of
the ambiguity of those words. His answer to the corpora-
tion was that they could not do better with their money
than in improving the streets and thoroughfares of the City
(Hear.) He wished first to know what corporate funds
they referred to, but from the day when the offer was made
to the present time he had not been able to ascertain that
important and interesting fact. (Hear, hear.) He believed
the corporate funds referred to related to the 4d coal tax.
—(hear, hear)—and that they claimed it as their own, and
to spend it in this manner. After referring to the legisla-
tion that had taken place with reference to the 4d and the
9d taxes, the right hon. gentleman said the question was.
whether the house agreed to accept the offer of the City,
which was not an offer to pay money, but to receive money
and to expend money that had been confided to the Metro-
politan Board of Works. That, he thought, was a question
that could be as well decided by a committee. of the whole
house, as by a select committee upstairs. If they complied
with the proposition they would sanction a retrograde move-
ment. There had always been a distinction made between
the two funds. The 4d tax was confined to City improve-
ments, and the 9d tax to the carrying out of the Thames
embankment and metropolitan improvements, and that dis-
tinction was continued and maintained when Parliament
decided on giaing to the Metropolitan Board of Works the
9d tax for the Thames embankment, of which the new
street in question formed part. The Metropolitan Board
of Works had been created since the last Continuance Act
was passed, and the whole of the 9d was intended
to be spent on improvements irrespective of
locality whether City or Metropolis. By this act the City
was made subordinate to the Metropolis, and the City was
represented at the Metropolitan Board of Works by three
members of the corporation, and therefore it was impossible
for the City to say they were a superior and independent
body; and, being represented at the b xtrd, they could not
expect to have it both ways. The Metropolitan Board of
Works did really represent the City as much as any other
part of the metropolis, and it would be contrary to the prin-
ciples of local self-government and representation going
with taxation, if they took away from the whole of the me •
trop lis any portion of the 9d, and gave it to the City of
London, which was only one district of the metropolis. He
had been unable to ascertain what were the corporate re-
sources referred to by the corporation—and all the com-
mittee were able to ascertain from Mr. B. Scott was that
there was a floating balance of £250,000, which the City
borrowed in 1857 from the Bank of England, which had
not yet been repaid, and which might be employed
till the time of repayment arrived towards City improve
molts; but he never led the committee to believe that it
was really available for the purpose. He hoped the house
would not accede to the motion, except they were furnished
with more definite information.

The LORD MAYOR said the right hon. gentleman was
very anxious that these great works should be carried out
with something like certainty. Well, if the bill was not re•
committed, the right hon. gentleman might rest assured
that there would be no certainty in the matter. The hon.
member who had moved the re-committal of the bill had
given them proofs of the mismanagement of the body to
whom the right hon. gentleman was anxious to entrust the
execution of the new street, in regard to the works already
under their control. The Corporation felt that, if this pro
posal were carried, it would prove one of the most fatal to
their privileges ever brought forward. Funds raised in the
City, and intended for great City improvements, had ac-
tually to be placed under the control of a foreign body.
Could there be a more destructive measure in regard to the
corporation ? The right hon, gentleman had spoken of the
shadowy nature of this fund of £350,000, which the corpo-
ration proposed to allocate as their contribution to the
scheme if the execution of the work was left to them, But
had the corporation of London ever entered into any pecu-
niary undertaking which they had failed to carry through ?
And were not their estimates for public improvements in
marked contrast to those of the Metropolitan Board of
Works, the estimates of the one being within the mark,
while those of the other body fell far short •of their expendi •
ture ? The experience of the corporation with respect to
the formation of large public works was much greater than
that of the Beard of Works, while they possessed in a pecu-
liar degree the knowledge requisite for the successful laying
down of a new street, and, above all, the knowledge re-
quisite to enable them to deal with questions of compensa-
tion. Moreover, the corporation could promise, with per-
fect certainty, that the works would be completed in the
time they undertook. (Hear.) If the right hon. gentleman
desired to know the sources whence the contribution of the
corporation was to come, his answer was, that the right hon,
gentleman had no right to such information. The corpora-
tion of the city of London had shown that they could exe-
cute great public works in the most successful manner; and
if they were to guarantee under the corporate seal their
readiness to undertake any work, the country might rest
satisfied of its sure accomplishment. He eid not hesitate to
denounce this inquiry of the right hon gentleman as an in-
quisitorial attempt to pry into the resources of the corpora-
tion, and to assert that the bill was a direct attack upon the
municipal institutions of the country. (Hear.)
_ _ _ _

Mr. NORRIS could assure the house that if the bill
were recommitted abundant evidence would be forth-
coming to show that the corporation were possessed of
ample funds to make good their undertaking. One re-
source on which they could now count, and which was
not at their disposal six months ago, was the £200,000
invested by them in the Metrepolitan Railway, and the great
successa which had attended that scheme fully justified
them in relying uprn the value of that resource being still
more enhanced. Th'n, again, the corporation were pos-
sessed of leasehold and other property to the extent of about
£250,000 a year in the gross ; and if from that gross revenue
certain fixed charges were deducted, the corporation had an
income of between £BO,OOO and £loo,oou a year available for
the purpose of public works of acknowledged usefulness,
the building of schools, and the encouragement of charities.
Well, rather than suffer the intervention of this foreign body
in matters which ought to be under the sole control of the
corporation, the corporation were willing to divert a large
portion of that income from the work of charity, and appro-
priate it to the formation of ; he new street.

Mr. DOULTON said he did not mean to argue whether
the 4d. coal tax belonged to the corporation or not. Parlia-
ment had dealt with it, and they might therefore fairly as-
sume it was not corporate property, The corp -tration of
London now came to Parliament and objected to the juris-
diction of the Metropolitan Board of Works, urging that it
was outside the City. If the Metropolitan Board of Works
was a body outside the jurisdi, tion of the City, how came
it that members of the corporation had seats at that board?
Nor could he understand why the corporation should make
an offer of £350,000, while it was notorious that they were
constantly applying to the Board of Works for petty doles
to carry out metropolitan improvements. He could prove
from documents which could not be contradicted that the
corporation of London did not represent the commercial in-
terests of the City. The corporation had nothing to do with
sewers, they had nothing to do with education, nothing to
do with the relief of the poor—indeed, the only department
which the corporation had under their management was the
eating and show departments. (A. laugh.) He believed that,
but for the mistake with regard to the Police Bill and the
humiliating withdrawal of it, the present proposition would
not be submitted to Parliament.

Lord J. MANNERS said he regretted the tone of hon,
members who spoke on both sides of the present question,
and although he entertained a great respect for the munici-
pality of London, he was bound to say that the corporation
had failed to make out a case before the committee ; and, in
point of fact, the members of the committee representing
the City voted for the preamble of the bill. (Hear, hear.)
Unless, therefore, some new fact of startling importance
had been discovered, he could not see the use of referring
the bill back to the committee.

Mr. Tl'! E defended the jurisdiction and the competency
of the Metropolitan Board of Works to execute the proposed
street, which would be a great benefit both to the metropolis
and the City.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY said ho disapproved of the pre-
sent proceeding on the part of the City authorities, and he
thought, instead of seeking to prevent the Metropolitan
Board of Works from carrying out a great metropolitan im-
provement, they should devote their attention to the City
proper. There were various works to be done in the City,
such as the erection of a new meat market in West Smith-
field, the widening of Newgate-street, the improvement of
Holborn valley, Tower-st eet, Thames-street, and Billings •
gate market.

Mr. W ILLIA3IS opposed the amendment, and condemned
the extravagance of the corporation, which lie said spent
more money in managing the City of London than was re •
quired for the whole town of Liverpool, including its public
debt.

Mr. CRAWFORD then withdrew his amendment, and
the house went into committee on the bill.
Mr. COWPER proposed an amendment, to the effect
that the new street out of Cannon-street should be 80 feet
wide instead.
Mr. CRAWFORD opposed the amendment, which would
lead to no great improvement, and would cause a loss of
2,000 square yards of land, worth £lOO,OOO.
After some further opposition from Sir J. Shelley, Mr.
Ayrton, Mr. Cox, and Lord Fermoy,
Mr. COWPER said he would withdraw his amendment
until it had received further consideration.
Clauses up to 7 were agreed to.
On clause 8, relating to the subway under the new street,
Mr. CRAWFORD moved an amendment that the sub •
way should be placed under the control of the commissioners
of sewers for the City of London instead of the Metropolitan
Board of \Vox ks.
Mr. CUBITT supported thl amendment, The Me-